HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.1 Dublin Ranch Specific Plan Study �2_0-3d
CITY OF DUBLIN
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 9, 1987
SUBJECT PA 87-031 Dublin Ranch General Plan Amendment/
Specific Plan Study Request
EXHIBITS ATTACHED 1. Letter from Ted Fairfield dated
February 23, 1987, requesting General Plan
Amendment/Specific Plan Studies and
Associated Studies
2. Dublin Ranch Specific Plan (Administrative
Draft) : (Under Separate Cover)
3. Attachment re: Existing General Plan
Policies
4. Excerpts re: General Plans and Specific
Plans from League of CA Cities' PC Handbook
RECOMMENDATION . (See Below)
FINANCIAL STATEMENT Undetermined. Applicant to pay for studies and
consultant costs related to the request.
DESCRIPTION
I. BACKGROUND
Mr. Ted C. Fairfield, on behalf of Chang Su-0 Lin et al, Property Owners,
is requesting the Dublin City Council to authorize a General Plan Amendment
and Specific Plan Study.
The request involves approximately 930 acres in unincorporated Alameda
County along both sides of Tassajara Road. The area is within the Dublin
Sphere of Influence and General Plan planning area. The portion of the
property west of Tassajara Road is contiguous to the eastern City limit.
The Applicant would like the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan to
provide for primarily residential uses, with support land uses and public
facilities. The Applicant's initial proposal has a maximum housing capacity
of 5,200 dwelling units within a density range from estate lots up to 25
dwelling units per acre with a majority of the area proposed for multi-family
dwelling units. The Applicant estimates that build-out will take more than 10
years.
The proposed site is located in the Extended Planning Area of the Dublin
General Plan.
Within the Extended Planning Area, the General Plan Map and Land Use
Element contain the following general land use policies:
1) Residential/Open Space designation (pg. ii)
2) Consider residential development proposals (including support
facilities such as neighborhood shopping centers, schools and parks)
on moderate slopes, with multi-family densities typically considered
on flatter land and next to business park areas (pg. 11) .
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COPIES TO: Ted Fairfield, Applicant
Property Owners (6)
ITEM NO. ♦ File PA 87-031
it a' � ... ..�, ..•a •-.' r- •�; �::.,, r .-,. �, fY 3 -"t
3) The location, extent and density of residential development will be
determined when municipal services can be provided and through
General Plan refinement studies (pg. 11) .
4) Approval of residential development in the extended planning area
will require determination that:
- Utilities and public safety services will be provided at urban
standards without financial burden to Dublin residents and
businesses.
- Proposed site grading and means of access will not disfigure
the ridgelands.
- Timing of development will not result in premature termination
of viable agricultural operations on adjoining lands.
- The fiscal impact of new residential development in the
extended planning area supports itself and does not draw upon
and dilute the fiscal base of the remainder of the City (pp.
11-12) .
State law limits General Plan Amendments to a maximum of four (4) per
calendar year. The limit applies to actual amendments to the General Plan.
The City Council authorizes the number and extent of studies and actual
amendments.
The City Council has previously authorized or initiated two (2) General
Plan Amendment Studies:
1) Hansen Ranch and its expansion to include the adjoining Blaylock -
Gleason - Fletcher property.
2) The Dublin Downtown Specific Plan has associated General Plan
Amendments.
The Dublin Ranch request would be a third amendment, but would probably
be completed after this calendar year.
State law does not limit the number of Specific Plans that can be pre-
pared. It does, however, call out the contents of a Specific Plan. A
Specific Plan has much more detailed requirements than a General Plan. A
Specific Plan must include:
1) Land Uses
2) Infrastructure and Facilities
3) Development and Environmental Management Standards
4) Implementation and Financing Measures
Since a Specific Plan typically requires more planning, architectural and
engineering detail and expertise than a General Plan Amendment, it is usually
more costly to prepare.
II. ISSUES
The first step in the process is for the City Council to determine
whether or not to authorize a General Plan Amendment Study to consider
clarifying or changing land use policies in the Extended Planning Areas. If
the City Council decides to not authorize an Amendment Study, all of the
existing policies will remain in effect. In essence, residential development
in the Extended Planning Area would be subject to future study when the City
Council finds it appropriate. A Specific Plan for residential development
would not be studied. No further direction would be needed.
If the City Council decides to authorize a General Plan Amendment Study,
the City Council should also determine whether or not to authorize a Specific
Plan Study. The Specific Plan Study area could include all or part of the
General Plan Amendment Study area.
-2-
It would be appropriate for surrounding property owners to provide input
and participate in a General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Study. They may
be interested and willing to share in the cost of either 1) a General Plan
Amendment Study only, or 2) a General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Study.
Their input may help define the size of the study area and the general scope
of land uses to be studied.
In recognition of the existing General Plan policy regarding the fiscal
impact of new residential development, including the Business Park/Industrial:
Low Coverage properties into the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan
Study may help achieve the fiscal balance called for by the General Plan.
III. RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions:
1. Determine whether or not to authorize a General Plan Amendment Study
at the time. If the study is not authorized, no other action is
needed.
2. Determine whether or not to authorize a Specific Plan Study.
3. Direct Staff to contact surrounding property owners regarding their
interest and willingness to share in the cost of 1) a General Plan
Amendment Study only, or 2) a General Plan Amendment and Specific
Plan Study, or 3) other application processing.
4. Direct Staff to bring the item back to the City Council at a future
meeting to 1) review input from surrounding property owners,
2) define size of study area, 3) determine general scope of land
uses to be studied, and 4) authorize Staff to select consultant
team.
-3-
, a ry TED C. FAIRFIELD
Consulting Civil Engineer R E C E l Y E D
FEB 2 51987
February 23, 1987 DUBLIN PLANNING
Mr. Laurence L. Tong
Planning Director
CITY OF DUBLIN
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
Dear Mr. Tong:
This letter and the accompanying documents will constitute an application
on behalf of Chang Su-0 Lin et al for approval of both a Specific Plan
and a General Plan amendment on the Lin's 930± acre Dublin Ranch property
on Tassajara Road, in the Eastern Extended Planning area.
We request that the City Council authorize the preparation of the
requisite General Plan Amendment Study, Specific Plan Study and
associated environmental , fiscal , traffic and other studies.
Enclosed with this letter are:
1 . Executed Planning Application Form
2. Executed Environmental Assessment Form '
3. Executed Processing Fee Agreement Form
4. $1 ,000 check (initial deposit) '
5. Assessors parcel maps plus composite exhibit, showing the requisite,
peripheral 300 ft. strip.
6. Mailing labels in conjunction with the previous item. /
7. Twenty additional copies of the Dublin Ranch Specific Plan documents.
8. Letter of authorization signed by the Lins. ,'
Please be aware that TJKM's detailed traffic reports are nearing
completion, and have been promised by March 2nd, after which copies will
be furnished to your office.
FJ
P.O. Box 1148 • 5510 Sunol Blvd. • Pleasanton, Califon ti.
Page Two
Mr. Laurence L. Tong
February 23, 1987
It is hoped that this application. will be presented to the City Council , �.
for initial action at its March 9th meeting.
Thanks for your continuing cooperation.
Very truly yours,
r f
TED C. FAIRFI
TCF:ch
Enc.
cc: Chris Kinzel
Marc Seeley
cc/w-enc: Jim Tong
Martin Inderbitzen
Richard Frisbie
Rod Andrade
�� IS'+ k ei .[� .•y '+� ' � "`y 's X�,'w.,yhn fry,
n
.r
r s
T A �� #t 2 7ga.t ,.E a ���sss,�W T`G•"' �'r .r ,€ � s'#Y,�t 3 'p. k`ra;�� a. : *z..,�, F�' t• a
.,>,�.V-�
`�
3r r�r: �`� `�'+ i"f'r`3�;r�k z ^`vat^'�4 <z,.v'i' L' + a-G• '� �` ,
-
`
_ t.�,.,h+. � �•- '`-"� i �'1 s ""`q.G .�� 'ice r"�".�rr Ls y a,.`-k� .�_�3 z L,� ''�r' s�+Yi$s Y.'4�as �' �`°r.i
1;' YY,s h ,< t s•+ "','}+tlh,f
� � }T oa d�„�, �a .ftr 'a 1 'ra e, yx Z'•3 y '��`�,s ? j .: k•�,.�''
♦.i���2, �� a. �' Y < s3 �� � 7 � a� � ,.. � tt ar ,r, `*P >tL n ^�C ,^a3
216,.. rs '„,:.x' •'�r"'° - r+4 �,. ,s Mrs '' :.i YdR "^'„�s
•r``"'s. 3t`Z z"& .ryr1 'ram r 's`
e>=-{�,y t' <, ' f g 'sT Fri- $ t'.`r+ ti..�
a u�'Y' e tr�" :rte s-xa .r '§ d �� -s
"T ,1'qN � r *�C y �, 8r^`.-a i f 2 ,�" .'ta
r
MIX
� d �
- s4^i* q'Y�$ S,'yt
y� �h�C, a'. ?.s1*h�'�.s�L .,,iC��" . `� % z•�;: 1 ����,�v"
'tA'�i� ;.,�rR� .. a} r �ti •e .� �t .T e5'3c d, By.�y g� d z-r ':r s,;YI.� u�� s
w�>��Ns_� h,r t?�0 ��� .� 5 y �„�d¢t i�
3d SPIV,
3 5'1 C7� 7 S `a '9 i� 't..
�y`x���..((�w r> �w �,����� ti � 7 S a� t,
xi +. � er '°c"`• JI.rt'. z*`',�^��,'
PTA$'" c#`"y ' ' ',1v { ' t�,� # >a rsvy,• r*t ,.d z k a�:. s r2
. ai'a"11r:#K S�rt,�"`{,: xi�Y rte' �A;; 'Y a,"mzr �}4 *f"t' rt, �+•$r;s. s� 4Mi``. � r�i. a �'.1" r a
'U i d y"
a G I aR
a °°3 a.z v
F�`�r'�"" ^r��� ba'12s�, .•" t Z air{�R;�.,� '�+�a'�� �� �7t������Xt 2;. -,F'���xr�v�� S �`
wx ~' i•. �'. d 1rt x dz� r rrr s^' c' t�
?sa sy'4 aR ra � k .a t � J�°� „3A^�y+,n"� +-•,."aa + tt r $ ,.�'rv; km t a„r
�.�� �' x..Yr' "�j �`:y��. / h �s ,,�•�6."T�+.,k�� .r`� F s:fi�s���, "•^�'rs1" "'�•r K ��ta'fdy t �'V,f f F,s�.d: ar
S,,z ,d� r r #! r, ha5J a s is d
S�•° aT yza' av N s 115:12
'> A �. s r r
04" yx ery
6 s a
;,yr,R',t r #Qr d. � Tyta„.y-x I .. ✓ s r ;F l.,S •.r zr
t s *�•
e� { ..,� �^rr •(` "rat +;;8' 'YS" •. ,� .; a
+ F,„.;,. `z°€.r,•'iY:«'`-��' .' 's`.a
�:�`
C r �",� `� v � ���"r•�•t rx $8 �'I�+ a,� �e �f°> �^,�'>. � Vi '1�r° ms's����,"'`3v"t ,�,"��`x r e
r ,..k Fs "' hk'kr»`h �f t ,"� a `s�" � � ! f�'� � `�w?' �� � � `• r c" .�
r L
n•,, R .'�c'1< .�sxFi` ,ri vc ga
h�� , Y KJ l%9 '
» y„at{v;vy+; `Yy
'� "' :s`^x 7T�T `� bS'�? ..� -.„�t ,.s„ v'tt � �r2SV( � �F� "• ,{! s�g, �� +�'"' ''t�t�a ,t3�r� ����„a,wit-"'�
"s r r
ri+A` y^c a
vx ,.
l �,r,'.,,rz v"�f i'M, zr .l of h'a:+' .f.``2*. ..r���, 'L Nf d .r,•Sri t �} ry,l
';P+ 'YroT r u(jr„+ai•'K .,C .1'< ""y a,, a't , ' .:kC. �s.Gr dJ 11 i
v2,� L .t l 'f F" � r ti �^+8•°r-R' , �3�urr ;7# e, � 1 t?,s 'S �."'„t��a,s*. "y,,r-t� r ,�. ws �"£�^e;
}H'��'�-°�°'d tr.��r C\,"�'s �"r M?• � 1>c,,pr..'' .rta'„r's�5`j(�t 's x L,' # »'�,4 �",CasX
44i,Yj•'t -•�'�('+/�•F f4fi.:'���,fi •dam�,1•. 1 i��"`C�l�}�� 'Y�".,���f�+��� ve r + � y1.`rrrTY,rra£ Y7i. � /�t�(.� t�ty��.� y5 -kk�2' h J` ';� y.�.j�lJJ...1�Y 3
R'3}„dA- .f�, !d •r .9 'f�l�."NS S '�' }4a.'RZ'5,�4 F S ♦}4 Y -bu� k ti, !ri .f .2"'3a a{' fi 4 7Y.k "S rr Y •T''`G £'R .
F'°",i szi�' .N '!°s zt'F' u .t•. ,yt. ara '"sy .:# xa. r a.` t?...
'°,"ff5
UZ R51,;:� n a;�+.�k ff �s'^ !�,�"°j t..> J; :! ",a'w` { ,�, �..�5�✓ �^z�� S' �>1���zsm?�ry<�`�+t.���s a� a`t•���•a'�ca��s s��`�y�� s�..�x 1
h w '�.. 1:j
rot};jMi' s'' rk,"rtf `a a, i -.:d s""Y df{yi, `�'}''"s sx.. "ri,a a,+fa`:'?3'4 s E 'i�.,�.d Sri,s3..�# «.. ,• „ 3_,,;�
+: „��� ��fc4�}
t.a °° '' l`�. dF 'N n•+ y">:..r'' rs'P`�. #'M1 dz. .. � z1�
IIr ,i"8 b a'r'k,.•#r"c`° c"`J .2S ai `�1 ,,'� ; z' r M t .is qua :P' ,� v ^ s '
=04
--- �'�f�t i� !. o +yy+,t,,'S' > >i� : ;-t ; " *, �'��>��:; is r �, ,z s �a#s +�''xt �`'} �t�.. � �»�t u �•
i
x rr*
r d*4' r:k LX ) ' ``s S�
01" `* Y*. ,c0 ,�:z,.'T 's•` K .a
's'.k FAlm
rr'f�: f9+,loll ?rte` +A_ � a ••.. n'`•f .nrr ax+i.'-".,; ,M 1, �.i
r � �t r a -tcffx r ?.k�to :_v � w Ltt z� € ;�nxt;;
i "h "'d a p 3 t� td 4F-3�.s M't,r ° �':o'} � u .p 3 `a+ 'fq d i
aC a r+� ,d.
r '.:`, '� 2 h P 'w a ,4E f '3 R.�
TXy fa"$ DBLI /1 T Oil tl � s
>r' _ tt rl', y ti YkZr°7.. & 4 -k cryJt�w` -.,#, .l ,.4�� 1e "d rY Sgy�kq7,
� ka�rPay `�� as�
,jR7 raa3se. Pe � 8d +$ a_'s$ '3•`,L-- y'-"r°a,
*kt
L p �2R!MN5a 1"A d� n ay x sN J ✓d q vt + o- s1F k #
t a vr6r x ,.,, e z INTERSTATE x -.580,w,,,w. r^ y x .a�,,rv+ik s' 't'
.s`tin x..ei`s,.
a �t �5 ti r s a fi k,•.krs � a r
�. . ,� y. JsYd ,-n5«a
,t{��d,,..�,, 'nz4 4?
. � ie x �. ,`r`t '
x �4 �i- 1. "r, F�* ,s Slim ; c
\v.t `Y yE e.li �t~.4* 't ,r$, i`' j}1•'"�^I}f"'� r4 e �: z Fx}+^� ''+,as a F.F, 3 a !
?jn pr4y 1L _� 2 s l flMt�° �l x ti�� - fi rya w n
z� �9 'Hk L �
"*yr `1''r f"�'ti'. "h s"�,.\rt�i D> y�!F'�F��x 2ii f F�,�4".��`G�'�'��^�'t�',�«'�t{•i""t•s z..��...`$"�r^e P��g,�y�`r v f,� ��a't'£:. } � �i- i q y k'ISr��r�
1�s 40
L
Prepared by:
FRISBIE,WOOD & ASSOCIATES
MACKAY & SOMPS
L MERRILL, SEELEY, MULLEN, SANDEFUR, INC.
HOLMAN & ASSOCIATES January 1987
L
D U B L IN R A N C H
Dublin, . California
January 1987
List of Assisting Consultants
Frisbie , Wood & Associates
Site Planners & Landscape Architects
Holman & Associates , Archaeological Consultants
MacKay & Somps , Civil Engineers
Merrill , Seeley, Mullen, Sandefur, Inc .
Consulting Geotechnical Engineers & Geologists
This draft Specific Plan is prepared for the City of Dublin and is
intended to conform to Government Code requirements for Specific
Plans , and the adopted City of Dublin General Plan. It is envisioned
that this draft Specific Plan will serve as an administrative draft
for city staff , Planning Commission and Council review , providing a
framework for a forthcoming "final draft" Specific Plan, concurrent
with the preparation of a draft Environmental Impact Report ( EIR) by a
separate consultant. The final city sponsored Specific Plan is to be
adopted in the same manner as provided for General Plans . Should it
be determined that the Specific Plan is not consistent with the
General Plan , a corresponding General Plan Amendment is required .
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
A. Location
B . Regional Setting
C . Dublin Ranch Development Plan
D. Scope & Intent of the Specific Plan
E. Relationship of the Specific Plan to
Dublin Plans & Codes
F . State & Local Agencies with Jurisdiction
CHAPTER II
GOAL & OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
A. Land Use
B . Public Facilities
C. Circulation
D. Utilities
E. Environmental Resources Management
F . Community Design
CHAPTER III
SPECIFIC PLAN ELEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
LAND USE ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
A. Residential
B . Commercial
C. Natural Open Space
PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
A. Public Parks
B. Schools
C. Libraries
D. Health Care
E . Police
F . Fire
CIRCULATION ELEMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
A. Traffic
B . Pedestrian, Equestrian & Bicycle Paths
C. Transit
UTILITIESELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
A. Domestic Water
B . Sanitary Sewer
C. Storm Water Drainage
D. Solid Waste
E. Gas & Electric
F. Telephone & Cable Television
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT ELEMENT . . . . . . 57
A. Mineral Deposits
B. Biotics
C. Archaeology
D. Seismicity & Geology
COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
A. Residential
B. Commercial
3
Page
CHAPTER IV
SPECIFIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
A. General Provisions
1 . Adoption of the Specific Plan
2 . Statement of Specific Plan Relationship
to the General Plan
3 . Environmental Assessment
4 . Amendment of the Specific Plan
5 . Development Agreements
B . Development Approval Process
1 . Filing Fees
2 . Processing Procedure
C . Capital Improvements
1 . Financing Mechanisms
2 . Capital Improvements Program
4
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
FIGURE 1 LOCATION MAP I 8
2 LOCATION MAP II 9
3 LOCATION MAP III 10
4 VICINITY MAP 11
5 DUBLIN RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLAN 13
6 VILLAGE BOUNDARY KEY 27
7 WATER PRESSURE ZONES 47
8 WATER PLAN DIAGRAM 49
9 SANITARY SEWER PLAN DIAGRAM 50
10 DRAINAGE SYSTEM PLAN DIAGRAM , PART I 53
11 DRAINAGE SYSTEM PLAN DIAGRAM, PART II 54
12 SLOPE CLASSIFICATION MAP 60
LIST OF TABLES
Page
TABLE 1 ACRES BY LAND USE DESIGNATION 28
2 MAXIMUM HOUSING CAPACITY 28
BY DENSITY CATEGORY
5
t
�I
t �
Chapter I
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides an introduction to the Dublin Ranch Development
Plan. Included within the overall description is an analysis of the
local and regional setting , and a brief discussion of the physical and
governmental constraints and opportunities that shape the development
concept. Also included is a summary of the governmental agencies with
jurisdiction within the specific plan area , and a corresponding
overview of the roles these agencies will play in order to implement
the plan.
6
A. Location
Dublin Ranch is located approximately 35 miles east of San
Francisco , in Alameda County , easterly of and contiguous to the
City of Dublin (Figures 1 & 2) . The site is less than a mile north
of Interstate 580 and lies along Tassajara Road in the proximity
of the Alameda County/Contra Costa County line . Interstate 680
Lies approximately 3 miles to the west. The site is divided by
Tassajara Road and the parallel Tassajara Creek. Of the irreg-
ularly shaped 930 acre site , approximately 179 acres lie to the
west of Tassajara Road , and approximately 751 acres lie to the
east (Figure 3) .
The Dublin Ranch site has a very scenic rural quality . Situated
along the northerly edge of the Livermore Valley , the terrain is
composed of gently rolling grassland hills and valleys typical of
the coastal hill areas of California . Although the main body of
the site does not contain the oak woodlands often found in the
region , a number of notable Valley Oak trees do line the Tassajara
Creek channel . Historically , the site has been utilized for low
intensive agricultural uses , namely cattle grazing , with selected
areas cultivated for the growing of hay crops .
