Agenda packet — Dublin City Council, September 17, 2024 (part 1 of 5)

September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 1 COUNCILMEMBERS City Council Chamber
Michael McCorriston, Mayor Dublin Civic Center
Dr. Sherry Hu, Vice Mayor 100 Civic Plaza
Jean Josey, Councilmember Dublin, CA 94568
Kashef Qaadri, Councilmember www.dublin.ca.gov
Janine Thalblum, Councilmember
Regular Meeting of the

DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, September 17, 2024 Location: City Council Chamber 100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
CLOSED SESSION 6:30 PM
REGULAR MEETING 7:00 PM
Additional Meeting Procedures
This City Council meeting will be broadcast live on Comcast T.V. channel 28 beginning at 7:00 p.m. This meeting will also be livestreamed at www.tv30.org and on the City’s website at: https://dublin.ca.gov/ccmeetings For the convenience of the City and as a courtesy to the public, members of the public who wish to offer comments electronically have the option of giving public comment via Zoom, subject to the following procedures:
□ Fill out an online speaker slip available at www.dublin.ca.gov. The speaker slip will be made available at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, September 17, 2024. Upon submission, you will receive Zoom link information from the City Clerk.

Speakers slips will be accepted until the staff presentation ends, or until the public comment period on non-agenda items is closed.
□ Once connected to the Zoom platform using the Zoom link information from the City Clerk, the public speaker will be added to the Zoom webinar as an attendee and muted. The speaker will be able to observe the meeting from the Zoom platform.
□ When the agenda item upon which the individual would like to comment is addressed, the City Clerk will announce the speaker in the meeting when it is their time to give public comment. The speaker will then be unmuted to give public comment via Zoom.
1 September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 2 □ Technical difficulties may occur that make the option unavailable, and, in such event, the meeting will continue despite the inability to provide the option.

CLOSED SESSION 6:30 PM
I. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Agency Designated Representatives: Councilmembers Josey and Qaadri Unrepresented Employee: City Manager
REGULAR MEETING 7:00 PM

1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

2. REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION

3. PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS

3.1 Recognition of Dublin Little League 10s and 12s Girls Softball Teams The City Council will recognize Dublin Little League’s Girls Softball teams for their achievements in their State Tournaments and beyond.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Recognize the teams.

Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Certificate of Recognition - Dublin Little League 10U Girls Softball Team Attachment 2 - Certificate of Recognition - Dublin Little League 12U Girls Softball Team

4. PUBLIC COMMENT
At this time, the public is permitted to address the City Council on non-agendized items.

Please step to the podium and clearly state your name for the record. COMMENTS SHOULD NOT EXCEED THREE (3) MINUTES. In accordance with State Law, no action or discussion may take place on any item not appearing on the posted agenda. The Council may respond to statements made or questions asked, or may request Staff to report back at a future meeting concerning the matter. Any member of the public may contact the City Clerk’s Office related to the proper procedure to place an item on a future City Council agenda. The exceptions under which the City Council MAY discuss and/or take action on items not appearing on the agenda are contained in Government Code Section 54954.2(b)(1)(2)(3).

5. CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent Calendar items are typically non-controversial in nature and are considered for approval by the City Council with one single action. Members of the audience, Staff or the City Council who would like an item removed from the Consent Calendar for purposes of public input may request the Mayor to remove the item.
2 September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 3

5.1 Approval of the September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes The City Council will consider approval of the minutes of the September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Approve the minutes of the September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting.

Staff Report
Attachment 1 - September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes

5.2 2024 Development Agreement Review
The City Council will receive a report on the annual review of active Development Agreements to ensure compliance with the terms and provisions of the Agreements pursuant to the California Government Code, Sections 65864 - 65869.5, and to Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt the Resolution Finding that Developers Having Obligations Under Active Development Agreements and Supplemental Agreements as Amended, Have Complied in Good Faith With the Terms and Provisions of the Agreements.

Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Resolution Finding that Developers Having Obligations Under Active Development Agreements and Supplemental Agreements as Amended, Have Complied in Good Faith with the Terms and Provisions of the Agreements

5.3 Tract 8649 Francis Ranch – Final Map Notice and Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features
The City Council will receive a notification of the City Engineer’s pending approval of the Final Map for Tract 8649, Francis Ranch. The City Council will consider approving the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features for Tract 8649, Francis Ranch.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Receive the notification and adopt the Resolution Approving the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features with Tract 8649, Francis Ranch.

Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Resolution Approving the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features with Tract 8649, Francis Ranch
Attachment 2 - Exhibit A to Resolution - Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features with Tract 8649, Francis Ranch
Attachment 3 - Tract 8649 Final Map

5.4 Payment Issuance Report and Electronic Funds Transfers The City Council will receive a listing of payments issued from August 1, 2024 - August 31, 2024, totaling $8,799,312.47.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Receive the report.

Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Payment Issuance Report for August 2024
3 September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 4

5.5 Delegation of Authority to the City Manager to Purchase Fleet Vehicles Exceeding $45,000
The City Council will consider delegating purchasing authority of fleet vehicles exceeding $45,000 to the City Manager for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2024-25.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt the Resolution Delegating Authority to the City Manager to Purchase Fleet Vehicles Exceeding $45,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-25.

Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Resolution Delegating Authority to the City Manager to Purchase Fleet Vehicles Exceeding $45,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-25
Attachment 2 - Administrative Policy 3.6 - Fleet Life Cycle/Replacement

5.6 Ordinance Adding a Low Carbon Concrete Requirement to the City’s Green Building Code in Coordination with the City’s Climate Action Plan The City Council will consider waiving the second reading and adopting the Ordinance amending the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and Section 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete). The City Council waived the first reading and introduced the ordinance at the meeting on September 3, 2024.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Waive the second reading and adopt the Ordinance Approving Amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and Section 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete).

Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Ordinance Approving Amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter

7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section

7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete) Attachment 2 - September 3, 2024 Staff Report (without attachments)

5.7 Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.24.020 of the Dublin Municipal Code Pertaining to the City’s Conflict of Interest Code At the June 4, 2024, City Council meeting, the City Council directed Staff to review the City’s Conflict of Interest Code and determine if it needs to be updated. Staff conducted a review of the Code and determined that several positions should be added or deleted. The City Council will consider introducing an ordinance to update the list of designated positions that must file a Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700).

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Waive the reading and INTRODUCE the Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.24.020 of the Dublin Municipal Code Relating to the City’s Conflict of Interest Code, and direct Staff to file the 2024 Local Agency Biennial Notice.

Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.24.020 of the Dublin Municipal Code Relating to the City’s Conflict of Interest Code
Attachment 2 - 2024 Local Agency Notice
4 September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 5

5.8 Agreement to Employ Colleen Tribby as City Manager
The City Council will consider approval of an agreement to employ Colleen Tribby as the next City Manager of the City of Dublin. The terms and conditions of her employment were discussed with the appointed Negotiating Committee, consisting of Councilmembers Josey and Qaadri. The Negotiating Committee is recommending the approval of the agreement.

The City Council will consider an amendment to the City Salary Plan to establish the flat monthly salary for the position of City Manager, effective October 11, 2024, to conform with the proposed Agreement.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

The Negotiating Committee recommends that the City Council approve and authorize the Mayor to execute the Agreement with Colleen Tribby for employment as City Manager and adopt the Resolution Amending the Salary Plan.

Staff Report - Agreement to Employ Colleen Tribby as City Manager Attachment 1 - Agreement between the City of Dublin and Colleen Tribby for Employment as City Manager
Attachment 2 - Exhibit A to the Agreement
Attachment 3 - Resolution Amending the Salary Plan

6. PUBLIC HEARING

6.1 Hexcel Redevelopment (PLPA-2022-00038)
The City Council will consider the Hexcel Redevelopment Project, which redevelops an

8.81-acre site located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard. The project would demolish the existing 62,175-square-foot former Hexcel research and development building and construct a new 125,532-square-foot light industrial building with 217 parking stalls and related site improvements. The project was first presented to the City Council on March 19, 2024, and the City Council continued the project to a date uncertain so the Applicant could address City Council comments related to the overall project design, compatibility with the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, and landscape buffer to adjacent properties. The Applicant has since revised the project design and landscaping in response to comments.

Requested approvals include a Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit. The City Council will also consider certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Conduct a public hearing, deliberate, and take the following actions: 1) adopt the Resolution Certifying an Environmental Impact Report and Adopting Environmental Impact Findings, Findings Regarding Alternatives, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project; 2) waive the reading and INTRODUCE the Ordinance 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; and 3) adopt the Resolution Approving a Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project.

Staff Report
5 September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 6 Attachment 1 - Resolution Certifying an Environmental Impact Report and Adopting Environmental Impact Findings, Findings Regarding Alternatives, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project
Attachment 2 - Exhibit A to the Resolution - Final Environmental Impact Report Attachment 3 - Exhibit B to the Resolution - Findings Concerning Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Attachment 4 - Exhibit C to the Resolution - Findings Concerning Infeasiblity of Alternatives and Potential Additional Mitigation Measures Attachment 5 - Exhibit D to the Resolution - Statement of Overriding Considerations Attachment 6 - Exhibit E to the Resolution - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Attachment 7 - Ordinance Amending Zoning Map and Approving a Planned Development Zoning District with Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project
Attachment 8 - Resolution Approving a Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project Attachment 9 - Exhibit A to the Resolution - Hexcel Redevelopment Project Plans Attachment 10 - Arborist Report
Attachment 11 - Planning Commission Resolution 23-11
Attachment 12 - March 19, 2024 Staff Report (without attachments) Item 6.1 - PowerPoint Presentation
SB 343

7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS

7.1 Draft Economic Development Strategy
The City Council will review the draft Economic Development Strategy.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Review and provide direction on the draft Economic Development Strategy.

Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Draft Economic Development Strategy
Attachment 2 - Economic Development Strategy Implementation Matrix Item 7.1 - PowerPoint Presentation

8. NEW BUSINESS

8.1 Annual Review of the City’s Statement of Investment Policy The City Council will consider a resolution completing the annual review of the Statement of Investment Policy. The Policy has been updated to clarify the Delegation of Authority and Authorized and Suitable Investments and remove language to the Prohibited Investment Practices to provide more flexibility in the City’s investment strategy. While not required by statute, annual review of a local agency’s investment policy is recommended by the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission and is included as a requirement in the City Policy. Additionally, the City Council will consider and provide feedback on the establishment of a Finance and Investment Subcommittee, which would be responsible for reviewing and making recommendations to the City Council on financial matters including the City’s investment strategy.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
6 September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 7 Adopt the Resolution Approving the Annual Review of the Statement of Investment Policy and Delegation of Authority to Complete Investment Transactions and provide feedback and direction on the establishment of a Finance and Investment Subcommittee.

Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Resolution Approving the Annual Review of the Statement of Investment Policy and Delegation of Authority to Complete Investment Transactions Attachment 2 - Exhibit A to the Resolution - Statement of Investment Policy for City of Dublin
Attachment 3 - Statement of Investment Policy for the City of Dublin (Redline) Item 8.1 - PowerPoint Presentation

8.2 Overview of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Transit Oriented Communities Policy
The City Council will receive an initial overview of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Transit Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy. The TOC Policy is designed to support the region’s transit investment by encouraging jurisdictions to adopt transitsupportive land use policies for areas within a half-mile radius of existing or planned transit stops or stations, and to adopt additional policies they intend to further equitable transit-oriented communities. The TOC Policy lays out a menu of policy options for local jurisdictions to choose from. Compliance with the TOC Policy is required to qualify for future One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) transportation funding. Additionally, funding for Valley Link is tied to compliance by the local jurisdictions served by them.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Receive the staff presentation.

Staff Report
Attachment 1 - Alameda CTC CIP Five Year Programming with Two-year Allocation for the City of Dublin
Attachment 2 - MTC's Transit Oriented Development Draft Administrative Guidance Item 8.2 - PowerPoint Presentation

9. CITY MANAGER AND CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Brief information only reports from City Council and/or Staff, including committee reports and reports by City Council related to meetings attended at City expense (AB1234).

10. ADJOURNMENT
This AGENDA is posted in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2(a) If requested, pursuant to Government Code Section 54953.2, this agenda shall be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Section 12132) (ADA), and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof. To make a request for disability-related modification or accommodation, please contact the City Clerk’s Office (925) 833-6650 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Upon receiving a request, the City will swiftly resolve requests for reasonable accommodation for individuals with disabilities, consistent with the federal ADA, and resolve any doubt in favor of accessibility. 7 September 17, 2024 Dublin City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 8 Agenda materials that become available within 72 hours in advance of the meeting, and after publishing of the agenda, will be available at Civic Center, 100 Civic Plaza, and will be posted on the City’s website at www.dublin.ca.gov/ccmeetings.

Mission
The City of Dublin promotes and supports a high quality of life, ensures a safe, secure, and sustainable environment, fosters new opportunities, and champions a culture of equity, diversity, and inclusion. 8 STAFF REPORT

CITY COUNCIL

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Item 3.1
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT: Recognition of Dublin Little League 10s and 12s Girls Softball Teams Prepared by: Colleen Tribby, Assistant City Manager
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City Council will recognize Dublin Little League’s Girls Softball teams for their achievements in their State Tournaments and beyond.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Recognize the teams.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

None.

DESCRIPTION:

Two Dublin Little League Girls Softball teams recently represented the community at the top levels in their divisions. The 10-year-olds (“10s”) won the NorCal State Championship, and the 12’s All Star Team won the California Major League State Championship and moved on to the Western Regional Tournament in San Bernadino. While they lost to Arizona in the championship game, they won three games leading up to the championship in an exciting event that was broadcast on ESPN. Both teams are composed nearly entirely of Dublin players.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

None.

NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:

The City Council Agenda was posted.
9

Page 2 of 2 ends

ATTACHMENTS:
1) Certificate of Recognition - Dublin Little League 10U Girls Softball Team 2) Certificate of Recognition - Dublin Little League 12U Girls Softball Team 10 Attachment 1

CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION
Given to

DUBLIN LITTLE LEAGUE
10U GIRLS SOFTBALL TEAM
In recognition of winning the NorCal State Championship.

Presented by the
The City of Dublin
Dated: September 17, 2024
Mayor Michael McCorriston Vice Mayor Sherry Hu
_______ __________________ Councilmember Jean Josey Councilmember Kashef Qaadri Councilmember Janine Thalblum 11 Attachment 2

CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION
Given to

DUBLIN LITTLE LEAGUE
12U GIRLS SOFTBALL TEAM
In recognition of winning the California Major League State Championship and competing in the championship game of the Western Regional Tournament.

CITY COUNCIL

Page 1 of 1 ends

Agenda Item 5.1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City Council will consider approval of the minutes of the September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Approve the minutes of the September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

None.

DESCRIPTION:

The City Council will consider approval of the minutes of the September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

None.

NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:

The City Council Agenda was posted.

ATTACHMENTS:
1) September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of September 3, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes Prepared by: Marsha Moore, MMC, City Clerk
13 MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
Regular Meeting: September 3, 2024

DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 3, 2024
The following are minutes of the actions taken by the City of Dublin City Council. A full video recording of the meeting with the agenda items indexed and time stamped is available on the City’s website at: https://dublin.ca.gov/ccmeetings CLOSED SESSION 6:30 PM
I. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Agency Designated Representatives: Councilmembers Josey and Qaadri Unrepresented Employee: City Manager
REGULAR MEETING 7:00 PM
A Regular Meeting of the Dublin City Council was held on Tuesday, September 3, 2024, in the City Council Chamber. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM, by Mayor McCorriston.
1) CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Attendee Name Status
Michael McCorriston, Mayor Present
Dr. Sherry Hu, Vice Mayor Present
Jean Josey, Councilmember Present
Kashef Qaadri, Councilmember Present
Janine Thalblum, Councilmember Present
2) REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
Mayor McCorriston reported there was no reportable action out of Closed Session. 3) PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS

3.1) Presentation of the Constitution Week Proclamation The City Council presented the Constitution Week Proclamation to the Daughters of the American Revolution.

Attachment 1
14 DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 3, 2024

3.2) Preview of Splatter 2024
The City Council received a presentation previewing Splatter 2024, taking place September 14, 2024, at Emerald Glen Park.
4) PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment.
5) CONSENT CALENDAR

5.1) Approved the minutes of the August 20, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting.

5.2) Adopted Resolution No. 98-24 titled, “Approving the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features With 6797 Pearl Place.”

5.3) Waived the second reading and adopted Ordinance No. 07-24 titled, “Amending Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.74 (Stormwater Management and Discharge Control);” and waived the second reading and adopted Ordinance No. 08-24 titled, “Amending Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.29 (Management of PCBs During Building Demolition Projects).”
On a motion by Vice Mayor Hu, seconded by Councilmember Qaadri, and by unanimous vote, the City Council adopted the Consent Calendar.

RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVED BY: Dr. Sherry Hu, Vice Mayor
SECOND: Kashef Qaadri, Councilmember
AYES: McCorriston, Josey, Hu, Qaadri, Thalblum
6) PUBLIC HEARING

6.1) Adding a Low Carbon Concrete Requirement to the City’s Green Building Code in Coordination with the City’s Climate Action Plan The City Council received a presentation regarding the low carbon concrete requirements, which are in alignment with the City of Dublin Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond, Measure MM-2, Reduce the Embodied Greenhouse Gas Emissions Associated with Building Materials.

Mayor McCorriston opened the Public Hearing.

Upon receiving no public comment, Mayor McCorriston closed the Public Hearing. 15 DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 3, 2024
On a motion by Councilmember Qaadri, seconded by Councilmember Josey, and by unanimous vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 99-24 titled, “Approving Findings Regarding the Need for Local Amendments to Provisions in the California Building Standards Code as Adopted by the City;” and introduced Ordinance Approving Amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section

7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and Section

7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete).

RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVED BY: Kashef Qaadri, Councilmember
SECOND: Jean Josey, Councilmember
AYES: McCorriston, Josey, Hu, Qaadri, Thalblum
7) UNFINISHED BUSINESS

7.1) Two-Year Strategic Plan Update and Final Report for Fiscal Years 2022-23 and 2023-24
The City Council received a presentation with an update and final report on the City’s TwoYear Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2022-23 and 2023-24.

7.2) Dublin Commons Affordable Housing Proposal
The City Council received a presentation regarding the Dublin Commons Affordable Housing proposal for the future development of the site.

Mayor McCorriston called for a break at 8:14 PM.

Mayor McCorriston reconvened the meeting at 8:22 PM.

Mayor McCorriston opened the public comment period.

Upon receiving no public comment, Mayor McCorriston closed the public comment period.

By consensus, the City Council directed Staff to include the following in the development agreement: 1) 60 moderate income units spread through the project proportionally developed; 2) 24 lower-income units spread through the project proportionally developed; 3) land site for parcel H1 prepared and dedicated; 4) affordable housing credits to the developer for each affordable unit above 80 on parcel H1; and 5) flexibility to evaluate forsale units by including language around the cadence of review for potential condo conversions.
16 DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 3, 2024
8) NEW BUSINESS

8.1) Amendments to the First-Time Homebuyer Loan Program Guidelines The City Council received a presentation regarding proposed amendments to the First Time Homebuyer Loan Program Guidelines.

On a motion by Councilmember Josey, seconded by Councilmember Thalblum, and by unanimous vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 100-24 titled, “Amending the First Time Homebuyer Loan Program Guidelines,” and approved the budget change.

RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVED BY: Jean Josey, Councilmember
SECOND: Janine Thalblum, Councilmember
AYES: McCorriston, Josey, Hu, Qaadri, Thalblum
9) CITY MANAGER AND CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
The City Council and Staff provided brief information-only reports, including committee reports and reports related to meetings attended at City expense (AB1234).

By consensus, the City Council directed Staff to explore an e-bike and e-scooter safety education program.
10) ADJOURNMENT
Mayor McCorriston adjourned the meeting at 9:51 PM.

Mayor
ATTEST:

City Clerk
17 STAFF REPORT

CITY COUNCIL

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Item 5.2
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT: 2024 Development Agreement Review
Prepared by: Jeff Baker, Community Development Director and Anastasia Nelson, Administrative Aide
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City Council will receive a report on the annual review of active Development Agreements to ensure compliance with the terms and provisions of the Agreements pursuant to the California Government Code, Sections 65864 - 65869.5, and to Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The fiscal impacts of these projects were addressed as part of a fiscal analysis performed for each approved project. All financial obligations of the subject developers have been met pursuant to the terms provided in their respective Development Agreements.

DESCRIPTION:

Background
An annual review of active Development Agreements is required by California Government Code Section 65865.1 and Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code. During the review period, occurring in July and August of each year, Staff reviews each active Development Agreement to ensure compliance with the terms and provisions of the agreement. The burden of demonstrating good faith compliance is on the respective developer and/or property owner. Staff from the Finance, Community Development, Fire Prevention, Parks and Community Services, and Public Works departments complete a thorough and detailed assessment of the developer’s compliance with the requirements contained in the applicable agreements. 18

Page 2 of 2 ends

Following the review, Staff presents the findings and recommends to the City Council to either: (1) determine that the parties are in compliance and conclude the review; or (2) determine that the parties have not complied in good faith, in which case the City Council must request that the matter of compliance be considered at a noticed public hearing. At said public hearing, the City Council may modify or terminate the Development Agreement upon making certain findings based on substantial evidence that the developer has not complied in good faith with the Agreement.

Analysis
The following active Development Agreements, identified in Table 1 below, were subject to the 2024 annual review. Based on Staff’s review, all required public improvements, payments, and scheduled financial obligations have been satisfied by each of the developers and property owners. Staff concluded that each of the developers/owners are proceeding in good faith with the terms of their Development Agreement, and is therefore recommending that the report be accepted by the City Council and the annual review be concluded.

Table 1: Active Development Agreements
No. Development Project Expiration Date Compliant

1. Bex Development (Branaugh Property) 04/20/2033 Yes

2. Dublin Crossings (Boulevard) 12/20/2033 Yes

3. Kaiser Dublin Medical Center 11/04/2041 Yes

4. SCS Dublin Project (The DC) 01/05/2028 Yes
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

None.

NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:

No public notice is required. However, a formal notification of the 2024 Development Agreement Annual Review was sent to the parties of the Development Agreements. The City Council Agenda was posted.

ATTACHMENTS:
1) Resolution Finding that Developers Having Obligations Under Active Development Agreements and Supplemental Agreements as Amended, Have Complied in Good Faith With the Terms and Provisions of the Agreements
19 Attachment 1
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted 09/17/2024 Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. XX – 24

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN

FINDING THAT DEVELOPERS HAVING OBLIGATIONS UNDER ACTIVE DEVELOPMENT

AGREEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENTS AS AMENDED, HAVE COMPLIED IN

GOOD FAITH WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENTS WHEREAS, as of July 1, 2024, the following projects have active Development Agreements with the City of Dublin: Bex Development (Branaugh Property), Dublin Crossings (Boulevard), Kaiser Dublin Medical Center and SCS Dublin Project (The DC); and WHEREAS, the annual review of active Development Agreements is required by California Government Code Sections 65864 – 65869.5, and Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, during the review period, occurring in July and August of each year, Staff reviews the development agreements to ensure compliance with the terms and provisions of the Agreements; and
WHEREAS, the burden of demonstrating good faith compliance with the Agreements rests with the Developers; and
WHEREAS, the appropriate City Departments have reviewed each of the active Development Agreements, and confirmed that the developers are in compliance with the terms of the Agreements; and
WHEREAS, Staff presents and recommends the City Council determine the parties are in compliance and conclude the review.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin concludes its review of the above referenced active Development Agreements and Supplemental Agreements as Amended, and determines that the Developers having obligations under said Agreements have complied in good faith with the terms and provisions of the Agreements.
{Signatures on the following page}
20 Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted 09/17/24 Page 2 of 2 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of September 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________
City Clerk
21 STAFF REPORT

CITY COUNCIL

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Item 5.3
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT: Tract 8649 Francis Ranch – Final Map Notice and Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features
Prepared by: Laurie Sucgang, City Engineer
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City Council will receive a notification of the City Engineer’s pending approval of the Final Map for Tract 8649, Francis Ranch. The City Council will consider approving the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features for Tract 8649, Francis Ranch.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Receive the notification and adopt the Resolution Approving the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features with Tract 8649, Francis Ranch.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

There is no impact to the General Fund. All costs associated with the agreements are borne by the developer.

DESCRIPTION:

The Francis Ranch development (formerly known as East Ranch) is located north of Interstate 580, east of Fallon Road and the Jordan Ranch development, south of the Positano development, and adjacent to the City’s eastern city boundary. The development is being subdivided into six neighborhoods. The developer has prepared a final map, Tract 8649, for Neighborhood 5. In accordance with Chapter 9.24.080 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code, this is notice of the following:
22

Page 2 of 2 ends

City Engineer’s pending decision on the following Final Map:

Tract Location Developer Number of
Units/Lots
Type Proposed
Decision
8649 Francis Ranch,
Neighborhood 5
TH East Ranch
Dublin, LLC
98 Lots Single Family Approve
Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features The Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features provides for the Homeowners’ Association to maintain project-related landscape and decorative features within the public street rights-of-way along all public streets within the neighborhood, including landscape plantings, irrigation, sidewalks, street trees, and decorative or stamped pavement. The project conditions of approval require this agreement prior to approval of the final map.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

None.

NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:

The City Council Agenda was posted.

ATTACHMENTS:
1) Resolution Approving the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features with Tract 8649, Francis Ranch
2) Exhibit A to the Resolution – Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features with Tract 8649, Francis Ranch
3) Tract 8649 Final Map
23 Attachment 1
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted 09/17/24 Page 1 of 1 RESOLUTION NO. XX – 24

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN

APPROVING THE AGREEMENT FOR LONG TERM ENCROACHMENT FOR LANDSCAPE FEATURES WITH TRACT 8649, FRANCIS RANCH
WHEREAS, a Vesting Tentative Map for Tract 8563, Francis Ranch was approved by City Council Resolution No. 140-21 on December 7, 2021, with Conditions of Approval; and WHEREAS, said Conditions of Approval required the developer to construct project-related landscape features within the public street rights-of-way; and WHEREAS, said Conditions of Approval required the developer to enter into an Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for the maintenance of said landscape features; and WHEREAS, the developer has executed and filed with the City of Dublin a Tract Improvement Agreement to construct the required Tract improvements, including said landscape features; and
WHEREAS, the developer has executed and filed with the City of Dublin an Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features for Tract 8649, Francis Ranch, attached hereto as Exhibit A, which will be recorded against the property concurrently with the Tract 8649 Final Map.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby approve the Agreement for Long Term Encroachment for Landscape Features for Tract 8649, Francis Ranch, attached hereto as Exhibit A to this Resolution.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager, or designee, is authorized to execute Exhibit A and make any necessary, non-substantive changes to Exhibit A to carry out the intent of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of September 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
City Clerk
24 Attachment 2
25 26
27 28
29 92 93 94 95 96 97 99 98 100 91 90 89 88 87 85 86 84 75 73 74 79 76 77 78 81 80 82 13 10 11 12 15 14 16 69 68 67 66 65 64 63 62 PARCEL C 61 60 59 58 57 PARCEL B 56 27 33 28 29 30 31 18 25 32 26 17 55 54 52 53 39 35 36 45 38 37 51 50 49 48 47 46 42 44 43 40 41 101 PARCEL G PARCEL D PARCEL E 34 21 22 23 24 20 19 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 83 MJR 2 PARCEL F 72 70 71 MJR 1 PARCEL A 37 27 MJR 30 40 35 36 3839 34 33 322931 22 24 23 21 28 26 44 25 50 47 48 49 52 51 53 46 42 41 43 45 5 6 78910 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 2 3 4 20 19 25 13 20 3 34 31 4137 3839 40 4442 43 45 MJR A 32 28 29 33 36 35 27 24 23 26 17 18 19 21 22 12 11 15 14 16 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 2 PARCEL A 1 30 PARCEL B PARCEL A PARCEL C 17 PARCEL B 18 52 39 27 MJR 78 68 4950 6566 67 63 71 64 70 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 83 82 81 80 79 77 76 73747572 91 58 51 59 54 605661 53 6257 55 47 4138 434645 40 48 37 44 42 26 34 2925 3135 28 363233 30 6 12 10 9 11 7 3 5 4 2 1 17 19 15 18 22 2021 24 23 16 13 14 PARCEL A 8 69 35 MJR 7164 837653 59 24 21 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 PARCEL C 16 14 PARCEL D 49 4847 46 45 44 43 42 4140 80 81 85 82 84 50 51 52 54 55 56 63 62 66 65 67 72 73 68 69 70 75 74 78 77 79 PARCEL F 60 5758 30 37 36 34 39 27 28 29 31 32 33 26 25 23 19 22 20 61 9 15 38 PARCEL A PARCEL B 17 18 PARCEL E 66686564 63 67 62 61 54 56 58 6028 27 24 25 26 55 57 59 36 35 31 29 34 33 30 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 51 50 49 48 47 46 45 7 6 5 4 3 8 2 22 21 PARCEL A 20 19 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 16 14 15 5253 23 32 72 1 70 69 73 71 37 92 PARCEL D MJR 41 53 51 50 55 PARCEL I 39 36 35 45 44 43 46 PARCEL K49 4748 PARCEL L 56 PARCEL M 59 52 54585762 37 3474 38 67 42 66 61 60 PARCEL N 63 70 PARCEL O PARCEL P 71 64 65 68 69 72 73 PARCEL A PARCEL B PARCEL C PARCEL E PARCEL F 10 2281951841511411 2367121613201721 23 PARCEL G 24 25 32 29 26 27 PARCEL H 3128 3033 PARCEL R PARCEL W 86 PARCEL T PARCEL S 88 85 83 89 84 82 80 PARCEL U 93 81 98 PARCEL Q797578 76 PARCEL V 96 77 97 9495909187 PARCEL X 9 PARCEL J 40 LEGEND:CITY OWNED AND MASTER HOA MAINTAINED HARDSCAPE (AREA = 13,836± SF) TRACT BOUNDARY SHEET 2 30 52 39 27 MJR 78 68 4950 6566 67 63 71 64 70 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 83 82 81 80 79 77 76 73747572 91 58 51 59 54 605661 53 6257 55 47 4138 434645 40 48 37 44 42 26 34 2925 3135 28 363233 30 69 92 PARCEL D MJR 41 53 51 50 55 PARCEL I 36 35 39 45 44 43 46 PARCEL K 49 4748 PARCEL L 56 PARCEL M 59 52 54585762 34 37 74 38 67 42 66 61 60 PARCEL N 63 70 PARCEL O PARCEL P 71 64 65 68 69 72 73 PARCEL A PARCEL B PARCEL C PARCEL E PARCEL F 10 2281951841511411 2367121613201721 23 PARCEL G 24 25 32 29 26 27 PARCEL H 31 28 3033 PARCEL R PARCEL W 86 PARCEL T PARCEL S 88 85 83 89 84 82 80 PARCEL U 93 81 98 PARCEL Q 797578 76 PARCEL V 96 77 97 9495909187 PARCEL X 9 40 PARCEL J LEGEND:CITY OWNED AND MASTER HOA MAINTAINED HARDSCAPE (AREA = 13,836± SF) TRACT BOUNDARY 31 FALLON
DUBLIN

ALAMEDA COUNTY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
ROAD
N. CANYONS

PARKWAY

COLLIER

CANYON DOOLAN
ROAD
I-580 PROJECT SITE ARNOLD DRIVESCARLETT DRIVE
VICINITY MAP HOPYARD ROAD DOUGHERTY ROAD SAN RAMON VALLEY I-680 BLVD. ROAD GLEASON

DRIVE TASSAJARA ROAD
PLEASANTON DRIVE HACIENDA SANTA RITA I-580 ROAD
DUBLIN

BOULEVARD

CENTRAL

PARKWAY EL CHARRO ROAD FALLON
DUBLIN

ALAMEDA COUNTY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
ROAD
N. CANYONS

PARKWAY

COLLIER

CANYON DOOLAN
ROAD
I-580 PROJECT SITE ARNOLD DRIVESCARLETT DRIVE
OWNER'S STATEMENT:

THE UNDERSIGNED DOES HEREBY STATE THAT HE/SHE/THEY IS/ARE THE OWNER OF ALL THE LANDS DELINEATED AND EMBRACED WITHIN THE TRACT BOUNDARY LINE OF THIS FINAL MAP ENTITLED: "TRACT 8649, FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5, CROAK PROPERTY", CITY OF DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA”, CONSISTING OF NINE (9) SHEETS, THIS STATEMENT BEING UPON SHEET ONE (1) THEREOF; THAT HE/SHE/THEY CONSENT(S) TO THE PREPARATION AND FILING OF SAID MAP; THAT SAID MAP DOES PARTICULARLY SETS FORTH AND DESCRIBES ALL THE LOTS INTENDED FOR SALE BY THEIR NUMBER AND PRECISE LENGTH AND WIDTH;

AND THAT SAID MAP PARTICULARLY SETS FORTH AND DESCRIBES THE PARCELS OF LAND SO RESERVED FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES BY THEIR BOUNDARIES, COURSES, AND EXTENT.

THE REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED BELOW IS DEDICATED IN FEE TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES:

1. THE REAL PROPERTY DESIGNATED AS HEREFORD ROAD, HOLSTEIN AVENUE, SHORTHORN STREET, KINZEL WAY AND GALLAGHER LANE FOR PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PURPOSES.

THE REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED BELOW IS DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN AS EASEMENTS FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES:

1. THE AREAS IN, UNDER, ALONG, AND ACROSS ANY AREA OR STRIP OF LAND DESIGNATED AS PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTS (PSE),

AS DELINEATED AND EMBRACED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE HEREIN EMBODIED MAP, ARE DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN FOREVER FOR THE "PURPOSES OF PUBLIC SERVICES" (AS HEREIN DEFINED). THE "PURPOSES OF PUBLIC SERVICES"

SHALL INCLUDE THE CONSTRUCTION, RECONSTRUCTION, REMOVING, REPLACING, REPAIRING, MAINTAINING, OPERATING, AND USING "PUBLIC SERVICE FACILITIES" (AS DEFINED HEREIN), AND ACCESS THROUGH THE PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT FOR THESE PURPOSES. "PUBLIC SERVICE FACILITIES" SHALL INCLUDE PUBLIC UTILITIES, FIRE HYDRANTS, ELECTROLIERS, IRRIGATION

SYSTEMS, SIGNS AND TRAFFIC SIGNALS, AND ALL NECESSARY APPURTENANCES THERETO SUCH AS BRACES, CONNECTIONS, FASTENINGS, APPLIANCES, AND FIXTURES FOR USE IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. ALL PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTS SHALL BE

KEPT OPEN AND FREE FROM BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES OF ANY KIND, WITH THE SOLE EXCEPTION OF PUBLIC SERVICE FACILITIES. ALL PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTS SHALL BE CONSIDERED PUBLIC "WAYS" AS THAT TERM IS USED IN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE SECTION 6202, AND ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES HOLDING A VALID FRANCHISE FROM THE CITY SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO USE THE PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THE FRANCHISE.

2. THE AREAS DESIGNATED AS EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT (EVAE) AS SHOWN UPON SAID MAP, FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OF PUBLIC SAFETY VEHICLES AND EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT.

3. THE AREAS DESIGNATED AS STORM DRAIN EASEMENT (SDE) AS SHOWN UPON SAID MAP, FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF APPLICABLE STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES AND APPURTENANCES THERETO. SAID EASEMENT SHALL BE KEPT OPEN AND FREE FROM ALL BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES OF ANY KIND.

THE AREAS DESIGNATED AS DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT (DSRSD) ARE HEREBY IRREVOCABLY OFFERED FOR DEDICATION

BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT TO DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT (DSRSD), OR ITS DESIGNEE IN GROSS, AS A SUBSURFACE

EASEMENT AND SURFACE EASEMENT FOR POTABLE AND RECYCLED WATER AND SANITARY SEWER PURPOSES, INCLUDING ACCESS

THERETO, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND REPLACEMENTS OF WORKS, IMPROVEMENTS, AND STRUCTURES, AND THE CLEARING OF OBSTRUCTIONS AND VEGETATION. NO BUILDING OR STRUCTURE MAY BE PLACED ON SAID

EASEMENT, NOR SHALL ANYTHING BE DONE THEREIN, NOR ACCESS RESTRICTED THERETO WHICH MAY INTERFERE WITH DSRSD'S FULL ENJOYMENT OF SAID EASEMENT.

AND THE UNDERSIGNED DOES HEREBY RESERVE TO ITSELF AND TO THE OWNERS, RESIDENTS, CUSTOMERS AND OTHERS DESIGNATED BY THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION OF TRACT 8649, THE AREAS MARKED AS PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT (PAE) AS SHOWN UPON SAID MAP. SAID AREAS ARE FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PRIVATE INGRESS AND EGRESS, PRIVATE STREETS, PRIVATE UTILITIES, PRIVATE STORM DRAINS, OVERLAND DRAINAGE RELEASE, LANDSCAPING AND ALL APPURTENANCES.

MAINTENANCE OF SAID PRIVATE ACCESS WAYS IS TO BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION GOVERNING TRACT 8649, ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SUBDIVISION RESTRICTIONS GOVERNING TRACT 8649. SAID AREAS ARE NOT OFFERED FOR DEDICATION TO THE PUBLIC AND ARE TO BE CONVEYED TO THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION GOVERNING TRACT 8649 BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT.

AND THE UNDERSIGNED DOES HEREBY RESERVE FOR FUTURE DEDICATION TO THE FALLON VILLAGE GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT

DISTRICT (GHAD), PARCELS D, W, AND X, AS SHOWN UPON SAID MAP, FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE ONGOING MAINTENANCE OF OPEN

SPACES AND REQUIRED GHAD ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE MAINTENANCE OF STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES, BENCHES, BROW DITCHES, ROADS OR TRAILS, FENCING, WATER QUALITY CONTROL PONDS, AND SLOPES. SAID PARCELS D, W, AND X

ARE TO BE CONVEYED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT TO THE FALLON VILLAGE GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT DISTRICT (GHAD) SUBSEQUENT TO THE FILING OF THIS FINAL MAP.

AND THE UNDERSIGNED DOES HEREBY RESERVE FOR FUTURE DEDICATION TO THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION PARCELS A THROUGH C, AND E THROUGH V, AS SHOWN UPON SAID MAP. SAID PARCELS A THROUGH C, AND E THROUGH V TO BE CONVEYED BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT TO THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION SUBSEQUENT TO THE FILING OF THIS FINAL MAP.

THIS MAP SHOWS ALL EASEMENTS ON THE PREMISES AND/OR OF RECORD, WITHIN THE BOUNDARY LINES OF THE HEREIN EMBODIED MAP.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE UNDERSIGNED HAVE EXECUTED THIS STATEMENT ON THE ______ DAY OF _______________________, 2024.

AS OWNERS: ARROYO CAP IV-3, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY BY: ARROYO CAP IV-2, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

ITS SOLE MEMBER
BY: ARROYO CAPITAL IV, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

ITS SOLE MEMBER
BY:

NAME:

TITLE:

CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' STATEMENT:

STATE OF CALIFORNIA)

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA)

I, ANIKA CAMPBELL-BELTON, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY STATE, AS CHECKED BELOW, THAT:
□ AN APPROVED BOND HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE SUPERVISORS OF SAID COUNTY AND STATE IN THE AMOUNT OF $___________

CONDITIONED FOR THE PAYMENT OF ALL TAXES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED AS TAXES, APPROVED BY SAID LOCAL BOARD IN SAID AMOUNT.
□ ALL TAXES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED AS TAXES HAVE BEEN PAID AS CERTIFIED BY THE TREASURER-TAX COLLECTOR OF THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I HAVE HEREUNTO SET MY HAND THIS _____ DAY OF ____________, 2024.

ANIKA CAMPBELL-BELTON BY:

CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DEPUTY COUNTY CLERK

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY RECORDER'S STATEMENT:

FILED FOR RECORD THIS DAY OF , 2024 AT M., IN BOOK OF MAPS AT PAGES THROUGH , UNDER SERIES NO. 2024 AT THE REQUEST OF FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

FEE: $_____________
MELISSA WILK BY:

COUNTY RECORDER IN AND FOR THE COUNTY DEPUTY

OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT:

A NOTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICER COMPLETING THIS CERTIFICATE VERIFIES ONLY THE IDENTITY OF THE

INDIVIDUAL WHO SIGNED THE DOCUMENT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE IS ATTACHED, AND NOT THE TRUTHFULNESS, ACCURACY, OR VALIDITY OF THAT DOCUMENT.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF )
ON , 2024, BEFORE ME , A NOTARY

PUBLIC, PERSONALLY APPEARED

WHO PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON(S) WHOSE

NAME(S) IS/ARE SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT HE/SHE/THEY

EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/HER/THEIR AUTHORIZED CAPACITY(IES), AND THAT BY HIS/HER/THEIR SIGNATURE(S)

ON THE INSTRUMENT THE PERSON(S), OR ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON(S) ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT.

I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT.

WITNESS MY HAND:

SIGNATURE:

PRINTED NAME, NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID COUNTY AND STATE PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS:

COMMISSION EXPIRES:

SOILS REPORT NOTE: COMMISSION # OF NOTARY:

A GEOTECHNICAL REPORT, DATED DECEMBER 10, 2021, REVISED FEBRUARY 17, 2022 HAS BEEN PREPARED BY ENGEO INCORPORATED, JOB NO. 5101.001.002 "GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION", FOR THIS SUBDIVISION AND IS ON FILE WITH THE CITY OF DUBLIN.

OPTIONEE'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT:

A NOTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICER COMPLETING THIS CERTIFICATE VERIFIES ONLY THE IDENTITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL

WHO SIGNED THE DOCUMENT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE IS ATTACHED, AND NOT THE TRUTHFULNESS, ACCURACY, OR VALIDITY OF THAT DOCUMENT.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA}
COUNTY OF }
ON , 2024, BEFORE ME , A NOTARY PUBLIC,

PERSONALLY APPEARED

WHO PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON(S) WHOSE NAME(S) IS SUBSCRIBED

TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT HE EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/HER/THEIR AUTHORIZED

CAPACITY(IES), AND BY HIS/HER/THEIR SIGNATURE(S) ON THE INSTRUMENT THE PERSON(S), OR ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON(S) ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT.

I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT.

WITNESS MY HAND:

SIGNATURE:

PRINTED NAME, NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID COUNTY AND STATE PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS:

COMMISSION EXPIRES:

COMMISSION # OF NOTARY:

OPTIONEE'S STATEMENT:

THE UNDERSIGNED, TH EAST RANCH DUBLIN LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AS OPTIONEE UNDER THE DOCUMENTS RECORDED ON SEPTEMBER 29, 2023, AS DOCUMENT NO. 2023111607 ON MARCH 29, 2024, AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 2024041809, AND ON MARCH 29, 2024, AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 2024041810 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DOES

HEREBY JOIN IN AND CONSENT TO THE FOREGOING OWNERS' STATEMENT AND ALL DEDICATIONS SHOWN HEREIN.

BY: _________________________________
NAME: _________________________________
AUGUST 2024 TITLE: _________________________________
A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563,
RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22

ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS

CITY OF DUBLIN

ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
TRACT 8649
FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5

CROAK PROPERTY
Attachment 3
32 ACTING CITY SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT:

I HEREBY STATE THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THIS FINAL MAP ENTITLED “TRACT 8649, FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5, CROAK PROPERTY", AND I AM SATISFIED THAT THIS FINAL MAP IS TECHNICALLY CORRECT.

DATED: , 2024
SETH H. IRISH, PLS 5922, ACTING CITY SURVEYOR

CITY OF DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT:

THIS MAP WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION AND IS BASED UPON A FIELD SURVEY IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND LOCAL ORDINANCES AT THE REQUEST OF TRUMARK HOMES, LLC IN JANUARY OF 2022. I HEREBY STATE THAT THIS FINAL MAP SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMS TO THE CONDITIONALLY APPROVED TENTATIVE MAP, IF ANY,

AND THAT ALL THE MONUMENTS INDICATED HEREON ARE OF THE CHARACTER AND OCCUPY POSITIONS INDICATED HEREON OR WILL

BE SET WITHIN TWENTY FOUR MONTHS FROM RECORDATION OF THIS FINAL MAP, AND THE COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS, AND

WILL BE SUFFICIENT TO ENABLE THE SURVEY TO BE RETRACED, AND THE SURVEY IS TRUE AND COMPLETE AS SHOWN, AND THAT THE GROSS AREA WITHIN THE TRACT IS 16.40 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.

DATED: , 2024

IAN BRUCE MACDONALD
LS NO. 8817
CITY ENGINEER'S STATEMENT:

I, LAURIE L. SUCGANG, CITY ENGINEER OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY STATE THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THE HEREIN EMBODIED FINAL MAP ENTITLED “TRACT 8649, FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5, CROAK PROPERTY", CITY OF DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA”, CONSISTING OF NINE (9) SHEETS, THIS STATEMENT BEING UPON SHEET TWO (2) THEREOF, AND THAT THE FINAL MAP WAS PRESENTED TO ME AS PROVIDED BY LOCAL ORDINANCE THIS ________ DAY OF _____________________, 20__, AND THAT THIS MAP CONFORMS WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND LOCAL

ORDINANCES APPLICABLE AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL OF THE VESTING TENTATIVE MAP AND THE SUBDIVISION AS SHOWN IS

SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME AS IT APPEARED ON THE VESTING TENTATIVE MAP AND ANY APPROVED ALTERATIONS THEREOF, AND THAT I

APPROVE SAID MAP AND ACCEPT, SUBJECT TO IMPROVEMENT, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN, HEREFORD ROAD, HOLSTEIN

AVENUE, SHORTHORN STREET, KINZEL WAY AND GALLAGHER LANE, EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT (EVAE), PUBLIC SERVICE

EASEMENT (PSE), AND STORM DRAIN EASEMENT (SDE) OFFERED FOR DEDICATION FOR PUBLIC USE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE TERMS OF THE OFFER OF DEDICATION . I FURTHER STATE THAT ALL AGREEMENTS AND SURETY REQUIRED BY LAW TO ACCOMPANY THE WITHIN FINAL MAP ARE APPROVED AND ARE FILED WITH THE CITY.

DATED: , 2024 LAURIE L. SUCGANG, RCE 73022

CITY ENGINEER

CITY OF DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
AUGUST 2024
A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563,
RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22

ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS

CITY OF DUBLIN

ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
TRACT 8649
FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5

CROAK PROPERTY
BENEFICIARY'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT:

A NOTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICER COMPLETING THIS CERTIFICATE VERIFIES ONLY THE IDENTITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL

WHO SIGNED THE DOCUMENT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE IS ATTACHED, AND NOT THE TRUTHFULNESS, ACCURACY, OR VALIDITY OF THAT DOCUMENT.

STATE OF ARIZONA}
COUNTY OF }
ON , 2024, BEFORE ME , A NOTARY PUBLIC,

PERSONALLY APPEARED

WHO PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON(S) WHOSE NAME(S) IS SUBSCRIBED

TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT HE EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/HER/THEIR AUTHORIZED

CAPACITY(IES), AND BY HIS/HER/THEIR SIGNATURE(S) ON THE INSTRUMENT THE PERSON(S), OR ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON(S) ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT.

I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT.

