HomeMy WebLinkAbout86-049 San Ramon Rd Specific Plan Amendment Study
CITY OF DUBLIN
PLANNIN:; aHITSSION
SUPPLEMENTARY STAFF REPORT
M=eting Date: September 2, 1986
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Planning Staff ~ J:r
PA 86-049 San Ramon Road Specific Plan Amendment
Study covering the 1.4+ acre Moret property and,
as directed by the Dublin City Council at its
June 23, 1986, hearing, the remaining acreage in
the 13.0+ acre Area 3 portion of the San Ramon
Road Specific Plan above and beyond the Moret
property and the 4.8+ acre Dublin Town & Country
Shopping Center property. The properties in
question include: I) Moret holding (7436 San
Ramon Road); 2) Rivers-Barton holding
(7400 San Ramon Road); 3) Canmercial Property,
Ltd. holding (7372 San Ramon Road);
4) Nichandros holding (7360 San Ramon Road); and
5) East Bay Iceland, Inc. holding (7212 San
Ramon Road).
TO:
FROM:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Specific Plan Amendment Study was initially considered at the Planning
Commission meeting of August 18, 1986. The Staff Report prepared for that
meeting outlined specific recanmended amendments to three of the sections of
the existing San Ramon Road Specific Plan.
In response to the recanmended changes outlined by Staff for the Land Use
Section of the Plan, the Commission directed Staff to revise the Draft
Resolution prepared for the August 18, 1986 meeting to reflect the following
changes, I) delete text which would have provided for the formation of Area 3B
(Sub-Area of Area 3 of the Plan, consisting of the 1.4+ acre Moret Property)
which would have allowed that portion of the Plan to be developed
"predominantly" by Office-type uses, and 2) provide text amending the Land Use
Plan Section of the Plan to pennit limited occupancy (25% maximum) by Personal
Service, Financial and Office Uses, regardless of property size.
The Commission indicated consensus support for the recanmended text changes to
the other two sections where amendments had been proposed by Staff (the
Circulation System Section and the General Development Criteria Section).
The Draft Resolution regarding the Specific Plan Amendment Study has been
adjusted to reflect the Planning Commission's direction (see Exhibit B).
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on August 18, 1986, Staff Report and the above Staff Report, Staff
recanmends the Commission proceed as follows:
FORMAT:
I)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Reopen public hearing.
Hear Staff presentation.
Hear Applicant and public presentations.
Close public hearing and deliberate.
Consider and act on two draft Resolutions.
1) A Draft Resolution regarding the Negative Declaration
of Environmental Significance for PA 86-049.
2) A Revised Draft Resolution regarding the Specific Plan
Amendment Study, for PA 86-049.
ITEM NO.
3. L./
COPIES TO: Owners
File PA 86-049
ACTION: Staff reconrnends the Planning Conmission adopt the
attached Resolutions (Exhibit A approving the Negative Declaration
of Environmental Significance for PA 86-049 and Exhibit B
reconrnending that the City Council make specific amendments to the
San Ramon Road Specific Plan).
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A - Draft Resolution approving the Negative Declaration of
Environmental Significance for PA 86-049.
Exhibit B - Revised Draft Resolution reconrnending the City Council make
specific amendments to the San Ramon Road Specific Plan
Amendment.
-2-
RESOLUTION 00. 86-
A RESOLUTION OF THE P~ CCMrrSSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AOOPI'TIG A NEX:;ATIVE DOCLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICAOCE
CON:::ERNllG PA 86-049 SAN IWDN ROAD SPOCIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT SIUDY -
AMENDMENT TO ARPA 3
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as
amended together with the State's administrative guidelines for implementation
of the California Environmental Quality Act and City environmental regulations,
requires that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impact and that
environmental dcx::wnents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has
been prepared for PA 86-049 by the Dublin Planning Department; and
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration for the San Ramon Road Specific
Plan was prepared by the Dublin Planning Department; and
WHEREAS, the Dublin City Council did review and adopt the Negative
Declaration for the San Ramon Road Specific Plan at a public hearing on
August 22, 1983, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Cornnission did hold public hearings on August
18, 1986, and September 2, 1986, to consider the San Ramon Road Specific Plan
Amendment Study; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearings was given in all
aspects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Cornnission did review PA 86-049 relative to
the previously adopted Negative Declaration for the San Ramon Road Specific
Plan and relative to the Negative Declaration prepared for the proposed
Specific Plan Amendment;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Corrrnission
finds that:
I. The project, PA 86-049, will not have any significant environmental
impacts and is consistent with the infonnation in the Negative
Declaration prepared for the San Ramon Road Specific Plan and the
Negative Declaration prepared for the subject Specific Plan Amendment
Study.
2. The Negative Declaration has been prepared and prcx::essed in accordance
with State and Local Environmental Law and Guideline Regulations and that
it is adequate and complete.
PASSED, APPROVED AND AOOPl'ED this 2nd day of September, 1986.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT :
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Planning Director
r:VH,I:RI T, A
~f,... . W7
-pI'" ~~-c-
f< Q...S 0 Il-l t 1 '0 V1
N!J' f)<:z c.. .
RESOLUTION 00. 86-
A RESOLUl'ION OF 'mE PLANNIN:; CXM1ISSION
OF 'mE CITY OF DUBLIN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REXXM1ENDTIG THAT 'mE CITY ~rr.. APPROVE AN AMENDMENl' TO 'mE
SAN RAM)N ROAD SPOCIFIC PIAN
PA 86-049 SAN RAIDN ROAD SPOCIFIC PLAN - AMENDMENl' TO ARPA 3
WHEREAS, Roy J. and Ula D. MJret requested on March 10, 1986, that
the Dublin City Council consider authorizing a Specific Plan Amendment Study of
a portion of Area 3 of the San Ramon Road Specific Plan (PA 86-018); and
WHEREAS, the City Council, at its regularly scheduled meeting of
April 14, 1986, authorized the preparation of a Specific Plan Amendment Study
to consider the merits of developing the 1.4+ acre MJret property as an office
development, amending the land use restriction in the Specific Plan which
limits the amount of office use that can be established in Area 3 of the
Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, consistent with the Planning
Conmission's recommendations on June 15, 1986, regarding PA 86-050.1 and .2,
directed by minute order at their June 23, 1986, meeting that the Study be
expanded to include the remaining, unstudied portion of Area 3; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Cannission did hold public hearings to
consider the Amendment on August 18, 1986 and September 2, 1986; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all
aspects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Land
Use Section of the Specific Plan be amended to establish a new Sub-Area in the
Plan covering the Moret property (providing development which would be
"predominantly" Office use in nature) and to further adjust the Land Use
Section to allow uses in the remaining portions of Area 3 of the Plan to
provide for up to 25% occupancy by Personal Service, Financial or Office uses
and to also adjust the Circulation System Section and General Development
Criteria Sections of the Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Conmission did hear and consider all said
reports, recommendations and testimony as herein set forth; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Conmission provided consensus direction at
their August 18, 1986, meeting for Staff to adjust the Draft Resolution
prepared for the Specific Plan Amendment to eliminate any reference to the
creation of a new Sub-Area in the Plan for the MJret property and to further
adjust the Draft Resolution to have it reflect an amendment to the Land Use
Section of the Plan to provide for properties in Area 3 of the Plan (above and
beyond the Dublin Town and Country Shopping Center property) to be developed
with uses including a maximum 25% occupancy (cumulative total) by Personal
Service, Financial, and Office uses; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to State and City environmental regulations, a
Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been previously adopted
for the Specific Plan Amendment Study (Planning Conmission Resolution
No. 86- ); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Cannission finds that the proposed amendments
to the San Ramon Road Specific Plan Amendment will not have a significant
environmental impact; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Specific Plan Amendments are appropriate for
the subject properties in tenus of providing for future development of land
uses which will be compatible to existing and proposed land uses and will not
overburden public services; and
R (V I.J "5~d
rVl!lnlT k DY;J ~ R..o...solu-60J-1
tj~ildD, U (1f/iOVI'0
It :v,Q n d wt.A,., t::
WHEREAS, the proposed Specific Plan Amendrrents will not have
substantial adverse effects on health or safety, or be substantially
detrimental to the public welfare, or be injurious to property or public
improvements;
NCM, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT 'mE Planning Ccxrmission
recorrrnends that the City Council amend the Land Use Plan Section of the San
Ramon Road Specific Plan for the 8.4+ acre "remainder" of Area 3 (above and
beyond Area 3A encompassing the 4.8+ acre Dublin Town & Country Shopping Center
property) to permit limited occupancy by Personal Service, Financial and Office
Uses irregardless of property size and subject to the following limitations:
- Up to a maximum occupancy of 25% of the total gross floor area of any
development ( cumulative total) can be for Personal Service, Financial or
Office Uses, as defined in the San Ramon Road Specific Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Planning Ccxrmission recommends that
the City Council amend the Circulation System Section of the San Ramon Road
Specific Plan to add the following direction to future development projects
covering properties in Area 3 of the Plan located north of the extension of
Amador Valley Boulevard.
The following "Key Items" shall be added to the Circulation System Section.
- Restrict access to San Ramon Road to the development of a single "shared
driveway" between the Moret property and the Rivers-Barton property.
- Development of the "shared driveway" with a 35 foot width with 25 foot curb
radius returns and a restriction of anyon-site circulation connection to
the driveway wi thin 50 feet of the San Ramon Road curb line.
- Development of two "shared driveways" on the north side of the Amador Valley
Boulevard extension respectively located 120+ feet and 430+ feet west of San
Ramon Road.
- Refinement to the location and nature of pedestrian;bicycle easements from
Shadow Drive through to San Ramon Road.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT 'mE Planning Ccxrmission recommends that
the City Council amend the General Development Criteria Section of the San
Ramon Road Specific Plan as follows:
Sub-Category 2 - Compatibility of Uses - The following text is added to this
Sub-Category:
Applications for Planned Development Zoning in Area 3 of the
Plan involving commercial lands adjoining existing or planned
multi-story construction shall have included as part of the
development plan review application plan sections to detail the
proximity and relationship of the relative land uses.
Redevelopment of the East Bay Iceland, Inc. property shall
reflect a site plan layout which attempts to maximize the
coordination between its planned uses and the adjoining Dublin
Town & Country Shopping Center property to the north as
regards building location and orientation, vehicular and
pedestrian cross access, landscape treatment and use of
ancillary structures (location and design).
Sub-Category 3 - Circulation Improvements - The following text is added to
this Sub-Category:
Circulation improvements established in conjunction with the
development of the portion of Area 3 of the Plan located north
of the Amador Valley Boulevard extension shall reflect the
Findings and Recommendations of the TJKM Memorandum dated April
23, 1986 (see Appendix B).
Development of the 0.4 acre stem remainder (346+' x 51+')
extending easterly to San Ramon Road from the southeast corner
of Area 2 of the Plan shall be subject to the Planned
Development (PD) Rezoning process and shall be developed as part
-2-
of a coordinated site plan tying the stem either to the Morrison
Homes-Kildara Project and/or to the adjoining properties located
north or south of the stem.
Sub-Category 4 - Physical Constraints - The following text is added to this
Sub-Category:
Geologic Reports prepared in conjunction with the Developrrent
Plan requests covering undeveloped or marginally developed
properties in Area 3 of the Plan may require on-site sub-surface
trenching to assess potential geotechnical hazards.
Sub-Category 5 - Noise - The following text is added to this Sub-Category:
Acoustical Reports may be required to be prepared in
conjunction with the building permit process for any new
ccmnercial or residential developments in the Plan Aera. Where
required, said studies shall determine existing and future
noise levels and shall outline specific construction and design
measures that will be taken, as necessary, to provide the
appropriate noise attenuation.
Sub-Category 6 - Setbacks - The following text is added to this Sub-Category:
Building setbacks for new development in Area 3 adj acent to the
easterly limits of Area 2 can be reduced to 15 feet if it can be
demonstrated that visual and acoustic privacy for existing or
planned residential uses in Area 2 can be provided with this
lesser setback standard.
The setback standard observed at the northern limit of Area 3
shall be determined at the time of development plan review. The
building location(s) shall be such to maximize the privacy of
the residential development at the north side of Martin Canyon
Creek and shall take into consideration the existing vegetation
canopy in the Creek.
Sub-Category 9 - Existing Vegetation - Project Landscaping - This Sub-Category
is created with the following text:
9. Existing Vegetation - Project Landscaping - To the
greatest extent feasible, the existing vegetation within the
Martin Canyon Creek corridor extending through the Plan Area
shall be left undisturbed. Said vegetation shall be utilized
and enhanced to serve as a natural buffer strip between land
uses in the Plan Area and as a design element, with use of
appropriate building design and siting, to compliment and
enhance new development adjoining the Creek area. Existing,
mature trees located in the Plan Area which are located outside
the Creek corridor shall be retained as feasible and
incorporated into the project design of new developments.
Project landscaping shall be of a design, mass, scale and
relationship to promote harmonious transitions between adjoining
projects and land uses and to create an internal sense of order
and provide a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and
the general cornnunity. Project landscaping shall serve as a
design feature to provide conceptual compatibility with the
immediate environment of the site.
Sub-Category IO - Project Architecture - This Sub-Category is created with the
following text:
IO. Project Architecture - The following Design Standards
shall be considered and applied, as applicable, to new
development in the Specific Plan Area:
A. Consistency and compatibility with applicable elements
of the City's General Plan.
B. Conceptual compatibility of design with the immediate
environment of the site.
-3-
C. Appropriateness of the design to the site and function
of the project.
D. Promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character
in areas between different designated land uses.
E. Corrpatibility with future construction both on and off
the site.
F. Expresses an appropriate sense of identity with its
function.
G. Creates an internal sense of order and provides a
desirable envirorurent for occupants, visitors, and the
general cOImlUIlity.
H. Utilizes materials, textures, colors, and details of
construction which are an appropriate expression of its
design concept and function and are corrpatible with the
adjacent and neighboring structures and functions.
PASSED, APPROVED AND AOOPl'ED this 2nd day of September, 1986.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT :
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATIEST:
Planning Director
-4-
CITY OF DUBLIN
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: September 2, 1986
TO:
Planning Commission
Planning Staff V-o tr
PA 86-053 The Fishery in Dublin - Planned
Development Rezoning and Site Development Review
requests for a proposed 7,385~ square foot -
225+ seat Restaurant.
FROM:
SUBJECT:
GENERAL INFORMATION:
PROJECT:
Planned Development Rezoning and Site
Development Review Requests for a proposed
7,385~ square foot - 225~ seat Restaurant on a
1.5+ acre property located within Area 3 of the
San-Ramon Road Specific Plan Area.
APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE:
Michael S. Johnstone
Meta 4 Design Incorporated
5927 Almaden Avenue
Oakland, CA 94611
PROPERTY OWNER:
Ron Rivers
22701 Foothill Boulevard
Hayward, CA 94541
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
AND LAND USE: The subject 1.5~ acre property is a rectangularly shaped
property with 125~ feet of frontage along the west side of San Ramon Road.
The property is included within the Phase II - San Ramon Road Improvements
Project. With construction of those improvements, San Ramon Road will be
widened to its ultimate design width along the subject property's frontage.
Included with these improvements will be the realignment of the bikeway path
approximately five feet westward into the subject property. The frontage of
the property is irregularly shaped, reflecting previous right-of-way acquisi-
tions to accommodate a planned frontage road which was never constructed.
Even with the widening of San Ramon Road, excess right-of-way will remain and
is planned by the Applicant to be purchased and incorporated for development
into the subject project proposal. The subject property is currently vacant.
There are several mature trees on the front (easterly) portion of the
property.
SPECIFICATIONS AND
ZONING DESIGNATIONS: The subject property is located within Area 3 of the San
Ramon Road Specific Plan. The Specific Plan anticipates development in Area 3
to be Retail Shopper Uses. (A Specific Plan Amendment Study is currently in
progress.) The subject property is currently zoned C-1, Retail Business
District. In conjunction with new development proposals, application of a PD,
Planned Development District is required by the General Development Criteria
of the Specific Plan.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ITEM NO. ~,,,~
COPIES TO: Applicant
Owner
PA File 86-053
SUBJECT LOCATION AND
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER:
7400 San Ramon Road
941-040-2-14
SURROUNDING LAND USE:
North: 1.4~ acre Moret holding, currently
occupied by a single family
residential structure and
ancillary structures, Zoned C-1,
Retail Business District.
East: San Ramon Road and mixed retail
development, zoned C-1, Retail
Business District.
South: Commercial Property, Ltd. (0.4+
acres) and Nichandros (3.1~ acres)
holdings. Both marginally
developed with retail-commercial
uses; both zoned C-1, Retail
Business District.
West: Vacant PD, Planned Development
District. Lands owned by Morrison
Homes (12.4+ acres), carrying
approval for development of a
124-unit condominium project.
ZONING HISTORY:
March 11, 1964, the Board of Zoning Adjustments approved Conditional Use
Permit C-1437, permitting a Church at this location subject to nine conditions
covering only the first phase of the Church development.
January 6, 1965, the Board of Zoning Adjustments approved Conditional
Use Permit C-1501, permitting development of the Church with a 20' setback
rather than the previously approved 160' from San Ramon Road.
June 2, 1965, the Planning Commission approved Variance V-3291,
permiting a 4' by 9' identification sign for one year.
October 2, 1967, the Planning Commission approved Variance V-4251, to
allow the identification sign without time limit.
April 1, 1968, Variance V-4398, was approved permitting division of the
property with reduced width and front yard.
April 15, 1968, Conditional Use Permit C-1855, was approved to enlarge
the existing Church facility by erection of three portable classrooms subject
to obtaining a building permit within one year.
January 3, 1970, the Board of Supervisors approved the 920th Zoning
Unit, rezoning the property from R-S-D-25 to C-1, Retail Business District.
July 11, 1979, Conditional Use Permit C-3643, was approved to allow the
expansion of existing daycare-preschool by the remodeling of existing modular
buildings.
July 25, 1983, the Dublin City Council adopted the San Ramon Road
Specific Plan placing the subject property into Area 3 of the Plan.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
A. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION AND POLICIES
8.1 SEISMIC SAFETY
The Calaveras Fault is the major active fault in the planning area with
rupture potential and runs parallel to and just west of San Ramon Road.
-2-
Guiding Policy
A. Geologic hazards shall be mitigated or development shall be
located away from 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.
Implementation Policies
8.1.1 Structural and Grading Requirements
A. All structures shall be designed to the standards delineated in
the Uniform Building Code and Dublin 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
away from any active fault trace. These distances may be reduced based
on adequate exploration to accurately locate the fault trace.
C. 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, should be designed to accommodate the maximum expected offset
from fault rupture. Site specific evaluations should determine the
maximum credible offset.
8.1.2 Required Geotechnical Analyses
E. A fault rupture evaluation, as outlined by the State of California
for Special Studies Zones (Alquist-Priolo Act), shall be required for
all development within the Revised Special Studies Zones as shown on the
Geologic Hazards and Constraints Map. The fault rupture evaluation
should be conducted after building sites are specifically defined.
Sites situated outside of this zone but within the Preliminary Zones
(Slossen, 1973) shall be evaluated if proposed for multi-family
dwellings or for public or recreational facilities.
8.1.4 Data Review and Collection
A. A procedure to review all required reports and data shall be
established with the Alameda County Geologist or a consulting
engineering geologist shall be retained as reviewer. This individual
shall participate in the review process from the earliest proposal stage
to the completion of the project.
9.0 NOISE ELEMENT
Noise exposure contours projected for 2005 based on anticipated traffic
volumes increases indicated noise in the 65+ CNEL range along the east
side of the property.
Guiding Policy
A. Where feasible, mitigate traffic noise to levels indicated below:
Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments
Land Use Category
Normally Acceptable
Conditionally Acceptable
Offices: Retail
Commercial
70 or less CNEL
70 - 75 CNEL
B. SAN RAMON ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN
The subject property is located within Area 3 of the Specific Plan.
Development in this portion of Area 3 is envisioned to be for Retail
Shopper Uses.
-3-
The Planning Commission considered adjustments to the Land Use Plan for
Area 3 of the Plan at their August 18, 1986, meeting. Actions at that
meeting included direction to modify the allowable uses in Area 3 to
include up to 25% occupancy by Personal Service, Office or Financial
Uses in addition to Retail Shopper Uses. The Amendment Study is also
scheduled for consideration at the September 2, 1986, Planning
Commission hearing.
The Specific Plan includes General Development Criteria to guide new
project development within the Plan. This section of the Plan is also
being considered for revision, with the bulk of reV1Slons serving to
elaborate upon the information currently in the Plan.
C. ZONING ORDINANCE
8-31.0 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS: INTENT: Planned Development
Districts, hereinafter designated as PD Districts, are established to
encourage the arrangement of a compatible variety of uses on suitable
lands in such a manner that the resulting development will:
a) Be in accord with the Policies of the General Plan of the
City of Dublin;
b) Provide efficient use of the land that includes preservation
of significant open areas and natural and topographic
landscape features with minimum alteration of natural land
forms;
c) Provide an environment that will encourage the use of common
open areas for neighborhood or community activities and
other amenities;
d) Be compatible with and enhance the development of the
general area;
e) Create an attractive, efficient and safe environment.
8-32.12 CHANGE IN ZONING DISTRICT REQUIRED. The provisions of this
Article shall become applicable to any given development only upon
change in Zoning District to a Planned Development District, in
accordance with the provision of Article 8 (Procedures) of this Chapter,
with the following exceptions to the provisions of said Article 8:
a) The determination that the proposal will benefit the public
necessity, convenience and general welfare be based, in
part, on the conformance of the proposal with provisions of
this Article.
b) Any change in Zoning District accomplished in accordance
with this Article is subject to review by the Planning
Commission at the expiration of two (2) years from the
effective date of said change, if during the two (2) year
period construction, in accordance with the approved plan is
not commenced, or if the approved staging plan has not been
followed. At the conclusion of the review by the Planning
Commission, the Planning Commission may recommend to the
City Council that: the lands affected by the Planned
Development District be rezoned from the Planned Development
District. Said hearings by the Planning Commission and the
City Council shall be in accordance with the provisions of
this Chapter.
c) A Planned Development District shall be established by the
adoption of an Ordinance by the City Council reclassifying
the described property to a Planned Development District and
adopting by reference, a Land Use and Development Plan, the
provisions of which shall constitute the regulations for the
use, improvement and maintenance of the property within the
boundaries of the plan.
-4-
8-31.1.5 COMMON AREAS - PROVISIONS, OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE.
Maintenance of all lands included within the plan not utilized for
building sites, State and County Roads, and public uses, shall be
assured by recorded land agreements, covenants, proprietary control, or
other stated devices which attain this objective. The proposed method
of assuring the maintenance of such lands shall be included as part of
the Land Use and Development Plan.
