HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.1 Brannigan St GP~~~~ Off' nU~~~
/ii ~ 111
L~~ - ~ ~~~
DATE:
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
CITY CLERK
File #420-30
April 17, 2012
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
..
FROM: Joni Pattillo, City Manager ~~..
SUBJECT: Brannigan Street: General Plan Amendment, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
Amendment, Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1 Development
Plan Amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan, Development Agreement,
and CEQA Addendum to prior CEQA documents fora 3-acre parcel located
along the west side of Brannigan Street north of Gleason Drive within Area F of
Dublin Ranch (PLPA-2011-00039)
Prepared by Mike Porto, Consulting Planner
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The subject of this application is a 3-acre parcel located along the west side of Brannigan Street
north of Gleason Drive. This site currently is designated Public/Semi-Public in the General Plan
and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan with consistent zoning of Planned Development (PD)
Public/Semi-Public. The Applicant has requested land use amendments to the General Plan
and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, a Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1
Development Plan Amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan to change the land use
designation and zoning from Public/Semi-Public to Medium Density Residential. The Applicant
has also requested a Development Agreement.
FINANCIAL:
If this project is approved, the City of Dublin will receive a Community Benefit Payment of
$50,000 as well as street improvements between the southeasterly boundary of the Project site
and the Gleason Drive right-of-way.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) Receive Staff presentation; 2) Open the Public
Hearing; 3) Take testimony from the Applicant and the public; 4) Close the public hearing and
deliberate; and 5) Take the following actions: a) Adopt a Resolution adopting a CEQA
Addendum for the project proposed fora 3-acre site on Brannigan Street north of Gleason Drive
within Dublin Ranch and adopting a related Statement of Overriding Considerations; b) Waive
the reading and introduce an Ordinance adopting a Planned Development rezone with related
Stage 1 Development Plan Amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan fora 3-acre site on
Brannigan Street north of Gleason Drive; and c) Waive the reading and introduce an Ordinance
approving a Development Agreement between the City of Dublin and Lennar Homes of
California, Inc.
Page 1 of 9 ITEM NO. 6.1
~, f
..,gym«..~a „~..,.....~
Submitted By
Director of Community Development
DESCRIPTION:
Background:
~d .,,, _ .. ~. _. ~.... , ...
Reviewed By
Assistant City Manager
The Project Site is a three-acre parcel (APN 098-0052-021) located along the west side of
Brannigan Street north of Gleason Drive within Planning Area F of Dublin Ranch.
The following table describes the surrounding land uses:
LOCATION ZONING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE CURRENT USE OF
PROPERTY
North PD Public/Semi-Public Springfield Montessori School
South PD Public/Semi-Public Vacant
East PD Medium Density Residential Medium Density Single-Family
(across Brannigan Street) Residential "Sonata"
West PD Medium Density Residential Medium Density Single-Family
"
"
Residential
Courtyards
Figure 1 -Vicinity Map
~ ` ~7~I~
-~
~:~
~. _
~.ra
~~
1:~~~LVh~ ~LVC~ ~~
~,
~ ~.
Page 2 of 9
The original annexation prezoning was approved by Ordinance 11-94. The current boundaries
and configuration of Area F include portions that originally were part of Dublin Ranch Areas B
and E. Land use designations and zoning for portions of this area subsequently were changed
by Resolution 141-97. In February 2000, the City Council adopted Ordinance 06-00 which
established Stage 1 and Stage 2 Planned Development zoning for Area F.
On March 21, 2000, the City Council adopted Resolution 35-00 approving a General Plan
Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment, which designated land uses within a
reconfiguration of planning areas for Dublin Ranch, including Planning Area F (approximately
285 acres). At that time, the project site was part of a 50-acre site designated for High School
(HS) use in both the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The Stage 1 Planned
Development zoning in Ordinance 06-00 (PA 01-037) was adopted as PD-HS, consistent with
the approved land use. Following adoption of these land uses, the Dublin Unified School District
decided not to pursue the high school site on this property.
In 2004, the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan were amended through the Area F
North project to change the use of the 6.3 acres remaining from the high school site (including
the Project Site) to Public/Semi-Public use. Stage 1 Planned Development zoning was adopted
by Ordinance 12-04 consistent with the adopted land use designation. The project site
comprises 3 acres of the 6.3-acre area. The Project Site is vacant with no vegetation having
been part of an area mass graded for Dublin Ranch. It is described as Parcel 1 of Parcel Map
9451. The Springfield Montessori School was built generally in the northern portion of the 6.3
acre site.
The Project Site was purchased by the current property owner, East Bay Muslim Community
Center, for use as a community center/worship facility. Since that time the property has
remained vacant. Indications have been that the property is too small to accomplish the
intended use given the required development standards. Lennar Homes of California holds an
option to purchase the property from the current owner and is serving as the owner's
representative in obtaining entitlements. On June 21, 2011, the City Council adopted Resolution
112-11 initiating a General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment Study based on
the current proposal.
Current Proposal:
The Applicant is requesting approval of General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
Amendments to re-designate the site from Public/Semi-Public to Medium Density Residential
(6.0-14.1 du/ac). The request includes a corresponding Planned Development rezoning with
related Stage 1 Development Plan Amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan. The
proposed PD zoning would allow for the development of 19 single-family detached homes. The
application also includes a Development Agreement between the City of Dublin and Lennar
Homes of California, Inc.
ANALYSIS:
General Plan & Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment
The project site has a current General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use
designation of Public/Semi-Public. The General Plan defines Public/Semi-Public Facilities to
include uses such as public schools, libraries, city offices, post offices, fire stations, and
community serving uses, child care centers, youth centers, senior centers, special needs
Page 3 of 9
program facilities, religious institutions, clubhouses, community centers, community theatres,
hospitals, private schools, and other facilities that provide cultural, educational, or other similar
services. Public/Semi-Public uses may be built at a maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of .50%.
The proposed General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendments would modify the
existing land use designation of the 3-acre site from Public/Semi-Public to Medium Density
Residential (6.0 to 14.1 dwelling units per acre). The Applicant is proposing to develop 19
homes, consistent with existing Medium Density Residential development to the east and west.
Existin Land Use
(---------.
i
i
i
II ~
~I ! ~
, L_ -----
r-lf.CIJfw"
I Medium
: Density Res
I
i
i
"_._._.-i~--..---_L-__.__.----"-
Public/Semi-
Public
;',
III
Public/Semi-
Public
Proposed Land Use
~~t~'''''
~........,.
",--------.
i i
i J
!I ~I
, fl ~i
. I K' I
I I I l ----
Ii! i r-~--
i 1!
, u___________J_ I
Public/Semi- i
Public i
L-_---....-...--
..--------~~r-..---- .
-.-
-
The project proposal includes related amendments to the various figures, texts, and tables in the
General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan to ensure consistency throughout the
documents.
Cities are limited by the State to amend a single Element of the General Plan no more than 4
times per calendar year. Currently, the City of Dublin has applications for several General Plan
Amendments which, if approved individually in 2012, would exceed the State requirement. For
that reason, the General Plan Amendment requested for two projects on the City Council
Agenda tonight have been grouped together (Silvera and Brannigan). These GPA requests will
come before the City Council for action as a separate Agenda item. This will allow the City to
adopt one General Plan Amendment. Please refer to this agenda item for the Resolution to
adopt the proposed GPAlEDSPA.
Planned Development Rezoning with related Stage 1 Development Plan Amendment
(Ordinance 12-04) and new Stage 2 Development Plan
The Applicant also requests approval of a Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1
Development Plan Amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan consistent with the
requested General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use amendments. The rezone
will amend the existing PD Zoning to allow Medium Density Residential uses on the subject site.
Page 4 of 9
With the proposed PD Amendments, residential development standards would be adopted for
the Project Site so that the subdivision would be consistent with the existing Medium Density
Residential development in Dublin Ranch Area F, including: lot size, frontage, setbacks,
coverage, distance between buildings, common outdoor areas, usable outdoor areas, height
limits, parking, driveways, and grading standards.
The Development Regulations for the Brannigan Street project are proposed as follows:
Development Regulations -Brannigan Street
Standards Medium Density
Single Family Detached (Area F1)
Lot Size: Minimum 3,150 sf
Lot Size 3,150 sf
Minimum Street Frontage 35 feet
Maximum Lot Coverage 50%
Maximum Building Height 38 feet
Maximum Stories 3
Minimum Front Yard Setbacks
to living area 12 feet
to porch 10 feet
front of garage 18 feet
Minimum Side Yard Setback
2 story to 2 story 4 feet minimum
corner lot (setback from side street) 9 feet
Minimum Rear Yard Setback
Living Space 12 feet average, 5 feet minimum
Usable Rear Yards 300 sf contiguous flat area minimum
5 feet minimum dimension
Parking Spaces Required 2 covered, 1 guest
The proposed Stage 1 Development Plan Amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan are
consistent with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 8.32-Planned Development
Zoning).
An Ordinance approving the Planned Development rezone with related Stage 1 Development
Plan Amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan for the Brannigan Street project is
included as Attachment 1.
Development Agreement
Projects within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) require a Development Agreement
between the City of Dublin and the Developer. California Government Code §§ 65864 et seq.
and Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code authorize the City to enter into an agreement for
the development of real property with any person having a legal or equitable interest in such
property in order to obtain certain commitments and establish certain development rights for the
property. The Development Agreement must be approved prior to recordation of the Final Tract
Map and issuance of building permits for the development of the property.
Page 5 of 9
Development Agreements are approved by an Ordinance of the City Council upon
recommendation by the Planning Commission. The proposed Development Agreement was
drafted with input from City Staff, the project Applicant, property owner, and the City Attorney
based on the standard Development Agreement prepared by the City Attorney and adopted by
the City Council for projects located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area.
The Development Agreement provides security to the developer that the City will not change its
zoning and other laws applicable to the project. The Development Agreement becomes
effective for a term of five (5) years from the date of the signing of the agreement. The City also
benefits from entering into the Development Agreement with the property owner in a number of
ways. This document is a contract that establishes obligations for meeting the goals of the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and guarantees timing for construction of public infrastructure and
facilities for the project area. Additionally, it ensures that dedications of property and easements
are made, project phasing is followed, appropriate fees are paid for the development, and any
additional terms of the agreement are carried out as development proceeds.
In return, the Developer agrees to comply with the Conditions of Approval and, in some cases,
makes commitments which the City might otherwise have no authority to compel the Developers
to perform. Specifically, the Development Agreement augments the City's standard
development regulations; defines the precise financial responsibilities of the developer; ensures
timely provision of adequate public facilities for each project; and provides terms for the
Developer to advance funds for specific facilities which have community or area-wide benefit or
for reimbursement from future development, as appropriate. Since the Development Agreement
runs with the land, the rights thereunder can be assigned. Specifically, Paragraph 17 of the
Development Agreement would delegate authority to the City Manager for approval of such
requests for transfer or assignment. Other items specific to this Development Agreement
include: a) a Community Benefit Payment of $50,000, and b) street improvements between the
southeasterly boundary of the Project site and the Gleason Drive right-of-way.
An Ordinance approving a Development Agreement between the City of Dublin and Lennar
Homes of California, Inc. for the Brannigan Street project is included as Attachment 2 with the
Development Agreement attached as Exhibit A to Attachment 2.
Planning Commission Action:
At their meeting of March 27, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended City Council
approval of the CEQA Addendum, the Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1
Development Plan Amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan and the Development
Agreement (Attachments 3, 4 & 5). The Planning Commission did not recommend that the City
Council approve the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendments (Attachment
6). The Planning Commission approved a Site Development Review and Vesting Tentative
Tract Map 8093 (see Attachment 7) for a residential subdivision of 19 single-family detached
units on approximately 3 acres consistent with the development standards in nearby Medium
Density Residential projects. These approvals are contingent on the City Council adopting the
proposed GPA/EDSPA and Planned Development Zoning Amendments. Please refer to
Attachment 8 for the Planning Commission minutes.
Page 6 of 9
CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN, SPECIFIC PLAN & ZONING ORDINANCE
The application includes a request for Planned Development rezone with a Stage 1
Development Plan Amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan that are consistent with the
proposed land use amendments under the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The
Stage 2 Planned Development zoning and its Development Regulations would be applicable to
the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Site Development Review approved by the Planning
Commission at their meeting on March 27, 2012 by Resolution 12-12 (Attachment 7).
The proposed project has been reviewed for conformance with the Community Design and
Sustainability Element of the General Plan. The project itself is a portion of the larger Dublin
Ranch Area F project that has implemented pathways, gathering spaces, and open spaces.
The Project will adhere to the City of Dublin Green Building Ordinance but due to the small
number of units, the project is not required to satisfy the 50 point threshold in the City's program.
However, the Applicant has provided the Build it Green Checklist indicating the project will
obtain 134 points. The proposed project will further the goals of the Community Design and
Sustainability Element of the General Plan by providing a high quality of life and preserving
resources and opportunities for future generations.
REVIEW BY APPLICABLE DEPARTMENT AND AGENCIES:
The Building Division, Fire Prevention Bureau, Public Works Department, Dublin Police Services
and Dublin San Ramon Services District reviewed the project and provided Conditions of
Approval where appropriate to ensure that the Project is established in compliance with all local
Ordinances and Regulations. Conditions of Approval from these departments and agencies are
included in Planning Commission Resolution 12-12 approving the Site Development Review and
the Vesting Tentative Map (Attachment 7).
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:
In accordance with State law, a Public Notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants
within 300 feet of the Public/Semi Public Land use (Springfield Montessori site and the project
site). A Public Notice was also published in the Valley Times and posted at several locations
throughout the City. A copy of this Staff Report has been provided to the Applicant.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan were adopted by the City to encourage
orderly growth of the Eastern Dublin area. The Eastern Dublin EIR was a Program EIR and
evaluated the potential environmental effects of urbanizing Eastern Dublin over a 20 to 30 year
period.
On May 10, 1993, the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution No. 51-93, certifying an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (Eastern Dublin EIR, SCH #91103064). The certified EIR consisted
of a Draft EIR and Responses to Comments bound volumes, as well as an Addendum dated
May 4, 1993, assessing a modified reduced development alternative. The City Council adopted
Resolution No. 53-93 approving a General Plan Amendment and a Specific Plan for the
modified reduced area alternative on May 10, 1993. On August 22, 1994, the City Council
adopted a second Addendum updating wastewater disposal plans for Eastern Dublin.
Page 7 of 9
Later CEQA reviews addressing the Project site include a 1997 Negative Declaration (ND)
(Resolution 140-97) and a 2000 Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Dublin Ranch
Area F project (Resolution 34-00). An EIR Addendum was adopted for the Area F North project
on March 16, 2004 by Resolution 43-04.
The Eastern Dublin EIR addressed the cumulative effects of developing in agricultural and open
space areas and the basic policy considerations accompanying the change in character from
undeveloped to developed lands. For identified impacts that could not be mitigated to a less
than significant level, the City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for
cumulative traffic, extension of certain community facilities (natural gas, electric and telephone
service), regional air quality, noise, and other impacts. Because the Eastern Dublin project
proposed urbanization of the almost completely undeveloped Eastern Dublin area, the Eastern
Dublin EIR also analyzed conversion of agricultural and open space lands to urban uses. These
impacts together with visual and other impacts from urbanization were also determined to be
significant and unavoidable. Where the Eastern Dublin EIR identified impacts that could be
mitigated, the previously adopted mitigation measures continue to apply to implementing
projects, such as the Brannigan Street project. Similarly, mitigation measures from the 2000
MND would continue to apply to the Project, as appropriate.
Consistent with CEQA Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163, an
Initial Study was prepared by the City, as the Lead Agency, to determine whether there would be
significant environmental impacts occurring as a result of the current project beyond or different
from those already addressed in the previous CEQA documents. Consistent with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15164, a determination was made to prepare an Addendum to the
environmental documents certified previously.
The Initial Study and Addendum to previous CEQA documents concluded that the proposed
project did not identify any new or more severe significant impacts that were not analyzed
previously, and that no further environmental review under CEQA is required. Pursuant to the
2002 Citizens fora Better Environment case, approval of the Addendum will include a
Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant unavoidable impacts identified in the prior
Eastern Dublin EIR that are applicable to the project or project site. The Planning Commission
recommended that the City Council adopt the CEQA Addendum. The City Council Resolution
adopting the CEQA Addendum is included as Attachment 9 with the CEQA Addendum attached
as Exhibit A to Attachment 9.
The CEQA Addendum, prior CEQA documents, and all of the Resolutions, and Ordinances
referenced above are incorporated herein by reference and are available for review at City Hall
during normal business hours.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Ordinance adopting a Planned Development rezone with related
Stage 1 Development Plan Amendment and new Stage 2
Development Plan fora 3-acre site on Brannigan Street north of
Gleason Drive
2. Ordinance approving a Development Agreement between the City of
Dublin and Lennar Homes of California, Inc. for the Brannigan Street
project with the draft Development Agreement attached as Exhibit A
3. Planning Commission Resolution 12-09 recommending that the City
Council adopt a CEQA Addendum for the project proposed for a
Page 8 of 9
3-acre site on Brannigan Street north of Gleason Drive within Dublin
Ranch
4. Planning Commission Resolution 12-11 recommending that the City
Council adopt an Ordinance approving a Planned Development
rezone with related Stage 1 Development Plan Amendment and new
Stage 2 Development Plan fora 3-acre site on Brannigan Street
north of Gleason Drive
5. Planning Commission Resolution 12-13 recommending the City
Council approve a Development Agreement between the City of
Dublin and Lennar Homes of California, Inc. for the Brannigan Street
project
6. Planning Commission Resolution 12-10 recommending that the City
Council not adopt a resolution amending the General Plan and
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan to change the land use designation
from public/Semi-Public to Medium Density Residential fora 3-acre
site on Brannigan Street north of Gleason Drive
7. Planning Commission Resolution 12-12 approving a Site
Development Review for 4single-family detached units and Vesting
Tentative Parcel Map 10053 fora 4-lot subdivision
8. Draft Planning Commission minutes from March 27, 2012 meeting
9. Resolution to adopting a CEQA Addendum for the project proposed
fora 3-acre site on Brannigan Street north of Gleason Drive within
Dublin Ranch and adopting a related Statement of Overriding
Considerations
Page 9 of 9
ORDINANCE NO. XX - 12
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
*****************************************
ADOPTING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONE WITH RELATED STAGE 1
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT AND
A NEW STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FORA 3-ACRE SITE
ON BRANNIGAN STREET NORTH OF GLEASON DRIVE
(APN 985-0052-021)
PLPA-2011-00039
The City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: RECITALS
A. On March 21, 2000, the City Council adopted Ordinance 06-00 for Dublin Ranch Areas F,
G and H, which Ordinance approved a Planned Development rezoning and related Stage 1
Development Plan for the three areas. The current Brannigan Street Project site is within Area
F and is part of a larger 50-acre site that was previously designated for a future high school.
Other parts of Area F were designated in the General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and
Ordinance 06-00 for Medium Density Residential development. The Ordinance 06-00 Stage 1
Development Plan adopted detailed development standards for such development.
B. On April 6, 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance 12-04 for the Dublin Ranch Area F
North project, approving a PD-Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1
Development Plan for reconfiguration of Dublin Ranch Areas F, B and E. The current Brannigan
Street Project site remained in Area F and was redesignated for future Public/Semi-Public uses.
C. The current Brannigan Street project includes General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan amendments to change the land use designations from Public/Semi-Public to Medium
Density Residential, a Planned Development rezoning and related Stage 1 Development Plan
Amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan fora 19-lot residential development, and
related Site Development Review, Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Development Agreement.
D. The current Brannigan Street project amends the Stage 1 Development Plan in
Ordinance 06-00 to designate the Project site for Medium Density Residential development.
