HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-023 Appeal of Bryant Deck
AGENDA STATEMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: September 14, 2004
SUBJECT:
ATTACHMENTS:
RECOMMENDATION:
PUBLIC HEARING: PA 04-023, Appeal of Zoning
Administrator Approval of Bryant Deck Conditional Use Permit
for Amendment to a Planned Development District, P A 95-030.
Report Prepared by: Pierce Macdonald, Associate Planner ~
1.
2.
Resolution Affinning Zoning Administrator Approval
Letter Received August 13,2004 Appealing Zoning
Administrator Decision of August 9,2004
Zoning Administrator Staff Report, without Attachments, for
August 9, 2004
Zoning Administrator Public Hearing Minutes for August 9,
2004
Project Plans
Staff Analysis of Site Plan
City Council Resolution 12-96
Site Photographs
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
1.
2.
3.
Open the Public Hearing;
Hear the Staff Presentation;
Take testimony from the Appellants, the Applicant and the
public;
Question Staff, the Public, the Applicant and the Appellants
and close the public hearing; and,
Adopt the attached resolution (Attachment 1) affinning the
Zoning Administrator's decision thereby denying the Appeal
and affinning the Conditional Use Pennit to amend Planned
Development District regulations (P A 95-030) to allow
construction of a two-story rear yard deck; or
a. The Planning Commission may detennine that the Zoning
Administrator's action be affinned with modifications and
direct Staff to prepare a resolution affinning the Zoning
Administrator's decision with modifications; or
b. The Planning Commission may detennine that the Zoning
Administrator's decision be reversed and direct Staff to
prepare a resolution reversing the Zoning Administrator's
decision and denying the Conditional Use Pennit
application.
4.
5.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G:IP A#\2004104-023 Bryant DeckIPC AppeallPCstaffreportDOC
COPIES TO: Applicant
In-House Distribution
ITEM NO.
'11
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Background:
On January 23, 1996, the City Council adopted Resolution 12-96, which established Planned
Development provisions for Dublin Ranch Phase I, P A 95-030 (included as Attachment 7). This
Resolution established minimum setbacks, minimum lot sizes, height limits and other design standards for
the Phase I area. Maximum lot coverage standards were not explicitly addressed within the provisions of
the Planned Development text. All conventional residential zoning districts (i.e., R-l) are regulated by
Section 8.36.020(A) of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance which stipulates that the maximum lot coverage for
a single-story residence is 40% and for a two-story home, 35%. Maximum lot coverage is the area of a
parcel that may be covered with buildings and structures.
Over time, subdivision applications were submitted and approved by the City, which established the lots
within this area. Subsequent individual Site Development Review (SDR) applications for the design of
the homes within each subdivision were approved by the Planning Commission.
On December 10, 2002, the Planning Commission approved a minor amendment to the PD District by
means of a Conditional Use Pennit (CUP), PA 02-059, to allow an increase in the maximum lot coverage
requirement, as there was a discrepancy between the zoning regulations for the subdivision and the actual
lot coverage of the homes. The minor amendment defined the PD District's maximum lot coverage
requirement as the existing lot coverage approved under the SDR application for each of the individual
lots. The Planning Commission staff report also explained that those residences that desired to expand
beyond the lot coverage approved by the SDR and Zoning Ordinance would be required to obtain a
Conditional Use Pennit, which would allow Staff the opportunity to evaluate the proposal in context with
the overall design of the proposed addition and in context to the impacts to the adjacent residences.
On August 9, 2004, the Community Development Director, in his role as Zoning Administrator, held a
public hearing for the Bryant Deck CUP application to amend the lot coverage requirements for a home at
3122 Colebrook Lane in the Dublin Ranch Phase I Stone Crest neighborhood. The Applicant, Mr.
Anthony Bryant, requested the Zoning Administrator's approval to build a second-story deck to the rear of
his home and increase the maximum allowable lot coverage for his property pennitted in the development
standards of PD District P A 95-030. The proposed second-story deck would be 8 feet deep and 11 feet
wide with an area of 88 square feet. The project would increase the lot coverage of the home from a lot
coverage of 41.4% to 43% (a change of 1.6%). The Zoning Administrator approved the Conditional Use
Pennit, subject to Conditions of Approval, pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 8.32.080. The issues
reviewed by the Director are outlined in the staff report prepared for the Zoning Administrator's public
hearing (included as Attachment 3) and in the section below, entitled "Zoning Administrator Hearing and
Action. "
An appeal of the Zoning Administrator's decision was filed by Kevin and Angi Queenan, the adjacent
neighbors at 3120 Colebrook Lane, with the Dublin City Clerk on August 13, 2004, pursuant to the
requirements of Chapter 8.136, Appeals, of the Zoning Ordinance. The Queenans received notice of the
August 9th public hearing, but did not attend. The Appellants' letter appealing the Zoning
Administrator's decision is included as Attachment 2 and discussed in the section below, entitled
"Grounds for the Appeal."
2
ANAL YSIS:
The site, 3122 Colebrook Lane, is located near North Bridgepointe Lane, within the Stone Crest
neighborhood (L-5) of Dublin Ranch Phase I. The subject lot is 5,559 square feet. Two single-family
homes are located on either side of the site and the rear property line of the property is adjacent to a stream
corridor which follows Fallon Road. The home is a traditional, two-story frame house with white
clapboard siding.
The project would increase the lot coverage of the home by 1.6% and amend the PD lot coverage above
that allowed by the existing CUP, as the two-story deck would increase the building's footprint and lot
coverage calculations. Section 8.32.080 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance provides the ability for the
Community Development Director to make minor amendments to adopted Development Plans upon the
finding that the amendment substantially complies with the provisions of the Planned Development
District. Pursuant to the purposes and intent of the Planned Development District and the requirements of
CUPs, Chapter 8.100, the finding that the proposed use was compatible with other land uses,
transportation and service facilities in the vicinity was made by the Community Development Director in
approving the CUP.
Zoning Administrator Hearing and Action:
At the August 9, 2004 public hearing, infonnation was presented to the Zoning Administrator which
evaluated the project's confonnance with the Zoning Ordinance and PD requirements related to lot
coverage and other impacts (the Staff Report is included as Attachment 3 and Minutes, as Attachment 4).
The presentation reviewed the following issues: design and massing of the structure; possible adverse
impacts to privacy relative to the project; and, the safety of persons using the added feature. The Applicant
spoke in support of the project and no one spoke in opposition. There was one neighbor who observed the
meeting but did not speak in support or opposition to the project. In addition, no comments or objections
were received by Staff from any interested party prior to the public hearing.
The Zoning Administrator found that the proposed use was compatible with adjacent land uses because, as
conditioned, the deck was compatible with the architectural design of the residence and neighborhood, the
deck would be constructed pursuant to the Building Division requirements, and any potential impacts to
the privacy of other residents in the neighborhood had been addressed with the orientation and size of the
deck. These issues are analyzed in detail, as follows below.
DesÙzn and Massinz:
The proposed structure would be frame construction with a traditional balustrade or railing on the top (see
elevation entitled Deck Front View in Project Plans, Attachment 2). It would have a height of 10 feet and
a 42-inch balustrade or railing. The deck would be painted white to match the home. There are no
residential uses to the rear of the property as it is adjacent to a stream corridor and Fallon Road. The deck
would be visible from persons in the homes or rear yards located at 3120 and 3126 Colebrook Lane,
respectively, on either side of the subject address. The homeowners of these neighboring residences
reviewed the proposed plans and signed the Applicant's Dublin Ranch Homeowners' Association design
review application, which was approved by the Association.
Two draft Conditions of Approval were included in the Resolution attached to the Zoning Administrator
Staff Report to ensure that the deck's construction was consistent with the quality of the existing home and
residential neighborhood (also included in the draft Resolution, Attachment 1). Condition 1 required that
3
any lighting ofthe deck be directed away from adjacent properties. Condition 2 required that the design be
reviewed by the Dublin Ranch Homeowner's Association prior to issuance of a building pennit, as the
design had been slightly changed since the Association's earlier approval, to ensure that the deck remained
consistent with the area's architectural style.
Privacy:
Staff reviewed the privacy impacts of the proposed deck design in relation to the adjacent, single-family
homes located at 3120 and 3126 Colebrook Lane. A site plan of the home and the adjacent properties is
included as Attachment 6, Staff Analysis of Site Plan. Photographs of the elevations of the homes that
face the proposed deck are included as Attachment 8.
Two (2) windows on the south elevation of the home at 3126 Colebrook Lane face the proposed deck at an
angle. The distance from the deck to these windows is approximately 53 feet. These windows are part of
the Master Bedroom Suite of the home, which includes five (5) windows that do not face the proposed
deck. On the opposite side of the subject home at 3120 Colebrook Lane, there is one (1) window on the
north elevation of the home that faces the proposed deck. The distance from the deck to this window is
approximately 25 feet. This window is part of the Master Bedroom Suite of the home, which includes five
(5) windows that do not face the proposed deck.
From the analysis shown in Attachment 6, it was concluded that the impacts to the privacy of adjacent
homeowners would be minimized by the small size of the deck. The eight-foot depth of the deck would
limit the site lines of persons using the deck because a person looking at the adjacent properties on either
side would not have a very limited view into the rooms. The distance of the deck from adjacent properties
also would decrease the visibility of the interior of these homes. No homes would directly face the deck
along the rear property line.
Safety:
The Building and Safety Division reviewed the application and detennined that a Building Pennit was
required to construct the second-story deck to maintain minimum health and safety standards. As part of
the CUP, the Building and Safety Division recommended that the following requirements be made
conditions of the project's approval and were included in the Zoning Administrator Resolution as
Condition 16 (also included in the draft Resolution included with this staff report as Attachment 1):
· Detailed infonnation on construction and any electrical wiring and/or equipment associated with
the deck structure shall be required; and
· Engineered drawings and calculations for the deck structure shall be required.
Grounds for the Avveal:
On August 13,2004, an appeal was filed with the City of Dublin City Clerk by the adjacent neighbors,
Kevin and Angi Queenan, consistent with the requirements of Zoning Ordinance Chapter 8.136, Appeals.
