HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.1 HansenRnchRezn
.
.
..
CITY OF DUBLlN
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 22, 1995
SUBJECT:
PUBLIC HEARING: P A 95-007 Hansen Ranch General Plan
Amendment, Planned Development Rezoning, and Tentative Map
Amendment
REPORT PREPARED BY:
Tasha Huston, Associate Planner jf,1J-
EXHIBITS ATTACHED:
Exhibit A:
Resolution Adopting Findings Pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act, Certifying a
Final EIR, and Adopting a Statement of Overriding
Considerations
Resolution Approving General Plan Amendment
Resolution Approving Planned Development
Rezoning
Resolution Approving Tentative Map Amendment
Dr~ Ordinance Amending the Dublin Zoning
Ordinance
Exhibit B:
Exhibit C:
Exhibit D:
Exhibit E:
BACKGROUND ATT ACHi\tffiNTS
1: Staff Study showing general location of relocated homesites
and possible General Plan Land Use Designations (exact lot
configuration on General Plan Map does not apply)
2. Proposed project Plans:
A. Reduced copies of proposed Tentative Map Amendment
and Limits of Grading Exhibit showing 10-lot alternative
B. Full-size versions of proposed Tentative Map Amendment
and Limits of Grading Exhibit
3 : General Plan Map depicting project site and area of proposed
land use change
4: Approved 1989 Tentative Map
5: APPlicht' s most recent written statement
RECOMMENDATION: rJAK'
.h- t'u 1.) Open blie Hearing and hear Staff presentation.
'1" 2) Take estimony from Applicant and the public.
3) Question Staff, Applicant and the public.
4) Close public hearing and deliberate.
Cfi/ 5) Adopt Draft Resolutions (Exhibits A, B, C, and D) and waive
reading and introduce the Zoning Ordinance for the Hansen
Ranch PD District Rezoning, relating to PA 95-007, or
provide direction and continue the matter to another specific
City Council meeting.
FINANCIAL STATENfENT: None
~;6.T----
COPIES TO:
Associate Planner
PA File 95-007
Applicant
CITY". CLERK
FILE ~
.
.
BACKGROUND
Development applications for the Hansen Hill Ranch project were first approved in February of 1989
with the City Council approval of a General Plan Amendment, along with new General Plan policies, and
Environmental Impact Report for the Hansen Hill Ranch site. The land use designations approved for the
site included:
Low Density Single Family Residential (0.5 - 3.8 units per acre) - 57.2 acres
[providing for 28 to 217 dwelling units]
Open Space/Stream Corridor - 89.8 acres
Additional project approvals occurred in November, 1989 with the Prezoning of the site to a Planned
Development District, and Tentative Map for 180 single family lots. Annexation of the property into the
City of Dublin was certified in May, 1991, and the Dublin City Council adopted the Hansen Ranch
Development Agreement Ordinance in February, 1992.
After the initial tentative map approval was granted, the applicants decided to process the subdivision in
two phases. Phase 1 of the subdivision involves 72 lots, and Phase 2 involves 108 lots. The City
Council approved amendments to Phase I of the Hansen Ranch Tentative Map in February and March of
1995.
On February 14, 1995, Martha Buxton, representing California Pacific Homes, submitted an application
for a General Plan Amendment, Planned Development Rezoning, and Tentative Map Amendment for
revisions to Phase II of the approved Hansen Ranch subdivision (P A 95-007). The request involved
approximately 2.4 acres of land (overall) redesignated from open space to residential land use, with 16
homesites relocated into an oak/bay woodland area, on the 147+ acre Hansen Hill Ranch project site.
This amendment proposal for 16 lots was reviewed by the Planning Commission at a noticed Study
Session on April 17, and a Public Hearing on May 1, 1995. After the close of the May 1 hearing, the
Planning Commission adopted resolutions recommending the City Council deny P A 95-007, General
Plan Amendment, PD Rezoning; and Tentative Map Amendment
At the May 8, 1995 City Council meeting, Councilmembers considered the original proposal for 16 lots
in the previously designated open space area. The Council provided the direction that a relocation of 16
lots into this environmentally sensitive area was not appropriate. At the City Council meeting, the
applicant showed the Councilmembers a new proposal for 10 lots to be relocated into the open space
area. Several issues were raised regarding the proposal, including the following questions:
1. What are the significant impacts to the environment, especially upon the riparian corridor area
including loss of oak woodland, riparian vegetation, wildlife movement.
2. Can the road extension intended to serve the adjacent property to the north be located
anywhere else, and will it extend to the project property line.
3. Are the amendments consistent with the City's General Plan policies;
The Council continued the Public Hearing on this item to the meeting of May 22, 1995, in order to
provide staff the opportunity to evaluate the new 10-10t proposal and report back to the Council. The
City Council also directed staff to concentrate on the proposal's impacts to the riparian corridor.
The current project description analyzed in this Staff Report is a request for a General Plan Amendment,
Planned Development Rezoning, and Tentative Map Amendment for revisions to Phase II of the
approved Hansen Ranch subdivision. Th~ project would involve approximately 2.4 acres of land
(overall) redesignated from open space to residential land use, with 10 homesites relocated into an
oak/bay woodland area, on the 147+ acre Hansen Hill Ranch project site.
2
.
.
ANAL YSIS SUMMARY
Staff has analyzed the proposed project in terms of its relation to the City of Dublin General Plan,
as well as the significant environmental impacts which could result. Overall, it appears that the
proposed project would result in at least 2.5 more acres of tree loss throughout phase n than that
approved under the 1989 plan. In the homesite relocation area, which is located at the riparian
corridor, the development of 10 homesites in the open space area results in .33 acres more grading
and loss of oak woodland in that area than under the approved plan. Additionally, the area
covered by the 10 homesites would result in a net loss of approximately 1.5 acres of area which
would previously have been replanted with riparian revegetation. The proposed project will
include revegetation and enhancement of the swale through the riparian corridor area in order to
mitigate riparian habitat loss. The ten lots are sited to preserve a 200-foot wide corridor close to
where the natural corridor occurred, and the proposed gaps in homesites near the riparian
corridor appear adequate to allow wildlife passage. The loss of oak woodlands due to grading for
lots 1 through 6 on Inspiration Drive exceeds that approved under the 1989 plan by 1.37 acres.
Further explanations of these facts are contained in the analysis below.
ANAL YSIS
The proposed General Plan Amendment, Planned Development Rezone, and Tentative Map Amendment
would redesignate 2.4 acres (overall) from Open Space/Stream Corridor to Residential land uses, with 10
homesites relocated to an area previously designated for open space. The portion of the site in question is
an area in Phase II of the project, along the northern project boundary, near the Martin Canyon Creek (the
area higWighted in Attachment 1).
Staff s analysis will include a brief assessment of the project in terms of the issues raised at the May 8,
1995 City Council meeting, as mentioned above. However, as directed by the Council, the focus will be
the project's impacts to the riparian corridor.
1. Significant Environmental Impacts
Under the plan approved in 1989, significant impacts to the oak woodlands and riparian vegetation would
be minimized through implementation of the EIR mitigation measures. The primary mitigation measure
was elimination of residential development along the loop road. Another mitigation measure required
minimal grading for the road. Another required that the slopes graded for the road be revegetated with
native plants after construction. With the approved plan, the trees replanted on graded slopes would
eventually mature to replace most of the oak woodland area destroyed by the roadway grading.
Under the proposed plan, 1.5 acres of the open space area would not be replanted -- there would be 10
lots instead of native plants. The grading and woodland removal required for the ten-lot alternative
involves .33 acres more in the area of the riparian corridor than that approved under the 1989 plan.
Although the proposed 10 lots have been sited to avoid portions of the natural riparian corridor
alignment, and the remaining slopes would be replanted, the existence of 10 lots in this area would result
in a greater loss of vegetative cover and open space in the long run than with the approved plan.
The loss of riparian corridors for animal travel between habitats under the proposed 10-10t alternative
would be more significant than the losses under the project approved in the 1989 approved plan. With
only a road traversing the open space area, wildlife could cross the road and still travel between habitat
areas through an approximately 900 foot wide opening.
3
.
.
Under the proposed plan, the relocation of 10 homesites narrows the opening to 200 feet wide, and
increases the existence of structural barriers in the open space area. However, the lots have been sited to
maintain the open area in the general vicinity of the natural riparian corridor. While comments on the
recently revised lO-lot alternative have not been received from the Department ofFish and Game, it
appears that this open area, in combination with two other gaps in development nearby, would be
sufficient for passage of wildlife between major open space areas. It is expected that a letter of comment
from Fish & Game regarding the proposed lO-lot alternative should be received by the date of the City
Council meeting on May 22nd.
In addition to the revegetation of graded slopes, the applicant has indicated a willingness to provide
habitat and vegetation enhancements in the riparian corridor area, in an attempt to recreate a habitat more
similar to the natural setting than what would exist based upon the approved 1989 plan. Staffhas
discussed this issue with Malcolm Sproul, ofLSA Associates, who offered examples of enhancements to
the revegetation plan, including: irrigating the young plants, placing top soil on fill slopes, using special
planting techniques such as drilling into fill slopes to allow root penetration, and planting at a density
similar to the native woodlands in the riparian corridors. The applicant has provided a statement
indicating the measures to be taken to provide this enhanced riparian habitat, which is included as
attachment 5.
In the applicant's written statement dated May 5, 1995, it was stated that the proposed 10-10t plan would
allow the reconstruction of the seasonal stream channel in the Riparian Corridor. However, in
subsequent discussions with the applicant and her engineer, it was determined that the stream channel
cannot be reconstructed to reflect it's natural flow. The only water flow which would occur above-
ground would be from rainfall within the swale north of the loop road, draining toward the creek. A
statement and diagram from Adams & Streeter, the applicant's engineer, which illustrates this situation is
included with the applicant's written statement under Attachment 5.
Finally, the proposal to revise the subdivision includes 6 redesigned lots along Inspiration Drive. The
siting of lots in this area would be modified from the plan approved in 1989 in that instead of four custom
lots with a reinforcing crib wall, the new plan would have 6 padded lots and no crib wall. The result of
these changes would require an additional 1.37 acres of oak/bay woodland to be removed beyond the
grading approved for the 1989 plan. Overall, the proposed amendment would result in at least 2.5 more
acres of woodland loss in Phase II than that approved under the 1989 plan.
2. Road Extension
The second major issue raised at the Council meeting was whether an alternate location could be found
for the road extension which is intended to serve the adjacent property to the north. The planning staff
discussed this issue with the City Engineer, the Applicant, and the Applicant's engineer. Because of the
significant site constraints north of the loop road, which include landslides and steep slopes, it appears
that an alternate location for the road extension in the nearby area is not feasible. A road extension in the
north west comer of the site, looping around lot 109, has been suggested. However, the construction of a
road through this area was not discussed under the project EIR, and could not be approved without a
complete environmental analysis. However, it is possible that a road extension in concept could be
considered, with the understanding that the environmental studies must be completed prior to its actual
approval and construction.
Additionally, concerns were raised by the Council with the cul-de-sac shown at at the end of this road. It
was suggested that the cul-de-sac should be constructed as a hammerhead or dead-end barricade to give
residents the clear impression that the road is intended to be extended in the future. The cul-de-sac has
been modified on the proposed plan to represent a hammerhead turnaround. While this design appears to
be acceptable for the service needs of the Public Works and Fire personnel, the exact design and
dimensions will need to be verified on the final improvement plans. Conditions of approval have been
incorporated to require that a statement declaring the intended road extension be included in the
subdivision C.C. & R.s as well as recorded with the title or deed for each lot.
4
.
.
3. General Plan Policies
The third major issue before the City is whether the change, from an Open Space designation to a
Residential designation, is appropriate, given other General Plan policies. A list of General Plan policies
which need to be considered when reviewing the history of the projects and the proposed amendments to
this project was included with the staff report from the May 8, 1995 City Council meeting.
The specific policies which relate to the proposal for a land use change include guiding policies 3.t.a,
7.1.a, 7.3.a., and 8.2.3. These policies relate to;
(a) preservation of Open Space and natural resources for public health and safety; (b) protection
of riparian vegetation as a protective buffer for stream quality and for its value as a habitat and
aesthetic resource;
( c) protection of oak woodlands; and
(c) preservation of woodlands and riparian vegetation to minimize runoff.
The new proposal for 10 lots near the riparian corridor and 6 lots along Inspiration Drive would require
the removal of a .3 3 acres of additional oak woodlands. When interpreted strictly, the above policies
would prohibit amending the General Plan to allow residential development in an oak woodland and
riparian habitat area, because it would be inconsistent with these policies without adequate mitigation
measures to address this significant impact.
Additionally, policies 7.7.e and 7.7.f, specifically relate to the project as it was approved in 1989. These
policies require that:
Access roads, including emergency access roads, arterial streets, and collector streets that
must pass through open space areas shall be designed to minimize grading to the
maximum extent possible so as not to damage the ecological and/or aesthetic value and
characteristics of the open space area
Prohibit development within designated open space areas except that designed to enhance
public safety and the environmental setting
These policies were originally developed in response to the Hansen Ranch development approved in
1989. When this policy was adopted, under the General Plan Amendment which approved the project's
land uses, it was intended to accommodate the approval of ~ the road through this area of the project
site, not residential lots. The Council can determine that the construction of 10 homesites in this area is
consistent with the intent of these policies, because the residential lots have been sited to avoid the
riparian corridor as much as possible, while still providing the road extension intended to provide future
access to the Nielsen property.
e.
f.
Staffs evaluation of the proposed 10-10t relocation has determined that while the amendment proposal is
not 100% in compliance with the strict interpretation of the above policies, the project as a whole will
preserve the majority of oak woodlands and riparian vegetation on site. The area of the most significant
riparian habitat would have been graded in any event in order to construct a loop road as approved in the
1989 plan.
In summary, the proposed location of 10 homesites in the open space area results in more loss of oak
woodland within the riparian corridor than under the approved plan. The plan could include revegetation
and enhancement of the riparian corridor area in order to replace an area of enhanced riparian habitat.
The proposed gaps in homesites near the riparian corridor appear adequate to allow wildlife passage. The
loss of oak woodlands due to grading for lots 1 through 6 on Inspiration Drive exceeds that approved
under the 1989 plan.
5
e
.