The current project also adopts a new Stage 2 Development Plan.
SECTION 2: FINDINGS
A. Pursuant to Section 8.120.050 of the Dublin Municipal Code, the City Council finds as
follows.
1. The proposed Stage 1 Development Plan Amendments and new Stage 2
Development Plan fora 3-acre site along the west side of Brannigan Street
north of Gleason Drive (the "Property") will be harmonious and compatible with
existing and potential development in surrounding areas because: the
proposed zoning amendment for the property from Public/Semi-Public to
Medium Density Residential uses would allow development of the Property
similar to Medium Density Residential developments on properties to the east
and west.
2. The Property is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the Planned
Development Zoning District proposed because: 1) it is located adjacent to
Medium Density Residential development and areas zoned for that use; 2) The
Project will be developed under standards consistent with the standards
adopted for the adjacent neighborhoods; 3) the Stage 1 and Stage 2
Development Plans will allow the construction of 19 units which will remain
within the permitted General Plan density range of 6.0 to 14.0 units per acre;
and 4) the Project will implement all applicable mitigation measures from prior
CEQA reviews and all applicable City grading, construction and development
ordinances.
3. The proposed Stage 1 Development Plan amendments and new Stage 2
Development Plan for the Property 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 welfare because: 1) development resulting from the
proposed zoning amendments to the Property would be subject to
development standards previously approved for Medium Density Residential
development adopted with Ordinance 06-00 and 12-04, (PA 01-037); 2)
development resulting from the proposed zoning amendments to the Property
would be subject to Ordinance requirements and Conditions of Approval
designed to preserve public health, safety, and welfare; and 3) adequate
hillside slope preservation and bio-retention measures will be incorporated to
prevent run-off onto adjacent and surrounding developments.
4. The proposed Stage 1 Development Plan amendments and new Stage 2
Development Plan for the Property are consistent with the Dublin General Plan
and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan because: 1) The Property has been
designated for Medium Density Residential development under the companion
General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan amendments approved by
Resolution XX on XX, 2012; and 2) the requested zoning is consistent with this
land use.
B. Pursuant to Section 8.32.070 of the Dublin Municipal Code, the City Council finds
as follows.
1. The proposed Stage 1 Development Plan amendments and new Stage 2
Development Plan for the Property meet the purpose and intent of Chapter
8.32 Planned Development Zoning District of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance
because: 1) the proposed project is consistent with the intent of the General
Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan designations for Medium Density
Residential development approved by Resolution XX on XX, 2012; and 2) the
proposed project complies with purposes stated in Section 8.32.010 of the
Dublin Zoning Ordinance by coordinating future development of the Project site
with similar existing residential development in neighboring areas.
2
2. Development under the Planned District Development Plan will be harmonious
and compatible with existing and future development in the surrounding area
because: 1) the proposed zoning amendments to the Property from
Public/Semi-Public to Medium Density Residential would allow development of
the Property similar to existing Medium Density Residential development to the
east and west of the site; and 2) adequate hillside slope preservation and bio-
retention measures will be incorporated to prevent run-off onto adjacent and
surrounding developments.
C. The City Council approved a CEQA Addendum for the Project, including the proposed
PD rezoning, by Resolution XX on A ril 17, 2012, which resolution is incorporated herein by
reference.
SECTION 3. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT
Pursuant to Chapter 8.32, Title 8 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code the City of Dublin Zoning
Map is amended to rezone the Brannigan Street property, as described and shown below, to the
PD-Planned Development zoning district
The 3-acre Property generally located along the west side of Brannigan Street north
of Gleason Drive (APN 985-0052-021).
A map of the rezoning area is shown below:
~ -
....
r.......__......_..~.~..~...~re•~~~~.~__~__...~....~..~ _._.__ _
r
P-~ r,~
.~ ~ ., ~ d
1
~~ ~~
~ --- ~
~~ ~ ~~ ~~'.~; i"[~7 TIC ~-S ~~,
_.
M
q _____ ____ .~~~~
e ~C~ 0.1 ~~; ~:~.
'I
~w
rlr~ ~ W
~~I.'ry"~ ~'~~~~~ ~'"h'.~~ ~S)qa'~~ ~ ".~. ~J " ~..1~t;~'a j I
1 ~ :o "M ~ ~
w ~ % ~ . I ~ i
~~
.~
..., "'
._ .~
uuuuuu urwu~uuu -.~v.~ ~-~_w -f-___--_
~~u~ ., - ..______~_ ..... L _ ~____--_. .
3
SECTION 4. APPROVAL OF STAGE 1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT AND OF NEW
STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
The regulations for the use, development, improvement, and maintenance of the Property are
set forth in the following Stage 1 Development Plan Amendment and new Stage 2 Development
Plan for the project area, which are hereby approved. Any amendments to the Stage 1 and
Stage 2 Development Plans shall be in accordance with section 8.32.080 of the Dublin
Municipal Code or its successors.
A separately bound document titled "Brannigan" (hereafter, "Application booklet") submitted as
part of the Project applications and dated March 13, 2012, is incorporated herein by reference
and on file in the Dublin Community Development Department.
Stage 1 Development Plan Amendment
1. Ordinance 06-00. The Stage 1 Development Plan in Ordinance 06-00 is hereby amended to
designate the Project site as Medium Density Residential. Other provisions of the Stage 1
Development Plan are amended in accordance with the following.
a. Statement of proposed uses. All uses permitted, conditional, accessory, and
temporary for PD Medium Density Residential approved by Ordinance 06-00 are
applicable to this property.
b. Stage 1 site plan. As shown in Application booklet (Sheet AP8).
c. Site area, proposed densities. Site area as shown in Application booklet (AP8).
Maximum 19 residential units/lots permitted.
d. Phasing plan. The project shall be developed in a single phase.
e. Master Neighborhood Landscaping Plan. As shown in Application booklet (Sheet
L-1 ).
f. General plan and specific plan consistency. The PD zoning is consistent with the
General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, as amended by Resolution XX
adopted XX, 2012.
g. Inclusionary zoning regulations. The Project at 19 units is not subject to the
Inclusionary Zoning Regulations.
h. Aerial photo. As shown in Application booklet (Sheet AP3).
Stage 2 Development Plan
1. Statement of compatibility with Stage 1 Development Plan: The Stage 2
Development Plan is compatible with the Stage 1 Development Plan Amendment, and all
applicable provisions for development of a Medium Density Residential subdivision of 19
lots.
4
2. Permitted Uses: All uses permitted, conditional, accessory, and temporary for PD
Medium Density Residential approved by Ordinance 06-00 are applicable to this property.
3. Stage 2 Site Plan: As shown in Application booklet (Sheet AP9).
4. Site area, proposed densities: Site area as shown in Application booklet. Maximum 19
residential units/lots permitted (AP7).
5. Development Standards: As shown below.
Standards Medium Density
Single Family Detached (Area F1)
Lot Size: Minimum 3,150 sf
Lot Size 3,150 sf
Minimum Street Frontage 35 feet
Maximum Lot Coverage 50%
Maximum Building Height 38 feet
Maximum Stories 3
Minimum Front Yard Setbacks
to living area 12 feet
to porch 10 feet
front of garage 18 feet
Minimum Side Yard Setback
2 story to 2 story 4 feet minimum
corner lot (setback from side street) 9 feet
Minimum Rear Yard Setback
Living Space 12 feet average, 5 feet minimum
Usable Rear Yards 300 sf contiguous flat area minimum
5 feet minimum dimension
Parking Spaces Required 2 covered, 1 guest
6. Architectural standards: As shown in Application booklet (Sheets Al through A25).
7. Preliminary Landscaping Plan: Refer to Stage 2 Conceptual Landscaping Plan in
Application booklet (Sheet L-1 ).
8. Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance: Development of the Project Site is not subject to the
City's Inclusionary Housing requirements as it is less than 20 units.
SECTION 5. Other Zoning Regulations. Pursuant to the Dublin Zoning Ordinance, section
8.32.060.C, the use, development, improvement, and maintenance of the Project area shall be
governed by the provisions of the closest comparable zoning district as determined by the
Community Development Director and of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance except as provided in the
Stage 1 Amended/Stage 2 Development Plans. Except as specifically modified by the PD
District Rezone, all applicable and general requirements of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance shall
be applied to this PD District.
5
SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE AND POSTING OF ORDINANCE
This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days following its adoption
contingent on approval of the companion General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
amendments. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at
least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the
Government Code of the State of California.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this
day of , 2012, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
G:IPA#120111PLPA-2011-00039 Lennar Homes Brannigan GPA EDSPAIKit's DOC commentslcc ordinance approving pd for
brannigan_lennar. DOC
6
ORDINANCE NO. XX - 12
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
*****************************
APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FORA 3-ACRE SITE
ON BRANNIGAN STREET NORTH OF GLEASON DRIVE
BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND
LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
(PLPA-2011-00039)
The City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows:
Section 1. RECITALS
A. The proposed project known as Brannigan Street, Lennar Homes is located within
the boundaries of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and is included in the approval for Planned
Development under PLPA-2011-00039.
B. A Development Agreement for Brannigan Street, Lennar Homes between the City
of Dublin and Lennar Homes ("Developer") has been presented to the City Council, Exhibit A,
attached hereto.
C. Consistent with CEQA Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and
15163, an Initial Study was prepared by the City, as the Lead Agency, to determine whether
there would be significant environmental impacts occurring as a result of the current project
beyond or different from those already addressed in the previous CEQA documents. Consistent
with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, a determination was made to prepare an Addendum to
the environmental documents certified previously.
D. A public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement was held before the
Planning Commission on March 27, 2012 for which public notice was given as provided by law.
E. The Planning Commission has made its recommendation to the City Council for
approval of the Development Agreement by Resolution 12 - 13.
F. A public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement was held before the
City Council on April 17, 2012 for which public notice was given as provided by law.
G. The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning
Commission, including the Planning Commission's reasons for its recommendation, the
Addendum, the Staff Report, all comments received in writing, and all testimony received at the
public hearing.
Section 2. FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS
Therefore, on the basis of (a) the foregoing Recitals which are incorporated herein, (b)
the City of Dublin General Plan, (c) the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, (d) the Addendum, (e) the
Staff Report, and on the basis of the specific conclusions set forth below, the City Council finds
and determines that:
1. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general
land uses and programs specified and contained in the City's General Plan, as amended by the
General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment in that: (a) the General Plan and
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designation for the site is Medium Density Residential, (b)
the proposed project is consistent with the designated land use; (c) the project is consistent with
the fiscal policies of the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan with respect to the
provision of infrastructure and public services; and (d) the Development Agreement includes
provisions relating to vesting of development rights, and similar provisions set forth in the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.
2. The Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the
regulations prescribed for, the land use districts in which the real property is located in that the
project approvals include, Stage 1 Development Plan Amendment and Stage 2 Development
Plan, Site Development Review, and Vesting Tentative Map.
3. The Development Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general
welfare, and good land use policies in that the Developer's project will implement land use
guidelines set forth in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the General Plan which have
planned for Medium Density Residential, and infrastructure uses at this location.
4. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety and
general welfare in that the Developer's project will proceed in accordance with all the programs
and policies of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.
5. The Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of
property or the preservation of property values in that the project will be consistent with the
General Plan and with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.
Section 3. APPROVAL
The City Council hereby approves the Development Agreement (Exhibit A to the
Ordinance) and authorizes the Mayor to execute it.
Section 4. RECORDATION
Within ten (10) days after the Development Agreement is fully executed by all parties, the
City Clerk shall submit the Agreement to the County Recorder for recordation.
Section 5. EFFECTIVE DATE AND POSTING OF ORDINANCE
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of
its passage. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause the Ordinance to be posted in at
least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the
Government Code of the State of California.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this _ day of _,
2012 by the following votes:
2 of 4
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
G:IPA#120111PLPA-2011-00039 Lennar Homes Brannigan GPA EDSPAIPC Mtg 3.27.121CC Ord adopting da for Brannigan.docx
3 of 4
4 of 4
RESOLUTION NO. 12-09
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A CEQA ADDENDUM FOR THE
PROJECT PROPOSED FORA 3-ACRE SITE ON BRANNIGAN STREET NORTH OF
GLEASON DRIVE WITHIN DUBLIN RANCH
(APN 985-0052-021)
PLPA-2011-00039
WHEREAS, Lennar Homes of California, Inc. ("Applicant") submitted applications fora 3-
acre site located along the west side of Brannigan Street north of Gleason Drive ("Project
Site"). The applications include: 1) General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
amendments to change the land use from its current designation of Public/Semi-Public to
Medium Density Residential; 2) Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1
Development Plan Amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan; 3) Site Development
Review (SDR) to construct 19 single-family detached homes; 4) Vesting Tentative Tract Map
8093 to create 19 residential lots; and 5) Development Agreement. The Project Site and the
applications are collectively known as the "Project;" and
WHEREAS, the Project site and currently is vacant land; and
WHEREAS, the Project is in the General Plan Eastern Extended Planning Area and the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, for which the City Council certified a Program Environmental
Impact Report by Resolution 51-93 ("Eastern Dublin EIR" or "EDEIR", SCH 91103064) on May
10, 1993 (resolution incorporated herein by reference). The Eastern Dublin EIR identified
significant impacts from development of the Eastern Dublin area, some of which could not be
mitigated to less than significant. Upon approval of the General Plan Amendment and Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan, the City Council adopted mitigations, a mitigation monitoring program and
a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Resolution 53-93, incorporated herein by reference);
and
WHEREAS, since certification of the EDEIR, the Project site has been addressed in
several later CEQA reviews, including a 1997 Negative Declaration (Resolution 140-97), a
2000 MND for the Dublin Ranch Area F project (Resolution 34-00), and a 2004 Addendum for
the Dublin Ranch Area F North project (Resolution 43-04). The foregoing resolutions are
incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified significant unavoidable impacts from
development of the Eastern Dublin area, some of which would apply to the Project; therefore,
approval of the Project must be supported by a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and
WHEREAS, for the Brannigan Street Project, the City prepared an Initial Study to
determine if additional review of the proposed Project modifications and development was
required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15162. Based on the Initial Study, the City
prepared an Addendum dated March 27, 2012 describing the modifications, development and
Page 1 of 4
findings that the impacts of the proposed Project have been adequately addressed in the prior
CEQA documents referenced above. The Addendum is attached as Exhibit A and is
incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report for the Planning Commission, dated March 27, 2012 and
incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the project, and recommended
adoption of the CEQA Addendum and approval of the Project; and
WHEREAS, on March 27, 2012 the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public
hearing on the project at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the CEQA Addendum as well as the
prior CEQA documents, and all above-referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony
before taking any action on the project.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission makes the following
findings to support the determination that no further environmental review is required under
CEQA for the proposed Project. These findings are based on information contained in the
CEQA Addendum, the prior CEQA documents, the Planning Commission Staff Report, and all
other information contained in the record before the Planning Commission. These findings
constitute a summary of the information contained in the entire record. The detailed facts to
support the findings are set forth in the CEQA Addendum and related Initial Study, the prior
CEQA documents, and elsewhere in the record. Other facts and information in the record that
support each finding that are not included below are incorporated herein by reference:
1. The proposed Project does not constitute substantial changes to the previous
projects affecting the Project site, as addressed in the prior CEQA documents, that will require
major revisions to the prior documents due to new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in severity of previously identified significant effects. Based on the Initial
Study, all potentially significant effects of the proposed Project are the same or less than the
impacts for the projects which were previously addressed. The proposed Project will not result
in substantially more severe significant impacts than those identified in the prior CEQA
documents. All previously adopted mitigation measures continue to apply to the proposed
Project and project site as applicable.
2. The Initial Study and Addendum did not identify any new significant impacts of the
proposed Project that were not analyzed in the prior CEQA documents.
3. The City is not aware of any new information of substantial importance or substantial
changes in circumstances that would result in new or substantially more severe impacts or
meet any other standards in CEQA Section 21166 and related CEQA Guidelines Sections
15162/3.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends the following
to the City Council:
2 of 4
1. No further environmental review under CEQA is required for the proposed Project
because there is no substantial evidence in the record as a whole that any of the standards
under Sections 21166 or 15162/3 are met.
2. The City has properly prepared a CEQA Addendum and related Initial Study under
CEQA Guidelines section 15164 to explain its decision not to prepare a subsequent or
supplemental EIR or conduct further environmental review for the proposed Project.
3. The City Council adopt the CEQA Addendum and related Initial Study, attached
as Exhibit A, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 for the Project.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of March, 2012 by the following vote:
AYES: Wehrenberg, Schaub, O'Keefe, Bhuthimethee
NOES:
ABSENT: Brown
ABSTAIN:
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Planning Manager
3 of 4
G:IPA#120111PLPA-2011-00039 Lennar Homes Brannigan GPA EDSPAIKit's DOC commentslpc reso recommending cega addendum for
brannigan_lennar. DOC
4 of 4
RESOLUTION NO. 12-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE
APPROVING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONE WITH RELATED STAGE 1
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT
AND NEW STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A 3-ACRE SITE.
ON BRANNIGAN STREET NORTH OF GLEASON DRIVE
(APN 985-0052-021)
PLP A-2011-00039
WHEREAS, Lennar Homes of California, Inc. ("Applicant") submitted applications for a 3-
acre site located along the west side of Brannigan Street north of Gleason Drive ("Project Site").
The applications include: 1) General Plan and Eastern Dublin SpeCific Plan amendments to
change the land use from its current designation of Public/Semi-Public to Medium Density
Residential; 2) Planned Development Rezoning with related Stage 1 Development Plan
Amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan; 3) Site Development Review (SDR) to
construct 19 single-family detached homes; 4) Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093 to create 19
residential lots; and 5) Development Agreement. The Project Site and the applications are
collectively known as the "Project;" and
WHEREAS, the Project Site currently is vacant land; and
WHEREAS, a CEQA Addendum to prior environmental review documents has been
prepared for the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report 'for the Planning Commission, dated March 27, 2012 and
incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the CEQA Addendum and the
. Project, including the proposed Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1
Development Plan Amendment and the new Stage 2 Development Plan, and recommended
approval of the Project; and
WHEREAS, on March 27, 2012 the Planning Commission held a properly noticed publiC
hearing on the Project, including the proposed Planned Development rezoning at which time all
interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, following the public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended that
the City Council adopt the CEQA Addendum, and adopt the related General Plan and Specific
Plan Amendments for the Project, which resolutions are incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the CEQA Addendum and prior CEQA
documents, and all above-referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony prior to taking
any action on the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this resolution.