8-95.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW. Site Development Review is intended to
promote orderly, attractive, and harmonious development; recognize
environmental limitations on development; stabilize land values and
investments; nd promote the general welfare by preventing establishment
of uses, or erection of structures, having qualities which would not
meet the specific intent clauses or performance standards of this
Chapter, or which are not properly related to their sites, surroundings,
traffic circulation is found to so require, the Planning Director may
establish more stringent regulations than those otherwise specified for
the District.
8-95.1 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW: PROCEDURE. The Planning Director or
his designated representative shall receive and decide applications for
Site Development Review. No public hearing is required, except in the
case of a concurrent application for a Variance, or in the case of a
Conditional Use.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The City proposes to adopt a Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Environmental Significance which finds the proposed project
will not have a significant impact on the environment (see Exhibit A - Draft
Resolution regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Significance).
NOTIFICATION:
published
in public
Public Notice of the September 2, 1986, hearing was
in The Herald, mailed to adjacent property owners, and
buildings.
posted
ANALYSIS:
The subject proposal to establish a Restaurant use on this 1.5+ acre
property is consistent with the site's underlying land use restrictions (as
established by the General Plan and the San Ramon Road Specific Plan). Prior
to the formal submittal of this request, an Area Traffic Study, funded by the
Applicant, was performed by the City's Traffic Engineering firm (TJKM). The
Report expanded upon findings and recommendations detailed in an earlier TJKM
Report, which had been prepared in conjunction with the San Ramon Road
Specific Plan. The updated Report (collectively entailing the Memorandums
dated August 15, 1986, and April 23, 1986 - see Attachment #7) focused in on
the properties in Area 3 of the Specific Plan located north of the Amador
Valley Boulevard extension. The Initial Report served to establish as "Key
Elements" in the Circulation Section of the Specific Plan the two following
items regarding this portion of the Plan:
- An internal and external street circulation and pedestrian pattern.
- Limitation of the number of direct access points from adjacent
properties to Silvergate Drive, San Ramon Road and Dublin Boulevard.
The 1986 update to the Study gave detailed direction as to the number
and location of driveways along the portions of both San Ramon Road and the
Amador Valley Boulevard extension which serve the referenced portion of Area 3
of the Specific Plan.
The subject proposal is the first entitlement request for new develop-
ment in this portion of Area 3 since the updated traffic information has been
prepared. (An area-wide Specific Plan Amendment Study has been occurring
simultaneously in response to a proposal to establish Office Uses on the
adjoining Moret property to the north.)
The Draft Resolution prepared for the Planned Development and Site
Development Review requests includes indepth direction regarding circulation
improvements related to the subject proposal.
-5-
A principle item of the proposed circulation improvements is the
establishment of a shared driveway to San Ramon Road to serve directly both
the subject property and the Moret property (see Conditions #14 - #17 and #24
- Exhibit B).
Provision of the shared driveway is the key element in the recommenda-
tions for this area from the City Traffic Engineer. Staff recommends that the
Applicant be required to provide improved access to the site by either
providing full development of the shared driveway at the north side of the
property or, if the necessary private agreements cannot be secured to install
those improvements, provision of improvements along the south side of the
property within the 28-foot access strip that currently serves the subject
property (see Condition #15 of Exhibit B).
Regardless of what agreements can be reached between affected property
owners concerning the envisioned circulation improvements in the area, the
current Applicant should be required to demonstrate that a diligent effort has
been made to secure all necessary approvals to accommodate the planned
improvements and corresponding cross access easements. If all the necessary
private agreements cannot be secured by this Applicant, then he should be
required to record his portion of the respective agreements which will allow
the matching ends of the various agreements to be picked up when subsequent
entitlements are sought by neighboring property owners.
Development of the subject property must take into consideration the
presence of an active seismic fault wich traverses the eastern portion of the
property. A Geotechnical Report has been prepared for this site (see
Attachment #5) and is currently being reviewed by the Alameda County
Geologist. It is anticipated that some level of supplemental geotechnical
information may need to be supplied for the project proposal. Condition #3 in
Exhibit B addresses the possibility that the supplemental geotechnical
information may result in the need to adjust the project's site plan layout.
If a change in the proposed location of the Restaurant is required, Staff
recommends that said modification be subject to review through the Conditional
Use Permit process.
There are several prominent mature trees on the front (eastern) portion
of the project. While the four palm trees at the northeast corner of the site
are proposed to be retained, the latest site plan is not proposing that the
five mature cedars (located along the eastern edge of the proposed Restaurant)
be retained. Earlier versions of the Site Plan indicated an intention to
retain of those trees. Staff would recommend that every effort be made to
save the trees (see Condition #36 of Exhibit B).
The subject proposal envisions a subsequent development application for the
rear 10,000~ square feet of the site. It is understood by Staff that the
Applicant envisions some type of Office Use for that portion of the property.
Under the current land use controls of the Specific Plan, no Office Use would
be allowed at this site. The current recommendations tied into the San Ramon
Road Specific Plan Amendment Study would accommodate up to 25% occupancy of
Personal Service, Financial or Office Uses, serving to soften the current
requirement for 100% occupancy by Retail Shopper Uses. Implementation of that
modified Land Use Standard may still serve to require partial occupancy by
Retail Shopper Uses in any future development at the rear of the subject
property. Development of the rear of the site should be subject to a separate
Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review (see Condition #5 of
Exhibit B).
Until such time as the rear of the property is developed, the current
Site Plan would appear to provide more than ample parking for the Restaurant.
Even factoring in the proposed outside deck seating, it is anticipated that
the seating count (dining, bar and waiting area) will not exceed 250 seats and
could be more than accommodated by the planned parking. With the subsequent
development of the rear of the site, a detailed parking analysis will be
necessary to determine exact parking requirements of the respective uses and
what amount, if any, of cross use ("double counting") parking will be
appropriate.
-6-
A key element in the entire development proposal is the assumption that
excess right-of-way along San Ramon Road can be purchased by the Developer and
incorporated for use in this project. If an adequate amount of excess right-
of-way cannot be secured to implement this site plan, than a Conditional Use
Permit should be required to be processed to review the resultant, alternate
site plan layout (see Condition #4 of Exhibit B).
As indicated elsewhere in this Report, Staff is recommending that a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance be adopted for
this project. The Initial Study prepared for this project identified the
following Environmental Components (see Background Attachment #2):
1. Soils, Geology and Seismicity
2. Traffic Circulation
3. Noise
4. Tree Preservation
The Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has
been formatted in a manner that presupposes the Applicant will agree, through
the course of the public hearing process, to project design changes and/or to
enter into binding commitments that address and mitigate each potential signifi-
cant environmental impact identified in the Initial Study prepared for this
project. A letter to the Applicant outlining design changes and/or binding
commitments that addresses and mitigates each potential identified environmental
impact has been prepared and is included as part of Attachment #2.
RECOMMENDATION:
FORMAT:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Open public hearing.
Hear Staff presentation.
Hear Applicant and public presentations.
Close public hearing.
Consider and act on three Draft Resolutions:
A - A Resolution regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration
of Environmental Significance;
B - A Resolution regarding the PD, Planned Development
Rezoning and the Site Development Review Requests.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A - Draft Resolution regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration
of Environmental Significance
Exhibit B - Draft Resolution regarding Planned Development Rezoning and
Site Development Review Requests - PA 86-053.1 and .2
Exhibit C - Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review
Submittals
Background Attachments
1) Applicant's Written Statements
2) Site Location and Area Maps
3) Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance
4) Letter calling for Applicant to provide project redesign or binding
commitment that addresses and mitigates each potential identified
environmental impact.
5) Executive Summary Section of Report entitled Geotechnical
Investigation for Restaurant, Dublin, California, prepared by
J. V. Lowney & Associates, dated February 12, 1986.
6) Pertinent Agency Comments
-7-
RESOLUTION NO. 86-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOMMENDING THE DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE CONCERNING PA 86-053.1 AND .,2
THE FISHERY IN DUBLIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING AND
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REQUESTS (RIVERS/BARTON - OWNERS;
META 4 DESIGN, INC. - APPLICANTS)
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as
amended together with the State's Administrative Guidelines for implementation
of the California Environmental Quality Act and City environmental
regulations" requires that certain projects be reviewed for environmental
impact and that environmental documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been prepared
by the Dublin Planning Department with the project specific mitigation measures
outlined in Staff's Initial Study of Environmental Significance dated
August 28, 1986, regarding:
1. Soils, Geology and Seismicity
2. Traffic Circulation
3. Noise
4. Tree Preservation
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did review the Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Environmental Significance and considered it at a public hearing
on September 2, 1986; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given as legally
required; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determined that the project,
PA 86-053.1 and .2, has been changed by the Applicant and/or the Applicant has
agreed to provide mitigation measures resulting in a project that will not
result in the potential creation of any significant environmental impacts
identified in the Initial Study of Environmental Significance;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission
recommends that the Dublin City finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration
of Environmental Significance has been prepared and processed in accordance
with State and local environmental law and guideline regulations, and that it
is adequate and complete.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of September, 1986.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Planning Director
rXH'O.. .1 T
t:a~ ;.I~:.. ~ A
p~" ~(JJ..' ~(i /YIlt: "',&-. ()e-,.
RESOLUTION NO. 86
"-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AND ESTABLISH
FINDINGS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) REZONING
AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REQUESTS CONCERNING PA 86-053.1 AND .2
THE FISHERY AT DUBLIN (RIVERS/BARTON - OWNERS,
META 4 DESIGN, INC. - APPLICANTS)
WHEREAS, Michael S. Johnstone, with Meta 4 Design Incorporated,
filed Revised Plans requesting Planned Development Rezoning and Site
Development Review approval for a proposed 7,385~ square foot - 225+ seat
Restaurant at 7400 San Ramon Road; and
WHEREAS, the adopted San Ramon Road Specific Plan and City of
Dublin Zoning Ordinance provide in part for the establishment of Retail Shopper
- Restaurant Use as an allowable use at the subject property; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on said
applications on September 2, 1986; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, this application has been reviewed in accordance with the
prOV1Slons of the California Environmental Quality Act and a Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Environmental Significance has been recommended for adoption
(Planning Commission Resolution No. 86- ) for this project, as it will have no
significant effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that the
Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review applications be
conditionally approved; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all said
reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth; and
WHEREAS, the proposed land use, if conditionally approved, is
appropriate for the subject property in terms of being compatible to existing
land uses in the area and will not overburden public services;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Planning Commission finds:
A. Construction of the 7,385~ square foot - 225~ seat Restaurant serves the
public need by providing for an expansion of Retail Shopper Uses available
to City residents.
B. The uses will be compatible with and enhance the development of the
general area as they will be properly related to other land uses, and
transportation and service facilities in the vicinity.
C. The uses will not materially adversely affect the health or safety of
persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be materially detrimental
to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the
neighborhood, as all applicable regulations will be met.
D. The uses will not be contrary to the specific intent clauses or perfor-
mance standards established for the district in which they are to be
located.
E. All provisions of Section 8-95.0 through 8-95.8, Site Development Review,
of the Zoning Ordinance are complied with.
EXHIBIT B
()({A~.,!trSOL; ~L 'D~tJ~ ! s~t<..-
F. Consistent with Section 8-95.0, this project will promote orderly, attrac-
tive, and harmonious development, which includes preservation of
significant natural landscape features with minimum alteration of natural
land forms and which recognizes environmental limitations on development;
stabilizes land values and investments; and promotes the general welfare
by preventing establishment of uses or erection of structures having
qualities which would not meet the specific intent clauses or performance
standards set forth in the Zoning Ordinance, and which are not consistent
with their environmental setting.
G. The approval of the project as conditioned is in the best interest of
public health, safety and general welfare.
H. General site considerations, including site layout, orientation, and the
location of buildings, vehicular access, circulation and parking,
setbacks, height, public safety and similar elements have been designed to
provide a desirable environment for the development, and which will
encourage the use of common open areas for neighborhood or community
activities and other amenities.
I. General architectural considerations as modified by the Conditions of
Approval, including the character, scale and quality of the design, the
architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, building
materials and colors, screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior
lighting, and similar elements have been incorporated into the project in
order to insure compatibility of this development with its design concept
and the character of adjacent buildings and uses.
J. General project landscaping provisions for irrigation, maintenance and
protection of landscaped areas and similar elements have been considered
to insure visual relief to complement buildings and structures and to
provide an attractive environment to the public.
K. The project is consistent with the policies contained in the City's
General Plan and within the San Ramon Road Specific Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning
Commission hereby recommends that the City Council conditionally approve the
Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review applications
PA 86-053.1 and .2 as shown by materials labeled Exhibit A, on file with the
Dublin Planning Department, subject to the following Conditions:
Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with
prior to issuance of building or grading permits and shall be subiect to
Planning Department review and approval.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. Development shall generally conform with the revised plans prepared by Meta
4 Design, Inc. consisting of five sheets dated received by the City
Planning Department, August 14, 1986, and the changes called for by these
Conditions of Approval. Approval for the Site Development Review shall be
valid until October 21, 1987. If construction has not commenced by that
time, this approval shall be null and void. The approval period for the
Site Development Review may be extended one additional year (Applicant must
submit a written request for the extension prior to the expiration date of
the permit) by the Planning Director upon his determination that the
Conditions of Approval remain adequate to assure that the above stated
Findings will continue to be met. Development shall be subject to the
Conditions listed below.
2. Comply with the City of Dublin Site Development Review Standard Conditions
and the City of Dublin Police Services Standard Commercial Building
Security Recommendations.
3. If the Geotechnical Investigation Report prepared for this project by J. V.
Lowney & Asociates (dated February 12, 1986) is not accepted by the Alameda
County Geologist as adequate to serve as a Project Alquist-Priolo Report,
and new geotechnical investigation is required which subsequently calls for
an adjustment to the proposed footprint of the Restaurant (to provide for a
-2-
larger or modified seismic setback zone), said adjustment to the Site Plan
shall be subject to review under a Conditional Use Permit application filed
by the Developer.
4. The Developer shall initiate the necessary proceedings to allow
consideration of the abandonment of excess right-of-way along the
property's San Ramon Road frontage. If an adequate depth of right-of-way
cannot be purchased from the City to facilitate the development of the site
as proposed by the plans cited in Condition #1 above, the Developer shall
be required to secure Conditional Use Permit approval for the resultant,
modified site plan layout that would be utilized as a result of having a
smaller property available for development.
5. The seating capacity of the Restaurant (including inside and outside dining
areas, the bar area and the waiting area) shall not exceed 250 seats. A
minimum of 65 of the 91 proposed parking spaces shall be assigned for
exclusive use by the Restaurant. A maximum of 20 parking spaces may be
considered for "double-counting" between the Restaurant and the future use
established at the rear (west) portion of the property.
6. The Developer shall diligently pursue the necessary approvals to provide
for the installation of curbing and landscaping within the properties to
the south to allow the design changes generally portrayed on the Staff
Study dated August, 1986. Pursuit of the necessary approval to install
these improvements is considered necessary to allow: 1) a widening by two
feet of the proposed eastern parking area (along a north-south axis) to
allow the adjustment of the northerly eight compact-sized parking spaces
into seven standard- sized parking spaces to reduce the ratio of compact-
sized parking spaces to a more acceptable ratio (21+ compact-sized to 26+
full-sized); 2) allow the development of a 5' to 6'~ide off-site landsc~pe
strip along the south side of the eastern parking area; and 3) the
provision of a drop-off area at the southern side of the proposed
Restaurant. If, upon demonstration that a diligent effort has been made by
the Developer to pursue the necessary approvals for the referenced
improvements and no approval can be secured, discharge of the requirements
of this Condition may be granted by the Planning Director.
ARCHAEOLOGY
7. If, during construction, archaeological remains are encountered,
construction in the vicinity shall be halted, an archaeologist consulted,
and the City Planning Department notified. If, in the opinion of the
archaeologist, the remains are significant, measures, as may be required by
the Planning Director, shall be taken to protect them.
ARCHITECTURAL
8. Exterior colors and materials for the building addition shall be subject to
final review and approval by the Planning Director. All ducts, meters, air
conditioning equipment and other mechanical equipment on the proposed
structure shall be effectively screened from view with materials
architecturally compatible with the main structure.
9. The design, location, color and materials of canopy covers for exterior
deck seating areas shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning
Director and DSRSD Fire Department prior to installation.
DEBRIS/DUST/CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
10. Measures shall be taken to contain all trash, construction debris, and
materials on-site until disposal off-site can be arranged. The Developer
shall keep adjoining public streets free and clean of project dirt, mud,
and materials during the construction priod. The Developer shall be
responsible for corrective measures at no expense to the City of Dublin.
Areas undergoing grading, and all other construction activities, shall be
watered, or other dust-palliative measures used, to prevent dust, as
conditions warrant. Provision of temporary construction fencing shall be
made subject to review and approval of the City Engineer and the Building
Official.
-3-
11. The detailed design of the trash enclosure area shall be subject to review
and approval as part of the project Landscape and Irrigation Plans. The
design of the trash enclosures shall reflect dimensional criteria deemed
acceptable by the Livermore-Dublin Disposal Service, and shall incorporate
use of a concrete apron in front of the enclosure to facilitate the
District's mechanical pick-up service. If wooden doors are utilized, the
doors shall be trimmed with a heavy metal lip. Raised concrete curbing
shall be provided inside the trash enclosure area to serve as wheel stops
for metal trash bins to protect the interior walls of the enclosures.
DRAINAGE
12. A grading and drainage plan shall be prepared and shall be submitted for
review and approval by the City Engineer. Calculations (hydraulic) shall
be prepared by the Developer for review by the City Engineer to determine
the sizing of drainage lines.
13. The area outside the building addition shall drain outward at a 2% minimum
slope for unpaved areas and a 1% minimum in paved areas (with a maximum
gradient of 5%).
14. Roof drains shall empty into approved dissipating devices. Roof water, or
other concentrated drainage, shall not be directed onto adjacent
properties, sidewalks or driveways. No drainage shall flow across property
lines. Downspouts shall drain through the curb of the concrete walks
around the building.
15. Where storm water flows against a curb, a curb with gutter shall be used.
The flow line of all asphalt paved areas carrying waters shall be slurry
sealed at least three feet on either side of the center of the swale.
DRIVEWAYS AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS
16. The design of the shared driveway along the north property boundary shall
be modified to reflect the TJKM Memorandum (and Graphic Study) dated
August 15, 1986.
17. If access from San Ramon Road is utilized along the south side of the
property on an interim basis (i.e., until the shared driveway at the north
property boundary is developed), the location and width of improvements
installed at this driveway intersection shall be subject to review and
approval by the Planning Department and the City Traffic Engineer.
Additionally, the Developer shall provide recorded documentation of right
of access across the 28-foot wide easement strip running along the south
side of the subject property. Upon full development of the northerly
driveway, the Developer shall quit claim all rights to access to San Ramon
Road from the 28-foot wide easement strip running along the south side of
the property.
18. The location and design of the driveway connection between the subject
property and the adjoining property to the north (Moret holding:
APN 941-040-1-2), proposed for development along the western portion of the
properties, shall be subject to modification at the direction of the
Planning Department if it is determined, prior to the construction of said
improvements, that an adjusted location or configuration for the driveway
is necessary to promote improved circulation and/or to promote the health
and well-being of the large, mature trees located in the southwest corner
of the Moret holding.
19. The driveway and intersection design of the northerly driveway and the use
of an entry median and/or entry paving at the northerly project entry
driveway shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Department
and the City Traffic Engineer (TJKM) at the time building permits are
requested. Said review shall include consideration of the lane widths,
radius return dimensions, height, width and length of median, depth of
entry paving and type of landscaping, if utilized, in the raised driveway
median.
20. All improvements within the public right-of-way, including curb, gutter,
sidewalks, driveways, paving and utilities, must be constructed in
accordance with approved standards and/or plans.
-4-
21. Landscaping at the driveway intersection(s) with San Ramon Road shall be
such that sight distance is not obstructed.
22. The Developer shall be responsible for correcting deficiencies in the
existing frontage improvements to the satisfaction of the City or County
Engineer.
23. Any relocation of improvements or public facilities shall be accomplished
at no expense to the City.
24. The parking and driveway surfacing shall be asphalt concrete paving. The
City Engineer shall review the project's Soils Engineer's structural
pavement design. The Developer shall, at his sole expense, make tests of
the soil over which the surfacing and base is to be constructed and furnish
the test reports to the City Engineer. The Developer's Soils Engineer
shall determine a preliminary structural design of the road bed. After
rough grading has been completed, the Developer shall have soil tests
performed to determine the final design of the road bed.
25. An encroachment permit shall be secured from the City Engineer for any work
done within the public right-of-way, where this work is not covered under
the improvement plans.
EASEMENTS
26. As regards the proposed shared San Ramon Road driveway entrance, if the
Developer's diligent efforts fail to secure the necessary cross vehicular
access easements, he shall then provide for the recordation of an agreement
which binds the subject property to enter into a future cross access
easement at such time as a corresponding agreement on the adjoining
property to the north is secured.
27. Cross vehicular access easements (or other appropriate documents approved
by the Planning Department) providing for driveway interconnections shown
on the plans cited in Condition #1 above shall be recorded between the
subject property and the adjoining properties to the north and south. The
cross access easements shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Planning Department and the City Attorney prior to recordation.
28. The Developer shall record an offer to enter into a future cross access
easement agreement (or other appropriate document approved by the Planning
Department) with the adjoining property to the south for a future
interconnection between the eastern parking area and the adjoining property
to the south above and beyond the proposed connection at the southwest
corner of the eastern parking area. The agreement shall be submitted for
review and approval by the Planning Department and City Attorney prior to
recordation. This future driveway connection shall be at the southeast
corner of the subject property's eastern parking area and shall be
developed in co junction with the redevelopment of the Commercial Property,
Ltd. holding (APN 941-040-2-10) and/or with the elimination of the access
connection to San Ramon Road for the 28-foot wide easement which runs along
the north side of that property.
29. The Developer shall be responsible for the installation of on-site and/or
off-site improvements necessary to establish access to the subject property
from San Ramon Road, either by improving the easement area along the south
side of the subject property or by developing the shared driveway proposed
along the north property boundary.
30. The Developer shall acquire easements, and/or obtain rights-of-entry from
the adjacent property owners for improvements or construction activity
required outside of the subject properties. Copies of the easements and/or
rights-of-entry shall be in written form and shall be furnished to the City
Engineer.
31. Existing and proposed access and utility easements shall be submitted for
review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of grading
or building permits. These easements shall allow for practical vehicular
and utility service access for portions of the subject properties.
