The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About6.2 Wallis Ranch CEQA PD RezoneOF t'� 4( - &2 STAFF REPORT CITY CLERK v CITY COUNCIL FII@ #400- 20/410- 30/450 -30 DATE: May 20, 2014 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Christopher L. Foss, City Manager J SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Wallis Ranch CEQA Addendum, Planned Development rezoning with Amended Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review, Master Vesting Tentative Map 7515 for a 806 -Unit Project on 184.1 Acres and Neighborhood Vesting Tentative Maps 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714, 7715, 7716, 8169, and 8170 Prepared by Mike Porto, Consulting Planner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Applicant, Trumark Homes LLC, has requested approval of a project for 806 homes (previously approved for 935 units) in a gated community of eight neighborhoods with related parks, open space and improvements. The current plan proposes a CEQA Addendum, Planned Development rezoning with amended Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review, Master Vesting Tentative Map, and eight Neighborhood Vesting Tentative Maps. Approximately 88.5 acres would be zoned and designated for residential use proposed as: 1) 92 units on 15.4 acres of Low Density Residential (LDR) (0.9 to 6.0 units per acre) in Neighborhood 1; 2) 529 units on 57.1 acres of Medium Density Residential (MDR) (6.1 to 14 units per acre) in Neighborhoods 2, 3, 4, 7, and 8; and 3) 185 units on 16 acres of Medium -High Density Residential (MHDR) (14.1 to 25.0 units per acre) in Neighborhoods 5 and 6. No change is proposed for the remaining areas designated and zoned for a) Open Space - 83.3 acres, b) Neighborhood Park - 10.4 acres, and c) Semi - Public - 1.9 acres. FINANCIALIMPACT: No financial impact to the City. All costs associated with processing the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review and Vesting Tentative Tract maps will be borne by the Applicant. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the public hearing, deliberate, adopt a Resolution Adopting a CEQA Addendum for the Wallis Ranch Project and related Statement of Overriding Considerations; waive the reading and INTRODUCE an Ordinance Approving the Planned Development Rezone with Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan Amendment for Wallis Ranch; and adopt a Resolution approving a Site Development Review, Master Vesting Tentative 7515, and Neighborhood Maps 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714, 7715, 7716, 8169, and 8170 for 806 units of single - family detached homes and attached townhome /condominium units in eight neighborhoods on a 184.1 -acre site known as Wallis Ranch. Page 1 of 18 ITEM NO. 6.2 Submitted By Community Development Director PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Project Site Location Z"Zwx, "Reviewed By Assistant City Manager The 184 -acre Wallis Ranch project area is located near the northeasterly City limits west of Tassajara Road. The project site is widest within its northerly section below a ridge line and narrows down to a "panhandle" in the southerly portion along the Tassajara Creek corridor. Tassajara Creek, a wide and deeply incised Creek, flows from north to south adjacent to and within the easterly boundary of the project site and west of Tassajara Road. Tassajara Creek crosses the project site in a southwesterly direction near the top of the panhandle and an existing bridge proposed to be the main entry to the Wallis Ranch project. The southerly boundary of the project site is defined by a tributary of Tassajara Creek extending under Tassajara Road from the east. The 184.1 -acre project site is shown on the vicinity map below: �.58Q PLEASANTON VICINITY MAP The width and depth of Tassajara Creek and its two tributary channels vary throughout the site. The eastern portions of the site and the areas paralleling Tassajara Creek are generally flat to mildly sloping. As the property extends west beyond Tassajara Creek the land becomes rolling hills where some 45% slopes begin to appear and occur in some locations to the westerly boundary. The lowest elevation of the project area is approximately 405 feet above sea level, while the highest elevation is approximately 705 feet. The Tassajara Creek corridor is Page 2 of 18 vegetated with native oaks and riparian plant materials including a number of mature or heritage trees. The project site essentially is vacant and undeveloped. However, existing uses on the site currently include one residence, outbuildings, and the vacant Antone School house. With the exception of the Antone School, all structures will be removed prior to development. In accordance with the 2009 Development Agreement, the Antone School structure is stored on site. It is the Applicant's intention to utilize as much of the existing structure as possible and relocate and enhance the building once it is relocated and will provide site access to the public. Two bridges have been built spanning Tassajara Creek, along with three storm drain outfalls that will be used by the project, all pursuant to prior approvals. Adjacent and Surrounding Land Uses: Abutting the Wallis Ranch project area to the north is an additional 11.6 acres of the property owner's holdings which extend over the ridge and across the City Limits /County Line into unincorporated Contra Costa County. This additional property is designated for open space and will be partially graded for 1) an emergency vehicle access road; 2) the possible installation of a bioswale and herpetological (species sensitive) fencing; and 3) grading to support neighborhoods at the northerly portion of the project; no structures or other off -site improvements are proposed. Although outside the City's jurisdiction, this additional acreage is integral to the Wallis Ranch project and will be retained in a private open space and conservation district. Contra Costa County has jurisdiction over the improvements to this area. The adjacent uses to the south, west, and east include various public, private, and institutional uses. Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area, owned by the United States Government, serves as the western boundary along the northerly portion of the project site. An East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) regional trail easement and regional park site is west of the southerly portion of the project site. Four properties separate a portion of the project site from Tassajara Road. The most northerly is the Tipper property. The Frederich and Vargas properties, near the proposed Tassajara /Fallon Roads intersection currently have a development application for 54 homes under consideration. Uses east of the project site directly across Tassajara Road include: 1) the 258 -unit Silvera Ranch project currently under construction; 2) a landscaping business, and 3) a private K -12 school (Quarry Lane School). Background In 2007, the City approved a General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment (Resolution 19 -07), Planned Development Rezone with a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan (Ordinance 02 -07), Site Development Review and Vesting Tentative Map (Planning Commission Resolution 07 -01), Development Agreement and Mitigated Negative Declaration (Resolution 18 -07) for a 935 residential unit project within six neighborhoods for the land uses designated as: Low Density Residential (LDR - .9 to 6.0 units per acre), Medium Density Residential (MDR - 6.1 to 14 units per acre), and Medium -High Density Residential (MHDR - 14.1 to 25.0 units per acre). The project also included lands designated for Neighborhood Park, Semi - Public uses, Open Space, regional multi -use trail system, private recreation facilities, and water quality measures. Enhancements and elements specific to the Wallis Ranch project also included: 1) a tree protection plan, 2) preservation of an historic building, and 3) wildlife habitat protection measures. Page 3 of 18 Current Request The Applicant requests approval of a Planned Development Rezone with amended Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review, and Vesting Tentative Maps. The project site would be developed as 806 units within a total of eight neighborhoods (a reduction of 129 units). The residential area would occupy 88.5 acres of the 184.1 acre project site located at the northerly City limits generally west of Tassajara Road. In addition to the surrounding hillsides, Tassajara Creek is a significant feature affecting the layout of Wallis Ranch. Less than half of the acreage is allocated for residential use with the rest to be used for open space, parks, and a private recreation facility. The project proposes a mix of attached and detached homes, some in a court configuration. The homes would be located in the broad, flatter area of the site, west of Tassajara Creek. Substantial open space area is provided along the easterly boundary of the site, along the Tassajara Creek corridor, and in the steeper areas in the central western area of the site. Public parks are proposed in the southerly area of the site. In addition to the residential uses and on -site circulation, other land uses within the Project include: Open Space (OS), Neighborhood Parks (NP), and a Semi - Public Facilities site. A large portion of the site (approximately 83 acres) has been designated as Open Space. The open space area includes Tassajara Creek that flows through the property, and hillsides within the property. The Specific Plan indicates that these areas are to be permanently preserved as a visual and natural resource with no development allowed. A Geologic Hazard Assessment District (CHAD) will be established within the hillside open space area and a Land Trust has been established for the Stream Corridor to preserve the site's natural resources. Two Neighborhood Park sites are located within the project; one located next to Tassajara Road and south of the main entry road, the second abuts the western property line of the project and the main entry road. In total, the parks will be 7.66 net acres to be dedicated to the City of Dublin. A private recreation area of 3.0 acres will be placed in a central location within the gated area of the project. (See Attachment 4A; Landscape Tab, Page LA.13 and Architecture Neighborhood B Tab, Pages Ac.0 thru ACA) A 1.9 -acre site across from Quarry Lane School (east side of Tassajara Road) has been provided in the southern portion of the site for Semi - Public facilities. This site would have frontage on Tassajara Road as well as access to the secondary entry road to Wallis Ranch. No uses are presently proposed for this site. ANALYSIS: General Plan & Eastern Dublin Specific Plan The existing General Plan land use designations are shown on the Land Use map, below: Page 4 of 18 - - -RR-A_ zH y r � MH NC MH . 1 S / o5 9 g- - _ _ 41 Irv• I i NORTH Land Use Designations No changes are proposed to the existing General Plan and Specific Plan land use designations. Table 1 identifies the total number of units by use approved under the existing entitlements, compared with the current proposal. TABLE 1: Land Use - General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (1) Gross acres (z) Units per acre (3) Total acreage for Medium High Density Residential is 16 acres. The Water Quality Basin will occupy 2.9 acres within this land use designation. (4) Based on 13.1 acres Planned Development Zoning The requested action is a Planned Development (PD) rezone with an amended Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan. The PD Amendment addresses the plan currently proposed for 806 units in eight neighborhoods. The Planned Development rezoning with accompanying Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans would supersede and replace the previous Planned Development Zoning for a 935 -unit project. Page 5 of 18 Existing Proposed PA 05 -051 (2007) PLPA 2013 -00035 Land Use Designations Acres(') Units Density (2) Units Density (2) Low Density Residential 15.4 58 3.77 92 5.97 (LDR) (.9 to 6.0 units per acre) Medium Density Residential 57.1 629 11.05 529 9.26 (MDR) (6.1 to 14.0 units per acre) Medium High Density Residential (3) 13.1 248 15.5(4) 185 14.12(4) (MDR) (14.1 to 25.0 units per acre) Water Quality BasinPT 2.9 0 -- 0 -- Open Space (OS) 83.3 0 -- 0 -- Semi- Public (SP) 1.9 0 -- 0 -- Neighborhood Park (NP) 10.4 0 -- 0 -- Total 184.1 935 806 (1) Gross acres (z) Units per acre (3) Total acreage for Medium High Density Residential is 16 acres. The Water Quality Basin will occupy 2.9 acres within this land use designation. (4) Based on 13.1 acres Planned Development Zoning The requested action is a Planned Development (PD) rezone with an amended Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan. The PD Amendment addresses the plan currently proposed for 806 units in eight neighborhoods. The Planned Development rezoning with accompanying Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans would supersede and replace the previous Planned Development Zoning for a 935 -unit project. Page 5 of 18 The proposed Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan includes the following: 1. A list of permitted, conditional and accessory uses. 2. Site plan showing each of the eight neighborhoods, as well as public and private amenities. UWA — r � � , "A 4 North LEGEND - / // �/ N b�w u :ern. rvo rd N. ro — r p rv:1 n sre�r.mbwmonm e9 m.com N. ��;, � � ry ed�e•s prembwmonm -a�n N.gnbw d ereb Fembo.om.a suakwun 3. Development densities by land use. 4. A summary of each neighborhood. 5. Phasing Plan. 6. Master Neighborhood Landscape Plan. 7. Grading 8. Development Regulations /Standards - Development Regulations and Site Development Standards include: minimum lot area and dimensions, minimum lot frontage and depth, minimum setbacks (for front, rear, and side - yards), maximum building height, maximum coverage, minimum distance between buildings, common outdoor areas, usable private outdoor areas, allowable setback encroachments, parking, driveways, signage, trash enclosures, and grading standards, accompanied by any necessary diagrams. (See Attachment 1, Exhibit A) 9. Architectural Design Standards. The architectural styles /elevations of Wallis Ranch draw from the East Bay's farming and agrarian history and relationship to the surrounding area. In total, eight architectural styles have been identified for the neighborhoods of Wallis Ranch, each encompassing elements that reflect the area's existing character and elements that help build on the desire to become a vibrant and dynamic pedestrian - friendly community. The eight architectural styles identified for Wallis Ranch are as listed below and further described in the Ordinance approving the PD (Attachment 1, Exhibit A, Architecture Guidelines): • Traditional Farmhouse • Contemporary Farmhouse • West Coast Classic • California Modern • Bay Area Contemporary • Napa Valley Classic Page 6 of 18 • Central Coast Revival • Americana 10. Landscape Design Standards — The Site Development Review procedures requires that 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. (See Attachment 1, Exhibit A, Landscape Guidelines) 11. Inclusionary Zoning Regulations. An Ordinance approving the Planned Development rezoning and amended Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan for Wallis Ranch is included as Attachment 1. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Access & Circulation Access to the Project is from two streets off of Tassajara Road. The Specific Plan anticipates that Tassajara Road eventually will be expanded to its planned full width of four to six lanes. The precise alignment for Tassajara Road has been approved by the City Council. The Applicant proposes to install the frontage improvements as well as three lanes of Tassajara Road from Shadow Hill Road at the southerly boundary of the site to just north of Wallis Ranch Road. The main entry road is designed as the main collector for the Wallis Ranch Project. The entry and exit will be separated by a median. The road will have an eight -foot landscape strip and an 8 -foot sidewalk along its west side. A bridge over Tassajara Creek has already been constructed. The Applicant proposes installation of a decorative rail separating the sidewalk from the vehicular travel way. The same decorative element will be applied to vehicular gates at the main and secondary access points. Beyond the controlled gate to the residential areas, all roads within the project will be privately owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association. The Applicant is proposing to have flush curbs on both sides of the road with a 12 -foot bio -swale and 8 -foot sidewalk on the eastern side of the road (Attachment 4A, Landscape Tab, Page LA.5, LA.8 thru LA.12). The secondary access road from Tassajara Road is provided to allow for two points of access to meet fire regulations as well as provide a loop for the public to access the Neighborhood Parks and proposed trails. In addition to sidewalks, pedestrian and bicycle access will be provided by a multi -use trail along the creek (Attachment 4A, Landscape Tab, Pages LA.1 thru LAA and LA.15). The trail will follow the outer perimeter of the creek and tributary corridor to minimize environmental impacts. Discussions have been held with the EBRPD to ascertain their plans for this area. EBRPD noted that they would support a multi -use trail alignment along the western side of Tassajara Creek within the associated open space area. In addition, EBRPD maintains their trail easement in Parks RFTA, immediately adjacent to the westerly property line boundary of Wallis Ranch. This project provides a 14 -foot trail connection from the western Neighborhood Park to the county line for future connection to EBRPD's regional trail. It is EBRPD's intention that this trail will eventually link up to other EBRPD trails in Contra Costa County that lead to Mt. Diablo. Multi -use trails may be utilized as maintenance roads for the creek and open space areas and for emergency access. Page 7 of 18 Landscaping /Streetscape Plan The creation of pedestrian- oriented neighborhoods was a major feature in the overall design of Wallis Ranch. Each of the eight neighborhoods embodies their own unique character working to create a shared sense of community throughout the generous mix of housing types. Walkable tree -lined streets, paths and trails, and interconnected spaces, all anchored by a private community park and clubhouse. The overall landscape theme is a refined interpretation of an Agrarian /California Ranch landscape. With an emphasis on place making, Wallis Ranch invites its visitors in with a sequence of experiences that work to build the character of the community. Stone walls, orchard grids, and native grass plantings are used to reinforce the theme in key areas. Landscape and open space guidelines provided and the following Basic Design Principles are intended to achieve this goal. The Landscape Plan and Design Guidelines address the following components (See Attachment 4A, Landscape and Architecture Tabs): 1. Community Form — this section provides the details for the following focal points, themes and recreational opportunities the project has to offer the community: a. The Main Entry sets the thematic tone by incorporating many of the materials that are present throughout the community. A windmill and water tank will reinforce the ranch theme as well as serve as some of the community's iconic landmarks. (Page LA.5 and LA.6) b. The Bridge over the creek and beyond the main entry will present a mix of rustic charm, contemporary lines, and sense of destination. (Page LA.8) c. The Antone Pavilion will be located adjacent to the water quality basin and will serve as a gathering place along the multi -use trail. It is a tribute to a historic school house structure that can be recalled as a landmark and image of the past. (Page LA.12 and Neighborhood 8 Tab, Page A9.1) d. The Entry Gate and pedestrian portal mark the arrival to the neighborhoods and private residential areas of Wallis Ranch. (Page LA.11) e. The Community Clubhouse is the heart of Wallis Ranch. All eight neighborhoods surround this private park area which serves as the primary community gathering space. In addition to the 4,500 square foot clubhouse, other amenities include: farm stand kiosk, orchard plantings, gardens, play areas, central water feature, fire pits, and lawns. (Page LA.13 and Neighborhood 8 Tab, Pages AC.0 thru ACA) f. Water Quality Basin — A thoughtful design has been created to utilize this area as an open space amenity constructed as a requirement for drainage and runoff control. g. The Main Spine is the backbone of the community carrying the theme throughout the neighborhoods. 2. Streets & Trails —The streetscape system provides a visually unifying thread for the community. The circulation system is a clear hierarchy of streets that logically steps down in size from the Upper Loop Road to the neighborhood streets. As part of the streetscape plan, street sections are provided showing the abutting landscape and hardscape improvements. Parkway strips will be provided along some of the streets as shown in the details. Enhanced paving would be provided at the main entry and Page 8 of 18 generally at pedestrian crossing locations near the Antone School or near access points to the trail. 3. Walls & Fencing - The community fencing and wall system will be designed to visually recede into the setting to the extent possible. Low theme wall feature dry stacked stone. Monuments, clad in cultured ledge stone, would follow a hierarchy of prominence. Where visible, the fence plan takes into consideration retaining walls and lattice -top fences of an appropriate height where necessary and as the interface between adjacent properties on the upslope, the down slopes, and /or abutting right -of -way. Cable railing would be installed between properties with a significant grade differential to prevent a solid boxed - in effect. View fences would be erected along rear yards where they abut open spaces. Open space interface fencing takes a number of forms. Trails are delineated with concrete rail fencing and sensitive habitats are fenced to restrict access. 4. Landscape Framework — This section provides the plant palette, lighting, and furnishings for the streetscape. The landscape plans have been prepared to reflect the building footprint of each floor plan. In addition to the overall landscape plan for the neighborhood, a typical landscape /site plan is provided for both interior and corner lots for each neighborhood. The landscaping for the parkways and the individual lots will be required to conform to the City Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. This section also addresses landscaping of common areas such as the green court /paseos in Neighborhood 4 and motorcourts in Neighborhood 8. 5. Open Space Management and Responsibilities - Management of open space and maintenance of common areas will be an integral component of the landscape system. Responsibilities will be assigned among: the HOAs, individual property owners, a Geologic Hazard Assessment District (CHAD), Land Trust, and the City (for public areas). The open space within the residential community also requires a management plan for those areas to be dedicated to the City, held in common by the homeowners association (HOA), or managed by a special district or land trust. Parks /Open Space /Conservation - The Applicant has worked extensively with various environmental agencies, biologists, and arborists to design a project that minimizes environmental impacts to the biological resources on the site. State of the art fencing and barriers have been developed to prevent California tiger salamanders from entering into developed areas. A tree protection plan has been prepared by a certified arborist. Additional detail will be required prior to receipt of a grading permit to protect trees during demolition, grading and construction activities. The Tassajara Creek Corridor Conservation Area is comprised of two areas. The Tassajara Creek Management Zone, which is generally the creek bed and the area between the top of bank on either side of the creek, accounts for approximately 38 acres. The Tassajara Creek Private Open Space Conservation Area, which is generally the area between the top of bank and a minimum 100 foot setback from the top of bank, accounts for approximately 16 acres. A land trust has been established to maintain the former, while an HOA or the same land trust will maintain the latter. The Tassajara Creek Corridor Conservation Area has been approved by the State and Federal environmental resource agencies for mitigating environmental impacts to Dublin Ranch and is a permanent easement. Mitigation measures contained within this site consist of several small riparian re- vegetation sites, construction of in- stream pools and natural Page 9 of 18 revetments for stabilization, and restoration of wetland vegetation by removal of grazing. All open space lands along the creek and hillside open space areas, and in Contra Costa County, will be placed in a conservation easement and no habitable structures will be permitted on the parcels. To protect wildlife species and human security, fencing will be provided within or adjacent to the conservation areas. Trails designed and constructed to EBRPD's standards, will be located at the outer extents of the conservation areas to minimize disruption to wildlife. Grading - On site grading will be required to provide building pads, internal roads, and proper drainage with suitable slope ratios and correct soil conditions. Whenever possible site improvements are required to take into consideration the natural terrain, to avoid excessive cuts and fills, and enhance the natural environment by preserving hillsides, creek corridors, and wildlife habitat. Neighborhood Plan The eight proposed neighborhoods are arranged around the private recreation center located central to the project. A description and summary of the housing product types by Neighborhood is provided in Table 2: TABLE 2: Wallis Ranch - Neighborhood Summary Neighborhood Product Type / Lot Size Number Gross Net Gross Net Unit Size of Units Acres Acres Density Density Range 1 Single Family Detached 92 15.4 15.4 5.9 6.0 3,070 - 4,383 sf Conventional /50' x 95' 2 Single Family Detached 101 17.9 15.5 5.6 6.5 2,669 - 3,672 sf Conventional /48' x 80' 3 Single Family Detached 74 7.4 6.7 10.1 11.2 3,150 - 3,406 sf Alley -Loaded/35'x 85' 4 Single Family 147 12.3 10.4 12.0 14.1 1,960 - 3,108 sf Green Court Cluster 5 Tri -Plex* (Attached) 60 3.3 2.7 18.2 22.2 1,832 - 2,162 sf 6 Townhomes* (Attached) 125 9.8 7.6 12.7 16.4 1,435 - 2,052 sf 7 Single Family 68 7.2 5.6 9.4 12.1 2,190 - 2,617 sf Alley Loaded /30' x 50' 8 Single Family 139 12.3 10.8 11.4 13.0 1,719 - 2,459 sf Motor Court Cluster Total 806 85.6 74.7 9.4 10.8 *Note: for General Plan and Specific Plan consistency. Page 10 of 18 A plan of the Neighborhoods is shown below. 4 North LEGEND _ NeigM1M1mM1 1- Biryle Family Dale MReaitlec8sl NcigM1bcrM1Catl 3- Bugle Family OelacM1etl Reaitlen8al Neig88mnootl a- sideFamiy Datacnea �aitlecgel, aiey �eatlm NelgM1ecmootl a- Slrgle Femlry DMacM1eS, dp.& G.— coon NeIgM1NlrM1OOtl 5 -3y1. _ NelgM1barM1 8- T —h..ea Nepm igM1M1OOtl 1. Sirgle Family DW,hW. alley LCa NeigM1ECrM1gctl 8- Single Family OelecM1etl.6peticmuR Neighborhood Plan The eight neighborhoods are described as follows: Neighborhood 1 is a 15.4 acre area designated as Low Density Residential with three floor plans of traditional two -story homes and one floor plan with a nested third floor. Neighborhood 1 is located at the most northwesterly portion of the project site. The 112 units in this neighborhood are single - family detached with a minimum lot size of 50 feet x 95 feet (4,750 square feet). Neighborhood 1 takes advantage of the terrain of the property and is located at the highest elevation providing views for future homeowners. Neighborhood 2 includes two -story single - family detached homes located in the western portion of the site and also designed to take advantage of the terrain of the property by stepping up the hillside. The 63 lots in Neighborhood 2 would be located in a Medium Density Residential area with a proposed minimum lot size of 48 feet x 80 feet (3,840 square feet). Neighborhood 3 is located along the main spine road as well as one of the spines that travels from the main road to the creek. Neighborhood 3 is a Medium Density single - family product with a minimum lot size of 35 feet x 85 feet (2,975 square feet). Each of the 74 three -story units is designed to have the front door on a street or paseo while the garages would be accessed from an alley (alley - loaded). Each home has a private side yard integrated with the interior living spaces. There are three separate and distinct floor plans proposed. Neighborhood 4 is located in the northern portion of the site and consists of Medium Density single - family product arranged into six -home clusters with garages on a rear stub court. Front doors for the two homes adjacent to the street face the street while the other four homes face landscaped common paseos. Each of the 147 three -story homes has a private outdoor patio area integrated with the interior living space. There are six distinct floor plans. Neighborhood 5 is the first collection of homes immediately past the main community entry gate. This Medium High Density area is arranged as two -story alley - loaded triplexes. These units will Page 11 of 18 have front doors facing onto a street while the garages will take access from internal alleys. Each of the 60 three -story homes has a private outdoor area either on the side or front of the unit. Neighborhood 6 also is a Medium High Density area which lies between the triplexes in Neighborhood 5 and the Tassajara Creek channel. This Neighborhood is the densest with the 125 units arranged as three -story multi - family attached townhome structures of four, five, or six units. Front doors will be accessed off of an internal street or a landscaped common paseo. Garages will be accessed from alleys. Neighborhood 7 is a Medium Density single - family detached product that is designed to have the front doors face the street and /or greenbelt, while garage access is from rear - facing alleys. The 68 three -story units are set as a backdrop for the private community recreation area. The Applicant is proposing three floor plans. Private outdoor space id provided using a combination of reciprocal side yard easements and standard side yards. Neighborhood 8 is a Medium Density single - family detached product in the northeast location of the community. The 139 two -story homes are organized in clusters of 6 homes, with four different floor plans, on a common plaza court. Front doors for the two homes adjacent to the street face these streets while the remaining four homes face the common plaza court. All six homes in the cluster have traditional private rear yards. Floor Plans A variety of living areas are available among the floor plans for the eight neighborhoods in Wallis Ranch. The floor plans generally are described in the following Table 3 below: Table 3: Floor Plans by Neighborhood Neighborhood/Floor Plan Unit Size Bed/Bathroom Neighborhood 1 — Single- family Detached (conventional) Units/Plan 4 Floor Plans Plan 1 3,070 sf 4 bedrooms /3.5 baths (optional loft or 5th bedroom) (flex space /separate entry) per fit list Plan 2 3,257 sf 4 bedrooms /4 baths (optional loft or 5 bedroom) per fit list Plan 3 3,603 sf 5 bedrooms /4 baths per fit list Plan 4 4,158 — 4,383 sf 5 bedrooms + 1 optional /5 baths per fit list NEIGHBORHOOD TOTAL 92 units Neighborhood 2 — Single- family Detached (conventional) 3 Floor Plans Plan 1 2,699 sf 4 bedrooms /3 baths per fit list Plan 2 2,828 sf 4 bedrooms /3 baths per fit list Plan 3 3,357 - 3,359 sf 5 bedrooms + loft/4.5 baths per fit list Plan 3 (multi - generational) 3,725 sf 5 bedrooms + loft/4.5 baths per fit list NEIGHBORHOOD TOTAL 101 units Neighborhood 3 — Single- family Detached (Alley- Loaded) 3 Floor Plans Plan 1 3,150 sf 4 bedrooms + loft/4.5 baths per fit list Plan 2 2,981 — 3,403 sf 4 bedrooms + loft/4.5 baths per fit list Plan 3 3,406 sf 4 bedrooms + loft/4.5 baths (separate entry) per fit list NEIGHBORHOOD TOTAL 74 units Neighborhood 4 — Single- family Detached (Green Court /Paseo Homes) 6 Floor Plans Plan 1 1,960 sf 3 bedrooms + loft/4 baths per fit list Plan 2 2,194 sf 3 bedrooms + loft/3.5 baths per fit list Plan 3 2,400 sf 3 bedrooms + loft/3.5 baths per fit list Plan 4 2,574 sf 4 bedrooms + loft/4 baths I per fit list Page 12 of 18 Plan 5 2,918 sf 4 bedrooms + loft/4 baths per fit list Plan 6 3,108 sf 4 bedrooms + loft/4 baths per fit list NEIGHBORHOOD TOTAL 147 units Neighborhood 5 - 2 -story Tri- plexes 3 Floor Plans Plan 1 1,832 sf 3 bedrooms + office /2 baths each building Plan 2 1,993 sf 4 bedrooms /3.5 baths contains one of Plan 3 2,162 sf 4 bedrooms /3.5 baths each plan NEIGHBORHOOD TOTAL 60 units Neighborhood 6 — Attached Townhomes Plan 1 1,438 sf 2 bedrooms /2 baths 19 units Plan 2 1,509 sf 2 bedrooms /2 baths 19 units Plan 3 1,869 sf 3 bedrooms /3.5 baths 26 units Plan 4 1,888 sf 3 bedrooms /3.5 baths 20 units Plan 5 1,971 —2,052 sf 4 bedrooms /3.5 baths 41 units NEIGHBORHOOD TOTAL 125 units Neighborhood 7 — Single- family Detached (Alley- Loaded) 3 Floor Plans Plan 1 2,190 sf 3 bedrooms + den (4 BR)/3.5 baths per fit list Plan 2 2,241 sf 3 bedrooms + den (4 in BR)/3.5 baths per fit list Plan 3 2,617 sf 3 bedrooms + den (4 in BR)/3.5 baths per fit list NEIGHBORHOOD TOTAL 68 units Neighborhood 8 — Single- family Detached (Motor Court Clusters) 4 Floor Plans Plan 1 1,719 sf 3 bedrooms /2.5 baths per fit list Plan 2 2,044 sf 4 bedrooms or 3 +loft/2.5 baths per fit list Plan 3 2,082 sf 4 bedrooms or 3 +loft/2.5 baths per fit list Plan 4 2,459 sf 4 bedrooms /3 baths per fit list NEIGHBORHOOD TOTAL 139 units Grand Total 806 units Each neighborhood of single - family detached residential lots is provided with a plot plan and fit list showing which floor plan will fit on each lot. Within the parameters of the fit list, the following criteria would also apply: • Applicant has the ability where possible and, with City approval, to construct up to 40% of a single floor plan within the subdivision. • Individual floor plans may be placed next to or across the street from each other. Only two of the same individual floor plans may be plotted next to each other without being interrupted by a different floor plan. If two of the same individual floor plans are plotted next to each other, the same individual floor plan may not be plotted across the street from the two. 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. • The Applicant shall provide a master plotting plan for the current and previous phases of development at the same time the individual plot plans for each lot and /or phase are submitted to ensure compliance with these criteria. For Neighborhood 5, each triplex structure will have one each of the three floor plans. For Neighborhood 6, the 27 townhome buildings are labeled by types of layout as A, B, C, D, E, and F. Buildings A, B, and C are four -plex structures. Building D is a five -plex structure, and Buildings E and F are six -plex structures. Architectural Styles: styles as shown in the Development Zoning: Each neighborhood will utilize a variety of the approved architectural table below and described in the Ordinance approving the Planned Page 13 of 18 TABLE 4: Stvle and Neighborhood Matrix Style /Neighborhood 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Traditional Farmhouse X X X X 60 125 X X Contemporary Farmhouse X X X 4 X X 4 139 West Coast Classic X X X X 3 4 3 4 California Modern X Bay Area Contemporary X Napa Valley Classic 832 spaces 111 116 61 X X 115 78 Central Coast Revival • Perpendicular (on -site) 41 spaces 0 0 22 5 X X Americana 0 subtotal provided: 864 spaces 111 116 X X X X X = allowed style 140 Required = 806 spaces 92 101 74 147 60 125 *3 plus 1 multi - generational plan 1. A floor plan shall not be used consecutively more than two times in a row. 2. Each plan is required to have 3 style options. 3. No two adjacent homes using the same elevation style shall have the same exterior color scheme. Color schemes and material may be subject to approval by the Community Development Director. 4. Any individual neighborhood shall be all smooth and /or shake concrete tile or composition shingle roofing. Color & Materials — A color and material palette has been provided which allows for 28 body stucco /siding colors, 12 accent colors, and nine trim colors. All roof materials are composition shingle in six colors with standing metal seam roofing as an accent in six colors. Five brick veneer colors and styles will be used, or eight color and styles of cultured El Dorado stone veneer. Parking Parking for the project would be built in compliance with the standard adopted with the Stage 2 PD rezoning of two (2) covered spaces per unit within an enclosed garage, plus one guest space per unit for a total parking requirement of 2,418 spaces as shown in the table below: TABLE 5: Parkina Spaces Parking Spaces /Neighborhood 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 number of units per neighborhood 92 101 74 147 60 125 68 139 min. number of styles per neighborhood(') 3 3 3 4 2 33 4 139 min. number of plans Pe neighborhood 4 4* 3 6 3 4 3 4 *3 plus 1 multi - generational plan 1. A floor plan shall not be used consecutively more than two times in a row. 2. Each plan is required to have 3 style options. 3. No two adjacent homes using the same elevation style shall have the same exterior color scheme. Color schemes and material may be subject to approval by the Community Development Director. 4. Any individual neighborhood shall be all smooth and /or shake concrete tile or composition shingle roofing. Color & Materials — A color and material palette has been provided which allows for 28 body stucco /siding colors, 12 accent colors, and nine trim colors. All roof materials are composition shingle in six colors with standing metal seam roofing as an accent in six colors. Five brick veneer colors and styles will be used, or eight color and styles of cultured El Dorado stone veneer. Parking Parking for the project would be built in compliance with the standard adopted with the Stage 2 PD rezoning of two (2) covered spaces per unit within an enclosed garage, plus one guest space per unit for a total parking requirement of 2,418 spaces as shown in the table below: TABLE 5: Parkina Spaces Parking Spaces /Neighborhood 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Enclosed 2 -car Garage per unit 92 101 74 147 60 125 68 139 subtotal provided: spaces 184 202 148 294 120 250 136 139 Required = 1,612 spaces 184 202 148 294 120 250 136 278 Guest Parking (1 space per unit) • Curbside (on -site) 832 spaces 111 116 61 141 61 115 78 140 • Perpendicular (on -site) 41 spaces 0 0 22 5 4 10 0 0 subtotal provided: 864 spaces 111 116 83 146 65 125 78 140 Required = 806 spaces 92 101 74 147 60 125 68 139 Total Provided: 2,476 spaces 295 318 231 440 185 375 214 418 Total Required = 2,418 spaces 276 303 222 441 180 375 204 417 Page 14 of 18 The location of parking is shown with the plans presented in Attachment 4A, Civil /Site Tab, Pages C.1.4, C.2.4 -1, C.2.4.2, C.3.4, C.4.4, C.5.4, C.6.4, C.7.4, C.8.4 for each neighborhood. Phasing - Phase 1 backbone infrastructure and Phase 2 infrastructure assigned to certain neighborhoods are provided (Attachment 1). Phase 1 backbone infrastructure will be installed with the first neighborhood constructed. The Neighborhoods may develop in any order. A phasing plan also is included specifically for the Neighborhood 6 Townhomes as shown in Attachment 1. The 27 buildings in Neighborhood 6 will be built in seven phases. Affordable Housing /Inclusionary Zoning – The project is subject to the City's Inclusionary Zoning Regulations (Chapter 8.68). The City and the Property Owner are parties to an agreement titled Development Agreement between the City of Dublin and Chang Su-0 Lin and Hong Lien Lin — Dublin Ranch Fairway Ranch ( "the Agreement "), which pertains to the development of an affordable housing projec1t known as the "Fairway Ranch Project." Consistent with the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations, the Agreement provides for the creation of Affordable Unit Credit Certificates (AUCCs) upon completion of affordable units in the Fairway Ranch Project. The AUCCs can be used toward the satisfaction of the Inclusionary Zoning requirements for the subject property. AUCC's in excess of 117 Affordable Unit Credit Certificates are currently available which is sufficient to satisfy the Inclusionary obligation for this project. Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, 117 of the AUCCs in the Developer's possession shall be applied to the Inclusionary Housing obligation of the Project. Public Art Compliance – The proposed project is subject to compliance with the City's Public Art Ordinance. The Ordinance requires the Applicant's contribution to be .5% of the aggregate value of the home construction to be determined and calculated by the City's Building Official. The Applicant proposes to meet this requirement through placement of public art on site (Attachment 2, Condition of Approval #3). Vesting Tentative Tract Map The approvals in 2007 for the Wallis Ranch project included Master Vesting Tentative 7515 and Vesting Tentative Tract Maps associated with neighborhoods and housing types anticipated at that time; however, final maps were never recorded. Master Vesting Tentative Map 7515 has been revised based on the plans currently proposed for eight neighborhoods and to reflect the open space and infrastructure improvements which have been further defined. The eight neighborhood Vesting Tentative Maps generally correspond to the proposed Neighborhoods as follows.. TABLE 6: Neighborhood Vesting Tentative Maps TRACT Neighborhood Net Acres Units Master Tract 7515 7711 1 15.0 92 1 7712 2 15.6 101 2 7713 3 8.1 74 3 7714 4 12.3 147 4 7715 5 4.8 60* 5 7716 6 6.1 125* 6 8170 7 4.6 68 7 8169 8 12.5 139 8 79 806 Total * Condominium airspace Page 15 of 18 TABLE 7: Master Vestinq Tentative Map 7515 - Parcel Development Lots /Parcel Acreage Use Owned/ Maintained By Parcels 1 - 8 79 Neighborhoods 1 — 8 (806 units) private 9 2.2 Neighborhood Park Master HOA 10 1.6 Open Space Master HOA 11 19.3 Open Space Master HOA 12 1.1 Landscape Master HOA 13 11.2 Open Space and Trail Master HOA 14 30.6 Open Space Land Trust 15 .7 Landscape Master HOA 16 4.0 Neighborhood Park City 17 .8 Open Space and Trail Master HOA 18 .4 Open Space and Trail Master HOA 19 2.4 Open Space Land Trust 20 1.1 Open Space and Trail Master HOA 21 3.7 Neighborhood Park City 22 1.3 Semi - Public Property Owner 23 2.7 Open Space and Trail Master HOA 24 5.9 Open Space Land Trust A 3.5 Public Street City B 4.1 Private Street HOA C 5.0 Private Street HOA Total (Map) 180.6 The maps also show: 1) public improvements; 2) drainage; 3) road sections; 4) contours and sections relating to the overall grading of the project site; and 5) easements. A Resolution approving the Vesting Tentative Map and Site Development Review, with Conditions of Approval, is included as Attachment 2. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION At a Special Planning Commission meeting on April 29, 2014, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt: • CEQA Addendum for the Wallis Ranch Project (Resolution 14 -16). • Ordinance approving the Planned Development Rezone with Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan Amendment for Wallis Ranch (Resolution 14 -17). • Resolution approving a Site Development Review, Master Vesting Tentative 7515, and Neighborhood Maps 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714, 7715, 7716, 8169, and 8170 for 806 units of single - family detached homes and attached townhome /condominium units in eight neighborhoods on a 184.1 -acre site known as Wallis Ranch (Resolution 14 -18). CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN, SPECIFIC PLAN & ZONING ORDINANCE The application includes Planned Development rezoning with an amendment to the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review, Master Vesting Tentative Map 7515, and eight Neighborhood Vesting Tentative Maps 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714, 7715, 7716, 8169, and 8170. The proposed project will contribute to housing opportunities and diversity of product type consistent with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and the City's Zoning Ordinance. The proposed master planned community is compatible with surrounding neighborhoods and Page 16 of 18 communities developing in the City's Eastern Extended Planning area. The proposed project has been reviewed for conformance with the Community Design and Sustainability Element of the General Plan. 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 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 the Resolution approving Site Development Review and Subdivisions. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The project is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, which was the subject of an Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (SCH # 91103064), certified by the City Council in Resolution No. 51 -93. The General Plan Amendment /Specific Plan EIR is a program EIR, which anticipated a series of subsequent actions related to future development in Eastern Dublin and identified some impacts from implementation of the General Plan Amendment /Specific Plan that could not be mitigated to less than significant. Upon approval of the Eastern Dublin project, the City adopted a statement of overriding considerations for such impacts. The City also adopted a mitigation- monitoring program, which included numerous measures intended to reduce impacts from the development of the Eastern Dublin area. A Draft Supplemental EIR (SEIR) (SCH #2003022083) was prepared for the Dublin Ranch West (Wallis Ranch) annexation project to assess the potential for the project to cause or contribute to significant impacts beyond those identified in the 1993 EIR. The 2005 project included a General /Specific Plan amendment and a PD pre- zoning with Stage 1 Development Plan that removed the prior neighborhood commercial designations and approved up to 1,023 units on the Wallis site (Ordinance 10 -05). The SEIR was certified in March 2005. In addition a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared and adopted in 2007 to address the adjacent 11.6 -acre parcel within Contra Costa County. Related Ordinance 2 -07 amended Ordinance 10 -05 to include the 11.6 acre offsite area into the Stage 1 Development Plan and reduced the number of units to 935. The current project proposes no changes to the previously approved General /Specific Plan designations. Like the projects analyzed in the prior CEQA reviews, the current project locates the residential development in the less constrained flatter areas outside the Tassajara Creek corridor. The current project further reduces the number of units to 806. The more constrained areas of the site, including the area along Tassajara Creek and in the steeper portions at the west side of the site continue to be planned for open space. With past CEQA reviews for more intense development on the site, Staff prepared an Initial Study pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15162/3 to determine if any further environmental review was required for the project. Based on the Initial Study, Staff determined that all of the potential impacts of the project were adequately addressed in the prior CEQA reviews. Accordingly, Staff prepared a CEQA Addendum, dated April 22, 2014 (Attachment 3) and incorporated herein by reference. All of the prior adopted mitigation measures from the EDEIR, 2005 SEIR and 2007 MND continue to apply to the project, as appropriate. No additional environmental review is required; however, because prior EIRs identified significant and unavoidable impacts that could result from implementing development, such as the project, the Page 17 of 18 City Council must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations in connection with any project approval, upon a determination that the project benefits continue to outweigh its significant impacts. The EDEIR, 2005 SEIR, 2007 MND and all Resolutions, and Ordinances referenced above and throughout the Staff Report are incorporated herein by reference and are available for review at City Hall, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, California during normal business hours. PUBLIC NOTICING: In accordance with State law, a public notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the proposed project to advertise the project and the upcoming public hearing. A public notice also was published in the Tri- Valley Times and posted at several locations throughout the City. A copy of this Staff Report has been provided to the Applicant. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Ordinance approving the Planned Development Rezone with Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan Amendment for Wallis Ranch 2. Resolution approving a Site Development Review, Master Vesting Tentative 7515, and Neighborhood Maps 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714, 7715, 7716, 8169, and 8170 for 806 units of single - family detached homes and attached townhome /condominium units in eight neighborhoods on a 184.1 -acre site known as Wallis Ranch 3. Resolution adopting a CEQA Addendum for the Wallis Ranch Project and a related Statement of Overriding Considerations 4. Applicant's submittal package dated March 18, 2014 A. Site Development Review B. Vesting Tentative Map C. Image Book Page 18 of 18 ORDINANCE NO. XX — 14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ADOPTING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING WITH AMENDED STAGE 1 AND STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR WALLIS RANCH PLPA 2013 -00035 The Dublin City Council does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. RECITALS A. Wallis Ranch ( "project ") is in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area. On April 5, 2005, the City Council adopted Ordinance 10 -05 prezoning the 184.1 acre Wallis Ranch area, formerly known as Dublin Ranch West, to PD- Planned Development in accordance with the 1993 Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The prezoning included two other properties. Following annexation, the City Council adopted Ordinance 02 -07 on March 6, 2007 for a Planned Development Rezone with related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans that included site plan refinements on the Project site and improvements on an 11.6 acre adjacent parcel. The Planned Development rezoning established permitted uses, development standards, and other regulations for future development for as many as 935 residential units in six neighborhoods. B. The PD- Planned Development rezoning adopted by this Ordinance would supersede Ordinance 10 -05 and 02 -07 for the 184.1 acre Wallis Ranch project area. Ordinance 02 -07 would continue to apply to the 11.6 acre adjacent parcel. C. PD- Planned Development rezoning adopted by this Ordinance would not require amendments to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan as no changes to the land uses are proposed. D. PD- Planned Development rezoning adopted by this Ordinance remains subject to a Development Agreement between the City and the property owner adopted by Ordinance 01 -09. SECTION 2. FINDINGS A. Pursuant to Section 8.32.070 of the Dublin Municipal Code, the City Council finds as follows. 1. The Wallis Ranch PD- Planned Development rezoning meets the purpose and intent of Chapter 8.32 in that it provides a comprehensive development plan that creates a desirable use of land that is sensitive to surrounding land uses by virtue of the layout and design of the site plan. 2. Development of the Project under the PD- Planned Development zoning will be harmonious and compatible with existing and future development in the surrounding area in that it provides residential development in an area that supports residential uses in a variety of densities, layouts, and amenities and preserves natural features such as Tassajara Creek and the surrounding hillsides. The Project provides a high degree of design and landscaping to complement existing and planned uses in the area. B. Pursuant to Sections 8.120.050.A and B of the Dublin Municipal Code, the City Council finds as follows. 1. The PD- Planned Development zoning for the Project will be harmonious and compatible with existing and future development in the surrounding area in that it provides residential development in an area that supports residential uses, preserves natural features, such as Tassajara Creek and the surrounding hillsides, and pays tribute to a historic structure with accommodations for public access. The Project provides a high degree of design and landscaping to complement existing and planned uses in the area. 2. The Project site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the zoning district and residential uses being proposed in that the denser development is planned for the flatter areas of the project site while the more conventional single family homes will be located in areas that take advantage of the grade and step with the hillside. The project site will be properly graded with consideration of the natural terrain and provided with a network of infrastructure to serve the proposed uses. Over half of the project site will be preserved as surrounding hillsides or the natural drainage channel for Tassajara Creek. There are no major physical or topographic constraints. 3. The PD- Planned Development zoning 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 in that the project will comply with all applicable development regulations and standards. In order to ensure adequate emergency vehicles access to all portions of the project, access is provided in two locations from Tassajara Road, and the internal streets are designed to provide multiple loops. 4. The PD- Planned Development zoning is consistent with and in conformance with the Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, as amended, in that the proposed residential and other uses and the site plan are consistent with the land use designations for the site . C. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the City Council adopted a CEQA Addendum to the Eastern Dublin EIR, 2005 Dublin Ranch West SEIR and 2007 Mitigated Negative Declaration, as set forth in Resolution XX -14 on XXX, 2014, which resolution is incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 3. APPROVALS Planned Development Rezoning 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 property described below ( "Property ") to a Planned Development Zoning District: 184.1 acres east of the Parks Reserve Training Facility (PRTF) and portion of an East Bay Regional Parks District (EBRPD) regional trail, west of Tassajara Creek /Road, and south of the Alameda /Contra Costa County boundary (APN 986- 0004 - 005 -05) 2 A vicinity map is shown below- PLEASANTON A map of the rezoning area is shown below- ,v c� amp Iva. eau RRA T —jil.e kk- Op.Spece IA Os,�, a a,'. "I'ggry Park P/SP Open �. �....m Medium High Density Residmtisl WaterQ ,rjn_ Op. Sp— -. Meduuu Density Residential Pk �e a Medium Density Umi"d"""r,�t'3k�eit>eur„n R�demet Pub 0ok,/SC"li '11Abl'ua u dS wm....a Open Speve NorthI S Land Use S-7 »�08 ewoam sne. ..nm sns.ivua„w„nmma...m� q —llau __ nLweiry Low�YR®amtial Low Den tlridemial M.a�nmarn=.;amen iss ....w .a�x�9inm.�has�a.otiat� tM IOA •...