HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/17/1988 PC Agenda CITY OF DUBLIN
Development Services Planning( S2.9- 16
P.O. Box 2340 Zoning 49
Dublin, CA 94568 Building at Safety
Engineering/Public829- 922
Works 829-4927
DECLARATION OF POSTING
I declare under penalty of perjury that the fore o'
Dublin Planning Commission meeting of gng Agenda for the
0
at the Dublin R�'
Library, , 19 was posted
y, 7606 Amador Valle
the � (2)(� �,� � Y Boulevard, Dublin,
of (� California, on
19Z by "
P.m-
Executed this
day of
California. 19 at Dublin,
Laurence L. Ton
Planning Commission
Secretary by
Pla in Secretary
r
AGENDA
CITY OF DUBLIN
PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting - Shannon Center
11600 Shannon Avenue West Room Monday - 7:00 p.m.
October 17 1988
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
4. ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA
5. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING - August 1, 1988 and October 3, 1988
6. ORAL COMMUNICATION - At this time, members of the audience are permitted
to address the Planning Commission on any item which is not on the
Planning Commission agenda. Comments should not exceed 5 minutes. If
any person feels that this is insufficient time to address his or her
concern, that person should arrange with the Planning Director to have
his or her particular concern placed on the agenda for a future meeting.
7. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
8.1 PA 88-054 Dublin Security Storage Conditional Use
Permit for a 35-foot freestanding sign, at
6005 Scarlett Court
8.2 PA 87-045 Hansen Ranch General Plan Amendment Study,
EIR, Planned Development Prezoning, Tentative
Subdivision Map No. 5766, and Annexation request for
248 dwelling units on 147 acres, west of Silvergate
Drive and north Hansen Drive (continued from the
October 3, 1988 meeting)
9. NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS
10. OTHER BUSINESS
11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' CONCERNS
12. ADJOURNMENT
(Over for Procedures Summary)
_
CITY OF DUBLIN
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: October 17, 1988
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Staff 1
SUBJECT: PA 88-054 Dublin Security Storage Conditional
Use Permit for a 35' tall freestanding sign at
6005 Scarlett Court
GENERAL INFORMATION:
During the Staff's review of this application, it was discovered that one of
the Applicant's current site uses (Ryder truck rental) has been established
without obtaining a City approved use permit and that the previous use permit
(PA 86-060) which allowed for rented space of outdoor storage for private
vehicle storage and expansion of the mini-storage operation lapsed in August
1988.
Staff recommends that this item be continued to allow Staff an opportunity to
work with the Applicant and property owners/operator in submitting additional
permit applications for Commission consideration concurrently with this
application.
Upon submittal of the additional information the Staff will reschedule and
renotice the applications for a future public hearing.
The Staff has reviewed this matter with the Applicant who has submitted a
letter (attached) in agreement with the continuance.
RECOMMENDATION:
FORMAT: 1) Open public hearing and hear Staff presentation.
2) Take testimony from Applicant and the public.
3) Continue Public Hearing.
ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission continue PA 88-054 Dublin
Security Storage, with Staff to renotice the application.
COPIES TO: Applicant
3 Owner
.
ITEM NO. / File PA 88-054
SURROUNDING LAND USE
AND ZONING: North: Single family and multi-family, zoned
PD; grazing land, zoned A
South: Single family, zoned R-1; church, zoned
A; grazing land, zoned A
East: Multi-family and single family, zoned PD
West: Grazing land, Zoned A
ZONING HISTORY: February 18, 1956, Alameda County zoned the site
A, Agricultural.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
The Dublin General Plan establishes policies and standards to control land use
and development within this area.
Section 8-31.0 (Planned Development District Intent) states, in part, that
Planned Development Districts are established to encourage the arrangement of
a compatible variety of uses on suitable lands in such a manner that the
resulting development will:
a) Be in accord with the Policies of the General Plan of the City of
Dublin;
b) Provide efficient use of the land that includes preservation of
significant open areas and natural and topographic landscape
features with minimum alteration of natural land forms;
c) Provide an environment that will encourage the use of common open
areas for neighborhood or community activities and other
amenities;
d) Be compatible with and enhance the development of the general
area;
e) Create an attractive, efficient and safe environment.
Section 8-1.2 of Chapter 1, Title 8 (Subdivision Ordinance Intent) states, in
part, that it is the intent of this Chapter to promote the public health,
safety, and general welfare; to assure in the division of land consistency
with the policies of the General Plan and with the intent and provisions of
the Zoning Ordinance; to coordinate lot design, street patterns, rights-of-
way, utilities and public facilities with community and neighborhood plans; to
assure that areas dedicated for public purposes will be properly improved
initially so as not to be a future burden upon the community; to preserve
natural resources and prevent environmental damage; to maintain suitable
standards to insure adequate, safe building sites; and, to prevent hazard to
life and property.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The City proposes to adopt an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) which finds the proposed project may have a significant
impact on the environment.
NOTIFICATION: Public Notice of the September 19, 1988 hearing was
published in The Herald, mailed to adjacent property owners,
and posted in public buildings.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
This item was continued from the October 3, 1988 Planning Commission
meeting at which time the Commission received comments from the Applicant,
the Public and Staff. At that meeting the Commission considered and
discussed the revised plan presented by the Applicant and directed Staff to
prepare resolutions for Planning Commission consideration at the October
17, 1988 Commission Meeting.
The three Planning Commissioners present at the October 3, 1988 Commission
meeting unanimously directed Staff to prepare a resolution with favorable
recommendations concerning:
-2-
1. Adequacy and completeness of the Final EIR.
2. Amend General Plan to incorporate entire Hansen Hill Ranch project within
the primary planning area.
3. Amend General Plan to delete Areas 5,6 and 7 from Table I and Figure 4 of
the General Plan.
4. Amend General Plan policy and map with regard to Hansen Drive extension.
5. Amend General Plan to include alternate roadway serving Hansen Hill Ranch
site (Valley Christian Center access road) and designate as a collector
street.
6. Amend General Plan to include policy establishing level of service D as
maximum level of service acceptable.
7. Amend General Plan to include policies requiring fire protection buffer
zone around perimeter of residential development which interface with open
space lands.
8. Amend General Plan to include policies related to open space maintenance.
Two Planning Commissioners indicated they were in favor of the Applicant's
proposal for density and location of development:
Applicant's Proposal
1) Open Space/Stream Corridor
2) Single Family Residential (.9 - 6.0 DU/Acre)
3) Medium Density Residential (6.1 - 8 DU/Acre)
One Planning Commissioner expressed a preference for Staff's recommendation on
maximum unit yield and a preference for the Applicant's proposal on location
of development.
Approval of Staff's recommended unit yield in combination with the Applicant's
proposed land use designation location would result in the following density
range:
Density
Acres DU/AC Unit Yield
Medium Low Density 5.5 ac (gross 6.3 ac) 6.1 to 8 38 to 50
Single Family Low Density 71.5 acres .4 to 1.8 28 to 129
Total Unit Yield 66 to 179
The Applicant is proposing a maximum unit yeild of 245 units on 147 acres.
The Applicant's General Plan Amendment proposes the following land use
designations and approximate acreage: (See Attachment 30 for location of
proposed land use designations):
Applicant's Proposed Land Use Designations
Acres Density Unit Yield
Open Space 70+ ac -0- -0-
Medium Density 5.5+ ac (gross 6.3 ac) 6.1 to 8 du/ac 38 to 50
Single Family 71.5+ ac 9 to 6 du/ac 64 to 429
Total Unit Yield 102 to 479
The Applicant's current proposal reduces grading and residential development
within Area 1 and a portion of Area 3. Residential Development and a
significant amount of fill is still proposed within Area 2 (see Attachment
15).
Staff recommends the following land use designations and approximate acreage:
(See Attachment 6 for location).
-3-
Staff Recommendation
Unit Yield
Based on
Density Gross Acre
Open Space 96+ ac
Medium Low Density 5.5+ ac (gross ac 6.3) (6.1 to 8 du/ac) 38 to 50 du
Single Family Low Density 46+ ac (.5 to 2.8 du/ac) 23 to 129 du
Total Unit Yield 61 to 179
Approval of Staff's recommendation on density and land use designation would
result in a total unit yield range for the site between 61-179 dwelling units.
Consistent with existing General Plan Policies Staff's recommendation eliminates
residential development within oak/bay woodland areas, 30% slope areas and
riparian habitat areas, and recommends open space designation for these areas.
It is Staff's recommendation and interpretation that the proposed General Plan
Amendment requesting residential land use designation within Areas 2 and 3
(Attachment 15) is inconsistent with existing General Plan policies relating to
open space preservation, oak woodlands and 30% slopes, in particular policies:
3.1A Preserve oak woodlands, riparian vegetation, and natural creeks as open
space for their natural resource value.
3.1B Maintain slopes predominately over 30 percent (disregarding minor surface
humps or hollows) as permanent open space for public health and safety.
3.1C Continue requiring reservation of steep slopes and ridges as open space as
a condition of subdivision map approval (pg. 15).
Approval of the Applicant's proposal to allow 66 dwelling units in areas which
the existing General Plan policies would not allow development in will
necessitate a policy amendment to allow an exception to policies 3.1A, 3.1B, and
3.1C if the finding is made that the development will meet other overriding
General Plan policies such as Policy 2.1.1A.
"2.1.1A. Encourage housing of varied types, sizes and prices to meet
current and future needs of all Dublin residents."
Exhibit C contains a policy addressing this issue.
Staff recommends the Commission adopt the Resolutions 1) recommending City
Council certification of the EIR as complete and adequate with findings and a
statement of overriding considerations (Exhibit A) and 2) recommending adoption
of the General Plan Amendments relating to the primary planning area, Hansen
Drive extension and alternate roadway, maximum acceptable level of service
(LOS), fire protection buffer zone, and open space maintenance and recommending
land use designation and density for the Hansen Hill Site (Exhibit B).
Should the Planning Commission wish to recommend approval of the Applicant's
proposal, the Planning Commission should adopt Exhibit C.
Should the Planning Commission wish to modify the density on either the Staff's
recommendation or Applicant's proposal, the Planning Commission should indicate
so to Staff.
RECOMMENDATIONS
FORMAT: 1) Open public hearing and hear Staff presentation.
2) Take testimony from Applicant and the public.
3) Question Staff, Applicant and the public.
4) Close Public Hearing and Deliberate.
5) Adopt Resolutions recommending City Council approval of EIR
and General Plan Amendment.
ACTION: Adopt 1) Resolution Exhibit A recommending certification of the EIR
and 2) Adopt Resolution Exhibit B recommending adoption of General
Plan Amendment (Staff Recommendation) -or- Exhibit C (Applicant's
Proposal)
-4-
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A: Resolution recommending City Council Certification of EIR
Exhibit B: Resolution recommending City Council approval of General Plan (Staff
Recommendation)
Exhibit C: Resolution recommending City Council approval of General Plan
Amendment (Applicant's proposed density and land use designation)
Background Attachments
Attachment 6: Staff Study, General Plan Land Use Designation, July 1988
(from 7/18/88 Staff Report)
Attachment 15: Staff Study, Areas of Difference, July 1988 (from 8/1/88 Staff
Report)
Attachment 30: Applicant's proposed land use designation, map
Previous Background Attachments
REFER TO JULY 18, 1988 STAFF REPORT FOR ATTACHMENTS 1 THROUGH 13.
REFER TO AUGUST 1, 1988 STAFF REPORT FOR ATTACHMENTS 14 THROUGH 18.
REFER TO AUGUST 23-24, 1988 STAFF REPORT FOR ATTACHMENTS 15 THROUGH 20.
REFER TO SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 STAFF REPORT FOR ATTACHMENTS 21 THROUGH 27.
REFER TO OCTOBER 3, 1988 STAFF REPORT FOR ATTACHMENTS 28 AND 29.
