The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem 6.1 Tassajara Highlands GPor 19 82 /ii � 111 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL August 19, 2014 Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers CITY CLERK File #600 -60 Christopher L. Foss, City Manager " Tassajara Highlands General Plan /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendments, Planned Development Rezoning with a Related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 8133, and CEQA Addendum for a 11.11 -acre site (PLPA 2012 - 00051) Prepared by Mike Porto, Consulting Planner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Applicant is requesting a General Plan /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment to reduce the residential and eliminate the commercial uses for an 11.11 acre Project Site which is comprised of two adjacent parcels designated Medium Density Residential (4.95 acres), Neighborhood Commercial (3.51 acres) and Medium -High Density Residential (2.65 acres). The amendment would change the land use designations for the combined site to Medium Density Residential (6.16 acres) and Open Space (3.06 acres), and Public Right -of -Way for Tassajara Road widening and frontage improvements (1.89 acres). A Planned Development Rezone, Site Development Review, and Vesting Tentative Map 8133 have been submitted for a project of 48 detached single - family homes. The Project includes four floor plans with 4 or 5 bedrooms ranging in size from 2,718 square feet to 3,159 square feet and available in three architectural styles. Lots would range in size from 3,671 square feet to 6,907 square feet at an overall density of 6.92 units per acre. A CEQA Addendum is also included. FINANCIAL IMPACT: All costs associated with processing this project are borne by the Applicant. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the public hearing, deliberate, and take the following actions: a) Take a straw vote regarding the proposed General Plan and Specific Plan Amendment; and b) Adopt a Resolution Adopting a CEQA Addendum and a related Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Tassajara Highlands project (Fredrich /Vargas); and c) Waive the reading and INTRODUCE an Ordinance Rezoning the Tassajara Highlands (Fredrich /Vargas) Project Site to a Planned Development Zoning District and Approving a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan; and d) Adopt a Resolution Approving a Site Development Review Permit and Vesting Tentative Map 8133 for the Tassajara Highlands Project (Fredrich /Vargas) Project. Page 1 of 4 ITEM NO. 6.1 Submitted By Community Development Director PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 'Reviewed By Assistant City Manager The Tassajara Highlands project is proposed to be constructed on an 11.11 -acre site currently comprised of two adjacent parcels: 1) the Fredrich property is a 6.16 -acre parcel located at 6960 Tassajara Road, and 2) the Vargas property is a 4.95 -acre parcel located at 7020 Tassajara Road, immediately north of the first parcel. The Applicant is requesting approval of a General Plan /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment, Planned Development Rezone with related Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review, Tentative Map and CEQA Addendum to develop a residential project comprised of 48 detached single - family homes and related site improvements. ANALYSIS: The following is a brief discussion of the proposed project. The Planning Commission Staff Report dated July 22, 2014 (Attachment 1) includes a detailed analysis of the project. The current request for the proposed Tassajara Highlands project entitlements include: • General Plan /Specific Plan Amendment: The project site is currently designated Medium Density Residential (4.95 acres), Neighborhood Commercial (3.51 acres) and Medium -High Density Residential (2.65 acres). The proposed amendments would reduce the residential uses and eliminate the commercial uses by changing the land use designations for the combined sites to Medium Density Residential (6.16 acres) and Open Space (3.06 acres), with the remainder of the site dedicated as Public Right -of -Way for Tassajara Road widening and frontage improvements (1.89 acres). The proposed residential density would allow a range of 38 -86 residential units. However, the PD zoning locks in the unit count at 48 detached units (6.92 du /acre). A draft Resolution with the proposed General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendments is included as Attachment 2. State law limits General Plan amendments to four per General Plan Element per calendar year. In order to avoid amendments in excess of the number permitted by State Law, General Plan amendments for specific projects can be grouped together and adopted by one resolution. Therefore, formal adoption of this General Plan /Specific Plan Amendment will be grouped together with other proposed General Plan Amendments to be considered as a single action at a future City Council meeting. All approvals under this agenda item will not be effective until the General Plan Amendment item is approved and effective. • Planned Development Rezoning: The PD Rezoning related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan addresses the plan currently proposed for 48 single - family detached homes with related site improvements, open space, and public improvements. The Development Regulations for the Tassajara Highlands project have been proposed as compatible standards adopted for other single - family detached MDR projects in the vicinity. Page 2 of 4 An Ordinance adopting the Planned Development Rezone with related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan is included as Attachment 3 to this Staff Report. • Site Development Review: To construct 48 detached single - family homes with related site improvements. The Project includes four floor plans with 4 or 5 bedrooms ranging in size from 2,718 square feet to 3,159 square feet and available in three architectural styles. The project plans are included as Attachment 4 and a Resolution approving the Site Development Review is included as Attachment 5. • Vesting Tentative Map 8133: To allow the subdivision of 48 lots that range from 3,671 square feet to 6,907 square feet. The Project includes drainage improvements, habitat preservation, dedication of right -of -way, and coordination of perimeter off -site improvements with the area wide coordination of traffic and circulation improvements, especially with regard to Tassajara Road. The Project Plans are included as Attachment 4 and a Resolution approving the Vesting Tentative Map is included as Attachment 5. • CEQA Addendum: A CEQA Addendum dated July 2014 has been prepared to address the proposed project. Pursuant to Sections 15162 and 15164 of the CEQA implementing regulations, the City has determined that: (i) the proposed project remains within the scope of the previous environmental assessments of the development programs which have included the Project Site, and (ii) subject to continued implementation of the applicable mitigation measures, the proposed project will not result in any significant environmental effects that already have not been evaluated and addressed. A Resolution adopting a CEQA Addendum is included as Attachment 6 to this Staff Report. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The project is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, which was the subject of an Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (SCH # 91103064), certified by the City Council in Resolution No. 51 -93 and Addenda dated May 4, 1993 and August 22, 1994. The General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan EIR is a program EIR, which anticipated several subsequent actions related to future development in Eastern Dublin and identified some impacts from implementation of the General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan that could not be mitigated. Upon certification of the EIR, the City adopted a statement of overriding considerations for such impacts. The City also adopted a mitigation- monitoring program, which included numerous measures intended to reduce impacts from the development of the Eastern Dublin area. Since the two parcels comprising the Project Site were annexed at different times, environmental impacts related to potential development during the initial planning stages also were separately addressed. The 6.16 acre parcel was included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Mission Peak /Fallon Crossing annexation adopted on May 16, 2006 by City Council Resolution No. 71 -06. The 4.95 acre parcel was addressed in 2007 as a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) adopted by City Council Resolution 57 -07 (SCH #2007032020) and was annexed concurrently with the property known as Moller Ranch. Copies of the environmental documents in reference are available for review at Dublin City Hall during normal business hours. Page 3 of 4 PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW On July 22, 2014, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Tassajara Highlands (Fredrich /Vargas) project. At the conclusion of the discussion, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt- 1 . A CEQA Addendum and a related Statement of Overriding Considerations; 2. Resolution approving General Plan /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan amendments; 3. Ordinance approving a Planned Develop Rezone and related Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan; and 4. Resolution approving a Site Development Review Permit and Vesting Tentative Map 8133. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS A notice of this public hearing was published in the Valley Times, mailed to all property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the project area boundaries. The Staff Report was provided to the Project Proponent and is also available on the City's website. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Staff Report dated July 22, 2014 without attachments 2. Resolution approving General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendments for the Tassajara Highlands (Fredrich /Vargas) project 3. Ordinance rezoning the Tassajara Highlands (Fredrich /Vargas) project site to a Planned Development Zoning District and approving a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, with Landscape Design Standards as Exhibit A and Architectural Design Standards as Exhibit B. 4. Applicant's submittal package dated June 5, 2014 5. Resolution approving a Site Development Review Permit and Vesting Tentative Map 8133 for the Tassajara Highlands Project (Fredrich /Vargas) Project 6. Resolution adopting a CEQA Addendum and a related Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Tassajara Highlands project (Fredrich /Vargas) with the CEQA Addendum included as Exhibit A, Statement of Overriding Considerations included as Exhibit B, and the Initial Study included as Exhibit C Page 4 of 4 DU�� 19 �' 82 U_,% 114 TO STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION July 22, 2014 Planning Commission SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING — PLPA 2012 -00051 Tassajara Highlands General Plan /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendments, Planned Development rezoning with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 8133, and CEQA Addendum for a 11.11 -acre site Report prepared by Mike Porto, Consulting Planner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Applicant is requesting a General Plan /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment to reduce the residential and eliminate the commercial uses for an 11.11 acre Project Site which is comprised of two separate existing parcels – (1) 4.95 acres designated Medium Density Residential, and (2) 6.16 acres designated Neighborhood Commercial (3.51 acres) and Medium -High Density Residential (2.65 acres). The amendment would change the land use designations for the combined sites to Medium Density Residential (6.16 acres) and Open Space (3.06 acres), with the remainder of the site dedicated as Public Right -of -Way for Tassajara Road widening and frontage improvements (1.89 acres). A Planned Development Rezone, Site Development Review, and Vesting Tentative Map 8133 have been submitted for a project of 48 detached single - family homes. The Project includes four floor plans with 4 or 5 bedrooms ranging in size from 2,718 square feet to 3,159 square feet and available in three architectural styles. Lots would range in size from 3,671 square feet to 6,907 square feet at an overall density of 6.92 units per acre. A CEQA Addendum is also included. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1) Receive Staff presentation; 2) Open the Public Hearing; 3) Take testimony from the Applicant and the public; 4) Close the public hearing and deliberate; and 5) Adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt a CEQA Addendum with CEQA mitigation findings and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Tassajara Highlands project; 6) Adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt a Resolution approving amendments to the General Plan /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; 7) Adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance rezoning the project site to PD- Planned Development with related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan; and 8) Adopt a Resolution recommending City Council adopt a resolution approving a Site Development Review and Vesting Tentative Map 8133. Submitted By Reviewed By Consulting Planner Assistant Community Development Director COPIES TO: Applicant Item 8.3 File Page 1 of 14 C:IUserslagendaOesktopl6.1 attch 1.doc PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proiect Site The Tassajara Highlands project is proposed to be constructed on an 11.11 -acre site currently comprised of two separate parcels: 1) the Fredrich property is a 6.16 -acre parcel located at 6960 Tassajara Road (APN 985 - 0004 - 007 -03), and 2) the Vargas property is a 4.95 -acre parcel located at 7020 Tassajara Road (APN 985 - 0004 - 007 -01) to the north, immediately north of the first parcel. The southern portion of the site is triangularly shaped and characterized as a low hilltop. A tributary of Tassajara Creek, referred to as Moller Creek, flows beneath Tassajara Road and runs across the southerly portion of this parcel. The drainage area is vegetated with dense trees, shrubs, and ground cover but also supports sparse riparian vegetation. A single - family residence with ancillary agriculture - related structures is on the southern portion of the site. The northern portion of the site includes a single - family residence and ancillary structures. A number of native and ornamental trees exist on the Tassajara Highlands site, but none of the trees in the development are considered Heritage Trees. rO 0ANVUF A SAN RA ON COUNT DUI CONTRA. e, :A�'C C OF � x TRACT AR Neu. s F o Ci��T,, • UNTO` PRiiJECT �,,. �� NFST(IN PROGRESS SAP A"rr�A WE C LIN PROPERTY �M CAMP PARKS PAR'S RFS RV FORCFS TRAINING AREA VICINITY MAP 2of14 Adjacent and Surrounding Land Uses: Uses surrounding the proposed Tassajara Highlands project site include: • North — The project site tapers to a point at its northerly boundary with Tassajara Road and Tassajara Creek. Moller Ranch and the Tipper properties, both currently vacant, are located to the north of the project site. • South — A fragment of the area designated for Neighborhood Commercial use remains south of the project site. This area will be reconfigured for drainage and water quality improvements, publicly -owned open space, and additional circulation improvements for the Tassajara Road /Fallon Road intersection. • To the east — Moller Ranch and Chateau are located across Tassajara Road. • To the west — The Tassajara Creek stream corridor runs along the westerly boundary of the project site with Wallis Ranch located further west. Current Request The Applicant proposes to develop a project of 48 detached single - family homes with four floor plans with 4 or 5 bedrooms ranging in size from 2,718 square feet to 3,159 square feet and available in three architectural styles. Lots would range in size from 3,671 square feet to 6,907 square feet at an overall density of 6.92 units per acre. The current request for the proposed Tassajara Highlands project entitlements include: • General Plan /Specific Plan Amendment — Amending the land uses to reduce residential densities and eliminate the commercial land use designations. • Planned Development Rezoning — Planned Development Rezoning with related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan. • Site Development Review — to construct a neighborhood of 48 single - family detached homes with related site improvements, open space, and peripheral public improvements. • Vesting Tentative Map 8133 - to allow the subdivision of 48 lots for detached single - family homes. • CEQA Addendum — CEQA Addendum analyzing the environmental impacts of the proposed Tassajara Highlands project. ANALYSIS: General Plan /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment The Applicant proposes to amend the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land uses as shown in Table 1, below. 3of14 TABLE 1: Land Uses — Existina and Proposed The existing land use for the Vargas property is Medium Density Residential which allows 30- 99 units. The existing land uses for the Fredrich property include Medium -High Density Residential and Neighborhood Commercial (NC). Based on the existing land uses, approximately 37 to 66 units and 92,000 square feet of commercial could be accommodated within that acreage and density range. The NC land use designation is the remnant of a commercial area originally anticipated at the Tassajara Road /Fallon Road interchange known as Tassajara Village. Combined, the Fredrich and Vargas properties would have allowed between 67 and 165 units. The City Council re- evaluated the Tassajara Village concept based on a division of the area by Tassajara Creek and the restrictions on development created by the natural features, topography, and preservation requirements. The non - residential uses in the vicinity of the proposed Tassajara Village west of Tassajara Creek were re- designated for open space, environmental conservation features, and recreational amenities as part of the original Wallis Ranch project in 2007. However, no concepts were addressed or proposed for the Fredrich property lying immediately east of Tassajara Creek. Therefore, the commercial uses within the Tassajara Village concept plan have remained in place on the Fredrich property. The completed improvement plans for the Tassajara Road /Fallon Road intersection have further defined the development parcels within this area. The feasibility of configuring viable neighborhood commercial uses with adequate access on the site has effectively been eliminated due to the topography and natural drainage related to the adjacent Tassajara Creek and location of its tributary, Moller Creek, which crosses the southerly portion of the Fredrich property. The existing and proposed General Plan /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designations are shown below. The proposed residential land uses on the two properties allow 38 to 86 residential units. However, the PD analysis locks in the unit count at 48 detached units (6.92 du /acre). Existing General Plan Land Uses Proposed General Plan Land Uses 4of14 Existing Acres +/- Proposed Acres Use Fredrich Vargas Total Fredrich Vargas Total % MHDR 2.65 0 2.65 -2.65 0 0 0 0 NC 1 3.51 0 3.51 -3.51 0 0 1 0 1 0 MDR 0 4.95 4.95 +1.21 4.08 2.08 6.16 55.5% OS 0 0 0 +3.06 2.08 .98 3.06 27.5% r/w 0 0 0 +1.89 0 1.89 1.89 17% Total 6.16 4.95 11.11 - 6.16 4.95 11.11 100% The existing land use for the Vargas property is Medium Density Residential which allows 30- 99 units. The existing land uses for the Fredrich property include Medium -High Density Residential and Neighborhood Commercial (NC). Based on the existing land uses, approximately 37 to 66 units and 92,000 square feet of commercial could be accommodated within that acreage and density range. The NC land use designation is the remnant of a commercial area originally anticipated at the Tassajara Road /Fallon Road interchange known as Tassajara Village. Combined, the Fredrich and Vargas properties would have allowed between 67 and 165 units. The City Council re- evaluated the Tassajara Village concept based on a division of the area by Tassajara Creek and the restrictions on development created by the natural features, topography, and preservation requirements. The non - residential uses in the vicinity of the proposed Tassajara Village west of Tassajara Creek were re- designated for open space, environmental conservation features, and recreational amenities as part of the original Wallis Ranch project in 2007. However, no concepts were addressed or proposed for the Fredrich property lying immediately east of Tassajara Creek. Therefore, the commercial uses within the Tassajara Village concept plan have remained in place on the Fredrich property. The completed improvement plans for the Tassajara Road /Fallon Road intersection have further defined the development parcels within this area. The feasibility of configuring viable neighborhood commercial uses with adequate access on the site has effectively been eliminated due to the topography and natural drainage related to the adjacent Tassajara Creek and location of its tributary, Moller Creek, which crosses the southerly portion of the Fredrich property. The existing and proposed General Plan /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designations are shown below. The proposed residential land uses on the two properties allow 38 to 86 residential units. However, the PD analysis locks in the unit count at 48 detached units (6.92 du /acre). Existing General Plan Land Uses Proposed General Plan Land Uses 4of14 The requested amendments to the General Plan and EDSP would require adjustments to various figures, texts, and tables in the General Plan and EDSP to ensure consistency throughout the documents. A Resolution recommending City Council approval of an amendment to the General Plan /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan is included as Attachment 1 with the City Council Resolution included as Exhibit A. Planned Development Zoning The requested action is a Planned Development (PD) rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan. The PD Rezoning addresses the plan currently proposed for 48 single - family detached homes with related site improvements, open space, and public improvements. The Development Regulations for the Tassajara Highlands project have been proposed as compatible standards adopted for other single - family detached MDR projects in the vicinity. The proposed Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan includes the following. Please refer to Attachment 2, Exhibit A for the complete Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan: 1. A list of permitted, conditional and accessory uses 2. Site plan 3. Development densities by land use 4. Phasing Plan 5. Master Landscape Plan 6. Grading 7. Development Regulations /Standards 8. Architectural Design Standards 9. Landscape Design Standards 10. Inclusionary Zoning Regulations A Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance approving the Planned Development Rezone with related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan for the Tassajara Highlands project is included as Attachment 2. The Development Regulations for the proposed project are included as Exhibit A to Attachment 2. 5of14 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW The proposed project includes demolishing the existing structures and subdividing the site into 48 detached single family homes with related site improvements, open space, and peripheral public improvements. The following is a discussion of project components. The project plans are included as Attachment 3. Access & Circulation The Tassajara Highlands project would be accessed from a private main entry road from Tassajara Road (See Attachment 3, Page SDR 11). This access point will be signalized at its intersection with Tassajara Road. It would line up with the future entrance road to Moller Ranch to be developed on the east side of Tassajara Road. The project will have a private circulation system with an interior north -south loop that would terminate in a cul -de -sac at the northerly portion of the site. To the south, the roadway would circulate through the residential subdivision. The main access road would have a 5 -foot sidewalk along its south side separated from the travel lane by a 6 -foot landscape strip. The internal streets would have a paved width of 28 feet and a 5 -foot sidewalk on both sides of the street situated at the back of curb. Three private driveways (A, B, and C) with sidewalk on both sides provide access to six homes from the Loop Road. A sidewalk will be provided along the southern portion of the project along Tassajara Road adjacent to the project is near the Moller Creek drainage culvert and open space in the south part of the project which extends pedestrian access to Private Drive B or leads to a trail within the open space corridor along the westerly boundary of the project adjacent to Tassajara Creek. Emergency Vehicle Access is provided along the project perimeter. Site Layout/Plotting Individual lots would be oriented towards the interior roads with exception of seven lots — the 6 lots taking access from a private driveway (Lots, 25, 26, 27, 28, 45, and 46) and Lot 4 with a side orientation near the Creekview Court cul -de -sac. Lot sizes for the single - family residences would generally range from a minimum of 3,671 square feet to 6,907 square feet. As with previously approved SDRs within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, a flexible plotting scheme would be allowed whereby any of the four approved floor plans may be constructed on any of the 48 lots, with some exceptions identified on the plotting plan (Attachment 3, Sheet SDRA), as shown in the floor plan "fit list" for each lot (Attachment 3, Sheet SDR.5), and in compliance with the other conditions described below. The fit list identifies which floor plans, with or without an optional loggia along the rear, would fit on each lot and not exceed the maximum coverage of 55 %. As with the other neighborhoods, the purpose of allowing this flexibility is to enhance sales and marketing while maintaining sufficient diversity along the street scene. Also, the ability to plot any house on any lot will add a more distinctive look to the neighborhood and eliminates the repetitious look of many subdivisions. The parameters for this plotting provision would be applied as follows- - Any single floor plan may not exceed 40% of the subdivision. 6of14 - Individual floor plans may be placed next to each other. However, only two of the same individual floor plans may be plotted next to each other without being interrupted by a different floor plan. If two of the same individual floor plans are plotted next to each other, the same individual floor plan may not be plotted across the street from the two. - In no case will the same architectural elevation or color scheme be allowed next to or across the street from each other, unless they are a different individual floor plan. The Applicant shall provide a master plotting plan for the previous phases to ensure compliance with these standards. Seven corner lots within the subdivision have been reserved for Plan 1 (Lots 1, 27,29, 33, 35, 38, and 48). The plotting plan also identifies which lots would be subject to enhanced elevations due to visibility from locations with public access. Landscaping /Streetscape Plan /Open Space Landscaping — The landscape concept for Tassajara Highlands has been designed to be compatible with the creekside location. The landscape materials mostly consist of low -water use plantings of varying colors and textures that are well- suited to the local Mediterranean climate. The overall landscape concept and planting plan is shown on Attachment 3, Sheet L -1 along with the proposed palette of trees and shrubs. All landscaping within the common areas and the individual lots will be required to conform to the City Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. The landscape plans address three components: 1) project perimeter along Tassajara Road, 2) Front yard l and scape /streetscape, and 3) private /common open space. • Tassajara Road — The topography of the perimeter of the site along Tassajara Road is a challenge due to the grade. However, the approach will follow a multi - layered landscaping application. Plants have been selected and placed in order to minimize the need for trimming. Climbing vines, shrub massing, and trailing plants have been planned to mature into an integrated combination of textures, against the slopes and walls. • Front Yards — The landscape plans have been prepared to reflect the building footprint of each floor plan. In addition to the overall landscape plan for the neighborhood, a typical landscape /site plan is provided for both interior and corner lots for each of the floor plans. Front yard landscaping will be planted with a minimum of one street tree (or two trees for corner lots), and plantings on each lot will be Chemed for the architectural style of the home. The Spanish style would include mostly Mediterranean plant material with some flowering accent plants. French Country typically would reflect a cottage garden containing perennials and loose masses of flowering shrubs. The English theme would combine flowering perennials with formally arranged traditional shrubs. An available alternative is an Italian theme with sculpted hedges along the building foundation and walkways. Shrubs would be hearty varieties suitable for hot, dry climates. • Private /Common Open Space — A band of open space, shown as Parcel E on the subdivision map, crosses the southerly boundary of the project site adjacent to the Moller Creek culvert and extends along the westerly boundary of the project site adjacent to Tassajara Creek. A pedestrian pathway is planned to be constructed within this buffer. A bio -swale runs along the westerly edge of the project site from the northerly boundary to the detention basins along the southerly boundary. Planted areas would be hydroseeded with a native meadow mix, providing a layered transition from the residential community 7of14 to the undisturbed open space along Tassajara Creek that would be drought resistant and typical of native plants. The open space buffers along the stream corridor also are anticipated to serve as wildlife corridors. Therefore, the common area landscaping is proposed to be deer - resistant. The southerly portion of the project site will continue to function as drainage with enhancements for storm drain bio- retention purposes related to the project site and secondarily for Moller Creek, a tributary of Tassajara Creek. The Moller Ranch project on the east side of Tassajara Road has been designed with bio- retention measures on its site; however, Moller Creek drainage will be directed under Tassajara Road into a culvert on the west side served by Parcel C of the Tassajara Highlands site. Parcels B and D would serve as clean water detention basins on either side of the culvert, and the adjacent City owned open space at the Tassajara Road /Fallon Road intersection, would function as an area -wide detention basin. The bio- retention areas along the southerly boundary of the site would be screened with vegetation. In addition, two small private open space areas (shown as Parcels F and G) are located among the lots within the site - one at the north end and one at the south end. The Landscape Plans also indicate the type and styles of walls and fencing that will be used within the project. A community identification /entrance wall would be located at the project entrance at Tassajara Road and the main project entrance. It will be 2.5 feet to 3 feet tall with the neighborhood name. A pre -cast sound barrier wall, six to eight feet in height (See Attachment 3, Page L.2), is proposed to be constructed along the Tassajara Road right -of -way from the most northerly lot south to Private Drive B; it would have with columns located every 35 feet or at a change in grade. A number of retaining walls, ranging in height from approximately 1 foot to 8 feet, are proposed to be constructed south of Private Drive B and at various locations on the east side of the project site adjacent to Tassajara Road. Landscaping would be installed between the edge of Tassajara Road and any walls (See Attachment 3, Page L.2). Other fences include (See Attachment 3, Page L.6): - Good Neighbor Fences — 6 -foot tall vertical board fence between lots. - Lattice Fence — Vertical wood fence visible from the public right -of -way, such as for corner lots. - Ornamental Iron Guardrail — 42 -inch high railing along retaining walls or adjacent to sidewalks. - Basin Fence — 6 -foot tall, vinyl -clad mesh with 2 -inch metal posts. Streetscape — Streetscape improvements generally are addressed in the landscape plans. All project streets, perimeter sidewalks, interior sidewalks, paths, and common areas are shaded and enhanced by trees and plantings within the front setback of each lot. Architecture Styles /Elevations - The architectural styles proposed for the four floor plans are: (A) Spanish, (B) French Country, and (C) English. The styles are intended to complement the architecture of neighboring subdivisions and also capitalize on its elevation for outstanding view corridors. Roof materials are flat concrete the for French Country and English and concrete low- profile S- tile for Spanish. Exterior material for all three styles primarily is stucco. Standard forms and elements typical to each style include: roof and window forms, exterior accent materials, window 8of14 trims and accents, and decoration and embellishments. Roll -up garage doors would be installed specific to each style and coordinated with each color scheme. Each style generally is described as follows: (A) Spanish — This style is characterized by low- profile gable -roof forms with concrete S- tiles and shed or gable projections. Gable end embellishments are decorative carved or sculpted ornaments or wrought iron details. Exterior material is primarily stucco. The entry on each plan is accented with an arch. The arch is also a feature of prominent ground floor windows and upper level balconies. Each plan includes at least one grouping of windows in two or more with simple mullion patterns. Windows also may be framed with paneled shutters, heavy trim, and enhanced sills. Balconies may have sculpted cantilevers, corbelled supports, wooden posts (when not arched), and decorative iron railings. French doors are featured on the front deck of Plans 3 and 4, along with a boxed and corbelled window enhancement over the entry on Plan 3. (B) French Country — This style features hip roof forms with hip or gable roof projections. In addition to the stucco, exterior accent materials include cultured stone veneer in three styles and /or cementitious horizontal siding or shingles. Gable end embellishments are simple niches or siding. Front entries are arched on Plans 3 and 4. Windows typically would be paired or grouped and accented with paneled shutters and heavy sills that are formed or corbelled. The mullion pattern would be multi - paned. Projections and balconies supports may display heavy beams or be sculpted. Balcony railings are decorative wood, and balcony posts are wood with kicker supports. First and second floor maybe delineated with a heavy wood -like band or bowed form. (C) English — Roof forms for this style are hip with gable or shed projections. In addition to the stucco, exterior accent materials include brick or cultured stone veneer. Gable end embellishments include cementitious board and bait siding or stylized vents. Window and door forms are straight and formal framed by paneled or plank shutters and heavy sills and headers. Windows are grouped or sequential with a multi -paned mullion pattern. Upper level windows are boxed and supported with narrow iron corbels, and lower level accent windows are boxed with a stone or brick base. Balconies are supported with heavy beam and corbels with a decorative iron railing. First and second floors maybe delineated with a heavy wood -like band. Each elevation style is available in three color schemes for a total of 12 color schemes. All elevations visible from the public right -of -way would have enhanced architectural detailing on several elevations. Floor Plans Each of the four floor plans is two stories. Floor plans are offered as a four - bedroom unit with optional build out of a fifth bedroom. The ground floor of each unit is arranged as a "great room" with open living, nook, and kitchen areas. All Great Rooms have a fireplace. All kitchens have an island and walk -in pantry. Each unit has direct access to the two -car garage through a "drop zone." All plans allow for the optional construction of an outdoor loggia along the rear of the ground floor adjacent to the living area with an optional upper level deck provided that it would not cause lot coverage to exceed 55 %. The loggia would range in size from 164 square feet to 204 square feet, and the upper level deck would be accessible from the Master Bedroom and (except for Plan 4) to the loft or fifth bedroom. At a minimum, each plan is provided with a ground floor bedroom and adjacent 9of14 full bathroom which may be configured en suite or remain generally accessible from the ground floor. All plans have a covered front porch. On the second floor, each unit has at least 3 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, and a loft which may be built out as a fifth bedroom. The master bedroom with en suite bathroom has at least one walk - in closet. Each Master bathroom has dual basins, separate water closet, and separate tub and shower. All secondary bathrooms on the second floor have dual basins. All laundry rooms are on the second floor and can accommodate an optional wash basin. All floor plans offer a Universal Design Ordinance (UDO - handicapped accessible) option. Plan 2 could be configured with a "granny flat" having separate access from outdoors. Floor plan details are shown in Table 2, below. TABLE 2: Floor Plans Plans actuzire Bedrooms Bathrooms Parking,' Elevations Stories Feet 1 2,718 sf 4 + loft or 3 2 A, B, & C 2 1 or dining 4 +loft or or 3 +1�2 2 2,829 sf 4 + dining, den, or 2 A, B, & C 2 granny flat 3 2,980 sf 4 + loft or 1 (suite) 3+1 2 A, B, & C 2 and dining or den 4 3,159 sf 4+ loft or 1 3 2 A, B, & C 2 and dining or den Total Elevations: (A) Spanish, (B) French Country, and (C) English In addition to the features described above, the floor plans are described as follows: Plan 1 — Plan 1 is the smallest at 2,718 square feet, and in addition to all of the features mentioned above, includes a large indoor storage closet. Plan 2 — Plan 2 is slightly larger than Plan 1 at 2,829 square feet. A separate dining area off of the entry may be built out as a den or this area combined with the downstairs bedroom may be built our as a 379 square foot "granny" suite with separate outdoor access to living, kitchenette, sleeping quarters, and full bathroom. Under this option, the large indoor storage closet may be built out as a powder room for the primary home. Plan 3 — At 2,980 square feet, Plan 3 also offers the build option for the separate dining room as a den. It also allows the loft area to be built out as a fifth bedroom suite with full en suite bathroom and walk -in closet. For the Spanish style, Bedroom 3 at the front of the second would have access to a front deck or balcony. Plan 4 — Plans 4 is the largest at 3,159 square feet. This plan also offers the build out option of a separate dining room or den on the ground floor and has the smallest loggia option. The loft or fifth bedroom option on this plan is located at the front of the second level with access to a front deck or balcony for all three elevation styles. 10 of 14 Parking - As with most single - family detached projects, each unit requires two enclosed parking spaces plus one guest space per unit that may be provided curbside, on the driveway, or in dedicated parking areas. Based on this standard, the residential parking required for the Tassajara Highlands project would 96 enclosed spaces and 48 guest spaces for a total of 144 spaces. The enclosed parking requirement is satisfied by the two -car garages provided with each unit for a total of 96 enclosed parking spaces. Guest space parking is satisfied in driveways (2 spaces each, for an additional 96 spaces), curbside along internal streets (26 spaces), four spaces at the ends of private driveways "A" and "C," and five perpendicular parking spaces in dedicated areas for a total of 131 guest spaces; 227 spaces would be provided by the project overall. The location of parking provided is shown on Attachment 3, Sheet SDR.7. A Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt a Resolution approving the Site Development Review is included as Attachment 4 with the City Council resolution included as Exhibit A. Affordable Housing//nclusionary Zoning — The proposed Tassajara Highlands project would be subject to Chapter 8.68 of the Zoning Ordinance, Inclusionary Zoning regulations, which require 12.5% of the units as income restricted for sale to low and moderate income households. Therefore, the developer is required to provide 6 affordable units. Due to the location of the site, with no proximity to a significant transportation network or convenient goods and services, the Applicant is proposing an "alternative method of compliance" in accordance with Section 8.68.040.A to supply their obligation. This method of compliance is included as a Condition of Approval No. 15, Attachment 4, Exhibit A. Public Art Compliance — The proposed project is subject to a Public Art Compliance Report The Public Art Compliance Report and its findings will determine the trigger point by which this project complies with or is exempt from the Public Art program which typically would be satisfied by a public art installation or payment of in -lieu fees. An appropriate Condition of Approval has been included. (See Attachment 4; Exhibit A, Condition of Approval #14). Vesting Tentative Tract Map The Vesting Tentative Map 8133 (See Attachment 3, Vesting Tentative Map tab) generally subdivides the 11.11 -acre project site as follows: TABLE 3: Vesting Tentative Map 8133 Parcel Area Use Description Lots 1 -48 4.8673 Medium Density Residential Single Family Detached 48 units A 1.9641 Medium Density Residential private streets and parking B 0.0521 Open Space (within development area) private open space C 2.1097 Open Space private open space /preservation D 0.0480 Open Space (within development area) private open space E 0.5423 Open Space clean water detention basins R/W 0.6223 Medium Density Residential Right -of -Way Tassajara Road Transfer 0.9067 Open Space Moller Creek culvert TOTAL 11.11 11 of 14 Conditions of Approval are included in the Resolution recommending approval (Attachment 4, Exhibit A) including drainage improvements, habitat preservation, dedication of right -of -way, and coordination of perimeter off -site improvements with the areawide coordination of traffic and circulation improvements, especially with regard to Tassajara Road. CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN, SPECIFIC PLAN & ZONING ORDINANCE The application includes proposed amendments to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, Stage 1 and Stage 2 Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans, Site Development Review, and Vesting Tentative Map 8133. The proposed Stage 1 and Stage 2 Planned Development rezoning with related Development Plans would be consistent with the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, as amended. The proposed project will contribute to housing opportunities and diversity of product type as a complement to the surrounding neighborhoods. The proposed project has been reviewed for conformance with the Community Design and Sustainability Element of the General Plan. The Applicant intends to exceed the City of Dublin Green Building Ordinance and will exceed the 50 point threshold in the City's program. In general, the proposed project furthers the goals of the Community Design and Sustainability Element of the General Plan by providing a high quality of life and preserving resources and opportunities for future generations. REVIEW BY APPLICABLE DEPARTMENT AND AGENCIES: The Building Division, Fire Prevention Bureau, Public Works Department, Dublin Police Services and Dublin San Ramon Services District reviewed the project to ensure that the Project is established in compliance with all local Ordinances and Regulations. Conditions of Approval from these departments and agencies are included in the Resolution (Attachment 4, Exhibit A) approving Site Development Review and Subdivisions. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: A CEQA Addendum dated July 2014 has been prepared to address the proposed project. Pursuant to Sections 15162 and 15164 of the CEQA implementing regulations, the City has determined that: (i) the proposed project remains within the scope of the previous environmental assessments of the development programs which have included the Project Site, and (ii) subject to continued implementation of the applicable mitigation measures, the proposed project will not result in any significant environmental effects that already have not been evaluated and addressed. The project is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, which was the subject of an Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (SCH # 91103064), certified by the City Council in Resolution No. 51 -93 and Addenda dated May 4, 1993 and August 22, 1994. The General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan EIR is a program EIR, which anticipated several subsequent actions related to future development in Eastern Dublin and identified some impacts from implementation of the General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan that could not be mitigated. Upon certification of the EIR, the City adopted a statement of overriding considerations for such impacts. The City also adopted a mitigation- monitoring program, which included numerous measures intended to reduce impacts from the development of the Eastern Dublin area. 12 of 14 Since the two parcels comprising the Project Site were annexed at different times, environmental impacts related to potential development during the initial planning stages also were separately addressed. The 6.16 acre parcel was included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Mission Peak /Fallon Crossing annexation adopted on May 16, 2006 by City Council Resolution No. 71 -06. The 4.95 acre parcel was addressed in 2007 as an Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) adopted by City Council Resolution 57 -07 (SCH #2007032020) and was annexed concurrently with the property known as Moller Ranch. Copies of the environmental documents in reference are available for review at Dublin City Hall during normal business hours. A Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the CEQA Addendum is attachment as Attachment 5 with the City Council Resolution included as Exhibit A. PUBLIC NOTICING: In accordance with State law, a public notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the proposed project to advertise the project and the upcoming public hearing. A public notice also was published in the Valley Times and posted at several locations throughout the City. A copy of this Staff Report has been provided to the Applicant. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution recommending City Council approval of General Plan /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendments for the Tassajara Highlands project. 2. Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance rezoning the Tassajara Highlands project site to PD- Planned Development and approving a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, with Ordinance attached as Exhibit A, Landscape Design Standards as Attachment 1 to Exhibit A and Architectural Design Standards as Attachment 2 to Exhibit A. 3. Applicant's submittal package dated June 5, 2014 4. Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt a Resolution approving a Site Development Review Permit and Vesting Tentative Map 8133 for the Tassajara Highlands Project, with the City Council Resolution attached as Exhibit A. 5. Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt a CEQA Addendum (for the Tassajara Highlands project) to the Eastern Dublin Environmental Impact Report with City Council Resolution attached as Exhibit A, with the CEQA Addendum as Exhibit A, Statement of Overriding Considerations as Exhibit B and the Initial Study as Exhibit C to the Ordinance. 13 of 14 GENERAL INFORMATION: APPLICANT: Tim Lewis Communities and STL Company LLC 3300 Douglass Boulevard, Building 400, Suite 450 Roseville, CA 94661 Attn: Tim Lewis PROPERTY OWNERS: Thomas A. & Helene L. Fredrich 6960 Tassajara Road Dublin, CA 94568 Jose & Violetta Vargas 7020 Tassajara Road Dublin, CA 94568 LOCATION: 6960 and 7020 Tassajara Road - The project site is bounded by Tassajara Road on the East, Tassajara Creek/Wallis Ranch project on the west; Moller Ranch on the northeast (across Tassajara Road); the Singh property (formerly Tipper property) on the northwest; and City - owned open space /right -of -way for the Fallon Road /Tassajara Road intersection on the south. (APNs 986- 0004 - 002 -01 and 986- 0004 - 002 -03) ZONING: Existin — PD- Medium Density Residential, PD- Medium High Density Residential, and PD- Neighborhood Commercial Proposed — PD- Medium Density Residential and PD -Open Space GENERAL PLAN & EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN: SURROUNDING USES: Existin — Medium Density Residential (MDR), Medium High Density Residential (MHDR), and Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Proposed — Medium Density Residential (MDR) and Open Space (OS) LOCATION ZONING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE CURRENT USE OF PROPERTY Northeast PD Low Density Residential (LDR), Rural Vacant (Moller Ranch) Residential /Agriculture (RR /A) open space and agriculture Northwest PD Medium Density Residential (MDR), Vacant /agriculture Stream Corridor (SC) (Tipper /Singh property) Road right -of -way, drainage South PD Open Space corridor, and public open space, Low Density Residential (LDR), Rural Open space, vacant (Moller East PD Residential /Agriculture (RR /A), Open Ranch), and single - family Space/ Stream Corridor Stream residential under construction Corridor (OS /SC) (Chateau at Fallon Crossing) West PD Stream Corridor (SC) Tassajara Creek and vacant (approved as Wallis Ranch) 14 of 14 RESOLUTION NO. XX - 14 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AND EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR THE TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS (FREDRICH /VARGAS) PROJECT PLPA- 2012 -00051 (APNs 986- 0004 - 002 -01 and 986- 0004 - 002 -03) WHEREAS, the Applicant, Tim Lewis Communities and STL Company LLC, proposes to create a development of 48 single - family detached homes on an 11.11 acre site known as the Frederick and Vargas properties. The proposed development and applications are collectively known as the "Project "; and WHEREAS, the application includes a General Plan /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment to change the land use designations from: Medium Density Residential, Medium - High Density Residential and Neighborhood Commercial to a combination of Medium Density Residential (6.16 acres) and Open Space (3.06 acres) and 1.89 acres of associated road right - of -way; and WHEREAS, the application also includes Planned Development rezoning with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 8133; and WHEREAS, the Project also includes a CEQA Addendum; and WHEREAS, the Project Site consists of two existing parcels, the approximately 7.93 gross acre Fredrich property located at 6960 Tassajara Road and the approximately 5 gross acre Vargas property at 7020 Tassajara Road (APNs 986- 0004 - 002 -01 and 986- 0004 - 002 -03); and WHEREAS, consistent with California Government Code Section 65352.3, the City obtained a contact list of local Native American tribes from the Native American Heritage Commission and notified the tribes on the contact list of the opportunity to consult with the City on the proposed General Plan and Specific Plan amendments. None of the contacted tribes requested a consultation within the 90 -day statutory consultation period and no further action is required under section 65352.3; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State guidelines and City environmental regulations, require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared. To comply with CEQA, the City prepared an addendum to the Eastern Dublin EIR and two prior Mitigated Negative Declarations for the Project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, including the proposed General Plan and Specific Plan amendments, on July 22, 2014, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and 1 WHEREAS, a Staff Report, dated July 22, 2014 and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the Project, including the General Plan and Specific Plan amendments, for the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, on July 22, 2014, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 14 -38 (incorporated herein by reference) recommending that the City Council approve the General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments for the Project; and WHEREAS, on , 2014 the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, including the proposed General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan amendments, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, a staff report dated , 2014 and incorporated herein by reference described and analyzed the project and related Addendum for the City Council and recommended approval of the General Plan and Specific Plan amendments for the Project; and WHEREAS, following the public hearing, the City Council approved Resolution XX -14 approving the proposed CEQA addendum and adopting a statement of overriding considerations, which resolution is incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use their independent judgment and considered the CEQA addendum and prior CEQA documents, and all said reports, recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set forth prior to taking any action on the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin approve the following amendments to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan based on findings that the amendments are in the public interest and that the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan as so amended will remain internally consistent, and that the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan as amended is consistent with the General Plan, as amended. A. Amend the Land Use Map (Figure 1 -1 a) of the General Plan as shown below: 2 B. Amend the Land Use Map (Figure 4.1) of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan as follows: C. Amend Table 2.1 in the General Plan to increase the amount of Medium Density Residential by 1.21 acres; decrease Medium High Density Residential by 2.65 acre; increase Open Space by 3.06 acres and reduce Neighborhood Commercial Land Use by 3.51 acres. D. Amend Table 4.1 in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan to increase the amount of Medium Density Residential by 1.21 acres; decrease Medium High Density Residential by 2.65 acre; increase Open Space by 3.06 acres and reduce Neighborhood Commercial Land Use by 3.51 acres. E. Amend Table 4.2 in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan to reduce the square fee of allowable Neighborhood Commercial development employees and population based on reduced acreage and decrease the number of Medium High Density Residential units and population based on the acreage reduction and increase the number of Medium Density Residential units and population. F. Amend Table 4.3 in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan to change the number of dwelling units, job, employed residents, balance and ratio based on acreage changes. G. Amend Table 4.10 in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan to increase the amount of Medium Density Residential by 1.21 acres; decrease Medium High Density Residential by 2.65 acre; increase Open Space by 3.06 acres and reduce Neighborhood Commercial Land Use by 3.51 acres. H. Maps to be updated: Figure 6.1 - Open Space Framework Appendix 4: Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Land Use Summary by Land Owners to reduce the Neighborhood Commercial acreage on Fredrich by 3.51 acres, eliminate the Medium -High Density Land Use category, increase the Medium Density Residential Land Use category by 4.08 acres, and increase the Open Space acreage by 2.08 acres and on Vargas change the Medium Density Residential acreage to 2.08 acres and increase the Open Space acreage by 0.98 acres. 3 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall take effect thirty days after the date of adoption. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2014 by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: City Clerk 2298286.1 11 Mayor ORDINANCE NO. XX — 14 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN * * * * * * * * * * * * ** REZONING THE TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS (FREDRICH/VARGAS) PROJECT SITE TO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT AND APPROVING A RELATED STAGE 1 AND 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN PLPA 2012 -00051 The Dublin City Council does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. RECITALS A. The Applicant, Tim Lewis Communities and STL Company LLC, proposes to develop 48 single - family detached homes on an 11.11 acre site. The applications include a General Plan /Specific Plan amendment to change the land use designations from Medium -High Density Residential, Neighborhood Commercial and Medium Density Residential to a combination of Medium Density Residential (6.16 acres) and Open Space (3.06 acres) and 1.89 acres of associated road right -of -way. The applications also include a Planned Development rezoning with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review, and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 8133. The proposed development and applications are collectively known as the "Project ". B. The Project Site consists of two existing parcels, the approximately 7.93 gross acre Fredrich property located at 6960 Tassajara Road and the approximately 5 gross acre Vargas property at 7020 Tassajara Road (APNs 986- 0004 - 002 -01 and 986- 0004 - 002 -03). C. To comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State guidelines and City environmental regulations, the City prepared an addendum to the Eastern Dublin EIR and two prior Mitigated Negative Declarations for the Project. D. Following a public hearing on July 22, 2014, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 14 -37 recommending that the City Council approve the CEQA addendum for the project, Resolution 14 -38 recommending approval of the Project General Plan and Specific Plan amendments, and Resolution 14 -39, recommending approval of the Planned Development rezoning and related Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, which resolutions are incorporated herein by reference and available for review at City Hall during normal business hours. E. A Staff Report, dated , 2014 and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the Project, including the Planned Development rezoning and related Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, for the City Council. F. On , 2014, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, including the proposed Planned Development rezoning and related Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard. G. On , 2014, the City Council adopted Resolution xx -xx approving the CEQA addendum and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Project, and adopted Resolution xx -xx approving General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan amendments for the Project, which resolutions are incorporated herein by reference and available for review at City Hall during normal business hours. H. The City Council considered the CEQA addendum and related prior CEQA documents and all above - referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony prior to taking action on the Project. SECTION 2: FINDINGS A. Pursuant to Section 8.32.070 of the Dublin Municipal Code, the City Council finds as follows. 1. The Tassajara Highlands Project Planned Development zoning meets the purpose and intent of Chapter 8.32 in that it provides a comprehensive development plan that creates a desirable use of land that is sensitive to surrounding land uses by virtue of the layout and design of the site plan. 2. Development of the Project under the Planned Development zoning and the related Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan will be harmonious and compatible with existing and future development in the surrounding area in that the site will provide residential development consistent with the surrounding development by providing unique floor plan designs and the incorporation of open space components while also being sensitive to the adjacent creek and conservation area. B. Pursuant to Sections 8.120.050.A and B of the Dublin Municipal Code, the City Council finds as follows. 1. The Planned Development zoning for the Project and the related Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan will be harmonious and compatible with existing and potential development in the surrounding area in that the proposed site plan has taken into account sensitive adjacencies and will provide a wide range of amenities to the surrounding neighborhoods. 2. The project site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the zoning district being proposed in that the Project maintains the general character and density of adjacent development. The project site conditions are documented in the certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the environmental impacts that have been identified will be mitigated to the greatest degree possible, and the project will implement all adopted mitigation measures. There are no site conditions that were identified in the EIR that will present an impediment to development of the site for the intended purposes. There are no major physical or topographic constraints and thus the site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the retail commercial center approved through the Planned Development zoning. 3. The Planned Development zoning will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare in that the project will comply with all applicable development regulations and standards and will implement all adopted mitigation measures. The Project uses are compatible with surrounding uses. 2 4. The Planned Development zoning is consistent with the Dublin General Plan, as amended, and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, as amended, in that the proposed residential uses are consistent with the Medium Density Residential land use designations for the site. C. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the City Council approved a CEQA addendum and Statement of Overriding Considerations on , 2014, as set forth in Resolution , which resolution is incorporated herein by reference and available for review at City Hall during normal business hours. SECTION 3: ZONING MAP AMENDMENT Pursuant to Chapter 8.32, Title 8 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code the City of Dublin Zoning Map is amended to rezone the property described below to a Planned Development Zoning District- 11. 