B. Regional Setting
Dublin Ranch and surrounding lands east of Dougherty Road , north
of Interstate 580 , and south of the county line are unincorporated
lands within the Sphere of Influence of the City of Dublin. The
Sphere of Influence , which designates lands that may be ultimately
annexed to Dublin, extends easterly to the City of 'Livermore
Sphere of Influence boundary located just east of Croak Road . The
unincorporated land herein measures approximately 15 square miles ,
most of which is undeveloped .
For the most part , the lands surrounding Dublin Ranch are very
similar in general character . Most of the land is utilized for
low intensive agricultural uses , although some areas along
Tassajara Road both north and south of the site are developed with
a sprinkling of older and newer "ranchettes" . To the north ,
Tassajara Road threads through the taller hills that provide much
of the visual backdrop for the Livermore/Amador Valley region,
ultimately reaching the City of Danville . To the south along
Tassajara Road near Interstate 580 , the terrain levels out to form
the main valley floor . Here in the relatively flat area along
Interstate 580 , long range plans envision a large scale high
technology/light industrial center , complimenting the Hacienda
Business Park now under construction across the freeway in
Pleasanton ( See Vicinity Map , Figure 4) .
In response to current and anticipated industrial growth and the
accompanying burgeoning job force , the regional circulation system
is undergoing rapid change . Significant improvements are either
planned or underway on all east Dublin I-580 interchanges . Dublin
Boulevard , a parallel "relief valve" arterial street north of 1-
580 is also planned for extension from its current terminus at
Dougherty Road easterly to Tassajara Road , and then ultimately to
the North Canyons Parkway in Livermore . Tassajara Road and all
7
•/
1 SOLANO
COUNTY
SAN JOQUIN
COUNTY
• Concord •`
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY '
'�•�� • Walnut Creek i
Dublin Ranch
• akla ` � �.
r
San � o .�• •�
Franc o ••` •r• t 5g0 •
Dublin a Tracy
• Livermore I
Hayward •Pleasanton -
ALAMEDA COUNTY
V
SAN ATEO -
COUNTY
San Joe
�.` SANTA CLARA
• COUNTY
...............................................
.......�---
Location Map
Figure 1
24 O Walnut Creek
Alamo O
Danville O
DUBLIN Co ;00
♦• RANCH Co JtO s oo d ��ly
San '
Ramon
Sa Leandro
i
0 Seo Dublin 1580
Livermore
�µ OHayward
Pleasanton
C
O
Union
City
e�
O
as Fremont
Newark
0
Alameda County
------- - - -- — --
Santa Clara County
rJalo Alto
O s
'o
Milpitas
O
237
Location Map
Figure 2
ov�ty 000
Costa Gvr�
1 00�tc Mme a
.00�
OZZ
DURB� 1
T -- -
i
i
C' RANCH
Ca V
°
0 00
r
O
Co CIS
Cay o�
y
~ O
Al
a
Interstate 580.
DUBLIN LIVERMORE [>
Location Map III
5 Figure 3
5 _.� .Q-' � (�,,,�~�3 4 t� �.O _ O Y, �.c,�l.�...0�h` 41 )ri��'l,`,c% +a'�•�\��\"�%�,,:!i,/� �.�_" j _�"��'1/�� n L/ ��.,`')•.'
d _ 4�X��/' � '�'r _ r "p I_ (, ii11� 1 /�/��1 \� tom• ',`✓^-!'/ r?�\ �� .l `-�S��:� \ ���\��� �;t 1
6_ 1 � .� -.Qf :,ts� V'' <( t�.��� �- ��'`\ i-'�`'-•'I _`,stt UZ�'J��t�` � �,.jt :��. t'(
�'. ,t \n rs., - �- -'� / t'�1.�;-� �/,���.y/�� :ii+�_ �i �/ / ,t c_`✓�ZZt" - \:..< � ::�+ 1t�,7.
tg
rk to '�5T' - t ea••-..�,-,..`�i\ p,.-�, ' / `---s� 1 r/ � �t 4i-" •'- °m.,F :v. r\v� (
-w ,19-�,
\�"'-::-,. !x�•-�'"'`' r ,l J t •( � - 1
;ws1"Mum
\ej• ' `,�Vg 2 �' t t' r��//of i�• 'n/,
r ,\`-_./��sf�`�''.: :i.- fi'11 z t r'4t .ice .t'S'•� �r \..;i''t 7 l r�`1� 4t'�-_% 'lA/��^.'' _ "'-:�- t,� `^t�•S - '� m 1 ./-
1 1 t, n4a SIN A�r
x'a \. �':a.:t e `r'�� r`ki'� t✓,:.;'`l _7 �,v pT ;� ..�n ,1(u ::o {'"
n•:b,'y0 -�f�`(i!-, � &� l ��-1'�� Z>,•a3��"', .Ufa �.> ��f`��r, � /r � ��./t.a xa + �v ,.(;
>Ia .'sf,�;. -.� =F-,.1_, r .:,2 =af�f ..1-,11 \-f.()s1!,i i"~� {. \ _ ((!.tba r✓/ ! . o
l vx. G.9��pa r^ .{7 •r `, �y .�'
�vn°'''�i1s/..,. V::_ '(i�+7��a :.;y, >,,;-.:. ,,...•` �. +(lli ;�:,: �- a J '/ �,�_ "� �_'-� "f"':
r ` �r,.y/w..i,}ter w.s' r f,. °w� /;` :•'�. a3a s (: ca. CJ� r4f
' .c'e�-+,.' .Y;? �L ./..t, I'�.ii-�.�\1`.,I';�t >/��' r,t, s I Z°��.t•" (,-� ,a"!1`� 5-� e�.,��.�-
A •..�.:,, .�: �- _:,� " .r�Pcti;"`;.`- `� ,�::^•,,,r 1 ��1 .,.� >m:kr��v .J °.,a X17_�'....�e,e��;��r( �
y
bxS
iYY�t'.�' ,A�'AEGIG. \6rJ e-y t, '��\L.\tr �%'�e7 y ✓ 1...�' _ w ./_i� a -,.J� ;tl•c
�• ,,�"t -1\. .Stn-R ,dn. !. .acr: r�.� r' ts ;;�+ +j.�'�'' ( ,..,'�-� �o eclr� ''iicHd/� �,�h.,..:7� ���`'� ��F,i�-�.`l�� -�'''- �+ `.6 'l
,'�' 1, _ � �ti: Z'- �';`�/ d -� �/ �1'.: � / , \',ii,r :�.""� .-: �-" - :Y�\.�,t„ _ j• :y 3>.,,,,�+�`ti
a �` \ .,�� t y � R�k..a Ir ::I".: -..` : '� e's�"- .r;�'�. y I,4�: I � a.� p .�. 5. �z;. ���7..�� ,=�Fy ;,�..;< �` •� �� ,4ai
`" Lc�_ e�0�I ,+-- , , ;� ::; C_ .;.� �a�• f!�. •,,1 S tiU1�+-�;,� l\,� �� �`h '.kis� � r.,f.'. '
-xn..". � d � m'z'!{e' - �� .y,: .a-ht 1..-.s ,.h °1 e �i: g•! _,,? \c;�l �""p`.,�t J �..� i r(`.;;,:<,��.m';�; ,ttr r ;d"t "(tit,
.. ;,». .Y .:.. �. _ �t,!;.� :Illf.�fi 4 - -..,Y• ti d... .I:�uF� 'Sl� �:' r(� �\�l<!t� ��. �y1 � '?'34� s[ } �\ M1*.Sy` \�i r fi �"�Y {y',i t�,.
�.Aa .;c,�!f �\ k7 �dTUr= � '('f�� - � �f<' ��:�� of {v�f/ �j�•_r"''°�^,' .i 1,." �1/yet r �' �t�r _ t'.� ry �t t (: .r z.,•»„-_,•
a rs„ ^. ll L `\,°�� m''�f� ��ul''n I•�r T -�, '.\\ '.11-(I��'�J� -�- —t .?- yi;.p`t.. ,'� r i 'bl•ri!J}� 4,"� -.\. r}`S
ter s .a t I p r.t'i- -t'f-, c :v. ,t .;�,,'� 1. `,�', ,/.�. .k;l 1/ -,l/1� r �. �a i1: a•.�\.\e-� \t\ ::
5 4•�,,5�'y[ S.';.�Yf ' .Fi T�-,�f�,.d ;Imo"'_ 'C ,. .�j\ -;1�.;/ I;,/} is�� ti..:/(� � � ��.., wy7 �. I�,ye
- W,�j `�r -;``\",�".), \,,� "G�3 ��•',.;' ��:,1 �+- s„-�,.��u,. i 1� :.� `:t�i'=''.
�; !�..''�„�. •�f"f.,, ,�; •:� "� - dl n ,o•a I..?sr,t..,..Vm�
,F"' ���i ��'• '.�- V @... .�� a�f � v'� � ,tom�,�'� �'�'v
1¢ - •�� r� •>\�� � a 7i/�"^."4'sri3 m��"'°.�, �s _:e'3 p y TEa;I 1�.,�k���r4 �_ �1�,- -� r5-, �C v..��/� r s, ..,is ���.l.. ..
`rP.'.�"'� -.�:%\ i�t:n.���,ry��.. ti �"�>,y .,®a�-�.-"�, ,•°r`E9.'3 L � = pl. I I y,u 1;- - -"%`-�`�g�v d �''.3�.\, � �.�4 '��IQi�/r. 7 � :�:�.:�`=-�J_ �,j ;_.` /�.
.4(•r _ aIz1_ ,r f .�..a (iF 1 _ -\ ���j�(��.1,r+ 1 /t 11\e, �.f i r /
.11 'Y i
�S. \ \ \ 's,JM/S,,��Jy! _1 � F •%�� �'�(, n5'rnn 1t «. --'�.di`�ai--,v +\ '+-.�k �na. eke i�_ 11,\
��
�'�t'�m�"F: c' v,5 � _ _I� 11 11 s9ti., /. \ - �r� �,• :i�x � s t '�_-1\.
Iv
`mr.,.. M��rte:,,._
dubl'n nm�uc)h -m-my MAP
o iooa CHANG SU-O LIN
DVUL�IlOVy �� wza,es
o FRISBIE,WOOD&ASSOCIATES
FIGURE 4
other hill collector streets located north of I-580 must also
significantly increase traffic service capacity in order to
accommodate the expected new employment traffic to be generated
from the new home areas envisioned for the north and east hill
areas .
Neighboring lands to the west of Dublin Ranch are an unknown
factor in mapping future development scenarios . These lands
occupy much of the geographic area between Dougherty Road and
Tassajara Road and are for the most part comprised of three large
land holdings ; Federal Government lands (Parks Reserve Forces
Training Area and the Federal Correctional Institution,
Pleasanton) , County of Alameda lands ( Santa Rita Rehabilitation
Center and a new county jail facility under construction) , and
East Bay Regional Park District lands (Tassajara Creek Regional
Park) . Although annexation of most of these lands has been
completed (a crucial step in pursuing annexation of lands located
further east) , the public agencies involved have voiced little
overt interest in development; however , impetus for development
beyond current low intensive land use activities will increase as
surrounding lands are developed . A related factor that may
ultimately affect long range development patterns for the region
is the current litigation between Camp Parks and the E . B .R. P . D.
The federal government is attempting to reclaim land previously
given to the park district. If the federal government succeeds ,
the land in question could potentially be used for expansion of
the County jail facility, or for expansion of the army reserve
facilities . E. B.R. P .D. may in turn look to acquire other similar
land holdings in the east Dublin area .
C. Dublin Rauch Development Plan
The Dublin Ranch Development Plan illustrates the land uses ,
circulation system, and major public facilities proposed for
Dublin Ranch (Figure 5) . Dublin Ranch plays an integral role in
future East Dublin area development plans . Containing primarily
residential uses , Dublin Ranch is to be a major contributor of
support housing for the future I-580 high technology corridor . As
a planned residential community , Dublin Ranch responds to the
varied housing needs projected for the area by providing a wide
array of housing opportunities within a planning framework
sensitive to locational and topographical constraints . Envisioned
as a quality landmark community for the City of Dublin , Dublin
Ranch provides a diverse housing mix that ranges from estate lots
and single family homes to patio homes , condominiums and
apartments . Density intensity varies according to the visibility
of the development area and according to the terrain, with higher
densities placed on flatter less visible areas . In order to
essentially preserve the scenic hilly portions of the site , no
development is planned for the steeper hill face areas . As a
result, natural open space corridors of hill face slope visually
separate and organize the developable areas into very distinct
"neighborhood clusters" . All neighborhood clusters and
corresponding density intensities are illustrated on the Dublin
Ranch Development Plan.
The Dublin Ranch community is self-contained and , for practical
12
].� Coo�/ cd,By��:efpledvY
o Costa Cow Y Vicinity Map
/jam— 680 Freaw
J\�` axuoaw
... DU Inlenelly Scale
\VIII'ag i
�\\`\I; nw Village 1
a � � NolBneprnooa cw.1e, 1 s 1zs
Nelphbprhood Cluala, 2 22 220
NelphbprhooE C-- 3 15 3]6
N IphO ClC-- 4 ] 175
N I hb hoo—f d Clualar 5 33 )80
\ N l h hood Clualar e a 80
N hE rh ] 2 420
N hb,hood.,d C--Cluele, 8 18 10
N IOhb hood Clualar 0 '14 144o
NelOhborhood Clusler 10 10 60
EivN Bry RedmN Perk Obekl 4 - C/ 'l \�` �\'� 1
3ob1p1.1 17B 2525
Village Il
N Iphbpmopa twee, 1 5 1z5
N Iphb,hood Clualar 2 30 300
N I tIE hood Clualar 3 ) 17 6
IBhb hopd dueler < 12 120
I hb hopd Clualar 6 40 ]3s
V11189 % y N 1 b
h bood C--r B 10 5a
N IphZ'h.d Clualar ) 10 80
Nelphbo,hood C-- S 13 80
J 2
1 NelOhbothood Clusler 8 1B Bs
Village III
N Iphb rhppa epee, 1 3
N IOhb,hood Clualar 2 88 880
N IOhborhood Cluelor 3 I1 55
I\
Cw . —ghboo Cuo 4 12 120
Subtotal BS 885
neeldenllel Toles 460 520D10
4
j H $ \1 11�\J ' } Elemenlery School/Perk 16
Elemenlery Sch-UPark 14
v} 0 Vlllepo Center(CpnM018ce) 13
�`•-rte- ' �w �� MIe,W 5
Molar CO3sclm 10
Colecls 13
AY a SU—o 9r ke Street 41
W as 0 9ubt.1.1 74
y Tdel Oevelopmenl Arse 658
Nelu,el Open Space 9]I
DUBLIN RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLAN ' E"°"°°Tf
To1l1
es Slle Aree 930
SPECIFIC PLAN CHANG SU-O LIN
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA FRISBIE,WOOD&ASSOCIATES
FIGURE 5
purposes , functions as a "new community" . The development plan
designates an array of support land uses and public facilities ,
including commercial uses , offices , schools , parks , and open
spaces in sufficient numbers and in proper locations to adequately
provide for the needs of future residents . The Town Center is de-
signated as the hub of the community . As well as providing the
service commercial uses , the Town Center is also projected to
contain offices and other community support services , including a
branch library and fire station , if needed . Higher density
residential areas and support parks and recreational facilities
are planned in close proximity .
The major street circulation system represents an expansion and
upgrade of the existing street network. Tassajara Road is to
continue as the main traffic link to Interstate 580 , and will
also provide access to the future Dublin Boulevard extension . An
on-site collector "loop" street, appropriately named Dublin Ranch
Parkway provides for efficient internal access to many of the
individual neighborhood clusters . Dublin Ranch Parkway also links
with both Fallon Road and Doolan Road (both existing dead-end
streets ) , providing desirable through -street access for lands
situated further east. The alignments of the four major streets ,
Tassajara Road , Dublin Ranch Parkway, Fallon Road , and Doolan Road
are all illustrated on the development plan. Minor street
alignments are also shown, however these streets may be amended
depending upon circumstances that exist at the time future
development plans are processed .
Dublin Ranch buildout is projected to take more than 10 years .
This schedule is based on an estimation of future home absorption
rates , and on very generalized estimates concerning the timetable
for providing the ultimate facilities and utilities package . The
possible phased delivery of facilities and utilities , in concert
with the unique Dublin Ranch cluster concept, may likely dictate a
phased construction program. In anticipation, . the Dublin Ranch
Development Plan and support Specific . Plan text are structured to
provide a planning and engineering framework to facilitate phased
project development, perhaps by several builders . The overall
intent of the Specific Plan is to create a landmark community in
terms of visual and functional appeal , one that sets the standard
for excellence for the remaining undeveloped portions of the east
Dublin foothills .
D. Scope & Intent of the Specific Plan
Under California law (Government Code Section 65450 , et. seq . ) a
city may prepare a "specific plan" for any portion of the
geographical area within its jurisdiction , including
unincorporated lands within the established Sphere of Influence .
Specific plans are usually applied to areas where unique
circumstances exist that prompt cities to seek development
guidelines and policies more detailed than those contained in the
general plan. By law, specific plans are adopted in the same
manner as general plans (except that it may be adopted by
resolution or by ordinance and may be amended as often as deemed
necessary by the legislative body) and must include detailed
regulations programs , and legislation considered necessary to
14
implement the purposes of the plan. The Government Code ( Section
65451) requires that a specific plan include the following :
" (a ) A specific plan shall include a text and diagram or diagrams
which specify all of the following in detail :
( 1) The distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land ,
including open space , within the area covered by the plan.
( 2) The proposed distribution , location , and extent and intensity
of major components of public and private transportation , sewage ,
water , drainage , solid waste disposal , energy , and other essential
facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the
plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan.
( 3) Standards and criteria by which development will proceed , and
standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of
natural resources , where applicable .
( 4) A program of implementation measures including regulations ,
programs , public works projects , and financing measures necessary
to carry out paragraphs ( 1) , ( 2) , and ( 3) .
(b) The specific plan shall include a statement of the relation-
ship of the specific plan to the general plan. "
The Dublin Ranch Specific Plan is currently "site-specific" , that
is , the goals and policies listed herein, and the land use and
circulation designations shown on the Dublin Ranch Development
Plan apply only to the lands of Chang Su-0 Lin (Assessors Parcel
Nos . 946-541-51 , 946- 1040- 1, 946- 1040-2 , 946- 1040-3, 946-680-4,
99B-346-2-3 , 99B-346-2-6 , 99B-346-2-7 , 99B-346-2-8 , and 99B-346-2-
9) . The City of Dublin may at its discretion choose to expand the
area covered by the specific plan, and as a consequence modify any
portion to accommodate new circumstances . This "expandable"
concept may be especially suited to the east Dublin hill area
where similar natural conditions and development constraints lend
themselves to a unified , rather than piecemeal , development
approach.
E. Relationship of the Specific Plan to Dublin Plans and Codes
1 . General Plan
Since a specific plan is a vehicle for implementing the policies
and goals described in the general plan, a specific plan may be
adopted only if it is found to be consistent with the general plan
(California Government Code 65454) . If the jurisdiction intends
to adopt a specific plan, but determines that the plan is not
consistent with the general plan, a corresponding general plan
amendment is required .
The Dublin General Plan, adopted February 11 , 1985 , describes
lands generally east of Dougherty Road , but within the city ' s
Sphere of Influence , as the "EXTENDED PLANNING AREA" . Very little
General Plan policy references exist for this area . Most of the
Extended Planning Area , including Dublin Ranch, is designated as
15
"Residential/Open Space" on the supplemental land use diagram. In
contrast, the General Plan contains very specific policies and
precise land use patterns for the "PRIMARY PLANNING AREA" , an area
generally corresponding to the 1985 city limits . The General Plan
text contends that " . . . information available on environmental
constraints , means of providing services , and landowners '
intentions . . . " within the Extended Planning Area is not sufficient
to formulate extensive policies . However , Section 2 . 1 . 4 of the
General Plan Land Use Element does establish the following
policies to guide future growth:
A. Consider residential development proposals ( including
support facilities such as neighborhood shopping cen-
ters , schools .and parks ) on moderate slopes , with multi-
family densities typically considered on flatter land
next to business park areas .
B . The location, extent and density of residential develop-
ment will be determined when municipal services can be
provided and through General Plan refinement studies .
C. Approval of residential development in the extended
planning area will require determination that:
- Utilities and public safety services will be
provided at urban standards without financial
burden to Dublin residents and businesses .
- Proposed site grading and means of access will
not disfigure the ridge lands .
- Timing of development will not result in pre-
mature termination of viable agricultural
operations of adjoining lands .
- The fiscal impact of new residential develop-
ment in the extended planning area supports
itself and does not draw upon and dilute the
fiscal base of the remainder of the city .
2 . City Ordinances
All future city public works projects , tentative maps , and
zoning ordinance changes that affect the area regulated by
the Specific Plan must be consistent with the Specific Plan.
Provisions contained in the City ' s zoning ordinance shall
continue to apply in the Specific Plan area ; however , where
conflicts exist between the Zoning Ordinance and the Speci-
fic Plan, the Specific Plan shall govern.
