HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.1 Historic Park Environmntl Rev
CITY CLERK
File # D[!]~5J-~[Q]
~oO~2JJ
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 3, 2008
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing: Dublin Historic Park - Environmental Review
and Master Plan Amendment
Report by Diane Lowart, Parks & Community Services Director
ATTACHMENTS:
1) Resolution Adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Ko1b Ranch Building
Move, Rehabilitation, and Facility Reuse at the Dublin Historic
Park and Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum, with
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
Program as Exhibit A
2) Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Amendment, June 2008
3) Resolution Adopting the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan
Amendment
~.
1) Open Public Hearing
2) Receive Presentation from Staff
3) Receive Public Testimony
4) Close Public Hearing and Deliberate
5) Adopt Resolution Adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program
6) Adopt Resolution Adopting the Dublin Historic Park Master
Plan Amendment
RECOMMENDATION~
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
None
DESCRIPTION: One of the City Council Strategic Goals is to "Expand and enhance
Dublin Historic Park". In order to accomplish this goal, the City contracted with Royston Hanamoto
Alley and Abey to develop a site master plan for an expanded park. The Dublin Historic Park Master Plan
was one in a series of actions relative to expansion of the existing historic park. The Dublin Village
Historic Area Specific Plan and related General Plan Amendment (adopted by City Council Resolution
149-06) provides for redesignation of approximately 7.55 acres of land from Retail/Office to Parks/Public
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COPY TO: RHAA
Page 1 of3
ITEM NO.
6./
G:\COUNCIL\Agenda Statements\2008\6-3 Historic Park MP Update. doc
v
Recreation. The Specific Plan also provides policies, programs and architectural guidelines for
development of future public and private projects in the specified historic area.
The Dublin Historic Park Master Plan was adopted by the City Council on August 1, 2006 (Resolution
151-06). The Master Plan contemplates that the park will be developed in phases as funding becomes
available; six phases of development are included. The Fiscal Year 2007-2008 Budget includes funding
to initiate Phase 1 of the project as well as the Streetscape Phase.
On August 21, 2007 the City Council approved a subsequent Agreement with Royston Hanamoto Alley
and Abey for consultant services for preparation of the final design and construction documents for the
Dublin Historic Park, Phase 1. Included in the scope of work was the preparation of a master plan
addendum to assess the condition of the Kolb Ranch structures (house, barn, and workshop) and develop a
plan for relocation of the properties if appropriate.
At the March 4, 2008 City Council meeting, the Council received the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan
Addendum - Kolb Ranch Relocation and approved Option C which was to relocate five structures from
the Kolb Ranch to the Dublin Historic Park including the Old House, the Main House, the Sunday School
Barn, the Hay Barn and the Pumphouse. Additionally the Council designated $3.18 million of the FY
06/07 General Fund Reserve to the project.
In order to move forward, it is necessary to take the following actions: 1) prepare environmental
documentation relating to the move, rehabilitation and reuse of the Kolb Ranch structures at the Dublin
Historic Park and for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum - Kolb Ranch Relocation; and 2)
prepare an Amendment to the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan to incorporate the structures from the
Kolb Ranch.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
A draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared in compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Dublin
Environmental Guidelines to identify and analyze impacts of the proposed project (moving the structures
from the Kolb Ranch to the Dublin Historic Park for rehabilitation and reuse). A 20-day public review
period began April 22, 2008 and ended May 12, 2008. A draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was
prepared because it was determined, through the review process, that the project will not have a
significant effect on the environment with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures.
During the public review period, one comment letter was received from the City of Pleasanton. The letter
noted that the City of Pleasanton, a responsible agency under CEQA, concurs with the conclusions of the
draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration. In addition, the City of Pleasanton asked that the
City of Dublin take care to minimize the number of trees removed from the Kolb property at the time of
the building move and also requested that the Kolb property be left in an attractive condition after the
buildings are removed. The comment letter did not change any of the conclusions of the draft Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and did not require any revisions to the document.
Attachment 1 is a resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
Program for the Kolb Ranch Building Move, Rehabilitation, and Facility Reuse at the Dublin Historic
Park and Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program are shown as Exhibit A to the Resolution.
Page 2 of3
DUBLIN HISTORIC MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT:
Staff has prepared an Amendment to the May 2006 Dublin Historic Park Master Plan (Attachment 2).
The Amendment incorporates the Kolb Ranch structures into the Dublin Historic Park by revising the
overall site plan, phasing plan and cost estimates. Additions to the Master Plan are indicated by underline
and deletions by strikethrough.
Attachment 3 is a resolution adopting the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Amendment.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the Public Hearing
and take the following action: 1) adopt Resolution Adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program; and 2) adopt Resolution Adopting the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan
Amendment.
Page 3 of3
l~.r~
RESOLUTION NO. - 08
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
*********
ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND A MITIGATION
MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE KOLB RANCH BUILDING MOVE, REHABILITATION,
AND FACILITY REUSE AT THE DUBLIN HISTORIC PARK AND
DUBLIN HISTORIC PARK MASTER PLAN ADDENDUM
WHEREAS, on August 1, 2006 the City Council approved the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan.
The Historic Park Master Plan identified a six-phase buildout of the future park facility in Dublin's
Historic Specific Plan area on the southeast comer of Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the project,
which was also adopted by the City Council on August 1, 2006; and
WHEREAS, with the cooperation of the Kolb/Strom families, the City of Dublin explored the
possibility of relocating several of the Kolb Ranch buildings located at 11393 Dublin Canyon Road in
Pleasanton to the Historic Park for use as public buildings and Staff prepared an amendment to the
Historic Park Master Plan as such; and
WHEREAS, Staff examined the environmental impacts of moving, rehabilitating, and reusing the
five Kolb Ranch buildings for public purposes at the Dublin Historic Park and the associated amendments
needed to the Historic Park Master Plan in an Initial Study dated April 22, 2008; and
WHEREAS, on the basis of the Initial Study, the City prepared a draft Mitigated Negative
Declaration which was circulated for public review from April 22, 2008 to May 12, 2008 and is attached
as Exhibit A to this Resolution. The City received one comment letter from the City of Pleasanton, a
responsible agency under CEQA, wherein Pleasanton stated their support of the document's conclusions
and noted two construction-related requests; and
WHEREAS, a City Council Staff Report, dated June 3, 2008 and incorporated herein by
reference, described and analyzed the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Project, including the
proposed amendments to the Historic Park Master Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Staff Report and Draft Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program (Attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A) at a noticed
public hearing on June 3, 2008, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, as required by CEQA, the City prepared a Mitigation Monitoring Program, which is
attached to the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the City's independent judgment
and analysis on the potential for environmental impacts from the Project; and
WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and other
documents that constitute the record of proceedings for the Project is the City of Dublin Community
Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568. :Ltew, :f::t".. 6" ~l~ lo~~"
1 ATTACHMENTl ~
c:< ~. }dg
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
A. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution.
B. The Dublin City Council reviewed and considered the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to
making a recommendation on the Project.
C. The Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the CEQA
Guidelines and the City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines.
D. The Mitigated Negative Declaration is complete and adequate and reflects the City's independent
judgment and analysis as to the environmental effects of the Project as described in the Mitigated
Negative Declaration.
E. On the basis of the whole record before the City Council, including the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and comments received on it, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a
significant effect on the environment.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that based on the above findings, the City Council adopts the
attached Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Kolb Ranch
Building Move, Rehabilitation, and Facility Reuse at the Dublin Historic Park and Dublin Historic Park
Master Plan Addendum, both of which are incorporated herein by reference.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of June 2008, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
Interim City Clerk
2
J ~J;g
Initial Study and
Mitigated Negative Declaration
for the
Kolb Ranch Building Move, Rehabilitation, and Facility Reuse
at the Dublin Historic Park
and
Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum
Lead Agency
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Public Review period: April 22, 2008 - May 12, 2008
EXHIBIT A
. If ~I~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Environmental Checklist Form....................................................................................................................... 1
Background and Project Description............................................................................................................. 3
Existing Physical Setting, Uses, and Structures ............................................................................................5
Exhibit 1: Regional Context.......................................................................................................................... 7
Exhibit 2: Project Vicinity.............................................................................................................................. 8
Exhibit 3: Dublin Village Historic Area .......................................................................................................... 9
Exhibit 4: Kolb Ranch Building relocation to the Dublin Historic Park......................................................... 10
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ......................... ................. ...... ........................... .......... ............ 11
Determination .............................................................................................................................. ................ 11
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts .......................................................................................................... 12
Aesthetics...................................................................................................................................................... 14
Agricultural Resources................................................................................................................................... 15
Air Quality...................................................................................................................................................... 15
Biological Resources.....,..................................................................,...,..................................,..................... 18
Cultural Resources........................,..,.,.......................................................................................................... 20
Geology and Soils.......................................................................................................................................... 22
Hazards and Hazardous Materials................................................................................................................. 24
Hydrology and Water Quality......................................................................................................................... 26
Land Use and Planning........,........................................................................................................................ 28
Mineral Resources........................................................................ ,................................................................ 28
Noise............................................................................................ .......................................................,.......... 29
Population and Housing................................................................................................................................. 29
Public Services..................,........................................................................................................................... 30
Recreation..................................,.................................... ............................................................................... 30
Transportation and T rafflc.,...............................................................................:......................,................. ....30
Utility and Services Systems....................,..................................................................................................... 31
Mandatory Findings of Significance............................................................................................................. 32
Background Information.................................................................................................................... ...........34
Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
5 ;;rId-!
BACKGROUND AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Background
On August 1, 2006 the City Council approved the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and the Dublin Historic
Park Master Plan, which set the policy and land use framework for the development of a former shopping center
site in Dublin's historic core into the City's Historic Park. An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration was
prepared for the project, which was adopted by the City Council at the same meeting.
The Historic Park Master Plan identified a six-phase buildout of the future park facility, with the eventual
construction of an 800 square foot building for classroom space. In Summer 2007, the Dublin City Council
decided to explore the possibility of relocating the historic Kolb Family Properties (house, barn and workshop) in
Pleasanton to the Dublin Historic Park to be rehabilitated to serve as the classroom facility, and at its meeting of
March 4, 2008, the Dublin City Council directed staff to prepare an amendment to the Master Plan to relocate five
of the Kolb Ranch buildings to its Historic Park: two residences, two barns, and a pumphouse.
The Kolb Ranch property at 11393 Dublin Canyon Road was the site of an approved Planned Unit Development
(PUD) rezoning for a combination of single-family residential, open space, and future commercial uses in the City
of Pleasanton (PUD-99-03). A proposed senior care facility was to be located where the existing Kolb Ranch
buildings now stand, but the details of the facility and the accompanying CEQA environmental analysis were
expected to be completed once the PUD application for the senior facility was received. The rezoning approved
the allowed use of the site at 11393 Dublin Canyon Road for a senior care facility, and noted that the existing
single-family residence (Kolb House) and associated farm buildings were allowed to remain as interim uses until
the senior facility was constructed. The buildings were not intended to remain on the property once the senior
care facility was developed.
As noted previously, the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan was approved by the Dublin City Council in 2006, and
the park site was acquired by the City of Dublin in 2007, with the intent of creating a public space in the area of the
City's few remaining historic resources. Adjacent to the newly-acquired Historic Park site sits St. Raymond's
Church, Murray Schoolhouse, and Pioneer Cemetery, which collectively make up the publicly-owned Dublin
Heritage Center. Acquiring the Historic Park site meant that the City could expand the Heritage Center and create
a larger educational, cultural, and park space for the community.
Project Description
In an effort to further the City's efforts as stated above, the City of Dublin is proposing the following actions, which
collectively describe the project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA):
1. Adoption of Amendments to the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan to note the inclusion of five buildings
from the historic Kolb Ranch on the Dublin Historic Park site. The buildings include the Main House, the Old
House, the Sunday School Barn, the Hay Barn, and the Pump House. See Exhibit 4 for reference.
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 3 of 34
April 22, 2008
0~)~
2. Removal of any trees necessary on the Pleasanton parcel in order to physically move the buildings off the
site and onto the roadway.
3. Removal of electrical or other utilities which currently serve the buildings in order to render the buildings
movable.
4. Preparation of the Kolb Ranch buildings to be moved, including deconstruction as needed in order to
make the buildings suitable for travel.
5. Physically moving the Kolb Ranch buildings from their location in Pleasanton to the Dublin Historic Park.
The move includes the actual physical relocation of the five buildings from one location to the other by the
building moving team.
6. Construction of infrastructure and utilities at the Dublin Historic Park site in preparation for the new
buildings, including but not limited to site grading and the preparation of building foundations.
7. Reconstruction, rehabilitation, and reuse of the Kolb Ranch buildings for public use as described in the
Kolb Ranch Relocation Addendum to the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan.
8. Construction of the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan interim improvements (Park Master Plan Phases 1-3 as
modified by the Kolb Ranch Relocation Addendum).
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 4 of 34
April 22, 2008
711?!
EXISTING PHYSICAL SETTING, USES AND STRUCTURES
Since the project as described involves the physical move of five ranch buildings from one jurisdictional location to
another, this section of the document will describe the physical setting, uses, and structures of both the property in
Pleasanton where the buildings are being removed from as well as the property in Dublin, to where the buildings
are being relocated.
Project Locations
Dublin:
The City of Dublin is a community of approximately 43,630 people located in the Amador Valley of central
Alameda County. The precise location of Dublin is identified in Exhibit 1. The Dublin Historic Park is located in the
Dublin Village Historic Area, which consists of approximately 38 acres of land located northwest of San Ramon
Road and Interstate 580. The Historic Area includes commercial, residential, public, and business parkJindustrial
properties near the intersection of Donlon Way and Dublin Boulevard, as shown in Exhibit 3.
The Dublin Historic Park, which is currently under development, is comprised of approximately 4.2 acres in the
heart of the Historic Area at the southwest corner of Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way. For the purposes of this
document, this is considered the "Project Area".
Pleasanton:
The City of Pleasanton is a community of approximately 67,700 people located immediately south of Dublin across
Interstate 580. The site of the existing Kolb Ranch is 11393 Dublin Canyon Road, which is approximately one-half
mile west on Dublin Canyon Road off Foothill Boulevard, in the northwestern-most portion of Pleasanton.
The two sites are approximately 1500 feet from one another as the crow flies, or approximately 1.3 miles by road,
as shown in Exhibit 2.
Physical Settings, Uses, and Structures
Dublin:
Although today dominated by late twentieth century commercial, retail and residential uses, the immediate area
surrounding the Historic Park site also contains several historically significant buildings, structures, sites, objects
and landscape features dating from the latter half of the nineteenth century and the early part of the twentieth
century.
Identified historic resources are concentrated along Donlon Way, centering on the City-owned Dublin Heritage
Center site, which includes the Murray Schoolhouse, Dublin Pioneer Cemetery and St. Raymond's Church.
Another identified historic resource is Green's Store, a privately owned former general store and tavem located on
the southeast corner of Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way. Previously unidentified potential historic resources are
scattered throughout the survey area. These include: "Ponderosa," a circa-1929 bungalow at 6570 Donlon Way;
the Bonde House, a circa-1923 bungalow at 11760 Dublin Boulevard; Alamilla Springs and remnants of a walnut
grove at 7100 San Ramon Road; historic walnut and pepper trees on the Heritage Park Office Center property at
11887 Dublin Boulevard; as well as potential archaeological sites in the vicinity of Dublin Creek and the Heritage
Park Office Center.
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 5 of 34
April 22, 2008
'ibtfl)l
In addition to the built environment, the project area also contains a valuable natural resource. Dublin Creek runs
through the project area adjacent to the existing Dublin Heritage Center and the vacant property proposed for the
cemetery expansion within the Historic Park. Although partially channeled in other sections, this portion of Dublin
Creek retains its natural bed as well as some of its riparian woodland corridor.
Pleasanton:
The general character of the area is a mixture of commercial and residential, primarily along Dublin Canyon Road.
Immediately off Foothill Boulevard (to the east of the Kolb Ranch property), is a 3-story hotel and 4-story
commercial office complex. To the south and west of the Kolb Ranch property are recently-developed single
family homes on estate-sized lots. Immediately to the north is Interstate 580.
The Kolb Ranch property is not in context with its surroundings, and has been encroached by newer development.
On May 2, 2000, the Pleasanton City Council approved a development plan approval for a 12-lot single family
residential development on the south side of Dublin Canyon Road, adjacent to the Preserve development. As part
of that PUD, a 5.2 acre site adjacent to Dublin Canyon Road containing the structures remaining from Kolb Ranch
was conceptually approved for a future senior care facility. The existing structures were not required to be
retained, but were allowed to remain as interim uses. A separate development plan would need to be approved by
the City of Pleasanton before the senior care facility could be built.
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 6 of 34
April 22, 2008
o
o
G
o,~~
EXHIBIT 1: REGIONAL CONTEXT
,~
-t
- t
;:;11-.... _.
en
E
@.
@2006 NA.VTEQ
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 7 of 34
April 22. 2008
o
o
G
10 c;f);H;
EXHIBIT 2: PROJECT VICINITY
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 8 of 34
April 22. 2008
f/ ~ IJ-t
0 EXHIBIT 3: DUBLIN VILLAGE HISTORIC AREA
1l ;
'" o~ !:i
I!! ~~ Ii
(i) <1J ro c <{ &.
Ol<lJro c: ~ .~
>- {l '" ~~b
ro"'- ... OJ> 0::
=<(0- ro :>. ....J
'" '" Ol .g " t:'"t
5uu -c ;!: Qi .!O .lO <;; ; f~
c .;::~ c .. :z5 l2 ~ .
:J \!! ~ " ::; 2:. ~!.
._ 0 u .... Iii 0 co en
::o~<lJ 0 I[]'
co I
:J"- c. @- -
oJ:1J)
o
o
~
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 9 of 34
April 22. 2008
"
c
o
12- ~ I~
EXHIBIT 4: KOLB RANCH BUILDING RELOCATION TO THE DUBLIN HISTORIC PARK
Hay Barn
Shelter for play area
Sunday School Barn
Multi-use classroom space
Reception & event area
Potential Black Box Theater
Optional dressing room addition ,____
,
Locust trees '.
t FINAL
"- MASTERPLAN ~
BUILDOUT -l.-
Old House
Restroom
H iSloric (ence and gates
nOlth
<.4\ ~
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 10 of 34
April 22, 2008
Jg 11~
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one
impact that is a "potentially significant impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agricultural Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils
Hazards and Hazardous Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/ Planning
Materials
Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing
Public Services Recreation T ransportation/
Circulation
Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of
SiQnificance
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a
significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project
proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless
mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on
the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it
must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to
applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing
further is required.
Signature:
Date: April 22, 2008
Printed Name: Kristi Bascom, Consulting Planner
For: City of Dublin
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 11 of 34
April 22, 2008
/4 ~/~
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Scope of the Environmental Assessment
This environmental assessment addresses the potential impacts of the proposed Kolb Ranch Building Move,
Rehabilitation, and Facility Reuse at the Dublin Historic Park and accompanying Dublin Historic Park Master Plan
Addendum (Kolb Ranch Relocation) in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). The scope of review includes only potential impacts resulting from development of the facilities
described in the above documents. Any potential site-specific environmental impacts not anticipated during this
environmental review will need to be addressed as part of an application submittal consistent with CEQA
requirements. Additionally, any development in the project area that is outside the scope of this document may
need further analysis if it can be determined that potential environmental impacts exist.
The method of environmental analysis includes a review to determine whether the impact related to the City's
evaluation criteria would be: potentially significant; less than significant unless mitigation is incorporated; less than
significant; or no impact. The analysis includes a summary of the affected environment and a review of the
threshold for determining significance. The evaluation of potential impacts applies the threshold, determines
significance and, if necessary, includes recommended mitigation measures
An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was previously prepared for the original Historic Park
Master Plan. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15612, this Initial Study considers whether the
proposed amendments to the Master Plan will result in new significant or substantially more severe impacts from
the impacts analyzed in the 2006 IS/MND. All mitigation measures in the 2006 IS/MND will apply to the actions
under the amended Master Plan.
Sources used to determine potential environmental impacts:
1. Determination based on Staff review of the project.
2. Determination based on the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Draft Addendum - Kolb Ranch Relocation
(including the Technical Memorandum prepared by Kelley & VerPlanck Historical Resources Consulting)
3. Determination based on the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan (2006)
4. Determination based on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Dublin Village
Historic Area Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment, et ai, dated May 25, 2006 (prepared by the
City of Dublin Community Development Department).
5. Determination based on the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan (prepared by the City of Dublin
Community Development Department) August 2006
6. Determination based on information contained in the April 1 , 2008 City of Pleasanton staff report,
"Information Concerning the City of Dublin's Request to Relocate Structures Located on the Former Kolb
Ranch Property at 11393 Dublin Canyon Road to the Dublin Historic Park", prepared by Jerry Iserson,
Community Development Director
7. Determination based on communication with appropriate City of Dublin departments and utility service
providers
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 12 of 34
April 22, 2008
15~~
Notes:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answEJS that are adequately supported by the
information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is
adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to
projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should
be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not
expose sensitive receptors b pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including oft.site as well as on-site, cumulative as
well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers
must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, Less than significant with mitigation, or less than
significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be
significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an
EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less than significant with mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant
Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigatirn measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the
effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross
referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, (J' other CEQA process, an effect
has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a
brief discussion should identify the following:
. a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope
of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state
whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than significant with mitigation Measures Incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the
extentto which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential
impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document
should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals
contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies
should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmertal effects
in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance
On the following page, the source of determination is listed in parenthesis. See listing of sources used to
determine each potential impact at the end of the checklist. Copies of the documents referenced in this document
are available for public review at the City of Dublin Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin,
CA 94568.
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 13 of 34
April 22, 2008
Aesthetics
Would the project:
(Sources: 1, 4, 7)
a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but
not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
I h 1/;;..8
x
x
a-c) Have a significant impact on scenic vista, damage to scenic resource, degrade visual character of
the site?
Pleasanton site: No impact. The property from where the buildings are being moved is intended to be
redeveloped for commercial uses in the future, and a Planned Unit Development rezoning was approved for the
site in 1999 by the City of Pleasanton. The five buildings are not listed on the City of Pleasanton's Historic
Resources Inventory, nor are they visible from any state scenic highways (Interstate 580 in this location is not
listed as a state scenic highway).
Dublin site (Proiect Area): No impact. The project area is not located in an area with any scenic corridor or scenic
vista designation, so there will not be any impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project. The
project will not degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site, but will instead improve and enhance the
area with substantial public improvements, including the expansion of the City's Heritage Center, relocation of
historically-significant structures, and related streetscape improvements.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
Pleasanton site: No impact. The removal of the five ranch buildings will reduce the amount of light generated by
the site.
Dublin site (Proiect Area): Less than siqnificant. The proposed project will involve the installation of new light
fixtures in and around the relocated buildings, but it will not be substantially more than was already planned to be
located on the Historic Park site. It is standard practice that a photometric study is provided with final construction
drawings for any project prior to the issuance of an electrical permit. Adherence to this practice when construction
documents are prepared for will ensure that the impact of new site lighting will be less-than-significant.
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 14 of 34
April 22, 2008
1711~
Ag rieu Itu ral Resou rees
Would the project:
(Sources: 1, 4, 7)
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland
of Statewide Importance, as showing on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency, to a non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use?
x
x
Pleasanton site: No Impact. The proposed project does not involve impacts to any farmland and/or agriculturally-
designated properties.
