HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.1 BrittanyLaneRequestFile # 410-30
CITY CLERK
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 4, 2003
SUBJECT: Request by Residents of Brittany Lane Relating to PA00-009 (~
Report Prepared by: Libby Silver, City Attorney and 3eri Rgm,
Planning Manager
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Request for Agenda Item submitted 1/7/03
2. Letter from Black Mountain Neighbors dated 11/4/02
3. Resolution 26-01 of the City Council Affirming Planning
Commission approval of PA00-009
4. Resolution 82-85 [conditions 4 and 12]
5. Section 8.104.100 Waiver of the Zoning Ordinance as
amended November, 2002
6. Section 8.104.100 Waiver of the Zoning Ordinance that was
in effect in August, 2002
7. Assessor's Parcel Map showing lot pattern for Black
Mountain Project as well as adjacent lots
RECOMMENDATION://Q~ 1. Receive staff report and take no action at this time
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None at this time.
DESCRIPTION:
In 1985, the City Council approved Tract Maps 5072, 5073, and 5074. Lot 1 and Lots 7 to 12 of Block 1
of Tract 5073 were not constructed when the rest of the homes of the project were built in 1985. City
Council Resolution No. 82-85 sets forth the conditions of approval for the three tract maps. Conditions 4
and 12 of the Resolution require that a Site Development Review be processed for development of these
seven lots.
COPIES TO: In-House Distribution
Mr. David Bewley
Mr. Jeff Woods
Residents listed in 11/4/02
Petition
Residents. within 300' of
Black Mountain Project
Current 'owners of Lots 6 and
7 of Black Mountain
Project
G 2PA#L2000\00~009\CCSR2-4-03.DOC ITEM NO. ~'1
In 2000, Jeff Woods of Black Mountain Development applied for Site Development Review approval for
these seven lots. The Planning Commission approved Site Development Review and an appeal to the
City Council followed. The City Council adopted Resolution 26-01, affirming the decision of the
Planning Commission and approving Site Development Review for the seven lots, subject to certain
conditions. Although Mr. Woods has since sold Lot 7, the Site Development Review approval continues
to apply unless the new owner obtains a new Site Development Review (SDR) approval from the City.
At the December 3, 2002 City Council meeting Mr. David Bewley of 11166 Brittany Drive spoke during
the public comment period regarding some of the concerns of Brittany Lane residents regarding the Black
Mountain Project and heritage tree protection. Mr. Bewley presented a letter signed by 17 Brittany Lane
residents regarding the pruning of heritage trees, site development review and setbacks (Attachment 2).
In addition, Mr. Bewley indicated that he had other concerns that were not addressed in the letter. He
indicated to the City Council that he would put those concerns in writing and submit them at a later date.
On January 7, 2003, Mr. Bewley submitted a "Request for an Agenda Item" to the City Council,
summarizing his comments of December 3, 2002. The purpose of this agenda item is to review both the
letter signed by the Brittany Lane residents on December 3, and Mr. Bewley's comments submitted
January 7th.
The following comments were common to both letters (note that Staff is paraphrasing the comments,
please see Attachments 1 and 2 for complete text):
1. Residents of Brittany Lane are requesting a new Site Development Review be required for PAO0-O09.
The two letters question Staff' s determination that the Site Development Review approval for PA00-009
is currently valid. Although the Conditions of Approval ## 3 [18 months] and 72 [24 months] have two
expiration dates - Staff based its determination on the most conservative of the Conditions of Approval -
that a permit must be pulled and construction commenced within 18 months of the approval (Condition
No. 3). This conservative approach requires that the permits be pulled and construction commenced by
August 20, 2002. A Grading Permit for all the lots was issued on July 9, 2002, and a building permit for
Lot 10 was pulled on August 19, 2002. It should be noted that Mr. Bewley's letter mistakenly refers to
conditions of approval dated February 2000. The project was actually approved in February 2001 and
those conditions of approval are attached to this Staff Report as Attachment 3.
Residential and commercial projects are often phased. This means that generally no one pulls permits for
the entire project at once. The City's consistent practice since incorporation has been that the SDR is
considered valid once one permit is issued for a project. It doesn't matter if a project is sold or if more
than one lot is sold. Until a new SDR is filed, the SDR stands for all the lots as long as the developer is
diligently proceeding with the project. If one lot is sold and a new SDR applied for - the old SDR remains
in effect until the new one is approved assuming the developer is diligently working on the project.
Reduction of one of the lots in an SDR project does not invalidate the SDR for the other lots.
2. A request that a public hearing be held to review the existing conditions of approval for PA 00-009
with the purpose of modifying or changing the conditions to make them consistent with conditions of
approval for Tract Maps 5072, 5073 and 5074.
This request refers back to the decision that the City Council made when the Council affirmed the
Planning Commission approval on February 20, 2001. The City Council may recall at that time the
residents expressed that the setbacks that established an envelope for the development of houses within
Tracts 5072, 5073 and 5074 should not be modified by the new site development review for the Black
Mountain Project. However, the City Council determined that based on compatibility and view issues, it
made sense to reduce the front yard setbacks, thereby reducing the street height of the homes.
Black Mountain has pulled a building permit for one home. It has not, however, begun construction of
the home. Under California law [Avco Community Developers, Inc. v. South Coast Regional Commission
(1976) 17 Cal.3d 785], a developer can secure a vested right to proceed with a development if it has
"performed substantial work and incurred substantial liabilities in good faith reliance upon a [building]
permit". The courts look to the expenditure of "hard costs", not "soft costs." Black Mountain has not,
under these facts, secured a vested right to construct the homes under California law.
Although Black Mountain may not have a vested right to proceed with construction of the homes, that
does not give the City the authority to require a public hearing on this project while the Site Deyelopment
Review is in effect. The Site Development Review approval became final following the Council's
adoption of Resolution 26-01 and the running of the time to file a lawsuit challenging the SDR.
Although the Zoning Ordinance provides that a SDR approval can be amended [DMC 8.104.090], the
application to amend the SDR must be filed by Black Mountain, the original applicant [DMC 8.104.040].
An amendment cannot, under the City's Zoning Ordinance, be initiated by neighbors or the Council.
Thus, unless Black Mountain applies to amend the SDR, the SDR approval is valid as long as the
developer diligently proceeds with the construction of the homes.
3. A request that the City Council reconsider the modifications to the setback requirement of Tract Maps
5072, 5073 and 5074 that was approved as part of PAO0-O09.
This request for reconsideration of the City Council affirming the Planning Commission approval of PA
00-009 again relates to the issue relating to setbacks that was the subject of the appeal hearing. The City
has no authority to require a new SDR hearing on this project (see Staff response under Item 2, above).
4. The Community Development Director should not be able to approval a minor modification to the
plans after the project is approved
The purpose of this Section of the Zoning Ordinance is to allow the Community Development Director to
issue a Site Development Review Waiver when minor modifications to the approved project are requested
that meet the intent of the original approval.
Two areas have been identified in Mr. Bewley's letter where he believes waivers have been issued: (1)
relating to the time period in which the Site Development Review is in effect; and (2) Protection of the
drip line of heritage trees.
In Item No. 1, above, Staff has explained how we have consistently interpreted the effective date of Site
Development Review. This interpretation is not classified as a Site Development Review Waiver.
Staff is currently reviewing building permit plans for Lot 8 of the Black Mountain Project. This lot has
Heritage Tree No. 340 on it. The challenge for the developer and Staff has been to ensure that the intent
of the conditions of approval to protect the heritage tree is implemented while allowing for development
of the approved house. Several conditions of approval ensure that the heritage tree is protected.
Additionally, there is in place a Heritage Tree Ordinance and Wildfire Management Plan. Staff has been
working with the developer, the City Fire Marshal and the City Arborist to make sure that the tree is
protected, but at the same time make sure that the house that is constructed will be in compliance with the
Site Development Review and Wildfire Management Plan.
At the present time, the drip line of the tree is fenced and no pruning has taken place. Prior to beginning
construction, the developer must comply with the Wildfire Management Plan and prune the tree. The
pruning to reduce fire danger will be supervised by the City's Arborist and Fire Marshal to ensure that the
safety of the tree and residences are protected. All pruning will take place within the fenced protection
zone. The pruning will not change the location of the fence and the drip line that has been determined at
the time of submittal of building permit.
Staff is working with the developer on building techniques that will allow the same house to be
constructed on the lot with minimal changes. The first story of the house may need to be indented to
provide the 5-foot protection area. The second story may cantilever over the tree. This would allow for
the protection of the heritage tree root area (5 feet) and at the same time, allow the approved house to be
constructed with minimal modifications. If the design change is determined to be in compliance with
City Building, Fire and the Arborist's recommendations, the Community Development Director intends to
issue a Site Development Review Waiver.
The Site Development Review Wavier Process is codified in Section 8.104.100 of the City of Dublin
Municipal Code. This process allows for Staff to approve minor changes to the Site Development Review
approval as the project moves forward towards building permit and more information about a site or a
building become known. Site Development Review Waivers allow Staff to facilitate and work out
solutions to issues that arise in the field or as more engineering and architectural plans are developed,
without bringing minor issues that do not change the intent of the approval back to the Planning
Commission. Site Development Review Waivers are documented in the City files by an application,
attached plans as well as the Staff justification for granting the Waiver.
There has been one Site Development Review Waiver issued on the project to date. This Waiver was
issued on Lot 10. The purpose of the Wavier was to allow a modification to the placement of the house
on the lot. The house footprint was rotated to accommodate the retaining wall and side yard drainage on
the north side. The modification allowed for less intensive grading and filling of the split pad lot. As
modified, view corridors were maintained at 25 feet between Lots 10 and 9 and 28 feet between Lots 10
and 11. The rear yard setback was shortened from 55 feet to 52 feet. There was no change made to the
building height, size or design.
5. The Heritage Tree Ordinance is not being enforced and needs to be revised.
As noted above under Item 4, Staff is reviewing the building permit plans for Lot 8. Staff will and has
ensured that the Heritage Tree Ordinance is being followed for the Black Mountain Project. Public
Works Staff monitor the project on a daily basis. In addition, Staff and the City's Arborist meet regularly
with the developer and their arborist to ensure that the conditions of approval are implemented.
Although Mr. Bewley has indicated that the Heritage Tree Ordinance needs to be revised to guarantee
protection of preserved trees, no specific language or problems were identified in his letter. As the City
works with the Heritage Tree Ordinance Staff will identify any weak areas and bring forward
amendments to improve it. If the City Council should desire a maj or modification to the Ordinance, Staff
suggests this be discussed as part of the Goals and Objectives discussion in March 2003.
· 6. The new Site Development Review Applications for Lots 6 and 7 should use the same envelope defined
by the 1985 conditions to prevent inconsistent enforcement.
Staff is currently reviewing Site Development Review Applications for Lots 6 and 7. Lot 7 has a current
Site Development Review Approval under PA00-009, which stays in effect until it either expires or is
replaced by a new approval. Lot 6 is a custom lot that was not included in the PA00-009 approval.
Following Staff review of the applications, recommendations will be made based on view, tree protection,
and design to ensure the best possible solution to fit the homes into the existing neighborhood. The Site
Development Review will be heard by the Planning Commission.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Cotmcil receive the Staff Report and take no action at this time.
Request for Agenda Item - Custom lots on Brittany Lane
Submitted by Residents of Brittany Lane as requested by Council 3~ December, 2002.
REQUEST:
Residents of Brittany Lane are requesting that the Council require a new Site Development
Review for Site Development Review .Application PA 00-009 and for Lot 6.
We further request that the February 2000 Second Conditions of Approval, which allow the
development of the six custom lots on Brittany Lane and the one Custom Lot on Rolling
Hills Drive, be reviewed in a public meeting with the purpos~ of establishing firm guidelines
consistent with the First Conditions of Approval established for our subdivision in 1985, the
Second Conditions of Approval established February 2000, and the Dublin Heritage Tree
Ordinance.