Attachment 1: Summary of Impact and Mitigation
Attachment 2: General Plan Policies
Attachment 3: General Plan Figure 4 Sites for Housing Development
Attachment 4: DEIR Figure 4-1 Mitigated Alternative
Attachment 5: DEIR Table 3-8 Intersection Levels of Service
Attachment 6: Staff Study General Plan Land Use Designation July 1988
Attachment 7: Letter Schenone & Peck 7/5/88
Attachment 8: General Plan Primary Planning Area Map
Attachment 9: General Plan Extended Planning Area
Attachment 10: Hansen Hill Ranch EIR Final Addendum (under separate cover)
Attachment 11: Reduced Copy Tentative Map 5766 9 Sheets (full size under
separate cover)
Attachment 12: Reduced Copy of Preliminary Landscape Plan (full size under
separate cover)
Attachment 13: Reduced Copy of Preliminary Landscape Plan, Townhouses,
Landscape Concepts and Prototypes Planning 5 Sheets
(full size plans under separate cover).
Attachment 14: TJKM memo dated received July 26, 1988
Attachment 15: Staff Study July 1988 Areas of Difference
Attachment 16: Hansen HIll Ranch Environmental Assessment Study dated
December 1986
Attachment 17: Staff Study July 1988 areas of Judgment Call
-5-
Attachment 18: Cut and Fill Map
Attachment 19: Letter from Russell C. Smerz dated received August 8, 1988
Attachment 20: Memorandum from Department of Fish & Game dated received
August 2, 1988
Attachment 21: Excerpt from Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation (pages
10-11)
Attachment 22: Page 4 General Plan Density Measurements
Attachment 23: Density Comparison Submitted by Applicant
Attachment 24: Table 1 General Plan Development Policies
Attachment 25: Figure 4 General Plan Sites for Housing Development
Attachment 26: Example of Existing Development .5-2.8 Du/Acre
Attachment 27: Example of Existing Development 3.0 DU/Acre
Attachment 28: City of San Ramon Open Space Policies
Attachment 29: Applicant's Revised Plan
OTHER ITEMS HELPFUL IN REVIEW OF PROJECT:
Draft EIR
General Plan
-6-
RESOLUTION NO. 88 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND
MAKING FINDINGS AND A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION REGARDING
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PA 87-045 HANSEN HILL RANCH GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held seven Public Hearings on
PA 87-045, Hansen Hill Ranch General Plan Amendment and EIR on February 1 and
16, 1988, July 18, 1988, August 1, 1988, September 19, 1988, October 3 and 17,
1988; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the written and oral
testimony submitted at the public hearings; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received and reviewed the staff
analysis and recommendation on the environmental effects of the Hansen Hill
Ranch General Plan Amendment; 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 impact and that environmental
documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), has been prepared
pursuant to CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the final EIR consists of the Draft EIR, and Final
Addendum Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission
recommends the City Council adopt the Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission
recommends the City Council find as follows:
1. CEQA Compliance: That the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is adequate
and complete and has been prepared in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the State CEQA Guidelines, and that the
Commission has considered and reviewed the information contained in the EIR.
2. Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts: That the significant Adverse
Environmental Impacts identified in the EIR (See summary Page 1-2 through 1-11)
will be mitigated to a less than significant level by application of the
mitigation measures identified in the EIR summary and incorporated by reference
as Attachment A-1.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission
recommends the City Council adopt the following findings and statement of
overriding considerations regarding significant environmental effects of the
Hansen Hill Ranch General Plan Amendment PA 87-045:
1. Extensive Grading: Development of the project will result in extensive
grading on the site. The extensive grading will result in an unavoidable
adverse impact to a significant ravine and woodland area as the ravine is
proposed for fill of 50 ft. depths.
Findings: The adverse environmental impacts associated with the extensive
grading (cut & fill) is considered "acceptable" as the benefit of balancing cut
and fill on site (eliminating export of fill) outweigh the unavoidable adverse
environmental impact of filling significant ravine and woodland area.
Anep,FT
o.-US..k -u ac.Resoi,l; ,
op Er!,
2. Oak/Bay Forest and Riparian Corridor Impact: Placement of fill material
and cutting of slopes within and under the tree canopy will reduce habitat
value and result in removal or potential damage to individual trees. The
largest area of oak/bay woodland removal occurs within an approximate 6 acre
area containing oak/bay woodland and drainage swale/ravine. The most extensive
riparian corridor area on site disturbed by the project occurs in the area at
which the riparian corridors of Martin Canyon Creek and the largest tributary
on site meet.
Findings: The adverse environmental impacts to the oak/bay woodland and
riparian habitat corridor is considered "acceptable" as the benefit of
balancing cut and fill on site, outweighs the unavoidable adverse environmental
impacts of eliminating a significant ravine and woodland area through the
placement of fill material, and the benefit of providing vehicular and
emergency access on site, outweighs the adverse environmental impacts to the
oak/bay woodlands.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of October, 1988.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Planning Director
-2-
1.Summary
1.3 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS
Resource Impact Mitigation
Geology I. Reactivation of occurrence I.(Repair slides in areas of
of new landslides. construction. Establish a
slope maintenance schedule
and assign responsibility for
maintenance and future
repairs.
1. Mass-grading resulting in Z,1 Reduce grading or establish
imbalanced cut and fill. agreement for export with
adjacent land owners.
Soils 3. Soils with high shrink-swell 3.ITreat,cover or remove
potential. those soils.
Hydrology '}, Increased flows and flow t},I Construct detention basins
velocities in Martin Canyon and drop structures to
Creek resulting in potential reduce contribution to peak
localized erosion and flows.
flooding.
I L Rip-rap stress points in
channel
4.3 Establish a drainage
structure and channel
maintenance schedule and
assign responsibility for
maintenance and repairs.
5. Erosion during site 5.1 Restrict construction to the
construction. dry season and stabilize
unprotected areas in
accordance with erosion and
sediment control plan.
(o, Erosion from roof drainage Io.IDirect roof drainage toward
and lot drainage. specific structures. Design
lot grades to prevent runoff
across lot lines where lots
are split.
86123 1-2
ATTACHMENTA '-
1. 170481_04S Ke301 �
ern,
1. Summary
Resource Impact Mitigation
i t 4
Vegetation I• Project construction could 1, i Any construction activity in
remove 36% (22 acres) of close proximity to mature
the total area (61 acres) of trees should be done in a
l oak/bay forest vegetation manner that will minimize
on the site. trauma to the root system
(see details in Chapter 3.4
Vegetation).
1, 2 Disturbed areas should be
revegetated with natural
tree and bush species.
Specific details of the
revegetation plan should be
worked out in consultation
with the California Depart-
ment of Fish and Game, the
City and the Alameda
County Flood Control
District.
1.3 Areas of extensive grading
and fill in Neighborhoods 5
and 9 should be eliminated
and the oak/bay woodland in
these areas preseved.
$. Project construction would $, ( The California Department
disturb approximately two of Fish and Game should be
acres of riparian habitat in consulted as required under
the area of the Hansen Hill Section 1601-03 of the Fish
Road/Creekside Road and Game Code.
intersection. 8.2Minimize fill and cut slopes
within the riparian corridor,
especially in the area of the
Hansen Hill Road and
Creekside Road inter-
section. Redesign the
intersection of Hansen Hill
Road and Creekside Road to
reduce the amount of fill
placed in the riparian
corridor.
8,3 Revegetation of riparian
habitats with native species
in disturbed areas as well as
elsewhere on the site to
compensate for habitats lost
t'!
in graded areas.
86123 1-3
.-. ^ 1. Summary
Resource Impact Mitigation
Vegetation $.4 Remove lots 102-110 and
(continued) 95-107 which back up to the
riparian corridor along
Martin Canyon Creek.
g 5 Relocate Creekside Road to
the west in the area
between lots 103 and 104 in
Neighborhood 9.
Wildlife 5. The placement of a large q.1 Place a box culvert under
amount of fill under Hansen the roadway rather than a
Hill Road at the confluence 30-inch pipe.
of two canyons would
isolate the tributary canyon
from large mammals.
10, If fish are found there, 10. I Final design of flood control
improperly designed drop structures and measures
structures within the creeks within the creeks must be
would prevent native fish approved by DFG.
from migrating upstream.
II. Loss of oak/bay woodland 11. I Redesign the project to
and riparian habitats at two avoid these areas as much
critical areas -- as possible. If unavoidable
Neighborhoods 5 and 9. then compensation
elsewhere on or offsite. All
compensation efforts must
be approved by DFG.
Land Use 12. . Placement of project iz. ! The project site plan should
clusters implies the 79.6 be modified to provide clear
acres retained for open public access to the
space would serve only designated open space on
private project users. the site.
t2.2 Provide a pedestrian
corridor along the
streambank and extending
through the site.
13 City's Subdivision Ordinance i3.Iln-lieu park fees and/or land
provides for land dedications should be
requirement of .011 acres required as part of the
per unit for single-family subdivision review process.
units and .009 per multi-
family unit.
86123 l-4
• 1. Summary
Resource Impact Mitigation
Land Use Pt Access to site from 1q,1 Installation and
(continued) neighboring parcels, both maintenance of a project-
cattle and trespassers size perimeter fence should
be required.
icf,2 Project Home Owners'
Association should maintain
a list of plant materials
acceptable for landscaping.
Visual Quality is. Grading would remove 15.I Site ridgelands overlooking
prominent knolls and would I-580 should be preserved
alter existing ridgeline. and not altered by grading.
Ho. A significant number of 1(p.) Visually important trees and
trees would or might be tree clusters should be
affected by grading and identified and tagged in the
development. field for protection and
preservation. Lots within
tree preservation areas
should not be developed.
11. Visual character of the site I'j, (Develop design guidelines
would change from rural to which establish building
suburban. colors, materials and
finishes which are
compatible with the
surrounding area. Decrease
road widths and gutters.
Perimeter site fencing
should be compatible with
the rural character of
surrounding lands.
I$. Night lighting and glare IS.' Reflective finishes should
might increase. not be used on site
structures; excessive
exterior lighting should be
avoided.
►5, Views from designated 1c1,i Homes should be sited well
scenic roadways would be below ridgelines and away
further impacted. from slopes overlooking I-
- 580.
86123 1-5
^ 1. Summary
Resource Impact Mitigation
2-0. Siting of homes along ridge- Development should not
lines and slopes which are occur on ridges or slopes
visible from I-580 would overlooking I-580. Density
conflict with City of Dublin could be increased on sites
policies. lower down and with less
constrained slopes.
Topography 09.1.1 Extensive grading, excessive 0.1 Develop site grading plan
cutting and filling. Approx- which avoids cut slopes of
imately 496,000 cubic yards greater than 2:1. Place cuts
of excess excavated ma- for building pads behind
terial would require off-site structures. Landscape with
disposal. native materials. Cut and
fill volumes should be bal-
anced when possible or used
on adjacent site if fill is
needed.
Fire 22 DSRSD Fire Department 22.1- Automatic fire exting-
would serve project. Proj- uishing system on all units
ect poses some potential built beyond 5 minute
fire service impacts. response time.
;2,22- Non-combustible roofs for
all units.
22,5 - Redesign of plan to in-
clude fire breaks between
homes and undeveloped
land and fire trails, based
on criteria to be set by
the Dublin, San Ramon
Service District (DSRSD).
22.4- Ensure adequate water
supply and pressure.
23, Some roads exceed a 12% 23.1- Redesign road so grades
grade. do not exceed 12%, unless
approved by Dublin Police
& DSRSD Fire
Departments.
2*. Possible blockage of fire 214,1- Redesign entrance to
protection access to homes property at Valley Christ-
at project's west end. ian Center to eliminate
possible blockage, or
provide alternate emerg-
ency access per Fire Mar-
shall.
86123 1-6 •
•
1. Summary
Resource Impact Mitigation
'! 425• Bridge at main entrance of 25.1- Redesign bridge to unob-
project is too low. structed height of 13 feet
6 inches for emergency
vehicle access.
Police 2(°, Upon annexation, Dublin 26„1 Access to townhouses should
Police Department would be protected by a fence
require one additional off- along all sides.
icer.