:ttt-f
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin Planning Commission recommends that
the City Council approve the Ordinance attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by
reference, based on findings that the PO zoning: a) is consistent with the General Plan and
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan as amended by the Project; b) is consistent with the purpose and
intent of the Planned Development zoning district; and c) will be harmonious and compatible
with existing and potential development in the surrounding area.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 27th day of March 2012 by the following vote:
AYES: Wehrenberg, O'Keefe, Bhuthimethee
NOES: Schaub
ABSENT: Brown
ABSTAIN:
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Planning Manager
G:IPA#\2011\PLPA-2011-00039 Lennar Homes Brannigan GPA EOSPAIPC Rasa-ree PO amend Brannigan. doc
RESOLUTION NO. 12 - 13
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR
A 3-ACRE SITE ON BRANNIGAN STREET NORTH OF GLEASON DRIVE
(APN 985-0052-021)
PLPA-2011-00039
WHEREAS, Lennar Homes of California, Inc. ("Applicant") submitted applications fora 3-
acre site located along the west side of Brannigan Street north of Gleason Drive ("Project
Site"). The applications include: 1) General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
amendments to change the land use from its current designation of Public/Semi-Public to
Medium Density Residential; 2) Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1
Development Plan Amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan; 3) Site Development
Review (SDR) to construct 19 single-family detached homes; 4) Vesting Tentative Tract Map
8093 to create 19 residential lots; and 5) Development Agreement. The Project Site and the
applications are collectively known as the "Project," and
WHEREAS, the project is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area; and
WHEREAS, Development Agreements are required as an implementing measure of the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, a CEQA Addendum to prior environmental review documents has been
prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA
Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, on March 27, 2012, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the
Project, including the Development Agreement, and recommended that the City Council adopt
the CEQA Addendum, adopt General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendments for
the project as stated above from Public/Semi-Public to Medium Density Residential, and
recommended that the City Council adopt a Planned Development (PD) rezoning with related
Stage 1 Development Plan amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan to guide
development of the proposed residential project; and
WHEREAS, a proposed Ordinance to adopt a Development Agreement and the text of
the draft Development Agreement ("Agreement") are attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A;
and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by
law; and
WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning
Commission recommend that the City Council approve the Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use their independent judgment and
considered the CEQA Addendum and prior CEQA documents, all said reports,
recommendations, and testimony prior to taking any action on the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City of Dublin Planning Commission
does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding the draft Development
Agreement:
1. The Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and
programs specified in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan/General Plan in that: a) the Agreement
addresses a Medium Density Residential subdivision on the Project site consistent with the
proposed General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designations; b) the project
is consistent with the fiscal policies in relation to the provision of infrastructure and public
services of the City's General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; and c) the Agreement
sets forth the rules the Applicant and the City will be governed by during the development
process which is required by the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the Mitigation Monitoring
Program of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.
2. The Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations
prescribed for, the land use district in which the property is located and consistent with the
approvals for the Project.
3. The Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and
good land use practice in that the Applicant's project will implement land uses and policies set
forth in the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan for Eastern Dublin generally and the
Project site specifically.
4. The Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare in
that the development will proceed in accordance with the applicable Planned Development
zoning, the Agreement and any Conditions of Approval for the Project.
5. The Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of the property
or the preservation of property values in that the development will be consistent with the City of
Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City of Dublin Planning
Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council adopt an Ordinance approving the
Development Agreement between the City of Dublin and Lennar Homes of California, Inc. for
the Lennar Brannigan Project (PLPA-2011-00039), which documents are attached as Exhibit A
to this resolution and are incorporated herein by reference.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27t" day of March of 2012.
AYES: Wehrenberg, Schaub, O'Keefe, Bhuthimethee
NOES:
ABSENT: Brown
ABSTAIN:
Planning Commission Chair
Page 2 of 3
ATTEST:
Planning Manager
G:IPA#120111PLPA-2011-00039 Lennar Homes Brannigan GPA EDSPAIPC Mtg 3.27.121pc reso recommending da for brannigan_Iennar.DOC
Page 3 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. 12 - 10
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL NOT ADOPT A RESOLUTION AMENDING
THE GENERAL PLAN AND EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN TO CHANGE THE LAND
USE DESIGNATION FROM PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
FOR A 3-ACRE SITE ON BRANNIGAN STREET NORTH OF GLEASON DRIVE
(APN 985-0052-021)
PLP A-2011-00039
WHEREAS, Lennar Homes of California, Inc. ("Applicant") submitted applications for a 3-
acre site located along the west side of Brannigan Street north of Gleason Drive ("Project Site").
The applications include: 1) General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan amendments to
change the land use from its current designation of Public/Semi-Public to Medium Density
Residential; 2) Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1 Development Plan
Amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan; 3) Site Development Review (SDR) to
construct 19 single-family detached homes; 4) Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093 to create 19
residential lots; and 5) Development Agreement. The Project Site and the applications are
collectively known as the "Project;" and
WHEREAS, consistent with California Government Code Section 65352.3, the City
obtained a contact list of local Native American tribes from the Native American Heritage
Commission and notified the tribes on the contact list of the opportunity to consult with the City
on the proposed General Plan and Specific Plan amendments. None of the contacted tribes
requested a consultation within the 90-day statutory consultation period and no further action is
required under section 65352.3; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan amendments would
change the existing land use from Public/Semi.Public to Medium Density Residential (6.0 to
14.0 dwelling units per acre); and
WHEREAS, a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Addendum has been
prepared pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report for the Planning Commission, dated March 27, 2012 and
incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the project, including the proposed
amendments to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and the related CEQA
Addendum; and
WHEREAS, on March 27,2012 the Planning Commission held a properly noticed pUblic
hearing on the project, including the proposed General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
amendments, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, on March 27, 2012 the Planning Commission recommended that the City
Council adopt a CEQA Addendum for the Project, which resolution is incorporated herein by
reference and available for review at City Hall during normal business hours; and
itto
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the CEQA Addendum, prior CEQA
documents, and all above-referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony priorto taking
any action on the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that the City
Council approve General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan amendments to change the
land use designation for the Project from Public/Semi-Public to Medium Density Residential,
including all related tables and maps which will be revised to reflect these changes, based on
findings that the amendments are in the public interest and that the General Plan as so
amended will remain internally consistent and finding the Project within the scope of the Eastern
Dublin EIR and related addenda.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 2yth day of March, 2012 by the following vote:
AYES: Wehrenberg
NOES: Schaub, O'Keefe, Bhuthimethee
ABSENT: Brown
ABSTAIN:
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Planning Manager
G:\PA#\2011\PLPA-2011-G0039 Lennar Homes Brannigan GPA EDSPAIKit's DOC commentslpc reso recommending gpa_spa for
brannigan_tennar.doc
2
RESOLUTION NO. 12- 12
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT AND VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 8093 FOR 19 SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED UNITS FOR
A 3-ACRE SITE LOCATED ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF
BRANNIGAN STREET NORTH OF GLEASON DRIVE
(APN 985-0052-021)
PLP A-2011-00039
WHEREAS, the Applicant, Lennar Homes of California, Inc. submitted applications for a
3-acre site ("Project Site") located along the west side of Brannigan Street north of Gleason
Drive within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, the applications include: 1) General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
amendments to change the land use from its current designation of Public/Semi-Public to
Medium Density Residential, and 2) Planned Development rezoning with related a Stage 1
Development Plan Amendment and a new Stage 2 Development Plan; and
WHEREAS, the applications also include: a) Site Development Review (SDR); and b)
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093 for 19 single-family detached residential units/lots within the
Project Site; and
WHEREAS, the applications collectively define this "Projecf' and are available and on file
in the Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, the Project site is vacant land that has been rough graded in connection with
prior approvals; and
WHEREAS, a CEQA Addendum to prior environmental review documents has been
prepared .for the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, on March 27, 2012, the Planning Commission held a public hearing
recommended that the City Council adopt the CEQA Addendum and adopt General Plan and
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendments for the project as stated above from Public/Semi-
Public to Medium Density Residential, and recommended that the City Council adopt a Planned
Development (PO) rezoning with related Stage 1 Development Plan Amendments and a new
Stage 2 Development Plan to guide development of the proposed residential project; and
WHEREAS, the 19 lots that comprise the Project Site are identified as Lots 1 through 19
of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by
law; and
:tt:(
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission
approve the Site Development Review and Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a pUblic hearing on said applications on
March 27, 2012, for this project at which time all interested parties had ~he opportunity to be
heard; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use independent judgment and
considered the CEQA Addendum and prior CEQA documents, all said reports,
recommendations, and testimony prior to taking any action on the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
Dublin does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding said proposed
Site Development Review for 19 lots of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093 along the west side
of Brannigan Street north of Gleason Drive:
Site Development Review:
A. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of Chapter 8. 104 of the Zoning
Ordinance, with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plans and design
guidelines because: 1) The project will not undermine the architectural character and
scale of development in the area which the proposed project is to be located; 2) the
project will provide a unique, varied, and distinct housing opportunity; 3) the project is
consistent with the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. Land Use
designation of Medium Density Residential; and 4) the project complies with the
development standards established in the Stage 2 Development Plan Ordinance.
B. The proposal is consistent with the provisions of Title 8, Zoning Ordinance because:
1) the project contributes to orderly, attractive, and harmonious site and structural.
development compatible with the existing neighborhood subdivision mapping and
blends well with the surrounding properties; and 2) the project complies with the
development regulations set forth in the applicable PO Ordinance.
c. The design of the project is appropriate to the City, the vicinity, surrounding
properties, and the lot in which the project is proposed because: 1) the project
augments available housing in the vicinity; 2) the size and mass of the proposed
houses are consistent with the lot sizes and other residential developments in the
surrounding area; and 3) the project will provide a more complete street scene.
D. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the approved
development because: the proposed homes to be developed on the property meet all
of the development standards established to regulate development in the
neighborhood overall as referenced in the approved Stage 2 Development Plan.
E. Impacts to existing slopes and topographic features are addressed because: 1) the
infrastructure in the area is under construction including streets and utilities pursuant
to prior approvals; 2) the project site will be graded in accordance with the related
Vesting Tentative Tract Map for the Project Site; and 3) retaining walls will be
constructed to establish the required lot size and building envelope.
2
F. Architectural considerations including the character, scale and quality of the design,
site layout, the architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, screening of
unsightly uses, lighting, building materials and colors and similar elements result in a
project that is harmonious with its surroundings and compatible with other
developments in the vicinity because: 1) the development will be similar to homes
already constructed in the general vicinity; 2) the proposed houses will utilize three (3)
architectural styles and development regulations similar to existing homes in the area;
3) the materials referenced in the style guidelines will be consistent; and 4) the color
and materials proposed will match the colors and material being utilized on homes
existing in the vicinity.
G. Landscape considerations, including the location, type, size, color, texture and
coverage of plant materials, and similar elements have been incorporated into the
project to ensure visual relief, adequate screening and an attractive environment for
the public because: 1) all perimeter landscaping, walls, fences, and hardscape are
proposed for construction in accordance with the PO zoning for the Project; and 2)
the project front yard landscaping and sideyard fencing is consistent with other
developments in the vicinity and conform to the requirements of the Stage 2
Development Plan and the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.
H. The site has been adequately designed to ensure the proper circulation for bicyclist,
pedestrians, and automobiles because: 1) all infrastructure including streets,
parkways, pathways, sidewalks, and streetlighting are proposed for construction in
accordance with the PO zoning for the Project; and 2) development of this project will
conform to the major improvements already installed allowing residents the safe and
efficient use of these facilities.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Dublin does
hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding Vesting Tentative Tract Map
8093:
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093
A. The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093 is consistent with the intent of
applicable subdivision regulations and related ordinances addressing the Project site.
B. The design and improvements of the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093 are
consistent with the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, as amended to
allow medium density residential development and are consistent with adjacent
residential neighborhoods designated for this same type of development.
C. The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093 is consistent with the Planned
Development zoning approved for the Project through Ordinance XX-12 and therefore
consistent with the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance.
D. The properties created by the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093 will have
adequate access to major constructed or planned improvements as part of Dublin Ranch
project-related approvals.
3
E. Project design, architecture, and concept have been integrated with topography of the
project site created by the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093 to minimize
overgrading and extensive use of retaining walls. Therefore, the proposed subdivision is
physically suitable for the type and intensity of development proposed.
F. The Mitigation Measures and the Mitigation Monitoring programs adopted with the
program EIR for the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the 2000 Area F Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND) would be applicable as appropriate for addressing or
mitigating any potential environmental impacts of developing the Project and Project
site, as documented in the approved CEQA Addendum.
G. The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093 will not result in environmental damage
or substantially injure fish or wildlife or their habitat or cause public health concerns.
H. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at
large, or access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The City
Engineer has reviewed the map and title report and has not found any conflicting
easements of this nature.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Dublin does
hereby approve the Site Development Review for the proposed project of 19 detached single
family residential units within the project of a 3-acre site on Brannigan Street north of Gleason
Drive, as shown on plans prepared by SDG Architecture + Engineering and HLD Group
Landscape Architecture dated received March 13, 2012 subject to the conditions included
below.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Dublin does
hereby approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093 for 19 single family detached residential lots
within the project of a 3-acre site on Brannigan Street north of Gleason Drive prepared by SDG
Architecture + Engineering and HLD Group Landscape Architecture dated received March 13,
2012 subject to the conditions included below.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Unless stated otherwise. all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to the issuance
of buildina permits or establishment of use. and shall be subiect to Plannina Department review
and approval. The followina codes represent those departments/aaencies responsible for
monitoring compliance of the conditions of approval. (PL.l Plannina. (Bl Buildina. (POl Police,
(PM Public Works (P&CSl Parks & Community Services. (ADM] Administration/City Attornev.
(FINl Finance. (Fl Alameda County Fire Department. (DSRl Dublin San Ramon Services District.
(COl Alameda County Department of Environmental Health. (Z7l Zone 7.
NO.
Agency
When
Required,
Prior to:
Source
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PLANNING DIVISION
1. Approval. This Site Development Review approval is
for the construction of 19 Sin le-Famil detached
4
On going
NO. Agency
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
residential units on approximately 3 acres within
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093. This approval
shall be as generally depicted and indicated on the
plans prepared SDG Architecture + Engineering and
HLD Group Landscape Architecture dated received
March 13, 2012 on file in the Community Development
Department, and as specified by the following
Conditions of Approval for this project and subject to
City Council approval of the related CEQA Addendum,
General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
amendments, and Planned Development rezoning
with related Stage 1 Development Plan amendment
and new Stage 2 Development Plan becoming
effective.
2. Time Extension. The original approving decision- PL
maker may, upon the Applicant's written request for
an extension of approval prior to expiration, and upon
the determination that any Conditions of Approval
remain adequate to assure that applicable findings of
approval will continue to be met, grant a time
extension of approval for a period not to exceed six (6)
months. All time extension requests shall be noticed
and a public hearing or public meeting shall be held as
required by the particular Permit.
3. Effective Date. This Site Development Review PL
approval becomes effective 10 days after action by
the Planning Commission and subject to City Council
approval of the related CEQA Addendum, General
Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan amendments,
and Planned Development rezoning with related
Stage 1 Development Plan amendment and new
StaQe 2 Development Plan becoming effective.
4. Permit Expiration: Construction or use shall PL
commence within one (1) year of Site Development
Review (SDR) approval, or the SDR shall lapse and
become null and void. Commencement of
construction or use means the actual construction or
use pursuant to the approval, or demonstrating
substantial progress toward commencing such use. If
there is a dispute as to whether the SDR has expired,
the City may hold a noticed public hearing to
determine the matter. Such a determination may be
processed concurrently with revocation proceedings in
appropriate circumstances. If a SDR expires, a new
application must be made and processed according to
the requirements of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance.
5
When Source
Required,
Prior to:
One year Standard
following
approval date
On going Standard
One year from Standard
approval
NO.
.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
5.
Revocation of permit. The permit shall be revocable
for cause in accordance with Chapter 8.96 of the
Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Any violation of the terms
or conditions of this permit shall be subject to citation.
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 of Fish and Game, Army Corps
of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board,
State Water Quality Control Board) and shall submit
copies of the permits to the Public Works Department.
Requirements and Standard Conditions. The
Applicant/Developer shall comply with applicable
Alameda County Fire, Dublin Public Works
Department, Dublin Building Department, Dublin
Police Services, Alameda County Flood Control
District Zone 7, Livermore Amador Valley Transit
Authority, Alameda County Public and Environmental
Health, Dublin San Ramon Services District and the
California Department of Health Services
requirements and standard conditions. Prior to
issuance of building permits or the installation of any
improvements related to this project, the Developer
shall supply written statements from each such
agency or department to the Planning Department,
indicating that all applicable conditions required have
been or will be met.
Modifications: The Community Development
Director may consider modifications or changes to this
Site Development Review approval if the modifications
or changes proposed comply with Section 8.104.100
of the Zonino Ordinance.
Satellite Dishes: The Applicant/Developer's Architect
shall prepare a plan for review and approval by the
Director of Community Development and the Building
Official that provides a consistent and unobtrusive
location for the placement of individual satellite
dishes. Individual conduit will be run on the interior of
the unit to the satellite location on the exterior of the
home to limit the amount of exposed cable required to
activate any satellite dish. It is preferred that where
chimneys exist, the mounting of the dish be
incorporated into the chimney. In instances where
chimneys do not exist, then the plan shall show a
common and consistent location for satellite dish
6
6.
7.
8.
9.
Agency
PL
PL, PW
Various
PL
PL
When
Required,
Prior to:
On going
Source
Standard
Issuance of
Building
Permits
Standard
Issuance of
Building
Permits
Standard
On-going
Standard
Issuance of
building permit
Project
Specific
NO. Agency
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
placement to eliminate the over proliferation,
haphazard and irreQular placement.
10. Indemnification: The ApplicanUDeveloper shall PL, B
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, Community Development
Director, Zoning Administrator, or any other
department, committee, or agency of the City 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
ApplicanUDeveloper's duty to so defend, indemnify,
and hold harmless shall be subject to the City's
promptly notifying The ApplicanUDeveloper of any
said claim, action, or proceeding and the City's full
cooperation in the defense of. such actions or
proceedings.
11. Retaining Walls: The ApplicanUDeveloper shall PL
indicate on the plot plans, with dimensions, the
precise location of the point on the side yard retaining
walls where the wall material will change from
precision block (able to be stuccoed) to split face
block. The intent of this condition is to assure that the
entire portion of the wall visible to the street (from the
perpendicular side-yard fence to the end of the wall
closest to the street) is able to be enhanced with
stucco material as required in the approved
Development Plans. Also, it is intended that the
perpendicular side yard fence should be located at the
transition point of the two block materials. No stucco
wall face should occur behind the perpendicular side
yard fence. Potential issues may arise in the field
conditions which will be addressed on a case-by-case
basis as directed by the Stage 1 and Stage 2
Development Plans.
12. Clean up. The ApplicanUDeveloper shall be PL
responsible for clean-up and disposal of project
related trash and for maintaining a clean, litter-free
site.
13. Controlling Activities. The Applicant /Developer PO, PL
shall control all activities on the project site so as not
to create a nuisance to the surroundinQ residences.
7
When
Required,
Prior to:
Source
On going
Standard
Issuance of
building permit
Project
Specific
On going
Standard
On going
Standard
NO.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
14. Noise/Nuisances. No loudspeakers or amplified
music shall be permitted to project or be placed
outside of the residential buildings during construction.
15. Accessory Structures. The use of any accessory
structures, such as storage sheds or trailer/container
units used for storage or for any other purpose during
construction, shall not be allowed on the site at any
time unless a Temporary Use Permit is applied for and
approved.
16. Final building and site development plans shall be
reviewed and approved by the Community
Development Department staff prior to the issuance of
a building permit. All such plans shall insure:
a. That standard residential security requirements as
established by the Dublin Police Department are
provided.
b. That ramps, special parking spaces, signing, and
other appropriate physical features for the
handicapped, are provided throughout the site for
all publicly used facilities.
c. That continuous concrete curbing is provided for
all parking stalls, if necessary.
d. That exterior lighting of the building and site is not
directed onto adjacent properties and the light
source is shielded from direct offsite viewing.
e. That all mechanical equipment, including air
conditioning . condensers, electrical and gas
meters, is architecturally screened from view, and
that electrical transformers are either underground
or architecturally screened.
f. That all vents, gutters, downspouts, flashings,
etc., are painted to match the color of adjacent
surface.
g. That all materials and colors are to be as
approved by the Dublin Community Development
Department. Once constructed or installed, all
improvements are to be maintained in accordance
with the approved plans. Any changes, which
affect the exterior character, shall be resubmitted
to the Dublin Community Development
Department for approval.
h. That all exterior architectural elements visible from
view and not detailed on the plans be finished in a
style and in materials in harmony with the exterior
8
Agency When Source
Required,
Prior to:
PO, PL On going Standard
PL,B,F On going Standard
PL
Issuance of
building permit
Project
Specific
NO. Agency
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
of the building. All materials shall wrap to the
inside corners and terminate at a perpendicular
wall plane.
