HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.1 EDublinGPA&SP Draft
,,-
"
.
.
CITY OF DUBLIN
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY: COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
APRIL 27, 1993
City Council and Staff Recommended Changes to the
Draft Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment (GPA)
and Specific Plan (SP)
~AG Brenda A. Gillarde, Project coordinator
~ 1. Modified Land Use Concept for Eastern
Dublin
I 2. Resolution Referring Eastern Dublin
General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan
Back to Planning commission for
Consideration
Draft Eastern Dublin GPA, SP, EIR and related
documents (previously provided under separate
cover)------
SUBJECT:
REPORT PREPARED BY:
EXHIBITS ATTACHED:
rtl>
0/) 3.
v\?
RECOMMENDATION:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Ff
~,V
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
DESCRIPTION:
A. BACKGROUND
Open public hearing
Hear staff ~resentation
Receive add1tional public testimony
Question Staff and the public
Close public hearing
Discuss proposed changes to GPA and SP
and direct staff accordingly
Adopt resolution referring the GPA and
SP back to the Planning commission
continue item to May 10, 1993, to hold
separate public hearing on Planning
Commission recommendations on GPA and
SP, then consider actions on EIR, GPA,
SP and related items.
None
At the February 23, 1993 meeting, the city council directed staff to
proceed with the following changes to the Draft Eastern Dublin General
Plan Amendment (GPA) and Specific Plan (SP):
1. Revise the Eastern Dublin project to reflect the development
concept in Alternative 2 in the Eastern Dublin Draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR), dated AUgust 28, 1992, with
modifications.
6.1
1
CITY CLERK
FilE ~
,,1Jf!Ii
.
.
2. Designate the area outside the city's current Sphere of Influence
(SOI) as "Future study Area."
3. Modify certain specific Plan grading pOlicies as suggested by
Staff in the January 21, 1993 Staff Report.
4. Modify the specific Plan language requiring a grid-type street
pattern.
5. Modify the lane configuration of the Transit spine.
6. Modify the Specific Plan language regarding flexibility in the
design guidelines
7. Eliminate residential uses within the Airport protection Area.
8. Allow some General Commercial in certain areas designated Campus
office.
Staff has also included several additional issues for Council
consideration:
a. Addition of language to the Specific Plan regarding average
intersection level of service.
b. Clarification of the Specific Plan policy regarding school
availability.
c. Discussion of fiscal viability of the modified project.
d. Discussion of project phasing.
e. pre~aration of an Addendum to the EIR to determine potential
env1ronmental impacts of the above modifications and the need for
additional environmental documentation.
f. Identification of the necessary steps to process the revised GPA
and SP.
Staff has prepared the necessary analysis and documentation for the
Council to consider and make determinations on the above issues.
staff has also prepared a resolution for Council approval, referring
this item back to the Planning Commission. Each issue is discussed
below.
B. DISCUSSION
COUNCIL INITIATED CONSIDERATIONS
I. Revise Eastern Dublin project to reflect the Draft EIR
Alternative 2: and
2
,,'
.
.
2. Designate the area outside the city's current Sphere of Influence
as Future study Area.
Attachment 1 illustrates the revised Eastern Dublin GPA land use
map. The area beyond the city's current SOI will be designated
"Future study Zone." The underlying land use will be
Agricultural, one unit per 100 acres, which is consistent with
the County's current General Plan land use and zoning designation
for this area.
This modification to the Eastern Dublin project will result in
the following:
a. No development will be indicated for the 4.3 square mile
area between the city's current SOI and the eastern GPA
boundary. This area includes Doolan canyon. compared to
the "project" described in the Draft EIR, this modification
would eliminate potential for approximately 4,040 dwelling
units, 770,000 square feet of commercial use, 1,340 jobs,
housing for 6,550 workers, 2 school sites, and 5 park sites.
b. Doolan Canyon Road will not be extended northerly to
Tassajara Road.
c. A portion of the crosby property (14 acres) will be.
designated "Future study Area" since it lies outside the
city's current SOl. Formerly, this portion was designated
for residential and commercial uses.
d. The GPA text, maps and tables will be modified to reflect
the reduced development potential of the lands between the
SOI and the eastern project boundary.
e. Language will be added to the GPA text clarifying the intent
of the Future study Area.
f. Lan9Uage changes will be made to the Specific Plan, as
ind1cated in the paragraphs below.
