HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.4 Casden Company Rezoning f
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 27, 1989
SUBJECT: Public Hearing
PA 88-009. 1/.2/.3 The Casden Company
Planned Development Rezoning, Tentative
Map 5883 and Site Development Review
REPORT PREPARED BY: Trudi Ryan, Project Planner
EXHIBITS ATTACHED: xhibit A: Planned Development
District, Tentative Map and
` Site Development Review .
Plans (reduced copies)
Exhibit B: Draft Resolution adopting a
Mitigated Negative
Declaration of
Environmental Significance
Exhibit C: Draft Resolution adopting a
Monitoring Program for
mitigation measures
incorporated into the
project.
Exhibit D: Draft Resolution regarding
rezoning of the property to
Planned Development
Exhibit E: Draft Resolution adopting
Tentative Tract Map 5883
Exhibit F: Draft Resolution imposing a
Traffic Impact Fee
Exhibit G: Draft Resolution adopting
the Site Development Review
Exhibit H: Draft Ordinance amending
Zoning Ordinance
Background Attachments:
1. Applicant' s Written Statement
2 . Draft Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Envi3�onmental
Significance (includes expanded
Initial Study)
3 . City Attorney's February 14, 1989
memo regarding easement/right-of-
way ingress and egress to subject
property through Stagecoach Drive
4 . December 19, 1988, Planning
Commission Staff Report (without
attachments)
5. January 17, 1989 Planning
Commission Staff Report (without
atta. hi,—fit ••)
6. February 21, 1989 Planning
Commission Staff Report (without
attachments)
7. Location Map
ITEM NO--- r. -------------------------COPIES TO::--
OE---Applicant_---
Owner/Rep
PA 88-009
RECOMMENDATION:
1 - Open public hearing and hear Staff presentation.
2 - Take testimony from Applicant and the public.
3 - Question Staff, Applicant and the public.
4 - Close public hearing and deliberate.
5 - Adopt Resolution regarding Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Significance (Exhibit B) .
6 - Adopt Resolution regarding Monitoring Program for mitigation
measures incorporated into the project (Exhibit C) .
7 - Adopt Resolution regarding Planned Development. (PD) Rezoning
- PA 88-009. 1 (Exhibit D) .
8 - Adopt Resolution regarding Tentative Map 5883 - PA 88-009.2
(Exhibit E) .
9 - Adopt Resolution regarding Traffic Impact Fee (Exhibit F) .
10- Adopt Resolution regarding Site Development Review - PA 88-
009. 3 (Exhibit G) .
11- Waive the reading and introduce an ordinance to amend the
zoning ordinance (Exhibit H) .
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: This project would have minimal affect
on City finances.
DESCRIPTION:
CoastFed Properties, Owner, and The Casden Company, Applicant,
are requesting the City to rezone 17.45+ acres of property
located south of Amador Valley Boulevard south and east of
Stagecoach Drive from Zoning Unit #1497 to Planned Development
District (PD) . They are concurrently requesting the City to
consider a request to subdivide the property to accommodate 206
multi-family residential condominium units and a request for Site
Development Review of the property.
The use of the site is governed by the Dublin General Plan. The
General Plan designates the land use for this property as Medium
Density Residential (6. 1 to 14. 0 units per acre) and Stream
Corridor. Approximately 14 .5- acres are in Medium Density and
about 2 .95 acres are in Stream Corridor. This site is part of
Zoning Unit 1497 which would have permitted 230 dwelling units on
the remaining vacant site (subject property) . Since the County
approval of the 1497 Zoning Unit, the City has adopted the
General Plan which includes the Stream Corridor designation on a
portion of the property. Staff advised the Applicant that the
stream corridor area could not be physically built, upon and would
not necessarily be used in calculating project density. Compared
with other creeks in Dublin, the creek lacks high visual quality
due to its relatively sparce vegetation and has marginal
accessibility both of which substantially reduce the natural
resource value of the creek. Since the site was previously
approved for 230 units and the creek, as it exists, does not have
high natural resource value, Staff advised the Applicant that one
dwelling unit per acre of stream corridor (up to three dwelling
units) could be credited toward the overall project density.
Permissible number of units is 91 to 206.
Project Overview
The''Appiicant is pro1a6sihq""2'016 °apartme:nt/condominiium- consisting
of one, two and three bedroom units in 26 two-story buildings.
Each unit includes a washer, dryer, separate water heater,
private storage area and a balcony or patio. Bui-ding exteriors
are stucco with wood trim. Architectural detailing includes
decorative strips of wood, windows with divided lights, and
lattice patio fences and deck walls plus lattice archways.
-2-
Fourteen of the buildings are oriented to face the creek
providing views of the creek. Physical access to the creek is
limited to Zone 7 maintenance vehicles and emergency vehicles.
The main entry road, off of Amador Valley Boulevard, loops
through the project and connects to Stagecoach Drive.
The project includes one carport space for each unit and 255 open
spaces for a total of 461 spaces (2. 23 spaces per unit) .
Modifications to the site plan, as recommended by Staff, would
delete 3-6 parking spaces, which would still exceed the standard
minimum requirements (2 . 15 spaces/unit) .
The conceptual landscaping plan (Exhibit A) shows a heirarchy of
street trees, canopy trees and vertical accent trees with shrubs
and groundcovers. Proposed species all have fairly low water
requirements and can withstand drought conditions. Thirty
percent of the trees will be 24 inch box or larger; seventy
percent will be 15 gallon.
Proposed landscaping is located around buildings, and parking
areas, providing shading and visual accents. Landscape screening
is also proposed between new buildings and the existing Heritage
Commons development.
The City's park dedication requirement is 0. 009 acres per
dwelling unit, for a total of 1.84 acres for this project. In
lieu fees, based on the current market value of the project land,
area available. Parkland dedication credit for on-site
improvements may be available. This credit is bared on a portion
of minimum size and dimensioned recreation areas. Preliminary
Staff calculations are for 0. 1333 acres of credit.
Environmental Review
An Initial Study (Environmental Assessment) was prepared for this
project (Attachment 2) and identified three main areas of
concern: traffic, noise and biology. Studies of these issues
were prepared and mitigation measures have been incorporated into
the proposed project conditions of approval.
Noise. Present and future noise conditions (both exterior and
interior) were evaluated for this site. The study concluded
that exterior noise levels would not exceed the acceptable
limits as set forth in the Dublin General Plan.
Noise levels inside the second floor units (with the windows
open) of the four buildings closest to Amador Valley Boulevard
would exceed the State maximum of CNEL 45 db by about 2 db.
With the windows closed, the indoor standard can be met.
Mechanical ventilation or air conditioning would be required, in
these units. Condition #27 and #28 of the PD Rezoning makes
these a requirement for those buildings.
Biology. The biological resources were reviewed at two levels.
The first level was a tree-stand study to identify and evaluate
the health of existing trees over 6 inches in diameter. The
study also evaluated the impacts from development and made
recommendations for tree removal or preservation along with
recommendations of preservation techniques. The report
recommends removal of several trees due to poor health of those
trees. After the initial evaluatis.t•1::on ,.the. siteaan, was
• _ _ .:ESA....•• ..,• ...=y wi:••.:�v . > wtm-5
modified to preserve the maximum number of trees. Mitigation
measures providing design guidelines and construction
guidelines to preserve and protect trees as well. as long term
maintenance guidelines are referenced in PD Rezoning Condition
#11.
The second level of biological evaluation concerns the habitat
and wildlife of the entire site. Using bioloigical analyses
prepared for an adjacent site, conditions of approval were
added which will help preserve the "riparian forest" habitat.
-3-
Traffic. Under existing conditions, the project access at the
entry on Amador Valley Boulevard (east of Stagecoach Drive)
would be restricted to right turns into and out of the project.
This arrangement could result in increased accidents at
Wildwood Road/Amador Valley Boulevard and at Stagecoach
Drive/Amador Valley Boulevard from vehicles attempting U-turns
where inadequate space is available. Mitigation includes a
median break in Amador Valley Boulevard opposite, the project's
main entry to include appropriate acceleration lanes. This
mitigation will also reduce the number of vehicles using the
existing Heritage Commons for ingress and egress from 71% to
32% of the total average daily trips.
The project will contribute to cumulative increases in traffic
on several roads and intersections within the City of Dublin.
The project should contribute its proportional :share to the
improvement of these facilities. Condition 068 of the
tentative map addresses the requirement for traffic impact
mitigation fees.
These applications were the subject of three Planning Commission
hearings (December 19, 1988, January 17, 1989 and February 21,
1989) . During the course of those meetings, three: main issues
emerged:
1) Use of Stagecoach Drive, a- private street, by PA 88-009.
2) Traffic circulation through the project and along Amador
Valley Boulevard.
3) Apartment vs. Condominium ownership.
1) Stagecoach Drive
Concern was expressed by Heritage Common's residents that
there was no record of an easement across their property which
would permit access to the subject property. The project
applicant furnished information to demonstrate the existence of
the easement. Subsequently, the City Attorney reviewed the
information and provided an opinion to the Planning Commission
that there is a valid easement (see Attachment 3) .
2) Traffic and Circulation
Heritage Common' s residents expressed concern over the
increased traffic volumes through their project and concern that
pedestrian safety could be adversely affected. The Applicant
suggested, and the Commission has recommended, that speed bumps
be added at the existing end of Stagecoach Drive and the on
extension to slow traffic.
There were several suggestions that a traffic. signal be
installed at Amador Valley Boulevard and the project's main
(east) entry. Staff advised that Traffic Signal Warrants could
not be made for a signal at this location, and that it would be
irresponsible to install a signal which could increase traffic
problems, especially certain types of accidents (e.g. rear end
collisions) .
3) _Unit, Ownership_ -
The Applicant has requested the units to be
apartment/condominium. The Applicant has indicated that the
units will be offered as rentals initially. At such time as the
market is more supportive of condominiums they would offer the
units for individual sale. The community expressed concern that
a rental project has a potential for lack of maintenance. The
Planning Commission was satisfied that the project, as
conditioned, would provide an appropriate level of project
maintenance. The City's property maintenance ordinance is an
additional tool to assure that this property is well. maintained.
-4-
Another concern raised by the Planning Commission in the
course of the hearings related to the availability of schools for
project residents. The School Board advised that sufficient
capacity is available at the high school and middle school levels
for this and other projects. District wide, capacity is
available at the elementary level, however, the District may need
to adjust school service boundaries to accommodate growth in some
.areas of the City.
Other questions raised during the public hearings were
responded to either orally at the hearing or in writing in staff
reports.
Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the Planning
Commission' s recommendations regarding these applications and
take the following actions.
1) Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Significance (Exhibit B) .
2) Adopt a Monitoring Program for mitigation measures
incorporated into the project (Exhibit C) .
3) Adopt Resolution regarding Planned Development -(PD)
Rezoning - PA 88-009. 1 (Exhibit D) .
4) Approve the Tentative Map 5883-PA 88-009.2 (Exhibit E) .
5) Approve the Traffic Impact Fee (Exhibit F) .
6) Adopt the Site Development, Review-PA 88-009. 3 (Exhibit
G) .
7) Waive the reading and introduce the Ordinance amending
the Zoning Ordinance (Exhibit H) .
-5-
','' ' . •
` cGIIffO �Cf�` ��AL
0 0
1M �nl�
4 o
U � 11 l,U ,. . ♦ '• , 1��4—_ a
�: 1� �( � , •o.o w••Nw•••vo. Hvewr eau c• »an T,-asaa • O•.\- ♦�,� �..�.��.__
A.. ♦ ti. .,� .l e �� _
,�� �. ,� ' ' )\�'\ `•r�• ���`.i .(t J • e ♦� ros'gi \`` C I .-C�f�' �1��..`( e 1 � --�\ �L,
//i /-/ t`h� , V • ,\� C �•' ,1: .• ` pJ �•�/Jy'`!. �`!�• n C `.Y\(J wY ., C �'l\\ `(JeJ1
`♦ • I -/ , � 1. �. � ,♦ 4 •�
t S; / l ...;•,Y, .J i / I l--'�' ('"} �' 4 .' Q J/• 'C c.aH n,.awn
' g� :�` % ���(' ,'/I /��1,), 'c �• i /; c..T•ww•nal /
\\ice t t! • I f , '.��'. l''` ,\ f�r8 ..T•T1 \ (. w'rjE i v, T •!; / . , ..!!
// � r P ti �q l� .rP';P�1 • \�A/ '� ��l 1 ,_t' l� � �� � `'�`��/.�/( /'� 1. ''T' t• /`/ ;1 .' wru
if VACANT I S, \ 1 Y • //�i ! +� y �' IM1 .J'' 1 l�' :'/'
A»a•• i'� 1\ \. 1 �r �1 • e ' I , �•,, ' 1::/�' 1�'1L�," _.l� Pq I / '/
wr=Nn:Tw Wn •.1 I..r I I i I I I I I- y`�.. `�
•.a..a H•N I•IT• � �• `. , t• I Y '-"L�Cf-�t rT, � �` � VVII..JJMANTENANCE -• �,�'
C•a•11 H•- .1•R1 T • 1 /
TOTAL HWn '\ ' � • � I I I •••,. A•••T••K•rNIM .a• •n• , ��_���•�� , •/ T' -'raa to uw•
i I wr rA•u•rroN r.•..n. ..a r,...w ... n. � �` AL
cr•ruAAroN • � I I A-.e•u•.a wn „•» � _ _ ._ _- � � /
con.m•*..cuo-n • I I I •-aH ae••w wn ° .» ». �\ /(♦ �\. ir'�'t.` •'-•_ /' Imu►uec•w eou+r
o'-.— •)• TOT" »Wn ' "�• .,
i�
rota no t +\ 1 I
"�T\ \•.,T Cy r I Y Y c r••uN /
/
covcnco STANDARD-32 �� �.���t ��.••� 1 .r.r..m .a e.�w
or<•.rAw•no -al \ \\; ATEDKW DENSITY NEB,DEN1TAl
MMA
EX OKM COV•CT -0 1
' 9 roue Ta
9s :�
F I '
1 'A-b:F,--009
n
Q.1
n
O .►� w
KITCHEN DINING Q i9
�.
BEDROOM BA H 0 N
- BATH
I t"� IIIV -- -- -- �m�
-- - LL
•
II o DINING N;
or
TILL Qao
h BEDROOM LIVING BEDROOM
U°m
II0
LIVING -
l��rl,^Tl I O )
-- i = PLAN A — 1 BR — 1 BA STORAOI BALCONY F
H ;;;�. ;)AG eaLCONV — 660 S.F. _ —11 PLAN B — 2BR — 2BA
' RS 940 S.F.
II I + I� PATIO FIT I�
FLOO � .
t� PATIO FIRST FLOOR i; -I •
DGDROOM I TI ^ DATII DINING Q
�J
- - _ 0
i ItIIIIWI w
II l 11-1VP1_ _ 0
F—
cc
BEDROOM BEDROOM LIVING —� LLJ
.F4 (
— PLAN C — 3BR — 2BA
pyp �ee,4. _� 9TORAG BALCONY
�
f Ewa- 1100 S.F. _
}: I PATIO FIRST FLOOR ...r
' WHITE MULLION
FALUMINUM WINDOWS PEACH STUCCO } LLL �•• ��' r :� �' yn
SMOOTH STUCCO
PAINT WHITE raw
yN
N
� Q v
N
0
V°m
WOOD LATTICE
CI SS,_S, FENCE GREY
SIDE ELEVATION PLAN A
E�
1 ,
<<
WOOD RAILING GREY r WHITE METAL
t WOOD SEAM OREV 1 .v,
DOWNSPOUT Z
PAINT Will WOOD LATTICE STUCCO SCREED PAINT WHITE O
i PAINT GREY
MACHINE APPLIED PEACH STUCCO
Lu
H0. OOR L
W
rr 1
_111100R. .aY.�uuw
'(i1' Jjl li�l METAL STAIRS ~ ~ 1
_I WOOD LATTICE ----- PAINT GREY
TIII FENCE GREY
-LIGHT PEACH STUCCO
FR T ELEVATION PLAN A .. z
WIIIIE th
lJ �Z `ti.L
-4NI, Lk*'
•rkCIi STUCCO WOOD LATTICE
OnEY
SIDE ELEVATION PLAN B
W111TE
Wjf�•l 1:VI 14 1 (n
(,A woou fITATA(1111:1
z
0
p WHITE DOWNSPOUT
IND FLOOR•
- -=' 1611�9i(���6 9��9�� . � �.II��n6i�:I������: - . �������aT _ Lu
WOOD LATTICE
GREY
FRONT ELEVATION PLAN B
.f3
LT.PEACN -
` N
/y,-- PEACN srucco --- — --' — \� ♦,I � -'t :1 i �LL�
� �... _.. _ �--WIIIIE 9MOOIN 9,UCC0 �� � j •� � yi n
I rt In.
III
SIDE ELEVATION PLAN C \Al
/ -///---rr:Arn 9nlcco ! E Z
—wnnc
WAIEn r — vl'Ir CAP vnul-
\ 0
. W 1111 I: \�V
\ ► y ., 110011 II11M „---.•
willir
lit
STUCCO 9C CEO .- ....._._. _..... ..... ��PY ��14 ���Y. Y +•t— y�.4' ._�_..� a1 //��
PAINT WHITE 1 -{{{--_�_ � ���! ��`. Vf.•
�1� `
1��_
- -,a..::,Ae
J W000 LA,TICE
�000n
ff:NCE GnEY A]• 11'
FRONT ELEVATION PLAN C �- a
r'
avows �.
I
a �
sroR.
.
--- --,�--(-��—_ acs
f
EXERCISE ROOM
PLAN — B
RECREATION ROOM
STORM
_ I
I -
I 1 TO POOL
OFFICE
MEN WOMLN e1
PLAN — B I ! 1 1 I N
OFFICE - V
_ 111
.._._ .... LOUNGE
._.....
.............. --------'--'° ._........
STOR. _
ti
ENTRANCE ��. ..v�e�r.•
ga. mfr,
s 1 RECREATION BLDG. FLOOR PLAN _s
r4
1
' _-'_-_-^--'__------_'------__-_--___
�
CL
Is A
RECREATION BLDG SIDE ELEVATION
CONCRETE TILE ROOF
GREY
Mal
......... -di
in
uj
PSI
WOOD LATTICE LLJ
FENCE GREY
-4'-B* ............ J-
RECREATION BLDG FRONT ELEVATION
�
,ww.�es'r�.r.r;•-4I^'.;�.i�:s'•.."''�'r?^ �s✓.'.:•.,.:^..»rcr".�.+y.r-v-r`fi,tr s vr f�..^-.r,r �Rh_.y-,,,r:S�.i'Y1�y.ix.).,r 1�,',Y+T1'�,<.''L.x. ,(.,'M-<�.i.l t'� ��rs u.:l"•-'-, �:•2r.•i'j....krs..I�-Iy 7?.s^.LT.7 •7.s s. :.:;,(lh y3•.'N•4"•t.?f,1•.; f'`•3'L,v't,:.a F.—.4-.x.'<l,•r!+'.^�r riY-y<.q.q}rl;...FN.•,',t-<;si.g:�h.;.'ti rk"J,..�a..Y'fA,.�...rY.M('�C.»1:,-'.'•cfi,t._2.:.i`.•f...ki.,R,:.,,;_....•1..':!..r�.}_jo�,.i�....�r:.t•yT..r...:wr,���.i4.�.N.-k i IMF, y .
ma4r CaT!. a 3s, . v• f•yi 8J.i.'-:�%�•it:a'a:�,.•�•.-u•t:+:.J.-r lT:.<v.yxr.t.i,r5'�a r L'a�•!Y�":''l•i•t rt.4r a-.F- •1�1.n I,E t..-sZ"
RARE
VIA
S ��.•t:..k-" :-��....K-.:-..,
�1-
.. +
'•t
.,:
,,e..,�;� n%,Ntl � l�., <a .iF,3.-,r s..A.�r >..: ! ,t. � ,.�.. .-. __ .-. •_ .,....._.. --
,..4..-..-rN'..a...-..r:,.�::.J•..wi2,P]'��"F', :aw:�rT:.7±S�t���'1.Y:6V, .�` i�'iClJ��6'tuVif�;y'�e,�f�fk�fiC 5�u....!.''M.�iir±�.'ii��ii!'.tit::l�.n+ws1�';G l:�iai'iu:n�i;.i ,'4c•'y-w:'ti:�wr...:..,%�+c?..r.�:..:a::�:'>,:cc�::<•":,'.'-
,,d 'ti+ ��• �. ten• _ EM
!•3il-ice '�' �e ��°�'!i'� v_�'• y ���•� �, �•+�� A
�� y � �►.. �- � � ..'t� : ,tip �a,.E `. ; �lrfr 1 �'��1�
•�� � � t �� .I,t • ka v0 are , y, .r ,�
iC IC
'vr
' . , �.. , . .: _.�• _ 1:' :i:'•1, . ��-- r ice' • ;i.=';i 1 1
i .' � �.-•- .y"a1 rte.- •n - _ _
Tyro SECT am
IT t
I �,, ) `�I ;!' i — el •5.. "'�"•�!� ti'� •_� �, `�1"~-_,s, �t'.«R'._� - t _, '+ •. S�1 ,r�•-•
�- 1
_ 711ACT 4950
- - - - t -
I f � �' �( ', r�.. �� it `t' -_L:__�L— � II_ .1 � �•� . ;` �t'-� .���t��" '--�,
till r,t tsl� , 1 t� I � ,r � ! �\�= r,� •� : �f "��.r
a em' - _. , ' Z �� FL:1rc :I _ . ,r'1. ►1 wY1v.Yin+w.00idrr wl++._
v fix
54. TL
�� � '1, 1 .�Y'"�`�• l./i *. 1`r. ."'�:�`.r .�..... . �
I'I 3 I J ,'�'� ��/ _/''_JC`f \,fit•... � ./ 1�.� _ L.I r ewrw.rr
• n _ CR=
.�" ;�C' �� - •" HERITAGE COMMONS'
f� � � -,\� 1� � "'` '\`� 1 _ __ - ,. y .> �•�.,,;,�,,.,[- ..,,.p TENTATIVE TRACT 5863
/ 11LVSlr!�_ �y �w,•. •`�- — •'4., �;� .'' 1 — t i'•"/ wto+N.Ya,..e. .... CITY OF Mum t
::•:•••i ALAYEDA COUNTY. CALWOW"'
1i:1•�\lam 1 :yoi /_. ~/y/ al
.I
Z- � J!''��.��.5 1 •7•,� � -• /I fit LL A ARN. INC.
/�I��Y4.�1...YY.YYMW 1 C 1 Y 1 1 t Y • 1 Y t t •
I/Y � i + /^`` 1 � � ^�` � I• Irfr,�.J"f -" ;i''!• �'�/ � r.....rl.r, t•.o.l w.wn...l•
� :IBS --�.—�- _��• J - �--==-rte.`-`=a� ----__._...----- . .. --- - - . - -
RESOLUTION NO. - 89
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) REZONING, TENTATIVE MAP 5883 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW REQUESTS FOR A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF 206 DWELLING UNITS,
AND COMMON OPEN SPACE PROPOSED OVER A 17.45+ ACRE PROPERTY SOUTH OF AMADOR
VALLEY BOULEVARD, SOUTH AND EAST OF STAGECOACH DRIVE, COLLECTIVELY REQUESTED
UNDER PA 88-009.1, .2 AND .3, HERITAGE COMMONS PHASE 2-4, COASTFED PROPERTIES,
CASDEN COMPANY
WHEREAS, Casden Company submitted a request that the City rezone to a
Planned Development (PD) District 17.45+ acres lying south of Amador Valley
Boulevard with concurrent requests for Tentative Map and Site Development
Review approval covering the Planned Residential Development; and
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , as amended
together with the State's administrative guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act and City Environmental regulations,
requires that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impact and that
environmental documents be prepared; and -- -- -
WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq. , a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been prepared
by the Dublin Planning Department with the project specific mitigation measures
outlined in Staff's Environmental Assessment dated December 7, 1988, regarding:
1. Biological Resources
2. Traffic and Circulation
3. Noise
4. Archaeology
5. Slope Stability, Foundation Support, Consolidation
6. Nuisances
7. Conservation
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did review and consider said Mitigated
Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance at its meetings of
December 19, 1988, January 17, 1989 and February 21, 1989; and the Planning
Commission adopted Resolution No. 89-006 recommending approval of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hold a public hearing on March 27, 1989, on
said Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given as legally
regUire'dj°
[PA88-009:Reso CC (ND) 3/27/89] . EXHIBIT
PA-09b-009 (N))
WHEREAS, the City Council determined that the project, PA 88-009.1, .2
and .3, has been changed by the Applicant and/or the Applicant has agreed to
provide mitigation measures resulting in a project that will not result in the
potential creation of any significant environmental impacts identified in the
Environmental Assessment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council finds that
the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been
prepared and processed in accordance with State and Local Environmental Law and
Guideline Regulations and that it is adequate and complete.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of March, 1989.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
-2-
[PA 88-009:Reso CC (ND) 3/27/89]
RESOLUTION NO. - 89
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADOPTING A REPORTING OR MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE .PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD)
REZONING, TENTATIVE MAP AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REQUESTS OF 206 DWELLING
UNITS AND COMMON OPEN SPACE PROPOSED OVER 17.45+ ACRE PROPERTY SOUTH OF AMADOR
VALLEY BOULEVARD, SOUTH AND EAST OF STAGECOACH DRIVE, COLLECTIVELY REQUESTED
UNDER PA 88-009.1, .2 AND .3 HERITAGE COMMONS PHASE 2 THROUGH 4, COASTFED
PROPERTIES, CASDEN COMPANY
WHEREAS, Casden Company submitted a request that the City rezone
to a Planned Development (PD) District 17.45+ acres lying south of Amador
Valley Boulevard with concurrent requests for Tentative Map and Site
Development Review approval covering the planned residential development; and
WHEREAS, the project has been reviewed for environmental impacts
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) together with the
State Administrative Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Significance was prepared by the Dublin Planning Department with project
specific mitigation measures; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted the Mitigated Negative
Declaration in Resolution - 89 at a public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended City Council
adoption of the Monitoring Program in Resolution 89-007; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Staff Report which
recommends that the project be approved subject to specific mitigation
measures; and
WHEREAS, the California Public Resources Code Section 21081.6
requires that the City adopt a Reporting or Monitoring Program for the changes
to the project which the City has adopted in order to mitigate or avoid
significant effects on the environment.
-1-
[PA88-009:Reso CC (Monitor) ] uIHIBIT
PA08-n0`l (Alood- �9rnl
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council
approves the Monitoring: Program dated December 14, 1988, and attached hereto as
Attachment 1.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of March, 1989.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
-2-
[PA88-009:Reso CC (Monitor) ]
PA 88-009 HERITAGE COMMONS
PD REZONING, TENTATIVE MAP AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
MONITORING PROGRAM
December 14, 1988
The Applicant shall be responsible for any and all costs incurred in
monitoring mitigation measures.
A. Biological Resources
Mitigation measures to protect biological resources will be monitored
in the following manner:
1. Construction permits for grading improvements and buildings shall
not be issued unless plans reflect tree preservation, tree
revegetation and construction techniques specified in the
Mitigated Negative Declaration. Construction documents shall
specify conformance. (Responsibility: Planning Department)
2. Final inspection of improvements will not be granted until all
improvements specified on the plans have been instituted.
(Building Inspection Department; Planning Department; Public Works
Department)
. 3. Planning Department personnel will inspect the creek area
approximately every six months after final inspection, until the
creek area is turned over to Zone 7, to assure that the creek
vegetation is being properly maintained. (Planning Department)
B. Traffic and Circulation
1. Final improvement plans shall include the design of the median
break on Amador Valley Boulevard. These improvements shall be
bonded to assure that if the developer does not complete the work,
the City can cause the work to be completed. (Public Works
Department)
2. Traffic impact fees will be collected prior to issuance of
building permits. (Building Inspection Department)
C. Noise
1. Building plans shall specify the 1) low air infiltration rate
frames for the affected buildings and 2) the means by which these
units will be mechanically ventilated or air-conditioned.
(Building Inspection Department)
ATTACH
4
PAeyo-ov9 (To avNT. P60-t)
D. Archaelogy
1. Construction plans or specifications shall state that project
construction shall be stopped if archaeological materials are
discovered so that the materials can be evaluated by a qualified
archaeologist. (Planning Department)
E. Slope Stability, Foundation Support, Consolidation
1. Copy of revised soils report shall be submitted with improvement
plans. Construction permits will not be issued unless plans
reflect recommendations in the soils report. (Public Works
Department)
F. Nuisances
1. Construction plans shall specify dust paliative measures.
Construction permits shall specify hours of operation. (Public
Works Department)
G. Conservation
1. Building permits shall not be issued unless plans indicate
individual gas meters for each unit. Building permits for pools
shall not be issued unless solar heating is included. (Building
Inspection Department)
l
I
i
i
PAGE.4 ..Of?-
i
RESOLUTION NO. - 89
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
--------------------------------7---------------------------------------------
APPROVING AND ESTABLISHING FINDINGS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS
FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) REZONING CONCERNING
PA 88-009.1 HERITAGE COMMONS, SOUTH OF AMADOR VALLEY BOULEVARD BETWEEN
THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AND ALAMO CREEK
WHEREAS, CoastFed Properties is requesting the City rezone approximately
17.45 acres lying south of Amador Valley Boulevard between the Southern Pacific
right-of-way and Alamo Creek (APN 941-2765-03/04) from Zoning Unit 1497 to a
Planned Development (PD) District for a planned residential development of 206
multiple family residential units; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold public hearings on the project
on December 19, 1988, January 17, 1989 and February 21, 1989; and
WHEREAS, the Planning -Commission adopted Resolution 89-00'8 recommending
approval of PA 88-009.1; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hold a public hearing on said request on
March 27, 1989; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects
as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that the request be
approved subject to conditions prepared by Staff and reflected in Planning
Commission Resolution 89-008; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and consider all said reports,
recommendations and testimony as herein set forth; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to State and City environmental regulations, a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been adopted
by the City Council for this project as it will have no significant effect on
the environment; and
WHEREAS, the rezoning, as modified, is consistent with the City General
Plan and Policies; and
` WHEREAS, the rezoning, as conditioned, will not have a significant
environmental impact; and
-1-
[PA88-009.1:Reso CC (PD) 3/27/89]
E'X'OHIBIT
[Aa4Z-tr0q. I Pb
WHEREAS, the rezoning is appropriate for the subject property in terms
of being compatible to existing land uses in the area, and will not overburden
public services; and
i
WHEREAS, the rezoning will not have substantial adverse effects on
health, or safety, or be substantially detrimental to the public welfare, or be
injurious to property or public improvements; and
WHEREAS,' there is little or no probability that the rezoning, as
modified, will be a detriment to, or interfere with, the City's General Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dubiln City Council does hereby
approve the Planned Development (PD) Rezoning request PA 88-009.1 subject to
the following Conditions of Approval.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Unless otherwise specified, the following conditions shall be complied with
prior to issuance of building permits. Each item is subject to review and
approval by the Planning Department unless otherwise specified.
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS:
1. This approval is for a planned residential development of 206 multi-
family dwelling units along with on-site recreation facilities,
consistent with the following submittals.
Except as specifically modified elsewhere in these Conditions,
development shall be generally consistent with the following submittals:
A. Conceptual site plan, floor plans, elevation prepared by the Casden
Company for CoastFed Properties, consisting of six (6) sheets and
dated received December 12, 1988 (Architectural Plans) and one (1)
sheet dated received October 28, 1988 (Site Plan) .
B. Conceptual landscape plan prepared by Robert Bucci Associates,
consisting of one (1) sheet and dated received November 7, 1988.
C. Tentative Tract Map 5883 prepared by Bissel & Karn, Inc. consisting
of one (1) sheet and dated received October 26, 1988.
Collectively, these materials shall serve as Exhibit "A" for this project
and shall be maintained on file with the Planning Department.
2. Site Development Review approval for this project shall be secured
prior to issuance of building permits.
3. Except as may be specifically provided for within these Conditions of
Approval, the development shall be subject to the requirements of the
R-S zoning district.
-2-
[PA88-009.1:Reso CC (PD) 3/27/89]
4. Any exterior modifications such as trellises, sunshades, patio covers,
or feces or other accessory structures must comply with a master plan
that,'.is architecturally compatible with approved project design, and
approved by the Planning Director for this development prior to permit
issuance for the development. The master plan shall remain on file
Fith the City as a guide for future modifications by individual owners.
5. Except as may be specifically provided for within these conditions of
approval, the development shall comply with City of Dublin Site
Development Review Standard Conditions (see Attachment A) .
6. Except as may be specifically provided for within these Conditions of
Approval, development shall comply with City of Dublin Police Services
Standard Residential Building Security Requirements (see Attachment B) .
7. Approval of this Planned Development is for two (2) years as is
specified in Section 8-31.2(b) of the Zoning Ordinance. A formal
project phasing schedule shall elaborate on this requirement and detail
timing of construction of all major project improvements.
8. If the subject project is not subdivided, as proposed under Tentative
Tract Map 5883, the project shall remain subject to the Conditions of
Approval established for that Subdivision, as determined applicable by
the City Engineer and the Planning Director.
9. Mitigation measures and monitoring program specified in City Council
Resolutions and are made a part of these Conditions
of Approval. - -
AIR QUALITY
10. Particulate Control
A. Dust control measures, as approved by the City Engineer, in
conjunction with the .project's improvement plans, shall be
followed at all times during grading and construction operations.
Construction areas shall be sprinkled during periods when work is
proceeding and during other periods, as required, to minimize the
generation of dust.
B. Graded slopes over 5 feet in height shall be revegetated and
hydromulched upon completion of grading operations if to be
unlandscaped through the winter season. Where feasible,
hydromulch shall be installed in stages.
C. To the extent feasible, phased project construction shall balance
cut and fill to avoid off-hauling, or import of material along
roadways.
i
I
-3-
[PA88-009.1:Reso CC (PD) 3/27/89]
,f
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
11. Loss, of Major Trees
/A. Trees identified in the Tree Report, prepared by HortScience, Inc.
on October 5, 1988, and the Addendum prepared November 11, 1988,
shall be preserved and protected. The project shall implement the
Tree Preservation Design, Construction_, and Maintenance Guidelines
contained in the Tree Report. Within the creek channel, the
Applicant shall have the responsibility for implementing these
guidelines for a minimum period of one (1) year from the
completion of construction, or until the Alameda County Flood
Control District or other public entity accepts the channel,
whichever is later.