We further request that that the Council reconsider the exceptions granted allowing
modification of mandatory setbacks based on size of a home due to the inappropriate
precedent it establishes for the rest our subdivision.
There are several reasons why a new site development review is appropriate to establish a
single set of standards that conform to the-original 1981 conditions that applies to our
subdivision and to these custom lots and to specifically reestablish that the size of a house
has never been a condition or a basis to modify the First Conditions of Approval established
in 1985 or the Second Conditions of Approval established in February 2000.
FIRST:
The mandatory time period established in the February 2000 Second Conditions of
Approval for all of the lots has expired without house plans, building permits or
construction being undertaken. A new Site Development Review is required.
Condition 3 of. the Second Conditions states "Approval of. the Site Development Review
shall be valid for one year from approval by the Planning Commission. If construction has
not commenced by that time, this approval shall be null and void. The approval period for
Site Development Review may be extended six (6) additional months by the Director of
Community Development upon determination that the Conditions of. Approval remain
adequate to assure that the above stated findings of approval will continue to be met.
(Applicant/Developer must submit a written request f,or the extension prior to the expiration
date o£the Site Development Review.)".
Condition 72 states: "Building permits for the proposed project shall be secured and
construction commenced within one (1) year after the effective date of this approval or said
approval shall be void" This one (1) year period may.be extended an additional one (1) year
after the expiration date of'this approval (a written request for the extension must be
submitted prior to the expiration date) by the Community Development Director upon the
determination that the Conditions of Approval remain adequate to assure that the above
stated Findings of Approval will continue to be met."
The February 2000 Second Conditions of Approval for this project passed by this Council
specifically mandates that the entire project be completed within a timely manner or a new
site development review will be required. A six-month extension was granted but expired
August2002. ~.~ / ~//~///,~9~,~
1 ATTACHMENT
Request for Agenda Item - Custom lots on Brittany Lane
Submitted by Residents of Brittany Lane as requested by Council 3rd December, 2002.
Only lot 10 has a permit and building has not been undertaken. Lots have been Sold without
development and all of the lots are being offered for sale as either developed or undevelOped.
Currently, a new sitedevelopment review is being done on lot 7, Which was sold as
undeveloped. Lot 6, which is adjacent to Lot'.7, is also undergoing a separate site
development review. Lot 6 is not part of this project but is still subject to the 1985 Conditions
of Approv'ai.
SECOND:
The developer is proposing a major change of a mandatory condition of approval. This
requires a new site development review..
The developer is proposing and the planning department is considering a request to allow
construction of the house on lot 8 up to 10 feet into the drip line of the trees, allowing up to
15 feet total encroachment because of the required five foot buffer zone. This request is being
considered even though:
· There are 35 mandatory conditions protecting this tree in the second conditions of
approval, passed by this council in February 2000
· Mandatory language establishing a 25 foot buffer zone in the 1985 original Conditions of
Approval
· The Heritage Tree Ordinance establishes this tree as a preserved tree.
Condition 16' of 1985 Conditions passed by this council, which still apply, establish a zone
25 feet beyond the drip lines of this tree requiring approvals, horticultural reports for any
grading within that zone.
The Second Conditions of February 2000 devote 35 out of 112 conditions to .the onsite trees
'and all are mandatory. This surely indicates the importance that the Council attached to tree
preservation at the time of development approval. For example:
Condition 78 of the Second Conditions states "A Tree Protection Zone shall be established at
the drip lines of all trees. No grading, excavation, construction or storage of materials shall
occur within this zone".
Condition 111 of the Second Conditions states '2qo structure shall encroach to within 5 feet
of the drip line of a' Fire. Resistive Heritage Tree".
THIRD:
Reduction of the mandatory 20 foot setback to allow for a larger home should not be
considered in a new site development review.
Modification of Condition3 First Conditions of Approval in 1985 established a mandatory
20-foot setback for all of the homes in our subdivision. Allowing reduction to 13 feet to
allow larger homes to be constructed on lots 8 and 9 creates bad precedent (Can existing
owners of homes in our subdivision apply for reduced setbacks to increase the size of their
2
Request for Agenda Item - Custom lots on Brittany Lane
Submitted by Residents of Brittany Lane as requested by Council 3r~ December, 2002.
homes?). It invites requests for modification of other mandatory Conditions and weakens the
authority of any other mandatory Conditions that establish an envelope within which a house
is to be developed. There is no Condition establishing the size of a home as part of the Site
Development Review process in our subdivision in the1985 or the February 2000 Conditions
and yet it was the basis for the modification allowed in the FebrUary 2000 Conditions of
Approval. Smaller homes could be constructed on these lots and comply with the mandatory
20-foot setback.
FOURTH:
A request to modify a condition should not be construed as a minor change within the'
jurisdiction of the Community Development Director where the condition is mandatory
and where the citizens in the local community object. A new Site Development review is
required.
A letter from the local residents was sent to this council last month asking for a new Site
Development review for the Black Mountain Project.
Condition 2 of the February 2000 Second Conditions of Approval states: "Modifications or
changes to this Site Development Review approval may be considered by the Community
Development Director, if the modifications or changes proposed comply with Section
8.104.100, of the Zoning Ordinance" Section 8.104.100, of the Zoning Ordinance only
allows for minor changes and specifically states it is never to be used to circumvent the need
for a new site development review.
A series of Site Development Waivers have been allowed when a new Site Development
Review should have been required. We have been informed that the approval of a building
permit for one lot will vest the project without time limitations. This is a major waiver of the
one-year time limit. Also there are waivers of mandatory conditions being considered on
other lots concerning setbacks, and as mentioned above, construction within the'tree drip
lines. In view of the importance attached to set backs and tree preservation throughout the
planning review process for this project, these changes, both individually and collectively
cannot be construed as minor changes, do not fall within the jurisdiction of the Community
Development Director and require a new Site Development Review.
It is necessary for the Council to establish that mandatory guidelines are to be followed and
that modifications are not allowed.
FIFTH: ·
The Dublin Heritage Tree Ordinance is not being enforced and needs to be revisedto
guarantee protection of preserved trees under Section 560.40b of the Heritage Tree
Ordinance.
Section 5.60.40b of the Heritage Tree Ordinance establishes oak trees on the lots as
preserved trees and is incorporated into the February 2000 Second Conditions of Approval.
Section 5.60.40 b states: "A tree required to be preserved as part of an approved development
plan, zoning permit, use permit, site development review or subdivision map." Condition 110
3
Request for Agenda Item - Custom lots on Brittany Lane
Submitted by Residents of Brittany Lane as requested by Council 3rd December, 2002.
of the February 2000 Second Conditions of Approval states "All nineteen Oak trees on the
project site addressed by the Tree Protection Plan are designated as Heritage Trees by this
Site Development Review and shall be protected by the provisions of the Heritage Tree
Ordinance pursuant to Section 5.60.40.b, Heritage Tree Definition".
The proposal being considered on lot 8 will allow for significant construction within the drip
lines of the trees. This is another major exception to a mandatory condition. Also it is not in
COnformance with any of the normal practices concerning protected trees. We can show the
Council documented evidence that Dublin, San Ramon and Pleasanton do not permit any
development within 25 feet of protected tree drip lines, yet exceptions were granted on this
site allowing development within 5 feet of the drip lines of the protected trees. Now it
appears that the plans may be modified yet again to allow even further encroachment into
protected tree drip lines
SIXTH:
New Site Development Reviews are being undertaken on Lots 6 and 7. They are subject
to the 1985 First Conditions of Approval but may not be subject to the February 2000
Second Conditions of Approval. There is a need to have all of the lots developed within
the same envelope defined by the 1985 Conditions to prevent inconsistent enforcement.
Lot 6 should be included because the Custom Lots are all subject to the same 1985
Conditions. Currently there is a proposal to reduce the mandatory 20 foot setback to 18 feet
on Lot 6. This will create uncertainty as to the mandatory height and setback requirements
for the remaining lots. Guidelines for all of the lots need to be established in a consistent
manner.
SUMMARY:
In summary, there are several reasons why a new Site Development Review is required for
the Custom lots 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. We are asking that this Council require a new
site development review for this project and that in this process:
o lot 6 be included
· the 20-foot setbacks, maximum height limitations based on the setback and grade of the
lots be consistently established
· the protection of the Heritage trees be consistently followed without exceptions or
modifications
· that all the homes be constructed within the envelope created by this site development
review.
Attached: Minutes of Dublin City Council meeting 3rd December 2002, for reference.
4
Request for Agenda Item - Custom lots On Brittany Lane
Submitted by Residents of Brittany Lane as requested by Council 3rd December, 2002.
Extract from Minutes of Dublin City Council meeting 3rd December 2002
David Bewley, Brittany Lane, congratulated the Mayor and Councilmembers on their re-
election, and asked that we put gna future agenda a project that was before the Council
previously' related to Black Mountain Properties. They request that the City look into a
series of issues on this and provide guidance. Seven custom lots were to be developed
and to be a single project. ]:t appears some of the lots are being developed separately.
As neighbors, they had a letter with 17 signatures, and asked that this be agendized for
future review. They are looking for some certainty on this project. There were :~12
conditions placed on this development. Their understanding is that if it isn't developed
within the time limit, it is null and void. They believe it is no longer being developed in a
phased manner, and feel a new SDR is in order. Substantial modifications are on lot 8 as
they are looking to build near a heritage tree. There were 35 mandatory conditions
relating to heritage trees. The Heritage Tree Ordinance specifically states trees must be
preserved. There has been an unauthorized cutting of one of the trees with a crew of 4
or 5 people. They took issue and called the City and were told they had permits. They
cut one limb off and stated they were through. They would like to see signs put on
heritage trees and conditions could also be put somewhere on the 10t so people looking
to buy will have no misunderstanding. People could look at fines as simply a cost of
doing business. We should strengthen the Ordinance to say if you cut a tree, you must
replace it, in addition to a higher fine. Look at lots 8 and 9; as they feel conditions
weren't followed. Look into some way where these specific conditions could be a part of
the deeds. He stated he would like the letter included in the record. Copies were
provided to the C!ty Clerk for distribution to the Council.
Cm. Oravetz asked if the ideas were included in the letter.
Mr. Bewley stated no, but he could write out his comments and get them to the City
Clerk. They are requesting 3 separate conditions for heritage trees and feel the
Ordinance can be refined.
RECEIVED
November 4, 2.002 DUBLIN PLANNING
Pierce Macdonald
Community Development Department
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Il_E: Black Mountain Development's
Proposal to Prune Heritage Oak Tree # 340
Site Development Review (SDR)
PA 00-009
Dear Ms. Macdonald,
We the undersigned are writing to you to give you our input as neighbors regarding the
Proposal and the current status of this Site Development Review (hereinafter SDR).
We are opposed to any pruning of the Heritage Oak tree as part of this development
because prun'mg to allow for construction inside the drip lines of these trees is
specifically prohibited by Condition 78 of the Conditions of Approval. In addition we
believe that tt~ere should be a new SDR for this project because the current conditions
haVe fundamental ambiguities that need to be addressed given that there are co~)tlicting
times lines in Condition 3 and 72. 'Additionally, there are changes in ownership of three
lots, mhd the timeline for development as required by both conditions 3 and 72 have
expired.
A brief summary of this project wilt help explain the reasoning for our position on this
matter.