Dublin site (Proiect Area): No Impact. The project area does not contain any properties that are currently used for
agriculture or farming, nor does the project area contain any properties with Williamson Act contracts or any
farmland that would be converted to a non-agricultural use. There are five properties in the project area that have
an Agricultural zoning designation (Assessor Parcel Numbers 941-1560-001-01 , 941-1560-001-02, 941-1560-003-
03,941-1560-005, and 941-1560-006.
The park and building reuse proposed on the parcels (which fall into the community facility and cemetery use
categories for purposes of zoning classification) are permitted in an Agricultural zoning district, so the proposed
project does not conflict with the zoning and has no detrimental impact to agricultural resources.
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
x
Air Quality
(Where available, the significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management district may be relied on
to make the following determinations).
Would the project:
(Sources: 1, 4, 7)
x
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 15 of 34
April 22, 2008
f2:f!J!:
c) Result in a cumulatively consderable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
x
x
x
a-b) Would the project conflict or obstruct implementation of an air quality plan or violate any air
quality standards?
Pleasanton site: Less than siQnificant with mitiQation. The demolition of building materials always carries with it a
certain risk that particulate matter could be problematic from an air quality perspective. In the process of securing
permits to move the buildings, the building movers will be required to sample and test suspected asbestos
containing materials to see what protocol need be followed related to Regulated Asbestos Containing Material
(RACM). Since the main house and other buildings were built in the early part of the 20th century, it is likely that
they contain some RACM and will need to be treated as such.
Adherence to the following mitigation measure will ensure that the impacts of the building deconstruction and
building move are less than significant:
Mitiaation Measure 1: In accordance with Bav Area Air Qualitv Manaaement District (BAAQMD)
reaulations. the proiect proponent will be reauired to obtain a District iob number (J#) prior to structural
demolition.
Dublin site (Project Area): Less than siQnificant with mitiQation. The proposed project would not conflict with the
local Clean Air Plan adopted by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. Air quality impacts result from two
main sources: temporary impacts due to project construction and long-term impacts due to project operation.
Generally, air quality impacts from project operation are based on vehicular emission from traffic. The current
Dublin Historic Park Master Plan proposes an 800 square foot pavilion/classroom building. With the relocation of
the five Kolb Ranch buildings, one of which will now be used for the classroom building and eliminating the need
for the construction of the original building, the total square footage being added to the Historic Park site is 4,305
square feet - an increase of 3,505 square feet over the original proposal.
In general, parks and recreational facilities are typically not large traffic generators, they are not typically peak-hour
trip generators, and vehicle trips are spread throughout the day on weekdays as well as weekends. The Institute
of Traffic Engineering trip generation manual has a very limited sample of traffic studies for public City park
facilities, and there is no recent data that has been collected, which makes it difficult to quantify the precise traffic
impacts of park facilities. However, the few studies that have been conducted show that the peak trip generation
time periods for park facilities are weekday mid-day and on the weekends, but the study data varies greatly
depending on the size of the park and the combination of amenities.
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 16 of 34
April 22, 2008
Iq1~
Even with the additional ranch buildings being added to the site (a total increase of 3,505 squa[e feet), the actual
intensity of use of the park site is not expected to substantially increase, and therefore the air quality impacts are
not expected to be significant in comparison with the original Historic Park Master Plan proposal and the Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration which was prepared and adopted by the City.
In terms of construction~related impacts, it is anticipated that the project would generate temporary increases in
dust and particulate matter caused by minor site excavation and grading activities as buildings and facilities in the
area are constructed. Construction vehicle equipment on unpaved surfaces generates dust as would wind blowing
over exposed earth surfaces. However, City regulations require that a project-specific Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Program (SWPPP) be developed when the construction drawings for the Historic Park are prepared,
which will also address air quality issues. The SWPPP will contain measures relating to the containment of
fugitive dust during grading and construction activities, mandating that construction equipment be kept in proper
running order, mandating that the developer is responsible for watering or other dust-palliative measures to control
dust as conditions warrant or as directed by the City Engineer, and mandating the avoidance of construction waste
burning to reduce short-term air quality impacts to a less-than-significant level.
Through the required SWPPP, the project shall implement dust control measures to reduce project dust deposition
to acceptable levels. Dust control shall conform to the requirements ofthe SWPPP, which for the proposed Dublin
Historic Park Master Plan, will be developed by the Parks and Community Services Development Staff in
cooperation with the City's Public Works Staff.
Adherence to the following mitigation measure area will ensure that the impacts of construction related to the
relocation of the Kolb buildings are less than significant:
Mitiaation Measure 2: In accordance with City reaulations. a proiect-specific Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Proaram rSWppp) shall be prepared in compliance with the City's NPDES permit. The
SWPPP shall have the followina minimum reauirements:
1. Active construction areas will be watered daily and more freauently if necessary.
2. All trucks haulina soil. sand or other loose materials shall be covered.
3. Water shall be applied daily. or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads. parkina
areas. and exposed stockpiles at construction sites.
4. All access roads and parkina areas at construction sites shall be swept daily with water sweepers.
c) Would the project result in cumulatively considerable air pollutants?
Pleasanton site: No impact. The Kolb Ranch buildings are being moved from this location to another, so there will
be no impacts resulting in considerable air pollutants.
Dublin site (Proiect Area) Less than significant impact. The BAAQMD has established thresholds for determining
whether a given project has the potential for significant air quality impacts. If a project exceeds the thresholds,
detailed air quality analyses are usually required. If the project does not exceed the thresholds, it is typically
assumed to have a less than significant impact on air quality. BAAQMD does not usually recommend a detailed
air quality analysis for projects generating less than 2,000 vehicle trips per day. It is difficult to quantify the number
of daily vehicle trips for a typical public park facility, but based on the fact that the project is the addition of 3,505
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 17 of 34
April 22, 2008
20~~
square feet of building area to an already-existing public park, the increase in estimated vehicle trips to the Historic
Park attributable to the relocation of the Kolb Ranch buildings is expected to be minimal.
Implementing the proposed project will not generate significant additional amounts of traffic, as described above.
Vehicular emissions are estimated to be less than significant. Overall, the air quality impacts associated with the
proposed project would be below the standard of air quality significance as established by the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District.
d, e) Expose sensitive receptors to significant pollutant concentrations or create objectionable
odors?
Pleasanton site: No impact. The Kolb Ranch buildings are being moved from this location to another, so there will
be no impacts to sensitive receptors or the creation of objectionable odors.
Dublin site (Proiect Area): Less than siQnificant impact. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District defines
sensitive receptors as facilities where sensitive receptor population groups (children, the elderly, the acutely ill and
the chronically ill) are likely to be located. These land uses include residences, schools, playgrounds, child-care
centers, hospitals and medical clinics. This project would involve construction and development of new park
facilities where people would gather for recreation, although the relocation of the Kolb Ranch buildings do not
involve the construction of any playground areas..
The relocated Kolb Ranch buildings will not be placed in the vicinity of any significant generators of pollutants such
as a factory or agricultural operation, but the buildings will be located in the Historic Park, which is adjacent to
Interstate 580. 1-580 carries a significant amount of traffic and produces pollution and odors from vehicle
emissions. However, the relocated ranch buildings are currently located in close proximity to 1-580, so the new
building location will not be measurably different form that perspective. The Historic Park property wOl,lld be a
public park with public facilities regardless of whether the Kolb Ranch Buildings were relocated to the site or not,
so any impacts to sensitive receptors would not be significantly different with the buildings or without. Therefore,
the relocation of the Kolb Ranch Buildings will not increase the exposure of sensitive receptors to significant
pollutant concentrations or create objectionable odors at the Dublin Historic Park, and the impacts are expected to
be less than significant.
Biological Resources
Would the project:
(Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 7)
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly through
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 18 of 34
April 22, 2008
2-1 ~ ) ~
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies or regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse impact on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption
or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as tree protection ordinances?
n Conflict with the provision of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other
approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan?
x
X
X
X
X
a-b) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly through habitat modifications, on any riparian
habitat or species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Pleasanton site: No impact. There is limited information available on the existing Kolb property, but it is known
that the site from which the buildings are being moved has been used for the past decades as an active
homestead and farm, and therefore the potential for impacts to flora or fauna are very limited.
Dublin site (Proiect Area): No impact. The original Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Dublin
Historic Park Master Plan, adopted by the Dublin City Council on August1, 2006, included all necessary mitigation
measures to account for any possible disturbance to candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Because the
areas proposed for locating the Kolb Ranch buildings at the Historic Park site were areas that we already intended
for disturbance, the previous CEQA document adequately covered these issues.
c) Have a substantial adverse impact on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other means?
Pleasanton site: No impact. There are no federally protected wetlands on the site.
Dublin site (Proiect Area): No impact. There are minimal alterations proposed to Dublin Creek in the project area,
but those alterations are to take place with or without the Kolb Ranch building relocation and the impacts were
already addressed in the original Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Dublin Histone Park Master
Plan (as referenced above).
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 19 of 34
April 22, 2008
2--2-1' 018
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
Pleasanton site: No impact. There are no known native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species on the site.
Dublin site (Project Area): No impact. Because the creek and its associated flora is proposed to be left in its
natural state, with the exception of the construction of the footbridge footings, no migration corridors should be
interrupted. This disturbance in the vicinity of Dublin Creek is to take place with or without the Kolb Ranch building
relocation and the impacts were already addressed in the original Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for
the Dublin Histone Park Master Plan (as referenced above).
e-f) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree
protection ordinances or conflict with the provision of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional or state habitat
conservation plan?
Pleasanton site: Less than siqnificant with mitiqation. The City of Pleasanton's Tree Preservation Ordinance
(Chapter 17.16 ofthe City's Municipal Code) requires a permitto remove any tree considered a "heritage tree". It
is unknown at this time the route that will need to be taken in order to remove the buildings from the property in
Pleasanton, but it is possible that some trees may need to be removed.
Once the building move path is determined, a tree survey will need to be prepared and an arborist's report (if
necessary) completed in compliance with the City of Pleasanton Tree Preservation Ordinance. Adherence to the
following mitigation measure will ensure that the projects will be less than significant.
Mitigation Measure 3: The proiect shall complv with Chapter 17. 16 of the Pleasanton Municipal Code.
"Tree Preservation".
There are no adopted conservation plans in the project area with which the proposed project would be in conflict.
Dublin site (Proiect Area): No impact. The original Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Dublin
Histone Park Master Plan, adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1,2006, included all necessary mitigation
measures to require adherence to the City of Dublin's Heritage Tree Ordinance.
There are no adopted conservation plans in the project area with which the proposed project would be in conflict.
Cultural Resources
Would the project:
(Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 20 of 34
April 22,2008
:h31k)b
Cultural Resources
Would the project:
(Sources: 1,2,3,4,5,6, 7)
a) Cause a substantial adverse impact in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in CEOA Guidelines Sec.
15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archeological resource pursuant to Sec. 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside
of a formal cemetery?
x
x
x
x
a) Cause substantial adverse change to a significant historic resource?
Less than sianificant. The Kolb family has historic roots in both the cities of Pleasanton and Dublin dating back to
the 1880's. Phillip Kolb was a major business and community leader in Pleasanton at that time, and around 1904,
Phillip's brother, George Kolb, established the family farm on 350 acres on Dublin Canyon Road. The property
included land which overlapped what is now the two cities of Dublin and Pleasanton, before construction of
Highway 50, which later became Interstate 580.
Although none of the Kolb Ranch buildings are identified Federal, State, or Local historical resources, it could be
argued that the buildings are eligible for listing on a Historic Resource Inventory. In conducting the due diligence
in preparation for this project proposal, the City of Dublin commissioned a study by architectural historians Kelley
and VerPlank Historical Resources Consulting, who noted in a Technical Memorandum dated October 27,2007
that they believe the Kolb Ranch buildings are (local) historic resources and that the Kolb Ranch "buildings and
settings tell us much about the history of Dublin." None of the Kolb Ranch buildings are on Pleasanton's list of
local historic structures and the buildings were not required by Pleasanton's PUD development plan approval in
2000 to be retained when the Kolb Ranch property develops into a senior care facility as is planned. However, the
structures are significant enough to the City of Dublin to warrant moving the buildings to the Dublin Historic Park
site. '
Therefore, according to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, a project with an effect that might have a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the
environment. However, Section 15064.5 also notes that a project that follows the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and
Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995), shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant
impact on the historic resource.
It is the intent of the Project proponents that to the extent possible, the relocation and restoration of the Kolb
Ranch buildings shall be done according to the "Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995)"
in order to preserve the most historically relevant characteristics of the buildings, It was the opinion of the historic
architect reviewing the proposal to relocate the buildings, Frederic Knapp, that the rehabilitation of the buildings as
proposed will conform to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards.
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 21 of 34
April 22, 2008
;?tf 1102
An addition to the adherence to the Secretary's Standards, it was also noted in the Kelley and VerPlank Technical
Memorandum that "there is a significant interpretative benefit to relocating at least three of the Kolb Ranch
structures because they will create an 'ensemble' that reproduces the historic relationships among buildings that
characterized the home ranch of rural California."
Dublin's Historic Park is comprised of land contiguous to the original Kolb Ranch. The Kolb Ranch buildings are
proposed to be restored in this historic setting among other buildings with historically compatible uses. The
relocation of the Kolb buildings in this setting will ensure that the impacts to both the Kolb structures as well as the
historic resources already present in the Dublin Historic Park will not be substantially impacted. Additionally, it is
noted in the Kolb Ranch Addendum to the Historic Park Master Plan that the spatial relationships of the Kolb
Ranch buildings shall be replicated in their new location as far as is practicable and that landscape features with
historically appropriate plant materials shall be used to recreate the spaces between the ranch structures.
The relocation and rehabilitation of the Kolb Ranch buildings conform to the Design Guidelines contained within
the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, which were based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
the Treatment of Historic Buildings. Additionally, the proposed project is in compliance with Chapter 8.62 of the
Dublin Zoning Ordinance (Historic Overlay Zoning District), ensuring that impacts to significant historic resources
in the project area are less than significant.
In conclusion, it is the combination of proposed adherence to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the
treatment of the Kolb Ranch buildings, the fact that the buildings will be relocated to property that was contiguous
to the original Kolb Ranch, and the fact that the Kolb Ranch buildings are proposed to be restored in a historic
setting among other buildings with historically compatible uses allows the conclusion that the impacts to all of the
involved historic resources will be less than significant.
b-d) Cause substantial adverse change to significant archeological or paleontological resource or a
unique geologic feature or disturb any human remains (either inside or outside a formal
cemetery)?
No impact. There are no new impacts with the proposed project that were not already addressed, and mitigated if
necessary, in the original Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan as
adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006.
Geology and Soils
Would the project:
(Sources: 1, 2, 4, 7)
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the X
most recent Alquist-Priolo Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist or based on other known evidence of a
known fault?
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? X
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse Page 22 of 34
April 22, 2008
25 ~J;.&
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the project and
potentially result in on- and off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or similar hazards?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 13-1-B of
the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks
to life or property?
e) Have soils capable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where
sewers are not available for the disposal of waste?
x
x
X
X
X
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss,
injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist or based on other known evidence of
a known fault? Expose people to strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure
(including liquefaction), or landslides?
Pleasanton site: No impact. Buildings are being removed from this location.
Dublin site (Proiect Area): Less than siqnificant impact. Active earthquake faults within the region that influence
earthquake susceptibility include the San Andreas, Hayward, Calaveras and Greenville Faults. The Calaveras
Fault runs through Dublin generally along San Ramon Road, close to the Project Area.
Signed into law in 1972, the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was signed into law with the intent to
mitigate the hazard of surface faulting to structures for human occupancy. The Act requires that all residential
construction within a fault zone has a comprehensive geologic investigation completed prior to building that shows
that the fault does not pose a hazard to the proposed structure.
Under moderate to severe seismic events, which are probable in the Bay Area, structures and facilities in the
project area would be subject to damage caused by ground shaking. The General Plan contains policies in both
the Conservation Element and the Seismic Safety and Safety Element that will reduce the potential impact of
ground failure and rupture. Adherence to these policies is required for any development in the City.
Adherence to all requirements of the Uniform Building Code (UBC), and the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Act requirement that all construction plans in a fault zone incorporate the recommendations of a
geotechnical investigation, will ensure that the project impacts are less than significant. It is a City standard that a
registered Professional Engineer design the grading and foundation plans for any new construction. A Registered
Geotechnical Engineer is is required to stamp and sign the grading and foundation plans certifying that they
conform to the recommendations contained in the final geotechnical investigation, and this is verified when grading
plans are reviewed and approved by the Building Division and the Public Works Department. Additionally, all
structures proposed to be built within the Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone will be subject to additional near-fault structural
requirements and the plans will be reviewed by the Building Division through the plan check process.
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 23 of 34
April 22, 2008
~f., 11d-t
b-d) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or be located on expansive soil?
Pleasanton site: No impact.
Dublin site: Less than sionificant with mitioation. The project area is underlain by stiff to very stiff clay soil to a
depth of approximately 20 feet below ground surface. At depths greater than 20 feet, soil varies from medium
dense to dense clayey and silty sands. Properties in the project area have been previously disturbed, graded, and
paved in many instances to accommodate buildings, parking areas, roads, and other public and private
improvements. For any construction project that is proposed in the project area, the Applicant will be required to
obtain a grading permit from the City, and approval of the permit will be based on compliance with standard City
development procedures.
According to the United States Geologic Survey and the California State Department of Emergency Services,
properties in the project area are all classified as having moderate susceptibility for ground liquefaction, as well as
other seismic hazards. The following mitigation measure will serve to reduce the impacts of the project to less
than significant:
Mitiaation Measure No.4: A site-specific soils report/oeotechincal investioation shall be required prior to
site development and shall be conducted bv a California-reoistered oeolooist or a California-reoistered
enoineerino oeolooist. The report shall address the potential for expansive soils and oround liquefaction.
Specific measures to reduce seismic hazards, expansive soils, and liquefaction hazards to a less than
sionificant level shall be included in the report and those measures shall be implemented as part of the
site development.
e) Have soils capable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste?
Pleasanton site: No impact. No new development at this site is part of this project proposal.
Dublin site (Proiect Area) No impact. The project area is served by an existing sewer system.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Would the project:
(Sources: 1, 2, 4, 7)
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of hazardous into the
environment?
x
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 24 of 34
April 22, 2008
0<7 +1;2i,
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing
or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code
Sec. 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where
such plan has not been adopted, would the project result in
a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project
area?
n For a project within the vicinity of private airstrip, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with the
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury
or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands
are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
x
X
X
X
X
X
a-c) Create a significant hazard through transport of hazardous materials or release or emission of
hazardous materials?
Pleasanton site: Less than sionificant with mitioation. When the building moves occur, they shall be done in
accordance with the appropriate City of Pleasanton demolition and/or building permit, which requires compliance
with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) regulations. Because the buildings were
constructed in the early part of the 20th century, there is a possibility that either lead paint or asbestos is present in
the building, both of which are considered hazardous materials. Adherence to the following mitigation measure
will ensure that the presence of and removal of those materials in that building, as well as any other building
proposed to be demolished in the project area, has a less than significant impact on the environment.
Mitiaation Measure No.5: Prior to demolition of any of the Kolb Ranch buildinos, the buildino shall be
sampled to determine if the buildino contains lead paint and/or asbestos. If either of the materials are
determined to be present and are to be removed, they shall be handled and disposed of as a hazardous
material and in compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal reaulations.
The project site is not within one quarter mile of an existing school.
Dublin site (Proiect Area): Less than sionificant with mitioation. The same issues that apply above with the safe
handling of hazardous materials shall ~pply when the buildings are being reconstructed as well.
Mitiaation Measure No.6: If any of the Kolb Ranch buildinos are determined to contain lead paint
and/or asbestos that is disturbed and to be removed, they shall be handled and disposed of as a
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 25 of 34
April 22,2008
d8 '1. pg.
hazardous material and in compliance with all applicable local. state, and federal reoulations prior to their
rehabilitation and reuse at the Dublin Historic Park site.
The project site is not within one quarter mile of an existing school.
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant
to Government Code Sec. 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
Pleasanton site: No impact. No new development or activity is proposed on this site.
Dublin site (Proiect Area): Less than sionificant impact. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was conducted
for the Dublin Square Shopping Center site at 11759 Dublin Boulevard in January 2005, which is one of the
properties within the project area. The study found that there are several facilities within the City that appear on
regulatory agency lists, but that no facilities appear to be affecting the environmental conditions in the project area
itself. Properties in the project area were used in the past for agricultural purposes, so there is a possibility that
pesticide/herbicide contamination may be present near the surface, but it is not expected to be present in high
levels due to the amount of time that has passed since agricultural operations were underway. Therefore, the
potential of the site to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment is less than significant.
e,f) Is the site located within an airport land use plan of a public airport or private airstrip?
No impact. Neither site is located within an airport land use plan or within the immediate vicinity of a public airport;
therefore no impacts are anticipated regarding airport noise or crash hazards zones.
g,h) Interference with an emergency evacuation plan, expose people and structures to a significant
risk involving wildland fires, and are nearby residences intermixed with wildlands?
No impact. Neither site is located in an area that is at risk involving wildland fires.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the project:
(Sources: 1,2,4, 7)
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g. the production rate of
existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted?
x
x
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 26 of 34
Apri122,2008
,;{'1 ~ }Ji
Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the project:
(Sources: 1, 2, 4, 7)
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the aeration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
areas, including through the alteration of a course or stream
or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on-
or off.site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
~ Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 1 DO-year flood hazard area as mapped
on a Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map
or other flood delineation map?
h) Place within a 1 DO-year flood hazard area structures which
impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury,
and death involving flooding, including flooding as a result
of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow?
x
x
x
x
X
X
X
X
a-f) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, deplete groundwater
resources, alter drainage patterns, effect surface or subsurface water quality, result in placing
housing in a flood plain?
Pleasanton site: No impact. No new development or activity is proposed on this site.
Dublin site (Proiect Area): No impact. The original Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Dublin
Historic Park Master Plan, adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1,2006, included all necessary mitigation
measures to account for impacts to hydrology and water quality.
g-j) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? Place within a 100-year flood hazard
area structures which impede or redirect flood flows? Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury, and death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a
levee or dam? Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow?
Pleasanton site: No impact. No new development or activity is proposed on this site.
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 27 of 34
April 22, 2008
60 1 fJ-$
Dublin site (Proiect Area: Less than siqnificant impact. The relocated Kolb Ranch buildings will be located in a
X500 flood zone area, which is defined as an area with aO.2% annual chance flooding. Because the Kolb Ranch
buildings will be used intermittently and not for residential purposes, the flood impacts to people or structures will
be less than significant.
Land Use and Planning
Would the project:
(Sources: 1, 2, 4, 7)
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation
of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but
not limited to the general plan, specific plan, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan?
x
X
X
a-c) Physically divide an established community, conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or
regulation, or conflict with a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?
No impact. The original Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan,
adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006, included all necessary mitigation measures to account for
impacts to land use and planning.
Mineral Resources
Would the project
(Sources: 1,4, 7)
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
that would be of value to the region and the residents of the
state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general Plan,
specific plan or other land use plan?
X
X
No impact. Neither of the properties are within the project area designated by the California State Department of
Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, as having deposits of minerals. Additionally, no mineral resources
are shown on the State of California's maps of such resources, and therefore no impacts are expected as a result
of project implementation.