3. Hodifv certain gradinq policies.
staff was requested to review some of the grading policies in the
Specific Plan and corresponding mitigation measures in the Draft
ErR to determine whether greater flexibility could be
incorporated without compromising the intent of the policies.
Additions to the policies and mitigation measures are shown in
underlininq: deleted text is shown by s~ri~ee~~~
POlicy 6-29. page 69: Mitiqation Measure 3.8/5.0. vaqe 3.8-7.
Development is not permitted on the main ridgeline that borders
the planning area to the north and east, but wi%% ~ be
permitted on the foreground hills and ridgelands. Minor
3
~/ftI\"
.
.
~nterIQ~tions of views a; ~; main ridqeline by individual
uild~n_ masses may be n~rm~~sible in limited circumstances where
all other remedies have been exhausted. i~-a-8aekare~-e~-fta~~rar
ria~erifte9-remaifts-visibre-wheft-viewe8-frem-8esiqna~ed-seeftie
re~~e9-afl8-ap~repria~e-mea9~re9-are ~axen-~e-miftimize-visaar
iml'fle-es,,;,
Policy 6-33. page 70. site grading and access roads shall
maintain the natural anpearance of ne~-8isfi~e the upper
ridgelands or foreground hills within the viewshed of travellers
along I-580, Tassajara Road, and the future extension of Fallon
Road. streets should be aligned to follow the natural contours
of the hillsides. straight, linear rows of streets across the
face of hillsides shall be avoided.
Policy 6-35. page 70: Mitigation Measure 3.8/4.2. page 3.8-6.
Extensive areas of flat pad grading are not appropriate in
hillside areas, and should be avoided. Building pads should be
graded individually or stepped, wherever possible. structures
and roadways should be designed in response to the top~aphical
and geotechnical conditions. ~ft-hiiisi8e-areas-ift-par~~eara~T
~ean8a~ien9-6esi~e8-fer-siepift~-si~es-sheti~d-be-tise8-ra~er-~afl
reeen~earin~-~e-si~e-~-aeeemmeda-ee-f~a~-iaft8-eefts~e~iefl
~eeftni~e9.
Policy 6-36, page 70: Mitigation Measure 3.8/4.3. Da~e 3.8-6.
Building design shall conform to the natural land form as much as
possible. Techniques such as multi-level foundations, rooflines
which complement the surrounding slopes and topography, and
variations in vertical massing to avoid a monotonous or linear
appearance sharr should be used. In areas of steep topography,
structures should be sited near the street to minimize required
grading.
Second Guideline under Form. paqe 99. eeneen~ra-ee-deveiepmel'\~-en
~e-fieer-al'\8-sides-ef-Varreys-ra~her-~ftaft-eft-ri~erines-and
ftoges-of-hiiis,,;,
First Guideline under Building siting. page 99. Cluster
development baiidin~s to reduce necessary grading and preserve
open space continuity (see Figure 7.30).
4. Modify the language requiring a grid-tvne street pattern.
The Council determined that greater flexibility was desired for
the type of street system that would serve the Specific Plan
area. The original Specific Plan recommended a grid-type street
system to facilitate pedestrian accessibility while accommodating
ample auto circulation.
Per council direction, the Draft specific Plan text will be
revised to delete all recommendations for a grid-type street
4
.
.
pattern. In its place will be language that allows various types
of street systems, including curvilinear designs, as long as
pedestrian accessibility is maintained.
Detailed text changes to the Specific Plan are as follows:
Page 18. second column. third naragranh. third sentence: ...In
the commercial area, the goal is to establish the character of a
traditional town center, with a walkable ~~~d system of streets
well-defined by buildings and a lively, interesting shopping
street catering to pedestrians and transit users.
Page 79, second colu~n. too of paae: ...on establishing the
character of a traditional town center, with a walkable ~~~e
system of streets well-defined by buildings and a lively,
interesting shopping street catering to pedestrian and transit
users.
