HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-16-1996 Item 8.1 Dublin Ranch Phase 1 Rezone CITY OF DUBLIN
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: January 16, 1996
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Staff
PREPARED BY: Carol R. Cirelli, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: PA 95-030 Dublin Ranch Phase I Rezone
GENERAL INFORMATION:
PROJECT: The applicant is requesting a Planned Development (PD) District
Rezone approval for an approximate 210 acre site. The project
involves rezoning the site to: PD Single Family Residential (109.8
acres; 570 dwelling units); PD Medium Density Residential (35.7
acres; 277 dwelling units) for a total 847 dwelling units and 57.5
acres PD Open Space. This rezone request also includes a 5 acre
neighborhood park and a 2 acre private recreational facility.
APPLICANT: Ted C. Fairfield
Consulting Civil Engineer
P.O. Box 1148
5510 Sunol Boulevard
Pleasanton, CA 94566
PROPERTY OWNER: Jennifer Lin
C/O Ted C. Fairfield
Consulting Civil Engineer
P.O. Box 1148
5510 Sunol Boulevard
Pleasanton, CA 94566
LOCATION: East of Tassajara Road and approximately 4,000 feet north of the
Interstate 580 Freeway within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
project area.
ASSESSOR 946-680-3; 94-680-4; 946-1040-1-2; 946-1040-2; 946-1040-3-2;
PARCEL NO.(S): 99B-3046-2-6; 99B-3046-2-9
Item No. 8.1 Copies To: Applicant
Property Owner
PA File
Senior Planner
Admin. File
R*A .R
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: Single Family; Medium Density; Open Space
EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC
PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family; Medium Density; Open Space
EXISTING ZONING
AND LAND USE: PD Single Family; PD Medium Density; PD Open Space/
Cattle Grazing and Agriculture
SURROUNDING LAND
USE AND ZONING: North: Cattle Grazing; Agriculture/PD Community Park;
Agricultural District;
South: Cattle Grazing; Agriculture/ PD Medium Density
Residential; PD Single Family Residential; PD Open
Space
East: Cattle Grazing; Agriculture/PD Open Space
West: Equestrian Facility/PD Medium Density
ZONING HISTORY:
October 10, 1994: Dublin City Council approved the Eastern Dublin Planned
Development District Overlay Zone (Prezone) for a 1,538 acre site
(PA 94-030).
November 14, 1994: Alameda County LAFCo approved the Eastern Dublin Reorganization
request for PA 94-030.
January 12, 1995: Alameda County LAFCo unanimously disapproved the request to
reconsider the Eastern Dublin Reorganization approval.
January 23, 1995: Dublin City Council approved Eastern Dublin Annexation/Detachment
No. 10 (PA 94-030).
October 1, 1995: Eastern Dublin Reorganization (Annexation/Detachment No. 10)
became effective for a 1,538 acre site (PA 94-030).
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
Section 8-31.0 Planned Development District of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance applies to this
project.
BACKGROUND:
A public hearing for this project was held before the Planning Commission on
January 2, 1996. Because some of the Commissioners requested additional project
information, the Commission, with a split vote, closed the public hearing and continued the
item to the January 16, 1996 Planning Commission meeting.
2
f �
ANALYSIS:
The Planning Commission requested additional project information covering the
following four items: 1) school district responses to the modified school mitigation
condition; 2) Dublin San Ramon Services District's (DSRSD) project comments; 3) Medium
Density neighborhood roadway widths (i.e. adequacy of fire vehicle access and parking),
and 4) number of units (i.e. clarifying the process for approving a certain number of units
for the Dublin Ranch Phase I project).
This report also includes responses to a letter received after the January 2nd public
hearing, the Contra Costa County letter presented at the public hearing, and a landowner's
concern. Lastly, additional minor draft Resolution revisions were made clarifying certain
conditions of approval.
School District
A second letter was sent to both school districts (Livermore and Dublin) asking for
written confirmation and concurrence of the revised school mitigation agreement. As of
this date, only the Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District submitted a written
response (see Attachment 1). The City Attorney has submitted an update of this issue (see
Attachment 2).
DSRSD
DSRSD submitted a letter (see Attachment 3) clarifying their concerns with the
previous January 2nd Planning Commission staff report. The letter specifies that the
infrastructure illustrations , (Attachment 3 of the January 2 staff report), portrayed a
reasonable preliminary plan for off-site potable and recycled water and wastewater
collection system improvements. However, the attachment's references to the
responsibility for construction may be premature or inaccurate. In accordance with the
District Policy for Major Infrastructure (Res. 29-94), DSRSD will determine who shall design
and build the District's off-site improvements.
DSRSD also revised condition of approval #34. Exhibit B incorporates the revised
condition.
Medium Density Neighborhood Roadway Widths
The Commission had concerns with fire access and parking availability within the
Medium Density Neighborhood. The applicant is now proposing that the minimum width of
roadways be 32 feet with parking on one side, not 30 feet as previously proposed. Exhibit
A from the January 2nd staff report will be revised to incorporate this change, and these
changes are depicted in Exhibit A of this staff report.
DRFA's Fire Prevention Officer stated that there would be no fire access problems
even with a 30 foot wide roadway and parking on one side. The Uniform Fire Code and
DRFA's code requires a minimum 20 foot free and clear right-of-way (10 feet in each
direction). The Commission was also concerned with the length of the roadways through
the Medium Density area. According to DRFA, there are adequate egress and ingress points
all along the abutting Tassajara Road, providing adequate emergency access. Attachment 6
provides additional information. A DRFA official will be present at the January 16 meeting
to answer any additional questions.
3
Regarding parking, the applicant has calculated the number of off-street parking
spaces that would be available throughout the Medium Density area. This information will
be presented at the Planning Commission meeting.
Number of Units
This PD rezone approval will set the maximum number of residential units that can
be constructed for the entire Dublin Ranch Phase I project. The maximum number of units
for this PD rezone would be 847. When the applicant applies for future Tentative Map
approvals, the City would be approving a certain number of units for each residential
category. As the draft Resolution specifies, the number of dwelling units and mix of
dwelling unit types can vary under each residential land use category while staying within
the approved density ranges.
Hypothetically, if an approved Tentative Map for Dublin Ranch requires an
amendment due to the discovery of a seismic or geologic safety problem, the City may
approve a decrease in the number of units that was previously approved for the Tentative
Map. However, the total number of units approved for the Tentative Map amendment could
not exceed 847 unless a new PD rezone is approved for a different maximum number of
units.
The following chart depicts the maximum and minimum number of units that would
be allowed within each residential land use category for the Dublin Ranch Phase I project.
Maximum Capacity (regulated by PD Rezone) - 847 Dwelling Units
Land Use Designation Density Range Dwelling Units Allowed
Single Family 0.9 du/ac - 6.0 du/ac 99 dus (min) to 659 dus
(max)
Medium Density 6.1 du/ac - 14.0 du/ac 218 dus (min) to 500 dus
(max)
Letters and Landowner Concerns
A letter was received after the January 2nd public hearing requesting that the City
consider requiring the applicant to provide an interim bicycle path along the north side of I-
580 (see Attachment 4). The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan requires this bicycle route. This
required bicycle route does not run through the Dublin Ranch Phase I project. Attachment 5
is Public Works' response to this letter and the Contra Costa County's letter.
The Dublin Land Company landowner expressed concern over the conceptual
alignment of Gleason Road as shown on the applicant's site plan. This roadway
configuration, which complies with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, cuts through the
northern portion of the Dublin Land Company property, located just south of the project's
Medium Density area, and leaves a narrow strip of land (approx. 900' x 120', or approx. 2
acres) for development. Public Works and Planning Staff informed the landowner that it
would be best if he resolved this issue with the Dublin Ranch landowner.
4
PA
GE
i
Minor Resolution Changes
Draft Resolution Exhibit B, includes the revised conditions that were presented at
the January 2 meeting, DSRSD's revised condition #34, and minor condition revisions for
language clarification. These revised conditions (nos. 6, 8, 12, 13, 16, 19, 23, 24, 34-36,
43, 48) are indicated with strikethroughs, and bold and italicized letters.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
FORMAT: 1) Open public hearing and hear staff presentation.