•� 29v-rm ofllue Jesi�eliuueacwmLLYeotieivelNb MUSImmNenwemweliHeod Memioudei¢ 0 II ni'i,.ibH iu�ta3�q '�veamu.ma�etawao9o.mva®a. 3 SECTION 4. Amended Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan The regulations for the use, development, improvement, and maintenance of the property are set forth in the following Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan amendment for the Project area, which is hereby approved. This Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan supersedes and replaces Ordinances 10 -05 and 02 -07 for the 184.1 acre Wallis Ranch project area. Any amendments to the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan shall be in accordance with section 8.32.080 of the Dublin Municipal Code or its successors. This is a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan amendment pursuant to Chapter 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. This Development Plan meets all the requirements for Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans and is adopted as part of the PD- Planned Development rezoning for Wallis Ranch, PLPA 2013 - 00035. The PD- Planned Development District and Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan amendment provides flexibility to encourage innovative development while ensuring that the goals, policies, and action programs of the General Plan and provisions of Chapter 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance are satisfied. 1. Statement of permitted, conditional, and accessory uses. PD Low Density Residential Permitted Uses: Accessory structures and uses in accordance with Section 8.40.030 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance Community care facility /small (permitted if required by law, otherwise as conditional use) Home occupation in accordance with Chapter 8.64 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance Private recreation facility (for homeowners' association and /or tenant use only) Second residential unit in accordance with appropriate regulations of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 8.80) Single family dwelling Small family day care home per Chapter 8.08 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance Other similar uses as determined by the Community Development Director Conditional Uses: Ambulance service Bed and breakfast inn Day care center Large family day care home Parking lot - residential Religious facility School /private Other similar uses as determined by the Community Development Director Accessory Uses: All Accessory Uses shall be in accordance with Section 8.40 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance 9 Temporary Uses: Temporary construction trailer Tract and sales office /model home complex PD Medium Density Residential Permitted Uses: Accessory structures and uses in accordance with Section 8.40.030 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance Community care facility- small (permitted if required by law, otherwise as conditional use) Home occupations (per Chapter 8.64 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance) Multi- family dwelling Private recreation facility (for homeowners' association and /or tenants use only) Second residential unit above detached garage, subject to site development standards in section 8, Development regulations /standards. Where the detached garage includes a bonus room over the garage, the bonus room may be converted to a second residential unit, subject to the site development standards referenced above. Single family dwelling Small family day care home per Chapter 8.08 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance Water quality, drainage, and other similar facilities, including swales and basins Other similar uses as determined by the Community Development Director Conditional Uses: T F TI RIS _ .%FzUITII Boarding house Community center Day care center Large family day care home Large vehicle storage area (appropriately screened) Parking lot - residential Religious facility School /private Other similar uses as determined by the Community Development Director Accessory Uses: All Accessory Uses shall be in accordance with Section 8.40 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance Temporary Uses: Temporary construction trailer Tract and sales office /model home complex PD Medium -High Density Residential Permitted Uses: Accessory structures and uses Community care facility- small (permitted if required by law, otherwise as conditional use) Family day care home- small Home occupations (per Chapter 8.64) 5 Multi- family dwelling Private recreation facility (for homeowners' association and /or tenants use only) Water quality, drainage, and other similar facilities, including swales and basins Hydromodification Basin. A stormwater retention basin is permitted on an approximately 2.2 acre site (generally shown as lot 26 on the project Master Vesting Tentative Map). If this facility is not required by the resources agencies, the site may be considered for approximately 40 -72 residential units through an amendment to this Stage 1/2 Development Plan and any further environmental review as may be appropriate Other similar uses as determined by the Community Development Director Conditional Uses: T 0TI ONS T_ %FZU1T11 Boarding house Community care facility- large Day Care center Family day care home- large Parking lot Religious facility School /private Other similar uses as determined by the Community Development Director Accessory Uses: All Accessory Uses shall be in accordance with Section 8.40 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance Temporary Uses: Arts and crafts fair Sales office /model home complex Temporary construction trailer PD Open Space Permitted Uses, including, but not limited to: Agriculture and grazing Conservation areas Public or private infrastructure Public or private recreation facility- active or passive Streams and drainage protection corridors Those uses allowed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 and 1600 agreements. Trails and maintenance roads, including emergency vehicle access Trail staging area Other educational or recreational facilities: Water quality, drainage, and other similar facilities, including swales and basins Wildlife habitat preservation areas Other similar uses as determined by the Community Development Director 0 PD Neighborhood Park Permitted Uses: including, but not limited to: Community park Neighborhood park Recreational or educational facilities Trail staging area Water quality, drainage, and other similar facilities, including swales and basins Other similar uses as determined by the Community Development Director PD Semi - Public Permitted Uses: including, but not limited to: Community Center /Clubhouse Community Facility Cultural Center Day Care Center Farmer's Market Recreational or educational facilities - active or passive Trail staging area Other governmental and quasi - governmental offices as determined by the Community Development Director Other offices as determined by the Community Development Director Incidental and accessory structures and uses Parking lot Public or private infrastructure Senior Center Those uses allowed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 and 1600 agreements. Trails and maintenance roads Trail staging area Water quality, drainage, and other similar facilities, including swales and basins Youth Center Other similar uses as determined by the Community Development Director 7 2. Stage 1 and Stage 2 Site Plan. 3. Site area, proposed densities. Gross /net area: 184.1 acres. Maximum number of units: 806. Allocation of units: Low Density /Single - Family Residential — 92 units; Medium Density Residential — 529 units; and Medium -High Density Residential - 185 units. PARK PLPA 2013 -00035 Land Use Designations Acres(') Units Density (2) Low Density Residential (LDR) (.9 to 6.0 units per acre) 15.4 92 5.97 Medium Density Residential (MDR) (6.1 to 14.0 units per acre) 57.1 529 9.26 Medium -High Density Residential (3) (MDR) (14.1 to 25.0 units per acre) WuP pp4 i l 4 14.12(4) Water Quality Basin iii '9i // Open Space (OS) 83.3 -- -- Semi- Public (SP) 1.9 -- -- Neighborhood Park (NP) 10.4 -- -- Total 184.1 806 3. Site area, proposed densities. Gross /net area: 184.1 acres. Maximum number of units: 806. Allocation of units: Low Density /Single - Family Residential — 92 units; Medium Density Residential — 529 units; and Medium -High Density Residential - 185 units. (1) Gross acres (2) Units per acre (3) Total acreage for Medium -High Density Residential is 16 acres. The Water Quality Basin will occupy 2.9 acres within this land use designation. (4) Based on 13.1 acres PLPA 2013 -00035 Land Use Designations Acres(') Units Density (2) Low Density Residential (LDR) (.9 to 6.0 units per acre) 15.4 92 5.97 Medium Density Residential (MDR) (6.1 to 14.0 units per acre) 57.1 529 9.26 Medium -High Density Residential (3) (MDR) (14.1 to 25.0 units per acre) 13.1 185 14.12(4) Water Quality Basin 2.9 Open Space (OS) 83.3 -- -- Semi- Public (SP) 1.9 -- -- Neighborhood Park (NP) 10.4 -- -- Total 184.1 806 (1) Gross acres (2) Units per acre (3) Total acreage for Medium -High Density Residential is 16 acres. The Water Quality Basin will occupy 2.9 acres within this land use designation. (4) Based on 13.1 acres 4. Neighborhood Site Area and Densities Neighborhood Site Area and Densities Product Type /Lot Size Number Gross Net Gross Net Unit Size of Units Acres Acres Density Density Range 1 Single - Family Detached 92 15.4 15.4 5.9 6.0 3,070 - 4,323 sf Conventional 50'x 95' 2 Single - Family Detached 101 17.9 15.5 5.6 6.5 2,669 - 3,725 sf Conventional 48'x 80' 3 Single - Family Detached 74 7.4 6.7 10.1 11.2 3,150 - 3,406 sf Alley- Loaded 35'x 85' 4 Single - Family Detached 147 12.3 10.4 12.0 14.1 1,960 - 3,108 sf Green Court Cluster 5 Tri -Plex* (Attached) 60 3.3 2.7 18.2 22.2 1,832 - 2,162 sf 6 Townhomes* (Attached) 125 9.8 7.6 12.7 16.4 1,435 - 2,052 sf Single - Family Detached 7 Alley- Loaded (1,680 sf min) 68 7.2 5.6 9.4 12.1 2,190 - 2,617 sf 28' min x 55' min 8 Single - Family Detached 139 12.3 10.8 11.4 13.0 1,719 - 2,459 sf Motor Court Cluster Total 806 85.6 74.7 9.4 10.8 *Note: Neighborhoods 5 and 6 combine for a total of 185 units on 13.1 gross acres for a combined gross density of 14.1 du /ac. The 2.9 acres of the Water Quality Detention Basin has been omitted from this figure 5. Phasing Plan. Phase 1 backbone infrastructure will be installed with the first neighborhood constructed. The Neighborhoods may develop in any order and shall install Phase 2 backbone improvements as shown on the diagram and chart below. i i. 1� i' J -` I t ' 1 r �1 4 North 0 ;I SPARK LEGEND _ - -_ -', PHASE 1 BACKBONE I PHASE 2 BACKBONE (ASSIGNED TO -ST NEIGH- HILoRTGmIHSTALL NEIGHBORHOODS) Phasing Plan — Neighborhood 6 LEGEND: PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE PHASE 4 PHASE 5 PHASE 6 PHASE 7 6. Master Neighborhood Landscaping Plan. M.dk m M.di. M.di.. 3--, M.di.. STREET F ----------------- ---------- 10 7. Grading. Future grading will conform to the City policies and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan as shown below: ' l PTO a scmm ax mirz s ensex sysrexl � fs✓ Si,,, / �' enece vnxees � R � � ens �� iv e .. /f /� gS rnnwu u � \ f eaaeese �[� N e &$ N 8. Development Regulations /Standards CRITERIA — Single Family Detached N1, Minimum Neighborhood Lot Size (sf) 4750 Minimum Lot Width 50' Maximum Lot Coverage (13) (14) 55% Maximum Building Height (4) 38' Maximum Stories (7) 3 Minimum Front Yard Setbacks (1)(2) Living Area 8' Porch 8' Front -on Garage (15) 18' Swing -In Garage (55' Lots or Wider) (8)(9) 12' Minimum Side Yard Setbacks (1)(2)(4)(10) Living Area (3) 4' Porch (5) 4' Courtyard (6) 0' Corner Lot (Living Space to Street Side PL) 9' Encroachments (3) Minimum Rear Yard Setbacks (1)(2)(9)(11)(17) Living Area (1) 12' avg.; 5' min (4) Garage N/A Garage Face to Garage Face N/A Corner Lot Setbacks (1) (2) (16) Living Area from Front 8' Porch from Front 7' Porch from Corner 7' Courtyard (6) (19) (20) Distance from Living Area Perpendicular to Site Line 3' Distance from Porch to Site Line (19) 0' Accessory Structures (18) Parking Spaces Required Per Home (12)(13) 2 covered 1 guest Maximum Encroachments 2' 3840 48' 55% 38' 3 8' 8' 18' 12' 4' 4' 0' 9' (3) 10' avg.; 5' min (4) N/A N/A 8' 7' 7' 3' 0' (18) 2 covered 1 guest 2' 2975 35' (21) 38' 3 8' 8' N/A N/A 4' 4' 0' 9' (3) 3' to alley 3' to alley 28' N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A (18) 2 covered 1 guest 2' Minimum Usable Private Open Space (SF) Minimum Neighborhood Lot Size (sf) Minimum Lot Width Maximum Lot Coverage (13) (14) Maximum Building Height (4) Maximum Stories (7) Minimum Front Yard Setbacks (1)(2) Living Area Porch Front -on Garage (15) Swing -in Garage (55' Lots or Wider) (6)(9) Minimum Side Yard Setbacks (1)(2)(4)(10) Living Area (3) Porch (5) Courtyard (6) Corner Lot (Living Space to Street Side PL) Encroachments Minimum Rear Yard Setbacks (1)(2)(9)(11)(17) Living Area (') Garage Garage Face to Garage Face Corner Lot Setbacks (1) (2) (16) Living Area from Front Porch from Front Porch from Corner Courtyard (6) (19) (20) Distance from Living Area Perpendicular to Site Line Distance from Porch to Site Line (19) Accessory Structures Parking Spaces Required Per Home (12)(13) Maximum Encroachments Minimum Usable Private Open Space pu 400 S.F with a min. dimension of 10 ft. Yard area may be provided in more than one location within a lot with a min. of 80 SF yard or courtyard area. 2250 40' (21) 38' 3 6' to ROW or P/L 4' to ROW or P/L N/A N/A 3' N/A 0' N/A (3) 2' to alley 3' to alley 28' N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A (18) 2 covered 1 guest 2' 150 S.F with a min dimension of 10 ft ne 400 S.F with a min. dimension of 10 ft. Yard area may be provided in more than one location within a lot with a min. of 80 SF yard or courtyard area. 1680 28' (21) 38' 3 6' to ROW or 2' to Paseo 5' to ROW or 2' to Paseo N/A N/A 3' 3' 0' 6' (3) 3' to alley 3' to alley 28' N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A (18) 2 covered 1 guest 2' 150 S.F with a min dimension of 10 ft 150 S.F with a min. dimension of 10 ft 2250 39.5' (21) 38' 3 2' to Alley, 4' to ROW 2' to Alley, 4' to ROW 4' N/A 4' 4' 0' 9' (3) 4' N/A 28' N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A (18) 2 covered 1 guest 2' 150 S.F with a min. dimension of 10 ft (1) Setbacks measured from property line. (2) Graphic depiction of standards shown on pages 14 -19 of this Staff Report. (3) Items such as, but not limited to, air conditioning condensers, porches, chimneys, bay windows, retaining walls less than 4 feet in height, media centers, etc. may encroach 2 feet into the required setback of one side yard provided a minimum of a 3 -foot flat area is maintained for access around the house. (4) Subject to Building Code requirements for access. (5) Building setbacks shall be subject to review and approval of Building Official for Building Code and Fire Code issues. Setback to building overhang shall be 3 feet minimum or as required by current City Building Code or standards. (6) Maximum height of a front yard courtyard wall shall be 30" maximum (solid wall) or 42" maximum (transparent/fence). (7) The third floor must be stepped back from front and rear elevation to reduce building mass. (8) Three car garages and swing in garages are prohibited on lots less than 55' wide 12 (9) Retaining walls up to 4 feet high may be used to create a level usable [yard] area. Retaining walls in excess of 4 feet to create a usable yard area are subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. Retaining walls 30 inches in height are subject to safety criteria as determined by the Building Official. (10) Where a minimum 5' HOA parcel lies between a lot and an adjacent street, the lot is not considered a corner lot and interior lot setback standards shall apply. (11) At cul -de -sac bulbs, knuckles and similar conditions where lot depths are less than the standard depth, minimum rear yard setback requirements may be reduced by an amount equal to the min. lot depth minus the actual depth of the lot (i.e.: 100'- 90' =10'). In no case will the rear yard setback be reduced to less than 10'. (12) Curbside parking may be counted toward required number of guest spaces. 2 covered side -by -side spots shall be provided. Tandem spaces may not be utilized to meet the parking requirement. (13)A Second Dwelling Unit is permitted in neighborhoods of lots 5,000 square feet or greater only. No more than one (1) second dwelling unit is permitted per lot and requires one additional off - street parking space, tandem or uncovered space permitted. (14) Second Dwelling Unit Coverage: The principal residence and a second dwelling unit combined shall not exceed the maximum lot coverage (15) Driveway apron shall be centered on the garage door. In instances where 3 -car fronton garages are utilized the driveway apron shall be centered on the entire front on garage plane. (16)AII Corner lots to be enhanced. Refer to Enhanced Lots Key for Locations. (17) Visible lots to have rear enhancement. Refer to Enhanced Lots Key for Locations. (18)Accessory Structure Setbacks shall follow the City Dublin Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 8.40: Accessory Structures and Uses Regulations. (19)A low wall (30" or less) may encroach into the site line area. No solid structure above 30" shall be allowed; porch columns excluded. (20) Courtyard wall to return to side yard fence or front plane of main residential structure. (21) Due to the nature of a small lot product, there is no maximum coverage standard. CRITERIA = Attached N5 (l r Ptex) NB 6 (Tovunhomes) Maximum Building Height 38' 45' Maximum Stories 3 3 Minimum Setbacks Building to ROW 8' 6' Living Space to Alley or Common Driveway 5' 5' Garage Face to Alley Edge 4' 4' Minimum Building Separation Garage Door to Garage Door 28' 28' Porch /Balcony to Porch /Balcony 12' 12' Parking Spaces Required Per Home 2 covered 1 guest 2 covered 1 guest Minimum Usable Private Open Space (SF) 100 SF patio with a 10' min dimension or a 50 SF upper level deck with a 5' min inside dimension 100 SF patio with a 10' min dimension or a 50 SF upper level deck with a 5' min inside dimension 13 m 0 14 M 400 SF WW Dot am, MWmum dimension of — IV'. Yard &me may be provided in mm tan Oft is an within a 14 widt a mwmm 80 SR era. Ywd arm m be &ftud as a yard, &d, RW 15 — — --1 7771 : RW yad me oan 4firal a a yotd, dwk, patio, ewrtyxd or simlor am. I ALLEY_ 4 � Km El I S70RY MASSM ElUMBLE PNVATE YARD MINIMUM AREA (00 $F TOTAL) Now, Archittam Rhm is for iHwntive plop ooly, �V—Tcwlfff "MIT974w: NEIGHBORHOOD LOT SIZE 35'MINIMUM LOT WIDTH SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED ALLEY LOADED W 1 S SF W flat va Mitt in dimm6an of 7. Yrd ara m be &Geed as a ya4 dgd, patio, couttysId x sWlar no. 1 6' FIO ,Allff P I STORY MASSM USAOLE PIUVATEY&RD MINIMUM APJA (00 St I'OTAL) Notc ArcMucun Own is for ilk popmes only. NEIGHBORHOOD LOT SIZE 28'MINIMUM LOT WIDTH SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED ALLEY LOADED 17 F:F I STORY MASSING MULE MM YARD MMMUM AREA (00 9 TOTAL) Now, Arch oma is for its pwMa only, • 000 • 0 •. • iull LDU 101, y HN Imik f. . ......... U941VT PIN N, m VAND MIMENIUM AMIA (�MS11707,kL) Nolw AjxWcvtmry Own is f5ar illdwoivc porpo" mly, 2250, SF TYPICAL NEIGHBORHOOD LOT SIZE 39NMINIMUM ��LOT WIDTH SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED GREEN COURT CLUSTER 19 9. Architectural Design Standards – see attached binder Exhibit A to Ordinance. The eight architectural styles identified for Wallis Ranch are: • Traditional Farmhouse • Contemporary Farmhouse • West Coast Classic • California Modern • Bay Area Contemporary • Napa Valley Classic • Central Coast Revival • Americana 10. Landscape Design Standards –see Exhibit B 11. General Plan and Specific Plan Consistency. The Project is consistent with the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designations and applicable development policies. 12. Inclusionary Zoning Regulations. A Development Agreement between the City of Dublin and Chang Su-0 Lin and Hong Lien Lin — Dublin Ranch Fairway Ranch provides for the creation of Affordable Unit Credit Certificates (AUCCs) which may be available or applicable to projects including Wallis Ranch (Ordinance , dated ). Sufficient AUCCs shall be available at the time of tentative map approval or Site Development Review for the Project. 13.Aerial Photo. 20 14. Ownership and Maintenance HOA OWNED PRIVA*.RF'CIRF.Al ION COMMON AREA LANDSCAPING pppppppppppp PRIVATE ROAD SIDEWALK. PRIVATELY OWNED 15. Street Sections L L L L •u L L --t L L, (o -L 0! L v L ov 190 L L L - ----------- - 21 C rt f.'4 L, L aC,Rl Cl)-6211 t5'A-6 " L L L L W&M. R A iin X ffrM f.., f.2 Y Vs'•µ 16. Open Space, Parks and Trails 67l C"y C711 g q �-'I. mu 22 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 and Stage 2 Development Plan. SECTION 6. PRIOR PD ZONING SUPERSEDED. Ordinances 10 -05 and 02 -07 are hereby superseded as to the 184.1 acre Wallis Ranch project. SECTION 7. POSTING. 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. SECTION 8. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days following its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this day of 2014, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk G: 1PAM20131PLPA- 2013 -00035 WALLIS (DUB RANCH WES7)tPC Mtg 4.29.14 WALLI&CC Ord PD Wallis 2014.doc 2266735.1 23 WALLIS RANCH DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES REVISED MARCH 2014 TRUMARKHOMES i ATTACHMENT I TO EXHIBIT A O TRUMARKHOMES TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION Purpose and Objective 2. NEIGHBORHOODS Neighborhoods Location Map 3. ARCHITECTURAL COMPONENTS Siting Scale Elevation Variation 4. ARCHITECTURAL STYLES Traditional Farmhouse v Contemporary Farmhouse West Coast Classic California Modern Bay Area Contemporary Napa Valley Classic Central Coast Revival Americana I Table of Contents 3 Q i •Left Blank Intentionally ® 4 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines INTRODUCTION Purpose and Objective The Wallis Ranch Architectural Guidelines is the regulatory design document that provides the framework for high-quality homes in the eight residential neighborhoods of Wallis Ranch.These guidelines express the desired character of future development in Wallis Ranch and are intended as a guiding document to aid future developers,builders,and City Staff in the creation of cohesive communities that reflect the City's agrarian environment and enhances the unique setting and character of the area. As a guiding document,these guidelines are meant to provide direction to help achieve the vision of Wallis Ranch and are thus not meant to be exclusively restricted.Guidelines with the term"shall"are required and to be implemented,and guidelines with the term"should" are highly recommended. Flexibility has been written into the guidelines to encourage and support design creativity,innovation,and diverse housing options. For ease of use,the guidelines are structured into the following three sections: -Neighborhoods -Architectural Components -Architectural Styles Introduction 5 NEIGHBORHOODS Wallis Ranch is comprised of eight residential neighborhoods that come together to create a cohesive community of high-quality homes and open spaces.These neighborhoods aim to achieve the City's goals of healthy,walkable,sustainable,and placemaking communities through the use of pedestrian paths and walkways that link to the larger circulation network,open space boulevards and parks designed with natural and native plants,and high-quality homes indicative of the vernacular character. • n ® 6 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines NEIGHBORHOODS The map below identifies the location of each neighborhood. N8 N N /1 LEGEND `t Neighborhood 1-Single Family Detached Residential Neighborhood 2-Single Family Detached Residential _ Neighborhood 3-Single Family Detached Residential,Alley Loaded Neighborhood 4-Single Family Detached,6-pack Garden Court Neighborhood 5-Multi-Family Attached.3-Plex \; Neighborhood 6-Multi-Family Attached,Townhomes NNeighborhood 7-Single Family Detached-Alley Loaded Neighborhood 8-Single Family Detached,6-pack court ��z) • Wallis Ranch Neighborhoods 7 0 Left Blank Intentionally © 8 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines ARCHITECTURAL COMPONENTS A neighborhood's character is defined by many components that include,but are not limited to:building siting,scale,and landscaping.Successfully combined,these components provide residents and visitors the visual interest and physical comfort that makes for exciting and welcoming environments.This section contains the following four subsections that cover the crucial architectural and urban design components that will help make successful neighborhoods in Wallis Ranch: 1 -Siting -Scale -Elevations -Variation Wallis Ranch Architectural Components 9 SITING Siting refers to the location of a building(s)on any given lot and can be determined by setback dimensions.The siting of a building on a lot affects the experience pedestrians will have on a street as well as the experience of residents and users in the buildings. Setbacks • Variation of front building setbacks Rear is encouraged to create rhythm and ' interest along the streetscape. v • Deviation beyond minimum setback --- requirements is encouraged to facilitate the creation of different size ...... """ ` •••' .... public and private spaces on a lot. - -—- - -- — - - - - • Refer to the Land Use&Design Single Family Front-Loaded Example with Varied Setbacks Standards:Wallis Ranch Site Development Standards for specific building setback requirements. Corner Lots • • Corner lots shall have a larger side setback that is facing the street to allow for additional architectural articulation and landscaping. Alley ' • Wrap-around building elements ' such as porches are encouraged on 1 buildings on corner lots to activate the v public face and address the two street " C7 frontages. Front Enhanced Lots Attached Alley-Loaded Example • Lots designated as enhanced lots shall have building design that engages and responds to its surroundings. To this end,the same level of design and articulation shall apply to all s Street Facing Side Setback elevations of the building. I is Larger than Typical Side i • Refer to Neighborhood Site Plans in i Setback the Site Development Review Set for parcels designated as enhanced lots. i" Corner Lot Example • 'Footprints for Illustrative Purposes Only ® 10 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines SITING z- Side Yards • Side yards shall be of a sufficient size so they are a usable space.These spaces can allow for placement of trash and recycling receptacles. • For privacy purposes,windows that face onto side yards will be designed so that they do not align between neighboring homes. Sufficient Sized Side Yard Example Encroachments • Architectural projections that help �4 define building mass and add to the character of the streetscape are allowed to encroach 2'into front and rear setbacks.Projections include but are not limited to:bay windows,chimneys,and furred walls and columns. F u • Porches are not allowed to encroach I • into front and side front setbacks 1 per the development standards in the Minimum Setback and Yard '' Plan. Front Porch Example I Bay Window Example • Wallis Ranch Architectural Components 11 SCALE Scale refers to the massing and form of a building which is based on elements such as building footprint and height.The scale of a building directly impacts the overall streetscape of a neighborhood as more articulated forms provide better human scale buildings that contribute to a more walkable community. The guidelines below provide for the ability to create a welcoming environment that considers the pedestrian and motorist experience throughout each neighborhood as it relates to visual interest and comfort in a space. Massing - -- • To create variety and visual interest along the streetscape,the massing of buildings shall be articulated and diverse. Out of Scale Streetscape Example • 2-story building massing shall be comprised of 1-story and 2-story elements to help break down the overall scale of the building. The same applies _ in the case of 3-story buildings. • Wall planes shall be staggered to offer refinement • of building massing.This can occur on the Harmonious Scale Example horizontal plane and/or vertical plane. • Projections and architectural elements appropriate to the architectural style of the building are - encouraged as they also help refine massing and add interest to the streetscape. Height • Refer to the Land Use&Design Standards:Wallis Ranch Site Development Standards for maximum -; x.l �'I height requirements. P� 11.r 1 and 2-Story Elements Example ll • 2 and 3-Story Elements Examples 12 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines SCALE Roof Forms • Variation of roof forms shall occur to allow for the creation of an interesting roofscape and streetscape. 3 • Roof forms can include but are not limited to: 3 gable,shed,and hip.Generally flat roofs are not allowed unless they can be proven to be appropriate to the overall design of the building. • Roof pitches and overhangs shall be appropriate to 0' the architectural style of the building. Gable Roof Example • Combination of different roof forms on a building is encouraged to promote visual interest and articulation of building massing. • Appropriate roof forms allowed are provided in each architectural style section. Hip Roof Example Fq� �RR 1 Shed Roof Example ..........� Variation in Roof Line Example i Wallis Ranch Architectural Components 13 ELEVATIONS The elevation of a building refers to the exterior facades of the building which is comprised of elements such as garages,entryways,windows and doors,colors and materials,and details. Successfully executed,these elements can create visually interesting streetscapes that cater to the pedestrian experience and enhancement of the overall neighborhood character. Engaged Design • Engaged design,in general,refers to building design that responds to the streetscape and enhances the public realm.To this end,the same level of building , design and articulation should apply to all elevations ' visible to the public. I f Garages and Driveways _- • To create a more pedestrian friendly streetscape and promote architecture forward design,front-loaded buildings shall have the garage setback further than Recessed Garage Alley-Loaded Garage • the living spaces of the building. • Variation of garage types of front-loaded buildings is encouraged throughout the street to allow for visual interest.Garage types include:recessed garage,side- entry garage. ' • When possible,alley loaded buildings that promote a primarily pedestrian streetscape are encouraged. , • Garage doors shall be designed so they are not ' the primary focus in the streetscape and will be • complementary to the overall architectural design of - -— - - the home. 3-Car Garage has only -Garage door designs shall vary along the a 2-Car Garage Door street,with no more than two neighboring Front homes using the same design and pattern. • To minimize building bulk and the focus on vehicular elements,a maximum of 2-car garage bays shall front to the street. • Minimal standard driveway widths are encouraged so that they do not negatively impact the streetscape and walkability within the neighborhood. ® Garage Door Receives Same Level of Design Detail 14 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines ELEVATIONS Entryways • The entryway to a building is an important component of the building and overall streetscape. As the threshold between the private and public space,the entryway can include one of the following elements: -Porch -Portico -Trellis Windows and Doors • Windows and doors shall be designed to reflect the overall architectural style of the building. Porch Covers Entry and Provides Outdoor Space • Window and door materials shall not include reflective glass,as it creates glare. • Extensive details on window patterns and sizes are available in the architectural styles section. Colors and Materials • Colors and materials have a direct impact on the character of the streetscape and neighborhood. To create a visually interesting and harmonious streetscape,buildings shall use high-quality, durable materials that will weather well and reflect Portico Emphasizes Entry to Home the home's architectural style. This can include, but is not limited to: -Board and batten siding IIII -Sand finished stucco -Stone or brick veneer • Detailed colors and materials allowed are provided in each architectural style section. Final elevations,color selections,and materials may be _ : subject to approval by the Community Development ---- Director. �r Trellis Offers Structure forPlants and Highlights the Entrance Wallis Ranch Architectural Components 15 ELEVATIONS Colors and Materials Continued • Color and material blocking of buildings shall not terminate at outside corners and shall wrap to appropriate transition points. Enhanced Sides and Rears • In all instances,front elevations will be of high- quality materials and detailing. • At those lots with highly visible side or rear lots, there will also be a requirement for enhanced, Building Elements such as Chimneys Mahes Good high-quality materials and detailing. • Refer to the Site Development Review, Material Transition Area Neighborhood Site Plans for the specific location ---=- of enhanced read and side elevations in all neighborhoods. Details • Building details shall enhance and complement the overall building design and its associated .� • architectural style. • Building details shall occur wherever the building is visible to the public. • Details such as window shutters,accent trim, rafters,planter boxes,etc.shall be designed to be proportional to the element they are enhancing. Lighting These Shutters are Proportional to Window • Exterior lighting fixtures shall complement the overall architectural style of the building. ,. • Lighting fixtures shall not create glare or spillover to adjacent neighbors. Exterior Light Fixture Complements West Coast Classic Style • 16 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines VARIATION Diversity and variation in building plans and elevations help promote visually interesting and balanced streetscapes in a neighborhood.The variation requirements below offer future residents a range of housing options to choose from and will ensure that each neighborhood individually is distinct,but contextually harmonious. Style and Neighborhood Matrix Style/Neighborhood Traditional Farmhouse X X X X X X Contemporary Farmhouse X X X X X West Coast Classic X X X X California Modern X Bay Area Contemporary X Napa Valley Classic X X X Central Coast Revival X X Americana X X X X X=allowed style min.number of units per neighborhood 92 1 101 1 75 1 147 1 60 125 68 140 min.number of styles per neighborhood ' 3 1 3 3 4 2 3 3 4 min.number of plans per neighborhood '•Z 4 1 4* 3 6 3 4 3 4 *3 plus 1 multi-generational plan 1.A floor plan shall not be used consecutively more than two times in a row. 2.Each plan is required to have 3 style options. 3.No two adjacent homes using the same elevation style shall have the same exterior color scheme.Color schemes and material may be subject to approval by the Community Development Director. 4.Any individual neighborhood shall be all smooth and/or shake concrete tile or composition shingle roofing. C. i A Diverse Streetscape Provides Character and Visual Interest in a Neighborhood 3 Wallis Ranch Architectural Components 17 i • • •Left Blank Intentionally 0 18 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines ARCHITECTURAL STYLES The architectural styles of Wallis Ranch draw from the East Bay's farming and agrarian history and relationship to the surrounding area. In total eight architectural styles have been identified for the neighborhoods of Wallis Ranch, each encompassing elements that reflect the area's existing character and elements that help build on the desire to become a vibrant and dynamic pedestrian-friendly community.The eight architectural styles identified for Wallis Ranch are: o Traditional Farmhouse o Contemporary Farmhouse o West Coast Classic o California Modern o Bay Area Contemporary o Napa Valley Classic o Central Coast Revival o Americana A Each style is broken down into two main sections that offer basic design characteristics that embody the style. The first section contains minimum standards that are required and the second section additional elements where only a minimum of two of the elements are required. Together the minimum standards and additional elements provide direction that creates diverse,functional,and high-quality designed homes that are individually distinct yet harmonious with the neighboring homes. Before proceeding to the following sections,be sure to reference the Style and Neighborhood Matrix on page 17 for the required number of styles. t Wallis Ranch Architectural Styles 19 TRADITIONAL FARMHOUSE • The Traditional Farmhouse style dates back to 19th century America and encompasses a range of variations as it reflects local geography and climate. Throughout America there are examples ranging from more simplified traditional farmhouses,to more ornate versions.All of them reflecting the key concept of a functional home that effortlessly combines informal and formal spaces. This is essentially the root style for many neighborhoods of Wallis Ranch as it lends itself to a wide range of interpretation. Fundamentally this style is defined by simply detailed,understated, and utilitarian features that reflect the concept of a simple agrarian lifestyle.Homes in this style are often simple in massing and can include a covered porch element,gable roof forms,and wood columns and posts. Example of Traditional Farmhouse MINIMUM STANDARDS ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS (Select a minimum of 2 elements) -Gable Roof Forms -Varied Plate Heights -Shed Accent Roofs -Standing Seam Metal Roofing -40 Year Dimensional Composition -Steep or Pitched Gable Roof Forms Roofs Shingle Roofing -3:12 to 6:12 Pitch -12 to 18"Eaves -5 to 12"Rakes -Board and Batten Accent Siding -Board and Batten Accent Siding Exterior Finish -Lap Siding with 6 to 8 inch Expo- -Brick and/or Stone Veneer sure -Stucco Finish -Single Hung Windows -Sectional Garage Doors w/appropriate -Fixed Accent Windows style of Glazing Windows and -Accent Painted Entry Doors -Window Shutters Doors -Grid Patterned at Front Elevation and Around Entire Second Floor -Wood Brackets and/or Kickers -Wood Railings -Wood Porch Posts Trim and Accents -Wood or Smooth Foam Trim • 20 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines • Ems MI s , l Gable Roof Form,Lap Siding, and Fixed Accent Windows Gable Roof Form,Shed Accent Roof,and Wood Brackets c; -y t _ _ r � .0 �■ r ■® ®n ■■ �. WF 77 ' I Lap Siding,Gable Roof Form,and Single Hung Windows Composition Shingle Roofing and Fixed Accent Windows Standing Seam Metal Roof and Wood Porch Posts Batten Siding,Front Elevations,and Single Hung Windows TRADITIONAL FARMHOUSE Wallis Ranch Architectural Styles 21 CONTEMPORARY FARMHOUSE • The Contemporary Farmhouse style is an evolution of the Traditional Farmhouse style, building on the elements of basic comfort and practically with a modern lifestyle twist. This style uses more asymmetrical massing and forms and combines a palette of contemporary and traditional materials.Corrugated roofing, stone veneer and vertical board and batten siding are typical to this style. y I qq .l� r MINIMUM STANDARDS ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS (Select a minimum of 2 elements) • -Gable Roof Forms -Varied Plate Heights -Shed Accent Roofs -Roof Dormers at Top Floors -40 Year Dimensional Composition -Steeper pitched gable roof forms Shingle Roofing Roofs -Standing Seam Metal Roofs and/or awnings -3:12 to 6:12 Pitch -12 to 24"Eaves -5 to 12"Rakes -Lap Siding -Board and Batten Accent Siding Exterior Finish -Stucco Finish -Brick and/or Stone Veneer -Wood Trimmed Bay Windows -Single Hung Windows -Metal Sectional Garage Doors -Fixed Accent Windows -Window Shutters Windows and -Accent Painted Entry,Doors -Frosted Glass Garage Doors Doors -Wood Brackets and/or Kickers -Wood Built Out Smooth Porch Columns -Wood Porch Posts -Steel Cable Wire or Contemporary Wood Trim and Accents -Wood or Smooth Foam Trim Railings ® 22 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines Board and Batten Siding and Single Hung Windows Gable Roof Form and Composition Shingle Roofing u, f, n 1. Wood Porch Posts and Standing Seam Metal Roofing -- r t .. Lap Siding Wood Brackets,Fixed Accent Windows,and Shed Accent Roof Form CONTEMPORARY FARMHOUSE Wallis Ranch Architectural Styles 23 i WEST COAST CLASSIC QThe West Coast Classic style derives from the Pacific Coast-based form of architecture which embodies Prairie Style features.These homes celebrate natural materials and are typically nestled KKy; into the natural environment,building on a close relationship to nature. Homes of this style feature overhanging eaves,wide front porches framed by tapered columns,and a pop up second floor. Materials often include stone,wood,and stucco. o� Examples of West Coast C assk MINIMUM STANDARDS ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS (Select a minimum of 2 elements) -Low Pitched Gable and/or Hip Roof Forms -Varied Plate Heights -40 Year Dimensional Composition Shingle -Shed Accent Roofs Roofs Roofs -3:12 to 4:12 Pitch -12 to 24°Eaves -3 to 12"Rakes -Stucco Finish -Lap Siding with 4-8 inch Exposure Exterior Finish -Brick and/or Stone Veneer -Bold Accent Colors and Panels -Single Hung Windows -Sectional Carriage Style Garage Door -Fixed Accent Windows Windows and -Accent Painted Entry Doors Doors -Vertically Proportioned Windows -Grid Patterned at Front Elevation and Around Entire Second Floor -Wood Brackets and/or Kickers -Smooth Wood Porch Columns -Wood or Stucco Square Porch Posts -Steel Cable Wire Railings Trim and Accents -Thickened Stucco Wainscots -Battered Walls at Select Elements • 24 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines .3 , • Fixed Accent Windows and Stucco Finish Stucco Finish and Hip Roof Form r : a ► Gable Roof Forms,Smooth Wood Porch Columns,and Stucco and Lap Siding Finish ry' ilIM- Hip Roof Form and Stone Veneer Varied Plate Heights WEST COAST CLASSIC Wallis Ranch Architectural Styles 25 CALIFORNIA MODERN • The California Modern style spanned a period of roughly two and a half decades in the middle of the 20th century,from the mid-1940s to 1970. Notable for its use of flat planes,glass,clean lines,natural and manufactured resources, the California Modern style evoked a lifestyle of simple elegance and informality.This style bridges the organic and the man-made with an emphasis on pared-down forms,contemporary -- patterns,natural materials and a seamless flow between indoors and out to create a medley of functional comfort and chic style.Construction features often include exposed post and beam construction,extensive glass,and open floor Plans. Examp es of Ca ifornia Modern MINIMUM STANDARDS ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS (Select a minimum of 2 elements) -Low Pitched Gable Roof Forms -Varied Plate Heights ' -Accent Roofs -Shed Accent Roofs -Broad Roof Overhangs -Standing Seam Metal Accent Roofs -40 Year Dimensional Composition Roofs Shingle Roofing -3:12 to 6:12 Pitch -12-18"Eaves -3"Rakes -Stucco Finish -Brick and/or Stone Veneer -Lap Siding with 8 inch Exposure -Bold Accents with Varied Grooved or Exterior Finish Smooth Wood Panels -Foam Applied Build-ons -Large Glass Windows with Mainly -Large Glass Doors Horizontal Mullions -Panel Insets Between Windows(Stucco or Windows and -Fixed Accent Windows Wood,Grooved or Smooth) Doors -Accent Painted Entry Door -Metal Sectional Carriage Style Garage Door -French Doors at Accent Balconies -Geometric Lines -Articulated and Expressive Joints -Simple Trim Details -Thickened Stucco Wainscots Trim and Accents -Flat Metal Accent Balconies ® 26 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines .I z .� 1401 f ------- ...... u � Natural Looking Veneer and Low Pitched Roof Form Composition Shingle Roofing,Brick Veneer,and Broad Roof Overhangs .:C Low Pitched Roof with Varied Plate Heights and Standing Seam Metal Roofing Shed Roof Form and Wood Veneer i Stucco,Large Windows,Geometric Lines,and an Accent Roof Brick and Stone Veneer CALIFORNIA MODERN Wallis Ranch Architectural Styles 27 l i': BAY AREA CONTEMPORARY The Bay Area Contemporary style is a variation of the California Modern style deeply influenced by the many architectural styles within h,. California's Bay Area.Bay Area Contemporary essentially strips down and combines the many r Bay Area styles to emphasize functional comfort ` design.This style is most recognizable by its use of shed roof,clean geometric lines,large glass windows and doors,and modern interpretations of detail elements. Examples of Bay Area Contemporary MINIMUM STANDARDS ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS (Select a minimum of 2 elements) -Low Pitched Shed Roof -Exposed Rafters -40 Year Dimensional Composition -Standing Seam Metel Roof Shingle Roofing Roofs -Broad Roof Overhangs -3:12 to 6:12 Pitch -12-18"Eaves -3"Rakes -Stucco(light to medium)Finish -Board and Batten Accent Siding -Wood Veneer -Brick Veneer Exterior Finish -Lap Siding -Corrugated Metal Siding -Asymmetrical Facade of Multiple Layers of Textures -Fixed Accent Windows -Large Entry Glass Door -Large Glass Windows -Sectional Carriage Style Garage Door Windows and -Accent Painted Entry Door Doors -Geometric Lines -Accent Panels(Grooved or Smooth) -Simple Trion Details -Steel Cable Wire Railing Trim and Accents -Articulated and Expressive Joints y 28 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines Il�{lhllll � .. a i�iinnirn � ,� Board and Batten Accent Siding Low Pitched Shed Roof WIN w • 4 � v r Low Pitched Shed Roof and Wood and Brick Veneer G Board and Batten Accent Siding and Lap Siding Corrugated Metal Siding,Large Glass Windows,and Rafters BAY AREA CONTEMPORARY 29 Wallis Ranch Architectural Styles 1 NAPA VALLEY CLASSIC • The Napa Valley Classic style derives from the architecture of wine country which has it's roots in Traditional Farmhouse style.Napa Valley classic homes encompass basic comfort and functionality. This style uses detailed trimmings and displays a complementary combination of contemporary and traditional materials. Stone veneer and vertical board and batten siding are typical and prominent in this style. y Examp es o apa Valley Classic MINIMUM STANDARDS ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS (Select a minimum of 2 elements) -Gable Roof Forms -Varied Plate Heights -Shed Accent Roofs -Standing Seam Metal Roofing -40 Year Dimensional Composition -Decorative Gable Treatment to include a Roofs Shingle Roofing Siding Accent -5:12 to 6:12 Pitch -Rafter Tails -12 to 18"Eaves -6 to 12"Rakes -Lap Siding with 6 to 8"Exposure -Board and Batten Accent Exterior Finish -Stucco Finish -Brick and/or Stone Siding Veneer-One Story Height -Single Hung Windows -Sectional Garage Doors -Fixed Accent Windows -Window Shutters Windows and -Accent Painted Entry Doors Doors -Grid Patterned at Front Elevation and Around Entire Second Floor -Wood Brackets and/or Kickers -Decorative Outlookers -Wood Porch Posts -Enhanced Window Sills r Trim and Accents ® 30 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines it 11 11�i �i Decorative Gable and Board and Batten Siding Gable Roof Form,Window Shutters and Board and Batten Siding Board and Batten Siding with Stucco Finish and Standing Seam Metal Roofing F Stone Veneer,Window,Wood Brackets,and Standing Seam Metal Roofing Board and Batten Sitting and Stone Veneer NAPA VALLEY CLASSIC Wallis Ranch Architectural Styles 31 CENTRAL COAST REVIVAL The Central Coast Revival style originated in the 1850's in Monterey,California.This style is a blend of European influences.In today's Central Coast Revival style,balcony railings are typically styled in metal or wood,roofs are low pitched or gabled and covered with shingles,and exterior walls are constructed in stucco,brick,or wood. Examples of Central Coast Revival MINIMUM STANDARDS ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS (Select a minimum of 2 elements) -Low Pitched Gable Roof Forms -Occasional Hipped Roof Forms -40 Year Dimensional Composition Shingle -Gable Detail Roofing Roofs -4:12 to 5:12 Pitch -6 to 12"Eaves -12 to 18"Rakes -Stucco Walls with Smooth to Light Sand -Brick Veneer Exterior Finish Finish -Wood Eave Details -Single hung with Mullions Arranged in -Paired Windows Pairs or Single -Fixed Accent Windows Windows and -Shutters Doors -Full Length Window Opening onto Balcony -Grid Patterned at Front Elevation and Around Entire Second Floor -Wood Brackets and/or Kickers -Wood Balcony -Porch Posts -Detailed Hand Rails(Metal,Wrought Iron) Trim and Accents -Decorative Pot Shelves -Panel Shutters -Minimal Door and/or Window Surrounds ® 32 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines • Arched Doorway Double Hung Windows with Paired Mullions and Brick Veneer kN ....... .. * { .�r Stucco Walls Panel Shutters Stucco Walls with Smooth Light Sand Finish Wood Balcony with Decorative Pot Shelves a CENTRAL COAST REVIVAL 33 Wallis Ranch Architectural Styles AMERICANA The Americana style is a compilation of Colonial, Georgian,and Cape Cod styles. These styles are associated with buildings from around the 17th through the 19th century,most frequently associated with buildings in New England before the style migrated west.Traditionally,Americana homes were designed to blend into the landscape with natural colors and simple,subtle design elements inside and out.Modern Americana — style homes are characterized by a rectangular, symmetrical home,double-hung windows, clapboard and/or brick siding,and steeply pitched gabled roofs. 1� Examples of Americana MINIMUM STANDARDS ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS (Select a minimum of 2 elements) -Pitched Gable and/or Hip Roof Forms -Roof Dormers -40 Year Dimensional Composition Shingle -Decorative Gable Treatment to include and/or Slate Roofing Siding Accent Roofs -5:12 to 6:12 Pitch -12 to 18"Eaves -6 to 12"Rakes -Lap Siding with 6 to 8"Exposure -Brick and/or Stone Veneer Exterior Finish -Stucco Finish -Grid Patterned at Front Elevation and -Pediment Over Porches Around Entire Second Floor -Bay Window Windows and -Transom Over Front Doors Doors -Symmetrical Window Placement on Front Elevations -Front Porch with Colonial style Posts and -Brackets Under the Eaves Beams -Decorative Porch Railings Trim and Accents -Window Shutters -Decorative Window Sills © 34 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines h , it * yr fj ■ i il1111111{i111U11U 111111 ilillt1i011t(t(1 Dormers and Pediment Over Porch Pitched Gable Roof,Transom Over Front Door,and Casement Windows ■�� ee d Hipped Form Roof and Front Porch with Colonial Style Posts and Beams 71 { Window Shutters,Pediment Over Porch, and Transom Over Front Door Bay Window,Clapboard Siding,and Shingle Roofing AMERICANA Wallis Ranch Architectural Styles 35 RESOLUTION NO. 14- XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN * * * * * * * * * * ** ADOPTING A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT, MASTER VESTING TENTATIVE MAP 7515, AND NEIGHBORHOOD VESTING TENTATIVE MAPS 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714, 7715, 7716, 8169, AND 8170 FOR 806 UNITS OF SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES AND ATTACHED TOWNHOME /CONDOMINIUM UNITS IN EIGHT NEIGHBORHOODS ON A 184.1 -ACRE SITE KNOWN AS WALLIS RANCH (PLPA- 2013 - 00035) (APN 986- 0004 - 005 -01) WHEREAS, the Applicant, Trumark Homes, submitted applications for an area of approximately 184.1 acres known as Wallis Ranch within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area ( "Project Site "); and WHEREAS, the Project Site is located east of the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Area, west of Tassajara Road, and south of the Alameda /Contra Costa County boundary; and WHEREAS, the Project Site generally is vacant land; and WHEREAS, the proposed project initially was addressed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines by the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan ( "EIR "), which is a Program EIR (SCH No. 91- 103064) certified in 1994 by the City Council by Resolution No. 51 -93, subsequent Addenda dated May 4, 1993 and August 22, 1994; and WHEREAS, a Draft Supplemental EIR (SEIR) (SCH #2003022083) was prepared for the Dublin Ranch West (Wallis Ranch) annexation to assess the potential for the project to cause or contribute to significant impacts beyond those identified in the 1993 EIR. The SEIR was certified in March 2005. In addition, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared and adopted in 2007 to address the adjacent 11.6 -acre parcel within Contra Costa County; and WHEREAS, on April 29, 2014, the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution recommending that he City Council approve an Addendum to the prior EIRs to analyze changes proposed by the current project. WHEREAS, on April 29, 2014, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 14 -17 recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance approving a Planned Development rezoning with Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan Amendment for the proposed project and adopted Resolution 14 -18 recommending that the City Council adopt a Resolution approving the requested Site Development Review and Master Vesting Tentative Map 7515; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the City Council recommend approval of the Site Development Review permit, Master Vesting Tentative Tract 7515, and Neighborhood Vesting Tentative Maps 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714, 7715, 7716, 8169, and 8170; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hold a public hearing on said application on May 20, 2014, for this project at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use independent judgment and considered all said reports, recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin hereby makes the following findings and determinations regarding the proposed Site Development Review for 806 residential units in eight neighborhoods within Wallis Ranch: 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 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 designations of Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and Medium -High Density Residential; and 4) the project complies with the development standards established in the Planned Development Zoning. 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 intended use, proposed subdivisions, and the surrounding properties; 2) the Project provides a high degree of design and landscaping to complement existing and planned uses in the area; and 3) the project complies with the development regulations set forth in the Zoning Ordinance where applicable and as adopted for PD PLPA 2013- 00035. 