Based upon these factors and conditions, staff recommends that the City Council determine whether the
tradeoff of maintaining a 200 foot-wide corridor with enhanced riparian-type habitat outweighs the loss
of additional oak woodlands.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
In compliance with CEQA and the Dublin Environmental Guidelines, the staff prepared an Initial Study
for the proposed project. Based upon this Initial Study, it was determined that the EIR certified by the
Dublin City Council on February 27, 1989 for a previous project (pA 87-045 Hansen Hill General Plan
Amendment) could be used as the EIR for this project. This previous EIR (dated December 1987; SCH
No. 87050527), including the revised project description addendum (dated May 1988), Statement of
Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program encompass the subject site and
adequately describe 1) the environmental setting, 2) the significant environmental impacts and, 3) the
alternatives and mitigation related to the significant effects of the development on this project site.
As required by CEQA, a 30-day noticed public review period was provided for this project between
March 17, 1995 and April 15, 1995. Several letters of comment were received, some concerning the use
of the previous EIR. A summary of the pertinent comments received appeared in the Staff Report for the
May 8, 1995 City Council meeting.
A Draft Resolution incorporating a revised Statement of Overriding Considerations, adopting findings,
and certifying the EIR has been prepared and is included as Exhibit A, to be used if the Council
determines the proposed amendment should be approved.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Public Notice of the environmental review and of Public Meetings to be held on this project were mailed
to public agencies affected by the project, property owners within 300 feet of the site, published and
posted near the project site. Copies of several letters of comment from public agencies and citizens were
included in the May 8, 1995 Staff Report. No new comment letters have been received since the May 8
meeting.
AL TERNA TIVES/OPTIONS
If the Council determines that the land uses as generally shown on the Staff Study General Plan
Amendment Map appear to be acceptable, it could approve the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning
to allow a range of housing units and 59 acres of open space. The actual lot configuration of the
Tentative Map could be approved as proposed by the applicant, or could be reassessed and brought back
before the Council at its next meeting for consideration.
If the Council determines that the proposed 10-lot alternative does not provide the City with a
supportable project after consideration of the tradeoffs analyzed above, the Council could consider other
options, including, but not limited to:
1) Approving an amendment to the approved plan which allows only the reconfiguration near the
earthquake fault, but retains the design of the 1989 plan in all other areas of the site;
2) recommend that a new design could be developed which would involve no new grading in oak
woodland or riparian areas, such as smaller lots in designated residential areas to retain the 180 lot
count.
3) consider an amendment which would allow some of the units in the open space area, but not in
the configuration proposed, or not unless additional mitigation measures are agreed to by the
applicant; or ;
4) deny the project as proposed.
6
.
.
..
If the Council wishes to consider alternative designs, staff requests that direction be given regarding
whether any new grading should be allowed in oak woodland and riparian habitat areas, and whether
other design possibilities such as increased densities would be appropriate.
CONCLUSION
F or the reasons explained in the analysis, staff recommends that the City Council determine whether the
tradeoff of maintaining a 200 foot-wide corridor with enhanced riparian-type habitat outweighs the loss
of additional oak woodlands.
If the Council determines the proposed amendment should be approved, it may adopt the attached
Resolutions adopting CEQA Findings, revised Statement of Overriding Considerations, and certifying
the EIR, approving the General Plan Amendment and Tentative Map Amendment, and waive reading and
introduce the Zoning Ordinance Amendment for the Hansen Ranch PD Rezoning (Exhibits A through E).
7
RESOLUTION NO. - 95
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF TIffi CITY OF DUBLIN
ADOPTING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, CERTIFYING
A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACT REPORT AND ADOPTING
A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
(HANSEN RANCH PHASE II/P A95-007)
WHEREAS, California Pacific Homes, Inc. ("CPH") owns and plans to develop approximately
147 acres ofland commonly known as Hansen Hill Ranch located in the City of Dublin (the "Project
Site") with 180 single-family homes. Land use applications for the Hansen Hill Ranch project were
originally approved in February of 1989 as follows:
A. Resolution 019-89 for PA 87-045 making CEQA findings, certifying a final environmental
impact report and adopting a statement of overriding considerations.
B. Resolution 020-89 adopting a Mitigation Monitoring Program ("MMP#I") for the project.
C. Resolution 021-89 adopting general plan amendments to allow low density single family
residential (0.5-3.8) units per acre) development on the Project Site~ and
WHEREAS, in November of 1989, the City adopted a mitigated negative declaration, a
Mitigation Monitoring Program under Resolution No. 128-89 ("MMP#2") and approved a prezoning of
the Project Site to a Planned Development district under Resolution No. 129-89 and a tentative
subdivision map for 180 single family residential lots on the Project Site under Resolution No. 130-89
pursuant to the approved general plan amendment; and
WHEREAS, CPR plans to develop Hansen Hill Ranch in two phases of 72 and 108 residential
lots, respectively, CPR has requested a general plan amendment, a planned development rezoning and a
tentative subdivision map that would reconfigure the residential lots within Phase II but would not
increase the total number oflots in the project. Under this request as originally filed, sixteen residential
lots would be relocated to an area previously designated as open space although virtually all of the area
would have been graded for an access road under the previous approval. The application has been
modified to reduce the number of residential lots to be relocated from sixteen to ten lots. The current
request for Phase II (FA 95-007, as modified) proposes to redesignate approximately 2.4 net acres of the
Project Site from open space to low density single family residential~ and
WHEREAS, CPH has requested the following approvals from the City for Phase II:
A. General Plan Amendment to redesignate approximately 2.4 net acres from Open
Space/Stream Corridor to Low Density Single Family Residential (0.5-3.8 DU/acre) land
uses;
EXHIBIT A
B. Planned Development Rezoning to change the designated zoning district for
approximately 2.4 net acres on the Project Site from PD Open Space to PD Single Family
Homes and to revise various PD General Provisions and the configuration of the
residential lots within Phase II of the project. The PD Rezoning reduces the average lot
size from 7700 square feet to 7560 square feet;
C. Tentative subdivision map amendment that reflects the reconfiguration of the residential
lots within Phase II as described above~ and
WHEREAS, the City prepared an Initial Study to determine the appropriate type and level of
environmental review for the proposed amendments. The Initial Study, dated March 16, 1995, indicated
that the environmental impact report certified in February of 1989 for the Hansen Hill Ranch project and
the mitigated negative declaration adopted for the project in 1989 (collectively, the "1989 EIR"), and the
accompanying statement of overriding considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program, adequately
describe the general environmental setting, the significant environmental effects, and the alternatives and
mitigation measures related to each significant effect. The grounds for this determination were based on
the fact that the current application proposes development in an area that was also proposed for
development in the original 1989 project description, although the project ultimately was not approved as
proposed. The modification of the application to relocate ten rather than sixteen lots does not implicate
any environmental issues not addressed in the Initial Study~ and
WHEREAS, based upon the FEIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City
Council finds that the changes and modifications made to the .1989 ErR after it was circulated for public
review and comment for the Phase II Approvals do not collectively or individually constitute: (i) changes
to the proposed project that would require major revisions to the 1989 ErR due to the involvement of
new significant environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant impact; (ii) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is
undertaken which would require major revisions of the 1989 EIR~ or (iii) significant new information.
Therefore, the changes and modifications do not require the preparation of a Subsequent or Supplemental
ErR under CEQA.
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15153, the City prepared a "Notice of Use of
EIR From Earlier Project" commencing a 30-day public review and comment period from March 17,
1995 to April 15, 1995. The 1989 EIR was available for review and comment by concerned citizens and
public agencies during this period. Only one comment letter was received during the comment period,
however it did not address the issue of using the previous EIR for the current project; and
WHEREAS, on April 17, 1995, the Planning Commission held a noticed study session to receive
oral testimony regarding the use of the 1989 EIR for the current project and held a public hearing on May
1, 1995 to consider the proposed amendments; and
WHEREAS, the City received two written comments on use of the EIR after the close of the
comment period, one from the Dublin Unified School District and one from the Department ofFish and
Game~ although the letters were received after the public comment period, responses were included in the
May 1, 1995 Planning Commission staff report; and
g:\pa#\1995\95007\ccreceqa
2
WHEREAS, at its May 1, 1995 public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended denial of
the proposed amendments to the City Council for review at a noticed public hearing of the Council to be
held on May 8, 1995; and
WHEREAS, the Council held a public hearing on May 8, 1995, which was continued to May 22,
1995; and
WHEREAS, the 1989 EIR together with the March 16, 1995 Initial Study constitute the Final
Em. for the current project amendments (PA95-007, as modified).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council finds as follows:
A. The March 16, 1995 Initial Study, the 1989 EIR and the "Notice of Use ofEIR from
Earlier Proj ect" all reflect the independent judgment of the City Council.
B. All of the impacts and mitigation measures identified in the 1989 EIR, as well as related
findings and mitigation monitoring programs (MMP#1 and MMP #2) continue in effect
except for the Vegetation and Wildlife mitigations calling for no residential lots in the
relocation area. These include, but are not limited to, mitigation measures requiring a
detailed revegetation plan for disturbed areas and requiring compliance with California
Department ofFish & Game requirements.
C. The mitigation calling for elimination of residential lots in the relocation area is infeasible
because of the following specific economic, social or other considerations:
Since the approval of the Hansen Hill Ranch project in 1989 various geologic hazards
have been identified, including an earthquake fault in the western portion of the site and
additional landslides, which have required the reconfiguration of the individual lots. In
order for the project to be economically feasible, it is necessary to retain as many of the
lots approved in 1989 as possible. In addition to the earthquake fault and landslides, other
natural features of the site, including oak bay woodlands, riparian corridor, steep slopes,
and open ridgelines, constrain development of the remainder of the site and make it
infeasible to relocate lots to any area which is not environmentally sensitive. The
relocation often lots to the open space which will be graded for a road under the current
project, stream corridor area, will allow up to 180 units while protecting the riparian
corridor to the extent practicable.
D. Vegetation and wildlife impacts relating to the oak bay woodland and riparian habitat In
the relocation area have been mitigated to the extent feasible, but still cannot be avoided.
These effects are nevertheless acceptable due to the following overriding considerations.
1. Provisions of Housing.
The Hansen Hill Ranch project will provide housing opportunities in the City and in a
region where housing is costly and in short supply. The project will facilitate the City's
ability to contribute its fa~r share of regional housing opportunities.
g:\pa#\1995\95007\ccreceqa
3
2. Provisions ofIncreased City Revenues.
The Hansen Hill Ranch Project will provide economic benefits for the community in terms
of increased property and sales tax revenues.
3. Open Space and Visual Impacts.
The project designates substantial areas ofland for open space and low intensity
residential uses. This open space will conserve the ecological values of the site and
surrounding areas and provide recreational and open space amenities for residents of the
project, the City and the region. The proposed amendments provide that an approximately
16 acre area in the southwest portion of the Project Site with two existing knolls will
remain natural and upgraded. Under the Prior Approvals, the saddle between he knolls
would have been filled, creating a manufactured hill that would have been highly visible
throughout the community. The adverse visual impacts of the project are therefore
decreased by the proposed amendments.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE FURTHER RESOLVED the Dublin City Council certifies the Final
EIR for the proposed amendments (P A 95-007), as modified) as having been completed in compliance
with CEQA, and adopts the findings and statement of overriding considerations outlined herein.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of May, 1995.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
g:\pa#\1995\95007\ccreceqa
4
RESOLUTION NO. - 95
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF TIffi CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR P A 95-007
HANSEN RANCH/CALIFORNIA PACIFIC HOMES PHASE II
WHEREAS, California Pacific Homes has requested a General Plan Amendment Study, Planned
Development Rezoning and Tentative Map Amendment for a 2.4:1: acre portion of the Hansen Ranch site to
redesignate the open space/stream corridor General Plan land use designation to Low Density Single Family
Residential (0.5 to 3.8 DU/AC), to rezone the Planned Development Open Space Prezoning to allow single
family homes and relocate ten single family residential lots into that area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of State Planning and Zoning Law, it is the function and duty of
the City Council of the city of Dublin to review and act on proposed amendments to the City's General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed study session on April 17, 1995, and a
public hearing on May 1, 1995 to consider the General Plan Amendment, PD Rezoning, Tentative Map and
previous ErR for P A 95-007 planning application for Hansen HilVCalifornia Pacific Homes; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Staff analysis was submitted recommending denial of the General Plan Amendment to
redesignate the 2.4:1: acre open space area to low density single family residential (0.5 to 3.8 DU/AC); and
WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment has been reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the certified Hansen Ranch EIR determined that development within the proposed area
would have significant adverse impacts to the oak woodland/riparian habitat area; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on May 1, 1995 adopted Resolution Nos. 95-13, 94-14 and 95-
15 recommending denial of the proposed amendments; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Planning Commission recommendation at a duly noticed
public hearing on May 8, 1995, and May 22, 1995; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered all reports, recommendations and written and oral testimony
submitted at the Public Hearing as herein above set forth; and
WHEREAS, the City Council on May 22, 1995 adopted Resolution 95- adopting CEQA
findings, certifying a final environmental impact report and adopting a statement of overriding considerations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby find:
EXHIBIT B
1. That the City of Dublin has adopted a General Plan as a long term policy document which
contains several long tenn goals including preserving oak woodlands and riparian vegetation; and
2. That the proposed general plan amendment (P A 95-007) is consistent with the existing General
Plan policies that require preservation of oak woodlands and riparian vegetation in that (a) the ten lots which will
relocated into 2.4 :!: acre area will be sited to avoid the riparian corridor to the greatest extent practicable; (b) the
proposed development includes measures to enhance vegetation in the reconstructed swale over the riparian
corridor; (c) grading and loss of oak woodlands will occur in the 2.4 :!: acre area in any event in order to
construct the road which traverses this area; and
3. That existing General Plan policies require revegetation of graded slopes with native tress, grass,
and shrubs and that the portions of the project site to be graded will be revegetated; and
4. That the proposed General Plan Amendment land use designation is consistent with the General
Plan policies, in that the proposed development will eliminate grading on 16.28:!: acres of the site which will
allow two knolls to remain natural and ungraded, thus advancing general plan policies 2.1. 4 (c), 3.1 ( c), 3.3 (g),
and 3.3 (h) restricting development along ridgelines; and lots will be moved away from the earthquake fault, and
grading improvements will be made to repair landslides, thus advancing general plan policy 8.1(a).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council approves PA 95-007, Hansen
Ranch/California Pacific Homes General Plan Amendment; and redesignates approximately 2.4 :!: acres from
open space/stream corridor general plan land use designation to Low Density Single Family Residential (0.5 to
3.8 DU/AC), as shown on Attachment 1, Staff Study.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby direct the Staff to edit,
format, and print the up to date Dublin General Plan with all City Council approved revisions and without any
other substantive changes.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby direct that the
Applicant is responsible for all costs the City incurs in providing an up to date Dublin General Plan resulting from
the adoption of Hansen Ranch/California Pacific Homes General Plan Amendments.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT this resolution shall be effective 30 days following the date of
adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22nd day of May, 1995.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
g;\pa#\ 199 5\9 5007\ccresgpa
""
-
-<
:;;
:...