2) Take testimony from the applicant and the public.
3) Question staff, the applicant and the public.
4) Close public hearing and deliberate
5) Adopt Resolution Exhibit B relating to PA 95-030 Dublin Ranch
Phase I PD Rezone, or give staff direction and continue the matter.
ACTION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the Resolution
recommending City Council approval of the Planned Development District
Rezone, Exhibit B.
To approve the project as presented, a Planning Commissioner may make a
motion such as:
I move to adopt the Resolution approving the Planned Development District
Rezone, Exhibit B, for PA 95-030 Dublin Ranch Phase I.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A: (Refer to January 2, 1996 Planning Commission staff report Exhibit
A); Exhibit A Revisions Depicting Roadway Width Modification for
Medium Density Residential
Exhibit B: Planned Development District Rezone Resolution
Background Attachments:
Attachment 1: Letter from Robert E. Thurbon, representing LVJUSD, dated January
9, 1996
Attachment 2: Dublin City Attorney Correspondence
Attachment 3: DSRSD Letter dated January 9, 1996
Attachment 4: Letter from Robert S. Allen dated January 3, 1996
Attachment 5: Public Works Memos dated January 11, 1996
Attachment 6: Memo from DRFA dated January 5, 1996
g:\pa95030\1-16pcsr
1
5 AG 0i,'.P
ID
m
h ' 1 I 1
1 I i
r r11 "
-1 iiiti
� i 'H:I -�.:, 0'11 t 1 1 li
1 1 li 1\,s, 41•A_.
�� r �' III I lo,— 1 t
di. N
... ...:. Angail-4, \ .41 \ \ \
\\ `\ z 1\dl— ®.'f W \ \ ■ \
i h,I \+ 11 I�I� I ` 1= ` N `\ 1 \
■rn 2 : ,,, 0 \ \ *
m ���I= I -��� A vv m \ ----
O J1; x l !� I I \\\I�, .>r` ;;iii _ �Illit, . Wi � `\ `\
1► ', ,ter 1UM 7:►da. ° ,4,, \ ` �\ �: v
!if ' �5MI — O o� "° z \- (2 0 3----0- r L'i u) --- c*4, : \\ \ _____-))1 (17r-
0 > ,In ri m."31i�'; dRc1i -C -t,/" +' \v z - \ ' ,. , W 1' N p `'%1,'1) ` �\�` ,�,` __3u \ / it a
CI3 a kiLIV i■ -- ....
R:13 r t 'ill ��,I _ ,,�� c1'" �' i?!
Fi k 4 Wet'tc,
� ��� = • I 1 Irk °`,.4,j'`'' ��t� ° o c
‘iii
13 r
P s/ %►�ei/ s rr m' � v N (! O
O
p AV- • r►r 81H�a . .riv 1�\t?rLi, %;Y'_ AkAeI/►1 � :...P;. :3: -
IP!rn.t,ii), Illallfar 47,4P liA4 'MI% '-,i1V -411Kv___,mut, ----->0.1,3 cjvt.7i
r p3 W 4= �\!, 41 1 fI� ril \ �� °Ia.
�-�=--� � ... -- � - �I ��i �� � ISM \ \
3 Pr ,O !, •_= __VIII I' ,_�� no /_ a► %?,1 1
.1 i 014,.„,," 6 gki,P.A4 -
WAN= / .
III
`I�Tl 4I - -G GO C \\ o
,,Ilm i - , .4A ,.
.,,,,,
ri+4, 1
,.......,... t.z
.. 0
0 mi : ,., ......,...„........., ,........
\1 Iv ,t' I 1. ,,,/ III i \rn Ihv n9i!4 !I"//1 p ��A Y
x itfil APA, _________________ ________---' irl 0 t,
F , - /��Imom I�i'��: \ ‘ N. \ /,��
�t '►wit t '":::1 1
.
(-) . . 4 : i c..., 7L 1111111Pr ' , -:_w �• `�' � `.VIII `''�> ` \�';- ..
•
X 9s A\ r°-, r
O x
cn 1
w
4 P
z
to
i n A
T
I �, 1,•'e r -�
Y z w 7' .�ir Y ,yk r �. ,1 r i -yr 7f 1J F
C E. ll tp ti �
( , V I � C� r III .-.r I7vfr�j- 4 "'_--...-1, 'rx,7,AT CA .. X O _..—..i 94 o N....g.5 TNp�p avS I\ ;
o ` �V N ll Gi r~ii 31�JF�.a `: ! _ �• A �`� Ili ir� i "" g�alr Sa
` ,
l
.te _ +p , ./......3,?, ---
ice - O O
to.,.,_, = a, "-d ci) ,,,,,,„ "9 z
i n . ..... -
1Lpi ma
i 1C-
Dubli I, h ►- i.n idelin-s • 'Lou 14 19'5 • Lev in_ft- s'.
Pilasters, Walls and Fences
All fencing visible from any residential street shall be a good
neighbor fence with an open lattice top.
Cul-de-sac Connections
Residential streets terminating in cul-de-sac's should be designed to
provide visual access to the natural open space. To define the open
I space from residential lots a rail fence shall be tied into sideyard
4 :( fencing. The rail fence shall be placed on the property line and IP continue out towards the street and terminating in a stone pilaster to
�.
. allow access into the open space. Removable bollards shall be placed
Oat the back of the sidewalk at the opening in the rail fence to control
1 motorized maintenance and emergency access into the open space.
Native or indigenous planting materials shall provide transitional
0, '4 landscaping into the natural open space.
,,d.
Private Residential Streets -Medium Density Neighborhood
Private residential streets are designed to serve the residents of
' medium density neighborhood and should be more intimate in scale.
Dimensions
The private residential streets shall have a 32' curb to curb dimension
with two travel lanes and a parking lane on one side only. A 4'
monolithic sidewalk will be constructed on one side of the street.
Courtyard driveways will have a 20' curb to curb dimension and will
not include a sidewalk and parking lane.
One additional option may include a 36' curb to curb width with
parking on both sides of the street and a 4' monolithic sidewalk
constructed on one side of the street.
Landscape Treatment
Street trees shall act as the primary landscape element within each
medium density neighborhood. Through the use of a single species,
a grove effect similar to a planted orchard shall be achieved
supporting the character of the community. One street tree per lot
shall be required. Of the total trees, these may be placed throughout
the neighborhood where space allows.
EX.A p. s3f6 fa
Page IV-15
c1nr� r3
i ital. .C.'
RESOLUTION NO. - 96
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL AND ESTABLISHMENT OF FINDINGS
AND GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) DISTRICT REZONE
CONCERNING PA 95-030 DUBLIN RANCH PHASE I
WHEREAS, Ted Fairfield, representing property owner Jennifer Lin, submitted a Planned
Development(PD) District Rezone request(PA 95-030 Dublin Ranch Phase I) for rezoning an
approximate 210 acre site to PD Single Family (Low Density) Residential (109.8 acres; 570
dwelling units); PD Medium Density Residential (35.7 acres; 277 dwelling units); and PD Open
Space (57.5 acres). The PD Rezone request also includes a 5 acre neighborhood park and a 2 acre
private recreational facility. The project is generally located east of Tassajara Road and
approximately 4,000 feet north of the Interstate 580 Freeway, within the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan project area; and
WHEREAS, on October 10, 1994,the City Council approved a Planned Development District
Overlay Zone (Prezone) for a 1,538 acre site located within the adopted Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan project area(PA 94-030); and
WHEREAS, on November 14, 1994,the Alameda County LAFCo approved the Eastern Dublin
Reorganization for PA 94-030; and
WHEREAS, on January 12, 1995,the Alameda County LAFCo unanimously disapproved the
request to reconsider the Eastern Dublin Reorganization approval (PA 94-030); and
WHEREAS, on January 23, 1995, the City Council ordered the territory designated as
Annexation/Detachment No. 10 annexed to the City of Dublin, which includes the 1,538 acre site
and annexed to the Dublin San Ramon Services District and detached from the Livermore Area
Recreation and Park District (PA 94-030); and
WHEREAS, Annexation/Detachment No. 10 became effective on October 1, 1995; and
WHEREAS, the Dublin Ranch Phase I project site is located within the 1,538 acre site that has
been prezoned and annexed, and the Applicant's request complies with the existing Planned
Development District Prezone provisions; and
WHEREAS,the Applicant's PD Rezone request amends the initial PD Prezone and includes a
District Planned Development Plan as required under Section 11.2.7 of the Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan, and a Land Use and Development Plan as required under the City's Zoning
Ordinance, Title 8, Chapter 2, Section 8-31.16; and
g:\pa95-030\perel-16\crc
a
the initial Prezone with more detailed land use and development plan provisions. The PD District Rezone
allows the flexibility needed to encourage innovative development while ensuring that the goals, policies
and action programs of the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan are met. More particularly, the
PD District Rezone is intended to ensure the following policies:
1. Concentrate development on less environmentally and visually sensitive or constrained
portions of the plan area and preserve significant open space areas and natural and
topographic landscape features with minimum alteration of land forms.