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 size and mass of the proposed houses are consistent with other residential developments in the surrounding area; 2) the project will contribute to housing opportunities and diversity of product type as a complement to the surrounding neighborhoods; 3) the project will serve the current buyer profile and market segment anticipated for this area; and 4) a historic structure on the site will be preserved and /or acknowledged installation of a public plaza. D. The subject site is suitable for the type and intensity of the approved development because: 1) the Project is located in a master planned community that includes a variety of residential densities; 2) the Project provides residential development in an area that supports residential uses; 3) the denser development is planned for the flatter areas of the project site while the more conventional single family homes will be located in areas that take advantage of the grade and step with the hillside; and 3) the project site will be fully served by a network of infrastructure of public roadways, services, and facilities E. Impacts to existing slopes and topographic features are addressed because: 1) the project site will be re- graded in accordance with the related Tract Maps for the proposed project; 2) natural features, such as Tassajara Creek and the surrounding hillsides, amounting to over half of the project, will be preserved through public and private measures such as the homeowners association, land trust, and /or maintenance district; 3) landscaping along main thoroughfares and throughout the project will be complete; and 4) retaining walls will be constructed as required to support grade differentials between building envelopes and setback or right -of -way areas. 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 Project provides a high degree of design and landscaping to complement existing and planned uses in the area.; 2) the structures reflect the architectural styles and development standards for other Low Density, Medium Density, and Medium —High Density Residential projects in the area; 3) the materials proposed will be consistent with residential projects in the area; and 4) the color and materials proposed will be coordinated for continuity among the structures on site. 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 master plan; and 2) landscaping in common areas is coordinated through a backbone and neighborhood pedestrian system; 3) two Neighborhood Parks will be dedicated for public use; and 4) the project will 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) the designated open space areas will include a link to a regional trail system; 2) all infrastructure including streets, parkways, pathways, sidewalks, and streetlighting are proposed for construction in accordance with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; and 3) development of this project will conform to the improvements standards allowing residents the safe and efficient use of these facilities. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin hereby makes the following findings and determinations regarding Master Vesting Tentative Tract 7515, and Neighborhood Vesting Tentative Maps 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714,7715, 7716, 8169, and 8170: Vesting Tentative Tract 8171 A. The proposed Master Vesting Tentative Tract 7515, and Neighborhood Vesting Tentative Maps 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714,7715, 7716, 8169, and 8170 are consistent with the intent of applicable subdivision regulations and related ordinances for the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area. B. The design and improvements of the proposed Master Vesting Tentative Tract 7515, and Neighborhood Vesting Tentative Maps 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714, 7715, 7716, 8169, and 8170 are consistent with the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, as amended, as they relate to the subject property in that they are subdivisions for implementation consistent with other residential neighborhoods within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area designated for this type of development. C. The proposed Master Vesting Tentative Tract 7515, and Neighborhood Vesting Tentative Maps 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714,7715, 7716, 8169, and 8170 are consistent with the Planned Development zoning approved for Project through the Planned Development zoning adopted for this project and therefore consistent with the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. D. The properties created by the proposed Master Vesting Tentative Tract 7515, and Neighborhood Vesting Tentative Maps 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714,7715, 7716, 8169, and 8170 will have adequate access to major constructed or planned improvements as part of the Wallis Ranch master plan. E. Project design, architecture, and concept have been integrated with topography of the project site created by Master Vesting Tentative Tract 7515, and Neighborhood Vesting Tentative Maps 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714,7715, 7716, 8169, and 8170 to incorporate habitat preservation, install water quality measures, and minimize overgrading and extensive use of retaining walls. Therefore, the proposed subdivisions are physically suitable for the type and intensity of development proposed. F. The Mitigation Measures and the Mitigation Monitoring program adopted with the program EIR for the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area, the Dublin Ranch West EIR, and subsequent Addendum would be applicable as appropriate for addressing or mitigating any potential environmental impacts identified. G. The proposed Master Vesting Tentative Tract 7515, and Neighborhood Vesting Tentative Maps 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714,7715, 7716, 8169, and 8170will not result in environmental damage or substantially injure fish or wildlife or their habitat or cause public health concerns subject to Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval. H. The design of the subdivisions 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 City Council of the City of Dublin hereby approves the Site Development Review permit for the proposed project of 806 residential units in eight neighborhoods within the 184.1 -acre site based on findings that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, the Stage 1 Planned Development Rezoning, and Stage 2 Development Plan and as shown on plans prepared by MacKay and Somps, Dahlin Group Architecture, KTGY Group Architecture + Planning, and Gates & Associates Landscape Architecture dated received April 22, 2014 subject to the conditions included below. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin hereby approves Master Vesting Tentative Tract 7515, and Neighborhood Vesting Tentative Maps 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714, 7715, 7716, 8169, and 8170 for 806 residential units in six neighborhoods within the 64 -acre site prepared by MacKay & Somps dated April 22, 2014 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 building permits or establishment of use, and shall be subject to Planning Department review and approval. The following codes represent those departments /agencies responsible for monitoring compliance of the conditions of approval. FPL.I Planning, fB1 Building, FPO1 Police, FPWI Public Works FP &CS1 Parks & Community Services, FADMI Administration /City Attorney, FFINI Finance, FF1 Alameda County Fire Department, FDSRI Dublin San Ramon Services District, FCO1 Alameda County Department of Environmental Health, FZ71 Zone 7. No. CONDITION TEXT RESPON. WHEN SOURCE AGENCY REQ'D Prior to: PLANNING GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. Approval. This Site Development Review approval PL On -going Planning is for the Wallis Ranch (PLPA- 2013 - 00035). This approval shall be as generally depicted and indicated on the project plans prepared by MacKay and Somps, Dahlin Group Architecture, KTGY Group Architecture + Planning, and Gates & Associates Landscape Architecture dated received April 22, 2014, on file in the Community Development Department, and other plans, text, and diagrams relating to this Site Development Review, and as specified as the following Conditions of Approval for this project. 2. Permit Expiration. Construction or use shall PL One Year DMC commence within one (1) year of Permit approval or After 8.96.020. the Permit shall lapse and become null and void. If Effective D there is a dispute as to whether the Permit has Date 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 Permit expires, a new application must be made and processed according to the requirements of this Ordinance. 3. Time Extension. The original approving decision- PL Prior to DMC maker may, upon the Applicant's written request for Expiration 8.96.020. an extension of approval prior to expiration, upon Date E the determination that all Conditions of Approval remain adequate and all applicable findings of approval will continue to be met, grant an extension of the approval for a period not to exceed six (6) months. All time extension requests shall be noticed and a public hearing shall be held before the original hearing body. 4. Compliance. The Applicant/Property Owner shall PL On -going DMC operate this use in compliance with the Conditions 8.96.020. of Approval of this Site Development Review F Permit, the approved plans and the regulations established in the Zoning Ordinance. Any violation of the terms or conditions specified may be subject to enforcement action. 5. Revocation of Permit. The Site Development PL On -going DMC Review approval shall be revocable for cause in 8.96.020.1 accordance with Section 8.96.020.1 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Any violation of the terms or conditions of this permit shall be subject to citation. 6. Requirements and Standard Conditions. The Various Building Standard Applicant/ Developer shall comply with applicable Permit City of Dublin Fire Prevention Bureau, Dublin Public Issuance 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. 7. Required Permits. Developer shall obtain all PW Building Standard permits required by other agencies including, but Permit not limited to Alameda County Flood Control and Issuance 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. 8. Fees. Applicant/Developer shall pay all applicable Various Building Various fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance, Permit including, but not limited to, Planning fees, Building Issuance fees, Traffic Impact Fees, TVTC fees, Dublin San Ramon Services District fees, Public Facilities fees, Dublin Unified School District School Impact fees, Fire Facilities Impact fees, Alameda County Flood and Water Conservation District (Zone 7) Drainage and Water Connection fees; or any other fee that may be adopted and applicable. 9. Indemnification. The Developer shall defend, ADM On -going Administra indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Dublin and Lion /City its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, Attorney 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 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. 10. Clarification of Conditions. In the event that there PW On -going Public needs to be clarification to the Conditions of Works 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 to this project. 11. Clean -up. The Applicant/Developer shall be PL On -going Planning responsible for clean -up & disposal of project related trash to maintain a safe, clean and litter -free site. 12. Modifications. Modifications or changes to this PL On -going DMC Site Development Review approval may be 8.104.100 considered by the Community Development Director if the modifications or changes proposed comply with Section 8.104.100 of the Zoning Ordinance. 13. Lighting. Lighting is required over exterior PL, PW Building Municipal entrances /doors. Exterior lighting used after daylight Permit Code hours shall be adequate to provide for security Issuance needs. PLANNING 14. Private Recreation Center. PL Prior to the Project Prior to the issuance of the 300th building permit for issuance of Specific any residential neighborhood, the the 300th applicant/developer shall receive a building permit building for the Private Recreation Center. The Private permit Recreation Center shall be fully constructed and have received final occupancy permits, prior to the issuance of the 300th occupancy permit for any neighborhood. 15. Anton School. PL Prior to the Project Prior to the issuance of the 600th building permit for issuance of Specific any residential neighborhood, the the 600th applicant/developer shall receive a building permit building for the relocation /Reconstruction of the Anton permit School. The Anton School shall be fully relocated or reconstructed an have received final occupancy permits, prior to the issuance of the 600th occupancy permit for any neighborhood. 16. Public Art Project. The Applicant/Developer has PL Prior to Project elected to and shall acquire and install a public art first Specific project in accordance with Chapter 8.58 of the Dublin occupancy Municipal Code and shall comply with the Pubic Art Compliance Report submitted by Applicant/Developer, and on file with the Planning Department. The value of the public art project is required to equal or exceed 0.5% of the building valuation (exclusive of land) for the project. The Building Official has determined that the total building valuation of the project (exclusive of land) is $303,419,037.00. Therefore, the Applicant/Developer is required to acquire and install a public art project valued at a minimum amount of public art project valued at a minimum amount of $1,517,094.31. The location of the public art project site is shown on the Project Plans. Prior to first occupancy the Applicant/Developer shall (a) secure completion of the public art project in a manor deemed satisfactory to the City Manager; and (b) execute an agreement between the City and Applicant/Developer that sets forth the ownership, maintenance responsibilities, and insurance coverage for the public art project. The public art project is subject to the approval of the City Council upon recommendation by the Heritage and Cultural Arts Commission. BUILDING 17. Building Codes and Ordinances. All project B Through Standard construction shall conform to all building codes and Completion Condition ordinances in effect at the time of building permit. 18. Retaining Walls. All retaining walls over 30 inches B Through Standard in height and in a walkway shall be provided with Completion Condition guardrails. All retaining walls over 24 inches with a surcharge or 36 inches without a surcharge shall obtain permits and inspections from the Building & Safety Division. 19. Phased Occupancy Plan. If occupancy is B Occupancy Standard requested to occur in phases, then all physical of any Condition improvements within each phase shall be required affected to be completed prior to occupancy of any buildings building within that phase except for items specifically excluded in an approved Phased Occupancy Plan, or minor handwork items, approved by the Department of Community Development. 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 Director of Community Development, 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. 20. Building Permits. To apply for building permits, B Issuance of Standard Applicant/Developer shall submit five (5) sets of Building Condition construction plans to the Building & Safety Division Permits 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. Applicant/Developer will be responsible for obtaining the approvals of all participation non -City agencies prior to the issuance of building permits. 21. Construction Drawings. Construction plans shall B Issuance of Standard be fully dimensioned (including building elevations) building Condition accurately drawn (depicting all existing and permits 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. 22. Air Conditioning Units. Air conditioning units and B Occupancy Standard ventilation ducts shall be screened from public view of Unit Condition 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 Chief Building Official and Director of Community Development. 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 PD text. 23. Temporary Fencing. Temporary Construction B Through Standard fencing shall be installed along the perimeter of all Completion Condition work under construction. 24. Addressing B Standard a) Provide a site plan with the City of Dublin's Prior to Condition address grid overlaid on the plans (1 to 30 release of scale). Highlight all exterior door openings addresses on plans (front, rear, garage, etc.). The site plan shall include a single large format page showing the entire project and individual sheets for each neighborhood. 3 copies on full size sheets and 5 copies reduced sheets. b) Provide plan for display of addresses. The Prior to Building Official shall approve plan prior to permitting issuance of the first building permit. (Prior to permitting) c) Addresses will be required on the front of the Prior to dwellings. Addresses are also required near permitting the garage door opening if the opening is not on the same side of the dwelling as the front door. d) Townhomes / Condos are required to have Occupancy address ranges posted on street side of the of any Unit buildings. e) Address signage shall be provided as per the Occupancy Dublin Residential Security Code. of any Unit f) Exterior address numbers shall be backlight Prior to and be posted in such a way that they may permit be seen from the street. issuance, g) Driveways servicing more than one (1) and through individual dwelling unit shall have a minimum completion of 4 inch high identification numbers, noting Prior to the range of unit numbers placed at the permit entrance to each driveway at a height issuance between 36 and 42 inches above grade. The and through light source shall be provided with an completion uninterruptible AC power source or controlled only by photoelectric device. 25. Engineer Observation. The Engineer of record B Scheduling Standard shall be retained to provide observation services for the final Condition all components of the lateral and vertical design of frame the building, including nailing, hold- downs, straps, inspection shear, roof diaphragm and structural frame of building. A written report shall be submitted to the City Inspector prior to scheduling the final frame inspection. 26. Foundation. Geotechnical Engineer for the soils B Permit Standard report shall review and approve the foundation issuance Condition design. A letter shall be submitted to the Building Division on the approval. 27. Green Building B Standard Green Building measures as detailed in the SDR Through Condition package may be adjusted prior to master plan Completion 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) The Green Building checklist shall be included in Prior to first the master plans. The checklist shall detail what permit 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 Through completed checklist with appropriate verification Completion that all Green Points required by 7.94 of the Dublin Municipal Code have been incorporated. (Through Completion) Homeowner Manual — if Applicant takes advantage Project 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. (Project) Landscape plans shall be submitted to the Green Prior to Building Official for review. (Prior to approval of the approval of landscape plans by the City of Dublin) the landscape Developer may choose self - certification or plans by the certification by a third party as permitted by the City of Dublin Municipal Code. Applicant shall inform the Dublin Green Building Official of method of certification prior to release of the first permit in each subdivision / neighborhood. 28. Electronic File: The applicant/developer shall B Issuance of Standard submit all building drawings and specifications for the final Condition this project in an electronic format to the satisfaction occupancy 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. 29. Construction trailer: Due to size and nature of the B Through Standard development, the applicant/developer, shall provide Completion Condition a construction trailer will 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 applicant/developer shall provide a site with appropriate hook ups in close proximity to the project site to accommodate this trailer. The applicant/developer shall cause the trailer to be moved from its current location at the time necessary as determined by the Building Official at the Applicant/Developer's expense. 30. Copies of Approved Plans. Applicant shall B 30 days after Standard provide City with 2 reduced (1/2 size) copies of the permit and Condition City of Dublin stamped approved plan. each revision issuance 31. Cool Roofs. Flat roof areas shall have their roofing B Through Standard material coated with light colored gravel or painted Completion Condition with light colored or reflective material designed for Cool Roofs. 32. Solar Zone — CA Energy Code B Through Standard Show the location of the Solar Zone on the site Completion Condition plan. Detail the orientation of the Solar Zone. This information shall be shown in the master plan check on the overall site plan, the individual roof plans and the plot plans. This condition of approval will be waived if the project meets the exceptions provided in the CA Energy Code. 33. Wildfire Management. Provide in the master B Through Standard drawing set, a sheet detailing which lots are Completion Condition adjacent to open space and subject to the Wildfire Management provisions of the code. Include a note on the plot plan for each lot that is subject to wildfire management. 34. Accessible Parking. The required number of B Through CA parking stalls, the design and location of the Completion Building accessible parking stalls shall be as required by the Code CA Building Code. 35. Recreation Centers. Building permits are B Through Standard required for all recreation centers, swimming pools, Completion Condition spas, and associated amenities and are required to meet the accessibility and building codes. Pool and Deck area shall be considered conceptual in nature only, items such as exiting and permit requirements shall be reviewed during the permitting process. 36. Options. Selected options that affect the square B Through Standard footage of the dwellings shall be listed on the Completion Condition building permit application. Selected options that affect the footprint of the dwelling shall be shown on the plot plan 37. Emergency Access B Prior to Standard Vehicle Gates. Private roads and parking areas or Occupancy Condition structures controlled by unmanned mechanical And parking type gates shall be provided with police Through the emergency access by Opticom LED Emitter and life of the providing the gate access code for distribution to project emergency responders. The control box for the code device shall be mounted on a control pedestal consisting of a metal post/pipe, which shall be installed at a height of 36 to 42 inches to the center of the keypad and a minimum of 15 feet (4.6m) from the entry / exit gate. It shall be located on the driver's side of the road or driveway and accessible in such a manner as to not require a person to exit their vehicle to reach it, nor to drive on the wrong side of the road or driveway, not to require any back -up movements in order to enter / exit the gate. The gates accesses devices shall be designed and installed to allow for entry through the vehicular gate under three different and unique situations: a. The system is in services and under normal operations. b. A power failure has occurred and battery powered convenience open systems are employed. c. A power failure has occurred and the convenience open system has failed (dead or low charged battery). Pedestrian gates. All lockable pedestrian gates to residential neighborhoods serving six (6) or more dwellings units shall provide for policy emergency access utilizing an approved key switch device or approved Knoxbox, which shall be installed in a manner approved by the Chief Building Official. LANDSCAPING 38. Final landscape plans, irrigation system plans. P Issuance of Standard Tree preservation techniques, and guarantees, the building shall be reviewed and approved by the Dublin permit Planning Division prior to the issuance of the building permit. All such submittals shall insure: a. That plant material utilized 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. e. That concrete curbing is to be used at the edges of all planters and paving surfaces where applicable. f. That all cut and fill slopes conform to the master 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 stockpiles of loose soil existing on that date are hydroseeded in a similar manner. h. Cut and /or fill slopes exceeding a 3:1 grade shall be stabilized with jute netting or approved equal to control erosion. Trees planted on slopes that exceed a 3:1 grade shall be installed with approved rock slope protection above and below the tree pit to catch grade. i. 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. j. That a warranty from the owners or contractors shall be required to warranty all shrubs and ground cover, all trees, and the irrigation system for one year. That a permanent maintenance agreement on all landscaping will be required from the owner insuring regular irrigation, fertilization and weed abatement, if applicable. 39. Water Efficient Landscaping Regulations. P Issuance of Standard The Applicant shall meet all requirements of the the building City of Dublin's Water- Efficient Landscaping permit Regulations, Section 8.88 of the Dublin Municipal Code. 40. Open Space Areas. Open space areas shall be P Issuance of Standard planted and irrigated to create landscape that is the building attractive, conserves water, and requires minimal permit maintenance. 41. Trail Pavement. Decomposed granite pavement P Issuance of Standard shall be limited to areas with a maximum slope of the building 2% in any one direction. Grading of paved areas permit in the open space area shall be designed to meet accessibility requirements. Pavement materials shall provide an all- weather, non - eroding durable surface with a minimum life expectancy of 10 years. 42. Plant Clearances. All trees planted shall meet P Issuance of Standard the following clearances: any building a. 6' from the face of building walls or roof permit 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. 20' from either side of a streetlight 43. Irrigation System Warranty. The applicant shall P Issuance of Standard warranty the irrigation system and planting for a any building period of one year from the date of installation. permit 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 44. Walls, Fences and Mailboxes. Applicant shall P Issuance of Standard work with staff to prepare a final wall, fencing and any building mailbox plan that is consistent with Dublin permit Municipal Code and adjacent subdivisions. Mailbox locations shall be integrated within the landscape and shall comply with USPS requirements. 45. Sustainable Landscape Practices. The P Issuance of Standard landscape design shall demonstrate compliance any building with sustainable landscape practices as detailed permit in the Bay- Friendly Landscape Guidelines by earning a minimum of 60 points or more on the Bay - Friendly scorecard, meeting 9 of the 9 required practices and specifying that 75% of the non -turf planting only requires occasional, little or no shearing or summer water once established. Final selection and placement of trees, shrubs and ground cover plants shall ensure compliance with this requirement. Herbaceous plants shall be used along walks to reduce maintenance and the visibility of the sheared branches of woody ground cover plants. Planters for medium sized trees shall be a minimum of six feet wide. Small trees or shrubs shall be selected for planting areas less than six feet wide. 46. Copies of Approved Plans. The Applicant shall P Issuance of Standard provide the City with one full size copy, one any building reduced (1/2 sized) copy and one electronic copy permit of the approved landscape plans prior to construction. CIVIL CONDITIONS 47. Plans Coordination. Civil Improvement P Standard 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. 48. Utility Placement and Coordination: Utilities P Standard shall be coordinated with proposed tree locations to eliminate conflicts between trees and utilities. Submit typical utility plans for each house type to serve as a guide during the preparation of final grading, planting and utility plans. Utilities may have to be relocated in order to provide the required separation between the trees and utilities. The applicant shall submit a final tree /utility coordination plan as part of the construction document review process to demonstrate that this condition has been satisfied. FIRE 49. All portions of project with connection to open F On going Standard space shall meet Dublin Wildfire Management Plan and California Building Code Chapter 7A construction and landscape requirements. 50. All fire access roads shall have minimum corner F On going Standard radii of 40' with traffic bulb (96' minimum) and turn - around areas (70' leg minimum) that shall meet current Alameda County requirements. 51. In accordance with The Dublin Fire Code, fire F On going Standard sprinklers shall be installed in all buildings. The system shall be in accordance with the NFPA 13 / 13R / 13D, the CA Fire Code and CA Building and Residential Code. 52. California Fire Code Appendix D section D105 F On going Standard — 107. The minimum number of access roads serving residential development(s) shall be based upon the number of dwelling units served and shall be as follows: • 1 -30 Units - One public or private access road • 31 -100 Units - One public or private access road and one emergency access road. When more than one access road is required, the roadways shall be remotely located to provide a separate and distinct means of access and egress. • 200+ Units - A minimum of two public or private access roads. When more than one access road is required, the roadways shall be remotely located to provide a separate and distinct means of access and egress. 53. Fire apparatus roadways shall have a F On going Standard minimum unobstructed width of 20 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. Roadways under 36 feet wide shall be posted with signs or shall have red curbs painted with labels on one side; roadways under 28 feet wide shall be posted with signs or shall have red curbs painted with labels on both sides of the street as follows: "NO STOPPING FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1 ". 1. Fire apparatus roadways must extend to within 150 ft. of the most remote first floor exterior wall of any building. 2. The maximum grade for a fire apparatus roadway is 12 %. 3. Fire apparatus roadways in excess of 150 feet in length must make provisions for approved apparatus turnarounds. 54. Gates Approvals. Fencing and gates that cross F On going Standard pedestrian access and exit paths as well as vehicle entrance and exit roads need to be approved for Fire Department access and egress as well as exiting provisions where such is applicable. Plans need to be submitted that clearly show the fencing and gates and details of such. This should be clearly incorporated as part of the site plan with details provided as necessary. 55. Hydrants & Fire Flows. Show the location of F On going Standard any on -site hydrants and any fire hydrants that are along the property frontage as well as the closest hydrants to each side of the property that are located along the access roads that serves this property. Provide a letter from the D.S.R.S.D. indicating what the available fire flow is to this property. Hydrant spacing shall meet D.S.R.S.D. standard as to type and distance between hydrants. 56. Addressing. F On going Standard Addressing shall be illuminated or in an illuminated area. The address characters shall be contrasting to their background. Building Address. The building shall be provided with all addresses or the assigned address range so as to be clearly visible from either direction of travel on the street the address references. The address characters shall not be less than 5 inches in height by 1 -inch stroke. Larger sizes may be necessary depending on the setbacks and visibility. Multi- Tenants. Where a building has multiple tenants, address shall also be provided near the main entrance door of each tenant space. The address shall be high enough on the building to be clearly visible from the driveway, street or parking area it faces even when vehicles are parked. 57. FIRE ACCESS DURING CONSTRUCTION F On going Standard Fire Access. Access roads, turnarounds, pullouts, and fire operation areas are Fire Lanes and shall be maintained clear and free of obstructions, including the parking of vehicles. Entrances. Entrances to job sites shall not be blocked, including after hours, other than by approved gates /barriers that provide for emergency access. Site Utilities. Site utilities that would require the access road to be dug up or made impassible shall be installed prior to combustible construction commencing. Entrance flare, angle of departure, width, turning radii, grades, turnaround, vertical clearances, road surface, bridges /crossings, gates /key- switch, & within required 150 -ft. distance to Fire Lane Personnel Access. Approved route to furthermost portion of exterior wall. Route width, slope, surface, obstructions must be considered. Fire access is required to be approved all - weather access. Show on the plans the location of the all- weather access and a description of the construction. Access road must be desianed to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus. USE OF 1.5 -2" ROCK OF MINIMUM 4" DEPTH ALLOWED DURING LIMITED PERIOD PRIOR TO FIRST LIFT OF ASPHALT AS REQUIRED IN PLAN REVIEW. DSRSD 58. Complete improvement plans shall be submitted to DSRSD Issuance of Standard DSRSD that conform to the requirements of the any building Dublin San Ramon Services District Code, the permit DSRSD "Standard Procedures, Specifications and Drawings for Design and Installation of Water and Wastewater Facilities ", all applicable DSRSD Master Plans and all DSRSD policies. 59. All mains shall be sized to provide sufficient DSRSD Issuance of Standard capacity to accommodate future flow demands in any building addition to each development project's demand. permit Layout and sizing of mains shall be in conformance with DSRSD utility master planning. 60. Sewers shall be designed to operate by gravity DSRSD Issuance of Standard flow to DSRSD's existing sanitary sewer system. any building Pumping of sewage is discouraged and may only permit 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 pumping station. 61. Domestic and fire protection waterline systems DSRSD Issuance of Standard for Tracts or Commercial Developments shall be any building designed to be looped or interconnected to avoid permit dead end sections in accordance with requirements of the DSRSD Standard Specifications and sound engineering practice. 62. DSRSD policy requires public water and sewer DSRSD Issuance of Standard lines to be located in public streets rather than in any building off - street locations to the fullest extent possible. permit 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. 63. Prior to approval by the City of a grading permit DSRSD Issuance of Standard or a site development permit, the locations and any building widths of all proposed easement dedications for permit water and sewer lines shall be submitted to and approved by DSRSD. 64. All easement dedications for DSRSD facilities DSRSD Issuance of Standard shall be by separate instrument irrevocably any building offered to DSRSD or by offer of dedication on the permit Final Map. 65. Prior to approval by the City for Recordation, the DSRSD Issuance of Standard Final Map shall be submitted to and approved by any building DSRSD for easement locations, widths, and permit restrictions. 66. Prior to issuance by the City of any Building DSRSD Issuance of Standard Permit or Construction Permit by the Dublin San any building Ramon Services District, whichever comes first, permit 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. 67. Prior to issuance by the City of any Building DSRSD Issuance of Standard Permit or Construction Permit by the Dublin San any building Ramon Services District, whichever comes first, permit 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 at least 15 working days for final improvement drawing review by DSRSD before signature by the District Engineer. 68. No sewer line or waterline construction shall be DSRSD Issuance of Standard permitted unless the proper utility construction any building permit has been issued by DSRSD. A permit construction permit will only be issued after all of the items in Condition No. 9 have been satisfied. 69. The applicant shall hold DSRSD, its Board of DSRSD Issuance of Standard Directors, commissions, employees, and agents any building of DSRSD harmless and indemnify and defend permit the same from any litigation, claims, or fines resulting from the construction and completion of the project. 70. Improvement plans shall include recycled water DSRSD Issuance of Standard improvements as required by DSRSD. Services any building for landscape irrigation shall connect to recycled permit water mains. Applicant must obtain a copy of the DSRSD Recycled Water Use Guidelines and conform to the requirements therein. 71. DSRSD has communicated these Conditions of DSRSD Issuance of Standard Approval for the project verbally in previous any building meetings on this project. permit TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL CONDITIONS Unless otherwise stated, all Tentative Map Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to approval of the Final Map. The Site Development Review Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to final occupancy of any building (or depending on the context shall remain in effect throughout the life of the Project) and shall be subject to Planning Department review and approval. This approval for both the Site Development Review and Vesting Tentative Maps shall be subject to City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Stage 1 and Stage 2 Planned Development Rezoning. NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Agency Prior to: Source PUBLIC WORKS GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. General Conditions of Approval. Developer PW On going Standard shall comply with the following General Conditions of Approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Maps 7515, 7711 -7616, 8169 and 8170. 2. Street Lighting Maintenance Assessment PW First final map Standard District. The Developer shall petition to have the project area annexed into the Dublin Ranch Street Lighting Maintenance Assessment District and shall provide any exhibits required for the annexation. In addition, Developer shall pay all administrative costs associated with processing the annexation. 3. Ownership and Maintenance of PW Final map and on Public Improvements. Ownership and maintenance going Works of street right -of -ways, common area parcels and open space areas and improvements shall be by the City of Dublin and the Wallis Ranch Homeowner's Association as shown on the "Ownership and Maintenance" Stage II PD Exhibits, Sheets PD2.8.0 — PD2.8.8 prepared by MacKay & Somps, dated April 2014, except as modified by these Conditions of Approval. 4. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions PW First Final Map; Standard (CC &Rs). A Homeowners Association(s) shall modify with be formed by recordation of a declaration of successive Final Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions to Maps govern use and maintenance of the landscape, decorative pavement and other features within the public right of way contained in the Agreement for Long Term Encroachments; all open space and common area landscaping; all stormwater treatment measures; trail improvements; and the EVAE through parcel 11. Said declaration shall set forth the Association name, bylaws, rules and regulations. The CC &Rs shall also contain a provision that prohibits the amendment of those provisions of the CC &Rs requested by City without the City's approval. The CC &Rs shall ensure that there is adequate provision for the maintenance, in good repair and on a regular basis, the landscaping & irrigation, decorative pavements, median islands, fences, walls, drainage, lighting, signs and other related improvements. The Developer shall submit a copy of the CC &R document to the City for review and approval relative to these conditions of approval. 5. Phased Improvements. Right -of -way PW First Final Map Standard dedication and installation of public improvements may be done in phases as indicated on the Tentative Map and Site Development Review, subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. With each phased Final Map, the City Engineer shall identify all improvements necessary to serve and access the phased lots created. All rights -of -way and improvements, including utilities and traffic signal installation and modifications, identified by the City Engineer for construction within the boundaries of each phase of the development shall be required with the Final Map for that phase. In addition, the City Engineer may require the Developer to perform off -site grading in order to conform site grading to the adjacent grade outside of the phase proposed for development. 6. Private street and common area PW Final Map Standard subdivision improvements. Common area improvements, private streets, private alleys and all other subdivision improvements owned or maintained by the homeowners' owners association are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to Final Map approval and shall be included in the Tract Improvement Agreement for each respective tract. Such improvements include, but are not limited to: curb & gutter, pavement areas, sidewalks, access ramps & driveways; enhanced street paving; parking spaces; street lights (wired underground) and appurtenances; drainage facilities; utilities; landscape and irrigation facilities; open space landscaping; stormwater treatment facilities; striping and signage; and fire hydrants. 7. Private Street Easements. Public Utility PW Final Map Standard Easements (PUE), Sanitary Sewer Easements (SSE) and Water Line Easements (WLE) shall be established over the entire private street right -of -ways within all subdivisions. The PUE, SSE and WLE dedication statements on each Final Map are to recite that the easements are available for, but not limited to, the installation, access and maintenance of sanitary and storm sewers, water, electrical and communication facilities. Project entry monument signs and walls shall not be located within these easements. 8. Private Street Easements. The Developer PW Final Map Standard shall dedicate Emergency Vehicle Access Easements (EVAE) over the clear pavement width of all private streets and alleys. Easement geometry shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer and Fire Marshall. 9. Intersections: The design of the PW Final Map or Public intersections shall be generally as shown on improvement plans Works the Tentative Map and the Site Development Review. The Developer shall submit details of the guard /entry gate layout in addition to a typical intersection layout showing the design for the ramps, sidewalks, entry walls, stop signs, landscape planters, street trees, crosswalk locations and decorative pavement to be approved by the City Engineer prior to the submittal of the Improvement Plans. Decorative pavement shall not be installed within crosswalks. Final design details shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 10. Monuments. Final Maps shall include private PW Monuments to be Public street monuments to be set in all private shown on Final Map Works streets. Private street monuments shall be set and installed prior to at all intersections and as determined by the acceptance of City Engineer. improvements 11. Stormwater Source Control. "No Dumping PW Grading /Approval of Standard Drains to Bay" storm drain medallions per City improvement plans Standard Detail CD -704 shall be placed on all public and private storm drain inlets. 12. Trash Capture. The project Stormwater PW Approval of Grading Standard Management Plan shall incorporate trash Improvement Plans capture measures such as screens, filters or CDS /Vortex units to address the requirements of Provision C.10 of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 13. Grading. The toe of any slope shall be one PW Approval of Grading Standard foot back of sidewalk. The top of any slope Plans or issuance of shall be three feet back of walkway. Minor grading permit and exceptions may be made in the above slope on going design criteria to meet unforeseen design constraints subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 14. Front yard Grading: Finish grading for all PW Approval of Grading Standard front yards shall be of variable slope with a Plans or issuance of maximum of 3:1 between hinge points grading permit and located a minimum of fifteen feet (15') behind on going back -of -walk (10 feet if there is a building encroachment) and three feet (3') behind back of walk. 15. Curb Ramps: Curb ramp layouts are not PW Approval of Standard approved at this time. The number, location improvement plans and layout of all curb ramps shall be reviewed or start of and approved by the City Engineer with the construction Improvement Plans associated with each On going Final Map. All pedestrian ramps shall be designed and constructed to provide direct access to marked or unmarked crosswalks. Each pedestrian ramp shall be oriented such that it is aligned and parallel to the marked or unmarked crosswalk it is intended to serve. Pedestrian ramps serving more than one marked or unmarked crosswalk shall not be provided, unless specifically approved by the City Engineer. 16. Utilities. All new utility service connections, PW Approval of Standard including electrical and communications, shall Improvement Plans be installed underground. Electrical or start of transformers shall be installed in underground construction vaults within an appropriate utility easement or On going public service easement. 17. Landscape Plans. Developer shall submit PW 1st submittal or Standard design development Landscape Plans with improvement plans the first plan check for the street improvement and approved with plans and final map for each respective tract. Final Map The Landscape Plans shall show details, sections and supplemental information as necessary for design coordination of the various civil design features and elements including utility location to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Complete Landscape Plans shall be concurrently approved with the Tract Improvement Agreement and Final Map. 18. Street Light and Joint Trench Plans. PW 1st submittal or Standard Streetlight Plans and Joint Trench Plans shall improvement plans be submitted with the first plan check for the and approved prior street improvement plans and final map for to Final Map each respective tract. The final streetlight plan and joint trench plan shall be completed prior to Final Map approval for each respective subdivision. 19. Geotechnical Investigation. The Developer PW 1st submittal of Standard shall submit a design level geotechnical grading plans and investigation report defining and delineating on going any seismic hazard. The report shall be prepared in accordance with guidelines published by the State of California. The report is subject to review and approval by a City selected peer review consultant prior to the acceptance of each Final map. The applicant shall pay all costs related to the required peer review. The recommendations of those geotechnical reports shall be incorporated into the project plans subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 20. Soils Report. The Developer shall submit a PW 1st submittal of Public detailed soils report prepared by a qualified grading and Works engineer, registered with the State of improvement plans California. The required report shall include On going recommendations regarding pavement sections for all project streets including Tassajara Road and all internal streets. Grading operations shall be in accordance with recommendations contained in the required soils report and grading shall be supervised by an engineer registered in the State of California to do such work. 21. Geotechnical Engineer Review and PW 1st submittal of Public Approval. The Project Geotechnical Engineer grading and Works shall be retained to review all final grading improvement plans plans and specifications. The Project On going Geotechnical Engineer shall approve all grading plans prior to City approval and issuance of grading permits. 22. Grading. The disposal site and haul truck PW Approval of grading Public route for any off -haul dirt materials shall be plans, or start of Works subject to the review and approval by the City construction or Engineer prior to the approval the issuance of grading improvement plans or issuance of a Grading permit Permit. If the Developer does not own the parcel on which the proposed disposal site is located, the Developer shall provide the City with a Letter of Consent, signed by the current owner, approving the placement of off -haul material on their parcel. A grading plan may be required for the placement of the off -haul material. 23. Dust Control /Street Sweeping. The PW Start of construction Public Developer shall provide adequate dust control On going Works measures at all times during the grading and hauling operations. All trucks hauling export and import materials shall be provided with tarp cover at all times. Spillage of haul materials and mud - tracking on the haul routes shall be prevented at all times. Developer shall be responsible for sweeping of streets within, surrounding and adjacent to the project if it is determined that the tracking or accumulation of material on the streets is due to its construction activities. 24. Underground Obstructions. Prior to PW Prior to grading and Standard demolition, excavation and grading on any construction portion of the project site, all underground obstructions (i.e., debris, septic tanks, fuel tanks, barrels, chemical waste) shall be identified and removed pursuant to Federal, State and local regulations and subject to the review and approval by the City. Excavations shall be properly backfilled using structural fill, subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. 25. CLOMR -F. Prior to approval of the first "small PW Prior to approval of Public lot" Final Map that creates individual the first small lot Works residential lots within the existing Special Final Map that Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), the developer creates individual shall apply for and receive approval of either a residential lots Conditional Letter of Map Revision based on within the existing fill (CLOMR -F) from the Federal Emergency SFHA Management Agency (FEMA). A CLOMR-F shall be based upon the grading plan for the project and shall conclude that lots proposed to have structures for human occupancy will be removed from the SFHA. 26. LOMR -F. Prior to issuance of building permits PW Prior to issuance of Public for any buildings within the special flood Building Permits for Works hazard area, the Developer shall apply for and any buildings within receive approval of a Letter of Map Revision existing SFHA (LOMR) from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The LOMR shall be based upon the as -built grades of the building pads and shall determine that the pads are no longer within the SFHA. In the event FEMA does not approve the LOMR -F or FEMA review and approval is delayed beyond the time the developer wishes to occupy buildings, the developer shall submit, prior to occupancy, Elevation Certificates for all buildings within the flood hazard area demonstrating that buildings have been constructed in accordance with standards of the National Flood Insurance Program. TRACT 7515 (Master Tentative Map) 27. Landscape Features within Public Right of PW Final Map Standard Way. The Developer shall enter into an "Agreement for Long Term Encroachments" with the City for maintaining the landscape features within public Right of Way including frontage & median landscaping, decorative pavements, decorative bridge railings and special features (i.e. walls, monuments, fences, etc.), and landscaping and sidewalks along the west side of Tassajara Road from the project's northern frontage limit to the Fallon Road intersection as generally shown on Site Development Review exhibits. The Agreement shall identify the ownership of the special features and maintenance responsibilities. The Developer will be responsible for maintaining all decorative pavements including restoration required as the result of utility repairs. 28. Bulk Grading: The following bulk and rough PW Approval of grading Public grading shall be performed with Tract 7515 to plans or grading Works the satisfaction of the City Engineer: permit issuance for a. Grading as needed to construct the Tract 7515 backbone roadway improvements as required by these conditions of approval and as identified as Street A, Street B, Street C, Street D, Street E and Street F on the Tentative Map. b. Grading of Parcels 15 & 20 as needed for the installation of entry landscaping and monument features. c. Rough grading for the park on Parcel 16 as generally shown on Sheet 7 of the Tentative Map. d. Rough grading for the park on Parcel 21 as generally shown on Sheet 7 of the Tentative Map. e. Grading required for all required stormwater management measures. Grading for the individual neighborhoods such that no additional earth- moving activities will be required across completed roadways to complete the final grading as shown in the Tentative Maps packages for Tracts 7711- 7716, 8169 and 8170. 29. Public Streets: Developer shall construct all PW Approval of Public street improvements and offer for dedication improvement plans Works to the City of Dublin the rights of way for and final map Tassajara Road and all interior streets as shown on the Tentative Map as Parcel A (Street A and Street B) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This shall include all improvements to the existing bridges as shown on the Tentative Map including, but not limited to installation of decorative pedestrian railings. 30. Private Streets: The owner shall dedicate PW Approval of final Public private street right -of -way and install complete map and Works street improvements for the proposed private improvement plans streets within the development as shown on the Tentative Map as Parcels B and C (Street A, Street C, Street D, Street E and Street F). 31. Bridges. The Developer shall, prior to PW Prior to 1 st submittal Public preparation of Tract Improvement Plans, of improvement Works perform a certified inspection of the two (2) plans for Tract 7515 existing bridges to identify any existing structural deficiencies and required repairs. The inspection report shall be provided to the City for review and approval. All required and /or recommended repairs to the bridges shall be included in the Improvement Plans for Tract 7515. In addition, prior to acceptance of the two (2) existing bridges, the Developer shall prepare applications to the State of California, Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to request bridge numbers and to request the bridges be added to the National Bridge Inventory. Applications shall include all necessary as -built plans, calculations, photographs, and other information required by Caltrans. 