-5-
FIRE PROTECTION
32. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Developer shall supply written
confirmation that the requirements of the Dublin San Ramon Services
District Fire Department have been, or will be, met.
GRADING
33. Grading shall be completed in compliance with the construction grading
plans prepared for this project. The soil engineering recommendations
outlined in the Executive Summary and Design Recommendations Section of the
Geotechnical Investigation Report dated February 12, 1986, and prepared for
the project by J. V. Lowney and Associates shall be observed as well as any
recommendations established by any subsequent Soil and Geologic Study
prepared for this project~
34. Where soil or geologic conditions encountered in grading operations are
different from that anticipated in the Project Geologic Investigation
Report, or where such conditions warrant changes to the recommendations
contained in the original soil investigation, a revised Soil and/or
Geologic Report shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer. It
shall be accompanied by an engineering and geological opinion as to the
safety of the site from hazards of soil expansion, liquefaction,
settlement, or seismic ground shaking.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS, AGREEMENTS, AND SECURITIES
35. Prior to filing for building permits, precise plans and specifications for
street improvements, grading, drainage (including size, type, and location
of drainage facilities both on- and off-site) and erosion and sedimentation
control shall be submitted and subject to the approval of the City
Engineer.
36. The Developer shall enter into an Improvement Agreement with the City for
all public improvements. Complete improvement plans, specifications, and
calculations shall be submitted to, and reviewed by, the City Engineer and
other affected agencies having jurisdiction over public improvements prior
to execution of the Improvement Agreement. Improvement plans shall show
the existing and proposed improvements along adjacent public street(s) and
property that relate to the proposed improvements. All required
securities, in an amount equal to 100% of the approved estimates of
construction costs of improvements, and a labor and material security,
equal to 50% of the construction costs, shall be submitted to, and approved
by, the City and affected agencies having jurisdiction over public
improvements, prior to execution of the Improvement Agreement.
37. An encroachment permit shall be secured from the City Engineer for any work
done within the public right-of-way where this work is not covered under
the improvement plans.
LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION PLANS
38. A detailed Landscape and Irrigation Plan (at 1 inch = 20 feet or larger),
along with a cost estimate of the work and materials proposed, shall be
submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director. Landscape and
Irrigation Plans shall be signed by a licensed landscape architect. A Site
Specific Horticultural Report shall be prepared to assess the current
health of existing on-site trees and the impacts to those trees that will
result from the project's development. The Report shall establish mitiga-
tion measures and a tree preservation program for the trees shown for
retention on the Revised Site Plan dated received by the City of Dublin on
August 14, 1986. Every reasonable effort shall be taken to retain the five
existing cedar trees (forming a north-to-south row along the east side of
the proposed Restaurant structure), the two cedars at the northwest corner
of the project, and the 20" olive (in the center of the easterly proposed
parking lot). If necessary, minor adjustments to the configuration of
driveway/parking area (including selective elimination of parking spaces)
shall be made to increase the probability of the long term health and vigor
of trees to be retained.
39. The Developer/Owner shall sign and submit a copy of the City of Dublin
Landscape Maintenance Agreement.
-6-
40. Landscaping installed along San Ramon Road shall be established on a
landscape mound and shall include three additional IS-gallon sized trees
and shall also include clumped plantings of shrubs. This treatment shall
be of a design and layout to aid in the screening of parked cars from view
along San Ramon Road.
41. Additional project landscaping shall be provided along the west side of the
proposed improvements (i.e., into the area planned for future development) and
shall consist of a landscaped-irrigated strip of a minimum width of 10 feet.
42. The design and placement of service areas and utility boxes shall be compat-
ible with the site's overall design and landscaping and shall be subject to
review and approval by the Planning Director as part of the Landscape and
Irrigation Plan.
43.
Some of the planters
be raised planters.
planters.
proposed along the south elevation of the building shall
Seating benches shall be designed into some of the raised
LIGHTING
44. Exterior lighting shall be of a design and placement so as not to cause glare
onto adjoining properties or onto San Ramon Road. Lighting used after day-
light hours shall be adequate to provide for security needs. Wall lighting
around the entire perimeter of the building shall be supplied to provide
"wash" security lighting. Photometrics shall be submitted to the Planning
Department and Dublin Police Services for review and approval. The number,
height, design and location of light standards shall be subject to review and
approval by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of building permits.
The concrete base of new light pole standards shall be finished with an
aggregate pebble finish, or equivalent, as determined acceptable to the
Planning Department.
SIGNAGE
45. All project or building signs shall be subject to review and approval by the
Planning Director prior to installation.
STORAGE AND EXTERIOR ACTIVITIES
46. With the exception of exterior dining on the deck areas at the northeast and
northwest corners of the proposed structure, all demonstrations, displays,
services, and other activities associated with the new structure shall be
conducted entirely within the structure. No loudspeakers or amplified music
shall be permitted outside the structure.
MISCELLANEOUS
47. The materials used across the site for pedestrian walkways into the new
building shall be of a uniform design and shall be subject to review and
approval of the Planning Director. The pedestrian circulation system shall
include handicapped access.
48. The shared driveway at the northern side of the project shall be constructed
with special entry paving adjoining the raised driveway median.
49. All improvements shall be installed as per the approved landscaping and irri-
gation plans and the drainage and grading plans prior to the release of occu-
pancy. Additionally, grading of the subject property must conform with the
recommendations of the Soils Engineer to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
-7-
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of September, 1986.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Planning Director
-8-
, .
~
~
( ~ ..
.r \
~ \
\ \.
\
\ ,
\
. ~ ! .,
~ r '.
, \
I
.......
~
r
~
\
""''''lNCo ...,....".... \
\ \----
\ ---' --
\: ___----- .' ~-tJ~
\...Jli - ~..-ov~'?.~--'-
-- :
, 1'.
I :
I
(e"",--"" ....""""
I . . ,
""---v--""
I ",,' Q04<. "-
( "qt>>o#- I
_0 J
\ /
'......... .........--.-/
,/
.'
/'
\
\
I,
I
\
\
\
:~
!
,~'-"'-
I~"""
I!i> .:>L.
I~"""
i
I
i
'c;.o.l-
9""-
5......
, """'-
!;"""-
~........
, ......
rY~~~R. IT
Il"- ..~ i'it.
'.~~. t( 'i, < ;iI,' [,", .
r-;":...,o,:,j!J ~ a ~ M>>r
pC? ({.eiotJ,tJt:r 3 11tl,., ~v&ArfA1.5
j't.
\
~
~
~
t:I
,..
~
:4
'-'
I
IJ-L--
1\--'
l.... J I \
" ~ I
-
!
c
I......
-~
/
/
~ ....peWAJ...J/t.;-.J/
~.. .......m1
,,' -
~-
; '.--1-
,-
i'
I
I
I
:.---
--,
-
/
~-
/ ./
I L--- -
--
I--
I
I
L1&HT0 ~
J!)C1";If''''''''' CC)IL.O~,,",
\
i
I
--
-
--
j
I
I
,
~Te. Of= ~ ~"'~I'!i>""_ I ,-
r--'T' fO-1O' 10'
MWlJfo1 ""~ I~' I!;'
I1I:OUI1 ""~T '...,....;0' , 10'
MeDtVM '!C' 11.'
/'Jo.hT ~' !)'
~ !')' ~'
/1 ea..>M " ~,
HEOIJH J':.I 1'lz.1
MEOl:M /lo' r.'
NW.... ",. 4'
HU'llol1 2'J' L'"
MeDM1 1'1&.' IV
H<<>UM ,,' "
~
G
PLN-IT lJ?T
eor~I~'IJAMe..
1')ZC.Eh ;
","L-Ct'2.II>- Ju...t~~
~~"."..~ /
F""""'"'" &<~p,..: 'fu..VwoOd
PWr~'" <'lA1foJl<N.'"
-!;>.l~
~....."""""~
DlI!:T&.o ~~...
He-. '~
L.1l'loP/:. t1~1
HY'f21"\hGD1,.,IJto.II':)~...1
f.J~H O\,.~ '~P1..a.'
~la~I~LJ,...&QI...,Jo.'
~c GO.I"'"
A.WA.~ 'PETl!!a ~'
~ HEUY. '..,,~ ROoJT
~~ COJC.I~ 0.4 12.'
Ft:::\....e. l~w.o.TT ~~
l:a-IMC>J NJ>Me
EB
\
",
. 6>\4'- 1l2eL
wuP""" ~~
f/J>WoiOro ~Il'
CJl"e.e.~ F'I<:11'~"-
_____ Site Plan
F<lfZT'1J'....r UlH
e1" E>U.Je. ULI' T\X2F
1J2U~ HYftn-e
~Te Pl""~DEa
~R:>o.cr''''f
Thrw.......... _..... dv ........-,...w.twol
-'-......... o-p 1-.--........ _ _ k
.......................,.......,*-
_.I.....4~1........,.~
;;:- ~
..-- ;;:- 0:;;--
;;--
,.
.......'...
i__.
0.-.;....
~ ....4.......-.,...-.. '21'''''''''''' ~
............. o.ua..L CA "'11
...... .....
~arn.c- 14I)1U"~
The Hayward Fishery in Dublin
@. ~
1-,20'
_ J
~
\>
1-
~
\>
:1
(:I
1-
11
1:\
1>
, . G
~
~
)
,
.
~ ','
~ ','
~:J
il,.~llr .
!"(~
~'{~, .
"',
,:r'
,.; .
"1:,'
~i :1
v...
tt
!L'1
~" !~..
~~" ~, .
"l."
~:.,~.
~.:.:~
'i.I
\"::::;
i,';
\,',,',
4"-'
~.}.:;.;
t:;
r'. ,
F)i:
;1'1;-
(.~~
r.k'
iUi
~\J(
Lt.~
~\~;; .
....~. -
;;t:, ,
'.~i :
~ ,~,
(.'"
~~~~:'
t~ '1
i':.~(
~.. :;': ;
C',' ~
!;~.'..;:
~it, :
I~(~;:;.;';'\
'k';" .'.~ ':'~:'."i
.r(;. ...',",..
~:'>
t::,y~
rOo' .'
t..:,~
Meta4-=i
..~.._. _. _.'_ _. i ,:
:::
,
'iI'
II'
I"
:11'1
I
',"I '
, '
, I
, !:!I'II.
:1; ::
I' 'I"
" ,;'
I
lit]
rnJ)
Il' i,
.,; :/(;:i
i
I; t ni
Hill
urn
[ill]
am
~
Efm
IDll
'i:,1
c
.2
iO
>
Q)
ill
.t::
...
::l
o
en
I!
(
4
I
.
.
J
1
.
.
\
'.
'-
fEB
Ell
ItlI
I, i:
I: !
IE3
IEl
EEl
EEH
EEl]
:1:1:,':.
,il'i
I '
ffi]
aa
IJill
c
o
:0:
al
>
Q)
ill
~! ; .
,rr:n
: I ; UilJ
, ,I,I!\'"
"1' 'I '
:i ",,'1 'I' :
'; ,I, j"
';P ,
Iii
Q)
::,
c
.2
iO
>
Q)
ill
...
r/l
al
W
c
.2
iO
>
Q)
ill
.t::
...
....
o
Z
. _.~
\ '
\ ,,\
1.---.......;--/....
,I
t<\'
It'I
o
,
.s
IS)
~
~
o
oc
a;
E
o
c:
o
><
<
("-
--.--.-..-.
~
c
w
~- D
I I
~
.
..
,.~~..,..,
I
I
,J.)
"
U
.
o
f
,-
"
u
.
o
D
D
EB
~
n
I
c
CO
c:
...
o
o
u:
'"
11'
()
I
~
<:P
'*
4
~
_......0.._.._...
Ejj
,
C,
~,
0.1
'01
0;
, a:i
('
I
RECEIVED
iJUN 6 1986
DunLlN PLANNING
Written Statement:
This proJect, The Fishery, is proposed to the city of Dublin as a
seafood restaurant. The building is to occupy approximately 7,800
square feet. The site layout of the building is proposed to create
a quality seafood restaurant, 73 parking spaces, planting areas, and
a landscaped green belt in what currently is a empty parcel. The
green belt, creates a landscaped zone for pedestrian passage and
forms a separation between vehicular and pedestrian movement.
The proposed building is to be of timber frame construction with
sash windows. All mechanical will be under the roof and screened
from the public view.
Provision has been made in conJunction with the city's traffic study
to link at a future date with the proposed Amadon Valley court
extension to the south. Special care has been taken to break down
the massing of the building to work with the surrounding sites. The
Fishery should be a welcomed quality addition to the city of Dublin.
f. Il'\";l'T;' ~ C"' Et~T J
,...'.. i\ ~\ ~...... .' ~J.i.' ~. ,..'
1 r: ,c. Ij,. "ill .. <
it, 111~,~i i ,.1
~1'f'I.Jl/itfT$ \"~,ON SrA-feM~
Written Statement
The proposed seating count is estimated to be 180 and anticipated staff is
approximately 35. A drop off point will be used at the entrance. This point
will also meet all Handicap access requirements. The anticipated hours of
operation are 11:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. with peak times being 11:30 a.m. to
1:30 p.m. for lunch and 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. for dinners. Maximum customers
at peak hours are estimated at 125-135 persons. The restaurant will operate 7
days a week using a full on sale liquor license, and will provide banquet
service. A small retail sales area is located at the restaurant entry. This
area will display fresh fish and accounts for approximately 2% of sales. The
sign location will be indicated on the site plan.
With respect to the site plan, we have attempted to address the City's
concerns regarding access from San Ramon and site circulation. Currently
pending issues are the successful negotiation with the City for the small
parcel of land between the site of the Fishery and San Ramon Road as well as
an agreement with Mr. Roy Moret concerning the proposed shared access road.
;2.k,M~'
RECEiV':'\
JUL 18 1986
DUBLIN PLANNlhlG
'.' .'
.r
,~--
-
, ,
, ,
, .
..... i
,.
.. . -' -. .~.. '. -'"1' ~....~,~< ~-.J- ~J ";<,1;, J, -~. . '''-::~ i~:"!"':':"";f?:.....' ~'i ~:t"'_Sr ~-~ :~:'~l;"~:ii.';~'r ~:;':';:'_:~#;.:,;_' '_ _-~<
.!.:!.~~titlWtt~-:.}(;f!~~,~;1'.' '~':;r.t:;;.')tf;,f.:~~;~~."!~ ! ,~~.~4iJt~:T:;;.;:.};:~-t:~~'';{ ...~/.'{ >'~,.::~:".~'"':";f~'~:...
i.~~~;*. ,,'il~.;~:~.::.:~t:~' ~~I-.~~~f.;.):~';~\~~\"~":~'~i4;~..:'\"""" - 'f</~:~~~..r~. J:; ~.:~~. :.._:~..-.~:~_.~~;;~~~ (:v.<..~'. ~ '.~ ~ ~
"'. ",,,'."'~,,.{;...i$~ y-.,,.,,k. '-':';.., "r;:'I;i...._,""t'.~.....'). "'''.-'''"'~'''' .. '~";"~.' :'.".ll..:':;>' "i'" " J-.^ ":'.~.' .,,-, ' ~".._,_
If. .~.~:"i"7.....;:'Y:p ';' - ';00,0' .... "I' 's. ..-~ -",.; -~- ~'. ...;. ":". ::"..0: '. ..-'.-....; c. ~:_ t: .._ll....... ',.....:~ p_ .... :.'_ ~.' '.'" .:......... '.' _ . , ":;.. '
&~~&~~~~~~~~Wf~5~i.~.~~g_,RANCH ~15
~:....:..~'~ .~,.',>: ':,:;,"~}S9:7.<~):,~;~;C .' ., .,.,
" :,'..">.'.s.PClfe:,lt~'.ibo',:: _ ~:;~\":. ;':,
'-'\:"'\::~~:Ol:::j;. .
-' \ ~.A!ij;t:;:fj:~:( .
/.
}
" /
/
/
I
/
/
,/
.'
Parcels on this bl I
ar . OCK
e W1.thi.n a "Sro . 1
Zo " l:"'-C~a
ne as defin~-o b
Al . =-< ~ the
qtUst-Priolo ll.ct.
8'
4../0 Ac.~(p)
C-:::.o.~
.5/!J.6'e<;
5;;'-0, --,9
/'V80_ 3 ~02-"E
. I 'Ph-! . d.8 CXo
;.. 0 ~-(.,(.,(.,
.. ,t
4.e4AA,t ~,l\ V'7809
..... "\Ii
~ . +
,-,l::r" ~ ".84Ac.-
'PPl8~-<x:l'i ~ S-"7~1o ~
111~.~~ ~~~~ p~
~a~-(?8~ 0..
..../7.ffl35'-05"'7 rP.a~-tif.i " 3'-01/
.yi..~ ~- t)~
~o "'''..E7
fh,--l,8elo
2
o
~
.~ ~
'l-' ,
fli'~
'( ~.
IJo,
~
~ '/J
'Pl''r'\-a804>
'0-10(,,'"
pft CbY 'QIg v
4.0,8 Ac.: @
t. e<..vO,
S 1JtJ<1U'. ou9.
',I/~
PM zaos
C..~<Ol' ~
c: - 3o,ao 70./'!.AN.
C-oIoO"l .~.
tt1dJ
tD~
rrJ
" ID
'1'1""",
.....;;- -r
@ '5-4$"<.
2AC.~
~t
.#~~'/-'1'
i
I
,
;
., '......,...J--
, 61~.G4 -ll':Z.:>
C-.:l..\o..\g .. S . .
~. ~ ,,-~"iq~ ... ~-~~~ . ~U I~(A~
v-~o.\~ -.., . l') Or.?
"'O"i\~. ~';<..'e. 'Q..~-D-;o.. \
,,~ p~5.' '. -10: ,i ~ -
,,_~"I2>3 " ,
;;r~O\~ '7.95Ac.xfp)
v-I.l.C\,S4- .
~ ",_'1810\,:
~ ,', ,.';:'::'.'
'\J '...
~ '. ....
, >.~:. . .
~
,.,
o
,.;
(l)
-
ri
1I85Q.
-;
.~ ;~.;.
'. .,-r'
.: , ~.~:/~?.. ".
-. ."~::~ >;:/'
. . ,'.:
. ~...'....\-..~.,4'.,.
" .
. .:; ".:1
,.
~e~Area~N~~~'26-00( "
- r,.....:,. '_', y.
- '.~.':'~-;..,:~;~'-:-~~'-'-;"";'. 1
\ :... :'-. .'R,
, -~ \.
,~.-." ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
.-:;:
"n'... .,
~
I
I
I
\ I'
\ I
I
N
~
r:~ ~
t<tn 'Co.
,,:/ > .7436
<<!CI.I > ----=
vii' I
v::
N~
t?
-
I 7400 .
/73
o
r:
ID
f1l
;-J
AMADOR VALLEY
BLVD
7274
Z
0
r
<i :i05
Ci
.. -
Z
<t: \
(jJ
-...
~
-..:
,
~
/?f8.~-C53
~ . .;..
~, . - .:-~~.;' ," .
. _~ 1 . _.~ .--,
;)':...""
::...:-::-: :
, . . .~_:.:
.'. .
. .-:.'
CITY OF DUBLIN
Development Services Planning/Zoning 829-4916
P,Q. Box 2340 Building & Safety 829-0822
Dublin, CA 94568 Engineering/Public Works 829-4927
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE FOR:
PA 86-053.1 and .2 The Fishery in Dublin - Planned Development Rezoning and Site
Development Review requests for a proposed 7,385~ square foot -
225+ seat Restaurant at 7400 San Ramon Road.
LOCATION AND ZONING:
7400 San Ramon Road, Dublin, CA 94568
C-1, Retail Business District
(APN 941-040-2-14)
PROJECT:
Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review
requests to establish a 7,385+ square foot - 225+ seat
Restaurant on a 1.5+ acre property located withi~ Area 3 of the
San Ramon Road Specific Plan Area.
APPLICANT/
REPRESENTATIVE:
Michael S. Johnstone
Meta 4 Design Incorporated
5927 Almaden Lane
Oakland, CA 94611
PROPERTY OWNERS:
Rivers-Barton
22701 Foothill Boulevard
Hayward, CA 94541
FINDINGS:
The project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment.
The mitigation measures outlined in the Initial Study of Environmental
Significance dated August 28, 1986, document the steps necessary to assure
that the subject property will not have a significant adverse affect on the
environment.
INITIAL STUDY: The Initial Study of Environmental Significance dated August 85, 1986,
provides a discussion of the environmental components listed below. Each
identified environmental component has been mitigated through project
redesign or through binding commitment by the Applicant, as outlined in the
Mitigation Measures Sections of the Initial Study of Environmental
Significance.
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPONENTS:
1. Soils, Geology and Seismicity
2. Traffic Circulation
3. Noise
4. Tree Preservation
SIGNATURE: DATE:
Laurence L. Tong, Planning Director
A IT ACHMENT .3
lIRltn )lJ1T1&7?7eD ;/t1:,J /)ff I
Development Services
P,O, Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
CITY OF DUBLIN
Planning/Zoning 829-4916
Building & Safety 829-0822
Engineering/Public Works 829-4927
August 28, 1986
Michael S. Johnstone, AIA
Meta 4 Design, Inc.
5927 Almaden Lane
Oakland, CA 94611
RE: PA 86-053 The Fishery in Dublin
Rivers-Barton (Owners)/Meta 4 Design, Inc. (Applicant)
Dear Mr. Johnstone:
The revised application materials and environmental materials submitted for
your application, City File PA 86-053, have been reviewed concerning the
potential environmental impacts of the proposed commercial development.
This data, and this Department's review of it, indicated that your project may
have the potential of creating significant environmental impacts if specific
mitigation measures are not incorporated into the project's design and
ultimate development.
By this letter be advised that, in light of the information submitted to date,
this office cannot prepare a Negative Declaration of Environmental
Significance for this project. However, it is the position of this office
that a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be possible and consistent with the
State of California Environmental Quality Guidelines. Section 15080(d) 2 of
the Guidelines allows a Mitigated Negative Declaration to be prepared instead
of an Environmental Impact Report where the significant effects of a project,
as identified in an Initial Study, are clearly mitigated to the point where it
is reasonable to find that the significance is no longer in effect.
In order for this Office to prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration, the
project plans must first be revised to reflect changes that eliminate the
potential for the significant impact, and/or an enforceable commitment from
the Applicant must be made that shows the specific mitigation measures that
will occur. The following changes to your project have been determinec to be
necessary to permit this Office to prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Significance.