In the appeal letter, included as Attachment 2, the Queenans stated that their grounds for the appeal, which
are summarized as follows:
A. The Appellants received a copy of the plans for a second-story addition and a second-story
deck but were not verbally instructed that the project included a second-story deck. They
signed the plans prior to the Homeowner Associations design review process without
reviewing all of the plans.
4
B. The project will depreciate the real estate value of the Appellant's home.
C. The project will have adverse impacts on the privacy of the Appellant's home as the homes
are separated by 10 feet of space at the property line.
D. The architecture of the deck contrasts with existing development and will create an adverse
aesthetic impact as seen from Fallon Road (a distance of approximately 100 feet).
The following analysis addresses the main concerns raised by the Appellants, found in Paragraphs C. and
D. The issues raised in Paragraph A. do not have bearing on the project as the signature of neighbors is
not required pursuant to the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Additionally, the Appellants and all property
owners and residents within 300 feet of the project were notified ofthe Public Hearing 10 days prior to the
hearing as required by California State law and Zoning Ordinance Chapter 8.132, Notice and Hearings.
As evaluated above, there is one (1) window on the north elevation of the home at 3120 Colebrook Lane
that faces the proposed deck. The distance from the deck to this window is approximately 25 feet. This
window is part of the Master Bedroom Suite of the home, which includes five (5) windows that do not
face the proposed deck. The Zoning Administrator concluded that the impacts to the privacy of the
adjacent homeowners would be minimized by the small size of the deck. The eight-foot depth of the deck
would limit the sight lines of persons using the deck because a person looking at the adjacent properties on
either side would have a very limited view into the rooms. In addition, the Director concluded that the
distance of the deck from adjacent properties would minimize the visibility ofthe interior of these homes.
The Zoning Administrator also concluded, as is stated in the findings in Attachment 1, that the proposed
deck was consistent with the architectural style of the residence and neighborhood as it is painted and
constructed of the same colors and materials as the home, and as it was approved by the Dublin Ranch
Homeowners' Association design review process.
As described in the Appellants' letter, the issue of real estate depreciation found in Paragraph B. relates
directly to privacy, Paragraph C., and aesthetics, D., addressed above.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State guidelines and City
environmental regulations, require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impact and that
environmental documents be prepared. The project has been found to be Categorically Exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), according to Section 15301(1) because the project consists
of minor modifications to a residence on an existing developed lot; it is consistent with all General Plan
and Zoning regulations; and, it is currently served by all required utilities and public services.
CONCLUSION:
Under Section 8.l36.060.D, the Planning Commission may affinn or affinn in part to uphold the Zoning
Administrator's decision, or reverse the decision of the Zoning Administrator to deny the CUP. The
findings for the Planning Commission's action affinning or reversing the Zoning Administrator's decision
must identify the reasons for the action on the appeal, and verify the compliance or non-compliance ofthe
subject of the appeal with the provisions of Chapter 8.136, Appeals. The Resolution to affinn the Zoning
Administrator's decision to approve the CUP is included as Attachment 1. Should the Planning
5
Commission detennine that the decision should be reversed, the Planning Commission may indicate its
reasons for doing so by means of a straw vote. Staff would return at a later Planning Commission meeting
with a draft Resolution for reversal.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: open the Public Hearing; hear the Staff presentation;
take testimony from the Appellants, Applicant and the Public; question Staff, the Public, the Applicant
and the Appellants; close the public hearing; and, adopt the attached resolution affinning the Zoning
Administrator's decision thereby denying the Appeal and affinning the Conditional Use Pennit to amend
Planned Development District regulations (P A 95-030) to allow construction of a two-story rear yard deck
(Attachment 1); or
a. The Planning Commission may detennine that the Zoning Administrator's action be affinned
with modifications and direct Staff to prepare a resolution affinning the Zoning
Administrator's decision with modifications; or
b. The Planning Commission may detennine that the Zoning Administrator's decision be
reversed and direct Staff to prepare a resolution reversing the Zoning Administrator's
decision and denying the Conditional Use Pennit application.
G:IP A#12004104-023IAppeaIIPCStaff Report.doc
6
GENERAL INFORMATION:
PROJECT:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
APPLICANT:
PROPERTY OWNERS:
LOCATION:
APN:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
EXISTING ZONING
AND LAND USE:
PUBLIC HEARING: P A 04-023, Appeal of Zoning Administrator
Approval of Bryant Deck Conditional Use Pennit for Amendment to
Planned Development District P A 95-030.
The Applicant, Mr. Anthony Bryant, is requesting a Conditional Use
Pennit to allow a second-story rear yard deck that will exceed
maximum lot coverage requirements of P A 95-03, pursuant to
Section 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The project has been found to be Categorically Exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), according to Section
15301(1) because the project consists ofa minor modification to an
existing residence on a developed lot.
Mr. Anthony Bryant
Mr. Anthony Bryant and Mrs. Windy Bryant
3122 Colebrook Lane, Dublin, CA 94568
APN 985-0011-040
Low Density Residential (0.0 to 6.0 units per acre)
Planned Development 95-030
7
RESOLUTION NO. 04 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
AFFIRMING ZONING ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS OF PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT PA 95-030 FOR A SECOND-STORY DECK LOCATED AT
3122 COLEBROOK LANE, (ANTHONY BRYANT, PA 04-023)
WHEREAS, the Applicant, Mr. Anthony Bryant, has requested a Conditional Use Pennit to establish
a second-story rear yard deck with a minor amendment and increase to maximum lot coverage of 1.6% at
3122 Colebrook Lane, APN 985-0011-040, in Planned Development District, P A 95-030; and
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State guidelines
and City environmental regulations require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impact and
that environmental documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, the project has been found to be Categorically Exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), according to Section 15301(1) because the project consists of minor
modifications to an existing residence in a developed lot; it is consistent with all General Plan and Zoning
regulations as amendments to regulations of Planned Developments are allowed pursuant to Zoning
Ordinance Section 8.32.080; and, it is currently served by all required utilities and public services; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator, represented by the Community Development Director, held a
properly noticed public hearing on said application on August 9, 2004; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator did hear and consider all said reports, recommendations and
testimony set forth and did adopt Resolution 04-05 approving P A 04-023, the Anthony Bryant Conditional
Use Pennit; and
WHEREAS, on August 13,2004, Kevin and Angi Queenan appealed the decision of the Zoning
Administrator to the Planning Commission and requested reversal of the Zoning Administrator decision;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing in consideration of the appeal on
September 14, 2004; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Staff report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission make a
detennination based on the provisions of Chapter 8.136, Appeals, of the Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all said reports, recommendations, and
testimony hereinabove set forth and used their independent judgment to make a decision; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission hereby
affinns the decision of the Zoning Administrator to approve the Anthony Bryant Deck Conditional Use
ATTACHMENT 1
Pennit, P A 04-023, to amend the Planned Development District P A 95-030 to allow an increase in allowable
maximum lot coverage of approximately 1.6% to construct a second-story rear yard deck, and makes the
following findings and detenninations to deny said appeal:
1. Consistent with the standards and intent ofthe Zoning Ordinance Development Regulations,
the Purposes of Single-Family Residential Districts, and the requirements of Conditional Use
Pennits, the proposed deck is compatible with other land uses, transportation and service
facilities in the vicinity; will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or
working in the vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare; will not be
injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood; because the project shall consist
of a 88-square- foot deck with a total increase of 1.6% in maximum lot coverage;
2. The project will have adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation, and public
utilities and services to ensure that it would not be detrimental to the public health, safety and
welfare; and the site is physically suitable for the type, density and intensity of the use and
related structures being proposed as the two-story deck is an architectural feature on an
existing lot that is typical of architectural features found in quiet, family-living residential
environments.
3. As conditioned, the proposed deck shall be constructed in a traditional architectural style that
is consistent with the style of the home and neighborhood and all lighting of the deck shall be
directed away from adjacent properties (Conditions 4 and 5);
4. Possible adverse impacts to the privacy of adjacent neighbors have been addressed by the
limited size and angle of the deck and the distance of the deck from adjacent properties;
5. As conditioned, the ApplicantlProperty Owner shall be required to obtain a Building Pennit
prior to commencement of construction; and
6. The amendment substantially complies with and does not materially change the provisions or
intent of the adopted Planned Development Zoning District Ordinance ofthe site as it is an
increase to allow an outdoor deck with no increase is habitable floor area.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby approve
P A 04-023, Conditional Use Pennit, to allow a second-story deck with increase maximum lot coverage of
1.6% located at 3122 Colebrook Lane, APN 985-0011-040, as depicted on Attachment 5 of the Staff Report,
stamped approved and on file. The project approval shall be subject to compliance with the following
conditions:
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to the issuance of building
pennits or establishment of use, and shall be subiect to Planning Department review and approval. The
following codes represent those departments/agencies responsible for monitoring compliance ofthe
Conditions of Approval: rpL.l Planning, rBl Building, rpOl Police, rpWl Public Works rADMl
Administration/City Attorney, rFINl Finance, rFl Alameda County Fire Department, rDSRl Dublin San
Ramon Services District, rCOl Alameda County Department of Environmental Health.
2
Lighting. Exterior lighting shall be of a design and placement
so as not to cause glare onto adjoining properties. Lighting
used after daylight hours shall be minimized to provide for
securit and safet needs onl .
Architectural Design. The design of the deck shall be in PL
general confonnance with the design shown in Attachment 2
of the Staff Report. Additionally, the Applicant shall receive
approval of the design from the Dublin Ranch Homeowner's
Association rior to the issuance of build in ennits.
Exterior colors and materials. Exterior colors and materials PL
for all structures shall be subject to final review and approval
by the Community Development Director, shall be shown on
construction plans, and shall be compatible with those of the
residence.
GENERAL CONDI1'IONS
4. Modifications or changes. Modifications or changes to this
Conditional Use Pennit approval may be considered by the
Community Development Director, if the modifications or
changes proposed comply with Section 8.104.090, of the
Zoning Ordinance.
NO.