3 . Municipal Codes
The development policies and standards contained in the
Specific Plan do not supersede either the adopted building
code or any health and safety codes .
F. State & Local Agencies with Jurisdiction
1 . Dublin San Ramon Services District
The cities of Dublin and San Ramon are both within the
Dublin San Ramon Services District. DSRSD provides sani-
tary sewer, domestic water , fire protection, and. park and
recreational services . Currently , DSRSD' s service boundary
extends only as far east as Santa Rita prison. Concurrent
with annexation to the City of Dublin, Dublin Ranch is to be
annexed into the DSRSD service boundary.
16
2 . Alameda County
The Dublin Ranch site lies within Alameda County. The
County General Plan (Livermore-Amador Valley Planning Unit,
November ' 3 , 1977) designates the area as "Agriculture" .
The County has no long range plans for area development ;
cities are generally assigned the responsibility for regula-
ting land uses and providing services to areas within their
spheres of influence . County jurisdiction will end when
Dublin Ranch annexes to the City of Dublin.
Notices of nonrenewal for Dublin Ranch Williamson Act
Contract lands were filed with the County in 1982 and 1986
( Portions of Dublin Ranch are not under contract. ) . A notice
of nonrenewal allows the contract to lapse after 10 years .
Should Dublin Ranch property owners elect to cancel
contracts prior to established expiration dates , the County
will be lead agency in considering whether or not to grant
early cancellation requests . The City of Dublin will assume
this role upon annexation.
3 . Local Agency Formation Commission
Local Agency Formation Commissions exist in each county to
regulate city boundary and municipal service expansions .
LAFCO has authority to approve , deny or amend proposals
for annexation, Urban Service Area Boundary (USAB) expan-
sion, or formation of special districts . Ultimately , LAFCO
is to consider annexation of Dublin Ranch to the City of
Dublin, and corresponding expansion of the USAB .
17
I�
f
l
Chapter ll
i
CHAPTER II
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The goals and objectives are the conceptual framework that guides
future development within Dublin Ranch. The goals and objectives are
structured to represent appropriate City aspirations identified
through more recent detailed , site-specific analysis . The Dublin
Ranch goals are broad expressions of long-range concepts primarily
intended to enable the Planning Commission and City Council to reach
agreement on future development practices ; the objectives offer
specific courses of action to help these decision makers accomplish
the goals .
18
The following goals and objectives are organized by Specific Plan
Element , namely , Land Use , Public Facilities , Circulation, Utilities ,
Environmental Resources Management , and Community Design.
A. Land Use
Goal 1: Encourage diverse residential development to supplement
the housing inventory.
Objective la : Allow a mix of housing types , sizes , and
densities to permit a diversity of house-
holds within the area .
Objective lb : Promote higher density residential develop-
ment, including apartments , in appropriate
locations .
Objective lc : Create a residential community that is com-
patible with current plans for adjacent un-
developed properties .
Objective ld : Organize residential units into clusters to
promote social interaction among residents .
Objective le : Serve the housing needs generated by antici-
pated industrial development.
Goal 2: Provide for the service commercial needs of local resi-
dents.
Objective 2a : Provide neighborhood commercial uses where
necessary to support residential uses .
Objective 2b : Permit limited office uses where such are
ancillary to commercial uses .
Objective 2c : Prohibit commercial uses that would detract
from City efforts to develop downtown Dublin
as a regional commercial center .
Goal 3: Encourage land use relationships compatible with the High
Technology/Light Industrial land uses projected for the
nearby I-580 corridor.
Objective 3a : Provide a diversity of housing types to
accommodate the local work force .
Objective 3b : Encourage the development of cost conscious
housing.
Objective 3c : Promote higher residential densities where
practical to capitalize on the excellent
local jobs - housing relationship .
Objective 3d : Place higher residential densities proximate
to non-residential land use designations .
19
Goal 4: Preserve open space proximate to residential areas.
Objective 4a : Separate neighborhood residential clusters
with open space corridors where practical .
Objective 4b : Promote residential clusters in areas of
flattest terrain, allowing steeper hill face
areas to remain in open space .
Objective 4c : Enhance resident access to Tassajara Creek
Regional Park and other major natural open
areas .
B. Public Facilities
Goal 5: Provide public facilities and services without over bur-
dening iu-place facilities and services in surrounding
areas.
Objective 5a : Provide facilities and services at urban
standards without incurring financial burden
to Dublin residents and businesses .
Objective 5b : Develop_ a master plan for facilities and
services for the Extended Planning _Area .
Objective 5c : Phase Extended Planning Area development with
the orderly provision of facilities and
services .
Goal 6: Promote a level of public facilities and services that
enriches the local living environment.
Objective 6a : Centrally locate schools and neighborhood
parks to assure convenient access for
residents .
Objective 6b : Work with the designated school district with
jurisdiction to determine future school re-
quirements .
Objective 6c : Locate school sites adjacent to neighborhood
park sites where possible to permit dual
utilization of open space and recreation
facilities .
Objective 6d : Locate recreational facilities within a con-
venient distance from all residential areas .
Objective 6e : Work with local fire agencies to determine
future requirements for new fire stations
within the Extended Planning Area .
20
C. Circulation
Goal 7 : Develop an efficient circulation system to accommodate
regional traffic.
Objective 7a : Encourage future state commitment to expand
the El Charro/Fallon and Tassajara/Santa Rita
Roads interchanges .
Objective 7b : Promote construction of the Dublin Boulevard
extension from Dougherty Road to Tassajara
Road , and ultimately to North Canyons Parkway
and beyond north Livermore Avenue .
Objective 7c : Coordinate Dublin Ranch street improvements
with future circulation improvements planned
for both Interstate 580 and Dublin Boulevard .
Objective 7d : Extend and connect both Fallon Road and Doo-
lan Road to Tassajara Road thereby providing
acceptable access for other easterly prop-
erties within the Extended Planning Area
while also providing an additional east/west
collector street. ,
Objective 7e : Control access points into Tassajara Road
and other major streets in order to maintain
efficient traffic flows and to maximize
traffic safety.
Objective 7f : Support the planned BART extension along the
I-580 corridor , and promote the comprehensive
installation of park-and-ride facilities .
Goal 8: Develop a safe and efficient local circulation system.
Objective 8a : Design neighborhood service streets to avoid
monotonous straight-a-ways and to discourage
speeding.
Objective 8b : Design the circulation system to provide
efficient access for local residents without
encouraging short-cutting by motorists
through neighborhoods .
Objective 8c : Avoid development of areas where acceptable
street access cannot be provided .
Objective 8d : Encourage private street (private vehicle
accessways ) internal to neighborhood clusters
when feasible , thus lessening the City ' s
financial maintenance burden.
Objective 8e : Design the width of local streets to be as
narrow as reasonably possible , given public
safety and traffic generation considerations ,
thus. reducing the impact on the terrain and
improving development aesthetics .
21
Objective 8f : Provide street access to schools , parks , and
major open space areas without creating major
disruption to residential areas .
Objective 8g : Support a local transit system and provide
for a comprehensive network of transit stops
within the community .
Goal 9: Develop a safe and convenient bicycle, pedestrian, and
equestrian circulation system, providing access to
schools, parks, and recreational areas.
Objective 9a : Link the local bicycle , pedestrian, and
equesrian circulation system with the local
open space network where appropriate ..
Objective 9b : Design a comprehensive local bicycle and
pedestrian circulation system that is compat-
ible with automobile traffic .
Objective 9c : Promote a hiking and equestrian trail along
Tassajara Creek.
. Objective 9d : Promote a hiking and equestrian trail link to
Tassajara Creek Regional Park, and allow for
other future regional trail links within the
natural open space network.
D. utilities
Goal 10: Encourage timely, cost-effective construction of all
necessary public utility improvements.
Objective 1Oa : Provide utilities at urban standards without
incurring financial - burden to Dublin resi-
dents and businesses .
Objective 10b : Develop a master plan for utilities for the
Extended Planning Area .
Objective 10c : Support the development of the Tassajara
Water Reservoir as an interim local source of
water , . but support ultimate connection to the
"cross valley" pipeline .
Objective 10d : Promote the expansion of both the waste water
treatment plant and the export pipeline(s ) to
accommodate projected growth within the
Extended Planning Area .
Objective 1Oe :. Promote the improvement of the Arroyo Mocho
storm drainage facility to its ultimate
design capacity.
Objective 10f : Phase development in step with the orderly
expansion of utilities .
22
Objective 10g : Coordinate installation of street, sewer, wa-
ter , storm drain, and other utilities to
minimize the costs of subsequent develop-
ment on adjacent lands .
E. Environmental Resources Management
Goal 11: Preserve ecologically sensitive resources such as
riparian corridors along creeks, areas of steep terrain,
and prominent skyline ridges .
Objective lla : Coordinate with the flood control agency to
insure that improvements along Tassajara
Creek retain the natural character of the
streambed and preserve important trees and
areas of riparian vegetation .
Objective llb : Monitor the grading alteration of slopes
needed to create development areas to insure
that the grading scheme does not signifi-
cantly diminish the hilly character of the
site .
Objective llc : Establish major slope areas over 30% as per-
manent open space .
Objective lld : Restrict structures from areas that project
above the major skyline ridge , as viewed from
Interstate 580 .
Objective lle : Preserve any identified archaeological re-
sources of significant value .
. Goal 12 : Insure that adequate measures have been taken to minimize
threats to public health, safety and welfare from natural
hazards.
Objective 12a : Regulate development and grading on slopes
to insure slope stability.
Objective 12b : Permit grading alteration of steep slope
areas where it can be demonstrated that
proposed grading improves slope stability or
corrects other existing topographical or
geological problems .
Objective 12c : Locate structures in areas where geological
problems (or potential geological problems )
both on and off site can be feasibly
mitigated.
Objective 12d : Design new development to minimize soil ero-
sion and to control the volume and velocity
of surface runoff .
Objective 12e : Require new structures to be protected from
inundation from a 100-year storm.
23
Objective 12f : Require structures and utility lines to be
designed to minimize failure during earth-
quake ground shaking .
F. Community Design
Goal 13: Encourage high quality, visually appealing building
designs.
Objective 13a : Promote high quality architectural themes and
products to enrich the overall community
appearance .
Objective 13b : Allow variation of housing styles and sizes
to enhance the architectural scheme and to
accentuate the "village" concept.
Objective 13c : Encourage innovative and creative site plan-
ning concepts , while avoiding monotonous site
and building arrangements .
Objective 13d : Require support service commercial areas to
be comprehensively designed , and essentially
"residential" in appearance .
Goal 14: Promote development components that improve livability
and create a sense of place.
Objective 14a : Allow architectural , landscape , and signage
diversity among different residential clus-
ters to give neighborhoods individual
identity.
Objective 14b : Promote the use of accent features such as
highlight Landscaping, decorative walls , and
specialty street paving to distinguish
different neighborhoods and to delineate
private areas from public areas .
Objective 14c : Orient homes to take advantage of views .
Objective 14d : Minimize residents exposure to streets with
heavy traffic .
Objective 14e : Promote intensive landscaping along major
streets to screen development areas from
view, thus enhancing the scenic quality of
the streetscape .
24
C
C
,C
PC
f
J
1S
FF 1
�C.
1
Chapter III
;L
i
I�
C
C
CHAPTER III
SPECIFIC PLAN ELEMENTS
The policies and standards that will guide development in the Dublin
Ranch area are set forth in this chapter in six Plan Elements : Land
Use , Public Facilities , Circulation, Utilities , Environmental Resource
Management, and Community Design. The Land Use Element specifies per-
mitted uses and their general locations ; the Public Facilities Element
evaluates the need for provision of support services ; the Circulation
and Utilities Elements address the infrastructure requirements of
proposed land uses ; the Environmental Resources Management Element
concerns the ' conservation and management of the area ' s biotic
resources and measures to protect the public from man-made and natural
hazards ; the Community Design Element establishes standards for
functional and visual relationships that promote the living
environment and create sense of place .
25
LAND USE ELEMENT
The Land Use Element of the Specific Plan establishes provisions
governing the type , location and intensity of land uses proposed for
the Dublin Ranch "new community" . Figure 5 is the Dublin Ranch Devel-
opment Plan, a land use diagram that illustrates the proposed pattern
for proposed residential , commercial , and open space designations .
Primarily envisioned as a support residential area to the at large
Dublin area , and more specifically for the developing Interstate 580
technology corridor , Dublin Ranch incorporates a wide array of
residential uses , ranging from single family residential lots and
patio homes to townhomes and apartments .
To support the anticipated future service commercial needs of the new
residential community , a Town Center designation is situated at the
hub of the project near the intersection of Dublin Ranch Parkway and
Fallon Road . A final noteworthy feature of the land use diagram is
the large expanse of land without residential density designation.
These are major slope areas , designated to remain as permanent natural
open space , while also serving to divide the project into smaller more
isolated development areas , thus retaining the essence of the natural
open, hilly character of the site .
A. Residential
Dublin Ranch is organized into three "Villages" . Village I is
east of Tassajara Road .and includes all land situated west of
Dublin Ranch Parkway ( the loop collector street linking Tassajara
Road , Fallon Road , and Doolan Road extended) . Village II is also
east of Tassajara Road and encompasses all land situated on the
east side of Dublin Ranch Parkway . Village III is comprised of
all land situated west of Tassajara Road along Tassajara Creek.
For clarification, a village boundary key appears on Figure 6 .
The three Dublin Ranch villages are further subdivided into resi-
dential development areas called "neighborhood clusters" . Village
I contains 10 neighborhood clusters totaling 197 acres ; Village II
contains 10 neighborhood clusters totaling 166 acres ; . and Village
III contains 4 neighborhood clusters totaling 95± acres (see Table
1) . The acreage , permitted density intensity, and housing
capacity of each neighborhood cluster is indicated on the
Development Plan. Table 2 reassembles this information in terms
of the maximum number of dwelling units (housing capacity)
permitted for each of the five proposed density classifications :
0-5 du/acre , 5- 10 du/acre , 10- 15 du/acre , 15-20 du/acre , and 20-25
du/acre .
Policies and Standards
1 . The following are permitted uses within all residential
neighborhood clusters :
a . single family detached dwellings
b . two family dwellings
26
i
i
•
•
• ge II
Village II
Village I ._
Village Boundary Key
Figure 6
TABLE 1
ACRES BY LAND USE DESIGNATION
Village I Village II Village III Total
Residential 179 166 95 440
School/Park 14 15 -- 29
Comm/Office 13 -- -- 13
Roads 74
Natural Open
Space 374
Total 930
TABLE 2
MAXIMUM HOUSING CAPACITY BY DENSITY CATEGORY
Dwelling Units per Acre Total
Estate 1-5 5- 10 10- 15 — 15-20 20-25 Acres
Village I 5 lots 10 104 -- 38 27 179
Village II 4 lots 63 42 49 -- 12 166
Village III 1 lot 11 84 -- -- -- 95
Net Acres by 84 230 49 38 39 440
Density
Maximum Housing
Capacity 10 420 2300 735 760 975 5200
28
C . townhome dwellings
d . multiple dwellings
e . incidental residential day care facilities
f . accessory uses as normally allowed in the single family
residential district of the municipal code
2 . The following are conditional uses requiring Planning Commis -
sion approval within all residential neighborhood clusters :
a . public and quasi-public buildings and uses of a recrea -
tional , educational, religious or cultural nature
b. children' s nursery schools
C . boat, camper and trailer storage facilities for local
residents
3. Density intensity within a given neighborhood cluster may be
further divided into higher or lower intensities without any
required Planning Commission or City Council action sanction-
ing such changes , provided the stipulated holding capacity of
the neighborhood cluster is not exceeded .
4. Individual neighborhood clusters may be divided into "sub-
clusters" of ownership provided the land use relationships
from subcluster to subcluster are consistent with the intent
of the Specific Plan.
5 . Development of any cluster shall fully utilize all of the
available land . Any remnant open land resulting from density
intensity transfer shall be satisfactorily improved and the
ownership assigned to the Village homeowner ' s association.
6 . Density may be transferred from one neighborhood cluster to
another within the same village , provided the transfer is
approved by the builder/owners of affected clusters and by
the Planning Commission.
7 . Individual clusters should achieve a maximum amount of the
allocated density .
8 . Development at the higher end of the permitted density range
should be sited adjacent to -adjoining high density clusters
or proximate to neighboring service commercial , parks , or
schools .
9 . Higher density residential areas shall provide additional
private recreational facilities to supplement local parks .
The nature of the recreational facilities is a function of
the service population and the proximity to other recrea -
tional facilities . Private recreation facilities shall be
provided as determined necessary. by the Planning Director .
10 . A Homeowner ' s Association is to be formed for each Village
for maintenance of all commonly owned facilities , including
private streets , which are not maintained by a public agency .
11 . The Homeowner CC&R' s shall prohibit the parking of boats ,
campers , and trailers on residential sites . Recreational
vehicle parking lots for residents only may be provided in
locations approved by the Planning Commission.
12 . Residential development shall meet the following site stan-
dards :
Single family detached and two family dwellings on conven
tional lots :
a . Front yard: 20 feet, but may be reduced to 10 feet for
swing or Hollywood drives , provided a variety of setbacks
are maintained .
b. Side . yards : one side 5 feet, total both sides 10 feet ;
or one side 0 feet, total both sides 10 feet, provided
29
the dwelling on the adjacent lot is 10 feet away .
C . Side yard abutting vehicular accessway: 12 feet for sin-
gle story and 15 feet for two story dwellings .
d . Rear yard: 20 feet, but may be reduced to 15 feet
provided the average is 20 feet.
e . Building height: 35 feet for principal structures , 15
feet for accessory structures .
Multiple residential and townhome dwellings :
a . Building to building: between two buildings , 20 feet ;
such separation to be determined at a ratio of four to
one (4: 1) , building separation to building face length.
This distance may be reduced 10 feet where buildings are
one story or where no window is on one of the facing
sides of the building .
'b . Living room to living room: separated by 40 feet for
primary living room windows .
C . Living room to bedroom: primary windows separated by 30
feet.
d . Building to private vehicular accessway: separated by 15
feet, but may be reduced to 10 feet where end walls of
the building are not directly accessed to the accessway .
e . Building to public street right-of-way: one story and
two story separated by 20 feet; over two story separated
by 25 feet, but may be reduced to 12 feet 6 inches in
some locations .
f . Building to interior property line: separated by 15
feet, but 20 feet between a living room window and an
interior lot line .
g. Private open space areas : each dwelling shall have one
primary space directly accessible from the dwelling with
at least 120 square feet and a minimum dimension of 10
feet, or 60 square feet with a minimum dimension of 6
feet when the primary space is above ground level .
h. Private open space separations : separated by 10 feet to
a private vehicular accessway section or public street
right-of-way.
i . Open space coverage: at least 45 percent of the site
shall be reserved for open space , which may contain
plazas , pedestrian ways , landscaped greens , planting
pockets , recreation facilities , and roofs of parking
structures when designed for pedestrian or recreational
usage .
J . Signs : two identification signs are permitted per
multiple dwelling or a dwelling group , but it shall not
be illuminated nor have an area in excess of 20 square
feet. Each building and residence unit shall include a
lighted , clearly visible address . A lighted , clearly
visible project directory shall be provided at all major
entrances into multi-family clusters .
13 . Residential uses shall meet the appropriate off-street
parking requirements listed below. In the event a specific
use does not fit into a listed category, the Planning
Director will establish the required number of parking
spaces :
a . Single family detached and two family dwellings on
conventional lots : two covered parking spaces per
dwelling.
30
b . Townhomes, townhome designed condominiums , zero lot line
dwellings on nonconveutional lots : two covered parking
spaces and one-half open guest space per dwelling.
Required guest parking spaces may be located on public
streets when the dwelling directly accesses (either for
pedestrians or vehicles ) to that public street , and where
driveways do not preempt parking on the street.
C . Multiple family condominiums and apartments : one covered
parking space and one open parking space per dwelling .
One half of the open spaces must be designated for guest
parking.
14 . Parking and private and emergency vehicle accessways shall
meet the following standards :
a . The minimum open parking space dimension is 9 ' -00" by
19 ' -00" , but up to 35 percent of the required spaces may
be reduced to 8' -00" by 16 ' -00" to accommodate compact
automobiles . The minimum covered and/or enclosed
parking space inside dimension (for required covered
parking) shall be 9 ' -00" by 20' -00" with six inch
encroachment allowed for supporting columns . When a
raised curb is used at the end of a parking space , the
dimension of the space may encroach 2' -00" from face of
curb into the landscaping behind the curb , provided the
total minimum width of the landscaped area is 5 ' -00" .
b. All two-way private vehicular accessways (PVAW) shall be
not less than 24 feet wide (clear width) in those
portions where no parking is all.owed directly off the
accessway. An additional four foot width is required on
the side of the accessway wherein right angle enclosed
garage parking is provided , which may be in the form of a
four foot driveway apron.