There are seven undeveloped custom lots on Brittany Lane, lots 6 through 12 of Block 1
of Tract Map'5073. Lot 6 is the subject of a'separate SDIL which has expired and will
require a new SDR for any new development. 'Lots 7 through 12 and Lot 1 on Rolling
Hills Drive are Part of this SDR, whiCh was undertaken as a single project. As presented
at the public hearing on February 20, 2000 this project was to be constructed by Black
Mountain in a timely manner as specified in the Conditions of Approvai. This request for
pruning Heritage Tree #340, is for the tree located on Lot 8 and partly on Lot 9 and was
not part of the project that the Dublin City Council affirmed in their decision of the
Planning Commission on PA 00-009 on December 12, 2000, which was conditionall7
approved as Site Development, Review Application for PA 00-009 to develop .seven
Single family residences on seven tots on February 20, 2001 (with the Assessors Parcel
Numbers 941-2775-30, 94.1-2775-36, 941-2775-37, 941-2775-38, 941-2775-39, 941-
2775-40 and. 941-2775-41) as a single project. The residents Appeal of the Planning
Commission decision was focused primarily on issues related to Lots 8 & 9.
ATTACHMENT2.
These custom lots are part of the zoning of this tract and were never bulk. They have
speciat conditions regarding height, setbacks, and tree protection that are specific to these
lots, There are two conditions of approval allowing for development on the lots on
Brittany Lane. The FIRST Conditions are part of the Final Map establishing the
subdivision in 1985 and do not have a timeline or expiration clause. They are superseded
by the SECOND Conditions of approval, which are the subject of this letter. As already
noted, the SECOND Conditions of Approval were approved by the City Council by
Resolution 26-01 on Feb 20, 2001 as part ora public hearing and have a one-year
timeline for development or they are VOID unless extended. There are a total of 112
Conditions in the SECOND Condkions of Approval. The timelines are listed in
Condition 3 and Condition 72. Condition 78 established a tree protection zone at the
driplines of alt heritage trees on the property prohibiting any grading, excavation or
construction within the zone.
The Appeal of the December 12, 2000 Dublin planning Commission's conditional
approval of the SDR and Second Conditions of Approval resulted in yet another
modification for lot 8 and 9 to reduce the setbacks from 20 feet specifically required by
Condition 3, in the First Conditions of Approval, to 13 feet to save the Heritage trees as
required by Condition 78 of the Second Conditions of Approval, the Dublin Heritage
Tree Ordinance, Section 8.04.020(F) of the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance, and
Section 16 of the FIRST Conditions of Approval. The reduction of setbacks on lots 8 &
9 resulted in increasing the height ofthe homes over five feet from what would have been
allowed if the minimum 20 foot setbacks had been enforced as they were for the
remaining lots. Testimony was given and evidence entered by way of photographs and
arbor/st reports, demonstrating the tree pruning standards ~'or this development were
inconsistent with standards being applied in East Dublin and other neighboring
communities which prohibit any grading or construction for an area beyond the driplines
of protected trees. This modification, consisting of reducing the setbacks and allowing
grading and construction at but not to encroach into the driplines of the protected trees to
accommodate larger homes on lots '8 and 9, was not written or implied in the First
Conditions of Approval but 'was made by suggestion of a Councilmember, at the January
16th meeting' and approved bY a three to two vote at the final February 20t~ meeting with
strong dissenting statements regarding reducing the Setbacks in favor of larger houses.
This was the compromise. (On page 4 below, you will see two photos used as evidence
in the Appeal, and two photos showing where the drip line is established today on lot 8
and 9.)
As of today our understanding is that there is a building permit for only Lot 10. Lot 7 has
been sold and Will have a NEW Site Development Review and a different developer who
without permits or authorization of any kind, has already cut down a large branch of one
of the protected trees inside the dripline. Lot 11 and 12 have been sold and will not be
built by Black Mountain and new SDR's will be required if there are to be any material
changes. All of the lots are for sale as lots only or developed with the existing approved
plans. Grading with grading permits have been done on only 5 lots, with only lot 10,
Page 2 of 5 2
having a building permit granted on the last day of the extended approval period and no
construction has been undertaken on any of the tots. Currently the Black Mountain is
asking that Condition 78 be amended for Lot 8 wkhout going through another Site
Development Review with the Planning Commission. As this is no longer a single project
with homes to be built by Black Mountain with approved development, design standards
and established timelines for' coordinated development, we believe that new a New Site
Development Review should be allowed so that the residents could add additional
comments and suggestions and establish with certainty how, when and in what matter this
project will be undertaken.
Below is Condition 78 of the Second Conditions of Approval, which limits construction:
FIRE RESISTIVE HERITAGE TREES:
CONDITION 78: Tree Protection Zone.. A Tree Protection Zone shall be established at
the driplines of all trees. No grading, excavation, construction or storage of materials
shall occur within this zone.
Responsible Agency: PL.
The timeline on the SECOND conditions are in Condition 3 and 72, which state as
follows:
CONDITION 3: Term. Approval of the Site Development Review shall be valid for one
year from approval by the Planning Commission. If construction has not commenced by
that time, this approval shall be null and vOid:'The approval period for Site Development
Review mav be extended six (6) additionfil' months by the Director of Community
Development upon dete~nation that the Conditions of Approval remain adequate to
assure that the above stated findings of approval will continue to be met.
(Applicant/Developer must submit a written request for the extension prior to the
expiration date of the Site Development Review.)
Responsible Agency: PL
Required By: On-going
CONDITION' 72: Building permits for the proposed project shall be secured and
construction commenced within one (1) year after the effective date of this approval or
said approval shall be void. This one (1).year period may be extended an additional one
(1) year after the expiration date of this approval (a written request for the extension must
be submitted prior to the expiration date) by the Community Development Director upon
the determination that the Conditions of Approval remain adequate to assure that the
above stated Findings of Approval will continue to be met. [B, PL]
In summary, we the undersigned residents request that nq development be allowed within
the driplines of the Heritage Tree # 340 and tha~ a new Ske Development Review be
established for Lots 8 & 9.
Page 3 of 5 3
Protection Zone in East Dublin Protection Zone in San Ramon
Protection Zone Lot 8 Protection Zone Lot 8
The above photos show how the protection Zone for Black Mountain Project are set at
the driplines instead of beyond the driptines to protect the roots as is normally done in
other jurisdictions and in East Dublin.
Page 4 of 5 4
RESOLUTION NO. 26 - O1
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON DECEMBER 12, 2000,
APPROVING PA 00-009 BLACK MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR SEVEN SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES
ON EXISTING LOTS ON BRITTANY LANE WITH CHANGES PROPOSED BY STAFF
WHEREAS, Black Mountain Development has requested approval of a Site Development Review
for seven single family homes on existing lots on Brittany Lane; and
WHEREAS, a completed application for Site Development Review is available and on file in the
Dublin Planning Department; and
WHEREAS, The environmental impacts of this project were addressed under the Negative
Declaration prepared for the PA 85-035 Hatfield Development Corporation Planned Development
Rezone, Annexation and Site Development Review of which the subject lots were a part. The Negative
Declaration was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), State
CEQA Guidelines and the City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines. Further, the project is Categorically
Exempt pursuant to Section 15304, Class 4, minor public or private alterations in the condition of the
land, water, and/or vegetation which do not involve removal of healthy, mature, scenic trees except for
forestry and agricultural purposes. Specifically, Example 'T', Fuel management activities within 30 feet
of structures to reduce the volume of flammable vegetation, provided that the activities will not result in
the taking of endangered, rare, or threatened plant or animal species or significant erosion and
sedimentation of surface waters. This exemption shall apply to fuel management activities within 100
feet of a structure if the public agency having fire protection responsibility for the area has determined
that 100 feet of fuel clearance is required due to extra hazardous fire conditions. This project is adjacent
to a wildfire area and the 1998 California Fire Code requires 100 feet offuet clearance for this project;
and
WHEREAS, a Site Development Review is required for this project by Conditions 4 and 12 of City
Council Resolution 82-85 approving PA 85-035.3, Hatfield Development Corporation Investec, Inc.; and
WHEREAS, the project is consistent in all respects with the Heritage Tree Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the project is consistent in all respects with the Wildfire Management Plan; and
WHEREAS, the project is consistent in all respects with Dublin General Plan and Zoning
Ordinance; and
W1FIEREAS, the project is consistent in all respects with the conditions of approval of City Council
Resolution 82-85; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on said application on
December 12, 2000; and
WltEREAS, proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and
ATTACHN ENT &
WHEREAS, a staff report was submitted to the Planning Commission recommending approval of
the Site Development Review subject to conditions prepared by Staff, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use their independent judgement and
considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth; and
WHEREAS, on December 12, 2000, the Planning Commission did by a vote of 3 ayes and 2 absent
approve PA 00-009:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby make
the following findings and determinations regarding said proposed Site Development Review:
A. The approval of this application (PA 00-009) is consistent with the intent/purpose of
Section 8.104 (Site Development Review) of the Zoning Ordinance.
B. The approval of this application, as conditioned, complies with the policies of the General
Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, the Heritage Tree Ordinance, the Wildfire Management Plan
and City Council Resolution 82-85.
C. The approval will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working
in the vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare because all
applicable regulations will have been met.
D. Impacts to views have been addressed by sensitive design and siting of the proposed
single-family residences.
E. Impacts to existing slopes and topographic features are addressed in the project through the
use of pier and grade beams and by minimal grading to site the homes and front yards.
F. The approval of this application, as conditioned, is in conformance with regional
transportation and growth management plans.
G. The approval of this application, as conditioned, is in the best interests of the public health,
safety and general welfare as the development is consistent with all laws and ordinances
and implements the requirements of the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, the Heritage
Tree Ordinance and City Council Resolution 82-85.
It. The proposed physical site development, including the intensity of development, site
layout, grading, vehicular access, circulation and parking, setbacks, height, walls, public
safety and similar elements, as conditioned, has been designed to provide a desirable
environment for the development.'
I. Architectural considerations, including the character, scale and quality of the design, the
architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, signs, building materials and
colors, screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior lighting and similar elements have
been incorporated into the project and as conditions of approval in order to insure
compatibility of this development with the development's design concept or theme and the
character of surrounding development.
2
$. Landscape considerations, including the locations, type, size, color, texture and coverage
of plant materials, provisions and similar elements have been considered to insure visual
relief and an attractive environment for the public.
1NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Dublin City Council does
hereby find that:
A. The Black Mountain Development Site Development Review is consistent with the intent of
applicable subdivision regulations and related ordinances.
B. The design and improvements of the Black Mountain Development Site Development Review
is consistent with the Dublin General Plan polices as they relate to the subject property in that
it is a single-family residential development consistent With the Single-Family Residential
.Designation of the Dublin General Plan.
C. The Black Mountain Development Site Development Review is consistent with the Heritage
Tree Ordinance, City Council Resolution 82-85 and with the City of Dubiin Zoning
Ordinance.
D. The project site is located adjacent to Rolling Hills Drive and Brittany Lane, on seven existing
lots. Six shallow building pads face on Brittany Lane and on one flag lot on Rolling Hills
Drive. The homes will be supported by the shallow building pads, but the majority of each
residence will be placed on a framework of deep-seated piers and grade beams. This will
minimize grading impacts to the lots. Functional padded exterior living areas are proposed in
the front yards and' in raised deck areas. Therefore the site is physically suitable for the type
and intensity of single-family residential development proposed.