CONDITION TEXT
PLANNING
1.
2.
3.
5. Term. Approval of the Conditional Use Pennit shall be valid
for one year from the effective date of the approval. If
construction has not commenced by that time, this approval
shall be null and void. The approval period for Conditional
Use Pennit may be extended six (6) additional months by the
Director of Community Development upon detennination that
the Conditions of Approval remain adequate to assure that the
above stated findings of approval will continue to be met.
Applicant/Developer must submit a written request for the
extension prior to the expiration date of the Conditional Use
Pennit.
6. Fees. ApplicantlDeveloper shall pay all applicable fees in
effect at the time of building pennit issuance, including, but
not limited to: Planning fees; Building fees; Dublin San
Ramon Services District Fees; Public Facilities Fees; Dublin
Unified School District School Impact fees; City Fire Impact
fees; Alameda County Flood and Water Conservation District
(Zone 7) Drainage and Water Connection fees; and any other
fees as required by the City according to Ordinance. Unissued
building penn its subsequent to new or revised fees shall be
subject to recalculation and assessment of the fair share of the
new or revised fees.
3
HOW IS
CONDITION
SATISFIED?
Standard
Prior to PL
Issuance
of
Building
Pennit
On-going Z.O.
PL
PL
Approval
of
Improv-
ement
Plans
through
comple-
tion
On-going
Various
Various
times but
no later
than
Issuance
of
Building
Pennits
Z.O.
Z.O.
Various
NO. CONDITION TEXT RESPON. J:'.l;;JJ1Jl"l . HþW·
AGENC¥l t
DEPARTw
7. Revocation/Compliance. The CUP shall be revocable for PL On-going Z.O.
cause in accordance with Section 8.96.020.1 of the Dublin
Zoning Ordinance. The Applicant/Property Owner shall
develop this project and operate all uses in compliance with
the Conditions of Approval of this Conditional Use Pennit
and the regulations established in the Zoning Ordinance. Any
violation of the tenns or conditions specified shall be subject
to enforcement action.
8. Required Permits. Applicant/Developer shall comply with Various Various Z.O.
the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance and obtain all necessary times, but
pennits required by other agencies (Alameda County Flood no later
Control District Zone 7, California Department ofFish and than
Game, Anny Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Issuance
Control Board, State Water Quality Control Board, Etc.) and of
shall submit copies of the valid pennits to the Department of Building
Public Works. Pennits
9. Building Codes and Ordinances. All project construction B Through UBC
shall confonn to all building codes and ordinances in effect at Completi
the time of building pennit issuance. on
10. Building permits. To apply for building pennits, the B,PL, Prior to cUP
Applicant shall submit construction plans to the Building PW Issuance
Department for plan check. Each set of plans shall have of
attached a copy of these Conditions of Approval, with Building
annotations indicating where on the plans or how the Pennits
condition is satisfied. The notations shall clearly indicate
how all Conditions of Approval will be complied with.
Construction plans will not be accepted without the annotated
conditions attached to each set of plans. The Applicant shall
be responsible for obtaining the approvals of all participating
non-City agencies prior to issuance of building pennits.
11. Dust Control/Cleanup. Applicant/Developer shall ensure PW On-going CUP
that areas undergoing grading and all other construction
activity are watered or other dust control measures are used to
prevent dust problems as conditions warrant or as directed by
the Director of Public Works. Furthennore,
Applicant/Developer shall keep adjoining public streets,
sidewalks and driveways free and clean of project dirt, mud,
materials and debris, and clean-up shall be made during the
construction period as detennined by the Director of Public
Works. In the event that the Applicant/Developer does not
complete the clean-up within 48 hours of City's direction, the
City has the option of perfonning the clean-up and charging
the costs of such clean-up to Applicant/Developer. The use of
any temporary construction fencing shall be subject to the
review and approval of the Public Works Director and the
Building Official.
4
NO.
CONDITION TEXT
12.
Hold Harmless/Indemnification. Applicant/Developer shall
defend, indemnify, and hold hannless the City of Dublin and
its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Dublin or its agents, officers, or
employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of
the City of Dublin or its advisory agency, appeal board,
Planning Commission, City Council, Director of Community
Development, Zoning Administrator, or any other department,
committee, or agency of the City the Conditional Use Pennit
to the extent such actions are brought within the time period
required by Government Code Section 66499.37 or other
applicable law; provided, however, that the
Applicant/Developer's duty to so defend, indemnify, and hold
hannless shall be subject to the City's promptly notifying the
Applicant/Developer of any said claim, action, or proceeding
and the City's full cooperation in the defense of such actions
or roceedin s.
PIRE PROTECTION
13. Applicable regulations and requirements. The
Applicant/Property Owner shall comply with all applicable
regulations and requirements of the Alameda County Fire
Department (ACFD), including payment of all appropriate
fees.
BUILDING AND SAFETY
14. Construction plans. Construction plans shall be fully
dimensioned (including structure elevations) accurately drawn
(depicting all existing and proposed conditions on site), and
prepared and signed by an appropriate design professional.
The site plan, landscape plan and details shall be consistent
with each other.
Hours of construction. All construction shall be limited to
take place between the hours of7:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except as otherwise approved by the
Director of Public Works. No work shall be done on the
weekends or holida s.
The following shall be required as part of the Building B
Bennit application review:
15.
16.
a. Provide detailed infonnation on any electrical wiring
and/or equipment associated with this deck structure.
b. Engineered drawings with calculations for the deck
structure shall be submitted with construction plans.
MISCELLANEOUS
17. Conversion to Other Use Prohibited. The deck shall not be PL
converted to habitable floor area or any other use without
prior approval of the Community Development Director
5
HOW IS
CONDITION
SATISFIED?
CUP
Through
completio
n of
Improve
ments
and
Occupanc
y of the
last
Building
F
F
B,PL,
PW
B,PL,
PW
Prior to CUP
Issuance
of
Building
Pennits
On-going CUP
Prior to CUP
Issuance
of
Building
Pennits
On-going PL
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 14th day of September 2004.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Planning Manager
04/04-023/ draftCUPreso. doc
6
\7.;
August 13, 2004
C' - A- cSL
() WI hi) ï'?S I çV\
City of Dublin Planning B:eJ¡;llflCm:
RECEIVED
AUG 1 3 2004
DUBliN PLANNING
°E-EiVf=t';;
'n. V~'!" _L
i, , ',:, ,3 ',} 11 r' "I ",:
I;, l . {.!lLI
Dear Sirs:
ony OF DUBLIN
I am writing to appeal/contest Project P A 04-023, a planned second story deck extension
on 3122 Colebrook Lane.
Several months ago, I was approached by my next-door neighbor, asking for my
signature on a change he was planning to make to the exterior of his property. I assume
he approached me in order to be in compliance with the Dublin Ranch CC&R's, which
stipulate an approval signature from all neighboring properties. When presented with the
request, rather than combing through the pages, I simply asked what they were planning
to do, to which they replied they were planning to build a room extension above the
garage in the front of the house. Since they were my neighbor, I took them for their
word, never assuming I was being mislead. Wanting to maintain a positive relationship,
and seeing no hann in the project as described, I signed the document.
Recently, I received a notice in the mail for a public hearing on said project, only now it
has come to light that the project includes the construction of a second story rear deck.
Had I known the original plan, I would never have agreed to sign it. I have since
discovered that I was not the only neighbor that was not told the complete story of the
actual intent of the project.
As you are probably aware, Dublin Ranch is a densely populated development, and our
houses are separated by a mere 10 feet. Although I am disappointed in my neìghbor for
misleadirlg me, I do not want my request to appeal this project to be misinterpreted as
some fonn of retribution. I am strictly considering the ramifications of this project from
a practical perspective, and cannot, in good conscience, agree with the construction of a
second story deck that I believe will result in a depreciation in the value of my property, a
complete invasion of my privacy and create a contrasting eyesore when viewed from
Fallon Road.
I apologize for not being present to appeal this during the hearing, but my job precluded
me. I trust you will consider my request and notify me of other information that you
might request from me. I can be reached at 925-875-1456.
SinGerely, /Î
1 ! , /
I'MV-v 0/Æ,(ffi,J4'~
Li¿týt 111{twl 'L v'
Kevin & ~gi Queenan
ATTACHMENT ;L
AGENDA STATEMENT
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING DATE: August 9, 2004
SUBJECT:
ATTACHMENTS:
RECOMMENDATION:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
PUBLIC HEARING: PA 04-023, Bryant Deck Conditional Use
Permit for Minor Amendment to Planned Development District
P A 95-030 Development Regulations~
Report prepared by: Pierce Macdonald, Associate Planner
1.
Resolution Approving Conditional Use Pennit for Minor
Amendment to Maximum Lot Coverage Requirements of
Planned Development District P A 95-030
Project Plans
Site Photographs
Site Plan of Project Vicinity
City Council Resolution 12-96
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Open Public Hearing and Hear Staff Presentation.
Take Testimony from the Applicant and the Public.
Question Staff, Applicant and the Public.
Close Public Hearing and Deliberate.
Adopt Resolution (Attachment 1) Approving the Conditional
Use Pennit for Minor Amendment to Maximum Lot
Coverage Requirements of Planned Development District P A
95-030.
Background:
On January 23, 1996, the City Council adopted Resolution 12-96, which established Planned
Development provisions for Dublin Ranch Phase I, P A 95-030 (included as Attachment 5). This
Resolution established minimum setbacks, minimum lot sizes, height limits and other design standards for
the Phase I area. Maximum lot coverage standards were not explicitly addressed within the provisions of
the Planned Development text. Subdivisions were submitted and approved by the City, which established
the lots within this area. Subsequent individual Site Development Review (SDR) applications for the
design ofthe homes, within each subdivision, were approved by the Planning Commission.
A short time after approval, Staff recognized a conflict between the PD District requirement for Phase I
that "Development standards within the Single Family land use designation shall confonn to the City of
Dublin R-I provisions, unless modified herein" (page 4, Section (C)(2), of Attachment 5) and the homes.