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 28 of 34
April 22, 2008
Noise
Would the project result in:
(Source: 1, 4, 7)
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess
of standards established in the general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above existing levels without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels without the
project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working n the project area to excessive
noise levels?
n For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
cSl ~/JJ
x
x
x
x
x
x
a-f} Would the project expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards
established by the General Plan or other applicable standard, expose people to groundbome
vibration, result in permanent increases in ambient noise levels?
No impact. There are no new impacts with the proposed project that were not already addressed, and mitigated if
necessary, in the original Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan as
adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006.
Population and Housing
Would the project:
(Sources: 1, 4, 7)
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly
or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or
other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
replacement of housing elsewhere?
x
x
x
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 29 of 34
April 22, 2008
d:2.r;: J~
No impact. There are no new impacts with the proposed project that were not already addressed, and mitigated if
necessary, in the original Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan as
adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006.
Public Services
(Sources: 1,4, 7)
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
x
X
X
X
X
No Impact. There are no new impacts with the proposed projectthat were not already addressed, and mitigated if
necessary, in the original Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan as
adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006.
Recreation
(Sources: 1, 4, 7)
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
significant
with
miti ation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood
or regional facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities that
might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
X
X
No impact. There are no new impacts with the proposed project that were not already addressed, and mitigated if
necessary, in the original Initial Study/Mitig,ated Negative Declaration for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan as
adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006.
Transportation and Traffic
Would the project:
(Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 7)
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 30 of 34
April 22, 2008
2 g ';flfl
Transportation and Traffic
Would the project:
(Sources: 1,2,3,4, 7)
a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e.
result in a substantial increase in either the number of
vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads or
congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the County Congestion
Management Agency for designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results
in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g.
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses, such as farm equipment?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
~ Result in inadequate parking capacity?
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting
alternative transportation (such as bus turnouts and bicycle
facilities)?
x
x
x
x
x
X
X
No impacts. No impacts are anticipated with regard to traffic or parking for the proposed project. Existing and
proposed roadway improvements have been designed and sized to provide adequate transportation facilities and
transit modes with sufficient capacity for the existing and proposed uses.
Recreational facilities - even those with classroom and small outdoor stage facilities - are typically not large traffic
generators. They are typically not peak-hour trip generators, and are primarily local-serving. Vehicle trips are
spread throughout the day, and in fact the concentration of trips tends to be during non-peak hour times such as
afternoons, evenings, and weekends, which minimizes potential impacts to the city circulation systems
As noted above, there is limited data on the traffic generation rates of public City park facilities, so the actual
number of trips is difficult to quantify. However, due to the minimal amount of building square footage being added
to the park site, it can reasonable be concluded that there are no new impacts with the proposed project that were
not already addressed, and mitigated if necessary, in the original Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for
the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan as adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006.
Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project
(Sources: 1, 2, 4, 7 )
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 31 of 34
April 22, 2008
3'1 ~ Vt
Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project
(Sources: 1, 2, 4, 7 )
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project
from existing water entitlements and resources, or are new
or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand
in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
~ Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
x
x
x
x
x
x
No impact. There are no new impacts with the proposed project that were not already addressed, and mitigated if
necessary, in the original Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan as
adopted by the Dublin City Council on August 1, 2006.
Mandatory Findings of
Significance.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining lev.els, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number of or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of
past projects, the effects of other current projects and the
effects of probable future projects).
x
x
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 32 of 34
April 22, 2008
35 % w,
c) Does the project have en~ronmental effects that ,,;II cause I
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly
or indirectly?
x
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environmen~ substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
Less than siQnificant with mitiQation. The preceding analysis indicates that the proposed project will not have a
significant adverse impact on the environment with the incorporation of all mitigation measures as proposed. The
implementation of all stated mitigation measures will ensure that any potential impacts are reduced to a less than
significant level.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects
and the effects of probable future projects).
No. Although incremental increases in certain areas can be expected as a result of the implementation of the
proposed project, the implementation of all stated mitigation measures will ensure that any potential impacts are
mitigated to a less than significant level.
c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
No such impacts have been discovered in the course of preparing this Initial Study.
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 33 of 34
April 22, 2008
2C1~
BACKGROUND INFORMA liON
INITIAL STUDY PREPARER
Kristi Bascom, Consulting Planner, City of Dublin Community Development Department
AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED
The following agencies and organizations were contacted in the course of this Initial Study:
City of Dublin, Community Development Department - Planning and Building Divisions
City of Dublin, Parks and Community Services Department
City of Pleasanton, Community Development Department - Planning and Building Divisions
REFERENCES
1. Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Draft Addendum - Kolb Ranch Relocation (including the Technical
Memorandum prepared by Kelley & VerPlanck Historical Resources Consulting)
2. Dublin Historic Park Master Plan (2006)
3. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and
General Plan Amendment, et ai, dated May 25, 2006 (prepared by the City of Dublin Community
Development Department).
4. Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan (prepared by the City of Dublin Community Development
Department) August 2006
5. April 1 , 2008 City of Pleasanton staff report, "Information Concerning the City of Dublin's Request to
Relocate Structures Located on the Former Kolb Ranch Property at 11393 Dublin Canyon Road to the
Dublin Historic Park", prepared by Jerry Iserson, Community Development Director
Initial Study for the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum and Kolb Building Relocation and Reuse
Page 34 of 34
April 22, 2008
37 ~. flt
CITY OF DUBLIN
100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, California 94568 Website: http://www.cLdublin.ca.us
14fT J GA TED N E GAT I E
Project Title: Kolb Ranch Building Move, Rehabilitation, and Facility Reuse at the Dublin Historic Park
and accompanying Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum (Kolb Ranch Relocation)
Project Description: The City of Dublin is proposing to adopt an Addendum to the Dublin Historic Park Master
Plan to note the relocation of five buildings from the historic Kolb Ranch in Pleasanton to the
Dublin Historic Park site. The buildings include the Main House, the Old House, the Sunday
School Barn, the Hay Barn, and the Pump House. This Initial Study examines the potential
environmental impacts of this action and the associated implementation actions, collectively
referred to as the proposed project.
Project Location: Five buildings will be moved from the Kolb property at 11393 Dublin Canyon Road
approximately 1500 feet to the northeast to the location of the future Dublin Historic Park at
the southwest corner of Donlon Way and Dublin Boulevard. Specifically, Assessor Parcel
Numbers 941-2819-005 in Pleasanton and 941-1560-007-01,941-1560-001-01,941-1560-
001-02,941-1560-005,941-1560-006, and 941-1560-003-03 in Dublin.
Applicant: City of Dublin, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568
Determination: I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have
been made by or agreed to by the project proponent.
Kristi Bascom, Consulting Planner
Date
A copy of the Initial Study documenting the reasons to support the above finding is available at the City of Dublin, 100
Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568, or by calling (925) 833-6610.
Date NOI Mailed:
Date Posted:
Date Published:
Comment Period:
Considered by:
On:
N.O.D. filed:
City Council Resolution No.
April 18,2008
April 22, 2008
April 22, 2008
April 22, 2008 - May 12, 2008
Dublin City Council
June 3, 2008
June 4, 2008
xx-08
E
:::s
"t:S
e
CD
"t:S
"t:S
<C
e
as
a:::
...
CD
-
(I)
as
:E
~
...
as
D..
u
.;:
o
-
.~
:J:
e
:is
:::s
C
"t:S
e
as
-
.~ ~
3i2 as
uD..
CD u
.c ";:
O.s
E (I)
E:i:
me
e=
D...g
~c
.;: .!
.s-
.- -
e as
o CD
:E (I)
e :::s
o CD
._ 0:::
'1U~
m .-
;:; ==
~ ~
LL
"t:S
e
as
e
o
;;
as
==
:c
as
.c
~
0>
~
:E
m
e
:s
:::s
m
.c
u
e
~
,g
(5
~
CD
-
as
C
-
"is
~
.5
e
-0
0;;
E B
(;5:
LLl;
>
...
.2
e
CD 0
:is;;
'Ci) .~
e_
&. .;:
(I)~
~
... e
.20
.!!:S
:91:
(I) CD
5 i
c. - en
: c. <.)
o:::Ec....
..... a>
o =
..... -c _
a> a.. c
..c >.0 S 0
E..c::2: = ~c....
~~o~'o:!::::cc....
..c~<(UEE~c....
oen<(oa>a>en:S=:
~ .~ al _ ~ a...~ en
0>
.5
~
:::s
al
... a>
~ ~ 5 g>~
E '0 ..... =0.-_ ::: ~
.- .... a> ..., .s:::.
-~'E:::sa>en
CD e ._ ..c en =
eO- 00
o a>.c a..E
c~ea>
a a> a..~
~
:::s
(I)
as
CD
:E
e
o
;;
as
m
;;
~
>.= m
:!:'3: .....
<tl :::s
:::::s.......,~
Oc...,
~.s
..... 0 en
<( a.. 0
e-
~ a.......
.....-0
<( ~.I::
._ a..
>.e
<tl a..:ij;'
ala>::3.
.;;=,-
'3: en ~
c E
~_Q :::s
croC
<tl"S..c
"Eo>o
o a>.-
u....._
U-u
<tl 0 . I::
::2:00
..soo
n ~ <tl
-~c
~U$
:::s '1:: ..c
:000
CDO.9
:E
c~
a>,,, .
cElt:: c
o .- 0
;;a>:::s=
as 0> 0-=
m<tl~O
.- c E
~<tla>a>
:E::2:..c~
0>
.5
~
:::s
al
~
c....
:s=:
c....
~
c c::
a> 0
a> =
.s:::.U
- :::s
.s:::.~
0> en
:::s c
e 8
~15
....!..a>c.... >. a> -
u..cc.... = ..c <tl<tl
a>-c.... c cen
. e- <tl :s=: ~ <tl 0 a>
a.. i;5 en 0- .s:::. f!! 'c...
~ en a>..llo::
<tl c:- a> ...... en .!:::! g
enc....~ ~ <tl :Coo
Co c.... 0'-
.- :s=: E..... ~ ~
roen~ ~ "* en~
"S - E c E '0 0
arE~ <tl a> en~
.....<tla.. ~ en Ua>
~ a, en -ffi 00 .~ ~
.- 0 W Ui ~ - c
~!t~ca>~ .....a> ~ ~
- ..... cen
'3: s:Z: E .$ = >. <tl
.- en a> <tl 0 -a.. ~
a> c -~ -= 3= a.. <tl
Ua>-C':::S .....
c > .- 0- a> 0 <tl 0>
.{g ~ <.) ~ ..c 5 .5
.....c....a>E -g ..llo::
8c=:::s'3: ~ >-ro
~ _Q .s:::. E sa 'ffi a..
"5 :!::::'c: a>....."" ~ -
..s 0 3='E <tl .~ ~ ~
N c.... ~ 0> C 0> '0- e
..... c c .Q .5 a.. en
~ .$ .~ '3: U <tl en
:::s~c..02 ffi a>a>
(I):::>E-- ..cu
as o,$2en~.s:::. U
~Eua>8c<tlen m<tl
III:: 0 c= ~i3-cii;5~
e -.- a> a> a> :::s ~ ..... >
o en ~ >.2:: U ~ a> a> <tl
;;uQ)<tl-a> >-a..
as to:: ......s:::.<(u c o~ c
m'o ~ = ~ <( u:::> :::s
E ~~~ .
:E en a.. en ..- N ("I')
en
>.<tl
U >
C e
a> a..
0> a..
<(<tl
en
<.)
c....
en
<.)
c....
.s:::. a>
g> E
e =
.s:::. <tl
-
g>>.m ~
'0 U ~ =
o>c2ia>
c~c:c
a<tl<tla
a>
..c
......
o
CD
..-
<tl
.s:::.
en
en
.$
'en
c
o
1:5
:::s
.....
-
en
c
8
r--
..-
.....
.$
a..
<tl
.s:::.
<.)
.s:::.
-
'3: "c
>..Q
c..ro
E ~
ro 8~
en m~
<tl .s:::.c....
~ en a>
<tl~u~
0> a> a> I-
.5 ar '0''' -
~ a> o..~
<tl 3= a> 0
a..en.s:::.<.)
~~I--
c_ <tl
<tl<tlna..
- 3= (II') .-
a>en en CD .5::'!
_~.s:::....c
'en <tl:!:::: :::s :::s
ce3=(I)::2:
Oen>-~c
.- en'- - 0
Ua><tl:E-
:::s u~ c
~u_e<tl
en <tl a..a> 0 sa
c .- '"
0<(3='1U..9:?
U en mc....
Ea>
:E=
-q-
c3g q:; /Jt
"1
en
>.<tl
u >
c e
a> a..
0> a..
<(<tl
en
<.)
c....
-go>
<tl C
en~
<.):::s
c.... al
~
C
<tl
0>:::S
.5 ~
~=
:::S'E
..c .....
......a>
o a..
en
>.m
u >
o
~~
<(<tl
en
<.)
c....
, .
en
<.)
c....
.....g>
,$2.-
~
a> =
E :::s
._ ..c
;.c
c u
a~
~~~s~~~ "fig>
c<tl~ :::sa>:::s ffi:O
.s:::. -,.. ~ en ^" .:::;
.~ .s:::. .~ ~ ~ <tl <tl LL._
.$enO>cooa> ..c..c
o~~.$--E oa>
a>ccbO(/)ena> ::x::=
0> <tl .- a.. Q) ~ en
-;"", c .......... 0 a>......
1:: - ..... a> :::s <tl .s:::. .-
oC,$2.s:::.enN_ =a>
a..a>=_<tl<tl~
~ E <tl a>.s:::. c 15 .5
c.. () ~ E c: co ...; >.. E
eno<tlQ)uot::a5ca>
=a> .....to::=OE<tl-a>
o > 5 ~.- u
en a> ~ ~~ ara..o15~
~ 00 <tl a.. a> ..... -
u .- en:::s a> a> c .9
to:: a> 0>= 0- > 0
'0 ~.Q <tl = = a> = ~
a> o.s:::. c:: c~= a>
a.. 0 a> en 0 ~ .- a> 0-;::;:
en-O> =c~:!::::E~E
I.....~t::u<tla>ena>
.$ .Q a> 8.. ~ - ~ a> ~ ~
'en .......... a> en :::S.s:::.
a...$ ~ :::s=""(3-.9 a>
en o-oc...... ..c
<( ~.- a>'- en._ 0 .....
~O> - a>t::o-
'5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ..c <tl '1:: m
0- I C -- c.. c.... .s:::.
~ a>'~ 5 ~ <tl en en
.....E ......<tl.s:::.<tl.;;~
CD... a> 0 00 0> a.. en ~ c'
:::s ..c ~ .0, ~ ~ a> a> ~:o
(I) -,~ 0 c > 1::: :::s =
asm'-'O<tlena>a>(I):::S
CD.s:::.<tla>en~_Eas..c
:E en 0>=..... C a> CD a>
c..c>' 0 N<tl <tl - :E .s:::.
0> en u a.. _
eg~ca><tl!EEe _
o <tl a>.1:: >.s:::. c.- 0 en
;; 0> - a>'- U 0> a> .- 2:
as = g a> ~ .- 'en ..c '1U c
m en ~.5 <tl E = m:o
;; a> C 0> a...~ ffi <tl ;; =
~.~ 8 a5 ~ ~ = i;5 ~ E
CD
-
ca
C
-
Ci
:e
.E
r:::
'0.2
-
E ~
... .-
o~
LL.~
>
...
02
r:::
.!eo
.c~
'(i) ~
8!E
Q....
tn~
~
...
028
CD~
::as
'(i) i
Or::: E
CD
Q.-
tnQ.
CD E
0::-
J"} :1 /~
en
>.ro
u >
C e
<1>0.
0> 0.
<Cro
0>
,5:
32
-::;
co
C/)
()
a..
... ~
~ g 0
E .- - "0
~~~~
CD r::: en'~
r:::O 0 0
o o.E
e <1>
0. "0
e
::I
tn
ca
CD
:::E
r:::
o
~
ca
C)
~
:i
<1>
'- 0>..0
.g _5: .9 "0
"0 <1>
<1> = "O..c:
E ::] <1> en
__ ..0 en ,-
:::..c:00
.....uO'E
Oc ro e <1>
<1> 0."0
~~ro ~"OenmU
ro _ ro C ::] '- ';:::
en -g :5 ro 0 <1> .9
m ro '3: en "0 "E "0 ,~
';::: ..c: 0> <1> ro ~ :r:
.$ <1> <1> .5: -e ~ "0
ro..c u 32 .a..c: C ,5:
E = ffi '::; en ro ro:c
<1> ~ .;;. ..0:0 en a) B
..c: en E ..c: - ~ ro 10
_ >'0 U_--en <1>
_<1>U croO ..c:
o ..c: ro ..c: - -
- C a:::-~m-
'- _ __ en Cl) U ro
~~-g :Q.98.0~
_ CD 0 ro <Ii 0 en en <1> ::]
E C~~:O:C~
_ roO en ro
_ ~ ';::: :+=: <1> ro"O u"O
<1><1>ro:5,-c=c
<Ii ..0 10 5: _ .Q ro 2t ro
.9oE<1>O"O~roc
en- '- C~- 0
<1> <1> en - >. ro"O ro:+=:
..c'-::]~C-C ~
enroO<1>rocro..c:=
ro "0 "E "0 'ffi ..c: :=: :c
'- c ro ~ ::= 0. <1> == ro
.Qro~"O "O..c<1>-a3
"O-..c:C ro=U'-
c c " <1> ro c
ro <1> ro CD -..c: ro,!::
en ro...~ c en = <1>
_ ~ en ~ CD -- 0. ..c:
,5: 0. ro ~ 5 ~ a> E -
~ <1> _ en tn gC..c: 0 .9
..co_-ca _u'-
"00 roCD -co
ro _"0 U :::E 0"0 -- -;:::
<1>"O~o -~"Oo.
-<1>O<1>r:::"Oocen
en C 0. - 0 <1> E ro C
_5: -E ~ ia ~ 'E5: ~ ro ,Q .$
ro '- '-' U ... ,- - ,-
_ <1> ,- C) <1> '- ro en
c_"Oa..~<1>..c.$"3":'::
o <1> C 0.'- Q) ro 0> '-
u"Ororo:E"OOE<1>ro
_ '- a..
4011~
DUBLIN HISTORIC PARK
E
Prepared for the City of Dublin, California June 2008
R. () Y S T () N H A N /\M 0 T () A L. LEY & A B E 'f
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
CITY COUNCIL
Janet Lockhart, Mayor
Tim Sbranti, Vice Mayor
Kasie Hildenbrand
Tony Oravetz
Kate Ann Scholz
PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION
Sue Flores, Chairperson
Steve Jones, Vice-Chairperson
Alan Elias
Rich Guarienti
Angela Muetterties
Gaby Lorenzo, Student Representative
HERITAGE AND CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION
Eric Swalwell, Chairperson
Anita Carr, Vice-Chairperson
Mary Beth Acuff
Kim Halket
Judy Lussie
Connie Mack
Georgean Vonheeder-Leopold
PARTICIPATING MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
CITY STAFF
Richard C. Ambrose, City Manager
Diane Lowart, Parks and Community Services Director
Herma Lichtenstein, Project Manager
Elizabeth Isles, Heritage Center Director
John Hartnett, Heritage and Cultural Arts Supervisor
Tim Eisler, GIS Coordinator
CONSULTING TEAM
Aditya Advani, Royston Hanamoto Alley + Abey
Doug Nelson, Royston Hanamoto Alley + Abey
Cordy Hill, Royston Hanamoto Alley + Abey
Nathan Lozier, Royston Hanamoto Alley + Abey
Blaine Merker, Royston Hanamoto Alley + Abey
Steve Spickard, Economic Research Associates
Linda Cheu, Economic Research Associates
Christopher VerPlanck, Page & Turnbull
Randall Heiken, BKF Engineering
Frederic Knapp, Architect
41 ~ J,;;g
A
42--~pt
DUBLIN HISTORIC PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
I ntrod uction
Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I I
Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Kolb Ranch historic relevance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Landscape typologies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Needs assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Key questions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
Summary of public process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'. . . .2 I
2
Existing Conditions
Urban context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27
Site conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28
Current uses. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34
Potential development areas considered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35
Opportunities and constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
3
Master Plan
Master Plan concept. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43
Freshwater Corner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44
Orchard Garden. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 I
Kolb Ranch relocation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61
Parking and streetscape improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63
Pioneer Cemetery expansion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65
Green Store. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70
Utilities and infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71
4
Cost Estimate and Phasing Plan
Acquisition and development cost summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .75
Phasing plan and development cost detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76
Operations cost estimate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79
Appendix
Meeting flyers
Public comment summaries
Memoranda
Executive Summary
One of the City Council Strategic Goals is to "Expand and enhance
Dublin Historic Park". In order to accomplish this goal. in May 2005 the
City contracted with Royston Hanamoto Alley and Abeyto develop a site
master plan for an expanded park that would commemorate the history
of the site and also fulfill the parks need in the City. The Dublin Square
Shopping Center and land owned by the Dublin Historic Preservation
Association adiacent to the existing Dublin Heritage Center was to be
considered as potential expansion areas for the park.
The design process included two public meetings. two ioint meetings
of the Parks and Community Services Commission and Heritage and
Cultural Arts Commission and two City Council presentations. one being
a special financing workshop. Recommendations from these meetings
were incorporated into a preferred option which was approved by the
City Council in February 2006. The Dublin Historic Park Master Plan
was subsequently adopted by the City Council in August 2006. The
Master Plan contemplates that the park will be developed in phases as
funding becomes available: five phases of development are included.
In summer 2007. Royston Hanamoto Alley and Abey was retained in
order to explore the possible relocation of the Kolb properties to the
Dublin Historic Park. The house and its associated buildings. centered
some 1.500 feet southwest of Dublin Historic Park across Interstate
580. are the last remnant of the historic Kolb Ranch. a typical "home
ranch" of rural Amador Valley. The ranch was once contiguous with the
Historic Park site and directly connected to old Dublin Village before the
freeway divided the area.
The study concluded that it is feasible to honor the program. goals and
design of the 2006 Dublin Historic Park Master Plan while integrating
as many of the ranch structures as necessary to recreate a historically
acceptable core ranch layout. In March 2008. the City Council received
the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan Addendum. Kolb Ranch relocation.
which included three options for relocation of Kolb Ranch structures
to the Dublin Historic Park. The Council approved Option C which
provided for relocation of the Old House. the Main House. the Sunday
School Barn. the Hay Barn and the Pumphouse.
The lune 2008 Amendment to the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan
incorporates the Kolb Ranch structures into the Dublin Historic Park by
revising the overall site plan. phasing plan and cost estimates.
RlH.IA IA
4 L/1 j;2-t
45 ~ jdJ
I . I
Project background
For several years, the City Council has been considering how to take
a more proactive approach to building the historic Dublin Village
settlement area around Donlon Way into a cohesive district to better
highlight Dublin's historic resources. In March 200 I, the Council
requested the Staff to develop plans for a historical district designation
for the Donlon Way area. In August 200 I , the City Council authorized
Staff to prepare a Specific Plan for the area, and work has been done
over the past several years to achieve this goal.
