Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.3 Site Dev Review The Fishery PA 86-053.1 L-150-so - AGENDA STATEMENT City Council Meeting Date: September 22, 1986 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: PA 86-053.1 and .2 The Fishery in Dublin - Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review requests for a proposed 7,385+ square foot - 225+ seat Restaurant on a 1.5+ acre property located within Area 3 of the San Ramon Road Specific Plan Area. EXHIBITS ATTACHED: Exhibit A - Draft Resolution regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance for PA 86-053. Exhibit B - Draft Resolution regarding the Planned Development (PD) Rezoning and Site Development Review requests - PA 86-053.1 and .2. Exhibit C - Draft Ordinance for Planned Development (PD) Rezoning Request. Exhibit D - Planned Development (PD) Rezoning and Site Development Review Submittals Background Attachments: 1) Applicant's Written Statements 2) Site Location and Area Maps 3) Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance 4) Letter calling for Applicant to provide project redesign or binding commitment that addresses and mitigates each identified potential environmental impact. 5) Letter from Applicant agreeing to the necessary project redesign and providing binding commitment that address and mitigate each identified potential environmental impact. 6) Executive Summary Section of Report entitled Geotechnical Investigation for Restaurant, Dublin, California, prepared by J. V. Lowney & Associates, dated February 12, 1986. 7) Pertinent Agency Comments 8) TJKM Memorandum dated April 23, 1986, and August 15, 1986. 9) September 2, 1986, Planning Commission Agenda Statement/Staff Report (without attachments). f i ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ COPIES TO: Applicant Owner ITEM NO. PA File 86-053 r RECOMMENDATION: 1 - Open public hearing and hear Staff Presentation. 2 - Take testimony from Applicant and the public. 3 - Question Staff, Applicant and the public. 4 - Close public hearing and deliberate. 5 - Adopt Resolution regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance (Exhibit A). 6 - Adopt Resolution regarding the Planned Development (PD) Rezoning and Site Development Review Requests - PA 86-053.1 and .2 7 - Waive reading and introduce Ordinance Amending Zoning Ordinance (Exhibit C). FINANCIAL STATEMENT: The project will have a negligible fiscal effect on the City. DESCRIPTION: I. Background The subject property is located within Area 3 of the San Ramon Road Specific Plan. The Specific Plan calls for development in this portion of Area 3 to be by Retail Shopper Uses. The subject property is currently zoned C-1, Retail Business District. Application for Planned Development (PD) District Rezoning is required by the General Develop- ment Criteria of the Specific Plan for new development proposals. The subject proposal to establish a 225+ seat Restaurant use on this 1.5+ acre property is considered consistent with the site's underlying land use restrictions. Prior to the formal submittal of this request, an Area Traffic Study, funded by the Applicant, was performed by the City's Traffic Engineering firm (TJKM). The study expanded upon findings and recommendations detailed in an earlier TJKM Report, which had been prepared in conjunc- tion with the San Ramon Road Specific Plan. The updated information (the Memorandums dated August 15, 1986, and April 23, 1986 - see Attachment #8) focused on those properties in Area 3 of the Specific Plan located north of the Amador Valley Boulevard extension. The TJKM Memorandums provide detailed direction as to the number and location of driveways along the portions of both San Ramon Road and the Amador Valley Boulevard extension which serve the referenced portion of Area 3 of the Specific Plan. A key item of the proposed circulation improvements in this portion of Area 3 is the establishment of a shared driveway from San Ramon Road to serve both the subject property and the Moret property to the north. Staff and the Planning Commission are recommending that the Applicant be required to provide improved access to the site by either providing full development of the shared driveway at the north side of the property or, if the necessary private agreements cannot be secured to install those improvements, provision of improvements along the south side of the property within the 28-foot access strip that currently serves the subject property. t -2- � r Regardless of what agreements can be reached between affected property owners concerning the envisioned circulation improvements in the area, the Applicant should be required to demonstrate that a diligent effort has been made to secure all necessary approvals to accommodate the planned improvements and corresponding cross vehicular access easements. If all the necessary private agreements cannot be secured by this Applicant, then he should be required to record his portion of the respective agreements which will allow the matching ends of the various agreements to be picked up when subsequent entitlements are sought by neighboring property owners. A key element in the entire development proposal is the assumption that excess right-of-way along San Ramon Road can be purchased by the Developer and incorporated for use in this project. If an adequate amount of excess right-of-way cannot be secured to implement this site plan, then a Conditional Use Permit should be required to be processed to review the resultant, alternate site plan layout. The item had been "pre-noticed" for the City Council's September 8, 1986, meeting in anticipation of an action being taken by the Planning Commission on September 2, 1986. At the meeting of September 8, 1986, the City Council continued the item to their September 22, 1986, meeting. The Planning Commission conducted the public hearing for these items at their September 15, 1986, meeting and adopted the following two Resolutions: 1 - Resolution No. 86-050 regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance. 2 - Resolution No. 86-051 regarding Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review Requests - PA 86-053.1 and ..2. Attached to this report are copies of the Draft City Council Resolutions that would provide for the approval of the Planned Development (PD) Rezoning and the Site Develoment Review requests and which are reflective of the recommendations of the .Planning Commission from their September 15, 1986, meeting. II. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the above Staff Report, and previous reports prepared for the Planning Commission pertaining to these requests, Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions: 1 - Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance (Exhibit A). 2 - Adopt a Resolution regarding the Planned Development (PD) Rezoning and Site Development Review requests - PA 86-053.1 and .2 (Exhibit B). 3 - Waive the reading and introduce the Ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance (Exhibit C). -3- RESOLUTION NO. -86 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN I - -----`------------------------------------------------------------------------- ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE FOR PA 86-053.1 AND .2 THE FISHERY IN DUBLIN' PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REQUESTS (RIVERS/BARTON - OWNERS; META 4 DESIGN, INC. - APPLICANTS) 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 August 28, 1986, regarding: 1. Soils, Geology and Seismicity 2. Traffic Circulation 3. Noise 4. Tree Preservation WHEREAS, the Project Architect submitted a letter on September 8, 1986, on behalf of the Owners, ,agreeing to the necessary project redesign and providing binding commitment that addresses and mitigates each identified potential environmental impact; and WHEREAS, the Dublin Planning Commission on September 15, 1986, did adopt Resolution No. 86-050, recommending the City Council accept the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance for the project as adequate and complete; and WHEREAS, the City Council did review the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance and considered it at a public hearing on September 22, 1986; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearings was given as legally required; and _ WHEREAS, the City Council determined that the project, PA 86-053.1 and .2, 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 22nd day of September, 1986. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor .� ATTEST: City Clerk r Q /N_ e C _ , — :-.�-p;� ., .., -�:.:' fi -••:.. ai�'*.`�v'�'�,`-a�-g+-� •, x -s'rt �,-x--} ,^y, rs^� sir r _ RESOLUTION NO. -86 7. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY.COUNCIL OF .THE'CITY OF"DUBLIN ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ APPROVING AND ESTABLISHING FINDINGS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) REZONING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REQUESTS CONCERNING PA 86-053.1 AND .2 THE FISHERY AT DUBLIN (RIVERS/BARTON - OWNERS, META 4 DESIGN, INC. - APPLICANTS) WHEREAS, Michael S. Johnstone, with Meta 4 Design Incorporated, filed Revised Plans requesting Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review approval for a proposed 7;385+ square foot - 225+ seat Restaurant at 7400 San Ramon Road; and . WHEREAS, the adopted San Ramon Road Specific Plan and City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance provide in part for the establishment of Retail Shopper - Restaurant Use as an allowable use at the subject property; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold public hearings on said applications on September 2, 1986, and September 15, 1986, at which time the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.. 86-051 recommending approval of the Planned Development (PD) Rezoning and Site Development Review requests for PA 86-053.1 and .2; and WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that the requests be approved subject to conditions prepared by Staff and reflected in Planning Commission Resolution No. 86-051; and WHEREAS, The City Council did hold a public hearing on said applications on September 22, 1986; and WHEREAS, proper notice of was given in all respects as required by law for the Planning Commission hearings and the September 22, 1986, City Council public hearing; and WHEREAS, this application has been reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance (City Council Resolution No. -86) for this project, as it will have no significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and consider all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth;- .and .. WHEREAS, the proposed land use, .if conditionally approved, is appropriate for the subject property in terms of being compatible to existing land uses in the area and will not overburden public services; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE City Council finds: A. Construction of the 7,385+ square foot - 225+ seat Restaurant serves the public need by providing for an expansion of Retail Shopper Uses available 'to City residents. B. The uses will be compatible with and enhance the development of the general area as they will be properly related to other land uses,. and transportation and service facilities in the vicinity. C. The uses will not materially adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood, as all applicable regulations will be met. D. The uses will not be contrary to the specific intent clauses or perfor- mance standards established for the district in which they are to be located. E. All provisions of Section 8-95.0 through 8-95.8, Site Development Review, of the Zoning Ordinance are complied with. ry LAH L) D. n Q �_X Q 4 M . `. • "v`r $ .r7 r,� 1"�. ,y c .