2. Encourage innovative approaches to site planning,building design and construction to
create a range of housing types and prices, and to provide housing for all segments of the
community.
3. Create an attractive, efficient and safe environment.
4. Develop an environment that encourages social interaction and the use of common open
areas for neighborhood or community activities and other amenities.
5. Create an environment that decreases dependence on the private automobile.
B. Dublin Zoning Ordinance - Applicable Requirements
Except as specifically modified by the provisions of the PD District Rezone, all applicable and
general requirements of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance shall be applied to this PD District.
C. General Provisions and Development Standards
1. Intent: This approval is for the Planned Development(PD) District Rezone PA 95-030
Dublin Ranch Phase I. This approval rezones 109.8 acres to PD Single Family Residential
(570 dwelling units; 5.2 du/ac); 35.7 acres to PD Medium Density Residential (277
dwelling units; 7.8 du/ac), for a total maximum of 847 dwelling units; and 57.5 acres to PD
Open space. The number of dwelling units and mix of dwelling unit types (i.e. ratio of
Single Family Residential to Medium Density Residential) can vary under each residential
land use category while staying within the approved density ranges. However,the total
number of units shall not exceed the maximum number of dwelling units,which is 847.
This approval also rezones 5 acres for PD neighborhood park and 2 acres for a private
recreational facility. Development shall be generally consistent with the following PD
Rezone submittals labeled Exhibit A on file with the Dublin Planning Department:
a. District Planned Development Plan, Land Use and Development Plan, comprising
the Phase I Site Plan, 20-Scale Plotting Maps, and Boundary and Phasing Plan,
prepared by MacKay and Somps, William Hezmalhalch Architects, Inc. and
NUVIS dated received August 10, 1995 and November 15, 1995.
3 Pr"3 r. OF
g:\pa95-030\pere 1-16\crc
I i
b. Dublin Ranch Phase I Architecture and Landscape and Open Space Design
Guidelines prepared by MacKay and Somps, William Hezmalhalch Architects, Inc.
and NUVIS dated received August 10, 1995 and November 15, 1995.
2. Single Family Residential: Development standards within the Single Family land use
designation shall conform to the City of Dublin R-1 District provisions and the PD District
Overlay Zone for PA 94-030 Eastern Dublin(City Council Resolution No. 104-94). As the
R-1 District base zone, all the R-1 District provisions shall apply, except those superseded
by the following provisions. Only detached single family units are allowed in this District.
Lot Size: 4,000 sq. ft. minimum
Median Lot Width: 50 feet
Minimum Lot Frontage: 35 feet
Minimum Lot Depth: 80 feet
Front yard Depth(setback from back of sidewalk):
Minimum 12 feet to orch or living g area.
Minimum 17 feet to garage, except for side opening garages
(minimum 15 feet to side opening garages).
Driveways less than 20 feet in length require automatic
garage door openers and"roll up" doors
Side Yard (setback): Minimum 5 feet to living area- Minimum 10 feet at corner
conditions
Garages located at the rear half of a lot have no minimum
side yard. Building restrictions for zero lot line structures
shall be applied as conditions of Site Development Review
approval.
Rear Yard (setback): 5 feet minimum. Include a useable yard equal to 10% of the
lot size with a minimum dimension of 10 feet in any
direction. Garages located in the rear half of a lot have a 3
foot minimum rear setback.
Minimum Building
Separation: 10 feet(excluding allowable encroachments).
Maximum Building
Height: 30 feet or 2 stories at any one point.
PAGE I 11
4
g:\pa95-030\pere 1-16\crc
3. Medium Density Residential: Development standards for attached and detached units
within the Medium Density land use designation shall conform to the City of Dublin R-S
District provisions and the PD District Overlay Zone for PA 94-030 Eastern Dublin(City
Council Resolution No. 104-94). As the R-S District base zone, all the R-S District
provisions shall apply, except those superseded by the following:
Attached Standards:
Front Yard Depth: Minimum 10 feet to porch or living area.
Minimum 5 feet to garage.
Side Yard (setback): Minimum 5 feet including encroachments (UBC standards).
Rear Yard(setback): Minimum 10 feet to living area.
Yard Space: Provide a useable yard of 150 square feet with a minimum
dimension of 10 feet in any direction.
Upper floor units shall have a deck of at least 50 square feet
with a minimum dimension of 5 feet.
Minimum Building
Separation: 10 feet including encroachments (UBC building standards).
Maximum Building
Height: 30 feet, or 2.5 stories at any one point.
Detached Standards:
Minimum Lot Size: 2,000 square feet
Median Lot Width: 30 feet at building setback; 35 feet at corner conditions
Average Lot Depth: Not Applicable
Front Yard Depth(setback from back of sidewalk):
Minimum 10 feet to porch or living area.
Minimum 5 feet to garage without driveway, or greater than
17 feet to garage with driveway, except for side opening
garages.
5
gApa95-030\pere1-16\cre P.I7 I 073
•
Driveways less than 20 feet in length require automatic
garage door openers and"roll up"doors.
Side Yard(setback): 3 feet minimum- 6 feet at corner conditions.
Garages have 0 foot side yards.
Rear Yard (setback): 5 feet minimum. Provide a minimum useable yard of 150 sq.
ft. with a minimum dimension of 10 feet in any direction.
Garages may have 0 feet rear yards.
Minimum Building
Separation: 6 feet
Garages may be attached.
Reciprocal easements may be used to satisfy yard
requirements.
Maximum Building
Height: 30 feet, or 2.5 stories at any one point.
Additional Standards:
Garages: Parking requirements may be met with tandem garages.
Adjacent Uses: Interior side yard setbacks adjacent to common open space, parks,
greenbelts and stream corridors shall be a minimum of 10 feet.
Encroachment: The following encroachments shall be allowed to project up to 2 feet
into yard setbacks: eaves, architectural projections, fireplaces,
(including log storage and entertainment niche), balconies, bay
windows,window seats, exterior stairs, second floor overhangs,
decks, porches and air conditioning equipment. All non-fire rated
encroachments must be at least 3 feet from property lines.
Front Yard
Landscaping: The applicant/developer shall install front yard landscaping within all
the medium density neighborhoods.
4. Curvilinear Streets: Site design of the individual neighborhoods may vary from that
shown in Dublin Ranch Phase I Rezone (PA 95-030) if the number of units in a
neighborhood is adjusted or attached units are substituted for detached (in medium density
neighborhoods only). However, the concept of curvilinear streets and cul-de-sacs cannot
be altered.
5. Architectural Design: Eight distinct architectural styles are described in the Dublin
Ranch Phase I Architecture and Landscape and Open Space Design Guidelines and
architectural elevations. Any or all of these styles can be utilized in an individual
6
g:\pa95-030\perel-16\crcy" `
neighborhood. Additional styles can be permitted at Site Development Review if it is
determined they would not change the overall character of the Dublin Ranch Phase I plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby
recommend City Council approval of PA 95-030 Dublin Ranch Phase I PD Rezone subject to the
following conditions:
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to final occupancy of any
building, and shall be subject to Planning Department review and approval. The following codes
represent those departments/agencies responsible for monitoring compliance of the conditions of
approval: [PL] Planning, [B] Building. [P] Parks and Community Services, [PO] Police. [PW] Public
Works ADM Administration/Cit Attorne FIN Finance F Do 'hert Re.inal Fire Authorit
[DSR] Dublin San Ramon Services District. [CO] Alameda County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District [Zone 7].
