HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.2 Scarlett Court Design Guidelines
SUBJECT:
~v
ATTACHMENTS:
CITY CLERK
File # D~[1J[Q]-~[q]
X If?'o -~D
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 1,2007
PUBLIC HEARING: PA 03-063 - Scarlett Court Design Guidelines,
General Plan Amendment and Amendments to Title 8, Zoning
Ordinance, of the Dublin Municipal Code to create Chapter 8.34,
Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District; amend Chapter 8.104, Site
Development Review; and amend the Zoning Map to depict an overlay
zoning designation for the Scarlett Court area. (Legislative Action)
Report prepared by Erica Fraser, Senior Planner
1) Resolution approving the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines with the
Design Guidelines attached as Exhibit A.
2) Ordinance amending Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code to create
Chapter 8.34, Scarlett Court Overlay District; amendment to Chapter
8.104, Site Development Review; and an amendment to the Zoning
Map to depict an overlay zoning designation for the Scarlett Court area
attached as Exhibit A.
3) Resolution approving a General Plan Amendment to include policies
related to the Scarlett Court area and amendments related to the
Casamira Valley and Vargas properties.
4) March 27,2007 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes.
5) April 1 0, 2007 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes.
6) Planning Commission Resolution 07-18 recommending that the City
Council adopt a Resolution approving the Scarlett Court Design
Guidelines and recommending that the City Council adopt an
Ordinance adding Chapter 8.34 to the Dublin Municipal Code (Zoning
Ordinance) establishing the Scarlett Court Overlay District, adding
Section 8.104.030.J to the Dublin Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance)
relating to the Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Site
Development Review, and amending the Zoning Map to add an overlay
zoning designation for the Scarlett Court Area
7) Planning Commission Resolution 07-19 recommending that the City
Council adopt a Resolution amending the General Plan to include
policies related to the Scarlett Court Area.
8) Flyers for the October 20, 2006 Walking Tour and the October 30
Community Workshop.
COpy TO:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 1 of9
ITEM NO. tJ" ~
~
G:\P A#\2003\03-063 Scarlett Court Specific Plan\CC May 1 \CCSR 5.1.07 .doc
9) Flyer for the February 22,2007 Community Workshop.
10) Map of the Scarlett Court Specific Plan area.
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Open the Public Hearing;
2) Receive Staff presentation;
3) Take testimony from the public;
4) Close the Public Hearing and Deliberate;
5) Adopt Resolution approving the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines with
the Design Guidelines (attached as Exhibit A);
6) Introduce an Ordinance amending Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal
Code to create Chapter 8.34, Scarlett Court Overlay District,
amendment to Chapter 8.104, Site Development Review, and an
amendment to the Zoning Map to depict an overlay zoning designation
for the Scarlett Court area (attached as Exhibit A); and
7) Adopt Resolution approving a General Plan Amendment to include
policies related to the Scarlett Court area and amendments related to
the Casamira Valley and Vargas properties.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The Scarlett Court area is approximately 52 acres in size and consists of approximately 26 parcels. The
area is bounded on the west by Dougherty Road, the north by Dublin Boulevard, the south by 1-580, and
the east by the Iron Horse Trail right-of-way (see Attachment 10).
The area has a General Plan land use designation of Business Park/Industrial: Outdoor Storage (F.A.R: .25
to .40) and Retail/Office and Automotive (F.A.R. .25 to .50). The General Plan designation anticipates
retail and manufacturing activities conducted outdoors such as construction materials storage. The zoning
district for the area is M-1 (Light Industrial), which allows warehousing, industrial, and other similar uses
and C-2 (General Commercial), which allows auto related and retail uses.
The Scarlett Court area currently contains a variety of industrial uses including: building material sales,
light industrial uses, outdoor storage, mini storage, auto repair, and new/used automobile sales. Currently,
the predominant use within the area is auto-related.
The Scarlett Court Design Guidelines represent Phase 1 of the Scarlett Court Specific Plan. Phase 1 of the
Specific Plan includes design guidelines and the necessary amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and
General Plan only.
Phase 1 includes the following:
. Scarlett Court Design Guidelines;
. Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to create Chapter 8.34, Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning
District;
. Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to amend Chapter 8.104, Site Development Review;
Page 2 of9
. Amendment to the Zoning Map to add an overlay zoning designation to the Scarlett Court area;
and
. Amendment to the General Plan to include a Policy for the Scarlett Court area.
Phase IT, is anticipated to occur in the future and may include policies and a change in the existing land
use designations including permitted and conditionally permitted uses of land as part of a Specific Plan.
BACKGROUND:
During the Goals and Objectives session for Fiscal Year 2002/2003, the City Council requested Staff, as a
high priority item, to initiate a Specific Plan for the Scarlett Court area. At the time, the City Council was
concerned about the potential development/redevelopment of several large and underutilized parcels,
including the former Dolan Lumber parcel. In June 2001, Dolan Lumber ceased operations and later sold
the property to Dublin Honda (currently under construction). The City Council was also concerned about
the aesthetics of this area since the Scarlett Court area is visible from the 1-580 freeway, Dublin Boulevard
and Dougherty Road.
On August 6, 2002, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the adoption of an Urgency
Ordinance for the Scarlett Court area which would have imposed a moratorium on any discretionary
action including site development reviews, conditional use permits, or building permits which could alter
the appearance or potential use of the property; business licenses for a new use or permit; or the
resumption of a use that had been vacant for at least one year prior to the application. During the meeting,
the City Council provided direction to Staff on the moratorium and asked that Staff bring some options
(alternatives) back to the Council regarding the moratorium, but did not act on the moratorium.
The August 6, 2002 City Council hearing on the moratorium was continued to September 3,2002. During
that meeting, Staff provided the City Council with three alternative options for a moratorium. At the
meeting, the City Council directed Staff to return to the Council with a draft moratorium ordinance which
prohibited certain use types while the City worked on the Scarlett Court Specific Plan. The time frame for
the moratorium was not to exceed two years.
On October 1, 2002, the City Council held a public hearing to discuss the draft ordinance which
prohibited certain uses during a moratorium. At the meeting, the City Council discussed the draft
ordinance and received input from the public on the proposed moratorium and current projects property
owners were pursuing in the area. Based on public testimony, the City Council decided to table the matter
for one year to give property owners time to implement current projects and make improvements to their
properties.
On October 21, 2003, Staff provided a report regarding the preparation of the Specific Plan which
recommended that the City Council authorize Staff to work on the Specific Plan without a moratorium. At
the meeting, the City Council authorized Staff to continue preparation of the Scarlett Court Specific Plan.
Since October 2003, Staff has begun work on the Specific Plan; however, the completion of the Specific
Plan was delayed due to competing high priority goals and the review of several large development
projects in the Scarlett Court Specific Plan area including the new Honda Dealership and Arlen Ness
Motorcycles.
During the Goals and Objectives session for Fiscal Year 2005/2006, the City Council assigned a high
priority for the completion of a Specific Plan for the Scarlett Court area by the end of Fiscal Year
2006/2007. During the City Council meeting on August 6, 2006, Staff discussed the Scarlett Court
Specific Plan with the City Council. At the August 6, 2006 meeting, the City Council directed Staff to
Page 3 of9
divide the Specific Plan preparation into two phases. The Council directed Staff to begin work on Phase 1
of the Scarlett Court Specific Plan which included landscape, signage and design guidelines.
Following the June 20, 2006 City Council meeting, Staff sent a Request for Proposals to several firms. On
September 19, 2006, the City Council approved a contract with RBF for the preparation of the Scarlett
Court Design Guidelines (Phase I).
Public Participation
On October 20, 2006, RBF and Staff conducted walking tours of the Scarlett Court Specific Plan area..
The purpose of the walking tours was to discuss the intent of the design guidelines and to gain an
understanding of the property owners and tenants issues or concerns with the Scarlett Court area.
On October 30, 2006, RBF and Staff held a community workshop to discuss the design guidelines with
the public. The purpose of this workshop was to get community members involved in the process by
conducting an image survey of the area, engage the public in a discussion to gain an understanding of any
concerns they have with the area or with the preparation of design guidelines and to discuss the purpose
and objectives of the design guidelines.
After the walking tour and the first community workshop, RBF prepared a set of draft guidelines based on
community input. Following the preparation of the draft guidelines, RBF and Staff held a second
community workshop on February 22, 2007. The purpose of this meeting was to present the draft
guidelines to the public and discuss any concerns or comments on the draft guidelines. During this
meeting, one comment was received requesting that a lighting section related to auto dealerships be
included. The guidelines were revised to include Section 3.4.4, Auto Dealership Display Lighting (page
43 of Exhibit A in Attachment 1).
Notification of the walking tour, the two community workshops, the Planning Commission meeting and
City Council meeting were sent to all tenants and property owners in the Scarlett Court area, property
owners within 300 feet of the Scarlett Court Specific Plan Area, interested parties, the City Council and
the Planning Commission (Attachments 8 and 9). Notices were also posted in all City posting places and
were also published in the newspaper. The notice for the second community workshop also notified the
public that draft design guidelines were also available for review at City Hall to provide members of the
public who were unable to attend the meeting with an opportunity to review the draft guidelines and
provide feedback to Staff.
Planning Commission Review
On March 27, 2007, the Planning Commission reviewed the draft Design Guidelines and amendments to
the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map, related to Scarlett Court, during a Public Hearing. During the
meeting, the Planning Commission requested several minor modifications to some of the text and pictures
in the draft guidelines (please refer to the minutes ofthe meeting in Attachment 4).
On April 10, 2007, the Planning Commission reviewed the revised Design Guidelines, amendments to the
Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map and General Plan Amendment (please refer to the minutes of the
meeting in Attachment 5). The Planning Commission adopted Resolution 07-18 recommending the City
Council approve the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines and adopt an Ordinance amending the Zoning
Ordinance and Zoning Map (Attachment 6) and Resolution 07-19 recommending that the City Council
approve an amendment to the General Plan to include policies related to the Scarlett Court Area
(Attachment 7).
Page 4 of9
ANALYSIS:
Phase 1 of the Scarlett Court Specific Plan is divided into 3 main components: the Design Guidelines,
three associated Zoning Ordinance amendments and a General Plan amendment to implement the Design
Guidelines. All actions are explained in more detail below. The Design Guidelines will only be applicable
to redevelopment, new development, exterior improvements/modifications (such as new fences, walls or
fa9ade remodels) and new or replaced signage. Property owners and tenants in the Scarlett Court area are
not required to improve their properties to comply with the guidelines at this time, unless an application is
submitted for development activity, as described above.
Scarlett Court Design Guidelines
The intent of the Design Guidelines is to guide future development and improvements in the Scarlett
Court Specific Plan Area. The Design Guidelines are presented in Exhibit A of Attachment 1 to this Staff
Report and all page numbers referenced in this section are included in Exhibit A.
The Scarlett Court Design Guidelines contain the following Chapters:
Chapter 1 : Introduction - this section explains the purpose of the document and also includes an
explanation ofthe permit review process.
Chapter 2: Existing Setting and Future Vision - this section contains information and the vision for
the Scarlett Court area. This section also contains three renderings (on pages 9-11) which
depict what the Scarlett Court area could look like in the future with the implementation
of the design guidelines.
Chapter 3: Design Guidelines ~ the guidelines are described in the following sections:
3.1: Site Planning
3.2: Architectural Guidelines
3.3: Sign Guidelines
3.4: Lighting Guidelines
3.5: Landscape Guidelines
Chapter 4: References - this section notes the references that were used to create the design
guidelines.
Information on the design guidelines sections can be found in the following sections.
Site Planning
The Site Planning section begins on page 15 of the design guidelines. The purpose of this section is to
create a positive visual relationship between buildings, public streets, landscaped areas, parking lots,
storage and service areas and uses on adjacent properties. Key components of this section include
pedestrian and bicycle circulation (which includes suggestions on the location and appropriate styles of
bicycle racks), screening of electrical and mechanical equipment and building siting.
Architectural Guidelines
The Architectural Guidelines section begins on page 21 of the design guidelines. The purpose of this
section is to provide principles for various architectural elements and encourage high quality design in the
Scarlett Court area. Some key components of this section include appropriate building mass, a discussion
on articulation of buildings, appropriate building materials and colors and roof forms.
Page 5 of9
Sign Guidelines
The Sign Guidelines section begins on page 29 of the design guidelines. This purpose of this section is to
provide guidelines for the design, construction and placement of signs in the Scarlett Court area. The
guidelines apply to new signs and signs which will be replaced, relocated or if the repair of a sign will cost
more than 50 percent of the value of the sign. The guidelines in this section supplement the sign
regulations in Chapter 8.84, Sign Criteria, ofthe Dublin Zoning Ordinance.
This section includes a discussion on inappropriate signs (for example, signs attached to a fence, handheld
signs, etc.) and appropriate signs. Guidelines for appropriate signs include wall signs, monument signs,
blade signs (a sign that projects perpendicular to a building), freeway oriented signs, directory signs and
directional signs are also included in the guidelines. The freeway oriented sign section (pages 35-36)
limits the height of these signs to 35 feet (the height ofthe existing Dublin Auto Mall electronic sign) and
recommends that businesses co-locate on the signs to limit the number of freeway oriented signs in the
area. The section also includes guidelines on the readability of signs, sign materials and lighting.
Lighting Guidelines
The Lighting Guidelines section begins on page 41 of the design guidelines. The purpose of this section is
to provide guidelines to ensure adequate, safe, and appropriate lighting levels. The guidelines include
recommendations on light design, reduction of glare and spill-over lighting and also include a section on
auto dealership display lighting. Due to the special security needs of dealerships, this section also includes
a section on page 43 which relates to auto dealership lighting and includes height limits for the sign poles
and recommendations on display lighting.
Landscape Guidelines
The Landscape Guidelines start on page 45 of the design guidelines. The purpose of this section is to
provide guidelines on landscape materials to promote the orderly development of the landscape
environment as well as guidelines which promote attractive and high quality screen walls and fences.
The design guidelines also include appropriate types of fences and walls for the screening of service areas,
equipment, parking lots and trash areas (pages 45-46). Fences and walls which are discouraged in the area
can be found on page 47 and include fences constructed with chain link, plywood and barbed wire, which
can be seen from the right-of-way or the Iron Horse trail.
The guidelines also include general landscaping guidelines on pages 47-53 which include the screening of
vehicle displays, suggested locations for plant materials, maintenance and parking lot landscaping.
The design guidelines state that the primary street tree for Scarlett Court and Scarlett Drive is the Bradford
Pear tree and the accent tree is the Yoshino Flowering Cherry tree (page 53). The guidelines also include
the London Plane tree on Dublin Boulevard (this tree is currently planted along Dublin Boulevard). The
street trees in the Design Guidelines are compatible with the City's Streetscape Master Plan.
A plant matrix which includes recommended trees, shrubs and groundcover for the Scarlett Court area can
be found on pages 55-57. Newly proposed projects and improvements which include landscape
improvements or new landscaping will need to select plant materials from this matrix.
Zoning Ordinance and Map Amendments
In order to ensure compliance with the Design Guidelines, Staff is proposing the following amendments to
Title 8, Zoning Ordinance, of the Dublin Municipal Code:
Page 6 of9
1. The creation of Zoning Ordinance Chapter 8.34, Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District;
2. An amendment to Chapter 8.104, Site Development Review; and
3. An amendment to the Zoning Map to add an overlay zoning designation to the Scarlett Court Area.
Creation of the new Chapter 8.34 of the Dublin Municipal Code (Scarlett Court Overlay District)
Since the Design Guidelines are Phase 1 of the Scarlett Court Specific Plan, an overlay zoning district is
necessary to implement the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines and provide for a mechanism for ensuring
that projects or improvements proposed in the Scarlett Court area comply with the Design Guidelines in
the absence of a specific plan. The full text of the Overlay Zoning District is included in Attachment 2.
In summary, the new Chapter 8.34 of the Zoning Ordinance states that any exterior improvements, signs,
new development or construction in the Scarlett Court area shall be subject to a Site Development Review
process specific to the Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District and that the project shall be reviewed for
substantial compliance with the Scarlet Court Design Guidelines.
The Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District is a designation that will exist on the properties in the area in
addition to the base Zoning District that each property in the Scarlett Court District retains (M-1, Light
Industrial or C-2, General Commercial). The base Zoning District contains all information regarding
permitted and conditionally permitted uses, development standards, and regulations, while the Scarlett
Court Overlay Zoning designation provides a mechanism to review development on any of the properties
in the District for substantial compliance with the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines.
Amendment to Chapter 8.104, Site Development Review, of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance
Staff proposes to add the following paragraph to the Site Development Review section of the Zoning
Ordinance under Section 8.104.030 (Projects subject to Site Development Review):
"8.104.030. J: Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District. Any development in the Scarlett
Court Overlay Zoning District (as indicated on the Zoning Map) shall be reviewed in
accordance with and subject to Chapter 8.34, Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District, in
addition to this Chapter."
The above change can be found in the Ordinance included as Attachment 2. The addition of this text
requires projects to be processed in accordance with the Site Development Review process.
Amendment to the Zoning Map to add an Overlay Zoning Designation to the Scarlett Court Area
In order to indicate to which properties the Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Ordinance applies, the
Zoning Map needs to be amended to include the overlay district. The Zoning Map will still indicate the
base zoning district, M-1, Light Industrial and C-2, General Commercial, for each property, but will also
indicate the area in which the Scarlett Court Overlay zoning regulations apply. The Scarlett Court Overlay
Zoning Designation is included as Exhibit A to Attachment 2.
General Plan Amendment
In addition to the Zoning Ordinance amendments, Staff is also proposing an amendment to the General
Plan to include a policy statement which discusses the Scarlett Court area and clearly identifies that the
Scarlett Court area will be treated differently from typical zoning districts in the City. In the absence of a
Specific Plan, the General Plan Amendment will afford the City protection and will clearly state the
objectives of the design guidelines in order to further the City's goal of enhancing the Scarlett Court area.
Staff is proposing an amendment to the General Plan, which would add the following language as Section
2.2.6 to the Land Use and Circulation: Land Use Element portion ofthe General Plan:
Page 7 of9
Guiding Policv
A. Strengthen and improve the Scarlett Court Planning Area.
The Scarlett Court Design Guidelines were adopted by the City Council on
Guidelines are intended to guide future development and improvements in
Planning Area to enhance the character and image of the Area.
. The Design
the Scarlett Court
The Scarlett Court Planning Area is visible from Interstate 580, Dougherty Road, the Iron Horse
Trail and Dublin Boulevard and the view of this Area from these key roadways is of importance to
the City.
Imvlementinf! Policv
B. Create an Overlay Zoning District for the Scarlett Court Planning Area.
C. Encourage improvements to existing businesses and properties in the Scarlett Court
Planning Area.
D. Require all redevelopment and improvements related to the site planning, architectural
design, lighting, signage and landscaping to be consistent with the adopted Scarlett Court
Design Guidelines.