There are still four (4) areas of your project proposal which have been
identified as having the potential of creating significant environmental
impacts, as defined by CEQA:
..A 1T ACHMEtH ~
Le/TCR- 61Nj)/Ntr ~Pe2 ;m /f/lr: fiI/~S(jfe5
1. Soils, Geology, Seismicity
2. Traffic Circulation
3. Noise
4. Tree Preservation
If the project plans are received to incorporate the following features,
and/or if the Developer provides binding agreement to provide the design
components as indicated below (or that achieve the same effect of the items
listed below), this Office will proceed with the preparation of a Mitigated
Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance.
1. Soils, Geology and Seismicity
A supplemental project specific Geological and Soils Investigation and
Foundation Study shall be prepared (if determined necessary by the Alameda
County Geologist) which expands upon the recommendations outlined in the
February 12, 1986, Study prepared by J. V. Lowney & Associates entitled
"Geotechnical Investigation for Restaurant, Dublin, California." If the
current information, or information from a subsequent investigation, leads to
a determination that a modified or more restrictive seismic setback zone is
required, then the resultant modifications to the site plan layout shall be
subject to review and approval under a separate Conditional Use Permit (see
Condition #3 of the Draft Resolution for the Planned Development Rezoning and
Site Development Review requests).
2. Traffic Circulation
a. Shared Driveway to SanRamon Road at North Property Boundary - The
Developer shall initiate the necessary steps to provide for the
development of a shared driveway to San Ramon Road along the north
property boundary. The location and design of this driveway shall be as
generally shown by the TJKM Memorandum and graphic attachment dated
August 15, 1986. If the necessary agreements to allow the creation of
this driveway cannot be secured, then the Developer shall record an
agreement to enter in a future cross access easement with the property
to the north. With this situation, the development of the shared
driveway would be put off until the adjoining property to the north
pursues a development entitlement and has a corresponding agreement
imposed on its development permit (see Conditions #14 - #17, #24 and #27
of the Draft Resolution for the PD Rezoning and Site Development
Review).
b. Cross Access Easements - The Developer shall initiate the
necessary steps to provde for the recordation of cross access easements
for the envisioned internal circulation pattern represented on the
Revised Site Plan dated received August 14, 1986 (see Condition #26 of
the Draft Resolution for the PD Rezoning and Site Development Review).
-2-
3. Noise
Due to existing and anticipated future noise levels along the adjoining San
Ramon Road corridor, the new Restaurant structure developed with this project
shall be constructed in a manner to provide the necessary sound attenuation to
insure interior noise levels are in compliance with applicable standards as
set forth by State and local regulations.
4. Tree Preservation
A Site Specific Horticultural Report shall be prepared to assess the current
health of existing on-site trees and the impacts to those trees that will
result from the project's development. The Report shall establish mitigation
measures and a tree preservation program for the trees shown for retention on
the Revised Site Plan dated received by the City of Dublin on August 14, 1986.
Every reasonable effort shall be taken to retain the five existing cedar trees
(forming a north-to-south row along the east side of the proposed Restaurant
structure), the two cedars at the northwest corner of the project, and the 20"
olive (in the center of the easterly proposed parking lot). If necessary,
minor adjustments to the configuration of driveway/parking area (including
selective elimination of parking spaces) shall be made to increase the
probability of the long term health and vigor of trees to be retained.
These recommendations are made for environmental purposes only. The design,
engineering, and land use aspects of the project will receive additional
review. Recommendations regarding their merits will be prepared and
incorporated into a Staff Report to be presented to the Planning Commission
along with the environmental determination.
Please provide us with plans and information which give us the assurance that
the potentially significant environmental aspects of the project have been
mitigated.
Questions concerning this matter may be directed to Kevin Gailey of this
Office at (415) 829-4916 at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Laurence L. Tong
Planning Director
LLT/KJG/ao
Enclosures
cc: File PA 86-053
Lee Thompson - City Engineer
Ron Rivers
-3-
<
r-
I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
J. V. Lowney &. Associates has been retained by Hayward Fishery to
perform a geotechnical investigation for the proposed Hayward
Fishery Restaurant to be located in Dublin, California. The purpose
of the investigation has been to assess the subsurface conditions in
the project area and to provide recommendations concerning the
geotechnical engineering aspects of the project. Principal results,
conclusions, and recommendations from the investigation are
presented below. Please note that this summary is not intended to
be used for design purposes, as it is simply a synopsis of the major
points of our report. Please see the teXt of the report for complete
design recommendations.
1. A thin (1.5-foot thick) layer of sandy gravelly fill covers the
surface. The fill is underlain by very stiff moderately expansive
brown silty clay (CL) from a depth of 1.5 to 5.5 feet. This
stratum is underlain by firm to stiff sandy clays and medium
dense to dense clayey sand and gravel. In our opinion, these soils
will provide adequate bearing for a shallow spread footing
foundation.
2. Free ground water was encountered in both borings at depths
ranging from 7 to 8 feet on the west side of the Calaveras Fault
during the drilling operations. Please be cautioned, however,
that fluctuations in the level of the ground water may occur due
to variations in rainfall and other factors at the time
measurements were made.
3. The site is likely to experience strong seismic shaking during a
moderate to severe earthquake which is expected to affect the
San Francisco Bay Area during the 50-year period following
construction. In our opinion, the probability of fault rupture is
high since the Calaveras Fault crosses the site. Currently, a 50-
foot setback is established west of the fault; no setback has been
established east of the fault. In our opinion, the probability of
J. V. LOWNEY & ASSOCIATES
A> T. T' II n~~"Jr~l-j" 5
'. -~" ~1..,....... ~." ". .~"1-'1.'.:. ".: <....",......-\..;.'...a. .~.i.._.;....:....1,..
.- _. t".'.~, , _ f" ..-: ~.: }.:P; ",fr-- r\t,:~ t
, i\.Uloihfj~i~'
cxez UllvZ=- dtl;J1M;,e'1 6to1?Ol C/fL ~
:
ground movement resulting from soil liquefaction and
differential compaction at the site is low.
4. The building may be supported on conventional continuous and/or
isolated spread footings bearing on native soil or compacted
structural fill. All ground level footings should extend at least
18 inches below lowest adjacent finished grade and Can be
designed for maximum allowable bearing pressures of 1500
pounds per square foot for dead loads, 2000 pounds per square
foot for combined dead and live loads plus one-third for all loads
including wind or seismic. Footings should have a minimum
width of 18 inches.
5. We recommend that slabs-on-grade be supported on at least
6-inches of non-expansive structural fill to minimize slab damage
due to heave. In areas where floor wetness would be undesirable,
a capillary break consisting of 4 inches of 1/2-inch crushed rock,
a vapor barrier, and a 2-inch sand buffer may be used beneath
the floor slabs. The combined thickness of sand and gravel for
capillary moisture cut-off can be used in lieu of the equivalent
required thickness of the non-expansive fill beneath slabs.
*
*
*
*
J. V. LOWNEY & ASSOCIATES
~ ,-
, (
DUBLIN SAN' RAMON SERVI(,cS DISTRICT
General Offices: 7051 Dublin Boulevard · Dublin, California 94568. (415) 828-0515
Jtm.e 20, 1986
RECEIVED
iJUN 2 5 1986.
Mr. Kevin J. Gailey, Senior Planner
City of Dublin
Development Services
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
DUBLIN PLANNING
Subj ect: Application Referrals-Jtm.~, 1986
Dear Mr. Gailey:
This letter confirms our telephone conversation of Jtm.e 19, 1986 re-
garding the following referrals:
1) File No. PA86-049-Moret-San Ramon Road Specific Plan Amendment Study
The District would require a water and sewer layout throughout the
development to serve the needs of the proposed buildings. These main lines
would be maintained by the District. In addition, fire hydrant locations
would be required to be approved by the District Fire Department. The water
main extended by the District last year would be benefited by the property
owner of this site, and therefore, the District would require compensation
of the fair share of this line.
2) File No. PA 86-053-The Fishery in Dublin-Ronald Rivers-Planned Develop-
ment Rezoning and Site Development Review
The applicant has been advised that a sewer connection fee for the
proposed restaurant could range from $50,000 'to $100,000, depending on the
strength and flow of the sewer generated by the establislunent. Further in-
vestigation of similar establislunents within the Livennore-Pleasanton area
'has resulted in potential fees of doubling the above range based on the
suspended solids and bio-oxygen demand of a seafood establislunent. I
strongly urge the City to continue advising the applicant of these fees prior
to completion of the building permit process.
3) File No. PA 86-058-Pulte Home Corporation-Tentative ~fup 5588
Please refer to our letter of March 24, 1986 regarding our concerns for
water and fire services.
Yours very truly
<2w-~ ~~~
Emil Kattan
Assistant Civil Engineer
cc: Douge McMillan, Office Engineer
A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA' PROVIDES MUNICIPAL TYPE SERVICES TO CITIZENS OF AMADOP,LIVERMORE AND SAN RAMON VALLEYS
ALAMEDA AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTIES,
AT'" III 11''I''i;'~~~-''':, 1!1"-~1II
,~ ;'\'~.:-~. _~ ,~ t', '>.. ::.. ',.;:'"d-: _ 'j r"
11"i~~ ~h~~~~! 0
faTl/VW- /J6er/t y {iffit/Z1f7v75
, '
ALAMEDA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
5997 PARKSIDE DRIVE
.
PLEASANTON, CALIFORNIA 94566
.
(415) 484.2600
June 20, 1986
RECEfVED'
JUN 2 5 1986
Mr. Kevin J. Gailey, Senior Planner
City of Dublin
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
"
Subject: PA 86-053, The Fishery of Dublin
Dear Mr. Gailey:
Reference is made to your June 13, 1986 referral of subject matter.
The Zone is responsible for enforcement of the Groundwater Protection Ordinance
(Ordinance No. 73-68). Known water wells without a documented intent of future
use, filed with Zone 7, are to be destroyed prior to any demolition or
construction activity in accordance with a well destruction permit obtained
from Zone 7. Other wells encountered prior to or during construction are to be
treated similarly. Well 3S/1W 2A2 is a known well on the site.
Very truly yours,
Mun J. Ma r
General Manager
By
1"1
Vincent Wong,
Environmental
Division
VW:bkm
DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT
FIRE DEPARTMENT
HEADQUARTERS STATION
9399 Fircrest Lane
San Ramon, California
7051 Dublin Boulevard
Dublin, California 94566
Telephone:
829.2333
July 24, 1986
Mr. Kevin Gailey
Senior Planner
City of Dublin
P. O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
~ECEIVeD
JUL 251986,
DU8LfN Pl.AN~'~G
Dear Kevin:
In regards to P.A. 86-053 "The Fishery in Dublin", this
department has no objection to the construction. Access
to the area meets our requirements. An on-site hydrant
will be needed, location to be determined at a later
date. Portable fire extinguishers will be required in
addition to hood and duct protection anywhere grease
laden vapors are produced.
If you have any question, please contact me.
Very truly YO~s, ;I'
~~~
Tom Hathcox
Captain, Fire Marshal
TH:j1c
(-
_7
( ,
I,
~~
4637 Chabot Drive, Suite 214
Pleasanton Ca. 94566
(415) 463-0611
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
August 15, 1986
":' f"" ;~ l V E D
AUG 18 1986
TO:
Kevin J. Gailey, Senior Planner
FROM:
Chris D. Kinzel
C(j8L~~J ?lJ\!'!N!NG
SUBJECT:
Site Plan - The Fishery
In your July 30, 1986 letter you requested our comments on the driveway design
for The Fishery in the Dublin site plan.
The raised median near the driveway is very important to restrict left-turn
movements and possible blockage of the interim intersection just adjacent to San
Ramon Road. Therefore, an access scheme similar to that shown in the
July 3, 1986 staff study drawing should be followed.
To allow convenient "in" movements, the entrance portion of the driveway should
be 24 feet wide from San Ramon Road to the first north-south aisle way. The
portion of the entrance aisle adjacent to the median should have a minimum width
of 14 feet. The median should be four feet wide to accommodate traffic signs.
The exit aisle way should be at least 14 feet wide adjacent to the median. Curb
return radii of approximately 25 feet should be provided for the driveway, for
both the entrance and exit sides. The east nose of the median should extend to
within about ten feet of the west curb line of San Ramon Road. See the attached
Sketch.
Please contact me or Ty Tekawa if there are questions. We would like to review
the final drawings.
rhm
Attachment
cc: Lee Thompson
PLEASANTON'SACRAMENTO"FRESNO'CONCORD
~~""'""~'r""'-''''''''''''.'''''''''1'''''~
,.~ ~' P,~ :'\;.,," f,
\ II j iUi h'id.i 1 I 7
7Jt)1 ;Z1f1Vl~5 1~/5-ab S Lf~3~~8
/',
~~
4637 Chabot Drive, Suite 214
Pleasanton Ca. 94566
(415) 463-0611
MEMORANDUM
~ECEIVED
AUG 181986
DUBl.!N Pl.Af'!N!NG
--rrn=-
P\ S ~t2. '(
Pt Gc:.-a.cs S
p a.o(>o~ ~L
'2. i'
-" 4iE- 4- '
14-' '2.4'
lO'
- -t-.
S ~ l2.A-M() I'J ~o PrO
U>~l"1J7
e,t4-- ~ t
PLEASANTON . SACRAMENTO' FRESNO' CONCORD
:---'
r-
r- , ~[km
4637 Chabot Drive, Suite 214
Pleasanton Ca. 94566
(415) 463-0611
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
April 23, 1986
TO:
Lawrence L. Tong, Planning Director
Kevin Gailey, Senior Planner
FROM:
Chris D. Kinzel
SUBJECT:
Traffic Analysis of Area Three of
the San Ramon Road Specific Plan
As requested,. TJKM has undertaken an analysis of' the traffic issues related to the
land generally north and west of the intersection of Amador Valley Boulevard and
San Ramon Road.
Access to this area is of special concern primarily due to the adjacent San Ramon
Road arterial and the desire to consolidate driveway access to a minimum number
of well designed locations along the San Ramon Road frontage of the four
properties within Area Three.
In preparing the recommendations contained in this analysis, TJKM has taken into
account the San Ramon Road Specific Plan, the improvement plans for San Ramon
Road and current development proposals for various properties within Area Three.
TJKM had earlier analyzed the traffic impacts of development in this area, and
has sized the intersection in order to accommodate development from Area Three.
The intersection will also accommodate traffic from other proposed development in
the area and through traffic along both San Ramon Road and Amador Valley
Boulevard. For this reason, it appears that the San Ramon Road/Amador Valley
Boulevard intersection is able to accommodate foreseeable land uses to which Area
Three could be developed. Consequently, the traffic concerns of TJKM in this
area are related to access and circula tion as opposed to congestion or traffic
impacts.
In the various proposals that have been made to date there are essentially two
driveway locations proposed for access from Area Three to San Ramon Road. The
first driveway proposed would be located on the south side of the Hayward
Fishery holdings which would place the driveway in alignment with an existing
easement. This driveway would be located approximately 170 feet in advance of
the signalized intersection of Amador Valley Boulevard and San Ramon Road.
The other driveway is located near the north end of the Moret property
approximately 470 feet north of the signalized intersection. From a traffic
standpoint, neither of these driveways is at a good location. The driveway on the
south side of the Hayward Fisheries is too close to the major signalized intersection
and would require exiting traffic from the driveway to, on occasion, make
hazardous movements just to proceed southerly on Amador Valley Boulevard. On
the occasion where drivers exiting this driveway wanted to make either a left turn
to Amador Valley Boulevard or a U-turn to proceed north on San Ramon Road,
such a movement would be potentially quite hazardous.
PLEASANTON'SACRAMENTO'FRESNO'CONCORD
~
( ,~
The driveway at the north edge of the Moret property is located on San Ramon
,Road in advance of the special auxiliary lane being constructed to facilitate
driveway movements in and out of the Area Three properties. Thus, access into
and out of the Moret property at the proposed location would be made from a
moving traffic lane on a relatively high speed, high volume arterial.
Considering the location of the signalization intersection, the planned length of the
auxiliary lane, and the parcelization of properties, the optimum location for a
driveway appears to be at the property line common to the Moret parcel and the
Hayward Fisheries. This location would provide a driveway approximately 340
feet in advance of the intersection, which is a sufficient distance to allow traffic
exiting the common driveway to either make a right turn, proceed straight
southerly, make a left turn or even a U-turn at the signalized intersection.
Such a driveway should be of a high standard construction consisting of
approximately a 35 foot width with street type opening with curb return radiis of
approximately 25 feet. This would proyide a driveway somewhat comparable in
characteristics to the driveways recently constructed for the residential
development north of Area Three and the shopping center south of Area Three.
It is recognized that this particular location is at odds with the preliminary site
plans that have been developed for the parcels and does not align itself with the
easement on the south side of the Hayward Fisheries property. It appears this
issue of the misalignment with the easement and the driveway can be handled with
proper design of the on-site circulation. There will need to be on-site circulation
connecting the various parcels possibly necessitating a roadway or aisleway parallel
to San Ramon Road. Should this occur, such an aisleway should be located at least
50 feet west of the San Ramon Road curb line so that blockage of such an
aisleway would not normally occur unless there are more than two cars waiting to
exit Area Three.
In addition to the driveway provided on San Ramon Road to Area Three, there
will need to be access points provided on Amador Valley Court. There appears to
be a general agreement as to the location of two access points to Amador Court,
one approximately 120 feet west of San Ramon Road and an additional location
about 310 feet west of the first location. Both such access points would traverse
the current Nichandrous holdings. These two locations are satisfactory to TJKM
TJKM will be happy to respond to any questions you or any of the property
owners may have regarding these recommendations.
CDK/nlc
cc: Lee Thompson V
157-032MICK
-2-
DRAFT ORDINANCE
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE
REZONING REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST PORTION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
The Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: Chapter 2 of Title 8 of the Dublin Ordinance Code is hereby
amended in the following manner:
Approximately 1.5 acres located in the southwest portion of the City, fronting
along a section of the west side of San Ramon Road for a distance of approxi-
mately 140 feet (further identified as Accessor's Parcel Number 941-040-2-14),
are hereby rezoned to the PD, Planned Development District; and PA 86-053
(.1 and .2) The Fishery in Dublin - Rivers/Barton (Owners) - Meta 4 Design,
Inc. (Applicants), as shown on Exhibit A (Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Significance), and Exhibit B (Approval, Findings and General
Provisions of the PD, Planned Develoment Rezoning and Site Development Review)
on file with the City of Dublin Planning Department, are hereby adopted as
regulations for the future use, improvement, and maintenance of the property
within this district. A map of the area is'as follows:
, . '!....,.: \ . \ \ " i:': \ \, ;;
)-.4' 1 I \..' - "- .. . f'" \\ I
/ ' : '\J'-\ 1'~' ':;\', ? \\ ,~;
i- 1'~ \ I 't--.\i., .. .~, . .... '\ '~....~ .,J \
. \ ' 1.\ ' , '(", ,.... ' - "
I \ \.. -. "1.\,.\,,\,,. -'. v
,; '.. ,'~-\ ~;\"\ ,.\. '~'
a".. \ - ~ . \ _>-\.- .....\.... '.,," , ,~~
,\ \...\.' \.' \-- \- .. '., ' "'" ' ';~,:
\ ,. , \' ,. '."
'-' \....... '''':,".:. .~., '
_ f ~
.\ . ,
ttrl\.sEN
1) -?,/: ;:p
'. ):/ Ii":", ~CII'O
-L /,".,f~
1 ';" /\'.\)..-) ~
'(7-'1>>.~/,' \
/-://>,'-1 ~" '..,'. \,
SECTION II: This Ordinance shall take effect ana (30) days
from and after the date of its passage. Before the expiration of fifteen (15)
days after its passage, it shall be published once with the name of the
Councilmembers voting for and against the same in The Herald, a newspaper
published in Alameda County and available in the City of Dublin.
~\
'...---
~
\
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Dublin on
this th day of , 1986, by the following votes:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
AIT' AC' ;.' ~~.".~r~..~.' 1 8
ft ill~i~J~ I
TJrthff D~(NMi [f ffl2- Yo r< trJ{r Pir 8 {tJ ~ o~ 3>
..
CITY OF DUBLIN
"of
P,O, Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
M E M 0 RAN DUM
(415) 829-4600
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Kevin J. Gailey ~
Senior Planner \)
DATE:
August 14, 1986
RE:
Planning Commission Agenda Packet
Meeting of August 18, 1986
Please note that the Staff Report for Item 8.4, PA 86-049 San
Ramon Road Specific Plan, and the Staff Study for Item 8.5,
PA 86-024 Fallon School Site, will be delivered to you under
separate cover tomorrow afternoon.
KJG/ao
if .
CITY OF DUBLIN
P,O, Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
(415) 829-4600
M E M 0 RAN DUM
FROM:
Planning Commission
Kevin J. Gailey~
Senior Planner '\j
TO:
DATE:
August 15, 1986
RE:
Staff Study - Item 8.5
PA 86-024 Fallon School Site
The attached is the Staff Study for Item 8.5, PA 86-024 Fallon
School Site. As noted in my memorandum to you yesterday, this
was not included in the agenda packet delivered to you at that
time.
Also attached is the Staff Report for Item 8.4 PA 86-049 San
Ramon Road Specific Plan Study.
KJG/ao
Attachments
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Dublin Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the following
projects:
1. .
PROJECT:
PA 86-036 Kahler's Auto Repair -
Conditional Use Permit, Site Development
Review and Variance requests for a
proposed 7,200+ square foot auto repair
facility with long term exterior storage
and a proposed 7+ foot street-side
sideyard setback-(10-foot minimum
required), a proposed zero-foot sideyard
(10-foot minimum required), and with
additional Variances requested from the
City's dimensional parking requirements at
6117 Dougherty Road.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The City proposes to adopt a Negative
Declaration of Environmental Significance
which finds that the proposed project will
not have a significant impact on the
environment.
PLANNING PERMIT:
Conditional Use Permit/Site Development
Review and Variance requests to establish
a 7,200~ square foot auto repair facility
involving the construction of a new two-
story structure on a 0.30+ acre property
at the southeast corner of the
intersection of Dougherty Road and Houston
Place.
PROPERTY AND ZONING:
6117 Dougherty Road
PD, Planned Development District (with
uses restricted to those allowed in C-2,
General Commercial and M-1, Light
Industrial Districts)
(APN 941-550-045)
OWNER AND
REPRESENTATIVE:
Dennis Kahler
6392 Scarlett Court
Dublin, CA 94568
2.
PROJECT:
PA 86-049 San Ramon Road Specific Plan
Study covering the 1.4+ acre Moret
property and, as directed by the Dublin
City Council at its June 23, 1986,
hearing, the remaining acreage in the
13.0+ acre Area 3 portion of the San Ramon
Road-Specific Plan above and beyond the
Moret property and the 4.8+ acre Dublin
Town & Country Shopping Center property.