GENERAL
1. The Land Use and Development Plan, District Planned Development Plan and Architecture and
Landscape and Open space Design Guidelines for Dublin Ranch Phase I (PA 95-030) are
conceptual in nature. No formal amendment of this PD Rezone will be required as long as the
materials submitted for the Tentative Map and Site Development Review are in substantial
conformance with this PD Rezone and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The Planning Director
shall determine conformance or non-conformance and appropriate processing procedures for
modifying this PD Rezone (i.e. staff approval, Planning Commission approval of Conditional Use
Permit, or City Council approval of new PD Rezone). Major modifications, or revisions not found
to be in substantial conformance with this PD Rezone shall require a new PD Rezone. A
subsequent PD rezone may address all or a portion of the area covered by this PD Rezone. [PL]
2. Prior to obtaining building permits,the applicant must receive Site Development Review(SDR)
approval as established in the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance, unless the Planning Director
approved a SDR waiver and a zoning approval is granted upon the determination that the
construction constitutes a minor project and building permit plans are in accord with the intent and
objectives of the SDR procedures. [PL]
3. Except as may be specifically provided for within these General Provisions for PA 95-030,
development shall comply with the City of Dublin Site Development Review Standard Conditions
(see Attachment A-1). [PL]
4. Except as may be specifically provided for within this PD, development shall comply with the
City of Dublin Residential Security Requirements (Attachment A-2). [PO]
5. The design, location and material of all fencing and retaining walls shall be subject Site
Development Review approval unless the Planning Director waives the SDR requirement. [PL]
7 ti
g:\pa95-030\perel-16\crc
6. The applicant shall comply with all applicable grading guidelines as indicated on page 103 of the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. [PW, PL]
7. The Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) of one or more Dublin
Ranch Phase I homeowners associations shall be submitted with the Tentative Map and/or Site
Development Review application, and shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning
Director and City Attorney prior to recordation of the Final Subdivision Map, or prior to Site
Development Review approval. [PL, ADM]
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
8. The Dublin Ranch Phase I project proponent and the City of Dublin shall enter into a development
agreement prior to Tentative Map approval, which shall contain, but not be limited to,provisions
for financing and timing of on and off-site infrastructure,payment of traffic, noise and public
facilities impact fees, in lieu affordable housing, fee, and other provisions deemed necessary by
the City to find the project consistent with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. At some future date,
the applicant shall be responsible for paying all fees required by the Development Agreement.
[PL]
SCHOOL FACILITIES IMPACT MITIGATION
9. No tentative subdivision map for all or any part of the area covered by this Land Use and
Development Plan shall be approved by the City Council until the applicant has entered into a
written mitigation agreement with the affected school district(s) and the City. The mitigation
agreement shall establish the method and manner of financing and/or constructing school facilities
necessary to serve the student population generated by the development. The mitigation
agreement shall address the level of mitigation necessary,the amount of any school impact fees,
the time of payment of any such fees and similar matters. The City shall be a party to any such
agreement only for the purpose of assuring uniformity with respect to different property owners
and appropriate land use planning. [PL, ADM]
NOISE
10. A noise study shall be required for the Tentative Map application submittal to show how interior
noise levels will be controlled to acceptable limits. [PL, B]
SCENIC CORRIDOR POLICIES
11. The applicant shall comply with the City's proposed Eastern Dublin Scenic Corridor Policies and
Development Standards. If the Eastern Dublin Scenic Corridor Policies and Development
Standards have not been adopted prior to approving the Tentative Map for the project, the
applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan's scenic corridor,
development standards and grading policies and action programs through a detailed visual analysis
submitted with the Tentative Map application. [PL]
8
g:\pa95-030\pere 1-16\erc
• 3
LANDSCAPE/OPEN SPACE/TRAILS
12. As part of the Tentative Map approval,the applicant shall be conditioned to offer to dedicate the
intermittent stream/open space and trail corridors. If the City accepts this dedication of
improvements, no credit for these areas and improvements shall be given towards parkland
dedication requirements. [P, PL, PW]
13. All graded cut and fill slope areas shall be revegetated as described in Policy 6-22 of the Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan, • - . • . - -- , e. _ . -- , subject to Site Development
Review approval. [PL, PW]
14. All landscape within the open space and common areas, including the neighborhood park and the
intermittent stream and open space corridor shall be subject to Site Development Review approval.
The proposed landscape plans to be submitted with the Site Development Review application shall
take into consideration Dublin Ranch Phase I PD Rezone comments prepared by Singer, Hodges,
Evans, dated received October 10, 1995. [PL]
15. Appropriate all weather surface (e.g. crushed gravel or rock) vehicular access to open space,
various trail systems and some residential areas, as shown on Exhibit A, shall be provided and
maintained on a continuous basis, to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief, Public Works Director and
Planning Director. [F, PW, P]
16. A minimum 25 foot setback from the intermittent stream/open space corridors shall be required
encouraged wherever possible. Setbacks for this purpose shall be measured from the edge of
drainage corridors as shown on Figures 4.1, 6.2 and 7.33 of the Specific Plan. [PL]
BUILDING
17. All project construction shall conform to all building codes and ordinances in effect at the time of
building permit. [B]
18. The following information shall be submitted with the Tentative Map application: 1)Dublin
Ranch Phase I Geotechnical Report dated June 19, 1995; 2) solar panel guidelines; 3) clarification
of new Zone 2 or Zone 3 water reservoir location and need; 4) City of Pleasanton's water reservoir
details (i.e., fences, retaining walls, roadway for access). [B]
PARKS AND RECREATION
19. The applicant shall comply with the City's Dublin Municipal Code , Chapter 9.28 Dedication of
Land for Park and Recreation Purposes and the Dublin Parks and Recreation Master Plan park
dedication and design requirements by either dedicating 12 acres of park land, or paying park
dedication in-lieu fees, or providing a combination of both park land dedication and in-lieu fees
based on the maximum number of units proposed,prior to Final Subdivision Map approval. The
City may consider the applicant's request to improve the neighborhood park and receive credit
for those improvements. [P, PW, PL]
9
OF
g:\pa95-030\pere 1-16\crc
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
20. The applicant shall comply with the City's proposed Stream Corridor Restoration Program and the
Grazing Management Plan. The project's intermittent stream enhancement and restoration
improvements shall comply with the Plan requirements and shall be submitted with the Tentative
Map application for the Dublin Ranch Phase I project. If a Stream Corridor Restoration Program
and the Grazing Management Plan have not been adopted prior to approving the Tentative Map for
the project, the applicant shall provide project specific stream corridor restoration and grazing
management requirements and shall submit this plan during the Tentative Map project review.