According to State Law, the City is limited to four General Plan Amendment actions per year. Each action
can include multiple projects/sites. In an effort to group several General Plan Amendments at one time,
Staff proposes to include the General Plan Amendment with two other General Plan Amendments
(Casamira Valley and Vargas) which are being reviewed by the City Council at tonight's meeting. One
Resolution has been prepared which incorporates the above amendment with the amendments for
Casamira Valley and Vargas. This Resolution (Attachment 3) must be adopted with the Casamira Valley
and Vargas projects which follow on a separate Agenda item.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff has reviewed and has found that that adoption of this ordinance be determined to be exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). Section
15061(b)(3) states that CEQA applies only to those projects that have the potential to cause a significant
effect on the environment. This adoption of this ordinance is an activity that is exempt from CEQA
because the ordinance does not, in itself, allow the construction of any building or structure, but it sets
forth the design guidelines that shall be followed if and when a building or structure is proposed to be
constructed or a site is proposed to be developed under existing entitlements. This ordinance, therefore,
has no potential for resulting in significant physical change in the environment, directly or ultimately.
Individual projects in the Scarlett Court area will be reviewed for compliance with CEQA.
CONCLUSION:
The Scarlett Court Design Guidelines will only apply to exterior improvements and new construction and
do not require improvements to be made to the properties in the Scarlett Court Area. The Scarlett Court
Design Guidelines have been prepared to guide the design of future development, improve the public
realm to enhance the area's image, create a unique sense of place and to enhance the aesthetics in the
Scarlett Court Area. The proposed amendments to Title 8 of the Municipal Code and the General Plan
will provide a suitable mechanism to implement the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines in the absence of an
adopted Specific Plan.
Page 8 of9
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) Open the Public Hearing; 2) Receive Staff presentation; 3)
Take testimony from the public; 4) Close the public hearing and Deliberate; 5) Adopt Resolution
approving the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines with the Design Guidt;lines (attached as Exhibit A); 6)
Introduce an Ordinance amending Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code to create Chapter 8.34, Scarlett
Court Overlay District, amendment to Chapter 8.104, Site Development Review, and an amendment to the
Zoning Map to depict an overlay zoning designation for the Scarlett Court area (attached as Exhibit A);
and 7) Adopt Resolution approving a General Plan Amendment to include policies related to the Scarlett
Court area and amendments related to the Casamira Valley and Vargas properties.
Page 9 of9
l~q1
RESOLUTION NO. XX-07
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
********************
ADOPTING THE SCARLETT COURT DESIGN GUIDELINES
P A 03-063
WHEREAS, the Scarlett Court area consists of approximately 52 acres of land and is bounded on
the west by Dougherty Road, the north by Dublin Boulevard, the south by 1-580 right-of-way, and the east
by the Iron Horse Trail right-of-way; and
WHEREAS, during the Goals and Objectives session for Fiscal Year 2002/2003, the City Council
requested Staff, as a high priority item, to initiate a Specific Plan for the Scarlett Court Area; and
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2006, the City Council directed Staff to divide the Specific Plan
preparation into two phases with the first phase of the Scarlett Court Specific Plan to include landscape,
signage and design guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines are proposed as set forth in Exhibit A, and no
land use changes are proposed at this time; and
WHEREAS, the City held one walking tour of the Scarlett Court area with the public on October
20,2006, and two community workshops on October 30, 2006, and February 22,2007, to gain feedback
from the public; and
WHEREAS, City Staff worked with RBF Consulting, property owners and tenants in the Scarlett
Court area, to develop design guidelines intended to ensure that future improvements in the Scarlett Court
area enhance the aesthetics of the area; and
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State
guidelines and City environmental regulations require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental
impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, the project has been found to be Exempt from CEQA, according to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15061 (b )(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed Scarlett
Court Design Guidelines may have a significant effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held public hearings on said Scarlett Court Design
Guidelines on March 27,2007 and April 10, 2007 and adopted Resolution No. 07-18 recommending that
the City Council adopt this Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and
made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts the Scarlett Court Design
Guidelines as set forth in Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1 st day of May 2007 by the following vote:
Page 1 of2
6 -I-OJ l..t/~
ATTACHMENT 1
{)1J 0,1
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
G:\P A#\2003\03-063 Scarlett Court Specific Plan\CC May I \CC Reso Scarlett Court Design Guidelines.DOC
Page 2 of2
".
Scarlett Court'
Design Guidelines --
t . . t.
:>
a .~;~t "~.I
Of . I "
'~-~-'::f
"'<11'\.'"
t
Pr.epared~ for City..of DubHn
..
...,
..",
(, <"
-
... ...
...
l"
I'
.:.... ~
.. I~
CONEA~VED
APR 0 ~ Z007
ATTACHMENT 3
DUBLIN PLANNING
1 I i II I TABLE OF CONTE
Public Review Draft
Scarlett Court Design Guidelines
April 2007
Prepared for:
City of Dublin
Community Development Department
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Prepared By:
RBF Consulting's Urban Design Studio
111 W. St John Street, Suite 850
San Jose, CA 95113
o
-I
)>
OJ
r
m
o
"T1
(")
o
Z
-I
m
z
-I
C/)
Table of Contents
U ' G .d ...
ser s UI e................................................ III
Chapter 1. Introduction .............................. 1
1.1. Introduction ....................................................... 1
1.2. Understanding Design Guidelines................... 1
1.3. Purpose and Applicability................................ 1
1.4. Permit Review Process..................................... 2
Chapter 2. Existing Setting and Future
Vision ........................................ 5
2.1. Existing Setting ................................................. 5
2.2. Future Vision ..................................................... 8
Chapter 3. Design Guidelines .................. 13
3.1. Site Planning ................................................... 15
3.2. Architectural Guidelines................................. 21
3.3. Sign Guidelines ............................................... 29
3.4. Lighting Guidelines ......................................... 41
3.5. Landscape Guidelines .................................... 45
Chapter 4. References.............................. 59
f::~\
II .
~..._-
I; II I USER'S GUI
User's Guide
This section is intended to provide straightforward guidance for
optimizing the use of the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines (Design
Guidelines). The following steps are recommended:
Step 1: Review Chapter 1: Project appl icants should review Chapter
1 (introduction) to gain an understanding of the purpose and
applicability of design guidelines and to familiarize themselves with the
specific design review process for the City of Dublin.
Step 2: Gain {Ill Understanding of Scarlett Court: Project
applicants should read Chapter 2 (Existing Setting and Future Vision)
to gain an understanding of the area's existing conditions and to
understand the City's vision for its future.
Step 3: Review Applicable Guidelines: The Design Guidelines are
presented in Chapter 3 (Design Guidelines) in the following five
sections:
Section 3.1: Site Planning: presents guidelines for placement of
buildings, driveways, pedestrian circulation, and associated
elements.
Section 3.2: Architectural Guidelines: presents design
guidelines for buildings and their associated elements.
Section 3.3: Sign Guidelines: presents guidelines for style,
size, placement, lighting and landscaping of signs.
Section 3.4: Lighting Guidelines: presents guidelines for style,
size, and placement, and landscaping of lighting.
Section 3.5: Landscape Guidelines: presents guidelines for
type, size, and location of landscaping and associated elements.
o
~ i ii \,
i.~_j~
Based on the scope and nature of the project, certain sect ions of
Chapter 3 mayor may not apply to the proposed project. For new
construction and major development projects, all of the section~~ would
likely apply to the project. Smaller projects, such as a new sign or
fence, may only require compliance with one or two sections. Project
applicants should consult with the City of Dublin Planning :;taff to
determine which section(s) would apply to their project.
Step 4: Meet with City Staff: After completing steps I thru 3,
project applicants should schedule an appointment with the City of
Dublin Community Development Department to review their id ~as, ask
questions, and discuss potential issues, solutions, and approaches. The
City encourages project applicants to collaborate with City Sta ff early
on in the design process to foster shared understanding and positive
outcomes.
Step 5: Ask More Questions: If the project applicants have
additional questions or concerns, they should contact the City of Dublin
Community Development Department at (925) 833-6610.
c
en
m
:;0
en
G)
c
c
m
Scarlett Court Area
""""r
'r.- _
~
I.......
~ .... '" ~ ('\"
1 ..... i} "I,
I ~
-, #- !"
,,;
..." .
f;
Dublin Bouleval~d
~ c..-
r~':
I
df
...
"'...
':0'
.j
....
I
,.
I
I
.,
,
., -,
...
"
..,
~.
.,
"
I. I
~
~~.t,
, I
,- ~ ~.
"'
,
1--58"0
-- .
BART
...
r; --;
'i..I.V. '
~'-- -~/
I: II I CHAPTE
Chapter 1. Introduction
1.1. Introduction
The Scarlett Court area is an approximately 52-acre industrial district in
the City of Dublin. The area is located in the central portion of the City
and is bounded by Dougherty Road to the west, Dublin Boulevard to
the north, the lron Horse Trail to the east, and lnterstate 580 to the
south.
Over its history, the Scarlett Court area has developed into a light-
industrial district with a variety of auto-oriented and outdoor storage
uses. Previous subdivisions have created a series of long and narrow
lots, some of which do not have direct access to public streets. Over
time, the properties were developed with a variety of building styles,
landscaping treatments, and signs.
The City of Dublin has expressed a desire to create a set of guidelines
for new development and improvement projects in the Scarlett Court
area. The City wants to ensure that development in this highly visible
gateway to Dublin creates a positive image for the City.
1.2. Understanding Design Guidelines
Design guidelines are a set of recommendations that guide the
development of land to achieve a desired level of quality for the
physical environment. Design guidelines contain text, sketches,
diagrams, and photographs that establish desired outcomes for future
development projects. Items addressed in design guidelines typically
include:
· Site Design: placement of buildings, parking, service areas,
storage, driveways, pedestrian paths, etc.
· Architecturlll Design: form, mass, height, fa<;ade articulation,
materials, colors, mechanical equipment, etc.
o
· Signllge: sign types, placement of signs, size of signs, ~ tc.
· Lllndscllping: landscaping requirements, plant and tre,: types,
fencing and screening, etc.
1.3. Purpose and Applicability
The way properties in Scarlett Court are developed will greatly
influence the overall character and image of the area. The purpose of
this document is to provide site and building design, signage, and
landscape guidelines to ensure that future development enhances the
desired character and image of the Scarlett Court area. F roperty
owners, architects, landscape architects, engineers, project p anners,
tenants, and designers should review the applicable design guid~ lines to
gain an understanding of the City's desired image and chara ;ter for
Scarlett Court. City Staff, the Planning Commission, and he City
Council will use these guidelines to judge the merits of al future
development proposals for the Scarlett Court area.
During the review process for future development projects, the
Community Development Director, City Staff, the Zoning
Administrator, the Planning Commission and the City Council 'viII use
discretion in applying various provisions of the design guide .ines to
specific projects. Each guideline may not apply equally to every
project. When implementing these design guidelines, the overall
objective is to ensure that the intent and spirit of the guidelines are
followed and that the project respects its surroundings and fosters the
desired character and image.
Z
-i
::0
o
C
C
n
-i
o
Z
1.4. Permit Review Process
would consider the project during a public hearing. This process IS
described on the following page.
Project applicants for the Scarlett Court area are strongly encouraged to
review these design guidelines and to meet with City Staff to discuss
their ideas and/or preliminary plans prior to submitting an application.
The purpose of this meeting is to discuss preliminary issues or
concerns, the submittal requirements for the project, and the application
review procedures. After this meeting, the project applicant will
complete and submit their plans and application to the City.
Process for Project that Requires Community Development Director or
Zoning Administrator Review
In general, there are two application review processes for projects in
the Scarlett Court area: (I) those that require a public hearing by the
Community Development Director or the Zoning Administrator; and
(2) those that require a public hearing by the Planning Commission.
Chapter 8.l32 of the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance provides
detailed guidance for the noticing and hearings process.
_...........~
,0 .
" .
" .
" .
"
"
,0
"
"
"
"
,,'
"
"
.'
0'
The Community Development Director or the Zoning Administrator
can approve some minor projects. Once the application materials are
submitted to the Community Development Department, City Staff will
review the materials to ensure all the items are properly completed and
to assess compliance with City regulations. Once the application is
deemed complete, City Staff will schedule and notice a public hearing
by either the Community Development Director or the Zoning
Administrator. At the public hearing, the project will be approved,
conditionally approved, or denied by either the Community
Development Director or the Zoning Administrator. A Notice of
Decision will be given, consistent with Chapter 8.132 of the City of
Dublin Zoning Ordinance. This decision may be appealed to the
Planning Commission.
Based on the complexity of the project or other potential issues of
controversy or concern, the Community Development Director or the
Zoning Administrator may defer their decision-making authority to the
Planning Commission. In these instances, the Planning Commission,
not the Community Development Director or the Zoning Administer,
t
?-.
r 2 ,.~
~"/
I I: II I CHAPTE
Applications for major projects, including facade improvements or
additions and those that require a Conditional Use Permit and/or
Variance, require a public hearing by the Planning Commission. Once
the application materials are submitted to the Community Development
Department, City Staff will review the materials to ensure all the items
are properly completed and to assess compliance with City regulations.
Once the application is deemed complete, City Staff will prepare a staff
report and will schedule and notice a public hearing by the Planning
Commission. At the public hearing, the project will be approved,
conditionally approved, or denied. An appeal period will follow the
decision of the Planning Commission. lf the decision of the Planning
Commission is not appealed, then the project is approved and the
applicant may apply for subsequent permits, such as demolition,
grading, and building permits. lf the decision of the Planning
Commission is appealed, the City Council will review the project
during a public hearing. The City Council's decision is final and
cannot be appealed.
Certain applications within the Scarlett Court area may require City
Council approval, such as applications for General Plan Amendments
and the rezoning of property. For applications that require City
Council approval, the Planning Commission becomes an advisory body
to the City Council, and would make a recommendation to the City
Council on whether or not the project should be approved, approved
with conditions, or denied.
0.3".;
'~"_-,,,b
Process/or Project that Requires Planning Commission Review
......... ....\
.. .
.. .
.. .
.. .
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
...
'""',''''' ~
Z
-4
;:;0
o
c
c:
(")
-4
o
Z
This page intentionally left blank.
~,~
'I' 4 '\
~ fi
I I i II I CHAPTE
Chapter 2: Existing Setting and Future
Vision
2.1. Existing Setting
The Scarlett Court area is located between Dougherty Road to the west,
Dublin Boulevard to the north, the Iron Horse trail to the east, and 1-
580 to the south.
2.1.1. Surrounding Uses
A variety of commercial and residential uses are located near the
Scarlett Court area. A mix of restaurants, a hotel, auto-service/retail
businesses, dental offices, retail stores, and gas stations are located
north and west of the Scarlett Court area. These businesses are located
in a variety of different commercial buildings setback from Dublin
Boulevard. This area does not have a common or unifying architectural
theme or style. A large portion of land under the jurisdiction of the
U.S. Army, referred to as Parks Reserve Forces Training (Camp Parks),
is presently left as open space to the northeast of the area.
The Iron Horse Trail and the Dublin/Pleasanton Bay Area Rapid
Transit (BART) station and associated parking lot are sited
immediately to the east of the Scarlett Court area. Multi-family
o
~. /
residential units are located just north of the BART parking lot: within
approximately 300 feet of the Scarlett Court area. An electric power
substation and City's corporation yard are also located east of the
Scarlett Court area.
Views of commercial uses to the north of the Scarlett Court a'-ea.
(photos areji-om outside of the plan area)
r --------n-l
~
I
n_~
A~~
"TIm
ex
-1-
een
::o:!
mz
<G)
-en
~m
0-1
z:!
z
G)
)>
z
c
Ii
Views of BART parking lot and multi-family residential units loca:ed to the
east of the Scarlett Court area. (photos are from outside of the pi m area)
...
I [
r
I ~
The Iron Horse trail, located just outside of the Scarlett Court area's
eastern boundary, is a 33-mile regional trail connecting several cities
throughout the Counties of Alameda and Contra Costa. This multi-
functional trail is used for a range of recreational activities, including
walking, biking, and horseback riding. The trail is elevated above the
grade of the adjacent properties within the Scarlett Court area. As a
result, trail users have clear views of the adjacent properties within the
Scarlett Court area.
mini-storage facilities. Exterior building materials include corrugated
metal, wood siding, stucco, and concrete. The buildings within the
Scarlett Court area do not have a common or unifying architectural
theme or style. Building setbacks and landscaping treatments vary
from parcel to parcel.
Buildings within the Scarlett Court area.
Views of the Iron Horse Trail. The Scarlett Court area is located on the
left side of the photos. (photos are from outside of the plan area)
'-~
Office and commercial uses (within the City of Pleasanton) are located
to the south of the Scarlett Court area and Interstate 580.
2.1.2. Scarlett Court Area
In the 1960s, light-industrial businesses began locating within the
Scarlett Court area. Many of the properties were developed under
Alameda County regulations before the City of Dublin was
incorporated. Today, the area has been subdivided into approximately
22 properties that vary in size from less than a half acre to over five
acres.
\1
.
The properties have a variety of different types of buildings, including
warehouses, large service garages, auto dealership showrooms, and
; '\..J'
"':'!:t'~''''
r'''''-''o,
l 6 ,
'~_~h
I I i II I CHAPTE
A variety of light industrial uses are located in the area. Most
businesses are automobile-related, including auto and motorcycle
dealerships, mechanics, and auto-body shops. The area also includes a
lumberyard, storage facilities, and vehicle and equipment rental
businesses.
The Scarlett Court area has two main streets. Scarlett Court extends
from Dublin Boulevard and runs parallel and adjacent to Dougherty
Road and l-580. Scarlett Cqurt terminates as a cul-de-sac near the
BART parking lot. The second street, Scarlett Drive, bisects the
project area and connects Scarlett Court and Dublin Boulevard. An
uncovered drainage channel runs down the middle of Scarlett Drive,
separating the northbound and southbound lanes. The edges of the
channel are lined with chain-link fencing. Some segments of Scarlett
Court and Scarlett Drive contain sidewalks, many of which are not
ADA accessible. Where sidewalks are provided, they primarily occur
on private property, outside of the public right-of-way.
Scarlett Court
Scarlett Drive
...
.......
'"
Vehicle access to the properties within the Scarlett Court area IS
primarily provided from Scarlett Drive and Scarlett Court. Access
fi'om Dublin Boulevard is limited because of traffic safety and traffic
flow concerns. Access to properties from Dougherty Road is
prohibited. A few of the parcels within the area do not have direct
access from a public street. Driveways through an adjacent parcel
provide access to these parcels.
0..-:'\
~ !
.'--._.~
The Scarlett Court area is situated at a major gateway to the City of
Dublin and is highly visible from 1-580 and the Dougherty Road/I-580
on- and off-ramps. This location provides excellent freeway visibility
to the properties, businesses, and signs within the Scarlett COl rt area.
Other attributes of the area, such as access to and from InterstHte 580,
proximity to BART, and the surrounding retail and commerci 11 uses,
help define the area as a viable light-industrial business park.
Views of the Scarlett Court area from 1-580.
.:.:.
L --.
I
. -------'
~..::t ...:.1_ 1. I
"'11m
ex
-t-
een
:::o~
mz
<G)
-en
~m
O-t
z~
z
G)
)>
z
c
2.1.3. Applicable Regulations & Guidelines
The City of Dublin General Plan has designated most of the Scarlett
Court area as Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage (one
property is designated as Retail/Office and Automotive). The
properties are zoned M-I (Light lndustrial) with the exception of one
property, which is zoned C-2 (General Commercial). This document
does not change the area's current land use or zoning designation.
Applicable sections from the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance and
Municipal Code also apply to projects within the Scarlett Court area
where not changed by these design guidelines.