C . A 32 foot wide PVAW may be used with parallel parking on
one side , and 36 foot wide PVAW may be used with parallel S
parking on both sides in special cases approved by the
City Engineer.
d. Vertical curbs shall be used , except rolled curbs may be
used where driveways make vertical curbs impractical .
e . Valley gutters shall be discouraged .
f . The minimum at edge of pavement radius for PVAW is 20
feet except for parking lots and "turnaround" facilities .
g. A turnaround is to be provided at the terminus of any
dead end PVAW exceeding 150' in length. Turnaround bulbs
or hammerheads shall be adequate to allow fire apparatus
and other emergency vehicles to turn around without
backing into parking spaces .
h. Driveway aprons to enclosed garages shall be either eight
feet or less (four feet when a sidewalk is proximate) or
18 feet or greater, with the dimension measured along the
center line of the driveway apron. Automatic "roll-up"
garage doors shall be provided on all garages where
servicing driveway aprons are less than 23 feet in
length. Driveways less than 18 feet are not permitted
for single family or two family residences .
i . Where five units or more have front doors directly
accessed to the PVAW, , a sidewalk with a minimum width of
4' -00" (exclusive of the driveway apron lengths standard)
shall be provided on one side of the PVAW, unless an
acceptable pedestrian pathway system is provided within
31
the common space area , or driveway aprons are so closely
spaced that a sidewalk would serve no useful pedestrian
purpose .
j . Emergency accessways shall have a minimum clear right-
of -way of 20 feet and a minimum travel surface area width
of 15 feet.
k. Parking or circulation areas shall be setback 20 ' from a
public street right-of-way or private street easement.
Minor encroachments may occur to within 10 feet where
adequate mounding and screening to reduce views into
parking or vehicle access areas is provided , subject to
Director of Planning approval .
15 . Residential uses (except detached homes on individual lots )
shall meet the following minimum landscape standards :
a . All yard areas adjacent to public streets and private
vehicular accessways shall be landscaped with lawn ,
shrubs , ground cover , and trees in varying amounts
subject to Director of Planning approval .
b. All landscaped areas shall be provided with an automatic
irrigation system.
C . Large . areas of parking pavement shall be given visual
relief by interspersion of landscaped pockets . Open or
carport parking areas in developments shall be divided
into areas including no more than ten abutting parking
spaces with intervening areas landscaped with trees and
ground cover.
d . A minimum 6 foot wide landscaped planter is required be -
tween any off-street parking area and any proposed
building, except for "tuck-under" parking. The minimum
carport to building separation is 10 feet.
e . A minimum 6 foot wide buffer landscape strip is required
between any off-street parking area and any interior lot
line abutting a residential lot or future residential
lot. Buffer landscaping may be omitted where necessary
to permit dual driveway access for two residential lots
at the common property line i Buffers shall be planted
with evergreen screening type species capable of reaching
a height of 15 feet and providing a continuous screen
within 5 years .
f . Trees planted to shade or buffer parking lots shall be
a minimum five gallon size .
g. Trees shading or buffering parking lots shall be
installed in the following minimum ratios :
- Parking along the perimeter of the site : one tree per
three parking spaces ;
- Parking not. located along the perimeter of the site :
one tree per 10 parking spaces . Such trees shall be
distributed within the parking area other than the
perimeter .
h. Off street parking areas shall be screened from public
rights-of-way.
i . All plant materials shall be selected for low
maintenance , disease resistance , and suitability for
local soil and climate . Mature size of plants shall be
taken into account in placement and selection of plants .
.Trees shall be located sufficiently clear of buildings
and paved areas to minimize potential damage from roots .
Parking lot planters surrounded by pavement and used for
32
required shade trees shall have minimum clear dimensions
of 4 feet by 6 feet, with additional size desirable .
Tree selection and planting procedures shall include
special measures to recognize strong prevailing winds .
j . Plant materials shall be selected and placed for maximum
energy conservation benefits . Deciduous trees with
favorable solar shading characteristics shall be used
where possible near southeast and southwest corners of
buildings . Trees shall provide dense summer shading of
east and west walls wherever possible .
k. All landscaping shall be designed to incorporate safety
and security needs . Dense , tall shrubs near pathways and
entrances shall be avoided . Clear vision shall be main-
tained at all pedestrian crosswalks and street intersec-
tions .
1 . Landscape plans and lighting plans shall be carefully
coordinated to minimize potential conflicts . Light
standards shall be selected and located to avoid
undesirable light blockage -by trees at their mature size .
M. Irrigation systems proposed shall be automatic and shall
be a "conserving" type to the maximum extent feasible .
B. Commercial
The Town Center contains 13 acres and lies central to the Dublin
Ranch site . Convenient access from the Dublin Ranch Parkway loop
collector and from the terminus of Fallon Road make this a logical
and convenient service commercial location for both Dublin Ranch
residents and for residents of adjacent outlying lands . In
concept, the Town Center provides only limited services to supply
the small scale , immediate shopping needs of people living within
the immediate surrounding neighborhoods , and does not compete with
major retail or office centers in downtown or regional shopping
centers . Typically , neighborhood service commercial centers , like
the Dublin Ranch Town Center , attract such businesses as major
groceries , small scale drug stores , liquor stores , barber or
beauty salons , launderettes , gas stations , offices and other
similar retailing and personal service uses . A noteworthy feature
of the Dublin Ranch Town Center is that it truly functions as a
"Town Center" , lying proximate to the highest density portions of
the project, and bordering on a neighborhood park. The Town Center
land area designation . is sufficiently ample to accommodate other
functions , such as community buildings , branch fire stations or
libraries , or the like , should any such services be deemed
necessary.
Policies and Standards
1 . The following are permitted uses for the Dublin Ranch Town
Center :
a . apparel and accessory stores ;
b. auto and home supply stores ;
C . community recycling center ;
d . eating and drinking places , except night discotheques ,
and adult nightclubs ;
e. food stores ; .
f . general merchandise stores , except department stores ;
33
g . hardware stores ;
h. home improvement centers ;
i . miscellaneous retail , except adult bookstores and head
shops ;
J . paint , glass and wallpaper stores ;
k. service stations ;
1 . beauty and barber shops ;
M. bicycle , camera , lawnmower ,, leather goods , business
machine sales and repair shops ;
n. business services , except establishments engaged in rent-
ing or leasing machinery , tools , or other equipment;
o . clothing and costume rental ;
p . coin-operated service machine operations ;
q . communications services , not elsewhere classified ;
r . dog grooming ;
S . finance , insurance and real estate ;
t. gunsmith and locksmith shops ;
U. health clubs or spas ;
V . health services ;
W. laundry, cleaning and garment services , except power and
industrial launderers ;
X. legal and miscellaneous services , including landscape
architecture and planning ;
y. motion pictures , except drive-in motion picture theaters
and adult theaters ;
Z. photographic studios , portrait ;
aa . printing, publishing and allied industries ;
bb . radio and TV broadcasting ;
cc . . reupholstery and furniture repair ;
dd . shoe repair, shoeshine , and hat cleaning shops ;
ee . tax return preparation service ;
ff . travel agencies and bureaus ;
y gg . veterinary services ;
hh. watch, clock and jewelry repair ;
ii . generally : any other retail service or quasipublic use
which the Planning Director - finds is similar in nature ,
function or operation to permitted uses listed .
2 . The Town Center should be integrated with surrounding land
use and circulation patterns to achieve an orderly , effi-
cieut and attractive land plan.
3 . Roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened , prefer-
ably by the roof design. Any addition to the building to
screen mechanical equipment shall be integral with the build-
ing architecture and color . The use of separate mechanical
screen fencing shall be discouraged .
4. "Outdoor truck loading areas and trash areas shall be screened
with landscaping and building elements consistent with the
site design.
5 . No materials , supplies or equipment, excluding company owned
or operated trucks and motor vehicles , shall be stored on
site . Vehicle storage areas must be screened from public
areas by a barrier at least 6 feet high.
6 . Any community recycling center shall be screened from view
and shall be operated by a nonprofit agency.
7 . All commercial structures shall be constructed with automatic
sprinkling systems . Exceptions to this requirement may be
made by the Fire Chief in special cases where he determines
such systems are not necessary.
34
8 . Town Center development shall meet the following minimum site
standards :
a . Yards adjacent to streets : 20 feet in which parking is
not permitted ;
b . Building height: 40 feet maximum ;
C . Site coverage : 50 percent maximum ;
d . Signs : no roof signs or monument signs exceeding 12 feet
tall are permitted . Sign area and location are otherwise
limited by the Municipal Code .
9 . Commercial uses shall meet the parking requirements of the
Municipal Code .
10 . Parking and driveways shall meet the following standard :
a . The minimum open parking space dimension is 9 ' -00" by
19 ' -0011 , but up to 35 percent of the required spaces may
be reduced to 8 ' -00" by 16 ' -00" to accommodate compact
automobiles . When a raised curb is used at the end of a
parking space , the dimension of the space may encroach
2 ' -00" from face of curb into the landscaping behind the
curb , provided the total minimum width of the landscaped
area is 5 ' -00" .
b . All two-way driveways shall be not less than 24 feet
wide .
C . Parking space and driveway dimensions for angled parking
are regulated by the Municipal Code .
d . Vertical curbs shall be used in lieu of wheelstops .
e . Valley gutters are not permitted within public driveways
or parking areas .
11 . Commercial uses shall meet the following minimum landscape
standards :
a . All areas not utilized for parking , driveways , buildings.
or waterways shall be landscaped with lawn, ground cover,
shrubs , and trees in varying amounts , subject to the
Director of Planning approval .
b. All landscaped areas shall be provided with an automatic
irrigation system.
C . Large areas of parking pavement shall be given visual
relief by interspersion of landscaped pockets .
d . Trees planted to shade or buffer parking lots shall be a
minimum five gallon size .
e . All plant materials shall be selected for low main-
tenance , disease resistance , , and suitability for local
soil and climate . Mature size of plants shall be taken
into account in placement and selection of plants . Trees
shall be located sufficiently clear of buildings and
paved areas to minimize potential damage from roots .
Parking lot planters shall have minimum clear dimensions
of 4 feet by 6 feet, with additional size desirable . Tree
selection and planting procedures shall include special
measures to recognize strong prevailing winds .
f . Landscape plans and lighting plans shall be carefully
coordinated to minimize potential conflicts . Light stan-
dards shall be selected and located to avoid undesirable
light blockage by trees at their mature size .
g. Irrigation systems proposed shall be automatic and shall
be a "conserving" type to the maximum extent feasible .
35
C. Natural Open Space
A major feature of Dublin Ranch is the preservation of the natural
open, hilly character of the site , and retention of steeper slope
areas in natural open space . The land use diagram designates a
large portion of the site , slightly over 40 percent of the total
930 acres , as "natural open space" , located outside of designated
cluster boundaries . Natural open space areas include the visible
steep slope areas , remote areas inaccessible with reasonable
development techniques , 12 . 8 acres of site lands beyond the
Alameda County line , the Tassajara Creek channel , and select
natural riparian areas along portions of the Creek channel . It is
envisioned that the natural open space areas can link with similar
open space lands on adjoining properties to provide a visual
continuity to the region , and ultimately establish an open space
network that would include backdrop ridgeline . The open space
network may also allow opportunities for future hiking and
equestrian trail routes .
Tassajara Creek Regional Park, an East Bay Regional Park District
facility , is located along the westerly boundary of Village III .
E. B .R. P.D. envisions Tassajara Creek Regional Park as a very Low
use facility, with major value as natural backdrop as viewed from
surrounding lands . Natural open space adjacent to the Tassajara
Creek Regional Park may permit trail linkages to the park without
unwanted disruption to nearby residential clusters .
Policies and Standards
1 . Major slope areas shall be preserved as natural open space .
2 . The natural open space areas are to be owned and maintained
by the affected Homeowner ' s Association. Rights of ingress/
egress shall be granted to permit access for municipally
designated hiking and equestrian trails .
3 . Development edges should be softened (ie . berming , open
fencing , transitional landscaping) where there exist prom-
inent views into or across natural open space areas .
4. No intensive land uses are permitted within areas designated
as natural open space . The long term intent is to preserve
these lands as undeveloped areas .
5 . Graded areas that encroach into designated natural open space
are to be landscaped (hydroseeding , or drought tolerant shrub
and. tree plantings with a short-term support irrigation
system) in a manner approved by the Planning Director .
36
PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT
The Public Facilities Element of the Specific Plan establishes the
requirements for new public parks , schools , libraries , health care
facilities , and police and fire protection facilities for Dublin
Ranch. In cases where no projections for future demand have been made
by the affected agency, the Specific Plan recommends a course of
action to bring future facilities and services into step with future
projected development. The overriding concern is that facilities and
services be provided at acceptable levels without drain of services or
financial burden to existing Dublin residents .
A. Public Parks
DSRSD has no current plans for new parks in the vicinity of Dublin
Ranch. Consequently, the Dublin Ranch Development Plan designates
two major neighborhood parks situated near the two areas of
greatest residential density ; one is located in Village I at the
Town Center , the other is located central to Village II . The park
sites are both capable of accommodating school facilities , thus
permitting sharing of open space and recreational improvements .
The areas of both neighborhood parks are projected to be
approximately 14- 15 acres , with approximately 4-5 acres reserved
for adjoining school classrooms . Both parks are projected to
contain a wide array of recreational facilities , and are linked
with the pede:strian and bicycle trail system.
Policies and Standards
1 . Two neighborhood parks , each approximately 14- 15 acres are to
be dedicated to the City of Dublin and improved by the Dublin
Ranch developer(s ) . The parks are to be structured to permit
future lease of appropriate portions to the school district
for construction of classroom facilities .
2 . Each park site is to be linked with pedestrian and bicycle
trails serving outlying residential areas .
3 . In addition to curb side parking, each park is to contain an
off -street parking area sufficient in size to accommodate 40
parking spaces .
4. Park improvements are :
a . grading, contouring and drainage facilities ;
b . the installation of irrigation supply lines with an auto-
matic irrigation system;
C . the establishment of a free-play meadow area large enough
to accommodate a soccer field or softball field ;
d . the installation of 3 lighted tennis courts ;
e . the installation of a hard surface multi-purpose ball
court ;
f . the installation of a ' master tree program on a 25 tree
per acre basis ;
g . the construction and installation of creative play
apparatus for two age groups (under 6 years and over 6
years ) ;
37
h. the construction and installation of picnic and barbecue
facilities ;
i . the construction of ancillary benches and drinking
fountains ;
j . the construction and installation of a lighted restroom
building ;
k. the construction and installation of a public telephone
station in conjunction with the restroom building ;
1 . the preparation of landscape working drawings and speci -
fications for required items .
B. Schools
The Dublin Ranch Specific Plan area lies within the boundaries of
three school districts . The area east of Tassajara Road is
legally served by the Livermore Unified School District (K- 12) .
The area west of Tassajara Road is within the Pleasanton Joint
School District (K-8) , and the Amador Valley Joint Union High
School District ( 9- 12) . It is uncertain which district(s ) will
ultimately serve Dublin Ranch. Alameda County Board of Education
action is now underway to create separate unified school districts
for Dublin and Pleasanton, using Interstate 580 Freeway as the
boundary line . The outcome of this proposal may not be known for
several months .
In the interim, the Dublin Ranch Development Plan provides for two
elementary schools (K-8) ; recognizing that the required number of
schools may be altered depending on the final outcome of the
school district reorganization,. and the resultant official student
generation numbers . For the Dublin Ranch Development Plan, the
Murray School district student generation numbers were used to
roughly determine the number of future schools needed ( . 2
students/du x 5 , 200 du = 1 , 040 students ; 1 , 040 students = 2
schools @ 500 students/school) . Other school districts polled
have somewhat different generation numbers , and consequently , a
modified school site plan may evolve .
Policies and Standards
1 . Work with the school district with jurisdiction to determine
student generation numbers and individual school capacity to
develop a master plan for future schools (including junior
high schools and high schools ) in the Extended Planning Area .
2 . If additional schools are required within Dublin Ranch, addi-
tional neighborhood parks are also required , consistent with
the school/park relationship illustrated on the Dublin Ranch
Development Plan.
3 . The architecture for future classroom facilities constructed
by the school district shall be consistent with the high
quality themes established for the Town Center and the
surrounding neighborhood clusters . Unattractive portable
"trailer-type" classroom buildings are not permitted .
38
C. Libraries
The Dublin Ranch Specific Plan area is within the Alameda County
Library system, which has a nearby branch in downtown Dublin.
The library is funded by property tax collection within the
county ; however , the Dublin branch building is furnished by the
City of Dublin. Dublin library is a free access service and it is
estimated that approximately 45-50 percent of the users are Contra
Costa County residents . The Dublin library provides an outreach
service to schools , community groups and senior citizens to
encourage library use . A bookmobile travels to outlying areas and
to community centers approximately every two weeks .
Dublin Ranch, and other future Extended Planning Area residential
development, will have an effect on library services in terms of
increased staff . (These consequences are partially offset in that
the user increase generated by Dublin Ranch will all be Alameda
County tax payers . ) Library officials would not consider the need
for an additional branch library unless there was a service
population of at least 25 , 000 people in an area at least two miles
removed from existing branches .
Policies and Standards
1 . Retain flexibility in the final land plan to accommodate a
small branch library facility within the Town Center area
Ad jacent to the neighborhood park.
D. Health Care
There are two established hospitals within 15 to 20 minutes of
Dublin Ranch; Valley Memorial and Veterans Administration Hospi-
tal , both located in Livermore . In terms of size , Valley Memo-.
rial 'is a 110 bed facility with 24 hour emergency care ; Veterans
Administration Hospital is a 191 bed facility .
A new hospital is proposed within the service area of Dublin
Ranch. Valley Memorial Hospital , Pleasanton, is to be located at
W. Las Positas and Santa Rita Road in Pleasanton. This hospital
will be constructed in 3 phases , starting in 1987 , and will
ultimately include medical offices , an ambulatory care facility , a
behavior modification center , a 120 bed skilled nursing center , an
independent care facility for the elderly , and a 100 bed hospital
with 24 hour emergency care .
Policies and Standards
None are appropriate .
E. Police
Police service for the Extended Planning Area is provided by both
the Alameda County Sheriff ' s Office and the California Highway
Patrol . Currently , two Sheriff ' s office units , and four to six
Highway Patrol units patrol the at-large area that includes Dublin
Ranch. Once the site is annexed to the City of Dublin, the Dublin
Police Services will assume responsibility for law enforcement,
and additional patrol units will be requested.
39
Using Dublin Police Service generation numbers , 1 . 5 new officers ,
one new police marked unit, plus one additional police undercover
unit are needed for each 1 , 000 residents . Assuming Dublin Ranch
has a total buildout population of approximately 10 , 000 residents ,
this translates into a need for 15 new officers , 10 new marked
police units , and 10 new unmarked police units to adequately serve
the project.
Policies and Standards
1. Require security gates and private security patrols within
neighborhood clusters where possible to lessen the need for
municipal police services .
2 . Developers are to incorporate defensive space planning into
the design of housing clusters . This involves orienting
exterior lighting , parking areas , shrubbery , and homes in a
manner that helps eliminate dark, deserted areas , allowing
residents to help patrol their own neighborhoods .
3 . Provide additional Dublin Police Services personnel and
equipment to adequately service the specific plan area and
maintain existing levels of service elsewhere .
F. Fire
Dublin Ranch and the Extended Planning Area are presently
provided limited fire protection service by the Alameda County
Fire Patrol from their station on College Avenue in Livermore .
Tassajara Fire , a small local volunteer organization provides some
primary response assistance . Under the Twin Valley Mutual Aid
System Agreement, Camp Parks Fire Department (Federal) also
supplies support response assistance . Future annexation of Dublin
Ranch to the City of Dublin requires concurrent annexation into
the Dublin San Ramon Services District. Although all fire
agencies in the region would continue to operate under the mutual
aid program, DSRSD would then assume leadership responsibility for
fire protection for Dublin Ranch and subsequent annexed areas .
Currently, DSRSD has no fire station located in the area or near
enough to insure proper response time . Consequently , a new
station will most likely be needed in the Extended Planning Area .
Policies and Standards
1 . A fire station site at an acceptable location is to be
reserved and dedicated , if determined necessary by DSRSD, and
the City of Dublin at the time of processing the overall
tentative map .
2. Dublin Ranch developers shall ' construct adequate water
service facilities for fire protection, including mains and
hydrants , concurrent with development.
40
CIRCULATION ELEMENT
The Circulation Element of the Specific Plan establishes the major
public street network to serve Dublin Ranch, designates major public
street linkages necessary to serve adjoining lands within the Extended
Planning Area , and sets policies and standards to govern the placement
of the future minor street system (public and private) . The Circula-
tion Element also includes street design criteria , including means to
promote safe and efficient traffic circulation. . Provisions for in-
stallation of comprehensive bicycle , pedestrian, and equestrian trail
routes are also addressed . As part of the Specific Plan review
process , a traffic report is to be prepared to evaluate the Dublin
Ranch traffic circulation system. It is anticipated that this
forthcoming report may amend the Circulation Element.