•:. 5'F'•'""?�.,:7' ,,,",'-t�'3�T'�'.v,��� xr �;,�°.w^-.� �r•,;; c 1 .l:.,f:@?a'}�!tA•3s 2...SA:?Y.T"J i- x F. Consistent with Section 8-95.0, this project will promote orderly, attrac- tive, and harmonious development, which includes preservation'of significant natural landscape features with minimum alteration of natural land forms and which recognizes environmental limitations on development; stabilizes land values and investments; and promotes the general welfare by preventing establishment of uses or erection of structures having qualities which would not meet the specific intent clauses or performance standards set forth in the Zoning Ordinance, and which are not consistent with their environmental setting. G. The approval of the project as conditioned is in the best interest of public health, safety and general welfare. H. General site considerations, including site layout, orientation, and the location of buildings, vehicular access, circulation and parking, setbacks, height, public safety and similar elements have been designed to provide a desirable environment for the development, and which will encourage the use of common open areas for neighborhood or community activities and other amenities. I. General architectural considerations as modified by the Conditions of Approval, including the character, scale and quality of the design, the architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, building materials and colors, screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior lighting, and similar elements have been incorporated into the project in order to insure compatibility of this development with its design concept and the character of adjacent buildings and uses. J. General project landscaping provisions for irrigation, maintenance and protection of landscaped areas and similar elements have been considered to insure visual relief to complement buildings and structures and to provide an attractive environment to the public. K. The project is consistent with the policies contained in the City's General Plan and within the San Ramon Road Specific Plan. NOW, -THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council conditionally approves the Planned Development (PD) Rezoning and Site Development Review applications PA 86-053.1 and .2 as shown by materials labeled Exhibit A, on file with the Dublin Planning Department, subject to the following Conditions: Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to issuance of building or grading permits and shall be subject to Planning Department review and approval. GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. Development. shall generally conform with the revised plans prepared by Meta 4 Design, Inc. consisting of five sheets dated received by the City Planning Department, August 14, 1986, and the changes called for by these Conditions of Approval. Approval for the Site Development Review-shall be valid until October 21, 1987. If construction has not commenced by that time, this approval shall be null and void. The approval period for the Site Development Review may be extended one additional year (Applicant must submit a written request for the extension prior to the expiration date of the permit) by the Planning Director upon his determination that the Conditions of Approval remain adequate to assure that the above stated Findings will continue to be met. Development shall be subject to the M` Conditions listed below. 2. Comply with the City of Dublin Site Development Review Standard Conditions and the City of Dublin Police Services Standard Commercial Building Security Recommendations. 3. If the Geotechnical Investigation Report prepared for this project by J. V. Lowney & Asociates (dated February 12, 1986) is not accepted by the Alameda County Geologist as adequate to serve as a Project Alquist-Priolo Report, and new geotechnical investigation is required which subsequently calls for an adjustment to the proposed footprint of the Restaurant (to provide for a -2- ,�.rs! 'r4. k-r'raq+F^rr.,-.9+"cy,. . . �hyL Ga+i `7�y- ^t„^u t�??b .... FIR .�:II larger or modified seismic .setback zone), said adjustment to the Site Plan shall be subject to review under a Conditional Use .Permit application filed by the Developer. 4. The Developer shall initiate the necessary proceedings to allow consideration of the abandonment of excess right=of-way along the property's San Ramon Road frontage. If an adequate depth of right-of-way cannot be purchased from the City to facilitate the development of the site as proposed by the plans cited in Condition #1 above, the Developer shall . be required to secure Conditional Use.Permit approval for the resultant, modified site plan layout that would be utilized as a result of having a smaller property available for development. 5. The seating capacity of the Restaurant (including inside and outside dining areas, the bar area and the waiting area) shall not exceed 250 seats. A minimum of 65 of the 91 proposed parking spaces shall be assigned for exclusive use by the Restaurant. A maximum of 20 parking spaces may be considered for "double-counting" between the Restaurant and the future use established at the rear (west) portion of the property. 6. The Developer shall diligently pursue the necessary approvals to provide for the installation of curbing and landscaping within the properties to the south to allow the design changes generally portrayed on the Staff Study .dated August, 1986. Pursuit of the necessary approval to install these improvements is considered necessary to allow: 1) a widening by two feet of the proposed eastern parking area (along a north-south axis) to allow the adjustment of the northerly eight compact-sized parking spaces into seven standard- sized parking spaces to reduce the ratio of compact- sized parking-spaces to a more acceptable ratio (21+ compact-sized to 26+ full-sized); 2) allow the development of a 5' to 6' wide off-site landscape strip along the south side of the eastern parking area; and 3) the provision of a drop-off area at the southern side of the proposed Restaurant. If, upon demonstration that a diligent effort has been made by the Developer to pursue the necessary approvals for the referenced improvements and no approval can be secured, discharge of the requirements of this Condition may be granted by the Planning Director. ARCHAEOLOGY 7. If, during construction, archaeological remains are encountered, construction in the vicinity shall be halted, an archaeologist consulted, and the City Planning Department notified. If, in the opinion of the archaeologist, the remains are significant, measures, as may be required by the Planning Director, shall be taken to protect them. ARCHITECTURAL 8. Exterior colors and materials for the building addition shall be subject to final review and approval by the Planning Director. All ducts, meters, air conditioning equipment and other mechanical equipment on the proposed structure shall be effectively screened from view with materials architecturally compatible with the main structure. 9. . The design, location, color and materials of canopy covers for exterior deck seating areas shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director and DSRSD Fire Department prior to installation. DEBRIS/DUST/CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY 10. Measures shall be taken to contain all trash, construction debris, and materials on-site until disposal off-site can be arranged. The Developer shall keep adjoining public streets free and clean of project dirt, mud, and materials during the construction priod. The Developer shall be responsible for corrective measures at no expense to the City of Dublin. Areas undergoing grading, and all other construction activities, shall be watered, or other dust-palliative measures used, to prevent dust, as conditions warrant. Provision of temporary construction fencing shall be made subject to review and approval of the City Engineer and the Building �. Official. -3- TV ,...:�° `.f'n'p6',"'yi '�,,, r',r t... _. . .L? ...``'i :�- ;r "•-�a�:..-'a �' e ' ;4' ' .. y:`° ''x' Fr;??z.._ 11. The detailed design of the trash enclosure area shall be subject to review and approval as part of the project Landscape and Irrigation Plans. The _ design of the trash enclosures shall reflect dimensional criteria deemed - acceptable by the Livermore-Dublin Disposal. Service, .and...shall incorporate use of a concrete apron in front. of the enclosure to facilitate the District's mechanical pick-up service.. If wooden doors are utilized, the doors shall be trimmed with a heavy metal lip. Raised concrete curbing shall be provided inside the trash enclosure area to serve as wheel stops for metal trash bins to protect the interior walls of the enclosures. DRAINAGE 12. A grading and drainage plan shall be prepared and shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer_.. Calculations (hydraulic) shall be prepared by the Developer for review by the City Engineer to determine the sizing of drainage lines. 13. The area outside the building addition "shall drain outward at a 2% minimum slope for unpaved areas and a 1% minimum in paved areas (with a maximum gradient of 5%). 14. Roof drains shall empty into approved dissipating devices. Roof water, or other concentrated drainage, shall not be directed onto adjacent properties, sidewalks or driveways. No drainage shall flow across property lines. Downspouts shall drain through the curb of the concrete walks around the building. 15. Where storm water flows against a curb, a curb with gutter shall be used. The flow line -of all asphalt paved areas carrying waters shall be slurry sealed at least three feet on either side of the center of the swale. DRIVEWAYS AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS 16. The design of the shared driveway along the.north property boundary shall be modified to reflect the TJKM Memorandum (and Graphic Study) dated August 15, 1986. 17. If access from San Ramon Road is utilized along the south side of the property on 'an interim basis (i.e. , until the shared driveway at the north property boundary is developed), the location and width of improvements installed at this driveway intersection shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Department and the City Traffic Engineer. Additionally, the Developer shall provide recorded documentation of right of access across the 28-foot wide easement strip running along the south side of the subject property. Upon full development of the northerly driveway, the Developer shall quit claim all rights to access to San Ramon Road from the 28-foot wide easement strip running along the south side of the property. 