WITNESS MY HAND:

SIGNATURE:

PRINTED NAME, NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID COUNTY AND STATE PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS:

COMMISSION EXPIRES:

COMMISSION # OF NOTARY:

BENEFICIARY'S STATEMENT:

THE UNDERSIGNED, WESTERN ALLIANCE BANK, AN ARIZONA CORPORATION, AS BENEFICIARY UNDER THE DOCUMENT RECORDED ON MARCH 29, 2024, AS DOCUMENT NO. 2024041808 OF OFFICIAL

RECORDS OF ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY JOIN IN AND CONSENT TO THE FOREGOING OWNERS' STATEMENT AND ALL DEDICATIONS SHOWN HEREIN.

BY: _________________________________ NAME: _________________________________ TITLE: _________________________________
33 C1
BNDY
52 39
27 MJR
78 68
49 50
65 66
67 63
71 64
70 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
83 82 81 80 79 77 76
73 74
75 72
91 58
51 59
54 60
56 61
53 62
57 55
47 41
38 43
46 45
40 48
37 44
42 26
34 29
25 31
35 28
36 32
33 30
15 20
21 69
92 PARCEL D
MJR
41 53 51 50
55 PARCEL I
36 35
39 45
44 43
46 PARCEL K
49 47
48 PARCEL L
56 PARCEL M
59 52
54 58
57 62
34 37
74 38
67 42
66 61
60 PARCEL N
63 70

PARCEL O PARCEL P
71 64 65 68 69 72 73

PARCEL A

PARCEL B

PARCEL C

PARCEL E

PARCEL F
10 22
8 19
5 18
4 15
1 14
11 2
3 6
7 12
16 13
20 17
21 23

PARCEL G
24 25
32 29
26 27

PARCEL H
31 28
30 33

PARCEL R

PARCEL W
86 PARCEL T PARCEL S
88 85
83 89 84
82 80

PARCEL U
93 81
98 PARCEL Q
79 75
78 76

PARCEL V
96 77
97 94
95 90
91 87

PARCEL X
9 40

PARCEL J BASIS OF BEARINGS
N89°03'50"W 1000.82' BNDY N0°54'47"E 1315.04' BNDY N0°00'00"E 568.52' BNDY N90°00'00"E
164.00' BNDY
N90°00'00"E 501.00' BNDY N0°00'00"E 730.00' BNDY
N90°00'00"W 164.64' BNDY
C2
BNDY
L1(R)
BNDY
C3
BNDY
L2(R)
BNDY
9 PARCEL I 39 36 35
45 44
43 46

PARCEL K
49 47
48 PARCEL L
56 PARCEL M
59 52
54 58
57 62
37 34
74 38
67 42
66 61 60 PARCEL N 63 70 PARCEL O PARCEL P 71
64 65 68 69 72 73

PARCEL A

PARCEL B

PARCEL C

PARCEL E

PARCEL F
10 22
8 19
5 18
4 15
1 14
11 2
3 6
7 12
16 13
20 17
21 92

4.06±AC

PARCEL D
41 53 51 50
55 23 PARCEL G 24
25 32
29 26
27 PARCEL H
31 28
30 33

PARCEL R

PARCEL W
86 PARCEL T PARCEL S
88 85
83 89 84
82 80

PARCEL U
93 81
98 PARCEL Q
79 75
78 76

PARCEL V
96 77
97 94
95 90
91 87
PARCEL X N0°00'00"E 930.00'
N90°00'00"E 111.80' N0°00'00"E 111.45'
N90°00'00"E 218.00' N0°00'00"E 122.00'

62.64'
551.76'
R=71.00' Δ=90°00'00" L=111.53'
N0°00'00"E(R) 28.85'
N90°00'00"E 112.00'
N0°00'00"E 7.00'
N41°48'37"W 25.00'
C5 N59°31'59"W(R)
N41°48'37"W(R)
40 PARCEL J N0°00'00"W 608.57' M-M
N89°03'50"W
455.68' M-M
EX. 6'
PSE EX. 6' PSEEX. 6' PSE N0°00'00"W 287.50' M-M N0°00'00"E 394.00' M-M N0°00'00"E 287.50' M-M N90°00'00"W 319.00' M-M N90°00'00"W 277.50' M-M

28.5' 27.5'
N90°00'00"W 259.50' M-M 13' 33'

17.5'

28.5'
46'

17.5'
46'

28.5'
56' 46'
28' 18'

28.5'

27.5' 17.50' 28.50'
74 18
15 C
B 4
NDY
L2(R)
BNDY
74 PARCEL E
18 N90°00'00"W 277.50' M-M N0°00'00"E 53.50' M-PL

PARCEL E
15 17.50' 28.50' N0°00'00"E 730.00' BNDY

28.5'

17.50' 28.50' N0°00'00"E 287.50' M-M 42.50' M-PL 17.50' 28.50' Line Table
Line #
L1 BNDY
L2 BNDY
Bearing
N90°00'00"E
N90°00'00"W
Length

46.00'

46.00'
Curve Table
Curve #
C1 BNDY
C2 BNDY
C3 BNDY
C4 BNDY
C5
Radius

25.00'

71.00'
Delta
90°00'00"
90°00'00"
90°00'00"
90°00'00"
17°43'22"
Length

39.27'

21.96'

SEE DETAIL A

THIS SHEET
AUGUST 2024
A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563,
RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22

ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS

CITY OF DUBLIN

ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
TRACT 8649
FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5

CROAK PROPERTY
·
·
34 PARCEL A

PARCEL B
10 8541 23679 N0°54'47"E 1315.04' BNDY N0°00'00"E 730.00' BNDY N90°00'00"W 164.64' BNDY
3322± SF 9
1956± SF

PARCEL A
1956± SF

PARCEL B
4328± SF
10 3780± SF 8
4590± SF 5
3780± SF 4
3780± SF 1
3606± SF 2
3606± SF 3
4326± SF 6
3606± SF 7

4.06±AC
PARCEL D N0°00'00"E 930.00' (TOTAL)

62.64' N0°00'00"E 70.00'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50' N0°00'00"E 24.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00'
N90°00'00"E 54.00' N90°00'00"E 48.00' N0°00'00"E 85.00' N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50' N0°00'00"E 70.00'
N90°00'00"E 54.00'
N90°00'00"E 68.75'
N90°00'00"E 102.00'
N0°00'00"E

4.00'
N0°00'00"E

3.83' N0°00'00"E 43.17'
N90°00'00"E

32.67'
N90°00'00"W

25.58'
N90°00'00"W

10.50' 82.00' 82.00' 97.00' 82.00' 12.00'12.00'

48.00'

33.25' 51.00' 75.00' 70.00' 24.00' 85.00' 70.00' 24.00' 70.00'

54.00' 48.00' 24.00'

54.00' 27.50'

54.00' 27.50' 12.00' 12.00' N0°00'00"E 24.00'
N90°00'00"E

20.50'
N90°00'00"E

20.50'
11 12
6' PSE 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 28' PSE 2' 2' 28' PSE

54.00' 27.50'

54.00' 27.50'
6' PSE
6' PSE 43.17' PAE TO LOT 9 N0°00'00"E 394.00' M-M

28.5'

17.5'

17.5' 61'
20' EVAE,
SDE
20' EVAE,
SDE

PARCEL C

PARCEL E
19 18
15 14
11 12
16 13
20 17
1956± SF

PARCEL C
1956± SF

PARCEL E
19 3780± SF
18 4320± SF
15 3780± SF
14 4320± SF
11 4086± SF
12 4086± SF
16 3606± SF
13 20
3606± SF
17 N90°00'00"E 102.00'
10 54.00' 48.00'12.00' 12.00'

54.00' 27.50'

54.00' 27.50' 82.00' 92.00' 82.00' 92.00' N0°00'00"E 930.00' (TOTAL) N0°00'00"E 80.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N90°00'00"E 54.00' N90°00'00"E 48.00' N0°00'00"E 80.00' N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00'
N90°00'00"E 54.00' N90°00'00"E 48.00'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50' N0°00'00"E 24.00' N0°00'00"E 24.00' 12.00' 12.00' 24.00' 80.00' 70.00' 24.00' 80.00' N90°00'00"W

28.50'
N90°00'00"E

20.50'
N90°00'00"E

20.50'

4.06±AC
PARCEL D 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE N0°54'47"E 1315.04' BNDY 2' 2' 28' PSE 2' 2' 28' PSE N0°00'00"E 217.50' M-M 53.50' M-PL 164.00' M-PL 6' PSE
6' PSE
6' PSE N0°00'00"E 287.50' M-M

28.5'

17.5'

17.5' 28.5' N0°00'00"E 730.00' BNDY 17.5' 28.5'
20' EVAE,
SDE
20' EVAE,
SDE
AUGUST 2024
A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563,
RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22

ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS

CITY OF DUBLIN

ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
TRACT 8649
FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5

CROAK PROPERTY

SEE RIGHT

SEE LEFT
SEE SHEET 5

SEE DETAIL A
SHEET 3
35 N90°00'00"W 551.00' (TOTAL)
41 PARCEL I
36 35
39 34 37
74 38
67 70

PARCEL O PARCEL P
71 68 69 72 73

PARCEL E

PARCEL F
22 19
18 20
17 21
23 PARCEL G
24 25
29 26
27 31
28 30
40 PARCEL I 1956± SF
4104± SF
36 4066± SF
35 3780± SF
39 4200± SF
34 4774± SF
37 3916± SF
74 4426± SF
38 67
3780± SF
70 PARCEL O 1956± SF PARCEL P 1956± SF3780± SF
71 68
3606± SF
72 3606± SF
69 3846± SF
73 1956± SF

PARCEL F
3894± SF
22 3780± SF
19 18
15 3606± SF
20 17
3606± SF
21 41
6461± SF
23 1956± SF PARCEL G 3782± SF
24 4426± SF
25 29
4426± SF
26 3780± SF
27 31
28 30
N90°00'00"E 111.80' N0°00'00"E 111.45'
N90°00'00"E 218.00'
N41°48'37"W(R) 25.00'
N59°31'59"W(R)
40 N90°00'00"E 54.00' N90°00'00"E 48.00'
PARCEL D N0°00'00"E 70.00'
N90°00'00"W 75.00'
N90°00'00"W 75.00'
N90°00'00"W 82.00'
N90°00'00"E 76.00' N0°00'00"E 58.00' N0°00'00"E 56.00'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N0°00'00"E 930.00' (TOTAL) N0°00'00"E 164.00' N0°00'00"E 164.00' N90°00'00"E 241.00' N0°00'00"E 81.50' N0°00'00"E 81.50' N90°00'00"E 70.00' N90°00'00"E 70.00' N0°00'00"E 112.71' N90°00'00"W 241.00' N0°00'00"E 81.50' N0°00'00"E 81.50' N0°00'00"E 30.50' N0°00'00"E 54.00' N0°00'00"E 48.00' N90°00'00"W 70.00' N0°00'00"E 81.50' N0°00'00"E 81.50' N90°00'00"W 75.00'
N0°00'00"E 20.50'
N90°00'00"E

20.50' N0°00'00"E 58.00' N0°00'00"E 30.50' N0°00'00"E 54.00'

82.00' 82.00' 54.00' 54.71' 58.00'

70.00' 60.00'

12.00' 12.00' 27.50' 54.00' 54.00' 27.50'

24.00'

24.00' 76.00' 50.00' 27.50' 54.00'

87.00'

88.00' 31.00' 56.00' 48.00' 29.00'

54.00' 27.50'

54.00' 27.50' 12.00'12.00' N0°00'00"E 24.00' 34.00' 24.00' 70.00' R=71.00' Δ=90°00' " L=111.53' Δ=30°28'01"
L=37.75'
Δ=17°43'22" L=21.96'
Δ=33°42'49"
L=41.78'
Δ=8°05'48"
L=10.03'

63.80' 48.00' 82.00' 82.00'

12.00' 12.00' 56.00' 54.00' 27.50' 54.00' 54.00' 27.50'

12.00' 12.00'
N90°00'00"W

24.00'

70.00' 24.00' 50.00'
N90°00'00"E 501.00' BNDY
N90°00'00"W

46.00' BNDY

17.50' 28.50'
R=25.00' Δ=90°00'00"
L=39.27'
N90°00'00"E

24.00'
24' DSRSD,

EVAE, PAE
28' PSE
2' 2'
R=25.00' Δ=90°00'00"
L=39.27'
BNDY N08°05'48"W(R)
24' DSRSD,
EVAE, PAE 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 2' 2' 28' PSE
24' DSRSD,

EVAE, PAE
N90°00'00"E

24.00'
2' 2'
28' PSE EX. 6' PSE (R-1)
6' PSE 6' PSE
6' PSE 6' PSE
2' 2'
28' PSE

24.00' 70.00' 54.00' 27.50'

82.00'

82.00'
24' DSRSD,

EVAE, PAE
2' 2'
28' PSE
N90°00'00"W

24.00'
N0°00'00"E

20.50' N0°00'00"E 58.00' N0°00'00"E 54.00'
N90°00'00"E 70.00'
N90°00'00"W 70.00' N0°00'00"E 81.50' N0°00'00"E 81.50'

12.00'
SEE SHEET 3
N90°00'00"E
319.00' M-M N0°00'00"E 217.50' M-M 53.50' M-PL 164.00' M-PL N38°43'32"E 67.94' M-M
N90°00'00"E 241.00' M-M N45°00'00"E 60.81' M-M 18' 28' 18' 28'

17.5' 28.5' 28.5' EX. 6' PSE (R-1) 28.5' 27.50' 54.00'

70.00'
6' PSE 6' PSE 6' PSE
N90°00'00"E 277.50' M-M N0°00'00"E 112.00' 17.5' 17.5' 6' PSE 8' PSE

4.9' 5.26'

28.5'
20' EVAE,
SDE
20' EVAE,
SDE 20' EVAE, SDE
AUGUST 2024
A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563,
RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22

ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS

CITY OF DUBLIN

ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
TRACT 8649
FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5

CROAK PROPERTY
SEE SHEET 4 SEE SHEET 6
SEE SHEET 7
PARCEL
E
36 N0°00'00"E 54.00' 8' PSE
N90°00'00"E 551.00' (TOTAL)
MJR
41 39
45 44
43 46 56 47

PARCEL M
59 58
57 62
38 67
42 66
61 60

PARCEL N
63 70

PARCEL O
64 65 68 69
29 28

PARCEL R
82 PARCEL Q
79 75
78 40
PARCEL J 39
4648± SF
45 2749± SF
44 4800± SF
43 47 46 56
1956± SF

PARCEL M
4542± SF
59 3888± SF
58 57
5374± SF
62 38
3780± SF
67 6166± SF
42 3780± SF
66 4320± SF
61 5006± SF
60 PARCEL N 1956± SF3780± SF
63 70 PARCEL O 1956± SF
3606± SF
64 3606± SF
68 3606± SF
65 69
4426± SF
41 29 28

PARCEL R
82 PARCEL Q
79 75
78 4013± SF
40 PARCEL J 2536± SF

70.00' 70.00' 24.00'
N90°00'00"E 501.00' BNDY
28' PSE
2'
2'
24' DSRSD,
EVAE, PAE 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 2' 2' 28' PSE EX. 6' PSE (R-1) 6' PSE PAE TO LOT 44 24' DSRSD,

EVAE, PAE
2' 2'
28' PSE
24' DSRSD,

EVAE, PAE
2' 2'
28' PSE
N90°00'00"W

24.00'
N90°00'00"W

24.00'
N90°00'00"E

24.00' N0°00'00"E 24.00' N0°00'00"E 81.50' N0°00'00"E 81.50'

54.00'

58.00' 112.00' 82.00' 54.00' 48.00' 54.00' 54.00' 27.50' 27.50' N0°00'00"E 81.50' N0°00'00"E 81.50' N90°00'00"W 70.00' N90°00'00"W 70.00' N0°00'00"E 54.00' N0°00'00"E 48.00'N90°00'00"W 70.00' N0°00'00"E 58.00' N90°00'00"E 100.00' N90°00'00"E 70.00'
N90°00'00"E 100.00' N0°00'00"E 92.00' N0°00'00"E 84.00' N0°00'00"E 72.00' N0°00'00"E 476.00' N0°00'00"E 80.00' N0°00'00"E 102.00'

82.00' 82.00' 82.00' N0°00'00"E 76.31' N0°00'00"E 76.31' 77.00' 80.00' 24.00'

54.00' 27.50' 43.83' 48.00' 58.00' N0°00'00"E 30.50' N0°00'00"E 36.00' N90°00'00"E

30.84'
N90°00'00"W

25.58'
N90°00'00"W

10.50'
N0°00'00"W

3.83'
N0°00'00"E

4.00'
N90°00'00"E

30.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'
R

29.00' 70.00' 24.00'
=25.00' Δ=90°00'00"
L=39.27' BNDY EX. 6' PSE (R-1)
6'
PSE 27.50' 48.00' 27.50' 48.81'
R=71.00' Δ=90°00'00" L=111.53' Δ=35°46'18" L=44.33' Δ=28°50'17" L=35.74'
N90°00'00"E 54.00' N90°00'00"E 58.00' N90°00'00"E 102.35' 72.00'

54.00' 27.50' 12.00'12.00'

12.00' 12.00'
N0°00'00"E

20.50'
N0°00'00"E

20.50'

12.00'12.00' 27.50' 54.00'

0.81'
N84°20'31"W(R)N55°30'14"W(R)
N35°46'18"W(R) C1
L1
L2
C2
6' PSE
N90°00'00"E 319.00' M-M N0°00'00"E 529.50' M-M
N45°00'00"E 60.81' M-M
N90°00'00"E 259.50' M-M53.50' M-PL 476.00' M-PL
28' 18' 18' 28'
C3
N90°00'00"E

46.00' BNDY

18.00' 28.00'
6' PSE
18' 28' 28.5' 28.5'

12.00'12.00'

66.92' 33.08' 26.17'
N90°00'00"W 214.35' (TOTAL) N0°00'00"E 216.00' M-M 36' 17.5' N90°00'00"E
277.50' M-M 17.5'

SEE DETAIL B THIS SHEET
6' PSE
N90°00'00"W
241.00'
N90°00'00"E 241.00' M-M
6' PSE
8'
PSE 11.14'
Line Table
Line #
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
Bearing
N36°10'31"W
N36°10'31"W
N1°33'36"W
N90°00'00"E
N0°00'00"E
N90°00'00"W
N0°00'00"E
Length

8.37'

4.37'

2.00'

8.07'

2.00'

12.93'

6.00'
Curve Table
Curve #
C1
C2
C3
C4
Radius

49.50'

25.50'

71.00'

79.00'
Delta
36°10'31"
36°10'31"
19°43'56"
1°33'36"
Length

31.25'

16.10'

24.45'

2.15'
N90°00'00"E 2.00'
MJR
45 40
PARCEL J N90°00'00"E 241.00'
N84°20'31"W(R)
N35°46'18"W(R)
2' PSE
6' PSE
C2 36' PAE TO LOT 44
L2R=71.00' Δ=35°46'18" L=44.33' R
=77.00' Δ
=13°17'55" L
=17.87'
N11°15'00"W

16.87'
N90°00'00"E

11.13'
R=77.00'
Δ=13°39'28"
L=18.35'
N90°00'00"W

6.03'
N84°47'03"W(R)
45 N71°29'08"W(R)
N57°49'40"W(R)
N0°00'00"E 48.81'

21.00' N45°02'22"W 19.07'
N0°00'00"E 42.20'
N25°47'49"W(R) L7

PRIVATE

UTILITY

EASEMENT
PSE
43 PARCEL J

DSRSD, PSE,

EVAE, PAE
46 29
40 39
R=77.00' Δ=24°14'14" L=32.57'
C1
L1
L6
L3(R)
C4
L4
L5
AUGUST 2024
A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563,
RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22

ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS

CITY OF DUBLIN

ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
TRACT 8649
FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5

CROAK PROPERTY
SEE SHEET 7 SEE SHEET 5 SEE SHEET 9
41 44
37 MJR
53 51 50
55 45
44 46

PARCEL K
49 47
48 PARCEL L
56 PARCEL M
59 52
54 58
57 32
29 27

PARCEL H
31 28
30 33
86 83
82 79

PARCEL X
39 PARCEL I
45 44
4800± SF
3781± SF
46 1956± SF

PARCEL K
3780± SF
49 3606± SF
47 3606± SF
48 1956± SF

PARCEL L
4426± SF
56 1956± SF

PARCEL M
59 4200± SF
52 3780± SF
54 58
3780± SF
57 4200± SF
51 4654± SF
50 4654± SF
53 4426± SF
55 4426± SF
32 3996± SF
29 26
27 1956± SF

PARCEL H
4426± SF
31 3710± SF
28 3780± SF
30 3780± SF
33 PARCEL R

PARCEL W
86 PARCEL S
83 82
79 4512± SF

PARCEL X
40 PARCEL J
PARCEL D 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 2' 2' 28' PSE 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 2' 2' 28' PSE 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 2' 2' 28' PSE N0°00'00"E 24.00' N0°00'00"E 24.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N0°00'00"E 82.00' N0°00'00"E 82.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00'

54.00'

57.00'

48.00' 54.00'

57.00'

32.00' 50.00' 50.00' 32.00' 59.00' 70.00' 24.00' 24.00' 70.00' 59.00'

54.00'

27.50' 54.00'

27.50'

54.00' 27.50'

54.00' 27.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50' N0°00'00"E 70.00'

54.00' 58.00' 48.00' 54.35' 63.00' 70.00'

30.50' 20.50' N0°00'00"E 216.00' N0°00'00"E 84.00' N0°00'00"E 84.00' N0°00'00"E 84.00' N90°00'00"E 164.00'
N90°00'00"E 164.00'
R=71.00' Δ=90°00'00" L=11.53' N89°03'50"W 1000.82' BNDY 164.02'
N0°00'00"E(R)

26.17' N0°00'00"E(R)

28.85'
R=25.00'
Δ=90°00'00"
L=39.27'
R=25.00'
Δ=90°00'00"
L=39.27' N0°00'00"E 24.00'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00' 70.00' N90°00'00"E 59.00' 82.00' 82.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00'
N90°00'00"E 112.00' N0°00'00"E 216.00' 12.00' 12.00'
N90°00'00"E

30.50' 70.00' 45.00'

34.00' 53.00' 24.00' 70.00'
5' PSE

54.00' 58.00' 5' PSE 6' PSE
6' PSE
6' PSE 6' PSE
R=25.00'
Δ=90°00'00"
L=39.27'
R
=

71.0 ' Δ=90°00'00" L=111.53'
Δ=5°39'29"
L=7.01'
N84°20'31"W(R)
SEE SHEET 3
6' PSE

53.00'

54.00' 27.50'

54.00' 27.50'
N90°00'00"E
241.00' 28' 18'
N90°00'00"E 241.00' M-M N45°00'00"E 60.81' M-M N0°00'00"E 216.00' M-M N45°00'00"E 74.95' M-M
N90°00'00"E 164.00' M-M
N45°00'00"W 74.95' M-M N0°00'00"E 529.50' M-M
28' 18'
28' 18' 28' 18' 28' 18'
28'
28' 12.00' 12.00'12.00' 12.00'
6' PSE
6' PSE
6' PSE
N90°00'00"E 214.35' (TOTAL)
18'
18' N0°00'00"E 234.00' (TOTAL)
551.76'
285.04'
N90°00'00"E 214.00' (TOTAL)

7.00'

58.00'

50.00' 50.00'
N90°00'00"W 112.00' (TOTAL)

54.00' N90°00'00"E 58.00'
6' PSE
8'
PSE
6' PSE
8' PSE 5.04' 5.12' 5.74' 10.17'
N90°00'00"E

51.00' (TOTAL)
20' EVAE,
SDE 20' EVAE, SDE
AUGUST 2024
A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563,
RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22

ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS

CITY OF DUBLIN

ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
TRACT 8649
FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5

CROAK PROPERTY
SEE SHEET 6
SEE SHEET 5 SEE SHEET 5 SEE SHEET 8
38 92
53 PARCEL L
54 58
57 PARCEL R

PARCEL W
86 PARCEL T PARCEL S
88 85
83 89 84
82 80

PARCEL U
93 81
90 91
87 PARCEL L
54 58
57 4426± SF
92 53
1956± SF

PARCEL R

0.53±AC

PARCEL W
3780± SF
86 1956± SF
PARCEL S 1956± SF

PARCEL T
4426± SF
88 3606± SF
85 3780± SF
83 4426± SF
89 3606± SF
84 3780± SF
82 80
1956± SF

PARCEL U
93 3606± SF
81 94 79
3780± SF
90 3780± SF
91 3780± SF
87 N0°00'00"W 608.57' M-M
N89°03'50"W
455.68' M-M 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 2' 2' 28' PSE 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 2' 2' 28' PSE 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 2' 2' 28' PSE N89°03'50"W 1000.82' BNDY
285.04'
N0°00'00"E(R)

26.17'
6' PSE
6' PSE N0°00'00"E 476.00' N0°00'00"E 476.00'

54.00' 54.00'
N90°00'00"E(R) 214.00' N0°00'00"E 82.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N0°00'00"E 82.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N0°00'00"E 82.00' N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'

54.00' 58.00' 48.00' 54.00' R=71.00' Δ=90°00'00" L=111.53' 92.52' 70.00' 24.00' 70.00' 70.00' 24.00' 12.00' 12.00' 12.00'12.00'27.50' 54.00'

27.50' 54.00' 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 2' 2' 28' PSE 70.00' 24.00' 70.00' N0°00'00"E 24.00' N0°00'00"E 24.00'N90°00'00"E

30.50'
N90°00'00"E

20.50'

58.00' 48.00'

54.00' 27.50'

54.00' 27.50' 27.50'

27.50' 54.00'

54.00' 24.00' 70.00' 12.00' 12.00' 12.00'12.00' N0°00'00"E 24.00' N0°00'00"E 24.00'N90°00'00"E 81.50' N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'

54.00' 27.50'

54.00' 27.50' N0°00'00"E 529.50' M-M N45°00'00"W 74.95' M-M 18' 28'
18' 28' 27.5'

27.5'
N90°00'00"E

20.50'
N90°00'00"E

30.50'
6' PSE

28.5' 15' DSRSD 28' 18'
N90°00'00"W 214.00' (TOTAL) N0°00'00"E 568.52' BNDY

28.5'
AUGUST 2024
A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563,
RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22

ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS

CITY OF DUBLIN

ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
TRACT 8649
FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5

CROAK PROPERTY

PARCEL X
SEE SHEET 9 SEE SHEET 7
39 PARCEL M
58 62
61 PARCEL R
80 PARCEL U
93 98

PARCEL Q
79 75
78 76

PARCEL V
96 77
97 94
95 PARCEL M
58 62
61 92

PARCEL R
82 3606± SF
80 PARCEL U
4426± SF
93 81
4132± SF
98 1956± SF

PARCEL Q
3780± SF
79 4132± SF
75 3780± SF
78 4038± SF
76 1956± SF

PARCEL V
4426± SF
96 3606± SF
77 4948± SF
97 3780± SF
94 3780± SF
95 91 EX. 6' PSE (R-1)
6' PSE 54.00' 24.00' 70.00' 70.00'

58.00' 48.00' 70.00' 24.00' 54.00' 70.00'

29.00' 58.00' 48.00' 29.00'

27.50' 54.00'

54.00' 27.50'

54.00' 54.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N0°00'00"E 79.00' N0°00'00"E 91.00' N0°00'00"E 79.00' N0°00'00"E 82.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N0°00'00"E 82.00' N0°00'00"E 70.00' N90°00'00"E

30.50'
N90°00'00"E

20.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50' 12.00' N0°00'00"E N90°00'00"E 81.50'

54.00' 27.50' 12.00' N0°00'00"E
N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 2' 2' 28' PSE 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 2' 2' 28' PSE N0°00'00"E 24.00' N0°00'00"E 24.00'N90°00'00"E

30.50'
N90°00'00"E

20.50' 12.00'12.00' 12.00' 12.00'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'
N90°00'00"E 81.50'

27.50' 54.00'
N90°00'00"E 164.00' BNDY R=25.00' Δ=90°00'00" L=39.27' BNDY R=25.00' Δ=90°00'00" L=39.27' BNDY N0°00'00"E 568.52' BNDY N90°00'00"E

46.00' BNDY N0°00'00"E 476.00'
EX. 6'
PSE (R-1)

27.5'

27.5' 28.5' 28.5'
18' 28'
18' 28' S0°00'00"E 608.57' M-M
N90°00'00"E 259.50' M-M N90°00'00"E 319.00' M-M 28' PSE 28' PSE 53.50' M-PL N0°00'00"E 529.50' M-M 476.00' M-PL 2'2' 6' PSE 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 24' DSRSD, EVAE, PAE 17.5' 17.5'

28.5'

28.5'
N90°00'00"W 214.00' (TOTAL)
AUGUST 2024
A SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 13 TRACT 8563,
RECORDED IN BOOK 371 OF MAPS PAGE 12-22

ALAMEDA COUNTY RECORDS

CITY OF DUBLIN

ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
TRACT 8649
FRANCIS RANCH, NEIGHBORHOOD 5

CROAK PROPERTY
SEE SHEET 8 SEE SHEET 6
40 STAFF REPORT

CITY COUNCIL

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Item 5.4
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT: Payment Issuance Report and Electronic Funds Transfer Prepared by: Darlynn Haas, Management Analyst II
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City Council will receive a listing of payments issued from August 1, 2024 – August 31, 2024, totaling $8,799,312.47
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Receive the report.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

Summary of Payments Issued
Report Period August 1, 2024 – August 31, 2024
Total Number of Payments: 379
Total Amount of Payments: $8,799,312.47
DESCRIPTION:

The Payment Issuance Report (Attachment 1) provides a listing of all payments for the period beginning August 1, 2024, through August 31, 2024. This report is provided in accordance with the policy adopted November 15, 2011, in Resolution No.189-11. The listing of payments has been reviewed in accordance with the policies for processing payments and expenditures.

The City’s practice of reporting payments to the City Council after the payments have been made is in compliance with California Government Code Sections 37208 (b) and (c), which allow for an agency to make payments without first being audited by the legislative body, as long as such payments are: 1) conforming to a budget approved by ordinance or resolution of the legislative body; and 2) presented to the legislative body for ratification and approval in the form of an 41

Page 2 of 2 ends

audited comprehensive annual financial report.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

None.

NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:

The City Council Agenda was posted.

ATTACHMENTS:
1) Payment Issuance Report for August 2024
42 Date Issued
8/1/2024
8/2/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
CONSOR NORTH AMERICA, INC. BRIDGE & STRUCTURE INSPECTION TRAINING MAY 2024 268.00 CONSOR NORTH AMERICA, INC. KOOPMAN CANYON CREEK CHANNEL & BANK REPAIR JUN 2024 15,641.75 COMMUNITY RESOURCES FOR INDEPENDENT FY 23-24 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT (ARPA) 3,507.54 CLAUDIA M. DUARTE-FLORES DPS WINDOW TINT D45 760.00
CODE FOR FUN REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 3,181.50
CINTAS CORPORATION NO.2 FIRST AID RESTOCK 59.47
CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS, LLC RECYCLIST PROGRAM TRACKER JUN 2024 900.00 CASTRO VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 717.60 CHRISTINE PETIT REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 2,164.80
CASCADIA CONSULTING GROUP, INC SB 1383 IMPLEMENTATION ASSISTANCE JUN 2024 22,179.55 CALIFORNIA SPIRIT ELITE, INC. REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 1,519.00 BSK ASSOCIATES INC. GEOTECHNICAL PEER REVIEW JUN 2024 920.50 CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION GREEN BUILDING FEES FY23-24 9.90 BLUEBEAM, INC. TRAINING 7/8/24 - 7/7/25 6,250.00
BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC. DPS EVIDENCE SUPPLIES 636.69
BIG O'TIRES #7 POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS 2,289.35 BAY AREA NEWS GROUP EAST BAY LEGAL NOTICES - JUN 2024 1,473.43 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO SR ALARM 07/12/2024 198.59
AXIS COMMUNITY HEALTH HUMAN SERVICES GRANTEE - ARPA 6,148.00 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO CIVIC 07/13/2024 111.70
AT&T - CALNET 3 SHANNON CENTER ALARM 9391063350 07/12/2024 29.12 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO WAVE 07/12/24 111.81
AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO SHANNON 07/12/2024 249.64
AT&T - CALNET 3 HERITAGE CENTER BACKUP 07/06/2024 61.76 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO 800 07/12/2024 0.01
AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO FS18 07/14/2024 82.02
AT&T - CALNET 3 HERITAGE 9391018979 07/14/2024 29.71
AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO PSC FIRE ALARM 07/14/2024 57.87 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO FSP FAX 07/14/2024 57.87
AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO BLDG INSP 7/14/2024 29.71
AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO ELEVATOR 07/14/2024 114.17
AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO LIBRARY 911 07/14/2024 58.96 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO CY 7/14/2024 234.71
AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO CY FAX 7/14/2024 88.31
AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO CY 07/14/2024 57.87
AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO PSC 07/01/2024 111.81
AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO CIVIC FIRE ALARM 07/01/2024 56.69 AMY'S ENGRAVED SIGNS & AWARDS NAMEPLATES 135.06
ANGEL HOUZE CLAY ART C/O JULIE P. KARTONO REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 3,300.00 ALMETEK INDUSTRIES INC STORM DRAIN MARKERS 279.16
ALYSSA WU STORM DRAIN ART 500.00
ALAMEDA COUNTY WASTE MGMT AUTH REGIONAL MEDIA CAMPAIGN-FY23/24 USED OIL GRANT FUNDS 2,040.00 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SVCS INC CROSSING GUARD SERVICES - MAY - JULY 24 60,730.71 ALAMEDA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE SERVICES FY23-24 JUN 2024 1,037,997.16 ALAMEDA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL LIVING ARROYOS PARTNERSHIP JUN 2024 6,275.53 ALAMEDA CO SHERIFF'S OFFICE VICTIMS BILL OF RIGHTS CARDS 262.33 ALAMEDA CO SURPLUS PROP AUTHOR BART GARAGE FEES COLLECTED - ANNUAL DISBURSEMENT 2.70 ALAMEDA CO SHERIFF'S OFFICE BUSINESS CARDS 30.68
ADVANCED MOBILITY GROUP ANNUAL TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM SUPPORT FEB 2024 1,437.50 AKSHAY ARORA ARORA TENNIS & FITNESS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 7,882.00 AASKA PATEL REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 5,133.00
A4 PROMOTIONS & INCENTIVES DPS ENVELOPES 231.68
A4 PROMOTIONS & INCENTIVES PW BUSINESS CARDS 62.40
City of Dublin
Payment Issuance Report
Print Date: 9/3/2024
Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024

Page 1 of 9 ends

Payee Description Amount
Payments Issued 8/2/2024 Total: 24,725.27
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT CA STATE WITHHOLDING: PE 7/26/24 24,725.27 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE FEDERAL WITHHOLDING: PE 7/26/24 81,140.12 Payments Issued 8/1/2024 Total: 81,140.12
Attachment 1
43 City of Dublin
Payment Issuance Report
Print Date: 9/3/2024
Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024

Page 2 of 9 ends

8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024 PG&E B1 ART LIGHT 7401 DUBLIN BLVD 07/01/2024 632.55 PG&E SERVICE TO GLEASON IRRIG 06/24/2024 378.19
PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO FALLON 07/15/2024 192.93
PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO 6795 DOUGHERTY 07/02/2024 231.35
PG&E SERVICE TO FALLON IRRIG 07/10/2024 98.44
PARK ENGINEERING, INC. ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT MANAGEMENT JUN 2024 9,632.72 PETER GARELLICK FAMILY CAMPOUT PERFORMANCE 599.00
OLBERDING ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. FALLON VILLAGE GHAD PROFESSIONAL SVCS - OCT 2023 3,300.00 PAKPOUR CONSULTING GROUP, INC. EDTIF UPDATE - PHASE 2 - JUN 2024 617.50 NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, CHTD 2025 & 2026 PAVING WORK PLAN JUN 2024 22,364.99 NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, CHTD DESIGN SVCS-IRON HORSE NATURE PARK JUN 2024 16,167.73 NANOGAN SCIENCE & SERVICES, LLC REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 10,830.00 MCE CORPORATION MAINTENANCE SERVICES - JUN 2024 921,440.21 MOST DEPENDABLE FOUNTAINS, INC. WATER BOTTLE FILLERS APR 2024 28,176.48 MAKE ME A PRO SPORTS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 4,500.00
MCE CORPORATION SHANNON COMMUNITY CENTER PARKING LOT APR 2024 123,720.74 LIONS CENTER FOR THE VISUALLY IMPAIRED FY 23-24 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT (GF) 3,545.00 LANLOGIC INC. ON DEMAND, ON-SITE & REMOTE IT ENGINEERING SUPPORT 6/1/2024-6/13/2024 2,340.00 LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOR SENIORS HUMAN SERVICES GRANT FY2023-24 - LAS 9,795.00 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOC. INC. DESIGN SERVICES - SLIDE REPAIR JUN 2024 5,456.00 KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. LTA ANALYSIS PACVEST JUN 2024 13,062.50 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOC. INC. DUBLIN HINES PROJECT TRANSP. ANALYSIS - JUN 2024 18,619.50 JENNIFER B. HUBER PREP PAINTING & SEALING OF STORM DRAIN ART 500.00 KIDZ LOVE SOCCER REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 3,993.00
ISH AMITOJ KAUR REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 11,442.60
JCJCJ, INC PEOPLE OF THE PARKS ORGANIZATION SHAMROCK AWARD 69.59 HIVELY FY 23-24 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT (ARPA) 12,397.00
HOPE HOSPICE, INC. FY 23-24 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT (GF) 6,297.50 HERC RENTALS INC. PCS EVENTS 1,395.44
HF&H CONSULTANTS, LLC SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT JUN 2024 10,746.25 GURUS EDUCATION EAST BAY REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 8,055.00
GUIDA ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW - APR 2024 4,763.66 GUIDA SURVEYING SVCS IRONHORSE TRL JUN 2024 3,450.00
GRAFIX SHOPPE INSTALLATION OF POLICE VEHICLE DECALS 238.00 GRAINGER THE WAVE WATERPARK SUPPLIES 340.01
GOODFELLOW SEQUOIA AJV IRON HORSE TRAIL BRIDGE AT DUBLIN BLVD PROJ 465,806.85 GANNETT FLEMING, INC. CONSTRUCTION MGT IRON HORSE NATURE PARK PHASE 1 JUN 2024 16,737.67 GOODFELLOW BROS. CALIFORNIA, LLC IRON HORSE NATURE PARK AND OPEN SPACE - PHASE 1 374,461.50 EUROPEAN MOBILE WERKS POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS 2,167.56 EOA, INC. STORMWATER NPDES IMPLEMENTATION ASSIST MAY 2024 12,073.50 EOA, INC. STORMWATER NPDES IMPLEMENTATION ASSIST APR 2024 6,605.75 ECS IMAGING INC. CLERK/RECORDS DOCUMENT SCANNING SERVICES 2,426.28 EOA, INC. STORMWATER NPDES IMPLEMENTATION ASSIST JUN 2024 12,583.75 DUTCHOVER & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW APR 2024 1,476.25 EASTERSEALS NORTHERN CA FY 23-24 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT (GF) 6,147.50 DUBLIN CROSSING, LLC DON BIDDLE COMMUNITY PARK 211,068.27 DUBLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT UTILITY USE AT STAGER GYM 366.55 DREAM RIDE ELEVATOR ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE - JUN 2024 516.00 DSRSD REFUND FOR PWEN-2023-00143 1,187.00
DLT SOLUTIONS LLC ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION RENEWAL 3,469.60
DOROTHY DEMONTEVERDE REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 462.00
DIV OF THE STATE ARCHITECT CASP FEES REPORT FY23-24 3.70 DEPT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS THE WAVE SLIDES INSPECTION FEE 243.75 CSW/STUBER-STROEH ENGINEERING GROUP, PLANNING & PRELIM ENGINEERING VILLAGE PKWY JUN 2024 1,458.00 CSW/STUBER-STROEH ENGINEERING GROUP, GREEN STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE ENG SVCS MAY 2024 6,234.00 COUNTY OF MARIN/CAL-SLA CAL. CITY-COUNTY STREET LIGHT ASSOC. DUES FY24-25 1,260.00 COVANTA ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, LLC DPS EVIDENCE DISPOSAL 996.00 CONSOR NORTH AMERICA, INC. ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW JUN 2024 3,436.50 CORODATA SHREDDING, INC. SHRED BIN PICKUP JUN 2024 43.29 CONSOR NORTH AMERICA, INC. STRUCTURAL PEER REVIEW SERVICES JUN 2024 4,412.00 CONSOR NORTH AMERICA, INC. ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW MAY 2024 2,370.00 44 City of Dublin
Payment Issuance Report
Print Date: 9/3/2024
Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024

Page 3 of 9 ends

8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
SURF TO SNOW ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE MRP STORMWATER INSPECTIONS APR 2024 11,465.25 SURF TO SNOW ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE MRP STORMWATER INSPECTIONS MAR 2024 2,370.00 SQUAD SPORTS INC. REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 5,019.00
SNG & ASSOCIATES INC. ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW JUN 2024 12,736.50 SPECTRUM COMMUNITY SVCS INC. FY 23-24 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT (CDBG/ARPA) 1,965.95 SNG & ASSOCIATES INC. ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW MAY 2024 6,630.50 SHIR MARTIAL ARTS, LLC REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 877.10
S & J ADVERTISING INC SPLATTER EVENT ADS 535.00
SHAMROCK OFFICE SOLUTIONS, LLC FILE 2399 COPIER SUPPLY AND SERVICE AGREEMENT JUL & AUG 2024 5,665.48 RRM DESIGN GROUP, A CA CORP ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW JUN 2024 1,057.75 RRM DESIGN GROUP, A CA CORP LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK & INSPECTIONS JUN & JUL 2024 4,695.25 RON HSI TRI-VALLEY AIKIDO REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 72.00
RRM DESIGN GROUP, A CA CORP ENGINEERING SERVICES - PLAN REVIEW MAY 2024 712.50 QUADIENT LEASING USA, INC. NEOPOST MAIL MACHINE LEASE APR 2024-JUN 2024 1,282.75 R. YOUNAN LLC REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 1,614.60
PROLIFIC CONSTRUCTION, LLC PERMIT #BLDG-2024-03201 - REFUND 351.00 QUADIENT FINANCE USA, INC. POSTAGE FEES FOR JUN 2024 303.24 PLEASANTON VIP SENIOR CLUB SENIOR CENTER TRIPS & TOURS PROGRAM 960.00 PG&E SERVICE TO HPM 06/28/2024 778.88
PHOENIX GROUP INFO SYS. DPS PARKING CITATIONS COLLECTED 405.90 PG&E A6 SERVICE TO FS18 07/11/2024 107.12
PG&E B6 SERVICE TO LIBRARY 06/30/2024 738.99
PG&E SERVICE TO PSC 07/15/2024 5,879.45
PG&E SERVICE TO FS16 06/10/2024 9,893.34
PG&E SERVICE TO SR CTR 05/21/2024 10,883.09
PG&E SERVICE TO HCP 06/27/2024 2,990.40
PG&E LS2-A SERVICE TO ARN & MART 07/15/2024 102.24
PG&E LS2-A SERVICE TO CENTRAL 07/15/2024 4.80
PG&E LS2-A SERVICE TO AVB 07/01/2024 1,870.73
PG&E B1 SERVICE TO VARIOUS 1997-1 06/10/2024 56.16
PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO FALLON 07/12/2024 154.22
PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO 3544 DB 07/12/2024 273.61
PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO AVB 06/27/2024 84.70
PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO POSITANO 07/01/2024 415.66
PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO FALLON 06/25/2024 96.49
PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO FALLON 06/25/2024 111.43
PG&E SERVICE TO ART LIGHTING AVB 06/24/2024 304.18
PG&E SERVICE TO PSC 07/14/2024 1,483.02
PG&E SERVICE TO 3142 CENTRAL PKWY 07/11/2024 143.60
PG&E SERVICE TO VARIOUS IRRIG 07/11/2024 69.44
PG&E B1 SERVICE TO DEVANY 07/11/2024 27.98
PG&E SERVICE TO DB DOUGH IRRIG 06/30/2024 5.67
PG&E B1 SERVICE TO POSITANO IRRIG 06/30/2024 250.34
PG&E B6 SERVICE TO BRAY CMMN 07/11/2024 118.46
PG&E B1 SERVICE TO PASSATEMPO 06/24/2024 92.49
PG&E B1 SERVICE TO SEAN DIAMOND 06/26/2024 182.97
PG&E B6 SERVICE TO FSP 07/07/2024 6,813.21
PG&E B10S SERVICE TO EGP 07/09/2024 7,268.21
PG&E SERVICE TO SHANNON CENTER 06/28/2024 91.63
PG&E SERVICE TO SCH RNCH PARK 06/27/2024 453.36
PG&E B10S SERVICE TO CIVIC CENTER 07/01/2024 4,154.27
PG&E SERVICE TO CORP YARD 06/30/2024 1,882.98
PG&E 6196 HORIZON PKWY M DONBIDDLE 07/15/2024 666.43
PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO DB 07/05/2024 201.42
PG&E 6020 DUBLIN BLVD 1010865440 07/14/2024 7.91
PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO FALLON 07/10/2024 47.68
PG&E IRRIGATION SERVICE TO 07/01/2024 407.44
PG&E B1 IRRIG 2979 THREE CASTLES 07/14/2024 49.26
PG&E B1 7341 ROSAMOND HILLS CT 07/06/2024 7.99
PG&E SERVICE TO WAVE 07/07/2024 32,199.43
PG&E A6 SERVICE TO FS17 07/07/2024 100.28
45 City of Dublin
Payment Issuance Report
Print Date: 9/3/2024
Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024