The graphics on the following pages show how the vision could be
implemented at several sites within the Scarlett Court area. These are
conceptual sketches for demonstration purposes only. They are not
intended to represent absolute solutions for properties in the area.
2.2. Future Vision
Prior to the preparation of this document, City staff and RBF
Consulting conducted walking tours and a public workshop to discuss
the design guidelines, various design issues and concerns related to the
Scarlett Court area, and potential ways to improve the physical design
of the area. Based on the input and feedback received, the following
vision statement for the Scarlett Court area was prepared:
The Scarlett Court area is an attractive and highly visible
light-industrial district that serves the City of Dublin and its
surrounding communities. The area contains a variety of
attractive buildings with unifying architectural design
treatments, enhanced landscaping, improved sidewalks and
pedestrian connections, and consistent signage, all of which
supports the economic health of the light industrial and auto-
oriented businesses within the district. As a highly visible
district from Interstate 580, Dougherty Road, and Dublin
Boulevard, the enhanced Scarlett Court area has greatly
improved the overall image of the City of Dublin.
~N"'.1.- ~,
~' :!' .~
.~
~:~ ". ..:
:;oo"~'....
.f 8 \
!.. . '
~ ;."
CHAPTE'
"T1m
e)(
-t-
een
~~
mz
<G)
c;;en
-m
O-t
z-t
z
G)
)>
z
c
Existing view alo
I . ng Scarlett C lurt
ookmg southeast
Potential Future View
--
......--"...-
---
--
----
--.
o
~ '
~,"__..A
Potential Future V'
few
, ~.... ......t .,
.' .;.........
.'
~ ~.....i.-,' 'h)f.~"";;"",......;',<j. .
'~~'-"_._.' _'. ." ........'r."",,;;I',..,. ,~-;<
~., p~'" ':f;<~' ',~.:.,,'
,-~"'~~ :.':;.; - .-.' .
.,.(f ."'-;~ ..
, ~
l. ..J'.iol
.;~j?
.",
o.
<:
- ~ .
.'
IJ:- () J
;:i>d f r j:
0<0 0\/ ,. .
Q <09,' /,/
---\
\
c
\
.... -
-
CHAPTE'
Existing viewfi
C rom Scarlett
ourt looking east
Potenti IF
a uture I/""
"few
/
o..:!."-
/
/
/
'-.....
e.1..-.1..~.'~.
, '
'< ..h
This page intentionally left blank.
--~
r 12-'
~'-- "i/
I : I II I CHAPTE
Chapter 3. Design Guidelines
This chapter is divided into five sub-chapters. These sub-chapters are:
. Section 3.1: Site Planning: presents guidelines for site
planning and design. Topics addressed include building
placement, parking lot locations, storage areas, loading and
unloading facilities, trash disposal areas, driveway locations,
pedestrian circulation, bicycle circulation, electrical and
mechanical equipment, and land use buffers.
. Section 3.2: Architectural Guit/e/ines: presents design
guidelines for building design. Topics addressed include
architectural character, building mass and height, building
facades, window and door fenestration, building materials,
building colors, roofs, mechanical equipment, gutters and
downspouts, vents and flashing, and accessory structures.
. Section 3.3: Sign Guit/e/ines: presents guidelines for the
placements and design of signs. Topics addressed include
general considerations and guidelines, inappropriate signs,
appropriate signs (wall signs, monument signs, freeway
oriented signs, blade signs, directory signs, directional signs),
sign area, number of signs, materials, colors, symbols,
typology, lighting, banners and flags, and temporary signs.
. Section 3.4: Lighting Guit/e/ines: presents guidelines for
site lighting. Topics addressed include site lighting, light
design, and glare.
8..\
~__ A
. Section 3.5: Landscape Guit/e/ines: presents gu delines
for landscaping treatments. Topics addressed include fences,
walls, and screens; landscape compatibility, groundcover,
building landscaping, sidewalks and walkways, parkilg lots,
vehicle displays, landscaping scale, irrigation, maint ~nance,
storm water management, street trees, tree preservati, m, and
recommended plants.
As a general principle, the City should consider the context of the site
and its surroundings when applying the guidelines to projects.
G>C
em
-en
C-
mG>
rz
z
m
en
This page intentionally left blank.
,.... .~
r 14 ~.
./,
: I II I CHAPTE
Chapter 3.1. Site Planning
The site planning guidelines are designed to create a positive visual
relationship between buildings, public streets, landscaped areas,
parking lots, storage and service areas, and uses on adjacent properties.
3.1.1. Building Placenrent
Buildings should have a strong relationship with the street and
sidewalk. To maximize this relationship, buildings should:
· Be sited within close proximity to the sidewalk and street wih
adequate landscaping where appropriate.
.
Have main entrances on facades that face the street. Buildings
on corner lots are encouraged to have the main entrance at the
corner.
· Be oriented parallel to the street.
Multiple buildings on the same site should have a strong relationship
with each other. To maximize this relationship, buildings should:
.
Be connected with pedestrian walkways.
.
Be sited to create or define a common courtyard or landscaped
space.
Buildings clustered to
create courtyards and
landscaped areas with
pedestrian walkways
throughout.
Street
e
{1S\
';.... ..fl
3.1.2. Parking Lot Locations
Parking lots should be located behind or to the side of b lildings
wherever possible. Buildings, landscaping treatments, and/or
fencing/walls should screen views of parking lots from strel~ts, and
sidewalks. Dead-end parking aisles should be minimized, where
possible.
Parking to rear ofbuilding
-.
g
Parking
t(, side of
b tilding
=r::.
Street
Pedestrian walkway connecting buildings
Through Parking Lot
(Encourage! ~.
Dead-End Parking Lot
(Discouraged).
Will
eno
-m
-I en
m_
."G')
rZ
>G')
Zc:
Z-
-0
Zm
G')r
Z
m
en
Parking to display automobiles that are for sale or rent may be located
in front of the building. These auto-display areas should have no more
than one to two rows of parked display vehicles. The remaining
vehicles displayed for sale or rent should be placed along the side or to
the rear of buildings.
Street
("
Vehicles for
sale or rent may
be parked in
front of the
bllildilld- "
!m; !! I .
_,~.~~~~_.m.~m~
~
,- I Ff IIIHII".' ........................
..;. , . I::i t1 ,::::::::::,:::::::::::::::::::::::,::::::::::.
.
~
~
.. " "..~
b
~~,
..
~
ii)
3.1.3. StorageAreas
Outdoor storage areas should be located behind or to the side of
buildings. Views of storage areas from local streets, Interstate 580, and
the Iron Horse Trail should be screened by a combination of
walls/fences and landscaping. Refer to Section 3.5. I for guidelines that
address the design and height of walls.
LOC3~ loading
1a ell ities to the rea r of
buildings and ~roon
their view
f ~
\
~ .--~.
\:x)
~".'1'. LOC3tA trash disposal
\ - . -
i"'; ar<;.as to the r",ar of
'. ~I\.. buildings and semen
~~. ~ their view with trash
ene losures ::md
land~aping
Screen walls that block views of loading and
storage areas from the street (Encouraged).
3.1.4. Loading/Unloading Areas
Loading and unloading areas should be located behind buildings and
should generally be screened from views from local streets, Interstate
580, and the Iron Horse Trail. A combination of walls/fences and
landscaping, which is compatible with the building, should be used to
screen these areas. Refer to Section 3.5.l for additional guidelines that
address the design and height of walls.
Screen wall
[""il
:16 )
~'" .f
Loading
~l BI I;='~
~. 0'::1..',-."..
-.,.-..
'~::iffi--
.~~' . . "
D'~~::l:J:;,.!~'
..-"-
I !: II I CHAPTE
Loading and unloading areas should be located to minimize circulation
conflicts with employee and guest parking areas, and should be
designed with an adequate turning radius for large trucks.
Adequate provisions for emergency vehicles should be incorporated
into the design of parking lots and/or loading and unloading areas.
3.1.5. Trash Disposal Areas
Trash disposal areas shall be located behind buildings and shall be
screened from views from local streets, lnterstate 580 and the lron
Horse Trail. A combination of walls, enclosures, and landscaping
should be used to screen these areas. Height of walls shall be at least 6
feet and shall completely conceal the disposal areas. The trash
enclosure shall be designed with materials and colors that are
compatible with the main structures on the site. A solid roof is required
over trash disposal areas in order to comply with National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System requirements.
Trash enclosures hide visibility a/receptacles.
e
~ '
-- ~,;
3.1.6. Driveway Locations
Driveways should be located as far away as possible from street
intersections to minimize congestion and potential interference vrith the
flow of street traffic.
The number of driveways should be minimized, especially along
Dublin Boulevard, to reduce the potential for conflicts b~tween
automobiles entering and exiting the properties and autor1obiles
traveling along the street.
eno
-m
-ien
m_
"'CG)
r-Z
>G)
Zc
Z-
-0
Zm
G)r-
Z
m
en
Adjacent property owners and businesses are strongly encouraged to
share driveway access to parking lots to minimize curb cuts and to
maximize connectivity and access points.
Pedestrian access should be provided between sidewalks, on-site
parking, and building entrances. Pedestrian access points should
include landscaping, walkways, and decorative pavement.
BUILDING
- .
'l:~.l i.:.J"'J.l
t...~~.... ='l~:'t7 ~....~...
...,..... ...L...~ ~:~,.. .. _.....
~'f~. I :,'
"~'I. r....'~
.- ,'",
, . .';:"
.... I. .
.r;;f : '-',
...... :.:'~ ~
. ..1.:. .
I I
Link parking areas to major building
entrances when possible using
textured paving
. ~
r .
~~ (;2J
; ,
Shared parking and access (Encouraged).
Parallel parking should be discouraged along driveways. Painting the
curb red and minimizing the driveway width are appropriate measures
to discourage parking along driveways.
As required by the Zoning Ordinance, landscaped spaces are encouraged
between sidewalks and buildings. (See Section 3.5 - Landscape Guidelines
for related guidelines).
3.1.7. Pedestrian Circulation
A continuous sidewalk shall be constructed along property lines that
are adjacent to streets. The sidewalk must be a minimum of five feet
wide and shall be designed in compliance with the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA). In locations with right-of-way limitations, the
sidewalk should be constructed on private property. Street trees are
required along the sidewalks (see Section 3.5.6 for additional
guidelines related to street trees).
(1.8\
~ 1
I :: II I CHAPTE
3.1.8. Bicycle Ci,'culation
Bicycle racks and storage lockers are encouraged on all properties. At
least one bicycle rack shall be required for properties with parking lots
with more than 40 parking stalls. Bicycle racks should be placed
between the sidewalk and building entrance (adjacent to a pedestrian
walkway) or within a designated area of a parking lot.
Bicycle racks should meet the following criteria:
· Support the bicycle upright by its frame in two places.
· Prevent the wheel of the bicycle from tipping over.
· A U-Iock should be able to lock the front wheel and the down
tube of an upright bicycle, or lock the rear wheel and seat tube
of the bicycle.
Bicycle rack
meeting the
appropriate
criteria.
Appropriate bicycle racks include:
· lnverted "u" frame bicycle rack.
· "A" frame bicycle rack.
· Post and loop bicycle rack.
· Other style that meets the above requirements.
e..
~ "'
,~--:;
Inappropriate bicycle racks include:
· Comb bicycle racks.
· Toast bicycle racks.
· Wave bicycle racks.
BQQ
..A. INVERTED .V' POST AND LOOP
Appropric.te.
_Ill 00 ~
COMB WAVE TOAST
Inapprop~iate.
Bicycle racks should be placed in visible locations to discoura!,e theft.
Landscaping should not block views of the bicycle rack and should
generally consist of low-lying shrubs.
Bicycle racks should be anchored so that they cannot be stolen 'vith the
bikes attached.
Adequate spacing should be provided between multiple bicycle 'acks to
ensure that bicycles can be easily placed and removed from the lacks.
eno
-m
-fen
m_
"'DC')
r-Z
l>C')
Zc
Z-
-0
Zm
C')r-
Z
m
en
3.1.9. Electronic and Mechanical Equiptnent
The following shall not be located within sidewalks and shall be
screened from public views from streets and sidewalks:
All utility and communication lines serving the site must be placed
underground to improve the visual appearance of the site.
· Electric and water utility meters.
Cellular facilities shall be designed to blend in with the environment.
There design shall be visually compatible with the uses, buildings, and
facilities on the site.
· Heating/ventilation/cooling equipment.
3.1.10. Land Use Buffers
A combination of plant material, trees, and fencing screens may be
necessary to screen views of non-compatible uses on adjacent
properties.
· Satellite dishes greater than 18" in diameter.
· Antennas.
· Mechanical equipment.
· Generators.
· Fire sprinkler risers and detector check valves.
~
' ~i
j . -#-r~
I I .
~=-- - 1- _-=
Screening of
equipment
and utility
meters
(Required).
Appropriate methods of screening include fencing, landscaping, roof
parapets, and equipment enclosures. The design of screening devices
should be compatible with the main structures on the site and should
conform to other appropriate guidelines.
Noise levels of mechanical equipment shall be minimized by USing
appropriate noise-attenuating enclosures.
(201
:<""- .-,~
i II I CHAPTE
3.2. Architectural Guidelines
The architectural guidelines are intended to encourage creative and
high-quality design consistent with the overall vision for the Scarlett
Court area and the intended light-industrial uses of the buildings. This
section will establish the guiding principles for various architectural
elements governing the form and function of the buildings developed in
this area.
3.2.1. General Architectural Character
In general, buildings within the Scarlett Court area should be designed
with modern and postmodern architectural styles, materials, and design
details.
Buildings should foster a strong connection to the street by placing
internal uses that require window openings and pedestrian entrances
(such as offices) within the front of the building. Other internal uses
(such as warehousing and storage) should be placed within the back of
the building.
kiOl/ern architecture reflects a style that emphasizes the
{unction of the building, promotes the use of basic building
shapes (such as rectangles and square~), and generally rejects
the use of ornate details and traditional building forms (such
as Greek columns, the Roman arch, towers, domes, and sloped
rooj~). Although materials for modern buildings vary, new
materials (such as metal and concrete) are often used in place
of more traditional materials (such as wood, rock, or brick).
In modern architecture, the function of the building dictates
the form and design of the building. From a modern
architect's perspective, elaborate details and ornamentation
are generally viewed as excessive items that should be
eliminated from the building design, especially if they do not
contribute to the structural integrity or function of the
building.
Examples of modern architecture.
0.1.
~,~ -~-j
)>0
"m
nen
J:-
_G)
-IZ
mG)
~C
Co
"m
m....
Z
m
en
3.2.2. Building Mass and Height
The mass and scale of large, box-like buildings should be reduced by
articulating the facades (especially those that face the street) with
vertical and horizontal wall projections. Articulating the building can
greatly reduce monotony and can create visual interest.
Postmodern architecture rejects the strict rules of modern
architecture and allows the use of more complex building
forms, elements, and details. Many post modern buildings are
designed with projecting, angled, or rounded walls or roofs
that create more complex building forms. In some cases,
postmodern architects will allemptto combine the best features
of modern building design with the best features of other
historical architectural styles. Postmodern buildings may
incorporate modern materials and building technologies, but
they also may include features that are inspired by historical
and traditional styles, such as porticos, towers, domes,
columns, sloped roofs, and ornamental details. These
historical and traditional elements or styles are usually not
replicated, but rather reinterpreted in a new, modern form.
Materials generally vary and may include stucco, rock, brick,
granite tile, and metal.
....~
Box-like building (Discouraged).
Undesirable.
Vertical articulation
(Desired).
Horizontal articulation
(Highly Desired).
Building height should be varied for aesthetic quality and to avoid
monotony. Varying rootlines and incorporating tower elements are
appropriate examples of varying building height.
, ~
. ~ IIiii .11
. -I'
;/ r 11
- ,-~
Examples of postmodern architecture.
Towers and varied building height minimize potential for monotony
and help to create visual interest.
(.~
,.22 i
~",~j";
I I II I CHAPTE
3.2.3. Building Facades
All building elevations facing streets, whether such elevations function
as the front, side, or rear of the building, should be designed to avoid
the appearance of the "back of the building". These facades should be
designed with materials, colors, details, and features that are similar to
the front facade. Blank walls are prohibited.
Facades that front a street should be articulated to improve the quality
of the building design. Appropriate methods of articulation include a
combination of the following:
. Changing the direction of the wall or facade.
· Stepping back an upper tloor.
. lncreasing the number and/or size of window openings.
. Altering the height of the building or rootline.
. Breaking up large smooth surfaces with expansion joints,
expression lines, reveals, recessed panels, molding, or changes in
texture and color.
. Dividing large window openings by using smaller windowpanes.
. Providing projecting trellises, canopies, or awnings over window
openmgs.
. Adding depth and detail to the cornice or roof parapet.
. Recessing entrances and windows into the facade to create depth
and cast shadow patterns.
. Providing towers, building projections, or unique design features at
building entrances and/or corners.
. Creating a defined building base and cap.
e
r 2.3 1
~.._._/!.
Discouraged.
)>0
~m
nen
::t-
-Q
-IZ
mQ
~C
Co
~m
m.
Z
m
en
Encouraged.
~
Example of poorly articulatedfac;ade (Discouraged).
A
Example of appropriately articulatedfac;ade (Encouragea).
Blank facades that do not have window or door openings should be avoided
wherever possible. When necessary, these facades should be articulated by
a combination of dividing the wall surface with expansion joints, expression
lines, trellises, recessed panels, faux windows, reveals, or changes in texture
and color.
The main entrance to the building should be attractively designed as a
prominent element of the facade.
· Providing a unique building element, such as a tower or change in
the rootline, above the primary building entrance.
· Recessing the facade at the primary entrance to create an attractive
forecourt.
· Accenting the entrance with unique architectural elements, such as
columns, a marquee, projecting trellises, or unique lighting
features.
IS
Example of a wall without windows and doors that
is appropriately articulated.
EntlJ'Way is designed to stand out.
3.2.4. Window/Door Fenestrations
Pre-fabricated metal buildings and concrete tilt-up buildings should be
designed to look like conventionally built structures.
A high window to wall ratio (at least 50%) is encouraged on the front
facade of the building.
Window and door types, materials, orientation, and shapes should
complement the overall architectural style of the building.
Large expanses of glass should be broken into sections by
windowpanes, and other elements.
(24~
~-. -~
: : II I CHAPTE
3.2.5. Building Materials
Building materials should be durable and able to withstand long-term
exposure to sun and rain. Materials that require high maintenance are
discouraged.
The following building materials are encouraged:
· Brick (unpainted).
· Concrete (formed or textured, not flat).
· Glass.
· Masonry (painted or unpainted).
· Metal framing and structural beams.
· Stone.
· Wood accents.
~~
. ~..'.J
I ,.
I~' ~
t. l'.i~
r '-c 'CC
_~.IJ
.~~~j
r~.j
~~
~?:; !
<""'. . .-- J "
I.' . .
. 't.
/! .
IlIJfl1i'
~ If
'.
y:y-FF7FF:E.
r-ffnFf1G
I
~~--~~~~
1 ~
U..~.c:.. l...::....
:::':, !
~~
..,. .
. .--;:. ~~ I
~t I
. . . l.