B. During site preparation and construction, a horticulturalist shall
monitor and implement the specific preservation plan, and shall
supervise construction activities, especially grading and pruning,
as needed to implement the plan.
C. A revegetation plan for the creek shall be prepared and
implemented which includes the replanting of native species on
disturbed areas. The revegetation plan shall include provisions
to aid new trees during early years through irrigation,
fertilization, deer protection and disease prevention. Areas
where existing vegetation shall remain shall be marked on plans.
D. Two new trees of at least 15 gallon -size shall be provided within
the creek tree planting plan area to mitigate the loss *of each
existing tree over 6 inches in diameter. To the extent feasible,
new trees shall be of the same species as the trees lost. All
plans for additional tree planting shall be subject to review and
approval by Alameda County Flood Control District Zone 7.
E. Whenever possible, construction activities shall be restricted
from within the drip line. At the maximum, no more than 40
percent of the area within the drip line for trees planned to be
preserved shall be altered. Placement of rip-rap within the drip
line is permitted under supervision of a qualified .
horticulturalist and as specified in Condition "11-L" below.
F. During project construction, damaged roots shall be cut cleanly
with a saw. Trenches shall be back-filled as soon as possible to
avoid exposure of roots from dessication. Irrigation during and
following construction shall be provided where necessary.
G. Supplemental irrigation for trees subject to stress shall be
provided.
H. Positive drainage away from tree trunks shall be established and
water shall not be allowed to stand at the base of the trees.
I. Open areas around trees to be preserved shall not be" grubbed where
grading activities are not required.
-4-
[PA88-009.1:Reso CC (PD) 3/27/89]
J. Horticultural care, monitoring of pest population and the
incidence of disease and control treatments when necessary, shall
be provided. This measure shall apply to all trees with health
classified by the Tree Report as A, B, or C and as identified by
the tree preservation identification list as "preserved" or as
having a good or moderate suitability of being preserved.
K. Temporary fences shall be constructed around the trees to be
preserved to exclude all equipment from within the drip line.
L. Placement of soil and/or rip-rap or other slope protection
materials around the base of trees must be accomplished by hand,
or with equipment that is not standing within the drip line of
trees to be preserved.
M. All wounds to trees to be preserved shall be repaired promptly,
with such repair and pruning ,to be performed by a qualified
arborist.
12. Riparian Habitat Loss
A. Temporary fencing shall be provided during the construction for
those areas of riparian habitat not intended to be included within
the construction zone.
B. An erosion and siltation control plan shall be incorporated within
the grading plan for the project.
C. A revegetation effort shall be implemented on all reconstructed
channel banks as soon as possible after construction is completed
to enhance riparian habitat consistent with proper channel
maintenance for flood control. Such revegetation plans shall
include the following:
(1) Use of trees, shrubs and vine species native to the region.
(2) Use of shrubs with high wildlife value on the lower channel
slopes.
(3) Use of indigenous tree species, such as valley oak, live oak
and buckeye, on the upper channel slopes together with
shrubs and vines to approximate a natural riparian
community.
(4) Trees, shrubs and vines may be established from seeds, liner
stock or small container stock (one gallon) or hydromulch
where feasible.
(5) Undertaking of an irrigation program to aid survival of
woody plants during the first few summers. Where feasible,
fixed irrigation shall be installed.
-5-
[PA88-009.1:Reso CC (PD) 3/27/89]
(6) Inclusion within the revegetation plan of portions of the
existing riparian corridor which are intended to be left in
j their present condition, including provisions for native
trees, shrubs and vines, where they do not now exist.
i
(7) Obtaining the approval of Alameda County Flood Control
District for the revegetation plan, which shall be
consistent with Flood Control maintenance requirements.
(8) Provision of revegetation along the riparian corridor and
the successful establishment of plantings. Subsequent
maintenance and management of vegetation in the stream
channel will be the Applicant's responsibility for one (1)
year following completion of construction.
13. Construction Phase Impacts
A. Except with the permission of the City Engineer, earth moving
shall be undertaken and carried out during the dry season.
B.. Prior to winter rains, all bare ground shall be hydroseeded. If
grading is undertaken during winter time conditions, a plan shall
be submitted for stabilization and control of erosion. Such plan
may include mechanical soil stabilization, sediment barriers, and
settling ponds.
C. Conditions of the California Department of Fish and. Game Stream
Alteration Permit shaIr be followed to minimize erosion during
construction in the creek channel.
D. Sediment control measures shall be used within construction areas
to reduce movement of silt and other sediment from the site.
E. In order to protect both the riparian corridor and isolated trees
from construction equipment, vehicular activity, and dumping of
trash and debris, areas not intended to be graded shall be
protected with temporary fencing.
14. Long Term Impacts
Human use of the riparian corridor and stream channel shall be
restricted and, where feasible, fencing erected for this purpose.
ENERGY
15. All units shall contain standard and currently available energy saving
devices, and shall be insulated in accordance with Title 24, State of
California Administrative Code. All buildings shall be designed to
comply with Title 24 Energy Regulations.
16. All units shall be provided with separately metered gas for hot water.
ti All meters shall be,.sfcreened from view within. an enclosure that is..
compatible in design, location and materials to that of the building to
which it is to be installed.
-6-
[PA88-009.1:Reso CC (PD) 3/27/89]
17. Exterior lighting fixtures shall be energy efficient, fluorescent or
metal.'vapor lighting.
18. Landscape design shall incorporate use of solar shading for south- and
west-facing walls.
i
19. Recreation area pools shall incorporate solar heaters. The developer
shall submit documentation that the number, size, location and design at
the solar collector panels will suffice to provide adequate pool heating
for a reasonable length of time in each calendar year. Heating of the
pools may be supplemented by gas heaters. The use of pool covers may be
used in place of or in conjunction with solar heaters providing the
Applicant can demonstrate reasonable energy conservation to the
satisfaction of the Planning Director.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
20. Increased Flows
A. A hydraulic analysis shall be prepared to demonstrate that
sufficient capacity exists in the Alamo Creek channel to meet the
future flows both of this project and future buildout of the Alamo
Creek drainage.
B. Six-foot black clad chain link fencing shall be installed along
both sides of the creek.
21. Increased Erosion and Sedimentation
A. Grading within Alamo Creek shall be limited to the period from
April 15 through October 1 of each year.
B. An erosion control plan shall be prepared by the developer's
Engineer and submitted with the grading plan. The plan shall be
in use until permanent storm sewers have been installed and
streets paved, and then these erosion control plans shall be
modified to the new Conditions. Erosion control plans shall
include, as required, hydromulching cut-and-fill slopes, sediment
barriers, and sedimentation basis and ponds. Grading shall be
conducted in such a manner that standing water is not retained in
the vicinity of trees to be preserved.
C. A permanent revegetation plan shall be prepared for revegetation
of the channel, consistent with the requirements of Alameda County
Flood Control District Zone 7.
D. Culverts discharging into the stream channel shall be constructed
in such a manner as to avoid erosion by providing impervious
spillways on the side slopes into the bottom of the channel
......h •_ _` _ .- r res-r. _ .... .. .�.:-'!ih,. ..- -,..ww..zSas^i..i^�:. -..�. .K--.� -. a .-.r , -. .._..- .- .., .v ...�.-, _ ..--o
-7-
[PA88-009.1:Reso CC (PD) 3/27/89]
E. 'Final improvement plans prepared for the channel shall maintain
the maximum amount of existing channel vegetation feasible and
shall preserve existing tree stands identified in the Tree Report,
October 5, 1988 and Addendum, November 11, 1988, prepared by
j HortScience, Inc.
MUNICIPAL SERVICES AND FACILITIES
22. Water Supply
A. The project shall incorporate all-reasonable water conservation
measures including water conservation appliances and separate
metering of gas for hot water heaters. The project Architect, or
Civil Engineer, shall provide a letter to the Planning Director or
Building Inspector stating the water conservant toilets, shower
heads, and automatic dishwashers with low flow cycles will be
installed in the units in this project.
23. Fire Protection
A. All dwelling units within the project shall incorporate smoke
detectors and spark arrestors on fireplaces.
.B. Maintenance roads for the creek shall be available for emergency
access. Emergency access routes are subject to the approval of
DRFA (Dougherty Regional Fire Authority) .
C. Fire hyrdants at the locations approved by DRF9 shall be installed
and operable, to the satisfaction of DRFA prior to combustible
construction. Provision of raised blue reflectorized pavement
markers shall be made in the center of the private vehicle
accessways at each fire hydrant.
D. Each building and residence unit shall include a lighted, clearly
visible address. A lighted, clearly visible project directory
shall be provided at all major project access ;nays.
24. Police Protection
A. Emergency access along the Alamo Creek -channel maintenance road
shall be developed.
25. Recreation
Parkland shall be dedicated or in-lieu fees shall be paid, or a
combination of both shall be provided prior to issuance of Building
Permits or prior to recordation of the Final Map, whichever occurs first,
in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance. The parkland dedication
required is approximately 1.854 acres (0.009 acres/duelling units x
number of dwelling units) . In lieu fees are equal to the then current
value of one acre of the developable acreage of the area to be subdivded
times parkland dedication. Parkland dedication credit may be available
for on-site recreational facilities. Preliminary calculations of
dedication credit are 0.1333 acres. Final calculations on parkland
-8-
[PA88-009.1:Reso CC (PD) 3/27/89]
dedication credit are subject to review and approval of the Planning
Director and City Engineer based on final improvements, site and
landscaping plans.
NOISE %
26. Second floor units in the four buildings nearest Amador Valley Boulevard
(Buildings 23-26) shall have windows and doors in low air infiltration
rate frames as specified in the Noise Assessment prepared by Illingworth
& Rodkin dated November 11, 1988.
27. The above described units must be mechanically ventilated or air
conditioned to enable the occupants to close the windows for noise
control.
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBMITTAL
28. Open Space
A. Deck dimensions for second floor elevations shall have a minimum
dimension of seven feet, excluding fencing or railing and a minimum
of 70 square feet in area.
-B. Private useable open space (patios) for ground level units shall be
a minimum of 140 square feet in area.
29. Architectural Design
Site Development Review submittals shall include plans at an
appropriate design scale which detail that:
A. All dwelling units are oriented properly and at a sufficient
distance from each other, from parking and vehicular areas, and
group use areas.
B. Parking and vehicular areas shall be screened with patio fences
or appropriate landscaping from view of ground floor dwelling
units.
C. To the extent feasible, west-facing units have sun-shading
devices or landscape screening to prevent over-heating of units.
D. Architectural design is compatible in color and finish with its
surroundings.
30. The developer shall obtain written approval from the local postal
authority on the location and size of mail receptacles.
31. At-grade patios shall be individually fenced and' shall be supplied with
soil preparation to accommodate future planting. Individual hose-bibs
for each ground level unit patio area shall be provided by the
developer: The'ho'se-bib's may'be left 'in=a"='roughed=out stage'until" " "`
such time as the units are put up for individual sale. The layout of
the enclosed patio areas (regarding size and placement of concrete patio
-9-
[PA88-009.1:Reso CC (PD) 3/27/89]
pads and the design of the enclosing fencing and retaining walls) shall
, be subject to review and approval as part of the Site Develpment Review
submittal.
32. The developer's Engineer shall develop the expected truck length and
turning radius criteria to use the private streets (fire equipment,
delivery, garbage or moving trucks, etc.) and design the curb radii
accordingly and submit this data and design criteria with the
improvement plans.
33. Parking stalls shall be a minimum depth of eighteen (18) feet and a
minimum width of nine (9) feet for standard-sized stalls and a minimum
depth of sixteen (16) feet and a minimum width of eight (8) feet for
compact-sized stalls. A two (2) foot overhang into landscaped areas may
be included in parking stall length.
34. Special private storage areas of at least 120 cubic feet per unit shall
be provided within or adjacent to each unit. Details of the location
and design of these areas shall be subject to review and approval as
part of Site Development Review submittals.
35. Information detailing the design, location and materials of all fencing,
and of retaining walls over two feet in height, shall be subject to
review and approval of the Planning Director.
36. Slopes for areas adjoining both public and private roadways shall be
designed to maximize the level areas available for landscape treatment
and for general safety consideration and shall be subject, to review and
approval through the Site Development Review process:
37. Light standards (freestanding, pedestrian and/or wall mounted) utilized
in this project shall be of a design which shields the light sources
from view from off-site while providing for adequate security and safety
illumination. Light standards shall be subject to review and approval
as part of the Site Development Review submittal as regards design,
location, number and illumination intensity.
38. Handicapped ramps and access as required by Title 24, State of
California, shall be provided (parking and walkways serving on-site
recreational facilities) . Handicapped parking stalls, appropriately
signed, shall be provided evenly throughout the project with their
location and design as part of the Site Development :Review submittal.
39. The use of entrance gates at any portion of this development are
specifically disallowed unless architectural treatment, traffic and
emergency access impacts are addressed and approved through the Site
Development Review process.
40. A pedestrian circulation plan shall be submitted as part of the Site
Development Review materials. The plan shall include section details of
the pathway system and a detailed pedestrian walkway lighting plan.
-10-
[PA88-009.1:Reso CC (PD) 3/27/89)
41. Signs established at entrances for project identification purposes shall
be subject to review and approval as part of the Site=Development Review
submittal.
i
SOILS, GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY
42. Seismic Activity
An updated Geotechnical Investigation Report shall be prepared and
submitted with the project improvement plans.
43. Soils and Slope Stability
A. All foundation design, grading operations and site construction .
work shall be consistent with the recommendations of the
Geotechnical Investigation Report, prepared. by Bay Soils, Inc. and
dated January 13, 1981, or the updated report, if different.
B. No cuts or fill slopes shall exceed a slope of 2:1. Where
possible, cuts or fills should be designed at 2.5:1 or flatter.
C. All fills of sufficient height shall be keyed into the existing
soils as recommended by the soils report prepared for this site.
D. All cut slopes of sufficient height should have bench gutters to
prevent drainage over the face of the slopes.
E. Prior to any grading of the site, a detailed plan covering grading
(including phasing) , drainage, water quality, erosion and sedimen-
tation control for construction and the post-construction period
shall be prepared by the project Civil Engineer and/or Engineering
Geologist, and shall be approved by the City Engineer. Said plans
shall include detailed design, location, and maintenance criteria
of all erosion and sediment control measures. The plans shall
attempt to assure that no increase in sediment or pollutants from
the site will occur. The plan shall provide for long-term
maintenance of all permanent erosion and sediment control
measures.
F. A report addressing the liquefaction danger to buildings adjacent
to Alamo Creek shall be prepared.
G. Sub-drains shall be installed in all existing natural drainages
which are to receive material. Installation shall be per the
requirements of the Soils Engineers.
H. Full-time soils inspection by the Soils Engineer representative
during mass grading operations shall be provided by the developer.
I. All property including maintenance roads shall be graded to slope
away from the creek to protect slopes from erosion.
-11-
[PA88-009.1:Reso CC (PD) 3/27/89]
J. -The design of all multi-family residences shall be reviewed by a
licensed structural engineer for seismic requirements prior to the
issuance of building permits.
%K. Where import depth of non-expansive soils is less than 2.5 feet
thick, post tension slabs should be used to avoid potential damage
from expansive soils.
L. All import soil brought onto the site shall be of a non-expansive
nature.
M. Where soil or geotechnical conditions encountered in grading
operations are different from that anticipated in the soil and
geological investigation reports, or where such conditions warrant
changes to the recommendations contained in a site-specific/
project-specific soils and geotechnical report which shall be
submitted for review and approval by the City and shall be
accompanied by an engineering and geological opinion as to the
safety of the site from hazards of erosion, settlement and seismic
activity.
44. Mass Grading
A. Cuts and fills shall be designed to balance whenever possible to
avoid the need of offsite hauling.
B. Cut-and-fill slopes shall be contour-rounded to conform as closely _
` as possible with the natural slopes, to avoid a man-made
appearance, and to form a gradual transition to natural terrain.
C. Variable slopes shall be used to mitigate environmental and visual
impacts of grading.
45. Engineered slopes shall be contoured to blend into the natural topography
and shall not, to the extent feasible, exceed 2.5:1 slopes.
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
46. The developer shall construct a median break with left turn pocket at the
project entry as described in the Traffic Study prepared by Abrams
Associates, December 5, 1988.
MISCELLANEOUS
47. The project shall be constructed as approved. Minor modifications in
the design, but not the use, may be approved by Staff. Any other
change will require Planning Commission approval through the Conditonal
Use Permit review process or, depending on the magnitude of the
modification, submittal of a new Planned Development Rezoning
submittal. The four buildings closest to Amador Valley Boulevard shall
not exceed a maximum_.deviation of five-feet. from _the. pau.e)�sv3tioir5
indicated on the Revised Tentative Map and Development Plan, dated
received October 26, 1988.
-12-
[PA88-009.1:Reso CC (PD) 3/27/89]
48. If occupancy is to occur in phases, all physical improvements shall be
required to be in place prior to occupancy except for items
specifically excluded in a Construction-Phased Occupancy Plan approved
by the Planning Department. No individual unit shall be occupied until
the adjoining area is finished, safe, accessible, provided with all
reasonable expected services and amenities, and completely separated
from remaining additional construction activity. Any approved
Construction-Phased Occupancy Plan shall have sufficient cash deposits
or other assurances to guarantee that the project and all associated
improvements shall be installed in a timely and satisfactory manner.
At the request of the Planning Director, written acknowledgements of
continuing construction activity shall be secured from the property
owners and any and all occupants or tenants for the 'portions of the
project to be occupied, and shall be filed with the Planning
Department. Said acknowledgements for a subdivision shall be part of
the settlement documents between the developer and buyer.
49. Prior to final inspection and occupancy of any units:
A. Storm drainage facilities shall have been installed as approved
by the City Engineer.
B. Fire protection devices shall have been installed, be operable,
and conform to the specifications of and inspections by the
Dublin San Ramon Services District Fire Department.
C. Cable TV hook-up shall be provided to each unit.
D. As-built drawings showing the locations of all underground
utilities (water, storm and sanitary sewer, gas, electric,
telephone and cable TV) shall be provided to the City.
E. Street name signs, bearing such names as are approved by the
Planning Director, shall have been installed.
50. Prior to occupancy of any unit, each phase of development landscaping,
irrigation, fencing and landscape lighting in accordance with approved
landscape and erosion control plans shall have been installed, or a
bond or letter of credit for the landscaping, lighting, appurtenant
structures, and irrigation system shall be provided to the City. A
statement from the project Landscape Architect shall certify that the
landscaping has been installed in accordance with the plans and shall
be submitted to the Building Official and Planning Director.
51. Should the project be phased:
A. The undeveloped area shall be maintained as acceptable to DRFA
and shall be kept free of trash and debris.
B. Each phase shall be landscaped and developed such that should
construction of subsequent phases be delayed, the constructed
phase(s) will appear as a completed project.
-13-
[PA88-009.1:Reso CC (PD) 3/27/89]
52. Should the units be initially occupied as apartment units, the
following reports shall be filed with, and approved by, the City
Engineer at the time the units are put up for individual sale.
A. A report by a licensed roofing contractor certifying that the
roofs of all the structures are -in good condition and not likely
to be in need of replacement for at least 10 years. A reserve
deposit may be established to cover the estimated prorated costs
of roof replacement where replacement will be required prior to
10 years.
B. A report by a professional Engineer attesting, to the extent
reasonably feasible, that the structure of all buildings,
pavements, storm draininage facilities, and the interior and
exterior plumbing, electrical systems, and utility and mechanical
equipment to be owned in common, or as part of the individual
condominiums, are in good and serviceable condition.
C. A report by a licensed painting contractor that paint throughout
the project is in good condition and that the building exteriors
should not require repainting for at least five years. A reserve
deposit may be established to cover the estimated prorated costs
for the repainting of the units where repainting will be required
prior to a 5-year period.
D. A report by a licensed termite and pest control specialist
certifying that the structures are free of infestation and
structural damage caused by pests.
53. Should the units be initially occupied as apartment units, all
appliances shall either be replaced with new units or the initial
buyers provided with a one-year's parts and warranty guarantee on all
appliances at the time the units are put up for individual sale.
54. The developer shall provide guarantees that a minimum of 10% of the
multi-family units in the project shall be maintained as rental units
for a period of five years. The document providing said agreement
shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney.
Developer agrees that until the Condition has been satisfied, there
shall be no conversion of condominium units for sale.
55. The minimum distances between buildings, building appurtenances and
other project improvements shall comply with the chart in Attachment
The term "building" shall refer to the exterior side of building walls
containing heated space.
Exceptions to the standard setbacks are possible through review and
approval by the Planning Director through the Site Development Review
process.
-14-
[PA88-009.1:Reso CC (PD) 3/27/89]
t
'S:,L .arc x :7 � 1 � ➢ 4� � �4 }. i "i�F. n 1 if_ -.i
•
'e
PASSED,;"APPROVED AND .ADOPTED this 27th day of March" 1989.
AYES,
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
-15-
[PA88-009.1:Reso CC (PD) 3/27/89]
xustus.isuvrra:nu:un.acw:au.a«sarzri,ue.rra:°,a�xau; a�a.aura"murw +a': .r:Tscpstskdu 'stir' :ti'+;t71:efit�tts:r.i[feL. :'r:.": :r'm.s:;.l:xsst wswft..:i
CITY OF DUBLIN
% SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW STANDARD CONDITIONS w
All projects approved by the City of Dublin shall meet the following standard
conditions unless specifically exempted by the. Planning Department.
1. Final building and site development plans shall be reviewed and approved
by the Planning Department staff prior to the issuance of a building
permit. All such plans shall insure:
a. That standard commercial or residential security requirements as
established by the Dublin Police Department are provided.
b. That ramps, special parking spaces, signing, and other appropriate
physical features for the handicapped, are provided throughout the
site for all publicly used facilities.
C. That continuous concrete curbing is provided for all parking
stalls.
d. That exterior lighting of the building and site is not directed
onto, adjacent properties and the light source is shielded from
direct offsite viewing.
e. That all mechanical equipment, including electrical and gas
meters, is architecturally screened from view, and that electrical
transformers are either undergrounded or architecturally screened.
f. That all trash enclosures are of a sturdy material (preferably
masonry) and in harmony with the architecture of the building(s) .
g. That all vents, gutters, downspouts, flashings, etc. , are painted
to match the color of adjacent surface.
h. That all materials and colors are to be as approved by the Dublin
Planning Department. Once constructed or installed, all
improvements are to be maintained in accordance with the approved
plans. Any changes which affect the exterior character shall be
resubmitted to the Dublin Planning Department for approval.
i. That each parking space designated for compact cars be identified
with a pavement marking reading "Small Car Only" or its
equivalent, and additional signing be provided if necessary.
j . That all exterior architectural elements visible from view and not
detailed on the plans be finished in a style and in materials in
harmony with the exterior of the building.
k. That all other public agencies that require review of the project
be supplied with copies of the final building and site plans and
that compliance be obtained with at least their minimum Code
requirements. lit PA-Ob-r0q, I
�d
A ._ •I I A �
. ....:_:...._„-.'ax:�+un.vcs�.+�. -� •.,,:s;:.:a.s::.nu::wu:.M,rtnrr::.;.rc..:a.az:r�Rsv.- .„n.., c�..c;c�.7:::as�uarse:t:rr`uzca:a;se+na'.�:.iii'i3sti'r.Fa�i�-..rr"';::�f.:1F:ed”w.``"�+'+ifA:.Sa..r'+z:�!",GsE.sliY,� •;�;s:-�s arr :fir"...,r.szr;.�?ds�:a.s�.'i .,e
2. Final landscape plans, irrigation system plans, tree preservation
i
techniques, and guarantees, shall be reviewed and approved by the Dublin
Planning Department prior to the issuance of the building permit. All
such submittals shall insure:
t /a. That plant material is utilized which will be capable of healthy
growth within the given range of .soil and climate:
b. That proposed landscape screening is of a height and density so
that it provides a positive visual impact within three years from
i
the time of planting:
C. That unless, unusual circumstances prevail, at least 75% of the
proposed trees on the site are a minimum of 15 gallons in size,
and .at least 50% of the proposed shrubs on the site are minimum of
5 gallons in size.
d. That a plan for an automatic';irrigation system be provided which
assures that all plants get adequate water. In unusual
circumstances, and if approved by Staff, a manual or quick coupler
system may be used.
e. That concrete curbing is to be used at the edges of all planters
and paving surfaces.
f. That all cut and fill slopes in excess of 5 feet in height are
rounded both horizontally and vertically.
g. That all cut and fill slopes graded and not constructed on by
September 1, of any given year, are hydroseeded with perennial or
native grasses and flowers, and that stock piles of loose soil
existing on that date are hydroseeded in a similar manner.
h. That the area under the drip line of all existing oaks, walnuts,
etc. , which are to be saved are fenced during construction and
grading operations and no activity is permitted under them that
will cause soil compaction or damage to the tree.
i. That a guarantee from the owners or contractors shall be required
guaranteeing all schrubs and ground cover, all trees, and the
irrigation system for one year.
j . That a permanent maintenance agreement on all landscaping will be
required from the owner insuring regular irrigation, fertilization
and weed abatement.
3. Final inspection or occupancy_ permits will not be granted until all
construction and landscaping is complete in accordance with approved
plans and the conditions required by the Citv.
DUBLIN POLICE SERVICES
STANDARD RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SECURITY RECOMMENDATIONS
1. DOORS
A. All exterior wood doors and doors leading from garages
into interior dwelling areas of the residence shall be of
solid wood construction, no less than 1- 3/4 inches thief:.
B. Auxiliary leek's are to be added to each door and shall be
double cylinder deadbolt locks when there is a window within
forty inches of the locking ,device. Deadbolt locks must
have a minimum one inch throw or equivalent burglary
resistant loc:::s where permitted by the fire code. If the
cylinder of the lock protrudes from the face of the door, it
must be fitted with a cylinder ring guard so it cannot be
gripped by pliers or other wrenching devices.
i_. High security strike plates shall be fitted to all doors
with wooden .jambs when an auxiliary dendbolt loci, is
installer',. The strike plate shall have a minimum of two
wood screws of 3 inchES in length that engage the upright
dou_'r =tlids.
D. In-=-winging doers shall have rablttcd lambs or ait=rnative
means of strengtheninq.
E. E'iterior hinges siiall have non-removable hinge pins.
F. Exterior and interior garage out-swinging doors shall have
non-removable, hidden or non-accessible hinge pin_.
13. Double hung doors shall have one of tiie doors Secured with
two cane belts of hardened steel. The bolts shall engage a
metal strike to a 'depth cif not less than. 3/8 inch and be a
minimum 1114 inch diameter.
H. Sliding glass doors shall meet the uniform building code for
shatter resistance. Sliding glass doors shall be fitted
with a locking device, that shall engage the strike
sufficiently to prevent its being disengaged by any
possible movement of the door within the space or
clearances provided for installation and operation. The
bolt and strike shall be reinforced by hardened material so
as to prevent their separation by pulling, prying or similar
attack. An auxiliary locking device shall be installed on
-..�. ,_ . w ., .. the-door.• whi b2--a, in- lock: r- 7i'niilar-�e.,i-ce.,.`�,
less than 1/4 inch diameter. The pin shall be of hardened
material and engage the metal portion of the slidinq door.
Ammmm Am CHMEN'mm 8 & w0
x�i/A,V
^
,
'
'
/
The primary locking device function may be operable by a
.' keyed or code lock inside and out as permitted by the fire
/
department or building codes
/ .
Double sliding glass doors shall be locked at the meeting
rail . Each' segment, of or sliding portion of, the door
shall be fitted with an auxiliary security lock.
I. Entry doors shall A fitted with a minimum 180 degree
peephole.
2. WINDOWS
| A. All accessible dwelling windows shaIl be secured as follows:
sliding glass windows shall /be secured on the inside with a
/ locking device capable of withstanding prying or
� wrenching. An auxiliary lock shall be installed on each
�
sliding window that prevents movement in the sliding
track. Windows shall meet the uniform building security
code for shatter resistance.
B. Louvered windows shall not be used within eight feet of
ground level , adjacent structures, or fire escapes.
C. Casement type windows shall be secured with a metal to meta`
locking device contacting both frames of the window at the
meeting edge. Auxiliary locks such as a pin that penetrates
both frame structures shall be installed on casement and
double hung windows.
D. Windows fitted with a crank type gear opening devices shall
be fitted with a positive window lock that engages metal to
metal .
3. LIGHTING
A. Dwellings- shall be fitted with lighting over all exterior
entryways' The minimum standards shall be a 60 watt
incandescent light or the equivalent in lumins.
B. Street or apartment numbers shall be illuminated from the
interior and contain numerals of not less that 2 1/2 inches'
4. GARAGE AND STORAGE AREAS
A. Garage doors shall be secured with a metal to metal locking
device that prevents the door from being pulled or pried up
from the out side. No electric garage door openers shall be
permitted that will' automatical-ly, activate When- tha-dA5F-is` ~---
forced open. Garage doors fitted with automatic openers
shall be permitted with an alternative form of locking
device activated from the interior of the garage. Exterior
t. 4 }) �� t ti.�s )> r }� a ^� A > )5 �f "` It ' rav '.,�•1+'1'�"s l v ,y' gi
1• S
k'
tT
r
.. .. '/� ' fit - T {r} f ) A, F •
garage doors shall be of solid core construction and fitted)
/ with. a auxiliary,deadbolt lock:as prescribed in Section..,.. =
%1. Any windows inside garage doors shall be of non-breakable
material, or covered with a' security mesh of 1/18 inch
material minimum, two inches apart. .
B. Any exterior. storage area attached to a dwelling, apartment
or condominium and enclosed by a door shall -be fitted a
deadbolt lock and associated hardware, or,a minimum
inch diameter hardened padlock hasa.
PA88-009.1 !/
STANDARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS (in feet)
To Building. Building Appurt. Patio Fence Carport
From
Building 20
Appurtenance 15 10
Patio Fence 10 10: 5
Private Roads 15 10 5
Amador Valley Blvd. 25 20 15
Creek Fence 10 10 (a)
Parking Areas 10 10 5
Property Lines - 15 10 (a) 3
(a) Applies to patio fences parallel to creek fence or property line:
(1) 10 feet if a pathway falls between the two fences;
(2) 5 feet if no pathway falls between the two fences.
TO EXHIBIT D
PA 88-009 HERITAGE
PD REZONING
RESOLUTION NO. - 89
i
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
APPROVING TENTATIVE MAP 5883 CONCERNING
PA 88-009.2 - HERITAGE COMMONS - CASDEN COMPANY
WHEREAS, Casden Company requests approval to subdivide 17.45+ acres of
land into a one lot subdivision creating a lot for multiple family residential
(which is proposed for subsequent subdivision into residential condominium
air-space units) ; and
WHEREAS, The State of California Subdivision Map Act and the adopted City
of Dublin Subdivision Regulations require that no real property may be divided
into two or more parcels for the purpose of sale, lease or financing unless a
tentative map is acted upon, and a final map is approved consistent with the
Subdivision Map Act and City of Dublin subdivision regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold public hearings on December 19,
1988, January 17, 1989 and February 21, 1989 and the Planning Commission
adopted Resolution 89-009 recommending approval of PA 88-009.2'; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hold a public hearing on said Tentative 113ap
request on March 27, 1989; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearings was given in all respects
as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Staff Reports have been submitted recommending that the
Tentative Map be approved subject to conditions prepared by Staff; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and consider all said reports and
recommendations as hereinabove set forth; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to State and City Environmental regulations, a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been
previously adopted for the project (City Council Resolution No. ) ; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed Tentative Map will not
have a significant environmental impact.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby
find:
1. Tentative Map 5883, as modified, is consistent with the intent of
applicable subdivision regulations and City Zoning and related ordinances.
" 2:- 'Tentative Map -5883, as`modified, is consistent with the* Guy's
General Plan as it applies to the subject property.
[PA88-OO9.2:Reso CC (TMap) 3/27]
-1-
EAH15- -
3. Tentative Map 5883 will not result in the creation of significant
environmental impacts.
4. ; Tentative Map 5883 will not have substantial adverse effects on
health or safety or be substantially detrimental to the public welfare, or be
injurious to property or public improvements.
5. The site is physically suitable for the proposed development in
that the site is indicated to be geologically satisfactory for the type of
development proposed in locations as shown, provided the geological
consultant's recommendations are -followed; and the site is in a good location
regarding public services and facilities.
6. The site is physically suitable for the proposed development in
that the design and improvements are consistent with those of similar existing
residential developments which have proven to be satisfactory.
7. The request is appropriate for the subject property in terms of
being compatible to existing land uses in the area, will not overburden public
services, and will facilitate the provision of housing of a type and cost that
is desired, yet not readily available, in the City of Dublin.
8. General site considerations, including unit layout, open space,
topography, orientation and the location of future buildings, vehicular
access, circulation and parking, setbacks and similar elements have been
designated to provide a desirable environment for the development.
9. This project will not cause serious public health problems in that
all necessary utilities are, or will be, required to.be available and Zoning,
Building, and Subdivision Ordinances control the type of development and the
operation of the uses to prevent health problems after development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council approves Tentative
Map 5883 - PA 88-009.2 subject to the conditions listed below:
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Unless otherwise specified the following conditions shall be complied with
prior to the recordation of the Final Map. Each item is subject to review and
approval by the Planning Department unless othewise specified.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. Approval of Tentative Map 5883 is subject to the subdivider securing
final approval from the Dublin City Council for the Planned Development
(PD) Rezoning request covering the subject property. Any modifications
to the project design approved by the Planned Development (PD) Rezoning
action shall supersede the design on the Tentative Map and shall be
considered as an approved modification on the Tentative Map. Site
Development Review approval for the project shall be secured prior to
the recordation of the Final Map.
[PA88-009.2:Reso CC (TMap) 3/27]
-2-
2. Mitigation measures and monitoring program specified in City Council
Resolutions and are made a part of these Conditions of
Approval.
ALAMO CREEK
3. Provide bank stabilization along Alamo Creek. Detailed bank
stabilization plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer and approved
by the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
(Zone 7) .
4. Fencing (of a design acceptable to ACFC & WCD - Zone 7 and the City
Engineer) shall be installed to the satisfaction of Zone 7 and the City
Engineer along Alamo Creek prior to occupancy of any residential units
in this project.
5. The maintenance road constructed for this project along the east side of
the creek shall be paved for use as a possible future bike trail. The
minimum pavement section shall be two (2) inches of asphalt concrete
over 4 inches of base material. Soil's information and pavement design
shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for further review.
6. Access to the Alamo Creek maintenance roads shall be available to
emergency vehicles. Fencing and gates for access are subject to the
approval of Zone 7.