Page 4 of 9 ends

8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/5/2024
8/6/2024
8/6/2024
8/6/2024
8/6/2024
8/6/2024
8/6/2024
8/6/2024
8/6/2024
8/7/2024
8/7/2024
8/7/2024
8/7/2024
8/7/2024
8/9/2024
8/9/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024 CODE FOR FUN REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 997.50
CITY OF PLEASANTON TVBID FEES COLLECTED FOR APR - JUN 2024 118,545.96 CHANDLER ASSET MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT CONSULTING SERVICES JUL 2024 14,187.84 CHRISTINE PETIT REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 590.40
CASTRO VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 3,949.80 BYOG PCS UNIFORM SUPPLIES 1,221.57
CARBONIC SERVICE THE WAVE POOL CHEMICALS 672.73
BRINKS, INC. ARMORED CAR SERVICE - JUL 2024 53.34
BRINKS, INC. ARMORED CAR SERVICE - AUG 2024 314.72
BLUETOAD, INC. 2024 FALL/WINTER ACTIVITY GUIDE 507.00
ASSOC BAY AREA GOVMT ABAG ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP DUES FY 24/25 20,045.00 BIG O'TIRES #7 POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS 195.51 ALAMEDA COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SHANNON WATER PLAY AREA HMBP AUG 2024 889.00 AMY L. JONES REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 201.60
ALAMEDA COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH FS16 HMBP PERMIT AUG 2024 889.00 ALAMEDA COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PSC HMBP PERMIT JUL 2024 889.00 ALAMEDA CO SHERIFF'S OFFICE EVIDENCE ENVELOPES 430.53
AKSHAY ARORA ARORA TENNIS & FITNESS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 17,394.00 4LEAF INC. BUILDING INSPECTION & PLAN CHECK SERVICES JUL 2024 66,477.50 ABOVE AND BEYOND LEADERSHIP AND 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND 200.00 4IMPRINT INC COMMUNITY PROMOTION SUPPLIES 1,897.26
VISION SERVICE PLAN - (CA) VISION INSURANCE PREMIUM - JUL 2024 2,099.91 Payments Issued 8/9/2024 Total: 15,620.71
DELTA DENTAL OF CALIFORNIA DELTA DENTAL PREMIUM - JUL 2024 13,520.80 US BANK - PARS PARS: PE 7/26/24 10,075.48
Payments Issued 8/7/2024 Total: 59,453.21
I C M A 457 PLAN DEFERRED COMP 457: PE 7/26/24 32,740.12 UNUM LIFE INS CO OF AMERICA LIFE AND AD&D PREMIUM - JUL 2024 11,922.66 HEALTHEQUITY, INC. HEALTHEQUITY: PE 7/26/24 3,393.95
I C M A 401 PLAN DEFERRED COMP 401A: PE 6/28/24 1,321.00 Payments Issued 8/6/2024 Total: 691,092.60
TOMMY COOK MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT - JUL 2024 35.38
U.S. BANK CORPORATE PMT SYSTEM PURCHASE CARD STATEMENT JUL 2024 50,021.96 GASPARE ANNIBALE DENSITY BONUS TRAINING - WALNUT CREEK 23.85 NICOLE WANZENRIED MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT - JUL 2024 63.45 GASPARE ANNIBALE MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT - JUL 2024 4.69
CRYSTAL DE CASTRO MILEAGE REIMUBURSEMENT - TRAINING 22.78 DSRSD SERVICE TO 7/31/2024 540,328.83
CAL PERS PERS RETIREMENT PLAN: PE 7/26/24 100,591.66
Payments Issued 8/5/2024 Total: 3,904,257.97
WILLDAN ENERGY SOLUTIONS BLDG ELECTRIFICATION & CODE ASSISTANCE MAY 2024 8,906.50 WORLD CUP SOCCER CAMPS CLINICS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 6,459.00 WILLDAN ENERGY SOLUTIONS BLDG ELECTRIFICATION & CODE ASSISTANCE APR 2024 19,723.70 WEE HOOP, INC. REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 2,613.60
UNIVAR SOLUTIONS THE WAVE POOL CHEMICALS 2,639.80
VANESSA MEDVE REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 4,410.06
TRIVALLEY MINOR HOCKEY ASSOCIATION 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND 200.00 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT OF NO. UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT MEMBERSHIP FEE 2024 3,685.45 TREASURER ALAMEDA COUNTY PW AGENCY- TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND STREETLIGHT MAINTENANCE SVCS JUN 2024 44,396.75 TRI-VALLEY HAVEN FOR WOMEN FY 23-24 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT (ARPA) 7,506.99 TREASURER ALAMEDA COUNTY CAL-ID REMOTE ACCESS NETWORK FY23-24 42,008.00 TREASURER ALAMEDA COUNTY DPS PARKING CITATIONS COLLECTED 715.00 TIMOTHY DANA BOWEN REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 4,059.60
TETRA TECH, INC. DISASTER PREP GAP ANALYSIS CONTRACT SERVICES 6,200.00 TETRA TECH, INC. DISASTER PREPAREDNESS 2,435.00
SURF TO SNOW ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE MRP STORMWATER INSPECTIONS JUN 2024 3,286.32 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC SPIDERMAN MOVIE NIGHT RENTAL 8/2/24 750.00 46 City of Dublin
Payment Issuance Report
Print Date: 9/3/2024
Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024

Page 5 of 9 ends

8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES & SUPPLY CO. WINDOW & CARPET CLEANING LIBRARY JUL 2024 269.52 UNIVAR SOLUTIONS THE WAVE POOL CHEMICAL 2,512.59
UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES & SUPPLY CO. WINDOW & CARPET CLEANING CIVIC JUL 2024 635.17 U.S. BANK ADMINISTRATION FEES - FY24/25 1,700.00
ULINE, INC. THE WAVE WATERPARK SUPPLIES 1,522.27
TRI-SIGNAL INTEGRATION INC FIRE ALARM TESTING - LIBRARY AUG 2024 323.75 TRI-SIGNAL INTEGRATION INC FIRE ALARM TESTING - FIRE STATIONS 16-18 AUG-OCT 2024 126.00 SUNRUN INSTALLATION SERVICES PERMIT REFUND #BLDG24-02599 CXLD PERMIT 190.00 RROOAR REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 2,916.00
ROTARY CLUB OF DUBLIN, CA 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND 200.00 T-MOBILE USA, INC. PHONE HARDWARE - ENERGOV 20,448.61
TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFAIRS, INC GRANT STRATEGY AND WRITING SERVICES AUG 2024 5,000.00 T-MOBILE USA, INC. CELL PHONE SERVICES THROUGH 07/20/2024 652.89 T-MOBILE USA, INC. PIO & PW CELL PHONE SERVICES THROUGH 07/20/2024 438.40 SUNRUN INSTALLATION SERVICES PERMIT REFUND #BLDG23-02310 CXLD PERMIT 300.40 SUNRUN INSTALLATION SERVICES PERMIT REFUND #BLDG23-02554 CXLD PERMIT 190.00 ROBERT HALF TEMP EMPLOYEE FOR FINANCE DEPARTMENT 7/5/2024-7/26/2024 11,536.80 REDWOOD TOXICOLOGY LAB. INC. DPS TOXICOLOGY SERVICES 1,416.02 PRO CYCLES LLC POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS 1,410.02 MINUTEMAN PRESS FRANCIS RANCH SURVEY POSTCARDS 552.00
NANOGAN SCIENCE & SERVICES, LLC REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 3,645.00 STRAWN CONSTRUCTION, INC. CULTURAL ARTS REMODEL & CIVIC CTR IMPROV 467,618.78 MATRIX CONSULTING GROUP, LTD USER FEE STUDY CONSULTING FEE 1,500.00 KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND 200.00
LYNX TECHNOLOGIES, INC. GIS CONSULTING SERVICES - JUL 2024 5,325.00 JOY LIU PCS PICNIC FLIX 7-19 ELEMENTAL 290.00
JOY LIU PCS PICNIC FLIX 8-2 SPIDER-MAN 140.00
RENNE PUBLIC LAW GROUP, LLP CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLANNING 3,480.00 JOHN WHITE DPS PETTY CASH REPLENISH OPERATIONS FUND 1,085.00 JONES HALL, APLC EAST RANCH CFD BOND COUNSEL 25,000.00
INTERACTIVE DATA, LLC DPS INVESTIGATIONS SOCIAL MEDIA SEARCH JUL 2024 291.00 IRON MOUNTAIN POLICE RECORDS STORAGE 8/1/2024-8/31/2024 372.67 HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES SUMMER CAMPS WEEK 8 1,275.00 MAKE ME A PRO SPORTS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 5,700.00
GOODWIN CONSULTING GROUP, INC. DUBLIN CENTRE CFD FORMATION 6,597.50 GOODWIN CONSULTING GROUP, INC. DUBLIN BLVD MITIGATION CFD 6,171.13 GOODFELLOW BROS. CALIFORNIA, LLC IRON HORSE NATURE PARK AND OPEN SPACE - PHASE 1 390,918.63 FIELDMAN, ROLAPP & ASSOCIATES DUBLIN CENTRE CFD FORMATION 15,402.50 HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES SUMMER CAMPS WEEK 7 1,050.00 HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES PICNIC FLIX 1,200.00 GURUS EDUCATION EAST BAY REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 2,340.00
HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES SATURDAY CLASSES 450.00 GRAFIX SHOPPE INSTALLATION OF POLICE VEHICLE DECALS 579.00 GREEN POWERS AMERICA LLC DPS RADIO BATTERIES 1,194.00
EVERYTHING GROWS INTERIOR LANDSCAPING INTERIOR PLANT CARE & MAINT - CIVIC - AUG 2024 243.07 FIELDMAN, ROLAPP & ASSOCIATES DOWNTOWN FINANCING PLAN 3,600.00 EUROPEAN MOBILE WERKS POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS 186.11 EVERYTHING GROWS INTERIOR LANDSCAPING INTERIOR PLANT CARE & MAINT - CIVIC - JUL 2024 243.07 EDEN I & R INC OPS AND MAINT OF 211 ALCO COMMUNICATION SYSTEM 13,318.00 ENTERPRISE RENT A CAR EAN SERVICES, LLC DPS RENTAL CARS FOR SIU 2,382.36 EAST BAY POOL SERVICE, INC. THE WAVE POOL MAINTENANCE JUL 2024 12,431.00 DUBLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT STAGER GYM UTILITY BILL JUL 2024 1,555.14 EAGLE VIEW TECHNOLOGIES, INC. PICTOMETRY SOFTWARE 2,400.00 DUBLIN IRISH GUARD BAND 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND 200.00 DUBLIN LITTLE LEAGUE 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND 200.00 DUBLIN HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETICS 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND 200.00 DUBLIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY SHAMROCK GALA SPONSORSHIP 2,500.00 DENALECT ALARM COMPANY QUARTERLY ALARM CHARGE JUL 2024 363.00 DSRSD SENIOR CENTER GREASE TRAP INSPECTION - MAY 2024 143.00 COMCAST CIVIC CENTER COMCAST 500M INTERNET 06/30/2024 2,300.00 CORWOOD CAR WASH, INC. CAR WASHES FOR POLICE VEHICLES MAY-JUL 2024 2,832.00 47 City of Dublin
Payment Issuance Report
Print Date: 9/3/2024
Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024

Page 6 of 9 ends

8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/13/2024
8/15/2024
8/15/2024
8/16/2024
8/16/2024
8/16/2024
8/16/2024
8/16/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAT SERVICES WAVE JUL 2024 80.90 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAT SERVICES SENIOR JUL 2024 159.60 PLAN JPA GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS - JUL 2024 6,106.00
PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAT SERVICES PSC JUL 2024 155.61 PG&E SERVICE TO VARIOUS IRRIG 06/06/2024 79.88
PG&E SERVICE TO VARIOUS TC 06/28/2024 11,237.16
PG&E LS2-A EAST DUBLIN 06/13/2024 4,370.53
PG&E VAR PARK IRRIGATION 06/06/2024 132.44
PG&E SERVICE TO VARIOUS IRRIG 07/08/2024 1,376.17
PG&E LS2-A EAST DUBLIN 07/15/2024 21,309.86
NICHOLAS OCHOA PLANNING COMMISSION 8/13/2024 50.00
PAKPOUR CONSULTING GROUP, INC. CONSTRUCTION MGMT-DON BIDDLE COMM PARK - JUL 2024 990.00 MEGAN OLSON STORM DRAIN ART 500.00
MISSION EDGE SAN DIEGO SUMMER CAMP PRESENTATION 200.00
MATRIX CONSULTING GROUP, LTD USER FEE STUDY CONSULTING FEE 13,950.00 MATTHEW AINI PLANNING COMMISSION 8/13/2024 50.00
LIVERMORE-PLEASANTON UMPIRES SPORTS OFFICIATING SERVICES JUL 2024 2,140.00 LPA, INC. LIBRARY CONCEPT DESIGN - JUN 2024 7,641.50
JCJCJ, INC ART IN PUBLIC PLACES BRONZE PLAQUES 1,216.25 LANLOGIC INC. WEB PROTECTION AUG 2024 1,050.00
HOME DEPOT USA, INC. REFUND CXLD PERMIT #BLDG24-03256 (JOB #11283167) 59.20 JCJCJ, INC ADULT SOFTBALL AWARDS 675.43
GREG W. MACK CLOVER CARICATURES 3,600.00
HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES FARMERS MARKET 900.00 DAVID L. GATES & ASSOCIATES, INC. IRRIGATION UPGRADES - JUN 2024 7,074.00 EAST BAY POOL SERVICE, INC. THE WAVE POOL MAINTENANCE 315.24 CODE PUBLISHING, LLC MUNI CODE UPDATES 305.50
CORODATA SHREDDING, INC. SHRED BIN PICKUP JUL 2024 43.29 CHRISTINE PETIT REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 1,564.80
CARBONIC SERVICE THE WAVE POOL CHEMICALS 322.86
CATHERYN M GRIER PLANNING COMMISSION 8/13/2024 50.00
CALEHS ATTN: JOE MOULTON DESIGNATED UST OPERATOR INSP. SRVCS JUL 2024 600.00 CARAHSOFT DOCUSIGN ENVELOPES 21,975.68
BKF ENGINEERS TASSAJARA RD GAP CLOSURE PROJECT - JUN 2024 2,772.75 BICENTENNIAL SQUARE PARTNERS YEAR 4 SALES TAX REIMBURSEMENT 40,267.00 BIG O'TIRES #7 POLICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS 189.19 ANGELICA SMITH HC/CMO EVENT SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 327.61 BAY AREA NEWS GROUP EAST BAY LEGAL NOTICES - JUL 2024 744.96 AKSHAY ARORA ARORA TENNIS & FITNESS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 864.00 ALAMEDA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE SERVICES FY24-25 AUG 2024 1,483,859.50 AILI DONG PERMIT REFUND BLDG-2023-01877 CXLD PERMIT 188.80 US BANK - PARS PARS: PE 8/9/24 & CM - AUG 7,213.95
Payments Issued 8/16/2024 Total: 72,448.89
I C M A 401 PLAN DEFERRED COMP 401A: PE 8/9/24 1,276.83 I C M A 457 PLAN DEFERRED COMP 457: PE 8/9/24 & AUG COUNCIL 35,893.08 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT CA STATE WITHHOLDING: PE 8/9/24 & AUG COUNCIL 24,171.08 HEALTHEQUITY, INC. HEALTHEQUITY: PE 8/9/24 3,893.95
Payments Issued 8/15/2024 Total: 179,851.27
CAL PERS PERS RETIREMENT PLAN: PE 8/9/24 100,932.10
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE FEDERAL WITHHOLDING: PE 8/9/24 & AUG COUNCIL 78,919.17 Payments Issued 8/13/2024 Total: 1,301,280.21
WORLD CUP SOCCER CAMPS CLINICS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 3,468.00 VISIT TRI-VALLEY VISIT TRI-VALLEY CITY PARTNERSHIP 2024/2025 DUES 2,500.00 US NAVAL SEA CADETS CORPS RADM CHARLES 2024 FIREWORKS BOOTH REFUND 200.00 VERIZON WIRELESS DATA PLAN FOR LICENSE PLATE READERS 7/4/2024-8/3/2024 2,518.57 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES & SUPPLY CO. WINDOW & CARPET CLEANING SHANNON JUL 2024 1,281.58 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES & SUPPLY CO. WINDOW & CARPET CLEANING WAVE JUL 2024 758.62 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES & SUPPLY CO. WINDOW & CARPET CLEANING SENIOR JUL 2024 741.78 48 City of Dublin
Payment Issuance Report
Print Date: 9/3/2024
Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024

Page 7 of 9 ends

8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/19/2024
8/21/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024 HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES NATIONAL NIGHT OUT 1,050.00 GANNETT FLEMING, INC. SHANNON PARKING LOT - INSPECTION SVCS JUN 2024 9,075.14 HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES SUMMER CAMPS 2,100.00 GANNETT FLEMING, INC. MAP MEMORIAL PARK PATH RELO-CONST. JUN 2024 6,231.50 DELL MARKETING L.P. C/O DELL USA L.P. OPTIPLEX MICRO FORM FACTOR PLUS 7020 LAPTOP 1,096.18 DSRSD PLAN REVIEW FEE - PK0322 MAY 2024 5,670.00
CONSOLIDATED ENGINEERING DAC SPECIAL INSPECT & TESTING JUL 2024 9,456.24 CSW/STUBER-STROEH ENGINEERING GROUP, GREEN STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE ENG SVCS JUN 2024 4,942.50 COMCAST INTERNET/CABLE SVC WAV, SNC, PSC - 8/11-9/10/24 602.90 CIVICA LAW GROUP APC 2061 COLLIER CANYON RD (LABOR) CODE ENF. JUL 2025 28,195.77 CHARGE POINT, INC. CHARGEPOINT FLEET RFID CARDS - JUL 2024 108.20 CHRISTINE PETIT REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 633.60
CASTRO VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 1,440.00 DSRSD PERMIT INSPECTION FEES FOR PK0322 MAY 2024 1,900.00 CARBONIC SERVICE THE WAVE POOL CHEMICALS 629.44
BEST VERSION MEDIA, LLC THE WAVE MARKETING EAST DUBLIN LIVING 408.30 BLAISDELL'S BUSINESS PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES JUL 2024 1,315.86 BAY AREA AIR QUALITY MGMT DIST BAAQMD PSC ANNUAL PERMIT RENEWAL 2024-2025 617.00 BAY ALARM COMPANY ALARM SERVICES WAVE JUL 2024 2,762.34 CIVICA LAW GROUP APC 7461 BROOKDALE CT. (LABOR) -CODE ENF. JUL 2024 7,692.72 BAY ALARM COMPANY ALARM SERVICES FS16 & 17 JUL 2024 375.75 BAY ALARM COMPANY ALARM SERVICES SENIOR JUL 2024 369.30 BAY ALARM COMPANY ALARM SERVICES CIVIC JUL 2024 264.00
BAY ALARM COMPANY ALARM SERVICES CORP YARD JUL 2024 741.78 BAY ALARM COMPANY ALARM SERVICES SENIOR JUL 2024 207.00 BAY ALARM COMPANY ALARM SERVICES SHANNON JUL 2024 1,269.27 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO SHANNON FAX 07/27/2024 29.95 ARROW SIGN COMPANY MONUMENT SIGN DESIGN, MANUFT AND INSTALL AUG 2024 22,286.50 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO PSC 08/01/2024 114.17
4LEAF INC. STRUCTURAL REVIEW-PK0422 IH NATURE PARK AUG 2024 5,520.00 AMADOR VALLEY INDUSTRIES LLC TRASH SERVICES - CAMP PARKS - JUL 2024 37,633.52 BAY ALARM COMPANY ALARM SERVICES HERITAGE JUL 2024 2,277.57 AT&T - CALNET 3 CLARK AVE 07/27/2024 29.95
AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO CIVIC FIRE ALARM 08/01/2024 58.47 AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO FS16 07/27/2024 58.35
AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO CIVIC 07/27/2024 29.95
Payments Issued 8/21/2024 Total: 1,003.89
CAL PERS PERS RETIREMENT PLAN: AUG COUNCIL 1,003.89
Payments Issued 8/19/2024 Total: 1,672,383.57
AT&T - CALNET 3 SERVICE TO FS2-3 7/26/2024 345.24
WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, TO6 - 2024 ANNUAL STREET RESURFACING - JUL 2024 772.50 WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, TO6 - 2024 ANNUAL STREET RESURFACING - APR 2024 595.83 WC3-WEST COAST CODE CONSULTANT BUILDING PLAN REVIEW JUL 2024 12,023.00 WESCO GRAPHICS INC ACTIVITY GUIDE, ANNUAL & CITY REPORT PRINTING 8,081.82 VIDYA PILLAI REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 1,740.00
WAHIDA I. RASHID PLANNING COMMISSION 8/13/2024 50.00
TERRALINK COMMUNICATIONS INC. REFUND TUP PLOC-2024-00119 DEPOSIT 500.00 TESLA ENERGY PERMIT REFUND #BLDG-2024-03274 CXLD PERMIT 300.40 STANFORD HEALTH -VALLEYCARE MEDICAL TEST FEES 222.00
STEPHEN WRIGHT PLANNING COMMISSION 8/13/2024 50.00
RESCUE ROOTER PERMIT REFUND #BLDG-2024-03194 CXLD PERMIT 57.40 SHAMROCK OFFICE SOLUTIONS, LLC FILE 2399 CONTRACT USAGE CHARGE FOR 4/22/2024-7/21/2024 2,783.41 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAT SERVICES CIVIC JUL 2024 92.38 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAT SERVICES SHANNON JUL 2024 151.00 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAT SERVICES CORP YARD JUL 2024 102.40 QUALITY LOGO PRODUCTS, INC. ADVERTISING SUPPLIES 2,892.94 RENATA FLECCHIA TYLER PLANNING COMMISSION 8/13/2024 50.00 QUADIENT FINANCE USA, INC. POSTAGE FEES FOR JUL 2024 349.06 QUALITY LOGO PRODUCTS, INC. WAVE BIRTHDAY PARTY SUPPLIES 2,073.72 49 City of Dublin
Payment Issuance Report
Print Date: 9/3/2024
Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024

Page 8 of 9 ends

8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
8/26/2024
WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL - CWA ADMINISTRATION JUL2024 103.00 WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL - CWA ADMINISTRATION APR2024 154.50 WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, CWA ADMIN-GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE MAY 2024 1,013.88 WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, IRONHORSE NATURE PARK-CWA ADMIN JUL 2024 1,866.67 WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, CWA ADMIN-GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE APR 2024 103.00 WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, CWA ADMIN-GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE JUL 2024 1,579.85 WESTEK SYSTEMS INC. TROUBLESHOOT THE WIRELESS LOCK AT WAVE 960.00 WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, CWA ADMIN-GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE JUN 2024 151.41 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT OF NO. CA STATE FEE FOR REGULATORY COSTS JUL 2024-JUN 2025 1,128.43 WESCO GRAPHICS INC ACTIVITY GUIDE, ANNUAL & CITY REPORT PRINTING 6,654.89 TRI-VALLEY COMMUNITY TV RECORD/TELEVISE CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMM MTGS 973.87 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. ENERGOV PROJECT 29,439.55
SWINERTON MANAGEMENT AND CONSULTING PLAN/CONSTR REVIEW CULTURAL ARTS CENTER JUL 2024 46,503.00 TRB AND ASSOCIATES, INC. PLAN REVIEW & INSPECTION SERVICES JUL 2024 30,780.00 SQUAD SPORTS INC. REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 6,166.20
SAFECHECKS CHECK STOCK 693.69
SHAW LAW GROUP PC CONFIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT SERVICE 355.50 RAYNE OF SAN JOSE REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER SOFTENER SERV FS18 AUG 2024 204.30 RETIREE MEDICAL RETIREE MEDICAL 3,091.45
RAYNE OF SAN JOSE REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER SOFTENER SERV FS16 AUG 2024 236.90 RAYNE OF SAN JOSE REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER SOFTENER SERV FS17 AUG 2024 259.60 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAT SERVICES WAVE AUG 2024 161.80 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAT SERVICES PSC AUG 2024 51.87 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAT SERVICES SHANNON AUG 2024 75.50 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAT SERVICES CORP YARD AUG 2024 102.40 RAYNE OF SAN JOSE REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER SOFTENER SERV FS17 JUL 2024 259.60 RAYNE OF SAN JOSE REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER SOFTENER SERV FS18 JUL 2024 204.30 QUENCH USA, INC. WATER SERVICES D073045 AUG 2024 634.15 RAYNE OF SAN JOSE REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER SOFTENER SERV FS16 JUL 2024 236.90 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAT SERVICES WAVE JUL 2024 80.90 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAT SERVICES SENIOR AUG 2024 159.50 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAT SERVICES CIVIC JUL 2024 92.38 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY MAT SERVICES CIVIC AUG 2024 184.76 PRIME TIME ENTERTAINMENT SOUND SERVICE JUL 18 SUMMER CONCERT 1,650.00 PRIME TIME ENTERTAINMENT SOUND SERVICE JUL 11 SUMMER CONCERT 1,650.00 PRIME TIME ENTERTAINMENT SOUND SERVICE AUG 1 SUMMER CONCERT 1,650.00 PRIME TIME ENTERTAINMENT SOUND SERVICE JUL 25 SUMMER CONCERT 1,650.00 PG&E SERVICE TO FS16 07/11/2024 1,088.76
PG&E SERVICE TO HPM 7/28/2024 1,211.09
PG&E LS2-A SERVICE TO AVB 07/30/2024 1,703.20
PG&E SERVICE TO HCP 07/28/2024 2,972.52
PG&E B1 SERVICE TO VARIOUS IRRIG 07/11/2024 361.54
PG&E TC1 SERVICE TO 6795 DOUGHERTY 08/01/2024 222.85
PG&E B1 SERVICE TO POSITANO IRRIG 07/29/2024 410.74
PG&E SERVICE TO VARIOUS IRRIG 07/28/2024 61.73
PG&E B1 SERVICE TO PASSATEMPO 07/23/2024 79.74
PG&E B1 SERVICE TO SEAN DIAMOND 07/25/2024 186.95
PAKPOUR CONSULTING GROUP, INC. IHT BRIDGE PROJECT MANAGEMENT JUL 2024 8,715.00 LANLOGIC INC. 24/7 WAN INTERFACE FOR AT&T 637.50
IPERMIT PERMIT REFUND #BLDG-004199-2024 CXLD PERMIT 30.40 INCREDIFLIX, INC REC CLASS INSTRUCTOR 3,963.60
PG&E SERVICE TO SHANNON CENTER 07/29/2024 93.49
PG&E SERVICE TO SCH RNCH PARK 07/28/2024 485.81
PG&E B10S SERVICE TO CIVIC CENTER 07/14/2024 4,183.45
PG&E SERVICE TO CORP YARD 07/29/2024 1,633.40
PAKPOUR CONSULTING GROUP, INC. CM/INSP. SVCS. SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL JUL 2024 6,897.50 PG&E SERVICE TO GLEASON IRRIG 07/29/2024 1,019.69
HINDERLITER, DE LLAMAS & ASSOC CONTRACT SERVICES - SALES TAX JUL-SEP 2024 3,121.49 HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES THE WAVE AND KLS SOCCER 1,875.00 MINUTEMAN PRESS GOT WILDLIFE POSTCARD MAILING AND POSTAGE AUG 2024 736.68 HARRELL HARRIS PHOTOGRAPHY PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 600.00 50 City of Dublin
Payment Issuance Report
Print Date: 9/3/2024
Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024

Page 9 of 9 ends

8/26/2024
8/29/2024
8/29/2024
8/30/2024
8/30/2024
8/30/2024
8/30/2024
8/30/2024
8/30/2024
Total Number of Payments Issued:
$8,799,312.47
379
Grand Total for Payments Dated 8/1/2024 through 8/31/2024:

Payments Issued 8/30/2024 Total: 273,568.15
US BANK - PARS PARS: PE 8/23/24 5,238.54
I C M A 457 PLAN DEFERRED COMP 457: PE 8/23/24 32,188.20 I C M A 401 PLAN DEFERRED COMP 401A: PE 8/23/24 1,286.46 HEALTHEQUITY, INC. HEALTHEQUITY: PE 8/23/24 4,393.95
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT CA STATE WITHHOLDING: PE 8/23/24 24,021.94 RETIREE MEDICAL RETIREE MEDICAL 206,439.06
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE FEDERAL WITHHOLDING: PE 8/23/24 77,892.98 Payments Issued 8/29/2024 Total: 180,639.26
CAL PERS PERS RETIREMENT PLAN: PE 8/23/24 102,746.28
WORKFORCE INTEGRITY & TRAINING SOLUTIONS, SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL - CWA ADMINISTRATION MAY2024 753.01 Payments Issued 8/26/2024 Total: 341,847.35
51 STAFF REPORT

CITY COUNCIL

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Item 5.5
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT: Delegation of Authority to the City Manager to Purchase Fleet Vehicles Exceeding $45,000
Prepared by: Jordan Foss, Management Analyst II
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City Council will consider delegating purchasing authority of fleet vehicles exceeding $45,000 to the City Manager for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2024-25.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt the Resolution Delegating Authority to the City Manager to Purchase Fleet Vehicles Exceeding $45,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-25.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

Replacement vehicles will be covered by the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Internal Service Fund (ISF) Budget. Any revenue generated from the auction of the retired vehicles will be deposited into the ISF to offset future replacement costs. Authority for the purchase of non-replacement vehicles will be sought either through the annual budgeting process or at a City Council meeting during the year.

DESCRIPTION:

Background
The City’s fleet is made up of general use, maintenance, police, and fire vehicles. Public Works manages the general use and maintenance fleet, made up of nine vehicles which are either hybrid or electric. Dublin Police Services manages a fleet of 38 police vehicles, including 13 unmarked vehicles and 25 marked vehicles for patrol, crime prevention, and school resource officers.

Alameda County Fire Department manages a fleet of 11 fire vehicles, including seven apparatus (two of which are reserve units), two patrol vehicles, and two general use vehicles.

The City Manager recently established a Fleet Life Cycle/Replacement Administrative Policy (Attachment 2) that identifies the metrics to be used when considering vehicle replacement (age, 52

Page 2 of 2 ends

mileage, and repair/maintenance data). For example, Police vehicles are now reviewed after four years (it was previously three years) or 75,000 miles, and general fleet vehicles are reviewed at six years or 75,000 miles. Generally, Staff reviews the vehicle inventory each year and budgets for anticipated replacements in the Internal Service Fund. Police Services budgets for and replaces between six and 10 police vehicles each year on average; Public Works and Fire replace vehicles much more infrequently, as vehicle usage is much lower, and maintenance needs are not as prevalent. Currently, Public Works and Fire have no active vehicles that are over the mileage or age benchmark set forth in the Fleet Life Cycle/Replacement Policy.

Staff Request
Recent purchases of replacement vehicles and equipment have exceeded the City Manager’s purchasing authority of $45,000, requiring Staff to seek City Council approval. However, these transactions have been hindered by supply chain shortages and vehicle and equipment availability at various dealerships. By the time Staff obtains City Council approval, the vehicles are often no longer available, requiring Staff to begin the procurement process again. For this reason, Staff is seeking approval from the City Council to delegate purchasing authority to the City Manager for vehicles and equipment over $45,000 in accordance with the planned and budgeted vehicle replacement schedule.

Scheduled purchases for Fiscal Year 2024-25 include the replacement of four marked police vehicles and two police motorcycles. The model and make of the replacement vehicles are subject to availability. It is anticipated the replacement motorcycles will be procured from Harley Davidson for consistency purposes. Staff will provide a report to the City Council on the replaced vehicles as well as the purchased vehicles once procurement has been completed.

Staff is also requesting that the City Council authorize the disposal of any replaced vehicles by transferring them to a professional auction company for sale. Any revenue generated from the auction of the retired vehicles will be deposited into the fund to offset future replacement costs.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

None.

NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:

The City Council Agenda was posted.

ATTACHMENTS:
1) Resolution Delegating Authority to the City Manager to Purchase Fleet Vehicles Exceeding $45,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-25
2) Administrative Policy 3.6 – Fleet Life Cycle/Replacement 53 Attachment 1
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted 09/17/2024 Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. xx – 24

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN

DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO THE CITY MANAGER TO PURCHASE FLEET VEHICLES EXCEEDING $45,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024-25
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin’s fleet is made up of general use, maintenance, police, and fire vehicles; and
WHEREAS, Public Works manages a fleet of nine general use and maintenance vehicles, Dublin Police Services manages a fleet of 38 police vehicles, including 13 unmarked vehicles, and 25 marked vehicles for patrol, crime prevention, and school resource officers, and Alameda County Fire Department manages a fleet of 11 fire vehicles, including seven apparatus, two patrol vehicles, and two general use vehicles; and WHEREAS, to ensure reliability and to minimize repair expenses, the City reviews these vehicles in accordance with the City’s Fleet Life Cycle/Replacement Policy for replacement with the most appropriate vehicles to maintain City operations; and WHEREAS, scheduled purchases for Fiscal Year 2024-25 include the replacement of four marked police vehicles and two police motorcycles; and WHEREAS, due to increased costs, it is expected the procurement of new and replacement vehicles will exceed the City Manager’s purchasing limit of $45,000; and WHEREAS, due to supply chain shortages and reduced vehicle and equipment availability at various dealerships, the purchasing process has become time sensitive; and WHEREAS, with the City Council’s delegation of authority to the City Manager to make vehicle purchases over $45,000, Staff will be able to work with dealerships to quickly purchase the appropriate vehicles as they are available; and
WHEREAS, such purchases will be made in accordance with the vehicle replacement schedule and the availability of funds in the Internal Service Fund budget for Fiscal Year 2024- 25; and
WHEREAS, Staff will provide a report to the City Council detailing the vehicles replaced and purchased once the procurement process is completed.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that City Council approves delegation of authority to the City Manager to purchase fleet vehicles exceeding $45,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-25.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon placing the new vehicles in service, the replaced vehicles are declared surplus property and the City Manager and/or her designee shall be authorized to arrange for their auction in accordance with state and local laws and regulations. 54 Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 2 of 2 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of September 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________________
City Clerk
55 City of Dublin, CA Administrative Policy 3.6
Fleet Replacement
Original Effective Date: 9/9/2024

Page 1 of 4 ends

3.6—Fleet Life Cycle/Replacement

1. Purpose:
a. This policy’s goal is to establish replacement metrics for the classes of vehicle by analyzing age, mileage, repair/maintenance data to be compared to depreciated value, and to provide direction to departments on replacement policy, scheduling, and funding procedures.

2. General:
a. Service life is the amount of time a vehicle is capable of rendering service. Service life may be quite lengthy if a vehicle receives adequate maintenance and worn components are replaced. There is however a fatigue point for mechanical parts and structures that must be accounted for so as not to affect safety.
b. Technological life is the relative decline in productivity of a unit when compared to a newer model. Technology advancements affect fuel usage and greenhouse gas emissions. c. Economic life is the length of time that a vehicles cost is at a minimum. As the age and mileage of a vehicle increase the maintenance and operating costs increase also.

3. Replacement Schedule:
a. Vehicles become candidates for replacement when they reach either the age or the mileage replacement criteria, whichever comes first, as listed in the table below. The following chart will form the basis of a replacement cycle or schedule. This chart was developed using the City’s current replacement standards, but also references the CA Department of General Services’ Replacement Schedule Criteria, as well as research on other local agencies’ programs. Specialized vehicles, such as undercover police vehicles, Fire Trucks, and Fire Engines, may be retained for additional life as a reserve unit but must be evaluated annually.

Vehicle Type Age of Vehicle (in months) Vehicle Mileage Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles
Law Enforcement Sedans (Patrol) 48 75,000
Law Enforcement SUVs (Patrol) 48 75,000
Motorcycles (Patrol) 60 75,000
Sedans 72 75,000
Pickup Trucks 72 75,000
Sport Utility Vehicles 72 75,000
Mini Vans 72 75,000
Cargo Vans 72 75,000
Fire Trucks 180 100,000
Fire Engines 180 100,000
Hybrid Vehicles
Sedans 84 85,000
Pickup Trucks 84 85,000
Sport Utility Vehicles 84 85,000
Mini Vans 84 85,000
Cargo Vans 84 85,000
Attachment 2
56 City of Dublin, CA Administrative Policy 3.6
Fleet Replacement
Original Effective Date: 9/9/2024

Page 2 of 4 ends

Electric (EV) Vehicles
Motorcycles (Patrol) 60 75,000
Sedans 120 100,000
Pickup Trucks 120 100,000
Sport Utility Vehicles 120 100,000
Mini Vans 120 100,000
Cargo Vans 120 100,000

4. Vehicle Evaluations
a. When a vehicle has met its expected life, the Department Fleet Manager utilizes an evaluation sheet that reports the overall condition of the vehicle. The evaluation data that is collected includes the overall visual and mechanical condition of the vehicle, total lifespan costs of repair, preventative maintenance costs, and lifespan fuel costs. b. The vehicle is evaluated and tracked on a scoring system. Excellent condition items are given a score of 5 and a score of 1 would indicate poor condition. Any vehicle that has an overall score of 21 or less points, replacement is recommended. If the vehicle has a score above the 21 points and other contributing factors are evaluated, the vehicle lifespan may be extended.
c. In addition to the scoring system, there are other weighing factors such as maintenance repair costs, preventative maintenance costs and fuel costs based on the lifespan of the vehicle. As a vehicle ages, maintenance and repair costs increase. This data is evaluated and factored in on a case-by-case basis.
d. Environment and sustainability outcomes are factored into evaluations (including measures outlined in the City’s Climate Action Plan). At both Federal and State levels, emission standards for fleets have affected the future planning and purchases of vehicles.

Changing emission standards may require vehicle replacement. e. Once the Department Fleet Manager has completed the evaluation, the Department Director and/or City Manager will be included in further discussions and debriefed on findings and recommendations moving forward. It may be necessary to evaluate the vehicle based on personnel changes, equipment needs, etc.

5. Procedure
a. In January of each Fiscal Year, the Finance Department will distribute a fleet inventory list to Departments managing fleet vehicles (currently Fire Services & Prevention, Dublin Police Services, and Public Works). Departments will evaluate the fleet inventory list and prioritize vehicle replacement based upon this policy and with regards to budget building for the next Fiscal Year. The prioritized list will be shared with using departments to determine the correct replacement schedule as well as correct vehicle type and total vehicle inventory. Departments shall request budget for any vehicles to be replaced in or added to the fleet for the next Fiscal Year.
b. Where operationally possible alternatively fueled vehicles will replace conventionally fueled vehicles. Alternative options include Compressed Natural Gas (CNG), Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEV), Plug in Hybrid Electric (PEHV) and all Electric Vehicles (EV). The 57 City of Dublin, CA Administrative Policy 3.6
Fleet Replacement
Original Effective Date: 9/9/2024

Page 3 of 4 ends

prioritized list of replacement vehicles will be taken to City Council annually for approval, pending available funding in the Vehicle Replacement Fund.

Replacement Specifications
a. Once a vehicle has been met all prerequisites for replacement, the Department Fleet Manager will discuss the vehicle replacement with Department/Division Supervisors to verify that use and type of vehicle has not changed. Replacement policy of fleet is “like for like.” If there is a need to purchase a replacement vehicle that differs in class from previous vehicle, discussion will be carried out case-by-case. Deviations from a “like for like” replacement on vehicle classification type (i.e. sedan for sedan) will require Director and/or City Manager approval.

New Fleet Replacement Procedure
a. Department Fleet Manager will receive units from vendor, verify that vehicle that arrived matches what was specified by Department/ Division
b. Install or retrofit all necessary equipment needed based on vehicle use c. Apply City logos and all applicable decals
d. Add asset to insurance pool agency
e. Inform Department/Division of arrival of unit
f. Obtain vehicle number and license tag number (if required) and provide to Finance for Asset Tracking
g. Keys and necessary associated documents will be provided to the Department/Division personnel
h. Department/Division will surrender the replaced vehicle to the Department Fleet Manager prior to taking possession of new vehicle

6. Summary
a. This policy is to be used as guideline for cost effective vehicle replacement cycles. Other factors such available funding, incidents/accidents, or vehicle service level agreements may influence replacements. Increases in public health and safety measures requiring additional vehicles (New Needs) will also influence vehicle replacement schedules. In these cases, a vehicle may need to be retained past its life cycle, however these vehicles must be relinquished at the first opportunity in order to reduce operating costs and allow for adequate delivery of City services.

7. References
a. CA GSA Replacement Schedule Criteria
(https://www.dgs.ca.gov/Resources/SAM/TOC/4100/4126)
b. Related Administrative Policies
i. Vehicle Use Policy
ii. Collision Investigation Policy
iii. Safe Use of Cellular & Other Wireless Devices
iv. Green Fleet
58 City of Dublin, CA Administrative Policy 3.6
Fleet Replacement
Original Effective Date: 9/9/2024

Page 4 of 4 ends

Approved:
________________________
Linda Smith, City Manager
Summary of Revisions
2024--Adopted
59 City of Dublin
Vehicle Evaluation Form
ID # Div # Year Make Model Expected Life Span
Score (Scale 5=Excellent - 1=Poor)
Engine
Transmission Original Purchase Cost
Axle(s) Total Life to Date Operating Cost $ -
Suspension / Steering Est. Reconditioning Cost
Interior and Electrical Est. Auction Value
Exterior / Body
Aux Engine / Components
Total Score 0
Date
Description
Overall Condition Summary:

Age of Vehicle
Mileage/Hours
LTD Repairs
(Recommend replacement at 21 or lower)
LTD PM Services
LTD Fuel Cost
Department Fleet Manager
Recommended Action:
60 STAFF REPORT

CITY COUNCIL

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Item 5.6
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT: Ordinance Adding a Low Carbon Concrete Requirement to the City’s Green Building Code in Coordination with the City’s Climate Action Plan Prepared by: Nelson Pureco, Plan Check Engineer, and Shannan Young, Environmental & Sustainability Manager
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City Council will consider waiving the second reading and adopting the Ordinance amending the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and Section 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete). The City Council waived the first reading and introduced the ordinance at the meeting on September 3, 2024.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The cost associated with implementing the Ordinance is estimated to be approximately $85,000 to $140,000 per year, reflecting staff time to educate applicants on the Ordinance and additional plan check and inspection time commitments. The City will recover the costs via fees adopted in the Master Fee Schedule.
61

Page 2 of 2 ends

DESCRIPTION:

The City of Dublin adopted the Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond (CAP 2030) on September 15, 2020 (Resolution 100-20). CAP 2030 includes five strategies with 22 measures intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and to put the City on the path to reach carbon neutrality by 2045.

Included under Strategy 4 is Measure MM-2, Reduce the Embodied Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) Associated with Building Materials. The embodied GHG emissions of a building are carbon dioxide or other GHGs generated by making and transporting building materials to a site, including mining, refining, and shipping. According to the Rocky Mountain Institute, 11 percent of global GHG emissions are generated during the lifecycle of building materials and concrete production is responsible for approximately 8 percent of global carbon emissions. The GHG emissions associated with concrete can be reduced by minimizing cement use to the extent possible or by using cement alternatives called supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs).

SCMs include but are not limited to fly ash, slag, and glass pozzolans.

On September 3, 2024, the City Council held a public hearing and introduced an Ordinance amending the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to require the use of low carbon concrete. The Ordinance would amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and add Section

7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and Section 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete) (Ordinance). These requirements would be applicable to all projects that require a building permit and that use readymix concrete, and this requirement would go into effect on January 1, 2025.

The City Council will consider waiving the second reading and adopting the Ordinance (Attachment 1) approving amendments to the DMC Green Building Code. Attachment 2 provides a complete description of the proposed Ordinance.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

None.

NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:

The City Council Agenda was posted.

ATTACHMENTS:
1) Ordinance Approving Amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete)
2) September 3, 2024 Staff Report (without attachments) 62 Attachment 1
Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 1 of 13 ORDINANCE NO. xx – 24

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 7.94 (GREEN BUILDING CODE) TO AMEND SECTION 7.94.050 (DEFINITIONS) AND TO ADD SECTION

7.94.085 (LOW CARBON CONCRETE) AND SECTION 7.94.120 (LOW CARBON

CONCRETE)
The Dublin City Council does ordain as follows:

SECTION 1. RECITALS.

A. Health and Safety Code Section 18938 makes provisions published in the California Building Standards Code pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17922 applicable to all occupancies throughout the State and effective one hundred and eighty days after publication by the California Building Standards Commission (the “Commission”), or at a later date established by the Commission.

B. California Health and Safety Code Sections 17958, 17958.5, 17958.7 and 18941.5 establish the authority for a city to adopt and make local amendments and modifications to the building standards in the California Building Standards Code to establish more restrictive building standards than those contained in the California Building Standards Code.

C. California Health and Safety Code Sections 17958, 17958.5, 17958.7 and 18941.5 permit a city to make such local amendments and modifications as the city determines are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions.

D. California Health and Safety Code Sections 17958, 17958.5, 17958.7 and 18941.5 require a city, before making any amendments and modifications to the California Building Standards Code, make an express finding that such amendments and modifications are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions.

E. Under Health and Safety Code Section 17958.7, changes pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17958.5 may not become effective until the required findings, and the changes, have been filed with the California Building Standards Commission; and F. Government Code Section 50022.2 permits enactment of City Ordinances that adopt codes or statutes, including codes of the State of California, by reference.

G. A Staff Report was submitted to the Dublin City Council recommending approval of the proposed amendments to Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code).

H. The City Council held a public hearing on the proposed amendments to Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) on September 3, 2024, at which time all interested persons had an opportunity to be heard.

I. Proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law. 63 Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 2 of 13 J. The City Council did hear and consider all said reports, recommendations and testimony herein above set forth and used its independent judgement to evaluate the amendments.

Section 2. EFFECT OF CODE ON PAST ACTIONS AND OBLIGATIONS.

The adoption of the Dublin Building Code, 2022, does not affect any civil lawsuit instituted or filed or prosecutions for ordinance violations committed on or prior to the effective date of said Code, does not waive any fee or penalty due and unpaid prior to the effective date of said Code, and does not affect the validity of any bond or cash deposit posted, filed or deposited pursuant to the requirements of any ordinance.

Section 3. REFERENCES TO PRIOR CODE.

Unless superseded and expressly repealed, references in City forms, documents and regulations to the chapters and sections of the former Dublin Building Code, 2019, shall be construed to apply to the corresponding provisions contained within the Dublin Building Code, 2022.

Section 4. No penalty clauses are adopted by reference pursuant to this Ordinance. While Chapter 7.94 of the Dublin Municipal Code remain in force, a reasonable supply of the incorporated codes shall be available in the office of the City Clerk for public purchase.

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. POSTING.

This Ordinance shall take effect on January 1, 2025. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Government Code Section 36933.

Section 7. CEQA FINDING.

The City Council hereby finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title 14, sections 15002 and 15378 as this Ordinance is not a “project” within the meaning of the State CEQA Guidelines. Specifically, this Ordinance will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment because it does not authorize the construction of any new large structures or other physical changes resulting in impacts to the environment.

Section 8. AMENDMENT 7.94.050 OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE.

Section 7.94.050 of the Dublin Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

7.94.050 Section 202, Chapter 2, Definitions – Amended. 64 Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 3 of 13 The following definitions are hereby added to Section 202 of the State Code to read as follows:

ALL-ELECTRIC BUILDING. A building that contains no combustion equipment or plumbing for combustion equipment within the building or building property lines, and instead uses electric appliances for service.

ASPHALTIC CONCRETE. Commonly called asphalt, bituminous asphalt concrete, and bituminous mixture), consists of any composite material composed of mineral aggregate adhered with a binder and commonly used to surface roads and parking lots.

CALTRANS AUTHORIZED MATERIALS LIST. Cementitious Materials for use in concrete as updated from time to time. This list includes blended cement, Portland cement, fly ash, pozzolan, metakaolin pozzolan, silica fume, and slag materials.

CARBON CURE CONCRETE. A technology that introduces recycled CO₂ into fresh concrete to reduce its carbon footprint without compromising performance. Once injected, the CO₂ undergoes a mineralization process and becomes permanently embedded.

COMMERCIAL FOOD HEAT-PROCESSING EQUIPMENT. Equipment used in a food establishment for heat-processing food or utensils and that produces grease vapors, steam, fumes, smoke, or odors that are required to be removed through a local exhaust ventilation system, as defined in the California Mechanical Code.

COMBUSTION EQUIPMENT. Any equipment or appliance used for space heating, water heating, cooking, clothes drying and/or lighting that uses fuel gas.

CONCRETE. Any approved combination of mineral aggregates bound together into a hardened conglomerate in accordance with the requirements of this code. Concrete as defined in this Chapter does not include asphaltic concrete.

CO₂. Carbon Dioxide.

CO₂ INJECTION. The process of injecting CO₂ into the cement mixture rather than water for purposes of curing the product.

ELECTRIC HEATING APPLIANCE. A device that produces heat energy to create a warm environment by the application of electric power to resistance elements, refrigerant compressors, or dissimilar material junctions, as defined in the California Mechanical Code.