E. The environmental impacts of this project were addressed under the Negative Declaration
prepared for the PA 85-035 Hatfield Development Corporation Planned Development Rezone,
Annexation and Site Development Review of which the subject lots were a part. The Negative
Declaration was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), State CEQA Guidelines and the City of Dubtin Environmental Guidelines. Further,
the project is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15304, Class 4, minor public or private
alterations in the condition of the land, water, and/or vegetation which do not involve removal
of healthy, mature, scenic trees except for forestry and agricultural purposes. Specifically,
Example 'T', Fuel management activities within 30 feet of structures to reduce the volume of
flammable vegetation, provided that the activities will not result in the taking of endangered,
rare, or threatened plant or animal species or significant erosion and sedimentation of surface
waters. This exemption shall apply to fuel management activities within 100 feet ora
structure if the public agency having fire protection responsibility for the area has determined
that 100 feet of fuel clearance is required due to extra hazardous fire conditions. This project
is adjacent to a wildfire area and the 1998 California Fire Code requires 100 feet of fuel
clearance for this project.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby
affirm the decision of the Planning Commission on PA 00-009 on December 12, 2000, and hereby
conditionally approves the Site Development Review Application for PA 00-009 to develop seven single
family residences on seven lots with the Assessors Parcel Numbers 941-2775-30, 941-2775-36, 941-
2775-37, 941-2775-38, 941-2775-39, 941-2775-40 and 941-2775-41 as generally depicted by materials
labeled Attachment 1, stamped "approved" and on file in the City of Dublin Planning Department. This
approval shall conform generally to the project plans submitted by EDI Architecture dated "received
3
December 4, 2000" and "received February 12, 2001", the Heritage Tree Protection Plan for this project
stamped "received February 12, 2001", the Site Development Plan by RMR Design Group dated
"received December 4, 2000" and the Colors and Materials Boards submitted by EDI Architecture dated
"received June 12, 2000" by the Department of Community Development, unless modified by the
Conditions of Approval contained below.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Unless otherwise stated, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to final occupancy of
any building and shall be subject to Planning Department review, and approval. The following codes
represent those departments/agencies responsible for monitoring compliance with the Conditions of
Approval: [PL] Planning, [BI Building, [PO] Police, [PW] Public Works, [ADM] Administration/City
Attorney, [FI2N] Finance, [PCS] Parks and Community Services, [17] Alameda County Fire Dept., [DSR]
Dublin San Ramon Services District, [CO] Alameda County FlOod Control and water Conservation
District Zone 7.; The bolded words at the beginning or each condition of approval identify_ the general
topic of the condition of approval or constitute the condition if not followed by explanatory, text.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Standard Conditions of Approval. Applicant/Developer shall comply with all applicable City of
Dublin Standard Public Works Criteria (Attachment A). In the event of a conflict between the
Public Works Criteria and these Conditions, these Conditions shall prevail.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Approval of Improvement Plans through completion
2. Modifications or changes. Modifications or changes to this Site Development Review approval
may be considered by the Community Development Director, if the modifications or changes
proposed comply with Section 8.104.100, of the Zoning Ordinance.
Responsible Agency: PL
Required By:: Approval of Improvement Plans through completion
3. Term. Approval of the Site Development Review shall be valid for one year from approval by the
Planning Commission. If construction has not commenced by that time, this approval shall be null
and void. The approval period for Site Development Review may be extended six (6) additional.
months by the Director of Community Development upon determination that the Conditions of
Approval remain adequate to assure that the above stated findings of approval will continue to be
met. (Applicant/Developer must submit a written request for the extension prior to the expiration
date of the Site Development Review.)
Responsible Agency: PL
Required By: On-going
4. Fees. Applicant/Developer shall pay all applicable fees in effect at the time of building permit
issuance, including, but not limited to, Planning fees, Building fees, Dublin San Ramon Services
District Fees, Public Facilities Fees, Dublin Unified School District School Impact fees, City
Traffic Impact fees, City Fire Impact fees; Noise Mitigation fees, Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu
fees; Alameda County Flood and Water Conservation District (Zone 7) Drainage and Water
Connection fees; and any other fees as noted in the Development Agreement. Unissued building
permits subsequent to new or revised fees shall be subject to recalculation and assessment of the
fair share of the new or revised fees.
4
Responsible Agency: Various
When Required: Various times, but no later than Issuance of Building Permits
5. Revocation. The SDR will be revocable for cause in accordance with Section 8.96.0203 of thc
Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Any violation of the terms or conditions of this approval shall be
subject to citation. Responsible Agency: PL
Required By: On-going
6. Required Permits. Applicant/Developer shall comply with the City of DUblin Zoning Ordinance
and obtain all necessary permits required by other agencies (Alameda County Flood Control
District Zone 7, California Department ofFish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, Regional
Water Quality Conlxol Board, State Water Quality Comrol Board, Etc.) and shall submit copies of
the permits to the Department of Public Works.
Responsible Agency: Various
When Required: Various times, but no later than Issuance of Building Permits
7. Building Codes and Ordinances. All project construction shall conform to all building codes and
ordinances in effect at the time of building permit.
Responsible Agency: Bldg.
When Required: Through Completion
8. Compliance. Applicant/Developer shall comply with the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance, City
Council Resolution 82-85, the Wildfire Management Plan, the Tree Protection Plan for this project
and the CiW of Dublin General Plan.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Issuance of Building Permits and On-going
9. Conditions of Approval. In submitting subsequent plans for review and approval, each set of
plans shall have attached an annotated copy of these Conditions of Approval and the Standard
Public Works Conditions of Approval. The notations shall clearly indicate how all Conditions of
Approval and Standard Public Works Conditions of Approval will be complied with.
Improvement plans will not be accepted without the annotated conditions and standards attached
to each set of plans. Applicant/Developer will be responsible for obtaining the approvals of all
participating non-City agencies.
Responsible Agency: PW, PL, Bldg.
When Required: Building Permit Issuance
10. Solid Waste/Recycling. Applicant/Developer shall comply with the City's solid waste
management and recycling requirements.
Responsible Agency: ADM,
When Required: On-going
11. Refuse Collection. The refuse collection service provider shall be consulted to ensure that
adequate space is provided to accommodate collection and sorting ofpetrucible solid waste as well
as source-separated recyclable materials generated by the residents within this project.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Occupancy of Any Building
12. Water Quality Requirements. All development shall meet the water quality requirements of the
City of Dublin's NPDES permit and the Alameda County Urban Runoff Clean Water Program.
Responsible Agency: PW, PL
Required By: Issuance of Grading Permit
13. NPDES Permit. Pursuant to requirements of federal law, a NPDES permit shall be obtained from
the RWQCB, and any terms of the permit shall be implemented, if applicable.
Responsible Agency: PW
Required By: Finaling Building Permits
14. Phase 1 and Phase 2 Environmental Assessment Studies. Applicant/Developer shall supply the
Director of Community Development and Public Works Department with a copy of the '
Developer's Phase 1 and Phase 2 (only as required by Phase 1) environmental assessment studies.
All remediation required by those studies shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director
of Public Works prior to Improvement Plan approval.
Responsible Agency: PL, PW
Required By: Issuance of Grading Permit
15. Rodenticides and Herbicides. The use ofrodentieides and herbicides within the project area shall
be performed in cooperation with and under the supervision of the Alameda County Depaxtment of
Agriculture and will be restricted, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development,
to reduce potential impacts to wildlife.
Responsible Agency: PL
Required By: Issuance of Grading Permit
16. Dust Control/Cleanup. Applicant/Developer shall ensure that areas undergoing grading and all
other construction activity are watered or other dust control measures are used to prevent dust
problems as conditions warrant or as directed by the Director of Public Works. Furthermore,
Applicant/Developer shall keep adjoining public streets, sidewalks and driveways free and clean
of project dirt, mud, materials and debris, and clean-up shall be made during the construction
period as determined by the Director of Public Works. In the event that the Applicant/Developer
does not complete the clean-up within 48 hours of City's direction, the City has the option of
performing the elean-up and charging the costs of such clean-up to Applicant/Developer. The use
of any temporary construction fencing shall be subject to the review and approval of the Public
Works Director and the Building Official.
Responsible Agency: PW
Required By: Ongoing
17. Hold Harmless/Indemnification. Applicant/Developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless
the City of Dublin and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding
against the City of Dublin or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an
approval of the City of Dublin or its advisory agency, appeal board, Planning Commission, City
Council, Director of Community Development, Zoning Administrator, or any other department,
committee, or agency of the City the Site Development Review to the extent such actions are brought
within the time period required by Government Code Section 66499.37 or other applicable law;
provided, however, that the Applicant/Developer's duty to so defend, indemnify, and hold harmless
shall be subject to the City's promptly notifying the Applicant/Developer of any said claim, action, or
proceeding and the City's full cooperation in the defense of such actions or proceedings.
Required By: Through completion of Improvements and Occupancy of the last
Building
6
DRAINAGE/GRADING
18. Grading, drainage and improvement plan. The Applicant/Property Owner shall submit a
grading, drainage and improvement plan for each residence subject to review and approval by the
Public Works Director.
Responsible Agency: PW
Required By: Grading Permit
19. Compliance. The Applicant/Property Owner shall comply with the City of Dublin Public Works
Department grading permit process and Plan Check-List. An information packet outlining the
grading permit process and Plan Check List is attached.
Responsible Agency: PW
Required By: Grading Permit
20. Undocumented fill. Any undocumented filI on the project site shall be removed during the
grading for this project.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to issuance of Building Permits.
21. Drainage. All rain water leaders from roof~outters, balconies~ and patios shall be connected to a
pipe network that discharges to the abutting public street via through-curb drains. Foundation or
retaining wall subdrains that must discharge towards the rear of the properties due to their lower
elevation in relationship to the street shall terminate with City-approved energy-dissipation
devices or per a design that prevents erosion of the natural downslopes. No water from subdrains
or from earthen swales shall discharge in a concentrated manner over and across the natural slopes
below the proposed building envelopes. No surface storm runoff shall be directed towards or
across the neighboring sideyard lot finest.
Responsible Agency: PW
When required: Prior to issuance of Building Permits.
22. Lots 8 and 9. The cluster of boulders that exist on Lots 8 and 9 shall be removed to allow for
construction on the existing slope and to eliminate the hazard they may present to people. Other
surface boulders that may be discovered on the existing slopes shall be evaluated by the
geotechnical engineer to determine whether a hazard potential will exist if left in place. The
Director of Public Works shall concur with the recommendations of the geotechnical engineer
with respect to any boulders or other topographic features proposed to remain.
Responsible Agency: PW
When required: Prior to issuance of Building Permits.
23. Storm Drain Easement on Lot 1. According to the final map for Tract 5073, an existing 10'-
wide ~'Common Area Storm Drain Easement" extends across Lot 1 (Rolling Hills Drive flag lot) to
allow storm runoff from the neighboring Lot 2 to discharge downslope to Martin Canyon Creek.
No permanent stmctures, including the proposed residence, shall be constructedpver said exi.s~g
easement. Concrete flatwork and landscaping may be allowed if the Applicant demonstrates ma
said improvement will not adversely i .mpact the drainage pattern. Alternatively, the Applicant
may demonstrate to the City that perrmssion from the Silvergate Highlands Owners Association
has been obtained for the relocation of the easement and the associated drainage facilities.
Responsible Agency: PW
When required: Prior to issuance of Building Permits.
DEDICATIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS
24. Site Drainage and Erosion Control Plan. The project site shall drain in accordance with City of
Dublin Grading Ordinance and State Regional Water Quality Control standards. A Site Drainage
and Erosion Control Plan and "Best Management Practices" erosion control measures must be
reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department prior to approval of improvement plans.
Responsible Agency: PW
Required By: Approval of Improvement Plans
25. Mitigation Measures/Drainage Impacts. Applicant/Developer shall demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the Director of Public Works that all mitigation measures that need to be improved
as a result of drainage impacts of this project will be constructed prior to occupancy of any
building. All drainage improvements shall be constructed to the satisfaction to of the Director of
Public Works.
Responsible Agency: PW
Required By: Occupancy of any Building
215. Retaining Walls. Where finish grade of this property is in excess of twelve (12) inches higher or
lower than the abutting property or adjacent lots, a concrete or masonry block retaining wall or
other suitable solution acceptable to the Director of Public Works shall be required.