[PL, Zone 7, PW]
21. The applicant shall comply with all Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR mitigation measures for
mitigating potentially significant plant and animal species impacts (e.g. Applicant shall submit a
preconstruction survey prepared within 60 days prior to any habitat modification to verify the
presence of sensitive species. A biologist shall prepare the survey and shall be subject to the
Planning Department review and approval). Any updated surveys and/or studies that may be
completed by a biologist prior to Tentative Map application submittal shall be submitted with the
Tentative Map application. [PL]
PARKING
22. The availability of adequate on-street parking within the Medium Density Residential area shall be
re-assessed prior to Tentative Map approval to determine its adequacy. [PL, PW]
TRAFFIC/PUBLIC WORKS
23. The Applicant shall meet all City of Dublin minimum roadway standards for public streets prior to
Tentative Map approval. All minor modifications to the City's roadway standards shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Public Works Director. [PW]
24. Applicant shall pay a traffic impact fee or construct required improvements based on the adopted
Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (per Resolution No. 1-95) and the I-580 Interchange Traffic
Impact Fee (fee that has been agreed upon by the City of Dublin and City of Pleasanton for
interchange improvements)). These fees shall be paid prior to final inspection of each unit, unless
and until,the City Council amends Resolution 1-95 to make the fee payable prior to issuance of
building permits. [PW, B]
25. The applicant shall submit an update of the traffic study prepared by TJKM dated December, 1995
with the Tentative Map application and the study shall be subject to review and approval by the
Public Works Director. Appropriate traffic mitigation measures will be identified and included as
conditions of Tentative Map approval. Such traffic mitigation may include, but not be limited to:
[PW]
a. Traffic signalization
b. Roadway shoulder construction
10
ft,ft,"1- r-3�
g:\pa95-030\pere 1-16\crc
c. Frontage improvements
d. pavement widening
e. Overlays of existing pavement
f. Dedications of right-of-way
g. Restriping
26. Where decorative paving is installed in public streets,pre-formed traffic signal loops shall be used
under the decorative paving. Where possible, irrigation laterals shall not be placed under the
decorative paving. Maintenance costs of the decorative paving shall be included in a landscape
and lighting maintenance assessment district or other funding mechanism acceptable to the City
Manager. Decorative paving plans shall be submitted with the Tentative Map application
submittal and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Public Works Director. [PW,
ADM]
27. Street lights on arterial streets shall be the City Standard cobra head luminaries with galvanized
poles. Where decorative lights are to be used on residential streets,these lights shall be designed
so as to not shine into adjacent windows, shall be easily accessible for purchase over a long period
of time (e.g. 30 or more years), and shall be designed so that the efficiency of the lights do not
require close spacing to meet illumination requirements. A street lighting plan demonstrating
compliance with this condition shall be submitted with the Tentative Map application and shall be
subject to the Public Works Director's review and approval. [PW]
28. Street name signs shall display the name of the street together with a City Standard shamrock logo.
Posts shall be galvanized steel pipe. A street sign plan shall be submitted with the Tentative Map
application and shall be subject to the Public Works Director's review and approval. [PW]
29. The applicant shall construct a minimum 10 foot wide bicycle/pedestrian path between the looped
residential collector street and Fallon Road, as shown on Exhibit A. [PW, PL]
FIRE
30. Applicant shall comply with all DRFA fire standards, including minimum standards for
emergency access roads and payment of applicable fees. [F]
31. A fire buffer zone between the development area and open space area shall be provided and
maintained by a home owners association on a continuous basis to the satisfaction of the
Dougherty Regional Fire Authority. [F]
32. The applicant shall comply with the City's proposed Wildfire Management Plan. The Plan
requirements shall be incorporated into the CC&Rs for the Dublin Ranch Phase I project. If a
Wildfire Management Plan has not been adopted prior to approving the CC&Rs for the project,the
applicant shall provide a project specific wildfire management plan and shall submit this plan
during the Tentative Map project review. [F, PL, PW]
11
g:\pa95-030\pere 1-16\crc
UTILITY SERVICES/POSTAL SERVICES
33. The location and siting of project specific wastewater, storm drainage and potable water system
infrastructure shall be consistent with the resource management policies of the Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan. [PL, PW, DSR]
34. All on-and off-site potable and recycled water and wastewater facilities shall be constructed in
conformance with DSRSD Major Infrastructure Policy (Res. 29-94). The applicant shall submit
plans for the potable and recycled water water and sewer system to service this development
acceptable to DSRSD,pay fees required by DSRSD and receive DSRSD's approval prior to
issuance of any building permit. Developer shall construct these facilities prior to final inspection
of the first unit. Developer-dedicated facilities shall be in conformance with the DSRSD
Standard Specifications and Drawings. [B, PW, DSR]
35. The applicant shall provide a"will" serve letter from DSRSD prior to issuance of the grading
permit for the grading that creates individual building sites, which states that the Dublin Ranch
Phase I project can be served by DSRSD for water and sewer prior to occupancy. [B, PW]
36. _ ., . _. . _ . . .. . , , • ,
Phase I area per City of Dublin, Zenc 7 and DSRSD requirements. A recycled water distribution
system for the landscaping within Dublin Ranch Phase I area shall be provided per the City of
Dublin, Zone 7, and DSRSD requirements. The landscaping areas must meet City of Dublin
Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance requirements. [PW, Zone 7, DSR]
37. Applicant shall provide Public Utility Easements per requirements of the City of Dublin and/or
public utility companies as necessary to serve this area with utility services. [PW]
38. The applicant shall confer with local postal authorities to determine the required type of mail units
and provide a letter from the Postal Service stating their satisfaction at the time the Tentative Map
and Site Development Review submittal is made. Specific locations for such units shall be to the
satisfaction of the Postal Service and the Dublin Planning Department. [PL]
39. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide "will serve" letters from
appropriate agencies documenting that adequate electric, gas, telephone and landfill capacity is
available prior to occupancy. [PL]
40. The applicant shall work with DSRSD to help fund a recycled water distribution system computer
model that reflects the adopted Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment.
[DSR]
41. The applicant shall comply with all Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District- Zone 7 Flood Control requirements and applicable fees. [Zone 7, PW]
12
g:\pa95-030\pere 1-16\crc
F : l
fr..!
•
MISCELLANEOUS EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN/GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FINAL
EIR MITIGATION MEASURES
42. Applicant shall work with LAVTA to establish the need, bus route(s), bus turnouts, bus stop sign
locations, bus shelter locations, and other transit amenities for this project prior to Site
Development Review approval. [PW]
43. Applicant shall design bus turnouts,transit shelters and pedestrian paths (sidewalks) consistent
with the proposed LAVTA routes and stops and the City of Dublin's requirements and standards
prior to issuance of building permits for the residential units. These Conceptual design plans
shall be submitted with the Tentative Map application submittal and subject to the Public Works
Director review and approval. Construction shall be undertaken as part of the street improvement
work. [PW]
44. The applicant shall comply with the City's erosion and sedimentation control ordinance. [PW]
45. The applicant shall comply with all visual resource mitigation measures of the FEIR relative to
grading, scenic corridors, scenic vista preservation, and similar visual resources. [PL, PW]
46. The applicant shall comply with the City's solid waste management and recycling requirements.
[ADM]
47. All new reservoir construction shall comply with DSRSD's requirements. [DSR, PW]
48. The applicant shall comply with all applicable action programs and applicable mitigation
measures of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan and companion Final
Environmental Impact Report(FEIR), respectively,that have not been made specific conditions of
approval of this PD Rezone. [PL]
PASSED,APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of January, 1996.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Planning Director
13 rr
g:\pa95-030\perel-16\crc
01/00, '96 17:11 ID:THURBON&YOUNGBLOOD FAX:9166492491 PAGE
THURBON at YOUNGBLOOD
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
14e8 RESPONSE ROAb,*WIC 105
SACRAMI NTO,CALIFORNIA 05615
TELEPHONE FAC$IMIL[
1016)649-3204 (111016410-2A01
January 9, 1996
Lawrence L. Tong VIA FACSIMILE AND
City of Dublin FIRST CLASS MAIL
Post Office Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
Re : Dublin Ranch Phase I PD Rezone
Dear Mr. Tong:
I am in receipt of your correspondence dated January 4, 1996.
I apologize for the delay in my original response to this issue,
however, I understood Libby' s request, to be a request for a
response confirming our agreement with Mr. Inderbitzen' s proposal
for the school mitigation condition result regarding the above-
referenced project . The purpose of this letter is to set forth our
position regarding the issue and is being provided to you in
accordance with your January 4, 1996 correspondence so that you may
incorporate our comments accordingly.
The District appreciates the efforts the City has undertaken
to adopt school impact mitigation conditions and the efforts that
you and the Planning staff have expended in getting to where we are
today. At first glance, Mr. Inderbitzen' s suggestion for
resolution of the school issue has some appeal . However,
conditions attached to tentative maps may be more susceptible to
legal challenge than simply enforcing the original condition in
accordance with the requirements established when the City adopted
the condition pursuant to its earlier legislative act . The
original condition basically requires project proponents to comply
with the school mitigation requirements prior to the final
legislative act affecting a project .