I. That all other public agencies that require review
of the project are supplied with copies of the final
building and site plans and that compliance is
obtained with at least their minimum Code
requirements.
17. Fees. The ApplicanUDeveloper shall pay all PW
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, Public Works Traffic
Impact fees, City of Dublin Fire Services 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 either in effect at the time
and/or as noted in the Development Agreement.
18. Final landscape plans, irrigation system plans, tree PL
preservation techniques, and guarantees, shall be
reviewed and approved by the Dublin Planning
Division prior to the issuance of the building permit.
All such submittals shall insure:
a. That plant material is utilized which will be capable
of healthy growth within the given range of soil
and climate.
b. That proposed landscape screening is of a height
and density so that it provides a positive visual
impact within three years from the time of
planting.
c. That unless unusual circumstances prevail, at
least 75% of the proposed trees on the site are a
minimum of 15 gallons in size, and at least 50% of
the proposed shrubs on the site are minimum of 5
gallons in size.
d. That a plan for an automatic irrigation system be
provided which assures that all plants get
adequate water. In unusual circumstances, and if
approved by Staff, a manual or quick coupler
system may be used.
e. That concrete curbing is to be used at the edges
9
When Source
Required,
Prior to:
Zone 7 and Standard
Parkland In-
Lieu Fees Due
Prior to Filing
Each Final
Map; Other
Fees Required
with Issuance
of Building
Permits
Issuance of Standard
building permit
NO.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
of . all planters and paving surfaces where
applicable.
1. That all cut and fill slopes conform to the vesting
tentative map and conditions detailed in the Site
Development Review packet.
g. That all cut and fill slopes graded and not
constructed by September 1, of any given year,
are hydroseeded with perennial or native grasses
and flowers, and that stock piles of loose soil
existing on that date are hydroseeded in a similar
manner.
h. That the area under the drip line of all existing
oaks, walnuts, etc., which are to be saved are
fenced during construction and grading operations
and no activity is permitted under them that will
cause soil compaction or damage to the tree, if
applicable.
\. That a guarantee from the owners or contractors
shall be required guaranteeing all shrubs and
ground cover, all trees, and the irrigation system
for one year.
j. That a permanent maintenance agreement on all
landscaping will be required from the owner
insuring regular irrigation, fertilization and weed
abatement, if applicable.
19. Water Efficient Landscaping Regulations: The
Applicant shall meet all requirements of the City of
Dublin's Water-Efficient Landscaping Regulations,
Section 8.88 of the Dublin Municipal Code.
20. Landscape Plans. Civil Improvement Plans, Joint
Trench Plans, Street Lighting Plans and Landscape
Improvement Plans shall be submitted on the same
size sheet and plotted at the same drawing scale for
consistency, improved legibility and
interdisciplinary coordination.
21. Utilities. Utilities shall be coordinated with proposed
tree placements to eliminate conflicts between trees
and utilities. Utilities may have to be relocated in order
to provi,de the required separation between the trees
and utilities.
22. Chapter 8.72 The Applicant shall work with staff
during the preparation of construction documents to
refine the landscape design so that it meets the intent
10
Agency
PL
When
Required,
Prior to:
On going
Source
Standard
NO. Agency When Source
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Required,
Prior to:
of Chapter 8.72 of the Dublin Municipal Code and so
that trees can be incorporated into the design as
shown on the Preliminary Landscape Plan.
23. Open Space Areas. The open space area shall be
planted and irrigated to create landscape that is
attractive, conserves water, and requires minimal
maintenance. .
24. Brannigan Streets cape Planting. The streetscape
planting along Brannigan Street shall be consistent
with the planting design across the street so that they
are visually compatible.
25. Plant Clearances. All trees planted shall meet the
following clearances:
a. 6' from the face of house walls or roof eaves.
b. 7' from fire hydrants, storm drains, sanitary sewers
and/or gas lines.
c. 5' from top of wing of driveways, mailboxes, water,
telephone and/or electrical mains
d. 15' from stop signs, street or curb sign returns.
e. 15' from either side of street Iiahts.
26. Irrigation System Warranty. The applicant shall
warranty the irrigation system and planting for a period
of one year from the date of installation. The applicant
shall submit for the Dublin Community Development
Department approval a landscape maintenance plan
for the Common Area landscape including a
reasonable estimate of expenses for the first five
years.
27. Walls and Fences. Applicant shall work with staff to
prepare a fencing and wall plan that is consistent with
Dublin Municipal Code and adjacent subdivisions.
28. Masonry Wall Caps. The design of masonry walls
shall be consistent with the Dublin Ranch standard
with precast concrete caps.
29. Sustainable Landscape Practices: The landscape PL On going Standard
design shall demonstrate compliance with sustainable
landscape practices as detailed in the Bay-Friendly
Landscape Guidelines by earning a minimum of 60
points or more on the Bay-Friendly scorecard and
specifying that 75% of the non-turf planting only
requires occasional, little or no shearing or summer
water once established.
30. Plotting: The Site Development Review allows any of PL Issuance of Project
the two floor plans in the materials referenced in building Specific
Condition #1 to be constructed on any of the lots permits
within the Proiect site, subiect to limitations as follows:
11
NO.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
· Individual floor plans may be placed next to each
other. However, only two of the same individual
floor plans may be plotted next to each other
without being interrupted by a different floor plan.
· In no case will the same architectural elevation or
color scheme be allowed next to or across the
street from each other, unless they are a different
individual floor plan.
PUBLIC WORKS
31. General Public Works Conditions of Approval:
Developer shall comply with the City of Dublin General
Public Works Conditions of Approval unless
specifically modified by these Conditions of Approval.
32. Development Agreement: A Development
Agreement between the City of Dublin and the
Developer shall be recorded.
33. Street Lighting Maintenance Assessment District:
The Developer shall request the area to be annexed
into a subzone of the Citywide Street Lighting
Maintenance Assessment District and shall provide
any exhibits required for the annexation. In addition
Developer shall pay all administrative costs associated
with processinQ the annexation.
34. Ownership and Maintenance of Improvements:
Ownership, dedications on final map, and
maintenance of street right-of-ways, common area
parcels, and open space areas shall be by the City of
Dublin and the Homeowner's Association, as shown
on the Ownership and Maintenance Responsibility
Exhibit, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8093, Brannigan
Street, prepared by Carlson- Barbee-Gibson, Inc.,
dated November 30, 2011, except that the plans shall
be modified to show the planter strip landscaping and
irrigation on Brannigan Street to be owned and
maintained by the Homeowner's Association.
35. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs).
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs). A
Homeowners Association shall be formed by
recordation of a declaration of Covenants, Conditions,
and Restrictions to govern use and maintenance of
the landscape features within the public right of way
contained in the Agreement for Long Term
Encroachments and the frontage landscaping along
BranniQan Street. Said declaration shall set forth the
12
Agency
PW
PW
PW
PW
PW
When
Required,
Prior to:
On going
Final Map
Final Map
Final Map and
On going
Final Map
Source
...
Standard
C of A
Standard
CofA
Standard
CofA
Project
Specific
Standard
CofA
NO. Agency
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Association name, bylaws, rules and regulations. The
CC&Rs shall ensure that there is adequate provision
for the maintenance, in good repair and on a regular
basis, of the landscaping & irrigation, decorative
pavements, median islands, fences, walls, drainage,
lighting, signs and other related improvements. The
CC&Rs shall also contain all other items required by
these conditions. The Developer shall submit a copy
of the CC&R document to the City for review and
approval.
36. Long Term Encroachment Agreement: The PW
Developer shall enter into an "Agreement for Long
Term Encroachments" with the City to allow the HOA
to maintain the landscape and decorative features
within public Right of Way including frontage &
median landscaping, decorative pavements and
special features (i.e., walls, portals, benches, etc.) as
generally shown on Site Development Review exhibits
referenced in Condition #1. The Agreement shall
identify the ownership of the special features and
maintenance responsibilities. The Homeowner's
Association will be responsible for maintaining the
surface of all decorative pavements including
restoration required as the result of utility repairs.
37. Public Streets: Developer shall construct street PW
frontage improvements for Brannigan Street as shown
on the Tentative Map, to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. Striping shall be as shown on the Tentative
Map and as approved bv the City Traffic EnQineer.
38. Brannigan Street Off-Site Improvements: The PW
Developer shall be responsible for the completion of
street frontage improvements on the west side of
Brannigan Street from the southerly boundary of the
project to Brannigan Street's intersection with Gleason
Drive. Improvements shall consist of widening the
street to match the improvements on the portion of
Brannigan Street fronting the Project site (56' curb
face to curb face), as well as constructing the ultimate
curb return for the northwestern portion of the
Brannigan Street/Gleason Drive intersection.
Improvements shall include grading as needed, full
pavement structural section, concrete curb and gutter,
a 6' temporary asphalt concrete walkway (including a
connection to the existing walkway on Gleason Drive),
and an accessible curb ramp with domes at the
intersection. The existing pedestrian push button pole
13
When
Required,
Prior to:
Final Map
Final Map
Final Map
Source
Project
Specific
Standard
CofA
Project
Specific
NO.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
at the intersection shall be relocated behind the new
curb face. A drainage inlet shall be installed at the
northerly end of the curb return, and pipe installed to
tie the inlet to the existing system, unless the need for
the inlet is waived by the City Engineer during final
design.
39. . Joint Trench: The developer shall complete the
installation of the joint trench along the Brannigan
Street as needed.
40. Storm Drain Treatment Measures: The developer
shall install storm drain treatment measures that
comply with Section C.10 of the Municipal Regional
Permit for Stormwater with regards to trash capture.
The location and type of measures shall be approved
by the City Engineer. Measures located on-site shall
be maintained by the HOA; measures located within
the public right-of-way and that accept public street
runoff will be maintained by the City.
41. Internal Streets: The internal street layout shall be
modified to provide a pedestrian connection with
ramps and striping across Circle "A" connecting the
walkways south of Lots 7 and 8.
42. Existing Access Easement: The existing access
easement along the northerly property line shall be
quitclaimed by the adjoining owner prior to filing the
Final Map.
43. On-site Storm Drain: A storm drain inlet shall be
provided at the northeast corner of the Brodie Way/
Circle "A" intersection to prevent runoff from draining
across the intersection or draining across Brodie Way/
BranniQan Street intersection,
44. Fallon Road/ 1-580 Interchange Improvement
Contribution: The developer shall pay a fair share
portion of costs advanced by the Un Family for
improvements to the Fallon Road/I-580 Interchange.
The advance will be payable at the time of filing of the
first final map. The amount shall be calculated against
the then-outstanding balance as of the first final map.
City will provide a credit to developers in the amount
of developer's advance to be used by developer
against payment of Section 2 obligations of the
Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee ("TIF"). In
accordance with the City's TIF Guidelines (Reso. 20-
07), establishment of the credit shall require the
payment of an administrative fee. The use of credits
(including limitations on the use of credits) and
14
Agency
PW
PW
PW
PW
PW
When
Required,
Prior to:
Final Map
Final Map
Final Map
Final Map
Final Map
Final Map
Source
.
Project
Specific
Project
Specific
Project
Specific
manner of conversion of the credit to a right of
reimbursement will be as set forth in the City's TIF
Guidelines, subject to the following provisions: (a) the
credit shall be granted at the time Developer makes
the advance required by this condition; and (b) the
credit may be used only to satisfy Section 2 TIF
obligations.
45. Traffic Impact Fees: The developer shall be
responsible for payment of the Eastern Dublin Traffic
Impact Fee (Sections 1 and 2), the Eastern Dublin 1-
580 Interchange Fee, and the Tri-Valley
Transportation Development Fee. Fees will be
payable at issuance of buildinQ permits.
46. Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Minimum
Payment: The developer shall be responsible for
payment of a minimum portion of the Eastern Dublin
Traffic Impact Fee in cash (11% Category 1 and 25%
of Category 2), as specified in the resolution
establishing the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee.
These minimum cash payment shall be in addition to
any other payment noted in these conditions and may
not be offset by fee credits.
PUBLIC WORKS GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TRACT ,MAP 8093
47. The Developer shall comply with the Subdivision Map PW On going
Act, the City of Dublin Subdivision, and Grading
Ordinances, the City of Dublin Public Works
Standards and Policies, the most current requirements
of the State Code Title 24 and the Americans with
Disabilities Act with regard to accessibility, and all
building and fire codes and ordinances in effect at the
time of building permit. All public improvements
constructed by Developer and to be dedicated to the
City are hereby identified as "public works" under
Labor Code section 1771. Accordingly, Developer, in
constructing such improvements, shall comply with the
Prevailing Wage Law (Labor Code. Sects. 1720 and
followinQ).
48. The 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,
Community Development Director, Zoning
Administrator, or any other department, committee, or
NO.
Agency
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PW
PW
PW
]5
When
Required,
Prior to:
Issuance of
Building
Permits
Issuance of
Building
Permits
On going
Source
Standard
CofA
Standard'
CofA
Standard
C of A
Standard
C of A
NO.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
agency of the City related to this project (Tract 8093)
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 Developer's duty to so defend, indemnify,
and hold harmless shall be subject to the City's
promptly notifying The Developer of any said claim,
action, or proceeding and the City's full cooperation in
the defense of such actions or proceedings.
49. In the event that there needs to be clarification to
these Conditions of Approval, the Director of
Community Development and the City Engineer have
the authority to clarify the intent of these Conditions of
Approval to the Developer without going to a public
hearing. The Director of Community Development and
the City Engineer also have the authority to make
minor modifications to these conditions without going
to a public hearing in order for the Developer to fulfill
needed improvements or mitigations resulting from
impacts of this proiect.
AGREEMENTS AND BONDS ' .... ,
50. The Developer shall enter into a Tract Improvement
Agreement with the City for all public improvements
including any required offsite storm drainage or
roadway improvements that are needed to serve the
Tract that have not been bonded with another Tract
Improvement Agreement.
51. The Developer shall provide performance (100%), and
labor & material (100%) securities to guarantee the
tract improvements, approved by the City Engineer,
prior to execution of the Tract Improvement
Agreement and approval of the Final Map. (Note:
Upon acceptance of the improvements, the
performance security may be replaced with a
maintenance bond that is 25% of the value of the
performance security.)
"FEES
52. The 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,
Public Works Traffic Impact fees, Alameda County
Fire Services fees; Noise Mitigation fees, Inclusionary
Housing In-Lieu fees; Alameda County Flood and
Water Conservation District (Zone 7) Drainage and
16
Agency
When
Required,
Prior to:
PW On going
, .'
PW First Final Map
and
Successive
Maps
PW First Final Map
and
Successive
Maps
PW Zone 7 and
Parkland In-
Lieu Fees Due
Prior to Filing
Each Final
Map; Other
Fees Required
with Issuance
. of Building
Source
Standard
CofA
Standard
C of A
Standard
C of A
Standard
CofA
NO. Agency When Source
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Required,
Prior to: ..
Water Connection fees; and any other fees either in Permits
effect at the time and/or as noted in the Development
AQreement.
53. The Developer shall dedicate parkland or pay in-lieu PW Each Final Map Standard
fees in the amounts and at the times set forth in City C of A
of Dublin Resolution No. 214-02, or in any resolution
revising these amounts.,. and as implemented by the
Administrative Guidelines adopted by Resolution 195-
99.
PERMITS ,
.
54. Developer shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from PW Start of Work Standard
the Public Works Department for all construction C of A
activity within the public right-of-way of any street
where the City has accepted the improvements. The
encroachment permit may require surety for slurry
seal and restriping. At the discretion of the City
Engineer an encroachment for work specifically
included in an Improvement Agreement may not be
required.
55. Developer shall obtain a Grading / Sitework Permit PW Start of Work Standard
from the Public Works Department for all grading and. CofA
private site improvements that serves more than one
lot or residential condominium unit.
56. Developer shall obtain all permits required by other PW Start of Work Standard
agencies including, but not limited to Alameda County CofA
Flood Control and Water Conservation District Zone 7,
California Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps
of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board,
Caltrans and provide copies of the permits to the
Public Works Department.
SUBMITTALS .
57. All submittals of plans and Final Maps shall comply PW Approval of Standard
with the requirements of the "City of Dublin Public Improvement CofA
Works Department Improvement Plan Submittal Plans or Final
Requirements", and the "City of Dublin Improvement Map
Plan Review Check List".
58. The Developer will be responsible for submittals and PW Approval of Standard
reviews to obtain the approvals of all participating non- Improvement CofA
City agencies. The Alameda County Fire Department Plans or Final
and the Dublin San Ramon Services District shall Map
approve and sign the Improvement Plans.
59. Developer shall submit a Geotechnical Report, which PW Approval of Standard
includes street pavement sections and grading Improvement CofA
recommendations. Plans, Grading
17
NO. Agency When Source
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Required,
Prior to:
Plans, or Final
Map
60. Developer shall provide the Public Works Department PW Acceptance of Standard
a digital vectorized file of the "master" files for the Improvements CofA
project when the Final Map has been approved. and Release of
Digital raster copies are not acceptable. The digital Bonds
vectorized files shall be in AutoCAD 14 or higher
drawing format. Drawing units shall be decimal with
the precision of the Final Map. All objects and entities
in layers shall be colored by layer and named in
English. All submitted drawings shall use the Global
Coordinate System of USA, California, NAD 83
California State Plane, Zone III, and U.S. foot. .
EASEMENTS '. , .. '.' .
"
61. The Developer shall obtain abandonment from all PW Approval of Standard'
applicable public agencies of existing easements and Improvement CofA
right of ways within the development that will no longer Plans or
be used. Appropriate
Final Map
62. The Developer shall acquire easements, and/or obtain PW Approval of Standard
rights-of-entry from the adjacent property owners for Improvement CofA
any improvements on their property. The easements Plans or
and/or rights-of-entry shall be in writing and copies Appropriate
furnished to the City EnQineer. Final Map
GRADING '.. .. "
63. The Grading Plan shall be in conformance with the PW Prior to Standard
recommendations of the Geotechnical Report, the Approval of CofA.
approved Tentative Map and/or Site Development Grading Plans
Review, and the City design standards & ordinances. or Issuance of
In case of conflict between the soil engineer's Grading
recommendations and City ordinances, the City Permits, and
Engineer shall determine which shall apply. On going
64. A detailed Erosion Control Plan shall be included with PW Approval of Standard
the Grading Plan approval. The plan shall include Grading Plans CofA
detailed design, location, and maintenance criteria of or Issuance of
all erosion and sedimentation control measures. Grading
Permits, and
On QoinQ
65. Tiebacks or structural fabric for retaining walls shall PW Approval of Standard
not cross property lines, or shall be located a Grading Plans or CofA
minimum of 2' below the finished grade of the upper Issuance of
lot. Grading Permits,
and On going
66. Bank slopes along public streets shall be no steeper PW . Approval of Standard
than 3: 1 unless shown otherwise on the Tentative Grading Plans CofA
18
NO. Agency When Source
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Required,
Prior to:
Map Grading Plan exhibits. The toe of any slope or Issuance of
along public streets shall be one foot back of walkway. Grading
The top of any slope along public streets shall be Permits, and
three feet back of walkway. Minor exception may be On going
made in the above slope design criteria to meet
unforeseen design constraints subject to the approval
of the City EnQineer.
IMPROVEMENTS. . ,
67. The publiC improvements shall be constructed PW Approval of Standard
generally as shown on the Tentative Map and/or Site Improvement C of A
Development Review. However, the approval of the Plans or Start
Tentative Map and/or Site Development Review is not of
an approval of the specific design of the drainage, Construction,
sanitary sewer, water, and street improvements. and On Qoing
68. All public improvements shall conform to the City of PW Approval of Standard
Dublin Standard Plans and design requirements and Improvement C of A
as approved by the City Engineer. Plans or Start
of
Construction,
and On aoinQ
69. Public streets shall be at a minimum 1 % slope with PW Approval of Standard
minimum gutter flow of 0.7% around bumpouts. Improvement C ofA.