Responsible Agency: PW
Required By: Issuance of Building Permit
27. Joint Utility Trenches/Undergrounding/Utility Plans. Applicant/Developer shall construct all
joint utility trenches (such as electric, telephone, cable TV, and gas) in accordance with the
appropriate utility jurisdiction. All communication vaults, electric transformers, and cable TV
boxes shall be underground in designated landscape areas. Utility plans showing the location of
all proposed utilities (including electrical vaults and underground transformers) shall be reviewed
and approved by the Director of Public Works and Director of Community Development.
Location of surface or aboveground items shall be shown on the Final Landscaping and Irrigation
Plan and screened from view.
Responsible Agency: PW, PL
Required By: Occupancy of Affected Buildings
28. Driveway approaches. The driveway approaches for each residence shall be constructed in
accordance with City Standard Detail CD-306, and said work shall be performed per an
Encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department. Driveways shall be constructed of.
portland cement concrete or similar material in accordance with City Standard Detail CD-305.
For Lots 7-12, the driveway slopes shall not exceed 12%.
Responsible Agency: PW
When required: Prior to issuance of Building Permits.
29. Grading, site development, and foundation work. All grading, site development, and
foundation work shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations contained in the
geoteclmical report prepared by Engeo titled "Foundation Exploration, Bordeaux Estates, Dublin
California" dated April 6, 2000. The responsible geotechnical engineer shall certify on the
building plans that all proposed grading, site development, and foundation work conforms to the
recommendations contained in the geotechnical report.
Responsible Agency: PW
When required: Prior to issuance of Building Permits.
8
30. Plans for each residence. The plans for each residence shall include a site-specific plot plan
prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer in a format acceptable to the City. Said plans shall be based
on an accurate topographic survey of each lot, showing existing contour lines at one-foot intervals,
prepared by a licensed Land Surveyor. All proposed improvements including the house footprint,
proposed contour lines, drainage system, fences, retaining walls, building setbacks, street
addresses, water/sewer/joint trench utilities, etc. shall be shown on each plot plan.
Responsible Agency: PW
When required: Prior to issuance of Building Permits.
31. Steep inclines. Grading which results in slope inclinations that are steeper than presently exist
will not be allowed, unless the grading results in slopes no steeper than 2 horizontal to 1 vertical.
Responsible Agency: PW
When required: Prior to issuance of Building Permits.
PHASED OCCUPANCY PLAN
32. Phased Occupancy Plan. II'occupancy of residences is requested to occur in phases, then all
physical improvements within each phase shall be required to be completed prior to oceupancy of
buildings within that phase except for items specifically excluded in an approved Phased
'Occupancy Plan, or minor hand work items, approved by the Department of Community
Development. The Phased Occupancy Plan shall be submitted to ~the Director of Community
Development, and Public Works for review and approval a minimum of 45 days prior to the
request for occupancy of any building covered by said Phased Occupancy Plan. No individual
building shall be occupied until the adjoining area is finished, safe, accessible, provided with all
reasonably expected services and amenities, and separated from remaining additional construction
activity. Subject to approval of the Director of Community Development, the completion of
landsc, aping may be deferred due to inclement weather with the posting of a bond for the value of
the deferred landscaping and associated improvements.
Responsible Agency: PL, B
Required By: Prior to Occupancy for any affected building
Construction Noise Management Program/Construction Impact Reduction Plan
33. Construction Noise Management Program/Construction Impact Reduction Plan.
Applicant/Developer shall conform to the following Construction Noise Management
Program/Construction Impact Reduction Plan. Construction shall be conducted so as to minimize
the impacts of the construction on the existing community and on the occupants of the new homes
as they are completed.
Responsible Agency: PL
Required By: During any construction
34. Construction Noise Management Program/Construction Impact Reduction Plan. The
following measures shall be taken to reduce construction impacts:
Responsible Agency: PL
Required By: During any construction
a. Off-site truck traffic. Off-site track traffic shall be routed as directly as practical to and
from the freeway (1-580) to the job site. Primary route shall be from 1-580 along, San
Ramon Road, Dublin Boulevard, Silvergate Drive, Rolling Hills Drive and Brittany Lane.
An Oversized Load Permit shall be obtained from the City prior to hauling of any
oversized loads on City streets.
b. Watering. The construction site shall be watered at regular intervals during all grading
activities. The frequency of watering should increase if wind speeds exceed 15 miles per
hour. Watering should include all excavated and graded areas and material to be
transported off-site. Use recycled or other non-potable water resources where feasible.
9
c. .Idling construction equipment. Construction equipment shall not be left idling while not
In use.
d. Muffling devises. All construction equipment shall be fitted with noise muffling devises.
e. Erosion control measures. Erosion control measures shall be implemented during wet
weather to assure that sedimentation and erosion do not occur.
f. Mud and dust clean up. Mud and dust carded Onto street surfaces by construction
vehicles shall be cleaned-up on a dally basis.
g. Excavation haul trucks. Excavation haul trucks shall use tarpaulins or other effective
covers.
h. Wind erosion. Upon completion of construction, measures shall be taken to reduce wind
erosion. Replanting and repaying should be completed as soon as possible.
i. Phasing. Houses will be constructed in phases such that most of the construction traffic
can be routed into the subdivision without traveling in front of existing homes that are
occupied.
j. Fugitive dust. After grading is completed, fugitive dust on exposed soil surfaces shall be
controlled using the following methods:
k. Seeding and watering of inactive portions of the construction site. Inactive portions of
the construction site should be seeded and watered until grass growth is evident.
1. Watering. Require that all portions of the site be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive
amounts of dust.
m. On site speed limit. On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 mph.
n. Air Quality District. Use of petroleum-based palliatives shall meet the road oil
requirements of the Air Quality District. Non-petroleum based tackifiers may be required
by the Director of Public Works.
o. The Department of Public Works. The Department of Public Works shall handle all dust
complaints. The Director of Public Works may require the services of an air quality
consultant to advise the City on the severity of the dust problem and additional ways to
mitigate impact on residents, including temporarily halting project construction. Dust
concerns in adjoining communities as well as the City of Dublin shall be addressed.
Control measures shall be related to wind conditions. Air quality monitoring of PM levels
shall be provided as required by the Director of Public Works.
p. Construction interference with regional non-project traffic. Construction interference
with regional non-project traffic shall be minimized by:
1. Scheduling receipt of construction materials to non-peak travel periods.
2. Routing construction traffic through areas of least impact sensitivity.
3. Routing construction traffic to minimize construction interference with regional
non-project traffic movement.
4. Limiting lane closures and detours to off-peak travel periods.
5. Providing ride-share incentives for contractor and subcontractor personnel.
10
q. Emissions control of on-site equipment. Emissions control of oa-site equipment shall be
minimized through a routine mandatory program of low-emissions tune-ups.
r. Radios and loudspeakers. Radios and loudspeakers shall not be used outside of the
residences during all phases of construction.
s. Construction vehicles and worker's vehicles. Construction vehicles and worker's
vehicles shall not be parked on the north side of Brittany Lane or in any driveways on the
north side of Brittany Lane.
t. Double-parking. No double-parking shall be allowed along Brittany Lane.
u. Fencing of construction site. Fencing of construction site shall be to the satisfaction of
the Building Official.
PARKS
35. Public Facilities Fee. Applicant/Developer shall pay a Public Facilities Fee in the amounts and at
the times set forth in City of Dublin Resolution No. 195-99, or in the amounts and at the times set
forth in any resolution revising the amount of the Public Facilities Fee.
Responsible Agency: PCS
Required By: As indicated in Condition of Approval
ARCHITECTURE
36. Exterior colors and materials. Exterior colors and materials for the structures shall be subject to
final review and approval by the Community Development Director and shall be shown on
construction plans.
Responsible Agency: PL
Required By: Prior to building permit
37. Exterior lighting. Exterior lighting shall be of a design and placement so as not to cause glare
onto adjoining properties. Lighting used after daylight hours shall be minimized to provide for
security needs only.
Responsible Agency: PL
Required By: Ongoing
38. Fencing, and of all retaining walls. The design, location and materials of all fencing, and of all
retaining walls installed by the developer, shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning
Director. Provision of common £ences for all side and rear yards shall be the responsibility of the
developer. Fencing installed by the developer at the bottom or top of slopes higher than ten feel
and/or fences of rear yards with a high visibility from adjoining down slope areas, may be
designed with an open mesh material, subject to review and approval by the Planning Director as
regards the location and material utilized.
Responsible Agency: PL.
When Required: Prior to approval of Final Landscaping and Irrigation Plans.
39. Pad elevations. All residences shall be built at the pad elevations shown on the project plans by
EDI Architects dated received February 12, 2001.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to occupancy.
40. Increase in height of residences prohibited. The increase in height of residences in this project
beyon6'~tiht-originally approved by the City is prohibited.
11
LANDSCAPING
41. Final Landscaping and Irrigation Plan. Applicant/Developer shall submit a Final LandScaping
and Irrigation Plan, conforming to the requirements of Section $.72.030 of the Zoning Ordinance
(unless otherwise required by this Resolution), stamped and approved by the Director of Public
Works and the Director of Community Development. The plan should generally conform to the
landscaping plan and must reflect any revised project design shown on the Site Development
Review with a later date. Responsible Agency: PL
Required By: Prior to building permit
42. Wildfire Management Plan. The Final Landscaping and Irrigation Plan shall be in accordance
with the City of Dublin Wildfire Management Plan.
Responsible Agency: F
Required By: Prior to building permit
43. NPDES. The final landscaping and irrigation plan shall address erosion control as an ongoing
prevention program that will meet the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
requirements.
Responsible Agency: PW, PL
Required By:~ Ongoing
44. Installation. Prior to final occupancy approval, all required landscaping and irrigation, shall be
installed.
Responsible Agency: PL, B
Required By: Prior to oeenpancy
45. Dronght-tolerant and/or native species. The landscape design and construction shall emphasize
drought-tolerant and/or native species wherever possible.
Responsible Agency: PL
Required By: Prior to occupancy
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
46. Damage/Repairs. The Developer shall repair all damaged existing street, curb, grater and
sidewalk along Brittany Lane and Rolling Hills Drive, lot frontages that exist now, or that result
from construction activities to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
Responsible Agency: PW
Required By: Prior to Occupancy of first residence
POLICE SECURITY
47. Residential Security Requirements. The development shall comply with the City of Dublin
Residential Security Requirements (attached). Security hardware must be provided for all doors,
windows, roof, vents, and skylights and any other areas per Dublin Police Services
recommendations and requirements.
Responsible Agency: B, PO
Required By: Prior to Occupancy of first residence
48. Projected Timeline. ApplicantdDeveloper shall submit a projected timeline for project completion
to the Dublin Police Services Department, to allow estimation of staffing requirements and
assignments. Responsible Agency: PO
Required By: Prior to Issuance of Building permits
12
FIRE PROTECTION
49. Applicable regulations and requirements. The Applicant/Property Owner shall comply with all
applicable regulations and requirements &the Alameda County Fire Dep~tment (ACFD),
including payment o£ all appropriate fees.
Responsible Agency: F
Required By: Ongoing
50. Rear yard accessibility. The rear yard shall be accessible from both sides o£thc structure.
Responsible Agency: F
Required By: Ongoing
51. Roofing material. The roofing material shall conform to the City of Dublin Fire Area
specifications which require Class A or better.
Responsible Agency: F
Required By: Prior to issuance of Building Permits
52. Wildfire Management Plan. Site development shall be in accordance with the City of Dublin
Wildfire Management Plan.
Responsible Agency: F
Required By: Prior to issuance of Building Permits
53. Water supply. Water supply shall be adequate to support required frre flow.
Responsible Agency: F
Required By: Prior to issuance of Building Permits
54. Fire Hydrants. The Developer shall construct any required new fire hydrants in streets to City
and Alameda County Fire Depa~h~ent standards. The Developer shall comply with applicable
Alameda County fire Department, Public Works Department, Dublin Police Service, Alameda
County Flood Control District Zone 7 and Dublin San Ramon Services District requirements.