ENVIRONMENTAL PRODUCT DECLARATION. Present quantified environmental information on the life cycle of a product based on the results of a comprehensive Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to enable comparisons between products fulfilling the same function. Environmental Product Declarations must conform to International Organization for Standardization 14025 accreditation and European Standard EN 15804, or International Organization for Standardization 21930 accreditation, and have at least a “cradle to grave” scope (which covers product life cycle from resource extraction to the factory).

FUEL GAS. A gas that is natural, manufactured, liquefied petroleum, or a mixture of these. 65 Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 4 of 13 GREENHOUSE GAS (GHG). Any gas that has the property of absorbing infrared radiation (net heat energy) emitted from Earth’s surface and reradiating it back to Earth’s surface, thus contributing to the greenhouse effect. GHG gasses include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxides, and water vapor.

PLAIN CONCRETE. Concrete that contains no steel reinforcement in the form of rods, bars, or mesh or containing not more than two tenths of one percent of reinforcing.

READY-MIX CONCRETE. Concrete that is batched for delivery from a central plant instead of being mixed on the job site. Each batch of ready-mixed concrete is tailor-made according to the specifics of the contractor and is delivered to the contractor in a plastic condition, usually in the cylindrical trucks often known as cement mixers.

REINFORCED CONCRETE. Concrete in which reinforcing steel in the form of rods, bars, or mesh—is inserted into the concrete to absorb the tensile, shear, and sometimes compressive stresses in a concrete structure.

SECONDARY CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS (SCM’S). Materials that include, but are not limited to, ground granulated blast furnace slag (ggbs), fly ash, metakaolin pozzolan, pozzolan, silica fume, and Belterra clay.

UPFRONT EMBODIED CARBON (EMBODIED CARBON). The emissions, including greenhouse gasses, released before the built asset is used. The release of emissions occurs in material extraction, transportation, manufacturing, and installing building materials on site. Upfront embodied carbon also includes operational and end-of-life emissions associated with materials.

Section 9. ADDITION OF 7.94.085 TO THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE.

Section 7.94.085 is hereby added to the Dublin Municipal Code to read as follows:

7.94.085 Section 4.420, Division 4.4, Chapter 4, Low Carbon Concrete-Added.

A new Section 4.420 is added to read:

4.420 Low Carbon Concrete Requirements.

4.420.1 Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide standards and requirements for the composition of concrete, as defined herein, that maintains adequate strength and durability for the intended application and at the same time reduces greenhouse gas emissions associated with concrete composition.

4.420.1.2 Applicability. The requirements of this section shall only be applicable to projects that require a building permit.

4.420.3 Compliance. Compliance with the requirements of this section shall be demonstrated through any of the compliance options in Sections 4.420.3.2 through

4.420.3.5.
66 Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 5 of 13 Table 4.420.3: Cement and Embodied Carbon Limit Pathways Cement limits
for use with any compliance
method

4.420.3.2 through 4.420.3.5
Embodied Carbon limits
for use with any compliance
method

4.420.3.2 through 4.420.3.5
Minimum
specified
compressive
strength f’c , psi
Maximum ordinary Portland
cement content, lbs/yd3 (1)
Maximum embodied carbon kg
CO2e/m3, per Environmental
Product Declaration
up to 2500 362 260
2501-3000 410 289
3001-4000 456 313
4001-5000 503 338
5001-6000 531 356
6001-7000 594 394
Greater than
7000
657 433
up to 3000 light
weight
512 578
Up to 4000 light
weight
571 626
4001-5000 light
weight
629 675
Notes (1) Portland cement of any type per ASTM C150.

4.420.3.1 Allowable Increases
(1) Approved Cements. The maximum cement content may be increased proportionately above the tabulated value when using an approved cement, or blended cement, demonstrated by approved Environmental Product Declaration to have a plant-specific Environmental Product Declaration lower than 1040 kg CO2e/metric ton. The increase in allowable cement content is:
1040 / plant-specific Environmental Product Declaration %. (2) Cement and Embodied Carbon Limit Allowances. Cement or Embodied Carbon limits shown in Table 4.420.3 can be increased by 30% for concretes demonstrated to the Building Official as requiring high early strength. Such concretes may include but are not limited to, precast or prestressed concrete; beams and slabs above grade; and shotcrete.

4.420.3.2 Cement Limit Method – Mix
67 Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 6 of 13 Cement content of a concrete mix using this method shall not exceed the value shown in Table 4.420.3. Use of this method is limited to concrete with specified compressive strength not exceeding 5,000 psi.

4.420.3.3. Cement Limit Method – Project
Total cement content shall be based on total cement usage of all concrete mix designs within the same project. Total cement content for a project shall not exceed the value calculated according to Equation 4.420.3.3.

Equation 4.420.3.3:

Σ(Cemn)(vn) ≤ Σ(Cemlim)(vn)
Where,
n = the total number of concrete mixtures for the project Cemn = the cement content for mixture n, kg/m3 or lb/yd3 Cemlim = the maximum cement content for mixture n per Table 4.420.3, kg/m3 or lb/yd3
vn = the volume of mixture n concrete to be placed, yd3 or m3 Calculations may use yd3 or m3 but must keep the same units throughout.

4.420.3.4 Embodied Carbon Method – Mix
Mix embodied carbon of a concrete mix, based on an approved Environmental Product Declaration, shall not exceed the value given in Table 4.420.3.

4.420.3.5 Embodied Carbon Method – Project
Total embodied carbon of all concrete mix designs within the same project (EC proj) shall not exceed the project limit (EC allowed) determined using Table 4.420.3 and Equation

4.420.3.5.

Equation 4.420.3.5:

Σ(ECn )(vn ) ≤ Σ(EClim )(vn )
Where,
n = the total number of concrete mixtures for the project ECn = the embodied carbon content for mixture n, per mixture Environmental Product Declaration, kgCO2e/m3
EClim = the maximum embodied carbon content for mixture n per Table 4.420.3, kgCO2e/m3
vn = the volume of mixture n concrete to be placed, yd3 or m3 68 Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 7 of 13

4.420.3.6 Verification and Enforcement
Prior to the approval of the building permit application involving the placement of concrete, the permit applicant shall submit a completed Low-Carbon Concrete Compliance Form to the Building & Safety Division. If the permit applicant has not secured a concrete supplier at the time the permit application is submitted, the applicant may complete the Low-Carbon Concrete Compliance Form to calculate the maximum allowable cement and embodied carbon and shall certify by signature that they will meet maximum allowable limits at the time of construction.

As a condition of such building permits, and prior to approving construction inspections and prior to placement of concrete, the permit applicant shall submit batch certificates and/or Environmental Product Declarations with an updated Low-Carbon Concrete Compliance Form to the Building & Safety Division. The batch certificates and/or Environmental Product Declarations, and the updated Low-Carbon Concrete Compliance Form shall be reviewed for compliance by the Building & Safety Division prior to performing further inspections or pouring concrete.

When deviations from compliance with this section occur, the Building Official or their designee, is authorized to require the permit applicant to provide evidence of equivalent carbon reductions from the portions of remaining construction of the project to demonstrate alternative compliance with the intent of this chapter and payment of associated administrative fees. If the permit applicant is unable to provide evidence of equivalent carbon reductions, the Building & Safety Division reserves the right to penalize the permit applicant for the excess embodied carbon used in the project. Excess embodied carbon shall be determined by the amount of embodied carbon content in the project greater than EClim per Equation 4.420.3.5, in metric tons. The maximum penalty shall be determined as follows:

Pm = (ECx)($190) + A
Where,
Pm = the maximum penalty ($)
ECx = the total excess embodied carbon content in the project, in metric tons determined from Equation 4.420.3.5.
$190 = penalty per metric ton of excess embodied carbon ($/metric ton) A = Building and Safety Administrative Fee ($), refer to the City’s Master Fee Schedule.

For projects involving placement of concrete by, or on behalf of, the City of Dublin the City Project Manager for the project, or their designee, shall maintain accurate records of the total volume (in cubic yards) of all concrete placed, as well as the total compliant volume (in cubic yards) of all concrete placed.

4.420.3.7 Exemptions
(a) Projects exempt from permits. Projects that do not require a building permit per Chapter 7.28, shall not be subject to the requirements in section 4.420 (b) Projects that do not involve the placement of ready-mix concrete. (c) Asphaltic concrete is not considered as concrete for the purposes of section 4.420 69 Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 8 of 13 (d) Due to lack of commercial availability of low-carbon concrete options, shotcrete, gunite, and stucco are exempt from embodied carbon requirements. (e) Small projects as approved by the Building Official. (f) Hardship or infeasibility exemption. If an applicant for a project subject to section

4.420 believes that circumstances exist that make it a hardship or infeasible to meet the requirements of section 4.420, the applicant may request an exemption as set forth below.

In applying for an exemption, the burden is on the applicant to show hardship or infeasibility. The applicant shall identify in writing the specific requirements of the standards for compliance that the project is unable to achieve and the circumstances that make it a hardship or infeasible for the project to comply with this chapter. Circumstances that constitute hardship or infeasibility may include, but are not limited to the following:
(1) There is a lack of commercially available material necessary to comply with section 4.420;
(2) The cost of achieving compliance is disproportionate to the overall cost of the project;
(3) Compliance with the requirements would impair the historic integrity of buildings listed on a local, state or federal list or register of historic structures as regulated by the California Historic Building Code (Title 24, Part 8). (g) Granting of an exemption. If the Building Official determines that it is a hardship or infeasible for the applicant to fully meet the requirements of section 4.420 and that granting the requested exemption will not cause the building to fail to comply with the California Green Building Standards Code, the Building Official shall determine the maximum feasible threshold of compliance reasonably achievable for the project. In making this determination, the Building Official shall consider whether alternate, practical means of achieving the objectives of section 4.420 can be satisfied. If an exemption is granted, the applicant shall be required to comply with section 4.420 in all other respects and shall be required to achieve the threshold of compliance determined to be achievable by the Building Official.
(h) Denial of exception. If the Building Official determines that it is reasonably possible for the applicant to fully meet the requirements of section 4.420, the request shall be denied, and the applicant shall be notified of the decision in writing within 60 days after receipt of the request for exemption. The project and compliance documentation shall be modified to comply with the standards for compliance.

Section 10. ADDITION OF 7.94.120 TO THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE.

Section 7.94.120 is hereby added to the Dublin Municipal Code to read as follows:

7.94.120 Section 5.420, Division 5.4, Chapter 5, Low Carbon Concrete-Added.

A new Section 5.420 is added to read:

5.420 Low Carbon Concrete Requirements.

5.420.1 Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide standards and requirements for the composition of concrete, as defined herein, that maintains adequate strength and 70 Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 9 of 13 durability for the intended application and at the same time reduces greenhouse gas emissions associated with concrete composition.

5.420.1.2 Applicability. The requirements of this section shall only be applicable to projects that require a building permit.

5.420.3 Compliance. Compliance with the requirements of this section shall be demonstrated through any of the compliance options in Sections 5.420.3.2 through

5.420.3.5.

Table 5.420.3: Cement and Embodied Carbon Limit Pathways Cement limits
for use with any compliance
method

5.420.3.2 through 5.420.3.5
Embodied Carbon limits
for use with any compliance
method

5.420.3.2 through 5.420.3.5
Minimum
specified
compressive
strength f’c , psi
Maximum ordinary Portland
cement content, lbs/yd3 (1)
Maximum embodied carbon kg
CO2e/m3, per Environmental
Product Declaration
up to 2500 362 260
2501-3000 410 289
3001-4000 456 313
4001-5000 503 338
5001-6000 531 356
6001-7000 594 394
Greater than
7000
657 433
up to 3000 light
weight
512 578
Up to 4000 light
weight
571 626
4001-5000 light
weight
629 675
Notes (1) Portland cement of any type per ASTM C150.

5.420.3.1 Allowable Increases
(1) Approved Cements. The maximum cement content may be increased proportionately above the tabulated value when using an approved cement, or blended cement, demonstrated by approved Environmental Product Declaration to have a plant-specific Environmental Product Declaration lower than 1040 kg CO2e/metric ton. The increase in allowable cement content is:
1040 / plant-specific Environmental Product Declaration %. 71 Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 10 of 13 (2) Cement and Embodied Carbon Limit Allowances. Cement or Embodied Carbon limits shown in Table 5.420.3 can be increased by 30% for concretes demonstrated to the Building Official as requiring high early strength. Such concretes may include but are not limited to, precast or prestressed concrete; beams and slabs above grade; and shotcrete.

5.420.3.2 Cement Limit Method – Mix
Cement content of a concrete mix using this method shall not exceed the value shown in Table 5.420.3. Use of this method is limited to concrete with specified compressive strength not exceeding 5,000 psi.

5.420.3.3. Cement Limit Method – Project
Total cement content shall be based on total cement usage of all concrete mix designs within the same project. Total cement content for a project shall not exceed the value calculated according to Equation 5.420.3.3.

Equation 5.420.3.3:

Σ(Cemn)(vn) ≤ Σ(Cemlim)(vn)
Where,
n = the total number of concrete mixtures for the project Cemn = the cement content for mixture n, kg/m3 or lb/yd3 Cemlim = the maximum cement content for mixture n per Table 5.420.3, kg/m3 or lb/yd3
vn = the volume of mixture n concrete to be placed, yd3 or m3 Calculations may use yd3 or m3 but must keep the same units throughout.

5.420.3.4 Embodied Carbon Method – Mix
Mix embodied carbon of a concrete mix, based on an approved Environmental Product Declaration, shall not exceed the value given in Table 5.420.3.

5.420.3.5 Embodied Carbon Method – Project
Total embodied carbon of all concrete mix designs within the same project (EC proj) shall not exceed the project limit (EC allowed) determined using Table 5.420.3 and Equation

5.420.3.5.

Equation 5.420.3.5:

Σ(ECn )(vn ) ≤ Σ(EClim )(vn )
Where,
n = the total number of concrete mixtures for the project 72 Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 11 of 13 ECn = the embodied carbon content for mixture n, per mixture Environmental Product Declaration, kgCO2e/m3
EClim = the maximum embodied carbon content for mixture n per Table 4.420.3, kgCO2e/m3
vn = the volume of mixture n concrete to be placed, yd3 or m3

5.420.3.6 Verification and Enforcement
Prior to the approval of the building permit application involving the placement of concrete, the permit applicant shall submit a completed Low-Carbon Concrete Compliance Form to the Building & Safety Division. If the permit applicant has not secured a concrete supplier at the time the permit application is submitted, the applicant may complete the Low-Carbon Concrete Compliance Form to calculate the maximum allowable cement and embodied carbon and shall certify by signature that they will meet maximum allowable limits at the time of construction.

5.420.3.7 Exemptions
(a) Projects exempt from permits. Projects that do not require a building permit per Chapter 7.28, shall not be subject to the requirements in section 5.420. (b) Projects that do not involve the placement of ready-mix concrete. (c) Asphaltic concrete is not considered as concrete for the purposes of section 5.420 (d)Due to lack of commercial availability of low-carbon concrete options, shotcrete, gunite, and stucco are exempt from embodied carbon requirements. (e) Small projects as approved by the Building Official. (f) Hardship or infeasibility exemption. If an applicant for a project subject to section

5.420 believes that circumstances exist that make it a hardship or infeasible to meet the requirements of section 5.420, the applicant may request an exemption as set forth below.

In applying for an exemption, the burden is on the applicant to show hardship or infeasibility. The applicant shall identify in writing the specific requirements of the standards for compliance that the project is unable to achieve and the circumstances that make it a hardship or infeasible for the project to comply with this chapter. Circumstances that constitute hardship or infeasibility may include, but are not limited to the following:
(1) There is a lack of commercially available material necessary to comply with section 5.420;
(2) The cost of achieving compliance is disproportionate to the overall cost of the project;
(3) Compliance with the requirements would impair the historic integrity of buildings listed on a local, state, or federal list or register of historic structures as regulated by the California Historic Building Code (Title 24, Part 8). (g) Granting of an exemption. If the Building Official determines that it is a hardship or infeasible for the applicant to fully meet the requirements of section 5.420 and that granting the requested exemption will not cause the building to fail to comply with the California Green Building Standards Code, the Building Official shall determine the maximum feasible threshold of compliance reasonably achievable for the project. In making this determination, the Building Official shall consider whether alternate, practical means of achieving the objectives of section 5.420 can be satisfied. If an exemption is granted, the applicant shall be required to comply with section 5.420 in all other respects and shall be required to achieve the threshold of compliance determined to be achievable by the Building Official.
(h) Denial of exception. If the Building Official determines that it is reasonably possible for the applicant to fully meet the requirements of section 5.420, the request shall be denied, and the applicant shall be notified of the decision in writing within 60 days after receipt of the request for exemption. The project and compliance documentation shall be modified to comply with the standards for compliance.
{Signatures on the following page}
74 Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 13 of 13 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin on this 17th day of September 2024, by the following votes:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
___________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
City Clerk
75 STAFF REPORT

CITY COUNCIL

Page 1 of 4 ends

Agenda Item 6.1
DATE: September 3, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT: Adding a Low Carbon Concrete Requirement to the City’s Green Building Code in Coordination with the City’s Climate Action Plan Prepared by: Nelson Pureco, Plan Check Engineer, and Shannan Young, Environmental & Sustainability Manager
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City Council will consider introducing an ordinance amending the City’s Green Building Code to add a requirement for the use of low carbon concrete and adopting a related resolution. The low carbon concrete requirements are in alignment with the City of Dublin Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond, Measure MM-2, Reduce the Embodied Greenhouse Gas Emissions Associated with Building Materials.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Take the following actions: 1) adopt the Resolution Approving Findings Regarding the Need for Local Amendments to Provisions in the California Green Building Standards Code as Adopted by the City; and 2) INTRODUCE the Ordinance Approving Amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section

7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and Section 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete).

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The cost associated with implementing the Ordinance is estimated to be approximately $85,000 to $140,000 per year for additional plan check and inspection time commitments. The costs may decrease over time as applicants become familiar with the requirements. These increased costs are accounted for in the City’s Master Fee Schedule adopted in June 2024.

Attachment 2
76

Page 2 of 4 ends

DESCRIPTION:

Background
The City of Dublin adopted the Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond (CAP 2030) on September 15, 2020 (Resolution 100-20). CAP 2030 includes five strategies with 22 measures intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and to put the City on the path to reach carbon neutrality by 2045. The five strategies in CAP 2030 are:

Strategy 1 – Renewable and Carbon Free Electricity
Strategy 2 – Building Efficiency and Electrification
Strategy 3 – Sustainable Mobility and Land Use
Strategy 4 - Materials and Waste Management
Strategy 5 – Municipal Leadership
Included under Strategy 4 is Measure MM-2, Reduce the Embodied Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) Associated with Building Materials. The embodied GHG emissions of a building are carbon dioxide or other GHGs generated by making and transporting building materials to a site, including mining, refining, and shipping. According to the Rocky Mountain Institute1, 11 percent of global GHG emissions are generated during the lifecycle of building materials and concrete production is responsible for approximately 8 percent of global carbon emissions. Although CAP 2030 did not quantify the embodied GHG emissions from the consumption of building materials, the inclusion of Measure MM-2 acknowledges the importance of addressing embodied emission to achieve the 2045 carbon neutrality goal.

Concrete is composed of an aggregate blend and cement. The GHG emissions associated with concrete can be reduced by minimizing cement use to the extent possible or by using cement alternatives called supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs). These include but are not limited to fly ash, slag, and glass pozzolans. Based on conversations with local ready-mix suppliers, Staff understands these cement alternatives to be locally available and have cost parity with cement. These low carbon concrete mixes are not new. The State of California Department of Transportation incorporated SCMs into the 2010 document “Guidelines for the Design & Inspection of Concrete” and noted that SCMs are cost effective and provide benefits to the strength, workability, permeability, and durability of concrete.

Based on Staff’s research and in alignment with the goals of CAP 2030, Staff proposes to amend the City’s Green Building Code to add a requirement for the use of low carbon concrete.

Analysis
The proposed Ordinance would add Sections 7.94.085 and 7.94.120 to Chapter 7.94, Green Building Code, of the Dublin Municipal Code (DMC).

The requirements are based on the low carbon concrete code adopted in 2019 by Marin County, who partnered with several entities and conducted robust stakeholder engagement to develop a

1 The Rocky Mountain Institute is an independent, non-partisan, non-profit organization of experts across disciplines working to accelerate the clean energy transition and improve lives. 77

Page 3 of 4 ends

regionally replicable building code amendment.

Requirements would be applicable to all projects that require a building permit and that use ready-mix concrete. Projects that use bagged concrete, shotcrete, gunite, stucco, and asphaltic concrete (asphalt) would be exempt. Projects would demonstrate compliance with the low carbon concrete code by either using the cement limit equation or through the embodied carbon pathway.

When using the embodied carbon method, the carbon in the concrete mix shall not exceed the values, as demonstrated via an Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) for the concrete mix. An EPD is a document that provides third-party verification of life-cycle analysis of products and goods.

If an applicant is unable to meet the limits, the applicant has the option to use an alternative compliance pathway to demonstrate reduced equivalent carbon emissions reductions from the remaining portions of the project. If the applicant is unable to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate equivalent carbon emissions reductions, the Ordinance allows for the assessment of penalties based on the social cost of carbon as established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The Ordinance includes the calculation for assessing penalties. The current social cost of carbon is set at $190 per metric ton of carbon dioxide.

The initial implementation of the proposed Ordinance would be an education and outreach effort led by the Public Works Department in conjunction with the Community Development Department. To ensure a successful launch of the low carbon concrete code, Staff recommends adoption with an effective date of January 1, 2025.

The proposed modifications as described in Section 7.94.085 and 7.94.120 are necessary to limit carbon emissions associated with concrete construction, while ensuring adequate strength and durability for the intended use. Low carbon concrete is available locally and can be incorporated into projects occurring in the City. The reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from the use of low carbon concrete helps mitigate climate change and its negative effects such as extreme heat, droughts, intense storms, and flooding that may occur in the City, making these amendments reasonably necessary for local climatic reasons.

In calendar year 2023, 2,903 building permits were issued. Of those permits, 11.6 percent (338 permits) would have been subject to this ordinance while 17.2 percent (499 permits) would require further review to determine if the project met an exemption. Therefore, at least 71.2 percent of permits issued met an exception and would not require a review for compliance.

Based on the time it takes to review applications and enforce requirements during the plan check and inspection process, Staff estimates that the new requirements will add 45 minutes to the review time for smaller buildings, such as a single-family detached dwelling, to as much as four hours for a large commercial project. Review and inspection times will likely decrease over time as applicants, owners, contractors, and developers become more familiar with the standards.

The effect on residential projects depends on the scope of the project. See examples listed below:
 No Effect:
o Work that is exempt from a Building permit
78

Page 4 of 4 ends

o Water heater replacement permits
o Heating and air conditioning replacement permits
o Electrical permits
 Possible Minor Effect:
o Repair work
o New swimming pool permits without a concrete deck around the pool o Retaining walls
 Moderate Effect:
o New swimming pools with a concrete deck
o Small additions
o Accessory structures
o New landscaping permits with concrete pathways
 Full Effect:
o New buildings
o Accessory Dwellings Units
o Additions
Lastly, in order to amend our local Building Code, the City has to make certain legal findings that support the amendments to the State Code. Attached to this item is a resolution that makes those findings.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

None.

NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:

Two community meetings were held on April 10, 2024 to inform stakeholders of the potential Ordinance and requirements. A combined 20 people attended, including both contractors and developers. A few questions were addressed regarding the documentation and the timeframe of the process.

In accordance with State law, a public notice was published in the East Bay Times and posted at several locations throughout the City. The City Council Agenda was posted.

ATTACHMENTS:
1) Resolution Approving Findings Regarding the Need for Local Amendments to Provisions in the California Green Building Standards Code as Adopted by the City 2) Exhibit A to the Resolution – California Green Building Standards Code Findings 3) Ordinance Approving Amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 7.94 (Green Building Code) to Amend Section 7.94.050 (Definitions) and to Add Section 7.94.085 (Low Carbon Concrete) and Section 7.94.120 (Low Carbon Concrete)
4) Underline Version of the Proposed Amendments to Chapter 7.94 of the Dublin Municipal Code 79 STAFF REPORT

CITY COUNCIL

Page 1 of 3 ends

Agenda Item 5.7
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT: Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.24.020 of the Dublin Municipal Code Pertaining to the City’s Conflict of Interest Code Prepared by: Camilla Getz, Assistant City Attorney
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

At the June 4, 2024, City Council meeting, the City Council directed Staff to review the City’s Conflict of Interest Code and determine if it needs to be updated. Staff conducted a review of the Code and determined that several positions should be added or deleted. The City Council will consider introducing an ordinance to update the list of designated positions that must file a Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700).

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

None.

DESCRIPTION:

The Political Reform Act prohibits a public official from using their official position to influence a governmental decision in which they have a financial interest. The City must maintain a Conflict of Interest Code that identifies all officials and employees who make governmental decisions based on the positions they hold. The individuals identified in the Conflict of Interest Code must publicly disclose their designated financial interests by filing a Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700).

The City’s Conflict of Interest Code, Chapter 2.24 of the Dublin Municipal Code, identifies all positions within the City that participate in the making of governmental decisions. These 80

Page 2 of 3 ends

designated positions are required to disclose certain financial interests under state law. A local agency’s conflict of interest code is not applicable to mayors, city councilmembers, planning commission members, city managers, or city attorneys, as Government Code Section 87200 requires full Form 700 disclosure for individuals holding these positions.

The Political Reform Act requires the City to biennially review and determine whether amendments to the Code are required. (Gov. Code § 87306.5.) The last biennial revision to the City’s Code was approved on November 1, 2022.

The City Council is the code reviewing body for City agencies. Pursuant to Government Code Section 87306.5, City departments must determine whether amendments to the Code are necessary and notify the City Council if such amendments are required. (Gov. Code §§ 82011(c), 87306.5.)
According to previous direction from the City Council and the requirements of the Political Reform Act, Staff completed a thorough review of the Conflict of Interest Code, the job specifications for all City employment positions, as well as the FPPC regulations governing the update process. Based on this review Staff recommends the following changes to Chapter 2.24.020:

1. Amend Section 2.24.020 of the Conflict of Interest Code entitled, “Designated Positions,” to add four City positions determined by Staff to “make or participate in the making of governmental decisions.” These positions (and accompanying disclosure categories) are:
a. Accounting Manager (disclosure category 3)
b. Principal Engineer (disclosure category 1)
c. Deputy City Manager (disclosure category 3)
d. Economic Development Manager (disclosure category 1)

2. Amend Section 2.24.020 of the Conflict of Interest Code entitled, “Designated Positions,” to delete three City positions that have been eliminated. These positions are:
a. City Clerk/Records Manager (deleted via Resolution No. 14-23) b. Heritage and Cultural Arts Manager (deleted via Resolution No. 72-23) c. Recreation Manager (deleted via Resolution No. 72-23)

3. Amend Section 2.24.020 of the Conflict of Interest Code titled “Designated Positions” to revise the title of three City positions already designated in the Code. Those positions, and accompanying disclosure category and revisions, are:
a. Administrative Services Director (disclosure category 3). Revised to Finance Director (disclosure category 3).
b. Assistant Director of Administrative Services (disclosure category 3). Revised to Assistant Finance Director (disclosure category 3).
c. Recreation Manager (disclosure category 3). Revised to Parks and Community Services Manager (disclosure category 3).
81

Page 3 of 3 ends

4. Amend Section 2.24.020 of the Conflict of Interest Code titled “Designated Positions” to revise the disclosure category of the designated position Assistant Director of Parks and Community Services from disclosure categories “2, 3” to “1” to align with other similar designated positions in the Code.

The City’s amended Code will not be effective until it has been adopted by the City Council. (Gov.

Code § 87303.) Staff recommends that the City Council waive the reading and introduce the ordinance amending the Conflict of Interest Code consistent with the changes described above, and direct Staff to file the 2024 Local Agency Biennial Notice.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

None.

NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:

The City Council Agenda was posted.

ATTACHMENTS:
1) Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.24.020 of the Dublin Municipal Code Relating to the City’s Conflict of Interest Code
2) 2024 Local Agency Biennial Notice
82 Attachment 1
Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 1 of 4
ORDINANCE NO. XX – 24

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
AMENDING CHAPTER 2.24.020 OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE CITY’S CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act codified at Government Code Section 81000 et seq., requires every local government agency to review its Conflict of Interest Code biennially to determine whether amendments to the Code are required; and WHEREAS, following review of the Conflict of Interest Code, it was determined that the amendments contained in this Ordinance were appropriate.

NOW, THEREFORE, The City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows:

Section 1. Chapter 2.24.020 is amended to read as follows (additions shown in italics and deletions shown in strikethrough):

For local officials specified in Government Code Section 87200 (including the Mayor, City Councilmembers, Planning Commissioners, City Manager, and City Attorney), no disclosure is required by this Conflict of Interest Code as full disclosure is required by Government Code Section 87200 et seq.

The positions listed in this section are designated positions, and this section is hereby deemed the Appendix referenced in the provisions incorporated by Section 2.24.015. Officers and employees holding those positions are designated public officials, and are deemed to make, or participate in the making of, decisions which may foreseeably have a material financial effect on a financial interest of the designated public official. Each designated public official shall file an annual statement disclosing that public official’s interests as required by the disclosure category applicable to that public official.

Designated Position Disclosure Category
Administrative Services Director 3
Accounting Manager 3
Assistant City Attorney 1
Assistant City Manager 1
Assistant to the City Manager 1
Assistant Director of Administrative Services 3
Assistant Director of Community Development 1
Assistant Finance Director 3
Assistant Director of Parks and Community
Services
1 83
Attachment 1
Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 2 of 4
Designated Position Disclosure Category
Assistant Public Works Director/City Engineer 1
Associate Civil Engineer 1
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Manager 1
Chief Building Official 1
Chief Information Security Officer 1
City Clerk 3
City Clerk/Records Manager 3
Code Enforcement Officer 1
Communications Manager 1
Community Development Director 1
“Consultant”* as defined in FPPC Reg. sect.
18700.3
1 Deputy City Clerk 3
Deputy City Manager 3
Economic Development Director 1
Economic Development Manager 1
Environmental Coordinator 1
Environmental Sustainability Manager 1
Finance Director 3
Finance Analyst 1
Heritage and Cultural Arts Manager 1
Housing Specialist 1
Human Resources Director 3
Human Resources Manager 3
Information Services Manager 3
Management Analyst II 3
Parks and Community Services Director 1
Parks and Community Services Manager 3
Plan Check Engineer 1
Planning Manager 1
Principal Engineer 1
Principal Planner 1
84 Attachment 1
Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 3 of 4
Designated Position Disclosure Category
Public Works Director/Assistant City Engineer 1
Public Works Manager 1
Public Works Transportation and Operations
Manager
1 Recreation Manager 3
Recreation Supervisor 2, 3
Senior Civil Engineer 1
Senior Code Enforcement Officer 1
Senior Management Analyst 3
Senior Planner 1
Special Projects Manager 1
Senior Public Works Inspector 1
Designated Boards and Commissions Disclosure Category
Human Services Commission 1
Heritage and Cultural Arts Commission 1
Parks and Community Services Commission 1
* Consultants/new positions shall be included in the list of designated employees and shall disclose pursuant to the terms of the Disclosure Category 1, subject to the following limitation:

The City Manager may determine in writing that a particular consultant or new position, although a “designated position,” is hired to perform a range of duties that is limited in scope and thus is not required to fully comply with the disclosure requirements in this chapter. Such a written determination shall include a description of the consultant’s or new position’s duties and, based upon that description, a statement of the extent of the disclosure requirements. The City Manager’s determination is a public record and shall be retained for public inspection in the same manner and location as this conflict of interest code. (Gov. Code Section 81008.) Section 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days following its final adoption.

Section 3. Posting. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California.
85 Attachment 1
Ord. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/24 Page 4 of 4
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this __th day of _______ 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
City Clerk
86 www.fppc.ca.gov
FPPC Advice: [email protected] (866.275.3772)

Page 1 of 1 ends

2024 Local Agency Biennial Notice
Name of Agency:

Mailing Address:

Contact Person: Phone No.

Email: Alternate Email:

Accurate disclosure is essential to monitor whether officials have conflicts of interest and to help ensure public trust in government. The biennial review examines current programs to ensure that the agency’s code includes disclosure by those agency officials who make or participate in making governmental decisions.

This agency has reviewed its conflict of interest code and has determined that (check one BOX):
 An amendment is required. The following amendments are necessary:
(Check all that apply.)
 Include new positions
 Revise disclosure categories
 Revise the titles of existing positions
 Delete titles of positions that have been abolished and/or positions that no longer make or participate in making governmental decisions
 Other (describe)
 The code is currently under review by the code reviewing body.  No amendment is required. (If your code is over five years old, amendments may be necessary.)
Verification (to be completed if no amendment is required) This agency’s code accurately designates all positions that make or participate in the making of governmental decisions. The disclosure assigned to those positions accurately requires that all investments, business positions, interests in real property, and sources of income that may foreseeably be affected materially by the decisions made by those holding designated positions are reported. The code includes all other provisions required by Government Code Section 87302.
__________________________________________ _________________________ Signature of Chief Executive Officer Date
All agencies must complete and return this notice regardless of how recently your code was approved or amended. Please return this notice no later than October 1, 2024, or by the date specified by your agency, if earlier, to:
(PLACE RETURN ADDRESS OF CODE REVIEWING BODY HERE)
PLEASE DO NOT RETURN THIS FORM TO THE FPPC.

Attachment 2
87 STAFF REPORT

CITY COUNCIL

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Item 5.8
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT: Agreement to Employ Colleen Tribby as City Manager Prepared by: Incoming City Manager Negotiating Committee (Councilmembers Josey and Qaadri)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City Council will consider approval of an agreement to employ Colleen Tribby as the next City Manager of the City of Dublin. The terms and conditions of her employment were discussed with the appointed Negotiating Committee, consisting of Councilmembers Josey and Qaadri. The Negotiating Committee is recommending the approval of the agreement.

The City Council will also consider an amendment to the City Salary Plan to establish the flat monthly salary for the position of City Manager, effective October 11, 2024, to conform with the proposed Agreement.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

Sufficient funding is available in the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget.

DESCRIPTION:

At the August 20, 2024, regular meeting, the City Council reported that it had selected Colleen Tribby to succeed Linda Smith, contingent upon the City Council’s approval of an employment agreement. At that meeting, the City Council also appointed a Negotiating Committee, consisting of Councilmembers Josey and Qaadri, to meet with the prospective manager to discuss the terms and conditions of her employment as City Manager. Since that time, the Committee and Ms. Tribby have discussed the terms and conditions of employment. As a result of those discussions, the 88

Page 2 of 2 ends

Committee is recommending that the City Council approve an agreement with Ms. Tribby for her employment as City Manager (Attachment 1).

Included in the City’s personnel system are Resolutions that address the salary ranges of full-time and part-time personnel. The attached resolution (Attachment 2) is a proposed amendment to the City Salary Plan for full-time personnel that would establish a flat monthly salary for the position of City Manager, effective October 11, 2024, to conform with the proposed Agreement.

The basic terms of the proposed agreement are as follows:
 Initial five-year term, beginning October 11, 2024 and ending October 10, 2029.  Base salary of $28,896 per month, with cost-of-living adjustments each July 1 beginning in 2025 of a minimum of 0.5% and a maximum of 3.5%.
 Standard benefits package, including PERS classic retirement, medical, dental, and other benefits that accrue to City employees.
 Automobile allowance of $450 per month.
 Technology allowance of $1,500 per year.
 City deferred compensation contribution of $5,000 per year.  31 days of general leave and 12 days of management leave.  Severance: Except for termination for cause, City to pay a severance payment equal to 12 months of salary.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

None.

NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:

The City Council Agenda was posted.

ATTACHMENTS:
1) Agreement between the City of Dublin and Colleen Tribby for Employment as City Manager 2) Exhibit A to the Agreement
3) Resolution Amending the Salary Plan
89 Attachment 1
1 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER

AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN

AND COLLEEN TRIBBY

FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER
This Agreement is entered as of September 17, 2024 by and between the City of Dublin, California, a municipal corporation and general law city (the “City”), and Colleen Tribby, an individual (the “City Manager”). The City and the City Manager are sometimes individually referred to as a “Party” and collectively as “Parties” in this Agreement.

RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City requires the services of a City Manager; and, WHEREAS, the City Manager has the necessary education, executive ability, and qualifications to serve as the City’s City Manager; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Dublin (the “City Council) desires to employ the City Manager to serve as the City Manager of City.

WHEREAS, in consideration of these Recitals and the performance by the Parties of the promises, covenants, and conditions contained in this Agreement, the Parties agree as follows:

AGREEMENT
I. EMPLOYMENT OF THE CITY MANAGER.

The City, consistent with the provisions of City Municipal Code Chapter 2.04 (all subsequent Chapter or Section references are to the Municipal Code unless otherwise noted), appoints and employs, effective upon the separation of the City’s current City Manager, which is anticipated to be on October 10, 2024, Colleen Tribby as its City Manager, and Colleen Tribby hereby accepts such employment effective on October 11, 2024 (“the Appointment Date”). During the term of employment, the City Manager shall not undertake any employment other than as City Manager of the City, except that she may also serve as the chief executive of other legal entities without violating this Agreement when appointed to such position or positions by the City Council and she may also coach youth basketball provided that it does not interfere with her role as City Manager.
90 Attachment 1
2 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER II. COMMITMENTS OF THE PARTIES.

A. City Manager Commitments.

1. Duties and Authority.
(a) The City Manager shall have those powers and perform all of the duties of the City Manager as set forth in the laws of the State of California, Municipal Code Chapter 2.04, and City policies and procedures approved by the City Council from time to time.
(b) The City Manager shall administer and enforce policies established by the City Council and promulgate rules and regulations as necessary to implement City Council policies and direct the work of all appointive City officers and departments except those that are directly appointed by or report directly to the City Council.

2. Hours of Work.
(a) The City Manager is an exempt, at-will employee but is expected to engage in those hours of work that are necessary to fulfill the obligations of the City Manager’s position. The City Manager does not have set hours of work as the City Manager is expected to be available at all times.
(b) It is recognized that the City Manager must devote a great deal of time to the business of the City outside of the City’s customary office hours, and to that end the City Manager’s schedule of work each day and week shall vary in accordance with the work required to be performed. The City Manager shall spend sufficient hours on site to perform the City Manager’s duties; however, the City Manager has discretion over the City Manager’s work schedule and work location.

3. Disability or inability to perform.

In the event the City Manager becomes mentally or physically incapable of performing the City Manager’s functions and duties with reasonable accommodation and it reasonably appears such incapacity will last for more than six months, the City Council may terminate the City Manager. If the City Council does elect to terminate the City Manager due to incapacity, the City Manager shall receive all severance benefits provided in Section V.C below.
91 Attachment 1
3 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER B. City Commitments.

1. As of the Appointment Date, the City shall provide the City Manager with the compensation and benefits, as set forth in Section III below.

2. The City shall pay for or provide the City Manager reimbursement for all actual business expenses consistent with Government Code section 53234 et seq., also known as “AB 1234.” The City shall provide the City Manager a City credit card to charge legally authorized and necessary City business expenses.

3. The City agrees to pay the professional dues or membership dues and subscriptions on behalf of the City Manager as may be agreed by City Manager and City Council, including the International City Manager’s Association (“ICMA”).

4. The City agrees to pay the travel and subsistence expenses of the City Manager to pursue official and other functions for the City, and meetings and occasions to continue the professional development of the City Manager, including, but not limited to, national, regional, state, and local conferences, and governmental groups and committees upon which the City Manager serves as a member, subject to annual review by the City Council.

5. The City also agrees to pay for the travel and subsistence expenses of the City Manager for short courses, institutes and seminars that are necessary for the performance of City Manager duties as set forth in Municipal Code Section 2.04.060.

C. City Council Commitments.

1. The City Council sets policy for the governance and administration of the City, and it implements its policies through the City Manager.

2. The City Council recognizes that to meet the challenges facing the City it must exercise decisive policy leadership. As one step in carrying out this leadership responsibility, the City Council commits to spending time each year outside of regular City Council meetings to work with the City Manager and staff on creating and revisiting the City’s strategic plan, for setting goals and priorities for the City government, and to work on issues that may be inhibiting the maximal achievement of City goals. Likewise, each member of the City Council will make sufficient time available to the City Manager each week to provide an opportunity to be briefed on City issues.

3. The City Council agrees none of its individual members will order the appointment or removal of any person to any office or employment under the supervision and control of the City Manager.
92 Attachment 1
4 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER D. Mutual Commitments.

1. Strategic Workshops.
(a) As soon as practicable after October 11, 2024, the City Council and the City Manager will meet to review the City’s existing Strategic Plan and/or set out goals and priorities for the City Manager to implement prior to the City Manager’s annual performance evaluation or such other dates as determined in the course of the meeting.
(b) Thereafter the review and update of the City Council’s Strategic Plan will occur bi-annually between January 1st and March 31st, in accordance with the City’s budget cycle. For purposes of clarity, the City Council and the City Manager shall further establish a relative priority among those goals and objectives within the Strategic Plan.

2. Annual Performance Evaluation.
(a) The City Council shall conduct an evaluation of the City Manager’s performance at least once each year. The City Council and the City Manager agree that performance evaluations, for the purpose of mid-course corrections, may occur at any time. The parties agree that the initial evaluation shall occur approximately eight months following the Appointment Date and that subsequent evaluations shall occur shortly before or after June 1 of each year thereafter. (b) The annual review and evaluation shall be in accordance with specific criteria developed jointly by the City Council and the City Manager during the initial strategic planning and goal setting workshop described in Section II.D.1(a) above. Such criteria may from time to time be added to or deleted as the City Council determines in consultation with the City Manager.
(c) In addition to the annual strategic plan workshops the City Council and the City Manager may further define such goals and performance objectives during the annual evaluation as they mutually determine are necessary for the proper operation of the City for the attainment of the City Council’s policy objectives. The City Council and the City Manager shall further establish a relative priority among those goals and performance objectives. The Parties may use an outside facilitator paid for by City to assist them in conducting the City Manager’s annual performance evaluation. (d) The City Manager shall hold annual team building retreats with key Departmental personnel.
93 Attachment 1
5 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER

3. ICMA Code of Ethics.
(a) The Parties acknowledge that the City Manager is a member of the ICMA and desire that the City Manager be subject to and comply with the ICMA Code of Ethics, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A. (b) The City and the City Council agree that neither the City Council nor any of its members will give the City Manager any order, direction, or request that would require the City Manager to violate the ICMA Code of Ethics.

III. COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS.

The City agrees to provide the following compensation to the City Manager:

A. Compensation and Required Employer Costs.

1. Base Salary.
(a) The initial salary for the position of City Manager shall be $28,896 per month. On July 1, 2025 and each July 1 thereafter during the Initial Term (as defined in Section VI.A.1), the then-existing salary shall be increased (but not decreased) by the percentage change between February of the then-prior year and February of the then-current year in the consumer product index for urban wage earners and clerical workers in San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, California.

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, any automatic increase implemented pursuant to the foregoing sentence shall not be less than 0.5% nor more than 3.5%.

The City agrees to reevaluate the salary after each performance evaluation following the initial performance evaluation described in Section II.D.2(a) above. (b) The City Manager shall be paid at the same intervals and in the same manner as regular City employees.
(c) The City shall not at any time during the term of this Agreement reduce the base salary, compensation or other financial benefits of the City Manager, unless as part of a general City management salary reduction, and then in no greater percentage than the average reduction of all designated management employees.

2. Pay-for-Performance.
(a) To provide a recognition for the City Manager to produce laudable results for the organization, the City Council agrees to consider providing a 94 Attachment 1
6 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER Pay-for-Performance payment for meeting or exceeding specific goals established by City Council that are achieved by the City Manager. The City Manager will be eligible at the sole discretion of the City Council for a Pay-for-Performance payment that is equivalent to the miscellaneous employees Pay-for-Performance program. (b) Any adjustment in earnings under this section shall be included as “compensation earnable” by the City Manager in reporting to the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) for annual pension credit, but only to the extent, if any, that CalPERS will consider it to be “compensation earnable.”

3. Required State Costs.

The following costs, to the extent they are applicable, shall be borne by the City:
(a) Unemployment Compensation.
(b) California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS).

The City contracts with the CalPERS for retirement benefits. The City and the City Manager’s contributions to CalPERS shall be the same as the contributions provided to and made by classic CalPERS miscellaneous employees of the City of Dublin. In addition, the City Manager shall be eligible for the CalPERS Third Level 1959 Survivor Benefits. The City shall pay the portion required by CalPERS, and the City Manager shall pay $2 per month.
(c) The cost of any fidelity or other bonds required by law for the City Manager.
(d) The cost to defend and indemnify the City Manager as provided in Section VI.E below.
(e) Workers Compensation.

B. Leave and Basic Benefits.

1. Holidays.

The City Manager shall receive the same paid holidays as allocated to miscellaneous general City employees.

2. Leave Allowance:
(a) General Leave:
95 Attachment 1
7 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER The City Manager shall be required to cashout all general leave as of October 11, 2024 at her Assistant City Manager rate. The City Manager shall then receive thirty-one (31) days of general leave on October 11, 2024 and the first day of the pay period following each October 11th thereafter so long as the Agreement remains in effect. Such leave shall be otherwise subject to the same rules applicable to City management employees. Annually, on the last day of the pay period in which October 11th falls each year, City Manager may elect to be compensated for any unused general leave granted the previous year not to exceed 160 hours.
(b) Management Leave:

On the first day of the pay period following October 11th of each year during the term of this agreement, City Manager shall receive twelve (12) days of “Management Leave.” This leave is treated differently than other leave, in that if the City Manager is unable to use this leave by the last day of the pay period that includes October 11th of the year following the City Manager’s receiving it, City Manager will be compensated for any unused Management Leave at that time. Such compensation shall be based upon the City Manager’s base salary identified in Section III.A.1(a) above. (c) Sick Leave:

The City Manager shall accrue sick leave subject to the same rules applicable to City management employees.
(d) Payments upon Resignation or Termination:

In the event that the City Manager’s services are terminated for any reason, the City Manager shall be compensated for any unused general leave and management leave, but not for general leave that has been converted to sick leave. Such compensation shall be based upon the City Manager’s base salary identified in Section III.A.1(a) above.

3. Automobile Allowance.

Beginning October 11, 2024, the City Manager shall be provided a monthly automobile allowance of $450.00 for the use of a personal vehicle for CITY purposes.

4. Insurance
The City Manager shall receive the same health, dental, vision, life, long term disability coverage available to the designated management employees of the City. 96 Attachment 1
8 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER

5. Benefits that Accrue to Other Employees.

The City Manager shall be entitled to all compensation benefits, rights, and privileges accorded to City’s designated management employees except as otherwise provided in this Agreement. If there is any conflict between this Agreement and any resolution fixing compensation and benefits for City’s designated management employees or other unclassified/miscellaneous employees, this Agreement shall control.

6. Technology Allowance.

Given the importance of technological tools to the effective and efficient business of City government, the City shall provide the City Manager with an annual $1,500 technology allowance. The technology allowance shall be paid with the first of the City’s adopted pay periods that occur after October 11th of each year, beginning in 2024.

IV. SECURITY.

A. Pensions.

1. California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS).

For the purposes of CalPERS reporting, the City shall treat as “compensation earnable” all payments that CalPERS will consider to be “compensation earnable.”

2. Deferred Compensation.

The City agrees to the City Manager’s participation in a Deferred Compensation Plan. City shall contribute $5,000 annually to such a Plan on the City Manager’s account commencing in October 2024. The annual contribution shall be prorated on a monthly basis.