Page 79. Form, first bullet: A?~an~e-5~ree~8-ift-8-~rie-~a~~erfl7
re~m~ft~-5m8~i-bieeks-fte-mere-~8ft-5ee-~eee-ift-efte-ieft~e8~
d~meftsreft~--~ft-~he-eemmHft~~y-eemmerei8i-8rea-8%eft~-~8B58jara
Read7-bieekB-may-be-eem5~fted-~e-~erm-iar~er-si~es-~er-eemm~iey
8fte~~~ft~-eeft~er-aeveiepmeft~~ Develop a street system in the Town
center commercial area that provides at least one Darallel street
on either side of the Transit Spine.
Page 79. Form. add a second bullet: In order to Dreserve the
pedestrian scale in the commercial area. cross streets to the
Transit Spine should be spaced no Dore than 500 feet apart.
Figure 7.1. Town Center Concent Plan: A note will be placed on
the figure stating the fallowing:
Note: This figure illustrates one possible interpretation
of the development pattern that could result from
implementation of the Specific Plan community desion
guidelines. The Concept Plan in this figure is illustrative
only and is not intended to restrict. in any way.
development patterns that are consistent with the objectives
of this Specific Plan. .
Paae 88. Form: ~fte-~radi~ieft8i-ei~y-~r~-ha5-~ie~ibiii~y-~e
aeeemme6a~e-a-wide-raft~e-e~-~~e8-8fta-aeft5i~ie8-e~-resiaeft~ial
deve~e~meft~7-wi~ift-aft-eas~~y-Hftaer5~eea-8ftd-aeees5~B~e-framework
er-~fiblie-s~ree~s7
A?~aft~e-s~ee~5-ift-a-grid-~a~~ern-~ermift~-rei8~iveiy-sma~~7
wa~kaBie-bieeks-fte-mere-~8ft-5ee-iee~-ift-~he-ieft~ee~-aimeftSieft7-
a~~he~~b-seme-gria-5~ree~8-may-be-eiesed-a~-~e-ed~e8-ef-~e
~e9iaeft~~a~-area-~e-re8~ee-ftei~hherheed-~eti~h-~~arrie7-~e
~a~~e~ft-e~-geYeie~meft~-sfte~~d-eeft~ifttie-~o-~eiiew-the-everaii-~rid
~a~~e~ft~-
5
.
.
The traditional grid of city streets has the flexibility to
accommodate a wide range of types and densities of residential
development, with an easily understood and accessible framework
of public streets. However. a vrid system of streets is not the
only acce~table means of provid1ng an efficient and Dedestrian-
friendly circulation system.
Provide a highly interconnected pattern of streets that
accommodates the movement of vehicles while enhancing
opportunities for pedestrian and bicycle circulation. Avoid the
creation of excessively long blocks (scaled to motor vehicles
rather than pedestrians) or numerous culs-de-sac and dead-end
streets.
Page 89, Auto Circulation introductory sentence: The ~~a street
system can accommodate large volumes of traffic generated by
higher density aense development, b~~-di5~er5e5 by dispersing it
among many iew lower-volume streets throughout the development.
Page 89. Pedestrian/bicycle circulation, introductory sentence:
The sidewalks along the ~~d-e~ neighborhood streets should
provide an active, friendly pedestrian environment connecting
residences to neighborhood parks, squares and the larger open
space system. .
5. Modify the Transit Spine.
The Transit S~ine will be shown as a four lane road, versus the
two lane conf1guration in the Draft specific Plan. The following
text change will be inserted (page 50, section 5.2.4, third
sentence): It will provide ene-or two through lanes in each
direction. Figure 5.1 (page 57) and Figure 7.44 (page 110) will
be modified to reflect four lanes on the spine.
6. Modify the Specific Plan lanauage regarding flexibility in the
design guidelines.
The fOllowing paragraph will be inserted at the end of the
introductory paragraph on page 79 of the Draft Specific Plan:
With two exce9tions, the guidelines in this cha9ter are advisory
in nature and the city may find that an equivalent or superior
method is available to achieve the objectives of the Specific
Plan. The auidelines are intended to be used bv developers and
planninq staff. in conjunction with the city's zoning Ordinance.
to formulate and approve ~lans that meet the obiectives for
quality development envis10ned by this specific Plan. Those
~~~6lines relatina to building height (page 80) and street
___~_vements (Dages 105-117) are regulatory in nature and will be
required as set forth in this element.