32. Tassajara Road Frontage Improvements. PW Final map and Public The Developer shall dedicate right -of -way and improvement plans Works install complete roadway and utility for Tract 7515 improvements along the project's Tassajara Road frontage such that the half- street right - of -way width of Tassajara Road is sixty four feet (64'). In addition to the improvements shown on the Tentative Map, the Developer shall construct a forty -foot (40') wide raised landscaped median in general conformance with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the Precise Plan adopted for Tassajara Road. The curb -to- median curb width shall be a minimum of thirty two feet (32') and include two 12' travel lanes and an 8' bike lane in the southbound direction. The median shall be designed and landscaped to allow the future construction of two 12' lanes (one lane each in the southbound and northbound directions). Required roadway and utility improvements for the widening of Tassajara Road along the project's frontage shall include, but are not limited to: installation of pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, drainage structures, stormwater treatment measures, street trees, median landscaping, irrigation, utilities, street lights, and fire hydrants. In addition, signing, striping, pavement conforms and transitions will be required to switch the existing pavement width on Tassajara Road to two lanes of northbound traffic. The Developer shall be eligible for Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (EDTIF) Section 1 credits for the cost of the improvements and design in an amount not to exceed the costs included in the 2010 EDTIF Update or subsequent updates. 33. Tassajara Road Off -Site Improvements: PW Final map and Public The Developer shall widen Tassajara Road improvement plans Works and install complete roadway and utility for Tract 7515 improvements from the project's northern frontage limit to the Fallon Road intersection such that the half- street right -of -way width of Tassajara Road is sixty four feet (64') and include two 12' travel lanes and an 8' bike lane in the southbound direction and a forty - foot (40') wide raised landscaped median in general conformance with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the Precise Plan adopted for Tassajara Road. The median shall be designed and landscaped to allow the future construction of two 12' lanes (one lane each in the southbound and northbound directions). Required roadway and utility improvements for the widening of Tassajara Road shall include, but are not limited to: installation of pavement, curb, gutter, 6' separated sidewalk, 6' parkway strip, drainage structures, stormwater treatment measures, street trees, median landscaping, irrigation, utilities, traffic signal modification, street lights, and fire hydrants. In addition, signing, striping, pavement conforms and transitions will be required to switch the existing pavement width on Tassajara Road to two lanes of northbound traffic. The Developer shall be eligible for Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (EDTIF) Section 1 credits for the cost of the improvements and design in an amount not to exceed the costs included in the 2010 EDTIF Update or subsequent updates. 34. Fallon Road Off -Site Improvements: The PW Final map and Public Developer shall modify the existing median on improvement plans Works Fallon Road between Tassajara Road and for Tract 7515 Cydonia Court to provide one additional 12' travel lane in both the northbound and southbound directions. Required improvements shall include, but are not limited to: pavement widening; installation of landscape, trees and irrigation within the median; new median curb; stormwater treatment measures; and modification of traffic signals at the Fallon Road/Tassajara Road, Fallon Road /Silvera Ranch Drive and Fallon Road /Cydonia Court intersections. The Developer shall also install landscaping, street trees and irrigation within the existing median between Cydonia Court and the existing bridge to the south. In addition, signing and striping modifications will be required south of Cydonia Court to establish two thru lanes on Fallon Road in each direction. The Developer shall be eligible for Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee ( EDTIF) Section 1 credits for the cost of the improvements and design in an amount not to exceed the costs included in the 2010 EDTIF Update or subsequent updates. 35. Tassajara Road Traffic Signals: The PW Final map and Public Developer shall modify the Tassajara Road improvement plans Works traffic signals at Silvera Ranch Drive and at for Tract 7515 Quarry Lane School as needed to accommodate the Wallis Ranch and Tassajara Road improvements. 36. Traffic Signal Interconnect. The Developer PW Final map and Public shall interconnect existing signals at Fallon improvement plans Works Road /Tassajara Road and Silvera Ranch for Tract 7515 Drive/Tassajara Road. Project applicant shall provide one communication modem /switch at the signal controller at each location as well as one spare per signal location. 37. Traffic Signal Camera. The Developer shall PW Final map and Public install a traffic monitoring camera at the improvement plans Works Silvera Ranch Drive/Tassajara Road for Tract 7515 intersection and one at the Tassajara Road /Fallon Road intersection. 38. Temporary Walkway Tassajara Road: The PW Final map and Public Developer shall install a temporary 5 -foot wide improvement plans Works asphalt concrete walkway within the existing for Tract 7515 right of way along the western frontage of Tassajara Road from the southern end of the project's frontage to the existing walkway approximately 2,000 linear feet to the south to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 39. Regional Trail: The Developer shall dedicate PW Final map and Public Public Access Easements and construct a 10- improvement plans Works foot wide asphalt concrete trail with 2 -foot rock for Tract 7515 shoulders on Parcels 13, 17, 18, 20 and 23 as shown on the Tentative Map to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 40. Emergency Vehicle Access Easement: The PW Final map for Tract Public Developer shall dedicate to the public a 7515 Works minimum sixteen foot (16') wide Emergency Vehicle Access Easement (EVAE) through Lot 11 to provide access from Parcel 1 to Parcel 2 as shown on Page 6 of the Tentative Map. Final easement geometry shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer and Fire Marshall. 41. Neighborhood Park on Parcel 16: The PW Final map and Public Neighborhood Park on Parcel 16 shall contain improvement plans Works a minimum of 4.0 acres and be shown on the for Tract 7515 Final Map as future parkland to be deeded to the City of Dublin by separate document. The parcel line shall be at the back of curb. The City will not accept the future parkland parcel until the site is rough graded, including erosion control measures, and all associated improvements are completed as generally shown on Tentative Map 7515 to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Parks & Community Services Director. Required improvements include, but are not limited to, street frontage improvements, curb and gutter. Neighborhood parkland credits will not be provided until the required grading and street improvements are complete or an agreement with the City is executed for the completion of the improvements. 42. PW Final map and Public Neighborhood Park on Parcel 21: The improvement plans Works Neighborhood Park shown on Parcel 21 on for Tract 7515 the Tentative Map shall contain a minimum of 3.7 acres and be shown on the Final Map as future parkland to be deeded to the City of Dublin by separate document. The park parcel lines shall be at the back of curb adjacent to Parcel A (internal public street) and twelve feet (12') behind the curb line along Tassajara Road as shown on the Tentative Map. The City will not accept the future parkland parcel until the site is rough graded, including erosion control measures, and all associated improvements are completed as generally shown on Tentative Map 7515 to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Parks & Community Services Director. Required improvements include, but are not limited to, street frontage improvements, curb, gutter and sidewalk along Tassajara Road. Neighborhood parkland credits will not be provided until the required grading and street improvements are complete or an agreement with the City is executed for the completion of the improvements. 43. Neighborhood Parks Utility Stubs: Storm PW Improvement Plans Public drainage, sanitary sewer, potable water, P Tract 7515 Works recycled water and electric services shall be Parks stubbed to the Neighborhood Parks at locations approved by the City Engineer and Parks & Community Services Director. 44. Master Drainage Plan: The Developer shall PW Final Map for tract Public provide a Master Drainage Plan for the 7515 or issuance of Works proposed development within the Tract 7515 grading permit, area to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. approval of grading plans 45. Drainage Release Easements: The PW Final Map Public Developer shall dedicate to the City of Dublin Works drainage release easements on any privately owned parcels (HOA or Trust) that accept storm drainage from public owned streets or parcels. 46. Stormwater Management. The provided PW Prior to approval of Public Stormwater Management Plan included with grading, Works the Tentative Map is approved in concept improvement plans only. The final Stormwater Management Plan is subject to City Engineer approval prior to approval of the Tract Improvement Plans. Approval is subject to the developer providing the necessary plans, details, and calculations that demonstrate the plan complies with the standards outlined in Order No. 02- 01- C0883, Water Quality Certification and Waste Discharge Requirements ( "Order "), Wallis Ranch Project, issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. 47. Stormwater Management. If the project is PW Grading, Public developed in phases, suitable stormwater improvement plans Works treatment and hydromodification measures for each phase shall be installed with each phase such that the stormwater runoff from the impervious areas created or replaced within the boundaries of each phase shall be properly treated and metered with stormwater treatment and hydromodification measures constructed with that phase or in previous phases. 48. Storm Water Treatment Measures PW Final Map Standard Maintenance Agreement. Developer shall enter into an Agreement with the City of Dublin that guarantees the property owner's perpetual maintenance obligation for all stormwater treatment measures installed as part of the project. Said Agreement is required pursuant to Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, Order No. R2- 2009 -0074. Said permit requires the City to provide verification and assurance that all treatment devices will be properly operated and maintained. The Agreement shall be recorded against the property and shall run with the land. 49. Landscape Improvements: All landscape PW Final Map and Public plantings, irrigation, decorative pavements, improvement plans Works and structures as approved with the Site for Tract 7515 Development Review within the public right of On going way, along all private roads dedicated with Tract 7515, along the regional trail corridor, within all common area parcels dedicated with Tract 7515, and within Parcels 15 & 20 related to gateway entry features shall be completed with Tract 7515 unless otherwise noted in the Conditions of Approval for the individual Neighborhoods. Landscape Plans for the required improvements shall be approved concurrently with the Improvement Plans, Tract Improvement Agreement and Final Map for Tract 7515. 50. Grading for the EBRPD Trail: The Developer PW 1S phase of bulk Public shall rough grade the East Bay Regional Park grading plans Works District ( EBRPD) easement for the proposed trail adjacent to the westerly boundary of the project from the current EBRPD staging area to the point where the applicant's trail intersects the easement; if EBRPD fulfills all of the following items: a. Provides the applicant a right of entry to the property from Camp Parks for the purposes of grading the easement. b. Provides approved grading plans for the proposed grading to be accomplished by the Developer. The grading plans shall be designed such that the grading balances without the need to import or off -haul dirt. c. Prepares all environmental documentation necessary. d. Provides all clearances and permits from Camp Parks, US Fish and Wildlife (USFW) and US Fish and Game (USFG) as well as any other agencies, environmental or otherwise (such as but not limited to Alameda County, City of Dublin, etc.) prior to any grading activity. e. Provides all drainage, stream bank stabilization, wildlife mitigation, and erosion control measures improvements. The developer shall not be required to provide any other improvements besides grading. The developer shall grade the EBRPD trail with the first phase of bulk grading that is started after EBRPD has fulfilled all the above items. If EBRPD has not fulfilled the above items prior to the start of the final rough grading phase of the Wallis Ranch project, this condition will no longer will be in effect. TRACT 7711 (Neighborhood 1) 51. Private Streets. The Developer shall dedicate PW Final Map and Public private street right -of -way and install complete improvement plans Works street improvements, including landscaping, for the proposed private streets — Street A, Street G, Street H, Street 1 and Street J — within the development as shown on the Tentative Map and the Site Development Review package. 52. Emergency Vehicle Access. The Developer PW Improvement Plans Standard shall construct a minimum twelve foot (12') F wide emergency vehicle access road within the Emergency Vehicle Access Easement (EVAE) dedicated on Parcel 11 with Tract 7515. The aggregate based section reflected on Sheet 3 of the Tentative Map is not approved. The pavement section for the access road shall be able to accommodate a 75,000 lb. load, shall be paved with an all - weather surface and shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer and Fire Marshall. 53. Emergency Vehicle Access. If at the time of PW Prior to Final Map Public Final Map approval for Tract 7711, the Final and Improvement Works Map for Neighborhood 2 (Tract 7712) has not Plans Fire yet been approved, the Developer shall be responsible for securing an emergency vehicle access easement (EVAE) and constructing the necessary roadway improvements through Parcel 2 of Tract 7515 to provide a second access to the site from Street A as shown on the Stage II PD Phasing Plan, Sheet PD2.7. The final location and design of the emergency vehicle access road through Parcel 2 of Tract 7515 shall be approved by the Alameda County Fire Department. The Final Map for Tract 7711 shall not be approved until the EVAE through Parcel 2 of Tract 7515 has been granted to the City by separate instrument. 54. Emergency Vehicle Access. Construction of PW Final Map and Public the emergency vehicle access road between F improvement plans, Works Neighborhoods 1 & 2 and through Parcel 2 of occupancy of 31St Tract 7515 connecting to Street A shall be unit in N1 completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Fire Marshall prior to the issuance of Final Occupancy for the thirty first (31St) unit within Neighborhood 1 (Tract 7711). 55. Parcel 10 Grading. Final grading on Parcel PW Grading, Public 10 of Tract 7515, including construction of the improvement plans Works proposed four foot dry stack retaining wall along Street A shall be completed with Tract 7711 such that no additional grading on Parcel 10 will be required when grading Tracts 7713 or 7714. 56. Parcel 11 Grading. The portions of Parcel 11 PW Grading, Public of Tract 7515 that are upslope from Tract improvement plans Works 7711 shall be finish graded with Tract 7711 to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 57. Grading within Contra Costa County. Final PW Final Map, issuance Public Grading within Contra Costa County north of of grading permit Works Tract 7711, including the proposed herpetological fence as shown in the Tentative Map, shall be completed with Tract 7711. The Developer shall provide evidence of a Grading Permit, or similar approval, from Contra Costa County for the required grading prior to approval of the Final Map for Tract 7711. 58. Landscape Improvements: All landscape PW Improvement Plans, Public plantings, irrigation and other improvements Final Map Works as shown in the Site Development Review package within Parcel 10 of Tract 7515 and on Parcel 11 of Tract 7515 upslope of Tract 7711 shall be completed with Tract 7711. Landscape Plans for these improvements shall be approved concurrently with the Improvement Plans, Tract Improvement Agreement and Final Map for Tract 7711. TRACT 7712 (Neighborhood 2) 59. Private Streets: The Developer shall dedicate PW Final Map Public private street right -of -way and install complete Works street improvements, including landscaping, for the proposed private streets — Street D, Street L, Street M, Street N and Street O — within the development as shown on the Tentative Map and the Site Development Review package. 60. Access Gate. The Developer shall install the PW Improvement Plans Public access gate and all appurtenances on Street Works L as shown in the Site Development Review package at the connection to B Street. The gate shall allow vehicles to exit Neighborhood 2 on to B Street and allow both ingress and egress to /from Neighborhood 2 to emergency vehicles. 61. Parcel 11 Grading: The portions of Parcel 11 PW Grading, Public of Tract 7515 that are upslope from Tract Improvement Plans Works 7712 shall be finish graded with Tract 7712 to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The Developer shall also construct all drainage facilities including, but not limited to concrete ditches, as shown on the Tentative Map, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 62. Parcel 12 Grading: Final grading on Parcel PW Grading, Public 12 of Tract 7515, including the proposed four Improvement Plans Works foot high dry stack retaining wall along Street A, shall be completed with Tract 7712 to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 63. Landscape Improvements: All landscape PW Improvement Plans Public plantings, irrigation and other improvements P Works as shown in the Site Development Review package within Parcels 11 and 12 of Tract 7515 shall be completed with Tract 7712. Landscape Plans for these improvements shall be approved concurrently with the Improvement Plans, Tract Improvement Agreement and Final Map for Tract 7712. TRACT 7713 (Neighborhood 3) 64. Private Streets. The Developer shall dedicate PW Final Map Public private street right -of -way and install complete Works street improvements for the proposed private streets — Street P, Alley A, Alley B, Alley C, Alley D and Alley E — within the development as shown on the Tentative Map and the Site Development Review package. 65. Street P. The Developer shall dedicate and PW Final Map Public secure the dedication of right -of -way and Works install roadway and utility improvements for Street P from the intersection with Street E to the northeastern boundary of the site as shown on the Tentative Map. Roadway improvements shall include all improvements between back -of -curbs and sidewalk improvements along the Tract 7713 frontage. Street P is a private road with a right -of -way width of forty six feet (46'). The applicant shall dedicate twenty three feet (23') of the required right -of way for Street P. The applicant shall also facilitate and secure the dedication of the remaining twenty three feet (23') of required right -of -way by the adjacent parcel owner (Parcel 4 of Tract 7515). Dedication of the required right -of -way by the owner of Parcel 4 of Tract 7515 shall be recorded prior to approval of the Final Map for Tract 7713. 66. Alley E. The Developer shall dedicate and PW Final Map Public secure the dedication of right -of -way and Works install complete roadway and utility improvements for Alley E between Street C and Street P as shown on the Tentative Map. Alley E is a private alley with a right -of -way width of twenty feet (20'). The applicant shall dedicate ten feet (10') of the required right -of way for Alley E. The applicant shall also facilitate and secure the dedication of the remaining ten feet (10') of required right -of- way by the adjacent parcel owner (Parcel 4 of Tract 7515). Dedication of the required right - of -way by the owner of Parcel 4 of Tract 7515 shall be recorded prior to approval of the Final Map for Tract 7713. 67. Parcel B. Parcel B shall be a private common PW Final Map Public area owned and maintained by the F Works Homeowner's Association. The Developer Fire shall dedicate to the public a minimum ten foot (10') wide Emergency Vehicle Access Easement (EVAE) and Trail Easement through Parcel B to provide access from Street P to Street A as shown on Page 4 of the Tentative Map. Final Easement geometry shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer and Fire Marshall. 68. Parcel 10 Grading. The portions of Parcel 10 PW that are upslope from Tract 7713 shall be finish graded with Tract 7713 to the satisfaction of the City Engineer such that no additional grading on Parcel 10 will be required when grading Tract 7711. 69. Landscape Improvements: All landscape PW Improvement Plans Public plantings, irrigation and other improvements Works as shown in the Site Development Review package within the Common Area Parcels A and B shall be completed with Tract 7713. Landscape Plans for these improvements shall be approved concurrently with the Improvement Plans, Tract Improvement Agreement and Final Map for Tract 7713. TRACT 7714 (Neighborhood 4) 70. Private Streets. The Developer shall dedicate PW Final Map Public private street right -of -way and install complete Works street improvements for the proposed private streets — Street P, Street Q, Street R and Alley E — within the development as shown on the Tentative Map and the Site Development Review package. 71. Street P. The Developer shall dedicate and PW Final Map and Public secure the dedication of right -of -way and Improvement plans Works install roadway and utility improvements for Street P between Alley E and Street Q as shown on the Tentative Map. Roadway improvements shall include all improvements between back -of -curbs and sidewalk improvements along the Tract 7714 frontage. Street P is a private road with a right -of -way width of forty six feet (46'). The applicant shall dedicate twenty three feet (23') of the required right -of way for Street P. The applicant shall also facilitate and secure the dedication of the remaining twenty three feet (23') of required right -of -way by the adjacent parcel owner (Parcel 3 of Tract 7515). Dedication of the required right -of -way by the owner of Parcel 3 of Tract 7515 shall be recorded prior to approval of the Final Map for Tract 7714. 72. Alley E. The Developer shall dedicate and PW Final Map Public secure the dedication of right -of -way and Works install complete roadway and utility improvements for Alley E between Street C and Street P as shown on the Tentative Map. Alley E is a private alley with a right -of -way width of twenty feet (20'). The applicant shall dedicate ten feet (10') of the required right -of way for Alley E. The applicant shall also facilitate and secure the dedication of the remaining ten feet (10') of required right -of- way by the adjacent parcel owner (Parcel 3 of Tract 7515). Dedication of the required right - of -way by the owner of Parcel 3 of Tract 7515 shall be recorded prior to approval of the Final Map for Tract 7714. 73. Parcel A. Parcel A shall be a private common PW Final Map Public area to be owned and maintained by the P Works Homeowner's Association. 74. Private Yard and Access Easements: The PW Final Map Public Private Yard Easements and Access Works Easements over the paseos shall be shown on the Final Map to be dedicated under separate instrument. 75. Parcel 10 Grading. The portions of Parcel 10 PW Grading Plans Public that are upslope from Tract 7714 shall be Works finish graded with Tract 7714 to the satisfaction of the City Engineer such that no additional grading on Parcel 10 will be required when grading Tract 7711. 76. Grading within Contra Costa County. Final PW Final Map, Issuance Public Grading within Contra Costa County north of of grading permit Works Tract 7714, including the proposed herpetological fence as shown on the Tentative Map, shall be completed with Tract 7714. The Developer shall provide evidence of a Grading Permit, or similar approval, from Contra Costa County for the required grading prior to approval of the Final Map for Tract 7714. 77. Landscape Improvements: All landscape PW Improvement Plans Public plantings, irrigation and other improvements and Final Map Works as shown in the Site Development Review package within the Common Area Parcel A shall be completed with Tract 7714. Landscape Plans for these improvements shall be approved concurrently with the Improvement Plans, Tract Improvement Agreement and Final Map for Tract 7714. TRACT 7715 (Neighborhood 5) 78. Private Streets. The Developer shall dedicate PW Final Map Public private street right -of -way and install complete Works street improvements for the proposed private streets — Street F, Alley F and Alley G — within the development as shown on the Tentative Map and the Site Development Review package. 79. Street F. The Developer shall dedicate and PW Final Map and Public secure the dedication of right -of -way and Improvement plans Works install roadway and utility improvements for Street F between Street C and Street D as shown on the Tentative Map. Roadway improvements shall include all improvements between back -of -curbs and sidewalk improvements along the Tract 7715 frontage. Street F is a private collector road with a right - of -way width of forty six feet (46'). The applicant shall dedicate twenty three feet (23') of the required right -of way for Street F. The applicant shall also facilitate and secure the dedication of the remaining twenty three feet (23') of required right -of -way by the adjacent parcel owner (Parcel 6 of Tract 7515). Dedication of the required right -of -way by the owner of Parcel 6 of Tract 7515 shall be recorded prior to approval of the Final Map for Tract 7715. 80. Landscape Improvements: All landscape PW Final Map and Public plantings, irrigation and other improvements Improvement plans Works as shown in the Site Development Review package within the Common Area Parcels A and B shall be completed with Tract 7715. Landscape Plans for these improvements shall be approved concurrently with the Improvement Plans, Tract Improvement Agreement and Final Map for Tract 7715. TRACT 7716 (Neighborhood 6) 81. Private Streets. The Developer shall dedicate PW Final Map Public private street right -of -way and install complete Works street improvements for the proposed private streets — Street F, Alley H, Alley 1, Alley J, Alley K and Alley L — within the development as shown on the Tentative Map and the Site Development Review package. 82. Private Alley Areas from Street D. The PW Final Map Public Developer shall dedicate private street right- P Improvement Plans Works of -way and install complete street improvements for the adjacent Street D following areas shown on the Tentative Map area between Lots 14/15 and area between Lots 16/17, area between Lots 18/19 and area between Lots 20/21 — within the development and shown on the Tenetative Map /Site Development Review package. Areas shall be given Parcel designations on the Final Map and given Alley designations on the Improvement Plans. 83. Street F. The Developer shall dedicate and PW Final Map Public secure the dedication of right -of -way and Improvement Plans Works install roadway and utility improvements for Street F between Street C and Street D as shown on the Tentative Map. Roadway improvements shall include all improvements between back -of -curbs and sidewalk improvements along the Tract 7716 frontage. Street F is a private collector road with a right - of -way width of forty six feet (46'). The applicant shall dedicate twenty three feet (23') of the required right -of way for Street F. The applicant shall also facilitate and secure the dedication of the remaining twenty three feet (23') of required right -of -way by the adjacent parcel owner (Parcel 5 of Tract 7515). Dedication of the required right -of -way by the owner of Parcel 5 of Tract 7515 shall be recorded prior to approval of the Final Map for Tract 7716. 84. Landscape Improvements: All landscape PW Final Map Public plantings, irrigation and other improvements Improvement Plans Works as shown in the Site Development Review package within the Common Area Parcels shall be completed with Tract 7716. Landscape Plans for these improvements shall be approved concurrently with the Improvement Plans, Tract Improvement Agreement and Final Map for Tract 7716. TRACT 8170 (Neighborhood 7) 85. Private Streets. The Developer shall dedicate PW Final Map Public private street right -of -way and install complete Works street improvements for the proposed private streets — Street S, Alley M, Alley N, Alley O, Alley P and Alley Q — within the development as shown on the Tentative Map and the Site Development Review package. 86. Street S. The Developer shall dedicate and PW Final Map Public secure the dedication of right -of -way and Improvement Plans Works install roadway and utility improvements for Street S between Street C and Street D as shown on the Tentative Map. Roadway improvements shall include all improvements between back -of -curbs and sidewalk improvements along the Tract 8170 frontage. Street S is a private collector road with a right - of -way width of forty six feet (46'). The applicant shall dedicate twenty three feet (23') of the required right -of way for Street S. The applicant shall also facilitate and secure the dedication of the remaining twenty three feet (23') of required right -of -way by the adjacent parcel owner (Parcel 8 of Tract 7515). Dedication of the required right -of -way by the owner of Parcel 8 of Tract 7515 shall be recorded prior to approval of the Final Map for Tract 8170. 87. Landscape Improvements: All landscape PW Final Map Public plantings, irrigation and other improvements Improvement Plans Works as shown in the Site Development Review package within the Common Area Parcels A — D shall be completed with Tract 8170. Landscape Plans for these improvements shall be approved concurrently with the Improvement Plans, Tract Improvement Agreement and Final Map for Tract 8170. TRACT 8169 (Neighborhood 8) 88. Private Streets. The Developer shall dedicate PW Final Map Public private street right -of -way and install complete Improvement Plans Works street improvements for the proposed private streets — Street S, Street T and Street U — within the development as shown on the Tentative Map and the Site Development Review package. 89. Street S. The Developer shall dedicate and PW Final Map Public secure the dedication of right -of -way and Improvement Plans Works install roadway and utility improvements for Street S between Street C and Street D as shown on the Tentative Map. Roadway improvements shall include all improvements between back -of -curbs and sidewalk improvements along the Tract 8169 frontage. Street S is a private collector road with a right - of -way width of forty six feet (46'). The applicant shall dedicate twenty three feet (23') of the required right -of way for Street S. The applicant shall also facilitate and secure the dedication of the remaining twenty three feet (23') of required right -of -way by the adjacent parcel owner (Parcel 7 of Tract 7515). Dedication of the required right -of -way by the owner of Parcel 7 of Tract 7515 shall be recorded prior to approval of the Final Map for Tract 8169. 90. Landscape Improvements: All landscape PW On going Standard plantings, irrigation and other improvements as shown in the Site Development Review package within the common areas shall be completed with Tract 8170. Landscape Plans for these improvements shall be approved concurrently with the Improvement Plans, Tract Improvement Agreement and Final Map for Tract 8170. PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD CONDITIONS: GENERAL 91. Developer shall comply with the following City PW On going Standard of Dublin Public Works Standard Conditions of Approval ( "Standard Condition ") unless specifically modified by Project Specific Conditions of Approval above. Standard Conditions shall apply to Vesting Tentative Tract Maps 7515, 7711 -7616, 8169 and 8170. 92. The Developer shall comply with the PW On going Standard Subdivision Map 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 following). 93. The Developer shall defend, indemnify, and PW On going Standard 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 related to this project (Tract Map 8102) 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. 94. In the event that there needs to be clarification PW On going Standard 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 project. 95. If there are conflicts between the Tentative PW On going Standard Map approval and the SDR approval pertaining to mapping or public improvements the Tentative Map shall take precedent. Agreement and Bonds 96. The Developer shall enter into a Tract PW First Final Map & Standard Improvement Agreement with the City for all Successive Maps 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. 97. The Developer shall provide performance PW First Final Map & Standard (100 %), and labor & material (100 %) Successive Maps 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 98. The Developer shall pay all applicable fees in PW Zone 7 and Standard effect at the time of building permit issuance Parkland In -Lieu including, but not limited to, Planning fees, Fees due prior to Building fees, Dublin San Ramon Services filing each Final District fees, Public Facilities fees, Dublin Map, other fees Unified School District School Impact fees, required with Public Works Traffic Impact fees, Alameda issuance of building County Fire Services fees, Noise Mitigation permits fees, Inclusionary Housing In -Lieu fees, Alameda County Flood and Water Conservation District (Zone 7) Drainage and Water Connection fees and any other fees as noted in the Development Agreement. 99. The Developer shall dedicate parkland or pay PW Prior to filing final Standard in -lieu fees in the amounts and at the times map set forth in City of Dublin Resolution No. 60- 99, or in any resolution revising these amounts and as implemented by the Administrative Guidelines adopted by Resolution 195 -99. Permits 100. Developer shall obtain an Encroachment PW Start of work Standard Permit from the Public Works Department for all construction 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. 101. Developer shall obtain a Grading /Sitework PW Start of work Standard Permit from the Public Works Department for all grading and private site improvements that serves more that one lot or residential condominium unit. 102. Developer shall obtain all permits required by PW Start of work Standard other agencies including, but not limited to Alameda County 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 103. All submittals of plans and Final Maps shall PW Approval of Standard comply with the requirements of the "City of improvement plans Dublin Public Works Department Improvement or final map Plan Submittal Requirements ", and the "City of Dublin Improvement Plan Review Check List ". 104. The Developer will be responsible for PW Approval of Standard submittals and reviews to obtain the approvals improvement plans of all participating non -City agencies. The or final map Alameda County Fire Department and the Dublin San Ramon Services District shall approve and sign the Improvement Plans. 105. Developer shall submit a Geotechnical PW Approval of Standard Report, which includes street pavement improvement plans, sections and grading recommendations. grading plans or final map 106. Developer shall provide the Public Works PW Acceptance of Standard Department a digital vectorized file of the improvements and "master" CAD files for the project when the release of bonds Final Map has been approved. Digital raster copies are not acceptable. The digital 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. Final Map 107. All Final Maps shall be substantially in PW Approval of Final Standard accordance with the Tentative Maps approved Map with this application, unless otherwise modified by these conditions. Multiple final maps may be filed in phases, provided that each phase is consistent with the tentative map, that phasing progresses in an orderly and logical manner and adequate infrastructure is installed with each phase to serve that phase as a stand -alone project that is not dependent upon future phasing for infrastructure. 108. All rights -of -way and easement dedications PW Approval of Final Standard required by the Tentative Map shall be shown Map on the Final Map. 109. Any phasing of the final mapping or PW Approval of Final Standard improvements of a Tentative Map is subject to Map the approval and conditions of the City Engineer. 110. Street names shall be assigned to each PW Approval of Final Standard public /private street pursuant to Municipal Map Code Chapter 7.08. The approved street names shall be indicated on the Final Map. 111. PW Monuments to be Standard All Final Maps shall include street monuments shown on final map to be set in all public streets. and installed prior to acceptance of improvements Easements 112. The Developer shall obtain abandonment from PW Approval of Standard all applicable public agencies of existing improvement plans easements and right of ways that will no or appropriate final longer be used. map 113. The Developer shall acquire easements, PW Approval of Standard and /or obtain rights -of -entry from the adjacent improvement plans property owners for any improvements on or appropriate final their property. The easements and /or rights- map of -entry shall be in writing and copies furnished to the City Engineer. Grading 114. The Grading Plan shall be in conformance PW Approval of grading Standard with the recommendations of the Geotechnical plans or issuance of Report, the approved Tentative Map and /or grading permits. Site Development Review, and the City design On going standards & ordinances. In case of conflict between the soil engineer's recommendations and City ordinances, the City Engineer shall determine which shall apply. 115. A detailed Erosion Control Plan shall be PW Approval of grading Standard included with the Grading Plan approval. The plans or issuance of plan shall include detailed design, location, grading permits. and maintenance criteria of all erosion and On going sedimentation control measures. 116. Tiebacks or structural fabric for retaining walls PW Approval of grading Standard shall not cross property lines, or shall be plans or issuance of located a minimum of 2' below the finished grading permits. grade of the upper lot. On going Improvements 117. The public improvements shall be constructed PW Approval of grading Standard generally as shown on the Tentative Map plans or issuance of and /or Site Development Review. However, grading permits. the approval of the Tentative Map and /or Site On going Development Review is not an approval of the specific design of the drainage, sanitary sewer, water, and street improvements. 118. All public improvements shall conform to the PW Approval of Standard City of Dublin Standard Plans and design improvement plans requirements and as approved by the City or start of Engineer. construction. On going 119. Public streets shall be at a minimum 1% slope PW Approval of Standard with minimum gutter flow of 0.7% around improvement plans bumpouts. Private streets and alleys shall be or start of at minimum 0.5% slope. construction. On going 120. Curb Returns on arterial and collector streets PW Approval of Standard shall be 40 -foot radius, all internal public improvement plans streets curb returns shall be minimum 30 -foot or start of radius (36 -foot with bump outs) and private construction. streets /alleys shall be a minimum 20 -foot On going radius, or as approved by the City Engineer. Curb ramp locations and design shall conform to the most current Title 24 and Americans with Disabilities Act requirements and as approved by the City Traffic Engineer. 121. Any decorative pavers /paving installed within PW Approval of Standard City right -of -way shall be done to the improvement plans satisfaction of the City Engineer. Where or start of decorative paving is installed at signalized construction. intersections, pre- formed traffic signal loops On going shall be put under the decorative pavement. Decorative pavements shall not interfere with the placement of traffic control devices, including pavement markings. All turn lane stripes, stop bars and crosswalks shall be delineated with concrete bands or color pavers to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Maintenance costs of the decorative paving shall be the responsibility of the Homeowners Association. 122. The Developer shall install all traffic signs and PW Occupancy of units Standard pavement marking as required by the City or acceptance of Engineer. improvements. 123. Street light standards and luminaries shall be PW Occupancy of units Standard designed and installed per approval of the City or acceptance of Engineer. The maximum voltage drop for improvements. streetlights is 5 %. 124. The Developer shall construct bus stops and PW Occupancy of units Standard shelters at the locations designated and or acceptance of approved by the LAVTA and the City improvements. Engineer. The Developer shall pay the cost of procuring and installing these improvements. 125. Developer shall construct all potable and PW Occupancy of units Standard recycled water and sanitary sewer facilities or acceptance of required to serve the project in accordance improvements. with DSRSD master plans, standards, specifications and requirements. 126. Fire hydrant locations shall be approved by PW Occupancy of units Standard the Alameda County Fire Department. A or acceptance of raised reflector blue traffic marker shall be improvements. installed in the street opposite each hydrant. 127. The Developer shall furnish and install street PW Occupancy of units Standard name signs for the project to the satisfaction or acceptance of of the City Engineer. improvements. 128. Developer shall construct gas, electric, cable PW Occupancy of units Standard TV and communication improvements within or acceptance of the fronting streets and as necessary to serve improvements. the project and the future adjacent parcels as approved by the City Engineer and the various Public Utility agencies. 129. All electrical, gas, telephone, and Cable TV PW Occupancy of units Standard utilities, shall be underground in accordance or acceptance of with the City policies and ordinances. All improvements. utilities shall be located and provided within public utility easements and sized to meet utility company standards. 130. All utility vaults, boxes and structures, unless PW Occupancy of units Standard specifically approved otherwise by the City or acceptance of Engineer, shall be underground and placed in improvements. landscape areas and screened from public view. Prior to Joint Trench 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 131. The Erosion Control Plan shall be PW On -going as needed Standard implemented between October 15th and April 15th unless otherwise allowed in writing by the City Engineer. The Developer will be responsible for maintaining erosion and sediment control measures for one year following the City's acceptance of the subdivision improvements. 132. If archaeological materials are encountered PW On -going as needed 1993 during construction, construction within 100 EDEIR feet of these materials shall be halted until a MM 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. 133. Construction activities, including the PW On -going as needed Standard maintenance and 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. 134. Developer shall prepare a construction noise PW Start of construction Standard management plan that identifies measures to implementation and be taken to minimize construction noise on on -going as needed 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. 135. Developer shall prepare a plan for PW Start of construction Standard construction traffic interface with public traffic implementation and on any existing public street. Construction on -going as needed traffic and parking may be subject to specific requirements by the City Engineer. 136. The Developer shall be responsible for PW On -going Standard controlling any rodent, mosquito, or other pest problem due to construction activities. 137. The Developer shall be responsible for PW On -going Standard watering or other dust - palliative measures to control dust as conditions warrant or as directed by the City Engineer. 138. The Developer shall provide the Public Works PW Issuance of Building Standard Department with a letter from a registered civil permits or engineer or surveyor stating that the building acceptance of PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this 2014, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk day of pads have been graded to within 0.1 feet of improvements 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 Grading Plans. Storm Water Quality (NPDES) 139. Prior to any clearing or grading, the Developer PW Start of any Standard shall provide the City evidence that a Notice of construction Intent (NOI) has been sent to the California activities 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. 140. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan PW SWPPP to be Standard (SWPPP) shall identify the Best Management prepared prior to Practices (BMPs) appropriate to the project approval of construction activities. The SWPPP shall improvement plans, include the erosion control measures in implementation prior accordance with the regulations outlined in the to start of most current version of the ABAG Erosion and construction and on- Sediment Control Handbook or State going as needed. Construction Best Management Practices Handbook. The Developer is responsible for ensuring that all contractors implement all storm water pollution prevention measures in the SWPPP. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this 2014, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk day of 0 jt "� .• li WALLIS CH DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE DESIGN GUIDELINES MARCH 2014 TRUMARKHOMES GATES +ASSOCIATES ATTACHMENT 2 TO EXHIBIT A • a WALLIS RANCH DESIGN TEAM Community Developer Trumark Homes Architecture Dahlin Group KTGY Landscape Architecture Gates + Associates Civil Engineers MacKay & Somps • • • Page Intentionally Left Blank Table of Contents • s F c T 10 N 0 INTRODUCTION A-2 Overview A-3 Illustrative Site Plan S F c T 10 N ® COMMUNITY FORM B-2 Overview B-3 Community Form Diagram B-6 Community Entry at Tassajara Road B-8 The Bridge B-9 Water Quality Basin B-10 Entry Gates B-13 The Antone Pavilion B-14 Community Clubhouse B-20 The Main Spine B-21 Neighborhood 1 Gateway S E C T 10 N ® STREETS Est TRAILS C-3 Streetscape Plan C-4 Street Sections C-6 Trails Plan C-7 Trails Sections • s F C T 1 o N m WALLS & FENCING D-2 Fencing Plan D-3 Fence Details D-9 Monumentation D-11 Fencing Diagrams S F c T 10 N M LANDSCAPE FRAMEWORK E-2 Street Tree Plan E-4 Street Tree Palette E-8 Plant Palette E-13 Enhanced Paving Plan E-14 Signage E-15 Landscape Accessories E-16 Lighting E-18 Public Art SFC-Tic� ® OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT & RESPONSIBILITIES F-2 Maintenance Responsibilities F-3 Maintenance Diagram • F-4 Utilities Screening Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines i Page Intentionally Left Blank < T Introduction Wallis Ranch is located on approximately 184 acres in the northernmost portion of Dublin. Wallis Ranch presents a rare opportunity to create a new community that carefully blends traces of early California character with a modern touch of today's lifestyle. Natural riparian corridors and rolling open space help to frame the edges of the community as the undulating terrain of Wallis Ranch provides dramatic open vistas and view corridors that help to build its character. The creation of pedestrian-oriented neighborhoods was a majorfeature in the overall design of Wallis Ranch.Each of the eight neighborhoods embodies their own unique characterworkingto create a sharedsense of community throughout the generous mix of housing types. Walkable tree-lined streets,paths and trails,and interconnected spaces,all anchored by a community park and clubhouse that appeal to all residents. The overall landscape theme is a refined interpretation of an Agrarian/California Ranch landscape. Stone walls, orchard grids, and native grass plantings are used to reinforce the theme in key areas. Landscape and open space guidelines described on the following pages are intended to achieve this goal. Basic Design Principles • The streetscape system provides a visually unifying thread for the community.The circulation system is a clear hierarchy of streets that logically steps down in size from the Upper Loop Road to the cul-de-sacs. Street widths and landscape character reinforce the friendly neighborhood ambiance. • The open space system provides the community recreation opportunities and celebrates the agrarian setting. • The community fencing and wall system will be designed to visually recede into the setting to the extent possible. • Management of open space and maintenance of common areas will be an integral component of the landscape system. J* city of Dublin E*= :• :0 e ;w 11 a *Overview 0 2 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines 0 j y [J • Q _ ` ♦STS• 1. � • • `.�� ,� •:,'�is / •J k,`r■ �,•• " " ��''' of • •n•� 1I, r �1 AAA �ss�'�,�'•��,� �•„�y.� 1 •,■` •� tg: }�� y�ill .F fw 1�- •■ i ice`- �,•♦ � • ��• R ten • ' `\ M!iri c:r a l,��' rte' r�; � 1\ ��\• • •, wel fit:■ t�■r• ��•R• ay e• �•y rs��Via• •y„ � A •� �• � A �� . • ' �l' ai �a—� •� �a_ s � • .... �.i,•,•�•� •'• •—•�•'•� � �� q � `r �; � � .,,� iii ,. QPage Intentionally Left Blank i 1 ( T I \ ® Community Form Wallis Ranch integrates the simple and informal character of the California farm &t ranch vernacular of the region and is reinterpreted in a way that captures the essence of the local character. With an emphasis on place making, Wallis Ranch invites its visitors in with a sequence of experiences that work to build the character of the community. • The Main Entry sets the thematic tone by incorporating many of the materials that are present throughout the community.The windmill and water tank reinforce the ranch theme as well as serve as some of the community's iconic landmarks. • The Bridge with a prominent mix of rustic charm and contemporary lines,builds a sense of drama as residents and guests traverse it. • The Anton Pavilion greets residents and guests as it overlooks the water quality basin.An ode to the historic school house that once called Wallis Ranch home,the Anton Pavilion serves as a gathering place along the multi-use trail. • The Entry Gate and pedestrian portal mark the arrival to the neighborhoods of Wallis Ranch. • The Community Clubhouse is the heart of Wallis Ranch.All eight neighborhoods surround this space which serves as the primary community gathering space. 1 4 ' • The Main Spine is the backbone of the community carrying the theme throughout the neighborhoods. Z' 1 �ommunit y Form ® 2 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines C 0 ° o LL4 ° w v W o_ U U c c o E c 3 LU E E Y w ri. U a > J O U Is uj • U y i ` I � 1 � o t i = d E °° u m ° i 1 ♦ CL 1 � c V Q d! [ ME 1 1 1 � to 4+ c y LLI d O H �0+ f 1 = o a � o N 05 c c 1 w s v v c v c s 1 b N m. O �. ` la u tm v 00 am won 0 o v c V o s o l7 -K:7 {Z O O 0 0 3 M 0c c a ' ° -o O c > z , y _ ' Z d \ s Z ° AVON / E= v ` �, 0 ` r - a 0 co MINIM "Oft, ftftb O _ ' ° 14%N, ° O ` � s / � s ° oo X40° TD Z / Z Z MINE 1 soo MEW / ' i NEW 0 •- / / 1 ° / dw •� EON , too 00 NONE %b mm / / MENEM Page Intentionally Left Blank • Page Intentionally Left Blank • 35-foot windmill Orchard trees .� d�►<. 14-foot water tank with project identification Trough pool(concrete or galvanized) • Specimen trees Dry stacked stone wall Landscape boulders&gr es Scale:1116"-1' Elevation B-B-Community Entry Monument Scale.NTS Section A-A-Community Entry North Side � Two 24-foot travel lanes • Planted 9-foot median • Windrow trees south • Orchard trees north • 12-foot pedestrian trail connections • Themed stone walls The Community Entry at Tassajara Road starts the experiential sequence of arrival with a gentle transition from the urban bustle of the outside world to the hearth of the home. The rural character of Tassajara streetscape evolves into orchard grids and low stone walls that define the community entry. The road continues over a country bridge and creek to arrive at the Community Entry Gates welcoming residents home. ezommunity Entry at Tassajara Road ® 6 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines I / 12-foot Pedestrian path 4-foot Dry stacked stone wall f Orchard planting Windmill&r tank structure Drought tolerant grass seed mix Specimen trees Boulders Unit paver enhanced _ paving bands Planted median Specimen trees ? Boulders Groundcover roses Linear windrow of columnar trees 1, 12-foot Bioswale 4-foot Dry stacked stone j wall 1 Riparian open space/ i existing trees ' 12-foot pedestrian path 1 connecting to public park 1 / Public park I � Wil1► yn�."'=a . Scale:T'=50' 10► • Plan-community Entry at Tassajara Road 7 Community Form r t t t r Scale:I"=40' Bridge Elevation 14-foot street light Luminaire:Lumec Candela(CAND1-40W42LED4K- R-PC-C-RLE3-V OLT-BKTX) Bracket:PC-lA-BKTX Pole:APR4F-14-LBC4C-BKTX Color.Textured Bronze 5-foot Stone veneer light plinth Veneer:Coronado Stone(Rocky Mountain Ledge Color.Bitterroot Joints:Drystack 8-inch Cast-concrete timber railing with 1/9"steel members in 4-inch grids Painted steel decorative brackets Existing concrete bridge parapet wall '-o° walk stained to compliment veneer finish 8'-0"Clear Path Board Formed Concrete Formliner 5 4'-6" v 28'-0" levationEnlargementY Scale:U8"=1' Stone Veneer Board formed Concrete LumecCandcla The Bridge is a signature feature that links the Community Entry to the neighborhoods,signifying a"crossing over"from the outside world into the comfort of home.Striking in its design and use, The Bridge spans a valley with a seasonal stream,to be enjoyed by both pedestrians and vehicular passengers.Designed cast-concrete timbers,stone light plinths,and a bike guardrail,The Bridge is charming and safe, all the while offering stunning views. Final design of bike guardrail to be determined through the public art program process. OFhe Bridge ® 8 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines Entry wall Community entry Antone Pavilion Dry creek bed Guest entry access box I Low flow channel with - willow massings Secondary access gate y`" Enhance pedestrian trail • *_-�` - crossing t r > i• r • l Basin bottom with r wetland/wildflower mix I Detention basin Vegetated basin slopes Proposed riparian ' d / vegetation y 1 Existing riparian vegetation Public park - r }` 10-foot meandering asphalt trail at park edge i h '�• Edge of bridge } J, � t t j Scale 1" 60 O Plan-Entry Gates&Water 2uality Basin Overview i Water Quality Basin 9 Community Form i O O Antone Pavilion 0 Main community entry gate Pedestrian portal Orchard trees Unit paver enhanced 0 o \ paving uaiiub Guest turn-out with keypad ° entry point o 0 Specimen trees o Enhanced pedestrian crossings to Public Park 0 0 0 Q O 0 0 • o • o • • 0 o Stone wall Neighborhood 2 EVA/exit gate Public Park 4 Community Entry Gates Scale:I"=40'6 The Entry Gates to Wallis Ranch establish a unique sense of place. The stonework and steel •% framework introduces the look and feel of the community,while double-swing automatic doors open to welcome residents home. A separate pedestrian portal accommodates residents on foot along the main and secondary entries.Project identifiers let residents and guests know they have arrived at Wallis Ranch. acommunity Entry Gates ® 10 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines r_ I Pedestrian portal +� Decorative light sconce ® le-swing vehicular gates "Final gate design to be determined through the public art program process a wall wall with co concrete wall with community identification 12 4' 12' B' S' 22' Water 15' Quality Basin Neighborhood 2 Landscape Travel lane Median Travel Lane Parkway Walk Landscape Setback Q ty Scale.1116"=1' Section A-A-Main Entry Gate Elevation q.