In 2004, the Council revised the Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
The 2004 Parks and Recreation Master Plan includes Guiding Policy
I . 13 ("Select sites for parkland acquisition in order to provide for the
anticipated deficit of 5.3 + /- acres") and suggests that changes in land
uses in the City's primary planning area may provide land that is suitable
for park development. It also provides that the City should designate
sites for new parks to alleviate the 5.3-acre park deficiency by amending
the Park and Recreation Master Plan to show the location of future
park sites. (Action Program I k.) It also indicates the City should pursue
opportunities to expand its historic holdings in the Donlon Way area
(Action Program I j). Finally, it includes standards for a historical park.
The Dublin Square property was one of the six sites identified by the
Council as a potential location for future parks in Dublin in order to
correct the City's anticipated 5.3+/- acre parkland deficit as detailed in
the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Royston Hanamoto Alley + Abey
FIGURE I-I
Ohlone people were the first inhabitants along Dublin Creek
C. RIHIAIA
was hired to produce a master plan for a park that would commemorate
the history of the site and also fulfil the parks need in the City.
In Fiscal Year 2004/2005 the City had commissioned RBF Consultants
to craft Design Guidelines for the Dublin Village Historic Area. The
intent of the Design Guidelines is to ensure that future development
in the area recaptures elements of the historic character and image that
once defined Dublin Village. The Design Guidelines were adopted by
the City Council in January 2005.
Lastly the City Council adopted a Historic Overlay Zoning District
that will serve to implement the Dublin Village Historic Area Design
Guidelines. This was also done in 2005.
1.2 A Vision for a Historic Park
The City of Dublin of 2006 bears little resemblance to "Dublin Village"
- the small crossroads settlement that existed for a century before the
postwar suburban boom of the I 950s and 60s transformed the Amador
Valley into the sprawling urban area of today. The remnants of Mexican
and early California settlements are now rare, most of the traces having
been wiped out in the I 970s by fire or neglect. A short stretch of Dublin
Creek and the remnant of Alamilla Spring are the few reminders of
what life was like in the Amador Valley before the arrival of Europeans.
Several notable historic buildings have, however, been preserved and
assembled on City-owned property known as the Heritage Center.
FIGURE 1-2
Components of the proposed Historic Park
RI".HI
if f, ~ Id-l
PROPOSED HISTORIC PARK SITE
(PREVIOUSLY OWNED BY BERKELEY
LAND COMPANY)
EXISTING HERITAGE CENTER AND
PIONEER CEMETERY
(OWNED BY THE CITY OF DUBLIN)
PROPOSED CEMETERY EXPANSION
(OWNED BY DUBLIN HISTORIC
PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION)
CD
I ~
o 100 200
I
400
600 feet
FIGURE 1-3
41 t;f 1dt
This nucleus of historical artifacts, combined with the cemetery where
valley's early European settlers are buried, has helped residents stay
connected to the stories and cultures of the area's past. With the City
still growing rapidly though, the development of the present threatens
to eclipse the past.
The creation of the Dublin Historic Park is a chance to re-establish the
City's historic heart. Sited near the crossroads and springs that were
Dublin's reason for existence, the park will become an icon for the City.
The park's design is an opportunity to shape the City's identity and to
share its collective memory - but it will also serve the everyday needs
of the community by providing a place to rest and relax. A successful
design will tap into the well of local symbolism and meaning, using the
language of the landscape to tell the history of the site and the City.
The Historic Park will complement and add to the existing Heritage
Center by providing additional program facilities.
The park will be designed as a sustainable feature of the City -
economically, ecologically and culturally - and promote a sustainable
Dublin by using best urban design practices, "smart growth" principles,
creating a walkable neighborhood, and being accessible by diverse
forms of transit.
The San Ramon Valley in 1961
R'I'HIAIA
FIGURE 1-4
Historic photos of Dublin Village
l[- 2, c;f~
Clockwise from the top: Dublin Boule'lffifd looking west, about i 930; Meyer's
Amador Garage about 1930; students at Murray school in 1891; Dublin Village,
looking east, 1913.
RIHIAjA
1.3
qq ~"~
Site history
The Ohlone people inhabited the Amador Valley beginning in about
AD 500 and trapped and hunted migratory birds in Willow Marsh, a
large wetland that began near the edge of the site. They led a hunting /
gathering life until the arrival of Europeans, marked by the exploratory
visit of Spanish soldiers en route from San Pablo Bay to Monterey in
1772. Before long Spanish missionaries began relocating the Ohlone to
Mission San Jose.
After Mexico won independence from Spain, Jose Maria Amador, the
former civilian administrator of Mission San Jose, lobbied the Mexican
government and won sixteen thousand acres of land in the valley
- some of the best in California. In 1835 he built his adobe next to
Alamilla Spring, 1,000 feet to the northeast of the Historic Park site,
and employed about 150 Mexican and local Indian workers to run
cattle on his ranch. It is rumored that Amador buried his workers next
to Dublin Creek on the park site. The Amador Ranch and its spring
became the principle stopping point for travelers on two trails, one from
San Francisco Bay to the San Joaquin Valley and the other from the
Carquinez Straight to Mission San Jose.
After the United States annexed California in 1846, Amador was forced
to sell off most of his land holdings to Irish immigrants who were beginning
to settle the valley. Like Amador, the new immigrants ran cattle, but
soon began growing crops of fruit and nut trees, especially after the
arrival of the railroad in I 869 made these lucrative exports. By 1866
the immigrants had built a school (Murray Schoolhouse, later moved
closer to the site), church (St. Raymond's), store (Green's Store), hotels
(Amador Hotel and Dougherty Station) and a handful of other buildings
around the crossroads which would later become the intersection of
Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way. In I 859 they started a cemetery on
land that had probably also been used by the Ohlone to bury their dead.
The trails became stagecoach lines (Stockton-Oakland and Martinez-
San Jose) and the collectiOn of buildings ,came to be known as "Dublin
Village". The availability of fresh water, accommodations for the traveler,
and prosperous agriculture created a small, thriving community.
As the automobile replaced the stagecoach, Dublin Village became a
stopping place for cars. Garages, lunch counters and other businesses
oriented themselves to the "Lincoln Highway" (Route 50), Dublin
Boulevard. Even into the 1950s, though, Dublin Village was a compact
settlement surrounded by pastures and walnut groves. By the 1960s
and the arrival of Interstate 580, however, the population of the area
exploded as subdivisions carpeted the valley. New landowners, eager
to subdivide and develop the area, removed many of the traces of
the historic settlement. In a backlash against the wholesale destruction
of Dublin's physical history, preservationists saved several important
structures in the I 970s and early I 980s and established the Heritage
Center.
RI'H.JAIA
1.4
-
Kolb Ranch historic relevance
At the time of this writing. Kolb Ranch exists as a time capsule of a
landscape and lifestyle that is rapidly vanishing from Dublin and the
Amador Valley. It is somewhat remarkable that the ranch has remained
intact for as long as it has. Its existence as a working farm was severely
impacted with the construction of Highway 50 (now Interstate 580) but
the Kolb family managed to continue ranching operations until recent
years.
George Kolb was born in Germany in 1867 and immigrated to San
Francisco. He moved to Pleasanton to work in his older brother's
general merchandise store on Main Street. In the I 890s. George Kolb
bought the lohn Green Merchandise store in Dublin. Around 1904,
Kolb purchased a ranch of about 350 acres from Charles Dougherty. He
ran the store until 19 10 when he moved his family to the ranch. George
Kolb farmed until his death in 1933. His sons, and later grandchildren.
operated and lived on the ranch until 2006.
In the early years of the farm. grains and hay were produced. Later;
vegetables. particularly tomatoes, were grown. In general. the Kolb
Ranch and farm produced a wide variety of products including eggs,
chickens, sheep. cattle, milk cows. and apricot orchards. In 1952 the
ranch was cut offfrom Dublin Village with the construction of Highway 50
(later to become Interstate 580) and lost its outlying land incrementally.
Now, the remaining core of the ranch is becoming a redevelopment
site. The Kolb family. original owners and occupants of the ranch. no
longer operate it agriculturally and have offered to donate buildings
to the City of Dublin for relocation to Dublin Historic Park. The City
Council accepted the donation in March 2008.
+:4 I .5 Landscapetyp~lQgies
In the history of Dublin's human settlement, several types of landscape
have existed-some created by nature, some shaped by people. These
"landscape typologies" became the starting point for the Historic Park
design described in Section 3. Because they are the palette from which
the community and the consulting Landscape Architect shaped the
design, it is worth introducing them.
+++ L2J. Marsh
A large wetland known as Willow Marsh once occupied the low-lying
area between Dublin and Pleasanton. Until it was drained in the late
1800s, it likely was the defining feature of the valley bottom. Dublin
Creek, now channelized, was once the primary tributary to this marsh.
RIHJAIA
50 a.1 ~
Marsh
Springs
Creek
Rancho
~1;5.2
+4:-3 1.5.3
++4 1.5.4
/\ ~'\.....,
!?{ ~/)J.t
This type of habitat was often called a "sausal" on Spanish land grant
maps. Once a defining landscape feature dotting the bay area, these
willow marshes are now almost totally gone. The historical record
indicates they were likely populated by arroyo willow (Salix laseolepis),
cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), box elder (Acer negundo
califomicum), Oregon ash (Fraxiunus oregona), blackberry (Rubus
vitifolius), ninebark (Physocarpus capitatus) and Rosa Californica.
Spring
Alamilla Spring provided water and refreshment to the Native residents
of the Dublin area and was likely a much-needed stopping place for
anyone traveling overland through the area. Spanish soldiers probably
stopped at the spring on an exploration of the area in 1772, and as
a stage crossroads developed at what would become the corner of
San Ramon Road and Dublin Boulevard, Alamilla Spring became an
important area landmark. Rancho San Ramon depended on the spring
for fresh water. Although the spring still exists just west of San Ramon
Road, it is a remnant of its original form and has been encroached upon
by development. Nevertheless, it is an important piece of Dublin's
heritage that is a hidden treasure amid recent development that has
turned its back on the past.
Creek
Spanish explorers had been impressed by the creeks in the valley that
was to become Dublin. These streams cut deep, wooded ravines
through the hills of the Coast Range and spilled into grassy woodlands
and finally marshes at the valley floor. Dublin Creek, a perennial stream,
fed the large Willow Marsh and provided cover for game and shelter
for the Native American residents who lived along it. Although most
of Dublin Creek is channelized today, a small remnant of its historic
character is left intact, along the southern edge of the Heritage Center, '
next to 1-580. Here, bay laurel, live oak and riparian plants overhang the
cut banks, and even in the summer a steady trickle of water covers the
smooth rocks in the streambed, belying deeper waters flowing hidden
underground.
Rancho
Jose Maria Amador, the former administrator of Mission San Jose,
founded a ranch on lands that later became Dublin and built his home
next to Alamilla Spring, at the crossroads of two Native American
trails. The Rancho San Ramon was a two-story Monterey-style adobe
surrounded by orchards, a vineyard, a large garden, weaving shops, a
tannery, a blacksmith shop, ovens for baking and a smaller garden for
the kitchen. The house itself was a series of L -shaped buildings enclosing
a rectangular courtyard, typical of the rancho style.
RIH<,IA'jA<
The interior of the rancho was domestic, but the outlying areas of the
Amador home were given over to fields of grain and corn that stretched
down to Dublin Creek. Beyond the fields, Amador ran 14,000 cattle,
4,000 sheep and 400 horses on the 25 square miles of land granted to
him by Mexican government with the help of hired Native American
and Mexican vaqueros. The landscape of the range lands was a mixture
of perennial grasslands and oak savannah, but grazing transformed the
species composition of the grasslands and development has all but
erased them from the urban area. However, a glimpse of what this
landscape looked like in Amador's time may still be seen from Interstate
580 as it rises to Altamont Pass from the Livermore Valley.
+4:-5 1.5.5 Orchard
Orchards are a familiar landscape type in many parts of California today,
and they used to be even more numerous in the Dublin area. Amador's
ranch raised an orchard next to the house, and by the late 1800s and
early 1900s fruit crops had become an important part of the area's
economy. The signs of industry were picturesquely married to the
rhythms of nature as the dependable pattern of flower, leaf and fruit
bore out each year in rows and ranks that carpeted the landscape.
Common orchard crops for this area included walnuts, apricots,
peaches, plums, pears, apples and apricots.
+:4:6 1.5.6 Crossroads
Long before the Spanish arrived in the Amador Valley, Native Americans
had been using two trails that crossed near Alamilla Spring. The trail
that ran north-south connected the South Bay and the Sacramento
Delta; the trail running east west connected the Central Valley to the
San Francisco Bay.
f::..s groups of settlers populated the valley after 1835, the crossroads
became even more important in defining the growth of the area. Until
the automobile, the crossroads was the meeting point of the San Jose-
Martinez and Oakland-Stockton stage lines. Photos from this era show
the Amador Hotel (which, along with Dougherty's Station, served
travelers on the stage line) and its large front porch'-Clearly a good
spot for watching the world pass by. A water trough painted with the
words "fresh water" sits next to the porch, a testament to the continued
importance of water to the weary traveler.
The crossroads languished temporarily between I 869 and 189 I when
the Transcontinental Railroad bypassed the Dublin crossroads by several
miles. But it reappeared when state highways replaced the stage roads,
and by the 1920s it was a nexus of automobile culture, sporting service
stations, garages and eateries. Today, the largest regional crossroads is
the interchange of Interstates 580 and 680. Although the freeway has
R.IHIAIA
tbt;fvt
Orchard
Crossroads
83 11if8
become the physical crossroads for the area, it is there for the same
reasons that compelled the trails to cross near Alamilla Spring: the need
to go east, west, north and south, and to find refreshment along the
way.
f:5 1.6 Needs assessment
Prior to beginning design work on the Historic Park, RHM and Economic
Research Associates (ERA) performed an analysis of unmet the program
needs that the Dublin Historic Park could fulfill. The current uses of
the Heritage Center were also part of this needs assessment. Current
programs operating at the Heritage Center include:
+ Permanent exhibits
+ Temporary exhibits
+ Workshops
. School tour programs
+ Concerts
+ Music jams
+ Event rentals in Saint Raymond's Church
ERA identified other programs that could also be incorporated into the
Historic Park, based on local and regional "markets" for such programs.
These included:
+ Black box theater.
+ Expanded rental event space, used in conjunction with St.
Raymond's, for weddings and conferences
+ Visual arts / ceramics studio
+ Exhibit space for showcasing art by local and regional artists
Early design options for the Historic Park. included facilities for all of
these programs, and RHM provided the City Council with estimates
of the costs associated with building and operating the facilities. After
considering these costs and weighing the potential market for the
facilities in a special workshop, the Council decided to only provide a
multi-purpose classroom space in the Historic Park. (See Section!
Summary of public process and Section 2, Master plan.)
Existing programs - exhibits, classes, music jams and event rentals
-would continue to happen in St. Raymond's Church and the Murray
Schoolhouse, but new indoor and outdoor facilities in the Historic Park
would expand capacity of the Heritage Center.
+:5-+ ~ Park needs
Although many new parks have been built recently in Dublin, these are
mainly in the newer, eastern half of the city. The City is underserved
by parks on its older, western end (see Section 2J).The City has
also invested heavily in tightly-programmed parks that specialize in
R"'H.lA IA .
G'-f~/r}-t
athletics, but according to RHMs analysis, lacks sufficient "passive use"
parks that allow a variety of functions and serve a broad age range and
demographic. Typical activities in a passive use park include:
. Strolling and jogging
+ Festivals and concerts
. Picnicking
. Family gatherings
. Sunbathing, reading and resting
+ Informal sports and pickup games, such as frisbee and catch
Passive use parks are characterized by lawns, groves and flexible paved
outdoor spaces that can be used for multiple activities, sometimes
occurring simultaneously. Some passive use parks serve mainly the
surrounding neighborhood, but a larger park like the Historic Park can
serve as a City-wide draw for passive uses.
~ 1 .6.2 Heritage Center needs
The Heritage Center includes St. Raymond's Church, the Murray
Schoolhouse, and the Pioneer Cemetery. The Murray Schoolhouse
contains a permanent collection of historic artifacts from Dublin's
settlement from the early I 880s to the present. St. Raymond's Church
contains a main meeting area that is used for weddings and event rentals.
The Pioneer Cemetery is small, at less than two acres, and expected
to reach capacity within the near future. The Heritage Center needs
expanded facilities in two areas:
. Classroom space
+ Cemetery facilities
Because of the historic character of the existing buildings and lack of
room on which to build immediately adjacent to them, it is necessary to
build any additional facilities within the Historic Park itself.
The City Council has recognized cemetery expansion as a civic goal
because it would allow residents who would like to be buried in Dublin
to do so, rather than having to choose cemetery plots outside the City.
The Dublin Historic Preservation Association now owns the parcel south
of Dublin Creek, which provides room for the cemetery to expand with
the addition of a bridge over the creek.
+-.5-3 1.6.3 Community needs
Community members have identified a need In Dublin for more
program spaces for:
. Community theater / performance space
. Art classrooms and gallery space
RIH"IAIA
55~\pg
+:6 1.7 Key questions
Before the design process, RHM established a set of key questions
to guide the community's visioning of a new Historic Park. These
included:
. What are the criteria for a successful historic park?
. What is the critical mass of program activity required to make the
park feel lively?
. What is the maximum program capacity of the site?
. What defines historic "authenticity"?
. How should contemporary Dublin be reflected in the historic
park?
. How can the park design make the Heritage Center more visible
to the surrounding community?
At each stage of presentation, RHM and community participants
returned to answer these questions to help evaluate the progress of
the design effort.
+:T 1.8 SUJnmary of e@JI~process
Community input was a critical driver for this project, especially since at
the outset of design, a program had not yet been developed. Because
the notion of history is intertwined with feelings of civic pride, it was
especially important that residents of Dublin be the primary voice in the
design of their Historic Park.
To that end, RHM organized a series of community meetings to learn
the community's priorities, and to get feedback on whether the design
solutions it proposed met community goals and expectations. The
public process for the design was as follows (also see Appendix A.2.!.
A.1.3):
R'IHIAIA
V1
V1
W
U
0
c:L. .'
n.. ....
".
'.
,
Z
CJ
V1
W
0
.'
.
Meeting I: Kick-off
Participants: Heritage and
Services, RHAA, ERA
Purpose: Establish project goals,
consultants.
Community
and introduce
Meeting II: Listening to the public
Participants: Members of the community, Heritage
Arts, Parks and Community Services, RHAA, ERA
Purpose: Introduce the project to the community, consultant
listening, gathering ideas, identify issues.
Option
I
Full site version
--------------_.__.....................-..-
Half site version
--------------------------------------------
One-third site version
Meeting III: Present initial park design concepts
Participants: Members of the community, Heritage ultural
Arts, Parks and Community Services, RHAA, ERA
Purpose: ts present design alte
Meeting II. preferred option and ga
refine desi
Full site version
--------------------------------------------------------
Half site version
-----------------------------------------------------.--
One-third site version
Meeting IVa: Present
Preferred Option to Joint
Commissions
Participants: Heritage and
Cultural Arts Commission,
Parks and Community Services
Commission, RHAA, ERA
: Present
ption to City
Council
Participants: City Council,
RHAA, ERA
\......
Purpose: Commissions and Council direct consultant team
to pursue Full, Half, or One-third site version.
(continued)
R+"IAIA
t5? c;f./,)J
(continued from previous page)
Meeting Va: Present
revised Full site
Preferred Option to Joint
Commissions
Participants: Heritage and
Cultural Arts Commission,
Parks and Community Services
Commission, RHAA
Meeting Vb: Present
revised Full' Preferred
Option to uncil
Participants: Ci ncil,
RHM
Purpose: Consultants incorporate direction from
Commissions and Council, receive feedback for Master Plan
z
<(
--.J
0....
cL
w
l-
V>
<(
L
Meeting Via: Present
Master Plan to
Joi ommi
Participants: Her d
Cultural Arts Commission,
Parks and Community Services
Commission, RHAA
Purpose: Identify Master Plan refinements.
Meeting VII: Present Final Master Plan to City Council
Participants: City Council, RHM
Purpose: Present Final Master Plan
RI".HI,,'A!.A
51 ~I.;.t
FIGURE 2-1
Urban context
2.1
Urban context
Dublin is situated in Alameda County, California at the crossroads of
Interstate 580 and Interstate 680. As an urban area, it is relatively new,
having seen most of its growth since 1950. Consequently, the texture of
the urban fabric surrounding the Dublin Historic Park is typical of post-
World War II suburban development, typified by single family homes on
open lots, automobile-oriented commercial areas and generous street
widths.
! inch'" 2000 feet,
The defining features of the park's context on the older, west end of
Dublin are Interstate 580 (located directly south), Dublin Boulevard (to
the north of the site), Dublin Creek (which flows next to the freeway),
and the mixture of mostly office park commercial buildings on the east
and west sides of the park.
Interstate 580 is perhaps the dominant feature of the site and imposes
several important conditions:
+ Noticeable automobile noise and louder sounds of trucks braking
and cars accelerating
. A physical barrier to access of the park from the south
+ Views of cars passing
! inch '" 1000 feet,
The most convenient connections to the site are via automobile.
Pedestrian connections are mainly along Dublin Boulevard.
FIGURE 2-2
Map of Dublin
CD
I,
o
,----,
3/4
I
I 112
2 1/4 miles
RIHIAJA
C,01,;>-g
2.2
Site conditions
The existing Heritage Center sits at the end of Donlon Way and is not
highly visible from Dublin Boulevard, which is the main thoroughfare
through town. Between the Heritage Center and Dublin Boulevard is
the future site of the Historic Park. The site presents a unique opportunity
to expand the visual presence of the Heritage Center and announce the
Historic District on Dublin Boulevard. However, currently the Historic
Park site contains an aging shopping center and a bank surrounded by a
large, parking lot that blocks views to the large trees, historic buildings
and creek at the Heritage Center.
Occupying the center of the 4.22-acre Historic Park site is the Dublin
Square Shopping Center, constructed in 1963. The shopping center
was acquired by the City in May 2007. This complex of buildings sits
at the center of a large parking lot and is made up of a main pavilion
with two wings to the east and west. The south side of the complex
is a loading area that abuts the edge of the Pioneer Cemetery. A mass
of mature live oak trees just inside the cemetery lines the fence that
separates the Dublin Square parcel from the cemetery. In the northwest
corner of the parking lot is a building constructed in 1999, now leased
to US Bank. There are few trees on the site, and those that are present
are located on the perimeter and are generally young.
There are three historic structures within the park area:
. Old St. Raymond's Church, constructed in 1859 by the Diocese
of Oakland, is adjacent to Donlon Way about halfway between
Dublin Boulevard and Dublin Creek.
FIGURE 2-3
Historic structures within park area
alHIA IA ~
FIGURE 2-4
F L/\i\jJ-8
o;f
. The Old Murray Schoolhouse, constructed in 1856 on James
Dougherty's land and moved to its present site, atthe south end
of Donlon Way, about 100 feet from St. Raymond's Church.
According to its historic evaluation it is "of overriding significance
as the oldest surviving school in eastern Alameda County and one
of a handful of surviving structures from the pioneer settlement
of Dublin."
. The Green Store, constructed in 1860, is on the southeast corner
of Donlon Way and Dublin Boulevard. It served as a general store
Interstate 580 and Donlon Way
RIHIAIA^
bo2 <;( fA'
FIGURE 2-5 I Cemetery and Dublin Boulevard edge conditions
for seventy-five years in the late 1800s and early 1900s, and is a
prime example of early California vernacular construction.
