Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.2 DBX EstablishROWLinesCITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT City Council Meeting Date: April 11, 1988 SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Establishment of Right-of-Way Lines for the Extension of Dublin Boulevard between Dougherty Road and the Southern Pacific Railroad Right-Of-Way and for a Connecting Road between the Dublin Boulevard Extension and Scarlett Court EXHIBITS ATTACHED: iA) Draft Ordinance indicating no protests received lB) Draft Ordinance indicating denial of protests 2) Resolution Adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration 3) Map of Proposed Plan Line for Dublin Boulevard 4) Map of Proposed Plan Line for Connector Street 5) Typical Roadway Section 6) Alternate Intersection Alignments 7) Alternate Extension Alignments 8) Proposed Dedication by Developer of TR 4978 9) Planning Commission Resolution Recommending Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration (Resolution No. 88-010) 10) Planning Commission Resolution Recommending Establishment of Plan Line (Resolution No. 88-011) 11) Environmental Assessment 12) Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 13) Planning Commission Minutes, March 7, 1988 14) Planning Commission Resolution Initiating Amendment to Zoning Ordinance to Allow Conforming Status to Properties Rendered Non-Conforming Solely by Condemnation RECOMMENDATION: ~.) 3) 4) 5) 6) Open public hearing Receive Staff report and public testimony Question Staff and the public Close public hearing and deliberate Waive reading and introduce Ordinance Establishing Right-of-Way Lines (lA or lB as appropriate) Adopt Resolution Adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration FINANCIAL STATEMENT: No direct financial impacts would occur from the recommended action. Costs to the City as a result of development of the road would depend on the financing mechanism selected for this project. A separate action would be required by the City Council to authorize financing the project. DESCRIPTION: The existing General Plan identifies the general location of the Dublin Boulevard extension with an implementing policy to develop a plan line for a six-lane divided extension from Dougherty Road to Parks RFTA boundary (Parks RFTA is co-terminus with the Southern Pacific right-of-way). This roadway extension is proposed as a six-lane facility to serve as an arterial to the extended planning area east of Dougherty Road. This road is the only connection to the extended planning area shown in the General Plan. The Dublin Boulevard extension is ultimately planned to extend through the extended planning area and to tie into North Canyons Parkway in the City of Livermore. Dublin Boulevard will serve as a frontage road to 1-580. ITEM NO. ~~f__ COPIES TO: Property Owners The adoption of a right-of-way line for the extension of Dublin Boulevard will reserve the area specified in the proposed ordinance for the extension of Dublin Boulevard. Adoption of this ordinance will not result in immediate acquisition of any property; its effect is to prohibit construction of buildings in the designated area (Ordinance No. 44-87) and to require dedication of the right-of-way under certain circumstances upon future construction (Ordinance No. 11-88). IMPACTS: Several traffic and land use issues were identified in connection with the proposed right-of-way lines. The proposed right-of-way line has been designed to incorporate features which will mitigate adverse impacts. These issues and the mitigation features are summarized below. 1) Traffic: The Dublin Boulevard extension will eliminate left turns into and out of Scarlett Court near the Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road intersection. The resulting Scarlett Court/Dublin Boulevard intersection would be too close to Dougherty Road to allow stacking of vehicles between intersections. Mitigation Features: An additional connection between Dublin Boulevard and Scarlett Court will be built adjacent to the Alameda County Flood Control channel. Median breaks will be placed along Dublin Boulevard away from intersections to allow left turns and U-turns. 2) Land Use: Right-of-way needs will require purchase or dedication of portions or all of several properties. These land requirements will result in the need to acquire about 182,125 square.feet of land (for the Dublin Boulevard extension itself) and five structures. Mitigation Features: Property owners will receive fair market value for the property needed for the full right-of-way width. In addition, the City will purchase remnant of lots rendered unusable at a fair market rate. Building owners will also receive a fair market compensation for structures (or portions of structures) within the proposed right-of-way. Relocation assistance will be provided to businesses or residents who no longer would be able to use their buildings. Where feasible, a building will be constructed (or moved) on-site to replace buildings within the proposed right-of-way. The Miracle Auto Painting property will have six parking spaces eliminated. This would reduce the amount of parking to eight spaces, which is one space below the normal requirement for the use. Instituting short-term parking (4 hours or less) along this section of Scarlett Court would provide parking for customers who would otherwise park on-site. The amount of land or building required for individual parcels is discussed in detail in the Environmental Assessment Initial Study. Mitigation measures made a part of the project are described in the attached Negative Declaration. ALTERNATIVES: 1) The extension alignment at Dougherty Road is proposed to be a right angle to Dougherty Road. Alignments which ranged five degrees north and south from a right angle were also examined to see if impacts on existing structures would differ. In all scenarios, the building at the Boat House would be eliminated upon ultimate construction of the street. A right angle intersection is the superior alternative from a design and safety standpoint. 2) Three main alignments were considered for the areas east of the Dougherty Road intersection. A) The entire right-of-way north of the east-west property lines. B) The entire right-of-way south of the east-west property lines. C) The right-of-way split between properties north and south of the property lines. -2- Ail three scenarios would require about the same amount of land. Impacts to improvements and existing businesses increase as the line is moved south. Option A would have the fewest impacts to existing business. However, this option could result in Parcels 16 - 20 (Brtdgepoint Properties) having limited land remaining for development. The Bridgepoint Properties have their legal frontage on the unimproved extension of Sierra Lane. If the land dedicated to the extension of Sierra Lane is "exchanged" for an equal amount for the dedication and improvement of Dublin Boulevard extension, 78.5 feet of right of way would be required across the south of the Bridgepoint properties. A balance of 31.5 feet of right-of-way would be required from the properties south of the Bridgepoint properties. Option B requires the use of more developed and improved property for the right-of-way which could result in greater costs for compensation to property owners for the taking of property. Option C is proposed for the right-of-way line as it would minimize impacts to the usability of vacant property and would result in fewer costs to the City for constructing the street, as Bridgepoint Properties would install frontage improvements for Dublin Boulevard instead of Sierra Lane. 3) The alignment of a connecting street between Dublin Boulevard extension and Scarlett Court is needed to improve circulation in the project area, as the close proximity of the Scarlett Court