Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.1 - Branaugh Property PLPA-2021-00014STAFF REPORT
Planning Commission
Page 1 of 11
Agenda Item 6.1
DATE:February 14,2023
TO:Planning Commission
SUBJECT:Branaugh Property (PLPA-2021-00014)Prepared by: Amy Million, Principal Planner
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:The property owner, Randy Branaugh of BEX Development, has requested approval of an amendment to the existing Planned Development Zoning Stage 1 Development Plan, approval of aPlanned Development Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 9306and Development Agreement for the Branaugh property located adjacent to the eastern City limits.The proposed project would establish zoning regulations and development standard for future development of up to 97 single-family detached homes and approximately 527,773 square feet of industrial uses.The proposed project would also subdivide the 40.16-acre site into four parcels to accommodate proposed residential and industrial development. The Planning Commission will also consider and make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the project and an Addendum to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Environmental Impact Reports.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Conduct the public hearing and adopt the Resolution recommending that the City Council approvean Addendum to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Environmental Impact Reports, an Amendment to the Zoning Map, Amendments to Planned Development Ordinance No. 32-05 for Fallon Village,a Planned Development Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 9306, and a Development Agreement Related to the Branaugh Property Project.
DESCRIPTION:BackgroundThe Branaugh property is located north of Interstate 580, adjacent to the eastern city boundary, and south of the Croak property (East Ranch Project)within the Fallon Village project area (refer to Figure 1). Please refer to Table 1 for surrounding uses. The project site is primarily undeveloped rolling hills and grass lands with existing structures including several houses, a barn and several sheds, located in the southern portion of the property. A landscaping business occupies the area closest to I-580 and the property also has a house located in the northwestern portion of the property. Access to the site is currently provided from Collier Canyon Road. Once developed,access to the site will be provided by the future Dublin Boulevard extension.
10
Page 2 of 11
Figure 1. Location Map
Table 1. Surrounding Land UsesLocationZoning General Plan Land Use Current Use of PropertyNorthPD (Planned Development)Single Family Residential Vacant (future East Ranch Residential Project)South N/A N/A Collier Canyon Road / I-580East Alameda CountyA Agriculture Alameda CountyRM Resource Management Vacant
West PD (Planned Development)Medium Density Residential & Industrial Park Vacant
The 1,134+acre Fallon Village project,which included a General Plan Amendment, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment (Resolution No. 223-05), and Planned Development Rezone with a Stage 1 Development Plan (Ordinance No. 32-05), was approved by the City Council in December 2005.As part of the City Council approval, 9.87 acres were designated Medium-Density Residential and 30.29 acres were designated Industrial Park land uses on the Branaugh property.The Stage 1 Development Plan established the permitted, conditional and temporary land uses
11
Page 3 of 11
allowed on the Branaugh property. An overview of the types of uses for each land use designation is provided in Table 2 below. This is not an exhaustive list but provides context as to the types of uses envisioned for this area of Fallon Village. No changes to the existing allowable uses are proposed as part of the proposed project. Table 2. Overview of Allowed UsesLand Use Designation Permitted Land Uses Conditionally Permitted Land Uses
Medium Density Residential
Accessory Dwelling UnitAccessory Structures/UsesHome OccupationMulti-Family DwellingSingle Family DwellingSmall/Large Day Care Home
Bed and Breakfast InnBoarding HouseCommunity Care Facility Day Care CenterSemi-Public Facilities
Industrial Park Automobile/vehicle rentalBuilding Material sales and storageContractorHome appliance reportLight manufacturing Research and DevelopmentWarehousing distribution
Automobile/vehicle sales and serviceAnimal sales and serviceGas stationsMini-storageOutdoor storageRecreation (indoor and outdoor)Recycling facilityVeterinary officeProposed ProjectThe Applicant has requested approval of an amendment to the existing Planned Development Zoning Stage 1 Development Plan, Planned Development Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 9306 and a Development Agreement. The project would establish development standards and subdivide the 40.16-acre site into four parcels to accommodate proposed residential and industrial development. The project approvals wouldallow up to 97 units within 9.87 acres designated Medium-Density Residential and approximately 527,773 square feet of industrial use on 30.29 acres designated Industrial Park. Additional discretionary approvals are required to implement the project; however, they are not requested at this time. Those include approval of 1) Site Development Review Permits by the Planning Commission for the architectural and site plan details; 2) a Tentative Tract Map for the individual residential parcels; and 3) a Master Sign Program/Site Development Review Permit by the Community Development Director for the industrial signage. The timing of those permits will likely respond to the construction of the Dublin Boulevard extension. AnalysisPlanned Development ZoningThe site has existing Planned Development Zoning (Ordinance No. 32-05). The Stage 1 Development Plan established the specific residential and industrial uses that are permitted by right, conditionally permitted, and prohibited as well as the overall development density and intensity on this site. The Stage 1 Development Plan also provides development standards for
12
Page 4 of 11
industrial sites which may be modified through a Stage 2 Development Plan for projects that are greater than 15 acres.The application includes a Planned Development Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan and amendments to the Stage 1 Development Plan . The Stage 2 Development Plan builds off the exiting Stage 1 Development Plan and includes development regulations (i.e.density, setbacks, height, parking, etc.), architectural and landscape standards, a phasing plan, inclusionary housing requirements and a conceptual site plan for the residential and industrial areas. The proposed Stage 2 Site Plan is provided in Figure 2 below. Figure 2. Planned Development Stage 2 Site Plan