In addition to these buildings, the main historic feature of the area is the
Pioneer Cemetery, which occupies the west portion of the Heritage
Center site. The cemetery has a feeling of being tucked away from
the road. Currently there is a parking lot between it and Donlon Way.
. R +"'"JAIA
t--,-f /,
~_j : :m::"<. FL,,/\:-' -",;
03 ;;f /~
FIGURE 2-6 I Site conditions
Grave sites are grouped together in areas bounded by curbs. Large oak
and walnut trees dating from early European settlement tower over
the cemetery, giving it a shady, forested feeling. At the back (west) end,
small bushes and trees have become overgrown and blend in with the
wooded area across the fence on the Hexcel property.
'R.IHIAIA
I:
FIGURE 2-7
I Kolb Ranch location
Though the physical connection to the old Dublin Village was severed
in 1952 with the construction of the modern Highway 50 (now 580).
the historic connections of the Kolb Ranch remain. The freeway and
municipal boundaries are artificial divisions: historically. the ranch
was linked to the center of Dublin physically. structurally,
and socially.
When the ranch was built. Dublin and Pleasanton were separate
places. not yet municipalities. Technically the Kolb Ranch is now located
inside the Pleasanton City line. however. originally the ranch was more
physically related to Dublin Village than to the more distant town of
Pleasanton. Its farm fields originally extended north. right to the edge of
Dublin village. directly connected by Dublin Canyon Road. Additionally.
the Kolb family was socially tied to the "old village" having owned the
Green Store for a period of time.
The dominant natural feature of the site is Dublin Creek. It is in roughly
its natural condition here and is unique in this - in the rest of the urban
area it has been channelized or culverted. Its banks are steep and the
stream is not easy to access from above. It is heavily wooded with oak.
bay laurel and walnut trees. which provide significant visual screening
from the freeway.
RI".H..IAIA
(elf ..l,)~
~p-o
crf'
'E~I~ /
Alamilla Spring is another significant natural feature in the area, although
it is located across Dublin Boulevard near San Ramon Road. The spring,
and its proximity to the crossroads, is the historical reason for the
founding of Dublin. The spring is in a depression about 75' long by 12'
wide, with its sides lushly vegetated with redwoods, walnuts, oaks and
willows. At its eastern end, the spring flows into a box culvert which
diverts water across San Ramon Road.
FIGURE 2-7a I Alamilla spring and Dublin Creek
. RIH.IAi'A
e:, ((; i I~
2.3
Current uses
The three sites within the Historic Park Master Plan (see i -2)
contain a variety of uses, both public and private:
2.3.1
Site A: Dublin Square Shopping Center
The building complex contains a mix of commercial uses, including a
bank, catering business, computer repair shop, barber shop and an auto
parts store. With the exception of the bank. all of the other uses have
moved and the buildings are vacant.
FIGURE 2-8 I Current Heritage Center programming
RI.'.HI'A!A
2.3.2
2.3.3
2.4
'''.,/1
,,<>:cr\ ~.
~1 ~/ I
Site B: Heritage Center
The Heritage Center houses cultural and civic programming as well
as private functions held in rented facilities. In the two buildings (St.
Raymond's Church and the Murray Schoolhouse) and cemetery, uses
include:
+ Musical concerts and jams
. Weddings, baptisms and other private ceremonies
+ Lectures, conferences and recitals of less than 100 people
+ Historic and cultural tours
+ Classes for school-age children
+ Permanent and temporary museum collections of artifacts from
Dublin's settlement
Site C: Proposed cemetery expansion
A temporary trailer currently occupies the eastern portion of the site;
otherwise, the site is vacant of structures. The site has a meadow-
woodland character. The area around Dublin Creek is known to
have had Ohlone settlements, so this site may contain archeological
remains.
Potential development areas
considered
The City of Dublin directed the consultants to study three development
area options during the public process of the Master Plan. These were:
+ Scheme A: Full site
At 4.22 acres, this scheme included acquisition ofthe entire
parcel currently occupied by the Dublin Square Shopping
Center. The entire parcel would be developed as the Historic
Park.
+ Scheme B: Half site
At I .80 acres, this scheme split the Dublin Square parcel in
roughly half. Half would be developed as the Historic Park and
half would be turned back over to private development.
+ Scheme C: One-third site
At 1.40 acres, this scheme would acquire the eastern section
of the Dublin Square parcel. One-third of the parcel would be
developed as the Historic Park and two-thirds would be turned
back over to private development.
During the public process, RHM developed three design alternatives
and presented them at public meetings (see Section 1.1'). For each
alternative a "full site," "half site" and "one-third" site version were
presented. The public attending the presentations, the Heritage
and Cultural Arts Commission, the Parks and Community Services
Commission and the City Council favored the full site scheme (A), and
RlH'IA'I'A
FIGURE 2-9
Site development options
R+HIAJA
Option A
Fun-site development:
4,22.acre Historic Park
Option B
Half-site development:
I JIO-acre Historic Park
Option C
One-third site development:
I AO.acre Historic Park
G
I r--l
o 25 50
68 c;f 1.;J8
I
100
I 50 feet
NOTES
CD HISTORIC DUBLIN BOUNDARY
Area of city developed between
I 850-1960; Contains California Points
of Historical Interest: St. Raymond's
Church, Murray School and the Green
Store
Dublin Pioneer Cemetery located in
District
Original site of "Dublin Village"
(3) PERIPHERAL HISTORIC AREA
Contains Bonde House, Ponderosa
House, A1amilla Spring and Amador
Adobe site, historic walnut grove,
historic walnut trees at office complex
and mature valley oaks
CD NATIVE AMERICAN HISTORIC SITE
Settlement near A1amilla Spring
contained Ohlone burial grounds
with moderate to high possibility of
archeological resources at Historic Park
site. High possibility of historic-period
resources at Historic Park site.
0 EXISTING HERITAGE CENTER
Hidden, but charming creekside
character;'potential expansion; Parking
lot divides center of existing site;
Potential to expand cemetery; Potential
to reduce freeway noise with soundwall.
G) DUBLIN CREEK
Remnant of historic creek is not in a
culvert; Primary tributary to Willow
Marsh; Riparian woodland area contains
native and introduced species.
@ HISTORIC CROSSROADS
Historic crossing of the Oakland-
Stockton Road (Dublin Boulevard) and
the Martinez-Mission San Jose Road
(San Ramon Road)
DUBLIN SQUARE SHOPPING
0 CENTER
Buildings block connection to Dublin
Boulevard; Bank is on long-term lease
SURROUNDING
CD NEIGHBORHOODS
Post-war suburban, commercial and
office and light industrial; Daycare center
currently in Bonde House
2.5
2.5.1
&0 c;f)~'
RHM was directed by Council to pursue this design scheme.
The full site scheme (A) requires acquisition of the entire Dublin Square
Shopping Center parcel.
Qpportunities and constraints
Although Dublin's pre~ 1960 history has largely been erased, a good deal
of what is left lies within the boundaries of the newly-created Dublin
Village Historic District. In January 2004 the City Council adopted design
guidelines for the District. Following are some of the sites opportunities
and constraints:
Opportunities
Several key historic features are within the Historic Park area. These
are:
+ The Pioneer Cemetery
+ The Green Store
+ The Murray Schoolhouse
+ Remnants of Hawthorn Lane
+ St. Raymond's Church
These buildings are important assets, and integrating them into the
Historic Park presents many opportunities. Other opportunities
include:
+ Dublin Creek's presence can be enhanced and celebrated, since
it is a unique stretch of natural creek within the urban area
. Large walnut trees and live oaks exist on the site, especially
between the existing Heritage Center and Dublin Square
Shopping Center. Opening up views of these trees will significantly
enhance the site.
. If the existing Dublin Square Shopping Center buildings are
removed, the site will become very open on the north end,
creating good views to the historic buildings and large trees in the
Heritage Center area.
+ The parcel across Dublin Creek from the Pioneer Cemetery is a
good site on which to expand the cemetery.
+ A freeway soundwall, if installed, can be integrated into the
cemetery expansion columbarium.
+ The "back gate" to the Pioneer Cemetery at the northwest corner
can be integrated with a vehicle drop-off from Dublin Boulevard,
reducing the walking distance to reach that part of the cemetery.
. The corner of Donlon Way and Dublin Boulevard can be
celebrated for its historic significance by creating a focus here.
+ Donlon Way is a quiet, dead-end street thatwill be amenable to
pedestrian enhancements.
R"IHJAIA
16 ~. J0>.2
FIGURE 2-10 I Opportunities and constraints
~
CIj
~
~
~
~
~
G
I r----l
o 75150
I
300
@
450 feet
R+HIAfA
2.5.2
."r'::1<1/\,,~f~
. The Bonde House, directly across Dublin Boulevard from the
site, could be integrated into the history of the park through
interpretive signage, even if the building remains in private
hands.
. Archeological remains, from both Native American and post-
contact settlement, probably exist throughout the site. While this
also imposes a constraint on building, it provides an opportunity
to protect these assets by developing the site as a park.
Constraints
Interstate 580 imposes some of the most severe constraints on the site.
These include:
. Noise
. A physical barrier that reduces accessibility visibility to the site
. Visual qualities that conflict with the peaceful and natural setting
of the cemetery
Other, general constraints on the site include:
. Lack of visibility from more populated parts of Dublin
+ Although site is close to BART, pedestrian connection is not direct
or pleasant (pedestrians must cross San Ramon Road and walk
through auto-dominated streetscapes)
. Dublin Boulevard is currently wide and not pedestrian-friendly at
the Historic Park frontage
. Currently there is little dense residential development immediately
surrounding the site. More residential nearby would increase
general, everyday use of the park.
Note that of all the constraints the freeway is the only one that cannot
be changed in the near term.
RlHIAIA
Master Plan
IV
3.0
13ii~ Q.t
Master Plan concept
The Historic Park is organized by several "landscape typologies" that
are native to Dublin. These typologies are the language with which the
stories of Dublin's past are constructed:
Orchard, Springs, Crossroads, Ranch, Creek
These features of the park are not reconstructions of the past, but
landscape allegories that resonate deep within the cultural memory of
Dublin. The intent of the design is to create a contemporary landscape
that connects the past and the future of the City by engaging visitors'
own stories and interpretations of what they see. Above all, the Historic
Park's attitude is that history is a tactile, living thing that is subject to as
many interpretations as there are people who visit the park. Dublin's
history is not just in the past: it will live and evolve with the people who
make up the City, as will the meanings inherent in their park.
Additionally the Historic Park recreates a historically acceptable core
ranch layout with the relocation of ranch structures from the Kolb
Ranch.
The two three main features of the design are the Orchard Garden, and
the Freshwater Corner, and the Kolb Ranch relocation.
The Freshwater evokes both the Springs and the Crossroads,
the sources of Dublin's growth. By combining these typologies into a
new, hybrid metaphor within the tracery of the old Amador Hotel, a
new gateway to the Historic District is created. At the center of the
Freshwater Corner is a playful reminder to the child in all of us that
summer days were made for refreshing play in the water.
The Orchard Garde!'! is arranged according to the grid of an orchard,
once common and still seen in the Amador Valley. The grid is also a
tapestry of paths, woven at right angles, which investigate both the ways
in which our many cultures are similar, and how they are different. This
system of paths is called the Culture Walks and the Diversity Streams.
In this fabric (warp and weft), the history of Dublin and its residents
can be discovered, explored and celebrated. The Orchard Garden also
provides, with its orderly rows of trees, an almost-architectural space
in which various programmatic elements - picnic, play, learning -
are arranged. It also provides a place for Dublin's current and future
residents to impart their own identity to the park, to become a part of
"history" .
The Kolb Ranch relocation creates an "ensemble" that reproduces
the historic relationships among buildings that characterized the home
ranch of rural California. Five ranch structures will be relocated to the
Historic Park. The Main House is refurbished to include two period
museum rooms in the dining room and living room, three discovery
RIHIAJA"
rooms in two ofthe bedrooms and the back porch, a public room in the
entry area, a catering/teaching kitchen and archival storage space in the
upstairs. Park restrooms are provided in the refurbished Old House and
the Sunday School Barn is retrofitted as a multi-use classroom space,
with the capacity to serve as a Black Box Theater as well. The Hay
Barn is used as a shelter to the Ranch Play Area and the Pump House is
placed adiacent to the Past Time Pool.
Functional elements include a perimeter path, a stroll down which
takes in all features of the park and makes a satisfying route for joggers
and strollers; parking which is distributed about the park's perimeter
for convenient access everywhere; large, flexible lawn spaces that can
accommodate many different programs; and a robust interface with the
streetscape that respects and enhances Dublin's emerging, walkable
urban environment.
Most vital to the park's success, though, are its existing assets: large
trees, the creek, views of the hills, historic buildings and cemetery, and
a sense that the ground is filled with stories. Wherever possible, this
scheme highlights and protects these assets.
3.1
Freshwater Corner
- .-
The Freshwater Corner combines elements of the historic springs and
the historic crossroads into a signature contemporary landscape feature
that offers refreshment, sociability and play in the most visible part of the
Historic Park. It draws on the essential aspects of the spring:
. Cool, running water
. Sylvan enclosure
And the essential traits of the crossroads:
. A sheltered, privileged vantage point to view the action
. A sense of arrival...and the intrigue of possible destinations
. Refreshment, respite and relaxation
The Freshwater Corner is composed of several elements, each drawing
from a historic feature of the area. They are combined to create a
district within the park, a place of greater activation, a special gateway
that interfaces with the City. The elements of the Freshwater Corner
are:
3.1.1
The interactive fountain
The central feature of the Freshwater Corner is an elliptical fountain,
recalling the oval shape of Alamilla Spring, in which approximately two
dozen in-grade nozzles shoot water into the air to a height of two to ten
feet. There is no curb or separate basin-only a couple inches of water
collect in a low spot on the ground, which is paved with a resilient,
RIH..IA I.A"
14- ~ pg-
A sign advertising "Fresh Water" marks
a trough in front of the Amador Hotd in
!'.mo.
FIGURE 3-1
HEXCEL
.~.,~
-,,:-~:' ..~{;'?,
.' '~:< '<f:. ,',
~ ";'L,,~
<~~;" ~,;.;;~
""~. )......
.~'..-.
p{':.i.)(;f~ - '.
<'":-"~ .
SITE BOUNDARY
'" ~
"
". 4; , ~.!, 3:~~
"'t~ .:)1 ..: ..;':~~: "
E): :"~'" _~. ,,::~:""'"
... ~~'2 ~ J fr~l 1 ./<t ~~,.~-! ~
~ _',::,~' <It'" r~
... .,...,.
1
..
..:""';~
..
......
'f'Iri1. ..
'@t'
II.
..~
-"" ~ ~'. ,., '.
~~n
.,
~
.,
~:-
".
..
ii5
"5
J::
is
$
;.::.
~
",.
~~
-:;.
,.,
r.~
.. ~ \l~
.""" 'I-
,. ~~
/' . '.~
..-.-. ~: ~'.
~ 1 · _ ,,'" ,'...,
'46 PARKING SPACES '
,,'
'f
,. ~
...i.
I .' .~,,;;.
"i.J~ .....(.. ~:-\'~
'l:f .;. ~;~,
"l~ :"
P NDEROSA~. .. ~;l ;"-.
HOUSE . . '''' 'f
0, " ..~
t'~ ,)...
\-\, <r ~
~"{ C.......
r&', .-5
Ir--" .-g" <I,
~, f::'~ \
" t,.. 'C)',f,'
~,_,,: ~"'W~ \ollt .J,
LZ,];t $'~;<.; -,.....::.,,,A.. ..:
~- .~\ -r~.)<. ~ ~.
",. A". .~.~ ''';~
\,: _1T'~l..~.~'" ,;~,
~f.:t' ~ ~...... . .:"~ f' ;; . .
~:"(.('.~ .~~~~~~~~~
'.l( '.. '
~ '~Nl ' · . r~
J '.. { ,,;~.. \. ~ ~
.... ''JI.( '., l
~' :~. .~' " .,,".
,'. ~"..;Nt ~.'-J'-
' '~~~'. 'tA.J.;~':"'JJ '~.a:;"'J.t "~.
. '" ~ 'f}'!" ~t "fp~..r. ,. .
'. .,; ''''''. t:J-'" .. to- _ A..' 11'$-~".
~J:':~ ~~.~.' ..t~~;
\~/'!l\';~~~;~:~ :.
~-;~' ~ L'.' . "\S4
....
~.
.......
...
, ,
:j"'"
.\ .
\.
1" ~_ .,:
~L " -."'. '''.-
"r~
i~.";~~'~
. :U:.c.' ~.
.V' ..p <!
;....~,.:. :.t.
~~71o~ -~:
'1l:1 ~ 'ff." .'y
.~~ '~.' ~'.~ ..~- .....
.~Jf.~" M
. .~~:.J., ~ ~ ;ih
_ ,r- ...
, ..
_.....: .~
JI. -""" ,'.
.,,~. ".1
I! ...~'Y.) .,: f4 '4-' ,
~~. ~l :ft',
~ ,.. -'
. ~:t'"
~
~
"
r~~
,,;
~ _..r"
~
-
~ \.., @~
23 pARKING SPACES
- L @
~
--- a
. . 1
I @
~ - ---
I
160
@
GREEN'S
STORE @
@
2 ..1:PARKINGrA~ES
~'.
,~
north
f)
5T. RAYMOND'S
CHURCH
~
20 40
,
80
HERITAGE PARK OFFICE CENTER
....
/s :f I~/
NOTES
CD
CD
CD
8)
DROP-OFF PlAZA
Benches and lights for wa~ing in comfort
PARKING AREAS
98 total parking spaces
HAY BARN
Shelter for play area
STAGE
Informal concert seating accomodates several
hundred
Views from Dublin Boulevard
CD
CEMETERY EXPANSION
Columbarium walls
Trad~ional plots
Footbridge connection to existing Pioneer
Cemetery
ORCHARD GARDEN
Rancho Playground
Landscape Memory walls
Grid of knowledge
Group picnic area
Artifact cubes
Orchard trees
Past-Time Pool
CD
(j)
@
EXISTING PIONEER CEMETERY
NORTH LAWN
Informal green for sports, picnicking
Views from Dublin Boulevard
cv
SUNDAY SCHOOL BARN
Multi-use classroom space
Reception & event area
Potential Black Box Theater
Optional dressing room add~ion
HAWTHORN LANE
Trees recall historic lane and entrance to
cemetery
Unifying feature of park
SOUTH LAWN & OUTDOOR CLASSROOM
Quiet, refiective spaces under large trees
Outdoor classroom faces toward lawn
@
@
@
@
EAST LAWN
"THE SPRINGS" INTERACTIVE FOUNTAIN
At-grade bubblers and jets provide interactive
fun for kids
Evokes historic Alamilla Spring
Lawn berm for parents to watch kids
FRESHWATER PlAZA
Paving pattern unites Green's Store and Park
"Front Steps" and porch recall Amador Hotel
PIONEER CEMETERY ENTRANCE PlAZA
Pergola strucutre announces entry
Limited vehicle access for overilow parking area
PERIMETER CIRCUIT PATH
Limited vehicle access points at Heritage Center
and northwest parking lots
OLD HOUSE & PUMP HOUSE
Restroom
MAIN HOUSE
Offices
Museum
Garden area
(9
I r---l
o 20 40
I 20 feet
I
80
>if ; Tel ~lj\f)f Id-t
GRASS BERMS
gripping surface. Children can walk right onto one of the bubbling jets
on a hot summer day, or surprise themselves by being caught in one as
they try to make it across without getting wet.
NOTES
CD
CD
CD
(3)
CD
(0
0)
@
INTERACTIVE FOUNTAIN
Fountain jets can be programmed to flow constantly or activate in
random sequence. In the summer, this fountain is the place to be for
kids! Parents can watch from two lawn berms to either side of the
fountain or benches on the sidewalk.
AMADOR INN "PORCH"
DISTRICT ENTRY MONUMENTS
IN-GROUND CROSSROADS SIGNS
Similar water features have been successfully built and maintained in
such communities as Stockton, San Jose and Los Angeles.
CROSSROADS PLAZA
DONLON WAY SPECIAL PAVING
GREEN STORE
FIGURE 3-2
Freshwater Corner - detail plan
c
c
w
c
:z
(9
RI'H,JA'I'A^'
11 ~ I ~
FIGURE 3-3
FIGURE 3-4
Concept diagram
z
i5
~
:E
:I:
III
Z
f
Landscape typologies represented in the park design
Springs
Crossroad.
Orchard
Rancho
RI"HIAIA
3.1.2
3.1.3
f""/~ ,;:
:1:rgp /~
Amador Inn "Porch"
Framing the fountain is a pergola that echoes the footprint of the porch
of the Amador Inn, which once served as stopping place for stages, and
later cars, passing the crossroads here. The front porch of the Amador
Inn was a place where people could recline and watch the action on the
road. Historic photos of the Amador Inn show a watering trough with
the words "Fresh Water" painted on it.
The "porch" takes advantage of the existing grade change at the corner
of Donlon Way and Dublin Boulevard with a couple of long steps that
help separate the interior of the park from the "crossroads plaza" area
next to the street. At the top of these steps are rows of chairs which
could swivel to allow visitors to face either into or out of the park, and
face whichever direction the action is, or rock to recall the rocking chairs
that might have once sat out on the porch.
The structure of the pergola itself should be designed to echo, but not
necessarily mimic, the front porch ofthe old Amador Hotel. The posts,
for example, could be set at the same interval as the hotel's - about
ten feet apart - but other members could be updated to reflect a
more contemporary look. In any case, the structure should be designed
to impose roughly the same volume as the original front porch, but
offer a permeable fa<;ade to the park that announces the corner without
blocking views into the park itself.
Crossroads Plaza
The Crossroads Plaza is the area of sidewalk between the base of the
steps and the street, including special paving on Donlon Way. The feel
of this plaza should be urban, embracing Dublin's modern identity as a
metropolitan area. Street trees are placed in alignment with the rest of
Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way, helping to tie the north and east
frontages of the park together. Trees should be set in deep wells in the
sidewalk and have grates. Pedestrian street lighting should be consistent
with the rest of Dublin Boulevard. (All streetscape elements should be
coordinated with the Dublin Master Plan, adopted June
2005 and Dublin adopted January 2004.)
Inlaid in the sidewalk at the corners of Donlon Way and Dublin Boulevard
are the words Stockton, Martinez, Oakland and San Jose. These represent
the destinations of the historic stage lines that used to cross near the park.
See 3.2, note 5. These in-ground signs can be made of steel or
bronze, and type should be no smaller than 12" high.
Some work on this area will occur in advance of actual park construction
in order to take advantage of early funding opportunities specifically for
streets cape improvements on Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way. (See
Sectkm J.J for streets cape improvements and Section 4.5 for phasing
details.)
RI"HIAIA
7'1 r;( /~
FIGURE 3-5 I Freshwater Corner interactive fountain
FIGURE 3-6 I Intersection of Donlon Way and Dublin Boulevard, looking west
.RIHIAIA
go 1/~
3.1.4
District entry monuments
On either side of Donlon Way at the northeast corner of the park will
be district entry monuments to announce the park to Dublin Boulevard
and provide a gateway into the Historic District Core (for monument
locations see note 4; see Figure 3-6 for design intent
rendering). The monuments should be designed as low walls that do
not block views into the park or Donlon Way, but rather accentuate the
intersection as the Historic District Core's primary entrance. The walls
should be located so as to be obviously visible from Dublin Boulevard.
