Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/17/1995 PC Agenda .-. PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting- Dublin Civic Center Monday- 7:30 p.m. 100 Civic Plaza, Council Chambers April 17, 1995 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 MEETINGS - March 20, 1995 6. ORAL COMMUNICATION-At this time,members of the audience are permitted to address the Planning Commission on any item(s)of interest to the public;however,no ACTION or DISCUSSION shall take place on any'item which is NOT on the Planning Commission Agenda. The Commission may respond briefly to statements made or questions posed, or may request Staff to report back at a future meeting concerning the matter. Furthermore, a member of the Planning Commission may direct Staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda. Any person may arrange with the Planning Director(no later than 11:00 a.m.,on the Tuesday preceding a regular meeting)to have an item of concern placed on the agenda for the next regular meeting. 7. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS 9.1 PA 95-007 Hansen Ranch Phase II-Study Session. The applicant is requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment, Planned Development (PD) Rezoning, and Tentative Map Amendment to the approved Tentative Map. The Hansen Ranch Subdivision includes 180 units overall on a 147 acre site on the west side of Silvergate Drive, north of Hansen Drive and south of Winding Trails Lane. The proposed amendments apply to Phase II of the subdivision, and involve approximately 2.4 acres of land (overall) redesignated from open space to residential land use, with 16 homesites relocated into an Oak/Bay woodland area on the project site. Public comment welcome. 10. OTHER BUSINESS (Commission/Staff Informational Only Reports) 11. ADJOURNMENT (OVER FOR PROCEDURE SUMMARY) CITY OF DUBLIN PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: April 17, 1995 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Staff .4-- PREPARED BY: Tasha Huston, Associate Planner 1 SUBJECT: PA 95-007 Hansen Ranch General Plan Amendment, Planned Development Rezone& Tentative Map Amendment GENERAL INFORMATION: PROJECT: The applicant is requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment, Planned Development (PD) Rezoning, and Tentative Map Amendment to Phase II of the approved Tentative Map. The project involves approximately 2.4 acres of land (overall) redesignated from open space to residential land use, with 16 homesites relocated into an Oak/Bay woodland area, on the 147+ acre Hansen Hill Ranch project site. APPLICANT: California Pacific Homes, Inc. One Civic Plaza, Suite 300 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Martha Buxton, Agent PROPERTY OWNER: California Pacific Homes, Inc., 1 Civic Plaza, Suite 300, Newport Beach, CA 92660. Phone#:(714)721-2770 LOCATION: West of Silvergate Drive, north of Hansen Drive, south of Winding Trail Lane. ASSESSOR PARCEL: 941-110-1-9; 941-110-2 PARCEL SIZE: ±147 acres(Phases 1 and 2) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Single-Family Residential; Open Space, Stream Corridor EXISTING ZONING AND LAND USE: Planned Development District; Vacant Agricultural land with grazing use. COPIES TO: Applicant Owner r ITEM NO. . l Address File SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: Planned Development District with residential use;Alameda County Agricultural District with grazing use. South:R-1-B-E District with residential use;Agricultural District with church use;Planned Development District with grazing use. East: Planned Development District with residential use. West: Planned Development District with grazing use,Agricultural District with grazing use. ZONING HISTORY: PA 87-045: On February 27,1989,City Council adopted a General Plan Amendment to allow Low Density Single Family Residential and Open Space,Stream Corridor land use designations and policy revisions,for the Hansen Hill Ranch project. Along with this approval,and on the same date,the City Council certified the Final Environmental Impact Report on the project,with Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations,pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. PA 89-062: On November 27,1989,City Council approved Planned Development Prezoning, Tentative Map,and Annexation proposal,for 180 single family units and±96 acres of open space,for the Hansen Hill Ranch project. On May 23,1991,LAFCO certified Annexation No.7,bringing the approximately 147 acre Hansen Ranch property into the Dublin City limits. PA 89-115: On May 14, 1990,City Council denied General Plan Amendment,Planned Development Prezoning,and Tentative Map to redesignate open space for 10 single family custom lots. PA 90-018: On March 19, 1991 the Applicant applied for Site Development Review for Residential floorplans for the 180 lot project,then requested that the application be withdrawn in order to facilitate the redesign of the single-family units. The Planning Department closed the file,in response to the withdrawal request from the Applicant. PA 89-062: On December 2,1991,the Planning Commission approved a time extension of the Planned Development Prezoning,to May 27, 1992,coinciding with the expiration date of the approved Tentative Map 5766. PA 91-096 On February 18, 1992 the Planning Commission adopted Resolutions 92-013 and 92-014 approving PA 91-096 Hansen Ranch Conditional Use Permit(approving a minor modification to the approved General Provisions for the Hansen Ranch Planned Development Project),and Hansen Ranch Site Development Review (SDR)for the First Phase(lots 1-72)of the 180 lot Hansen Ranch Project. PA 91-099 On February 24,1992,the City Council adopted the Hansen Hill Ranch Development Agreement Ordinance(PA 91-099),approving a Development Agreement between the City and The Donald L.Bren Company(Hansen Ranch property owners)for the Hansen Ranch project. The Development Agreement was entered into by the City on March 25, 1992,and is effective for an initial term of eight years. All previous project approvals are automatically extended for the term of the Development Agreement. (PA 91-099). PA 94-054 On February 27, 1995,the City Council adopted amendments to Phase I of the Hansen Ranch Tentative Map involving changes in street and lot configurations, elevation changes for some lots,and design changes to the creek access road/hiking trail. On March 13,1995,the City Council adopted a Development Agreement Amendment approving the creek access road/hiking trail revisions. -2- APPLICABLE REGULATIONS California State Law limits the number of General Plan Amendments a jurisdiction may adopt to a maximum of four(4)amendments per calendar year. The City Council authorizes the number and extent of General Plan Amendments. To date,the City Council has not adopted any General Plan Amendments in 1995. The Government Code procedures require that when considering an amendment to its General Plan,a City must provide the opportunity for public involvement,pursuant to Section 65351. The Dublin Zoning Ordinance,Section 8-103.3, requires that upon receipt of a petition to reclassify property,the proposal shall be set for public hearing before the Planning Commission as required by State Law. After the conclusion of hearings on any proposed amendment,the Planning Commission shall make a report of its findings and recommendations and reasons. The City Council also holds public hearings on the matter and has authority to adopt the proposed amendments. General Plan policies affected by the proposed amendment include: 3.1. Open Space For Preservation of Natural Resources & for Public Health and Safety (oak woodlands, riparian vegetation, and natural creeks) 3.3. Open Space For Outdoor Recreation (restrict structures on the hillsides that appear to project above major ridgelines) 5.6 Scenic Highways (work to enhance a positive image of Dublin as seen from designated scenic routes) 7.1 Stream Corridors and Riparian Vegetation (riparian vegetation, habitat value and aesthetic resource) 7.2 Erosion and Siltation Control (Regulate grading and development on steep slopes, restrict development on slopes of over 30 percent) 7.3 Oak Woodlands 7.7 Open space maintenance/management (visual image, permanent restriction by recorded map or deed; revegetation of cut and fill slopes; use of native trees, shrubs, and grasses in revegetation of slopes; access roads that pass through open space areas; development within designated open space areas) 8.2.3 Flooding (minimize runoff by preserving woodlands and riparian vegetation) Section 8-31.0 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance related to Planned Development(PD)Districts Intent states,in part,that PD districts are established to encourage the arrangement of a compatible variety of uses on suitable land 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 include 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;and e) Create an attractive,efficient,and safe environment. -3- Section 9.04.030 of Chapter 9.04 of the Dublin Municipal Code(Subdivision Ordinance Intent)states,in part: "It is the intent of this title to promote the pubic health,safety and general welfare;to assure in the division of land consistency with the policies of the City of Dublin general plan,any applicable specific plan of the City of Dublin,and with the intent and provisions of the City of Dublin 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 ensure adequate,safe building sites;and to prevent hazard to life and property. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:Based upon an Initial Study of the proposed project,the City of Dublin plans to use the EIR certified by the Dublin City Council on February 27, 1989 for a previous project(PA 87-045 Hansen Hill General Plan Amendment)as the EIR for this project,PA 95-007,Hansen Ranch GPA,PD Rezoning,and Tentative Map Amendment. This previous EIR(SCH No.87050527)including the revised project description addendum,Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program encompassed the subject site addressing 1)the environmental setting,2)the significant environmental impacts and,3)the alternatives and mitigation related to the significant effects of the development on this project site. NOTIFICATION: Public Notices of the April 17,1995 Planning Commission Study Session,as well as the May 1,1995 Planning Commission Hearing and the May 8,1995 City Council Hearing,were published in the local newspaper,posted in public buildings and at the project site,and mailed to adjacent property owners and public agencies. BACKGROUND: Development applications for the Hansen Hill Ranch project were first approved in February of 1989 with the City Council approval of a General Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Report to allow Low Density Single Family Residential(0.5-3.8 units per acre),Open Space,Stream Corridor land use designations and General Plan policy revisions relating to Land Use,Circulation,Safety and Conservation,for the Hansen Ranch project. Additional project approvals occurred in November,1989 with the Prezoning of the site to a Planned Development District,and Tentative Map for 180 single family lots. Annexation of the property into the City of Dublin was certified in May,1991,and the Dublin City Council adopted the Hansen Ranch Development Agreement Ordinance in February,1992. After the initial tentative map approval was granted,the applicants decided to process the subdivision in two phases. Phase 1 of the subdivision involves 72 lots,and Phase 2 involves the remaining 108 lots. The City Council approved amendments to Phase I of the Hansen Ranch Tentative Map in February and March of 1995. The current application(PA 95-007)involves processing three planning applications concurrently: 1)a General Plan Amendment;2)a Planned Development(PD)Rezoning;and 3)a Tentative Map Amendment to Phase II of the approved Tentative Map. To meet its financing commitments,the applicant has requested that its application be acted upon by the Planning Commission at its May 1 meeting and by the Council at its May 8 meeting. The April 17th Study Session is intended to provide a forum whereby public input can be received,and the Planning Commission can consider the project and provide the staff with input,so that the staff can prepare appropriate documents for the May 1 meeting. -4- ANALYSIS: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT The proposed General Plan Amendment would redesignate 2.4 acres (overall) from Open Space/Stream Corridor to Low Density Single Family Residential (0.5-3.8 DU/Acre) land uses, with 16 homesites proposed to be relocated to an area previously designated for open space. An illustration highlighting the 16 homesites is included as Attachment 1. The main issue regarding the proposed General Plan Amendment is whether the land use designation for a portion of the site should be amended to allow residential units in an area designated as open space. When the Hansen Hill Ranch General Plan Amendment was reviewed by the City in February