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�'°'•'•• _