7. Eliminate residential uses within the Livermore Airport
6
.
.
Protection Area CAPA).
The Draft General Plan Amendment and specific Plan allowed some
residential uses with the APA. The revised Plan will show these
areas as "Future study Area." The underlying land use will be
"Agricultural" which is consistent with the current Alameda
County General Plan. This modification will eliminate potential
for 625 units (183 low density, single family units and 442
medium density multi-family units) and housing for 1,013 workers
on 90 acres of land.
8. AllOw some General Commercial in certain areas designated Campus
Office.
The Draft General Plan Amendment and specific Plan designated
approximately 83 acres of campus Office along I-580, south of
Dublin Boulevard between Tassajara and Fallon Roads. with the
mix of land uses shown in the Draft General Plan Amendment and
Specific Plan, the Dublin Boulevard/Tassajara Road and the Dublin
Boulevard/Fallon Road intersections potentially reach Level of
Service D during the afternoon peak hour. Retail uses can
generate up to twice as much afternoon peak hour traffic as
compared to office uses. Any additional retail uses within the
area designated for campus Office will need to be carefully
planned in order to maintain Level of service D at the . .
surrounding intersections.
The select area designated Campus Office will be modified to
allow consideration of some General Commercial land uses instead
of Campus Office, with the stipulation that traffic levels of
service established in the specific Plan will be maintained.
A Planned Development zoning process will be required to
determine the amount, location and development standards for
General commercial uses that replace the Campus Office uses
designated on the Specific Plan land use map. The following
changes will be made to the specific Plan to accommodate General
commercial uses instead of Campus Offige:
a. A note will be added to the Specific Plan Land Use Map
indicating the possibility for General Commercial uses in
the select campus Office area. (A similar note will be
added to the GPA land use map.)
b. Text will be added to the Specific Plan to:
1) indicate that this shift to allow either campus Office
or General commercial will create greater flexibility to
respond to changing market conditions that may occur in the
future; and
7
.
.
2) state that no uses will be permitted to occur if
the established traffic levels of service would be
exceeded.
STAFF INITIATED CONSIDERATIONS
a. Addition of lanQUage to the snecific Plan regarding average
intersection level of service.
staff has identified the need to clarify the term "average
intersection level of service" within pOlicy 5-3 (page 50) of the
specific Plan. The specific Plan was designed to accommodate
average intersection levels of service standards on an hourly
basis using reasonable land use forecasts for approximately 20
years into the future. The underlined sentence will be added to
Policy 5-3 of the specific Plan:
Plan development in eastern Dublin to maintain Level of Service D
or better as the average intersection level of service at all
intersections within the Specific Plan area during AM, PM and
midday peak periods. The averaae intersection level of service
is defined as the hourly average using reasonable pro;ections for
a year 2010 time frame.
b. Clarification of the pOlicy regardina school availability (Policy
8-3, page 119).
The city Attorney recommends rev1s1ng the Specific Plan policy
relating to school availability, based on recent amendments to
the law:
"Ensure that adequate school facilities are available prior to
development in eastern Dublin to the extent pernlitted bv law."
c. Discussion of the fiscal viability of the modified pro;ect.
Concerns were expressed in past public hearings about the fiscal
viability of the Draft specific Plan. The specific Plan was
designed to be a self-sufficient development. Some of the
capital costs will be financed by existing and future impact
fees: other funds may come from developers using such mechanisms
as Mello-Roos bonds, Marks-Roos bond pooling and special
assessment districts.
Chapter 10 of the Specific Plan contains policies to ensure a
fiscally sound project. policies require that new development
pay the cost of infrastructure, encourage pay-as-you-go
financing, and establish thresholds for the issuance of bonds by
the city.
The Draft EIR, page 3.12-2, evaluated the potential fiscal impact
of the project and found that the project-generated revenues will
8
.
.
more than cover project-generated costs. The Draft ErR also
evaluated Alternative 2 without modifications and found that it
would generate a net fiscal surplus in the long term (page 4-14).