All conventional residential zoning districts (i.e., R-l) are regulated by Section 8.36.020(A) of the Dublin
Zoning Ordinance which stipulates that the maximum lot coverage for a single-story residence is 40% and
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G:\PA#\2004\04-023 Bryant Deck\ZAStaff ReportDOC
COPIES TO:
Applicant
Property Owner
PA File
Project Manager
ITEM NO.
ATTACHMENT 3
for a two-story home, 35%. Maximum lot coverage is the area of a parcel that may be covered with
buildings and structures. Staff recognized that many of the homes exceeded these standards and prepared
a minor amendment to the Planned Development Zoning District to reconcile the PD with the approved
design of the homes.
On December 10, 2002, the Planning Commission approved a minor amendment to the PD District by means
of a Conditional Use Pennit, P A 02-059, to allow an increase in the maximum lot coverage requirement. The
minor amendment defined the PD District's maximum lot coverage requirement as the existing lot coverage
approved under the SDR application for each of the individual lots. The Planning Commission staff report also
explained that those residences that desired to expand beyond the lot coverage approved by the SDR and
Zoning Ordinance would be required to obtain a Conditional Use Pennit, which would allow Staff the
opportunity to evaluate the proposal in context with the overall design of the proposed addition and in context
to the impacts to the adjacent residences.
ANAL YSIS:
The site is located on Colebrook Lane near North Bridgepointe Lane, within the Stone Crest neighborhood
(L-5) of Dublin Ranch Phase I. The subject lot is 5,559 square feet and the rear property line is adjacent
to a stream corridor which follows Fallon Road. The home, located at 3122 Colebrook Lane, is a
traditional, two-story frame house with white clapboard siding.
Conditional Use Permit:
The Applicant, Mr. Anthony Bryant, is requesting Community Development Director approval to build a
second-story deck and increase the maximum allowable lot coverage for his property pennitted in the
development standards of PD District P A 95-030, pursuant to Section 8.32.080 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The proposed second-story deck is 8 feet deep and 11 feet wide with an area of 88 square feet. It has a
height of 10 feet anp a 42-inch balustrade or railing (see Attachment 2 for Project Plans).
If approved, the project would increase the lot coverage of the home from a lot coverage of 41.4% to 43%
(a change of 1.6%). The project would increase the total lot coverage beyond the 35% allowed under the
Zoning Ordinance and beyond the existing home's lot coverage approved in the SDR. Section 8.32.080
of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance provides the ability for the Community Development Director, by means
of a Conditional Use Pennit, to make minor amendments to adopted Development Plans upon the finding
that the amendment substantially complies with the provisions of the Planned Development District.
In evaluating the project's conformance with the Zoning Ordinance and PD requirements related to lot
coverage in the past, the Planning Division has reviewed issues of: design and massing of the structure;
possible adverse impacts to privacy relative to the project; and, the safety of persons using the added
feature. These issues are analyzed in the following sections.
Desifln and Massing:
Staff reviewed the fonn and massing of the second-story deck. The structure will be built of frame
construction with a traditional balustrade or railing on the top (see elevation, entitled Deck Front View,
Attachment 2). The deck will be painted white to match the home. There are no residential uses to the rear
of the property as it is adjacent to a stream corridor and Fallon Road. The deck would be visible from
persons in the homes or rear yards located at 3120 and 3126 Colebrook Lane, respectively, on either side
2
of the subject address. The homeowners of these neighboring residences have reviewed the proposed
plans and signed the Applicant's Dublin Ranch Homeowners' Association design review application,
which was has been approved by the Association.
Two draft Conditions of Approval are recommended to ensure that the deck's construction is consistent
with the quality of the existing home and residential neighborhood (see Attachment 1). Condition I
requires that any lighting of the deck be directed away from adjacent properties. Condition 2 requires that
the design be reviewed by the Dublin Ranch Homeowner's Association Architectural Design Committee
prior to issuance of a building pennit, as the design has changed since the Committee's earlier approval,
ensuring that the deck is consistent with the area's architectural style.
Privacv:
City Staff reviewed the privacy impacts of the proposed deck in relation to the adjacent, single-family
homes located at 3120 and 3126 Colebrook Lane. A site plan of the home and the adjacent properties is
included as Attachment 4.
Two (2) windows on the south elevation of the home at 3126 Colebrook Lane face the proposed deck at an
angle. The distance from the deck to these windows is approximately 53 feet. These windows are part of
the Master Bedroom Suite of the home, which includes five (5) windows that do not face the proposed
deck. On the opposite side of the subject home at 3120 Colebrook Lane, there is one (1) window on the
north elevation of the home that faces the proposed deck. The distance from the deck to this window is
approximately 25 feet. This window is part of the Master Bedroom Suite of the home, which includes five
(5) windows that do not face the proposed deck.
The impacts to the privacy of adjacent homeowners will be decreased by the small size of the deck. The
eight- foot depth of the deck limits the site lines of persons using the deck because a person looking at the
adjacent properties on either side does not have a full view into the rooms. The distance of the deck from
adjacent properties also decreases the visibility of the interior of these homes. There are no homes that
directly face the deck along the rear property line.
Safetv:
The Building and Safety Division has reviewed the application and detennined that a Building Pennit is
required to construct the second-story deck to maintain minimum health and safety standards. As part of
this Conditional Use Pennit, the Building and Safety Division recommends that the following
requirements be made conditions of the project's approval and are contained in the draft Resolution as
Condition 16 (Attachment I):
· Detailed infonnation on construction and any electrical wiring and/or equipment associated with
the deck structure shall be required; and
· Engineered drawings and calculations for the deck structure shall be required.
This information will be provided by the Applicant at the Building Pennit submittal stage.
Conditional Use Permit Findinzs:
Pursuant to the purposes and intent of the Planned Development District and the requirements of
Conditional Use Permits, Chapter 8.100, the finding that the proposed use is compatible with other land
uses, transportation and service facilities in the vicinity must be made. Staff finds that the proposed use is
compatible with adjacent land uses because, as conditioned, the deck is compatible with the architectural
3
design of the residence and neighborhood, the deck will be constructed pursuant to the Building division
requirements, and any potential impacts to the privacy of other residents in the neighborhood have been
addressed.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State guidelines and City
environmental regulations, require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impact and that
environmental documents be prepared. The project has been found to be Categorically Exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), according to Section 15301(1) because the project consists
of minor modifications to an existing developed lot; it is consistent with all General Plan and Zoning
regulations; and, it is currently served by all required utilities and public services.
CONCLUSION:
The Applicant, Mr. Anthony Bryant, requests a Conditional Use Pennit for a new second-story deck and
for a minor amendment to lot coverage requirements pursuant to Chapter 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The findings for the Conditional Use Pennit, contained in the Resolution (Attachment 1), can be made as
the proposed increase in lot coverage is 1.6% for a total of approximately 43% lot coverage; the structure
will be constructed pursuant to Building Division requirements to maintain health and safety; the design of
the structure is consistent with the architectural style of the home and neighborhood; and the Conditional
Use Pennit approval is subject to the requirements in Attachment 1.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Zoning Administrator: 1) open public hearing and hear Staff presentation; 2)
take testimony from the Applicant and the public; 3) question Staff, Applicant and the public; 4) close
public hearing and deliberate; and 5) adopt the Resolution (Attachment 1) approving Conditional Use
Pennit for Minor Amendment to Maximum Lot Coverage Requirements of Planned Development District
P A 95-030 for a deck at 3122 Colebrook Lane.
G:\P A#\2004\04-023\ZA Staff Report. doc
4
Zoning Administrator Hearing
August 9.. 2004
CALL TO ORDER
A special meeting of the City of Dublin Community Development Director was held on Monday August 9, 2004 in
the Dublin Civic Center Public Works Meeting Room, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin. Acting Zoning Administrator Eddie
Peabody,]r. called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m.
ATTENDEES
Eddie Peabody,]r., Community Development Director; Pierce Macdonald, Associate Planner; Anthony Bryant,
Applicant; a Neighbor of Mr. Bryant; and Renuka Dhadwal, Recording Secretary .
PUBLIC HEARING
1. P A 04-023, Bryant Deck, Conditional Use Permit for Minor Amendment to Planned Development
(PD) District PA 95-030
Acting Zoning Administrator Eddie Peabody opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Ms. Macdonald presented the staff report. She stated that the Applicant is requesting a minor amendment to the
Planned Development District PA 95-030 of Dublin Ranch Phase I development. She further stated that the
PowerPoint presentation will cover a quick analysis and description of the project and will give Staffs
recommendation. The Applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct a second story deck which
would be 8ft. by 11 ft. and 10ft high from grade and would increase the maximum allowable lot coverage of the PD
District from 41.4% to 43% for the subject property at 3122 Colebrook Lane. She showed pictures of the rear
elevation of the property. The siding of the new deck would match the existing home. Staff reviewed the project for
size and massing, privacy, as well as for health and safety. Staff found that the neighbor on 3126 Colebrook Drive
has two windows facing the deck, but since there is no direct sight line to the deck there would be no impacts to
privacy. Staff also found that the neighbor on 3120 Colebrook Drive has a window facing the deck but due to the
angle, the privacy of the bedroom would not be impacted. Ms. Macdonald pointed out that these neighbors had
reviewed the plans as part of the Dublin Ranch Home Owners Association's Architectural Design Review
Application and have signed acknowledging the plans and that it has been approved by the Home Owners
Association. As far as health and safety were concerned, the Building Division has requested a condition of approval
for permit processing for the project and that calculations be submitted for the same. Ms. Macdonald indicated that
Staff notified neighbors within 300-ft radius and advertised the project in the newspaper. Staff did not receive any
comments from any neighbors. This project is exempt from CEQA regulations. Based on the above Staff could
make the following required findings:
· The proposed increase in lot coverage is 1.6% for a total of approximately 43% lot coverage;
· The structure will be constructed pursuant to Building Division requirements to maintain health and safety;
· The design of the structure is consistent \vith the architectural style of the home and neighborhood; and
· The Conditional Use Permit approval is subject to the requirements in the draft resolution.
Finally, Staff recommended that the Zoning Administrator approve the project and adopt the attached resolution.