The properties in question include:
1) Moret holding (7436 San Ramon Road);
2) Rivers-Barton holding (7400 San Ramon
Road); 3) Commercial Property, Ltd.
holding (7372 San Ramon Road);
4) Nichandros holding (7360 San Ramon
Road); and 5) East Bay Iceland, Inc.
holding (7212 San Ramon Road).
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The City proposes to adopt a Negative
Declaration of Environmental Significance
which finds that the proposed project will
not have a significant impact on the
environment.
-1-
PLANNING PERMIT:
San Ramon Road Specific Plan Study to
consider adjustment of the uses allowed in
Area 3 of the Plan and to also consider
adjustment to the development criteria for
the individual properties in Area 3 of the
Plan.
PROPERTY/ZONING/APN:
Properties within this Study include the
C-1, Retail Business District properties
in Area 3 of the San Ramon Road Specific
Plan (excludes the PD, Planned Development
District - Dublin Town & Country Shopping
Center property), including:
1. Moret property
(APN 941-040-1-2)
2. Rivers-Barton property
(APN 941-040-2-14)
3. Commercial Property, Ltd. property
(APN 941-040-2-10)
4. Nichandros property
(APN 941-040-2-3, -2, -7 and -3)
5. East Bay Iceland, Inc. property
(APN 941-040-5-1).
PROPERTY OWNERS:
1. Roy J. & Ula D. Moret
129 San Wedge Place
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
2. Ronald Rivers
22701 Foothill Boulevard
Hayward, CA 94541
3. Commercial Property, Ltd.
931 Camino Ramon
Danville, CA 94521
4. J. C. & L. K. Nichandros
7360 San Ramon Road
Dublin, CA 94568
5. East Bay Iceland, Inc.
7212 San Ramon Road
Dublin, CA 94568
APPLICANT:
City of Dublin
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
3.
PROJECT:
PA 86-024 Fallon School Site - Conditional
Use Permit and Tentative Map (5616)
requests to subdivide 14~ acres into 20
lots to accommodate a mixture of planned
uses including: single family
residential, Murray School District
Administrative Offices and Corporation
Yard, child educational program for
developmentally disabled youths
(Kaleidoscope Center), and use of portions
of the property as a future neighborhood
park and senior center generally located
between Brighton Drive and Larkdale
Avenue, south of Lucania Street.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The City proposes to adopt a Mitigated
Negative Declaration of Environmental
Significance which finds the proposed
project will not have a significant impact
on the environment.
-2-
~
PLANNING PERMIT:
Tentative Map 5616 proposes the sub-
division of the 14+ acre Fallon School
site into 20 lots with the following
proposed lotting and land use pattern:
Lots #1-#17 for single family residential
use, Lot #18 for future use as a
neighborhood park, Lot #19 for the Murray
School District Administrative Offices and
Corporation Yard and operation of a child
educational program for developmentally
disabled youths (continued operation of
the Kaleidoscope Center), and Lot #20 for
future use as a City senior center. The
Conditional Use Permit request has been
concurrently filed to accommodate the uses
indicated as currently existing on
proposed Lot #19, or proposed to be added
to that Lot.
PROPERTY AND ZONING:
The subject property consists of Lots #14
and #29 of Tract 2286, comprising 14~
acres and containing the Fallon School
site and Kolb Park. The subject property
is located between Larkdale Avenue and
Brighton Drive. The site is zoned
R-1-B-E, Single Family Residential
Combining District.
(APN 941-181-27-1)
OWNER:
Murray School District
7416 Brighton Drive
Dublin, CA 94568
APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE:
Wallace B. Duncan
Wallace B. Duncan & Associates
9260 Alcosta Boulevard, Suite D-24
San Ramon, CA 94583
The hearing will be held on August 18 1986, at 7:00 p.m., at the Dublin
Library, located at 7606 Amador Valley Boulevard. Any interested person may
appear and be heard on this matter.
Information on the above mentioned project(s) may be reviewed in the Dublin
Planning Department, 6500 Dublin Blvd., Suite D, Dublin. If you have
questions or comments, contact the Dublin Planning Department or call: (415)
829-4916.
DATED: August 5, 1986
-3-
Regular Meeting - August 4, 1986
A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on
August 4, 1986, in the Meeting Room, Dublin Library. The aeeting was called
to order at 7:01 p.m. by Cm. Mack, Chairperson.
* * * *
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Commissioners Barnes, Burnham, Petty, Mack, and Raley, Laurence L.
Tong, Planning Director, and Kevin J. Gailey, Senior Planner.
* * * *
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Cm. Mack led the Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledge of
allegiance to the flag.
* * * *
ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA
None.
* * * *
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
Cm. Mack requested that reference to the Conditions of Approval for PA 86-058,
Pulte Homes Corporation, on page 82 of the minutes be verified for accuracy.
On motion by Cm. Raley, seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by a unanimous vote, the
minutes of the meeting of July 21, 1986, were approved contingent upon
necessary revisions to page 84.
* * * *
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
* * * *
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Mr. Tong advised that the Commissioners had received several Appealable and
Final Action Letters.
* * * *
Regular Meeting
PCM-6-91
August 4, 1986
PUBLIC HEARINGS
SUBJECT:
PA 86-058 Pulte Homes Corporation -
Stedman & Associates Tentative Map 5588
request.
Cm. Mack opened the public hearing and called for the Staff Report.
Mr. Gailey advised that subsequent to the public hearing held on July 21,
1986, it became apparent to Staff and the Applicant that there were several
items related to possible adjustments to the project's grading plan which must
still be addressed and resolved. He stated that the Applicant was requesting
a continuance to August 18, 1986. Staff recommended that the Commission
provide an opportunity for those present in the audience to give testimony and
then grant the request for continuance.
Mr. Tom Fahey, resident on Betlen Drive, expressed his concern about the
request for continuance as he felt that other residents more greatly impacted
than himself by the subject project may not be able to attend the following
hearing.
Mr. Elliott Healy, 11362 Betlen Drive, said he felt positive about the
direction provided at the previous public hearing, and requested that the
Planning Commission not change the recommendations made at that meeting.
Cm. Raley restated a concern he had expressed at the previous meeting
regarding the grade changes between portions of the project.
In response to a concern expressed by the Commission that the Applicant be in
attendance and prepared to present the subject proposal at the next Planning
Commission meeting, Mr. Tong advised that it may be feasible to continue the
project to an unspecified date and to renotice the public hearing prior to
that meeting. He also advised that the project could be continued to the
meeting of September 2, 1986.
On consensus of the Commission, PA 86-058 Pulte Homes Corporation Tentative
Map 5588 Request was continued to the Planning Commission meeting of
September 2, 1986.
SUBJECT:
PA 86-076 Bordeaux Estates/Diamond Signs
Conditional Use Permit application.
Cm. Mack opened the public hearing and called for the Staff Report. Mr. Tong
advised that the request was for approval of a sign which already exists at
the southwest corner of Silvergate Drive and Rolling Hills Drive. Mr. Tong
noted that the neither the Applicant or a representative were present.
On motion by Cm. Raley, seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by a unanimous vote, the
public hearing was closed.
In response to an inquiry from Cm. Raley, Mr. Tong said the Silvergate
extension should be open within the next week or two. Mr. Gailey gave a brief
status of the work being done which has necessitated the closure of the
Silvergate extension, and advised that the major concern related to potential
conflicts between earth moving equipment and the general public.
Regular Meeting
PCM-6-92
August 4, 1986
On motion by Cm. Raley, seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by a unanimous vote,
PA 86-076 Bordeaux Estates/Diamond Signs Directional Tract Sign Conditional
Use Permit request was -continued until the meeting of August 18, 1986, in
order to permit the Applicant to remove the existing Bordeaux Estates
directional sign located on the west side of San Ramon Road, the large banner
sign located in the 'vicinity of the Bordeaux Estates Model Complex, and all
other signs erected without prior City approval, and to provide for the
opening of the Silvergate extension.
SUBJECT:
PA 86-078 Sign Technology/Kaufman & Broad
Off-Site Directional Tract Signs -
Conditional Use Permit requests.
Cm. Mack opened the public hearing and called for the Staff Report.
Mr. Gailey advised that approval of the signs would provide directional
information to visitors to the 129-unit Kaufman & Broad California Vista
Project. He said Staff recommended the Planning Commission adopt the
Resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit application.
Pam Thiessen, representative for the Applicant, stated that the application
was submitted by Sign Technology, not Diamond Signs, as indicated on the
agenda.
On motion by Cm. Raley, seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by a unanimous vote, the
public hearing was closed.
On motion by Cm. Raley, seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by a unanimous vote,
PA 86-078 Sign Technology/Kaufman & Broad Off-Site Directional Tract Sign -
Conditional Use Permit requests was continued to the meeting of August 18,
1986, in response to the Commission's concerns regarding the construction
activity for the subject project (specifically the timing of the opening of
Silvergate Drive to through, public vehicular access).
SUBECT:
PA 86-060 Dublin Security Storage Site
Development Review and Conditional Use
Permit requests.
Cm. Mack opened the public hearing and called for the Staff Report.
Mr. Gailey displayed a copy of the site plan and advised that the Staff Study
had been prepared to give the Applicant an indication of what must be
accomplished during each phase of the project development. Mr. Gailey
reviewed the Staff Report in detail, and advised that Staff recommended the
Planning Commission adopt the Resolutions approving the Negative Declaration
of Environmental Significance and the Conditional Use Permit/Site Development
Review applications for the subject project.
In response to an inquiry from Cm. Mack, Mr. Gailey advised that Condition #12
should be adjusted to state that the minimum floor elevation for all new
buildings should be 330 or an elevation determined acceptable by the City
Engineer.
Glenn Kierstead,
put in temporary
configuration of
Applicant and Owner, requested
curbing in the cul-de-sac area
the turn-around facility.
that he be given the option to
and to adjust the location and
Regular Meeting
PCM-6-93
August 4, 1986
Mr. Gailey recommended that, as a result of discussions with the Livermore
Dublin Disposal Service, a condition be added which would stipulate that the
handling of trash enclosures would be subject to review and approval by the
City Planning Department. -Mr. Gailey referred to a letter received from
Mr. Hathcox, DSRSD Fire Department, dated August 4, 1986, related to the
proposed construction design of Building B (without openings on the second
story). He recommended that an additional sentence be added to Condition #18
stipulating that if windowless second story construction is utilized,
automatic smoke removal vents be required. ,Mr. Kierstead indicated he
concurred with the Condition, and that the plans will be revised to reinstall
the windows on the second story.
On motion by Cm. Barnes, seconded byCm. Raley, and by a unanimous vote, the
public hearing was closed.
On motion by Cm. Petty, seconded by Cm. Raley, and by a unanimous vote, a
Resolution adopting a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance was
approved.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-040
ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE
CONCERNING PA 86-060.1 AND .2 DUBLIN SECURITY STORAGE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
On motion by Cm. Raley, seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by a unanimous vote, a
Resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit/Site Development Review for
6031 Scarlett Court was approved contingent upon the following revisions:
Condition #6 be deleted (regarding Variances from the Building Code),
Condition #12 be amended to require a finished floor elevation of 330 on the
National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 or an elevation determined acceptable
by the City Engineer, a sentence be added to Condition #18 which coincides
with concern expressed by the Fire Department (regarding proposed construction
design), and indicating that an additional fire hydrant will be required,
Condition #27 be amended to permit temporary asphalt curbing, while
stipulating that permanent curbing be installed when the project is finalized,
and that a sentence be added to Condition #15 regarding the design, location,
and size of trash enclosures and requiring that they be subject to review by
the Planning Department.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-041
APPROVING PA 86-060.1 AND .2 DUBLIN SECURITY STORAGE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
6031 SCARLETT COURT
* * * *
NEW BUSINESS OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Mr. Gailey advised that the Union 76 Service Station on the corner of Amador
Valley Boulevard and Village Parkway will be re-opened as a service station.
Cm. Mack referred to several Fictitious Business Name Statements which
recently appeared in the paper, and requested that Staff follow up to insure
that the businesses are in compliance with City zoning regulations.
Regular Meeting
PCM-6-94
August 4, 1986
Cm. Mack circulated a newspaper clipping written about a development by Pulte
Homes which has been approved by the City of Alameda.
Cm. Mack said she had attended the Joint Tri-Valley Commissioners meeting and
,felt it was more informative than the previous meetings.
The Commissioners indicated they would each be attending the Hacienda Business
Park "Strolling Down Main Street" event.
* * * *
OTHER BUSINESS
None.
* * * *
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' CONCERNS
None.
* * * *
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:18 p.m.
* * * *
Respectfully submitted,
Planning Commission Chairperson
Laurence L. Tong
Planning Director
* * * *
Regular Meeting
PCM-6-95 .
August 4, 1986
CITY OF DUBLIN
PLANNING COMMISSION
SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: August 18, 1986
TO:
Planning Commission
Planning Staff f"\.S\\
FROM:
SUBJECT:
PA 86-076 Bordeaux Estates/Diamond Signs
Directional Tract Sign Conditional Use Permit.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
PROJECT:
Conditional Use Permit for a Directional Tract
Sign on the southwest corner lot of Rolling
Hills Drive and Silvergate Drive (APN
941-2772-001).
APPLICANT:
Paula Fortier
Diamond Signs
2001 Tarob Court
Milpitas, CA 95035
PROPERTY OWNER:
Kaufman & Broad
6379 Clark Avenue
Dublin, CA 94568
LOCATION:
Southwest corner of Rolling Hills Drive and
Silvergate Drive.
ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER:
941-2772-001
PARCEL SIZE:
6.92 acres
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Categorically Exempt, Class 4
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
Section 8-87.66 of City's Zoning Ordinance requires approval of a
Conditional Use Permit for a Directional Tract Sign in any district.
Section 8-94.0 states that conditional uses must be analyzed to
determine: 1) whether or not the use is required by the public need; 2)
whether or not the use will be properly related to other land uses,
transportation and service facilities in the vicinity; 3) whether or not the
use will materially affect the health or safety of persons residing or working
in the vicinity; and 4) whether or not the use will be contrary to the
specific intent clauses or peformance standards established for the district
in which it is located.
Section 8-94.4 states the approval of a Conditional Use Permit may be
valid only for a specified term, and may be made contingent upon the
acceptance and observance of specified conditions, including but not limited
to the following matters:
a) substantial conformity to approved plans and drawings;
b) limitations on time of day for the conduct of specified activities;
c) time period within which the approval shall be exercised and the proposed
use brought into existence, failing which, the approval shall lapse and be
void;
ITEM NO. -', ,
COPIES TO: Applicant
Owner
PA File 86-076
d) guarantees as to compliance with the terms of the approval, including the
posting of bond;
e) compliance with requirements of other departments of the City/County
Government.
BACKGROUND:
This item was first considered at the August 4, 1986, Planning
Commission meeting. At that meeting, the Commission identified two concerns:
1) the removal of all existing Bordeaux Estates signs erected without prior
City approval, and 2) the re-opening of the closed portion of Silvergate Drive
(on which the Applicant is requesting approval to locate the directional
sign). Due to the absence of a project representative or applicant to respond
to the Commission's concern, the item was continued to the August 18, 1986,
Planning Commission meeting.
To date of this writing, Silvergate Drive has been re-opened and the
banner sign at the Bordeaux Estates model homes complex has been removed. The
off-site directional tract sign located on San Ramon Road north of Amador
Valley Boulevard has not yet been removed. However, the Applicant has
indicated the sign will be removed by August 15, 1986.
RECOMMENDATION:
FORMAT:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Open public hearing.
Hear Staff presentation.
Hear Applicant and public presentations.
Close public hearing.
Adopt Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit.
ACTION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the attached
Resolution approving PA 86-076 Conditional Use Permit for a
Directional Tract Sign.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A - Sign Copy and Location
Exhibit B - Resolution approving PA 86-076 Conditional Use Permit
Background Attachments:
1. Location Map
-2-
OJ'
rnO
CJ)~
-MO----
~n1
~
~
~~
Otfj
~~
O~
~O
~Z
~oo
z~
~~
=~
'~~
~~
~>
~~
~trj
.~
~
.
~~
, '\:) x-
,-C. \'->
'"
~ -0'1
~
"'3
...:5'"
~~
c. -
29
\v
J:-
" 1
~ -l:::
r~ .......
1: ~ ~
::>
"i- t)j <'
"- -
'~\J , ~ '\P
\;. .. (}I~ ~
~ .......... c: :::> ]\
S;: ~ ~ ,J Q.....
~ ~ -
!~ EXHIBIT A
?0 j
,. <L_
-!:-
~. \0{ :3
'^
\.'v fA-~" -C>7&
0
-
, -'
If
'.
d.
\.
}
I
....
1/
.
'1"...." _ -..-'"
-,..
<t",tr Jt..<$IW~_
I
I
...
i
..
I I I .
. I I I
. .. .
'T--
.
.... . ". ~....~~o.r
.:0.,. ::o":o:~
':- ~i~:. ;'. ~~~~
~ - po""........
I _L.L-_I
. .. .
I . _.1., . .
-----.
1-;.. __ ..."J
.
-
....
......
II I/'x 10' Sign Structure 11-
DIAMOND5IGN5INC.~~
'"
'0
EXHIBIT
"""PA e<o ,- 67 ~
..
.1 ""'"3
/.",,~::'
. ..
.1:.__>_
.,:
'~'.:
100
,-
~;..;
.' ~ '.~ ..
REC:E , V E D
JUL\15 W8G
~ .:..-
'.t'.
DUBliN PlANNING
"'
II')
. .: .- f~ '. .
_.;:~:, c
,-"~ .
~~:: .
',".:J
. '~v:,~~.r~;:""."~
1IIIl~~,",,< ""A.,
,. '-'-', ...
i~' . ~ ...'"'''~ _ ~",.., . ~.
._e'ExHiBITA ~43
.,', '}?~:.~,-C:7V:: ,
~'~':~{:;;:i'i:'~~~ififrt~:~0: "
RESOLUTION NO. 86 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPROVING PA 86-076, DIAMOND SIGNS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST
TO LOCATE AN OFF-SITE DIRECTIONAL TRACT SIGN ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
SILVERGATE DRIVE AND ROLLING HILLS DRIVE
WHEREAS, Paula Fortier, representing Diamond Signs, filed an
application for a Conditional Use Permit to locate an off-site directional
tract sign for Bordeaux Estates on the southwest corner of Rolling Hills Drive
and Silvergate Drive; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said
application on August 4, 1986; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the request is categorically exempt in accordance with
the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending the application
be conditionally approved; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission heard and considered all said
reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Dublin Planning Commission
does hereby find:
a. The use is required by the public need in that it provides directional
information to the general public for the Bordeaux Estates.
b. The use would be properly related to other land uses and transportation
and service facilities in the vicinity.
c. The use, if permitted under all circumstances and conditions of this
particular case, will not materially affect adversely the health or
safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity or be materialy
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or
improvements in the area, as all applicable regulations will be met.
d. The use will not be contrary to the specific intent clause or
performance standards established for the district in which it is to be
located.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin Planning Commission does
hereby approve said application as shown on Exhibit "A" on file with the
Dublin Planning Department and subject to the following conditions:
1) The sign shall have a maximum single-faced area of 32 sq. ft. (a
double-faced sign with a maximum area of 32 sq. ft. on each sign may be
used) and a maximum height of 12'.
2) The tract sign shall not obstruct the visibility of motorists,
pedestrians and cyclists. The precise location of the sign shall be
subject to review and approval by the Planning Director. The sign shall
be relocated from its present location it determined by the Planning
Director to not meet the intent of this Condition.
-1-
EXHIBIT B
1711 B(o~ 070
3) This approval shall remain in effect until August 28, 1988, or. until the
last lot is sold, whichever occurs first, and shall be revocable for
cause in accordance with Section 8-90.3 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance.
4) The Applicant shall remove said sign and support upon expiration of this
Conditional Use Permit approval.
5) The Applicant shall post a letter-of-credit with the City of Dublin in
the amount of $500.00 to secure the faithful performance of Condition #5
(removal of sign). Said letter-of-credit shall guarantee that these
funds will be available and that the instrument of credit will remain
effective until October 28, 1988. An alternate instrument of credit may
be used subject to review and approval by the City Attorney.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of August, 1986.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Planning Director
-2-
\
SM"~MOIt
.......11
.,
",AI.L(T
OllltlSTIAN
C(NT(R
-------------------
~~ll~~~ENT I
.'~I:~*%;!.<:' ;,- ::-~:,~:~$~~~F~-~~";:-.~:
CITY OF DUBLIN
PLANNING COMMISSION
SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: August 18, 1986
SUBJECT:
:::::::: :::::\:~i1r
PA 86-078 Sign Technology/Kaufman & Broad Off-
site Directional Tract Signs - Conditional Use
Permit request to establish two off-site
Directional Tract Signs for the 129 unit Kaufman
& Broad California Vista Project (Tract 5410),
previously identified as the Silvergate
Highlands Townhouse Development.
TO:
FROM:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
This item was initially scheduled for consideration at the Planning
Commission hearing of August 4, 1986. The item was continued to the hearing
of August 18, 1986. The continuance was prompted by the Commission's concerns
regarding the construction activity for the California Vista Project
(specifically timing of opening Silvergate Drive to provide for through
vehicular public access).
Subsequent to that action, Kaufman & Broad completed the rough grading
at the California Vista site and opened Silvergate Drive to through vehicular
access (during the week of August II, 1986).
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution,
Exhibit "A", of this Supplementary Staff Report, approving the Conditional Use
Permit request for use of two directional tract signs.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit "A" - Draft Resolution
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ITEM NO.
1.2.
COPIES TO: Applicant
Owner
File PA 86-078
RESOLUTION NO. 86
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPROVING PA 86-078, SIGN TECHNOLOGY, INC. (APPLICANT);
CARTER/SEE'S CANDY SHOPS, INC. (OWNERS) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
REQUEST FOR DIREcrIONAL TRAcr SIGNS
WHEREAS, Sign Technology, Inc. filed an application for a
Conditional Use Permit to allow use of two Directional Tract Signs for the
Kaufman & Broad California Vista Project (Tract 5410); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold public hearings on said
application on August 4, 1986, and August 18, 1986; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the request is categorically exempt in accordance with
the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending the application
be conditionally approved; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all said
reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Dublin Planning Commission
does hereby find:
a. The use is required by the public need to provide directional information
for a new housing development to the general public.
b. The use would be properly related to other land uses and transportation
and service facilities in the vicinity.
c. The use, if permitted under all circumstances and conditions of this
particular case will not materially affect adversely the health, safety or
persons residing or working in the vicinity or be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the area, as all
applicable regulations will be met.
d. The use will not be contrary to the specific intent clause or performance
standards establishd for the district in which it is to be located.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin Planning Commission does
hereby approve said application as shown on Exhibit "A" on file with the Dublin
Planning Department and subject to the following conditions:
1) The signs shall have a respective maximum single-faced area of 32 sq. ft.