Responsible Agency: F, PW
Required By: Prior to Occupancy of adjacent building
55. Delivery of any combustible material. Prior to the delivery of any combustible material for
storage on the site, fire hydrants, water supply, and roadways shall be installed and sufficient
water storage and pressure shall be available to the site. Approved roadway shall be first lift of
asphalt.
Responsible Agency: F
Required By: Prior to delivery of any combustible material
AI,AMEDA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT, ZONE 7
56. Wells. Any water wells, cathodic protection wells or exploratory borings shown on the map that
are known to exist, are proposed or are located during field operations without a documented
intent of future use, filed with Zone 7, are to be destroyed prior to any demolition or construction
activity in accordance with a well destruction permit obtained from Zone 7 and the Alameda
County Department of Environmemal Services or are to be maintained in accordance with
applicable groundwater protection °rdinanees. Other wells encountered prior to or during
construction are to be treated similarly.
Responsible Agency: Zone 7, PW
Required By: Prior to any demolition or construction
13
57. Salt Mitigation. Recycled water projects must meet any applicable salt mitigation requirements of
Zone 7.
Responsible Agency: Zone 7, PW
Required by On-going
58. Requirements and Fees. Applicant/Developer shall comply with ali Alameda County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District-Zone 7 Flood Control requirements and applicable fees.
Responsible Agency: Zone 7, PW
Required by Prior to Issuance of Building Permits
DSRSD
59. Requirements and regulations. The ApplicantfProperty Owner shall comply with all applicable
requirements and regulations of the Dublin San Ramon Services District.
Responsible Agency: DSRSD.
Required By: Ongoing
60. Improvement plans. Prior to issuance of any building permit, eomplcte improvement plans shall
be submitted to DSRSD that conform to the requirements of the Dublin San Ramon Services
District Code, the DSRSD "Standard Procedures, Specifications and Drawings for Design and
Installation of Water and Wastewater Facilities,, all applicable DSRSD Master Plans and all
DSKSD policies.
Responsible Agency: DSRSD.
Required By: Prior to issuance of Building Permits
61. Sewers. Sewers shall be designed to operate by gravity flow to DSRSD's existing sanitary sewer
system. Pumping of sewerage is discourag.ed and may only be allowed under extreme
circumstances following a case by case review with DSRSD staff. Any pumping station will
require specific review and approval by DSRSD of preliminary design, reports, design criteria, and
final plans and specifications. The DSRSD reserves the right to reqmre payment of .pr. es.ent worth
20 year maintenance costs as well as other conditions within a separate agreement vath the
applicant for any project that requires a pumping station.
Responsible Agency: DSRSD.
Required By: Ongoing
62. Fees. Prior to the issuance cfa building permit, all utility connection fees, plan check fees,
inspection fees, permit fees and fees associated with a wastewater discharge permit shall be paid to
DSRSD in accordance with the rates and schedules established in the DSRSD Code.
Responsible Agency: DSRSD.
Required By: Prior to issuance of Building Permits
63. Signatures. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, ali improvement plans for DSRSD
facilities shall be signed by the District Engineer. Each drawing of improvement plans shall
contain a signature block for the District Engineer indicating approyal of the sanitary sewer or
water facilities shown. Prior to approval by the District Engineer, tlae Applicant shall pay all
required D SRSD fees, and provide an engineer's estimate of construction costs for the sewer and
water systems, a performance bond, a one-year maintenance bond, and a comprehensive general
liability insurance policy in the amounts and forms that are acceptable to DSRSD. The Applicant
shall allow at least 15 working days for final improvement drawing review by DSRSD before
signature by the District Engineer.
Responsible Agency: DSRSD.
Required By: Prior to issuance of Building Permits
64. Utility Construction Permit. No sewer line or water line construction shall be permkted unless
the Proper utility construction permit has been issued by DSRSD. A construction permit will only
be issued aider all of the items in the condition immediately before this one have been satisfied.
14
Responsible Agency: DSRSD.
Required By: Ongoing
65. Hold ~larmless. The Applicant/Property Owner shall hold DSRSD, its Board of Directors,
commissions, employees, and agents of DSRSD harmless and indemnify, and defend the same
from any litigation, claims, or fmcs resulting from completion of the project.
Responsible Agency: DSRSD.
Required By: Ongoing
66. Limited construction permit. The Applicant/Property Owner shall obtain a limited construction
permit from the DSRSD prior to commencement of any work.
Responsible Agency: DSRSD.
Required By: Prior to commencement of any work
67. Construction by Applicant/Developer. All onsite potable and recycled water and wastewater
pipelines and facilities shall be constructed by the ApplieantfDeveloper in accordance with all
DSRSD master plans, standards, specifications and requirements.'
Responsible Agency: DSRSD.
Required By: Completion of Improvements
68. DSRSD Water Facilities. Water facilities must be connected to the DSRSD or other approved
water system, and must be installed at the expense of Applicant/Developer in accordance with
District Standards and Specifications. All material and workmanship for water mains and
appurtenances thereto must conform with all of the requirements of the officially adopted Water
Code of the District and shall be subject to field inspection by the District.
Responsible Agency: DSRSD.
Required By: Completion of Improvements
69. Fire flows. The applicant shall coordinate with the District and Alameda County Fire Department
on required fire flows.
Responsible Agency: DSRSD.
Required By: Approval of Improvement Plans
MISCELLANEOUS
70. Compliance. The Applicant/Property Owner shall comply with all applicable Alameda County
Fire Department, Public Works Department standard conditions, Dublin Police Services, Alameda
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and the Dublin San Ramon Services
.District regulations and requirements. Prior to issuance of grading or building permits or the
installation of any improvements related to this project, the Applicant shall supply written
documentation from each such agency or department to the Community Development
Department, indicating that all applicable conditions required .have been or will be met.
Responsible Agency: B, PL.
Required By: Ongoing
71. Compliance. The Applicant/Property Owner shall comply with ali applicable regulations and
requirements of the Uniform Building Code and the Building Inspection Department.
Responsible Agency: B
Required By: Ongoing
72. Building permits for the proposed project shall be secured and construction commenced
within one (1) year after the effective date of this approval or said approval shall be void.
This one (1) year period may be extended an additional one (1) year after the expiration date of
this approval (a written request for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration date) by
15
the Community Development Director upon the determination that the Conditions of Approval
remain adequate to assure that the above stated Findings of Approval will continue to be met. [B,
PL]
73. Building permits. To apply for building permits, the Applicant shall submit thirteen (13) sets of
full construction plans for plan check. Each set of plans shall have attached an annotated copy
of these Conditions of Approval, including any attached Special Conditions. The notations
shall clearly indicate how all Conditions of Approval will be complied with. Construction plans
will not be accepted without the annotated conditions attached to each set of plans. The Applicant
will be responsible for compliance with all Conditions of Approval specified and obtaining the
approvals of all participating non-City agencies prior to the issuance of building or grading
permits. Responsible Agency: B, Plo PW. Required By: Prior to issuance of building
permits
74. Construction plans. Construction plans shall be fully dimensioned (including building
elevations) accurately drawn (depicting all existing and proposed conditions on site), and prepared
and signed by an appropriately qualified design professional. The site plan, landscape plan and
details shall be consistent with each other.
Responsible Agency: B, Plo PW. Required'By: Prior to issuance of building permits
75. ltours of operation. All construction shall be limited to take place between the hours of 7:30
a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except as otherwise approved by the Director of
Public Works.. Responsible Agency: PW. Required By: Ongoing
76. Compliance. The Applicant/Property Owner shall develop this project and operate all uses in
compliance with the Conditions of Approval of this Site Development Review and the regulations
established in the Zoning Ordinance. Any violation of the terms or conditions specified may be
subject to enforcement action. Responsible Agency: PL. Required By: Ongoing
77. Postal authorities. The developer shall confer with the local postal authorities to determine the
type of mail receptacles necessary and provide a letter stating their satisfaction with the type of
mail service to be provided. Specific locations for such units shall be to the satisfaction of the
Postal Service. Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to issuance of Building Permit.
FIRE RESISTIVE HERITAGE TREES:
78. Tree Protection Zone. A Tree Protection Zone shall be established at the driplines of all trees.
No grading, excavation, construction or storage of materials shall occur within this zone.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to issuance of Building Permit.
79. Plot plans to be reviewed by project arborist. All plot plans shall be reviewed by the project
arborist for evaluation of impacts to trees and recommendations for mitigation.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to issuance of Building Permit.
80. Rock outcropping. The rock outcropping within 30 feet of trees #335 and 342 shall be retained.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
16
81. Underground services. No underground services including utilities, sub-drains, water or sewer
lines shall be placed in the Tree Protection Zone.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
82. Tree Preservation Notes. Tree Preservation Notes, prepared by the consulting arborist, shall be
included on all construction plans.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to issuance of Building Permit
83. Irrigation systems. Irrigation systems must be designed so that no trenching will occur within
the Tree Protection Zone except that necessary to protect the tree from surface runoff.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to issuance of Building Permit.
84. Landscape improvements. No landscape improvements such as lighting, pavement, drainage or
planting may occur which may negatively affect the health or structural stability of the trees.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
85. Foundations, footings and pavement. Foundations, footings and pavement on expansive soils
near the Fire Resistive Heritage Trees should be designed to withstand differential displacement
due to expansion and shrinking of the soil.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to issuance of Building Permit.
87. Construction Requirements. The following requirements shall be implemented in addition to
the construction requirements set forth in the Wildfire Management Plan when there is a Fire
Resistive Heritage Tree within 100 feet of the exterior wall or deck projection as measured from
the drip line of the tree.
A. Exterior walls. Fire rated construction standards required for the exterior wall of
buildings most exposed to wildfire risk shall be extended to the adjacent exterior
walls of the building.
B. Windows. Install dual tempered glass windows in openings on the elevation most
exposed to wildfire risk and adjacent elevations of the structure.
C. Metal Structural Members. Metal structural members shall be used in place of
wood in construction of all underfloor areas that are enclosed to the ground with
exterior walls as required above in the Wildfire Management Plan.
D. Automatic Fire Sprinklers. Provide fire sprinkler flow detection monitoring
through a central station company.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to issuance of Building Permit.
88. Vegetation Standards/prunin.g. When any of the Vegetation Standards of the Wildfire
Management Plan call for pmmng of limbs and trees that are identified as Fire Resistive Heritage
Trees, the following standards shall be implemented in place of required ground clearance.
A. An irrigated fuel break/greenbelt shall be installed outside the dripline of the Fire
Resistive Heritage Trees. Size and compatibility of the greenbelt shall be
17
determined following consultation with a Certified Arborist and review of the
degree of slope surrounding the trees. The greenbelt vegetation shall be fire
resistive and require little watering.
B. All vegetation shall be maintained per the Wildfire Management Plan standards or
Alameda County Fire Department Removal Standards, except as modified for Fire
Resistive Heritage Trees.
C. Ground under the Fire Resistive Heritage Trees shall be kept free of weeds and
dead wood. Leaf litter shall be allowed to remain as a mulch to protect the soil.
D. Limited priming shall be completed to thin foliage, remove dead wood, raise the
foliage one-foot above the ground, and separate the crowns of the trees. Branches
larger than one inch in diameter shall not be pruned unless agreed to by the project
arborist and the City's arborist.
E. All other applicable standards shall continue to apply except as modified above.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to issuance of Building Permit.
89. Irrigation of Irrigated Fuel Break/Greenbelt. Irrigation systems must be designed so that no
trenching will occur within the Tree Protection Zone. Surface water from the irrigation runoff
must be directed away from oak trunks.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to issuance of Building Permit.