18. The location and design of the driveway connection between the subject property and the adjoining property to the north (Moret holding: APN 941-040-1-2), proposed for development along the western portion of the properties, shall be subject to modification at the direction of the Planning Department if it is determined, prior to the construction of said improvements, that an adjusted location or configuration for the driveway is necessary to promote improved circulation and/or to promote the health and well-being of the large, mature trees located in the southwest corner of the Moret holding. 19. The driveway and intersection design of the northerly driveway and the use of an entry median and/or entry paving at the northerly project entry driveway shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Department and the City Traffic Engineer (TJKM) at the time building permits are requested. Said review shall include consideration of the lane widths, radius return dimensions, height, width and length of median, depth of entry paving and type of landscaping, if utilized, in the raised driveway - median. 20. All improvements within the public right-of-way, including curb, gutter, sidewalks, driveways, paving and utilities, must be constructed in accordance with approved standards and/or plans. -4- . v 21. Landscaping at the driveway intersection(s)' with San Ramon- Road shall be - such that sight distance is not obstructed.. . 22. The Developer shall be responsible for correcting deficiencies in the " existing frontage improvements to the satisfaction of the City or County Engineer. _ 23. Any relocation of improvements or public- facilities shall` be accomplished at no expense to the City. 24. The parking and driveway surfacing shall be asphalt concrete paving. The City Engineer shall review the project's Soils Engineer's structural pavement design. The Developer shall, at his sole expense, make tests of the soil over which the surfacing and base is to be constructed and furnish the test reports to the City Engineer.. The Developer's Soils Engineer shall determine a preliminary structural design of the road bed. After rough grading has been completed, the Developer shall have soil tests performed to determine the final design of the road bed. 25. An encroachment permit shall be secured from the City Engineer for any work done within the public right-of-way, where this work is not covered under the improvement plans. EASEMENTS 26. As regards the proposed shared San Ramon Road driveway entrance, if the Developer's diligent efforts fail to secure the necessary cross vehicular access easements, he shall then provide for the recordation of an agreement which binds the subject property to enter into a future cross access easement at such time as a corresponding agreement on the adjoining property to the north is secured. 27. Cross vehicular access easements (or other appropriate documents approved by the Planning Department) providing for driveway interconnections shown on the plans cited in Condition #1 above shall be recorded between the subject property and the adjoining properties to the north and south. The cross access easements shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Department and the City Attorney prior to recordation. 28. The Developer shall record an offer to enter into a future cross access easement agreement (or other appropriate document approved by the Planning Department) with the adjoining property to the south for a future interconnection between the eastern parking area and the adjoining property to the south above and beyond the proposed connection at the southwest corner of the eastern parking area. The agreement shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Department and City Attorney prior to recordation. This future driveway connection shall be at the southeast _ corner of the subject property's eastern parking area and shall be developed in cojunction with the redevelopment of the Commercial .Property, Ltd. holding (APN 941-040-2-10) and/or with the elimination of the access connection to San Ramon Road for the 28-foot wide easement which runs along the north side of that property. 29. The Developer shall be responsible for the installation of on-site and/or off-site improvements necessary to establish access to the subject property from San Ramon Road, either by improving the easement area along the south side of the subject property or by developing the shared driveway proposed along the north property boundary. 30. The Developer shall acquire easements, and/or obtain rights-of-entry from the adjacent property owners for improvements or construction activity required outside of the subject properties. Copies of the easements and/or rights-of-entry shall be in written form and shall be furnished to the City Engineer. 31. Existing and proposed access and utility easements shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of grading or building permits. These easements shall allow for practical vehicular and utility service access for portions of the subject properties. -5- a.. +,-•r r3u ,� t i rr`y�T+a,., .•�,. -ra.#"rc �gri_R� ys iiF4'si•t-�J- r- z., rte rs i _. _ FIRE PROTECTION 32. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Developer shall supply written confirmation that the .requirements of the Dublin.San-Ramon Services District Fire Department have been, or will be, met. GRADING - 33. Grading shall be completed in compliance with the construction grading plans prepared for this project. The soil engineering recommendations outlined in the Executive Summary and Design Recommendations Section of the Geotechnical Investigation Report dated February 12, 1986, and prepared for the project by J. V. Lowney and Associates shall be observed as well as any recommendations established by -any subsequent Soil and Geologic Study prepared for this project.. 34. Where soil or geologic conditions encountered in grading operations are different from that anticipated in the -Project Geologic Investigation Report, or where such conditions warrant changes to the recommendations contained in the original soil investigation, a revised Soil and/or Geologic Report shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer. It shall be accompanied by an engineering and geological opinion as to the safety of the site from hazards of soil expansion, liquefaction, settlement, or seismic ground shaking. IMPROVEMENT PLANS, AGREEMENTS, AND SECURITIES 35. Prior to filing for building permits, precise plans and specifications for street improvements, grading, drainage (including size, type, and location of drainage facilities both on- and off-site) and erosion and sedimentation control shall be submitted and subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 36. The Developer shall enter into an Improvement Agreement with the City for all public improvements. Complete improvement plans, specifications, and calculations shall be submitted to, and reviewed by, the City Engineer and other affected agencies having jurisdiction over public improvements prior to execution of the Improvement Agreement.. Improvement plans shall show the existing and proposed improvements along adjacent public street(s) and property that relate to the proposed improvements. All required securities, in an amount equal to 100% of the approved estimates of construction costs of improvements, and a labor and material security, equal to 50% of the construction costs, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the City and affected agencies having jurisdiction over public improvements, prior to execution of the Improvement Agreement. 37. An encroachment permit shall be secured from the City Engineer for any work done within the public right-of-way where this work is not covered under the improvement plans. LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION PLANS 38. A detailed Landscape and Irrigation Plan (at 1 inch = 20 feet or larger), along with a cost estimate of the work and materials proposed, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director. Landscape and Irrigation Plans shall be signed by a licensed landscape architect. A Site Specific Horticultural Report shall be prepared to assess the current health of existing on-site trees and the impacts to those trees that will result from the project's development. The Report shall establish mitiga- tion measures and a tree preservation program for the trees shown for retention on the Revised Site Plan dated received by the City of Dublin on August 14, 1986. Every reasonable effort shall be taken to retain the five existing cedar trees (forming a north-to-south row along the east side of the proposed Restaurant structure), the two cedars at the northwest corner of the project, and the 20" olive (in the center of the easterly proposed parking lot). If necessary, minor adjustments to the configuration of driveway/parking area (including selective elimination of parking spaces) shall be made to increase the probability of the long term health and vigor of trees to be retained. 39. The Developer/Owner shall sign and submit a copy of the City of Dublin Landscape Maintenance Agreement. - -6- . _.. . •... .-, >.-.r A.,a_,...'�,.".-r�.w_',.L"c�{`�».y}[ y4.t. r.... . .:A., .,...s � _ ....t .-y.,. . \�::` .. 40: Landscaping installed along San Ramon Road shall be established on a landscape mound and shall include three additional 15-gallon sized trees _ and shall also include clumped plantings of shrubs. This treatment shall be of a design and layout to aid in the.screening ,of parked. cars from view., .. along San Ramon Road. 41. Additional project landscaping shall be provided along the west side of the proposed improvements (i.e. , into the area planned for future development) and shall consist of a landscaped-irrigated strip of a minimum width of 10 feet. 42.1 The design and placement of service areas and utility boxes shall be compat- ible with the site's overall design and landscaping and shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director as part of the Landscape and Irrigation Plan. 43. Some of the planters proposed along the south elevation of the building shall be raised planters. Seating benches shall be designed into some of the raised planters. LIGHTING 44. Exterior lighting shall be of a design and placement so as not to cause glare onto adjoining properties or onto San Ramon Road. Lighting used after day- light .' shall be adequate to provide for security needs. Wall lighting around the entire perimeter of the building shall be supplied to provide "wash" security lighting. Photometrics shall be submitted to the Planning Department and Dublin Police Services for review and approval. The number, height, design and location of light standards shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of building permits. The concrete base of new light pole standards shall be finished with an aggregate pebble finish, or equivalent, as determined acceptable to the Planning Department. SIGNAGE 45. All project or building signs shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director prior to installation. STORAGE AND EXTERIOR ACTIVITIES 46. With the exception of exterior dining on the deck areas at the northeast and northwest corners of the proposed structure, all demonstrations, displays, services, and other activities associated with the new structure shall be conducted entirely within the structure. No loudspeakers or amplified music shall be permitted outside the structure. MISCELLANEOUS 47. The materials used across the site for pedestrian walkways into the new building shall be of a uniform design and shall be subject to review and approval of, the Planning Director. The pedestrian circulation system shall include handicapped access. 