11 acres at 6960 and 7020 Tassajara Road (APNs 986- 0004 - 002 -01 and 986 -0004- 002-03) ( "Project site ", or "Property "). A map of the rezoning area is shown below- 3 SECTION 4. APPROVAL OF STAGE 1 AND 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN The regulations for the use, development, improvement, and maintenance of the Project site are set forth in the following Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan for the Project area, which is hereby approved. Any amendments to the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan shall be in accordance with section 8.32.080 of the Dublin Municipal Code or its successors. Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan for the Tassajara Highlands (Fredrich/Vargas) Project This is a Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan pursuant to Chapter 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. This Development Plan meets all the requirements for both a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan set forth in Chapter 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance and is adopted as part of the Planned Development rezoning for the Tassajara Highlands project, PLPA- 2012 - 00051. The Planned Development District and this Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan provides flexibility to encourage innovative development while ensuring that the goals, policies, and action programs of the General Plan and provisions of Chapter 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance are satisfied. 1. Statement of Permitted, Conditional and Accessory Uses. PD — Medium Density Permitted Uses • Accessory structures and uses in accordance with Section 8.40.030 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance • Combinations of attached or detached dwelling, zero -lot line units, duplexes, townhouses, multi - family dwellings • Home occupation in accordance with Chapter 8.64 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance • Multi - Family Dwelling Unit • Nursing homes for not more than three patients • Single- family Dwelling Unit Conditional Uses • Accessory structures and uses located on the same site as a conditional use • Assisted living facility • Bed and Breakfast inns • Community clubhouse • Community facilities • Hospital in districts requiring not more than fifteen hundred (1,500) square feet of building site area per dwelling unit • Large family day care homes • Medical or residential care facility (7 or more clients) • Mobile home parks, as regulated by the Dublin Zoning Ordinance • Parking lot, as regulated in the Dublin Zoning Ordinance • Plant nursery or greenhouse used only for the cultivation of plant materials (wholesale only) • Public and Semi - Public Facilities 9 PD Open Space Permitted Uses, including, but not limited to: • Agriculture and grazing • Conservation areas • Public or private infrastructure • Public or private recreation facility- active or passive • Streams and drainage protection corridors • Those uses allowed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 and 1600 agreements. • Trails and maintenance roads, including emergency vehicle access • Trail staging area • Other educational or recreational facilities: • Water quality, drainage, and other similar facilities, including swales and basins • Wildlife habitat preservation areas • Other similar uses as determined by the Community Development Director 2. Stage 1 and 2 Site Plan. r �,, ie�sia lr� ,11A ff]AffVJF JUNE 14, 2013 AS'WVSio: ,Po'UCUS`A' 2Y. 200 ACFGISFG1v l,1FCFM6FIq .?.M, VII R. WMSESMf MY a, ON Rgmea JULY 4, 'W4 u y. En i 5 r r� w � m PIA M+*1M a, y" a wnwvv�m,�vrw rvwu mxr ww�xr ww.w r. a wnws �....w. �uwx��w aum�.rvrmx *xw. xvnr nva�s., *w 5 3. Site area, proposed densities. The density of the site is 6.92 du /ac 4. Development regulations. SINGLE FAMILY SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Typical Lot Width Proposed Use Fredrich Vargas Ac % MHDR 0 0 0 0 NC 0 0 0 0 MDR 4.08 2.08 6.16 55.5% OS 2.08 .98 3.06 27.5% subtotal r/w 0 1.89 1.89 17% Total 6.16 4.95 11.11 100% The density of the site is 6.92 du /ac 4. Development regulations. SINGLE FAMILY SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Typical Lot Width 45.0' Minimum Lot Size 3,670 Minimum Street Frontage width @ cul -de -sac 50' Maximum Lot Coverage 55% Maximum Building Height 35' Maximum Stories 2 Minimum Front Yard Setbacks: Living Area Porch /Deck Garage (front facing) Minimum Side Yard Setbacks: First Floor Upper Floors Corner Lot Porch /Deck Encroachments Minimum Rear Yard Setbacks to Living Area Usable Private Rear Yard Space Required Parking Notes: 8' 8' 19' 4' 4' 8' 4' 2' max into required setback 8' 400 sf min. flat area, minimum depth 8.0' 2 in garage, 1 guest 1. Front yard setbacks are measured from the property line which is the back of the sidewalk. 2. 60% of homes backing up to open space or public streets will have a minimum 10' setback at the rear elevation. 3. Two -story homes can have "nested" tirhd floor living space within the roofline. 4. Side yard encroachments may include window bays, chimneys, furring or other architectural projections. A minimum of 3' clear passage must be proved for emergency responders. 5. For lots less than 5,000 square feet in size, mechanical equipment that generates noise (such as swimming pool, spa and air conditioning equipment on the property shall be enclosed as necessary to reduce noise at the property line to a maximum of 50 dBA at any time. 0 5. Phasing Plan. Phase I backbone infrastructure will be installed with the area constructed. The individual homes will be constructed in 5 phases of up to 11 homes per phase. TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS TEMPORARY PHASING PLAN CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA JULY 1, 2019 tMs i ✓ '4 , 01, v ' 1.1 zz- `1j1� u ,r,,, r M / 1 ,. „. .,Ww -... • •x•„ IA pies Resowces, Mc. b. Frei iminaryiiviaster Neignaornooa Lanascape Nian. 7 7. Architectural Standards. See Exhibit A to this Ordinance. 8. Landscape Standards. See Exhibit B to this Ordinance. 9. Inclusionary Zoning Regulations. The project is subject to Chapter 8.68 of the Zoning Ordinance, Inclusionary Zoning regulations, which require 12.5% of the units as income restricted for sale to low and moderate income households. The developer is required to provide 6 affordable units. An "alternative method of compliance," will be provided in accordance with Section 8.68.040.A. 11. Applicable Requirements of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Except as specifically provided in this Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, the use, development, improvement and maintenance of the property shall be governed by the provisions of the closest comparable Zoning District as determined by the Community Development Director and of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance pursuant to Section 8.32.060.0 except as provided in the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan. No development shall occur on this property until a Site Development Review permit has been approved for the property. 12. Compliance with adopted Mitigation Measures. The Applicant/Developer shall comply with all adopted mitigation measures of the Eastern Dublin EIR, 2006 and 2007 Mitigated Negative Declarations, as applicable. SECTION 5. PRIOR PD ZONING SUPERSEDED Ordinance No. 10 -07 establishing the existing PD zoning is superseded as to the Project site. SECTION 6. POSTING OF ORDINANCE The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California. SECTION 7. EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days following its adoption PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this day of 2014, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: City Clerk 2298306.1 Mayor 9 LANDSCAPE DESIGN STANDARDS STREET TREES Street trees will be planted behind the sidewalk to ensure fit between utilities. • Tassajara Road: Pyrus calleryana Bradford'— Bradford Pear • Creek View Loop /Court: Celtis sinensis — Chinese Hackberry • Creek View Way: Pyrus calleryana `Chanticleer'— Chanticleer Pear Bradford Pear LANDSCAPE p a g e 1 Chinese Hackberry LANDSCAPE p a g e 2 Chanticleer Pear LANDSCAPE p a g e 3 FRONT YARD ACCENT TREES • Acerpalmatum Bloodgood'— Red Japanese Maple • Arbutus Marina'— Marina Strawberry Tree • Cera's canadensis Forest Pang'— Forest Pansy Redbud • Lagerstroemia indica 1Vluskogee' — Crape Myrtle • Magnolia grandiora Tittle Gem'— Dwarf Southern Magnolia Red Japanese Maple Marina Strawberry Tree Forest Pansy Redbud LANDSCAPE p a g e 4 Crape Myrtle OPEN SPACE TREES Platanus racemosa — California Sycamore Quercus agrifolia — Coast Live Oak Tree Schinus n Dwarf Southern Magnolia California Sycamore LANDSCAPE p a g e 5 Coast Live Oak Tree 4F California Pepper Tree LANDSCAPE p a g e 6 WALLS AND FENCING COMMUNITY ENTRANCE WALL This wall is used along Tassajara Road, and defines the entry to Tassajara Highlands. The wall is low, 2.5' to 3' in height, with the project name. The wall and column color is "Outerbanks" SW #2064 by Sherwin Williams or equal; the wall and column concrete cap color will be natural grey. SOUND WALL The sound wall will be installed along the frontage of Tassajara Road. The wall is a Sierra Precast stucco, "Marina" style, varying in height from 6' to 8', with columns located every 35' or at grade changes. The wall and column color is "Outerbanks" SW #2064 by Sherwin Williams or equal, and the wall and column concrete cap color will be natural grey. LANDSCAPE p a g e 7 GOOD NEIGHBOR FENCE The good neighbor fence is located between lots, and is constructed as a vertical board wood fence, 6' tall with cap and fascia board. 4" x 6" wood posts are located at a minimum of 8' on center. E -fin IEa+NZ►_s3IIkmI 2xb�AP 2 1IX4' MAIL-UK AT FRONT I'XA" NAILER AT BACK I'Xy" FENCINO (50AR0 ON DOARV 4";'b" FMT 0 8' O.G. I"K4' NAILER n AT E AGK 7X4" NAILER AT FRONT BOTTOM RAIL 2 "x9" I41GY.BOARD CENTERED in I i 13•x24" I �I Ill cla FT6. NOTE ALL WOOD TO E3E CONSTRUCTION 1L—llL— 3 GRADE REDWOOD. I0o5T5 To 13E - III " PRESWRE TREATED DOUGLAS PIR. t.211 LATTICE FENCE A lattice fence may be used at locations where the fence is visible from the public right -of way such as parallel to the front of the home and along corner lots. This fence is similar to the good neighbor fence with an 18" top panel of vertical lattice integrated into the overall 6' height. ,-- 2'X6" GAP r I "X2" FRAME —ALL AROUND BOTH 5117155-MITER GOI�J�[ER9 R ON000 PRE -FAB SELECT H16H- OENSITY PRIVACY SGUAR.E LRTTIGE PANEL - 2" X 6" M10 RAIL 2'X 4" NAILER I' X 4' TRIM— TOP /BOTTOM I" X 6" FPNGIN6 (BOARD ON SOAR[p) in - 4' X 6" POST m &0 G 2' X 4' NAILER I' X 4" TRIM- TOPJBOTTOM r- 2 "X6" 50TTOM RAIL I WOOD TO BE NO I DOUSLA5 FIR I r ALL P0579 TO BE PRE551JRE L'. F TREATED ALL HARDWARE TO BE I •I GALVANIZED. GONGRBTE 2. TO 5E PLACED ON CORRER L01'5 FOOTINb AND WHEiZE V151BLE FROM STREET 10„ LANDSCAPE p a g e 8 42" ORNAMENTAL IRON GUARDRAIL This guardrail is secured to the top of the retaining wall and provides safety for the public sidewalk along Tassajara Road. The design is powder coated black ornamental iron with 5/8" square pickets and 1 "x2" square posts. The overall height is 42" from surface of sidewalk. IXI 112 X.Ob3 TUBULAR GIL 5 O„ GIL 5TEEL 5TRIN&ER o TOP 1 1 C I X2 STEEL POST 518 X 518 X .045 STEEL PICKET a 4 1/2" 00. (TYP) IXI 112 X 055 TUBULAR 57F-EL 5TRINCGER BOTTOM TOP OF FRECA57 HALL F5 SIDEAALK *NOTE THE FR 4NG 15GAN' FENCE BY THOMPSON 8 TFf0MP50N FENCE CD., ING (510 -2i6- $350); PAINT FACTORY PAINT AND FIELD TOUGH -UP, (1) GOAT PRIMER - (2) GOATS 5EM15L055 - SLAGIC NOTE. FILLET YIELD /SMOOTH &RIND ALL JOINTS ALL METAL TO BE 160" THICK BASIN FENCING: This fence is used along the boundary of the detention and bioretention basins, and is a tubular steel fence. The overall height is 6' -0 "'. C/L Gn. e• -a' IXI I12 XOa5 TU6ULAR. 57EFL 5TRIN6ER IK2 STEEL 1'05T �o IXI 112 x jOaD TUBULAR GONG. FOOTIN& "NOTE 'T+iF FAfRMONT' FENCE BY THOMFWN r 4 THpj,4F5ON FENCE GOv ING (510-276-1.5550), - PAINT FACTORY PAINT ANp FIELp TOVt H -V-, _ tt (I) WAT PRIMER - (2) COATS 5EMIblOW - } ELACK. NOTE- FILLET AELD/5M007H &KIND b ALL JOINT'S ALL METAL TO BE .160" THICK. Y ri r.L 11 IMBEVDEP INTO RETAINING YVALL I X2 STEEL POST 518 X 518 X .045 STEEL PICKET a 4 1/2" 00. (TYP) IXI 112 X 055 TUBULAR 57F-EL 5TRINCGER BOTTOM TOP OF FRECA57 HALL F5 SIDEAALK *NOTE THE FR 4NG 15GAN' FENCE BY THOMPSON 8 TFf0MP50N FENCE CD., ING (510 -2i6- $350); PAINT FACTORY PAINT AND FIELD TOUGH -UP, (1) GOAT PRIMER - (2) GOATS 5EM15L055 - SLAGIC NOTE. FILLET YIELD /SMOOTH &RIND ALL JOINTS ALL METAL TO BE 160" THICK BASIN FENCING: This fence is used along the boundary of the detention and bioretention basins, and is a tubular steel fence. The overall height is 6' -0 "'. C/L Gn. e• -a' IXI I12 XOa5 TU6ULAR. 57EFL 5TRIN6ER IK2 STEEL 1'05T �o IXI 112 x jOaD TUBULAR LANDSCAPE p a g e 9 GONG. FOOTIN& "NOTE 'T+iF FAfRMONT' FENCE BY THOMFWN r 4 THpj,4F5ON FENCE GOv ING (510-276-1.5550), - PAINT FACTORY PAINT ANp FIELp TOVt H -V-, _ (I) WAT PRIMER - (2) COATS 5EMIblOW - } ELACK. NOTE- FILLET AELD/5M007H &KIND b ALL JOINT'S ALL METAL TO BE .160" THICK. LANDSCAPE p a g e 9 OPEN SPACE VIEW FENCE — LOTS 6 THROUGH 26 This fence is used along the western edge of Tassajara Highlands, where the yards abut open space. The design is a welded wire fence on 4x6 wood posts with wood rails without a bottom kicker board. The overall height is 6'. NOTE ALL HOOP TO BE C.ON5 RL7 --TION GRADE R,E174 OOD. POSTS TO BE PRPE61JRE TREATED 00UGLA5 FIR 2'x6' clIP 2 "x4" STRMSOER 4 "x 6' PT P05T or, 2 "x4" (ICS &AUCWJ � KIRE HESH - a (DALVANIZED 2"X4' STR -I N&EtR F!N15H 5RAPE WAS" cork. � II I. _ GOMPAGTE� 5U136RAIX OPEN SPACE VIEW FENCE — TYPICAL This fence is used at the end of Private Drive D. The design is a welded wire fence on 4x6 wood posts with wood rails with a bottom kicker board. The overall height is 6'. NTL ALL INVOP TO $E GON5TIRUG7ION GRADE KEPN OD. P05TS TO BE PRE55URE TREATED PCU6LAS FIR INN' GAP 2 "z4" 5TRINC7ER Wx 6' " PT P05T — 0 8-0" 0c, 2 "x4" (10 6AUCoW - KIRE MESH - &ALVANIZED 5TRI N$rR 2 '42" P.T IF.F _ RlrI CEREsOARED FINISH (SRApE t] F40rIN6 J_,1 S{ LANDSCAPE p a g e 10 ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN STANDARDS SITING CRITERIA It is important to create a street scene that provides visual quality and variety. Visual quality and variety can be accomplished by siting homes with varying setbacks, reversing plans so that garages and entries are adjacent to each other where possible, and providing architectural massing relief through porches, bays and other single story elements along the street. Where sides and rears of homes can be viewed from streets or open space, articulation of these elevations is important as well. This can be accomplished by providing architectural massing relief through varied setbacks. Development Standards are shown on the following page. ARCHITECTURE page 1 SINGLE FAMILY SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Typical Lot Width Minimum Lot Size Minimum Street Frontage width @ cul -de -sac Maximum Lot Coverage Maximum Building Height Maximum Stories Minimum Front Yard Setbacks: Living Area Porch /Deck Garage (front facing) Minimum Side Yard Setbacks: First Floor Upper Floors Corner Lot Porch /Deck Encroachments Minimum Rear Yard Setbacks to Living Area Usable Private Rear Yard Space Required Parking 45.0' 3,670 50' 55% 35' 2 4' 4' 8' 4' 2' max into req'd setback 8' 400 sf min. flat area, minimum depth 8.0' 2 in garage, 1 guest Guest parking A total of 35 on -street parking spaces will be provided for guests. Notes: 1. Front yard setbacks are measured from the property line which is the back of the sidewalk. 2. 60% of homes backing up to open space or public streets will have a minimum 10' setback at the rear elevation. 3. Two -story homes can have "nested" third floor living space within the roofline 4. Side yard encroachments may include window bays, chimneys, furring or other architectural projections. A minimum of 3' clear passage must be proved for emergency responders. 5. For lots less than 5,000 square feet in size, mechanical equipment that generates noise (such as swimming pool, spa and air conditioning equipment) on the property shall be enclosed as necessary to reduce noise at the property line to a maximum of 50 dBA at any time. ARCHITECTURE page 2 STYLE GUIDELINES Tassajara Highlands is designed to create a modern interpretation of European countryside styles, including English, Spanish and French Country elevational styles as pictured and described by the exterior elevations of Plan 1 through 4 in the Proposed Development Concept and Uses section.. The homes will complement architecture within neighboring subdivisions, but also capitalize on its elevation to combine the style with outstanding view corridors. A connection of architectural style with its hillside location and expansive views will allow the Tassajara Highlands homes to exhibit a strong sense of place and permanence. The landscape design will anchor the homes to their hillside location. The following features have provided guidance for architectural style throughout Tassajara Highlands: • Architecture shall be simple in massing and form and provide visual interest. • Architectural elements and materials shall be mixed and matched among elevation styles to provide variety. • Color palettes shall be bold and appropriate to the style BUILDING HEIGHT Single family homes shall be limited to thirty -five (35) feet in height. While not anticipated with the current plan types, newly introduced plan types may contain third story rooms, so long as they are tucked below the roof line in attic space. Roof dormers, lifts or gable end windows are allowed to provide natural light and ventilation into these rooms. MASSING Each home or building shall be articulated so that the massing of the streetscape of a neighborhood has variety and visual interest. This is applicable to all front elevations, as well as street facing side elevations of corner lots. In addition, easily visible rear elevations such as those that back onto open space or public streets shall be articulated. Solutions to achieve these goals include: • Providing floor plans with a mixture of one and two story elements (when appropriate to the style) • Providing floor plans with offset wall planes • Providing a variety of roof forms Providing variety of porches, decks or other architectural elements ARCHITECTURE page 3 ARCHITECTURAL PLAN MIX Homes and multi - family buildings shall be plotted in a manner that provides a variety of floor /building plans and elevation styles along any given streetscape. Plotting two floor plans of the same type on adjacent lots shall be avoided. At no time shall the same single family floor plan with the same elevation style be plotted adjacent to each other. The architecture will include four plan types, as described below. All plans have English, Spanish and French Country elevation styles (as pictured and described in the following pages), and all plans contain first floor suites to accommodate multi - generational living: • Plan 1: Approximately 2,700sf, with up to 5 bedrooms, 3 baths, 2 car garage; designed for use on corner lots; • Plan 2: Approximately 2,800 sf, with up to 5 bedrooms, 3 baths, 2 car garage, with an alternate Granny Suite option available on this home; • Plan 3: Approximately 2,980sf, with up to 5 bedrooms, 3 baths, 2 car garage; • Plan 4: Approximately 3,100 sf, with up to 5 bedrooms, 3 baths, 2 car garage. PLAN 1 Exterior Elevations Spanish NA pfgrjoi Legend= Goncreie Law Pfofl{c 'S' SfuccO Finish Snuffers Deaorotive Gnbfe End I Enhanced SOIs 1 x Stucco Finish Trim ARCHITECTURE page 4 i r1glish Mnieriol Legend: Bull Conrretc Tile Roofing Sruccn Finish Cemeriiitious Sk*Vf Shwq Shutiers Brick veneer Enhanced SML 1 x Stucco hlrxsh Trim French Cauniry MUierlal tege110: FlOt CCnCFeJe Trig Roofing StU4=u i-yrl Sh Cemaniitiou$ 56dfng! 5hlrglw Shutters Wood POSIS Stone veneef Enhanced SAh Ix St,j000 Finikh film ARCHITECTURE page 5 PLAN 2 Exterior Elevations s� nish Mulreriul Legend, Conerele Low PFO ile Stucco Finish 5hOtars DeCOMINB Gable Enc Enhc nced Sills 1x Stucco finish Trim Frcnch Country AAGrerial legend: Fk3l COrrCT010 Tile ROp Siucco Finis) 5hutle" Wood POST s Slone Veneer Enhanced Sills I x Sivcco RnIsh Trim ARCHITECTURE page 6 MaNk31 L&96nd; P-01 Cohcrete Twe Roonnc $te a FiniSh Cemeritllious Sijingf Shin Shullers 9rick V9rddar Emanciod 511K Ix Stucco 1`160 TOM PLAN 3 Exterior Elevations Spanish Material Legend; CpnCrade Lt}w PIPRi4 T Ti1kb Slucco Fi*h Shutters Decorative Gobre End Dek Entranced Srils IxzluccoriNsn ii irn ARCHITECTURE page 7 ELEVATION! 'B' - FPENCH COUNTRY Engl€h f .91 .11P al iagEnd- FIa1 Concrete The Roofii Stucco FWijrFh Cernanlltious Slding/ 5 h Shu l l ers Brick Veriaer Enhanced Sills 1 x %fL1GG4 RnLcih Trim Stone Veneer ;r4b-mv- R Cr L retry rNcMarlal Legend; gblt ConcrOle r10 :R firQ stuc" rinrsn ShuH4ws VJOOcj Posts $tom VeflE�er EnhoncerJ Slis I k Stucco FI nish Tri rn ARCHITECTURE page 8 PLAN 4 Exterior Elevations S OMSh tGFkA Lc 1gcrFd: Corw:refe �Crwv Pra le "S' Tit& 5f c4 fkn[sh 31tiu Il�rs oecorasws c01060 Er`n D-WOM EnhOnes.d sits 1 r St- VM-ki F Trh-n FrenCl l CflUrRPFY AAOte�rkA Lftg4nd= Neal Concraria� Tile itao" Stucco Finish Shutters 1+ 'boil POs #s -& DOCOCU#ivc fng P-n3 ranted Silas I m Shfflcr`1? Rrpisn Ti ARCHITECTURE page 9 inn XAd anal Lsg0rJ6. FW Cnwxrata No Rnn Siunco Rnkh Brick Yerwn%mr Enhanced Sills 1x 5rucoo MnKh Thm Stonevemeer _ l _ .lam CORNER LOT CONDITIONS The building materials on the front elevation should wrap to a logical termination point or perpendicular change of plane on the side elevation. Building materials on homes or buildings plotted on corner lots shall wrap to a logical termination point or perpendicular change on the rear elevation. End lots on lanes or courts and lots adjacent to walking paths shall be considered corner lots. For lots with enhanced elevations, refer to sheet SDRA for all lots that will have enhanced elevations. Below is a representative example of Plan 3 enhanced right elevations and two rear enhanced eleevations, for more specific details of the other 3 plan types, refer to the Architecture section. 0 0 0 inu�� ni m IIII IIII !�i i!i -'SPANISH'- Rl "-- HT AT ENH ARCHITECTURE page 10 - SIGHT AT ENHA 1 EN GLISH - RI i i LM REAR AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY D ARCHITECTURE page 11 LM REAR AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY D ARCHITECTURE page 11 REAR YARDS Homes shall be plotted in a manner that maximizes the rear usable portion of the lot for the homeowner's private open space. SIDE YARDS Homes shall be plotted to maximize the visual separation between homes within the project. • Care shall be given to u1u1u1ze the aligning of windows between neighboring homes on side elevations. Where possible, the visual sight lines between the homes should be broken. • Trash receptacles are permitted to be located within the side yard setbacks (behind the perpendicular fence) provided that they are screened from view by appropriate side yard fencing and have access to the street through an appropriate gate and a minimum three (Y) foot clear and level path providing access to the rear yard is maintained at all times. ENCROACHMENTS Encroachments are not anticipated with the current plans, but future changes or newly introduced plan types could have encroachments of up to two (2) feet into the front and rear yards and up of one (1) foot into the 4' side yards for architectural projections that provide relief to the main building massing form. For example, chimneys, bay windows, furred walls or columns, retaining walls less than 4' in height, media centers, AC units, etc. may encroach 2' into the required setback of a side yard, provided a 36" minimum clear and level area is maintained for access around the house at all times. Below is representative example of the Plan 2 floor plan, for more details on all 4 plan types, refer to the Architecture section. ARCHITECTURE page 12 T--- — ----- — ---- co D PATLO DECK VE- 00 No mud min ■ ■ Mo or. R W owe., No No eEqRC�OM 4 ARCHITECTURE page 12 OPTIONAL DECKS Decks are planned to be used when the outdoor use area can be oriented towards a view, and away from Tassajara Road. Decks shall be designed to reflect the appropriate scale and detail for the architectural style they are associated with, and will be a minimum of eight (8) feet in depth so that they are useable to the homeowners. Shown here are 2 representative examples of the Plan 1 floor plan and Spanish style rear optional deck and Plan 3 floor plan and French Country rear optional covered patio. For details of all 4 plan types with the 3 different styles of the showing the rear options of the deck and /or covered patio, refer to the Architecture section. PLAN 1 IF-------------------------- r------------------ - - - - -- - _ OPT- COVERED PATTOf ri I I DECK ABOVE. L 1' li GARAGE -D RM1 ,1 � f- EA VV / PT10r,,AL DES K ARCHITECTURE page 13 PLAN 3 r - I I I I I ARCHITECTURE p a g e 14 ARCHITECTURAL TREATMENT ELEVATIONS All four sides of each home will exhibit similar architectural treatment. Where materials from one elevation terminate on an adjacent elevation, consideration will be given to identify an appropriate terminus for the material. There will be three elevational styles per plan. RECESS AND SHADOW Recesses and shadow lines will be created by the architecture of the home or building. Recessed windows are encouraged when appropriate to the style. ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTIONS Appropriately scaled architectural projections are encouraged in order to provide additional massing forms. ENTRY STATEMENT Each home or living unit shall have an appropriately scaled entry element. These elements may include: • Decorative surrounds • Porches • Porticos • Garden Walls and Gates • Trellises GARAGES AND DRIVEWAYS • Garages and driveways with unique scoring details should be set back from the main facade of the homes. • Designs shall strive to reduce the overall visual mass of the garage on the front elevation. • Garages should be de- emphasized by highlighting other elements of the home through architectural form. • The garage should be set back behind the main living space of the home, to the extent possible. • Only sectional type garage doors are permitted. ARCHITECTURE page 15 SIDE ELEVATIONS Side elevations of homes or buildings should have architectural relief and detailing similar to the front and rear elevation. This relief and detailing shall be appropriate in scale to the overall architectural style of the home or building. It may be necessary to enhance visible side and rear elevations where the view is prominent. Below are representative examples of the Plan 1 enhanced side elevations for all three styles, which will be utilized where the side of the home is prominently visible. 1 A - 'SPANISH' - RIGHT AT EN HAk E L OTS GNLY ARCHITECTURE page 16 I oo i [ I o FM_1 1 C - 'ENGLISH' - RIGHT I,,T ENHAN WINDOWS AND DOORS Window grids, door styles and associated trim design will vary per elevation. Consistency of this detailing around all elevations shall be maintained. • On all elevations, openings will be articulated with the appropriate head and sill details as a minimum (4" x 1 "). Jamb details should be added when appropriate to the style. • Shutters, if incorporated, shall be sized appropriately to the window or door they serve. • Window grids, when appropriate to the architectural style, shall be used on all elevations for both stories. • Windows may be provided in various shapes and sizes, provided they are appropriate to the architectural style of the home or building. • Dormer windows shall be architecturally correct in scale, proportion and detail with the selected architectural style. ROOFS A variety of roof forms and pitches shall be provided and will assist in meeting the massing and site criteria for Tassajara Highlands. Roof pitches shall be appropriate to the architectural style of the home or building. • Mechanical equipment, other than solar equipment, is not permitted on the roof. • Solar equipment shall be installed at the same slope as the pitch of the roof plane on which it is located. Satellite dishes shall be located so that they are limited from street view as much as possible. Central hook -ups shall be provided to a central location facing the appropriate direction to prevent haphazard installations. • Satellite dishes shall not be permitted on decks, balconies or railings. • Roof penetrations for vents shall be on the rear side of roof ridges whenever possible. All vents shall be painted to match the color of the roof. • Overhangs shall be appropriate to the elevational style of the home or building. ARCHITECTURE page 17 MATERIALS AND COLORS The exterior elevations shall receive a consistent use of materials and colors on all sides. Accent materials such as brick and stone used on street facing elevations should be returned to a logical point of termination at perpendicular change of plane on the adjacent elevations and at inside corners. Natural or natural appearing materials shall be used as details to compliment the architectural style, and are subject to architectural design review. Elevation materials may, as appropriate to the architectural style, include: • Stucco, board and batten siding, lap siding, or shingle siding (siding may be real wood or a cementitious material. • Stone or brick. • Wood and high density foam trim elements. Roofing material shall consist o£ • Composition shingle (high quality, 40 year minimum shingle with shadow relief) • Concrete tile roofing ACCESSORY STRUCTURES Accessory and garden structures will comply with the City of Dublin Building Code in effect at the time of construction. ARCHITECTURE page 18 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS General Plan Amendment /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment SITE REFERENCE SR.1 VICINITY MAP SR.2 PROJECT CONTEXT EXHIBIT SR.3 SITE PHOTO EXHIBIT GPA/EDSPA GP.1 EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USES GP.2 PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USES GP.3 OVERALL AREA PLAN STAGE I & II PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SI &I1.0 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DESIGN GUIDELINES (1 PAGE) S/ &//.1 STAGE I PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PLAN SI &I1.2 STAGE // PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PLAN SI &I1.3 STREET SECTIONS SI &I1.4 VEHICULAR & PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION SI &I1.5 OWNERSHIP & MAINTENANCE PLAN SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR.1 PROPOSED SETBACKS SDR.2 PRELIMINARY GRADING & SITE IMPROVEMENTS SDR.3 PRELIMINARY GRADING & SITE IMPROVEMENTS SDR.4 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SDR.5 LOT /UNIT DESIGN REFERENCE TABLE SDR.6 MINIMUM SETBACK & FRONT YARD EXHIBIT SDR.7 PARKING EXHIBIT SDR.8 ADDRESS PLAN SDR.9 UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE (UDO) SDR. 10 LIDO EXTERIOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTES SDR. 11 LIDO EXTERIOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTES LANDSCAPE L.1 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN L.2 PRELIM. PROJECT ENTRY LANDSCAPE, SITE SECTIONS AND ELEV. L.3 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE COMMON AREAS L.4 PRELIMINARY FRONT YARD TYPICAL LANDSCAPE L.5 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE SITE DETAILS L.6 PRELIMINARY FENCING PLAN Stage / & Stage // Planned Development Site Development Review Vesting Tentative Map Table of Contents May 22, 2014 REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 ARCHITECTURE A0.1 STREET SCENE A0.2 COLOR & MATERIALS A0.3 GREENPOINTS CHECKLIST A0.4 GREENPOINTS CHECKLIST UD.1 UNIVERSAL DESIGN PLAN 1 UD.2 UNIVERSAL DESIGN PLAN 2 UD.3 UNIVERSAL DESIGN PLAN 3 UD.4 UNIVERSAL DESIGN PLAN 4 W4.1 WINDOW ADJACENCY EXHIBIT W4.2 WINDOW ADJACENCY EXHIBIT W4.3 WINDOW ADJACENCY EXHIBIT A 1.0 PLAN 1A FLOOR PLAN A 1. 1 PLAN 1B & 1 C PARTIAL FLOOR PLANS A 1.2 PLAN 1 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A 1.3 PLAN 1A "SPANISH" WRAP ELEVATIONS A 1.4 PLAN 1B "FRENCH COUNTRY" WRAP ELEVATIONS A 1.5 PLAN 1C "ENGLISH" WRAP ELEVATIONS A 1.6 PLAN 1A "SPANISH" OPTIONS A 1.7 PLAN 1B "FRENCH COUNTRY" OPTIONS A 1.8 PLAN 1C "ENGLISH" OPTIONS A 1.9 PLAN 1 ENHANCED RIGHT ELEVATIONS A2.0 PLAN 2A FLOOR PLAN A2.1 PLAN 2B & 2C PARTIAL FLOOR PLANS A2.2 PLAN 2 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A2.3 PLAN 2A "SPANISH" WRAP ELEVATIONS A2.4 PLAN 2B "FRENCH COUNTRY" WRAP ELEVATIONS A2.5 PLAN 2C "ENGLISH" WRAP ELEVATIONS A2.6 PLAN 2A "SPANISH" OPTIONS A2.7 PLAN 2B "FRENCH COUNTRY" OPTIONS A2.8 PLAN 2C "ENGLISH" OPTIONS A2.9 PLAN 2 RIGHT ELEVATIONS "GRANNY SUITE" A3.0 PLAN 3A FLOOR PLAN A3.1 PLAN 3B & 3C PARTIAL FLOOR PLANS A3.2 PLAN 3 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A3.3 PLAN 3A "SPANISH" WRAP ELEVATIONS A3.4 PLAN 3B "FRENCH COUNTRY" WRAP ELEVATIONS A3.5 PLAN 3C "ENGLISH" WRAP ELEVATIONS A3.6 PLAN 3A "SPANISH" OPTIONS A3.7 PLAN 3B "FRENCH COUNTRY" OPTIONS A3.8 PLAN 3C "ENGLISH" OPTIONS A3.9 PLAN 3 ENHANCED RIGHT ELEVATIONS ARCHITECTURE A4.0 PLAN 4A FLOOR PLAN A4.1 PLAN 4B & 4C PARTIAL FLOOR PLANS A4.2 PLAN 4 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A4.3 PLAN 4A "SPANISH" WRAP ELEVATIONS A4.4 PLAN 48 "FRENCH COUNTRY" WRAP ELEVATIONS A4.5 PLAN 4C "ENGLISH" WRAP ELEVATIONS A4.6 PLAN 4A "SPANISH" OPTIONS A4.7 PLAN 4B "FRENCH COUNTRY" OPTIONS A4.8 PLAN 4C "ENGLISH" OPTIONS A4.9 PLAN 4B ENHANCED RIGHT ELEVATIONS A4. 10 PLAN 4C ENHANCED LEFT ELEVATIONS VESTING TENTATIVE MAP VTM.1 VTM TITLE PAGE VTM.2 EXISTING BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS VTM.3 LOT & PARCEL LAYOUT VTM.4 LOT & PARCEL LAYOUT VTM.5 PRELIMINARY GRADING & SITE IMPROVEMENTS VTM.6 PRELIMINARY GRADING & SITE IMPROVEMENTS VTM.7 TASSAJARA ROAD PAINTED LANE CONFIGURATION VTM.8 SITE CROSS SECTIONS VTM.9 LEGEND & DETAILS VTM. 10 PRELIMINARY STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN VTM. 11 EROSION CONTROL PLAN CONSULTANT TEAM ARCHITECT KTGY GROUP, INC. 580 SECOND STREET, SUITE 200 OAKLAND, CA 94607 -3545 5101272 -2910 CIVIL ENGINEER /PLANNER PIA DESIGN RESOURCES, INC. 3021 CITRUS CIRCLE, SUITE 150 WALNUT CREEK, CA 94598 -2635 9251210 -9300 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT RIPLEY DESIGN GROUP 1615 BONANZA STREET, SUITE 314 WALNUT CREEK, CA 964596 -4531 9251938 -7377 Replace this sheet with 11" x 17" tab labeled SITE REVIEW TO DANVILLE & SAN RAMON un � z D O �A STA COUiY.oF pUgVIN NTRA �� 'Ti SIT PROJECT i i C��N SITE A�AMED LIN PROPERTY CAMP PARKS PARKS RESERVE FORCES TRAINING AREA TO OA KL A ND/HA Y WA RD �NTY ki TRACT MAP NO. 8102 VESTING TENTATIVE MAP (IN PROGRESS) TO LIVERMORE /TRACY TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS DUBLIN CALIFORNIA L Lt Bringing fire•sfor qualify home VICINITY MAP MAY 22, 2014 REVISED: JULY 4, 20,4 /1 NORTH N. T. S. PIADesign Resources, inc. Planning a Engineering a Surveying 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Welnet Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 SR.1 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA Fm PANS= AP. VA $ . r , 3� NgR/N 1• s � 0' Yo. io, 1�0, MIMW AW WOW SWA= ff- AM fff-M-M-ff Now ZdWJW AM It Ari 0" 1 / 1 � AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY NOTE ADM PHOTOORAPH SHOWN NEOEEM/ WAS GENERATED BY PAWOMAM EW FROM AEWL PHOT00RAPHY TAN�N/N 44N LOM 18, 2013 AM PAEPAM BY OEOMAPS OF RANCHO COMM =0 COMM ESTABLL'SNED BY PIA DESfM/ RE'SOIAP= M a PROJECT CONTEXT EXHIBIT y kt � a JUNE 14, 2013 REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 _ RFVLSED: JULY 4, 2014 ♦ a \ PIA PANdW AV 191 6 swvoow R 2 3021 C M often SWb RTO W" Wt crook CBRForn/a 94699 -mm TEL (8251 210-9300 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA VIEWS FROM SITE PHOTO 1 GOg -TY TA COUNTY � I` iON'SA S" A�AM DE DUDUN TRACT MAP NO. 8102 VESTING TENTATIVE MAP (IN PROGRESS) rio t 4 f. 44 1 - 9 3'', �o PIADesign Resources, Inc. Slt Planning Engineering Surveying 31 l D m i . al � C 2 PHOTO 2 _ PR T�+ V.tFGA$F%`I� �. 966 0004 \y - 'IAPN: 9FPE \ 00-1, S w APN X000 O I \ \]Gyi+L 0 �cb - 0 - PHOTO 3 PHOTO 4 1" = 200' o' 16' 2 . a 1, .r - pan l.r c i 90 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH & KEY TO SITE PHOTOS NOTES: 1. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY: AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH SHOWN HEREON WAS GENERATED BY PHOTOGRAMMETRY FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY TAKEN JANUARY 18, 2013 AND PREPARED BY GEOMAPS OF RANCHO CORDOVA. 2. COLOR PHOTOGRAPHS: COLOR PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWN HEREON WERE TAKEN BY P/A DESIGN RESOURCES, INC, ON 7113112 THROUGH 8129112. SITE PHOTO EXHIBIT MARCH 6, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 VIEWS TOWARDS SITE PHOTO A PHOTO B F4 PHOTO C PHOTO D PIADesign Resources, Inc. Slt Planning Engineering Surveying 31 m i . 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL !9251 210 -9300 Replace this sheet with 11" x 17" tab labeled GPA /EDSPA TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA sTR F9� 0 RG�9C c ��io r s OPEN SPACE ® S EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USES MARCH 6, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2093 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 �� oo LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 00 ROP O (1k NORTH , = 60, 0' 30' 50' 120 LEGEND OF EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS OPEN SPACE RURAL RESIDENTIAL / AGRICULTURE II UNIT PER 100 GROSS RESIDENTIAL ACRESI STREAM CORRIDOR ENSITY UIDENTIAL LOW D R ESIDE 10.0 - 6.0 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 16.1 - 14,0 DU /AC) LAND USE DESIGNATION BOUNDARY MEDIUM /NIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 114.1 -25.0 OU/ACI NOTE LAND USE DESIGNATION INFORMATION PER THE DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AS AMENDED MARCH 3, MI PIA ®esign Resources, Inc. GP. Planning ■ Engineering i Surveying 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL 19251 210 -9300 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA r i TRANSFER PA PER EXCH ��EE / / / / / / q � s PI / a o MEDI / / jxQ EXISTING a t m RE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 0 1 SEv' OPEN 'PA GE • PROP® I HEAVY BLACK LINE INDICATES PROJECTBOUNDARY (1NORTH , = 60' 0" 30" 50' 120 PROPOSED MEDIUM PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USES MARCH 6, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2093 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 o _ o ` � SyRpN DR1vE ` ♦ ♦ F1 R ®P� RCEL ANGE -' MENT PROPOSED R/W DEDICA TION I N 9T- ® PROPOSED 4 `I OPEN SPACE . `,l\ ��A� S rczi �o0 ?OPOSED UM DENSITY I SIDENTIAL � gP OPT QROQo -^ — o — — — — — — — e � T 3 I f DENSITY RESIDENTIAL / / / / / STREAM CORRIDOR i I LEGEND OF PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS OPEN SPACE STREAM CORRIDOR MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL I6,1 - 14.0 DUPACI LAND USE OESIGNA PON BOUNDARY NOTE LAND USE DESIGNA LION INFORMATION PER THE DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AS AMENDED WEED 3, 2011 PIA ®esign Resources, Inc. G-RuP62 Planning AF Engineering Ar Surveying 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (9251 210 -9300 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA OVERALL AREA PLAN MARCH 6, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2093 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 -HIGHWAY 580 TO OAKLAND /HAYWARD HIGHWAY 580 TO LIVERMORE /TRACY - NOTE 1. LAND USE BASE: BASE MAP FOR THIS SHEET IS THE DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FIGURE 1 -1A AS AMENDED MARCH 3, 2011. 11.800, 0' dd 6o- 8 o' 160' PIADesign Resources, Inc. Planning i Engineering i Surveying G.R.1 '2 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL 19251 210 -9300 Replace this sheet with 11" x 17" tab labeled STAGE I & II PD STAGE I & II PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DESIGN GUIDELINES SINGLE FAMILY SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Typical Lot Width Minimum Lot Size Minimum Street Frontage width @ cul -de -sac Maximum Lot Coverage Maximum Building Height Maximum Stories Minimum Front Yard Setbacks: Living Area Porch /Deck Garage (front facing) Minimum Side Yard Setbacks: First Floor Upper Floors Corner Lot Porch /Deck Encroachments Minimum Rear Yard Setbacks to Living Area Usable Private Rear Yard Space Required Parking 45.0' 3,670 50' 55% 35' 2 4' 4' 8' 4' 2' max into req'd setback 8' 400 sf min. flat area, minimum depth 8.0' 2 in garage, 1 guest Guest parking A total of 35 on- street parking spaces will be provided for guests. Notes: 1. Front yard setbacks are measured from the property line which is the back of the sidewalk. 2. 60% of homes backing up to open space or public streets will have a minimum 10' setback at the rear elevation. 3. Two -story homes can have "nested" third floor living space within the roofline 4. Side yard encroachments may include window bays, chimneys, furring or other architectural projections. A minimum of 3' clear passage must be proved for emergency responders. 5. For lots less than 5,000 square feet in size, mechanical equipment that generates noise (such as swimming pool, spa and air conditioning equipment) on the property shall be enclosed as necessary to reduce noise at the property line to a maximum of 50 dBA at any time. STAGE I /STAGE II PLANNED DEVELOPMENT S I& I I. 0 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA o i TRANSFER PA PER EXCH ��EE / / / / / / s PI / a o MEDI / / jxQ EXISTING a t m RE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 0 (1NORTH , = BO' 0" 30" 50' 120 EN SPACE pROPOSEV OP HEAVY BLACK LINE INDICATES PROJECTBOUNDARY PROPOSED MEDIUM I S TA GE / PLANNED DEVEL OPMENT PLAN MARCH 6, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2093 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 o _ o SyRpN pmge ` / RoP® RCEL \ ♦ ♦♦ ANGE MENT PROPOSED R/W DEDICA TION I a`a N I � � N ` 9 I ® PROPOSED OPEN SPACE A�� 00 0- I ?OPOSED UM DENSITY I SIDENTIAL � gP OPT s" QROQD -^ — o — — — — — — — e wo <.o 3 I / DENSITY RESIDENTIAL / / / / / STREAM CORRIDOR i I LEGEND OF PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS %j j� OPEN SPACE STREAM CORRIDOR MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL T6 . f - 16.0 SHIACI LAND USE DESIGNATION BOUNDARY NOTE LAND USE DESIGNATION INFORMATION PER THE DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AS AMENDED MARCH 3, 2011 PIA ®esign Resources, Inc_ Planning Ar Engineering a Surveying 1 UGl 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL 19251 210 -9300 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS STAGE H PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PLAN JUNE 14, 2013 CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 \ REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 ° ° \ EMAD BOUTROS AND SANDY TRACT AP N0. 7 BESNAY 6833 TASSAJARA ROAD \ � DUBLIN, CA 94568 4 APN 985 -0055- 003 -02/O4 �\ O TRACT � ENTATI 1 MA .. � - . ' o VESTING TENFA�IVE h%4 (IN PROGRE \ STANDARD PACIFIC CORPORA77ON SYR, DRIVE GPP \ 6847 TASSAJARA ROAD fP�� • > , \ DUBLIN. CA 94568 APN 985 - 0002- ODi -03 C' CIRCLE � \ � MOCCER CREfK O _.I \ TEMPORARY 2 A' SIDE 4' SIDE 1"SSAJP Rp POPS oaf AC BERM y 5 /LVERA RANCH - a' s0 li I 23 \ i 20 v a 21 22 N ° o n \ \ TE DR A OR /YE E' RAW TION �m LOGGIA I LOGGIA BRADDOCK AND LOGAN SERVICES, INC. _ - LIMIT OF IMPROVEMENTS 6861 TASSAJARA ROAD' . . . . . . . . i ¢ . . . DUa"N, CA 94568 w PR /V VE PROPOSED BARRICADE AND \ APN 985 -0001- 001 -01 i _ \� / �\ PARCEL O � OPEN SPACE ° 39 R ovPOmcMCanorNCIT TYPICAL LOT SETBACKS \ BYOTNERB SEE SDR 6 FOR MORE DETAILS NOT TO SCALE P�`D / ( 30 GIRDLE ✓ \� ` \ \ \4\. -\ 27 �zI '0ze °Fm c� \ X q WALL MAI ENANCE � � - 1 1 � �C '4CF \ Iy lJ GL D El1EMEN% ,�RCEi 'e' 35 36- PR /VATPFOPEN SPACE -z,vlt SF m 4 PRrvATEnRrvE'D• i T r R--25 33 31 µp y 2¢ PARCEL G \ 32 POOR 6 . T 8 \ \ PRIVATE TE N \ _ ,.. ,....t0 R -25 J �I ��PA� --. o APPROXIMATE LIMIT \ \ OF CIVIL GRADING - \ 21 15 ( � A O�MaGRADN 79 FA, `WALL MAINTENANCE / PRIVATE OPEN SPACE EASEMENT % R \ '` 2.111 AC CNANC S. LIN 6582 TASSAJARA ROAD DUBLIN. CA 0 AP \ \ N 986 - 0004 - 0-005- 5 -05 � \ \C \� CBEE SINGH FAMILY PROPERTIES, LP. 7740 TASSAJARA ROAD DUBLIN. CA 94568 �../ �-✓ APN 986 - 0000 -001 4 / 0 1, PIA ®esign Resources, Inc. S-[&-[-1.2 Planning Ar Engineering i Surveying 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 SETBACKS (ARE INDICATED BY DOTTED LINES ON EACH LOT) - FROM YARD 8' MINIMUM TO LIVING AREA 8' MINIMUM TO PORCH /DECK SIDE YARD 4' MINIMUM FIRST FLOOR NORTH 4' MINIMUM UPPER FLOORS _ 8' MINIMUM CORNER LOT REAR YARD B MINIMUM NOTE: 0, 30, 60" 120' MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE 55% THIS PLAN DEMONSTRATES THE 35 GUEST PARKING SPACES OF 8' USEABLE REAR YARD 400 S MINIMUM WIDE X 20' LONG. 1, PIA ®esign Resources, Inc. S-[&-[-1.2 Planning Ar Engineering i Surveying 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA S/W R/W S/W 126'128' ULTIMATE RIGHT OF WAY OPEN SPA C£ EY R% W PARALLEL OR BASIN R/W WIDENING VARIES PROPOSED SOUND WALL f2' -f5' VARIES 104' ULTIMATE PC TO FC C/L MAINTENANCE EASEMENT FC TO EX MEDIAN 16' RAISL' ISLAND 20% S/W STANDARD CURB AND GUTTER ' . 44 EX PC TO EX MEDIAN PROPOSED SOUND WALL "\ 1 ` PER CITY STANDARD CO -300 PAV WIDENING VARIES TASSAJARA ROAD #3('---") 11 TO EXISTING TASSAJARA ROAD EX AC DIKE SCALE: I" , 10' CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK JOINT TRENCH PROPOSED PAD PER CITY STANDARD CD -302 TO BE REMOVED DETERMINED BY THE 'R' VALUE 2.0'F. 2% 3T MA �X 2.0% PARKING ALLOWED ONE SID£ SCALE, 1" - 10' SIDEWALK PER CITY STANDARD 1D -302 STRUCTURAL SECTION TO BE DETERMINED BY THE 'R' VALUE STANDARD CURB AND GUTTER PER CITY STANDARD CD -300 TASSAJARA ROAD # 1 (LOOKING NORTR) ULTIMATE CONDITION W ?H 16' _. SCALE.. 1" = 10' LIMIT OF IMPROVCMENIS TO )+0).44 CL TASSAJARA ROAD R/W 132' -126' ULTIMATE RIGHT OF WAY RESIDENTIAL LOTS R/W WIDENING VARIES PROPOSED SOUND WALL 4 10' -16' VARIES 104' ULTIMATE PC TO PC MAINTENANCE EASEMENT PAV WIDENING VARIES 56' TRAVEL WAY 16' PROPOSED SOUND WALL 8' 12' 11' 11' 12' }2' 12' 12' CLASS r STRAIGHT S RAIGHT STRAIGHT LET TURN STRAIGHT STRAIGHT STRAIGHT CLA BIKE LANE OR RIGHT OR RIGHT BIKE PROPOSED PAD 2 —Y 31k 2.0% STANDARD CURB AND GUTTER STRUCTURAL BE OGN TO BE PER CITY STANDARD CO -300 DETERMINED BY THE 'R' VALUE TASSAJARA ROAD #2 aDGKING NGRTR) INTERIM CONDITION WITH PAINTED ISLANDS SCALE T_:'0' EX R/W TRACT MAP NO. t HOLLER RANCI IN PROCESSI PROPOSED SOUND WALL MAINTENANCE EASEMENT 10' -12' VARIES d -B'1 4'� E. \' PAV Z EX C/L PROPOSED SOUND WALL E/ A PROPOSED PAD Y.E TC ZO% REMAIN 20% STREET CROSS SECTION KEY MAP NOT i0 SCALE EX _w RA CT M FALLON W, R/W R/W PER CITY STANDARD CD 300 Ex R'w 'A' ENTRY TRACT MAF NO 6I0? HOLLER RANCH NO PARKING AL[OW£O i ON PROCESS/ CUR PE DETERMINED BY THE 'R' VALUE SCALE 1" - 10' I To BE DETERMINED BY THE 'R' VALUE '8' COURT oDKINC NURTHi V RKINC ALLOWED 0/4£ 5 /OE SCALE 1" - 10' PUB S/W f0' 10' 8' S/W PUE L LANE LANE PARALLEL _ C/L PARKING 20% \ STANDARD CURB AND GUTTER STRUCTURA[ SECTION TO BE PER CITY STANDARD CO -300 DETERMINED BY THE 'R' VALUE TASSAJARA ROAD #3('---") 11 TO EXISTING TASSAJARA ROAD GRADE SCALE: I" , 10' STREET CROSS SECTION KEY MAP NOT i0 SCALE EX _w RA CT M FALLON W, R/W R/W PER CITY STANDARD CD 300 Ex R'w 'A' ENTRY TRACT MAF NO 6I0? HOLLER RANCH NO PARKING AL[OW£O i ON PROCESS/ CUR PE DETERMINED BY THE 'R' VALUE SCALE 1" - 10' I To BE DETERMINED BY THE 'R' VALUE '8' COURT oDKINC NURTHi V RKINC ALLOWED 0/4£ 5 /OE SCALE 1" - 10' PUB S/W f0' 10' 8' S/W PUE LANE LANE PARALLEL _ C/L PARKING 20% 20% I - PROPOSED/ GRADE CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK JOINT TRENCH PER CITY STANDARD CD -302 STRUCTURAL SECTION TO BE DETERMINED BY THE 'R' VALUE 'C' CIRCLE PARKING ALLOWED ONE SID£ SCALE, 1" - 10' VCE STREET SECTIONS JUNE 14, 2013 REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 CITY STANDARD CD 300 PRIVATE DRIVE U'/LDOKING sGUTHI SCALE 1" = 10' PRIVATE DRIVE E'(LOOIING EAST) (SUBDIVISION EVAE) SCALE 1" _ l0' CITY STANDARD DO 300 PRIVATE DRIVE 'F'(D,_ us SCALE C 10' PIADesign Resources-, Inc_ S_1&11.3 Planning Ar Engineering i Surveying 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 p- - 6w m MOLLER RANCH =3 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS ............. .............. 00 IA -0 AK, 711 It 00000000010000.01111111— A TASSAJARA CREEK owl"mi;d 4 4 Ink - tp Bringing five•jiftoff qualify home VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULA TION "4 MA Y 22- 2014 LEGEND: 'R- - - VEHICULAR CIRCULATION --I Rw PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION REVISED: JULY 4,2014 NORTH 1 150' 75 150 Design Resources, inc. PIA Planning a Engineering m Surveying 3021 Citrus C—, S.- 150 W.1— Creek, California 94198-2631 TEL (9261 2104300 Sl &ll. 4 Replace this sheet with 11" x 17" tab labeled SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA 20 BRADDOCK AND LOGAN SERVICES, INC. 6861 TASSAJARA ROAD DUa"N, CA 94568 APN 985- 0001 - 001 -01 SETBACKS IARE INDICATED NY DOTTED LINES ON EACH LOT) - FROM YARD 8' MINIMUM TO AREA PORC 8' MINIMUM TO PORCH /DECK SIDE YARD 4' MINIMUM FIRST FLOOR NORTH 4' MINIMUM UPPER FLOORS _ 8' MINIMUM CORNER LOT REAR YARD B' MINIMUM NOTE: MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE 55% THIS PLAN DEMONSTRATES THE 35 GUEST PARKING SPACES OF 8' USEABLE REAR YARD 400 S MINIMUM WIDE X 20 LONG. 0, 30, 60" 120' SITE DEVELOPMENT )0 11 al rnacr G� g REVIEW SITE PLAN JUNE 14, 2013 REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 \ EMAD BOUTROS AND SANDY BESHAY 6833 TASSAJARA ROAD DUBLIN, 94566 APN 985 -00555 - 003 -02/O4 o o 10 110 P a fp SILVERA RANCH .� °rod q`EK \ vy ss v 3' APPROXIMATE LIMIT\ - OF CIVIL GRADING \ F� P \ P PIA ®esign Resources, Inc_ SDR. 1 Planning Ar Engineering i Surveying 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA PRELIMINARY GRADING AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS JUNE 14, 2013 REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 APN 986 - 0004 -00I y rf \pF� i. ` ( l.0 f'r �"� { Design Resources, Inc_ PIA Planning i Engineering i Surveying Y' = 30' 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 0' 1.5' 3b' 6b, Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 ly�J SDR.21 (LANDS PRELIMINARY GRADING AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS JUNE 14_ 2013 CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA e REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 SA RA ROAD pD m fop W P �o P \ Ac BoR Y REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 - \ L REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 Wwe 1A5 JA a S� o e A Li � S ae o a 86 a� REVISED: JULY 4 2014 c;a ��W � 3Mi e ,�A^ owe 4 taW:ddBd. O RM N1 EXISTING CTR ICTTION BY OTHERS < dd m r cG ka d ^� ae a� oa <owyv _3 0 >e °ep m may.. r PIM1T E V E AND OFIMPROEMENS SILVERA RANCH 9r A111-11 Ss OUTFALL=4600x \ m\ EXISTING SANITARY\ ( SEWER LINE TO BE Z _ \ ELOCATED -A HYDROMOOIFICA TIONI \ N \\ \ N ._ ,! I BIO- RETENTION ¢ LL DETENTION BASIN \ 7 O\P I I I h easrN N3 I easrN g4 \ c. I I I 0 I I $g II a GurFAU All 6 a \ \ \ \ ELEV. 465.0 o I I I ELEV. 456.0 P -4801x I P:419.9x 0 TSW 4820 \ \ y I I el I GR -46. \ 9 'HIGH DEC ORATIVEA Bl0- RETENTION @ \ \ 4 I I \ ONCE (SEE LANOSCA A pgQT,gj I A \ BASIN #2 I I I I I FL_456.0! \ P NS FOR DETAILS( _ ELEV 472.0 �� ourFAU. -4s6ex I A p 76 w- 4>6.0. �. 7 V Bw=a]9ox \ P479, ]« \ \ 11w,4sa5e FL roe A \ \ FrELO vE rEB Q \ � A�A \V P=d80.O4 OPEN V c A - EXISTING SANIrAR GEWFR LINE To RE IN ew- as4.or tW`dee� A� _ 5S / l 'ill. IMPORTANT NOTE: �� A \ p PROPOSED GRADING, CULVERT, 1 \ N(TYPIGAU l l HEADWALL BOULDER DROP AND 9 P_46 iii l � RIP RAP SHOWN IN THIS AREA �/ '61 / / a ASSUMED TO Bf CONSTRUCTED. � � � \ \ \ 14 .9, I \ x494 A \ Blo- swALEpr II P,ae1F4 \ \\ �Z P�F� ✓ i P 4602« ?3 / /// Sl iI - i BErvcE wlrH RATEE , o / - \ (SEE IANOSOA PLANS !� _ A G FOR DETAILS( \ \\ _Vy r / {J L -are y, P IN V v4er5• A / / //i ,�9/ P �� '.. Cl7Y OF OUBLIN \ \ �\ 5 i / ` / / DUBLIN, CA 9d568 V �J F' = 494.3 G1P \ / / i // "`3 m 986- 0004 - 003 -00 \ p \\ BOG / i FNANG A S. LIN T EXCHANGE AGRFEME / 6582 TASS JCA 9 ROAD - 18 P--484 ,6, \\ / � jam' � DUBLIA; CA 94568 1 APN 986 -0004- 005 -05 LOGGIA NI NORTH 0' 1.5' YO' 60' PIA ®esign Resources, Inc. SDR.3 Planning Ar Engineering i Surveying 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 Replace this sheet with 11" x 17" tab labeled LANDSCAPE TASSAJARA ROAD SECTION SEE SHEET L2 T SOUNDWALL AT LOT 40 — 8' SOUNDWALL AT LOT 4148 RAISED MEDIAN ISLAND, SEE SHEET L2 VITEX AGNUS-CASTIS CHASTE TREE J56 MEDIUM TASSA� ROAD MEW PLATANUS A. 'COLUMBIN LONDON PLANE TREE 24' BOX MEDIUM � 0 wENM`( MEN 11111 C. 'CHANTICLEER' CHANTICLEER PEAR S,1*1OX MEDIUM OPEN AMPACE MEW 2,vaox LOW PLATANUS RACEMOSA CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE OUERCUS AGRIFOUA COAST LIVE OAK 24-BOX 0on DETENTION WIN MESS ZZ a Ig h N, O Al SEE DETAIL • SHEET F, .eI��$4 qa ° STREET TREE, TYPICAL MAIN ACCENT TREE, TYPICAL 1 Q\ �..dF�ee o �'p�a• e� eWr�RB BENCH ON CONCRETE PAD, TYPICAL - �• " SEE DETAIL, SHEET L3 f RETAINING WALL y OPEN SPACE SITE WALL / TRAIL W/ 48" HIGH RAILING TREE, TYPICAL SECTIONS- SEE DETAIL, SHEET L5 END OF 6-0" SOUND SEE SHEET L2 WALL AT TASSAJARA ROAD W. PRECAST FLUTED CONCRETE PILASTER WITH PRECAST CAP 4" WIDE PRECAST CONCRETE WALL PANEL WITH INTEGRAL CAP AND STX.CO FINSH it i II'I NN)5H &RdVE RETAINING WALL W/ 48" HIGH RAILING SEE DETAIL, SHEET L5 ANY DISTURBED AREAS AROUND 6' SOUNDWALL AT LOT 39 DETENTION BASIN TO BE HYDROSEEDED WITH A HYDROSEED MIX - PLANT EVA GATE PER CIVIL ENGINEER - - - ° -- "c�UBULAR STEEL FENCI'- V- SOUNDWALL AT CLEAN SEE DETNI SH@E_L5 WATER BASIN'B' 1- -Y r VA DETENTION• I� ) AN WA EAN WATER BASIN D A\ \ IN'I '� v�� E SIN IT TRANSFER PARCEL \ ° OPEN SPACE TREE A �� \ 5 6-0" SOUNDWALL AT LOT 26 24 / OPEN SPACE PQRGEL'D' / COMMUNITY MAILBOX, � J 3 CONCRETE PPAVING W/ P1C NJ(';'I'ABLE AND BENCH SEATING, SEE DETAILS ON SHEET AND 1.3 ACCENT TREE, TYPICAL — VIEW FENCE- SEE DETAIL, SHEET L5 6' WOOD PRODUCTION FENCE AT SIDE YARD- SEE DETAIL, SHEET L5 RETAINING WALLS PER CIVIL ENGINEER, TYPICAL ENHANCED WOOD FENCE WHERE VISIBLE FROM STREET & CORNER LOTS, TYPICAL - SEE DETAIL, SHEET L5 P"4 TM NOTES: HOA OR NEISMBORING I. ALL TREES SHALL BE PLANTED AND STAKED PER TOWN STANDARDS. PRIVATE PROPERTY PRELIMINARY TREE PALETTE ROOT BARRIERS. CHAIN LINK FENCE COMMUNITY MAILBOX BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME 812E WATER USE 4. TO REDUCE WATER USE, 75% OF THE PLANTS SELECTED SHOULD BE STREET TIIEES NATIVE OR CLIMATE ADAPTED TO THE DUBLIN ENVIRONS WITH PRECAST CAP 5. THE IRRIGATION DESIGN SHALL UTILIZE LOW FLOW. DURABLE. IRRIGATION 4• WIDE PRECAST - CONCRETE WALL CELTIS SINENGS CHINESE HACKBERRY 24-BOX LOW 7. REFER TO SHEET LI FOR PRELIMINARY DETAILS OF: ACCENT TREES PRECAST SOUNDWALL NIRBYEWAGP O S. REFER TO SHEET L3 FOR PRELIMINARY DETAILS OF: FINISH GRADE ACER P. 'BLOOD600D' RED JAPANESE MAPLE ISG MEDIUM COMMON YARROW ARBUTUS MARINA STRAWBERRY TREE 15G LOW EPILOCHU DUTIFOORUM COTINUS COGGYGR , SMOKE TREE 15G LOW PICNIC TABLE PROJECT SIGN LAGERSTROEMIA 1.'MUSKOGEE' CRAPE MYRTLE 15G LOW MAGNOLIA G LITTLE GEM DWARF SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA 15G MEDIUM MAGNOLIA STELLATA SAUCER MAGNOLIA 15G MEDIUM IG OLEA E. SWAN HILL FRUITLESS OLIVE 15G LOW PRUNUS C. KRAUTER VESUVIUS PURPLE LEAF PLUM 15G LOW ARCHTOSTAPHYLOS DENSIFLORA PYRUS KAWAKAMII EVERGREEN PEAR 15G MEDIUM TASSAJARA ROAD SECTION SEE SHEET L2 T SOUNDWALL AT LOT 40 — 8' SOUNDWALL AT LOT 4148 RAISED MEDIAN ISLAND, SEE SHEET L2 VITEX AGNUS-CASTIS CHASTE TREE J56 MEDIUM TASSA� ROAD MEW PLATANUS A. 'COLUMBIN LONDON PLANE TREE 24' BOX MEDIUM � 0 wENM`( MEN 11111 C. 'CHANTICLEER' CHANTICLEER PEAR S,1*1OX MEDIUM OPEN AMPACE MEW 2,vaox LOW PLATANUS RACEMOSA CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE OUERCUS AGRIFOUA COAST LIVE OAK 24-BOX 0on DETENTION WIN MESS ZZ a Ig h N, O Al SEE DETAIL • SHEET F, .eI��$4 qa ° STREET TREE, TYPICAL MAIN ACCENT TREE, TYPICAL 1 Q\ �..dF�ee o �'p�a• e� eWr�RB BENCH ON CONCRETE PAD, TYPICAL - �• " SEE DETAIL, SHEET L3 f RETAINING WALL y OPEN SPACE SITE WALL / TRAIL W/ 48" HIGH RAILING TREE, TYPICAL SECTIONS- SEE DETAIL, SHEET L5 END OF 6-0" SOUND SEE SHEET L2 WALL AT TASSAJARA ROAD W. PRECAST FLUTED CONCRETE PILASTER WITH PRECAST CAP 4" WIDE PRECAST CONCRETE WALL PANEL WITH INTEGRAL CAP AND STX.CO FINSH it i II'I NN)5H &RdVE RETAINING WALL W/ 48" HIGH RAILING SEE DETAIL, SHEET L5 ANY DISTURBED AREAS AROUND 6' SOUNDWALL AT LOT 39 DETENTION BASIN TO BE HYDROSEEDED WITH A HYDROSEED MIX - PLANT EVA GATE PER CIVIL ENGINEER - - - ° -- "c�UBULAR STEEL FENCI'- V- SOUNDWALL AT CLEAN SEE DETNI SH@E_L5 WATER BASIN'B' 1- -Y r VA DETENTION• I� ) AN WA EAN WATER BASIN D A\ \ IN'I '� v�� E SIN IT TRANSFER PARCEL \ ° OPEN SPACE TREE A �� \ 5 6-0" SOUNDWALL AT LOT 26 24 / OPEN SPACE PQRGEL'D' / COMMUNITY MAILBOX, � J 3 CONCRETE PPAVING W/ P1C NJ(';'I'ABLE AND BENCH SEATING, SEE DETAILS ON SHEET AND 1.3 ACCENT TREE, TYPICAL — VIEW FENCE- SEE DETAIL, SHEET L5 6' WOOD PRODUCTION FENCE AT SIDE YARD- SEE DETAIL, SHEET L5 RETAINING WALLS PER CIVIL ENGINEER, TYPICAL ENHANCED WOOD FENCE WHERE VISIBLE FROM STREET & CORNER LOTS, TYPICAL - SEE DETAIL, SHEET L5 P"4 TM NOTES: HOA OR NEISMBORING I. ALL TREES SHALL BE PLANTED AND STAKED PER TOWN STANDARDS. PRIVATE PROPERTY 10. LANDSCAPE PLANS SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH =FORMA GREEN BUILDING GUIDELINES. 11. PLANTING OF SITE STRUCTURES SHALL NOT OBSTRUCT THE SIGHT DISTANCE OF MOTORISTS, PEDESTRIANS OR BICYCLISTS, PLANTING, AND /OR SITE STRUCTURES SUCH AS WALLS, AT INTERSECTIONS SHALL NOT BE TALLER THAN 30 INCHES ABOVE THE CURB, EXCEPT FOR TREES. 12. TREE AND PLANT CLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS: - LOCATE TREES A MINIMUM OF 8 FEET FROM SANITARY SEWER, WATER, ELECTRIC AND GAS LINES - LOCATE TREES A MINIMUM OF 6 FEET FROM BUILDING WALLS AND RODF OVERHANGS -WOODY PLANTS SWILL BE KEPT A MINIMUM OF 36 INCHES CLEAR FROM THE EDGE OF CURB OR WALKWAYS SO AS NOT TO REQUIRE SHEARING 13. STREET TREE GUIDELINES: - LOCATE TREES A MINIMUM OF 8 FEET FROM FIRE HYDRANTS, SANITARY SEWER WATER ELECTRIC AND GAS LINES - LOCATE STREET TREES AT LEAST 15 FEET FROM STREET LIGHTS (20 FEET PREFERRED) -LOCATE STREET TREES A MINIMUM OF 5 FEET FROM DRIVEWAYS IS, 2. TREES WITHIN EIGHT 18) FEET OF PAVING TO BE INSTALLED WITH ROOT BARRIERS. CHAIN LINK FENCE COMMUNITY MAILBOX 3 LANDSCAPE SHALL COMPLY WITH TOWN'S CURRENT WATER - EFFICIENT CAREX PANSA CALIFORNIA MEADOW SEDGE DUCHAMPSIA CESPITOSA TUFTED HAIRGRASS DESCHAMPSA FI LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE. �.7A1 4. TO REDUCE WATER USE, 75% OF THE PLANTS SELECTED SHOULD BE - 50 PRECAST FLUTED CANCRETE PILASTER NATIVE OR CLIMATE ADAPTED TO THE DUBLIN ENVIRONS WITH PRECAST CAP 5. THE IRRIGATION DESIGN SHALL UTILIZE LOW FLOW. DURABLE. IRRIGATION 4• WIDE PRECAST - CONCRETE WALL EQUIPMENT AND THE DESIGN SHALL COMPLY WITH WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE OVELO) REQUIREMENTS. PANEL WITH INTEGRAL LAP AND STUCCO 6, ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE MULCHED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH BE 2'. FINISH 7. REFER TO SHEET LI FOR PRELIMINARY DETAILS OF: ELYMUS GUMUS BLUE WILDRYE FESTUCA CAUFORNICA CALIFORNIA FESCUE PRECAST SOUNDWALL NIRBYEWAGP O S. REFER TO SHEET L3 FOR PRELIMINARY DETAILS OF: FINISH GRADE 6' -0' WOOD PRODUCTION FENCE MEW FENCE 10. LANDSCAPE PLANS SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH =FORMA GREEN BUILDING GUIDELINES. 11. PLANTING OF SITE STRUCTURES SHALL NOT OBSTRUCT THE SIGHT DISTANCE OF MOTORISTS, PEDESTRIANS OR BICYCLISTS, PLANTING, AND /OR SITE STRUCTURES SUCH AS WALLS, AT INTERSECTIONS SHALL NOT BE TALLER THAN 30 INCHES ABOVE THE CURB, EXCEPT FOR TREES. 12. TREE AND PLANT CLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS: - LOCATE TREES A MINIMUM OF 8 FEET FROM SANITARY SEWER, WATER, ELECTRIC AND GAS LINES - LOCATE TREES A MINIMUM OF 6 FEET FROM BUILDING WALLS AND RODF OVERHANGS -WOODY PLANTS SWILL BE KEPT A MINIMUM OF 36 INCHES CLEAR FROM THE EDGE OF CURB OR WALKWAYS SO AS NOT TO REQUIRE SHEARING 13. STREET TREE GUIDELINES: - LOCATE TREES A MINIMUM OF 8 FEET FROM FIRE HYDRANTS, SANITARY SEWER WATER ELECTRIC AND GAS LINES - LOCATE STREET TREES AT LEAST 15 FEET FROM STREET LIGHTS (20 FEET PREFERRED) -LOCATE STREET TREES A MINIMUM OF 5 FEET FROM DRIVEWAYS IS, MIAB RBCWB- NYORONID AIX- WAN {X01{°PoBM® ARISTIDA PURPUREA PURPLE THREE -AWN PRELIMINARY PROPOSED BIORETENTION 1615 BONANZA STREET CHAIN LINK FENCE COMMUNITY MAILBOX & DETENTION BASIN PLANT PALETTE CAREX PANSA CALIFORNIA MEADOW SEDGE DUCHAMPSIA CESPITOSA TUFTED HAIRGRASS DESCHAMPSA FI WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 �.7A1 BOTANIOM. NAME COMMON NAME SIZE WATER WE SPACING FMW]BIf eFBNEe JUNCUS PATENS BLUE RUSH IG HIGH 24' O.C. ELYMUS GUMUS BLUE WILDRYE FESTUCA CAUFORNICA CALIFORNIA FESCUE NIRBYEWAGP O •'• �'� PIER FOOTING AT PILASTERS 7 TALI AT LOT 41 8' TALL AT LOTS 42 THROUGH 46 FESTUDA RUBRA RED FESCUE HORDEUM 9RACHYAWHERUM MEADOW BARLEY AC LEA MILLEFODUM COMMON YARROW 10 LOW 30' O.C. EPILOCHU DUTIFOORUM DENSE SPIKWHEATflOSE PICNIC TABLE PROJECT SIGN ERIOGONUM LATIFOLIUM ERIOGONUM COAST BUCKWHEAT FLATTOP BUCKWHEAT 8' PRECAST SOUNDWALL SCALE. Vi' = V -0 IA CALIFATUM flNICA EIMONIU CALIFORNIA POPPY NASELLA LEPIDA FOOTHILL NEEDLEGRA55 SISYgINCHIUM BELLUM BLUE -EYED GflA55 CAL) ORNI LIMONIUM CALIFORNICUM MIMULU$ AURANTNCUS MARSH ROSEMARY COMMON MONKfYFLOWER IG HIGH 30' O.C. "MM ARCHTOSTAPHYLOS DENSIFLORA MANZANITA MCMINN' IG LOW G. O.C. ARCH T...APWW MANZANITA COMMON MANZANITA IG LOW 6' O.C. ARCHTOSTAPHYLOS UW -URSI BACCHARIS PIUMARI$ MANZANITA EMERALD CARPET- COYOTE BRUSH PROSTRATE IG IG LOW LOW CE4N0THUS HEARSTIORUM CEANOTHUS IG LOW 4' O.C. HETEROMELES ARBUTIFGUA MAHONIA AOUIFOLMM TOYON OREGON GRAPE IG IS LOW LOW 5' O.C. 4'O.C. MAHONM PEPENS CREEPING OREGON GRAPE IS LOW 4'O.C. RHAMNUS CAUFORNICA RIBES AUgEUM COFFEES RRY GOLDEN CURRENT IG IG LOW LOW 4' O.C. ROEA CAUFORMCA CALIFORNIA WILD ROSE IS LOW RUBUS VRSINUS M M CLEVELAWH CALIFORNIA BLACKBERRY CLEVELAND SAGE It IS LOW LOW 4O.C. 4: C.C. SALVM LEUCOPHYLLA PURPLE SAGE IG LOW 4'D.C. SALMM SONOMENSIS SAMBUCUS MEXICANA CREEPING SAGE ELDERBERRY IG IG LOW LOW 4' O.C. 4'O.C. SYMPHORICARPOS ALBUG SNOWBERRY IG LOW 4' O.C. STYKAX OFN4TNALIS ROM ZAUSCHNERIA CALIFORNICA CALIFORNA SNOWDROP CALIFORNIA FUCHSIA IG 16 LOW LOW 4' O.C. 4' O.C. MIAB RBCWB- NYORONID AIX- WAN {X01{°PoBM® ARISTIDA PURPUREA PURPLE THREE -AWN (ER PERT ) It J mon = 50H, - - - - _- Tassa�ara Highlands 0 TIM LEWIS COMMUNITIES J ' Dublin, California 1st \y a LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE x .. • .' 1615 BONANZA STREET CHAIN LINK FENCE COMMUNITY MAILBOX SPACE STREET TREES GENERALLY 35 FEET ON CENTER WITH A MAXIMUM OF 50 FEET ON CENTER CAREX PANSA CALIFORNIA MEADOW SEDGE DUCHAMPSIA CESPITOSA TUFTED HAIRGRASS DESCHAMPSA FI WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 �.7A1 TEL: 925.938.7377 FAX: 925.9387436 BENCH - GENERALLY, ONE TREE IS REQUIRED PER 60 FOOT WIDE LOTS. LOTS SS P HOLCIFORMISPPACIIFIC HAIRGRASS A • . ".Y H Ib' DIAM. CONCRETE S. SOUND WALL HEIGHT TO BE V WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTION: WIDER THAN 60 FEET REWIRE TWO TREES AND CORNER LOTS REQUIRE THREE TREES (35 FEET ON CENTER) ELYMUS GUMUS BLUE WILDRYE FESTUCA CAUFORNICA CALIFORNIA FESCUE CL CC NOTE: WALL TO BE MARINA' STYLE WITH FLUTED PILASTERS BY 51ERRA •'• �'� PIER FOOTING AT PILASTERS 7 TALI AT LOT 41 8' TALL AT LOTS 42 THROUGH 46 FESTUDA RUBRA RED FESCUE HORDEUM 9RACHYAWHERUM MEADOW BARLEY GRAPHIC SCALE PRECAST OR ISWAL. PAINT DOLOR TO SE YOGNE WHITE° BY SHERWIN RLLIAMS 10. REFER TO SHEET L2 FOR PRELIMINARY DETAILS OF LEYMUS TA TICOIDES CREEPING WILDRYE MELICA MPERFECTA COAST RANGE MELIC 0 50 100 150 PICNIC TABLE PROJECT SIGN MUHLENBERMA RIGENS DEERGRASS N/SELLA ULCHRA PURPLE NEEDLEORASB 8' PRECAST SOUNDWALL SCALE. Vi' = V -0 NASELLA LEPIDA FOOTHILL NEEDLEGRA55 SISYgINCHIUM BELLUM BLUE -EYED GflA55 (ER PERT ) It J mon = 50H, - - - - _- Tassa�ara Highlands 0 TIM LEWIS COMMUNITIES J ' Dublin, California 1st \y a LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE x LAND PLANNING 1615 BONANZA STREET SUITE 314 WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 �.7A1 TEL: 925.938.7377 FAX: 925.9387436 Preliminary Landscape Plan & Site Details JULY 8, 2014 L1 Iff F,!]` ;; ! � °| ] � p @ Qn �. o � % p \ � \ � \ � m � S� ;| \§ � C - � � - � : . ..� m m It 2 ® 7k %■ � � 2 g � G o � / � R ` � � ■ \M $ � ] 9 ® � � � p @ Qn �. o � % p \ � \ � \ � m � S� ;| \§ � C - � � - � : . ..