intersection to the Dougherty Road intersection will require.that access to Scarlett Court become right-turn-in and right-turn-out, with a median barrier on the Dublin Boulevard Extension. Several properties east of the Scarlett Court/Dublin Boulevard intersection were examined. Most of the properties had structures or other improvements placed in a manner which would require removal of the structure. However, adjacent to and west of the Alameda County Flood Control channel is a private road (32.76 feet wide) which could provide access. On the east side of the flood control channel is a private access easement. Individually, neither one of these accessways is of sufficient width for a public street. Together, they could serve as a one-way couplet. This alignment has a minimal impact on existing businesses, as the alignment and right-of-way are currently being used for traffic. In addition, the channel meets Scarlett Court around the midpoint of its length, making access to the connecting road centralized. EFFECTS ON INDIVIDUAL PARCELS (from Dougherty Road east to Southern Pacific Railroad): 1) Assessor Parcel #941-550-10-6 (Miracle Auto Paint) would remove six parking spaces from the front of the parcel. The proposed right of way would be about 27 feet from the front of the building. 2) Assessor Parcel Numbers 941-50-9-15 and 10-13 (Crown Isuzu) would remove a triangle of land approximately 100 feet long and 3C'feet wide on the Scarlett Court frontage which is now being used to display cars. 3) Assessor Parcel Number 941-50-10-11 (Valley Boat House) would remove the sales building and leave the remaining parcel too small for the boat sales business requiring a complete purchase of this property. 4) Assessor Parcel Number 941-50-12-7 (Curtis Dodge) would remove the back half of the existing building on the site together with approximately one third of the rear of the parcel. This may be a total or partial purchase of the parcel depending on the viability of the remainder of the parcel for the existing or other use. 5) Assessor Parcel Number 941-0-13-2 (Dublin Rock and Ready) would remove the residence and garage at the rear of the parcel. 6) Assessor Parcel Number 941-550-14-2 (Dolan Lumber) would remove a 31 1/2 foot strip of lumber storage at the rear of the parcel. 7) Assessor Parcel Number 941-550-15-6 (Busick) would remove 31 1/2 foot strip of paved parking area at the rear of the parcel. -3- 8) Assessor Parcel Number 941-550-16-2 (Dory Cadillac) would require the removal of the service building at the rear of the parcel and a 31 1/2 foot strip of land now under the building. 9) Assessor Parcel Number 941-50-39 (U-Haul) would remove 31 1/2 feet of a proposed parking area at the rear of the parcel. The proposed right-of-way would be approximately 23 feet away from the proposed U-Haul building. 10) Assessor Parcel Number 941-0-19-10 (Lemoine) would remove 31 1/2 feet of vacant storage area at the rear of the parcel. 11) Assessor Parcel Numbers 941-0-42, 43, & 44 (Bridgepoint) would remove 78 1/2 feet of vacant property along the southerly property lines of these parcels. TIMING: Timing of the improvement of the Dublin Boulevard extension may be dependent upon demand from development of the extended planning area to the east. That development may be two to five years from now. If an assessment district is formed, the roadway could be designed and built within a one year time period. COST: Preliminary estimated costs to acquire property, relocate businesses (and residents), design the improvements, and construct the roadway would be about $8,200,000. These costs represent approximately $6.8 million for the Dublin Boulevard extension and $1.4 million for the connecting road between Scarlett Court and Dublin Boulevard. Several options exist for paying for this project, including an assessment district for adjacent property owners and off-site improvement requirements for future development to the east. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 7, 1988, and adopted resolutions recommending that the City Council adopt the alignment proposed as Option C and adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance regarding the project. Testimony was received from two property owners attending the hearing and indicated support for the alignment. The Planning Commission additionally directed Staff to prepare a Resolution initiating an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance which would grant a conforming status to properties rendered non-conforming solely due to condemnation. This Resolution was subsequently adopted by the Planning Commission on March 21st and will be placed on a City Council agenda on a future date. On March 14, 1988, the City Council adopted a Resolution of Intent to Establish Plan Lines for the Dublin Boulevard Extension between Dougherty Road and the SPRR right-of-way and for the Connector Street between the Dublin Boulevard Extension and Scarlett Court. This Resolution was posted in the City's three established locations and as near as possible to the proposed right-of-way lines as required by law. Staff additionally published the Resolution and mailed copies to all adjacent property owners. One of two optional ordinances is proposed to be introduced. Option IA indicates no protests were made at the hearing; Option lB indicates protests were made and denied. If Option lB is adopted, the names of the persons protesting must be entered at the close of the hearing. Staff recommends that the City Council 1) conduct a public hearing, waive the reading, and introduce Ordinance iA or lB Establishing Right-of-Way Lines, and 2) adopt the Resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance. -4- HOUHTON PLr ~.~ 17 18%, 'f';I,~.CT 4976 "MAP SHOWING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES FOR EXTENSION OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD BETWEEN DOUGHERTY ROAD AND SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT-OF-WAY." 21 22 23 ORDINANCE NO. -88 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ESTABLISHING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES FOR THE EXTENSION OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD BETWEEN DOUGHERTY ROAD AND THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AND FOR A STREET CONNECTING THE DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION WITH SGARLETT COURT The City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows: WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Resolution calling for a public hearing to consider future right-of-way lines for the extension of Dublin Boulevard between Dougherty Road and the Southern Pacific Railroad Right-of-Way and for a street connecting the Dublin Boulevard Extension with Scarlett Court (Resolution No. 41-88) and set a public hearing for April 11, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. to hear objections to the establishment of said right-of-way lines; and WHEREAS, notice of said public hearing was duly given; and WHEREAS, no protests were made either in writing or orally to the establishment of said right-of-way lines; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council finds and ordains that: Section 1. Right-of-way lines are hereby established for the extension of Dublin Boulevard between Dougherty Road and the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way and for a street connecting the Dublin Boulevard extension with Scarlett Court, within the City of Dublin, County of Alameda, State of California, as follows: Ail that certain real property situate in City of Dublin, State of California, described as follows: Dublin Boulevard Extension A strip of land one hundred and ten (110) feet in width, fifty-five (55) feet (measured at right angles) on either side of the following described centerline: Beginning at a point on the