I\h. Peabody "ked if ,be neighbot' on eitber ,ide ~Oiced their approval either by a IetreÄTr KCHit ENT i
Ms. Macdonald responded that when the neighbors were shown the plans, they signed them stating that they had
reviewed them, but it did not indicate if they approved or opposed the project.
Mr. Peabody asked the Applicant, Mr. Bryant, if he had any questions on the conditions of approval for his proposed
deck.
Mr. Bryant stated that when he submitted his plans to the Homeowners Association, he had indicated that he was
proposing to construct a deck similar to a neighbor at 3338 Oak Bluff Lane. He further indicated to his Association
that he was enclosing the deck with a siding similar to the existing architecture of his home. He noted that after the
architectural analysis was done, Mr. Bryant was required to block the deck as well as add brick to the posts to make it
architecturally pleasing. He had no other concerns or issues with the conditions of approval.
Mr. Peabody asked the one member of the public present at the hearing if he had any concerns with the project and
to identify himself. The neighbor indicated that he was there to observe the meeting. He declined to give his name
but stated that he was a neighbor of Mr. Bryant.
Hearing no other comments, Mr. Peabody closed the public hearing.
Mr. Peabody noted that the neighbors did not have an issue with the proposed deck, and he further noted that it
had been demonstrated that there would be no major visual impacts with the proposed construction of the deck.
Based on the conditions of approval, the Zoning Administrator approved the Conditional Use Permit for the
minor amendment to the Planned Development District, and adopted the following resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. 04 - 05
A RESOLUTION OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO LOT
COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PA 95-030 FOR A SECOND-
STORY DECK LOCATED AT 3122 COLE BROOK LANE, APN 985-0011-040
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m.
Eddie Peabody,]r.
Acting Zoning Ad
ATTEST:
r
t' WetA-·
r¡;' (/ (
! (j.L.U.trr c'I,j(J/·
Pierce Macdonald
Associate Planner
2
f¡
STREAM CORRIDOR
P 503.8
86
84
.~
.¿.~~ /!I ,p
: C~ÚI^'IJ
.r ;..:, aq;' þ~
~':.þ~~.
~CJo~,~-4
~"o~:r rf)
4.1J:,,~<fy.~
~?7
----------
I,
, :
II
I!
~¡
liT
1:1 8
I d
u,! 0
c: i
, I ,;
I I
"
I.
Ii
4'
85
PLAN 3DR
FF504.5
INV. 501.9
-
~
~
:;j
o
U")
(j
~
COLEBROOK LANE
o
I
10
40
LEG ENl2;
- - - - - (' PVC DRAlKb.GE SYSTW
- - - - - PUBLIC SER\1CE EASEMENT (PS£) S SANfTAAY SEW£R LATERAL '* ElECTROUER
TC TOP or CURB £I.tVATJON W WATER LATrAAl t:. FIRE HYDRANT
HP HICH POINT .. ORAINAG£ SWAL£ -)( . 'x )( - GOOD NEIGHBOR FENCE
P PAD ElEVATION (ROUGH GRADE) @ ARtA DRAIN (AO) .--............ GOOD NEIGHBOR FENCE W/TREU.IS TOP
ff FINISH F'LOOO · - .. 2-S' CURB DRAINS -0 0 VIEW fENCE
:J>¡ PS PROr¿CTNt SLOPE . CATCH BASIN ~ - - -- ~ PRECAST CONCRETE WALL
INY INVERT MATION 'J nn YT'H~ SLOPE Eo---o-I PRECAST CONC W~l. w/lflFJI FENCE
~ GL aAAAGE UP ELEVATION ~ S£DIMENT TRAP (51) I) RAIN WATER LEADER
("') [J ElECTRICAL BOX rn TEI..£PHONE BOX JT JOINT TRENCH
:c BW BACK OF W,ALK ~ AIRCONDlTIONING UNIT &J CASU: BOX
:Š:1t: It ÌI ÞIe WftO tonlrar'1 "~iIy to h.w . '/'IIÌIIof' I)'IttIII 10 cdltet end CI", CII roo( !II~ Þfot'I ~~ It "" tdmtnl Irq! fII'4 cur1l 4raI,..
1'11'1 Plot þlan II ¡:t'Iporld to IlIaw Iht ~m.ft.lonøl rtlollolllNp II"òm bulldlno t~~1on I. I"OpttIy II~ Øl8lc¡rl Øroln~1 Gllnl"" ~ Ond dll1ctlon ot dl'O~ 111). to elln/orm
~h local ol'dlnoncq lor the purpoet IIr IIIIlIlIi"9 ptrmlt kl\lann. ThI, plOt dlln NI ...nee! 01 btAI ,oncIlUon.. IIDWrm', G1I cOftltnn:tlon Irlol Þt conelstlrll with Cill Sbtltof1ll.
20
=.J
SCALE 111 =20'
r;J
,·,.-n"..1Im ""I.(I)4't'"'.IN......~.n1J~.a
3122 COLEBROOK LANE SF AREA: 555B± PLOT PLAN-LOT 85
STONECREST AT DUBLIN RANCH-TRACT 6960
DUBLIN. CALIFORNIA
DRAWN BY:£RIC JOB I 19'0tI-1 ""TE: ,-,!-~¡ REV. OATES:
15
(/)
ßlAClCAy Pc SOIR
C"'l [NCt<lŒIINO.1.NIO "LA.N"'HC.~O IUlIYtwIIC
,.~.-^tcn. CA <'25) - 22:1-0890
~ MAY êlVED
~ . 1 2 2004
~' &.1IJBLIN PLANNING
r---..
K;
Gv~
¡i..I..
t......"
... .......
-......
-""-
-
_..u
NMC.Dt' ~
.........11'"'
--
--
A__
~
A
3
'Yl
CUEN!!
.. & _IIITAIfT
_a..-u.
-.ca_
.-1--
z
o
it
~é
111-
~I
~...
o::¡
23
~z
si
:.Ira
..
"
I
.____·_4
I
FRONT ElEVATION
I
I
r'---
'L_ --
I
IIXImNG
.UVATlOIØ I
- --
ä
~
RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION
V4-.'-o·
2
~
eø.....,..
-.......
w....._
-
--
_'M
..........'104
-
--
A___
I
1
\1
~
p
a
:z:.
z
o
-I
i!
:ë
jl
~2
8-
.;
~:
sj
Aa
..
CI)
CUEHTI
lilt. _ -.TAIC1'
----~
-.... c:A....
lIlt) --
EXlmHO
EU!AV'nOIIS II
,..-.--
f:;~
I
¡
i
r-----{'
I !
I ¡
LL
~---r-
i
I
I
I
!
,
I
-- ..-----'10
~ -l~-\
-- - --'" -f=-= - -----1
.':_~:-~: . '. .::-::...:....:=:::-~-::..-::::-~_._.-
. '
m mill mm mm rn i
CJc:::::Jc:::Jc::J
c::Jc::Jr:=:Jc::J
c:::::Jl U I· ..
:3 REAR ELEVATION
./ \/4'·"-0'
~
:-::=- .:'.-..~':.::'.:._..
-:'.:~:"'::""~:-::='__. n-=::-:::-'-"':""_':_-
.---- . ..----.-.-. ..-.- - ._-
.--.---- ._---~-_.
----.- .-.._---_._-.
---., .... ---'---'-- . ...-.....
----..-.. ----, ----.--..
.-- ..-...---..-......
. ..--.-----.-- - ..-
---,- ... --'-'--"
-. .-.-----. ._~.'
..-.--.... ....--"---
-... .--..---......---
._ __.__ .._. ._'u
__A.. . ____~.....
ffir~ø~
-.,.---.- ....._--
...._ ___.__.u . .___
.. . .--.---- ... --.
.. ..---..- ----
..- .-.~--- .-
-. .----- -.
.---. .---
.-. . - .-.--
----- ~. .-
..,..----. -. ---.--
.....-..- . ...
'-' --.-.-
u..... ".__. -..
. ...._- ..-.
...._-_._~_.... --._--
.~_... . . .--.--.--.
-.-- .-.-.--....-- --.-.-
- . ----_.--. - -_.._._-_..~.
=----~._~-=-=-.-=;.:--:..;... ~
-... - -'. -.--.-...-..- - .---
.-.--..- . ....... .--....------
.____ '. . ...___._ ___ R_.~.·
---.--.-....-
._----_....-.. .-. ---_..-
._.._... ..... n_'_ ______..._ _ .
-.. ---'-' . .-.---'
æ
.. 88 u~_~
.. ..., ... -.-
-.. --..-. .
- ...... ..~
.. ---.
_ _..u . n'
_... .....,----
- _.- -------.
- _.....
.- . ..---
.- -.
.. -.---.-
- --.-.
... - . .--------.. ... -..~._.
-..--- .-.----
.. . .. .__..___. .____.__. _h _._.
----.-. ..----
..--. .. -_.-- ..--..-'--"-" . ...
4ì ~~~IDE ELEVATION
L"".
CA.....
c.. fItiMn, lie.
--
.......-
-
-....
-,""
-"'"
-
--
A__
z
o
Em
51
~i
~2
§i
.CJ
~!
8&
=i
...
fit
--ì
I
II
--1
I
I
I
"
~
p
~
FRONT ELEVATION
1/0411."-0-
CUINTI
.... _IIIYAIIT
~za_UM
MIIIUII, CIA_
CII'I--
PROPOIED
EUVATlOHI I
~~'!J ~JI«<A\
$' D'''''~ ,,~~
f~'o~ of \'\0
f4Al ~,...t~
-
....-
i
¡
~
I
Cfy
"
AS.O
RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION
V4-.I'-o·
2
-
--
-----~
~
-
-
:~;'~"'. A
ena.......
--
.......-
-
--
_'M
........",,..
-
--
A___
z
EI
I
Ulè
~I
8~
d
oi
Co)
aB
'I"
fit
~~
I
I
REAR ELEVATION
þ.
~
3
CUIN1l
IIII&_IIII'IAMT
M.ØOI__~
-.... CA_
.. ......