� m m C �n� pa 5C a H Y y iE y ®C t�. d � c Al i� k In Is Y mQ� ZwA V P �' T oAg9 r Ni m N J e bN vy C �yC Ila G y �4 Z4 a p �i 09 Ewo Mm �9 w_z �o I ME rD �y � k1 H f7 � ►C O A� pa 5C a H Y y iE y ®C t�. d � c Al i� k In Is Y mQ� ZwA V P �' T oAg9 r Ni m N J e bN vy C �yC Ila G y �4 Z4 a p �i 09 Ewo Mm �9 w_z �o I ME It Imo• �rC O "i A A� H A K m trn ci m NO I� V, a x M O M ^^ p. iA w U1 a� e n am �o F IIII sS Pill; I IN is p €911 1 jf'qj REAR j, §? is M5d4 z `fig qma �mm F3� pill R 111111111y1loom € if � � s is a RRRRRRRRRRR:RRRRRRRR m� i 9 pm Pig i ` l 1� 11111M I IN. � E Cm2m °E o n &a Is HIPY1110"lulpil 11 RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR 6p y € is € RRRRRRRRRRRRRRR is RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR Jill ON ID i =l � .iii Im G PARCEL'C' �I GRAPHIC SCALE 0 50 100 150 (w Leer ) mon = 66 it R I P L E Y - -- - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LAND PLANNING 1615 BONANZA STREET SUITE 314 WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 TEL: 925.938.7377 FAX: 925.9387436 END OF 6' -0" SOUND WALL AT TASSAJARA ROAD E 1 ...,...•'.yam- �� I w �� ♦ � ■A■■■■n■e■n � 'p��vp �o�� i � ��o po ��...no IlC•`��l��• �� d RETAINING WALL W/ 49" HIGH RAILING SEE DETAIL, SHEET L5 O SOUNDWALL AT LOT 39 i N WATE LSIN'B' ! RETAINING WALL W/ 49" HIGH RAILING SEE DETAIL, SHEET L5 �1/ \ IN \ TENTIO \\ \ CLEAN WATER g BASIN'C' PARCEL 'E' + V v A\ TRANSFER PARCEL /- i i �\ / %i 6' -0" SOUNDWALL AT LOT 26 '; . VIEW FENCE- SEE DETAIL, SHEET L5 �/. 6' WOOD PRODUCTION FENCE w. AT SIDE YARD- SEE DETAIL, SHEET L5 RETAINING WALLS PER CIVIL ENGINEER, TYPICAL ENHANCED WOOD FENCE WHERE VISIBLE FROM STREET & CORNER LOTS, TYPICAL - SEE DETAIL, SHEET L5 M TIM LEWIS COMMUNITIES n Preliminary Fencing Plan \ V A A \ \ vv v vv v vv v A\ \ \ \ Legend •EMEMSER TUBULAR STEEL FENCE E E E E E 0' 6' WOOD PRODUCTION FENCE ENHANCED WOOD FENCE VIEW FENCE WITH KICKERBOARD VIEW FENCE WITHOUT KICKERBOARD ■ RETAINING WALL WITH 48" HIGH RAILING O SOUNDWALL T SOUNDWALL 8' SOUNDWALL Tassajara Highlands Dublin, California JULY 8, 2014 L6 Replace this sheet with 11" x 17" tab labeled ARCHITECTURE Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities '3C'- ENGLISH Street Scene Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. ,.2,23,20, 3 Architecture +Planning 07.04.2014 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland. California 94507 ktgy.cvm 510 272 2910 A0.1 � c G•G S0 � ' n N 0X20 o yc�a « �• 0 d n N tires m �1 Z 00 V N S_ °OO ~ C � O m c = >n y e•D b2 mom � c [pia c ZE i N °° c 0 0 ny °po i mnC', zrm� rA r Gm « no goo ro r0 �3 gyz 3 gg0 �c0 mm OA� 0 o a ono Gn N�aF n A°\f'� Goy zm zm m n a Dx DO ➢ O � �= 09 Z Z!<! >n Or tmii Ll mg J2 C mW � Pm PS m 2 ZO zO � w H m K O ° 3 D O 3 C O s D J y nN o� nm Dm as zn fl"I ea Nn o� oN N 'n Nn �� z mw mw < mm y r F -1 O N zo zb rY O ° Q D D � ° D T ax am a °v nn O9 -m 3^< e,n �Q T- b1' NS Owl 21 z n a m mra m o ° G•G S0 � z n O m 0X20 o yc�a « 3 0 d n z tires m bc� „$ 00 V N A [pia c ZE i N °° c 0 0 ny °po i mnC', zrm� rA r Gm « no goo ro r0 �3 gyz 3 gg0 �c0 mm OA� 0 o a ono Gn N�aF n A°\f'� Goy zm zm m n a Dx DO ➢ O � �= 09 Z Z!<! >n Or tmii Ll mg J2 C mW � Pm PS m 2 ZO zO � w H m K O ° 3 D O 3 C O s D J y nN o� nm Dm as zn fl"I ea Nn o� oN N 'n Nn �� z mw mw < mm y r F -1 O N zo zb rY O ° Q D D � ° D T ax am a °v nn O9 -m 3^< e,n �Q T- b1' NS Owl 21 z n a m mra m o ° hamO m<ozc zzm9mx N mmol C m n c z n O m 0X20 N v x < x « 3 0 �opc z v m 043 „$ 00 9yG A °OO ~ z A O m c = >n y ➢L b2 mom Oa 0 opo u0 �< N NO mz z OZOO ° ° >m ti Z 0 ax s< hamO m<ozc zzm9mx N mmol C m n c a0 n 0X20 0 x « 3 z �opc o v C) xo cnr S� „$ 00 m bm A °OO ~ Z A O m c a x y b2 rnn Oa n OAS u0 N mz z OZOO ° ° >m ti Z y�mm ax s< Z sm =< 8z zg �3mg v+ a� am = cma ma p m D m C z m 8QO� n0 °an �n 03 -O °D OA_ L z< DA M �z< ar ar ax ao w ci AA Z� ND aQN so m0 c m y 4 O nx O a z O3 Dx 3n FN wn mo zw m CV m m> m° A z ° hamO m<ozc zzm9mx N mmol C m n c a0 n 0X20 0 x « 3 z �opc o v C) xo cnr S� „$ 00 m bm MON °OO ~ Z A O m c a x y b2 rnn Oa n OAS u0 N mz z OZOO ° ° >m ti Z y�mm ax s< Z sm hamO m<ozc zzm9mx N mmol C m n c a0 O m °O A➢ r « . m yCy 7mc ZZ C MOO Vw C) xo cnr S� „$ 00 m bm MON °OO ~ O A O m c a x y hamO m<ozc zzm9mx N mmol C m n c a0 xm 3 « aF ZZ om Vw �$ � 008 m bm T °OO ~ O OOaGz O m c a x y eD A Oa n u0 Dm mz z n >m m� p, ax s< sm =< 8z zg OA v+ a� am = ma m m z n O 2 03 -O °D M L DA M ar ar ax ao w ci AA Z� ND so m0 c m 4 O hamO m<ozc zzm9mx N mmol C m n c a0 xm « aF ZZ om Vw �$ �o 008 m bm ~� °OO ~ O OOaGz m c a x xmmma n m n c ai aF om om Vw �$ �o A ➢ m m bm sm O z Ul D Do V� mW zo O W T (D G 01 n3 x ox ➢ it v. rp o >6; >z o� nm T y mz xn 00 x0 2m P° wA O8i Nj ---I 1 ---I 'IW 1 aaa N _ � r N m ae' i Q5 ' N a 0 1 aaa 1 _ Q o X d N o w a: � c � a r fD' N N ri 0 1 aaa 1 _ � o X d N o �a a: 0 "°g a aaa r N ri ail 6. 'lg} CD t 6 Sjas i N ;lilt ffToar9 l<pFo m ac� mum st 3N °$'F47 nmea m/mm� om 0 Lam 0 11 r g[ 3 }y �i e r 9� as aaa as aa: as a 9 1 a: :es "°g a aaa r }ixaIfill 6 ail 6. 'lg} }�f3 t 6 Sjas i ;lilt {F. Is (tfpp/ if 99�.3jjv �S Oil iiS;ld1 �e' I t E[ ak _ gp,`3 Sf 2t ' if R it if 7iifi i`d 137 ppggp; f34id IY it fill 1 3& '1i1 ItRiSiji ii - ;Iii i 11 I _ Lmm — g �'I as aaa as aa: as a 9 1 a: :es "°g a aaa r }ixaIfill �aF�j$�g,tfl ail 'lg} }�f3 t 6 Sjas i ;lilt {F. Is (tfpp/ if 99�.3jjv �S Oil iiS;ld1 �e' I t E[ ak _ gp,`3 Sf 2t ' if R it if !;d all fill 1 } '1i1 ;s ii elf i i3 If s F S a l�@ c9 { i If 4� 1 a a : as aa: as a r as as :es "°g a aaaa S�y¢1�( �aF�j$�g,tfl ail a E 11611 995egi .0 pp {F. Is iii ttI �S Oil iiS;ld1 �e' I t E[ ak _ 2t if R !;d all fill 1 } '1i1 ;s ii elf i i3 If s F S a l�@ c9 { i If 4� 1 a a : as aa: as a r :es 'Ig821��5 aaaa S�y¢1�( �aF�j$�g,tfl i= 995egi {a€it� ?1t iii ttI �S Oil iiS;ld1 �e' E[ ak _ 2t if R !;d all ir [f :{'Hit dp }1} Ills K }} i� Oil S Oil l0 iy is ` ;a} as a r :es 'Ig821��5 aaaa S�y¢1�( �aF�j$�g,tfl i= 995egi {a€it� ?1t iii ttI �S Oil iiS;ld1 �e' E[ ak _ 2t if R all ir i 11 I _ Lmm — �r� 'IW G> aaa N o � r S m a$� o �a ' O N d °r G> aaa r � o as K S p a o �a O � d ro' N N °r G> aaa r � a K p a o �a O iaaa iFF g N eI C e fD !"1 r N €'iqr fill Noma �'o FOB 3 V p (f SRG) N WEB o N�C ar »9_ m/mm� m om 0 Lam a 0 MI 3 E ` F r r iF F3Fy9 9g M aaa aar a i, a a as iaaa iFF g F r €'iqr fill FF�F�F3aj�Ftli F tl ri t € fl Eiji, FigFqi$iFF# =j�F g3ji F 4 F Fj ,FH €rk su e.i Nil 1 i F 3 Si z }5 gp r iF F3Fy9 9g I aar a i, a a as iaaa iFF g F r €'iqr fill FF�F�F3aj�Ftli F € fl Eiji, FigFqi$iFF# =j�F g3ji F 4 F Fj ,FH €rk su e.i Nil F 3 Si z }5 gp $ p T 4 i I a a a a i iFF g F r €'iqr fill FF�F�F3aj�Ftli F d FigFqi$iFF# =j�F g3ji F Fj ,FH €rk ,a Nil F 3 Si I i iFF g €'iqr FigFqi$iFF# =j�F g3ji F Fj ,FH €rk ,a Nil F 3 Si $ p T I A/ PAD OPT. COVERED PATIO/ DECK ABOVE. NOOK 115 x10 First Floor Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL.. U16 Plan I Universal Design Dublin, California KTGY # 2017 -0656 12.231013 UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTES U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL', PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR AT ENTRY DOOR MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR, U2 MANDATORY TO OFFER: OPTIONAL REMOVABLE RAMP TO FRONT DOOR CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U3 MANDATORY TO OFFER: OPTIONAL REMOVABLE RAMP AT GARAGE-TO -HOUSE ENTRY DOOR CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL', GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM /BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. US MANDATORY TO INSTALL', FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11q OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" CIA CIRCLE, 48" X 60" RECTANGLE OR 60" DID. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER, FUI MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117,1 U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER /BATH, OR LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER. U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 110. U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE LAVATORY /SINK, U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 110. U73 MANDATORY TO INSTALL' KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER /OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST A 30" X 49'C EAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE 18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR, DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER, U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR REMOVABLE UNDER -SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT SWITCH LEVEN OR LOWER LEVEL U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO. 21 -07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90070 INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST AND COST OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER. WALL LEGEND 2X6 WALL DEEBII= 2X4 WALL NOTES REFER TO SHEET GN -1 AND CITY OF DUBUN ORDINANCE 21 -07 FOR A COMPREHENSIVE UST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION. MANDATORY TO INSTALL 1. HAND - ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A 2, ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, 3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE 0 2 4 i i T U14, KTGY Group, Inc. i i - 1 FE MANDATORY TO OFFER: U14 — MEDIA ADJUSTABLE SINKAND /OR ABOVE REMOVABLE UNDER -SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH CHAPTER 11A. f = 14 Oakland, CA 94607 I GREAT ?OI 510.272.2910 ROOM °'_— 211 x 171 KITCHEN —J PANTR STORA E Z NE q \ �� U3 I 1 BEDRM 4 MANDATORY TO OFFER: I 11� x 11 PROVIDE 2X6 REINFORCEMENT BETWEEN +32" AND +38" ONO E OR BOTH SIDES OF ACCESSIBLE TANKLESS INTERIOR ROUTE PER UNIVERSAL WH DESIGN RED. SEC. 7.90.070 I GARAGE 20= x2,0 EN�T'RY U e 66 166 7I1 /,r1 I v I II; II U9 u1 ua i21a8Q �� D First Floor Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL.. U16 Plan I Universal Design Dublin, California KTGY # 2017 -0656 12.231013 UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTES U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL', PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR AT ENTRY DOOR MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR, U2 MANDATORY TO OFFER: OPTIONAL REMOVABLE RAMP TO FRONT DOOR CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U3 MANDATORY TO OFFER: OPTIONAL REMOVABLE RAMP AT GARAGE-TO -HOUSE ENTRY DOOR CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL', GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM /BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. US MANDATORY TO INSTALL', FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11q OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" CIA CIRCLE, 48" X 60" RECTANGLE OR 60" DID. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER, FUI MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117,1 U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER /BATH, OR LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER. U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 110. U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE LAVATORY /SINK, U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 110. U73 MANDATORY TO INSTALL' KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER /OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST A 30" X 49'C EAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE 18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR, DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER, U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR REMOVABLE UNDER -SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT SWITCH LEVEN OR LOWER LEVEL U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO. 21 -07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90070 INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST AND COST OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER. WALL LEGEND 2X6 WALL DEEBII= 2X4 WALL NOTES REFER TO SHEET GN -1 AND CITY OF DUBUN ORDINANCE 21 -07 FOR A COMPREHENSIVE UST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION. MANDATORY TO INSTALL 1. HAND - ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A 2, ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, 3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE 0 2 4 i i 8 lJD•I KTGY Group, Inc. i i - Arch itecture +Planning 580 Second St., Suite 200 Oakland, CA 94607 1 510.272.2910 ktgy.corn OPT. COVERED PATIO/ DECK ABOVE. PAD NOOK 15 x 10a 1 u14 F 1 I _ MANDATORY TO OFFER: 14 ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR MEDIA REMOVABLE UNDER -SINK CABINETS ABOVE CONSISTENT WITH CHAPTER 11A. f— 14 GREAT 1 ❑ o l ± ® MANDATORY OOD FAN CONTROLS GREAT 1 :U U14 HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT ROOM I U16 O U _� U BITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, ROOM O L L =� 215 x 16� ❑ 212 x 162 1 KITCHEN KITCHEN ��J PANTR STORAGE — — � � / ID /� D OP o\ / I �. Imp Q\ tl � / Z NE m /� US U1 U4 U8 � �21d8QI1usul�l /Hu1 1 1 I U4 ll,8 —� U7 UB U1 P, U3 1 U3 BA DINING 1 6 U6 U„ -a 0 U9 U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: OPT. DEN MANDATORY TO OFFER: PROVIDE 2X6 REINFORCEMENT 1 1 0 x 1 14 PROVIDE 2X6 REINFORCEMENT BETWEEN -32, ONE OR 1 BETWEEN +32 "AND +38 "ON ONE OR \ BOTH SIDES OF ACCESSIBLE BOTH SIDES OF ACCESSIBLE TANKLESS INTERIOR ROUTE PER UNIVERSAL TANKLESS INTERIOR ROUTE PER UNIVERSAL I /\ \ WH DESIGN RED. SEC. 7.90.070 WH DESIGN RED. SEC. 7.90.070 / U17 U17 1 1 SLEEPI G ETRY 6 1 11' x9a GARAGE r 61�� y6 I GARAGE L 202 x21 °_ \ / \ / 20' x21 °_ L_ ,x\ i NTRY U141 __ s_xB_ METERS ITCIIEN E L J METERS I `I o J // �. � BEDROOM 4 OPT. GRANNY SUITE LIVING 11' X95 I First Floor 112 X119 I Tassajara Highlands Plan 2 Universal Design Tim Lewis Communities Dublin, California RiGY # 2017 -0656 17.231013 UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTES U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL', PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR AT ENTRY DOOR MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR, U2 MANDATORY TO OFFER: OPTIONAL REMOVABLE RAMP TO FRONT DOOR CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U3 MANDATORY TO OFFER: OPTIONAL REMOVABLE RAMP AT GARAGE -TO -HOUSE ENTRY DOOR CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL', GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM /BATHROOM CONSISTENT WR"H THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. US MANDATORY TO INSTALL', FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11q OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" CIA CIRCLE, 48" X 60" RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER, MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117,1 U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER /BATH, OR LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER, U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILED INSTALLED CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE LAVATORY/SINK, U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 114 U73 MANDATORY TO INSTALL'. KRCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CRC CHAPTER 11A. U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER /OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST A 30" X 49'C EAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE 18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30" X 4S" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR, DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER, U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR REMOVABLE UNDER -SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT SWITCH LEVEN OR LOWER LEVEL U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO. 21 -07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90070 INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST AND COST OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER. WALL LEGEND 2x6 wALL DI 2X4 WALL NOTES REFER TO SHEET GN -1 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21 -07 FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION. MANDATORY TO INSTALL 1. HAND - ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 114 2, ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, 3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A OR APPUCABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE 0 2 4 i i 8UD.Z KTGY Group, Inc. i i - Arch itecture +Planning 580 Second St., Suite 200 Oakland, CA 94607 1 510.272.2910 ktgy.corn `� First Floor Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities - MANDATORY TO OFFER' HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL. U18 Plan 3 Universal Design Dublin, California HTGY # 2012 -0656 12.23.2013 UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTES U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL', PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR, AT ENTRY DOOR MANDATORY TO OFFER EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR, F U2 MANDATORY TO OFFER', OPTIONAL REMOVABLE RAMP TO FRONT DOOR CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A U3 MANDATORY TO OFFER: OPTIONAL REMOVABLE RAMP AT GARAGE -TO -HOUSE ENTRY DOOR CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS. OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM /BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL', FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER', CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CRC CHAPTER 11A OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA CIRCLE, 48" X 60" RECTANGLE OR 60" DR, CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER, U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A1171 U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER'. GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER /BATH, OR LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER, U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER' WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER'. REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE LAVATORY /SINK 112 MANDATORY TO OFFER', WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A 133 MANDATORY TO INSTALL', KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER. AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER /OWNERS OPTION, AT LEAST A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE 18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR, DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER, U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER'. ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR REMOVABLE UNDER -SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER. HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT SWITCH LEVEN OR LOWER LEVEL 117 MANDATORY TO OFFER'. ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO 21 -07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST AND COST OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER, WALL LEGEND 2X6 WALL 2X4 WALL NOTES REFER TO SHEET GN -1 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07 FOR A COMPREHENSIVE UST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION. MANDATORY TO INSTALL', 1. HAND- ACTMATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTED WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A 2, ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A1171 OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A. 3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CAUFORNIA, ELECTRICAL CODE. 024 8UD.3 KTGY Group, Inc. Architecture +Planning 580 Second St., Suite 200 • Oakland, CA 94607 510.272.2910 ilk 1 ktgy.com IW = MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL. U16 Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities I Af PAD i OPT. COVERED PATIO/ I DECK ABOVE. NOOK 16 -x11a 1 � + C TI 4-- f - - +_j I L -- I I 1 L VIII III I� I I MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINKAND /Oft REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH CHAPTER 11A. RtEj Arch itecture +Planning U3 Oakland, CA 94607 MANDATORY TO OF 510.272.2910 ORC PROVIDE 2X8 REINFORCEMENT ktgy.corn BETWEEN +32" AND +39' ON ONE OR BOTH SIDES OF ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE PER UNIVERSAL DESIGN RED. SEC. 7.90.070 TANKLESS U77 WH GARAGE 20' x 21 ' First Floor GREAT ROOM 205 x 176 ■ 1■N.. _ I1� n MEDIA ADOVE DINING OPT. DE t0 °_x12a- [U4 0 M U9 U11 ' I— U 0 ` U9 U�12 ITRY /\ *N U1 U2 /\ BEDRM 4 1010 12' Plan 4 Universal Design Dublin, California KTGY # 2017 -0656 12.231013 UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTES U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL', PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR AT ENTRY DOOR MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR, U2 MANDATORY TO OFFER: OPTIONAL REMOVABLE RAMP TO FRONT DOOR CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U3 MANDATORY TO OFFER: OPTIONAL REMOVABLE RAMP AT GARAGE-TO -HOUSE ENTRY DOOR CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL', GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM /BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. US MANDATORY TO INSTALL', FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA CIRCLE, 48" X 60" RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER, FUI MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117,1 U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER /BATH, OR LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER, U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 110. U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE LAVATORY /SINK, U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A U73 MANDATORY TO INSTALL' KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CRC CHAPTER 11A. U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER /OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE 18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR, DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER, U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR REMOVABLE UNDER -SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A. U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT SWITCH LEVEN OR LOWER LEVEL U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO. 21 -07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90070 INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST AND COST OF THE PURCHASER /OWNER. WALL LEGEND 2X6 WALL DEEBII= 2X4 WALL NOTES REFER TO SHEET GN -1 AND CITY OF DUBUN ORDINANCE 21 -07 FOR A COMPREHENSIVE UST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION. MANDATORY TO INSTALL 1. HAND - ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A 2, ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR UGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, 3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE 4 8 UD 4 - KTGY Group, Inc. Arch itecture +Planning 580 Second St., Suite 200 Oakland, CA 94607 1 510.272.2910 ktgy.corn `� ry —_ __ __ ry ------ I II I I PLAN 1 I PLAN 1 I I R P A P P A A I FD I FD I I I I LiI — I I I I I — I I PLAN 1 &2 PLAN 1 &1 I II I II I II —7 I ;—L law WWW II PLAN 1 I PLAN 1 I PLAN 3 PLAN 1 1 P P A 1: FD - �- P A A I FD I I I FD -�- I I I I _ I I I I T"� F-- I I PLAN T &3 PLAN I & 3R I PLAN I A II I II W W— 1 R PLAN 2 I P P 40 I A I I FD I FD All I I I I I PLAN IR &2 I Tassajara Highlands --- I Tim p Lewis Communities PLAN 2R I p I q I I I PLAN 1 PLAN 2 I PLAN 1 R I A P A A A P I I FD I FD I LiI — I I I I I — I I PLAN 1 &2 I II I I I PLAN T &1R F—, II PLAN 1 PLAN 4 P PLAN 1 P PLP FD - �- A I A J3R I I FD I F l I _ I I PLAN 1 &4 I T"� F-- I 7 PLAN I & 3R I II 1 II I PLAN 1 R 1 PLAN 3 I 7 I I I PLAN 1 R p I PLAN 2R I I I FD A P o o A P I I FD I I FD I I I I - I I , Dublin, California I I PLAN iR &2R � II I II I I PLAN 1 I PLAN 2 I P A P A I FD I FD I I LiI — — I I I — — — I I — PLAN 1 &2 I II F-- I I II PLAN 1 PLAN 4 P A P A FD - �- I FD I I I I I PLAN 1 &4 T"� F-- 7 Ih I PLAN 1 R I PLAN 3 I A p p q I I FD A^dh_ I I o o FD I I I I I PLAN 1R &3 - Window Adjacency - -M Exhibit Dublin, California KTGY # 2017 -0656 12.23.2013 I 7 PLAN 2R , 1 A P I FD _A^ I 4-1— I L — — PLAN 1 & 2R PLAN 1 PLAN 4R I I I P A A P I I I FD —r— FD --Ak ZY—\_ I I I PLAN I & 4R LEGEND - - - - -- A ACTIVE SIDE P PASSIVE SIDE FD FRONT DOOR 1 ST FLR. BUILDING P A 1 ST FLR. WINDOWS D 2ND FLR. WINDOWS -�- 2ND FLR. BUILDING NOTE: PORCHES NOT ILLUSTRATED AS DESIGN VARIES BYARCHITECTURAL STYLE WA. KTGY Group, Inc. Arch itecture +Planning 580 Second St., Suite 200 Oakland, CA 94607 , 1 510.272.2910 ktgy.corn `� I ---- ry = ___ — N 7 I I I I PLAN 1 R I I PLAN 3R I P A P A A P FD I I FD FD Ah—I -sue- I I FD I I L- I I - I I I I I I I -� I PLAN 1R &4 I PLAN 1R &3R I II I II 1 I I I PLAN 3R I PLAN 2 I I PLAN 2R I P P A I I A P FD I I I FD I I FD I ANk I I I I PLAN 2 & 3 I PLAN 2 & 2R 7 I 11 H Am, AhAh I I PLAN 2 PLAN 2R PLAN 4R I I PLAN 3 P A A P P I FD — I FD 4 I I FD w\— I I FD , I I I I I I I I PLAN 2 & 4R Tassajara Highlands --- I Tim Lewis Communities I I I I YI I 7 I I I PLAN 1 R PLAN 4R I I PLAN 4 I A A P P P A I FD FD I FD I Ah—I -sue- FD I I I L- I I - -- I I -- I I I I -� PLAN 1R &4R PLAN 1R &4 I I PLAN 2 PLAN 3R I PLAN 3 I I A P A P A FD I I FD I I t o o FD I I I I I I I I I I PLAN 2 & 3R PLAN 2 & 3 7 I I PLAN 2R I I PLAN 3 I P A P P P A I FD 4 I I I —1— FD I t o FD I I I I I I I' _ ► 1 I I I � I I PLAN 1 R PLAN 4R I I A P A P I FD Afth I FD I I I L- -- I I - -- I I PLAN 1R &4R I PLAN 2 I PLAN 3R I P A A P I I FD I I FD I I I I I I PLAN 2 & 3R I PLAN 2R I PLAN 3R I A P A P I I FD I FD 4 I I I PLAN 2R & 3R Window Adjacency Exhibit Dublin, California KTGY # 2012 -0656 12.23.2013 I p I p I PLAN 2 PLAN 2 I I I P A P A I I I FD FD I I I PLAN 2 & 2 I � I PLAN 2 PLAN 4 I I I P A P A I I I lip FD FD Ak — I I I PLAN 2 &4 LEGEND hi - - - - -- A ACTIVE SIDE 6 P PASSIVE SIDE -� FD FRONT DOOR 1 ST FLR. BUILDING P A 1 ST FLR. WINDOWS 2ND FLR. WINDOWS "FD 2ND FLR. BUILDING NOTE: PORCHES NOT ILLUSTRATED AS DESIGN VARIES BY ARCHITECTURAL STYLE WA.2 KTGY Group, Inc. Architecture +Planning 580 Second St., Suite 200 Oakland, CA 94607 1 510.272.2910 ,. ktgy.corn u..J I II I II I 7 I I PLAN 2R PLAN 4 I I A P P A I I I FD FD _� - 1 I I I I PLAN 2R & 4 I II I I PLAN 3 PLAN 4 lip P A I P A I ' — I FD FD _/_�1 LI —'I I I I I PLAN 3 & 4 oil I I PLAN 4 I I I P A I I I I FD -sue- I I I I PLAN 4 &4 Tassajara Highlands --- Tim Lewis Communities I II I I I ,I I PLAN 3 PLAN 2R I PLAN 4R I P I A P A P I FD FD AAftft I I FD I I I I I I PLAN 2R & 4R -A� r I I I 000 PLAN 3 PLAN 4R I I P A A P PLAN 3R I PLAN 4 — FD I A I FD I'MLY—'\,- I I FD I I I PLAN 3 & 4R I - _ I I PLAN 4 PLAN 4R j I P A P PLAN 4R I FD 11� I I �nI FD I A I I 1I� � X111 PLAN 4 & 4R II I II I I PLAN 3 I PLAN 3 I P A P A I FD I FD I I I o o I I I I I PLAN 3 & 3 I II I I PLAN 3R PLAN 4 A P P A FD I FD I I I I PLAN 3R &4 I N 4R PLAN 4R P I A P I I FD I � FD �I-Ak zy-�- I I I I LLI - - - I I - - - I I PLAN 4R & 4R Window Adjacency Exhibit - - -M Dublin, California KTGY # 2017 -0656 12.23.2013 I II I II I I PLAN 3 PLAN 3R I I P A A P� I I I FD FD I I I I I I I PLAN 3 & 3R I II I 3 PLAN 3R PLAN 4R I � I I A P A P I I I FD FD Imo_ I o o I I I L7— — — — — — PLAN 3R & 4R LEGEND —__- A ACTIVE SIDE P PASSIVE SIDE FD FRONT DOOR 1 ST FLR. BUILDING P A i-1 ST FLR. WINDOWS 2ND FLR. WINDOWS FD -Ak 7 2ND FLR. BUILDING NOTE: PORCHES NOT ILLUSTRATED AS DESIGN VARIES BYARCHITECTURAL STYLE WA.3 KTGY Group, Inc. Arch itecture +Planning 580 Second St., Suite 200 Oakland, CA 94607 1 510.272.2910 ktgy.corn `� II II II II II II II OPT. DECK II II I NOTE: FAU LOCATED IN ATTIC Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities LINEN LI 0 O /O m W 11 OPT. BEDROOM 5 N A.5' -O" 37' -O" I W t - r ----------------------------- - - - - -- r I ~ - - I - rr I OPT. COVERED PATIO/ --I ; I DECK ABOVE. ABC 'AD I I I LL— L_I�LJ LLLH L LLL L LLLLL LL LL LLLLLLLL - - - - -- LLLLLLLL L L L I L I_ - - -- L L MEDIA -- L 11�� ABOVE LLL L j!_ _ -- -- L LLL X18 - -- ROOM L I® LLL 21L X 17L L9_ : LLL LL,1LrJ4 LL tt L� `� I LLLLLL STORA E ; ZONE II I II El E I GARAGE 20' x 21 0 EDRM 4 112 X11° - YANKEE N_ - - - - - -- INV 0 �Y t2 _L L LL i MEItHS - LL LL I BA J ---- --------- - - - - -- NOTE: VERIFY WITH CIVIL PLAN 1 217 18 SQ. FT. Dublin, falifornia NTGY # 2012 -0656 06.20.2013 0r II II j FO-11 I n I I 6IN1� no' X I"I II II I 1011 II I I II II a III / OPT. DINING ;F ALL SET -BACKS PER P.D. AC CONDENSER SHALL NOT EXCEED 50 DB AT PROP LINE ~ PER CITY ORDINANACE O PROVIDE CONDUIT AND FACE PLATE FOR FUTURE SATELLITE DISH INSTALLATION. LOCATION SHALL BE AS CLOSE TO SOUTHEAST O WITHOUT BEING ON THE FRONT FACADE OF ANY HOME. N MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR SOLAR READY BUILDINGS REQUIRED IN THE 2013 BUILDING G S ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS WILL BE MET USING EXCEPTION 7 PER SECTION 1 10. 1 O(B) 1 A i 0 2 4 8 -j --� I A1.0 KTGY Group Inc. Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy. corn I 510 272 2910 ` Elevation 'C' Addendum Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities Elevation 'B' Addendum _Plan I Addenda Dublin, California KTGY # 2011 -0656 i i i Z4 i ALI KTGY Group Inc. 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 b.� Decorative Gable End Detail Decorative Shutter Enhanced Sill Recessed Window Stucco Finish 1 Enhanced Sill I Recessed Window Brick Veneer Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities U iN_ LN- Flip+ III ]IN aaaaa ELEVATION'] A'- SPANISH ■ Cemetitious Board & Batt Siding Decorative Shutter English Material Legend: Flat Concrete Tile Roofing Stucco Finish Cementitious Siding/ Shingles Shutters Brick Veneer Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim Mu -� u Spanish Material Legend: Concrete Low Profile 'S' Tile Stucco Finish Shutters Decorative Gable End Detail Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim lLill nnnnmm�nm i ELEVA ELEVATION 'C' - ENGLISH Plan I Exterior Elevations Dublin, California MY # 2012 -0656 06.20.2013 French Country Material Legend: Flat Concrete Tile Roofing Stucco Finish Cementitious Siding/ Shingles Shutters Wood Posts Stone Veneer Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim 0 2 4 8 KTGY Group Inc. Arch ite ct u re +P T a n n i n g 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 A1.2 8 FE11IF111IF111MIL-1U FENCE LINE I I I I LEFT FENCE LINE RIGHT Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities 0 �I x Q 0 M t n KN 1 A - Spanish Material Legend: Concrete Low Profile 'S' Tile Stucco Finish Decorative Gable End Detail Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim --- --- - - - - -1 I I I 4:12 I I I I I ------------------------------- - - - - -1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1W / /N,_ I I I I I I L I I `- - - - - -- -- - - - - - -- -----'' ROOF PLAN OVERHANG: I Z RAKE : 6' ROOF PITCH: 4:12 U.N.0 FENCE LINE +L PLAN IA 'SPANISH' - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ° 4 8 A1.3 Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.corn 4 510 272 2910 ' FENCE LINE I I I I LEFT nwiuw■Iwwni■ii�w wiiw wwwunww wuwn_I ■��n��u��w� u u u d MWINIMM FENCE LINE ME W -IU RIGHT x Q 0 io M t 0 M I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I --- -- - - - - -- I I I 4:12 I n N i N ROOF PLAN OVERHANG: 6" RAKE : 6" ROOF PITCH: 6:12 U.N.O + iLd E+11 I ULLd-1 I E::::] I + I L-JUL IT LH El FENCE LINE I _ Tassajara Highlands PLAN 16 'FRENCH COUNTRY' - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ° 4 8 A 1.4 Tim Lewis Communities Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 IM111111il iwwwnnnnnnnIInnunn�■ ar ■Iwwwwwwwl iwnnl■wnw■Mnwwnw■ ■www��wwwnnn■Iww ■Iwnw - • •• - • - • - • • -• - -- • uwww ■Iwwwwwwwl ■ww ■� ■wwwwww ■Iw -- ____ -- -- �nwwuwwwwwwwwwwwwwww� ■wwwwwwwww iiwiliui�u■ �iiini�i ■'�iiwiii�iiiii■�iliw�iii�w . vwww■ I■ YwnwYYnwww ■IY ■Yw ■w ■I ■YwYI ■Ywwwnw ■�wY ■wnwwn ■Iwwwwl ■wwnwww ■�wwYnww ■Iwwwwl ■wwwwww�� El IIIE]III III - ME, FENCE LINE I I I I LEFT nwiuw■Iwwni■ii�w wiiw wwwunww wuwn_I ■��n��u��w� u u u d MWINIMM FENCE LINE ME W -IU RIGHT x Q 0 io M t 0 M I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I --- -- - - - - -- I I I 4:12 I n N i N ROOF PLAN OVERHANG: 6" RAKE : 6" ROOF PITCH: 6:12 U.N.O + iLd E+11 I ULLd-1 I E::::] I + I L-JUL IT LH El FENCE LINE I _ Tassajara Highlands PLAN 16 'FRENCH COUNTRY' - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ° 4 8 A 1.4 Tim Lewis Communities Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 IM111111il FENCE LINE i i i t I t I LEFT innn■■n ■nnnn� 9II 171 Fill I --------- RIGHT Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities e FENCE LINE ■InnnN� L!J u i0: --- --- - - - - -1 I I I 4:12 I I I I I I I I I 1 C - English 6 1 2 Material Legend: Flat Concrete Tile Roofing Stucco Finish I Brick Veneer I I 6:12 Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim x Q 0 Cl) I t 0 M O ROOF PLAN OVERHANG: 6' RAKE : 6" ROOF PITCH : 6:12 U.N.O IM nnu.0 nn■�nnu■ �J u nnnnnnnnnnnn mmmmsInnnnnmo immmmmoommmmm rot FBI FBI FENCE LINE i i PLAN IC 'ENGLISH' - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 4 8 A I.5 Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. K1GY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 IOWA x Q 0 M t LO n N Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities �_ \:��i�l x Q 0 Lo Cl) t L9 N x Q 0 M L9 N O REAR AT ENHANCED LOT NLY FENCE LINE _1 it 111 _ 1 i M � � i. ��. � . ?�!�Ii1�i i i�i� '!I —]LlFn�ii —i- REAR W/ OPTIONAL DECK PLAN IA - 'SPANISH' - OPTIONS Dublin, California KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 � i i i A1.6 KTGY Group Inc. Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.corn I 4 510 272 2910 /► ' x Q 0 M 0 M Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities 01111 —� FMII 1 _ 11 S. .I n.. ... ....1■ n..00......1 il........n..l■.1 • w�• l� �1� o---° M- -� LT+ + JMA I �]�d'ILJ Ll+�IJIEI L ;J1 10 0 i a REAR AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY y FENCE LINE re Ld — 1111 4-111 — — �w:.'::.�:.::::: IIIIIIIIIIIIIII� �IIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIII� • ■...■�...... ■I.I �wi ■www��wwuwww■ L!J LJ • Lj u u 'FRENCH REAR W/ OPTIONAL DECK PLAN 113- COUNTRY' OPTIONS Dublin, Group :0 Second Street, 00 Oakland, .0 x Q 0 LO M t O M Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities i O REAR W/ OPTIONAL 11111 F111 VERED PAT x Q 0 zo M t O M x Q 0 M 0 M I IDE FE-jill ID, FENCE LINE 0 - i i t i Mir- REAR AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY T e1 O y REAR W/ OPTIONAL DECK PLAN IC - 'ENGLISH' - OPTIONS Dublin, California KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 101j] 14 8 A1.8 KTGY Group Inc. Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 b.r� nn�nnnnnnnn■�nn■■n�1 nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn�■n ■nnn■innnnnnninnnnnnni■ -- - nnnn1■nn�■nnn■1 EMIM nnn�■nn�■nnnnnn■�r% , nnnn�■nn� ■nn■�� -� FENCE LINE 1 B -'FRENCH COUNTRY'- RIGHT AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities 1 A -'SPANISH'- RIGHT AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY ® FENCE LINE 1 C -'ENGLISH'- RIGHT AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY PLAN I - ENHANCED RIGHT ELEVATIONS Dublin, California KTGY # 2012.0656 0 2 4 8 KTGY Group Inc. 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 A1.9 II II II II II II OPT. DECK II II II II BEDRM 5 „4 x,2- FIE 0 0 00 OPT. BEDROOM 5 II II DEN II x„^ II , OPT. DEN NOTE: FAU LOCATED IN ATTIC 'x ALL SET -BACKS PER P.D. AC CONDENSER SHALL NOT EXCEED 50 DB AT PROP LINE PER CITY ORDINANACE T as s a j a ra Highlands PROVIDE CONDUIT AND FACE PLATE FOR FUTURE SATELLITE DISH INSTALLATION. LOCATION SHALL BE AS CLOSE TO SOUTHEAST WITHOUT BEING ON THE FRONT FACADE OF ANY HOME. Tim Lewis Communities Dublin, (alifornia NTGY # 2012 -0656 DROP DR ZONE �fl�/BA ❑ SQUARE FOOTAGE AT GRANNY OPT. 3RANNY UNIT = 379 > QUARE FOOTAGE OF HOME GRANNY UNIT NOT INCLUDED) = 2461 3RAND TOTAL WITH GRANNY UNIT = 2. SLEEPING LIVING ❑ ❑ OPT. GRANNY SUITE MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR SOLAR READY BUILDINGS REQUIRED IN THE 2013 BUILDING ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS WILL BE MET USING EXCEPTION 7 PER SECTION 1 10. 1 O(B) t o O 0 2 4 8 AZ i i i —, KTGY Group Inc. - -- -- -- -- -- 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy. corn I 45' -0" ` 4' -0" 37-0" O Q W 0) O 9 I ~_ ----------- - - - - ------------- - - - - -- _ -- IT r rr II LLL LLLL 4 OPT. COVERED PATIO/ LLL I,O, LL DECK ABOVE. LL LL ** ' Pao LL L L 0= I I L L LL LL L oll LL ❑ LLLLL LL LL 11 LLLLLI L I - - - - -- LLLLLLLL _ L II LLL I MEDIA �- L ABOVE li 1 - L GREAT L -LLL - - - -- ------- ROOM L -LLL - 211X161 LL LLL L L L ap- - - - - -- -LLI p LT 7 0 STORAGE DROP _____ ZONE I DINING GARAGE 20L x 2, - UO 1 i I I I IIIII – – F1070 I I I I I � YANKEE : ; W" 4 ' OPT. DEN N LLLLL 11 L_ H k�r °D BA ' LL L METERS WOOI{I }� I III�III II� 1 I I I I I I I I BEDROOM 4 � 1 I 0I ' NOTE: VERIFY SETBAC( ' WITH CIVIL p PLAN 2 21829 SQ._ FT. Dublin, (alifornia NTGY # 2012 -0656 DROP DR ZONE �fl�/BA ❑ SQUARE FOOTAGE AT GRANNY OPT. 3RANNY UNIT = 379 > QUARE FOOTAGE OF HOME GRANNY UNIT NOT INCLUDED) = 2461 3RAND TOTAL WITH GRANNY UNIT = 2. SLEEPING LIVING ❑ ❑ OPT. GRANNY SUITE MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR SOLAR READY BUILDINGS REQUIRED IN THE 2013 BUILDING ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS WILL BE MET USING EXCEPTION 7 PER SECTION 1 10. 1 O(B) t o O 0 2 4 8 AZ i i i —, KTGY Group Inc. 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy. corn I 510 272 2910 ` Elevation 'C' Addendum Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities Elevation 'B' Addendum PLAN 2 ADDENDUM Dublin, (alifornia HTGY # 2012 -0656 08.20.2018 0 2 4 8 A2.1 i i — KTGY Group Inc. Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 Decorative Gable End Detail Decorative Shutter Enhanced Sill Recessed Window Stucco Finish ELEVATI Enhanced Sill Recessed Window Brick Veneer Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities PANISH CI II lul IGCU JIIU 1 x Stucco Finish Trim EL Cementitious Siding Spanish Material Legend: Concrete Low Profile 'S' Tile Stucco Finish Shutters Decorative Gable End Detail Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim ELEVATI French Country Material Legend: Flat Concrete Tile Roofing Stucco Finish Cementitious Siding/ Shingles Shutters Wood Posts Stone Veneer Stone Veneer Enhanced Sills 1x Stucco Finish Trim SH Plan 2 Exterior Elevations Dublin, California KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 i 2 4 8 A2.2 KTGY Group Inc. Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 V ID a OWN US 0 III IJ11-111-111 lu _ FENCE LINE LEFT RIGHT Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities II \I L El FENCE LINE J' 2A - Spanish Material Legend: Concrete Low Profile 'S' Tile Stucco Finish Shutters Decorative Gable End Detail Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim Decorative Railing and Posts x Q 0 L0 in N I I I I I 4:12 I I I I_------- - - -a -- 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 I 1 I I I 4:12 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I a ------ - - - - -� I -`7 I I 1 I 4:12 I ad I I I I I I ROOF PLAN ` - - -- ' - - - -- - - -- OVERHANG : 12" RAKE: b" ROOF PITCH: 4:12 U.N.O 111111 1 1!1 Ri1 111.11%V1 111 I 1 1 1- 11- 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 IL_ 111111.111 IIII -11- 0 0 r 1l 1 Ir_1 111 Ir1111 -1 -1 111111 1 1111 11 - -11 -1 1 1 1[_ 1 1 1 1 1�1 1 1 1[_ 1 1 1 1 1__ 1 EE IT H111j FENCE LINE PLAN 2A-- 'SPANISH' - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 4 A2.3 Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. KIGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 FENCE LINE LEFT - - --- ------ - - - - -- RIGHT Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities FENCE LINE 2B - French Country Material Legend: Flat Concrete Tile Roofing Stucco Finish Cementitious Corbels Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim x `Q C 0 M t O M O� ROOF PLAN OVERHANG:6' RAKE: 6" ROOF PITCH : 6:12 U.N.O +1L I I L-�UFIII PLAN 2B - 'FRENCH COUNTRY' - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 4 A2.4 Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. K1GY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 19 ------ - - - - -� I 4:12 � 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 ROOF PLAN OVERHANG:6' RAKE: 6" ROOF PITCH : 6:12 U.N.O +1L I I L-�UFIII PLAN 2B - 'FRENCH COUNTRY' - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 4 A2.4 Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. K1GY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 19 L_ nnnnnnnn11 mmmim imii■�ii■�ini�IN nmmmi■■ mmmmnnnme mmmmmnnnnnnnmmmi nn�■Iommmm ■nnnmmmmmms nn�n� ■innnnnnnnwnnnni nn lmmm ■Innnnnnnl■nnME MMMMMMi��■i��anvi I —III— I_I LIJ u = Mill- I RIGHT Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities FENCE LINE : - English iterial Legend: Flat Concrete Tile Roofing Stucco Finish Cementitious Corbels Brick Veneer Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim X Q 0 Lo M t b M Sk- - -- REAR I I I I 46 I I I I I � I � ROOF PLAN OVERHANG:6' RAKE: 6" ROOF PITCH : 6:12 U.N.O Y EN iY I FENCE LINE PLAN 2( - 'ENGLISH' - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ° 4 A2.5 Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. K1GY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 19 ------ - - - - -� I 4:12 � I I ' I III I I I I 46 I I I I I � I � ROOF PLAN OVERHANG:6' RAKE: 6" ROOF PITCH : 6:12 U.N.O Y EN iY I FENCE LINE PLAN 2( - 'ENGLISH' - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ° 4 A2.5 Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. K1GY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 19 x Q 0 M t LO n N Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities �_ \:��i�l x Q 0 Lo Cl) t L9 N x Q 0 M L9 N O REAR AT ENHANCED LOT NLY FENCE LINE �lw2 1 MINI �@i I 1 ' 1 1 _I -- '��Y �iwi iolis �1�ii1��1► �� IiitM�Aiii► �r —]LlFn�ii —i- REAR W/ OPTIONAL DECK _PLAN 2A - 'SPANISH' - OPTIONS Dublin, California KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 4 8 A2.6_ KTGY Group Inc. Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.corn I 4 510 272 2910 /► ' x Q 0 M 0 M Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities 01111 —� FMII 1 _ ....... ..un..........1■n..00.........1 il........n..l■.1 IA.I ��o�- sum -- ■-° �- --• �--�w��-��I-�• rl� y ��-�00�-�01�-��1� LT+ + JMA I �]�d'ILJ Ll+�IJIEI L ;J1 10 0 i a REAR AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY y FENCE LINE re Ld — 1111 4-111 — — �w:.'::.�:.::::: IIIIIIIIIIIIIII� �IIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIII� • ■...■�...... ■I.I �wi ■www■�wwwwww■ L!J LJ • Lj u u 'FRENCH REAR W/ OPTIONAL DECK PLAN 213- COUNTRY' OPTIONS Dublin, Group :0 Second Street, 00 Oakland, .0 x Q 0 LO M t O M Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities i O REAR W/ OPTIONAL 11111 F111 VERED PAT x Q 0 zo M t O M x Q 0 M 0 M I IDE FE-jil ID, FENCE LINE 0 - i i t i Mir- REAR AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY T e1 O y REAR W/ OPTIONAL DECK _PLAN 2( - 'ENGLISH' - OPTIONS Dublin, California KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 101j] ° 2 4 8 A2.8_ KTGY Group Inc. Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com V 510 272 2910 b.r� N I r � - � w IM :■■: n s Z 3 s � c o - �. a o C sn C f LE 011 - - A�In � N � N® y I rn (ZDj 00 z S I- >_ ti Fun c> a _ ins FMN c m 1C... S T r mmp �lly� T In M° s IEEE no om on / on I_i■ii 1 on ME U [Ni!1 a ti ham .:o - II I II II II II II I II II II II II I II II II II OPT. DECK Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities II 11 �i- D- I\ OPT. BDRM S SUITE SCALE: 1 /4— 1'd" NOTE: FAU LOCATED IN ATTIC OPT. DEN SCALE: 1/4— 1' -0" ALL SET -BACKS PER P.D. AC CONDENSER SHALL NOT EXCEED 50 DB AT PROP LINE PER CITY ORDINANACE PROVIDE CONDUIT AND FACE PLATE FOR FUTURE SATELLITE DISH INSTALLATION. LOCATION SHALL BE AS CLOSE TO SOUTHEAST WITHOUT BEING ON THE FRONT FACADE OF ANY HOME. L MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR SOAR READY BUILDINGS REQUIRED IN THE 2013 BUILDING ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS WILL BE MET USING EXCEPTION 7 PER SECTION 1 1 O. 1 O(B) 1 A a V Dublin, falifornia KTGY Group Inc. KTGY # 2012 -0656 09.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy. com 510 272 2910 A3.0 LJ BEDRM 3 11 V-1 BEDRM 2 Elevation 'C' Addendum Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities M BEDRM 3 GARAGE ---------------------r---------- BEDRM ENTRY BEDRM 4 Elevation 'B' Addendum _Plan 3 Addenda Dublin, California KTGY # 2011 -0656 06.20.2013 z 4 8 A3.1 i i i i KTGY Group Inc. Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 Decorative Posts & Railing Enhanced Sill Decorative Gable End Detail , 0 0 Decorative Shutter Decorative Finial Built - up Dec Bay Window 0 0 0 II # II II * II Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities 0 aill0I LEVATION 'A' - SPANISH Spanish Material Legend: Concrete Low Profile 'S' Tile Stucco Finish Shutters Decorative Gable End Detail Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim English Material Legend: Flat Concrete Tile Roofing Stucco Finish Cementitious Siding/ Shingles Shutters Brick Veneer Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim Stone Veneer 0 0 01 Decorative Gable End Vent Fr- iop7A� 7-1== Lz� © I=— I ®I Wood Corbel Decorative Shutter a Enhanced Sill r7ZA N FA N ELEVATION 'B' - FREN French Country Material Legend: Flat Concrete Tile Roofing Stucco Finish Shutters Wood Posts Stone Veneer Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim Plan 3 Exterior Elevations Dublin, California KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 L' =_I H COUNTRY Stone Veneer Cementitious Board & Batt Siding Brick Veneer Decorative Shutter Recessed Window Brick Veneer Sill Stone Veneer 2 i � a A3.2 I—T� KTGY Group Inc. Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 b.r� LEFT RIGHT Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities o 0 ® ® 3A - Spanish Material Legend: Concrete Low Profile 'S' Tile Stucco Finish Decorative Railing Decorative Gable End Detail Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim FENCE LINE i -- - - - - -, -------------------- I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I , I , 1 I , I , I , I , I , I , I I , I , I , I � I � I � I � I � I � 1 4'12 I � I � 1 4:12 � I � � I � I � I , I I � ROOF PLAN OVERHANG: 12" RAKE : 6" ROOF FROH: 4:12 U.N.O Y Sk O Lo a M 00 (V ■ ® FENCE LINE ® _ ® FENCE LINE _._.t - -- -- - - - - -- -- --- -- - - -- ---- - - --�i � - -- -- - - - -- --- --- - -- - O 1 REAR PLAN 3A - 'SPANISH' - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 4 A3.2 Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.corn 1 510 272 2910 19 ILJI El L- H-r- LEFT 11 I 1 11 1117-�-4--T-LAI UC RIGHT Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities FENCE LINE ---- -- 0 IL 1 1_ - .I 0 i i I i 3B - French Country Material Legend: Flat Concrete Tile Roofing Stucco Finish Decorative Railing & Wood Posts Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim FENCE LINE -- -- ----------------------- ---- -- i i i i i i ROOF PLAN OVERHANG: 6' RAKE: 6' ROOF "v H: 5:12 U.N.O I =777 0 X Sk Q Lo ET IMIF-1 --J---, i s i i i i i i i i i i i i i FENCE LINE PLAN 3B - 'FRENCH COUNTRY' - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 4 A3.4 Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. K1GY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 19 b.� FENCE LINE ■■ LEFT RIGHT Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities e o _4_ u _U_ 'J I I FENCE LINE l ------- ------- I 4.11 I I I I I I I I 6:12 I 3C - Englsih Material Legend: Flat Concrete Tile Roofing Stucco Finish Decorative Railing & Wood Posts 6:12 Brick Veneer Enhanced Sills I 1 x Stucco Finish Trim I 6:12 I _ I I I x CQ L O h M O M i O I I ROOF PLAN OVERHANG: 6" RAKE: 6" ROOF FnCH : 6:12 U.N.O I WILEJ :r-�T- 'ilk REAR 1 II —F— FENCE LINE i i PLAN 3( - 'ENGLISH' - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ° ? 4 A3.5 Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 V bnA X Q 0 M C0 t n 00 N Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities a O REAR W o lion, PTIONAL COVERED PATI X Q 0 M t n W N X Q O M + i� 60 N EIT . j F 11L L11 REAR AT ENHANCED LOT I o 0 0 El Ld u IhPlnlnl 1�^Inlnlnlnl'+1 I"9ntnlnl I�InI 1�1 r. [MET:1111+1E11 Iii REAR W/ OPTIONAL DECK _PLAN 3A - 'SPANISH' - OPTIONS Dublin, California KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 1I11111'1 0 2 4 8 FENCE LINE A3.6_ KTGY Group Inc. Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.corn I 4 510 272 2910 /► ' X Q O h M i t 01 N Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities O� i O REAR W PTIONAL VERED PATI X Q O 10 M U N X Q 0 Lo M N O O _PLAN 3B - Dublin, California KTGY # 2012.0656 lal ■I: REAR AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY REAR W/ OPTIONAL DECK 'FRENCH COUNTRY' - OPTIONS 0 2 4 8 A3.7_ KTGY Group Inc. 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 19 x Q 0 in M t O Cl) Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities a . ...................................... . u u .. ..................... ..n REAR W/ OPTIONAL VERED PATI x Q 0 LO M t O M x Q 0 LO M t O M O REAR AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY EAR W/ OPTIONAL DECK _PLAN X - 'ENGLISH' - OPTIONS Dublin, California KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 FENCE LINE 4 8 A3.8_ KTGY Group Inc. Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.corn I 510 272 2910 1► 0.4 P Is El 0 o 01 M IN FENCE LIN9. 3A -'SPANISH- RIGHT AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY .. ©_ c_ FENCE LINE Lot 3B -'FRENCH COUNTRY'- RIGHT AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY 7 Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities LA-1 I u [± ❑� El[ u u I FENCE LINE 3C -'ENGLISH'- RIGHT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY PLAN 3 - ENHANCED RIGHT ELEVATIONS 4 A3.9 Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 b.r� Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities OPT. DECK -II n n n n n n II I� I BEDRM 5 rl -, I L I J I I a OPT. BEDROOM 5 SCALE: 114 " - V -0" MO W L11 WLA OPT. DEN ® SCALE: 1/4"- V -0" ALL SET -BACKS PER P.D. L7= ;� ;� AC CONDENSER SHALL NOT EXCEED 50 DB AT PROP LINE PER CITY ORDINANACE PROVIDE CONDUIT AND FACE PLATE FOR FUTURE SATELLITE DISH INSTALLATION. LOCATION SHALL BE AS CLOSE TO SOUTHEAST NOTE: FAU LOCATED IN ATTIC WITHOUT BEING ON THE FRONT FACADE OF ANY HOME. MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR SOLAR READY BUILDINGS REQUIRED IN THE 2013 BUILDING ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS WILL BE MET USING EXCEPTION 7 PER SECTION 1 1 O. 1 0(B) 1 A Dublin, falifornia KTGY # 2012 -0656 NOTE: VERIFY SETBACKS WITH CIVIL PLAN 4 3, 159 SQ. FT. A4.0 KTGY Group Inc. 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy. corn I 510 272 2910 ` Elevation 'C' Addendum Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities Elevation 'B' Addendum PLAN 4 ADDENDUM Dublin, (alifornia HTGY # 2012 -0656 08.20.2018 0 2 4 i i 8 A4.1 KTGY Group Inc. Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 Decorative Finial Decorative Railing - ELEVATI Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities Decorative Gable End Detail Decorative Shutter - SPANISH Enhanced Sill Spanish Material Legend: Concrete Low Profile 'S' Tile Stucco Finish Shutters Decorative Gable End Detail Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim ELEVATI _Plan 4 Dublin, California KTGY # 2012.0656 Decorative Post & Railing French Country Material Legend: Flat Concrete Tile Roofing Stucco Finish Decorative Gable Shutters End Vent Wood Posts & Decorative Railing Enhanced Sills 4 lx Stucco Finish Trim Decorative Shutter English Material Legend: Enhanced Sill Flat Concrete Tile Roofing Stucco Finish Brick Veneer Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim Stone Veneer Exterior Elevations 0 2 4 8 KTGY Group Inc. 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 A4.2 LEFT WIT _ t_IJ u q RIGHT Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities ---------- M W FENCE LINE --------------- 4A - Spanish Material Legend: Concrete Low Profile 'S' Tile Stucco Finish Decorative Railing Decorative Gable End Detail Enhanced Sills 1 x Stucco Finish Trim e' ROOF PLAN OVERHANG: IT' RAKE: 6" ROOF PITCH : 4:12 U.N.O FENCE LINE REAR PLAN 4A - 'SPANISH' - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 4 8 A4.3 Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.corn 4 510 272 2910 ' -------- - - - - -, �w ■iis�ii ■nniin ■ime � 1��wiii�i■�iiiii� I I— I❑� \• u uu Material • . Concrete — Roofing Enhanced Stucco Finish Decorative Railing & Wood Posts Sills 1x Stucco Finish Trim FENCE LINE rw ROOF PLAN 1A11 : LEFT ROOF IIMI 6:12U.N.0 n — --------------------------------------------------------- nnnnwwn ■nunnnnnn■�■nn■nnnnnuui ■�.. nnnnnuuuuwuwi ■wuwnww��uwYwwo snnu. . iiu��nnY�uuuuuwuuuuwnuu��wuuuuiininnni�� .wnnnn��nn nnnnnnnnw■nwnnn�■nnwnnnnnnnn�` iun nwnnn��nnnnnnnnnnnwn ■nnnn�■w ®■tnnnnn�,., � �iii��wwi��i� ■iii�i■�ii■�u�ii��iwnii�i� nni■i�ii■�n� uuuuuu■wuuwuu�■uuuuuuuuwuuuwwuw ■nnwnuun� �uuuuwuuuwuuw■uuuuunuuu■uu■ uuunu "�':Yi -- iiu�'�if■- iiiiif■ ■nuuuuuu■uuuuuuuuuuwnuuuuu ; % `, unuwu �� uuu �uunuu■uuuuuuuu i w■�■uu = �uuwu■ uun ■nuunuuuwuYnuu uu��u� - -' ��ww� �!, innnn■ �uuwuwnuuuuuuuw w■r� -•��■ u ■in�nnq ■nwuuww��wwun u u u u u - NEI o — FENCE LINE -� FENCE LINE RIGHT REAR Tassajara Highlands PLAN 4B - 'FRENCH COUNTRY' - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A49—IF Dublin, California KTGY Tim Lewis Communities KTGY # 2012-0656 06.20.2013 Architecture+Planning Group :0 Second Street, 00 Oakland, .0 in !j I FENCE LINE I I I I I I LEFT ■ uuuuuu■ ■uu� ■uuunu■■��uuuu■■iu�■u�uuui■ ■mm mm m■mm m mmumuuui■nuuuu��■uuu■iu�■uuuwuu �nuu■ MNM1■uuu�■�uuMMMMMuu�u�■■iu■MM MI ■u uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu� ■ ■iuuuuuuuu mmmmmm NIMMMMIMM�i�w��u��u��i��■� El -II ❑� _III L Ll Lj �t-- - - - - -� ® FENCE LINE RIGHT Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities _ I 6:12 I , ' I I , I , ' I I � I , I , I I ' I ' I ' , I , I 4C - Englsih I Material Legend: Flat Concrete Tile Roofing Stucco Finish I ' I ' Decorative Railing & Wood Posts Brick Veneer I Enhanced Sills I 1 x Stucco Finish Trim I I I 6:12 _____________ X I 6" I 6:1 I ROOF PLAN OV ERHANG : 6' RAKE: 6' ROOF PITCH : 6:12 U.N.O I■11111111Iuu ■1uu JUL , a u�■ ■iuuuuu , wuu uuuuuuuuuu iuu■�� `iii�w�un��u��u�i�� u -III II � -I� I I -II- TI u ®� �. - - - - -- - - -- FENCE LINE O L■WWW-r ■■II I i REAR PLAN 4( - 'ENGLISH' - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 4 8 A4.5 Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 V ID !j bnA x Q 0 t bo N Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities k4:fA x Q 0 EO N x Q 0 EO Cl) t n W N lid ail MEN H+-i- I� REAR AT ENHANCED LOT REAR W/ OPTIONAL DECK _PLAN 4A - 'SPANISH' - OPTIONS Dublin, California KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 121 F 4 M7 MP!::: P! 0 2 4 8 I I I FENCE LINE A4.6_ KTGY Group Inc. Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.corn I 4 510 272 2910 /► ' X Q o= M a o M REAR W Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities SIDI 11 !I ICU I+ I� PTIONAL COVERED PATI C c C c x Q 0 10 - + --i EJEj: E]] L nij EL--] REAR AT ENHANCED • REAR W/ OPTIONAL DEC S ONLY PLAN 4B - 'FRENCH COUNTRY' - OPTIONS 0 2 4 8 II I I I FENCE LINE A4.7_ Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 x Q 0 M 0 0 M Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities i O i u REAR W/ OPTIONAL COVERED PATI x Q 0 LO M 0 0 Cl) x Q 0 M t O O Cl) U ML El ------- -- __��I�� O REAR AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY al O FENCE LINE PLAN 4( - 'ENGLISH' - OPTIONS 4 8 AU Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 �� It� 4B - RIGHT AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY I � l !il 1 -i - -1 ■ �-_i_u uu uu LF 110! 4C - RIGHT AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities FENCE LINE PLAN 4 - ENHANCED RIGHT ELEVATIONS ° i I 8 A4.9 Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. KTGY # 2012.0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 Tassajara Highlands Tim Lewis Communities alwo �■uuwnuuuuu�uuwwu�■uuuwuunuu -------------- -- �inuuwuunnuunuu ■iuuwnuuuuwunnun n uunuuuwuwnuuuuuu ■iuuuuuuuuwuunuuu uuuuuuuuwnunnuuuuu ■inwuuuuunwunnu uwwwwwwuwwwwnwwuwwwnwwwwwwwwwww� ■uuwuuwwuuuuuu w��■��w�w�� wwuw ..r............ I_ E5H FENCE LINE i i i i t 4C - LEFT AT ENHANCED LOTS ONLY PLAN 4 - ENHANCED LEFT ELEVATIONS 4 8 M.10 Dublin, California KTGY Group Inc. KTGY # 2011 -0656 06.20.2013 Architecture +Planning 580 Second Street, Suite 200 Oakland, California 94607 ktgy.com 510 272 2910 �Li�� Replace this sheet with 11" x 17" tab labeled VESTING TENTATIVE MAP TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS TRACT MAP NO. 8733 A QUALITY SINGLE - FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY by TIM LEWIS COMMUNITIES GENERAL NOTES 1. LEGAL PROPERTY OWNERS JOSE L & VIOLETA VARGAS 7020 TASSAJARA ROAD DUBLIN CA 94568 -9452 THOMAS A. & HELENE L. FREDRICH TRUSTEES OF THE FREDRICH FAMILY TRUST 6960 TASSAJARA ROAD DUBLIN, CA 945669451 2. APPLICANT /SUBDIVIDER & BUILDER TlM LEWIS COMMUN /TIES and SG COMPANK LLC. 3300 DOUGLAS BOULEVARD, BLDG 400 STE 450 ROSEVILLE CA 94661 -3844 TELL 916/763 -2300 3. PLANNERS, ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS P DESIGN RESOURCES. INC 302, CITRUS CIRCLE SUITE 150 WALNUT CREEK, CA 94598 -2635 1 4. ARCHITECT KTGY GROUP, INC. 580 SECOND STREET SUITE 200 OAKLAND. CA 94607 -3545 TEL 5101272 2910 5. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 1615 BONANZA STREET SUITE 314 WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 -4531 TEL 9251938 -7377 6. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT MARYLEE GUINON, LLC. OLBERDING ENVIRONMENTAL INC. 1390 WILLOW PASS ROAD SUITE 370 CONCORD, CA 94520 TEL 925/825 -2111 7. ARBORIST HORTSCIENCE INC. 325 RAY STREET PLEASANTON, CA 94566 -6621 TELL 925/484 -0211 B. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER ENGEO, INC 2010 CROW CANYON PLACE, SUITE 250 SAN RAMON, CALIFORNIA 94583 4 63 4 TEL 925/8 66 9000 10, ASSESSOR'5 PARCEL NUMBERS APN 986 - 0004 - 002 - 01 14 35, ACI - VARGAS APN: 986 - 0004 - 002 -03 18.58 ! AC) - FREDRICH IT. TOTAL SITE ACREAGE 1293 - ACRES (PER ALAMEDA CO. ASSESSOR) 12. EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION KOHL LP -OENSI iY RESIDENTIAL 161 - 14.0 OU/AC) MEDIUM /HIGH - DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 140 - 250 DU/AC1 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 13. PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION MEDIUM - DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 16.1 - 14.0 DU /ACI 14. EXISTING CITY OF DUBLIN ZONING DISTRICT PD - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT IPA 06 -0301 15, PROPOSED CITY OF DUBLIN ZONING DISTRICT PO FOR PROPOSED 48 LOT MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 16. EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY RESIDENTIAL, HORSE GRAZING 17. PROPOSED USE OF PROPERTY MEDIUM - DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 61.7% PRIVATE OPEN SPACE 24.8% TASSAJARA ROAD DEDICATION 5.3% CULVERT TRANSFER PARCEL —N 1000% 18, PROPOSED SUBDIVISION 48 SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS • AVERAGE LOT SIZE 4.4US OF • MINIMUM LOT SIZE 3,670, SF 19. PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY 48 OU / 6.92 AC : 693 DU /AC 20. ESTIMATED PROJECT POPULATION 48 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS x 27 PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD : 130 PERSONS THIS INFORMATION IS BASED ON THE 2010 US CENSUS FOR DUBLIN 21. PUBLIC UTILITIES SOURCE OF WATER SUPPLY DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT WATER PRESSURE ZONE PRESSURE ZONE 2 SEWAGE DISPOSAL: DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY TELEPHONE SERVICE AT&T CABLE TELEVISION COMCAST (FRANCHISED BY THE CITY) 22. TOPOGRAPHY TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN HEREON WAS GENERATED BY PHOTOGRAMMETRY FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY TAKEN JANUARY IB, 200 AND PREPARED BY GEOMAPS OF RANCHO COROOVA USING CONTROL ESTABLISHED BY P/A DESIGN RESOURCES, INC. CITY of DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA VESTING TENTATIVE MAP 23. BENCHMARK AND DATUM CALIFORNIA STATE PLANE BAD 83, EPOCH 2010.00. BENCHMARK NAVD 66 BASED ON GPS OBSERVATIONS AT LIPS CONTROL POINT 58. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, BID DE 8507 WITH CROPS ETRIC HEIGHT OF 599.54', 24, CONTOUR INTERVALS EXISTING: 2 FOOT INTERVALS DESIGN 2 FOOT INTERVALS 25. PUBLIC SERVICES FIRE PROTECTION ALAMEDA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE SERVICE- ALAMEDA COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE SCHOOL DISTRICTS: DUBLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT • GREEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (K 51 • ELEANOR MURRY FALLON MIDDLE SCHOOL RUS) • DUBLIN HIGH SCHOOL 19 -121 PARK SERVICES: DUBLIN PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT 26. SUBDIVISION BOUNDARY THE BOUNDARY LINE SHOWN HEREON IS NOT BASED UPON A FIELD SURVEY, BUT IS AN APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY COMPILED FROM AVAILABLE PUBLIC RECORD DATA 27. PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS ALL PROPOSED STREETS WITHIN THE PROJECT BOUNDARY SHALL BE PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION PRIVATE OPEN SPACE PARCELS 'B', 'C', D & 'E', WHICH INCLUDES THE BID SMILE # 1, 810 RETENTION BASIN If 3 AND HYDROMOURROATION/ DETENTION BASIN X4, RETAINING WALLS IRRIGATION AND LANDSCAPING SHALL BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION THE AREA DESIGNATED AS "TRANSFER PARCEL" AND THAT ADDITIONAL CERTAIN OFF -SITE CITY OWNED PARCEL APN 986 - 0004 003 -00 SOUTH OF PARCEL "E' SHALL BE USED FOR THE BIORETENTION HYDROMODIFICAPON AND DETENTION BASINS. RETAINING WALLS PUBLIC TRAILS HAND RAILS. IRRIGATION AND LANDSCAPING PARCEL E' AND APN 986 - 0004 - 00300 SHALL BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION AS PROVIDED FOR IN AN EXCHANGE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF DUBLIN 28. CIVIL EARTHWORK QUANTITY SUBDIVISION BASIN CUT = 141,000, cu. ytls. CUT = 14,000! IN, yds. FILL : 14,900, cu. yds. FILL : 7,280, cu. yds. EXPORT : 72,700, w. export EXPORT : 6.700: cu. yds. NOTE: Does — include remedial IXIR ork puenlif- 29. IMPORTANT NOTES A. THERE ARE NO EXISTING AREAS SUBJECT TO INUNOA TION OR PONCING WITHIN THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CAN BE FOUND ON THE FEMA FLOOD THE RATE MAP (FIRM), PANEL 0326G OF 125 AND IS LOCATED IN A AREA DESIGNATED AS "20 NE X ZONE X DEFINED AS MINIMAL RISK AREAS OUTSIDE THE tY. AND 02% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD PLAINS NC BASE FLOOD DEPTHS ARE SHOWN WITHIN THESE ZONES. B THE DEVELOPER HEREBY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO FILE MULTIPLE FINAL MAPS ON THE VESTING TENTATIVE MAP PER SECTION 664561 OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT THE SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS ARE PROPOSE TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITHIN ONE (11 YEAR OF THE RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAPSO IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THE INDIVIDUAL HOMES WILL BE CONSTRUCTED IN 5 PHASES OF UP TO 11 HOMES PER PHASE C FOR A WRITTEN LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE TWO PROPERTIES CONTAINED WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THIS SUBDIVISION, PLEASE SEE THE PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORTS BY FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY NO LOT 618656ALA AND 0 131- 6 0 6 31ALA, DATED DECEMBER 21 2012 AGO SUBMITTED WITH THIS APPLICATION D. ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET (NAMES AND ADDRESSES/ OF THE PROJECT SITE ARE SHOWN ON SHEET VTM -2 E THIS PLAN PROVIDES FOR THIRTY -FIVE [35) FULL -SIZE (8' X 207 ON- STREET PARKING SPACES. ADDITIONALLY, EACH INDIVIDUAL RESIDENCE SHOWN WILL BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE A MINIMUM OF FOUR 14) OFF - STREET PARKING SPACES, 2 IN THE DRIVEWAY AND 2 IN THE GARAGE F ALL EXISTING BUILDINGS PAVEMENT UTILITIES AND LANDSCAPING SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE ENTIRE 12.93, ACRE SUBJECT SITE. G THERE I5 APPROXIMATELY 18.042, SQUARE FEET OF EXISTING IMPERVIOUS SURFACE ON THE SITE H THE BUILDER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADJUST THE FLOOR PLANS AND ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATION MIX TO RESPOND TO MARKET CONDITIONS, L THIS PROPERTY IS MORE THAN 1000 FEET FROM CAMP PARKS ✓ THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF THE 55, 60, 65 AND 70 CNEL (COMMUNITY NOISE EQUIVALENT LEVEL) CONTOURS, IF ANY WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE CEQA PROCESS K A PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT SIAE) SHALL BE DEDICATED OVER THE PUBLIC TRAIL THAT PASSES THROUGH THE PROJECT L. A RAE ANN MAINTENANCE ACCESS EASEMENT (MAE/ SHALL BE DEDICATED TO THE CITY OVER PARCEL E' ANN APN 9860004- 003 -D0. M A STORM DRAIN EASEMENT NOE) SHALL BE DEDICATED OVER PARCELS C, E AND THE TRANSFER PARCEL TO ALLOW PUBLIC WATERS FROM TASSAJARA ROAD RUN -OFF TO PASS THROUGH THE TREATMENT BASINS. N ALL PRIVATE STREETS [PARCEL A') SHALL HAVE ADDITIONAL EASEMENTS FOR PRIVATE ACCESS, EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS. SANITARY SEWER, DOMESTIC WATER AND STORM DRAIN DATED: JUNE 14, 2013 REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2093 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2093 REVISED: MAY 22, 2094 REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 TO DANVILLE ,3 SAN RAMON CAMP PARKS VTM. i A PARKS RESERVE FORCES MEGA ouNry PROJECT pis of DueuN CIn SITE PRELIMINARY GRADING & SITE IMPROVEMENTS. VTM.5 PRELIMINARY GRADING & SITE IMPROVEMENTS. . . . . . VTM.6 TASSAJARA ROAD PAINTED LANE CONFIGURATION VTM.7 \ LlN PROPERTY DETAILS AND LEGEND VTM.9 PRELIMINARY STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN. VTM. 10 CAMP PARKS VTM. i A PARKS RESERVE FORCES LOT & PARCEL LAYOUT (WITH DIMENSIONS AND AREAS). TRAINING AREA LOT & PARCEL LAYOUT (WITH DIMENSIONS AND AREAS) TASSAJARA CREEK) PRELIMINARY GRADING & SITE IMPROVEMENTS. O -NTy— GON�ftP iDp1 SOUK N C' P'yEOF DUB / R T MAP NO. 8102 V ING TE TATIVE MAP (IN P OGRESS) r� TRAIL IEBRPD) \ IT II S� R O J Q o DU IN Hq'VCh TO HWY 580 & PLEASANTON 111 VICINITY MAP SCALE T 8004 THESE PLANS IDENTIFIED AS TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS • TRACT MAP NO 8133 VESTING TENTATIVE MAP, CITY OF DUBLIN CALIFORNIA, SHEETS TM -1 THROUGH TM 11 INCLUSIVE, DATED JUNE 14, TOM, REVISED AUGUST 22. 2013, REVISED DECEMBER 20 2013 REVISED MAY 22 2014, REVISED JULY 4, 2014 HAVE BEEN PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF AND APPROVED BY FESS 0 �p�NaK A, Fy ° No. C 53063 m * fxp. 06/10/15 RAZMIK AVEDIAN RC.E 53063 EXPIRES 6130115 P/A DESIGN RESOURCES, INC TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL NOTES, VICINITY MAPS VTM. i EX /STING BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS VTM.2 LOT & PARCEL LAYOUT (WITH DIMENSIONS AND AREAS). VTM.3 LOT & PARCEL LAYOUT (WITH DIMENSIONS AND AREAS) VTM.4 PRELIMINARY GRADING & SITE IMPROVEMENTS. VTM.5 PRELIMINARY GRADING & SITE IMPROVEMENTS. . . . . . VTM.6 TASSAJARA ROAD PAINTED LANE CONFIGURATION VTM.7 SITE CROSS SECTIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VTM.8 DETAILS AND LEGEND VTM.9 PRELIMINARY STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN. VTM. 10 EROSION CONTROL PLAN VTM. 11 CON lME , pOBLIN I r CITY IlV 9N1 Y PROJECT SITE R k Q W Q R �I. LIN PROPERTY H51 TRACT MAP NO. 8102 VESTIN (G SIL VERA /rl it LOCATION MAP SCALE 1' 300' PIA ®esign Resources, Inc_ VTM 1 Planning Ar Engineering i Surveying • 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA EXISTING BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS JUNE 14, 2013 REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 3815 N` YARD ROAD E 275 I� 4� q 5 \ y L —1 BOUTROS AND SANDY BESHAY PLEASANTON GA 945 8 \ / (j R O P O 7617 6833 TASSAJARA ROAD Oi APN 985-0097-024 7052 SYRAH DRIVE DUBLIN 'CA 94568 `, L DUBLIN, CA 94568 ' ''� \ \ GgcIL \� O �/ APN 985 - 0055 - 003 -02104 O2 APN 985- 0097 -023 7058 SYRAH DRIVE, DUBLIN, CA 94588 d \ O3 APN 985 - 0097 -013 3626 McCORMICK COURT, DUBLIN, CA 945 ,\ o A0 10 pp O4 APN 985 - 0097 -014 3610 McCORMICK COURT, DUBLIN, CA 94568 i STANDARD PACIFIC CORPORATION n R� R /1 \ o pMp \ R4CT MAP NO. 8102 8847 TASSAJARA ROAD F � OS APN 985- 0097 -015 7088 SYRAH DRIVE, DUBLIN, CA 94568 \ DUBLIN, CA -001- VESTING TENTATIVE MAP �\ �.% APN 985- 0002 - 001 -03 74 \ O6 APN 985- 0097 -016 7082 SYRAH DRIVE, DUBLIN. CA 94568 O7 APN 985- 0097 -012 7071 SYRAH DRIVE, DUBLIN, CA 94568 O8 APN 985 -0097 -071 7075 SYRAH DRIVE, DUBLIN, CA 94568 ® y TRAFFIC SIGNAL O9 APN 985 -0097 -010 7075 SYRAH DRIVE, DUBLIN, CA 94568 �.J �..._X- ITCRUE RELOCATED ROAD 10 APN 985- 0097 -002 6487 TASSAJARA DRIVE. DUBLIN, CA 94568 ASSAJARA P` 11 APN 985 -0097 -009 7083 SYRAH DRIVE, DUBLIN, CA 94568 12 APN 985-0097-007 7097 SYRAH DRIVE, DUBLIN, CA 94568 _,30'03"& l3 APN 985 -0097 -008 7091 SYRAH DRIVE, DUBLIN CA 94568 (2Sp (T,5i) - —� 417 °36'11 "EX UTILITY HONES\' \ P 13 APN 985- 0097 -001 6487 TASSAJARA DRIVE, DUBLIN, CA 94568 0 / L.3695I.< TO BE RELOCATED EX UNDERGROUND WIRE F.�..... \ BRADDOCK AND LOGAN SERVICES, INC. C7 �'� 'T✓U'°�` 1 `EX OVERHEAD WIRE 6861 TASSAJARA ROAD -� - , % - +264+ d JOINT POLES DUBLIN CA 94568 r - T LN- 2g2'i'r /^" (2SS) (2U1 �WO \. RELOCATED \ APN 985- 000 /- ODI -Ol . i N12° / J/ .ss SEX, SS [INS d MANHOLES \ _ ;\ µ APPROXIMATE LIMIT TO BE RELOCATED OFF -SITE TREE CHART / L� 1271j` \ �oF CIVIL GRADING EX DRIVEWAY ACCESS B MAI• NAB BY OTHERS NUMBER SIZE /SPECIES ToDf� (yyl EASEMENTS TO 4- ABANDONED -2 ��< +168+ \ 212 �l a -T6 (2za1 0934 242675, asa4 z4zsTS s 1161 -212 lzs�'1 � \� �- +z6i+\ o na- T14- \ 272 24 BLUE OAK (2151 ea 63' -f�1 — 3361 - _ \ — 3 �ti ((�� tt 273 14" BLUE OAK w' EX POSE EASEMENT X175- of (8966 OR 5811 274 )0" BLUE OAK f2° l�67 �i To BE ABANDONED 2n- -� 275 6" BLACK WALNUT Ex.�D ,GROUND WIRE / ALL Exss —EX cEL< TOWER s ASSOCIATED ® s` ti ' j� 276 12" BLUE OAK R1T/ (2161 BUILDINGS TO (117) fOUIPMENT TO BE REMOVED' �' _ `\ r -27a-\ / 0 BE REMOVED X OVERHEAD WIRE (2Sii T-� NOr °15'33 "E t43. I -T79- 277 3 - 4" ALMONDS 0,�T j I TO BE REMOVED (1311 r- i X80 278 7" ALMOND D26/ (z171 ��..JJ (- '/,"S�,— (,.x31 L�--� jv '�- f' _ �zel- 279 5" BLUE OAK (213) --� Izaol - V r ,y�LZx°I ns2 _ ! f,= r --z82- \ r-.l CITY Of DUBLIN 280 11' ALMOND / / (ztal (. �- 50 �..,.�^ \ 10o avic PLAZA r i ALL EXIST BUILDINGS // N '`�� \ DUBLIN CA 94568 18J- 281 2 - 12" BLUE OAK$ ,EXISTING EC ECTRICAL t^ TO BE REMOVED "�' `- MO4<E,PC�. �,kPN 986- 0004 - 003 -0 262 12" BLUE OAK POLE TOBE REMOVED" ` • J 1 (1 /` APPROXIMATE GIMIT� WfFK \ _ (PAR EXCHANGE AGREEMEN~7 \ 283 5 - 3° ALMONDS lrrPLGAt/ (238 \ \\ of croa cRAplmc Y\ ��(1351 (1371 -�� \LL� \ \LL (�,J � \ � �\ \ \\ Q / EXISTING WELL \/�� 1�1 EXISTING FENCES $ J \ ALL EXIST BUILDING TO BE CLOSED 1 '\ / TO BE REMOVED �61j M 4() \ \ CONCRETE AND �,,, /j ITYPICALI / 5p EXISTING FENCE FENCES ]O BE EXIS I 1 �( \ AND ASPHALT TO REMOVED TRAILERS TO BE REMOVED BE REMOVED 216, (2- 1 FENCES ANOLCONC / EXIST LEACH FIELD ( / TO ]O BE REMOVED �lyl.T.� BXl,O BE BUILDING K„ EX POLES ANDJ �'l . (ICS/ ' -411 TO BE REMOVED / J \ \ o A' OVERHEAD WIRES \ l '�b31 TO BE REMOVED EXIST LEACH FIELD APPROXIMATE LIMIT 9, r0 BE REMOVED EXISTING ELECTRICAL OF CIVIL GRADING \ \ \P 9ryd — POLE TO BE REMOVED 444 \\ APPfj (MATE LIMIT X325 - _ EXISTING STRUCTURE �- LTYPICALI OF CIVIL GRAOING� A Tp BE REMOVED /� _ AOXIMATE LIMIT / �PPROF CIVIC GRADING EXISTING STRUCTURE �TO BE REMOVED / �_ W 5344'' LIMIT OF ^ 248 '11°41o, 'E / \ \ FEMA ZONE A� asz.a. \ .101 / EX OVERHEAD WIRE, -'- '" T R l T T / \ / 65DUBUN'SA A9 ROAD • TREE TRUNK PER JANUARY 2007 (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) 4-6°1354- , n l ' _ ` '� DU966 CA 90568 247 TREE NUMBER TO BE SAVED PER JANUARY 2007 REPORT L.9060' =8334 / APN 986 -0004- 005 -OS -272- TREE NUMBER TO BE REMOVED DUE TO CONSTRUCTION OF A R SUPERFICIAL BANK SLOUGH BIO— RETETENTION AND HYDROMODIFICATION /DETENTION BASIN TREE NUMBER TO BE REMOVED DUE TO MOLLER CREEK CULVERT 1254r REPLACEMENT BY OTHERS L 'MA F ZONE A r SINGH FANILY PROPERTIES, LP. 7740 TASSAJARA ROAD + I } DUBLIN CA 94568f/ APN 986 -0004 -001 LEGEND NOTES 1. AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY: TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN HEREON WAS GENERATED BY PHOTOGRAMMETRY FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY TAKEN JANUARY 18, 2013 AND PREPARED BY GEOMAPS OF RANCHO CORDOVA USING CONTROL ESTABLISHED BY PIA DESIGN RESOURCES, INC. 2. RECORDED AGREEMENTS NOT DEFINED ABOVE TO BE ABANDONED OR TERMINATED.' LICENSE AGREEMENT: BETWEEN FREDRICH TRUST, ET. AL. & PACIFIC BELL; SIZE & LOCATION UNDEFINED. LEASE AGREEMENT: BETWEEN FREDRICH TRUST ET. AL. & SPRINT SPECTRUM LP; 450 SQ. FT., LOCATION UNDEFINED. LEASE AGREEMENT: BETWEEN FREDRICH TRUST, ET. AL. & AT &T; 250 SO. FT., LOCATION UNDEFINED. 3. TREE REPORT: * FOR INFORMATION REGARDING TREES REFER TO REPORT TITLED "UPDATED TREE REPORT VARGAS/ FREDRICH PROPERTY DUBLIN, CA" PREPARED BY HORTSCIENCE, INC. OF PLEASANTON, CA., DATED JANUARY 2007. *4. ADDITIONAL TREE REMOVAL: TREES 272 THROUGH 283 ARE OFF SITE, THEY ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE ABOVE REFERENCED TREE REPORT. REMOVAL OF THESE TREES IS TO ACCOMMODATE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 910- RETENTION AND HYDROMODIFICATIONI DETENTION BASIN AND FUTURE WIDENING OF TASSAJARA ROAD. FOR SPECIES OF TREES, REFER TO THE OFF -SITE TREE CHART ON THIS SHEET. UMIT OFD FEMA ZONE A / >gSSgfaR REE PIA ®esign Resources, Inc_ V TM 2 Planning Ar Engineering i Surveying • 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 — — — APPROXIMATE L/M1T OF GRADING • TREE TRUNK PER JANUARY 2007 (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) (215) TREE NUMBER TO BE REMOVED PER JANUARY 2007 REPORT 247 TREE NUMBER TO BE SAVED PER JANUARY 2007 REPORT ®F22-01 TREE NUMBER NO LONGER EXISTING (SINCE JANUARY 2007 REPORT) NDRTH -272- TREE NUMBER TO BE REMOVED DUE TO CONSTRUCTION OF A _ BIO— RETETENTION AND HYDROMODIFICATION /DETENTION BASIN +263+ TREE NUMBER TO BE REMOVED DUE TO MOLLER CREEK CULVERT 1" 60' D" 30" 60" 120' REPLACEMENT BY OTHERS 1. AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY: TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN HEREON WAS GENERATED BY PHOTOGRAMMETRY FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY TAKEN JANUARY 18, 2013 AND PREPARED BY GEOMAPS OF RANCHO CORDOVA USING CONTROL ESTABLISHED BY PIA DESIGN RESOURCES, INC. 2. RECORDED AGREEMENTS NOT DEFINED ABOVE TO BE ABANDONED OR TERMINATED.' LICENSE AGREEMENT: BETWEEN FREDRICH TRUST, ET. AL. & PACIFIC BELL; SIZE & LOCATION UNDEFINED. LEASE AGREEMENT: BETWEEN FREDRICH TRUST ET. AL. & SPRINT SPECTRUM LP; 450 SQ. FT., LOCATION UNDEFINED. LEASE AGREEMENT: BETWEEN FREDRICH TRUST, ET. AL. & AT &T; 250 SO. FT., LOCATION UNDEFINED. 3. TREE REPORT: * FOR INFORMATION REGARDING TREES REFER TO REPORT TITLED "UPDATED TREE REPORT VARGAS/ FREDRICH PROPERTY DUBLIN, CA" PREPARED BY HORTSCIENCE, INC. OF PLEASANTON, CA., DATED JANUARY 2007. *4. ADDITIONAL TREE REMOVAL: TREES 272 THROUGH 283 ARE OFF SITE, THEY ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE ABOVE REFERENCED TREE REPORT. REMOVAL OF THESE TREES IS TO ACCOMMODATE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 910- RETENTION AND HYDROMODIFICATIONI DETENTION BASIN AND FUTURE WIDENING OF TASSAJARA ROAD. FOR SPECIES OF TREES, REFER TO THE OFF -SITE TREE CHART ON THIS SHEET. UMIT OFD FEMA ZONE A / >gSSgfaR REE PIA ®esign Resources, Inc_ V TM 2 Planning Ar Engineering i Surveying • 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS LOT & PARCEL LAYOUT JUNE 14, 2013 CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 R/W DEDICAT ION REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 RAW DEDICATION _ -� 1, 40� I`� \ - -\ PARCEL 'E' \' �m\"l O ^ D +� soolillillillillill PARCEL 'A' - -( 45 }' W \\ - �' NESTING TENTATIVE IMAP >. A JARA R I� _ � W !PRIVATE STREET ROWI l ('�17 �- TRANSFER PARCEL (IN PROGRESS) I TOS N�25d 29Z r4A ° 1 477 (\ �\1 PARCEL 'D' / R_Id65.9' CE PARCEL 'B' / �48 - \ / r 25/ 0' f � " 40 1 r�� -_ / �.. / P,i6i. 039 42 3,67Or SF 43 20 3,756, SF L V PARCEL 'A' �Jy 44 L EL PWINVA TE STREET ROW) �/ - 4,1 5 SF R9BB0 <RA pL g3. L_44.1' 1 PARCEL KEY MAP w m a3'x �14 1 .,'! " \ R:690' SEE snEEr vrM.9 FOR PARCEL CHART Nrs / J 45 $� oPO L,2s.4'r SCI CIRCLEA ofiA'9. 6oD, SF �a nal' � CEL RAW DEDICAT /ON R,4 q25" F =9670' pQR - - 051t AC L' R:18 f. d' ii g5 9 r -8 0' TI p" 263' R -450, / 2 L -,B APPROXIMATE IMIC r / 038 L 21+'x aF civu crfADlNC zb P" _ 3i \ 46 f�-4 7 1.316 SF 3.9'. 4F/ / 9.Y'! D (- 54.5'r m IIIIF1il `— R_ie+.Q R =690' —' L22 a'r ory / /h 3% R -310 BRADDOCK AND LOGAN SERVICES, INC. 35 6861 TASSAJARA ROAD / / 4 WALL 1 D j R =69.0 4,605r SF 36 DUBLIN, CA 94568 �,(f _ MAINTENANCE 1 1 L -1464 5,425. SF APN 985 - 0001 - 001 -01 / / EASEMENT 5.,63r SF 1r1yI,`R =1810' 417 �R_34f 0' EASEMENT I I,- L-40.0 5531 2 I j 4,116, OF 81.81 z 4,280. SF R_+43,0' 4' WALL R= 303,0' / L =86.a'r �'„°- MAINTENANCE L -4d 3'r EASEMENT /I 3410' / 3 I I L425't 4-anx SF ez.v.� �' I 34 d[2, 206'' // R 1610' 3,858r SF R..462. d' 3i \ / 4 LL4 3,. p� •16 R=303,0' 38' XW / 6,534! SF R_3620 rL_26. }r Q + O L502'.� d,532r SF PARCEL 519.0' I R_34 >a' - PRIVATEOPEN SPACE �L-20,'r �/ L•3)5'z 31 22711 ST w L_309'r /� 33 1095 - —' 41699. SF 5,093. OF sR S 26, / R =29.9' OuR 111,3'" - 3 m L_283'r » 9' /pARCEL J— z6z�. M PgRCEL A' �`� / 395= 199.2+ R= 324.0' 46.0_ R= 32411 R_32a.0' — /X �d6Pj -, L =dBS'i L_514'r L= 23.3', 36�• �L =514'• 'O 6��A m - / / I Z1 r: 9 10 11 C+as'! LR =4Ba 0 4, ,B L• SF (621' / d, a35r SF 3,851r SF 12 L \2r3r 8 3,)35! SF � R =48[0' SF 13 L:238'r 456. 63'r R -30.0' % .3,658' SF ,° J / 633 A'• / 3,135! SF 14 Q _ / fl- 53.0' 4,402. SF 421'r b R 4O5 rL L- 54.1'r \ R-13 ,0" 41.8'z 4j6-• dS0'x 15 3.931 r SF L 40:5'! r 45.0 " - 16 44e e/ / 1 eU� ' 46.0'. 4331 3,8]91 SF b 19 5 / 43.9'= 17 / 6.112. SF 1� _ - - - - _ _ _ _ PEDESTRIAN ACCESS tl,)9a 4,283, SF / 9 ---- - - -__- EASEMENTlPAEI _ -_ 18 APPROXIMATE LIMIT 6 / AC R:"" / - _ 4,632. SF OF CIVIL GRAOING� APPROXIMATE A MATE LMT 60 0_ F CIVIL GRADINI``` PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT lPAEI / PROPOSED BARRICADE - LIMIT OF IMPRO VfMENTS / / - - - - - - PARCEL 'C' - - - - - - - - PRIVATE OPEN SPACE 2.111 AC �� % �____ NOB •4 � �` ��_ _ . _ r 3•a ,E Ono - -- CTANGJALlN 4 —____- T' // P n; 6582 TASSAJARA ROAD — c- i - - - - - - N 4,p8 5i "W OV9LIN, CA 94568 - - - - - - — - APN 986 -0004- 005 -OS ,t ^5 A APPROXIMrE LIMIT J r ~ \P / OF CIVIL GRADING. 1 46°,3'54' - L 99.69' 1254 s f SINGH FAMILY PROPERTIES, LP. 7740 TASSAJARA ROAD DUBLIN, CA 94568 APN 986 - 0004 -001 (I'll NDRTH Y' = 30' 01 15, 30, 50' / J ' CgFFM f PIA ®esign Resources, Inc_ Planning i Engineering i Surveying V TM 3 • 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA -------- -------- - - - - -- - - - - -- noun R/W DEDICATION LOT & PARCEL LAYOUT JUNE 14, 2013 REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 � R� p REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 AD i 'S REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 J SAJA R/ PROPOSED BARRICADE AND LL A� LIMIT OF IMPROVEMENTS \' L 0. r I3 AC _ R= 1194.0' a L =3091 R/W DEDICAT ION \sas 4 � I0,2'z e- _ 0.513 AC — 4' WA """INEEWANCE, R =7670' \ ASF69ENT U1 msi19 ( tP V /' V A APPROXIMATE LIMIT \ L (] 4 L= e7,T'z 4' WALL / rOF CIVIL GRACING 6' WALL T V MAINTENANCE / \ \ BY OTHERS A MAINTENANCE I 1 u EASEMENT \ \ \ \ \ 9 EASEMENT 39 C' D �\ TRANSFER PARCEL \ 4,687, IF PEDESTRIAN ACCESS� / > \ \ \ p �-° I - /\ EASEMENT IPAEI \i \ \R EXCHANGE AGRf£MfNTf \\ \ PEDESTRIAN ACCESS \ y0 41 40 � a \ / 1 \ \ 3,773, IF R 24.0' / 4' WALL l �\ �\ \�\/ EASEMENT IPAEI OPEN CSPACE R =69.0 L-2081 �-SOE MAINTENANCE \ 0.543 AC o \ L =1d.5' EASEMENT R_69.0 m EV E R= 986.0' �R.-- 53.0'o m \ \ 3 SILVERA RANCH R =380' L= 32,9', 28 1\ \ \\ y_'L g \ \ 5,62632 IF . \ L_222828 1�R= 967.0' s Qp 0; '- . \ J _ CIRCLE s3� ry / sDE "P6 ,,s� \� m� %�� 1 -� _ __ - - - -- - - - -,\ PARCEL_'A_ R =190 27 PARCEL \� _ R= 948.0' pl 4,59034 IF PRIVATE OPEN SPwC\ \ L= 24.0', \ 38 0'\ 2.113 AC R= 946.0' 1 d70 38 4.728, IF 37 4, 39, IF �" R,za. o' ye r; 1 e R -24 01 0/ 26 l I \ 1311, sF 6931586: \ m\ 238x 2 P5 9 / 34.1- 4 617, SF \ g is 3.690, IF 3 01 -69 D' 3,912. SF l� 1 L*357'1 31 24 41668- SF 259 5.369, SF / � h ^ 10.0'- L= 43.0'. 1661 g1�1 �A4. L =350'. 1 i/ R =696' 23 QG�� \h\ L-11 1', 4,599- IF 1G� C/1n � 1 P p5 p 9D pPR 1oi 22 —L =13H I _ 4.132- IF 303 / / YAPPROXIMATE CAIN, 9 `R =1]0' OF CIVIL GRADNG R IJ9.0' L =313'r 321 7 BE 56� L =405', 20 4, ifda SF 0° A5. 09 18 65E 66� � 2 02 A55" PARCEL 'C' PRIVATE OPEN SPACE/ 2.113 AC /' PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT (PAR) (I'll 1" = 30' 01 15, 30, 60' d ND12533 E >6.7, \ \ \ \ CITY OF DUBLIN \ \\ \ 100 CIVIC PLAZA \ 886- 000490038 ARM 00 l PARCEL TO BE ACQUIRED \ \ FROM CITY OF DUBLIN THROUGH EXCHANGE AGREEMENT G `-1 PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT IPAE) \ \ APPROXIMATE LIMIT \ \ \ !� OF CIVIL GRADING \ \ \ i!J \ \ \ O f � j \ l \ R/W DEDICA T /ON \'\PARCEL 'E' 28 \ \ \ \ 'I \ TRANSFER PARCEL \ 1 1 PARCEL 'D' - r _25 \ DUBLIN, 94568 APN 986 -00000 d- 605 -OS R/W DEDICATION PARCEL 'A' (PRIVATE STREET ROWI is PARCEL '6' '4" 1 L__V 48� �— \aO Is PARCEL ,Cr PAEDE PARCEL KEY MAP SEE SHEET VTM9 FOR PARCEL CHART NTS. PIA ®esign Resources, Inc_ V TM 4 L 'A' TE STREET NOW Planning i Engineering i Surveying • 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA PRELIMINARY GRADING AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS JUNE 14, 2013 REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 APN 986 - 0004 -00I Design Resources, Inc_ PIA Planning Ar Engineering i Surveying Y' = 30' 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 0' 1.5' 3b' 6b, Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 ly�J VTM.51 (LANDS PRELIMINARY GRADING AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS JUNE 14_ 2013 CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA e REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 SA RA ROAD pD m fop W P �o P \ Ac BoR Y REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 - \ L REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 Wwe 1A5 JA a S� o e A Li � S ae o a 86 a� REVISED: JULY 4 2014 c;a ��W � 3Mi e �°j. owe 4 taW:ndBd. O RM N1 EXISTING CTR ICTTION BY OTHERS < dd m r cG ka d ^� ae a� oa <owyv _3 0 >e °ep m may... r PIM1T E V E AND OFIMPROEMENS SILVERA RANCH 9r A111-11 Ss GUTFALL=4600, \ m\ EXISTING SANITARY\ ( SEWER LINE TO BE Z _ \ ELOCATED -A HYDROMOOIFICA TIONI \ N \\ \ N ._ ,! I BIO- RETENTION ¢ LL DETENTION BASIN \ 7 O\P I I I h easrN N3 I easrN g4 \ c. I I I 0 I I $g II a GurFAU All 6 a \ \ \ \ ELEV. 465.0 o I I I ELEV. 456.0 P -4801x I P:419.9x 0 TSW 4820 \ \ y I I el I GR -46. \ 9 'HIGH DEC ORATIVEA Bl0- RETENTION @ \ \ 4 I I°� I \ I NCE (SEE LANOSCA 'A pgQT,gj I A \ BASIN #2 I I I I I FL_456.0! \ P NS FOR DETAILS( _ ELEV 472.0 �� ourFAU. -4s6ex I A p 76 w- 4>6.0. �. 7 V Bw=a]9ox \ P479, ]« \ \ 11w,4sa5e FL roe A \ \ FrELO vE rEB Q \ � A�A \V P=d80.O4 OPEN V c A - EXISTING SANIrAR GEWFR LINE To RE IN ew- as4.or tW`dee� A� _ 5S / l 'ill. IMPORTANT NOTE: �� A \ p PROPOSED GRADING, CULVERT, 1 \ N(TYPIGAU l l HEADWALL BOULDER DROP AND 9 P_46 iii l � RIP RAP SHOWN IN THIS AREA �/ '61 / / a ASSUMED TO Bf CONSTRUCTED. � � � \ \ \ 14 .9, I \ x494 A \ Blo- swALEpr II P,ae1F4 \ \\ �Z P�F� ✓ i P 4602« ?3 / /// Sl it - i BErvcE wlrH RATEE , o / - \ (SEE IANOSOA PLANS !� _ A G FOR DETAILS( \ \\ _Vy r / {J L -are y, P IN V v4er5• A / / //i ,�9/ P �� '.. Cl7Y OF OUBLIN \ \ 5 i / ` / / DUBLIN, CA 9d568 V �J F' = 494.3 G1P \ / / i // "`3 m 986- 0004 - 003 -00 \ p i \\ BOO / i FNANG JA LIN T EXCHANGE AGRFEME 6582 TASSCA 9 ROAD 1 I P--484 ,8! \ % / / !.' � DUBLIN, CA 94568 ___ J APN 986 -0004- 005 -05 LOGGIA \� /// � _ NI NORTH 0' 1.5' YO' 60' PIA ®esign Resources, Inc. VTM.6 Planning Ar Engineering i Surveying 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA TASSAJARA ROAD PAINTED LANE \� TRACT MAP NO. 8102 _ VESTING TENTATIVE MAP - - - - -- -- (IN PROGRESS) I \ / STANDARD PACIFIC CORPORATION I +1 6847 TASSAJARA ROAD DUBLIN, CA 94568 APN 985 - 0002 - 001. -03 \ T \ EX PAINTED SFWIPJ(JG� BRADDOCK AND LOGAN SERVICES, INC. �\ / \ - _ 6 t0 OBE -THERS ITYd.A \ 6861 TASSAJARA ROAD \ \ \ \\ N' REMOVED 111 DUBLIN, CA 94568 APN 985 -0001 - 001 -01 — \`\ EX PAINTED STRIPING BY OTHERS ITYPI / NG rE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE / 41 40 39 �5a EASTERN HALF OF TASSAJARA 42 ROAD TO BE DESIGNED AND p' CONSTRUCTED BY OTHERS. / PaovasED PAlmeo qq STRIPING / / ✓% � � .D. cl LE ._ � r � 35 36 37 38 \ / / 1 47 2 p pPOr 3 34 29 P 33 32 31 / \ _ I [E _ 9 10 11 12 7 �13 -- \� / i4 21 16 20 go 17 18 19 SINGH FA& PROPERTIES 7740 TASSAJAI DUBLIN, CA APN 986 -00( NORTH 0" 30" 60" I20' j T a a �o V t J t DRIVE TI _ R — TASSAJA CONFIGURA TION JUNE 14, 2013 REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 \ —D BOB— AND SANDY BESHAY 6833 TASSAJARA ROAD DUBLIN, CA 94568 APN 985 - 0055 -003 -02104 o o SO I'D � o i✓' TEMPORARY ' \ /J \ S SILVERA RANCH 28 \ ' s IMPORTANT NOTE Mp4F PROPOSED GRADING, CULVERT,._ HEADWALL BOULDER DROP AND _ - RlP RAP SHOWN IN T AREA I !/ SBUMED TO BE CONSTRUCTED, 25 P PROPOS\8A \ AND LIMIT OF \ IMPROVEMEM1R \ \ o OBO a 24 — U 22 \\ \ CITY Or DUBLIN 100 CIVIC PLAZA ../ t DUBLIN, CA 94568 /I yl APN 986-0004 -003 -00 '(PARt OF EXCHANGE ZNiif ENT) C) CHANG S. LIN 6582 TASSAJARA ROAD DUBLIN, CA 94566 APN 986 -0004- 005 -05 J I� L_jvE�q AFA t \1 � 1 P a. PIADesign Resources-, Inc_ V TM 7 Planning Ar Engineering i Surveying • 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 4� % TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA 550 5d0 530 U CHANG C "` o 520 APN 986 -0004- 005 -05 n m 510 6' WIDE CONCRETE 500 PUBLIC TRAIL 490 EXIST B`\ SILVERA RANCH 480 GRADE R/W R/W R/W 470. PARCEL ., \ - -_ 460 �- DAYLIGHi� ►A R W R� o FLIT- R/W ¢ 550 550 540 B`\ SILVERA RANCH R/W R/W R/W / 4d `4 j14�✓ TRANS FE 1 44,43 I pg PA \ 7 PARCEL ., \ POPS ,554 3 3738 1 z d7 540 `N �- RP 3 256 55p)P 'd X29 �, \ \\ oo \ T� 2a ✓ TP ,9 L�RT -1 C. �R 32 2 ✓ ? g 9 70�j1111 131a ,E 11'2 ✓ '.' 15Y6 /flrl 920 J-�EI, \ \ 5 C' CIRCLE ✓ � PpRLEI C \ \� o TASSAJARq GREEK I PARKING .A 510 SITE CROSS SECTION KEY MAP PARCEL C' CHANG S LIN APN 9660004- 005 -15 NGT TO SCALE SITE CROSS SECTIONS JUNE 14, 2013 550 R W FLIT- R/W ¢ 550 550 540 PARCEL '0 R/W R/W R/W R/W R/W 530 540 530 w i TASSAJARA ROAD Q LOT 42 C' CIRCLE �- LOT 36 HYDROMOOIFICAi.ON /DETENTION BASIN ,� PARKING "C' CIRCLE 510 LOT 19 PARCEL C' CHANG S LIN APN 9660004- 005 -15 530 U 520 U. 30 p OZ � O ____O. _ SOUND WALL MAX BOTTOM ELEV 465.0 ---- - - - - -- BOTTOM ELEV 456.0 - - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- - -- EXIST /T\ `\ 460 470 DAYLIGHT / / WIDE CONCRETE RED SPAECE ¢ 3 520 5f0 w � EX /ST apm a �' PLANS FOR DETAIL EARTHiONE SPLIT PROPOSED 450 440 GRADE �� 1 \\`` FACE BLOCK WALL O 4FACEHBaOCK e�oJ GRADE1 ��/ _ DS IGHT� -- -3 \ WALLS 490 ¢ 480 -DAYL - - -I \ `EA�T"Ll` -_ DAYLIGHT EXIST GRADE 480 470 - FAL BIO -$WALE �f� _ _Z - - -- - 4]0 460_-- -�� \\\\ 460 410 _ 6' W /DE CONCRETE 440 PUBLIC TRAIL 440 430 - -- -430 420 -- - -- 420 410 400 410 00 SITE CROSS SECTION A - A PARCEL 'C R/W R/W R/w R/W EXISr GRADE R/W PRIVATE OPEN SPACE (OT 13 LOT f4 LOT 15 'C' CIRCLE LO] 33 LOT 32 -- OT 31 -1(L 30_ LOT 19 C' CIRCLE OPEN PARCEL C' I O L ___� > PRIVA rE PROPOSfO EXIST Y - -Y SPACE LOT 21 B/O -$WALE ,$f� GRADE4 GRADE/ L� i p\ OPEN SPACE EARTHTONE SPLIT FACE BLOCK WALL PROPOSED GRADE \ 6' WIDE RAIT ]E� PUBLIC TRAIL SITE CROSS SECTION B - B SCALE H:V f" = 40' REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 SCALE I : i' _ 40' PIA ®esign Resources, Inc. V TM 8 Planning Ar Engineering i Surveying • 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 R W FLIT- R/W ¢ 550 TRANSFER PARCEL PARCEL '0 530 OPEN SPACE O � 520 wz HYDROMOOIFICAi.ON /DETENTION BASIN ,� ¢ Q 510 w� 3 BIG - RETENTION BASIN #3 MAX. 100 YR FLOOD ELEV 46586 MAX HYDROMOD ELEV 463.27 4 O 500 � O ____O. _ MAX BOTTOM ELEV 465.0 ---- - - - - -- BOTTOM ELEV 456.0 - - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- - -- - DA YLIGHT� 460 470 DAYLIGHT / / WIDE CONCRETE 6' HIGH DECOR LIVE FENCE (SEE LANDSCAPE E OT GRADE 460 DAYOGHr PUBLIC ERAIL PLANS FOR DETAIL EARTHiONE SPLIT 5) 450 440 -- FACE BLOCK WALL 430 420 410 400 SCALE I : i' _ 40' PIA ®esign Resources, Inc. V TM 8 Planning Ar Engineering i Surveying • 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA LOT AREA CHART LEGEND LOT LOT AREA 1 5,163t SF 2 4,280! SF 3 4,017t SF 4 6,534. OF 5 6,772- SF 6 4,4022 OF 7 3,735% SF 8 3,735± SF 9 4,035, SF 10 4,181± SF 11 3,857- SF 12 3,735± SF 13 3,858E SF 14 4,140! SF 15 3,931, SF 16 3,879! SF 17 4,283! SF 18 4,632, SF 19 4,6702 SF 20 4,114! SF 21 3,735+ SF 22 4,132, SF 23 4,599- SF 24 5,369, SF 25 3,690L SF 26 4,317E SF 27 4.590 SF 28 5.828! SF 29 4,617± SF 30 3,982! SF 31 4,668, SF 32 5,093, SF 33 4,6991 SF 34 3,858- SF 35 4,605- SF 36 5,425, SF 37 4,739- SF .Y& 4,728+ SF 39 4,676, SF 40 3,773- SF 41 3, 6702 SF 42 3,670E SF 43 3,766, OF 44 4,145, SF 45 4,600± SF 46 4,371. SF 47 4,176- SF 48 4,532,- SF PARCEL AREA CHART PROPOSED ITEM EXISTING PURPOSE SUBDIVISION BOUNDARY PLANS FOR DETAILS) LOT LINE - - CENTER LINE - - - - EASEMENT LINE - - APPROXIMATE EXISTING FENCE XISTING LIMITS OF CIVIL GRADING OVERHEAD WIRES FOR WIDENING OF TASSAJARA ROAD UNDERGROUND WIRES.n - - - - - - CONCRETE LINED DITCH 93 SANITARY SEWER LINE - HOA PRIVATE OPEN SPACE (BETWEEN LOTS 4 -51 STORM DRAIN LINE w WATER LINE - D RECYCLED WATER BOA PRIVATE OPEN SPACE (BETWEEN LOTS 25 -27) CREEK FLOW LINE Y FIRE HYDRANT » O SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE � lJ OR ❑8 OR E=1 STORM GRAIN CATCH BASIN 0.91, AC JOINT POLE W /GUY ANCHOR �;- ELECTROLIER /STREET LAMP) 69W BOTTOM OF RETAINING WALL SSW BOTTOM OF SOUNDWALL CB CATCH BASIN CO" CONCRETE ESMT of ESM'T EASEMENT EX or EXIST EXISTING EVAE EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT F/C or FC FACE OF CURB FL FLOW LINE GRAD GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT DISTRICT HOA HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION MIN. MINIMUM M -M MONUMENT TO MONUMENT BMW OVERHEAD WIRE P/L or PL PROPERTY LINE RAE PAV PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT PAVEMENT PROP PROPOSED PUE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT R/W or RW RIGHTOFWAY PC TOP OF CURB TRW TOP OF RETAINING WALL TSW TOP OF SOUNOWALL SD STORM DRAIN LINE SOE STORM DRAIN EASEMENT SDMH STORM DRAIN MANHOLE SS SANITARY SEWER SSE SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT PARCEL AREA PURPOSE TRAIL PLANS FOR DETAILS) RI DEDICATED TO CITY OF DUBLIN - 0.51± AC FOR WIDENING OF TASSAJARA ROAD APPROXIMATE EXISTING FENCE XISTING R DEDICATED TO CITY OF DUBLIN 0111 AC FOR WIDENING OF TASSAJARA ROAD A 1, 96L AC PRIVATE STREET R/W B 0.05: AC HOA PRIVATE OPEN SPACE (BETWEEN LOTS 4 -51 C 2. LIE AC BOA PRIVATE OPEN SPACE !BEHIND LOTS 5 - 281 D S, o5,, AC BOA PRIVATE OPEN SPACE (BETWEEN LOTS 25 -27) E 0.54- AC OPEN SPACE (BASIN) 20Y. MlN CULVERT /REPAIR BY OTHERS), PER EXCHANGE TRANSFER 0.91, AC AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF DUBLIN alt'y FINISH GRADE NOTE: DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE MINIMUM TYP. SLOPE ROUNDING DETAIL HYDROMODIFICATION/ DETENTION BASIN ELEV: 4560 RETAINING WALL AT H YDROMODIFICA TION BASIN ALONG TASSAJARA RIT'.L- DECORATIVE FENCE /BARRIER ISEE LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR DETAILS/ NOT TI L. -W 19' MIN. BW TO GARAGE 15' MIN BIN TO A' TO TRENCH GRAIN MIN GARAGE FINISHED FLOOR 2Oi -1 -5% MIN- 25Y. TRENCH DRAIN- PAD TYPICAL DRIVEWAY TRENCH DRAIN SECTION LOTS 6 THROUGR 26 SCALE: 1" , 10' LEGEND AND DETAILS JUNE 14, 2013 REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 FACE OF FACE OF BUILDING BUILDING g 6' HIGH DECORATIVE FENCE ISEE LANDSCAPE TRAIL PLANS FOR DETAILS) 4B" RAILING DECORATIVE 2X E IJ1 O APPROXIMATE EXISTING FENCE XISTING 6:5' o k _I_ GRADE 0 PEDESTRIAN TRAIL DETAIL CL OF SIDE NOT TO SCALE HYDROMODIFICATION/ DETENTION BASIN ELEV: 4560 RETAINING WALL AT H YDROMODIFICA TION BASIN ALONG TASSAJARA RIT'.L- DECORATIVE FENCE /BARRIER ISEE LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR DETAILS/ NOT TI L. -W 19' MIN. BW TO GARAGE 15' MIN BIN TO A' TO TRENCH GRAIN MIN GARAGE FINISHED FLOOR 2Oi -1 -5% MIN- 25Y. TRENCH DRAIN- PAD TYPICAL DRIVEWAY TRENCH DRAIN SECTION LOTS 6 THROUGR 26 SCALE: 1" , 10' LEGEND AND DETAILS JUNE 14, 2013 REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 FACE OF FACE OF BUILDING BUILDING 6' HIGH DECORATIVE FENCE ISEE LANDSCAPE e PLANS FOR DETAILS) u 3' FLAT FINISN�G 3PIDMAM HYDROMODIFICATION/ DETENTION BASIN ELEV: 4560 RETAINING WALL AT H YDROMODIFICA TION BASIN ALONG TASSAJARA RIT'.L- DECORATIVE FENCE /BARRIER ISEE LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR DETAILS/ NOT TI L. -W 19' MIN. BW TO GARAGE 15' MIN BIN TO A' TO TRENCH GRAIN MIN GARAGE FINISHED FLOOR 2Oi -1 -5% MIN- 25Y. TRENCH DRAIN- PAD TYPICAL DRIVEWAY TRENCH DRAIN SECTION LOTS 6 THROUGR 26 SCALE: 1" , 10' LEGEND AND DETAILS JUNE 14, 2013 REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2013 REVISED: MAY 22, 2014 REVISED: JULY 4, 2014 FACE OF FACE OF BUILDING BUILDING TYPICAL SIDE YARD RETAINING WALL & FENCE SECTION DIMENSIONS WILL VARY DEPENDING ON THE TYPE AND THICKNESS NOT TO SCALE IIE STUCCO WOOD. BRICK OR STONE TRIM) OF THE BUILDING SIDING, -MH RIM--1621! EXISTING GRADE lTO BE FIELD VERIAEDI \ rGRATE-446.0! )RM DRAIN FROM - ENERGY DISSIPATING IYOROMOD BASIN 1/4 TON LOOSE TO OUTFALL ROCK RIP RAP OUTFACE BOX STRUCTURE PVC LOW FLOW PIPE WITH "TEE" AT THE END HYDROMODIFICA TION/ DETENTION BASIN OUTFALL PIADesign Resources., Inc_ V TM 9 Planning jr Engineering i Surveying • 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 3 -11 1% " 2 -0" CL OF SIDE YARD SWALE 7 3' -B il4" CLEAR 0 3"o 6fa- CL OF SIDE e � 4" X 6' FENCE POST YARD SWALE 1" X 6" FENCE FACE OF 6" BOTTOM FOUNDATION /-P, LATE 20Y. MlN 4" CONCRETE SLAB a FACE OF ¢ O FOUNDATION 3" AREA DRAINPIPE (TO FRONT CURBI 20% MIN SON MIN 2- X 12" RETAINING BOARDS \\ CONCRETE SLAB 3" AREA DRAIN PIPE ITC FRONT C1181 CONCRETE PIER TYPICAL SIDE YARD RETAINING WALL & FENCE SECTION DIMENSIONS WILL VARY DEPENDING ON THE TYPE AND THICKNESS NOT TO SCALE IIE STUCCO WOOD. BRICK OR STONE TRIM) OF THE BUILDING SIDING, -MH RIM--1621! EXISTING GRADE lTO BE FIELD VERIAEDI \ rGRATE-446.0! )RM DRAIN FROM - ENERGY DISSIPATING IYOROMOD BASIN 1/4 TON LOOSE TO OUTFALL ROCK RIP RAP OUTFACE BOX STRUCTURE PVC LOW FLOW PIPE WITH "TEE" AT THE END HYDROMODIFICA TION/ DETENTION BASIN OUTFALL PIADesign Resources., Inc_ V TM 9 Planning jr Engineering i Surveying • 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA PRELIMINARY STORMWA TER CONTROL PLAN JUNE 14, 2013 REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2093 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2093 REVISED: MAY 22, 2094 REVISED: JULY 4, 2094 - - - -- ^ \ �� STANDARD PACIFIC CORPORATION / ✓ AO ro \ 6847 TASSAJARA ROAD - - - - -- O`+ DUBLIN, CA 94568 L APN 985 - 0002- 00I -OT TRACT MAP N0. 8102 � � � � � � o�LE � �y VESTING TENTATIVE MAP PqP p �� (IN PROGRESS) RA OAD TEMPORARY / jlr R / c eERM TASSA�A =� III OROMODIF� \ /. nFrF"rinu "4 ICAT /0N / au xA BRADDOCK AND LOGAN SERVICES, INC. 6861 TASSAJARA ROAD DUBLIN, CA 94568 APN 985 -0001- 001 -01 PROPOSED 6pPRICADE AND CIMIt fiF�IMPROVEMENT$�`\ \\\\.Y I4 FEMA SINGH FAMILY PROPERTIES, LI 7740 TASSAJARA ROAD DUBLIN, CA 94568 APN 986 -0004 -001 i / A /PROP / P1 i 4 � i NORTH _ DRAINAGE AREAS 1" = 60' 0, 30" 60, 120 /�BIO- REJENTRdA/. - -- BASIN i{A -- - IBA_SR�/2.. `,28 . CIRCLE 35 26 30 1 B10- SWALE ;f t NOT TO SCALE T � � - MYOROMODIf1CATlON/ DETENTION BAB" 14 \ LEGEND AREA FLOWS TO 810—SWALE #1 AREA FLOWS TO BIO— RETENTION BASIN #2 AREAS FLOWS TO BIO— RETENTION BASIN #3 DAREA FLOWS TO HYDROMODIFICATION/ DETENTION BASIN #4 ,.: LEGEND IMPERVIOUS AREAS D BIORETENTION AREA D PERVIOUS AREAS INDICATES DMA (DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREA) PIADesign Resources, T 10 Planning i M Engineering i Surveying • 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS EROSION CONTROL PLAN JUNE 14, 2013 CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA REVISED: AUGUST 22, 2013 REVISED: DECEMBER 20, 2093 REVISED: MAY 22, 2094 REVISED: JULY 4, 2094 .� EMAD BOUTROS AND SANDY BESHAY " _ 6&T3 TASSAJARA ROAD ' DUBLIN, CA 94568 APN 985- 0055- 003 -02/04 TRACT MAP NO. 8102 VESTING TENTATIVE MAP (IN PROGRESS) \ / - V SrANDARD PACIFIC CORPORATION \ - - - VLOP 6847 TASSAJARA ROAD CA 45 APN 985 - 0002 9 0068 03 ' -. - - -_- _ -. - -_ OAD 7FMP. AC BERM - - fASSA�ARA R FIBER SILVERA RANCH FIBER ROLL _.y,.... PROPOSED " BARRICADE AND (TYPICA LIMIT OF IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTION STORAGE k SANITARY 1ACI1100 ' ' SILT FENCE 39 ��' V (TYPICAL) CONSTRUCTION ACCESS I.• CATCH BASIN AND WASH AREA N / PROTECTION 28 \ y (TYPICAL) t. BRADDOCK AND LOGAN SER17CE5, INC. . / 45 G, OPOLE 6861 TASSAJARA ROAD i:' x ��u`�'si s 27 DUBLIN, CA 9/568 FIBER ROLL APN 985 -000I- 051 -0I (TYPICAL) 46 �. 37 36 35 36 `',SPACE 20 47 (mrcay 34 29 �� 25 - 9 q 3 -C ONSTRUCnav 30 \ \ / ffiARER g9 OPEN 32 31 *� 24 ` /.x.o 4P � SPACE ndMT r. � 33 , u. �.r, sir. GAOLE ini I I 13 i '( 11 12 z ��., y; 22 CITY OF DuBUN 1U �� / 6 9 CA BASIN BASIN z x SILT PENCE - \ I00 CIVIC PLAZA 6 7 (ryl j 14 15 �� =��,x,�,x`� 21 (TYPICAL) Du9uN, ca 9/S6a / _I 16 20 mot` - -- -- - EXCHANGE AGREE- ) APN 986-0004-003-00 \ —(PART OF ENi F. x - - -- +x FIBER MOLL 17 16 PROPOSED BARRICADE AND SILT FENCE _ LIMIT OF IMPROVEMENTS \ `z, ------------ CHANG S L N 6582 TASSAJARA ROAD _ r OU9L/N, CA 94568 i APN 986 -0001- 005 -05 7f SINGH FAMILY / 2 .1 1 D �� r ._ \ q&'EK - PROPERTIES, LP. 7740 TASSAJARA ROAD - 1. / • -� J i ( -- �'. — D/ / 1 DUBLIN, CA 94568 - S APN 986- 0004 -OOI t _- w� i N LEGEND (1NORTN 1" = 60' 0, 30" 60, 120' SILT FENCE FIBER ROLL ❑❑ CATCH BASIN PROTECTION CONSTRUCTION ACCESS 8 WASH AREA CONSTRUCTION STORAGE 6 SANITARY FACILITIES PIA ®esign Resources, Inc_ V TM 11 Planning i Engineering i Surveying • 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150 Walnut Creek, California 94598 -2635 TEL (925) 210 -9300 RESOLUTION NO. XX -14 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN * * * * * * * * * ** APPROVING A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT AND VESTING TENTATIVE MAP 8133 FOR THE TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS (FREDRICH/VARGAS) PROJECT (PLPA- 2012 - 00051) WHEREAS, the Applicant, Tim Lewis Communities and STL Company LLC, proposes to create a development of 48 single - family detached homes on an 11.11 acre site known as the Frederick and Vargas properties. The proposed development and applications are collectively known as the "Project "; and WHEREAS, the application includes a General Plan /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment to change the land use designations from: Medium -High Density Residential and Neighborhood Commercial and combining the existing Medium Density Residential to a combination of Medium Density Residential (6.16 acres) and Open Space (3.06 acres) and 1.89 acres of associated road right -of -way; and WHEREAS, the application also includes Planned Development rezoning with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 8133; and WHEREAS, the Project also includes a CEQA Addendum; and WHEREAS, the Project Site consists of two existing parcels, the approximately 7.93 gross acre Fredrich property located at 6960 Tassajara Road and the approximately 5 gross acre Vargas property at 7020 Tassajara Road (APNs 986- 0004 - 002 -01 and 986- 0004 - 002 -03); and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State guidelines and City environmental regulations, require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared. To comply with CEQA, the City prepared an addendum to the Eastern Dublin EIR and two prior Mitigated Negative Declarations for the Project; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report dated July 22, 2014 was submitted to the City of Dublin Planning Commission recommending City Council approval of the Project, including the Site Development Review request and Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8133; and WHEREAS, on July 22, 2014, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and adopted Resolution 14 -37 recommending that the City Council approve the CEQA addendum, Resolution 14- 38 recommending that the City Council approve the requested General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan amendments, Resolution 14 -39 recommending that the City Council approve the Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan consistent with the requested land use amendments and Resolution 14 -40 recommending that the City Council approve the requested Site Development Review and Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8133. All of the above resolutions are incorporated herein by reference and are available for review at City Hall during normal business hours; and Page 1 of 36 WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the City Council approve the Project, including Site Development Review and Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8133; and WHEREAS, on , 2014, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard. Following the public hearing, the City Council approved Resolution XX -14 approving the proposed CEQA addendum, Resolution XX -14 approving amendments to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; and adopted Ordinance XX -14 approving a Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan for the Tassajara Highlands (Fredrich /Vargas) Project. The above resolutions and ordinance are incorporated herein by reference and are available for review at City Hall during normal business hours; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use its independent judgment and considered the addendum and prior CEQA documents, all said reports, recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin hereby makes the following findings and determinations regarding the proposed Site Development Review for a development of 48 single - family detached homes on an 11.11 acre site known as the Frederick and Vargas properties located at 6960 and 7020 Tassajara Road: Site Development Review: A. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of Chapter 8.104 of the Zoning Ordinance, with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plans and design guidelines because: 1) the project will be consistent with the architectural character and scale of development in the area; 2) the project will provide a needed and attractive housing opportunity; 3) the project is consistent with the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designations of Medium Density Residential and Open Space; and 4) the project complies with the development standards established in the Planned Development ordinance for the Project. B. The proposal is consistent with the provisions of Title 8, Zoning Ordinance because: 1) the project contributes to orderly, attractive, and harmonious site and structural development compatible with the intended use, proposed subdivision, and the surrounding properties; and 2) the project complies with the development regulations set forth in the Zoning Ordinance where applicable and as adopted for PD PLPA 2012 - 00051. C. The design of the project is appropriate to the City, the vicinity, surrounding properties, and the lot in which the project is proposed because: 1) the size and mass of the proposed houses is consistent with other existing and approved residential development in the surrounding area; 2) the project will contribute to housing opportunities as a complement to the surrounding neighborhoods; and 3) the project will serve the current buyer profile and market segment anticipated for this area. Page 2 of 36 D. The subject site is suitable for the type and intensity of the approved development because: 1) the Project development envelope is tailored to protect the creek areas and avoids steeper slopes, which are designated for open space; 2) the Project will implement all applicable prior adopted mitigation measures; and 3) the project site is fully served by public services and existing roadways. E. Impacts to existing slopes and topographic features are addressed because: 1) the Project is required to comply with all previously adopted mitigation measures designed to ensure slope stability; 2) grading on the site will ensure that the site drains away from any structures and complies with the Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements; 3) most of the steeper areas of the site are in designated open space; and 4) retaining walls will be constructed as required to support grade differentials between building envelopes, and setback or right -of -way areas. F. Architectural considerations including the character, scale and quality of the design, site layout, the architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, screening of unsightly uses, lighting, building materials and colors and similar elements result in a project that is harmonious with its surroundings and compatible with other developments in the vicinity because: 1) the Project provides a high degree of design and landscaping to complement existing uses in the area.; 2) the structures reflect the architectural styles and development standards in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan for residential buildings in the area; 3) the materials proposed will be consistent with the requirements of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; and 4) the color and materials proposed will be coordinated among the structures on site. G. Landscape considerations, including the location, type, size, color, texture and coverage of plant materials, and similar elements have been incorporated into the project to ensure visual relief, adequate screening and an attractive environment for the public because: 1) generous landscaping is proposed to buffer the proposed noise barrier, providing an attractive view from Tassajara Road; and 2) landscaping in common areas is coordinated through a series of sidewalks; 3) common area open space has been provided in the form of two internal private open space areas; and 4) the project will conform to the requirements of the Stage 2 Development Plan and the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. H. The site has been adequately designed to ensure the proper circulation for bicyclist, pedestrians, and automobiles because: 1) the project site provides opportunities for pedestrian and bicycle circulation; 2) the project will provide a public path along the westerly and southerly open space areas of the site. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin hereby makes the following findings and determinations regarding Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8133: Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8133 A. The proposed Vesting Tentative tract Map 8133 is consistent with the intent of applicable subdivision regulations and related ordinances for the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. B. The design and improvements of the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8133 are consistent with the General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, as amended, as they Page 3 of 36 relate to the subject property in that it is a subdivision for implementation consistent with adjacent residential neighborhoods designated for this type of development. C. The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8133 is consistent with the Planned Development zoning approved for Project through the Planned Development zoning adopted for this project and therefore consistent with the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. D. The properties created by the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8133 will have adequate access to major constructed or planned improvements as part of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. E. Project design, architecture, and concept have been integrated with topography of the project site created by the Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8133 to incorporate water quality measures and minimize overgrading and extensive use of retaining walls. Therefore, the proposed subdivision is physically suitable for the type and intensity of development proposed. F. The Mitigation Measures adopted with the program EIR for the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and with the prior MNDs would be applicable as appropriate for addressing or mitigating any potential environmental impacts of the Project. G. The proposed Vesting Tentative Map 8133 will not result in environmental damage or substantially injure fish or wildlife or their habitat or cause public health concerns subject to Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval. H. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, or access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The City Engineer has reviewed the map and title report and has not found any conflicting easements of this nature. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council hereby approves the Site Development Review for a development of 48 single - family detached homes on an 11.11 acre site known as the Fredrich and Vargas properties located at 6960 and 7020 Tassajara Road., as shown on plans prepared by KTGY, Inc., P/A Design Resources, Inc., Ripley Design Group dated received July 10, 2014 and subject to the conditions included below. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council hereby approves Vesting Tentative Map 8133 prepared by KTGY, Inc., P/A Design Resources, Inc., Ripley Design Group dated received July 10, 2014 and subject to the conditions included below. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to the issuance of building permits or establishment of use, and shall be subject to Planning Department review and approval. The following codes represent those departments /agencies responsible for monitoring compliance of the conditions of approval. FPL.I Planning, FB1 Building, FPO1 Police, FPWI Public Works FP &CS1 Parks & Community Services, FADMI Administration /City Attorney, FFINI Finance, FF1 Alameda County Fire Department, FDSRI Dublin San Ramon Services District, FCO1 Alameda County Department of Environmental Health, FZ71 Zone 7. Page 4 of 36 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Agency Prior to: Source PLANNING GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. Approval. This Site Development Review approval PL Ongoing Planning is for the Tassajara Highlands (PLPA- 2012 - 00051). This approval shall be as generally depicted and indicated on the project plans prepared by KTGY, Inc., P/A Design Resources, Inc., Ripley Design Group dated received July 10, 2014, on file in the Community Development Department, and other plans, text, and diagrams relating to this Site Development Review, and as specified as the following Conditions of Approval for this project. This approval is subject to adopting the CEQA addendum, and companion General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments and related Planned Development Zoning. 2. Permit Expiration. Construction or use shall PL One Year DMC commence within one (1) year of Site Development After Effective 8.96.020. Review Permit approval or the Permit shall lapse Date D and become null and void. If there is a dispute as to whether the Permit has expired, the City may hold a noticed public hearing to determine the matter. Such a determination may be processed concurrently with revocation proceedings in appropriate circumstances. If a Permit expires, a new application must be made and processed according to the requirements of this Ordinance. 3. Time Extension. The original approving decision- PL Prior to DMC maker may, upon the Applicant's written request for Expiration 8.96.020. an extension of approval prior to expiration, upon Date E the determination that all Conditions of Approval remain adequate and all applicable findings of approval will continue to be met, grant an extension of the approval for a period not to exceed six (6) months. All time extension requests shall be noticed and a public hearing shall be held before the original hearing body. 4. Compliance. The Applicant/Property Owner shall PL Ongoing DMC operate this use in compliance with the Conditions 8.96.020. of Approval of this Site Development Review F Permit, the approved plans and the regulations established in the Zoning Ordinance. Any violation Page 5 of 36 Page 6 of 36 of the terms or conditions specified may be subject to enforcement action. 5. Revocation of Permit. The Site Development PL Ongoing DMC Review approval shall be revocable for cause in 8.96.020.1 accordance with Section 8.96.020.1 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Any violation of the terms or conditions of this permit shall be subject to citation. 6. Requirements and Standard Conditions. The Various Building Standard Applicant/ Developer shall comply with applicable Permit City of Dublin Fire Prevention Bureau, Dublin Public Issuance Works Department, Dublin Building Department, Dublin Police Services, Alameda County Flood Control District Zone 7, Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority, Alameda County Public and Environmental Health, Dublin San Ramon Services District and the California Department of Health Services requirements and standard conditions. Prior to issuance of building permits or the installation of any improvements related to this project, the Developer shall supply written statements from each such agency or department to the Planning Department, indicating that all applicable conditions required have been or will be met. 7. Required Permits. Developer shall obtain all PW Building Standard permits required by other agencies including, but Permit not limited to Alameda County Flood Control and Issuance Water Conservation District Zone 7, California Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Caltrans and provide copies of the permits to the Public Works Department. 8. Fees. Applicant/Developer shall pay all applicable Various Building Various fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance, Permit including, but not limited to, Planning fees, Building Issuance fees, Traffic Impact Fees, TVTC fees, Dublin San Ramon Services District fees, Public Facilities fees, Dublin Unified School District School Impact fees, Fire Facilities Impact fees, Alameda County Flood and Water Conservation District (Zone 7) Drainage and Water Connection fees; or any other fee that may be adopted and applicable. 9. Indemnification. The Developer shall defend, ADM Ongoing Administra indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Dublin and Lion /City its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, Attorney action, or proceeding against the City of Dublin or Page 6 of 36 Page 7 of 36 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, Planning Commission, City Council, Community Development Director, Zoning Administrator, or any other department, committee, or agency of the City to the extent such actions are brought within the time period required by Government Code Section 66499.37 or other applicable law; provided, however, that the Developer's duty to so defend, indemnify, and hold harmless shall be subject to the City's promptly notifying the Developer of any said claim, action, or proceeding and the City's full cooperation in the defense of such actions or proceedings. 10. Clarification of Conditions. In the event that there PW Ongoing Public needs to be clarification to the Conditions of Works Approval, the Director of Community Development and the City Engineer have the authority to clarify the intent of these Conditions of Approval to the Developer without going to a public hearing. The Director of Community Development and the City Engineer also have the authority to make minor modifications to these conditions without going to a public hearing in order for the Developer to fulfill needed improvements or mitigations resulting from impacts to this project. 11. Clean -up. The Applicant/Developer shall be PL Ongoing Planning responsible for clean -up & disposal of project related trash to maintain a safe, clean and litter -free site. 12. Modifications. Modifications or changes to this PL Ongoing DMC Site Development Review approval may be 8.104.100 considered by the Community Development Director if the modifications or changes proposed comply with Section 8.104.100 of the Zoning Ordinance. 13. Lighting. Lighting is required over exterior PL, PW Building Municipal entrances /doors. Exterior lighting used after daylight Permit Code hours shall be adequate to provide for security Issuance needs. PLANNING — PROJECT SPECIFIC 14. Public Art Contribution. Developer shall fulfill the PL Prior to first Project Public Art Contribution through the provision of in- occupancy Specific lieu fees. Prior to the recordation of the final map for the project, Developer shall obtain the total building valuation of the project from the Building Official, and the value of the applicant's required public art Page 7 of 36 Page 8 of 36 project shall be determined by the Community Development Director. 15. Inclusionary Housing: This project is subject to the PL Recordation Project City's Inclusionary Zoning Regulations (Chapter of the first specific 8.68 of the Municipal Code). Under the terms of the final map regulations, the Developer has a 6 unit affordable housing obligation, which may be satisfied by several means. Developer proposed an "alternative method of compliance" under Section 8.68.040.A to satisfy its 6 unit affordable housing obligation, which is subject to City Council approval. In particular, the Developer has proposed to pay a fee of $600,000 in lieu of construction of the 6 affordable housing units. The Developer shall make the payment 60 days after the recordation of the final map. If the Developer fails to make the payment when due, the City may withhold further approvals and authorizations for the Project, and may elect to revoke the approval of the alternative method of compliance and apply the Regulation's standard requirements. 16. Comprehensive Biological Resources PL Issuance of Project Management Plan. Prior to the issuance of grading grading specific permits, the Applicant shall have a qualified biologist permit prepare a Comprehensive Biological Resources Management Plan to compile the various biological mitigation measures contained in the previous CEQA documents in a logical manner. Completion of this Plan will ensure that all previous applicable measures are logically complied to eliminate overlap and duplication and appropriately monitored at the appropriate stage of the proposed project. Therefore, no new or more severe impacts with respect to candidate, sensitive or special- status species would occur than have been analyzed in the three previous CEQA documents. Comprehensive Biological Management Plan shall also address impacts and updates to previous mitigation measures addressing riparian habitat and wetlands. No new or more severe impacts would occur than have been previously analyzed with respect to this topic. 17. Heritage Tree Ordinance. Prior to the issuance of PL Issuance of Project Grading permits, the Applicant shall apply for a grading Specific Heritage Tree Removal Permit, if needed, in permit accordance with the plans provided herein and in accordance with the requirements of the Heritage Tree Ordinance. 18. Street Lights. Street lights selected for this PL In conjunction Project subdivison shall have the ability to accept cut -off with approval Specific Page 8 of 36 Page 9 of 36 shielding to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. of improvement plans LANDSCAPING 19. Final Landscape Construction Documents. The PL Issuance of Standard final planting and irrigation design shall: building permits a. Utilize plant material that will be capable of healthy growth within the given range of soil and climate. b. Provide landscape screening that is of a height and density so that it provides a positive visual impact within three years from the time of planting. c. Provide that 75% of the proposed trees on the site are a minimum of 15 gallons in size, and at least 50% of the proposed shrubs on the site are a minimum of 5 gallons in size. d. Provide concrete curbing at the edges of all planters and paving surfaces where applicable. Final landscape construction documents shall: a. Provide specific landscape and irrigation plans for non - typical and corner lots. This requirement includes any lot that varies more than five feet in width from the typical plan. b. Specify that all cut and fill slopes graded and not constructed by September 1, of any given year, are hydroseeded with perennial or native grasses and flowers, and that stockpiles of loose soil existing on that date are hydroseeded in a similar manner. c. Specify that the area under the drip line of all existing oaks, walnuts, etc., which are to be saved are fenced during construction and grading operations and no activity is permitted under them that will cause soil compaction or damage to the tree, if applicable. d. Include a warranty from the owners and /or contractors to warrant all trees, shrubs and ground cover and the irrigation system for one year from the date of project acceptance by the City. 20. Maintenance Agreement. A permanent PL Issuance of Standard maintenance agreement on all common area the building Page 9 of 36 Page 10 of 36 landscaping will be required from the owner insuring permit regular irrigation, fertilization and weed abatement. 21. Tree Preservation. Tree preservation techniques, PL Issuance of Standard and guarantees, if applicable, shall be reviewed and the building approved by the Dublin Planning Division prior to permit the issuance of the building permit. 22. Street Trees and Accent Trees. Street trees shall PL Issuance of Standard be spaced between 30 and 50 feet on center or the building approximately one per typical lot. Corner lots shall permit provide a minimum of two trees and a maximum of three street trees per lot. Generally, each lot will provide one accent tree, space permitting. 23. Water Efficient Landscaping Regulations. The PL Issuance of Standard Applicant shall meet all requirements of the City of the building Dublin's Water- Efficient Landscaping Regulations, permit Section 8.88 of the Dublin Municipal Code. 24. Bio- Retention Areas. The designed bio- retention PL Issuance of Standard areas shall be enhanced to create an open space the building landscape that is landscape attractive, conserves permit water, and requires minimal maintenance. 25. Plant Clearances. All trees planted shall meet the PL Issuance of Standard following clearances: the building a. 6' from the face of building walls or roof eaves permit b. 7' from fire hydrants, storm drains, sanitary sewers and /or gas lines C. 5' from top of wing of driveways, mailboxes, water, telephone and /or electrical mains d. 15' from stop signs, street or curb sign returns e. 20' from either side of a streetlight 26. Irrigation System Warranty. The Applicant shall PL Issuance of Standard warranty the irrigation system and planting for a the building period of one year from the date of installation. The permit Applicant shall submit for the Dublin Community Development Department approval, a landscape maintenance plan for the Common Area landscape including a reasonable estimate of expenses for the first five years. 27. Walls, Fences and Mailboxes. Applicant shall PL Issuance of Standard work with staff to prepare a final wall, fencing and the building mailbox plan that is consistent with Dublin Municipal permit Code and the design character of the architecture. The design of the mailbox station shall be upgraded to provide an enclosure or housing for the gang mailboxes so that they are integrated into the structure. Mailbox locations shall be integrated within the landscape and shall comply with USPS requirements. 28. Sustainable Landscape Practices. The PL Issuance of Standard landscape design shall demonstrate compliance the building Page 10 of 36 Page 11 of 36 with sustainable landscape practices as detailed in permit the Bay- Friendly Landscape Guidelines by earning a minimum of 60 points or more on the Bay - Friendly scorecard, meeting 9 of the 9 required practices and specifying that 75% of the non -turf planting only requires occasional, little or no shearing or summer water once established. Final selection and placement of trees, shrubs and ground cover plants shall ensure compliance with this requirement. Herbaceous plants shall be used along walks to reduce maintenance and the visibility of the sheared branches of woody ground cover plants. Planters for medium sized trees shall be a minimum of six feet wide. Small trees or shrubs shall be selected for planting areas less than six feet wide. 29. Copies of Approved Plans. The Applicant shall PL Construction Standard provide the City with one full size copy, one reduced (1/2 sized) copy and one electronic copy of the approved landscape plans prior to construction. CIVIL CONDITIONS 30. Plans Coordination. Civil Improvement Plans, PL Preparation of Standard Joint Trench Plans, Street Lighting Plans and final grading, Landscape Improvement Plans shall be submitted planting and on the same size sheet and plotted at the same utility plans drawing scale for consistency, improved legibility and interdisciplinary coordination. 31. Utility Placement and Coordination: Utilities shall PL Preparation of Standard be coordinated with proposed tree locations to final grading, eliminate conflicts between trees and utilities. Submit planting and typical utility plans for each house type to serve as a utility plans guide during the preparation of final grading, planting and utility plans. Utilities may have to be relocated in order to provide the required separation between the trees and utilities. The applicant shall submit a final tree /utility coordination plan as part of the construction document review process to demonstrate that this condition has been satisfied. BUILDING 32. Building Codes and Ordinances. All project B Through Standard construction shall conform to all building codes and Completion ordinances in effect at the time of building permit. 33. Retaining Walls. All retaining walls over 30 inches B Through Standard in height and in a walkway shall be provided with Completion guardrails. All retaining walls over 24 inches with a surcharge or 36 inches without a surcharge shall obtain permits and inspections from the Building & Safety Division. 34. Phased Occupancy Plan. If occupancy is B Occupancy of Standard Page 11 of 36 Page 12 of 36 requested to occur in phases, then all physical any affected improvements within each phase shall be required building to be completed prior to occupancy of any buildings within that phase except for items specifically excluded in an approved Phased Occupancy Plan, or minor handwork items, approved by the Department of Community Development. The Phased Occupancy Plan shall be submitted to the Directors of Community Development and Public Works for review and approval a minimum of 45 days prior to the request for occupancy of any building covered by said Phased Occupancy Plan. Any phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access to all parcels in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and purpose of the subdivision approval. No individual building shall be occupied until the adjoining area is finished, safe, accessible, and provided with all reasonable expected services and amenities, and separated from remaining additional construction activity. Subject to approval of the Director of Community Development, the completion of landscaping may be deferred due to inclement weather with the posting of a bond for the value of the deferred landscaping and associated improvements. 35. Building Permits. To apply for building permits, B Issuance of Standard Applicant/Developer shall submit five (5) sets of Building construction plans to the Building & Safety Division Permits for plan check. 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 or have been complied with. Construction plans will not be accepted without the annotated resolutions attached to each set of plans. Applicant/Developer will be responsible for obtaining the approvals of all participation non -City agencies prior to the issuance of building permits. 36. Construction Drawings. Construction plans shall B Issuance of Standard be fully dimensioned (including building elevations) building accurately drawn (depicting all existing and permits proposed conditions on site), and prepared and signed by a California licensed Architect or Engineer. All structural calculations shall be prepared and signed by a California licensed Architect or Engineer. The site plan, landscape plan and details shall be consistent with each other. 