� Double-swing vehicul p' - gates Final gate design to be determined through the 6-foot stone monument public art program process 1 I ` Dry Stacked Stone Theme 11111111 1 Wall WiConcrete split rail fence i 5 Neighborhood 2 Walk Travel Lane Walk (Emergency Vehicle Access&r Exit Only Scale.1116"=1' Section B-B-Neighborhood 2 EVA/Exit Gate 13'-0* _ Standing Seam Metal Roof ' s ■ arrrrrrNr fts'Columns Board Famed CGnerele VVall Pedestrian Portal at Main Entry Gate Community Entry Gates 11 Community Form k Standing Seam Metal Roof a -- 8"x8" Columns Board Formed Concrete Wall f \S. Pedestrian Portal Elevation Scale:114"=1' 6'-6" _ Decorative Sconce Barn Light Electric Luminaire:Newport(UCR16) Bracket:WM30 9'-10" Glass:Ribbed Finish:Sage[55] - Stone Veneer Coronado Stone s Model:Rocky Mountain Ledge Color:Bitterroot Joints:Drystack Pedestrian Portal Side Views Scale:114"-F Wommunity Entry ates y 0 12 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines Bike parking Water feature Antone Pavilion O • � , Pet watering statio.-- O Lawn with seating boulders 1 Overlook deck with seating Interpretive signage O Dry creek with boulders 10-foot asphalt trail with 2-foot decomposed granite shoulders ' Guest turn-out with keypad entry F Detention basin edge o Unit paver enhanced paving bands AntoneFivili'm Enlnrgcrncnt .ak� Dry Creek Bed The Antone Pavilion is a major attraction designed to gather and entertain the community at Wallis Ranch. Acting as a central gathering plaza with indoor and outdoor space,it is the ideal setting for community building holiday festivities, summer concerts, performances, and other events. The dry creek and lawn with boulders contribute to the bucolic setting,while its central location and connection to the main spine and trail corridor make it easily accessible to all residents by foot. IS The Antone Pavilion Community Form 13 ■ I oil 0 R Inspiration-Cameros Inn 0 Central Park is located along the eastern edge of the Spine Road and serves as the village center for the community. A core community amenity,the Central Park also serves as a focal hub for the open space system. The park is designed for major community events as well as passive recreation. The terraced plazas,meandering stone walls, and open lawn areas support the diverse needs of an engaged lifestyle. A tree-lined promenade with the clubhouse in the background is the visual terminus from an intersecting neighborhood street. Homes will front the park on all sides and on-street parking will be provided for residents and visitors. w,ommunity Clubhouse ® 14 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines Orchard Trees Stone Retaining Wall Event Lawn Spa Area ° Fire Pits • Covered Bar ° Fireplace i ° ° `�• \ Seating Area with Water Element � Neighborhood Connection Rose Garden/Screen t Planting Water Play Area ° t Kids Play Area �a wn t Clubhouse(4,50 ` Plaza Entry Alpha Omega Terrace Central Water Feature Lower Garden Terrace Organic Garden Garden Kiosk/Info 1 5-foot Dry Stacked Stone _ Wall *, Focal Platform Scale.]"-80'0 Plan-Community Clubhouse Concept • Community Form 15 Vii; ♦ �,\,, � 0�dA • �► *� ��►�/� , -� _,fit IMM♦��'� - t Orm • •• • •. IM . • • x B - R � c r r i Mori ,ION_°J- � 4' , I, 60-inch Neighborhood Fence 1 ® 5-foot Dry Stacked Stone Wall F 4-foot Dry Stacked Stone Wall- 1 24-inch Flush g' Varies Central Park Neighborhood 2 15' Landscape Setback Concrete Curb Concrete Vertical Curb Trail R/W R/VV Section E-E-Main Spine Collector Street at The Clubhouse/Central Park Scale.l"=20'-0" i Central Park 5' 15' 5' 5' Neighborhood 7 Walk Decomposed Granite Walk Walk Landscape Setback R/W R/W Section H-H-Typical Neighborhood Street"D"at the Clubhouse/Central Park Scale.l"=20' • I WIubhouse Sections ■ 18 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines Orchard trees M Neighborhood 4 g g' S' Central Park Walk Landscape Walk R/W Strip R/W Section G-G-Typical Neighborhood Street"E"at The Clubhouse/Central Park Scale:F Central 5' 15' S' 8' S' Neighborhood 5 Park Walk Decomposed Granite Walk Landscape Walk Landscape Setback Strip R/W R/VV Section H-H-Typical Neighborhood Street"D"at The Clubhouse/Central Park Scale:1"=20' IK ly r Clubhouse Sections Community Form 19 �-- 60°View Fence 2:1 Max 4'to 6'Stone Theme Wall 41 Max Neigh.2 Neigh.5&6 325 15' 295 12' 8' 19 Landscape Setback Landscape R/W Travel Lanes Swale R/W Walk Section-Main Spine Scale:1116"=1' y�r 4 -. its ` Stonc 11'011 Bioswale �r • Two 13-foot travel lanes • 24°flush concrete curbs 4'to 6'stone theme wall • 8-foot pedestrian trail on the east side • 12-foot bioswale • Large canopy trees to the west of the road • Uniform street trees to the _. east side The Main Spine serves as the backbone of the Wallis Ranch Community,extending north from Tassajara Road. The peaceful, rural ambiance of the community is optimized in the character of this entry road The traditional concrete curb and gutter have been eliminated and the road narrowed slightly to inherit a look and feel of the rural nature that came before.The entry road also serves to strengthen the network of pedestrian trails and bike paths by connecting neighborhoods to each other,to the parks,and to the perimeter open space system. Offic Main Spine ® 20 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines Orchard trees ° ° Split rail fence Paseo connection ° L Unit paver a ° enhanced paving L , ° bands A it G O ° ° O _ ° Entry monolith Corner accent trees ° Dry st ed stone \ \ L Landscape boulders wall ° Multi-trunk specime trees Orchard trees Neighborhood 1 Gateway Enlargement Scale:l"=60' The Neighborhood Gateways are the last of the community and neighborhood entry markers, signifying that the resident or visitor is almost to their destination. Gateway elements may include stone walls, monoliths, decorative lighting, street signage, and ornamental planting to complement the entryways. Neighborhood Gateway Community Form 21 • Page Intentionally Left Blank • • SECTION ® Streets lam. Trails � I t I' Legend Trail Edge Section L' Main Spine Section — Typical Neighborhood Street-Monolithic Typical Neighborhood Street-Separated 1 ; E Design Concept The hierarchy of the streets form a strong framework for Scale.r"=i000' 40' the community.Flush curbs along the main spine road build on the tradition of rural roads.The streetscape system enhances the pedestrian experience and visually unifies the community. Streetscape Plan Streets &z Trails 3 10'Asphan Trail with 2' Decomposed Granite Shoulders Concrete Split Rail Fence 1'Herptelogical Barrier Note: Trail surface should be crowned and slope of trail surface and shoulders should not exceed 2% 8'Landscape Strip 5'Walk 14 2 Varies Trail Corridor R/N 15' Varies Bioswale Trail Edge Section Scalc l 20'-0" 60"Neighborhood 2 View Fence 4'Dry Stacked Stone Wall 15' 24"Flush Concrete Curb 12' 8' Landscape Setback Bioswale Concrete Trail RM R11N Main Spine Section Scale:1%20'-0" — - The Trail Edge section runs along The Main Spine Section is the primary the edge of the site by Tassajara way in and out of the community and t Creek.They are designed to accommodates vehicles,bicyclists, be multi-use,accommodating and pedestrians.The street is lined pedestrians,vehicles and trail users. with trees and parkways,with a A bioswale captures and filters bioswale on one side to capture f runoff before it enters the creek. runoff.View fences and stone walls (2)18-foot vehicular travel add visual interest. lanes a 29.5-foot travel lane with 5-foot pedestrian walkway flush curbs a 14-foot trail corridor for a 15-foot landscape setback bikes and hikers a 8-foot pedestrian trail Key Map a 15-foot bioswale a 12-foot bioswale Witriciet Sections ® 4 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines ® A. 4 i`l 5'Monolithic Sidewalk I � RNV RNV Typical Neighborhood Street-Monolithic scale:3/32"=r r � i 8'Landscape Strip 5'Separated Sidewalk RNV RNV Typ=Neighborhood Street-Separated Scale.3/32" r = Sections E-E and F-F are quiet internal roads ideal for walking.Both sides of the street are lined with trees and sidewalks,while the street is wide enough for both vehicles and bicyclists. • (2)18-foot travel lanes • (2)8-foot landscaped parkways • (2)5-foot separated and monolithic pedestrian walkways , Key Map Street Sections Streets &Trails 5 s= da •�� i�w ,'��a�Y w�..". •� O ti d�� ri { 21 "•fir � \�\ti f• 3.4�'�a'iI Wt!MMIl" MIJAIIII 11 J'$ J)�j�ll947 i i� " 10'Asphalt Trail with 2' Decomposed Granite Shoulders Concrete Split Rail Fence 1' Herptelogical Barrier Note: Trail surface should be crowned and slope of trail surface and shoulders should not exceed 2% 14' 2' Varies Trail Corridor W 15' Varies Bioswale Regional Creekside Multi-use Trail Scale:1"=10'-0" OWN" The Regional Creekside Multi-use trail is a wide path designed for a variety of recreational uses,including walking,hiking,jogging,and biking.The path is distanced from the vehicular roadway while a fence protects both people and wildlife. .. • 10-foot asphalt trail • 2-foot decomposed granite shoulders • 15-foot bioswale • Concrete split rail fence between trail and bioswale t Key Map I Trail Sections Streets &s Trails 7 5' Varies Walk PtTE Internal Pedestrian Multi-use Trail Scale.1/8"=1' t iii�•_ The Internal Pedestrian Multi-use Trail is found on several streets and provides safe access throughout the residential parts of the j neighborhood. ' 8-foot parkway I , • 5-foot walkway i Key Map Trail Sections Streets &Trails 8 M < ® Walls & Fencing ...................... • •. fir•'••''• •• r re For Bridge details refer to Section B,page 8. e g end -------- Braided Wire Fence r �;b —••—• Concrete Split Rail Fence with Herpetological Barri ` M ■■■■■ Concrete Split Rail Fence ••••• Neighborhood 2 Interior View Fence Neighborhood 1 Enhanced View Fence V Open Space Interface Fence Stacked Stone Theme Wall Fire Lots Design Concept The fencing throughout the Wallis Ranch neighborhoods enhances visual unification,defines properties,and provides scate:l"=1000' 1 0► security and privacy.The fencing is not allowed to visually dominate.Rather,it is a part of the overall community ambiance. AWWA all & Fencing Plan ® 2 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines 8'-0" MAX 4"x4"Wood Post Ornamental Iron Fence Panel 24�24, 5-0" 4" 3'-0" 6'Good Neighbor Fence 5'View Fence RETURN DIAGRAM Location: Occurs along rear yards where they abut open space and views are possible. Also may be used when the elevation between rear yards is greater than 20'. 5'ENHANCED VIEW FENCE �""" Thin CMU Cap +/-40" y E— 8"x8'x16"CMU Block — -- ——" - Basalite Shotblast Concrete +�-24� Masonry Unit with RainBloc Color 345-Grout to match Location: Located in Neighborhood 4 in spots along the streetscape and in the paseos. CMU WALL 'Will Wall & Fence Details Walls & Fencing 3 Welded 4"x4" Post 1"x2"Tubular Steel Frame W Wire Mesh � ■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■ ■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■111■■■I■ Bottom .r 2"x8" Kick Board IODUIII !N!f+idipi, 1■■■ ■■■I 111'��IIIIIIUIIItiii !f'"i,+uru,a' lnuu+,a n r■�■I Irr III/UI�tlitll{ iu�iirrujn;r',i ur■r■■ Irllrnllrlly..Itu, lf.+++lr.+,.,, . urrrrr■I Ilprlllll��;;l.�l,• +",��,��;,�,,,:.�� iirrrrrii iilr�inl;v'►!;'-;� j„�;;;'.,„,. • ... Neighbor Fence 5'View Fence A0, RETURN DIAGRAM Occurs along rear yards where they abut the main spine in Neighborhood 2. . 4"x4” Post <— Braided Steel Wire } OIL 1 ■a�� .. - -. -- 1 ='. . Located in and around the Central Park/Clubhouse area. ESPALIER FENCE 0----=�� 4�' & Fencc Dctails rt- Guidelines 8'-0" MAX 2„x6„Cap I _. 4"x4" Post Y t 6'-0" t I I - 1"x8"With 1" 2"x4" Bottom Rail Overlap Each Side 1"x6" Kick Board Location: Occurs between lots, separating private yards. 6'GOOD NEIGHBOR FENCE 8'-0"MAX 2"x6"Cap Vertical Wood Lattice I I 6'-0" 4"x4" Post 1"x8"With 1" Overlap Each Side 2"x4" Bottom Rail 1"x6" Kick Board i Location: Fence is setback a minimum of 5'from front facade. This fence is used parallel to the front of the home. Where side yards abut a residential street, •. 6'Lattice-top fence the lattice fence is also used. Where fence is adjacent to the street a minimum ; at corner lot of T landscape buffer is provided between walkway and fence. 6'Good Neighbor fence • 6'LATTICE TOP FENCE e X � N ` X 6'Lattice-top fence to cover 1/4 of 4.5'Solid wood X � fence at corner lot side of house length Optional 4.5'Solid wood fence to > provide additional coverage; Distance varies according to specific house plan maximum 75%coverage of house N SIDE YARD FENCING ON CORNER LOTS Wall & Fence Details Walls &z Fencing 5 Top Rail Ili'iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii i_ii_ii NII it IIIii111NN�it NI 1 11111111 NIIII ' �! - A 1 11111 h pN11 111 1 NI IIIINIIII 1 4f •- Posts p j4- 11$1 11111111/NIIIIIH$1 N 1$ 11151 111 . � � Rail - 'iiii 1111 IIIIIININI/NIINIINNIIININIIIIIIIN/II_ i�ui R F Location: Occurs along rear yards where they abut open space.Also may be used when the elevation between rear yards is greater than 20'. *All wood to be Construction Heart Redwood Fire Hardened/Heavy Timber to meet the Dublin Wildfire management requirements *All wood to be fire retardant treated per section 71 OA.3.2 and 71 OA.4 7A of the California building code for all exterior wood products. GPADE ROL 4 n . V - Location: Located along the multi-use trail and along paseo conditions that abut internal open space areas. ONall & Fence Det , Wallis E 3 Ranch Design e M 6 i 10'-0" MAX BETWEEN T-POSTS 6" `! Metal T-Post Braided and Smooth Location: wire to be 12-1/2"guage Located along creek corridor in open space preserve. BARBED WIRE FENCE Monolith (Height Varies) 10"Thick Board Formed Concrete Wall Height Varies Location: Located in and around the Central Park/Clubhouse area.Also used as a transition wall between the dry stacked stone walls and project monoliths. BOARD FORMED CONCRETE WALL Wall & Fence Details Walls & Fencing 7 ■ 4'-0" Location: Initially located at the main community entry at Tassajara Road and continues along the main spine road up to Neighborhood 1. Height may vary depending on location. DRY STACKED STONE THEME WALL Batter @ 2:12 24"m I g a 2 � g 8 3 Z E L 2 4 t 6 t �' E ODry-stack wall. Fieldstones shall be 3'x 2'x 2'min.Top O Batter face of wall 2-inches for every I-foot of course to be full width of wall and at least 24"thick. height. Lay stones perpendicular to batter,fit tightly. Verify sample with Landscape Architect before ®Drain pipe outfall per grading plan. Allow weep construction. holes 4'o.c.min. Mortar top two courses in place. Rake joints back 4"min. Class II aggregate base compacted to 95%rel.den. Color to be determined based on stone sample. ©Compacted subgrade DRY STACKED STONEWALL(RETAINING) .air.. 2,r � Batter @ 2:12 h 1� 2 E 3 E 4 E 5 (D Dry-stack wall. Fieldstones shall be 18"max. Top course 0 Batter face of wall 2-inches for every I-foot of height. to be at least 24"thick. Verify sample with Landscape Lay stones perpendicular to batter,fit tightly. Architect before construction. ®Class 11 aggregate base compacted to 95%rel.den. O2 Mortar top two courses in place. Rake joints back 4"min. O Compacted subgrade Color to be determined based on stone sample. DRY STACKED STONE WALL(LANDSCAPE) � 3�a � ��'^ � ~ s F "' 1Vall & Fence Details ® 8 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines 13'-0" • Standing Seam ! Metal Roof s 8"x8"Columns Board Formed Concrete Wall PEDESTRIAN PORTAL Scale:3 116"=1' 6'-6" Decorative Sconce T,. Bam Light Electric _ Luminaire:Newport(UCR16) Bracket:WM30 Glass:Ribbed Finish:Sage i55] - Stone Veneer Coronado Stone _ Model:Rocky Mountain Ledge Color:Bitterroot J Joints:Drystack Scale:3116"=1' $ 6,_0„ - r � 3'-6" 1 5'-0" 3-O" Scale:3116"=1' LARGE SECONDARY TERTIARY MONOLITH MONOLITH MONOLITH Monumentation Walls & Fencing 9 i 11411 Lattice fence 00" k I I f I •�",:. 1/411 6'Lattice-top fence x at corner lot 6'Good Neighbor fence X v • X • • X 6'Lattice-top fence to cover 1/4 of • 4.5'Solid wood X • fence at corner lot side of house length fOptional 4.5'Solid wood fence to > ; provide additional coverage; • Distance varies according to specific house plan maximum L9 75%coverage of house SIDE YARD FENCING ON CORNER LOTS Corner Lot Fencing On corner lots, the fence shall overlap a maximum of 25% of the side house length. A view fence may be added where the layout creates a large side yard to create more private space for the homeowner. Special care shall be taken on corner houses to insure that the character of front facing architecture wraps around side elements. Worner Lot Fencing 0 10 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines W 3 4'max.Side Yard Wall i X � Good Neighbor Fence iIi x I ' � x Lattice Fence on 2'max. Retaining Wall(if needed) i I i X- 4 i i , x I Front Yard Retaining '' B Wall 2'max. 5 SE, � I i A i L Y JP8S E ' Y 2aIxY 5' Sidewalk Front Yard Retaining Wall 4'max(if needed). Minimum of 5'From Back of Sidewalk. FRONT&SIDE YARD RETAINING WALL Retaining Walls 1` (2'Max) 1' m Retaining Wall (Max 4') Parkway Walk SECTION B SECTION A Front Yard Retaining Walls Front yard retaining walls shall be a maximum of 4'in height and be stucco to match the overall community theme. The front yard retaining wall shall be located at or behind the PSE.Utilities should be grouped and combined with front retaining walls where required to avoid multiple retaining walls on a single lot. Front and Side Yard Retaining Walls Walls & Fencing 11 Open Space Interface Steel View Fence Fence X X X x r — _._._._., 13'min. Wood Fence Wood Fence F",_L_L FENCE AT OPEN SPACE Fencing At Open Space Fencing at open space must conform to the Dublin Wildfire Management Plan. Heavy timber wood fencing or tubular steel view fences with 3'returns may be used along the rear property lines. All wood is to be construction heart redwood fire hardened/heavy timber to meet the Dublin Wildfire management requirements. All wood to be fire retardant treated per section 710A.3.2 and 710A.4 7A of the California building code for all exterior wood products. Fencing at Open Space Walls & Fencing 12 SFCTION ® Landscape Framework Aft V4 T b , r y ' Y�} i Legend i Acer rubrum`Red Sunset' EwTilia cordata `• Pistacia chinensis`Keith Davey' t `d Quercus virginiana y '� Ulmus parvifolia Koelreuteria paniculata { 00 Enhanced Open Space � •••• Orchard/Windrow Trees N. ��. Agrarian Tree Mix 1 50%-Quercus virginiana k �es< 25%-Quercus suber ; 25%-Platanus orientalis Design Concept Street trees at Wallis Ranch should be used to accent Scale.Y=1000' t`r entries,form strong street edges,provide privacy,and emphasize open space. Wtreet Tree Plan ® 2 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines Pistacia chinensis`Keith Davey' Koelreuteria paniculata-Goldenrain Tree Acer rubrum`Red Sunset'-Red Sunset Red Maple Tilia cordata-Little Leaf Linden ® � •i9 'G Quercus virginiana-Southern Live Oak Ulmus parvifolia-Chinese Elm Legend Acer rubrum`Red Sunset' Pistacia chinensis`Keith Davey Ulmus parvifolia Tilia cordata Quercus virginiana Koelreuteria paniculata Each neighborhood street should feature a different deciduous shade tree. Major roads should be recognizable by their prominent and distinctive tree species. A single tree species will be used to define each major road within the neighborhood. Street Trees Landscape Framework 3 RESIDENTIAL STREET TREES BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME EVERGREEN DECIDUOUS RECLAIMED WATER Arbutus`Marina' Strawberry Tree x x cer rubrum`Red Sunset' Red Sunset Red Maple x x Arbutus unedo Strawberry Tree x x Celtis sinensis Chinese Hackberry x Koelreuteria paniculata Goldenrain Tree x x Lagerstroemia indica Crape Myrtle x x Metrosideros excelsa New Zealand Christmas Tree x x Pistacia chinensis`Keith Davey' Chinese Pistache x x Quercus virginiana Southern Live Oak x x Quercus robur fastigiata English Oak x Quercus rubra Red Oak x x Quercus suber Cork Oak x x Tilia cordata Little leaf Linden x ACCENT TREES BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME EVERGREEN DECIDUOUS RECLAIMED WATER Koelreuteria paniculata Goldenrain Tree x x Chitalpa tashkentensis Chitalpa x x Citrus Citrus x x Cotinus coggygria Smoke Tree x Lagerstroemia indica Crape Myrtle x Melaleuca linariifolia Flaxleaf paperbark x x Nerium oleander Oleander`standard' x x Olea europaea Olive(non-fruiting) x x Punica granatum Pomegranate x Quercus agrifolia multi-trunk Live Oak x x ENHANCED OPEN SPACE TREES BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME EVERGREEN DECIDUOUS RECLAIMED WATER Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf Maple x Aesculus californica California Buckeye x Olea europaea Olive(non-fruiting) x x Platanus racemosa California Sycamore x Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak x x Quercus lobata Valley Oak x x Quercus suber Cork Oak x x Umbellularia californica California Bay x *Free Palette 0 4 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines .I% N 0*11i", . ate:. i h.. Lagerstroemia indica-Crape Myrtle Acer macrophyllum-Big Leaf Maple �r f Melaleuca linariifolia-Flazleaf paperbark 2uercus suber-Cork Oak r Olea europaea-Olive Quercus lobata-Valley Oak Legend Enhanced Open Space Trees Plant material should be selected appropriately for location and microchmate. Provide a combination of evergreen,deciduous and flowering trees. Accent & Enhanced Open Space Trees Landscape Framework 5 WINDROW TREES BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME EVERGREEN DECIDUOUS RECLAIMED WATER Arbutus marina Strawberry Tree x x arpinus`Fastigiata' European Hornbeam x Laurus nobilis Sweet Bay x x Quercus robur fastigiatta English Oak x EX Zelkova serrata`Muschino' Columnar Zelkova x EVERGREEN SCREEN TREES BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME EVERGREEN DECIDUOUS RECYCLED WATER Dodonaea viscosa Hopseed Bush x Garrya elliptica Silk tassel tree Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon x Metrosideros excelsa New Zealand Christmas Tree x x Prunus caroliniana Carolina Laurel Cherry (may be salt sensitive) i Rhamnus alaternus Italian Buckthorn I Rhus lancea African sumac Xylosma congestum Shiny xylosma x I I � ORCHARD TREES BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME EVERGREEN DECIDUOUS RECLAIMED WATER Juglans`Paradox' Walnut x x I Malus spp. Apple/Crabapple x Prunus cerasifera Plum x x Schinus molle St.Pepper Tree x x I *Free Palette 0 6 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines b" y Arbutus marina-Strawberry Tree Laurus nobilis-Sweet Bay t I I I i i Callistemon viminalis-Bottlebrush 2uercus Robur fastigiata-English Oak i j I I' Malus spp.-Crabapple Prunus cerasifera-Plum 1 Legend Orchard Trees I Windrow, Evergreen Orchard Trees Landscape Framework 7 ACCENT SHRUBS BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME FIRE SAFE RECYCLED DEER RESISTANT WATER gapanthus Lily of the Nile x x x uxus microphylla var.japonica Japanese Boxwood x Carex Sedge x Coleonema puchellum'Sunset Gold' 'Sunset Gold'Breath of Heaven x x Coreopsis spp. Coreopsis x x x Helictotrichon sempervirens Blue Oat Grass x x Hemerocallis Day Lily x Hesperaloe parviflora Red Yucca x x Heuchera maxima Coral Bells x Iris douglasiona Pacific Coast Iris x x Kniphofia uvaria Devil's Poker/Red Hot Poker x x Lantana Lantana x x x Liriope muscari Lily Turf x Penstemon sp. Penstemon Teucriumchamaedrys Germander x Tulbaghia violacea'Silver Lace' Society Garlic x x Verbena Verbena x MEDIUM SHRUBS BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME FIRE SAFE RECYCLED DEER RESISTANT WATER Arbutus unedo'Compacta' Compact Strawberry Bush x x Callistemon'Little John' Dwarf Cottlebrush Cistus spp. Rock Rose x x Coleonema spp. Breath of Heaven x Correa spp. Australian Fuchsia x Dietes spp. Fortnight Lily x x Escallonia Escallonia x Grevillea'Noelii' x Muhlenbergia rigens Deer Grass x x Myrtus communis'Compacta' Dwarf Myrtle x Nandina spp. Nandina/Heavenly Bamboo x x Nerium oleander'Petite' Oleander x Olea europaea`Montra' Little 011ie x x Perovskia atriplicifolia Russian Sage x Phomium tenax sp. New Zealand Flax x Pittosporum tobira'Wheeler's Dwarf Dwarf Mock Orange x x Plumbago auriculata Cape plumbago x Rhaphiolepsis indica Indian Hawthorn x Salvia spp. Sage x x Teucrium fructicans Bush Germander x Viburnum tinus compacta Viburnum x GAccent & Medium Shrubs 0 8 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines TALL SHRUBS BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME FIRE SAFE RECYCLED DEER RESISTANT WATER Abelia spp. Abelia x Arctostaphylos Manzanita Buddleia davidii Butterfly Bush x i a Camelia japonica Japanese Camelia x { Ceanothus hybrid'Dark Star' Dark Star California Lilac x j Ceanothus hybrid'Frosty Blue' Brown-Eyed Rock Rose x Cercis occidentalis Western Redbud x x Euonymus japonica Spindle Tree x Fejoa sellowiana Pineapple Guava x Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon x Ligustrum texanum Waxleaf Privet x x x Loropetalum chinensis Chinese Fringe Flower x Myoporum laetum Myoporum x i Myrica californica Wax Myrtle x x x 19 Nerium oleander Dwarf Pink Oleander x x x Rhamnus californica Coffeeberry x x I GROUNDCOVER BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME FIRE SAFE RECYCLED DEER RESISTANT WATER Acacia redolens Acacia x x i Ceanothus griseus California Lilac x x Cotoneaster horzontalis Rock Cotoneaster x Coprosoma kirkii'Verde Vista' Prostate Mirror Plant x x Erigeron karvinskianus Santa Barbara Daisy x Festuca californica California Fescue x Festuca ruba creeping Red Fescue x x Gazania Orange Gazania x x Geramium spp. Hardy Scented Geramium x x Myoporum parvifolium prostate Myoporum x x Pelargonium peltatum Ivy Geramium x Oenothera speciosa childsii Mexican Evening Primrose x Osteospermum fruticosum African Daisy x x Rosa'Carpet Rose' Carpet Rose x x Rosmarinus spp. Rosemary x x x Trachelospermum asiaticum Asiatic Jasmine x Trachelospermum jasminoides Star Jasmine x x x Vinca minor Periwinkle x VINES BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME FIRE SAFE RECYCLED DEER RESISTANT WATER Jasmiunum Jasmine x Parthenocissus quinquefolia Virginia Creeper x Solanum jasminoides Potato Vine I x y Tall Shrubs & Groundcover Landscape Framework 9 ® k Hemerocallis-Day Lily Heuchera maxima-Coral Bells Kniphofia uvaria-Red Hot Poker i Muhlenbergia rigens-Deer Grass Dietes vegata-African Iris Coleonema spp.-Breath of Heaven * L • 7• 1tE'� Teucrium fruticans-Bush Germander Perovskia atriplicifolia-Russian Sage Salvia spp.-Sage Plants should be selected and spaced appropriately to ensure mature and healthy growth.A variety of flowering, variegated,and evergreen shrubs should be mixed to maintain visual interest and seasonal diversity. Acccnt & Medium Shrubs ® 10 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines Buddleia davidii-Butterfly Bush Camelia japonica-Japanese Camelis Ceanothus hybrid-Ceanothus i e ►' �' A Myoporum laetum-Myoporum Rosmarinus officinalis-Rosemary Coprosma kirkii-Mirror Plant ry a s s s Erigeron karvinskianus-Santa Barbara Daisy Festuca californica-California Fescue Rosa'Carpet Rose'-Carpet Rose Recommended shrubs and groundcover are non-invasive and suited to the site. Plants with similar watering needs should be planted together to prevent under or over watering. i Tall Shrubs & Groundcovcr Landscape Framework 11 1 Shrubs&Groundcover Emphasis should be placed on use of Agrarian associated plants. Use drought tolerant, deer-resistant plant materials. Select plants appropriate for selling from `East Bay Municipal Utility District Plant & Landscape for Summer — Dry Climates'. As recycled water will be used for irrigation, use plant materials tolerant of reclaimed water. Irrigation ' Irrigation throughout the public rights-of-way, and landscape setbacks shall be accomplished by means of automatically controlled spray, bubbler, and drip irrigation systems. The design shall incorporate water saving techniques and equipment and shall meet the water efficient requirements of the water efficient landscape ordinance adopted by the City of Dublin. Irrigation systems that use recycled water shall conform to the Dublin San Ramon Services District Recycled Water Use Guidelines. All irrigation systems shall be efficiently designed to reduce overspray onto walks, walls, fences, pilasters, street and other non-landscaped areas and into natural open space areas. All irrigation systems within the major streetscapes and common areas shall be designed to accommodate the use of recycled water in the event that it becomes available in the future. Irrigation systems shall be valved separately depending on plant ecosystems, orientation and exposure to sun, shade, and wind. The design shall be sensitive to the water requirements of the plant material selected and similar water using plants shall be valved together. Slope and soil conditions will also be considered when valving irrigation systems. * Y 68hrubs Groundcovcr 0 12 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines !i i ro If f,INN • . .• ..•-. 1 • .. .. E T'o`�•� Jlr t � { E i II GPM Trash and Recycling Receptacles Bench Manufacturer. landscape Forms Manufacturer: Landscape Forms Model Lakeside Model:Lakeside Style:Side Opening Trash and separate Recycling Receptacle with Style:Embedded,backed,no divider 10"opening,both surface mounted and locked Finish Bronze Metallic with Ipe Wood for exterior use Finish:Bronze Metallic m e� f r� • a y ,_ Pots Pots Pots Manufacturer: Quickcrete Manufacturer:Quickcrete Manufacturer:Quickcrete Model Cascade Round Model:Mesa Model-Malaysian Finish Davis Color Dune Finish•Davis Color Dune Finish:Davis Color Dune Landscape accessories are important elements that can contribute to the agrarian feel of _ Wallis Ranch. • They should be woven throughout the site and reference historic agrarian uses, as though they were`left behind'by the previous farm owner. • Furnishings could include decorative iron work incorporated into the site may. architecture,a windmill by one of the seasonal ponds,or an old sun dial. ''� � • Each of these elements should have seating Bench nearby for people to rest and contemplate, Manufacturer: landscape Forms either benches or informal seating made of Model:Lakeside cut stone. Style:Backless,no divider Finish Bronze Metallic with Ipe Wood for exterior use Landscape Accessories Landscape Framework 15 Street Lighting Street lighting is used for decoration and to mark special paths ' and landmarks. • Single lights should be used on both sides of the the Main Entry Road,the Neighborhood Entry Road,and the Neighborhood Spine Road • The Lumec Hexagonal series or similar is recommended, �rrll with hardware included for banners. Luma Candela Series Y4" TYR 4'-0" 24" TYR TYR 4'-0" TYR 24" TYR ;j 4'-0" 22'-0" TYR TYR 19'-0" TYR 10'-0" TYR corm, c rc-,C 18" vc a 5,-0" ,. 5'0. L 6'-6"TYR 6'6"TYP. VARIES VARIES 9 rt PARKWAY STRIP MONOLITHIC SIDEWALK PEDESTRIAN LIGHT Single mounted light at 22' Single mounted light at 19' Single mounted light at 10' Philips Lumec Candela Series Philips Lumec Candela Series Philips Lumec Candela Series Model:CAND1 /PC-1A Model:CAND1 /PC-1A Model:CANDS1 /RMS-1A Color:Textured Bronze Color:Textured Bronze Color:Textured Bronze - Pathway Lighting Pathway lighting is used to create safe pedestrian walkways while adding a consistent aesthetic element. • It should be used along the pedestrian trail that stretches from the entry gateway,through the public neigborhood park,to the East Bay Regional Trailhead. • Model:Lumec Candela CANDBl • Color:Texture Bronze to match light poles Lumec Candela Series with Cavawood Bases blighting 0 16 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines FEATURE LIGHTING Lighting can add dramatic impact to elegant architectural features. • Feature lighting should be added to all signage,the ionic stone building,walls and monoliths,and other artistic elements throughout the site. • The planning of feature lighting will be coordinated in the detailed design phase of each element. Lighting is an important design element througout the site,contributing to safety as well as the rural community character of the site. MonolithMlall 71 1�7 6'-8" �. TYR NIL SCONCE ACCENT LIGHT Barn Light Electric Luminaire: Newport(UCR16) Bracket: WM30 Glass: Ribbed Finish:Architectual Bronze[51] Landscape Framework 17 ; ail f v .. t IR i 3 Public Art Wallis Ranch will have public art incorporated in and around the community landscape as part of the overall story and setting. Areas that could include public art installations are the main community entry,the bridge, the parks,the Antone Pavilion. All the public art in Wallis Ranch will go through the public art program process to determine the artist and location. SPublic Art ® 18 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines SFCTI()N Open Space Management & Maintenance 'II Design Concept There our four entities who will have responsibilities for maintenance of the landscape systems at Wallis Ranch: The City of Dublin The master homeowner association(HOA) The geologic hazards abatement district(GRAD) The individual homeowner The attached maps and cross sections illustrate the various areas of responsibilities. In general the city is responsible for the maintenance of the streets, medians, and multi-use trails. The only landscape areas which are the cities responsibilities are the median in the collector road and public parks. The HOA is responsible for maintaining the landscaping and walls along the gateway,collector roads,entry roads, and landscaping in the parkway and at the end of the cul-de-sac on the residential streets. They are also responsible for the street trees located in the Public service easement on the individual lots. The GHAD is responsible for maintaining the open space areas, landscaping along trail corridors, habitat areas, open space corridor, landscape buffer areas, bio-retentioin basins,and natural and engineered open space slopes. The individual homeowner is responsible for maintaining all landscape on their property including side yard setbacks along the street and adjacent sidewalks unless it is a multi-use trail.They are also responsible for their walls and fences. I r OZintenance Responsibilities ® 2 Wallis Ranch Design Guidelines c�S 4. /1 M CIS J� 41 c6 i 0 m W D cn _ - - - - r c ¢ I ' U U) z O U) _ - - Z o ¢ D I z U)O J z W ¢ U Q g z z m / � w o o a p v w ¢ w w ¢of c/) LU LU O w ¢ J w _U ww ` w > mm j w W J Z U co O a OU a in Q LL a OUa i f 7 \ - I 1 ij All, - _- _\ 7 r r • Page Intentionally Left Blank i P.G.&E.Pad Mounted PMH-4 lea a Pad Size:60.5"x 49" Cabinet Size:43"w x 57"d x 63"h a ra oil „ Utility Box Screening Plan • Adapt grading to minimize the use of retaining walls. If retaining walls are required limit height to 30" and construct with tan mansonry block walls. • Blend visually into setting with the use of landscaping while maintaining required clearances. _: x P.G.&E Pad Mounted PMH-9 Pad Size:80.5"x 88" Cabinet Size:82"w x 77"d x 67"h -r Existing Screened Utility Box Existing Screened Utility Salerno Drive,Positano Development Positano Parkway,Positano Development Utlility Box Screening Management &z Maintenance 4 RESOLUTION NO. XX - 14 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ADOPTING A CEQA ADDENDUM FOR THE WALLIS RANCH PROJECT AND A RELATED STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS PLPA 2013 -00035 WHEREAS, the Applicant, Trumark Homes LLC, has submitted a Planning Application to develop up to 806 dwellings on 88.5 acres of an approximately 184 -acre site. The remaining area of the site would include parks, open space and other improvements. The project proposes a Planned Development rezoning with amended Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review, Master Vesting Tentative Map 7515, and eight Neighborhood Vesting Tentative Maps 7711, 7712, 7713, 7714, 7715, 7716, 8169, and 8170. The applications are collectively referred to herein as the "Project "; and WHEREAS, the Project site contains one residence, several outbuildings, and a historic school building that was moved onto the site. The site is located east of Camp Parks, west of Tassajara Road and south of the Alameda /Contra Costa County boundary. The site is broad in its northern area and narrows considerably towards the south. Tassajara Creek passes along the easterly property boundary and is covered by a conservation easement known as the Tassajara Creek Management Zone. In the northern area, several other smaller properties are located between the site and Tassajara Road; the middle and southern parts of the property are adjacent to the road; and WHEREAS, the 806 dwellings would include 92 units of Low Density Residential, 529 units of Medium Density Residential, and 185 units of Medium High Density Residential. The residential neighborhoods would be located in the westerly, generally flatter areas west of Tassajara Creek, where the property is broadest; and WHEREAS, the non - residential uses include approximately 83.3 acres designated for Open Space, 10.4 acres designated Neighborhood Park, and 1.9 acres designated Semi - Public (for which no specific use is proposed). The non - residential areas are generally located along Tassajara Creek, in the steeper areas along the southwestern border of the site, and in the southerly, narrower areas of the site; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State guidelines and City environmental regulations, require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and WHEREAS, the Project 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, which resolution is 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 Page 1 of 4 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, in 2005, a Supplemental EIR ( "SEIR ", SCH #2003022083) was prepared for the Dublin Ranch West (Wallis Ranch) annexation to identify potentially significant impacts beyond those identified in the 1993 EIR. The SEIR identified additional significant unavoidable impacts for air quality and traffic. The City Council certified the SEIR (Resolution 42 -05, dated March 15, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference) and adopted a related Statement of Overriding Considerations; and WHEREAS, in 2007, an 11.6 acre parcel was added to the project to provide room for offsite grading and an emergency vehicle access. The added parcel is north of the Project site, in Contra Costa County and is owned by the Wallis Ranch owners. The City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the expansion area through Resolution 18 -07 on February 20, 2007, which resolution is incorporated herein by reference. The current Project proposes no change to the adjacent 11.6 acre parcel; and WHEREAS, the Eastern Dublin EIR and 2005 SEIR identified significant unavoidable impacts from development of the Eastern Dublin area and the Project site, some of which would apply to the Project; therefore, approval of the Project must be supported by a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and WHEREAS, the City prepared an Initial Study to determine if additional review of the proposed Project was required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15162. Based on the Initial Study, the City prepared an Addendum dated April 29, 2014 describing the Wallis Ranch project and finding that the impacts of the proposed Project have been adequately addressed in the prior EIRs and MND. The Addendum and its supporting Initial Study is attached as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, on April 29, 2014, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on the Wallis Ranch project, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, a staff report dated April 29, 2014 and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the Wallis Ranch project and related Addendum for the Planning Commission and recommended adoption of the CEQA Addendum and approval of the Project; and WHEREAS, on April 29, 2014, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 14 -16 recommending that the City Council adopt the CEQA Addendum for the Wallis Ranch project, which resolution is incorporated herein by reference and available for review at City Hall during normal business hours; and WHEREAS, a staff report dated May 20, 2014 and incorporated herein by reference described and analyzed the Wallis Ranch project and related Addendum for the City Council and recommended adoption of the CEQA Addendum and approval of the Project; and 2 of 4 WHEREAS, on May 20, 2014 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 EIRs and MND 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 City Council makes the following findings to support the determination that no further environmental review is required under CEQA for the proposed Wallis Ranch 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 from the Eastern Dublin EIR and the SEIR continue to apply to the proposed Project and project site as applicable. In addition, all of the MND mitigations continue to apply to the 11.6 -acre expansion area. 2. The Addendum and its related Initial Study 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 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 of 4 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 (and incorporated herein by reference), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 for the Wallis Ranch project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations attached as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 2014 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: City Clerk 2264070.1 Mayor 4 of 4 EXHIBIT A CEQA ADDENDUM FOR THE WALLIS RANCH PROJECT PLPA- 2013 -00035 April 22, 2014 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 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 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 Specific 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. Since certification of the EIR, many implementing projects have been proposed, relying to various degrees on the certified EIR. A Supplement was prepared to the Eastern Dublin EIR in 2005 (State Clearinghouse # 2003022082) for an annexation of the property to the City of Dublin and Dublin San Ramon Services District and prezoning of the site. The 2005 Supplemental EIR provided updated analyses of agricultural resources, biology, air quality, land use, population and housing, traffic and circulation, schools, parks and recreation and utilities and services. In certifying the 2005 SEIR and approving the prezoning, the City Council, through Resolution No. 42 -05, adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project and the cumulative air quality impacts. In 2007, the City of Dublin approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) to analyze improvements within approximately 11.6 acres of land located immediately north of the Wallis Ranch property that was the subject of the 2005 SEIR. This property is under the same ownership as Wallis Ranch, but located in the unincorporated portion of Contra Costa County rather than within Dublin and Alameda County. The applicant proposed placement of an Emergency Vehicle Assess (EVA), a herpetological barrier and a bioswale within this area. The MND was adopted by Dublin City Council Resolution No. 18 -07 on February 20, 2007. This Addendum has been prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 for the Project, as described below. Project Description The current application includes applications for a Planned Development Rezone with amended Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, a Site Development Review (SDR) permit, and a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to change the number of dwellings units on this 184.1 -acre site. The proposed Development Plan includes construction of up to 809 dwellings at various densities and product types rather than up to 935 dwellings allowed under existing City approvals, primary and internal roadways, two neighborhood parks, a private park, permanent open spaces, public and semi - public uses and other related improvements. Prior CEQA Analyses and Determinations As summarized above and discussed in more detail in the attached Initial Study, the Wallis Ranch property has been planned for urbanization since the Eastern Dublin approvals in 1993, 2005 and 2007, and has been the subject of two previously certified EIRs and a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). The Eastern Dublin EIR identified numerous environmental impacts, and numerous mitigations were adopted upon approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan. For identified impacts that could not be mitigated to insignificance, the City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Similarly, the 2005 SEIR identified supplemental impacts and mitigation measures, as well as additional significant unavoidable impacts for which statements of overriding considerations were adopted. All previously adopted mitigation measures for development of Eastern Dublin identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the 2005 SEIR that are applicable to the Project and Project site continue to apply to the currently proposed Project as further discussed in the attached Initial Study. Current CEQA Analysis and Determination that an Addendum is appropriate for this Project. Updated Initial Study. The City of Dublin has determined that an Addendum is the appropriate CEQA review for the Project, which proposes minor changes to the Planned Development zoning. If approved, the proposed project would reduce the number of dwellings allowed on the site from up to 935 to up to 809 dwellings. The applicant is also seeking City approval of a Planned Development Rezone with amended Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review permit, a vesting subdivision map and potentially an amendment to an existing Development Agreement. The City prepared an updated Initial Study dated April 22, 2014, incorporated herein by reference, to assess whether any further environmental review is required for this Project. Through this Initial Study, the City has determined that no subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration is required for the plan and zoning amendments or the refined development details. No Subsequent Review is required per CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 identifies the conditions requiring subsequent environmental review. After a review of these conditions, the City has determined that no subsequent EIR or negative declaration is required for this Project. This is based on the following analysis: Page 2 a) Are there substantial changes to the Project involving new or more severe significant impacts? There are no substantial changes to the Project analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR, as supplemented by the 2005 SEIR and 2007 MND. The Project is similar to land uses for the project site analyzed in the 2005 SEIR. As demonstrated in the Initial Study, the proposed land uses on the site is not a substantial change to either the 2005 SEIR analysis or the 2007 MND analysis and will not result in additional significant impacts, and no additional or different mitigation measures are required. b) Are there substantial changes in the conditions which the Project is undertaken involving new or more severe significant impacts? There are no substantial changes in the conditions assumed in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the 2005 SEIR or the 2007 MND. This is documented in the attached Initial Study prepared for this Project dated April 22, 2014. c) Is there new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known at the time of the previous EIR that shows the Project will have a significant effect not addressed in the previous EIR, or previous effects are more severe, or, previously infeasible mitigation measures are now feasible but the applicant declined to adopt them, or mitigation measures considerably different from those in the previous EIR would substantially reduce significant effects but the applicant declines to adopt them? As documented in the attached Initial Study, there is no new information showing a new or more severe significant effect beyond those identified in the prior CEQA documents. Similarly, 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 CEQA documents adequately describe the impacts and mitigations associated with the proposed development on portions of the Wallis Ranch property. d) If no subsequent EIR -level review is required, should a subsequent negative declaration be prepared? 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 previous CEQA documents for the site, as documented in the attached Initial Study. Conclusion This Addendum is adopted pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 based on the attached Initial Study dated April 12, 2014. The Addendum and Initial Study review the proposed the Planned Development rezoning amendment, Site Development Review, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map and Development Agreement amendment 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 2005 SEIR and the 2007 MND adequately address the potential environmental impacts of the Page 3 land use designation change for the Wallis Ranch site as documented in the attached Initial Study. As provided in Section 15164 of the Guidelines, the Addendum need not be circulated for public review, but shall be considered with the prior environmental documents before making a decision on this project. The Initial Study, Eastern Dublin EIR, the 2005 SEIR, the 2007 MND and all resolutions cited above are incorporated 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. Page 4 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 Wallis Ranch project. The project proposes a residential development on the west side of Tassajara Road, generally south of the county line. The City prepared a Supplemental EIR in 2005 for the Dublin Ranch West project, which was similar to the current project but with more dwellings. The 2005 Supplemental EIR identified supplemental impacts that could be mitigated to less than significant. The Supplemental EIR also identified supplemental Air Quality and Traffic impacts that could not be mitigated to less than significant. The City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with the original land use approvals for urbanization of Eastern Dublin and again with approval of the 2005 and 2007 projects. Pursuant to a 2002 court decision, the City Council must adopt new overriding considerations for the previously identified unavoidable impacts that apply to the Wallis Ranch project.1 The City Council believes that many of the unavoidable environmental effects identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the 2005 Supplemental EIR will be substantially lessened by mitigation measures adopted with the original Eastern Dublin approvals and by the environmental protection measures adopted through the 2005 Dublin Ranch West 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 and the 2005 Supplemental 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, and 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 Wallis Ranch project. "...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). Land Use Impact 3.1/F. Cumulative Loss of Agricultural and Open Space Lands; Visual Impacts 3.8/13; and, Alteration of Rural /Open Space Character. Although development has occurred south of the project area, the site is largely undeveloped open space land. Future development of the Wallis Ranch site will contribute to the cumulative loss of open space land. Traffic and Circulation Impacts 3.318, 3.31E. 1 -580 Freeway, Cumulative Freeway Impacts: While city street and interchange impacts can be mitigated through planned improvements, transportation demand management, the 1 -580 Smart Corridor program and other similar measures, mainline freeway impacts continue to be identified as unavoidable, as anticipated in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Future development on the Wallis Ranch site will generate less traffic than anticipated in the Eastern Dublin EIR, but will still incrementally contribute to the unavoidable freeway impacts. Traffic and Circulation Impacts 3.311, 3.31M. Santa Rita Road /1 -580 Ramps, Cumulative Dublin Boulevard Impacts: The Wallis Ranch project will be required to implement all applicable adopted traffic mitigation measures, including contributions to the City's TIF program; however even with mitigation these impacts continue to be identified as unavoidable, as anticipated in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Community Services and Facilities Impact 3.41S. Consumption of Non - Renewable Natural Resources and Sewer, Water, and Storm Drainage Impact 3.51F, H, U. Increases in Energy Usage Through Increased Water Treatment, Disposal and Operation of Water Distribution System: Future development of the Wallis Ranch project will contribute to increased energy consumption. Soils, Geology, and Seismicity Impact 3.618. Earthquake Ground Shaking, Primary Effects: Even with seismic design, future development of the Wallis Ranch project could be subject to damage from large earthquakes, much like the rest of the Eastern Dublin planning area. Air Quality Impacts 3.11/A, 8, C, and E. Future development of the Wallis Ranch project will contribute to cumulative dust deposition, construction equipment emissions, mobile and stationary source emissions. 3. Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts from the Dublin Ranch West Supplemental EIR. The following unavoidable significant supplemental environmental impacts identified in the 2005 Supplemental EIR for the Dublin Ranch West project apply to the Wallis Ranch project. Supplemental Impacts AQ -2, AQ -3. Project emission increase that would exceed the BAAQMD significance thresholds for ozone precursors on project and cumulative levels. Even with implementation of the previously adopted mitigation measures and the additional mitigation measures in the Supplemental EIR, project and cumulative precursor emissions will exceed BAAQMD thresholds. rd Supplemental Impact TRA -2. Impacts to study intersections under Buildout conditions (Dublin Boulevard /Dougherty Road). Even with implementation of the previously adopted mitigation measures, including contribution to intersection improvements through the TIF program, the project will contribute to significant and unavoidable impacts at this intersection under Buildout conditions. 