Loading...
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:e J¡; l lflCm: 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.. fIt iMn, 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 ~