37. Air Conditioning Units. Air conditioning units and B, PL Occupancy of Standard ventilation ducts shall be screened from public view Unit Page 12 of 36 Page 13 of 36 with materials compatible to the main building and shall not be roof mounted. Units shall be permanently installed on concrete pads or other non - movable materials approved by the Chief Building Official and Director of Community Development. Air conditioning units shall be located such that each dwelling unit has one side yard with an unobstructed width of not less than 36 inches. Air conditioning units shall be located in accordance with the PD text. Air conditioning units shall comply with Section 8.36.060,C,3 of the Zoning Ordinance. 38. Temporary Fencing. Temporary Construction B Through Standard fencing shall be installed along the perimeter of all Completion work under construction. 39. Addressing B Standard a) Provide a site plan with the City of Dublin's address grid overlaid on the plans (1 to 30 Prior to scale). Highlight all exterior door openings release of on plans (front, rear, garage, etc.). The site addresses plan shall include a single large format page showing the entire project and individual sheets for each neighborhood. 3 copies on full size sheets and 5 copies reduced sheets. b) Provide plan for display of addresses. The Building Official shall approve plan prior to Prior to issuance of the first building permit. (Prior to permitting permitting) c) Addresses will be required on the front of the dwellings. Addresses are also required near Prior to the garage door opening if the opening is not permitting on the same side of the dwelling as the front door. d) Address signage shall be provided as per the Occupancy Dublin Residential Security Code. of any Unit e) Exterior address numbers shall be backlight and be posted in such a way that they may Occupancy be seen from the street. of any Unit f) Driveways servicing more than one (1) individual dwelling unit shall have a minimum Prior to of 4 inch high identification numbers, noting permit the range of unit numbers placed at the issuance, entrance to each driveway at a height and through between 36 and 42 inches above grade. The completion light source shall be provided with an uninterruptible AC power source or controlled only by photoelectric device. Page 13 of 36 Page 14 of 36 40. Engineer Observation. The Engineer of record B Scheduling Standard shall be retained to provide observation services for the final all components of the lateral and vertical design of frame the building, including nailing, hold- downs, straps, inspection shear, roof diaphragm and structural frame of building. A written report shall be submitted to the City Inspector prior to scheduling the final frame inspection. 41. Foundation. Geotechnical Engineer for the soils B Permit Standard report shall review and approve the foundation issuance design. A letter shall be submitted to the Building Division on the approval. 42. Green Building B Standard Green Building measures as detailed in the SDR Through package may be adjusted prior to master plan Completion check application submittal with prior approval from the City's Green Building Official provided that the design of the project complies with the City of Dublin's Green Building Ordinance and State Law as applicable. In addition, all changes shall be reflected in the Master Plans. (Through Completion) The Green Building checklist shall be included in Prior to first the master plans. The checklist shall detail what permit Green Points are being obtained and where the information is found within the master plans. (Prior to first permit). Prior to each unit final, the project shall submit a Through completed checklist with appropriate verification that Completion all Green Points required by 7.94 of the Dublin Municipal Code have been incorporated. (Through Completion) Homeowner Manual — if Applicant takes advantage Project of this point the Manual shall be submitted to the Green Building Official for review or a third party reviewer with the results submitted to the City. (Project) Landscape plans shall be submitted to the Green Building Official for review. (Prior to approval of the Prior to landscape plans by the City of Dublin) approval of the Developer may choose self - certification or landscape Page 14 of 36 Page 15 of 36 certification by a third party as permitted by the plans by the Dublin Municipal Code. Applicant shall inform the City of Dublin Green Building Official of method of certification prior to release of the first permit in each subdivision / neighborhood. 43. Electronic File: The applicant/developer shall B Issuance of Standard submit all building drawings and specifications for the final this project in an electronic format to the satisfaction occupancy of the Building Official prior to the issuance of building permits. Additionally, all revisions made to the building plans during the project shall be incorporated into an "As Built" electronic file and submitted prior to the issuance of the final occupancy. 44. Construction trailer: Due to size and nature of the B TUP required Standard development, the applicant/developer, shall provide prior to a construction trailer with all hook ups for use by placement of City Inspection personnel during the time of trailer construction as determined necessary by the Building Official. A Temporary Use Permit is required prior to placement of the construction trailer. In the event that the City has their own construction trailer, the applicant/developer shall provide a site with appropriate hook ups in close proximity to the project site to accommodate this trailer. The applicant/developer shall cause the trailer to be moved from its current location at the time necessary as determined by the Building Official at the Applicant/Developer's expense. 45. Copies of Approved Plans. Applicant shall B 30 days after Standard provide City with 2 reduced (1/2 size) copies of the permit and City of Dublin stamped approved plan. each revision issuance 46. Solar Zone — CA Energy Code B In Standard Show the location of the Solar Zone on the site conjunction plan. Detail the orientation of the Solar Zone. This with Master information shall be shown in the master plan check Plan check, on the overall site plan, the individual roof plans and prior to the plot plans. This condition of approval will be issuance of waived if the project meets the exceptions provided Building in the CA Energy Code. Permits 47. Wildfire Management. Provide in the master B Prior to Standard drawing set, a sheet detailing which lots are issuance of adjacent to open space and subject to the Wildfire Building Management provisions of the code. Permits 48. Household Waste Materials. Removal of existing B Prior to Project household waste materials on the site shall be issuance of Specific monitored by a qualified professional and that Grading normal and customary testing be performed for lead Permits and Page 15 of 36 Page 16 of 36 based paint and asbestos building materials prior to issuance of demolition of existing on -site buildings. Compliance demolition with this condition shall be demonstrated to the permit Building Official prior to obtaining a demolition permit. FIRE 49. New Fire Residential Sprinkler System F Prior to CA Requirements. In accordance with The Dublin Fire issuance of Building / Code, fire sprinklers shall be installed in all Building Residential buildings. The system shall be in accordance with Permits Code the NFPA 13D, the CA Fire Code and CA Building / Residential Code. 50. Fire apparatus. Roadways shall have a minimum F In CA unobstructed width of 20 feet and an unobstructed conjunction Building / vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. with Site Residential Roadways under 36 feet wide shall be posted with Improvement Code signs on one side; roadways under 28 feet wide Drawings shall be posted with signs both sides of the street as follows: "NO STOPPING FIRE LANE - CVC 22500.1 ". 1. Fire apparatus roadways must extend to within 150 ft. of the most remote first floor exterior wall of any building. 2. The maximum grade for a fire apparatus roadway is 12 %. 3. Fire apparatus roadways in excess of 150 feet in length must make provisions for approved apparatus turnarounds. 51. Gate Approvals. Fencing and gates that cross F Prior to CA pedestrian access and exit paths, as well as vehicle issuance of Building / entrance and exit roads and Emergency Vehicle Building Residential Access ways, need to be approved for fire Permits Code department access and egress as well as exiting provisions where such is applicable. Plans need to be submitted that clearly show the fencing and gates and details of such. This should be clearly incorporated as part of the site plan with details provided as necessary. 52. Hydrants & Fire Flows. Show the location of any F Prior to CA on -site fire hydrants and any fire hydrants that are issuance of Building / along the property frontage as well as the closest Building Residential hydrants to each side of the property that are Permits Code located along the access roads that serves this property. Provide a letter from the water company indicating what the available fire flow is to this property. DSRSD 53. Complete improvement plans shall be submitted to DSRSD Issuance of Standard Page 16 of 36 Page 17 of 36 DSRSD that conform to the requirements of the any building Dublin San Ramon Services District Code, the permit DSRSD "Standard Procedures, Specifications and Drawings for Design and Installation of Water and Wastewater Facilities ", all applicable DSRSD Master Plans and all DSRSD policies. 54. All mains shall be sized to provide sufficient DSRSD Issuance of Standard capacity to accommodate future flow demands in any building addition to each development project's demand. permit Layout and sizing of mains shall be in conformance with DSRSD utility master planning. 55. Sewers shall be designed to operate by gravity DSRSD Issuance of Standard flow to DSRSD's existing sanitary sewer system. any building Pumping of sewage is discouraged and may only be permit 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. 56. Domestic and fire protection waterline systems for DSRSD Issuance of Standard Tracts or Commercial Developments shall be any building designed to be looped or interconnected to avoid permit dead end sections in accordance with requirements of the DSRSD Standard Specifications and sound engineering practice. 57. DSRSD policy requires public water and sewer lines DSRSD Issuance of Standard to be located in public streets rather than in off- any building street locations to the fullest extent possible. If permit unavoidable, then 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. 58. Prior to approval by the City of a grading permit or a DSRSD Issuance of Standard site development permit, the locations and widths of any building all proposed easement dedications for water and permit sewer lines shall be submitted to and approved by DSRSD. 59. All easement dedications for DSRSD facilities shall DSRSD Issuance of Standard be by separate instrument irrevocably offered to any building DSRSD or by offer of dedication on the Final Map. permit 60. Prior to approval by the City for Recordation, the DSRSD Issuance of Standard Final Map shall be submitted to and approved by any building DSRSD for easement locations, widths, and permit Page 17 of 36 Page 18 of 36 restrictions. 61. Prior to issuance by the City of any Building Permit DSRSD Issuance of Standard or Construction Permit by the Dublin San Ramon any building Services District, whichever comes first, all utility permit connection fees including DSRSD and Zone 7, plan checking fees, inspection fees, connection 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. 62. Prior to issuance by the City of any Building Permit DSRSD Issuance of Standard or Construction Permit by the Dublin San Ramon any building Services District, whichever comes first, all permit 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. 63. No sewer line or waterline construction shall be DSRSD Issuance of Standard permitted unless the proper utility construction any building permit has been issued by DSRSD. A construction permit permit will only be issued after all of the items in Condition No. 9 have been satisfied. 64. The applicant shall hold DSRSD, its Board of DSRSD Issuance of Standard Directors, commissions, employees, and agents of any building DSRSD harmless and indemnify and defend the permit same from any litigation, claims, or fines resulting from the construction and completion of the project. 65. Improvement plans shall include recycled water DSRSD Issuance of Standard improvements as required by DSRSD. Services for any building landscape irrigation shall connect to recycled water permit mains. Applicant must obtain a copy of the DSRSD Recycled Water Use Guidelines and conform to the requirements therein. 66. DSRSD has no objections to this proposed alternate DSRSD Issuance of Project site plan should such a site plan be permissible with any building Specific the revised Tassajara Road right of way and under permit Dublin Zoning regulations. Page 18 of 36 PUBLIC WORKS GENERAL CONDITIONS 67. Street Lighting Maintenance Assessment PW First final map Public District. The Developer shall petition to have the Works project area annexed into the Citywide Lighting Maintenance Assessment District and shall provide any exhibits required for the annexation. In addition, Developer shall pay all administrative costs associated with processing the annexation. 68. Ownership and Maintenance of Improvements. PW Final map Public Ownership and maintenance of street right -of -ways, and on going Works common area parcels and open space areas and improvements shall be by the City of Dublin and the Tassajara Highlands Homeowner's Association as shown on the "Ownership and Maintenance Plan" Stage I & II PD Exhibit, Sheet SI &II.5 prepared by P/A Design Resources, dated July 4, 2014, except as modified by these Conditions of Approval. 69. Landscape Features within Public Right of Way. PW Final Map Standard The Developer shall enter into an "Agreement for Long Term Encroachments" with the City for maintaining landscape features and other improvements within the public right -of -way and City -owned parcels including frontage & median landscaping, decorative pavements, decorative features (i.e. walls, monuments, fences, etc.), storm drain facilities, stormwater treatment measures and public trails as generally shown on Site Development Review exhibits. The Agreement shall identify the ownership of the special features and maintenance responsibilities. The Developer will be responsible for maintaining all decorative pavements including restoration required as the result of utility repairs. 70. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions PW First Final Public (CC &Rs). A Homeowners Association(s) shall be Map; modify Works formed by recordation of a declaration of with Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions to govern successive use and maintenance of the landscape, decorative Final Maps pavement and other features within the public right - of -way contained in the Agreement for Long Term Encroachments; all private road improvements; all open space and common area landscaping; all stormwater treatment measures; and all trail improvements. Said declaration shall set forth the Association name, bylaws, rules and regulations. The CC &Rs shall also contain a provision that prohibits the amendment of those provisions of the CC &Rs requested by City without the City's approval. The CC &Rs shall ensure that there is Page 19 of 36 Page 20 of 36 adequate provision for the maintenance, in good repair and on a regular basis, of the private roads, landscaping & irrigation, stormwater treatment measures, public trail, decorative pavements, fences, walls, drainage, lighting, signs and other related improvements. The Developer shall submit a copy of the CC &R document to the City for review and approval relative to these conditions of approval. 71. Phased Improvements. Right -of -way dedication PW First Final Public and installation of public and private improvements Map Works may be done in phases as indicated on the Tentative Map and Site Development Review, subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. With each phased Final Map, the City Engineer shall identify all improvements necessary to serve and access the phased lots created, including stormwater treatment measures required to meet the provisions of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Municipal Regional Permit (MRP). All rights -of -way and improvements, including utilities and traffic signal installation and modifications, identified by the City Engineer for construction within the boundaries of each phase of the development shall be required with the Final Map for that phase. In addition, the City Engineer may require the Developer to perform off -site grading in order to conform site grading to the adjacent grade outside of the phase proposed for development. 72. Moller Creek Culvert. The Moller Creek culvert PW Prior to filing Public improvements, to be constructed by others as of first Final Works shown on Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8102, shall Map that be substantially completed to the satisfaction of the creates Lots City Engineer prior to filing the first Final Map that 25 -28 and Lot creates Lots 25 -28 and Lot 39. The Developer may 39. alternatively submit phasing plans demonstrating how these units may be constructed in such a way as to not impede the progress of the Moller Creek culvert construction or compromise public safety. The phasing plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to filing the first Final Map that creates Lots 25 -28 and Lot 39. 73. Tassajara Road. The Developer shall dedicate PW First Final Public right -of -way along the project's Tassajara Road Map Works frontage as shown on the Tentative Map such that the typical half- street right -of -way width of Tassajara Road is sixty four feet (64'), in general conformance with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the Page 20 of 36 Page 21 of 36 Precise Plan adopted for Tassajara Road. Slight variations in the typical half street right -of -way width will be permitted to allow for variations in the fence line fronting Tassajara Road as shown on the Tentative Map and as approved by the City Engineer. All right -of -way for Tassajara Road shown on the Tentative Map shall be dedicated with the first Final Map. 74. Tassajara Road. If necessary, the Developer shall PW First Final Public dedicate additional right -of -way along the Map Works Tassarjara Road frontage of the portion of Parcel E identified on the Tentative Map as "To Be Acquired from City of Dublin Through Exchange Agreement" to facilitate widening of the southbound lanes of Tassajara Road by the developer of the adjacent Wallis Ranch development. 75. Tassajara Road. A portion of Parcel E, as PW First Final Public identified on the Tentative Map, is currently roadway Map Works right -of -way for the planned widening of Tassajara Road as established in the Precise Plan. This area of existing roadway right -of -way shall be vacated with the first Final Map for the project in accordance with Subdivision Map Act Sections 66434(g) and 66436, and deeded to the Developer. The Developer shall pay all administrative costs associated with processing the vacation and grant deed. 76. Tassajara Road Frontage Improvements. The PW Improvement Public Developer shall install complete roadway and utility Plans for Works improvements along the project's Tassajara Road Tassajara frontage as shown on the Tentative Map. The Road Developer shall also construct a sixteen -foot (16') approved and wide raised landscaped median between the improvements project's main driveway and the median bonded prior improvements constructed with the Moller Ranch to first Final development (Tract 8102). The curb -to- median curb Map width shall be a minimum of forty four feet (44') and include three 12' travel lanes and an 8' bike lane in the southbound direction. At the intersection with Fallon Road, the southbound curb -to- median curb width shall be increased to provide one left turn lane, two through lanes, two right turn lanes and a bike lane. Required roadway and utility improvements for the widening of Tassajara Road along the project's frontage shall include, but are not limited to: installation of pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps, drainage structures, stormwater treatment Page 21 of 36 Page 22 of 36 measures, street trees, median landscaping, irrigation, utilities, street lights, and fire hydrants. In addition, signing, striping, pavement conforms and transitions may be required to conform to the existing pavement width on Tassajara Road north of the project's main driveway. The Developer shall be eligible for Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee ( EDTIF) Section 1 credits for the cost of right -of- way, improvements and design in an amount not to exceed the costs included in the 2010 EDTIF Update or subsequent updates. 77. Completion of Sidewalk. The Developer shall PW First Final Public construct sidewalk and curb ramps at the northwest Map Works curb return of the intersection of Tassajara Road and the project's main driveway. In addition, sidewalk shall be provided along the north side of the project's main entrance road connecting to Tassajara Road. Crosswalks shall be provided across the project's main entry road and across both approaches of Tassajara Road at the project's main entry intersection. Pedestrian ramps shall be provided at all crosswalk approaches. 78. Intersection Visibility. Any sound walls or any PW First Final Public architectural walls shall be designed to avoid the Map Works visibility zone at the intersection of Tassajarra Road and the project's main driveway. The Visibility Zones shall be defined by the triangles established at the intersection corners by applying the Corner Sight Distance criteria of the current Caltrans Highway Design Manual. Corner Sight Distance shall be calculated using a 45 MPH speed along Tassjarra Road. 79. Left Turn Pocket: The pocket length for the PW First Final Public northbound left turn lane at the intersection of Map Works Tassajarra Road and the project's main driveway shall be 150 feet long. The bay taper for this left turn lane shall be 120 feet long and designed according to the City standards 80. Tassajara Road Bus Stop. The Developer shall PW Improvement Public construct a bus stop, concrete bus pad and shelter Plans for Works just south of the project's main driveway along Tassajara southbound Tassajara Road. The final location of Road the bus stop shall be approved by LAVTA and the approved and City Engineer. In conjunction with the new bus improvements stop, the Developer shall construct an eight foot (8') bonded prior sidewalk between the project's main driveway and to first Final the bus stop location (Approximately 100 feet). The Map Developer shall pay the cost of procuring and Page 22 of 36 Page 23 of 36 installing these improvements. 81. Tassajara Road Traffic Signal: The project's main PW Signal Plans Public driveway will form the fourth leg of the intersection and Works of Tassajara Road and the entrance road to the improvements Moller Ranch development (Tract 8102). The bonded prior Moller Ranch development is conditioned to to first Final construct a 3- legged traffic signal at this Map. Signal intersection. The Developer shall modify the complete Tassajara Road traffic signal as needed to prior to accommodate the project's main driveway and occupancy of required Tassajara Road frontage improvements. the 24th unit. If the 3- legged traffic signal required to be constructed by Moller Ranch has not been /will not be completed prior to occupancy of the 24th unit, the Developer shall be responsible for construction of a 3- legged traffic signal. In such case, the Developer may enter into a reimbursement agreement for any cost over 50% of the total estimated cost of a four - legged signal. 82. Tassajara Road /Fallon Road Traffic Signal: The PW Signal Plans Public Developer shall modify the existing traffic signal at and Works Tassajara Road and Fallon Road to accommodate improvements the required Tassajara Road frontage bonded prior improvements. to first Final Map 83. Traffic Signal Interconnect. The Developer shall PW Signal Plans Public interconnect the traffic signals at Fallon and Works Road /Tassajara Road and Moller Ranch improvements Drive/Tassajara Road /project main driveway. bonded prior Project applicant shall provide one communication to first Final modem /switch at the signal controller at each Map location as well as one spare per signal location. 84. Tassajara Road Overhead Utility Lines: The PW First Final Public Developer shall be responsible for undergrounding Map Works or removing the two existing joint utility poles and associated overhead utilities with the northwest quadrant of the Tassajara Road /Fallon Road intersection. 85. Tassajara Road Traffic Control: The Developer PW Issuance of Public shall provide traffic control measures, including first Grading Works flaggers if necessary, to allow for the safe ingress or Sitework and egress of construction traffic to /from the project Permit site from /to Tassajara Road. A traffic control plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer and Traffic Engineer at least ten (10) days prior to the start of any construction activities. The traffic control measures shall be in place prior to the start of construction and remain in place until all traffic signal improvements at the project's main Page 23 of 36 Page 24 of 36 driveway are operational. 86. Tassajara Road, 1 -580 to Dublin Boulevard: If PW First Final Public applicable, the Developer shall pay the Map Works proportionate cost of a 5th northbound lane on Tassajara Road from I -580 to Dublin Boulevard. 87. Private Streets: The owner shall dedicate private PW Approval of Public street right -of -way and install complete street final map and Works improvements for the proposed private streets improvement within the development as shown on the Tentative plans Map as Parcel A. 88. Private street and common area subdivision PW Final Map Public improvements. Common area improvements, Works private streets, private alleys and all other subdivision improvements owned or maintained by the homeowners' association are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to Final Map approval and shall be included in the Tract Improvement Agreement. Such improvements include, but are not limited to: curb & gutter, pavement areas, sidewalks, access ramps & driveways; enhanced street paving; parking spaces; street lights (wired underground) and appurtenances; drainage facilities; utilities; landscape and irrigation facilities; open space landscaping; stormwater treatment facilities; striping and signage; and fire hydrants. 89. Private Street Easements. Public Utility PW Final Map Public Easements (PUE), Sanitary Sewer Easements Works (SSE) and Water Line Easements (WLE) shall be established over the entire private street right -of- ways within all subdivisions. The PUE, SSE and WLE dedication statements on each Final Map are to recite that the easements are available for, but not limited to, the installation, access and maintenance of sanitary and storm sewers, water, electrical and communication facilities. Project entry monument signs and walls shall not be located within these easements. 90. Private Street Easements. The Developer shall PW Final Map Public dedicate Emergency Vehicle Access Easements Works (EVAE) over the clear pavement width of all private streets and alleys. Easement geometry shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer and Fire Marshall. 91. Emergency Vehicle Access Gate. Prior to the PW, PL, First Final Public issuance of grading permits, the developer shall F Map creating Works provide details of the EVA access way and gate to 30th unit Public Works, Fire and Planning. 92. Intersections. The design of all project PW Final Map or Public Page 24 of 36 Page 25 of 36 intersections shall be generally as shown on the improvement Works Tentative Map and the Site Development Review. plans The Developer shall submit a typical intersection layout showing the design for the ramps, sidewalks, entry walls, stop signs, landscape planters, street trees, crosswalk locations and decorative pavement to be approved by the City Engineer prior to the submittal of the Improvement Plans. Decorative pavement shall not be installed within crosswalks. Final design details shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 93. Monuments. The Final Map shall include private PW Monuments Public street monuments to be set in all private streets. to be shown Works Private street monuments shall be set at all on Final Map intersections and as determined by the City and installed Engineer. prior to acceptance of improvements 94. Public Trail: The Developer shall dedicate Public PW Final Map Public Access Easements and construct a six foot (6') wide creating said Works concrete trail within Parcels C, E and the "Transfer parcels Parcel" as shown on the Tentative Map to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 95. Stormwater Management. The provided PW Prior to Public Stormwater Management Plan included with the approval of Works Tentative Map is approved in concept only. The grading, final Stormwater Management Plan is subject to improvement City Engineer approval prior to approval of the Tract plans Improvement Plans. Approval is subject to the developer providing the necessary plans, details, and calculations that demonstrate the plan complies with the standards of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Municipal Regional Permit (MRP). 96. Stormwater Management. The proposed PW Prior to Public Bioretention Basin #3 and Hydromodification Basin approval of Works #4 as shown on Tentative Map shall be sized to grading, accommodate the stormwater runoff from the improvement additional impervious roadway pavement surface on plans Tassajara Road constructed as part of the Moller Creek culvert widening. 97. Stormwater Management. If the project is PW Grading, Public developed in phases, suitable stormwater treatment improvement Works and hydromodification measures shall be installed plans for each with each phase such that the stormwater runoff phase from the impervious areas created or replaced within the boundaries of each phase shall be properly treated and metered with stormwater treatment and hydromodification measures Page 25 of 36 Page 26 of 36 constructed with that phase or in previous phases. 98. Storm Water Treatment Measures Maintenance PW Final Map Standard Agreement. Developer shall enter into an Agreement with the City of Dublin that guarantees the property owner's perpetual maintenance obligation for all stormwater treatment measures installed as part of the project. Said Agreement is required pursuant to Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, Order No. R2- 2009 -0074. Said permit requires the City to provide verification and assurance that all treatment devices will be properly operated and maintained. The Agreement shall be recorded against the property and shall run with the land. 99. Drainage Release Easements: The Developer PW Final Map Public shall dedicate to the City of Dublin drainage release Works easements on any privately owned parcels (HOA or Trust) that accept storm drainage from public owned streets or parcels. 100. Stormwater Source Control. "No Dumping Drains PW Final Map or Public to Bay" storm drain medallions per City Standard improvement Works Detail CD -704 shall be placed on all public and plans private storm drain inlets. 101. Trash Capture. The project Stormwater PW Final Map or Public Management Plan shall incorporate trash capture improvement Works measures such as screens, filters or CDS /Vortex plans units to address the requirements of Provision C.10 of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 102. Grading. The toe of any slope shall be one foot PW Approval of Public back of sidewalk. The top of any slope shall be Grading Works three feet back of walkway. Minor exceptions may Plans or be made in the above slope design criteria to meet issuance of unforeseen design constraints subject to the grading approval of the City Engineer. permit and on going 103. Curb Ramps: Curb ramp layouts are not approved PW Approval of Standard at this time. The number, location and layout of all improvement curb ramps shall be reviewed and approved by the plans or start City Engineer with the Improvement Plans of associated with each Final Map. All pedestrian construction ramps shall be designed and constructed to provide On going direct access to marked or unmarked crosswalks. Each pedestrian ramp shall be oriented such that it is aligned and parallel to the marked or unmarked crosswalk it is intended to serve. Pedestrian ramps serving more than one marked or unmarked crosswalk shall not be provided, unless specifically Page 26 of 36 Page 27 of 36 approved by the City Engineer. 104. Utilities. All new utility service connections, PW Approval of Standard including electrical and communications, shall be Improvement installed underground. Electrical transformers shall Plans or start be installed in underground vaults within an of appropriate utility easement or public service construction easement. On going 105. Landscape Plans. Developer shall submit design PW 1st submittal Standard development Landscape Plans with the first plan or check for the street improvement plans and final improvement map for each respective tract. The Landscape plans and Plans shall show details, sections and supplemental approved with information as necessary for design coordination of Final Map the various civil design features and elements including utility location to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Complete Landscape Plans shall be concurrently approved with the Tract Improvement Agreement and Final Map. 106. Street Light and Joint Trench Plans. Streetlight PW 1st submittal Standard Plans and Joint Trench Plans shall be submitted or with the first plan check for the street improvement improvement plans and final map for each respective tract. The plans and final streetlight plan and joint trench plan shall be approved completed prior to Final Map approval for each prior to Final respective subdivision. Map 107. Geotechnical Investigation. The Developer shall PW 1S submittal Standard submit a design level geotechnical investigation of grading report defining and delineating any seismic hazard. plans and on The report shall be prepared in accordance with going guidelines published by the State of California. The report is subject to review and approval by a City selected peer review consultant prior to the acceptance of each Final map. The applicant shall pay all costs related to the required peer review. The recommendations of those geotechnical reports shall be incorporated into the project plans subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 108. Soils Report. The Developer shall submit a PW 1S submittal Public detailed soils report prepared by a qualified of grading Works engineer, registered with the State of California. The and required report shall include recommendations improvement regarding pavement sections for all project streets plans including Tassajara Road and all internal streets. On going Grading operations shall be in accordance with recommendations contained in the required soils report and grading shall be supervised by an engineer registered in the State of California to do such work. 109. Geotechnical Engineer Review and Approval. PW 1S submittal Public Page 27 of 36 Page 28 of 36 The Project Geotechnical Engineer shall be retained of grading Works to review all final grading plans and specifications. and The Project Geotechnical Engineer shall approve all improvement grading plans prior to City approval and issuance of plans grading permits. On going 110. Grading. The disposal site and haul truck route for PW Approval of Public any off -haul dirt materials shall be subject to the grading plans, Works review and approval by the City Engineer prior to or start of the approval the improvement plans or issuance of construction a Grading Permit. If the Developer does not own or issuance of the parcel on which the proposed disposal site is grading located, the Developer shall provide the City with a permit Letter of Consent, signed by the current owner, approving the placement of off -haul material on their parcel. A grading plan may be required for the placement of the off -haul material. 111. Dust Control /Street Sweeping. The Developer PW Start of Public shall provide adequate dust control measures at all construction Works times during the grading and hauling operations. All On going trucks hauling export and import materials shall be provided with tarp cover at all times. Spillage of haul materials and mud - tracking on the haul routes shall be prevented at all times. Developer shall be responsible for sweeping of streets within, surrounding and adjacent to the project if it is determined that the tracking or accumulation of material on the streets is due to its construction activities. 112. Underground Obstructions. Prior to demolition, PW Prior to Standard excavation and grading on any portion of the project grading and site, all underground obstructions (i.e., debris, septic construction tanks, fuel tanks, barrels, chemical waste) shall be identified and removed pursuant to Federal, State and local regulations and subject to the review and approval by the City. Excavations shall be properly backfilled using structural fill, subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD CONDITIONS: GENERAL 113. Developer shall comply with the following City of PW On going Standard Dublin Public Works Standard Conditions of Approval ( "Standard Condition ") unless specifically modified by Project Specific Conditions of Approval above. 114. The Developer shall comply with the Subdivision PW On going Standard Map Act, the City of Dublin Subdivision, and Grading Ordinances, the City of Dublin Public Works Standards and Policies, the most current requirements of the State Code Title 24 and the Americans with Disabilities Act with regard to Page 28 of 36 Page 29 of 36 accessibility, and all building and fire codes and ordinances in effect at the time of building permit. All public improvements constructed by Developer and to be dedicated to the City are hereby identified as "public works" under Labor Code section 1771. Accordingly, Developer, in constructing such improvements, shall comply with the Prevailing Wage Law (Labor Code. Sects. 1720 and following). 115. The Developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold PW On going Standard harmless 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, Planning Commission, City Council, Community Development Director, Zoning Administrator, or any other department, committee, or agency of the City related to this project to the extent such actions are brought within the time period required by Government Code Section 66499.37 or other applicable law; provided, however, that The Developer's duty to so defend, indemnify, and hold harmless shall be subject to the City's promptly notifying The Developer of any said claim, action, or proceeding and the City's full cooperation in the defense of such actions or proceedings. 116. If there are conflicts between the Tentative Map PW On going Standard approval and the SDR approval pertaining to mapping or public improvements the Tentative Map shall take precedent. Agreement and Bonds 117. The Developer shall enter into a Tract Improvement PW First Final Standard Agreement with the City for all public improvements Map & including any required offsite storm drainage or Successive roadway improvements that are needed to serve the Maps Tract that have not been bonded with another Tract Improvement Agreement. 118. The Developer shall provide performance (100 %), PW First Final Standard and labor & material (100 %) securities to guarantee Map & the tract improvements, approved by the City Successive Engineer, prior to execution of the Tract Maps Improvement Agreement and approval of the Final Map. (Note: Upon acceptance of the improvements, the performance security may be replaced with a maintenance bond that is 25% of the value of the performance security.) Fees 119. The Developer shall pay all applicable fees in effect PW Zone 7 and Standard Page 29 of 36 Page 30 of 36 at the time of building permit Parkland In- issuance including, but not limited to, Planning Lieu Fees fees, Building fees, Dublin San Ramon Services due prior to District fees, Public Facilities fees, Dublin Unified filing each School District School Impact fees, Public Works Final Map, Traffic Impact fees, Alameda County Fire Services other fees fees, Noise Mitigation fees, Inclusionary Housing In- required with Lieu fees, Alameda County Flood and Water issuance of Conservation District (Zone 7) Drainage and Water building Connection fees and any other fees as noted in the permits Development Agreement. 120. The Developer shall dedicate parkland or pay in -lieu PW Prior to filing Standard fees in the amounts and at the times set forth in City final map of Dublin Resolution No. 60 -99, or in any resolution revising these amounts and as implemented by the Administrative Guidelines adopted by Resolution 195 -99. Permits 121. Developer shall obtain an Encroachment Permit PW Start of work Standard from the Public Works Department for all construction activity within the public right -of -way of any street where the City has accepted the improvements. The encroachment permit may require surety for slurry seal and restriping. At the discretion of the City Engineer an encroachment for work specifically included in an Improvement Agreement may not be required. 122. Developer shall obtain a Grad i ng/Sitework Permit PW Start of work Standard from the Public Works Department for all grading and private site improvements that serves more that one lot or residential condominium unit. 123. Developer shall obtain all permits required by other PW Start of work Standard agencies including, but not limited to Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Zone 7, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Caltrans and provide copies of the permits to the Public Works Department. Submittals 124. All submittals of plans and Final Maps shall comply PW Approval of Standard with the requirements of the "City of Dublin Public improvement Works Department Improvement Plan Submittal plans or final Requirements ", and the "City of Dublin Improvement map Plan Review Check List ". 125. The Developer will be responsible for submittals PW Approval of Standard and reviews to obtain the approvals of all improvement participating non -City agencies. The Alameda plans or final County Fire Department and the Dublin San Ramon map Services District shall approve and sign the Page 30 of 36 Page 31 of 36 Improvement Plans. 126. Developer shall submit a Geotechnical Report, PW Approval of Standard which includes street pavement sections and improvement grading recommendations. plans, grading plans or final map 127. Developer shall provide the Public Works PW Acceptance Standard Department a digital vectorized file of the "master" of CAD files for the project when the Final Map has improvements been approved. Digital raster copies are not and release acceptable. The digital vectorized files shall be in of bonds AutoCAD 14 or higher drawing format. Drawing units shall be decimal with the precision of the Final Map. All objects and entities in layers shall be colored by layer and named in English. All submitted drawings shall use the Global Coordinate System of USA, California, NAD 83 California State Plane, Zone III, and U.S. foot. Final Map 128. All Final Maps shall be substantially in accordance PW Approval of Standard with the Tentative Maps approved with this Final Map application, unless otherwise modified by these conditions. Multiple final maps may be filed in phases, provided that each phase is consistent with the tentative map, that phasing progresses in an orderly and logical manner and adequate infrastructure is installed with each phase to serve that phase as a stand -alone project that is not dependent upon future phasing for infrastructure. 129. All rights -of -way and easement dedications required PW Approval of Standard by the Tentative Map shall be shown on the Final Final Map Map. 130. Any phasing of the final mapping or improvements PW Approval of Standard of a Tentative Map is subject to the approval and Final Map conditions of the City Engineer. 131. Street names shall be assigned to each PW Approval of Standard public /private street pursuant to Municipal Code Final Map Chapter 7.08. The approved street names shall be indicated on the Final Map. 132. All Final Maps shall include street monuments to be PW Monuments Standard set in all public streets. to be shown on final map and installed prior to acceptance of improvements Easements 133. The Developer shall obtain abandonment from all PW Approval of Standard applicable public agencies of existing easements improvement Page 31 of 36 Page 32 of 36 and right of ways that will no longer be used. plans or appropriate final map 134. The Developer shall acquire easements, and /or PW Approval of Standard obtain rights -of -entry from the adjacent property improvement owners for any improvements on their property. The plans or easements and /or rights -of -entry shall be in writing appropriate and copies furnished to the City Engineer. final map Grading 135. The Grading Plan shall be in conformance with the PW Approval of Standard recommendations of the Geotechnical Report, the grading plans approved Tentative Map and /or Site Development or issuance of Review, and the City design standards & grading ordinances. In case of conflict between the soil permits. engineer's recommendations and City ordinances, On going the City Engineer shall determine which shall apply. 136. A detailed Erosion Control Plan shall be included PW Approval of Standard with the Grading Plan approval. The plan shall grading plans include detailed design, location, and maintenance or issuance of criteria of all erosion and sedimentation control grading permits. measures. On going 137. PW Approval of Standard Tiebacks or structural fabric for retaining walls shall grading plans not cross property lines, or shall be located a or issuance of minimum of 2' below the finished grade of the upper grading lot. permits. On going Improvements 138. The public improvements shall be constructed PW Approval of Standard generally as shown on the Tentative Map and /or grading plans Site Development Review. However, the approval or issuance of of the Tentative Map and /or Site Development grading Review is not an approval of the specific design of permits. the drainage, sanitary sewer, water, and street On going improvements. 139. PW Approval of Standard All public improvements shall conform to the City of improvement Dublin Standard Plans and design requirements plans or start and as approved by the City Engineer. of construction. On going 140. Public streets shall be at a minimum 1 % slope with PW Approval of Standard minimum gutter flow of 0.7% around bumpouts. improvement Private streets and alleys shall be at minimum 0.5% plans or start slope. of construction. On going 141. Curb Returns on arterial and collector streets shall PW Approval of Standard Page 32 of 36 Page 33 of 36 be 40 -foot radius, all internal public streets curb improvement returns shall be minimum 30 -foot radius (36 -foot plans or start with bump outs) and private streets /alleys shall be a of minimum 20 -foot radius, or as approved by the City construction. Engineer. Curb ramp locations and design shall On going conform to the most current Title 24 and Americans with Disabilities Act requirements and as approved by the City Traffic Engineer. 142. Any decorative pavers /paving installed within City PW Approval of Standard right -of -way shall be done to the satisfaction of the improvement City Engineer. Where decorative paving is installed plans or start at signalized intersections, pre- formed traffic signal of loops shall be put under the decorative pavement. construction. Decorative pavements shall not interfere with the On going placement of traffic control devices, including pavement markings. All turn lane stripes, stop bars and crosswalks shall be delineated with concrete bands or color pavers to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Maintenance costs of the decorative paving shall be the responsibility of the Homeowners Association. 143. PW Occupancy of Standard The Developer shall install all traffic signs and units or acceptance of pavement marking as required by the City Engineer. improvements 144. Street light standards and luminaries shall be PW Occupancy of Standard designed and installed per approval of the City units or acceptance of Engineer. The maximum voltage drop for improvements streetlights is 5 %. 145. The Developer shall construct bus stops and PW Occupancy of Standard shelters at the locations designated and approved units or by the LAVTA and the City Engineer. The acceptance of Developer shall pay the cost of procuring and improvements installing these improvements. 146. Developer shall construct all potable and recycled PW Occupancy of Standard water and sanitary sewer facilities required to serve units or acceptance of the project in accordance with DSRSD master improvements plans, standards, specifications and requirements. 147. Fire hydrant locations shall be approved by the PW Occupancy of Standard Alameda County Fire Department. A raised reflector units or blue traffic marker shall be installed in the street acceptance of opposite each hydrant. improvements 148. The Developer shall furnish and install street name PW Occupancy of Standard signs for the project to the satisfaction of the City units or Engineer. acceptance of Page 33 of 36 Page 34 of 36 improvements 149. Developer shall construct gas, electric, cable TV PW Occupancy of Standard and communication improvements within the units or fronting streets and as necessary to serve the acceptance of project and the future adjacent parcels as approved improvements by the City Engineer and the various Public Utility agencies. 150. All electrical, gas, telephone, and Cable TV utilities, PW Occupancy of Standard shall be underground in accordance with the City units or policies and ordinances. All utilities shall be located acceptance of and provided within public utility easements and improvements sized to meet utility company standards. 151. All utility vaults, boxes and structures, unless PW Occupancy of Standard specifically approved otherwise by the City units or Engineer, shall be underground and placed in acceptance of landscape areas and screened from public view. improvements Prior to Joint Trench Plan approval, landscape drawings shall be submitted to the City showing the location of all utility vaults, boxes and structures and adjacent landscape features and plantings. The Joint Trench Plans shall be signed by the City Engineer prior to construction of the joint trench improvements. Construction 152. The Erosion Control Plan shall be implemented PW On -going as Standard between October 15th and April 15th unless needed otherwise allowed in writing by the City Engineer. The Developer will be responsible for maintaining erosion and sediment control measures for one year following the City's acceptance of the subdivision improvements. 153. If archaeological materials are encountered during PW On -going as 1993 construction, construction within 100 feet of these needed EDEIR materials shall be halted until a professional MM Archaeologist who is certified by the Society of California Archaeology (SCA) or the Society of Professional Archaeology (SOPA) has had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest appropriate mitigation measures. 154. Construction activities, including the maintenance PW On -going as Standard and warming of equipment, shall be limited to needed Monday through Friday, and non -City holidays, between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. except as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Extended hours or Saturday work will be considered by the City Engineer on a case -by -case basis. 155. Developer shall prepare a construction noise PW Start of Standard Page 34 of 36 Page 35 of 36 management plan that identifies measures to be construction taken to minimize construction noise on surrounding implementatio developed properties. The plan shall include hours n and on- of construction operation, use of mufflers on going as construction equipment, speed limit for construction needed traffic, haul routes and identify a noise monitor. Specific noise management measures shall be provided prior to project construction. 156. Developer shall prepare a plan for construction PW Start of Standard traffic interface with public traffic on any existing construction implementatio public street. Construction traffic and parking may n and on- be subject to specific requirements by the City Engineer. going as needed 157. The Developer shall be responsible for controlling PW On -going Standard any rodent, mosquito, or other pest problem due to construction activities. 158. The Developer shall be responsible for watering or PW On -going Standard other dust - palliative measures to control dust as conditions warrant or as directed by the City Engineer. 159. The Developer shall provide the Public Works PW Issuance of Standard Department with a letter from a registered civil Building engineer or surveyor stating that the building pads permits or have been graded to within 0.1 feet of the grades acceptance of shown on the approved Grading Plans, and that the improvements top & toe of banks and retaining walls are at the locations shown on the approved Grading Plans. Storm Water Quality (NPDES) 160. Prior to any clearing or grading, the Developer shall PW Start of any Standard provide the City evidence that a Notice of Intent construction (NOI) has been sent to the California State Water activities Resources Control Board per the requirements of the NPDES. A copy of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be provided to the Public Works Department and be kept at the construction site. 161. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan PW SWPPP to be Standard (SWPPP) shall identify the Best Management prepared Practices (BMPs) appropriate to the project prior to approval of construction activities. The SWPPP shall include the improvement erosion control measures in accordance with the plans, regulations outlined in the most current version of implementatio the ABAG Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook n prior to start or State Construction Best Management Practices of Handbook. The Developer is responsible for construction ensuring that all contractors implement all storm and on -going water pollution prevention measures in the SWPPP. as needed. Page 35 of 36 162. The Applicant shall work with Staff to enhance the PC Issuance of Project landscaping around the perimeter of the first specific bioretention area, including widening the landscape occupancy buffer areas, and lowering and enhancing the perimeter fence. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of , 2014 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk G:IPA120121PLPA- 2012 -00051 Fredrich GPA Initiation RequestlPC Mtg 7.22.14 Tassajara Highlands Frederick VargaslSTAFF REPORT W ATTACHMENTSIcc reso approving sdr vtm for fredrich vargas (tars highlands).docx 2298993.1 Page 36 of 36 RESOLUTION NO. XX - 14 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ADOPTING A CEQA ADDENDUM AND A RELATED STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS (FREDRICH/VARGAS) PROJECT PLPA 2013 -00035 WHEREAS, the Applicant, Tim Lewis Communities and STL Company LLC, proposes to create a development of 48 single - family detached homes on an 11.11 acre site known as the Frederick and Vargas properties. The proposed development and applications are collectively known as the "Project "; and WHEREAS, the application includes a General Plan /Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment to change the land use designations from: Medium -High Density Residential and Neighborhood Commercial and combining the existing Medium Density Residential to a combination of Medium Density Residential (6.16 acres) and Open Space (3.06 acres) and 1.89 acres of associated road right -of -way; and WHEREAS, the application also includes Planned Development rezoning with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 8133; and WHEREAS, the Project also includes a CEQA Addendum; and WHEREAS, the Project Site consists of two existing parcels, the approximately 7.93 gross acre Fredrich property located at 6960 Tassajara Road and the approximately 5 gross acre Vargas property at 7020 Tassajara Road (APNs 986- 0004 - 002 -01 and 986- 0004 - 002 -03); and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State guidelines and City environmental regulations, require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and WHEREAS, the Project is in the General Plan Eastern Extended Planning Area and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, for which the City Council certified a Program Environmental Impact Report by Resolution 51 -93 ( "Eastern Dublin EIR" or "EDEIR ", SCH 91103064) on May 10, 1993, which resolution is incorporated herein by reference. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified significant impacts from development of the Eastern Dublin area, some of which could not be mitigated to less than significant. Upon approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan, the City Council adopted mitigations, a mitigation monitoring program and a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Resolution 53 -93, incorporated herein by reference); and WHEREAS, based on Medium Density Residential and Neighborhood Commercial land use designations for the Fredrich property, the Eastern Dublin EIR assumed future development of up to dwellings and sf of commercial use. On May 16, 2006, the Page 1 of 4 City Council approved Resolution 71 -06 (incorporated herein by reference) for a supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Mission Peak /Fallon Crossing project, which also included annexation of the Fredrich property but no proposed development or change in land use on the site; and WHEREAS, based on Medium Density and Medium High Density Residential land use designations for the Vargas property, the Eastern Dublin EIR assumed future development of up to 55 dwellings. On , 2007, the City Council approved Resolution 57 -07 (incorporated herein by reference) for a supplemental MND for the Vargas project consisting of 33 dwellings; and WHEREAS, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified significant unavoidable impacts from development of the Eastern Dublin area and the Project site, some of which would apply to the Project; therefore, approval of the Project must be supported by a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and WHEREAS, the City prepared an Initial Study to determine if additional review of the proposed Project was required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15162. Based on the Initial Study, the City prepared an Addendum dated July 22, 2014 describing the project and finding that the impacts of the proposed Project have been adequately addressed in the prior EIR and MNDs. The Addendum and its supporting Initial Study is attached as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, on July 22, 2014, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, a staff report, dated July 22, 2014 and incorporated herein by reference, described and analyzed the Project and related Addendum for the Planning Commission and recommended adoption of the CEQA Addendum and approval of the Project; and WHEREAS, on July 22, 2014, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 14 -37 (incorporated herein by reference) recommending that the City Council adopt the CEQA Addendum for the Project; and WHEREAS, on , 2014 the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, a staff report dated , 2014 and incorporated herein by reference described and analyzed the project and related Addendum for the City Council and recommended adoption of the CEQA Addendum and approval of the Project; and WHEREAS, on , 2014 the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Addendum, as well as the prior EIR and MNDs and all above - referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony before taking any action on the Project. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution. 2 of 4 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council makes the following findings to support the determination that no further environmental review is required under CEQA for the proposed project. These findings are based on information contained in the CEQA Addendum, the prior CEQA documents, the City Council staff report, and all other information contained in the record before the City Council. These findings constitute a summary of the information contained in the entire record. The detailed facts to support the findings are set forth in the CEQA Addendum and related Initial Study, the prior CEQA documents, and elsewhere in the record. Other facts and information in the record that support each finding that are not included below are incorporated herein by reference- 1 . The proposed Project does not constitute substantial changes to the previous projects affecting the Project site as addressed in the prior CEQA documents, that will require major revisions to the prior documents due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in severity of previously identified significant effects. Based on the Initial Study, all potentially significant effects of the proposed Project are the same or less than the impacts for project which were previously addressed. The proposed Project will not result in substantially more severe significant impacts than those identified in the prior CEQA documents. All previously adopted mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR and prior MNDs continue to apply to the proposed Project and project site as applicable. 2. The Addendum and its related Initial Study did not identify any new significant impacts of the proposed Project that were not analyzed in the prior CEQA documents. 3. The City is not aware of any new information of substantial importance or substantial changes in circumstances that would result in new or substantially more severe impacts or meet any other standards in CEQA Section 21166 and related CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162/3. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin finds the following: 1. No further environmental review under CEQA is required for the proposed Project because there is no substantial evidence in the record as a whole that any of the standards under Sections 21166 or 15162/3 are met. 2. The City has properly prepared an Addendum and related Initial Study under CEQA Guidelines section 15164 to explain its decision not to prepare a subsequent or Supplemental EIR or conduct further environmental review for the proposed Project. 3. The City Council considered the information in the Addendum and prior CEQA documents before approving the land use applications for the proposed Project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin adopts the CEQA Addendum and related Initial Study, attached as Exhibit A (and incorporated herein by reference), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 for the Tassajara Highlands (Fredrich /Vargas) project. 3 of 4 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations attached as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 2014 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: City Clerk 2298196.1 Mayor 4 of 4 CEQA ADDENDUM FOR THE TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS PROJECT PLPA -2012 -00051 July 22, 2014 On May 10, 1993, the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution No. 51 -93, certifying an Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan ( "Eastern Dublin EIR, SCH #91103064). The certified EIR consisted of a Draft EIR and Responses to Comments bound volumes, as well as an Addendum to the Eastern Dublin EIR dated May 4, 1993, assessing a reduced development project alternative. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 53 -93 approving a General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan for the reduced area alternative on May 10, 1993. On August 22, 1994, the City Council adopted a second Addendum updating wastewater disposal plans for Eastern Dublin. The Eastern Dublin EIR evaluated the potential environmental effects of urbanizing Eastern Dublin over a 20 to 30 year period. Since certification of the EIR, many implementing projects have been proposed, relying to various degrees on the certified EIR. In 2006, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Mission Peak and Fallon Crossing project, which also included the 8.58 -acre Fredrich property in the analysis. In this Addendum, this document will be referred to as the Fredrich Project Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). The MND was approved by the City Council on May 16, 2006 by Resolution No. 71 -06 and addressed all topics included in the standard CEQA checklist. The MND analyzed the impacts of prezoning, annexing and developing up to 103 single - family dwellings on the 67.8 -acre Mission Peak property on the east side of Tassajara Road south of Moller Creek. The MND did not assume any development on the Fredrich property as part of the analysis; however, the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and EIR assumed the ultimate development of 68 dwellings on the Fredrich site (EDSP, Appendix 4). In 2007, the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution No. 57 -07 that approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 5 -acre (gross) site Vargas property. In this Initial Study, this CEQA document will be called the Vargas MND. The Vargas MND analyzed the environmental impacts of amending the Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan at a less intense land use density than the 55 units assumed in the Eastern Dublin EIR, approving a Stage 1 Development Plan and prezoning for the property, approving a pre- annexation agreement and requesting annexation to the site to the City of Dublin. The project included development of 33 single - family dwellings on the site and analyzed all environmental topics included in the standard CEQA checklist. The State Clearinghouse Number for this CEQA document is #2007032020. This Addendum has been prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 for the Project, as described below. Project Description The proposed project includes demolishing the two existing single - family dwellings on the site and other accessory buildings, subdividing the site into up to 54 single - family lots, two internal small private open space areas, and a large open space area including a public pathway on the western and southern sides of the site, grading of the site, extension of utilities and constructing one dwelling on each of the lots. The applicant has requested approvals of the following in order to implement the project: amendments to the Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, a PD rezoning with related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, a Site Development Review (SDR) Permit and a Vesting Tentative Map. Prior CEQA Analyses and Determinations As summarized above and discussed in more detail in the attached Initial Study, the Tassajara Highlands property has been planned for urbanization since the Eastern Dublin approvals in 1993, and has been the subject of two previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declarations (MNDs). The Tassajara Highlands property consists of merging the adjacent Fredrich and Vargas properties into a single property for purposes of development. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified numerous environmental impacts, and numerous mitigations were adopted upon approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan. For identified impacts that could not be mitigated to insignificance, the City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Similarly, Mitigated Negative Declarations for the Fredrich property in 2006 and the Vargas property in 2007 identified supplemental impacts and mitigation measures. All previously adopted mitigation measures for development of Eastern Dublin identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the 2006 Fredrich property MND and the 2007 Vargas property MND that are applicable to the project and project site continue to apply to the currently proposed Project as further discussed in the attached Initial Study. Current CEQA Analysis and Determination that an Addendum is Appropriate for this Project. Updated Initial Study. The City of Dublin has determined that an Addendum is the appropriate CEQA review for the Project, which proposes minor changes to the land use designations and Planned Development zoning. If approved, the proposed project would reduce the number of potential dwellings on the site from up to 101 to up to 54 dwellings. The applicant is also seeking City approval of amendments to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, a Planned Development rezoning with related Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review approval and a Vesting Tentative Map. The City prepared an updated Initial Study dated July 22, 2014, incorporated herein by reference, to assess whether any further environmental review is required for this Project Through this Initial Study, the City has determined that no subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration is required for the plan and zoning amendments or the refined development details. Page 2 No Subsequent Review is Required per CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 identifies the conditions requiring subsequent environmental review. After a review of these conditions, the City has determined that no subsequent EIR or negative declaration is required for this Project. This is based on the following analysis: a) Are there substantial changes to the Project involving new or more severe significant impacts? There are no substantial changes to the Project analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR, as supplemented by the 2006 MND. and 2007 MND. The Project is similar to land uses for the project site analyzed in all previous CEQA documents and the number of dwellings has been reduced. As demonstrated in the Initial Study, the proposed land uses on the site is not a substantial change to either the 1993 Eastern Dublin EIR analysis or the 2006 MND or the 2007 MND analysis and will not result in additional significant impacts, and no additional or different mitigation measures are required. b) Are there substantial changes in the conditions which the Project is undertaken involving new or more severe significant impacts? There are no substantial changes in the conditions assumed in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the 2006 MND or the 2007 MND. This is documented in the attached Initial Study prepared for this Project dated July 22, 2014. c) Is there new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known at the time of the previous EIR that shows the Project will have a significant effect not addressed in the previous EIR; or previous effects are more severe; or, previously infeasible mitigation measures are now feasible but the applicant declined to adopt them; or mitigation measures considerably different from those in the previous EIR would substantially reduce significant effects but the applicant declines to adopt them? As documented in the attached Initial Study, there is no new information showing a new or more severe significant effect beyond those identified in the prior CEQA documents. Similarly, the Initial Study documents that no new or different mitigation measures are required for the Project. All previously adopted mitigations continue to apply to the Project. The CEQA documents adequately describe the impacts and mitigations associated with the proposed development on the Fredrich and Vargas properties. d) If no subsequent EIR -level review is required, should a subsequent negative declaration be prepared? No subsequent negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration is required because there are no impacts, significant or otherwise, of the Project beyond those identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and previous CEQA documents for the site, as documented in the attached Initial Study. Conclusion. This Addendum is adopted pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 based on the attached Initial Study dated July 22, 2014. The Addendum and Initial Study review the proposed General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan amendments, the Planned Development rezoning, Site Development Review, and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map as discussed above. Through the adoption of this Addendum and related Initial Study, the City determines that the above minor changes in land uses do not require a subsequent EIR or Page 3 negative declaration under CEQA Section 21166 or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163. The City further determines that the Eastern Dublin EIR, the 2006 MND and the 2007 MND adequately address the potential environmental impacts of the land use designation change for the Fredrich and Vargas properties as documented in the attached Initial Study. As provided in Section 15164 of the Guidelines, the Addendum need not be circulated for public review, but shall be considered with the prior environmental documents before making a decision on this project. The Initial Study, Eastern Dublin EIR, the 2006 MND, the 2007 MND and all resolutions cited above are incorporated herein by reference and are available for public review during normal business hours in the Community Development Department, Dublin City Hall, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin CA. Page 4 EXHIBIT B STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 1. General. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15093, the City Council of the City of Dublin adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for those impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR as significant and unavoidable (Resolution 53 -93, May 10, 1993). The City Council carefully considered each impact in its decision to approve urbanization of Eastern Dublin through approval of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan project. The City Council is currently considering the Tassajara Highlands (Fredrich /Vargas) project. The project proposes a residential development on the west side of Tassajara Road at 6960 and 7020 Tassajara Road. The project site was also analyzed in two supplemental Mitigated Negative Declarations. The first was for the Mission Peak /Fallon Crossing project and was adopted on May 16, 2006 by City Council Resolution No. 71 -06. The second was for the Vargas project and was adopted through City Council Resolution 57 -07 on May 1, 2007. The City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with the original land use approvals for urbanization of Eastern Dublin. Pursuant to a 2002 court decision, the City Council must adopt new overriding considerations for the previously identified unavoidable impacts that apply to the Tassajara Highlands (Fredrich /Vargas) project.1 The City Council believes that many of the unavoidable environmental effects identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR will be substantially lessened by mitigation measures adopted with the original Eastern Dublin approvals and the subsequent 2006 and 2007 approvals, to be implemented with the development of the project. Even with mitigation, the City Council recognizes that the implementation of the project carries with it unavoidable adverse environmental effects as identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The City Council specifically finds that to the extent that the identified adverse or potentially adverse impacts for the project have not been mitigated to acceptable levels, there are specific economic, social, environmental, land use, and other considerations that support approval of the project. 2. Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts from the Eastern Dublin EIR. The following unavoidable significant environmental impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR for future development of Eastern Dublin apply to the Tassajara Highlands (Fredrich /Vargas) project. Land Use Impact 3.1/F. Cumulative Loss of Agricultural and Open Space Lands; Visual Impacts 3.8/13; and Alteration of Rural /Open Space Character. Although development has occurred south of the project area, the site is largely "...public officials must still go on the record and explain specifically why they are approving the later project despite its significant unavoidable impacts." (emphasis original.) Communities for a Better Environment v. California Resources Agency 103 Cal.App. 4th 98, _ (2002). undeveloped open space land. Future development of the Tassajara Highlands site will contribute to the cumulative loss of open space land. Traffic and Circulation Impacts 3.318, 3.31E. 1 -580 Freeway, Cumulative Freeway Impacts: While city street and interchange impacts can be mitigated through planned improvements, transportation demand management, the 1 -580 Smart Corridor program and other similar measures, mainline freeway impacts continue to be identified as unavoidable, as anticipated in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Future development on the Tassajara Highlands site will generate less traffic than anticipated in the Eastern Dublin EIR, but will still incrementally contribute to the unavoidable freeway impacts. Traffic and Circulation Impacts 3.311, 3.31M. Santa Rita Road /1 -580 Ramps, Cumulative Dublin Boulevard Impacts: The project will be required to implement all applicable adopted traffic mitigation measures, including contributions to the City's TIF program; however even with mitigation these impacts continue to be identified as unavoidable, as anticipated in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Community Services and Facilities Impact 3.41S. Consumption of Non - Renewable Natural Resources and Sewer, Water, and Storm Drainage Impact 3.51F, H, U. Increases in Energy Usage Through Increased Water Treatment, Disposal and Operation of Water Distribution System: Future development of the project will contribute to increased energy consumption. Soils, Geology, and Seismicity Impact 3.618. Earthquake Ground Shaking, Primary Effects: Even with seismic design, future development of the project could be subject to damage from large earthquakes, much like the rest of the Eastern Dublin planning area. Air Quality Impacts 3.11/A, 8, C, and E. Future development of the project will contribute to cumulative dust deposition, construction equipment emissions, mobile and stationary source emissions. 3. Overriding Considerations. The City Council previously balanced the benefits of the Eastern Dublin project approvals against the significant and potentially significant adverse impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The City Council now balances those unavoidable impacts that apply to future development on the Tassajara Highlands (Fred rich /Vargas) site against its benefits, and hereby determines that such unavoidable impacts are outweighed by the benefits of the project as further set forth below. The project will further the urbanization of Eastern Dublin as planned through the comprehensive framework established in the original Eastern Dublin approvals. Prior approvals provided important protections to Tassajara Creek and through reasonable and protective designations for sensitive creek areas; the project will implement these protections through previously adopted mitigation measures and current development standards. The project will provide approximately 48 K units of needed housing as well as maintaining open space on the site. Development of the site will also provide construction employment opportunities for Dublin residents. 2298238.1 3 TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS PROJECT (Vargas & Fredrich Parcels) PLPA 2012- 00051 INITIAL STUDY Lead Agency: City of Dublin Prepared By: Jerry Haag, Urban Planner July 22, 2014 Table of Contents Introduction..................................................................................... ..............................2 Applicant/ Contact Person ............................................................. ..............................3 Project Location and Context ........................................................ ..............................3 Prior Environmental Review Documents .................................... ..............................4 ProjectDescription .......................................................................... ..............................6 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ................................ .............................17 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts .......................................... .............................19 Attachment to Initial Study ............................................................ .............................32 1. Aesthetics .................................................................. .............................32 2. Agricultural and Forestry Resources .................... .............................36 3. Air Quality ................................................................ .............................38 4. Biological Resources ................................................ .............................41 5. Cultural Resources ................................................... .............................50 6. Geology and Soils .................................................... .............................53 7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ..................................... .............................56 8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................... .............................57 9. Hydrology and Water Quality ............................... .............................59 10. Land Use and Planning ........................................... .............................63 11. Mineral Resources .................................................... .............................64 12. Noise .......................................................................... .............................64 13. Population and Housing ......................................... .............................67 14. Public Services .......................................................... .............................67 15. Recreation .................................................................. .............................70 16. Transportation/ Traffic ............................................ .............................71 17. Utilities and Service Systems .................................. .............................75 18. Mandatory Findings of Significance ..................... .............................78 InitialStudy Preparers .................................................................... .............................79 Agencies and Organizations Consulted ....................................... .............................79 References......................................................................................... .............................79 City of Dublin Environmental Checklist/ Initial Study Introduction This Initial Study has been prepared in accord with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and assesses the potential environmental impacts of implementing the proposed project described below. The Initial Study consists of a completed environmental checklist and a brief explanation of the environmental topics addressed in the checklist. Because the proposed project is generally based on the land use designations, circulation patterns etc. assigned to the project by the City of Dublin General Plan, the Initial Study relies on a Program EIR certified by the City in 1993 for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan (the "Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 91103064). That EIR, also known in this Initial Study as the "Eastern Dublin EIR," evaluated the following impacts: Land Use, Population, Employment and Housing, Traffic and Circulation, Community Services and Facilities, Sewer, Water and Storm Drainage, Soils, Geology and Seismicity, Biological Resources, Visual Resources, Cultural Resources, Noise, Air Quality and Fiscal Considerations. In 2006, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Mission Peak/ Fallon Crossing project, which also included the 8.58 -acre Fredrich property in the analysis. This CEQA document was approved by the City Council on May 16, 2006 by Resolution No. 71 -06. The Fredrich Project MND analyzed the impacts of prezoning, annexing and developing up to 103 single- family dwellings on the 67.8 -acre Mission Peak property on the east side of Tassajara Road south of Moller Creek. The MND included the Fredrich property on the west side of Tassajara Road but did not assume any development on the Fredrich property as part of the analysis; however, the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and EIR assumed the ultimate development of 68 dwellings on the Fredrich site (EDSP, Appendix 4). In 2007, the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution No. 57 -07 that approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 4.35 -acre Vargas property. This will be referred to as the "Vargas Project MND." The Vargas Project MND analyzed the environmental impacts of amending the Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan from Medium -High to a Medium Density land use designation, approving a Stage 1 Development Plan and prezoning for the property, approving a pre - annexation agreement and requesting annexation to the site to the City of Dublin. The project included development of 33 dwellings on the site. The subject of this Initial Study is a proposed General Plan Amendment, a Specific Plan Amendment, a PD rezoning with related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review (SDR), a vesting tentative subdivision map and related applications to develop the 12.93 -acre Tassajara Highlands residential project, that City of Dublin Page 2 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 includes both the Vargas and Fredrich properties, located in the Eastern Dublin portion of the City of Dublin. The Development Plan includes construction of up to 54 single - family residential dwellings, internal roadways, open spaces and other related improvements. Applicant: Tim Lewis Communities and STL Company, LLC 3500 Douglas Blvd., Suite 270 Roseville CA 95661 Attn: Michael O'Hara (916) 783 -2300 Project Location and Context The project is located in the northern area of the Eastern Extended Planning area of the City of Dublin as identified in the Dublin General Plan. More specifically, the project site is located on the west side of Tassajara Road and east of Tassajara Creek. Moller Creek, a tributary of Tassajara Creek, extends through the project site at its southern boundary. The site consists of two separate property ownerships that comprise the Tassajara Highlands project. The Vargas property is the northern portion of the site and contains approximately 4.35 acres of land. The Fredrich property comprises the southern portion of the project site and contains approximately 8.58 acres of land. As part of the Tentative Map approval process and the filing of the Final map, the two existing parcels will be effectively merged and re- subdivided with the recordation of the Final Map. Exhibit 1 depicts the regional setting of Dublin and Exhibit 2 shows the location of the project site in context with nearby features, including nearby roadways and adjacent creeks. Existing land uses adjacent to the project site includes the Tipper property to the north (currently owned by the Singh family) that is a rural homestead. Land to the west is within a permanent open space easement area within and adjacent to Tassajara Creek. The Dublin Ranch West development (also known as the Wallis Ranch) lies west of the open space easement and has been approved for residential development at a mix of densities and product types. Moller Creek flows immediately to the south of the project site. Located to the southeast of the project site is a residential project, known as the Fallon Crossing/ Mission Peak that is currently under construction by Standard Pacific consisting of 106 single- family units. Additionally, located to the northeast of the project site is a proposed residential project by Braddock & Logan known as Moller Ranch. This project consists of up to 370 single - family lots. The 4.35 -acre Vargas property comprises the northern portion of the overall Tassajara Highlands project site. The Vargas property contains one single - family dwelling and accessory outbuildings generally along the Tassajara Road frontage. The Vargas City of Dublin Page 3 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 property has a gradual slope from the south to the northwest toward Tassajara Creek. Much of the Vargas site is vacant and was previously used for animal grazing. The Alameda County Assessor's Parcel Number for the Vargas property is 986- 0004 - 002 -01. The 8.58 -acre Fredrich property comprises the southern portion of the Tassajara Highlands project site. This property contains one single - family dwelling and is characterized by a moderately steep hill in the northern portion of the site. The site then has a moderate slope to the southwest towards Moller Creek and Tassajara Creek. One single - family dwelling has been constructed on the Fredrich property. The County Assessors Parcel Number for the Fredrich property is 986- 0004 - 002 -03. A number of native and ornamental trees exist on the Tassajara Highlands site. Exhibit 3 shows the location and configuration of the Tassajara Highlands project site, the two properties that comprise the site and existing topographic features. Prior Environmental Review Documents The project has been included in three previous CEQA documents, as noted below: Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (State Clearinghouse #91103064). A Program Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment (Eastern Extended Planning Area) and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) was certified by the City Council in 1993 by Resolution No. 51 -93. This document and its related Addenda collectively are referred to as the "Eastern Dublin EIR" or "EDEIR." It evaluated the following impacts: Land Use; Population, Employment and Housing; Traffic and Circulation, Community Services and Facilities; Sewer, Water and Storm Drainage; Soils, Geology and Seismicity; Biological Resources; Visual Resources; Cultural Resources; Noise; Air Quality; and Fiscal Considerations. The City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Resolution No. 53 -93) for the following impacts: Cumulative loss of agriculture and open space land, cumulative traffic, extension of certain community facilities (natural gas, electric and telephone service), consumption of non - renewable natural resources, increases in energy uses through increased water treatment and disposal and through operation of the water distribution system, inducement of substantial growth and concentration of population, earthquake ground shaking, loss or degradation of botanically sensitive habitat, regional air quality, noise and alteration of visual character. The Eastern Dublin EIR was challenged in court and was found to be legally adequate. Mission Peak and Fallon Crossing Mitigated Negative Declaration In 2006, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Mission Peak and Fallon Crossing project, which also included the 8.58 -acre Fredrich property in the analysis. In this Initial Study, this document will be referred to as the Fredrich City of Dublin Page 4 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Project Mitigated Negative Declaration. The MND was approved by the City Council on May 16, 2006 by Resolution No. 71 -06 and addressed all topics included in the standard CEQA checklist. The Mission Peak MND analyzed the impacts of prezoning, annexing and developing up to 103 single - family dwellings on the 67.8 - acre Mission Peak property on the east side of Tassajara Road south of Moller Creek. The Mission Peak MND did not assume any development on the Fredrich property as part of the analysis; however, the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and EIR assumed the ultimate development of 68 dwellings on the Fredrich site (EDSP, Appendix 4). Vargas Property Mitigated Negative Declaration In 2007, the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution No. 57 -07 that approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 5 -acre (gross) site Vargas property. In this Initial Study, The Vargas MND analyzed the environmental impacts of amending the Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan at a less intense land use density, approving a Stage 1 Development Plan and prezoning for the property, approving a pre- annexation agreement and requesting annexation to the site to the City of Dublin. The project included development of 33 single - family dwellings on the site and analyzed all environmental topics included in the standard CEQA checklist. The State Clearinghouse Number for this CEQA document is #2007032020. City of Dublin Page 5 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Project Description Overview. The proposed project includes demolishing the two existing single - family dwellings on the site and other accessory buildings, subdividing the site into up to 54 single - family lots, two internal small private open space areas, and a large open space area including a pathway on the western and southern sides of the site, grading of the site, extension of utilities and constructing one dwelling on each of the lots. The applicant has requested approvals of the following in order to implement the project: amendments to the Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, a PD rezoning with related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan, a Site Development Review (SDR) Permit, a Vesting Tentative Map. Development Plan. The proposed development plan for the site is shown on Exhibit 4. As shown, the main vehicular entry to the site would be at a signalized intersection with Tassajara Road which is also the main entry to the Moller Ranch development project to the east. Individual lots would be located off of the interior loop road, further described in the section below. Lot sizes for the single - family residences would generally range from a minimum of 3,670 square feet (smallest) to 6,907 square feet. All dwellings would be two stories in height and the sizes of dwellings would also vary. On -site parking on each lot would be provided as well as on- street and guest parking spaces. Two small private open space areas are located within the site, one at the north end and one at the south end. A series of storm drain bio- retention ponds, linked with a detention pond would be used on the south side of the project site and for the purpose of detaining peak stormwater flows from the site and filtering water prior to release into Moller Creek. An open space buffer would also be provided along the western and southern boundaries of the project site, between the development portions of Tassajara Highlands and Tassajara Creek and Moller Creek. A pathway is planned to be constructed within this buffer. A sound barrier wall is proposed to be constructed along the Tassajara Road right -of- way from the most northerly lot south to Private Drive B. Retaining walls south of Private Drive B / EVAE are proposed to be constructed at various locations on the east side of the project site adjacent to Tassajara Road. Landscaping is proposed to be installed between the edge of Tassajara Road and the sound barrier and retaining walls. Circulation and access. As noted above, a main east -west entry road would be provided from Tassajara Road. This road would have a variable right -of -way width between 74 and 80 feet. The intersection of this street and Tassajara Road is planned to be signalized. The entry road would lead to an interior north -south looped road system that would terminate in a cul -de -sac on the northern portion of the site. To the south, this road would circle around a development area and reconnect with the north -south link. City of Dublin Page 6 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Interior roads would generally have a paved width of 28 -feet that would accommodate vehicle parking on one side of this roadway. In addition, at the northern portion of the project site, there would be a 3 -space parking area. No parking would be allowed on the main entry road into the project site. All project roadways would have sidewalks adjacent to travel lanes. Landscaping. Exhibit 5 depicts the preliminary landscape plan for the project site. Utility services. Domestic water service and sewer service would be provided by Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD). The project developer would be required to install mainline extension of sewer and water from the southern portion of the project site thorough Private Drive B / EVAE into the proposed project. Preliminary storm drainage plans include collecting storm water runoff into a series of underground storm drain lines and transporting storm water flows in a southerly direction into a series of stormwater bio- retention ponds and a detention pond at the southern portion of the site. Following treatment, storm water would be metered out to replicate the existing, predevelopment site condition. All storm water from the site would then be transported into a new outfall for release into Moller Creek, which then joins up with Tassajara Creek southwest of the project site. Improvements within and immediately adjacent to Moller Creek, south of the project site, include a culvert and related grading, and are not included in the Tassajara Highlands project. Moller Creek improvements are a separate project with environmental impacts analyzed in a separate Supplemental EIR (Moller Ranch/ Moller Creek Culvert Replacement Project SEIR, SCH # 200502146, certified by the Dublin City Council on December 18, 2012). Grading. The applicant proposes to grade the site to allow construction of the residential areas, roadways and the bio- retention/ detention ponds, which would partially be located on the project site. The grading concept would be to reduce the height of the existing hill feature and use the earthen material to fill other, flatter portion of the site. The preliminary grading plan indicates approximately 64,000 cubic yards of material would be hauled off of the site. This includes approximately 5,000 cubic yards of material that would be removed to create the bio- retention and storm drain detention basins. No destination for the material has been identified, but will be prior to issuance of a grading permit by the City. Erosion controls would be implemented during grading activities pursuant to City and Regional Water Quality Board requirements, as enforced by the City of Dublin, to protect surface water quality. A number of retaining walls are proposed to be constructed on the site, ranging in height from approximately 1 foot to 8 feet. Biological and hydrological resources. The applicant prepared an Addendum to the 2012 Biological Resources Analysis for the Tassajara Highlands Residential Development Project (May 2014). This document provides the current status of biological surveys for the site, including a wetland delineation verified by the USACE July 26, 2013, provides a status report on the regulatory permitting, and identifies avoidance and minimization measures (such as pre- construction surveys) in compliance City of Dublin Page 7 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 with CEQA mitigation measures. The applicant will remove any trees or out - buildings slated for removal during the biological window when potential special - status roosting bats are not present. This proactive avoidance measure is included in the Vargas MND and will also serve to remove trees before the bird nesting period. Inclusionary housing. The City of Dublin's inclusionary zoning ordinance requires that 12.5% of a project's dwelling units must be affordable to very low, low and moderate income households. Compliance could consist of constructing the required number of inclusionary units and/or paying an in -lieu fee to the City, or some other form of compliance subject to approval by the City. Requested land use approvals. A number of land use approvals are required from the City of Dublin to construct the project as proposed. These are described in more detail below. General Plan Amendment The City of Dublin General Plan Designates the Tassajara Highlands site as a mix of Medium Density Residential on the Vargas property and a combination of Medium/ High Density Residential and Neighborhood Commercial on the Fredrich property. The proposed General Plan land use designations would be a combination of Medium Density Residential and Open Space. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment Similar to the requested General Plan Amendment, land use designations on the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land Use Maps would be changed from Medium Density Residential, Medium/ High Density Residential and Neighborhood Commercial to a combination of Medium Density Residential and Open Space. PD rezoning with related Stage 1 & Stage 2 Development Plan. Previously approved Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plans would be replaced by the proposed Development Plan shown on Exhibit 4. A rezoning is being considered to ensure consistency with the requested General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments. Vesting Tentative Map. A Vesting Tentative Tract Map is proposed to subdivide the site into single - family lots, roads and other facilities. City of Dublin Hage tt Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 0 h 0 U T Y ro e 0 v m CITY OF DUBLIN TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS PROJECT INITIAL STUDY Exhibit 1 REGIONAL LOCATION 0 2 4 6 8 10 miles S A N P A B L 0 Martinez BAY 4 4 San 80 Concord 6w Rafael Richmond Mill 101 580 Valley Walnut 24 Creek Berkeley 0 680 Oakland San Francisco 580 gid�@aa S A N San Leandro DUBLIN F R A N CISCO N0 seo Daly City Livermore B A Y n 101 Pleasanton Hayward �. 92 280 San Mateo Fremont n � 1 Newark O Redwood City Half 84 Moon Bay Palo (0 Alto ^' 880 85 1101 680 zeo Sunnyvale Santa Clara San Jose 101 n CITY OF DUBLIN TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS PROJECT INITIAL STUDY Exhibit 1 REGIONAL LOCATION 0 2 4 6 8 10 miles 0 c 6 0 U m m v r PROJECT SITE STA C- OUN,-- CpN RA %oA COLJ ALA MED a m 0 13 m 0 i O a c U Z 1 -580 Blvd P�tia n a co 5aa�a 4 r CITY OF DUBLIN TASSAJARA HIGHLANDS PROJECT INITIAL STUDY Exhibit 2 SITE CONTEXT w H M N � U w X -.3 w O cc a N v N w 7 0 IL U 0 g OQ� U 0 LL Q � g /7 p1p . frS54Jrrr � J c i / f hP / IF �s. a w e A a T i o Mme, e Pao$ CA�K k a J � J. i 1 ry A P, ,s L C C C i v v v I-- Q z LU LU cnaz :5 O a w OWa M> aW 0 U W O cc CL cn 0 z Q J z 0 J = G C Q F- OQ� Cl) H N H U H ? I eC 7, V, m rty (Z Q) (1) Q Q) cc -:3 C) co z CL LU CL Cl) Lo Z x UJ z LU LLI D 0 cc IL U) a z z 0 LL o< N C/) 1. Project description: Development of the Tassajara Highlands site with up to 54 single- family residences, open spaces and roads. The project includes demolition of existing structures, re- grading of the site, installation of retaining walls and construction of a series of water quality ponds and a detention basin. Requested land use entitlements include amendments to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, a PD rezoning with related Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan, Site Development Review (SDR) and a Vesting Tentative Map 2. Lead agency: City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin CA 94568 3. Contact persons: Michael A Porto Consulting Planner (925) 833 6610 4. Project location: Generally located on the west side of Tassajara Road and east of Tassajara Creek. Assessor's Parcel Numbers 986- 0004 - 002 -01 & -03 5. Project sponsor: Tim Lewis Communities and STL Company, LLC 6. General Plan designation: Existing: Medium Density Residential Medium/ High Density Residential Neighborhood Commercial 7. Zoning: Proposed: Medium Density Residential Open Space PD- Planned Development 8. Other public agency required approvals: Approval of an Affordable Housing Agreement (City of Dublin); 1602 / 3 Streambed Alteration Permit (California Department of Fish and Game, possible); City of Dublin Page 15 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 • State Incidental Take Permit (California Department of Fish and Game, possible); • Section 404 Permit including a Section 7 consultation (under the Endangered Species Act) from the United States Department of Fish and Wildlife (United States Army Corps of Engineers, possible); • Section 401 Clean Water Certification (San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, possible); • Notice of Intent (San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board); • Issuance of demolition, building and grading permits (City of Dublin); and • Approval of water and sewer connections (DSRSD) City of Dublin Page 16 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "potentially significant impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. _ Aesthetics _ Agricultural - Air Quality Resources - Biological _ Cultural Resources - Geology /Soils Resources _ Hazards and - Hydrology / Water _ Land Use/ Hazardous Quality Planning Materials - Mineral Resources -- Noise -- Population/ Housing -- Public Services _ Recreation - Transportation/ Circulation -- Utilities/ Service - Mandatory Systems Findings of Significance Determination (to be completed by Lead Agency): On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and the previous Negative Declaration certified for this project by the City of Dublin adequately addresses potential impacts. _ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Negative Declaration will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be any new or substantially more severe significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects: a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards; and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed on the proposed Project, except for those impacts which were identified as significant and unavoidable and for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was previously adopted by the City. An Addendum to the Eastern Dublin Environmental Impact Report, the 2006 Mission Peak Properties /Fallon Crossing MND and the 2007 Vargas Property MND will be prepared. _ I find that the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects City of Dublin Page 17 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed on the proposed project. Signature: `,1 Date: Printed Name. J For: City of Dublin Page 18 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "no impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parenthesis following each question. A "no impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "no impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project- specific factors as well as general factors (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project- specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project - level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less- than - significant with mitigation, or less- than - significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less - than - Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less -than- Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less- than - significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier Analysis," as described in (5) below, may be cross - referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). The checklist will include a response "no new impact" in these circumstances. In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed: Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less- Than - Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site - specific conditions for the project. City of Dublin Page 19 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 6) Lead Agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances, etc.). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is a suggested form and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each agency should identify the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question and the mitigation measures identified, if any, to reduce the impact to a less than significant level. City of Dublin Page 20 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Environmental Impacts (Note: Source of determination listed in parenthesis. See listing of sources used to determine each potential impact at the end of the checklist) Note: A full discussion of each item is found following the checklist. 1. Aesthetics. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (Source: 2, 3, 4, 6) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (Source: 2,3 ,4,6) c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Source: 2, 3, 4, 6) d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Source: 6) 2. Agricultural Resources Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to a non- agricultural use? (Source: 2, 6) b) Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Source: 2,6) c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to a non- agricultural use? (Source: 2,6) 3. Air Quality (Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district may be relied on to make the following determinations). Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (Source: 2,7) b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? (Source: 2,7) City of Dublin Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X X Page 21 July 2014 c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? (2,3 ,4,7) d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Source: 2,6) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Source: 6) Biological Resources. Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ?(Source: 2,3,4, 7) b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Source: 2,3,4, 7) c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other means? (Source: Source: 2,3,4, 7) d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (Source: 3,4,7) e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree protection ordinances? (Source: 1, 7) City of Dublin Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X Page 22 July 2014 f) Conflict with the provision of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? (Source: 1,7) 5. Cultural Resources. Would the project a) Cause a substantial adverse impact in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Sec. 15064.5? (Source: 2,3, 4, 7) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to Sec. 15064.5 (Source: 2,3,7) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource, site or unique geologic feature? (Source: 2,3,7) d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of a formal cemetery? (6, 7) 6. Geology and Soils. Would the project a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault (Source: 2, 3, 4, 7) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking (2,6) iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? (2, 3, 4, 7) iv) Landslides? (2, 3, 4, 7) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (Source: 2,3, 6) c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or similar hazards (Source: 2, 3, 4, 7) d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (Source: 2, 3, 4, 7) City of Dublin Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X X X X X Page 23 July 2014 e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? (Source: 1, 2) 7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials (Source: 3, 4) b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Source: 3,4) c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Source: 3, 4) d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Sec. 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Source: 7) e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted within two miles of a public airport of public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (Source: 7) f) For a project within the vicinity of private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (Source: 7) g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with the adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Source: 7) City of Dublin Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X Page 24 July 2014 h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (Source: 1,2,4,5) 8. Hydrology and Water Quality. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (Source: 2, 5 ) b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g. the production rate of existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? (2) c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? (Source: 2,5,6) d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or areas, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? (Source: 5, 6) e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (Source: 5) f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? (Source: 3,5) g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? (Source: 7) City of Dublin Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X Page 25 July 2014 h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Source: 7) i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, and death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? (7) j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? (5) 9. Land Use and Planning. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? (Source: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Source: 1, 2) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? (1,2) 10. Mineral Resources. Would the project a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Source: 1, 2) b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general Plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Source: 1, 2) 11. Noise. Would the proposal result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (2, 3,4) b) Exposure of persons or to generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (Source: 2, 3, 4) c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above existing levels without the project? (2,3, 4) City of Dublin Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X X X X Page 26 July 2014 d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (2,3,4) e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working n the project area to excessive noise levels? (2, 3,4) f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Source: 7) 12. Population and Housing. Would the project a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (Source: 1, 2, 3, 4) b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (6) c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement of housing elsewhere? (Source: 6) 13. Public Services. Would the proposal: a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service rations, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services? (Sources: 5) Fire protection Police protection Schools Parks Other public facilities Solid Waste City of Dublin Initial Study(Tassajara Highlands Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X X X X X Page 27 July 2014 14. Recreation: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated (Source: 2, 3,4) b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Source: 2, 5) 15. Transportation and Traffic. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads or congestion at intersections)? (2,3,4) b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the County Congestion Management Agency for designated roads or highways? (2,3,4) c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (2,3,4) d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses, such as farm equipment? (5) e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (6) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (6) g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (such as bus turnouts and bicycle facilities) (1,2) City of Dublin Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X X rage ;eb July 2014 16. Utilities and Service Systems. Would the project a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (2, 3, 4,5) b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (2,3) c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (3,4,5) d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing water entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (5) e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the providers existing commitments? (5) f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? (5) g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? (5) 17. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? City of Dublin Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X X X X X X X Page 29 July 2014 b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects). c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No New Impact X X Sources used to determine potential environmental impacts 1. Eastern General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan 2. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan SEIR 3 Fredrich MND 4 Vargas MND 5. Discussion with City staff or service provider 6. Site Visit 7. Other Source XVII. Earlier Analyses a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. Portions of the environmental setting, project impacts and mitigation measures for this Initial Study refer to environmental information contained in the 1993 Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 91103064), hereinafter referred to as the Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR is a Program EIR which was prepared for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan of which this Project is a part. It was certified by the Dublin City Council on May 10, 1993. Following certification of the EIR, the Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for impacts including but not limited to: cumulative traffic, extension of certain community facilities (natural gas, electric and telephone service), regional air quality, noise and visual. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a large number of mitigation measures which apply to this Project and which would be applied to any development within the Project area. Specific mitigation measures identified in the certified Eastern Dublin EIR for potential impacts are referenced in the text of this Initial Study. City of Dublin Page 30 Initial StudyfTassajara Highlands Project July 2014 This Initial Study relies on two other adopted Mitigated Negative Declarations for the subject properties, as follows: • Mission Peak/ Fallon Crossing Mitigated Negative Declaration, adopted by City Council Resolution No. 71 -06 on May 16, 2006 ( "Fredrich Project MND. ") • Vargas Project Mitigated Negative Declaration, adopted by City Council Resolution No. 57 -07 on May 1, 2007 (Vargas Project MND). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and 15163, this Initial Study is intended to identify the potential for any new or substantially increased significant impacts on or of the project which were not evaluated in the Eastern Dublin EIR the Mission Peak MND or the Vargas Project MND and which would require additional environmental review. City of Dublin Page 31 Initial StudylTassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Attachment to Initial Study Discussion of Checklist 1. Aesthetics Environmental Setting The project is set in an existing rural area of Eastern Dublin that is transitioning to urban uses under the auspices of the City of Dublin General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin EIR, adopted in 1993. The project site is characterized by moderate to steep sloping hill in the south- central portion of the site that slopes to the north and west towards Tassajara Creek. Tassajara Road forms the easterly boundary of the site and Moller Creek flows just south of the site. Two existing dwellings and a number of agricultural outbuildings are located on the project site. A number of trees are also present on the site. Surrounding land uses include the Tipper property to the north (currently owned by the Singh family) that is a rural homestead. Land to the west is within a permanent open space easement area within and adjacent to Tassajara Creek. The Dublin Ranch West site (also known as the Wallis Ranch) lies west of the open space easement and has been approved for residential development at a mix of densities and product types. Moller Creek flows immediately to the south of the project site. Located to the east of the project site is a residential project, known as the Fallon Crossing/ Mission Peak that is currently under construction by Standard Pacific consisting of 106 single - family units. As a largely rural area, minimal light sources exist on the project site. Major light sources include house and security lighting associated with the two existing residences. Limited lighting exists to the east within the Fallon Crossing/ Mission Peak development, primarily security lighting. Regulatory framework Alameda County Scenic Route Element In May, 1966, Alameda County adopted a Scenic Route Element of the County General Plan. The Element identifies Tassajara Road as a Major Rural Road. The County's General Plan Element has been incorporated by reference into the City of Dublin General Plan. The Scenic Route Element contains the following principles that apply to scenic route rights -of -way: • Design scenic routes to minimize grading in rights -of -way; • Landscape rights -of -way of existing and proposed routes; • Utilize scenic route identification signs. City of Dublin Page 32 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Dublin General Plan. The project area is included in the Eastern Dublin Extended Planning Area. Implementing Policy C.2 of the General Plan states that "proposed site grading and means of access will not disfigure ridgelands." Further, Implementing Policy C. 5 requires development projects to be consistent with all applicable General Plan and Specific Plan policies." Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The City of Dublin adopted the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) in 1993 to guide the future development of approximately 7,200 acres of land in the eastern Dublin area. The Specific Plan includes a number of policies and programs dealing with visual resources, including but not limited to protection of ridgelines and ridgelands, scenic corridors, and hillside development. Eastern Dublin Scenic Corridor Policies and Standards. In 1996, the City of Dublin adopted scenic policies and standards for the Eastern Dublin area, known as the Eastern Dublin Scenic Corridor Policies and Standards. This document identifies the site as lying within Zone 5, the Fallon Village Open Space area. This corridor area is defined primarily by lands adjacent to public rights -of -way, which should be park, rural residential, open slopes or riparian drainage areas. Previous CEOA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated visual resource impacts from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include: • Mitigation Measure 3.8/ 1.0 reduced project impacts related to standardized tract development (IM 3.8/13) to a less- than - significant level. This mitigation requires future developers to establish visually distinct communities which preserves the character of the natural landscape by protecting key visual elements and maintaining views from major travel corridors. Mitigation Measure 3.8/2.0 reduced the impact of converting the rural and open space character of the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan area (IM 3.8/B) but not to a less- than - significant level. The mitigation measure requires implementation of the land use plan that emphasizes retention of predominant natural features. Even with adherence to this measure, IM 3.8/B would remain significant and unavoidable on both a project and cumulative level. • Mitigation Measure 3.8/3.0 would reduce the impact of obscuring distinctive natural features of the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan area (IM 3.8/C) but not to a less -than- significant level. The mitigation measure requires implementation of the land use plan that emphasizes retention of predominant natural features. • Mitigation Measures 3.8/4.0-4.5 reduced the impact of altering the visual quality of hillsides (IM 3.8/1)) to a less- than - significant level. These mitigation measures require implemtation of appropriate Eastern Dublin Specific Plan policies City of Dublin Page 33 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 including but not limited to use of sensitive grading design to minimize grading, use of existing topographic features, limiting use of flat pads for construction, using building designs that conform to natural land forms, recontouring hillside to resemble existing topography and minimizing the height of cut and fill slopes. Mitigation Measures 3.8/5.0-5.2 reduced the impact of altering the visual quality of ridges (IM 3.8/E) to a less- than - significant level. These mitigation measures limit development on main ridges that border the Specific Plan area to the north and east but are allowed on foreground hills, and would limit development in locations where scenic views would be obscured or would extend above a ridgetop. • Mitigation Measure 3.8/6.0 reduced the impact of altering the visual quality of watercourses (IM 3.8/ G) to a less- than - significant level. This mitigation measure protects Tassajara Creek and other stream courses from unnecessary alteration or disturbance, and adjoining development should be sited to maintain visual access to stream corridors. • Mitigation Measures 3.8/7.0 and 7/1 reduced impacts on scenic vistas (IM 3.8/1) to a less- than - significant level. These mitigation measures require protection of designated open space areas and directs the City to conduct a visual survey of the EDSP area to identify and map viewsheds. Vargas Project MND Mitigation Measure 1 requires submittal of a visual survey and analysis with future Stage 2 Planned Development applications to ensure that future developments on this site comply with the Eastern Dublin Scenic Corridor Policies; that views of the Tassajara Creek bank are protected; and, that distinctive natural features on the site will be visible, once development is complete. • Mitigation Measure 2 requires that future developments retain as much of the existing topographic pattern as possible. No new aesthetic impacts or mitigation measures were identified in the Mission Peak MND. The proposed project will be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures related to aesthetics set forth in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Vargas Project MND. Project Impacts a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista? No New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR identifies that implementation of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan would result in a potentially significant impact (Impact 3.8/I), development on the project area [i.e. the Eastern Dublin planning area] will alter the character of existing scenic vistas and may obscure important sightlines). Adherence to Mitigation Measure 3.8 / 7.