(a double-faced sign with a maximum area of 32 sq. ft. on each side may be
used) and a maximum height of 12'.
2) The Directional Tract Signs shall not obstruct the visibility of
motorists, pedestrians and cyclists. The precise location of the signs shall
be subject to review and approval by the Planning Department.
3) The signs currently in place at the two subject locations shall be
removed within 15 days of the effective date of this permit and shall not be
re-established at said locations until after the framing inspection approval of
the model complex.
4) This approval shall remain in effect until August 29, 1988, or until the
last townhouse is sold, whichever occurs first. The applicant shall remove
said signs and support upon expiration of this Conditional Use Permit.
-1-
Dr::J jt
EXHIBIT X~Q~::ut.
5) The Applicant shall post a letter-of-credit with the City of Dublin in
the amount of $500.00 to secure the faithful performance of Condition #4
(removal of sign). Said letter-of-credit shall guarantee that these funds will
be available and that the instrument of credit will remain effective until
October 14, 1988. An alternate instrument of credit may be used subject to
review and approval by the City Attorney.
6) This approval shall be revocable for cause in accordance with Section
8-90.3 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance.
PASSED,APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of August, 1986.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Planning Director
-2-
.."-")',,",:-.
CITY OF OOBLIN
PI.J\NNI~ ~ISSIOO
AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: August 18, 1986
SUBJEcr:
Planning Commission
Planning staff~C:;i1:
PA 86-036.1, .2, and .3 Kahler's Auto Repair -
Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review,
and Variance requests for the proposed
construction of a 7,200+ square foot auto repair
facility with street-side sideyard, a sideyard
variance, and dimensional parking variances and
with use of long-term exterior storage.
TO:
FRa1:
GENERAL INFORMATION:
PROJEcr:
Conditional Use Perlnit, Site Development Review,
and Variance requests for a 7,200+ square foot,
two-story auto repair facility with long-term
exterior storage and with a 7+ foot street-side
sideyard setback (lO-foot minImum required), a
O-foot sideyard (lO-foot minimum required), and
with additional variances from the City's
dimensional parking requirements.
PROPERTY OiVNER AND
REPRESENTATIVE:
Dennis Kahler
6392 Scarlett Court
Dublin, CA 94568
LOCATION:
6117 Dougherty Road
Dublin, CA 94568
ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER:
941-550-045
EXISTING LAND USE
AND ZONING:
planned Development (PD) District allowing both
Light Industrial (M-l) and General Commercial
(C-2) uses. Present land use consists of a
single-story structure used for offices by a
moving and storage company.
SURROUNDING LAND USE
AND ZONING:
North: Truss manufacturing and storage yard; PD
allowing M-l and C-2 uses.
South: Brake shop; PD allowing M-l and C-2
uses.
East: Parcel "B" of Parcel Map 4008, occupied
by a truck repair and truck stop; PD
allowing M-l and C-2 uses.
West: Bowling Alley; C-2.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ITEM NO.
'~3
COPIES TO: Applicant
ONner
PA File 86-036
ZONING HISTORY:
1962:
The site and area were rezoned from A, Agricultural
District, to M-l, Light Industrial District (447th
Zoning Unit).
11-4-79:
The subject property was rezoned by Alameda County
from the M-l District to the PO, Planned oevelopment
District, restricting use of the property to uses
allowed by the M-l and C-2, General Commercial
District (14llth zoning Unit.)
3-4-81:
Alameda County Approved a Conditional Use Permit (C-
3973) for the adjoining truck stop and weigh station.
At the time of the approval, the subject property was
part of the 4.8+ acres subsequently subdivided in 1982
into three parcels.
7-11-82:
The Dublin Planning Commission approved a Tentative
Parcel Map (PA 83-016) for the site. The subject
proposal consists of Parcel "B" of Parcel Map 4008.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
Section 8-49.l(d) establishes as an allowable use (subject to Site
Development Review approval) in a C-2, General Commercial District, the
operation of an auto repair facility.
Section 8-5l.3(b) of the Zoning Ordinance establishes as a Conditional
Use in a M-l, Light Industrial District, the use of long-term exterior
storage.
Section 8-94.0 states that conditional uses must be analyzed to
determine: 1) whether or not the use is required by the public need; 2)
whether or not the use will be properly related to other land uses,
transportation and service facilities in the vicinity; 3) whether or not the
use will materially affect the health or safety of persons residing or working
in the vicinity; and 4) whether or not the use will be contrary to the
specific intent clauses or peformance standards established for the district
in which it is located.
Section 8-94.4 states the approval of a Conditional Use Permit may be
subject to conditions.
Section 8-95.0 of the zoning Ordinance states that the Site Development
Review is intended to promote orderly, attractive, and harmonious development;
recognize environmental limitations on development; stabilize land values and
investments; and promote the general welfare by preventing establishment of
uses or erection of structures having qualities which would not meet the
specific intent clauses or performance standards of this Chapter or which are
not properly related to their sites, surrounding traffic circulation, or their
environmental setting. Where the use is proposed, the adjacent land uses,
environmental significance or limitations, topography, or traffic circulation
is found to so require, the Planning Director may establish more stringent
regulations than those otherwise specified for the District.
Section 8-95.5 of the zoning Ordinance states that at the conclusion of
the Site Development Review investigation, the Planning Director shall
determine from reports and data submitted whether the Use and Structures
proposed will meet the requirements and intent of this Chapter, and upon
making an affirmative finding, shall approve said application. If from the
information submitted, the Planning Director finds that compliance with the
requirements on this Chapter, and the intent set forth herein would not be
secured, he shall disapprove, or approve subject to such conditions, changes,
or additions, as will assure compliance.
-2-
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The City proposes to adopt a Negative Declaration
of Environmental Significance which finds the
proposed project will not have a significant
effect on the environment.
NDrIFICATION:
Public Notice of the August 18, 1986, hearing was published
in The Herald, mailed to adjacent property owners, and
posted in public buildings
ANALYSIS:
Land Use:
The subject proposal involves the relocation of an existing auto repair
operation from its current location at 6392 Scarlett Court to a new structure
at the subject property. Auto repair use, along with the limited amount of
exterior long-term storage proposed, is considered consistent with existing
adjoining land uses and the intent of the site's underlying zoning. Auto
repair is listed as an allowable use in the C-2, General Commercial District,
and therefore is consistent with the site's PD (C-2/M-l) zoning designation.
The exterior long-term storage is proposed to be limited to the 25' x 65'
fenced area at the rear (easterly) portion of the site and will be effectively
buffered by its proposed location, use of perimeter fencing, and construction
of the proposed new 20'8" high structure.
Development of a functionally laid out car repair facility at this site
is hindered by the property's width. The width of the subject property is
substandard, as regards the median lot width required for an M-l, Light
Industrial District (lOO-foot median lot width required - 76.9-foot median lot
width existing). The existing width, when reviewed in terms of a double-
loaded auto repair facility (i. e., interior car racks/workstations loaded on
either side of a central drive aisle/maneuvering area), would make development
of the site for the proposed use questionable without securing the requested
street-side sideyard and sideyard variances.
Site plan Layout:
The application was initially submitted on April 23, 1986. A detailed
summary of recommended design changes was prepared by Staff in response to
that submittal (see Attachment 8) and prompted preparation of revised plans,
which were submitted on July 23, 1986. The revised application materials
address the items listed in Staff's June 16, 1986, memorandum on a point-by-
point basis (see Attachment 4) and include input from Staff/Applicant meetings
held subsequent to the preparation of the June 16, 1986, memorandum.
The revisions accommodated a reduction in the magnitude of the street-
side sideyard variance (setback was increased from a 6.9' setback to a mixed
7.5' to 8.5' setbacks) and eliminated the bulk of the originally requested
front yard setback and dimensional parking variances proposed within the front
(west) parking area.
The request for a zero-foot sideyard setback variance was retained in
the revised submittals. This variance request is supported by Staff due to
the presence at the shared property line of an existing structure (with a 0-
foot sideyard setback). The adjoining brake shop to the south runs 158 feet
along the common property line. The proposed auto repair facility will be
built along an 82-foot portion of that adjoining structure.
The basic layout of the site provides customer parking at the front 1/3
of the site. Directly adjacent to this parking is the covered vehicular entry
to the proposed structure (entry will double as the service write-up area) and
the public pedestrian entry to the structure (access to the counter write-up
area and public waiting room). The structure occupies the bulk of the center
of the property (footprint coverage of the proposed structure is 5,638+ square
feet, or 43%, of the l2,990~ square foot site). -
The revised parking layout appears adequate both numerically and
dimensionally. In the case of a full parking lot, the proposed location of
the driveway entrance to the building can doubly serve as one leg of a hammer-
head turnaround to provide easy turnaround and exit maneuvers.
-3-
The Applicant is requesting that sidewalks along Houston Place not be
required to be installed along a majority of the Houston Place frontage. The
basis of this request is tied to the Applicant's perception that limited use
of the sidewalks will exist until the property across Houston place to the
north redevelops to a more intensive commercial use. The City Engineer has
indicated a desire to require that curb and gutter be installed along the
length of the property's Houston Place frontage. The City Engineer has
indicated he would accept deferment of installation of sidewalk for the
portion of the Houston place frontage located east of the first driveway along
Houston Place.
Architecture:
The review of the plans initially submitted prompted Staff to advise the
Applicant of general concerns about the architectural detailing of the
proposed structure. Concurrence was reached that the architectural detailing
of the front (west) elevation of the building should receive highest priority
as it was the high-activity area as well as the most visually prominent
portion of the proposed structure.
While the project revisions submitted by the Applicant served to largely
satisfy the stated architectural goals, Staff has several additional
adjustments it feels should be considered. The Draft Resolution for the
Conditional Use Permit/Site Development Review request recommends the
following changes be incorporated into the project (see Conditions 4
through 7):
1. Provision of a second floor overhang along the length of the front
(west) building elevation to match the overhang proposed on the western edge
of the north elevation.
2. Raise the height of the area proposed to use a metal-seamed roof
treatment one foot above the height of the unroofed portion of the structure.
Additionally, provide a metal roof trim cap atop the brick wall portion where
no roof treatment is proposed.
3. Reinstitute use of brick columns along the blank portions of the
street side (north) elevation (3 columns) and the rear (east) elevation (5
columns) to help break up the mass of these two areas.
4. Increase depth of the "tower" pop-out to a minimum depth of two feet
and change the exterior treatment to predominant, or complete, use of split-
face dark gray bricks.
Landscaping:
The preliminary landscape plan submitted for the project proposes use of
turf lawn and trees. Staff has several adjustments it feels should be made to
the preliminary plans to make best use of the pnJposed landscape areas. The
recommended adjustments include the following (see Conditions 22 through 25):
1. Mound the landscaping to be established along Dougherty Road and
modify the landscape treatment in this area to include three additional trees
and to introduce use of clumped shrubbery planting.
2. Mound the landscaping to be established along Houston place, running
the mound up against the street-side sideyard building elevation (north
elevation). Modify the landscape treatment of this area to include six
additional trees (with some trees to be 24-inch box specimen sized trees) and
to introduce use of clumped shrubbery planting.
3. Introduce more intensive landscaping at the base of the front
building elevation (west elevation) using both shrub planting and ornamental
trees (four small "color" trees).
4. Introduce vine and/or vertical tree/shrub growth at the exposed base
of the adjoining structure to the south.
-4-
RECa1MENDATION:
FORMAT:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Hear Staff presentation.
Open public hearing.
Hear Applicant and public presentations.
Close public hearing.
Consider and act on three draft Resolutions:
A) A Resolution regarding the Negative Declaration of
Environmental Significance.
B) A Resolution regarding the Variance Application PA 86-
036 .1) .
C) A Resolution regarding the Conditional Use Permit/Site
Development Review applications (PA 86-036.2 and .3).
AcrION:
Based on the above Staff Report, Staff recommends the planning
Commission adopt the following Resolutions: Exhibit A approving
the Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance for PA 86-
036.1, .2, and .3; Exhibit B approving the Variance Application
(PA 86-036.1); and Exhibit C approving the Conditional Use
Permit/Site Development Review applications (PA 86-036.2 and .3).
A'ITACHMENTS:
Exhibit A - Resolution approving the Negative Declaration of
Environmental Significance for PA 86-036.1, .2, and .3.
Exhibit B - Resolution approving the Variance application PA 86-036.1.
Exhibit C - Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit and Site
Developnlent Review applications PA 86-036.2 and .3.
Exhibit D - Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review, and
Variance submittals.
Background Attachments
1 - Location Maps
2 - Copy of Applicant's Written Statement.
3 - Environmental Assessment Form (dated received April 23, 1986).
4 - Memorandum submitted in conjunction with submittal of revised
plans.
5 - Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance for PA86-
036 .1, .2, and .3.
6 - Site Photographs.
7 - Pertinent Agency Comments
8 - Staff Memorandum dated June 16, 1986, outlining recommended
design changes (in response to initial application submittal).
-5-
RESOLl1I'IOO NO. 8()-~
A RESOLUTIOO OF THE PLANNING <:n1MISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADOPTING A NEX;ATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIROOMENI'AL SIGNIFICANCE
roNCERNING PA 86-036.1, .2, and .3 KAHLER'S Aura REPAIR -
CUIDITIOOAL USE PERMIT, SITE DEVELOPMENl' REVIEW, AND VARIANCE RBJUESI'S
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as
amended together with the State's administrative guidelines for implementation
of the California Environmental Quality Act and City environmental regulations,
requires that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impact and that
environmental documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has
been prepared for PA 86-036.1, .2, and .3; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did review the Negative
Declaration of Environmental Significance and considered it at a public hearing
on August 18, 1986; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission determined that the project,
PA 86-036.1, .2, and .3, will not have any significant environmental impacts;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission
finds that the Negative Declaration of Environm~ntal Significance has been
prepared and processed in accordance with State and Local Environmental Law and
Guideline Regulations, and that it is adequate and complete.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of August, 1986.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATI'EST:
planning Director
EXHIBIT A
P<4FT ;<!'Es~L.v77PJ1/ - J)/aT; Jk~tMJ
RESOLUTION NO. 80'::
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING CCl-1MISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPROVING PA 86-036.1 KAHLER I S AUTO REPAIR
VARIANCE ~S FOR STREEr-SIDE SIDEYARD, SIDEYARD, AND
DIMENSIONAL PARKING VARIANCES
WHEREAS, Dennis Kahler filed Conditional Use Permit, Site
Development Review, and Variance applications requesting approval of a proposed
7,200! square foot auto repair facility with street-side sideyard, sideyard,
and dimensional parking variances, and with use of long-term exterior storage
at 6117 Dougherty Road; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a Public Hearing on
August 18, 1986, on this application; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said Public Hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, this application has been reviewed in accordance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and a Negative
Declaration of Environmental Significance has been adopted (Planning Commission
Resolution No. -86) for this project, as it will have no significant effect
on the environment; and
WHEREAS, the Staff report was submitted recommending the Variance
application be approved; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all said
reports, recommendations, and testimony as hereinabove set forth;
NCW, THEREFCRE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission
does hereby find that:
a) There are special circumstances (substandard lot width and
area) which would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other property
in this vicinity under the identical zoning classification;
b) The granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of
special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in
the vicinity and zone;
c) The granting of the application will not be detrimental to the
persons or property in the neighborhood or to the public welfare;
d) The requested variance, as conditioned, will not be
inconsistent with the General Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby
adopt said Variance application subject to the following conditions:
1. Development shall generally conform with the revised plans
prepared by stoddard Design, A. I. A., consisting of five sheets dated received
by the City of Dublin Planning Department July 23, 1986, and the changes called
for by the Conditions of Approval for the Conditional Use Permit and Site
Development Review requests PA 86-036.2 and .3.
2. The approval period for the Variances shall be valid until
August 28, 1987. If construction pursuant to PA 86-036.2 and .3 has not
commenced by that time, this approval shall be null and void. The approval
period for the Variances may be extended one additional year (Applicant must
submit a written request for the extension prior.to the expiration date of the
permit) by the Planning Director upon his determination that the above stated
Findings will continue to be met.
EXHIBIT
8
-I
!7Mrr !t:rOLvT/PnJ - t/ ~/Tt'l LE
'--"'.-,','",-\,-',';!"
~; ,.. - ~ ~.',,'
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of August, 1986.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT :
ATI'EST:
Planning Director
Planning Commission Chairperson
-2-
~,-..c;..~;-
. -,.....,..''-"-..'
.-', ,"
RESOLUTIOO NO. 86-
A RESOLUTIOO OF THE PLANNING CCfoDotISSIOO
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPROVING PA 86-036.2 AND .3 - KAHLER'S AUTO REPAffi axIDITIOOAL USE PERMIT
AND SITE DEVELOPMENI' REVIEW 6117 DOOGHERTY ROAD
WHEREAS, Dennis Kahler filed Conditional Use Permit, Site
Development Review, and Variance applications requesting approval of a
proposed 7,200+ square foot auto repair facility with street-side sideyard,
sideyard, and dimensional parking variances, and with use of long-term
exterior storage at 6117 Dougherty Road; and
WHEREAS, the adopted City of Dublin zoning Ordinance provides in
part for the establishment of auto repair facilities in C-2, General
Commercial Districts, as an allowable use and further provides for the
establishment of long-term storage as a Conditional Use in the M-l, Light
Industrial District; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on said
applications on August 18, 1986; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, this application has been reviewed in accordance with the
prov~s~ons of the California Environmental Quality Act and a Negative
Declaration of Environmental Significance has been adopted (Planning
Commission Resolution No. 86- ) for this project, as it will have no
significant effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, a concurrent request, PA 86-036.1, for variance approval.
to establish a street-side sideyard of 7+ (lO-foot minimum required), a
sideyard of zero feet (10 foot minimum required) and for variance approval
from the City's dimensional parking requirements has been previously approved
(Planning Commission Resolution No. 86- ___); and
WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that the
Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review applications be
conditionally approved; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all said
reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth; and
WHEREAS, the proposed land use, if conditionally approved, is
appropriate for the subject property in terms of being compatible to existing
land uses in the area and will not overburden public services;
N<l'l, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Planning Commission finds:
a) Construction of the 7,200+ square foot auto repair facility with
ancillary long-term exterIor storage serves the public need by providing
for the relocation and expansion of an existing commercial auto repair
facility.
b) The uses will be properly related to other land uses, and transportation
and service facilities in the vicinity, as the proposed uses will be
compatible to said land uses, and transportation and services facilities
in the immediate vicinity.
c) The uses will not materially adversely affect the health or safety of
persons residing or working in the vicinit~, or be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or
improvements in the neighborhood, as all applicable regulations will be
met.
EXHIBIT C
-1-- preA-ff f!ESoLV71lJ,J - c.vP /.sDR-
.-.",_.,' ,:-,:'_')3~::,~"
, ... -'--.'"
.,'",c.,..,\,:''':-.",,-, ,-
',,; ,,~ '''.' -'.. -
d) The uses will not be contrary to the specific intent clauses or
performance standards established for the district in which they are to
be located.
e) All provisions of Section 8-95.0 through 8-95.8 Site Development Review,
of the zoning Ordinance are complied with.
f) Consistent with Section 8-95.0, this project will promote orderly,
attractive, and harmonious development, recognize environmental
limitations on development; stabilize land values and investments; and
promote the general welfare by preventing establishment of uses or
erection of structures having qualities which would not meet the specific
intent clauses or performance standards set forth in the Zoning Ordinance
and which are not consistent with their environmental setting.
g) The approval of the project as conditioned is in the best interest of the
public health, safety and general welfare.
h) General site considerations, including site layout, orientation, and the
location of buildings, vehicular access, circulation and parking,
setbacks, height, public safety and similar elements have been designed
to provide a desirable environment for the development.
i) General architectural considerations as modified by the Conditions of
Approval, including the character, scale and quality of the design, the
architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, building
materials and colors, screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior
lighting, and similar elements have been incorporated into the project in
order to insure compatibility of this development with its design concept
and the character of adjacent buildings and uses.
j) General project landscaping provisions for' irrigation, maintenance and
protection of landscaped areas and similar elements have been considered
to insure visual relief to complement buildings and structures and to
provide an attractive environment to the public.
k) The project is consistent with the policies contained in the City's
General Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby
conditionally approve Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review
applications PA 86-036.2 and .3 as shown by materials labeled Exhibit A, on
file with the Dublin Planning Department, subject to the following conditions:
Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with
prior to issuance of building or grading permits and shall be subject to
Planning Department review and approval.
1. Development shall generally conform with the revised plans prepared by
Stoddard Design, A.I.A., consisting of five sheets dated received by the
City Planning Department, July 23, 1986, and the changes called for by
these Conditions of Approval. Approval for the Conditional Use Permit
shall be until August 28, 1988. The approval period for the Conditional
Use Permit may be extended two additional years (Applicant must submit a
written request for the extension prior to the expiration date of the
Conditional Use Permit) by the Planning Director upon his determination
that the Conditions of Approval remain adequate to assure that items a) -
d) and k) of the above stated Findings will continue to be met. Approval
for the Site Development Review shall be valid until August 28, 1987. If
construction has not commenced by that time, this approval shall be null
and void. The approval period for the Site Development Review may be
extended one additional year (Applicant must submit a written request for
the extension prior to the expiration date of the permit) by the Planning
Director upon his determination that the Conditions of Approval remain
adequate to assure that items e) - k) of the above stated Findings will
continue to be met. Development shall be subject to the Conditions
listed below.
2. Comply with the City of Dublin Site Development Review Standard
Conditions and the City of Dublin police Services Standard Commercial
Building security Recommendations.
-2-
ARCHAEOLOGY
_:-..-
3. If, during construction, archaeological remains are encountered,
construction in the vicinity shall be halted, an archaeologist consulted,
and the City Planning Department notified. If, in the opinion of the
archaeologist, the remains are significant, measures, as may be required
by the Planning Director, shall be taken to protect them.
ARCHITECI'URAL
4. Exterior colors and materials for the building addition shall be subject
to final review and approval by the Planning Director and shall be
consistent with those of the existing structure. All ducts, meters, air
conditioning equipment and other mechanical equipment on the enlarged
structures shall be effectively screened from view with materials
architecturally compatible with the main structure.
5. The "roof" treatment proposed along the top of the west elevation and
along the westerly 18+ feet of the north elevation shall be modified by
raising it approximately one foot above the remainder of the untreated
walls. Brick columns shall be added to the east elevation (five columns)
and to the blank portion of the north elevation (three columns). The
"tower" treatment shall be adjusted to reflect a minimum "POJ;r-out" of two
feet.