Private streets and alleys shall be at minimum 0.5% Plans or Start
slope. of
Construction,
and On Qoing
70. Curb Returns on arterial and collector streets shall be PW Approval of Standard
40-foot radius, all internal publiC streets curb returns Improvement CofA
shall be 30-foot radius (36-foot with bump outs) and Plans or Start
private streets/alleys shall be a minimum 20-foot of
radius, or as approved by the City Engineer. Curb Construction,
ramp locations and design shall conform to the most and On going
current Title 24 and Americans with Disabilities Act
requirements and as approved by the City. Traffic
Engineer.
71. The Developer shall install all traffic . signs and PW Occupancy of Standard
pavement marking as required by the City Engineer. Units or CofA
Acceptance of
Imorovements
72. Street light standards and luminaries shall be PW Occupancy of Standard
designed and installed per approval of the City Units or CofA
Engineer. The maximum voltage drop for streetlights Acceptance of
is 5%. Improvements
73. All new traffic signals shall be interconnected with PW Occupancy of Standard
other new signals within the development and to the Units or CofA
19
NO. Agency When Source
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Required,
Prior to:
existing City traffic signal system by hard wire. Acceptance of
Improvements
74. The Developer shall construct bus stops and shelters PW Occupancy of Standard
at the locations designated and approved by the Units or CofA
LAVTA and the City Engineer. The Developer shall Acceptance of
pay the cost of procuring and installing these Improvements
improvements.
75. Developer shall construct all potable and recycled PW Occupancy of Standard
water and sanitary sewer facilities required to serve Units or C of A
the project in accordance with DSRSD master plans, Acceptance of
standards, specifications and requirements. Improvements
76. Fire hydrant locations shall be approved by the PW Occupancy of Standard
Alameda County Fire Department. A raised reflector Units or CofA
blue traffic marker shall be installed in the street Acceptance of
opposite each hydrant. Improvements
77. The Developer shall furnish and install street name PW Occupancy of Standard
signs for the project to the satisfaction of the City Units or CofA
Engineer. Acceptance of
Improvements
78. Developer shall construct gas, electric, cable TV and PW Occupancy of Standard
communication improvements within the fronting Units or CofA
streets and as necessary to serve the project and the Acceptance of
future adjacent parcels as approved by the City Improvements
Engineer and the various Public Utility agencies.
79. All electrical, gas, telephone, and Cable TV utilities, PW Occupancy of Standard
shall be underground in accordance with the City Units or CofA
policies and ordinances. All utilities shall be located Acceptance of
and provided within public utility easements and sized Improvements
to meet utility company standards. ,
80. All utility vaults, boxes and structures, unless PW Occupancy of Standard
specifically approved otherwise by the City Engineer, Units or CofA
shall be underground and placed in landscape areas Acceptance of
and screened from public view. Prior to Joint Trench Improvements
Plan approval, landscape drawings shall be submitted
to the City showing the location of all utility vaults,
boxes and structures and adjacent landscape features
and plantings. The Joint Trench Plans shall be signed
by the City Engineer prior to construction of the joint
trench improvements.
CONSTRUCTION .' '. , ",
", " .; .I', , ,',
81. The Erosion Control Plan shall be implemented PW On going as Standard
between October 15th and April 15th unless otherwise Needed CofA
allowed in writing by the City Engineer. The Developer
will be responsible for maintaining erosion and
sediment control measures for one year following the
20
NO. Agency
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
City's acceptance of the subdivision improvements.
82. If archaeological materials are encountered during PW
construction, construction within 30 feet of these
materials shall be halted until a professional
Archaeologist who is certified by the Society of
California Archaeology (SCA) or the Society of
Professional Archaeology (SOPA) has had an
opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and
suggest appropriate mitigation measures.
83. Construction activities, including the maintenance and PW
warming of equipment, shall be limited to Monday
through Friday, and non-City holidays, between the
hours of 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. except as otherwise
approved by the City Engineer. Extended hours or
Saturday work will be considered by the City Engineer
on a case-by-case basis.
84. Developer shall prepare a construction noise PW
management plan that identifies measures to be taken
to minimize construction noise on surrounding
developed properties. The plan shall include hours of
construction operation, use of mufflers on construction
equipment, speed limit for construction traffic, haul
routes and identify a noise monitor. Specific noise
management measures shall be provided prior to
project construction.
85. Developer shall prepare a plan for construction traffic PW
interface with public traffic on any existing public
street. Construction traffic and parking may be
subject to specific requirements by the City Engineer.
86. The Developer shall be responsible for controlling any PW
rodent, mosquito, or other pest problem due to
construction activities.
87. The Developer shall be responsible for watering or PW
other dust-palliative measures to control dust as
conditions warrant or as directed by the City Engineer.
88. The Developer shall provide the Public Works PW
Department with a letter from a registered civil
engineer or surveyor stating that the building pads
have been graded to within 0.1 feet of the grades
shown on the approved Grading Plans, and that the
top & toe of banks and retaining walls are at the
locations shown on the approved GradinQ Plans.
21
When
Required,
Prior to:
On going as
Needed
On going as
Needed
Start of
Construction
Implementation
On going as
Needed
Start of
Construction;
Implementation
On going as
Needed
On going
Start of
Construction;
Implementation
On going as
Needed
Issuance of
Building
Permits or
Acceptance of
Improvements
Source
1993
EDEIR
MM
Standard
CofA
Standard
CofA
Standard
CofA
Standard
CofA
Standard
CofA
Standard
CofA
NO.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
NPDES < ... .
89. Prior to any clearing or grading, the Developer shall
provide the City evidence that a Notice of Intent (NOI)
has been sent to the California State Water
Resources Control Board per the requirements of the
NPDES. A copy of the Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be provided to the
Public Works Department and be kept at the
construction site.
90. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
shall identify the Best Management Practices (BMPs)
appropriate to the project construction activities. The
SWPPP shall include the erosion control measures in
accordance with the regulations outlined in the most
current version of the ABAG Erosion and Sediment
Control Handbook or State Construction Best
Management Practices Handbook.. The Developer is
responsible for ensuring that all contractors implement
all storm water pollution prevention measures in the
SWPPP.
91. The Homeowner's Association shall enter into an
agreement with the City of Dublin that guarantees the
perpetual maintenance obligation for all storm water
treatment measures installed as part of the project.
Said agreement is required pursuant to Provision
C.3.h. of RWQCB Order R2-2009-0074 for the
issuance of the Alameda Countywide NPDES
municipal storm water permit. Said permit requires
the City to provide verification and assurance that all
treatment devices will be properly operated and
maintained. This condition shall not apply if the water
quality treatment measures are maintained by a
GHAD or other public entity.
92. Clarification. In the event that there needs to be
clarification to these Conditions of Approval, the City
Engineer or Community Development Director has the
authority to clarify the intent of these Conditions of
Approval to the Developer without going to a public
hearing. The City Engineer or Community
Development Director also has the authority to make
minor modifications to these conditions without going
to a public hearing in order for the
Applicant/Developer to fulfill needed improvements or
mitigations resulting from impacts of this proiect.
93. Applicant/Developer shall obtain an Encroachment
Permit from the Public Works Deoartment for all
22
Agency
PW
PW
PW
PW, PL
PW
When
Required,
Prior to:
Start of Any.
Construction.
Activities
SWPPP to be
Prepared Prior
to Approval of
Improvement
Plans:
Implementation
Prior to Start of
Construction
and On going
as Needed
First Final Map;
Modify as
needed with
Successive
Maps
On-going
Construction
Source
Standard
CofA
Standard
C of A
Standard
CofA
Standard.
Standard
NO. Agency
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
construction activity within the public right-of-way of
any street where the City has accepted the
improvements. At the discretion of the City Engineer
an encroachment for work specifically included in an
Improvement Agreement may not be required.
94. ApplicanVDeveloper shall obtain a Grading I PW
Sitework Permit from the Public Works Department
for all private grading and site improvements. This will
include any community walls or soundwalls installed
as part of the project. Wall construction will be subject
to plan review by the Public Works Department and
the Building Division, and will be subject to special
inspections during construction.
95. Plot plans shall be submitted for review and approval PW
by the Public Works Department and the Community
Development Department prior to approval of building
permits.
96. Roof drainage shall be connected to a closed PW
conduit, discharging to a curb drain or connected to
the storm drain system. Concentrated flows will not be
allowed to drain across public sidewalks
97. The Applicant/Developer is responsible for ensuring PW
that all contractors implement all storm water pollution
prevention measures in the SWPPP.
98. Removal of Obstructions. ApplicanVDeveloper shall PW
remove all trees including major root systems and
other obstructions from building sites that are
necessary for public improvements or for public safety
as directed by the soils engineer and Public Works
Director.
99. Utility Siting Plan. The ApplicanVDeveloper shall PW, PL
provide a final Utility Siting Plan showing that
transformers and service boxes are placed outside of
public view where possible and/or screened to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Director
and Public Works Director. Applicant/Developer shall
place all utility infrastructures underground including
electric, telecommunications, cable TV, and gas in
accordance with standards enforced by the
appropriate utility agency. Utility plans showing the
location of all proposed utilities shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer/Public Works Director
prior to installation.
23
When Source
Required,
Prior to:
Construction Standard
Building Standard
Permits
Tract impmt Standard
agreement
During Standard
construction
Issuance of Standard
Occupancy
Permits
Issuance of Standard
Grading
Permits
NO.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
BUILDING DIVISION
100. Building Codes and Ordinances: All project
construction shall conform to all building codes and
ordinances in effect at the time of buildina permit.
101. Universal Design Ordinance, Due to the limited
number of units, the proiect is exempt.
102. Retaining Walls: All retaining walls over 30 inches in
height and in a walkway area shall be provided with
guardrails. All retaining walls located on private
property, over 24 inches, with a surcharge, or 36
inches without a surcharge, shall obtain permits and
inspections from the Buildina Division.
103. Phased Occupancy Plan: If occupancy is requested
to occur in phases, then all physical improvements
within each phase shall be required to be completed
prior to occupancy of any buildings within that phase
except for items specifically excluded in an approved
Phased Occupancy Plan, or minor handwork items,
approved by the Community Development
Department. The Phased Occupancy Plan shall be
submitted to the Directors 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.
Any phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular
access to all parcels in each phase, and shall
substantially conform to the intent and purpose of the
subdivision approval. No individual building shall be
occupied until the adjoining area is finished, safe,
accessible, and provided with all reasonable expected
services and amenities, and separated from remaining
additional construction activity. Subject to approval of
the Community Development Director, the completion
of landscaping may be deferred due to inclement
weather with the posting of a bond for the value of the
deferred landscaping and associated improvements.
104. Building Permits: To apply for building permits,
ApplicanUDeveloper shall submit seven (7) sets of
construction plans to the Building Division for plan
check. Each set of plans shall have attached an
annotated copy of these Conditions of Approval. The
notations shall clearly indicate how all Conditions of
Approval will or have been complied with.
Construction plans will not be accepted without the
annotated resolutions attached to each set of plans.
ApplicanUDeveloper will be responsible for obtainina
24
Agency
B
B
B
B
B
When
Required,
Prior to:
Source
Through Standard
Completion
Through Standard
Completion
Through Standard
completion
Occupancy of Standard
any affected
building
Issuance of Standard
building permit
NO. Agency
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
the approvals of all participation non-City agencies
prior to the issuance of building permits.
105. Construction Drawings: Construction plans shall be B
fully dimensioned (including building elevations)
accurately drawn (depicting all existing and proposed
conditions on site), and prepared and signed by a
California licensed Architect or Engineer. All structural
calculations shall be prepared and signed by a
California licensed Architect or Engineer. The site
plan, landscape plan and details shall be consistent
with each other.
106. Air Conditioning Units: Air conditioning units and B
ventilation ducts shall be screened from public view
with materials compatible to the main building and
shall not be roof mounted. Units shall be permanently
installed on concrete. pads or other non-movable
materials approved by the Building Official and
Community Development Director. Air conditioning
units shall be located such that each dwelling unit has
one side yard with an unobstructed width of not less
than 36 inches. Air conditioning units shall be located
in accordance with the PO text.
107. Temporary Fencing: Temporary Construction B
fencing shall be installed along the perimeter of all
work under construction.
108. Addressing: B
a. Provide a site plan with the City of Dublin's
address grid overlaid on the plans (1 to 30 scale).
Highlight all exterior door openings on plans (front,
rear, garage, etc.). (Prior to release of addresses)
b. Provide plan for display of addresses. The
Building Official and Director of Community
Development shall approve plan prior to issuance
of the first building permit. (Prior to permitting)
c. Addresses will be required on the front of the
dwellings. Addresses are also required near the
garage door opening if the opening is not on the
same side of the dwelling as the front door. (Prior
to permitting)
d. Address signage shall be provided as per the
Dublin Residential Security Code. (Occupancy of
any Unit).
e. Provide a site plan with the approved addresses in
1 to 400 scale prior to approval or release of the
25
When Source
Required,
Prior to:
Issuance of Standard
building permit
Occupancy of Standard
unit
Through Standard
completion
Issuance of Standard
building permit
and through
completion
NO.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
project addresses. (Prior to permitting)
f. Exterior address numbers shall be backlight and
be posted in such a way that they can be seen
from the street.
109. Engineer Observation: The Engineer of record shall
be retained to provide observation services for all
components of the lateral and vertical design of the
building, including nailing, hold downs, straps, shear,
roof diaphragm and structural frame of building. A
written report shall be submitted to the City Inspector
PJior to schedulinq the final frame inspection.
110. Foundation: Geotechnical Engineer for the soils
report shall review and approve the foundation design.
A letter shall be submitted to the Building Division on
the approval.
111. Green Building: Green Building measures as
detailed may be adjusted prior to master plan check
application submittal with prior approval from the
City's Green Building Official. Provided that the
design of the project complies with the City of Dublin's
Green Building Ordinance and State Law as
applicable. In addition, all changes shall be reflected
in the Master Plans. (Through Completion)
However due to the limited number of units, the
project is exempt from the 50 point minimum
requirement.
The Green Building checklist shall be included in the
master plans. The checklist shall detail what Green
Points are being obtained and where the information
is found within the master plans. (Prior to first permit)
Prior to each unit final, the project shall submit a
completed checklist with appropriate verification that
all Green Points required by 7.94 of the Dublin
Municipal Code have been incorporated. (Through
Completion)
Homeowner Manual - if Applicant/Developer takes
advantage of this point the Manual shall be submitted
to the Green Building Official for review or a third party
reviewer with the results submitted to the City.
(Through Completion)
Applicant/Developer may choose self-certification or
certification by a third party as permitted by the Dublin
Municipal Code. Applicant/Developer shall inform the
Green Buildinq Official of method of certification prior
26
Agency
B
B
B
When
Required,
Prior to:
Source
Scheduling the Standard
final frame
inspection
Through Standard
completion
Through Standard
completion
NO. Agency
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
to release of the first permit in each subdivision /
neighborhood.
112. Electronic File: The ApplicanUDeveloper shall submit B
all building drawings and specifications for this project
in an electronic format to the satisfaction of the
Building Official prior to the issuance of building
permits. Additionally, all revisions made to the
building plans during the project shall be incorporated
into an "As Built" electronic file and submitted prior to
the issuance of the final occupancy.
113. Construction trailer: Due to size and nature of the B
development, the ApplicanUDeveloper, shall provide a
construction trailer with all hook ups for use by City
Inspection personnel during the time of construction
as determined necessary by the Building Official. In
the event that the City has their own construction
trailer, the applicanUdeveloper shall provide a site with
appropriate hook ups in close proximity to the project
site to accommodate this trailer. The
ApplicanUDeveloper shall cause the trailer to be
moved from its current location at the time necessary
as determined by the Building Official at the
ApplicanUDeveloper's expense.
114. Copies of Approved Plans: ApplicanUDeveloper B
shall provide City with 4 reduced (1/2 size) copies of
the approved plan.
, .
SECURITY AND POLICE
115. Security During Construction.
a. Fencing - The perimeter of the construction site
shall be fenced and locked at all times when
workers are not present. All construction activities
shall be confined to within the fenced area.
Construction materials and/or equipment shall not
be operated or stored outside of the fenced area or
within the public right-of-way unless approved in
advance by the Public Works Director.
b. Address Sign - A temporary address sign of
sufficient size and color contrast to be seen during
night time hours with existing street lighting is to be
posted on the perimeter street adjacent to
construction activities.
c. Emergency Contact - Prior to any phase of
construction, ApplicanUDeveloper will file with the
Dublin Police Department an Emeraency Contact
PO, B,
PW
27
When Source
Required,
Prior to:
Issuance of Standard
building permit
Issuance of Standard
Building
Permits
30 days after Standard
permit and
each revision
issuance
During
construction
Standard
NO. Agency When Source
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Required,
Prior to:
Business Card that will provide 24-hour phone
contact numbers of persons responsible for the
construction site.
d. Materials & Tools - Good security practices shall
be followed with respect to storage of building
materials and tools at the construction site.
e. Security lighting and patrols shall be employed as
necessary.
116. Graffiti. The Applicant/Developer shall keep the site PO,PL On going Standard
clear of graffiti on a regular and continuous basis and at
all times. Graffiti resistant materials should be used.
'FIRE,INSPEC'fION . . ",:; ,:' ,,:.' .' ",," ", . >" .:, , , "
, "'" '.< '" . ,
117. Provide escape or rescue window for every sleeping F On going Standard
room below the fourth story in accordance with the
UBC section 310.4.
118. The project shall comply with Building and Fire Codes F On going Standard
as adopted bv the City of Dublin.
DS'RSb ' .:;':.:,. ,'" ".A ..' /'. ,. .<'.' , ';.,. .,'" , .. ' , "
" ..!.... ;. ,. . . .. ,. . . .'. , .', "
"
119. Prior to issuance of any building permit, complete DSRSD On going Standard
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 DSRSD
policies.
120. All mains shall be sized to provide sufficient capacity DSRSD On going Standard
to accommodate future flow demands in addition to
each development project's demand. Layout and
sizing of mains shall be in conformance with DSRSD
utility master plannina.
121. Sewers shall be designed to operate by gravity flow to DSRSD On going Standard
DSRSD's existing sanitary sewer system. Pumping of
sewage is discouraged 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 require payment of present worth 20 year
maintenance costs as well as other conditions within a
separate agreement with the applicant for any project
that requires a pumpina station.
122. Domestic and fire protection waterline systems for DSRSD On going Standard
Tracts or Commercial Developments shall be
28
NO. Agency
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
designed to be looped or interconnected to avoid
dead end sections in accordance with requirements of
the DSRSD Standard Specifications and sound
enQineerinQ practice.
123. DSRSD policy requires public water and sewer lines to DSRSD
be located in public streets rather than in off-street
locations to the fullest extent possible. If unavoidable,
then public sewer or water easements must be
established over the alignment of each public sewer or
water line in an off-street or private street location to
provide access for future maintenance and/or
replacement.
124. Prior to approval by the City of a grading permit or a DSRSD
site development permit, the locations and widths of
all proposed easement dedications for water and
sewer lines shall be submitted to and approved by
DSRSD.
125. All easement dedications for DSRSD facilities shall be DSRSD
by separate instrument irrevocably offered to DSRSD
or by offer of dedication on the Final Map.
126. Prior to approval by the City for Recordation, the Final DSRSD
Map shall be submitted to and approved by DSRSD
for easement locations, widths, and restrictions.
127. Prior to issuance by the City of any Building Permit or DSRSD
Construction Permit by the Dublin San Ramon
Services District, whichever comes first, all utility
connection fees including DSRSD and Zone 7, plan
checking fees, inspection fees, connection 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.