Z
'-l
....
~
Q
Z
'-l
:;;
-<
z -
:J /;
:.. -
...;
<:
:::: ..,;
~ <:
Z -
~
~
Q -
~ <:
'JJ
.-.
':' /;
<
.-.
-- -
::::
...
o
<UJ
UJI-
e:::<
<2
wog
~r-~UJ
Ul020U
WI-;;>-2
!::OUJ...J(I)
U')WI-I-Z
WUl<ZW,j
:!:OU2c..
06Sc::O
;;C::W~(I)
....c..e:::U<
~.>.~'
";~ "
I ~..' L,
.. ...-
.:zl.j~ -.. ... I ~
MI....I.4~~
'':)Nl 'S'l::I31NI:)H] 1iA1:)
I!I tis. "yQy
i
I
I
~1 ~
~!
~! s i
~: ,
~I .
~i ,
r
- -
II, .
"' .....
... .....
\ ,...
..:';, ~ \. I
. I .
. . j
(
"',;\.
::\, ~.-~\;1'
.. \ \ . ~ .
.' . ..
( . -'
"'- "-""'-'-/.,:
...... - . It..
"~...<.: .\
'i
.1
..-"'f
,i
, '/
. :;/
:jL;
, , /'~.
i....
I. .
I
"
I
~,.
.~(~
.-'
.,
(
'\""":'
\
" \
",'\
F-
. ;..
I .1;--.
..; . -
,
/'r:'-~
~- ,
I :::-7....
'h:. ~~.
" \./;~:;...
)., ,. , ,
. - .;. I, ~
.-
---~-------~~""~-~,. ...., '-,,--
- ~~:-.=--' .-...........~...,....-..
- '~ .
'-
.....
. \, I
\'~
. ~, ".~
'.:':""".. '"---! ,It;)
__~'_~:f};) :It \
~-=:: ~_.:r I
--------= . "::'.\'-:':"." . 'L.:.".
-. ~~.~.~
-'-
- q---=:::::-:
""&.
:'.":.
U')
W...J
~..J
cn<t
W~
:!:ID
0_
Ill::
CU
WO
Cz
Cz
<t~
0._
..,::
J .-
lj1z}i~~L
..J
~.:~-::-~:
\
-.--
"""''''
../...
/
>-
C
::J
I-
en
LL.
LL.
ex:
.....
en
/
i
--
f-o
Z
~
~
o
<:
r-
~
<:
~; -
i/ -
(l
:t
i
'1
'j
-'.'
.'.'
-11
i~
...
RESOLUTION NO. - 95
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
_~~__~_______________________________~_____w_~_____w__~______________._________~______________________w__.__._______
APPROVING THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) REZONING
AND GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR P A 95-007
HANSEN RANCH/CALIFORNIA PACIFIC HOMES PHASE II
WHEREAS, California Pacific Homes has requested a General Plan Amendment Study, Planned
Development Rezoning and Tentative Map Amendment for a 2.4:t acre portion ofthe Hansen Hill site to
redesignate the open space/stream corridor General Plan land use designation to Low Density Single Family
Residential (0.5 to 3,8 DU/AC), to rezone the Planned Development Open Space Prezoning to allow single
family homes and relocate ten single family residential lots into this area; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment has been reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed study session on April 17, 1995, and a
scheduled public hearing on May 1, 1995 to consider the General Plan Amendment, PD Rezoning, Tentative
Map and previous EIR for P A 95-007 planning application for Hansen Ranch/California Pacific Homes; 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 the Planning Commission recommend City
Council denial of the applications, including the Planned Development Rezoning; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on May 1, 1995, considered all reports, recommendations and
written and oral testimony submitted at the Public Hearing as hereinabove set forth and adopted Resolution No.
95-15 recommending denial of the applications; and
WHEREAS, based on the reports, recommendations and testimony before it, the City Council
determined the General Plan Amendment redesignation would be consistent with other applicable general plan
policies and objectives and adopted Resolution _ - 95 approving the General Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Planning Commission recommendation as a duly noticed
public hearing on May 8, 1995 and May 22; and June 13, 1995.
WHEREAS, based on the reports, recommendations and testimony before it, the City Council
considered whether the Planned Development Rezoning request was consistent with the General Plan as
amended and with the objectives of the zoning ordinance Planned Development Provisions,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE City Council does hereby find that:
1. The proposed Planned Development Rezoning, as conditioned, is consistent with the City General
Plan and Policies in that the site would allow residential development under the approved General Plan
Amendment.
2. The proposed Planned Development Rezoning, as conditioned, is consistent with the Planned
Development provisions of the zoning ordinance and the general nature and character of the project as approved
in the original Planned Development zoning.
EXHIBIT C
3. The proposed Planned Development Rezoning, as conditioned, will benefit the public necessity,
convenience and general welfare in that it conforms to the provisions of the City's zoning ordinance.
4. The proposed Planned Development Rezoning, as conditioned, will provide efficient use of the land
and will preserve significant open areas and natural and topographic landscape features; will provide an
environment which will encourage use of open areas for neighborhood activities; will be compatible with and
enhance development of the general area; and will create an attractive, efficient and safe environment.
5. The proposed Rezoning will not have a significant environmental impact; and
6. The Rezoning, as conditioned, 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
7. 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.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council approves P A 95-007, Hansen
Ranch/California Pacific Homes Planned Development Rezoning subject to the following general provisions and
development standard which constitute regulations for the use, improvement and maintenance of the Hansen
Ranch project.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. Intent: This approval is for Planned Development Rezoning P A 95-007 Hansen Ranch, an
amendment which supersedes the PO prezoning approved under P A 89.062. This PO District is established to
provide for and regulate the development of production and custom single-family dwellings. This approval
prezones up to 180 low-density single-family lots on approximately 51 acres and the remaining acreage.
Approximately 94 acres are prezoned as open space. Development shall be generally consistent with the
following submittals:
A. Tentative map prepared by Adams & Streeter dated received May 11, 1995.
B. Plans prepared by Bassenian Lagoni Architects, consisting of preliminary floor plans and elevation
plans dates received January 23, 1992 (as amended for Phase I under PA 91-096), to generally depict
the approved home designs for Phase I.
C. Plans prepared by Shleppey Hesmalhalch Associates, Inc. consisting of preliminary floor plans and
elevation plans dated received May 22, 1989, to generally depict the approved home designs for
Phase II,
D. Plans prepared by David L. Gates and Associates consisting of21 sheets dated received August 9,
1989 relating to landscaping and other general provisions, except for the lot configuration, which
were amended through the 1989 approval and the 1995 amendment. A revised set of Landscaping
and PO Illustrative Plans shall be provided to reflect the Lot configuration as approved under the
amended tentative map (per condition of approval #26).
2. Site Development Review: All structures shall be subject to the Site Development Review
procedures established in the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance unless a Site Development Review waiver is
2
approved by the Planning Director and a zoning approval is granted constitutes a minor project and building
permit plans are in accord with the intent and objectives ofthe Site Development Review procedures,
3. Yards (Setbacks): The minimum requirement for yards shall be as follows:
A. Depth of Front Yard (Setback): 20 foot minimum Exception: 1) 10 foot minimum for units with side
vehicular entrance garages (see building height exception) and 2) custom homes may deviate from
the 20 foot minimum setback subject to approval of Site Development Review finding that either the
topographic or vegetative constraints of the site prevent the development from complying with the
30 foot minimum setback. In no event shall the front yard setback for a custom home be less than 5
feet from the garage.
B. Rear Yard (Setback): 20 foot minimum, 15 foot minimum clear and level zone
Exception: 1) see Section 8.26.6.1 Alternate Provision of Rear Yard (compensating yards) of the Dublin
Zoning Ordinance. 2) 10 foot minimum for shade structures attached to the unit provided the shade
structure is not enclosed (enclosed means more than one vertical wall), 3) 10 foot minimum setback for
second story decks, however second story decks encroaching within the required 20 foot setback on lots
with their rear property line adjacent to another residentiallot(s) shall be subject to Site Development
Review approval.
C. Side Yard (Setbacks): 5 foot minimum with 15 foot total aggregate side yard setback required. 5
foot wide minimum clear and level zone each side yard,
Exception: 10 foot minimum street side yard of comer lot.
D. General Yard Provisions:
1. Fireplaces, chimneys and air conditioning units shall not encroach within the required clear and level
zone. Other encroachments shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval.
2. Roof eaves, pop-outs, bays, architectural projections and columns may project 3 feet into required
yards subject to compliance with building code requirements,
3. A 15 foot minimum separation shall be maintained between all buildings located on adjacent lots.
4. Accessory structures located in required yards shall be subject to the provisions of Section 8-60,20
through 8-60.32,8-60.59 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance,
5. On lots where the minimum rear yard clear and level zone can not be provided due to topography or
vegetation constraints, decks of comparable area shall be required subject to Site Development Review approval.
6. Building Height: 32 foot maximum or two stories at anyone point. Building height shall be
measured from the finished grade at the perimeter of the building to the top of the structure. Exception:
Building height for units with garage 10 foot front yard setbacks, shall not exceed one (1) foot for each one (1)
foot the building is setback from the back of sidewalk, However, architectural features and elements may exceed
this provision by a 2 foot maximum, and a gable element may exceed this provision by 5 foot maximum.
7. Custom homes site development shall generally conform to the guidelines established in "custom lot
design guidelines". ,.
3
8. Parking: minimum 2 covered parking spaces per dwelling
9. Building site: Lot size: 5,700 square foot minimum; 7,560 square foot average,
10. Except as specifically modified by the provisions of this PD (PA 95-007) District, the lots
developed in this PD District shall be subject to the R-l Single Family Residential District development criteria.
11. Except as specifically modified by the provisions of this PD District, all applicable and general
requirements of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance shall be applied to development within this PD District.
12. The design, location and material of all fencing and retaining walls installed by the developer shall
be subject to approval of Site Development Review,
13. All graded cut and fill slope areas shall be revegetated with native trees, shrubs and grasses subject
to review and approval of the Planning Director and Public Works Director.
14. All landscape areas within open space and common areas shall be subject to approval of Site
Development Review.
15. Appropriate vehicular access to open space shall be provided and maintained on a continuous basis,
to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief, Public Works Director and Planning Director.
16. All signs established for identification of this project shall be subject to approval of Site
Development Review.
17. Except as may be specifically provided for within these General Provisions for PA 95-007,
development shall comply with City of Dublin Site Development Review Standard Conditions (Attachment 2).
18. Except as may be specifically provided for within this PD P A 95-007 development, shall comply
with City of Dublin Police Services Standard Residential Building Security Recommendations (Attachment 3).
19. Residential lots 181 through 190 depicted on Sheets L-5 and L-6 prepared by David Gates &
Associates are not approved in the configuration shown. .
20. Minor deviations from the conditions established in Provision 15 and 16 above may be made
through the Site Development Review process.
21. CC&R's shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Director prior to recordation of the
Final Subdivision Map.
22. The Open Space/Landscape Management Plan shall be subject to review and approval of the Public
Works Director and Planning Director in conjunction with Site Development Review of Landscape Plans, The
applicant shall submit to the City a tree replacement plan including the riparian corridor prepared by a qualified
restoration specialist for the replacement of native trees. The plan shall include the methods and locations of tree
plantings; the number of trees, their size and species to be planted; irrigation and maintenance methods; tree
protection from browsing animals; and a five-year monitoring program to evaluate the rate of tree establishment
against the performance criteria ofthe plan. The plan will incorporate the techniques recommended as mitigation
measures in the 1989 EIR as well as other enhancement techniques required by staff, to ensure the success of the
revegetated areas similar to the environment in the riparian area woodlands south of the homesite relocation area.
Examples of enhancements to the revegetation plan include, but are not limited to: irrigating young plants,
4
placing top soil on fill slopes, and special planting techniques such as drilling into fill slopes to allow root
penetration. The plan shall also include specific measures to protect native trees at the limits of grading which
area not proposed for removal. Monitoring reports shall be submitted to the City of Dublin Planning
Department.
23. A master trail system plan for the open space area shall be constructed and shall be subject to
approval of Site Development Review.
24. Fire buffer zone shall be provided and maintained on a continuous basis to the satisfaction of the
Dougherty Regional Fire Authority Fire Chief.
25. The fire buffer zone shall be subject to Site Development Review approval.
26. The applicant shall provide the City with a Planned Development site plan for the entire Hansen
Ranch site, similar to the site plan approved under the original Planned Development P A 89-062, but showing
the amended lot configuration as approved by the City Council February 27, 1995 (for Phase I) and May 22 and
June 13, 1995 (for Phase II). This plan shall be provided prior to the June 13th City Council meeting.
This Resolution will be effective upon the effective date of the Ordinance adopting the PO Rezoning,
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this of22nd day of May, 1995.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
(g:/pa#/95007/ccresopd)
5
RESOLUTION NO. - 95
A RESOLUTION OF TIlE CITY COUNCIL
OF TIlE CITY OF DUBLIN
...-------------------------------------------------...--------------------------------------------------...---------------
APPROVING TENTATIVE MAP 5766 AMENDMENT
FOR P A 95-007 HANSEN RANCH/CALIFORNIA PACIFIC HOMES
WHEREAS, California Pacific Homes has requested a General Plan Amendment, Planned
Development Rezoning and Tentative Map Amendment for a 2.4::1: acre portion of the Hansen Hill site to
redesignate the open space/stream corridor General Plan land use designation to Low Density Single
Family Residential (0.5 to 3.8 DU/AC), to rezone the Planned Development Open Space Prezoning to
allow single family homes and relocate ten single family residential lots into this area; and
WHEREAS, the application has been reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the ~alifornia
Envirorunental Quality Act; 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 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 held a properly noticed study session on Aprill7, 1995,
and a public hearing on May 1, 1995 to consider the General Plan Amendment, PO Rezoning, Tentative
Map and previous EIR for P A 95-007 planning application for Hansen Hill/California Pacific Homes; 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 the Planning Commission recommend
City Council denial of the Tentative Map; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on May 1, 1995, heard and considered all said reports,
recommendations and written and oral testimony submitted at the Public Hearing as hereinabove set forth
and adopted Resolution Nos. 95-13,95-14, and 95-15 reconunending denial of the applications; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Planning Commission reconunendation as a duly
noticed public hearing on May 8, 1995 and May 22; and June 13, 1995.
