HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-024 WDbBARTSPA 06-12-2001 AGENDA STATEMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: June 26, 2001
SUBJECT:
West Dublin BART Specific Plan Amendment for Crown Chevrolet
and EneafllHH Properties, PA# 01-024
Prepared by Janet Harbin, Senior Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution recommending City Council approve the West Dublin BART
Specific Plan Amendment
2. Memorandum from Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) dated May
31, 2001
3. Initial Traffic Analysis prepared by Omni-Means dated April 19, 2001
4. Subsequent Traffic Calculations prepared by Omni-Means dated May
15, 2001
RECOMMENDATION:
2.
3.
4.
Open public hearing and receive staff presentation.
Receive testimony of property owners and the public.
Question staff, property owners and public.
Adopt Resolution recommending City Council approve an amendment
to the West Dublin BART Specific Plan to change the FAR to 1.00 on
the subject properties and other properties designated as Retail/Office
and Commercial B, and amend Specific Plan Table 5 and appropriate
Maps as shown in attached Exhibits A through G.
DESCRIPTION:
On December 19, 2000, in adopting the West Dublin BART Specific Plan, the City Council directed staff
at the request of the property owner to analyze a change in the intensity of development and the Floor
Area Ratio (FAR) for the property presently operating as Crown Chevrolet located in the Specific Plan
area at the southeast comer of Dublin Boulevard and Golden Gate Drive. Additionally, the City Council
directed staff to analyze inclusion of approximately 20 acres of adjacent property known as the Enea
Plaza and adjacent office development within the Specific Plan area boundaries, along with a request by
the property owner to increase the FAR for that property. Staff has evaluated the requests based on
economic and traffic analyzes prepared by consultants, and recommends that a Specific Plan Amendment
be recommended for adoption by the City Council to change the FAR to 1.00 for both properties, revise
the Land Use Concept map in the Plan to reflect the projected uses, and include the Enea and office
properties at the end of Amador Plaza Road within the planning area boundaries.
Background
In a letter dated October 26, 2000, Robert Enea of St. Michael Investment expressed concern that the
properties on which the Enea Plaza shopping center, the Stoneridge Chrysler auto dealership and the
office buildings at the terminus of Amador Plaza Road are located were not included within the boundary
of the West Dublin BART Specific Plan area, and thereby would not receive the benefits of a higher FAR
Copies To: Property owners
PA File
Senior Planner
as other properties near the BART Station would. In determining the extent of the boundaries of the
Specific Plan area, staff had considered the property for inclusion; however, since it had recently been
redeveloped, it was not anticipated that a change in use would occur over the five- to seven-year time life
envisioned by the Plan. Mr. Enea has requested that an FAR of 1.00 and a Commercial B use designation
be applied to the properties. Additionally, Mr. Enea has requested that the increased FAR and the
Commercial B use designation be applied to the adjacent property at the end of Amador Plaza Road
where office buildings are presently located, owned by HHH Investment Company and the Aldo Guidotti
Trust. In this report, the Enea, HHH Investment Company, and Guidotti properties will be referred to as
the Enea/HHH properties.
The City Council also received a letter dated November 16, 2000 from William Bums and another dated
December 14, 2000 from Mark Hirsch, both representing Betty Woolverton and Crown Chevrolet,
requesting a change in land use for approximately six acres located at the southeast comer of Dublin
Boulevard and Golden Gate Drive and at the southeast comer of St. Patrick Way and Golden Gate Drive
to permit construction of an office and retail building twelve or more stories in height and a FAR increase
to 2.50 for the site. In the existing Specific Plan, the property was assumed to remain as an auto
dealership with the existing FAR of. 18. This assumption that the property would remain under the
existing use was made based on conversations with Crown Chevrolet during the development of the
Specific Plan. Since the Specific Plan analysis was essentially complete when the letter was received
from Mr. Bums indicating that the property owner was interested in a change in land use and intensity for
the site, the City Council directed staff to initiate an evaluation of the request and that of Mr. Enea
following adoption of the Plan.
ANALYSIS:
In the development of the West Dublin BART Specific Plan last year, an extensive economic analysis of
existing and projected market demands was prepared by a consulting land use economics firm, EPS, to
assist in determining potential land uses and FAR's, or intensity of use, for properties within the Plan
area. Based on the information compiled in the economic study, a thorough traffic and circulation
analysis was prepared by Omni-Means, the City's traffic consultant, to determine the maximum intensity
of development which could be supported by the existing transportation system, programmed roadway
improvements, the introduction of the BART station, and additional traffic mitigation measures to ensure
that major downtown intersections continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service. To evaluate the
requested changes for the Enea/HHH Properties and the Crown Chevrolet site in this amendment,
additional economic and traffic analyzes were also prepared to evaluate various levels of land use
intensity and development for the properties and thereby determine the maximum development potential
possible for this portion of the Specific Plan area.
Economic Analysis
The impetus for development in the West Dublin BART Specific Plan area is the future BART station at
the terminus of Golden Gate Drive, immediately north of the 1-580 freeway. The development of the
BART station, which is expected to be completed in 2004, is anticipated to result in a significant increase
in the demand for new office, commercial, high-density residential and similar uses because of improved
regional accessibility and the patronage of the new transit station. When the Specific Plan was prepared
and adopted, many of the land use types in this area were changed to uses consistent with more urbanized
development to reflect the economic projections of EPS's study. Additionally, the intensity of use,
2
expressed in floor area ratio (FAR), or the ratio of the square footage of the site to that of the structure on
the site, for many properties was increased from an average of .31 FAR to FAR's up to 1.00, dependent
on the property's location in proximity to the BART station and the projected land use.
The economic analysis prepared for the amendment to the Plan now being considered analyzed the Crown
Chevrolet property and the Enea/HHH properties to determine the appropriate land use type and
maximum development potential, reflected by the FAR, for those sites within the context of their
locations relative to the BART station. Various land use scenarios and FAR's consisting of low-,
medium- and high- intensity development were tested by the economic consultant for each property to
illustrate possible development potential, and these are shown in Table 1 of the Memorandum from
Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) dated May 31, 2001, Attachment 2. This information is briefly
summarized below. The economic analysis also projected the revenue impacts on the City of each land
use change in Table 2 of Attachment 2.
Crown Chevrolet Property: The Crown Chevrolet property is currently shown in the Land Use Plan,
Exhibit 9, of the West Dublin BART Specific Plan with a Retail/Auto land use designation. The Crown
Chevrolet property contains an auto dealership which is planned to move to the East Dublin area to locate
with the other auto dealerships currently there. The existing FAR for the Crown Chevrolet site is
approximately .18, with an existing 38,325 square feet of building space. The existing FAR and square
footage of the structures on the site are reflected in the Specific Plan in Table 5, Maximum Economic
Development Potential. The majority of the lot acreage is utilized as parking and storage of automobiles
and trucks. The property owner has requested a high-intensity FAR and development potential of 2.50 for
the site.
The location of the property at the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Golden Gate Drive, which is less
than one-quarter mile from the future BART station, lends itself to potentially be developed as an office
type use. There is also a potential market in this area for ground-floor retail. Based on the square footage
that would result from developing the Crown Chevrolet site at a FAR of 1.00 (low-intensity), 1.75
(medium-intensity) or 2.50 (high-intensity), a parking structure at varying heights would be necessary on
the smaller 1.211 acre parcel south of St. Patrick Way to accommodate the parking needs of the
development. Because parking structures are not considered in the calculation of FAR, as they usually
contain little or no useable space, the building square footage associated with the acreage in the smaller
parcel has been added to the amount permitted on the office use parcel in the following table. The low-
intensity scenario includes a small amount (10,000 square feet) of ground-level retail in the parking
garage building.
Crown Chevrolet Property - Maximum Development Potential
Development FAR (Floor Projected Land Acreage Existing Potential Required
Intensity Area Ratio) Use Square Square Stories
Footage Footage
Low 1.00 Office 4.905 38,325 266,000 4
Parking/Retail 1.211 0 10,000 4
6.116 38,325 276,000 sqfl
Medium 1.75 Office 4.905 38,325 466,000 8
Parking 1.211 0 0 8
3
6.116 38,325 466,000sqfl
High 2.50 Office 4.905 38,325 534,000 12
Parking 1.211 0 0 9
6.116 38,325 534,000sqfl
As shown in the table above, a FAR of 1.00 applied to the Crown Chevrolet property could result in a
maximum of approximately 276,000 square feet of development, which is over seven times the amount of
building square footage on the property at the present time. At a FAR of 1.75, approximately 466,000
square feet of space could be developed, approximately 12 times greater in size than the existing building
area on the site. The highest intensity tested for the site, a FAR of 2.50 as requested by the property
owner, could create 534,000 square feet of building area, and would be approximately 14 times greater in
size than the existing building area presently on the site.
The low-intensity FAR evaluated is only considered "low" for the purposes of this study. A FAR of 1.00
for this portion of the Specific Plan would exceed the FAR of all existing development in the Plan area as
the average FAR for developed properties in the area is .23. As the FAR is increased for the property and
the square footage of the building size increases, the parking needs for the development would also
increase. Additionally, as the development of the site intensifies to an FAR of 1.75 or 2.50, the number of
stories in the office building and the parking structure increase. At the present time, eight stories is the
maximum height permitted in the Specific Plan area, which corresponds with the medium-intensity FAR
of 1.75 in the above table. With the increased square footage at the various development intensity levels,
the traffic impacts of the potential development on the downtown area increase proportionately. This is
addressed in the Traffic Analysis section below.