6. Treatment of the proposed "tower" shall be modified to use split-face
dark grey blocks. A metal trim cap along the unroofed portions of the
exposed perimeter shall be provided.
7. The second floor area at the front (east) building elevation shall be
cantilevered out to match the outset shown for the western portion of the
building's north elevation.
DRAINAGE
8. A grading drainage plan shall be prepared and shall be submitted for
review and approval by the City Engineer. Calculations (hydraulic) shall
be prepared by the developer for review by the City Engineer to determine
the sizing of drainage lines.
9. The area outside the building addition shall drain outward at a 2%
minimum slope for unpaved areas and a 1% minimum in paved areas (with a
maximum gradient of 5%).
10. Roof drains shall empty into approved dissipating devices. Roof water,
or other concentrated drainage, shall not be directed onto adjacent
properties, sidewalks or driveways.
11. Where storm water flows against a curb, a curb with gutter shall be
used. The flow line of all asphalt paved areas carrying waters shall be
slurry sealed at least three feet on either side of the center of the
swale.
DEBRIS/DUST/CONSTRUcrION AcrIVITY
12. Measures shall be taken to contain all trash, construction debris, and
materials on-site until disposal off-site can be arranged. The developer
shall keep adjoining public streets free and clean of project dirt, mud,
and materials during the construction priod. Developer shall be
responsible for corrective measures at no expense to the City of Dublin.
Areas undergoing grading, and all other construction activities, shall be
watered, or other dust~palliative measures used, to prevent dust, as
conditions warrant. Provision of temporary construction fencing shall be
made subject to review and approval of the City Engineer and the Building
Official.
FIRE PRarEcrION
13. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall supply written
confirmation that the requirements of the Dublin San Ramon Services
District Fire Department have been, or will be, met.
-3-
;:;':~-:~';.'.
:~--
GRADING
14. Grading shall be completed in compliance with the construction grading
plans and the soil engineering recommendations as established by a Soil
and Foundation Study prepared for this project (subject to review and
approval by the City Engineer). The report shall discuss the compaction
of soil under the proposed building addition.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS, AGREEMENl'S, AND SECURITIES
15. Improvements within the public right-of-way along Houston Place shall
include curb, gutter, and sidewalks (west of the western driveway),
driveways, and paving (as appropriate). Improvements must be constructed
in accordance with approved standards and/or plans.
16. Installation of the sidewalks for the remainder of the Houston Place
frontage may be deferred until deemed required by the City Engineer.
Cost of installation of this portion of the sidewalk shall be covered by
a deferred improvement agreement and/or performance bond deemed
acceptable by the City Engineer.
17. Prior to filing for building permits, precise plans and specifications
for street improvements, grading, drainage (including size, type, and
location of drainage facilities both on- and off-site) and erosion and
sedimentation control shall be submitted and subject to the approval of
the City Engineer.
18. The subdivider shall enter into an Improvement Agreement with the City
for all public improvements. Complete improvement plans, specifications,
and calculations shall be submitted to, and reviewed by, the City
Engineer and other affected agencies having jurisdiction over public
improvements prior to execution of the Improvement Agreement.
Improvement plans shall show the existing and proposed improvements along
adjacent public street(s) and property that relate to the proposed
improv~nents. All required securities, in an amount equal to 100% of the
approved estimates of construction costs of improvements, and a labor and
material security, equal to 50% of the construction costs, shall be
submitted to, and approved by, the City and affected agencies having
jurisdiction over public improvements, prior to execution of the
Improvement Agreement.
19. An encroachIDent permit shall be secured from the City Engineer for any
work done within the public right-of-way where this work is not covered
under the improvement plans.
LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION PLANS
20. A detailed Landscape and Irrigation Plan (at 1 inch = 20 feet or larger),
along with a cost estimate of the work and materials proposed, shall be
submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director. Landscape
and Irrigation plans shall be signed by a licensed landscape architect.
21. The developer/owner shall sign and submit a copy of the City of Dublin
Landscape Maintenance Agreement.
22. Landscaping installed along Dougherty Road shall be established on a
landscape mound and shall include three additional IS-gallon sized trees
and shall also include clumped plantings of shrubs. This treatment shall
be of a design and layout to aid in the screening the front end of parked
cars from view along Dougherty Road.
23. Landscape planting along Houston Place shall be established on a
landscape mound running up to the north wall of the proposed structure
and shall include two additional trees and shall also include clumped
plantings of shrubs. Of the trees along Houston Place, the six trees
along the building frontage shall be 24-inch box specimen trees. The
landscape treatment shall be of a design and layout to aid in softening
the building height and setback of the adjoining two-story building
elevation.
24. Additional landscaping (shrubs and two ornamental trees) shall be provided
along the base of the west building elevation.
-4-
25. Additional landscaping (shrubs and/or trellis climbing vines) shall be
provided along the portion of the south property line adjacent to the
exposed portion of the adjoining building.
LIGHTING
26. Exterior lighting shall be of a design and placement so as not to cause
glare onto adjoining properties. Lighting used after daylight hours
shall be minimized to provide for security needs only. Wall lighting
around the exposed perimeter of the new building shall be supplied to
provide "wash" security lighting. photometrics shall be submitted to the
Planning Department for review and approval.
SIGNAGE
27. Any new project or building signs shall be subject to review and approval
by the planning Director prior to installation.
STORAGE AND EXTERIOR AcrIVITIES
28. With the exception of long-term exterior storage of vehicles in the rear
fenced storage area, all demonstrations, displays, services, and other
activities associated with the new structure shall be conducted entirely
within the structure. No loudspeakers or amplified music shall be
permitted outside the structure.
MISCELLANEOUS
29. The materials used for pedestrian walkways into the new building shall be
of a uniform design and shall be subject to review and approval of the
Planning Director. The pedestrian circulation system shall include
handicapped access.
30. The Developer shall be responsible for correction of deficiencies in the
existing frontage improvements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
31. All improvements shall be installed as per the approved landscaping'and
irrigation plans and the drainage and grading plans prior to the release
of occupancy. Additionally, grading of the subject property must conform
with the recommendations of the Soils Engineer to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
32. The existing well located on the subject property shall be abandoned in
accordance with the requirements of the Alameda County Health Department.
33. The location and means of on-site storage and enclosure of trash shall be
subject to review and approval by the Livermore-Dublin Disposal Service
and the Planning Department prior to the issuance of building permits.
34. Except as specifically altered by the above conditions of approval,
development shall comply with the conditions established for PA 83-016.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of August, 1986.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Planning Commission Chairperson
A'ITEST:
planning Director
-5-
\;f: f
i~ '
:;i: ,~
:;1' t
I!i ,t'~'
I' ~ ' iJ.
!l ~V
'.'!' ,.\"l.
''1 1'1
"i,1 ~;m
i" ~H:
D ;li~Hi
~PhZI
~ 12 ~ \J Irl'.s" ~ irrM.)~'
f!!,\
_S~
I~
'.-.
I',
HOUSTON
PLACE
.;.
b.O'
zt..O'
1 7,&;, ,
Z5.0'
1'1',0'
l!>Z.O'
"';)'.. ....I
'.. ". ,..'
.~
.-=- ".-
-~
-~
f"'
()
eJJl$t..ISl'( /Vy__
- Hr:~ rLlA: -. -----
...
"~
A
IF;;,-~
"J~'<....
. ' -
'<,
,,~.
,-
~:
':':..~"
,...,
"I ~
\J <t
~I~
~
"
,
\
\\
~_eJ(/.\T'~
N6U- (c..o.,,=,
")
""
. '.~ r"',R.. r'- c;.,lUoVG(.
I2..:;;{)P:......~.-
I . 'I- ':. /
" ~. - "rlAtlt ~~"' ;- .
. i. , i . d!er.iST~>>d, ~(l>1AJ4 u...rr}"-
"::'-' :,-:::,,"~:j::~_:~~--- _...:_~--------_..._--_.:.
. ':1-. I :
;f~,t't'tZ;~C-VV.T/ON i
''1'- r~" (JlSTA-<.J....) ,
~;f:.:{~.:i'~:.. ," "
~;zlCS'i4;w 6"XIS7>'~ o.tl'ltZ
-,..:-:' l1tr'~"'A/t;) ;.eE~
:.q ..: '~__""IIL ~t!!7cJ "Z.AJ:..IJIN'" ./__
,T . ~~;,,:,.'. --..
.r'I......~ 1('
:~;_ ~l.1.;,../.,.... <. :: . ~
-C) ~tl"~'~" '. . . ~
l:j':{i,: . .. Q
to ": '.:; &fsT'...... lNV"'Gis ___
-LLJlJ<.yL"""'URsHO>'tt)~-. .........
. I. ."(. ' . ';~:~:;!_
. -r ,
~. ;: ,',
iMec1' , I _________PR:OP05ED.8U/LD/Nc,
s./7;<i!Y r, ',~, l-/or:;,/!;,;:::p;,"oC>"( .-......,,\/s /,Vl/&?<"'~'"
, , ". ~O^" Pt.-/l~ e =I;ET fkJrTOt1,
~ ,~
!
.. 1''1't:IVAr~
-?TOK!Atiid' "...IeD'
'\,
lp; F. 333.51
.-------, .
, ~Sii~
i
,
\
\ ..
" .' .-
\
"
.-,
.I
;~
.'0_.
-,
~
. ~'"
..~
. ..----"
~'t_II.#
CHlfltCJl../AJIC
Ft:NCI!!
t.ySLATS.
i'-'-
I
'......".-
o
/7.&>'CoffflolCT -srA.L.I...
_....AIU ,-/~/_-t.:. F.t::I.J(..e.
8Z.0'
.,0.'0.'
"
..;
~
Z~.o'
..~j.i2,~~'~~;~:~.. . : J ~:...
::::T~~O/'lC.r:;D 51Te.' DLAN:~;';
'''~.il~/..'UI C-/...Jt:,,;.. 1.Ii, - .~ ,
;:~.~~ 1//3'. IJ-O'
1!'L.bG '
I
~
<yo
IS.--'""~---c...-::S
(I .~ ,,.' 1':'.....1
~
,
I,
1
tXltl E> rr
C\JP
-
~
NORTH
~~ .
..
'",,:'>1~;
"
.,.."..f'
,. 3(~ ~\:.~
'.. ~:~:,,~~,.~.i.
" ~-' ......,.~:,: :.~,~..;
.~ ~;: ,;:~i~lt
: '~'<.:
- ;..'-/<,~~.
.i;C,..~
-/~::~~~
::,~'~:,"
:; ~~,
I
I
, 1
~ \
';
l
f.'
I1ACHfNG"3ROP
. 11.~.!!.I8/~
.'
,,,*,' ~ f
,',
'l
:"
,-
.-:J.';
:}~.
F:'~'
.-
'f'"''
l,;
t
~
~
l::
~'
1'1
.
..
~
"
"..; 'r-:. .r
,. ....,
. ">"~f~Ct~.t~
.' .j
.~
.1
..,
.'
C\
,- CJFFIC.c. '
,J5L<'~_u
"'-.
,.
J
" ~.' .
.;..
~..
---
ST~
....h".L
'79(ECVTl7Ve-4"'/7c&
,::rtt:z:~'.
-"f,' 'r-: f
,..~".. ~-eot~'~ 4- Tj)~::~:
:~:fi,:...)':,:::,}::~;:,;'.~1'.~~"A>~c ."
: ~ .
..
~
"
,
1.=11"'\/1'1.
\"
, ,
Ii'
',.;-.. H--1
',.j.:;. . ,
,";'" .
.,
.. .'" .
.'
'~.... . -' ,
,:..
I
'F-1'"
, ' ,
. '..
:'\i';"(" ",..
I:,~;\ l.
'.l,..... . "
"... . .,
,:'L~':~,."),~~':~ '. .<>.; , ," ~ ..
{J";,1'.'.'t
". .
~\:.rt~:;/,':'..~.~
,.
.r--
I .
I
L-
~
---+
",
.
:', ". . f' ~~:':;::':
~f:t1tt:;' ,
. '. ~ . '. , I
.... ~"A,qs -S-rOICA6tB'
---~ 't,<4t,Yloi" -. ~
',' ,,,.
" ,'"
-'
i
,.
..-,
T
:~:~(
:;;;(~: . !~{j:;::'>"-':"'i.." ..";,'..
"'). .' . :.;,''eR6INE ,'ASSenBLY
..;~r<: '..~ ,;,.. '::.
i:
I., ;::
t
.
.
v,.
14,[t.
'_P..c::.1Jlt6
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I I!
I 1
I II
~
'l:
V
,
i
L,_
0';:)"
''{
.!
.~
~
~
~
"
,;
"
II;
~(
i "
\ ~.
,-=---
,
.-t
I
1
(
(
f
'J/l'\mNC::t
.~, ~ty~1
UIlI6:.Dr Ft.""'" N!JD-.../
. ,_.-_._--~._------_.-._--_.-.__...~. --..--,--.- -
'.. . ~
" .......- - _._..,-~....~..
;I~
. -. .......:;~
__, .._._~_._ __O.....-~___, ___.__._".
. '
~
........
L-___~__'_._ ,....-.-.
. _......-..~--'..._.
_.._...._._.._.___"___ ___._______--l..._..
. ~:. ., .. ,', ,
~"." ..-
"i
,~ -
'.'-'
..'.
_.. .--.---u______,.__~__
.~~.. ,-. r -'..-:-:-,:~-~p.------:.".~.:i.:..:~
._-~-_.....--",-,
. -----... .-
~ ,,'. ...\
..~:~:~.. -,,~;.:7 : ~:~:.:---:.~~:-.~=~~ -.-:_~._:~-,:=~..~ -.~: ' -'.---.-' --.
,.... t
:::3~;~i~~1;~~~'~:~:l:~c~:..:~:,',:..: ,
"~'3~;:t"".'-'".:., '..;,
,'.' .'..;;,
.:.,'.:','. '...'....li':-.:.
. ',~:':', :.:ry;:'j.'~~ - '~"I-~ .\~. ,;
.,
';",;;!
~.~ :..-. :,..,~.,. ...-...~:,:
.,'.t '. ~
~ ... ". ...
., .....
.. '.'....,." ...
. -. '. '.
',r~t-
...;..:{~f((fCs~,{.:
, ~ ' .' .~,.>,;~;J:;.::r;;ir>
h:"'WPf~~ _~:RJiofll(B&YON~),"
. j \. "{'::\.::,:' > '.:
~-$I'LlT"AGII' 1"9=a"&>..~"_'~'
i
i
"
.;0. ,:;.,.),.::.__'1
,;':".,
;'~1;(f.~~iW.""'.?.,.". 'V
,;.~..\_:~-, ;i.: .:.-,..:,.~i)";:', l'r:. ':,-'< ,: '.J: ~. " ;..':
'~'.'i~: ~~,:;.;.;:'.~'. "C':'1':';;:;';"1.:f.~,.1," ~, "'~ ~:'~:, ~~~:~:': .,:\~
~ :.' ':~:. -.-.-.~,.~:; . .'.~~::~';0'~~::--," ~':',::,:,": ~~"~~,'__.' ,:.~':=-, '" ,:-:,~-:t :;-....... +~~.~'.;.~.~~-.~_.
... ...,.,.,.....---~ '. ~~'-'\---~-~.
~',; '.'
.-'i;.'{;.:..'...-,/'f,('.:;....:
",~,:"j~j{;~i.:
I;''''' '.:~
'. ..1'" ~
,_, "",'~.. ..".... ". .. I .' :... '.t" ':-'.:., ".:'
.,.......
......1....
~ ~... .1...,:..... "., ~..' ..... .,' . .','
'" '., j"
";,"1.,' ".,'.' .
. -.
.... '-, 110,"
<:.1'1.1/. <:O~VIYN (t;>AIC
. ..'....';.,'..... . '. ., ...'
. .....f .,......
.',' '.'
"
., .,.,'.:
.'
. '.,
~ 1-.
".- .....'
, .'
..... .-
::-;
, .
.::, ,).:i~::t<,~'~,'"
1 ~~'J~!, ~.,';!::~\\~ .~.l'. ':~'...""
.' ,:' ...?~~.~,~;.~.~~j.~~?'~ /"-.
"~~\".,.(7.,::;; :
',\":::;: ,', ,:f;":~": .;.
,.....'!' '.';
.....-....,:..,....
.' '- t...
'.
:.. . ..... ~
... " ';\','
':.....
<:1'11.1 lOI""K ,;,oJ
.... '.
. ' . . ,
--.-....-- .......- ...,.- .-.--.-....
.--.----------.-..-..--.---.-
~"lIt,,(l/IiHr etli16r
.......,
. . .. '. ~ .' ,~
c!'lll (O....'K vzeY)
'. :.... '.
"
,"
/
/
/
"
'\.,
"
!;/'1u..(;.l__r.:-(;.M'r';
r ~. .,;.
"oJ ':. ~,,<,,~
.. '. . "
"
,. .
.:-~
, .'
':;~-~;.+ ~.;:\
;':"~:--.j:"r
l \.~: ;." "
." .'."' .:.' '" ..'
~, ...... .
.. . ~.
:r-~~~"-';-6.
. ' .
,
" .. :~. ~( '.; ';'
',;1'
'i' ",\l~'::
'.
'.' .
.... .., "
" . ,'.
"
'.
'.'
-EASTELEv:'......'.-i-.:' .
.~~...,/~O,.,,_ '
.... '..
"
~
~
"
"'. ....
j '. .
rINTW:"~'1. .(:N!-~"A~~T
~"""'7>Wl>W4~"""It__' ,
I ' ' .
'_,.LlT "Mt:, t:t1C1.J"DIIRJ.: 4UY)
"
\', .' ....
.,.LlT,.IlCE t:tt.'t(~/"HT_)
~"L ,.ItA". ~/rlE&'IIvINPtfI;$
.' ".'-'. '':'';''";'r
,-:
~1JG,qr. -slL.L. ~ WINDOwS
, '.
-"
, ..,
",
. .;
"$""" ,-",e.. c..f11../ (OIl~K 41!'1Y)
"c
Sf'(.I11"ACe ':'.I"1:lJ. ()./","r .u:.y)
,
""''Ic,,.,''~I'ftlt~i;:~;'~1;;if; ~j"*~i\~U:~~'~ ~
:'~-:.:..t.'..:.~.:~1r~"lo '~:"::":..::'. !.....~rnw,....':'"..~l:f
l'-~":' .....; ....,/<0 f~
" . '~..I"~~"S!:;,""~ ~,';' -..,,'/'1
'_;;/~.li:~~\:~;:':l'" ~~.
, . ::j.j:~ ;:d~~:~~~~;~.~;*l~,V.,~~ '~Y:~ :~.:~ :~;8':; :<: :'H:.\.1,~t::':~/;.:H'" \'
--U:i:'D' ofon"MC,< t! ~ LIIII4
"".".('"
~. ">f'~~"~~:{":~~i;I;'.
. ":;\';&1":';'
'~. , ~t~!~
~.:'. .... '.
-'"
. ......:..-
......'.
, . ...,. .' z::: .
'I' .... ' '. .'..,... . :
:..~.".(l." ',". -~-,
.
."
:-. ..:~ . ,
.'
"~.;i~,:j-VS~.;:l;'J:~ '1"t:;'. 0", j;,"
::'-~'~..~,!-,\'(l'''':r''.,:, ;....~':h..(:!.:.r.~,..:'.':.'~~ '-/~'." ,;.~ .
1lpm'HEI:Ev.-:7f5i57f'N 1"'L4t:e:
,,},,'i;,-"~~.-;--:~~!~: .,':..1. ':;l,,:.~~..;;:'t:-~.:_:,. " .
':
';
~.. ,
. ~, I ~: ; '.1 .. t \'i' "
" ..' ,I.,: if~, ~:,:r
',',,' ":.1";:<~ f.'.;.lj~I,.,t "
,.'. " 't J .;;;..'';' \.If'':.~ ~'. ::-j .....
,', . ,,',, "', "J'~ l, ~'f'~'~" t l" I. I . .
, t .' ..' . .,r.,. .'~ ~'''..., '" . jjll' '
,;;..'
,';:.,
1it'.:
~ -,", ',.'
, " '; .:.,:
:'.';;
.,.... .
, '
~.
..,'.
---
, .
.. .
'-"'.'~. .-....".-
. _ 'r__. ....~_. .
.. ~~.
.'-.. '. .....
''''''--7''''
'.:.,/
",i,'.
,-
.-.~~_.:....;-~ .'
'.. . ~ .
\, ..~,
,'..1\,.
-;"'-
'l~~ ;
.,.,-,,,
','
'",
.... ..:,
", ~~.~;'C
. ,: . . ~~,..,
.
"
.' ." .,
...:--;.,....
... .
'~.
'.~
,
:, .
.~. ':~
.,1
'~
,'.;'1< 'to
...".f..;I..... ... I'"
,', =.\,."
,;;".,,'}'.
. '.' ~:': ." ,,....,' ....::.. """t ";
l ~'..' , ::~.;~ ~
.:,-.~;;,;~t.,'; ~:~ ~'1: ::;~' ,~<" .
I.' . ....:. ~:\';lT:"it\?t" ,""~'" '.; 'i 'of. '
-;:.~~~~~~~'-;"'""~';'-.-r....-.";"w,...,~-- ..:...,.,... '..^',..... ::...,:~:f,).~;!I~hr~i;~~
", \ I ".. '.. ; ,rl .'; j., ., ;~.
".' tl ...'.; ~.' '''~l' " r';.'~" \:~"";1,':"" 'r~'l"~"':"~~,,",,,~;, ,l..-..~;.~.,'
,~i~t:;;~.;'l~.}~I:"~;r7;';~'):~f~rt"'\r~;~S~.~ J..~.~~\'./i!...:,; ~~:~.~I':f,l} i' ~;.\,~, l.;,~
"" ,\". - - ,,-It,j..-.;''-~4~~'. ,..",!,...".1..."\:J.~"",,',~..;
- -- -',;~n~i;':Y:>:;>:"".".
.'"," .' ."
'.
-.....". ."
...... .'
,: .....
.. ..' '.~ . '". ':
--: ...:....
. . "
~.. .
. '
, pRo:POS~"D'..,.,,'''./.
, CDtFf/i!.U)P/W../V'"'/
.!'If 86.. 03f;..
"
I:
f
I
!
=IVED
,q,86 -036
;.....__:Lsorc:~.
,.
'-l."-.
i 3 ;,986 CIT( OF DUBLIN
. - - -
.LANNING BASE MAP
J_ SCALE : 1in_O.OOfl. N.T.S.