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolutions 95- _ and 95- _ dated May 22, 1995
approving a related General Plan Amendment and Planned Development Rezoning to permit residential
development in the area proposed for relocation of the ten single family residential lots.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby
find:
EXHIBIT D
1. The proposed Tentative Map amendment is consistent with the City General Plan as
applied to this property in that the site would allow single family residential lots relocated into this area
under the approved General Plan Amendment.
2. The proposed Tentative Map amendment is consistent with the Planned Development
zoning in that the Planned Development zoning approval would permit residential lots in the proposed
relocation area.
3. The proposed Tentative Map amendment may be approved pursuant to Government Code
ss 66473.5,66474 and 66474.01 in that:
A. The amendment is consistent with the approved General Plan Amendment and the Planned
Development Rezoning proposing residential development in the relocation area.
B. The design and improvement of the proposed Tentative Map amendment is consistent with
the recommended General Plan Amendment in that design and improvement was reviewed in
connection with the related General Plan Amendment and the Tentative Map amendment continues
to comply with the overall project objective of providing large amounts of open space while
restricting development to specific areas on the site.
C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development as
reflected in the approved General Plan Amendment for residential development in the relocation
area.
D. The design of the proposed Tentative Map will cause substantial environmental damages
to oak woodland and riparian corridor, however, the related impacts identified in the original EIR
and Initial Study update have been mitigated to the extent feasible and a statement of overriding
considerations has been adopted in Resolution 95 - ----' dated May 22, 1995.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby approve P A 95-007,
Hansen Ranch/California Pacific Homes Tentative Map Amendment subject to the following conditions:
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Unless otherwise soecified. the following conditions shall be com"lied with orior to the recordation of the
Final Mao. Each item is subiect to review and approval bv the Planning Deoartment
unless otherwise specified. The following codes represent those departments/ap:encies resoonsible for
monitoring compliance of the Conditions of Aooroval: rPLl Planning:. fBl Buildinp:. {POl Police. rpWl
Public Works. rADMl Administration/City Attornev. rFINl Finance. (Fl Dougherty Regional Fire
Authority. rDSRl Dublin San Ramon Services District. rCOl Alameda County Deoartment of
Environmental Health.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. Approval of Tentative Map is subject to the subdivider/developer securing final approval from the
Dublin City Council for the General Plan Amendment and Planned Development (PD) Rezoning
request covering the subject property. Any modifications to the project design approved by the General
Plan Amendment or Planned Oevelopment (PO) Rezoning action shall supersede the design on the
2
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. Site Development Review and Final Map recordation may occur in phases.
2. This Resolution shall be considered as the approval for changes to Phase II of the Hansen Ranch
subdivision, and also shall contain the previously approved Conditions for Phase I of the Hansen
Ranch subdivision, as amended by the City Council on February 27, 1995. While no changes to Phase
I are currently proposed, this Resolution is consolidating the Conditions and requirements previously
approved to allow more efficient project review of the entire site.
3. The Developer shall comply with all requirements of the Department ofFish and Game related to
mitigation of impacts due to development in and near the riparian habitat area, and other impacts
resulting from the amended project, including any additional environmental studies that may be
required.
4. Comply with the "Typical Public Works Conditions of Approval for Subdivisions". [PW]
5. Except as specifically modified elsewhere in these conditions, development shall conform to the
Conditions of Approval established by: City Council Resolution Nos. 20-89 and 21-89, approved on
February 27, 1989, pertaining to PA 87-045 Hansen Hill Ranch General Plan Amendment and
Mitigation Monitoring Program for EIR. [PL]
6. The Developer shall comply with applicable Fire Department, Flood Control District, and Public
Works requirements. Written statements from each such agency or department approving the plans
over which it has jurisdiction shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of
building permits on lots of the subdivision or the installation of any improvements related to this
project.
7. Should the developer wish to file a master Tract Map separating or phasing the project, all off-site
work shall be guaranteed and constructed as part of the agreement for this tract. In addition, all streets
necessary to keep from landlocking any parcel shall be offered for dedication and the construction
guaranteed by the Subdivision Agreement. [PW]
COVENANTS, CONDmONS AND RESTRICTIONS
8. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be established for this development. The
CC&R's shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to the recordation of the Final Map.
9. 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 areas, lighting,
recreation facilities, landscape and irrigation facilities, fencing, 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.
3
C The Homeowner's Association shall keep the City Planning Department informed of the current
name, address and phone number of the Association's official representative.
o Payment of the water and street lighting bills (maintenance and energy) and maintenance and
repair of storm drain lines, are the obligations of the Homeowner's Association, unless paid for
through a Lighting and Landscape Maintenance Assessment District.
E. Each buyer is to sign an acknowledgment that he has read the Constitution and Bylaws of the
Homeowner's Association and the Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions applying to the
development.
F. The Homeowner's Association shall contract with, or be advised (as in handling maintenance
operations) by, a professional management firm.
G. 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 maintenance of private vehicle access ways and utility trenches in public utility easements.
H. The Homeowner's Association shall maintain a list of plant materials acceptable for landscaping
subject to review and approval of the Planning Director and Fire Department.
I. The CC&R's shall include a statement declaring that the road segment in Phase 2 which is shown
as a dead end with 5 homesites (lots 88, 89,90,94 and 95) is intended to be extended in the future
to serve the adjacent property to the north.
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
10. There are some manufactured slopes cut into mapped slides where the slides extend in tree covered
areas. These slide areas must be repaired. Show the trees that have to be taken out. [PW]
11. The original development proposal did a tree survey in areas where the trees were to come out. Due to
changes in the plan, a new tree survey is required, prior to approval of grading permit for Phase II. The
tree survey shall be conducted by a qualified arborist or horticulturist and shall include the location and
information on all trees 10 inches in diameter or greater proposed for removal. Information on each tree
shall include species, diameter at breast height, and condition. All trees to be removed shall be tagged
with a permanent, numbered aluminum tag. The information on tree removal will form the basis for the
number of trees to be replanted. [PW,PL]
12. It appears that Dry Creek Drive, which stubs to the creek area for access to the undeveloped properties
to the northwest, will have 5 lots fronting on it. It should be noted that this will reduce the number of
units that could be approved on those undeveloped properties because ofDRFA's requirements for
access. [PW]
]3. The right-of-way for the extension of Dry Creek Drive to the property line must be provided together
with working easements and slope easements of adequate width for roadway construction, for the future
construction of an extended roadway. The easement shall be shown on the final map prior to
recordation. The hammer-head turnaround design shall be subject to the approval of the Dougherty
Regional Fire Authority, and shall involve a rounded turnaround with a barricade at the end of Dry
4
Creek Drive to facilitate street cleaning, subject to the Director of Public Works approval. A statement
declaring the intented future extension of this road shall be recorded with the title or deed for each lot.
[PW]
14. It must be disclosed to all buyers in the development that Dry Creek Drive will be extended in the
future. [PW,PL]
15. Inspiration Drive and Dry Creek Drive must be designed as a residential collector with minimum design
speed ofJO mph, including intersection sight distance design, 40' curb to curb over 56' right-of-way
and minimum curve radius of 450'. "C" street and all residential streets must be 36' curb-to-curb over
52' right~of~way, and all cul-de-sacs must be 34' curb-to-curb over 50' right-of way. The turnaround
curb radius for cul-de-sacs must be a minimum of 40'. Minimum design speed for residential streets
and cul-de-sacs is 25 mph. All the streets within final subdivision map must conform to the City's
standards and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and dedicated to the City. [PW]
16. The storm drain system for streets must be designed for at least I5-year flood, and channels must be
designed for 100-year flood. The downhill cul-de-sacs must provide a storm drain overflow corridor to
pass between the two end units in the event that the cul-de-sac catch basin plugs up. [PW]
17. V -ditches must be picked up at the low point by drainage structures and conveyed to the bottom of
natural drainage courses. [PW]
18. Any grading on adjacent properties will require written approval of those property owners affected,
subject to the approval of the Planning and Public Works Departments. [PW,PL]
19. Ten-foot Public Utility Easements must be dedicated along all public streets. [PW]
20. Handicap ramps must be placed at all curb returns and conform to Federal ADA and City of Dublin
Standards. [PW]
21. Street trees must be placed along all public streets. The type of trees must be approved by the Public
Works Director and must be placed at least five feet from the back of sidewalk. [PW,PL]
22. Written permission shall be obtained from the owners of the Donlan Canyon development and Valley
Christian Church (VCC) for grading on their sites prior to approval of the grading plans by the City.
Inspiration Drive within VCC must be dedicated to the City at the same time as the final subdivision
map is recorded. [PW]
23. A vehicle turnaround must be designed and constructed at the middle and west end of the hiking trail.
[PW]
24. The Developer must obtain or prove that he already has rights to improve and transfer an easement to
the City over the access road to the north of the creek. Access road shall be improved to the satisfaction
of the Director of Public Works. In addition, this access road must be a minimum of 12' wide and
designed, graded, the subgrade compacted, and a minimum of six inches of Class II aggregate base be
placed and compacted on the access road. An easement for access and maintenance wide enough to
properly maintain the road and any drainage improvements associated with the roadway
5
must be transferred to the City. The turnaround must be designed and constructed at the west end of
the access road. [PW]
25. If this road cannot be improved and an easement dedicated to the City, then the eight-foot hiking trail
on the south side of the creek shall be constructed as a twelve-foot trail and access road. [PW]
26. The fence along the north property line of the creek area must be replaced with a six-foot high black
clad chain link fence at the north side of the access road. Also, gates must be installed at critical areas,
with the exact location to be determined by Director of Public Works. [PW]
27. The fire access roads must be designed, constructed, and gated to the satisfaction of the Director of
Public Works. Improvement plans must be approved by the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority as
indicated by their signature on the title sheet. [[PW]
28. There is a big watershed for the open space within Inspiration Drive. It appears that the headwall for
this area is not at the low point of the open space. Relocate this headwall to low point. [PW]
29. Developer and it's representative (engineer, contractor, etc.) must meet and follow all the City's
requirements and polices, including Urban Runoff Program and Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.
[PW]
30. All of the plans including Tentative Map, Improvement Plans, Grading Plans, and subdivision maps
must be designed to the City of Dublin's standards, policies, requirements, title block and formats.
Grading plans must also be designed based on approved soil reports. In addition to the civil engineer, a
soils engineer must sign the grading plans. The soils engineer must be present at all times during
grading. All plans must be designed and signed by a Registrar Civil Engineer. Plans must be to the
satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, and after his approval original mylars or photo mylars
with three sets of blue prints must be submitted to the City. [PW]
31. A faithful performance bond or securities that are 100% of Improvement cost, and a labor and material
bond or securities that are 50% of Improvement cost, must be provided prior to issuing any grading or
improvement permits or whichever occurs first. Improvement cost will include street, drainage,
grading, utilities, and landscaping cost to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. [PW]
32. Labor and materials bond will be released after City's acceptance of improvements. The Performance
bond will be released one year after acceptance of improvements. The Developer, with the approval of
the Director of Public Works, has the option of providing a Maintenance Bond after acceptance of
improvements by the City which could be 25% of improvements costs. This will serve instead of a
Faithful Performance Bond. Prior to release of the Faithful Performance Bond or the Maintenance
Bond, all improvements and landscaping shall t-e installed and established- per approved plans and a
declaration by the project civil engineer that the finished graded building pads are within::l: 0.1 feet in
elevation of those shown on approved plans. [PW]
33. Upon completion of the work, an as-built plan (mylar) prepared by a registered civil engineer and a
Declaration by a civil engineer that all work was done under his supervision shall be submitted to the
Public Works Department. [PW]
6
34. Each lot shall be graded so as not to drain onto any other lot or adjoining property prior to being picked'
up by an approved drainage system. [PW]
35. A minimum 18" diameter pipe shall be used for all public storm drains to ease maintenance and reduce
potential blockage. [PW]
36. Areas undergoing grading and all other construction activity shall be watered or other dust control
measures may be used to prevent dust as conditions warrant or as directed by the Public Works
officials. [PW]
37. All open space and common area landscaping shall be maintained by Developer or a Hom~wners'
Association, including fire emergency access roads. [PW,PL] ..
38. Install fire hydrants at the location approved by the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority in accordance
with the standards in effect at the time of development. Raised blue reflectorized traffic markers shall
be epoxied to the center of the paved street opposite each hydrant. [PW,F],..,. "..'
3 9. The minimum uniform street gradient shall be 1 % and structure design of the road shall be to the
satisfaction and approval of the Director of Public Works. Parking lots shall have a minimum gradient
of 1 % and a maximum gradient of 5%. No cut and fill slopes shall exceed 2: 1 unless recommended by
the project soils engineer and approved by the Public Works Oirector. Slopes shall be graded so that
there is both horizontal and vertical slope variation where visible from public areas in order to create or
maintain a natural appearance.
40. All building pad elevations must be above the IOO-year flood level. [PW]
41. During the construction, noise control and construction traffic measures within residential
neighborhoods or on public streets must be taken to reduce noise and use of public streets by
construction traffic as directed by Public Works officials. [PW]
42. Copies of the final map and improvement plans indicating all lots, streets, and drainage facilities within
the subdivision shall be submitted at I "=400' scale and I "=200 scale for City mapping purposes. [PW]
43. The subdivider/developer is responsible for the job site and construction until the City of Dublin
accepts the improvements. [PW]
44. Construction and grading operations shall be limited to weekdays, Monday through Friday, and non-
City holidays, between the hours of7:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The Director of Public Works may
approve days and hours beyond the above mentioned days and hours with the understanding that the
developer is responsible for Public Works inspectors' overtime. [PW]
45. The subdivider shall dedicate and improve land for park per approval and requirement of the Director
of Public Works or pay a fee in lieu of park dedication to the City of Dublin as is required by the
Subdivision Ordinance. [PW]
46. Any relocation of improvements or public facilities shall be accomplished at no expense to the City.
[PW]
7
47. Encroachment and grading permits shall be secured by the developer from the Public Works
Department. [PW]
48. Install street light standards and lurninieres per approval of the Director of Public Works. The
maximum voltage drop for street lights is 3%. [PW]
49. A current title report and copies of the recorded deed of all parties having any recorded title interest in
the property to be divided, copies of the deed and a photo mylar of the final maps for adjoining
properties and easements shall be submitted at the time of the submission of the final subdivision maps,
if the Director of Public Works deems necessary. [PW]
50. Upon filing of the final map, the subdivider shall furnish the Public Works Director with a letter from
Dublin-San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) stating that the District has agreed to furnish water and
sewer services to each of the dwelling units and/or lots included on the final map of the subdivision.