Enea/HHHProperties: Robert Enea is requesting that the boundaries of the Specific Plan be adjusted to
include his remaining approximately 14 acre property adjacent to the existing Plan boundaries and extend
to the alignment of the 1-580 and 1-680 freeways, and that the land use type for this area be shown as
Commercial B in the Plan with a permitted FAR of 1.00. The land is currently developed as a Planned
Development district containing the Enea Plaza, a retail shopping center, and the Stoneridge Chyrsler auto
and track dealership. As this property was not included in the West Dublin BART Specific Plan area, a
potential land use is not shown in this location on the Land Use Plan, Exhibit 9, of the Specific Plan.
Additionally, an approximately 6 acre portion of the property at the end of Amador Plaza Road, owned by
HHH Investment Co. and Aldo Guidotti, is currently within the boundaries of the West Dublin BART
Specific Plan area and is included in Mr. Enea's request for the land use change. In the Specific Plan, this
property is shown as Retail/Office in the Land Use Plan, Exhibit 9, with an increased FAR of .83. The
existing building square footage on the site, currently developed with three office buildings, is 61,812
square feet, and with the increased FAR shown in the current Specific Plan, it has a potential for
redevelopment at approximately 225,250 square feet. Mr. Enea has requested that this be increased to a
' FAR of 1.00 with this amendment, and the Land Use Plan reflect a Commercial B type land use for
consistency with the Enea Plaza property.
In his request to the City Council, Mr. Enea expressed a desire for flexibility in the Commercial B land
use category on the properties to accommodate potential lodging or upper level apartment uses. The
property is currently zoned as a Planned Development district which allows commercial and retail uses
4
similar to a C-1 General Commercial zoning district. A motel or hotel facility is required to obtain a
Conditional Use Permit from the Planning Commission under the City's Zoning Ordinance in all
commercial zoning districts. In this instance, an amendment to the Planned Development district would
be necessary to permit a motel or hotel facility in this area. In regard to upper level apartment uses,
Objective 6.7 of the Specific Plan allows the City to consider a vertical mix of uses, such as residential
over retail use, and also live/work units in the planning area when reviewing a proposal.
In analyzing development intensities and land uses for the properties, the economic consultant considered
three potential FAR designations and land use mixes. The property is currently built at a FAR of .21 on
the retail portion of the Enea/HHH properties, and at a FAR of .23 on the portion of the properties
developed as office uses. The low-intensity development scenario in the economic study assumed a FAR
of .50 with retail, office, residential and hotel uses on the 14 acre retail portion of the properties. The
medium-intensity development scenario assumed a FAR of 1.00 with similar use types and a parking
garage. The highest intensity of development for the property considered in the analysis was at a FAR or
1.50. The portion of the properties containing the existing office uses was not analyzed in the economic
study as it is in the current Specific Plan at a FAR of .83, and only the medium- and high-intensity
development scenarios would increase the allowable square footage on the property. However, staff did
evaluate it for this amendment, and with a change from the existing FAR of .83 to 1.00 as requested, an
increase of approximately 47,000 square feet would result in the office use area. With a FAR of 1.50, an
increase of approximately 183,800 square feet would result. The resulting maximum development
potential and square footage projected for the entire EneoJHHH property area considered for change at
this time is summarized in the table below.
Enea/HHH Properties - Maximum Development Potential
Development FAR Projected Land Use Acreage Existing Potential Required
Intensity Square Square Stories
Footage Footage/Units
Low .50 Retail/Residential 3.569 46,421 75,000/38du 2
Residential 2.410 27,146 50,000/100du 2
Hotel/Restaurant 3.900 25,672 82,000 2
Office 4.000 24,840 84,000 2
Retail/Office 6.260 61,812 136,345 2
20.14 185,891 427,345 sq.fl.
138du
Medium 1.00 Retail/Residential 3.569 46,421 156,000/117du 4
Residential/Parking 2.410 27,146 132,000/34du 2
Hotel/Retail/Restaurant 3.900 25,672 170,000 4
Office/Parking 4.000 24,840 174,000 4
Retail/Office/Parking 6.260 61,812 272,690 4
20.14 185,891 904,690 sq.ft.
151du
High 1.50 Retail/Residential 3.569 46,421 233,000/194du 6
Parking 2.410 27,146 315,000 3
5
Hotel/Retail/Restaurant 3.900 25,672 255,000 6
Office/Retail 4.000 24,840 261,000 6
Retail/Office/Parking 6.260 61,812 409,030 6
20.14 185,891 1,473,030sq.ft.
194du
As summarized in the table above, a FAR of .50 would increase the potential square footage on the Enea
properties to 427,345 (over two times the existing square footage on the property), and could add 138
dwelling units to the site. At a medium-intensity FAR (I .00), as requested by the property owner, the
square footage could increase to 904,690 square feet (over 4 times the existing square footage on the
property), and provide 151 dwelling units. The highest intensity of development (1.50), could result in up
to 1,473,030 square feet of office and retail commercial development in this area, with 194 dwelling
units. Development at this level of intensity would be almost eight times greater in square footage than
the existing development on the site. Ifa project were proposed containing a multi-family residential
component, as analyzed in the economic analysis, a General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan
Amendment may be required. This is not being considered with this amendment as no actual
development project has yet been proposed for the property.
Traffic Analysis
Based on the information compiled in the economic study for the Crown Chevrolet site and the
Enea/HHH properties, a thorough traffic and circulation analysis was prepared by Omni-Means, to
evaluate the effects on the transportation system in the downtown area of the various levels of
development intensities and the land use mixes in the land use scenarios. The traffic analysis was then
utilized to determine the maximum development potential that could be supported by the existing
transportation system, programmed roadway improvements, introduction of the BART station, and the
traffic mitigation measures included in the Specific Plan, to ensure that major downtown intersections
continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service.
The traffic analysis prepared by Omni-Means, Attachment 3, contains the results of the traffic
consultant's evaluation of the scenarios. The analysis found that the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and
San Ramon Road would operate at an unacceptable level-of-service (LOS) E during the PM peak hour
with the low-intensity, medium-intensity and high-intensity development scenarios. As the development
intensity increased, the LOS at this intersection deteriorated proportionately. With the high-intensity
development scenario, the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Golden Gate Drive also deteriorated to
LOS E in both the AM and PM peak hour.
After review of the traffic consultant's analysis, staff requested that another development alternative
providing all the properties in the study area with a FAR of 1.00 be evaluated to determine if an
acceptable LOS could be maintained while still providing the properties with a higher development
potential. The resulting analysis determined that the LOS at the Dublin Boulevard/San Ramon Road
intersection would operate at an acceptable level (LOS D) during both the AM and PM peak hours (refer
to Attachment 4, Subsequent Traffic Calculations prepared by Omni-Means dated May 15, 2001).
Additionally, Public Works staff tested an increase in the FAR to 1.25 for both properties and found that
that level of development intensity was close to the threshold between LOS D and E. Staff determined
6
that the increased FAR for all the properties at 1.00 would be the best alternative relative to maintaining
an acceptable LOS at the major intersections in the downtown area.
Additionally, with the increased development potential from a change in the FAR of .83 to 1.00 on the
existing office site at the end of Amador Plaza Road (an increase of approximately 47,000 square feet),
and adjustments in the FAR for other properties in the planning area shown as Retail/Office and
Commercial B in the Specific Plan. This revision in the maximum development potential for these
properties would allow development opportunities for those properties similar to those provided by this
amendment to the Crown Chevrolet and Enea/HHH properties (discussed below in the section on Land
Use Modifications), and traffic volumes would increase slightly. However, the slight increase in traffic
associated with these modifications in the Plan would still maintain an acceptable LOS for traffic
operations in the downtown.
Height Issues
The amendment request from the property owner of the Crown Chevrolet property suggests that an
increase in the limit for buildings be allowed for this particular site to permit buildings up to twelve
stories in height. The current height regulation in the Specific Plan allows construction of buildings up to
eight stories in height. When the City Council considered adoption of the Specific Plan in December
2000, an increase in height for buildings up to ten stories was considered. However, the Council
determined that the eight-story height limitation was most appropriate for the area, and an increase up to
ten stories might be considered if an outstanding building design was submitted for consideration on a
specific site in the future. At that future time, the City Council would then evaluate such a change in the
regulation.
Additionally, the economic study prepared for the amendment evaluated the maximum height that would
be feasible given the potential FAR and parking needs based on building square footage and determined
that more than eight stories in this area would not be feasible. At the present time, the tallest building in
the downtown area is four stories. Staff recommends that the increase in the height limitation for this area
be considered when a specific development is proposed and a well-developed building design is
submitted.
Land Use Plan Modifications and Recommended FAR
With the possible move of Crown Chevrolet from the West Dublin BART Specific Plan ama to the auto
dealership area in East Dublin, a change in the land use type in the Plan for this property is logical. Based
on the office use across Golden Gate Drive from the site, its proximity to the BART station, and the
potential for other office uses to develop on Golden Gate Drive toward the BART station, a Retail/Office
designation for the site in the Specific Plan, as requested by the property owner, is appropriate. This
would allow development of office and retail uses on the site in the future.