4. Overriding Considerations. The City Council previously balanced the benefits of the Eastern Dublin 2005 and 2007 project approvals against the significant and potentially significant adverse impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and 2005 Supplemental EIR. The City Council now balances those unavoidable impacts that apply to future development on the Wallis Ranch site against its benefits, and hereby determines that such unavoidable impacts are outweighed by the benefits of the Wallis Ranch project as further set forth below. The project will further the urbanization of Eastern Dublin as planned through the comprehensive framework established in the original Eastern Dublin approvals. Prior approvals provided important protections to Tassajara Creek and through reasonable and protective designations for sensitive creek areas; the Wallis Ranch project will implement these protections through previously adopted mitigation measures and current development standards. The project will provide approximately 806 units of needed housing with diverse densities and building types, as well as maintaining open space and the potential for semi- public uses on the site. Development of the site will also provide construction employment opportunities for Dublin residents. 2266460.1 3 WIM Lead Agency: City of Dublin Prepared By: Jerry Haag, Urban Planner April 22, 2014 Introduction..................................................................................... ..............................2 Applicant.......................................................................................... ..............................4 Project Location and Context ........................................................ ..............................4 Prior Environmental Review Documents .................................... ..............................4 ProjectDescription .......................................................................... ..............................7 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ................................ .............................17 Determination................................................................................... .............................17 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts .......................................... .............................19 Attachment to Initial Study ............................................................ .............................32 1. Aesthetics .................................................................. .............................32 2. Agricultural and Forestry Resources .................... .............................35 3. Air Quality ................................................................ .............................37 4. Biological Resources ................................................ .............................40 5. Cultural Resources ................................................... .............................46 6. Geology and Soils .................................................... .............................48 7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ..................................... .............................53 8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................... .............................53 9. Hydrology and Water Quality ............................... .............................55 10. Land Use and Planning ........................................... .............................58 11. Mineral Resources .................................................... .............................59 12. Noise .......................................................................... .............................60 13. Population and Housing ......................................... .............................62 14. Public Services .......................................................... .............................63 15. Recreation .................................................................. .............................65 16. Transportation / Traffic ............................................ .............................66 17. Utilities and Service Systems .................................. .............................70 18. Mandatory Findings of Significance ..................... .............................72 InitialStudy Preparers .................................................................... .............................73 Agencies and Organizations Consulted ....................................... .............................73 References......................................................................................... .............................74 Attachment 1 -Trip Generation Analysis ....................................... .............................75 City of Dublin Environmental Checklist/ Initial Study Introduction This Initial Study has been prepared in accord with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and assesses the potential environmental impacts of implementing the proposed project described below. The Initial Study consists of a completed environmental checklist and a brief explanation of the environmental topics addressed in the checklist. Because the proposed project is generally based on the land use designations, circulation patterns etc. assigned to the project by the City of Dublin General Plan, the Initial Study relies on a Program EIR certified by the City in 1993 for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan (the "Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 91103064). That EIR, also known in this Initial Study as the "Eastern Dublin EIR," evaluated the following impacts: Land Use, Population, Employment and Housing, Traffic and Circulation, Community Services and Facilities, Sewer, Water and Storm Drainage, Soils, Geology and Seismicity, Biological Resources, Visual Resources, Cultural Resources, Noise, Air Quality and Fiscal Considerations. Even with mitigation, however, some of the identified significant impacts could not be reduced to a less than significant level. Several of these impacts were cumulative level impacts, such as loss of agriculture and open space, 1-580 and other regional traffic impacts, and air quality impacts. As required by CEQA, the Draft EIR identified project alternatives, including No Project and No Development alternatives, a Reduced Land Use Intensities alternative, and a Reduced Planning Area alternative, and analyzed whether the alternatives would avoid any of the otherwise unavoidable impacts. As further discussed below, the City Council adopted a modified version of the Reduced Planning Area alternative after certifying the EIR as adequate and in compliance with CEQA on May 10, 1993. (Resolution 51-93.) The City Council also certified an Addendum dated May 4, 1993 which assessed the modifications to the Reduced Planning Area alternative and concluded that this alternative "will have no environmental impacts not addressed in the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan." (May 4, 1993 Addendum, p. 1.) The Addendum further concluded that no subsequent or supplemental EIR was required under CEQA Guidelines section 15162 or 15163 for approval of the modified alternative. A second Addendum was later prepared, dated August 22, 1994. The second Addendum updated plans for providing sewer services to Eastern Dublin. The May 10, 1993 certified EIR, the May 4, 1993 Addendum and the August 22, 1994 Addendum are collectively referred to hereafter as the Eastern Dublin EIR, or the "EDEIR" and are incorporated herein by reference into this Initial Study. These documents are available City of Dublin Page 2 Initial StudyA/Vallis Ranch[Trumark Project April 2014 for review at the Dublin Community Development Department during normal business hours. In 2005, a Supplemental EIR to the 1993 Eastern Dublin EIR was prepared for the Dublin Ranch West project, also known as the Wallis Ranch, as well as other smaller properties adjacent to the Dublin Ranch West site. This document will be referred to as the "2005 SEIR." The Dublin Ranch West SEIR was certified by the City Council on March 15, 2005, by City Council Resolution No. 42-05. This CEQA document analyzed annexation of the property to the City of Dublin and Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD), amendments to the Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, a Planned Development prezoning and related Stage 1 Development Plan. Following certification of the SEIR, the City of Dublin subsequently approved a PD rezoning with related Stage 2 Development Plan for the Wallis site, a Site Development Review (SDR) permit, a vesting tentative subdivision map and a Development Agreement. This Supplemental EIR analyzed future development of up to 1,034 dwellings at a variety of densities (see SEIR Table 2). The Dublin Ranch West has since been annexed into the City of Dublin and the Dublin San Ramon Services District. The 2005 SEIR analyzed agricultural resources, air quality, biological resources land use, population, housing and employment, transportation and circulation and parks and recreation. In 2007, the City of Dublin approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) to analyze improvements within approximately 11.6 acres of land located immediately of the Wallis Ranch property that was the subject of the 2005 SEIR. This property is under the same ownership as the Wallis Ranch, but is located in the unincorporated portion of Contra Costa County rather than within Dublin and Alameda County. The applicant proposed placement of an Emergency Vehicle Assess (EVA), a herpetological barrier and a bioswale within this area. The MND was adopted by Dublin City Council Resolution No. 18-07 on February 20, 2007. The proposed improvements were not constructed and this 11.6-acre property is not part of the current development application. The subject of this Initial Study includes applications for a PD rezoning with amended Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, A Site Development Review (SDR) permit, and a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to change the number of dwellings units on this 184.1-acre site. The proposed Development Plan includes construction of up to 809 dwellings at various densities and product types, primary and internal roadways, two neighborhood parks, a private park, permanent open spaces, public and semi-public uses and other related improvements. City of Dublin Page 3 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch[Trumark Project April 2014 wrealm Trumark Homes 4165 Blackhawk Plaza Circle, Suite 200 Danville CA 94506 Attn: Christopher Davenport (925) 309 2503 Project Location and Context The project area consists of 184.1 acres of land located in northern portion of Dublin generally bounded by the Alameda/ Contra Costa line to the north, Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (Parks RFTA) to the west, Tassajara Road to the east and the Tassajara Creek to the south. The Assessors Parcel Number for the site is 986-0004-05. Exhibit 1 depicts the regional setting of Dublin and Exhibit 2 shows the location of the project site in context with nearby features, including nearby roadways and adjacent creek. The project site is fallow, with one inhabited residence (in the process of being vacated), outbuildings and a historic school building adjacent to Tassajara Road. The easterly portion of the site area includes Tassajara Creek, a major regional drainage facility. Land uses surrounding the site include Parks RFTA to the west and along the southerly boundary of the site. East of the project area is Tassajara Creek (which has been placed in a conservation easement known as the Tassajara Creek Management Zone) and Tassajara Road. A portion of the Silvera Ranch residential development is located directly across Tassajara Road. Additionally, Quarry Lane School, a private K-12 education facility has been constructed east of the project. A residential project, Nielsen Ranch, is also east of the project and has been approved for development of 36 residential lots but is as yet not constructed. A portion of Tassajara Creek forms the sites southern boundary. An equestrian center, an East Bay Regional Park District staging area and rural residential uses are also found south of the site. Prior Environmental Review Documents The project has been included in the following previous CEQA documents, as noted below: Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR (State Clearinghouse #91103064). A Program Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment (Eastern Extended Planning Area) and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) was certified by the City Council in 1993 by Resolution No. 51-93. This document and its related Addenda collectively are referred to as the "Eastern Dublin EIR" or "EDEIR." It evaluated the following impacts: City of Dublin Page 4 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Land Use; Population, Employment and Housing; Traffic and Circulation; Community Services and Facilities; Sewer, Water and Storm Drainage; Soils, Geology and Seismicity; Biological Resources; Visual Resources; Cultural Resources; Noise; Air Quality; and Fiscal Considerations. The City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Resolution No. 53-93) for the following impacts: Cumulative loss of agriculture and open space land, cumulative traffic, extension of certain community facilities (natural gas, electric and telephone service), consumption of non-renewable natural resources, increases in energy uses through increased water treatment and disposal and through operation of the water distribution system, inducement of substantial growth and concentration of population, earthquake ground shaking, loss or degradation of botanically sensitive habitat, regional air quality, noise and alteration of visual character. The Eastern Dublin EIR was challenged in court and was found to be legally adequate. Two Addenda documents to the 1993 Eastern Dublin EIR have been approved by the City, as described earlier. Dublin Ranch West Supplemental EIR (SCH #200322082). In 2005, a Supplemental FIR to the 1993 Eastern Dublin EIR was prepared for the Dublin Ranch West project, also known as the Wallis Ranch, as well as other smaller properties adjacent to the Dublin Ranch West site. The Dublin Ranch West SEIR was certified by the City Council on March 15, 2005, by City Council Resolution No. 42-05. This CEQA document analyzed annexation of the property to the City of Dublin and Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD), amendments to the Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, a Planned Development prezoning and Stage I Development Plan. Following certification of the SEIR, the City of Dublin subsequently approved a PD rezoning with related Stage 2 Development Plan for the site, a Site Development Review (SDR) permit, a vesting tentative subdivision map and a Development Agreement. The SEIR analyzed traffic and transportation and other impacts of constructing 1,034 dwellings on the site, although the City ultimately approved 935 dwellings. This SEIR identified significant and unavoidable impacts with respect to project exceedances of Bay Area Air Quality Management District air quality standards on a project and cumulative level. 2007 MND. In 2007, the City of Dublin approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) to analyze improvements within approximately 11.6 acres of land located immediately of the Wallis Ranch property that was the subject of the 2005 SEIR. This property is under the same ownership as the Wallis Ranch, but is located in the unincorporated portion of Contra Costa County rather than within Dublin and Alameda County. The analyzed the proposed placement of an Emergency Vehicle City of Dublin Page 5 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Assess (EVA), a herpetological barrier and a bioswale within this area. The MND was adopted by Dublin City Council Resolution No. 18-07 on February 20, 2007. Proposed land use approvals included an amended Stage 1 Development Plan for Dublin Ranch West as well as a Vesting Master and Tentative Maps, Site Development Review and Development Agreement. The proposed improvements were not constructed and this 11.6-acre property is not part of the current development application. City of Dublin Page 6 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trurnark Project April 2014 Overview. The proposed project includes amending existing land use entitlements granted by the City of Dublin and developing up to 809 dwellings at various densities and product types on the site as well as parks, open spaces, public /semi - public uses and infrastructure improvements. If approved, there would be a reduction of approximately 126 dwellings from existing City of Dublin approvals on the site. The existing residence and associated outbuildings are proposed to be demolished. The historic school building would be reconstructed on the site using historic building material supplemented by other materials to replicate historic structures. The existing Development Agreement between the City and the property owner requires the owner to relocate the historic Antone School on the site. If the structure is damaged during relocation, the owner is required to construct a similar structure as approved by the City of Dublin Community Development Director. The applicant has requested approvals of the following in order to implement the project: a Stage 2 Development Plan, a Site Development Review (SDR) Permit and a Vesting Tentative Map. The existing Development Agreement may be amended as part of this project, or a new Development Agreement negotiated between the applicant and City of Dublin. Approved Development Plan. The approved development plan for the site is shown on Exhibit 3. The development plan was based on Alternative 3 contained in the 2005 SEIR which moved the Neighborhood Park to border Tassajara Road. The Development Plan approved by the City in 2005 and modified in 2007 allows the construction of up to 935 dwellings including a combination of Low Density Residential dwellings, Medium Density Residential dwellings and Medium -High Density Residential dwellings. Medium and Medium -High Density dwellings would be constructed in the approximate center of the site, with the Low Density Residential dwellings located in the northwest portion. A Neighborhood Park would be located in the southern portion of the site with a 1.9 -acre Semi Public use located in the southern portion of the site adjacent to Tassajara Road. The eastern portion of the site adjacent to Tassajara Creek is retained as permanent Open Space through previous recordation of a permanent non -build easement. Access into the site is provided by two existing roadways from Tasssjara Road with associated bridges over Tassajara Creek into the site. The on -site main roadway is to be extended in a northwesterly direction to provide access to individual neighborhoods on the site. The second access is provided into the site from Tassajara Road with a bridge crossing Tassajara Creek south of the main drive. Both bridges over Tassajara Creek have been constructed in accordance with approved plans and all required local, state and federal agency permits. Proposed Development Plan. The proposed Development Plan would be similar to the approved plan, with the proposed changes listed below, including build -out of fewer City of Dublin Page 7 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch /Trumark Project April 2014 dwellings. The area of development and ground disturbance on the site would be the same as established in the approved development plan. ® The total number of dwellings would be reduced from 935 to up to 809. See Table 1, below. ® In addition a public Neighborhood Park included in the approved plan, bisected by the Tassajara Creek Conservation Area, a 3.0 gross acre private park would be provided in the approximate center of the site. ® The main interior roadway would be located in a more westerly location than shown in the approved plan Proposed public Neighborhood Parks, Open Space areas and the Public/ Semi - Public area would remain the same as the approved plan and would contain approximately the same acreage as approved. Exhibit 4 shows the proposed development plan for this project. Table 1 compares approved and proposed land uses on the project site. Table 1. Approved v. Proposed Development Plans Land Use Type Approved Development Proposed Development Gross Acres Dwellings Gross Acres Dwellings Low Density Res. 15.4 58 15.4 92 Medium Density Res. 57.1 629 57.1 531 Med. High Density Res. 13.1 248 13.1 186 Water Quality Basin 2.9 -- 2.9 -- Neighborhood Park 10.4 -- 10.4 -- Open Space 83.3 1 -- 83.3 -- Semi Public 1.9 1 -- 1.9 -- Total 184.1 1 935 1 184.1 1 809 Source: Project Applicant, 2013 Note: the 2005 SEIR analyzed development up to 1,034 dwellings on the site. Circulation and access. Vehicular access to and from the site is currently provided from Tassajara Road via two roadways. Both roads traverse Tassajara Creek via existing bridges that would extend into the interior of the site and provide access to all of the neighborhoods. Smaller private roadways would be constructed off of the main road for access into each neighborhood and private in -tract streets would provide access to individual dwellings. Road widths would vary from 74 feet for the main project access road to 34.5 feet for roads within neighborhoods. Sidewalks or walkways would be provided on one or both sides of all streets. City of Dublin Page 8 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch /frumark Project April 2014 A 6-ft. wide concrete sidewalk would be constructed along the project frontage on the western side of Tassajara Road. The sidewalk would also serve as a portion of a regional recreation trail. This would be consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element. Additionally, an on-site and at-grade trail would be constructed extending from the southwesterly edge of the site and adjacent to the western edge of Tassajara Creek would link the East Bay Regional Park District trail to Contra Costa County to the north. Building architecture and design. Future dwellings that would be constructed on the 0 9 project site would include single-family detached dwellings (up to 622 dwellings), townhouses (up to 126 dwellings) and three-plex attached dwellings (up to 61 dwellings). Future dwellings would generally be of two-and three-story construction and would reflect a rural/ agrarian design theme. Exterior building materials would consist of stucco, board and batten siding or lap siding. Roof material would consist of composition shingle or concrete tile. A variety of window and door treatments would be designed and each dwelling would have accent material to present an aesthetically pleasing appearance. A number of floor plans and sizes would be constructed. Dwelling unit sizes would range from approximately 1,960 to 4,158 square feet each. Each dwelling would include vehicle parking in the form of enclosed garages or open parking that would meet City of Dublin parking requirements. Landscaping. The applicant proposes a comprehensive landscape plan for the project. Landscaping would including planting of street trees along all project roadways, public and private parks and open space slope areas. An enhanced entryway would be provided at the main project road along Tassajara Road. The entry area would consist of project identification sign, monumentation and enriched landscaping. Utility services. Domestic water, recycled water and sewer service would be provided by Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD). The project developer would be required to install mainline extension of sewer along the frontage, to the entrance of the project, as well as the in-tract water and sewer lines and laterals. Surface water quality improvements would include a central water quality/ hydromodification pond in the south-central portion of the site. Bio-swales to filter stormwater runoff would also be installed adjacent to most of the streets in the project. Grading. The applicant proposes to grade the site to allow construction of the residential areas, roadways, parks and related improvements. Generally, the site would be re-contoured from its present condition to provide a flatter development area in the central portion of the site. The existing open space areas on the west side of the project site would not be graded. A number of retaining walls are proposed on the site. It is City of Dublin Page 9 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 anticipated that cut and fill will balance on the site, which means no dirt would be imported into or exported from the site. Erosion controls would be implemented during grading activities pursuant to City and Regional Water Quality Board requirements, as enforced by the City of Dublin, to protect surface water quality. Inclusionary housing. The inclusionary housing requirement was met for Dublin Ranch West (Wallis Ranch) by the Fairway Ranch (The Groves) development and therefore, no further requirement is necessary. With the reduction of units with this application from 935 to approximately 809, the original requirement of 117 units would be reduced to 101 thereby potentially over-providing 16 inclusionary units. Historic resource: The Antone School building is located on the site. This building has been relocated to the project site from elsewhere on the larger Dublin Ranch site. The current Development Agreement for the property requires the developer to relocate this structure on the site and restore it. If the structure is damaged during relocation, the Development Agreement requires the developer to construct a replacement structure with the exterior design resembling the current building, as approved by the Dublin Community Development Department. Requested land use approvals. A number of land use approvals are required from the City of Dublin to construct the project as proposed. These are described in more detail below. PD Rezoning with Amended Stage I & Stage 2 Development Plan. Previously approved Stage I and Stage 2 Development Plans and associated land use development standards would be replaced by the proposed Development Plan shown on Exhibit 4. Site Development Review (SD R). A Site Development Review permit has been requested to approve exterior building architecture, landscaping, walls and fences and related improvements. Vesting Tentative Map. The Vesting Tentative Tract Map is shown on Exhibit 5. Approval of the subdivision map would create a number of smaller building lots for individual dwellings, multi-family housing, parks, open space, roads and utilities. Development Agreement. A 15 year Development Agreement was approved or this property in 2009, and remains in force until 2024. In accordance with the provisions of the development Agreement, the property owner has the right to assign all or a portion of the Agreement to any potential purchaser of all or a portion of the site to the satisfaction of the City Manager. The current Development Agreement may be amended or a new Agreement negotiated. City of Dublin Page 10 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trurnark Project April 2014 0 0 0 U 0 x 0 w CITY OF DUBLIN WALLIS RANCH /TRUMARK PROJECT INITIAL STUDY Exhibit 1 REGIONAL LOCATION 0 2 4 6 8 10 miles SAN P A 8 L 0 4 Martinez 4 B A Y San so Concord 680 Rafael Richmond Mill 101 580 Valley Walnut 24 Creek Berkeley O 680 Oakland San Francisco 580 AIaM�a 5 A N San Leandro DUBLIN FRANCISCO 880 Sso Daly A City Livermore B A Y h 101 Pleasanton Hayward 92 200 N, San Mateo Fremont h 84 1 Newark Q Redwood City r Half Moon 84 Bay Palo <O Alto A 880 8 101 680 280 Sunnyvale Santa Clara San Jose 101 17 CITY OF DUBLIN WALLIS RANCH /TRUMARK PROJECT INITIAL STUDY Exhibit 1 REGIONAL LOCATION 0 2 4 6 8 10 miles W -3 0 Cr a. Y D cc F- 3: Z cc LL (1) 0—. U) -j z E X -j ui >1 C\I ...... ... .. - — - ®. ®, ® - ®! 0 Fallon Rd. x uj uj 55 ui assajara RrIA, O < z U) < F�s Hacienda Dr. w A4 J CL O w Arnold Rd. LL O (t LU Lu CC LU LU ,),Ou,herty Rd, 0 U) LL 0 Damon Rd. San r W -3 0 Cr a. Y D cc F- 3: Z cc LL (1) 0—. U) -j z E X -j ui >1 C\I Z 0 x uj uj 55 W -3 0 Cr a. Y D cc F- 3: Z cc LL (1) 0—. U) -j z WI V9 41 j . ........... I ....... W n 0 cr. CL it • Y X cc Z.T. M Z cc: U. (n F- Lij 0 U) 0 F- co 5 z o it • Y X cc Z.T. M Z cc: U. (n F- Lij 0 U) 0 F- co 5 z o ,3. ■ 11 Buz zap_ R Z -j CL I-- z uj 05 CL 0 —j LU W uj 0 Lij U) 0 (L 0 F- 0 W 0 cc CL M Wc Z_ -j Co Z 0 CC U. U) 0 4 a 7;9 it 1P P /I v ,3. ■ 11 Buz zap_ R Z -j CL I-- z uj 05 CL 0 —j LU W uj 0 Lij U) 0 (L 0 F- 0 W 0 cc CL M Wc Z_ -j Co Z 0 CC U. U) 0 1. Project description: Constructing up to 809 dwellings at various densities and product types on the site, as well as two public and one private parks, open spaces, a public /semi- public site and roads. The proposed project would also include grading of the site to accommodate proposed uses and extension of utilities to and within the site. 2. Lead agency: City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin CA 94568 3. Contact persons: Michael A. Porto Consulting Planner (925) 833 6610 4. Project location: Generally located on the west side of Tassajara Road and, south of the City limit line and east of Parks RFTA 5. Project sponsor: Christopher Davenport Trumark Homes 6. General Plan designation: Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Medium/ High Density Residential Open Space Public/ Semi - Public 7. Zoning: PD- Planned Development S. Other public agency required approvals: • Approval of PD- Planned Development zoning (City of Dublin); • Approval of a Stage 2 Development Plan (City of Dublin); • Approval of a Vesting Tentative Map (City of Dublin); • Approval of a Site Development Review (SDR) Permit; • Approval of Development Agreement (City of Dublin, possible); • Notice of Intent (State Water Resources Control Board); • Issuance of building and grading permits (City of Dublin); and • Approval of water and sewer connections (DSRSD) City of Dublin Page 16 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "potentially significant impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Determination (to be completed by Lead Agency): On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and the previous Negative Declaration certified for this project by the City of Dublin adequately addresses potential impacts. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Negative Declaration will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be any new or substantially more severe significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects: a) have been analyzed adequately in earlier CEQA documents pursuant to applicable standards; and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to those earlier CEQA documents, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed on the proposed Project, except for those impacts which were identified as significant and unavoidable and for which Statements of Overriding Considerations were previously adopted by the City. An Addendum to the Eastern Dublin Environmental Impact Report, the 2005 Dublin Ranch West Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, and 2007 MND will be prepared. I find that the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects City of Dublin Page 17 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Aesthetics - Agricultural - Air Quality Resources Biological - Cultural Resources - Geology / Soils Resources Hazards and Hydrology /Water Land Use/ Hazardous Quality Planning Materials Mineral Resources Noise Population/ Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/ Circulation Utilities/ Service Mandatory Systems Findings of Significance Determination (to be completed by Lead Agency): On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and the previous Negative Declaration certified for this project by the City of Dublin adequately addresses potential impacts. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Negative Declaration will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be any new or substantially more severe significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects: a) have been analyzed adequately in earlier CEQA documents pursuant to applicable standards; and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to those earlier CEQA documents, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed on the proposed Project, except for those impacts which were identified as significant and unavoidable and for which Statements of Overriding Considerations were previously adopted by the City. An Addendum to the Eastern Dublin Environmental Impact Report, the 2005 Dublin Ranch West Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, and 2007 MND will be prepared. I find that the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects City of Dublin Page 17 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed on the proposed project. Signature: P" Date: ?.2,1 Printed Name: City of Dublin Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project For: A Of y 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "no impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parenthesis following each question. A "no impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "no impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project- specific factors as well as general factors (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project- specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project - level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less- than - significant with mitigation, or less - than - significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less- than - Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less- than - Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less - than - significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier Analysis," as described in (5) below, may be cross - referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). The checklist will include a response "no new impact" in these circumstances. In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed: Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less -Than- Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site - specific conditions for the project. City of Dublin Page 19 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 6) Lead Agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances, etc.). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is a suggested form and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each agency should identify the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question and the mitigation measures identified, if any, to reduce the impact to a less than significant level. City of Dublin Page 20 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Environmental Impacts (Note: Source of determination listed in parenthesis. See listing of sources used to determine each potential impact at the end of the checklist) Note: A full discussion of each item is found following the checklist. 1. Aesthetics. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (Source: 1, 2, 5) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (Source: 1, 2, 5) c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Source: 5) d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Source: 1, 2, 5) 2. Agricultural Resources Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to a non- agricultural use? (Source: 1, 2) b) Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Source: 1, 2) c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to a non- agricultural use? (Source: 1, 2, 5) 3. Air Quality (Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district may be relied on to make the following determinations). Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (Source: 1,4) b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? (Source: 2) City of Dublin Initial Study/Wallis RanchfTrumark Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X X Page 21 April 2014 c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? (2) d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Source: 2, 5) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Source: 6) 4. Biological Resources. Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ?(Source: 1, 2, 6) b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Source: 1, 2.6) c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other means? (Source: Source: 2, 3, 6) d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (Source: 2, 5) e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree protection ordinances? (Source: 2, 6) City of Dublin Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X Page 22 April 2014 f) Conflict with the provision of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? (Source: 6) 5. Cultural Resources. Would the project a) Cause a substantial adverse impact in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Sec. 15064.5? (Source: 1, 2) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to Sec. 15064.5 (Source: 1, 2) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource, site or unique geologic feature? (Source: 1, 2) d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of a formal cemetery? (2) 6. Geology and Soils. Would the project a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault (Source: 2, 3,6) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking (2, 6) iii) Seismic- related ground failure, including liquefaction? (2, 6) iv) Landslides? (2, 6) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (Source: 2, 6) c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or similar hazards (Source: 2, 6) d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (Source: 2,6) City of Dublin Initial StudyANallis Ranch /frumark Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X X X X X Page 23 April 2014 e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? (Source: 1, 2) 7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials (Source: 2, 6) b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Source: 2, 6) c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Source: 2, 6) d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Sec. 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Source: 6) e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted within two miles of a public airport of public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (Source: 2, 6) f) For a project within the vicinity of private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (Source: 2, 6) g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with the adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Source: 2, 6) City of Dublin Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X Page 24 April 2014 h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (Source: 2, 6) Hydrology and Water Quality. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (Source: 2, 4 ) b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g. the production rate of existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? (I, 2) c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? (Source: 2, 5, 6) d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or areas, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? (Source: 2, 5) e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (Source: 4,5) f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? (Source: 4, 5) g) Place housing within a I00 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other- flood delineation map? (Source: 4) City of Dublin Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X Page 25 April 2014 h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Source: 4) i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, and death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? (2) j) Inundation by seiehe, tsunami or mudflow? (5) 9. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? (Source: 1, 2, 5) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Source: 1, 1,2) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? (2, 6) 10. Mineral Resources. Would the project a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state, (Source: 1, 2) b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general Plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Source: I , 2) 11. Noise. Would the proposal result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (2,3) b) Exposure of persons or to generation of excessive (Yroundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (Source: 2, 6) c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above existing levels without the project? (2, 5) City of Dublin Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X X X X Page 26 April 2014 d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (2, 5) e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working n the project area to excessive noise levels? (2, 6) f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Source: 2, 6) 12. Population and Housing. Would the project a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (Source: 2, 5) b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (5) c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement of housing elsewhere? (Source: 5) 13. Public Services. Would the proposal: a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service rations, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services? (Sources: 2, 4) Fire protection Police protection Schools Parks Other public facilities Solid Waste City of Dublin Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X X X X X Page 27 April 2014 14. Recreation: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated (Source: 2, 4) b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Source: 2, 4.6) 15. Transportation and Traffic. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (Le. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads or congestion at intersections)? (2, 3) b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the County Congestion Management Agency for designated roads or highways? (2, 3) c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (2,3) d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses, such as farm equipment? (4) e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (4) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (4) g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (such as bus turnouts and bicycle facilities) (1,4) City of Dublin Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X I X X X X X 16. Utilities and Service Systems. Would the project a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (2, 4) b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (2,4) c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (4) d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing water entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (4) e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the providers existing commitments? (4) f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? (4) g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? (4) 17. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause afish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? City of Dublin Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X I X X X X X X X BENZ, b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects). c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant I Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X Sources used to determine ootential environmental impacts I Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan EIR 2 2005 Dublin Ranch West SEIR 3 Trip Generation Analysis (TJKM) 4. Discussion with City staff or service provider 5. Site Visit 6. Other Source XVIL Earlier Analyses a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. Portions of the environmental setting, project impacts and mitigation measures for this Initial Study refer to environmental information contained in the 1993 Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 91103064), hereinafter referred to as the Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR is a Program EIR which was prepared for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan of which this Project is a part. It was certified by the Dublin City Council on May 10, 1993. Following certification of the EIR, the Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for impacts including but not limited to: cumulative traffic, extension of certain community facilities (natural gas, electric and telephone service), regional air quality, noise and visual. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a large number of mitigation measures which apply to this Project and which would be applied to any development within the project area. Specific mitigation measures identified in the certified Eastern Dublin EIR for potential impacts are referenced in the text of this Initial Study. City of Dublin Page 30 Initial Study/Wallis RanchfTrumark Project April 2014 This Initial Study relies on 2005 Dublin Ranch West Supplemental EIR (State Clearinghouse #2003022082), certified by the Dublin City Council by Resolution No. 42- 05 on March 15, 2005. This Initial Study also relies on a Mitigated Negative Declaration for an 11.6 -acre site located just north of the Wallis Ranch but included in the earlier City of Dublin approval for the site (State Clearinghouse #2003022082), certified by the Dublin City Council by Resolution No. XX -07 on February 20, 2007. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and 15163, this Initial Study is intended to identify the potential for any new or substantially increased significant impacts on or of the project which were not evaluated in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the 2005 SEIR and which would require additional environmental review. City of Dublin Page 31 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Attachment to Initial Study Discussion of Checklist 1. Aesthetics Environmental Setting The project is set in an a portion of Eastern Dublin that is transitioning to urban uses under the auspices of the City of Dublin General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin EIR, adopted in 1993. The existing natural topography includes consists of steep slopes in the western portion of the site adjacent to Parks RFTA transitioning to moderate to gentle slopes in the approximate center of the site. The portion of the site lying adjacent to Tassajara Creek is generally flat. The portion of the project site adjacent to Tassajara Creek is heavily wooded. This area is protected by an existing conservation easement and trees and other vegetation and would not be disturbed as part of this project. Tassajara Road from the I -580 freeway to the south, to the Alameda County - Contra Costa County line just north of the Dublin Ranch West site is classified as a Scenic Route in the Alameda County Scenic Route Element of the General Plan, which has also been adopted by the City of Dublin by reference in the City of Dublin General Plan. No existing parks, playgrounds, scenic vistas or other places for public gathering are found on the project site. As a largely rural area, minimal light sources exist on the project site. Regulatory framework Dublin General Plan. The project area is included in the Eastern Dublin Extended Planning Area. Implementing Policy C.2 of the General Plan states that "proposed site grading and means of access will not disfigure ridgelands." Further, Implementing Policy C. 5 requires development projects to be consistent with all applicable General Plan and Specific Plan policies." Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The City of Dublin adopted the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) in 1993 to guide the future development of approximately 3,200 acres of land in the eastern Dublin area. The Specific Plan includes a number of policies and programs dealing with visual resources, including but not limited to protection of ridgelines and ridgelands, scenic corridors, and hillside development. Previous CEQA documents Eastern Dztblin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated visual resource impacts from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include: City of Dublin Page 32 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Mitigation Measure 3.8/ 1.0 reduced project impacts related to standardized tract development (IM 3.8/13) to a less- than - significant level. This mitigation requires future developers to establish visually distinct communities which preserves the character of the natural landscape by protecting key visual elements and maintaining views from major travel corridors. Mitigation Measure 3.8 / 2.0 reduced the impact of converting the rural and open space character of the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan area (IM 3.8/B) but not to a less-than-significant level. The mitigation measure requires implementation of the land use plan that emphasizes retention of predominant natural features. Even with adherence to this measure, IM 3.8/13 would remain significant and unavoidable on both a project and cumulative level. Mitigation Measure 3.8/3.0 would reduce the impact of obscuring distinctive natural features of the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan area (IM 3.8 / C) but not to a less -than- significant level. The mitigation measure requires implementation of the land use plan that emphasizes retention of predominant natural features. Mitigation Measures 3.8 / 4.0-4.5 reduced the impact of altering the visual quality of hillsides (IM 3.8/D) to a less - than - significant level. These mitigation measures require impleintation of appropriate Eastern Dublin Specific Plan policies including but not limited to use of sensitive grading design to minimize grading, use of existing topographic features, limiting use of flat pads for construction, using building designs that conform to natural land forms, recontouring hillside to resemble existing topography and minimizing the height of cut and fill slopes. Mitigation Measures 3.8/5.0 -5.2 reduced the impact of altering the visual quality of ridges (IM 3.8/E) to a less- than - significant level. These mitigation measures limit development on main ridges that border the Specific Plan area to the north and east but are allowed on foreground hills, and would limit development in locations where scenic views would be obscured or would extend above a ridgetop. IM 3.8/F analyzed alteration of the visual character of the Eastern Dublin flatlands. No mitigation measures were identified and the impact was identified as significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measure 3.8 / 6.0 reduced the impact of altering the visual quality of watercourses (IM 3.8 / G) to a less-than-significant level. This mitigation measure protects Tassajara Creek and other stream courses from unnecessary alteration or disturbance, and adjoining development should be sited to maintain visual access to stream corridors. Mitigation Measures 3.8/7.0 and 7/1 reduced impacts on scenic vistas (IM 3.8/1) to a less- than - significant level. These mitigation measures require protection of City of Dublin Page 33 Initial Study/Wallis RanchfTrumark Project April 2014 designated open space areas and directs the City to conduct a visual survey of the EDSP area to identify and map viewsheds. 2005 SEIR. Aesthetics were addressed in the Initial Study for the SEIR. No potentially significant aesthetic impacts or mitigation measures were identified in this document. The proposed project will be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures related to aesthetics set forth in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Project Impacts a,b) Have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista or substantially damage scenic resources, within a state scenic highway? No New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR identifies that implementation of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan would result in a potentially significant impact (Impact 3.8/I), in that development in the Eastern Dublin planning area will alter the character of existing scenic vistas and may obscure important sightlines. Adherence to Mitigation Measure 3.8 / 7.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR reduced this impact to a less - than - significant impact. This measure requires the City to preserve views of designated open space areas and to complete a visual assessment and guidelines for the Eastern Dublin area. There are no scenic vistas visible from public vantage points along Tassajara Road. The proposed project would include grading of the project site from its existing natural condition so that access roads, building pads, water quality improvements and related improvements. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified the potential for alteration of visual resources along scenic routes, including Tassajara Road (Impact 3.8/j). The same portion of the site would be disturbed for development as has been previously analyzed in the 2005 SEIR and approved by the City of Dublin. The heavily wooded areas of the Wallis site along Tassajara Creek are protected by a conservation easement. All of the mitigation measures contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the visual policies contained in the EDSP will apply to this project. There are no impacts beyond those in the prior review; no additional analysis is required. C) Substantially degrade existing visual character or the duality of the site and its surroundings? No New Impact. The proposed project includes the consideration of a modified development plan for the Wallis Ranch project in Eastern Dublin. Aesthetic impacts would include disturbance of existing vegetation, Landform modification resulting from grading building pads and roads, and construction of a mix of housing units where none now exist. The Eastern Dublin EIR addressed the following potential impacts related to visual and aesthetics impacts of adopting the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan: Impact 3.8/13: Urban development of the project site will substantially alter the existing rural and open space qualities that characterize Eastern Dublin City of Dublin Page 34 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 The Eastern Dublin EIR identified one measure to mitigate this impact (Mitigation Measure 3.8/ 2.0, "Implement the land use plan for the project site which emphasizes retention of predominant natural features... "). Both the approved and proposed development plans on the project site would adhere to this mitigation measure by preserving Tassajara Creek that provides a significant natural feature on and adjacent to the site. However the Eastern Dublin EIR concluded that even with adherence to Mitigation Measure 3.8 / 2, alteration of rural and open space in Eastern Dublin would remain a potentially significant impact. The proposed Stage 2 Development Plan, if approved, would disturb the same amount of the site as the currently approved plan and has been analyzed in the 2005 SEIR. A large portion of the site, within and adjacent to Tassajara Creek, would remain undeveloped. No new or more severe impacts have been identified in this Initial Study and no further analysis is required. d) Create light or glare? No New Impact. The project site contains minimal light sources and construction of the proposed project would add additional light sources in the form of streetlights along exterior and interior roadways as well as building and security lighting, as noted in the Initial Study for the 2005 SEIR. City of Dublin development requirements will be imposed as standard conditions as part of the normal and customary review process to restrict spillover of unwanted light off of the project site. The amount of light and glare would be reduced compared to that assumed in the 2005 SEIR. No new or more significant impacts would result with respect to light and glare than has been previously analyzed in the previous CEQA documents and no additional analysis is required. 