of 1989, the issue to allow units in this portion of the site was considered. The EIR for the project was initially based upon a site plan that showed development in this sensitive area. Due to the significant environmental impacts which would result from that development, the EIR recommended that the project be redesigned to eliminate building structures from this area of the site. Subsequently, the EIR project description was revised, through an addendum to the EIR, and only custom homes were shown for development in this area. Still, when adopting the General Plan Amendment which established the land uses for this site in February of 1989, the City Council decided to designate the area as open space. Additionally, the Council amended the General Plan to include a policy requiring revegetation of cut and fill areas with native trees, shrubs and grasses, and adopted a policy which allows roadways with minimized grading to traverse open space areas. The Hansen Hill Ranch EIR, certified by the City Council in 1989, identifies development within this area as a significant environmental impact to the oak woodlands and riparian habitat. The Council adopted a statement of overriding considerations in that the impacts associated with construction of the roadway through the open space could not be mitigated to an acceptable level. However, the EIR and Council's statement of overriding considerations anticipated that the impacts to the oak woodlands and riparian vegetation would be minimized through implementation of the EIR mitigation measures, which require minimal grading for the road, and require the cut and fill slopes to be revegetated with native plants after construction. Eventually, trees replanted on graded slopes would mature to replace that portion of the oak woodland and riparian habitat area destroyed by the roadway grading. The statement of overriding considerations only addressed construction of a road through the open space area, it did not anticipate or address residential development within the Open Space area. Overall, the question before the City is whether it is appropriate to change the existing Open Space designation to a Residential designation, given other General Plan policies, such as that requiring protection of environmentally sensitive areas. The proposal would be inconsistent with the Planned Development objective to provide efficient use of land and preserve significant open areas and natural and topographic landscape features. The area proposed for conversion from open space to residential land uses is located at the intersection of two canyons, which were identified in the EIR as riparian habitat areas. By allowing homesites in this area, development would eliminate an area of oak woodland, and create a physical barrier between significant open space and riparian habitat areas. Additionally, the proposal would affect several General Plan policies, including guiding policy 3.1.a, related to Open Space for Preservation of Natural Resources& for Public Health and Safety. This policy requires that Oak Woodlands, riparian vegetation, and natural creeks be preserved as open space for their natural resource value. Also, guiding policy 7.1.a requires that Riparian Vegetation be protected as a protective buffer for stream quality and for its value as a habitat and aesthetic resource, and policy 7.3.a requires that the City protect oak woodlands. Further, policy 7.7, regarding Open Space Maintenance/Management includes a few guiding policies affected by this proposal. They include: a. Require open space management and maintenance programs for open space areas established through subdivisions and Planned Development Districts so that it produces a positive and pleasing visual image. -5- b. Require that land designated as open space through development approval be permanently restricted to open space use by recorded map or deed c. Require revegetation of cut and fill slopes d. Require use of native trees,shrubs,and grasses with low maintenance costs in revegetation of 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 The proposal would also affect General Plan policy 8.2.3 regarding Flooding. The guiding policy requires that development in hill areas be regulated to minimize runoff by preserving woodlands and riparian vegetation. All of the above listed policies apply to the development of the Hansen Ranch Site. The proposal to amend the General Plan and allow residential development in an oak woodland and riparian habitat area would be inconsistent with policies 3.1.a,7.1.a,7.3.a,and 7.7.c. Finally,California State Law requires adoption of a General Plan that is a comprehensive long term plan for the physical development of the City. With regard to the Hansen Ranch site,the City's existing General Plan is a long term plan in which residential development is not allowed in this oak/bay woodland and riparian habitat area. The plan considers the long-term effects of allowing a roadway through the open space area,and requires that the graded area be revegetated with native plants in an effort to minimize the disturbance of this environmentally sensitive area. If a General Plan amendment were approved to redesignate the area from open space to residential development,not only would it be inconsistent with several General Plan policies,but it would also be in response to specific project circumstances,which may be contrary to the intent of a General Plan as a comprehensive,long term document. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING The proposed Planned Development(PD)Rezoning would change the designated zoning district of approximately 2.4 acres(overall)from PD Open Space to PD Single Family Homes and revise various PD General Provisions and subdivision configuration to allow the 16 homesites to be moved into the previous open space area and reduce the average lot size from 7700 to 7560 square feet. State law requires consistency between the City's General Plan and zoning. Thus,the GPA request is accompanied by a request to amend the applicable PD zoning General Provisions. TENTATIVE MAP AMENDMENT The proposed Tentative Map Amendment to Tract 6308 would allow the subdivision redesign and relocation of 16 homesites,and other minor revisions to the lot and street configurations. One effect of the revised configuration is the elimination of grading over a 16-acre area in the southwest portion of the site. The lots in this area would be moved slightly to the north,which would require less grading,and would leave two existing knolls in their natural,ungraded condition.In the area proposed for relocation of the 16 lots,the anticipated grading would increase somewhat beyond the grading needed for the roadway in some portions,and decrease in others. A graphic display developed by the Applicant which illustrates the differences in the grading involved for the approved tentative map versus the grading involved for the proposed plan is attached as Exhibit A("Limits of Grading"). A large size print with a colored overlay showing lots and limits of grading is available at the Planning Department and will be available at the April 17th study session to further illustrate this issue. PUBLIC CONCERNS Public Notice of the environmental review and Notice of Public Meetings to be held on this project were mailed to public agencies affected by the project,property owners within 300 feet of the site,published -6- and posted. Several nearby residents have inquired about the project,and the City received one letter of comment from a resident near the project site(Attachment 5). The letter objects to the City's consideration of converting land from an Open Space designation to build houses. It points out that compromises,considerations,and approvals have occured for the plan that is presently approved,and asks that the City reject the proposal for development on previously designated open wooded space. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with CEQA and the Dublin Environmental Guidelines,the initial study prepared for the project determined that the previous EIR prepared for the Hansen Hill Ranch site(dated December 1987) with the revised addendum(dated May 1988),certified by the City Council in 1989,adequately describes 1)the environmental setting,2)the significant environmental impacts and,3)the alternatives and mitigation related to the significant effects of the development on this project site. The EIR certified in 1989 adequately identifies the significant impacts resulting from the project. In certifying the previous EIR,the City Council adopted a statement of overriding considerations finding that the adverse environmental impacts to the Oak/Bay woodland and riparian habitat corridor are considered acceptable,as the public safety and welfare benefit of providing vehicular and emergency access on site outweighs the potential adverse environmental impacts. As required by CEQA,a 30-day noticed public review period was provided for this project between March 17, 1995 and April 15,1995. During this period,public comments were received,but as of this date,none concerned the use of the previous EIR nor any additional,reasonable alternatives or mitigation measures that should be considered as ways of avoiding or reducing the significant effects of the project. ALTERNATIVES/OPTIONS 1) Project as proposed Several General Plan policies,as well as EIR mitigation measures,which have previously been adopted, would need to be modified in order to approve the project as proposed by the applicant. If the Planning Commission wishes to consider approval of the General Plan Amendment,Rezoning,and Tentative Map amendment,as proposed,direction would need to be given regarding new General Plan policies to modify or replace those with which the project is inconsistent. Also,regarding environmental impacts,new findings and a new statement of overriding considerations would need to be prepared if the Council approved the applications as proposed. 2) Revised Project: The main issues and concerns with the project as proposed result from the request to redesignate approximately 2.4 acres of land(overall)from open space to allow residential land use,with 16 homesites relocated into an Oak/Bay woodland area. Several of the environmental impact concerns and inconsistencies with General Plan policies could be addressed or lessened if there were fewer or no units allowed in this sensitive area. One alternative would be to redesign the proposal to reduce the number of homesites to be built in the open space area,or eliminate units in this area and relocate them to another portion of the site which is currently designated for residential land use. Another option would be to select a portion of the site for redesignation from open space to residential which has fewer environmental constraints,and possibly even increase the density in that area,while maintaining the project density overall. It should be noted that if any number of units are to be allowed in open space areas,the modifications to General Plan policies and environmental mitigation measures mentioned in option#1 above would need to be made. -7- 3) Denial The project as proposed involves development which would undermine the General Plan policies to protect environmentally sensitive areas. If the City wished to maintain consistency with the current General Plan without amending several existing guiding policies, it would need to deny the Applicant's request for a General Plan Amendment. Because state law requires consistency between the City's General Plan and its Zoning, denial of the GPA would require denial of the Rezoning and Tentative Map applications, to maintain consistency. SUMMARY The Planning Commission's role at the April 17th Study Session is to consider the project's concept, provide a forum whereby public input can be received, and provide the Staff with input from the Commission, so that Staff can prepare appropriate documents for the May 1, 1995, Planning Commission meeting. These documents and additional information may include: a. Specific descriptions of the alternatives and options, including denial of the project, approval of the project, or possible revisions to the project b. Processing steps necessary to pursue the various options. c. Mitigation measures which may be required, depending upon the alternative selected, such as environmental findings and overriding considerations At the May 1, 1995 Public Hearing, the Commission's role will be to receive additional public input on the three planning applications, and make a recommendation to the City Council. RECOMMENDATIONS FORMAT: 1) Hear Staff presentation. 2) Receive comments from Applicant and public. 3) Question Staff, Applicant and the public. 