48. The shared driveway at the northern side of the project shall be .constructed with special entry paving adjoining the raised driveway median.. 49. All improvements shall be installed as per the approved landscaping and irri- gation plans and the drainage and grading plans prior to the release of occu- pancy. Additionally, grading of the subject property must conform with the recommendations of the Soils Engineer to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. -7- _ .' �? l", yw Mir•�'4'. .n.,��-c'rcT' °'-FY �.'�y G,`"i,..�r.,G��Yy}'°i. y.-.r"✓�"�'R..�i k� PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this '22nd day of September, 1986. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk -8- ., ..�S.K .`,�r �W.�s�Xd�i��'�4.+✓ .,:'.'c :., .: Sn t.. ��+—x .. .. ...-_. ''���'f "'+i' DRAFT ORDINANCE ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE REZONING REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST PORTION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN The Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows: SECTION I: Chapter 2 of Title 8 of the Dublin Ordinance Code is hereby amended in the following manner: Approximately 1.5 acres located in the southwest portion of the City, fronting along a section of the west side of San Ramon Road for a distance of approxi- mately 140 feet (further identified as Accessor's Parcel Number 941-040-2-14), are hereby rezoned to the PD, Planned Development District; and PA 86-053 (.1 and .2) The Fishery in Dublin - Rivers/Barton (Owners) - Meta 4 Design, Inc. (Applicants), as shown on Exhibit A (Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance), and Exhibit B (Approval, Findings and General Provisions of the PD, Planned Develoment Rezoning and Site Development Review) on file with the City of Dublin Planning Department, are hereby adopted as regulations for the future use, improvement, and maintenance of the property within this district. A map of the area is as follows: N SCJICJL ' SECTION II: This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage. Before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its passage, it shall be published once with the name of the Councilmembers voting for and against the same in The Herald, a newspaper published in Alameda County and available in the City of Dublin. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Dublin on this th day of 1986, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk laws N LAI I U 50 r ��- LX P_ '. � � ��� _ �W>IWO Wes.+•• 1 �+��,'; ' �� ` 'n I 1 ,�°�y_�� .��r6.�d cssa � l "�no„e r\+w++R �I a • � l \ Ls v.wc e'c•c � •� • °`nle>Lam . \\ \ �a_rrl.• wA \ � ;1 7. Poore dv+.+�+if vr • � II 11 ' � � nufn'« 'l��ma+F 1 \t^�� �, „ �1+•\•,;.,�•'vNi�g `r` I,la _� / { -o°'F �' ,IJ u Tr ����.��. ' ,fit _.. PcnD.c n'cm-�� .,'',' 'p !•.':`. • � -✓,�I�� I I �,� / ,I � L L �1{ _ � _.h.- �t:x waovC� oy+�% 111 '•� 3 t,l•• . I � � ��_e.pTyu.a.wawo ..penNL DtXf9LSS ��P•L nv'd' 1� O I+i�; ` . /i I I I�luun �—_ a ,• I cervlcc �\ —_ I .. no.n antiLdcY `��, � ` \ �J{.I ' v, �lis. � =lJl.ur I1 '==T � _°I' I /• v� � r5�1. 'jv S I / LPYFGZ a pL W... I — 17,t'E'°R / acoRw..Mtrtirt �—•'�1 ) S ' i• _- �r- I i t I . i Ir_urh � r uvml HaiwG ate.l '•OLx IWWATY 14 . tt ' i y�ITy. nOfPN UI_'IJ ME �,+•'>"1 NNiG_ � "FLLG Ip WOTr NPs 1 �pRPh 1 ' I IIl P LL+.++- rL>L<TUlu ZIh PuOu•Q-1 u•l"u'�r,N �.�sLa. r°"r ' i , 1 Plan WLP—e,IP41 Site ' .. I 194E FN+•�NWi AtY4PM yLLl'' yyWOLD.✓+W MtDUH it>r 40 ' r✓r 4-L4,iu 41> UINVJG Prafi.ul L. HLDIUH 10' 12' }•'••'• -A •..I. 1 eLw .•[.FR••lT1U�MW4NWi Yl Y j' � vueT. WP'fNIWf LILY H[o.W ! '' R 9 Lti NP�'LLYJ� r4' Fd!m{' I th L.IPIG'G MW(tRl dL BIK LILY TUPP HEOIFI ,�:N j plY C HYRiLG r He4 H 4' L� 1 4� fiy + cw+n�Nn'r—r-x�' Two . ��I el B T eLW- NCPwIH 0.[u+Dr1.•RTRG Wi FZ'tllL'PVIL 6[.410.'R nq 'I' i •-' 1k' Lk' e•.. P+NIIOIev,a 'bL1LPINr' - P�J �1_1 r- S u 6��A1.5 Il' I i.k. Nrxa�..n-.x•NCmL.G i he Heyward Flahory In Dublin Meta4 �I I zr awrsa ri...i� Vw, vNrn I 1 I • 7S� - ZID _ - "r.�• 1 � HN W r t4MJ W A ' . West Elevation South Elevation ,`JI �•� r r cif `i1 � r i rrr 1:•A. 1 is �Nrytt /��•.ti _ •r� � l ! � III � � Ir ll � ' ~ f � r - - - __.._. North Elevation East Elevation 1 � i ii •il y y ' ,a wto I1(! R I);} � Axonometric 1 :i • 1 Retell Entry 2i y� I Kitchen , r; p u o ,�y --- Bar 1 i i _ Banquet Room +; Dining Room j •� Dock r,r i Dock i f Floor Plan to 9 y t M i 1 + j h. UEid-1008 y T �- i T I. �. RECEIVED 'JUN & 1986 -. DU3UN PLANNING Written Statement : This project, The Fishery, is proposed to the -'city of Dublin as a seafood restaurant. The building is to occupy approximately .7, 800 square feet. The site layout of the building is proposed .to create a quality seafood restaurant, 73 -parking spaces, planting areas, and a landscaped green belt in what currently is a empty parcel. - The green belt, creates a landscaped zone for pedestrian passage and forms a separation between vehicular and pedestrian movement. . ... The proposed building is to be of timber frame construction with sash windows. All mechanical will be under the roof and screened from the public view. Provision has been made in conjunction with the city' s traffic study to link at a future date with the proposed Amadon Valley court extension to the south. Special care has been taken to break down the massing ..of the building to work with the surrounding sites. The Fishery should be a welcomed quality addition to the city of Dublin. M C77 PJO�i Es ET I' . c �a Written Statement The proposed seating count is estimated to be 180 and anticipated staff is approximately 35. A drop off point will be used at the entrance. This point will also meet all Handicap access requirements. The anticipated hours of operation are 11:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. with peak times being 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. for lunch and 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. for dinners. Maximum customers at peak hours are estimated at 125-135 persons. The restaurant will operate 7 days a week using a full on sale liquor license, and will provide banquet service. A small retail sales area is located at the restaurant entry. This area will display fresh fish and accounts for approximately 2% of sales. The sign location will be indicated on the site plan. With respect to the site plan, we have attempted to address the City's concerns regarding access from San Ramon and site circulation. Currently pending issues are the successful negotiation with the City for the small parcel of land between the site of the Fishery and San Ramon Road as well as an agreement with Mr. Roy Moret concerning the proposed shared access road. R E C c J V JUL 18 1986 DUBLIN PLANNING' . _ .:t.- . ' ^'s'S?'.�r'''�#'_'A'!���.. -. >._ ..�?'l:'�:�_fi;;^�=`:��5:"r3i.�..-,�;"`i'rirrr.-?'r;�7: <".�ui�z..:.s..�k'a?,?•°: �.�-a"-."�.i�.;",cm. T.w�:>. �'k... / \ �___) CT J 3 \\\\\ \ c y�''• tq °`t•.,,0j i 4 DUBUn 50100 \\ \\ PARR ; \ SCMOCL Cl MSrFhCT LANO :� !--"{pi + •%.r ti` : C'�� �!� �"'"�; 1. 45 \ -I I Sol• ' p• '• 1 i � \ f 1 I I �i •a r..� KIL3" 1 cr f OM)a �• \ �\ °• ' \11 �/ ';/ ,t�/. \\\.A cal. ✓•t'• �iia" \ .r '. �"; { •��—' � (/ \1 • \ \ r r ' '"HMENT -. --- ---------------- ------ -- _�_:-- ---�,»1 ' ATTAu --- „ ....: •.vr:�."� � .:'fiy a:.-" L ..;- •t r-°\-a^"�� �:Z�:yt �1'i e..fr rlrwi��tp .�' x314�'�'�¢c^y �- _ - �: �PLOT.A HE DOUGHERT Y RANCH ( 17 806 cio7i62) AMENDEG. .iao P.M.•928 r6; `•SCOYB 's��'W-2, 00 Parcels o n ttis bloc,,,:are within I - ZorIe jj as de Social 1 I Quist-Priolo p t. the • -- - - .... . �,�mss: s/o 03 10 l �"J' \V 103 .�crc)s` r _ .a C, �jy� to l S�•� S\♦��.ti•Y-3-79 e., ptfl c9 h �,-3dv� S?��w •`o°�''�,r, o��V �2 � ..11Ac_ l- J a= 35.'92. f� Sol s Jk T c• 7aCC, 1-- w v,f � 7'✓ 1 r �C• 11y �J�f�C�•�o(. y�1 j- r / W 9 g a9•'f'+�A 83-cp °W.928 /�/�s�f� gp r �/ t� 83•co� �/� 0 V - S-3bl g. 1 - �> , > Q� ! TT3r 2 o.r �A 83 oc'� 4._/ v 0.756Ac c.j lbb "`I v ` V. 5, 9•♦ , �Dc-395 v� OD 7 � I 517�J 5.. ,VC 41C�•- , 1:83 c-3� (n Ac.* O S-59a - c-A16o 3 �7 S-14-76. 44tao\ ' AMADOR VALLEY E .„ s ' BLVD. L•43�}-� �h1 a8Co s9 •o C.RQN. (. -�8�� 2 (PIZ 1 3 O ! LV `ti •.-•-��J 4.84,4,-• �Oy S`7 4 io �� 1.�. j'gg5�-o8 P�83-o6� D. 7274 69 rn� 'l-ol�Oto ?A'83 P'V2806 f �( 0 • 4.08 Ac.; 5- ro 2Ac.± x53;5 G-3ioo� ._�N 305 f�� i g Z•cj �,, sL T •� 'W 813.64 _ c,- < y-x193 n c-- V '3 S3V .. •f° 45 11850 .v�8b1 f. ti . _'A,t .., .. .'?.1r r.tk-s"?'rt••' ._ ,b;>. ': "il."'�r± _F 'i. „JZ -+'..'_._.. CITY OF DUBLIN Development Services Planning./Zoning 829-4916 P.O. Box 2340 Building & Safety 829-0822 Dublin, CA 94568 Engineering%Public Works 829-4927 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE FOR: PA 86-053.1 and .2 The Fishery in Dublin - Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review requests for a proposed 7,385+ square foot - 225+ seat Restaurant at 7400 San Ramon Road. LOCATION AND ZONING: 7400 San Ramon Road, Dublin, CA 94568 C-1, Retail Business District (APN 941-040-2-14) PROJECT: Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review requests to establish a 7,385+ square foot - 225+ seat Restaurant on a 1.5+ acre property located within Area 3 of the San Ramon Road Specific Plan Area. APPLICANT/ REPRESENTATIVE: Michael S. Johnstone Meta 4 Design Incorporated 5927 Almaden Lane Oakland, CA 94611 PROPERTY OWNERS: Rivers-Barton 22701 Foothill Boulevard Hayward, CA 94541 FINDINGS: The project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. The mitigation measures outlined in the Initial Study of Environmental Significance dated August 28, 1986, document the steps necessary to assure that the subject property will not have a significant adverse affect on the environment. INITIAL STUDY: The Initial Study of Environmental Significance dated August 85, 1986, provides a discussion of the environmental components listed below. Each identified environmental component has been mitigated through project redesign or through binding commitment by the Applicant, as outlined in the Mitigation Measures Sections of the Initial Study of Environmental Significance. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPONENTS: 1. Soils, Geology and Seismicity 2. Traffic Circulation 3. Noise - 4. Tree Preservation SIGNATURE: DATE: Laurence L. Tong, Planning Director RIT P, ou'!H_ M E PIT I CITY OF DUBLIN Development Services Planning/Zoning 829-4916 P.O. Box 2340 Building & Safety 829-0822 Dublin, CA 94568 Engineering/Public Works 829-4927 August 28, 1986 Michael S. Johnstone, AIA Meta 4 Design, Inc. 5927 Almaden Lane Oakland, CA 94611 RE: PA 86-053 The Fishery in Dublin Rivers-Barton (Owners)/Meta 4 Design, Inc. (Applicant) Dear Mr. Johnstone: The revised application materials and environmental materials submitted for your application, City File PA 86-053, have been reviewed concerning the potential environmental impacts of the proposed commercial development. This data, and this Department's review- of it, indicated that your project may have the potential of creating significant environmental impacts if specific mitigation measures are not incorporated into the project's design and ultimate development. By this letter be advised that, in light of the information submitted to date, this office cannot prepare a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance for this project. However, it is the position of this office that a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be possible and consistent with the State of California Environmental Quality Guidelines. Section 15080(d) 2 of the Guidelines. allows a Mitigated Negative Declaration to be prepared instead of an Environmental Impact Report where the significant effects of a project, as identified in an Initial Study, are clearly mitigated to the point where it is reasonable to find that the significance is no longer in effect. In order for this Office to prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration, the project plans must first be revised to reflect changes that eliminate the potential for the significant impact, and/or an enforceable commitment from the Applicant must be made that shows the specific mitigation measures that will occur. The following changes to your project have been determines: to be necessary to permit this Office to prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance. There are still four (4) areas of your project proposal which have been identified as having the potential of creating significant environmental impacts, as defined by CEQA: M� . L�r� B 1. Soils, Geology, Seismicity 2. Traffic Circulation 3. Noise 4. Tree Preservation If the project plans are received to incorporate the following features, and/or if the Developer provides binding agreement to provide the design components as indicated below (or that achieve the same effect of the items listed below), this Office will proceed with the preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance. 1. Soils, Geology and Seismicity A supplemental project specific Geological and Soils Investigation and Foundation Study shall be prepared (if determined necessary by the Alameda County Geologist) which expands upon the recommendations outlined in the February 12, 1986, Study prepared by. J. V. Lowney & Associates entitled "Geotechnical Investigation for Restaurant, Dublin, California." If the current information, or information from a subsequent investigation, -leads to a determination that a modified or more restrictive seismic setback zone is required, then the resultant modifications to the site plan layout shall be subject to review and approval under a separate Conditional Use Permit (see Condition #3 of the Draft Resolution for the Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review requests). 2. Traffic Circulation a. Shared Driveway to San Ramon Road at North Property Boundary - The Developer shall initiate the necessary steps to provide for the development of a shared driveway to San Ramon Road along the north property boundary. The location and design of this driveway shall be as generally shown by the TJKM Memorandum and graphic attachment dated August 15, 1986. If the necessary agreements to allow the creation of this driveway cannot be secured, then the Developer shall record an agreement to enter in a future cross access easement with the property to the north. With this situation, the development of the shared driveway would be put off until the adjoining property to the north pursues a development entitlement and has a corresponding agreement imposed on its development permit (see Conditions #14 - #17, #24 and #27 of the Draft Resolution for the PD Rezoning and Site Development Review). b. Cross Access Easements - The Developer shall initiate the necessary steps to provde for the recordation of cross access easements for the envisioned internal circulation pattern represented on the Revised Site Plan dated received August 14, 1986 (see Condition #26 of the Draft Resolution for the PD Rezoning and Site Development Review). -2- 3. Noise Due to existing and anticipated future noise levels along the adjoining San Ramon Road corridor, the new Restaurant structure developed with this project shall be constructed in a manner to provide the necessary sound attenuation to insure interior noise levels are in compliance with applicable standards as set forth by State and local regulations. 4. Tree Preservation A Site Specific Horticultural Report shall be prepared to assess the current health of existing on-site trees and the impacts to those trees that will result from the project's development. The Report shall establish mitigation measures and a tree preservation program for the trees shown for retention on the Revised Site Plan dated received by the City of Dublin on August 14, 1986. Every reasonable effort shall be taken to retain the five existing cedar trees (forming a north-to-south row along the east side of the proposed Restaurant structure), the two cedars at the northwest corner of the project, and the 20" olive (in the center of the easterly proposed parking lot). If necessary, minor adjustments to the configuration of dr.iveway/parking area (including selective elimination of parking spaces) shall be made to increase the probability of the long term health and vigor of trees to be retained. These recommendations are made for environmental purposes only. The design, engineering, and land use aspects of the project will receive additional review. Recommendations regarding their merits will be prepared and incorporated into a Staff Report to be presented to the Planning Commission along with the environmental determination. Please provide .us with plans and information which give us the assurance that the potentially significant environmental aspects of the project have been mitigated. Questions concerning this matter may be directed to Kevin Gailey of this Office at (415) 829 74916 at your convenience. Sincerely, Laurence L. Tong Planning Director LLT/KJG/ao Enclosures cc: File PA 86-053 Lee Thompson - City Engineer Ron Rivers -3- Taw,+•.....-.. 4 r R � •CF � V � ._ __ IS .p .1986j DUgVi., ?INNING - Laurence L. Tong 9/2/86 Planning Director Developement Services P.O. Box 2340 Dublin, CA 94568 RE: PA 86-053 .The Fishery in Dublin Rivers-Barton(owners)/Meta4 Design Incorporated(applicant) .Dear Mr. Tong In reference to your. letter dated August 28, 1986 which outlined four areas of environmental concern, namely: 1. Soils, geology, seismicity 2. Traffic circulation 3. Noise 4. Tree preservation We agree to incorporate your suggestions in these four areas into our plans in order to address the environmental concerns described. Sincerely, Michael S. ;Joh stone AIA Architecture Meta4 Design Incorporated 5927 Almaden Lane Transamerica Pyramid Retail Planning Oakland, CA 94611 600 Montgomery Street Interior Design 4th Floor Graphic Design (415) 339-2964 San Francisco, CA 94111 r� ) / CPO ;�"< .".�i,..'-mr rnit''y-,' —p'4"$' il'° y. x.a-x..*st .'-, ?'; ` ..„r a^°' i c{',j.zi'1&"-sw Fr-' v., '?.("1',iz. 1., _•7yp ?A a fi 1,,. r'Y'�T1'. .. t v J•a L. `SZ? f' °q j: r r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY J. V. Lowney Ec Associates has been retained by Hayward Fishery to perform a geotechnical investigation for the proposed Hayward Fishery Restaurant to be located in Dublin, California. The purpose of the investigation has been to assess the subsurface conditions in the project area and to provide recommendations concerning the geotechnical engineering aspects of the project. Principal results, conclusions, and recommendations from the investigation are presented below. Please note that this summary is not intended to be used for design purposes, as it is simply a synopsis of the major points of our-report. Please see the text of the report for complete design recommendations. 1. A thin (1.5.-foot thick) layer of sandy gravelly fill covers the surface. The fill is underlain by very stiff moderately expansive brown silty clay (CL) from a depth of 1.5 to 5.5 feet. This stratum is underlain by firm to stiff sandy clays and medium dense to dense clayey sand and gravel. In our opinion, these soils will provide adequate bearing for a shallow spread footing foundation. 2. Free ground water was encountered in both borings at depths ranging from 7 to 8 feet on the west side of the Calaveras Fault during the drilling operations. Please be cautioned, however, that fluctuations in the level of the groundwater may occur due to variations in rainfall and other factors at the time measurements were made. 3. The site is likely to experience strong seismic shaking during a moderate to severe earthquake which is expected to affect the San Francisco Bay Area during the 50-year period following construction. In our opinion, the probability of fault rupture is high since the Calaveras Fault crosses the site. Currently, a 50 foot setback is established west of the fault; no setback has been established east of the fault. In our opinion, the probability of J.V.LOWNEY&ASSOCIATES Ak :f r c -Z AT I t _ 14�M 4-41 ground movement resulting from soil liquefaction and differential compaction at the site is low. 4. The building may be supported on conventional continuous and/or isolated spread footings bearing on native soil or compacted structural fill. All ground level footings should extend at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent finished grade and can be designed for maximum allowable bearing-pressures of 1500 pounds per square foot for dead loads, 2000 pounds per square, foot for combined dead and live loads plus one-third for all loads including wind or seismic. Footings should have a minimum width of 18 inches. 