V. SEPARATION.

A. Resignation.

The City Manager may resign at any time and agrees to give the City at least 60 days advance written notice of the effective date of the City Manager’s resignation, unless the Parties to this agreement mutually agree to other notice.

B. Non-Renewal of Employment Agreement, Termination & Removal. 97 Attachment 1
9 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER

1. The City Manager is an at-will employee serving at the pleasure of the City Council, as provided in Government Code Section 36506.

2. The City Council may terminate the City Manager at any time, with or without cause, by a majority vote of its members. Notice of termination or nonrenewal of this employment agreement shall be provided to the City Manager in writing consistent with this Agreement.

3. The City Manager shall not be removed during the 90-day period preceding or following any City election for membership on the City Council, or during the 90-day period following any change in membership of the City Council, except upon four-fifths vote of the City Council.

4. Given the at-will nature of the position of City Manager, an important element of the employment agreement pertains to termination. It is in both the City’s interest and that of the City Manager that any separation of the City Manager is done in a businesslike manner.

C. Severance Pay.

1. In the event that the City Council terminates the City Manager’s employment for reasons other than for “cause” as further defined under subparagraph D below, the City shall pay to the City Manager a Severance Payment. The Severance Payment shall be equal to twelve (12) months of the base salary on the effective date of termination. In the event that the City is obligated to make the Severance Payment, the amount shall be paid to the City Manager, at the City Manager’s option, in either equal monthly installments commencing on the 10th work day following the date of termination or in a lump sum. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the foregoing, the Parties agree that in no event shall the City Manager receive a cash settlement upon termination of this Agreement in excess of the maximum cash settlement authorized by subdivision (a) of Government Code section 53260.

2. In addition, in accordance with Government Code section 53261, the City will reimburse the City Manager for the premiums for the City Manager’s medical and dental insurances for a period following the effective date of termination equal to the number of months then being used to calculate the amount of the Severance Payment under Section V.C.1. at the rates in effect on such dates, provided that such reimbursements will terminate upon the City Manager’s retirement or when the City Manager finds other employment so long as the other employment includes paid coverage for medical and dental insurance.
98 Attachment 1
10 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER

3. In the event the City refuses, following written notice of noncompliance, to comply with any provision in this Employment Agreement benefiting the City Manager, or the City Manager resigns following a suggestion, whether formal or informal, by a majority of the City Council that the City Manager resign, or the City Council imposes a material reduction in the powers and authority of the City Manager, then, in that event, the City Manager may, at the City Manager’s option, be deemed to be “terminated” as of the date of such refusal to comply or suggestion to resign and this severance pay provision shall be actuated.

D. Separation for Cause.

1. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section V.C above, the City Manager may be terminated for cause. For purposes of this Agreement, “cause” shall mean one or more the following:
(a) Conviction of a felony, or conviction of a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude;
(b) Commission of an act of moral turpitude;
(i) the City Council will not make a finding or
determination about whether the City Manager has
engaged in such conduct without first providing the
City Manager a full, fair opportunity to rebut, defend
and justify any such alleged act involving moral
turpitude in an open or closed session, at the sole
choice of the City Manager.
(c) Abuse of non-prescription or prescription drugs, alcohol or controlled substances that affect the performance of the Manager’s duties; (d) Repeated and extended absences from the City Manager’s office and duties, which absences have not been approved by the City Council. (e) Violation of the City’s policies concerning sexual
harassment;
(f) Material breach of the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

2. In the event the City terminates the City Manager for cause, then the City may terminate this Agreement immediately, and the City Manager shall be 99 Attachment 1
11 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER entitled to only the compensation accrued up to the date of termination and such other termination benefits and payments as may be required by law. The City Manager shall not be entitled to any severance benefits provided by Section V.C above.

3. In the event the City terminates the City Manager for cause, the City, the Mayor and/or the City Council members and the City Manager agree that neither Party shall make any written or oral statements to members of the public or the press concerning the City Manager’s termination except in the form of a joint press release which is mutually agreeable to both Parties. The joint press release shall not contain any text or information that would be disparaging to either Party. Provided, however, that either Party may verbally repeat the substance of any such press release in response to inquiries by members of the press or public.

E. Payment for Unused Leave Balance.

In the event the City Manager dies while employed by the City under this Agreement, the City Manager’s beneficiaries, or those entitled to the City Manager’s estate, shall be entitled to the City Manager’s earned but then-unpaid salary, and any inlieu payments for then-accrued benefits, including compensation for any unused general and management leave in accordance with Section III.B.2(c) above.

VI. GENERAL PROVISIONS.

A. Term.

1. The Initial Term shall be for a period of 60 months commencing on October 11, 2024, and continuing until October 11, 2029 (“the Termination Date”).

2. This Agreement shall automatically renew as provided herein unless the City gives the City Manager timely notice of non-renewal. The City must give the City Manager written notice of non-renewal at least twelve (12) months prior to the Termination Date or any succeeding Termination Date, as defined in the next sentence.

Unless such notice of non-renewal is timely given, this Agreement shall automatically renew for an additional three-year Term and a new Termination Date shall be accordingly established.

B. Provisions that Survive Termination.

Many sections of this Agreement are intended by their terms to survive the City Manager’s termination of employment with the City, including but limited to Sections IV, V.C, V.E, and VI.E above. These sections, and the others so intended, shall survive termination of employment and termination of this Agreement. 100
Attachment 1
12 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER C. Amendments.

This Agreement may be amended at any time by mutual written agreement of the City and the City Manager.

D. Conflict of Interest.

1. The City Manager shall not engage in any business or transaction or shall have a financial or other personal interest or association, direct or indirect, which is in conflict with the proper discharge of official duties or would tend to impair independence of judgment or action in the performance of official duties. Personal as distinguished from financial interest includes an interest arising from blood or marriage relationships or close business, personal, or political associations. This section shall not serve to prohibit independent acts or other forms of enterprise during those hours not covered by active City employment, providing such acts do not constitute a conflict of interest as defined herein.

2. The City Manager shall also be subject to the conflict of interest provisions of the California Government Code and any conflict of interest code applicable to the City Manager’s City employment.

3. The City Manager is solely responsible for submitting to the City Clerk the appropriate Conflict of Interest Statements at the time of appointment, annually thereafter, and at the time of separation from the position.

E. Indemnification.

1. The City shall defend, save harmless and indemnify the City Manager against any claim or action to the extent required by, and subject to the limitations contained in, Government Code sections 825-825.6 and Government Code sections 995–996.6. The City may compromise and settle any such claim or suit and pay the amount of any settlement or judgment rendered thereon.

2. In the event that the City Manager shall serve as the chief executive of other City-controlled legal entities, then the City agrees, for the purposes of the indemnity and defense obligations under this section and Government Code sections 825-825.6 and 995-996.6, that any actions or omissions within the scope of those duties shall be treated as within the scope of City Manager’s employment by the City.

F. Severability.
101
Attachment 1
13 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER If any clause, sentence, part, section, or portion of this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal or unenforceable, such clause, sentence, part, section, or portion so found shall be regarded as though it were not part of this Agreement and the remaining parts of this Agreement shall be fully binding and enforceable by the Parties hereto.

G. Jurisdiction and Venue.

This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, and the Parties agree that venue for legal action concerning any aspect of the Agreement in State Court shall be maintained in Alameda County Superior Court and for an action in Federal Court shall be in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

H. Entire Agreement.

This Agreement represents the entire agreement of the Parties, which has been jointly drafted by the Parties, and no representations have been made or relied upon except as set forth in this Agreement which may be amended or modified only by a written, fully executed agreement of the Parties.

I. Notice.

Any notice, amendments, or additions to this Agreement, including change of address of either party during the term of this Agreement, which the City Manager or the City shall be required, or may desire, to make shall be in writing and shall be sent by prepaid first class mail or hand-delivered to the respective Parties as follows:

If to the City:

City Clerk
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
If to the City Manager:

Colleen Tribby
6945 Prince Drive
Dublin, CA 94568
102
Attachment 1
14 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND COLLEEN TRIBBY FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER VII. EXECUTION
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT in duplicate at Dublin, California, as of the date set forth above.

CITY OF DUBLIN CITY MANAGER
By: _______________________ _______________________
Michael McCorriston, Mayor Colleen Tribby
ATTEST:
_______________________
Marsha Moore, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
John Bakker, City Attorney
103

ICMA CODE OF ETHICS
The mission of ICMA is to create excellence in local governance by developing and fostering professional local government management worldwide. To further this mission, certain principles, as enforced by the Rules of Procedure, shall govern the conduct of every member of ICMA, who shall:

Attachment 2 - Exhibit A

1. We believe professional management is essential to effective, efficient, equitable, and democratic local government.

2. Affirm the dignity and worth of local government services and maintain a deep sense of social responsibility as a trusted public servant.

3. Be dedicated to the highest ideals of honor and integrity in all public and personal relationships in order that the member may merit the respect and confidence of the elected officials, of other officials and employees, and of the public.

4. Serve the best interests of all community members.

5. Submit policy proposals to elected officials; provide them with facts, and technical and professional advice about policy options; and collaborate with them in setting goals for the community and organization.

6. Recognize that elected representatives are accountable to their community for the decisions they make; members are responsible for implementing those decisions.

7. Refrain from all political activities which undermine public confidence in professional administrators. Refrain from participation in the election of the members of the employing legislative body.

8. Make it a duty continually to improve the member’s professional ability and to develop the competence of associates in the use of management techniques.

9. Keep the community informed on local government affairs. Encourage and facilitate active engagement and constructive communication between community members and all local government officials.

10. Resist any encroachment on professional responsibilities, believing the member should be free to carry out official policies without interference, and handle each problem without discrimination on the basis of principle and justice.

11. Manage all personnel matters with fairness and impartiality.

12. Public office is a public trust. A member shall not leverage his or her position for personal gain or benefit.

Adopted by the ICMA Executive Board in 1924, and most recently revised by the membership in April 2023. 104
Attachment 3
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted 09/17/2024 Page 1 of 1 RESOLUTION NO. XXX-24

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN

AMENDING THE SALARY PLAN
WHEREAS, in accordance with the City’s Personnel System Rules, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 55-24 and subsequent Resolutions which comprise the Salary Plan.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the position of City Manager shall be covered under Article I, Section A of the Plan:

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said position shall be paid a flat monthly rate within the salary plan as follows:

City Manager (Contract): $28,896 (flat rate)
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this document shall become a part of the official Salary Plan for the City of Dublin; and that the changes contained herein shall be effective October 11, 2024.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of September, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
_____________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
105

STAFF REPORT

CITY COUNCIL

Page 1 of 7 ends

Agenda Item 6.1
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT: Hexcel Redevelopment (PLPA-2022-00038)
Prepared by: Gaspare Annibale, Associate Planner
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City Council will consider the Hexcel Redevelopment Project, which redevelops an 8.81-acre site located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard. The project would demolish the existing 62,175-squarefoot former Hexcel research and development building and construct a new 125,532-square-foot light industrial building with 217 parking stalls and related site improvements. The project was first presented to the City Council on March 19, 2024, and the City Council continued the project to a date uncertain so the Applicant could address City Council comments related to the overall project design, compatibility with the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, and landscape buffer to adjacent properties. The Applicant has since revised the project design and landscaping in response to comments. Requested approvals include a Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit. The City Council will also consider certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The cost associated with processing the project application is borne by the Applicant. 106

Page 2 of 7 ends

DESCRIPTION:

Background
Overton Moore Properties is proposing to demolish the existing 62,175-square-foot Hexcel research and development building located 11711 Dublin Boulevard and construct a new 125,304-square-foot light industrial building to appeal to advanced manufacturing and life science uses. Requested approvals include a PD Rezone Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review Permit, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit.

Figure 1. Project Location
On March 19, 2024, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. At the meeting, the City Council raised concerns with the project design and compatibility with the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, and landscape screening to buffer uses to the north and east of the project site. At the conclusion of the discussion, the City Council continued the project to a date uncertain in order to provide time for the applicant to address these concerns.

Revisions to the Project
Since the March City Council meeting, the Applicant has made the following changes to the project to address the City Council’s comments and concerns, and these changes have been incorporated into the Site Development Review Permit:
 Revised the project design with the use of brick veneer and muted taupe and earth tones to complement the brick and soften the building. The massing of the building is broken up using reveals, paint color, material changes, and articulation, allowing the scale to reflect a pedestrian orientation. The exterior employs channel canopies with hanging rod details above the entrances inspired by historical industrial buildings, black channel trim around the storefront system featuring gray glazing carrying the theme of the canopy, brick wainscot flanking the main entrances and storefront glazing, accent paint to match the brick color and provide continuity across building facades, and recessed arch details inspired by historical brick arched windows. At the tenant locations and in the mezzanine areas, windows and glazing reflect a stronger vertical orientation with simple frames. The 107

Page 3 of 7 ends

building would have two-story glazing at the proposed office spaces on the north, east and northwestern elevations, primarily along Dublin Boulevard, maximizing natural light into the office and mezzanine spaces and providing distinct office entrances for multiple tenants.
 Added a wood fencing element at the entrance to tie with Heritage Park, including a wood arbor, fences flanking the main entrance, and stone bases.  Refined the landscape plan to better match the existing landscape around Heritage Park.  Added more trees and shrubbery and modified the shrubbery to a fast-growing species to provide additional screening from Dublin Boulevard at the north and from Heritage Park to the east.
 Included a stone monument commemorative plaque and located it at the northeast corner of site to provide high visibility.

With this revised design the applicant proposes a slightly larger and taller building, 228 square feet larger and six inches taller. The planned development zoning limits the floor area ratio (FAR) to 0.33 and the maximum building height to 40 feet. Even with the minimal increase in the building area, the project would still meet the allowable FAR of 0.33. The new building height (40’6”) is inclusive of the parapet, which is an architectural feature. Per the Dublin Municipal Code (DMC), architectural features may be a maximum of 15 percent higher than the height limit of the applicable zone, therefore, the new building design complies with the allowable height limit.

Figure 3. Proposed Building Perspective
Existing landscaping west of the main driveway and new landscaping east of the main driveway would provide a landscape buffer along Dublin Boulevard to help soften the project frontage.

Furthermore, along the southern boundary of the project site, all existing landscaping would remain within Parcel 2, which provides a buffer from Interstate-580 and the rear of the building.

Large shade trees in the parking lot area would provide shade and reduce the urban heat island effect. The landscape design preserves the existing heritage trees on site and incorporates them into the site design. New landscape screening which includes 48 trees and matches the plant pallet 108

Page 4 of 7 ends

found in the Historic Area is provided along Dublin Boulevard to screen and soften the building from public view. This includes preserving the existing trees and planting 38 new trees ranging from 15 feet to 70 feet tall at maturity and new fast-growing shrubbery. Figures 4 and 5 below are renderings of the landscaping.

Figure 4. Proposed Dublin Boulevard Frontage Landscaping Figure 5. Proposed Parking Lot Landscaping
The landscaping along the eastern property line provides new shrubbery and trees to screen the project from the adjacent properties. A total of 18 trees would be provided east of the proposed building, which includes one existing Chinese elm tree to remain and 17 new trees ranging in height from 30 feet to 50 feet at maturity. Shrubbery eight feet in height at maturity would also be planted to further buffer the site in addition to the existing landscaping on the adjacent property to the east between the project site and the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Pioneer Cemetery. A condition of approval has been provided to ensure this landscaping is protected during grading/construction activities.

Specifically, the new landscaping southeast of the proposed building would provide screening 109

Page 5 of 7 ends

from the Dublin Pioneer Cemetery and the dense tree canopy on the cemetery property. In addition to the shrubbery noted above, 14 new trees would be planted in this area to screen the building from view of the cemetery. Figure 6 shows the proposed building perspective view from the Dublin Pioneer Cemetery.

Figure 6. Proposed Project Site View from Dublin Pioneer Cemetery The draft Ordinance amending the Zoning Map and approving Planned Development Zoning with related Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans is included as Attachment 7. The Resolution approving the Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit is included as Attachment 8, with the Project Plans (Attachment 9) and the Arborist Report (Attachment 10). A complete discussion of the project is provided in the Staff Report of March 19, 2024 (Attachment 12).

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed project. On May 15, 2023, the City issued a Notice of Preparation for an EIR and held a public scoping meeting on May 25, 2023.

The City received three letters regarding the scope of the EIR. Subsequently, a Draft EIR was prepared for the proposed project and circulated for a 45-day public review period from August 21, 2023 to October 5, 2023. The City received three comment letters during the public review 110

Page 6 of 7 ends

period. In addition, a fourth letter was received after the public review period. Responses have been prepared for each of the comments received by the City. The Draft EIR, comments and associated responses, and changes and clarifications to the Draft EIR constitute the Final EIR (Attachment 2).

The environmental document prepared for the project is a Focused EIR that evaluates potential impacts of a limited number of environmental issue areas that the City determined to be significant (CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(c)(3)). After preparation of an Initial Study , the City determined that the proposed project would have significant or potentially significant impacts in the following topic areas that require further analysis and are therefore discussed in the Draft EIR:
 Air Quality
 Biological Resources
 Cultural Resources*
 Energy
 Geology and Soils
 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
 Tribal Cultural Resources
The Draft EIR concludes that the proposed project would have a significant and unavoidable impact on Cultural Resources (noted above with *). The remaining topic areas have mitigation measures that have been prepared to reduce impacts in these areas to a level that is less than significant. Attachment 12 provides an overview of all topic areas.

After the EIR was prepared for the project, the applicant revised the architecture and landscape plan and increased the size of the building by 228 square feet and increased the height by six inches in response to City Council concerns, as discussed above. These changes would not affect any of the conclusions in the Initial Study and EIR because they are related to visual changes that would result in making the proposed building blend in better with the surrounding Historic Area.

The minimal increase in the footprint and height would not substantially change the visual appearance or bulk/scale of the building such that the initial study conclusions regarding aesthetics would be affected. The minimal increase to the size of the building would not substantially change the required excavation and grading. The proposed changes would not result in any additional or more severe impacts from what was already analyzed, and no new mitigation measures are required.

The City Council resolution certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report is included as Attachment 1. To approve the project, the City Council must make findings regarding significant impacts and mitigation measures (Attachment 3), make findings concerning infeasibility of alternatives and potential additional mitigation measures (Attachment 4), and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) (Attachment 5) that identifies all environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated and explains why the benefits of the project outweigh its unavoidable environmental impacts. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is included as Attachment 6.
111

Page 7 of 7 ends

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

None.

NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:

Two City-led Community Meetings were held on October 25 and 26, 2023, to provide Dublin residents with information about the proposed Hexcel Redevelopment project. Staff provided a presentation that included an overview of the City’s development review process and the proposed project. Questions were asked about the project’s impact on infrastructure capacity and the general contractor that would be used for the project. Comments were also provided regarding the EIR and project design.

In accordance with State law, a public notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the proposed project to advertise the project and upcoming public hearing. A public notice was also published in the East Bay Times and posted at several locations throughout the City. A Planning Application sign was posted on the project site and the project was also included on the City’s Development Projects webpage. A copy of this Staff Report has been provided to the applicant.

ATTACHMENTS:
1) Resolution Certifying an Environmental Impact Report and Adopting Environmental Impact Findings, Findings Regarding Alternatives, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project 2) Exhibit A to the Resolution – Final Environmental Impact Report 3) Exhibit B to the Resolution – Findings Concerning Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures
4) Exhibit C to the Resolution – Findings Concerning Infeasibility of Alternatives and Potential Additional Mitigation Measures
5) Exhibit D to the Resolution – Statement of Overriding Considerations 6) Exhibit E to the Resolution – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 7) Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map and Approving a Planned Development Zoning District with Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project 8) Resolution Approving a Site Development Review Permit and Heritage Tree Removal Permit for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project
9) Exhibit A to the Resolution – Hexcel Redevelopment Project Plans 10) Arborist Report
11) Planning Commission Resolution No. 23-11
12) March 19, 2024 Staff Report (without attachments)
112
Attachment 1
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 1 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. XX – 24

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN

CERTIFYING AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND ADOPTING ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT FINDINGS, FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES, A STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING

PROGRAM 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 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. It was determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was required for the Project; and WHEREAS, the City circulated a Notice of Preparation, dated May 15, 2023, to public agencies and interested parties for consultation on the scope of the EIR. The City also conducted a public scoping meeting on May 25, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the City prepared a Draft EIR, dated August 2023, for the proposed Project that reflected the City’s independent judgment and analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Project (SCH No. 2023050372). The Draft EIR is included in the Final EIR attached as Exhibit A and is incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was circulated for a 45-day public review period from August 21, 2023, through October 5, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the City received three comment letters from State, regional, and local agencies during the public review period and one additional letter from the public after the close of the comment period. In accordance with the requirements of CEQA, the City prepared written responses to all the comments received during the public comment period and also included the letter from the public; and
WHEREAS, the City conducted tribal consultation as requested by the Confederated Villages of Lisjan Nation; and
113
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 2 of 3 WHEREAS, the City prepared a Final EIR, dated November 2023, for the proposed Project, which includes an annotated copy of each comment letter identifying specific comments, responses to each specific comment, and clarifications and minor corrections to information presented in the Draft EIR. The Final EIR is attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution and is incorporated herein by reference. The Draft EIR, comments and associated responses, and changes and clarifications to the Draft EIR constitute the Final EIR. The responses to comments provide the City’s good faith, reasoned analysis of the environmental issues raised by the comments; and
WHEREAS, the Draft EIR identified potentially significant environmental effects anticipated as a result of the Project such as air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, and hazards/hazardous materials, most of which can be substantially reduced through mitigation measures; therefore, approval of the Project must include impact and mitigation findings as set forth in attached Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, some of the impacts cannot be lessened to a level of less than significant; therefore, approval of the Project must include findings regarding alternatives as set forth in attached Exhibit C, and must include a Statement of Overriding Considerations as set forth in attached Exhibit D; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the project on December 12, 2023, at which time they reviewed and considered the Draft and Final EIRs, and all reports, recommendations and testimony before them. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 23-11 recommending the City Council approve the project and certify the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Planning Commission minutes and recommendation, a staff report, the Draft and Final EIRs, and all written and oral testimony at a duly noticed public hearing on March 19, 2024, 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 Project and Draft and Final EIR for the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Hexcel Redevelopment project on September 17, 2024, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the Draft and Final EIRs reflect the City’s independent judgment and analysis on the potential for environmental impacts and constitute the Environmental Impact Report for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project; and
WHEREAS, the Draft and Final EIRs are bounded as one document, incorporated herein by reference, and are available for review in the City of Dublin Community Development Department, file PLPA-2022-00038. The custodian of the documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project is the City of Dublin Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin CA 94568; and WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as required by CEQA, is contained in attached Exhibit E.
114
Reso. No. XX-24, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2024 Page 3 of 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council certifies the following.

A. The EIR for the Hexcel Redevelopment project has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures.

B. The EIR for the Hexcel Redevelopment project was presented to and reviewed by the City Council prior to taking action on the Hexcel Redevelopment project.

C. The EIR reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis as to the potential environmental effects of the Hexcel Redevelopment project. The EIR provides information to the decision-makers and the public on the environmental consequences of the Project.

D. The EIR adequately describes the Project, its significant environmental impacts, mitigation measures and a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council certifies the EIR consisting of the Draft EIR and the Final EIR as set forth in Exhibit A, adopts the impact and mitigation findings set forth in Exhibit B, the findings regarding alternatives set forth in Exhibit C, the Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth in Exhibit D, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program set forth in Exhibit E, which Exhibits A, B, C, D and E are incorporated herein by reference.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of September 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
City Clerk
115
Hexcel Redevelopment Project
Focused Final EIR
November 17, 2023
PROJECT APPLICATION PLPA-2022-00038
Attachment 2
116
This page intentionally left blank
117
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Table of Contents | Page i
Table of Contents
1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Document Organization and Framework ........................................................................... 1

1.2 CEQA Requirements Regarding Comments and Responses............................................... 2 2 Responses to Comments ....................................................................................... 3

2.1 Comments on the Draft EIR ................................................................................................ 3

2.2 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR.......................................................................... 3

2.2.1 COMMENT LETTER 1 (DSRSD) ...................................................................................... 3

2.2.2 COMMENT LETTER 2 (ZONE 7 WATER AGENCY).......................................................... 3

2.2.3 COMMENT LETTER 3 (CALTRANS) ................................................................................ 5

2.2.4 COMMENT LETTER 4 (STEVE MINNIEAR) ..................................................................... 6

2.3 Comments Received on the Draft EIR................................................................................. 7 3 Changes to the Draft EIR...................................................................................... 15 4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.................................................... 19 Appendices
A Draft EIR
B Appendices to Draft EIR
List of Tables
Table 2-1: Comment Letters Received .............................................................................. 3 Table 4-1. Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program Table ........................................... 20 118
This page intentionally left blank
119
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Table of Contents | Page ii
Acronyms
ACDEH Alameda County Department of Environmental Health ADA American Disabilities Act
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CCR California Code of Regulations
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CHRIS California Historic Resources Information System
City City of Dublin
dBA A-weighted decibel
Draft EIR Draft Environmental Impact Report
DSRSD Dublin San Ramon Services District
EIR Environmental Impact Report
ESA Environmental Site Assessment
Final EIR Final Environmental Impact Report
FTA Federal Transit Administration
GPR Ground Penetrating Radar
HABS Historic American Building Survey
HAER Historic American Engineering Record
HALS Historic American Landscapes Survey
I- Interstate
in/sec inches per second
Leq equivalent sound level
Lincoln Highway later known as US Highway 50
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MLD Most Likely Descendant
MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
mph miles per hour
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPS National Parks Service
NWIC Northwest Information Center
OPR Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
PM10 particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns PM2.5 particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 microns PPV peak particle velocity
PRC Public Resources Code
Project Hexcel Redevelopment Project
R&D research and development
ROW Right-of-Way
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SVP Society of Vertebrate Paleontology
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TMP Transportation Management Plan
VMT vehicle miles travelled
120
This page intentionally left blank
121
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 1
Hexcel Redevelopment Project
Final Environmental Impact Report
1 Introduction
The Hexcel Redevelopment Project (Project) Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) was circulated for a 45-day public review period from August 21, 2023, through October 5, 2023, as assigned by the State of California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) State Clearinghouse and consistent with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) regulations.

Copies of the document were distributed to federal, state, regional and local agencies, as well as organizations and individuals, for their review and comment. This Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) has been prepared in accordance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Dublin (City) CEQA Guidelines and Procedures. This document represents the independent judgment of the City of Dublin as CEQA Lead Agency. This document, together with the Draft EIR, technical appendices, and other written documentation prepared during the EIR process, will constitute the Final EIR. This includes any modifications to those documents made by the City Council at the time of certification. This is in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15132 and the City’s CEQA Guidelines and Procedures. The Draft EIR and appendices to the Draft EIR are included in this Final EIR as Appendix A and Appendix B.

1.1 Document Organization and Framework
This Final EIR is organized as follows: Chapter 1 provides a brief introduction to this document.

Chapter 2 provides a list of agencies and interested persons who commented on the Draft EIR.

This chapter provides responses to substantive comments related to CEQA and the Draft EIR that were received during the 45-day review period. To facilitate review of the responses, an index number has been assigned to each comment letter and each individual comment within the comment letter. This identifier is used to identify both the comment and the corresponding response. Chapter 2 also contains copies of all public comments received on the Draft EIR.

Chapter 3 contains text changes to the Draft EIR that have been made in response to the comments received. Chapter 4 contains a Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program, a required component of the EIR process. CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 and Public Resources Code §21081.6 require a public agency to adopt a monitoring and reporting program to ensure efficacy and enforceability of any mitigation measures applied to a proposed project.

City staff has reviewed the comment letters and information generated in the course of preparing responses and has determined that none of this material constitutes significant new information that requires a recirculation period for further public comment under CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. None of this material indicates that the project will result in a significant new environmental impact not previously disclosed in the Draft EIR. Additionally, none of this material indicates that there would be a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified environmental impact that would not be mitigated, or that there would be any of the other circumstances requiring recirculation as described in Section 15088.5. 122
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 2

1.2 CEQA Requirements Regarding Comments and Responses
CEQA Guidelines Section 15204(a) outlines parameters for submitting comments and reminds persons and public agencies that the focus of review and comment of Draft EIRs should be, “on the sufficiency of the document in identifying and analyzing possible impacts on the environment and ways in which significant effects of the project might be avoided or mitigated.

Comments are most helpful when they suggest additional specific alternatives or mitigation measures that would provide better ways to avoid or mitigate the significant environmental effects. At the same time, reviewers should be aware that the adequacy of an EIR is determined in terms of what is reasonably feasible, in light of factors such as the magnitude of the project at issue, the severity of its likely environmental impacts, and geographic scope of the project.

CEQA does not require a lead agency to conduct every test or perform all research, study, and experimentation recommended or demanded by commenters. When responding to comments, lead agencies need only respond to significant environmental issues and do not need to provide all information requested by reviewers, as long as a good faith effort at full disclosure is made in the EIR.”
123
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 3
2 Responses to Comments

2.1 Comments on the Draft EIR
This section includes a list of all written comments received on the Draft EIR and the City’s response to each comment. Comment letters and specific comments are given identifying numbers for reference purposes. Responses to comments are provided in Section 2.2, and copies of each comment letter received are provided in Section 2.3. Changes to the text of the Draft EIR, made in response to the comments received, are provided in Chapter 3. Table 2-1 contains the list of agencies and persons that submitted comments on the Draft EIR during the public review period:

Table 2-1: Comment Letters Received
Comment Letter No. Commenting Agency Date
1 Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) 9/19/2023
2 Zone 7 Water Agency 10/4/2023
3 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 10/4/2023 4 Steve Minniear 10/26/2023

2.2 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR

2.2.1 COMMENT LETTER 1 (DSRSD)
Response to Comment 1-1: Thank you for your letter. The City has reviewed your comment regarding the requirement to contact DSRSD to coordinate the removal of any water meters on the Project site, if needed. The Draft EIR has been revised on pages 10 and 11 to reflect this requirement, as detailed in Chapter 3 of this Final EIR.

2.2.2 COMMENT LETTER 2 (ZONE 7 WATER AGENCY)
Response to Comment 2-1: Thank you for your comment. This comment is regarding a lost well (3S1W02K001) and a destroyed well (3S1W02K012) on the Project site and drilling permit requirements. The City was not previously aware of these wells on the Project site. However, Zone 7 will be notified if these wells are found on the Project site. As discussed on pages 86 and 90 of the Initial Study, Appendix B of the Draft EIR, the Project site does not include any groundwater wells, nor does the Project propose drilling for new wells. While no drilling or boring for new water wells is proposed, the City acknowledges that any water well or soil boring work will require a drilling permit from Zone 7. Revisions have been made to pages 10 and 12 of the Draft EIR to clarify this potential requirement, as detailed in Chapter 3 of this Final EIR.

Response to Comment 2-2: This comment is related to groundwater resources. The City acknowledges that the Project site is located within the basin area under sustainable groundwater management by Zone 7 and that the Project is subject to all relevant sustainable groundwater management actions set forth in the Alternative Groundwater Sustainability Plan. 124
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 4
Hydrology and water quality impacts were evaluated in the Initial Study, Appendix B of the Draft EIR. As discussed on page 90 of the Initial Study, no water wells are being proposed and water needs for the proposed Project would continue to be met by DSRSD, as they are now.

Additionally, page 90 states that while the proposed Project would result in a higher amount of impervious surface at the site as compared to existing conditions, bioretention areas have been sized accordingly and, therefore, the Project would not result in a substantial decrease in the surface area of permeable soils that would allow rainwater to reach the aquifer. Therefore, less than significant impacts to groundwater supplies are expected. No revisions to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.

Response to Comment 2-3: This comment relates to potential hydrology and water quality impacts of development adjacent to a creek. Hydrology and water quality impacts of the Project, including impacts related to the proximity of the Project site to Dublin Creek, are discussed in Section 8 of the Initial Study, Appendix B, on pages 89 through 92. The Initial Study found that the Project would have less than significant impacts to hydrology and water quality.

During project construction, the Project would be required to comply with California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit as discussed on page 89. No construction would occur on the southern approximately 0.56 acre of the Project site (Parcel 2), which is adjacent to Dublin Creek. During Project operation, the proposed on-site stormwater drainage system would be sufficient to detain and treat operational stormwater runoff generated by the proposed Project and runoff would not be discharged into Dublin Creek, as discussed on page

91. Development is prohibited within 30 feet of the centerline of any creek or 20 feet of the top of a bank, per Dublin Municipal Code Section 7.74.110[B], as stated on page 87. Page 91 states that no development associated with the Project would occur within 30 feet of the centerline of Dublin Creek or within 20 feet of the top of the creek bank. Therefore, the Project would be consistent with Zone 7’s proposed methodology and potential failure of the creek bank would not be expected to impact infrastructure on the site. No revisions to the Initial Study are required in response to this comment.

Response to Comment 2-4: This comment relates to assessment of impact fees for development projects that create new impervious areas. The City acknowledges development projects 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.

Revisions have been made to the Draft EIR under Project Approvals on page 12, to identify Zone 7 as an additional agency whose approval may be required, as shown in Chapter 3 of this Final EIR.

Response to Comment 2-5: This comment requests the use of drought-tolerant and climate adapted landscape. As discussed on page 9 of the Draft EIR, the Project would utilize native and drought tolerant plants, which would conserve water at the site. Therefore, the Project would 125
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 5
satisfy Zone 7’s recommendation for water wise landscaping. No revisions to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.

2.2.3 COMMENT LETTER 3 (CALTRANS)
Response to Comment 3-1: Thank you for your letter. This comment describes the commenter’s understanding of the Project and their agreement that the vehicle miles travelled (VMT) analysis and significance determination within the Initial Study were undertaken in a manner consistent with the OPR’s Technical Advisory and the City’s Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines, and would contribute to meeting the State’s VMT reduction goals. The City thanks the commenter for their concurrence.

Response to Comment 3-2: This comment is related to construction impacts from the Project.

The comment requests that potential impacts to the State Right-of-Way (ROW) from projectrelated temporary access points should be analyzed and that mitigation measures related to construction and noise should be identified for significant impacts. Additionally, this comment notes that coordination with Caltrans prior to construction to develop a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) and a transportation permit may be required.

Transportation (Section 16) and noise (Section 12) impacts are evaluated in the Initial Study, Appendix B, of the Draft EIR. As described in the Transportation section on page 128, all construction and staging activities would occur on the Project site with no encroachment or alterations of public ROW, including State ROW. There is no direct access to the Project site from nearby State ROWs of Interstates 580 and 680 (I-580 and I-680). However, it is assumed that access to the site would be via the I-580 Foothill Road/San Ramon Road exit (Exit 44 A) to connect to Dublin Boulevard to the west. I-680 also could be used to connect to the I-580 Exit 44 A to the west. Since State highways and their interchanges are designed to accommodate large trucks and higher traffic volumes than local roads, there would be less than significant impacts to State ROWs from project-related construction traffic, as these highways would be able to accommodate the slight temporary increase in construction vehicles. As discussed on page 129, Project construction would result in up to 128 traffic trips per day to and from the Project site from construction workers and deliveries of equipment and materials, and approximately 51 of these trips would be from trucks during peak construction periods. These trips would not be an incompatible use to the highways. Since the Initial Study concluded that these impacts would be less than significant, mitigation is not required.

Impacts from construction noise and vibration were evaluated in the Noise section of the Initial Study and were determined to be less than significant. A construction noise assessment was conducted using construction prediction methodologies based on the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) manual. Tables 10 and 11 on pages 107 and 108 of the Initial Study show that Project construction activities would not exceed the FTA general assessment construction noise criteria of 90 dBA (A-weighted decibel), Leq (equivalent sound level) at the nearest noisesensitive receptor. Furthermore, noise from construction vehicles is expected to be less than the construction activities analyzed in Tables 10 and 11. 126
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 6
As discussed on page 111 of the Initial Study, vibration associated with Project construction activities would occur most notably during major ground-disturbing activities, such as site grading. The piece of construction equipment generating the strongest vibration would be the dozer which, per the FTA Manual, can generate a vibration level of up to 0.089 peak particle velocity (PPV) inches per second (in/sec) at 25 feet. State ROW was not considered to be a sensitive receptor due to the already high levels of noise associated with vehicle traffic.

Because the Project would have a less than significant impact from noise and vibration, mitigation is not required.

The City acknowledges that the Project may require a TMP and that any required oversized or excessive load vehicles during construction operations would require a transportation permit from Caltrans before construction commences. Revisions have been made to the Project approvals list on page 12 of the Draft EIR, to acknowledge the need for such a permit, as shown in Chapter 3 in this Final EIR.

Response to Comment 3-3: This comment is related to potential impacts to Caltrans facilities and American Disabilities Act (ADA) standards. As discussed in Section 16 of the Initial Study, no impact to Caltrans facilities would result from the proposed Project. No revisions to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.

2.2.4 COMMENT LETTER 4 (STEVE MINNIEAR)
Response to Comment 4-1: Thank you for your letter. This comment requests that the EIR acknowledge the potential for unmarked graves along the eastern edge of the Project site. The Draft EIR on page 55 acknowledges that Pioneer Cemetery is adjacent to the Hexcel property, and that historic documents suggest the cemetery could extend into the Project site. On page 62 in Section 3, Cultural Resources (Impact c), it is discussed that historic documents suggest that the cemetery was larger than the currently marked boundary, and that there is a high probability that portions of the cemetery extend to the west of the marked cemetery, beneath the Hexcel parking lot. On this page, it also states that if unmarked portions of the cemetery extend beneath the Hexcel property, the Project has the potential to disturb human remains during earthmoving and excavation activities to implement the Project. On page 97 in Section 7, Tribal Cultural Resources (Impact b), similar information to Section 3 is included regarding the extent of the cemetery, as well as an acknowledgement that the cemetery possibly includes Native American human remains. Mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR, including archaeological and tribal monitoring, and protocols for inadvertent/unanticipated tribal cultural resources discovery, would reduce potential impacts to less than significant.

Please note that the exact location of potential unmarked gravesites was not specified in the Draft EIR, as they could extend well beyond the eastern edge of the Project site. No revisions to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.

Response to Comment 4-2: This comment requests that the EIR acknowledge that the western portion of the property is the original Lincoln Highway route from Dublin to what is now Dublin 127
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 7
Canyon Road. This statement has been added to the Draft EIR on page 42 in Section 3, Cultural Resources, as detailed in Chapter 3 of this Final EIR.

Response to Comment 4-3: This comment requests that photographs and historical material should be given to the City of Dublin (Parks and Community Services), not the Dublin Historical Society as stated on page 57 in Section 3, Cultural Resources, of the Draft EIR. This statement in the Draft EIR has been revised to identify the correct entity to receive these materials, as detailed in Chapter 3 of this Final EIR.

Response to Comment 4-4: This comment requests that the proposed light industrial building comply with the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan architectural guidelines. As the commenter states, the applicant envisions wood paneling on exterior walls as an architectural element to honor the historic character of the area. Additionally, as noted in the Draft EIR on page 9, proposed landscaping would provide buffers between the site and adjacent properties, and plants would be strategically placed to screen the site’s aboveground utilities from public streets. While the architectural design of the proposed building would not fully be consistent with the architectural guidelines outlined in Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, it would still be in conformance with the Specific Plan. This is because the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan provides discretion when implementing the guidelines as specified on page 31 in Section 7.1 of the Specific Plan, which states the following:

During their review of proposed development projects, City Staff, the Planning Commission, and the City Council may use discretion in applying various provisions in the design guidelines to specific projects. It is not anticipated that each guideline will apply equally to every project. In some cases, one or more of the guidelines may be relaxed to facilitate compliance with a more important or appropriate guideline for that project. When implementing the guidelines, the overall objective is to ensure that the intent and spirit of the design guidelines are followed and that the project respects its surroundings and honors the heritage and desired character of the area.

City Staff has determined that the proposed Project would be in conformance with the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and will be recommending approval to the Planning Commission and City Council. No revisions to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.

2.3 Comments Received on the Draft EIR
The following pages include copies of all comments received on the Draft EIR. Comment letters are presented in the same order as responses provided in Section 2.2 above. 128
This page intentionally left blank
129
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 8
COMMENT LETTER 1 (DSRSD)
130
This page intentionally left blank
131
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 9
COMMENT LETTER 2 (ZONE 7 WATER AGENCY)
132
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 10
133
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 11
134
This page intentionally left blank
135
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 12
COMMENT LETTER 3 (CALTRANS)
136
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 13
137
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 14
COMMENT LETTER 4 (STEVE MINNIEAR)
138
This page intentionally left blank
139
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 15
3 Changes to the Draft EIR
Changes to the Draft EIR are shown on the following pages in the order that they appear in the EIR. New text is shown in underline, and removed text is shown in strikethrough. These text changes do not constitute substantial new information and do not result in a new significant new impact or increase the severity of an impact already disclosed in the Draft EIR.

The following text is revised on page 9 of the Draft EIR due to minor changes in the number of trees identified on the Project site and number of trees being proposed for removal.

Note: that the analysis within the Initial Study assumed that 85 trees would be removed, based on the project description at the time of analysis. The proposed reduction in tree removal described below compared to what was analyzed within the Initial Study would not alter the analysis or conclusions of the Initial Study.

Parcel 1 of the Project site contains 89 87 trees, four of which are heritage trees. A total of 65 trees are proposed for removal, including one heritage tree. All trees within this parcel would be removed except for two of the heritage trees; The heritage trees that would remain include one in the northeast corner along the project frontage; one in the southwest portion of the site; and one in the northwest portion of the site. A heritage tree directly in the southern portion of the site would be removed. Parcel 2 of the Project site contains 108 trees within the Dublin Creek riparian corridor. All trees in Parcel 2 would be retained, 19 of which are heritage trees.

The following text is revised on page 10 of the Draft EIR in response to DSRSD Comment 1-2 and Zone 7 Comment 2-1.

Utilities Systems
The Project site is currently served by existing utilities for water, sanitary sewer, electricity, and gas. As discussed in the Initial Study in Section 18: Utilities and Service Systems, Dublin San Ramon Services District provides water and wastewater services to the site, and East Bay Community Energy provides electricity and gas to the site, which is distributed by Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Sanitary sewer, sanitary sewer manholes, a water meter, and electrical lines and cables would be removed and replaced with new lines that would connect to existing offsite service lines. If any water meters require removal, the applicant shall contact DSRSD to coordinate their removal.

Additionally, an existing electrical cabinet, storm drain pipe, electrical transformer, and air conditioner unit are proposed for removal and would be replaced. Some of the existing stormwater lines will be left in place but abandoned. New utility lines would be buried below ground. No wells are known to be present on the Project site, however, the Zone 7 Water Agency has indicated that there is one lost well (3S1W02K001) and one destroyed well (3S1W02K012) in the Project area, but that the exact location of the wells is unknown. If any wells are encountered during construction, they would be destroyed in accordance with Zone 7 well destruction standards. 140
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 16
The following text is revised on page 11 of the Draft EIR in response to DSRSD Comment 1-2.

Demolition – This stage would include the demolition of the existing facility, asphalt pavement (140,724 square feet), concrete curbs, landscape including trees and bushes, irrigation system, drainage system, sewer system, site lights, electrical boxes and other electrical equipment, gas, and water meters, fence, shed and gate. All water meters onsite are owned by DSRSD and shall not be demolished. If the water meters need to be removed, then the applicant shall contact DSRSD to coordinate their removal.

Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include concrete saws, excavators, loaders, tractors, backhoes, and rubber-tired dozers.

The following text is revised on page 12 of the Draft EIR in response to DSRSD Comment 1-1, Zone 7 Comments 2-1 and 2-4, and Caltrans Comment 3-1.

1. Project Approvals
The City of Dublin is the Lead Agency for the proposed Project under CEQA. The City is responsible for considering the Project’s impacts as part of the Project approval. The City would require the applicant to obtain the following approvals and permits: approval of a Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan; Site Development Review Permit; Heritage Tree Removal Permit; and demolition, building, grading, and encroachment permits.

Other agencies whose approval may be required include:
• Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD); and • Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB);
• Caltrans;
• Zone 7; and
• Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD)
The following text is added on page 42 just before the History of the Hexcel Property and Hexcel Products, Inc. subsection of the Draft EIR in response to Steve Minniear Comment 4-2.

Lincoln Highway (1913 to 1927)
The Lincoln Highway (later known as US Highway 50) was the major east/west land route from the San Francisco Bay Area to the Central Valley and the rest of the county. The western portion of the Project site is the original Lincoln Highway route from Dublin to what is now Dublin Canyon Road (Lincoln Highway Association 2023).

The following text is revised on page 57 of the Draft EIR in response to Steve Minniear Comment 4-3.

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 141
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 17
shall be placed on file with the City of Dublin Planning Division, and the Dublin Historical Society at the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums (Parks and Community Services ) as the operator of the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums.

The following text is revised on page 59 of the Draft EIR and in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) in response to consultation with the Confederated Villages of Lisjan Nation. Also, an error related to what agency should receive archaeologist report has been revised.

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 Treatment 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 142
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Final EIR | Page 18
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 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.

New References to be added to the sources on page 89 of the Draft EIR.

Lincoln Highway Association. 2023. The Lincoln Highway in California. Available:
https://www.lincolnhighwayassoc.org/info/ca/. Accessed on November 13, 2023.
143
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.
144
This page intentionally left blank
145
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 QualityDuring 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
146
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 ResourcesDuring construction
MM BIO-1: Nesting Bird Avoidance MeasuresA. 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 147
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 fledgedand 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 148
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 ResourcesPrior 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
149
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 150
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.