7. Final creek stabilization and improvement plans are subject to review of
soils repor-t which might modify-requirements for creek slope
stabilization.
ARCHAEOLOGY
8. If, during construction, archaeological remains are encountered, '
construction in the vicinity shall be halted, an archaeologist
consulted, and the City Planning Department notified. If, in the
opinion of the archaeologist, the remains are significant, measures, as
may be required by the Planning Director, shall be taken to protect
them.
BONDS
9. Prior to release by the City Council of the performance and labor and
materials securities:
a. All improvements shall be installed as per the approved Improve-
ment Plans and Specifications.
b. All required landscaping along public streets shall be installed
and established.
C. An as-built landscaping plan for landscaping along public streets
shall be prepared by a Landscape Architect, together with a
~ - declaration that" the 'lands cape'-instAllation is in Conformance Vitt:' •• -
the approved plans.
[PA88-009.2:Reso CC (TMap) 3/27]
-3-
d. The following shall have been submitted to the City Engineer:
i
1) An as-built grading plan prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer, including original ground surface elevations, as=
graded ground surface elevations, lot drainage, and
locations of all surface and subsurface drainage facilities.
2) A complete record, including location and elevation of all
field density tests, and a summary of all field and
laboratory tests.
3) A declaration by the project Geologist or Soils Engineer
that all work was done in accordance with the recommen-
dations contained in the soil and geologic investigation
reports and specifications, and that continuous monitoring
was performed by a representative of the Soils Engineer.
4) A declaration by the project Civil Engineer or Land Surveyor
that the finished graded building pads are within + 0.1 feet
in elevation of those shown on the grading plan (or to any
approved modified grades) .
COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS
10. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be- established for
the development. The CC&R's shall be approved by the Planning Director
prior to the recordation of the Final Map.
The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City to assure that:
a. There is adequate provision for at least the maintenance, in good
repair, of all commonly owned facilities, property and
landscaping, including but not limited to open space, common
parking and driveway areas, lighting, recreation facilities,
landscape and irrigation facilities, fencing, exterior of all
buildings, and drainage and erosion control improvements.
b. Payment of dues and assessments shall be both a lien against the
assessed land and a personal obligation of each property owner.
An estimate of these costs shall be provided to each buyer prior
to the time of purchase.
C. The Association shall keep the City Planning Department informed
of the current name, address and phone number of the Association's
official representative.
d. Payment of the water and street lighting bills (maintenance and
energy) and maintenance and repair of storm drain lines, are the
obligations of the Homeowners' Association, unless paid for
through a Lighting and Landscape Maintenance Assessment District.
[PA88-009.2:Reso CC (TMap) 3/27]
-4-
e. Each buyer is to sign an acknowledgement that he has read the
Constitution and Bylaws of the Homeowners' Association and the
/ Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions applying to the
development.
f. The Homeowners' Association shall contract with, or be advised (as
to how to handle maintenance operations) by, a professional
management firm.
g. Parking of recreational vehicles or boats shall be prohibited,
except in designated recreational vehicle parking spaces.
h. The CC&R's shall include a statement outlining the obligations of
the property owner to be responsible for public liability in case
of injury in connection with public utility easements, and for
mainentance of private vehicle access ways and utility trenches in
public utility easements. They shall further be void of any
mention of future dedication 'of the access way to the City as a
public street.
i. Restrict the recoloring, refinishing, or alteration of any part of
the exterior or any building until the Owner or Declarant first
obtains approval from the related City of Dublin Departments.
DRAINAGE
11. Roof drains shall be tied into the storm drain system in a manner
approved by the City Engineer.
12. A minimum of 12" diameter pipe shall be used for all public storm drains
to ease maintenance and reduce potential blockage.
13. The improvement plans for Subdivision 4950 shall be examined by the
Applicant's engineer to discover the actual location of the existing
storm drain facilities extending from Subdivision 4950 across this
property in a southerly direction to Alamo Creek. The facilities as
shown on the tentative map are incorrect.
14. The existing storm drain facilities that are under the proposed
buildings must be removed, relocated or building locations changed. Any
change in building locations is subject to approval of the Planning
Director.
15. All storm drain outfalls into Alamo Creek should be of an Alameda County
SD-506 type structure or as specified by Zone 7.
16. Entire site, including Alamo Creek maintenance roads, must be graded to
drain away from Alamo Creek. On-site storm drainage shall be collected
and discharged to the creek as specified by Zone 7.
[PA88-009.2:Reso CC (TMap) 3/27]
-5-
DEBRIS
17. Measures shall be taken to contain all trash, construction debris, and
materials on-site until disposal off-site can be arranged. The
developer shall be responsible for corrective measures at no expense to
the City of Dublin.
18. The developer shall keep adjoining public streets and driveways free and
clean of project dirt, mud, materials and debris, and clean-up shall be
made during the contruction period, as determined by the City Engineer.
EASEMENTS
19. Where the subdivider does not have easements, he shall acquire
easements,. and/or obtain rights-of-entry from the adjacent property
owners for improvements required outside of the property. Original
copies of the easements and/or rights-of-entry shall be in written form
and shall be furnished to the City :Engineer.
20. Permission shall be obtained from Alameda County for any encroachment
into their property along the western property line.
21. Existing and proposed access and utility easements shall be submitted
for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the grading and
improvement plan. These easements shall allow for practical vehicular
and utility service access for all lots.
22. The developer shall be responsible for the development and recordatio-n
of an appropriate agreement (subject to review and approval by the City
Attorney) which assures provision of the vehiclular/ pedestrian/bicycle
cross access, where such access facilities are common to Subdivision
4950 and 5883.
23. Public utility easements shall be established for the electric
distribution system and to provide for lines for the telephone company.
FIRE
24. All materials and workmanship for fire hydrants, gated connections, and
appurtenances thereto, necessary to provide water supply for fire
protection, must be installed by the developer and conform to all
requirements of the applicable provisions of the Standard Specifications
of Dougherty Regional Fire Authority (DRFA) . All such work will be
subject to the joint field inspection of the City Engineer and DRFA.
FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS
25. Amador Valley Boulevard is improved to 80-foot major arterial street
standards. Any deficiencies in. existing frontage improvements shall be
corrected. New improvements shall be required to be installed by this
development and shall include sidewalk, street monuments, street trees,
landscaping along the fror*.age, and Ftrpet restriping.
[PA88-009.2:Reso CC (TMap) 3/27]
-6-
26. The sidewalk, landscaping and irrigation, along the project's Amador
Valley Boulevard frontage shall be installed prior to the occupancy of
any units in this project. Final design details. shall be subject to
review and approval by the Planning Department and City Engineer prior
to installation.
27. Landscaping and irrigation plans for the project's frontage along Amador
Valley Boulevard shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Planning Department and City Engineer with the project landscape working
drawings.
28. Improvements shall be made, by the applicant, along all streets within
the development and as required off-site, to include curb, gutter,
sidewalk, paving, drainage, and work on the existing paving, if
necessary, from a structural or grade continuity standpoint.
GRADING
29. Prior to commencement of construction of any structures, site grading
shall conform with the recommendations of the project Soils Engineer, to
the. satisfaction of the City Engineer. A declaration by the Soils
Engineer that he has supervised grading and that such conformance has
occurred shall be submitted.
30. Prior to final preparation of the subgrade and placement of base
materials, all underground utilities shall be installed and service
connections stubbed out behind the sidewalk. Public utilities, Cable
TV, sanitary sewers, and water lines shall be installed"in a manner
which will not disturb the street pavement, curb, gutter and sidewalk
when future service connections or extensions are made.
31. The Applicant shall be aware of the fact that some conrete/asphalt
rubble was placed deep in the fill for areas which were previously to be
landscaped. If buildings are to be placed over this rubble, special
foundations will be required by the City's Building Inspection
Department, or the rubble must be removed.
32. Grading shall be completed in compliance with the construction grading
plans and recommendations of the project Soils Engineer and/or
Engineering Geologist, and the approved erosion and sedimentation
control plan, and shall be done under the supervision of the project
Soils Engineer and/or Engineering Geologist, who shall, upon its
completion, submit a declaration to the City Engineer that all work was
done in accordance with the recommendations contained in the soils and
geologic investigation reports and the approved plans and specifica-
tions. Inspections that will satisfy grading plan requirements shall be
arranged with the City Engineer.
33. Any grading on adjacent properties will require written approval of
those property owners affected.
34. Where soil or geologic conditions .crtcountered in grading operas_-ions .ar_e .
different from that anticipated in �1-.a soil and geologic investigation
report, or where such conditions warrant changes to the recommendations
[PA88-009.2:Reso CC (TMap) 3/27]
-7-
contained in the original soil investigation, a revised soil or geologic
report shall be submitted for review by the City Engineer. It shall be
accompanied by an engineering and geological opinion as to the safety of
the site from hazards of land slippage, erosion, settlement and seismic
activity.
35. The developer and/or his representatives shall notify the State
Department of Fish and Game, P.O. Box 47, Yountville, California 94599,
of any construction activity proposed in conjunction with this project
that may affect Alamo Creek in accordance with Sections 1601 and 1602 of
the Fish and Game Code. A Streambed Alteration Agreement shall be
secured by the developer from the Department of Fish and Game.
HANDICAPPED ACCESS
36. Handicapped ramps and parking shall be provided as required by the State
of California Title 24.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS, AGREEMENTS AND SECURITIES
37. All improvements within the public right-of-way, including curb gutter,
sidewalks, driveways, paving and utilities, must be constructed in
accordance with approved standards and/or plans.
38. Provide documentation acceptable to the City for unrestricted use of
Stagecoach Road by project residents and visitors.
39: Prior to recordati-on o€-the Final Map, improvement plans complete with
all on and off-site improvements, grading plans, hydrology map (showing
complete drainage area) , hydrology and hydraulic calculations (proving
adequacy of on and off-site drainage improvements) and engineer's
estimate shall be approved by the City Engineer. Moreover, all
improvements shall be bonded and all plan checking and inspection fees
shall be paid.
40. Existing adjacent street improvements shall be inspected by the
developer and a representative of the City to determine the existing
condition of the improvements. Any damage caused by the construction of
the work on this project shall be repaired to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer prior to acceptance of the tract by the City Council.
41. Where the project improvements encroach on the Dublin Housing Authority
lands, negotations shall be undertaken to obtain the right o improve
those lands, or failing that, the project shall be m3ved away from the
creek to insure no loss of improvement should there be creek bank
failure.
42. Remove fence and repair improvements, including drain inlets, at the
south end of Stagecoach Road to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
43. The subdivider shall enter into an Improvement Agreement with the City
for all. public improvements. Complete improvement plans, vpecific^rions
..and c c, i ationv`:s}',al`l .b'e.' s bmi°—led to, and approved by the City
Engineer and other affected agencies having jurisdiction over public
[PA88-009.2:Reso CC (TMap) 3/27]
-8-
improvements prior to execution of the Improvement Agreement.
Improvement plans shall show the existing and proposed improvements
along adjacent public street(s) and property that relate to the proposed
improvements. All required securities, in an amount equal to 100% of
the approved estimates of construction costs of improvements, and a
labor and material security, equal to 50% of the construction costs,
shall be submitted to, and approved by, the City and affected agencies
having jurisdiction over public improvements, prior to execution of the
Improvement Agreement.
44. The Sign Program utilized for this project shall reflect the City
Engineer's direction regarding street name signs and regulatory signs
and shall be reviewed as part of the Project Improvement Plans.
45. Prior to approval of the improvement plans by the City Engineer, the
first sheet must be signed by an authorized representative of the
Dougherty Regional Fire Authority to approve "equipment access and
hydrant locations" and by an authorized representative of PG&E to
approve "street light locations".
PARK DEDICATION
46. Parkland shall be dedicated or in-lieu fees shall be paid, or a
combination of both shall be provided prior to issuance of Building
Permits or prior to recordation of the Final Map, whichever occurs
first, in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance. The parkland
dedication required is approximately 1.854 acres (0.009 acres/dwelling
units x number of dwelling -units)-.- - In lieu fees are equal to the then
current market value of one acre of the developable acreage of the area
to be subdivided times parkland dedication requirement. Parkland
dedication credit may be available for on-site recreational facilities.
Preliminary calculations of dedication credit are 0.1333 acres. Final
calculations on parkland dedication credit are subject to review and
approval of the Planning Director and City Engineer based on final
improvements site and landscaping plans.
STREETS
47. The minimum uniform gradient shall be 1% on streets and parking areas
and shall be 2% on soil drainage. The street surfacing shall be asphalt
concrete paving, except as otherwise noted for the project entry off of
Amador Valley Boulevard. The City Engineer shall review the project's
Soils Engineer's structural design. The subdivider shall, at his sole
expense, make tests of the soil over which the surfacing and base is to
be constructed and furnish the test reports to the City Engineer. The
subdivider's Soils Engineer shall determine a preliminary structural
design of the road bed. After rough grading has been completed, the
developer shall have soil tests performed to determine the final design
of the road bed and parking areas.
48. An encroachment permit shall be secured from the City Engineer for any
work done within the public right-of-way i..f this work is not cohered.
under the impro!c t:�ni. plans.`
[PA88-009.2:Reso CC (TMap) 3/27]
-9-
49. The striping and signing of internal roadways shall be,subject to review
and approval by the City Engineer as part of the Project Improvement
Plans. Internal roadways shall be posted as private streets. Parking
area striping and signing shall include small car, handicapped, and
visitor parking information. Use of double parking space striping is
encouraged.
50. A concrete band entry pavement treatment shall be supplied at the
project entry off of Amador Vallely Boulevard to delineate a private
street. The design, materials, dimensional layout, and traffic signing
for the entry pavement areas shall be subject to review and approval by
the City Engineer as part of the Project Improvement Plans and Site
Development Review.
51. Street names shall be submitted and processed through the Planning
Department and those approved names shall be indicated on the Final
Subdivision Map.
52. The Applicant shall submit a Private Vehicle Accessway Agreement for
review and approval by the City Engineer, Planning Director and City
Attorney prior to the framing inspection of any units in the project.
The' Agreement shall serve to establish a contract which will enable the
City to provide specified maintenance service on the vehicle accessways
in the event the Developer or the Homeowners' Association fails to so
maintain them. This maintenance will be carried out at the Developer's
or Homeowners' Association's expense.
53. The roadway alignment between the south edge-of the main entry turn-
around, a point approximately 100 feet south shall be adjusted to
eliminate the offset at the first driveway intersection.
54. The roadway alignment at the eastern portion of Area 2 shall be modified
to remove the compound curves.
55. The sidewalk along the east side of the main loop road shall be extended
from the recreation center in Area 1 to Amador Valley Boulevard.
UTILITIES
56. Electrical, gas, telephone, and Cable TV services, shall be provided
underground to each building in accordance with the City policies and
existing ordinances. All utilities shall be located and provided within
public utility easements, sized to meet utility company standards, or in
public streets.
57. Prior to approval of the grading and improvement plans, the developer
shall furnish the City Engineer with a letter from Dublin San Ramon
Services District (DSRSD) stating that the District has agreed to
furnish water and sewer service to the development.
58. Secure DSRSD agreement to maintain the on-site sanitary sewer collection
system excluding individual laterals, The system shall be designed as
a.cc.eptabhe `to DSRSD, __-
i [PA88-009.2:Reso CC (TMap) 3/27]
-10-
'r
59. All utilities to and within the project shall be undergrounded.
60. Priof to final preparation of the subgrade and placement of base
materials, all underground utility mains shall be installed and service
connections stubbed out beyond curb lines, and the Public Works
Department notified by each of the utility companies having facilities
within the work area, that the utility installation has satisfactorily
passed acceptance tests. Public utilities and sanitary sewers shall be
installed in a manner which will not disturb the street pavement, curb,
and gutter when future service connections or extensions are made.
61. All new and existing utilities that will remain in place must be located
in an easement that is acceptable to the utility company and the City
Engineer.
WATER
62. Water facilities must be connected `to the DSRSD system, and must be
installed at the expense of the developer, in accordance with District
standards and specifications. All material and workmanship for water
mains, and appurtenances thereto, must conform with 311 of the
requirements of the officially adopted Water Code of the Distict, and
will be subject to field inspection by the District.
63. Any water well, cathodic protection well, or exploratory boring shown on
the map, that is known to exist, is proposed or is located during the
course of field operations, must be properly destroyed, backfilled, or
maintained in accordance with applicable groun&7ater-protection
ordinances. Zone 7 should be contacted at (415) 443-9300 for additional
information.
64. Comply with DSRSD, Public Works, requirements, particularly regarding:
a. The elevation of the storm drain relative to the sewer lines.
b. The location of the sewer man-holes. They shall be in parking or
street areas accessible by District equipment.
C. Dedication of sewer lines.
d. Location and design of the water system values.
MISCELLANEOUS
65. Copies of the project plans, indicating all lots, streets and drainage
facilities, shall also be submitted at 1" — 400-ft. scale, and
1" — 200-ft. scale for City mapping purposes.
66. All construction activity at this site shall be limited to the hours
between 7:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. , Monday through Friday, except as may be
approved in advance in writing by the City Engineer. A request for
weekenrl work shall, he limited to .!J*. ?:.r _nu ;p-t� ,x:s>t an,?,; hand .wai'-. ar.A shat l
be requested in wricing no later Lhan Wednesday prior to the proposed
weekend work.
[PA88-009.2:Reso CC (TMap) 3/27]
-11-
67. All construction traffic shall enter and leave the site directly from
the �mador Valley Boulevard frontage; none is to use the existing
Stagecoach Road access, except as may be approved in advance, in writing
by/ the City Engineer.
68. The developer shall pay a traffic impact fee to be used for traffic
facility improvements, as outlined in the City Traffic Engineer's (TJKM)
memo of December 5, 1988. The fees are based on the project's
proportional share of cumulative traffic impacts within the City of
Dublin for traffic improvements identified in the City of Dublin General
Plan and 1988-1993 Capital Improvement Program. Total fees shall not
exceed $106,668 or $518 per dwelling unit.
69. Maintenance of common areas including ornamental landscaping, graded
slopes, erosion control plantings and drainage, erosion and sediment
control improvements, shall be the responsibility of the developer
during construction stages, and until final improvements are accepted by
the City, and the performance guarantee required is released;
thereafter, maintenance shall be the resonsibility of a Homeowners'
Association, which automatically collects maintenance assessments from
each owner and makes the assessments a personal obligation of each owner
and a lien against the assessed property.
70. There shall be compliance with DRFA requirements, Flood Control District
requirements, and Public Works requirements. Written statements from
each agency approving the plans over which it has jurisdiction shall be
submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuan--e of Building
Permits on lots of the subdivision or the installation of any
improvements related to this project.
71. Unit address information and directories shall be provided to the
satisfaction of the DRFA, Postal Services, and Dublin Planning and
Building Departments.
72. Install street light standards and luminaries of the design, spacing and
locations approved by the City Engineer.
73. The subdivider shall furnish and install street name signs, in
accordance with the standards of the City of Dublin, bearing such names
as are approved by the Planning Director. The subdivider shall furnish
and install traffic safety signs in accordance with the standards of the
City of Dublin.
74. Street trees, of at least a 15-gallon size, shall be planted along the
public street frontages. Trees shall be planted in accordance with a
planting plan, including tree varieties and locations, approved by the
Planning Director. Trees planted within 6 feet of sidewalks or curbs
shall be provided with root shields.
75. A current title report and copies of the recorded deeds of all parties
having any record title interest in the property to be developed and, if
-:u:v.x�._ ,.�� ,::,,.•,,,,.:.-..,:necess'ary. ..•copies o€°dec�cls•'for adjoining ,pi'opeYt:�.'��, `�s.�d�e:�:r c';� t,�,,........ .,.::;,,:_ ,.
thereto, shall be submitted at the time of submission of the grading and
improvement plans to the City Engineer.
[PA88-009.2:Reso CC (TMap) 3/27]
-12-
y
76. Any relocation of improvements or public facilities','shall -be
accomplished at no expense to the City.
77. Prior to filing of a condominium plan or offering a condominium unit for
sale, the developer shall have completed the following:
i`
a. Recordation of the final map.
b. Completion and final acceptance as complete by the City of all
construction within the project to be offered for sale, including
buildings, streets, parking and landscaping.
78. Two speed bumps shall be installed on Stagecoach Drive; one near the end
of the existing road and one south of the property line on the extension
of Stagecoach Drive.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of March, 1989.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
[PA88-009.2:Reso CC (TMap) 3/27]
-13-
RESOLUTION NO. - 89
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
------------------------------------------------------------------
A RESOLUTION IMPOSING A TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE
ON PA 88-009. 2 - HERITAGE COMMONS
Recitals
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. - 89, the City Ccuncil has
approved a tentative map for a subdivision known as Heritage
Commons (PA 88-009 .2) , Tentative Map 5883 (hereafter "the proposed
development") ; and
WHEREAS, one condition of approval of the -Tentative Map
(Condition No. 68) is that the developer pay a traffic: impact fee
to be used for traffic facility improvements; and
WHEREAS, a report setting forth the impacts of the proposed
development on traffic through the year 2010 has been prepared by
TJKM, along with an analysis of the need of the public facilities
and improvements required by future development, consisting of a
memorandum dated December 5, 1988 to Lee Thompson from Michelle
DeRobertis of TJKM, which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and
incorporated herein (referred to herein as "the report") ; and
WHEREAS, said report sets forth the relationship between the
proposed development, the needed facilities and the estimated
costs of the facilities; and
WHEREAS, a noticed public hearing was held for purposes of
consiuering adoption of r..his resolution; and
limpact. fee 1
January 4 , 1989
E
PA -88-a�i. eve& is K-<
WHEREAS, the report was available for public inspection and
review more than ten (10) days prior to this public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council resolves that:
1. The purpose of the said traffic impact fee is to
mitigate the traffic impacts caused by the proposed development by
construction of certain public facilities.
2 . The public facilities to be constructed with the traffic
impact fee (referred to herein as "the public facilities") are
identified in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof
(Memorandum of December 5, 1988, from Michelle DeRobertis of TJKM
to Lee Thompson, re Traffic Mitigation Fee for Heritage Commons) .
3 . The traffic impact fee is needed in order to finance the
public facilities and to pay for the proposed development's fair
share of the construction of the improvements and will be used for
these purposes.
4 . The Council finds the fee to be consistent with the
General Plan and, pursuant to Government Code § 65913.2, has
considered the effects of the fee with respect to the City's
housing needs as established in the housing Element of the General
Plan.
5. The fees collected pursuant to this resolution shall be
used to finance the public facilities identified in Exhibit A.
6. After considering the report prepared by TJKM (Exhibit
A) , and the testimony received at this public hearing, the Council
approves and adopts said report, and incorporates such herein, and
futct'fier fincis that the proposed development wiil generate
limpact. fee 2
January 4, 1989
additional demands on municipal services.
7.• The report and the testimony establish:
(a) That there is a reasonable relationship between the
need for the public facilities designated in Exhibit A and the
impacts of the proposed development for which the corresponding
fee is charged;
(b) That there is a reasonable relationship between the
fee' s use and the proposed development for which the fee is
charged;
(c) That there is a reasonable relationship between the
amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion
of the public facility attributable to the proposed development on
which the fee is imposed; and
(d) That the cost estimates set forth in Exhibit A are
reasonable cost estimates for constructing these facilities, and
the fees expected to be generated by future developments will not
exceed the total costs of constructing the public facilities
identified in Exhibit A.
8 . The TJKM report (Exhibit A) is a detailed analysis of
how public services will be affected by the proposed development,
the existing deficiencies, and the public facilities required to
accommodate that development and those deficiencies. The
calculations and assumptions in the report can reasonably be
applied to the proposed development.
9 . The method of allocation of the traffic impact fee to
.the proposeu . evelopmer,-L bears.-a tair::and reasonable relationship
limpact. fee 3
January 4 , 1989
to the proposed development's burden on, and benefit from, the
facilities to be funded by the fee.
10. A traffic impact fee in the amounts set forth in Exhibit
A and condition No. 68 to Tract Map 5883 is hereby imposed, to be
paid prior to filing the final map for Tract 5883. The Council
finds that Exhibit A is the "plan" required by Government Code
§ 53077. 5.
11. (a) The traffic impact fee shall be placed in the
Capital Improvement Fund and shall be segregated in separate and
special accounts as provided herein and such revenues,along with
any interest earnings on each account, shall be used for the
following purposes:
(1) To pay for design and construction of the
public facilities described in Exhibit A and reasonable costs of
outside consultant studies related thereto;
(2) To reimburse the City for the public
facilities described in Exhibit A, constructed by the City with
funds from other sources, unless the City funds were expended to
remedy existing deficiencies as identified in Exhibit A or were
obtained from grants or gifts; and
(3) To pay for and/or reimburse costs of program
development and ongoing administration of the traffic impact fee
program.
12 . The fees collected pursuant to this resolution shall be
deposited into deposit accounts for the improvement projects
identified in Exhibit, 'A and . dentified..by_. developer. or development
limpact. fee 4
January 4 , 1989
s
being charged.
13.. (a) Fees in the Capital Improvement Fund, and interest
thereon, shall be expended only for those facilities listed in
Exhibit A and only for the purpose for which the fee was
collected; and
(b) The standards upon which the needs for facilities
are based are the standards of the City. The City has undertaken
an extensive capital improvement program to implement these
standards and the City will remedy existing deficiencies without
using proceeds of the traffic impact fee.
14 . The City Manager may develop rules and regulations for
the effective implementation and administration of the traffic
impact fee.
15. (a) No later than June 30, 1990 and June 30 of each
year thereafter, the City Manager shall prepare a report for the
City Council identifying the balance of fees in the improvement
projects ' deposit account, the facilities constructed and the
capital facilities to be constructed. In preparing the report,
the City Manager shall adjust the estimated cost of the public
improvements in accordance with the Engineering Construction Cost
Index as published by Engineering News Record for the elapsed time
period from the previous July 1 or the date that the cost estimate
was developed. The annual report shall also include a review of
the administrative charge; and
(b) The City Council shall review the report at a .
..noticed 'public h6aring- and -shLII -make L iVidibgs idefiLifying the
limpact. fee 5
January 4 , 1989
RN
g q -
RAIL ;m m,�iwrqiw�" .34
Xr ';'141;��I_
M-11
2-N
Pl
Ng�
_.x
2.
--balances `�u d
xisting :fee are'; t. an
purpose o which ,the e to be
demonst ating a reasonable relationship between the .fee"and,the
- purpose for which it is charged. '
.16.' The fees imposed herein shall beeffective 60 days
following adoption of this 'resolutio'n.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this th day of
1988.
AYES:
NOES: '
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
limpact. fee 6
January 4, 1989
DEC J 1988
MEMORANDUM DUBUiN PLANNING
DATE: December 5, 1988 l
TO: Lee Thompson
FROM: Michelle DeRobertis
SUBJECT: Traffic Mitigation Fee for Heritage Commons
This memo is to present the results of our analysis to determine appropriate traffic
mitigation fees for the second phase of the Coastfed Properties/Heritage Commons
residential project on Amador Valley Boulevard in the City of Dublin. The project
consists of 206 one, two and three bedroom multi-family residential units.
The traffic generated by the project has been estimated to impact several locations
in the City of Dublin. The project traffic along with cumulative traffic will
require that certain traffic improvements be implemented in order to accommodate
the future traffic.
1. The first improvement required as a result of project and cumulative
traffic is the widening of Dougherty Road from two lanes to six lanes
between Amador Valley Boulevard and Sierra Lane. The funding for
half of the new four lane section has already been committed by
another source. However, the cost to improve the remaining half of the
new four-lane road, and the cost to widen from a four-lane road to a
six-lane road as well as undergrounding the utilities (which are
currently located in what will be a travel lane of the six-lane road) still
remains unfunded. Therefore, the project should contribute to the cost
of these unfunded improvements in proportion to its share of the new
future traffic volumes. The cost of the road widening improvements is
estimated by the City Engineer to be $1,556,000 and the cost of
undergrounding the utilities is estimated to be $569,500, totalling
$2,125,500.
The Coastfed Properties Traffic and Transportation Study by Abrams
Associates, November 2, 1988, determined that the project will
contribute 318 vehicles per day to this section of Dougherty Road. The
future daily volumes on this section of Dougherty Road are projected to
be 34,100 in the year 2010. The existing average daily traffic volume on
this road segment is 12,900. Thus the increase in daily traffic is
21,200 vehicles per day (vpd). The project's contribution of 318 vpd is
1.5 percent of the total new future daily traffic volume. Therefore, the
project should contribute 1.5 percent of the cost of improving
Dougherty Road to a six-lane section, or $31,882.
2. The second improvement required to accommodate project and future
traffic is the widening of Dougherty Road from two lanes to six lanes
...�ciwccn the-City' limit arid'Nroador'lallc Boulc:sru. T1,.<.:c:und ng,
three permanent lanes and one temporary lane of the required six-lane
' section has already been committed by another source. However, the
is T® Gh-W
4637 Chabot Drive,Suit
' PLEASi T "11"'e Fee.
Lee Thompson -2- December 5, 1988
cost to widen from a four-lane road to a six-lane road still remains
unfunded. Therefore, the project should contribute to the cost of these
unfunded improvements in proportion to its share of the additional
future traffic volumes. The estimated cost of these improvements is
$2,332,000.
The Coastfed Traffic Study projected that 80 project trips would use
Dougherty Road north of Amador Valley Boulevard. The future
estimated daily traffic on this section of Dougherty Road in the year
2010 is 24,100. The existing traffic volume is 5300, so the net increase
in traffic is 18,800 vpd. The••projeet traffic would be 0.4 percent of
this additional future traffic. Therefore, the project should contribute
0.4 percent of the cost of the improvements or $9,328.
3. The third improvement required as a result of project and cumulative
traffic volumes is the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection
of Amador Valley Boulevard and Amador Plaza Road. The
methodology for determining the proportionate cost sharing of this
improvement was developed.previously: for the Rainbow Investments
mitigation fee in our memo dated October 25, 1988 and will be
reiterated here.
The future traffic volumes at the intersection of Amador Valley
Boulevard and Amador Plaza Road were determined for the Downtown
Dublin Improvement Plan Study of 1986. These volumes included the
traffic generated by all approved developments as well as all future
developments that could be accommodated in Downtown Dublin,
including BART. The future volumes at this intersection were
compared to the existing volumes to determine the total number of
incremental trips as of February, 1986, the time of the downtown study.
In 1986, there were 2,199 p.m. peak hour trips through the intersection
of Amador Valley Boulevard and Amador Plaza Road. The future
traffic projections at buildout at the intersection are 3,087 p.m. peak
hour trips. This is an increase of 888 p.m. peak hour trips.
The projected total cost of the signal at Amador Valley Boulevard and
Amador Plaza Road, is $127,766 (see attachment). Therefore, the cost
of each peak hour trip through the intersection is $144, ($127,766
divided by 888 peak hour trips).
This mitigation fee of $144 per p.m. peak hour trip through the
intersection of Amador Valley Boulevard and Amador Plaza Road was
applied to the peak hours trips projected for the Coastfed development.
The Abrams Associates traffic study projected that 53 project trips
would travel through the intersection of Amador Valley Boulevard and
Amador Plaza Road during the p.m. peak hour. Therefore, the project
should contribute 53 X $144 = $7,632 toward the cost of this traffic
signal.
4. The fourth improvement required as a result of project and cumulative
traffic volumes is the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection
of Village Parkway and Lewis Avenue.
The future traffic volumes at the intersection of Village Parkway and
Lewis Avenue were determined for the Downtown Dublin Improvement
Plan Study of 1986. These volumes included the traffic generated by
i
Lee Thompson -3- December 5, 1988
all approved developments as well as all future developments that could
be accommodated in Downtown Dublin, including BART. The future
volumes at this intersection were compared to the existing volumes to
determine the total number of incremental trips as of February, 1986,
the/time of the downtown study. In 1986, there were 1826 p.m. peak
hour trips through the intersection of Village Parkway and Lewis
Avenue. The future projection at build-out through this intersection is
2,278 p.m. peak hour trips. This is an increase of 452 p.m. peak hour
trips.
The projected total cost of the signal at Village Parkway and Lewis
Avenue is approximately $97,700 (see attachment). Therefore, the cost
that each new peak hour trip through the intersection should contribute
is $97,700 / 452 = $216. The Abrams Associates report projected that
31 p.m. peak hour trips would travel through the intersection of Village
Parkway and Lewis Avenue. Therefore, the project should contribute
31 X $216 = $6,696 to the cost of this signal.
5. The fifth improvement is the restripirig and associated widening of
Dublin Boulevard from four to six lanes between Village Parkway and
Donlon Way. The estimated cost of this improvement is $870,000.
Dublin Boulevard is projected to carry an average of 30,100 vpd in the
year 2010 between Village Parkway and Donlon Way. The existing
average daily traffic volume on this road segment is 21,575. Thus the
increase in daily traffic is 8,525 vpd over present volumes. The project
is estimated to contribute 159 vpd to Dublin Boulevard or 1.9 percent of
the additional future traffic. Therefore, the project should contribute
1.9 percent of the cost of the improvement or S870,000 X 0.019 =
$16,530.
6. The sixth roadway improvement is widening Dougherty Road to six
lanes between the S.P.R.R. tracks and Dublin Boulevard. The estimated
cost of this improvement is $870,000.
This section of Dougherty Road is projected to carry 32,100 vpd in the
year 2010. The existing average daily traffic volume on this road
segment is 18,800 vpd. Thus, the increase in daily traffic is 13,300 vpd
over present volumes. The project is estimated to contribute 270 vpd to
Dougherty Road or two percent of the additional future traffic.
Therefore, the project should contribute two percent of the cost of this
improvement or $870,000 X 0.02 = $17,400.
7. The seventh roadway improvement is the construction of the parallel
road to Dublin Boulevard between Regional Street and Amador Plaza
Road. The estimated cost of this improvement is 53,000,000.
The parallel road to Dublin Boulevard is projected to carry
approximately 5,000 vpd. Since this road does not currently exist, all
5,000 trips would be new trips. The project is estimated to contribute
8 vpd to the parallel road or 0.16 percent of the traffic. Therefore, the
project-.sh.ould. co.ntri.b.ute 0.16 percent of the colt of this. read
improvement or 53,000,000 X 0.0016 = S4800.
Lee.Thomson -4- r "December 5,A988
8. The eighth road improvement is the relocation of the I-580 westbound ,
off ramp at San Ramon:Road. The estimated cost of this improvement is
$500,000.
The-I 580 westbound offramp is projected to carry.1 8,000 vpd, an
increase of 11,700 vpd over present volumes. No project traffic is
estimated to use this off-ramp. Therefore, the project should not
contribute any funds to this road improvement.