5. We recommend that slabs-on-grade be supported on at least 6-inches of.non-expansive structural fill to minimize slab damage due to heave. In areas where floor wetness would be undesirable, a capillary break consisting of 4 inches of 1/2-inch crushed rock, a vapor barrier, and a 2-inch sand buffer may be used beneath the floor slabs. The combined thickness of sand and gravel fcr capillary moisture cut-off can be used in lieu of the equivalent required thickness of the non-expansive fill beneath slabs. J.V.LOWNEY&ASSOCIATES DUBLIN SAN'"'RAMON SE YIGcS DISTRICT. General Offices: 7051 Dublin Boulevard • Dublin, California 94568 • (415) 828-0515 June 20, 1986 - RECE Y E b 'JUN 2 51986. Mr. Kevin J. Gailey; Senior Planner City of Dublin DUBLIN PLANNING Development Services P.O. Box 2340 Dublin, CA 94568 Subject: Application Referrals-June, 1986 Dear Mr. Gailey: This letter confirms our telephone conversation of June 19, 1986 re- garding the following referrals: 1) File No. PA 86-049-bioret-San Ramon Road Specific Plan Amendment Study The District would require a water and sewer layout throughout the development to serve the needs of the proposed buildings. These main lines would be maintained by the District. In addition, fire hydrant locations would be required to be approved by the District Fire Department. The water main extended by the District last year would be benefited by the property owner of this site and therefore, the District would require compensation of the fair share of this line. 2) File No. PA 86-0S3-The.Fishery in Dublin-Ronald Rivers-Planned Develop- ment Rezoning and Site Development Review The applicant has been advised that a sewer connection fee for the proposed restaurant could range from $50,000 •to $100,000, depending on the strength and flow of the sewer generated by the establisIhment. Further in- vestigation of similar establishments within the Livermore-Pleasanton area has resulted in potential fees of doubling the above range based on the suspended solids and bio-oxygen demand of a seafood establishment. I strongly urge the City to continue advising the applicant of these fees prior to completion of the building permit process. 3) File No. PA 86-058-Pulte Home Corporation-Tentative Al2p 5583 - Please refer to our letter of March 24, 1986 regarding our concerns for water and fire services. Yours very truly Emil Kattan Assistant Civil Engineer cc: Douge McMillan, Office Engineer A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA PROVIDES MUNICIPAL TYPE SERVICES TO CITIZENS CF AMADCP...UVER1dCRE AND SAN RAMON VALLEfS ALAMEDA AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTIES. 9117%IN A T UP, _ C r„T r r 1 -,tlj-1g z y- -vi'-+r q>�" '` 'm' 'a -r.e --�F r..3,,,r y. •FF e.r x7y•+- 3 cr-k?:. s-S,, .-.w.--' R E$00,9 ^ - 3 �Fs ALAMEDA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT a a _ 5997 PARKSIDE DRIVE 1 PLEASANTON. CALIFORNIA 94566 1 (415) 484-2600 'VA G E June 20, 1986 R >= CEIVED JUN 2 5 1986 Mr. Kevin J. Gailey, Senior Planner City of Dublin P.O. Box 2340 Dublin, CA 94568 Subject: PA 86-053, The Fishery of Dublin Dear Mr. Gailey: Reference is made to your June 13, 1986 referral of subject matter. The Zone is responsible for enforcement of the Groundwater Protection Ordinance (Ordinance No. 73-68). Known water wells without a documented intent of future use, filed with Zone 7, are to be -destroyed prior to any demolition or construction activity in accordance with a well destruction permit obtained from Zone 7. Other wells encountered prior to or during construction are to be treated similarly. Well 3S/1W 2A2 is a known well on the site. Very truly yours, Hun J. Mar General Manager By Vincent Wong, Chief Environmental Resources Division VW:bkm • .._. �--'^ .7 ••� - �'1. -'P'P 4 q'4•.f Z..Y.?" 'i r'3_.fi 9t.�+ I S.�k r'S,�CC`r,"` T?'tr �',vtr'-tRra,.a+rl�T'.��.,i(i$'Ye^�, 'P'-+r�`fi�j,.. c•,$^- y"'^7^ ."yam 3t ,tai �.rv,.. y�r .w. ,..c.' "6 ':_°. .-..t'. t .. ..- `t ._ ,.., ? _._ ..•t?,�.3-£.n....:..a,._ _�. .*..c ...J, . DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT FIRE DEPARTMENT HEADQUARTERS STATION 9399 Fircrest Lane 7051 Dublin Boulevard Telephone: San Ramon, California Dublin, California 94566 829-2333 July 24, 1986 Mr. Kevin Gailey JUt, 2 5•1986• Planner Senior City ofDublin QUg�JN PLAMNING P. 0. Box 2340 Dublin, CA 94568 Dear Kevin: In regards to P.A. 86-053 "The Fishery in Dublin", this department has no objection to the construction. Access to the area meets our requirements. An on-site hydrant will be needed, location to be determined at a later date. Portable fire extinguishers will be required in addition to hood and duct protection anywhere grease laden vapors are produced. If you have any question, please contact me. Very truly yours, Tom Hathcox Captain, Fire Marshal TH:jlc ..., .,y„z.... .-- --•xp y . :.•:r..n. f,.,- .mar "trr. Z-';"'•t�. -r ": j - 4637 Chabot Drive,Suite 214 Pleasanton Ca. 94566 (415)463-0611 MEMORANDUM DATE: August 15, 1986 1 V E D TO: Kevin J. Gailey, Senior Planner- AUG 181986 FROM Chris D. Kinzel SUBJECT: Site Plan - The Fishery In your July 30, 1986 letter you requested our comments on the driveway design for The Fishery in the Dublin site plan. The raised median near the driveway is very important to restrict left-turn movements and possible blockage of the interim intersection just adjacent to San Ramon Road. Therefore, an access scheme similar to that shown in the July 3, 1986 staff study drawing should be followed. To allow convenient "in" movements, the entrance portion of the driveway should be 24 feet wide from San Ramon Road to the first north-south aisle way. The portion of the entrance aisle adjacent to the median should have a minimum width of 14 feet. The median should be four feet wide to accommodate traffic signs. The exit aisle way should be at least 14 feet wide adjacent to the median. Curb return radii of approximately 25 feet should be provided for the driveway, for both the entrance and exit sides. The east nose of the median should extend to within about ten feet of the west curb line of San Ramon Road. See the attached Sketch. Please contact me or Ty Tekawa if there are questions. We would like to review the final drawings. rhm Attachment cc: Lee Thompson PLEASANTON•SACRAMENTO•FRESNO-CONCORD 7" X05 • .._..^ ��x'^1 a,x•T _..., .:. -� S,.RL �y;."s^:r`,...� ,.t.•t^` •""'oF� � %�r-F y''"5:.. .. 4 �• ,' J., 4637 Chabot Drive,Suite 214 Pleasanton Ca. 94566 (415)463-0611 MEMORANDUM ' ECEIVED AUG 18 1986 DUBLIN P'..ANN!NG P 20 Pos P%L 14! t4' s4' ZS,� 10 �^ 5 A-rJ 2 Pr PLEASANTON-SACRAMENTO*FRESNO•CONCORD 4637 Chabot Drive,Suite 214 r' 4 Pleasanton Ca. 94566 Aiu (415)463-0611 MEMORANDUM DATE: April 23, 1986 TO: Lawrence L. Tong, Planning Director Kevin Gailey, Senior Planner FROM Chris D. Kinzel SUBJECT: Traffic Analysis of Area Three of the San Ramon Road Specific Plan As requested,.TJKM has undertaken an analysis of•the traffic issues related to the land generally north and west of the intersection of Amador Valley Boulevard and San Ramon Road. Access to this area is of special concern primarily due to the adjacent San Ramon Road arterial and the desire to consolidate driveway access to a minimum number of well designed locations along the San Ramon Road frontage of the four properties within Area Three. In preparing the recommendations contained in this analysis, TJKM has taken into account the San Ramon Road Specific Plan, the improvement plans for San Ramon Road and current development proposals for various properties within Area Three. TJKM had earlier analyzed the traffic impacts of development in this area, and has sized the intersection in order to accommodate development from Area Three. The intersection will also accommodate traffic from other proposed development in the area and through traffic along both San Ramon Road and Amador Valley Boulevard. For this reason, it appears that the San Ramon Road/Amador Valley Boulevard intersection is able to accommodate foreseeable land uses to which Area Three could be developed. Consequently, the traffic concerns of TJKM in this area are related to access and circulation as opposed to congestion or traffic impacts. In the various proposals that have been made to date there are essentially two driveway locations proposed for access from Area Three to San Ramon Road. The first driveway proposed would, be located on the south side of the Hayward Fishery holdings which would place the driveway in alignment with an existing easement. This driveway would be located approximately 170 feet in advance of the signalized intersection of Amador Valley Boulevard and San Ramon Road. The other driveway is located near the north end of the Moret property approximately 470 feet north of the signalized intersection. From a traffic standpoint, neither of these driveways is at a good location. The driveway on the south side of the Hayward Fisheries is too close to the major signalized intersection and would require exiting traffic from the driveway to, on occasion, make hazardous movements just to proceed southerly on Amador Valley Boulevard. On the occasion where drivers exiting this driveway wanted to make either a left turn to Amador Valley Boulevard or a U-turn to proceed north on San Ramon Road, such a movement would be potentially quite hazardous. PLEASANTON•SACRAMENTO•FRESNO•CONCORD „ - The driveway at the north edge of the Moret property is located on San Ramon Road in advance of the special auxiliary lane being- constructed to facilitate driveway movements in and out of the Area Three properties. Thus, access into . and out of the Moret property at the proposed location would be made from a moving traffic lane on a relatively high speed, high volume arterial. Considering the location of the signalization intersection, the planned length of the auxiliary lane, and the parcelization of properties, the optimum location for a driveway appears to be at the property line common to the Moret parcel and the Hayward Fisheries. This location would provide a driveway approximately 340 feet in advance of the intersection, which is a sufficient distance to allow traffic exiting the common driveway to either make a right turn, proceed straight southerly, make a left turn or even a U-turn at the signalized intersection. Such a driveway should be of a high standard construction consisting of approximately a 35 foot width with street type opening with curb return radiis of approximately 25 feet. . This would provide a driveway somewhat comparable in characteristics to the driveways recently constructed for the residential development north of Area Three and the shopping center south of Area Three. It is recognized that this particular location is at odds with the preliminary site plans that have been developed for the parcels and does not align itself with the easement on the south side of the Hayward Fisheries property. It appears this issue of the misalignment with the easement and the driveway can be handled with proper design of the on-site circulation. There will need to be on-site circulation connecting the various parcels possibly necessitating a roadway or aisleway parallel to San Ramon Road. Should this occur, such an aisleway should be located at least 50 feet west of the San Ramon Road curb line so that blockage of such an aisleway would not normally occur unless there are more than two cars waiting to exit Area Three. In addition to the driveway provided on San Ramon Road to Area Three, there will need to be access points provided on Amador Valley Court. There appears to be a general agreement as to the location of two access points to Amador Court, one approximately 120 feet west of San Ramon Road and an additional location about 310 feet west of the first location. Both such access. points would traverse the current.Nichandrous