128. Prior to issuance by the City of any Building Permit or DSRSD
Construction Permit by the Dublin San Ramon
Services District, whichever comes first, all
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 approval of the
sanitary sewer or water facilities shown. Prior to
approval by the District Engineer, the applicant shall
pay all required DSRSD 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
29
When
Required.
Prior to:
On going
On going
On going
On going
On gomg
On gOing
Source
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
NO. Agency
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
at least 15 working days for final improvement drawing
review by DSRSD before signature by the District
EnQineer.
129. No sewer. line or waterline construction shall be DSRSD
permitted unless the proper utility construction permit
has been issued by DSRSD. A construction permit
will only be issued after all of the items in Condition
No. 9 have been satisfied
130. The applicant shall hold DSRSD, its Board of DSRSD
Directors, commissions, employees, and agents of
DSRSD harmless and indemnify and defend the same
from any litigation, claims, or fines resulting from the
construction and completion of the project
131. Improvement plans shall include recycled water DSRSD
improvements as required by DSRSD. Services for
landscape irrigation shall connect to recycled water
mains. Applicant must obtain a copy of the DSRSD
Recycled Water Use Guidelines and conform to the
requirements therein.
132. Above ground backflow prevention devices/double DSRSD
detector check valves shall be installed on fire
protection systems connected to the DSRSD water
main. The applicant shall collaborate with the Fire
Department and with DSRSD to size and configure its
fire system. The applicant shall minimize the number
of backflow prevention devices/double detector check
valves installed on its fire protection system. The
applicant shall minimize the visual impact of the
backflow prevention devices/double detector check
valves throuQh strategic placement and landscaping.
When
Required,
Prior to: .
On going
On going
On going
On going
. S()urce
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2ih day of March, 2012 by the following vote:
AYES: Wehrenberg, O'Keefe, Bhuthimethee
NOES: Schaub
ABSENT: Brown
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Planning Commission Chair
Planning Manager
G:\PA#\2011\PLPA-2011-00039 Lennar Homes Brannigan GPA EDSPA \PC Mtg 3.27. 12\pc reso approving vtm and sdr for
brannigan_lennar. DOC
30
DRAFT DRAFT
Planning Commission Minutes
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, March 27,
2012, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair Wehrenberg called the
meeting to order at 7:00:55 PM
Present: Chair Wehrenberg; Vice Chair O'Keefe; Commissioners Schaub and Bhuthimethee;
Jeff Baker, Planning Manager; Marnie Delgado, Senior Planner; Mike Porto, Consulting Planner;
and Debra LeClair, Recording Secretary.
Absent: Cm. Brown
ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA -NONE
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS - On a motion by Cm. Schaub, seconded by Cm.
O'Keefe, the minutes of the March 13, 2012 meeting, on a vote of 4-0-1, with Cm. Brown being
absent, were unanimously approved as revised.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -NONE
CONSENT CALENDAR -NONE
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS -NONE
PUBLIC HEARINGS -
8.1 PLPA-2011-00039 Brannigan Street, General Plan Amendment, Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan Amendment, Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1 Development
Plan Amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review and Vesting
Tentative Tract Map 8093 for 19 Single-Family homes in a 19-lot subdivision, Development
Agreement, and CEQA Addendum to prior CEQA documents fora 3-acre parcel located along
the west side of Brannigan Street north of Gleason Drive within Area F of Dublin Ranch.
Mike Porto, Consulting Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report.
Cm. Schaub asked if the Medium Density Residential units per acre are considered net or gross
acres.
Mr. Porto answered the units per acre are considered gross acres.
Cm. Schaub asked about the net acreage for Medium Density Residential.
Mr. Porto answered net is when the roads are taken out of the equation. He mentioned that this
property has already been subdivided; all the dedications have been made for the width of the
road, etc. so therefore the parcel is a net site of 3-acres.
12
DRAFT DRAFT
Chair Wehrenberg asked about the small square parcel shown at the bottom of the Springfield
Montessori School site.
Mr. Porto answered the property was originally subdivided and the small square parcel is where
the Hope Hospice was going to be located. However, the parcel was eventually sold to
Springfield Montessori School. Lennar is purchasing the property from the Muslim Community
Center. He continued that the Springfield Montessori School includes parcels 2 and 3 of the
original parcel map.
Cm. Schaub asked how the DiManto property fits into the project.
Mr. Porto answered that, with the 1994 Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP), this area was
designated as a 50 acre high school site. He continued that the site was subsequently changed
to a 50 acre middle school site, then to a 25 acre middle school site, and then aPublic/Semi-
Public and residential site which includes the existing Lennar Sonata subdivision. The DiManto
property is also designated Public/Semi-Public.
Cm. Schaub asked if the land use designation on the DiManto property will change.
Mr. Porto answered it is not proposed to change with the current actions.
Cm. Schaub felt it was important to note that the property/parcel line runs through to Gleason
Drive.
Mr. Porto pointed out on the slide where the Public/Semi-Public line is located.
Cm. Schaub asked how many parcels designated Public/Semi-Public are left in the City,
including the Braddock and Logan project that was discussed at a recent Planning Commission
meeting.
Jeff Baker, Planning Manager, stated the Braddock and Logan project is different because it is
designated in the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan as Semi-Public, as opposed to
the Public/Semi-Public designation of the subject property.
Mr. Porto answered there are approximately 6 parcels designated Public/Semi-Public or Semi-
public (Wallis, Croak, Chen, Jordan, Promenade, and one on the west side of town).
Cm. Schaub asked why there would be a street connecting the DiManto property to this project.
Mr. Porto answered the proximity of the intersection of Gleason and Brannigan will make it
difficult to have access to the DiManto property off of Brannigan Street.
Cm. Schaub felt the DiManto parcel is not big enough for a project and half of it is on a slope.
He was concerned with the parcel was not wide enough to develop because of the topography
of the parcel and frontage improvements.
Mr. Porto answered the street would be 120 feet to 150 feet wide depending on how much right-
of-way is taken for Gleason Drive. He stated Staff has seen various proposed uses for the
parcel including day care centers and 120 condos which would have to utilize the slope in the
design of the project. He continued the site will set the slope for the area and felt there was not
13
DRAFT DRAFT
much else that could be done because the alignment of Brannigan and Gleason are already
there and the rate of grades are already set. The parcel will be locked in due to where
Brannigan and Gleason are today.
Chair Wehrenberg asked who owns the property.
Mr. Porto answered the property is owned by the Dublin Land Company, but usually referred to
as the DiManto property.
Cm. Schaub asked how tall the houses would be.
Mr. Porto answered approximately 30 feet tall.
Cm. O'Keefe asked if the Muslim Community Center has identified another location.
Mr. Porto answered Staff did not know.
Cm. O'Keefe asked if there were any community meetings held with the residents.
Mr. Porto stated there were 2 meetings. He stated the Applicant sent out notices to greater than
the usual 300 foot radius and only 3 people attended. He stated there was another meeting in
March 2012 and 3 different people attended, for a total of 6 people.
Cm. Schaub asked if the property was owned by the Lins who sold it to the Muslim Community
Center who is now selling the property to Lennar.
Mr. Porto answered yes.
Cm. Schaub asked if this kind of transaction has ever happened before.
Mr. Porto answered not that he was aware of.
Cm. O'Keefe stated the Commission had a request recently to change the land use from Semi-
public to Residential and felt the local residents for that project were sold their homes with the
idea of the lot remaining Semi-Public. He asked if the residents attending these meetings felt
the same.
Mr. Porto answered he attended only one meeting and residents were mostly concerned with
when Brannigan would be finished, but nothing about what was promised when they bought
their homes.
Chair Wehrenberg asked if there are plans for improvement to Gleason Drive in regards to this
project.
Mr. Porto answered the developer will provide, as a community benefit for the City, the
Brannigan frontage improvements, the completion of the corner, relocation of the traffic signal
and the sidewalk to Gleason.
Chair Wehrenberg asked the reason for the lower density homes in this project since the
adjacent areas are designated Medium Density.
14
DRAFT DRAFT
Mr. Porto answered the project is for single-family homes placed on the property at the low end
of the Medium Density range. He continued the Sonata project has the same density and same
type of housing, same setbacks and same criteria. The property to the west, The Courtyards,
are in the mid-range of Medium Density with approximately 10 units per acre; this project is
approximately 6 units per acre.
Chair Wehrenberg asked about an easement that seems to run between the subject site and the
Springfield Montessori School properties, and asked if they can build on lot 1 with the easement.
Mr. Porto explained the Developer is working on having the easement removed.
Cm. O'Keefe mentioned that, in June 2011, the City Council approved a study on the site and
asked if the study came back with any findings as to whether or not the City would like to see
this site rezoned.
Mr. Porto responded what the City Council authorized Staff to study the Applicant's request for
the viability of the project on this site. He continued Staff did that and that project is what is
being presented to the Commission. He stated, at the time, the City Council was aware of the
situation on the property and expressed that this project might be an appropriate use at the time.
Cm. Schaub was concerned that the houses would not fit on the lots with the backyard
requirement and felt the project is too dense for what is being proposed.
Mr. Porto stated this project is identical to Sonata which is east of the project.
Cm. Schaub felt the Sonata project was done without the backyard requirement.
Mr. Porto stated the Sonata homes are also three stories high.
Chair Wehrenberg opened the public hearing.
Adam Tennant, representing Lennar Homes, spoke in favor of the project. He stated he brought
with him a group of people who worked on the project to answer questions. He agreed to the
Conditions of Approval, signed the DA and stated they did not want to add or amend any of the
Conditions of Approval. He stated there was a proposal previously for aPublic/Semi-Public
project that was not well received by the community. For that reason they held community
meetings and noticed approximately 500 feet surrounding the property; only 3 people attended
the first meeting. In answer to Cm. O'Keefe's question, there was no discussion from the
residents regarding the use. He stated they held another neighbor meeting in March 2012 and
3 different people attended mostly out of curiosity. He felt the use was compatible with the
surrounding communities and in line with the density. He stated there is a representative of the
Muslim Community Center in attendance to answer questions. He stated the easement is very
close to being "quit claimed" and he understands that issue must be completed prior to the final
map. In response to Cm. O'Keefe's question regarding the City Council initiation request; the
Applicant wanted to get as much feedback as possible, so they showed the City Council a 19-
home site plan so that they understood the density being submitted when the Council initiated
the General Plan Amendment Study.
Chair Wehrenberg asked how the community was noticed.
15
DRAFT DRAFT
Mr. Tennant responded the notice was sent out as a letter for the first meeting and the radius
was 500 feet. For the 2nd meeting, they were more concerned with making sure they noticed
certain areas, so they contacted everyone at the Courtyards, all of Sonata and 2 or 3 buildings
at Sorrento.
Zameer Siddiqui, founder and board member of the Muslim Community Center East Bay
(current owners of the property), 5502 Serenity Terrace, spoke in favor of the project. He
stated, when the Muslim Community Center purchased the property in 2007, the goal was to
build a church to accommodate approximately 250 or more members. But after purchasing the
property and working with architects, they realized the site would not be suitable. He stated
their main concerns were parking, traffic and the fact that the neighborhood was mainly
residential. He stated they held informal meetings with the neighbors in the Dublin Ranch area
and noted that some church members also live in the area, and the feedback was that it was not
a suitable site for their church. He stated they decided to sell the property and have acquired a
5 acre site with a 40,000 square foot building in Pleasanton that will fit their needs.
Kulwant Singh, 3716 Edgecomb Ct. in the Sonata development, spoke in opposition to the
project. He stated that when he bought his home he was told about all of the Public/Semi-Public
uses that could be applied to the site. He was concerned with view obstruction and felt there
were not enough play areas for the children in the surrounding area. He asked if the Planning
Commission considers play areas for the children when approving a project. He stated that
some of his neighbors agreed regarding more play areas.
Chair Wehrenberg closed the public hearing.
Jeff Baker, Planning Manager, asked the Planning Commission to disclose if they had any Ex
Parte communications regarding this project.
Cm. Schaub stated he had not spoken with the Applicant/Developer.
Cm. Bhuthimethee stated there was an invitation proposed but she never met with anyone.
Chair Wehrenberg stated there was an invitation proposed but she never met with anyone.
Cm. O'Keefe stated there was an invitation proposed but he never met with anyone.
Chair Wehrenberg commented regarding Mr. Singh's concerns. She stated that the Planning
Commission addresses parks and try to make them central to the projects. She asked Staff to
address those issues with the speaker.
Cm. Bhuthimethee asked where the closest park is.
Mr. Porto answered Ted Fairfield Park is at the intersection of Grafton and Anton, Emerald Glen
Park at Tassajara and Gleason, the neighborhood square Piazza Sorrento which is 1 block
south and two blocks in, the 5 acre Pasatiempo Park being built which will connect to Piazza
Sorrento by a bridge. He continued there are a number of parks centrally located in the area.
Mr. Baker mentioned there is also an elementary school just to the north of the project site.
16
DRAFT DRAFT
Mr. Porto added the sports fields at the end of Fallon Road are open.
Cm. Schaub was concerned with making a recommendation to the City Council regarding
changing the zoning from Public/Semi-Public to residential. He felt it was inappropriate because
the Commission has taken a lot of time in the last 10-15 years to carve out a few areas for
Public/Semi-Public facilities. He was concerned about losing the Public/Semi-Public parcels in
the City and stated he would not recommend to the City Council any change of land use from a
designated Public/Semi-Public parcel. He wanted to suggest that the City develop financial
alternatives or incentives to help the property owners use the parcels as intended. He felt the
City Council had been adamant about preserving the Public/Semi-Public sites and he does not
want to lose any of them. He stated he has a lot of concerns regarding this project.
Chair Wehrenberg agreed with Cm. Schaub. She asked Mr. Baker if the Planning Commission
had to approve the project as a whole or if it could be approved in part.
Mr. Baker explained that the Commission's role is to make a recommendation to the City
Council regarding the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment and the
zoning amendment. The SDR and Vesting Tentative Tract Map would be contingent upon
approval of those documents by the City Council.
Cm. Schaub asked what would happen if the Commission chooses not to approve the SDR.
Mr. Baker answered the Commission could approve, deny or refer the approval of the
SDR/VTMap to the City Council. He continued that, if the Planning Commission denied the
SDR, the Applicant can appeal the decision to the City Council. He suggested polling the
Commission regarding a recommendation to the City Council.
Chair Wehrenberg asked the Commission if they agree or disagree regarding the zoning
change.
Cm. Bhuthimethee felt it would be useful to preserve the Public/Semi-Public parcels, but felt this
project is different from the last one because the land was owned by the developer and the
community had an opportunity to voice their concerns regarding the current project but didn't,
which showed there was not a lot of opposition.
Cm. Schaub disagreed and felt that 10 years from now it might be different. He felt that the
issue was not about this particular project but preserving all the Public/Semi-Public parcels and
finding financial means to encourage property owners to develop the property as intended. He
does not feel the Planning Commission has done their due diligence in preserving these
properties by allowing developers to build houses on these sites. He felt this parcel is a perfect
place for something for the community to be built there.
Cm. O'Keefe felt this project was totally different than the previous project. He stated he was
pleased they had done community outreach but felt it was premature to rezone the property. He
thought the previous project would be the last one which was the basis for his support of the
project, not the community dissatisfaction. He stated he could support the rezone if Dublin was
at full build-out and the property was still vacant but could not support it at this point.
Chair Wehrenberg felt there has been difficulty determining what to build on this site as well as
with the Public/Semi-Public parcel nearby and thought the grading problems would make it
17
DRAFT DRAFT
difficult to build such uses on the parcel. She was unsure what type of project could be built on
the parcel that would meet the parking requirements.
Cm. Schaub stated he could not know all the different needs of the community but did not
imagine not having the parcel available when it is needed.
Chair Wehrenberg understood but did not want the property to sit empty for years. She felt this
project presents an opportunity to develop the property versus letting it remain empty and was
unsure what would happen if they can't sell the property.
Cm. Schaub stated the City did not buy the property and the Planning Commission did not
suggest the property owner buy the property and flip it.
There was a discussion regarding the sale of the property and if there were attempts to sell the
property to other Public/Semi-Public uses. The Commission was concerned with setting a
precedence which would invite developers to change other Public/Semi-Public sites to
residential and there would be none left in the City.
Cm. Schaub stated he could not make the findings that the project is compatible with the
surrounding areas. He felt the houses would be too high above the other houses in the
community and look out of place. He felt the property should be graded so that they are on the
same level as the other homes in the area. He liked the architecture but could not support the
project.
Chair Wehrenberg asked if Cm. Schaub was on the right path regarding the grading of the
project.
Mr. Porto stated the City has been unable to get the DiManto property graded. He stated that,
in order to grade the property as Cm. Schaub proposed, they would have to build a wall to hold
up the DiManto hill until they grade their property. He stated that is why Brannigan is not fully
developed because they could not receive permission to grade on their property. He continued
that one of the promises made to the Standard Pacific residents was that they would not bring
the elevation of the property down to their level and they would continue the landscape buffer
between the project and their property. Because of that Staff asked the developer to hold the
houses back as far as possible so that the residents aren't looking up to the back of a house.
He continued that if they took the site down and created the transition slope between the
Montessori School and this site the whole northern tier of the project would be below Brannigan.
He stated the developer will bring the lots down but not as much as Cm. Schaub suggested. He
continued Brannigan and Gleason are built to the bump that is on DiManto property and
because that cannot be resolved the developer is obligated to hold grade and the DiManto's
property will have to match their grade with this site.
Cm. Schaub felt this is the wrong project at this time and he could not make the findings.
Cm. Bhuthimethee stated she likes the architecture, felt the DiManto property made the grading
difficult and thought it was graded similar to Montessori.
Mr. Porto responded it is straight graded
Cm. Bhuthimethee felt it was graded level with Brannigan Street.
18
DRAFT DRAFT
Cm. Schaub stated that the grading is level with Brannigan at the top but inconsistent at the
bottom.
There was a discussion regarding the grading of the property and the height of the houses and
Cm. Schaub presented some photos he had taken of the parcel.
Cm. O'Keefe stated he could make the findings that the development is consistent with the
surrounding community and felt they are doing the best they can with the piece of land, but
disagrees that the City should give up the Public/Semi-Public land, but if the City Council
approves the rezone then he would be in support of the project.
Cm. Schaub felt that making the best out of a bad situation is not the way to plan a community.
He felt the project is inconsistent with the surrounding community and did not feel the grading
issue with the DiManto property is an excuse for a bad project.
Cm. O'Keefe disagreed and felt the houses are consistent with the houses in the area.
Cm. Bhuthimethee agreed with Cm. O'Keefe.
Cm. Schaub disagreed and felt the houses are not consistent with the other houses in the area.
He felt this project is not graded correctly and is the wrong place to have houses.
Cm. Bhuthimethee stated she is not ready to give up the Public/Semi-Public parcel either.
Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if there is an expiration date for selling this property to another
Public/Semi-Public use. She felt that with the last project the developer was actively trying to
sell the property to a Public/Semi-Public use.
Mr. Baker mentioned that the City does not control the property. It is owned by the Muslim
Community Center and they have chosen a buyer, and it's up to the property owner as to how
they market the property.
Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if the property has been advertised for sale.
Mr. Baker suggested she ask the property owner how they have marketed the property, but it
has been available for sale.
Chair Wehrenberg felt it didn't make a difference as to what the property could be used for and
was not sure the City would pursue purchasing the property for some kind of community center.
Cm. Bhuthimethee felt even though the market does not support the Public/Semi-Public use
now, it could change in the future.
Mr. Baker stated this is a policy decision for the City Council to make on whether to move
forward with the project that is submitted or continue to wait for aPublic/Semi-Public use.