9. The ninth road improvement is the road on the S.P.R.R. right-of-way
connecting Dougherty Road..to the westerly extension of Dublin
Boulevard. The estimated cost of this improvement is $3,100,000.
The road on the S.P.R.R right-of-way is projected to carry 12,400 vpd.
Since this road does not currently exist, all 12,400 trips would be new
trips. The 'project is estimated to contribute 48 vpd to this road or
0.4 percent of the traffic. Therefore, the project should contribute
0.4 percent of the cost of this road improvement or $3,100,000 X 0.004 =
$12,400.
and/md
Attachments
157-001
a T,x .c i.. it - .,-,-ir`Y s Fs'.. •-k
SIGNAL COSTS
AMADOR VALLEY BLVD: AT AMADOR PLAZA
Mobilization $ 600 -
Signal/ 63,400 '
Clear! & Grub 500
Sidewalk Removal 840
Island Removal 4,360
Pavement Removal 8,000
AC Sawcut -275
PCC Sawcut 41
Full Pavement Section 19,436
Construction Staking 1,250
Planing Keycut 3,019
AC Overlay 2,368
PCC Curb 4,875
Curb & Gutter 64
Sidewalk 424
Handicap Ramp 400
Driveway 900
Relocate Roadway Sign 400
Roadway Sign 425
Striping 2,500
114,077
Engineering/Insp. 12% 13.689
TOTAL: $ 127,766
CITY OF DUBLIN
M E M O R A N D U M
Date: December 2, 1988 DEC/ 5 1088
To: j Michelle DeRobertis, TJKM
TJKM
From: Rich Lierly, Asst. City Engineer
Subject: Signal Costs - Village Parkway at Lewis Ave.
Following is a breakdown of costs for the above traffic signal:
Mobilization $ 900
Signal 69,000
Clear and Grub 100
Sidewalk Removal 800
Pavement Removal 1,427
AC Sawcut 275
9 PCC Sawcut 90
Construction Staking 500
Curb & Gutter 64
Sidewalk 424
Handicap Ramp 400
Driveway 900
Striping 1,000
Traffic Control 1,300
Interconn. Conduit 2" 1,500
Interconn. Conduit 1 1/2" 5,500
Interconn. Pull Box 625
Interconn. Cable 2,400
Subtotal: 87,205:00
Engr./Inspection 12% 10,464.60
Total: 97,669.60
Rounded Total: 97,700.00
Also, Trudi wanted you to know -that Dougherty Road north of Amador
Valley is already undergrounded. If you have any questions, please let- me
know.
RCL/gr
RESOLUTION NO. - 89
i
/ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPROVING THE SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
CONCERNING PA 88-009.3, HERITAGE COMMONS - CASDEN COMPANY
WHEREAS, Casden Company is requesting the City rezone approximately
17.45+ acres to a Planned Development (PD) District for a planned residential
development of 206 apartment/condominium dwelling units; and
WHEREAS, Casden Company requests concurrent Site Development Review
approval for said 206 apartment/condominium units; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold public hearings on December 19,
1988, January 17, 1989 and February 21, 1989, and the Planning Commission
adopted Resolution 89-010 recommending approval of PA 88-009.3; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hold a public hearing on said Site
Development Review request on March 27, 1989; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearings was given in all respects
as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Site
Development Review be approved subject to conditions prepared by Staff; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and consider all said reports and
recommendations herein above set forth; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to State and City environmental regulations, a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been
recommended for adoption for this project (City Council Resolution No.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby
find:
1. The project will promote orderly, attractive, and harmonious
j development in that general architectural considerations, including the
j character, scale, and quality of the design, the architectural relationship
with the site building materials, colors and similar elements have been
incorporated into the project in order to insure compatibility of this
development with its design concept and the character of planned future land
uses.
V
[PA88-009.3:Reso CC (SDR) 3/27) -1- Mum
s PA- 530 `6 ��
2. The project 'recognizes environmental limitations on development by
preserving the natural features of the creek to the maximum extent, providing
noise controlled environment where interior noise levels may exceed local and
state standards, and providing for off-site circulation improvements.
3. The project will stabilize land values and investments in the area
in that it is compatible to existing and planned land uses in the area, will be
visually attractive, will not overburden public services, and will provide
housing of a type that is desired in the City of Dublin.
4. The project will promote the general welfare as it meets the
specific intent clauses or performance standards of the City of Dublin zoning
regulations and the General Plan.
5. The .project is properly related to its site, surroundings, traffic
circulation, and its environmental setting.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE City Council approves Site Development
Review PA 88-009.3 subject to the conditions listed below:
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Unless otherwise specified, the following conditions shall be complied with
prior to issuance of building permits. Each item is subject to review and
approval by the Planning Department unless otherwise specified..
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: -
1. This approval is for a Site Development Review of 206 multi-family
dwelling units along with on-site recreation facilities, consistent with
the following submittals.
Except as specifically modified or elaborated upon by the conditions
listed below, development of the 206 unit apartment/condominium project
shall conform to the Conditions of Approval. established by Resolution
Nos. and of the Dublin City Council, approved on
, for City File PA 88-009.1 and .2.
Except as specifically modified elsewhere in these conditions, .
development shall be generally consistent with the following submittals:
a. Conceptual site plan, floor plans, and elevations prepared by
the Casden Company for CoastFed Properties, consisting of seven (7)
sheets and dated received October 28, 1988 (Site Plan) and December 12,
1988 (Architectural Plans) .
b. Conceptual landscape plan prepared by Robert Bucci
Associates, consisting of one (1) sheet and dated received November 7,
1988.
C. Tentative Tract Map 5883 propnred by, P,<.;sal. & Karn, inn..
consisting of one (1) sheet and dated i,�c�ived October 26, 1988.
[PA88-009.3:Reso CC (SDR) 3/27]
i -2-
i
.Collectively, these materials shall serve as "Exhibit A" for this
project and shall be maintained on file with the Planning Department.
2. Mitigation measures and monitoring program specified in City Council
Resolutions and are made a part of these Conditions of
Approval.
3. Except as may be specifically provided for within these Conditions of
Approval, the development shall comply with City of Dublin Site
Development Review Standard Conditions (see Attachment A of PD Rezoning
Conditions of Approval) .
4. Except as may be specifically provided for within these Conditions of
Approval, development shall comply with City of Dublin Police Services
Standard Residential Building Security Requirements (see Attachment B of
PD Rezoning Conditions of Approval) .
5. Except as may be specifically provided for within these Conditions of
Approval, the development shall comply with the City of Dublin
Preliminary Residential Condominium Guidelines (Attachment C) .
6. Private vehicular accessway requirements (e.g. widths) delineated in
Attachment C shall be observed.
7. The Developer shall complete and submit the City of Dublin Standard
Plant Material, Irrigation System and Maintenance Agreement (see
Attachment D) .
8. The Site Development Review approval shall be valid for two (2) years
from the date of approval. The approval period for the permit may be
extended one additional year (Developer must submit a written request
for the extension prior to the expiration date of the permits) by the
Planning Director upon a determination that the Conditions of Approval
remain adequate to assure that the above stated Findings of Approval
will continue to be met. Failure to exercise the approval, or to make
substantial progress in completing the project (significant above ground
construction based on valid building permits) , will cause the permit to
become null and void.
9. Construction plans shall clearly show the location, design and materials
used for any project fences, walls, gates and retaining walls. The
design, location and materials used for these items are subject to
review and approval by the Planning Director. Wooden fence posts and
any other wooden fence members in direct contact with the soil shall be
pressure treated, unless an alternative treatment/material is approved
by the Building Official.
10. All construction shall be limited to take place between the hours of
7:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. , Monday through Friday, except as may be
approved in advance in writing by the City Engineer.
11. A condominium plan shall be filed for this property -.-prior to cc_canancy
of any unit.
[PA88-009.3:Reso CC (SDR) 3/27]
-3-
12. Prior.'to the issuance of building permits, the Developer shall document
that -the Ordinance requirements of the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority
(DRFA) have been, or will be, satisfied. (Attachment E outlines DRFA's
requirements) .
13. Construction plans submitted for building permits shall include details
on design, dimensions, locations and materials for the swimming pools,
spa, tot lots, mail kiosks, tennis courts, and trash enclosures. These
details are subject to review and approval by the Planning Director.
14. A street naming and numbering system based on the City address grid
system (Attachment F) must be submitted for review and approval by the
Building Inspection Department prior to the issuance of building
permits.
SITE PLANS
15. Exceptions to the standard setback requirements as established for PA
88-009.1 by City Council Resolution and shown on Exhibit "A" are
granted as follows:
a. Building 2 - may observe 10 feet setback from property line.
b. Building 7 - a minimum 10 foot setback from parking area shall be
provided; exceptions are granted to allow 8 feet from creek fence and
10 feet from private road at south corner of building.
c. Building 10 - building may observe a 9 foot creek fence setback at
east corner and 9 foot private street setback at south corner.
d. Building 11 - southside building appurtenance may observe a 5 foot
setback from creek fence to provide a 15 foot setback at northeast
corner.
e. Building 22 - south corner may observe a 10 foot setback from property
line.
f. Building 2 appurtenance and Building 1 setback shall be reduced to 17
feet to allow Building 1 to observe 15 foot setback from property
line.
16. Maintenance road and fencing adjacent to Building 3 shall be modified to
shorten the center of the maintenance road about 30 feet. Fencing shall
be arced along an approximately 25 foot radius curve from a point
roughly parallel to the Building #3 entry to a point on the property
line. Area previously shown as maintenance road shall be landscaped.
17. Building 3 setback from the loop road shall be increased to at least 12
feet.
[PA88-009.3:Reso CC (SDR) 3/27]
-4-
18. Eliminate eastern patio/deck area from north side of Building 11.
19. Building 26 shall observe a minimum 12 foot setback from the creek fence
where pathway passes between building and the fence.
20. Mailbox locations shall be approved by the U.S. Postal Service prior to
acquiring building permits. Written confirmation of said approval shall
be supplied to the Planning Department.
21. All uncovered parking spaces shall be shown to be at least 9 feet in
width and 18 feet in length. Compacts shall be shown to be at least 8
feet in width and 16 feet in length. A 2 foot overhang (into a
landscaped area) is permitted.
22. A minimum parking ratio of 2.15 spaces per dwelling unit shall be
provided. A maximum of 50% of the uncovered spaces may be for compact
cars.
23. Parking shall be permitted only in approved parking stalls. No parking
is permitted along street. No storage of vehicles or other items is
permitted in any parking areas.
24. Revised building layout for Area 2 is subject to approval of the
Planning Director. Revisions are required to increase the Building 14
setback from the private road. Parking spaces on the west side of
street adjacent to overpass to Area 1 shall be eliminated. Exceptions
to the standard setback requirements established for PA 88-009.1 may be
approved by the Planning Director if the exceptions will not cause
safety conflicts and if the exceptions are in keeping with established
aesthetic standards established for this project.
25. A minimum of 15% of the total parking spaces shall be marked for visitor
use only. One carport space shall be assigned to each dwelling unit.
The remaining parking spaces shall be unassigned.
LANDSCAPE PLANS
26. The root shields utilized throughout this project shall be by Deep Root
Control Products, made of high impact polystyrene, or of an equivalent
design, as determined acceptable by the City Engineer. The locations
where root shields shall be utilized shall be subject to review and
approval by the City Engineer.
27. Transformers, irrigation control boxes, backflow devices, valves, and
the like, shall be enclosed in vaults, fencing and/or painted out and
landscaped, as determined acceptable to the Planning Director.
28. Plant materials shown on the Conceptual Site Plan are generally
acceptable. The Lirodendron tulipifera may be used as an accent tree,
but because of high water requirements in the summer, it shall not be
used as a theme tree.
[PA88-009.3:Reso CC (SDR) 3/27]
-5-
29. A plant watering and maintenance program for non-creek areas shall be
submi.tted to the Planning Director for review and approval. Separate
winter and summer watering schedules shall be established. Watering of
trees shall be restricted to deep watering two to three times per month.
First year watering and mainteaance programs to establish plants shall
be specified.
30. Pathway from Building 7 carports to east side entry shall be added to
pathway plan.
31. Pathway to Building 25 westside entry shall be as shown on Site Plan.
32. Pathway between Buildings 4 and 5, as shown on Site Plan, shall be
included in pathway plan.
33. Main pedestrian walkway shall be extended,from the recreation area in
Area 1 and connect to Amador Valley Boulevard sidewalk. Wheelchair
ramps per Title 24 shall be provided at each street (private or public)
crossing.
34. The final internal pedestrian walkway system shall be subject to review
and approval as part of the Project Landscape Working Drawings.
IMPROVEMENTS/PLANS
35. Prior to filing for building permits, complete project improvement plans,
including precise plans and specification for street improvements, grading,
drainage (including size,- type, and location of drainage facilities both
on- and off-site) and erosion and sedimentation control shall be submitted
to and approved by the City Engineer.
36. Construction Plans shall include design and location details for vehicular
traffic signing (e.g. stop signs, street name signs) throughout the
project site. The striping and signing of internal roadways shall be
subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to installation.
Internal roadways shall be posted as private streets. Parking area
striping and signing shall include small car, handicapped and visitor
parking information. Use of double striping for open parking spaces is
encouraged.
37. Prior to approval of improvement plans, the Developer shall document that
the requirements of Zone 7 have been, or will be, satisfied (Attachment G
outlines Zone 7's requirements) .
38. The Applicant shall submit a Private Vehicle Accessway Agreement for review
and approval by the City Engineer and City Attorney. The Agreement shall
serve to establish a contract which will enable the City to provide
specified maintenance service on the vehicle accessways in the event the
Developer or the Homeowner's Association fails to so maintain them (see
Sample Agreement - Attachment H) .
[PA88-009.3:Reso CC (SDR) 3/27]
-6-
39. Details of the textured concrete walks and the stamped concrete entryways
and crosswalks shall be clearly delineated on construction plans. The
gn
desi ; materials, dimensional layout and colors shall be subject to review
and approval as part of the Project Landscape Working Drawings by the
Planning Director.
40. Unless specifically provided for within Exhibit A, parking of recreational
vehicles (as defined in Section 8-22.51 of the City Zoning Ordinance)
within this project is specifically prohibited. Said restrictions shall be
prominently outlined within the Rental Agreements and Terms of Sale
Agreement for individuals purchasing units in the project. Upon request,
copies of such documents shall be submitted to the Planning Department.
41. A 10-foot wide concrete paving strip shall be provided across each
entrance. The main entry paving strip shall align with the lip of gutter
on Amador Valley Boulevard and textured paving stones on project interior.
42. If occupancy is requested to occur in phases, then all physical
improvements shall be required to be in place prior to occupancy except for
items specifically excluded in a Construction-Phased Occupancy Plan
approved by the Planning Department. Said plan shall be submitted a
minimum of 45 days prior to the occupancy of any unit covered by the plan.
No individual unit shall be occupied until the adjoining area is finished,
safe, accessible, provided with all reasonable expected services and
amenities, and completely separated from remaining additional construction
activity. Any approved Construction-Phased Occupancy Plan shall have
sufficient cash deposits or other assurances to guarantee that the project
and all associated improvements shall be installed in a timely and
satisfactory manner. Any approved Construction-Phased Occupancy Plan shall
indicate the proposed timing of completion of the project recreational
facilities. At the request of the Planning Director, written
acknowledgements of continuing construction activity shall be secured from
all occupants or tenants for the portions of the project to be occupied,
and shall be filed with the Planning Department. Said acknowledgements for
a subdivision shall be part of the settlement documents between the
Developer and Buyer, if applicable.
43. A grading permit shall be obtained prior to any grading of the site.
44. An encroachment permit is required for all work in the public right-of-way.
45. Existing storm drain lines shall be relocated and easements abandoned and
rededicated as required to avoid building areas.
46. As-built drawings showing the locations of all underground utilities
(water, storm and sanitary sewer, gas, electric, telephone and cable TV)
shall be provided to the City.
ARCHITECTURAL/BUILDINGS
47. Exterior colors and materials for the structures shall be subject to final
review and approval by the Planning Director and shall be shown on
constructions plans. A colors and materials sample board shall be
submitted with construction plans when applying for building permits.
[PA88-009.3:Reso CC (SDR) 3/27]
-7-
48. All ducts', meters, and other mechanical equipment on the structures shall
be effectively screened from view with materials architecturally compatible
with the main structures. The method used to accomplish this shall be
clearly delineated on construction plans and shall be subject to review and
approval by the Planning Director.
49. Unit security shall contain: dead bolt locks with security strike plates
on all entry doors; a 180 degree peephole on all entry doors; positive
window locks; pin locks on all sliding glass doors; dead bolt locks with
security strike plates or hardened padlock hasps on all exterior unit
storage areas.
50. Exterior lighting shall be provided on stairwells, dwelling entrances and
by street and unit numbers.
51. A minimum of 120 cubic feet of special storage shall be provided for each
unit. Architectural plans shall clearly indicate 120 cubic feet of usable
and water proofed storage space. Clear access shall be provided to water
heater, furnace and other utility equipment.
SIGNS
52. Signs established for the project (other than traffic regulatory signs)
shall be subject to review under a separate Planning Department
application. No signs shall be installed on the site ;without prior
Planning Department review and approval. I
53. Design and location of address directories shall be approved by the
Planning Director and Dougherty Regional Fire Authority (DRFA) prior to
occupancy of any unit.
54. No off-site subdivision signs shall be utilized within the City limits
until the appropriate Conditional Use Permit approvals are secured.
MISCELLANEOUS
55. The recreation area pool shall incorporate use of solar collector panels.
The type of panel utilized shall be subject to approval of the Planning
Director. The Developer shall supply documentation that the number, size
and location of the panels utilized shall suffice to provide, adequate pool
heating for a reasonable length of time in each calendar year. Heating of
the pool may be supplemented by gas heaters. The use of pool covers may be
used in place of or in conjunction with solar heaters providing the
Applicant can demonstrate reasonable energy conservation to the
satisfaction of the Planning Director.
56. The developer shall comply with all requirements of the Dublin San Ramon
Services District Water Department and provide documentation that all
Ordinance requirements have been, or will be, satisfied. This
documentation shall be submitted prior to the issuance of building permits.
57. New exterior lighting shall be of a design and placement so as not to cause
. -�!._gl-are, onto-�adj,o n ng�,proFe-r-ties: h ght-ing used aftior'daylight
be minimized to provide for security needs only.
[PA88-009.3:Reso CC (SDR) 3/27]
-8-
I
I
58. To apply--for -building permits, the Applicant shall submit six (6) sets of.'
construction plans. to the Building Department for plan check. = Each set of
plans hall have attached an annotated copy of the Final Action Letter.
The notations shall clearly indicate how all conditions of approval will be
complied with. Construction plans will not be accepted without the
annotated Final Action Letter attached to each set of plans. The Applicant
will be responsible for obtaining the approvals of all participating non-
city agencies prior to the issuance of building permits,
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of March, 1989.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor
z
ATTEST:
City Clerk
[PA88-009.3:Reso CC (SDR) 3/27]
-9-
••. .. r -_'. $ vet �•T t.. r r 4 f •
CITY :OF DUBLIN
.PRELIMINARY
PRESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES
Primary Guidelines
1. Parking
` 2 . Open Space
3. Private Vehicular Accessways
4 . Storage
5. Refuse Collection ,
6 . Site Development Review Standard Conditions
7. Standard Residential Security Requirements
Secondary Guidelines
8 . Alameda County Land Use & Development Plan Objectives,
Principles and Standards
9 . Guidelines for Authorizing Construction or Conversion
of Condominium. . .Projects.
t
M '; TO EXHIBIT G
ERR'AwOTACINR s.'� PA 88-009 HERIT
Form: DP 83-02 SITE DEVELOPMEN'
1. Parking Requirements
Two ;spaces -per unit, one of which must be covered and assigned
to a specific unit. A minimum of 15% of the parking spaces shall
be reserved for guest parking only.
No more than 25% of the site can be paved for road or parking
purposes.
Covered parking stalls shall be 9 'x 201 .
Uncovered parking stalls for standard cars shall be 9 'x 18 '
and for compact cars 81x 17 ' . P_ 2 ' overhang is permitted.
35% of the uncovered parking stalls may be for compact cars.
2 . Open Space `
Fifty per cent of the site shall contain useable common
open space. An open space area must be at least 15 feet wide to
be counted as open space. Decks, patios and balconies must be
at least 7 ' wide to be counted as open space.
Each ground level unit shall have at least 200 sq. ft. of
private useable open space (e.g. decks, patios and balconies)
directly adjacent to the unit.
Each above grade unit shall have at least 70 sq. ft. of
private useable open space directly adjacent to the unit. This
space must have a minimum dimension of 6 feet.
3. Private Vehicular Accessways
Without parking on either side 20 feet
90° uncovered on one side only 26 feet
900 covered parking on one side only 30 feet
901 uncovered on both sides 30 feet
90° covered on both sides 32 feet
900 covered on one side and uncovered 32 feet
on the other side
Sidewalks with handicapped ramps shall be provided to allow
resident and visitors to walk through the development without
needing to utilize the vehicular accessways.
4 . Storage
Each unit shall have at least 120 cubic feet of individual
lockable and water-proofed storage space assigned it. The space
must have a minimum dimension of 4 feet.
II
Ar 71,
ie tij
.4,57
Lt
it
5. RefuselCollection'.' '
Refus' e colle:cti'on* areas shall be enclosed by solid and
substantial-.materials; the design of which shall be* compatible
with the,/ architecture of the project, and the height of which
must exceed the height of the refuse containers.
III
8. LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
OBJECTIVES, PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS TO BE
UTILIZED IN THE PREPARATION AND EVALUATION
OF LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE
RESIDENTIAL PLANNED
I
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
: Page 1
=:) The objectives, principles and standard: that fullow are inti:n3rd to guide th^
..,y� applicant in the preparation of the Lnr.d Usr. and bevc•lup��et.t Plan and they gill
i be used as the basis of the evaluation or the CinJ U,e and Development Plan by
f...� technical agencies, the Planning Ccnnission and the Board of Supervisors.
The Objectives may be thought of as the primary social, ecunomie and physical goals
of the District to which the Land Use and Development Plan should be aimed.
The Principles set forth the manner in which the land should be developed to achieve
the objectives
The Standards are considered to be measures that will assure realization of the
objectives and principles; an alternate standard may be utilized if it is demonstrated
that it is as effective as the listed standard,
J
�' '0°JECTIVia
The Planied Develc;.ment District and the pros;sions of this resolution, are
established to encourage the arrznccr„ent of a variety of residential uses on
Suitable lands in suchra m2nner:that the result;ng develcznent will:
a, be in accord with the General Plan of the County of Alameda;
b, provide efficient use of the land that includes precervat;ert of sigaificznc
open areas and natural and topocraphic landscape features;
C. provide an environmcrit that will encourage the use of ecrv-on open areas
for eo=iunity activities and other zmcnities;
d, provide variety in the siting of varied housing tyres and in t!e des;gn
of access and circulation facilities;
C' be compatible w;th and enhznce the devcle,.ment of the -enera; area,
PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS
1. COHHON OPEEN A.::. DESIGN
A, Principles:
1, Co,,:--non O:gn Area (all lands not utilized by iuildiic Sites,. the
— buildir.: and its pee ;red yards, private o_tdcor living areas, reads,
school sites, and other land areas owned or maintained by a
governm.ental agency) s`nuld be:
a) Designed as an essent;a? or major tie-cnt of the develop-en';
b) Located to take advantace of and help ;reserve eziscin4g
natural amenities such as trees, topa;raoh;c features,
watcr,.ays and views;
C) Consolidated generally into large usea�lr areas; but use".
also to buffer incompatible uses and provide corridors :.r
space around and within developed areas to achieve a sczcieus
character and e--nvenic.1t linka,e to all parts of the development.
2, Useable Co•--lon 0=en 'reas (that portion of Cc-.on :pen .Areas that
ceets c—ri t-ria (TI, b, 2 far outdoo- liv;nz) should 'e*:
a) Conveniently located for use by all the residen:s, but pr;,:arily
distributed so th:t the largest and r-ost uscablc areas are
in closest pri.;nity to h;ghest dens;;v - hiShest inze.ns;ty
p--rt;cns •�r the d:v: - ae�t• t
b) A-ic;uatc in sire z•ld eor,r;yur,-tiJn t. ai CCU:noda t: a r,;de ralye
of recr;atiei�l v,he:h;r szz:ific retreat;onal
areas cr fac;r;t;es are provido-I ini6 ally or in th•: future,
Page 2
�f j• Rvc rea(ir:nal Areas should be:
�V N a) Do signed to provide for a wide range of recreational e>perienc:s,
j both passive and active. The extent and nature of sp^.c;fic
improvements such as pools, play fields, court games, tot arras,
sitting areas, and nature trails should be related to the general
recreation needs of the residents, site characteristics and
the availability of area-wide recreational facilities;
b) Provid_d most generously where high-density--high intensity
levels of development result in the limited availability
: of private outdoor spaces;
c) Conveniently located without impairinc the view and privacy
of individual dwellings;
: d) Safe to use, durable, and economical to maintain.
4. The common open area and recreational facilities should he
preserved eserved in perpetuity, and that the residents will share the
advantaces of usinc it and the responsibilities of maintaining it.
8. Standards:
1. All common open areas and recreational facilities shall be owned
by a Homeowners Association capable of dis:lution by MIM of its
membership.
2. Useable co•--.on cDen areas shall be:
a) Provided at the ratio of 500 sq. ft. ;er dwelling unit. This
re;uirenent may be rec_ced by 100 sq. f:, fcr each ,CO sq. f:.
of Private Outdoor Living Area prcvidc� a 6,elling unit in
excess of that otherwise required by this Resolution (II8i
b) Consolidated in units of at least 1C,C o sq, ft, in area that
measure not less than 100 feet in width or depth and shall
not exceed a maximum gradient of 10%.
j• All dwelling units shall be a minimum of 53 feet from the perimeter
of all recreation areas and facilities subject to intensive use.
11, BUILDING SITE DESIGN
A. Principles:
i 1. Dwelline concentrations of differiae densities should be arranged
that in general the hichest density portions of the developmcnt are
closest to existing and anticipated centers of activity, major
transporation routes, co-nercial areas and other public facilities.
2. Dwellinc units should be situated:
a) In locations which are not subject to the pro.ab;lity of natural
or man-made dangers, annoyances or incznven;ences;
b) To permit optimum site utilization c_-^ensurate with the
conservation of desirable topographic features;
e) In ccnpatible groups of similar building types;
d) To take advvntaye of desirable views:
t) Ta provide natural light and vrntilati;n, privacy
and convenient access to and around each building;
f) To assure their harm.loious itlatiiinsyip .ith existing and
'anticipated development along peripheral boundaries.
"Page 3
3, Spaces should vary bet:/c en buildings in accordance with the building
size and use in order to achieve a desirable visual and social
relationship.
4. The distance between bu;ldings and streets should vary according
to building size, use and eharacter of street traffic in order to
provide well planned streetscape and to assure protection from
traffic noise, congestion and property damage.
5, Private outdoor liv;na areas for each dwelling unit shall be ample in size,
useable in shape and adjacent to the dwelling units served.
g�
Standards:
1, A minimum five (5) foot yard shall be provided adjacent to each exterior
.• building wall. This yard shall be increased:
a) Five (5) feet for each story of the building wall over one story; and
j b) Two (2) feet for the first fifty (50) feet of building wall length, plus
one (1) foot for every 10 feet of building*wall length over 50 'ee:; ar.�
0 e) Five (5) feet from a limited access street (less than 300 vehicle
trips per day);
d) Ten (10)•feet for a minor residential street (300 to 600 vehicle
trips per day;
e) Twenty (20) feet from a neighborhood collector street (6C0 to
2,000 vehicle trips per day);
f) Thirty (30) feet from an arterial (over 2,000 vehicle trips per day);
trod a buildir shall be cscd to satisfy the yacd req_;re77�ent cf anc: .-r
(No yard requ
building.)
2. Peripheral setbacks for a building located alert; the bcundaries of the
Planned Develc;nent site shall be equal to the required yard for that
building:but not less than 20 feet;
3. Private outdccr living areas shall be:
a) At least. 500 useable sq• ft. in area and measure not less than
15' in width or depth for single occupancy, detached buildings
located on the ground floor;
i . •
b) At least 300 useable sq. ft. in area and measure net less than
15' in width or death for multiple occupancy attached dweilin;s
1 '• located on the ground floor;
1
i
{
i
I
t
a
Page 4
3 """c. At least 70 useable sq. ft. in area and measure not less than
in width or depth for dwellings located above the ground floor.
III. DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS FOR RPD ACCESS WAYS
j
A. Purpose:
These principles and standards are to be employed in the design, evaluation
and approval of access ways in Residential Planned Develorpcwnt District (RPD)
Land Use and Development Plans.
B. Definition of Access Way
For the purpose of these principles and standards "access way" means those
:i areas in an RPO intended for the circulation and maneuvering of motor vehicles
where Design Hourly Volume (DHV) does not exceed 100. "Access way" Includes
accesses to open and covered parking spaces, but not the spaces themselves.
C. General Principle - Functional Design: _
Access ways should be designed to meet'�the specific conditions present in
each development and be integrated with all other elements of the site plan.
As local conditions and desired residential characteristics vary, so should
access way function and design. The major determ inants of RPD access way
design are:
1. Desired speed of movemcnt: Generally there will be no need for fast
movement of vehicles within the residential portions of Residential
Planned Developments, speed and efficiency of movement being of no re
importance on collector and arterial streets leading to and th r ugh
the development. Maintaining speeds within a range of fron 5-15 mph
within the residential portions generally will be desired in the interest
of safety and residential compatibility. Exceptions where speeds to
25 mph will be desired may occur in very large or strung out develop-
ments where more than 4 minutes travel time (1 mile at 15 eiph) on a
given access way required to reach the collector or arterial street
providing access to and through the development.
2. Volume of traffic: Volume of traffic (DHV) should determine the
number of moving lanes and intersection design, including parking
in combination with design speeds, the width of
bay access, and
i travel lanes.
Type of vehicles served: Travel lane widths should be greater than
required for automobiles alone where large service and emergency
i vehicles must be accanmodated.
4. Accom mdation of utilities: Wherever necessary, the roadway area should
be designed to accommodate water, sewer, electric, telephone, gas and
drainage facilities.
5. Maintenance: The access way should be designed structurally for the
base to last the life of the RPD and the surface to last at least ten
years without significant repairs. Routine and major maintenance should
be provided for either through the incorporation into the County Road
System or by the Homes Association. Streets intended to serve traffic
needs of an area beyond the RPD and collector or arterial streets
within the RPD should be County maintained.
6. Safety and residential compatibility: Access ways should be designed
to:
a. Provide convenient access while minimi:ing danger, an-' aiwoyNice.
h. Avoid adverse grading and drainage eunditions and conserve existinq
amenities of the Site.
-page 5
C. Minimize through traffic.
`` 7, Needs of surrounding areas: Provide for general circulation needs of
.i the surrounding area by providing connections to the existing street
system and stub streets to undeveloped lands, which streets should be
county maintained,
D. Standards:
Access way width: Access way width is to be dete mined by adding to the
basic travel lane width other elements of the cross section that may be
necessary for a given design situation, I.e., areas for parking, side-
walks, landscaping, utilities, protective slopes, etc,
2. Travel lane width:
Speed. Range Traffic Volume Minimum
(DHV)l Lane Width
j 10 - 15c.ph 0 - 50 912
15 - 25 mph So - 100 10'
loesign Hourly Volume
A minimums 10' width including shoulders is necessary if service
and emergency vehicles will use.
3, Grades: Grades should not exceed 17% for portions of access ways likely
to be used by schccl huses. Access ways may have short runs exceed r.;
12`.S but not greater than 15'H or not greater than 20'% if the access way
is no more than 300 ft, in length.
4, Horizontal Curves:
Soeed Range, mDh lane Centerline Radius
10 - 15 mph 301 1
— 15 - 25 mph 501
- mph
e 1Where emergenc, vehicle service necessary 40'
m;nir.w,n; right angle turns 20' minimer..
5. Turn around facilities_: Maneuvering space for vesicle turnaround
should be provided at the enus of dead-end access ways and at $001
intervals along access ways where intersections are non-existent
or 1000' or mere apart.
b. Parking: Parkins spaces as required to service the resident and
quest needs of the development may be located In lanes adjacent to
access way•., traffir lanes. in bays off the access way, in eenventional
garage and porkiny structures or in various ccr5inations as appropriate
for the particular RPD design concept.
ParklmI lane Darallel to traffic lane:
_ Design Soeed Parking Len. W th
0 - 15 mph 8'
15 - 25 mph 9'
Page 6
�( Parking in bays perpendicular to and adjoining travel lane:
Speed Range of DHV Stall Back up
t Travel Lane Width/Depth (includes travel
lane area)
0 - 15 mph 0 - 20 9' - 20' 25' minimum
20 - 50_ 9' - 20' 28' minimum
15 - 25 mph Perpendicular Parking Hot Permitted
7, Sidewalks and bicycle ways should be provided at locations within the
RPD consistent with the need to service pedestrian and bicycle traffic
likely to be generated. These facilities, depending on local conditions,
may be a part of the vehicle travel way, lccated adjacent to it or in
an entirely separate area. When associated with the access way, the
following Standards shall apply:
Speed Range Traffic
Vol:une Sidewalks Bicycle brays
(mph) (D. _
t 0 _ 15 0 - 20 Part of;travel way Part of travel way
except when high
pedestrian volume
anticipated
20 - 50 4' wide, adjoining Part of travel way
15 - 25 0 - 50 4' wide, adjoininc Part of travel way
50 - 100 4' wide, separated 10' wide adjoining
- by parkstrip rvacway
IPark strip is 2' wide except where additional width is required for landscapinc,
S. Curbs and nutters, shoulders, slope and utility easements: Should he
provided and included as part of the access way as warranted by traffic,
drainage, tonogr2phic, soils and road structural conditions,
9. Access way structural section: Access way structural section should
i consist of a ninimum 0,2' asphalt concrete paven.ent or. a 0,5' aggregate
ibase, or greater if delennined necessary by base soil analysis.
t
C. Illustrations of standards:
Following_ examples are of some typical access way crass sections that may
occur in RPD's through use of the preceding principles and standards,
Ia'T�".aL V-11=irf
Q _Qr 0.5'
I.4
t - 4-
Minimum 10 - 15 mph speed range and traffic volume 0 - 50 DHV
No provision for emergency or service vehicles necessary
Parking anJ pedestrian wovervnl acconr,ndated elsewhere
Curbs for drainage and protection of street edge and adjoining landscapin,
' Page 7
/ 1 'TUf7AL' YJIoT}t
r3'I lo' 10' 9' X25 4�
L Vj
t
i
1 15 - 25 speed and 50 - 100 DY.V
" Parkinq one side
Sidewalk one Sidr
(f.U.E, varics)
10'
,
f L-
I
0 - 15 mph speed and 20 - 50 DHV traffic
Parking al. right angles in bay open to access way
64- TC740- WIDTH
C1 1 �trta5
i
. I t
41u
Speed to 25 mph, traffic 50 - 100 DHV
Parking both sides
Sidewalks I,utl, sides and scpara:cd by parkstrip
Bicycle way provided. separated by planter strip
Slope casement One side (varies)
Pa3e B
IV. DESIGN OF PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION SYSTEMS
%I
/ 1 A. principles:
Pedestrian ways should be:
. 1
1. Designed to provide for safe and convenient circulation within and
beyond the development; special attention should be given to the
connections between parking areas, dwelling units and all project
facilities;
2. Designed and improved in accordance with their intended use (i.e.,
nature trails, entry walks, and street Sidewalks or equivalent);
of proper width, alignment and gradient to provide safety, convenience
and appearance suitable for pedestrian traffic;
4. Designed, located, and improved to protect privacy of individual
dwellings.