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 151
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 152
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 153
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. 154
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 shallbe 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 SoilsDuring 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
155
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 MaterialsPrior 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 156
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 TrafficProject 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
157
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 ResourcesPrior 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) 158
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. 159
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 orobjects 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 ConservationDuring construction
See Air quality mitigation measure MM AQ-1. Implement Basic Construction Emission Control Practices.
 Responsible for
approval: City of Dublin
 Implementation:

Project applicant
160
This page intentionally left blank
161
Appendix ADraft EIR

162
This page intentionally left blank
163
Hexcel Redevelopment Project
Focused EIR
August 21, 2023
PROJECT APPLICATION 000688
164
This page intentionally left blank
165
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Table of Contents | Page i
Table of Contents
Project Summary.......................................................................................................... 1 Project Description.......................................................................................................................1 Alternatives..................................................................................................................................1 Issues of Concern .........................................................................................................................1 Environmental Review Process....................................................................................................3 Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report and Scoping Period.....................4 Draft EIR and Public Review Period .........................................................................................5 Final EIR and Responses to Comment .....................................................................................5 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.......................................................................5 Scope of EIR..................................................................................................................................6 Topics Addressed in this EIR ....................................................................................................6 Topics Not Addressed in Detail in this EIR Based on Preparation of the Initial Study .................6 Project Description....................................................................................................... 7 Project Site and Vicinity ...............................................................................................................7 Project Objectives........................................................................................................................7 Surrounding Land Uses ................................................................................................................7 Project Characteristics .................................................................................................................8 Proposed Building ....................................................................................................................8 Project Approvals.......................................................................................................................12 Environmental Analysis.............................................................................................. 13 Introduction ...............................................................................................................................13 Environmental Topics ............................................................................................................13 Impact Levels .........................................................................................................................13 Environmental Baseline .........................................................................................................14 Source(s) ................................................................................................................................14 Section 1: Air Quality..................................................................................................................15 Environmental Setting ...........................................................................................................15 Air Pollutants of Concern.......................................................................................................16 Regulatory Framework ..........................................................................................................16 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures.............................................................................18 Source(s) ................................................................................................................................23 Section 2: Biological Resources..................................................................................................25 Environmental Setting ...........................................................................................................25 Regulatory Framework ..........................................................................................................26 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures.............................................................................28 Source(s) ................................................................................................................................35 166
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Table of Contents | Page ii
Section 3: Cultural Resources ....................................................................................................37 Environmental Setting ...........................................................................................................37 Regulatory Framework ..........................................................................................................48 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures.............................................................................56 Source(s) ................................................................................................................................63 Section 4: Energy........................................................................................................................67 Environmental Setting ...........................................................................................................67 Regulatory Framework ..........................................................................................................68 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures.............................................................................70 Source(s) ................................................................................................................................72 Section 5: Geology and Soils......................................................................................................75 Environmental Setting ...........................................................................................................76 Regulatory Framework ..........................................................................................................77 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures.............................................................................79 Source(s) ................................................................................................................................81 Section 6: Hazards and Hazardous Materials.............................................................................83 Environmental Setting ...........................................................................................................83 Regulatory Framework ..........................................................................................................85 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures.............................................................................87 Source(s)................................................................................................................................89 Section 7: Tribal Cultural Resources ..........................................................................................91 Environmental Setting ...........................................................................................................91 Regulatory Framework ..........................................................................................................92 Context for Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures .........................................................95 Project Impacts and Mitigation .............................................................................................97 Significance after Mitigation..................................................................................................99 Source(s) ..............................................................................................................................100 Other CEQA Considerations...................................................................................... 101 Cumulative Context..................................................................................................................101 Cumulative Impact Analysis.................................................................................................102 Growth Context........................................................................................................................108 Growth Inducing Analysis ....................................................................................................109 Significant Irreversible Changes Context .................................................................................109 Significant Irreversible Changes...........................................................................................110 Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Context ..............................................................111 Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Analysis..........................................................111 Source(s) ..................................................................................................................................111 Alternatives.............................................................................................................. 113 Introduction .............................................................................................................................113 167
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Table of Contents | Page iii
Factors Considered in the Selection of Alternatives................................................................113 Description and Analysis of Alternatives Retained ..................................................................114 No Project Alternative .........................................................................................................114 Reduced Grading Alternative...............................................................................................115 Alternatives Considered but Rejected .....................................................................................117 Partial Preservation Alternative...........................................................................................117 Environmentally Superior Alternative .....................................................................................119 Report Preparers...................................................................................................... 121 Lead Agency .............................................................................................................................121 Consultant – AECOM................................................................................................................121 Appendices............................................................................................................... 133 Appendices
A Initial Study
B Notice of Preparation and Scoping Comments
C Historical Resources Evaluation
D CalEEMod Output Sheets
E Final Transportation Impact Study
List of Figures
Note: All figures are included at the end of the document.

Figure 1. Project Location
Figure 2. Project Site
Figure 3. Site Plan
Figure 4. Elevations
Figure 5. Overall Floor Plan
Figure 6A. Landscape Plan
Figure 6B. Landscape Plan Detail
Figure 7. Fire Access Route
168
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Table of Contents | Page iv
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of Impacts and Mitigation ................................................................... 2 Table 2: Building Composition by Level............................................................................. 9 Table 3: Anticipated Construction Schedule ................................................................... 11 Table 4: Total and Average Daily Construction Emissions............................................... 21 Table 5: Annual and Average Daily Operational Emissions ............................................. 22 Table 6: Special-Status Species Potential to Occur in the Project Area ........................... 30 Table 7: Construction and Operational Energy Consumption ......................................... 71 Table 8: Cumulative Projects in the City of Dublin ........................................................ 105 Table 9: Comparison of Proposed Project and Alternatives.......................................... 120 169
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Table of Contents | Page v
Acronyms
1,1,1-TCA 1,1,1-trichloroethane
AB Assembly Bill
ACDEH Alameda County Department of Environmental Health ACMs asbestos-containing materials
A.D. Anno Domini
ADA American With Disabilities
Alquist-Priolo Act Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act APE Area of Potential Effects
APN Assessor Parcel Numbers
Ardent Ardent Environmental Group
B.C. before present
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
bgs below the ground surface
BL1 Green Buildings
BL2 Decarbonize Buildings
BMPs Best Management Practices
Business Plans Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventories CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy
cal B.C. calibrated years before the present
Cal/OSHA California Occupational Safety and Health Administration CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CAP Climate Action Plan
CAP 2030 Climate Action Plan 2030
CARB California Air Resources Board
CBC California Building Standards Code
CCR California Code of Regulations
CCTS Central California Taxonomic System
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CESA California Endangered Species Act
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CGS California Geological Survey
CHP California Highway Patrol
City City of Dublin
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Data Base
CO carbon monoxide
170
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Table of Contents | Page vi
CO2 carbon dioxide
Cornerstone Cornerstone Earth Group
county County of Alameda
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency
CY cubic yard
DOC California Department of Conservation
DPR Department of Parks and Recreation
DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control
EBCE East Bay Community Energy
EDR Environmental Database Report
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
ESA Environmental Site Assessment
ESA Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973
EV electric vehicle
GGEs gasoline gallon equivalents of petroleum
GHG greenhouse gas
HABS Historic American Building Survey
HAER Historic American Engineering Record
HALS Historic American Landscapes Survey
Hexcel Hexcel Products, Inc.

Hi Bay laboratories were used for small-scale testing, while the building located south of the offices/laboratories
HRI Historic Resources Inventory
I- Interstate
IPaC Information for Planning and Consulting
IS Initial Study
LED light emitting diode
light industrial zoned M-1
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MLD most likely descendant
MLT Middle-to-Late Transition
MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
mph miles per hour
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NHL National Historic Landmark
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NHSTA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
171
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Table of Contents | Page vii
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOP Notice of Preparation
NOX nitrogen oxides
NPS National Parks Service
NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Service
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
NWIC Northwest Information Center
OES Office of Emergency Services
PD Planned Development
PG&E Pacific Gas & Electric Company
PM particulate matter
PM10 PM equal to or less than 10 micrometers in diameter PM2.5 PM equal to or less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter Porter-Cologne Act Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act PRC Public Resources Code
proposed project The proposed actions that would involve replacing existing building with a new building and other site improvements R&D research and development
ROGs reactive organic gases
Royal Research Royal Research Corporation
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SFBAAB San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin
SIP State Implementation Plan
SO2 sulfur dioxide
SVP Society of Vertebrate Paleontology
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB California State Water Resources Control Board
TACs toxic air contaminants
TCE trichloroethene
UBC Uniform Building Code
UCMP University of California Museum of Paleontology
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
UST Underground Storage Tank
VOCs volatile organic compounds
WSA William Self Associates, Inc.
172
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Table of Contents | Page viii
This page intentionally left blank
173
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 1
Hexcel Redevelopment Project
Environmental Impact Report
Project Summary
Project Description
Dublin Boulevard Owner, LP is proposing to construct a new 125,304 square foot building on the 8.81- acre project site located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin, Alameda County, California.

The project site is composed of two parcels (Assessor Parcel Numbers [APN] 941-1560-009-01 [Parcel 1] and 941-1560-003-04 [Parcel 2]) with an existing 62,715 square foot building on Parcel 1. The existing Hexcel research and development (R&D) building would be demolished and replaced with the proposed building. The proposed building would cater to future tenants in the R&D and life sciences field. Other site improvements would include landscaping; parking; a fire access road; circulation improvements for truck access and loading and unloading materials; utilities; pavement and grading to treat site drainage.

Alternatives
• No Project Alternative (existing conditions, no change) • Alternative 1: Reduced Grading Alternative
The alternatives discussion of this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared in accordance with Section 15126(d) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and focuses on alternatives that are capable of eliminating or reducing significant adverse effects associated with the proposed project while feasibly attaining most of the basic objectives.

This EIR identifies the No Project Alternative as the “environmentally superior” alternative, because it would eliminate the significant and unavoidable impacts to the Project site’s historic resource, and would also eliminate less than significant (or less than significant with mitigation) impacts on other resource topics. While the No Project Alternative would eliminate the significant adverse effect of the proposed Project, it would not achieve the Project objectives.

When the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, CEQA requires that an additional alternative be identified. In this case, Alternative 1 (Reduced Grading) would be the environmentally superior alternative, because it would accomplish most of the Project’s objectives while reducing potential impacts to buried archeological and paleontological resources as described in the Alternatives section.

Issues of Concern
The main issue of concern regarding the proposed Project is the demolition of the site’s historic resource, which is the existing building. This issue is fully addressed in the Environmental Analysis of this EIR. Table 1: Summary of Impacts and Mitigation below summarizes potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project. The table includes a list of impacts and mitigation measures identified in this EIR. The table lists impacts and mitigation measures in two major 174
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 2
categories: significant impacts that would remain significant even with mitigation (significant and unavoidable), and potentially significant impacts that could be mitigated to a less than significant level.

Mitigation measures descriptions provided in Table 1 are abbreviated; for the complete description of these mitigation measures, please refer to their associated sections in this EIR. Refer to the Initial Study in Appendix A for further discussion of impacts that would have no impact or be less than significant without mitigation.

Table 1: Summary of Impacts and Mitigation
Impact Mitigation Level of
Significance
After Mitigation
Impact AQ-1: The proposed
Project could be inconsistent with
BAAQMD’s Basic Construction
Mitigation during demolition and
construction.

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). See Section 1 for complete description.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Impact AQ -2: The proposed
Project could result in a
cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant
for which the region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard during construction and
operation.

See Mitigation Measure AQ-1 in Impact AQ-1 above. See Section 1 for complete description.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Impact BIO-1: The proposed
Project could result in nest
destruction and failure to nesting
birds during construction activities.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1. Nesting Bird Avoidance Measures: 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. 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. See Section 2 for complete description.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Impact BIO-2: The proposed
Project could result in mortality to
bats during construction activities.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2. Roosting Bat Surveys and Avoidance:

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. See Section 3 for the complete description.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Impact CR-1: 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.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1: HABS Recordation:

The Project applicant shall document the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility prior to demolition. See Section 3 for the complete description.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Interpretive Displays:

The Project applicant shall install permanent interpretive displays for public exhibition detailing the history and significance of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility at the Project site. See Section 3 for the complete description.

Significant and
Unavoidable
175
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 3
Impact Mitigation Level of
Significance
After Mitigation
Impact CR-2: The proposed
Project could cause substantial
adverse change in the significance
of an archaeological resources
during excavation activities.

Mitigation Measure CUL-3: Archaeological and Tribal Monitoring:

A qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the applicant prior to implementing construction. See Section 3 for the complete description.

Mitigation Measure CUL-4: Inadvertent Discovery Protocols: a number of protocols would be followed in the case of the discovery of archeological and tribal resources. See Section 3 for the complete description.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Impact EN-1: The proposed
Project could consume energy in a
wasteful or inefficient way.

See Mitigation Measure AQ-1 in Impact AQ-1 above. Less Than Significant with
Mitigation
Impact GEO-1: The proposed
Project could accidentally cause
damage to, or destruction of
unique paleontological resources
during earthmoving activities.

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.

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. See Section 5 for the complete description.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Impact HAZMat-1: The proposed
Project could expose people to
contaminated soil or groundwater
that exceed regulatory thresholds.

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).

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.

See Section 6 for complete description.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Impact TR-1: The Project could
disturb Native American human
remains during excavation
activities.

Mitigation Measure TR-1: Inadvertent/Unanticipated Tribal Cultural Resources Discovery Protocols: a number of protocols would be followed in the case of the discovery of tribal resources.

See Mitigation Measures CUL-3 and CUL-4 in Impact CR-2 above.

Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Notes:

ACDEH = Alameda County Department of Environmental Health, BAAQMD = Bay Area Air Quality Management District, City = City of Dublin, ESA = Environmental Site Assessment, PM10 = PM equal to or less than 10 micrometers in diameter, PM2.5 = PM equal to or less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter, Project = The proposed actions that would involve replacing existing building with a new building and other site improvements, Project Applicant = Dublin Boulevard Owner, LP, Project site = 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin, Alameda County, California, SWRCB = California State Water Resources Control Board
Environmental Review Process
The City of Dublin (the City) is the lead agency responsible for administrating the environmental review under CEQA. After preparing an Initial Study, the City has determined that an EIR must be prepared to evaluate potentially significant effects that could result from implementation of the proposed Project.

A Notice of Preparation was prepared and a scoping period held from May 15, 2023 to Jun 15, 2023.

The full CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist is provided in the Initial Study (see Appendix A). 176
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 4
CEQA requires that, before a project with potentially significant environmental effects may be approved, an EIR must be prepared that fully describes the environmental effects of the project, identifies mitigation measures to lessen or eliminate adverse impacts, and examines feasible alternatives to the project. The information contained in the EIR is to be reviewed and considered by the lead agency prior to the ultimate decision to approve, disapprove, or modify the proposed project.

Consistent with CEQA guidelines sections 15080 through 15097, the CEQA process has multiple phases, many of which require notification to the public and opportunity for public comments. The environmental review process for a focused EIR includes the following steps: publication of a notice of preparation (NOP) of an EIR and public scoping; publication of a Draft EIR for public review and comment; preparation and publication of responses to public and agency comments on the draft EIR; and certification of the final EIR. The EIR process provides an opportunity for the public to review and comment on the proposed Project’s potential environmental effects and to further inform the environmental analysis. These steps are described in more detail in the following sections.

Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report and Scoping Period An initial study is an analysis conducted by a lead agency to determine whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment and aids in determining what type of environmental document the lead agency is required to prepare. An initial study was prepared for the proposed Project (see Appendix A). It analyzed the environmental topics included in CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist to determine which topics would be less than significant. This EIR further evaluates environmental topics which would have significant impacts that could be mitigated to less-than-significant levels and other topics that would have significant and unavoidable impacts.

Consistent with the requirements of CEQA guidelines sections 15063 and 15082, the City has made a good-faith effort during the preparation of the Draft EIR to contact all responsible and trustee agencies; organizations and persons who may have an interest in the proposed Project; and all applicable government agencies, including the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse. This outreach effort included the circulation of a NOP on May 15, 2023, which began a 30-day comment period that ended on June 15, 2023. The NOP requested that agencies and interested parties comment on environmental issues that should be addressed in the Draft EIR. A copy of the NOP is provided in Appendix B.

The City sent out NOP and scoping period notices as follows:

1. Sent NOP via certified mail to the County clerk and public agencies on May 15, 2023.

2. Sent email blast to contacts on the City’s universal mailing list on May 15, 2023.

3. Copy of NOP and noticing posted at Dublin Library and at the City Hall

4. Publication of NOP in the East Bay Times on May 17, 2023

5. Posting the NOP and noticing to the City website at https://dublin-development.icitywork.com/ The City held a virtual public scoping meeting on May 25, 2023, at 7:00 pm, with options for joining by phone or computer. The purpose of the scoping meeting was to inform the public about the proposed Project, explain the environmental review process, and provide an opportunity for the public to make 177
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 5
comments and express concerns related to the Project’s environmental issues. No one called into the meeting and the meeting ended at 7:15 pm. Two comment letters were received during the public scoping period: one from the Native American Heritage Commission and one from the City of Pleasanton. Copies of these letters are contained in Appendix B.

Draft EIR and Public Review Period
This Draft EIR is available for a 45-day public review period as indicated on the Public Notice of Availability of this document, which ends on October 5, 2023. The purpose of public review of the EIR is to receive comments on the adequacy of the document in addressing adverse physical effects of the Project. This Draft EIR is being circulated to relevant local, regional and/or state agencies, and to interested organizations and individuals who may wish to review and comment on the report.

During the public review period, written comments on the adequacy of the Draft EIR may be submitted to the City of Dublin at the following address:

Gaspare Annibale, Associate Planner & Anne Hersch, Assistant Community Development Director City of Dublin
Community Development Department
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Written comments may also be submitted via email to [email protected] and [email protected] with “Hexcel Redevelopment Project Draft EIR” noted in the subject line.

Final EIR and Responses to Comment
Responses to all substantive comments received on the adequacy of the Draft EIR and submitted within the specified review period will be prepared and included in the Responses to Comments/Final EIR, including any revisions to the EIR required in response to the comments. If the City decides to approve the Project, the City must first certify the Final EIR and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for mitigation measures identified in the EIR, in accordance with the requirements of California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21001.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
At the time of Project approval, CEQA and the CEQA guidelines require agencies to adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program and to make that program a condition of project approval, to mitigate or avoid significant impacts on the environment (CEQA section 21081.6; CEQA guidelines section 15097). Mitigation measures that have been recommended in this EIR to reduce the environmental impacts of the proposed Project in relation to the above topics will be included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) that the City of Dublin will prepare and adopt (pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15097) if the City determines that the proposed Project or one of the proposed alternatives should be approved.
178
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 6
Scope of EIR
Topics Addressed in this EIR
Pursuant to section 15143 of the state CEQA guidelines, a lead agency may focus an EIR’s discussion on specific issue areas where significant impacts on the environment may occur: “[e]ffects dismissed in an Initial Study as clearly insignificant and unlikely to occur need not be discussed further in the EIR unless the Lead Agency subsequently receives information inconsistent with the finding in the Initial Study. A copy of the Initial Study may be attached to the EIR to provide the basis for limiting the impacts discussed.” The initial study for the proposed Project is included in Appendix A of this Draft EIR.

Pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15063(c)(3), and based on its review of existing information and the initial study completed for the proposed Project, the City determined that the proposed Project would have significant or potentially significant impacts in the following resource areas that require further analysis and are therefore discussed in this Draft EIR:
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
• Energy
• Geology and Soils
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Tribal Cultural Resources
Topics Not Addressed in Detail in this EIR Based on Preparation of the Initial Study The information and analysis presented in the Initial Study provides substantial evidence for the conclusion, for all the issues listed below (i.e., those not addressed in detail in this EIR), that: 1) CEQA standards triggering preparation of further environmental review do not exist for those issues; and 2) impacts under these topics would have no impact or be less than significant. Topics not addressed in this EIR in detail are listed below by impact determination category identified in Appendix G, the Environmental Checklist Form. These topics are, however, analyzed for full disclosure of the environmental determination, in the Initial Study, included within Appendix A of this EIR. In addition to the list below, impacts from the CEQA checklist that have a less than significant impact related to air quality, biological resources, energy, geology and soils, and hazards and hazardous materials are also included in the Initial Study.
• Aesthetics
• Agricultural and Forestry Resources
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use and Planning
• Mineral Resources
• Noise
• Population and Housing
• Public Services
• Transportation
• Utilities and Service Systems
• Wildfire
179
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 7
Project Description
Project Site and Vicinity
The Project site is located at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin, Alameda County, California.

See Figure 1. Project Location. The site includes two parcels totaling 8.81 acres; APN 941-1560-009-01 [Parcel 1] is the larger parcel at 8.30 acres and is located adjacent to Dublin Boulevard, and [APN] 941- 1560-003-04 [Parcel 2] is the smaller parcel at 0.51 acre and is located toward the back (south) of the Project site adjacent to I-580. The site slopes from a maximum elevation of approximately 395 feet above mean sea level near the southwest corner to about 382 feet at the northern corner. Parcel 1 is zoned M-1 (light industrial) and Planned Development (PD) (Ordinance No. 80-60) and Parcel 2 is zoned M-1 (light industrial).

The site is also located in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan boundary. The Specific Plan intends to protect and preserve historical resources and further enhance this area with development that is compatible with the extant historic buildings and remnants in the area. The original historic buildings in this area include St. Raymond’s church, the Murray Schoolhouse, Pioneer Cemetery, Green’s Store, and two bungalow homes. These resources function together as the Dublin Heritage Center, a local history museum and cultural center. The Specific Plan boundary extends from Cronin Circle to Interstate (I-)580 and San Ramon Road to Hansen Drive, including portions west of Hansen Drive along Dublin Boulevard. The Dublin Village Historic Area encompasses approximately 40 acres (City of Dublin 2014).

Parcel 1 (the northern and main portion of the site) is developed with a 62,715 square foot building, atgrade parking, underground and aboveground utilities, pavement, and ornamental landscaping. The existing building is being used as a R&D facility. The landscape consists of grass areas and mature trees.

Parcel 2 (the southern parcel) is undeveloped and is surrounded by dense riparian vegetation including mature trees. The Dublin Creek runs along the approximate southern boundary and is approximately 13 to 18 feet below the adjacent site elevations.

Project Objectives
The proposed Project has the following objectives:

1. To redevelop the Hexcel site with a new and upgraded facility that appeals to the life sciences and manufacturing field.

2. 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.

Surrounding Land Uses
As shown in Figure 2. Project Site, the Project site is immediately surrounded by commercial office uses including an R&D facility, medical and professional offices to the west, US Bank, Dublin Pioneer Cemetery, and the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums to the east; I-580 to the south; and Dublin Boulevard to the north. To the north of Dublin Boulevard and to the east of the Dublin Heritage Park 180
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 8
and Museums and cemetery are single-family houses. Approximately a mile to the west is Dublin Hills Regional Open Space Preserve.

Project Characteristics
The proposed Project would result in the existing 62,715 square foot industrial building being demolished and a new 125,304 square foot building being developed on the 8.81-acre Project site. The new building would cater to future tenants in the R&D and life sciences field. Other site improvements would include landscaping; parking; a fire access road; circulation improvements for truck access and loading and unloading materials; utilities; pavement and grading to treat site drainage. Figure 3. Site Plan shows the proposed site layout. The following sections describe the proposed Project and project components.

Proposed Building
The proposed building would cover approximately 33 percent of Parcel 1 (see Figure 3. Site Plan). The building would be set back approximately 135 feet from Dublin Boulevard, separated by landscaped areas, parking stalls and a fire access route for aerial apparatus access (described in succeeding sections). As shown in Figure 4. Elevations, the building would be a single-story building with the potential addition of a second floor mezzanine office and would have a maximum height of 40 feet.

The outside of the building would be made of concrete tilt-up panels painted in various colors including blue, white and gray. The north side (front) of the building would have separate entrances to the lower level of each of the four separate tenant spaces (i.e., Units A, B, C and D). Access to the upper mezzanine office spaces would be provided from the interior of the building via stairways. The double doors to the entrance would have aluminum framing with insulated tempered glazed windows. Units B and C would also have doors on the front of the building that would provide access to the industrial and warehouse spaces. Large, glazed windows with aluminum framing would be installed on both lower and upper levels of the building to provide for maximum light filtering from the outside into the office spaces. The west and northwest side of the building would provide for six separate points of ingress/egress into the Unit A industrial and warehouse space, and from the inside provide access outside to adjacent parking stalls and a large landscaped area at the west corner of the site. The east side of the building would provide for four points of ingress/egress into Unit D and would have large vision glass that would allow light to flow into the space from outside while keeping the inside of the building cool and private. The south side (rear) of the building would have 4 to 5 dock doors per unit for loading and unloading of materials from the warehouses. There would be four drive-in doors for truck access inside the warehouse.

The interior design of the building would maximize natural light with mezzanine offices on the second floor overlooking the ground floor. The total square footage of the first floor would be 119,304 square feet and the second floor would be 6,000 square feet. As indicated in Table 2: Building Composition by Level, the space would be configured for different uses related to life sciences and advanced manufacturing. The overall building square footage could potentially be divided into four separate units (Units A, B, C and D), each with separate entrances, for four future tenants (see Figure 5. Overall Floor Plan). Each of the units would be between 26,000 to 34,000 square feet consisting of office, industrial, and warehouse space.
181
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 9
Table 2: Building Composition by Level
Level Use Square Footage
Level 1 Office 12,000
Level 1 Light industrial 30,000
Level 1 Warehouse 77,304
Level 2 Office 6,000
Other features of the building would include an interior bike rack, interior roof drain with pipe overflow, and an electrical room. All walking surfaces would be non-slip types. The floors would be a flat/tilt concrete slab and interior walls would be concrete. The building would be designed in compliance with fire codes related to fire access, internal sprinkler systems, electrical systems and fireretardant materials. Additionally, the building would comply with American With Disabilities (ADA) standards related to access, ramps, breakrooms and bathrooms.

Landscape Improvements
Most of the existing landscape would be replaced, as illustrated in Figure 6A. Landscape Plan, except within the southern portion of the site (Parcel 2) where existing vegetation within the riparian corridor of Dublin Creek and along the I-580 boundary would be retained. The total site landscape area would be 99,106 square feet, which includes new and existing landscape. A variety of evergreen shrubs, ornamental trees, grasses, and perennials would be planted around the perimeter of the site and at parking lot areas as listed in Figure 6B: Landscape Plan Details. A total of 85 trees would be added to the site along with other plant materials. Some of the proposed plants include sweet bay, strawberry tree, toyon, hopbush, coffeeberry, red yucca, agave, fort night lily, ceanothus and atlas fescue. Bark mulch would be placed in planters around shrubs.

Native and drought tolerant plants would be utilized to enhance biodiversity and conserve water. Large ornamental trees planned for parking lot areas would provide shade and minimize radiating heat. The landscape would be designed to provide buffers between the site and adjacent properties, and plants would be strategically placed to screen the site’s aboveground utilities from public streets. Temporary and permanent irrigation systems would be installed to establish plants. A 3,827 square foot grass bioswale surrounded by trees and shrubs is proposed in the west corner of the site. Additional bioswales/bioretention planters are proposed in the northeast and southeast areas of the site. The total bioretention areas would be 9,819 square feet.

Parcel 1 of the Project site contains 87 trees, four of which are heritage trees. All trees within this parcel would be removed except for two of the heritage trees; one in the northeast corner along the project frontage and one in the southwest portion of the site. The heritage trees that would be removed in Parcel 1 include one in the northwest portion of the site and one near the center of the site. Parcel 2 of the Project site contains 109 trees within the Dublin Creek riparian corridor. All trees in Parcel 2 would be retained, 19 of which are heritage trees.

Access, Circulation and Parking
Vehicular access would be provided from two existing driveways off Dublin Boulevard, one near the center of the site frontage and the other at the eastern boundary. These driveways would be 182
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 10
connected by a 30 to 40-foot-wide fire access route around the perimeter of the proposed building (Figure 7. Fire Access Route). A total of six fire hydrants would be installed along this fire access road.

The road would be designed to accommodate emergency response vehicles (i.e., fire trucks), delivery box trucks, and trash trucks. A 26-foot-wide fire access route along the northern side of the building would allow for aerial apparatus access.

A total of 217 parking spaces would be provided for the Project. The parking spaces would be located around the perimeter of the building and at the edges of the site, and would include stalls for compact vehicles, standard vehicles, electric vehicle (EV) charging stations, and accessible parking. Compact parking would account for 27 percent of the overall parking spaces, while EV parking would account for 45 percent of the overall parking spaces. Additionally, 12 long-term and 12 short-term bicycle stalls would be provided onsite. Offsite loading spaces would be provided in the back (south) of the proposed building adjacent to the dock doors and facing Highway 580. No truck parking or loading will be facing the street.

Utilities Systems
The Project site is currently served by existing utilities for water, sanitary sewer, electricity, and gas. As discussed in the Initial Study in Section 18: Utilities and Service Systems, Dublin San Ramon Services District provides water and wastewater services to the site, and East Bay Community Energy provides electricity and gas to the site, which is distributed by Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Sanitary sewer, sanitary sewer manholes, a water meter, and electrical lines and cables would be removed and replaced with new lines that would connect to existing offsite service lines. Additionally, an existing electrical cabinet, storm drain pipe, electrical transformer, and air conditioner unit are proposed for removal and would be replaced. Some of the existing stormwater lines will be left in place but abandoned. New utility lines would be buried below ground.

A fire service line would connect to a public water line, which would provide water to the fire hydrants located around the site. Irrigation lines would also connect to public water lines. Stormwater would be treated onsite via five bioretention treatment planter areas that would be implemented in the western corner, southeast corner and south and northeast portions of the site. The site would be graded to have water flow into these biorientation areas. Approximately 9,819 square feet of bioretention areas on the Project site would be used for stormwater control. The proposed Project would include catch basins and storm drains throughout the project site. Full trash capture devices would be installed in all storm drain catch basins.

Other Improvements
An approximately 6-foot-high retaining wall would be installed along the southern edge of the parking lot and bioretention area in the southwest portion of the site, and lower (approximately 1- to 2-feethigh) retaining walls would be constructed adjacent to the bioretention areas in the southeast and northeast portions of the site. Additional retaining walls would be constructed to create loading dock ramps along the southern façade of the building.

A trash enclosure is proposed immediately adjacent to the backside of the building to the west. The trash enclosure would be 10.5 feet tall and 25.75 feet wide. A metal screen would be installed on the top of the enclosure to prevent illegal dumping. Double doors to move dumpsters in and out of the 183
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 11
enclosure and an accessible gate would be provided in the front of the enclosure. The enclosure would store two 6-cubic yard (CY) dumpsters and one 2-CY bin for green waste.

A pathway would be constructed that would extend from the front of the proposed building to the side of the building providing access to doors along the building, parking spaces and the trash enclosure. A trash container for trash, recycle and compost would be installed near the front entrance of the proposed building.

Construction Activities and Schedule
A detailed construction schedule has not been determined at this phase; however, all construction of the Project is anticipated to occur over a 12-month period with some of the phases overlapping. Work would occur during weekdays from 7 am to 4 pm. The anticipated (preliminary) construction schedule is provided in Table 3: Anticipated Construction Schedule, which may be updated subject to market conditions, regulatory approvals, and other factors. The number of onsite workers would vary depending on the construction phase, but it is anticipated for a Project of this scope to range from 7 to 64 workers. Typical grading depths throughout the site would be less than 2 to 3 feet below ground level. The maximum depth of excavation would be between 12 to 20 feet below the existing ground level at the storm drain pump, which would be located in the southern portion of Parcel 1. In the parking lot near the southwest corner, grading would extend to approximately 4.5 feet below ground level.

Table 3: Anticipated Construction Schedule
Construction Phase Schedule Duration
Demolition Late fall 2023 to winter 2024 3 months
Site preparation/grading Early spring 2024 1 month
Trenching and foundation Spring 2024 1 month
Exterior building construction Late spring 2024 to fall 2024 6 months Interior building construction Late fall 2024 2 months
Paving/landscape Late fall 2024 to early winter 2 months Construction phases would include demolition, site preparation and grading, trenching and foundation work, exterior building construction, interior building construction, and outside paving/landscaping. A summary of each construction phase is described below.

Demolition – This stage would include the demolition of the existing facility, asphalt pavement (140,724 square feet), concrete curbs, landscape including trees and bushes, irrigation system, drainage system, sewer system, site lights, electrical boxes and other electrical equipment, gas and water meters, fence, shed and gate. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include concrete saws, excavators, loaders, tractors, backhoes, and rubber-tired dozers.

Site preparation/grading – After the demolition phase, the site would be cleared of all demolition waste and earthmoving activities such as excavation, grading and leveling would take place to prepare the site for the proposed building and other site improvements. Utility line trenching would also occur 184
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 12
during this stage. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include graders, rubber-tired dozers, tractors, loaders, and backhoes.

Trenching and foundation – This phase would consist of excavating and trenching for footings, laying down reinforcing bars (rebar) for retaining walls, drilling piers, preparing beams for foundation, and pouring the foundation slab. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include tractors, loaders, backhoes, and excavators.

Exterior building construction – This phase would include construction of framing, roof, and siding and installation of exterior windows and doors. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include cranes, forklifts, generator sets, welders and tractors, loaders, backhoes and excavators.

Interior building construction – This stage would involve the interior rough out and interior finishes of the building. Walls, flooring, stairs, ceiling, windows, doors, interior electrical and plumbing would be developed at this phase. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include air compressors and aerial lift.

Paving and landscape – This stage would include laying down the pavement for the parking, driveways, fire access road, and walkway areas. This stage also includes installation of landscaping and irrigation around the site. Anticipated construction equipment to be used would include cement and mortar mixers, pavers, pavement equipment, rollers, tractors, loaders, and backhoes.

Project Approvals
The City of Dublin is the Lead Agency for the proposed Project under CEQA. The City would be responsible for considering the Project’s impacts as part of the Project approval. The City would require the applicant to obtain the following approvals and permits: approval of a Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan; Site Development Review Permit; Heritage Tree Removal Permit; and demolition, building, grading, and encroachment permits.

Other agencies whose approval may be required include:
• Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD); and • Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
185
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 13
Environmental Analysis
Introduction
The Environmental Analysis chapter contains the analysis of the potential effects to environmental topics considered under CEQA from construction and operation of the proposed Project. This chapter describes the existing setting, relevant plans and policies that would minimize or avoid potential adverse environmental effects, the significance criteria used to determine environmental impacts, the approach to the analysis, and the potential impacts that could result from development of the property. This chapter also identifies mitigation measures necessary to reduce the potential impacts of the proposed Project.

Environmental Topics
This document is a Focused EIR in that it evaluates potential impacts on a limited number of environmental issue areas that the lead agency determined to be significant (CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(c)(3)). After preparation of the Initial Study Checklist (see Initial Study in Appendix A), the City of Dublin determined that the EIR would focus on the potentially significant impacts of the proposed Project including Cultural Resources and Tribal Resources and other impacts that could result in a less than significant impact with mitigation.

Impact Levels
The EIR uses the following terms to characterize environmental impacts of the proposed Project:
• No impact indicates that the construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed Project would not have any direct or indirect effects on the physical environment. This designation means the proposed Project would not result in a change to existing conditions. This impact level does not need mitigation.
• A less-than-significant impact is one that would not result in a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the physical environment. This designation means that the Project would result in some degree of change to existing conditions, but that change would not be considered “significant,” as explained in the next impact designation. This impact level does not require mitigation under CEQA.
• A significant impact is defined by California Public Resources Code Section 21068 as “a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment.” Levels of significance can vary by project, based on the setting and the nature of the change in the existing physical condition. CEQA Guidelines Section 15382 defines a significant effect as a “substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project, including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance. An economic or social change by itself shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment. A social or economic change related to a physical change may be considered in determining whether the physical change is significant.” A designation of an impact as significant requires that feasible mitigation measures or alternatives to the proposed project must be identified, where necessary and applicable, to eliminate or reduce the magnitude of the significant impact.
186
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 14
• A potentially significant impact is one that, if it were to occur, would be considered a significant impact as described above; however, the occurrence of the impact cannot be immediately determined with certainty. For CEQA purposes, a potentially significant impact is treated as if it were a significant impact. Therefore, under CEQA, feasible mitigation measures or alternatives to the proposed project must be provided, where necessary and applicable, to eliminate or reduce the magnitude of potentially significant impacts.
• A potentially significant and unavoidable impact or significant and unavoidable impact is one that would result in a potentially substantial or substantial adverse effect on the environment, and that could not be reduced to a less-than-significant level even with implementation of feasible mitigation. Under CEQA, a project with significant and unavoidable impacts could still be approved, but the lead agency would be required to: (i) conclude in findings that there are no feasible means of substantially lessening or avoiding the significant impact in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3); and (ii) prepare a statement of overriding considerations, in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, explaining why the lead agency would proceed with a project, in spite of the potential for significant impacts.

Environmental Baseline
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(a), this EIR measures the physical impacts of the proposed project against a “baseline” of physical environmental conditions at and in the vicinity of the Project site. The environmental “baseline” is the combined circumstances existing at the time the NOP of the EIR was published; unless otherwise specified, this is considered the “existing” condition for this EIR.

For this Project, the baseline is May 15, 2023. The baseline also includes the policy and planning context for the proposed Project, such as the existing design review policies and procedures that currently govern proposed development.

Source(s)
City of Dublin Community Development Department. 2014 (updated). Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan. Adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006, Resolution No. 149-06.

Available online: https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/7780/DVHASP-FULL-PDF10714?bidId=. Accessed April 2023. 187
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 15
Section 1: Air Quality

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
X
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
X
Environmental Setting
Air quality is defined by the concentration of pollutants in relation to their impact on human health and the environment. Concentrations of air pollutants are determined by the rate and location of pollutant emissions released by pollution sources, and the atmosphere’s ability to transport and dilute such emissions. Natural factors that affect transport and dilution include terrain, wind, and sunlight. Therefore, ambient air quality conditions within the local air basin are influenced by natural factors such as topography, meteorology, and climate, in addition to the amount of air pollutant emissions released by existing air pollutant sources.

The proposed Project is located in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB), which is comprised of complex terrain types, including coastal mountain ranges, inland valleys, and bays, which distort normal wind flow patterns. Along the County of Alameda’s (the county) western coast, temperatures are moderated by the bay, which can act as a heat source during cold weather or cool the air by evaporation during warm weather. It is generally sunnier farther from the coast, although partly cloudy skies are common throughout the summer. Average summer temperatures are mild overnight and moderate during the day. Winter temperatures are typically cool overnight and mild during the day. Highest temperatures are more common inland. Wind speeds vary throughout the county, with the strongest gusts along the western coast, often aided by dominant westerly winds and a bay-breeze effect. Rainfall totals average about 14 to 23 inches per year, with the highest totals in the northern end of the county and atop the Oakland-Berkeley hills (BAAQMD 2021).
188
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 16
Air Pollutants of Concern
Individual air pollutants at certain concentrations may adversely affect human or animal health, reduce visibility, damage property, and reduce the productivity or vigor of crops and natural vegetation. Six air pollutants have been identified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) as being of concern both on a nationwide and statewide level: ozone; carbon monoxide (CO); nitrogen dioxide (NO2); sulfur dioxide (SO2); lead; and particulate matter (PM), which is subdivided into two classes based on particle size: PM equal to or less than 10 micrometers in diameter (PM10) and PM equal to or less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM2.5). Because the air quality standards for these air pollutants are regulated using human health and environmentally based criteria, they are commonly referred to as “criteria air pollutants.” Ozone is not emitted directly into the air but is formed through a series of reactions involving reactive organic gases (ROGs) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) in the presence of sunlight. ROG and NOX are referred to as “ozone precursors.”
Toxic Air Contaminants
In addition to criteria air pollutants, EPA and CARB regulate hazardous air pollutants, also known as toxic air contaminants (TACs). TACs collectively refer to a diverse group of air pollutants that can cause chronic (i.e., long-duration) and acute (i.e., severe but short-term) adverse effects on human health, including carcinogenic effects. TACs can be separated into carcinogens and noncarcinogens based on the nature of the effects associated with exposure to the pollutant. For regulatory purposes, carcinogens are assumed to have no safe threshold below which health impacts would not occur. Noncarcinogens differ in that there is generally assumed to be a safe level of exposure below which no negative health impact is believed to occur. These levels are determined on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis.

Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive receptors are facilities that house or attract children, the elderly, people with illnesses, or others who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants. Hospitals, schools, convalescent facilities, and residences are examples of sensitive receptors. The nearest sensitive receptors include residences located across Dublin Boulevard, approximately 200 feet north of the Project site, a daycare located approximately 300 feet north of the Project site, and residences located approximately 570 feet east of the Project site.

Regulatory Framework
Federal Clean Air Act and National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Pursuant to the Clean Air Act, the EPA has established ambient air quality standards to protect public health and welfare with an adequate margin of safety. These federal standards, known as NAAQS, were developed for the six criteria pollutants described above. NAAQS represent safe levels of each pollutant to avoid specific adverse effects to human health and the environment. Two types of NAAQS have been established, primary and secondary standards. Primary standards set limits to protect public health, especially that of sensitive populations such as asthmatics, 189
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 17
children, and seniors. Secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare, including protections against decreased visibility and damage to animals, crops, and buildings.

The Clean Air Act was amended in 1977 to require each state to maintain a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for achieving compliance with the NAAQS. In 1990, the Clean Air Act was amended again to strengthen regulation of both stationary and mobile emission sources.

California Clean Air Act and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). In 1988, the state legislature adopted the California Clean Air Act, which established a statewide air pollution control program. The California Clean Air Act requires all air districts in the state to make progress towards meeting the CAAQS by the earliest practical date. The California Clean Air Act establishes increasingly stringent requirements over time. CAAQS are generally more stringent than NAAQS and incorporate additional standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, visibility-reducing particles, and vinyl chloride.

The California Clean Air Act substantially adds to the authority and responsibilities of air districts. The California Clean Air Act designates air districts as lead air quality planning agencies, requires air districts to prepare air quality plans, and grants air districts authority to implement transportation control measures.

Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). BAAQMD is the agency responsible for protecting public health and welfare through the administration of federal and state air quality laws and policies in the SFBAAB. BAAQMD’s tasks include air pollution monitoring, preparing air quality plans, and promulgating rules and regulations. BAAQMD rules and regulations relevant to the proposed Project include but are not limited to: Regulation 6 (Particulate Matter); Regulation 7 (Odorous Substances); Regulation 8, Rule 3 (Architectural Coatings); Regulation 11, Rule 2 (Asbestos Demolition, Renovation and Manufacturing). Additional rules and regulations may be applicable dependent upon the future specific tenants of the building.

BAAQMD also maintains multiple air quality monitoring stations that continually measure the ambient concentrations of major air pollutants throughout the SFBAAB. Under the California Clean Air Act, BAAQMD is required to develop an air quality attainment plan for nonattainment criteria pollutants within the air district. The 2017 Bay Area Clean Air Plan: Spare the Air and Cool the Climate was adopted on April 19, 2017, and provides a regional strategy to protect public health and protect the climate. To fulfill state ozone planning requirements, the 2017 control strategy includes all feasible measures to reduce emissions of ozone precursors and reduce transport of ozone and its precursors to neighboring air basins. In addition, the 2017 Clean Air Plan builds upon and enhances BAAQMD’s efforts to reduce emissions of fine PM and TACs (BAAQMD 2017a).

Attainment of Federal and State Air Quality Standards
Areas are classified under the Federal Clean Air Act and California Clean Air Act as attainment, non-attainment, or maintenance (areas that were previously non-attainment but are currently attainment) for each criteria pollutant based on whether the federal and state air quality standards have been achieved. With respect to the NAAQS, the SFBAAB is designated as a 190
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 18
nonattainment area for ozone and PM2.5, and as an attainment or unclassified area for all other pollutants. With respect to the CAAQS, the SFBAAB is designated as a nonattainment area for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5, and as an attainment or unclassified area for all other pollutants (BAAQMD 2017b).

City of Dublin General Plan. The City of Dublin General Plan, adopted in 1985 and amended in 2022, includes an Environmental Resources Management: Conservation Element. The following policies related to air quality would be applicable to the proposed Project (City of Dublin 2022):
• Request that the Bay Area Air Quality Management District establish an air quality monitoring station in Dublin.
• Require an air quality analysis for new development projects that could generate significant air emissions on a project and cumulative level. Air quality analyses shall include specific feasible measures to reduce anticipated air quality emissions to a less-than-significant CEQA level.

Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Consistent with air quality plans (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
Air quality plans describe air pollution control strategies to be implemented by a city, county, or regional air district. The primary purpose of an air quality plan is to bring an area that does not attain NAAQS and CAAQS into compliance with those standards pursuant to the requirements of the Clean Air Act and California Clean Air Act. The most recent air quality plan is the BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan (BAAQMD 2017a). The 2017 Clean Air Plan identifies potential control measures and strategies, including rules and regulations that could be implemented to reduce air pollutant emissions from industrial facilities, commercial processes, on- and off-road motor vehicles, and other sources. BAAQMD implements these strategies through rules and regulations, grant and incentive programs, public education and outreach, and partnerships with other agencies and stakeholders.

A project is determined to be consistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan if it supports the goals of the Clean Air Plan, includes applicable control measures from the Clean Air Plan, and would not disrupt or hinder implementation of any control measures from the Clean Air Plan (BAAQMD 2017a). Consistency with the Clean Air Plan also is determined through evaluation of projectrelated air quality impacts and demonstration that project-related emissions would not increase the frequency or severity of existing violations or contribute to a new violation of the NAAQS or CAAQS. The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines include thresholds of significance that are applied to evaluate regional impacts of project-specific emissions of air pollutants and their impact on the BAAQMD’s ability to reach attainment (BAAQMD 2017c). Emissions that are above these thresholds have not been accommodated in the air quality plans and would not be consistent with the air quality plans.

Demolition activities and construction of the proposed Project would involve the use of offroad equipment, haul trucks, and worker commute trips that would generate short-term 191
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 19
criteria air pollutant emissions. Operation of the proposed Project would generate long-term emissions associated with daily employee vehicle trips, building energy consumption, reapplication of architectural coatings, use of consumer products, and maintenance/testing of the fire pump. As discussed in Impact (b) below, construction-related emissions of the proposed Project would not exceed the thresholds of significance recommended by BAAQMD. In addition, consistent with Stationary Source Control Measures SS36 (PM from Trackout) and SS38 (Fugitive Dust) of the 2017 Clean Air Plan, the proposed Project would implement BAAQMD’s Basic Construction Mitigation Measures as noted in Mitigation Measure AQ-1 and be subject to BAAQMD Rules and Regulations for controlling fugitive dust emissions (Regulation 6 [Particulate Matter]), which would reduce fugitive dust emissions during demolition and construction. Further, as discussed in Impact (b) below, the proposed Project would result in a net reduction of emissions compared to existing conditions for NOx, PM10, and PM2.5, and ROG emissions would not exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance. The proposed Project would also comply with Dublin Municipal Code, Chapter 7.94.100 (Green Building Code), which requires that new construction buildings are all-electric buildings. Compliance with the Green Building Code would also be consistent with building control measures included in the 2017 Clean Air Plan, such as BL2 (Decarbonize Buildings). Furthermore, the proposed Project electrical and plumbing fixtures would be Title 24 and California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) compliant, which would be consistent with Building Control Measure BL1 (Green Buildings). Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan and this impact would be less than significant with mitigation. (b) Project emissions (Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated) By its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. The nonattainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development within the SFBAAB, and this regional impact is cumulative rather than being attributable to any one source. A project’s emissions may be individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when taken in combination with past, present, and future development projects.

BAAQMD published the May 2017 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, which provides lead agencies assistance in evaluating air quality impacts of projects and plans proposed in the SFBAAB (BAAQMD 2017c). The guidelines provide recommended procedures for evaluating potential air impacts during the environmental review process, consistent with CEQA requirements, and include recommended thresholds of significance, mitigation measures, and background air quality information. BAAQMD has stated that the CEQA Guidelines are for informational purposes only and should be followed by local governments at their own discretion (BAAQMD 2017c). The BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines may inform environmental review for development projects in the Bay Area, but do not commit local governments or BAAQMD to any specific course of regulatory action. The thresholds for criteria pollutants were developed through a quantitative examination of the efficacy of fugitive dust mitigation measures and a quantitative examination of statewide nonattainment emissions and are used for the analysis of projectgenerated emissions. 192
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 20
Construction emissions are short term but have the potential to result in a significant impact on air quality. Demolition and construction activities would generate temporary emissions of precursors to ozone (ROG and NOX), CO, PM10, and PM2.5. ROG, NOX, and CO emissions are associated primarily with mobile equipment exhaust, including off-road construction equipment and on-road motor vehicles. Fugitive particulate matter dust emissions are associated primarily with site preparation and travel on unpaved roads and vary as a function of parameters such as soil silt content, soil moisture, wind speed, acreage of disturbance area, and miles traveled by construction vehicles.

Demolition and construction activities are anticipated to begin in late fall 2023 and last approximately 12 months. Emissions associated with construction and operational activities were modeled using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2020.4.