holdings. These two locations are satisfactory to TJKM TJKM will be happy to respond to any questions you or any of the property owners may have regarding these recommendations. CDK/nlc cc: Lee Thompson✓ 157-032M.1 CK -2- c 7 n � ^sYo- CITY OF DUBLIN PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: September 2, 1986 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: PA 86-053 The Fishery in Dublin - Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review requests for a proposed 7,385+ square foot - 225+ seat. Restaurant. GENERAL INFORMATION: PROJECT: Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review Requests for a proposed 7,385+ square foot - 225+ seat Restaurant on a 1.5+ acre property located within Area 3 of the San Ramon Road Specific Plan Area. APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE: Michael S. Johnstone Meta '4 Design Incorporated 5927 Almaden Avenue Oakland, CA 94611 PROPERTY OWNER: Ron Rivers 22701 Foothill Boulevard Hayward, CA 94541 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LAND USE: The subject 1.5+ acre property is a rectangularly shaped property with 125+ feet of frontage along the west side of San Ramon Road. The property is included within the Phase II - San Ramon Road Improvements Project. With construction of those improvements, San Ramon Road will be widened to its ultimate design width along the subject property's frontage. Included with these improvements will be the realignment of the bikeway path approximately five feet westward into the subject property. The frontage of the property is irregularly shaped, reflecting previous right-of-way acquisi- tions to accommodate a planned frontage road which was never constructed. Even with the widening of San Ramon Road, excess right-of-way will remain and is planned by the Applicant to be purchased and incorporated for development into the subject project proposal. The subject property is currently vacant. There are several mature trees on the front (easterly) portion of the property. SPECIFICATIONS AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS: The subject property is located within Area 3 of the San Ramon Road Specific Plan. The Specific Plan anticipates development in Area 3 to be Retail Shopper Uses. (A Specific .Plan Amendment Study is currently in progress. ) The subject property is currently zoned C-1, Retail Business District. In conjunction with new development proposals, application of a PD, Planned Development District is required by the General Development Criteria of the Specific .Plan. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ITEM NO. A'vqPAc,1.: stm �Q 9' --r�- �rG = - TM.K 57T J yS ?F�dFD R 7,10,70 P SUBJECT LOCATION AND ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 7400 San Ramon Road 941-040-2-14 SURROUNDING LAND USE: North: -1.4+ acre Moret holding, currently occupied by a single family residential structure and ancillary structures, Zoned C-1, Retail Business District. East: San Ramon Road and mixed retail development, zoned C-1, Retail Business District. South: Commercial Property, Ltd. (0.4+ acres) and Nichandros (3.1+ acres) holdings. Both marginally developed with retail-commercial uses; both zoned C-1, Retail Business District.. West: - Vacant PD, Planned Development District. Lands owned by Morrison Homes (12.4+ acres), carrying approval for development of a 124-unit condominium project. ZONING HISTORY: March 11, 1964, the Board of Zoning Adjustments approved Conditional Use Permit C-1437, permitting a Church at this location subject to nine conditions covering only the first phase of the Church development. January 6, 1965, the Board of Zoning Adjustments approved Conditional Use Permit C-1501, permitting development of the Church with a 20' setback rather than the previously approved 160' from San Ramon Road. June 2, 1965, the Planning Commission approved Variance V-3291, permiting a 4' by 9' identification sign for one year. October 2, 1967, the Planning Commission approved Variance V-4251, to allow the identification sign without time limit. April 1, 1968, Variance V-4398, was approved permitting division of the property with reduced width and .front yard. April 15, 1968, Conditional Use Permit C-1855, was approved to enlarge the existing Church facility by erection of three portable classrooms subject to obtaining a building permit within one year. January 3, 1970, the Board of Supervisors approved the 920th Zoning Unit, rezoning the property from R-S-D-25 to C-1, Retail Business District. July 11, 1979, Conditional Use Permit C-3643, was approved to allow the expansion of existing daycare-preschool by the remodeling of existing -modular buildings. July 25, 1983, the Dublin City Council adopted the San Ramon Road Specific Plan placing the subject property into Area 3 of the Plan. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: A. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION AND POLICIES 8.1 SEISMIC SAFETY The Calaveras Fault is the major active fault in the planning area with rupture potential and runs parallel to and just west of San Ramon Road. -2- �'2]-°*•.ip+=c" '�'�"v»�� i.. ���.f`Mix"-.�- ""7?�� tlr'T.^tt+xY"i xt �.�.. @. ..rs��-j, 7. 7"r_— 4:�Wf -f"^'t„"c, v,...s Guiding Policy A. Geologic hazards shall be mitigated or development shall be located away from hazards in order to preserve life, protect property; and reasonably limit the financial risks to the City of Dublin and other public agencies that would result from damage to poorly located public facilities. Implementation Policies 8.1.1 Structural and Grading Requirements A. All structures shall be designed to the standards delineated in the Uniform Building Code and Dublin_ Grading Ordinance. A "design earthquake" shall be established by an engineering geologist for each structure for which ground shaking is .a significant design factor. B. Structures intended for human occupancy shall be at least 50 feet away from any active fault trace. These distances may be reduced based on adequate exploration to accurately locate the fault trace. C. Generally, facilities should not be built astride potential rupture zones, although certain low-risk facilities may be considered. Critical facilities that must cross a fault, such as oil, gas, and water lines, should be designed to accommodate the maximum expected offset from fault rupture. Site specific evaluations should determine the maximum credible offset. 8.1.2 Required Geotechnical Analyses E. A fault rupture evaluation, as outlined by the State of California for Special Studies Zones (Alquist-Priolo Act), shall be required for all development within the Revised Special Studies Zones as shown on the Geologic Hazards and Constraints Map. The fault rupture evaluation should be conducted after building sites are specifically defined. Sites situated outside of this zone but within the Preliminary Zones (Slossen, 1973) shall be evaluated if proposed for multi-family dwellings or for public or recreational facilities. 8.1.4 Data Review and Collection A. A procedure to review all required reports and data shall be established with the Alameda County Geologist or a consulting engineering geologist shall be retained as reviewer. This individual shall participate in the review process from the earliest proposal stage to the completion of the project. 9.0 NOISE ELEMENT Noise exposure contours projected for 2005 based on anticipated traffic volumes increases indicated noise in the 65+ CNEL range along the east side of the property. Guiding Policy A. Where feasible, mitigate traffic noise to levels indicated below: Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments Land Use Category Normally Acceptable Conditionally Acceptable w.. Offices: Retail 70 or less CNEL 70 - 75 CNEL Commercial B. SAN RAMON ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN The subject property is located within Area 3 of the Specific Plan. Development in this portion of Area 3 is envisioned to be for Retail Shopper Uses. -3- - The Planning Commission considered adjustments to the Land Use Plan for _ Area 3 of the Plan at their August 18, 1986, meeting. Actions at that' meeting included direction to modify the allowable uses in Area 3 to include up to 25% occupancy by Personal Service, Office or Financial Uses in addition to Retail Shopper Uses. The Amendment Study is also .- scheduled for consideration at the September 2, 1986, Planning Commission hearing. The Specific Plan includes General Development Criteria to guide new project development within the Plan. This section of the Plan is also being considered for revision, with the bulk of revisions serving to elaborate upon the information currently in the Plan. C. ZONING ORDINANCE 8-31.0 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS: INTENT: Planned Development Districts, hereinafter designated as PD Districts, are established to encourage the arrangement of a compatible variety of uses on suitable lands in such a manner that the resulting development will: a) Be in accord with the Policies of the General Plan of the City of Dublin; b) Provide efficient use of the land that includes preservation of significant open areas and natural and topographic landscape features with minimum alteration of natural land forms; c) Provide an environment that will encourage the use of common open areas for neighborhood or community activities and other amenities; d) Be compatible with and enhance the development of the general area; e) Create an attractive, efficient and safe environment. 8-32.12 CHANGE IN ZONING DISTRICT REQUIRED. The provisions of this Article shall become applicable to any given development only upon change in Zoning District to a Planned Development District, in accordance with the provision of Article 8 (Procedures) of this Chapter, with the following exceptions to the provisions of said Article 8: a) The determination that the proposal will benefit the public necessity, convenience and general welfare be based, in part, on the conformance of the proposal with provisions of this Article. b) Any change in Zoning District accomplished in accordance with this Article is subject to review by the Planning. Commission at the expiration of two (2) years from the effective date of said change, if during the two (2) year period construction, in accordance with the approved plan is not commenced, or if the approved staging plan has not been followed. At the conclusion of the review by the Planning Commission, 'the Planning Commission may recommend to the City Council that: the lands affected by the Planned Development District be rezoned from the Planned Development District. Said hearings by the Planning Commission and the City Council shall be in accordance with the provisions of --- this Chapter. c) A Planned Development District shall be established by the adoption of an Ordinance by the 'City Council reclassifying the described property to a Planned Development District and adopting by reference, a Land Use and Development Plan, the provisions of which shall constitute the regulations for the use, improvement and maintenance of the property within the boundaries of the plan. -4- - r ..,.Y+"'4+''Y r' :I.ti]�`,»SF SY'an'`3;f rfi"' +' Po'!"Ff'^•cF' Y- 1.: _''!;ter: � i J;rT�'. - � s 8-31.1.5 COMMON AREAS - PROVISIONS, OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE. Maintenance of all lands included within the plan not utilized for building sites, State and County Roads, and public uses, shall be assured by recorded land agreements, covenants, proprietary control, or other stated devices which attain this objective. The proposed method_ of assuring the maintenance of such lands shall be included as part of the Land Use and Development Plan. 8-95.