Mr. Inderbitzen has proposed, as I understand it, that as the
final legislativet approaches that the condition be modified for
the subject project to read that "no tentative subdivision map for
all or any part of the area covered by this land use and
development plan shall be approved by the City Council until the
applicant has entered into a written mitigation agreement with the
affected school district (s) and the City. " As a general rule,
conditions placed on a subdivision map are enforceable and it would
seem, at first glance that such a condition would provide adequate
protection to schools . However, cities and counties, when
considering requiring developers to mitigate their impacts on
schools, act from their strongest position when they deny or�C
condition the project pursuant to a legislative act . ATTACHMENT .,Z
I understand that it is the intent of the City and Mr.
Inderbitzen that the restriction on approval of subdivision maps
occur pursuant to a legislative act . However, if the City does not
ti:7,1'7 IL f‘‘,-,„I
• 01/09 '96 17:12 IL':THURBONVOUPJGBLOOD FAX:9166492491 PAGE
Lawrence L. Tong
City of Dublin
Re : Dublin Ranch Phase I PD Rezone
January 9, 1996
Page 2
require the project proponent to enter into a written mitigation
agreement consistent with the original condition, a subsequent
purchaser of the property may choose to challenge the City's
ability to deny a tentative subdivision map based on mitigation of
school impacts because approval of a tentative subdivision map is
not a legislative act . This puts the City at some risk and
ultimately, reduces the protection that the school districts have
from the condition as originally adopted by the City. This may not
seem like a significant issue today, but it could be an issue in
the future.
For example, we are currently involved in litigation with
another county over a very similar issue. Specifically in that
case, the County, during a rezoning process and a CEQA review,
recommended that a condition be adopted requiring a project
proponent to enter into an agreement with affected school districts
to mitigate the development' s impacts on the school district . The
condition was similar to the one proposed in Dublin and the
condition was placed on the tentative map stating that prior to
approval of the final map, the project proponent had to negotiate
a written agreement with the affected school districts regarding
school impact mitigation. Once all legislative actions had been
taken and the condition attached to the tentative map, the project
proponent sold portions of the project to other individuals and the
process of working towards a final map took many months .
During that time financial conditions for the parties involved
changed, County Counsel retired and a new County Counsel came into
the picture and ultimately a new Planning Director was hired by the
County. Thereafter, portions of the project had been sold a second
time, counsel for the new owners decided that they could
successfully challenge a school mitigation condition attached to
the tentative map. We have been in litigation on the issue for
several months and^while we are close to settling the matter, the
school district' s position has been compromised during settlement
discussions . When faced with the legal challenge, County Counsel
and the new Planning Director, as well as the County Board of
Supervisors took a neutral position and refused to enforce the
condition based on the threat of litigation from the new owners of
the project . Ultimately, the County approved the final map
notwithstanding the condition which led to the current liti
4
ation.
Arguably, from a technical standpoint, placing the L MENT
condition on a tentative map should protect the City and the
affected school districts . However, under the current state of the
law in California the City, if challenged in the future, may find
itself in the position of not being able to enforce the condition
as originally anticipated. Mr. Inderbitzen has represented that
there is no intent to sell portions of the project at this time. �;1
•
01/': 96 17:1::: IL :THURBLNgYOUh••1GBLOOLi FHi:;:9166492491 P E 4
Lawrence L. Tong
City of Dublin
Re : Dublin Ranch Phase I PD Rezone
January 9, 1996
Page 3
However, as we all know, the complete development process takes a
long period of time and based on economic issues circumstances may
change in the future . In short, enforcement of the original
condition at this point in time, as adopted by the City, presents
little legal risk and secures the interests the City sought to
protect with the original condition. Modifying the condition as
suggested merely delays, what we all anticipate will be the
inevitable (a mutual agreement between the developer and the school
district) and unnecessarily weakens the City' s legal position as it
relates to enforcing the condition as a tentative map condition.
The District recognizes the need for Mr. Inderbitzen and his
client to continue their development process without unreasonable
delays. To that end, the District is prepared to meet with Mr.
Inderbitzen and his client, on a daily basis if necessary, to
arrive at an equitable agreement which will satisfy the original
condition adopted by the City and allow Mr. Inderbitzen and his
clients to proceed with their development uninterrupted. I have
contacted Mr. Inderbitzen and advised him of our position in this
matter. I suggested that we immediately begin meeting to reach an
acceptable agreement between the parties which will comply with the
original condition and allow his project to continue uninterrupted.
In the meantime, we respectfully request that the City adhere to
the condition as originally adopted.
If you need further clarification or have any questions,
please feel free to call me.
Very truly yours,
THURBON & YOUNGBLOOD
By: E)Z. C:i7.--/L-----)
ROBERT E. THURBON
RET:mbp
cc : Dr. Joyce Mandesian
Mike White ATTACHMENT IMIENT j
Libby y 6ilver, City Attorney HH
. JAN-1.1-96 THU 15:40 MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK&SILV, FAX NO. 510 351 4481 P. 02/04
MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER & WILSON
MICHAEL R.NAVE A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
STEVEN R.MEYERS SANTA ROSA OPFICF
ELIZABETH H.SILVER
EN4EL S.RIBACK
KN GATEWAY PLAZA 555 FIFTH STREET,SUITE 230
CLIFFORD ORD F.CAMPBELL 777 DAVIS STREET,SUITE 300 SANTA ROSA,CA 05401
MICHAEL F.HODRigUE= TGLePHONE-(tut)54$-
KATHLEEN FAUBION,AICF SAN LEANDRO,CALIFORNIA 94577 FACSIMILE:(707)545.6677
WENDY A.RoSBRTR TELEPHONE:(510)351-4300
DAVID W.SKINNER FACSlMlLE:
JT 6 tvEN T.MATTAS ( 10 351-4481
R1CK W.JARVIS
LARISSA M RFTo
DEBBIE F.LATHAM
WAYNE K.SNODGRASS
OF COUNSEL
ANDREA J.SALTZMAN
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission DATE: January 11, 1996
City of Dublin
FROM: Elizabeth H. Silver
City Attorney
RE: Dublin Ranch Phase I PD Rezone
The staff has asked me to address several issues which may arise at your continued
public hearing on January 16 on the Dublin Ranch Phase I PUD.
Environmental Re.virM.
•
Because the project before you -- a PD rezone -- is a residential project undertaken
pursuant to and in conformity with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.the PD rezone is
exempt from CEQA, as indicated in the Agenda Statement for your January 2 meeting.
(State CEQA Guidelines, section 15182.) If the PD rezone is approved, the applicant will
still need to process a tentative map and site development review before development can
occur. No further environmental review is required at tentative map approval or at site
development review unless the initial study performed at that time disclosures some new
environmental impact not previously addressed in the Program Elk prepared for the
Specific Plan. (Ibid.)
Condition Requiring School Mitigation Agreement Prior to Tentative Map Approval
In 1994 the Council prezoned 1500 acres, including the property in question, and
imposed a condition on the prezoning ("Prezoning Condition") which stated that
• applicants for PD rezonings must enter into a school mitigation agreement with the
affected school district prior to PD rezoning. The mitigation agreement would require
developers to pay school impact fees in excess of the amount of school mitigation fees that
PAGE a-4
& 1 OHM Ar lsm 1
• JAN-11-96 THU 15:41 MEYERS,NAVE, R I BACK&S I I.V. FAX NO. 510 351 4481 P. 04/04
• TO: Planning Commission, City of Dublin
FROM: Elizabeth H. Silver, City Attorney
RE: Dublin Ranch Phase I PD Rezone
DATE: January 11, 1996
PAGE: 3
The case Mr. Thurbon described involved a condition imposed on the tentative map.
That, however, is not what the applicant is requesting and the staff is recommending. The
Proposed Rezoning Condition would be imposed on the Pll rezoning, which is a
"legislative" act. The Council has the power to impose such a condition in this case when .
taking a "legislative" act.
The question before the Planning Commission is whether it believes that the
proposed project is consistent with the Specific Plan and the zoning on the property. If
the Commission believes that the Proposed Rezoning Condition is consistent with and
implements the Prczoning Condition, the Commission can make the required finding of
consistency notwithstanding the fact that one or both school districts may have voiced
• objections to the Proposed Rezoning Condition. There is no legal requirement that the
school districts agree with the Proposed Rezoning Condition because, as noted above, it is
the City Council and not the districts that has the power to impose the requirement for a
mitigation agreement which includes a fee.