A. Traffic
The Dublin Ranch site lies along the east and west sides of
Tassajara Road , just north of Interstate 580 . In the vicinity of
Dublin Ranch, Tassajara Road is a rural , two-lane road that
extends to provide access south to the City of Pleasanton, and
north to both the Blackhawk area and the City of Danville . South
of Interstate 5801 Tassajara Road is refered to as "Santa Rita
Road" ; north of the Contra Costa County line , "Camino Tassajara"
is the official name .
Tassajara Road is the most important traffic collector on the
Dublin Ranch Development Plan. Tassajara Road links much of the
future Extended Planning Area traffic to both the I-580 inter-
change and future Dublin Boulevard extended . The geographics of
the region also permit alternate "escape valve" access connec-
tions for existing dead-end streets situated to the east, namely
Fallon Road and Doolan Road . Both of these latter streets are
depicted on the Dublin Ranch Development Plan as major traffic
circulation routes , and the envisioned connections to Tassajara
Road enhances traffic flow and improves property access for lands
located further east. The Dublin Ranch Development Plan also
depicts a cross-connecting street, named "Dublin Ranch Parkway" ,
that privides an internal linkage between Fallon Road and Doolan
Road . Dublin Ranch Parkway is the primary access to the Town
Center and to many of the residential neighborhood clusters with-
in Villages I and II .
Similar cross -connections may ultimately be constructed between
Tassajara Road and Dougherty Road somewhere north of Dublin
Boulevard extended . (Tassajara Road runs parallel to Dougherty
Road over much of it' s length from I-580 northward . ) The main
difficulty in selecting cross -connecting routes is the inter-
vening terrain. The hill face along the west bank of Tassajara
Creek is steep and affords only few places for "over-the-hill"
connections without very significant grading hinderances . The
timing of Tassajara Road-Dougherty Road connection(s ) is specu-
41
i
lative at best; current ownership patterns within Alameda County
south of Dublin Ranch, Village III , may encourage initial "over-
the-hill" connections to happen further to the north within Contra
Costa County .
The approximate alignments for Tassajara Road , Fallon Road , Doolan
Road , and Dublin Ranch Parkway are shown on the Dublin Ranch
Development Plan. Four types of streets are defined on the
Development Plan as follows :
Street Type
1 . Tassajara Road (south of Doolan Road) Arterial
2 . Tassajara Road (north of Doolan Road) Major Collector
Dublin Ranch Parkway (westerly of Fallon Rd) Major Collector
3 . Dublin Ranch Parkway (northerly of Fallon Rd) Collector
Fallon Road Collector
Doolan Road Collector
4. All others shown Minor Street or
Service Street
The minor streets/service streets are illustrated to show a
concept for neighborhood cluster access . The final configuration
and location of these streets may be amended at the time of
development, thus permitting flexibility in the site planning
scheme . The minor streets/service streets are generally public
streets that conduct traffic from the various neighborhoods to the
major streets . In one instance a minor street connection is
established to indicate direct access from an adjoining property
(Lands of Lin, a separate owner) . This street connection is shown
just south of the Town Center, and is established to permit
alternate access for the lands of Lin at a location that also
enhances the viability of the Town Center commercial uses .
Lesser residential streets within individual neighborhood clus -
ters ,most of which are private vehicle accessways (PVAWs ) , are not
shown.
On a regional scale , Dublin Ranch and other future Extended Plan-
ning Area developments will have a cummulative impact on Inter-
state 580 and the existing interchanges . I Improvements to the
Hopyard Road, Hacienda Drive and Tassajara/Santa Rita Road inter-
changes are already committed by the State . At the present time ,
no commitment has been made to construct the E1 Charro
Road/Fallon Road interchange . Development costs for this latter
improvement (and perhaps reimbursements to assessment districts _
already formed to help finance the other three interchanges ) may
require a new assessment district to include appropriate portions
of the Extended Planning Area . This issue is to be fully examined
in the Traffic Report.
Policies and Standards
1 . Require Dublin Ranch Developers to construct the major street
system to the following widths :
a . Tassajara Road: 4 lanes with raised median from Village
III . entrance to the most southerly Dublin Ranch property
42
line . Should Dublin Ranch development precede the devel-
opment of adjacent south properties , some interim im-
provement of Tassajara Road from the most southerly
property line to I-580 may be required .
b . Dublin Ranch Parkway: 4 lanes with raised median from
the southern most intersection with Tassajara Road
northerly to Fallon Road , then two lanes with appropriate
left turn lanes from Fallon Road northerly to Tassajara
Road .
C . Doolan Road: 2 lanes with appropriate left turn lanes
from Tassajara Road to the northerly property line .
d . Fallon Road: 4 lanes between Dublin Ranch Parkway and
the main entrance to Village II , then two lanes to the
southerly property line . Interim emergency access con-
nection to existing Fallon Road may be required ,
depending on the timing of surrounding area development
and the construction of other accessways .
2 . The City of Dublin shall establish a preferred plan line for
both Fallon Road and Doolan Road , and shall require construc-
tion of fair share improvements for these streets in conjunc-
tion with approving future Extended Planning Area development
projects .
3 . The developer shall dedicate sufficient street width along
both sides of Tassajara Road to accommodate the potential
need for two additional travel lanes . (The need for a six
lane Tassajara Road is not established ; however , it is one of
the many possible development scenarios for the region. )
Similarly , additional width shall also be dedicated for
Dublin Ranch Parkway, Fallon Road , and Doolan Road to provide
for future widening to four lanes . All dedicated frontages
shall be landscaped by the developer and maintained by the
adjoining Homeowner ' s Association.
4. Dublin Ranch developers shall participate in the costs of
construction of local freeway interchange improvements and
other related off-site improvements that benefit Dublin
Ranch, as required by the City of Dublin.
5 . No driveways to individual dwelling units are allowed onto
arterials , major collectors , or collectors .
6 . Traffic signals are to be installed by Dublin Ranch
developers at locations established by the Traffic Report.
Pedestrian-actuated signals are to be provided to accommodate
designated bicycle and pedestrian routes and to accommodate
school crossings .
7 . Minor street/service street locations may be amended at the
time of development to allow for variation of site planning
concept.
B. Pedestrian, Equestrian & Bicycle Paths
No regional trails are designated in the Dublin Ranch vicinity by
any agency with jurisdiction. However, Dublin Ranch development
is to include a comprehensive internal pedestrian, equestrian, and
bicycle path system. Pedestrian paths consist of both the typical
street right-of-way sidewalks , and joint-use pedestrian/equestrian
trails constructed within the reserved natural open space areas .
Bicycle routes may utilize sidewalks , especially along major
traffic routes , or be delineated within .the traffic travelway on
43
lesser streets . The design of pedestrian sidewalks and bicycle
routes is to promote community safety and provide for convenience
of access . The Dublin Ranch trail system envisions safe access
for children walking or bicycling to and from schools and neigh-
borhood parks , and convenient resident access to the Village
Center , transit stops , and nearby park and recreation areas .
As a general rule , sidewalks are to be provided on both sides of
public streets , designed to City of Dublin standards . Within
individual neighborhood clusters served by private streets , side-
walks may be installed on one side only , but must provide
essentially continuous linkage to nearby public walks (sidewalks
and open space trails ) , and to any internal cluster recreation
facilities . Where sidewalks are also designed to serve as bicycle
routes , additional sidewalk width is to be provided. Bicycle
routes within traffic travelways are to be adequately marked .
Equestrian/pedestrian trail routes are to be provided within
selected portions of the natural open space lands to link with
Tassajara Creek trail and Tassajara Creek Regional Park.
(Although there is no official designation for a future Tassajara
Creek trail by an agency with jurisdiction, the idea has been in-
formally supported by both the Alameda County Flood Control , Zone
7 and the East Bay Regional Parks District. ) Other off-site
connections may become possible as regional trail routes are
formulated . On-site equestrian/pedestrian trail routes are to be
generally "circuit" in design (rather than dead-end) and designed
to minimize potential street crossing conflicts .
Policies and Standards
1 . Dublin Ranch developers shall install a pedestrian/equestrian
trail along Tassajara Creek. The trail may coincide- with the
Alameda County Flood Control , Zone 7 maintenance road. The
trail and creek area shall be selectively open to public
access from public lands in a manner acceptable to both Zone
7 and the City of Dublin.
2 . A pedestrian/equestrian trail connection easement between
Tassajara Creek trail and Tassajara Creek Regional Park shall
be provided ; however , no public parking lot is to be
provided, thereby preserving the low intensity use , passive
viewshed nature of the park. (This easement is not required
if E. B.R. P.D. ownership reverts back to the U. S . Army . )
3. Pedestrian/equestrian trail easements shall be provided ' with-
in natural open space areas of Dublin Ranch as determined
necessary by the City of Dublin at the time of submittal of
the overall tentative map .
4. Project CC&R' s shall prohibit the boarding of horses except
for individual custom lots . Commercial boarding of horses is
prohibited ; no stable or corral areas may be within 200 feet
of any residential cluster boundary.
5 . Sidewalks are to be installed on both sides of public streets
unless the Planning Director determines circumstances exist
to waive the requirement. A monolithic 4 foot sidewalk is
required on one side of PVAWs serving individual neighborhood
clusters .
6 . Bicycle routes shall be designated at the time of filing of
the tentative map(s ) . Where approved bicycle routes utilize
public sidewalks , the sidewalk width is to be increased to 8
44
feet. Where approved bicycle routes lie within the public
street travelway, Dublin Ranch developers shall provide all
necessary safety improvements , including striping and
signing .
C. Transit
On July 1 , 1986 a joint powers agreement was entered into by the
Cities of Dublin, Pleasanton and Livermore , and the County of Ala-
meda to form the "Livermore-Amador Valley Transit Authority" .
"Wheels" , the name given to the new transit system, currently
serves both Dublin and Pleasanton, and is scheduled to take over
the current Livermore "Rideo" transit system in July of 1987 . The
transit authority is preparing a 5 year , short-range transit plan
to prepare for the orderly expansion of the system. The transit
plan will need to be amended to consider future development within
the Extended Planning Area .
Some overlap of local bus service now occurs with the BART buses
which provide local access to the Hayward BART station. As the
"Wheels" system expands , the BART system may be able to stream-
line , and function as more of an express service to BART stations .
Once BART heavy rail reaches the Amador Valley region, BART bus
service may be terminated.
Earlier this year, a preferred alignment for the future BART heavy
rail connection to the Amador Valley was selected . Paralleling
I-580 , perhaps within the freeway median, the BART facility is to
have both a "Pleasanton Station" (at the future Hacienda Drive/
I-580 Interchange) and a "Dublin Station" (near the I-580/ 1-680
Interchange ) . The timing of this extension is unknown, although
funding is now available for a park-and-ride facility at or near
the "Dublin Station" site . (Other park-and-ride facilities are
also being considered .. ) The park-and-ride facility is to be
placed on both sides of the freeway and is to have a user capacity
of approximately 1 ,400 cars .
Policies and Standards
1 . Transit stops , including shelters , are to be provided by
Dublin Ranch developers at locations within Dublin Ranch as
determined necessary in the Traffic Report.
2 . The City of Dublin is to provide status reports of develop-
ment within the Extended Planning area to the Livermore-Ama-
dor Valley Transit Authority for the purpose of updating the
short-range transit plan.
45
UTILITIES ELEMENT
The Utilities Element of the Specific Plan institutes a framework for
providing domestic water, sanitary sewer, storm water drainage , and
gas , electric , telephone , and cable television service . The timely
expansion of these municipal services is fundamental to orderly ,
planned urban growth. The municipality must coordinate with other
agencies with jurisdiction over services , select the engineering
solutions that best compliment long-range plans for the area , and
assess the ability to fund improvements . A major feature of the
Dublin Ranch Specific Plan is that the future utility extensions to
serve Dublin Ranch are to be provided at the expense of future area
developers , with allowance for reimbursement as later projects come
on-line . An assessment district procedure may be used to finance this
construction.
A. Domestic Water
The Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) is expected to
annex lands within the Extended Planning Area , and will own and
operate the water supply and distribution system for Dublin Ranch.
In order to supply water to it ' s service area , DSRSD purchases
water from the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District (ACFC & WCD) Zone 7 . The ultimate source of water for
Dublin Ranch is the "cross valley" pipeline system owned by ACFC
&- WCD Zone 7 , located south of Interstate 580. The interim source
of domestic water is the imminent City of Pleasanton Tassajara
storage reservoir, a 7-8 million gallon tank to be constructed
within Dublin Ranch. The Tassajara storage reservoir is connected
to the existing City of Pleasanton water system via a 24" main in
Tassajara Road , and is able to serve up to an elevation of 390
feet. For elevations above the 390 foot elevation pressure zone
(valley zone) , the Tassajara storage reservoir serves as a pumping
supply source for two additional pressure zones ( See Figure 7) .
Pressure Zone 1 serves between elevations 390 feet and 560 feet,
and Pressure Zone 2 serves between elevations 560 feet and 710
feet. Although it lies within Pressure Zone 2 , Residential Cluster
3 of Village III is an exception and must be served by a separate
hydropneumatic system due to the considerable distance from the
supply source . Individual estate homesites above the 710
elevation must also be served hydropneumatically .
46
OR/
ilk
'gg
®RION
IN
gN
ON
I IN
FAI
fit
.... ...
6- IN
ON
NOW
f4l
I!qg M�
djL
Lit
IpAll
-dill
The on-site water delivery system consists of three reservoirs
referred to as "A" , "B" , and "C" (Reservoir "A" is the City
of Pleasanton "Tassajara Reservoir" . See Water Plan Diagram,
Figure 8 . ) The three reservoirs are to be interconnected ; water
from reservoir "A" will be pumped to reservoir "B" , and water from
reservoir "B" will be pumped to reservoir "C" . Reservoirs and
distribution lines within the supply system are to be designed to
meet both domestic and fire flow demands . The ultimate size of
reservoirs "B" and "C" and select distribution lines depends in
part on future development plans for adjoining properties .
Policies and Standards
1 . Commit to an interim water supply use of Tassajara Reservoir
for Dublin Ranch, but design the water system for eventual
additional connections to the future cross valley pipeline .
2 . Require developers to construct adequate water service
facilities , including mains and reservoirs , at the time of
project development.
3 . Coordinate sizing of reservoirs and mains to accommodate the
projected future water service needs of appropriate adjoining
properties .
B. Sanitary Sewer
The Dublin Ranch. sanitary sewer collection system is shown on the
Sanitary Sewer Plan Diagram (Figure 9) , and essentially conforms
with DSRSD' s Sewer System Master Plan, Alamo Creek and East
Dublin, Interim Final Report, dated November , 1985 . The collec-
tion system is to be owned and operated by DSRSD' and constructed
in accordance with DSRSD standards and specifications .
In terms of collection system capacity , the Dublin Ranch Specific
Plan proposes a higher intensity of residential development than
was originally projected in the DSRSD master plan. However ,
increased sanitary sewer flow can be -easily accommodated . Minimal
increases of pipe sizes significantly increases capacity in area
of steep terrain, a characteristic common to much of the Dublin
Ranch collection system service area . The sizing of select down-
stream mains may also depend upon the timing of development of
adjacent south properties . Should Dublin Ranch develop in advance
of these downstream properties , a portion of the Tassajara Road
sanitary sewer main shown on the DSRSD master plan must be
enlarged (from 15" to 21" ) . If the timing of development is
reversed , appropriate sewer mains should be extended through
effected properties to the Dublin Ranch south boundary .
The DSRSD Waste Water Treatment Plan (WWTP) serves both Dublin and
Pleasanton, and is located along Interstate 680, approximately one
mile south of Interstate 580 . The WWTP has a current operating
capacity of 9 . 0 million gallons/day (MGD) , with a current reserve
of 0. 21 MGD. Assuming the available reserve were to be used
solely for residential uses , this translates to approximately 946
new residential dwelling units . DSRSD estimates there are
presently some 1 ,080 residential dwelling units "on the drawing
boards" which will soon request permission to connect to the
sewage system.
48
Legend
1 Oq Tank'A',City of Pleasanton,Teas ejare Reservoir,
tl C�GOUT y
B. MG,Elev.490 ft. (Does not s rve
/ project except as supply source.)e
Con�iPaa eda
S Ey+ 0. /� O Tank'B',Zone I Reservoir,3.2 MG.,Elev.880 ft.
Tank'C',Zone 2 Reservoir,2.0 MG.,Elev.810 ft.
Booster Pump�A'.5.2 MGD To Tank'B'
/ 6 L
Booster Pump'8'2.0 MGD To Tank'C'
Booster Pump"C" (Village III,Cluster 3)
4.
4.
Village'lll�l
1
so`
g
East Bay Regional Park District �' + '
L<
Village 1 6 - f
b °`<
tiCCC` p, A 4 iz
C-My of Alamoaa 14<� 5 `�//� emcsvnrses
OL—to-
C
u 4,�
3 0 'tY4Yl 4 ��1`l - o
v icc�t�F"cx
c I ao.
C.s,1— x o
icx: 4.1
4� f FIGURE 8
s °
CO.—� e i WATER PLAN DIAGRAM
DUBLIN RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SPECIFIC PLAN CHANG SU-O LIN
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA FRISBIE.WOODE&gASSOCIATES
C CO Y
tom"-a eda
6
� l l
Villa a II n L7 1x7' s
-, !jl�l��l
t} ---
fv
o a 6 Or v 9
East Bay Regional Park District c�`� Villag gill I�,i..
.�i.
1 r c
LO
\ Village 1
v
t
County of Mameda r .. r ` 5 �
ol
Legend '"� "b ti 3
go
I IV
�i+�.� (. F' va .fir. <
Pr000eed sewer mein end size.
aa area and dlree„on e,1 low:11 �i y
t
? 'v
c—ps" ��t--- > r a
�r3
DUBLIN r FIGURE 9
__N' SEWER PLAN DIAGRAM
33'• ti�' 30"��
DUBLIN RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SPECIFIC PLAN CHANG SU-O LIN
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA FRISBLE.WOODE&ASSO ciaeEs
According to DSRSD, future treatment plant expansions are planned
in order to accommodate future growth and development with DSRSD' s
sphere of influence . A 2 . 5 MGD expansion of the WWTP is presently
under construction , with a planned 50/ 50 allocation split to
Dublin and Pleasanton. Of the 1 . 25 MGD capacity available to
Dublin, 0 . 25 MGD are already allocated to the expansion of the
Santa Rita prison facility , leaving approximately 1 . 0 MGD of
available capacity for other developments . DSRSD estimates that
this will allow approximately 4, 000 new residential units in
Dublin, assuming none of the capacity is allocated to other land
uses .
The following table projects the estimated sanitary sewer flows
generated by Dublin Ranch assuming buildout of all housing
capacity.
Land Use Generation Factor MGD
Residential
Single Family Detached 2730 du @ 220 GPD/du . 60
Multiple Family 2470 du @ 180 GPD/du . 44
Service Commercial/Office 13 ac . @ 2500 GPD/ac . . 03
School/Park 15 GPD/student x 500
students x 2 schools . 02
Total 1 . 09 MGD
The above table illustrates that the total estimated Dublin Ranch
sewage flow at buildout ( 1 . 09 MGD) exceeds the projected available
City of Dublin share in the expanded ( 11 . 5 MGD) WWTP facility .
However , the planned 15 year construction phasing of Dublin Ranch
allows a considerable time frame to complete needed future WWTP
expansions , provided bonds for such expansions are ultimately
approved by service area voters . Hopefully , the current projected
1 . 0 MGD of capacity allows a fair share portion of sewer allot-
ments for Dublin Ranch as other Primary and Extended Planning Area
projects come on-line .
Available sewage flow capacity is also limited in the export pipe-
line from the DSRSD' s WWTP facility . The pipeline is owned by the
Livermore Amador Valley Waste Management Association (LAVWMA) ,
which serves both the DSRSD and Livermore treatment plants . The
pipeline flow capacity of 16 . 6 MGD is near capacity, although a
4. 4 MGD expansion is under construction and is scheduled for
completion in 1988 . Envisioning the future export capacity
shortage , the Tri-Valley Wastewater Agency (TWA) is planning a
second pipeline with a flow capacity of 21 MGD. Under current
projections , this pipeline will have ample capacity to serve the
needs of the Dublin/San Ramon area until approximately the year
2010 .
Policies and Standards
1 . Assist DSRSD, LAVWMA, and TWA in efforts to expand the WWTP
and .export pipelines to accommodate development consistent
with the Dublin General Plan.
51
2 . Request DSRSD to revise their Master Plan to reflect the
housing intensity within Dublin Ranch and within other
portions of the Extended Planning Area covered by specific
plans .
3 . Require future developers to construct sewer mains as
necessary to connect Dublin Ranch to the existing City sewer
system.
4. Install mains of sufficient size , and install mains for
future service to adjoining properties in a manner consistent
with the DSRSD master plan.
5 . The sanitary sewer collection system is to be developed in
orderly phases to accommodate the development anticipated in
each phase of construction.
6 . Require developers to provide water conservation measures
(shower heads with flow control devices , low flush toilets ,
etc . ) in future dwelling units to reduce waste water genera-
tion.