~..;. - ~--1
~
I
0).25\
\. l
~..~~'"
I
)>0
;em
oen
::1:-
_G>
~z
~G>
~c
Co
;em
m.
z
m
en
Buildings should use a variety of materials to provide visual intel est and
avoid monotony. Buildings should not just rely on different c(tlors of
paint to avoid monotony.
The following exterior building materials are discouraged:
. Vinyl.
. Plywood.
. Corrugated metal siding.
. Wood siding.
. Timber panels.
. Glossy and/or highly reflective surfaces.
. Mirror glass that cause glare.
. Cinder blocks.
3.2.6. Building Colors
Building colors should be complementary and compatible with other
buildings on the site.
3.2.7. Roofs
Simple roof forms that complement the architectural style of the
building are encouraged.
Light, neutral colors that reduce the perceived mass and bulk of
buildings are encouraged. Warmer earth tones are preferred over white
or other bright colors that produce glare. Bright and dark contrasting
colors should be used as accents only. Neon, pastel, or primary colors
should be avoided as primary building colors.
Where possible, limit flat roofs or use a combination of pitched and flat
roofs on the structure.
Flat roofs should be designed with a decorative parapet wall. Parapets
should be articulated by projecting attractive cornices, lentils, or caps.
Caps should be proportional with the building.
Bright colors (Discouraged).
Light. neutral colors (Encouraged).
., - i""':.....
..~--~-
;~~.IIIII.
. =---11-
:;ijiiiijII..--- .
.:;ijiiiijII
.---:::::;.~~
..'~'-~"'''''^'..'''
.'~~
flit
Contrasting trim and color bands and other applications should be
applied to enhance and create an appealing building facade.
Examples of a decorative roof parapet.
When a sloped roof is used, low-pitch roofs are preferred over steep-pitch
roofs. Where possible, limit flat roofs or use a combination of flat and
pitched roofs.
Use of color creates interest and minimizes
monotony.
Low-pitch (Encouraged).
Steep-pitch (Discouraged).
",.
v~
~'26 ;
:.. J
I ! I II I CHAPTE
If used, mansard roofs should wrap around the entire perimeter of the
structure. Piecemeal treatment of roof that breaks continuity of form IS
discouraged.
Sloping roofs should be designed with an overhang to prevent water from
dripping down the side of the building. Roof overhangs should be
appropriately proportioned with the overall frame of the building. A 12-
inch minimum overhang is recommended.
Roofs may be provided over outdoor vehicle drop-off and maintenance
areas. These roofs should be designed to reflect the architecture of the
building.
-....
,:~ . . .
=J..,.~j:
.. '""- .... ,-;,
~~. '!. -.. T ~'I
[0
/ -'. l/'e~
.. ~l~;_: I ~_~~~~
Overhangs complement architecture.
Overhangs used to protect from weather.
0.r....~...
. 27 ~
"-;",-,)
3.2.8. Mechanical Equipment
Any mechanical or electronic equipment, heating, venting or air-
conditioning units (HV AC) attached to the building or mounted on the
roof must be completely screened from public view.
Screening materials shall be similar to the materials used in the roof
and complement the composition of the roof and building design.
Rooftop equipment should be clustering when using equipment 'Nells.
Screening equipment to match the architecture (Encouraged).
.. 4~
..~~~ -
'2:~~ ....~
,~p
More mature landscaping
should be used to screen the
box (Not Appropriate).
Hidden equipment
(Appropriate)
)>0
::;om
oen
:J:-
_C>
-IZ
~C>
-IC
Co
::;Om
mr-
Z
m
en
Equipment for solar lighting or heating may be visible from the public
right-of-way when incorporated into the architecture or as needed to
maximize solar exposure.
3.2.9. Gutters and Downspouts
All gutters and downspouts should be integrated and internalized into
the building form. This may be achieved by recessing the gutters into
the roofline and downspouts into the walls to avoid a projecting form.
If this configuration is not feasible, gutters and downspouts should be
painted to match the color of the adjacent surface, unless being featured
as a unique architectural treatment, such as a copper downspout.
3.2.10. Vents and Flashing
All vents and flashing should be painted to match the color of the
adjacent surface.
3.2.11. Accessory Structures
The design of accessory buildings (e.g. security kiosks, maintenance
buildings, trash receptacles, and outdoor equipment enclosures) should
be compatible with the overall design of the main buildings on the site.
Trash and recycle enclosures should be consistent with the design of
the project and building architecture. Materials that are the same or
similar to the materials used on the building should be used on the
enclosure. Architecturally designed roof structures should be used to
create a finished looking structure.
,~ '.:
\>~ l
~..,~
~~)
I I I II I CHAPTE
3.3. Sign Guidelines
This section contains recommendations for the design, construction and
placement of signs. The guidelines in this section supplement (but do
not replace) the sign regulations established by Chapter 8.84 (Sign
Regulations) of the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. All signs will be
required to conform with the Zoning Ordinance (except where modified
by these guidelines) and shall be approved by the City.
Existing signs that were previously permitted by the City of Dublin, but
that do not comply with the guidelines in this document, should be
treated as non-conforming signs. They should be permitted to remain
until any of the following events occur:
· The property is improved.
· The sign is relocated or replaced.
. The sign structure is damaged or destroyed by more than 50
percent of its value at the time of damage or destruction.
. Repair of a sign that costs more than 50 percent of its current
value.
3.3.1. Sign Considerations and General Guidelines
Sign clutter on buildings and sites should be avoided by considering the
placement, spacing, size, orientation, scale, and design of signs.
Signs should be compatible with the modern and postmodern
architectural style of the building (refer to page 21 and 22 for a
description of modern and postmodern architectural styles). Sign
elements should fit with the overarching theme or character of
buildings on the site.
0.'9\
\. >:~
ln addition to the sign requirements in the Zoning Ordinance, a Master
Sign Program shall be required for buildings with more than three
tenants. This program should ensure that each tenant sign has an
appropriate and compatible size, location, shape, orientation, and scale.
The number of signs should be in proportion to the length of the
property as determined by the Community Development Directcr.
All signs on a property should share common design elements, SJch as:
. Materials.
. Size.
. Shape.
. Lighting technique.
. Placement.
. Alignment.
. Method of attachment.
I
I
I
I
\
I
I
I
C:1J
QH
Different types of signs that share a
common design elements (Encouraged).
enc
-m
G>en
z-
enG')
z
G>
c:
C
m
r-
z
m
en
· Signboards mounted on or above the roof.
\.fr
3.3.2. Inappropriate Signage
The project applicant should review the Zoning Ordinance for a full list
of sign regulations. The following types of signs are prohibited:
· Signs painted directly on a building.
· Amateur or poorly crafted hand-painted signs.
,.
: "~~l~~;
; ~: lli~~~;'~" :.:,~:~:~
~~ f"tJlU~'__.
.:;.:~ "i'. ~'ir~.. Y'A_. _-1 . ~lO"/OlA
~~.=f~~~..',- e.
~~21;r~ '..'~:,i.~?~
-:- ~~ ~C.-J
.. .:---. ~ - -
· Neon signs, billboards, permanent banners, or plywood signs.
· Window signs occupying more than 25% of an individual
window's area (including those directly painted on window).
1.-.-
.
Permanent inflatable signs and moving/rotating signs
(electronic or windblown), including those that produce smoke
or sound.
.
Handheld signs, sidewalk signs, sandwich boards (A-frame),
and other portable freestanding signs.
.
Signs, flags, streamers or banners that are attached to or lean
on a fence, wall or pole, or that are not securely attached to the
building or a designed sign base, such as a monument sign.
.
Freestanding single-pole signs (Lollipop signs)
.
Signs on public right-of-way.
.
Signs attached to a fence
'J,,:'-
Inappropriate signs (Discouraged).
Inappropriate signs (Discouraged).
fJ"
~ 30
'.
I I I II I CHAPTE
3.3.3. Appropriate Signage
The following types of signs are encouraged:
'~).!I:hl15:
~'~In
~~'r ..
~~~"I U
~{~>! 'w . ,
:.;g.'l......-.'.'.. "Ink
.;"-t,:"
:~"~: II
. Wall signs.
. Monument signs.
. Freeway-oriented signs.
. Blade signs (shingle signs)
. Directory Signs.
. Directional Signage.
Blade Sign.
Guidelines for each of these signs are provided on the following pages.
The number of monument signs and freeway-oriented signs shall be
limited to one monument sign or one freeway sign (not both) per lot
frontage.
Monument Sign.
e
~,.. ~-..-."
Directional Sign age.
Wall Sign.
-,
I
;J
~..--
~~..
I
Directory Sign.
Freeway-Oriented Sign.
ene
-m
G')en
z-
enG')
z
G')
c
e
m
r-
Z
m
en
3.3.4. Wall Signs
Wall signs are vehicle- and pedestrian-oriented signs that are mounted
flat on the facade of a building, usually above the business entrance and
below the roofline of the building. Wall signs include:
Wall signs should not be placed at random locations on the facade.
Building facades should be designed with specific areas dedicated for
wall signs. The location, placement, and size of walls signs should
create a consistent pattern of signs on the facade. In general, wall signs
should be placed above the building entrances and below the roofline.
· Raised or box/cabinet signs that are framed and mounted to the
wall.
Inconsistent sign patterns on
facades (Discouraged).
· Three dimensional letters, symbols, or icons that are individually
cut and mounted on the wall.
Consistent sign patterns on
facades (Encouraged).
I
-- m E:::!I
\DLJLI
E[J
- -----J
6175
Wall signs should not be placed over building details, cornices,
molding, windows, or other prominent design features on the building.
Wall signs should not project more than 12 inches from the building
facade.
Mounting hardware should be an attractive and integral part of the sign
design, or should be hidden behind the sign.
Examples of wall signs.
32
I I II I CHAPTE
3.3.5. Monu1nent Signs
Monument signs are freestanding signs that are attached to a
freestanding monument structure. They are oriented toward pedestrians
and veh icles.
r:::::.-
.~
Examples of monument signs.
Monument signs should be located within the landscaped area between
the sidewalk and building. These signs should be oriented
perpendicular to the street or intersection and should generally be
located near vehicle entrances.
e.-3.~."
;..;.. ./'
No more than one monument sign should be allowed per vehicle
entrance (unless the entrance is a shared driveway for nultiple
properties). When a vehicle entrance provides access to nultiple
buildings or businesses, signs for each business should be co-Io.;ated on
one monument sign.
The structure of monument signs should be rectilinear in f(,rm and
scaled for use by both pedestrians and vehicles. In general, m(Inument
signs with a horizontal orientation should not exceed a heighl of five
feet, as measured from the adjacent sidewalk grade. Monument signs
with a vertical orientation and narrow width may be taller (up to eight
feet). An appropriate example of a tall monument sign is the Arlen
Ness sign (see photo to the left with the "A" logo).
Landscaping or a raised planter should surround a monument sign.
Evergreen or flowering plants should surround the sign to help
highlight and define the base of the sign and screen the support
structures.
"D-
. ".'~ :,:'1.
_. .,
High quality and durable materials, such as metal, brick, stone, :ile, cast
concrete, or similar masonry materials, are encouraged. l\I, aterials,
finishes, and colors should be carefully selected to be in harm(lny with
the on-site buildings.
cnc
-m
G')en
z-
enG')
z
G')
c
c
m
....
z
m
en
3.3.6. Blade Signs
A blade sign (or a shingle sign) is a double-sided sign that projects
perpendicular to the building facade and hangs from a mounted wall
brace. Blade signs are primarily oriented towards pedestrians.
The maximum area of a single blade sign shall not exceed 10 square
feet.
The lowest point of a projecting sign that hangs over a sidewalk, plaza,
or pedestrian walkway shall be at least eight feet above the grade of the
adjacent sidewalk or pedestrian walkway. Blade signs shall not extend
more than four feet from the facade.
Example of blade sign.
Blade signs should be mounted above the ground floor windows near
building entrances. No portion of a blade sign should extend above the
roofline of the structure.
Only one blade sign should be allowed per tenant.
Blade signs should be externally illuminated.
Design Standards for
Projecting Signs:
~;. 1\\ ~ h.~\ J r;)\i~
~~LH\ j I~Vj n I~.
I j~-~-l ~
['5~: T ~1 " J".~
.. ": :1 .,_
:: !~!: . .
. :.,[\\-_ he
. ~. ..
: ~i
:- ,
- :Inku
4'
Maximum
Width
8' Minimum
Clearance
Example of blade sign.
r34~
, .'
"'"",: ._~,;.
I II CHAPTE
3.3.7. Freeway-Oriented Signs
Freeway-oriented signs are tall freestanding signs that are oriented
towards vehicles traveling along Interstate 580.
~I
~~
~~~!
;I.:j
I ~.,.
M ~-...
I
1
Freeway-oriented signs should only be permitted on properties along
Scarlett Court and Interstate 580. Freeway-oriented signs are
discouraged along Dublin Boulevard, Scarlett Drive, Dougherty Road,
and the Iron Horse Trail.
No more than one freeway-oriented sign is allowed per property. If a
property has more than one business, signs for each business should be
co-located on one freeway-oriented sign. Co-located signs are
encouraged and should be designed with specific spaces to hold the
individual signs for each business. The placement of multiple business
signs should not create clutter on the sign.
8.5.';
:l.. ...?/
Freeway-oriented signs that are mounted on a single pole (lollipop
signs) are discouraged. Freeway signs should be mounted on a solid
structure or a minimum of two structural columns. Sign panel~ should
be limited in width to fit between the structural columns.
l~illr~I~~i~11
., ... -. ,...-..~
'=
'-
Tenont $ign$
: .I.'
Single-pole or lollipop signs
(Discouraged).
Encouraged.
Sign clutter (Discouraged).
Co-located sign that is
appropriately designed to avoid
clutter (Encourage~.
enc
-m
G>en
z-
enG>
z
G>
c
C
m
r-
z
m
en
Freeway-oriented signs should be limited to a height of 35 feet. A
taller sign that allows for co-location of signs from other tenants within
the Scarlet Court area may be considered for approval by the Planning
Commission.
3.3.8. Directory Signs
Directory signs are pedestrian-oriented signs that are usually placed at
eye level near building entrances. These signs may be placed on the
building facade or on a freestanding structure, similar to a small
monument sign.
Currently, the Scarlett Court area has one freeway-oriented sign with
video/digital elements. Due to the limited size of the area, the City
should discourage additional signs with digital/video elements.
Multiple signs with video and digital elements would be distracting to
drivers along lnterstate 580.
Buildings and properties with multiple tenants should have a directory
sign that is placed at a convenient location and that is accessible to
pedestrians.
The sign design should be compatible with the architecture style and
materials of the buildings on the property.
_ :r.:
'\ ClNlCR
\ covrr
Jill
~!
. ~~~
6rl"' ~~........
---
........t...,
.. ........-..,.
5.1. _.~-
It .......,,_......
. -I....
---.
-4 -:: .~,~-
-...,..
.:~~-,,::,:
3
2
1
~......-
----...--
~._-
---
---.--
---
--
~:::=
=:-~-:
~
.............
,',.
vy:
BUSINESS DIRECTORY
Simple directo/Y signs.
Existing Freeway-oriented video sign
in the Scarlett Court area.
/ ...
f 36 ~
'- .j
F.
1 I II I CHAPTE
3.3.9. Directional Signs
Directional signs are small freestanding signs that provide direction to
pedestrians and vehicles entering the property. Directional signs are
located along internal driveways and pedestrian walkways.
Directional signage is encouraged when the site has multiple businesses
or functions. For example, directional signs should be provided to
direct service trucks to loading/unloading areas and customers to
appropriate parking areas. Auto dealerships should have directional
signs to direct people to the appropriate department, such as the sales
office, service department, or parts department. Properties with
multiple businesses (especially business that are not visible from public
streets) should utilize directional signage to clearly direct people to the
appropriate business.
Directional signage should include the name of the area or the user to
be alerted, and a simple arrow.
'"
II
:;:::~::~~~;:~::;~:
~~~:
~, k-
Simple directional signs.
Directional signs should have a similar design and theme as all of the
signs on the site. However, these signs should be smaller in terms of
scale and height related to other types of monument signs.
0.7..'\
~.".._//
3.3.10. Sign Area
The total area of each sign category is regulated by the City of [lublin's
zoning ordinance. This information is available in Chapter 8.8,~ of the
Zoning Ordinance.
3.3.11. Nutnber of Signs
The number of signs per business will be established by the criteria
established by Chapter 8.84 of the City of Dublin Zoning Ordim nce.
The number of monument signs and freeway oriented signs ~ hall be
limited to one monument sign or one freeway sign per lot fronta.~e.
3.3.12. Sign Material
Sign materials should complement the overall architectural character of
buildings on the property and be constructed out of high quality
materials, such as acrylic, aluminum, and weather resistant w(lod and
composite materials.
Sign materials should be durable, weatherproof, and treated or painted
so that they will not discolor, rust, fade, crack, or corrode.
Sign materials should make a positive contribution to the legihility of
the sign. G lossy finishes that cause glare and reflecti< Ins are
discouraged.
Plywood, unfinished lumber, and neon signs are prohibited.
enc
-m
G>en
z-
enG>
z
G>
c:
C
m
r-
z
m
en
3.3.13. Sign Color
Sign colors should complement the colors of adjacent buildings on the
site.
mlltJ) ~@
lteaD
The color of the sign's frame and letters should generally contrast the
background of the sign or wall to maximize the sign's legibility. Light
letters on a dark background or dark letters on a I ight background are
most legible.
Letters which are hard to read
(Discouraged).
F
M
The color scheme should be limited to five colors to maintain visual
balance. Colors or color combinations that interfere with legibility of
the sign copy or that interfere with viewer identification of other signs
should be avoided.
Simple serif or sans serif
lettering (Encouraged).
3.3.14. Sign Syntbol (Logos)
Symbols and corporate logos should be used for easy identification of
the tenant, especially along 1-580 and Dublin Boulevard. Pictographic
images will usually register more quickly in the viewer's mind than a
written message.
tJ /- Ji:.j). 1 ()
rr,,~" /). ~f t I'
Easy to
Read Sign
Discouraged.
Encouraged.
IiQ,
'io~
The text styles, font type, and size should be chosen for clear legibility
from a distance.
Sign letters should occupy no more than 75 percent of the designated
sign area to maximize readability.
- -
Logos are encouragedfor signs facing Dublin Boulevard and 1-580.
IDELICATESSENI
3.3.15. Sign Typology
The type of font used to display text should be simple and easily
readable. Bold font styles are encouraged. Lettering can be in upper
case or title case. Hard to read or intricate type faces should be avoided.
Letters take up too much of the
sign area (Discouraged).
DELICATESSEN
Letters occupy approx. 75% of the
sign area (max.) (Encouraged).
."~
.~
,,-38)
".,-,__3"~
I I II I CHAPTE
3.3.16. Sign Lighting
Appropriate types of illumination include:
. External lighting that is directed on the sign face or provided from
an on- or off-site light pole.
. Backlighting of individually mounted letters and sign symbols.
. lnternal illumination of box signs that illuminate just the letters,
logos, or symbols of the sign, but not the sign background.
Internally illuminated box signs that illuminate the entire sign
(letters, symbols, logos, and background) are discouraged.
~~-: --.,,_..,..._._'~~ I ~~
External lighting of signs (Encouraged).
Backlighting of signs (Encouraged).
e
:'..39.. :
~ 'v;, _ _ ._.;.r.