90. Pruning. Fire Resistive Heritage Trees shall be pruned in conformance with the Wildfire
Management Plan. All pruning shall be completed by a Certified Arborist and Tree Worker in the
presence of the City's arborist and be in conformance with the guidelines of the International
Society of Arbor]culture, Tree Pruning Guidelines, current edition, on file in the Community
Development Department. In addition, pruning shall be in conformity with the provisions of the
Priming Specifications of the Tree Protection Plan for this project.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to issuance of Building Permit.
91. Tree Protection Zone for trees on lots 1, 7, 8, and 9. The Tree Protection Zone for trees on lots
1, 7, 8, and 9 shall completely surround those trees to the satisfaction of the City's arborist. A
fence shall completely surround and define the Tree Protection zone to the satisfa~ion of the
City's arbor]st pr]or to demolition, grubbing or grading. FenCes shall be 6 feet tall chain link or
equivalent as approved by the consulting arbor]st. Fences are to remain until all grading and
construction is completed.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to issuance of Grading Permit.
92. Meeting to review work procedures, access routes, storage areas and tree protection
measures. Prior to work the contractor must meet with the consulting arborist at the site to review
all work procedures, access routes, storage areas and tree protection measures.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to issuance of Building Permit.
18
93. Grading, construction, demolition or other work within the Tree Protection Zone. No
grading~ eonstructio~ demolition or other work shall occur within the Tree Protection Zone. Any
modifications must be approved and monitored by the consulting arborist.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to issuance of Grading Permit.
94. Spoil. Spoil f~om trench, foofing~ utility or other excavation shall not be placed within Tree
Protection Zone. Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to issuance of Grading Permit.
95. Damage. If damage should occur to any tree during construction it shall be immediately reported
,o the Director of Community Development so that proper treatment may be administered. The
Director will refer to the City Al-borist to determine the appropriate method of repair of any
damage. The cost of any ~-eatment or repair shall be borne by the developer/applicant responsible
for the development of the project. Failure to do so may result in the issuance ora stop work
order.
Responsible Agency:. PL
When Required: Ongoing
96. Dumping or storage within the Tree Protection Zone. No excess soil, chemicals, debris,
equipment or other materials shall be dumped or stored within the Tree Protection Zone.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
97. Tree Pruning Guidelines. All pruning shall be in accordance with the Tree Pruning Guidelines
(International Society of Arboriculture) and adhere to the most recent editions of the American
National Standard for Tree Care Operations (Z133.1) and Pruning (A300).
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
98. Tree pruning by construction personnel. ~No tree pruning may be performed by construction
personnel.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
99. Aerial inspection. While in the tree, the arborist shall perform an aerial inspection to identify
defects that require treatment. Any additional work needed shall be reported to the Project
Arborist.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
100. Chipping and hauling of brush. Brush shall be chipped and chips shall be spread underneath
trees to a maximum depth 0£6 inches, leaving the trunk clear of mulch. Wood shall be hauled off
the site.
· Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
101. Trees shall not be climbed with spurs.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
19
102. Thinning cuts are to be employed rather than heading cuts. Trees shall not be topped or
headed back.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
103. Vehicles and heavy equipment. Vehicles and heavy equipment shall not be parked beneath the
trees. If access by equipment is required to accomplish the specified pruning, the soil surface shall
be protected with 6 inches to 8 inches of wood chips before placing equipment or vehicles.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
104. Servicing and fueling of equipment. Equipment shall be serviced and fueled outside the tree
canopy to avoid accidental spills in the root area. Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
105. Certified arborist. A certified arborist shall be present on the project site during grading or other
construction activity that may impact the health of the Fire Resistive Heritage Trees in this project.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
106. Guide to Maintenance for Native Oaks. The consulting arborist shall prepare a Guide to
Maintenance for Native Oaks that describes the care needed to maintain tree health and structural
stability including pruning, fertilization, mulching and pest management as may be required. In
addition, the Guide shall address monitoring both tree health and structural stability of trees. As
trees age, the likelihood of failure of branches or entire trees increases. Therefore, annual
inspection for hazard potential should be addressed in the Guide. A copy.of this Guide shall be
provided to each purchaser.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Prior to occupancy
107. Cash bond or other security deposit. The applicant/developer shall guarantee the protection of
the Fire Resistive Heritage Trees on the project site through placement cfa cash bond or other
security deposit in the amount of $100,000. The cash bond or other security shall be retained for a
reasonable period of time following the occupancy of the last residence occupied, not to exceed
one year. The cash bond or security is to be released upon satisfaction of the Director of
Community Development that the Fire Resistive Heritage Trees have not been endangered. The
cash bond or security deposit shall be forfeited as a civil penalty for any unauthorized removal or
destruction of a Heritage Tree.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing /
108. Overhead wires or underground pipes or conduits. Any public utility installing or maintaining
any overhead wires or underground pipes or conduits in the vicinity cfa Heritage Tree in this
project shall obtain permission from the Director of Community Development before performing
any work, which may cause injury to the Heritage Tree.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
20
109. Removal of Heritage Tree. No heritage Tree on the project site shall be removed unless its
condition presents an immediate hazard to life or property. Such Heritage Tree shall be removed
only with the approval of the Director of Community Development, City Engineer, Police Chief,
Fire Chief or their designee. The Fire Marshall has indicated the Fire Resistive Heritage Trees
conform with the Wildfire Management Plan and that no Heritage Tree on the project site will be
removed pursuant to the Wildfire Management Plan.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
110. Designation of oaks as Heritage Trees. All nineteen Oak trees on the project site addressed by
the Tree Protection Plan are designated as Heritage Trees by this Site Development Review and
shall be protected by the provisions of the Heritage Tree Ordinance pursuant to Section 5.60.40.b,
Heritage Tree Definition.
Responsible Agency: PL
When Required: Ongoing
111. Encroachment of Driplines. No structure shall encroach to within 5 feet of the dripline of a Fire
Resistive Heritage Tree.
Responsible Agency: PI,
When Required: Prior to issuance of Building Permit.
112. Perpetuation of Oak Grove/planting of additional oak trees. Landscape improvements for this
project shall include the planting of additional oak trees.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 20th day of February, 2001.
AYES: Councilmembers Oravetz and Zika and Mayor Houston
NOES: Councilmembers Lockhart and McCormick
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None ~~~
Mayor
ATTEST
- ~ler~-~ ~
K2/C~2-20-01/reso-blkmt~sdr. do¢ (Item 6.2)
G;pa00-009/cc reso sdr
21
RESOLUTION NO. 82-85
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN'
APPROVING THE SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
PA 85-035.3 HATFIELD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
INVESTEC, INC.
WHEREAS, Hatfield Development Corporation-Investec,
Inc. have submitted detailed Site Development Review plans for
the 175-lot single family residential (70+ acres) and common open
space (18.6+ aacres) project that collectively make up Tentative
Maps 5072, ~073, and 5074 being the remaining, unrecorded single
family residential portions of Tentative Map 4859 (APN 941-1007-
34, 7-40 and 7-44); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public
hearing on the matter at their regularly scheduled meeting on
July 15, 1985; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution
No. 85-042 recommending that the City Council approve PA 85-035.3
Hatfield Development Corporation - Investec, Inc.; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of the July 15, 1985, Planning
Commission and the August 12,. 1985, City COuncil public hearings
were given in all respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending
that the Site Development Review be approved subject to
conditions prepared by Staff and reflected in the Planning
Commission Resolution No. 85-042; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and consider all
said reports and recommendations as herein above set forth; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered and reviewed the
submittal information at their regularly scheduled meeting on
August 12, 1985; and
WHEREAS, the City Council had'previously adopted a
Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance for the
project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed Site
Development Review will not have a significant environmental
impact;
NOW. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Dublin City
Council does hereby Find:
I The Site Development Review request is substantially
consistent with the intent and requirements set forth within
the conditions of approval covering this property specifically
as set forth by Resolution No. 17-8~ of the Dublin City
Council (PA 83-073; Tentative Map Extension), the Findings and
General Provisions for the 1478th Zoning Unit approved by
Alameda County on July 20, 1981, and Resolution No. 85-33 of
the Dublin Planning Commission (PA 85-038; Conditional Use
Permit).
2 The approval of the Site Development Review will be consistent
with the Dublin General Plan.
3 The proposed Site Development Review request will not have a
significant environmental impact.
ATTAChmENT
The Site Development Review request is appropriate for the
subject property in terms of being compatible to existing land
uses in the area, will be visually attractive, will not
overburden public services, and will prov±de housing of a type
and cost that is desired, yet not readily available in the
City of Dublin.
5 The proposed Site Development Review request will not have
substantial adverse effects on health or safety or be'
substantially detrimental to the public welfare, or be
i~jurious to property or public improvements..
6 General site considerations~ including site layout,
orientation and the location of buildings, vehicular access,
circulation and parking, setbacks, public safety.and similar
elements have been designed to provide a desirable environment
for the development.
7 General architectural .considerations including the character,
scale and quality of the design, the architectural
relationship, with the site and other buildings, building
materials, colors and similar elements have been incorporated
in order to insure compatibility of this development with its
design concept and the character of adjacent buildings and
'uses.
8 General landscape considerations including the locations,
provisions for irrigation, maintenance and protection of
landscaped areas and similar elements have been considered to
insure visual relief to complement buildings and structures
and to provide an attractive environment for the public.
9 The site is physically suitable for the proposed development
in that the site is indicated to be geologically satisfactory
for the type of development proposed in locations as shown~
provided geological consultants' recommendations are followed;
and the site is in a good location regarding public services
and facilities.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Dublin Planning
Commission finds that the Site Development Review PA 85-035.3 is
an integral part of the Planned Development (PD) Zoning and
Prezoning of the subject property; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin Planning
Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council and
Planning Director approve the Site Development Review PA 85-035.3
subject to the conditions listed below:
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Unless otherwise specified the following conditions shall be
complied with prior to issuance of the building permits. Each
item is subject to review and approval by the Planning Depart~ent
unless otherwise specified.
1. Except as specifically modified or elaborated upon by the
conditions listed below, site development of the 89+ acre - 175
unit single family residential/common open space remainder of the
Nielsen Ranch Subdivision (Tentative Map ~8~9)' shall conform to
the Conditions of Approval established by Resolution No. 85-33 of
the Dublin Planning Commission approved on guZy 1, 1985, for City
File PA 85-038; Conditional Land Use Permit.
2. Development shall be generally consistent with the following
submittals;
A. Tract 5072 Plot and Grading Plan, prepared by Wilsey and Ham
and dated received by the Dublin Planning Department May 17,
1985.
-2-
B. Tract 5073 Plot and Grading Plan, prepared by Witsey and Ham
and dated received by the Dublin Planning Department June 6,
1985.
C. Tract 507~ Plot and Grading Plan, prepared by Wilsey and Ham
and dated received by the Dublin Planning Department June
D. Floor Plan and Elevations - Dublin Heights, prepared by Emil
Benes.Associates, architecture and Planning, and dated
received by the Dublin Planning Department May 17, 1985.
E. Dublin Heights - Exterior Color Schedule, prepared by
Hatfie!d Development Corporation and dated May 6, 1985.
F. Nielsen Ranch - Custom Quality Features, prepared by
Hatfield Development Corporation, and dated July 1, 1985.
G. Nielsen Ranch - Rear yard depth on lots indicated as having
less than 15' level, prepared by Wilsey & Ham and dated
received by the Dublin Planning Department August 12, 1985.
Collectively these submittals constitute Exhibit "E" on file with
the Dublin Planning Department (PA 85-038).
3. Unless otherwise stipulated in these conditions of approval
or by subsequently approved Site Development Reviews covering the
lots in this project, development of the single family
residential lots in this project shall conform to the following
design criteria;
Front Setback - 20' minimum
Rear Setback - 20' minimum* (with a 15~ minimum
clear and level area from building
to adjoining ~op or toe,of any
engineered slope area steeper.then
a three-horizontal-to-one-vertical
ratio).