A Commercial B type land use on the EneoJI-IHH properties, as requested by Robert Enea, would allow
development of retail businesses including specialty retail, restaurants, offices, entertainment and other
pedestrian-oriented uses. The businesses within the existing Enea Plaza shopping center are similar to the
specialty retail and restaurant businesses permitted by this category. The existing office type uses on the
6 acre property at the end of Amador Plaza Road would also be permitted within this category of uses.
7
Because of the proximity of the future BART station, these pedestrian-oriented uses would be appropriate
for this area. Additionally, an extension of the boundaries of the Specific Plan area is necessary to
facilitate this change.
Based on the economic and traffic analyses prepared for this amendment, a FAR of 1.00 for the subject
properties is recommended. In addition to this revision, changes to FAR's for other properties shown as
Retail/Office and Cornmercial B in the planning area are recommended to provide consistency in the Plan
and provide similar properties with the same development potential opportunities. As discussed in the
traffic analysis section of this report, acceptable levels-of-service could still be maintained at major
intersections in the downtown area with this modification.
General Plan/Zoning Conformity
The existing General Plan designation for both the Crown Chevrolet site and the Enea/HHH properties is
Retail/Office. The modifications to the Land Use Concept in the West Dublin BART Specific Plan
proposed with the amendment would not require a change in the General Plan land use designation for the
properties. The Specific Plan Retail/Office and Commercial B land use categories to be applied to the
properties are consistent with the General Plan designation of Retail/Office as currently exists on the
properties.
The Crown Chevrolet site is presently zoned C-2 General Commercial Zoning District, which allows a
variety of office and commercial retail uses. The existing C-2 zoning district is consistent with the
proposed change in the Specific Plan land use category for the site and with the projected use as an office
and retail development. The Enea/ItHH properties are zoned as Planned Development Zoning Districts
which permit a specific variety of office, retail and other commercial service type uses similar to the C-2
zoning district. In general, the Commercial B Specific Plan category as proposed in this amendment is
consistent with these uses. However, when an actual development project is proposed in the future for
redeveloping the properties, a review of the proposed uses on the site will be necessary to ensure
consistency with the Specific Plan and the zoning district. An amendment to the Planned Development
Districts' regulations or a rezoning may be required at that time.
Environmental Review
The environmental impacts of increased FAR's were addressed by the Negative Declaration for the
Downtown Specific Plans and the associated General Plan Amendments approved on December 19, 2000.
The proposed project is consistent with the range of uses and FAR's in the West Dublin BART Specific
Plan and the Dublin General Plan for this area. Additionally, a supplemental traffic analysis was prepared
for this amendment to assess the impacts of the increased FAR's on the transportation system in the
downtown area. No additional impacts of the project have been identified at this time. Further
amendments or changes in the Specific Plan may require additional assessment, and specific development
proposals on individual sites may require additional analyses.
CONCLUSION:
Based on the studies prepared for the requests to amend the West Dublin BART Specific Plan, a
modification in the FAR for the subject properties, revisions to the Land Use Concept, and a revision to
the Plan boundaries is appropriate at this time. These changes would be in conformance with the intent of
the Specific Plan to create a vital urban environment in close proximity to public transit facilities and
transportation corridors.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended by Staff that the Planning Commission take the following actions:
1) Open public hearing.
2) Receive presentation by Staff.
3) Receive public testimony.
4) Close public hearing.
5) Consider analysis of amendment and testimony.
6) Adopt Resolution recommending City Council approve an amendment to the West Dublin BART
Specific Plan to change the FAR to 1.00 on the subject properties and other properties designated as
Retail/Office and Commercial B, and amend Specific Plan Table 5 and appropriate Maps as shown in
attached Exhibits A through G.
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
PROPERTY OWNER:
City of Dublin
Crown Chevrolet Property:
Betty Woolverton et al.
1484 Emmons Canyon Dr.
Alamo, CA
EneaJHHH Properties:
Robert Enea
St. Michael Investments
6670 Amador Plaza Rd.
Dublin, CA 94568
HHH Investment Co.
6665 Amador Plaza Rd.
Dublin, CA 94568
Aldo Guidotti Trust
104 Diablo View
Orinda, CA 94563
LOCATION:
ASSESSORS PARCEL NO.:
EXISTING ZONING:
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATIONS:
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
7544 Dublin Boulevard; 6401-6445 & 6707 Golden Gate
Drive; 6665-6680 & 7450-7498 Amador Plaza Road
941-1500-014-17, -015-07, -032-00, -038-01, -042-02, -048-
00, -049-2, -049-3, -051-02, -052-00, & -053-00; and various
other properties in the Specific Plan area.
PD Planned Development and C-2 General Commercial
Districts
Retail/Office
R/A Retail/Auto and R/O Retail/Office
The environmental impacts of increased FAR's in the planning
area were addressed by the Negative Declaration for the
Downtown Specific Plans and the associated General Plan
Amendments approved on December 19, 2000. The proposed
project is consistent with the range of uses and FAR's provided
for in the West Dublin BART Specific Plan and the Dublin
General Plan for this area.
10
RESOLUTION NO. 0l-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO
THE WEST DUBLIN BART SPECIFIC PLAN
FOR 01-024
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin is desirous of improving the appearance, functionality,
economic vitality of the downtown portion of Dublin in a manner consistent with the broad vision
expressed in the Dublin General Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City adopted the West Dublin BART Specific Plan on December 19, 2000
which was prepared pursuant to Government Code Sec. 65450 et seq.; and,
WHEREAS, the Specific Plan include permitted land uses, development standards, urban
design guidelines, transportation improvements and implementation programs to achieve the goals of
the Dublin General Plan; and,
WHEREAS, at the request of property owners, the Planning Commission does find that it is
appropriate to amend the West Dublin BART Specific Plan to extend the planning area boundaries
and include properties consisting of approximately 14 acres to the east of the existing area as shown
on Exhibit B, Specific Plan Boundary, Exhibit 3 of the West Dublin BART Specific Plan, as
amended; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does find it appropriate to amend the land use category
to Commercial B for approximately 6 acres of land located in the Specific Plan area at the southeast
comer of Dublin Boulevard and Golden Gate Drive for the property known as the Crown Chevrolet
site, and to Retail/Office for approximately 20 acres of land located to the west, east and south of
Am~ador Plaza Road known as the Enea/HHH properties, as shown on Exhibit G, Land Use Plan,
Exhibit 9 of the West Dublin BART Specific Plan, as amended; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does find that based on the economic and traffic
studies prepared for the requests to amend the West Dublin BART Specific Plan, a modification in
the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) to 1.00 for the subject properties, and for other properties to ensure
consistency in the Plan, as shown in Exhibit A, Table 5 of the West Dublin BART Specific Plan,
Maximum Development Potential, as amended, is appropriate to create a vital urban environment in
close proximity to public transit facilities and transportation corridors; and
WHEREAS, the environmental impacts of increased FAR's were addressed by the Negative
Declaration for the Downtown Specific Plans and the associated General Plan Amendments
approved on December 19, 2000, and prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15071 and on
file in the Dublin Planning Department. The Negative Declaration found that the implementation of
the Specific Plans would have no adverse environmental effects as mitigation measures were
ATTACHMENT 1
incorporated into the Plans. The proposed project is consistent with the range of uses and FAR's in
the West Dublin BART Specific Plan and the Dublin General Plan for this area. No additional
impacts of the project have been identified at this time; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on the amendment to the
West Dublin BART Specific Plan on June 26, 2001 and received testimony and comments from the
public and property owners; and,
WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use their independent judgment and
considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony herein above set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does
hereby find that the proposed West Dublin BART Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the
land use designations, goals, policies and implementing programs set forth in the Dublin General
Plan and the Specific Plan, as amended.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning
Commission does hereby the amendment to the West Dublin BART Specific Plan to: (1) modify the
Plan boundaries as shown in Exhibit B; (2) revise Table 5 of the Plan to reflect an increase in the
allowable FAR for certain properties to 1.00 as shown in Exhibit A; (3) revise the land use category
for the property known as the Crown Chevrolet site to Commercial B, and for the property known as
the Enea/HHH properties to Retail/Office as shown in Exhibit G; and (4) revise the applicable West
Dublin BART Specific Plan Maps as shown in Exhibits C, D, E and F.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning
Commission does hereby recommend City Council approval of this amendment to the West Dublin
BART Specific Plan in conformance with Exhibits A through G.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 26th day of June 26, 2001.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Community Development Director
g~DwntwnSpecPlans\pc reso West BART Amend 6-26.doc
2
EXHIBIT A
TO ATTACHMENT 1
WEST DUBLIN BART SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
PA 01-024
Table 5. Maximum Economic Development Potential (Amended)
SP Land Use Category* Acres FAR Existing Dev. Max. Dev.
DU/AC (sq. ft.)** (sq. ft.)
Commercial A (Com A) 10.87 0.25 243,344 118,375
Commercial B (Com B) 7.76 a AQ ~ '~ Q~ ~ ~ non
26. 69 1. O0 203, 714 1,162, 620
Lodging (L) 9.31 1.20 103,231 339,530
(246 rooms) (486 rooms)
Retail/Office (R/O) 12.28v.wn ~ 38,325 AAA...,-~ ~.~
18. 40 1. O0 801,500
~ 4.76 n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~<
Residential (R) 3.54 45 DU/ac -- 160 DU
Office (O) 6.98 1.00 242,385 304,050
Mixed Use (MU) 11.33 1.00 -- 493,430+
331 DU
P~king (P) 2.46 ......
Right-of-Way 2.11 ......