The wall west of Donlon Way may intersect the stairs and provide a
feature on which to climb or sit.
As the main piece of identity signage for the park and Historic District
Core, the walls should use quality durable materials, such as stone and
metal, and be detailed to project an image of civic permanence. As
with all new built elements in the Historic District, the style of the walls
should be distinctly different from the style of historic structures while
still maintaining sensitivity to their context. (Also refer to Dublin
Design Section 6. which calls for "gateway entry signs
at Donlon Way and Dublin Boulevard.)
3.1.5
Donlon Way paving
Donlon Way will receive a special paving treatment from the edge of
Dublin Boulevard to the southern edge of Crossroads Plaza. The design
of the paving may incorporate crosswalk striping as well. See Section
3.2.2.
3.2
Orchard Garden
The Orchard Garden is the physical heart of the park. It is defined by a
grid of walnut trees, spaced 30' apart, as in orchards typical of the area
before urbanization. A grid of paths straddle the spaces between the
trees. The squares of the grid created on the groundplane are filled with
decomposed granite.
The Orchard Garden is defined by two systems of pathways:
. Culture Walks
. Diversity Streams
:U.4)
3.2.4)
This gridded system of two kinds of walks organizes the Orchard
Garden and conveys the history of Dublin through text imprinted in
the groundplane of the paths. The Culture Walks describe the various
cultures that have settled Dublin, while the Diversity Streams describe
the many traditions and ways of life that each of these cultures expresses
uniquely.
,. RIHI'AIA
FIGURE 3-7 I Orchard Garden - detail plan
8/~[~
RIH'IAIA
75 feet
&:<~~
NOTES
CD DROP-OFF PlAZA
CD LANDSCAPES OF MEMORY WALLS
CD RANCHO PLAYGROUND & HAY BARN
8 PICNIC AREA
CD DIVERSITY BORDER GARDEN
CD ARTIFACT CUBES
0 OLD HOUSE
CD PUMP HOUSE
0 PAST-TIME POOL
@ MAIN HOUSE
@ SUNDAY SCHOOL BARN
@ RECEPTION AREA
@ FARM IMPLEMENTS
@ HISTORIC LOCATOR
Within the Orchard Garden are also distinct sub-spaces:
. The Rancho Playground (see Section 3.2.2 and 3~7, note 3)
. Ti,e ravilion building (Sediol1 3.2.7 alld rig!;!1 e ]~7, note 7)
. The Diversity Border Garden (Section 3.2.6 and Figure
note 5)
. The Picnic area 3.2.8 and 3~7, note 4)
And there are other, vertical features, or "garden objects" which add
interest and help convey the history of the area. These are:
. The Past-time Pool (Section 3.:2.1 and
. Landscape Memory walls 3.2.3 and
. Artifact Cubes (Section 3.2.5 and 3.7, note 6)
The 30' grid of the Orchard Garden lends itself to accommodating
booths or stalls for festivals. Each 30' square can accommodate four
I O'x I 0' tents, with the orchard tree in the center. Tents can be placed
so that their open sides face outwards, towards the paths. This modular
setup can be configured in many ways, depending on the fair or festival
using the park.
The Orchard Garden is a metaphor for the history of Dublin, taking its
form from a type of landscape with deep roots in the area. Visitors to
the park will likely spend time strolling through the orchard, investigating
the objects along the paths and reading inscriptions in the groundplane.
RI,"HI'A!A
~D~ Jdt
3.2.1
Past-time Pool
The Past-time Pool is designed to draw children into the past and give
them a glimpse of the previous residents of Dublin. The design consists
of a reflecting pool lined with a base of large granite slabs. Portraits of
past residents are etched into the slabs. Interspersed along the edge
(where children can easily look into them) are small, oval mirrors that
capture the reflection of Dublin's current (and future?) residents.
FIGURE 3-8
Past-time Pool
alHIAIA
24 ~ )c?%
3.2.2
Rancho Playground
The Rancho Playground occupies the center of the Orchard Garden
(see l"lOte J). The playground's design is themed loosely
on the Rancho San Ramon (figure 3-9). It contains some traditional
play equipment, such as slides and swings, but the majority of the play
structures are custom-designed in the vernacular of a ranch in the
I 880s. The features allow kids to experience the feel of the materials of
that era (such as wood, adobe, sand and iron), but also to play at some
typical activities of a ranch, like:
. Fetching water
. Saddling a horse
. Weaving and spinning
. Blacksmithing
. Planting and harvesting crops
The Hay Barn from the Kolb Ranch will be integrated into the Rancho
Playground and will serve as a shelter for play beneath.
On the west end of the playground is the drop-off plaza (see Section
3.3.2). This is a main area from which parents may want to watch their
children play, if they are parking in the west parking lot. It should provide
ample comfortable seating.
FIGURE 3-9
Conjectural layout of Rancho San Ramon (Hamel)
C01el4
lib..
..
~H'.
RIH'IAIA
&5 ~ ) ~
FIGURE 3-10 I Diversity streams
FIGURE 3-1 1 I Artifact cubes
RIHIAjA
g 6 c;fJ~
3.2.3
Landscape Memory walls
Within the Orchard Garden will be several walls approximately 30 feet
long with scenes on both sides depicting the area landscape at various
points in history. These scenes roughly correspond to the landscape
typologies mentioned in Section ! .4. The walls serve to transport
visitors in time and place.
They should be designed, at a minimum, to include a bench or seatwall
on at least one side. If the concrete is left exposed, it should be cast
or finished in a way to provide interesting aesthetic texture (e.g.,
sandblasted, board-formed, etc.).
FIGURE 3-12 I Landscape Memory walls
RI'HIAIA
3.2.4
Culture Walks and Diversity Streams
(The Grid of Knowledge)
The north-south walkways in the Orchard Garden are assigned diverse
aspects of everyday life that each culture represented in Dublin has
expressed in a different way. For example, all cultures have language
- but each sounds different. The Diversity Streams show how each
culture lives differently. These streams are:
language,
clothing,
art, play, beliefs
On the other hand, the east-west Culture Walks in the Orchard Garden
are each assigned to the waves of immigrant cultures that have settled
in Dublin. They are:
Ohkme and
ami
Spanish and Scandinavian
Multicultural contemporary Dublin
The Walks are the circulation system of the Orchard Garden, but also
serve as a way to discover the cultures and lifeways that have shaped
Dublin. The discoveries one makes depend on which route one takes.
If a park visitor decides to trace the "food" Diversity Stream, she might
learn about how the Ohlone villagers, Mexican ranchers, Irish immigrants
and modern urban Dubliners all cook their dinners. If she decided to
stroll just the Ohlone Culture Walk, she would learn all about how the
Native Americans here cooked food, played games, built shelters, and
soon.
Information is conveyed primarily within the paving of the walkways
themselves. Figure 3-10 suggests how paving stones might be engraved
to record the many names that have been given to children in different
cultures. The names in the paving would change depending on which
Culture Walk was nearby. Alternately, objects might be imbedded in the
paving or narrative text stamped into it.
3.2.5
Artifact Cubes
Artifact Cubes are stationed at the intersections of the Culture Walks
and the Diversity Streams in the Diversity Border Garden. They are
granite blocks onto which cast bronze "artifacts" have been affixed.
Some of the artifacts are historical-some are contemporary. Examples
of the artifacts could include:
. Ohlone baskets
. Dinner plates from a pioneer family
. Corn, stalks of grain and fruits from a Mexican rancho
. An iPod or Gameboy belonging to a Dublin kid's bedroom
R.IH.IA1A
81 ~ l~
Example of text engraved in stone paths.
Example of cast bronze objects set on a
stone pedestal.
3.2.6
3-:H
t-,/) " ,. . , ,
~!Ei
"- ,'>
1~
The artifact on each block corresponds to its position within the Diversity
Streams. For example, if it is in line with the "play" path, then the cast
artifact might be a game. If it is in line with the "food" path, then it might
be a utensil or dish.
The purpose the Artifact Cubes is to put tactile, everyday objects from
different periods within the grasp of young visitors. They are placed to
be touched and investigated within easy reach of 3- to 10-year-olds.
They should be constructed and designed to withstand heavy use,
climbing, etc.
Local artists might also be engaged to produce the cast objects for each
Artifact Cube.
Diversity Border Garden
The two northern Culture Walks are dedicated to Dublin's contemporary
multicultural makeup. In this garden, each of the cultures contributing
to today's multicultural population will be represented. The garden will
need to be designed in detail through a public process that engages the
current community. It is also a suitable location for other, specific artist-
designed installations.
The Pavilion
The ["'aviliol, provides a flexible indoor space in vvhich ta hold classes,
galle!, exhibitions, sn ,all concerts and recEptians. Its 800-squal'C foot
plan consists of one lar-ge roon, and a sepal ate rotl 001" area vvhich
can be accessed dir-ectl, from outside tne building vvhen the main roon I
is closed.
TFie design of the building is subject to tl,e Dublin 'Jibge D~$ign
~tlide!im'!!$. The building should complen ,ent the existing nistorie
al'Chitecture but not min ,ie it (far conceptual rcnderillg, see rigtl! e J-
(3). [)ceausc it is a I,evv addition, the building vvill nave its ovvn identity
and st}-Ie. It might d! avv on several traditions expressed in tne Dublin
al ea, including I 950s-el a Califolllia "ranen style," itself a style derived not
01'11, fron I native vernaculal I al,en arcl ,itectul"e of the nineteenth eentul)
but also the Craftsman bUl,galovvs of the earl, t'vventietl, ewtul). In
keeping vvith othel histol ie buildings neal-b" it might have a gable roof,
but also use transpal ent glass vvalls to din,inish the building's bulk vvithin
the park landscape, and in the Califoll,ia tl aditiol, visuall, bril,g
the activities inside to the OUtdOOls, al,a the leaf, settillg of the park,
in. TFirough beil,g unique and distinct vvhile acknovvledging the historic
al'Chitectul"e vvhich is its context, tne ["'avilion vvill sel ve to st! engthen the
ehal actcr of tne District.
Actual design of the Pavilion vvill be detem ,ined in ti,e park design
process.
RIH.IAjA
B:B 3.2.7 Picnic area
The picnic area within the Orchard Garden accommodates 50 people
at 12 picnic tables. Metal barbecue stands should be built in.
B:-9 3.2.8 Sculpture benches
Within the Orchard Garden, benches should be amply provided next to
the pathways. They may be grouped in twos or threes, especially at the
busier areas. All benches in the park should be of consistent design and
materials. Select benches within the Orchard Garden can have special
sculptural elements attached to them, such as seated human figures
from various periods of Dublin's history. This popular type of sculpture
has been tried out in many cities, and is a playful way for adults and
children to interact with life-sized pieces of history.
3.2. I 0 3.2.9 North Lawn and stage
The North Lawn provides the Historic Park with a large, flexible passive
use space. It is pastoral in appearance and highly visible from Dublin
Boulevard. It is open in the center, allowing for picnicking or informal
games. It can be programmed for large-scale gatherings, such as concerts
or fairs. Trees will be clustered near the edges of the main lawn space
to provide areas of shade, but the main area will be clear and planted
only in lawn.
At the northwest corner of the North Lawn is an outdoor stage. The
stage is a simple, ADA-accessible concrete platform that can also be
accessed from a loading area at the northwest driveway. The concrete
platform may be outfitted with inset sleeves to accommodate pillars for
a removable shade structure.
3.2.11
Cast Lawn
The Cast Lavvl, is a sel, li-cil culal space betvveen the Orchal'd Gal den,
St. fl.a)'n ,and's Church al,d tl,e Iresl,vvatel COI nel. It is easil, accessed
b, the diagol,al parkil,g alol,g Donlol, W3:'f. [3ecause it quite eas, to
pal k next ta this lavvl" it I"ight becol, Ie papulal for short visits to the
pal k dUI il,g lunchtin ,e al I vveekd3:'fs. [3el,c1 les should be an ,pi)' pi ovided
aroul,d tl,e pel il"etel of this lavv',.
3.2. 12 3.2. I 0 South Lawn and outdoor classroom
The South Lawn and outdoor classroom replace the existing parking lot
at the Heritage Center. This lawn will become a woodsy, contemplative
space for educational activities connected with programs in 5t.
Raymond's Church and the Murray Schoolhouse. Generally, this is a
quieter space than either the East or North Lawns. It is close to the
creek and adjacent to the Pioneer Cemetery. A vvalkvv3:'f leadil,g fj'om
"R+HIA \A
gq ~ J~
Example of a sculptural element 011 11 bench.
~
00 1 )c9!;
thc f'avilion l3uilding to thc CCII,etel"y Annex flanks the vvcst cdge of the
South Lavvn.
Next to the Murray Schoolhouse, the outdoor classroom - a circular
seating area - provides a place for groups of children and adults outside.
The seats can be made of cast-in-place concrete and special paving used
at the walkway here. The outdoor classroom should be oriented so that
the seats take in views of Dublin Creek and the cemetery.
Several trees that are in planters within the existing parking lot may need
to be taken out or relocated to create this lawn area.
Kolb Ranch relocation
The ensemble of Kolb Ranch buildings is a typical instance of a broader
"type" of historic California landscape-the "home ranch." To the extent
that the look and feel of the home ranch can be evoked within the
Historic Park and not compete with the ensemble of other historic
structures (Green Store, Murray Schoolhouse, St. Raymond's Church),
its presence in the park can help serve the park's mission by adding
another layer of regional historical interpretation.
The most promising buildings for relocation, based on their significance,
the role they play in the current ranch grouping, and their potential for
reuse, are the Main House (which could be used as a house museum,
archival storage, or small classrooms), Sunday School Barn (which could
serve as space for multi-use classrooms and a black box theater),. and
the Old House (which could provide toilet rooms for the park).
These buildings should be sited so that the essentials of their historical
interrelationships are apparent. This would require:
. setting them back from the curb and apart from each other
appropriately
. organizing them into alignments and functional groupings that
resemble the grid orientation of the original ranch
. surrounding and orienting them logically to landscape zones
congruent with the buildings' character
The treatment of the -landscape around the relocated ranch buildings
will also be important for conveying the story of the ranch. Simple
treatments such as granular surfaces will look and feel like a ranch
landscape. Placement of selected farm implements from the ranch can
also add to the ranch story. Orchard trees and the common locust
trees can also help recreate the ranch setting. Around the Main House,
pathways lined with diagonal brick and proper historic plant material will
tell the story of what it was like to live on the ranch.
RIHIAIA^
3.3.1
Main House
The Main House is refurbished to include two period museum rooms
in the dining room and living room, three discovery rooms in two of
the bedrooms and the back porch. a public room in the entry area. a
minimally refurbished staff kitchen and archival storage space upstairs.
The Front Field could be used as an outdoor event venue.
3.3.2
Sunday School Barn
The Sunday School Barn is retrofitted as a multi-use classroom space.
with the capacity to serve as a Black Box Theater. The Sunday School
Barn also provides a facility for receptions in coniunction with events at
St. Raymond's which can spill onto the Front Field area.
'11 ~ tc?g
RIH"IAjA
north
f)
~
20 40
,
80
,
160
>/l/~: c,
.~L:' p, ,"\f\
.9"11~
3.3.3
Old House
The Old House will be refurbished to serve as park restrooms.
3.3.4
Hay Barn
The Hay Barn is integrated into the Rancho Play Area and serves as a
shelter for play beneath.
3.3.5
Pumphouse
The Pumphouse is relocated adiacent to the Past Time Pool to augment
the water theme there.
3d 3.4 Parking and streetscape
..
rrnprovements
Parking and streetscape improvements around the Historic Park have
the potential to enhance the historic character of the District, improve
pedestrian comfort and safety, unify the appearance of the park, service
parking requirements and create a memorable public amenity. Relevant
planning documents should be consulted when designing these
features:
. Dublin Village Design Guidelines
. Dublin Si:reetscape Master Plan
The Historic Park Master Plan calls for 98 total parking spaces on Donlon
Way, off Donlon Way within the Heritage Center area, and in a new
parking lot in the northwest corner of the park. The current Heritage
Center contains 34 parking spaces.
B-:+ 3.4.1 Dublin Boulevard streetscape improvements
Consistent with the Dublin Design Section 6,
adopted January 2004, Dublin Boulevard should be modified along its
frontage with the Historic Park to improve the pedestrian experience
and create a more memorable impression in the historic area. The
goals of these improvements, and some measures to be taken are as
follows:
. Goal: Calm traffic on Dublin Boulevard
Measures: Add median to Dublin Boulevard, expand sidewalks
to 12', add street trees to median and sidewalk
. Goal: Create more pleasant, safer pedestrian experience
Measures: Add "pedestrian safe zone" to Dublin Boulevard
median, use special paving materials at all pedestrian crossings,
avoid placing vertical streetscape amenities within vehicle turning
RIHIAJA
13 '1 /,:)k
sightlines at intersections, add 5' bike lane to Dublin Boulevard
. Goal: Make Dublin Boulevard more memorable and express
the historic character of the District
Measures: Add streetscape amenities (street trees, tree grates,
wayfinding signage, pedestrian lighting), add district gateway
signs (see Section 3.1.4)
Parts of the Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way streetscapes in the
public right-of-way may be eligible for improvement in advance of actual
park construction through a Metropolitan Transportation Commission
(MTC) Transportation for Livable Communities (TLC) Planning Grant.
See Sectkm 4.5 for phasing details.
Overall, Dublin Boulevard should be redesigned along the Historic Park
to create a more urban feel, consistent with both the historic character
of the District and the rest of the boulevard in other parts of Dublin.
B::t: 3.4 .2 Donlon Way treatment
Thirty-two diagonal parking spaces will be added on Donlon Way. An
eight foot sidewalk should run along this parking area adjacent to the
East Lawn and connect to the entrance plaza at the Heritage Center.
The entire vehicle travel area of Donlon Way should be 28' wide, not
including the diagonal parking.
FIGURE 3-14
North Lawn and stage, viewed from the west
RfHIAI
'jf'Sq4"~ l.n
At the intersection of Donlon Way and Dublin Boulevard, the vehicle
travel area of Donlon Way should be paved with unit pavers, stamped
concrete, or other distinctive and detailed paving. Contrasting colored
bands of concrete or unit pavers should be used to indicate the crosswalk
across Donlon Way. All paving should be designed to withstand heavy
vehicle use. The unit paving on Donlon Way should extend south to
align with the southern edge of the pathway that passes the interactive
fountain, and north to the outer edge of the southern curb on Dublin
Boulevard.
B-3 3.4.3 Drop-off plaza
The drop-off plaza is located at the south end of the main parking lot.
The semi-circular curbside drop is a safe place for drivers to quickly drop
children near the Rancho playground without requiring pedestrians to
cross any additional parking or traffic areas.
The plaza provides a spot to linger while waiting for rides or entering
into the park, and is one of the gateways into the parle Since there
is an expanse of paving here, paving materials should be warm and
interesting. Unit pavers or concrete with varying bands or color should
be used. Trees should be set in wells with tree grates, similar to the
treatment along Dublin Boulevard. There should be an ample supply
of seating. Directional signage, consistent with the rest of the Historic
District, is also appropriate here.
a-:4 3.5 Pioneer Cemetery expansion
According to the Dublin Village "the City should
consider expanding the Dublin Heritage Center Cemetery to the
southwest, across from Dublin Creek." In order to provide continuing
opportunities for Dublin residents to be buried within the City, if they
choose, this Master Plan outlines how the cemetery expansion should
be carried out and integrated with existing historic features and the
proposed Historic Park. These improvements include the cemetery
expansion itself, enhancements to Dublin Creek, a restoration and
re~emphasis of historic Hawthorn Lane, the addition of a pedestrian
bridge connecting the cemetery expansion with the existing Pioneer
Cemetery, ground plane treatments consistent with the character of the
area, a columbarium wall, and a soundwall to protect the area from the
intrusion of noise from Interstate 580.
3-:4:+ 3.5.1 Expansion south of Dublin Creek
The .94-acre parcel owned by the Dublin Historic Preservation
Association, immediately south of Dublin Creek from the existing
Pioneer Cemetery, provides an excellent area on which to expand the
cemetery. Although it is highly impacted by the noise from Interstate
580, the setting is visually pleasant despite its proximity to the roadway.
RI"'H.I.A!
It is set on a bench of land next to the creek and has the character
of a woodland meadow. The two major infrastructural requirements
for expansion are a new pedestrian bridge across Dublin Creek (see
Section ~ 3.5.3) connecting this parcel to the existing cemetery and
a new soundwall (see Sedion ~ to mitigate noise from the
freeway.
Considering that the Pioneer Cemetery is the only cemetery within the
City, the design of the cemetery expansion should maximize the limited
amount of land available. RHM and Economics Research Associates
investigated both the economic and the spatial implications of various
traditional gravesite and columbarium burial designs (see Appendix).
Economic considerations included:
+ Demand for columbarium interment has increased in recent
years as the general availability of land has decreased and cost of
traditional burial plots has increased.
+ In the Bay Area, approximately half of all families choose cremation
over full burials.
. The usual problem of convincing the surrounding community to
accept a cemetery is not as large an issue here, since the existing
and historic cemetery use is already established.
+ The most profitable design would be a mixture of columbarium
and traditional burial interment sites.
Design considerations included:
+ The existing cemetery has a rich historical heritage that can also
be bestowed on the expansion, if it is appropriately integrated
through design, aesthetic treatments and visual connections.
. Automobile access will be needed to within 120-140 feet of the
expansion.
+ The soundwall can be integrated with the design of the
columbarium wall.
Given these factors, a design was selected that maximized the limited
amount of land available, responded to market demands, mitigated
freeway noise and conferred the historic character of the old cemetery
on the new.
Thecemeteryexpansion, asshown in Figure 3.15, contains approximately
I 15 traditional burial plots (Note I) and 2, 100 columbarium niches
(Note 4). The site is accessed via a footbridge over Dublin Creek that
aligns with the central axial path of the cemetery expansion (Note 3).
On its southern end, this path terminates in a small courtyard at the
columbarium (Note 2). To the north, the path connects with a path in
the existing cemetery and continues into the Orchard Garden. Vehicles
may access the north end of the pedestrian bridge from the existing
cemetery, but may not cross the bridge itself. A vehicle turnaround
can be created at the easternmost path in the existing cemetery (Note
5). Access to the cemetery expansion for digging equipment needed
RJHIAjA
q61 Jdg
NOTES
CD
CD
CD
8)
CD
(0
TRADITIONAL BURIAL PLOTS
COLUMBARIUM COURTYARD
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
COLUMBARIUM NICHES
VEHICLE TURN-AROUND
FREEWAY SOUNDWALL
(Extends past Ponderosa House)
q(p 1 J~
FIGURE 3-15 I Cemetery expansion - detail plan
RJ"H'+A IA
11 <<:X I~
for graves, such as a Bobcat, must be obtained via an access route to
Donlon Way south of Dublin Creek.
The columbarium wall will be stacked six niches high, to a height of
7'. It can be designed so that it and the soundwall are a common
structure. It should have a small roof extending from the top of the
wall that provides architectural definition and protects visitors from rain
when they are standing in front of the columbarium. Nine shorter walls
may extend at right angles from the main wall; these create alcoves that
increase the area of the wall available for niches. These walls should be
given a similar roof treatment. Roof and ColUl"bal iUI" vvall should be
cool"dil,atcd aestheticall, vvith the ravilion buildil,g (Section :U.7).