4) Discuss item. 5) Give Staff direction. ACTION: none ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Project Plans: Reduced copy of proposed General Plan Amendment Map, Planned Development Map, Tentative Map, and Limits of Grading Exhibit Background Attachments: Attachment 1: Diagram highlighting 16 homesites; Existing General Plan Land Use Map; Location/Zoning Map Attachment 2: Applicant's Written Statement Attachment 3: General Plan policies regarding proposed amendments Attachment 4: Resolutions approving previous project (PA 87-045) regarding adoption of General Plan Amendment, adoption of Mitigation Monitoring Program, and Certifying Final EIR with Statement of Overriding Considerations. Attachment 5: Copies of letters of comment from public (g:\pa#\1995\pa95007\stdsess l.doc) -8- 1 11 J 1 1 1 1 11 HANSEN HILL RANCH - PHASE II GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT cc Wuj UJ LAND USE DESIGNATION w wW. F y LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 44.7 ACRE Z c • C7 i — (0.5 to 3.8 DU/ACRE) Z U � W OPEN SPACE, STREAM CORRIDOR 58.5 ACRE Q J — — COLLECTOR STREET IN OPEN SPACE I I co 7-0 w ((; �� 6 t 4 == '�� Qz z �.,,� tt .•," 5t �.�� 1 1 \ J m LLJ c ` L \ RECEIVED 'm Q15-n Ir G R I I 0t;, I� SHEET OF I PAGE 0 Y rxH lol r v � `b♦ I 1 ♦ HANSEN HILL -RANCH Ammended - Planned Development Rezoning Phase II 1 / \d� oak-T 0/:-, 112 w♦ m ®® ed �\ �,.! • w,/ / Martin Canyon Creek113 �m _ e �'-6' v'9ty1 Clad chain fink fence Haan Its e / ♦o in tos rr �. \- a.,aa a ` t99 f09 • 10 / \`� I/�+ - Galan bl' DS - \ \ \ ® /♦m\ 86 124 oak -bay Kland y�Gev�gatateQ gll � es a te0 tel \ 179 �, 1�3 79 I • ��tvvv���`rrr�e��nn���11 area�iih vn tnoc _ k Ise • - \ •. e1 +.4 tttIse `1y re s r' \ 1s9 3 February 1"S .. ::....«............... ALIFORMA-- ® 40 em �0_ rsotc c.... e .t.ec,.r.. GATES.. PACIFIC I \• HOLIES ♦� �— —1 ra----- - -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- 1E7v_ 131 AMENDED TENTATIVETRACT AND ANNEDDE VEL OPMENTREZONING 6308 _____________________4 ---_--_--- I i 4 I I LA1vJDS OF ]MELSr1vl I < —� l N 110'U9 _ ' 1 09�5 N64'50'S5"E i ' I \ —� TRACT r 5073 3 8' N. HIKING tY 151.80' N89'S0'S5"E I TRAIL 53.46' 12'ACCESSR 2< + --------- "----- -- i%/��%i/l '19' w ROTC / II PHASE 2 II I 11 ii I A x I F/FvvvJ � 1pJ o Q I � ,o ITL 1 I I RNA — IL N88 54'OS"W Site `$ s a sd 6 9 DUBLIN yp 1-580 9� VICINITY MAP `TRAIL HIKING i I I I 1 �1 1s I I I , I - - 1 1323.26' N8OT8a, 'IL /11\l J J OF VALLEY 4078 CTHRISTIAN CENTER UTTN CANYON RD. 1 -TRACT 541 10 TRACT 5/1, j I �Y *00S W Nd1'34'52 E 1I � II � MEADOW CT N ,y )' 1 //1 �� •I� N7t.'ly'S0'i Nen Se'oo•w P do0.00 L ISJ.//' i �� der 4HIµbV °J4� !6)00' Nd 5 9'4(}'E ..-� N81'08"00'W \\ A1\/ / N]t'08'30'E 345.08• \ Y N67'2] 00 E 87,40' > 1—I I NH 57'00'E T RA CT 2534 OWNER/DEVELOPER : CALIFORNIA PACUTC HOMES 5 CIVIC PLAZA SUITE 100 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 ENGINEER: ADAMS STREETER CIVIL ENGINEERS INC 15 CORPORATE PARK IRMNE, CA 92714 SO4L ENGINEER: BERLOGAR GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS 5587 SUNOL BLVD. PIEAS,NTON, CA 94566 NOTES: 1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE BASED ON U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 1929 SEA LEVEL DATUM 2. CONTOUR INTERVAL : 2 FEET 3. EXISTING USE : VACANT 4. PROPOSED ZONING : PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 5. LOT SIZE : 5.700 S.F. (MIN) - AVERAGE LOT SIZE : 7560 S.F. TOTAL LOTS : IM SINGLE FAMILY LOTS 6. WATER SUPPLY : DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT (ANNEXATION TO DISTRICT REQUIRED) 7. SEWER DISPOSAL : DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT (ANNEXATION To DISTRICT REWIRED) 8. ALL STREETS SHALL BE DEDICATED TO PUBLIC 9. ALL STREET UGHTS PER CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARDS 10. LANDSLIDE INFORMATION WAS DERIVED FROM THE FROM THE GEOTE04 ICAL WVES71GA71ON NO. 1783A01. DATED 1/14/92 BY BERLWAR GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS 1t LOT "A" STREAM CORRDOR TO BE DEDICATED TO THE CRY OF DUBLIN ACREAGE SUMMARY TOTAL AREA 146.84 ACRES PHASE 2 103.26 ACRES LOT AREA 18.74 ACRES STREET AREA 7,60 ACRES OPEN SPACE\ 56.92 ACRES STREAM CORRIDOR Ndd'23'00'E 1 e' \ , TRACT � J J J —=1 121 yI PARKING --12 Z` PARKING -._ 2X --�- -TYPICAL MAJOR STREET SECTION N.T.S. R\W } R\W I �I I TYPICAL MINOR STREET SECTION 9m SHEET I I i SEE SHEET 4 F�� P=710 sb '� P=645 9291 �06,892 s.f. �'551 N. 8891 sf104 oo �"1 I P556 Iw�u 5� I \\ sP=682P=67211.877 s.E i 3.840 0 106 Y 1, 6,502 s.f. y - �1r1 "e 93 ��• 18,542 s.f.\ c' ,� "._ P=692 a . U' ea '� J, r , b ., �` et _.=li o ,1 0 © P=560 -P=564 11,419 s. t. \\ �. I H N. f ,ss' 107 n, m -. \- 100 �. .I i , ,. ° s 7:732 s.f. M.6,330 s.L . - /� ° a �.� ' I - s 1 1U8 TAP-700 N 89 L 2 ✓°° . m ry�F .f B 10.221 s.1, '� 'r 5a• 8.186 s.f. sP• \`\ p6�g'� 567 Lu ` o 10.30909. (.�D 66 _ '� ,ob �, • �- P_ _67 `&. \. W 7,032 a.f.PF y W P=734 P=717 e e'f li V My/ �9 9,16 s.f. Z P' 1s,�a� a.r. I 1o,es1 9.r. \P 88 Z 0110 ° 9,617 s.f.. 98 r_ �� 6,7 0 s. f. G e< o yy I P-725 m 53 I < ? \ lr e5 \u oNa. O S 4 .1 {. �\` .,I,:. \ o. � P=594 1 Q V � - ib v 9,o3a s. r. 95 A �rri i- 11}, .'r r_� ��\,A ao �" P=587q P=574 o�' s. s,1s8 s.f. 96 . \ 120 m' p=581 9,347 s.f. f/ / P=738 e r� I `\ nso 5 /a..zs zaF 5,963 s. - I 6.539 s.L az. poi _ Y 121 6,656 s.f. Y- - SCALE � 1 © ' 1�_40" — t i M1 73 1 _�- � e ss 0 124 ° I ,APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF 1 uo' oe• P=739 - 100''EARTHQUAKE FAULT - / ,\1 6.207 tt. f. r / SETBACK__� 0. 1� N {v M 00 iI 1 / 126 z Q 6, 739 >y / 4 I I I r ' 8,579 s.f. It O 6.546 s.t Cn 127 ao� �-- � � �r g 1 a sz. h se wak W W' �o pp q0 t38 I 148 _ ''" P=692 J Q� .P�740 / 128 7.781 s.f. 130 51' P-739 1 X111 m P-739 17,569_'.'.._.P-=740 � P4733rfi '°'7,752 eJ. 1�. a I' P= 5 W Q 8,28i s.t. I,• r i I - 6,277 I ' V.l 5,724 s.f. n w P 739' I/ � w4 �. �• 2 3 1'}4 8.130 s. f. I 5�47 p.. 132 •.as. v� �� P=73 P=739 6. 7 6,641 s.f. � ¢ 1 Ow � � v -"^—._. R poo' i" , as• J�oj w� 133 0 �=.7�9 r v vv Aso ss Il.. 4 •ram°� ' ayP 7,279 s. f. m401 f i ss°.� y 145 ss. )) >95 vvv F \ o P=740 qr \ , - / r _ 7.099 s.L s. '' �,82 P=740 0 162 ss'6.017 s. f. ^'.� 1 1 / a __�/ r r "� 144 / N P�739� / e �. ,, 140I I - s ° a�o - 6,144 s.f. 6, I // �, P 739 1 1 I / il� ►•'RE-iw�r �,� ' 5913 d. f.o P=7325 '- ss 8.239 s.f. 164 s.f. o -'-•- --/�o � f ss. P=738.5 .f - _ 143 n I i r s / SHEE_ or 5 SEE SHEET 2 SSG J�3 I 1 9 S9 6 �3. S�J G 5S %s 6 HIKING —\ TRAIL N C� msG.s bl0 620650 6,0 J 114 660 ` o I 11.602 \ �r p ,68 'a na .r ��O... 11882 0 ,SEE SHEET 3 H Q L) n W Z 1 a sH °$ � W \�� N W C4 0-00 O a it 3., e LL 1 3 SS(F W 7 \\ E, bhp 89 �j px567 44 / , a as >_570 6,710 (' " .CET =' � 5 m; PHASE 11 _ Itl HANSEN RANCH A° CITY OF DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA LIMITS OF GRADING EXHIBIT ACCESS/WNG MAL \- - Iy \ _ 109FGRACNG \ � MAP1N CANVAN LEGEND -------- 1989 LIMITS OF GRADING v�>� �� C�\ ?• �� 888�iv�L�T��/li s.�wvvvw� - �� vv v N� ........... 1994 LIMITS OF GRADING TRACT BOUNDARY LINE �I •� / Q \ 1 I �- .A� J\'ll\ \`\\ \scot%"^ �5 �� �\ ,"« \ i� ' V -'~ \ AREA 1989 GRADING ENCROACHES BEYOND 1994 GRADING (27.50 ACRES) AREA 1994 GRADING ENCROACHES BEYOND 1989 GRADING (4.05 ACRES) es• , q II \'\ 1 �_�r�i;, 10,., \ 0 b \ \ (8\\,II \ - e = no 6 - � r�I: _ - .,�:dl a „ 198911Ri5 \` F`Ib { \ I U\�s\M— i jf 1 4 \ �\ • ,- - _�� -= -> TJ,APFVALLEY CHRISt1AW CENTER 1989 GRADING IS SA�yIE AS 1994 DATE GRADING WITHIN TNIS AREA I CIVIL ENGINEERS INC. -- — rt ucaw�m14 //J.N. 94-1000 - gCVIVED EBI p 1995 f N� PALL 6_ OF 16 HOMESITES PROPOSED TO BE RELOCATED INTO AREA HANSEN HILL RANCH PHASE Il CURRENTLY DESIGNATED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AS OPEN SPACE 0 ID C Rli OR, LAND USE DESIGNATION LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 44.7 ACRE OPEN SPACE, (0.5 to 3.8 DU/ACRE) OPEN SPACE, STREAM CORRIDOR 58.6 ACRE COLLECTOR STREET IN OPEN SPACE V11 --7 -n X, S z OPEN SPACE, �5 \\F? � t/ 1 f1 77, LOW DENSITY FAMILY V SINGLE r ----- ----- X<� A Z r T J. < OPEN SPACE RECEIVED I 1ju LIN PLA oo 0 Li z 0 m V) Fs PAGE --L of ---3' SHEET ATTACHMENT PA 87-045 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT • • • • • ' • . \ : • • LAND USE DESIGNATION Alti_.... .z.,....4...........0. LOW DENSITY, SF (.5-2.8 DU/AC) 52.3 ACRES . • ::i• \ . _ _ .. . . ' NEDIUPI DENSITY (6. 1-8.0 DU/ACRE) 4.9 ACRES 7) >1... ••ii4-p-----;,--,,,..... OPEN SPACE: 89.8 ACRES J.:--, - ‘ .s-Z-Y''.4*,•- •-,, ' • • ' /.......„4-;„1-.-.1.-e-.--- •:...,•-•,-;•-•.---;..s-- • • .-----'• •r•..W,':.- -•\.!"• ----- • J4\I .• . COLLECTOR STREET IN OPEN SPACE AREA • - ,21_,P,,,, X.,. . ., . \ •-... ,a . . -IP •... r.0 'A'•,0 \ ;-•\" ..".s.- '' •i''. ''>1 • .\\• '''''4:7•‘•?'''.••/,, •\ --:•4"%.'.k•iw'14.: I/1 • - .,-. 0 i ----, .,, ,, :.N.k \,:,,,c;-,:-___,_xt..- ,,,,...:,...,,,-t-,._.]„;\ _ . • viry-J- --.::—.7_0,-!‘410..,«teRec;.4 ---------,-.,,: c‘s&s.-,_-_-:::-_-_.:_-;,-. ,:.-.:-...:k . /2/,‘,4",isAI• -F.:::2,1,:•?:,)), ,±::,..- 7,71..;.:s...°,1*. ,,-,,c).1::..b;:tis,s A '13 . ' ''':€st.' • I • - - 7-,.:"0---•,2%-lgr.F-.-_-1.7.'n•\‘‘ „ • • , -,...;:::,\eo-1-_,). :,,, ......, -... .., • , ' .• ‘:‘ ( f ' N0 :'. ot-...,.....;..„..,.—,'_=(1--..-.-1..4:%..-.-j-%.....5-.;-..-''-,'-',.:..-.17.11)1 I,1I ',;j:,:_15:;;-;..,•<.,,--_s,•:——,clr_-....a-,..,•14:4,:, 4r'0ST:4 srAV-\12'.t,-/..?...,:%......‘.iT'''''.) s N•9.,\--1..(.-..2,,',*7c . s% ' . .. I,•)) i I it///,/.0'. kX, .. .1,1735. )071/11)V. .7--.-r,..,—Z.--."...::-.' • •••—•-.--2b•-• kai 7 . L04/ DENSITY • i•.Q`'')'•;:: :••-•-•2•4---7;':-•-••;; til.4'i i 41////1 ' •C•k•c'js \ ‘• ''''':;:•:.;'9..-C-,,..c."7/.1 '''frr:•-.-."•:..1>..:. ......-.< r . SINGLE FAI•1ILY i 1••(.•a•. . .--7.:::::::-., ,,),`,,,,i• r„it ,,,/ (1 '4,5 •it,,.4)°,6""Iiii,,,.$/,..,,,-,....5--•:...?;56":_.:.-;:sz;;;-,2 3,,\'••-\\\:.\\?\_ 7. &P.80,.. - 0 - ''',c"..'<A4.),, \-••=-1•-•:- .. •‘,." •''''''). 0.• / . 0: 4-re'', IQ' , •lq(7,V,/.;,•. (,,,,,-/.-5.5".f,,-1;;;...,''' -yr_V.,,,I-1-,-.4:- •I'',..,),(?) 3.1 p,,,,$ . . ..i -_""'''._ •••:4,;••. . ..,..e:<3 .1,.,:,,,, , .4. .;7.--, .(4`i,-;,.• .-.TVIiiikt--:.-*=. -,,,sz ' 1/6 i i':.':"-.----4=----z--2:------- "tvr tr-.,‘q., . • • ' •• ••:.:!.z.......-.4.-1414&9•‘-,r,' -,'... -.7' • o. Ab e?...,/,' /rni`;,/sir-c-jr3-• V.X,',71r ) / t-C,f//e,,Sre.‘,1-16_,v- ••,' `''a • , • •••,. --:.-..--7 0 • g., ...,,•• ,e. . e.P ri.'• . 21,fi . ',...... 1 '''t !";',.lt ii.P..1.....,' lis.:::,•1.1,I' (I I ;i;- ,..7'. -- .c•';irc.6 /5 • •-•....„--......z. •••01 49 .4,,,,qh ... • -+- . .c..,11 o( ,e.,:,,,...,..\--%• (1 . ,s?•• ' I 1) -it"• " isp),,,.. \ 1 ..,t ..e.,...,,, .... .......**,,,:••... ‘.1..../. ,N,„•'414...T.,r,,I• LOW DENSITY I\ ' _2::::,:,-': ',,14'd 7.,31-T1',1,•..//,(-A , ,, ''.1."..11,4. 4k, , ;AU,),?!.71 i.,,, ,,,,„ •-• 4•.,,,,• •••••-0‘j-; 01 .k .._, •.,.. ,(4„,.,,, ,,, tt , • ...., ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, •-... /.L. INGLE FAMILY.,•.• •._,.,. •,.j--'-392',. .. "4q,, i '• " 1 ....,.\ ..:-.? „..•'.1,47.•• ...,6-• l•• "1, ..-. :,:' ••••••• (I. /47" ::, _..z„, -.•:,.•:::::::::::::.;•;:.‘-- '',..:-..- - -0 ••• -1<'•',•• s.'' ;' :-•,-i„ ----z----7--:z4'''''-:• /-•-•'(044 VT '''' ler-t3j C.,44; lil. 71'.. .•5 -Y.: n,4,. .,,,•,„: 1.....',.;,,,,,, •!es!,..:;"..;-•,:Fg..17. (SINGLE FAMILY.71.. •• ;3' ''• -17..").-....2* • • 'it .................:.....;.:1\s‘Z,,,. ,......)))s ) •1\ ,,,,,,,,,,,;.,..:...:.•;.:;',..:.,-. ..." 7rq,: 6-,iitwl.irj:spl ,, n 2r• -,... .,..u:sr,,,t,-4..\\,"0:.,„., ..to • -,-,,,70 _ -,,,,, OPEN SCE P A s. ss C .;'''' ''.;"‘'-' • .. ' il .......:.......,..,,,, ... , , -. ... .s.....,, ....=___ 0 . . % .... ,..„......_____ .....- ---...- -----..„.,.......„ _____......„ , - , ,_.„.,.... .. • 411,.. c7 ' CZ . . CONCEPlUAL SRE LAVCA.IT P1.4,1 1240) V' g In Z"Z.7-'`-'--.7..." . / ---*- ---- • . 1.,... 1,••• • /,- _ Flans en.Hill Ranch-. • .17 tS: rr; ...,,, - ... . . . • 1.111. .1.otyrk. C. _. \s\s\7 '-V."‘‘;'74.1.11.M --- .-e. —,.. • ' • • •,•• C.., :< 1g' C-2 n .— I I • r.-7 ,2'•-""--" . . 19;1 .._.-.12.i ...-•-• /-`. • ; " * :'. - : . . . .. : • ; t 1: : • i i ! ! _ . • i • • • •. . , .- •• - '..: • • . . • • . i . . . . • .•:. • . . . . ..: . • • . : • . i • • . • . •-,,-,•:, ti. •. • "..") ,3.i. .. . : .•-• •.:" ,...,,... p ;-_•\_. ,, • • .. --.-_-/<-1(1\ • • 1.1't 1 r .-.... II\ .:\.' . ./.\ r—• :, : • ;:-....2. . .-- • . i '•' : • I 1.--1'.1 'S'4' 1 i,;--z r L..1.,` C-J !,_.__ i! ‘: 1....7:;--.11:'.., -. /I.'71.. ••••• -.=-1- ....,-. •••••=z.:.- 1 :: I • 7'3 3'1'.I .-‘.'":.••••.s:'--..,':-.- (.--\.:.( i,.;........,. .C :*7'--' i ' t-Tr-7-,4,/"....Ac_..._,,•i li-••sc).'!. .\..- :: -'- P: I‘*,;;--F---(f/ ..,„,..1.•Az:r7-:-.. ‘-' .\. . ,`-f.'2:4-'—•.._ )77.!..; :-\,1 i /1.."•Z•,..:Z.. ,-... .i N. ...1\--",•-1 r : t•-•./ /-4_!.__?-{3..., •;-;; '- - z-., , ,,_. \„.....i,..,_-:--i .._.„ „. .r • ..L.J.....1 —l •.2.;./•%- NI::, t........--k. • ...,___I---1-------•1_6 _.„......Z L..........,...„,-_,.....-.... ..,N...I ---.....*.-----.- '''/i 1 1 ,......1.••.._1...------ .."=r;--:_-1. -----..s.:„N- ....."••••:: 1 \-'-'"=- ' "gNo.t.-- .',.:•-:---..--;-- / s'!.1 • S• " tk •/40. '-'s-K3 --- •---"--"iN--' • Iii-s ‘1 , .., -- ..........aNI.,-....z.:_ ....s,..z.d. •-..";••<,0.--r.,..:_zil-N-,.,..\/ 't ".. ..:-; . - ‘%I i '7%.•'.-\---...----i, -- ----"_27, /N./ , N , . T,;:s../‘ „1,..--,....-:-.1-4 ,1,-....._•,...--:--f. , ---:1,-z`' . , ie."\ ...„,:, . .-r-Lz:....„..:-_-‘ -:4___• . n.„...--1/4,,:-..s,,1 ' 1 . •\). -41 :-"‘ k,'...