,2'I, Residences at east end of 27,1 Trails to riparian and picnic
project can be easily areas should be eight feet
accessed by burglers along wide(excluding the should-
creek bottom. er)to allow access by emer-
gency vehicles.
28. There is no acceptable em-
ergency access to riparian
and picnic areas on the site.
Schools 2q Proposed project would Ai Project sponsor would corn-
generate approximately 56 ply with Amador Valley
k-8 grade students and 89 9- District's impact fee.
12 grade students. Students
could be served within facil-
ity capacity of the Murray
School District(k-8)and the
Amador Valley Joint Union
High School District.
30• Cumulative Impact of new go,/Add required capacity. (See
students with other area Fiscal Section).
projects would be an excess
area capacity in the Nielson
(K-8)School of 68.
3 f, Transportation(busing)and 3I. Institute such programs.
student safety(crossing (See Fiscal Section).
guards)could also arise.
Solid Waste 32. Proposed project would 32.1 None would be required or
generate 562 tons per year, recommended.
for Oakland Scavenger
Company's collection within
the San Ramon Area and an
increase of 0.04% in waste
to the Altamont Landfill.
86123 1 7
/'N 1.Summary
,
Resource Impact Mitigation
Water 33. The proposed project would 33.I Payment of hookup charges
demand about 131,500 gpd, and fees by project sponsor.
c' and the DSRSD does not Payment of user charges by
anticipate any supply prob- the homeowners.
lems.
3cf. Infrastructure for comple- 34.I Project sponsor would pay
tion of Zone III and con- direct capital costs.
struction of Zone IV would
be required.
Wastewater 3S Proposed project would 35•(Project sponsor would pay
• generate approximately hookup fees and the cost of
112,000 gpd, 1.13%of on-site improvements and
DSRSD's existing treatment any required extension to
capacity and 7%of the existing sewer lines.
increased capacity.
Gas, Electricity, 3(.. PG&E,Pacific Bell and Via-3`•(Project sponsor would pay
Communication com have indicated the any relocation and/or exten-
capacity to serve the pro- sions of PG&E facilities.
posed project.
36.zHomeowners would pay for
underground conduit and any
other facilities required by
Pacific Telephone.
Parks 37. Proposed project would 37.1 Project sponsor would pay
generate the need for an the in-lieu fee. Some of the
additional 2.73 acres of increased property tax rev-
parkland: acquisition,de- enues could be used to off-
velopment, maintenance. set the increased mainten-
ance costs.
•
372Compliance with City's
parkland dedication/in-lieu
fee ordinance.
City of Dublin 38. A positive net annual fiscal 3L None required.
impact of about$26,600.
Dublin San Ramon 37. Net capital fiscal impact of'39,i Payment of water and sewer
Services District zero;net annual fiscal im- hookup fees and capital
pact of a positive$166,000. expenses not covered by the
hookup fees.
1
86123 18
tom"
1. Summary
Resource Impact Mitigation
1.1 Schools 40, Net capital fiscal impact to 4O.ICompliance with Amador
the Amador Valley Joint Valley District's impact fee.
Union High School District
yt of a positive $953,000 upon
compliance with District's
impact fee.
is=;
41, No net capital fiscal im- 41,/Institute a Development
pacts to Murray (element- Impact Fee as authorized
ary) School District from under recent legislation
proposed project. Net capi- (AB 2926).
tal fiscal impacts from
c-• cumulative development
1.4 would be negative. •
Traffic 42 Potential for decrease in c{2,1 Widen eastbound approach
' the Level of Service at of the intersection to have
Dublin Boulevard/San Ra- two right-turn lanes, one
mon Road from Level of left-turn only lane, one
Service (LOS) D to LOS F shared through and left, and
when combining project one through only lane.
effects with the cumulative
impacts of other projects. 42,2 Widen westbound approach
to have three left-turn
lanes.
tf3. Cumulative increase in daily 43, 1. Reduce project size or
traffic on Sivergate Drive 43•2. Encourage the use of
between Peppertree Road Dublin Boulevard by
and Creekside Drive beyond 43.2..a. Choosing Alterna-
the environmental capacity. tive 1 as second
access road
43.2•b. designing access
road as major col-
lector with few
intersecting drive-
ways
43.2.c. make access road
as direct as possi-
ble to Dublin
Boulevard.
86123 1-9 -
i .J
1.Summary
)1,,
Resource Impact Mitigation
j
I Noise 44. High noise levels would be 4V.1 Limit construction to day-
experienced during project light hours, muffle equip-
construction. ment where possible.
45 Proposed homes would be 451 Install insulation adequate
located in an area exposed to shield residents from
to noise from 1-580. noise and/or eliminate or
relocate homes in direct
line of sight of I-580.
Air Quality 410 Particulate matter would be46.1 Sprinkle exposed earth with
generated during project water continuously during
construction. grading,then as needed
during other operations,
cover stockpiles and haul
trucks,pave and landscape
as soon as possible.
4z Construction equipment 41,1 None required.
exhaust contains air pollut-
ants.
tkt, Hydrocarbons generated by 4ai None required.
project vehicles would im-
pact regional ozone levels.
49 Project related vehicles 4q,1 Implement measures sug-
would increase local con- gested for traffic impacts.
centrations of CO.
56 High CO episodes could 56,I City of Dublin should
become common as develop- institute a CO"hotspot"
ment continues in the Tri- monitoring program under
Valley area. the guidance of the
13AAQMD and paid for by
developers.
Historic 5 1 No known historic resources 51.1 None required.
Resources within the project site.
Archaeological 52 The project area contains 52. Should any archaeological
Resources environmental features materials be encountered
which are considered to be during project construction,
archaeologically sensitive. all activity within a 50
meter radius of the find
should be stopped and a
qualified archaeologist re-
tained to examine the find
and recommend appropriate
mitigation.
86123 1-10 •
Ili 1. Summary
I
Resource Impact Mitigation
Historic Resources 53, No known historic resources 53.1Should any archaeological
within the project site. materials be encountered
P during project construction,
all activity within a 50
meter radius of the find
I should be stopped and a
!'- qualified archaeologist
retained to examine the find
and recommend appropriate
I mitigation.
Archaeology Resources 54. No known historic resources
within the project site. The
project area contains
environmental features
which are considered to be
archaeologically sensitive.
Ai
• :,
i'
i-
r
86123 1-11 -
1
{
L
RESOLUTION NO. 88 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
FOR PA 87-045 HANSEN HILL RANCH
WHEREAS, The Hansen Hill Development Corporation, an affiliate
development company of Venture Corporation has requested a General Plan
Amendment Study, Planned Development Prezoning, Tentative Subdivision Map No.
5766 and Annexation to allow a maximum of 245 dwelling units on 147+ acres in
unincorporated Alameda County west of Silvergate Drive and north of Hansen
Drive; and
WHEREAS, on August 11, 1986 the City Council authorized a General
Plan Amendment Study for the Hansen Hill Ranch property; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of State Planning and Zoning
Law, it is the function and duty of the Planning Commission of the City of
Dublin to review and recommend action on proposed amendments to the City's
General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held four Public Noticed Study
Sessions on the Hansen Hill Ranch planning applications on February 2, 1987,
February 17, 1987, August 23, 1988 and August 24, 1988; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held two Public Noticed field
trips to the Hansen Hill Ranch site on February 27, 1988 and August 20, 1988;
and
WHEREAS, notice of Public Hearing was published in the Herald,
posted in public buildings, and mailed to property owners within 300 feet of
the project in accordance with California State Law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held noticed public hearings to
consider the Planning Application for Hansen Hill Ranch on February 1, 1988,
February 16, 1988, July 18, 1988, August 1, 1988, September 17, 1988,
October 3, 1988 and October 17, 1988; and
WHEREAS, at the July 18, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting the
Commission unanimously voted to review the Planning Applications separately, to
review and recommend action on the General Plan Amendment and EIR prior to
consideration of the PD Prezoning, Tentative Map and Annexation requests; and
WHEREAS, the Staff analysis was submitted recommending amendments
to the General Plan relating to the Primary Planning Area, Table I and Figure
4, policy and map relating to Hansen Drive extension, alternate roadway serving
Hansen Hill Ranch, policies establishing an acceptable level of service (LOS)
for intersections in Dublin, and policies establishing fire protection buffer
zone around perimeter of residential development interfacing with open space
lands; and
5'R$7-dctS Flamm (4-1t G577 gecomiAckl.
WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment has been reviewed in accordance
with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared
pursuant to CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered all written and oral
testimony submitted at the public hearings;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission
does hereby recommend City Council approval of the following General Plan
Amendment PA 87-045 Hansen Hill Ranch:
1. Amend Figure 1 Dublin General Plan Primary Planning Area to:
a. include the entire Hansen Hill Ranch site (941-110-1-9 and 941-
110-2) within the Primary Planning Area.
b. amend the land use designations on Hansen Hill Ranch site, as noted
on Attachment B-1 to include:
- open space, stream corridor
- single-family low density residential (.5 - 2.8 units per acre)
- medium low density residential (6.1 - 8 units per acre)
c. eliminate Hansen Drive extension through Valley Christian Center
site.
d. include alternate roadway serving Hansen Hill Ranch site from
Dublin Boulevard through the Valley Christian Center and designate
roadway as a collector street.
2. Amend Table 1, Development Policies for Residential Sites, page 8, and
Figure 4, Sites for Housing Development, page 9, eliminating Area 5, 6 and 7
from the Table and Figure.
3. Eliminate implementing Policy 5.1G, page 19, "Reserve Right-of-Way for
Hansen Drive Extension to the Western Hills".
4. Amend 5.0, Land Use and Circulation Section: Circulation and Scenic
Highways Element to include a policy establishing the maximum level of service
acceptable for intersections within the City:
"Phase development and road improvements outside the Downtown Specific
Plan Area so that the operating Level of Service (LOS) for major street
intersections in Dublin do not exceed LOS D."
5. Amend 8.0 Environmental Resources Management Section: Seismic Safety and
Safety Element 8.2.2 Fire Hazard & Fire Protection implementing policies to
include a policy requiring fire protection buffer zone around perimeter of
residential development which interface with open space lands.
"A fire protection buffer zone shall be provided around the perimeter of
residential development situated adjacent to undeveloped open space
land".
6. Amend 7.0 Environmental Resources Management Section: Conservation
Element to include policies relating to open space maintenance:
A. "Require open space management and maintenance programs for open
space areas established through subdivisions and Planned Development
districts. Programs should include standards to ensure control of
potential hazards; appropriate setbacks; and management of the open space
so that it produces a positive and pleasing visual image."
B. "Require that land designated as open space through development
approval be permanently restricted to open space use by recorded map or
deed."
-2-
C. "Require revegetation of cut and fill slopes."
D. "Require use of native trees, shrubs and grasses with low
maintenance costs in revegetation of cut and fill slopes."
E. "Access roads (including emergency access roads), arterial streets
and collector streets that must pass through open space areas shall be
designed to minimize grading to the maximum extent possible so as not to
damage the ecological and/or aesthetic value and characteristics of the
open space area."
F. "Prohibit development within designated open space areas except
that designed to enhance public safety and the environmental setting."
G. "Promote inclusion of hiking, bicycling and/or equestrian trails
within designated open space areas."
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of October, 1988.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Planning Director
-3-
8'.. KEY MAP
. i
' V, N••- • • . ,
I
. I
OPEN SPACE, STREAM CORRIDOR
: • • • It,:....
•
i -.!\'. • ,..i, .s_ ...._ \ . . .
! ..7., , L.:,••.- -7-7----.-',:-.••••••
),-...i..,W.1:.•3 ji t.11: •
. ..•' .: ''''''-'s• :** s:ZZ:'.s...
•
1. • . 4-. -;:.:%.'5:7;'-;:T;*S-.4.• ..,t. ''• .. , •:..