centerline of Dougherty Road at the intersection of the centerline of Dublin Boulevard; thence from said POINT OF BEGINNING, leaving said centerline of Dougherty Road on a prolongation of the centerline of Dublin Boulevard in a northeasterly direction to a point on the west line of the parcel of land described in the deed to D.M. Nohr, etal., recorded March 19, 1984, as instrument number 84-051-707, records of Alameda County, said point being the beginning of a tangent 1000.00 radius curve concave to the south; thence along the arc of said curve to a point 23.50 feet north of, measured at right angles to the south line of Tract 4978 as recorded in Book 145 of Maps at Page 3, records of Alameda County; thence easterly on a course parallel with said south line of Tract 4978 to a point on the southwest right-of-way line of Southern Pacific Railroad and the POINT OF TERMINATION for this description. The side lines of above described right-of-way to be shortened or lengthened to intersect the east line of Dougherty Road or the southwest line of Southern Pacific Railroad. Connector Road - Dublin Boulevard Extension to Scarlett Court Two strip parcels of land running parallel to and adjacent to the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District land located between Scarlett Court and the southerly boundary of Tract 4978 (Assessor's Parcel Number 941-550-18-3). The easterly line of the westerly parcel being the easterly line of Parcel Map #3000 and the westerly line of the easterly parcel being 31 foot right angle distance easterly of the easterly line of Parcel Map #3000. The westerly parcel being a uniform width of 32.76 feet, terminating on the south at Scarlett Court and on the north at the proposed Dublin Boulevard Extension. The easterly parcel being a uniform width of 35 feet terminating on the south at Scarlett Court and on the north at the proposed Dublin Boulevard Extension. all as more particularly shown on that certain map entitled "MAP SHOWING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES FOR EXTENSION OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD BETWEEN DOUGHERTY ROAD AND SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY and that certain map entitled "MAP SHOWING CONNECTOR STREET BETWEEN DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION AND SCARLETT COURT," dated March 1, 1988, and filed in the office of the City Clerk on March 7, 1988, which map is hereby adopted as a precise plan of said right- of-way lines. Section 2. The effect of said right-of-way lines shall be governed by the provisions of Dublin Ordinance No. 44-87. Section 3. EFFECTIVE DATE AND POSTING OF ORDINANCE. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California. PASSED AND ADOPTED this __ day of , 1988. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST; City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. -88 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ESTABLISHING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES FOR THE EXTENSION OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD BETWEEN DOUGHERTY ROAD AND THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AND FOR A STREET CONNECTING THE DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION WITH SGARLETT COURT The City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows: WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Resolution ~alling for a public hearing to consider future right-of-way lines for the extension of Dublin Boulevard between Dougherty Road and the Southern Pacific Railroad Right-of-Way and for a street connecting the Dublin Boulevard Extension with Scarlett Court (Resolution No. 41-88) and set a public hearing for April 11, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. to hear objections to the establishment of said right-of-way lines; and WHEREAS, notice of said public hearing was duly given; and WHEREAS, protests to establishment of said right-of-way line were made by the owners of , which protests are hereby denied; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council finds and ordains that: Section 1. Right-of-way lines are hereby established for the extension of Dublin Boulevard between Dougherty Road and the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way and for a street connecting the Dublin Boulevard extension with Scarlett Court, within the City of Dublin, County of Alameda, State of California, as follows: Ail that certain real property situate in City of Dublin, State of California, described as follows: Dublin Boulevard Extension A strip of land one hundred and ten (110) feet in width, fifty-five (55) feet (measured at right angles) on either side of the following described centerline: Beginning at a point on the centerline of Dougherty Road at the intersection of the centerline of Dublin Boulevard; thence from said POINT OF BEGINNING, leaving said centerline of Dougherty Road on a prolongation of the centerline of Dublin Boulevard in a northeasterly direction to a point on the west line of the parcel of land described in the deed to D.M. Nohr, etal., recorded March 19, 1984, as instrument number 84-051-707, records of Alameda County, said point being the beginning of a tangent 1000.00 radius curve concave to the south; thence along the arc of said curve to a point 23.50 feet north of, measured at right angles to the south line of Tract 4978 as recorded in Book 145 of Maps at Page 3, records of Alameda County; thence easterly on a course parallel with said south line of Tract 4978 to a point on the southwest right-of-way line of Southern Pacific Railroad and the POINT OF TERMINATION for this description. The side lines of above described right-of-way to be shortened or lengthened to intersect the east line of Dougherty Road or the southwest line of Southern Pacific Railroad. Connector Road - Dublin Boulevard Extension to Scarlett Court Two strip parcels of land running parallel to and adjacent to the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District land located between Scarlett Court and the southerly boundary of Tract 4978 (Assessor's Parcel Number 941-550-18-3). The easterly line of the westerly parcel being the easterly line of Parcel Map #3000 and the westerly line of the easterly parcel being 31 feet right angle distance easterly of the easterly line of Parcel Map #3000. The westerly parcel being a uniform width of 32.76 feet, terminating on the south at Scarlett Court and on the north at the proposed Dublin Boulevard Extension. The easterly parcel being a uniform width of 35 feet terminating on the south at Scarlett Court and on the north at the proposed Dublin Boulevard Extension. all as more particularly shown on that certain map entitled "MAP SHOWING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES FOR EXTENSION OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD BETWEEN DOUGHERTY ROAD AND SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY and that certain map entitled "MAP SHOWING CONNECTOR STREET BETWEEN DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION AND SCARLETT COURT," dated March 1, 1988, and filed in the office of the City Clerk on March 7, 1988, which map is hereby adopted as a precise plan of said right- of-way lines. Section 2. The effect of said right-of-way lines shall be governed by the provisions of Dublin Ordinance No. 44-87. Section 3. EFFECTIVE DATE AND POSTING OF ORDINANCE. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California. PASSED AND ADOPTED this __ day of , 1988. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. -88 A RESOLUTION OF THE GITY COUNCIL OF THE GITY OF DUBLIN ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE CONCERNING DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION PLAN LINE (DOUGHERTY ROAD TO SOUTHERN PAGIFIG RIGHT-OF-WAY) GITY OF DUBLIN WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as amended together with the State's administrative guidelines for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and City environmental regulations, requires that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impact and that environmental documents be prepared; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq., a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been prepared by the Dublin Planning Department with the project specific mitigation measures outlined in Staff's Initial Study of Environmental Significance dated February 8, 1988, regarding: 1) Traffic Circulation 2) Land Use W~EREAS, the Planning Commission did review the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance and considered it at a public hearing on March 7, 1988; and WHEREAS, the City Council did review the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance and considered it at a public hearing on April 11, 1988; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearings was given as legally required; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council determined that the project, Dublin Boulevard Extension Plan Line (Dougherty Road to Southern Pacific Right-of-Way) has been changed by the Applicant and/or the Applicant has agreed to provide mitigation measures resulting in a project that will not result in the potential creation of any significant environmental impacts identified in the Initial Study of Environmental Significance; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been prepared and processed in accordance with State and Local Environmental Law and Guideline Regulations, and that it is adequate and complete. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this llth day of April, 1988. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk HOUBTON PL, TRJ,CT 4~7~ LN. 2O "MAP SHOWING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINES FOR STREET CONNECTING DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION WITH SCARLETT COURT" I:~UBUN BI~ULEVAI:::Irl I=)C~EN~ION CoNH Sl'IH TYPICAL SECTION DUBLIN BOULVARD EXTENSION DOUGHERTY ROAD TO SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT-OF-WAY NOT TO SCALE ,.I HOUBTON PL. SIERRA L.N. 2O I I I I INT&KZd TI DUEII-]N BOULEVARD EXTENSION OOUGHERTY ROA~) TO SOUTHERN PACU~C R/W 0 $0 ~00 200 300 400 S C A L ~= II HOUBTON BIERRA IN, 4978 mm mm mm imm 21 22 23 HOUBTON PL, 17 m m nUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION DOUraHERTY ROAD TO BOUTHERN PACIFIC R/W nATHI I~BBo ~Bm 9BBB 0 $0 100 tO0 300 400 S C A L mil mm mm F L I I RESOLUTION NO. 88-010 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMI~ISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOM2~ENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE CONCERNING DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION PLAN LINE (DOUGHERTY ROAD TO SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT-OF-WAY) CITY OF DUBLIN WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as amended together with the State's administrative guidelines for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and City environmental regulations, requires that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impact and that environmental documents be prepared; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq., a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been prepared by the Dublin Planning Department with the project specific mitigation measures outlined in Staff's Initial Study of Environmental Significance dated February 8, 1988, regarding: 1) Traffic Circulation 2) Land Use WHEREAS, the Planning Commission ~did review the Mitigated Negative Decl%ration of Environmental Significance and considered it at a public hearing on March 7, 1988; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given as legally required; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determined that the project, Dublin Boulevard Extension Plan Line (Dougherty Road to Southern Pacific Right-of-Way) has been changed by the Applicant and/or the Applicant has agreed to provide mitigation measures resulting in a project that will not result in the potential creation of any significant environmental impacts identified in the Initial Study of Environmental Significance; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Dublin Planning Commission recommends that the City Council find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been prepared and processed in accordance with State and Local Environmental Law and Guideline Regulations, and that it is adequate and complete. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 7th day of March, 1988. AYES' Commissioners Barnes, Burnham, Mack, Tempel, and Zika ATTEST: NOES: None ABSENT: None Planning Dir~ctor~ RESOLUTION NO. 88-011 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISH PLAN LINE FOR DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION FROM DOUGHEETY ROAD TO SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT-OF-gAY WHEREAS, the Dublin General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Dublin by Resolution No. 12-85 on February 11, 1985; and WHEREAS, the General Plan contains a policy in Section 5.1 "Land Use and Circulation Section: Trafficways" to develop a plan line for a six- lane divided extension of Dublin Boulevard from Dougherty Road to Parks RFTA boundary; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on March 7, 1988; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHE~, this application has been reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been recommended for adoption (Plahning Commission Resolution No. 88- ) for this project, as it will have no significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS, the Staff report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth; and WHEREAS, the plan line is appropriate for the subject property in terms of being compatible to existing and proposed land uses and conforming to the underlying land use designation and it will not overburden public services; and WHEREAS, the plan line will not have a substantial adverse effect on health or safety or be substantially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to property or public improvement; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Dublin Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council approve the plan line as described on the attached Exhibits A and B dated March 1, 1988. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 7th day of March, 1988. AYES: Commissioners Barnes, Burnham, Mack, Tempel, and Zika NOES' None ABSENT: None ATTEST: Planning Director ~i~ning Commission Chairperson l© CI:TY OF!' 7,,I,tlFEIF[ (Pursuant to Public Resources ~de 5scf~on 21000 ef se~.).. Based on the protect informctlon submittecl in Section 1 General Data, the Plann;ng StaFf will use .Section 3, Inlt[ai Study, to determ[ne whether a lqegct;,/e Declarbtbn or cn Envkonmenta] Impac,.t R~por't is required. - -. SECTION 3. INITIAL STUDY - - - to be completed by the PLANNING STAFF "Nome oF Proiect or Applicant: Dub'lin 'Boulevard Extension - Do6gherty Road to Southern Pacific Right-of-Way 'A.-- ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING - DescripHon oF project s~te before the protect, including · information on: topograph)>; so~l stability; plants and animals.; h[storlccl, cultural, and scenic aspects; exlst[ng structures; and use oF structures Flat, unvegetated area 'through and a~jacent to industrial uses. Five. structures would need to be demolished - (vehicle sales, storage & repair, single-family residence). Vacant-land an~ - land u~ed for outdoor storage and parking would need to be acquired. Description oF surraundina properties, including inForm, allan an: plants ~nd cnimols; his~orlc=]~ cultural, end scenic aspects; ~Fe end intensify ~i land use; on~ scale or development. Property to north is vacant, p~o~e~tV,to south is auto~obile~ boat, vehicle sales,-lumber and construct±on material Sales/ co~£~actor, and other' similar businesses, plus a single-family residence with garage. B. ENVIRONMENTAL I/,JPACTS - Factual explcncH.on.s oF ell cn~',vers except "no" ore re-. qulred on attached sheets. NO Q~.r,TFT~ YES Ioo;c ~[o~ca? I ~ 1.2 ~ou~d Water W;]I the project affect ~h~ q~l;~ or ~n,;~ ~r X [ l or ¢ou~e alte~o/;on Q[ stream chapel Yogin? X ~ · J I 1.