‹\tt ::::rr-'-itt---2 isi-1-.---"cl--"-‘...•___-..1.- -,-.:. • ;l', . '*.L. \7.s./ 'P'•• ' '`e•,/,--.3.4:C7-4L2_,-.1-1- %%,. ,.,-, • : :t: ... ---•: \ , '-'-'" i''•-• ---Li i!)1 ' '--:*:"---:c.::/-;'-'71 :11 ..p'.: \---.. ..., L.),.r) 0...,' :, ..,„ .- k...,--••••1 I ,......1.....,..7--.:.---77 : 1 -s Z._ Ir.1.......r4.., \• ,\ ,..$;„,.••:‘,.;Ik. ..;;;;1 1....tr..-<—r..--7-1 ;1. ;•••,..Z. r'''.=..<3,4-•-""- \;;;;..‹\\_/-.,,, -;;•;:,4 . ;.;::::::! ....,!,,......;---=-77 I ''."\ j.......:A•'.. \\ \..>:'-'.,. . :-7"--, - '-. 1.....*''',y‘: i' ,\\ \\s" -- 0‘ r,,,_ •,,,,,, .., _ .,..." :••. _.„... ,,,, \-4 1.:-‘• . ‘t,.‘ ,..-_,.._--;,,...„,,,..„... . .., i\ ..A V ‘...,s.,,,-- :'• ••: ) .,'“. Iv-- --=:1•,.. .• . 0 --' s •-, ,1"7".' , .._4_ U\ot ...lik :\\/‘ sr,r; ' F.'i`i•i'.= • N...\; \\......,i, % -1,,,,- r1.---\-\\., .,.Cif‘ ''' fiz; ..7;'1'-:•••:,:::; . --.• - • , u-- _,-_ k t!^. I •.-:: t:ft.; .-- ..:.„ .. •,• :•-•-,...; :1,- ; :r..--1-•- 7" ‘ ;-,...!. (?:,....' .i."; 1.....-- \ Fj.•:-.--,----.:'..-1.-i 7.: i"1?•••••.---•••""":' ' ..4.--'-'- .-.=. . ..,... ....., ...;F:V • Vi. : .......• . ".......".: r. ) :_,..; ., \--:- .4••••; ; .1.•.••: -: 1 • \r. .1.":."---::z : :•-...?.. : -. :_...!:--s-ff_.::---- ,.,., . . \ • 1•.........„k\./...--;:l . \ t • :.:. \ t ni":: 7...._2 tri • \ - ..-,-,.,....--..-. • .•:" I t t -- •//1.------: .- • - . ‘ *-- •\"*- \ .:,,.; •"::::":.: ...-"•.• t -. t•-7.:// -: _, \-,•\. r„----- , . 11:_:•,- "*••:•-.1. :',... 7.-/•'''j \ .- 'Cr. . ( - .."1-:, \, -:. ‘c- • /i ‘ \ ... ....... ............ A.,\ tzl 1% \---\ ' _... - \. /\\;•., %. if.k A\ .7' • ... '.-- ‘' n •. ‘ \ ...I • 2.1 11' % ...•. \ I.\<-52N---''.‘ . r ,......:. • _•-• ...... I . _ _._ _ _.,% :,. _ -.-;_ A.. v. ;9., .• ..... ..,1 _. , .--•__ __\ \____,,--L.----,..:?_\ *-z- -_---- •..A. ,-...,-..7:7---c1.-._‘ ::.:__=?--.7L.-__.-ca-f.z- _,-;•e_. t-.7 --"-:‘.- "-r'.:.)\-- ..--r"'-----V-;V:-/ r• . .. ..___._________............. 1.a.....,.._................_z,...:. .,. .........-...=.7...:-__:„........„„,„--_ -..-. .?..„2,-;-;.. ,. . ••• ' - - - . ' - . ' I.--"."-'-'-'----.-- • •• \ ., ._..._..___; •It ,- • -,!• \,\•- • - x x\ \ :---- ---..-- .. •.- ., -- ----(- ..._.... —A?Ait i C• •... • -:-. /••'-‘,!il ..'.-...-._._• _ ......,-. ...t.,7,1— i t.,..,...„...4",,.T.2!•••,,, 1-4.2. c r r Y oi- ../-7-_,-sx:\-as-A77-=-'—ZONING MA?. _\__-- lr.....__, Fi:, ..;.r._i v...., quat.tx__„__ --2.7..„,:DIO.M.P.§_q:i.rs„.... • Tki5,67:410c., !I -11 -i i 1 - ___: 1 --I . • — - • • 3 PAGE3_____OF .__. _ _ . HANSEN RANCH AMENDED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING #4-WRITTEN STATEMENT Phase 2 of Hansen Ranch consists of 108 single family lots. As amended,all of the lots will be flat,buildable pads. In the currently approved plan,there are 19 custom lots that have very little flat area and are primarily sloped. Given the current market and the demand for custom lots in the size range of Hansen Ranch,the 19 custom lots would be very slow to develop. The 16 lots that are designated as custom lots on the Amended Planned Development Rezoning map are planned to be built by California Pacific Homes at the time Phase 2 is developed. The currently approved houses for Phase 2 were designed in 1989. They are too big and outdated for today's market. When Phase 2 is ready for construction,new house plans will be submitted and homes will be designed to fit those lots currently designated as"custom". This benefits the City of Dublin in that all the homes will be built at the same time in Phase 2. There will be no need to wait for the sale of individual custom lots. Therefore,revenues generated by the construction and sale of the homes will be available sooner to the City. One of the goals in amending and redesigning the subdivision is to reduce the amount of grading. This has been done in Phase 2 with two primary benefits to the City. One,the street grades are less severe and will be safer and more pleasant to drive. Two,Lots 160 through 180,in front of the two exiting knolls,have been shifted north,away from the knolls. This has greatly reduced the amount of grading and eliminated the need for filling and contouring the existing knolls and creating a manufactured hill commonly known as "Mt.Jacoby". The knolls are highly visible on the horizon throughout the City of Dublin. It is a benefit to the City that they will remain in their current natural state. The design changes due to the discovery of the earthquake fault and the placement of lots in the area previously graded for required roadways are detailed in the General Plan Amendment written statement which is being processed simultaneously with the Amended PD Rezoning and the Amended Tentative Map. All of the costs that are associated with the approved Planned Development Rezoning will remain the same. #9i-PROJECT SUMMARY All aspects of the project summary remain the same as currently approved except for those identified below in item#12.. .91n19.5 PAGE OF 1 v 61N KA NN` 1 ATTtAcc-l-k-M tT Z Page Two HANSEN RANCH AMENDED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONING #10-PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN The plant palette and general locations of the proposed plants remains the same. The Amended Planned Development Rezoning site plan prepared by Gates and Associates for this submittal depicts those locations. #11 BUILDING ELEVATIONS The architectural plans prepared by Shleppy Hesmalhalch Associates referenced in the currently approved PD Prezoning,Resolution No. 129-89 remain the same. As stated before,as the time for construction of Phase 2 nears,new house plans will be submitted for approval. #16 SPECIAL INFORMATION-GENERAL PROVISIONS List of those general provisions of approved PD District which are affected by the Proposed amendment. #1.A.Attached are five reduced copies of the preliminary landscape master plan. The quality,quantity and general design of the preliminary landscape master plan prepared by Gates and Associates will remain the same. Sheet 1,the overall illustrative landscape plan, has been revised and is now designated as the Amended Planned Rezoning Phase II site plan. Sheet 2 only shows Phase 1. Sheets 2 through 6 depict the planning concept and plant list which will remain the same except that the lot locations will be modified as shown on the amended site plans. Sheet 7 can be omitted as"Mt.Jacoby"will no longer be built and therefore does not need to be reseeded to this extent. The 1995 Gates PD site plan that is included shows the extent of reseeding in this area. Sheets 8,9 and 10 are all Phase 1. The design concepts of Sheets 11 through 14 will be maintained in the amended plan. Sheets 15 and 16 depict crib wall design and locations. Crib walls have been eliminated in the amended plan. • #3.B References the rear yards of specific lots. The lot numbers will be modified during the Site Development Review process. • #7. Minimum lot size remains at 5700 square feet. The average lot size is amended to 7560 square feet. The change from 7700 sf to 7560 sf is primarily due to the elimination of all non-padded custom lots. The steeply sloped custom lots in the currently approved plan tended to be deeper than is necessary for a lot with a buildable pad. All current siting requirements will be met. • #24 The expiration date of the approval was superseded by the Development Agreement for Hansen Ranch. E C E I V E D �Ft All other general provisions of the planned development remain the same. it F E B 1 05 Ll •t--�Bl N PLANNIN,1 M E 2 OF 10 HANSEN RANCH GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT #4.WRITTEN STATEMENT A General Plan Amendment for Phase 2 is needed primarily as a result of the discovery in 1992 by Berlogar Geotechnical Consultants that the projection of the Dublin fault crosses the western part of the site. The Dublin fault is not considered active but Berlogar recommends"structures intended for human occupancy be setback a minimum of 50 feet from the fault zone". This constraint requires a reconfiguration of the site plan. Hansen Ranch is a difficult and expensive site to build. For the project to be financially feasible to build,the project must maintain a yield of 180 lots,as currently approved in the tentative map. (Note:the general plan allows up to 240 lots,60 more lots than requested.) In the amended general plan,Lots 88 through 100 and 153 through 156 are placed within the limits of grading for the construction of the required"Loop Road"and the required "Stub Street"in the currently approved plan. The area was previously designated as "Collector Street through the Open Space"and will now be designated as Low Density Single Family Residential. The required"Loop Road"is still designated as"Collector Street through the Open Space". The site is not located on a hazardous waste and substance site R} CEIVED ��EB2 v199; . lotluik 'JE6 N�Nf 'AGE 3 OF 10 HANSEN RANCH AMENDED TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP SUBDIVISION 6308 #4-WRITTEN STATEMENT The project details,benefits and costs either remain the same as currently approved or are amended as described in the written statements for the General Plan Amendment or the Amended Planned Development Rezoning. a) The inconsistency with the current General Plan is outlined in the written statement of the General Plan Amendment and depicted on the Planned Development Rezoning maps. b through e) All of these findings remain the same for the Amended Tentative as they are for the currently approved Tentative Map. #12-SPECIAL INFORMATION See#12 of the Amended Planned Development Rezoning. RECEIV ,PR FQ FEB IQ199 OF lyL �C<✓�� ��lN►'IANNlNr HANSEN RANCH PHASE II 2/8/95 Current Proposed Plan Plan Open Space/Stream Corridor 55.4 AC 55.5 AC (Not including roads and slopes) Open Space/Stream Corridor 60.9 AC 58.5 AC Low Density Single Family Residential Acreage 1 42.4 AC 44.7 AC (Slopes, streets, and lots) Low Density Single Family Residential Density (0.5 to 3.8 DU/AC)1 2.5 DU/AC' 2.3 DU/AC (Slopes, streets, and lots) Area that the current plan grading encroaches 27.5 AC beyond the proposed plan grading Area that the proposed plan grading encroaches 4.1 AC beyond the current plan grading Area that the current plan tree removals encroaches 6.6 AC beyond the proposed plan tree removals Area that the proposed plan tree removals encroaches 3.5 AC beyond the current plan tree removals • F RECEIVED plAct - 1 F E B 1 0 1995. 5 10 From : Marti Buxtor✓Fh#: '::51O1254-6968 FHONE No. : 510 254 7954 Mar.10 1995 5:07PM P01 Martha W. Buxton Real Estate Development Services 120 Village Sgvaro #130 (510) 754-6968 Orinda, Ca 94563 FAX (510) 254-7954 DATE: MARCH 10, 1995 TO: TASHA HOUSTON FROM: MARTI BUXTON //4.FC 461 ha. rib RE: HANSEN RANCH, PHASE II 54/ / 0 ACREAGE FOR 16 LOTS TO BE REZONED Pl'4A/ AREA SUMMARY FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N/N8 As requested,Adamc-Streeter hoc caluclated the following: ACREAGL OF 16 LOTS IN AREA CURRENTLY ZONED OPEN SPACE = 2.78 ACRES AREA SUMMARY HANSEN RANCH PHASE I & PHASE 11 MARCH 9, 1995 FklASE PHASE II Lot Area 13.13 AC 18.74 AC Street Area 5.60 AC 7.60 AC Slope Area 11.52 AC 18.42 AC Open Space 13.33 AC 58.50 AC (Including Streets and Slopes) Total Area 43.58 AC 103.26 AC • PAGE --I 0- Martha W. Buxton Real Estate Development Services 120 Village Square #130 (510)254-6968 Orinda,Ca 94563 FAX(510)254-7954 DATE: APRIL 6,1995 TO: TASHA HOUSTON,ASSOCIATE PLANNER FROM: MARTI BUXTON - CONSULTANT,CALIFORNIA PACIFIC HOMES RE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT,PHASE TWO OF HANSEN RANCH STATEMENT OF GREATER OR EQUIVALENT MITIGATION TO REDUCE THE IMPACTS OF THE AMENDED TENTATIVE MAP,FOR PHASE TWO OF HANSEN RANCH Hansen Ranch was approved in 1989 as a 180 lot subdivision but has not been economically feasible to build due to excessive construction costs both on-site and off- site. California Pacific Homes has undertaken a redesign of Hansen Ranch in order to enable construction of needed housing in the City of Dublin and to provide economic benefits for the community in terms of potential increased tax revenues.Both of these public benefits are noted in Resolution No.19-89,Attachment A-2. This has been accomplished primarily by significantly reducing the amount of grading and designing all lots as production lots in Phase II. The area of grading in Phase 2 has been reduced by 23.45 acres in the proposed plan as compared to the 1989 approved plan. In addition to reducing costs and the physical impacts associated with the grading operation,reduced grading has the added benefit of mitigating the visual impact of the project from the community. A 16.28 acre area in the southwest portion of the site with two existing knolls will remain natural and ungraded.In the current plan the saddle between the knoll is filled creating a manufactured hill which would be highly visible throughout the community. The current plan includes 19"custom"lots which have steep slopes with very little level area. Homes are not likely to be built on these lots for many years. The proposed plan consists solely of production lots which will be built