24. :-...-'"•;,:,:e\:::4*
•
, : •
SINGLE-FAMILY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
! 2 t•...1-'..... 'Xi\Z:. 6t..14r.4•&'. ---- '•49-0,s, ‘'...- . . .: (.5 - 2.8 DU/ACRE)
t . ; c:^7;:Ni=7-14`?Zn....-;•••'':•0. .tr:r4...r'i-. ''''' .4iit'A'.1(-4iAS i-r -- -:---;,.--- --_1:-;:. -- --- ,
•
.,. ,I-'.. A....-,1/4-1.4. . so. G4'ipl\< ), i,1 q......)Y -.6.1.,,t> . . ' Z.
.. Qr.,46.../CI•rstts--::•fr -P .. 7•7•••7' • " %.;4-1...- '''c,\ -:•,/ - -`%.--11" • .I ••
.•:,. ..;*. • I
'Vfqie•• gh''SW.>4 ...:. ':'.:%.N)1, ‘r s 1.41M1. ', .. ... .:.‘'t::....X. ..e,.......,, ', ....... I
, •
MEDIUM LOW DENSITY
. I i•
i , 'ff-•:?-;,411.° 7---"-.7 .%s'W )11‘s,"4" ° , ,':,C''',:-.2.::•--4.- 7--..-• '--..- • ‘ ••"-,, W.-, 4vrj RESIDENTIAL ': .1 • • "- • ic';..• s s,''.'.--, ..--,:y.) ;_..>
:rd''s-r ji-;6-."-1 iti YAM& / ),,S.,Aq • 0 t")'-.' '."'' ' " .0 s ' ---)I F.-r.
•- , .1 / 4, . 1••• '',;, •., ‘ %F., ..t. 4. •-•,..-044,,,,,,.. ..,.....\-...,,,...\... ..f.„-i..-..,-.....,,..1 v ,-,.. 1 (6.1 - 8 DU/ACRE) i • • ) i:
-
r.kanrb.••••• .s ,_,....0 „.....rr,
--Jiv mIllatiraglEak*W4 "'"::- ;r:-PAT':4-.4-4 /7.4i;P:•ge,-...: ''?:::-•i-••<-,,,:;•:: ?..--.z-Z--Z-'1P4-• `;41<i•••,: 1.
k
t '
""upaltivoinsialge •ilsi,3if-t•••)%`•\,•1 ‘:;--NN-1-4--:/ • .19 ,"ik..:'' "k."--.\•Zs' '''•:'•••M's.•'•?(,2.p. r'37 * 7:;/..-/C,.?..,_, •
• r .
it. • ''`k.itilffi"." 'n.P:"''''''',t''.4'•;.". '71....1 •413),1;Nei;-4* .,...„,„,7141'. .-..d,'' •)r\t?),(-;'i‘ ):.1::SS:,14`. ( 's,.\.,1,..../3?',1-., '
1 . I/#.''%C:‘k.\... -- :••••,:t4;k:.•4,27.•%:*-:•:'''•••r Xi4z1:1'kl`ts...!F. plaWilli ,:. 'w 1\'`."4r==--.--;`'.1-''' 5' `)`<fs‘erZ I• *-7:)'41/4.- >";„.,4• ':12.%..;*•:.'::3W-,:•)2tv:;2.--.:ZZ;:;;--- tir-7- e'--IZ,';-• • K'..:Tili • , ''',N).,•':•\r"?:•;r-.Z: --Y, "1/) '3•; ••_'--1'.';',.-.: 1 i. -
V.A.'.•..r'•---1:-:-....• ---4•f=, -,..---,,,-,.,6_,-43,--,..-,.., . . •\-,:4-...--,__:-...,..,•,,,,, L-1 ..:_7.-- :-,:ls,.",:-,. /'-‘e. ,
, •t'*--:• :.•(......4....-.-L--.7;.:?7.-- ,Z"Ii.4:M-_-zrpt •-_-_•_-_-11,•A?, •^.,I^R•Ns); 1,s..L-2.7.'il)1)11,11-1;-• -.. --:2--:-.::::',;•- 1 /).•• ..--1..,_ •
ii citWt-4-i'V:N:-.:4-,7.:.: -. •--:;=..-.4:74'.:J..?."7.t77-W:'.. "••.- ': 1' T.-.012/,'.1 i/A,i42A7•:--•-?-:.,2•:.;:. ';:-•-1. :,-.,;}- . CI:7,v,, --": VII
w.w,wcreik4 s- ‘,ir-''''-=-1____::Zi;.!.-- ,, . 4‘.•-..0-1' 1?4-P'-4 ...,i MI-i''...\) ' ''' l'IV'FIV:;:s0Z.F.'...7.1:74t:::';: i -"Etr':1-7 - -P.4" 0 --.'.-- .
I -
'Pitilailt:•:--F--•,7::;:;F;::.:•Yirs7P A&V ;M*-7-)V-UY) '''•• - .-.^-- . ''; ., 41', ,,,,,;77/ c0:-.)--:::•"•-• '',,„7 .'2•!k-1-3' s-•aYi,"'" ` -'--.:'. .1'. --- - . AM ;=-77;tplar / •
'. .. ''')1'41:c>9. :; w 4--t• •f•.) •-•.nT•.: • ii.'21,Minif.*-.4, ''Illj" r 'I /...4:.:-:•.;:i5,'>144.111WYMq, i:,/ra I 'I•i-1.-i ova.'-' '
mu / ?'?' .'--'ex • _Ag“'" - ''' "'%C37-r• y-./o, 1
,. ,....
IIP ;116,-`44:4;/ 1: '‘.- ' ••• , i? ':A' mrk-,effipat4 .1, .7f. .:,-.. .,.. . . ..:s'j'iL 1.4Fr -,--4ii•V4.:P..;fe ••- / 4
.r...,...- .- 1 , • , 6. 4 fri, -11 . . 4... ....e ltottve • •140474 4
., '',.....•::: :114t414• 457. .-• 4.,.- • 41,_ '''. , ,•:,,,,4as aWillr.: ,4 e4P;, - nt.01•;;...0%.A,4;• .....e.,,,,.... ,,,,,42. ./. ..L?&,., jit .1. ,.,.. e-aimr.......,, „p.zr...,t,4..• r.;:i....f_.4,3,... e., ,\3.c. .
.... ......:.-_:.- • "'";. -'s'..-• •,s- • 1 Ts.- -,"-.../(6J ,
ipip-Awero--:no .
c•.1 --7,---,,,,kisk. -. 4,-,,•,::: . , -v. ----... ,. • ,;-,. . . , ,,K,-;._: ,r,-,-. 1,4.-„ei,i).',1-A.,m„-,, ,..P',,„../0",,,..,(i c'........ 4 . • \4,40.34'44206.,-fti. .•$' ' .
Noist
4 >•---..,...-..., 7:‘'7-7,\.:,•-• i. :,•4....f,...`,,,,7 1.2,,,794.4,,,,, ')•ti../. ' „,'. ',,.4.,.,- , ,,-, ,:fi.,:: t;14-,:' .....• • •T , , " -,A: :ci •en' .. ..L.,0,/ ..... 4k.`4,46......ortiii,--..,g,, • .
1 II:=0 2---:,4---s"-"c'N ss \ • ' ' ••••=-1.,Q.2(iileAllnopn,,j' Q./ . ...--:/14'--4- •' .''' .%),„' •=',',,,'• j a •. t.15;.,), . , ' - • '. •ior l't .-4.2...., - .....-.4 rar,-CL.4.;, ) ..
..-s--"•••.•• ......‘•••Pe. ••••,:s.;••:. at*F'..,•••.;; ;•-•=1:- "LVr..2.7/1./jj•••. 1 I ' '''''.7'''''4:7. TI:11:--/P;‘..A' ,..rod 0 •-'‘;'c'...;'4. p r , 1 ..- -,740 2 r 0,or,..sronfr. '-i'' 'i
...::::••• x•-•,..,..-:.•::::-.7.-,...:::. .;, ... "z".:...hs .,;..„•:, iti.).job .21 •--i. ) tttfttl ••1//17-.7: - 71 i '•-•C;c2\• • • 14414:47 -•--'::''''' ,'Z ''...741::--•----4.--.'-',.;?1s•--- V&VM, • - 0,2* 4etie24 • '-'i•-.- .; -1) • • 4 ••14t‘ • • • •,:.!•C ' ottt ID
irr '1 ?"4"21112 'MCI
ill; 1 P.
A\ ? x__ „Efi?T.P.' , 4N..,4‘14.T.c.wav-46 -ilam-Fli_i_'-i-LL--t-'irrikalirJeluNgre„,-,ov•
(-2;.=.:4:.,:•:' • :'A.0 i , . • -,1
st, ,,,) '-----
,/.I‘ ••is(\ ...:.•, ''-=:•••••.'-. .-, _`-----T:=. ''.7-'=-7-
• •I , • : taintillei
M1Vir . \0 •.
,n,= ''','"• :-;.Z.-----x-22-_-_-_--:-.-1.5:-'' •/-•.7- --/-•-•.- •X?"-•-- . . •• •
. i • •
••. i
' =MA :••`:ss*•\:,Z•••:::--.1.4----•'-.. .',-.''-- " , *-•fy.....::::-:17. • • • • • ,.
• ",, ,-.7-Z- ::7 I • , . • .
•. . ...cf----.....,,/ / ..."......... • . • - .
- • •• ......'-•:.....--••••,/,'"s........,/ .. 7----r-• .
•
0 1CO 210
Sa
• •.
... 2,.....•
•"•'.• Di•-•'"'"" • .-:-1:-..-N-4;.'s •'' / ..." ------''' .• • .
Nom, f..0---•-• Ii0*.- . . ...• ,•• s, ' r : 1
I
. ___........
-- P-7-
1 E.---••-••••- ,_..•-•-•
RESOLUTION NO. 88 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
FOR PA 87-045 HANSEN HILL RANCH
WHEREAS, The Hansen Hill Development Corporation, an affiliate
development company of Venture Corporation has requested a General Plan
Amendment Study, Planned Development Prezoning, Tentative Subdivision Map No.
5766 and Annexation to allow a maximum of 245 dwelling units on 147+ acres in
unincorporated Alameda County west of Silvergate Drive and north of Hansen
Drive; and
WHEREAS, on August 11, 1986 the City Council authorized a General
Plan Amendment Study for the Hansen Hill Ranch property; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of State Planning and Zoning
Law, it is the function and duty of the Planning Commission of the City of
Dublin to review and recommend action on proposed amendments to the City's
General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held four Public Noticed Study
Sessions on the Hansen Hill Ranch planning applications on February 2, 1987,
February 17, 1987, August 23, 1988 and August 24, 1988; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held two Public Noticed field
trips to the Hansen Hill Ranch site on February 27, 1988 and August 20, 1988;
and
WHEREAS, notice of Public Hearing was published in the Herald,
posted in public buildings, and mailed to property owners within 300 feet of
the project in accordance with California State Law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held noticed public hearings to
consider the Planning Application for Hansen Hill Ranch on February 1, 1988,
February 16, 1988, July 18, 1988, August 1, 1988, September 17, 1988,
October 3, 1988 and October 17, 1988; and
WHEREAS, at the July 18, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting the
Commission unanimously voted to review the Planning Applications separately, to
review and recommend action on the General Plan Amendment and EIR prior to
consideration of the PD Prezoning, Tentative Map and Annexation requests; and
WHEREAS, the Staff analysis was submitted recommending amendments
to the General Plan relating to the Primary Planning Area, Table I and Figure
4, policy and map relating to Hansen Drive extension, alternate roadway serving
Hansen Hill Ranch, policies establishing an acceptable level of service (LOS)
for intersections in Dublin, and policies establishing fire protection buffer
zone around perimeter of residential development interfacing with open space
lands; and
-1- pcC
„pp
b1-043- /}7'PLt trojbSFrt-
r
WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment has been reviewed in accordance
with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared
pursuant to CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered all written and oral
testimony submitted at the public hearings;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission
does hereby recommend City Council approval of the following General Plan
Amendment PA 87-045 Hansen Hill Ranch:
1. Amend Figure 1 Dublin General Plan Primary Planning Area to:
a. include the entire Hansen Hill Ranch site (941-110-1-9 and 941-
110-2) within the Primary Planning Area.
b. amend the land use designations on Hansen Hill Ranch site, as noted
on Attachment C-1 to include:
- open space, stream corridor
- single-family low density residential (.9 - 6.0 units per acre)
- medium low density residential (6.1 - 8 units per acre)
c. eliminate Hansen Drive extension through Valley Christian Center
site.
d. include alternate roadway serving Hansen Hill Ranch site from
Dublin Boulevard through the Valley Christian Center and designate
roadway as a collector street.