Sideyards - 5' minimum and 15' aggregate
minimum (The minimum sideyard shall
be increased to a width of 6' to 8'
wherever feasible, and shall
include a 5~ minimum width clear
zene for circulation and
maintenance purposes adjoining the
structure placed on each lot which
shall be clear and. level. Wherever
feasible a 10' clear and level
zone, for possible future vehicular
access to rear yard areas and for
maintenance purposes (exclusive of
any ~' lift or drop where front-
to-rear split level units are
established), shall be provided
adjoining the structure placed on
each lot in this subdivision. This
10' clear and level zone shall be
provided along the sideyard
adjoining the garage wherever
feasible].
Street-Side
Sideyard Setback - 15' minimum
-3-
Except as specifically modified by the above listed design
criteria, Or as established elsewhere in the conditions of
approval for this project, the lots developed in this project
shall be subject to the guidelines of the R-i-B-E; Single Family
Residential Combining District (with 7,000 sq. ft. minimum lot
size and 70' minimum average width) as regards both land use
restrictions and minimum/maximum development criteria.
* Rear yard setbacks for Lots 1-10 of Block 5 - Tract 5073 may
be reduced below this 20' standard as generally depicted on
the Plot and Grading Plan covering those lots. Rear yard
clear and level areas for custom, modified plans and
production units listed on the submittal identified in
Condition #2.G. above may be reduced to less than the 15'
standard as generally indicated by that submittal.
~. Site grading aggregating in excess of fifty cubic yards
and/or placement of ancillary detached structures aggregating in
excess of 100 sq. ft. in size located in excess of thirty-five
feet from the principle residences established on the following
lots shall not occur until a Site Development Review application
is processed pursuant to Section 8-95.0 of the Zoning Ordinance;
Tract 5072, Block 1, Lots 1 & &-6
Block 2, Lots 7-9
Tract 5073 Block 1, Lots 1, 3, $ & 6-12
Block 2, Lots 1, 2, 12, 13 & 16-21
Tract 5074 Block 1, Lots 2-10 & 14-19
Block 3, Lots 1-16 & 18-22
'5- Slope areas with a gradient steeper then three-horizontal-
to-one-vertical created in conjunction with this project with the
resultant slope height in excess of seven feet shall be planted
with 15-gallon sized trees within 60 days of the site':s rough
grading. Planting ratios to be observed for these areas shall be
one tree @ 1,000+ square feet of slope area. In addition to the
trees required aT rear and/or side slope areas, a minimum of two
on-site tree shall be provided by the developer along'the
frontage of the lots established by this development. These
trees shall be of a minimum size of 15-gallons and shall be of a
species determined acceptable by the Planning Department. Trees
in slope areas .of individual lots and within the Common Open
Areas shall be irrigated and shall be maintained by the developer
until the individual units are initially occupied and the
ownership of the common open areas is assumed by the Homeowner's
Association for this project. Irrigation of trees within
individual lots shall be by separate irrigation systems to be the
responsibility of the future individual property owners.
6. The height of custom or modified homes shall not exceed
twenty-five (25) feet as measured perpendicularly from natural
grade. Skirt heights screening undeveloped, non-living space for
custom or modified homes (measured from natural grade to finished
floor elevations) shall not exceed a maximum of nine (9) feet.
Deviation and/or refinement of these standards may be considered
as part of the Site Development Review process covering these
lots.
7. The design, location and materials of all fencing,, and of
all retaining walls install by the developer, shall be subject to
review and approval by the Planning Director. Provision of
common fences for all side and rear yards shall be the
responsibility of the developer. Fencing insyalted by the
developer at the bottom or top of slopes higher then ten feet,
and/or fences of rear yards with a high visibility from adjoining
down slope areas, may be designed with an open mesh material,
subject to review and approval by the Planning Director as
regards location and material utilized.
$. An adjustment to downslope fill areas shall be made below
the following lots to provide a more rounded, finished design
more reflective of surrounding natural slopes;
Tract 5072; Block 2 - Lots 7 - 9
Tract 5073; Block 3 - Lot 1
Tract 5074; Block 1 - Lots 25 - 28
9. Stem access areas into the Common Open Space Areas shall be
graded to accomodate vehicular entry. Final grading plans for
these areas shall be subject to review and approval by the City
Engineer, the DSRSD - Fire Department and by the. Dublin Police
Department as regards maximum horizontal and cross slopes.
Provision of bollards and/or gated access entrys to these areas
from adjoining public streets shall be subject to review and
approval by the same three parties.
10. Adjustment to Lots 1, 2, and 23 to 26 of Block 4 of Tract
5073 shall be made to generally conform to the Staff Study
prepared for that area and dated July 10, 1985. These
modifications shall be made to increase the clear, level rear
yard area of Lot 2 and Go provide a minimum !5-foot street-side
side yard setback for Lot 23.
tl. A new, Common Open Space Area shall be established
encompassing the bulk of the ungraded slope areas of Lots t, 2,
12-14, and 16-19 of Block 2 - Tract 5073. Appropriate vehicular
access to this new common open space area shall be supplied and
shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director,
the City Engineer and the DSRSD-Fire Department. Heavy irrigated
landscaping on the cut slope areas above the adjoining the cui-
de-sac bulb for Cloud Court (slopes within 75 of the cul-de-sac
on Lots 12 and 13 of Block 2 - Tract 5073) shall.be provided by
the developer and maintained as part of the new common open space
area by the project's future Homeowner's Association. i
12. The twelve custom lots proposed for development within this
project are subject to individual, or grouped Site Development
Review applications pursuant to Section 8-95.0 of the Zoning
Ordinance. Grading for these lots shall be minimized to the
greatest extent possible while creating reasonably sized,
functional exterior living areas (padded yard areas and/or raised
deck areas).
13. To the greatest degree feasible, the site grading and
drainage established in proximity of the north west corner of th~
adjoining Dolan School Site (APN 941-100-7-26) shall be
coordinated to provide smooth, uniform slopes and intergrated
drainage systems.
14. The adjoining lands identified as the 3.5+ acre Common Open
Space Area - Parcel "D" of Tentative Map ~859 ~hall be retained
within the remaining, unsubdivided portion of the Nielsen Ranch
holding. Access to this area shall be provided between Lots 15
and 16 of Block 3 - Tract 5074.
15. The pad elevation and lot configuration of Lots $, 22 and 23
of Block 1 - Tract 507~ shall be modified to generally conform to
the Staff Study prepared for that area and dated July 10, 1985.
These modifications shall be made to allow the height of the
driveway ramp for Lot ~ to be lowered a minimum of 4'-6' to
decrease its impact on adjoining Lot 9.
16. Project grading performed within 25 feet of the drip line of
existing onsite or offsite trees shall be addressed by a
horticultural report and the recommendations and findings of that
report incorporated into the grading and improvement plans of
this project.
-5-
17. The lot configurations of Lots 3 - 6 of Block 3 - Tract 507~
shall be modified to generally conform to the Staff Study
prepared for that area and dated July 10, 1985. These
modifications shall be made to limit the encroachment of Lot ~
(lot configuration, unit placement and site grading) into the
adjoining open space lands. The required minimum clear level
area at the rear of the structure developed on this lot may be
reduced to five feet.
18. Grading above Custom Lots 17 - 19 of Block 2 - Tract 5074
shall be modified to provide deeper building pads and a smoother,
rounder graded face for cut slopes established above these lots.
19. The developer shall confer with the local postal authorities
to determine the type of mail receptacles necessary and provide a
letter stating their satisfaction with the type of mail service
to be provided. Specific locations for such units shall be to
the satisfaction of the Postal Service.
20. Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, a
detailed phasing plan shall be-submitted for review and' approval
by the Planning Director indicating phasing of construction and
installation of pr6ject structures, roads, drainage improvements,
improvements with common open areas and required landscaping and
irrigation improvements.
21. Signs established for project identification (as regards to
number, size, location, copy and design) shall be subject to
review and approval by the Planning Director prior to
installation.
22. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer
shall submit a letter documenting that the ordinance requirements
of the DSRSD-Fire Department have been satisfied.
23.. The configuration and unit plotting for Lots 1-5 of Block 1
- Tract 5073 shall be modified to generally conform to the Staff
Study prepared for that area and dated July 10, 1985. ·These
modifications shall be made to maximum the distance between the
structures respectively at be located on Lots 3 & ~ and to allow
the proposed headwall to be moved further up the existing swale
area and to allow a corresponding reduction of the amount of fill
placed in said swale area. Based upon his review of the revised
plot and grading plan for these two lots, it shall be at the
Planning Director's discretion whether development of the two
lots shall be with custom designed structures. The decision to
require, or not require, custom units shall be tied to the degree
that grading within the swale area and the related impacts to
existing vegetation is minimized by application of the required
revisions to lot configuration and unit location.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12th day of August,
1985.
AYES: Councilmembers Hegarty, Jeffery, Moffatt,
Vonheeder and Mayor Snyder
NOES: None
City Clerk ' ~
-6-
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Chapter 8.104
8.104.090 Amendment. The process for amending a Site Development Review shall
be the same as the process for approving a Site Development Review except
that the decision-maker for such Site Development Review shall be the
same decision-maker that ultimately approved the Site Development
Review including approval on appeal. The Community Development
Director or his/her designee may grant a Site Development Review Waiver
for applications approved by another decision-maker or body upon the
determination that the modification is a minor project and in accordance
with Section 8.104.100, Waiver.
8.104.100 Waiver. The Community Development Director or his/her designee may
allow a minor physical change to an approved Site Development Review as
a Waiver upon determining that a Site Development Review Waiver is in
substantial conformance with the Site Development Review is a minor
project, is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act, and is consistent with the conditions of approval for the Site
Development Review. It is not the intent of this Chapter that a series of Site
Development Review Waivers be used to circumvent the need for a new
Site Development Review. Rev. Ord. 16-02 (November 2002)
8.104.110 Guidelines. Site Development Review Guidelines adopted by the City
Council on May 11, 1992 shall be used to guide the review of Site
Development Review applications.
8.104.120 Building Permits. Building Permits shall not be issued except in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the Site Development Review
approval.
8.104.130 Procedures. The procedures set forth in Chapter 8.96, Permit Procedures,
shall apply except as otherwise provided in this Chapter.
City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance 104-4 September, 1997
Amended November 1, 2002
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Chapter 8.104
8.104.090 Amendment. The process for amending a Site Development Review shall
be the same as the process for approving a Site Development Review except
that the decision-maker for such Site Development Review shall be the
same decision-maker that ultimately approved the Site Development
Review including approval on appeal. The Community Development
Director or his/her designee may grant a Site Development Review Waiver
for applications approved by another decision-maker or body upon the
determination that the modification is a minor project and in accordance
with Section 8.104.100, Waiver.
8.104.100 Waiver. The Community Development Director or his/her designee shall
determine that a Site Development Review Waiver is in substantial
conformance with the Site Development Review if it is a minor project as
described below, is Categorically Exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act, and is consistent with the conditions of
approval for the Site Development Review. It is not the intent of this
Chapter that a series of Site Development Review Waivers be used to
circumvent the need for a new Site Development Review. A minor project
shall include any of the following:
1. The physical expansion of a structure by no more than 1000 square feet.
2. The exterior modification of no more than 100 square feet of surface
area of an existing structure.
8.104.110 Guidelines. Site Development Review Guidelines adopted by the City
Council on May 11, 1992 shall be used to guide the review of Site
Development Review applications.
8.104.120 Building Permits. Building Permits shall not be issued except in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the Site Development Review
approval.
8.104.130 Procedures. The procedures set forth in Chapter 8.96, Permit Procedures,
shall apply except as otherwise provided in this Chapter.
City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance 104-4 September, 1997
(A) TR. 5072 ~$s/,~
s¢~: ,": ,oo' :,_, TR. 5073 ,s~/~
'
~00