As indicated above, I believe that the Proposed Rezoning Condition is consistent
with and implements the Prezoning Condition and provides adequate protection to the
City that adequate school facilities will be available for the students who will reside in the
homes to be constructed on the property.
Very truly yours,
MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER &WILSON
40C20(__
Elizabeth I-I. Silver
EHS:rja
MWPDIMNRSW\I 141MEMO1,8O\COMMISSI.W6 I
PA E A oF F
£7'TLw 7
•
01/10/96 16:04 FAX 510 829 1180 DUBLIN SR SVCS D 444 CITY OF DUBL USA V1002/003
DUBLIN ~`
SAN RAMON =�/ � • 7051 Dublin Boulevard
Dublin,California 94568
SERVICES FAX 510 829 1180
DISTRICT
'1t, Dis 510 828 0515
January 9, 1996
Carol Cirelli, Senior Planner
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Subject: PA 95-030 Dublin Ranch Phase 1 PD Rezone,
Planning Commission Meetings
Dear Carol:
We have reviewed the City's staff report,the proposed conditions of approval and the included
illustrations for the subject project. The following comments shall serve to clarify the concerns
which we expressed previously regarding the information provided.
1. The infrastructure illustrations (Attachment 3)portray a reasonable preliminary plan for
the off site potable and recycled water and wastewater collection system improvements.
However,the District Policy for Major Infrastructure (Res. 29-94, copy enclosed)must
be consulted on a case by case basis for a determination of whom shall design and build
District off site improvements. Thus the references on these illustrations to the
responsibility for construction may be premature or inaccurate. Please note also that the
illustration for recycled water facilities does not show the storage tank required by the
District's master planning for this area.
2. We suggest the following revision to Condition No. 34 of the Conditions of Approval to
clarify the District's determination of responsibility for construction of on and off site
facilities:
Condition of Approval #34: ATTACHMENT 3
All on and off site potable and recycled water and wastewater facilities shall be
constructed in conformance with DSRSD Major Infrastructure Policy(Res. 29-
94). Applicant shall submit plans for the potable and recycled water systems and
sewer system to service this development acceptable to DSRSD,pay fees required
by DSRSD and receive DSRSD's approval prior to issuance of any building
The Dublin San Ramon Services Dlnnet is a Public entuy
01/10/96 16:05 FAX 510 829 1180 DUBLIN SR SVCS D 444 CITY OF DUBL USA 421003/003
Carol Cirelli, Senior Planner
January 9, 1996
Page 2
permit. Developer dedicated facilities shall be in conformance with DSRSD
Standard Specifications and Drawings.
Thank you for considering our comments and incorporating them into the approval of this
project. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
/110 jag
BRUCE W. WEBB,
Engineering Planner
cc: Martin Inderbitzen
Robert Gresens
Bert Michalczyk
F:\user\Conley\wp51\webb\1995\cireti96.1tr ATTACHMENT 3
1
223 Donner Avenue
Livermore , CA 94550-3040
January 3, 1996
Dublin Planning Commission
Re : Dublin Ranch ( Lin ) proposal
I hope that your action will provide for an interim bicycle
path along the north side of I-580 on land that would later allow
widening of I-580 to allow a BART extension in the median .
A narrow strip about . 8 miles long; linking Croak Rd . ( at
Fallon and El Charro ) with Nort}istde Dr . east of T'assa.iara Rd .
would be a big part of an ultimate hike route linking Dublin and
the new BART station with Las Positas College and Livermore in the
I-580 corridor . ( Bikes now have only one east-west route in the
valley - Stanley Blvd . ) All that would be left is a small . 3-mile
link between Croak Rd . and Collier Canyon Road West .
Requiring the dedication of such a strip, which would
ultimately be needed to widen I-580 for a further BART extension,
would be a key ingredient in encouraging inter-city bicycle travel
within the valley.
Very truly yours ,�/"�
Robert S . Allen
449-1387
RECEitirE
jr N - 4 1996
rtr..UN PL.:S: iNG^
CITY OF DUBLIN
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 11, 1996
TO: Carol Cirelli, Sr. Planner
FROM: Mehran Sepehri, Sr. Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Contra Costa County's letter dated January 2, 1996 re: Dublin Ranch
Development Traffic Impacts.
I received the copy of Mitch Avalon's letter dated January 2, 1996. As Mitch indicated in his
letter, Dublin Staff has been working with him on studying the impact of Contra Costa County
development on Dublin's road system and vice versa.
The purpose of this study is to determine the traffic impact fee to mitigate the impact of each
development on other jurisdictions. We are hoping that this study will be completed within
approximately six months. When the traffic impact fee between Dublin and Contra Costa
County is established, that fee will be incorporated into the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee.
Please contact me if you have any further questions.
g:lcorreslmslavalon
ATTACHMENT 5
. t
01'02'96 TUE 16:22 FAX 510 313 2333 CCC PUBLIC WORKS x002
Contra Public Works Department J.Michael Watford
public Works Director
Costa 255 Glacier Drive
'+', Martinez, California 94553-4897 Milton F.Engineering ek
COU
11 FAX: (510)313-2333
Deputy•
Telephone: (510) 313.2000 Patricia R.McNamee
Deputy.Operations
January 2, 1996 •
Mr.Larry Tong Maurice M.Shiu
Deputy-Transportatior.
Planning Director
City of Dublin S. Clifford Hansen
P.O.Box 2340 Deputy•Administration
Dublin,CA 94568 File: Dublin JEPA
Dear Mr.Tong:
I am writing to respond to a couple of concerns raised by Dublin regarding the mitigation of development
impacts on large scale projects in the area. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors recently approved
the rezoning and development agreements for the Dougherty Valley development project.During the
hearings,Dublin requested removal of any proposed cap on the traffic impact fee and expressed concern
about having a time limit placed on determining the fee,if there were delays not subject to Dublin's control. I
am pleased to inform you that the Board of Supervisors approved the rezoning and development agreements
with provisions that did not include a cap on the traffic impact fee,and also allows an extension of time for
any delays in determining the fee caused by the County or the developer.
County staff and Dublin staff have been meeting on and off for almost two years to determine the appropriate
traffic fee to mitigate impacts of development in each jurisdiction. We are using the Tri-Valley
Transportation Council model as a basis for determining the fee. The model is used to determine the impact
of Dublin traffic on County roads and to determine the impact of Dougherty Valley traffic on Dublin roads.
The impacts between the two jurisdictions will be compared and the difference will be used to calculate the •
fee.
It is our understanding that the Dublin Ranch project in east Dublin is being heard before the Dublin Planning
Commission tonight. We request that any approval of the Dublin Ranch project acknowledge that the County
and City are working towards a mutual traffic impact foe to mitigate the impacts of development in Dublin
and the County.Traffic impacts from the Dublin Ranch project should be included in the determination of
this fee.
County staff and Dublin staff will continue to meet to determine a traffic impact fee. I believe we will have a
draft fee and agreement ready for review within the next three months.
Very truly yours, •
10zikti4,7,-, ....(,....„
R.Mitch Avalon
Assistant Public Works Director
RMA:rs Engineering Services Division
G:tengsvclautchVong.ti
c: V.Alexeeff,GMEDA
J-M.Waked,Public Works •
L horn Pubes Works ATTACHMENT L Thompson,Dublin
M.Sepehri,Dublin
O.Barry,COD
S.Goetz,COD
J.Bueren,Public Works
(i)
CITY OF DUBLIN
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 11, 1996
TO: Carol Cirelli, Sr. Planner
FROM: Mehran Sepehri, Sr. Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Letter Dated January 3, 1996, re: Dublin Ranch (Lin) Proposal
I have received a copy of the letter from Robert S. Allen dated January 3, 1996, regarding the
Dublin Ranch (Lin) proposal.
Mr. Allen stated in his letter that he would like to see provision for a bicycle route to connect the
East Dublin BART Station and Ironhorse Trail to the Las Positas College in Livermore. This
bicycle route has already been included in the City of Dublin Specific and General Plans and
will be along the Dublin Blvd. Extension to Livermore.