2. Amend Table 1, Development Policies for Residential Sites, page 8, and
Figure 4, Sites for Housing Development, page 9, eliminating Area 5, 6 and 7
from the Table and Figure.
3. Eliminate implementing Policy 5.1G, page 19, "Reserve Right-of-Way for
Hansen Drive Extension to the Western Hills".
4. Amend 5.0, Land Use and Circulation Section: Circulation and Scenic
Highways Element to include a policy establishing the maximum level of service
acceptable for intersections within the City:
"Phase development and road improvements outside the Downtown Specific
Plan Area so that the operating Level of Service (LOS) for major street
intersections in Dublin do not exceed LOS D."
5. Amend 8.0 Environmental Resources Management Section: Seismic Safety and
Safety Element 8.2.2 Fire Hazard & Fire Protection implementing policies to
include a policy requiring fire protection buffer zone around perimeter of
residential development which interface with open space lands.
"A fire protection buffer zone shall be provided around the perimeter of
residential development situated adjacent to undeveloped open space
land".
6. Amend 7.0 Environmental Resources Management Section: Conservation
Element to include policies relating to open space maintenance:
A. "Require open space management and maintenance programs for open
space areas established through subdivisions and Planned Development
districts. Programs should include standards to ensure control of
potential hazards; appropriate setbacks; and management of the open space
so that it produces a positive and pleasing visual image."
B. "Require that land designated as open space through development
approval be permanently restricted to open space use by recorded map or
deed."
-2-
C. "Require revegetation of cut and fill slopes."
D. "Require use of native trees, shrubs and grasses with low
maintenance costs in revegetation of cut and fill slopes."
E. "Access roads (including emergency access roads), arterial streets
and collector streets that must pass through open space areas shall be
designed to minimize grading to the maximum extent possible so as not to
damage the ecological and/or aesthetic value and characteristics of the
open space area."
F. "Prohibit development within designated open space areas except
that designed to enhance public safety and the environmental setting."
G. "Promote inclusion of hiking, bicycling and/or equestrian trails
within designated open space areas."
7. Amend 3.0 Land Use & Circulation Section: "Parks and Open Space Element
to include a policy providing an exception to Policies 3.1A, 3.1B and
3.1C.
"3.1.D After site specific analysis or evaluation policies 3.1A,
3.1B and 3.1C may be negated, provided the finding is made that the
development will meet other overriding General Plan policies".
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of October, 1988.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Planning Director
-3-
—T:-5—iN3wiHa.. yii 7......:.-...:...,;.;;.••,...T ; •4'7) It t L' 4f•}i 4 � ri.YY Y r.
S i,O- 08 , __A ...
•
_ ,
. ,_.....
. . . .,,,,,,,..,, ii...,,,,.. .../ / it _,._.:,;.4.„,,,, „,.;...,. .•••,:,:d Is. I . /.),I.:01,,I...-6L-5..,
.. .,_, _ ____+_f.... IOW 110111 NMI 111.111.11111111 1111111111111111k 1 - .. I .
1 , I . ,•••.,..• .• , .; // / ,• ..i.i. ._,.;__ . N' i I, . s.:10 4:Zo , _ - ..—,.... •••z -•• ,:;.• S N.. I
1 , ; -, . 1.1 z\f,i.
I i - s 4.•ti• - os 0 • . I
t 1t \ • / '�•� _ , '.'d! •surd '.��l: :\4 \C 1
• . • „,.. •...„ z.• 8 :•:. ,p, - --..... \ .:
. . '.* ..•/••6 N.',-- .c'T.•4:1_,77.-"‘____-:-.1‘.'t..\,a)'.. P .'--.z.s.-'.-..,-.- i ‘...c. '-' e:5 ;,...----iG:4;
; ,, -:i....;._:•--ag\;',_,,,f.,k;.`'.17N,..\-,, ' ,,:::.zi -,..,..,,. .... 1 t`K,- , -,-,-:=&.. ..1 ?
i-k 1.-.?.1\, .-1 ii'Wtioxf/.s•.'Mi..s., -. 3
t • i. - 1�y,..' I
•
•
9, rc ' 'y
i ;! /�y., - < `+ /0 .. • yam.\!• ` •. ' ,.\-,_cg. 1
1 "-e, I ! c`.,• „ \,n ib ki
rC`,-`411.., :,:•\., '-•** • '...;`-'7,4 sla : : • .° ;').a 4r: • ••*.t • .:
`
.
J.I. •
'i4" 0t.) .; 'f-, ' .
s a. ' _1 . '�;'_v\J.! , _ ,/. Lam
• 1.1 ‘--: . . -.-.., :Li .• .....-,.,- ..--_-„c -1rnalltu-s)," .: --- --...-1:-,- i•,--.-7,
tiii:',..-', •- ; t::•'-' -I-.-••,7:••ri::--•,-."-'iN--• ' i '-.) • ' ' ". ::
ii•-'- ..,.-: \b,_-- ,,,N -,•• -• ----•-. - -__:,. .--.-'';;;,11. - , i / ,--- R
g V ,..:VP'' j ..,,, '.i5.
F� , i
I::ic : .„.i. , \ ,, -.4-. .,7-A ".. ..7-b, < ...g •
* L-- _ -tf-44:1- •,,,,,\;'=•,. 3% i"?-111‘.-';', . . • " fik,. : -,
r... .
::.).:1-.,.- • I,_.1,-, •,.r_____;.it„.•-;_ .
iti
. ..xi-- .
Zft.., .
• D p Iti
1,11 —I3 I'". ‘r-,,,. _117,., :4,..-_. -741..„,i;,-,6,fri,:-.:j. ,-.:
▪ > 1 ,• tJO! , I m
K .' \ - a.--:Ill ..rr.:ANi."' z
sa
, 0
Z � d
a _
.. ,_ .s.,..., _..., ,,,,, ..., .._ ...,. ,
0
7 �� r., I,I / t13 CD rn
c = i 17'- Y' l - i. 'a
3. � �' - , � _-,-.Pi1
r..5. y 4
_ r _49 L,NIT I G.t
'-1 a n sei 1 h S i►' 11/4., PRELIMINARY LANC�.APE PLAN E'�
'NSEN HILL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION �/ -
MAP
pe-
. .. ......... • • .
OPEN SPACE, STREAM CORRIDOR
,•:, • '.\ , 4/141`;: • .
r...,,,.... „,)\'\ x •s:N•-•
- ,..;;''...; : • ...:1\\.• •6..1 --'"----...,. . . . . , 'i
Ictil4IT, 1;1•:, ' •.-Z.,, :',-;. -...11 -.- -..7.--"••. ...
.r,,,,,,,4, ,..-, ,i, ......7... i,„•,....... .. .._.....,...714.,:_ --......z,,:‘,.., ),...1...0.,.,:ta$4 tor. •
i!.,'' -..••, •.i'....i• '', -•.- •i7...k!4- '''':%••:•..,.1,,._-..*;;• as:- .. •
--,:-.*....-;.-I ';',,s-•• :,' , ..-%-'/•.'`'.':--.:-.'-':' ---:-. • . '''' \. _._. _. ' . 1
4r..."x
. .
SINGLE-FAMILY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIA
.;7„:-.4..*•,-J.., •,-,, , .,....••••,•1 •0:•7•07:.:...pv,:-...2-%a.•:.• ....!:,/•••fl 't. ' '`...."1".......-**i \ -,:: 4S**-• •-i f::ks‘t.:...;' •.• .if.'zi,..4,r.ac4'; gz.' 't/WAn ^ (.5 2.8 DU/ACRE) II-
MEDIUM•; ' . =
.(Z_A.,!) . • s‘'' Pg10,11.1Y0' ' '1\•''.;(-1.?'"' -'`I.f3.'' '
''t:'''',,Ya..;; k`4!..f ... A r..0„.:toct'EF-`67.`?:-Ps ZS). ••s').'`.'..411` ' 6.tr,,s:f.\--..1'-'tqc'''S', `,ILi- ': :--.-f/. .,_ • • I ,
i La.lw
,pz.--T. .. ,,:.,..;., Fir-,-::::-./.,..4 -.1..t gh--qr.:, .-,. '.......,-.:7,,k-s 'AN:sk,Atl , ..; /.:: .....--":---7_ ---.,.. -3--,.•; -,__
MEDIUM LOW DENSITY
'RESIDENTIAL
, ••,',.?•"=".. ,: ,•-:..ri744 ,11 4,1 . .witt , c.„ ivtz,:... ..—_,‘,-,r,. ::',.:1--.---,,,,...-: ,\ •::.•--ik•Fr?...,..---., ....., , . .
: ,,,,,.:4.4,-;,4.4 -;•' ••• A / At l'..• 4.. 4. 41: • , 4:r ,.1.-ii."11.,:a •.'"'-',4•4•-•••a(;;;:..,•''' ,'4 V.,\41:.•••., -:.7-___,---.11.41 4 =°i
(6.1 - 8 DU/ACRE)
.Ts V---, '' •. )/‘•-\ ,1.4-___,..„,, ,,,, Mat., •!_de :J.-. -.;",„ ..,At•:ik:1 ' -.,---V-‘2•/:;--•,•04.- -... ...-- -...',7"-''-I,• ., '' •
[
- ••'"Lai ct):::,. 913• • '.0 ••• •• .11`-•:' ..• •••••t:-:.- ,....-1-,•zr ,.. 'S.:7, -I-.
l• CEM(k
' t...V.'-,.. .4..:k --- wililltitillat•a TI` . ..0. 5.r.... I 1, •c.... ,,,i,_:,j/.0. ,..4.0 . :::,..--,......"....,:z:: ::••,-..--A.. -•1-4...-••ry.N...):,_ -, ,.,-,• ' 1
, ',714...A 1 '.,',: "",,qyktillismoMantp, lif,t:i \vvi..e:),..‘i./..i.rt, ...t.w.,04.04",t se ..: .':‘1.2)...•sc-- .....f:c(.'4').:J-..'•-/,''..'r,Li--Cril.,., '
.tvii 1 1 00 o•A. .0,Z.-f"'•• ,t•‘.,4:4,i,. 46. •:. “...:••...c. ss.,N ' s. •i•-•-• • %., z.;•••,, • 4. ., .
• ."'".4*.''"' ''Z': 14.- • .4•44.010'" Polo"- =`4.b. :..."/,..,,V‘i•••IsY-Z•1" .lirl;1.....C../.-..c,ft . .• t•• .. .•'••:,1•‘. ,r..-;,- ‘-,.'.:•,.:-••••;.1. ,.. •,... .,:m . ' go:C4)
.
...‹..,',. ., . . 1 ,,. %';',.• -..- ,-..?....%...--.. .".7..."-.4"!--...m.r.'N,;1.1"..- ''•iiili' - mark. d> ;\\ 0.,,,.'...,' '',.,,,4.,/,=--,, c:•s)\,/ -/-.,, -
,,,:s.r4,-, .: --.1.•tir,)•.\,9>.:- ;.-.4,•,-CC,,, ..7,,•-t4--,%'.-...,._7:-vc-N---: 7,51cli::!2- — . • '. 1 N\•1. r••'S.: •• Y 7,3-"4-e-r-'1---z--.-•: ? •,3 i i i.
! 11..mm it
It :', • ' 1 "16' ' =1:r .. (47•-''10.f:'' 1• ----414T'i:ilitr•--.."-‘ "'' 0 N. . ••.'A::•_'.• ..--.1..,-:,•.\ , yi ---,=.------1,-,.•,,0,.: ,N.-
. .-1,. ,-.-,,,c_ • imy .t t'. .-';P:,-(-...4-__:-;..-i:-,-,_g;N2,-,,,,,,41,- -zi:p;::-...44.),... :.- ,..,,,,t. .4) f,' L---r>0.9/,',i i .i---'r-,:;-,---- ..--zsN‘; f • ''-- • .-- .