in a timely manner producing revenues for the City. In order to maintain a lot count equal to that currently approved,16 lots(lots 88 to 100 of the proposed plan)are located in an area designated as open space with a collector street. In the current plan this area is graded for a loop road and a stub street to serve potential future development. The proposed lots are located within the limits of grading of road construction in the current plan. The total acreage of the lots is 2.78 acres. The following is offered as equal or greater mitigation to reduce the impacts of the lots in the currently designated open space. PAGE 1 O-_l 0 Page Two Phase Two, Mitigation • 3.16 acres adjacent to the lots will remain open space and will be revegetated as depicted on the attached exhibit.. Three new trees of at least 15 gallon size shall be provided to mitigate the loss of each existing tree over 10 inches in diameter. If coast live oaks and big leaf maple are utilized, the minimum size may be reduced to five gallon. • Prior to the issuance of a grading permit there will be a preliminary staking of the limits of grading surrounding areas of the oak/bay woodlands to be removed. A certified arborist will tag each tree over 10 inches in diameter. The Planning Department will then determine the number of trees to be planted as described in the above revegetation program. • Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, significant, visually important trees and tree clusters shall be tagged in the field for protection. A cyclone, or other appropriate fence, shall be erected around the dripline of these marked trees to ensure their protection throughout the grading and construction activity, subject to review and approval of the Public Works Director and the Planning Director. • 1.38 additional acres of open space is created in the proposed plan by shifting lots 160 through 180 slightly to the north the of the area designated as Open Space in the southwest portion of the site as depicted on the attached exhibit. • Wildlife corridors are maintained by having gaps between the lots (320 feet between lots 88 and 87 and 80 feet between lots 104 and 105) which prevents large mammals from being isolated due to the roadway/lot construction.* *As an historical note: It was brought to my attention last month that the Mitigation Monitoring Program adopted February 27, 1989 included a requirement for a box culvert under the roadway at the confluence of two canyons in the northwestern portion of the site. The current plan does not include this design nor was it made a condition of approval. I was unaware that it had been formally adopted as a mitigation. When I became involved with Hansen in April, 1989 I was told that Fish and Game, as represented by Terry Palmisano, had stated that box culverts were not effective in that the animals merely crossed the road at will and did not seek out nor use box culverts. -„.„1 - 1 1 ==.. . 1` _......... .y j.. • 1 r11 \ \ I I i t a -;, o ?\—/: r.n,7/�}yZ / df \ ----- • WSJ '.s;: ` �b - .. —< i�. 1 O � —`_ t -. i. $y a �- • i •`� '�/ r - �- - 1'. \ ..x\ , i ,/ , • yam. ss - `Oil` } +`� /��f ; ... -` g a•}O- Ai14 A g \ - o I ,,,. , : •4141% �, . e g \ \ N . j 1'10. 7 1( 1 f ',1...-' 6,' p i' i r':( , r i. ' .:.'l_3-e _ti. 1\ p � ' 3 / 1\rii (/1 ' / / `j J 1 ri I i• l rD 1 ,:L f � uo) M1T10 17t + r r�ras la + h-ra 7n `V 4 8 .w 74/ l NM '''' - -..:....... P. ' r -9. . .1. / 1 Ili ./.4 ay tor,,„ ,,, 4 c2 . .,,..„ 8 � i`+iiii�. ® tl i :/ .;►•ii•w4-. '-';--Y,'-- "" r 4•i•ii• `14.` .. lip*, •••-x.# ---..._._ • 1.38 acr©s +, ����:�i�i:%• %i�i�i�������������%%%��e���.. / 8/ / O :Jr� 444 No,• 1 REAR PL `, ��1�i f CURREN'I'DESIGN `n, CITY OF DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN POLICIES Related to PA 95-007 Hansen Ranch General Plan Amendment, PD Rezoning,and Tentative Map Amendment 2.1.4 Extended Planning Area a. Consider residential development proposals (including support facilities such as neighborhood shopping centers, schools and parks) on moderate slopes, with multi-family densities typically considered on flatter land and next to business park areas. c. Approval of residential development in the extended planning area will require determination that: - Proposed site grading and means of access will not disfigure the ridgelands 3.1. Open Space For Preservation of Natural Resources & for Public Health and Safety a. Preserve Oak Woodlands, riparian vegetation, and natural creeks as open space for their natural resource value. b. Maintain slopes predominantly over 30 percent as permanent open space for public health and safety. c. Continue requiring reservation of steep slopes and ridges as open space as a condition of subdivision map approval. 3.3. Open Space For Outdoor Recreation g. Restrict structures on the hillsides that appear to project above major ridgelines. The present undisturbed natural ridgelines as seen from the primary planning area are an essential component of Dublin's appearance as a freestanding city ringed by open hills. h. Use subdivision design and site design review process to preserve or enhance the ridgelines that form the skyline as viewed from freeways (I-580 or I-680) or arterial and major streets (Dublin Boulevard, Amador Valley Boulevard, San Ramon Road, Village Parkway, Dougherty Road) . 5.6 Scenic Highways a. Incorporate previously designated scenic routes in the General Plan and work to enhance a positive image of Dublin as seen by through travelers. b. Exercise design review of all projects within 500 feet of a scenic route and visible from it. PAGE_I_OF I_ T'TPrC t MEstT 3 7.1 Stream Corridors and Riparian Vegetation a. Protect Riparian Vegetation as a protective buffer for stream quality and for its value as a habitat and aesthetic resource b. Promote access to stream corridors for passive recreational use and to allow stream maintenance and improvements as necessary, while respecting the privacy of property abutting stream corridors 7.2 Erosion and Siltation Control a. Regulate grading and development on steep slopes b. Restrict development on slopes of over 30 percent 7.3 Oak Woodlands a. Protect oak woodlands b. Require preservation of oak woodlands. Where woodlands occupy slopes that otherwise could be graded and developed, permit allowable density to be transferred to another part of the site. Removal of an individual oak tree may be considered through the project review process. c. Develop a heritage tree ordinance. 7.7 Open space maintenance/management a. Require open space management and maintenance programs for open space areas established through subdivisions and Planned Development Districts...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 c. Require revegetation of cut and fill slopes d. Require use of native trees, shrubs, and grasses with low maintenance costs in revegetation of 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 8.2.3 Flooding a. Regulate development in hill areas to minimize runoff by preserving woodlands and riparian vegetation. Retain creek channels with ample right of way for maintenance and for maximum anticipated flow. 2 0 PAGE OF a RESOLUTION NO. 021 - 89 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ADOPTING 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 240 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 two noticed field trips on February 27, 1988 and August 20, 1988; and WHEREAS, notice of Planning Commission Public Hearings 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 seven noticed public hearings to consider the General Plan Amendment and EIR for PA 87-045 Planning Application for Hansen Hill Ranch on February 1, 1988, February 16, 1988, July 18, 1988, August 1, 1988, September 19, 1988, October 3, 1988 and October 17, 1988; and WHEREAS, the Staff analysis was submitted recommending amendments to the General Plan relating to General Plan Land Use Designation and Density, the Primary Planning Area, Table I and Figure 4, policy and map relating to Hansen Drive extension, alternate roadway serving Hansen Hill Ranch, policies =',l c I Or o�a [CC Reso GPA 2/27/89] -1_ ArrA_u+r-t e-N r 4- 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 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, on October 17, 1988, the Planning Commission, after considering all written and oral testimony submitted at the public hearings, adopted Resolution No. 88-058 recommending City Council certification of the EIR and Resolution No. 88-059 recommending adoption of General Plan Amendments; WHEREAS, the City Council held one Public Noticed Field Trip on November 27, 1988; and WHEREAS, Notice of City Council Public Hearings 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 City Council held six Public Hearings to consider PA 87-045 Hansen Hill Ranch General Plan Amendment on November 14, 1988, November 29 , 1988 , December 13, 1988, January 10, 1989, January 24, 1989 and February 27 , 1989; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment has been reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) ; and WHEREAS, a Staff analysis of the Planning Commission recommendation, Staff recommendation and .the Applicant's proposal was submitted to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered all written and oral testimony submitted at the Public Hearings; and WHEREAS, on February 27, 1989, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 019-89 making findings certifying the Hansen Hill Ranch EIR and Addendum as adequate and complete. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby approve the following General Plan Amendments for PA 87-045 Hansen Hill Ranch as discussed by the Planning Commission and as modified by the City Council which modifications are not substantial: 1. Amend Figure 1 Dublin General Plan Primary Planning Area to: a. include the entire Hansen Hill Ranch site (APN 941-110-1-9 and APN 941-110-2) within the Primary Planning Area. [CC Reso GPA 2/27/89] -2 PAGE Ga�_ b. amend the land use designations on Hansen Hill Ranch site, as noted on Attachment C-1 to include: - Open Space, Stream corridor - Low Density Single-Family Residential (0.5 - 3.8 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: "Strive to phase development and road improvements outside the Downtown Specific Plan Area so that the operating Level of Service (LOS) for maor street in Dublin shall not be worse than 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. " (CC Reso GPA 2/27/89] -3- a • 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 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. " BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby direct the Staff to edit, format, and print the up to date Dublin General Plan with all City Council approved revisions and without any other substantive changes. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby direct that the Applicant is responsible for all costs the City incurs in providing an up to date Dublin General Plan resulting from the adoption of Hansen Hill Ranch General Plan Amendments . PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of February, 7989. AYES: Councilmembers Hegarty, Jeffery, Snyder, ` onheeder, and Mayor MO Z L L NOES: None ABSENT: None /1 7;hi I ce.... .L4)A u (Alt' el, .1 Mayor / ATTEST: City Clerk [CC Reso GPA 2/27/89] • 5,....,',t;fL-;i•Z'',..?,',,.:;:liJ4A;4'- r,7;7..• , ,,-'7; ..<;:•%',.) . _ ,-:1,‘,.,et!".:"-,.... :p.1:'14 •• .;,;,....;..1...f'-;.-;-• • '.."..•;.:;1....:;-4-.:,.:-:;.,•...,:.:''./-".".7:.,,,,1 I 1 rs,I I f ''' . 4.,t:.,-,..„.....-.. ..--..,.. .... .1.,. 1..,...,,,..).?:,..\\\v‘ -...)-...:- .<1.,, J.../ i:i'';':::":---3,/f/1:1,"-Y•:-7.4•24. ,•;.;---;'/6-!...,.,17;,.-..!.:Ii , /.• :://'//,:i ,,,.4ci;•:,.7.--•,:.-i.„,..5.-1,_,• •9 , 1,,,);?,;\\1.:;..,, • ,,,,•••p,..-,Y;-X,4••:0:,,t.ici,;`,-t..-.,;Ti..=4--..•,-;-,1, /./.•:',2,;/ ),/,ip ii,.,;,,, ,,, ,,,,:-.. ..,,,,779?..t11)r"-''T, ' • r..,::•-•..4;-"<",-...i,i-z.,:y,-...,,,tfi_,:;,,,,4,,p;:•_zi ,/i':':',!,;:;:.(i1;:71.1- .//1.:1:::. .-,liCc1,.1-1..''.fi'-_,Irif''.- ._tf',1.,,l'•';-,'' <1 'it-='-'''f-=-,f-:., ..-.7-,,,,:;..:.----4':•:.,,-...,:•;._.'.1 ..-c-;,...t.-..-.-,?..-,.„:3?„,,::.. .-::.,,...:,:.-/,:c.:..•.),,,,,,,:.f,-; ',..,., /77:::',:ii::fc'1,_4,-/,:::::!„../.'::,,...5".....5,•••(ivi.::)..4:r5-,,,•,•;:s. i,ii...,..e:'-'-ufn••x.,-3,,y./.4%:17.,i'.):ri:L•F,...:,,,,,-,:::".;;-;•,',--,;',•;;•-:- :';',-;:••!"%--.7426-1 ,: i:c'„',a•-_,'/111,• '_.5=1 /..s'",:',....t•'.. ' -.4-..',-."1.,%7'/f-J.)7;zrp .';',...:' ,i.",;,-.:=7.-z:-&?.:-?ii.:',,,-,4:'f:-",: c..,,,,.T:F...,,',-1 ,f,;.,I 11,;.,,,:-1_/,'14,.•. -'-.z.,:.,!>,::„..,"'w-?•.•,:iiiie.-:,,,I.c.„ _,--.72ii5--y 4.t...5// ,-........-.,,,,-.,,,:,-,-;,:-.,-;:.';`'.;7f:'::.'. .:I ''''tl' , j, .1-..1:.. \,9 .:'•o-,. . ...,..-f ;-•. vi.. b z.--,7;I','`,\' ..!--./ Ir -.C.-:.-•' ...f...,/°A''',i44::,:‘:`,._,•:--‘g.:03.-,-;tp/Iii .:,•1:Yd•: .;',:.1'.,°.:::f.';':-.'-f.:.:-:-.-;:::::-:",,,:,,,f,-.----"1,y.1 — ...-ri;.:i:::,'.‘?"=',,,,,...-..,if 4,...','...::•i:r:f3--;--;?_T'.:.41 rli/( \.'-0 If f--,`,14"1.'3''' ----- $1.41>.,-1-_--_--.=:.;7-- -•=-A.!Erf'•fi .f•,:';''..