Internal illumination of box sign letters, logos, or !>ymbol"
(Encouraged).
Internal illumination of entire box sign (letters, logos, symbol,:, and
sign background (Discouraged).
eno
-m
G)en
z-
enG)
z
G)
c
o
m
r-
z
m
en
3.3.17. Te"lnporary Signs
All temporary signs shall confirm with the size and display period
standards as required in the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance and
Municipal Code.
Signs designed or intended for temporary use should not be displayed
on a permanent basis. Temporary signs should not interfere with
permanent signs and should retain similar color schemes and style as
existing signs whenever possible. Materials should be sturdy and able
to withstand rain, wind, and sun for the duration of use. Temporary
window signs should not take over more than 25% of the window
space.
Discouraged.
Encouraged.
~.~
l40 )
~.~.. .-",.r.
I I II I CHAPTE
3.4. Lighting Guidelines
The lighting guidelines are recommendations for the design and
placement of lights within the Scarlett Court area. These guidelines are
meant to ensure adequate, safe, and appropriate lighting levels.
3.4.1. Site Lighting
Adequate lighting should be provided throughout the site to create a
safe and non-threatening environment. The following should be
illuminated at night:
· Intersection of streets.
· lntersection of driveways and streets.
· Surface parking lots.
· Pedestrian walkways and paths.
· Courtyards.
· Sidewalks.
. All entrances to buildings, including rear and service
entrances.
· Garbage disposal areas.
· Other areas routinely used by pedestrians.
Lighting should be provided at regular intervals to avoid light and dark
pockets. Dark pockets can create uncomfortable areas for pedestrians
and provide opportunities for criminals to hide in dark shadows. Light
pockets can create a "fish bowl" effect. Within the light pocket,
pedestrians may be observed, but their ability to see outside of the light
pocket is limited, which creates discomfort and insecurity.
8.1.'1
x -?"
Light and dark pockets (Discouraged).
Over lighting the building and site should also be avoided. Over
lighting can create a "prison-yard" look and can degrade nighttime
views.
Sollards or pathway lights should be integrated into the pdestrian
circulation system when other lighting is not provided.
Pedestrian-scale
bollaI'd lighting
along pathway
(Encouraged).
Security lighting should be installed in areas not visible from th ~ public
right-of-ways and in areas that may be subject to vandalism,
entrapment, or other unsafe conditions.
rc
-m
G')en
::I:-
-IG')
-Z
z
G')G')
c
c
m
r
Z
m
en
Lighting levels shall be maintained at all times by the property owner.
3.4.3. Glare
Motion-activated lighting is encouraged when feasible, to conserve
energy and to serve as a security measure.
All exterior lights should be designed and located so that only the
intended area is illuminated and off-site glare is prevented.
3.4.2. Light Design
The scale, materials, colors, and design detail of light posts and fixtures
should reflect the desired character of Scarlett Court and the
architectural style of the surrounding buildings. ln general, basic metal
light posts and fixtures should be used.
~
Light posts should be appropriately scaled to pedestrians near
sidewalks and other areas of pedestrian circulation. Extremely tall light
posts and fixtures (over 15' in height) should be avoided.
l-'"
Light does not spill over to surrounding properties (Encouraged).
ji
,j
Examples of appropriate light post designs.
Light poles and fixtures should have a dark color application.
Example of an appropriate light.
(4~
i II CHAPTE
3.4.4. Auto Dealership Display Lighting
The guidelines below apply to light fixtures that are intended to
illuminate and highlight display areas that contain vehicles for sale.
They do not apply to guest or employee parking lots.
Areas of the auto dealership other than specified display areas should
be treated secondary to the display areas. Lighting in these other areas
should follow the guidelines outlined in Section 3.4.l-3.4.3.
Lighting fixtures, poles, and other associated elements should match or
complement the architecture of the building and the design of other
lighting fixtures on site.
Light poles should not exceed 30 feet in height. Light fixtures should
be full cutoff fixtures to minimize glare. Light fixtures should be
organized and designed to avoid over lighting an area or creating
light/dark pockets.
Lighting should be metal halide or high pressure sodium.
Vehicles in display areas should have appropriate display lighting to
showcase the featured vehicles. A lighting pattern that emphasizes
elements other than the intended vehicles is considered inconsistent
with the purpose of vehicle display lighting, and should be avoided.
Vehicles in outdoor display lots should have appropriate display
lighting to highlight the featured vehicles. The lighting pattern should
emphasize the intended display areas over other exterior areas.
Perimeter lighting should utilize shields to block light from spilling
onto other properties or the public right-of-way.
e
~--:-,i__
Accent lighting to highlight display area vehicles.
I.
-~---..
~. l
~
\
Consistent lighting that llses shields to prevent off-site light. ng
spillover.
10
-m
G)en
J:-
-IG)
-Z
z
G)G)
c
o
m
I
Z
m
en
This page intentionally left blank.
.... --.;
'1 \
~ 44!!
l
. -Ir~.. .,,..;'
; II CHAPTE
3.5. Landscape Guidelines
The guidelines in this section apply to the landscaping of private
property.
3.5.1. Fence~ Walls~ and Screens
Fencing and walls should be used for sound attenuation, to maintain
privacy retaining, and to screen views of the following:
· Parking lots.
· Trash disposal areas.
.
Service and loading/unloading areas.
.
Equipment on the roof, side of building, or ground.
Fences and walls should be between four and six feet in height. Taller
walls shall be required for screening purposes. (See Chapter 8.72 of
the City of Dublin Zoning Code for more information).
Exterior walls that are visible from a public right of way should have an
attractive cap and base.
....,.,., ~
K:=T.:" ~
I
I....- -
~I. .
Attractive caps and bases on(ences and walls.
e
( 4. .5. i
:. ..
~. .A.
The materials selected for fences and walls should be compatit Ie with
the architecture of associated buildings. Walls should be painted to
match or complement the surrounding architecture. Brick and natural
stone should not be painted.
Fence and wall surfaces should be articulated to prevent mo 10tony.
Appropriate methods of articulations include a combinat ion of
regularly spaced columns, a defined base and cap, providing me re than
one color or material, and/or altering the height of the wall.
Flat wall s trface
(Discoura ged).
Articulated .vall surface
(Encou '"aged).
rc
)>m
ZCIJ
C-
ClJQ
OZ
)>Q
~C
Zc
Qm
r
Z
m
CIJ
Low landscaping, such as vines and shrubs, should be planted between
walls/fences and public streets to soften their appearance and to deter
graffiti. The landscaping should be placed close to the wall/fence so
that individuals are not able to hide between the wall/fence and the
landscaping (i.e. there should not be a space between the wall/fence and
the landscaping that would allow a criminal to hide).
Landscaping planted in front of wall.
Q~ --~- -~ J
A
-~
Appropriate walls or solid fencing should be placed along property
lines that are adjacent to the Iron Horse Trail to screen views of the
industrial properties and outdoor storage uses. Full canopy trees are
encouraged to screen views into these properties from the Iron Horse
Trail.
The following types of fences are encouraged along portions of the site
that are visible from streets, Interstate 580, and the Iron Horse Trail:
Examples of appropriate types offences.
.
Decorative wrought iron fences
.
Solid walls made of cast concrete, natural stone, brick, and or
concrete block
.
A combination of a solid wall with decorative wrought iron.
(146 -,
\
I 'II I
! I CHAPTE
Chain-link fences, plywood, barbed wire, and cosentino wire fences
should be avoided along portions of the property that are visible from
public streets, the lron Horse Trail, and lnterstate 580. These fences
may be appropriate for areas of the site that are behind buildings and
that are not visible from public right-of-ways. However, they shall be
adequately maintained.
--I
I
Chain-link and barbed wire (Discouraged).
0.\
" ;'
+ + -.....
3.5.2. General Landscaping
Native and/or drought-tolerant plants and trees are strongly encl)uraged
to minimize the amount of water for irrigation. Landscaping tre ltments
should include a variety of trees, grasses, shrubs, and wildflowers as
well as a diversity of species.
All areas not used by buildings, walkways, driveways, parking, ;torage,
or loading/unloading should be landscaped. Landscaping inclu 1es live
material, which may be accented with non-living material such ,LS rock.
Soil type, sun and wind exposure, and other such factors sh )uld be
considered when choosing landscaping species and locations.
All trees should have a planting area adequately sized for the antou-nt of
room needed for tree roots.
Plants lhat
complement tree.
Appropriate space should be provided
for trees roots.
ro
>m
zen
C-
enQ
OZ
>Q
~C
Zc
Qm
r
Z
m
en
Providing a mix of complementary trees, shrubs, grasses, and other
landscaping materials is encouraged to minimize monotony.
3.5.3. Compatibility
Landscaping should be planted in a manner that at maturity it will not
damage neighboring properties, block sunlight from surrounding
buildings, or otherwise degrade the integrity of adjacent uses.
3.5.4. Groundcover
Groundcover should be planted so that 100 percent coverage will be
achieved within three years.
Wherever possible, trees and shrubs should be planted in groups to
create unity and present a more natural feel.
Turf or lawn landscaping should be minimized to reduce water use for
irrigation, and should not exceed 25 percent of the landscaped area
within a project. In place of turf, a combination of native
groundcovers, perennial grasses, shrubs, and trees should be used (see
Section 3.5.l5-Plant Matrix-for a list of recommended species).
3.5.5. Building Landscaping
The base of the buildings should be landscaped to soften the edges.
Accent landscaping should be provided at major focal points, such as
near entries and pedestrian gathering areas.
~:48
I I II CHAPTE
Large deciduous trees are encouraged on the west and south sides of
buildings to block wind and summer heat and to utilize winter solar
heat. Evergreen trees are encouraged for areas needing windbreaks.
Trees and other landscaping should be planted at an appropriate
distance from the foundation to avoid conflicts with roots. Generally,
smaller trees should be planted at least 10 from the foundation. Larger
trees should generally be planted at least 20 feet from the foundation.
Distances may vary by species.
Landscaping should not block solar panels or other facilities requiring
solar access. Landscaping should be used to shade air conditioners and
other similar equipment to minimize the temperature.
3.5.6. Sidewalk and Walkway Landscaping
The public right-of-way, sidewalks, and on-site pedestrian walkways
should be lined with a landscaped strip that is at least five feet deep,
where possible. A mix of trees, shrubs, and groundcover should occur
in this area. Shade trees are encouraged along sidewalks to minimize
the impacts of the sun on pedestrians.
Low lying shrubs along sidewalks and pedestrian walkways should
generally be less than 3 feet tall. Trees should be pruned so that at least
seven feet of clearance is provided between the bottom of the sidewalk
and the lowest branches of the tree.
Pedestrian walkways should be designed with a solid paving material,
such as concrete, brick, or concrete unit pavers. Turf block or
decomposed granite may also be appropriate for certain walkways.
Root barriers should be used when trees are planted near pedestrian
walkways and sidewalks.
Landscaped hedges that are 36 inches in height should be provided
between sidewalks and parking lots to screen views of vehicles
adjacent to the sidewalk and public streets.
e."9~<)
'. "'
7' MIN. CLtAAAN(.f"
UNPe.~ 1"ru:~ CAI~OP'(
3IMA)(. Hr.
OF sHRU6S
Sidewalks and walkways should be landscaped with a
variety of trees, shrubs, and groundcover.
~
.0
)>m
zen
0-
enGl
OZ
)>Gl
~C
Zc
Glm
.
Z
m
en
3.5.7. Parking Lot Landscaping
The perimeter and aisles of parking lots should be landscaped with a
variety of trees and low-lying shrubs and plant materials. The
landscaping edge should be at least five feet wide. Trees should be
regularly spaced to provide a canopy of shade for the parking lot.
Planters, including diamond shaped planter boxes, with trees should be
used within center parking aisles and between public sidewalks or
street and parking lots. Planters should be five feet in width and should
be planted with a combination of trees, shrubs, and flowering plants.
Planter walls should not exceed 24 inches in height.
ln general, large evergreen shade trees should be planted along the edge
of the parking lot at a ratio of one tree for every three to four parking
spaces and within the interior of the site at a ratio of one tree for every
four parking spaces.
I
=m
\2U
I
~
~
I
I
5.
~
~
Location and
type of parking
lot planters.
\ Accent trees
\ delineate aisles
'. '.. I
, .,
.1 I "
Canopy shade trees
located throughout
parking lot
Low hedge or :
screen wall
Landscape
buffer
t1 ttrt_ I
fl
=g
Planters should allow
ample room for tree
roots. Five feet is
generally acceptable.
I.D
Accent trees
and enhanced
paving define
entry
.\
~,.~OJ
: il I CHAPTE
I
I
Appropriate parking lot landscaping.
Biofilters, or vegetated/grass swales are encouraged at the edges of
parking lots to collect, filter, and distribute stormwater runoff from
parking lots. Biofilters should either be designed to accommodate large
storms, or have overflow storm drains where runoff from large storms
may bypass the biofilter and enter the underground drainage system.
Catch-basins can be used to direct runoff to the vegetated swales.
ShallolVturj-
lined slI'ale
Biofilter.
e.-~1\
, ,
\~. __.,.if'
Driveway entrances to parking lots should have an attracti Ie and
defined design. Landscape treatments and decorative paving m lterials
are encouraged at driveway entrances.
...~~
~ ,--,.~-~~~--:
'.-=~---"'-.. .><.-~ >- >--
_~ '_-.-' _:5-><~~3
'- -.. ..,~~'"". ~-..><><~-~
'_._-C-. ~~..... ~--.....
~ ....,.---- ~-' ,~~- >< .....'::.<
Attractive driveway entrance to parking lot.
rc
)>m
ZC/)
C-
C/)G')
OZ
)>G')
~C
Zc
G')m
r
Z
m
C/)
3.5.8. Vehicle displays
Automobile dealerships may have designated areas to display vehicles
that are for sale. These areas may be specifically designed with
permanent ramps and flat elevated display areas. Elevated display
areas shall be no more than 16 inches above grade. The base of the
display area shall be landscaped with evergreen plants. Moveable
metal ramps/display structures and rotating vehichle displays are
prohibitted.
3.5.9. Landscaping Scale
Landscaping should not interfere with the visibility of signage or
entry/exit areas.
c .-
~_J- ~ /
I - _J
Example of appropriately designed display
area (Encouraged).
Landscaping should complement and highlight (not block
or interfere) with signs or driveways.
",
~'..'
"
f... ..,
Landscaping should be in scale with adjacent structures, streets, and
public spaces, and be sized appropriately at maturity.
<') f) 4)'" '" ').,.
1'>,,\. .~.t.,.)l:-l."k}l /~i" ;.,ta... 1~~.ta
t:';~~..~ ~)tQ-~r~~~~1J'')~)t~:4/
""',,) ~~ ~ 'I ~ .oj
k;lr''''~~~' .
. " ~:t r~ . - .., - _.
- -, ~- ~ ~ ~
,.', ~=u=t=~... _
-e;v ... ~...:;!.r::"7---,1 I ~
oO~~ -"- ~_!J--.J,~
~.:...- -~.. ~ Yalllk... ___ _ .I
Appropriate scale (Encouraged).
Gut of scale (Discouraged).
Moveable metal ramp and display (Prohibited).
('52'~
~. f
1 I: II I CHAPTE
needed. Hydrozoning groups together plants by their water needs, and
provides appropriate irrigation for each zone.
High-efficiency automatic drip irrigation systems with up-to-date
equipment and technology is encouraged for landscaping that requires
more water than would naturally be provided. Systems that apply water
slowly are encouraged to minimize runoff and erosion.
lrrigation systems should not overwater the landscaping and should not
produce over-spray on surfaces outside the planting area. Water meters
and adjusting watering cycles with the weather minimize overwatering.
Designing on-site rainwater collection system and recycled water or
graywater systems are encouraged. Water from these systems are
suitable for watering landscaping, but not for drinking.
3.5.10. Maintenance
A II landscaping should be maintained in a healthy and attractive state
and should be watered, weeded, generally maintained, and replaced (if
necessary) by the property owner/property manager.
The property owner/property manager should monitor the irrigation
system and replace or repair broken parts as soon as possible to ensure
the proper functioning of the system.
Landscaping should be trimmed regularly to maintain health, vigor and
natural shape and to avoid conflicting with pedestrian walkways,
driveways, lighting, and signage.
3.5.11. Stonnwater
Run-off retention, first-flush storm-water facilities, and storm water
treatment methods should be an integral part of parking lot design and
landscape areas. Treatment products such as bioswales and oil/grit or
oil/water separators are encouraged. lnlets with sumps in
loading/unloading and storage areas are encouraged to collect
8.....':
~.< "
accidental spills. The above methods can reduce the amount of
pollutants leaving the site and can improve overall water quality
3.5.12. Tree Preservation
Existing, mature, and healthy trees should be preserved to thl: extent
feasible (See Chapter 8.72 of the City of Dublin Zoning Code hr more
information).
Trees shall not be removed from a site without prior permission from
the City. Property owners and tenants should contact the City to
determine if the tree to be removed is a heritage tree and to dete "mine if
a tree removal permit is required from the City. When a tree is
removed from a site, it should be replaced with a new tlee that
conforms to these guidelines.
3.5.13.
Street Trees
Street trees shall be required on the edges of all property lines that are
adjacent to a local streets. For Scarlett Court and Scarlett 01 ive, the
primary street tree shall be the Pyrus Calleryana "Bradford" (E:radford
Pear) and the accent street tree shall be the Prunus Yedoensis ('(oshino
Flowering Cherry). For Dublin Boulevard, the street tree shall be the
Platanus x hispanica (London plane tree).
The spacing of primary street trees should be approximately 3(1 feet as
measured from the trunk of the tree. Deviations from this spacing
pattern should only occur when necessary to accommodate driveway
entrances. The spacing of accent trees should vary.
Ie
)>m
zen
e-
enG')
OZ
)>G')
~c
Ze
G'>m
I
Z
m
en
3.5.14.
Tree and Plant Sizes
When planting new shrubs and trees on a site, the following sizes are
required:
· Trees: At least 30 percent of all new trees shall have a box size of
at least 36 inches. The remaining trees shall have a box size of at
least 24 inches.
· Shrubs/flowering plants: Minimum size of five gallons.
3.5.15. Plant Matrix
The trees, shrubs, and groundcovers on the table on the following pages
are recommended:
;o.-~- --,.
lS4i
'i, }
I, II I CHAPTE
Recommended for: ..---
.--'
Landscaped Landscaped Highlighting Screening of
Species Name Common Name areas between storage/ ser,lice
Parking Lots strips along walkways and entrances areas andl
sidewalks buildini!s and/or signs EouiDment
-
Trees
-
Pyrus kawakamii Evergreen Pear X X X
.-
Brachychiton populneus Bottle Tree X X
.-
Saucer Magnolias Magnolia X X
Ilex aquifolium .-
English Holly X
-
Umbellularia californica California Laurel X X
-
Sequoia sempervirens Redwood X X
Pinus nigra -
Australian Black Pine X X
.-
Betula nigra River Birch (use as X X
accent tree) .-
Betula pendula European White Birch X X
(use as accent tree) -
Lagerstroemia indica Crape Myrtle (use as X X X
accent tree) .-
Liquidambar styraciflua American Sweet Gum X X
(use as accent tree) .-
Malus species Flowering Crabapple (use X X X X
as accent tree) -
Pinus canariensis Canary Island Pine X X X X
-
Pistachia chinensis Chinese Pistache (use as X X X X
accent tree) .-
Platanus acerifolia London Plane Tree X X X
.-
Podocarpus macrophyllus Yew Pine X X
-
Prunus blireiana Flowering Plum (use as X X X
accent tree)
e
t5.5 :
':~.. - -~>"'I".