Totals 70 799 __ ~q ~a~ ~ aaa oqa
91.69 831,000 3, 219, 505
0 DU 491 DU
*Note: Potential plazas areas included in acreages
** Existing 210, 744 Industrial/t~arehouse square footage not included. (rev. 6/26/01pc)
EXHIBIT B
TO ATTACHMENT 1
Area of boundary
LEGEND
~ · · mm SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY
SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY
WEST DUBLIN BART SPECIFIC PLAN
N.T.S.
JUNE 2001
CITY
OF
DUBLIN
EXHIBIT 3
EXHIBIT C
TO ATTACHMENT 1
LEGEND
SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY
RETAIL/RESTAURANT
OFFICE/SERVICE COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL/BUSINESS PARK
HOTEL/ENTERTAINMENT
VACANT
RETAIL/AUTO
EXISTING LAND USES
WEST DUBLIN BART SPECIFIC PLAN
N.T.S.
JUNE 2001
CITY
OF DUBLIN
EXHIBIT 4
EXHIBIT D
TO ATTACHMENT 1
LEGEND
~ RETAIL/OFFICE
F'~'~,~,."~ .,..~ PUBUC/SEMI-PUBLIC FACIUTY
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
WEST DUBLIN BART SPECIFIC PLAN
N.T.S.
JUNE 2(X)1
CITY
OF
DUBLIN
EXHIBIT 5
EXHIBIT E
TO ATTACHMENT 1
_I~Li:-H~TATE_~80
LEGEND
m C-1: RETAILCOMMERCIALZONINGDISTRICT
~ C-2: GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTR)CT
~ M-l: LIGHT INDUSTRIALZONING DISTRICT
EXISTING ZONING
WEST DUBLIN BART SPECIFIC PLAN
N,T.S,
JUNE2001
CITY
OF DUBLIN
EXHIBIT 6
EXHIBIT F
TO ATTACHMENT 1
LEGEND
IIIIIIIII ARTERIAL STREET
I I I Ill COLLECTOR STREET
IIII(P)IIII PROPOSED STREET (ST. PATRIC~S WAY}
II1~1111 PROPOSED BIKEWAY- CLASS II (LANE)
II~ll~l BIKEWAY - CLASS I (PATH)
CIRCULATION SYSTEM
WEST DUBLIN BART SPECIFIC PLAN
N.T,S.
JUNE 2001
CITY
OF DUBLIN
EXHIBIT 7
EXHIBIT G
TO ATTACHMENT 1
(~/0)
to be ~
(cOt~ B)
(R/o)
(~
(co~ E~)
(~/0)
LEGEND
.... SPECIRC PLAN BOUNDARY
~ USE AS NOTED
POTENTIAL PLAZA LOC..~,TION
OPPORTUNFrY SITE
(P) PARKING
(L) HOTEL
(IvlU)
(COU B)
(o)
(R/A)
(COM A)
MIXED USE
COMMERCIAL B
OFFICE
RETAIL/OFFICE
RESIDENTIAL
RETAIUAUTO
COMMERCIAL A
LAND USE PLAN
WEST DUBLIN BART SPECIFIC PLAN
N,T,S.
JUNE 2001
CITY
OF DUBLIN
EXHIBIT 9
ATTACHMENT
Economic e~
Planning Systems
Public Finance
Real Estate Economics
Regional Economics
Land Use Policy
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
Eddie Peabody and Janet Harbin
Walter Kieser and Nicole Brown
Revenue Outlook for Development Scenarios, Downtown Dublin Specific
Plan Amendments; EPS ~310
May 31, 2001
BACKGROUND
In December of last year, the Dublin City Council adopted the West Dublin BART
Specific Plan, as well as the Downtown Core Specific Plan, based in part upon market
analysis and recommendations provided by Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS).
Since that time, the City has received requests from two property areas near or within
the West Dublin BART Specific Plan area for policy changes related to the properties
and permitted uses within this Specific Plan area.
Specifically, the owner of the Crown Chevrolet properties (parcels 32 and 15-7)
requested that her properties be zoned for high-rise office of twelve or more stories. The
owner of the Enea properties (parcels 48, 49-2, 49-3, 38-1, and 42-2) requested that his
properties be included within the West Dublin BART Specific Plan area boundary and
that these properties be designated "Commercial B,' with an FAR of 1.00.
EPS was retained by the City to prepare a comparative analysis of the impacts of the
proposed amendments to the West Dublin BART Specific Plan, as well as specific
variations of those proposed amendments. This Technical Memorandum documents
EPS's findings related to the potential revenue impacts of the proposed amendments.
For this analysis, EPS worked in conjunction with the City to identify three development
scenarios for the purpose of comparing the potential revenue impacts to existing
conditions within the Specific Plan Area.
DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS
As indicated above, three development scenarios were created to estimate the potential
impacts of the proposed amendments to the West Dublin BART Specific Plan. These
scenarios include low-density, medium-density, and high-density development
alternatives, and are shown in detail in Table 1, attached. It should be noted that the
250I Ninth Street, Suite 200 phone; 510-841-9190 ~.*~" phone: 916-649 8010 phone: 503-623-3557
Berkeley, CA 94710-2515 fax: 510-B4l 9208 ~° tax: 916 649-2070 fax: 303
www.epsys.com
Eddie Peabody and Janet Harbin May 31, 2001
City of Dublin Page 2
owner of the Crown properties requested a change in land use for her properties that
corresponds to the high-density scenario. The Enea property owner requested a land use
designation that corresponds to the medium-density scenario.
For each scenario, EPS assumed a specific floor-to-area ratio for each set of properties, as
well as a height requirement, and uses for each parcel. Because the density is the
primary difference between the three alternatives, the uses assumed for each parcel
remained relatively constant. For example, in each scenario, parcel 15-7 of the Crown
properties was assumed for office use, while parcel 32 is assumed to be used for parking
(and some retail in the low-density scenario).
For the Enea properties, EPS assumed that parcels 48 and 49-2 would contain ground
floor retail and residential units on upper floors. Parcel 49-3 was assumed to be used for
parking and/or residential units, depending upon the density assumed, and a
combination of retail, restaurant, and hotel uses was assumed for parcel 38-1. Office was
assumed to occupy parcel 42-2 for each scenario, with retail or parking as a complement
in the higher density scenarios.
REVENUE IMPACTS
Using the development scenarios as described above, the revenue impacts of each
alternative were estimated and compared with existing conditions, as shown in Table 2.
Although the Enea properties are not currently located within the West Dublin BART
Specific Plan area boundaries, the existing conditions shown reflect estimates of current
revenues collected by the City.
Changing the use of the Crown properties from auto sales to office use will decrease
revenues to the City within the Specific Plan area for each of the density scenarios
studied. However, it is important to note that the dealership is moving of its own
volition; thus, this loss of revenue from the Specific Plan area is inevitable and not the
result of specific plan policy. Further, though the move represents a loss to the Specific
Plan area, it will not impact City sales tax revenues because the dealership is relocating
within the City of Dublin.
As shown in Table 2, the revenue loss to the City resulting from the proposed use
change would range from $258,000 for the low-density scenario to $76,000 for the high-
density scenario. This is because sales taxes paid on auto sales are an important revenue
stream for the City, and the proposed office use would result in little or no sales taxes.
Existing sales tax revenues collected from Crown Chevrolet account for nearly 30
percent of all sales taxes collected within the Specific Plan area.
Adding the Enea properties to the Specific Plan area would result in no net change to the
City's revenues as a whole, but would increase revenues within the Specific Plan area by
$646,000. The low density scenario would result in a net revenue loss of $124,000 relative
to existing revenues. However, the higher density scenarios would result in a revenue
Eddie Peabody and Janet Harbin May 31, 2001
City of Dublin Page 3
gain of $471,000 in the medium-density scenario, and $1,057,000 in the high-density
scenario.
The total revenue impact of changes made to both the Crown and Enea properties
would result in an estimated loss of $382,000 for the low-density scenario, a gain of
$285,000 for the medium-density scenario, and an increase of more than $980,000 for the
high-density scenario. Changing each set of properties as requested by their respective
property owners would result in a net gain of $395,000.
Table 1
Crown Properties
Development Scenarios
Dublin Specific Plan Amendments
FAR Stories Acres Building Use SF Units Parking Parking
SF Needed Met
Low Density
Crown Properties
15-7
32
Enea Properties
48 and 49-2
49-3
38-1
42-2
Medium Density
Crown Properties
15-7
32
Enea Properties
48 and 49-2
49-3
38-1
42-2
1.00
1.75
1.00
4 4.905 266,000 Office 266,000 0 798
266,000 0 798 297
4 1.211 196,000 Parking 186,000 0 0 531
Retai~ 10,000 0 30
198,000 0 3_.qo s3._~
462,000 0 828 828
2 3.569 75,000 Retail
Residential
2 2.410 50,000 Residential
2 3.900 82,000 Retail/Rest.