CalEEMod allows the user to enter project-specific construction and operational information, such as types, number and horsepower of construction equipment, number and length of offsite motor vehicle trips, project square footage, daily vehicle trips, and anticipated energy consumption details. Demolition of the existing building is anticipated to require approximately 608 total loaded haul truck trips. Construction activities would require the use of concrete/industrial saws, excavators, rubber-tired dozers, graders, tractors/loaders/backhoes, cement and mortar mixers, pavers, paving equipment, rollers, air compressors, aerial lifts, cranes, welders, and generator sets. Approximately 6,800 cubic yards of material are anticipated to be excavated and re-used onsite. The proposed Project would also require removal of approximately 141,000 square feet of asphalt pavement, which would be reused onsite. Additional modeling assumptions and details are provided in Appendix D.

Operation of the proposed Project would generate criteria air pollutant emissions associated with mobile, area, and stationary sources. Mobile sources would include vehicle activity from employee commutes and miscellaneous truck deliveries associated with the proposed office, light industrial, and warehousing land uses. Area source emissions were based on CalEEMod default data and would be associated with landscaping equipment usage, consumer product usage (i.e., cleaning supplies, parking surface degreasers), and periodic reapplication of architectural coatings. Stationary sources of emissions would include maintenance and testing of the diesel-fired 175-horsepower fire pump. As described previously, the building would be all-electric (i.e., no natural gas); therefore, there would be no onsite energy-related emissions.

Additional modeling assumptions and details are provided in Appendix D.

Table 4: Total and Average Daily Construction Emissions shows the total and average daily emissions associated with construction of the proposed Project. 193
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 21
Table 4: Total and Average Daily Construction Emissions Source/Description ROG NOX PM10 (Exhaust) PM2.5 (Exhaust) Total Construction Emissions (tons) 1 0.90 1.96 0.08 0.07 Average Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 2 6.92 14.98 0.60 0.57 Threshold of Significance (lbs/day) 3 54 54 82 54
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No
Notes: lbs/day = pounds per day; NOX = nitrogen oxides; PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 micrometers in diameter; PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 10 micrometers in diameter; ROG = reactive organic gases 1 The construction emissions modeling assumed the proposed Project would include 227 parking spaces. Based on the latest site plan, the proposed Project would include 217 parking spaces. As such, the emissions presented above related asphalt paving and striping activities are conservative and actual emissions are anticipated to be slightly lower. 2 Average daily emissions estimated assuming 261 construction workdays based on a 5-day construction workweek and 12 months of construction.
3 BAAQMD 2017c
As shown in Table 4, construction-related emissions of ROG, NOx, PM10 exhaust, and PM2.5 exhaust would not exceed the applicable thresholds of significance established by BAAQMD.

Therefore, the impacts from emission of these criteria air pollutants during construction would be less than significant.

BAAQMD does not have quantitative mass emissions thresholds for fugitive PM10 and PM2.5 dust. Instead, BAAQMD recommends that all projects, regardless of the level of average daily emissions, implement applicable Best Management Practices (BMPs), including those listed as Basic Construction Measures in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines (BAAQMD 2017c). Without implementation of BAAQMD’s Basic Construction Measures, the impact of fugitive dust emissions during Project construction would be potentially significant.

In order to comply with the BAAQMD threshold for fugitive dust emissions, the following mitigation measure is needed:

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.
194
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 22
• 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.

With implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the proposed Project would be consistent with BAAQMD guidance and the generation of fugitive dust emissions from Project construction would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation.

As shown in Table 5: Annual and Average Daily Operational Emissions, operation of the proposed Project would result in a net reduction in emissions of NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 compared to existing conditions, and emissions of ROG would not exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance. Therefore, the impact of operational emissions would be less than significant.

Table 5: Annual and Average Daily Operational Emissions Source/Description ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5
Proposed Project Annual Emissions (tons/year) 1 0.68 0.26 0.54 0.15 Existing Conditions Annual Emissions (tons/year) 0.61 0.47 0.65 0.18 Net Emissions (tons/year) 0.08 (0.22) (0.12) (0.04)
Threshold of Significance (tons/year) 2 10 10 15 10
Exceeds Annual Threshold? No No No No
Average Daily Emissions (lbs/day)3 0.60 (1.69) (0.90) (0.27) Threshold of Significance (lbs/day) 2 54 54 82 54
Exceeds Average Daily Threshold? No No No No
Notes: lbs/day = pounds per day; NOx = nitrogen oxides; PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 micrometers in diameter; PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 10 micrometers in diameter; ROG = reactive organic gases; tons/year = tons per year 1 The operational emissions modeling assumed the proposed Project would include 18,000 square feet of office space, 36,500 square feet of light industrial space, and 70,804 square feet of warehousing space. Based on the latest site plan, the proposed Project would actually include 18,000 square feet of office space, 30,000 square feet of light industrial space, and 77,304 square feet of warehousing space. As light industrial land uses generate higher daily vehicle trips than warehousing land uses, daily vehicle trips and the associated mobile source emissions are anticipated to be lower (i.e., the emissions modeling assumed the proposed Project would generate 494 daily trips, based on the 2022 Transportation Impact Study (W-Trans 2022); however, under the revised site plan, the proposed Project is anticipated to generate 473 daily trips). As such, the emissions presented above are conservative and actual emissions are anticipated to be lower. Implementation of the proposed Project would result in a higher net reduction in emissions compared to existing conditions. 2 BAAQMD 2017c
3 Average daily emissions estimated 260 working days per year, based on a Monday through Friday operational schedule. 195
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 23
Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, construction and operation of the proposed Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation. (c) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations (Less Than Significant Impact) Impact c was determined to be a less than significant impact, as the Project would not increase air emissions from existing conditions. Therefore, the full analysis for this impact is discussed in the Initial Study provided in Appendix A.
(d) Odors (Less Than Significant)
Impact d was determined be a less than significant impact. Since the proposed Project involves the redevelopment of an existing industrial building with a new industrial building, the proposed Project would not introduce a new odor-generating source. Therefore, the full analysis for this impact is discussed in the Initial Study provided in Appendix A.

Source(s)
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017a. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan: Spare the Air: Cool the Climate. Available online:
https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/plans/2017-clean-airplan/attachment-a_-proposed-final-cap-vol-1-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed February 2023. ____. 2017b. Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status. Available online:
https://www.baaqmd.gov/about-air-quality/research-and-data/air-quality-standardsand-attainment-status. Accessed February 2023. ____. 2017c. California Environmental Quality Act: Air Quality Guidelines. Available online:
https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-andresearch/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed February 2023. ____. 2021. In Your Community: Alameda County. Available online:
https://www.baaqmd.gov/about-the-air-district/in-your-community/alameda-county.

Accessed January 2021.

City of Dublin. 2022. General Plan. Available online:
https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30287/General-Plan-Update04192022-WEB. Accessed March 2023.

W Traffic Engineering Transportation Planning (W-Trans). 2022. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. December.
196
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 24
This page intentionally left blank
197
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 25
Section 2: Biological Resources

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
X
Environmental Setting
This section describes the existing biological setting within the Project site, which consists of two adjacent parcels, Parcel 1 and Parcel 2. The focus of the analysis was based on the areas potentially directly or indirectly affected by construction of the Project, referred to herein as the Project footprint. The Project footprint is exclusively in Parcel 1.

The City of Dublin is characterized by a diverse array of wildlife and plant species, with two discrete habitat types—the flatter urbanized portion of the City and the surrounding oak 198
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 26
woodland and California annual grassland. The Project site is located within the urbanized area, which exhibits plant and animal species typical of urbanized areas including a combination of native and introduced trees, grasses and shrubs used for landscaping purposes.

The proposed Project footprint is completely developed with buildings, hardscape, and landscaped areas. Vegetation within landscaped areas of the footprint is comprised of sod, various ornamental shrubs, various ornamental tree species, as well as native trees such as California Bay (Umbellularia californica), coast live oak trees (Quercus agrifolia), and California buckeye (Aesculus californica). No natural habitats (habitats with naturally occurring vegetation) occur within the Project footprint.

The Project site is primarily developed with buildings, hardscape, and landscaped areas associated with the existing Hexcel buildings; however, Dublin Creek is located to the south of the Project footprint approximately along the boundary of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2. Dublin Creek in this location contained less than 1 foot of water during AECOM’s site visit on December 12, 2022. The banks of this feature are natural, but this feature runs underground for long stretches immediately east and west of the project.

Vegetation Communities
Vegetation communities within the Project footprint are limited to landscaped areas comprised of sod, various ornamental shrubs, various ornamental tree species, as well as a large number of native trees such as coast live oak trees, California Bay, and California buckeye. To the south of the Project footprint and on Parcel 2, is riparian habitat associated with Dublin Creek.

Wildlife
Wildlife in the Project site is likely to be limited to those species easily habituated to human activity, and which typically occupy urban areas or interfaces between urban and open space areas. Larger fauna may include raccoon (Procyon lotor) and skunk (Mephitis mephitis), while smaller fauna would include species such as western fence lizards (Sceloporus occidentalis), southern alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata), deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus), and Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae).

A wide variety of bird species likely utilizes the riparian corridor of Dublin Creek to the south of the Project footprint, as well as the ornamental vegetation and trees within the Project footprint. These species include red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), western bluebird (Sialia mexicana), American robin (Turdus migratorius), Anna’s hummingbird (Calypte anna), among others.

Regulatory Framework
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 makes it illegal to take, possess, import, export, transport, sell, purchase, barter, or offer for sale, purchase, or barter any migratory bird, or the 199
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 27
parts, nests, or eggs of such bird, except under the terms of a valid federal permit. Migratory bird species protected by the act are listed in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in 50 CFR Part 10.13. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has statutory authority for enforcing the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 United States Code Sections 703-712).

Federal Endangered Species Act
The Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (16 United States Code Section 1531 et seq.) provides a regulatory program for the conservation of threatened and endangered plants and animals and the habitats in which they are found. The USFWS and National Marine Fisheries Service are the lead agencies responsible for implementing the ESA. The USFWS maintains a list of endangered species that includes birds, insects, fish, reptiles, mammals, crustaceans, plants, and trees. The USFWS and/or National Marine Fisheries Service requires authorization for any actions that they authorize, carry out, or fund, that may jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat.

California Endangered Species Act
The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) conserves and protects animals at risk of extinction. Plants and animals may be designated as threatened or endangered under CESA after a formal listing process by the California Fish and Game Commission. A CESA-listed species may not be killed, possessed, purchased, or sold without authorization from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

California Fish and Game Code Fully Protected Species
Sections 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515 of the California Fish and Game Code designate 37 species of wildlife as Fully Protected in California. Fully Protected species may not be taken or possessed at any time, and no licenses or permits may be issued for their take, except for the authorized collection of these species for necessary scientific research and relocation of bird species for the protection of livestock.

California Fish and Game Code Section 2081 Incidental Take Permits Section 2081(b) of the California Fish and Game Code allows the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to authorize take of CESA-listed species categorized as endangered, threatened, candidate, or rare plant species if that take is incidental to otherwise lawful activities, and if certain conditions are met. Section 2081(b) permits are commonly referred to as an Incidental Take Permit.

City of Dublin Municipal Code
The City of Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 5.60: “the Heritage Tree Ordinance” (Ord. 5-02 § 2 (part): Ord. 29-99 § 1 (part)), requires that a Tree Removal permit from the Director be acquired prior to the removal of heritage trees. Heritage trees include:
200
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 28

1. “Any oak, bay, cypress, maple, redwood, buckeye and sycamore tree having a trunk or main stem of twenty-four (24) inches or more in diameter measured at four (4) feet six (6) inches above natural grade;

2. A tree required to be preserved as part of an approved development plan, zoning permit, use permit, site development review or subdivision map;

3. A tree required to be planted as a replacement for an unlawfully removed tree.” In addition, all applications for demolition, grading, or building permits on property containing one or more heritage trees shall prepare a tree protection plan pursuant to Section 5.60.090.

City of Dublin General Plan
The City of Dublin General Plan Chapter 7 Environmental Resources Management Conservation Element provides guidance for the protection of biological resources in Dublin and includes objectives, goals, and policies regarding biological resources.

The following goals and policies from the City’s General Plan relating to biological resources apply to the Project:
• Guiding Policy 7.2.1A1: Protect riparian vegetation as a protective buffer for stream quality and for its value as a habitat and aesthetic resource
• Implementing Policy 7.3.2B1: Require erosion control plans for proposed development.

Erosion control plans shall include recommendations for preventing erosion and scour of drainageways, consistent with biological and visual values. • Implementing Policy 7.4.1B2: Enact and enforce the Heritage Tree Ordinance Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Substantial adverse effect on candidate, sensitive, or special status species (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
Special-Status Plants
As discussed previously, the Project site is largely developed, and the entirety of the Project footprint is either paved or landscaped. There is no potential for special-status plant species to occur in the sod or landscaped areas present within the areas that would be disturbed during Project construction. Therefore, the Project would have no impact on special status plant species.

Special-Status Wildlife
A desktop analysis was conducted to identify special-status wildlife species that may be present in the vicinity of the Project site. Google Maps, Google Earth, and photographs of the site were used to identify potential habitats that may be impacted by the Project. In addition, the following online resources were used to identify special-status wildlife species with the potential to occur on or near the Project site:
201
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 29
• USFWS: Information for Planning and Consulting (IPaC) (USFWS 2023) • California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW): California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB): The search area consisted of a 5-mile buffer on the Project site. (CDFW 2023) As described in the Environmental Setting, natural habitats are absent from the Project footprint. None of the special-status species identified in the desktop analysis have life history requirements associated with buildings, hardscape, and landscape areas present in the Project footprint. As summarized in Table 6: Special-Status Species Potential to Occur in the Project Area, the Project footprint does not provide suitable habitat for any of the special-status wildlife species identified during the records search. The riparian corridor associated with Dublin Creek that runs immediately south of the Project footprint may provide suitable habitat for San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat and/or pallid bat. Because the Project would not involve direct disturbance within the riparian corridor, it would not directly destroy or alter such habitat, and there would be no impact to special-status species with potential to occur within the Project footprint area.

The Project footprint is located within 5 feet of the riparian corridor associated with Dublin Creek; however, construction activities would occur on existing paved areas (parking lot), and no construction equipment will enter Dublin Creek and associated habitat. Disturbance from noise and vibration (see Section 12) on wildlife could result during construction activities.

However, these impacts would be minimal and only for a temporary period of time during construction. Furthermore, construction of the Project does not have the potential to result in introduction of non-native weeds to the riparian corridor of Dublin Creek since no construction equipment would enter the creek.

In the event that runoff from the Project or accidental spills entered species habitat within Dublin Creek, sedimentation or the introduction of pollutants to habitat within Dublin Creek would constitute a potentially significant impact. As discussed further in the Initial Study in Section 9, Hydrology (see Appendix A) the Project would avoid sedimentation or the introduction of pollutants to habitat within Dublin Creek through the required implementation of erosion and sediment control measures and the implementation of BMPs specified in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction, which would protect habitat within Dublin Creek. Thus, no substantial indirect impacts to status species would occur. 202
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 30
Table 6: Special-Status Species Potential to Occur in the Project Area Scientific Name Common Name Class Status Habitat Present Danaus plexippus Monarch Butterfly Invertebrate Federal Candidate None Branchinecta lynchi Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Invertebrate FT None Hypomesus transpacificus Delta Smelt Invertebrate FT, SE None Ambystoma californiense pop. 1 California tiger salamander - central California DPS
Amphibian FT, ST None
Rana draytonii California red-legged frog Amphibian FT, SSC None Emys marmorata western pond turtle Reptile SSC None
Masticophis lateralis
euryxanthus
Alameda whipsnake Bird FT, ST None
Agelaius tricolor tricolored blackbird Bird ST, SSC None Aquila chrysaetos golden eagle Bird BGEPA, FP None
Athene cunicularia burrowing owl Bird SSC None
Contopus cooperi olive-sided flycatcher Bird SSC None
Elanus leucurus white-tailed kite Bird FP None
Falco peregrinus anatum American peregrine falcon Bird FP None Gymnogyps californianus California Condor Bird FE, SE, FP None Sterna antillarum browni California Least Tern Bird FE, SE, FP None Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle Bird BGEPA, SE, FP None Antrozous pallidus pallid bat Mammal SSC None in project footprint. Possible
in riparian corridor.

Neotoma fuscipes annectens San Francisco dusky-footed
woodrat
Mammal SSC None in project
footprint. Possible
in riparian corridor.

Taxidea taxus American badger Mammal SSC None
Vulpes macrotis mutica San Joaquin kit fox Mammal FE, ST None Centromadia parryi ssp.
congdonii
Congdon’s tarplant Plant 1B.1 None
Eryngium jepsonii Jepson’s coyote-thistle Plant 1B.2 None Extriplex joaquinana San Joaquin spearscale Plant 1B.2 None Extriplex joaquinana San Joaquin spearscale Plant 1B.2 None Helianthella castanea Diablo helianthella Plant 1B.2 None Navarretia prostrata prostrate vernal pool
navarretia
Plant 1B.2 None
Status:

Federal
FE – listed as Endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act FT – listed as Threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act BGEPA – Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
State
SE – Listed as Endangered under the California Endangered Species Act ST – Listed as Threatened under the California Endangered Species Act SSC – State species of special concern
FP – Fully protected under California Fish and Game Code California Rare Plant Rank
1B.1 - Rare or endangered in California and elsewhere – seriously threatened in California (more than 80 percent of occurrences threatened) 1B.2 - Rare or endangered in California and elsewhere – moderately threatened in California (20 to 80 percent of occurrences threatened) 203
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 31
Migratory Birds
The various shrubs, ornamental trees, and native trees in the Project footprint may provide suitable habitat for common nesting birds, such as house finch, mourning dove, common raven, and other birds that typically occupy urban environments. The USFWS IPaC tool also lists the following migratory bird species that could occur in the Project area: Allen’s hummingbird (Selasphorus sasin), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), Belding’s savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi), Bullock’s oriole (Icterus bullockii), California gull (Larus californicus), California thrasher (Toxostoma redivivum), common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas sinuosa), golden eagle, (Aquila chrysaetos), Lawrence’s goldfinch (Carduelis lawrencei), Nuttall’s woodpecker (picoides nuttallii), oak titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus), olive-sided flycatcher (Contopus cooperi), tricolor blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), Western grebe (Aechmophorus occidentatis), wrentit (Chamaea fasciata), and yellow-billed magpie (Pica nuttalli).

As discussed in the regulatory section, these birds, their nests, and eggs are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Noise and vibration from proposed construction activities associated with the Project could disturb birds that are nesting on and near the Project site, for both common nesting birds and American peregrine falcon. Although nesting birds in this urban setting are typically habituated to human activity and associated noise, the increased level of human activity at the site during construction could temporarily disturb nesting birds.

In addition, the Project would involve the removal of approximately 85 landscape trees within the Project footprint, which could be used by birds during the nesting season. If a tree containing an active nest were to be removed during construction, such removal would result in nest destruction and failure. Due to this potential for loss of nests, and due to potential disturbance of nesting birds from noise and vibration during Project construction, the impact to nesting birds would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1, detailed below, is recommended to address this potentially significant impact to nesting birds.

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 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 204
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 32
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.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would protect nesting birds by ensuring that all active nests with the potential to be impacted by tree removal, construction noise, or human presence would be identified, appropriate avoidance buffers would be applied to active nests, and biologists would monitor active nests and bird behavior during construction so that the effectiveness of the buffer zone can be determined and the buffer distance can be adjusted if needed. Given the urban setting of the Project and presence of visual barriers such as other buildings and vegetation in the vicinity of the construction zone, the minimum search radii specified in Mitigation Measure BIO-1 (50 feet for passerines and 300 feet for raptors) are considered appropriate to reduce potential disturbance of nesting birds to a less than significant level.

With the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, proposed construction and associated activities would not disturb nesting birds or destroy their nests; therefore, potential Project impacts to candidate, sensitive, or special status species would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation.
(b) Substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other natural community (Less Than Significant Impact)
No riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities are located within the Project footprint; therefore, Project construction or operation would not directly impact riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities and is not expected to affect Dublin Creek. The Project would have less than significant impact on riparian habitat and sensitive natural communities. See Initial Study for the full analysis in Appendix A. 205
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 33
(c) Substantial adverse effect on wetlands (Less Than Significant Impact) No wetlands or other waters of the U.S. or state are located within the Project footprint; therefore, Project construction or operation would not directly impact wetlands and other waters. Furthermore, no substantial indirect impacts would occur to Dublin Creek from the Project. Therefore, the Project would have less than significant impact on wetlands and waters of the U.S. or state. See Initial Study for the full analysis in Appendix A. (d) Interfere or impede the movement of migratory fish or wildlife (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
There are no documented migratory wildlife corridors, wildlife nursery sites, or large waterbodies or rivers in the vicinity of the Project site. The Project site is located between commercial and residential development, and the I-580 freeway. Resident and migratory waterfowl are not anticipated to use the Project site because it is already developed and contains no open waterbodies or other habitat frequented by such species. Therefore, the project would not interfere with or impede the movement of migratory waterfowl.

As discussed previously under Impact BIO-1, above, the riparian habitat associated with Dublin Creek could be used as habitat for migratory birds. However, Dublin Creek is a highly urbanized creek that generally parallels I-580. The creek supports a riparian canopy of trees, but there is no understory vegetation in the vicinity of the project. The feature runs to the west of the project with no riparian canopy before going underground, and runs underground to the east of the project before emerging with wide concrete banks. As such, this section of Dublin Creek is less likely to be used as a migratory corridor for common and special-status wildlife species.

Because the project would not impact the riparian habitat, it would not directly interfere with or impede the movement of common and special-status wildlife species. Indirect impacts to migratory birds from construction noise is addressed under Impact BIO-1, above.

The riparian corridor associated with Dublin Creek could be used as foraging habitat for common bats. As such, trees that would be removed as part of the Project outside of riparian areas may provide suitable day or night roosting habitat for bat species. Given the availability of alternative natural habitat for hibernaculum in the vicinity of the Project and based on planned tree replacement, impacts to habitat for bats are not expected to be significant. However, if construction were to remove trees containing bats during the maternity or winter season, bat mortality could occur, and the impact to common bat species would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2, detailed below, is recommended to address this potentially significant impact to roosting bats.

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 206
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 34
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. i. 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.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would ensure that construction activities do not have the potential to result in significant impacts to roosting bats, by avoiding tree removal during times of the year when bats are most sensitive to disruption (maternity and overwintering seasons) to the extent feasible and 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. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, potential Project impacts to wildlife movement, migration, or nursery sites would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation.
(e) Conflict with local policies or ordinance include tree preservation (Less Than Significant Impact)
The proposed Project would adhere to the tree removal permit conditions, the Project would not conflict with the City’s tree ordinance or the Dublin General Plan, and potential impacts would be less than significant.
207
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 35
(f) Conflict with adopted habitat conservation or natural community conservation plans (No Impact)
There would be no impact since there are no Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Communities Conservation Plans that apply to the Project site. See Initial Study in Appendix A.

Source(s)
California Department of Fish and Wildlife Service (CDFW), 2023. Rarefind 5, a program created by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife that allows access to the California Natural Diversity Database. Reviewed January 17, 2023.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2023. IPaC Information for Planning and Consultation. Available online at: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed on January 17, 2023.
208
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 36
This page intentionally left blank
209
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 37
Section 3: Cultural Resources

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Significant
and
Unavoidable
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

3. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to section 15064.5? X
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries?
X
Environmental Setting
The Project site is at 11711 Dublin Boulevard in the City of Dublin, Alameda County, California and is approximately 8.81 acres. The project site is located south of Dublin Boulevard with the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums and Dublin Pioneer Cemetery to the east; I-580 to the south; and a business park to the west.

Historic-age built environment resources on the Project site consist of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility, landscaping, and parking. The Contemporary/Brutalist style facility has a roughly Lshaped plan and was largely constructed in two phases dating to 1962 and 1967, with small additions and alterations in the mid-1980s.

Pre-contact Cultural Context
Archaeological evidence demonstrates that people have lived in the San Francisco Bay Area for at least the past 10,000 years. The pre-contact history of the San Francisco Bay archaeological region is most commonly understood as a series of cultural and temporal periods defined by the Central California Taxonomic System (CCTS). The CCTS was developed by Beardsley (1948) and Gerow (Gerow with Force 1968), based on observations in the San Francisco Bay Area, the Sacramento Valley, and the Delta region. This system was further refined by Bennyhoff and Hughes (1987) and Groza (2002). The CCTS includes an Early Period, Middle Period, Middle-toLate Transition (MLT), and a Late Period, defined by a combination of changes in climate, artifact types, habitation patterns, and mortuary patterns. The following discussion will briefly describe each of these cultural-temporal periods, following Milliken et al. (2007).

Early Holocene (Lower Archaic): 8000-3500 B.C.

The people of the Early Holocene were mobile foragers, with seasonal, temporary camps located near food resources. The earliest archaeological site in the San Francisco Bay Area is CACCO-696 at Los Vaqueros Reservoir in Contra Costa County, dating to 7920 calibrated years 210
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 38
before the present (cal B.C.) This site included millingslabs (metates) and handstones (manos), used together to grind seeds, nuts, or other foods. Large wide-stemmed projectile points of Napa Valley obsidian were also found at the site. This assemblage is typical of Early Holocene sites in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Early Period (Middle Archaic): 3,500-500 B.C.

During the Early Period, new milling technology is introduced, and shell beads first made their appearance. In addition to millingslabs and handstones, assemblages now include mortars and pestles, suggesting greater reliance on acorns. Grooved stone net sinkers are also present, pointing to new fishing technology. Shell beads made from abalone (Haliotis sp.) and olive snails (Olivella sp.) were placed in burials as tokens of tribute or prestige, along with red ochre and ceremonial and ornamental artifacts. Settlement patterns were semi-sedentary, featuring long-term villages with organized cemeteries.

Lower Middle Period (Initial Upper Archaic): 500 B.C. - A.D. 430 During the Lower Middle Period, shell bead forms change abruptly, with new forms replacing the old. Bone tools were common, including awls made from deer bones, which were used for basketry. Barbless fish spears replace the net sinkers of the previous period. Mortars and pestles are more common than millingslabs and handstones. Large shell mounds are constructed, indicating further sedentism.

Upper Middle Period (Late Upper Archaic): A.D. 430-1050 Major change occurred in 430 A.D. Half of the known settlement sites were abandoned. The trade in saucer shaped shell beads from southern California collapsed, but were replaced with saddle bead forms. Hunting of sea otters intensified. More stylized forms appear, including ear spools, obsidian show blades, and fishtail charmstones. A new population seems to have moved into the area, with elaborate grave goods and distinct, extended, burial styles, which contrasted with the flexed burial positions seen in earlier periods. This new pattern is called the Meganos complex, and may be a sign of invasion or of multi-cultural communities.

Initial Late Period (Lower Emergent): A.D. 1050-1550
The Late Period was a time of increased social complexity. Status was earned, not inherited.

Status objects became more elaborate, including large mortars with shell applique and straight sides (“flower pot” mortars) and many new forms of abalone shell ornaments. Mortuary practices included cremation and grave goods associated with social status. The bow and arrow was added to the hunting toolkit, and small projectile points were seen for the first time.

Settlements were permanent, year-round villages.

Terminal Late Period (Protohistoric): A.D. 1550-1776
During the Terminal Late Period, lives were already influenced by the arrival of European explorers. Disease spread in advance of newcomers, impacting the Native populations as they came into contact with pathogens they had never encountered before. Populations thinned, and grave goods were less plentiful. Clam shell beads were introduced and made locally. The 211
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 39
forms of projectile points shifted from elaborate Stockton serrated points to simpler cornernotched forms.

In 1776, the first California Mission in the area was established by the Spanish in San Francisco, as well as a presidio. This was followed by the founding of Mission Santa Clara de Asís in 1777 and Mission San José in 1797. These marked the first European settlements in the San Francisco Bay Area, and led to major changes in the lives of Native Californians.

Ethnographic Context
An Ethnographic Context is provided within the Tribal Cultural Resources section of this EIR.

Historic Cultural Context
European Exploration (1542-1776 A.D.)
During the period of exploration, Europeans from Spain and England visited the coastline of California and a few inland areas, but did not visit the Amador Valley until Sergeant Pedro Amador passed through in 1795. Amador was the first to use the word “Alameda” to describe the area, meaning “place where cottonwoods grow”. Later that same year, Hermenegildo Sal and Father Antonio Danti began searching for locations to establish new Spanish Missions (Kyle et al. 2002).

However, even before Europeans set foot in the Amador Valley, their presence affected the Native people through spread of trade and disease. The first European ship to explore the coast of California was captained by Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo in 1542. Cabrillo’s party sailed as far north as Point Reyes, but only reported encounters with the Native population in Southern California. In 1579, the English explorer and pirate, Sir Francis Drake, anchored his ship, the Golden Hind, north of San Francisco in a small cove now known as Drake’s Bay. During their five week stay, Drake and his crew interacted extensively with the local residents, the Coast Miwok.

Sebastian Rodríguez Cermeño led an expedition to scout the California coast for safe ports in 1594, again anchoring in Drake’s Bay. Cermeño’s ship was wrecked by a storm as they left, and survivors walked south as far as San Luis Obispo before there was any account of their interactions with the Native people. In 1602, Sebastian Vizcaino led another expedition along the coast, searching for a good location for a port to support trade between New Spain (Mexico plus Alta and Baja California) and the Philippines. On finding Monterey Bay, Vizcaino proclaimed it “all that one could hope for” (Beebe and Senkewicz 2001:44-45). Nevertheless, King Felipe III of Spain issued a royal order prohibiting further exploration of Alta California, due to the presence of established ports in Baja California. The Spanish did not return to the Alta California Coast for 160 years (Beebe and Sekewicz 2001, Kyle et al. 2002).

In 1770, the Spanish returned to establish a presidio (military base) and mission in Monterey, and then began to explore in search of other potential Mission locations. Expeditions set out in 1772, led by Captain Pedro Fages, in 1774, led by Captain Fernando Rivera, in 1775, led by Father Vincente Santa Maria, and in 1776, led by Juan Bautista de Anza and Pedro Font. While these expeditions reached Santa Clara, San Francisco, and portions of Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, they did not reach the Amador Valley (Beebe and Sekewicz 2001). 212
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 40
The Spanish Period (1776-1821 A.D.)
Seven Spanish missions were founded in Ohlone territory from 1776 to 1797, the closest being Mission San José, 14 miles south of the Project and founded in 1797. The Ohlone were recruited to the Mission through trade and offering of foods. However, once baptized, they were not allowed to leave the Mission, and became the workforce to grow food and raise livestock to support the new Spanish settlements. Anyone who tried to leave the mission to return to their old way of life or even visit their villages was considered a runaway, and was tracked down and forcibly returned to the missions. Due to harsh living conditions, devastating disease, and reduced birth rates, the population of Native Americans living in Mission San José rapidly dwindled, and the Spanish needed to range further to recruit new neophytes. According to Mission baptismal records, the Pelnen came to Mission San Jose between 1798 and 1805 and the Seunen, being further north, joined between 1801 and 1804 (Milliken 1995).

The Amador Valley was used as grazing land for livestock to support Mission San José. The introduction of cattle, horses, and sheep, and inadvertent introduction of invasive plant seeds, interrupted and changed the local ecosystem, depleting the resources that the Native Americans relied upon.

The Mexican Period (1821-1848 A.D.)
In 1821, Mexico gained independence from Spain, and Alta California became a Mexican province. By 1834, the Mexican government had begun a process of secularization of the Missions. Jose Maria Amador, having lived in the valley that would be named for him since at least 1830 (possibly 1826), received an official land grant from the Mexican governor of California in 1835. This vast grant of over 4 leagues (30,500 acres), became known as Rancho San Ramon. Amador’s adobe home was constructed on the northwest side of the modern crossroad of Dublin Boulevard and San Ramon Road, within 0.25-miles of the Project location, and next to a natural spring called Almilla Springs (Kyle et al. 2002, VerPlanck 2003a). Amador’s estate raised livestock, grew crops, and manufactured goods such as soap, leather goods, farm tools, and furniture, with the help of 150 Mexican and Native American employees (Minniear 2018). It is rumored that the burial ground for his workers was in the vicinity of the Pioneer Cemetery, although the cemetery was not officially consecrated until 1860 (VerPlanck 2003b).

California Statehood and the Development of the City of Dublin (1848 A.D. to Present) Following the Mexican-American War (1846-1848), the Treaty of Guadalupe was signed, transferring control of Alta California officially from Mexico to the United States. California statehood soon followed in 1850. During the interim, gold was discovered in El Dorado County in 1848, leading to the California Gold Rush and a great influx of settlers (Kyle et al. 2002).

Amador tried his hand at gold prospecting but was largely unsuccessful. By 1852, he began selling off some of his property to ease some financial stress. Michael Murray and Jeremiah Fallon were two of the first to purchase land from Amador, south of Dublin Boulevard. The farmsteads soon grew into a settlement, and the settlement into a town, which was organized in 1853 as Murray Township, but in the late 1850s was also referred to as Amador’s or Amador 213
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 41
Valley. James Witt Dougherty, partnering with William Glaskins, purchased ten thousand acres from Amador in 1862 (Minniear 2018).

In 1859, St. Raymond’s Church was built in the location where it still stands on Donlan Way between Dublin Boulevard and I-580. During construction of the church, Tom Donlan fell to his death. A Catholic cemetery was established immediately west of the church, and Tom was the first to be officially buried there. However, historian Virginia Smith Bennett notes that the cemetery location had been used for burials before Donlan’s interment (Bennett 1978:2). The land for the church and the Catholic portion of the cemetery was donated by Michael Murry and Jeremiah Fallon. The land for the Protestant portion of the cemetery was donated by James W. Dougherty (Kyle et al. 2002, VerPlanck 2003b, 2003c). Existing grave markers give testament to the ongoing usage of the cemetery until present day. However, a fire in 1917 destroyed several wooden grave markers, which were not replaced (VerPlanck 2003b). Old St. Raymond’s Church (P-01-010635) was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 2006 (NPS 06000242), as eligible under Criteria A and C, with Pioneer Cemetery (P-01010637) as a contributing element (NPS 2006). St. Raymond’s Church has also been found eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) under Criteria 1 and 3 (VerPlanck 2003c).

The Old Murray School (P-01-010636) was built on land owned by Dougherty in 1856, and served all of Dublin and Pleasanton. When I-580 was widened in 1975, the schoolhouse was moved to its present location, just south of Old St. Raymond’s Church, and east of Pioneer Cemetery. It was restored by the Dublin Historic Preservation Association, and is now used as the Dublin Heritage Center (VerPlanck 2003d).

In the 1860s, the portion of the town to the south of the road to Stockton (now the I-580 corridor) was referred to as Dublin, reportedly based on a comment from James Witt Dougherty, saying that there were so many Irishmen south of the road to Stockton, it might as well be called Dublin (Kyle et al. 2003). By the 1870s, the name Dublin became common usage, however the name was not used officially until a post office was established in 1963. The City of Dublin was officially incorporated in 1982 (Minniear 2018).

John Green established a store in 1860 at the southeast corner of what is now Dublin Boulevard and Donlan Way, within 0.25-miles of the project location; Green’s Store (P-01-08150) was remodeled in the 1930s, but was restored to its 1914 condition in 1981 and now serves as the Tri-Valley Church of Christ (VerPlanck 2003e).

Dublin was primarily an agricultural community through the early twentieth century, with much of the land tied up in just a few large farms. But in 1942 the community changed, as the U.S.

Government purchased over 3,000 acres of land to establish Camp Parks, Camp Shoemaker, Shoemaker Naval Hospital, and a military prison, which later was relocated and became Santa Rita Jail (Minniear 2018). Hundreds of thousands of service members and their families passed through or moved into the Dublin area. Growth of Dublin took off in the 1960s, when the houses in the San Ramon Village area of Dublin were built, and supporting commercial development soon followed.
214
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 42
History of the Hexcel Property and Hexcel Products, Inc.

The following historic context, specific to the Project location, was prepared as part of the Historical Resources Evaluation technical memorandum of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility at 11711 Dublin Boulevard, prepared by AECOM for the City of Dublin. The historic context, relevant figures, and full evaluation for eligibility for listing in the CRHR are in the memorandum appended to this Focused EIR as Appendix C.

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. 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).

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, 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).
215
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 43
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. Hexcel president William S. Powell understood that technical employees were in great demand and wanted to entice new hires, so the building design included full-height 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 (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).

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).

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 216
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 44
at his house in Berkeley. Steele’s experimentation led to the creation of structural honeycomb, which he demonstrated at a government-sponsored plastics conference as the California Reinforced Plastics Company. 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).

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 strength-to-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). 217
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 45
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 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 218
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 46
Apollo 9 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 (Contra Costa Times 1967 March 26; Contra Costa Times 1969 March 28; Times Record 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 hightemperature resistant ceramic fabric to line the flight crew’s cabin to protect them from extreme heat upon earth re-entry (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 (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 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).

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 219
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 47
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 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’ 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 National Register of Historic Places (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).

Based on the results of AECOM’s historical resource evaluation, the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility at 11711 Dublin Avenue (P-01-010656) is eligible for listing in the CRHR under Criterion 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.
220
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 48
Regulatory Framework
Cultural resources in California are protected by a number of regulations. The following provides a brief outline of the regulations, policies, and ordinances that are applicable to the proposed project.

Federal
National Historic Preservation Act
The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (16 United States Code 470) and its implementing regulations (36 CFR 800) establish a program for the preservation of historic properties throughout the United States and provides a framework for identifying and treating historical and archaeological resources under the CEQA. Section 106 of the NHPA requires that federal projects or projects under federal jurisdiction consider the effect of an undertaking on properties eligible for or included in the NRHP. Historic properties that are listed in or eligible for the NRHP are considered historical resources for the purposes of CEQA.

National Register of Historic Places
Historic properties are those significant cultural resources that are listed in or are eligible for listing in the NRHP per the criteria listed below (36 CFR 60.4):

The quality of significance in American, state, and local history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and meet one or more of the following criteria:
a. Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history;
b. Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; c. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of installation, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction;
d. Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Ordinarily, cemeteries, birthplaces, or graves of historic figures; properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes; structures that have been moved from their original locations; reconstructed historic buildings; and properties that are primarily commemorative in nature are not considered eligible for the NRHP, unless they satisfy certain conditions. In general, a resource must be 50 years of age to be considered for the NRHP, unless it satisfies a standard of exceptional importance.

Listing in the NRHP does not entail specific protection of, or assistance for a property. However, listing does guarantee the property’s recognition during planning for federal or federally assisted projects, eligibility for federal tax benefits, and qualification for federal historic 221
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 49
preservation assistance. Additionally, project effects on properties listed in the NRHP must be evaluated under CEQA.

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties The “Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties” (Secretary’s Standards), codified in 36 CFR 67, provide guidance for working with historic properties. The Secretary’s Standards are used by lead agencies to evaluate proposed rehabilitative work on historic properties. The Secretary’s Standards are a useful analytic tool for understanding and describing the potential impacts of proposed changes to historic resources. Projects that comply with the Secretary’s Standards benefit from a regulatory presumption that they would not result in a significant impact to a historic resource. Projects that do not comply with the Secretary’s Standards may or may not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic property.

In 1992, the Secretary’s Standards were revised so they could be applied to all types of historic resources, including landscapes. They were reduced to four sets of treatments to guide work on historic properties: Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration, and Reconstruction.

Rehabilitation acknowledges the need to alter or add to a historic property to meet continuing or changing uses while retaining the property’s historic character and is most applicable to this Project. The Rehabilitation standards are as follows:

1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.

2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.

3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.

4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.

5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.

6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.

7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.

8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.
222
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 50

9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale, and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.

10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.

Generally, a project that follows the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the historical resource per CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(b).

State
California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA requires public agencies to consider the effects of their actions on “historical resources,” “unique archeological resources,” and “tribal cultural resources.” Pursuant to PRC Section 21084.1, a “project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.” Section 21083.2 requires agencies to determine whether proposed projects would have effects on unique archeological resources.

Historical Resources
“Historical resource” is a term with a defined statutory meaning (PRC § 21084.1; determining significant impacts to historical and archeological resources is described in the CEQA Guidelines, § 15064.5[a] and [b]). Per the CEQA Guidelines, section 15064.5(a), historical resources include the following:
(1) A resource listed in or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the CRHR (PRC § 5024.1).
(2) A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in PRC § 5020.1(k) or identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of PRC § 5024.1(g), will be presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant.
(3) Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered to be a historical resource, provided the lead agency’s determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. 223
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 51
(4) The fact that a resource is not listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the CRHR, not included in a local register of historical resources (pursuant to Cal. Pub. Resources Code § 5020.1(k)), or identified in a historical resources survey (meeting the criteria in Cal. Pub.

Resources Code § 5024.1(g)) does not preclude a lead agency from determining that the resource may be a historical resource as defined in Cal. Pub. Resources Code§§ 5020.1(j) or 5024.1.

Non-Unique Archeological Resources
Under CEQA, archeological resources are presumed non-unique unless they meet the definition of “unique archeological resources” (Cal. Pub. Resources Code § 21083.2[g]). Under CEQA, an impact on a non-unique archeological resource is not considered a significant environmental impact.

Unique Archeological Resources
Archeological resources can sometimes qualify as “unique archeological resources” that are not “historical resources.” (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(c)(3)). PRC, Section 21083.2(g) defines a unique archeological resource as an artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria:

1. Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information; or

2. Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or

3. Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.

If a project can be demonstrated to cause damage to a unique archeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. To the extent that resources cannot be left undisturbed, mitigation measures are required (PRC Section 21083.2[a], [b], and [c]).

California Register of Historical Resources
The CRHR is a guide to cultural resources that must be considered when a government agency undertakes a discretionary action subject to CEQA. The CRHR helps government agencies identify, evaluate, and protect California’s historical resources, and indicates which properties are to be protected from substantial adverse change (Pub. Resources Code, Section 5024.1(a)).

The CRHR is administered through the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) which is part of the California State Parks system. A cultural resource is evaluated under four CRHR criteria to determine its historical significance. A resource must be significant at the local, state, or national level in accordance with one or more of the following criteria set forth in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(3) and Public Resources Code section 5024.1:
224
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 52

1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of California’s history and cultural heritage;

2. It is associated with the lives of persons important in our past;

3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or

4. It has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

In addition to meeting one or more of the above criteria, the CRHR requires that sufficient time must have passed to allow a “scholarly perspective on the events or individuals associated with the resource.” The CRHR also requires a resource to possess integrity, which is defined as “the authenticity of a historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource’s period of significance. Integrity is evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.

Codes Governing Human Remains
Human remains are protected by several laws in the State of California, including Health and Safety Codes (HRC) 7050.5, 7051, 7052, and 7055. Together these laws define criminal consequences for disturbing, disinterring, mutilating, or removing human remains from their place of rest or discovery.

Section 7050.5 of the Health & Safety Code requires that construction or excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human remains until the county coroner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner must then contact the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which has jurisdiction pursuant to Public Res. Code § 5097. The NAHC, pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98, will immediately notify the person it believes to be most likely descendant (MLD), of the deceased Native American person so they can inspect the burial site and make recommendations for appropriate treatment or disposition.

Section 7051 makes it a crime, punishable by imprisonment, to remove any human remains from the place where they have been interred or deposited without authority of law. Section 7052 protects human remains from mutilation and disinterment. Section 7055 makes it a crime to remove interred human remains from a cemetery.

Local
City of Dublin General Plan
The City of Dublin General Plan, Chapter 7 Environmental Resources Management Conservation Element, provides guidance for the protection of archaeological and historic resources in Dublin and guiding policies related to historic and cultural resources are as follows:

Guiding Policy 7.7.1A.1: Preserve Dublin’s historic structures. 225
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 53
Seven sites in the Primary Planning Area are listed in the California Archaeological Inventory, Northwest Information Center, at Sonoma State University including the church and school on the grounds of the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums. As many as a dozen potentially significant historic and prehistoric sites have been identified in the Eastern Extended Planning Area.

Guiding Policy 7.7.1A.2: Follow State regulations as set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2 regarding discovery of archaeological sites, and Historical Resources, as defined in Section 5020.1 of the Public Resources Code.

Guiding Policy 7.7.1A.3: Preserve the Green Store.

The Green Store is a recognized historical resource and has been used as a church since 1989.

This use can remain as long as the landowner(s) wish to continue its operation. The Parks/ Public Recreation designation on the General Plan Land Use Map illustrates the long-term potential for expansion of the Dublin Heritage Park and Museums to include this historic structure and the property it is on and is not intended to affect or change the current church use or its continued operation as a religious land use under a valid conditional use permit.

Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan
The Project site is located within the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan boundary. The Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan (SP) was adopted in 2006 and updated in 2014.

Applicable goals and objectives of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan related to historic and cultural resources are as follows:

Goal 1: Preserve and protect the valuable historic resources within the Dublin Village Historic Area.

Objective 1.1: Identify Dublin’s historic resources and adopt a formal Historic Resources Inventory.

Objective 1.2: Identify mechanisms to protect properties on the Historic Resources Inventory from being destroyed or altered to the point of removing their historic value.

Objective 1.3: Identify incentives to encourage the preservation and enhancement of privatelyowned historic resources.

Objective 1.4: Pursue formal designation and recognition of Dublin’s historic resources through the California State Office of Historic Preservation and National Registry.

Objective 1.5: Work cooperatively with property owners to rehabilitate Alamilla Springs.

Objective 1.6: Ensure that improvements and renovations to publicly-owned historic resources are done according to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
226
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 54
Goal 2: Guide the design of future development to reinforce the unique historic qualities and design elements that once defined Dublin Village.

Objective 2.1: Create design guidelines for residential, commercial, and mixed-use development on private property.

Objective 2.2: Create design guidelines that provide direction for future streetscape improvements in the public right of way.

Objective 2.3: Create guidelines that provide direction on the preferred preservation and rehabilitation techniques for properties on the Historic Resources Inventory.

Additionally, the SP includes mitigation measures that apply to the treatment of historic resources within the Dublin Village Historic Area, drawn from the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) prepared by the City in 2006 (City of Dublin 2006). The mitigation measures for the Project will meet the requirements set forth in the SP and the associated IS/MND (City of Dublin 2014: Appendix B; City of Dublin 2006).

SP Mitigation Measure 4: In High Archeological Probability Areas (including a 150 meter (493 foot) corridor centered on Dublin Creek and within the general vicinity of St.

Raymond’s Church, Pioneer Cemetery, and the Dublin Square Shopping Center site), the permitting of future ground disturbance shall include provisions for further archival and field study by an archeologist, archeological testing and, and, if necessary, archeological monitoring during construction.

SP Mitigation Measure 5: Should preconstruction excavation or borings be conducted outside of the High Archeological Probability Areas, but within the project area, a qualified archeologist shall monitor the work to define the presence or absence of buried resources in order to promote advance planning for mitigation purposes.

SP Mitigation Measure 6: If a Native American artifact or human remains are identified during any demolition or construction in the project area, work on the project shall cease immediately until those steps outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (e) can be taken to the satisfaction of the Dublin Community Development Director. Project work may be resumed in compliance with the requirements of Section 15064.5 (e).

Additionally, the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately and Section 7050.5(b) of the California Health and Safety Code (relating to the discovery of Native American remains) should be implemented.

SP Mitigation Measure 7: If an archeological, prehistoric, or paleontological resource is discovered during any demolition or construction in the project area, work on the project shall cease immediately until a resource protection plan conforming to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (f) is prepared by a qualified archeologist and approved by the Dublin Community Development Director. Project work may be resumed in compliance with such plan.
227
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 55
Dublin Historic Resources Inventory
The Dublin Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) was created when the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan was adopted by the Dublin City Council in 2006. The HRI was established to “recognize those few remaining resources that have a place in Dublin’s history, including those resources that might be significant to the immediate community but not significant at the state or federal level” (City of Dublin Community Development Department 2014: 27).