Ie
)>m
zen
e-
enG')
OZ
)>G')
~c
Ze
G')m
I
Z
m
en
Recommended for:
Landscaped Landscaped Highlighting Screening of
Species Name Common Name areas between storage/ service
Parking Lots strips along entrances
sidewalks walkways and and/or signs areas and
-. bui~!iiru:~~ Eq I!!n.m e.ot
Prunus caroliniana Carolina Laurel Cherry X X X
(use as accent tree)
Prunus Yedoensis Yoshino Flowering X X X
Cherry (use as accent
tree)
Pyrus Call eryana Bradford Pear X X X X
"Bradford"
Quercus palustris Pin Oak X X X
Quercus virginiana Southern Live Oak X X X
Tristania laurina Water Gum X X X X
Sh ru bs
Agapanthus orientalis Lily-of-the-Nile X X X X
Buxus japonica Japanese Boxwood X X X X X
Dietes species Fortnight Lily X X X X
Escallonia 'Fradesii' No Common Name X X X
Hebe species No Common Name X X X X
HemerocaIIis hybridus Daylily X X X X
Lantana species Lantana X X X X
Lavandula species Lavender X X X X
Leptospermum New Zealand Tea Tree X X X
scopanum
Ligustrum species Privet X X X X X
Loropetalum chinense Loropetalum X X X X
Nandina domestica Heavenly Bamboo X X
Photinia fraseri Photinia X X X
r"".
(56 ;
~ ""~
I I. II CHAPTE
Recommended for:
Landscaped Landscaped Highlighting Screening
Species Name Common Name areas between storagel ser'
Parking Lots strips along entrances
sidewalks walkways and and/or signs areas anc
buildin!!s Eouiomel
Pittosporum species Tobira X X X X X
Rhaphiolepis indica Indian Hawthorn X X X X
Rosmarinus officinalis Rosemary X X X X X
Tulbaghia violacea Society garlic X X X X
Groundcovers
Festuca ovina glauca Dwarf Blue Fescue X X X
Gazania species Gazania X X X
Hedera helix English Ivy X X X
Rosmarinus officinalis Dwarf Rosemary X X X
"Huntington Carpet'
Trachelospermum Star Jasmine X X X
jasminoides
e
rc
)>m
zen
c-
af en G')
lice (") Z
r )>G')
t ~C
Zc
G')m
r
z
m
en
This page intentionally left blank.
" -
l' 58';
\'''''- ~~'
: II I CHAPTE
Chapter 4. References
The following is a list of references used to create these design
guidelines:
. Alameda County Waste Management Authority & Alameda
County Source Reduction and Recycling Board. Bay-friendly
landscaping guidelines: Sustainable practices for the
landscape professional.
. American Planning Association (2006). Planning and urban
design standards. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
. Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies (1999). Start at
the source: Design guidance manual for slormwater quality
protection.
. Dublin, City of (2002). City of Dublin General Plan.
. Dublin, City of (2006). City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance.
8.....5. g'\
'. - _.)
;:0
m
"T1
m
;:0
m
z
(")
m
en
This page intentionally left blank.
.. 60
~. ,/
--r
"
- . .
'"
J . .
["
...
"
-'I
--~ .:....
11
.:.. ~
. . .
. .
CONSULTING
Io~OO '1
RESOLUTION NO. XX - 07
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
*********
APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE SCARLETT COURT
DESIGN GUIDELINES
P A 03-063
WHEREAS, during the Goals and Objectives session for Fiscal Year 200212003, the City Council
requested Staff, as a high priority item, to initiate a Specific Plan for the Scarlett Court Area; and
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2006, the City Council directed Staff to divide the Specific Plan
preparation into two phases with the first phase of the Scarlett Court Specific Plan to include landscape,
signage and design guidelines (hereafter the "Scarlett Court Design Guidelines"), which shall be
implemented through a guiding policy and implementing policy in the General Plan applicable to the
Scarlett Court Planning Area; and
WHEREAS, consistent with section 65352.3 of the California Government Code, the City
obtained a contact list of local Native American tribes from the Native American Heritage Commission
and notified the tribes on the contact list of the opportunity to consult with the City on the proposed
General Plan amendment. None of the contacted tribes requested a consultation within the 90-day
statutory consultation period and no further action is required under section 65352.3; and
WHEREAS, the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines project has been found to be Exempt from
CEQA, according to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that
there is no possibility that the proposed amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) or
the General Plan may have a significant effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, at its April 10, 2007 hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 07-19
recommending approval of a General Plan Amendment for the Scarlett Court area which are incorporated
herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, a staff report dated May 1, 2007 and incorporated herein by reference, described and
analyzed the Design Guidelines, Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map amendments and General Plan
Amendment for Scarlett Court; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Project at a noticed public hearing on May 1, 2007, at
which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and
made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council approves the following
Amendments to the General Plan based on findings that the amendments are in the public interest and that
the General Plan as so amended will remain internally consistent.
A. Amend General Plan Land Use and Circulation: Land Use Element to add Section 2.2.6 to read as
follows:
1
ATTACHMENT 2
&4 UfJ q7
2.2.6 SCARLETT COURT PLANNING AREA
A. Strengthen and improve the Scarlett Court Planning Area.
The Scarlett Court Design Guidelines were adopted by the City Council on . The Design
Guidelines are intended to guide future development and improvements in the Scarlett Court
Planning Area to enhance the character and image of the Area.
The Scarlett Court Planning Area is visible from Interstate 580, Dougherty Road, the Iron Horse
Trail and Dublin Boulevard and the view of this Area from these key roadways is of importance to
the City.
Imvlementinf! Policv
B. Create an Overlay Zoning District for the Scarlett Court Planning Area.
C. Encourage improvements to existing businesses and properties in the Scarlett Court
Planning Area.
D. Require all redevelopment and improvements related to the site planning, architectural
design, lighting, signage and landscaping to be consistent with the adopted Scarlett Court
Design Guidelines.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of May 2007 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
2
Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Map
~
~
=-
-.
r:r
...
....
>
Scarlett Court Overlay
Zoning District
--J
C)
C3
..S>
-J
ll~ 41
ORDINANCE NO. XX - 07
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
**********************
ADDING CHAPTER 8.34 TO THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE)
ESTABLISHING THE SCARLETT COURT OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT AND ADDING
SECTION 8.104.030.J TO THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE)
RELATING TO THE SCARLETT COURT OVERLAY ZONING DISTRCT SITE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO ADD AN OVERLAY
ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION TO THE SCARLETT COURT AREA
P A 03-063
WHEREAS, the Scarlett Court area consists of approximately 52 acres of land and is bounded on
the west by Dougherty Road, the north by Dublin Boulevard, the south by 1-580 right-of-way, and the east
by the Iron Horse Trail right-of-way; and
WHEREAS, during the Goals and Objectives session for Fiscal Year 200212003, the City Council
requested Staff, as a high priority item, to initiate a Specific Plan for the Scarlett Court Area; and
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2006, the City Council directed Staff to divide the Specific Plan
preparation into two phases with the first phase of the Scarlett Court Specific Plan to include landscape,
signage and design guidelines; and
WHEREAS, as part of this first phase, amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map are
proposed as set forth herein, and no land use changes are proposed at this time; and
WHEREAS, the existing underlying zoning designations of M-l, Light Industrial, and C-2
General Commercial (APN: 941-0550-012-11 only) will remain in full force and effect; and
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State
guidelines and City environmental regulations require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental
impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, the project has been found to be Exempt from CEQA, according to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the
proposed amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) may have a significant effect on
the environment; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held public hearings on said amendments to the Zoning
Ordinance on March 27,2007 and April 10, 2007, and adopted Resolution No. 07-18 recommending that
the City Council adopt this Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby find that the proposed Ordinance
is consistent with the Dublin General Plan and all applicable Specific Plans.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council ofthe City of Dublin does hereby
ordain as follows:
Page 1 of6
ATTACHMENT 3
{lcJb 41
Section 1. Addition of Chapter 8.34: Chapter 8.34 ofthe Dublin Municipal Code is hereby
added to read as follows:
8.34.010
CHAPTER 8.34
SCARLETT COURT OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT
8.34.020
A.
B.
8.34.030
8.34.040
A.
8.34.050
Purpose. The purpose of this Chapter is to establish a procedure to ensure that all
development in the Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District is reviewed for substantial
compliance with the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines.
Intent. The intent ofthis chapter is to:
Enhance the aesthetics the Scarlett Court Area;
Guide the design of future development and improvements to reinforce the Scarlett Court
Design Guidelines; and
c.
Improve the public realm to create a positive pedestrian experience, enhance the area's
image, and create a unique sense of place.
Applicability. The Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District is a designation in addition to
the M-l (Light Industrial), C-2 (General Commercial) Zoning District that each property in
the area retains. The standard Zoning District contains all information regarding permitted
and conditionally permitted uses, development standards, and regulations, while the
Scarlett Court Overlay provides a mechanism to review development on any of the
properties in the District for substantial compliance with the Scarlett Court Design
Guidelines.
Projects subject to compliance with this Chapter:
B.
New Construction. Any new construction or additions to an existing structure within the
Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District that alters the exterior appearance of the building.
Internal tenant improvements are not subject to compliance with this Chapter.
Exterior Modification of an Existing Structure. Any exterior modification of an
existing structure located within the Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District, including but
not limited to, facade renovation, new and/or additional windows and doors, and roof or
ground-mounted mechanical equipment.
Modification to Site Layout. Any modification to site layout or site improvements in the
Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District, including but not limited to, parking, walls and
fencing, circulation, landscaping, accessory structures, or trash enclosures.
c.
D.
Signage. Installation of new signage or replacement of sign copy in the Scarlett Court
Overlay Zoning District.
Application. The Applicant shall submit a complete Site Development Review
application pursuant to Chapter 8.124, Applications, Fees and Deposits, accompanied by a
fee and such materials as are required by the Director of Community Development.
Page 2 of6
8.34.060
8.34.070
8.34.080
8.34.090
8.34.100
,3~ q 7
Notice Of Decision. A Notice of Decision shall be given consistent with Chapter 8.132,
Notice and Hearings. No public hearing is required for Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning
District Site Development Review unless the application is being considered is a permit
which requires a public hearing pursuant to Chapter 8.132.
Concurrent Consideration. When a Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Site
Development Review is required for a project that is also subject to a Conditional Use
Permit and/or Variance, it shall be approved, conditionally approved, or denied by the
same decision-maker or body for those actions.
A.
B.
Required Findings. The following findings shall all be made in order to approve an
application for Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Site Development Review:
Approval of the application is consistent with the purpose and intent of this Chapter.
Any approval complies with the policies of the General Plan, with any applicable Specific
Plans, with the development regulations or performance standards established for the
standard Zoning District in which it is located, and with all other requirements of the
Zoning Ordinance.
C.
The approval will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working
in the vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare.
The design of the project will provide a desirable environment for the development and an
attractive environment for the public.
The project is in substantial compliance with the applicable chapters of the Scarlett Court
Design Guidelines.
Action. The decision maker for Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Site Development
Review applications shall be the Director of Community Development (or his/her
designee), except as provided in Section 8.34.070, Concurrent Consideration, of this
Chapter. The Director of Community Development may, based on evidence in the public
record, and on the findings above, make an administrative decision to approve,
conditionally approve, or deny a Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Site Development
Review application.
D.
E.
Amendment. The process for amending a Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Site
Development Review approval shall be the same as the process for approving a Scarlett
Court Overlay Zoning District Site Development Review application. The decision-maker
for the Scarlett Court Zoning District Site Development Review amendment shall be the
same decision-maker that ultimately approved the Scarlett Court Zoning District Site
Development Review including approval on appeal. The Community Development
Director or his/her designee may grant a Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Site
Development Review Waiver for applications approved by another decision-maker or body
upon the determination that the modification is a minor project and in accordance with
Section 8.34.110, Waiver, to an approved Scarlett Overlay Zoning District Site
Development Review.
Page 3 of6
8.34.11 0
8.34.120
8.34.130
8.34.140
8.34.150
('-foo 41
A.
Waiver to an approved Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Site Development
Review. The Community Development Director or his/her designee may allow a minor
change to an approved Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Site Development Review as
a Waiver upon determining the following:
The proposed change is in substantial conformance with the approved Scarlett Court
Overlay Zoning District Site Development Review;
The proposed change is minor in scope;
B.
C.
The proposed change is exempt from or not otherwise subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act; and
The proposed change is consistent with the conditions of approval for the Scarlett Court
Overlay Zoning District Site Development Review and is substantially consistent with the
Scarlett Court Design Guidelines.
It is not the intent of this Chapter that a series of Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District
Site Development Review Waivers be used to circumvent the need for full and complete
Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Site Development Review.
D.
Waiver for a project that does not have an approved Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning
District Site Development Review. The Community Development Director or his/her
designee may allow a minor change to an existing site or building in the Scarlett Court
Overlay Zoning District that does not have an approved Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning
District Site Development Review as a Waiver upon determining the following:
A.
B.
The proposed change is minor in scope;
The proposed change is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act; and
The proposed change is substantially consistent with the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines.
It is not the intent of this Chapter that a series of Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District
Site Development Review Waivers be used to circumvent the need for full and complete
Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Site Development Review.
c.
Scarlett Court Design Guidelines. The Scarlett Court Design Guidelines adopted by the
City Council on by Resolution , and as may be amended thereafter,
shall be used to guide the review of Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Site
Development Review applications.
Building Permits. Building Permits shall not be issued except in accordance with the
terms and conditions of the Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Site Development
Review approval.
Ordinary Maintenance and Repair. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent
the ordinary maintenance or repair of any existing exterior architectural feature on any
property in the Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District that does not involve a change in
design, material, or exterior appearance and when such maintenance or repair is conducted
in accordance with Chapter 8.140, Non-conforming Structures and Uses.
Page 4 of6
16Ub '1?
8.34.160
Procedures. The procedures set forth in Chapter 8.96, Permit Procedures, shall apply
except as otherwise provided in this Chapter.
Section 2. Addition of Section 8.104. 030.J: Section 8.1 04.030.J ofthe Dublin Municipal Code
is hereby added to read as follows:
Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Site Development Review. Any development in the
Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District (as indicated on the Zoning Map) shall be reviewed in
accordance with and subject to Chapter 8.34, Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District, in addition to
this Chapter.
Section 3. Amendment of Zoning Map: The Zoning Map is hereby amended to add an overlay
designation to the Scarlett Court Area as shown in Exhibit A. Staff is hereby directed to amend the
official Zoning Map ofthe City of Dublin to reflect the addition of the Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning
District designation to the Scarlett Court Area.
Section 4. Compliance with California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA 'j: The City
Council declares that this ordinance is exempt from CEQA based on the following findings: This
ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), which provides that
CEQA applies only to those projects that have the potential to cause a significant effect on the
environment. This adoption of this ordinance is an activity that is exempt from CEQA because the
ordinance does not, in itself, allow the construction of any building or structure. This ordinance,
therefore, has no potential for resulting in a significant effect on the environment, directly or ultimately.
Individual projects in the Scarlett Court area will be reviewed for compliance with CEQA.
Section 5. Severability: In the event any section or portion ofthis ordinance shall be
determined invalid or unconstitutional, such section or portion shall be deemed severable and all other
sections or portions hereof shall remain in full force and effect.
Section 6. Savings Clause: All code provisions, ordinances, and parts of ordinances in
conflict with the provisions of this chapter are repealed. The provisions of this chapter, insofar as they are
substantially the same as existing code provisions relating to the same subject matter shall be construed as
restatements and continuations thereof and not as new enactments. With respect, however, to violations,
rights accrued, liabilities accrued, or appeals taken, prior to the effective date of this ordinance, under any
chapter, ordinance, or part of an ordinance shall be deemed to remain in full force for the purpose of
sustaining any proper suit, action, or other proceedings, with respect to any such violation, right, liability
or appeal.
Section 7. Effective Date and Posting of Ordinance: This ordinance shall take effect and be in
force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage. The City Clerk ofthe City of Dublin shall
cause the Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in accordance
with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this 1st
day of May 2007, by the following vote:
Page 5 of6
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
G:\P A#\2003\03-063 Scarlett Court Specific Plan\CC May 1 \CC Ord Amend ZO.DOC
Page 6 of6
., (()~'1
--1'1 Ub 0[1
Cm. Biddle asked about the project phasing. Dave Chadbourne, representing the applicant,
stated that the plan is to start construction in 10-12 months; however, based on the current
market situation the applicant may be requesting a time extension for the approval.
Hearing no further questions, Chair Schaub closed the public hearing.
Chair Schaub commented that he liked the project and is a great way to showcase Dublin Blvd.
Cm. Biddle commented that he likes the live-work-unit concept and is confident that other
projects would come up with this concept as well, especially in a redevelopment area.
Cm. Tomlinson commented that this is a nicely designed project.
On a motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by em. Tomlinson, and by a 5-0-0 vote, the Planning
Commission unanimously adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 07 -10
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR
DUBLIN RANCH AREAS B, C, D & E TO INCLUDE
PD-HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH LIVE-WORK UNITS
FOR SYCAMORE GROVE WITHIN THE FAIRWAY RANCH PROJECT P A 03-010
LOCATED IN THE EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA
P A 06-037
RESOLUTION NO. 07 -11
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
DEFERRING REVIEW AND DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY TO THE CITY COUNCIL
FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR SYCAMORE GROVE WITHIN
THE FAIRWAY RANCH PROJECT (PA 03-010) LOCATED NORTH OF DUBLIN
BOULEV ARD BETWEEN KEEGAN STREET AND LOCKHART STREET IN THE
EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA AND RECOMMENDING THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE SITE DEVELOPEMNT REVIEW FOR SYCAMORE GROVE
P A 06-037
8.3 P A 03-063 Scarlett Court Design Guidelines- Phase I of the Scarlett Court
Specific Plan which includes the creation of design guidelines for the Scarlett
Court area and an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map.
Chair Schaub asked for the Staff Report.
W(allnin,1f C{)ml1l~\'$i(m
'RifiulJr (\1.!'ttin;q
27
:-"'arrn r, ;ou;.
Attachment 4
l~"b cr1
Ms. Erica Fraser, Senior Planner, and Jason Jones, RBF consultant for the project, presented the
specifics of the project as outlined in the Staff Report.
Chair Schaub asked if this is similar to the overlay done for the Historic District. Ms. Fraser
responded that it is similar to the Phase 1 part of the Historic District Overlay. However, the
General Plan Amendment is being added to the Scarlett Court Study to include policy language
to the General Plan document. Ms. Mary Jo Wilson, Planning Manager, added that the General
Plan Amendment is not part of tonight's recommendation; however, it will be presented to the
Planning Commission at a later date.
Cm. Biddle asked about the public participation at public meetings. Ms. Fraser responded that
at the first community meeting there were only a few participants from the public; however,
once the design guidelines were drafted for the second community meeting, there was greater
participation from the public.