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW. Site Development Review is intended to promote orderly, attractive, and harmonious development; recognize environmental limitations on development; stabilize land values and investments; nd promote the general welfare by preventing establishment of uses, or erection. of structures, having qualities which would not meet the specific intent clauses or .performance standards of this Chapter, or which are not properly related to their sites, surroundings, traffic circulation is found to so require, the Planning Director may establish more stringent regulations than those otherwise specified for the District. 8-95.1 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW: PROCEDURE. The Planning Director or his designated representative shall receive and decide applications for Site Development Review. No public hearing is required, except in the case of a concurrent application for a Variance, or in the case of a Conditional Use. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The City proposes to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance which finds the proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment (see Exhibit A - Draft Resolution regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance). NOTIFICATION: Public Notice of the September 2, 1986, hearing was published in The Herald, mailed to adjacent property owners, and posted in public buildings. ANALYSIS: The subject proposal to establish a Restaurant use on this 1.5+ acre property is consistent with the site's underlying land use restrictions (as established by the General Plan and the San Ramon Road Specific Plan) . Prior to the formal submittal of this request, an Area Traffic Study, funded by the Applicant, was performed by the City's Traffic Engineering firm (TJKI%1) . The Report expanded upon findings and recommendations detailed in an earlier TJKM Report, which had been prepared in conjunction with the San Ramon Road Specific .Plan. The updated Report (collectively entailing the Memorandums dated August 15, 1986, and April 23, 1986 - see Attachment 7#7) focused in on the properties in Area 3 of the Specific Plan located north of the Amador Valley Boulevard extension. The Initial Report served to establish as "Key Elements" in the Circulation Section of the Specific Plan the two following items regarding this portion of the Plan: - An internal and external street circulation and pedestrian pattern. - Limitation of the number of direct access points from adjacent properties to Silvergate Drive, San Ramon Road and Dublin Boulevard. The 1986 update to the Study gave detailed direction as to the number and location of driveways along the portions of both San Ramon Road and the Amador Valley Boulevard extension which serve the referenced portion of Area 3 of the Specific Plan. The subject proposal is the first entitlement request for new develop- ment in this portion of Area 3 since the updated traffic information has been prepared. (An area-wide Specific Plan Amendment Study has been occurring simultaneously in response to a proposal to establish Office Uses on the adjoining Moret property to the north. ) The Draft Resolution prepared for the Planned Development and Site Development Review requests includes indepth direction regarding circulation improvements related to the subject proposal. -5- .. ....T.•� '}+' , va„•,-..,:5`n e.a.-ic 'TT .d"�' ! . + .off,..._. 7` �,.,.._ rrJ,.a7••'„ti A ' l A principle item of the proposed circulation improvements is the establishment of a shared driveway to San-Ramon Road to .serve directly both the subject property and the Moret property (see Conditions #14 - #17 and #24 - Exhibit B). Provision of the shared driveway is the key element in the recommenda- tions for this area from the City Traffic Engineer. Staff recommends that the Applicant be required to provide improved access to the site by either providing full development of the shared .driveway at the north side of the property or, if the necessary private agreements cannot be secured to install those improvements, provision of improvements along the south side of the property within the 28-foot access strip that currently serves the subject property (see Condition #15 of Exhibit B). Regardless of what agreements can be reached between affected property owners concerning the envisioned circulation improvements in the area, the current Applicant should be required to demonstrate that a diligent effort has been made to secure all necessary approvals to accommodate the planned improvements and corresponding cross access easements. If all the necessary private agreements cannot be secured. by this Applicant, then he should be required to record his portion of the respective agreements which will allow the matching ends of the various agreements to be picked up when subsequent entitlements are sought by neighboring property owners. Development of the subject property must take into consideration the presence of an active seismic fault wich traverses the eastern portion of the property. A Geotechnical Report has been prepared for this site (see Attachment #5) and is currently being reviewed by the Alameda County Geologist. It is anticipated that some level of supplemental geotechnical information may need to be supplied for the project proposal. Condition #3 in Exhibit B addresses the possibility that the supplemental geotechnical information may result in the need to adjust the project's site plan layout. If a change in the proposed location of the .Restaurant is required, Staff recommends that said modification be subject to review through the Conditional Use Permit process. . There are several prominent mature trees on the front (eastern) portion of the project. While the four palm trees at the northeast corner of the site are proposed to tie retained, the latest site plan is not proposing that the five mature cedars (located along the eastern edge of the proposed Restaurant) be retained. Earlier versions of the Site Plan indicated an intention to retain of those trees. Staff would recommend that every effort be made to save the trees (see Condition #36 of Exhibit B). The subject proposal. envisions a subsequent development application for the rear 10,000+ square feet of the site. It is understood by Staff that the Applicant envisions some type of Office Use for that portion of the property. Under the current land use controls of the Specific Plan, no Office Use would be allowed at this site. The current recommendations tied into the San Ramon Road Specific Plan Amendment Study would accommodate up to 25% occupancy of Personal Service, Financial or Office Uses, serving to soften the current requirement for 100% occupancy by Retail Shopper Uses. Implementation of that modified Land Use Standard may still serve to require partial occupancy by Retail Shopper Uses in any future development at the rear of the subject property. Development of the rear of the site should be subject to a separate Planned Development Rezoning. and Site Development Review (see Condition #5 of Exhibit B) . Until such time as the rear of the property is developed, the current Site Plan would appear to provide more than ample parking for the Restaurant. Even factoring in the proposed outside deck seating, it is anticipated that -.� the seating count (dining, bar and waiting area) will not exceed 250 seats and could be more than accommodated by the planned parking. With the subsequent development of the rear of the site, a detailed parking analysis will be necessary to determine exact parking requirements of the respective uses and what amount, if any, of cross use ("double counting") parking will be appropriate. -6- .. - A key element in .entire development proposal he assump.tion' that.. (�xcess right-of-way al. San Ramon Road can be :purchas y the Developer and incorporated for use in this project. If an adequate amount of excess right- of-way cannot be secured to implement this site plan, than a Conditional Use Permit should be required to be processed-to review the resultant, alternate _. site plan layout (see Condition #4 of Exhibit B). As indicated elsewhere in this Report, Staff is recommending that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance be adopted for this project. The Initial Study prepared for this project identified the following Environmental Components (see Background.-Attachment #2) : 1. Soils, Geology and Seismicity 2. Traffic Circulation 3. Noise 4. Tree Preservation The Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been formatted .in a manner that presupposes. the Applicant will agree, through the course of the public hearing process, to project design changes and/or to enter into binding commitments that address and mitigate each potential signifi- cant environmental impact identified in the Initial Study prepared for this . project. A letter to the Applicant outlining design changes and/or binding commitments that addresses and mitigates each potential identified environmental impact has been prepared and is included as part of Attachment #2. RECOMMENDATION: FORMAT: 1) Open public hearing. 2) Hear Staff presentation. 3) Hear Applicant and public presentations. 4) Close public hearing. 5) Consider and act on three Draft Resolutions: A - A Resolution regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance; B - A Resolution regarding the PD, Planned Development Rezoning and the Site Development Review Requests. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Draft Resolution regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration . of Environmental Significance Exhibit B - Draft Resolution regarding Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review Requests - PA 86-053.1 and .2 Exhibit C - Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review Submittals Background Attachments 1) Applicant's Written Statements 2) Site Location and Area Maps 3) Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance 4) Letter calling for Applicant to provide project redesign or binding commitment that addresses and mitigates each potential identified environmental impact. 5) Executive Summary Section of Report entitled Geotechnical Investigation for Restaurant, Dublin, California, prepared by J. V. Lowney & Associates, dated February 12, 1986. 6) Pertinent Agency Comments -7- • '. • —�;1^4::e:.f5'r:�'v.i:^, ....'.. ._. "C..'�.? FJ?.`Y-"FZM ?'�%'-we-...�'.`f'�t' i':�x_..•�:i?�'..�` _. 'C� .'w.='c: _. .. .. .�!".'"n�'°'•'•• _