B. Standards:
i
j The walking distance from a dwelling unit to the required parking space or
spaces which serve it shall not exceed 200' as measured along defined
walkways; walking distance from dwelling'units to guest parking spaces
shall not exceed $00' as measure along defined walkways.
V. SITE IMPROVEMENTS: GRADING DRAINAGE INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES USE OF PLANT
MATERIALS AND OTHER OUTDOOR FACILITIES
A. Principles:
1, Grading. Grading shall be designed to assure stable ground forms,
adequate surface drainage, safe and convenient access to and around
the buildings and to conserve desirable existing vegetation and
natural ground forms. Any unusual hazard to pedestrians created by
slopes or sudden grade changes shall be minimized by the installation
of fences, walls, rails, or planting.
2, Drainaae. Installation of adequate facilities for the collection and
disposal of storm waters shall be provided to prevent damage to
property and to provide for the safety and convenience of occupants.
' 3. All utility lnstallatlons installed in and for the purpose of
supplying service to the development shall be underground.
4. The appeal and character of the site should be preserved and
i enhanced by retaining and protecting existing trees and other
i site features to the extent that they enhance the project and
additional new plant materials should be added for privacy, shade,
erosion control and to screen out objectionable features.
$. Appropriately designed fences, walks, or planting should be installed
along property boundary lines, parking areas, playgrounds, laundry
yard, refuse collection points, and other locations where needed for
protection or screening purposes. Plant materials should be selected
and arranged to produce a harmonious visual effect.
6. Laundry and drying facilities of appropriate size should be provided
when necessary at locations readily accessible to the dwelling units.•
7. Refuse collection stations should be located convenient to both the
resldents and collectors and suitably screened.
_
S. Light fixtures for walks, steps, parking areas, driveway, streets
and other facilities should be provided to assure safe and convenient
night time use. Fixtures should be designed in keeping with the
project and properly shaded to screen dwelling unit windows from
the direct rays of light.
9. �
GUIDELINES FOR AUTHORIZING -
CONSTRUCTION OR CONVERSION OF
CONDOMINIUM, COMMUNITY APARTMENT
AND STOCK COOPERATIVE RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS
Adopted by the Alameda County Board of Supervisors
May I S, 1979
The following guidelines are adopted for use in Planning Department actions on
Tentative Subdivision Maps, Site Development Review and Planned District rezoning
applications involving either the new construction of, or conversion of existing
dwellings to, condominium community apartment and stock cooperative dwellings.
By using these guidelines together with existing General Pion policies and
regulatory ordinances it is the Planning Commission's objective to:
Promote the generation of housing of enduring quality and the
conservation of existing housing.
Assure residential living environments adequate to the needs of long-
term occupancy.
Provide neighborhood stability.
Protect individual housing investments.
Help assure economic and efficient operation of condominium homes
associations.
Address in condominium conversions needs of existing residents for
alternate housing.
GUIDELINES
I. Floor area ratio: The ratio of total project residential floor area
to project site area should not exceed 1:3. A greater floor area
than 1:3, as determined on a case by case basis; may be
'j appropriate for high density projects (normally exceeding 2500
square feet of site area per unit), where units are stocked and
other design elements ore introduced to increase openness and
privacy and where special amenities, such as views, offset site
deficiencies resulting from exceeding this ratio.
On sites where existing construction takes up a disproportionate
share of the site, the site area/floor area ratio should apply only
>. .;. to the area.remaining fo- development...
2. Parkin One of the two parking spaces per unit required by
zoning should be located as close to living units as good design will
permit; a separation of more than 50 feet should be avoided
Where practical, enclosed parking spaces should have an apron in
front capable of providing a tandem space for alternate or
additional use. One space per unit should be covered. In addition
Condominium Guidelines 1
Page Two '
to the two spoces required to serve each unit, guest parking should
be provided at 1 space per 2 units for units up to 1,000 square feet
and I to I for larger units. Available on-street parking may be
counted to meet this requirement. Signs should identify guest
parking areas and the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions
should prohibit the use of these areas by homeowner families.
Parking may be reduced below this,level if the project is in an
area with a public transit system considered adequate to serve the
needs of the residents or may be reduced to be consistent with a
Specific Pion adopted by the Board of Supervisors.
3. Private open areas: Each ground floor unit should have a private
open area properly related to the; floor plan and at least 3D0
square feet in area, with a minimum dimension of 15 feet. Units
not on the ground floor should have adequate balconies with a
minimum dimension of 8 feet.
4. Private entrances: Unit entrances should be designed as a
transition to the living areas and should be semi-private, with no
more than two together on any floor and not be via balconies past
other units. Building walls at entry areas should be separated at
least 12 feet from parking and driveways and special attention
should be given to the landscaping in the intervening area.
5. Unit orientation: Dwelling units should be sited and screened to
provide privocy from adjacent units and uses (including those on
adjacent property), from vehicular and service functions and from
group activity areas.
6. Landscaping: Project landscaping should be considered o vital
part of the overall development and should be designed by a
registered Landscape Architect. Special treatment should be
required in and around major parking areas for screening and for
freducing the visual impact of the paving.
7. Noise: Common walls and ceilings of oil units -should be
constructed using techniques to limit noise transmission as
specified by the current Building Code except where Code
standards con be demonstrated to have been met on the basis of
tests performed in each unit by a Professional Engineer
specializing in acoustical engineering.
8. Smoke detectors: Smoke detectors should be installed in each
residenti� uniby the Current Building recreation �� in
common required Y
""Ene ""'cat`servtittar. -Entr�gy}coriseivot-ion.:.insu.lation.should.be
nstalled in all project buildings in accordance with Title 24, State
of California Administrative Code, or any changes mode thereof.
' Condominium Guidelines
Page three -
10. Physical condition of FK>usinq to be converted to condominiums:
The project os a whoTe—s-hould be in good repair when offered or
sale. Prior to filing a final map permitting condominium sales,
the following reports should be submitted for review and approval
- by the Director of Public Works:
(a) A report by a licensed roofing contractor certifying that the
roofs of all the structures are in good condition and not
likely to be in need of replacement for at least 10 years.
(b) A report by a Professionol; Engineer attesting that the
structure of ail buildings,' pavements, storm drainage
facilities and the interior and exterior plumbing, electrical
systems and utility and mechanical equipment to be owned
in common or as part of individual condominiums are in good
and serviceable condition;
(c) A report by a licensed painting contractor certifying that
painting throughout the project is in good condition and that
the building exteriors should not require repainting for at
least five years.
(d) A report by a licensed termite and pest control specialist
certifying that the structures are free of infestation and
structural damage caused by pests.
(e) Deadbolts (flush mounted variety with I" "throw" into the
jamb) should be installed in entry doors of all units.
Deodbolts (flush mounted variety with i" "throw" into the jamb)
should be installed in entry doors of all units.
11. Domestic facilities: Adequate facilities at appropriate locations
should provided for domestic needs including laundry facilities,
screened gorboge collection facilities, and special storage areas
(100 cubic ft. min.), for eoch unit. Provision for laundry facilities
should be included in each unit, where possible; but, in any case,
at least one washer and one dryer should be provided for every
'+ four dwellings.
Appliances in converted apartment units should, if not new, be
warranted to new values.
12. Utilities: (It is the Intent of the following 'defines to secure
pu �c. main.t.enonce of as much as is feasible of the drtility systems
installed on•projeci common open areas. : In cbridersions where
such systems are privately maintalne-d reconstruction of the
system may be necessary to meet requirements of the servicing
entity.)
On-site sewer and water systems (except laterals to individual
units or buildings, plumbing within buildings, and landscaping
e-cos-n,cl end firs hydrants should be maintained by the
Condominium Guidelines ,
Page Four
i Systems should be designed to minimize the length of laterals and
to locate meters next to the buildings served. A separate water
meter should be provided for each residence or at least each
building. Master metering of gas and electric service is not
permitted. Separate metering of gas and electric service to each
individual dwelling unit will be •made in accordance with the
•serving utilities' tariffs.
Water supply systems for fire fighting should meet the
requirements of the fire district and be connected to the public
water supply system; keys to security gates end doors should be
kept in key boxes at locations approved by the Fire Chief. The
key box and key should be designed Ito district specifications.
The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions should . provide
that upon sufficient notice to homeowners, the serving utilities be
authorized to enter any portions of the units whenever restoration
of gas, electric and . telephone service Is required; that the
utilities shall have theof install,
theocommon, v
lines in or on any portions area, including the
Anterior and exterior of the units (except where undergrounding is
required by the Subdivision Ordinance) as is necessary to maintain
telephone service within the subdivision, and that this provision
may not be amended or terminated without the consent of the
uillities. In conversion, the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph
Company should be responsible for maintaining - the existing
underground telephone conduit distribution system serving the
buildings.
13. Play areas: Play areas with play equipment should be provided in
all projects likely to have children at locations where surveillance
is practical and noise can be tolerated. Play area size should be
determined on the basis of 40 sq. ft. per child
14. In considering ' applications for condominium conversions,
preference will be given proposals whereunder:
I
a. Renters over the age of 65, or who have children under 12
years of age, or who have serious physical handicaps, or
renters who for other reasons ore likely to have sgr eat
at
difficulty relocating, ore to be offered
current rents with provision for limiting rent increases to
not more than 7% annually.
b. Apartment buildings over 15 years old will be brought Into
substantial conformance with present Building Code
xc � standards. .:x,�,,,.
C. Moving expenses to a maximum of $500 are to be provided
to renters displaced by the conversion.
Condominium Guidelines
Page Five
,• 4
15. Rents for tenants residing for at least a full year in a project
considered for conversion shall not have been increased more than
the increase in the Cons,..,°r's Price Index for that period. No
rent increases shall be permitted during the period in which the
application is being processed by the County.
16. Tentative map applications for condominium conversions should be
accompanied by a survey of comparable rental housing in the area
surrounding the-proposed conversion. This survey is to be used to
ivaluate the impact of the conversion on tenants who will be
displaced. The boundary of the survey area should be determined
in consultation with the Planning Department staff. The survey
should.include identification of all rental housing in structures of
two or more units and the following information regarding each
development:
(a) Number of units, categorized by bedroom count and rents
charged;
(b) Vacancies by unit type;
(c) Policy on renting to families with children.
The application should also include any proposals by the subdivider
for offering leases to existing renters, for bringing apartment
buildings over 15 years old up to current Building Code stondards, -for paying moving expenses of renters that will be displaced by
the conversion, and evidence that rents during the past year
conform with the limitations of provision #15.
17. A copy of the proposed application for the Department of Real
Estate Public Report should be submitted with the application for
tentative map approval.
I C
f f
SHE CITY OF DUBLIN
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568 (415) 829-4600
STANDARD PLANT MATERIAL, IRRIGATION SYSTEM AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT
I (property owner) do hereby
agree that all plants (trees, shVubs and ground cover) will be
installed in accordance with the City of Dublin's approved
landscape plan for (name of
project) located at
(address) . All plants will be replaced in kind as per the
approved plan at such time as they are found to be missing,
diseased, damaged, or dead, for at least one (1) year from the
date of their installation.
I further agree that all plants will henceforth be irrigated,
fertilized, weeded and tended on a regular basis such that they
will maintain a healthy and weedfree appearance.
I further agree that the irrigation system will be installed
according to the - irrigation plans as approved by the City of
Dublin, and that said system will be kept in good working order
for at least one (1) year from the date of the landscaping
installation.
This agreement is binding against this and all property owners
of record.
Signed:
Date :
i
! � TO EXHIBIT G
a �+• ,..
Of
PA 88-009 HERITAGE
� Form . 83-05 AT SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEN
DC "GHERTY REGIC."" AL
FIRE AUTHORITY
9399 F?rcr_st Lare
San B.amc C 9 4J 2 s
(Telephone) 415-329-2J'3
November 10, 1988
0
Trudi Ryan, -�
Project Planner City of Dublin -
P. `'� �
0. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
Dear Trudi,
I have reviewed the plans for Tract 4950 (P.A. 88-009) and have the
following requirements and recommendations:
1. On-site hydrants will be required and will be fully charged
before construction with combustibles begin.
2 . All weather roadways will be provided for fire apparatus
before construction of co�<<bustibles are to begin.
3 . Parking shall be restricted to designated parking areas only.
4 . All bridges shall be maintained at the minimum required width
established by the fire code (201 ) and shall be capable of
supporting a gross vehicle weight of 50, 000 pounds.
5. All interior roads to be marked according to the California
Vehicle Code Section 22500. 1 as fire lanes.
6. Fire extinguishers are to be located within all common areas,
i. e. , recreation room, administration office, gym, and rental
office, and every 75 ' of travel distance within the complex.
7 . This department will require a Knox override switch on all
entrance gates into and out of the complex.
8 . Lighted addresses which are visible from the main streets are
to be installed. If a dwelling unit does not face a street,
a directory sign must be used. all directory signs and
location must be approved by this Department.
9 . A building directory will be required at all entrances to
"
compl"ex-. r Su�hd rectb�`: mlrst conta, all apa,rt.�F�rt nt:r�reis:
10 . All project buildings shall conforri with the safe roofing
Al (� t! t TO EXHIBIT G
b PA88-009 HERITAGE
�l
DRFA LETTER (2 PcC�eo�
_• -. , / � Iv 'y, °Y 5 ` i_.' ,3 .�y � "i ,i 7 hY x! �f..-1� yf* +
ordinance of Dublin, and spark arresters placed• on .all 'fire
places.
11. : A11/ units shall be equipped with smoke detector installed
according to UBC Standard No. : 43-6.
If you have any questions, please do .not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
TOM HATHCOX,
Fire Marshal
TH/liw
I
I
I
2
4✓/ O
i O a
\ ; I•
I'll o
♦
4b
. - 1
MOO= •I
�.� ;MOIIT CI,[.✓_!_GI/•~_.._ _ _vC11TU11A ----'• ..
�^
V V
F L
"O_' " r 1 1 1•f OUONI RTY ♦• '��
07 b
co 0
a 63Cn
00 •
E4 0
r \D a� •
C) txri H • 593,000
3 70
•
z H
\ 1(05co
a RESpv
N "p 0
�P Fs
Q ALAMEDA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
a 6 5997 PARKSIDE DRIVE I PLEASANTON, CALIFORNIA 94566 / (415) 484-2600
4
1 May 23, 1988
Ms. Trudi Ryan, Project Planner Line F
City of Dublin
P.O. Box 2340 RE -CE 1 .Y, E D
Dublin, CA 94568
111AY
Re: Heritage Commons/Tentative Tract 5883
Dear Trudi: DUBLIN PLANNING
` Enclosed is a copy of our November 18, 1987f letter to Casden with general
comments on an earlier development proposal. In addition to those comments,
I
our recommendations for the current proposal are listed below.
1. The rock riprap should be extended to protect the channel bottom
j downstream of Amador Valley Boulevard. Exit velocities from the
1 box culvert need to be determined and the rock sized accordingly.
1 2. An access road along the east side of the channel from Amador
.i Valley Boulevard to the Arroyo Vista Project should be installed.
3
.3. The sacked concrete riprap which runs along the southerly bank of
the creek (adjacent to Arroyo Vista) has been eroded at the toe.
Additional toe protection should be added.
7
4. The rock riprap should be extended along the boundary of Tract
4950 (below the existing units).
" 5. The tentative tract map should show a typical creek cross section
i with 2:1 slope or projection, 20-foot setback, access road,
i? V-ditch, etc.
j;
I.: 6. Zone 7 will not accept ownership or maintenance of the box
culvert. The culverts should be designed to carry the ultimate
4100• The minimum culvert height should be 7 feet, the minimum
jwidth 8 feet. The creek should be protected downstream of such
structures.
7. Final plans should include ramps to the channel bottom.
8. The City (Housing Authority) may wish to consider including the
portion of the creek within the Arroyo Vista Housing Project for
channel improvements in conjunction with the proposed
development. Zone 7 could make reimbursements for the
construction and right-of-way under the SDA 7-1 program mentioned
in our November 18, 1987 letter.
TO EXHIBIT G
K' � PA 88-009 HERITAGI
i
SDR/ZONE 7
'',1 (
.�, y K.ilil rr'� C .., JFu ♦� Y ly .1.,1� .�� Y�1 K� t� t AL 'z „..�,1�� 'n x+rt` v� ,7 i � � -..$
` :i _ t a t c.F ay.� .f 7r.g1 ,'�w..{ •4"'i .°1i•t-•, x.t.:
j 4
_ c G-t 7 •�\ -si�i���8 ��; r .'t�, �.1 �.7. 7,<t yF 1 � p h -.. "`•r r�f. u •S+�e ' -
4
Ms. Trudi Ryan, .Project Planner _
May 23, 1988'
Page 2 .
Please feel free to give Dennis Gambs a call if you have any questions or
comments.
Very truly yours, .
Mun J. Mar
General Manager
By
,'Vincent Wong, Manager
Environmental Resources Division
VW:DG:bkm
Enc.
cc: Lee Thompson, City of Dublin
Carl Steinberg, The Casden Company
Mitch Moughan, Bissell & Kara
i
N L", �'
A' A.IJEDA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROLAND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
-FEASANTON, CALIFORN!A 956 Da.VE / (t15i A51-2600
November 18, 1987
tine F
Mr. Carl Steinberg
The Casden Company
9090 Wilshire Boulevard, Third Floor
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
Re: Heritage Commons/Alamo Creek, Dublin
Dear Mr. Steinberg:
This letter will formalize in writing many of our design criteria which we
have previously discussed as well as list our comments and recommendations on
your current development proposal.
1. A minimum setback of 20-feet from the top of bank, or from a
2 (horizontal) to a 1 (vertical) projection from the toe of the creek to the
top of- ground (whichever is greater), should be provided. No buildings or
permanent structures should be constructed within this setback area.
2. A 15-foot wide access road for flood control maintenance should
be constructed at the top of bank within the setback area. The access road
should be graded to drain away from the creek bank at a 5% (minimum)
cross-slope into a V-ditch. Cross drains should be constructed at low points
on the road and should not be spaced at intervals greater than 500 feet. This
access road should connect to access easements on the interior streets as
marked on the conceptual site plan. These access easements should not be less
than 20 feet wide and must have inside turning radii of 35 feet or more.
3. An access road with fencing on the easterly side of the creek
connecting Amador Valley Boulevard. and the Arroyo Vista Housing (Housing
Authority of the City of Dublin) should be constructed with this development.
4. The channel bank area adjacent to the previously developed
property (Tract 4950) should be protected with rock riprap.
5. No surface runoff should be allowed to flow over the banks. The
site should be graded to drain away from the creek. Drainage should be
collected in an on-site storm drain system.
6. Drainage entering the creek should enter through reinforced
concr`ete -pipes-and be-,protected -unit-h .ou.tfall .structures_Asuch,L,as shiPVn,,PrV
ACFC&WCD Std. Dwg. SF-605.
Mr. Carl Steinberg
November 18, 1987
Page 2
7. A profile of the creek and cross sections at 200-foot (Wazimu:a)
intervals and at charges in creek cross sections should be determined by field
survey as part of the hydraulic investigation and for verification of the
required setbacks.
8. The hydraulic capacity of the channel to carry the ACFC&;CD
design flow (ultimate Q100 - 4,670 cfs) should be demonstrated.
9. The proposed creek right-of-way should be fenced with six-foot
black vinyl-clad chain-link fencing unless the City of Dublin includes this
area under their Joint use license agreement with Zone 7.
10. The developer/owner should relinquish access rights across the
channel right-of-way line on the recorded tract or parcel map.
11. The gates should be set back 30 feet from the face of curb at
Amador Valley Boulevard to allow for safe vehicular access. .
12. A soils report and/or investigation should address the following:
-- Are the existing creek banks stable?
-- Are there any potential slides along the creek?
Any identified problems must be corrected.
13. Improved channel side slopes should not be steeper than 2-1/2:1
in cut.
14. Creek bends should be protected from erosion. Bank protection
may include rock riprap or grouted rock riprap.
15.' A tree survey should be conducted by a horticulturist, and dead
or dying trees should• be removed from the creek area.
16. Debris, including concrete, scrap wood, etc., should be removed
from the creek area.
17. This creek is designated a proposed Special Drainage Area (SDA
7-1) facility. Under this program the developer would become eligible for SDA
7-1 reimbursements provided the developer enters into an agreement rith Zone 7
before any work is done. The developer must also grant fee title to the creek
right-of-way including the 20-foot setback area to Zone 7.
18. Any proposed landscaping in the creek area should conform to the
'IAlaned-s Count-y"Flood- Manual. . :L,agdsc.a.pi:r+g ,may-,,�,..:•,. _....,.,. r.,��, ::, r
established by hand watering or drip irrigation, however, no permanent
irrigation system should be installed in the creek area.
j.c I rte . r r rl`�' ; ,k r .i,h, =1 t< . t.t N.r�^Y, +yz �.y, f� tel: . f .:F •.;t
i >. 3�ri3�a -!tr 't;� E � 'Z1'' s a/h'{<�'s.'t d ,. i • ;,
t• 7' Yy+ •s 3 I �!� lt'c�f'• Y1� '.' rs ,
Mr. Carl Steinberg ;r
November 18, 1987 s
Page 3
19. Where the existing pipeline easement for the 24' Zone 7 water
line is only 10 feet vide and not in a future private street,• an additional 5
feet on each side of the existing easement is needed. Attached is sheet 4 of
22 of Dougherty Reservoir Pipeline Project ahoving the existing pipeline and
easement.
` Please feel free to give Dennis Gambs or the undersigned a call if you have
any questions or comments.
Very truly yours,
Mun J. Mar
General Manager
By
e/
Vincent Wong, ..anger
Environmental Resources Division
VW:DG:bkm
Enc. _
cc: Mike Taylor, Bissell Ram
Larry Tong, City of Dublin
Lee Thompson, City of Dublin
Jim Boren, Zone 7
RECORDING REQUESTED B7:
: W11E11 RECORD:D, PLEASE HAIL TO: R E C E I V E E'
Pettis, Tester, Kruse & Krinsky IIU`I S �z27
2301 Dupont Drive, 5th Floor
Irvine, California 92715 DUBUAI PLANNING
Attention: Dorothy A. Urbanec
(Space Above This Line for Recorder's Use Only)
VEHICLE ACCESSWAY MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
VILLAGE VII
THIS VEHICLE ACCESSWA7 11AINTEI1At10E F.GREEIaENT (the
"Agreement") is entered into this day of
by and between Standard Pacific, L.P. , a Delaware limited
partnership (the "Developer") and the City of Dublin (the
"City")
R E C I T A., L S
A. Developer is the owner of real property in the
City of Dublin, County of Alameda, State of California described
as Lot 147 of Tract No. 5511 filed in Book 163, Pages 48 to 58,
inclusive, of Maps records of said County ("Village VII") which
has been or will be resubdivided as Tract 5780.
B. Village VII is subject to the Master Declaration
(defined below) , which contains provisions for the shared use
and the maintenance o=-"Vehicle =ccessways" .(defined belo w) fc=
the benefit of all of the villaees described therein.
C. The Developer and City desire to enter into this
Agreement to assure continued maintenance, repair and
reconstruction of improvements upon the vehicle Accessways for
the benefit of such owners and to provide for an easement over
the Vehicle Accessways for such activity and for access by fire,
police, health and sanitation vehicles and public utilities
vehicles in -providing services to the adjacent property.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual
covenants, conditions and restrictions contained herein, the
parties hereto acree as follows:
1. Definitions. The .following terns shall have the
following meaning whenever used in this Agreement except where
the context clearly indicates otherwise:
(a) City. "Cite" shall mean and refer to the
City of Dublin, California.
(b) County. "County" shall mean and refer to the
County of Alameda, State of California.
(c) Master Declaration. "'Master Declaration"
shall mean and refer to the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions
'j and Restrictions for Alamo Creel,• recorded on S6-ptember 19, 1956
as Instrument No. 56-230.150, of Official Records of the Count_r
and any amendments thereto.
to any lot or parcel shown on a final or parcel map filed for
tecuril in the Count)- un.less a cendom.inium plan his been recorded
TO EXHIBIT G
j PA 88-009 HERITAGE
A vil
� t i SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIE14
(5 PAGES)
upon such lot or parcel pursuant to Section 1351(e) of the Civil
Code of the State of California, or any successor statute
thereof, in which event "Residence" shall then mean and refer to
a condominium. "Residence" shall not include any property owned
by a Subordinate Association. -
(e) Residence Owner. "Residence Owner" shall
mean and refer to one or more persons or entities who are alone
or collectively the record owner of a fee simple title to a
Residence excluding those having any such interest merely as
security for the performance of an obligation. -
(f) Subordinate P.ssociation. "Subordinate _
Association" shall mean and refer to any nonprofit mutual benefit
corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of
California, its successors and assigns, named in a 'Subordinate
Declaration".
(g) Subordinate Declaration. 'Subordinate
Declaration" shall mean and refer to any declaration of
covenants, conditions and restrictions and any supplemental
declaration thereto or any amendments thereof which are now or
will hereafter be recorded against all or any portion of Village
VII and will be subordinate to the Master Declaration.
(h) Vehicle Accessways. "Vehicle Accessways"
shall mean and refer to Parcels and the area designated as
"E.V.A.E. " or "Emergency Vehicle rt.ccess Easement' on said Tract
no.- 5780.
(i) Vehicle Accessway Owner. 'Vehicle Accessway
Owner" shall mean and refer to one or more persons or entities
who are alone or collectively the record owner of a fee simple
title to a Vehicle Accessway, excluding those having anv such
interest merely as security for the performance of an obligation.
(j) Village VII. "Village VII" shall mean and
refer to the property described in the Master Declaration to be
Lot 147 of Tract Map No. 5511 filed in Book 163, Paces 48 to 58,
inclusive, of Daps, records o_ the County which has been or will
be subdivided into Tract 5780.
2. maintenance Obligation. A Vehicle Accessway Owner
shall have the obligation, at no expense to the City, to
maintain, repair and reconstruct the improvements upon the
Vehicle Accessways owned in a manner satisfactory to the Citv anc.
in compliance with plans and specifications approved by the City.
The City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to assume
all or any portion of such maintenance, repair and reconstruction
in the event such activity is not adequately performed by the
Vehicle Accessway Owner.
3. Grant of Easement. Developer hereby grants to
City an easement over the Vehicle Accessways for the purpose of
maintaining, repairing and reconstructing said improvements upon.
the Vehicle Accessways as provided herein and for ingress and
egress for such purposes. This easement is specifically limited
to such purposes and shall not create any easement in favor of
the public. Entry by the City upon the Vehicle Accessways for
any allowable purpose may be made without notice in the event of
any emergency involving potential danger to life or property.
Entry for any non-emergency allowable purposes may be made at any:
reasonable time after notice of such entry and purpose of not
less than ten (10) days has -been given to the Vehicle Accessway
Owner responsible for such activity unless corrective work is
commenced by such Vehicle Accessway Owner within three (3) days
-f•o.l'hwing- cial•ivary-oi;-S tic h• no'.i: a and such correcti\!t-won i•s
prosecuted to ce:suletion within thirty (30) days fr:,u date of
co111lilell0elliont of such activity or such later date agreed to by the
Ci ty.
i
I
09/30/07 10532-00010
302\070900•IO.AGR
4 . Reimbursement of Costs. All reasonable costs
expended by the City for labor, materials, equipment, indirect
onsite supervision of the maintenance, repair and reconstruction
Performed under this Agreement shall be reimbursed to the City by _
the responsible Vehicle Accessway Owner. At the sole option of
the City, if such reimbursement is not made to the City upon
demand any such reimbursement may be included as an assessment on
the next succeeding County property tax bill covering such
vehicle Accessway, or in the event any Vehicle Accessway is owned
in common by Residence Owners for the benefit of all members of a
Subordinate Association or has been conveyed to a Subordinate
Association, the City shall have the power to include such
reimbursement as an assessment on the next succeeding County
property tax bill. of all Residences encumbered by the Subordinate
Declaration of such Subordinate Association. Such reimbursement
amount shall be apportioned at an equal amount for each such
Residence.
5. Indemnity. City hereby agrees to indemnify and
hold Vehicle Accessway Owners free and harmless from any claim,
loss or liability of any kind whatsoever in connection with or
arising out of the maintenance, repair or reconstruction work
performed upon the vehicle Accessways by the City (unless such
claim, loss or liability arises out of the wilful or negligent
act or omission of vehicle Accessway Owner, in which event, City
shall have no liability therefor) .
6. Successors and Assians. This Agreement and all of
its terms, covenants and conditions will inure to the benefit of
and be binding upon the successors and assigns of Developer, and
the successors in title to the Vehicle Accessways and the
Residences.
7 . Notice. Any notice to be given under the
provisions of this ?creement shall be in writira and shall be
-•- - _ directed to the address or the patty to whcm-�^terdee as follcws .
If to Cevelooer: 6990 Village Parkway, Suite 201
Dublin, California 94568
Attention: Michael C. Cortney
If to Subordinate
Association: The principal office of the
corporation established pursuant to
a resolution of its board of
directors.
If to Residence
Owner: To the street address of the
Residence of each such Residence
Owner.
Each of the foregoing parties may, designate from time
to time by written notice to the other parties a different
address which shall then be substituted for the one above
specified. Any notice sent by mail as aforesaid shall be deemed
delivered when directed to the addressee at the address indicated
for the purpose of notice and when placed in the United States
Pail, first class, postage prepaid.
8. Paraaraoh Headings. All paragraph headings are
inserted for convenience only ad shall not be used in any way to
modify, limit, construe or otherwise affect this Agreement.
9 . Waivers. No action taken pursuant to this
Agreement .b}..o- .owl behalf of .an.� party shall ,ha deemed„t,c
constitute a waiver by the party taking such actiCa of the
complete compliance with representations, covenants or agreements
contained herein. No waiver, modification or change shall ha
3
09/30/07 10532-00010
302\87090040.AGP,
binding unless in writing and signed by the party making the
waiver. A waiver by any party hereto of a breach of any
provision of this Agreement shall not operate or be construed as
a waiver of any subsequent breach. -
10. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed
by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of
California applicable to contracts made and to be performed in
that state.
11. Attorneys' Fees. Should any party institute any
action or proceeding to enforce this Agreement or any provision
hereof or for damages by reason of any alleged breach of this -
Agreement or of any provision hereof, or for a declaration of
rights hereunder; the prevailing party in any such action or
proceeding shall be entitled to receive from the other party all
costs and expenses, including, without limitation, reasonable
attorneys' fees, incurred by the prevailing party in connection
with such action or proceeding.
12. Severability. If any term(s) or provision(s) of
this Agreement or the application thereof to any persons or
circumstances shall to any extent be invalid or unenforceable,
the remainder of this Agreement or the application of such
term(s) or provision(s) to persons or circumstances other than
those as to which it is held invalid•or unenforceable shall not
be affected thereby. Each and every term of this Agreement shall
be valid and enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law.
13. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the
entire agreement between the parties pertaining to the subject
matter hereof and all prior and contemporaneous agreements,
representations, negotiations, and understandings of the parties,
oral or written, are hereby superseded and merged herein.
14 . Amendments. znv amendment to this Agreement must
be in writing and signed by all of the parties hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed
this Agreement as of the date First above written.
STANDARD PACIFIC, L.P.,
a Delaware limited partnership
Sy: StanPac Corp., a
Delaware corporation
Its Managing Partner
By:
By:
CITY OF DUBLIN
i
4
09/30/07 10532-00010
! 302\07090040.AGR
STATE OF CALIFORIIIA )
• ) ss.
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA )
On , before me, the undersigned, a Notary _
Public in and for said State, personally appeared
personally known to me (or proved to me
on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the
on behalf of StanPac Corp., a Delaware
corporation, the corporation therein named, and acknowledged to
me that said corporation executed the within instrument pursuant
to its Bylaws or a resolution of its Board of Directors, said
' corporation being known to me to be the managing partner of
STANDARD PACIFIC,. L.P., the partnership that executed the within
instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed
the same 'as such partner and that such partnership executed the
same.
WITNESS my hand and cfficial seal.
Notary Public in and for said State
(SEAL)
STATE OF C?TIFORiII )
• ) ss.
COUNTY OF P_LAMED1 )
On I .0 before me, the L`nC2rcir+.n @C,
a Notary Public in and for said State, personally ac^.°_ared
personally knc�n to me
er proved to me on the basis c satisfactory evidence to be the
person(s) who executed the within instrument as
of
an d
acknowledged to me that such
executed the same.
WITNESS my hand and cf icial seal.
Notary Public in and *"cr said State
(Seal)
S
09/30/07 10532-00010
302\870900.10.AGH
ORDINANCE NO.
----------- -------------------------------------------------------------------
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO PERMIT THE REZONING
OF REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF DUBLIN
The City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. Chapter 2 of Title 8 of the Ordinance Code is hereby amended
in the following manner:
Approximately 17.45 acres generally located south of
Amador Valley Boulevard south and east of Stagecoach
Drive, more particularly thedesignated remainder on
amended Tract 4950, is hereby rezoned to a PD, Planned
Development District; and PA 88-009.1/.2/and .3 Casden
Company, as shown on Exhibit A (PD Rezoning Plan -
Tentative Map 5883 and Site Development Review Plan) ;
Exhibit B (Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Significance) ; Exhibit C (Mitigation
Monitoring Program) ; Exhibit D (Approval, Findings and
General Provisions PD Rezoning) ; Exhibit E (Approval,
Findings, and General Provisions Tentative Map) ;
Exhibit F (Traffic Impact Fee) ; Exhibit G (Approval,
Findings and General Provisions, Site Development
Review) , all on file with the City of Dublin Planning
Department, are hereby adopted as regulations for the
use, improvement and maintenance of the property
within this District. A map of the area is as
follows:
P c o
D
i IM
04 ZU.
4
i S
PA
e
A.C-
w ed.N..