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR reduced this City of Dublin Page 34 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 impact to a less- than - significant impact. This measure requires the City to complete a visual assessment and guidelines for the Eastern Dublin area. This has been completed. The proposed project would include lowering the height of the existing small hill on the site and raising the topographic grades of the northern and western portions of the site to construct project improvements. The portion of the site closest to Tassajara Creek would not be graded and would remain in its existing natural area. The Tassajara Road frontage of the project site would be changed from a generally undeveloped, natural area to a more urban streetscape, typical of other housing developments south of the site along Tassajara Road. The proposed streetscape appearance would include street trees, other ornamental plantings and a noise barrier wall. The streetscape appearance would be similar to other residential subdivisions located further south on Tassajara Road in the Eastern Dublin area and generally consistent with previous development approvals on the project site. This developed condition of the site was envisioned in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. Applicable mitigation measures contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the visual policies contained in the EDSP and Vargas project MND mitigation measures will apply to this project and no new or more severe significant impacts would occur. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including those within state scenic highway? No New Impact. The project site has extensive frontage along Tassajara Road, a County and City- designated scenic highway. The project site adjacent to Tassajara Road consists of natural and ornamental landscaping with no significant stands of native trees, significant rock outcrops or other significant scenic resources. Two single - family dwellings and a number of outbuildings have also been constructed o the site. The appearance of the project frontage is proposed to change from a largely natural condition to a more urban environment with the addition of ornamental trees and landscaping and a noise barrier wall. Proposed improvements adjacent along Tassajara Road have been anticipated in the Mission Peak MND and Vargas MND as well as the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The Eastern Dublin EIR identifies that implementation of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment to add new residential, commercial and similar urban uses in the then - vacant project area would result in a significant and unavoidable impact to the Eastern Dublin planning area (see EDSP Impact 3.8/B), including the Tassajara Highlands property. Mitigation measures have been included in the Eastern Dublin EIR to minimize hillside grading, although some amount of hillside grading would likely be needed to accommodate proposed development improvements. The project developer will also be required to comply with hillside grading requirements contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR to minimize the visual effects of grading. No new or more significant severe impacts would occur with respect to damage to scenic resources than analyzed in previous CEQA documents. No additional review is required. City of Dublin Page 35 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 c) Substantially degrade existing visual character or the quality of the site? No New Impact. The proposed project includes the consideration of a development plan on the Vargas and Fredrich properties. Aesthetic impacts would include disturbance of existing vegetation and paving of undeveloped land to create project roadways, grading of the area to create development areas and removal of existing single - family residences and outbuildings on the site. The Eastern Dublin EIR addressed the following potential impacts related to visual and aesthetics impacts of adopting the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan: Impact 3.8/B: Urban development of the project site will substantially alter the existing rural and open space qualities that characterize Eastern Dublin The Eastern Dublin EIR identified one measure to mitigate this impact (Mitigation Measure 3.8/2.0, "Implement the land use plan for the project site which emphasizes retention of predominant natural features... "). Both the approved and current development plans on the project site would adhere to this mitigation measure by preserving on -site natural features (Moller Creek and adjacent ridge- tops). However the Eastern Dublin EIR concluded that even with adherence to this mitigation, alteration of rural and open space on the project site would remain a potentially significant impact. A potential visual impact would be grading and recontouring of the existing hillside in the approximate center of the site which would be required to facilitate development on the project site. The Eastern Dublin EIR addresses this impact and included mitigation measures that reduced this impact to a less -than- significant level. No new or more severe significant impacts have been identified in this Initial Study with respect to degradation of the visual character of the site and no further review is required. d) Create light or glare? No New Impact. The project site contains minimal light sources and construction of the proposed project would add additional light sources in the form of streetlights along the proposed roadway as well as new housing and yard lights. Properties adjacent to the project to the north and east (Tipper and Moller Ranch) are primarily rural and/or contain special - status biological wildlife species. City of Dublin development requirements will be imposed as part of the normal and customary review process to restrict spillover of unwanted light off of the project site. No new or more severe significant impacts would result with respect to light and glare than has been previously analyzed in previous CEQA documents. No additional review is required. 2. Agricultural and Forestry Resources Environmental Setting The Eastern Dublin EIR identifies the project site as a combination of 'locally important farmland" and "other lands," which lie adjacent to Tassajara Creek (see EDSP Figure 3.1 -B). The Vargas MND states that this property was used for cattle grazing prior to the City of Dublin Page 36 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 1960's but this activity ceased when the residential dwelling was constructed during this time period. Grazing also likely occurred on the Fredrich property as well, but has also ceased. No other agricultural operations have been observed on the project site. Figure 3.1 -C contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR notes that a 5 -acre portion of the Vargas property was under a Williamson Act Land Conservation Agreement in 1993, as of the date of EIR publication. The EIR also stated that the Contract was non - renewed and this contract has since expired. No other Williamson Act contracted properties exist on the site. A number of non -native trees exist on the site which have been planted as landscaping for existing residences. No forests or major stands of trees have been observed on the site, including Heritage Trees as defined in the Dublin Municipal Code (reference: "Heritage Tree Letter, Vargas / Fredrich Property, Dublin CA" by HortScience, dated July 3, 2014). Previous CEQA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified several potential impacts related to agricultural resources. Impact IM 3.1 / C stated that discontinuation of agricultural uses would be an insignificant impact due to on -going urbanization trends in Dublin and the Tri- Valley area. Impact 3.1 /D identified a loss of lands of Farmlands of Local Importance with approval and implementation of the General Plan and Specific Plan. This was also noted as an insignificant impact. Impact 3.1 / F stated that buildout of Specific Plan land uses would have a significant and unavoidable impact on cumulative loss of agricultural and open space lands. Finally, Impact IM 3.1 / E noted indirect impacts related to non - renewal of Williamson Act contracts. This impact was also identified as an insignificant impact. Fredrich Project MND. No impact to agricultural resources were identified in this document. Vargas Project MND. Agricultural resource were found to be less- than - significant in the Vargas MND. Project Impacts a,c) Convert prime farmland to a non - agricultural use or involve other changes which could result in conversion of farmland to a non - agricultural use? No New Impact. No significant impacts were identified with respect to agricultural resources in previous CEQA documents listed above. No new conditions have been identified in this Initial Study with respect to conversion of prime farmland to a non- agricultural use and residential development is proposed as assumed in the EDEIR. No new or more severe significant impacts would result than were analyzed in previous CEQA documents for this site and additional analysis is not required. City of Dublin Page 37 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 The proposed project would continue to contribute to cumulative loss of agricultural land and open space, which was identified as a significant and unavoidable impact in the Eastern Dublin EIR (Impact 3.1 / F). b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No New Impact. The City of Dublin has previously zoned the project site for residential uses. No Williamson Act contracts presently exist on the site nor are any agricultural operations on- going. No new or more severe significant impacts would result than have been previously analyzed in other CEQA documents for the site. No additional analysis is required. d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to a non forest use? No Impact. No forest land exists on the project site and no impact would result with respect to this topic. No additional analysis is required. e) Involve other changes which, due to their location or nature, could result of forest land to a non forest use? No Impact. See item "d," above. 3. Air Quality Environmental Setting The project is within the Amador Valley, a part of the Livermore sub - regional air basin distinct from the larger San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. The Livermore sub -air basin is surrounded on all sides by high hills or mountains. Significant breaks in the hills surrounding the air basin are Niles Canyon and the San Ramon Valley, which extends northward into Contra Costa County. Previous CEQA Documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated air quality impacts from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include: Mitigation Measure 3.11 / 1.0 reduced impacts related to emission of construction generated dust to a less- than - significant level by requiring construction projects to water graded areas in the late morning and end of the day, cleanup mud and dust onto adjacent streets on a daily basis, covering of haul trucks, avoiding unnecessary idling of construction equipment, revegetating graded areas and similar measures. Mitigation Measures 3.11/2.0-4.0 reduced project and cumulative impacts related to vehicle emission from construction equipment (IM 3.11 /B) but not to a less - than- significant level. These mitigations require emission control from on -site equipment, completion of a construction impact reduction plan and others. Even with adherence to these mitigations, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. City of Dublin Page 38 Initial Study/ Fassajara Highlands Project July 2014 • Mitigation Measures 3.11/5.0-11.0 reduced mobile source emission from ROG and NOx (IM 3.11 / C) but not to a less- than - significant level. Mitigation measures require coordination of growth with transportation plans and other measures. Many of which are at a policy (not a project) level. Even with adherence to adopted mitigations, IM 3.11 / C would remain significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measures 3.11/12.0-13.0 reduced project and cumulative impacts related to stationary source emissions (IM 3.11 / E) but not to a less -than- significant level. The two adopted mitigations require reduction of stationary source emissions to the extent feasible by use of energy conservation techniques and recycling of solid waste material. Even with adherence to the two measures, stationary source emissions would remain significant and unavoidable. Fredrich Project MND. The Fredrich MND identified three supplemental air quality mitigation measures in addition to EDSP mitigation measures: • Mitigation Measure 14 required contractors to water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or other materials that could be blown by the wind. Mitigation Measure 15 required contractors to sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas of construction sites • Mitigation Measure 16 required contractors to install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways. Vargas Project MND. The Vargas MND included Mitigation Measures 14 through 16 as contained in the Fredrich MND. The proposed project will be required to adhere to applicable mitigation measures related to air quality. Project Impacts a) Would the project conflict or obstruct implementation of an air quality plan? No New Impact. The amount of residential development proposed on the Tassajara Highlands site would be less than previously considered and approved by the City of Dublin. The current project includes up to 54 single - family dwellings. Previous CEQA documents and land use approvals included the development of up to 68 dwellings on the Fredrich property and 33 dwellings on the Vargas property for a total of up to 101 dwellings. Thus, the current project would represent a reduction of up to 47 dwellings from currently approved plans. The number of approved dwellings, 101 dwellings, was used in the preparation of the existing Regional Clean Air Plan. Therefore, approval and implementation of the proposed project would not represent a substantial dwelling unit increase that would conflict with or obstruct the regional clean air plan. No new or more severe significant impacts would result than was previously analyzed in other CEQA documents. No additional analysis is required. City of Dublin Page 39 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Related Criteria Air Pollutant Precursor Screening Level Sizes" Qattp:/ /www.baagmd.gov /- /media /Files /Plannin %20ar1d(,20Research /CEQA / Draft BAAOMD CEQA Guidelines May 2010 Final ashx) establish the minimum residential project sizes in terms of dwelling units that, below which, no air quality impacts would occur. For single - family dwellings, the following dwelling unit sizes are included in the screening level. • Operation Criteria (NOX): 325 single - family dwellings • GHG Screening: 56 single - family dwellings a Construction (ROG): 114 single- family dwellings Since the proposed project would contain 54 dwellings, below all of the District's air quality screening levels, there would be no supplemental impact. There would be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to violation of air quality standards than has been previously analyzed. No additional review is required. The proposed Tassajara Highlands project would continue to contribute to the cumulative impacts related to dust deposition, construction equipment emissions, mobile source emissions and stationary source emissions, but to a somewhat lesser degree than previously analyzed due to fewer dwellings proposed. These impact (Impacts (IM/3.11/ A, B,C and E contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR) were was found to be significant and unavoidable when the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan was approved. c) Would the project result in cumulatively considerable air pollutants? No New Impact. The number of dwelling units included in the Tassajara Highlands fall below the minimum screening thresholds for a significant air quality impact on a project and cumulative basis and is less than half of the units considered in prior CEQA reviews. The number of build -out dwelling units would also be less than currently included in the Regional Clean Air Plan. So there would be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to cumulative air quality impacts than have been previously analyzed and no additional review is needed. d,e) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial significant pollutant concentrations or create objectionable odors? No New Impact. No sensitive receptors, including but not limited to schools or hospitals, exist or are planned within or adjacent to the project area, so no impacts would result. Similarly, the site is not located adjacent to any freeways or major highway corridors that would release significant air emissions. Since the proposed project does not include manufacturing or similar uses uses, no objectionable odors would be created. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified this impact as a potentially significant cumulative impact which could not be mitigated to achieve the eight -fold reduction in stationary source emissions needed to meet City of Dublin Page 40 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 the insignificant threshold and, pursuant to CEQA, the City of Dublin adopted a Statement of Overriding Consideration for this impact. No new severe significant impacts are identified in this Initial Study beyond those identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and other CEQA documents ad no additional analysis is needed. 4. Biological Resources Environmental Setting The project site is located east of Tassajara Creek with Moller Creek, a tributary of Tassajara Creek, flowing south of the site in a generally northeast - southwest direction south of the project site. The Eastern Dublin EIR identifies the biological character of the Tassajara Highlands site as "ruderal field" which contains a mix of native and non -native species, primarily weedy species such as thistles, mustards and similar grasses (see EDSP EIR Figure 3.7- A). Non - native, introduced trees and shrubs have been planted on the site as part of existing residences. Based on a more recent biological analysis of the site ('Biological Resources Analysis Report Addendum for the Tassajara Highlands residential Development Project" prepared by Marylee Guinon LLC and Olberding Environmental Inc, dated May 2014.) This report is hereby incorporated by reference into this Initial Study and is available for review at the Dublin Community Development Department during normal business hours.). The May 2014 biological report also notes that in addition to ruderal grassland, the site contains creek channel and valley foothill vegetation types. The report notes that 1.47 acres of the site have been developed with dwellings, outbuildings and access roads. The western and southern boundaries of the site are bordered by Tassajara Creek (west) and Moller Creek (south). These area support riparian habitat, including but not limited to stand of arroyo willows and similar plants. Small area of wetlands and Waters of the US were identified on the Vargas property in previous CEQA documents, including 0.483 acre of potential jurisdictional wetlands. Existing grassland habitat on the site provides suitable habitat for a range of amphibians, reptiles birds and mammals, although the quality of habitat has been degraded by existing housing on the site, the presence of outbuildings and previous cultivation of portions of the site. A number of these species are considered special - status, protected species. An analysis of existing trees on the site were conducted by a Hortscience dated January 2007 ( "Updated Tree Report, Vargas /Fredrich Property. Dublin CA, January 2007." A supplemental letter from Hortscience was submitted on July 3, 2014. These reports are hereby incorporated by reference into this Initial Study and is available for review at the Dublin Community Development Department during normal business hours. The Hortscience arborist report found sixty (60) trees on the site, including a mix of non- native, introduced trees near residences and a stand of native oak trees near Tassajara Creek. City of Dublin Page 41 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Regulatory framework California Fish and Wildlife Code Section 1600. Streams, lakes, and riparian vegetation as habitat for fish and other wildlife species, are subject to jurisdiction by CDFW under Sections 1600 -1616 of the California Fish and Game Code. Any activity that will do one or more of the following: 1) substantially obstruct or divert the natural flow of a river, stream, or lake; 2) substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of a river, stream, or lake; or 3) deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it can pass into a river, stream, or lake; generally require a 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement. The term "stream," which includes creeks and rivers, is defined in the California Code of Regulations (CCR) as follows: "a body of water that flows at least periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and supports fish or other aquatic life. This includes watercourses having a surface or subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation" (14 CCR 1.72). In addition, the term stream can include ephemeral streams, dry washes, watercourses with subsurface flows, canals, aqueducts, irrigation ditches, and other means of water conveyance if they support aquatic life, riparian vegetation, or stream- dependent terrestrial wildlife. Riparian is defined as, "on, or pertaining to, the banks of a stream;" therefore, riparian vegetation is defined as, "vegetation, which occurs in and /or adjacent to a stream and is dependent on, and occurs because of, the stream itself." Removal of riparian vegetation also requires a Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFG. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act gives the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Corps regulatory and permitting authority regarding discharge of dredged or fill material into "navigable waters of the United States." Section 502(7) of the Clean Water Act defines navigable waters as "waters of the United States, including territorial seas." Section 328 of Chapter 33 in the Code of Federal Regulations defines the term "waters of the United States" as it applies to the jurisdictional limits of the authority of the Corps under the Clean Water Act. A summary of this definition of "waters of the U.S." in 33 CFR 328.3 includes (1) waters used for commerce; (2) interstate waters and wetlands; (3) "other waters" such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, and wetlands; (4) impoundments of waters; (5) tributaries to the above waters; (6) territorial seas; and (7) wetlands adjacent to waters. Therefore, for purposes of determining Corps jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act, "navigable waters" as defined in the Clean Water Act are the same as "waters of the U.S." defined in the Code of Federal Regulations above. The limits of Corps jurisdiction under Section 404 as given in 33 CFR Section 328.4 are as follows: (a) Territorial seas: three nautical miles in a seaward direction from the baseline; (b) Tidal waters of the U.S.: high tide line or to the limit of adjacent non -tidal waters; (c) Non -tidal waters of the U.S.: ordinary high water mark or to the limit of adjacent wetlands; (d) Wetlands: to the limit of the wetland. Some areas that meet the technical criteria for wetlands or waters may not be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act. Included in this category are some man- City of Dublin Page 42 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 induced wetlands, which are areas that have developed at least some characteristics of naturally occurring wetlands due to either intentional or incidental human activities. Examples of man - induced wetlands may include, but are not limited to, irrigated wetlands, impoundments, or drainage ditches excavated in uplands, dredged material disposal areas, and depressions within construction areas. In addition, some isolated wetlands and waters may also be considered outside of Corps jurisdiction as a result of the Supreme Court's decision in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (531 U.S. 159 (2001)). Isolated wetlands and waters are those areas that do not have a surface or groundwater connection to, and are not adjacent to a "navigable waters of the U.S. ", and do not otherwise exhibit an interstate commerce connection. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1341) requires any applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity that may result in a discharge of a pollutant into waters of the United States to obtain a certification from the state in which the discharge originates or would originate, or, if appropriate, from the interstate water pollution control agency having jurisdiction over the affected waters at the point where the discharge originates or would originate, that the discharge will comply with the applicable effluent limitations and water quality standards. A certification obtained for the construction of any facility must also pertain to the subsequent operation of the facility. The responsibility for the protection of water quality in California rests with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and its nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs). Federal and California Endangered Species Acts. The Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) of 1973 prohibits federal agencies from authorizing, permitting, or funding any action that would jeopardize the continued existence of a plant or animal species listed or a candidate for listing as Threatened or Endangered under the ESA. If a federal agency is involved with a proposed action or project that may adversely affect a listed plant or animal, that agency must enter into consultation with the USFWS under Section 7 (a) (2) of the FESA. Individuals, corporations, and state or local agencies with proposed actions or projects that do not require authorizing, permitting, or funding from a federal agency but that may result in the "take" of listed species or candidate species are required to apply to the USFWS for a Section 10(a) incidental take permit. The State of California enacted similar laws to the FESA, the California Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) in 1977 and the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) in 1984. The CESA expanded upon the original NPPA and enhanced legal protection for plants, but the NPPA remains part of the California Fish and Game Code. To align with the FESA, CESA created the categories of "threatened" and "endangered" species. The State converted all animal species listed as "rare" under the FESA into the CESA as threatened species, but did not do so for rare plants. Thus, these laws provide the legal framework for protection of California - listed rare, threatened, and endangered plant and animal species. CDFW implements NPPA and CESA, and its Wildlife and Habitat Data Analysis Branch maintain the CNDDB, a computerized inventory of information on the general location and status of California's rarest plants, animals, and natural communities. During the CEQA review process, CDFW is given the opportunity to City of Dublin Page 43 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 comment on the potential of the proposed project to affect listed plants and animals. East Alameda County Conservation Strategy. The project site is located in the East Alameda County Conservation Strategy ( "Conservation Strategy ") Study Area. The Conservation Strategy is intended to provide an effective framework to protect, enhance, and restore natural resources in eastern Alameda County, while improving and streamlining the environmental permitting process for impacts resulting from infrastructure and development projects. The City of Dublin is a partner in the Conservation Strategy and uses the document to provide a baseline inventory of biological resources and conservation priorities during project -level planning and environmental permitting. Eastern Dublin Comprehensive Stream Restoration Program. The Eastern Dublin Comprehensive Stream Restoration Program was adopted by the City of Dublin in 1996 as an implementation program required by the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan. The purpose of this document is to provide more detailed requirements relating to hydrologic and biological conditions for individual development projects proposed adjacent to Tassajara Creek and its tributaries, specifically to ensure that Tassajara Creek restoration policies and programs contained in the Eastern Dublin General Plan and Specific Plan are fully implemented. Previous CEQA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated impacts to biological resources from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include: • Mitigation Measures 3.7/ 1.0 -4.0 reduced impacts related to direct habitat loss (IM 3.7/A) to a less -than- significant level. These mitigations require minimization of direct habitat loss due to development, preparation of vegetation management and enhancement plans and development of a grazing management plan by the City of Dublin. • Mitigation Measure 3.7/5.0 reduced impacts related to indirect loss of vegetation removal (IM 3.7/B) to a less- than - significant level. Mitigation Measure 3.7/5.0 requires revegetation of graded or disturbed areas as quickly as possible. Mitigation Measures 3.7/6.0 -17.0 reduced impacts related to loss or degradation of botanically sensitive habitats (IM 3.7/C) but not to a less - than - significant level. These measures require a wide range of steps to be taken by future developers to minimize impacts to sensitive habitat areas, including preserving natural stream corridors, incorporating natural greenbelts and open space into development projects, preparation of individual wetland delineations, preparation of individual erosion and sedimentation plans and similar actions. • Mitigation Measures 3.7/18.0-19.0 reduced impacts related to the San Joaquin kit fox (IM 3.7/D) to a less -than- significant level. These measures require City of Dublin Page 44 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 consultation with appropriate regulatory agencies regarding the possibility of kit fox on project sites and restrictions on use of pesticides and herbicides. • Mitigation Measures 3.7/20.0 -22.0 reduced impacts related to the tri- colored blackbird (IM 3.7/I) to a less -than- significant level. These measures require preconstruction surveys for this species and protection of impacted habitat areas. These measures also apply to burrowing owl and badger species. • Mitigation Measures 3.7/23.0 -24.0 reduced impacts related to destruction of Golden Eagle nesting sites (IM 3.7/J) to a less- than - significant level. These measures require preconstruction surveys for this species and protection of impacted habitat areas. • Mitigation Measure 3.7/25.0 reduced impacts related to loss of Golden Eagle foraging habitat (IM 3.7/ K) to a less -than- significant level. This measure requires the identification of a Golden Eagle protection zone within the Eastern Dublin planning area. • Mitigation Measure 3.7/26.0 reduced impacts related to Golden Eagle and other raptor electrocution (IM 3.7/L) to a less- than - significant level. This measure requires undergrounding of electrical transmission facilities. • Mitigation Measure 3.7/20.0,27.0 reduced impacts related to American badger (IM 3.7/M, N) to a less- than - significant level. This measure mandates a minimum buffer of 300 feet around burrowing owl nesting sites and American badger breeding sites during the breeding season. • Mitigation Measure 3.7/28.0 reduced impacts related to special status invertebrates (IM 3.7/S) to a less -than- significant level. This measure requires follow -on special surveys for these species during appropriate times of the year. The Eastern Dublin EIR also addresses potential impacts and mitigation measures regarding bald eagle, peregrine falcons, red - legged frog, California tiger salamander, western pond turtle the prairie falcon, northern harrier, black - shouldered kite, sharp - shinned hawk, Cooper's hawk, short -eared owl and California horned lizard. Fredrich Project MND. This document includes the following applicable mitigation measures: Mitigation Measure 17 required the completion of spring surveys for big tar plant, large- flowered fiddleneck, diamond petaled California poppy, Congdon s tarplant and round - leaved filaree prior to start of grading or construction. Results of the surveys shall be provided to the City and California Department of Fish & Wildlife prior to construction. If these species are found, they shall be protected in place or safely relocated. • Mitigation Measure 18 required that, if required by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service or the California Department of Fish and Game, surveys for California City of Dublin Page 45 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Tiger Salamander, red - legged frog and western pond turtle shall be conducted at least 60 days prior to start of construction. • Mitigation Measure 19 required that if California tiger salamander species are found on the site, a management plan shall be prepared and approved by appropriate resources regulatory agencies to protect these species. • Mitigation Measure 20 required the installation of a permanent herpetological fence or barrier around the north, east and southern area of the site. • Mitigation Measure 21 required California tiger salamander larval surveys be conducted in the unnamed tributary for the proposed storm drain outfall to determine the presence or absence of CTS larvae. If found, a CTS management plan shall include methods to protect CTA at the outfall location. • Mitigation Measure 22 required completion of a pre - construction survey for nesting raptors prior to commencement of grading within 100 feet of a known nesting tree. Vegetation and tree removal shall be conducted outside of the raptor breeding season. • Mitigation Measure 23 required completion of a pre - construction survey for California horned lark and other ground- nesting birds prior to grading or construction. If these species are found, a protective buffer shall be placed around the nesting area until the young have fledged. • Mitigation Measure 24 required completion of a pre- construction survey for burrowing owls prior to grading or construction between September 31 and January 31. If found, construction shall be limited within 150 feet of any occupied nest. Owls may be removed from the site with necessary permits issued by the California Department of Fish & Wildlife. • Mitigation Measure 25 required a pre - construction survey during the nesting season for burrowing owl and, if found, a minimum 250 -foot wide buffer shall be maintained around active nests during the breeding season. • Mitigation Measure 26 required that if destruction of occupied burrowing owl nests are proposed, a the developer shall prepare a strategy to replace burrows by enhancing existing burrows or creating artificial burrows at a 2:1 ratio on protected lands. The plan shall be approved by the California Department of Fish & Wildlife. • Mitigation Measure 30 required that all protection measures required by the California Department of Fish & Wildlife and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service are implemented and maintained. • Mitigation Measure 31 required all construction personnel receive an education training program regarding special - status species and protection measures. • Mitigation Measure 33 required all grading activity to occur during the dry season to the extent practical. City of Dublin Page 46 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 • Mitigation Measure 34 required that any riparian habitat removed to be replaced by replacement riparian habitat at a 3:1 ratio subject to the approval of the California Department of Fish & Wildlife. As part of this measure, a Riparian Habitat Management Plan shall be prepared, consistent with the Eastern Dublin Comprehensive Management Plan and Dublin Ranch Tassajara Creek management Plan. • Mitigation Measure 35 required the project developer to provide proof that all necessary permits and approvals have been obtained from necessary biological regulatory agencies prior to issuance of any City permits. • Mitigation Measure 36 required the project to comply with the Eastern Dublin San Joaquin Kit Fox Protection Plan. Vargas Project MND. The Vargas project MND contains the following mitigation measures: • Mitigation Measure 7 required a pre - construction survey for nesting raptors prior to start of grading operations within 100 feet of any known trees with nests. If active nests are found, a buffer shall be established around the tree between January 1 and August 1, or until the young have fledged. Removal of vegetation with a know raptor nest shall occur during the non - nesting season. • Mitigation Measure 8 required the completion of a pre - construction survey for Red - legged frog no more than 60 days prior to construction or grading. Should this species be identified, a qualified biologist shall work with appropriate regulatory agencies to determine additional measures to avoid impacts to this specie. • Mitigation Measure 9 required the completion of a pre - construction survey for California Tiger Salamander no more than 60 days prior to construction or grading. Should this species be identified, a qualified biologist shall work with appropriate regulatory agencies to determine additional measures to avoid impacts to this specie. • Mitigation Measure 10 required that if California Tiger Salamander are found on the site, a California Tiger Salamander management plan is to be prepared and approved by appropriate biological regulatory agencies prior to start of construction. At minimum, the management plan shall include installation of barrier fences, a trapping and relocation plan, on -site presence of a qualified biologist during construction and limiting grading and vegetation clearance within a 750 -foot radius of California Tiger Salamander breeding and migration areas. • Mitigation Measure 11 required the installation of a permanent herpetological fence or barrier around the north, east and southern area of the residential portion of the site. • Mitigation Measure 12 required compliance with the Eastern Dublin San Joaquin Kit Fox Protection Plan. • Mitigation Measure 13 required the completion of a pre - construction survey for Southwestern pond turtle along the Tassajara Creek corridor. If found on City of Dublin Page 47 Initial StudylTassajara Highlands Project July 2014 site, turtles shall be relocated by a qualified biologist and the site blocked from future occupancy by turtles. • Mitigation Measure 14 required the completion of a pre - construction survey for burrowing owls if ground disturbance is to occur between September 1 and January 31. If no overwintering birds are present, burrows may be removed prior to construction. If owls must be removed during this period passive relocation measures shall be prepared and implemented based on current biological regulatory guidelines prior to construction. • Mitigation Measure 15 required that if construction is scheduled during the burrowing owl nesting season (Feb. 1— Sept. 1), a pre - construction survey shall be conducted within 30 days prior to ground disturbance. A minimum 250 -foot wide buffer shall be maintained during the breeding season around active nests to avoid direct take of individuals. • Mitigation Measure 16 required that if occupied owl burrows are destroyed either during the breeding or non - breeding season, a strategy shall be developed and implemented to replace such destroyed burrows by enhancing existing burrows or creating artificial burrows at a 2:1 ratio on nearby lands and shall include permanent protection of a minimum of 6.5 acres of burrowing owl habitat per pair or unpaired resident owls agencies to determine additional measures to avoid impacts to this specie. • Mitigation Measure 17 required the completion of a pre - construction surveys for special - status plant species prior to ground disturbance. Any rare plants shall be plotted and biological regulatory agencies notified of their presence. Special - status plants shall be protected from site construction or relocated to an alternative site as required by the resource agency. • Mitigation Measure 18 required the approval of a formal wetland delineation from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers prior to issuance of building permits or a grading permit. • Mitigation Measure 19 required the project developer to retain a qualified biologist to develop a plant to mitigate impacts to 0.397 acre of wetlands at a 2:1 ratio and 0.086 acre of waters of the United States at a 1:1 ratio. Appropriate methods of mitigation include creation of replacement wetlands or other methods as approved by the Corps of Engineers. • Mitigation Measure 20 required that construction and grading activities related to the trail system and grading activities located within the 100 foot creek setback shall be protected during construction of the trail and water quality pond and shall not occur during the wet season (Oct. 1 -April 15). • Mitigation Measure 21 required that prior to issuance of a building or grading permit, a creek and riparian resources protection plan shall be prepared for construction of a trail and water quality pond. At minimum, the plan shall include construction fencing, project schedule and erosion control measures. The proposed project will be required to adhere to applicable biological resource mitigation measures contained in the previous CEQA documents prepared for the site. City of Dublin Page 48 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Project Impacts a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a candidate, sensitive, or special- status species? No New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR, Vargas and Fredrich MNDs all document the presence of special - status plant and wildlife species on the project site. Numerous mitigation measures are included in these various documents to reduce impacts to candidate, sensitive and special- status species to a less -than significant level. These are listed above. As noted above, the project site was analyzed in multiple previous CEQA documents, each with slightly different mitigation requirements. To provide a consistent method of monitoring biological mitigation measures, a recommended condition of project approval is to have a qualified biologist prepare a Comprehensive Biological Resources Management Plan to compile the various biological mitigation measures contained in the previous CEQA documents in a logical manner. Completion of this Plan, prior to issuance of a grading permit, will ensure that all previous applicable measures are logically complied to eliminate overlap and duplication and be monitored at the appropriate stage of the proposed project. Therefore, no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to candidate, sensitive or special - status species would occur than have been analyzed in the three previous CEQA documents. No additional analysis is required. The proposed project would continue to contribute to cumulative loss or degradation of botanically sensitive habitat, which was identified as a significant and unavoidable impact (IM 3.7/C) in the Eastern Dublin EIR. b, c) Have a substantial adverse impact on riparian habitat or federally protected wetlands? Mo New Impact. Wetlands and waters of the United States have been identified on the project site and a wetland delineation was approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on July 26, 2013. An application for a water quality certification has been submitted to the Regional Water Quality Control Board was submitted in early 2014 and approval is pending. Also, a Streambed Alteration Agreement application has been filed with the California Department of Fish & Wildlife and approval is pending. Mitigation Measures have been included in the previously adopted CEQA documents to reduce such impacts to a less- than - significant level. The Comprehensive Biological Resources Management Plan shall also address impacts and previous mitigation measures addressing riparian habitat and wetlands. No new or more severe significant impacts would occur than have been previously analyzed with respect to this topic. No additional analysis is required. d) Interfere with movement of native fish or wildlife species? No New Impact. Mitigation measures contained in previous CEQA documents prepared to analyze previous development applications on the site contain mitigation measures that reduced this impact to a less- than - significant level. However, since there have been several previous CEQA documents adopted and /or certified for the site, a City of Dublin Page 49 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 recommended condition of project approval will require that adopted mitigation measures from previous CEQA documents dealing with interference of fish or wildlife movement be included in the Comprehensive Biological Resources Management Plan to eliminate duplication and overlap. No new or more severe significant impacts would occur than have been previously analyzed with respect to potential interference with fish or wildlife movement and no additional analysis is required. e, f) Conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources or any adopted Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans? No New Impact. Approval and construction of the proposed project could affect native oak trees and other trees species on the site. The City of Dublin affords Heritage Tree status to any oak, bay, cypress, maple, redwood, buckeye, or sycamore tree with a main trunk of at least twenty -four inches in diameter when measured at fifty -two inches above the natural grade; trees required for preservation under an approved development plan, zoning permit, use permit, site development review, or subdivision map. The HortScience arborist report did not identify the presence of any heritage trees on the site. The project site lies within the Eastern Alameda County Conservation Strategy ( EACCS) planning area. The City of Dublin utilizes the Conservation Strategy as guidance for environmental permitting for public projects, and private development projects are encouraged to use the EACCS as a resource as well. The Conservation Strategy embodies a regional approach to permitting and mitigation for wildlife habitat impacts associated with land development, infrastructure, and other activities. The Conservation Strategy is neither a Habitat Conservation Plan nor a Natural Community Conservation Plan, but is a document intended to provide guidance during the project planning and permitting process to ensure that impacts are offset in a biologically effective manner. No HCP or NCCP was identified in the prior CEQA documents and none applies at present. There would therefore be no new or significantly more severe impacts with respect to this topic than previously analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and 2002 Transit Center EIR. No new mitigation measures are required. 5. Cultural Resources Environmental Setting Potentially historic structures. Two single - family dwellings exist on the site, which appear to date from the early to mid- 1960's. The dwellings are typical of mid - century modern design and construction and do not qualify as unique historic structures. A number of smaller agricultural outbuildings have also been built on the site and are of the same age as the primary dwellings. Similar to the primary dwellings, none of these buildings are considered historic. The confirmation of no historic status for the Vargas house was confirmed by a cultural resource investigation of the Vargas property by the firm of Basin Research Associates dated July 2006 and included in the Vargas MND document. City of Dublin Page 50 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 The Eastern Dublin EIR did not identify any significant historic structures on the project site. Underground cultural resources. The Basin Research Associates cultural survey in 2006 did not identify the presence of underground cultural resources on the Vargas property portion of the site. A cultural resources records search was conducted by the Northwest Information Center for the realignment of Tassajara Road and Fallon Road adjacent to the Fredrich property in 2002. No significant resources were identified in the vicinity of this Eastern Dublin, although the records search noted the presence of other significant resources adjacent to Tassajara Creek to the south, near the I -580 freeway. These resources are not located on the project site. Native American resources. The Native American Heritage Commission review of the Sacred Lands File did not indicate the presence of Native American cultural resources within the project area. No former Native American villages, traditional use of the area or contemporary use of the area have been identified on or adjacent to the project site. Previous CEOA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated impacts to cultural resources from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include: Mitigation Measures 3.9/1.0 -4.0 reduced impacts related to disruption or destruction of identified prehistoric resources (IM 3.9 /A) to a less -than- significant level. These mitigations mandate a program of mechanical and /or hand subsurface testing for the presence or absence of midden deposits, recordation of identified midden sites, collection and /or testing of resources and development of a site - specific protection program for prehistoric sites. Mitigation Measures 3.9/5.0 -6.0 reduced impacts related to the disruption or destruction of unidentified prehistoric resources (IM 3.913) to a less -than- significant level. Mitigation Measures 3.9/7.0 -12.0 reduced impacts related to disruption or destruction of identified historic resources (IM 3.9/C) to a less- than - significant level. These measures would include preparing site - specific archival research for individual resources, encourage adaptive reuse of historic resources, recordation of historic sites on local state and federal registers, as appropriate and development of preservation programs for significant resources. Fredrich Project MND. The Fredrich MND referenced previous cultural resource impacts and mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR. Vargas Project MND. The Vargas MND contained one mitigation measure that reduced cultural resources on the Vargas site to a less -than- significant level. Mitigation Measure City of Dublin Page 51 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 30 required implementation of a contingency plan if an unrecorded resource is found during project construction. Work shall be halted in the vicinity of the site until a qualified archeologist can inspect the find and, if necessary, develop and implement a testing and recovery plan. The proposed project will be required to comply with the above cultural resource mitigation measures. Project Impacts a) Cause substantial adverse change to significant historic resources? No New Impact. No historic resources have been identified in the project area in both the Eastern Dublin EIR and the supplemental cultural resources survey completed for the Vargas property by Basin Research Associates in July 2006. Basin staff found that the existing dwellings on the Vargas property did not qualify for inclusion on the California Register of Historic Places and were therefore, not considered historic resources. The existing dwelling on the Fredrich property is of approximately the same age and similarly does not qualify as a significant resource. No new or more severe supplemental impacts have therefore been identified for the proposed project than were disclosed in previous CEQA documents and no additional analysis is required. b, c) Cause a substantial adverse impact or destruction to archeological or paleontological resources? No New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified a remote but potentially significant possibility that construction activities, including site grading, trenching and excavation, may uncover significant archeological and /or paleontological resources on development sites. The Eastern Dublin EIR categorized these resources as pre - historic cultural resources. Three potential pre- historic sites were identified by the EIR near the Tassajara Highlands site. The Eastern Dublin EIR assumed that all pre - historic sites would be disturbed or altered in some manner. This potential impact was identified and addressed in the Eastern Dublin EIR (Impact 3.9/A) and mitigation measures 3.9/ 1.0 through 3.9/4.0 (page 3.9 -6 — 3.9 -7) that require subsurface testing for archeological resources; recordation and mapping of such resources; and development of a protection program for resources which qualify as "significant" under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Mitigation Measures 3.9/5-0 and 3.9/6.Q, described above, also were adopted to address the potential disruption of any previously unidentified pre - historic or historic resources and would apply to the project as may be appropriate. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan also contains policies (Policies 6 -24 and 6 -25) requiring research of archaeological resources prior to construction and determination of the significance and extent of any resources uncovered during grading and construction. Therefore, no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to cultural resources have been identified that have been previously analyzed in other CEQA documents for the project area and no additional analysis is required. City of Dublin Page 52 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of a formal cemetery? No New Impact. Existing cultural resource mitigation measures contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the Fredrich MND and the Vargas MND reduced impacts to human remains to a less- than - significant level. No new or more severe significant impacts with respect to cultural impacts are anticipated beyond those previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. 6. Geology and Soils Environmental Setting Geology and soils. This section is based on a preliminary geotechnical investigation completed by ENGEO on July 14, 2006 ( "Preliminary Geological and Geotechnical Findings, Fredrich and Vargas Properties ") that was updated by ENGEO in July 2012 ( "Geotechnic Update. ") These reports are hereby incorporated by reference into this Initial Study. The reports are available for review at the Dublin Community Development Department during normal business hours. Landslide potential. The ENGEO report, as updated in 2012, identified that no historic landslides have been mapped on the project site or were observed on the site by ENGEO professional staff. Seismic hazard. The project area does not lie within an Earthquake Fault Zone (formerly Alquist- Priolo Special Studies Zone). Major active faults in the region that influence earthquake susceptibility include the San Andreas, Hayward, Calaveras, and Greenville Faults. The site is subject to strong ground shaking in the event of seismic activity, consistent with all of the Bay area. Tsunami and seiche hazards. The ENGEO reports found that the risk of damage to future improvements on the site from a tsunami or seiche is low. Previous CEOA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated impacts related to Soils, Geology and Seismicity from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include: • Mitigation Measure 3.6/1.0 reduced impacts related to primary effects of earthquake ground shaking (IM 3.6/13) but not to a less- than - significant level. This mitigation measure requires that future structure and infrastructure facilities be designed to applicable local and state building codes. • Mitigation Measures 3.6/2.0-6.0 reduced impacts related to the secondary effects of earthquake ground shaking (IM 3.9/C) to a less- than - significant level. Mitigation measures mandate building setbacks from landslides, stabilization of unstable land forms, removal and reconstruction of unstable soils, use of City of Dublin Page 53 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 engineered retaining structures, use of appropriately designed and engineered fill, and design of structures to account of potential soil failure. • Mitigation Measures 3.6/9.0-10.0 reduced impacts related to substantial alteration to landforms to a less -than significant level (IM 3.6/D). Mitigations require minimal grading plans with minimal cuts and fills and careful siting of homes and improvements to avoid excessive grading. • Mitigation Measures 3.6/14.0-16.0 reduced impacts related to expansive soils (IM 3.6 / H) to a less- than - significant level. Mitigation measures require formulation of site - specific designs to overcome expansive soils, reducing the amount of moisture in the soil and by appropriate foundation and pavement design. Mitigation Measures 3.6/17.0-19.0 reduced impacts related to natural slope stability (IM 3.6 / I) to a less- than - significant level. Mitigation measures mandate formulation of use of site - specific designs based on follow -on geotechnical reviews of individual developments, limiting the location of improvements on downslopes of unstable soils, removal/ reconstruction of potentially unstable slope areas and installation of surface and subsurface slope drainage improvements. Mitigation Measures 3.6 / 20.0 -26.0 reduced impacts related to cut and fill slope stability (IM 3.6 / J) to a less- than - significant level. These measures include developing grading plans for hillside areas that minimize grading and associate cuts and fills, ensuring that grading plans comply with appropriate building codes, utilizing keys and benches as part of grading to ensure slope stability and minimizing use of unreinforced fill slopes, appropriate compaction of fill areas and on -going maintenance of slope drainage areas. • Mitigation Measure 3.6/27.0 reduced the impact related to short -term construction- related erosion and sedimentation (IM 3.6/K) to a less -than- significant level. This measure includes limiting timing of construction to avoid the rainy season and implementing a number of other specific erosion control measures. • Mitigation Measure 3.6 / 28.0 reduced the impact related to long -term erosion and sedimentation (IM 3.6 / L) to a less -than- significant level. This measure includes installation of erosion control facilities into individual development projects, including sediment catch basins, creek bank stabilization, revegetation of graded areas and similar measures. Fredrich Project MND. No supplemental impacts or mitigation measures were identified in this MND. Vargas Project MND. This document contains Mitigation Measure 23, that required removal of unstable fill material from portion of the Vargas site during site preparation and grading as required by the project geotechnical report. City of Dublin Page 54 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 The proposed project will be required to comply with applicable soil, geologic and seismic mitigation measures. Project Impacts a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse impacts, including loss, injury or death related to ground rupture, seismic ground shaking, ground failure, or landslides? No New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified that the primary and secondary effects of ground - shaking (Impacts 3.6 / B and 3.6 / C) could be potentially significant impacts. With implementation of Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measure 3.6 / 1.0, the primary effects of ground - shaking are reduced but not to a less- than - significant level by using modern seismic design for resistance to lateral forces in construction, which would reduce the potential for structure failure, major structural damage and loss of life. Mitigation Measures 3.6 / 2.0 through 3.6 / 7.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR will be implemented to reduce the secondary effects of ground - shaking on proposed project improvements but not to a less- than - significant level. Impact 3.6/13 found that impacts related to seismic action in the Eastern Dublin area could damage structures and infrastructure and would be significant and unavoidable. This finding also applied to the proposed Tassajara Highlands project as well. Adherence to Mitigation Measures 23 contained in the Vargas MND by the project developer will ensure that infrastructure facilities built on the project site will comply with generally recognized seismic safety standards so that effects due to ground shaking and ground failure will be less- than - significant. Overall, no new or more severe significant impacts would occur with respect to ground rupture, ground shaking, ground failure or landslides than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. b) Is the site subject to substantial erosion and /or the loss of topsoil? No New Impact. Construction of the proposed project improvements on the Tassajara Highlands site would modify the existing ground surface and alter patterns of surface runoff and infiltration. These actions could result in a short -term increase in erosion and sedimentation caused by grading activities. Long -term impacts could result from modification of the ground- surface and removal of existing vegetation (Eastern Dublin EIR Impact 3.6/L). With implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.6 / 27.0 and 28.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR and re- stated above, both of these impacts would be less -than- significant. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan also contains a policy (Policy 6 -43), which requires that new development be designed to provide effective control of soil erosion as a result of construction activities. This policy will be applied to the Tassajara Highlands project. The project includes residential development of the type and in the location assumed in the prior CEQA documents. The project also includes the design - level geotechnical investigation required by the previously adopted mitigations City of Dublin Page 55 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 and will implement their project- specific recommendations. With adherence to previous mitigation measures, there would be no new or more severe significant impacts than have been previously analyzed in other CEQA documents for this site. No further analysis is required. c,d) Is the site located on soil that is unstable or expansive or result in potential lateral spreading, liquefaction, landslide or collapse? No New Impact. Consistent with Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measure 3.6/7.0, the project developer has commissioned a preliminary geotechnical investigation by ENGEO as updated in 2012. The report did not identify impacts related to landslide hazard on the site, although the issue of shrink -swell potential or lateral spreading was not addressed in this report. The ENGEO report and follow -on construction -level reports will be required, pursuant to standard City development requirements, to contain detailed design and construction methods to minimize impacts from shrink -swell and/or lateral spreading potential for future site improvements should these conditions be found on the site. These measures include special foundations designed to resist the effects of shrink -swell potential and other recommendations. With adherence to Eastern Dublin EIR mitigation measures, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan policies and the findings of the construction -level geotechnical report, no new or more severe significant impacts have been identified related to lateral spreading, liquefaction and other soil hazards than have been analyzed in previous CEQA documents. No additional analysis is needed. e) Have soils incapable of supporting on -site septic tanks if sewers are not available? No New Impact. Proposed residences on the site would be connected to sanitary sewers provided by DSRSD, so there would be no new or more severe impacts with regard to septic systems. 