PROPOSED
ILlAvnONS H
i
I
t:.-
~
1"6
NG»J
17ffY-
:5ID/f,j¡f-
v....;~-:·
8) ~~~IDE ELEVATION
JUL-22-2004 12:37
Tì"L:,/' K.
j..-/ I:,..- L.· I ~.
fib f\ ~ í ......--\{ ( ~. '\
I"--V I ".Ii . t:.\N
(~,Cjf-~~ ¡=~~~ RÞ)
" P. 01/01
........ c--"'- ~I~.../ I.....(.J ~ ~
1)CAbJ II~ J C~ q -45£8
CVJ N~tL ~~L)'f2- VliZvJ
f-f','f'o(ÀT MADE By ¿MtlF-g,
¿"J. ~~
7/2.2.../ O<f
'I~'
~4- .
ÒfA~'
~A';~ï1iO .
\oj ft ~
o P 1:;" (2. :14) RAzL¡J6,
.,__-"',.,.----- .pA.1,Jjl~ itH1! ~
"".
,./' _ VIO np Pt.~ ~1>t'L-I~
, ~ _ ~A Ir.JT~ IA ttt rs.
¡
i
i
¡
¡
!
I
!
H;.pJ) IE J.#J' -
PblliJG¡' (í(R
f'.!¡t NT lEi?
42.') f..¡H-r1Þ.
(~~£-
C~t<. )
..:1,-
=---- -
~~~~ -.:
DÞc:.N
, Ae.e:A
'/-'--
-r
r-- ...-- ,...--__
"'--
-
'-
r;'r~f£P.
wttrí/Z.-
b')(()' e~
f' ///'-'~/
/ ,.. ¡{> .
/ /'
.--.......
r )
"
r.
t' i
(
:' r I
r ¡
I
II II
6x6 (rrI~)
rAl,rrÞÞ
0J fN rr;...
(.5AHfi. M HaMS. .
c. () (..() ¡;z.. )
If
RO¡J.Nf) b í7<tl1
--rb co V£R-. ß (..t> c~;jf:¡
PA-l ;Jry-E-Ç> W H-rfE
".
,/
< '
'"
'" -
,~¡-~.. "'---"-.
seA/.r::
, I ,I ,
/z :=.: I-{)
.\
,..- -,,-
..-"..
r,n
.s ro(.{~~ (1) ~)') /
,--
..-'"
r-
-..
r··
r'-'
TOTAL P.01
07/22/2004 THU 12: 38 [TX/RX NO 7781] I4J 001
STAFF ANALYSIS-3I22 COLEBROOKAND
ADJACENT PROPERTIES
4j)~ .--
.J / "-
\
/ ' / ,~o~ '\,
// ,/' y~~
/ /
... "'-
"O( "-
4-~>
."-
"-
"
v-!'-
~~
.'\
VJ
(J'I
U:!
~
~
~
().
~
~
~
-0
~
.¡>o
.....
-0
lJ'
o
V'
CP
)
)
.....
~
:D
'¿j
o
o
~
r"'
~
t:t1
0'
.¡>
¡....;,
~
~~
~
~
(")
o
~
d
o
t;C
~
~
~
(")
o
~
d
o
~
RESOLUTION NO. 12 - 96
.---
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
*********
APPROVING AND ESTABLISHING FINDINGS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS
FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) DISTRICT REZONE
CONCERNING P A 95-030 DUBLIN RANCH PHASE I
WHEREAS, Ted Fairfield, representing property owner Jennifer Lin, submitted a Planned
Development (PD) District Rezone request (P A 95-030 Dublin Ranch Phase I) for rezoning an
approximate 210 acre site to PD Single Family (Low Density) Residential (109.8 acres; 570 dwelling
units); PD Medium Density Residential (35.7 acres; 277 dwelling units); and PD Open Space (57.5
acres). The PD Rezone request also includes a 5 acre neighborhood park and a 2 acre private
recreational facility. The project is generally located east of Tassajara Road and approximately 4,000
feet north of the Interstate 580 Freeway, within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan project area; and
WHEREAS, on October 10, 1994, the City Council approved a Planned Development District Overlay
Zone (Prezone) for a 1,538 acre site located within the adopted Eastern Dublin Specific Plan project
area (pA 94-030); and
WHEREAS, on November 14, 1994, the Alameda County LAFCo approved the Eastern Dublin
Reorganization for P A 94-030; and
..-
WHEREAS, on January 12, 1995, the Alameda County LAFCo unanimously disapproved the request
to reconsider the Eastern Dublin Reorganization approval (PA 94-030); and
WHEREAS, on January 23, 1995, the City Council ordered the territory designated as
Annexation/Detachment No. 10 annexed to the City of Dublin, which includes the 1,538 acre site and
annexed to the Dublin San Ramon Services District and detached ITom the Livermore Area Recreation
and Park District (PA 94-030); and
WHEREAS, Annexation/Detachment No. 10 became effective on October 1, 1995; and
WHEREAS, the Dublin Ranch Phase I project site is located within the 1,538 acre site that has been
prezoned and aIU1exed, and the Applicant's request complies with the existing Planned Development
District Prezone provisions; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant's PD Rezone request amends the initial PD Prezone and includes a District
PlaIU1ed Development Plan as required under Section 11.2.7 ofthe Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and a
Land Use and Development Plan as required under the City's Zoning Ordinance, Title 8, Chapter 2,
Section 8-31.16; and
,.------ .
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held public hearings to consider this request on January 2 and
January 16, 1996; and
ATTACHMENT 7
WHEREAS, proper notice of these Planning Commission public hearings was given in all respects as
required by law; and '
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended City Council approval of the PD Rezone subject .....
to conditions prepared by Staff; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing to consider this request on January 23, 1996; and
WHEREAS, proper notice oftrus request was given in all respects as required by law for the City
Council hearing; and
WHEREAS, an initial study was prepared for the project dated November 17, 1995 and found that the
project is exempt according to section 15182 of the State CEQA Guidelines. The project is a residential
project undertaken pursuant to and in conformance with the adopted Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and
none of the events described in section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines have occurred since the
adoption of the Specific Plan or certification of its EIR. No new effects could occur and no new
mitigation measures would be required for the Dublin Ranch Phase I PD Rezone project that were not
addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Eastern Dublin project, and the PD Rezone
is within the scope of the Final Environmental Impact Report; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending City Council approval of the Planned
Development District Rezone subject to conditions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council heard and considered all said reports, recommendations, written and oral
testimony submitted at the public hearing as herein above set forth. ..
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby find:
1. The proposed PD Rezone, as conditioned, is consistent with the general provisions and
purpose of the PD District Overly Zone (PD Prezone), the City General Plan and the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan provisions and design guidelines; and
2. The rezoning, as conditioned, is appropriate for the subject property in terms of being
compatible with existing land uses in the area, and will not overburden public services;
and
3. The rezoning will not have substantial adverse effects on health or safety, or be
substantially detrimental to the public welfare, or be injurious to property or public
improvements.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves P A 95-030 Dublin Ranch
Phase I subject to the general provisions listed below:
...
2
GENERAL PROVISIONS
A Purpose
This approval is for a Planned Development (PD) District Rezoning for P A 95-030 Dublin Ranch Phase
1. This PD District Rezone that includes a Land Use and Development Plan and District Planned
Development Plan is consistent with the initial Planned Development (PD) District Prezone and amends
the initial Prezone with more detailed land use and development plan provisions. The PD District
Rezone allows the flexibility needed to encourage innovative development while ensuring that the goals,
policies and action programs of the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan are met. More
particularly, the PD District Rezone is intended to ensure the following policies:
1. Concentrate development on less environmentally and visually sensitive or constrained
portions of the plan area and preserve significant open space areas and natural and topographic
landscape features with minimum alteration of land fOnTIs.
2. Encourage innovative approaches to site planning, building design and construction to
create a range of housing types and prices, and to provide housing for all segments ofthe
community.
3. Create an attractive, efficient and safe environment.
4. Develop an environment that encourages social interaction and the use of common open
areas for neighborhood or community activities and other amenities.
---
5. Create an environment that decreases dependence on the private automobile.
B. Dublin Zoning Ordinance - Applicable Requirements
Except as specifically modified by the provisions of the PD District Rezone, all applicable and general
requirements of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance shall be applied to this PD District.
C. General Provisions and Development Standards
1. Intent: This approval is for the Planned Development (PD) District Rezone P A 95-030
Dublin Ranch Phase 1. This approval rezones 109.8 acres to PD Single Family Residential (570
dwelling units; 5.2 du/ac); 35.7 acres to PD Medium Density Residential (277 dwelling units; 7.8
du/ac), for a total maximum of 847 dwelling units; and 57.5 acres to PD Open space. The
number of dwelling units and mix of dwelling unit types (i.e. ratio of Single Family Residential to
Medium Density Residential) can vary under each residential land use category while staying
within the approved density ranges. However, the total number of units shall not exceed the
maximum number of dwelling units, which is 847. This approval also rezones 5 acres for PD
neighborhood park and 2 acres for a private recreational facility. Development shall be generally
consistent with the following PD Rezone submittals labeled Exhibit A on file with the Dublin
Planning Department:
"
-'
a. District Planned Development Plan, Land Use and Development Plan, comprising the
Phase I Site Plan, 20-Scale Plotting Maps, and Boundary and Phasing Plan, prepared by
MacKay and Somps, William Hezmalha1ch Architects, Inc. and NUVIS dated received
August 10, 1995 and November 15, 1995. ...
b. Dublin Ranch Phase I Architecture and Landscape and Open Space Design Guidelines
prepared by MacKay and Somps, William Hezmalhalch Architects, Inc. and NUVIS
dated received August 10, 1995 and November 15, 1995.
2. Single Family Residential: Development standards within the Single Family land use
designation shall conform to the City of Dublin R-l District provisions and the PD District
Overlay Zone for PA 94-030 Eastern Dublin (City Council Resolution No. 104-94). As the R-l
District base zone, all the R-l District provisions shall apply, except those superseded by the
following provisions. Only detached single family units are allowed in this District.