..„..s..., ., , . .Ril.....),,..7.7..„,. .37,... ._....,,z.r.....43.,;.: ---,.„,q4,,-....... ........A... • ,..?;-:753. 4,/j.„1,... .-:;." -2:::::if.,;:;;;:•-; ..,,. 1,-;,,.......,.., ,... .6„...:...,..== egoire ,
-
• - a• `*-2•-•4:1•:.':::‘: -. •1,7Y),Z1V_:L.,..7)•(Y.., ...,., ; `'.0,-...•//Ae i/,••._-cr'.4-,'.L.-:'::42-' r-E-1- .-,.........%;-0)A-ffei•--,-, ...`.---f.-vp,,,. — ._,,_,- ,
--,.,4,7, . , 100:125LIP- .z=7'..!44.,.'„....;::;e73 N, , Iii,, '• .-........',---.7/,'••,• it;441?„ t :i, ,••-••'.;'/...:4- ',s:•.:`;',',"?:-.. :'.--,-,..• :.1. '- '..-/ .-- ,2
,'-..,-.,,j,:k!. ';'.` \‘`114• --'!"--,.7:*'.:;:''':::''it- '0 aiM ct''''. /7)1,-.4.1/ 'r a ' ' A, - '• IX ,41 .i..4.1^?..2:::':',f:',." .-1%'-'.'::::;' ‘`.E2 '.CIC-7C P'Z' r-'7`„...,,. '.. .,/. Ma ; egg- •'.r.
...,,,,, •
;,, . ;!._.,-•-i:L..,•:.•:~:,:•:-. q'tl‘ •..6., \I- • ,..-j, ". „'•-;:ti . '',',,t' '// .,:::::::7-•:.:::;,...-fSgy., 1't•j•-1: /cat ,:. .,„-,-
,,,,,,-,„ .. ,,,, ..„,i.et,,...„-- ,,,„.„ si,../-v, ....„ I__ oi, . ..„/. /• ., ......,:. .-; ::„::::(:,,. ,, _..i; .....:( _ ...,: _:,s.., ... „,. 41..V.,,447.4,,,•---, , ':',
"4., .,,vt:.:.. •?,/. ,‘ .,,.,,,,,.- ,-..,:i.Aftb. .,c.,4 ,i,e,i -..,,. lhagr. ii.z ... •..'.',../. .7..,.r.:;,.,:....:: ,.! .1-, ‘c?4 6,7 i,a65 ...,t .- q' P.''' '''',143P-1.41;1•4V2r2OF4,114.? - '
V
!. to.':-.-,--;;,, .(,, ,,:z.,-..:(1,z,---4,-wttii-Zistowo:• er •.ta. -4-.1t--,,, „A ,pyr, 7... .rt.,k).1. . .„.?...„.. ,,.. I,. L?el.r ,s,1 it ••• • a 4•0',.•.,.41$' f4tios%A• . i, \ -. ".i. /v. ti '' • - ' 1 ' - ' '' - 1 t i,/''',e,*•,..,:. Eat,...";.•4 21,,,' x'j,,' : . L,I•
. • .,;k: ":-...-A•- .14... 4.." "' •.."' • -.7 il\ri,,--- •,..:•-..'..1,,V ,a,..".• ....f, ,,,r ii.,,,.),....r.,-... , . . ,Tri • .., .< ,
v...-is I , -,,,-.L4.2;r4-4,1.--,--,-,•...,,r, ,'c1•5`;"'2.--;,-; o'•',.;/ ,' .'4. ifialM4007 Ai -A,... ... 'we?' '.
i .'.4'.-,''''',.-:-J, l''7c',, 161.13ki. ,•-t5 .. . ' Z.V.,'!..",t".... .
`VW
- .,...,t,fti.;,.„-i•rh,..—.e.i -.,......... ' ' ef-.:_.?•- .1,, ...see,„,,, , , .i.0 ,,loi..t; ,,,...,• tt•• ...„.:.„.,..,....i. .., ,,.....,2<,..",:r.„...,---..........-\_• „,,.:„....,,..,....) p,g/.-mirie, 4°- li;.,„' 7...*V'''''.0.... ', ki'). ,-/.E.,,,N21-.1,--,-loft • '`A, -. • " ' ,17. •rrr •diell' .v, '''.. ..••'" ' 41161,5..zeli7V-4'0.....w.j 4
'''i "••••,:-., ',r, ",.‘„1.--:-./ ---.....%‘..,„",-;•:;)\..,;:s".• . - --• -‘,.....,,,...),p,. ,..,13-,,,,,./4. i f• .,..----nr,r4r •,a,-• - , •,,,, .1 • „• 1 ,)•••,, 1 1-.:1`f." , ,..••;i:,..,, --'4.:,,.--:--. s‘..,e,\s•-•,...". ••,',/ ,A:Zi,...; •-"s'...,21".14-7,4'l .., .,'/. ' '".11...,-;3,.. .,-,,,_,,-. Am...-t,.,, ',.•%kf-• -- 4 . ....-.'..,• •,,• .f.' 11,104747P,,..,„_AkirMeir ,-- 1
*,, -4. '.,..:',.:-•.-: -"--....„4.t.•,,,2. .......•••,„\,..%.::144...-2,-...nr::: ..',.. - 1,•:* /Ai% '', '; 7".'- 'c.I ,-. ' 'lmrilt;;;3 - 11'4:4•5•:•z.7;4`.4'V I.z...c.,,,,..iro•ji g ...E'.. • •Az...-•..'"..-Wx.111,..,;;;,t1t, ;1 i
, ,',''' .•'''',..:. '-,ik...1-; ', '-.' ."••= '-'•,"••-:"., . ..,'''s..."-4•Z....."-----ie...-1--.Z..,_;:".,74§;00(6,11;‘;,••, 1...°.filgii 1 ' A .6.,-,ti- , ' v..• - .- - , ,e9R9', - .. ;
,,, • ,.... •.,... cp. / 114ft:Ne•N...°6 C.., ..21 f ...,tr-r,t,...,i, .-,-,
., ?,,,, ,,,-N " , 'i_•1•:: ::;:::,‘ Z.S.i.:•t..::::•-..::11:4••••-:::Z.••:-...:;`,4:::'-'-s, ...4 .4,r44fire,'..i., "*---7.-W.....i.mum<f“ - -1 c•:•-r- '' 4 iciii'ocalsiggyvir3ret-•-•°-• ID L--11-11--)Lt-PL-ri'''''''. I "liennt 1 ''' -6 L'''-.mai- ' • ' • Pe-, .\.c? , • —'7-- -7''',I---- "::'•'''',
1„sstaL,„ s,,,-,;,,,; ..-•.: ''...,--s' s -,7a.-7N-,S->•e•s--N-•••.;:e••:,-*-----,4.----":::: :..F.7::;:?;:_*;.:1.: '''''"'Ziitu,•.: a ' tegra j
' i'.'-1'•'."'- S'','• i'•--."\k\VQ1P..),‘ 4:-----7,-x.:37-...ij-,11,-:' . romitemaowgr, ...",\ , z ,, .. . .
.•. " --.'il'z'' --•`. 10, •-==.X .;:_-_,‘..! , e 1 )A ••'( .c7...:::.z:.:-7: •''' AL • ..'...-:-.. -- 4, ....,\'.c,:>:.' .. .....".. 1 . ..
•.*' Al. ;', *...... .........:/\,........,.......e/4'..) .,!!"i "0" ‘`.. •/s\ :'e i 1..'''."..!"..-"Z•N..... ---• vierimMUIRPg sv .- •-•
, .‘,... . -,.:,--.,.--,..,-•. ‘.-,..,......,__.(-..-- . •1
..,,,. ,i.,..46.1.,-.t :....„.,....._,, ..-...,.........A__- ....-c.-• _„...,...---....,21- \,,,,,,,,/,/_, .i.1 .• '. • . ,
: T ' ''- • ' -'---" 4 '•••••-•-:.7.-_:..-----4--. .,-;;/' -•'•-• ' s''',.`:----- ' ' - • ,
'.'',..;::4;si. '..'' '..',.7:-.,..'',.Z-41Z---,4•77...--•ra.
4• i • ... •
,;1.-- ' - ,: 1- 4.47,taa:.•••:' ,---7" --- "' :4-7Z-------- -y
'
k..„,j,•:,.' '.:.,-... .t.E.:4%.,....4:-.—... ,,,/ • -7---. • • . • - ' • ik.F.F csrv-t.y . : •
•
cr,,::...,...
''... ;-.4.----_,,•: ,- - •c-,..,‘Pq_.:•-,- •,.- ••••, ,e N•••-•' .' __/ •- -, ,-'sig.,4- - — -• -2/.--',1, .----' s• • , / ,•• ,--._ . . • G-4141414-1.4-k neko-ei‘ -. . 0 103 210
I. 1 6 •irT,Ir •• " .... :•01•7•':"..•• • . ...... .f;`....,"......, ," -•••'''••• .. . ..• • I,.prn'p vS E Ve5f6NATictsfr I 1 I )
... 7-1 v• - :.-- mi--- ;' ,...4,1:b It' •,. 1. a ... ______
— , ...
''''-: .-..e:4,7 ' 13.-..-..-. ' O."'' • •
.' 1-.‘,,,," 0---• .,v2.___. 1'014 %lea
.,,:.....- —
'/�// OPEN SPACE, STREAM CORRIDOR
•
3,�` SINGLE-FAMILY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
i• S. ' ' • •5 - 2.8 DU/ACRE 01 .;
)
•
!�C�"'":' -t , 1 • MEDIUM LOW DENSITY
•, Yta''.1L6fi' , � •N — RESIDENTIAL
s::fTo Ls{S' ' �1'1 ' �-`--� (6.1 - 8 DU/ACRE) i •
o AREA _, ,• 2•,r .,
-(t t� • itta�='�' 6 4'yTppo y�,r,*j- ..`�, r., v' •\Y:.'�� 1�+� - :,, i kryLr .. 1 /1�
( . ,,, , s.,,,::;:-:•,...` :','. =
'` °* ,��,i A ,'1.0'• • ''l. '-` �,:1 �\ • •.. _ , -r• • 'ti5be �:
•
o , i�� l•'�! ,,�.�r�..t, r✓/'a�°•' /�'"�as'; �.`y��"�^ .:`�.;•., eV;• •t��7�j - , ' ;ly:'e•41.,\SA•� • F...a�
•
• ' / .�= �y`1,y .:,S�i-1 f...._-�yi ^riln-T/�•04,-A' -. ,;' y' %V .�,r"-- ,: 1�`y �.•- •1'� -. i,t it l'+�;-',144-1',-`
.. ` t :.1� ���•..�,�'� /Y 7/ ti,1, �) I • L...`I_' ' )) ', .. ( L. T\:.\.�i I/ • ` ._�•� } .' ti t:
• ��� -ram .✓ •-3'AV
�I�y°16`tiv'`� �3 ‘' • .�U�� Y:'-!01J''�'r ./,•.;, -,S' ����.�• � I;;j'•j‘\�„',,1'J`il,��l ,• ��:
�, f, - % 'a3n,n:�+*�a• /�' !) R a tt) // '',,�a� r .r�,y - :,'c'`�+:.r�+cfF _�.;, rx s� VI
i
•' ,.� �� ���} .!..1: . f i ,o. �1i r • ;/J � •♦ t. r :If ( <�$•.7.-,• ,wi II7� 11)� •— r,• S �_ • ��• ••-• . 1�-t •_ r't t / I. /V /• Q'a ;.'l!,(i�`�, ! '', ,,..;:}. + ^ ,, p• (• +:tom-*+ "`.""a .4 11 .l\ `• l' ,A°•_g'�� .1 li 1 d z d, rr 4jjC4'''1` 1 ;'� 4•,7�/,PLh ,oL .•/'r.y!• A ,-'.y'�;1:0, !'{'r"e, ,,,*y
pp
_ �` __`��� — -- 1.• „.„ ,p ,Y SI�'1. �La o.. A Y� :fl.'`-'�''-,3. '» I r • ..i, %✓� `+F� r y,,, ,
�!`•"-- .y` Allr AP .pir9n ` d' 4 .^:,, •d(.. -F, L^ .oG}'h�; 1 •'' ir. ;I. yr. .- ,
•14 ` J4`;` •:``�,!'"�' 7'4: -"4t ulr�' •' " r 3 I,'rii IV .. J�/' oq.1 -°- ~' •�/jje 1\►\ .1 (t'"G'�. y1't, •1- "'�i'"' .,F�ltr..,^�•. ,
...k
,\ \ _ / .'�fi:�\`i ==.z��_ c� ,• ,,,�tY�` t o'• ��fL11 p� -t�l uyO.,'ati tr t '.s ,. , ��� �•�r -
• i'" .. <'s1^� ,$) .\, /f'`--::j_ 3;i'(a1 ; ,v,97- .� =1 n,- _ ;1 • , _ < :'�ICI' R , � ,\./��c0 S4Y•,•i a �.a�
-• �, �,�.. ==i'-•: -•. - v',,, 1 'j Sin \�J • 1� se`t i r +��,y
--- -ice �__--- . , -�-AP -u-p --�
•
•
•• kREAs oC' R-DICC e..er,cs _\'` / ' •ehaeel. fn i sconrov_. n M.