~ Scd[mcn~t;on W;I~ c~fls/mct;on ~n on orca rcsu]t [n ~[Or ~ed~ment [ J ~,~.~ · ' ~y project r~Jar~ act;,-;t;cs ~.o ~A~rH cxceasive d~a~ ~;on 2.5 velopmcnt o~ ~ells? ~luc close ro 4.0 P~N~S AND ANIMALS ~4.~ Plan~andAn;mal Species Are Ihere t~re ~endangzred dcnT fo~ ~ ~;ta~ lo wh;c~ co~;r;~ns will bc of sc;cntffic intone:t? h~ c~vcr~ly spec;c3, ~r to o :ub:t.:nr;ol 4.3 Dlvers~t~ o[ plant N~ec;e~ pre,chi? 5.0 FACILITtE¢: ANO SERVtC~S 5.1 Educational Facilities 5.2 Commerclol Focil;tles 5.3 LIRuld Waste 5.4 Solid Waste Di:posal 5.5 WoI~' S~pply 5.6 Steam Wat,r Draln~ge 5.7 Police 5.8 Fire 5.? R¢crcatlon 5.10 Cultural Facilities 6.0 T/LA NSPO?-TAT lO'N1 6.~. Tran~rtot;on Focil;lics 6.2 ' Circulatlon Conflicts 6.3 £ood Sofe~, and Design 7.0 HEALTH 7.1 Odors. 7.2 'Crowd[nD and Densib' 7.3 Nui~nces 7.4 Structural 8.0 N~)ISE $.1 No;se Levels Will pro[¢ctrcl cn~allment$ adversely afi'ec! the all a~;~;I;cs~ lncl~ng cla~:r~, or~s, c~ sto/f~ng Y/ill ~h~ p~oiect ;~ct the p-~;l/~eacker milo ~ as to ~mp~a the learning Is Ihe school Iocat:d such tho/ it pte:cnts a for o p~t;on a[ Ih~ enrollment ~n terms o~ travc~ time, ~;~once~ or ~c~ commercial ~.cH;ll.s Jar Ih~ ~re prov;s;~s ~ ~o ~poc[~ ;na~re standards? Will I~e ~roject bo ex.:ed Io nu~nces a~ os~c~ole~ w~/h ~sfe~ter ~lmcnt ~stos s~ncraf~ by the ptojectT ~;[I sierra ~ter dro~na~ ~c ~na~te to do--strum fleeing and to meet F~eml ~ta~e a~ local slc~crds? or ~te o pal;ce Wil~ thc pro,act's cd~[t[ana~ pcpulc~, Will the prelect ~ve inad~te ~oc;l;t~c3 to meet residents? Are the h-eEOc demands on ac~ocent roc:~,s c~rrently or oraSo~ ~ci~? finer, ~H[ the ~ff~c r~ck ~ (~cc~ cc~c~? Are t~e ol~ ~n~tar~on /ac~i;/;es ~;c~ :c~e pra~ect ~nod~te Io acc~mm~cte Ih= p~cct*s travel ~c~S? %¥;11 des~9~ o~ th~ pru~ec~ or tahitians ~n the WHI p;o~ec~ ~es~dcnts and u~ers be e~os~d to ~'~s~ acc;riehl r;s~ ~ Io r~y 0nd szrcct ~cs;~n ~ Joc~ o[ traffic odc~s ? h;gX dcn:;~ ;n their p~ysical lib;nO cnv;r~mcnr7 Will th= ~ro~cct be exposed to or scnerolc foct~rs ~y be censidercd os Will design and proposed cons~ruct~ to meal state a~ local ~uildinO codes? noise Icvrls ? will Ibc project bo cxposcd lo v~re~s ~oy;n9 lo hu~nS2 X X X X X X X X X X X xl X I I I 1 1 I ! I 'I I- I 1 I I I t- I I I I I I ! I I I 1 I I I 1 i 1 I I 1 t ! 1 I ! I I I I I I I I ! I I ! 1 1 1 1 I. NO oF ~n~me, ethn;C, h~us~ng, or age ~p? lO.O VIS~LC~LI~ J J j ' I I I I I 1 1].0 HISTORICANO CULTL}.~L J J . i I I- . ~so~z~s. I I I ' and Slruc~es o[ an crcha~1oD~cal rc~rCC? , or al~?hcr[c cJemenls ~har Gtc nol ;n c~rac~cr wllh j J J X cn cr~l~g;cal re~ce or ;ts ~etting? ~ J J 12.0 ENE~ GY ': I J J I I ! .... gy ,~u;r:d For .;,e project ? J 1 ........ " I I-'1 or s~,o~;ng o,~ c,~lc potcn:;alJ7 ~:ctdous s;lu- X J ' J J ' o[ ;n~tcur[17 and physlcal Ihr~l o~n9 1~.4 F~lJ;n~, drcdg;ng, dro;n;,,g, culvcrt;n~, ~:lc dis- J I J I I ! I I I .I .I ! ~~ t~p;~LTS ~13.5 Existing Land Will the project result in Use the removal or impact on existing facilities, that will result in adverse impacts to the existing Will the project result in a. - wouia Aen~tnen trmps Qr result C. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Does the proiect hove the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, subs,~c~-ntlclly reduce the habitat of o fish cr wildlife species, csu~-e o l:ish or wildlife population to drop below selt:- sustaining levels, threaten to elimincte a plant or animal communii'y, reduce the number er restrict the range of a rare or end'angered plcnt or animal or eliminate impor,"ant examples al the moior periods or California hisi'or)' c.r prehistory? Does the pro[ect h.-ave the potential to cchieve short- term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? · Does the projecl' have impacts which are [ndiv]dualJy · limited but cumulatelvely considerabJe? (A project may impact on two or more sepcrafe resources where the impact on each resour=e js relatively small, b'ut where the effect o,~ the total of those impacts-on the environment is significant.) (4) Does the pro]ect, have environmental effects which' will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either dlrect]y or indirectly? A-9: X X i MITIGATION MEASURES'- Discuss[on oF the ways to mltlga*e t~e significant effect~ ~dentlf[ed, if any: Compensate property owners and businesses for loss of property; relocate'businesses' and.residences which would be impacted; construct connectibg road to improve circulation. See attachment for more detailed discussiom uf -these mitigation measures.. DETERMINATION - On the bas~s oF this in[tlal evaluaHon: -. 'E. [~ Th~ City oF ]P~Lb[i~ ~'inds that there will not be any'significant eF:'ect. 'i'he par- titular cha~'acterlsHcs oF this project and the mit[gatlon measures incorporated .into .the design o1: the project provide ,~he. Factual bas[s for the finding. A NEGATI .VE DECLARATION !S ?~=_QU1RED ' ' F'-I The City oF ~ttb~,in finds thct the proposed project ~v~AY have a si~nlfic~nt eFFect on the environment. AN ENVIRONMENTAL iMPACT REPORT 1S REQUIRED** : **NOT~ Where a project is revlsed in response to an Initial Study so tho; po-~en:[al adverse effects are rn~tlgated to a point where no signlFic~mt env,.'ronmental effects would occur~ a revised Inltlal,S.~u':17 will be prepared..,a'~d ~ Negative Declaration. will be requ:.red i~s.~ead · an EIR. authorized Shaf~z ,.to issue an encroachmenh oermit to The Vallev~ Art[ses~ to display a banner ( Nay 2 - May 16), advertis~nI their spring show and craft sale, once ...~,--~ ........... ate ,~ Aoorove,-~ i.Tarrane o~_~ in the amoun: of $s72,!51 26; Adooted RESOLUTION NO. 25 - 88 FOR THE ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS TRACT 5402 (VISTA GREEN) and authorized Staff to accost a maintenance bonl at a future date. .,m©U~S~ FOR ~c. Im~ ..... o=_,zu°~'~"~ mOP ACQU!SiTTON_ AND IRPROVEi.IZNT OF ~'~m " ~ ~' :_,~ EXTENSION OF DUBLIz.~ BOULEVARD ~RO~ DOUGHERTY ROAD EASTERLY TO mum_..~ SOUTHERN PACIFIC R!~''~-n~-r'~''=.~ ~- ,,.:~ Staff advised that i: has been working on various alignments for the ........ · ~ .... en Deuchertv Road and the aoa=ne=n~, ~' ~ ~-~ =dc extension ~: Dublin ~o'~va-d .,{ , , = - , ~ ~ ' I {~-~ = ~,-~ O~anning Commission review ~gnn-o=-{ay and is scn_dulinc the a__ in Hatch of this year. c~-~f .2!e. w!t~. the al'~ies coT.~ro~ ', nor~2~' of ~ ...... isuzu on Dou~''=- .... lc~x), and i% was sointez~ cut' tha- ~ ~ ~he erooertv w~- ..... subilvi,-~.:s~__ so that the fronnage of the deep .~sEs were en .... _~: ex~ensior, of Dublin lc'aleveri ra~ner than on ~'r.e cu!-~o-~ac ~' =~ sion cf c~ Lane, *'~ '~": f the ~. .............. ~_~ o sroserty wou!i he enhanc.~ John loore has vo!unueered to iedicate ate imsrove a .... ~ of land ecual to _.,= ............. ~_n~ion of and ~n ~ '~u ~= the land d~ca+ed as Lane. He has further indicahed that he would work with the City to attemot ~ ,~ to ete the improvements from Douch~rtv to form, as assessmep, z ~se~-{ como! Road ho the~o~n~n ~ '~' ,~ ~cific_,~ Righ:-of-Way and to znclude' a road c~nn~,~=~_~~ from the Dublin Bouievarl l::tension ~o Scar~ Court. [,lr. l[oore has ~:a~ ==c than the~zn',_ znvestzaa~.~ the zeaslo~=,~= forminc_ an.. ass.~ssr, enn ?~ .... ~ ~ for irclltai=~P, ~ ~ J .... e~ ~s ~n _.,e Cour .... ea Jim [icXeenan, one of ~e,~ l'-nl .... :' ~. · ~ ....... ~,:_~. owners, addressed the Counci~ ~_"r. "~i{eehan stated that -aha~ 'qav'~ a final ma~ ~ uno site excae% for em~ toe ~. o= ~ha ~: .... are trying ~o ae.