C. Storm Water Drainage
Future jurisdiction over storm drain improvements is to be divided
between the City of Dublin, who will control on-site facilities ,
and Alameda County Flood Control , Zone 7 , who is to own and manage
Tassajara Creek. The Dublin Ranch storm water collection system
is illustrated on the Drainage System Plan Diagram (Figures 10 &
11) . As shown on the Drainage System Plan Diagram, the on-site
storm water collection system is located within two major drainage
(watershed) areas , designated by Zone 7 as areas "G-3" and "K" .
The majority of the site lies within "G-3" , an area which drains
southerly to the G-3 Channel and then to Arroyo Mocho . (Both of
the latter facilities are major storm drain facilities owned and
managed by Zone 7 . ) The remaining northerly portion of Dublin
Ranch lies within area "K" , which drains westerly to Tassajara
Creek.
Presently, natural drainage from the site either flows directly
into Tassajara Creek or in a southerly direction onto adjacent
properties . The latter drainage eventually reaches the I-580
frontage road where it is intercepted via ditch and the road , and
diverted to the G-3 Channel . Should Dublin Ranch develop prior to
adjacent downstream properties , surface drainage at the south
boundary is to be diverted westerly to Tassajara Road . This pro-
posal relieves properties lying between Dublin Ranch and the
freeway from experiencing related increases in surface runoff .
Tassajara Creek, which roughly parallels Tassajara Road , is a
natural stream with riparian vegetation ranging from heavy to
sparse tree cover to native grasses only . The creek varies in
depth from an estimated 40 feet in the vicinity of Village III to
an estimated 6- 10 feet further south along lands of Alameda
County. Except for the shallow southerly . portion, the creek
cross -section appears to provide adequate capacity to carry the
anticipated flows from both Dublin Ranch (area "K" ) and other con-
tributing surrounding areas , including a 100 year storm flow.
South of Interstate 580, Tassajara Creek is improved to its
ultimate design section. The Arroyo Mocho , into which Tassajara
52
Cv
a
z'- •?• I i r ."�''r - h - y- a r :( •� ,r '� r ,1L d ��.."-^-, -Lr N ,.
I�t1�`M-.= �a�,•jr�J111_%;.� ��i't rt '��t J�I.l��cl�.r5•r^�,'..,�t. ;�� � c-..: ��1 ., t!r!L: S.I J 'j �`I.�1 - f I/ `� � � t_'\,,..�i �
fff(1/1!�'i�r Y/l /�S•�' i i T..��y ) 4 rife t�y t _J`J.! '1'fr f t iel -'i;;� rl/sGZ `�S i ., -'� �l t' -fi.
i \ /f }!•pY �' t ( `+'� i Ni.� 14V E c 1:: / `1 1: q _.1 { r-'7 mot' ,M r r F- �., .tt_
s '�i 11<�r lriLhxi.��t k 11rJ- r f �� �-�t �','1,.--,. �'i J Y � r _ •i.: ��.{.. ! �Jrl,� .f-� J a ''�J _I� "�
r i �'._—. G--j.�a�r o• �, err.a t t, , a -, f �' _ —; f ;�� P �.
..: ;�/y. 11S#'}�✓`s-��iir��}i"=J".}.1'`y t = '�"`I'�1<{� S(��:-.%C Y�i`;v.^'lr`� aaS� t �'. ��`�a..��Y ..�._r�;'�"r•�`^ c� '#� �' �-ter 1 P,.-_•' 1 1v
-
.yr 17{ t za}
t.`'.`y �; •,.. �• t - - ` � .r E j r } � r.� r_fh7 -.-�,.-. r4-• ..EE— -s rt;"*--'1 :r I -� ✓r-
F
- L F•' '� al. 'i y i't '.:C � .!I -L-;. I i � i -
�f
1`rL.1 w'. �. �4 rL-.�� R h 7 ! )t f' aK Y r..y-+ .-•^. ,' ? +r � o.�,z\. 4�%t� /�:�,. tl♦�
� y',...• �. S cyst -'}: 1. 1 � r'y o- �`�(il" � .1
t I t?i
��.", �.: �- x. r '�`fr.. i.. 1. i`r f ':•. 11� JC�. ft --J y ��.,,�/ :,f s ) �..i iI :r �-tsa^ ( r )�r��try•"z,'i t- titer. f ,2 5 ._I,j�r -
tx
y r'' •., ,i 4 t `al "'. 1 r t /- I 'f .--"'.I _ +`" t t- S t ,l 't YC '1.r j �`'.?-•,.j}}. l_i
{ \ i•Yk �5 � }, y tj f f fry,; fAr� rGUduL I yacc ! w i y v ; /Y 1; }�- I ! { TS}t{F i.t'{S i.rf!•
Area
1 � -.i i` t � - J '.'-• F 1 / j\ ❑ .•,, t I� / i h"rr�l I � f f U 1 S I t l l i,{.
Ct
. 'irR.',g �.' `a,-�`kt�.-�;-.. aN -Y,��} rte•-"""...,... � ii2ft! ti> E "-) :� �' s rte-' � ^t: /%.5 ��� ( 5�� �' y � � � l A s•� 1�) ,
�'V-.. hY��t l F � I.'r _F I Jl rACFG ]1/ '`.r( e -. •`� S F' J j L :.'� � i U I-r I �l
i9✓', 'x�- rt`°4 iia�..-T'j_: e�_ .r'' [i r s 'ri .+•O -. ` tr 7; �t i 'c t ,E 4 p +r �� } \... /,� 4{'','Er'�:-_si {..
' •y
_ C r�r�j,A ♦xt - ��i,. 1 R ♦ �.:. Tt } 7 3 �., t - `, � ti\J,r / / t ;. '_t �14 f -�r, .
��a�,r r., %�+E a aft?�)�y ` �- s 1 - f� S -�� .. n --.. /e ,' /l r � � ��t ry i ,,. .�. �}.•li• ,�f
I n
�A., ! N t,^.F !RErh 'i�""?IS....,, ° ^.�//, ..�'..' {{>•--� T _ flrt r4- `1 _ f7 rY` �. �+`k ;ja-"S!'
$< cat 7 'mod it P I 1 N 9. `.EDUBLIN{flANCH t�l }6:.. L `1 +1
_
i"yii\ iF- h-L..a?itil te,y.. t.i� 7. �;� i� � i. -. I. II ;:ll 4 a iltt" /.�,F r J: %ak � x•1.3` fz�,� / t,�bCEy`"zC�j�''{ .-�
t E I 1�` '�°/ a f ,y .�...n °Laa� 7c,[ f f � �` ,."�F„ J v�r<_^ yr��•j� '�rt�E�`ri
n(
-3 Ate
a ii-.;.��Y t•. _ r A.. AliI s..:. -! 1..i i ^{ r .: :G a
cl,{ �i r t..yl.i:;: r t- t ':a\• l :f_ 7 �7 v. f Le... fir'`` ; rf .°'r .b.4u'�'_ •//;
jr
x
tl Fir J �,tt ^� }"//rkE} 1-I ,-1",. t t ♦v,.x I. 1 -. i� t r - -t t r! a� i -' .
�.b�-F a�\`,, r'�''�`;�.r,f -: k -._.t;v r �i.l���t"T' �,�" f t•. fii-^ �, t t;t- -I.- y � � 'c?�!
(t
'v'4'
C + ;
ir°7 ...........
r t t / t i1'F/ °'7 1 f. �♦ I , o •• :
P.1.1 8-3 [
'a J .....r/ fR .C. ,et ,! 10 (r .sue t .1 4¢qr❑ ACFCZ p.7y, f
.........�1 .s r'� .�¢tj'Q�a r 1 � � 9.". ��r . F tt"� ._..I: �• r I ts.� 9 ,ter Af � n A �.
7.
'L 'i4 1 1 z;
.i �.'.�....:u._ `�. ..-' ... �i..L�m..�_�_, ..t._`� _.. - ei.�av�T_._�.��j� - .L.w. w�h�F nY��ei/h�� y
FIGURE 10
i DRAINAGE SYSTEM PLAN
Unh�Il�ili;:I,iI rJ ��rj��ll ®® DIAGRAM (PART 1)
o i000 CHANG SU-O LIN
nreares
lV n' FRISBIE.WOOD&A6SOCIaES
i
j C 31 \4b�
3jr,�
to
\-Village III
/ I
I
c C
s
Pat K-4
b t'
. . u
a�tM
East Bay Regional Park District }
fi g \ n
Point K-3 a Ctt a yty 1' 7
Drainage Area"K" — , �tic�Out all(Zone 7)�—, ��
q`WRageP 6 %
1, Io,
g.
7. ���h �
IM.1.1
ra 1'�
t
County of Alameda ,, �`. �, n,rnPn,
°t
• \ ���;
Legend q 3
�- Pro po eed storm drain andh,
ea it meted size.
` Nwvc��'4�
a \ Drainage area and direction,'t)) C t ` 4V _ 2 2 1�"T` `�-`����1� "�t_•c v.�` ,
c�srrason i �r,l,
Note: Villages 1811 are pert of ACFC District(Zone 7) aononx
drainage area'G-3'. See Figure 10. FIGURE 11
1
�€
E I DRAINAGE SYSTEM PLAN
7 ,r�
t
DIAGRAM (PART 2)
I'I To GN3 oconn�ection.
DUBLIN RANCH DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SPECIFIC PLAN CHANG SU-O LIN
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA 1 F2TsBIE.woODE&pASSOCIATES 91121-11001219 6152
Creek flows , is improved to the ultimate design section from Santa
Rita Road west to the Arroyo de la Laguna . However , the portion
of Arroyo Mocho east of Santa Rita Road beyond the Tassajara Creek
confluence to the G-3 confluence and beyond , is constructed to
only one-half the ultimate design section. Although the G- 3
Channel is fully improved and sized to accept drainage flow from
the "G-3" area including most of Dublin Ranch, both the G-3
Channel and upper Arroyo Mocho are currently subject to a
"backwater" storm runoff condition. Zone 7 has been authorized by
it ' s Board of Directors to proceed with the preparation of
improvement plans to construct the Arroyo Mocho to its ultimate
capacity from Santa Rita Road to east of the G-3/Arroyo Mocho
confluence . The Zone 7 work is to be scheduled to coincide with
work done by upstream developers .
Policies and Standards
1 . The City shall evaluate the phasing program, placement, and
flow capacities for "minor" storm drain facilities . Future
developers shall install all -required "minor" storm drain fa-
cilities and provide suitable linkage stubs for future phases
.or development on adjoining lands .
2 . Developers shall demonstrate that they are not creating a
flood problem or worsening an existing problem along the
"major" storm drain facilities ( i . e . , Tassajara Creek, G- 3
Channel , or Arroyo Mocho) . Interim on-site solutions ( i . e . ,
retention ponds , in-pipe storage , etc . ) may be utilized . to
maintain project area drainage at pre-project levels , until
downstream Zone 7 improvements make such measures unnecessary .
3 . Tassajara Creek is to be retained as a "natural" channel ; im-
provements are to be limited to slope stabilization in badly
eroded areas , and construction of energy dissipating
structures to control velocity where needed .
4. Future development schemes shall retain the character of the
natural riparian habitat along Tassajara Creek. Structures
shall be set back a sufficient distance to both preserve the
creekside setting and avoid potential slope instability pro-
blems .
5 . The City should enter into a joint use agreement with Zone 7
to permit pedestrian/equestrian trail access along Tassajara
Creek. The agreement should include provision for the elimi -
nation of standard Zone 7 chain link fencing, and provide for
a combined trail/access road to reduce the amount of improve-
ments needed.
D. Solid Waste
Solid waste disposal service to Dublin Ranch is to be provided by
the Livermore Dublin Disposal Company . The solid waste is trans -
ported to the Altamont Sanitary Landfill site which has a pro-
jected service life of 50-90 years .
Policies and Standards
None are appropriate .
55
E. Gas and Electric
Gas and electric services are to be provided by P.G. & E. As
there is presently no gas service available in Tassajara Road , gas
service (an 8- 12 inch line) is to be extended from the Santa Rita
metering station located at the intersection of Interstate 580 and
Tassajara Road. P.G. & E. has ample gas capacity to serve Dublin
Ranch.
Existing electrical service to the area is via a three phase , 12
KV overhead line located along the west side of Tassajara Road ,
originating near Interstate 580 and extending to the southerly
project boundary. From here northerly , the service changes to a
two phase , . 12 KV line . In order to provide sufficient electrical
service to Dublin Ranch, the existing 12 KV service is to be
upgraded to a three phase , 21 KV service . The overall P .G . & E .
system has ample availability and service capacity to make the
necessary upgrade .
Policies and Standards
1 . All on-site electrical extensions are to be underground .
F. Telephone and Cable Television
Dublin Ranch is located within both the Livermore and San Ramon
service exchange areas operated by Pacific Bell . Pacific Bell may
ultimately decide to serve the site from either one or both of
these exchanges , a decision monitored by the Public Utilities
Commission. Telephone service is presently available in Tassajara
Road but must be upgraded to serve Dublin Ranch. No service prob-
lems are foreseen.
Cable television service is to be provided by Viacom Cablevision,
via a microwave receiving station to be placed at a high point on
the site . ( Signals are sent from . their San Ramon facility . )
Underground television cables serve individual residences .
Policies and Standards
None are appropriate .
56
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
The Environmental Resources Management Element of the Specific Plan
establishes means to conserve the area ' s resources , identifies poten-
tial natural and man-made hazards , and outlines development con-
straints to preserve the ecosystem and to enhance public safety . The
natural resources portion discusses potential mineral deposits ,
grazing land , existing trees , and archaeological resources . The po-
tential natural and man-made hazards portion discusses the local seis-
micity and geology.
A. Mineral Deposits
Several valuable mineral resources exist in the Livermore-Amador
Valley area . The most important in the vicinity of Dublin Ranch
are groundwater and gravel . The major Livermore Valley groundwa-
ter basin, which has been used as a public water source since the
1800' s , does not extend beneath the site . Consequently , project
area groundwater is not a significant resource . Gravel deposits
have been quarried for many years for the local construction
industry, but these major deposits are located some distance to
the south and east and do not include the site . No significant
mineral resources have been identified within Dublin Ranch.
A dirt quarry is located on the Redgwick property, adjacent to the
northeast corner of the site . Access to the quarry is presently
via an unpaved road across the northern part of Dublin Ranch.
(This roadway location is the approximate alignment for proposed
Doolan Road extended . ) Dublin Ranch development may ultimately
result in reduction or closure of the quarry due to transport con-
flicts with local home environments and residential traffic . (The
owners of the Redgwick property already anticipate the future
development of the property . ) Dirt deposits of similar extent and
characteristics are located in many areas throughout the
Livermore-Amador Valley area , and future loss. of this facility
does not represent a significant loss of natural resources .
Policies and Standards
None are appropriate .
B. Biotics
Approximately one half of the 930 acre Dublin Ranch site is under
Williamson Act Contract. The sole current agricultural value of
these lands (and most surrounding properties ) is as grazing land ,
although portions of the site were once used for growing hay and
alfalfa crops . Many of the field areas are also in decline due to
the influx of thistles and other weeds . The soil quality is
average (rated Class III-Class VI by the U. S . Department of
Agriculture , Soil Conservation Service) and in most cases , highly
erodible .
57
Few trees are on the site , although the Tassajara Creek channel
contains numerous Valley Oaks and Arroyo Willows that warrant pre-
servation. Little notable understory vegetation exists within the
channel due to the yearly flushing action of storm flows . East of
Tassajara Road a few stands of Eucalyptus globulus exists in
isolated locations . The latter trees are a less valuable species
than the Valley Oaks , and may not warrant preservation .
Policies and Standards
1. Preserve the existing Valley Oaks and Arroyo Willows within
the Tassajara Creek channel to the maximum extent possible .
C. Archaeology
Archaeological reconnaissance was conducted on the Dublin Ranch
site in March and April of 1985 by Holman and Associates , Archaeo-
logical Consultants . No noteworthy cultural finds were recorded ,
although four different locations were noted where possible minor
cultural materials exist. These areas are all located near the
south boundary of Dublin Ranch and the materials consist of ground
stone artifacts , and battered quartzite and volcanic rocks that
may be artifacts . It was concluded that these sites were not
worthy of preservation.
Policies and Standards
1 . An archaeologic reconnaissance shall be conducted in concert
with initial grading activities in areas where possible cul-
tural materials have been identified.
D. Seismicity & Geology
A preliminary geologic and geotechnic report on the Dublin Ranch
site has been prepared by Merrill , Seeley , Mullen, Sandefur , Inc . ,
Consulting Geotechnical Engineers and _Geologists .
Five major faults are of importance in evaluating earthquake
hazards in the Livermore/Amador Valley region ; the Calaveras , San
Andreas , Hayward, Concord, and Greenville faults . The nearest of
these five active faults is the Calaveras , located west of Inter-
state 680. Preliminary investigations 'indicate no active faults
are mapped within the immediate vicinity of Dublin Ranch.
However, ground shaking is expected in conjunction with
earthquakes along any of the major faults . To a considerable
extent, the effects of ground shaking can be minimized by proper
engineering practices and construction design.
Landslides are a common feature on these hillsides , as they are on
hillsides throughout coastal California . In the Extended Planning
Area , landslide deposits are for the most part off-site , concen-
trated in the higher , steeper hills to the north and east. Within
Dublin Ranch only a few landslide deposits of any significance
were found, and these are all subdued , older features . Field ob-
servations indicate that the exceptionally heavy rains of recent
years have triggered only a few .minor slides . One potentially
unstable debris basin was also found , and future corrective
measures here may be required. Other locally identified problem
58`
areas are the expansive characteristics of the surface clay soils ,
and "soil creep" ( the slow, downhill movement of soil caused by
gravity) . These latter characteristics can be mitigated with
proper grading techniques and by engineered foundation designs .
The conceptual grading scheme for Dublin Ranch attempts to correct
existing on-site problem areas identified in the geology report to
the maximum extent possible , while at the same time selectively
creating naturalized development areas . Development areas are
generally limited to the flattest portions of the site , leaving
the steeper hill slope areas undeveloped ( See Slope Classification
Map , Figure 12) . In some areas , significant cuts or fills are
needed to accomplish the purposes of the development scheme .
However , these are in the "non-visible" (from off-site) areas of
the site , and the manufactured slopes are also gently inclined to
blend into the natural terrain. (Most cut slopes are envisioned
to be 3 : 1 or flatter . ) Some large swale areas of the property
are to be filled in; where these deep fills do occur , they must be
monitored over time and allowed to settle to avoid potential
damage to future improvements . There are several reliable
engineering techniques to accomplish acceptable . compaction of deep
fills , and sufficient time for fill stabilization can also be
structured into the development phasing schedule .
Policies and Standards
1 . The maximum manufactured cut or fill for large slopes is 3 : 1
(horizontal to vertical) ; however , smaller cut or fill areas
may have 2 : 1 slopes .
2. All manufactured slopes shall be rounded to gently conform to
the adjacent natural terrain.
3. Detailed geotechnical engineering and subsurface exploration
studies , and detailed soils analysis shall be done and incor-
porated into final overall grading plan design.
4. The overall .grading plan shall include interim means to pre-
vent soil erosion and to manage storm water runoff during and
after grading activities .
5 . Hydrologic studies of Tassajara Creek are to be made to
evaluate the need for stream bank protection and to establish
adequate building setback.
6 . Grading activities shall be restricted to the dry season ,
and all graded areas are to be reseeded according to mutually
approved timetable .
59
i
/�/ 1,� �i rif vA ✓ VA\ � I
/• I r ✓r) l a = 1 /
/
t�� 1��°S' <. x,rr rj�{j� V ♦,l) vL. � ,N'<'"�/1�;�i / f I I i � AA , ,r I ,
it A I ��y ,✓y I) \� li f tV � / ,s�. a �'>l ��' / r / ,�A ( i py( , r
VYy
it\� y P1i s t , /y 1 J r .kl ".r�, //�/i ✓/i//• ��`�\ ! I r y.
'j1 t'M ... .r/ r rr///G/✓%/// /,f �i)el' ! r i, \\ i. l //� r j
t i\ a, / r/ I,I q// S >r/ , /rte r/ \\\\ ✓/ \� /
�I \.-\ j _ '1��la�..(w, � �\IIYL rl rl C I tl ✓%/// /fr .�L� ;; ' } „\�r i _� \\\�\��\ /�� � //r r rl
z d � ••�� �v���Avv� %r� Pi Sr�q'II�I r //� �i / ,i�. I / � r!/ /
I 'r
4x�/ v A` '/ I t.•,ri i /) I L� Will
r
I
II Ii Ii
< .:vA )I��!L� I✓°_ i , y��. Vag /�/ ri; •c.� \ ( 1-aA �`. � {elr � /��/ a
•' I y r �Vv A \ ��. VAA/ A \ r /�i2 hl li
A
I r r �. c� ✓ '��%/ 5 c ° I',I it
LEGEND
l`a 'I�aVA�A.;AAA
A under 10%slope
u
B 10-20%slope
C. - 20-30%slope
0 over 30%slope
//r V >1 ii 1,� �/ ��A�� , i°�'`'fi �I "� I Ip%/��, /'OVA• I 1. x I �,�A\s /
I
I
)I \ I;r ,I. � � •r n ,III ,r s , � n I ` ,
L, I, r ///:fir / �� _ /� .,1' /� !If
A\\
Y,
1
/; r� I ( V A \ Vim. I - ° 7,�'�,•
-
�- LOPE CLASSIFICATION MAP
DUBLIN RANCH
Lands of Chang Su-0 Lin
\ DUBLIN CALIFORNIA
o°wno,1004
- FIGURE 12
COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT
The Community Design Element establishes design parameters to create a
high quality , visually appealing Dublin Ranch residential community .