-.::::..-.:••:-...'--3.:,-;.1-:;.!:..`:IC,f f.,'..'-':::::'-,-:‘-': ;:i t I t. -.,% 1 '_1 Al"---.-.,..:r.,..-_____=---------=---;t:11:11\,‘;.,-;7•714-1D, I .,r.\ .-\1,,„/.::-.3 cn r 'Alit .......,---=---,:i thIji.",-,c:---.,1••;.„) • :f.'.:1'.7:.*:.', .-::.':."..:,7.....:'.;‘:,-,.:.,.-:',...-27..-...3.1 :'\‘`, I j i/.//,•141;H t: ..-°-.. *.•-='''•\.-'-----,--_--Y/%17-'O'i'•-,& - 17;:f.:,-•;.:;..::.1;-...-..,;."... ..,-,:-:"."-:--:"7'.:;,'" ;.-::',: t I I ';,??,/fOi''': i'•i'•••• L '-; •, •,•,--.,.',._ji, ,:6Y,, .;;;.::,'..•1=:-..;•-•`:- .7,1!,.y 4-:;',.:-,,;;---::' 1 / / I I(i i i.l."ila;,1:',;: IT';:'_'..c,b..;.-N, ItS4k2::-'frie:14.-%‘,\'') :::3'...1;:2;2;*:*--7*:::.:-',:-:1,-*;i*:.:f*.::•.'..'.'1:::: ','2-i:-',1 .,-•7!-'77. •;71.i- i.-;•.›. ..f....,V;;;;,i1Ei,11),),, *,:f..--•••-.::.•-•-*.r.:t'' '.*:'••••!•7*..:-:*;:••S".*.-...,:::". ..1;'''.,•.... •,,,- : I. 1;•,,,ILT.:;• ,,,,.„..„--•, 4, ..,;.y J. ,._,--;:_•.-f...':„--•' .t:.,,-,,,•--9.7-..ry-',,;•7,-tzi-',),.ii11,....i - - = ; -_ ,:-.1•:1-7---'•. •-:p---2 ,?: ., ., ;.c":1:1.-: 1_!;'; ; F::. ,.:::-.....-,....-.,-,-,,,--:-.-::::,::..:.,::?..,, ,,-,-,...;-::-.]:'.-i•-::4".'.•-•••-••:.:1;:,':- ..-.'"....:.:,.: ..:-'- ',..:----:,• 1.1'4;:_,•-_-,,q;.--,,;1•.,.,‘;•.,...,—..,•,,--,:-_-.:,,•_-•-•-,,s ,-,„—:,_..‘_•-•,.../t.;,,.'c..'.-.,;,/•,,-,,:,.,p-,,...,,„',:,.i/ . = . ,i,,,•,..3'..., , A --. • - 1,,41-•: .1, r, , > 1,--- ,j..-,1,1:-.--,i,el• ,-/.•,'-r.----'-='--,:.'-':g 11, __ _. -$..(--,=-,---.--,•:-•,,,,,:/"...>" : = 11-::-.-=',;f:i."-.-1.-...,...."q. 'T.--',.7---L-. •,-,•;,-='.!I•:-.. ,---„,..c.,.•c.7.....,-,;,!....--:2... ,--.,,g.-.. ..;,..--.,-,.:,,i- Ir. -=:. -_--2._._--..:,=-•-,..,iz.,.. ,v... „,-,,,-,,,,,.-•-, 1;, = .`,----'1•It'-1----c-:=4-'.-'f".',.:r._=;-•.,:".`2.:--,',..--.7.--2!,-.-'?"":// r. • r----:. ;'";..., •;',:-:::, ,'-V:7•;•-','"1<-.1c.2 -,-'j I -. . ... .. . . . 1 4i -4:>';•- • : . • • . ItX,-;,i,..-E-7'.-----7------Z___/-41'-Y.' .• • •. . - • s..:---‘;-.-.,-,,..•;•,\ N7-71/.. •J i',;-•,:).0--".-7:2-7"...-",..:-.-.7.-i ./ •. ...... .. •.•- • . .... = • ....,-, -.- - .:';t'...-. ......„....-sk,..-..' ,I; sv-..-..'i•---.:::,,,;z-'t•2-1....e.'•••+ .1,--_-=:::sc:-i• -,-..,;':.., : / . .. (VT..;'±..-Z--..-.-'' i.iij iz": i:. i •:-= ..":" = .-i. ,- :. '..,'...'..:.....:.:;:''7.:::..-2 r .: s'1'...5:- ! "r•---.-.-?., '•••- Z• I • = - , ..7 .0 i:••••' ii.•• -.. t :::. _ ._ . ••••'.•• • . •• • • • CCl'i•;. •-,'7.•:1-'1; > '' n: silf,./.•''..„,-•'•,Z7' '' li*. . „ .. . •..:7t.:F1;4,.'3,... .., 7, . " ;,t. * 7.. - F-:::2.:•.,-...A,A,"!,-.1,,-.-, ;•_ ... .• '- := • 't ,;-.:.-.4,-.A,-. „ _ . ., , .. 1._.., Ls_.....ri; ,••••1-....AL..= `.3. c, ,..,..•.,s•-•-a••ts•-g'''...0.,. = : : 7 zz.r r-=L.:i---.--4:••• lzt,•., ' F• " • •: . . - . • t!:::;'!'-:••• •-••• : r ,>:.= >. *-X.;> -. ; ;.: B C., ;•,' F= •-• C.`•••-••, r' •• • - . • - n • - •- ., = •,• ..- , ., .. • - • •• ... • • . • • • • ..: Z1 • ; . . . . • . • •••.- ' '' •. FIC•51I 1 . ,.. . - •••• . , • „,, • • Eli H 6- 1 . . . .. -.• .• . .• . • . •• . • . . . :.,.. -• . . . . . • PAGE 5 ri''' ---1- 11''s i Li 21 up,NID \,,56 TIP-- . ,.. - : .:,.......:..:......::::-:•:::i.- - RESOLUTION NO. 020 - 89 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (HANSEN HILL RANCH) WHEREAS, Public Resources Code 21081.6 requires the City to adopt a reporting or monitoring program for changes in a project or conditions imposed to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects in order to ensure compliance during project implementation; and WHEREAS, on February 27, 1989 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 019-89 making findings certifying the Hansen Hill Ranch EIR and Addendum as complete and adequate; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby adopt the "Hansen hill Ranch Mitigation Monitoring Matrix" attached hereto as Attachment B-1 as the monitoring program required by Public Resources Code 21081 . 6. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of February, 1989. AYES : Councilmembers Hegarty, Jeffery, Snyder, Vonheeder, and Mayor Moffatt NOES: None ABSENT: None / /7 7/ n \ ,t,-; 1,7 d t?, // - Myr ATTEST: City Clerk \ • PA 87-045 HANSEN HILL RANCH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM MATRIX FEBRUARY 17, 1989 • • The Applicant shall be responsible for any and all costs incurred in • monitoring mitigation measures. • For detailed information on impacts and mitigation measures refer to Hansen Hill Ranch Environmental Impact Report. • • RESOURCE IMPACTS MONITO RI G-ACTION VERIFICATION • Vegetation Oak/Bay woodland 1. Prior to issuance of 1. Public works due to roadway grading permits, the Dept (F,-D) with construction developer submits arborist Planning Dept throw^ open space horticultu_alist report. input Grading permits will not be issued unless plans reflect recommendation in • arborist/ccrticulturalists report 2a. The Developer shall 2a. Flanninz with identify significant ;D input trees and tree clusters on T.Map and grading plans. 2b. Prior to issuance of 2b. ?O with grading permit, signi- Planninginput ficant trees and tree clusters shall be tagged in the field for • protection. • 3. Prior to issuance of 3. ?ianniw:ch grading permits, the input from developer shall submit. CA Dept of Fish a revegetation landscape and Game and and irrigation plan for other appro- - disturbed areas. p_iate agency as needed. E 7• • [Monitor Matrix 2/27] "�• •• f+� •t v a' • _ • 9 • � RESOURCE IMPACTS MONITORING ACTION VERIFICATION Vegetation Riparian/stream 1. Prior to issuance of 1. (a) Planning •:1 corridor due to grading permits the (b) PWD with roadway grading developer shall (a) Planning •' construction submit verification of input Ithrough open Fish and Game permit (c) Planning space areas (b) submit grading plan with Fish minimizing cut and fill slopes and Game within riparian corridor (c) input : submit revegetation landscape plan (see 3 above) Wildlife Isolation of 1. The Developer shall 1. PCD with large mammals submit grading and Planning i-p_t due to roadway improvement plans prior construction issuance of grading • permit. Grading permit will not be issued unless the plans incorporate mitigation measures addressed in the EIR requiring box culvert under roadway at confluence cf • two canyons in northwestern portion of site. --- - - - - - ---- -------- - - -- -- ----------------------------------------------------- Grading/ Excessive Cu: 1. The developer submits 1. -_anni De:: Topography and Fill grading plans incon- with PWD n input junction with T.',ap Planning Application • Traffic Potential 1. Prior to issuance of 1. P:vD with into: d,r==se in building or g_adin` from City Traf- level of service permits, the developer fic Consultant Dublin 3. c./Sa, pays to the City a San Ration Road Traffic Mitigation Fe as compensation for projects fair share of cost of improvements required to mitigate traffic inpacts, or developer constructs improvements • • (Monitor Matrix 2/27) RESOURCE IMPACTS MONITORING ACTION VERIFICATION Traffic 2. City acquires 2. ND right-of-way at cost to the developer -- - - - --- -- --- - - -- -- --- -- - - ----------------------------------------------------- Geology/ Reactivation of 1. Prior to grading, 1. PVC Soil landslide, soil developer submits revised shrink-swell soils report/geotechnical report and erosion control/maintenance plan with improvement plans. Grading permits will not be issued unless plans reflect recommendation of soils teport/geotechnical report, erosion control and maintenance plan. --------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Hydrology Increased flow/ 1. Developer submits 1. ND velocities of revised drainage plans/ Martin Canyon hydrology report, £radinz Cray permits :i11 not be issued unless plans reflect recommendation in h•idro- lozy report. --- ------------- ----- - - -- - ----------------------------------------------------- Visual Site Change 1. Developer submits 2. ?iannin` Dept Quality from rural Planning Application to suburban for Planned Development, Tentative Map, including zoning regulations (setbacks, building heights, etc.), lot design and layout for City Councilreview and approval. (Monitor Matrix 2/2/ ] -3- RESOLUTION NO. 019 - 89 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AND CERTIFYING FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IHPACT REPORT, WITH STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT - PA 87-045 HANSEN HILL RANCH) 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 Hansen Hill Ranch General Plan Amendment (the "project"); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 88-058 recommending Council certification of the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State CEQA guidelines, require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impact and that environmental documents be prepared; and WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on the project has been prepared pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR dated December 1987, Final Addendum Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR dated May 16, 1988 and Addendum to Hansen Hill Ranch EIR dated February 7, 1988, which documents are incorporated herein by this reference. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby find as follows: a) The City Council has reviewed and considered the Final EIR and hereby finds and certifies that the Final EIR has been completed in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and the State EIR guidelines. - b) The City Council hereby finds that there are significant adverse impacts which can.be mitigated, avoided, or substantially lessened by changes or alterations required in or incorporated into the project, as follows: 1 -10 a� 1) The General Plan Amendment would allow certain growth and land use changes and intensification in the project area. However, changes and intensification must be consistent with and conform with the land use designations and policies of the City's existing General Plan and the General Plan Amendments. 2) Project construction, including roadway construction through open space areas, could impact oak/bay woodland vegetation on site. However, mitigation measures will be incorporated into the development phase of the project which will reduce these impacts. Mitigation will include: i) Any construction activity in close proximity to mature trees shall be done in a manner that will minimize trauma to the root system (see details in Chapter 3.4 Vegetation of the FIR) . ii) Disturbed areas should be revegetated with natural tree and bush species. Specific details of the revegetation plan shall be worked out in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game, the City and the Alameda Count; Flood Control District. iii) General Plan Amendment policy states "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." 3) Project construction, particularly construction of the roadway through open space areas, would disturb riparian habitat areas. However, impacts will be minimized in that the following mitigation will be implemented with project development: i) The California Department of Fish and Game shall be consulted as required under Section 1601-03 of the Fish and Game Code. ii) Minimize fill and cut slopes within the riparian corridor. iii) Revegetation of riparian habitats with native species in disturbed areas as well as elsewhere on the site to compensate for habitats lost in graded areas. 4) Project construction could impact wildlife with placement of a large amount of fill under roadways at the confluence of two canyons in the northwestern portion of the project site which would isolate the tributary canyon from large mammals. However, the following mitigation will reduce this impact: i) Place a box culvert under the roadway rather than a 30-inch pipe. -2- 5) Project construction, primarily roadway construction through open space areas, could result in loss of oak/bay woodlands and riparian habitats in the northwestern portion of the site. Impacts will be reduced with compliance of the General Plan Amendment policy (see item #2, iii) requiring minimal grading for roads through open space areas . Mitigation requiring revegetation will minimize these impacts. 6) Project construction, primarily grading, could impact trees. However, the following mitigation would minimize those impacts: i) Visually important trees and tree clusters shall be identified and tagged in the field for protection and preservation. Lots within tree preservation areas shall no: be developed. 7) Project construction could result in excessive cutting and filling. Project specific grading plans will be considered at the Tentat -:e Map and Planned Development level of the planning process. Specific mitigation will be applied at that stage of development and shall, where applicable, include the following: i) Develop site grading plan which avoids cut slopes of greater than 2:1. Place cuts for building pads behind structures. Landscape with native materials. Cut and fill volumes should be balanced when possible or used on adjacent site if fill __ needed. 