TIPMATY eo-s
PD RBZOni n9
rvu
LfflilBl I
a
FA Orb-ocq
ZU
SECTION`2. This ordinance shall take effectbaiid be in force thirty' .(30)
days from after the date of its passage. Before the expiration of fifteen
(15) days after its passage, it shall be published once with' the names of the
Council members voting for and against the same in the Tri-Valley Herald, a
newspaper published in Alameda County and available in the City-of Dublin.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of March, 1989.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Y
DUBLIN: ALAMO CREEK APARTMENTS
Written Statement/Project Description
1. Description of Project
The Alamo Creek Apartment project will be a 206 unit garden
complex, consisting of 26 two-story buildings located on a
17 . 45 acre site. Each building will contain eight units
(except for the recreation building) . This new multifamily
community is situated south of Amador Valley Boulevard and
west of Alamo Creek in the City of Dublin, Alameda County,
California. Construction is currently expected to be
completed in the second quarter of 1990.
The project design incorporates three different floor plans,
consisting of ground level and second story walk up units.
The unit mix is 56 one-bedroom/one-bath units, 110 two-
bedroom/two-bath units and 40 three-bedroom/two-bath units.
All units will feature wall-to-wall carpeting, drapes,
dishwashers, disposals, ovens and range, air conditioning
and heating. , Each unit will be individually metered for gas
and electricity.
Project amenities include two centrally located recreational
areas, two swimming pools and spas, sundeck and pool
furniture. A separate _recreational room will contain a
party/game room and lounge. The project will have two
conveniently located tot lots. There will be 461 parking
spaces provided throughout the site. Landscaping will be
designed to reflect a park like setting. Thirty percent of
the units have been oriented to provide direct views of
Alamo Creek.
The project is located in an area which facilitates easy
access to all major employment districts around Dublin. The
surrounding community is predominantly residential ,
consisting of single-family homes, apartment complexes and
condominiums. Adjacent to the site is a major master
planned community currently under construction.
2 . This project will: promote attractive and harmonious
development ; observe sensitivity of environmental
limitations on development; stabilize land values; enhance
general welfare by creating land uses which meet the
intentions of the Zoning Ordinance and the surrounding
community.
3 . The development offers well thought-out designs which
support intelligent urban planning. Site considerations
include: layout, open space, orientation and location of
" buildings, circula'tibn`and- parking, setbacks, height,' walls,
fences, and public safety.
TO STAFF REPORT
TACHMENI%lp
PA 88-009 HERITAGE
(2 pages)
� ? + 7 a �GR �.1 t• r.. , + Ate. aF f k ��3 ,� ro 1�... }a- g_, ti, y �c
t ,�'. r �� :. '�. - Y i 'x�cr x,°' pr;r �-�.. "} � i .� .1 3.s dl.`. � :a-rf. v� r�' � -'.`., s L. •i
t r c - i . ifs [r� a r '� -4 �• � _ 7
•
4 . Architectural considerations include ..the character,:scale
anA quality 'of the design. Architectural= relationships of
the site and adjacent buildings have been incorporated, in
;'order to insure compatibility of this ' development ..between
its own design concept and the character'of the location.
5. The project is consistent with the policies of the General
Plan.
6. Rock, rip rap, and other erosion protection will be placed
along Alamo Creek where long term erosion problems can be
anticipated to occur. A detailed plan has been developed to
provide Alamo Creek with adequate Flood Control.
s
4-DUBL
•
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR: Planned Development (Residential) Rezoning,
Tentative Map and Site Development Review of 206 apartment/condominiums
(Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq.
and Title 14 California Administrative Code Section 15071)
LOCATION: South of Amador Valley Boulevard, south and east of
Stagecoach Road
PROPONENT: CoastFed Properties
DESCRIPTION: A 206 dwelling unit apartment/condominium project
consisting of 26 buildings on 17.45+ acres. Project
includes improvements to Alamo Creek.
FINDINGS: The project will not have a significant effect on the
environment. -
INITIAL STUDY: The Initial Study ("Environmental Assessment") is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference
(as are all documents referenced in same Initial
Study) as Exhibit A.
MITIGATION MEASURES: See "Mitigation Measures" as included as Section D in
Exhibit A, which are included in the project.
PREPARATION: This Negative Declaration was prepared by the City of
Dublin Planning Staff, (415) 829-4916 pursuant to
Title 14, Division 6, of the California Administrative
Code and Public Resources Code, Section 21000, et seq.
SIGNATURE: DATE: December 15, 1988
Laurence L. Tong, Planning Director
LLT/TR:ga
a a + TO STAFF REPORT
PA 88-009 HERITAGE
(19 pages)
• E, SIT "A" OF NEGATIVE DECLARATI01.
CITY OF VU51-11-1 4 - }. PA No, 88-009 .
�; �►l�i�rr3' ?�J�'J3 a T Pt� . /4 ��-�e� MNT F 0 R M fN nazim
(Pur:,uant to Public Resourc,.s Code Section 21000 et sec.) ,
Based on the project incormmction submitted in Section 1 -General Data, the Planning StcF;
will use Section 3, initial Study, to determine whether a Negciive Declaration or en
Environmental impact Report is required.
SECTION 3. iNfTIAL STUDY - - - to be completed by the PLA?tNttaG STAFF
• • Name of Project or Applicant: Casden Company, Heritage Common's Phased 2-4
A... ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING — Desc:ip�ion of project site be' re the project, including
' icnts and animals; histcriccl, cultural, and
• inForclation on: topccrdpn}r; soil stc�ility; p
r
scenic aspects; existing structures; crd use or structures
SEE ATTACHMENT "A"
• LDesc:iption OF surrcunding properties, including in orm.c;ien en. picnts cra crir..cls;
-- hlsfCriCal, CUltural, cnd scenic ash:C:S; t`,/pe and iniensiiy ci Icna use; cirri. sccle cr
• develcpment. .
SEE ATTACHMENT "B"
8• ENVIRONME-NI TAL 1,4jPACTS — Fectucl exrlciretiors eF cIl crlsxers except "no a cre re-
quired Or-T attached sheets. SEE'ATTACHMENT "C"
`Z,TZ C. I,�rc�� SOURCE
N. Cox. YS IUN,1C�i�+
• • • _ • • ' . E-1 to
oiWt lE-
tat "S
� 1ai1 �
• t t t
1.0 WATER
\Yi;l cen%tn:et;on of the?rcicct alter the hydro- Y t t (2)
1.1 1lydroiog;c Balance t t r
la];c bo onca? I (1Y(2)
)
1.2 Ground Wafer \Y;;l the proicet affcet the gw;iN or gvont;ry of I I
grcund—oter 1uppi;e%?
1.r2,Dcpth,to\':otar Toolo \Yi;l the rate of wotei�•;thdrowi chonsc the depth x 1 1
'..H-. r ., '•e - or glad;dnt-of'iht-w'Ier-ta�:e:� .• rcl)(-)
W;;1 cemlruetion ;mped^ the natural drainage pottcrn I 1 t - t,.„
1.4 Oro;nagc and Channol Form t I ��� G,UIVJr
or eou%e alteration of•%lream ehonntl far-?
1.3 Sed•mantot;on \x;11 ecn%mchon ;n on area'trait ;n r.vior ud;ment
influ+ into adioeent —oter Sad;.%? '
% 1.3 Flnod;ny \Y;11 there be r;%4 of lot%of l;fc or property due X ( F&KA
en tl.�1�n 7
I
! . e
SUI I PPcr . SOURCE
. NO chr-LT== xlrs Urr�;arr
PA l 10
• ter t �
• 01Qtota
1.7 V/acct Cwlity Ooes dt;n4;r.g.water Supply foil to me+t state and � ( ( I DSRSD
federal standards?
Will s'-s-3.60 ;M.1&1•JOtoly o:conme-]ted and
• DSRSD
treated?
Will reccioing-stets fnil to mere lo=•sl, st.-•e and I I I
• federal standards?
Will ground»ter suffer contamination by v•rfu:t I I 1
wepo}s• inrrwion of soli or polluted»ter from I I I
• adjacent water bodies or from another rll?imtej
rsrs ( I I (2)
• oq.tifer7 � 1 r ` /
2.0 A 1R I I
2.1 Air Pollution Will there be 9-netorion and rGspersior.n(p�llutonts i 1
by project reiored ce:ivities or L7 proX:eit-,M t!:z
Project v Mc%Trill creed=.0 n r_:i•ro (2)
cluaNty star 1c:dt? l� j}.
2.2 Wind Alteration Will sjruc:%,ozd tetrnin-impede p:cseilirc Simi I { 1
flow musing e.Sar%nel;ng along certain rrrri�sZ sr I I I I
eostrvc:ion of.rind m-emenn7 1 (2)•
3.0 EARTH
• 3,1 Sic-PC Stability Are there patentwsi dank:n related to it p_ f=ilvres?
( 1 Bay Soils
3.2 faundotion Support Will there ba rrvc to ilia or properrj-c 2--ne of ] I I
excesssve defer-+crron of ma:er;ais? /� I Bay SO11S
i Csnwlidotion Will there be r;-.c ra life or proper.^,•he:=sre of I I I I I I I Bay Soils
r�ccessi-te czn,a::d rnr
=rien of found=ti-sr r-4? s r r
3.� Susidence Is there risx of major Sround sub%;d#! -r. ss•�cia:c l I I I I I I Bay "SO11S
with the pro;ec:?
3.5 5-1=;C Aef;.ty Is there risk ai cc +ale or Toss revrltiire furs tests- �/ I I t f `-
Bay Soils
3.3 L;rsuefoction Will the proicct e=•JS^or be�rnosc3:a ligv:.rc::ien I I 1 ( 1 I Bay Soils
Of soils in sie=es u uncrr Founde:r^as?
3.7 Erod,o;l;ty Will tlscte bt s)Itcnaci loss of sni:e,!z cr,n- I I 1 I 1 (2
structson pr_Urccs? I { {
3.9 Pemeob;lity Will the pct-ecbility of sails ossoc*at r!W;:!%th
\
project present oti—to conditions relative to da- I I 1 1 r 7/
\
velcomenr of-ells?
3.9 lhigve Features Will any vnieue 5coingical features bn dense-.4 I I I I (2\J C3*)
or destroyed by p:ojcet aetiv;ti-s7
3.10 M'neral Rcsoutces Ate there Svwcgtc deposits of potcnt;nl r.- erc;nl
ye -slue close:o'ha prn:ter?
{,0 PUNTS ANO ANIMALS -
_ t I 1
Are there rat or cndang_red spccirs pu=nt? I I I Leitner
1,1 Plant and Animal Species s
• Arc there accses pre_nt stile:%are p,-ssc•siariy I ( I 1 I I Leitner
susc pti]le to im^oc:from human oct;v;r+ 7
is there ve-eic6on pr^.s^nt, the los;of s.hi-F .ill I I I
• deny food or ir:bitot to important•..lid:i!c !pccits7 I r I Leitner
Are these nvi .nc• -c:ies of plait or onim=:s 1., v I
v.hich eenditiem-ill ire impro..ed by ti-e projcct7 �%j
4.2 Vcgetaliv Community Types Are there ony unusual populations of pinnts th-t:may I 1 I
be of scientific ;.tcra:t7 (Leitner
Are there ce,=tati.e community Py res ciirh n:e I I
Fa,;cuiorty sv cep:blc to impact firs 4v sun cc:i,;ry? Leitner
Ate th_rc m•sier trees or mainr ve^rtnh;•n th=t..itl I �/I I I HortSciencc
• h=c::•c:r.it•of:rr.rr,•f h� thr:(+raj^ct? _ /� t
. r. .`err, :ic:^r_�_.']:i.r, rnmmunity tyn-:r•-.^-•. sir l.:s I { 1
of winch •i:I dcnv fr s:{or haSo tr.i _� =r: -:i:iii- X 1 1 1 I Leitner
• sil r.c;c , re too :uti:t.:atini num7"a'r •••r: a"n�1: __
Is Ihcre ss.bu:oa::ni diversity in tl+;n^:••TS: ^ter„�•rn;:y I ( 1
s 1,3 Diroruity. _ _ p -
-. .... .�:t tti-.. ... os reflctted in tl•t•a..mbrr and :r lsrnr.it•.�h_.�cr'_J .. I 1. 1.,` ...._... n 1 - ... ..
species p•esenr or the fhre-'dim�nti.rr.l air-^^.r-n: -I I' 1 rt'of plant species prevent? :/ I I I Leitner%
HortSciencc
I 1 1
• I I I
I 1 I
Cotta IT 'P :C )P Il`2PPCr SOURCE
NO C�tPI.I'rZZD YES UMa+ll
' Flo
• l� l to
1 1 F
• oriole
p
_ • t ► 5
5.0 FACILITIES AND SEIVICES
5.1 Educational Facilities Will projected enrollments adversely affect the ex-
. 1 1 1
1st;ng a proposed faesl;l;es in terms of soac;ng for 1 1 1 School
all activities, Including elawoams, recreational l I I
erevs, end staffing needs? District
Will the project impact the p•Jpi1/teacher ratio to 1 1 1 It it
as to impede the learning process? 1 I I
Is the sctool located such?hot it presents a herdsh;p I 1 1
for a portion of the enrollment in terms of travel time, 1 1 I (4) 1,5
distance, at safery hazards?
xl I
' 3.2 Commercial Facilities Will there be an inadequate supply of vnd access to j i i / -
eomr.sareial facilities for the project? (2)
Id Waste Waste O sosal Are P rovisions for"we So eepae;ty inadequate for
5.3 Liqu I s s s
I 1 1
• - the needs of the project without exceeding quality I(2)
• standards? ` \
Will thn project be exposed to nu;=nets and odor, I I I 1 I I (2)
• assoe;oted with wastewater trevtrnent plants?
S.4 Solid Waste D;posoI Is there:r o_mgwto provision for disposal of•sol;d
wastes generated by file project?
5.5 Water Suppty Is there fnodcryuate quantity or quality of water ( I I 1 Q
supply to meet the needs of fix projec:? 1 1 1 �SRSD
5.6 Storm Water Drainage Hill storm ester droinvgS be inadeq ore to pre...nt
downstream flooding and to meet Federal ::ate a `
loc,l stcr.dards7
Ad 1 1 1 f LSRSD
ha proice:'s odd;t;anal populet;an, facilities,
5.7 Police Nil{ t
or other reziures cenerate an ,ncr o in police service I 1 ( ( I
or create a police Io_erd?
l Will the projec:'s additional pe=ula:ion, facilities, I I I -
i 5.3 Fire .. I 1 I
or other feon.+es generate on sncrcase in sue services I I I fl 4/\/\2/\
or create o hie hazard?
5.9 Recreation Will the project have ;ncdee,.ote foeiiit;es to meet I I I I I k2)(4)
the(eetcatianal need,of the resrdcnr,?
5.10 Cultural Faeil;t;es `'lilt eulhTOl facilities be unavailable to the project I 1 1 I �(2)(4)
residents?
6.0 T+2AN5?C.a.TAT1CN I I 1
I I 1
6.1 Tronworbtfon Facilities Are the heFfie demands on adjacent roods ewrently 1 1 I
of or v:ove capacity? If not, will the traffic gen- { I I
crated Sy rile proiect muse the vcjveent roods to 1 ( 1 Abrams
reach or exceed capacity? 1 1
Are the other transportation facilities";e.•,servo the I I 1 I 1
•• project inadequate to accommodate the project's -
travel demands? Abrams
6.2 Circulation C-rsfl;c:s \Vill desig-1 of Iha pruiect or eoneit:ems in the surround- X 1 1 1
;ng erev increase accidents due to circulation eonfllces. /` 1 1 1 I 'Abrams
6.3 Rood Sofety and Design .\rill preicct r.•s;dcnts and users be exposed to;ncrwsed I XI I I I
accident r;,<3 dun to readr.oy and street design or lock 1 1 I Abrams
of traffic ccwrols?
,
I
7.0 h'EALTH 1 I I
7.1 Odors Win the project be exposed to or generate any intense 1
•1 ado+,? 1 (4)(2�
'
7._' Gowding and Dan';-If \41;11 the residents and users be e.pcsed to crowding or Y ( 1 1
h;,h d:m:sy in the;r physical I;y;ng envrronmcnt? 1 (4)(2)
:.] Nuisance, Will the project be expo.cd to or generate factors that
rroybeecns;drrcda,nurssnces? I X I 1 I (4)(2)(3)
'.1 Srruetu*ol Sofa 7 \V;11 design and proposed eon+truet;o., reel-;gvas foal
to meet state and Ioeol Su;lding code,?
3.0' NOISE
\V;II the proiact be e.xpa»d to er generate ad—r" XI
3.1 No;b Lev.1s 1 I I II111n�tJ0r
noise levels?
9.: \/Srotions \V;11 the proicct be exposed to.6rot;nns nnnoyina to I 1 I
huovn,? 1 I 1
Illingro!-
I 1
CAMFCR`1Fs`IT ITZPACTS X OF 11,TAa Source
NO RU=ED rM- urraro;?I
D M-
NO
I I to
Q CO
� t 8:1 0
9.0 COMMUNITY C14AX-ACT-c1:
9.1 Community Organization Will the project disrupt on a■;sting yt of - •
organizations or groups within►1+,. cc.r unity? 3
iversity Will the project change the character of the
9.2 Homogeneity and D t 1
eommun,ry in teens of distributioti or eeneenrrotion I I ( 2,3,4
of income, ethnic, housing, or age gtoup7
9•3 Community StoSility and Will the project be expos--d to or generate on -I ( , .
Physical Conditions area of poor stability anJ pi� ili
+ical cor.� ont7 - 1;2,3,C
10.0 VISUAL QUALITY :
10.1 �/iews VAN residents of the surrounding area be adversely
offcc!ed by view;of or from the project? '
• YIi1l the project residents be adversely affected by s
vie--s a of from the surrounding arco? I 1 ( I I 3)(2)
10.2 Shadows Vf:ll the project be exposed to of generate excessive
• ' _ 11.0 HISTORIC AND CULTMAL -
RESOUZCES
11.1 Historic and Cultural Will Iles profeet involve the des!ruction of alter- ( I I (4)ation of a historic resowce? ' ' '
• Resources I I
• Y1iil the project result in isolat+o.l of a hisrorie
rc5owrcL iron its s-reundino envirchrsent? t t t
+Yi:l the project introduce(+hysical, viswl,avdiolc
of O!mO=. _ Clements ih.+!are nOr in CtoroClCr wilt I
• I o hia:orie reso ce or is scltiag? s t t I N/A
i 1I.2 Areiueo!ogicot 5ites Wiil the project involve tie dcs:rue:ien cc al!erorion I I 1 1 1 ' t 1,2,3,'
r and Structures of an erc,.aeolo�ica!rc.,urec?
Wi!l the project result in is»latien of cn orchocologicol
t 1 1
resoutee? I l l ►3 t
Wit; sic;-nice?introd'ree physical, visual, audible
or c1mor•hcric elements that ore not in character
l I t I
on crc::aer-to gical tesovrce or its setting. s 1 t -
1,2,3,E
1Z_0 EN;nGY
l 1
12_1 Energy negvirements A!.thefe potential probie•ns-:16 the supply of I ( I 2
encrry required for ti+e Project? r t r
Will the:iergy requirements excrcd the capacity I I
of:he service utility ecmpeny? 1 I 12, PG&1
1Viil there be o net incrcax in energy used for"c
project com;,3rcd to the no projcet oltcrmtive? 1 1 r
12.2 Conserwticn Measures - Coe :he f rajcct planning mewl desir,Eaii to include
Ovaii 5!C eefry con= m•:a:Vrr;?
n 1 t t
• 1 1 1 ,
13.0 LAND USE
i3.1 Site !J�_ards Co ee"Sitiens of the site, pr:•poscd site development, ) .
or su*roving area create porch:jolly hazardous situ-
oricns7
13.2 Ph�sieal threat, ,.it!toe project a the wrroundin.J ur-,create o feeling (,
of in+eeurity or+d physical throat the residents t 1 1 1,2
and users i I
1 I 1 I1
13.3 Sanilery Landfill W;I! :ic p,ojcct b- -,xpo,rrJ to srruQural d mngc, I I 1
nose, a;" or Ylffzc..,.,4 rro un,l-.7.1c,pollution 1 ( I
of alter nuilnnCr.;a,snciorcl virh o sanitary tondf:ll i
13.4 V.otar•-,)Ys Wirt ti,c project affect on e.i+ling .etcr�oy througi 1 1 1
r t•,, . s, filling, dredging, druini;,g, culvortiny soae dis-
chorgcs. loss of viswl quality or
prr•ct:u;l
I 1
l t
OF IMPP=
too WALIFIED YES UM:C7L�1J
- to
! ! . to
Ot6cr Envore—enlal COQ emtr I I I
• I I f -f
C. 'MANDATORY FINDINGS OF S-iGNl= ANi iC C;:
i
• (1) Does the project hcve the potential tc decrcde the ;
quality of the environmment, subslcnllclly reduce _
the habitat of a fish cr wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife peculation to crap below self- -
sus;cinina levels, threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, reduce the numoer er restrict
the rcnce of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate impartrit ex^:-nples o` the major periccs
or CaliFornio histcry Cr prehistcry?
` (2) Does the project hove the potential to achieve short-
Jerm, to the disadvantage of,lona-term, environmentcl
goals? ; X
(3) Does the project hcve impacts wnicn are individually
limited but cumulcteively considerccle? (A project
may impact on two.cr more separate resources where
�+ 'the 'impact on-eoch re-seuicce is.relctively small, but
where the eFFect o` the total of these impacts on tae 1
environment is sicniFicc;nt.)
(4) Does the project,have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adversa cHects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
j �. ' �I; yw,K. •i-� Ire -� 1�a �i� sp �x '°L�p•3-�%s�,�a�C�7 y7f�, b.� f'�'y' ��,5 ,(r'�l.r,.•�• �1�•4z. �_.r � 3i ,v
r �: ^il s•' r 1}`% !.^ i �.�` C to w t :r� 3'J �'� ,r j.s✓X-;7. Y 'f?. �'1�t' q .<r ;7 ;f ,� x•t+ 's. .
J'7
I •! �'Y. I r r l 7'�"' "si (x s''?, L"' Y' f uI•. k7"5'. J
D MITIGATION MEASURES - Discussion of the ways to mitiga`e the'sign ificant effects
identifW if any: -
SEE ATTACHMENT "D'►
E. DETERMINATION - On the basis of this initial evaluaticns
Q The City of Dublih finds that there will not be any'significant effect.-The par-
ticular characteristics of this project and the mitigation measures incorporated into `
the design of the project proAde `he tactual basis for the Finding. A NEGATIVE .
DECLARATION tS REQUIRED.
[� The City of 'tlbl in finds thet the proposed project MAY have a significant effect
on the environment. AN ENV'RONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT IS REQUIRED**
Signature and date: .
Name and title: _
DETERMINATIONS BASED ON: (Source)
0) location of project
(2) staff office review
(3) field review -
(4) Dublin General Plan Background Studies. and $IR._ -
(5) Dublin Zoning Ordinance
(6) Downtown Specific Plan Background Studies and Negative Declaration
(7) Not applicable
Other (State Data): SEE ATTACHMENT "E►'
**NOi Where a project is revised in resocnse to an Initial Study so !6.3` pa`.;,-►`ial adverse
effects c.a mitigated to a point where no signif ictint environmental effects would occur; a
revised Initial Study .vill be prepared and a Lego;ive Declaration will be re-q;.i-ired i is'ead of
an EIC.
t , J �.'/ 1 J �.», r�4�„'�c a r �.'' Y s Y aY r qu.r-` `• '`.. �-t s^J w '%
4
j r'W:
ra•.+.a'.'`�''� r 4 y +,a,Yr % "i. Y*' J,yy'1 ii;...J^''•Fwl+ �?'�.•.+rJA, ifi�,*. §iJ r'irr;t/ r F
}
J ... •. . .^�' i� :. S1.SP: '�:[ j r fP rF r-:�}J .t r,`�1 Nr�.r r.",�i�..f c. f'-� _
r..,y
..� + r ,n e Ati :c ti cJ r - r .✓�. Pi �.x SY,
i
Jt
PA 88-009,`Heritage .arsons
'Environmental Asse§sment
December 7, 1988
•
r
r .
Attachment "A"
I
Irregularly shaped vacant site transected by a seasonal creek. Upland ground
is relatively flat with slopes up to 35% near Amador Valley Boulevard; soils
appear stable; plants and animals include non-native annual grasses on the
upland areas (which provide habitat for very few wildlife species) and the
riparian corridor which provides habitat for several bird species, some
mammals, reptiles, amphibians and some fish. The southwest portion of the
site previously was occupied by a house, a barn and other ancillary buildings
without any historic significance. No cultural facilities have been
identified with this site.
I
s
i
PA 88-009, Heritage ions
Environmental Assess. ,
December 7, 1988
Attachment "B"
Properties to west include the abandoned Southern Pacific right-of-way and the
Alamo Flood Control Channel. To the northwest is a 73 unit townhouse
development (Phase I of Heritage Commons) ; north of Amador Valley Boulevard
are single-family (6,000+ square foot lots) and multi-family residential
developments separated by a large open space area: South and east of the site
are additional multi-family residential developments. Most residential
developments support ornamental landscaping common in the Dublin area and
domestic animals. The Villages projects (north and east) are under
development and includes the upstream extension of Alamo Creek. A stringent
creek renovation and revegetation program is being implemented as part of that
project to preserve and enhance wildlife habitats along the riparian corridor
and to adequately handle storm water run-off from the area.
-2-
PA 88-009, Heritage aeons
Environmental Assessment
December 7, 1988
ATTACHMENT "C"
B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - FACTUAL EXPLANATIONS
1.4 Drainage and Channel Form
Project includes rock rip-rap to protect and stabilize slopes of the
creek. This alteration to the creek banks does not cause any change to
the overall stream channel form. Prior to commencement of any
construction, a hydraulic investigation is required to verify creek
capacity and setback requirements.
3.1, 3.2, 3.3 Slope Stability, Foundation Suvport, Consolidation
The soils report (Bay Soils, 1981) incorporates slope design factors
into their recommendations which are intended to minimize any potential
for slope failure. Recommendations are also included for foundation
design (pp. 17-21) (p.10, pp. 16-17) . Project development will be
subject to review and incorporation of design features from an updated
geologic and soils investigation specific_ to the proposed development
plan.
4.0 Plants and Animals
A Biological Report was prepared for the Villages project, immediately
north of this project. The report addressed the Villages' impact on
existing vegetation and wildlife (Leitner & Leitner, 1985) . This
subject site is similar in terms of vegetation and past use and is
adjacent to the Villages site.
1. Rare and Endangered Species. A review of rare plants possibly
occurring on the Villages site concluded that no rare and endangered
plant species were present, and, based on the habitat present, that it
is unlikely that any rare and endangered species would occur in the
proposed project area. It would also be unlikely that the 17+ acre
Heritage Commons site, surrounded by major barriers (residential
development, roads, etc.) would support any rare and/or endangered
species.
The possible occurrence of rare, threatened, or endangered wildlife
species was investigated by record research, report examination,
consultation with the California Department of Fish and Came unit
biologist, and field survey for the Villages. The findings of the
z;. .,.•�,,_.,; �;r....,.r.epo.r.t ,we.re:x�;ha�t,no.,,3rar,,e,;�>.tbr.ea-tened;:nor,:endanger-ed�wild-l�ife :species^,---..• ,.
used the proposed project area.
-3-
PA 88-009, Heritage eons
Environmental Assess—Lt
December 7, 1988
j 2. Vegetative Communities. Two natural communities and
corresponding wildlife habitats exist on the CoastFed Properties site:
non-native annual grassland, and central coast riparian forest.
Although neither of the communities may be considered rare in
themselves, the riparian forest is the most significant habitat from a
regional perspective, as it supports the highest diversity of wildlife
species.
The annual grassland habitat that extends over most of the proposed
project area supports only a few common wildlife species. It has been
disturbed by long-term agricultural use and is subject to annual weed
abatement for fire control. The riparian forest with its associated
aquatic stream habitat has the higher value for animal life. It
supports a much greater diversity and abundance of wildlife. In a
regional perspective, however, the riparian strip along this section of
Alamo Creek is a somewhat degraded example of this habitat type, owing
to the effects of three processes which appear to have been operating
for'many years: 1) downcutting and erosion in Alamo Creek; 2) livestock
browsing; and 3) soil disturbance through tilling and landfilling
practices. The trees are scattered and do not form a continuous canopy
cover along the creek. Downcutting by the creek in historic times has
undermined the banks and resulted in the loss of trees. There is little
shrub understory and little tree regeneration. As a result, wildlife
diversity and. abundance are not.-as high as would be found in better-
developed riparian forest. A number of typical riparian forest wildlife
species are apparently not present. The riparian fauna here is
generally made up of the most common and widespread species, especially
those that are most tolerant of human disturbance.
B. Impacts.
1. Habitat Loss. Construction of' the Heritage Commons project
will result in the loss of the annual grassland habitat (non-native
annual grassland) on the proposed project site. This loss does not
represent a significant adverse impact. The annual grassland community
is widespread and common in California and in the local region. The
community is in degraded condition and is of relatively low ecological
and wildlife value.
2. Loss of Major Trees. A site survey and horticultural report
prepared for the project to determine the health and condition of thr
trees (Tree Report, Heritage Commons) , prepared by HortScience, Inc. ,
October 5, 1988) and a review of the grading plans by the horticultural
consultant, Nelda Mathny, concluded that there were a total of 57 trees
on the site with trunk diameters of over 6 inches, plus a large trichet
of arroyo willows.
As currently planned, 76 percent,of the trees will be preserved, 12
,percent will definitely be -removed, and 12 percent are suitable for
preservation but may not be preserved.
-4-
PA 88-009, Heritage ions
Environmental Assess. c
December 7, 1988
Loss of riparian habitat is the most important potential biological
impact of the proposed project. The removal of mature trees, especially
valley oaks, is of greatest concern; valley oaks are the slowest growing
trees of those represented on the site and they have historically
suffered the most serious reduction in numbers throughout their range.
However, current project design would allow definite retention of about
2/3 of the existing riparian habitat, and possible retention of up to
1/3. Protection of large tree stands and revegetation of disturbed
areas will restore the viability of the habitat.
3. Construction Impacts. During project construction, there is
potential for significant erosion both during stream channel slope
protection and during residential development. Such erosion could
result in generation of silt and other sediments; storm runoff could
then transport these materials offsite, resulting in downstream
siltation in the Arroyo de la Laguna and Alameda Creek.
The California Department of Fish and Game is pursuing a stream
rehabilitation project that would restore steelhead spawning habitat in
the Arroyo de la Laguna. Excessive erosion and subsequent siltation
during the construction phase could significantly impact this fishery
project.
4. Susceptibility to Human Activity. The--process of- urbanization
brings noise and disturbance that may discourage use of adjacent habitat
by some sensitive wildlife species. The riparian corridor through the
center of the project will be exposed to increased noise and human
activity. This impact is not likely to be significant, since most
wildlife species that use the riparian habitat currently are quite
tolerant of disturbance.
Increased numbers of domestic and feral (wild) dogs and cats could
increase harassment of and predation upon wildlife.
5.6 Storm Water Drainage
Zone 7, the Flood Control District, will require a detailed hydrology
and hydraulic study to demonstrate that Alamo Creek capacity on-site and
downstream can accommodate the 100-year storm conditions. Without that
capacity the project would not be able to be constructed without design
changes. If the changes are not in substantial conformance to the
approved project a new application would have to be processed.
6.0 Transportation
A Traffic and Transportation Study was prepared for this project by
Abrams Associates (December, 19.88) .
-5-
PA 88-009, Heritage ions
Environmental Assessment
December 7, 1988
Project access will be limited by the raised median in Amador Valley
Boulevard which would preclude left turns into or out of the project.
The lack of left turns may encourgae U-turns at Stagecoach and Wildwood,
causing safety conflicts due to the narrow cross-section of Amador
Valley Boulevard at those points.
The Abrams Traffic Study recommends the inclusion of a left turn lane on
Amador Valley Boulevard at the project's entrance. The left turn lane
should also include an acceleration lane for traffic leaving the project
(for westbound traffic) . Precise design of the left turn pocket and
changes to the median lighting will need to be coordinated with the
City.
The study concluded that the project would generate about 1,648 average
daily trips (ADT) with a p.m. peak hour average of 157 trips (9.5% of
total ADT) .
The Abrams report examined the cumulative effect of this project with
other projects on four intersections and concluded that V/C ratios would
be satisfactory. Further evaluation of the cumulative impacts on the
City's roadway network (TJKM, December 1988) identified seven (7)
additional roadway segments and intersections which will require
improvements. This project's contribution to future additional traffic
-" is minor; but should contribute its proportional share to offset costs
of improvements.
7.3 Nuisances
Temporary, construction related, odors, dust, etc. will be associated
with the project. Dust control measures should be instituted during
construction phases. Hours of construction will be controlled to limit
adverse affects in existing area residents.
8.0 Noise
A Noise Evaluation Study was prepared by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc.
(November 1988) .
The study concluded that outdoor noise levels and first floor interior
noise levels will not exceed standards established by the City of Dublin
or the State of California. Indoor noise levels for second floor units
in the first four buildings nearest Amador Valley Boulevard would exceed
a CNEL of 45 db with the windows open.
The noise study suggests air conditioning or other mechanical
ventilation be installed in these units so that the windows can be
closed to meet interior noise standards.
-6-
PA 88-009, Heritage ! ions
Environmental Assessment
December 7, 1988
11:2 Archaeological Sites and Structures
There are no known archaeological resources on the subject site.
However, areas adjacent to creeks have a higher potential for
archaeological resources. Therefore, conditions of project approval
should include provisions that in the event archaeological resources are
discovered during construction, the project should be stopped until the
Planning Director can determine the significance of the find.
12..1 Energy Requirements
Energy will be required for gas and electric service to the dwelling
units. To the extent that there is demand for additional dwelling
units, the "No Project" alternative would result in units being provided
elsewhere with similar energy requirements.