The HRI consists of resources that were found eligible for listing in the NRHP and the CRHR, or only having local significance, from the survey efforts undertaken in Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project that was finalized in 2004 by Page & Turnbull, Inc. The HRI includes only seven resources, three of which are near the 6600 block of Donlon Way: St. Raymond’s Church, Murray Schoolhouse, and the Pioneer Cemetery, which have been combined as the “Dublin Heritage Center.” The Pioneer Cemetery is adjacent to the Hexcel property, and historic documents suggest it extends into the Project parcel (VerPlanck 2003b).

The Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan did not establish goals or policies for maintaining or adding properties to the HRI. No guidelines were provided to reevaluate properties in the Dublin Village Historic Area that were less than 50 years old at the time the survey was conducted in 2004, nor any significance criteria or mechanisms for nominating or adding properties to the HRI.

Previous CEQA Documents
The City of Dublin hired the archaeological firm William Self Associates, Inc. (WSA) in 2003 to prepare an Archaeological Assessment Report of the Donlon Way Specific Plan (later renamed the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan area). A record search at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC), conducted by WSA, did not identify any previously recorded archaeological sites within the Specific Plan area boundaries, but one new archaeological site was recorded during the pedestrian survey and Archeological High Probability areas were also identified within the Specific Plan area boundaries. The Archaeological Assessment Report concluded that there is a moderate-to-high-probability of identifying Native American archeological resources and a high-probability of encountering historic-period archeological resources within the Specific Plan area boundaries.

The City of Dublin hired the architectural firm Page & Turnbull, Inc. in 2003 to prepare the Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project that was finalized in 2004. The city contracted with Page & Turnbull to identify and map historic resources in an approximately 38-acre area for a future Specific Plan for the Donlon Way area (later renamed the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan) and to prepare preservation recommendations. Page & Turnbull prepared a historic context of the Dublin Village area and recorded all of the properties in the survey area on Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 A and B forms. The Hexcel Corporation R&D facility on the Project site was recorded as part of this effort on December 10, 20003 (VerPlanck 2003f). At that time, the facility was not considered old enough (at least 50 years old) to be considered a potential historical resource under CEQA. Additionally, while the historic evaluation did contain a thorough historic context statement, it did not address the four 228
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 56
eligibility criteria for either the NRHP or the CRHR, but merely concluded that the property lacked architectural or historical significance to be eligible.

The Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan was adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006, under Resolution No. 149-06 and relied on the findings of the Archaeological Assessment Report of the Donlon Way Specific Plan and the Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project. The approximately 38-acre Specific Plan area included the two project site parcels. Subsequently, three Specific Plan addendum and amendments have been prepared for the Specific Plan. City Council determined that no new significant impacts were identified by the addendums or amendments, and no further environmental analysis was required.

Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5 (Significant and Unavoidable Impact) A historical resource evaluation was prepared for the Hexcel Corporation’s 1960s-constructed R&D facility on the Project site to assess its eligibility for listing in the CRHR as a potential historical resource for the purposes of CEQA (see Appendix C). The facility was determined to be eligible for listing in the CRHR under Criterion 1, because it is significant at the national level for its associations within the Man in Space historic context published by the National Park Service and is, therefore, considered a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA.

The significance of an historical resource is considered to be “materially impaired” when a project demolishes or materially alters the physical characteristics that justify the determination of an historical resources’ significance. Because 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.

CEQA requires that all feasible mitigation must be completed even if it does not mitigate project impacts below a level of significance. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(b), states that “In some circumstances, documentation of an historical resource, by way of historic narrative, photographs or architectural drawings, as mitigation for the effects of demolition of the resource will not mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur.” Therefore, recordation of a resource prior to demolition does not typically mitigate the physical impact on the environment caused by demolition or destruction of an historical resource; however, it does serves a legitimate archival purpose. Therefore, the following mitigation measures are required , even though they would not fully offset the loss of the resource, and the impact would remain significant and unavoidable.

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 professionals (in history or architectural 229
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 57
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.

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.

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.
230
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 58
Even with implementation of the mitigation measures identified above, 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. A discussion of alternatives that would involve the partial preservation and adaptive reuse of the portion of the building where the NASA research took place is presented in Alternatives Considered but Rejected section of this EIR.
(b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to section 15064.5 (Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated) The proposed Project would include excavation of much of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility property, which is adjacent to the Dublin Village Historic Settlement. The Dublin Village Historic Settlement is recorded as a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA (P-01-002127) and includes Old St. Raymond’s Church, the Pioneer Cemetery, the Old Murray School, Green’s Store, the site of the Green Mansion and Murray Homestead, and Donlon Way. St. Raymond’s Church is listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NPS 06000242), eligible under criteria A and C, with the Pioneer Cemetery listed as a contributing element. Additionally, the Hexcel property falls within the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, therefore the project must abide by the mitigation measures proposed in the associated IS/MND (City of Dublin 2014; City of Dublin 2006).

Based on the existence of archeological resources within and adjacent to the Project area, there is a high probability of encountering historic-period archeological resources during ground disturbance at the Project site, particularly within those portions of the property closest to St.

Raymond's Church and Pioneer Cemetery, and a high probability of identifying Native American archeological resources, particularly within a 150 meter (493 foot) corridor centered on Dublin Creek.

Section 15126.4 of the CEQA Guidelines directs public agencies to avoid damaging effects on an archeological resource whenever possible. For a project that could impact an archeological resource, Section 15064.5 (Determining the Significance of Impacts on Historical and Unique Archeological resources) of the CEQA Guidelines applies and all requirements of this section shall be met in the course of reviewing and implementing the Project. In order to mitigate any potential impacts to resources in the Project area, further archival and field study by an archeologist shall be undertaken prior to the construction of any development projects in the area in accordance with the recommendations of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and associated IS/MND (City of Dublin 2014; City of Dublin 2006).

In sum, there is a high potential for previously unrecorded archaeological resources associated with the historic settlement to be within the Hexcel Property. Additionally, the Hexcel property is adjacent to the marked boundary of the Pioneer Cemetery, a contributing element to the NRHP listed resource, St. Raymond’s Church (P-01-010635 / CA-ALA-521H / NPS 06000242). 231
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 59
The High Archeological Probability Areas identified for this Project, per the guidance of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and associated IS/MND, are the areas most proximate to St. Raymond’s Church and Pioneer Cemetery, and a 150 meter corridor centered on Dublin Creek. This includes the portion of the Project site to the east of the existing Hexcel building and much of the southern parking lot, approximately 115,763 square feet of the total project area of 383,764 square feet (30 percent). Per the proposed design, excavation within this High Archaeological Probability Area would exceed 1 foot below ground surface (bgs) in an area of approximately 61,850 square feet (53 percent) of the area, with a maximum depth of approximately 12 feet bgs.

The possibility of encountering buried archaeological resources in the Project area outside of the High Archeological Probability Area, remains a concern as well, and per the mitigation measures in the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and associated IS/MND, requires mitigation to avoid adverse impact.

If previously unrecorded archaeological resources associated with historical resources are present within the Hexcel property and/or if burials extend beyond the marked boundary of the adjacent Pioneer Cemetery, earthmoving and excavation activities to implement the Project could damage or destroy these buried resources, and the Project impact to archaeological resources would be potentially significant.

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 a Treatment and Monitoring Plan, in consultation with the City of Dublin, and through them, with any consulting Native American tribes.

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:
i. Archaeological testing to be done prior to the start of construction. ii. Archaeological and Tribal monitoring requirements, which will be based on the results of archaeological testing and consultation with Native American tribes. iii. Procedures and considerations for handling, documenting, analyzing, and curation of any historic-era or pre-contact era artifacts encountered during project activities.
iv. Procedures and considerations for handling, documenting, analyzing, and curation of any human remains from the historic era. (For human remains of 232
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 60
Native Americans, treatment protocols would be established with the designated MLD).

B. 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 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.

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 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.

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 Mitigation Measure CUL-3 and these recommendations shall be incorporated into the treatment plan.

The mitigation measures 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 on-site activities, as well as the regulations pertaining to discovery of human burials. Because the mitigation measures require stopping work within the area of any potential find(s), and require 234
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 62
that a qualified archaeologist inspect the find and make recommendations for avoiding or reducing impacts (in collaboration with tribal representatives), implementation of mitigations CUL-3 and CUL-4, would reduce the potential impact on archeological and buried resources to less-than-significant with mitigation.
(c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries (Less Than Significant)
The proposed Project would include excavation of the parking lot to the south of the Hexcel Corporation R&D facility, which is adjacent to the marked boundary of the Pioneer Cemetery.

Marked grave sites in the cemetery are within five feet of the Hexcel property fence. Historic documents suggest that the cemetery was larger than the currently marked boundary, and was used as an Ohlone burial site and as a burial ground for Native American and Mexican farm workers on José María Amador’s Ranchero San Ramón prior to consecration of the official cemetery in 1860 (Bennett 1978, VerPlanck 2003b).

For these reasons, there is a high probability that portions of the cemetery extend to the west of the marked cemetery, beneath the Hexcel parking lot. As designed, excavation depths in the area outside the existing building footprint would range up to 10 feet below surface along the southern boundary of the Hexcel property. If unmarked portions of the cemetery extend beneath the Hexcel property, the Project has the potential to disturb human remains during earthmoving and excavation activities to implement the Project. The disturbance of human remains could be a potentially significant impact if measures are not taken to protect the remains from damage, destruction, or discretion.

Human burials, in addition to being potential archaeological resources, have specific provisions for treatment in Section 5097 of the California Public Resources Code. The California Health and Safety Code (Sections 7050.5, 7051, 7052, and 7055) also has specific provisions for the protection of human burial remains. Existing regulations address the illegality of interfering with human burial remains, protect them from disturbance, vandalism, or destruction, and established procedures to be implemented if Native American skeletal remains are discovered.

Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 also addresses the disposition of Native American burials, protects such remains, and established the NAHC to resolve any related disputes.

Compliance with these regulations is mandatory for all projects; therefore, if human remains are encountered during Project implementation, work at the project site would stop, the Alameda County Coroner would be notified immediately, and no further disturbance would occur until the county coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. The remains would be protected from disturbance, vandalism, or destruction until such decision is made. If the human remains are determined to be from the historic-era, treatment, including excavation, documentation, analysis, and curation, will follow the archaeological Treatment and Monitoring Plan, as per CUL-3.A.iv. If the human remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner is required to notify the NAHC, which would determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD) within 24 hours. The MLD must complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal 235
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 63
and non-destructive analysis of Native American human remains and items associated with Native American burials. Pre-activity archaeological testing is to be included as part of the Archaeological Treatment and Monitoring Plan, per CUL-3.A.i. Archaeological testing prior to any ground disturbing activities would reduce the potential for disturbance of human remains during construction. However, it should be noted, archaeological testing would not eliminate the potential or degree to impact human remains, but would give the contractor more information on whether the resources are present and at what depths they could be encountered. The Reduced Grading Alternative, described in the Alternatives section, would be the most effective way to reduce the potential for adverse impacts. In addition, Mitigation Measure CUL-4 specifically requires training for all construction workers on the required regulations and procedures to be followed in the event that human burials are encountered.

Compliance with the mandatory regulations pertaining to human burials would reduce the potential for destruction or desecration of human remains, if encountered during project construction. Compliance with procedures defined in the archaeological Treatment and Monitoring Plan and/or in negotiation with the MLD will ensure that the treatment of human remains will be respectful, and will be mitigated to the satisfaction of consulting descendent populations. As a result, the impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

Source(s)
AIA Historical Directory of American Architects (AIA). 1970. “Knorr, Don Robert.” Available at:
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.

Beardsley, Richard K. 1948. Culture Sequences in Central California Archaeology. American Antiquity 14(1):1-28.

Beebe, Rose Marie, and Robert M. Senkewicz. 2001. Lands of Promise and Despair: Chronicles of Early California, 1535-1846. Berkeley: Heydey Books.

Bennett, Virginia Smith. 1978. Dublin Reflections and Bits of Valley History. Published by Dublin Friends of the Library. Union City, CA: Mill Creek Press.

Bennyhoff, James A., and Richard E. Hughes. 1987. Shell Bead and Ornament Exchange Networks Between California and the Western Great Basin. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History 64(2):79-175.

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.
236
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 64
________. 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-space2.pdf. Accessed January 2023.

City of Dublin. 2006. Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Mater Plan, and Dublin Village Historic Area Rezoning. Planning Application File No. PA 02-074. On file with the City of Dublin.

City of Dublin Community Development Department. 2014 (updated). Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan. Adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006, Resolution No. 149-06. Available online:
https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/7780/DVHASP-FULL-PDF10714?bidId=. Accessed April 2023. ____. 2022 (amended). General Plan. Available online:
https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30287/General-Plan-Update04192022-WEB. Accessed April 2023.

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.

Gerow, Bert A., with Roland W. Force. 1968. An Analysis of the University Village Complex with a Reappraisal of Central California Archaeology. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Groza, Randall Gannon. 2002. An AMS Chronology for Central California Olivella Shell Beads.

Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, San Francisco State University.

Hexcel.com. 2023. “History & Timeline.” Available at: https://www.hexcel.com/About/Historyand-Timeline. Accessed January 2023. 237
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 65
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.

Kyle, Douglas E., Mildred Brooke Hoover, Hero Eugene Rensch, Ethel Grace Rensch, and William N. Abeloe. 2002. Historic Spots in California, Fifth Edition. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.

Los Angeles Times. 1957 October 11. “Century Eng. Wil Change Name to Royal Industries.” Part Five, Page 9.

Minnear, Steven. 2018. Dublin California: A Brief History. Charleston, S.C.: The History Press.

NASA.gov. 2023. “NASA Orbiter Fleet.” Available at:
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/shuttleoperations/orbiters/columbia_info.htm.

Accessed January 2023.

National Park Service (NPS). 2006. National Register of Historic Places Registration Form for St.

Raymond’s Church, Record Number 06000242. Available at:
https://catalog.archives.gov/search?page=1&q=%22national%20register%20of%20histo ric%20places%22%2006000242. Accessed June 2023.

NPS. 2006. See National Park Service.

Oakland Tribune. 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. 238
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 66
________. 1985 November 13. “Building Permits – Dublin.” 16. ________. 1988 June 6. “Hexcel.” B-3.

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

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.

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.

VerPlanck, Christopher. 2003a. “Department of Parks and Recreation form: 7100 San Ramon Road, The Springs Apartments, Alamilla Springs.” P-01-010634, on file at Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Sonoma, CA. ________. 2003b. “Department of Parks and Recreation form: Dublin Pioneer Cemetery.” P-01- 010637, on file at Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Sonoma, CA. ________. 2003c. “Department of Parks and Recreation form: Old St. Raymond’s Church.” P-01- 010635, on file at Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Sonoma, CA. ________. 2003d “Department of Parks and Recreation form: Old Murray School.” P-01- 010636, on file at Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Sonoma, CA. ________. 2003e “Department of Parks and Recreation form: Green’s Store.” P-01-008150, on file at Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Sonoma, CA. ________. 2003f “Department of Parks and Recreation form: 11711 Dublin Boulevard.” P-01- 010656, on file at Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Sonoma, CA. 239
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 67
Section 4: Energy

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

4. ENERGY. Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or
operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
X
Environmental Setting
The proposed Project is located in the City of Dublin within Alameda County. Electric and natural gas services to Alameda County are provided by Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E).

In 2021, PG&E delivered approximately 78,588 gigawatt-hours of electricity within its service area (California Energy Commission 2023a). PG&E’s total natural gas throughput was approximately 4,467 million therms in 2021 (California Energy Commission 2023b). PG&E provides power from a variety of sources: biomass and biowaste, geothermal, small and large hydroelectric, solar, wind, natural gas, and nuclear (PG&E 2021).

In 2018, East Bay Community Energy (EBCE) began serving Dublin residential, business, and municipal electricity customers. To help meet the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions goals set in the City of Dublin’s Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond (discussed below), the Dublin City Council voted in January 2021 to set the default electricity option for Dublin residences to EBCE’s Renewable 100 service, which began in January 2022, and is sourced from California wind and solar facilities, including a new wind farm in Livermore. Customers can change their EBCE service or return to PG&E service at any time. All municipal electric accounts in Dublin have been powered by Renewable 100 since July 2019 (City of Dublin 2023).

Transportation, such as gasoline and diesel fuel consumption, is also an energy-consuming sector, and applicable to the proposed Project (diesel and gasoline fuel consumption during construction and operational activities). Transportation is the largest energy-consuming sector in California, accounting for approximately 34 percent of all energy use in the state in 2020 (EIA 2022a). Historically, gasoline and diesel fuel accounted for nearly all transportation-related energy demand; now, however, numerous transportation power options are available, including ethanol, natural gas, electricity, and hydrogen. Nonetheless, despite advancements in alternative fuels and clean-vehicle technologies, gasoline and diesel remain the primary fuels used for transportation in California, with 12.7 billion gasoline gallon equivalents of petroleum (GGEs) consumed in 2021 and 3.7 billion GGEs of diesel consumed in 2020 (DOE 2023). 240
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 68
Regulatory Framework
Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975. The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 established the first fuel economy standards for on-road motor vehicles sold in the United States. The National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration is responsible for establishing standards for vehicles and revising the existing standards. The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program was created to determine vehicle manufacturers’ compliance with the fuel economy standards. The EPA administers the testing program that generates the fuel economy data.

Energy Policy Acts of 1992 and 2005. The Energy Policy Act of 1992 was enacted to reduce dependence on imported petroleum and improve air quality by addressing all aspects of energy supply and demand, including alternative fuels, renewable energy, and energy efficiency. This law requires certain federal, state, and local government and private fleets to purchase alternate fuel vehicles. The act also defines “alternative fuels” to include fuels such as ethanol, natural gas, propane, hydrogen, electricity, and biodiesel.

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 was enacted on August 8, 2005. This law set federal energy management requirements for energy-efficient product procurement, energy savings performance contracts, building performance standards, renewable energy requirements, and use of alternative fuels. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 also amends existing regulations, including fuel economy testing procedures.

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Signed into law in December 2007, the Energy Independence and Security Act was enacted to increase the production of clean renewable fuels; increase the efficiency of products, buildings, and vehicles; improve the federal government’s energy performance; and increase U.S. energy security, develop renewable fuel production, and improve vehicle fuel economy. The Energy Independence and Security Act included the first increase in fuel economy standards for passenger cars since 1975. The act also included a new energy grant program for use by local governments in implementing energyefficiency initiatives, as well as a variety of green building incentives and programs.

Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards. On May 7, 2010, the final Light-Duty Vehicle GHG Emissions Standards and CAFE Standards were published in the Federal Register. Phase 1 of the emissions standards required that model year 2012–2016 vehicles meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide (CO2) per mile, which is equivalent to 35.5 miles per gallon, if the automobile industry were to meet this CO2 level solely through fuel economy improvements.

On March 31, 2022, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration finalized the CAFE Standards for model years 2024-2026. The final rule establishes standards that would require an industry-wide fleet average of approximately 49 miles per gallon for passenger cars and light trucks in model year 2026, by increasing fuel efficiency by 8 percent annually for model years 2024 and 2025, and 10 percent annually for model year 2026. 241
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 69
Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards. In September 2011, in response to a Presidential Memorandum issued in May 2010, EPA in coordination with National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHSTA) issued GHG emissions and fuel economy standards for medium and heavy duty trucks manufactured in model years 2014-2018, known as Phase 1 GHG Rule.

In October 2016, EPA and NHTSA jointly finalized Phase 2 standards for medium- and heavyduty vehicles through model year 2027 that will improve fuel efficiency and cut carbon pollution to reduce the impacts of climate change, while bolstering energy security and spurring manufacturing innovation.

On December 20, 2022, EPA adopted a final rule, “Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles: Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards,” that sets stronger emissions standards to further reduce air pollution, including pollutants that create ozone and particulate matter, from heavy-duty vehicles and engines starting in model year 2027. The final program includes new, more stringent emissions standards that cover a wider range of heavy-duty engine operating conditions compared to today's standards, and it requires these more stringent emissions standards to be met for a longer period of time of when these engines operate on the road.

This final rule is consistent with President Biden’s Executive Order, “Strengthening American Leadership in Clean Cars and Trucks” and is the first step in the Clean Trucks Plan.

City of Dublin General Plan. The City of Dublin General Plan, adopted in 1985 and amended in 2022, includes an Environmental Resources Management: Energy Conservation Element. The following implementing policies related to energy efficiency and conservation in new development would be applicable to the proposed Project (City of Dublin 2022):
• New development proposals shall be reviewed to ensure lighting levels needed for a safe and secure environment are provided—utilizing the most energy-efficient fixtures (in most cases, [light emitting diode] LED lights)—while avoiding over-lighting of sites. Smart lighting technology (e.g. sensors and/or timers) shall also be employed in interior and exterior lighting applications where appropriate.
• New development projects shall install LED streetlights in compliance with the City’s LED light standard.
• In new commercial and residential parking lots, require the installation of conduit to serve EV 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 (i.e. not individual, enclosed garages). • 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. Encourage landscaping conducive to solar panels in areas where appropriate.
242
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 70
• Promote and encourage photovoltaic demonstration projects in association with new development.

City of Dublin Climate Action Plan 2030. The City of Dublin adopted its Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond (CAP 2030) in September 2020, as a guiding document to identify ways in which the community and City can reduce GHG emissions, meet Dublin’s long-term climate action goals, and promote a healthy, prosperous community. The CAP 2030 focuses on the following strategies: 100 percent renewable and carbon-free electricity; building efficiency and electrification; sustainable mobility and land use; materials and waste management; and municipal leadership measures (City of Dublin 2020).

Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources (Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated)
Energy efficiency is a possible indicator of environmental impacts. The actual adverse physical environmental effects of energy use and the efficiency of energy use are detailed throughout this EIR and the Initial Study in Appendix A in the environmental topic-specific sections. For example, the use of energy for transportation sources (including construction equipment and haul trucks) leads to GHG emissions, the impacts of which are addressed in Section 3.9, Greenhouse Gas Emissions. There is no physical environmental effect associated with energy use that is not addressed in the environmental topic-specific sections of this EIR and the Initial Study in Appendix A.

The proposed Project activities would increase energy consumption for the duration of construction in the form of fossil fuels (e.g., gasoline, diesel fuel). Transportation energy use during construction would come from the transport and use of construction equipment (offroad), delivery and haul trucks (on-road), and construction employee passenger vehicles (onroad). Construction-related transportation energy use depends on the type and number of trips, vehicle miles traveled, fuel efficiency of vehicles, and travel mode. Most of the construction equipment used during demolition and construction activities would be gas- or diesel-powered equipment. The use of fuel by on-road and off-road vehicles would be temporary and would fluctuate according to the phase of construction. Construction fuel use under the proposed Project would cease upon completion of construction activities.

The annual energy consumption was estimated using the CalEEMod CO2 emissions calculations for the proposed construction activities, application of the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s CO2 emissions coefficients (EIA 2022b) to estimate fuel consumption for construction activities, and The Climate Registry’s 2022 Default Emission Factors (The Climate Registry 2022) to estimate the energy content per fuel type. Additional modeling assumptions and more details are provided in Section 3.4, Air Quality, and Appendix D. Construction and operational energy consumption associated with the proposed Project is summarized in Table 7: Construction and Operational Energy Consumption.
243
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 71
Table 7: Construction and Operational Energy Consumption Energy Consuming Activity Energy
Requirement
Unit Annual Energy
Consumption
(MMBtu)
Construction Diesel Consumption (amortized)1 1,278 gal/year 176 Construction Gasoline Consumption (amortized)1 201 gal/year 25 Construction Fuel Subtotal (amortized) - - 202
Building Electricity Consumption 2 1,209,922 kWh/year 4,128 Building Operations Energy Subtotal - - 4,128
Transportation Electricity Consumption 2 32,528 kWh/year 111 Transportation Diesel Consumption 2 6,174 gal/year 852
Transportation Gasoline Consumption 2 49,324 gal/year 6,166 Transportation Subtotal - - 7,128
Total Project Energy Requirement - - 11,458
Existing Land Uses Energy Requirement - - 12,236
Net Project Total - - (778)
Notes: gal/year = gallons per year; kWh/year = kilowatt hours per year; MMBtu = million British thermal units 1 Since construction-related energy demand would cease upon completion of construction, energy demand associated with construction of the proposed Project was amortized over the proposed Project lifetime. The assumed amortization period is 30 years, based on the typically assumed project lifetime based on other air districts (e.g., South Coast Air Quality Management District [2008]). 2 The operational energy consumption estimates assumed the proposed Project would include 18,000 square feet of office space, 36,500 square feet of light industrial space, and 70,804 square feet of warehousing space. Based on the latest site plan, it is anticipated the proposed Project would include 18,000 square feet of office space, 30,000 square feet of light industrial space, and 77,304 square feet of warehousing space. As light industrial land uses generate higher daily vehicle trips than warehousing land uses, daily vehicle trips and the associated energy consumption due to fuel usage is anticipated to be lower (i.e., the energy estimates assumed the proposed Project would generate 494 daily trips, based on the 2022 Transportation Impact Study (W-Trans 2022); however, the proposed Project based on the updated site plan is anticipated to generate approximately 468 daily trips). Similarly, based on California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) default data, building energy consumption rates for light industrial land uses are higher than building energy consumption rates for warehousing space. As such, the energy consumption presented above is conservative since fuel consumption and electricity consumption would be lower.

Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would result in a higher net reduction in energy consumption compared to existing conditions.

Based on the anticipated phasing of the construction activities, the anticipated equipment and construction work staff, the temporary nature of construction, and the project type, the proposed Project would not include unusual characteristics that would necessitate the use of construction equipment that is less energy-efficient than the equipment used at comparable construction sites.

In addition, construction contractors are required, in accordance with Mitigation Measure AQ1 and the CARB Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling, to minimize the idling time of construction equipment and trucks by shutting equipment off when it’s not in use or reducing the idling time to 5 minutes. Per Mitigation Measure AQ-1, construction contractors would also 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.
244
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 72
The proposed Project would redevelop an existing industrial building consisting of research and development land uses, with a new building approximately double the size of the existing building, consisting of office, warehouse, and light industrial land uses. Although the proposed Project is approximately double the size of the existing building, as shown in Table 7 the proposed Project would result in a net reduction in energy consumption, primarily related to improved building energy standards and eliminating natural gas infrastructure.

Therefore, energy consumption associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project would not be inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary with Mitigation Measure AQ-1 incorporated. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation. (b) Conflict with local plan for renewable energy (No Impact) The proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct any state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency and there would be no impact. See the Initial Study in Appendix A for the complete analysis.

Source(s)
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023a. 2021 Electricity Consumption by Entity: Pacific Gas & Electric Company. Available online: http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbyutil.aspx.

Accessed February 2023.
____. 2023b. 2021 Gas Consumption by Entity: Pacific Gas & Electric Company. Available online:
http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbyutil.aspx. Accessed February 2023.

City of Dublin. 2020. Climate Action Plan 2030 and Beyond. September. Available online:
https://dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/24447/Climate-Action-Plan-2030-AndBeyond. Accessed March 2023. ____. 2022. General Plan. Available online:
https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30287/General-Plan-Update04192022-WEB. Accessed March 2023. ____. 2023. Energy. Available online: https://dublin.ca.gov/2032/Energy. Accessed March 2023.

Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E). 2021. Power Content Label. Available online:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/4653. Accessed February 2023.

South Coast Air Quality Management District. 2008. Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold. Available online:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)- ceqa-significance-thresholds/ghgboardsynopsis.pdf?sfvrsn=2. Accessed February 2023.

The Climate Registry. 2022. Default Emission Factor Document. May. Available online:
https://theclimateregistry.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/2022-Default-EmissionFactors-Final.pdf. Accessed February 2023. 245
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 73
United States Department of Energy (DOE). 2023. Alternative Fuels Data Center: California Transportation Data for Alternative Fuels and Vehicles. Available online:
https://afdc.energy.gov/states/ca. Accessed April 2023.

United States Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2022a. State Profile and Energy Estimates: California. Available online: https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2.

Accessed February 2023.
____. 2022b. Carbon Dioxide Emissions Coefficients. October. Available online:
https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/co2_vol_mass.php. Accessed February 2023.

W Traffic Engineering Transportation Planning (W-Trans). 2022. Final Transportation Impact Study for the Hexcel Redevelopment Project. December.
246
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 74
This page intentionally left blank
247
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 75
Section 5: Geology and Soils

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

5. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated
on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the
area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault?
X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project,
and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
X
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
X
248
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 76
Environmental Setting
Seismic Hazards
The Project site is situated in a seismically active area within the Diablo Range, along the margin of the eastern Diablo Hills and the western edge of the Livermore Valley. The fault trace of the active Calaveras Fault is approximately 965 feet east of the Project site, and the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone associated with the Calaveras Fault is approximately 450 feet east of the Project site (DOC 2023). The active Pleasanton Fault is approximately 2.4 miles east of the Project site (Jennings and Bryant 2010). Other active faults in the Project region include a portion of the Las Positas Fault (approximately 11.7 miles to the southeast), the Greenville Fault (approximately 12.5 miles to the northeast), and the Hayward Fault Zone (approximately 7.3 miles to the southwest).

The Project site is located within an Earthquake Zone of Required Investigation for liquefaction as delineated by the California Geological Survey (CGS) (DOC 2023).

Soils
Based on a review of Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) soil survey data, native soil at the Project site consists of the Yolo loam (calcareous substratum, 0 to 6 percent slopes) soil type (NRCS 2022).

A preliminary geotechnical investigation was prepared for the proposed Project, which included four soil borings in the developed portion of the Project site north of Dublin Creek (Cornerstone Earth Group [Cornerstone] 2022). The results of soil borings indicated that the near-surface soils consist of undocumented artificial fill consisting of clay with variable amounts of sand and gravel, and clayey sand with gravel, to depths ranging from 1.5 to 5 feet below the ground surface (bgs). Below the artificial fill, clay with sand and silt was present to the maximum soil boring depth of 40 feet bgs.

Paleontological Resources
The near-surface soils at the Project site consist of artificial fill material to depths ranging from

1.5 to 5 feet bgs (Cornerstone 2022). Native sediments at the Project site beneath the artificial fill consist of the late Miocene to early Pliocene-age Contra Costa Group, which includes the Orinda and Moraga Formations. The Contra Costa Group is comprised of nonmarine sedimentary rocks including sandstone, conglomerate, shale, and minor claystone, limestone, and tuff (Wagner et al. 1991).

A search of the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP) database indicates there are over 40 recorded vertebrate fossil sites from within the Contra Costa Group (UCMP 2023). Most of these sites are in Contra Costa County; however, five of the sites are within Alameda County. The closest recorded vertebrate fossil site from within the Contra Costa Group is Bolenas Creek, approximately 6.5 miles northwest of the Project site (UCMP 2023). 249
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 77
Paleontological Sensitivity Analysis
A paleontologically sensitive geologic formation is one that is rated high for potential paleontological productivity (i.e., the recorded abundance and types of fossil specimens, and the number of previously recorded fossil sites) and is known to have produced unique, scientifically important fossils. Exposures of a specific geologic formation at any given Project site are most likely to yield fossil remains representing particular species or quantities similar to those previously recorded from that geologic formation in other locations. Therefore, the paleontological sensitivity determination of a rock formation is based primarily on the types and numbers of fossils that have been previously recorded from that formation.

In its standard guidelines for assessment and mitigation of adverse impacts on paleontological resources, the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP 2010) established four categories of sensitivity for paleontological resources: high, low, no, and undetermined. Areas where fossils have been previously found are considered to have a high sensitivity and a high potential to produce fossils. Areas that are not sedimentary in origin and that have not been known to produce fossils in the past typically are considered to have low sensitivity. Areas consisting of high-grade metamorphic rocks (e.g., gneisses and schists) and plutonic igneous rocks (e.g., granites and diorites) are considered to have no sensitivity. Areas that have not had any previous paleontological resource surveys or fossil finds are considered to be of undetermined sensitivity until surveys are performed. After reconnaissance surveys, a qualified paleontologist can determine whether the area of undetermined sensitivity should be categorized as having high, low, or no sensitivity. In keeping with the SVP significance criteria, all vertebrate fossils are generally categorized as being of potentially significant scientific value.

The near-surface artificial fill consists of materials that were excavated from another location, transported to the Project site, and then graded and compacted. During the excavation and subsequent construction process, any fossils that may have been present in the original materials would have been destroyed. Therefore, the artificial fill is not paleontologically sensitive.

Because of the large number of vertebrate fossils that have been recovered from the Contra Costa Group, it is considered to be of high paleontological sensitivity.

Regulatory Framework
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Alquist-Priolo Act) (PRC Sections 2621–2630) was passed in 1972 to reduce the hazard of surface faulting to structures designed for human occupancy. The Alquist-Priolo Act requires the State Geologist to establish regulatory zones known as Earthquake Fault Zones around the surface traces of active faults and to issue appropriate maps. Before a project can be permitted in a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, cities and counties must require a geologic investigation to demonstrate that proposed structures would not be constructed across active faults. 250
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 78
Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990 (PRC Sections 2690–2699.6) addresses earthquake hazards from non-surface fault rupture, including liquefaction and seismically induced landslides. The act established a mapping program for areas that have the potential for liquefaction, landslide, strong ground shaking, or other earthquake and geologic hazards. The act also specifies that the lead agency for a project may withhold development permits until geologic or soils investigations are conducted for specific sites and mitigation measures are incorporated into plans to reduce hazards associated with seismicity and unstable soils.

California Building Standards Code
The California Building Standards Code (CBC) (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) provides minimum standards for building design in California. The CBC applies to building design and construction in the state and is based on the federal Uniform Building Code (UBC) used widely throughout the country (generally adopted on a state-by-state or district-by-district basis). The CBC has been modified for California conditions with numerous more detailed or more stringent regulations. The State earthquake protection law (California Health and Safety Code, Section 19100 et seq.) requires that structures be designed to resist stresses produced by lateral forces caused by earthquakes. The CBC requires that any structure designed for a project site undergo a seismic design evaluation that assigns the structure to one of six categories, A–F; Category F structures require the most earthquake-resistant design. The CBC philosophy focuses on “collapse prevention,” meaning that structures are to be designed to prevent collapse during the maximum level of ground shaking that could reasonably be expected to occur at a site. CBC Chapter 16 specifies exactly how each seismic-design category is to be determined on a site-specific basis, based on site-specific soil characteristics and proximity to potential seismic hazards. CBC Chapter 18 regulates the analysis of expansive soils, slope instability, liquefaction, and surface rupture attributable to faulting or lateral spreading, along with an evaluation of lateral pressures on basement and retaining walls, liquefaction and loss of soil strength, and lateral movement or reduction of the foundation’s soil-bearing capacity.

Dublin Municipal Code Section Chapter 7.16, Grading Regulations The City of Dublin Grading Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 7.16) requires a geologic/soil investigation report, preliminary grading plans, proposed provisions for storm drainage control, and any existing or proposed flood control in the vicinity of the grading. A conceptual plan for erosion and sediment control is also required, including both temporary facilities and long-term site stabilization features such as planting or seeding for the area affected by the proposed grading. Chapter 7.16 prohibits grading operations during the rainy season except upon a clear demonstration, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, that at no stage of the work will there be any substantial risk of increased sediment discharge from the site. Should grading be permitted during the rainy season, the smallest practicable area of erodible land must be exposed at any one time during grading operations and the time of exposure must be minimized.
251
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 79
City of Dublin General Plan
Chapter 8.0 of the City of Dublin General Plan outlines policies and programs related to seismic safety, safety and emergency preparedness. The following policies related to geology and soils are applicable to the proposed project:
• Guiding Policy 8.2.1.A.1. Geologic hazards shall be mitigated or development shall be located away from geologic hazards in order to preserve life, protect property, and reasonably limit the financial risks to the City of Dublin and other public agencies that would result from damage to poorly located public facilities. • Implementing Policy 8.2.1.B.1. Structural and Grading Requirements a. All structures shall be designed to the standards delineated in the Dublin Building Code and Dublin’s Grading Ordinance. A “design earthquake” shall be established by an engineering geologist for each structure for which ground shaking is a significant design factor.
b. Structures intended for human occupancy shall be at least 50 feet from any active fault trace; freestanding garages and storage structures may be as close as 25 feet. These distances may be reduced based on adequate exploration to accurately locate the fault trace. Generally, facilities should not be built astride potential rupture zones, although certain low risk facilities may be considered. Critical facilities that must cross a fault, such as oil, gas, and water lines, shall be designed to accommodate the maximum expected offset from fault rupture. Site specific evaluations shall determine the maximum credible offset.

Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Seismic hazards (No Impact to Less than Significant Impact) The impact from seismic hazards such as seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, lateral spreading, landslides and settlement would be less than significant. There would be no impact related to surface fault rupture as the Project site is not in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. See the Initial Study in Appendix A for the complete analysis. (b) Erosion/topsoil loss (Less than Significant)
The Project applicant is required by law to prepare a SWPPP and implement site-specific BMPs specifically designed to prevent erosion. Furthermore, the Project applicant is required to implement the provisions of City Municipal Code Chapter 7.16, which require grading and drainage plans that identify measures to reduce erosion, and which generally prohibits grading activities during the winter rainy season. Therefore, impacts from construction-related soil erosion would be less than significant. See the Initial Study in Appendix A for the complete analysis.
(c-d) Soil stability (Less Than Significant Impact)
Design review performed through the City’s permitting process would ensure compliance with the requirements of the CBC and the City’s building standards. Therefore, because the Project 252
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 80
would implement measures to comply with the CBC and the City’s building standards, impacts from construction and operation related to unstable soils and soil expansion would be less than significant. See the Initial Study in Appendix A for the complete analysis. (e) Soil capability to support wastewater disposal, including septic (No Impact) The proposed Project would not require installation of a septic system or alternative wastewater disposal system; therefore, there would be no impact from Project construction or operation. See the Initial Study in Appendix A for the complete analysis. (f) Unique geologic feature/paleontological resources (No Impact to Less Than Significant With Mitigation)
Unique Geologic Feature
A unique geologic feature consists of a major natural element that stands out in the landscape, such as a large and scenic river, gorge, waterfall, volcanic cinder cone, lava field, or glacier.

There are no unique geologic features at the Project site or within the Project viewshed. Thus, there would be no impact to unique geologic features from Project construction or operation.

Paleontological Resources – Construction
As discussed previously, the Project site is composed of artificial fill to depths ranging from 1.5 to 5 feet, with native Contra Costa Group sediments below the fill. Most grading and earthmoving activities at the Project site would extend to a maximum depth of 2 to 3 feet below the ground surface, and therefore would generally be confined to the artificial fill material, which is not paleontologically sensitive. However, in areas where the artificial fill only extends to 1.5 feet, excavation and grading would encounter the native Contra Costa Group materials, which are of high paleontological sensitivity. Furthermore, excavation to a maximum depth of approximately 12 feet would occur at the proposed on-site stormwater drainage pumps, which would also encounter the paleontologically sensitive Contra Costa Group materials. Therefore, project-related earthmoving activities could result in accidental damage to, or destruction of unique paleontological resources, and this impact would be potentially significant.

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.
253
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 81
• 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.

Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would reduce potential impacts to unique paleontological resources 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. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, potential construction-related impacts to unique paleontological resources would be less than significant with mitigation.

Paleontological Resources – Operation
Because Project operation would not involve ground-disturbing activities, there would be no impact to unique paleontological resources.

Source(s)
California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2023. DOC Maps Data Viewer—Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, and Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones. Available:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/DataViewer/. Accessed January 11, 2023.

Cornerstone Earth Group (Cornerstone). 2022. Geotechnical Investigation, Dublin Boulevard Industrial, 11711 Dublin Boulevard, Dublin, California. Cornerstone Project No. 681-12-1.

Sunnyvale, CA.

Jennings, C.W. and W.A. Bryant. 2010. 2010 Fault Activity Map of California. Available:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/App/index.html. Accessed January 11, 2022.

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2022. Web Soil Survey. Available:
http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm. Accessed January 11, 2022.

Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP). 2010. Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee. 254
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 82
University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP). 2023. Paleontological Collections Database. Available: https://ucmpdb.berkeley.edu/about.shtml. Accessed January 25, 2022.

Wagner, D.L., E.J. Bortugno, and R.D. McJunkin. 1991. Geologic Map of the San Francisco-San Jose Quadrangle, California, 1:250,000. Regional Geologic Map Series, Map No. 5A.

California Division of Mines and Geology. Sacramento, CA. 255
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 83
Section 6: Hazards and Hazardous Materials

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

6. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within ¼ mile of an existing or proposed school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
X
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
X
Environmental Setting
The Project site has been used since the 1960s as a research and development facility, which tests epoxy resins and composites primarily for aerospace and other applications. The laboratories were used for small-scale testing, while the building located south of the offices/laboratories (referred to by Hexcel as the “Hi Bay”) was used to test larger quantities of carbon fiber plates. Part of the research activities include testing prefabricated prototype 256
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 84
carbon fiber plates. The research activities include chemical testing and reactions of the carbon fiber plates, as well as climate or extreme condition testing of the plates including extreme heat, cold, pressure, and electrical conditions, and stress testing. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was performed by Ardent Environmental Group (Ardent) in 2022. The main chemicals used at the site include petroleum oils and lubricants, non-chlorinated solvents, metals (such as chromium and aluminum), and acids. According to waste records and a 1994 chemical inventory, historical chemical uses included halogenated solvents, including 1,1,1- trichloroethane (1,1,1-TCA) and trichloroethene (TCE). Small containers of the different testing chemicals were stored in approximately 10 fire cabinets in a designated Hazardous Waste and Storage Area, while larger quantities of virgin chemicals and wastes were stored in 55-gallon drums in the Hazardous Waste and Storage Area. The following areas of concern were noted in the Phase I ESA (Ardent 2022).
• Area of Chemical Use, Storage, and/or Handling. Chemicals are used, stored, and/or handled in the laboratories (existing and historical), Hi Bay area, and within the hazardous waste and storage area of the site.
• Former 500-Gallon Waste Chromic Acid Underground Storage Tank (UST, Abandoned InPlace in 1988). This Underground Storage Tank (UST) was located immediately east of the Hi Bay portion of the building and was used to containerize waste acid wash reportedly consisting of deionized water, sulfuric acid, and sodium dichromate generated from the etching of aluminum panels. Soil and groundwater in the vicinity of this UST were investigated in the late 1980s under the direction and oversight of the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH). Laboratory results indicated no detectable to low concentrations of hexavalent chromium, trivalent chromium, and aluminum. Based on these results, ACDEH allowed Hexcel to abandon the UST in-place by filling the tank with a cement slurry.
• Recently Removed 520-Gallon Waste Chromic Acid UST (2021). This UST was formerly located immediately east of the on-site hazardous waste and storage area and accepted waste from accidental spills from this area. Floor drains in the hazardous waste and storage area directed any accidental spills of chemicals to the tank. The UST was removed in April 2021 under the direction and oversight of the ACDEH. Following removal, two soil samples were collected from within the UST excavation. Laboratory results indicated no detectable concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons, and no detectable to low concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), namely acetone, at levels that were well below federal and state thresholds. Based on these results, the ACDEH issued a No Further Action letter dated July 20, 2021.
• Asbestos and Lead-Based Paint. The eastern portion of the existing building was constructed in 1962, with subsequent additions over the years. Based on the age of the building, Ardent (2022) concluded that asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) and leadbased paint are likely present.

As part of the Phase I ESA, Ardent (2022) retained Environmental Database Report (EDR) to perform a search of federal, State, and tribal hazardous materials databases, and retained Antea Group to perform a review of identified hazardous materials sites near the Project site. 257
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 85
The database searches included those sites that are identified as part of the Cortese List. The Project is listed in the SWRCB’s GeoTracker database as a Cleanup Program Site; however, cleanup program sites are not considered part of the Cortese List. No hazardous materials sites were determined to represent a hazard for the proposed Project (Ardent 2022).

Regulatory Framework
California Occupational Safety and Health Administration The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) has the primary responsibility for developing and enforcing workplace safety regulations within California. The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration enforces hazard communication program regulations that contain training and information requirements, including procedures for identifying and labeling hazardous substances, communicating hazard information related to hazardous substances and their handling, and preparation of health and safety plans to protect workers and employees at hazardous waste sites. Cal/OSHA regulations also include requirements for protective clothing, training, and limits on exposure to hazardous materials.

Cal/OSHA also enforces occupational health and safety regulations specific to lead (CCR Title 8 Section 1532.1) and asbestos (CCR Title 8 Section 1529) investigation and abatement.

California Department of Toxic Substances Control
The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) implements the State’s hazardous waste management program for the California Environmental Protection Agency.

DTSC has the primary regulatory responsibility, with delegation of enforcement to local jurisdictions that enter into agreements with DTSC, for the management of hazardous materials (including remediation) and the generation, transport, and disposal of hazardous waste under the authority of California’s Hazardous Waste Control Law (California Health and Safety Code Section 25100, et seq.).

San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
The San Francisco Bay RWQCB is authorized by the State Water Resources Control Board to enforce provisions of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1969. This act gives the San Francisco Bay RWQCB authority to require groundwater investigations when the quality of groundwater or surface waters of the state is threatened and to require remediation of the site, if necessary.

Hazardous Waste Transportation
Statutory requirements governing hazardous waste transportation in California are contained in the California Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5, Articles 6.5, 6.6, and 13.

Hazardous waste transporters must have a valid registration permit issued by DTSC. In addition, hazardous waste transporters must comply with a variety of other State and federal regulations, including the California Vehicle Code (CCR Title 13); California State Fire Marshal Regulations (CCR Title 19); U.S. Department of Transportation regulations (Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations); and USEPA regulations (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations). 258
City of Dublin HEXCEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Focused EIR | Page 86
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2, adopted December 15, 1976, regulates hazardous pollutants from asbestos demolition, renovation, and manufacturing activities. The purpose of the rule is to control emissions of asbestos to the atmosphere during demolition, renovation, milling and manufacturing and establish appropriate waste disposal procedures. The rule sets out specific procedures to be followed and methods for reducing hazards from asbestos-containing materials during such activities.

Senate Bill 1082 – California Environmental Protection Agency’s Unified Program In 1993, Senate Bill 1082 gave the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) the authority and responsibility to establish a unified hazardous waste and hazardous materials management and regulatory program, commonly referred to as the Unified Program. The Unified Program is overseen by CalEPA with support from DTSC, RWQCBs, the Office of Emergency Services (OES), and the State Fire Marshal. The purpose of this program is to consolidate and coordinate hazardous materials and hazardous waste programs, and to ensure that they are consistently implemented throughout the state. The Unified Program includes:

Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventories (Business Plans), California Accidental Release Prevention Program, Underground Storage Tank Program, Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act Program, Hazardous Waste Generator and Onsite Hazardous Waste Treatment (tiered permitting) Programs, and California Uniform Fire Code Hazardous Material Management Plans and Hazardous Material Inventory Statements.

State law requires county and local agencies to implement the Unified Program. The agency in charge of implementing the program is called the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). The Alameda County Department of Environmental Health is the designated CUPA for the county. In addition to the CUPA, other local agencies, such as the City of Dublin, help to implement the Unified Program.

Dublin City CouncilSeptember 17, 2024

Dublin City Council
September 17, 2024