To facilitate reserving right-of-way for the widening of 1-580 and a further BART extension, a
copy of the future Planning Applications located adjacent to 1-580 should be sent to BART,
Caltrans, and the Tri-Valley Transportation Council for their comments and requirements for
right-of-way dedication for freeways.
g:Icorreslmslallen
ATTACHMENT 5
• ndv(
JAI i 15 '96 11: 1=i 1M BF:EON ODOHNEL t( t°tqQ, f c,, tyC F'.
BREON, O'DONNELL, MILLER, BROWN & DANNIS
ATTCa?'FY5 AT :_AW
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
71 Stet':nwn Street
tieitL:'.+?-^�n nineteenth Hoar
%targa::t L.U'DJnne: San Ftanciaco,CA 94:05
7avtd C.Milt• Tel: 4 5f 43 L::1
?riaztlla 3rc■11 Hx 4151i45.43t4
Gregor'I.pa--'-+
En:R.tl cha
erid eta ?I_ragan 253C ViaTeian
Nancy Sc r:< Suite 3A
Palos Vc:de,.CA 90274
liatt,n Lahr January 16, 1996 Tel: 310;371.6W
st rliyn).CI^vetand Fax: 31(973.908
lawie S.:anger:
loan Sirdt 17842 mcrn,'toad
1)3,4d A WO Suite"1::;
Brant T.iv' Salina: CA 93907
Claudia P.Madrigal Tel. 40s;“5-1.1470
Randall 0.?¢rent
Peter W.Srurg* W.Angela,(A
Lune F Reynolds
Guy A Bra.1 let. 930!642-x.23
:ans L :till•:etc!:
VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S, MAIL Costa Meaa,CA
4u7.11a R:;e1l Ccou lrl. 714/136,2•07
Laurence Tong
Planning Director
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
•
Re: Dublin Ranch Phase'I, Land Use Development Plan
Our file 51 50.1.000
Dear Mr. Tong:
This letter is to advise that the Dublin Unified School District and the Lin Family, owners of the
above-referenced project,have reached a mutually satisfactory agreement regarding the imposition of
the condition regarding school impact mitigation(copy enclosed). Therefore,the District has no
objection to the City's approval of the Land Use and Development Plan being considered by it on
January 16.
Very truly yours,
•
BREON, O'DONNELL, MILLER,
BROWN &DANNIS
, -- --'
•
Priscilla Brown
PB:kmd
Enclosure
cc: Vince Anaclerio, Superintendent, Dublin Unified School District
;518011000\tong1.196
223 Donner Avenue
Livermore , CA 94550-3040
January 3 , 1996
Dublin Planning Commission
Re : Dublin Ranch ( Lin ) proposal
I hope that your action will Provide for an interim bicycle
path along the north side of I-580 on land that would later allow
widening of I-580 to allow a DART extension in the median .
A narrow strip about . 8 miles long linking Croak Rd . ( at
Fallon and El Charro ) with Nortliside Dr . east of Tassa.iara Rd .
would be a big part of an ultimate bike route linking Dublin and
the new FART station with Las Positas College and Livermore in the
I-580 corridor . ( Bikes now have only one east-west route in the
valley - Stanley Blvd . ) All that would be left is a small . 3-mile
link between Croak Rd . and Collier Canyon Road West .
•
Requiring the dedication of such a strip, which would
ultimately be needed to widen I-580 for a further BART extension,
would be a key ingredient in encouraging inter-city bicycle travel
within the valley.
Very truly yours ,
if
Robert S . Allen
449-1387
ATTACHMENT 5
RECEIV, D
N - 4 1996
CCEL.4 01/4A1
J141 15 '96 11: 1511M BREON ODOR 4EL LA to Cq{p C K P.2/5
J
BREON, O'DONNELL, MILLER, BROWN & DANN 'S
ATTC Y5 AT ;_AW
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
71 Sie":nsnm Street
er:on nineteenth Moor
atgs:a L.QT.Lynne:' San Ftenciaco.CA 94:05
D
'ri d C.S!'.'.' TO; 4:5/343.4::1
°n::lile 3town i-ae et5/545-43R4
Gregory I..arm's
Ent R Llyeha a
Br,c c:,' er:rgan 255C Via Tc:on
Suite 3
�Nancy&;r:< a
Palo!1'c:da.CA 90274
Kathryn Lune January 16, 1996 re;: !10,37i.685;
ua_liyn I.Cleveland Frx: 110''373.6808
1»rie S..:uenger:
loaf:3irdt 17842 h:ern Road
Dart:A WO:f. Suite 1.12
Brett T.iet Salina: :A939G7
Claudia P lttedrlgdl Tel, 4o8;6634470
iidnGa:?
0.?arm
Peter W.;iturt.Nr Lo.Angeles,CA
Laurie?Reynolds
Trl. 570!642-:;23
Guy A 3n-at
:ane }:t'^c::
VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S,MAIL cAtald Mcaa,CA
S46She B:id: 7.1; 710662.4E77
Laurence Tong '•
Planning Director
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Re: Dublin Ranch Phase I, Land Use Development Plan
Our file 5180.1.000
•
Dear Mr. Tong:
This letter is to advise that the Dublin Unified School District and the Lin Family, owners of the
above-referenced project,have reached a mutually satisfactory agreement regarding the imposition of
the condition regarding school impact mitigation(copy enclosed), Therefore, the District has no
objection to the City's approval of the Land Use and Development Plan being considered by it on
January 16.
Very truly yours,
•
• BRBON, O'DONNELL, MILLER,
BROWN &DANNIS
Priscilla Brown
PB:kmd
Enclosure
cc: Vince Anaclerio, Superintendent, Dublin Unified School District
'.5180\1000\tong 1.196
\ 3 Y
14(Ck 1412-J 0 d af
VI(444(10 ft Mme ,
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
20. The applicant shall comply with the City's proposed Stream Corridor Restoration Program and the
Grazing Management Plan. The project's intermittent stream enhancement and restoration
improvements shall comply with the Plan requirements and shall be submitted with the Tentative
Map application for the Dublin Ranch Phase I project. If a Stream Corridor Restoration Program
and the Grazing Management Plan have not been adopted prior to approving the Tentative Map for
the project,the applicant shall provide project specific stream corridor restoration and grazing
management requirements and shall submit this plan during the Tentative Map project review.
[PL, Zone 7, PW]
21. The applicant shall comply with all Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR mitigation measures for
mitigating potentially significant plant and animal species impacts (e.g. Applicant shall submit a
preconstruction survey prepared within 60 days prior to any habitat modification to verify the
presence of sensitive species. A biologist shall prepare the survey and shall be subject to the
Planning Department review and approval). Any updated surveys and/or studies that may be
completed by a biologist prior to Tentative Map application submittal shall be submitted with the
Tentative Map application. [PL]
PARKING
22. The availability of adequate on-street parking within the Medium Density Residential area shall be
re-assessed prior to Tentative Map approval to determine its adequacy. [PL, PW]
TRAFFIC/PUBLIC WORKS
23. The Applicant shall meet all City of Dublin minimum roadway standards for public streets prior to
Tentative Map approval. All minor modifications to the City's roadway standards shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Public Works Director. [PW]
24. Applicant shall pay a traffic impact fee or construct required improvements based on the adopted
Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (per Resolution No. 1-95) and the I-580 Interchange Traffic
Impact Fee (fee that has been agreed upon by the City of Dublin and City of Pleasanton for
interchange improvements), as such fees may hereafter be modified or amended.. These fees
shall be paid prior to final inspection of each unit, unless and until,the City Council amends
Resolution 1-95 to make the fee payable prior to issuance of building permits. [PW, B]
25. The applicant shall submit an update of the traffic study prepared by TJKM dated December, 1995
with the Tentative Map application and the study shall be subject to review and approval by the
Public Works Director. Appropriate traffic mitigation measures will be identified and included as
conditions of Tentative Map approval. Such traffic mitigation may include,but not be limited to:
[PW]
a. Traffic signalization
b. Roadway shoulder construction
10
g:\pa9S-03 0\pere 1-16\crc