Cm. Biddle wanted clarification on the replacement and repair of the existing signs. Ms. Fraser
explained that if a store owner wanted to repair more than 50% of its sign, then the current
zoning ordinance requires the owner to conform the sign to existing regulations. If the design
guidelines were also in effect then the owner would need to comply with the guidelines as well.
Cm. Biddle asked if it was 50% of the cost or area. Ms. Wilson responded that it was 50% of the
valuation of the sign.
Chair Schaub asked how would the design guideline relate to the City's Design Element. Ms.
Wilson responded that the Community Design Element that the City will work on shortly is an
element of the General Plan which would be a guiding document with general policies related
to design. As a part of the preparation of the Community Design Element, staff will ensure
consistency with the various Specific Plans.
Jason Jones, with RBF gave an overview of the design guidelines and talked about next steps.
Chair Schaub commented that the document should discuss what type of signage is appropriate
with various architectural styles. Ms. Wilson responded that Staff would ensure that the
suggested language is included in the document under signage. Cm. Biddle commented that
the sign section was good. Cm. Tomlinson commented that the examples cited in the guidelines
were good.
em. Tomlinson stated that he understood that the window signs are discouraged if it occupies
25% or more of the glass area; how would that be defined? Ms. Fraser responded that the
Zoning Ordinance describes the percentage of the window pane as well as how the area of the
window pane is calculated. Cm. Tomlinson asked if the 25% was appropriate or should it be
further reduced. Ms. Fraser responded that 25% is appropriate and it is consistent with what
most of the cities regulate. Ms. Wilson further added that the City has active code enforcement
with regard to signage. Cm. Tomlinson asked if the coloring or glazing of windows needs to be
addressed in this document. Ms. Wilson responded that the Site Development Review section
of the Zoning Ordinance will be reviewed as a part of the City's update to the Zoning
Ordinance.
:/'!!1 '111 lilY ('trmmt\'Sia'r.
R<:ii"!<l' (\1fcting
28
'Mardi 27, .?OIF
lql1b ~ 7
Cm. Tomlinson wanted to know if the street lights depicted in the draft guidelines would be the
standard for the Scarlett Court area. Ms. Fraser responded that the street lights shown in the
guidelines are examples of what they could be, not necessarily what they need to be. Since the
City does not maintain privately installed street lights, it would be up to the developers to
decide on the type of street lights they would like to install.
Chair Schaub said that palm trees are shown in the document; however, they should be
removed from page 52.
Cm. Tomlinson asked about overhead utilities and wanted to know if applicants were required
to underground them? Ms. Fraser responded that there were overhead utilities in two areas.
There are overhead utilities on private properties and overhead utilities facing 1-580. The
Municipal Code requires overhead utilities to be under grounded on private properties. An
example would be the Lowe's development which was required to underground its utilities.
However, at this time the City does not have plans to underground the overhead utilities facing
1-580.
Cm. King noted that on page 24 of the draft guidelines cinder blocks were not listed as a
discouraged material. Ms. Wilson stated that Staff would add that to the list of discouraged
materials.
Cm. Tomlinson wanted a modification to the discussion on dark colors on buildings. He
wanted to ensure that the use of dark colors were not too limiting. Ms. Fraser indicated that the
guidelines indicate that the dark colors have to be used as accents only as the City does not
. want a developer to color a whole building black. Ms. Wilson stated that Staff would refine the
language to address the Commissions concern.
Hearing no further questions for Staff, Chair Schaub opened public hearing and asked if anyone
in the audience would like to comment.
Brad Kassabian, from Kassabian Motors, asked when phase 2 would be completed. Chair
Schaub responded that the City Council would be ones to answer the question. Ms. Fraser
further added that the City Council's direction was to postpone phase two of the Scarlet Court
Specific Plan at this time.
Jim Bailey, with Dublin Honda, commented that the new site where the dealership will be
located has parking issues as BART riders tend to park there. He also indicated that the
suggested landscaping for the area is good; however, it is difficult to find dirt that will hold
plants that is able to sustain life.
Russ Fuller, with Dublin Honda, clarified that the dirt being referred to is the dirt that is
required to fill the bioswales. Ms. Fraser responded that the landscaping in the draft guidelines
are typical landscaping and have nothing to do with bioswales. The bioswale requirement as
referenced by Mr. Fuller and Mr. Bailey is part of the conditions of approval required by the
Public Works Department for the Dublin Honda project. Ms. Wilson suggested that the
representatives from Dublin Honda give their contact numbers to Staff and Staff could have the
Public Works Department personnel contact them regarding the issue.
(Planning (.'o-rrz,nnssr'(,n
'R(qfl{:;Ir (\f.i'~imil
29
:~t(m;/i 2/, ;:OiH
?>olf(/11
Doreen Green, Property Manager of Buscik-Gearing, said that they have been in Dublin a long
time and would like the City to treat them kindly. She asked that the City bear in mind that the
City needs the small businesses in addition to the big commercial complexes.
Hearing no further comments or questions, Chair Schaub closed the public hearing.
Chair Schaub commented that he likes the document. He indicated that the Commission would
like to see the suggested changes to the photographs and text brought back to the Planning
Commission. Ms. Fraser asked if the Commission would like to continue the item to April 10,
2007 meeting.
On a motion by Chair Schaub and seconded by Cm. Wehrenberg, and by a 5-0-0 vote, the
Planning Commission unanimously moved to continue the hearing of the Scarlet Court Design
Guidelines to the April 10, 2007 Planning Commission meeting.
Cm. Biddle asked about the procedure for the distribution of the guidelines once it is adopted
by the City Council. Ms. Fraser indicated that Staff is looking into various options to make the
document available for those who would like a copy. One of the options is to make it available
on the City's website as well as on disk for purchase.
NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS - NONE
OTHER BUSINESS
10.1 Brief INFORMATION ONLY reports from the Planning Commission and/or Staff,
including Committee Reports and Reports by the Planning Commission related to
meetings attended at City Expense (AB 1234).
Cm. Biddle discussed the last Housing Commission meeting and gave a brief overview of the
major points of the meeting.
Cm. King stated that he would like a half hour presentation on the different architectural styles.
Staff indicated that this can be done.
ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
#54-
Planning Commission Chair
q'iannWH {'f)rr:m~\si,'~
'i-;m U[d yii1eet !nll
30
;-t'tardi 2(, .:{liJ7
Planning Commission Minutes
DRAFT
~l '1J Cf7
DRAFT
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, April 10,
2007, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair Schaub called the meeting to
order at 7:00p.m.
Present: Chair Schaub, Vice Chair Wehrenberg, Commissioners Biddle, King, and Tomlinson;
Mary Jo Wilson, Planning Manager; Kit Faubion, Assistant City Attorney; Erica Fraser, Senior
Planer; Bryan Moore, Assistant Planner; and Renuka Dhadwal, Recording Secretary.
Absent: None
ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA - NONE
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS
The March 27, 2007 minutes were approved as submitted.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - NONE
CONSENT CALENDAR - NONE
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - NONE
PUBLIC HEARINGS
8.1 P A 03-060 and 06-030 Annexation, General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan
Amendment, Stage 1 Development Plan for Casamira Valley (Moller Ranch), Vargas
and Tipper properties, Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (Casamira Valley),
Mitigated Negative Declaration (Vargas) and Pre-Annexation Agreement (Legislative
Act).
Chair Schaub asked for the Staff Report.
Ms. Erica Fraser, Senior Planner, presented the specifics of the project as outlined in the Staff
Report.
Chair Schaub asked if the discussion regarding the demonstration garden would occur during
the Stage 2 process. Ms. Fraser indicated that it is partly a Stage 1 issue as well, since the
process typically involves setting aside some land for semi-public uses.
Chair Schaub asked what the net density was for Casamira Valley fMoller Ranch project. He
indicated that he would like to discuss the concept of general average density based on the way
the property was configured, versus what is actually being built in the net use of the space. Ms.
<Pfanni1lfJ Commission
~ul4r fMeeti1lfJ
31
jlprifl0,2oo7
ATTACHMENTS
DRAFT DRAFT
Fraser pointed out that Casamira Valley is a little different. The density for this project has ~ '11
calculated on the net acres for the site which is at 6.1 and is considered net and gross value.
Chair Schaub asked what the net density was for the Vargas project. Ms. Fraser pointed out that
it is a little over 13. Chair Schaub further added that if the General Plan indicates developing
. lower density and if the developer proposes a high density project then it should be a point for
discussion. Ms. Fraser pointed out that the Moller Ranch project (Casamira Valley) is different
from most projects, as the developer is developing only a smaller portion of the site. Vargas on
the other hand, is larger and therefore can include more density within that project. Ms. Mary
Jo Wilson, Planning Manager, stated that while the General Plan regulates the land uses, it also
has a section that describes how the net and the gross densities are calculated.
Chair Schaub wanted to clarify that the affordable housing is not part of the Stage 1 approvals.
Ms. Fraser responded that it would be part of the Site Development Review or the Tentative
Map process.
Cm. Wehrenberg asked when the Stage 2 process would begin. Ms. Fraser pointed out that the
properties would need to get annexed in to the City before Stage 2 can commence. Staff
anticipates being on the LAFCo agenda in July and the Moller Ranch project will then proceed
with Stage 2, after July.
Chair Schaub clarified for the Commission that the reason the Frederich property is not
included is because it has already been annexed in to the City.
Cm. Biddle asked Staff if there is any activity on the Frederich property. Ms. Fraser responded
that Vargas and Frederich properties are proposed to be developed as one residential
development and the two properties have the same developer. For the Frederich property, the
developer on April 3, 2007 asked Council's permission to conduct a study to change the
Medium-High and Neighborhood Commercial land uses to Single-Family residential uses. The
City Council authorized Staff to conduct a Study for its feasibility.
Cm. Biddle commented that it would be nice if the two properties could be processed as one
application. Ms. Fraser indicated that Staff is anticipating the developer to bring forward the
two properties (Vargas and Frederich) as one development. However, the developer for Vargas
is hoping to go through the Stage 1 process and annexation for Vargas before coming forward
with a formal application for developing the two properties.
Chair Schaub stated that he had looked at the comments received from the agencies regarding
the Mitigated Negative Declaration and noted that they were not significant. He wanted to
know if Staff received any responses from the agencies to the City's response to their comments.
Ms. Fraser responded that nobody responded to the City's responses. Ms. Wilson indicated
that, typically, the City does not receive any comments to the responses. If an agency/person
has any issues with the responses, the agency/person would attend the public hearing to
address those issues.
<Pfanning Commission
<J?fflul4r ~eeting
32
JIpriil0,2oo7
DRAFT DRAFT
1>3~ ct 1
Cm. Biddle wanted to knowm when Moller and Vargas get annexed, what will be left to ann~.
Ms. Fraser responded that the Redgewick property would be the last property left to be
annexed.
Hearing no further questions for Staff, Chair Schaub opened the public hearing and asked the
applicant to speak.
Jim Summers, President of DeSilva Group and applicant for the Moller Ranch project thanked
Staff for all of their efforts and stated that he would answer any questions the Commission may
have.
Cm. Biddle asked who would be responsible for the trail on the property. Mr. Summers pointed
out on a map, the different agencies responsible for the different easements. The areas marked
as green, which is the Conservation Easement, would be maintained by the Home Owners
Association (HOA); the areas marked in blue, adjacent to the drainage would be maintained by
the GHAD; and the area marked in brown would be maintained by the HOA.
Cm. Biddle wanted to know who would claim ownership to the rural residential portion. Mr.
Summers responded that the ownership of the rural residential will be held by the HOA;
however, it would eventually end up being owned by the holder of the conservation easement.
Chair Schaub asked if that land could be leased out for farming by the holder of the
conservation easement. Mr. Summers indicated that it is a possibility. He further added that
there would be a cattle grazing fuel management plan to ensure that the fuel levels are kept in
check for the area. Ms. Fraser pointed out that the Stage 1 Planned Development for the project
includes that the cattle grazing activity will continue in the hills. Furthermore, there is an
Eastern Dublin Grazing Management Plan which will regulate the cattle grazing activity on the
hills.
Cm. Biddle wanted to know if measures were in place for protecting trees and that grazing does
not occur along the roads and the creek. Mr. Summers responded that as a part of their work
with the biological resource agency, certain measures were being taken to protect sensitive
habitat in the area between the roads. Ms. Fraser further added that the developer will be
reconstructing the creek by adding numerous trees and would be fixing the creek to restore its
original, natural state.
Mr. Fred Musser, representative from the Sun Valley Development, also came forward to talk
about the Vargas project. Mr. Musser complimented Staff for their hard work and stated that he
would be glad to answer any questions that the Commission may have.
Chair Schaub pointed out that it is appropriate to discuss the product type being proposed for
Vargas. He wanted to ensure that it is stated on record that the Commission has questions and
concerns regarding the product type being proposed, since neither this type of product nor the
proposed density has been built before. Chair Schaub asked the Assistant City Attorney if it
was alright to have a discussion regarding the product type although it is not part of the
approval process. Chair Schaub noted that the houses being proposed were too many and too
<Pfanni1tfJ Commission
<R..rguwr !Meeti1tfJ
33
jIpriflO,2oo7
DRAFT DRAFT
. <:6t..fOh'11
close to each other. Ms. Wilson explained that this particular zoning designation allows for 6j
to 14 dwelling units per acre and is based on gross density as per the General Plan and that
there could be a variety of product types designed. The types of dwellings proposed by the
applicant are detached and have narrow widths; however, that is not part of the approvals for
Stage 1. Ms. Wilson stated that the direction the Planning Commission needs to take is to
decide if the land use designation is appropriate for the type of dwellings being proposed as a
part of the Stage 1 before the Commission this evening.
Cm. King commented that the litmus test for this would be the comments from the people
living in the neighborhood indicating how the Planning Commission could approve this project.
Cm. King used California Highlands as an example of a similar project that is not well received
due to the narrow streets and the resultant access issues.
Cm. Biddle, on the contrary, indicated that quality could be achieved through constructing
small detached homes. He pointed out that this product type has not yet been constructed in
the eastern Dublin area. Ms. Fraser pointed out that California Highlands was designated high
density with 25.1 dwellings to 1 acre and hence they are different.
Cm. Tomlinson stated that he would not dwell on the issue of the market demand for such
product type; however from a planning perspective he wanted to know if the access issues
raised during the Study Session were addressed. Ms. Fraser responded that those issues can be
brought up during the Stage 2 process. She added that the Planning Commission could guide
the applicant by telling them the types of issues that the applicant needs to address for the Stage
2 process. Cm. Tomlinson suggested that he would like to see some kind of common recreation
element similar to the Casamira Valley project.
Cm. Wehrenberg stated she would like the applicant to address two critical points for Stage 2
and those would be: a) acceptable parking, and b) access issues into the driveway. Cm.
Wehrenberg also suggested that the applicants for both projects incorporate some green
elements such as solar roofing. Cm. King stated that he would support the issue raised by Cm.
Wehrenberg. Cm. King suggested that the applicants should wire the dwellings to install solar
panels. Cm. Wehrenberg indicated that she would like the applicants to build the houses with
solar energy. Cm. King indicated that he would like to know what the cost would be to build
the homes with solar energy. Mr. Musser responded that the solar panels would cost $20,000
per house. Mr. Musser added that Sun Valley would be incorporating some green elements in
their project based on the Planning Commission's comments during the Study Session;
however, the solar panels, due to the cost involved, could be offered as an option to the
homeowner to install. Ms. Fraser pointed out that the City does not require green building
elements. The current City policy is to provide the developer with a checklist at building permit
process, to check-off the green elements being provided and this process could be included for
these two projects as well. Cm. Wehrenberg indicated that since these projects would be one of
the last developments that would occur, she would like to include green elements in the project.
Chair Schaub commented that he would like: a) parking; b) safety; c) recreation; and d) garbage
pick-up issues to be addressed for Stage 2. Mr. Musser responded that his company would be
happy to address all the issues raised by the Planning Commission.
CJ?fanni11fj Commission
~uwr ~eeti11fj
34
ftprifl0, 2007
DRAFT
DRAFT
1>51Jt11
Cm. King noted that there was no commercial zoning listed in the project and he would like to
see some commercial uses in the area in terms of reducing traffic.
Cm. Biddle asked if the Stage 2 process would commence during late summer. Mr. Musser
responded that would be the intent.
Chair Schaub commented about affordable units for the Casamira Valley Site 1 and stated that
due to the number of homes proposed, there would be lot of areas that would be maintained by
the HOA and that would add to the cost of purchasing the home and making it less affordable
for the homeowner. This would be a point of discussion for Stage 2 and the City Council would
need to make a decision if that is the most affordable way to develop this project.
Hearing no further comments, Chair Schaub closed the public hearing.
Cm. Wehrenberg asked when the Tipper property would come back for a change to the density.
Ms. Fraser responded that Staff will be unable to answer that now, since the intent of the
development is unknown.
Cm. Biddle commented that topography plays a large role in the development of these
properties.
On a motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by Cm. King and by a vote of 5-0-0, the Planning
Commission unanimously adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 07 -12
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF A SUPPLEMENTAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CASAMIRA V ALLEYfMOLLER
RANCH PROJECT AND TIPPER PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6861 AND 7440 TASSAJARA
ROAD (APN 985-0001-001 AND 986-0004-001)
P A 03-060
RESOLUTION NO. 07-13
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR THE VARGAS PROJECT, A MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM AND A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSDERATIONS
P A 06-030
Pl"anni1l{J Commission
~ufar :.Meeti1l{J
35
flprill0,2oo7
DRAFT
DRAFT
1)l.POb tt 1
RESOLUTION NO. 07-14
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECT STAFF
TO FILE AN APPLICATION WITH THE ALAMEDA COUNTY
LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCo) TO ANNEX THE CASAMIRA
V ALLEY/MOLLER RANCH, TIPPER AND VARGAS PROPERTIES TOTALING
APPROXIMATELY 243.18 ACRES TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND THE DUBLIN SAN
RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT (DSRSD)
P A 03-060 AND 06-030
RESOLUTION NO. 07-15
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING mAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND
AN EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE A PORTION OF THE
CASAMIRA VALLEY/MOLLER RANCH PROPERTY FROM LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO
MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND TO INCLUDE THE CASAMIRA VALLEY/MOLLER
RANCH PROPERTY IN THE EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN AND TO CHANGE A PORTION
OF THE VARGAS PROPERTY FROM MEDIUM/IllGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM-
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
P A 03-060 AND 06-030
RESOLUTION NO. 07-16
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
PREZONE AND A STAGE 1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR CASAMIRA V ALLEY/MOLLER
RANCH LOCATED AT 6861 TASSAJARA ROAD (APN 985-0001-001)
P A 03-060
RESOLUTION NO. 07-17
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
PREZONE AND A STAGE 1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR VARGAS LOCATED AT 7020
T ASSAJARA ROAD (APN 986-0004-002-01)
P A 06-030
<PfanniTtfJ Commission
~ouf4r :MeetiTtfJ
36
)1.prifl0,2oo7
DRAFT
~lDfJ~1
DRAFT
Chair Schaub recessed the meeting for three minutes at 8:06. Chair Schaub called the meeting to
order at 8:09.
8.2 P A 03-063 Scarlett Court Design Guidelines, General Plan Amendment and
Amendments to Title 8, Zoning Ordinance, of the Dublin Municipal Code to add
Chapter 8.34, Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District; amend Chapter 8.104, Site
Development Review; and amend the Zoning Map to add an overlay zoning
designation for the Scarlett Court area. (Legislative Action).