8) Project development when combined with the cumulative impacts of other projects have the potential for decrease in the level of service (LOS) at Dublin Boulevard/San Ramon Road from LOS D to LOS F. However, implementation of mitigation to widen the eastbound intersection to have two right turn lanes, two left turn lanes and two through lanes will minimize the potential impact. c) The City Council hereby finds that there are identified insignificant impacts, as follows : 1) Construction and grading within the project area may impact geoo_.: and soil conditions resulting in reactivation of landslides and imbalanced cut and fill. However, project specific grading plan and mitigation reviewed and implemented at the Subdivision and Planned Development stage of review renders this potential impact as insignificant. • 2) Construction within the project area may increase flows and velocities of Martin Canyon Creek, and result in erosion during construction and erosion from roof and lot drainage. However, implementation of mitigation measures such as detention basins, drop structures, rip-rap, erosion and sediment control plan will minimize these impacts such that they are considered insignificant. -3- r;7,17: 1c� k;- 3) Filling of the saddle between the knolls which is not specifically a part of this project (in that it does not involve General Plan Amendments) is considered an insignificant impact in that filling the saddle may be considered enhancement to the ridgeline. 4) Development within the project site area may result in changes to the visual quality of the site as the site changes from rural to suburban. However, lot design and layout and building materials which will be reviewed and mitigated at subsequent levels of review (Subdivision, Planned Development, and Site Development Review) render this impact insignificant. 5) Development within the project site could impact police, fire, recreation, telephone, gas, electric and other utilities. However, the potential impacts are considered insignificant in that project specific mitigation will be established and implemented at subsequent levels of review. Additionally, costs for utilities will be borne by the developer and homeowner. 6) Development in the project site would generate an increase _n demand for water and sewer services. However, the capacity of the facilities are anticipated to be adequate to accommodate the increased demand so as to render the potential impacts insignificant. 7) Development within the project site will generate an increase in school enrollment and a corresponding increase in school operating costs. However, the potential impact is considered 1nsign1 - in that the student increase is considered within the facilities capacity and State law allows school districts to impose development impact fees. 8) Potential noise and air quality impacts associated with construction activity on the site are considered insignificant in that mitigation measures will be implemented and applied to the project at subsequent levels of project specific review and consideration. 9) Development of the project site will result in an insignificant impact to historic and archaeological resources in that there are no known historic or archaeological resources on the site. Additionally, mitigation will be implemented during the construction stage of development requiring construction activity to stop and retension of a qualified archaeologist to examine the site if archaeological material is encountered during the project construction. - d) The City Council hereby finds that there would be significant adverse impacts which are unavoidable, in that specific physical, social, economic or other considerations make substantial mitigation or project alternatives infeasible, as follows: 1) Oak/Bay Woodlands and Riparian Corridor Impacts: The grading for roadways through open space areas (oak/bay woodland and riparian corridor areas) will reduce habitat value and result in removal or potential damage of individual trees. The primary areas in which potential habitat disturbance will occur is in the northwestern portion of the project site, and within the southeastern portion of the site in the vicinity of Martin Canyon Creek. The specific impacts of roadway grading will be determined during review of detailed grading plans which will be required for consideration of the Subdivision Map. Impacts are anticipated to be minimized through compliance with the General Plan Amendment policy requiring roadways through open space areas to be designed to minimize grading to the maximum extent possible so as not to damage the ecological or aesthetic value and characteristics of the open space. e) The City Council hereby finds that four (4) alternatives, as more fully set forth in the Final EIR, were considered and are found to be infeasible, for specific economic, social or other considerations, as follows: Alternative =1 - No Project The "no project" alternative assumes that the site would remain in open space, allowinz one dwelling unit on the site. The "no project" alternative fails to provide needed housing, along with the associated increase in property tax revenues, and is thus considered infeasible. Alternative =2 - Neighborhood Context Alternative This alternative assumes approximately 175 single-family detached homes on 50 acres, or 3 .5 dwelling units per acre. This alternative would result in less housing than the project and less affordable housing than the project. Traffic generated by this alternative would be less than that generated by the project. This alternative is infeasible in that it would not provide an adequate number of housing units and the associated increase in the property tax reveues. Alternative =3 - Mitizated Alternative This alternative assumes approximately 202 dwelling units (179 single- family and 24 townhouses) with a net density from approximately 2.9 units per acre to 4.1 units per acre. This alternative would avoid development on ridgelines, oak woodlands and would eliminate- extensive cut and fill. Traffic impacts would be essentially the same as those of alternative #2, Neighborhood Context Alternative. This alternative would result in less housing than the project while at the same time resulting in greater density in some areas. This alternative is infeasible in that it would not meet the housing needs or associated tax revenue and would not allow for vehicle access through open space areas. l —5— c.._._ am. • Alternative #4 - Creek-Oriented Alternative This alternative assumes a total of 280 dwelling units with a high number of multi-family units and a lower number of detached single-family units . This alternative assumes a large amount of grading and greater impact to woodland and riparian corridor areas. This alternative is infeasible in that it would allow for destruction of environmentally significant woodland and riparian habitat areas. The number of units and density is infeasible in that it would not be compatible with surrounding residential land uses. f) The City Council further has set forth a Statement of Overriding Considerations explaining the need to proceed with the project althou not all expected environmental effects may be mitigated or eliminated, which Statement is marked Attachment A-1 and is attached hereto as if fully set forth herein. g) The City Council hereby adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations , certifies that the Final EIR for the General Plan Amendment PA 87-045 is complete, with the mitigation measures, stipulations , corrections, and Overriding Considerations as included, and stipulates that the mitigation measures set forth in the Final EIR be incorporated in the implementation of the General Plan, as amended. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of February, 1989. AYES : Councilmembers Hegarty, Jeffery, Snyder, Vonheeder and May,_ Moffatt NOES : None ABSENT: None T40 •� Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk \5 -6- ADDENDUM TO HANSEN HILL RANCH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FEBRUARY 7, 1989 INTRODUCTION The State CEQA guidelines (California Administrative Code, Title 14, Section 15164) require preparation of an Addendum to an EIR under the following circumstances : (1) None of the conditions described in Section 15162 (subsequent EIR) calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. (A subsequent EIR is typically required if there are changes in the project which involve significant environmental impacts not addressed in the previous EIR or if significant new information is available) ; (2) Only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to make the EIR under consideration adequate under CEQA; and (3) The changes to the EIR made by the addendum do not raise important new issues about the significant effects on the environment. CEQA Guidelines indicate that the addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR. Additionally, the CEQA guidelines state that the decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR prior to making a decision on the project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION (IN DEIR AND FEIR) The Applicant revised the proposed project from the project evaluated in the DEIR completed on December 22, 1987. The Final EIR (FEIR) response to written comments dated May 16, 1988 includes a description of that revised project, which was again subsequently revised (December 28, 1988) . Figure 1 page 4 illustrates the revised land use designation plan for the Hansen Hill Ranch site. Figure 2 page 5 represents the Applicant's proposed site plan included on page 2-2 of the FEIR (revised from the plan included in the DEIR) . The purpose of this Addendum is to amend the FEIR description of the project. IA Ch A �: [Addendum to EIR] -44 s j �, A - Acdenc_un PROJECT DESCRIPTION (REVISED) The project consists of the following General Plan amendments: 1. Incorporate entire Hansen Hill Ranch project within primary planning area. 2. The Hansen Hill Ranch site (see Figure 1, page 4) General Plan Land Use Designation 57 .2 acres (58.5 gross acres) Low Density Single Family Residential (0.5 to 3.8 DU/Acre) ; 89.8 Acres open space stream corridor; for a total project site of 147 acres (148.3 gross acres) . 3. Amend Table 1, development policies for residential sites, page 8, and Figure 4 sites for housing development, page 9, eliminating Areas 5, 6 and 7 from the Table and Figure. 4. Amend General Plan policy and map with regard to Hansen Cri e extension (delete Hansen Drive Extension) . 5. Amend General Plan relating to alternate roadway serving project site (add collector street north from Dublin Boulevard through Valley Christian Center site) . 6. Amend General Plan relating to maximum acceptable level of service (LOS) for major street intersections (add policy establishing LOS D as maximum) . 7. Amend General Plan relating to fire protection buffer zone (add policy requiring fire protection buffer zone around perimeter of residential development adjacent to undeveloped open space land) . 8. Amend General Plan relating to open space maintenance to include the following policies: 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 manazement 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.". _ 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 -2- [Addendum to EIR] 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." REVISED PROJECT (COMMENTS) The revised project eliminates residential development within oak/bay woodland areas, riparian habitat stream corridor areas and areas of 30% or greater slopes . However, the revised project allows roadways through designated open space areas with minimal grading. Conceptual project circulation is modified eliminating the need for the previously proposed separate off-site emergency access north of the project site. The revised project significantly reduces the impacts to the oak/bay woodland and stream corridor riparian vegetation areas from the impacts which would occur with the previous proposed plan. However, some impacts to these areas will still occur with roadways traversing designated open space areas . The revised project reduces the density range to 0.5 - 3.3 DU/Acre resulting in a reduced maximum unit yield possible for the site (222 DU based upon gross acreage of 58.5 acres) . -3- [Addendum to EIR] • Ii,•/./ 1 .......... .,.....;.............. .7:7..% 'awar2:4•1V• •/// / 1 l'71 6 ' .:1;.,,..;,1.3- 7--. e-sp\ i, ‘;,.,_,• , 1 _•:..:..: >` .,;_:-. S;"!''/. / fit! ih�!%I • ,' _ •7�'- 'd.-..-�T11 r�{i_�..• •�:::.". 1i,•'••Vi �/,. „ - 'li5 4� Y f} 'IP,.1.4i(,t "/l . .. ;;,. I / "':„ t ••r'/''// . �'••1•I C C,� °'J mat •^• .I;,s'M• I;' I 1 ',`•r�.(` l ;Jr `�4`..�7.,; i� � .� �•}L)"/,(� i t l• I I I t t �r• `a sue, n_ rl t:d :� .,J'j. ,, %,' /r ' '�• / 1 � t `t "N'• // f 1, �V.��;� ":�G�.'��'�t 4:\�iC ��%�r;••�j / J j .1'- r Ie I!1 1 i II I' i� . L r C/�1 +`•. -�•\� t' ht . iy • iv t ' t F. ,'r,= 1 `t" ••,_:•:In (I > - .1 '-•:--=sC' =?' 11....515i; '`rI 'k c — • • • 72 %:fly • /,,:r �_Y ,F? , •1.I --. ` ‘-.• /•c : �+/tom •/•..��, • • S r7--i.