7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Environmental Setting Since certification of the Eastern Dublin EIR in 1993 and follow -on CEQA documents, the issue of contribution of greenhouse gasses to climate change has become a more prominent issue of concern as evidenced by passage of AB 32 in 2006. On March 18, 2010, amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines took effect which set forth requirements for the analysis of greenhouse gasses. The topic of the project's contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and climate change was not analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the 2006 and 2007 MNDs. Since the Eastern Dublin EIR and prior MNDs have already been approved, the determination of whether greenhouse gasses and climate change needs to be analyzed for this proposed project is governed by the law on supplemental or subsequent EIRs (Public Resources Code section 21166 and Guidelines, Sections 15162 and 15163). Greenhouse gas and climate change is not required to be analyzed under those standards unless it constitutes "new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete (CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15162 (a) (3).) Greenhouse gas and climate change impacts is not new information that was not known City of Dublin Page 56 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 or could not have been known at the time the Eastern Dublin EIR and the prior MNDs. The issue of climate change and greenhouse gasses was widely known prior to these CEQA reviews. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was established in 1992. The regulation of greenhouse gas emissions to reduce climate change impacts was extensively debated and analyzed throughout the early 1990s. The studies and analyses of this issue resulted in the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. In the early and mid 2000s, GHGs and climate change were extensively discussed and analyzed in California. In 2000, SB 1771 established the California Climate Action Registry for the recordation of greenhouse gas emissions to provide information about potential environmental impacts. In 2005, the Governor issued Executive Order # S -03- 05 establishing greenhouse gas emission reduction targets in California. AB 32 was adopted in 2006. Therefore, the impact of greenhouse gases on climate change was known at the time of the certification of the Eastern Dublin EIR in May 1993 and the adoption of the prior MNDs in 2006 and 2007. Under CEQA standards, it is not new information that requires analysis in a supplemental EIR or negative declaration. No supplemental environmental analysis of the project's impacts on this issue is required under CEQA. Project Impacts a,b Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment or conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? As discussed above, no additional environmental analysis is required under CEQA Section 21166. 8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials (This section of the Initial Study is based on a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared by ENGEO in September 2012 (" Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Dublin Highlands, 7020 & 6960 Tassajara Road, Dublin California "). This document is incorporated into this Initial Study by reference and is available for review at the Dublin Community Development Department during normal business hours. Environmental Setting The Phase I analysis prepared by ENGEO did not identify any recognized environmental conditions on the project site. However, the report recommended that removal of household debris on the site be supervised by an environmental professional and that standard testing be completed for structures to be removed for asbestos containing materials or lead -based paint. These recommendations will be made conditions of project approval. Previous CEQA documents Fredrich Project MND. This document re- states Eastern Dublin EIR mitigation measures for fire hazard reduction (Mitigation Measures 3.4/ 11.0 and 12.0). Vargas Project MND. The Vargas MND contains Mitigation Measure 24, which reduced impacts related to wildfire hazard by requiring development on the Vargas site to be City of Dublin Page 57 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 designed in a manner consistent with the City's Wildfire Management Plan. Future dwellings are also required to include automatic sprinklers as well as being in compliance with Alameda County Fire Department rules and regulations, City of Dublin standards and the California Fire Code. Project Impacts a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? No New Impact. There would be no impact with regard to transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials, since the proposed project involves construction of a residential development on the Vargas and Fredrich properties. Residential development was assumed in prior CEQA documents for the two properties encompassing the project site. There would be no use, storage or transport of significant quantities of hazardous materials associated with the proposed development. Conditions of project approval require that removal of existing household waste materials on the site be monitored by a qualified professional and that normal and customary testing be performed for lead based paint and asbestos building materials prior to demolition of existing on- site buildings. No new or more severe impacts would therefore occur on the site than have been previously analyzed and no new analysis is required. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? No New Impact. Based on the discussion in subsection "a," above, no new impacts are anticipated with respect to the release of hazardous materials than were analyzed in the Vargas and Fredrich CEQA documents and no new analysis is required. c) Emit hazardous materials or handle hazardous materials or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. Approval and implementation of the proposed project would have no impact with regard to this topic, since no schools exist or are planned near the project area. No new or more severe significant impacts with respect to emission or handing of hazardous materials within one - quarter of an existing or planned school. No additional analysis is required. d) Is the site listed as a hazardous materials site? No New Impact. No properties comprising the project area are listed on the State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control as an identified hazardous site as of July 22, 2013. There is therefore no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to this topic than have been previously analyzed and no additional analysis is required. e,f) Is the site located within an airport land use plan of a public airport or private airstrip? No New Impact. The project site is not located near a public or private airport, airfield or airstrip. No new or more severe significant impacts are anticipated regarding airport safety issues than were discussed in the Vargas and Fredrich CEQA documents. No additional analysis is required. City of Dublin Page 58 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 g) Interference with an emergency evacuation plan? No New Impact. The proposed project would include the construction of a residential project on private land. No emergency evacuation plan would be affected since no roadways would be blocked. No new or more severe significant impacts would result than have been previously analyzed and no additional analysis is required. h) Expose people and structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No New Impact. No New Impact. The project area is located in a partially undeveloped area with residential development approved to the east (Moller Ranch and Mission Peak) and far west (Dublin Ranch West). However, significant natural areas remain to the near west (Tassajara Creek and adjacent open space easement area) and south (Moller Creek). The development/ open space interface was addressed in prior CEQA reviews. Adherence to mitigation measures contained in previous CEQA documents will reduce impacts to wildland fire risk to a less- than - significant level. There is no new or more severe significant impacts than previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. 9. Hydrology and Water Quality Environmental Setting Local surface water. The project site is located within the Alameda Creek watershed which drains to the San Francisco Bay via the Arroyo Del Valle and Arroyo de la Laguna. Moller Creek, a tributary of Tassajara Creek, flows in a northeast - southwest direction through the project area to Tassajara Creek to the west. The main course of Tassajara Creek flows in a north -south direction west of the site. Existing site conditions. A majority of the site is undeveloped. Developed areas include two single - family dwellings, outbuildings and driveways. The project area is located within the jurisdiction of Zone 7 of the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Zone 7). Zone 7 provides maintenance of regional drainage facilities within this portion of Alameda County. Surface water quality. Water quality in California is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), which controls the discharge of pollutants to water bodies from point and non -point sources. In the San Francisco Bay area, this program is administered by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board ( RWQCB). Federal regulations issued in November 1990 expanded the authority of the RWQCB to include permitting of stormwater discharges from municipal storm sewer systems, industrial processes, and construction sites that disturb areas larger than one acre of land area. The City of Dublin is a co- permittee of the Alameda County Clean Water Program, which is a coordinated effort by local governments in Alameda County to improve water quality in San Francisco Bay. City of Dublin Page 59 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Flooding. Upland portions of the site, not located near existing creeks, lie outside of a 100 -year flood hazard area (Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel No. 03626G). Previous CEQA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated impacts related to hydrology and storm drainage from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include: • Mitigation Measures 3.5/44.0-48 reduced impacts related potential flooding (IM 3.5 / Y) to a less- than - significant level. These mitigation measures require new storm drainage facilities as part of new development, requires developers to prepare storm drain plans for individual development projects and requires new flood control facilities to alleviate downstream flooding potential. Mitigation Measures 3-5/51.0 to 55.0 reduced impacts related to non -point source pollution (IM 3.5 / AA) to a less - than - significant level. These mitigation measures mandate that specific water quality investigations be submitted as part of development projects and that the City should develop community -based programs to educate residents and businesses to reduce non -point source pollution. These mitigations also require all development to meet the requirements of the City's Best Management Practices, the City's NPDES permit and the County's Urban Runoff Clean Water Program to mitigate stormwater pollution. Fredrich Project MND. This document includes Mitigation Measure 66 that requires the project developer to submit a preliminary creek alignment plan for Tassajara Creek prior to approval of the project by the City. Vargas Project MND. The adopted MND contains the following mitigation measures. Mitigation Measure 25 required the project developer to prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that lists Best Management Practices to reduce construction and post - construction activities to a less - than - significant level. Specific BMPs may include revegetation of graded areas, use of bio- filters and similar methods. The SWPPP shall conform to Regional Water Board and City of Dublin standards. A Notice of Intent shall also be obtained by the applicant from the State Water Resources Control Board. Mitigation Measure 26 required the project developer to submit a drainage and hydrology study to the Dublin Public Works Department. The report shall identify historic stormwater flows from the site, estimated increases in stormwater flow and the ability of downstream facilities to accommodate additional flows. The report shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a grading permit and shall also document the project's fair share contribution to fund any needed downstream drainage system improvements. City of Dublin Page 60 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 • Mitigation Measure 27 required that the siting of storm drainage improvements be consistent with Resource Management Policies of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The proposed project shall adhere to all of the applicable above previous mitigation measures. Project Impacts a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? No New Impact. Approval and construction of the proposed development project would add impervious surfaces to the essentially undeveloped site that would increase the amount of stormwater runoff and potentially degrade water quality. Mitigation Measure 3.5/51.0 contained in the EDSP EIR requires each project developer to prepare and submit a water quality investigation. Mitigation Measure 25 contained in the Vargas MND also requires the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan to minimize release of water pollutants that would exceed water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Adherence to the existing mitigation measures to minimize water pollution and current standard City of Dublin water quality requirements will ensure that no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to water quality violations or wastewater discharges would result than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. b) Substantially deplete groundwater recharge areas or lowering of water table? No New Impact. No new or more significant impacts are anticipated with regard to depletion of groundwater resources than have been analyzed in previous CEQA documents. Although 54 new dwellings are proposed (two dwellings currently exist) on the site, much of the site would remain as open space in terms of private yards and an open space area, that would allow recharge of the underground aquifer. Also, stormwater runoff from the site would be directed to an on -site stormwater basin that would allow recharge of the aquifer in a location near Moller Creek and Tassajara Creek. Also, the proposed water source for this project would rely on surface water supplies from DSRSD and not local groundwater supplies. The project site is not identified as a groundwater recharge area in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. Therefore, no new or more severe significant impacts would occur with respect to this topic than has been previously analyzed in other CEQA documents. No additional analysis is required. c) Substantially alter drainage patterns, including streambed courses such that substantial siltation or erosion would occur? No New Impact. New impervious surfaces would be added to the Tassajara Highlands project site to accommodate new dwellings, roadways, driveways, pathways and similar surfaces. Existing drainage patterns may be slightly modified based on proposed development, similar to the existing approved Development Plan. However adherence to Mitigation Measure 46.0 contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Mitigation Measures 25 and 26 contained in the Vargas MND would reduce changed drainage patterns to a less -than- City of Dublin Page 61 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 significant level. No new or more severe significant impacts would result with respect to changed drainage patterns than have been previously analyzed and no new analysis is needed. d) Substantially alter drainage patterns or result in flooding, either on or off the project site? No New Impact. No impacts or significant changes to drainage patterns are anticipated as part of the Tassajara Highlands project. Based on the latest ENGEO hydrology report, cited above, the proposed upland development area lies outside of a FEMA 100 -year flood hazard area. No new or more severe significant impacts are anticipated than have been previously analyzed and no additional analysis is required. e) Create stormwater runoff that would exceed the capacity of drainage systems or add substantial amounts of polluted runoff? No New Impact. Adherence to Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measures 3.5/44.0 -48.0 will reduce drainage and pollution impacts to a less - than - significant level. These mitigation measures require new storm drainage facilities as part of new development and requires developers to prepare storm drain plans for individual development projects such as the Tassajara Highlands project. Mitigation Measure 26 also requires completion of a drainage and hydrology study to identify any drainage system deficiencies and funding of system upgrades. Based upon this analysis, the project includes hydromodification ponds in the southern portion of the site to ensure that the local and regional drainage system would not be exceeded. Other water quality features have been proposed for the project, as previously described. No new or more severe significant impacts have been identified in this Initial Study regarding increases in stormwater runoff than have been previously analyzed and no additional analysis is required. f) Substantially degrade water quality? No New Impact. This potential issue and has been addressed above in items "a" and "e." There are no new or more severe significant impacts beyond those identified in prior CEQA reviews and no additional analysis is required. g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped by a Flood Insurance Rate Map? No New Impact. The development portion of the Tassajara Highlands project is not located within a 100 -year flood plain, as documented in the ENGEO hydrology report. No new or more severe significant impacts are anticipated than have been previously analyzed and no additional analysis is required. h, i) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard boundary structures that impeded or redirect flood flow, including dam failures? No New Impact. Refer to item "g," above. j) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflows? No New Impact. The project site is located well inland from San Francisco Bay or other major bodies of water to be impacted by a tsunami or seiche. No new or more severe significant impacts would therefore result with respect to seiches, tsunamis or mudflows than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is needed. City of Dublin Page 62 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 10. Land Use and Planning Environmental Setting The project site consists of a combination of flatter areas to the north and west with a moderate to steep hill in the eastern and central portion of the site. Two single- family dwellings and a number of agricultural outbuildings have also been constructed. Surrounding uses include a combination of developed and undeveloped properties within the Eastern Dublin Planning area. Many of the surrounding properties have been approved for development, including the Dublin Ranch West project, the Moller Ranch project and the Mission Peak residential project, currently under construction. Tassajara and Moller Creeks lie immediately south and west of the project site. Project Impacts a) Physically divide an established community? No New Impact. The project site is located within a distinct area, between Tassajara Road to the east and Tassajara Creek to the west. All of the site would either be developed with dwellings and related improvements or be reserved for permanent open spaces. Therefore, no existing, established community would be physically divided. No new or more severe significant impacts have been identified in this Initial Study than have been previously analyzed and no additional analysis is required. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation? No New Impact. Although amendments have been requested to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan to reduce the amount of development on the property (101 dwellings approved v. 54 dwellings proposed), the number of dwellings would be substantially less with the proposed project than under existing General Plan and Specific Plan land use designations. No changes are proposed to any regulation affecting environmental protection. No new or more severe significant impacts are anticipated with regard to land use regulations than have been previously analyzed in other applicable CEQA documents and no additional analysis is required. c) Conflict with a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No New Impact. The project site lies within the Eastern Alameda County Conservation Strategy ( EACCS) planning area. The City of Dublin utilizes the Conservation Strategy as guidance for environmental permitting for public projects, and private development projects are encouraged to use the EACCS as a resource as well. The Conservation Strategy embodies a regional approach to permitting and mitigation for wildlife habitat impacts associated with land development, infrastructure, and other activities. The Conservation Strategy is neither a Habitat Conservation Plan nor a Natural Community Conservation Plan, but is a document intended to provide guidance during the project planning and permitting process to ensure that impacts are offset in a biologically effective manner. The project site has never been within an HCP or NCCP area. There would therefore be no new or significantly more severe significant impacts than City of Dublin Page 63 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 previously analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and other CEQA documents prepared for this site and no additional analysis is needed. 11. Mineral Resources Environmental Setting The project site contains no known mineral resources. This is based on the Eastern Dublin EIR. Project Impacts a, b) Result in the loss of availability of regionally or locally significant mineral resources? No New Impact. The Eastern Dublin EIR does not indicate that significant deposits of minerals exist in the project area, so no new or more severe significant impacts would occur than have been previously analyzed. 12. Noise Environmental Setting The City's Noise Element of the General Plan defines "noise" as a sound or series of sounds that are intrusive, irritating, objectionable and/or disruptive to daily life. Noise is primarily a concern with regard to noise sensitive land uses such as residences, schools, churches and hospitals. Although noise is controlled around commercial, industrial and recreation uses, community noise levels rarely exceed maximum recommended levels for these uses. Regulatory Setting The Noise Element of the General Plan identifies the following primary sources of noise in Dublin: traffic noise from freeways and major roadways within the community and noise generated by the BART line adjacent to the I -580 freeway. The Noise Element identifies the following maximum noise exposure levels by land use type. Table 1. City of Dublin Land Use /Noise Compatibility Standards (decibels) Land Use Normally Acceptable Conditionally Acceptable Normally Unacceptable Clearly Unacceptable Residential 60 or less 60 -70 70 -75 75+ Lodging Facilities 60 or less 61 -80 71 -80 Over 80 Schools, churches, nursing homes 60 or less 61 -70 71 -80 Over 80 Neighborhood arks 60 or less 61 -65 66 -70 Over 70 Office /Retail 70 or less 71 -75 76 -80 Over 80 Industrial 70 or less 71 -75 Over 75 -- Source: Dublin General Plan Noise Element, Table 9 -1, 2012 City of Dublin Page 64 July 2014 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project The City of Dublin also enforces an interior noise standard of 45 decibels for residential dwellings. Previous CEOA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR notes that major noise sources within Eastern Dublin include traffic noise from arterial roadways, helicopter overflights from Camp Parks RFTA, west of Tassajara Road, noise generated by development of land uses under the Specific Plan and General Plan and construction noise. No specific significant future noise sources are identified on the project site. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated noise impacts from the General Plan and EDSP project. These include: • Mitigation Measures 3.10/1.0 reduced impacts related to exposure of proposed housing to future roadway noise (IM 3.10/A) to a less- than - significant level. This mitigation measure require that all future development projects within a future CNEL 60 noise contour have an acoustic analysis prepared to ensure that future dwelling units meet City interior and exterior noise exposure levels. • Mitigation Measures 3.10/4.0 and 5.0 reduced impacts related to construction noise (IM 10 /E) to a less- than - significant level. These mitigation measures require developers to submit construction noise management plans and to limit hours of construction operations among other things. Fredrich Project MND. The Fredrich project MND contains Mitigation Measure 69 that required preparation of a noise study prior to the approval of a Planned Development Phase 2 Development Plan to show compliance with interior and exterior noise standards. The noise study shall evaluate noise impacts of traffic on Tassajara Road on the project as well as noise generated by air conditioners, pool pumps and other mechanical equipment. Sound barriers and other noise measures included in the noise study shall be incorporated into improvement plans and an acoustical engineer shall sign construction plans. Vargas Project MND. This document contains Mitigation Measure 28 that required all Stage 2 and Site Development Review plans to show noise barriers, berms or solid fencing to control noise in outdoor spaces (including rear and side yards) to comply with applicable noise standards. A noise sturdy shall be prepared and submitted with construction plans prior to a building permit. The report shall evaluate the effects of traffic noise on Tassajara Road on project residences and include methods to ensure that interior noise levels shall be 45 bBA or less. The proposed project will be required to comply with applicable noise mitigation measures identified above. City of Dublin Page 65 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Project Impacts a) Would the project expose persons or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established by the General Plan or other applicable standard? No New Impact. As analyzed in previous CEQA documents affecting the site, development of proposed residential land uses on the project site would increase noise on the project site and future residents would be subject to traffic noise along Tassajara Road. The project includes construction of a noise barrier wall adjacent to Tassajara Road to reduce traffic noise on future residential lots to meet City exterior noise exposure standards. A recommended condition of approval is to have an acoustic specialist ensure that the final height of the wall will be sufficient to reduce exterior noise to acceptable levels within private yard areas based on the final grading plan and building/ yard topographic elevations. Adherence to Eastern Dublin EIR noise mitigation measures, mitigation measures contained in the Fredrich and Vargas MNDs, noise standards in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the City noise ordinance will reduce noise to a less- than - significant level. No new or more severe significant noise impacts have been identified than have previously analyzed. No additional analysis is needed. The project would contribute to cumulative noise conditions identified as Impact 3.10/B in the Eastern Dublin EIR, which is exposure of existing residences to future roadway noise. This impact was found to be significant and unavoidable in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Also, EDSP EIR Impact 3.10/1), exposure of proposed residential development to noise from future military training activities at Parks RFTA, was found to be significant and unavoidable. b) Exposure of people to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? No New Impact. The proposed project would not include construction or operational elements that would result in significant groundborne vibration levels to nearby residents (source: Mike O'Hara, applicant representative, 8/ 8/ 13). No new or more significant severe impacts would result with respect to vibration or groundborne vibration than was analyzed in previous CEQA documents on the project site and no additional analysis is needed. c) Substantial increases in permanent in ambient noise levels? No New Impact. Increased levels of permanent noise on the project that would occur based on project construction would be reduced to a less -than significant level through adherence to applicable mitigation measures contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR, mitigation measures contained in other CEQA documents prepared for previous projects on the same site and the Dublin Noise Ordinance. No new or more severe significant impacts have been identified in this Initial Study than have been previously analyzed and no additional analysis is needed. d) Substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels without the project? No New Impact. Increased levels of short -term construction noise generated on the project site would be reduced to a less -than- significant level through adherence to applicable mitigation measures contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR, other CEQA documents and the Dublin Noise Ordinance. These measures require project developers to limit hours of construction activity City of Dublin Page 66 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 and to prepare construction noise management plans. No new or more severe significant impacts have been identified in this Initial Study than have been previously analyzed and no additional analysis is needed. e, f) For a project located within an airport land use plan, would the project expose people to excessive noise levels? No New Impact. No portions of the Tassajara Highlands site are located within the airport referral area for Livermore Municipal Airport. No new or more severe significant impacts are therefore anticipated in terms of this topic than was previously analyzed in previous CEQA documents. No additional analysis is needed. 13. Population and Housing Environmental Setting The project area currently contains two single - family dwellings and unoccupied outbuildings, but is primarily vacant. Project Impacts a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly? No New Impact. Approval of the proposed project would not induce substantial additional population growth in the Eastern Dublin area, since development on the affected properties has long been envisioned in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and Dublin General Plan since its adoption in 1993. Approval of the proposed project would result in fewer dwellings being constructed than originally anticipated in the Dublin General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (101 units currently approved v. 54 proposed) but would be generally the same type of development as assumed in previous CEQA documents. No new or more severe significant impacts than were previously analyzed are therefore anticipated with respect to this topic and no additional analysis is required. b,c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing units or people? No New Impact. The two existing dwellings currently on the site would be removed to accommodate proposed development on the property, as assumed in previous CEQA documents for the site. This would not be a substantial number of residents and no impact would result. No new or more severe significant impacts than were previously analyzed are therefore anticipated with respect housing displacement and no additional analysis is needed. 14. Public Services Environmental Settin& The following provide essential services to the community: City of Dublin Page 67 Initial StudylTassajara Highlands Project July 2014 • Fire Protection. Fire protection services are provided by the Alameda County Fire Department. The Department provides fire suppression, emergency medical response, fire prevention, education, building inspection services and hazardous material control. The nearest station is Station 18 at 4800 Fallon Road. • Police Protection: Police and security protection is provided by the Alameda County Sheriff under contact to the City of Dublin. • Schools. The Dublin Unified School District provides K -12 educational services for properties on the project site. • Library Services: Alameda County Library service. • Maintenance. Maintenance of streets, roads and other governmental facilities are the responsibility of the City of Dublin. Previous CEQA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. Applicable mitigation measures contained in Eastern Dublin EIR addressing fire and police protection include: • Mitigation Measure 3.4/7.0: Establish appropriate funding mechanisms to cover up- front costs of capital fire improvements. • Mitigation Measure 3.4/9.0: Incorporate Fire Department recommendations on project design relating to access, water pressure, fire safety and prevention into the requirements of development approval. • Mitigation Measure 3-4/10.0: Ensure, as a requirement of project approval, that an assessment district, homeowners association or other mechanism is in place that will provide regular long -term maintenance of the urban/ open space interface. • Mitigation Measure 3.4/12.0: The City shall work with the Fire Department and qualified biologists to prepare a wildfire management plan for the project area. • Mitigation Measure 3.4/1.0: Provide additional personnel and facilities and revise beats as necessary in order to establish and maintain City standards for police protection service in Eastern Dublin. • Mitigation Measure 3.4/3.0-5.0: Incorporate into the requirements of project approval Police Department recommendations on project design that affect traffic safety and crime prevention. Fredrich Project MND. This document contained he following mitigation measures addressing public service impacts: City of Dublin Page 68 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Mitigation Measure 70 required project compliance with the City of Dublin Wildfire Management Plan and installation of automatic fire sprinklers in each residence. Mitigation Measure 71 required payment of the City Fire Protection Fee prior to issuance of building permits. No significant public service impacts or mitigation measures were identified in the Vargas Project MND. The project will be required to comply with the above mitigation measures. Project Impacts a) Fire protection? No New Impact. As reflected in previous CEQA documents affecting the project site, approval and implementation of the proposed project would increase the number of fire and emergency medical calls for service that would need to be responded to by the Alameda County Fire Department, the City of Dublin's contract fire department, as a result of a greater number of dwellings on the project site. The proposed project is required to adhere to mitigation measures, including payment of public facility impact fees to assist in funding new fire stations (Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measure 3.4/ 7.0), so that impacts to the Alameda County Fire Department related to approval and construction of the proposed project would be less -than- significant. Consistent with Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measure 3.4/9.0, proposed development on the project site will be conditioned to meet Fire Department requirements including but not limited to maintaining minimum water pressure and fire flow, providing adequate site access, using fire retardant building materials and similar features. Proposed development on the site will also be conditioned to be consistent with the City's adopted Wildfire Management Plan (Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measure 3.4/12.0). Mitigation Measures contained in the Fredrich MND will also reduce impacts of the proposed project on fire protection Based on discussions with Alameda County Fire Department staff, there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to fire service beyond that analyzed in previous CEQA documents (source: Bonnie Terra, Alameda County Fire Department, 7/25/13) and no new or expanded fire stations would be needed to provide fire and emergency service for the proposed Tassajara Highlands project. No additional analysis is required. b) Police protection? No New Impact. Similar to fire protection, there would be no new impact with regard to police protection, based on mitigation measures included in the Eastern Dublin EIR. These Mitigation Measures include paying City of Dublin public facility impact fees to assist in funding new police facilities (EDSP EIR Mitigation Measure 3.4/ 1.0), incorporating Police Department safety and security requirements into the proposed project, including but not limited to adequate locking devices, security lighting and ensuring adequate surveillance for structures and parking areas (EDSP EIR Mitigation Measures 3.4/3.0 -5.0). City of Dublin Page 69 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Based on discussions with Dublin Police Services Department staff, there would be no new or substantially more severe impacts with respect to police service associated with the proposed project beyond that analyzed in previous CEQA documents and no additional analysis is needed (source: Captain Tom McCarthy, Dublin Police Services, 7/24/13). c) Schools? No New Impact. No new impacts to school service are anticipated should the proposed Tassajara Highlands project be approved since payment of mandated statutory impact fees at the time of issuance of building permits will provide mitigation of educational impacts of the proposed Project pursuant to CEQA. There would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in previous CEQA documents. d) Other governmental service, including maintenance of public facilities? No New Impact. Maintenance of public facilities would continue to be provided by the City of Dublin with no new impacts in regard to this topic. New public facilities will be required to be designed to meet City of Dublin standards. There would therefore be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to this impact than has been previously analyzed in previous CEQA documents. No new analysis is required. 15. Recreation Environmental Setting No neighborhood or community parks and/or recreation services or facilities exist on the project site. However, the City of Dublin maintains a wide range of park facilities throughout the community. Regional park facilities are provided by the East Bay Regional Park District, which maintains a large number of regional parks, trails and similar recreation facilities in Alameda and Contra Costa County. The project applicant is planning to construct a recreational trail along the western side of the project site along the east side of Tassajara Creek. Previous CEQA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. Applicable mitigation measures contained in Eastern Dublin EIR addressing fire and police protection include: • Mitigation Measure 3.4/29.0: Ensure, as apart of the approval process, that each new development provide its fair share of planned open space, parklands and trail corridors. • Mitigation Measure 3.4/31.0: Calculate and assess in -lieu park fees based on the City's parkland dedication ordinance. Credit towards parkland dedication City of Dublin Page 70 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 requirements will only be given for level or gently sloping areas suitable for active recreation use. • Mitigation Measure 3.4/36.0: Require developer to dedicate public access easements along ridgetops and stream corridors to accommodate the development of trails and staging areas. No mitigation measures were included in the Vargas or Fredrich CEQA documents that applied to the Tassajara Highland site. Project Impacts a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks? No New Impact. Approval and construction of the proposed project would increase the use of nearby City or regional recreational facilities, since it would include increasing the on -site permanent population on the site, although with fewer dwellings than assumed in previous CEQA documents. No parks are proposed on the project site, however, the project developer proposes to pay community facility fees to the City of Dublin based on the number of expected residents in the project. These fees, in combination with fees paid by other developers, will fund City of Dublin parks elsewhere in the Eastern Dublin area. There would therefore be no new or more severe significant impacts with respect to recreation than were previously analyzed. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of recreational facilities? See item "a," above. 16. Transportation /Traffic Environmental Setting Roadways and freeways. The project area is served by Tassajara Road, an arterial road that provides access from southern Contra Costa County to the I -580 freeway and southerly into Alameda County south of the I -580 freeway. Existing transit service. The Livermore /Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA) provides bus service in Dublin and throughout the Tri- Valley. The Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) provides regional rapid transit service with the nearest station located at the Dublin Transit Center, located on the south side of Dublin Boulevard just west of Arnold Road. Limited bus service is currently provided to the project site. Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities. There are no marked pedestrian facilities adjacent to the proposed project site along Tassajara Road. However, there is a striped and paved shoulder for bicycles on either side of Tassajara Road adjacent to the project site. Previous CEQA documents City of Dublin Page 71 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR contains a number of mitigation measures to reduce anticipated traffic impacts from the General Plan and EDSP project. These measures generally include construction of new roadways, widening of existing roadways and improvements to local freeway facilities to accommodate anticipated increases in the number of vehicles associated with the build out of the Eastern Dublin area. With the exceptions noted below, the EIR found that all traffic and transportation impacts could be reduced to less -than- significant levels with adherence to mitigation measures identified in the EIR. A number of impacts could not be reduced to a level of insignificance even with mitigations. These include: impacts to the I -580 freeway between I -680 and Hacienda Drive (IM 3.3/B), impacts to the I -580 Freeway between Tassajara Road and Airway Boulevard (IM 3.3/C), cumulative freeway impacts (IM 3.3 / E) impacts to Santa Rita Road and T -580 Eastbound ramps (IM 3.3 / I), and cumulative impacts to Tassajara Road (IM 3.3/N). Fredrich Project MND. This CEQA document included the following applicable mitigation measures: • Mitigation Measure 79 required the project developer to advance funds to the City to acquire right -of -way and construct roadway improvements identified in the September 25, 2005 TJKM Transportation Consultants traffic impact analysis for the proposed Fallon Crossings Development project. • Mitigation Measure 80 required the project developer to contribute a pro -rate share of the cost to improve the Santa Rita Road /I -580 Eastbound off - ramps /Pimlico Drive intersection to include a third left -turn lane for the eastbound off -ramp approach for this intersection. a Mitigation Measure 81 required the project developer to pay Tri- Valley Transportation Development (TVTD) fees for I -580 and I -680 freeway improvements as well as TVTD fees for BART station improvements. Vargas Project MND. The following Mitigation Measures were included in the Vargas MND: • Mitigation Measure 29 required the project developer to widen Tassajara Road between North Dublin Ranch Drive and the City/ County line to four lanes, in the event this project is developed prior to the Moller Ranch /Casamira or the Fallon Crossings projects. Additional property may be required for dedication along the project frontage, as determined by the City Engineer. • Mitigation Measure 30 required the project developer to pay the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact fee to the City to fund improvements at the Dublin Boulevard/ Dougherty Road intersection. City of Dublin Page 72 Initial StudyfTassajara Highlands Project July 2014 • Mitigation Measure 31 required the project developer to advance funding to the City for acquisition of right -of -way and construction of improvements for the project's fair share of cost at the Dublin Boulevard/ Dougherty Road intersection. • Mitigation Measure 32 required the project developer to contribute a fair -share of the cost to improve the Santa Rita Road / I -580 Eastbound Ramp / Pimlico Drive intersection to include a third left -turn lane for he southbound off -ramp approach as well as related improvements. • Mitigation Measure 33 required that the southern entrance to the project site line up with the entrance/ exit for the Moller Ranch /Casamira Valley project. The developer of this project is also required to install a traffic signal at the intersection of Tassajara Road and the southern entrance/ exit to the project. • Mitigation Measure 34 required the final project design shall provide adequate parking to serve the residential development. A detailed parking analysis shall be submitted that reviews on- and off -site parking shall also be submitted in conjunction with the Stage 2 rezoning and Site Development Review applications. The proposed project will be required to comply with all of the above transportation and circulation mitigation measures. Project Impacts a,b) Conflict with applicable plans related to the effectiveness of the circulation system, including all modes of travel, including intersections, streets, highways and other components or conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including level of service standards, travel demand measures and other applicable standards? The Eastern Dublin EIR considered the development of the project site with residential land uses and adopted mitigation measures to address the impacts thereof. Additional analysis of increased traffic and circulation impacts occurred in 2006, as part of the Fredrich MND and in 2007 as part of the Vargas property development. The two approved projects would have contained up to 101 dwellings (68 dwellings on the Fredrich site and 33 dwellings on the Vargas site. The following table compares estimated vehicle trips from the proposed Tassajara Highlands site v. trips that would have been generated from he previously approved development projects. The following table does not include trips generated from the two existing residences on the site that would be removed as part of the proposed project. City of Dublin Page 73 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Table 2. Comparative Trip Rates - Approved v. Proposed Development Notes: 1) Assumes development of 33 dwellings on Vargas site and 68 dwellings on Fredrich site 2) Trip rates based on ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th edition Based on the above table, the proposed Tassajara Highlands project would generate an estimated 34 fewer a.m. peak hour trips, 41 fewer p.m. peak hour trips and 426 fewer daily trips than the current amount of approved development. There would therefore not be a new or more severe significant impacts on the roadway system that was previously analyzed in other CEQA documents and no new analysis is needed. However, if approved and constructed, the project would continue to contribute to significant and unavoidable cumulative project impacts as part of the larger Eastern Dublin project. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified such impacts on the following roads and transportation facilities: • I -580 freeway between I -680 and Hacienda Drive; • The Santa Rita Road /I -580 eastbound ramps; • The Dublin Boulevard/ Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard/ Tassajara Road intersection; • Other impacts to Tassajara Road, as identified in the EIR. c) Change in air traffic patterns? No New Impact. The proposed project includes residential uses and would have no impact on air traffic patterns. No new or more severe significant impacts would result with respect to this topic than was previously analyzed in other CEQA documents. No new analysis is needed. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use? No New Impact. Although the project includes a reduction in the number of units compared to prior approvals, approval of the proposed project would add new driveways, sidewalks and other vehicular and pedestrian travel ways where none currently exist. The current development proposal will be required to comply with current City engineering design standards and other safety standards to ensure that no safety hazards would be created or exacerbated. No new or more severe City of Dublin Page 74 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 No. Dwellings A.M Peak P.M Peak Total Daily Trips Trips Trips Approved 101 73 88 916 Development Proposed 54 39 47 490 Development (Difference) 1 1 -34 1 -41 1 -426 Notes: 1) Assumes development of 33 dwellings on Vargas site and 68 dwellings on Fredrich site 2) Trip rates based on ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th edition Based on the above table, the proposed Tassajara Highlands project would generate an estimated 34 fewer a.m. peak hour trips, 41 fewer p.m. peak hour trips and 426 fewer daily trips than the current amount of approved development. There would therefore not be a new or more severe significant impacts on the roadway system that was previously analyzed in other CEQA documents and no new analysis is needed. However, if approved and constructed, the project would continue to contribute to significant and unavoidable cumulative project impacts as part of the larger Eastern Dublin project. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified such impacts on the following roads and transportation facilities: • I -580 freeway between I -680 and Hacienda Drive; • The Santa Rita Road /I -580 eastbound ramps; • The Dublin Boulevard/ Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard/ Tassajara Road intersection; • Other impacts to Tassajara Road, as identified in the EIR. c) Change in air traffic patterns? No New Impact. The proposed project includes residential uses and would have no impact on air traffic patterns. No new or more severe significant impacts would result with respect to this topic than was previously analyzed in other CEQA documents. No new analysis is needed. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use? No New Impact. Although the project includes a reduction in the number of units compared to prior approvals, approval of the proposed project would add new driveways, sidewalks and other vehicular and pedestrian travel ways where none currently exist. The current development proposal will be required to comply with current City engineering design standards and other safety standards to ensure that no safety hazards would be created or exacerbated. No new or more severe City of Dublin Page 74 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 significant impacts with respect to design hazards would be created than previously analyzed. No additional analysis is needed. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? No New Impact. A single, signalized roadway access to Tassajara Road would be provided to serve the site. Based on discussions with the Alameda County Fire Department, the proposed drive would provide adequate emergency access to and from the site (source: D. Jones, Assistant Fire Marshall, 8 / 15 / 13). No new or more severe significant impacts would result with respect to this topic and no additional analysis is needed. f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs regarding public transit, pedestrian facilities or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? No New Impact. No conflicts to plans, policies or programs that promote public transit, pedestrian use or similar features were identified with either the Fredrich or Vargas development proposals as part of previous CEQA reviews. The current project would include sidewalks along Tassajara Road to allow for enhanced pedestrian circulation for future project residents. No new or more severe significant impacts have been identified in this Initial Study that has been previously analyzed in other CEQA documents for the project site. No additional analysis is needed. 16. Utilities and Service Systems Environmental Setting The project area is served by the following service providers: • Water supply and distribution: Dublin San Ramon Services District ( DSRSD). • Sewage collection and treatment; recycled water: DSRSD. • Storm drainage: City of Dublin and Zone 7. • Solid waste service: Amador Valley Industries • Electrical and natural gas power: Pacific Gas and Electric Co. • Communications: AT &T Previous CEQA documents Eastern Dublin EIR. In terms of water resources, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified overdraft of groundwater resources (Impact 3.5/P) as a potentially significant impact Adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.5/24.0 and 25.0 would reduce this impact to a level of insignificant. These measures require the City of Dublin to coordinate with DSRSD to develop recycled water resources and otherwise carefully use water resources and that all new development in the Eastern Dublin project area to connect to the DSRSD water system. Impact 3.5 / Q identified an increase in water demand as a potentially significant City of Dublin Page 75 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 impact, but this impact could be mitigated to an insignificant level based on implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.5 / 26.0 -31.0. These mitigation measures require implementation of water conservation measures in individual development projects and construction of new system -wide water improvements which are funded by development impact fees. Another related impact identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR is the need for additional water treatment plant capacity (Impact 3.5 / R). This impact was identified as being reduced to a level of insignificance through the implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.5/32.0 -33.0, which requires improvement to the Zone 7 water system, to be funded by individual development impact fees. Impact 3.5 / S (lack of a water distribution system) was identified as a potentially significant impact in the Eastern Dublin EIR, but this impact has been reduced to an insignificant level through adherence to Mitigation Measures3.5 / 4.34.0 -38.0. These mitigations require upgrades to the project area water system and provision of a "will serve" letter prior to issuance of a grading permit. Impact 3.5 / T identified a potentially significant impact related to inducement of substantial growth and concentration of population in the project area. The Eastern Dublin EIR found that this was a significant and unavoidable impact. Regarding sewer service, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified Impact 3.5/13 (lack of a wastewater collection system) as a potentially significant impact that could be mitigated through adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.5/1.0-5.0. These measures require DSRSD to prepare an area -wide wastewater collection system master plan, requires all new development to be connected to DSRSD's public sewer system, discourages on -site wastewater treatment, requires a "will- serve" letter from DSRSD and requires that all sewer facilities be constructed to DSRSD engineering standards. Impact 3.5 noted an impact with regard to extension of a sewer trunk line with capacity to serve new development, but could be reduced to an insignificant level since the proposed Eastern Dublin Specific Plan sewer system has been sized to accommodate increased sewer demand from the proposed Specific Plan project. Impact 3.5/G found that lack of wastewater disposal capacity as a significant impact. An upgraded wastewater disposal facility has been constructed by the Livermore Amador Valley Water Management Agency and is operational. Impact 3.5/E identified lack of wastewater treatment plant capacity as a potentially significant impact, which could be reduced to an insignificant level through adherence to Mitigation Measures 3.5 / 7.1, 8.0 and 9.0. No additional analysis is needed. No mitigation measures pertaining to utilities or service systems were contained in the Fredrich or Vargas MND documents. Project Impacts a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB? The current project would contain the same type of development but fewer units than analyzed in the prior CEQA documents. Based on recent discussions with DSRSD staff (noted below) regarding this project, the proposed project would not exceed wastewater requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). No new or more severe significant impacts with respect to wastewater treatment City of Dublin Page 76 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 requirements have been identified in this Initial Study than have been analyzed in previous CEQA documents. No additional analysis is required. b) Require new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities? No New Impact. Water, recycled water and wastewater extensions to existing mains in Tassajara Road would need to be constructed to serve the amount of development proposed in the Tassajara Highland development application. According to a representative of DSRSD, the need for increased water, wastewater collection, treatment and disposal facilities from the construction of the proposed project would not result in a new or more significant impact than was analyzed in previous CEQA documents that assumed a greater amount of development on the site (source: Stan Kolozdie, DSRSD, 8/25/13). The Tassajara Highlands project would also contribute to cumulative impacts related to consumption of non - renewable natural resources (Impact 3.4/S, increase in energy use though increased wastewater treatment and disposal and though the operation of the water system (Impact 3.5 / F, H, and U), and inducement of substantial growth and concentration of population (Impact 3.5 / T). All of these impacts were identified as significant and unavoidable in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The project still includes residential use, but with a fewer number of dwellings than currently proposed. The previously identified impacts would be somewhat reduced, but not to less than significant. The project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts than analyzed in the prior CEQA documents. No additional analysis is required. c) Require new storm drainage facilities? No New Impact. The proposed Tassajara Highlands development project would require new and or upgraded drainage facilities to support proposed development. Consistent with Eastern Dublin EIR Mitigation Measures, the project developer will be required to install new or upgraded on and off -site (if required) storm drain systems that comply with City of Dublin and Zone 7 standards. No supplemental storm drainage impacts were identified in other previous CEQA documents. The current project would generally require the same type of drainage facilities as anticipated for approved Fredrich and Vargas development projects in 2006 and 2007, respectively. No new or more severe significant impacts are anticipated with respect to storm drain facilities that have been analyzed in previous CEQA documents. No additional analysis is required. d) Are sufficient water supplies available? No New Impact. Based on the information provided by DSRSD staff, the District has planned for future urban uses on this site and included such development in the District's Urban Water Management Plan (source: Stan Kolozdie, DSRSD, 8/25/13). No new or more severe significant are anticipated with respect to water supplies than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is required. e) Adequate wastewater capacity to serve the proposed project? See response to "a," above. City of Dublin Page 77 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 e, f) Solid waste disposal? No New Impact. The project site is within the franchise area of Amador Valley Industries that provides residential and commercial solid waste pick -up and recycling services. According to representatives of the company, no solid waste service is currently provided to the area, since it is largely undeveloped. The topic of solid waste disposal was not identified as a potentially significant impact in previous CEQA documents and no new or more severe significant impacts have been identified in this Initial Study than have been previously analyzed. No additional analysis is needed. g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No New Impact. The existing service provider will ensure adherence to federal, state and local solid waste regulations. No new or more severe significant impacts are anticipated impacts than have been previously analyzed and no additional analysis is needed. 17. Mandatory Findings of Significance a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? No New Impact. Potential impacts related to biological resources, including a reduction in habitat area of fish or wildlife species, elimination of a plant or animal community, or elimination of an important example of major periods of California history or prehistory was analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and prior MNDs. The proposed project would represent less development intensity than previously analyzed there are no new or more severe significant impacts beyond those previously identified in the prior CEQA documents. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects). No New Impacts. Cumulative impacts of the proposed Tassajara Highlands project have been analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and prior MNDs. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No. No such impacts have been discovered in the course of preparing this Initial Study. City of Dublin Page 78 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Initial Study Preparers Jerry Haag, Urban Planner, project manager Agencies and Organizations Consulted The following agencies and organizations were contacted in the course of this Initial Study: City of Dublin Luke Sims, AICP, Community Development Director Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director Michael Porto, Project Manager Andy Russell PE, City Engineer Obaid Khan, City Transportation Engineer Bonnie Terra, Alameda County Fire Department Darrell Jones, Alameda County Fire Department Chief Tom McCarthy, Dublin Police Services Kathleen Faubion, AICP, Assistant City Attorney California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Website DSRSD Stan Kolozdie Applicant Representatives Mike O'Hara References Dublin General Plan, City of Dublin, Updated through 7/2/11 Eastern Dublin General Plan, Wallace Roberts & Todd, 1993 Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General Plan Environmental Impact Report, Wallace Roberts & Todd, 1994 Eastern Dublin Comprehensive Stream Restoration Program, Sycamore Associates, 1996 Eastern Dublin Scenic Corridor Policies and Standards, David Gates & Associates, 1996 Geotechnical Update, Dublin Highlands Project, ENGEO, Inc. July 2012 City of Dublin Page 79 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014 Livermore Municipal Airport Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan ESA Associates, August 2012 Parks and Recreation Master Plan. City of Dublin, 2006 update Tassajara Highlands, Dublin CA, Environmental Noise Assessment Charles M. Salter Associates, November 2013 City of Dublin Page 80 Initial Study/Tassajara Highlands Project July 2014