It is expected that Alternative 2 with modifications will result
in the same net fiscal benefit given that the two are virtually
the same, with the exception of residential development in the
Livermore APA. Under the modified specific Plan, 625 units would
be eliminated. This loss is not anticipated to have a negative
fiscal impact, since residential development, especially multi-
family, generally does not generate surplus revenues.
d. Discussion of project phasing.
Considerable discussion re9arding project phasing occurred
throughout the public hear1ngs on the proposed project. To
demonstrate how the pro~sed Specific Plan addresses project
phasing, Staff has comp11ed a list of Specific Plan policies and
programs that relate, either directly or indirectly, to project
phasing.
Pro<rram 4-E, page 27: Requires the use of development agreements
for proper phasing of infrastructure and other project amenities.
POlicy 4-26. page 30: Requires maintenance of sufficient land
for achieving a reasonable jobsjhousing balance. .
Policy 4-28, page 32: Requires park development to be consistent
with the standards contained in the city's Draft Park Master
Plan.
Program 4-M, page 32: Requires a Parks Implementation Plan for
eastern Dublin that identifies priorities for park phasing, land
dedication and facilities.
Policy 8-2. paae 119: Promotes a consolidated development
pattern to facilitate provision of schools and adequate classroom
space.
Policy 8-3. paae 119: Requires adequate school facilities prior
to development taking place, to the extent provided by law.
Program 8-0. cage 120: Requires proper phasing of development to
ensure timely expansion of police service to the area.
POlicy 8-5. page 121: Requires coordination of development with
construction of fire protection facilities.
Program 8-I. page 122: Requires a funding mechanism for open
space maintenance be in place prior to project approval.
Policy 8-9. page 123: Requires coordination of development with
utility service providers.
9
.
.
POlicy 9-2. pa~e 126 and POlicy 9-4, paqe 127: Requires
coordination wlth DSRSD to ensure adequate facilit1es to the
development area.
Policy 9-6. page 128: Requires availability of waste water
treatment/disposal facilities for development in eastern Dublin.
Policy 10-4. 10-5. and 10-6, page 147: Requires availability of
funding for infrastructure to serve future development.
Policy 10-9 and 10-10. ~age 147: Establishes thresholds for the
issuance of bonds.
e. Preparation of an Addendum to the EIR to determine potential
environmental impacts of Alternative 2. with modifications.
staff has determined that an addendum to the
General Plan Amendment and specific Plan EIR
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
needed because:
Eastern Dublin
is required by the
The addendum is
1) None of the conditions requiring a subsequent or
supplemental EIR have occurred:
a) Subsequent changes in the project do not involve any
new significant environmental impacts not previously
considered in the EIR;
b) Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to
the circumstances under which the project is undertaken
which will involve new significant environmental
impacts not previously covered in the ErR;
2) Only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to
make the EIR adequate; and
3) Changes to the EIR made by the addendum do not raise
important new issues about the significant effects on the
environment.
staff will prepare the addendum for the city Council's review.
The city Council will need to consider the addendum with the
final EIR, prior to making a decision on the project.
f. Determination of the necessary steps to nrocess the revised GPA
and Specific Plan.
Some of the changes to the GPA and Specific Plan were not
previously considered by the Planning commission. It is
therefore recommended that the revised project be returned to the
planning Commission for its recommendation, as required by state
law. The following tentative schedule has been established to
10
~~~H
. '
.
.
accomplish this in the shortest amount of time:
May 10
Planning commission public hearing on the revised GPA
and Specific Plan
city council pUblic hearing on the planning
commission's recommendations on the GPA and SP. city
Council certification of the Final EIR and adoption of
the revised GPA and specific Plan (Alternative 2, with
modifications) and other related items.
May 3
3. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Compared to the project described in the Draft EIR, Alternative 2 with
modifications would eliminate potential for approximately 4,660
dwelling units, 770,000 square feet of commercial use, 1,340 jObs,
housing for 7,560 workers, 2 school sites, and 5 park sites.
Staff recommends the city council take the following actions:
1. Conduct and then close the public hearing.
2. Discuss proposed changes to GPA and SP and direct staff
accordingly.