Lot Size:
4,000 sq. ft. minimum
Median Lot Width:
50 feet
:Minimum Lot Frontage:
35 feet
:Minimum Lot Depth:
80 feet
Front yard Depth (setback from back of sidewalk):
,..
Minimum 12 feet to porch or living area.
Minimum 17 feet to garage, except for side opening garages
(minimum 15 feet to side opening garages).
Driveways less than 20 feet in length require automatic garage
door openers and "roll up" doors
Side Yard (setback):
Minimum 5 feet to living area - Minimum 10 feet at corner
conditions
Garages located at the rear half of a lot have no minimum side
yard. Building restrictions for zero lot line structures shall be
applied as conditions of Site Development Review approval.
Rear Yard (setback):
5 feet minimum. Include a useable yard equal to 10% of the lot
size with a minimum dimension of 10 feet in any direction.
Garages located in the rear half of a lot have a 3 foot minimum
rear setback.
Minimum Building
Separation:
....
10 feet (excluding allowable encroachments).
4
Maximum Building
Height: 30 feet or 2 stories at anyone point.
r---
3. Medium Density Residential: Development standards for attached and detached units within
the Medium Density land use designation shall conform to the City of Dublin R-S District
provisions and the PD District Overlay Zone for P A 94-030 Eastern Dublin (City Council
Resolution No. 104-94). As the R-S District base zone~ all the R-S District provisions shall
apply, except those superseded by the following:
Attached Standards:
Front Yard Depth:
Minimum 10 feet to porch or living area.
Minimum 5 feet to garage.
Side Yard (setback):
:Minimum 5 feet including encroachments (UBC standards).
Rear Yard (setback):
Minimum 10 feet to living area.
Yard Space:
Provide a useable yard of 150 square feet with a minimum
dimension of 10 feet in any direction.
Upper floor units shall have a deck of at least 50 square feet with
a minimum dimension of 5 feet.
.-
Minimum Building
Separation:
10 feet including encroachments (UBC building standards).
Maximum Building
Height:
30 feet, or 2.5 stories at anyone point.
Detached Standards:
Minimum Lot Size:
2,000 square feet
Median Lot Width:
30 feet at building setback; 35 feet at corner conditions
Average Lot Depth:
Not Applicable
Front Yard Depth (setback rrom back of sidewalk):
Minimum 10 feet to porch or living area.
Minimum 5 feet to garage without driveway, or greater than 17
feet to garage with driveway, except for side opening garages.
-
Driveways less than 20 feet in length require automatic garage
door openers and "roll up" doors.
5
Side Yard (setback):
Rear Yard (setback):
Minimum Building
Separation:
Maximum Building
Height:
Additional Standards:
Garages:
Adjacent Uses:
Encroachment:
Front Yard
Landscaping:
3 feet minimum- 6 feet at corner conditions.
Garages have 0 foot side yards.
5 feet minimum. Provide a minimum useable yard of 150 sq. ft.
with a minimum dimension of 10 feet in any direction. Garages
may have 0 feet rear yards.
..
6 feet
Garages may be attached.
Reciprocal easements may be used to satisfy yard requirements.
30 feet, or 2.5 stories at anyone point.
Parking requirements may be met with tandem garages.
Interior side yard setbacks adjacent to common open space, parks,
greenbelts and stream corridors shall be a minimum of 10 feet.
The following encroachments shall be allowed to project up to 2 feet into
yard setbacks: eaves, architectural projections, fireplaces, (induding log
storage and entertainment niche), balconies, bay windows, window seats,
exterior stairs, second floor overhangs, decks, porches and air conditioning
equipment. All non-fire rated encroachments must be at least 3 feet from
property lines.
...
The applicant/developer shall install front yard landscaping within all the
medium density neighborhoods.
4. Curvilinear Streets: Site design of the individual neighborhoods may vary from that shown in
Dublin Ranch Phase I Rezone (FA 95-030) ifthe number of units in a neighborhood is adjusted
or attached units are substituted for detached (in medium density neighborhoods only).
However, the concept of curvilinear streets and cul-de-sacs cannot be altered.
5. Architectural Design: Eight distinct architectural styles are described in the Dublin Ranch
Phase I Architecture and Landscape and Open Space Design Guidelines and architectural
elevations. Any or all of these styles can be utilized in an individual neighborhood. Additional
styles can be permitted at Site Development Review if it is determined they would not change
the overaI1 character of the Dublin Ranch Phase I plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council approves ofPA 95-030 Dublin
Ranch Phase I PD Rezone subject to the following conditions:
.....
6
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
,-
Unless stated otherwise. all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to final occupancy of
any building. and shall be subiect to Planning Department review and approval. The following codes
represent those departments/agencies responsible for monitoring compliance of the conditions of
ap~roval: IPLl Planning. [B] Building. (P] Parks and Community Services. rpO) Police. (PW] Public
Works. r ADM] Administration/City Attorney. (FIN] Finance. [Fl Doughertv Regional Fire Authority.
[DSR] Dublin San Ramon Services District. [CO] Alameda County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District [Zone 71.
GENERAL
1. The Land Use and Development Plan, District Planned Development Plan and Architecture and
Landscape and Open space Design Guidelines for Dublin Ranch Phase I (P A 95-030) are
conceptual in nature. No formal amendment of this PD Rezone will be required as long as the
materials submitted for the Tentative Map and Site Development Review are in substantial
conformance with this PD Rezone and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The Planning Director
shall determine conformance or non-conformance and appropriate processing procedures for
modifying this PD Rezone (i.e. staff approval, Planning Commission approval of Conditional
Use Permit, or City Council approval of new PD Rezone). Major modifications, or revisions not
found to be in substantial conformance with this PD Rezone shall require a new PD Rezone. A
subsequent PD rezone may address all or a portion of the area covered by this PD Rezone. [PL]
2.
Prior to obtaining building permits, the applicant must receive Site Development Review (SDR)
approval as established in the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance, unless the Planning Director
approved a SDR waiver and a zoning approval is granted upon the determination that the
construction constitutes a minor project and buildï"ng permit plans are in accord with the intent
and objectives of the SDR procedures. [PL]
,-
3. Except as may be specifically provided for within these General Provisions for P A 95-030,
development shall comply with the City of Dublin Site Development Review Standard
Conditions (see Attachment A-I). [PL]
4. Except as may be specifically provided for within this PD, development shall comply with the
City of Dublin Residential Security Requirements (Attachment A-2). [PO]
5. The design, location and material of all fencing and retaining walls shall be subject Site
Development Review approval unless the Planning Director waives the SDR requirement. [PL]
6. The applicant shall comply with all applicable grading guidelines as indicated on page 103 of the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. [PW, PL]
7. The Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) of one or more Dublin
Ranch Phase I homeowners associations shall be submitted with the Tentative Map and/or Site
Development Review application, and shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning
Director and City Attorney prior to recordation of the Final Subdivision Map, or prior to Site
Development Review approval. [PL, AD:"-1]
7
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
8. The Dublin Ranch Phase I project proponent and the City of Dublin shall enter into a
development agreement prior to Tentative Map approval, which shall contain, but not be limited ...
to, provisions for financing and timing of on and off-site inftastructure, payment of traffic, noise
and public facilities impact fees, affordable housing, and other provisions deemed necessary by
the City to find the project consistent with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. At some future
date, the applicant shall be responsible for paying all fees required by the Development
Agreement. [PL]
SCHOOL FACILITIES Th1PACT MITIGATION
9. No tentative subdivision map for all or any part of the area covered by this Land Use and
Development Plan shall be approved by the City Council until the applicant has entered into a
written mitigation agreement with the affected school district(s) and the City. The mitigation
agreement shall establish the method and manner of financing and/or constructing school
facilities necessary to serve the student population generated by the development. The
mitigation agreement shall address the level of mitigation necess~, the amount of any school
impact fees, the time of payment of any such fees and similar matters. The City shall be a party
to any such agreement only for the purpose of assuring uniformity with respect to different
property owners and appropriate land use planning. [pL, ADM]
NOISE
10. A noise study shan be required for the Tentative Map application submittal to show how interior "-
noise levels will be controlled to acceptable limits. [PL, B]
SCENIC CORRIDOR POLICIES
11. The applicant shall comply with the City's proposed Eastern Dublin Scenic Corridor Policies and
Development Standards. I[the Eastern Dublin Scenic Corridor Policies and Development
Standards have not been adopted prior to approving the Tentative Map for the project, the
applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan's scenic corridor,
development standards and grading policies and action programs through a detailed visual
analysis submitted with the Tentative Map application. [PL]
LANDSCAPE/OPEN SPACE/TRAILS
12. As part of the Tentative Map approval, the applicant shall be conditioned to offer to dedicate the
intermittent stream/open space and trail corridors. If the City accepts this dedication of
improvements, no credit for these areas and improvements shall be given towards parkland
dedication requirements. [P, PL, PW]
13. All graded cut and fill slope areas shall be revegetated as described in Policy 6-22 of the Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan, subject to Site Development Review approval. [PL, PW]
....
14.
All landscape within the open space and common areas, including the neighborhood park and
the intermittent stream and open space corridor shall be subject to Site Development Review·
8
/"""'
approval. The proposed landscape plans to be submitted with the Site Development Review
application shall take into consideration Dublin Ranch Phase I PD Rezone comments prepàred
by Singer, Hodges, Evans, dated received October 10, 1995. [PL]
15.
Appropriate all weather surface (e.g. crushed gravel or rock) vehicular access to open space,
various trail systems and some residential areas, as shown on Exhibit A, shall be provided and
maintained on a continuous basis, to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief, Public Works Director
and Planning Director. [F, PW, P]
16.
A minimum 25 foot setback from the intermittent stream/open space corridors shall be
encouraged wherever possible. Setbacks for this purpose shall be measured £Tom the edge of
drainage corridors as shown on Figures 4.1,6.2 and 7.33 of the Specific Plan. [PL]
BUILDING
17. All project construction shall conform to all building codes and ordinances in effect at the time
of building permit. [B]
18. The following information shall be submitted with the Tentative Map application: 1) Dublin
Ranch Phase I Geotechnical Report dated June 19, 1995; 2) solar panel guidelines; 3)
clarification of new Zone 2 or Zone 3 water reservoir location and need; 4) City ofPleasanton's
water reservoir details (i.e., fences, retaining walls, roadway for access). [B]
--
,.