12.2 Conservation Measures
Project approval would be conditioned on providing energy conservation
measures such as solar heating for pools and individual water heaters
for units.
13.4 Waterways
The project includes slope stabilization of the creek and two creek
crossings with a road over culverts. The creek will be offered for
dedication to Zone 7 for maintenance. Creek improvements will be
subject to review and approval of Zone 7 and U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. Both agencies will review the project to assure that the
culverts can accommodate the storm flow in the creek.
1
i
s
J!
J
-7-
ii _
PA 88-009, Heritage 1 ions
Environmental Assessment
December 7, 1988
ATTACHMENT "D"
D. MITIGATION MEASURES
Slope Stability, Foundation Support, Consolidation
Provide an updated soils report, specific to proposed development
plan and incorporate soils engineers recommendations into
construction plans.
Biological Resources
1. Loss of Major Trees
a. Preserve and protect trees identified in the Tree Report,
prepared by HortScience, Inc. , October and November 1988. Project
shall implement Matheny's Tree Preservation Design, Construction
and Maintenance Guidelines contained in the Tree Report. Within
the creek channel, the Applicant will have the responsibility for
implementing these guidelines for a minimum.period of one year
from the completion of construction, or until the Alameda County
Flood Control District or other public entity accepts the channel,
whichever is later.
b. A horticulturalist will develop a specific preservation plan
for preservation of trees recommended for "preservation" following
development of final grading plans. During site preparation and
construction, a horticulturalist will monitor and implement the
plan, and will supervise construction activities, especially
grading, as needed to implement the plan.
C. Prepare a revegetation plan for the creek to include the
replanting of native species. The revegetation plan shall include
provisions to aid new trees during early years through irrigation,
fertilization, deer protection, and disease prevention.
d. Provide two new trees of at least 15 gallon size within the
creek tree planting plan area to mitigate the loss of each
existing tree over 6 inches in diameter. New trees shall be of
the same species as the trees lost. All plans for additional tree
planting shall be subject to review and approval by Alameda County
Flood Control District Zone 7.
-8-
PA, 88-009, Heritage ' ions
Environmental Assess
December 7, 1988
e. Whenever possible, restrict construction activities from
within the drip line. At the maximum, do not alter more than 40
percent of the area within the drip line for trees planned to be
preserved.
f. During project construction, cut damaged roots cleanly with
a saw. Backfill trenches as soon as possible and avoid exposure
of roots from dessication. Provide irrigation during and
following construction where necessary.
g. Provide supplemental irrigation for trees subject to stress.
h. Ensure positive drainage away from tree trunks. Do not
allow water to stand at the }base of the trees.
i. Do not grub open areas around trees where grading activities
are not required. Apply and maintain organic mulch under the
trees within the development areas.
j . Provide horticultural care, monitor pest population and the
incidence of disease, and apply control treatments when necessary.
This measure applies to all trees with health classified as A, B,
or C and as identified by the tree preservation identification
list (Appendix A)_. as ."preserve.d" or having a high or medium
probability of being preserved. A work program for such
horticultural care shall be submitted to the city prior to
commencement of grading.
k. Construct temporary fences around the trees to be preserved
and exclude all equipment from within the drip line.
1. Repair all wounds promptly, repair and pruning to be
performed by qualified arborist.
2. Riparian Habitat Loss
t
j; a. Provide temporary fencing during the construction for those
areas of riparian habitat not intended to be included within the
construction zone.
j
} b. Provide an erosion and siltation control plan to be
incorporated within the grading plan for the project.
C. Implement a revegetation effort on all reconstructed channel
banks as soon as possible after construction is completed to
enhance riparian habitat consistent with proper channel
maintenance for flood control. Such revegetation plans will
include the following:
-9-
J
PA 88-009, Heritage eons
Environmental Assess. .t
December 7, 1988
F
1. Use of trees, shrubs and vine species native to the
region.
2. Use of shrubs with high wildlife value on the lower
channel slopes.
.3. Use of indigenous tree species, such as valley oak, live
oak, and buckeye on upper channel slops, together with shrubs and
vines to approximate a natural riparian community.
4. Trees, shrubs and vines may be established from seeds,
liner stock or small container stock (one gallon) or hydromulch
where feasible.
5. An irrigation program shall be undertaken to aid survival
of woody plants during the first few summers. Where feasible,
fixed irrigation shall be installed.
6. Include within the revegetation plan portions of the
existing riparian corridor which are intended to be left in their
present condition, including provisions for native trees, shrubs
and vines, where they do not now exist.
7. Obtain the approval of Alameda County Flood Control
district for the revegetation plan, which should be consistent
with Flood Control maintenance requirements.
8. The developers will provide for revegetation along the
riparian corridor and will be responsible for successful
establishment of plantings. Subsequent maintenance and management
of vegetation in the stream channel will be the Applicant's
responsibility for a minimum of one (1) year following completion
of construction.
Impacts
3. Construction Phase Im
�• P
I _
I
a. Earth moving should be undertaken and carried out during the
dry season.
b. Prior to winter rains, all bare ground should be
hydroseeded. If grading is undertaken during winter time
conditions, a plan shall be submitted for stabilization and
control of erosion. Such plan may include mechanical soil
1'
stabilization, sediment barriers, and settling ponds.
C. Conditions of the California Department of Fish and Game
Stream Alteration Permit shall be followed to minimize erosion
—during _cA.nstruction. ii:.,the.,creek.:ctaarir:el
i
a
—10-
c
is
PA 88-009,. Heritage ( )ns
Environmental Assessm,____
December 7, 1988
d. Sediment control measures shall also be used within
construction areas to reduce movement -of silt and other sediment
from the site.
e. In order to protect both the riparian corridor and isolated
trees from construction equipment, vehicular activity, and dumping
of trash and debris, 'areas not intended to be graded will be
protected with temporary fencing.
4. Long Term Impacts
a. Human use of the riparian corridor and stream channel should
be restricted and, where feasible, fencing erected for this
purpose.
Storm Water Drainage
Provide a detailed hydrology and hydraulic study to demonstrate Alamo
Creek capacity on-site and downstream for the 100-year storm conditions.
Traffic and Circulation
1. Project Specific Impacts
Construct a break in the existing median of Amador Valley
Boulevard for left turns as shown on attach Figure. The exact
design and the treatment of median lighting will need to be
coordinated with the City.
The developer should provide details of the bus system schedules
and routes to prospective tenants, and should provide information
regarding carpool matching agencies.
2. Cumulative Impacts
Provide a traffic impact fee equal to the project's proportional
share of cumulative impacts on the City-wide traffic system.
Nuisances
Limit hours of construction to Monday-Friday, 7:30 a.m. - 6:00 p.m.
Require dust-palliative measures during construction.
Noise
Install standard residential grade sliding glass windows and doors in
low air infiltration rate frames for second floor units of the 4
buildings-=c•lose-st"=to rAm-odor}-Valley BouleVa.rd.' nifiltrafi-&d-"- '',
rate frame is one which does not leak air at a rate in excess of 0.15
cubic feet/min. per foot of crack length when tested per ASTM standard
-11-
?",>s...,� '` r �PA-t88 009;;mHeritage� �ns�'�¢�j((;; � ���•� ; � , � ��'�fr�+�' ,`� � �y ,•� fx �"�r rx F, �',,•} f
r •f'i�l/. h r•ef+'.f. rf�l,"4,:+a/ar.x,,.�Y,f.. ,.y.r ....^r. k, �c�*+l}� � �" •1 m,.�..t_,• :fi+i`cFu?' Y}'4t� .f'fA yi ETC y�r { i
J^a `dt tf {`vrrr YJ r r i s
-'v Environmental::Assessu. �s� s�{ ; ,
.1'7• ; .• ",� w . rs-r•'_ sI •fL:� .S rt".'�ar^'� -p;,,.9r ..r °t 1f rY .;yi¢1 ✓..�.�i r ,�• ieY.r.ci• to r,�'�'b.:a-.:; rsser' ti-j.
6
rf r ,-4�'� s# Si 4 E�Lt r'r'.,.r�' If'.Y J.fJ/. .; 7�t�r�;Z:.��-; v '.jt r..A2sr f�t fiY1 s�:r+'1� !r >�,rs y t ,•
,December /7, .;1988-• +:
Yv-!�!�f.•"L%.�•r.:9.•av{/A p'�r.J.:•,iyf�.=f'•.L B SI t�i✓,^-.1f•<"C�li a.-%.G r'.�'S_�'�vi4 J w,l rc Y..�/r,�/�`- S'14:t t Iitx y•r r�'I�„ ' ;-.2'jyf i-k t,�i'ceC.'i'F J.rt'1.l.fit.r S.df j t�'C•jI/ru Y J 3..`>fS NYr.,s:': .✓:'��(.y.y.•.`�4 a..7� f) �CT�'f4t����'✓7..'s^'•! �{3•.,✓y�„
�k�p!:frrr�y'�ccY /{x'rl i,r zrs f -tY01.Q`j.�.r,ti f.C s•;�r--
.Y4� (t ft 3 S ✓Jl : ✓ yL iN r t r �S 1 s i 3k 7tp J ! rf r ✓ J
t.�t j v It � {r�.l,t F' �..�5� st�Y 1 rt •"~`.ri J[f F y J F - F ,+.+ !t ->, 1 �• -3...*�� � ! ! 1 •
� f
E-283 Because the windows in•these units.must be `closed to achieve 'the -
state standard,• the -plans for these units must specify„the means with
J.: ventilated or air -conditioned if
which they will be mechanically
necessary .to allow the occupants to, .at their option,- close the windows
" for .noise control. p s
..Archaeology
.If any archaeological materials are encountered during project activity,
• such activity should be stopped until a qualified archaeologist
evaluates the find and recommends measures to protect resources
Conservation
Require solar heating for pools and individual water heaters for each
dwelling unit.
i
I
i
i
I '
1
( -12-
PA 88-009, Heritage ons
Environmental Assess►.
December 7, 1988
ATTACHMENT "E"
FEMA, Flood Insurance Rate Map, City of Dublin, CA, Alameda County,
August 18, 1983
LEITNER & LEITNER, "Revised Draft Report on Botanical & Wildlife
Resources of the Proposed Alamo Creek Villages Project Area, Dublin,
CA" , June 12, 1985.
BAY SOILS, INC. , "Geologic and Soil Investigation on Proposed
Development Amador Valley Boulevard near Dougherty Road", January 13,
1981
HORTSCIENCE, INC. , "Tree Report, Heritage Commons Tentative Tract Map
5883" , October 5, 1988 and November 11, 1988 letter.
ZONE 7, letter to Carl Steinberg, November 18, 1988 and letter to Trudi
Ryan, May 23, 1988
DSRSD, letter to Lee Thompson, April 6, 1988
PG&E, letter to Michael Taylor, March 9, 1988
ILLINGWORTH & RODKIN, INC. , "Heritage Commons Condominiums --
Environmental Noise Assessment", in letter to Trudi Ryan, November 11,
1988.
ABRAMS ASSOCIATES, "CoastFed Properties, Traffic and Transportation
Study" , December 5, 1988.
TJKM, memo to Lee Thompson, December 5, 1988
-13-
F
MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK &WEST
MICHAEL R.NAVE a. A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION SAN LEANDRO OFFICE
STEVEN R.MEYERS 1220 HOWARD AVE.,SUITE 250 GATEWAY PLAZA
NATALIE E.WEST 777 DAVIS STREET,SUITE 300
ELIZABETH H.SILVER BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010-4211
415)348.7130 SAN LEANDRO,CA 94577
MICHAEL S.RIBACK �' ( (415)351.4300
MOLLY T.TAMI FAX(415)342-0886 FAX(415)351.4481
ANNE E.MUDGE
MICHAEL F.RODRIQUEZ MARIN OFFICE
'—" 1202 GRANT AVE.,SUITE E
OF COUNSEL NOVATO,CA 94945
THOMAS F.BERTRAND (415)892.8878
REPLY TO:
Burlingame Office
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: City of Dublin Planning Commission
FROM: Michael R. Nave, City Attorney
V
RE: PA 88-009, Heritage Commons
DATE: February 141 1989
At the Planning Commission's January 17, 1989, public
hearing, a question arose as to whether the applicant, Coast
Fed Properties, has a legally valid easement for -ingress and
egress over Stagecoach Drive to serve its real property to
be developed as--the Alamo Creek Apartments. - I am satisfied
that it does .
Background
The subject property (PA 88-009) is a 17.45+ acre site
located south of -property Valley Boulevard south and east of
Stagecoach Drive. Stagecoach Drive is a 'private drive which
services a project known as Heritage Commons. Heritage
Commons, a 5± acre 73 unit condominium complex was
originally approved as the first phase of a planned
development when the property was part of unincorporated
county (1497th Zoning Unit) . The remaining phases are the
same lands as PA 88-009. Approvals of the 1497th Zoning
Unit included plans for an additional 230 units located on
the remaining lands, with access provided via an extension
of Stagecoach Drive which would loop around and connect90 1 Y. E D
to Amador Valley Boulevard.
I=EB 16198
Questions
DUBLIN PLANNING
1. Who determines whether an easement/right of ingress
and egress exists for the subject property?
1 rade
valid easement foi ingress and e9rebs over 5Lagecoach Road.
Absent litigation, attorneys can interpr.et the documentation
TO STAFF REPORT
z' PA 88-009 HERITAGE
-ATTACHM wo (2 pages)
MEMORANDUM TO:
Planning Commission
February .141, 1989
Page 2
i
and status of title. It is my opinion from a review of the
pertinent legal documents that the easement is valid.
However , if the Homeowner 's Association disagrees with the
interpretation of the applicant's attorney and the City
Attorney, the Association can sue for a determination of the
validity of the easement.
2: Does the City Attorney have this right/ability? If
yes , given the available information, can the City Attorney
make this determination?
As mentioned above, the City Attorney can give an
opinion to the Planning Commission regarding the validity of
the easement. My opinion is that the easement is valid.
However, if challenged, a court would ultimately determine
the validity of the easement .
3. In absence of a legal determination on the
easement , does the Planning Commission have a legal right to
make a decision on the project?
The Planning Cormission has a legal right to make a
decision on the project with or without a legal opinion.
The Planning Commission may desire to condition its project
approval by requiring the applicant to obtain a final
judgment which declares the validity of the easement.
However, I do not believe this is necessary.
MRN: jar
rF rte.
n;� t
CITY OF DUBLIN
fy� w. t f� y ' PIANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT
ep: � ,} °,r ,".':�,;, '';"c p;Tr;,•,,,r ..:'" Meeting Date: December 19, 1988
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Staff !�J(
SUBJECT: PA 88-009 Heritage Commons
j GENERAL INFORMATION:
PROJECT: Planned Development Rezoning, Tentative Map, and
...;; _ !_•�;,,': :;.`� Site Development Review
"`-;• 1 APPLICANT: Casden Company
Attn: Carl Steinberg
? 9090 Wilshire Boulevard
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
- I '
PROPERTY OWNER: CoastFed Properties
9090 Wilshire Boulevard
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
LOCATION: South of Amador Valley Boulevard
South and East of Stagecoach Drive
ASSESSOR PARCEL bUMBER: 941-2765-3/941-2765-4
PARCEL SIZE: 17.45+ acres
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: Medium density residential (6.1 to 14.0 units
per acre) and Open Space; Stream Corridor
EXISTING ZONING
AND LAND USE: PD (Planned Development) Zoning Unit 1497 for a
total of 309 units on this vacant property and
the already developed Phase I property
SURROUNDING I.ND USE
AND ZONING: North: PD, Single-Family and Medium Density
Residential and open space
East: PD, Residential & Commercial
South: PD, Residential
West: Southern Pacific right-of-way
ZONING HISTORY:
Heritage Commons was approved as a Planned Development by Alameda Count_:
in November, 1981. At that time, 309 attached residential units were
approved. To date, Phase.One, originally approved for 79 units has been
developed with 73 units. Other phases were approved for 230 units.
The 73 units were developed after a Conditional Use Permit was processed
and approved by the Dublin Planning Commission in October, 1983. The 1983
Conditional Use Permit included: changes in the bedroom mix (one-bedroom units
were added and the number of 2 and 3 bedroom units was decreased); stacked
flats were eliminated in favor of all townhouse units; and the garages and
driveways were redesigned to permit parking in the driveway.
i
jA6MMTAC
�, TO STAFF REPORT
ITE1 M N0. P s PA 88-009 HERITAGE
(12/19/88 Staff
,r:YES iujy`'+•..f
*• -> :`i'. ;' APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
A. GENERAL PLAN: The General Plan designates the land use for this
yr �n:� , 7G:.yr9 .•. property as Medium Density Residential (6.1 to'14.0 units per acre) and Stream
Corridor. Approximately 14.5 acres are in medium density and about 2.95 acres
are in Stream Corridor. As explained in the zoning history, this site is part
of Zoning Unit 1494 which would have permitted 230 dwelling units on the
remaining vacant site (subject property). Since the approval of that project
the City has adopted the General Plan which includes the "Stream Corridor'
designation on a portion of the property. Staff advised the Applicants that
; ' „ •:� the stream corridor area could not be used in calculating permissible density.
The creek lacks high visual quality due to relatively sparce vegetation and
"`.• `'.'? .J has marginal accessibility which substantially reduce the natural resource
value of the creek. Since the site was previously approved for 230 units and
the creek, as it exists does not have high natural resource value Staff
advised the Applicants that one dwelling unit per acre of stream corridor
could be credited toward the overall project density. Permissible number of
units is 90 to 206 (assuming one dwelling unit per acre of Stream Corridor)-
Medium Density allows duplex, townhouses and garden apartment development
s suitable for family living.
Guiding Policy 3.1 of Open Space for Preservation of Natural Resources and for
Public Health and Safety states:
Preserve oak woodlands, riparian vegetation, and natural creeks as open space
for their natural resource value.
B. ZONING ORDINANCE:
: 8-31.0 Planned Development Districts: Intent: Planned Development
Districts, hereinafter designated as PD Districts, are established to
encourage the arrangement of a compatible variety of uses on suitable
lands in such a manner that the resulting development will:
1) Be in accord with the policies of the General Plan of the City of
Dublin.
2) Provide efficient use of the land that includes preservation or
significant open areas and natural topographic landscape features
with minimum alteration of natural land forms.
3) Provide an environment that will encourage the use of common open
areas for neighborhood or community activities and other
amenitites.
4) Be compatible with and enhance the development of the general
area.
5) Create an attractive, efficient and safe environment.
8-31.2 Change in Zone District Reouired: This section requires:
1) The determination that the proposal will benefit the public
necessity, convenience and general welfare be based, in part on the
conformance of the proposal with provisions of the Zoning regulations.
2) A Planned Development District shall be established by the
adoption of an ordinance by the City Council reclassifying the property
to Planned Development and adopting (by reference) a Land Use and
Development Plan with provisions for the use, improvement and
maintenance of the property.
8-95.0 Site Development Review: This review is intended to:
1) promote orderly, attractive and harmonious development;
-2-
2) recognize environmental limitations on development;
! ;;.+.ry;.. s;;':=:' ': ';r:•:-.i r: 3) stabilize land values and investments; and
f�
::ru :•:::,.;' -- •:':•'.�;: j ::`; 4) promote the general welfare by preventing establishment of uses or
erection of structures having qualities which would not meet the
4; ;,• ;•* ;•?.i1.(�rrM specific intent clauses or performances standards of the Zoning
regulations or which are not properly related to their sites,
surroundings, traffic circulation, or their environmental setting.
' Procedures for Site Development Review (SDR) indicate that the Planning
= Director shall decide applications for SDR without a public hearing
except in the case of a concurrent Variance or Conditional Use Permit.
It is the policy of the Planning Department to extend the public hearing
requirement for concurrent rezonings and tentative maps as well.
C. SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
Section 1.2 of the City subdivision regulations state that it is the
intent of the Subdivision Ordinance to:
•. "- j 1) promote the public health, safety and general welfare;
'J 2) assure in the division of land consistent with the policies of the
General Plan and with the intent and provision of the Zoning
Ordinance;
3) coordinate lot design, street patterns, rights-of-way, utilities
and public facilities with community and neighborhood plans;
4) assure that areas dedicated for public purposes will be properly
improved initially so as not to be a future burden upon the
community;
S) preserve natural resources and prevent environmental damage;
6) maintain suitable standards to insure adequate, safe building
sites; and
7) prevent hazard to life and property.
Section 8-2.5 of the Subdivision regulations states that Conditions of
Approval to tentative maps may include dedication and improvement of
streets, alleys including access rights and abutter's rights, drainage,
public utility easements and other public easements.
Section 8-2.6 requires that a tentative map must be in conformance with
the subdivision ordinance, zoning ordinance and any other ordinance of
the City.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Mitigated Negative Declaration
NOTIFICATION: Public Notice of the December 19, 1988, hearing was
published in The Herald, mailed to adjacent property owners, and posted
in public buildings.
ANALYSIS:
Density
The project density was calculated based on the General Plan designations.
However, the area reserved for the creek is larger than the area designated on
the General Plan.
i The conceptual site plan (Attachment 2) indicates that 4.7 acres of the site
will be dedicated to Zone 7 Flood Control District. The 4.7 acres is larger
'than the 2:95 acre stream corridor to allow for maintenance access al'oig the-
' top of the creek banks. The total 4.7 acres would become permanent open
space.
i
-3-
�r f/ �� �'f r��i'�^i.! fSy71r��Y,•t+f,.!J��i/�'".`�
�1 1'51 .Y 1•.t x 1 J ,g
7^ �A ':% f l�hi..:{�•'7 Ji�,. .off/':7
The development of the units and recreational facilities is accomplished on
:•� %%'''hvr. •*" % ,";.. .`� the remaining 12.75 acres (17.45 - 4.7 — 12.75). The effective density of
U 1�;, -, � �k t5),t �,,,� ,•�a ,y 16.1 units per acre was made possible through preserving an additional 1.75
? ,» f acres (4.7 - 2.95 — 1.75) for stream corridor and clustering the units onto
the 12.75 acres. Overall project density does not exceed 14.0 units per acre
3 .'1 Gri i^•o as designated in the General Plan. The following chart presents the acreage
,rryrr s - and percentage of the property for the various land uses for this site.
1r#,"� Attachment 9 shows the land use areas.
- ,J!.--`�y..•rrr'l .T!yl,4^_,•.:7. ;' OF ENTIRE SITE $ OF DEVELOPMENT AREA
USE ACRES (17.45 ACRES) (12.75 ACRES)
°_: ,zy;t• •` r«ti 'vwq:
Parking/Circulation 3.75 21.5 29.4
4'•F'' - — ;•X!c`�.r.-.ISf:J,4`, - � Building Coverage 2.20 12.6 17.3
Zone 7 Dedication 4.70 26.9 0.0
Landscape/Recreation 6.80 39.0 53.3
Total 17.45 100% 100%
:.,, ,,.�.•,. i Project Overview
The project will have direct access off of Amador Valley Boulevard. This is
considered the main entry for the project. The Main road loops through the
project to join with the existing Stagecoach Drive (part of the existing
°'• ='•�'= = ``=''j Heritage Commons development). The primary access is near the office, the
recreation room, and the main recreation area. With the addition of a median
break on Amador Valley Boulevard, the main entry would handle about 62% of all
i project traffic. The secondary access, through Stagecoach Drive, would handle
about 38% of all vehicle trips in and out of the project.
Alamo Creek winds through the project dividing the site into 3 areas. The
center area is accessed by two creek crossings (box culverts).
= Fourteen of the 26 buildings are oriented to face the creek, providing direct
views of the creek to over 30% of the units. Each building (containing 8
units) is located adjacent to the parking areas, with pathways leading to one
of the two entry landings for each building. Each unit has its own outside
entry but shares an entry landing with 3 other units.
Typically, buildings are separated 20 feet from each other and setback 10 feet
from parking areas and the creek fencing. Setbacks from the creek less than
10 feet are proposed in several areas to accommodate the irregularly shaped
;.. = site.
Physical access to the creek would be limited to Zone 7 maintenance vehicles
_ and emergency vehicles. However, visual access is available at numerous
points throughout the project.
A 5 foot wide sidewalk runs adjacent to the main loop road; and, pathways are
provided from parking aras to unit entries and the recreation areas.
' •_ ''; Architecture
The site plan shows 26 two-story buildings with 8 stacked garden
apartment/condominium units (the recreation/office building has only 6 units).
Only one unit type is in each building. The different size units are spread
throughout the 3 sections of the site.
Type Unit Square Feet : ProDosed
1 Br, 1 Ba 660 56
2 Br, 2 Ba 940 110
.,l
3 Br, 2 Ba 1100 40
TOTAL 206
Each unit includes a washer and dryer, separate water heater, private stora,e
area and balcony, ar patio (:Attachment 4).
.�•. - 4
Y'y' �:�%Yf•Y.�}rJ4c�:'Y�t!j �!r!f�;,�t•�4 ,i'q _
MJ
The building elevations (Attachment 5) show stucco exterior with wood trim.
Architectural detailing includes decorative
�,. ;_•,.i;.; :_ , ;.r>-;w .... g strips of wood, windows with
it + .' r�`�•�.�."r*ex`s � y •• ,+0. /i,, ;� divided li g hts and lattice patio fences and deck walls plus lattice archways.
N 1r�,Fsr}f'r y' Recreation
Recreation features include two pools (one each in Areas 1 and 3), two tot
�.'u,�s,����,�{},.Y•. �,,rMg� ���;�j lots (one each in Areas 1 and 3), two tennis courts (Area 1) and a community
area with a recreation room, lounge, exercise room, bar areas and restrooms
y!, =1''':+:�• < ;'.`°';.;7?" a with showers. About 1300 square feet of community area is provided. The
complex offices are located adjacent to the community area (Attachment 4).
Landscaping
A conceptual landscaping plan (Attachment 3) includes a heirarchy of street
trees, canopy trees and vertical accent tre. Proposed species all have
r � PY �S.
fairly low water requirements and can withstand drought conditions. Thirty
percent of the trees will be 24 inch box or larger; seventy percent will be 15
gallon. The proposed shrubs and groundcovers also have low water
requirements.
Proposed landscaping is located around buildings, and parking areas, providing
j shading and visual accents. Landscaping screening is also proposed between
- new buildings and the existing Heritage Commons development.
j Park Dedication
The City's park dedication requirement is 0.009 acres per dwelling unit, for a
_ total of 1.84 acres for this project. In lieu fees, based on the current
market value of the project land, are available. Parkland dedication credit,
' for on-site improvements may be available. This credit is based on a portion
of minimum size and dimensioned recreation areas. Preliminary Staff
calculations are for 0.1333 acres of credit.
Parking
The project includes one carport space for each unit and 2:5 open spaces for a
total of 461 spaces. The parking ratio is 2.23 spaces per unit, which exceeds
the planning department guidelines of 2.15 spaces per unit by 18 spaces.
Modifications to the Site Plan, as recommended by Staff would delete 3-6
parking spaces, which would still exceed the standard minimum requirements for
parking spaces. Twenty-nine percent (298) of the open parking stalls are
shown for compact vehicles, which is within the planning department guidelines
maximum of 358.
The Site Development Review recommended Conditions of Approval include a
_ provision that 158 of all parking spaces be reserved for visitors, and that
all units have one carport space assigned to them. The remaining spaces would
be unassigned, available to both visitors and residents.
Environmental Review
An Initial Study (Environmental Assessment) was prepared for this project
(Attachment 7) and identified three areas of concern: traffic, noise and
biology. Study of these issues were prepared and mitigation measures have
" been incorporated into the proposed project conditions of approval.
Noise. Present and future noise conditions (both exterior and interior)
were evaluated for this site. The study concluded that exterior noise
levels would not exceed the acceptable limits as set forth in the Dublin
General Plan.
Noise levels inside the second floor units (with the windows open) of
the four buildings closest to Amador Valley Boulevard would.exceed the
State maximum of CNEL 45 db by about 2 db. With the windows closed, the
indoor standard can be met. Mechanical ventilation or air conditioning
would be required in these units. Condition #27 and 28 of the PD
Rezoning makes these a requirement for those buildings.
-5-
:� .�3 <- �-�' •rF��.''Gz.�"to},..,�gr,,;.6s � •
Biology. The biological zesources'were reviewed at two levels. The
first level was a tree-stand study to identify and evaluate the health
of existing trees over 6 inches in diameter. The study also evaluated
J�rr "• 't4'�{ pr7, ��t.� rfJc�r ar3�r the impacts from development and made recommendations for tree removal
fis"t`ti�FoRf ,?nom r ��r� ;� or preservation along with recommendations of preservation techniques.
•},,,y•t..,,+'�'���`•',%� ..?:-)�Y,r'•-:-.G.r The report recommends removal of several trees due to poor health of the
tree. After the initial evaluation, the site plan was modified to
,.-„,•r �,:w, ,,. ,:,', 1Y,,;---: preserve the maximum number of trees. Mitigation measures providing
'.. J�;-.t:r:•�*;�gy1",...��.:•.;•; "'• •'• design guidelines and construction guidelines to preserve and protect
"•,tea=.'• ;1'=' ;;'.°�'=,:r; ;..•;�;'' ::F trees as well as long term maintenance guidelines are referenced in PD
rezoning Condition #11.
• "�• K•::•; `•'.,. �"i _ The second level of biological evaluation concerns the habitat and
;�7.;r: ":;-;i'•' J = wildlife of the entire site. Using biological analyses prepared for Z. adjacent site conditions of approval were added which will help preserve
the "riparian forest" habitat. Y
"`.'- - Traffic. Project access at the entry on Amador Valley Boulevard (east
of Stagecoach Drive) would be restricted to right turns into and out of
:..'z.' the project. This arrangement could result in increased accidents at
Wildwood Road at Amador Valley Boulevard and at Stagecoach Drive on
Amador Valley Boulevard from vehicles attempting U-turns where
inadequate space is available. Mitigation includes a median break in
Amador Valley Boulevard opposite the project's main entry to include
appropriate acceleration lanes. This mitigation will also reduce the
number of vehicles using the existing Heritage Commons for ingress and
egress from 71% to 32% of the total average daily trips.
The project will contribute to cumulative increases in traffic on
several roads and intersections within the City of Dublin. The project
W. should contribute its proportional share to the improvement of these
facilities. Condition #68 of the tentative map addresses the
requirement for traffic impact mitigation fees.
RECOMMENDATION:
FORMAT: 1) Open public hearing and hear Staff presentation.
2) Take testimony from Applicant and the public.
3) Question Staff, Applicant and the public.
4) Close public hearing and deliberate.
S) Take action regarding the Negative Declaration, Monitoring
Program, Planned Development Rezoning, Tentative Tract Ma?
and Site Development Review; or give Staff and the Applicant
direction and continue the item.
ACTION: Approve the following resolutions recommending that the City
Council:
a) Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Significance;
b) Adopt a monitoring program for mitigation measures
incorporated into the project.
c) Rezone the property to Planned Development (PD) district (?A
88-009.1);
d) Approve Tentative Tract Map 5883 (PA 88-009.2);
e) Approve the Site Development Review (PA 88-009.3); and
-6-
' ' ' �r .l !-� b. it J �:.r"r�� j 4's ?;n% f •..-ry�it� � A'�r 4 s' ,•w,. x �'1 t �x r� *r
k � °' � y s. ✓L��+�i ] ''''�.. t q v'r' ,rte � K L' r T 7 ,� r
' f
?k.
_
f ,
ATTACHMENTS: ,
r +� Exhibit A: Resolution recommending City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Environmental Significance
Exhibit B: Resolution recommending City Council adopt a Monitoring Program
r for mitigatoin measures incorporated into.the project.
a
, •y '� Exhibit C: Resolution recommending City Council adopt the rezoning of the
property to Planned Development
k{I •,�` d . �I�•.4
Exhibit D: Resolution recommending City Council adoption of Tentative Tract
yz tir .�• ; Map 5883
Exhibit E: Resolution recommending City o�II p
cil adoption of Site Development
;may ,' Cj'- y F' ' ^»R i{✓!-q,��,
'�"7k:. ,•{�r�4 :t.' �" Review
t- :•'�'�:, nit ', •l`�<••7i:.,�:
Background Attachments:
+�}_3r•.�'� �,��yy''Jai••�.�,��r•�
Attachment 1: Zoning Map
r tta.' ✓� s-` Attachment 2: Site Plan
Attachment 3: Landscaping Plan
Attachment 4: Floor Plans (2 sheets)
t'�' tom •.s„ i;;t•?riI'x r,�.l,,, r
Attachment 5: Elevations (3. sheets)
Attachment 6: Tentative Map
Attachment 7: Initial Study (Environmental Assessment)
`'•�':$'°.:� '� "'`��.';,r.'w�'r_•�'�•�;'.�'t``,,.� Attachment 8: Negative Declaration
Attachment 9: Land Use Areas Map
�,`
•�r �--r t.r�; --.� Attachment 10: Applicant's Written Statement
Attachment 11: Site Development Review Staff Study
y
ice'
�_ - +:TNT � ,�,:. •'J�i,:_.:��_
'"• .LX����'" �Tw7.� V :IAA•"'\�\�4� ,
g 9.., + !ir• � �.�,. of i^a.71 { .." �!+Y as . �r d-. -.
f CITY OF-DUBLIN
j PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT
is Meeting Date: January 17, 1989
t
o
�M TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Staff Iva
SUBJECT: PA 88-009 Heritage Commons
9 � .
ref GENERAL INFORMATION:
PROJECT: Planned Development Rezoning, Tentative Map, and
t• 'r °w% r• ` Site Development Review
APPLICANT: Casden Company
Attn: Carl Steinberg
9090 Wilshire Boulevard
' y-. �••�.���}.: ',�� -z �ate- Beverly Hills, CA 90211
. :•.. �r�.�'a �. , �1.� PROPERTY OWNER: CoastFed Properties
9090 Wilshire Boulevard
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
,�£:,,.�.,.,r-��,,1-�'s� �;,_:;•p,� _�;;•„�.;:_-�.;.�rr� LOCATION: South of Amador Valley Boulevard
n° South and East of Stagecoach Drive
'l 1� _r. o.G ".Y ^'r;•-vim
ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: 941-2765-3/941-2765-4
PARCEL SIZE: 17.45+ acres
GENERAL. PLAN
_`_° "%-'{ c-"'{` ? '�`.-'•,:ir }�' DESIGNATION: Medium density residential (6.1 to 14.0 u
_,„ '�,: -, Ys .:•-. nits
+=-�•�•-�'' ) and Open
per acre Space;
Stream Corridor
gc� ti way. 5 4 k� t Asa EXISTING ZONING
AND LAND USE: PD (Planned Development) Zoning Unit 1497 for a
.?.�'•�y,=•.;;:•:��:•�'I.:;"„- `� '=- total of 309 units on this vacant property and
the already developed Phase I property
y; yr SURROUNDING LAND USE
.' =''" " S " '��"�}� AND ZONING: North: PD,
Single-Family and Medium Density
P
en Residential and o space
Fri��j �t'�•f�".,'}K-h.�'t...t.'�1:.'�g�o-_� P
East: PD, Residential b Commercial
�„ '�-. �i, ••��--��n�, �i jam'. rcial
,�'•dri'3 "-`'' }`" ' r " .'" '''"` South: PD, Residential
West: Southern Pacific right-of-way
::.:r..,i-:,...°.: a t �1�3 + - cam'••..;
i
,��+�� ZONING HISTORY:
{�� i�i''a•":�?S='';,'- ,' ao d ?� %t iii
Heritage Commons was approved as a Planned Development by Alameda County
,t L + t, cGx in November, 1981. At that time, 309 attached residential units were
.Rw`: `� 4 approved. To date, Phase One, originally approved for 79 units has been
K
developed with 73 units. Other phases were approved for 230 units.