[PW]
51. DSRSD must review and approve their facilities. [PW, DSR]
52. Any water bill or exploratory boring shown on the map that is known to exist, is proposed, or is located
during the course of the field operation must be properly destroyed, backfilled, or maintained in
accordance with the applicable Groundwater Protection Ordinance. Zone 7 should be contacted for
additional information. [PW]
53. Long term maintenance of these landslide repairs and unrepaired landslides in the open space shall be
the responsibility of the Developer or Homeowner's Association and incorporated in the CC&R's. [PW]
54. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the City shall contract for a third party soil's engineer to review
and give a recommendation of the Applicant's submitted Geotechnical Investigation Report. The
Applicant/Developer shall pay the City the cost of the third party review. [PW]
55. A minimum of6" subdrains shall be installed in all swales that are to be filled. [PW]
56. All concentrated storm drain flow shall be discharged into the established drainage channels, not onto
the slopes. [PW]
57. A registered civil engineer shall design all retaining walls over three feet in height (or over two feet in
height with a surcharge) and a building permit shall be required for their construction. A maintenance/
inspection program shall be implemented by the developer/homeowners' association for the periodic
inspection and maintenance of all retaining walls that could possibly affect the public right-of-way.
[PW, B]
58. The Applicant/Developer shall submit for Public Works Director review and approval, a detailed
hydrologylhydraulic report for this project. In particular, the report shall include the effects on the
creek and the downstream drainage facilities of the ultimate development of the entire watershed that
this project is a part of. The hydraulic capacity of the creek to carry the 100 year design flow at
ultimate upstream development should be demonstrated. The report shall address the possible need for
creek improvements including, but not limited to, realignment, widening, bank repair/reinforcement,
and drop structures. Moreover, the report shall look at the possible need and location for detention
8
basins. These improvements shall be made as part of this subdivision, subject to review and approval
of the Public Works Director. [PW]
59. A profile of the creek and cross sections at 200-foot (maximum) intervals and at changes in creek
cross sections should be determined by field survey as part of the hydraulic investigation required and
for verification of the required setbacks. These x-sections shall show the 10, 25, and 100 year water
levels. [PW]
60. Creek velocities should not exceed 6-7 fps to avoid erosion problems. [PW]
61. A soils report and/or investigation should address the stability of the existing creek banks. Any
recommended repairs should be implemented. [PW]
62. No drainage shall be directed over a slope. [PW]
63. Drainage in all concrete ditches shall be picked up and directed to the bottom of an approved drainage
channel. The slope on these ditches shall not be less than .5%. [PW]
64. All cut and fill slopes shall be contoured to appear natural and blend with the existing natural contours.
[PW, PL]
65. The soils report for the project shall include reconunendations 1) for foundations, decks, and other
miscellaneous structures, 2) for design of swimming pools, and 3) for setbacks for structures from top
or toes of slopes. Additionally, the soils report shall include a professional opinion as to safety of the
site from the hazards of land slippage, erosion, settlement and seismic activity. [PW]
66. Upon completion of grading, a declaration by the soils engineer that all work was done under his
supervision and in accordance with the recommendation contained in the soils report shall be submitted
to the Public Works Director.
67. 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, water lines and any other private utilities 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. All public and private utilities shall be underground. [PW]
68. Grading shall be completed in compliance with the construction grading plans and recommendations of
the project's soils engineer and/or engineering geologist, and the approved erosion and sedimentation
control plan, and shall be done under the supervision of the project's soils engineer and/or engineering
geologist, who shall, upon its completion, submit a declaration to the Public Works Director that all
work was done in accordance with the reconunendations contained in the soils and geologic
investigation reports and the approved plans and specifications. At Developer's cost, Soils Engineer
must be on site at all times during grading for inspections that will satisfy grading plan requirements.
[PW]
69. Grading within the designated open space area shall be limited to that grading which is necessary for
construction of the roadways traversing the open space and only development approved by the City
intended to enhance the environmental setting. [PW]
9
70. The grading in the vicinity of the two existing knolls in the southwestern portion of the site shall be
limited to the grading shown on the Tentative Map approved by the City Council on May 22, 1995,
and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Public Works Director. [PW]
71. The developer and/or his representatives shall secure all necessary permits for work including, but not
limited to, grading, encroachment, Fish and Game Department, Corps. of Engineers and State water
quality permits and show proof of it to the City of Dublin, Department of Public Works. [PW]
72. All cut and fill slopes shall be revegetated with native shrubs, trees and grasses subject to review and
approval of the Planning Director and Public Works Oirector. A revegetation plan shall be prepared
by a qualified restoration specialist for the replacement of native trees. The plan shall include the
methods and locations of tree plantings; the number of trees, their size and species to be planted;
irrigation and maintenance methods; tree protection from browsing animals; and a five-year monitoring
program to evaluate the rate of tree establishment against the performance criteria of the plan. The plan
will incorporate the techniques recommended as mitigation measures in the 1989 EIR as well as other
enhancement techniques required by staff, to ensure the success of the revegetated areas. Revegetation
in open space areas shall include, at a minimum, three new trees of at least 15 gallon size to mitigate
the loss of each existing tree over 10 inches in diameter. Where coast live oak and big leaf maple trees
are replaced, the minimum size may be reduced to five gallon. The revegetation plan shall be required
at the time of Site Development Review for Phase II. [PW]
73. Enhanced revegetation techniques shall be employed in the riparian corridor to ensure the success of
the revegetation. Examples of enhancements to the revegetation plan include irrigating the young
plants, placing top soil on fill slopes, using special planting techniques such as drilling into fill slopes
to allow root penetration, and planting at a density similar to the native woodlands in the riparian
corridors.. The enhanced revegetation in the riparian corridor area shall be designed to produce
vegetation similar to the environment in the riparian area woodlands south of the homesite relocation
area. . The revegetation plan shall be required at the time of Site Development Review for Phase II.
[PW, PL].
74. A monitoring program shall be developed requiring the Homeowners association to continually
evaluate the success of the planting and implement additional planting measures or replant when
necessary if planting fails.
STREETS
75. Minimwn sight distance for public streets including intersection sight distance shall meet the
CAL TRANS Highway Design Manual. [PW]
76. All public streets shall drain into storm drain systems before being discharged into established drainage
channels. [PW]
77. The landscaped median area shown at the Silvergate Drive entrance shall be owned by the City of
Dublin, but maintained by the Developer or the homeowners within this development. This median
shall be installed to not less than City of Dublin standards, including moisture barriers and subclrains.
[PW]
10
78. An encroachment permit shall be secured from the Public Works Director for any work done within the
public right-of-way where this work is not covered under the improvement plans.
79. Street names shall be submitted and processed through the Planning Department and shall be indicated
on the Final Map. [PW]
80. The Developer 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 City. The subdivider shall furnish and install
traffic safety signs in accordance with the standards of the City of Dublin. [PW]
OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS
81. Prior to issuance of building permit, the developer shall be responsible for paying or reimbursing
Traffic Impact Fees of an additional right-turn lane and related signal modifications on the west leg of
eastbound Dublin Boulevard at the San Ramon Road intersection. 'This cost shall be split between this
development and the development of the Blaylock, Gleason, Fletcher (Donlan Canyon) property
immediately to the west, on a pro rata basis based on the amount of traffic generated by each
development. [PW]
82. Prior to approval of the improvement plans and Final Map, the ApplicantlDeveloper shall submit
documents satisfactory to the City of Dublin dedicating the proposed road across the Valley Christian
Center property to the City of Dublin. Also, Developer is responsible to construct the road prior to
occupancy of any unit. [PW]
83. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the Applicant/Developer shall pay the Traffic Impact Fee for
the project's proportionate share (23.7%) of the cost for the widening of the existing Dublin Boulevard
roadway, between Silvergate Drive and Hansen Drive to acconunodate four 12-foot traffic lanes, two
five-foot bike lanes, and a five-foot sidewalk, as generally shown on the proposed widening plans
prepared by TJKM and Greiner. The costs shall be determined prior to issuance of the building permit.
[PW]
84. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the Applicant/Developer shall reimburse the City for the
project's proportionate share (23.7%) of the cost of the redesign of the existing Dublin Boulevard!
Silvergate Drive intersection to form a "T" intersection with Dublin Boulevard. [PW]
UTILITIES
85. Electrical, gas, telephone, and Cable TV services, shall be provided underground to each lot or 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. All
utilities to and within the project shall be underground.
WATER & SEWER
86. Prior to issuance of any building permit, complete improvement plans shall be submitted to DSRSD
that conform to the requirements of the DSRSD Code, the DSRSD "Standard Procedures,
Specifications and Drawings for Design and Installation of Water and Wastewater Facilities", all
applicable DSRSD Master Plans and all DSRSD policies. [DSR]
11
87. All mains shall be sized to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate future flow demands in addition
to each development project's demand. Layout and sizing of mains shall be in conformance with
DSRSD utility master planning. [DSR]
88. Sewers shall be designed to operate by gravity flow to OSRSD's existing sanitary sewer system.
Pumping of sewage is discouraged and may only be allowed under extreme circumstances following a
case by case review with DSRSD staff. Any pumping station will require specific review and approval
by DSRSD of preliminary design reports, design criteria, and final plans and specifications. The
DSRSD reserves the right to require payment of present worth 20 year maintenance costs as well as
other conditions within a separate agreement with the Applicant for any project that requires a pumping
station. [DSR]
89. Domestic and fire protection waterline systems for Tracts or Commercial Developments shall be
designed to be looped or interconnected to avoid dead end sections in accordance with requirements of
the DSRSD Standard Specifications and sound engineering practice. [DSR]
90. DSRSD policy requires public water and sewer lines to be located in public streets rather than in off-
street locations to the fullest extent possible. If unavoidable, public sewer or water easements must be
established over the alignment of each public sewer or water line in an off-street or private street
location to provide access for future maintenance and/or replacement. [DSR]
91. Prior to approval by the City of a grading permit or a site development permit, the locations and widths
of all proposed easement dedications for water and sewer lines shall be submitted to and approved by
DSRSD. [DSR]
92. All easement dedications for DSRSD facilities shall be by separate instrument irrevocably offered to
DSRSD or by offer of dedication on the Final Map. [DSR]
93. Prior to approval by the City for Recordation, the Final Map shall be submitted to and approved by
DSRSD for easement locations, widths, and restrictions. [DSR]
94. Prior to issuance by the City of any Building Permit, all utility connection fees, plan checking fees,
inspection fees, permit fees and fees associated with a wastewater discharge permit shall be paid to
DSRSD in accordance with the rates and schedules established in the DSRSD Code. [DSR]
95. Prior to issuance by the City of any Building Permit, all improvement plans for DSRSD facilities shall
be signed by the District Engineer. Each drawing of improvement plans shall contain a signature block
for the District Engineer indicating approval of the sanitary sewer or water facilities shown. Prior to
approval by the District Engineer, the Applicant shall pay all required DSRSD fees, and provide an
engineer's estimate of construction costs for the sewer and water systems, a performance bond, a one-
year maintenance bond, and a comprehensive general liability insurance policy in the amounts and
forms that are acceptable to DSRSD. The Applicant shall allow at least 15 working days for final
improvement drawing review by DSRSD before signature by the District Engineer. [DSR]
96. No sewer line or water line construction shall be permitted unless the proper utility construction permit
has been issued by DSRSD. A construction permit will only be issued after all of the items in
condition #43 above have been satisfied. [DSR]
12
97. The Applicant shall hold DSRSD, its Board of Directors, commissions, employees, and agents of
DSRSD harmless and indemnify the same from any litigation, claims, or fines resulting from
completion of the project. [OSR]
98. A water line connection to Water Zones 2 and 3 is required which will connect to lines at the west end
of Hansen Drive. An easement has already been dedicated across property in Tract 4988 to
accommodate this connection. A 20 foot wide easement shall be dedicated to the District on the Final
Map or by separate instrument satisfactory to the Oistrict, to align with the existing easement, allowing
the necessary water line connection to Bay Laurel Street (new street). [DSR]
99. A water line and connection to Water Zone 3 is required which will connect the project to Zone 3
lines in Rolling Hills Drive. A 15 foot wide easement shall be dedicated to the District on the Final
Map or by separate instrument satisfactory to the District, to align with the existing Zone 3
connection on the north boundary of the project. A portion of this required water line may
alternately follow the existing access road along the north side of Martin Canyon Creek.[DSR]
100. Water facilities shall be connected to the DSRSD system, and shall be installed at the expense of the
Developer, in accordance with District standards and specifications. [DSR]
101. 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 groundwater protection ordinances. Zone 7
should be contacted for additional information. [PW]
102. The Tract will be served water within Pressure Zone 3, which cannot serve house pad elevations
greater than 740 feet above sea level. [DSR]
103. Pressure Zone 3 water facilities will be tied to a future Potable Water Reservoir to be constructed on
the Donlan Canyon project west of the site. To ensure compliance with water master planning for
the area, Zone 3 water lines must be routed to the tract boundary and connected to the pipeline
within the road stub at the Tract's western boundary. [DSR]
104. Interim water facilities may be constructed across Phase II linking existing Zone 3 lines south of
Silvergate Drive with Valley Christian Center. In order to allow uninterrupted Zone 3 service after
this interim line is built, Zone 3 water lines within Phase I must be completed and in service before
grading in the vicinity of the interim line is commenced within Phase II. [DSR]
105. If the interim water facilities referenced are built, the pipeline shall be abandoned in place and
plugged with non-shrink grout. The Phase II water facilities shall include a permanent connection to
a Zone 3 waterline in Inspiration Drive, which connects to water lines within the Valley Christian
Center property. [DSR]
106. Developer shall design and construct the water system in accordance with the DSRSD requirements.
107. Developer shall design, incorporate, and institute water conservation measures for the entire project.
[DSR,PW]
13
108. Developer shall design and provide infrastructure for recycled water use for landscaping in
accordance with DSRSD and to the satisfaction of the Public Work Director. [PW]
109. Developer shall obtain "will serve" letter prior to issuance of grading pennit which states that the
project can be served by DSRSD prior to occupancy. [PW]
EASEMENTS
110. Where the ApplicantlDeveloper 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 Public Works Oirector. [PW]
Ill. Existing and proposed access and public utility easements shall be submitted for review and
approval by the Public Works Director prior to the grading and improvement plan. These easements
shall allow for practical vehicular and utility service access for all lots. [PW]
112. A 10-foot public utility easement shall be shown on the Final Map along all street frontages, in
addition to all other easements required by the utility companies or governmental agencies. [PW]
IMPROVEMENT PLANS, AGREEMENTS AND SECURITY
113. Prior to filing for building permits, precise plans in City's title block and specifications for street
improvements, grading, drainage (including size, type and location of drainage facilities both on and
off-site) and erosion and sedimentation control shall be submitted and subject to the review and
approval of the Public Works Director. [PW]
~
114. The subdivider shall enter into an Improvement Agreement with the City for all public improvements
prior to issuance of grading or improvement permit, which ever occurs first. Complete improvement
plans, specifications and calculations shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Public Works
Director and other affected agencies having jurisdiction over public improvements prior to execution
of the Improvement Agreement. Improvement plans shall show the existing and proposed
improvements along adjacent public street(s) and property that relate to the proposed improvements.