Hotel
2 4.000 84,000 Office
8 4.905 466,000 Office
8 1.211 355,000 Parking
37,500 0 113
37,500 38 75
75,000 38 188 188
50,000 50 100 100
41,000 0 205
41,000 82 82
82,000 82 287
84,000 0 252
84~000 ~ 252
291,000 170 827
287
25._[2
827
466,000 0 1,398
466,000 0 1,398 384
355,000 0 0 1,014
355.000 ~ ~ 1,014
821,000 0 1,398 1,398
4 3.569 155,000 Retail 39,000 0 117
Residential 117,000 117 176
156,000 117 293 288
2 2.410 105,000 Residential 34,000 34 51
Parking 98,000 0 0 281
132,000 34 51 281
4 3.900 170,000 Retail/Rest. 42,500 0 213
Hotel 127,500 255 255
170,000 255 468 315
4 4.000 174,000 Parking 43;500 0 0 124
Office 174,000 0 522 324
174.000 ~ 522 448
632,000 323 1,333 1,333
Table 1
Crown Properties
Development Scenarios
Dublin Specific Plan Amendments
FAR Stories Acres Building Use
SF
SF
Units Parking Parking
Needed Met
Hlqh Density
Crown Properties
15-7
32
Enea Properties
48 and 49-2
49-3
38-1
42-2
2.50
12
9
1.50
6
3
6
6
4.905 534,000 Office
1.211 413.000 Parking
534,000 0 1,602
534,000 0 1,602 421
413,000 0 0 1,181
413,000 0 0 1,181
947,000 0 1,602 1,602
3.569 233,000 Retail 39,000 0 117
Residential 194,000 194 291
233,000 194 408 289
2.410 315,000 Parking 315,000 0 0 900
3.900 255,000 Retail/Rest. 42,500 0 213
Hotel 212.500 425 425
255,000 425 638 315
4.000 261,000 Retail 43,500 0 131
Office 217,500 0 659
261,000 0 783 324
1,064,000 619 1,829 1,828
Table 2
Revenue Impact Summary: Crown and Enea Properties
Dublin Downtown Specific Plan Amendments
Item Existing Scenario 1: Low
Condltlons Density
Scenario 2:
Medium Density
Scenario 3: High
Density
Crown Properties
Property Tax $4,820 $146,360 $239,018 $348,671
Sales Tax $419,960 $20,000 $0 $0
Transient Occupancy Tax $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Revenue $424,780 $166,360 $239,018 $348,671
Change from Existing ($258,420) ($185,762) ($76,109)
Pmperbj Tax $30,638 $142,276 $375,200 $497,840
Sales Tax $615,175 $211,875 $214,375 $325,750
Transient Occupancy Tax $0 $167~608 $527.352 $878.920
Total Revenue $645,813 $521,759 $1,116,927 $1,702,510
Change from Existing ($124,054) $471,114 $1,056,697
Total: Enea and Crown Properties
Property Tax $35,458 $288,636 $614,218 $846,511
Sales Tax $1,035,134 $231,875 $214,375 $325,750
Transient Occupancy Tax $0 $167,608 $527,352 $878,920
Total Revenue $1,070,593 $688,119 $1,355,945 $2,051,181
Change from Existing ($382,474) $285,352 $980,589
Source: City of Dublin; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
omni.means
ENGINEERS.PLANNERS
ATTACHMENT
Apffi 19, 2001
Ms. Janet Harbin
Associate Planner
City of Dublin
Planning Department
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Subject: Initial Findings Related to the Proposed Eneas and Crown Properties Dublin
Specific Plans Amendment for Proposed Low, Medium, and High Density
Alternatives
Dear Janet:
We have completed our initial traffic analysis for the proposed Eneas and Crown properties
amendments as they relate to the Dublin Specific Plans and this letter report summarizes our
findings.
The analysis has involved calculating vehicle trip generation for the low, medium, and high
density alternatives based on information supplied by Economic and Planning Systems (Nicole
Brown, EPS, "Eneas and Crown Properties Development Scenarios, Dublin Specific Plan
Amendments, March 19, 2001). Based on the same trip generation rates and assumptions found
in the Dublin Specific Plan traffic analysis, daily, AM and PM peak hour trip generation for the
alternative density scenarios was then faxed to you for review (attached). For each property, the
"net" trip generation was determined by subtracting out existing uses on the sites from each
proposed alternative. Net trip generation for each alternative has been shown in Table 1. As
calculated, net PM peak hour trips would range from 392 trips for the low density alternative to
1,386 trips for the high density alternative.
Initial evaluation of the plan amendments have been based on the operation of six key
intersections in the Specific Plans area (as discussed with City Transportation staff) and include
the following:
1. Dublin/San Ramon
2. Dublin/Golden Gate
3. Dublin/Amador Plaza
4. Village Parkway/Amador Valley
5. Dougherty/Dublin
6. Hopyard/I-580 Eastbound off-ramp
RECEIVED
APR 1 9 2001
DUBLIN pLANNING
ROSEVILLE
2237 Douglas Boulevard, Suite 1 O0
Rosevllle, CA 95661
(916) 782-8688
FAX (916) 782-8689
REDDING
434 Redcllff Drive, Suite D
Redding, CA 96002
(530) 223-6500
FAX (530) 223-9326
VISALIA
720 W. Center'Avenue, Suite C
Visalia, CA 93291
(559) 734-5895
FAX (559) 734-5899
WALNUT CREEK
1901 Olympic Boulevard, Ste. 120
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
(925) 935-2230
FAX (925) 935-224?
Table !
Eneas and Crown Properties; Net Daily, AM and PM Peak Hour Trip Generation
Low, Medinm~ and High Density Alternatives~
Scenario/ Trip Generation
Properties Daily AM (In,Out) PM (In, Out)
LOW Density:
Eneas: 1,028 119 134
Crown: 1,552 271 258
Total: 2,580 390 (329,61) 392 (82, 310)
MEDIUM Density:
Eneas: 3,337 342 375 4 2 '/!
Crown: 2, $85 510 459
Total: 6,222 852 (699,153) 834 (173,661)
HIGH Density:
Eneas: 6,730 529 688 ¢
Crown: 4,646 760 695
Total: 11,376 1,289 (1041,248) 1,386 (334, 1.052)
(1)
(2)
Trip generation calculations based on "Consultants Report of the Transportation Impacts
For the Proposed Village Parkway, Downtown Core, and West BART Station Specific
Plans, City of Dublin, Omi-Means, Final Draft Report, September 25, 2000." (See
attached trip generation calculations).
Low, medium, and high density land uses for the Eneas and Crown properties based on
"Economic and Planning Systems, Inc,. Development Scenarios Specific Plan
Amendments, March 13, 2001." (See attached)
In addition, City Transportation staff has provided ultimate build-out geometries for the
Dublin/Golden Gate, Dublin/Amador Plaza, Village Parkway/Amador Valley, and
Dougherty/Dublin intersections.~ Cumulative base volumes for impact evaluation have been
derived from the recent transportation studies performed for the Dublin Safeway and Dublin
Transit Center projects? 3 These volumes represent cumulative traffic with the Dublin Specific
Plans (as previously approved), Safeway, and Dublin Transit Center projects.
With the revised Specific Plan's traffic added to cumulative baseline volumes, intersection level-
of-service (LOS) have been calculated and are shown in Table 2. Intersection LOS has been
shown for the cumulative baseline condition traffic as well as the Iow, medium, and high density
alternatives for revised Specific Plans.
With just cumulative baseline volumes, all six study intersections would be operating at
acceptable levels-of-service during the AM and PM peak hours. However, with the recent
Safeway Center project, the intersection of Dublin/San Ramon would be operating at LOS D
(0.90) during the PM peak hour. Neither the Dublin Specific Plan or Safeway traffic analyses
were required to mitigate this intersection since it continued to operate at acceptable levels.
Discussions with City Transportation staff indicate that there is a very limited potential for
physical circulation improvements that can be suggested beyond those improvements assumed for
cumulative traffic conditions.4 Based on our discussions, an additional eastbound overlap phase
for the right-turn movements from Dublin Boulevard onto San Ramon Road has been assumed.
With the addition of low, medium, and high density alternative traffic, specific key intersection
LOS would degrade to unacceptable levels. Depending on the intensity of development, this
would include the intersections of Dublin/San Ramon, Dublin/Golden Gate, and Dublin/Amador
Plaza intersections. We have initially not suggested any additional mitigation measures for these
intersections to allow City staff to review intensity of development relative to approved and/or
pending traffic mitigation measures (consistent with recent studies). It is also noted that
additional circulation improvements at these intersections may not be feasible beyond what has
currently been assumed.
We have attached EPS data, trip generation calculations, and LOS calculation sheets for staff
review. Please review this report and attachments and call us with your input. We would be
happy to discuss the potential for pursuing more aggressive mitigation measures to accommodate
some level of revised Specific Plan development.
Sincerely,
Peter J. G~loway, Tr~p~o~tion Planner
cc: Mr. Ray Kuzbari, Associate Traffic Engineer
Table 2
Key Intersection Level-of-Service (LOS)
Dublin Specific Plan Cmnulative Baseline and Low, Medium, and High Density Conditions
Intersection
Key ]atersecfion LOS
Cumulative
Baseline~ Low Density Medium Density High Density
AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM
1. Dublin/San Ramon C 0.78 D 0.90 C 0.79 E 0.93 D 0.81 E 0.96 D 0.82 E 0.99
2. Dublin/GoldanGate A0.56 C0.77 B0.69 D0.82 C0.80 D0.87 E0.92 E0.92
3. Dublin/Amador Plaza A0.45 C0.77 A0.48 D0.81 A0.53 D0.86 A0.58 E0.92
4. Village Pkwy./Amador Valley A 0.46 B 0.63 A 0.47 B 0.64 A 0.48 B 0.64 A 0.49 B 0.65
5. Dougbe~y/Dublin: B 0.67 D 0.82 B 0.68 D 0.82 B 0.68 D 0.83 B 0.69 D 0.83
6. Hopyard/I-580 EB off B 0.63 B 0,68 B 0.63 B 0.68 B 0.63 B 0.68 B 0.64 B 0.68
(1)
Cumulative baseline volumes for intersections 1-4 derived from a traffic study conducted for the approved
Dublin Safeway Center, Omni-Means, March 2001. Volumes for intersections 5 and 6 derived from the
traffic study for the proposed Dublin Transit Center, Omni-Means, January 26, 2001. Baseline geometries
provided by City Transportation staff for all six intersections.