The 73 units were developed after a Conditional Use Permit was processed
and approved by the Dublin Planning Commission in October, 1983. The 1983
Conditional Use Permit included: changes in the bedroom mix (one-bedroom units
`:•_`:_; �fFX ,-.; Y��, kY` were added and the number of 2 and 3 bedroom units was decreased); stacked
flats were eliminated in favor of all townhouse units; and the garages and
Orij.` '` �� . driveways were redesigned to permit parking in the driveway.
r, 'y
ut .yam cow `k v �.^.b•�•i +�-, Y1l
3 �iT '�f'`S'�'t�'•,. r7:'��tG^•i 9j y.1, .
�• "' `` a a TO STAFF REPORT
PA 88-009 HERITAGE
,�`;�,R�,�.•'•��;���; ,��,; �`�r"� �1�°• ro �4 � ST
(1/17/89 FF A REPORT)
A
•, , .;ir APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
r! rFr T :A. GENERAL PLAN The General Plan designates the land use for this
gn
as Medium Density Residential 6.1 to 14.0 units
� •
property y ( per acre) and Stream
Corridor. Approximately 14.5 acres are in medium density and about 2.95 acres
ii" i�` � 'n r✓b;'- ":•:•L• •.-- are in Stream Corridor. As explained in the zoning history,'1!1`�:i�°��•�•ti:'•`f�ij'.{�),�i�'"��'.Y�;�'`�''•-':7•:, p g this site is part
C'4Ysa4 5,f?, .�, �;yj;, '.. ._':^ [� of Zoning Unit 1494 which would have permitted 230 dwelling units on the
remaining vacant site (subject property). Since the approval of that project
the City has adopted the General Plan which includes the "Stream Corridor"
' :• yr " r ' designation on a portion of the property. Staff advised the Applicants that
.. _ z;•:ry,;,•_;;:-:.;. �,:.,.-•::,.;,� the stream corridor area could not be used in calculating permissible density.
The creek lacks high visual quality due to relatively sparce vegetation and
•:�::.;..:;:;�:.::;%.;;.,;--� =•Z has marginal accessibility which substantially reduce the natural resource
value of the creek. Since the site was previously approved for 230 units and
_` �;::..•✓:'n;_;~-_:,: ;_:„.. '.::'" •:^ the creek, as it- exists does not have high natural resource value. Staff
advised the Applicants that one dwelling unit per acre of stream corridor
could be credited toward the overall project density. Permissible number of
;.. ,,;j:._•.';^e:_-: :`;;y.;;_',.;' ... .', units is 90 to 206 (assuming one dwelling unit per acre of Stream Corridor).
Medium Density allows duplex, townhouses and garden apartment development
suitable for family living.
Guiding Policy 3.1 of Open Space for Preservation of Natural Resources and for
Public Health and Safety states:
=' ':_:.': <'`•'`;'": Preserve oak woodlands, riparian vegetation, and natural creeks as open space
for their natural resource value.
B. ZONING ORDINANCE:
8-31.0 Planned Development Districts: Intent: Planned Development
Districts, hereinafter designated as PD Districts, are established to
encourage the arrangement of a compatible variety of uses on suitable
lands in such a manner that the resulting development will:
1) Be in accord with the policies of the General Plan of the City of
Dublin.
2) Provide efficient use of the land that includes preservation of
significant open areas and natural topographic landscape features
with minimum alteration of natural land forms.
3) Provide an environment that will encourage the use of common open
areas for neighborhood or community activities and other
amenitites.
4) Be compatible with and enhance the development of the general
area.
5) Create an attractive, efficient and safe environment.
8-31.2 Change in Zone District Required: This section requires:
1) The determination that the proposal will benefit the public
necessity, convenience and general welfare be based, in part on
the conformance of the proposal with provisions of the Zoning
regulations.
2) A Planned Development District shall be established by the
adoption of an ordinance by the City Council reclassifying the
property to Planned Development and adopting (by reference) a Land
Use and Development Plan with provisions for the use, improvement
and maintenance of the property.
8-95.0 Site Development Review: This review is intended to:
1) promote orderly, attractive and harmonious development;
[PA88-009:Ag Stmt PC 1/17/89]
-2-
Ell
2) recognize environmental limitations on development;
W;. 1 3) stabilize land values and investments; and
J Y � , J
�aq ff"f
4 �; 4) promote the general welfare by preventing establishment of uses or
erection of structures having
specific intent clausesoriperformances st standards
•�'.' .yr ''j`"� '`' "'L, s ,!JSgtN, °'7a;-
regulations or which are not properly related to their sites,
surroundings, traffic circulation, or their environmental setting.
Procedures for Site Development Review (SDR) indicate that the Planning
Director shall decide applications for SDR without a public hearing
"" Director
in the case of a concurrent Variance or Conditional Use Permit.
It is the policy of the Planning Department to extend the public hearing
requirement for concurrent rezonings and tentative maps as well.
C. SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
Section 1.2 of the City subdivision regulations state that it is the
? intent of the Subdivision Ordinance to:
1) promote the public health, safety and general welfare;
2) assure in the division of land consistent with the policies of the
....... General Plan and with the intent and provision of the Zoning
Ordinance;
3) coordinate lot design, street patterns, rights-of-way, utilities
and public facilities with community and neighborhood plans;
4 4) assure that areas dedicated for public purposes will be properly
improved initially so as not to be a future burden upon the
community,
5) preserve natural resources and prevent environmental damage;
6) maintain suitable standards to insure adegt.ate, safe building
sites; and
7) prevent hazard to life and property.
Section 8-2.5 of the Subdivision regulations states that Conditions of
Approval to tentative maps may include dedication and improvement of
streets, alleys including access rights and abutter's rights, drainage,
public utility easements and other public easements.
Section 8-2.6 requires that a tentative map must be in conformance with
the subdivision ordinance, zoning ordinance and any other ordinance of
i the City.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Mitigated Negative Declaration
NOTIFICATION: Public Notice of the December 19, 1988, hearing was
published in The Herald, mailed to adjacent property owners, and posted
in public buildings.
ANALYSIS:
This item was continued from the December 19, 1988 Planning Commission
Hearing, requesting that Staff provide 1) additional information on the School
District's long range plans, 2) information on any easements which may exist
between the current Heritage Commons Development and the subject property, and
3) a traffic consultant to explain the traffic report and some of the
methodology behind traffic analysis. In addition, several other questions
' were raised during public testimony.
(PA38-009:Ag Stmt PC 1/17/891
i
j
7 G •�
SCHOOLS
L. A letter was sent to the Superintendent of Schools for the Dublin Unified
School District asking for information on school projections and long range
�jPl1r,..•1 six., ,: ,a.�^?ts'.;{^ .r plans of the School District.
n
The School District has provided some of this information via telephone,
Currenity, the District has a total enrollment (K-12) of 3164 students. These
students are in schools with grades K-5 (1482 students), 6-8 (765 students)
and 9-12 (917 students). District-wide there is adequate capacity for any
j.• �:1�. :._ .
students generated by new projects within the City limits (including this
project). The District is currently preparing a new master plan to reflect
the new District's boundaries which became effective July 1, 1988. In
addition to curriculum plans, the master plan will address enrollment and
projections for.each of the school facilities. If necessary, school
boundaries will be adjusted so that enrollment at a school will not exceed its
capacity. The District specifically mentioned the need to examine the
Frederiksen and Murray school boundaries. This master plan will not be
available for about six months. The District may be able to provide
- ', information on enrollment and projections prior to the completion of the
• % �:: . :'. .- i master plan.
" In terms of this project, the District has assured the Planning Department
Staff that students can be.accommodated.
EASEMENTS
Residents from Heritage Commons Phase 1 were concerned about use of their
private street by the future project. Questions were raised regarding
recorded easements for the use of Stagecoach Drive by future phases.
The Applicant has provided the City with several documents to demonstrate the
existence of an easement for ingress and egress to the remaining portions of
Heritage Commons.
In summary, these documents include:
Grant Deed of property to 01)mpic Savings reserving an easement to
southern parcel, by Maximillian Manufacturing Company, recorded January 29,
1982 (Attachment 12).
Final Amended MaD for Tract 4950 which states in a note that Stagecoach
Drive encompasses an easement for ingress, egress, etc. reserved by
Maximillian Manufacturing Company in a deed recorded January 29, 1982 (above
Grant Deed) (Attachment 13)
CC&R'S for Heritage Commons Homeowner's Association, page 22 (Section F)
which refers to an easement for reasonable access and use to the owners of any
lots and/or units in any subsequent phase of the project which is annexed
pursuant to Article II of the CC&R's. (Attachment 14).
Applicant's Letter which summarizes the documents sent to the City for
review (Attachment 15).
Staff has reviewed these documents and is satisfied as to the existence of an
eaesment for ingress and egress to the subject property.
Condition #22 of the Tentative Map conditions requires that an agreement for
cross access for Subdivision 4950 (existing Heritage Commons) and 5883 (this
project) be recorded. In addition, Conditions #21, #38 and #75 emphasize the
need for proper recordation and verification of easements for this property.
Provisions for maintenance of any commonly used facilities (e.g. Stagecoach
Drive) would be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer and
Planning Director during review of CC&R's and improvement plans for this
project.
TRAFFIC, CIRCULATION AND PARSING
Mr. Charles Abrams of Abrams Associates has been asked to attend the hearing.
Abrams Associates prepared the traffic study which addresses project specific
impacts related to traffic and circulation. Mr. Chris Kinzel from TM4, the
(PA88-009:Ag Stmt PC 1/17/S9)
-4-
City's traffic consultants,has also been invited to the hearing. TJKH
4 i ` reviewed the Abrams Associates traffic study,,especially the recommendation
for a median break on Amador Valley Boulevard.
Tit Project circulation would be provided by a main loop road which would connect
" the existing Stagecoach Drive to the main entry on Amador Valley Boulevard.
The use of Stagecoach Drive for this project is discussed above under
! easements. City Staff has required.the loop road to provide more efficient
rF y circulation for the project. Efficient circulation is especially important
for emergency vehicles.
Project parking would be a minimum of 2.15 spaces per dwelling unit. The site
plan indicates closer to 2.23 spaces per unit. Each unit would have one
assigned,✓���r,::o carport space. Conditions of approval would require that 15% of the
required spaces (minimum 66 spaces) be reserved for visitors. Some site plan
modifications suggested by Staff could reduce the parking by 3-6 spaces,
y� a?fiY mi
however total parking would still meet the minimum requirements.
.�".��F �,
The traffic study included peak hour traffic counts at intersections and
roadway sections, and counts at the entry to Heritage Commons. These counts
��-f��='�f��' �,s� ��'`'�`" •���t';{,,�.�^,;- �,`,Y,1.�'= were taken September 19-30, 1988.
-�i Y Y,; SL'i Ta e: ,3v EXISTING HERITAGE COMMONS
1. ti fS a3`y.ni!•i._��i'.'t-:=1�",,—'7 r._r•:':•S,+•
The existing phase of Heritage Commons Phase 1
g p g ( ) was constructed in 1984.
Several modifications to the project originally approved by Alameda County
were processed through the City prior to 7construction.
%x' '`�S`'sfi: �':"'Y t„': •; "z'•' Phase 1 consists of 73 units on 5.21 acres. Unit mix is shown in the
following table:
Y Z
Phase 1 Units
Wit: '' -_ :_La.j`.f.1, ..,d•_ ” :J
Unit Type Size Quantity
Y`
Studio 495 s.f. 3
1 Bedroom 1020 s.f. 27
2 Bed/2-1/2 Bath 1225 s.f. 30
3 Bedroom 1288 s.f. 13
73
; = The Phase 1 units are larger than those proposed for this project
(Phases 2-4)
Parking for Phase 1 is provided in one and two-car garages, driveway parking
=r`- ,' '',c ^..-�,;,.•�;�•,!"'�"r• •r-. '=r _`,';:r:..-:::°::: .. and designated perpendicular and parallel parking off the private
streets.
Total parking for the project is 86 garage spaces, approximately 64 driveway
w e �? �'L.`+:Iy` •y. ,.a.�•� _,_.� spaces, and 33 off-street spaces for a total of about 183 spaces (2.50 spaces
:_ ;:__rt,x:_. ,.: •.�,: per dwelling unit).
PROPOSED PROJECT
yew Several other items were raised during public testimony which require
,5, clarification.
Project Name: The application bears the name Heritage Commons. This name was
used by Staff in processing the application as the Applicant had not selected
a new project name. This project will have its own name and identity;"`-: •�Aw+ ;t,�.- ' t�-> P J P J from the
existing Heritage Commons; the Applicant has indicated Alamo Creek may be the
AY project name.
W? _ Construction Access: The recommended Conditions of Approval include a
=
provision that all construction access to the project
•:;;�� ,;. � •••..,�.�•. :;- be provided directly
y4%1"•:,w-�_ ���;.,;:;..�,:�,,..,�.;,.:;;.�•,:,::;� from Amador Valley Boulevard. Exceptions to that access may be granted by the
City Engineer for limited construction which cannot be provided directly from
Amador Valle Boulevard. The developer would b repairing
\^,:::y:?a -.,�;r' fie'i�,�cr Y.: s•.,r.^.o^r.-`.:;1 Y P e responsible for any
? ;`4r"`' �"�2:'�:a•:y,-{ a:: damage to Stagecoach Drive that results from construction traffic.. f . ..
F t :w;+.; e`er.^,Cp:wh•.r�••„1�v-.
h � ,�s"y � �ry}L [PA88-009:Ag Stmt PC 1/17/89]
7 r,
ell
rr•;- a- . .;: ';' : '.': Setbacks: Building setbacks from the property line are generally 15 feet or
greater. Staff has recommended approval of 10 foot setbacks in two spots
where adjacent buildings are over 20 feet from the property line or the
is,,�„ pl; } ^aye✓ t ^±f ,n ft r,� building is not for residential use (i.e. recreation room). Attachment 16
highlights these two exceptions.
SI
Landscape Buffers: A concern was raised that it did not appear from the site
«3;'-.,-•. ,: >-,- -"''''r`. plan (Attachment 2) that adequate landscape buffers were being provided
between Phase I and the proposed project. The conceptual landscape plan
^`• -.� (Attachment 3) more accurately shows proposed landscaping of the site. A full
sized landscaping plan will be exhibited at the Public Hearing. A typical
landscaping treatment from a full sized plan is shown on Attachment 17.
Creek Resources: A concern was raised regarding the creek as a natural
resource. The December 19, 1988 Staff Report stated that the creek, as it
exists, does not have high resource value due to relatively sparce vegetation
and poor accessibility of the creek. The resource value of the creek is
_ relative to other creeks in Dublin. Martin Canyon and Koopman Canyon Creeks
for example, would have high resource values. However, the General Plan does
_ designate Alamo Creek as "Stream-Corridor* to be maintained as open space for
its natural resource value. The Planned Development Rezoning and Tentative
Map Conditions of Approval include conditions that would require enhancement
and revegetation of disturbed areas of the creek as well as protection of
existing mature trees. The result would be an improved habitat and higher
natural resource value of the creek. Conditions of construction and
revegetation in the creek are similar to those of the Rafanelli & Nahas
project, The Villages.
Unit Ownership: The Applicants have requested the units to be
apartment/condominium. The Applicant has indicated that the units will be
offered as rentals initially. At such time as the market is more supportive
of condominiums they would offer the units for individual sale. Conditions
#52 and #53 of the Planned Development include standards to assure that
applicances, roof, utilities, exterior paint, etc. are in good condition.
Condition #54 (PD) requires that a minimum of 108 of the units be available
for rental for a period of five years.
Environmental Review: Staff has prepared an environmental analysis for the
project and is recommending that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Significance be adopted. In addition to a checklist, the
environmental assessment includes a short discussion of several environmental
resources including: Drainage and Channel Form; Slope Stability, Foundation
Support and Consolidation; Storm Water Drainage; Nuisances; Community
Organization; Archaeological Resources; Energy and Conservation and Water ays.
In addition, the environmental assessment includes a summary of reports
prepared on: Transportation; Noise; and Plants and Animals. Specific
mitigation measures, identified in the environmental assessment are included
as Conditions of Approval for the project.
Staff is recommending approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration as it is
believed that the recommended Conditions of Approval will mitigate any adverse
environmental impacts associated with the project_ Specific questions
pertaining to potential traffic impacts and creek (biology) are discussed in
previous paragraphs of this report. Questions regarding other environmental
resources were not raised at the December 19, 1988 meeting.
An EIR was not prepared for this project, nor was an EIR prepared for the
previous approval of Heritage Commons.
RECOPDIENDATION:
FORMAT: 1) Open public hearing and hear Staff presentation_
2) Take testimony from Applicant and the public.
3) Question Staff, Applicant and the public.
4) Close public hearing and deliberate.
5) Take action regarding the Negative Declaration, Monitoring
Program, Planned Development Rezoning, Tentative Tract Mai
Traffic Impact Fee and Site Development Review; or give
_ Staff and the Applicant direction and ca;ti*ir"ue T.h_ it ac
ACTION: Approve the following resolutions recommending that the City
Council:
(PA88-009:Ag Stmt PC 1/17/891
-6-
I •
a) Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Significance;
b) Adopt a monitoring program for mitigation measures
incorporated into the project,
c) Rezone the property to Planned Development (PD) district (PA
88-009.1);
d) Approve Tentative Tract Map 5883 (PA 88-009.2);
P e) Approve Traffic Impact Fee; and
f) Approve the Site Development Review (PA 88-009.3);
ATTACHMENTS:
r• �r ,� ;;'�• � Exhibit A: Resolution recommending Ci ty Council adopt a Mitigated Negative
�y,•rz' y' ,��� Declaration of Environmental Significance
� -�- -
���� Exhibit B: ' Resolution recommending City Council adopt a Monitoring Program
for mitigation:measures incorporated into the project.
?+x+' s`c '. !`�': '--r'^= '��'+•9 Exhibit C: Resolution recommending City Council adopt the rezoning of the
; property to Planned Development
•r �;;F,:F.;-w:, �':+.. .�.:�::ti.:.-.: Exhibit D: Resolution recommending City Council adoption of Tentative Tract
,.5 �. �- .hs ,..��_� .�..a,�•-� � Map 5883
c-;, i ar'�r++ jy�^'tom t y�z Exhibit E: Resolution recommending City Couincil impose a Traffic Impact Fee
Exhibit F: Resolution recommending City Council adoption of Site Development
_ :.�.'.•,�Y Review
�..�_ Background Attachments:
- fir: �° � s�.�! '-`;:.';;-;.'. .•� -- -
Note to Planning Commission: PLease bring a copy of the December 19, 1988
Staff Report to the January 17, 1989 meeting. Contact. the Planning Department
� '-^p= max. •:�`'? ::;' = Staff if you need another copy of this report.
>,��y�H3` ' �cr•:_ V �" i Refer to December 19th Staff Report for the following attachments:
*.sc.._.araiy�r•n.—w4o:.ns„yy'?'x'�•'n- �•s'i�7:.q�M.,;sd
Attachment 1: Zoning Map
Attachment 2: Site Plan
Attachment 3: Landscaping Plan
4 ,• , n'�t.�r yam, �:' '",.••�� Attachment 4: Floor Plans (2 sheets)
Attachment 5: Elevations (3 sheets)
'_' '?;ti5+?:.'=3 Attachment 6: Tentative Map
Attachment 7: Initial Stud Environmental Assessment
Attachment 8: Negative Declaration
Attachment 9: Land Use Areas Map
Attachment 10: Applicant's Written Statement
-='f'' ': ''"�"� � :a-'� Attachment 11: Site Develo ment Review Staff Study
rte:=.T4:.; .... �n:;.•{ '.:•t
,t Attached hereto:
Attachment 12: Grant Deed
V' .`t Attachment 13: Final Amended Map
for Tract 4950
;„ �y2 �'4) •� ,}. ," it terra.,yt Attachment 14: CC&R's for Heritage Commons (excerpts)
Attachment 15: Letter from Carl Steinberg to City Staff dated 1/9/89
,�, _.e:•�:;� 'a .:';.� ,��� ,� ::r-;� Attachment 16: Property Line Setback Exceptions
t^� `i>j�'-=::r'• ~"° "= `°'` Attachment 17: Typical Landscaping
Buffers
< l�At-Y j Via, J�cZ �i'• ..�c- `xa '�
s• " zaS*•1 �''�('`-tip �y,�t�..`,:w.�t\ „ti5•C"v
tf>ti..5 to t''� r 1 3 i1.•L' rti
, �•t��,�`.�°,,: ±,�.•1 ;;�� t� Gr"i' [PA88-009:Ag Stmt PC 1/17/89]
7.
TEA::'..�+• 'rr 1 .� �i r
't o NYC\ �'�w�4 t '7.,.•OM�I � k.
a 1
%f7?^t}�+'i'�S�•.ktf t df.CS. E if t i fir! y'r �Y�� ,+yjVr.!'�.'
t
CITY OF DUBLIN
i PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT
x Meeting Date: February 21, 1989
` f TO: Planning Commission
f' -
Y FROM: Planning Staff L '
SUBJECT: PA 88-142 Hobby Horse Learning Center -
Childcare, Conditional Use Permit
GENERAL INFORMATION:
C ' ,x PROJECT: Conditional Use Permit request to maintain
#�.
existing use of one of the buildings at the
d Cronin School property for a daycare facility
�; ' �'`�• �,t =.4 -" - for up to 80 children
i ° �' ' � APPLICANT: Joseph P. Sullivan
e;i,ME Hobby Horse Learning Center
_4 •y17„ -
7'^ ry "' `. 6901 York Drive
�`� }�="r,'x�f`��"*b - '• �° Dublin CA 94568
o ,3�< f, R -B REPRESENTATIVE: Melody Ferreia
a. ;{``ir� '� �yGRk Hobby Horse Learning Center
!" �6.'a�•::'t,:.:..-.`c,FZ'Jd
✓ ,; yr�•_;y- >• .t�>•,i 6901 York Drive
Dublin, CA 94568
PROPERTY OWNER.: Dublin Joint School District
` `z;;i '';; '•`SFr`r :-'4 Y =%+ Attn: Stan Maleski
7471 Larkdale Avenue
Dublin, CA 94568
i,LIP
c � A
LOCATION: Cronin Elementary School (Pod B)
6901 York Drive
�:q. a •' 7s• � t1�---t sS.�2•��iS i �=yi
r• .r.,,t :1,c ,•r
ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: 941-201-25
1 a- cam. s
�_,.�'�_�.,�` ,;,,„nT����•t,s�' '.:::� PARCEL SIZE: 7.65+ acres
� � '� a • a`,• •x�' 'tiTn
.i•a. s.r.,aJ. ' .,�of a�i•., . ,_ '
r Y
GENERAL PLAN
y��v.. ,a: �;,� •.� ,,�Lix __a,, DESIGNATION: Public/Semi-Public Facility
? � •�' 1 ''fit� �' - ?- +yf
� >n �5 EXISTING ZONING
,t,;s•;;:.J.,+•:a 'a.,� ?�•� *c:; AND LAND USE' R-1 (Single Family Residential)
Elementary School site containing: Valley
`° •= r.+* `^� '? i� Continuation High; Montessori School and Hobby
Horse Learning Center
SURROUNDING LAND USE
AND ZONING: North: R-1, Single-Family Residential/School
South: R-1, Single-Family Residential
.',•tii •�:• �>- '�'�:cti•� 'w;o•.^:�.�r,.4 g;<t'<�: East: R-1, Single-Family Residential
West: R 1, Single-Family Residential
4a.
------------------------------------------------- .----------------------------
'ti
TO STAFF REPORT
.rte rs haiwr„fI�A� 1�1 ;L� 7i ITEM N0. PA 88-009 HERITAGE
r^�Z �} }t�`�^lt�fa4 :ay����..�}�t i 4• `) `' d or"�'�. C� f"�j�.w•� + y
(2/21/89 Staff Repoi
:.a. ZONING HISTORY:
July 1986 - The Dublin Planning Commission approved a two-year
,,•,,.� ..? (.a r y. C3yJA 1 !-�4 Conditional Use Permit to operate a Montessori School in Pod A at the
rru r
,;,•.•::._ Cronin Elementary School for up to 144 children
s I t .•`, `Y £ �,'• 'ki-/ j November 1986 - The Dublin Planning Commission approved a two-year
Conditional Use Permit request for Hobby Horse Learning Center, a 80
child preschool/daycare facility in Pod B of the Cronin Elementary
School.
s`?c'.':?:;-":;,_':'•' ":- November 1986 - The Dublin Planning Commission approved a two-year
Conditional Use Permit request by Family Bible Church to occupy Pod C at
- the Cronin School.
January 1987 - The Dublin Planning Commission approved a Variance for a
numerical parking requirements to allow shared parking of three spaces
for the Family Bible Church (Note: The Church ceased operation with the
establishment of this Pod as a continuation high school).
April 1988 - The Dublin Planning Commission denied a Conditional Use
Permit to establish a 60-student continuation high school in Pod C (plus
two portable classrooms). However, the Dublin Joint Unified School
District Board of Trustees overrode the Zoning Ordinance, thereby
allowing the school to operate in Pod C beginning with the fall term,
1988.
August 1988 - The Dublin Planning Commission approved a 60-day
Conditional Use Permit to continue operation of the Montessori School in
" .. Pod A at the Cronin School.
October 1988 - The Dublin Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use
Permit to continue operation of the Fountainhead Montessori School
involving a preschool, childcare and Kindergarden through 3rd grade
classes for up to 144 children in Pod A at the Cronin School.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
Section 8-26.3 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that a Conditional Use
Permit be obtained from the Planning Commission for the establishment of a
Community Facility, which includes daycare, nursery schools and school
centers, when proposed in a single-family zone.
Section 8-94.0 states that conditional uses must be analyzed to
determine: 1) whether or not the use is required by the public need; 2)
whether or not the use will be properly related to other land uses,
transportation and service facilities in the vicinity; 3) whether or not the
use will materially affect the health or safety of persons residing or working
in the vicinity; and 4) whether or not the use will be contrary to the
specific intent clauses or peformarce standards established for the district
in which it is located.
Section 8-94.4 states the approval of a Conditional Use Permit may be
valid only for a specified term, and may be made contingent upon the
acceptance and observance of specified conditions, includine but not limited
to the following matters:
a) substantial conformity to approved plans and drawings;
b) limitations on time of day for the conduct of specified activities;
-1 V- c) time period within which the approval shall be exercised and the proposed
use brought into existence, failing which, the approval shall lapse and be
void;
d) guarantees as to compliance with the terms of the approval, including the
posting of bond;
e) compliance with requirements of other departments of the City/County
Government.
-2-
40,t ;
:ill"tiy .J:yy; ,, "�u•'t.+:i', w:•:.,i•.:o:•`'.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Categorically Exempt, Class 1
Section 15301 - Operation of an existing private
f•�„%^'.%"'' ';`' facility involving no expansion or charge
' of use
��,.,'�;:� •r. � ,��,�;r�
beyond that which currently exists.
,,.}o, ., �;,�,r„? �' •
!� ,y In compliance with CEQA, the Commission
.:n„�.,�,•, ,,.,:,.,. .._:,,. ;;.�!., previously adopted a Negative Declaration with
"”" the Conditional Use Permit in 1986. No changes
' "'' ` " are proposed in the operation or use and no
-r significant cumulative changes have occurred in
I -'; :'_•`- "i ',i .:`'•`'%. a: the area, therefore, no further environmental
action is necessary and the proposal can be
considered categorically exempt.
r :;r NOTIFICATION: Public Notice of the FebruAry 21, 1989, hearing was
published in The Herald, mailed to adjacent property. owners, and posted
in public buildings.
ANALYSIS:
`•`' r`° '' Hobby Horse Learning Center is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit
to allow the continued operation of the existing childcare facility at the
Cronin Elementary School site. The City originally approved this use at this
site in 1986. No changes in the operation are proposed with the new requested
use permit.
The Applicant's use involves a childcare operation for up to a maximum of 80
children (60 children between the ages of 2 - 12 years, and up to 20 children
between the ages of 12 - 24 months). A total of ten instructors and one
administrator staff the facility. The use occupies Pod B at the Cronin Sc.,
(8200+ square feet of floor area) plus a fenced playyard in front of the Pod.
Typical hours of operation for the school are 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., with
occassional evening parent meetings. Parking as well as the drop off and pick
up of children attending the center will occur on-site. Minor site
modifications made in 1986 by the Applicant were: 1) installation of fencing
and gates to enclose the play area and 2) construction of an enclosure wail
for the atrium planting area.
The site contains a total of 33 parking spaces which are shared with the
Montessori School (located in Pod A). A total of 29 spaces are needed for the
Montessori and Hobby Horse schools (18 for Montessori, 11 for Hobby Horse)..
The parking lot area west of the Montessori School (Pod A) is used for the
• Valley Continuation School parking and contains 23 parking spaces.
I Staff has supported previous Conditional Use Permit applications for this t.-pe
of use as being an appropriate utilization of the school district property,
_ provided potential problems were minimized or eliminated altogether. In
general, the City has not received complaints regarding the operation of the
Hobby Horse Learning Center.
The Applicant has requested modification or elimination of three conditions of
the previous approval of Resolution 86-069 (see Attachment 5 and 6).
The Applicant believed a condition (#11 of Resolution 86-069) required an
enclosed garbage containment area. At the time it was imposed, the school had
ceased operation and the commercial type dumpster had been removed. Staff was
concerned that regular 'can"/bag type service would not be adequate for this
use and the condition imposed to secure a commercial type dumpster. Staff has
reviewed the Applicant's materials and has determined that the means of trash
t _ containment is sufficient and the Applicant has complied with this condition.
The location is within the newly created parking lot and the locked, covered
J bins are painted green and located close to the grass field area so they are
not visible from the public street.
Staff has reviewed the landscape planter condition (�15 of Resolution 86-0zQ,
Attachment 6): The planters are located withiii the fenced play ysrd and are
screened from the street by grass berms. The Staff feels that given the
location and use of the property, planting these would not contribute to
-3-
i� P ix ' •..�:,,! enhancement of the property appearance and would create maintenance problems,
` ,.,. :. ^',h;.c _5:;'rJi:i% ?;. ' ' ;.: ••:;i At times however, poor conditions of landscape maintenance and litter control
�rl✓t rr-" f �, ,���i, have occured. Staff is therefore recommending that the Applicant and/or
{ f, r4w urr 11,yrJf�, School District develop a maintenance plan to ensure healthy landscaping, and
that litter is contained. Given the existing site conditions, it is
sr:f;-•�tr, ':� ycy�:yj-;h';,;,.. ,....,� - +.,�'•(=�r• recommended that the Applicant and School District work with Staff to improve
J /J •�i,�1�f , ti.y � :. the sites deteriorating landscape areas
(at a minimum, include weed removal
"' `Gry:.�:..:=' ,.,�y,..,',• •' '•'° � and remove and replace dead plants and add supplemental plant materials)
The Applicant is also requesting that the existing 2' 6" x 3' 6" wall sign be
allowed to remain. The Applicant believed this sign size was acceptable, as
it was similar to one at Montessori School. Staff believes there has been
_� ,.t.> •,;::,:;:�?•;ci.:�=.':"::�'�'r :-,,;: some miscommunication as the sign at Montessori referred to by the Applicant
was illegal and was removed. The correct size allowed for signage in this
residential district is a 2 square foot wall-mounted name identification.
Montessori has this type of sign and Staff has again included a condition
requiring the existing sign be brought into conformance.
._J..A7 .
The Dublin Police Department has verified with Staff that the Child Abuse
Awareness Program has.been presented, for the 1988 year. The condition
_ �".,,_-,.,;;•...,,,�,,,;.>:_�.,_;,-.., requires this program to be performed annually, therefore the Applicant will
need to coordinate with the Dublin Police Services for future resentations as
t'-l�.' `�':,� -�•��"~-�•"�= - �-:1 required. P
Staff is recommending that the use permit be approved with a three-year time
r.•:-'.;' ?_: limit and up to a two-year extension by the Planning Director provided all
conditions are being met and the appropriate findings can still be made. The
i:: °•- "'- !.:; proposed continued operation of the school has been reviewed by other agencies
and conditions of approval have been included in the draft resolution.
RECOMMENDATION:
FORMAT: 1) Open public hearing and hear Staff presentation.
2) Take testimony from Applicant and the public.
3) Question Staff, Applicant and the puolic.
` 4) Close public hearing and deliberate..
! 5) Adopt Resolution regarding the Conditional Use Permit, or
j give Staff and Applicant direction and continue the matter.
ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the attached
Resolution (Exhibit A) approving Conditional Use Permit
i •'
• �.. - -- application PA 88-148
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A: Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit for PA 88-148
Background Attachments:
Attachment 1: Location Map
�. .
f�f Attachment 2: Site Plan
Attachment 3: Floor Plan
Attachment 4: Applicant's Information
Attachment 5: Applicant's Letter
i -, Attachment 6: Resolution 86-069
t . .
... -4-
;j
r 1.1. M1%v
'Ilk
L
04 F-I
JU it)
gel P-1
L
F 0
is F-I
-cc 0 0
III-fill)
I
U) 00
00
u
11 0
!:r"I•It%v
-If'IN
oIt
CH
14 111 /.U.
1 11,j111 �,\I",•• /: � 111_1C - �,�`\,� — -• 'F/• C
0
ficl-
CITY
<\
ZA \w
Old..
\:ill 4.1-
I),.]
Al'
V-112
111. fill. 17-11!1
P D
SHEETS
Ala -
SEE 51 ILLT 'Ic