The in-ground grave plots occupy the area between the columbarium
and the creek. In order to preserve the "meadow" character of the site,
headstones should be of the flush, in-ground type and groundcover
over the plots should be lawn. The profile of the ground should be
kept level, without curbs or other obstructions, with the objective of
maintaining the visual dominance of the creek and trees.
Benches and / or planters should be provided within each of the
columbarium wall alcoves and in clubbed arrangements where views
into the creek are best. Plantings in the cemetery expansion should be
sympathetic to the riparian character of the site and its natural setting.
FIGURE 3-16 I Columbarium wall, elevation and section
RINIAI'A'
mGJ~F~ }~
3-:+l3.5.2 Dublin Creek enhancements
The Heritage Center has one of the few remaining reaches of Dublin
Creek left in a semi-natural state; the rest of the creek within the City
has been channelized or culverted. The creek is an educational and
ecological opportunity.' School and community groups could be engaged
in removing invasive vegetation and trash, planting and creating habitat
for fish and other wildlife.
Physical improvements in and around the creek must be coordinated
with the regulating bodies, including:
. California Department of Fish and Game
. US Army Corps of Engineers
. Regional Water Quality Control Board
While it is desirable to provide greater physical access to the creek,
this goal should be balanced against the need to protect and enhance
riparian habitat, which increased access may damage.
The pedestrian bridge (see Section ~ 3.5.3) will enhance visibility
into the creek. Picnic tables, currently located at the top of the north
bank of the creek, can be arranged to take advantage of views into the
creek. Invasive vegetation, especially ivy and blackberries, can also be
cleared to improve views into the creek.
'R'I'HIA!'A'"
q11 Jdk
3-+3- 3.5.3 Pedestrian bridge
The bridge connecting the existing cemetery (Note 3) to the cemetery
expansion should meet ADA requirements for accessible path of
travel, complement its surroundings through its design, and be feasible
to position into location using a crane. For cost estimating purposes,
RHM used a pre-fabricated Cor-Ten steel structure, 88' in length and
12' wide. This is wide enough to drive a small earthmoving vehicle, such
as a bobcat, across. Concrete footings should be designed to minimally
impact the riparian area. Although the siting of the bridge as shown in
this Master Plan avoids known trees, bridge placement may need to be
adjusted to protect significant trees if necessary.
3-+4 3.5.4 Paths and ground treatment
Paths in the cemetery expansion may be made of stabilized decomposed
granite, which, when level, provides an ADA-compliant surface, is low
maintenance and will blend in with the natural surroundings. In front of
the columbarium walls, it may be necessary to provide a harder surface
for increased use. Paving materials should be coordinated to match or
complement the paving used at the corner of Donlon Way and Dublin
Boulevard.
3-+5 3.5.5 1-580 soundwall
The soundwall should extend beyond the columbarium area to include
the Ponderosa House. The section beyond the columbarium may be a
cinder block structure. (See J.IS, !'lote 6.)
3-+6 3.5.6 Hawthorn Lane
Hawthorn Lane is a historic roadway that was planted with hawthorn
trees and likely contains artifacts from the period I 830- 1950. It once
ran along the west side of the Heritage Center and Historic Park sites.
Some hawthorn trees remain, although the area is mostly overgrown.
It should be paved and planted with hawthorn trees to match those
growing along the main path through the Pioneer Cemetery. (See
3-1, !'lote 10.)
a-5 3.6 Green Store
The Green Store is currently under private ownership. However,
because it is one of the few historically significant, intact structures in the
Historic District, the City should eventually acquire this property and
integrate it into programming for the Historic Park. Few changes would
need to be made to the area around the building, except as noted in the
streetscape section of this plan (see Sedio!"! 3.:U.:U.% 304.1-3.4.2);
parking configuration and driveway locations could most likely remain
the same.
RIHJAf'A'
I tJ7V ~ loR
Landscaping around the proposed district entry monument (see Sedkm
3.1.4) next to the Green Store should be coordinated with the rest of
the Historic Park. If possible, the City should help the building's current
owner to do this before the Green Store is acquired, and possibly
provide funding or incentives to coordinate the Green Store's physical
appearances with the Historic Park.
3-:6 3.
Utilities and infrastructure
figure 3-11 shows sections of the park needing utility connections.
FIGURE 3-17 I Utilities and infrastructure connections
SWITCHGEAR
BUilDING
PICNIC SHELTER
BANK PARKING lOT
Reconfigure switchgear.
etc.
Water service
Electrical service
Water service
Electrical service
Provide adequate lighting
IllUMINATED PATHWAY
Electrical service required
SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE
RI'H.I
IA
I
OUTDOOR STAGE
Amplified Sound
BUilDING
Water service
Electrical service
Sanitary sewer
SMAll FOUNTAIN
Water service
Electrical service
Sanitary sewer
LARGE FOUNTAIN
Water service
Electrical service
Sanitary sewer
BUilDING
Water service
Electrical service
Natural gas
Sanitary sewer
, 0 r ~,Jd-8-
ost Estimate a
sing Plan
Acquisition and
Phasing plan and
Operations cost estimate
'C;f I ~
4.1 Acquisition and development
cost summary
KEY PROJECT INFORMATION
land area for acquisition (acres) .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.:21
land area for acquisition
feet) .............. .. 183.823
land cost per square foot. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ $48.27
spaces in northwest lot. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45
Parking spaces along Donlon Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
spaces at Center (parking lot and overflow). . .2.1
COST SUMMARY
Site cost................... $6,795,990 $S,Bi4.5Iti
Buildil.g devll:!lopment: cost: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , $348,999
costs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $684,500
Structure relocation costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2.09.000
Intel im r:><l:l k developmem: tOst5 ............,...... $2,238,6I':)a
Historic Parle development costs. . . , . . . . . $5,679,SGa $9.455,300
Pioneer
improvements and expansion. . . . . .
TOTAL ACQUISITION AND DEVElOPMENT COST $19, I 52, I GO
$2.4.211.516
Bollmi' mmQtmts based on 2{1~ ~ppi'aijm! ~nd do not ind!:lde
RlH'IAIA
4.2
!:: '3 ;r ):2-t
Phase 55
5treetscape improvements
CD Demolish existing sidewalk along Dublin Boulevard and north
end of Donlon Way (to St. Raymond's Church), asphalt
in median on Dublin Boulevard, asphalt on Donlon Way
adjacent to Green Store. Relocate storm drains.
(3) Construct new sidewalk and median on Dublin Boulevard.
Construct new sidewalk along Donlon Way, to St. Raymond's
Church.
o
CD
Install asphalt for diagonal parking along Donlon Way.
Install unit paving and special crosswalk paving on Donlon
Way.
CD
Install trees in sidewalk and median on Dublin Boulevard.
Install tree grate for trees in sidewalk.
CD
Install pedestrian lighting and site furnishings along Donlon
Way and Dublin Boulevard.
o
Restripe street, add bike lanes.
Del, ,olition
DI ainage
raving
rlanting & ill igatioll
Street ligl ,til ,g
~1obiliLatiol " adn ,illi3t1 atiol, & contingcl ,C}
$ 15,100
$ 3,000
$ 271,800
$ 3G,GOO
$ 10,000
$ 207,700
Pltau S5 total
$ 68.t,:S88
Relocate structures
Refurbish structures
Landscape improvements
Mobilization. administration & contingency
Phase 55 total
$ 0
$ 0
$ 396.800
$ 287.700
$ 684.500
Phase I
Intel il11 Pal k Kolb Ranch relocation
@
Acquire Dublin Square site (not included in cost estimate -
for acquisition costs, see Section 4.1).
o
Demolish existing Dublin Square shopping center, parking
lots and bank building. (Hazardous material removal and
archeological resource monitoring not included in cost
estimate.) Recycle building waste, asphalt and aggregate
base.
@
Maintain existing drainage infrastructure. Cap, extend and
add risers as necessary.
@
Obtainadditionalfilllocallyfrom other parks projects, ifavailable.
Re-grade site to drain to existing catch basins and drains. Test
top 6" of subgrade for herbicide residue.
@
Construct west parking lot with temporary paving (to be
paved over in Phase 3).
@
Install turf and temporary rotor irrigation system on rest of
site.
@
Relocate and refurbish Kolb Ranch structures and related
landscape improvements.
Den ,olitioll
[artl, vvork
DI"~il ,age
r'avil ,g (pal kil ,g lot)
rial ,til ,g & ill igatiol ,
Ligl,til ,g (pal killg lot)
~1obiliLation, adn Iii li3tratiol I & colltil ,gel ,q
$ 709,300
$ I GG,900
$ 33,000
$ GI,GOO
$ 3 15,000
$ 12,000
$ 910,000
$1,238,688
Pltale I total
Relocate structures
Refurbish structures
Landscape improvements
Mobilization. administration & contingency
Phase I total
$ 209.000
$ 1.392.600
$ 2.208.300
$ I .60 I .000
$5.41 0.900
Fr -. - - - - -..
( - -~-~.:
17 1\; 1 I
@ JU~
& - ~@
~
I'
19
t
-..---
Phase 2
Orchard Garden improvements
@ Demolish portion of temporary turf area. Adjust
temporary irrigation in remaining turf area as necessary.
@ Re-grade Orchard Garden area and install drainage
system.
Phase 3
Freshwater Corner improvements and lawns
@ Demolish remaining temporary turf area and temporary
irrigation.
@
Re-grade for lawns, fountain area and corner entry plaza.
Install new drains for lawns and tie to existing system.
@ COI,st, uct r'avilion stl UctUI e. Install Haybarn over
Rancho Playground.
@ Install Orchard Garden landscape features, including:
walls, paving systems, small fountain, picnic tables, trees
and tree grates, planting area, benches, playground
equipment.
@
Install interactive fountain, steps, entry monument walls
and pergola structure.
@
@
@
Construct stage.
Install irrigation system, lawn, trees and other plantings.
Re-pave west parking lot to repair wear and tear during
Phases 1-3.
@ Utilize walkway to Donlon Way and west parking lot
as staging and access areas, backing out final paving as
construction finishes.
All costs are approximate and for planning purposes only. Estimate based on conceptual design and Api il 2006 March 2008 costs. and does not include escalation
which may result from phased construction. Other potential costs not included in this estimate are Native American observers and hazardous material removal.
"Mobilization, administration & contingency" contains provisions for contractor mobilization (10%), construction contingency (15%) and design contingency (25%) as
percentages of construction budget, as well as design fees and City administration costs (15% of total phase budget). All numbers rounded up to the nearest 100.
1
y~,@
~-.
I
l
I
I
I
J
104 ~ )~
Phase 5
Pioneer Cemetery improvements
@ Protect existing trees, demolish existing asphalt parking lot
and walkways, grade south lawn area and install drainage.
@
Protect existing trees and grade for diagonal parking off of
Donlon Way.
~~
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
Install new walkways.
Construct "outdoor classroom" area.
Replant and / or infill hawthorn trees.
Install irrigation and turf.
Install parking areas.
Construct entrance pergola structure.
Install lighting and site furnishings.
Phase 4
Cemetery expansion
@ Acquire Dublin Historic Preservation Association site (not
included in cost estimate).
@
@
Protect existing trees, grade site and install drainage.
Construct bridge footings and install pre-fabricated steel /
wood bridge.
@)
Construct freeway sound wall and columbarium
structure.
DeFl,olition $ JJ, 100 Den ,olition $ 19J,200 Den ,olition $ 1,000 Del "oIitiol"l $ GG,OOO
Cal'tnvvol k $ IJ,500 CarthvvOI k $ 65,300 [artnvvol k $ I I ,GOO Cartl"lvvork $ 8,800
Drainage $ I OG,500 DI ainage $ J, 100 Drainage $ 13,800 Drainage $ 7,500
raving $ OJ7,000 flaving $ 210,200 flaving $ 155,GOO flaving $ J25,300
rlanting & ill igatiol' $ 112,900 rlanting & ill igation $ 229,000 rlanting & ill igation $ 21,500 rlantir,g & irrigation $ 82,000
Site fUl niskil,gs & stl UctUI es $ 1,371,600 Site fUI nisnir,gs & stl UctUI es $ 161,600 Site fUl nishings & structurcs $ I ,201,700 Site fumisnir,gs & stl UctUI es $ 12G, 100
~1obilization, adFl,il,i~1 ation & contir,gcncy $ 1,511,900 ~1obilization, aOl"l,inistl atiol"l & contingenq $ . 015,000 ~1obilization, aon ,il,istl ation & contingeFlcy $ 1,023, 100 ~1obilization, adn ,inistl ation & eontir,genc, $ 145,GOO
'hMe 1 total S 4,8 16,888 'halc 3 total S 1,8 I 8,788 'hMC 4 total S 1,434,J88 'IIMC Statal S 1,861,388
@
Install irrigation, paving, plantings, lawn and site furniture.
Relocate structures
Refurbish structures
Landscape improvements
Mobilization. administration & contingency
Phase 2 total
$ 209 .000
$ 1.392,600
$ 2.208.300
$ 1.601.000
S 5.410.900
Relocate structures
Refurbish structures
Landscape improvements
Mobilization. administration & contingency
Phase 3 total
$ 0
$ 0
$ I .071 .600
$ 776.900
S 1.848.500
Relocate structures
Refurbish structures
Landscape improvements
Mobilization. administration & contingency
Phase 4 total
$ 0
$ 0
$ I All ,200
$ 1.023,100
S 2.434.300
Relocate structures
Refurbish structures
Landscape improvements
Mobilization, administration & contingency
Phase 5 total
$ 0
$ 0
$ 615,700
$ 445,600
S 1.061.300
4.3
MI' ;~~:;,*JdR
Qperations cost estimate
PHASE I buildout
Turf and maintenance. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $42,400
lot maintenance. . . . . . . . . . . , . . . , . , . . . . . . . . . . . $2,000
Phase I annual total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . $44,400
PHASE 2 buildout
Turf maintenance .... . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . $16,600
Irrigation and maintenance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $11,000
Planting and tree care. . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3,800
event preparation. . . . . . . . $2.13,300
mai!'ltenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $6,400
fountain maintenance ..,...........................
Phase 2 annual total. . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . $69,800
PHASE 3 buildout
Turf maintenance ................................. $1 1,700
Irrigation ami maintenance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $7,:WO
Planting and tree care .............................. $7,600
general inspection, stage & event preparation , $45,000
l3uilding maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , $6,400
Fountain maintenance. . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $29,2.00
Phase 3 annual total . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $107, I 00
Estimate assumes an
rate of $70 for maintenance staff.
All subtotals rounded to the next highest $ I 00.
Exclusions: trash pickup,
replacement and maintenance materials costs.
Disclaimer: This is a estimate of cost, Actual cost may
vary This estimate should be used as a guide
RIH.IA,IA q'
ElP US E ISI T E F RE
DU,BLIN HERITAGE CENTER
JUNE 28, 2005
The City of Dublin invites you to
attend a Public Workshop to
6:30 pm SITE WALK
discuss options for expansion
7:00-9:00 pm MEETING
of the Dublin Heritage Center.
Meeting will focus on
OLD ST. RAYMOND'S CHURCH
6600 DONLON WAY
community feedback and
response to the presentation.
For more information call Diane Lowart,
Parks and Community Services Director:
(925) 833-6645
ELP S ESt T E F R F
DUBLIN HERITAGE CENTER
The City of Dublin invites you to
JULY 26, 2005
attend a Public Meeting to dis-
7:00-9:00 pm MEETING
cuss conceptual design options
and inspirational themes for the
REGIONAL MEETING ROOM
DUBLIN CIVIC CENTER
100 CIVIC PLAZA
expansion of the Dublin Heritage
Center. Public participation will
be encouraged in small-group,
idea-generating workshops.
For more information call Diane Lowart,
Parks and Community Services Director:
(925) 833-6645
A.2. I
101 ~ IX
JUNE I, 2005
DUBLIN CITY HALL
ATTENDEES
Diane Lowart, Parks & Community Services Director City of Dublin
John Hartnett, Heritage and Cultural Arts Supervisor, City of Dublin
Elizabeth Isles, Heritage Center Director, City of Dublin
Steven Spickard, Economics Research Associates
Linda Cheu, Economics Research Associates
Aditya Advani, Royston Hanamoto Alley + Abey
Doug Nelson, Royston Hanamoto Alley + Abey
Nathan Lozier, Royston Hanamoto Alley + Abey
I . Aditya inquired about what background resources the City
could provide, Aerial photos, parcel maps, GIS data, survey,
etc. Diane will forward RHM any information, including digital
files on CD. Diane will check with the Dublin Square property
owner about surveying the private property.
2. Aditya asked whether there were any stakeholders concerned
with the Cemetery who should be included in discussions of the
Cemetery. Diane did not believe there were any stakeholders
at this point. Diane will send a map of the Cemetery to
RHM.
3. Diane explained that the Dublin Square property is owned
by Berkeley Land Company (Mike Mikulich). Berkeley Land
Company has been interested in developing the property
and proposed a office development 3-4 years ago, which was
blocked by the City Council. She has heard that Berkeley Land
Company has also proposed housing for the site, which would
require rezoning. The City Council is interested in preserving
the site.
4. RHM and ERA asked the City what potential uses they had
envisioned for the site.
a. John noted that a 250 seat community theater has
been discussed. There are two community theater
groups in Dublin, "Imagine Performing Arts" (formerly
"Dublin Theater Group") and "Valley Shakespeare
Company. "
b. The Historical Society envisions a green park with
some form of historical re-creation or interpretation.
c. Members of the Heritage and Cultural Arts
/If) ~ I~
commissions have discussed "gateway" features and
sculpture as well as re-creations of historic features.
d. John also noted interest in space for community art
classes and gallery space.
e. The Old St. Raymond's Church is often rented for
weddings. There is a potential to develop the site to
better accommodate weddings, including space for
receptions. The issue offreeway noise would need to
be mitigated.
f. Elizabeth noted that the primary users of the existing
Heritage Center are school groups. Additional
classroom space at the Heritage Center would be
useful.
g. Additionally, the existing Heritage Center has been
used for small band practice and performances.
h. There is a possibility to move Antone Schoolhouse
from Tassajara Road to the Dublin site, however, Dublin
already has one school house at the Heritage Center.
I. Specific precedents mentioned to refer to include
Ghiradelli Square (San Francisco), Jack London Square
(Oakland), Todos Santo Plaza (Concord), and Hap-
McGee Park (Danville), Ardenwood Farm (Fremont),
and Danville Community Theater (converted Grange
Hall). Elizabeth and Doug, both urged that site should
not create a false history.
J. Overall, city staff is looking for a program that provides
a unique asset and cultural heart to the community. No
particular revenue goals were identified.
5. The first Public Community Meeting will be June 28 at
Old St. Raymond's Church. There will be a site walk
at 6:30pm and the meeting will be 7-9pm. RHM will
create an announcement flier for the City to distribute.
RHM will develop and agenda and presentation boards
for the meeting.
6. Costs for different options will be discussed at the second
community meeting along with an expanded presentation of
project alternatives.
*** END***
A.2.2
)I) ~ JA
Public meeting
JUNE 28,2005
DUBLIN CITY HALL
ATTENDEES
Diane Lowart, Parks & Community Services Director City of Dublin
John Hartnett, Heritage and Cultural Arts Supervisor, City of Dublin
Elizabeth Isles, Heritage Center Director, City of Dublin
Steven Spickard, Economics Research Associates
Linda Cheu, Economics Research Associates
Aditya Advani, Royston Hanamoto Alley + Abey
Doug Nelson, Royston Hanamoto Alley + Abey
Nathan Lozier, Royston Hanamoto Alley + Abey
(Members of the Public, see sign in list)
Summary
The purpose of this meeting was to introduce the project to the
community and to begin a public visioning process to gather community
ideas and feedback. The meeting began with a site walk of the Dublin
Heritage Center and Donlon Way to the Dublin Square property.
Background information on the project and the public process, including
the history of Dublin and project opportunities were presented. The
floor was then open for discussion, and a variety comments and
suggestions from the community were recorded.
I. Diane Lowart introduced project team, explained the public
process for the project, and presented background information
and rationale for the project. Diane explained that the City has
identified a deficit of parkland at build out of the City, is interested
in studying expansion potential for the Pioneer Cemetery, and
is interested in expanding the current Heritage Center. Diane
explained that the City has already commissioned a historical
resources inventory report, and has subsequently adopted
design guidelines for new development in the historic district.
Elizabeth Isles described current uses of the Dublin Heritage
Center (permanent & temporary exhibits, workshops, school
tour program, concerts, music jams, and facility rentals)
2. Aditya asked that everyone in the room introduce themselves
to the group and briefly speak about their background and
interests in attending the meeting.
3. Aditya presented the agenda and asked for any questions or
additions to the agenda. No changes were suggested and the
II.) ~ Jdi'
follow agenda was agreed upon:
a. Project Information
b. Overview of Dublin History
c. Park Design
d. Development Economics for Cultural Facilities
e. Case Studies
f. Public Input
g. Next Steps
- next meeting: July 26
- development options
4. Elizabeth Isles presented a brief history of the City of Dublin.
a. A number of Ohlone and Bay Miwok tribes utilized
Willow Marsh and Alamilla Springs since 500AD
b. 1772 Spanish expedition through San Ramon Valley,
stopping at Alamilla Springs
c. I 834 Rancho San Ramon established
d. 1850 Fallon, Dougherty and Murray purchase 246 acres
from Amador
e. 1856 Murray Schoolhouse built
f. I 860 Green Store opens
g. Dublin remains small in the 1940s
h. Suburban growth in the 1960s
I. Historic preservation efforts in the 1970s
5. Aditya presented the opportunities for the project as creating a
resource for the future, commemorating Dublin's cultural and
natural history and its contemporary community, and revitalizing
the historic core of Dublin. Aditya asked the community to
consider the following key questions:
a. What is the criteria for a successful historic park?
b. What is the minimum program activity required?
c. What is the maximum capacity of the site (building size
and parking constraints)?
d. What defines historic authenticity?
e. How do we reflect the contemporary Dublin
community?
f. How do we increase visibility of the Heritage Center?
6. Steve Spickard of ERA discussed potential financial implications
for the City in purchasing and developing the proposed
expansion site. Steve asked the community to consider the
following:
a. Livability and the need for park land
b. Needed community facilities (museums, galleries, art
classrooms, community theater, event and festival space)
c. Acquisition and operating costs, revenue potential
d. Historic authenticity (places with heart and soul, not
contrived false history)
e. Potential for site to be a visible public resource, create
) J .3 ~ /~
value for neighbors, and encourage new adjacent uses
7. Aditya presented the following site development
options:
a. Park on entire site
b. Park on half of the site, private development on the
other half
c. Park on 113 ofthe site, private development on the
remaining 213 of the site
d. City cultural facility with parking on half the site, private
development on the other half of the site
8. Doug Nelson of RHM noted the unique character of the
Dublin Heritage Center expansion project. Doug presented a
variety of case studies to consider, that though different in scale
and context could serve as a starting point for discussion. The
case studies included:a. Historic parks and
Plazas (Healdsburg Plaza, Saint James Square, Sonoma Plaza,
and Todos Santos Plaza)
b. Historic preservation parks (Ardenwood Historic Farm,
Old Town San Diego, Hap McGee Ranch Park, Pio Pico
State Historic Park)
c. Adaptive Reuse (UC Santa Cruz Barn Theater, Fort
Mason Center, Plaza Park/Carnegie Library Oxnard.)
PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS
Following the City and consultant team presentation, the public was
encouraged to comment and discuss ideas for the Dublin Heritage
Center expansion. Ideas from the public discussion are summarized
below.
PARK USES & ACQUISITION
I . Many comments encouraged the idea of a performing arts
center / theater as an appropriate community use for the
site. It was noted that some coordination work has already
begun to determine regional theater needs and that the region
needs a community incubator theater of 150 seats. It was also
mentioned that Dublin High may build a new theater space for
800-1000 seats. Willows Theater in Concord, Aurora Theater
in Berkeley, and the Danville Community Theater were all
mentioned as examples of small community theaters. Journey
Church, located on the site being considered for City acquisition
was also identified as housing a number of non-church related
community uses.
2. Potential revenue-generating uses for the site were discussed.
One person suggested the idea of developing some kind of
senior or affordable housing on a portion of the site, possibly in
I)Lf ~ IX
conjunction with a cultural/arts facility as a way to bring activity to
the site. Other revenue generating ideas included some type of
commercial or retail development such as a boutique hotel or
restaurants. Albuquerque and Todos Santo Plaza in Concord
were noted as vibrant plazas surrounded by retail/restaurants,
though their surrounding land uses are more commercial.
3. Others questioned the need to generate revenue on the
site and asked whether the City could find a way to afford
acquisition of the entire 4.2 acre site for public use. One person
commented that new development in east Dublin could pay for
the development of the park. A number of speakers noted the
need for more open spaces and community gathering spaces in
west Dublin. If the ultimate desired development of the site is
not affordable at once, it was suggested that the project could
be phased creating temporary but usable outdoor spaces prior
to the construction of a building.
4. Other potential park elements suggested included play
areas for children, water play features, a dog park, an
outdoor amphitheater, picnic areas, and space for biking
and skateboarding, wedding reception space, and a quiet
passive-use park. Creating a variety of spaces for all ages was
recommended by one speaker.
5. City acquisition of the Green Store and A1amilla Springs was
encouraged as a high priority by a few people.
6. One person asked whether there was any potential in
investigating whether Hexel might be interested in selling or
swapping their property with the City.
PARK DESIGN
I . One person encouraged highlighting Dublin's Irish heritage.
Another person suggested depicting the areas agricultural
heritage with farming equipment. Others asked what
contemporary residents could contribute to the park and how
to make the history relevant to new residents with a variety of
backgrounds. Ethnic diversity and Dublin's changes over time
and into the present were noted as important. One person
questioned the authenticity of creating a new building to look
historic and urged that the historic architectural guidelines to be
relaxed to allow for more contemporary possibilities.
2. A number of comments focused on restoring and enhancing the
ItS:::f J~
historic natural character of the site, including the creek, springs,
historic marsh, and native trees and vegetation, and historically
significant orchard trees. Natural features were suggested as
inspiration for design. A creek walk and restoration of the creek
was suggested, as was some way to recreate or represent the
importance of Alamilla Springs.
3. It was noted that the existing Heritage Center is nearly invisible
from Donlon Way. Views into the site from Dublin Boulevard
and views from the freeway were suggested as important
considerations for site design. A view of St. Raymond's Church
from Dublin Boulevard was encouraged. A building at the
corner of Donlon Way and Dublin Boulevard and gateway
elements were suggested as a way to announce the presence
of the Heritage Center from Dublin Boulevard. Another
person wanted to see a peaceful, beautiful space at the corner
of Dublin Blvd. and Donlon, without buildings. Consideration
of views from the site to the hills was also mentioned.
4. The potential of bringing historic buildings to the sites was
mentioned as a possibility. One person noted that a Protestant
Church was once located adjacent to St. Raymond's Church.
The Antone Schoolhouse on Tassajara Road was identified as
a building available to move to the site, though the Heritage
Center already has a historic schoolhouse.
5. Parking and transportation were discussed. The idea of a trolley
bringing people to the site from other parts of the city was
suggested. Another idea is to lease parking space in the evenings
and weekends from the Heritage Center Office Complex.
Modifications such as the narrowing, or removal of Donlon
Way was suggested, as was the creation of diagonal parking on
Donlon Way was also noted as a way to decrease the need for
parking on the site. The City was asked to consider trail system
connections including connections from the West Dublin BART
station and transit oriented development. Consideration of
the character of Dublin Boulevard was suggested as well as the
restoration of the old stage road.
Following the discussion, Aditya asked the participants whether they
wanted to vote on any of the community comments and ideas recorded
on the poster boards during the discussion. The community consensus
was not to vote on anything at this time, but for the City and consultant
team to consider the community input and develop these ideas into
their work for the next community meeting.
*** END***
A.2.3
/I ~ 1/,;Lg
Public meeting
JULY 26,2005
DUBLIN CITY HALL
ATTENDEES
Diane Lowart, Parks & Community Services Director, City of Dublin
John Hartnett, Heritage & Cultural Arts Supervisor, City of Dublin
Elizabeth Isles, Heritage Center Director, City of Dublin
Linda Cheu, Economics Research Associates
Aditya Advani, Royston Hanamoto Alley + Abey
Doug Nelson, Royston Hanamoto Alley + Abey
Blaine Merker, Royston Hanamoto Alley + Abey
(Members of the public, see sign in list)
SUMMARY
The purpose of this meeting was to get community feedback on six
alternative concepts developed by RHM for the Dublin Historic Park:
three for a whole site acquisition, two for a half site acquisition and one
for a one-third site acquisition. The meeting began with a recap of the
public meeting of June 28, 2005 by Aditya Advani. It included a summary
of the historical landscape typologies of this site used as basis for the
design, a summary of the visioning meeting (6/28105) and a summary of
the project goals and key issues. Then he presented three conceptual
alternatives for the design of the park: I) "Historic Palimpsest," 2)
"Crossroads Plaza Park" and 3) "Garden Rooms & Creek Walk" and
a reduced-site version of each of these three. After these alternatives
were presented, Linda Cheu discussed the park's programming options
investigated by Economics Research Associates and outlined their various
costs, revenue-generation potential, and spatial requirements. The floor
was opened for discussion, and members of the community were
invited to ask questions about the alternatives, express which option
they preferred and identify elements in any of the proposals that should
be brought forward as design work continued.
MINUTES
I . Diane Lowart introduced the project team and explained the
public process for the project. She explained that the City had
been directed by the Council to commission the exploration of
three park designs, with each alternative to include a reduced
site size option in case the Council decided not to acquire
the entire block for the Park. Several community members
111~/~
expressed the view that the Council should acquire the entire
block for the Park regardless, and Diane reiterated that the City
and its consultants had been charged to explore reduced-site
options as well, and these would be presented to the Council.
2. Aditya Advani asked that everyone present introduce
themselves, say how long they had lived in Dublin, and what
their interest in the Park was.
3. Aditya presented the historical landscape typologies local
to the site that had been used to develop the three design
alternatives.
4. Aditya introduced the three design alternatives by explaining
that, since the site had been wiped relatively clean of the traces
of history, the park could be designed starting from the image
that the community wanted to create. Then he explained the
three alternatives. For each, he showed a plan drawing and a
set of images from precedent projects that could inform the
design, and a reduced-site version.
a. Historic Palimpsest
In this option, various landscape typologies are
assembled to create a "geography of memory." The
plan is a mosaic of elements that reference the historic
marsh, the spring, and the crossroads inn, all organized
around a quadratic plan. Options were shown for a full
site design, half site, and a design that included the actual
Alamilla Spring adjacent to San Ramon Road as a pocket
park linked to the historic park.
b. Crossroads
The "Crossroads" scheme is organized around an "X"-
shaped walkway plan that cross in the center of the site
at an interactive water feature. The plan recalls typical
American town squares, as well as the Spanish colonial
layout of plazas. In this more formal plan, multipurpose
lawns accept changing programs and a bands hell at
one side accommodates performances. Options were
shown for a full and half site design.
c. Garden Rooms & Creek Walk
In this option, park elements are organized along a
"creek walk" that contains a narrative about the history
of the site and leads one from a water feature at the
corner of Donlon Way and Dublin Boulevard, through
the Heritage Center, and toward the creek. History
walls spaced across the site contain various graphics
depicting the area's settlement and development.
Parking is moved to the north and center of the site
and a large community/cultural building occupies the
center of the Park. Options for a full and a half site were
presented.
JI<;} 1 ~
5. Linda Cheu, of Economics Research'Associates, presented
initial research on the spatial requirements, users, revenue
generating potential, costs, and other issues associated with
several types of program that might be implemented as part of
the Park design. She outlined the opportunities and constraints
associated with a black box theater, event space rental, arts and
crafts programs and exhibit spaces.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION ITEMS
Following presentation by the consultant teams, Aditya opened the floor
to public comment and asked for specific feedback I) which proposal(s)
attendees favored, both for the full-site and partial-site options and 2)
which elements in all any of the proposals attendees liked, regardless of
which alternative was eventually brought forward to final design.
SPECIFIC COMMENTS
I . The "Garden Rooms / Creek Walk" option contained many
elements which attendees favored, especially: history walls, an
interactive water feature, and a linear walk from the corner of
Donlon Way and Dublin Boulevard to the creek,
2. An interactive water feature was especially popular as a design
element, and generally attendees expressed the desire to see
one included in the final design. Some people were concerned
with the location of the water feature, and asked that it not be
placed too close to Dublin Boulevard for safety and aesthetic
reasons. Some people felt it would be used more if it were
located away from traffic.
3. Several people expressed concern that any building sited at the
corner of Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way would block both
views and circulation from that corner toward the Heritage
Center. Generally, the siting of a building on that corner was not
favored. Attendees did express that this corner was important
to the park, however-whatever went there needed to draw
people into the park, but not block their path.
4. The "Spring" element in the "Garden Rooms / Creek Walk"
alternative was favorably viewed by some attendees who asked
that it be brought into the final design.
5. Much of the discussion of program centered on revenue
generation. Several people questioned the necessity of program
elements generating revenue. They asked if it would be better
ifthe park were designed withoutthis constraint in mind, since
U151 /~
it would allow for a broader consideration of options. Linda
Cheu responded by noting that revenue generation could
simply offset costs of park programs, which would otherwise be
borne by the City, and that regardless of the program options
considered she would explore revenue potentials in order to
fully understand the options.
6. Some attendees brought up the idea of acquiring the Green
Store from its current private owner and incorporating it into
the Park as a restored store. Diane Lowart said that the City
currently had no plans to purchase the property.
7. Several meeting attendees suggested that the new Park should
have program facilities that stood out as very unique, since
Dublin is currently building many new parks and this one could
easily fade into the rest without a unique attraction. The Allied
Arts Guild was cited as an example of such an attraction.
8. It was suggested that existing buildings and uses around the park
site could be incorporated into the design. Other commercial
uses around the park could be acknowledged in the park's
design in order to allow them to operate synergistically with
the park.
9. Other program elements suggested were:
a. A kiln that was tied to the history of Native Americans in
the area
b. Restrooms were needed
OTHER TOPICS
10. One attendee requested that larger context-scale maps be
brought in to the next community meeting, since some people
were not familiar with the area and had trouble orienting
themselves using the only the site plan.
I I . The owner of the private property subject to acquisition by the
City for the new park stated that he did not support the park in
the proposed location and that any acquisition of the property
would harm his business. He suggested that the site between
the freeway and and the creek may be a better location for
park expansion, but acknowledged that noise and access issues
would need to be overcome.
12. One person suggested combining high school and private
theater company users in a new theater facility, but it was
)JO~ )o<g
concluded that there are usually too many user conflicts to
allow this.
13. Low-water plantings were identified by one attendee as
desirable for the long-term ecological and financial sustainability
of the Park. She noted that large amounts of lawn were less
desirable than a mix of lawn, paving and low-water trees.
14. One attendee questioned whether a "European" aesthetic was
an appropriate model for the park.
15. One person expressed a desire to see the bandshell brought
into the final design.
16. One person favored multi-use facilities in the Park with an eye
toward long-term financial viability. It was explained that multi-
use buildings were more likely to make it through financial hard
times.
Following the discussion, Aditya asked attendees to vote on which of the
proposals and design elements they liked best. RHM staff distributed
color-coded stickers for participants to use in voting for the favorite
whole-site and partial-site options. Attendees were also asked to put
as many stickers as they liked on other photographs of precedents. The
following are the results of those votes:
DESIGN OPTIONS
Garden Rooms & Creek Walk, Full Site
Garden Rooms & Creek Walk, Half Site
Historic Palimpsest, Full Site
Crossroads, Half Site
Crossroads, Full Site
(9)
(8)
(4)
(2)
(I)
PRECEDENT IMAGES
Bronze fallen tree art piece
Bosque of trees on grid
Guadelupe River Park, history wall
Pool of Genes, rocks with names
Circular pools/fountains
FDR Memorial
Large, leafy allees
Cafe tables
Linear rock berms (Portland)
Trellises
Abstracted river
Allees with opposing benches
Large park trees (plane)
Landscape type: Creek
Landscape type: Inn
(9)
(8)
(7)
(7)
(6)
(6)
(5)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(I)
(I)
Landscape type: Spring
Historic .image of Amador Hotel
Linear water entry feature
Veterans Memorial
Linear falling stream
Gazebo
Kiosk selling food
Ornamental benches
*** END***
je:z{ ~ I~
(I)
(I)
(I)
(I)
(I)
(I)
(I)
(I)
j,l.?~ !~
Economics ReU!!llu'dt Alu,ochHutS
Memorandum
D ate: September 2, 2005
To: Royston Hanamoto Alley and Abey (RHAA)
From: Economics Research Associates (ERA)
RE: Financial Analysis of Cemetery Expansion (Dublin
Historical Park Project)
Introduction
One of the elements that has been discussed for inclusion in an expanded park is an
additional cemetery area that could serve as an expansion to the existing historical
cemetery at the Heritage Center. All of the space in the existing cemetery is spoken
for, although members of the founding families of Dublin continue to be interred there
on occasion.
The consultant team conducted targeted research into the economic factors that would
affect the operation of an expanded cemetery adjacent to the Heritage Center. A key
issue is whether or not a private entity would be interested in developing and operating
such a new cemetery. A preliminary financial analysis investigating the relative scale
of the potential operation was developed to assist in answering this question.
Economic Factors to Consider
· There are many different types of operators for cemeteries including for-profit,
not-for-profit, religious, and fraternal organizations, as well as government
operations by cities, counties, cemetery districts and the military.
· Private cemeteries (for-profit and not-for-profit) are regulated by the Cemetery
and Funeral Bureau of the California Department of Consumer Affairs.
· The existing historic cemetery is a traditional graveyard where full size caskets
are buried in defined gravesites, or family plots, in the ground. There are other
ways to store human remains as well. These include above-ground mausoleum
buildings where full size caskets are entombed, or columbariums where urns
388 Market Street, Suite 1 S8D San Francisco. CA 94111
(415) 9S6-81 S2 FAX (415) 956-5274 www.econres.com
Los Angeles San Francisco San Diego Chicago Washington DC
London
1e?3~ 1;J.6
September 2, 2005
Page 2
containing cremated human remains are stored'in pre-constructed niches. Any
new expansion area for the cemetery could have a mix of these types of
facilities.
· A mix of gravesites and columbariums is recommended in the Bay Area
market, because approximately half of all families choose cremation over full
burials.
· For planning purposes, typical average pricing is about$5,000 for a gravesite,
and $2,500 for a niche.
· The historical Dublin Cemetery is "sold out" in that no new gravesites are
available for new families. This means that there is no significant revenue
potential from the existing cemetery, other than fees to cover the cost of burials
in the space remaining in historic family plots.
. Due to the lack of revenue potential, it is unlikely that a private operator of any
expansion area would be interested in assuming long-term responsibility for the
existing cemetery. On the other hand, one of the most difficult problems in
establishing a new cemetery is getting the surrounding population to see it as a
place worthy of entrusting their loved ones remains for all eternity. The
presence of the existing historic cemetery bestows a rich heritage on the site,
and if the design of the expansion area were to take advantage of it (e.g., shared
entrance, visual connections, etc.) it would be in the best interest of the operator
of the new area to have the historic cemetery well maintained.
· The City does not currently own the land between the creek and 1-580 that
could be used for the cemetery expansion. No appraisal of that specific
acquisition has been done, but for planning purposes the appraisal for the
Dublin Square Shopping Center estimated a value of $36 per square foot for
that acquisition. Applying $36 per square foot to a 0.4 acre acquisition would
cost approximately $627,000.
· Access to the site is currently blocked; by the creek on the north and west sides,
and by an existing modular home on the east side. Additional expense will be
required to provide access, either by building a bridge over the creek or by
acquiring a right-of-way parallel to the freeway through the site currently
occupied by the residence.
· There are aesthetic considerations as well. A pleasant and restful environment
will maximize the attractiveness of the property for cemetery uses, and thus
maximize its revenue potential. A firm connection to the existing historical
cemetery, requiring construction of a bridge, could create identity and lend
instant "heritage" status to the expansion area.
loll( ~ J~
September 2, 2005
Page 3
. Freeway sound is another major aesthetic consideration. A significant sound
wall seems logical at a minimum. A sound wall, however, also creates an
opportunity to line the interior side of the wall with revenue producing
columbarium niches.
. There is a limit to how far people will walk from parked cars to participate in
burial services. The rule of thumb in the industry is about 120 to 140 feet. This
would require vehicular access to the expansion site, over a bridge or around to
the back side of the site parallel to the freeway, or both.
. Once the new cemetery is "sold out," an Endowment Care Fund must be in
place to ensure the perpetual maintenance of the grounds and facilities. The
endowment funq will be built from the sales revenues, and must be sufficient to
cover costs from interest only.
Financial Analysis and Operator Interest
The economic factors that affect potential for cemetery expansion have been collected
into a spreadsheet in Table 1. This is a preliminary analysis, and should not be
construed as a full feasibility study for cemetery development. It is sufficient,
however, to advise the City on whether or not to include this component further in the
park planning. The assumptions and approximations in the financial analysis are as
follows:
· Option 1 assumes a sound wall is built along 200 lineal feet of the freeway
frontage along the south side of the site. This wall would be lined with
columbarium niches, approximately 12 inches wide and stacked six high, to a
height of approximately seven feet. The remaining area would then be used to
accommodate the maximum number of traditional burial sites.
· Option 2 assumes the sound wall is augmented by 8 to 10 short walls of
columbarium niches projecting perpendicularly out from the sound wall into the
site creating a series of courtyards surrounded by niches in the walls. This
would increase the number of niches available, and reduce the number of
grave sites that could be accommodated.
. The gravesites are assumed to be traditional simple holes dug in the earth.
These minimize the up-front development cost, but must also take up more
space (assumed to be 5' by 10'). More grave sites could be created through use
of pre-dug concrete vaults that would reduce required dimensions to 3' by 8' ,
but these would cost approximately $5,000 each to produce, eliminating any
profit available on a per unit basis.
/-) r~ /d-f
September 2, 2005
Page 4
. Total sales revenues from the expansion could vary with market conditions and
will be collected over a number of years, but could range from $3 to $6 million
under the planning assumptions.
. The cost items are all approximations at this point. However, they indicate that
there could be some potential for this use. Most likely, an operator that already
owns or manages one or more cemeteries in the East Bay could most cost-
effectively run this small facility. This would reduce the overhead to be borne
by just this O.4-acre site, and provide an existing sales staff and perhaps
maintenance contracts.
. As can be seen by the bottom line difference between the two options, the
"denser" the project, the more "profit" or land value it can generate. The
ultimate design might call for even more density, with no traditional in-ground
burial plots at all. It could instead be composed of mausoleum crypts for full
coffins and columbarium niches, but still offering nicely landscaped gardens
and courtyards.
. At least one operator of existing cemetery facilities contacted by the consultants
expressed interest in investigating the feasibility of this small expansion area
further.
/db ;+. I~
Table 1
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF CEMETERY EXPANSION
(in Constant 2005 Dollars)
Option 1 Option 2
Physical Capacities
Potential Number of Grave Sites 149 115
Potential Number of Columbarium Niches 1050 2100
SOURCES OF FUNDS
Gross Revenue Potential 1 Estimation Factors
Sale of Grave Sites at $5,000 each $745,000 $575,000
Sale of Niches at $2,500 each $2,625,000 $5,250,000
TOTAL SOURCES OF FUNDS $3,370,000 $5,825,000
USES OF FUNDS
Site Acquisition Cost
0.4 Acres at $36 per sq. ft. $627,264 $627,264
Development Costs
Sound Wall: 200 LF Frontage $100 per L.F. $20,000 $20,000
Allowance for Grave Site Area $10 per sq. ft. $74,500 $57,500
Allowance for Columbarium2 at $500 per niche $525,000 $1,050,000
Bridge over Creek (rough estimate) $250,000 $250,000
Access Past Kennel (rough estimate) $100,000 $100,000
Other Pathways and Landscaping $10 per sq. ft. $174,240 $174,240
Soft Costs at 18% of above $205,873 $297,313
Operating Costs 3
Sales and Staffing for 7 to 10 Years $65,000 per year $455,000 $650,000
Maintenance During Sales Period $50,000 per year $350,000 $500,000
Endowment Care Fund, to produce $50,000 per year $625,000 $625,000
TOTAL USES OF FUNDS $3,406,877 $4,351,317
NET POTENTIAL "PROFIT/(LOSS)" ($36,877) $1,473,683
Profit as a Percent of Sales Revenues -1% 25%
1 Not including fees paid at the time of burial which are assumed to essentially cover costs.
2 Including a foundation and appropriate courtyard furnishings.
3 To keep costs down and realize economies of scale, this small facility would best be
run by an operator who already has one or more cemeteries in the Bay Area.
Source: Economics Research Associates. 9/2/05
I~ & ~ {~
RESOLUTION NO. - 08
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
*********
ADOPTING THE DUBLIN HISTORIC PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, on August 1, 2006 the City Council adopted Resolution 151-06 adopting the Dublin
Historic Park Master Plan which identified a six-phase buildout of the future park facility in Dublin's
Historic Specific Plan area on the southeast comer of Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way; and
WHEREAS, on March, 2008 City Council meeting, the Council received the Dublin Historic Park
Master Plan Addendum - Kolb Ranch Relocation and approved Option C which was to relocate five
structures from the Kolb Ranch to the Dublin Historic Park including the Old House, the Main House, the
Sunday School Barn, the Hay Barn and the Pumphouse; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to prepare an amendment to the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan to
incorporate the structures from the Kolb Ranch into the Dublin Historic Park; and
WHEREAS, the City prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration analyzing the potential
environmental impacts of moving the structures from the Kolb Ranch to the Dublin Historic Park for
rehabilitation and reuse. On June 3, 2008, the City Council adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and a Mitigation Monitoring Program prior to making any plan approvals (Resolution _-08,
incorporated herein by reference); and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the Dublin Historic Park Master Plan
Amendment at a public hearing on June 3, 2008; and
WHEREAS, proper notice ofthe public hearings was given in all respects as required by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council finds that the foregoing recitals
are true and correct and are made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby finds the Dublin Historic Park Master
Plan Amendment consistent with the General Plan and the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves the Dublin Historic Park
Master Plan Amendment.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of June, 2008.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
Interim City Clerk
- 1 -
ATTACHMENT 3