The intent of the design standards and recommended project embellish-
ments is to create a unique , unified theme for the overall develop-
ment, while allowing flexibility for design variation from neighbor-
hood cluster to neighborhood cluster .
A. Residential
A primary objective of the Community Design Element is to provide
for quality architectural themes for residential neighborhoods ,
while providing latitude for different "village" designs . The re-
sulting variation enriches the overall project, while establishing
local sense of place . Building intensity also varies from place
to place ; the densities assigned for neighborhood clusters illus -
trated on the Dublin Ranch Development Plan are reflective of the
site terrain, proximity to other proposed land uses , and visibil-
ity from both the valley floor and the surrounding major street
system. Consequently , the Community Design Element also deals
with land use transitions along visible open space areas , street
design criteria to enhance development appearance (both Tassajara
Road and Doolan Road are now designated by Alameda County as "sce-
nic highways") , and the creation or preservation of panoramic
vistas . Design enrichment for residential areas also includes the
application of discriminate "finishing touches" such as high qual-
ity landscape materials , tasteful accent street furniture ( light-
ing , benches , etc . ) and thematic and interesting uses of such
features as masonry walls , fencing , textured paving and mounding .
Policies and Standards
1 . Building design shall reflect a variety of forms , not just the
application of various finishes to uncreative building
"boxes" . Architecture that incorporates elements such as
varied forms , interesting roof lines , multi-level floor plans ,
roof dormers , bay windows , and the like are to be encouraged .
2 . All sides of residential buildings are to be architecturally
treated, although one or more sides may be emphasized .
3 . Building exteriors should utilize an assortment of quality
materials and finishes , such as high quality wood or stucco
finishes , shake and tile roofs , masonry architectural accents
(pilasters , fireplaces , walls , etc . ) , comprehensive wood trim
applications , cus-tom window treatments , and decorative treat-
ments for balconies , decks and private yard fencing.
4 . Housing mix shall be arranged to avoid monotonous repetition
of model types and facade options . No one product shall be
repeated side to side , nor shall the same facade option be
located on the same side of the street within the next six
adjoining units .
5 . {variation in building orientation is encouraged to avoid long
monotonous stretches of similar facades .
61
6 . Carports and other accessory structures shall incorporate the
architectural theme of the main buildings , including roof line
and materials .
7 . Buildings shall be constructed using climatological consider-
ations where possible , and utilizing feasible energy-effective
appliances and devices .
8 . Building design , fence location, and landscape options shall
consider screening from prevailing winds .
9 . On custom lots , step foundations are encouraged in lieu of
"flat pad" grading to help minimize visible slope alteration.
10 . Higher density residential areas are to be situated on the
flatter portions of the site, thus minimizing the "bench"
grading often associated with construction of larger buildings
on sloping terrain.
11 . Residential view orientation to open spaces and distant vistas
should be maximized .
12 . Housing clusters shall be designed to promote informal
resident surveillance of open space areas to deter opportuni -
ties for crime .
13 . Where lots back up to open space , open fencing shall be used
to soften the development edge . . Solid fencing may be used
where special circumstances exist that make this requirement
impractical .
14. Lighting for parking lots and private streets shall utilize
sodium vapor or other energy conserving lighting systems .
15 . The street improvements shall include "gateway" treatments at
all major street intersections , and similar downscaled treat-
ment where minor streets/service streets intersect major
streets . "Gateway" treatment may include such features as de-
corative median, supplemental specimen street trees , decora-
tive street furniture , including monument signs , decorative
walls , trellises , specialty lighting , and the like .
16 . PVAW entrances serving individual neighborhood clusters should
be designed to announce the private nature of the area . En-
trances should differentiate from the public street by utiliz-
ing such features as divided roadways , textured paving , spe-
cialty lighting, decorative pilasters , bollards and sign monu-
ments , trellising , unique and inventive landscape applica-
tions , and the like .
17 . Where neighborhood clusters back up to public streets , a mini -
mum 5 feet additional street width (in excess of the stan-
dard right-of-way width) is to be provided. The park strip
within the street right-of-way and the minimum 5 feet addi-
tional frontage are to be uniformly and comprehensively land-
scaped, and maintained by the respective homeowners associa-
tion. The property line barrier is to be a six foot decora-
tive masonry wall (unless an acoustical report specifies a
greater height) , with provision for variation in wall setback
to accommodate landscape pockets , or to announce village
entrances .
18 . Meandering walks with support landscape mounding are en-
couraged along major public streets .
19 . Where visible from public or private streets , private yard
wood fencing shall be an upgrade over standard neighborhood
board fencing design.
62
B. Commercial
By virtue of its location, the Village Center is the focus of
Dublin Ranch. Consequently , the Specific Plan envisions the
Village Center as the "pace setter" . for the community ,
establishing a standard for local design excellence . The overall
architectural style is not predetermined , however , it should be
residential in flavor and scale , utilizing high quality components
and embellishments . The envisioned Village Center is an asset to
Dublin, influencing and enriching the value of the surrounding
community as a living place .
Policies and Standards
1 . The Village Center buildings are to be "residential" in char-
acter , demonstrating complexity in building mass and height,
utilizing a prominent roof with interesting variation in roof
line , and presenting high quality exterior finishes and de-
tailing on visible building elevations .
2 . Visible support structures (i .e . trash enclosures , masonry
walls , kiosks , identity boards , and the like ) are to be an
integral part of the Village Center design, and shall utilize
similar , high quality materials .
3 . Building roof design shall consider views from surrounding
homes , especially those located at higher elevations . Roof
mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened (preferably
enclosed by the roof design) to minimize unsightly views from
off-site .
4. Lighting for parking lots shall utilize sodium vapor or other
energy conserving lighting systems .
5 . The public street frontage and the adjoining 20 foot setback
area are to be landscaped in a manner to both compliment the
architectural design of the Village Center, and to announce
the presence of the commercial area to street traffic . Land-
scape elements that may be utilized include , supplemental
specimen size trees ( 24" box or larger) , mounding , meandering
walks , decorative light standards , accent street furniture ,
trellising, low walls , entry pilasters , bollards , textured
paving, and the like .
63
i
f
r
f
l
r
i
Chapter IV
r
CHAPTER IV
SPECIFIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
This chapter outlines the procedure for adoption of the Specific Plan,
and the process for approval of subsequent individual development
plans . Additionally, the funding mechanisms to achieve the major
capital improvements for Dublin Ranch are summarized.
64
A. General Provisions
1 . Adoption of the Specific Plan
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65453 , a specific
plan may be adopted by either ordinance or resolution. Adoption
by ordinance is generally the practice when the specific plan
supersedes a zoning ordinance or other code with precise
regulatory measures . Adoption by resolution is generally done when
the specific plan is more of a policy document, without specific
regulations or implementation measures .
The Dublin Ranch Specific Plan will most likely be processed along
with a number of parallel public hearing matters . These hearings
include a potential General Plan study , prezoning , USAB expansion ,
annexation, and environmental assessment. The General Plan study
will be required if the City of Dublin determines that the Dublin
Ranch Specific Plan (or an expanded version of the Specific Plan)
is beyond the scope of the current General Plan, or is
inconsistent with the General Plan. The Specific Plan, a General
Plan amendment, a prezoning study and an environmental assess -
ment may be processed concurrently. It is anticipated that there
may be more than one prezoning category considered for an expanded
specific plan area , depending upon the level of specificity of
each "sub-area" . Sub-areas , like Dublin Ranch, that exhibit a high
level of detail may receive the ultimate zone classification, most
likely PD ( Planned Development) . Conversely , sub-areas with lesser
levels of detail may be prezoned to a low intensive , interim zone
classification. Conceptual master tentative maps will most likely
be required for those sub-areas to be initially zoned PD.
2 . Statement of Specific Plan Relationship to the General Plan
A specific plan must be consistent with the general plan in effect
at the time of adoption. State law requires that a specific plan
contain a statement of relationship of the specific plan to the
general plan ( Section 65451(b) of the Government Code) . Should the
City of Dublin determine that the Dublin Ranch Specific Plan is
not consistent with the General Plan, one (or both) of the plans
must be amended prior to adoption. The following statement
supports consistency between the General Plan and the Dublin Ranch
Specific Plan:
The Dublin Ranch Specific Plan augments the existing City of
Dublin General Plan (February 11 , 1985) without requirement for
amendment of any listed goal or policy statements . The Specific
Plan accomplishes the guiding principles for future development
within the Extended Planning Area as expressed in the General
Plan, Section 2 . 1 . 4, namely :
a . Development areas are located on the more moderate slopes ;
multi-family areas are situated on the flatter land .
b. Refinement studies provide means to accomplish interim and
ultimate municipal services to support the density intensity
specified on the Dublin Ranch Development Plan. The Specific
Plan text also Lists future actions required of developers ,
65
the City of Dublin, or other agencies with jurisdiction to
implement satisfactory levels of municipal services . The
final project is to be phased , allowing development to pro-
ceed in step with the phased delivery of services . Flex-
ibility in density transfer from cluster to cluster also
permits adjustment of final density allocation to meet any
unforeseen localized service delivery problem.
c( l) The financial responsibility for initially constructing most
municipal facilities to urban standards rests with the future
developers .
c( 2) The "backdrop" ridge , as viewed from I-580, lies north and
east of Dublin Ranch, and is not affected by the Specific
Plan. However , the Specific Plan concept of neighborhood
clusters' acts to preserve much of the background hill face
as open space . Preservation of these areas as undeveloped ,
natural open space retains much of the hill character of the
site .
c( 3) Via.ble agricultural operations on adjoining lands will not be
prematurely terminated. Existing area agricultural uses are
very low intensive . The timing of development in the east
foothills is also prefaced by recent development actions ,
namely annexation of county and federal lands just westerly of
the planning area . Notices of non-renewal have also already
been filed for Williamson Act Contract lands within Dublin
Ranch.
c(4) The fiscal impact of new development is not expected to draw
upon or dilute the fiscal base of the City of Dublin. The
urban infrastructure is to be provided at the expense of
future developers . The future land use mix envisioned for the
Extended Planning Area will generate self-supporting tax
revenues , with potential benefit gains for the remainder of
the City .
3. Environmental Assessment
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is to be prepared to address
the impacts of the Dublin Ranch Specific Plan. This EIR is to be
prepared by a separate consultant, with the City of Dublin acting
as lead agency. Once the "master" EIR is certified by the
Council , the California Government Code (Section 65457) exempts
future residential projects (including zone changes and tentative
maps) within the Specific Plan Area from subsequent EIRs , provided
they are in conformance with the Specific Plan. For
nonresidential projects (i . e. commercial uses ) any additional
environmental review (negative declaration or focused EIR) must
only address those site-specific impacts identified in the initial
study. Supplemental EIRs may be required for either residential
or non-residential projects if one of the following conditions
exists (Public Resources Code , Section 21166) :
a . The project is substantially different from the mix,
intensity , or type of uses described in the Specific Plan ;
66
b : Substantial changes occur in the circumstances under which a
project is being undertaken ; or
C . New information about the impacts of the project becomes
available after the master EIR has been certified .
4. Amendment of the Specific Plan
The Specific Plan may be amended as often as deemed necessary by
the City Council . If the General Plan is substantially amended in
a manner that the Specific Plan no longer conforms , the Specific
Plan must also be amended.
5. Development Agreements
The California Government Code ( Sections 65864,et. seq . ) provides
that development agreements may be entered into upon application
by the property owner to the City . Development Agreements are
intended to prevent subsequent change in land use regulations in a
manner that precludes the development originally approved .
Development agreements are contracts , and consequently cannot be
unilaterally imposed by the City . As a follow up step to the
approval of the Dublin Ranch Specific Plan, the City Council
should consider adoption of an enabling ordinance to enact
development agreements pursuant to Government Code Section 65865 .
Development agreements document the commitments each party will
make to assure that the development will take place . Given the
complex nature of the initial planning process , the extensive and
costly requirements for new infrastructure , and the long term
phasing program envisioned for future development, the need for
development agreements is especially apparent.
B. Development Approval Process .
1 . Filing Fees
Assuming the zoning in effect is PD (Planned Development),
individual applications for development plan approval shall be
assessed a fee equal to the fee in effect for Planned Development
review. Requirement for additional environmental assessment or
other supplemental application requires additional filing fee at
prevailing rates .
2 . Processing Procedure
The Dublin Ranch Specific Plan is structured to regulate future
development within very precise parameters . Consequently , the
review procedure emphasizes early city staff input on the
development plan, thus minimizing the need for a protracted public
hearing process . The following summarizes the development review
process required in advance of final maps or building permits :
a . Preliminary Plans - City Staff
Preliminary floor plans , conceptual building elevations , and
schematic site and landscape plans incorporating all relevant
67
items listed for site development review applications ( Section
8-95 . 2 of the Zoning Ordinance) shall be submitted to the City
Staff for review. (Tentative maps are optional . ) City Staff
shall respond to submittals within 30 calendar days of the
filing date . Staff review is advisory , and shall be based on
interpretation of the Dublin Ranch Development Plan, the
Specific Plan text, the subdivision requirements imposed on
tentative map (s ) , and the conditions of any development
agreement entered into by the applicant and the City of
Dublin. Applications are to be processed through agencies with
jurisdiction in the same manner as provided for site
development review.
b. Development Plan - Planning Commission & City Council
Dimensioned floor plans , detailed building elevations with
exterior materials noted thereon, site and schematic land-
scape plans , and other relevant information suggested by City
Staff is -to be submitted to the Planning Commission and City
Council in a manner consistent with City requirements for
planned developments : (Tentative maps may be submitted at a
later date for separate review without additional fee . )
Submitted plans are to be prepared by a professional planner,
architect, landscape architect and civil engineer.
C. Capital Improvements
1 . Financing Mechanisms
There are several appropriate financing mechanisms that may be
used to fund the construction of numerous public services and
facilities envisioned for Dublin Ranch. These mechanisms include
1) subdivision requirements (conditions of approval of tentative
maps) , 2) development fees and land dedications and/or reser-
vations , 3) local , state and federal funds , and 4) assessment
districts and Mello-Roos districts . Other methods are often used ,
however, the above four are easy to administer , politically
acceptable , and equitable in terms of who pays and who benefits .
None of these financing mechanisms require use of current City
revenues .
Subdivision requirements are facilities that are to be fully paid
for and either built or contract and bonded for by individual
developers . These facilities might include street improvements ,
smaller sanitary sewer collection systems , minor water mains ,
storm drain lines and the like . Development fees and land
dedications are to be imposed to pay for improvements that are
needed to prevent depletion of existing city-wide improvements ,
including such things as dedication of park and reservation of
school lands , dedication of additional lands for future . street
widening , dedication of a fire station site, fees for additional
police personnel and equipment, and construction of public park
recreational facilities and landscape amenities . State, Federal,
and local measure "B" funds are provided by appropriate agencies
to underwrite the costs of major infrastructure that has regional
68
benefits . Examples of this may be improvements to I-580
interchanges , and the future construction of Dublin Ranch school
classroom facilities . Lastly, Assessment Districts and Mello-Roos
districts' act to provide funding for certain types of major public
improvements , which benefit large areas . These facilities may
include major sewer collection systems , major stormdrain systems ,
major roadways , and major elements of water system infrastructure .
Under special districts benefit can be established and assessments
made to properties based on benefit which assessment is collected
in the same manner as property taxes are collected .
In addition to the methods mentioned above which are used to
finance construction of infrastructure , Special Maintenance
districts can be established for the maintenance of specialized
landscaping , lighting, and the like , usually where such are on
public lands . As with assessment districts , these fees are
collected in much the same manner as property taxes are collected .
In cases where specialized improvements , including those required
by a specific plan, are on private land but are of benefit to
numerous residential dwelling units , a homeowner ' s association is
often formed to insure continued, uniform maintenance . Given the
neighborhood cluster concept presented on the Dublin Ranch
Development Plan, and the potential for multiple developer
participation , the structure of the future homeowner ' s
association(s ) must consider both individual cluster maintenance
requirements (i .e . thematic frontage landscaping, private streets ,
internal landscaping and recreational facilities , etc . ) and
overall community maintenance requirements (i . e . natural open
space corridors , hiking and equestrian trails, etc . ) . Due to the
nature of the Dublin Ranch Development Plan, and considering the
extensive amounts of private land in common ownership , homeowner ' s
associations are expected to assume the major role for maintenance
of common lands . Streetside landscape areas within public
rights-of-way - may be maintained with special maintenance
districts .
2 . Capital Improvements Program
The following summarizes the capital improvements needed to
implement the Dublin Ranch Specific Plan, and lists the
corresponding financing mechanism.
Public streets , including Land to be dedicated ; improvements
traffic signals to be installed as a subdivision re-
quirement or by assessment district.
Private streets Improvements to be installed as a
subdivision requirement; mainte-
nance by homeowner ' s association .
Bicycle paths and transit Improvements to be installed as a
stops within public street subdivision requirement; mainte-
rights-of-way nance by maintenance district.
Public street right-of-way Improvements to be installed as a
improvements , including subdivision requirement or by
perimeter walls , lighting, assessment district; maintenance by
69
landscaping , and street maintenance district.
furniture
Natural open space and Landscaping and grading are to be
space trails held in pri- done in accordance with subdivision
vate ownership requirements ; maintenance by home-
owner ' s association.
Tassajara Creek Trail Land to be dedicated ; improvements
to be installed as a subdivision
requirement; maintenance by City
or special maintenance district.
Interstate 580/E1 Charro Improvements financed by combina -
Road interchange improve- tion of local , State and Federal
ments funds or future assessment dis-
trict, or combination of both.
Extra lanes for future Land to be dedicated .
major street improvements
Neighborhood parks Land to be dedicated ; recreation
facilities to be provided as a sub-
division requirement, or in-lieu
development fees paid ; maintenance
by DSRSD or the City of Dublin.
Schools Lands to be reserved by subdividers ;
school buildings and land purchase
to be financed by state funds and/
or developer fees pursuant to state
law.
Private recreation faci- Improvements to be installed as
lities a subdivision requirement ; . mainte-
nance by .a homeowner ' s association.
Fire station Land to be dedicated .
Water reservoirs Improvements to be installed as a
subdivision requirement or. by
assessment district.
Water mains Improvements to be installed as a
subdivision requirement or by
assessment district.
Sewer mains Improvements to be installed as a
subdivision requirement or by
assessment district.
Storm drainage facilities Improvements to be installed as a
subdivision requirement - major
outfalls may be installed by
assessment district.
Stabilize Tassajara Land to be dedicated ; improvements
70
Creek drainage channel to be installed as a subdivision
requirement; future maintenance by
by Zone 7 .
Arroyo Mocho Channel Future improvements by Alameda Coun-
project. ty Flood Control District.
71
Attachment/Supplement to City Council Agenda Statement = f
Existing General Plan Policies Regarding PA 87-031
Dublin Ranch General Plan Amendment Stud
In addition to those identified in the Agenda Statement, the following
list contains the existing policies for either the Primary Planning Area or
Extended Planning Area that could have a significiant effect on the residen-
tial development proposal and overall amendment study.
Neighborhood Diversity
- Avoid economic segregation by City sector.
- Require a mixture of dwelling types in large projects. [pg. 7]
Residential Compatibility
- Avoid abrupt transitions between single-family development and higher
density development on adjoining sites.
- Require a planned development zoning process for all development proposals
over 6.0 units per gross residential acre. [pg. 11]
Open Space: Natural Resources, Public Health and Safety
- Preserve oak woodlands, riparian vegetation, and natural creeks as open
space for their natural resource value.
- Maintain slopes predominately over 30 percent (disregarding minor surface
humps or hollows) as permanent open space for public health and safety.
- Continue requiring reservation of steep slopes' and ridges as open space as
a condition of subdivision map approval. [pg. 15]
Open Space: Agricultural
- Maintain lands currently in the Williamson Act agricultural preserve as
rangeland, provided that specific proposals for conversion to urban use
consistent with the General Plan may be considered not sooner than two
years prior to contract expiration.
- Approval of development of agricultural land not under contract shall
require findings that the land is suitable for the intended use and will
have adequate urban services and that conversion to urban use will not
have significant adverse effects on adjoining lands remaining under
contract.
Open Space: Outdoor Recreation, Appearance
Expand park area to serve new development.
- Restrict structures on the hillsides that appear to project above major
ridgelines.
- Use subdivision design and site design review process to preserve or
enhance the ridgelines that form the skyline as viewed from freeways
(I-580 or I-680) or major arterial streets (Dublin Blvd. , Amador Valley
Blvd. , San Ramon Road, Village Parkway, Dougherty Road) . [pg. 16]
Public Lands
Negotiate reservation of an alignment for Dublin Boulevard extension
across Parks RFTA and Santa Rita land. [pg. 18]
M rryn n77
Trafficways
- Reserve right of way and construct improvements necessary to allow
arterial and collector streets to accomodate projected traffic with the
least friction.