(2) LOS calculation for the Dougherty/Dubhn intersection assumes the extension of Scarlett Drive between
Dublin Boulevard and Dougberty Road.
References
Ray Kuzbari, Associate Traffic Engineer, City of Dublin, Memo to Peter Galloway,
Transportation Planner, Omni-Means, "Addendum Traffic Analysis for the Downtown Specific
Plans," March 15, 2001.
Omni-Means, Final Revort: Dublin Safeway Center, City of Dublin, March, 2001.
Omni-Means, Consultant's Revort: Transvortation Imnacts For the Provosed Dublin Transit
Center, City of Dublin, Draft Report, January 26, 2001.
Ray Kuzbari, Associate Traffic Engineer, City of Dublin, Personal communication March 26,
2001.
Appendices
-EPS Development Scenario Data-
-Trip Generation Tables (I-4)-
-LOS Calculation Sheets-
~ M~R-i'.~2001 09~$4 FROM ECONOMIC ~ PLANNING SYS~ TO 192~9~522~?-~.~]10 P~O~
Enea Properties
Development Scenarios
Dublin Specific Plan Amendments
FAR Stories Aores LOt SF Buading Building Use SF Unit~ Perkin9 perk;rig
SF Footprint Needed Met
48, m~d 49.2
1,5
1,5 $ 3.569 155,466 232.000
39,000 Ret~Ji 39,000 0 117
Residential 195,000 195 290
234,000 195 410
3 2,410 I04,990 292.544 98,000 Pe,~ing
6 3.900 189,884 255,000 43,000 RelaiVRestaurant
Hotel
42-2 1.5 6 4.000 174,240 261,000
4 3,569 155,466 155,000
Medium De~eity
48 and ~,9-2 1.0
49-3 1.0 2 2.410 104,980 t05.000
38-1 1.0 4 3,900 169,884 170,000
42~ 1.0 4 4~00 I~,2~ 1~,000
2 3969 155.466 ?5,000
48 and 49-2 0.5
49-3 0.5 2 2~410 104,980 50,000
39-1 0.5 2 2.900 169.984 82,000
292,$44 0 0
43,000 0 129
215,000 4,30 430
299,000 430 559
44,000 Retail 44,000 0 132
Office 220,000 0 660
264,000 0 792
1,048.544 625 1.761
39,000 Rmail 39,000 0 117
Reeident~t 117,000 1~7 176
15~R00 117 293
0 Residential 34,000 34 51
Pad(lng 71,000 0 0
105,000 34 51
43,000 Retail/Restaurant 43,000 0 129
Hotel 129,000 258 258
172,000 298 387
839
314
322
1,761
2~
202
2O2
314
44,000 Psddn9 44,000 0 0 126
Off,ce 174.000 0 522 322
174,000 0 522 448
607,000 326 1~253 1,253
39.000 Retail 38.000 0 114
Residential 38,000 38 76
76,000 38 190
25,000 Residential 50,000 50 100
41,000 RetaiFRestaurant 41,000 0 123
Hotel 41,000 82 82
S2,000 82 20S
84,000 0 252
84,000 0 252
42.2 0.5 2 4.000 174,240 84,000 42,000 Office
292,000 170 T47
190
100
205
252
747
'° MAR-19-2(DO~. 09:55 FROH ECOHOMIC & PLANNIHG~'~S.' TO 192JgJJ~47-~']9~,lO~ ~ ' ~
Crown Properties
Development Scenarios
Dublin Specific Plsn Amendments
FAR Stories Acme Lot SF Building Building
SF Foot~rlnt
SF
Heeded Met
Hi;Ih Den;~y
15-7 "~.50 12 4.905 213,651 534,000
32 %83 9 1.211 52,750 413,000
Medium Density
45,000
47,475
Office
Park'f/lg
534,000 0 1,602
534,000 0 1,602
413,000 0 0
413,000 0 0
947,000 0 1,602
421
1,181
1,181
1
15-7 1.75
Low Density
4.905 213,~51 374,000
1.211 52,750 247,000
47,000
47,475
Office
Parldng
374,000 0 1
374,000 0 1,122
247,000 0 o
247,0oo 0 o
621,000 0 1,122
415
707
707
1,122
15-7 1.0 4
32 1.0 3
4.905 213,681 214,000
1.211 52,750 128,000
54,000
43,000
Office
Pe~king
Retail
214,000 0 642
214,000 0 642 334
118.000 0 0 338
10,000 0 30
128,000 0 30 338
342,000 0 672 672
TABLE 1 HIGH DENSITY SCENARIO
Daily, AM, and PM Peak Hour Trip Generation
Eneas Properties:
Parcel #'s 48 & 49-2: Retail = 39,000 Residential = 195 Units
Size/Units Trip Rate Project Trips
In Out
Retail:
Dialy 39,000 42.92 1674
AM Peak 39,000 1.03 40
PM Peak 39,000 3,74 146
Residential:
Daily 195 6.63 1293
AM Peak 195 0.51 99
PM Peak 195 0.62 121
25 16
70 76
16 84
81 40
Parcel # 38-1: Retail = 21,500 Restaurant = 21,500 Hotel = 215,000
Size/Units Trip Rate Project Trips
In Out
Retail:
Daily 21,500 42.92 923
AM Peak 21,500 1.03 22
PM Peak 21,500 3.74 80
Restaurant:
Dally 21,500 89.95 1934
AM Peak 21,500 0.81 17
PM Peak 21,500 7.49 161
Hotel:
Daily 215,000 8.23 1769
AM Peak 215,000 0.56 120
PM Peak 215,000 0.61 131
14 9
39 42
12 8
108 53
73 47
70 62
Parcel # 42-2: Retail = 44,000 Office = 220,000
Size/Units Trip Rate
Project Trips In Out
Retail:
Daily 44,000 42.92 1888
AM Peak 44,000 1.03 45
PM Peak 44,000 3.74 165
Office
Dally 220,000 11.01 2422
AM Peak 220,000 1.56 343
PM Peak 220,000 1.49 328
28 18
79 86
302 41
39 288
Total Daily Trips: 11,903
Total AM Trips: 686
Total PM Trips: 1,132
463 223
486 646
TABLE t HIGH DENSITY SCENARIO
Daily, AM, and PM Peak Hour Trip Generation
Crown Properties
Parcel # 15-7 Office = 534,000
Size/Units Trip Rate
Project Trips
Out
Office:
Daily 534,000 11.01 5879
AM Peak 534,000 1.56 833
PM Peak 534,000 1.49 796
733
95
100
700
Total Daily Trips: 5,879
Total AM Trips: 833
Total PM Trips: 796
733
95
100
700
TABLE 2 MEDIUM DENSITY SCENARIO
Daily, AM, and PM Peak Hour Trip Generation
Eneas Properties:
Parcel #'s 48 & 49-2: Retail = 39,000 Residential = 117 Units
Size/Units Trip Rate Project Trip
Out
Retail:
Diaty 39,000 42.92 1674
AM Peak 39,000 1.03 40
PM Peak 39,000 3.74 146
Residential:
Daily 117 6.63 776
AM Peak 117 0.51 60
PM Peak 117 0.62 73
25
70
10
49
16
76
5O
24
Parcel # 38-1: Retail = 21,500 Restaurant = 21,500 Hotel = 129,000
Size/Units Trip Rate Project Trip
Out
Retail:
Daily 21,500 42.92 923
AM Peak 21,500 1.03 22
PM Peak 21,500 3.74 80
Restaurant:
Dally 21,500 89.95 1934
AM Peak 21,500 0.81 17
PM Peak 21,500 7.49 161
Hotel:
Daily 129,000 8.23 1062
AM Peak 129,000 0.56 72
PM Peak 129,000 0.61 79
14
39
12
108
44
42
9
42
8
53
28
37
Parcel # 42-2: Office = 174,000
Size/Units
Trip Rate Project Trip
Office
Daily 174,000 11.01 1916
AM Peak 174,000 1.56 271
PM Peak 174,000 1.49 259
239
31
Out
33
228
Parcel #49-3: Residential = 34 Units
Size/Units Trip Rate
Project Trip
Residential:
Dally 34 6.63 225
AM Peak 34 0.51 17
PM Peak 34 0.62 21
3
14
Out
15
7
Total Daily Trips: 8,510
Total AM Trips: 499
Total PM Trips: 819
341
353
159
467
TABLE 2 MEDIUM DENSITY SCENARIO
Daily, AM, and PM Peak Hour Trip Generation
Crown Properties
Parcel # 15-7 Office = 374,000
Size/Units Trip Rate
Project Trips
in
Out
Office:
Daily 374,000 11.01 4118
AM Peak 374,000 1.56 583
PM Peak 374,000 1.49 557
Total Daily Trips: 4,118
Total AM Trips: 583