Chair Wehrenberg agreed the property is unusual.
19
DRAFT DRAFT
Mr. Baker asked if Cm. Schaub is concerned about the height of the homes from the vantage
point of the Gleason/Brannigan intersection.
Cm. Schaub answered yes. He felt all the other developments are on the correct grade level.
Mr. Baker stated that this issue has been addressed and asked Mr. Porto to further illustrate the
grading for the Commission.
Mr. Porto directed the Planning Commission to Page C-3 of the project plans which shows a
slope along the westerly edge that will remain. There will be a 23 foot grade differential with the
street, a front yard setback and atwo-story house. He stated that, along Brannigan, the project
is at the same grade as the existing houses in Sonata which is across the street and will only be
about 5 feet above Brannigan at the southern edge of the project.
There was a continued discussion regarding the height of the project and the grade differential.
Mr. Baker referred the Commission to the Findings to assist with making a decision.
Chair Wehrenberg felt the Planning Commission has been very thorough and each one has a
different view point and all concentrate on something because it is about findings for the land
use. She agrees with Cm. Schaub regarding changing the zoning but in this instance she felt
the housing is consistent with the surrounding areas. She was not sure what to do about the
DiManto property stating that the Commission could hold out and never make a decision. She
felt that the City Council would like to see something done with the property. Therefore, as a
Planning Commissioner, she will probably approve all the items. She felt the architecture is fine,
and would support changing the zoning as well.
Chair Wehrenberg suggested going through each item and voting on each one individually.
Mr. Baker responded the Planning Commission will make recommendations to the City Council
on the CEQA Addendum, GPA/EDSPA, Stage 1 & 2 PD Amendment and the Development
Agreement. The Planning Commission is the approving body for the SDR/VTMap. A
recommendation of approval to the City Council requires 3 affirmative votes, since without that
the default is denial. The vote for the SDR/VTMap would need a majority vote of 3 to approve.
Chair Wehrenberg suggested taking a straw vote on each item.
Straw vote:
CEQA Addendum -Unanimous -Aye -Recommendation to adopt
GPA/EDSPA - Cm. Schaub - no, Cm. Bhuthimethee - no, Cm. O'Keefe - no, Chair
Wehrenberg -Aye =Recommendation to not adopt
Stage 1 & 2 - Cm. Schaub - no, Cm. Bhuthimethee -yes, Cm. O'Keefe -yes, Chair
Wehrenberg -yes =Recommendation to adopt
SDR/VTmap - Cm. Schaub - no, Cm. Bhuthimethee -yes, Cm. O'Keefe -yes, Chair
Wehrenberg -yes =Approved
20
DRAFT DRAFT
DA -Unanimous -Aye =Recommendation to Adopt
On a motion by Cm. Schaub and seconded by Cm. O'Keefe, vote of 4-0-1, with Cm. Brown
being absent, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to send the City Council the
Planning Commission's recommendations on items A, B, C, and E and approve item D as listed
in the straw vote above.
On a motion by Cm. Schaub and seconded by Cm. O'Keefe, on a vote of 4-0-1, with Cm. Brown
being absent, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 12-09
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A CEQA ADDENDUM FOR THE
PROJECT PROPOSED FORA 3-ACRE SITE ON BRANNIGAN STREET NORTH OF
GLEASON DRIVE WITHIN DUBLIN RANCH
On a motion by Cm. Schaub and seconded by Cm. O'Keefe, on a vote of 1-3, with Cm. Brown
being absent, the Planning Commission denied:
RESOLUTION NO. 12 - 10
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE
GENERAL PLAN AND EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN TO CHANGE THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION FROM PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR A
3-ACRE SITE ON BRANNIGAN STREET NORTH OF GLEASON DRIVE
On a motion by Cm. Schaub and seconded by Cm. O'Keefe, on a vote of 3-1, with Cm. Brown
being absent, the Planning Commission adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 12-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE
APPROVING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONE WITH RELATED STAGE 1
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT
AND NEW STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FORA 3-ACRE SITE
ON BRANNIGAN STREET NORTH OF GLEASON DRIVE
21
DRAFT DRAFT
On a motion by Cm. Schaub and seconded by Cm. O'Keefe, on a vote of 3-1, with Cm. Brown
being absent, the Planning Commission adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 12- 12
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT AND VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 8093 FOR 19 SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED UNITS FOR
A 3-ACRE SITE LOCATED ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF
BRANNIGAN STREET NORTH OF GLEASON DRIVE
On a motion by Cm. Schaub and seconded by Cm. O'Keefe, on a vote of 4-0, with Cm. Brown
being absent, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 12 - 13
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR
A 3-ACRE SITE ON BRANNIGAN STREET NORTH OF GLEASON DRIVE
8.2 PLPA 2010-00055 Silvera Ranch Phase 4 General Plan Amendment, Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan Amendment, Planned Development Zoning Amendments with related Stage 1 and
Stage 2 Development Plan Amendments, Site Development Review, Vesting Tentative Parcel
Map 10053, and related CEQA findings fora 0.95-acre site north of Fallon Road in the
neighborhood known as Bella Monte.
Mike Porto, Consulting Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report.
Cm. Schaub asked how much of the lots are flat and felt if the other lots were extended up the
hill they would also be 12,000 square foot lots.
Mr. Porto stated, when the original development was built, they had to create the fire road
behind it but they are no longer necessary for this project.
Chair Wehrenberg asked if the parcel behind the project is planned for future development.
Mr. Porto answered that the parcel is zoned rural residential/agriculture and there is no proposal
to develop the property.
Chair Wehrenberg asked if there were any trails in the community.
22
DRAFT DRAFT
Mr. Porto answered the fire roads act as trails and there is another connection point to a fire
road that leads to Fallon Road. He also pointed out another connection road to Fallon and a
connection to Chateau at Fallon Crossing development.
Chair Wehrenberg opened the public hearing.
Ray Panek, Applicant, KB Home, 6700 Koll Center Pkwy, Pleasanton, spoke in favor of the
project. He stated the change in the building code freed up the parcels. He stated the reason
the lots are shaped this way is because of the topography, grading and also sales people were
asking for homes with larger backyards.
Chair Wehrenberg asked for the status of the other homes in the development.
Mr. Panek stated they are approximately half way through construction but must abide by the
eagle nesting time frame.
Chair Wehrenberg closed the public hearing.
Cm. O'Keefe stated he supports the project, and could make the findings.
Cm. Schaub stated he could make all the findings.
Cm. Bhuthimethee stated she could make all the findings.
Chair Wehrenberg stated she could make all the findings.
On a motion by Cm. Bhuthimethee and seconded by Cm. O'Keefe, on a vote of 4-0-1, with Cm.
Brown absent, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 12 - 14
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE
GENERAL PLAN AND EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN TO CHANGE
THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL/AGRICULTURE TO
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FORA 0.95-ACRE SITE WITHIN
SILVERA RANCH PHASE 4 (BELLA MONTE) AND FINDING THE PROJECT WITHIN the
SCOPE OF THE EASTERN DUBLIN EIR
RESOLUTION NO. 12-15
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE
23
DRAFT DRAFT
APPROVING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING AMENDMENTS AND RELATED
STAGE 1 AND STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS FORA 0.95-ACRE SITE
WITHIN SILVERA RANCH PHASE 4 (BELLA MONTE)
RESOLUTION NO. 12- 16
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT AND VESTING TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP 10053 FOR A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF
4SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED UNITS ON
A 0.95-ACRE SITE WITHIN SILVERA RANCH PHASE 4 (BELLA MONTE)
8.3 PLPA-2010-00030 Combat Sports Academy Conditional Use Permit Amendment to
expand an existing Indoor Recreational Facility (Martial Arts Studio), a Parking Reduction for an
Individual Use and a Parking Reduction for Shared Parking.
Marnie Delgado, Senior Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report.
Cm. Schaub asked how the children would get to the facility.
Ms. Delgado answered, if the parents stay at the facility, they would be counted but if they drop
off, they would not be counted.
Chair Wehrenberg asked if the other businesses in the center were noticed and if there had
been any complaints about the current operation.
Ms. Delgado answered the public notice was sent to all the businesses/properties within 300
feet of the project and all the tenants in Parkway Center. There have been some complaints
regarding activities outdoors but none regarding parking. She continued that generally the
complaints about Parkway Center have been regarding abandoned vehicles being left for
extended periods but nothing specific to Combat Sports.
Cm. O'Keefe asked if there have been any day classes since June when the Zoning
Administrator hearing was postponed.
Ms. Delgado answered what initiated the amendment was the need to hold classes during the
day, and the activity occurring during the day was one-on-one personal training.
Cm. O'Keefe asked if, according to the Conditions of Approval, one-on-one training was
permitted.
Ms. Delgado responded that it was not allowed.
Mr. Baker added this has been a code enforcement issue. He continued that soon after they
received their original approvals, it was found that they were operating during the day. As a
24
DRAFT DRAFT
result of code enforcement, Staff met with the Applicant to modify their CUP to allow limited
operation during the day and then be in compliance.
Cm. O'Keefe asked if the City has been allowing the daytime activity up until this point because
they have been in communication with the City.
Mr. Baker answered that limited activities have been occurring.
Chair Wehrenberg asked if there have been any issues with them operating during the day time.
Mr. Baker stated that the City has received complaints about activities occurring in the parking
lot and conflicts with vehicles; however, this CUP will enable the Applicant to satisfy the parking
requirement and require all activities to occur indoors.
Chair Wehrenberg asked for a current operating schedule.
Ms. Delgado responded the reason there is no current class schedule is because, in 2009, all
indoor recreational facilities were subject to a CUP and the parking standards for a martial arts
studio have been changed since then. They were originally parked at a much higher ratio based
on their class schedule. The CUP will allow them to operate more fluidly and meet the parking
requirement.
Chair Wehrenberg stated she uses the schedule as a way of verifying the parking is being
planned correctly.
Mr. Baker referred the Commissioners to Attachment 6 which is a memo from the City's
Transportation Engineer which evaluates the parking determination based on surveys and hours
of operation, etc.
Chair Wehrenberg opened the public hearing.
Kerry Fitzgibbons, Co-owner of Combat Sports Academy, spoke in favor of the project. He
stated they have operated at the current facility for over 2 years and the business has grown.
He stated they enjoy being in Dublin and love their facility but they need to expand in order to
grow their business. He stated there have been no complaints about parking and felt there is
more than enough parking at the center. He stated that the hours of operation are classes at
gam, 12 noon and a kid's class at 4:30. He stated that the rest of the time the facility is not
being used. He stated that personal training has happened during the day, they have
communicated with Staff and they are aware and the reason for the application for expansion.
Cm. Schaub was concerned about the safety of the children going to the facility.
Mr. Fitzgibbons answered the proposed location for the kids classes is the current building with
street access. They do not anticipate the children crossing the parking lot. The other building
will house the Cross Fit program which is an adult's only program.
Cm. O'Keefe congratulated the Applicant on growing his business. He stated he is familiar with
the Cross Fit program. He was concerned about the safety of the members on long runs where
they run along the major streets.
25
DRAFT DRAFT
Mr. Fitzgibbons responded they are not expanding the Cross Fit schedule. He stated in the 2
years he's been in business there have been no issues, no incidents, no injuries, or emergency
vehicles sent to the location. He continued the members run from the building on the same
streets and trails that anyone would be using.
Mr. Baker referred the Applicant to Condition of Approval #15 which states that "all activity
should be conducted entirely within the building" and goes on to say "no outdoor running
activities shall begin or end at Combat Sports Academy."
Mr. Fitzgibbons responded the solution to that condition is that his members walk through the
parking lot to the street and then run. He stated they have agreed to all the conditions.
Cm. Schaub suggested either eliminating the condition or modifying it to allow the members to
start their run from the door of the facility.
Mr. Baker informed the Commission that one of the issues that was the reason for the condition
were complaints from surrounding businesses in regards to activities in the parking lot; including
conflicts between vehicles and people running in the parking lot and people throwing up in the
parking lot after a run.
Mr. Fitzgibbons wanted to clarify that on one occasion, one member working out in the parking
lot decided to go in front of the muffler shop and throw up. He stated that it only happened once
in 2 years and has not happened since. He continued that they will not use the parking lot as a
track, but they would like to have people start their run from the facility and then run back. He
felt that was a safe use of the property.
Cm. O'Keefe was more concerned about his members crossing major streets but had no other
problems.
Mr. Fitzgibbons agreed.
Cm. Schaub suggested eliminating the sentence that reads "Furthermore, no outdoor running
activities shall begin or end at Combat Sports Academy' of Condition of Approval #15.
Mr. Baker stated the throwing up issue would be covered under Condition of Approval #14
regarding Noise/Nuisance. He suggested changing Condition #15 to modify the sentence to say
"Furthermore, no outdoor running activities shall begin or end in the parking lot" because the
issue was conflicts with vehicles that do not anticipate people running in the parking lot. He
asked Mr. Fitzgibbons if the runs could start at the sidewalk instead of the parking lot.
Mr. Fitzgibbons answered they have started their runs at the sidewalk as awork-around of
Condition #15 and would like to have the runs begin at the door of the facility. He stated the
only issue that has come up was when his members were running laps in the parking lot. He
stated there has never been a safety issue there. He agreed with the change but stated he
would also agree to continue having his members start running at the sidewalk. He stated he
would abide by whatever the City wants but he would prefer to have his members start their
runs at the door.
Cm. Schaub was concerned about running starting at the building and running through the
parking lot.
26
DRAFT
Mr. Fitzgibbons agreed to the conditions as stated.
DRAFT
Mr. Baker stated that once the public hearing has concluded the Planning Commission can
discuss the issue further.
Chair Wehrenberg closed the public hearing.
Cm. O'Keefe stated he had no problem with Condition #15 but would also support eliminating
the sentence that would allow the runners to begin and end their run at the facility. He was in
support of the parking reduction and shared parking CUP.
Cm. Bhuthimethee agreed with eliminating a portion of Condition #15. She asked if all the
businesses on the list were still in operation.
Ms. Delgado answered that they updated the business list and noted any changes in hours of
operation as part of the parking study.
Cm. Bhuthimethee stated she is in support of the parking reduction and shared parking CUP.
Cm. Schaub stated he is in support of the parking reduction and shared parking CUP.
Chair Wehrenberg stated she is in support of the parking reduction and shared parking CUP
and the modification of Condition of Approval #15 to eliminate one sentence
On a motion by Cm. Schaub and seconded by Cm. Bhuthimethee, on a vote of 4-0-1, with Cm.
Brown being absent, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted, with a modification to
Condition of Approval #15 to delete the sentence that reads "Furthermore, no outdoor running
activities shall begin or end at Combat Sports Academy":
RESOLUTION NO. 12-17
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT TO EXPAND AN EXISTING
INDOOR RECREATIONAL FACILITY, A PARKING REDUCTION FOR AN INDIVIDUAL USE
AND A PARKING REDUCTION FOR SHARED PARKING AT
7100 AND 7106 VILLAGE PARKWAY
8.4 PLPA-2011-00026 Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 8.84 (Sign Regulations).
Marnie Delgado, Senior Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report.
Cm. Schaub stated he is in support of the amendment but was concerned with the lack of
enforcement regarding the number of temporary signs that some businesses post.
Mr. Baker responded that Staff is actively enforcing the current Ordinance. He continued the
current code does not restrict the number of signs. However, the proposed amendment will
27
DRAFT DRAFT
restrict the number of signs and the placement of the signs, plus require a longer waiting period
to display signs and address Cm. Schaub's concern.
Cm. Schaub asked if there would be some guidance on the quality of signs.
Ms. Delgado answered yes.
Mr. Baker stated that the City Council asked for a report on how to regulate the quality of signs.
If the City Council directs Staff to amend the code to address quality, that amendment will come
to the Planning Commission for a recommendation to the City Council.
Chair Wehrenberg opened the public hearing and, with no speakers, closed public hearing.
On a motion by Cm. Schaub and seconded by Cm. O'Keefe, on a vote of 4-0-1, with Cm. Brown
absent, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 12 - 18
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND CHAPTER 8.84 (SIGN
REGULATIONS) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT
TEMPORARY PROMOTIONAL SIGNS ARE ALLOWED TO BE DISPLAYED
NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS -NONE
OTHER BUSINESS -NONE
10.1 Brief INFORMATION ONLY reports from the Planning Commission and/or Staff,
including Committee Reports and Reports by the Planning Commission related to
meetings attended at City Expense (AB 1234).
10.2 Cm. Schaub requested the City Council and Staff address the problem of parking at the
Safeway gas station downtown. He is concerned about the safety of the drivers/cars.
Mr. Baker stated he made Public Works aware of the Commission's concerns from a
previous meeting. He stated he has had follow-up conversations with Public Works. He
stated the City is limited on their ability to regulate this issue because it is on private
property. There have been discussions with Safeway to address the issue. He
mentioned the auxiliary lane on Dublin Blvd which helps alleviate some of the back-up
into the travel lanes on Dublin Blvd.
10.3 Cm. O'Keefe asked if there was any feedback from Staff regarding reaching out to
CalTrans regarding the I-680 off-ramp downtown. Mr. Baker stated he relayed their
concerns to Public Works. He stated CalTrans controls the area and their options are
limited. He stated the City will update the Bikeways Master Plan which will be expanded
to include a pedestrian component and will include the intersection as part of that master
plan. Cm. O'Keefe asked if any of the Staff has a relationship with someone at CalTrans
28
DRAFT DRAFT
that they can have a dialogue with to address this issue. He felt there has not been
enough done to make that a safer off-ramp. He was very concerned that CalTrans
respond to this issue. He did not want a fatality before action is taken. Mr. Baker stated
that the City Council directs the use of Staff resources and Cm. O'Keefe's comments will
be noted in the minutes which the City Council reads.
10.4 Cm. O'Keefe asked to submit a speaker slip to Mr. Baker regarding the I-680 off-ramp
issue for the next City Council budget study session follow-up. He was unable to attend
all of the last Study Session in order to raise this issue and is not able to attend the next
Study Session. Mr. Baker stated that this is not the typical practice but agreed to give the
slip to the City Clerk and advise him of any issue with this approach.
10.5 Cm. O'Keefe asked if there have been any development talks regarding downtown. Mr.
Baker answered there has been some preliminary discussion but no applications. Chair
Wehrenberg asked about the other half of Sports Authority building. Mr. Baker answered
there has been no applications. He stated that Las Positas is moving into the third floor
of the building on Golden Gate. The former Crown Chevrolet site has had lots of activity
but no applications yet. Cm. O'Keefe asked about a grant for streetscape improvements
on Golden Gate. Mr. Baker answer there is no construction schedule as yet. Cm.
O'Keefe asked if the Commission would be able to review the designs. Mr. Baker
answered the project would not come to the Commission since it is a Capital
Improvement Project.
10.6 Cm. O'Keefe asked if there were drawings available for the Golden Gate project. Mr.
Baker suggested that, as a private resident, he contact Frank Navarro in Public Works
who can share the plans with him.
10.7 There was a discussion regarding the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan and the community
benefit program.
10.8 Cm. Bhuthimethee mentioned she learned at the Planners Institute there is grant money
available specifically for TOD areas. Mr. Baker stated there are various grants available
and Staff monitors them. He further stated that the DDSP EIR and Dublin Blvd
streetscape improvements were paid for with grant money.
10.9 Cm. Bhuthimethee reiterated her desire to have design guidelines for downtown with a
specific theme. Mr. Baker stated the DDSP was developed with design guidelines that
provide for a look and feel and quality of design but there was a conscious decision to not
have a specific theme. She mentioned the feedback from developers is the more specific
the development plans are; the better the developers like it. Mr. Baker stated that the
City Council recently adopted the DDSP. He further stated that the City Council allocates
staff resources for projects such as this and have not directed Staff to change the design
guidelines. Mr. Baker offered to set a meeting with her to discuss ideas she previously
shared with he and Jeri Ram regarding design guidelines in the DDSP.