"-MOOCI
, TRACT 5072,5073,!5074 , DATE: JULY 1983
. .. u "
TRACT 4930 ,!l180 a P.M. 4050 '. -, .-----..--.--.--
- ----- --- ----.---.--..
P.M.4008 . TRACT 4749, TRACT 49!10 ATTACHMENT 1
,P.M.2922,TRACT 4943. 4991 . 485965003
. TRACT 4929 , ..
TRACT 4978 .. . LiC!J"(7dtV /11.~f.s
TRACT4719 ". . " . ,
, . ,- . . . .-
-
..~.;
<.
,
!
t
, Estate EJ,..I7,A. DOUGHERTY \Bk.B Pg.751 ('
Pfn. AMENDED .,~. TOWN of DOUGHERTY tBk.c....'P<:l:J6)
P.M.2817 128/83
Scole.'I"=200' ..T.R 4978 14'/3
P.MA008,"2/"
---
-
205
POUG~I"R.r... ~
, ..
, l~
l70$Ac 1
'-8 .
.
, @
2.55Ac.t.
'_ Nr?F"I'nr
)'
- -" I
..... .,:". ----I
.., ~~
-'-.
a ':-~~~-~:~..
>>171!1k. ,;.
~ c;;;-..' ." " ,
rn~'_' i~ :~;
H'~'~ fp ,
.E3 c;) <0 J.!
'946
....",
"....'-"~
~;.:.
'l:'-'-::'::"~"_~
~~. . .;', . -:,-'
~~.:;..:' .,,1-. A.
; -::'- '. "..
).
..,....-
..
"
RECEIVED.
L 2 0 1985
DUBUN PlANNING.
RECEIVED.
JL\.U 0 1985
DUBUN PlANNING
i
1
\
t - --:
./
"
::~. \-, ...: ..~-. ""
.. . , .... ,- . :1. ~!. . 'l
~~~:-~--~T'>' '.',- - .'~ ..... . ;--:_--". '. ~ fA 8fo-03lii~ .l
~~S~'.i...\4';J~?t;,;~~;i~~;:.'" 'r>~'. "~: .:>'. :.: .'-,,:'. .-"~'.~'::.: " .-. ~,.", ,.' ,-..' ....... ;A"..:
.~~~);.J.{~~~. 4.._..~~ri~..':-."~'~~',:,.,:::~','~,~, ~.' l/"a..~:F~'..._: '.;:.~- ~'~"::~J:t.;.....~ ':',,-'~"6'~~.' .r. '.' .'; _. _:~'". ~__.,:,_:~'~~"~~;:.~'~:-~-:_:'t
:-;,',"..i;1,.;.~.;...,~,,.,.~"'_,, .,~ '""""'~~"r..' '. '. ',,,, ~,..?~ '..,,,',. .,".':'; " .' "'- '.". ,....':::: .' ,.,...,...'r:..:,:.
.~JJ.f.~t~;.;&:~r;:.::~:tJf?i,;::; :~;;::~}~:~:::~,t)::.;):. </?~~/:~..:~::\,~:~.}. ~ :<"~.'~ ~'~'.: ,:-' '..' ;:.\/>(~~',"
KAHLER.S
~
SERVICE & REPAIRS ON
PORSCHE
MERCEDES
April 23, 1986
RECEIVED
is'R 2 3 '1986
Ci ty of Dublin
Planning Department
6500 Dublin Boulevard
Suite D
Dublin, CA 94568
-; ~ ...-"
DUBLIN PLANNING
Gentlemen,
We are submitting plans for 6117 Dougherty Road, Dublin;"
CA; parcel #4008, for preliminary site development review and
a variance.
We presently have leased a portion of the building we are
located in on Scarlett Court since 1974. It is our desire to
own our building and property, thus giving us the pride and
control of ownership, and also allowing us to provide our
customers with the best possible atmosphere to have their
autos serviced and maintained. Our intent is to build a
high-quality auto repair facility at this site.
The city should incur no costs because of this proposed
project and will receive numerous benefits, including increased
revenues through taxes, and also initiating a new precedence
in ,the development of non-dealership independent automotive
facilities in the Valley. It is important to make clear that
we are concerned of the attractiveness and uniqueness of our
project. No outside storage of disassembled autos or unsightly
equipment will exist on this site.
A variance is requested on the Southern lot line. With the
unusually narrow width of this lot, our building was best ,
designed using 'a' lot line on the South. Please note that the
existing building which shares our property line to the South is
also located on 'a' lot line, as well as an automotive-related
business. '
Thank you.
Sincerely,
6392
KAHLER'S PORSCHE MERCEDES SERVICE
~~~
__.. _ .___n _ _______
ATTACHM~NT P
IIFJ11L1c/fN1fS =;Jf,reT JtHI~
'- .
.. - ~ .
I
..
T
c
(
-.
..;,:,
.RECEIVED
{\PR 23 ',986
PANo. 8(P~O%,I,,2.~I~
FORM, lNTef<.lM
CITY OF DUBLIN
DUBLIN PLANNING
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
(Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section. 21000 et sec.)
The state CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) Guidelines
require the City to take an active role in preparing environ-
mental documents. This comprehensive Environmental Assessment
Form is designed to assist the City in preparing a complete and
accurate environmental assessment in a timely manner and in
conformance with the state CEQA Guidelines. The form has three
sections: General Data, Exemption, and Initial study. The
applicant is requested to complete section 1, General Data. The
Planning Staff will prepare either Section 2, Exemption, or
Section 3, Initial study. Please type or print legibly in ink.
SECTION. 1. GENERAL DATA - - - to be completed by the APPLICANT
1. Name (if any) and address of proied: 6117 DOllglip,-t"y Rei, T)l1hlin
2. Proposed use of property: Automotive Repair Shop
. 3.
Name, address, and telephone of Appl icant:
6392 Scarlett Court. Dublin, CA
Dennis J. Kahler,
41')-82<:)-70'10
. .
'4. Name, address, and telephone of con~act person Din ~ddition to applicant or
o ins-tead of applicant:
5. Attached plans are@preliminary orDfully developed.'
6. Building area: 5310
sq. ft.
7. Site~rea:51,230
[Xlsq.ft. orOacres'. 8. Current zoning: PD
9. Maximum Building Height' 45
~ft. or o stories.
10. Describe ~mount of daily traffic generated by number, type and time of day:
. femployees 8am - 5pm" ApproximAt"f>ly 10 rllc::t"nmprc:: .'l ei.'lY
11. Number of off-street parking spaces provided: 11
12. Number of loading facilities provided: 1
~,-\
JlJ}Ji'l13
I
", ,. ........ .r
r-
c
\2s
, '-
"13. Proposed developmen~ schedule: .beginning:Summer 86 completion: Fall-Winter 86
14.a. If residential: number' of new 'units ; number of existing units
bedrooms ; unit sizes ;range of 0 sale prices or Dren~s
dwelling Osingle fcmilyD duplexD mul~iple.
;number of new
; type of
14.b. If commercial: scope of projec~D neighborhood, D city, rg regio~al
sales mea 0 sg. ft. or 0 acre; estimated employment per shif~' 5 ; hours of
operation 8: 00 - 5: 30
14.c. If industrial: materials involved
hours of operation'
. ; estimated employment per shift
14.d. If institutional: major function
estimated oc~upancy
i estimated employment per shift
;.hours of operation
15. Describe City permits required: ~ Site Devdof'Wlev-:t" ~"i~-"'v; D va.';;tL~c.e.;
o AJWlIV\istriA.til1e. CoMitioV\a..t Ltse. f.e.rMitj 0 Feclt::\SSjfi~{lc~ Cre:ZOr\i~ ;
D Plall\~ De.\I€..lopm€N\-tj D CoV'ditiDv1OJ USe.. ftY"l'v\rtj 051511\ 0\1\ l!j.i
o otY-e. Y"
16. Describe other public approvals required: fK] unknown; 0 lace! agencies; 0 regional
agencies; D s~ate agencies; D federal agenci~s; for '
CERTIFICATION
I he"reby certify that the information submitted is true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and bel ieF. I unders~and that the findings of this Environmental Assessment apply only to the
pro ject as described above.
Signature:~~' Date: 4-22-86
~.,
Name (print o~ type):
Dennis J. Kahlpr
A ~ 'J..
-. .":.-~:r-;:o:;:.:u~~;.~-;.~!;~ ,,-::~;::Jl>:"'~~,-.l-~.;;JS;~~
:-T.'!'"~";ffC,",?T<;"p.$".l:V," -" ';'~-:;-"S~->"-Pi"iSP;xr~1.'7i:; "
TO: CITY OF OUBLIN, PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FROM: DENNY KAHLER, KAHLER'S PORSCHE MERCEDES SERVICE
RE: DESIGN CHANGES PROPESED BY STAFF
I. A. A 20 FOOT SETBACK IS NOW USED WITH 2'6' OVERHANG FDR PARKING, AS
SUGGESTED BY STAFF.
B. THE PARKING SPACE ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER IS NO LONGER IN THE 10
FOOT SIDE YARD
C. THE NORTH ELEVATION HAS BEEN MODIFIED AS DISCUSSED WITH STAFF.
THE FRONT 20 FOOT HAS BEEN INSET THREE FOOT, A TOWER THEME WITH
A METAL SEAM ROOF HAS BEEN ADDED.
D. THE PARKING LOT HAS BEEN WIDENEO TO 57'6' AS REQUESTED.
E. VARIANCE APPROVAL ON SOUTH PROPERTY LINE AND ABOVE ITEMS IS
REGUESTEn.
2. A. HANDIC~P SPACE IS NOW LOCATED ON NGRTH SIDE OF DRIVEWAY RAMP AND
HANDICAP ACCESS IS SANE MATERIAL AS WALKWAYS.
B. THE BUILDING HAS BEEN MOVED TOWARD REAR PROPERTY LINE.
C. LANDSCAPING HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE
BUILDING
D. THE DRIVEWAY HAS BEEN CENTERED IN THE REAR LOT AND ACCESS FOR
TRUCK MOVEMENTS HAS BEEN PROVIDED.
E. LANDSCAPING IS REQUESTED ON THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE, HOWEVER IF
FUTURE TRAFFIC PATTERNS WOULD GENERATE NEED FOR h SiDEWALK I
WOULD AGREE TO INSTALL ONE AT THE RE~UEST OF STAFF.
3. A. THE WINDOW PLACEMENT ON THE WEST ELEVATION HAS BEEN MODIFIED TO
BETTER BALANCE THE ELEVATION. THE METAL SEAM ROOF HAS BEE~ RAISED
AND THE EXTENSION FROM THE FACE OF THE BUILDING SHORTENED.
B. DESIGN CHANGES ON THE NORTH ELEVATION ARE'SUBMITTED AS DISCUSSED
WITH STAFF.
C. THE BLOCK BANDS HAVE BEEN CHANGED AROUND THE BUILDING TO
PROVIDE BETTER APPEARANCE. THE COLUMNS HAVE BEEN DELETED ON
THE FRONT AND SIDE OF THE BU1LDING. NO ROOF ELEMENT HAS BEEN
BEEN ADDED TO THE REAR ELEVATION, HOWEVER ADDITiONAL ROOFING
HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE FRONT AND SIDE ELEVATIONS.
4. A. THE REAR STORAGE ~ILL BE USED FOR PARKING OF CARS ONLY.
THESE CARS MAY HAVE ENGINES REMOVED FOR REPAIRS BUT WILL
NOT APPEAR IN A DISASSEMBLED STATE ON THE LOT. CARS WiLL BE STORED
OVER 72 HOURS, A VARiANCE IS REQUESTED.
B. PHOTOS OF PROPOSED BLOCKS ARE PROVIDED.
C. THE SITE PLAN SHOWS THE BUILDING TO THE SOUTH.
D. SI6N DETAilS ARE NOT VET INCLUDED.
E. THE SiTE PLANS SHOWS PROPOSED FENCE.
F. THERE ARE CURRENTLY 5 EMPLOYESS, NO INCREASE IS ANTICIPATE~ AT
THE PROPOSED LOCATION.
S. A. A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTSIDE STORAGE 15 REQUESTED.
RECEIVED
JUL 2:1 1986
ATTACH ENT 1-
t1MttA#f!r NI'l(}~,^
G
CITY OFFICES
6500 DUBLIN BLVD.
ADMINISTRATION
829-4600
BUILDING INSPECTION
829-0822
CITY COUNCIL
829-4600
CODE ENFORCEMENT
829-0822
ENGINEERING
829-4927
FINANCE
829-6226
PLANNING
829-4916
POLICE
829-0566
PUBLIC WORKS
829-4927
RECREATION
829-4932
CITY OF DUBLIN
P.O. Box 2340 DUBLIN. CALIFORNIA 94568
NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENI'AL SIGNIFICANCE FOR:
PA 86-036 Kahler's Auto Repair Conditional Use Permit, Site
Development Review, and Variance
(Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq.l
LOCATION:
6117 Dougherty Road
Dublin CA 94568
PROJEcr:
Conditional Use Permit/Site Development
Review/Variance requests to establish a 7,200+
square foot auto repair facility involving the
construction of a new two-story structure on a
0.30+ acre property at the southeast corner of
the Intersection of Dougherty Road and Houston
Place. A Conditional Use Permit is requested
to allow long-term exterior storage. Variances
from the required street-side sideyard and
sideyard requirements and from the dimensional
parking requirements of the City zoning
Ordinance are requested.
CWNER AND
REPRESENl'ATIVE:
Dennis Kahler
6392 Scarlett Court
Dublin CA 94568
FINDINGS:
The project will not have a significant
adverse impact on the environment.
INITIAL STUDY:
The Initial Study dated July 1986 provided
a discussion of the project's potential
environmental impacts. No potential
significant impacts have been identified for
the project.
MITIGATION MEASURES:
project.
No mitigation measures are required for the
SIGNATURE:
Laurence L. Tong,
Planning Director
DATE:
. "",,,,,_I I
ATTACH flU 5 I
N"FIr. &Jtr(~1h\J
(-'.
(J
t.. r f ..
Sou+h (//~u/
, -=it:- 2-
V / ~ U/ 0 F Lo I r-/Z07/U'1
L #J
1V't::) /2 +J, U/ t,-s-r c o-e/'l--'C7l
r
,',
;", .
I
/l/OIZ+h VI 4:.., U/ -=#-f'
I
I
I
, ]U/f:.S"/ v/~ U/ -#-3
ATTACH fin ~
~rf' t?/-TP 6'Ahf1l.s
~ ;tJ .sf V' /0 i-V d1:=- s-
K~v /111/fP p~ S /p;-
Lr
,
P/GTV!2l;.....5
C
.J::;JOC/6-HE-RTY j?o//P
~
'P
c{
/VoRT"A.
#3
(
'l:!,.
~
~
RECEIVED
APR 23 1986,
DUBLIN PLANNING
:t
"
~,
~
c
~
~
(\
(I'
DUBLIN SAN kAMON SERVICES DISTRICT
General Offices: 7051 Dublin Boulevard · Dub!!.n, California 94568. (415) 828-0515
May 9, 1986
i?ECEIVED
MA Yi ~ 3 1986.
.... ...->
DUBLIN PLANNING
Mr. Kevin J. Gailey,
Ci ty of Dub 1 in
Development Services
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
Subject:
Seni or Pl anner
Files No. PA 86-034 & 86-036 Valley Christian Center,
Expansion of Existing Sanctuary & Kahler's Auto Repair
Dear Mr. Gailey:
The District requires the usual water, fire and sewer fees prior to
construction of the above facilities. Site drawings .sho~ling District utili-
ties would be required for District approval.
Very truly yours,
~'^'~t-~~~
Emil Kattan
Assistant Civil Engineer
EK/la
cc: Doug McMillan, Office Engineer
ALAMEDA AND CONTRA COS
A iT ACHMENT ""1
~freNc.Y (PIllMeWrs
A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. PROVIDES MUNICIPAL TYPE S.
r--
(
CITY OF DUBLIN
(
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin. CA 94568
REVISED SUBMITTAL
APPLICATION REFERRAL
Plarming Deprrt:naJ.t (415)829-4916
(415) 829-4600
Date: July 24, 1986
FILE NO. PA 86-036 Kahler's Auto Repair
Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review and
Variance Applications
RECEIVED
AUG 4 1986
TO: Paul Ryan - General Manager, DSRSD
C--~hi'-Phillips - Fire Department, DSRSD
Pacific Gas & Electric
Pacific Bell
Livermore Dublin Disposal Service
Zone 7, Alameda County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District
Lee Thompson ~ City Engineer
Vic Taugher - Building Official
John Severini - Police Department
':- '.~. .
1"1. .r, ~ ~" ,
;'.; .~j
FROM: Kevin J. Gaile~nior Planner
PROJECT DESCRIPTION~ ~onditional Use Permit, Site Development Review and
Variance applications for a proposed 6,856+ square foot auto repair facility
with a proposed 7.5+-foot street side sideyard (10' minimum required), a
zero-foot sideyard (10' minimum required), and with dimensional Variances from
the City Parking Ordinance. Subject property is located at the southeast
corner of Dougherty Road and Houston Place.
ATTACHED FOR YOUR REVIEW ARE:
- Applicant's Revised Written Statement (and Staff's Letter regarding
Project)
- Revised Site Plans and Building Elevations
PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM WITH COMMENT TO DUBLIN PLANNING BY:
August 5, 1986 .
//;/5 j}erl ha-s Some COYlcerns w;I-A an f/1-/ OCCupCfYlcybemy
localed WI f~ :zeyo /01 ;,;,,,, C/e-~rt:c~("~. :Z-Yl.sk//C<.//(:J~ t9.(
q C{ul()yna/~ .g;-e syslf'1N1 wou/c! ejj'n,,...:ale mooS!- (!)/19/AY
(t:JnreY' H 5
~;/~
Develop.(11ent Services
P.O: Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
-
(
CITY OF DUBLIN
.r
Planning,Zoning 829-4916
Building & Safety 829-0822
Engineering Public Works 829-4927
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
File PA 86-036 - Kahler's Auto Repair
Kevin J. Gailey - Senior Planner ~ b~ U:f
June 16, 1986 (Reflects Applicant/Staff Meeting
of June 11, 1986, and Discussions with Larry Tong, Planning
Director, on June 18, 1986)
TO:
DATE:
RE: Design Changes Proposed by Staff
T. Steps Necessary to Eliminate or Reduce Variances
A. Adjust the plan to move the westerly parking spaces out of
required 20' front yard setback along Dougherty Road. (Curb must
be moved back 3'-0"+, the 2'6" overhang of parking spaces may be
located within the 20' front setback zone, but will require
Variance approval.)
B. Adjust plan to move the parking space adjoining the northwest
corner of the building outside of the required 10' sideyard
setback. (Curb must be moved 1'6".:t. into site.)
C. Narrow the width of approximately 50% of the building to pull it
outside of the required 10' street side sideyard setback along
Houston Place. For the remaining portion of this builidng
elevation, pursue a Variance for a partial encroachment while
"dressing up" the north building elevation to downplay impact of
building's setback from street.
D. Widen parking area to meet the minimum required dimensional
standards. (Widen curb-to-curb width from 56'0" to 57'6" and
utilize compact sized depth for stalls on east half of parking
area.)
E. Variance for construction within the 10' sideyard at the south
property line will take Variance approval.
II. Site Plan Adjusmtents (See Staff Study Site Plan dated ~~y 27, 1986)
A. .Introduce one handicap space with adjoining required 5'0" handicap
access strip (proposed location is adjoining the north side of the
driveway ramp into the building with the ramp located along the
passenger side of the handicapped parking space and with the ramp
and parking space constructed of the same materials [e.g.
aggregate finish, bomanite concrete, or equivalent]).
A IT ACH Ef~T 8
!:rIrFF ~f( ~-ltJ-Bro
,-..
(
(
B. Design changes required to observe items in I., Steps Necessary to
Eliminate or Reduce Variances, will necessitate that the
building's depth be decreased or the building's footprint moved
back (to the east) by 5'6"+, or some combination of reducing the
width and adjusting the footprint location.
C. Adjust landscape plan to pull additional landscaping around
northeast corner of the building.
D. Adjust driveway location at east side of building to accommodate
existing truck movements off Houston Place into the American City
Truck Stop site.
E. Make provision of a sidewalk along the property's south boundary
(along Houston Place). Alternatively, put up assurance to build
sidewalk in the future while requesting to be allowed to landscape
that area in the interim.
III. Architectural Adjustments
A. Front (West) Elevation
1. Balance window locations and the number of windows used on
either side of the roll-up door.
2. Lift top of the metal seam roof element to the top edge to
align with the top of the adjoining block brick parapet (or
be slightly above the blocks).
3. Reduce the depth that the metal seam roof element extends
away from the west elevation and shorten the overall height
of the roof.
B. Side (North) ElevatQon
1. Move windows proposed at the west edge of this elevation off
the corner. Alternatively, add similar window treatment to
the east edge of the north building elevation.
2. Add a roof element using materials similar to the metal seam
treatment proposed for the front (west) elevation. Three
design options to consider:
a. Push in walls 3' to 5' at the ends of the elevation
and pullout center four segments and use a mansard
metal seam roof element over the top of the center
area.
b. Use an indented roof element for center four segments
of the wall.
-2-
---
r
c. Use a roof element with comparable width, height and
design as used on the front (west) elevation for the
center two or four segments of this elevation.
Alternatively, prepare and submit a different or
modified layout for consideration by Staff.
C. Rear (East) Elevation
1. Utilize split face blocks above,and below center band of
dark grey split-face to match north and west elevations.
"2. Add two ground-to-top-of-wall columns with similar location
as shown on front (west) elevation.
3. Adjust location of roll-up door to be centered between the
proposed columns (move to north 4'0" 2=.).
4. Adjust center band of dark grey split-face so it runs along
a single, centered line (i.e., eliminate portion of band
shown above roll-up door.
5. Add a roof element at the requested center section which
matches or compliments the width, height, and design used on
the front (west) elevation.
IV. Requested Supplementary Information
A. Provide description (within a revised Written Statement) of the
proposed uses of the rear storage area.
B. Provide photos or samples of block bricks proposed to be used at
this site.
C. Show on the site plan the location of the adjoining building to
the south.
D. Provide design details of proposed sign.
E. Provide design details of proposed rear fence.
F. Provide information detailing number of proposed employees (within
a revised Written Statement).
v. Conditional Use Permit for Outside Storage
Within the revised Written Statement describe the type of exterior
storage anticipated to occur at the rear (east) edge of the property.
If vehicle storage for more than 72 continuous hours is envisioned, then
the application will need to be modified to include a Conditional Use
Permit. If all temporarily stored vehicles are moved into the building
during evening hours, then no Conditional Use Permit will be required.
KJG/ao
cc: D. Kahler
N. Stoddard