= �� �:J/ f1 4. • C /..� 4' 1 >C./% - .i I .:— _O;J : � IQ VI • r"rt' •:'},�/� CI >1- I; • 0.2.--''•7 t' ',• tit:' •• n C' - -_ (ice• 4 _ r . • • I rj1 • t, r 1 • lI7.._ 1 r- -,: 1 4.i:•-•-'.‘'-.2.,:.s:••1••••':,;',-;";•• •••:•.:lifj.•,;•:.%';'74-:,F-7.L;•-•';l';'•;-t-'7•1•:.c.-7.1%-'4'.;41,'"•:••135:g4.r.ii?":••••-•-•'. . ..-.•-,- ,3„:•'..- •::•:;:%-:;•::••:;.i.••••-;:-..±.,;11•iti_ty-,r:i...;.* • l',:••••1,. i•.,:ji.X.,".-i),•••••.:.•'1'....,1.. 7.•...',;(1 's,,' 4r,‘ ti'....'•f:'•4;•."•''.• i.:...:'• ,•/".'.1•''•'3‘.••I:'. 70-41. ' .1,1,•':::•• ,• ...1 3'47•-...? 2.*• n*s• -•*-- •• •••.:•,• . . ... ..........."...„;J.,..,,.‘,• .,•...I.!.,....,....,,,. r•--, t..,......,..„/"..,,k•-,..,_,,3...1;41-z-...:.64::;;Za• .144., ,-",,,Zrze•••:•:..' •••:i. -3-1'74.- p -I,fol!"-..: ••••'•K. , t.-...-...•r...e. . ....... 7 ,-..:,,,..„„, ;,...),:),:4.,,•, .,,..:4--2..../..."..„2,1,,, . •- t, .,.,•,,...V....7.5.,.7 r• . ,,, ••:;,,j,.:,. .40,1;.....7.,,..,,,0 ")...,.,... . -.4;.*:-/.?.1:;11.-••177 li9.1%;:r7r7;..''',• -..f: ,. ... .‘....:••••••!,••••.; •:.•.',51,,,,5:i4-•-•:.;.•::,;:a..lex„'•''',.,...:,/-'' ,f. ', fis'..4r,-/-;,7.?Alf,a.t.i,-.• ••••4;1.•••.."."::.•lt,r,eriet;'7 '... *-77';.%/•- •'-':•••"1""':" '''-"•77'.".):;•,•';', ". •: -•" ,.-,--4•••.--e,''',.. ,'". "s •••• " -"t".... ' .'""C''''• •,i.e.-":.;,••••,•.7..1,....!.•.:,;'•,':.,.,i;;%-;.....;,;.'..!.1.:,.•.r•„-.",.;-;7..•-.!-/11.f-";•.T:::.:..•-;...,,''',,'„-.,';,i',)..,%...,:•,"•..•1'"..-;::''•'•%•.••-7.••.••;q;7,;.,„'4,4•.!.•_fr•,•,:--:"•-.•-,,-4.. -s,77(.A"0l y..x-".',,, .,.!1.,-..-•:e',:r..I'•V:•.•?•%•..-,•.-.2::.r•v.;;;:c.•;,?:•4:•:•:,•1•...;.'-..,...:•if..:•:...1i-...D'tf•../r,.f..•i.'„:-..-.,..:••••••9••-••-;-*•,•:"ar---!..-.-......-..„c.:-•.1..,,,,, ...". • _• _ f.. . ..._ - 7' : d . .. . .;•• .' ..--• ' - " 0 ...`4 •••i',:•i / , .. • • • ...•'1 t "t.; .7. ,, „ . ••:...• ....7.47i_. ..-t:ft• t. -..•••-• r•"•-I -1 ". • ri • •• ..-•,:,.:....„.-;„:,..,....i.„....;„.„,,.........i. ..ri › ...........„...,.... .,,. .:....,...?. .. ...-._..-. .. .e; . . .,, -_.. -_.../.1•••\.„, ,-',„,•, , o ...„. ..;:!•i.7,,,..•.....:••••„,....1.1..„,..,,..1":7.:,-,... .. ,...L.,...,:If.> •-1 •••:. •'•,•.•-•••3.•../• .....-.'•// -•.•:i. I',../ I I:I:••••....\_;,•,,, .,.y,.., i 1.•11---YT,2".'• sa.4..1...:•1 ;•;./.7' .•Z ...‘•-•• .: ;:/:::1:.'.::*!.:44!..-'7";•.';':.-7;:•3%":.--•".' ""re•;••••?:""::.)fi tA r".1,:•••••• •:•••1.-:i'' ZI':1/,;'s: •:.•;••••••:•1:.i •.. •.. -11•••:2 1. t I• i• - - • •!,-(.1..) • 1-...)-:-/' . ..' . • .7- :::,:• ...... •••,-........,',7--,-rr.....r....;;:,-,-;,..•.,,.!:-..,;olo 0 .,../.........,,. .i,..,,,... , .,..! ., ! „. ...,/,'....,:,, g.:.,..,,...,, „., , 1, ..... , i /I/ ....../..-,,, .,.. .....u.) --..:...,-,-..i......1.-.......7.-.,.-;-.7..'r,';',:,-.:-...!'...7:•:-...,:, •,...,,,;,...•.:..i 7.,,..z r, ... p:4,-;.:.• '''.',".'.' .;,••• r ,-,iy• e-,,,<- 1.. -2...a.3---•,. 1./,%. •4.,...-.... ,--• . ,:-.•-‘:-......-_,- ::?•-id,.,•-i,,,....'::.--....--,., .-.;1 - 7 :••••.'.,,," •::7'..",7 i••' - A r/.....„••••i•s" • --- .b.'7.1 ..........3•'•.--•:/. Z.-‘, :j f•3/. : r- _,. . _ ... ......,.:...:,./,..,...:-:.....•;-.••, :. . 2. - "...•.--•:•• '• •'.• • •! •/••• /: •7'• ifq I ••<.- ' -.7-'7-* •'. r•,-,- • •..,- :)----/ •1 . ... :.:.--..:-.-...':......,',.)...:,[...:.•,..-...;•;::::......•...-..-...:-..._I ?-_, . .,., .,',..•/:7., ..,.........,.. y., .r. 1. -•••\;...21 C.:::..).1 f-• ---,,,",..',-:4 , - i 0?) ,1 I C ";;.: ••'• :-:.•:‘-. :."-.• •'......",;-•.'. .7.•."-: •••-• '; ..' r- - ..' ,:•'!•'• .. .-', •';•''': f I.:-7':-.'./f. -I-A: •t- I .:-.'' -...' ' i t;--I ..--' i •-• il':• t • .'••.• • •I'/ •‘:•1 e jr-.....7-•)•-• f rriao•r• n!,,,. 7. A '' P•••••,• ..•• • , • ../••••• • /• I fr•••,,./. 3:•,."-:..!... •-.:' .....,.,-:..:.:.:-...i....7...-..'i..':...-Lz-.:-:.-.:.'...:.:...:.......7'"•;'•,.."•-:.•! II (:--:.,. !,'-• . :'..-•• •-"",,7:..,":;i•/7r/tg;..'C...i:- -1.,..i•: •f••... . 1 1--- N- ,1, - ,), I ,t- S-.•ff\ ....1;1"*;'''‘.•::•••i ''.--...., ,*... ...• •••., ..% ..."•.,•:'.. ','r....-:...;• .. •' ..... I : ift , . i ..., ../•,•,• iii•li,,--./ .1(./... •-.1 •1\'.1 e--...%.:) \?: "C .e.', ,,- i. • ,,•-•.:Ntli•••••-• k ',-4__-....- , ., • .- •..-,......;::...,.- -.,.;; . .!•:„. .: • •-- :: ; ; '. `. • ...„ if• .1C.;I-9 ,!', 1,:)•:.-- il 7 'I .....1 ' • ••.. ....•,.:-'•:•';f:'..•:.:-...•: . ••:.•'• • • ' . /... : ; .., ..• .. .•'''j.' i AV 1)-r•i . C.' 1 I ;•-•'1-,'ri ..... ,, ., , ....;;,.;•:...':.•.„:„.-.....,: ••;,,••••.,:.., ••••••• ....-....• 1 !: !if:Y.1 9 :••;...4)..c.q.... . X i 7..i-i 0 IS ?:. /;•• .:- ......., . •:••.;:••••••:::,::' •:.''. ••• : : t'• ./ i t t • :! il' !a,..!--•,„.-;•,?4 L.:,..•: i -- • . - ••••.• -Ir. ..c._. _i• ---;,,T...--,:,--t-t: 1 ' ...) 1 a I /.,N% 1-.1... ,.. :-4';'-'...' ,e--:•, ";•:•,.-.A.,.-?;.-e-___.- •;'•A. A• . . . . . . . .• . .. ... - 1 , . , -- P• --4 ',-, "-=-';5= .1 . /.1 3)7'/';_.et'. . ... . .........•• ,. • •. . - •., r "-- Pk1.9••• ,,,o- :-...-;1:... - i•/.. .7.'-; i .. , .,. .... . . . i 3. ..• . ... •:••..... .':'...:.%. ::•• ' ; :*. ‘3 %:‘ 1. 4: • : • 1.:-:.i/ 1 f . •• ••• (...)-',.."...i-:?I /. . , ..- ....--,---..,:;:.s.--:: . • •••••••. :.. i 1.; j .; f! ! •,.- !ii.'.:;;.r2-,tri.; r. -1.g: f 0-•• 1 '. • -.. - ••••• .... • ••_•... .. : i; i ...i.• • ....1:....hr:= ,--; •,J '-----,.-- ,.. ,. • •t t:.. . .... -c, .. • . ••••-..,•..•:,.....,..,-;.r...; .;s-•.., 1: / , ,•;.,.,./ 7 ;.:3, ....,-: Z.-..:(t..: .:•14..A.:. v.--...?qt.::••a 4•••-....2../..r-i-1.3.1 • .• - . ::.• , .. •','..• . 't • : :'.,:•' ' . . ',''.4.•••-• -.., . -•• •- / ".-7 1 I rr,L, ::'; • : !. ••-. ....F..•.•.!...,:- , .*•!... .-- -. : •:':•! , ••• • •1••/•-•71--r% .' ' ' L.,./..*:'''':'•I • • '"••''. i'-'- C.. . ...•. ... . •• , . ., 1/ .7-,/4 ;."1•• ••••• N.ZI;. ,-.1.,,,-• .- !t•1 .,..'.....;- -,1 . ..., ft:r.-, ,•.-,,...,•,,'w:•.•,..,-, .......-1.0.r,--, .4,;;; ./ ?:--7 ' . .. -;.•/•••c--',' -..:.<--r,•- r .. ..,,... 7 1 .. • .,,://..•,1/4:, 1,,.._•/......c•••,,__ ,.....ry., „ .7:.1..,•0 e, ,..... ,--,...---../...z. ..\--.3 .i,.._ , . ,4,i) ;----7„(--.......-• -.....'":.--). •,..--,•.T. .f.,...... ..„.•i.y. i C„..i• .I. .,.,y•-••f.-- -•!'••.•,"•••• ••••-•......,-(k- .• .-e 1 ::.-(..• ,‘N--.. .......'s •••-•i. -,' '' - •/--:1--7-,.,•. • .. .\_,y/. I. ▪ ..i.::••••(.,i • t i .. :•. > I T.8.1/1. =•••-•-...,--, • ..-••,c-- •-•7, ./" • I '-' ,....,,...-• ."......... c.... . r.ra , .,: 1; I. •, -.r,,,,.‘i"77.-"...J',.....") '' ..--:......",e ▪ • ,• • .- i../:•.. :.• .• -1 .....•"•• •1••-••••-,3ZZ•Lr-7: ?•-•.31. -C -s- -1 ‘ .... ..., ....... -. .-.. ,. /•-••.I al 1,,,-••.•.!'•''.1 11__:::••••....1 .....,",.."....,•!, 7.."II. ;- : I .•••...s. r '-:-,'- r7f ,.n.:J) I: \-1. ' 0 r..•....-% ., .-I,...,- •r•: •t, s'-‘-.7-•-!- ' • c • M ... - f•.• -, J •1: • .. .1•-• ,,,,--..-!:-."?-1= 1 ' ‘•517.: 7.- . - ----' , - - j --,• • '' I.i' . ..."--,-- '-0••- •-•N:•. .....- 1 •:: "N • r ..• . . . .. , •.. • 'l '..11 t:....--:-• •-•• • ; • •i'-1 )1 (.7 \... i: - • ... -.• -r 7,›---•N I 1 3... • , r'.....-. .. l's - il,. ,,,;----...• • •1,: • ,./. r•-"".1. i. (c......) -'..•.., C . .' • .,:. • • > '`:•:::,1-14 -...../:3 f•••••-•• 1.': - • ....: _•• f r.7. . • i' ' Z ."'"'s:2 IA - I 1„ ••,..:• . i l 7. • r, "7-• • !----. --z-=..,•• ' _ r- i•••••,s-r;is:, '•;:,.^i_ 1 -< .-:-- - -- "."‘••••.:1, ..-.•••••7' c-: -"N .1...:L-3' . • - I. .. _: • • 1...' . :7 7•:-;--:. :.; 1--........ '-••• • 3.: ••‘,. :".7,...--. • -•- .7.. 1. ...Z, :-:;1 : r-.•--..7.".:-.,n,.- ."-.t_ 't,, - • ...'.."-- . -- ,.. . I; -.-.•• :..-i •-.7..-.::--.7..",. ::,_ r--; ....-k i s ', . ..-"a-.::.; "7.7,'. :--".-_-..- • ,...., •,--1..• i-- l••- - „:-_, I '... --....;,.::: 1.•..r: c 1:, %..,. .-:„. 1, • L.':7! C.:),, ';" ;•:-.: .`'Ilk,- e 1- 1.--.-.-- .-,--.. -..--•' .::,\.:--• - ,, :..._. -,. ,.:.. A- •N'..„ ,;cr..:•1 _,.--....: . • p",7-7..L.,r t:; S 1,\.'..-.•- , ,• I -..•i .• -.. r•:•-••••••• 2/. I:i“:.•-•''' I •.';:-J I" ...1 ,;---'7"• . LC.-- -`_,___,_.. --:-..zs.;--•';:--. . • • • I" •-...;:.-.- - --21i ) ! -- . _• . -,/I •_ 1 t . . :l C.,---*.V7: ( • 1-\: • . . V 1.e., ..c-•:.-‘_ ••• . • . . ,•••-...:---:-.• .7 a-r-•::--:•^Z.3 ..•<- , F1 - L-.-..?,• -•.3.. ....-z..:.,1 . -• - • 1 ,-,- ;\', -- •:- -- ' - - \Z V., , ..•/,-- C..:-:•- 'V, ',- . •„ ,% ,•. ..-‘. /.3-1%. .,.-•-.A-\-%• 7 • ,.. \C.,..: *-- r:••;,-,,-:". -- •cl. 3..;(S.; ,,,• • ‘-.) s1,1 : 9•••:.r...A.' .:". r.' ..1 -. '.7 V: r 1 ' . . ‘..i.'' la '''' ,4% .: ...1 :•i'", •f.....--.3NZ7) ".- ' .:1./ '' :. ...:r. T. ... •••,... :L.'''.•I .:f•,.:I ..:•.., • II; .: ..... - ••••'*t ‘•-• .1- 1.7 .: ;•li• _z • • 1'.....,_ •-•4•. .-7,-,,,-,--.:::_-7.-_.j.-•••••7;.•:• 7. .. . , 1 ‘.....::7 ...";-c.?",::::.:•,....'..--..;• 1 5 _ - '--; 1- .Z..?:.....r........`71 t• ,; .. . .0 I ea.. i ..'-::.:-'7-.-•t:• . a -. 1 . . 1 =•..• r-:'....,"--1)...",--*:•-----' •.- li .__.•••••-•:---1/4, ---- ,-.-- -1 - ,: ••••• i 1.-•• - -••-.!---, ,,0-•-•• .• : - -1. --...•-' • 7"; "/".;:.t'CZ.;.:.4..' ','".....'. • L - -...•:_v_ri:......--.::.---.., ; ,r:•• : , ...: A•:-. s tL_-_..i.,- ..•:1•`,.-:' 1 I - i•'..•-• ...-.7.0.,-,-. .11 , 1 , - . I •.:. • • • ••• . . . • , F a s e 5 • . . • . 1 F,.‘ ,-•(:)0 i-;•'.1.2.- r'''' ),_C), • . •-••••-•• •.: ........„„,...... . . •. .• . ., 1 .1 . • •. . ATTACHMENT A-2 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS HANSEN HILL RANCH GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PA 87-045 The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that the Lead Agency balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risk in determining whether to recommend approval of the project. If the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable" . Vnere the decision of the Lead Agency would allow the occurrence of significant which are identified in the Final EIR but are not a_ least substantially mitigated, the Lead Agency is required to state in ____ the specific reasons to support its action based on the Final EIR and/or other information in the record. Such statement will be included in the record of the project approval. The following unavoidable environmental impacts are associated with the proposed Hansen Hill Ranch General Plan Amendment PA 87-045 as identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the project, consisting of the document entitled Draft Environmental Impact Report dated December 1987 and Final Addendum Responses to Comments on Draft EIR dated May 16, 1983 and Addendum to Hansen Hill Ranch EIR dated February 7, 1989. .::ese impacts canto= be mite _teed to acceptable levels or avoided through changes C_ alterations to the basic project: Oak/Bat Wocdlands and R_car_an Corridor Impact_: The grading. for road-.a':s through open space areas (oafcav woodland and riparian corridor areas) will reduce habitat value and result in re.:.Cva. or potential damage or individual trees. The primary areas in which potential habitat disturbance will occur is in the northwestern portion of the project site, and within the southeastern portion of the si to i n the vicinity cf Martin Canyon Creek. The specific impacts of roadway grading will be determined during review of detailed grad.g plans c- will be required for consideration of the Subdivision Map. 'Impacts arc anticipated to be minimized through compliance with the General P1_7 Amendment policy requiring roadways through open space areas to be designed to minimize grading to the maximum extent possible so as not tc damage the ecological or aesthetic value and characteristics of the C_ space. The City Council has considered the_ public record on the proposed Plan Amendment and does determine that the adoption and implementation of t'e General Plan Amendment PA S7-045 would result in the following substantial public benefits: 1. The adverse environmental impacts to the oak/'oay woodland and riparian habitat corridor are considered "acceptable" as the public saIety an;1 welfare benefit of providing vehicular and emergency access on site, outweighs the potential adverse" environmental impacts to the oak/bay wood l t:&S and : .,- t n p riparian habitats. g [CC Reso EIR 2/27/S91 zn.. OVLI'llWJ& G°nds�c -a K �� - ` -1 •.I- 1, : The General Plan Amendment would provide for needed housing . • • consistent with the housing element of the General Plan. • 3. The General Plan Amendment would provide economic benefits for to community in terms of potential increased tax revenues. • The City Council has weighed the above benefits of the proposed General Plan Amendment against its unavoidable environmental risks and adverse environmental effects identified in the Final EIR and hereby determines that those benefits outweigh the risks and adverse environmental effects and therefore further determines that these risks and adverse environmental are "acceptable" . • • • • } [CC Reso EIR 2/27/S91 -2- o!a k ltfif J/(va,,64 p,L /lc, 6 1 ' C%-:- 2 /f3/I7/7f v2c& J(4-) / T- / ir !- - / W /J 4 / z(%j;-- 7771q - l 7- -;-- ;—f r 0 G/< 4 \JC v /LD (-2A-) 4-' /6 /-A v-s: . �. 4 trz" , /. A—%J f� �� c4 4vt. v/ c e:dr ,4// /7` //N.-) 4 L C- j"J ` V " / - . �� 1 - ()47-E ? r 737ti i2 /0/ 4_0 Cif RECEIVED MAR 2i1995 ATTAC I-(M EDIT 6 . JBLIN PLANNINV