Total PM Trips: 557
513
67
513
67
70
490
7O
490
TABLE 3 LOW DENSITY SCENARIO
Daily, AM, and PM Peak Hour Trip Generation
Eneas Properties:
Parcel #'s 48 & 49-2: Retail = 38,000 Residential = 38 Units
Size/Units Trip Rate Project Trip
In
Out
Retail:
Dialy 38,000 42.92 1631
AM Peak 36,000 1.03 39
PM Peak 38,000 3.74 142
Residential:
DaiJy 38 6.63 252
AM Peak 38 0.51 19
PM Peak 38 0.62 24
24
68
3
16
15
74
16
8
Parcel # 38-1: Retail = 20,500 Restaurant = 20,600 Hotel = 41,000
Size/Units Trip Rate Project Trip
In
Out
Retail:
Daily 20,500 42.92 880
AM Peak 20,500 1.03 21
PM Peak 20,500 3.74 77
Restaurant:
Daily 20,500 89.95 1844
AM Peak 20,500 0.81 17
PM Peak 20,500 7.49 154
Hotel:
Daily 41,000 8.23 337
AM Peak 41,000 0.56 23
PM Peak 41,000 0.61 25
13
37
11
103
14
13
8
40
7
51
9
12
Parcel # 42-2: Office = 84,000
Size/Units Trip Rate Project Trip
tn
Out
Office
Daily 84,000 11.01 925
AM Peak 84,000 1.56 131
PM Peak 84,000 1.49 125
115
15
16
110
Parcel #49-3: Residential = 50 Units
Size/Units Trip Rate
Project Trip
in
Out
Residential:
Daily 50 6.63 332
AM Peak 50 0.51 26
PM Peak 50 0.62 31
4
21
21
10
Total Daily Trips: 6,201
Total AM Trips: 276
Total PM Trips: 578
184
273
92
3O5
TABLE 3 LOW DENSITY SCENARIO
Daily, AM, and PM Peak Hour Trip Generation
Crown Properties
Parcel # 15-7 Office -- 214,000
Size/Units Trip Rate
Project Trips
Office:
Daily 214,000 11.01 2356
AM Peak 214,000 1.56 334
PM Peak 214,000 1.49 319
Parcel # 32: Retail = 10,000
Size/Units
Trip Rate Project Trips
Retail:
Daily 10,000 42.92 429
AM Peak 10,000 1.03 10
PM Peak 10,000 3.74 37
Total Daily Trips: 2,785
Total AM Trips: 344
Total PM Trips: 356
In
294
38
in
6
18
300
56
Out
40
281
Out
4
19
44
300
TABLE 4 EXISTING ENEAS PROPERTIES
Daily, AM, and PM Peak Hour Trip Generation
Eneas Properties:
Parcel #'s 48 & 49-2: Retail = 25,222
Size/Unite Trip Rate
Project Trip
Out
Retail:
Dialy 25,222 42.92 1083
AM Peak 25,222 1.03 26
PM Peak 26,222 3.74 94
16
45
10
49
Parcel # 38-1: Retail = 46,421
Size/Units
Trip Rate Project Trip
Retail:
Daily 46,421 42.92 1992
AM Peak 46,421 1.03 48
PM Peak 46,421 3.74 174
29
83
Out
19
90
Parcel # 42-2: Chrysler Auto Dealemhip = 24,890
Size/Units Trip Rate
Project Trip
In
Out
Auto Dealership
Daily 24,890 37.5 933
AM Peak 24,890 2.21 55
PM Peak 24,890 2.97 74
40
30
15
44
Parcel #49-3: Retail = 27,146
Size/Units Trip Rate
Project Trip
In
Out
Retail:
Daily 27,146 42.92 1165
AM Peak 27,146 1.03 28
PM Peak 27,146 3.74 102
17
49
11
53
Total Daily Trips: 5,173
Total AM Trips: 187
Total PM Trips: ~?.~.
102
207
58
237
TABLE 4 EXISTING CROWN PROPERTIES
Daily, AM, and PM Peak Hour Trip Generation
Crown Properties:
Parcel # 15-7: Auto Dealership = 32,880
Size/Units Trip Rate
Project Trip
Auto Dealership
Daily 32,880 37.5 1233
AM Peak 32,880 2.21 73
PM Peak 32,880 2.97 98
Total Daily Trips: 1,233
Total AM Trips: 73
Total PM Trips: 98
in
53
4O
53
40
Out
20
58
20
58
85/16/2001 88:16 5189352247 OMNI MEANS PAGE
ATTACHMENT
FACSLMILE/~sMITTAL ~HJlEr
omni.means
1901 Olympic Blvd., Suite 120
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
5-15-01
Dam:
Fax #: 829-9248
No. of page~ tncludt~xg cover sheet: 7
Peter
To: From:
Mr. Ray Kuzbari
Associate Traffic Engineer OMNI-MEANS, Ltd.
City of Dublin Public Works 1901 Olympic Boulevard, Suite 120
100 Civic Plaza Walnut Creek, California 94596
Dublin, CA 94568 Tel: 925/935-2230 Fax: 925/935-2247
cc: Attachments
Original Documtmt Sent: O Overmght O By Mail ~ Not Sent Unless Requesmd
Dear Ray:
[ have run the LOS calculations for the Dublin/Scm Ramon intersection assuming no Schaefer Ranch
project and with thc densil:ies you requested, [ h, ye the following result.s:
AM PM
Low Density: D 0.82 D 0.85
Medium Densitx:: D 0.82 D 0,88
1.0 FAR C&E: D 0.82; D 0.86
As you can s~e. compared to our previous analysis with the Schaefer Ranch trips, without that project the
LOS improves t,> a degree. The calculations assume no eastbound right, mm overlap phase.
[ would im~.~,.ine you would discuss these results with Janet and tell us how to proceed with the overall
analysis. Pier, se ,'.'all me ar your convenience with any questions or comments.
Thank you.
~ :. Split:? Y
LEFT 2!7 .... '~'.0 1.O 3.0 2.0 1.0 --- 86 RIGHT
05/&6/200i 88:16 -5109352247 DMNI MEANS PAGE 82
CC:TALOS So~tw~r~ ~er. 2.35 by T~KM Transportation Oonsul~ant~
C:ondl~lon: AM Cmltv.~OlO D~P+Lc.w Density w/o G. Ranch
INTERSEC'TIDN 1 ~an Ramon/Dubiin ~oulevard City ~f Dublin
Coun~ D~ CU~L~TIV~ 2010 Time ~M QUMUL~TIV~ Peak Hour 7:30-8:30 ~M
CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE ~IGNAL
............ 291 1359 3~4
(--- v
STREET NAME:
THR. U 307 .... ?.0 (NO. OF LA~ES) 1.0'(--- 218 THRU Dublin Boulev~
834 .... 2.Ct 2.0 3.0 2.5 3.0 --- 734 LEFT
v ~ [ V
664 457 &~77 Urb=Y, Rur=Y
LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N
ST¢:EET NAME: Ban Ramon
ORIGINAL ADJWS'FED v/C CRITICAL
MOVEMENT VOLUME V~]LUME* t;APACI TY RATIO V/O
NB F,:I)~4'~' ('R ~,277 765 * 3C)00 0.2550
THRU' (T) 457 457 ~95C) 0.0923
LEFT (L) 664 664 3000 0.2213 O. ~213
SB RIGHT (R) 291 .17~ * 1650 O. 1C)4~
THRU (Ti, 2359 135~¢ 4950 0.2745 0.~745
LEFT (L) 324 3~- 3000 0. i080
EB RIGHT (R.) 834 469 * 3000 0.1563 0. i563
THRU (%) 307 307 3300 0,0930
LEFT (L;~ 217 217' ~000 0.0723
WB RI~HT (R> S6 ¢' * 1650 0.0000
THRU (T) ~18 . 21E: 1650 C).1321
LEFT (L:~ 734 734 4304 0.1705 0.170~
TOTA~ VOlUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.82
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D
· ADJUSTED FOI;' RIGHT TURN ON RED
INT=~..;NT, VOL=A3. VOL~ CAP=
05/16/2001 08:16 5109352247 OMNZ MEANS PAGE 03
CCTALOS Software. vet. 2.35 by l'JKM'Transporta~i,z,n Consultants
Cond~'~c,n: P$1 Cmltv. 2010 DGP+~c,w Dmnmity w/o S. Ranch 0~/1~/01
INTERSECTION I ~an Ram~n/Dublin Boulevard City ~f Dublin
Count Da~e CdMULATIVE 2010 Time PM CUMULATIVE F'mak Hour 5~00-6:00 PM
C'.~]:TA METHOD RIGHT THRU.LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL
............. lO1 7-'.-'7 ~'.47
t I I
.... ~ I I .....