10.10 Mr. Baker stated at the last meeting there was a question regarding the green waste bins
in multi-family projects; he confirmed that the green waste bins are available for multi-
family projects. Cm. O'Keefe asked if the City can mandate that gas stations must have
recycle bins next to trash containers at the pumps. Mr. Baker agreed to check with the
Environmental Services and advise them of the answer.
29
DRAFT DRAFT
ADJOURNMENT -The meeting was adjourned at 9:41:03 PM
Respectfully submitted,
Doreen Wehrenberg
Chair Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Jeff Baker
Planning Manager
GIM/NUTES120121PLANN/NG COMM/SS/ON103.27.12 DRAFT PC MINUTES (CF).docx
"R', 2~~.12
30
RESOLUTION NO. XX - 12
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
ADOPTING A CEQA ADDENDUM FOR THE PROJECT PROPOSED FOR
A 3-ACRE SITE ON BRANNIGAN STREET NORTH OF
GLEASON DRIVE WITHIN DUBLIN RANCH AND ADOPTING A RELATED STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
(APN 985-0052-021)
PLPA-2011-00039
WHEREAS, Lennar Homes of California, Inc. ("Applicant") submitted applications fora 3-
acre site located along the west side of Brannigan Street north of Gleason Drive ("Project
Site"). The applications include: 1) General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
amendments to change the land use from its current designation of Public/Semi-Public to
Medium Density Residential, 2) Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1
Development Plan and new Stage 2 Development Plan, 3) Site Development Review (SDR) to
construct 19 single-family detached homes, 4) Vesting Tentative Tract 8093 to create 19
residential lots, and 5) Development Agreement. The Project Site and the applications are
collectively known as the "Project," and
WHEREAS, the Project site currently is vacant land; and
WHEREAS, the Project is in the General Plan Eastern Extended Planning Area and the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, for which the City Council certified a Program Environmental
Impact Report by Resolution 51-93 ("Eastern Dublin EIR" or "EDEIR", SCH 91103064) on May
10, 1993 (incorporated herein by reference). The Eastern Dublin EIR identified significant
impacts from development of the Eastern Dublin area, some of which could not be mitigated to
less than significant. Upon approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and
Specific Plan, the City Council adopted mitigations, a mitigation monitoring program and a
Statement of Overriding Considerations (Resolution 53-93, incorporated herein by reference);
and
WHEREAS, since certification of the EDEIR, the Project site has been addressed in
several later CEQA reviews, including a 1997 Negative Declaration (Resolution 140-97), a
2000 MND for the Dublin Ranch Area F project (Resolution 34-00), and a 2004 Addendum for
the Dublin Ranch Area F North project (Resolution 43-04). The foregoing resolutions are
incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified significant unavoidable impacts from
development of the Eastern Dublin area, some of which would apply to the Project; therefore,
approval of the Project must be supported by a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and
WHEREAS, for the Brannigan Street Project, the City prepared an Initial Study to
determine if additional review of the proposed Project modifications and development was
required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15162. Based on the Initial Study, the City
Page 1 of 5
prepared an Addendum dated March 27, 2012 describing the modifications and development
and finding that the impacts of the proposed Project have been adequately addressed in the
prior CEQA documents referenced above. The Addendum is attached as Exhibit A and is
incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, on March 27, 2012, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 12- 09
recommending that the City Council adopt the CEQA Addendum for the Brannigan Street
project; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report for the City Council, dated April 17, 2012 and incorporated
herein by reference, described and analyzed the project, and recommended adoption of the
CEQA Addendum and approval of the Project; and
WHEREAS, on April 17, 2012 the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on
the Project at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Addendum, as well as the prior CEQA
documents and all above-referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony before taking
any action; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council makes the following findings to
support the determination that no further environmental review is required under CEQA for the
proposed Project. These findings are based on information contained in the CEQA Addendum,
the prior CEQA documents, the City Council staff report, and all other information contained in
the record before the City Council. These findings constitute a summary of the information
contained in the entire record. The detailed facts to support the findings are set forth in the
CEQA Addendum and related Initial Study, the prior CEQA documents, and elsewhere in the
record. Other facts and information in the record that support each finding that are not included
below are incorporated herein by reference:
1. The proposed Project does not constitute substantial changes to the previous
projects affecting the Project site as addressed in the prior CEQA documents, that will require
major revisions to the prior documents due to new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in severity of previously identified significant effects. Based on the Initial
Study, all potentially significant effects of the proposed Project are the same or less than the
impacts for project which were previously addressed. The proposed Project will not result in
substantially more severe significant impacts than those identified in the prior CEQA
documents. All previously adopted mitigation measures continue to apply to the proposed
Project and project site as applicable.
2. The Initial Study and Addendum did not identify any new significant impacts of the
proposed Project that were not analyzed in the prior CEQA documents.
3. The City is not aware of any new information of substantial importance or substantial
changes in circumstances that would result in new or substantially more severe impacts or
2 of 5
meet any other standards in CEQA Section 21166 and related CEQA Guidelines Sections
15162/3.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin finds the
following:
1. No further environmental review under CEQA is required for the proposed Project
because there is no substantial evidence in the record as a whole that any of the standards
under Sections 21166 or 15162/3 are met.
2. The City has properly prepared an Addendum and related Initial Study under
CEQA Guidelines section 15164 to explain its decision not to prepare a subsequent or
Supplemental EIR or conduct further environmental review for the proposed Project.
3. The City Council considered the information in the Addendum and prior CEQA
documents before approving the land use applications for the proposed Project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin adopts the
CEQA Addendum and related Initial Study, attached as Exhibit A, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15162 and 15164 for the Brannigan Street project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin adopts the
Statement of Overriding Considerations attached as Exhibit B.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2012 by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Manager
GIPA#120111PLPA-2011-00039 LennarHomes Brannigan GPA EDSPAICC Mtg 4.17.121Attch 8 CC Reso-CEQA-Addendum.doc
1836255v1
3 of 5
EXHIBIT A
CEQA ADDENDUM FOR THE BRANNIGAN STREET GPAlSPA PROJECT
PLPA-2012-00039
MARCH 27, 2012
On May 10, 1993, the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution No, 51-93, certifying an
Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and
~ecific Plan ("Eastern Dublin EIR, ~H #91103064). The certifie::l EIR consiste::l of a Draft
EIR and Responses to Comments bound volumes, as well as an Addendum to the Eastern
Dublin EIR dated May 4, 1993, assessing a reduced development project alternative, The
City Council adopted Resolution No. 53-93 approving a General Plan Amendment and
~ecific Plan for the reduced area alternative on May 10, 1993. On August 22, 1994, the
City Council adopted a second Addendum updating wastewater disposal plans for
Eastern Dublin. The Eastern Dublin EIR evaluated the potential environmental effects of
urbanizing Eastern Dublin over a 20 to 30 year period. Snce certification of the EIR, many
implementing projects have been proposed, relying to various degrees on the certifie::l
EIR.
In 1997, the City of Dublin adopted a Negative Declaration ("1997 NO") for Dublin Ranch
Planning Areas B-E in 1997 that analyzed the impacts of annexing this portion of the
Eastern Dublin Planning Area to the City of Dublin as well as approving land use
entitlements for these Planning Areas (City Council Resolution No. 140-97, November 18,
1997.) No significant environmental issues were identifie::l in the Initial Sudy on which
the Negative Declaration was based.
In 2000, an Initial Sudyl M itigate::l Negative Declaration ("2000 M NO") was approve::l by
the Dublin City Council (Resolution No. 34-00, dated February 15, 2000) for a General
Plan Amendment, Eastern Dublin ~ecific Plan Amendment and a Planne::l Development
rezoning with a Sage 1 Development Plan for Dublin Ranch Planning Area F, within
which this Project is located. The Initial Sudy analyzed all of the environmental topics
recommended in CEQA GuidelinesAppendix G. Based on additional site-specific analysis
of light and glare, biological resources, cultural resources, hydrology and water quality,
and traffic and circulation, supplemental mitigation measures were adopted by the City.
In March, 2004, the City of Dublin adopted an Addendum to the all of the previously
adopted CEQA documents for Dublin Ranch Planning Area F North (City Council
Resolution No. 43-04, March 16, 2004.) No new or more significant impacts were
identified in the Initial Sudy on which the Addendum was based.
This Addendum has been prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 for the
Project, as describe::l below.
Proj eel D escri pti on
The current application indudes a requestto amend the City of Dublin General Plan and
Eastern Dublin ~ecific Plan to re::lesignate a 3-acre (net) site on the north side of
Brannigan Sreet approximately 120 feet north of the intersection of Brannigan Sreet and
Gleason Drive (from "PI S:>>-Public/Semi-Public" to "M-Medium Density Residential."
The proposed General Plan and ~ecific Plan would facilitate development of 19 single-
family dwellings on the site. Other requested land use entitlements indude a Plannoo
Development rezoning with relatoo Sage 1 Development Plan amendment and a Sage 2
Development Plan, a Vesting Tentative SJbdivision Map, a Ste Development Review
permit and a Development Agreement.
PriorCEQA Analyses and Determinations
As summarized above and discussed in more detail in the attached Initial Sudy, the
Project site has been plannoo for urbanization in all the relatoo Eastern Dublin
approvals in 1993, 1997, 2000 and 2004 and has been the subject of a Negative
Declaration (NO), Mitigatoo Negative Declaration (MND) and an Addendum as well
as the original Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastem Dublin EIR identifioo numerous
environmental impacts, and numerous mitigations were adopted upon approval of
the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and ~ecific Plan. For identifioo impacts
that could not be mitigatoo to insignificance, the City Council adopted a Satement of
Overriding Considerations. The 2000 MND identified supplemental impacts and
mitigation measures in addition to those in the Eastern Dublin EIR. No additional
mitigation measures were indudoo in the 1997 ND or the 2004 Addendum. All
previously adopted mitigation measures for development of Eastern Dublin identifioo
in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the 2000 MND that are applicableto the Project continue
to apply to the currently proposed Project as further discussed in the attached Initial
Sudy.
Current CEQA Analysis and Determination that an Addendum is Appropriate for
this Project.
Updated Initial Study
The City of Dublin has determinoo that an Addendum is the appropriate CEQA
revieN for the Project, which proposes to amend the approvoo General Plan and
Eastern Dublin ~ecific Plan for the Brannigan Sreet site. If approvoo, the proposed
Project would change land uses on the 3-acre site as identified above.
The applicant is also seeking approval City approval of a PO rezoning with relatoo
Sage 1 Development Plan amendment, a Sage 2 Development Plan, a Ste
Development Review permit, a vesting tentative subdivision map and a Development
Agreement.
The City prepared an updated Initial Sudy dated March 16,2012, incorporatoo herein
by reference, to assess whether any further environmental review is requiroo for this
Project Through this Initial Sudy, the City has determinoo that no subsequent EIR, or
Negative Declaration is required for the plan and zoning amendments or the refinoo
development details.
No SJb5eQuent RevieN is ReQuiroo per CEQA Guidelines S3ction 15162. CEQA
Guideli nes S3ction 15162 identifies the conditions requi ri ng subsequent envi ronmental
revieN. After a revieN of these conditions, the City has determined that no subsequent
EIR or negative declaration is requiroo for this Project. This is based on the following
analysis:
a) Are tlH'e SlI:xiCTltici ~ to tro PrcjfIi involving nfW cr mere ::B/fTe sgnifiGa1t
impa:iS? There are no substantial changes to the Project analyzed in the Eastern
Dublin EIR, as supplemented by the 1997 NO, the 2000 MND and the 2004
Addendum. As demonstrated in the Initial Study, the proposed land uses for
Project site is not a substantial change to uses analyzed in previous CEQA
documents and will not result in additional significant impacts, and no additional
or different mitigation measures are required.
b) Are tlH'e SlI:xiCTltici chcrgJS in tro cx:nditiCJ1s ltVhich tro PrcjfIi is unctrlcK87 involving
nfW cr mere !!B/fI"e sgnifiGa1t impa:iS? There are no substantial changes in the
conditions assumed in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the 1997 NO, the 2000 MND or the
2004 Addendum. This is documented in the attached Initial Study prepared for
this Project March 16,2012.
c) Is tlH'e nfW infcrmctiCJ1 of SlI:xiCTltici im{XJrlCTl~ ltVhich was nd known and (X1Jld nci
h8tte 00en known ct tro time of tro prali(1Js EIR and cilH' CEQA ctx::ulT181ts that SuNstro
PrcjfIi will h8tte a sgnifiGa1t ffffIi nci crl:te.sscn in tro prati(1Js ctx::ulT181t~ cr prati(1JS
ffffIisCTemere!!B/fI"~ cr, prati(1Jsy inffBfiliemitigatiCJ1 TT1ffiSlJr€SCTenON ffBfiliebut tro
CfJpliGa1t ct:dine::J to adopt tlm1; cr mitigatiCJ1 TT1ffiSlJrescx:nscEJrEiiy difffI"87t from tf'aBin
tro prati(1Js EIR and MND w(1Jld SlI:xiCTlticily re::Jure sgnifiGa1t ffffIis but tro CfJpliGa1t
ct:din€S to adopt tlFm? As documented in the attached I nitial Study, there is no new
information showing a new or more severe significant effect beyond those
identified in the prior EIR and MND. Smilarly, the Initial Study documents that no
new or different mitigation measures are required for the Project. All previously
adopted mitigations continue to apply to the Project. The previously certified EIR
and other CEQA documents adequately describe the impacts and mitigations
assodated with the proposed development on the Project site.
d) If no SllxHJu87t EIR-IateI ratifW is rf1:/Uir8i, !iwld a SllxHJu87t nr:gafive ct:dCTctiCJ1 be
prr:p3rfd? No subsequent negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration is
required because there are no impacts, significant or otherwise, of the Project
beyond those identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and other previous CEQA
documents for the site, as documented in the attached Initial Study.
Condusion. This Addendum is adopted pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164
based on the attached Initial Study dated March 16, 2012. The Addendum and Initial
Study revi8V1l the proposed General Ran and Eastern Dublin ~edfic Plan
Amendments, the Planned Development rezoning amendment, Vesting Tentative
SJbdivision Map, the Ste Development Review permit and Development Agreement
as discussed above. Through the adoption of this Addendum and related Initial Study,
the City determines that the above minor changes in land uses do not require a
subsequent EIR or negative declaration under CEQA section 21166 or CEQA
Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163. The City further determines that the Eastern
Dublin EIR, the 1997 NO, the 2000 MND and the 2004 Addendum adequately address
the potential environmental impacts of the land use designation change and proposed
development for the Brannigan site as documented in the attached Initial Study.
As providErl in S3ction 15164 of the Guidelines, the Addendum need not be. circulatErlfor
public review, but shall be considerErl with the prior environrilentaLdocuments before making.
a decision on this project.
The Initial Sudy, Eastern Dublin EIR, the 1997 NO, the 2000 MND, the 2004 Addendum and
all resolutions citErl above are incorporatErl herein by reference and are available for public
review during normal business hours in the Community Development Department, Dublin
City Hall, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin CA.
"0_ _ _ 0 _.en
EXHIBIT B
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1. General. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15093, the City Council of the City of Dublin
adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for those impacts identified in the Eastern
Dublin EIR as significant and unavoidable (Resolution 53-93, May 10, 1993). The City Council
carefully considered each impact in its decision to approve urbanization of Eastern Dublin
through approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan project.
The City Council is currently considering the Brannigan Street residential project, PLPA-2011-
00039. The Project includes entitlements necessary to allow residential development of up to
19 units on the 3 acre project site. More specifically, the project includes General Plan/Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan amendments to change the land use designation of the site from
Public/Semi-Public to Medium Density Residential. A Planned Development rezoning with
related Stage 1 Development Plan amendment and new Stage 2 Development Plan would
amend the existing PD zoning accordingly. A Site Development Review and Vesting Tentative
Tract Map 8093 would approve construction of 19 homes and a related subdivision map.
These actions are collectively referred to herein as the "Project".
The City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with the 1993 land use
approvals for urbanization of Eastern Dublin, including the Brannigan Street property. Pursuant
to a 2002 court decision, the City Council must adopt new overriding considerations for the
previously identified unavoidable impacts that apply to the current Project. The City Council
believes that many of the unavoidable environmental effects identified in the Eastern Dublin
EIR will be substantially lessened by mitigation measures adopted with the Eastern Dublin
approvals and by the environmental protection measures included in the Project design or
adopted through the Project approvals, to be implemented with the development of the Project.
Even with mitigation, the City Council recognizes that the implementation of the Project carries
with it unavoidable adverse environmental effects as identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The
City Council specifically finds that to the extent that the identified adverse or potentially adverse
impacts for the Project have not been mitigated to acceptable levels, there are specific
economic, social, environmental, land use, or other considerations that support approval of the
Project.
2. Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts from the Eastern Dublin EIR. The following
unavoidable significant environmental impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR for future
development of Eastern Dublin apply to the Project.
Land Use Impact 3.1/F. Cumulative Loss of Agricultural and Open Space Lands; Visual
Impacts 3.8/B; and, Alteration of Rural/Open Space Character.
Traffic and Circulation Impacts 3.3/8, 3.3/E. I-580 Freeway, Cumulative Freeway Impacts.
Traffic and Circulation Impacts 3.3/1, 3.3/M. Santa Rita Road/I-580 Ramps, Cumulative Dublin
Boulevard Impacts.
~ "...public officials must still go on the record and explain specifically why they are approving the later project
despite its significant unavoidable impacts." (emphasis original.) Communities for a Better Environment v.
California Resources Agency 103 Cal.App. 4th 98, _ (2002).
4 of 5
Community Services and Facilities Impact 3.4/S. Consumption of Non-Renewable Natural
Resources and Sewer, Water; and Storm Drainage Impact 3.5/F, H, U. Increases in Energy
Usage Through Increased Water Treatment, Disposal and Operation of Water Distribution
System.
Soils, Geology, and Seismicity Impact 3.6/8. Earthquake Ground Shaking, Primary Effects.
Air Quality Impacts 3.11/A, 8, C, and E. Future development of the Project will contribute to
cumulative dust deposition, construction equipment emissions, mobile and stationary source
emissions.
3. Overriding Considerations. The City Council previously balanced the benefits of the
Eastern Dublin project approvals against the significant and potentially significant adverse
impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The City Council now balances those unavoidable
impacts that apply to future development on the Project site against its benefits, and hereby
determines that such unavoidable impacts are outweighed by the benefits of the Project as
further set forth below. The City declares that each one of the benefits included below,
independent of any other benefits, would be sufficient to justify approval of the Project and
override the Project's significant and unavoidable impacts. The substantial evidence
demonstrating the benefits of the Project are found in these findings, and in the documents
found in the administrative record for the Project.
The Project will further the urbanization of Eastern Dublin as planned through the
comprehensive framework established in the original Eastern Dublin approvals. The Project
will create a small residential neighborhood that is compatible with the residential development
in the vicinity of the Project. The Project will provide local roadway improvements contributing
to an efficient public roadway system. Although small, the Project will help the City toward its
RHNA goal for new housing units and will help implement policies contained in the Housing
Element of the General Plan. The Project will provide streetscape improvements such as curb,
gutter, sidewalk, and landscaping that will be an amenity to the larger community and provide
safer pedestrian and bicycle access between existing neighborhoods. The Project will create
new revenue for the City, County, and State through the transfer and reassessment of property
due to the improvement of the property and the corresponding increase in value. The Project
will contribute funds to construct schools, parks, and other community facilities that are a
benefit City-wide. Development of the site will provide construction employment opportunities
for Dublin residents.
1836276v1
5 of 5