Chair Schaub asked for the Staff Report.
Ms. Erica Fraser, Senior Planner, presented the specifics of the project as outlined in the Staff
Report.
Cm. Biddle noted that due to the time lapse between Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Scarlett Court
project, the proposed document would serve as guidelines for development in the area. Ms.
Fraser responded that in the absence of a specific plan, tools such as zoning ordinance
amendment, zoning overlay district, the general plan amendment and the proposed guidelines
would act as a tool to define the design for development in the area.
Cm. Tomlinson commented that this was a very well done document.
Hearing no other comments or questions for Staff, Chair Schaub opened the public hearing.
Doreen Green, Property Manager of Buscik-Gearing, stated that in the absence of the
documentation she would not know how this would impact her. Chair Schaub reassured Ms.
Green that this would not impact existing property owners; it would only impact future
developers. Ms. Fraser pointed out that this would affect her property only if she proposes to
do exterior modifications to her buildings.
Hearing no further questions, Chair Schaub closed the public hearing.
Chair Schaub thanked staff for making all the changes at a short notice.
On a Motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by Cm. seconded by Wehrenberg, and by a vote of 5-0-0
the planning commission adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 18
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
SCARLETT COURT DESIGN GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 8.34 TO THE DUBLIN
<PUznni11fJ Commission
rJ?i{Juwr :Meeting
37
jfprillO,2oo7
DRAFT DRAFT
~$Vbql
MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE) ESTABLISHING THE SCARLETT COURT
OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT, ADDING SECTION 8.104.030.} TO THE DUBLIN
MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE) RELATING TO SCARLETT COURT
OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, AND AMENDING THE
ZONING MAP TO ADD AN OVERLAY ZONING DESIGNATION TO THE SCARLETT
COURT AREA.
P A 03-063
RESOLUTION NO. 07 -19
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO
INCLUDE POLICIES RELATED TO THE SCARLETT COURT PLANNING AREA IN SECTION 2.2,
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL LAND USE
P A 03-063
NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS - NONE
OTHER BUSINESS
10.1 Brief INFORMATION ONLY reports from the Planning Commission and/or Staff,
including Committee Reports and Reports by the Planning Commission related to
meetings attended at City Expense (AB 1234).
Ms. Wilson invited the Planning Commission to the City San Ramon on Tuesday, June 5th for a
GHAD seminar.
Ms. Wilson informed the Planning Commission that the Safeway in the downtown area will be
repainting the building with contemporary colors.
Cm. Biddle asked, statute-wise, what is included in the Stage 1 and Stage 2 development
processes. Ms. Wilson indicated that she would email the section of the zoning ordinance
describing each development process, to each Commissioner.
Cm. King reminded staff about the architecture education he had requested at a previous
meeting.
ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 8:29 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
<Pfanni1l{J Commission
~ul4r fMeetino
38
jlprif10,2007
DRAFT
ATTEST:
Planning Manager
<PI4nni119 Commirsion
tf<!gufar :Meeting
39
DRAFT
Planning Commission Chair ~t1 Db Of 1
/lprifl0, 2007
'1DVbql
RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 18
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
SCARLETT COURT DESIGN GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 8.34 TO THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL
CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE) ESTABLISHING THE SCARLETT COURT OVERLAY ZONING
DISTRICT, ADDING SECTION 8.104.030.J TO THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING
ORDINANCE) RELATING TO SCARLETT COURT OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT SITE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, AND AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO ADD AN OVERLAY
ZONING DESIGNATION TO THE SCARLETT COURT AREA.
P A 03-063
WHEREAS, the Scarlett Court area consists of approximately 52 acres of land and is bounded on
the west by Dougherty Road, the north by Dublin Boulevard, the south by 1-580 right-of-way, and the east
by the Iron Horse Trail right-of-way; and
WHEREAS, during the Goals and Objectives session for Fiscal Year 2002/2003, the City Council
requested Staff, as a high priority item, to initiate a Specific Plan for the Scarlett Court Area; and
WHEREAS, on August 6, 2006, the City Council directed Staff to divide the Specific Plan
preparation into two phases with the first phase of the Scarlett Court Specific Plan to include landscape,
signage and design guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines and amendments to the Zoning Ordinance
comprise Phase 1 of the Specific Plan and no land use changes are proposed at this time; and
WHEREAS, the City held one walking tour of the Scarlett Court area with the public on October
20, 2006 and two community workshops on October 30, 2006 and February 22, 2007 to gain feedback
from the public; and
WHEREAS, City Staff worked with RBF Consulting, property owners and tenants in the Scarlett
Court area, to develop design guidelines intended to ensure that future improvements in the Scarlett Court
area enhance the aesthetics of the area; and
WHEREAS, adoption of a resolution, by the City Council, approving the Scarlett Court Design
Guidelines, (the "Resolution"; attached as Exhibit A), and the adoption of an ordinance creating Zoning
Ordinance Chapter 8.34, Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District; amending Chapter 8.104, Site
Development Review; and amending the Zoning Map to add an overlay zoning designation to the Scarlett
Court Area (the "Ordinance"; attached as Exhibit B) will serve as an appropriate mechanism to ensure that
improvements in the area are designed and built in compliance with the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines;
and
ATTACHMENT 6
t1IUb t11
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State
guidelines and City environmental regulations require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental
impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, the project has been found to be Exempt from CEQA, according to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed
amendments to the Dublin Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) may have a significant effect on the
environment; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said amendments to the Dublin
Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) on March 27, 2007, for which proper notice was given in accordance
with California State Law; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission
recommend City Council approval of the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines and the amendments to the
Dublin Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance); and
WHEREAS, the March 27, 2007 Planning Commission meeting was opened and continued to
April 10, 2007; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission at its April 10, 2007 meeting did hear and use its
independent judgment and consider all said reports, recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set
forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, the foregoing recitals are true and correct and
made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, the Dublin Planning Commission does hereby recommend
that the City Council adopt the Resolution approving the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines as set forth in
Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Dublin Planning Commission does hereby find
that the proposed Ordinance, as set forth in Exhibit B, is consistent with the Dublin General Plan and all
applicable Specific Plans and recommends that the City Council find the same.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Dublin Planning Commission does hereby
recommend that the City Council adopt the Ordinance, as set forth in Exhibit B and incorporated herein
by reference, adding Chapter 8.34 to the Dublin Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) establishing the
Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District, adding Section 8.104.030.J to the Dublin Municipal Code (Zoning
Ordinance) relating to the Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District Site Development Review, and
amending the Zoning Map to add an overlay zoning district designation to the Scarlett Court Area.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of April 2007 by the following vote:
2
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Cms. Biddle, Wehrenberg, King, Tomlinson and Chair Schaub
q26b 0[7
Planning Commission Chairperson
Planning Manager
G:\PA#\2003\03-063 Scarlett Court Specific Plan\PC PH\PC 4-1O-07\PC Reso Rec on Scarlett Court.DOC
3
cq ~Vb q,
RESOLUTION NO. 07 -19
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE POLICIES RELATED TO THE SCARLETT COURT PLANNING
AREA IN SECTION 2.2, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL LAND USE
P A 03-063
WHEREAS, the Scarlett Court area consists of approximately 52 acres of land and is bounded on
the west by Dougherty Road, the north by Dublin Boulevard, the south by 1-580 right-of-way, and the east
by the Iron Horse Trail right-of-way; and
WHEREAS, during the Goals and Objectives session for Fiscal Year 2002/2003, the City Council
requested Staff, as a high priority item, to initiate a Specific Plan for the Scarlett Court Area; and
WHEREAS, on August 6, 2006, the City Council directed Staff to divide the Specific Plan
preparation into two phases with the first phase of the Scarlett Court Specific Plan to include landscape,
signage and design guidelines; and
WHEREAS, no changes to the existing General Plan land use designations are proposed at this
time; and
WHEREAS, on April 10, 2007, the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution recommended
that the City Council adopt the Scarlett Court Design Guidelines; create Zoning Ordinance Chapter 8.34,
Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District; amend Chapter 8.104, Site Development Review; and amend the
Zoning Map to add an overlay zoning designation to the Scarlett Court Area to serve as an appropriate
mechanism to ensure that improvements in the area are designed and built in compliance with the Scarlett
Court Design Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments to the General Plan will not change the land use
designations for the Scarlett Court area.
WHEREAS, the General Plan will be amend as shown on Exhibit A, including:
. Adding the Scarlett Court Planning Area under Section 1.8.1, Land Use Classifications, under
other land use categories; and
. Adding Section 2.2.6 to the General Plan under Section 2.2, Commercial and Industrial Land
Use.
WHEREAS, the Project would amend corresponding the text of the General Plan as shown in
Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State
guidelines and City environmental regulations require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental
impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and
ATTACHMENT 7
Vi tf1J Of 1
WHEREAS, the project has been found to be Exempt from CEQA, according to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the
proposed amendments to the General Plan will have a significant effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said Scarlett Court Design
Guidelines and General Plan Amendments on April 10, 2007 and adopted Resolution No.
recommending that the City Council adopt this Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and
made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin Planning Commission recommends that the City
Council approve the following Amendments to the General Plan based on findings that the amendments
are in the public interest and that the General Plan as so amended will remain internally consistent.
A. Amend Section 1.8.1, Land Use Classifications, to include the Scarlett Court
Planning Area, as shown on Exhibit A.
B. Amend Section 2.2, Commercial and Industrial Land Use, to include Section 2.2.6,
Scarlett Court Planning Area.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of April 2007 by the following vote:
AYES:
Cms. Biddle, Wehrenberg, King, Tomlinson and Chair Schaub
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Planning Manager
G:\P A#\2003\03-063 Scarlett Court Specific Plan\PC PIDPC 4-1 0-07\PC Reso GP A for SC.DGC
2
c
.:::J
~
~
~
~ :====:=5
~
~~
~
l~~1
~
~~
d-~"
~
~~
~
~
c~
~
~
'5 ~o.o .....
o [/) ......s ~_' U I:':l >-.. ~ -
U - '-0 :::. 0'- Q)...t:: I:':l :-:::
.~ ... Q) ...t:: ..... ~ ~ ~
~ .g_ 8.3 ~ -B <;::: ~ Q).o...t::
i: .;: <.8 -B ~ <.8 .S ~ ~ .~
1:':lQ)1:':l 1:':l_Q)OO~...t::
~~~~80Q)I:':l~Et::~
Q) .~ fr .....~ cb ;f ~ :l I:':l.- I:':l
-B t:: 5.~~ 5b] ~8.~~
t:: .~ t::.S ~ [/) Q) .~ ~ - ~
o ~ O5b OJ ...0 ~ OJ CI).::: c-;::
..,.,: "'0 Q) "'0 ~ S e ~ S 'u- .t::_
~ _ .0 '5 ,Il) .~,-- .~
... c 0 0.0 - t:: co:i ~.~ Q) [/) g.
t:: I:':l <;::: 2? ~.~ ~ ~...t:: -B E ...t::
'f!l Sn ~._ ?f 'Q)u- ~ ~ t) U Q) ~ ~
~.~ .... "'Ot::o:.a:oSo
.0 51 0 .~ ~ Q)~..:s ..... ~ 8 U >
0._ t:: [/) 0 '" 0... .~ I:':l " U ;.>
...... rJJ ~ i:j ...... s u ~ ~ ".= C
~ Q)~ g ~ ~ [/) t;: Q) I:':l'- ~ '2
- 0... - t:: - ]'u ~ Q) ~ ..... :l
r./J ~o... o.o:ll:':l Q)...t::...t::..... ~ ~
"'0 [/) U'- "'0 - 0... 0... c:: g I:':l S
~-gt;: ~ ~ or./J t:: 0..... >-"0
U I:':l'u "'0 U Q) t I:':l >-.. 0.0 t:: U
~-Q) ~[/)4:::lO:;:';::t::1:':l
:.;:: Q) 0... Q) t:: Q) 0 -'- t:: Q)
V"'Or./J 0...Q) '-u U I:':l~ o-B
~2 ~ ~~ >-..-:-5 g.~ >-......
...t::u';::"'OQ)Q)Q)u ~--
.S '- t:: > ~ i: g, ~ Q)'2 ~
U 0 0 I:':l I:':l :ll:':lr./J iil...t:::l Q)
t::- -...t::Q"'U f-<8[/)
:l t:: Q) 1"'" [/) Q) r./J t';; >-. 8 ~
o I:':l [/) :3 0.0"'0 Q) :l Q) 0 U
uO:;I:':l0t::I:':l...t::o...t::8u[/)
cuo:UQ)B';;~~ Q):.o
._ ~- ~ ~ CJ ~.- ...... > IJ.) -5 11)
U :; 0 ~ 8.':: ~ ~ e -B .0
Q)Q)-~0t:::l1:':l0..08t::
...t::o...au:::.:l[/)U~-oQ)
f-< r./J 0... r./J E: 8.~ r./J .::: .S cb -B
D-
O
--=CD
Ii
aN
~o
,t'~
1:)
~ 0
18
o
u
!!
~
Ci:l
N
Ci:l
.......
~
o
.-
;>
.-
u
:EO
L~
o~
0;....
.. -
... ~
~
0'-
..~
:lie
LO
o
c:! 8
1ft 0
E~
e 8
'Iii Ci:l
;....
bO
o
;....
~
>...
:-.
Ci:l
:-.
~
.-
......:l
t15~ q7
I [/)
~:.a
I:':l Q)--
......0"'0 8]
<.8 '2 ~ 0 I:':l
.:l ~cb s:::
882"'O~
ci.. 8 e ~'[i)
o 0 0.- ~
<;:: u ~ 8 Q)~
r-- - Q)
I co:i <3 ..... ~
OQ)u~u
M..? ~u [/)
V)"""2.2"'O~
~ t:: I:':l "'0 ~ .....
""":lUQ)_~
o 0'2 Q) Q)
cbU:l~...t::t::
\O__8.....:l
o Q) ~ I:':l e1)uo
0_......Q)t::
N ~ 8 ~'5. t:::
~u Q)0Q)
S2r./JB...t::Q)i:
,-, ..... > I:':l
..... Q) "'0 b1) Q) U
Q) ...t:: Q) s::: "'0 r./J
.0 -- b1)....... Q)
B .9 e "8 .S ...t::
U -- :l I:':l .....
o 0.. 0 b1) "'0 .....
~OUQ)~<.8
>....c := :..... :=1
I:':l ell Q) ell Q) ~
"'O~Q)I:':l.ot::
c: 6.0 Q) .......
o ~_Q)
~~::'-~"'O
~ c ~ oa:; 05
o 02 ~ ~ g. bl)
eIl:lQ)Q)...t::~
:l 6.0 ~xa I:':l
.5 6 ~ a 5 51
~ 8 6 ;:; ~';;j
o.cJ)
o :j
~ ~
~ .
.... :::
o .-
;:::0
:j
c~
'S 'u
:j@)
a ....
a ~
o o:l
u~
(1) oj
- u
- .-
- ....
.... (1)
o _
'/l o:l
....-
:j .-
o o:l
r- a
OJ) (1)
:::..:::
.- OJ)
~ :j
c; 2
;::-5
(1) ....
..::: 0
-.0
......;:c;
~"'?
o:lr')
":::r')
0..00
a~
_N
0..0,
t.+-< t.+-< r/l Q) ~ i
o 0 I:':l - .- :::
I:':l ..... Q) ell I:':l : I:':l ~ .9
e g -B E e .5 . g ~ ~
<t:~r/l8<t:eU-l to
~ t::c:~t::t::.nt> 5 OJ)
III; :l....... U 0 :l "'1' I:':l U :::
_ 0 ~ ell U 0 ..... -- _ 'S
.. Ci:l U~:.o"'OU:l23 1ia
g (]) t::~o~t::~u ~o::
;.... Q)1:':l--eIlQ)Q)Q)eIl U(1)
< l:.....>-"Q)l:_eIl:l Vl..:::
. c: ~<.8.g i;l ~.g~ ~ .s.s
_ r./J \0 Q). ~ r./J Q) 0.. ::: .:;:
,,~ Q) 0 ...t:: Q) Q)"5 ~.5 0;;>
c:: ~ .so --...t::.s eIl~:O ::: i:i
" 0 c: N~ g C::::.5 0 Q.,.:l .g e
,~ :.a 0 ...t:: o...t:: f-< Q "'0 ~ '""'
I -- -- N b1) b1)."';::: . Q 'u t:: o:l
'u .~ ~ g.5 ~ ~..;r @) <2'~
(]) eIl.o..... "'0 ell ....... '0"'" .8 {.Ll
o 0.. ~.B-B~~~=~ C;;u
... r:/), c: U "'0 ti-c-"'O-c:-e-:::-s
.... ~ 0 Q) I-< ~ "'0 ~ <.+::i .9 g
.. t 0 ~..... ~Q) 0 c: ~ cd .'::: U
at ;:j ell ~ g/] >-.. I:':l < U :g (1)
c:: 0 ~:g ~ :l '5 ~ ~ '5 ~ ~
I U .5~, 0 ~ 0.. ~ .. I-< &: 0.
...... ell", U o b1)C'I 0
...... :lC:Q)C:I-< =0
! (]) -9 0 .0'8 o..';;j ~
....... ''''0 ell _ b1) "'0 ~ ~ \0
J ;....~~ s::: :l ';: 0 c: g, ~ \0
Ci:l I:':l c: ... ..... I:':l I:':l -
/0 ell''''''' _ ell U ~ M
r" ..... 0 ell v I-< ell .c M
'" .J. Q)...... I-< c: Q) "'0 00
C:o:ll:':lcs:::-:<n
~--01:':l~1:':l N
0"'Of-<~0-,g0\
>-..2 co:i I:':l ell B O{)~
t::.;; Q) ..... ~ "'0 = I-<
Q)S:::I-<~S:::Q)~Q)
0......... I:':l .':'")....... ~ _ r/l
8Q)Q)8gj-c:e
0... a.s 0...0 ~ ~~
ATTACHl\IENT 8
CONSULTINI
Join us on Thursday, February 22, 2007 from 5:30-7:00 p.m. for a com-
'munitt workshop to review the Draft Scarlet Court Design Guide-
I ,
Ilines. Property owners and tenants in the area are encouraged to
doin ud, for this workshop and provide feedback on the Draft Guide-
:lines. Feedback received during this workshop will be used to final-
\
ize the IDraft Guidelines which will then be presented to the Planning
Commis~ion and City Council during public hearings.
'Draft GUi~ines will be available for public review at City Hall from
'\
IWednesday, February 21, 2007 through Tuesday, February 27, 2007
!during normal ~usiness hours.
ir . fl. E' F S' PI C' f
I~or more In ormation, contact rIca raser, enlor anner, Ity 0
~Dublin Commu~ity Development Department at (925) 833-6610
lor ericaJraser@ci.dublin.ca.us
Community Workshop
I
Thursday, February 22, 2007, 5:30-7:00 p.m.
Regional Meeting Room, City Hall, lOO Civic Plaza, Dublin
I
Attachment 9
C\S
(l)
~
<
~
c\S
~
~
u
~
· ,...-4
u
(l)
~
r/J
t
~
o
U
~
~
(l)
~
~
C\S
u
r/J
C;r7 t5fJ 0) 1
Attachment 10