[PW]
115. The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold hannless the City of Dublin and its agents, officers,
and employees, from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Dublin or its agents,
officers, or employees, to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Dublin or its
advisory agency, appeal board, or legislative body concerning a subdivision, which action is brought
within the time period provided for in Section 66499.37 of the Government Code of the State of
California. The City of Dublin shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action, or
proceedings. [PW]
DEDICATIONS
116. All street dedications shall include working easements for slopes. [PW]
117. The boundary of all lots as well as the centerline of the streets, shall be survey monurnented. At
least three (3) permanent benclunarks shall be established. [PW]
14
118. All improvements within Tentative Map, Improvement Plans and Grading Plans, including curb,
gutter, sidewalks, driveways, paving and utilities, must be constructed prior to occupancy in
accordance witli approved standards to the satisfactory of Public Works Director and only after an
encroacrunent permit has been issued. [PW]
OPEN SPACE/COMMON AREASILANDSCAPING
119. Prior to release of building permits, the Applicant! Developer shall prune out all deadwood in the
trees to be saved and clean up ground of all deadwood and debris to keep this material from getting
into the watercourse. The CC&R's for the project shall establish a program to provide this service at
least once a year, occurring prior to October 15th of that year. [PW]
120. All permanent structures shall be set back a minimum of20 feet from (a) the top of the bank of
Martin Canyon Creek or (b) a 2 (horizontal) to a 1 (vertical) projection from the toe of the creek
bank to the top of ground (whichever is greater) as required by the Watercourse Protection
Ordinance. Maintenance easement shall be recorded over any portion oflots that encroach within
this setback area and potential purchasers of the lots shall be made aware that the City has the right
to remove, and not replace, any improvements that are constructed within the easement area. [PW]
121. Maintenance of common areas including omamentallandscaping, graded slopes, erosion control
plantings and drainage, erosion and sediment control improvements, retaining walls, and landslide
repair improvements shall be to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and 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 to
the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and be the responsibility of a Homeovmer's
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. [PW,PL]
122. Prior to issuance of grading permit visually important trees shall be tagged in the field for protection
and preservation and appropriately fenced subject to approval of the Public Works Oirector. [PW]
DUST AND DEBRIS
123. Measures which meet the City of Dublin Clean Water Program and State Clean Water Permit 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. [PW]
124. 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 construction period, as determined by
the Public Works Director. [PW]
ARCHAEOLOGY
125 . 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
15
.
the archaeologist, the remains are significant, measures, as may be required by the Planning
Director, shall be taken to protect them. [PW,PL]
FIRE
126. 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 specified by the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority
(DRF A). All such work will be subject to the joint field inspection of the Public Works Director and
DRFA.
127. The developer shall comply with all applicable requirements ofORFA including, but not limited to,
those related to the following:
A. Fire Trail Access
B. Fire Buffer Zone
C. Weed Abatement
D. Fire Sprinklers in Structures
E. Street Grades
F. Fire Impact Fee
128. Fire Hydrants shall be spaced every 400 linear feet in residential areas comprised primarily of well
spaced, average single family dwellings. * [F]
129. The maximum grades for fire apparatus roadways shall not exceed:*
a) 15% for all weather driving surfaces.
b) 15% to 20% for grooved concrete or rough asphalt for short stretches not to exceed 50 feet. [F]
130. The minimum number of fire access roads shall be as follows:*
a) 1-25 units One public access road
b) 26-74 units One public access road and one emergency access road
c) 75+ units Two public access roads [F]
131. The maximum length of a single access road shall be no greater than 1000 feet. * [F]
132. Dimensions. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet
and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. * [F]
133. Surface. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads
of fire apparatus and shall be provided with a surface so as to provide all weather driving
capabilities. * [F]
134. Open Space area. Provide for weed abatement before, during, and after construction with the
following guidelines:
a. Clear all vegetation 100 feet of combustible structures on uphill slopes.
16
.
b. Clear all vegetation 30 feet of combustible structures on downhill slope.
c. Provide an enviromnent thinning plan for the area between 30 and 100 feet of this
development. [F]
135. Provide a landscape plan for wildland open space areas. Supply vegetation fuel modifications and
lor buffer zones, and possible use offire resistive or drought tolerant varieties of plant life.
136. Trails. At the trail head, a lock down or removable bollard will be required to gain access to the trail
in the event of an emergency. In addition to, the Authority may require during the site review
process or during construction process access to gates and behind houses for emergency purposes.
[F]
137. All homes constructed beyond one and one-half mile distance from a fire station shall be protected
by a complete fire protection system, i.e., sprinkler system. [F]
138. Turn around bulbs shall be 40' - 0" radius minimum. [F]
139. All emergency access ways shall be clearly marked as a "E.V.A." [F]
140. No parking shall be allowed in front ofa "E.V.A.". Curbing shall be painted red and labeled "no
parking fire access" in front of access pathway/roads. [F]
141. Water supply shall be 2,500 gpm as per LS.O. Guide 1980. [F]
142. Approved spark arresters shall be installed on each chimney flue. [F]
143. Roofing shall be Class "B". [F]
144. A one-time Fire Impact Fee of $600.00 per unit shall be paid prior to a permit being issued. [F]
145. Submit a site plan of the proposed project for review, so that DRF A may further evaluate and assist
you in an expedient manner. [F]
146. Future site plans of the proposed project should be submitted to the Oougherty Regional Fire
Authority for review. [F]
CREEK ACCESS
147. The trail head at the collector street near Silvergate shall be 8 feet wide extending to the street and
designed to allow maintenance vehicles to access the trail from the street. The Hiking Trail on the
south side of the creek shall be 8' wide at a minimum. [pW, PL]
148. The proposed aggregate-base access road along the north side of the creek and east of Martin
Canyon Road shall be 12 feet wide, and shall be dedicated to the City with the creek improvements,
to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and subject to the approval of the Department of
Fish and Game and the Army Corps of Engineers. With approval of the Director of Public Works,
this creek access road may be less than 12 feet wide in limited areas where necessary for tree
preservation. [PW, PL]
17
t .
149. The Developer shall construct a 6' tall, black-clad, chain-link fence around the turnaround area at
the end of Martin Canyon, with a lockable gate to the maintenance roadway to the east, to the
satisfaction of the Public Works Director. [PW, PL]
150. There shall be turn around improvements made at the ultimate west end of the access road and
access trail, which shall be aggregate base for maintenance vehicles and police patrol purposes.
Temporary turnarounds shall be constructed ifneeded at the ends of these roads in Phase I, subject
to the determination of the Public Works Director.[pW, PL]
151. The Developer shall obtain, in the name of the City, an access easement to use the proposed access
road on the north side of the creek prior to recording of final map for Phase 1. The applicant shall
obtain the permission of the property owner on which the road exists to make improvements to the
access road, and shall ensure that the road is 12 feet wide at a minimum and has an aggregate base
satisfactory to the Public Works and Planning Departments, prior to dedication of the creek area to
the City.[PW,PL,F,PO]
152. If the applicant is unable to arrange for an easement for use and maintenance over the road discussed
in condition #14, an alternate location for a 12 foot wide access road shall be provided on the project
property, subject to the approval of all applicable City Departments. If this condition or any other
Condition of Approval related to the creek access trail or roads cannot be fulfilled by the developer,
the portion of this project approval related to the creek access trail/road shall revert back to the
previous design approved in 1989 (with a 12 foot wide creek access trail/road on the south side of
the creek). [PL, PW]
153. Lockable, removable bollards, or some other acceptable type of vehicle security measures, shall be
installed at each vehicular access to the trail to prevent unauthorized vehicles from using the trail,
while enabling access to the trail in the event of an emergency. The Dougherty Regional Fire
Authority may require, during the site review process or during construction process, access to gates
and behind houses for emergency purposes. [PW,PL,F,PO]
154. The access across the creek shall be over a properly designed pipe or culvert that will pass the design
storm flow and support fire and maintenance vehicle traffic loadings. The access road over this pipe
and creek area shall be paved with 2 inches of asphalt over 6 inches of aggregate base rock (as a
minimum). The inlet and outfall of the pipe shall be protected from erosion.[pW]
155. The developer shall provide a ten-foot wide flat rocked access area between the lots off the
Silvergate cul-de-sac and the top of the creek bank, as shown in "Staff Study" attached to Exhibit A
of P A 94-054. This is to provide access to the culvert headwall area upstream of Silvergate
Drive. [PW]
156. Those portions of the access road and access trail adjacent to and associated with Phase 1 shall be
improved and dedicated to the City prior to occupancy of any units in Phase I. [pW,PL,PO]
157. The Phase I access road and access trail improvements shall extend to and include the proposed
creek culvert crossing so that a drive-through maintenance loop can be made without having to back
up or turn around. [PW,PL]
18
.
158. When the creek area is dedicated to the City for maintenance of the public open space, the City will
accept, and be responsible for maintaining, the improved access road and access trail and the open
space and creek areas which are accessed from these roads. The City shall determine the location of
open space to be dedicated and maintained by the City. [PW,PL]
159. Every effort shall be made to locate, design, and construct the creek access trail and access road so
that grading and tree removal impacts are reduced to the maximum extent possible, so as to
minimize damage to the ecological and aesthetic value and characteristics of the open space area,
while providing the necessary service functions. [PW,PL]
MISCELLANEOUS
160. This property shall be annexed to the Street Lighting Maintenance Assessment District. [PW]
161. All construction traffic may be subject to specific routing as determined by the Public Works
Oirector. [PW]
162. The Developer shall provide unit address information to the satisfaction of DRF A, U. S. Postal
Services, and City of Dublin Planning Department and Building Department.
163. In submitting subsequent plans for review and approval, each set of plans shall have attached an
annotated copy of these conditions of approval. The notations shall clearly indicate how all
conditions of approval will be complied with. Construction plans will not be accepted without the
annotated conditions 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. [PW]
164. The ApplicantJDeveloper shall work with the ApplicantJDeveloper of the adjacent property Donlan
Canyon project site Tentative Map 5962 to provide adequate access and utility connections, to the
satisfaction of Public Works Director. [PW]
165. The applicant shall submit to the City for filing three copies of the Amended Tentative Map for
Phase I and three copies of the Amended map for Phase II of the Hansen Ranch project site which
shows the site configuration and grading as shown on the Tentative Maps as approved by the City
Council on February 27,1995 (for Phase I) and May 22, 1995 (for Phase II). Prior to stamping and
filing these plans, the Planning Director shall determine whether these plans substantially comply
with the plans approved by the City Council. [PW,PL]
166. Submit three approved blueprint and approved original mylar or photo mylar of improvement plan,
grading plan and recorded final map to City of Dublin's Public Works. Upon completion of
construction, the City's mylars shall be modified to an as-built plan (mylar) prepared by registered
civil engineer and a declaration by a civil engineer and soils engineer that all work was done under
his supervision and in accordance with the recommendation contained in the soils report shall be
submitted to the Public Works Department. [PW]
19
..
. .,
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this of 22nd day of May, 1995.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
(g\pa#\1995\007\ccresTM)
20
.., e
ORDINANCE NO. .95
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBUN AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE
TO PERMIT THE REZONING OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF SILVERGATE DRIVE,
NORTH OF HANSEN DRIVE, AND SOUTH OF WINDING TRAILS LANE
(APN 941-110-1-9)
The City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows:
Section 1
Chapter 2 of Tille 8 of the Dublin Ordinance Code is hereby amended In the following manner:
Approximately 2.4 net acres of the 147 -acre property generally known as the "Hansen Hill Ranch" project site,
located along the west side of Silvergate Drive, north of Hansen Drive, and south of WInding Trails Lane, more specifically
described as Assessor's Parcel Number 941-110-1-9, are hereby rezoned from PO Open Space to PO Single Family
Residential permitting Low Density Single Family land use as generally shown on Attachment 1, Hansen Ranch General Plan
Amendment, and the Planned Development Site Plan (TO BE PROVIDED BY APPUCANT PRIOR TO JUNE 13, 1995 CITY
COUNCIL MEETING), and as further defined in the Planned Development General Provisions adopted for the site with
approval of PA 95-007 Hansen Ranch Rezoning.
A map of the rezoning area is outlined below:
~
N
Section 2
This ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days from and after its passage. Before the expiration of
fifteen (15) days after its passage, it shall be published once, with the names of the Councllmembers voting for and against
same, In a local newspaper published n Alameda County and available in the City of Dublin.
votes:
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this 13th day of June, 1995, by the following
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
(g;\pa#\1995\pa95007\ORDREZCC. )
EXHIBIT E
C/J
-I
)>
> ."
1-3 ."
1-3
> CJ'J
(j
== -I
~ c:
~
z C
1-3 -<
,....
Q -
r~ IP, ,
i
", /." .
(
I
(
(
.
I
\
\
\
.
,\.
\
" _~:,-:J
~\T~~,~~jP/'
-.. !
/'"' '
(
/'"
/
'~"-
-~
~-~~
...-- ... .. ..
-;,,\1. _\,,,,
\.,.... IIltl""
C)
..,
'"
<:
'"
;:
...,
,'"
r"",
,
...j.'.....
, I ~ 1'1, "I
(
(
,
,
/
/
(
/
::
,;.
:i
~
~
;..:
~Q)
-"'tl
-i)>
~c
zo
Om
(')0
::o~
-0
CJ~
~m
)>00
.-
.-i
m
cn
",
- /(~ \
2\ ',' \ ; :\'
~... , - I ~ ~
(
,
, , ,
. ~; ,
r:::::~;-"
',-
, 'I:,' '. ~ :
::
~ ,~ ~.. -'-',
.~ .~ /~/r---'~'~ = ~~_
. ""';.
,---..-.-.-/ '"i ..:," ~ ~
\ '. ' '/ ----- - .~ :; ~
\'\. 'i::.' ~;:
\ ' ,~\ '/~,;,\. '.