~e ....... of a ~raffic oo,-~{on .~ -property ..... ~ ~ -- is') some '-~'~ ' flow whic'~., lnlkSS' S~S~.. _. [Ia ~id no- know the -,viiI:~n.~na~s of the other oeo'ol_~= to oart~ClOate in .~n r~ssassment ~ ~ ~{ ~ ..... ' ' ' ~ .......... , but -'~" are wiil~nc to balk to the DFoD~rh'/ owners. On motion ~: ~', '~ ....... ss ~d-~i bv Cm. cn','ier .... -~ '- ' Counc~l iirec ~ Staff o ~,~7~=~ t' a nary asses- ~'-'~ s'}r:.}nd, ~-c ?. ~e-' ~icn = ~ of ~o~ th f~-'~=~ ~ suojec~ orooosod asses ..... from E'-~.~ Cont.k:~g3nt laTM~= v',_ ~or Ehe above work. *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* +* +*+*+*+* +*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* C 1'-I- 7 - 4 7 Regular Meeting February 22, 1988 1.6 2.1 3.5 5.2 6.1 DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Factual explanations Drainage and Channel Form - Project will cross over a flood control channel. Final construction plans will need to demonstrate that flow is not impeded. FlOoding - Project is located in Zone B (100-year to 500-year flood, or 100-year flooding of depths less than one foot) on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). Project maybe subject to flooding in the event of 100-year or 500-year flood event. Flooding is considered minor and minimal property damage to project is expected. Air Pollution - This project could eventually accommodate 40,000 vehicles per day (at Level of Service C or better). This increase in- vehicles could raise air pollution levels in the area. The project would eventually extend further and connect to existing North Parkway in Livermore and points within Alameda County. To the extent that this project and future extensions will provide parallel access to 1-580, the result will be fewer vehicle miles and less stop-and-go traffic (idling vehicles contribute to higher emissions). These results would offset impacts to air quality from increased traffic on Dublin Boulevard extension. Traffic signals and appropriate striping will also improve traffic flow, reducing some of the adverse air quality impacts of slow-moving and idling vehicles. Seismic Activity - Few sites within the City of Dublin are without geologic impact or hazard. This site is located between 1/10 and 1/2 mile from an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. As the project is outside the zone, no fault rupture evaluation is required for this project. Risk of damage to roadway and roadway users due to earthquake activity would be minimal. Commercial Facilities This project will improve access to undeveloped commercial property just north of the project and future development to the extended planning area to the east. Transportation Facilities - Traffic demands at the existing Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road intersection are expected to reach a Level of Service D in the year 2005. This project along with further easterly extension of Dublin Boulevard and additional development in Contra Costa County could result in the level of service being further degraded. However, the project (and further extension) will help alleviate future congestion on 1-580 by providing parallel access. The project also will provide a positive impact of providing access to properties which currently have no street frontage. Dublin Blvd. Extension Initial Study Page 2 7.1 Odors Temporary construction related odors may be generated. As they would be temporary, they are not considered significant. Construction materials which generate odors should be brought to the site only when needed and used when wind velocities are low. 8.1 Noise - Temporary construction-related noise levels may exceed the noise standards for commercial/industrial areas. Construction equipment should be properly muffled to reduce noise levels. Upon completion of the project, traffic may generate noise levels up to 70 dB (CNEL). These levels are consistent with City of Dublin General Plan policies for business park/industrial areas. The remaining single-family residence will be subjected to noise levels exceeding what is normally acceptable for residences. Current noise levels near the residence exceed the 60 dB (CNEL) considered appropriate for residences. ! Full improvement of the Dublin Boulevard extension will require removal of the single-family residence (and garage). The removal of the structure will also remove adverse noise impacts to residents. Issues associated with the removal of the residence are discussed under land use (13.5). 10.1 Views - Views in the area will change due to development of vacant property. Development of this projedt may quicken the process. Disruption of views from industrial areas generally is not considered significant. 11.2 Archaeological Sites - No known archaeological sites exist in the project area; however, the Livermore Valley area was home to some Native American groups. A condition of project approval should include a requirement that in the event of discovery of archaeological artifacts, construction be halted so that the find can be examined by a qualified archaeologist. 12.1 Energy Requirements - The Dublin Boulevard extension will reduce the vehicle miles required to get between easterly and westerly points of the City. The project will also provide parallel access to 1-580 and will provide an alternate route when the highway is congested. The project will then contribute to lower energy requirements for vehicles in this area. 13.4 Waterways The project will cross over an Alameda County Flood Control Channel, thus requiring a bridge or culvert. The crossing should be designed so as not to adversely affect the use of the channel. Dublin Blvd. Extension Initial Study Page 3 13.5 Existing Land Use - The project will result in the following use of land or change in land use (see attached Figure). A) Elimination of about six parking spaces and a free-standing sign at Miracle Auto Painting (2,000 sq. ft. land). The Conditional Use Permit for the property established a total of 14 parking ~spaces (where a minimum of 9 is required per zoning regulations). Elimination of parking will reduce the parking to one space less 'than the minimum requirement. B) Elimination of about 10 parking spaces and change of access off Scarlett Court at Crown Isuzu car dealership (2,200 sq. ft. of land). Elimination of approximately 2,827 sq. ft. building and use of approximately 1/2 of parcel at Boat House property (18,325 sq. ft.). D) E) Elimination of approximately 12,461 sq. ft. building (right-of- way would require almost half of building) and use of approximately 1/3 of parcel (31,200 sq. ft.) at Curtiss Dodge dealership. Use of approximately 13,500 sq. ft. of land (used for storage and single-family residence and garage) at the rear of Dublin Rock and Ready Mix. Elimination of garage and single-family residence (right-of-way cuts through one-third of house). ¢) Use of approximately 7,100 sq. ft. of the rear of Dolan Lumber property. H) Use of vacant land from lots in Subdivision 4978: 1) 600 sq 2) 19,700 sq 3) 26,700 sq 4) 27,500 sq 5) 6,600 sq 6) 2,350 sq ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. I) Use of about 5,400 sq. ft. of land from Busick property. Use of about 5,350 sq. ft. of land from Lew Dory and elimination of 17,000 sq. ft. building. Dublin Blvd. Extension Initial Study Page 4 K) Use of about 9,000 sq. ft. of land from U-Haul property. L) Use of about 4,600 sq. ft. of land from LeMoine property. Overall, approximately 182,125 sq. ft. of land plus removal of five structures will be required to ~omplete the project. Land will have to be purchased at a fair market value for its highest and best use. Relocation assistance to affected businesses and residents will be required. 