3. Adopt resolution referring the GPA and SP back to the planning
Commission (see Attachment 2).
4. continue item to May 10, 1993, to hold a separate public hearing
on the GPA and SP. Thereafter, consider actions on the EIR, GPA,
SP and other related items.
11
*
* *
0 (j)
CD CD
!!!. ::s
lQ CD
..,
::s e
JIll
....
CD 0
0- 0
i1 3
e 3
.... CD
c: ..,
.., 0
CD
CJ) e..
.... 3
c:
0- l>>
'< '<
> cr
.., CD
CD 1:'
lit CD
....... ..,
3
> ....
lQ .....
:!. CD
(') 0-
c:
;:; er-
e '<
.., l>>
!!.
-c
l>>
::s
::s
CD
'c-
O
CD
<
CD
0
1:'
3
CD
::s
.....
N
0
::s
::s
cc
1:'
..,
0
(')
CD
III
III
~
~
=
~
:z:
.....
--
.
-- C
:::a
)>
."
-I
.
-
\
\
\'6
\ ({I
'.\;\
'\~
.W)
,~
.\.,..
\'6.
\
\
\
\
\
"
\
,
\
r--..---....~..--.....-_-...............__.......l
"
C
~
c
::c
m
.~.J
CJ I\:l
~ ~
~. ~
a :t>
~ ~
)>en
G)
::c
-
()
C
r
'-i
C
::c
)>
r
en
~
C
C
-<
)>
::c
m
)>
--
I'
I
~
,t., ~-""""""tl
"
.
\ I
.....A\ :
I . __' ....--..1
I , ...... II
I :1. r- L,u .... I
I .--....... . ~ .. ---. ---. -J ~1IIo1IiI~__-......-....____-"""'"
\
\
\
I
.
~ G) m I . I ~rn1~~ 0 ~~ ~BB~~~ DI~~o r-' :E ::D )>
. .
t . I g. " j~.~ .':",.... ',' ;,;; 0 (I)
:>- )> . . "',', OJ CD
t ! iii" ""tJ )~; c :,: m~ ~ (Q .., ,-
I I ....
n ' 0 m (I) :I: C. CD
CD :I=- en )> ....... Z m ::J
:c en G>CIl~ 0 )> -l 0 ~(i)(g)@ey (ID@@(ID& en :u r s: s: J: --l 0 JJ ~ 3: C ...
-t <5 m "'l" Z G> 0
0 '0 (1)Op> 0 "" '0 s: C 0 l\l (1) 15' }:: a. ll> l\l l\l 0 :J
(; . l\l 10 "" ~ }:: 0
c- o :J~i ro z (1) 10 " 5' .,... !!'. a. a. =r r c 3 .0' :J m
CD m ~ l\l <D . 0 ::J. :J :r Z 0 0 '" Jl,E L m "U c' e' !.'l '0 :r (1) r 0 CD
iil~~ !!'. c:r 0 0 ...
;:+ (J) o' Q en ro o -. I/O c ro ....... c :u 3 ~ ;:" C c:r !!'. C. ....
Q us' 3 .:;: ::> en (1) ro p> '"
In sa '0 g ~ 3 OJ ro ;:) - 0 i1 -.
:c "U J20 . ll> 563"'0 JJ 0 o' (1) II> '" 0 J: ;:) g ... 0, <
llO ill ll>- sa m ro en ... l\l 3 r is: (1) .0' ~. "'0 :r
""tJ 0 005 ~ ....... o I 2- 0 =' ::> -< p> 0 0 0 "'C
;:) ;:1- m 0 en =ti ro '< :::r
0 c} Z :;l !1? ro ~. ~ 0 3 > CD
;t>= 0.3-...;0:- m ro :r -. ll> ....... ;:) o'
en !!!. ~. o 10 "" C 0 -< 0 (1) a. 3 -
E' 3a; en 0 '< '" o :r '< c:r !il .., D)
C- . D 0 g. -u fi' "U ro 0 l\l I\)
C- o. (1)::> "'0 - en en m ;:) 0
C '< :JO C a. '" ;:) c 0 0 II> 0 0 :J
m o.ro p> ... cr :r ::T 'n Z .... 3 !il Z '.