,;:;.t --" '/ ',~ ;.
O ' "," "" ',' .-'C "'- :
. . - ,.,.- If" r.... - "----
\ ~i /----: .(' ,,:~;/' ,,"
'~! 'I-~ ,'<> '
,~{ I ",'" ","
i~1 \, , ',,'(')/"'\":~::';,
, I \'
.
\
, '- ----
'l't',/
---......."',.
--- -- \
,
; I
'J
-,'
:f"
--
~'"
;.;.~-------. .
-- . ~:~~~~<~:-
(
,
)
-....
~ -" -----
,-
.
j'
, / 'd"/
I: ._". _
".; ""'" I
'0',' , ~~'\((J
" .: :.": . .~
J"<. ~~\.\~ j~
. ,,::.... 3 \. \
. ~~~ r .
. ,"-:-i~~"
:.... ......~ .,'.{~..:..-.., ~ /
, -:~~1
J'
-~,~'/ '
I.':... J
C ."/
,
- "
~,,:;/Ll;~~f:
'\
'.
"
'.
.: . :~.~.
'"
"'" "
"" ;-..;""
,"'''-.. '"
"'," '--,.., , "'",=::
"~.. . ~ ,
,.," " "" " ...,.....""'.....""'............... ' .
...'....... (; I . -----------
,
,
,
\ "
I .
. .
\ ",
I '
I
\
I,
\""
\
- \
: , 1 1111' : :\' I
j
------
....
.,,,,., It..,
" .
",
..../
"
,
/'/(~
, ,
/. ,
i
!~:;'
r l.
~:\ /.,.,
;' J. .
, / ,
.' '. r ,:'
. J'J~',
j. --
I" ,
/
I'-
I '1 \
\
~,,,
~ \ .
..
..
..
...-' ..
. .
-:
-r
.. ~
w ~
~
:.:: ~ ~
~ ~ ~
I:: ~ ~
<l
"
"
8
"
=
.
,
\
r
I
'.", '
"\
~
Q
. . .....
~. .... i.'~.,\.~.'" io "" ..
"
~
:.::
"
2
;0
~
.;
<:
:.::
~
:;
"
J'
I' .
J ;-',
, '.
, "
'~
". '.
..
..,
"
..
~
..,
"
..
"
"
t:
;;
~
",
"
'"
. . i ~ .
I,. ~ " .,..
, \
\ \
\ .
" ''''----.
'-' \
x ~. .
'; J
,-.'
.,.
,~"
~.~ I,
'~~ .
'.~' ......
"~,
.)
I
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
SUBDIVISION 6308
TV
AOAMS . STREETER
CIVIL ENGINEERS. INC.
tt Co.lI'O*A TI ".u(
-we C.I, tJI'w. '"""I 4U.~l''bD
r
],
I
'~., J
-', ~ I I I, ;
~'. : . ,
'1~" ';
"
"
~"\ ~''f-,~~
\ " !;
""\ -;:"~',
~ l. C,
~
;t:>("):::o-c-Jo
C/)c::m:::oO
o:::or-o~
-c::t1O""'CO
mmQos:
zz......C/)m
C/)-i-imcn
rmo-
~-<tJ-irri
(")02000
mm-icc
G)Om
z:t:>
;p:::o
-im
m>
o
'"'C
-- ~
::- 0
<: '"'C
:r: 0
~
<: 00
-- t'!!'j
-.. ~
--
:- C"'1
:-
-- ~
~- :z
<: ~
-:--- ~
--
--
~
-- '"'C
--
-- ~
;:;... ~
c..r:,
-- Z
'".
-- ~
-..
~
~
:z
e=
~
~
z
~
~
~
I.~
EXTENDED
RIGHT OF WAY
--
,
,
,
\
..
"',
...
..
.. "
.. "
"... ~"
. '.' :;::l",~~I~
.. (:":~:;k~R~",
.. ] ',' "\',\:X,\\ Ii,"
\ , " ;::',\,.\,\.~\\;~,,,,:~~,:. :~.
'" \ \' , ~ ..""~ '. ~
' "', ';:'1 " " '
, \' \ < \ " I
\ \ \ \ \ \ I \.
'.'- ' . ~-' .C.' ,',:: ',: I"
' , ')',
:-.~
..
~
"
..
..
..
...
...' ,
....,....,
, L, ..~_I,.,
", ',:, " ':.... ..i:.,;,. t'-".;./At..~.,t~...__...._
~.. i:\~:\:.t~..t.::~~
,.- -.---
2>-
;a :3: ;Q
.ii ::;r,:oo III
f"'" ~ n
I Z - rn
~ -
CO <
US III
Z ~ CJ
~
'"
.
,
~
, ,:MIIIIIIIII.' I"" ......' I.... "'~.." lo' .~ \'1 1....11
"
"'--
n '
i4
I
::#
-.. I.'i".
, I
..
'I."
.J
,+ ~
';1,11 '
.ill'i\ \
111\' ,
'1'\\\" \
.r 1.IJi\. ~,
~' .
;': ,I ,
; ,~:' ;---. -Ii i ! ~ '
! I I ~i ' ;.,~;~/ ".,
. . ,II '_ (\",t '1'. I
-' ~, '~U ""'lj'~:.I'
. ; '1 ,.,)""~ I,;; i
__ "'_~"';.;_:' i ,c.; '. ...,' Ii::.) ',I,: ,', '
r .~" ,_"" ',~""- _. ,'f/!{'il, '
...,,' )".'f'- ,'.
,,:' ,,' "
, ",~I"" 'i t
..' I ','" I
f '"
I
:1.;
I';
" .
-+
r
~. \ ,
T--
;-
I, \',
_ I,' , 'I fuiI\,\"
\, I \ \ \ : \ ~~~~.\
'I ',' .
': . 'I
II ~ ~ '\
I, ~ I' ~ \
, '
t
I-
It
I~!!i! 'I II
:~:' [t I
i!i!~111
IIIII!!
liiidi" t
jiL
,..
Z
~t :J:
O..c)>
" ~~ "U
~1~m:J:
)> ,Z )>
~II~~
m Z
~)( 0
i .:J:
=i 1-
\ .
"
,"'I
" ,\
,,:
, I
I
!-
i
I,\' .-
'I,~ '
,i\I.
. ,I.
li.l\ I'! i I .' \ .:\' \ .
1:\ " I
\. ~ ~~. ~ I '" ,
Ii \ ',.:'"
"r i .
\ '
.1 l .....
~ I I,.",
"
,
.11
.-
.i =t '
,... I 3'!
Z ~
~ :;
Z -
Z en
_ i tD
~ U1
.;;,~
,'~
~
( .
i""j, . ' ','l ;;"".,,(
::1'11\'\1\ '. " I l.
'II.I\!
:,\i\"1\ ,>,\\'.. --, ,III
. I',' ",' ';;;'\\1\1),111) Iii; i " I
, . ,,' I : It I, \ j'II'I\\ i '
) . II~ I ' . ' ~
'1111,\I,r: i \, '
J ') If, ,1 ) I' ! I :
""J;,'lf . I, ,,-I
! .,J' l~ I~ ' I ' I
'i Ii:'" "I l f .'.~ .i}" I
",#,.. .
",
'I'.
(
I I I "'tl I m I I I () I D :0
I .....
........ c: 0 r::::::' l.. . CD
~~~ c- 3 ...... (/I
-. 3 . 4 /\ l':. c:
0 .= CD
..... CD
en "" :J
en 0 "ll "ll r-tII otll tII :tI :tI () ~::: ~3: ~en :ar-
tll c III -et ?let 0- ClI 0
... 'tI III C OC C C III . :I OJ
... CD ... 17 3 :c!!. -!!. (/I OJ f- 0. 0. "'IQ (II :c
Cll ~ II> II>
ID :l (/I n I :l 0.:1 :l ..... C C ~;- 0.0
0 ::::: :::::
3 (II , , "'tl OCll Cll Cll :J N 3 .. 3 O"Tl Cll Cll
:tI 0(/1 0 (II (/I 0 0
'tI (/I c: <(II ... (/I (II a. !-" I 0 0 III :l :I
0 01 III III c- - ::: c: o::t c:: ::::(11
1'1 Cll"ll en"ll - c: Cll g,3
0 I'l 3 "ll (/I 3cO :2. III;::
... CD ... -. ... III -Ill III (> 1'1 :l III = -'<
::. Cll .. () III ... ~ ... CD Cll .... ;=:=r ih
... .... (II .,,'< ?r.n
0. III "ll ..... lC7; 7; 7; III
... 0 Cll' III IlO OJ 0 ." ... '" :II
0 C IQ , , ." '" '< <.n_
o 17 5' .. ClI Cll , :l
U :;I ClI :l ;p ~ :l III
::I :tI " en IQ
(j' (tI 0. 0. 0. III '" -
c '" (II Q ClI
:J C C C ... ~ '" 0. o,ClI
"Tl (II en en 0 '" en ~ClI
'" '< ~c: r: "Tl
01 ~ ~ ... 3 :I
t"" > ... ~ III
\'1 III III 0 :tI Cll III 3
> G; III Cll :l III
- .. ., en ." =
Z '< < ~ '<
ClI C. III
~ > et '"
:;I n
d 0 ;;;
t/} ~ III
~ ~
n :;c
... 0
....
> ~
Z 0
I (
(
\
~ I I I () "d
I .... '='
0
I c: 0
OJ
.... '-l
~ "Tl "ll () ;p 0 ~
... ... ... 0 ... :J (j
III Cll 0 = ...
:;I ClI "0 Cll Cll 1-3
(II ~ 0 (>
'tI III (II ... III '(fJ
0 '< ClI 0
:. 0. ... III .....
:l ~
III (/I r.n 0.
... ~ ~
0 ... ~ . '" . .. ..
:;I Cll ell
ell Cll III
() 0
0
... r.n
...
Co ...
0 ClI
... III
...
(II
I
~
0 0 tIl
C 0 III
17 ~ ...
:l ::I
0 "0
(j ...
:c 0
'< ::> 'tI
~r 0
::> (II
III - Cll
:l 3 Cll Co Z
::I ;:; ::I -I
(II
::>, m
IQ "ll n :0
;p:' III (/I
... 3 -I
Cll :.> 0 :>-
III ... :l -I
Cl'< > m
0 ...
c: ClI
::l III
C.
III
...
'<
.....
,.:r.~;-:
..<~:::(:' ;;~~:::;
..<;~~ :r;':";;.'
z
0
-I
m
:.> 0 I./l
<0
C. ::l <0
"ll c: -I
'" 3 '"
~ 0" 0"
;tC Cll
(II <l>
, <l>
:0 C. 0
c:> ::l
" "ll 0
... c:
C> 0" '0
'" == "0
" 0
0 , III
::l I./l
Cl> Cl>
3 '0
T '"
"ll to
C <l>
0"
0
" ...
-n c.
OJ '"
" CIl
"
"0
'"
(II 1'1
::l
CIl
0 $
c
OJ
:tI r 0
III -
< Z
III
III G) >
c. ..
..
m '"
." 0
III ><
C" Z f
>
... ....
c m .. m
III .. Z
... :0 ID co
'< C? m
)> ....
... co
1'1
CO r >
CO ,...
~ ~
1J -;
.
r GO
..
)> ., GO
N "!.
Z ID
CD ..
C? m
.m
0
<
m
.
'.
fJ
"ll or
...
3 -)>
III :Oz
... ()O
'<
." C
III rc
:::I
:::I ;pC/)
:::I ~m
(Q
> Opo
...
II
III Z ...,
<0
C
-S
ltl
....
I
....
: ..ov.M4."
m ...t................... .......
~ .,:.:.:,,:.:.:.:-:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.
,... .,:~i::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.
,~::~ftt~rm~~tf~rtff\ ~
. ...11......3... .:.......... ...
. :11:!l::!i:::::!::11:!ll!:!:: i.:\
..... III III...... J;....... 9.- III . oil.. 'III",i ,.
, .. ....:.t::::::::;0' ~
, ~.. ?~
!::: \
\I!:~ 1
r=!!
. r
~
1-3
>
(j
==
~
~
Z
-3
(,H
-,
jo'''
>
1-3
1-3
>
(j
==
~
~
Z
1-3
~
r
-'
,I
. \
. ~ ~ : __7.: -
,.. N ..,
. ...=
.-
o
::I
Vl
""'
::I
'1'1
~
Vl
1'1
n
""'
:6
.IZ
r
.' ,.,.._ __.U _.~ ._..
~("Ialf"
-~~~:>
:~>::
I _...~
;=~--
.f"I":zn
, ~~,..:-:g.
\
\
\
~"\,
'~
'III'".~'t.",',.., _~ ...
I
......
;::;. :>
'?o.:z
- -....
~::: 11-'
1=
\
\
\
\
\
I
\
I
I
I
I
I
"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
/
,J
\ ,- (I
\ ~"( 1;/' (
\ .' /' J
\ d :~.
\ /.. ~ .,'
\ ~
I' T
~;) .,/ (
l~/
'~!L ...
~ Z '. ~
I~ ,-' e
I~ ... II.. ~ ~n. ""
~ I g
II' n<r- E
I I ,.,:>,. , ,
I ~ :;;:;... :;;:; . r-
'I j-:'::::-, r:;:;~ j' · ~
lid \~ =~g t-: : .. 11 /
I,~':::l I, /' ,. /'0"
_ II I ~ ",', r f'~ J" ')
"" 1'1 ,\:l I, I},...X........ y
g I: I \'i~ ~ 1/ ill; ) ~ ~<'..... 'j/
III 'w '/ /ff. l Q ( ..............) I
III \'" /1 , : f, ----\--~ ............./f,/
III ~\ I I f / ,;;....... /.J \ \ - '- -r
III \\ /./~:~ /r.,~IJ... )/, j \ IL il5
III " " /:./ ..~ .. J'::\ '\..--\ '\ \..-.l_L .1'--
III ,......._ _-,... \ < J/~'~\ \)- -r--',.----.,..
III .......-:::=:=-- ;- r /f/l~.":=\ \....-.l;" (...-';4 \ l...5l.--J
III J} : -:z '\ )..4".... \~..-\ LL..J I~ '
I' ~ .. /. "II )/ A..... \ '......J r-......---J
II . .,1 jJ:.ll^ >. ......-<;.., )........\..-\~\;..J I L
d I :Tl~ J, '" :/I/.' ;)- ..;.( V\.- :6 tf.~ ~ r--; \ -{
,,' ,,1 r ..--~ =A. /11/ ).~q,.""'" V >?..... H -I
I,' ~ F -_<.1 :.)" ~llr! ,.'.....y ~"--l \
,I -\ _ r.. , ~ ' I 'r-J J..... -r ... ....