6.4 Circulation - The intersection of Scarlett Court and the Dublin Boulevard Extension will be too close to the Dublin/Dougherty intersection for safe circulation. Modifications to the Scarlett Court intersection will be required to permit only right turns oDto and off of Scarlett Court. This change in the intersection will result in poor access to the west from Scarlett Court (necessitating that drivers make a U-turn on the Dublin Boulevard Extension in order to go west). A road which would connect the Dublin Boulevard Extension to Scarlett Court is proposed to parallel the Alameda County Flood Control Channel using existing access easements. No demolition of structures would be required to accommodate the new road. North and southbound directions would be separated by the Flood Control Channel, allowing only right turns into and out of adjacent properties. De~Telopment Services P.O. Box 2340 Dublin, CA 94568 CITY OF DUBLIN Planning/Zoning Building & Safety Engineering/Public Works 829-4916 829-0822 829-4927 NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR: DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION (Dougherty Road to Southern Pacific Right-of-Way) (Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq.) LOCATION: PROPONENT: DESCRIPTION' FINDINGS: INITIAL STUDY: MITIGATION MEASURES: PREPARATION: Easterly extension of Dublin Boulevard between Dougherty Road and the Southern Pacific right-of-way. City of Dublin First phase of the extension of Dublin Boulevard toward the City ~f-Livermore. Project will include redesign of the Scarlett Court intersection at Dougherty Road and a new public road Connecting the Dublin Boulevard Extension and Scarlett Court. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. The initial study is attached with a brief discussion of the following environmental components: Drainage, flooding, air pollution, seismic activity, transportation facilities, circulation, odors, noise, visual quality, archaeology, energy, land use. See attachment. This Negative Declaration was prepared by the City of Dublin Planning Staff, (415) 829-4916. SIGNATURE: Laurence L. Tong, Planning Director DATE: DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION (DOUGHERTY ROAD TO SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT-OF-WAY) Mitigation Measures included in project to eliminate impacts or reduce impacts to a level of insignificance. 1. Circulation - Final design of the Dublin Boulevard extension will include a minimum of one full median break (which will align with existing and future driveways) with the possibility of a second limited median break to facilitate left- and U-turns. - A connecting road between the Dublin Boulevard extension and Scarlett Court will be built adjacent to the Alameda County Flood Control channel to facilitate travel to the west from Scarlett Court and reduce traffic at the Scarlett Court/Dublin Boulevard (extension) intersection. The connecting road will be a public road. Existing private roads and access easements adjacent to the Alameda County Flood Control channel will ~eed to be acquired from the seven affected properties. 2. Land Use - Ail property owners will be compensated for acquisition of their real estate at a fair market value. The Valley Boat and the Curtiss Dodge dealer'will receive monetary assistance in the relocation of their businesses. - Single family residents also will receive relocation assistance. - The Dory Cadillac building could be relocated or rebuilt on- site; otherwise relocation assistance will be provided. ~ 3. Non-Conforming Uses Short-term (less than 4 hours) on-street parking will be designated on Scarlett Court to allow customers of Miracle Auto Painting to park on the street. In addition, the Planning Director should investigate zoning regulation provisions which would provide conforming status to non-conforming land uses rendered so solely because of condemnation of property. 4. Sign on-site. Freestanding sign at Miracle Auto Painting will be relocated Tong stated that the materials presented were the lastest submitted. park. was concerned with the off-site signs especially those located in the Mr. Naha type of s Mr. Tong stat~ more flexable f designed sign pro consolidation of s: Cm. Zika felt that the Mr. Nahas stated that signs behind the wall and Mr. Tong stated that there signs were located on the exte~ ~ked for guidance from the Planning Commission and Staff as to what they would like to see for the project. the ordinance relating to directional tract signs were -site signs and that a project of this size needs a nicely He stated that Staff recommendation would be toward ,. signs were awsome. ~ation of the wall made it necessary 'to put the ;efore the 17' height was necessary. ~isibili~ problems for motorists when the side of the wall. Mr. Tong also suggested that the give Staff a chance to meet with ing Commission continue this item to regarding the signage. Cm. Barnes stated she would not like to would like to see the signs shorter and e the signs mounted on the wall but [ler. .-~ Cm. Mack agreed with Cm. Barnes with regard off-site vs. on-site. Cm. Tempel stated he would like to see the numbe~ no direction with regard to height. sizes of the signs and signs minimized, but had On motion by Cm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Burnham, and by Barnes continued the public hearing to the next meeting of 5-0 Cm. A short recess was called. Cm. Barnes called the meeting back to order at 8:25 p.m. SUBJECT: Dublin Boulevard Extension Plan Line between Dougherty Road and the Southern Pacific Railroad Right-of-Way to consider establishment of plan lines for a portion of the Dublin Boulevard extension. Cm. Barnes opened the public hearing and called for the Staff Report. Mr. Tong gave a brief introduction with some background information which stated that the existing General Plan identifies the general location of the Dublin Boulevard extension with an implementing policy to develop a plan line for a six-lane divided extension from Dougherty Road to Parks RFTA boundary. '-8-39 March 7, 1988 ® © This roadway extension is proposed as a six-lane facility to serve as an arterial to the extended planning area east of Dougherty Road. This road is the only connection to the extended planning area shown in the General Plan. Mr. Tong also stated that the Dublin Boulevard extension is ultimately planned to extend through the extended planning area and to tie into North Canyons Parkway in the City of Livermore. Dublin Boulevard will serve as a frontage road to 1-580. Mr. Lee Thompson, City Engineer, continued with details regarding impacts. Mr. Thompson stated that several traffic and land use issues were identified with this project. The project has been designed to incorporate features which will mitigate adverse impacts. One issue is traffic: Dublin Boulevard extension will eliminate left turns into and out of Scarlett Court near the Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road intersection. The Scarlett Court/Dublin Boulevard intersection would be too close to Dougherty Road to allow stacking of vehicles between intersections. An additional connection between Dublin' Boulevard and Scarlett Court will be built adjacent to the Alameda County Flood Control channel. Median breaks will be placed along Dublin Boulevard away from intersections to allow left turns and U-turns. Mr. Thompson stated that another issue was land use; Right-of-way needs will require purchase or dedication of portions or all of several properties. These land requirements will result in the need to acquire about 182,125 square feet of land and five structures. Property owners will receive fair market value for the property needed for the full right-of-way width. The City will purchase remnant of lots rendered unusable at a fair market rate. Building owners will also receive a fair market compensation for structures within the proposed