2. Agricultural and Forestry Resources Environmental Setting The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a description of agricultural resources on and around the project area at the time of EIR certification. Agricultural and grazing uses historically predominated within the project area and throughout the Eastern Dublin area. Urban development has commenced pursuant to the adopted EDSP on lands immediately east of the project site and agricultural uses, including cattle grazing have ceased on the project site. The Project site is currently fallow. There are no current Williamson Act Land Conservation Agreements on the property. The Alameda County Important Farmland Map (2000) designates the project area as "Grazing Lands," with vegetation found on lands within this classification being suitable for grazing of livestock. No forests or major stands of trees exist on the site, although the Tassajara Creek corridor, located east of the site is heavily wooded. City of Dublin Page 35 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Previous CEQA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified several potential impacts related to agricultural resources. Impact IM 3.1 / C stated that discontinuation of agricultural uses would be an insignificant impact due to on -going urbanization trends in Dublin and the Tri- Valley area. Impact 3.1/D identified a loss of lands of Farmlands of Local Importance with approval and implementation of the General Plan and Specific Plan. This was also noted as an insignificant impact. Impact 3.1 / F stated that buildout of Specific Plan land uses would have a significant and unavoidable impact on cumulative loss of agricultural and open space lands. Finally, Impact IM 3.1 / E noted indirect impacts related to non - renewal of Williamson Act contracts. This impact was also identified as less -than- significant impact. 2005 SEIR. Agriculture resources were addressed in Chapter 4.1 of the SEIR. No additional significant impacts to agricultural resources were identified in this document. Project Impacts a,c) Convert prime farmland to a non - agricultural use or involve other changes which could result in conversion of farmland to a non - agricultural use? No significant impacts were identified with respect to agricultural resources in previous CEQA documents listed above. The project proposes uses consistent with, but at a lesser intensity and density than assumed in prior reviews. No new conditions have been identified in this Initial Study with respect to conversion of prime farmland to a non - agricultural use and no new or more severe impacts would result than were analyzed in previous CEQA documents for this site. No additional analysis is required. Development of the project site would continue to contribute to cumulative loss of agricultural land and open space, which was identified as a significant and unavoidable impact in the Eastern Dublin EIR (Impact 3.1 / F). b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No New Impact. The City of Dublin has previously zoned much of the project site for residential uses. No agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contracts presently exist on the site nor are any agricultural operations on- going. No new or more severe impacts would result than have been previously analyzed in other CEQA documents for the site. No additional analysis is required. d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to a non forest use? No Impact. No forest land exists on the development portion of the project site and no impact would result with respect to this topic. e) Involve other changes which, due to their location or nature, could result of forest land to a non forest use? No Impact. See item "d," above. City of Dublin Page 36 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 3. lair Quality Environmental Setting The project is within the Livermore - Amador Valley. The Livermore - Amador Valley forms a small subregional air basin distinct from the larger San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. The Livermore - Amador Valley air basin is surrounded on all sides by high hills or mountains. Significant breaks in the hills surrounding the air basin are Niles Canyon and the San Ramon Valley, which extends northward into Contra Costa County. The terrain of the Livermore - Amador Valley influences both the climate and air pollution potential of the sub - regional air basin. As an inland, protected valley, the area has generally lighter winds and a higher frequency of calm conditions when compared to the greater Bay Area. The occurrence of episodes of high atmospheric stability, known as inversion conditions, severely limits the ability of the atmosphere to disperse pollutants vertically. Inversions occur during all seasons in the Bay Area, but are particularly prevalent in the summer months when they are present about 90% of the time in both morning and afternoon. According to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, air pollution potential is high in the Livermore Valley, especially for ozone in the summer and fall (BAAQMD, 2005 SEIR, p. 38). High temperatures increase the potential for ozone, and the valley not only traps locally generated pollutants but also can be the receptor of ozone and ozone precursors from upwind portions of the greater Bay Area. Transport of pollutants also occurs between the Livermore Valley and the San Joaquin Valley to the east. During the winter, the sheltering effect of terrain and its inland location results in frequent surface -based inversions. Under these conditions, pollutants such as carbon monoxide from automobiles and particulate matter generated by fireplaces and agricultural burning can become concentrated. Previous CEQA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated air quality impacts from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include: • Mitigation Measures 3.11 / 1.0 reduced construction dust deposition impacts but not to a level of less than significant (Impact 3.11 / A). MM 3.11 / 1.0 requires development projects to implement dust control measures. Even with these measures, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable. • Mitigation Measures 3.11/2.0-4.0 reduced project and cumulative impacts related to vehicle emission from construction equipment (IM 3.11 / B) but not to a less - than- significant level. These mitigations require emission control from on -site equipment, completion of a construction impact reduction plan and others. Even City of Dublin Page 37 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 with adherence to these mitigations, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measures 3.11/5.0-11.0 reduced mobile source emission from ROG and NOx (IM 3.11 / Q but not to a less- than - significant level. Mitigation Measures require coordination of growth with transportation plans and other measures. Many of which are at a policy (not a project) level. Even with adherence to adopted mitigations, IM 3.11 / C would remain significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measures 3.11/12.0-13.0 reduced project and cumulative impacts related to stationary source emissions (IM 3.11 / E) but not to a less-than- significant level. The two adopted mitigations require reduction of stationary source emissions to the extent feasible by use of energy conservation techniques and recycling of solid waste material. Even with adherence to the two measures, stationary source emissions would remain significant and unavoidable. 2005 SEIR. This document identified the following significant supplemental impacts and supplemental air quality mitigation measures. Mitigation Measure SM-AQ-1 reduced impacts related to construction emission from construction activities (Supplemental Impact AQ-1) to a less-than- significant level. Specific items listed in this measure required contractors to cover stockpiles of debris, sweep paved access roads and parking areas and construction staging areas and install sandbags or equivalent to prevent silt runoff from construction areas. Mitigation Measure SM-AQ-2 reduced Supplemental Impact AQ-2 but not to a less-than-significant level. Supplemental Impact AQ-2 noted that the project would result in a regional emission increase exceeding BAAQMD thresholds for emission of ozone precursors. Mitigation Measure SM-AQ-2 required the project proponent to coordinate with the regional public transit provider to extend service the site along with transit improvements, the project developer to provide bike paths and sidewalks, consider a local shuttle service to regional transit hubs and consider installing a telecommute center. Even with adherence to all of these features, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Supplemental Impact AQ-3 noted that project emissions of ozone would exceed the BAAQMD threshold of significance for this pollutant. Adherence to Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM-AQ-2 would partially but not fully reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level and this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. The proposed project will be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures related to air quality. Project Impacts City of Dublin Page 38 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trurnark Project April 2014 a) Would the project conflict or obstruct implementation of an air quality plan? No New Impact. The amount of development proposed on the site would be less than previously considered and approved by the City of Dublin. Approved uses on the project site includes up to 935 dwellings with a mix of attached and detached dwellings. The proposed project would allow development of up to 809 dwellings on the site, which would be up to 126 fewer dwellings. Therefore, approval and implementation of the proposed project would represent a substantial dwelling unit decrease on the site used as the basis of the regional Clean Air Plan. The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct the regional Clean Air Plan. No new or more significant impacts would result than was previously analyzed in other CEQA documents. b,c) Would the project violate any air quality standards or result in cumulatively considerable air pollutants? No New Impact. Air quality impacts of development of the Eastern Dublin Planning area were analyzed in the 1993 Eastern Dublin EIR. The EIR found that future development of the Eastern Dublin area, including the proposed project, would contribute to the cumulative impacts related to dust deposition, construction equipment emissions, mobile source emissions and stationary source emissions and would exceed air quality standards. These impact (Impacts (IM/ 3.11 /A, B, C and E) were was found to be significant and unavoidable when the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan was approved. The 2005 Supplemental EIR also found that development if up to 935 dwellings on the Dublin Ranch West site would result in a significant and unavoidable emission of ozone Since the proposed project would contain fewer dwellings anticipated in the Eastern Dublin EIR and up to 126 fewer dwellings than analyzed in the 2005 SEIR, there would be no new or more severe impact with respect to violation of air quality standards than has been previously analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR. No new analysis is required. d,e) Expose sensitive receptors to significant pollutant concentrations or create objectionable odors? No New Impact. Impact. Residential uses are considered sensitive receptors, however, the site is not located adjacent to any freeways that would release significant air emissions. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified this impact as a potentially significant cumulative impact which could not be mitigated to achieve the eight -fold reduction in stationary source emissions needed to meet the insignificant threshold and, pursuant to CEQA, the City of Dublin adopted a Statement of Overriding Consideration for this impact in connection with the Eastern Dublin, 2005, and 2007 project approvals. No new impacts are identified in this Initial Study beyond those identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the 2005 SEIR, and no additional analysis is required. Since the proposed project does not include manufacturing or similar uses, no objectionable odors would be created. City of Dublin Page 39 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 4. Biological Resources Environmental Se" The project area, consisting of the development area and the approximately 23-acre western open space area, is dominated by non-native grassland with small areas of developed lands, riparian woodland and other aquatic habitat. A substantial amount of riparian woodland exists within the Tassajara Creek Management Zone, an adjacent private open space area that consists mostly of non-native grassland habitat with some riparian habitat. This area is not proposed for development. Regulatory framework California Fish and Wildlife Code Section 1600. Streams, lakes, and riparian vegetation as habitat for fish and other wildlife species, are subject to jurisdiction by CIDFW under Sections 1600-1616 of the California Fish and Game Code. Any activity that will do one or more of the following: 1) substantially obstruct or divert the natural flow of a river, stream, or lake; 2) substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of a river, stream, or lake; or 3) deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it can pass into a river, stream, or lake; generally require a 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement. The term "stream," which includes creeks and rivers, is defined in the California Code of Regulations (CCR) as follows: "a body of water that flows at least periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and supports fish or other aquatic life. This includes watercourses having a surface or subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation" (14 CCR 1.72). In addition, the term stream can include ephemeral streams, dry washes, watercourses with subsurface flows, canals, aqueducts, irrigation ditches, and other means of water conveyance if they support aquatic life, riparian vegetation, or stream-dependent terrestrial wildlife. Riparian is defined as, "on, or pertaining to, the banks of a stream;" therefore, riparian vegetation is defined as, "vegetation, which occurs in and/or adjacent to a stream and is dependent on, and occurs because of, the stream itself." Removal of riparian vegetation also requires a Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act gives the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Corps regulatory and permitting authority regarding discharge of dredged or fill material into "navigable waters of the United States." Section 502(7) of the Clean Water Act defines navigable waters as "waters of the United States, including territorial seas." Section 328 of Chapter 33 in the Code of Federal Regulations defines the term "waters of the United States" as it applies to the jurisdictional limits of the authority of the Corps under the Clean Water Act. A summary of this definition of "waters of the U.S." in 33 CFR 328.3 includes (1) waters used for commerce; (2) interstate waters and wetlands; (3) '/other waters" such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, and wetlands; (4) impoundments of waters; (5) tributaries to the above waters; (6) territorial seas; and (7) wetlands adjacent to waters. Therefore, for purposes of determining Corps jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act, City of Dublin Page 40 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch[Trumark Project April 2014 "navigable waters" as defined in the Clean Water Act are the same as "waters of the U.S." defined in the Code of Federal Regulations above. The limits of Corps jurisdiction under Section 404 as given in 33 CFR Section 328.4 are as follows: (a) Territorial seas: three nautical miles in a seaward direction from the baseline; (b) Tidal waters of the U.S.: high tide line or to the limit of adjacent non -tidal waters; (c) Non -tidal waters of the U.S.: ordinary high water mark or to the limit of adjacent wetlands; (d) Wetlands: to the limit of the wetland. Some areas that meet the technical criteria for wetlands or eaters may not be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act. Included in this category are some man - induced wetlands, which are areas that have developed at least some characteristics of naturally occurring wetlands due to either intentional or incidental human activities. Examples of man - induced wetlands may include, but are not limited to, irrigated wetlands, impoundments, or drainage ditches excavated in uplands, dredged material disposal areas, and depressions within construction areas. In addition, some isolated wetlands and waters may also be considered outside of Corps jurisdiction as a result of the Supreme Court's decision in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (531 U.S. 159 (2001)). Isolated wetlands and waters are those areas that do not have a surface or groundwater connection to, and are not adjacent to a "navigable waters of the U.S. ", and do not otherwise exhibit an interstate commerce connection. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1341) requires any applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity that may result in a discharge of a pollutant into waters of the United States to obtain a certification from the state in which the discharge originates or would originate, or, if appropriate, from the interstate water pollution control agency having jurisdiction over the affected waters at the point where the discharge originates or would originate, that the discharge will comply with the applicable effluent limitations and water quality standards. A certification obtained for the construction of any facility must also pertain to the subsequent operation of the facility. The responsibility for the protection of water quality in California rests with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and its nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs). Federal and California Endangered Species Acts. The Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) of 1973 prohibits federal agencies from authorizing, permitting, or funding any action that would jeopardize the continued existence of a plant or animal species listed or a candidate for listing as Threatened or Endangered under the ESA. If a federal agency is involved with a proposed action or project that may adversely affect a listed plant or animal, that agency must enter into consultation with the USFWS under Section 7 (a) (2) of the FESA. Individuals, corporations, and state or local agencies with proposed actions or projects that do not require authorizing, permitting, or funding from a federal agency but that may result in the "take" of listed species or candidate species are required to apply to the USFWS for a Section 10(a) incidental take permit. The State of California enacted similar laws to the FESA, the California Native Plant City of Dublin Page 41 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Protection Act (NPPA) in 1977 and the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) in 1984. The CESA expanded upon the original NPPA and enhanced legal protection for plants, but the NPPA remains part of the California Fish and Game Code. To align with the FESA, CESA created the categories of "threatened" and "endangered" species. The State converted all animal species listed as "rare" under the FESA into the CESA as threatened species, but did not do so for rare plants. Thus, these laws provide the legal framework for protection of California - listed rare, threatened, and endangered plant and animal species. CDFW implements NPPA and CESA, and its Wildlife and Habitat Data Analysis Branch maintain the CNDDB, a computerized inventory of information on the general location and status of California's rarest plants, animals, and natural communities. East Alameda County Conservation Strategy. The project site is located in the East Alameda County Conservation Strategy ( "Conservation Strategy ") Study Area. The Conservation Strategy is intended to provide an effective framework to protect, enhance, and restore natural resources in eastern Alameda County, while improving and streamlining the environmental permitting process for impacts resulting from infrastructure and development projects. The City of Dublin is a partner in the Conservation Strategy and uses the document to provide a baseline inventory of biological resources and conservation priorities during project -level planning and environmental permitting. Eastern Dublin Comprehensive Stream Restoration Program. The Eastern Dublin Comprehensive Stream Restoration Program was adopted by the City of Dublin in 1996 as an implementation program required by the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan. The purpose of this document is to provide more detailed requirements relating to hydrologic and biological conditions for individual development projects proposed adjacent to Tassajara Creek and its tributaries, specifically to ensure that Tassajara Creek restoration policies and programs contained in the Eastern Dublin General Plan and Specific Plan are fully implemented. Previous CEQA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated impacts to biological resources from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include: ® Mitigation Measures 3.7/ 1.0 -4.0 reduced impacts related to direct habitat loss (IM 3.7/A) to a less -than- significant level. These mitigations require minimization of direct habitat loss due to development, preparation of vegetation management and enhancement plans and development of a grazing management plan by the City of Dublin. ® Mitigation Measure 3.7/5.0 reduced impacts related to indirect loss of vegetation removal (IM 3.7/B) to a less -than- significant level. Mitigation Measure 3.7/5.0 requires revegetation of graded or disturbed areas as quickly as possible. City of Dublin Page 42 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Mitigation Measures 3.7/6.0 -17.0 reduced impacts related to loss or degradation of botanically sensitive habitats (IM 3.7/C) to a less- than - significant level. These measures require a wide range of steps to be taken by future developers to minimize impacts to sensitive habitat areas, including preserving natural stream corridors, incorporating natural greenbelts and open space into development projects, preparation of individual wetland delineations, preparation of individual erosion and sedimentation plans and similar actions. ® Mitigation Measures 3.7/ 18.0 -19.0 reduced impacts related to the San Joaquin kit fox (IM 3.7/D) to a less -than- significant level. These measures require compliance with the specified Kit Fox Protection Plan, consultation with appropriate regulatory agencies regarding the possibility of kit fox on project sites and restrictions on use of pesticides and herbicides. ® Mitigation Measures 3.7/20.0 -22.0 reduced impacts related to the red - legged frog, California tiger salamander, western pond turtle and tri- colored blackbird (IM 3.7 /F -I) to a less- than - significant level. These measures require preconstruction surveys for the species and protection of impacted habitat areas. ® Mitigation Measures 3.7/23.0 -24.0 reduced impacts related to destruction of Golden Eagle nesting sites (IM 3.7/J) to a less - than - significant level. These measures require preconstruction surveys for this species and protection of impacted habitat areas. ® Mitigation Measure 3.7/25.0 reduced impacts related to loss of Golden Eagle foraging habitat (IM 3.7/ K) to a less- than - significant level. This measure requires the identification of a Golden Eagle protection zone within the Eastern Dublin planning area. ® Mitigation Measure 3.7/26.0 reduced impacts related to Golden Eagle and other raptor electrocution (IM 3.7/L) to a less- than - significant level. This measure requires undergrounding of electrical transmission facilities. ® Mitigation Measures 3.7/20.0 and 27.0 reduced impacts related to burrowing owl and American badger (IM 3.7/M, N) to a less - than - significant level. This measure mandates preconstruction surveys and a minimum buffer of 300 feet around burrowing owl nesting sites and American badger breeding sites during the breeding season. ® Mitigation Measure 3.7/28.0 reduced impacts related to special status invertebrates (IM 3.7/S) to a less - than - significant level. This measure requires follow -on special surveys for these species during appropriate times of the year. The Eastern Dublin EIR also addresses potential impacts and mitigation measures regarding bald eagle, peregrine falcons, red - legged frog, California tiger salamander, western pond turtle the prairie falcon, northern harrier, black - shouldered kite, sharp - shinned hawk, Cooper's hawk, short -eared owl and California horned lizard. City of Dublin Page 43 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 2005 SEIR. Chapter 4.3 of this SEIR contained a comprehensive update regarding potential species and identified the following significant biological impacts. Supplemental Impact BIO -1 noted an impact to California Tiger Salamander (CTS) species. Supplemental Mitigation Measures SM -13I0-1 through BIO -7 reduced this impact to a less -than- significant level by requiring preparation of a CTS Management Plan, installation of a barrier fence, conducting CTS larval studies, acquiring compensatory CTS estivation habitat area, completion of an Open Space Management Plan, appointment of a biological resource monitor during construction and providing biological resource education to construction staff. Supplemental Impact BIO -2 found a significant impact with respect to California red - legged frogs (CRLF). This impact was reduced to a less - than - significant level through adherence to Supplemental Mitigation Measures SM -13I0-8 though BIO- 10. These supplemental measures required CRLF avoidance measures during prior to and during construction, provision of compensatory upland and dispersal habitat land and limitations on grading activities during the rainy season. Supplemental Impact BIO -3 noted an impact regarding breeding birds. Adherence to Supplemental Mitigation Measures SM -BIO -5 through 7 and 11 and 12 reduced this impact to a less- than - significant level by limiting tree removal to appropriate times of the year, establishing buffers around trees with nests and conducting pre - construction surveys for protected birds prior to construction. ® Supplemental Impact BIO -4 noted an impact with regard to bat species. Adherence to Supplemental Mitigation Measures SM -13I0-5 through 7 and 13 reduced this impact to a less- than - significant level by requiring preconstruction surveys for bat species. If occupied bat nests are found, a qualified biologist shall implement an exclusion plan to prevent further occupancy. Supplemental Impact BIO -5 found an impact with respect to Burrowing Owls. Adherence to Supplemental Mitigation Measures SM -BIO -5 through 7 and 14 reduced this impact to a less - than - significant level by requiring preconstruction surveys for owl species, limiting construction periods and creating alternative burrows away from construction areas. The mitigation requires the project developer to develop a management plan for enhancement of burrows, monitoring of burrows, funding assurance and similar measures. Supplemental Impact BIO -6 found an impact with loss of special - status plants. Adherence to Supplemental Mitigation Measures SM -BIO -5 through 7 and 15 reduced this impact to a less - than - significant level by requiring compensatory habitat for loss of Congdon's tarplant lost to construction and be requiring the project developer to prepare a detailed mitigation and monitoring plan for this species. City of Dublin Page 44 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Supplemental Impact BIO-7 noted an impact regarding loss of riparian habitat. Adherence to Supplemental Mitigation Measures SM-1310-5 and 6,16 and 17 reduced this impact to a less - than - significant level by mandating replacement riparian habitat at a 3:1 ratio and completing a Riparian Habitat Management Plan to compensate loss of this habitat type. A Tree Removal and Preservation Plan is also required to protect trees from construction activity and to require replacement trees for those lost to construction. Supplemental Impact BIO-8 found a temporary impact with loss of aquatic habitat. Adherence to Supplemental Mitigation Measures SM-1310-6 and 18 reduced this impact to a less-than-significant level by requiring all aquatic habitat to be replaced to pre-project conditions. A Restoration Plan for Tassajara Creek was also required that would minimize impacts to aquatic resources during construction. The proposed project will be required to adhere to applicable biological resource mitigation measures contained in the above documents prepared for the site. Project Impacts a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a candidate, sensitive, Or special- status species? No New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR and 2005 SEIR document the presence of special-status plant and wildlife species within the general project area and on the project site. Numerous mitigation measures are included in the Eastern Dublin EIR and 2005 SEIR to reduce impacts to candidate, sensitive and special- status species to a less-than significant level. These are listed above and must be completed prior to start of development. Therefore, no new or more severe impacts with respect to candidate, sensitive or special-status species would occur than have been analyzed in the three previous CEQA documents. No additional analysis is required. The proposed project would continue to contribute to cumulative loss or degradation of botanically sensitive habitat, which was identified as a significant and unavoidable impact (IM 3.7/C) in the Eastern Dublin EIR. b, c) Have a substantial adverse impact on riparian habitat or federally protected wetlands? No New Impact. No wetlands and waters of the United States have been identified on the upland portion of the project site in the 2005 SEIR. This is the proposed development area. Although wetlands and riparian habitat exist within and adjacent to Tassajara Creek, this area is protected by a permanent conservation easement and no development would occur in this location. No new or more severe impacts would occur than have been previously analyzed with respect to this topic. No additional is required. d) Interfere with movement of native fish or wildlife species? No New Impact. Mitigation measures contained in previous CEQA documents prepared to analyze the currently approved development project on the site contain mitigation measures that reduced this impact to a less - than - significant level, including placement of biological barriers to prevent migration of some species on the site. The proposed City of Dublin Page 45 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trurnark Project April 2014 project would disturb the same amount of the site in the same area as the currently approved site. The regional native fish and wildlife corridor in the project area is Tassajara Creek, which forms the eastern boundary of the site. Tassajara Creek and immediately adjacent land has been included in a permanent conservation easement to ensure full migration opportunities for native fish and wildlife. No new or more severe impacts would occur than have been previously analyzed with respect to potential interference with fish or wildlife movement. No additional analysis is required. e, f) Conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources or any adopted Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans? No New Impact. Approval and construction of the proposed project could affect native oak trees and other trees species on the site. The City of Dublin affords Heritage Tree status to any oak, bay, cypress, maple, redwood, buckeye, or sycamore tree with a main trunk of at least twenty -four inches in diameter when measured at fifty -two inches above the natural grade; trees required for preservation under an approved development plan, zoning permit, use permit, site development review, or subdivision map; and trees planted as replacements for unlawfully removed trees. Permits are required for the removal of any Heritage Tree. Mitigation Measure SM- BIO -17 contained in the 2005 SEIR requires the project applicant to prepare a Tree Removal and Preservation. The measure requires the Plan to be approved by the City prior to issuance of a grading plan. The project site lies within the Eastern Alameda County Conservation Strategy (EACCS) planning area. The City of Dublin utilizes the Conservation Strategy as guidance for environmental permitting for public projects, and private development projects are encouraged to use the EACCS as a resource as well. The Conservation Strategy embodies a regional approach to permitting and mitigation for wildlife habitat impacts associated with land development, infrastructure, and other activities. The Conservation Strategy is neither a Habitat Conservation Plan nor a Natural Community Conservation Plan, but is a document intended to provide guidance during the project planning and permitting process to ensure that impacts are offset in a biologically effective manner. There would therefore be no new or significantly more severe impacts with respect to this topic than previously analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and 2005 SEIR. No additional analysis is required. 5. Cultural Resources Environmental Setting The site is generally vacant and contains an existing inhabited residence (in the process of being vacated), associated outbuildings and one historic school building, the Antone School. The school building was moved onto the site several years ago. The current Development Agreement for the property requires the developer to relocate this structure on the site and restore it. In the event the structure is damaged during City of Dublin Page 46 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 relocation making it impracticable to restore, the developer shall construct a replacement building as approved by the Dublin Community Development Director, The Eastern Dublin EIR did not identify any significant historic structures on the project site. The Initial Study for the 2005 SEIR found impacts to cultural resources to be less -than- significant. Previous CEQA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated impacts to cultural resources from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include: Mitigation Measures 3.9/1.0-4.0 reduced impacts related to disruption or destruction of identified prehistoric resources (IM 3.9/A) to a less -than- significant level. These mitigations mandate a program of mechanical and /or hand subsurface testing for the presence or absence of midden deposits, recordation of identified midden sites, collection and /or testing of resources and development of a site - specific protection program for prehistoric sites. ® Mitigation Measures 3.9/5.0 -6.0 reduced impacts related to the disruption or destruction of unrecorded prehistoric resources (IM 3.913) to a less -than- significant level. These measures required that grading or construction activity be stopped if historic resources were discovered, until the significance of the find could be ascertained. Mitigation Measures 3.9 / 7.0 -12.0 reduced impacts related to disruption or destruction of identified historic resources to a less -than- significant level (Impact 3.9/ C) . These measures would include preparing site - specific archival research for individual resources, encourage adaptive reuse of historic resources, recordation of historic sites on local state and federal registers, as appropriate and development of preservation programs for significant resources. 2005 SEIR. The Initial Study of the 2005 SEIR did not identify any potentially significant impacts or mitigation measures with respect to cultural resources. The proposed project will be required to comply with the EDSP EIR cultural resource mitigation measures. Project Impacts a) Cause substantial adverse change to significant historic resources? No New Impact. Although one historic structure exists on the project site, the Antone School building, the applicant proposes to rehabilitate this structure re -using materials from the existing structure to replace the existing fagade and incorporate the structure into the project. No new or more severe supplemental impacts have City of Dublin Page 47 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 therefore been identified for the proposed project than were disclosed in previous CEQA documents. b, c) Cause a substantial adverse impact or destruction to archeological or paleontological resources? No New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR identifies a remote but potentially significant possibility that construction activities, including site grading, trenching and excavation, may uncover significant archeological and /or paleontological resources on development sites. The Eastern Dublin EIR categorized these resources as pre- historic cultural resources. None of these pre- historic sites were identified by the EIR within near the project site. The Eastern Dublin EIR assumed that all pre- historic sites would be disturbed or altered in some manner. This potential impact was identified and addressed in the Eastern Dublin EIR (Impact 3.9 / A) and mitigation measures 3.9 / 1.0 through 3.9 / 4.0 (page 3.9 -6 — 3.9 -7) that require subsurface testing for archeological resources; recordation and mapping of such resources; and development of a protection program for resources which qualify as "significant" under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Mitigation Measures 3.9/5.0 and 3.9/6.0, described above, also were adopted to address the potential disruption of any previously unidentified pre- historic resources and would apply to the project as may be appropriate. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan also contains policies (Policies 6 -24 and 6 -25) requiring research of archaeological resources prior to construction and determination of the significance and extent of any resources uncovered during grading and construction. Therefore, no new or more significant impacts with respect to cultural resources have been identified that have been previously analyzed in other CEQA documents for the project area and no additional analysis is required. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of a formal cemetery? No New Impact. Existing cultural resource mitigation measures contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR reduced impacts to human remains to a less - than - significant level. No new or more severe impacts with respect to cultural impacts are anticipated beyond those previously analyzed. 6. Geology and Soils Environmental Setting This section is based on a recent site - specific geotechnical report ( "Geotechnical Feasibility Review, Wallis Ranch Residential Development, Alameda County, California" prepared by Cornerstone Earth Group dated June 12, 2013). This report is hereby incorporated by reference into this Initial Study and is available for review at the Dublin Community Development Department during normal business hours. Geology and soils. The Cornerstone report identified alluvial soils on the lower, eastern portion of the site near Tassajara Creek and upper Tassajara Formation bedrock on the City of Dublin Page 48 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 upper hillside portion of the site. Alluvial soils are composed of stiff to very still clays with high potential for shrink and swell. Landslide potential. Portions of the site have moderate to steep slopes. Although some of the hillsides would be re-graded to allow for development, there is a potential for landslide on the site. This topic has been addressed in the Cornerstone report and recommendations are included in the report to ensure landsliding potential will not be significant. Seismic hazard. The Cornerstone report notes that the site is not within an Earthquake Fault Zone (formerly Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone). Major active faults in the region that influence earthquake susceptibility include the San Andreas, Hayward, Calaveras, and Greenville Faults. The site is subject to strong ground shaking in the event of seismic activity, consistent with all of the Bay area. Tsunami and seiche hazards. The risk of damage to future improvements on the site from a tsunami or seiche is low due to the inland location of the site. Previous CEQA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated impacts related to Soils, Geology and Seismicity from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include: Mitigation Measure 3.6/1.0 reduced impacts related to primary effects of earthquake ground shaking (IM 3.6 / B) but not to a less-than-significant level. This mitigation measure requires that future structure and infrastructure facilities be designed to applicable local and state building codes. Mitigation Measures 3.6/2.0 -7.0 reduced impacts related to the secondary effects of earthquake ground shaking (IM 3.9 / Q to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation measures mandate building setbacks from landslides, stabilization of unstable land forms, removal and reconstruction of unstable soils, use of engineered retaining structures, use of appropriately designed and engineered fill, and design of structures to account of potential soil failure. ® Mitigation Measures 3.6/9.0-10.0 reduced impacts related to substantial alteration to landforms to a less-than significant level (IM 3.6/D). Mitigations require grading plans with minimal cuts and fills and careful siting of homes and improvements to avoid excessive grading. Mitigation Measures 3.6/14.0-16.0 reduced impacts related to expansive soils (IM 3.6/H) to a less- than - significant level. Mitigation measures require formulation of site-specific designs to overcome expansive soils, reducing the amount of moisture in the soil and by appropriate foundation and pavement design. Mitigation Measures 3.6/17.0-19.0 reduced impacts related to natural slope stability (IM 3.6 /1) to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation measures mandate City of Dublin Page 49 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch[Trurnark Project April 2014 formulation of use of site - specific designs based on follow -on geotechnical reviews of individual developments, limiting the location of improvements on downslopes of unstable soils, removal/ reconstruction of potentially unstable slope areas and installation of surface and subsurface slope drainage improvements. Mitigation Measures 3.6 / 20.0 -26.0 reduced impacts related to cut and fill slope stability (IM 3.6 / J) to a less- than - significant level. These measures include developing grading plans for hillside areas that minimize grading and associate cuts and fills, ensuring that grading plans comply with appropriate building codes, utilizing keys and benches as part of grading to ensure slope stability and minimizing use of unreinforced fill slopes, appropriate compaction of fill areas and on -going maintenance of slope drainage areas. ® Mitigation Measure 3.6 / 27.0 reduced the impact related to short -term construction- related erosion and sedimentation (IM 3.6 / K) to a less -than- significant level. This measure includes limiting timing of construction to avoid the rainy season and implementing a number of other specific erosion control measures. ® Mitigation Measure 3.6 / 28.0 reduced the impact related to long -term erosion and sedimentation (IM 3.6/L) to a less- than - significant level. This measure includes installation of erosion control facilities into individual development projects, including sediment catch basins, creek bank stabilization, revegetation of graded areas and similar measures. 2005 SEIR. The Initial Study for the 2005 SEIR updated the Eastern Dublin EIR analysis based on a geologic study specific to the Wallis site. No supplemental impacts or mitigation measures related to geology or soils were identified in this document. The proposed project will be required to comply with applicable EDSP EIR soil, geologic and seismic mitigation measures. Project Impacts a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse impacts, including loss, injury or death related to ground rupture, seismic ground shaking, ground failure, or landslides? No New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified that the primary and secondary effects of ground - shaking (Impacts 3.6 / B and 3.6 / C) could be potentially significant impacts. With implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.6 / 1.0 the primary effects of ground - shaking are reduced but not to a less -than- significant level by using modern seismic design for resistance to lateral forces in construction, which would reduce the potential for structure failure, major structural damage and loss of life. Consistent with the mitigations for Impact 3.6/C, the Cornerstone geotechnical report identifies construction techniques, such as special footings and use of materials, to ensure that adverse impacts from ground shaking, landslides, ground failure and other geologic hazards, to be included in the project design as required by the City of Dublin, to minimize geological hazard impacts as anticipated in the Eastern Dublin EIR and 2005 City of Dublin Page 50 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 SEIR. No new or more severe impacts would result with respect to this topic than was previously analyzed in earlier CEQA documents. No further analysis is required. b) Is the site subject to substantial erosion and /or the loss of topsoil? No New Impact. Construction of the proposed project improvements on the site would modify the existing ground surface and alter patterns of surface runoff and infiltration and could result in a short -term increase in erosion and sedimentation caused by grading activities (Impact 3.6 / K). Long -term impacts could result from modification of the ground - surface and removal of existing vegetation (Eastern Dublin EIR Impact 3.6 / Q. With implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.6 / 27.0 and 28.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR and re- stated above, both of these impacts would be less - than - significant. The project will implement the erosion controls from the EDEIR as well as the RWQCB measures referenced in the Initial Study for the 2005 SEIR. Through the Cornerstone report, the project complies with adopted measures that site - specific erosion and other controls be identified and implemented. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan also contains a policy (Policy 6 -43), which requires that new development be designed to provide effective control of soil erosion as a result of construction activities. This policy will be applied to the proposed project. With adherence to previous mitigation measures, there would be no new or more severe impacts than have been previously analyzed in other CEQA documents for this site and no further analysis is required. c,d) Is the site located on soil that is unstable or expansive or result in potential lateral spreading, Liquefaction, landslide or collapse? No New Impact. Consistent with Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measure 3.6 / 7.0 and standard City development procedures, the project applicant has retained a geologist to prepare a soils and geotechnical report, as identified above. The report contains methods to minimize impacts from shrink - swell, lateral spreading and landslide potential for future improvements on the site. With adherence to Eastern Dublin EIR mitigation measures, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan policies and the findings of the Cornerstone geotechnical report, no new or more severe impacts have been identified related to lateral spreading, liquefaction and other soil hazards than have been analyzed in previous CEQA documents. No further analysis is required. e) Have soils incapable of supporting on -site septic tanks if sewers are not available? No New Impact. Proposed residences on the site would be connected to sanitary sewers provided by DSRSD, so there would be no new or more severe impacts with regard to septic systems. City of Dublin Page 51 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Environmental Setting Since certification of the Eastern Dublin EIR in 1993 and subsequent CEQA documents, the issue of contribution of greenhouse gasses to climate change has become a more prominent issue of concern as evidenced by passage of AB 32 in 2006. On March 18, 2010, amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines took effect which set forth requirements for the analysis of greenhouse gasses. The topic of the project's contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and climate change was not analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR or the 2005 SEIR. Since the Eastern Dublin EIR and 2005 SEIR have been certified, the determination of whether greenhouse gasses and climate change needs to be analyzed for this proposed project is governed by the law on supplemental or subsequent EIRs (Public Resources Code section 21166 and Guidelines, Sections 15162 and 15163). Greenhouse gas and climate change is not required to be analyzed under those standards unless it constitutes "new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete (CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15162 (a) (3).) Greenhouse gas and climate change impacts is not new information that was not known or could not have been known at the time the Eastern Dublin EIR and the 2005 SEIR were certified. The issue of climate change and greenhouse gasses was widely known prior to the certification of these EIRs. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was established in 1992. The regulation of greenhouse gas emissions to reduce climate change impacts was extensively debated and analyzed throughout the early 1990s. The studies and analyses of this issue resulted in the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. In the early and mid 2000s, GHGs and climate change were extensively discussed and analyzed in California. In 2000, SB 1771 established the California Climate Action Registry for the recordation of greenhouse gas emissions to provide information about potential environmental impacts. In 2005, the Governor issued Executive Order # S -03- 05 establishing greenhouse gas emission reduction targets in California. AB 32 was adopted in 2006. Therefore, the impact of greenhouse gases on climate change was known at the time of the certification of the Eastern Dublin EIR in May 1993 and the certification of a SEIR in 2005. Under CEQA standards, it is not new information that requires analysis in a supplemental EIR or negative declaration. No supplemental environmental analysis of the project's impacts on this issue is required under CEQA. Project Impacts a,b Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment or conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? As discussed above, no additional environmental analysis is required under CEQA Section 21166. S. Hazards and Hazardous Materials This section of the Initial Study is based on a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared by Cornerstone Earth Group. in June 2013 (" Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 6582 Tassajara Road, Dublin "). This document is incorporated into this City of Dublin Page 52 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Initial Study by reference and is available for review at the Dublin Community Development Department during normal business hours. Environmental Setting The Phase I analysis prepared by Cornerstone Earth Group did not identify any recognized environmental conditions on the project site. As is normal and customary for conversion of a former agricultural area to urban uses, the Cornerstone Phase I report does recommend preparation of a Site Management Plan that would establish protocols in the event hazards are encountered during construction. The project site is located considerably north of Livermore Municipal Airport and is not within the Airport Influence Area of this facility. The site is located within and adjacent to a wildland area that is subject to wildland fire hazard. Previous CEQA documents Impacts to hazards and hazardous materials was not addressed in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The Initial Study for the 2005 SEIR examined the potential for hazardous materials and wildfire impacts and found them to be less - than - significant. Project Impacts a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? No New Impact. There would be no impact with regard to transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials, since the proposed project involves construction of a residential development on the site. Proposed land uses on the site would not use, store or transport of significant quantities of hazardous materials. No new or more severe impacts would therefore occur on the site than have been previously analyzed and no additional analysis is required. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? No New Impact. Based on the discussion in subsection "a," above, no new impacts are anticipated with respect to the release of hazardous materials than were analyzed in the 2005 SEIR initial study document and no additional analysis is required. c) Emit hazardous materials or handle hazardous materials or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. Although the Quarry Lane private school is located just to the east of the project site, approval and implementation of the proposed project would have no impact with regard to this topic, since no hazardous materials or acutely hazardous materials would be released from the project, since the project would be a residential development. City of Dublin Page 53 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch(Trumark Project April 2014 d) Is the site listed as a hazardous materials site? No New Impact. No properties comprising the project area are listed on the State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control as an identified hazardous site as of February 6, 2014. There is therefore no new or more severe impacts impact with respect to this topic than have been previously analyzed. Approval and implementation of the proposed project would have no impact with regard to this topic, since no schools exist or are planned near the project area. No new impact with respect to emission or handing of hazardous materials within one - quarter of an existing or planned school will result from the project. e,f) Is the site located within an airport land use plan of a public airport or private airstrip? No New Impact. The project site lies significantly north of the Airport Influence Area (AIA) of Livermore Municipal Airport and is not included in the AIA. No new or more severe impacts are anticipated with respect to this topic than previously analyzed and no additional analysis is required. g) Interference with an emergency evacuation plan? No New Impact. The proposed project would include the construction of a residential project on private land. No emergency evacuation plan would be affected since no roadways would be blocked. No new or more severe impacts would result than have been previously analyzed, in the EDEIR or the Initial Study for the 2005 SEIR, and no additional analysis is required. h) Expose people and structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No New Impact. The project site is located in a largely rural and undeveloped area of Eastern Dublin. Properties to the north lie in Contra Costa County and are undeveloped. Land to the west is undeveloped and is within Parks RFTA. The project is required to adhere to mitigation measures contained in Eastern Dublin EIR (as discussed in the Initial Study for the 2005 SEIR) and City's Wildfire Management Plan (updated in 2002). No new or more severe impacts will result beyond those previously identified and no additional analysis is required. 