~ <--- v ---)' [ Split? Y
LEFT 135 .... 2.¢~ 1.0 3,0 ~,0 1.('1 --- 378 RIGHT
THRU 425 .... . 2.0 (NO, OF LANES) 1.0'4--- 388 THRU
ST~:EET NAME:
Dub1 in Boul eva
RIGHT 477 --- 2.0 ?.0 3.0 2.5 3.0 ---- 153-2 LEFT
', < --- " .... ). t
v ~ ', I v
Iq ', ~ t SIG WARRANTS:
W + E 666 1042 ,1561 Urb=Y, Rur=Y
S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N
STREET NAME~ San Ramon
ORIGINAL ADJU~TED V/C CRITICA~
MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAF'ACITY RATIO V/C
NB RIGHT ':R> 1561 493 * 3000 O. 1643
THRU (T> 104~ 104:Z 4950 0.~105
LEFT (L) 666 666 3000 0
SB RIGHT (R; 101 27 * 1650 0..0164
THRU (T) 727 727 4'B50 O. 146'B O. 146'~
LEFT (L) 347 347 3000 0. 1157
EB RIGHT (R) 477 11i * 3000 0.0~70
THRU (T) 425 425 3300 0. 1288 0. i288
LEFT (L.) 135 135 3000 0.0450
WB RIGHT ~R) 378 187 * 1650 O. 2133
THRU (T } 388 388 1650 O. ~352
LEFT (L) 15S2 1532 4304 0.3559 0.3559
TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RI~TIO: 0.85
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERV]iCE: D
· ADJUSTED FOP. RIGHT TURN ON RED
INT~B. IHT, VOL.=P3. VOL,CAP=
05/16/2001 08:16 5185352247 OMNI MEANS PAGE B4
OCTALOS So~;w~re vet. 2.3~ by TJKM Transportation Consultants
C,:,nditi,:,n: ~M Cmitv.2010 DSP+Me. dium Density w/o ~. Ranch 05/16/0
INTERSECTION 1 ~an Ramon/Dublin Bc,ulevard City of Dublin
METHOD RI
...........
Da'be ,:'UMULATIVE 20i0 Time A~ CUMULATIVE Peak
THRU LEFT
13~9 356
|
<--- v --->, Split? Y
i.O 1.0 3.0 ~.0 1.0 --- 90 RIGHT
LEFT 2~7 ---
Hour ?:30-8:30 AM
6-PHASE ~IGNAI
STREET NAME:
THRU 35~ --- 2.0 (NO. OF LANES) 1.0<-:- 226 THRU Dublin Boulew
RIGHT 834 ..... 2. o ~.0 3.0 2.5 ~.0 --- 754 LEFT
: <--- ~ ___> ~
N ~ ~ SI0 WARRANT~:
w E 664 457.1429 Urb=Y, Rur=]
S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N
STREET NAME: Smn Ramon
ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL
MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C
NB
P.I~HT (R) l~2'B 'BO~ ~$ 3000 0.3010
THRU (T) 457 457 4950 0.0923
LEFT ~:L) 664 664 3000 0.2213
SB RIGHT (R) 2z'B1 17:;.' * 1650 O. 1042
THRU (T> 1359 1359 4950 0.7745 0.2745
t~EFT ('L) 356 356 3000 O. li87
EB RIGHT (R) 834 46~.~ * 3000 O. 1563 O, 1563
THRU (T'I 334 334 3300 0. 1012
LEFT (L) 217 217 3000 0.07~3
WB RIGHT (R~ 90 0 * 1650 0.0000
THRU (~) 226 226 !650 O. 1~70
LEFT (L) 754 754 4304 O. 1752 0. 1752
TOTAL VOLUME--TO--CAPACITY RATIO: 0.83
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D
* ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED
INT=B. INT,VOI_=A2.VOL,CAP=
05/1G/2001 08:16 5i09352247 OMNI MEANS PAGE 85
C. CTALOS S,--,t't.~ar'e vet. ?.~5 by TJKM Transportation Consultants
Condi'~ic, n: PM C:mitv.2010 DSP~Medium Density w/o S. 'Ranch 05/16/0i
INTERSECTION 1 San Ramon/Dublin Bc, uievard City c,f Dublin
Count Date C:UMLIL. ATIVE 2010 Time PM CUMULATIVE Peak Hour 5:00-6:00 F'M
C:C:TA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT
................. 101 727 349
~ ~ ~ ,~.
: <--- v ---> I
LEFT l~ 2.0 1.O 3.0 2.0 i.~'~ -----
THRU 434 ....... 2.0 (NO. OF LANES) 1.0<---
2.0 3.0 ~.5 3,O ---
4. --- ' .... > I
666 i042 .1593
LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N
6-RHASE BIGNAL
Split? Y
407 RIGHT
414 THRU
1632 LEFT
STREET NAME:
Dublin Bc,uleva
SIG WARRANTS:
Urb=Y, Rur=Y
STREET NAME: San Ramon
ORI~INAL ADJUSTED V/F: CRITICAL
MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* C:AF'AC: I TY RATIO V/C:
., F" 3000 O. 1517
NB RI~HI ,:F') 1593 455 *
'~ -' 1A42 4950 O. 2105
THRU (T.~ 1L4; . -
LEFT (L ~ E, 66 666 3000 O.~":"~A.
S~ RIGHT (~'~ lO1 ~7 * 1650 0.0164
THRU "7 ~ 727 727 4950 O. 1469 O. i46'3
LEFT ~ L J ~:49 349 ~C ¢~A O. 1163
EB R. IGHT (R~ 477 1~2 * 3000 0.0~70
THRU <T]~ 434 434 3300 0. i315 O. 1315
~: 3000 0. 0450
LEFT (L.) 135
WB RIGHT (P- 407 215 * 1650 O. ~'~
THRU (T) 414 414 1650 0.2509
LEFT (L) 1632 16~; 4304 0. 3792 ..
TOTAL VOLMME-TO-CAF'ACITY RATIO: 0.88
IN%E~SE ..... N LEVEL OF SERVICE: D
· ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED
INT~B. IN!', VOL =F';.~. VOL, CAP=
05/16/2001
08:18 5189352247 OMNI MEANS PAGE
CCTALOS Sol~wa~.e vet. 2.35 by TJKt~ Transpc, r~a~i,Jn Consultants
Conditi,:,n: Am Ca(tv.2010 DSP+I.O EAR E&C w/o S. Ranch
INTERSECTION i San Remon/Dublin Bc, uie¥ard City of DUblin
Coun= Date CUMULATIVE 2010 Timm AM CUMULATIVE Peak Hour 7:30-8:30 AM
CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT
............ 291 1359 . 324
~ <--- v --->
LEFT 217 --- 2.0 1.O 3.0 .2~.0
THRU -'""'-~ ~' _
· ~..~,-' ....." ~.( (NO. OF LANES) 1.C-..- -
RIGHT 834 --- 2,0 ~.0 3.0 2.'5 3.0 ---
N I ~
W + E 664 457
S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N
I ~plit? Y
06 R I GHT
224 THRU
751 LEFT
6-PHASE SIGNAL
STREET NAME:
Dublin
SIG WARRANTS:
Urb=Y, Rur=Y
STREET NAME: San Ramon
ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL
MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C
NB RIGHT ~.~) 1333 810 * 3000
THRU (T) 457 457 4950 0.0933
LEFT (L) 664 664 3000 0.2213 0.2213
SB RIGHT (R) 291 172 * 1650 0.i042
THRU (T) i359 1359 4950 0.2745 0.~745
LEFT (LI 324 324 3000 O. 1080
EB RIGHT (R~ .834 469 * 3000 0.1563 0.1563
'THRU (T) 323 3~3 3300 O. 0979
LEFT (i) 217 217 3(300 O. 0723
WB RIGHT i:R) as 0 * 1650 0. 0000
THRU (T) 224 22z~ 1650 0.1358
LEFT (L) 751 75~. 4304 0.1745 0.1745
TOTAL VOLUME-TD-CApA¢;ITY~RATIO: 0.83
INTER~ECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D
ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED
INT=B. INT. VOL=A3. VOL, CAP=
05/16/2801 08:16 5189352247 OMNI MEANS PAGE 07
C£:TALOS S¢,f'twa~ vet. 2.35 by TJKM Transportation Consultants
C,:,n~ltic, n: PM C;mltv.2010 DSP+i.O FAR E&C w/o S. Ran'ch 05/16/01
INTERSECTION 1 San Rain.n/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin
Coun~ Date CUMULATIVE 2010 Time PM CUMULATIVE Peal,( Hour 5:00-6:00 PM
F:CTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL
............ 101 727 347
I I I '*
~ <--- v ---> I Split? Y
LEFT i35 ..... 2,0 i.O 3.0 2.0 ~.0 ---- 378 RIGHT
STREET NAME:
THRU 433 ..... "' 2.0 (NO. OF LANES) 1.0<--- 404 THRU Dublin Bouleva
RI~HT 477 .... 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.5 ~.0 1566
~ "~ -- :'- ~" .... >' l
v I I I v
W + E 666 1042 <[589
~i LEFT THRU RIGHT Split'?' N
LEFT
WARRANTS:
Urb=Y, Rur=Y
STREET NAME: San Ramon
ORIGINAL ADJUS'FED V/C CRITICAL
MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO
NB RIGHT (R:~ 1589 497 * 3000 O. 1657
THRU ~:T) 1042 1042 4950 0.2105
LEFT (L) 666 666 3000 0.2220 0.2220
SB RIGHT (R'~ 101 27 * 1650 0.0164
THRU (T) 727 727 4950 0.1469 0.146D
LEFT (L) 347 347 3000 O. 115~
EB RIGHT (R'..~ 477 li~, * 3000 0.0370
THRU (T) 433 433 3300 O. 13i~ O. 131~
LEFT (L) 135 135 3000 0.0450
WB RIGHT (R.) 378 287 * 1650 O, 2133
THRU (T) 404 40~ 1650 O. 2448
LEFT (L) 1566 1566 4304 0.3638 0.3638
TOTAL VOlUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.86
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SSRVICE: D
· ADJUS'fED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED
INT=~. INT,VOL=F'3.VOL,~AP=