�--1_ ( _." —o--
z
i t 6
I - / I y-. „ ..4.2, ♦ _ ` . ' -
/ . ,, -, :.----- ,\-..-s.4- ,,... . -N..:, \ : --,s IL iitt,i
l J \\
Ey
O y`-
c -, ,.,,,„,„,,,,,,, ,, ,,,......,..,...;,.,.N„:. ,„- :,. , , . ,i,
4#
, ,... -:,-..„, -" ..,,,N,, .,. ; ,,,.., :44-,, 0 :,:- -
II ,: 4' 44;,!.." s' .44,10.4 ,''..(;*1 . i 'i, l'.
‘..
\I.,
. . ,
N e � -V �1,1 i
•
-N....
4.04
L` _ r- `�ob '_ i ,fit ��
i ,f' y
m i�V
I.
j z l '- - ° - A� _'1 5
xi
-2 , . -40 / a 1
0 ,,,,\ ,,,. .....- , , 0
0 11:1
, 1‘-`r--7—.3 t._10-100-0* _- +./6 co cp ri
1: !i Q a •�= n z CO rr�
co
3 _ __ ___
igpy1.-. I i 1�i. ft F 9
-lansen Hill Ranch PRELIMII TTACHIt TTACHMEINT 3�
4NSEN HILL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PR B 'y__
CITY OF DUBLIN
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT
Meeting Dates: October 17, 1988
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: 1"f f( Planning Staff
SUBJECT: 1 PA 87-045 Hansen Ranch General Plan Amendment
Study, EIR, Planned Development Prezoning,
Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5766, and
Annexation request for 245 dwelling units on 147
acres, west of Silvergate Drive and north Hansen
Drive (continued from the October 3, 1988
Meeting)
GENERAL INFORMATION:
PROJECT: A General Plan Amendment Study, EIR, Planned
Development, Prezoning, Tentative Subdivision
Map No. 5766, and Annexation request to allow
245 dwelling units, including approximately 138
single family, 37 patio homes, 36 custom homes
and 34 townhomes, on 147 acres in unincorporated
Alameda County, west of Silvergate Drive and
north of Hansen Drive.
APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE: Gordon D. Jacoby, Vice President
Venture Corporation
P.O. Box 847
Mill Valley, CA 94942
PROPERTY OWNERS: George K. Hansen, Alicia Hansen,
Eleanor O'Neill & Ruth Reilly
547 Brookfield Drive
Livermore, CA 94550
William H. Gale, Jr., Esq.
62 West Neal
Pleasanton, CA 94566
LOCATION: West of Silvergate Drive, north of Hansen Drive,
and south of Rolling Hills Drive
ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS: 941-110-1-9 and 941-110-2
PARCEL SIZE: 147+ acres
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: Part of the site is within the Primary Planning
Area; part is within the Extended Planning Area.
Two portions of the site are currently
designated single family residential, with
density range to be determined based on site
conditions; one portion of the site is
designated medium density, 8+ dwelling units per
acre. Adjusted unit range is 42 to 109 dwelling
units.
EXISTING ZONING
AND LAND USE: A, Agricultural (Alameda County), vacant
property used for limited cattle grazing.
COPIES TO: Applicant
Q Owner
ITEM NO. p . O Mark Trembley, EIP
File PA 87-045
CITY OF DUBLIN
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT
Meeting Dates: August 23, 1988
August 24, 1988
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Staff rn(A
SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION: PA 87-045 Hansen Ranch General
Plan Amendment Study, Planned Development
Prezoning, Tentative Subdivision Map No. 5766,
and Annexation request for 248 dwelling units on
147 acres, west of Silvergate Drive and north
Hansen Drive.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
PROJECT: A General Plan Amendment Study, Planned
Development, Prezoning, Tentative Subdivision
Map No. 5766, and Annexation request to allow
248 dwelling units, including 141 single family,
37 patio homes, 36 custom homes and 34
townhomes, on 147 acres in unincorporated
Alameda County, west of Silvergate Drive and
north of Hansen Drive.
APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE: Gordon D. Jacoby, Vice President
Venture Corporation
P.O. Box 847
Mill Valley, CA 94942
PROPERTY OWNERS: George K. Hansen, Alicia Hansen,
Eleanor O'Neill & Ruth Reilly
547 Brookfield Drive
Livermore, CA 94550
William H. Gale, Jr., Esq.
62 West Neal
Pleasanton, CA 94566
LOCATION: West of Silvergate Drive, north of Hansen Drive,
and south of Rolling Hills Drive
ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS: 941-110-1-9 and 941-110-2
PARCEL SIZE: 147+ acres
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: Part of the site is within the Primary Planning
Area; part is within the Extended Planning Area.
Two portions of the site are currently
designated single family residential, with
density range to be determined based on site
conditions; one portion of the site is
designated medium density, 8+ dwelling units per
acre. Adjusted unit range is 42 to 109 dwelling
units.
EXISTING ZONING
AND LAND USE: A, Agricultural (Alameda County), vacant
property used for limited cattle grazing.
COPIES TO: Applicant
Owner
Mark Trembley, EIP
ITEM NO. File PA 87-045
j• \
SURROUNDING LAND USE
AND ZONING: North: Single family and multi-family, zoned
PD; grazing land, zoned A
South: Single family, zoned R-1; church, zoned
A; grazing land, zoned A
East: Multi-family and single family, zoned PD
West: Grazing land, Zoned A
ZONING HISTORY: February 18, 1956, Alameda County zoned the site
A, Agricultural.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
The Dublin General Plan establishes policies and standards to control land use
and development within this area.
Section 8-31.0 (Planned Development District Intent) states, in part, that
Planned Development Districts are established to encourage the arrangement of
a compatible variety of uses on suitable lands in such a manner that the
resulting development will:
a) Be in accord with the Policies of the General Plan of the City of
Dublin;
b) Provide efficient use of the land that includes preservation of
significant open areas and natural and topographic landscape
features with minimum alteration of natural land forms;
c) Provide an environment that will encourage the use of common open
areas for neighborhood or community activities and other
amenities;
d) Be compatible with and enhance the development of the general
area;
e) Create an attractive, efficient and safe environment.
Section 8-1.2 of Chapter 1, Title 8 (Subdivision Ordinance Intent) states, in
part, that it is the intent of this Chapter to promote the public health,
safety, and general welfare; to assure in the division of land consistency
with the policies of the General Plan and with the intent and provisions of
the Zoning Ordinance; to coordinate lot design, street patterns, rights-of-
way, utilities and public facilities with community and neighborhood plans; to
assure that areas dedicated for public purposes will be properly improved
initially so as not to be a future burden upon the community; to preserve
natural resources and prevent environmental damage; to maintain suitable
standards to insure adequate, safe building sites; and, to prevent hazard to
life and property.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The City proposes to adopt an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) which finds the proposed project may have a significant
impact on the environment.
NOTIFICATION: Public Notice of the August 23, 1988 and August 24, 1988,
hearing was published in The Herald, mailed to adjacent
property owners, and posted in public buildings.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
This item was continued from the August 1, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting at
which the Commission established two Study Sessions; one for August 23rd and
one for August 24th and a Field Trip to the project site on August 20, 1988.
The purpose of the August 20th Field Trip was for the Commission and the
public to review on site the three areas in which Staff's recommendation for
development differs from the Applicant's proposal (see Attachment 15,
August 1, 1988 Staff Report).
The purpose of the August 23rd and August 24th Study Sessions is for the
Planning Commission to review and gather information on the Hansen Hill Ranch
project and to provide direction to Staff and the Applicant. The Planning
Commission may decide to 1) conduct the Study Sessions without public comment
-2-
or testimony resuming public input at a regularly scheduled public hearing or
2) conduct the Study Sessions accepting public comment during the Study
Sessions at the Commission's discretion.
In conducting the Study Session, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
address the two key issues of 1) where to develop and 2) how much to develop:
1. Where to Develop: The Planning Commission should recommend what
areas on the site have potential for reasonable and desirable
development. The Planning Commission should give consideration to the
environmental constraints and General Plan goals of the City in
conjunction with the needs of the Applicant.
2. How Much to Develop: The Planning Commission should recommend
what amount and type of development is potentially reasonable and
desirable. The Planning Commission should recommend the General Plan
land use designation and density range, so that the number and type of
dwelling units can be determined.
In addition to the issues of where to develop and how much to develop, the
Planning Commission should address the other issues identified in the previous
Staff Reports and any other issues raised by the Planning Commission. The
additional issues include:
1. Adequacy and completeness of the Final EIR.
2. Land Use Designation - Staff recommends three General Plan land
use designations for the Hansen Hill Ranch site, as generally
depicted in Attachment 6:
a. Open Space/Stream Corridor
b. Low Density Single-Family Residential (.5 - 2.8 D.U./Acre)
c. Medium Density Residential (6.1 - 8 D.U/Acre)
3. Amend General Plan to incorporate entire Hansen Hill Ranch project
within the primary planning area.
4. Amend General Plan to delete Areas 5, 6 and 7 from Table I and
Figure 4 of the General Plan.
5. Amend General Plan policy and map with regard to Hansen Drive
extension.
6. Amend General Plan to include alternate roadway serving Hansen
Hill Ranch site (Valley Christian Center access road) and
designate as a collector street.
7. Amend General Plan to include policy establishing level of service
D as maximum level of service acceptable.
8. Amend General Plan to include policies requiring fire protection
buffer zone around perimeter of residential development which
interface with open space lands.
After the Planning Commission addresses all of the issues, the Planning
Commission should direct Staff to prepare a resolution incorporating the
Planning Commission's recommendations.
Prior to making any decisions on the proposed project, the Planning Commission
would need to reconvene in its regular meeting format, receive any additional
testimony, pose questions, close the public hearing, deliberate, then take
action.
RECOMMENDATION
FORMAT: 1) Open public hearing for Study Session (a non-decision making
workshop format) and hear Staff presentation.
2) Discuss and clarify issues and give informal and general
direction
3) Continue workshop to specific date, time and place.
-3-
Attachments
REFER TO JULY 18, 1988 STAFF REPORT FOR ATTACHMENTS 1 THROUGH 13.
REFER TO AUGUST 1, 1988 STAFF REPORT FOR ATTACHMENTS 14 THROUGH 18.