PARKS AND RECREATION
19. The applicant shall comply with the' City's Dublin Municipal Code, Chapter 9.28 Dedication of
Land for Park and Recreation Purposes and the Dublin Parks and Recreation Master Plan park
dedication and design requirements by either dedicating 12 acres of park land, or paying park
dedication in-lieu fees, or providing a combination of both park land dedication and in-lieu fees
based on the maximum number of units proposed, prior to Final Subdivision Map approval. The
City may consider the applicant's request to improve the public neighborhood park and receive
credit for those improvements to the public park. The City shall be responsible for designing
and inspecting the public park. [P, PW, PL]
19A. At the time of Tentative Map approval, the City may consider the applicant's request for credit
for the two (2) acre private recreation facility in accordance with the Dublin Municipal Code,
Chapter 9.28 Dedication of Lands for Park and Recreation Purposes. Should the City deny the
applicant's request, the applicant may delete the private recreation facility from the Land Use
and Development Plan (LOOP), and through the Planning Director's review and approval of the
modified LOOP and Tentative Map, develop the site in conformance with the Single Family
Residential land use designation and zoning. The maximum number of units that could be
allowed for this 2- acre site is 12 dwelling units. In this case, a maximum of859 dwelling units
could be allowed for the Dublin Ranch Phase I Rezone project. [P, PW, PL]
.~
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
20. The applicant shall comply with the City's proposed Stream Corridor Restoration Program and
the Grazing Management Plan. The project's intermittent stream enhancement and restoration·
9
improvements shall comply with the Plan requirements and shall be submitted with the Tentative
Map application for the Dublin Ranch Phase I project. If a Stream Corridor Restoration
Program and the Grazing Management Plan have not been adopted prior to approving the
Tentative Map for the project, the applicant shall provide project specific stream corridor ".
restoration and grazing management requirements and shall submit this plan during the Tentative
Map project review. [pL, Zone 7, PW]
21. The applicant shall comply with all Eastern Dublin Specific Plan EIR mitigation measures for
mitigating potentially significant plant and animal species impacts (e.g. Applicant shall submit a
preconstruction survey prepared within 60 days prior to any habitat modification to verify the
presence of sensitive species. A biologist shall prepare the survey and shall be subject to the
Planning Department review and approval). Any updated surveys and/or studies that may be
completed by a biologist prior to Tentative Map application submittal shall be submitted with the
Tentative Map application. [PL]
PARKING
22. The availability of adequate on-street parking within the Medium Density Residential area shall
be re-assessed prior to Tentative Map approval to determine its adequacy. [PL, PW]
TRAFFIC/PUBLIC WORKS
23. The Applicant shall meet all City of Dublin minimum roadway standards for public streets prior
to Tentative Map approval. All minor modifications to the City's roadway standards shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Public Works Director. [PW]...
24. Applicant shall pay a traffic impact fee or construct required improvements based on the
adopted Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee (per Resolution No. 1-95) and the proposed 1-580
Interchange Traffic Impact Fee (fee that will be agreed upon by the City of Dublin and City of
Pleasanton for interchange improvements), as such fees may hereafter be modified or amended..
These fees shall be paid prior to final inspection of each unit, unless and until, the City Council
amends Resolution 1-95 to make the fee payable prior to issuance of building permits. [PW, BJ
25. The applicant shall submit an update of the traffic study prepared by TJKM dated December,
1995 with the Tentative Map application and the study shall be subject to review and approval
by the Public Works Director. Appropriate traffic mitigation measures will be identified and
included as conditions of Tentative Map approval. Such traffic mitigation may include, but not
be limited to: [PW] .
a. Traffic signalization
b. Roadway shoulder construction
c. Frontage improvements
d. pavement widening
e. Overlays of existing pavement
f. Dedications of right-of-way
g. Restriping
.,.,.
10
26.
Where decorative paving is installed in public streets, pre-formed traffic signal loops shall be
used under the decorative paving. Where possible, irrigation laterals shall not be placed under
the decorative paving. Maintenance costs of the decorative paving shall be included in a
landscape and lighting maintenance assessment district or other funding mechanism acceptable
to the City Manager. Decorative paving plans shall be submitted with the Tentative Map
application submittal and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Public Works
Director. [PW, ADM]
,---
27. Street lights on arterial streets shall be the City Standard cobra head luminaries with galvanized
poles. Where decorative lights are to be used on residential streets, these lights shall be
designed so as to not shine into adjacent windows, shall be easily accessible for purchase over a
long period of time (e.g. 30 or more years), and shall be designed so that the efficiency of the
lights do not require close spacing to meet illumination requirements. A street lighting plan
demonstrating compliance with this condition shall be submitted with the Tentative Map
application and shall be subject to the Public Works Director's review and approval. [PW]
28. Street name signs shall display the name of the street together with a City Standard shamrock
logo. Posts shall be galvanized steel pipe. A street sign plan shall be submitted with the
Tentative Map application and shall be subject to the Public Works Director's review and
approval. [PW]
29. The applicant shall construct a minimum 10 foot wide bicycle/pedestrian path between the
looped residential collector street and Fa110n Road, as shown on Exhibit A. [PW, PL]
~
FllŒ
30. Applicant shall comply with all DRF A fire standards, including minimum standards for
emergency access roads and payment of applicable fees, including a Fire Capital Impact Fee. [F]
31. A fire buffer zone between the development area and open space area shal] be provided and
maintained by a home owners association on a continuous basis to the satisfaction of the
Dougherty Regional Fire Authority. (F]
32. The applicant shall comply with the City's proposed Wildfire Management Plan. The Plan
requirements shall be incorporated into the CC&Rs for the Dublin Ranch Phase I project. If a
Wildfire Management Plan has not been adopted prior to approving the CC&Rs for the project,
the applicant shall provide a project specific wildfire management plan and shall submit this plan
during the Tentative Map project review. [F, PL, PW]
UTILITY SERVICES/POSTAL SERVICES
33. The location and siting of project specific wastewater, stonn drainage and potable water system
infrastructure shaH be consistent with the resource management policies of the Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan. [PL, PW, DSR]
~
34. All on- and off-site potable and recycled water and wastewater facilities shall be constmcted in
conformance with DSRSD Major Infrastructure Policy (Res. 29-94). The applicant shall submit
plans for the potable and recyc1ed water and sewer system to service this development
11
acceptable to DSRSD, pay fees required by DSRSD and receive DSRSD's approval prior to
issuance of any building permit. Developer-dedicated facilities shall be in conformance with the
DSRSD Standard Specifications and Drawings. [B, PW, DSR]
,.
35. The applicant shall provide a "will" serve letter from DSRSD prior to issuance of the grading
pennit for the grading that creates individual building sites, which states that the Dublin Ranch
Phase I project can be served by DSRSD for water and sewer prior to occupancy. [B, PW]
36. A recycled water distribution system for the landscaping within Dublin Ranch Phase I area shall
be provided per the City of Dublin, Zone 7, and DSRSD requirements. The landscaping areas
must meet City of Dublin Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance requÎrements. [PW, Zone 7,
DSR]
37. Applicant shall provide Public Utility Easements per requirements of the City of Dublin and/or
public utility companies as necessary to serve this area with utility services. [PW]
38. The applicant shan confer with local postal authorities to determine the required type ofmaÎI
units and provide a letter from the Postal Service stating their satisfaction at the time the
Tentative Map and Site Development Review submittal is made. Specific locations for such
units shall be to the satisfaction of the Postal Service and the Dublin Planning Department. [PL]
39. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide "will serve" letters from
appropriate agencies documenting that adequate electric, gas, telephone and landfill capacity is
available prior to occupancy. [PL]
"0lIl
40. The applicant shall work with DSRSD to help fund a recycled water distribution system
computer model that reflects the adopted Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and General Plan
Amendment. [DSR]
41. The applicant shall comply with all Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District - Zone 7 Flood Control requirements and applicable fees. [Zone 7, PW]
MISCELLANEOUS EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN/GENERAL PLAN AMEND"MENT
FINAL EIR MITIGATION rvIEASURES
42. Applicant shall work with LA VT A to establish the need, bus route(s), bus turnouts, bus stop
sign locations, bus shelter locations, and other transit amenities for this project prior to Site
Development Review approval. [PW]
43. Applicant shall design bus turnouts, transit shelters and pedestrian paths (sidewalks) consistent
with the proposed LA VT A routes and stops and the City of Dublin's requirements and
standards prior to issuance of building permits for the residential units. Conceptual design plans
shall be submitted with the Tentative Map application submittal and subject to the Public Works
Director review and approval. Construction shall be undertaken as part of the street
improvement work. [PW]
...
44. The applicant shall comply with the City's erosion and sedimentation control ordinance. [PWl
12
45. The applicant shall comply with aU visual resource mitigation measures of the FEIR relative to
grading, scenic conidors, scenic vista preservation, and similar "risual resources. [PL, PW]
_.
46. The applicant shall comply with the City's solid waste management and recycling requirements.
[ADM]
47. All new reservoir construction shall comply with DSRSD's requirements. [DSR, PW]
48. The applicant shall comply with all applicable action programs and mitigation measures of the
Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan and companion Final Environmental
Impact Report (FEIR), respectively, that have not been made specific conditions of approval of
this PD Rezone. [PLJ
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of January, 1996.
AYES:
CouncUmembers Barnes, Burton, Howard, Moffatt and Mayor Houston
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
None
ABSTAIN: None
(:---1 r';/ ! -L
.A ,/ ~'1-Yf 1.1 !.A '-Vi--.
,,_.- \ l' ~ '" II'
, Mayor
.~
AT~
iry CI~0--
K2/G/1-23 -96/reso-lin.doc
-
13
STAFF ANALYSIS - SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
View to Left (3120 Colebrook Lane)
View to Right (3126 Colebrook Lane)
View to the Rear Across Fallon Road
ATTACHMENT ~