- Improve freeway access.
- Reserve right-of-way and construct improvements necessary to allow
arterial and collector streets to accommodate projected traffic with the
least friction.
- Develop a plan line for a six-lane divided extension of Dublin Boulevard
from Dougherty Road to Parks RFTA boundary. [pg. 19]
Scenic Highways
- Incorporate previously designated scenic routes in the General Plan and
work to enhance a positive image of Dublin as seen by through travelers.
[pg. 23]
Riparian Vegetation
- Protect riparian vegetation as a protective buffer for stream quality and
for its value as a habitat and aesthetic resource.
- Promote access to stream corridors for passive recreational use and to
allow stream maintenance and improvements as necessary, while respecting
the privacy of owners of property abutting stream corridors.
- Require open stream corridors of adequate width to protect all riparian
vegetation, improve access, and prevent flooding caused by blockage of
streams.
- Require revegetation of creek banks with species characteristic of local
riparian vegetation, where construction requires creekbank alteration.
[pg. 28-29]
Erosion/Siltation Control
- Maintain natural hydrologic system.
- Regulate grading and development on steep slopes.
- Review development proposals to insure site design that minimizes soil
erosion and volume and velocity of surface runoff.
- Restrict development on slopes of over 30 percent. [pg. 29]
Oak Woodlands
- Protect oak woodlands.
- Require preservation of oak woodlands. Where woodlands occupy slopes that
otherwise could be graded and developed, permit allowable density to be
transferred to another part of the site. Removal of an individual oak tree
may be considered through the project review process. [pg. 29]
Geotechnical Analyses
A preliminary geologic hazards report must be prepared for all sub-
divisions. Any other facility that could create a geologic hazard, such as
a road or a building on hillside terrain, must also have such a study.
Each of the hazards described in the Seismic Safety and Safety Element must
be evaluated. This hazard analysis shall be prepared by a registered
engineering geologist. [pg. 33]
-2-
Fire Protection
- Prepare and implement a plan for facilities and personnel at one or more
fire stations east of Tassajara Road -as a condition of development = �
approval in the Eastern Extended Planning Area.
- Enact a high hazard ordinance specifying:
- Fire retardant roof materials, spark arrestors, water storage, and
vegetation clearance around structures.
- Sprinklers for all habitable structures beyond five minutes response
time from a station. [pg. 34-35]
Flooding
- Regulate development in hill areas to minimize runoff by preserving
woodlands and riparian vegetation. Retain creek channels with ample right
of way for maintenance and for maximum anticipated flow.
- Require dedication of broad stream corridors as a condition of subdivision
approval.
- Protect riparian vegetation and prohibit removal of woodlands. Removal of
an individual oak tree may be considered through the project review
process.
- Require drainage studies of entire small watersheds and assurance that
appropriate mitigation measures will be completed as needed prior to
approval of development in the extended planning area. [pg. 35]
(The study should focus on any water sheds on the property or that let
water through the property.)
-3-
Wpe_x�_ 0� CA.CAT(E5
�(,�tJ.COMMISSIO�I -�}�11�1t�80D� .
fl-B The General Plan 1
The General Plan
Before 1971, a city's general plan was usually considered just a guideline
for growth. In fact, prior to 1971, Government Code§65860 read:"No county
or city shall be required to adopt a general plan prior to the adoption of a zoning
ordinance."
The major change in California planning law practice since 1971 is the .
growing importance of general plans.State laws now require that approvals be
consistent with city's general plan.
The general plan has taken on a very important legal meaning. As the
Attorney General stated in 58 Ops.Cal.Attny.Gen.21,23(1975):
"A study of the 1971 and subsequent statutory changes makes it clear
that the legislature intended that local government engage in the dis-
cipline of setting forth their development policies,objectives and stan-
dards in a general plan composed of various elements of land use.
§§65030,65302,65302.2.The general plans and their constituent ele-
ments are now the local constitutions to which all local development in
its many and varied phases shall repair. §§65302, 65303."
In addition to the Attorney General's opinion, the appellate courts have
discussed the importance of the general plan.
In City of Santa Ana v. City of Garden Grove[(1979) 100 Cal.App.3d 521,
532]the Court of Appeal, in explaining the McCarthy legislation of 1971,stated
it has " . . . transformed the general plan from just an'interesting study'to the
basic land use charter governing the direction of future land use in the local
jurisdiction . . . .As a result, general plans now embody fundamental land use
r^^i decisions that guide the future growth and development of cities."
In Friends of "B" Street, et al. v. City of Hayward, et al. [(1980) 106
Cal.App.3d 988], the court held that the construction of public improvements
must be consistent with the general plan and stated the general plan is,in short,
a constitution for all future development within the city.
General Plan Elements
Under the state planning law, each city shall adopt a comprehensive,long-
term general plan for the physical development of a city and.of any land outside
its boundaries which,in its judgment,bears relation to its planning(Government
Code§65300). Under state law, each city's general plan must have nine man-
datory elements:
1. Land Use -designating proposed general location and distribution of land
uses; includes standards of population density and building intensity.
2. Circulation-the general location and extent of transportation facilities and
public utilities all correlated with the land use element.
3. Housing - provision for housing improvement and site adequacy for all
economic segments of the community.
4. Conservation -of all natural resources.
5. Open Space - for preservation and managed production of natural re-
sources, outdoor recreation and public health and safety.
6. Seismic Safety- identification and appraisal of all seismic and associated
geologic hazards.
7. Noise-in quantitative terms,identifying noise levels and potential mitigation
measures associated with transportation facilities,industrial uses and other
stationary sources. Includes noise impacts on land use and the preparation
of a community noise exposure inventory.
8. Scenic Highways- identification and protection of scenic highways.
9. Safety-protection of community from fires, and geological hazards. ,..
: s
2 I1—B The General Plan
Under the decisions in Camp v. Mendocino [(1981) 123 CA3d 334] and
Twain Harte Homeowners Association, Inc. v. Tuolumne [(1982) 138
Cal.App.3d 6641 the elements must meet the requirements contained in state
law, or they will be deemed illegal and no subdivision approval, for example,
can be given. Thus it is imperative that a city make sure that statutory criteria
are contained in its local elements.
For example, the court in the Camp case, in discussing the inadequacies
of the county's noise element stated:
"The so-called 'noise element'of the Mendocino County General Plan
is set out in a separate pamphlet which shows that it was adopted by
the Board in 1976 . . . It includes no 'noise' exposure information . . .
required by Section 65302. It shows nothing "determined by monitor-
ing"with regard to"areas"deemed noise sensitive"as required by the
next paragraph of the statute. It does not include a "community noise
exposure inventory, current and projected," as required by the para-
graph after that. For these reasons and others,it does not substantially
comply with the requirements of Section 65302, subdivision (g). The
County asserts that it is "certainly adequate for a quiet rural county
such as Mendocino,"but the test is neither geographical nor subjective:
it is purely statutory, and the county has failed it."
In Twain Harte, the court ruled the housing element was adequate,but that
the land use and circulation elements were inadequate. It said the land use
element failed to include standards of population density and building intensity
as required by Government Code §65302(a). The court reasoned that popu-
lation density refers to numbers of people in a given area, and not to dwelling
units per acre,unless the basis for correlation between the measure of dwelling
units per acre and numbers of people is set forth in the plan.Tuolumne County's
plan contained no such correlation.The court further stated that the plan con-
tained no standards for building intensity for the nonresidential areas of the
county. Government Code §65302(b) requires the circulation element to be
correlated with the land use element. The court could not determine from the
evidence whether in fact the circulation element was correlated with the land
use element, and thus concluded that it was not.
Other permissive elements may be included in the general plan such as:
• Recreation: mandatory if the city desires to adopt a parkland dedication
ordinance;
• Transportation;
• Transit;
• Public services and facilities;
• Public building;
• Community design;
• Housing consisting of standards and plans for the elimination of substandard
dwelling conditions;
• Redevelopment;
• Historical preservation;
• Such additional elements dealing with other subjects which, in the judgment
The Nine Mandatory of the planning agency, relate to the physical development of the city.
Elements Of A General However, once a permissive element has been adopted, it is as important
and legally binding as a mandatory one.
Plan Some cities have adopted their elements individually, a practice that may
1. Land Use create a number of problems, particularly if the elements have been prepared
2. Circulation and adopted over many years. At the very least, it makes internal consistency
3. Housing difficult to maintain, results in needless duplication and bulk,and makes review
4. Conservation and use difficult.
5. Open Space Some cities have combined two or more state-mandated elements.Where
6. Seismic Safety elements are combined, the document ought to include an explicit statement
7. Noise of how its contents relate to state planning requirements. The most popular
8. Scenic Highways combinations pair open space with conservation, seismic safety with safety,
9. Safety
Il–B The General Plan 3
and scenic highway with open space. A number of cities have adopted Envi- ,
ronmental Resource Management Elements, integrating the open space,con-
servation, seismic safety and scenic highway elements. Certainly, other
combinations are also possible,including ultimate consolidation—the adoption
of a single document incorporating all the elements. Further,all elements have
equal legal status;in Sierra Club v..Kern Co. [(1981) 126 Cal.App.3d 6981,the
court voided the"precedence clause,"giving one element priority over another.
In 1982 the Legislature required cities to bring their general plan, specific .
plan,and zoning and building regulations into consistency with adopted airport
land use plans,or else to make specific findings. [Chpt. 1041 '82 Sts(AB2920)
adding Government Code§65309.3,amending and adding various sections to
Public Utilities Code starting with PU 21670 et seq.]
An Incomplete Plan
Since the mid-1970's every city has been required to have a general plan
with all of the nine mandatory elements, unless it has received an extension
from the Office of Planning and Research. However, an extension does not
validate or immunize a city's prior approval of land use permits from the re-
quirement of conformity to a valid general plan[Resource Defense Fund v. Co.
of Santa Cruz (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 800, 803]. .
What happens if a city does not have a completed and updated general
plan?The Attorney General commented on this in an opinion:
". . . Consequently, it is our opinion that a county or general law city
must have had a general plan in effect at the latest by January 1,1974,
with the elements which were then and are now required, in order that
O the local legislative body in adopting a zoning ordinance may comply
with the consistency requirement. Obviously, as the section itself
states, such consistency with a general plan cannot be found unless
'The city or county has officially adopted such a plan.' (§65860) [58
Ops. Cal.Atty.Gen. 21, 24 (1975)].
Suppose the city lacks a noise, seismic safety, or housing element, or an
element does not meet state law requirements, or its general plan is internally
inconsistent. If the city finds that a proposed rezoning is consistent with those
elements of the general plan that it has, such an action would be void, none-
theless. [See 58 Ops. Cal.Atty.Gen. 21, 26-27 (1975)]. Also, in Sierra Club v.
Kern County[(1981) 26 Cal.App.3d 698, 704],the court stated in part:"Since
the general plan was internally inconsistent, the zoning ordinance . .. could
not be consistent with such plan(G.C.§65860)and was invalid when passed."
In Resource Defense Fund, supra, the court stated, "Since consistency
with the general plan is required, absence of a valid general plan or relevant
elements thereof, preclude any enactment of zoning ordinances and the like."
In City of Carmel.v. Monterey County [(1982) 137 Cal.App.3d 964], the
court upheld.the trial court's decision that a use permit was necessarily void
because the general plan was inadequate. This case would appear to
supersede the ruling in Hawkins v. County of Marin [(1976) 54 Cal.App.3d
5861,where the court held that the issuance of a conditional use permit did not
have to be consistent with the general plan.
As to subdivision approval, it is quite clear from case law that if one of the
elements is missing, or if an element is inadequate, there cannot be a legal
consistency finding with the general plan. In Save El Toro Assn. v. Days, et al.
[(1977) 74 Cal.App.3d 64], the court stated that the city's laws did not contain
ordinances sufficient to constitute a comprehensive and long-range open
space plan,as required by§65563.The city failed to formulate inventory maps
to be used in conducting an inventory of the open space resources available.
Since the city had not adopted a valid open space plan, it could not approve
any subdivisions.
4 11-B The General Plan
In Friends of"B" Street, supra, the appellate court stated that the city of
Hayward could not proceed with a public works project because it was missing .
its noise element and therefore the project could not conform to an officially -
adopted general plan.
In summary, all zoning by general law cities, all subdivision approval, and
other land use approvals must be consistent with the entire general plan con-
taining all of the nine elements, unless an element is found not necessary
pursuant to Government Code§65302.1.Otherwise the city's action is subject
to legal attack. In addition, because of the Hayward case, all public works
projects must be consistent with the entire general plan,or it will be subject to'
legal attack.
Consistency
By law, consistency exists between zoning and general plan when a city
!mss officially adopted such a plan and the various land uses authorized by
ordinance are compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and
program specified in such a plan. The Attorney General, in 58 Ops.
Cal.Atty.Gen 21 (1975), stated:
". . . As a general approach we endorse the statement in the'General
Plan Guidelines'that'The zoning ordinance should be considered con-
sistent with the general plan when the allowable uses and standards
contained in the text of the zoning ordinance tend to further the policies
in the general plan and do not inhibit or obstruct the attainment of those
articulated policies.'General Plan Guidelines,September 1973,Coun-
cil on Intergovernmental Relations, page.11 11-13:'
Charter cities, except for Los Angeles, appear to be exempt from the con-
sistency mandate because of Government Code §65803,which provides that `
the zoning chapter, §§65800-65912,shall not apply to charter cities. However,
this exemption is only for zoning and not for consistency in subdivision map
approval, for public works construction, or for other land use approval. (For a
good discussion on consistency see "The Consistency Doctrine: Continuing
Controversy,"Chapter 6,page 77,Zoning and Planning Law Handbook,Storm
1982, Clark Boardman Co., Ltd.)
In 1982 the Legislature added comprehensive and specific provisions(Gov-
ernment Code§65750 et seq.),for challenging the adequacy of a general plan.
The action must be brought pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) 1085
traditional mandamus. If the plan is judicially determined to be inadequate,the
law specifies which actions of the city are affected: rezonings, subdivision
approval, and the like. It also specifies time limits to be imposed to prepare an
adequate plan. The law also details other relief the court can grant during the
life of the suit. A detailed reading of those sections and Government Code
§65009, are needed if a lawsuit is brought on this issue.
Procedure For Adoption
The adoption of a general plan or any amendments must follow the provi-
sions of Government Code §65350, et seq.The adoption is by resolution and
if a city has a planning commission, at least one public hearing must be con-
ducted by the planning commission and then one public hearing by the city
council. Approval by the planning commission must be done by the affirmative
votes of not less than a majority of its total voting members.
State law restricts amendments to any one of the mandatory elements of
the general plan to four per year. However, the restriction does not apply to
amendments for affordable housing projects. This requirement prevents con-
tinual general plan amendments every time an inconsistency between a pro-
posed zoning action and the general plan surfaces. This limitation tends to
- = t
11-B The General Plan 5
further focus attention upon basic land use questions rather than the all too
( frequent narrow inquiry, "How good is this particular project?"
Further, before adopting a general plan or any amendment,the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) must be addressed. CEQA guidelines are
applied to a general plan when it is adopted or amended in order to bring it into
conformance with state environmental codes(see Section III of this handbook.
for specific CEQA applications).
The Housing Element
One of the most detailed and sometimes controversial elements is the
housing element and its various requirements (Government Code §65580 et
seq).This 1980 legislation described in detail what must be considered by each
city in adopting the housing element of its general plan.
An assessment must be undertaken of the housing needs of all economic
segments of the community and a program must be formulated to meet those
needs. Housing need is determined by calculating the community's fair share
of the regional housing needs. That share is initially determined by the appro-
priate council of governments (COG), or by the Department of Housing and
Community Development in those areas where a COG does not exist. If a What Goes Into A Housing
community disagrees with the COG's determination, it may include its own
determination in its housing element, with all data justifying its conclusion. Element?
In addition to the assessment of housing need and-the development of a ■ An assessment of community
housing program, a housing element must include an analysis of existing housing needs.
household characteristics, an inventory of land suitable for residential devel- ■ A program to meet those needs.
opment, an analysis of governmental constraints on the development of hous- ■ An analysis of the community's
C1 ing,an analysis of nongovernmental constraints on the development of housing, household characteristics.
and an analysis of special housing needs such as those of the elder) or
y ■ An inventory of land suitable for
handicapped. residential development.
The housing program is developed by identifying adequate sites for a va- ■ An analysis of governmental
riety of types of housing for all income levels, by addressing governmental constraints on the development
constraints to the development of housing, by conserving and improving the of housing.
condition of existing affordable housing stock and by promoting housing op- ■ An analysis of non-governmental
portunities for all persons in the community. constraints.
The following provisions of the 1980 legislation on housing elements should ■ An analysis of special housing
be noted: needs, such as those of the elderly
• The Department of Housing and Community Development's Housing Ele- or handicapped.
ment Guidelines are declared to be advisory.
• All comments made by the Department in its review of local housing elements
are declared to be advisory. What The-Housing
• The burden of proving that a city's determination of its fair share is reasonable Element Does Not Do
does not rest with the city.
• The legislation states that a city may not be able to provide sufficient housing ■ It does NOT force cities to follow
to meet the identified need due to fiscal,environmental or other public health, the guidelines set out by the State
safety,and welfare objectives.Identification of need does not require fulfilling Department of Housing and
that need if other factors interfere with this effort. Inability to meet identified Community Development.
housing need does not render the housing element or the implementing ■ It does NOT remove a city's
zoning unlawful. authority to determine its fair share
The law further provides that a city shall not be required to expand local of regional housing needs.
revenues for the construction of housing,housing subsidies,or land acquisition; ■ It does NOT require a city to meet
nor to disapprove any residential development which is consistent with the its housing needs if other factors
general plan. interfere.
In 1982 the Legislature added another limitation on a city's power to dis- ■ It does NOT force cities to raise
approve or conditionally approve a housing development project at a lower money to build housing.
density than applied for. It required that written findings be made based on ■ It does NOT require a city to
specific conditions concerning specific, adverse impacts and the lack of fea- disapprove any residential develop-
sible mitigation methods (Government Code §65589.5). Even though this lim- ment that is consistent with the
itation added to the housing element article, its application is quite broad. general plan.
6 11—B The General Plan
Basically, if a housing project complies with applicable general plan, zoning
and development policies at the time the application is determined to be com-
plete, the city cannot later disapprove or approve it at a lower density until
written findings on the existence of specific conditions are determined.
(See further discussion of housing in Section W.F.)
Specific Plans
The specific plan is an effective but often unused tool for the implemen-
tation of general plan policies and priorities.Because their preparation requires
sophisticated staff or consultant resources,many cities are reluctant to prepare
these plans. Hence,they often request that a project applicant prepare or fund
the preparation of a specific plan which would encompass their project. Be-
cause of their relative specificity and ultimate assurances, they may be pre-
ferred by applicants for large scale development. Specific plans are designed
to define environmentally sensitive areas within the city/county and set the
parameters of development allowed in those areas. A specific plan evaluates
the features of the area (e.g., water, plant, animal resources, etc.) to enable
planners and developers to mitigate any measurable environmental impacts
before development is permitted.They do,however,require a significant"front
end"investment in planning, architectural and engineering fees without assur-
ances that a specific proposal will be approved.Some cities provide for general
"concept review"which, if approved,may provide some basis for a developer's
initial investment.
The authority for specific plans is contained in Government Code §65450
et seq. However, they are not applicable to charter cities unless adopted by
charter or ordinance (Government Code §65700). The plan shall include all
detailed regulations,conditions,program,and proposed legislation which shall —
be necessary or convenient for the systematic implementation of the general
plan.
The procedure for adoption of specific plans is basically the same as for
general plans. The city council may determine and establish administrative
rules and procedures for the application and enforcement of specific plans and.
regulations,and may assign or delegate such administrative functions,powers,
and duties to the planning or other agency as may be necessary or desirable.
Subdivisions and development agreements must be consistent with spe-
cific plans (Government Code§§66473.5 and 65867.5).
To assist and encourage cities and developers to use specific plans, the
Legislature, in 1979, adopted Government Code §65453.
"The Legislature hereby declares its intent to encourage counties and
cities to undertake the work and responsibility for development of spe-
cific plans. At the time a specific plan is presented to the legislative
body for adoption, the city or county shall also prepare and present a
complete cost breakdown . . . The legislative body, after adopting a
specific plan, may impose a special fee upon persons seeking govern-
mental approvals which are required to be in conformity with the spe-
cific plan. The amount of the fees shall be established so that, in the
aggregate they defray, but as estimated do not exceed, the cost of
development and adoption of the specific plan. As nearly as may be
estimated, the fee charged shall be a prorated amount in accordance
with the applicant's relative benefit derived from the specific plan. It is
the intent of the Legislature in providing for such fees to charge those
builders,developers,and others who benefit from development of spe-
cific plans for the costs thereof which result in savings to them by
reducing the cost of documenting environmental consequences and
advocating changed land uses which may be authorized pursuant to
the specific plan."