Attachment 1E: Summary of Impact and Mitigation
Attachment 2: General Plan Policies
Attachment 3: General Plan Figure 4 Sites for Housing Development
Attachment 4: DEIR Figure 4-1 Mitigated Alternative
Attachment 5: DEIR Table 3-8 Intersection Levels of Service
Attachment 6: Staff Study General Plan Land Use Designation July 1988
Attachment 7: Letter Schenone & Peck 7/5/88
Attachment 8: General Plan Primary Planning Area Map
Attachment 9: General Plan Extended Planning Area
Attachment 10: Hansen Hill Ranch EIR Final Addendum (under separate cover)
Attachment 11: Reduced Copy Tentative Map 5766 9 Sheets (full size under
separate cover)
Attachment 12: Reduced Copy of Preliminary Landscape Plan (full size under
separate cover)
Attachment 13: Reduced Copy of Preliminary Landscape Plan, Townhouses,
Landscape Concepts and Prototypes Planning 5 Sheets
(full size plans under separate cover).
Attachment 14: TJKM memo dated received July 26, 1988
Attachment 15: Staff Study July 1988 Areas of Difference
Attachment 16: Hansen HIll Ranch Environmental Assessment Study dated
December 1986
Attachment 17: Staff Study July 1988 areas of Judgment Call
Attachment 18: Cut and Fill Map
Attachment 19: Letter from Russell C. Smerz dated received August 8, 1988
Attachment 20: Memorandum from Department of Fish & Game dated received
August 2, 1988
OTHER ITEMS HELPFUL IN REVIEW OF PROJECT:
Draft EIR
General Plan
-4-
_
Russell C. Smerz
7530 Rolling Hills Circle
Dublin, Ca. 94568
828-7796
August 4, 1988
City of Dublin R E E 1 E
Dublin City Hall AUG B 1$8$
Dublin, CA 94568
Attn: Laurence L. Tong DUBLIN BANNING
Planning Director
Dear Mr. Tong,
Let me begin by commending you and the planning board for your professional and
thorough handling of the Hansen Hill Ranch project. Obviously, with the number
of topics discussed, and people talking, it would have been very difficult to
note or absorb all that took place during the August 1 meeting. With this in
mind I would like to submit the following summary of my comments to the board.
Applicable Regulations: Section 8-31.0-Pg. 2 Agenda Statement/Staff Report
d) Be compatible with and enhance the development of the general area;
e) Create an attractive, efficient and safe environment.
Page 5 - Same Staff Report -
"Deletion of Hansen Drive Extension/Addition of Alternate Road."
The last sentence of the section states "addition of a collector street
parallel to Hansen Drive."
Page 6 - Item 6 - Same Staff Report -
"Amend General Plan to include alternate roadway serving Hansen Hill Ranch
site (Valley Christian Center access road) and designate as a collector
street.
After calling attention to these sections of the staff report I pointed out and
showed on the wall map the exact location of the "collector road." According to
the plans submitted, and the model layout provided, it will be located directly
adjacent to the fence line bordering the Silvergate Highlands Townhouse
property. This is on the northeast corner of the proposed project and feeds on
to Silvergate Dr.
My fellow homeowners and I would like to voice our strongest objection to this
"collector road" placement for the following reasons:
Health and Safety - of the residents bordering this "collector road." With
the construction of 248 units directly adjacent to our property our estimate of
5 trips per day/per unit or 1240 vehicles using these roads. As the location of
Silvergate Ave. to the project is much closer to the project than Dublin Blvd.
(exiting through Valley Christian Center) the vast majority of vehicles would be
using the "collector road" next to our
ATTACHMENT 19 4564fr
'Po 8l.O`fs /aAc.t,µtt Ia....e.c.
Toxic Emissions - All townhouses along the "collector road" are constructed at
an elevation above ground level of 12 to 15 feet. Our major concerns are toxic
emissions and noise levels. The basic health of those living directly "abo era
street handlig—Tirge numbers of vehicles could be severely affected by
breathing emissions (carbon monoxide is one of the most deadly gasses known to
man) on a regular basis. This condition is magnified by the fact that a road
entering onto Silvergate Dr. must have a stop sign. In other words, every car
leaving the project which uses this exit would be required to stop (hopefully),
idle until traffic was clear to proceed onto Silvergate, and then apply extra
gas to continue onto Silvergate Dr. All these motions of a vehicle increase
emissions. (If you would like to test this, stand on any street corner where a
stop sign is located that is heavily traveled. Note the air quality - then move
down the street to an area which has free moving traffic. The difference is
obvious.)
Noise - During the meeting I referred to Section 6. Noise, contained in the
Environmental Assessment Study and pointed out specifically item 6.3, Policy
Review. It's difficult to imagine, given the traffic patterns described above
under emissions, that the noise level for residents living in this area will not
be higher than the 60 dBA regulation slated in this Section. Please keep in
mind the elevation of these homes directly above and to the northeast of this
street. It's also a basic fact of nature that our wind pattern carries from
West to East. This air flow will also carry both the noise and toxic emissions.
Our homes are located on the northeast section of this proposed development.
Safety - A brief comment was made concerning the speed of vehicles using
Silvergate Dr. Our association will be contacting the city regarding the
addition of "stop signs" as the intersection of Silvergate Drive and Rolling
Hills Drive. Due to the rise and lowering of Silvergate through our community
there are concerns about the ability of autos to stop if necessary for crossing
pedestrians or autos. The expected increase in "cross traffic" preceding north
on Silvergate from this "collector road" could be dangerous.
My final comment referred to Section 10 - Land Use Page 10-12, para. 3, last
sentence. "It is not known, however, whether the Silvergate Drive access point
could be capable of serving project-generated traffic at a level consistent with
maximum buildout potential of 65-542 units." I was a little uncertain what this
applied to and, understanding the nature of the meeting not to answer questions,
but to take comments, realize it may or may not be directly related to my prior
comments. My interpretation was that the staff already is concerned about this
"collector road", however didn't have sufficient information to make a
conclusion at this time.
In closing I would like to reiterate my satisfaction with you and your staff in
handling all aspects of this project. While concerns of others relating to
landfills, land cuts, trees, fox and even snakes are important, I'm personally
concerned with our most valuable asset, the people.
Please feel free to contact me concerning this letter or any other aspect of our
community.
Sincerely,
c_A
Russell C. Sme
:0 rot 6alilvrnlo _.
Th.RaOar[el Agency
M.eriiorandum C,
To 1. Projects Coordinator
Resources Agency Dole ° February 3, 1988
2. Mr. Kevin Galley
City of Dublin, Planning Department R E C E 1 VE D.
6500 "D" Dublin Boulevard
Dublin, CA 94568 j )G 21"6
From s Deportment of Fish and Gom.
DUBLINKAWK
Subject` Draft Environmental Impact Review (DEIR) for the Hansen Hill
Ranch Project, Dublin, Alameda County, SCH# 87050527
•
Department of Fish and Game (Department) personnel have reviewed
the DEIR for the Hansen Hill Ranch Project and have previously
been onsite with the project applicant. This project proposes to
construct 282 residential units on 147.3 acres of land. We have
the following comments: •
The document states that the project could adversely affect 22
Thee
(36percent) of the oak-bay woodland onsite. This habitat
is important and should be preserved, as it provides both food
•
and cover for a wide variety of wildlife. The Conservation
Element of the Dublin General Plan contains a Guiding Policy to
protect oak woodlands. The Implementing Policy is to "require
preservation of oak woodlands." The project, as proposed, is
contrary to the General Plan. Replacement of this vegetative
community elsewhere onsite as mitigation may be possible.
However, the value of the habitat will not be regained until the
planted saplings mature in 30 to 40 years. Also, other habitats
would have to be changed in order to create the acreage needed
for mitigation. The document states that 11 acres of oak/bay
woodland and a drainage swale will be removed by portions of
Neighborhoods 5 and 9. Mitigation suggested in the DEIR is that
the areas of extensive grading and fill in these two
neighborhoods be eliminated from the project and the oak/bay
woodlands preserved. Because of the value of this habitat, the
Department agrees with the mitigation suggested and recommends
that the project be redesigned in the areas mentioned.
The proposed project also will impact 0.3 to 3.5 acres of
creekside vegetation, depending on whether a 30 or 100-foot
buffer is established along the creek. The document states that
the Department recommends a 100-foot buffer. This is to protect
the vegetation along the creek and to provide an undisturbed
travel corridor for wildlife. A 30-foot buffer is being
recommended .in the DEIR for the area behind Neighborhood 1.
While this area has been disturbed, it is our opinion that a 30 foot buffer is not adequate.
ATTACHMENT 09 r. o? -
V %1-cs�s 44 %e., 1441A R0.4.CL.
�1 r
1. Projects Coordinator -2- February 3, 1988
Resources Agency
2. Mr. Kevin Galley
City of Dublin
We concur with the recommendations set forth in the DEIR to
preserve and protect the creekside vegetation. These
recommendations include: not allowing the building of structures
within the buffer; eliminating lots 102-110 and 95-101 so that
structures do not back up to the corridor; relocating Creekside
Road to the west/ and mitigating for trees removed "on a 3:1
basis. The elimination of lots 95-110 also would preserve
additional oak/bay woodland.
The document states that suitable habitat for the rare Alameda
striped racer occurs onsite and that the species may exist there.
The snake was not observed during the one day field survey which
was conducted. This type of survey is not adequate to determine
the presence or absence of this species. The snake is a
secretive animal and rarely is seen, even in areas where it is
known to exist in some numbers. Chaparral near riparian areas,
such as exists onsite, appears to be preferred habitat for this
species. One of the prime factors affecting sensitive species is
loss of habitat. The DEIR does not address the impacts to this
habitat or to the snake, nor does it pffer mitigation.
The Creekside Road crossing would link the project to an
emergency access road paralleling the north side of the creek.
The document states that this is a preferred access route in
terms of reducing impacts to the riparian corridor, rather than a
second emergency access road on the south side of the creek. We
agree that this is a preferred alternative. Any such road on the
south side of the creek would result in increased impacts tc
oak/bay and creekside vegetation and the need for increased
mitigation.
A mitigation measure presented in the Land Use Section of the
document recommends that a "pedestrian corridor along the
streambank" be created. In order to protect the habitat and
prevent human intrusion, we recommend that the pedestrian
corridor be placed along the outside edge of the buffer zone.'
The document also suggests that "installation and maintenance of
a project-size perimeter fence should be required" in order to
keep cattle off the site and discourage trespassers. We
discourage the construction of such a fence as it would inoede
the movement of wildlife. If a fence is required, we recommend
that it be of a type that will permit the passage of all wildlife
species. Some designs which would be acceptable include barbed
wire, smooth wire, or Wooden rail.
1 . Projects Coordinator -3 - February 3 , 1988
Resources Agency
2 . Mr. Kevin Galley
City of Dublin
The document correctly states that a Streambed Alteration
Agreement with this Department will be necesary for any work done
in the creek. The U. S . Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) also has
jurisdiction over creeks under Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act. If the applicant has not done so, we recommend that the
Corps be contacted in order tc determine if they wish to exercise
their jurisdiction over Martin Creek and require a permit.
Footnotes 6 on page 3-30 and 3 on page 3-36 should be changed to
reflect the correct name of the wildlife biologist that was
contacted for this project. She is listed as a contact person
below.
•
The Mitigated Alternative appears to alter the proposed project
based on the mitigations suggested in the text. This alternative
would avoid development on the ridgeline along the southwest
corner and the oak woodland areas in the central area and
northwest corner where extensive cut and fill was proposed.
Mitigation in the Vegetation section calls for the elimination of
lots 95-101. According to Figure 4-1, this suggestion has not
been included in the Mitigated Alternative. If this mitigation,
as well as the others included in the DEIR, is incorporated in
the design, we would consider the document to be adequate for
compliance with California Environmental Quality Act.
Department personnel are available to address our concerns in
more detail . To arrange a meeting, please contact
Terry Palmisano, Wildlife Biologist, at (415) 484-2586 ; or
Theodore Wooster, Environmental Services Supervisor, at (707)
944.-5500 .
(Pj b
_
Pete Bontadelll
Director
Palmisano/Rollins: ar/sa
DRF, LxFile, R3, R3—Palmisano , ESD, Chron