9. Hydrology and Water Quality Environmental Setting Local surface water. The project site is located within the Tassajara Creek watershed which drains to the San Francisco Bay via the Arroyo Del Valle and Arroyo de la Laguna. The main course of Tassajara Creek flows in a north -south direction just east of the site. The project area is located within the jurisdiction of Zone 7 of the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Zone 7). Zone 7 provides maintenance of regional drainage facilities within this portion of Alameda County. City of Dublin Page 54 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Surface water quality. Water quality in California is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), which controls the discharge of pollutants to water bodies from point and non -point sources. In the San Francisco Bay area, this program is administered by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board ( RWQCB). Federal regulations issued in November 1990 expanded the authority of the RWQCB to include permitting of stormwater discharges from municipal storm sewer systems, industrial processes, and construction sites that disturb areas larger than one acre of land area. The City of Dublin is a co- permittee of the Alameda County Clean Water Program, which is a coordinated effort by local governments in Alameda County to improve water quality in San Francisco Bay. Flooding. The project site lies outside of a 100 -year flood hazard area (Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel No. 060705- 0002B). Previous CEQA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated impacts related to hydrology and storm drainage from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include: ® Mitigation Measures 3.5/44.0 -48 reduced impacts related potential flooding (IM 3.5 / Y) to a less- than - significant level. These mitigation measures require new storm drainage facilities as part of new development, requires developers to prepare storm drain plans for individual development projects and requires new flood control facilities to alleviate downstream flooding potential. Mitigation Measures 3.5/51.0 and 52.0 reduced impacts related to non -point source pollution (IM 3.5/AA) to a less- than - significant level. These mitigation measures mandate that specific water quality investigations be submitted as part of development projects and that the City should develop community -based programs to educate residents and businesses to reduce non -point source pollution. 2005 SEIR. Hydrology and water quality was addressed in the Initial Study for the 2005 SEIR. No potentially significant impacts or mitigation measures related to hydrology and water quality were included in this document. The proposed project shall adhere to all of the applicable above previous mitigation measures. Project Impacts a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? No New Impact. Approval and construction of the proposed development project would add impervious surfaces to the essentially undeveloped site that would increase the amount of stormwater runoff and potentially degrade water quality. Mitigation Measure 3.5 / 51.0 contained in the EDSP EIR requires each project developer to prepare and submit a water quality investigation. The City of Dublin also requires City of Dublin Page 55 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 new development proposals to adhere to the most recent surface water quality standards adopted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The Wallis Ranch developer is proposing to install a large water quality/ hydromodification basin on the east - central portion of the site to filter water runoff prior to outfall into Tassajara Creek. Other, smaller, bioswales would be installed through the site. The proposed water quality facilities will ensure that water quality and waste discharge standards are met. No new or more significant impacts with respect to water quality violations or wastewater discharges would result than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. b) Substantially deplete groundwater recharge areas or lowering of water table? No New Impact. No new or more significant impacts are anticipated with regard to depletion of groundwater resources than have been analyzed in previous CEQA documents. A portion of the site would remain as open space that would allow recharge of the underground aquifer. Also, stormwater runoff from the site would be directed to proposed stormwater basin located on the east - central portion of the site that would allow recharge into the underground aquifer. Also, the proposed water source for this project would rely on surface water supplies from DSRSD and not local groundwater supplies. As noted in the EDEIR and Initial Study for the 2005 SEIR, the project site is not identified as a groundwater recharge area in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The project is required to comply with EDEIR mitigation measures 3.5/49 and 50 to protect water quality and support Zone 7's groundwater recharge program. No new or more severe impacts would occur with respect to this topic than has been previously analyzed in other CEQA documents. No additional analysis is required. c) Substantially alter drainage patterns, including streambed courses such that substantial siltation or erosion would occur? No New Impact. New impervious surfaces would be added to the project site to accommodate new dwellings, roadways, driveways and similar surfaces. Existing drainage patterns may be modified based on proposed development, similar to the existing approved Development Plan. However adherence to Mitigation Measure 46.0 requirement for a site - specific storm drainage master plan, as contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR, would ensure that impacts related to changed drainage patterns are less - than - significant. No new or more severe impacts would result with respect to changed drainage patterns than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. d) Substantially alter drainage patterns or result in flooding, either on or off the project site? No New Impact. No impacts or significant changes to drainage patterns are anticipated as part of the project. Based on the Flood Insurance Rate Map, cited above, the proposed development area lies outside of a FEMA 100 -year flood hazard area. No new or more significant impacts are anticipated than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. e) Create stormwater runoff that would exceed the capacity of drainage systems or add substantial amounts of polluted runoff? No New Impact. Adherence to Eastern Dublin City of Dublin Page 56 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 EIR Mitigation Measures 3.5/44.0-48.0 will reduce drainage and pollution impacts to a less- than - significant level. These mitigation measures require new storm drainage facilities as part of new development and requires developers to prepare storm drain plans for individual development projects such as the Wallis Ranch project. In compliance with these mitigations, the project applicant proposes the construction of a large water quality and hydromodificaton basin in the southern portion of the site as well as a number of vegetated swales throughout the site to filter stormwater. No new or more significant impacts have been identified in this Initial Study regarding flooding or increases in stormwater runoff than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. f) Substantially degrade water quality? This issue has been addressed above in items "a" and "e." g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped by a Flood Insurance Rate Map? No New Impact. As noted in the Environmental Setting section, above, the site lies outside of a 100 -year flood hazard zone. No new or more significant impacts are anticipated than have been previously analyzed. h, i) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard boundary structures that impeded or redirect flood flow, including dam failures? No New Impact. Refer to item "g," above regarding flood hazard. The project site lies outside of a dam failure inundation area, as mapped by the Association of Bay Area Governments (http:/ /www.abag.ca.gov /cgi- bin /pickdamx.pl). j) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami or mndflows? No New Impact. The project site is located well inland from San Francisco Bay or other major bodies of water to be impacted by a tsunami or seiche. Consistent with prior mitigations for slope stability, the Cornerstone geotechnical report addresses landslide and mudflow potential and includes design and construction methods to minimize impacts from this hazard. No new or more significant impacts would result than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. 10. Land Use and Planning Environmental Setting The project site contains a dwelling and unoccupied historic school building. Surrounding uses include a combination of developed and undeveloped properties within the Eastern Dublin Planning area. Properties to the east have been or are in the process of developing for residential uses. The property west of the site is a part of Parks RFTA and is used for military training purposes. Properties to the north are within the unincorporated portion of Contra Costa County and contain rural residential uses. Properties south of the Wallis Ranch are owned by a combination of the East Bay Regional Park District and Parks RFTA. City of Dublin Page 57 Initial StudylWallis Ranchtfrumark Project April 2014 a) Physically divide an established community? No New Impact. The project site is located in the northwestern portion of the Eastern Dublin planning area. Uses to the north and west of the Wallis Ranch are vacant and are likely not to experience significant development in the future due to the nature of the ownership (Parks RFTA) or being located in a rural residential portion of Contra Costa County to the north. No new or more significant impacts have been identified in this Initial Study than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation? No New Impact. No amendments have been requested to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan to change development areas on the site and the number of dwellings would be somewhat less with the proposed project than has been previously approved (935 approved v. up to 809 proposed). No changes are proposed to any regulation regulating environmental protection. No new or more significant impacts are anticipated with regard to land use regulations than have been previously analyzed in other CEQA documents prepared for this site. No additional analysis is required. � `/ Conflict with ~ habitat conservation plan ~' natural community conservation plan? " N" New Impact. The project site lies within the Eastern Alameda Conservation Strategy (EACCS) planning area. The City of Dublin utilizes the Conservation Strategy as guidance for environmental permitting for public projects, and private development projects are encouraged to use the EACCS as a resource as well. The Conservation Strategy embodies a regional approach to permitting and mitigation for wildlife habitat impacts associated with land development, infrastructure, and other activities. The Conservation Strategy is neither a Habitat Conservation Plan nor a Natural Community Conservation Plan, but is a document intended to provide guidance during the project planning and permitting process to ensure that impacts are offset in a biologically effective manner. There would therefore be no new or significantly more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the 2005 SEIR. No additional analysis is required. 11. Mineral Resources Environmental Setting The project site contains o0 known mineral resources. This iG based 0o the Eastern Dublin EIR. Project Impacts a, b) Result in the loss of availability of regionally or locally significant mineral resources? No New Impact. Neither the Eastern Dublin EIR nor the 2005 SEIR indicate that significant deposits of minerals exist on the project site, so no new or more severe impacts would occur than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. City ofDublin Page 58 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 12. Noise Environmental Setting The City defines "noise" as a sound or series of sounds that are intrusive, irritating, objectionable and /or disruptive to daily life. Noise is primarily a concern with regard to noise sensitive land uses such as residences, schools, churches and hospitals. Although noise is controlled around commercial, industrial and recreation uses, community noise levels rarely exceed maximum recommended levels for these uses. Regulatory Setting The Noise Element of the General Plan identifies the following primary sources of noise in Dublin: traffic noise from freeways and major roadways within the community and noise generated by the BART line adjacent to the I -580 freeway. On the project site, primary noise sources include vehicle noise from Tassajara Road and distant noise from operations at Parks RFTA. The Noise Element identifies the following maximum noise exposure levels by land use type. Table 2. City of Dublin Land Use /Noise Compatibility Standards (decibels) Land Use Normally Acceptable Conditionally Acceptable Normally Unacceptable Clearly Unacceptable Residential 60 or less 60 -70 70 -75 75+ Lodging Facilities 60 or less 61 -80 71 -80 Over 80 Schools, churches, nursing homes 60 or less 61 -70 71 -80 Over 80 Neighborhood arks 60 or less 61 -65 66 -70 Over 70 Office/ Retail 70 or less 71 -75 76 -80 Over 80 Industrial 70 or less 71 -75 Over 75 -- Source: Dublin General Plan Noise Element, Table 9 -1, 2012 The City of Dublin also enforces an interior noise standard of 45 decibels for residential dwellings. Previous CEQA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR notes that major noise sources within Eastern Dublin include traffic noise from arterial roadways, helicopter overflights from Camp Parks RFTA, west of Tassajara Road, noise generated by development of land uses under the Specific Plan and General Plan and construction noise. No specific significant future noise sources are identified on the project site. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated noise impacts from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include: City of Dublin Page 59 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 ® Mitigation Measures 3.10/ 1.0 reduced impacts related to exposure of proposed housing to future roadway noise (IM 3.10/A) to a less -than- significant level. This mitigation measure require that all future development projects within a future CNEL 60 noise contour have an acoustic analysis prepared to ensure that future dwelling units meet City noise exposure levels. ® Mitigation Measures 3.10/4.0 and 5.0 reduced impacts related to construction noise (IM 10 /E) to a less- than - significant level. These mitigation measures require developers to submit construction noise management plans and to limit hours of construction operations. 2005 SEIR. Noise impacts were addressed in the Initial Study for the 2005 SEIR. No supplemental impacts or mitigations were identified. The proposed project will be required to comply with applicable noise mitigation measures identified above. Project Impacts a) Would the project expose persons or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established by the General Plan or other applicable standard? No New Impact. Development of proposed residential land uses on the project site would increase noise on the project site and future residences would be subject to traffic noise from vehicles using Tassajara Road to the east. Consistent with EDEIR mitigation measure 3.10/ 1.0, a recommended condition of SDR and subdivision map approval will be to have an acoustic specialist ensure that project components, including residences, outdoor living areas and parks, are designed to meet City noise standards. Likely techniques could include setbacks from the roadway, enhanced landscaping, enhanced glazing for the residences, among other things. The project is required to adhere to Eastern Dublin EIR noise mitigation measures, noise standards in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the City noise ordinance. No new or more significant noise impacts have been identified than have previously analyzed. No further analysis is required. The project would contribute to cumulative noise conditions identified as Impact 3.10/13 in the Eastern Dublin EIR, which is exposure of existing residences to future roadway noise. This impact was found to be significant and unavoidable in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Also, EDSP EIR Impact 3.10/D, exposure of proposed residential development to noise from future military training activities at Parks RFTA, was found to be significant and unavoidable. b) Exposure of people to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? No New Impact. Consistent with discussion in the Initial Study for the 2005 SEIR, the proposed project would not include construction or operational elements that would result in significant groundborne vibration levels to nearby residents (source: Jim Templeton, project engineer, 2/10/14). No new impacts would result with respect to vibration or groundborne vibration than was analyzed in previous CEQA documents on the project site. No additional analysis is required. City of Dublin Page 60 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 c) Substantial increases in permanent in ambient noise levels? No New Impact. Increased levels of permanent noise on the project that would occur based on project development would be reduced to a less -than significant level through adherence to applicable mitigation measures contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the Dublin Noise Ordinance. The fewer number of dwellings on the project site (809) than the approved project (935) would also generate fewer vehicle trips to and from the site and would also represent a fewer number of mechanical systems on the site that generate local noise. No new or more significant impacts have been identified in this Initial Study than have been previously analyzed. d) Substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels without the project? No New Impact. Increased levels of short -term construction noise generated on the project site were addressed in EDEIR Impact 3.10/E and applicable mitigation measures. The project is also subject to the Dublin Noise Ordinance. These measures require project developers to limit hours of construction activity and to prepare construction noise management plans. No new or more significant impacts have been identified in this Initial Study than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. e, f) For a project located within an airport land use plan, would the project expose people to excessive noise levels? No New Impact. Based on Exhibit 3 -2 contained in the Livermore Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (2012), the Wallis Ranch site lies well north of the noise compatibility zone for this airport. The project site would therefore not be subjected to substantial aircraft noise from this airport. As noted in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Initial Study for the 2005 SEIR, the project site could be subject to overflight noise from Camp Parks. No new or more significant impacts are anticipated in terms of this topic than was previously analyzed in previous CEQA documents. No additional analysis is required. 13. Population and Housing Environmental Setting The project is generally vacant but contains one inhabited dwelling (in the process of being vacated) that would be removed to allow construction of the proposed project. An existing historic building also exists on the site as discussed in the Cultural Resources section of this Initial Study. Project Impacts a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly? No New Impact. Approval of the proposed project would not induce substantial additional population growth in the Eastern Dublin area, since development on the affected properties has been envisioned in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and Dublin General Plan and was approved for development in site - specific approvals in 2005 and 2007.. Approval of the proposed project would result in fewer dwellings being constructed than currently approved on the site (935 units currently approved v. City of Dublin Page 61 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 809 proposed.) No new or more severe impacts than were previously analyzed are therefore anticipated with respect to this topic. No additional analysis is required. b,c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing units or people? No New Impact. Only one housing unit and associated inhabitants would be displaced should be project be approved and implemented, although existing residents are currently relocating from the dwelling. No new or more severe impacts than were previously analyzed are therefore anticipated with respect housing displacement as several residences were occupied at the time of the 2005 SEIR. No additional analysis is required. 14. Public Services Environmental Setting The following provide essential services to the community: ® Fire Protection. Fire protection services are provided by the Alameda County Fire Department. The Department provides fire suppression, emergency medical response, fire prevention, education, building inspection services and hazardous material control. The nearest station is Station 18 at 4800 Fallon Road. • Police Protection: Police and security protection is provided by the Alameda County Sheriff under contact to the City of Dublin. • Schools. The Dublin Unified School District provides K -12 educational services for properties on the project site. • Library Services: Alameda County Library service. • Maintenance. Maintenance of streets, roads and other governmental facilities are the responsibility of the City of Dublin. Previous CEOA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. Applicable mitigation measures contained in Eastern Dublin EIR addressing fire and police protection include: ® Mitigation Measure 3.4/7.0: Establish appropriate funding mechanisms to cover up -front costs of capital fire improvements. ® Mitigation Measure 3.4/9.0: Incorporate Fire Department recommendations on project design relating to access, water pressure, fire safety and prevention into the requirements of development approval. City of Dublin Page 62 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Mitigation Measure 3.4/10.0: Ensure, as a requirement of project approval, that an assessment district, homeowners association or other mechanism is in place that will provide regular long-term maintenance of the urban/ open space interface. Mitigation Measure 3.4/12.0: The City shall work with the Fire Department and qualified biologists to prepare a wildfire management plan for the project area. Mitigation Measure 3.4/1.0: Provide additional personnel and facilities and revise beats as necessary in order to establish and maintain City standards for police protection service in Eastern Dublin. Mitigation Measure 3.4/3-0-5.0: Incorporate into the requirements of project approval Police Department recommendations on project design that affect traffic safety and crime prevention. 2005 SEIR. The Initial Study for the 2005 SEIR analyzed public service impacts and found no new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the EDEIR The project will be required to comply with the above mitigation measures. Project Impacts a) Fire protection? No New Impact. Approval and implementation of the proposed project would increase the number of fire and emergency medical calls for service that would need to be responded to by the Alameda County Fire Department, the City of Dublin's contract fire department, as a result of a greater number of dwellings on the project site compared to existing conditions. The proposed project is required to adhere to previously adopted mitigation measures, including payment of public facility impact fees to assist in funding new fire stations (Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measure 3.4/ 7.0) . Consistent with Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measure 3.4/9.0, proposed development on the project site will be conditioned to meet Fire Department requirements including but not limited to maintaining minimum water pressure and fire flow, providing adequate site access, using fire retardant building materials and similar features. Proposed development on the site will also be conditioned to be consistent with the City's adopted Wildfire Management Plan (Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measure 3.4/12.0). Based on discussions with Alameda County Fire Department staff, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to fire service beyond that analyzed in previous CEQA documents (source: Bonnie Terra, Alameda County Fire Department, 2/7/14) and no new or expanded fire stations would be needed to provide fire and emergency service for the proposed project. No additional analysis is required. b) Police protection? No New Impact. Similar to fire protection, there would be no new impact with regard to police protection, based on mitigation measures included in the Eastern Dublin EIR. These Mitigation Measures include paying City of Dublin City of Dublin Page 63 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch[Trurnark Project April 2014 public facility impact fees to assist in funding new police facilities (EDSP EIR Mitigation Measure 3.4/ 1.0), incorporating Police Department safety and security requirements into the proposed project, including but not limited to adequate locking devices, security lighting and ensuring adequate surveillance for structures and parking areas (EDSP EIR Mitigation Measures 3.4/3.0 -5.0). Based on discussions with Dublin Police Services Department staff, there would be no new or substantially more severe impacts with respect to police service associated with the proposed project beyond that analyzed in previous CEQA documents (source: Captain Tom McCarthy, Dublin Police Services, 2/ 7/ 14). No additional analysis is required. c) Schools? No New Impact. No new impacts to school service are anticipated should the proposed project be approved since payment of mandated statutory impact fees at the time of issuance of building permits will provide mitigation of educational impacts of the proposed project pursuant to CEQA. The currently proposed project would result in fewer school -aged children to be accommodated in DUSD school facilities than estimated in Chapter 4.8 of the 2005 SEIR. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in previous CEQA documents. No additional analysis is required. d) Other governmental service, including maintenance of public facilities? No New Impact. Maintenance of public facilities would continue to be provided by the City of Dublin with no new impacts in regard to this topic. New public facilities will be required to be designed to meet City of Dublin standards. There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in previous CEQA documents. No additional analysis is required. 15. Recreation Environmental Setting No neighborhood or community parks and /or recreation services or facilities exist on the project site. However, a 7.66 -acre neighborhood park site is proposed as a development require of the project and is shown on current development plans. The City of Dublin maintains a wide range of park facilities throughout the community. Regional park facilities are provided by the East Bay Regional Park District, which maintains a large number of regional parks, trails and similar recreation facilities in Alameda and Contra Costa County. The City of Dublin has planned a regional recreational trail along Tassajara Road in front of the proposed project. The portion of the trail adjacent to the project site would be constructed by the project developer. City of Dublin Page 64 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Previous CEOA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. Applicable mitigation measures contained in Eastern Dublin EIR addressing fire and police protection include: ® Mitigation Measure 3.4/29.0: Ensure, as apart of the approval process, that each new development provide its fair share of planned open space, parklands and trail corridors. ® Mitigation Measure 3.4/31.0: Calculate and assess in -lieu park fees based on the City's parkland dedication ordinance. Credit towards parkland dedication requirements will only be given for level or gently sloping areas suitable for active recreation use. ® Mitigation Measure 3.4/36.0: Require developer to dedicate public access easements along ridgetops and stream corridors to accommodate the development of trails and staging areas. 2005 SEIR. This document included supplemental mitigation measure PARK -1 that required the project developer to either provide an additional 1.04 net acre of Neighborhood Park area or provide a minimum of 1.9 net acres of Neighborhood Park area in close proximity to the project site. The current project will be required to comply with applicable mitigation measures identified above. Project Impacts a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks? No New Impact. Approval and construction of the proposed project would increase the use of nearby City or regional recreational facilities, since it would include increasing the on -site permanent population on the site, but to a lesser extent than analyzed in previous CEQA documents. The applicant proposes to dedicate a public park site to the City of Dublin and provide one private park on the site consistent with the 2005 SEIR Mitigation Measure. There would therefore be no new or more severe impacts with respect to recreation than were previously analyzed. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of recreational facilities? See item "a," above. 16. Transportation /Traffic Environmental Setting Roadways and freeways. The project area is served by Tassajara Road, an arterial road that provides access from southern Contra Costa County to the I -580 freeway and southerly into Alameda County south of the I -580 freeway. City of Dublin Page 65 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Existing transit service. Transit service to the project site is provided by The Livermore/ Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA) provides bus service in Dublin and throughout the Tri-Valley. The Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) provides regional rapid transit service with the nearest station located at the Dublin Transit Center, located on the south side of Dublin Boulevard just west of Arnold Road. Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities. There are no marked pedestrian facilities adjacent to the proposed project site along Tassajara Road. However, there is a striped and paved shoulder for bicycles on either side of Tassajara Road adjacent to the project site. Within the study area, there are numerous bicycle and pedestrian facilities providing access throughout the City of Dublin Previous CEOA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated traffic impacts from the General Plan and EDSP project. These measures generally include construction of new roadways, widening of existing roadways and improvements to local freeway facilities to accommodate anticipated increases in the number of vehicles associated with the build out of the Eastern Dublin area. With the exceptions noted below, the EIR found that all traffic and transportation impacts could be reduced to less- than - significant levels with adherence to mitigation measures identified in the EIR. A number of impacts could not be reduced to a level of insignificance even with mitigations. These include: impacts to the 1-580 freeway between 1-680 and Hacienda Drive (IM 3.3/B), impacts to the 1-580 Freeway between Tassajara Road and Airway Boulevard (IM 3.3/C), cumulative freeway impacts (IM 3.3 / E) impacts to Santa Rita Road and T-580 Eastbound ramps (IM 3.3 / 1), and cumulative impacts to Tassajara Road (IM 3.3/N). 2005 SEIR. This CEQA document identified the following significant supplemental impacts and mitigation measures: Supplemental Mitigation Measure TRA-1 reduced the impact of additional traffic along Tassajara Road segments near the project site to a less-than-significant level by requiring the developer to widen Tassajara Road to four travel lanes between North Dublin Ranch Drive to the northern project access road. Supplemental Mitigation Measure TRA-2 reduced the impact of potential traffic safety impacts to a less- than - significant level by requiring installation of traffic signals at the two project entrances, provide an east-bound right-turn lane, provide northbound left-turn capacity from Tassajara Road onto project access drives, provide a northbound left-turn lane from Tassajara Road onto the southern access drive and provide a southbound right-turn pocket with a taper on Tassajara Road at both access roadways.. The proposed project will be required to comply with all of the above transportation and circulation mitigation measures. City of Dublin Page 66 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trurnark Project April 2014 Project Impacts a,b) Conflict with applicable plans related to the effectiveness of the circulation system, including all modes of travel, including intersections, streets, highways and other components or conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including level of service standards, travel demand measures and other applicable standards? The Eastern Dublin EIR considered the development of the project site with residential land uses and adopted mitigation measures to address the impacts thereof. Additional analysis of increased traffic and circulation impacts occurred in as part of the 2005 SEIR. As noted above, even though the City of Dublin ultimately approved development of up to 935 dwellings on the Dublin Ranch West site, the 2005 SEIR analyzed up to 1,034 dwellings on the property. Table 3, below, compares daily, AM peak and PM peak trips on the site from the 2005 SEIR and the currently proposed development program. Documentation of this is found in Attachment 1 of this Initial Study. This document is hereby incorporated by reference into this Initial Study. Table 3. Trip Generation Comparison Notes: d.u. = Dwelling Units 'From Supplemental EIR for Dublin Ranch West Development, 2005 2Proposed Wallis Ranch minus 2005 EIR Project "Daily Rate is for Residential Condominium/Townhouse (230); ITE lacks daily rate for Low -Rise Residential Condo/TOwnhOuse (231) For Single - Family Detached Housing (210): Daily Trips = Ln (T) = 0.92Ln(X) + 2.72; AM Trips = T = 0.70(X) +9.74; PM Trips = Ln (T) = 0.90Ln(X) + 0.51; where X = Number of Dwelling units and T = Average Vehicle Trip Ends. For Low -Rise Residential Condom inium/Townhouse (231): Daily Trips = Ln (T) = 0.87Ln(X) + 2.46; A.M. Trips = T = 0.88(X) — 49.70; P.M. Trips = No. of Dwelling Units' Average Rate (0.78), where X = Number of Dwelling units and T = Average Vehicle Trip Ends. Source of trip rates for Proposed Wallis Ranch: ITE Trip Generation, 91h Edition, 2012 City of Dublin Page 67 Initial Study[Wallis Ranch /Trumark Project April 2014 Size Daily A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Land Use (ITE Code) (d.u.) Rate Total Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total 2005 SEIR Project' 1,034 - 8,713 - 152 527 679 - 580 309 889 Single - Family Detached 624 9.07 5,660 0.72 112 335 447 0.87 344 202 546 Housing (210) Proposed Wallis Low -Rise Ranch Residential 185 5.94* 1,099 0.61 28 85 113 0.78 84 60 144 Condominium/T ownhouse (23 1) Total 809 15.01 6,759 1.33 140 420 560 1.65 428 262 690 Difference -225 -1954 1 - 1 -12 -107 -119 -152 -47 -199 Notes: d.u. = Dwelling Units 'From Supplemental EIR for Dublin Ranch West Development, 2005 2Proposed Wallis Ranch minus 2005 EIR Project "Daily Rate is for Residential Condominium/Townhouse (230); ITE lacks daily rate for Low -Rise Residential Condo/TOwnhOuse (231) For Single - Family Detached Housing (210): Daily Trips = Ln (T) = 0.92Ln(X) + 2.72; AM Trips = T = 0.70(X) +9.74; PM Trips = Ln (T) = 0.90Ln(X) + 0.51; where X = Number of Dwelling units and T = Average Vehicle Trip Ends. For Low -Rise Residential Condom inium/Townhouse (231): Daily Trips = Ln (T) = 0.87Ln(X) + 2.46; A.M. Trips = T = 0.88(X) — 49.70; P.M. Trips = No. of Dwelling Units' Average Rate (0.78), where X = Number of Dwelling units and T = Average Vehicle Trip Ends. Source of trip rates for Proposed Wallis Ranch: ITE Trip Generation, 91h Edition, 2012 City of Dublin Page 67 Initial Study[Wallis Ranch /Trumark Project April 2014 Based on the above table, the proposed Wallis Ranch project would generate an estimated 107 fewer A.M. peak hour trips, 199 fewer P.M. peak hour trips and 1,954 fewer daily trips than the amount of development analyzed in the 2005 SEIR. However, if approved and constructed, the project would continue to contribute to significant and unavoidable cumulative project impacts as part of the larger Eastern Dublin project. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified such impacts on the following roads and transportation facilities: ® I -580 freeway between I -680 and Hacienda Drive; ® The Santa Rita Road/ I -580 eastbound ramps; ® The Dublin Boulevard/ Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard/ Tassajara Road intersection ® Other impacts to Tassajara Road, as identified in the EIR. No new or more severe impacts would result with respect to this topic than was previously analyzed in other CEQA documents. No additional analysis is required. c) Change in air traffic patterns? No New Impact. The proposed project includes residential uses and would have no impact on air traffic patterns. No new or more severe impacts would result with respect to this topic than was previously analyzed in other CEQA documents. No additional analysis is required. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use? No New Impact. Approval of the proposed project would add new driveways, sidewalks and other vehicular and pedestrian travel ways where none currently exist. The current development proposal will be required to comply with current City engineering design standards, appropriate supplemental mitigation measures from the 2005 SEIR dealing with traffic safety and other safety standards to ensure that no safety hazards would be created or exacerbated. No new or more severe impacts with respect to design hazards would be created than previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? No New Impact. Two access drives are already constructed into the project site from Tassajara Road. No new or more severe impacts would result with respect to this topic. No additional analysis is required. f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs regarding public transit, pedestrian facilities or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? No New Impact. No conflicts to plans, policies or programs that promote public transit, pedestrian use or similar features were identified in previous CEQA reviews for the subject property. No new or more impacts have been identified in this Initial City of Dublin Page 68 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Study that has been previously analyzed in other CEQA documents for the project site. No additional analysis is required. 17. Utilities and Service Systems Environmental Setting The project area is served by the following service providers: • Water supply and distribution: Dublin San Ramon Services District ( DSRSD). • Sewage collection and treatment; recycled water: DSRSD. • Storm drainage: City of Dublin and Zone 7. • Solid waste service: Amador Valley Industries • Electrical and natural gas power: Pacific Gas and Electric Co. • Communications: AT &T Previous CEQA documents Eastern Dnblin EIR. In terms of water resources, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified overdraft of groundwater resources (Impact 3.5/P) as a potentially significant impact Adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.5 / 24.0 and 25.0 would reduce this impact to a level of insignificant. These measures require the City of Dublin to coordinate with DSRSD to develop recycled water resources and otherwise carefully use water resources and that all new development in the Eastern Dublin project area to connect to the DSRSD water system. Impact 3.5/Q identified an increase in water demand as a potentially significant impact, but this impact could be mitigated to an insignificant level based on implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.5 / 26.0 -31.0. These mitigation measures require implementation of water conservation measures in individual development projects and construction of new system -wide water improvements which are funded by development impact fees. Another related impact identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR is the need for additional water treatment plant capacity (Impact 3.5 / R). This impact was identified as being reduced to a level of insignificance through the implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.5 / 32.0 -31.0, which requires improvement to the Zone 7 water system, to be funded by individual development impact fees. Impact 3.5/S (lack of a water distribution system) was identified as a potentially significant impact in the Eastern Dublin EIR, but this impact has been reduced to an insignificant level through adherence to Mitigation Measures3.5 / 4.34.0 -38.0. These mitigations require upgrades to the project area water system and provision of a "will serve" letter prior to issuance of a grading permit. Impact 3.5/T identified a potentially significant impact related to inducement of substantial growth and concentration of population in the project area. The Eastern Dublin found that this was a significant and unavoidable impact. City of Dublin Page 69 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 Regarding sewer service, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified Impact 3.5 / B (lack of a wastewater collection system) as a potentially significant impact that could be mitigated through adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.5/1.0-5.0. These measures require DSRSD to prepare an area -wide wastewater collection system master plan, requires all new development to be connected to DSRSD's public sewer system, discourages on -site wastewater treatment, requires a "will- serve" letter from DSRSD and requires that all sewer facilities be constructed to DSRSD engineering standards. Impact 3.5 noted an impact with regard to extension of a sewer trunk line with capacity to serve new development, but could be reduced to an insignificant level since the proposed Eastern Dublin Specific Plan sewer system has been sized to accommodate increased sewer demand from the proposed Specific Plan project. Impact 3.5 / G found that lack of wastewater disposal capacity as a significant impact. An upgraded wastewater disposal facility has been constructed by the Livermore Amador Valley Water Management Agency and is operational. Impact 3.5/E identified lack of wastewater treatment plant capacity as a potentially significant impact, which could be reduced to an insignificant level through adherence to Mitigation Measure. 2005 SEIR. Utilities and services were addressed in Chapter 4.7 of the 2005 SEIR. No supplemental mitigation measures were included in this CEQA document. The project developer shall be required to adhere to the applicable Eastern Dublin EIR mitigation measures. Project Impacts a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB? No New Impact. The current project would contain the same type of development as analyzed in the 2005 SEIR and, based on recent discussions with DSRSD staff (noted below) regarding this project, the proposed project would not exceed wastewater requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). No new or more significant impacts with respect to wastewater treatment requirements have been identified in this Initial Study than have been analyzed in previous EIRs. b) Require new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities? No New Impact. Water, recycled water and wastewater extensions to existing mains in Tassajara Road would need to be constructed to serve the amount of development proposed in the Wallis Ranch development application. According to a representative of DSRSD, District wastewater collection, treatment and disposal facilities from the construction of the proposed project would not result in a new or more significant impact than was analyzed in previous CEQA documents (source: Stan Kolozdie, DSRSD, 2/18/14). No additional analysis is required. The Wallis Ranch project would also contribute to cumulative impacts related to consumption of non - renewable natural resources (Impact 3.4 / S, increase in energy use though increased wastewater treatment and disposal and though the operation of the water system (Impact 3.5 / F, H, and U), and inducement of substantial growth and concentration of population (Impact 3.5 / T). All of these impacts were City of Dublin Page 70 Initial Study/Wallis RanchfTrumark Project April 2014 identified as significant and unavoidable in the Eastern Dublin EIR and were overridden by the City Council. c) Require new storm drainage facilities? No New Impact. The proposed development project would require new and or upgraded drainage facilities to support proposed development. Consistent with Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measures, the project developer will be required to install new or upgraded on and off -site (if required) storm drain systems that comply with City of Dublin and Zone 7 standards. The current project would include on -site storm pipes and a large water quality pond to ensure consistency with the City- approved stormwater management plan prepared for this project. No new or more significant impacts are anticipated with respect to storm drain facilities that have been analyzed in previous CEQA documents. No additional analysis is required. d) Are sufficient water supplies available? No New Impact. Based on the information provided by DSRSD staff, the District has planned for future urban uses on this site (source: Stan Kolozdie, DSRSD, 2/18/14). However, DSRSD staff also note that due to the current water emergency resulting from the drought, DSRSD will limit use of water for construction purposes. No new or more significant impacts are anticipated with respect to water supplies than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. e) Adequate wastewater capacity to serve the proposed project? See response to "a," above. e, f) Solid waste disposal? No New Impact. The project site is within the franchise area of Amador Valley Industries that provides residential and commercial solid waste pick -up and recycling services. According to representatives of the company, no solid waste service is currently provided to the area, since it is undeveloped. The topic of solid waste disposal was not identified as a potentially significant impact in previous CEQA documents and no new or more significant impacts have been identified in this Initial Study than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No New Impact. The existing service provider will ensure adherence to federal, state and local solid waste regulations. No new or more severe impacts are anticipated impacts than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. 18. Mandatory Findings of Significance a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? No. . Potential impacts related to biological resources, including a reduction in habitat area of fish or wildlife species, elimination of a plant or animal community, or City of Dublin Page 71 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 elimination of an important example of major periods of California history or prehistory was analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and supplemented in the 2005 SEIR. The proposed project would represent less development intensity than previously analyzed in earlier CEQA documents and would implement previously adopted mitigation measures. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects). No. Cumulative impacts of the proposed Sub Area 3 project have been fully analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the 2005 SEIR. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No. No such impacts have been discovered in the course of preparing this Initial Study. Initial Study Preparers Jerry Haag, Urban Planner, project manager Agencies and Organizations Consulted The following agencies and organizations were contacted in the course of this Initial Study: City of Dublin Luke Sims, AICP, Community Development Director Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director Michael Porto, Project Manager Andy Russell PE, City Engineer Obaid Khan, City Transportation Engineer Bonnie Terra, Alameda County Fire Department Darrell Jones, Alameda County Fire Department Chief Tom McCarthy, Dublin Police Services Kathleen Faubion, AICP, Assistant City Attorney California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSQ Website DSRSD Stan Kolozdie Applicant Representatives Christopher Davenport, Trumark Homes City of Dublin Page 72 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trumark Project April 2014 References Dublin General Plan, City of Dublin, Updated through 7/2/11 Eastern Dublin General Plan Wallace Roberts & Todd, 1993 Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General Plan Environmental Impact Report Wallace Roberts & Todd, 1994 Eastern Dublin Comprehensive Stream Restoration Program, Sycamore Associates, 1996 Eastern Dublin Scenic Corridor Policies and Standards David Gates Associates, 1996 Livermore Municipal Airport, Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, ESA Associates, August 2012 Parks and Recreation Master Plan City of Dublin, 2006 update All resolutions and ordinances referenced in the Initial Study are incorporated herein by reference and available for review at City Hall during normal business hours. City of Dublin Page 73 Initial Study/Wallis Ranch/Trurnark Project April 2014 At Tr a Generation , City of Dublin Page 74 Initial Study/Wallis RanchfTrumark Project April 2014 Transportation Consultants P!easanro'F 4305 Hacienda Drive Suite 550 Pleasanton, CA 94588.8526 925.463.061 I 925.463.3690 fax Fresno 516 W. Shaw Avenue Suite 200 Fresno, CA 93704 -2515 559.325.7530 559.221.4940 fax Sacra, rcnto 980 Ninth Street 16- Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 -2736 916.449.9095 Sant,. Rosa 1400 N. Dutton Avenue Suite 21 Santa Rosa, CA 95401 -4643 707.575.5800 707.575.5888 fax 1l(cn,6l,'gk,n con, ;vww.tik�r.coir F 1 1 tf4 t I s o"71m MrAwyour Community February 28, 2014 Mr. Jerry Haag 2029 University Avenue Berkeley, CA 94704 Re: Wallis Ranch /Trumark Development in the City of Dublin Dear Mr. Haag: TJKM Transportation Consultants has prepared this letter report comparing trip generation for the 184 -acre Wallis Ranch development site for the currently proposed mix of 809 dwelling units (d.u.) versus the project trip generation estimate for 1,034 d.u. presented in the certified 2005 Supplemental EIR for Dublin Ranch West Development (2005 SEIR). The project site is located west of Tassajara Road and south of the Alameda /Contra Costa County line. The purpose of this trip generation comparison is to assess whether the currently proposed 809 -unit mix at the Wallis Ranch site has the potential to generate additional traffic impacts not identified in the 2005 SEIR. Results As Table I indicates, the project analyzed in the 2005 SEIR for the Wallis Ranch site was estimated to generate 8,713 weekday daily trips, 679 a.m. peak hour trips, and 889 p.m. peak hour trips. Comparatively, using trip rates in Trip Generation, 91h Edition published by ITE (2012), the currently proposed Wallis Ranch project is expected to generate 6,759 weekday daily trips, 560 trips during the a.m. peak hour, and 690 trips during the p.m. peak hour, which represents fewer daily and peak hour trips than the project the SEIR analyzed. Table I: Trip Generation Comparison Notes: d.u. = Dwelling Units From Supplemental EIR for Dublin Ranch West Development, 2005 2Proposed Wallis Ranch minus 2005 EIR Project *Daily Rate is for Residential Condominium/Townhouse (230); ITE lacks daily rate for Low -Rise Residential Condo /Townhouse (23 1) For Single - Family Detached Housing (210): Daily Trips = Ln (T) = 0.92Ln(X) + 2.72; AM Trips = T = 0.70(X) +9.74; PM Trips = Ln (T) = 0.90Ln(X) + 0.51; where X = Number of Dwelling units and T = Average Vehicle Trip Ends. For Low -Rise Residential Condominium/Townhouse (231): Daily Trips = Ln (T) = 0.87Ln(X) + 2.46; A.M. Trips = T = 0.88(X) — 49.70; P.M. Trips = No. of Dwelling Units * Average Rate (0.78), where X = Number of Dwelling units and T = Average Vehicle Trip Ends. Source of trip rates for Proposed Wallis Ranch: ITE Trip Generation, 9' Edition, 2012 Size Daily A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Land Use (ITE Code) (d.u.) Rate Total Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total 2005 SEIR Project' 1,034 8,713 - 152 527 679 - 580 309 889 Single- Family Detached 624 9.07 5,660 0.72 112 335 447 0.87 344 202 546 Housing (2 10) Proposed Low -Rise Wallis Residential Ranch Condominium/ 185 5.94* 1,099 0.61 28 85 113 0.78 84 60 144 Townhouse (231) Total 809 15.01 6,759 1.33 140 420 560 1.65 428 262 690 Differencez -225 -1954 -12 -107 -119 -152 -47 -199 Notes: d.u. = Dwelling Units From Supplemental EIR for Dublin Ranch West Development, 2005 2Proposed Wallis Ranch minus 2005 EIR Project *Daily Rate is for Residential Condominium/Townhouse (230); ITE lacks daily rate for Low -Rise Residential Condo /Townhouse (23 1) For Single - Family Detached Housing (210): Daily Trips = Ln (T) = 0.92Ln(X) + 2.72; AM Trips = T = 0.70(X) +9.74; PM Trips = Ln (T) = 0.90Ln(X) + 0.51; where X = Number of Dwelling units and T = Average Vehicle Trip Ends. For Low -Rise Residential Condominium/Townhouse (231): Daily Trips = Ln (T) = 0.87Ln(X) + 2.46; A.M. Trips = T = 0.88(X) — 49.70; P.M. Trips = No. of Dwelling Units * Average Rate (0.78), where X = Number of Dwelling units and T = Average Vehicle Trip Ends. Source of trip rates for Proposed Wallis Ranch: ITE Trip Generation, 9' Edition, 2012 Mr. ferry Haag February 28, 2014 Page 2 Conclusion Based on the decrease in trip generation for the currently proposed Wallis Ranch development compared with the project analyzed in the 2005 SEIR, and the fact that the land use remains residential and the expected directional distribution of project trips would not change, the project - added traffic at intersections and roadway segments would be less than the 2005 SEIR analysis. As a result, TJKM concludes that no supplemental traffic impacts would result with the revised project. Very truly yours, Richard K. Haygood, P.E. Director, Traffic & Multimodal Studies cc: Shruti Shrivastava, TJKM