right-of-way. Relocation assistance will be provided to businesses or residents who no longer would be able to use their buildings. Where feasible, a building will be constructed, or moved on-site to replace buildings within the proposed right-of-way. Mr. Thompson further stated the Miracle Auto Painting property will have six parking spaces eliminated. Instituting short-term parking (4 hours or less) along this section of Scarlett Court would provide parking for customers who would otherwise park on-site. Mr. Thompson stated that there were the following alternatives; 1) extension alignment at Dougherty Road is proposed to be a right angle to Dougherty Road. Alignments which ranged five degrees north and south from a right angle were also examined to see if impacts on existing structures would differ. The building at the Valley Boat House would need to be eliminated. Mr. Thompson stated that three main alignments were considered for the areas east of the Dougherty Road intersection: A) the entire right-of-way north of the east-west property lines; B) entire right-of-way south of the east-west property lines; C) right-of-way split between properties north and south of the property lines. Ail three scenarios would require about the same amount of land. Impacts to improvements and existing businesses increase as the line is moved south. Regular Meeting PCM-8-40 March 7, 1988 Mr. Thompson stated that option "A" would have the fewest impacts to existing business; option "B" would require the use of more developed and improved property for the rtght-of-waywhich could result in greater costs for compensation to property owners for the taking of property; option "C" is proposed for the plan line as it would minimize impacts to the usability of vacant property and would result in fewer costs to the City for improving the road, as Bridgepoint Properties would install frontage improvements for Dublin Boulevard instead of Sierra Lane. With regard to the alignment of a connecting street between Dublin Boulevard extension and Scarlett Court Mr. Thompson stated this would be necessary to improve circulation in the project area, as the close proximity of the Scarlet Court intersection to the Dougherty Road intersection will require that access to Scarlett Court become right-turn-in and right-turn-out, with a median barrier on the Dublin Boulevard Extension. Mr. Thompson stated that timing of the improvement of Dublin Boulevard extension may be dependent upon demand from development of the extended planning areas to the east. That development may be two to five Years from now. If an assessment district is formed, the roadway could be designed and built within a one year time period. Mr. Thompson stated that preliminary estimated costs to acquire property, relocate businesses and residents, design improvements and construct the roadway would be about $8,200,000. These costs represent approximateley $6.8 million for the Dublin Boulevard extension and $1.4 million for the connecting road between Scarlett court and Dublin Boulevard. Cm. Burnham asked if the City would purchase all of the Valley Boat House business site. Mr. Thompson stated that State law required the City to give fair market value and help relocate at a new site. Cm. Burnham inquired about the Dodge dealership site. Mr. Thompson stated the City may help rebuild. Cm. Barnes inquired about the railroad right-of-way Mr. Tong reviewed the uncertain status of the Contra Costa County light rail study. Mr. Tong stated the further extension from Southern Pacific to Tassajara Road will be included in the East Dublin project. John Moore, 329 Cameron Circle, San Ramon, (Bridgepoint Properties) partner of Art Bridges, stated that he supported Staff's approach to the Dublin Boulevard extension. He also mentioned he was agreeable with working with Staff to plan around access of roadway. John Corallo, 6499 Scarlett Court, Valley Boat House, stated he has changed his approach to loosing his business site, recognizes the benefit to the community and expressed support of the project. He is willing to participate in an assessment district but would like to get on with the project. Regular Meeting PCM-8-41 March 7, 1988 Shirley Corallo, 6499 Scarlett Court, Valley Boathouse, stated she would like to collectively work with the City and other property owners. She stated she has a 5 year plan with her bankers and would like to get on with the project. She suggested looking at the potential for making allowances for non- conforming uses such as Miraqle Auto Painting. Cm. Burnham asked how long would it be before the project would be completed. Mr. Thompson said if an assessment district was formed approximately 1 year to 18 months, if not, 3-5 years approximately. There being no further comments, Cm. Barnes closed the public hearing. On motion by Cm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Burnham, and by a vote of 5-0 a Resolution was adopted recommending that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance concerning Dublin Boulevard extension plan line. RESOLUTION NO. 88 010 RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONI~ENTAL SIGNIFICANCE CONCERNING DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION PLAN LINE (DOUGHERT¥ ROAD TO SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT-OF-WAY) On motion by Cm. Mack, seconded by Cm. Zika, and by a vote of 5-0 a Resolution was adopted recommending the City Council establish plan line for Dublin Boulevard extension from Dougherty Road to Southern Pacific Right-of-Way. RESOLUTION NO. 88-011 RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISH PLAN LINE FOR DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION FROM DOUGHERTY'ROAD TO SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT-OF-WAY On motion by Cm. Mack, seconded by Cm. Tempel, and by a vote of 5-0 Staff was directed to prepare a Zoning Ordinance which would provide a conforming status to properties rendered non-conforming solely because of condemnation of property. SUBJECT: Dublin Boulevard extension Plan Line between Donlon Way and Amador Plaza Road to consider establishment of plan lines for a portion of the Dublin Boulevard extension. Cm. Barnes opened the public hearing and called for the Staff Report. Mr. Tong stated a plan line was established for Dublin Boulevard between Donlon Way and Amador Plaza Road in 1984. Since the City Council adopted the plan line, other studies and projects have revealed that future traffic on Dublin Boulevard will result in unacceptable traffic volumns at peak hours. A revised plan line which would widen Dublin Boulevard and provide additional left and right turn lanes is proposed. Regular Meeting PCM-8-42 March 7, 1988 RESOLUTION NO. 88 - 017 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN INITIATING AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE CONFORMING STATUS TO PROPERTIES RENDERED NON-CONFORMING SOLELY BECAUSE OF CONDEMNATION OF PROPERTY WHEREAS, the City of Dublin has, in the past, and may continue, in the future, to process and adopt street plan line studies; and WHEREAS, the street plan line studies may result in condemnation of property; and WHEREAS, it may be equitable to provide for conforming status to property that would otherwise be rendered non-conforming solely because of condemnation of property; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Dublin Planning Commission does hereby initiate an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to provide conforming status to properties that would otherwise be rendered non- conforming solely because of condemnation of property. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 21st day of March, 1988. AYES: Commissioners Barnes, Burnham, Mack, Tempel and Zika NOES: None ABSENT: None Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Planning Director