II' ~\ \(:;. .....--,. 1 t J ' , I I --{ ~ r 8
II' <l) ~ r ... J, II -1-) I--{ .., w
II g "':'5'<\~ I, \. \ ~IA !:1:t.:.r'I'Ji \(--\~/ N
~v '('I ..... ::-.1 ~\
~~"".-%',tl~'-:) ~i/}" _~ ~ \' \ Ff:I:1~=1:I=i:j€!€\€ €I €!3:~
'",,~\.'~ ~_.> .t.~_i.']' .11 ~~::: ; /1' /1 :1:1:\:\1: = :\=1:\1:1= : ; : : :11:
" e . - . . ' - - _1- .\' . . . . - -
-l~\\~ f __;:.J, ..r-'), l~; I / I : :1:1: : : : :1:\: : : : : : :1:
~ ~ \ t :J I ~. :"~ 'r., ~ 0 ~ (/ / :. : I i I:' : i : I; : : : ~ : : : : I:
i-lN I ~ ~J) C ~t' ,~i," 'I I :11=\:\:1:\:\:\:1:\:\:\: : : : : :
~~.IfG:J ~.. l _--~,-l ::::1-:::: ":--1"'-
I.{ t---J : r'. .. :;,..,~~1!...<;_ -.......
j , L -"DO J..;!:--- -.,
- . J .,.a ~:.------- ~
---.., ..-- ~...-\ ):
\ f , 't> ("\
\\ ';: -I
\ \ ~l~ \ ""
__..!-J \ '~ ...
~)~~~~\\ 0
\ \
~
.<'-
~(
-{.,....-...... . -.-
1 .
~ ~~ t
"';l ~. L
~ ~t~ ,.
~ _FT
- ~f'~
~ -.
l~
"",~n
-<
"';l
n
>
r
t
:!:
>
t-
O
c\\:; \ l~ \ \ \ \ \
-~~\~ II i r
r:'o
C'l
1'1
'0
'\': !~"~S::'l
~. f1<li....
;:~ =4P"~.s ~=(
::~t. .'..
o;"'t..all:
;&. ~ Ill,. "," ...AI
. . ~
,. ~.J. c
. ~ t ..
t-._ J
.. ~ .~
;:;. t. ' T
t ~ t'" 'III
.. t z ~
~ i !l
. .I
Jf.
It
..
c:
""'
:0
"%
1
~
p
.
. ... . . . ~ I e... .. mH~ ,... !e
~I.-r"""" -v:.t-c 1;':1:' ,.. n a-g I ~ r--2 :f
"'0",
0"-:>''''''' )01'0)00 01" !:! 0 )0-% 7-
;:Ii~~ ";II~'" ... 0 . % ~ ~ I a =<-s~ - tOn ,.
;II 0( ",')0 .;; .. ... ':1~~~
;~~o; ~o::ll"" N i 0 ,. ~ - %:(0 "
!:~I~::! ,.".r- .. C j ~ - 0 .....: ...
'" '" t:l " 2~ o 0;.. o :t, <
.."'cO 0 "rg:: :t ",.
P:: ad~ a--a ...... - <: ..
[_I:Z;.. 0 :l - ... ~-4'" .. . i ~II " 0:' ,.'
~ !:(. -i ~ 0 '" ... .. 1p~ n;:l<< c:
. ~ .../;1 ~ o ~ ..' ",... % - ... .~ ~ )0' ,
2 ~ S ~ ,. ...
; dO'- i 0 < -..
dqOr.J~: g :- )0 ...-
~ ........ )0 r- ~ ~g 0;:;
r- -, Ol' c . ",..
.. 0 ; ~~~~ , ~ - e '" ",no
... c ~.~
...! . ,... z .. .. ''/I ):..
0 !: o _x,..- J: > g .. E :: 0 ~ ..
0 ..... ... ".. - z '''' - -0
... ~ >-/ ~ z ',.. .. .. ..
0 ::0 " ... ... ~g <: ..
0 III .. III Z:)O - 0 - ..
)0 2J 5 c .. ..
)0 0 % 0 0 ~
... S S ~ ~~ III
,.. ;:I ::0 ;II <
0 III ~ .. 9.- ,.. d ~_
<
~ is!
. :l 1 l
! ! ~ 1
J
:: := .,. I
I I r I
l l k k
! ! ~ !
l:z...r-
-0::11>
::. 0 z
... .. J: Q
;:I. ..
.. N'" r-
.....0;;0
>.. III
.. - D
"'C',.i
>)00"
.........0
...",,1J
.oont:
n_:l:)o
);l::~
.... D 0 0
"'''')10%
.. .. ,...
," ~
- i ".
-<..
-c ... 0
%:'"
)0 - ;I
;10:"
r- t I
)0.. I
%0
, z:
()
z
""'
-<
~
.>
'''lJ
~
fjENTAllVE MAP ~ SUBDlVlSRJN,57.66 ~
'HANSEN Hll. RAl'01i
~ o::um jtll.J"Q'M.
.. --....~-,.....- -_.~._~~._.-----'~-~..........~.. ..-~ -.._--
.
R E r: ~: : ~: [: .:"
l~lA Y (\ ':""' 1QI;::;
. ::.J J IV;:;""
Martha W. Buxton
P' I;-"\.j t.-. '. i/__:~ ,-
t~ ~ ~ ; 'J "" \., ~. (..~ :-< ~
Real Estate Development Services
120 Village Square #130
Orinda, Ca 94563
(510) 254-6968
FAX (510) 254-7954
DATE:
May 5, 1995
TO:
T asha Houston, Associate Planner
FROM:
Marti Buxton, Consultant to California Pacific Homes
RE:
Revisions to the Amended Tentative Map for Phase 2
You have requested that I provide a written statement regarding the changes California
Pacific Homes (CPH) proposes to make to the Phase 2 Tentative Map/PO Rezoning Site
Plan which will be considered by the City Council at the May 8 meeting. For the
General Plan Amendment, the approximately 2.4 acres of land (overall) that will be
redesignated from open space to residential land use will remain the same.
CPH proposes to relocate 6 of the lots within the area requiring the General Plan
Amendment to the area between lots 141 and 142 fronting Inspiration Drive, (plan
attached) The lots that would be relocated are numbered 99, 98, 97, 96, 93 and 92 on
the February 1995 submittal. Relocating these lots has two significantly positive impacts:
1. It maintains the 200 foot wide Riparian Corridor to allow wildlife passage as
depicted on Attachment 4 of the City Council staff report, (see attached)
2, It is an improvement over the currently approved plan in that it allows the
reconstruction of the seasonal stream channel in the Riparian Corridor. The 1989
approved plan makes no provision for reconstructing the stream channel because
the drainage remains underground until it reaches Martin Canyon Creek and the
grading contours ignore the natural, above-ground drainage flow,
The area between lots 141 and 142 is an area that you mentioned at both the Planning
Commission study session and May 1 meeting as a potential site for relocating some of
the 16 lots. It is a logical site because in the 1989 approved plan there are lots in this
same area. Placing lots in this area as approved in the 1989 plan will result in 1.31 acres
of reforested oak bay/woodland beyond what is currently proposed.
It was a pleasure working with youJ Lorry, Carol and Lee today to develop a revised
plan that is actually better than the 1989 plan in that the Riparian Corridor can once
again provide a natural habitat.
cc: With attachments: Mayor Guy Houston
Members of the City Council
Lee Thompson ....,-/
Without attachments: Larry Tong
Carol Cerelli
ATTACHMENT 5
-
.
::1.... t'i
'-0 'r-
M ?~' 2
UJ \l.l
c:r: r
;:; ......
t:) 5 ~ ::j
i:i: ~ <!.
1 3
~ - 'r-
'r-
2 . -4:
. ~ ;:;
~ "
a-
ci:
" r-:-
J s :
.. D '-'-r I
0 'C
! "
u '..
" ./
~ :;(
~ ....
.~
g
;;
Q.
" "
;; .t
u.
~ ....
..
'" ~
..
0 i)
~ m
"
f
. ,
or
..
. ...
z
..
u
Z
4
..
..
~
<i
..
..
c'
..:-
-
,-
-"
- -
'.
(~:J
n.~",
or ~
.. ~.,
%
u -""
t; ~.,
~ ~~
..
MAY-17-1995 16:10
ADAMS STREETER
7144740251 P.02/04
94-1000
ADAMS · STREETER
CIVil ENGINEERS INC.
Jan A. Adams. Randal L. Streeter
May 17, 1995
Ms. Tasha Huston
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, California 94568
SUBJECT: Hansen Hills Riparian Corridor
Dear Tasha:
Upon review of the latest Site Plan for the new riparian corridor. we will be able to
concentrate storm flows within the newly graded area north of the loop road (approximately
1.76 acres), All storm water that falls within the newly graded area north of the loop road
will flow to the new ripman corridor. Please reference the attached Exhibit 1/ A 1/ .
On the allier hand, we will not be able (0 take stOrm water from south of the loop road and
place it within the riparian corridor . We have attached a sketch (Exhibit liB ") showing the
limitations of this concept. Due to vertical constraints, the stOrm drain would outlet
immediately before the top of a 60-foot high 2: 1 slope. Since we cannot run storm fiows
over the top of a 2: 1 slope, the storm water would again need to be sent underground,'
Secondly, the hiking trail is designed within the 2: 1 slope area and provides another
constraint to keep storm flows underground.
Despite these vertical constraints, we are most concerned about the volume of storm t10ws
generated south of the loop road. The area of drainage south of the loop road is
approximately 24 acres, This will generate approximately 45 cubic feet per second of storm
flows. This is a tremendous amount of flow. Due to the existing terrain, these storm flows
will also travel at a high velocity. For these reasons, these storm flows will become highly
erosive Over any new grading.
5 CORPORATE PARK
IRVINE, CA. 9271,4
714-474.2330
"l'lAY-19-1995 09: 12
ADAl'lS STREETER
7144740251 F'. 03/[13
Ms. Tasha Huston
May 16, 1995
Page 2
We would propose to take the stann flows (south of the loop road) underground and outlet
these flows at the creek. This is the same design and solution as shown on the CUrrent
Tentative Tract Map.
Tasha, should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.
;$4I~
Robert C. Liewer
Vice President
RCL:jk.'V
941000.rip
Enclosures
'.,
\ :\ >>">,>>, \
. \"'c
\. \ ""
'. \\~.,
...
"
\
"
......:...
'.~ 1
.....--1
~ :"'~::'":'':-::~;~...
~"'.
"'~
"
--"'",-, ~.-
,',:""'-~-~"
, "
',~::\\~,:,
". '\ "\'>'.
... \', '-.
\..
''(
.. \.
,
\.
, ..
" .....--~~_.- ~-~',--.,
. '\ ..~:. .~ '. . \
-', - '. ~ ~
::.~.~ ..~- :.- '.
'.
\,
,
,
'>
,\ ..
\ \
",
.-.....
~. -. ~:;"":~.:.~.~,'".-.:.,.'..,. >'
, :-""'"
"'---.. . _._ ..C'~'. .~.~::~~ ::~~~.
'.
--
"
'.
\ "
\ ,
\ \
.
'. \
, ,
'.
\ " \
" \ \
~ \. \
, '\ \
h:r~::-:
\
'.
"\
-'w,
. --, ----.~\
-"--
\'..,
"...
"'--. j
-.... ....~ -'!"
...~--
.........
\"
".
............
... ....~-.
.......,...
- "
.......
'.
""-.,
'-'-"n.~_
...........
, \
. '\. \...
\ '
" '\\
.............-
'..--."........-
....-.
----. --
-..._~_.-.
". .__~:-.:.:-=~<.z.;;:::::..._ ___
, '.
....... \,
",
....... ....L
" ,
,
"
",,", -,.Co
'. .
"
, '.
\ i \
/'1....
./
~..-. ,1.-
.. ,-
:?~'~;f~~;_~~
..,r
..,.- -~.....
_."...,--~..
..
,
,
, ..
. .' ...'"
l.-.".,. '~.:_....., .,.~_
" .. .",-.
"'---
-"'
-'
......-_.
,--
- --......--.
--..__n
-",.-
......7
r_""-
,,'
!.:.~", " ,. ,..:~-,." .~-".-::-
_n ,.01 ~ ~. ~._..~_"H'.._-
. .,...<_.,._.....~...:...-'....,-
::;;~~:::.:~~.~-:::.::~~ ~,~~~~_:.~:::-~
.r_'_' '--I~_. _
- :--::- -=~---~, .--~..:..-~~
.-.-.
EXHIBIT
"B"
t'Cl/[0 . d
lS;:0j?~t'j?1~
(:I3133::J1S SWljatf
01:91
S661- ~ 1- ,\tI~,J
'MA'(~17-1995 16: 12
ADAMS STREETER
~
0
'"t:I
a
~
C/J
~ ~ ~
~
~
CJ ~
~
~
a CI)
< ~ ~
a
... .. ~ ~
...
Cj .. Ci3 t:::J
...~ ~ s:
... ...
... ~ Z
G
~
0
~
t:i
trJ
d
~ ~
'-C/J ~~ t:::::J
::~ a~ ~
~
II t'-1 ~
ttj ~
01"
0
., , ..
71~4740251 P,84/04
From t'larti Buxton/Pkl:l: (510)254-6968 PHONE No,
510 254 7954
Ma~.19 1995 10:57AM P02
. ,
Martha W. Buxton
Real Estate Development S9rvices
120 VilloSJ. SqUOf8 :# 130
Orindu, Co 94563
(510) 254.6968
FAX (510) 25-4.7954
May 19, 1995
T asha Houston, City Planner
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Dear Tasha:
Aa a project measure to enhance the ravegetotion through the swale in the riparian
corridor in Phose II of the Hansen Ranch subdivision, Calilornia Podfic Homes, os the
developer, will utilize enhanced vegetation techniques to ensure the replanted
vegetation will achieve a density equivalent to the woodlands in the riparian corridor
south of the loop road.
Examples of enhancements to the revegetation plan include irrigating the young plants,
placing top soil on fill slopes, using special planting techniques such as drilling into fill
slopes to cHow root penetration, planting native trees, shrubs and grasses at a
replacement ratio which would replicate a density of vegetation adequote to provide a
riparian corridor for wildlife habitat similar to the woodlands previously existing in the
riparian corridor.
These project measures are incorporated into the design and part of the project
description.
Sincerely,
Martha W. Buxton
Consultant for California Pacific Homes
cc: Jeff Slavin, California Pacific Homes