;t> 3 co "U " 0' 0 8- ll> '< ~ :J
.... '" Q, ell
~ - c: l\l ro ;(- !i!. -.
'TI III a ~.
cQ' :JJ OJ en ![ ::J
II: E' ..... ~ <p l\) (Q
iil r- a. ~ .t:' ({'
'<
~ ./>. l\) ~ )>
;t> ()1
5 - 'm 0 ~ ~
~ Z 0 '" ""'I
f III 0 0 CD
~ III
... 0 0 m
~ I
~ ~
~......."'~;.~,.~?~.<.. ~"~':~~''','~:T?':7 :~.~ :~~..:'~"'~;"""~'-;-._""~';l'":-:~"'-"""- . -~'~""7'C ~ ,,":,.~':"'~~~ ,,~,,:".,..c~,_....,,~ .:__~~":,,,,-,-,,:,,:,.:---~-~,..~-..,.., _.- "".~'- ..... - "'.'T' _'.'._'M___:._,_ --< -.- -:;;;-- ~""n_ u -'. -~ -- ~- '.- ,,-, -~.....,...
, ,
f ':i .'.~.... .
, ,
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. ____-93
A RESOLUTION REFERRING EASTERN DUBLIN GENERAL
PLA5 ~ENDMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN BACK ~O
PLANNING COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION
Reed tala
1. The city Council has received a recommendation, pursuant
to Government Code section 65354, from the Planning Commission to
adopt the Eastern Dublin Draft General Plan Amendment and specific
Plan, as the "project" described in the Draft Environmental Impact
Report (Parts I and 11) dated August 28, 1992 (SCH No. 91103064)
("Draft EIR") with certain Revisions dated December 21, 1992.
2. The city Council held a public hearing on the Eastern
Dublin Draft General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan, as required
by Government Code section 65355.
3. The city council proposes to disapprove of the
recommendation of the Planning commission and, instead, adopt
Alternative 2: Reduced Planning Area (IlAlternative 2") as described
in the Draft EIR, with the modifications to Alternative 2 described
in the staft report for the April 27, 1993 Council meeting.
4. prior to making any substantial modifications which were
not previously considered by the Planning Commission during its
hearings, the Council is required by Government Code section 65356
to refer the matter to the planning commission for its
recommendation.
5. This resolution does not adopt Alternative 2 with
modifications., The purpose of this resolution is to comply with
Government Code section 65356 by referring the modifications to
Alternative 2 under consideration by the City council back to the
Planning Commission for its recommendation. The City Co~ncil has
determined that the Planning Commission previously considered
Alternative 2 at its hearings and it is, therefore, not necessary
for the Planning Commission to consider Alternative 2.
NOW, THEREPORS, aE IT RESOLVED THAT
A. The Planning Commission is directed to hold a public
hearing on May 3, 1993, to consider the following modifications to
Alternative 2, all as more fully set forth in the staff report for
the April 27, 1993 City council meeting:
1~ Designation of the area outside the city's current
sphere of influence as t1future study area."
2. Modification of certain specific Plan grading
policies.
A nACHMENT z..
. .
.
.
'..
3. Modification of Specific plan language regarding a
grid-type street pattern.
4. Modification of lane configuration of the Transit
Spine from two lanes to four lanes.
5. Modification of Specif io Plan language regarding
flexibility in design guidelines.
6. Elimination of residential land uses wi thin the
Airport Protection Area.
7. Modification of Specific Plan to allow General
commercial uses in certain areas designated as Campus Office.
S. Addition of language to Specific Plan regarding
average intersection level of service.
9. Modification of specific plan policy regarding
school avai~ability.
B. The Planning commission is directed to report to the city
Council on or before May 10, 1993, regarding its recommendation,
if any, with respect to the modifications described in paragraph
A. Failure of the Planning Commission to report to the Council by
May 10, 1993, shall be deemed a recommendation for approval of
Alternative 2 with the modifications described in paragraph A
above.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 27th day of April, 1993,
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
JI\WPD\MNRS\114\RESOL\29\REFER.BCK
,- ,