An amendment to the Stage 1 Development Plan is necessary for consistency with the proposed Stage 2 Development Plan. The amendment is limited to an increase in the floor area ratio (FAR)from 0.35 to 0.40 for warehousing uses in the industrial area. No other changes to the Stage 1 Development Plan are proposed.Increase in Floor Area RatioThe proposed Planned Development Rezone includes increasing the FAR from 0.35 to 0.40 in the industrial area for warehousing uses only. For all other uses the maximum FAR will remain 0.35 FAR. As stated in the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan,an increase in FAR beyond 0.35 is allowed on the portions of the site designated Industrial Park at the discretion of City Council as follows:General Plan: Industrial Park(Maximum FAR:.35,see text below for exceptions;Employee Density:590 square feet peremployee)This designation allows a wide variety of minimum-impact,light industrial uses.Uses allowedwithinthisdesignationinclude,but are not limited to,the following:manufacturing,processing,assembly,fabrication,research and development,printing,warehouse and distribution,andwholesaleandheavycommercialusesprovidedtheactivitiesdonothavesignificantexternaleffectsintheformofnoise,dust,glare,or odor.Uses requiring outdoor storage and service yards
13
Page 5 of 11
are permitted in this designation as long as they do not have adverse effects on surrounding uses.Residential uses are not permitted within this designation. Warehousing uses may go as high as.50 FAR at the discretion of the City Council.Eastern Dublin Specific Plan: Industrial Park(Maximum .35 Floor Area Ratio)Accommodates a wide variety of minimum-impact, light industrial uses, provided these activitiesdo not produce offensive levels of noise, dust, glare, or odor. Residential uses are not permittedwithin this designation. There are no minimum FAR requirements for the Industrial Parkdesignation. Higher FARs may be approved at the discretion of the City Council if proposed usesmeet one or more of the following criteria:
Unique project characteristics which result in reduced impacts relative to other uses in thesame area (e.g., lower traffic generation);
Unique project building requirements (e.g., warehouse uses that have large land coveragerequirements but low employment densities);
Extraordinary benefits to the City.On May 18, 2021, the City Council approved an Economic Development Zone (EDZ) and incentives package for properties east of Fallon Road along the Dublin Boulevard extension. The EDZ encourages investments in the targeted industry sectors prioritized by City Council, including “Med-Tech” and “Bio-Tech” companies and startups. The final users of the industrial parcels are unknown and therefore, the Planned Development Stage 2 Development Plan provides flexibility to support uses targeted by the EDZ incentives package. According to the Applicant, a FAR of 0.40 for warehousing uses is needed to obtain the building square footage to meet the users’ needs. An overview of the Stage 2 Development Plan is provided below. The draft Ordinance providing details of the amendments to the Stage 1 Development Plan and the proposed Stage 2 Development Plan is included as Attachment 2. Development StandardsThe Stage 1 Development Plan includes development standards Industrial Park and Residential area and allows them in the to be modified through a Stage 2 Development Plan. Development standards are proposed to one residential neighborhood supporting single-family and multi-family homes of various sizes and styles. Building off the existing Stage 1 Development Plan, the single-family homes would be a mix of one- and two-story buildings with a maximum height of 35 feet. The attached multi-family homes would be a maximum of three-stories and 40 feet in height. A minimum of two covered parking spaces and one guest parking space are required for every unit in the project area.For the industrial area, the development standards would allow a maximum height of three stories and 35 feet. It also provides the required setbacks for both the building and parking areas from Dublin Boulevard, adjacent properties. The parking requirement defers to the Dublin Municipal Code. A complete list of all development standards is included in the proposed Planned
14
Page 6 of 11
Development Ordinance (Attachment 2).Increase in Floor Area RatioAs outlined above, the proposed Planned Development Rezone includes increasing the FAR from 0.35 to 0.40 in the industrial area for warehousing uses only. For all other uses the maximum FAR will remain 0.35 FAR. Architectural and Landscape GuidelinesThe architectural and landscape guidelines provided in the Stage 2 Development Plan provide the framework for the future Site Development Review Permits. The architectural and landscapeguidelines are based on the Design Guidelines and Master Neighborhood Landscaping Plan in the Stage 1 Development Plan and aim to promote well designed and attractive development. The architectural guidelines are organized into two sections: Residential Design Guidelines and Industrial Design Guidelines. The guidelines for the residential area focus on four proposed architectural styles: Mediterranean, Cottage, American Heritage and Traditional architecture. The residential guidelines seek to develop an interesting mix of plans and elevation styles and to ensure balanced and varied streetscapes. In order to achieve this, requirements for varied elevations, colors and massing are included as well as criteria for building form and articulation, roof, window and door details, garage design and placement, and building materials and finishes. The industrial guidelines focus on creating a unique sense of place that is complementary to its industrial and residential surroundings. The industrial guidelines focus on contemporary and modern styles and include criteria for site design, parking and circulation, storage and loading areas, building form, scale and finish materials. The architectural guidelines are included as Attachment 3. The proposed landscape guidelines are intended to complement and enhance the architecture throughout the development. The emphasis for the Branaugh property is to create a well-designed development through the choices and arrangement of materials, colors, and textures. The overall landscape theme provides vibrant, flowering plant material that complements architecture andprovides seasonal color while encouraging pedestrian access and connectivity to and from adjacent uses and activities. The landscape guidelines are included as Attachment 4. Inclusionary ZoningPursuant to the City’s Inclusionary Zoning Regulations (Chapter 8.68 of the Dublin Municipal Code), developments of more than 20 residential units are required to set aside 12.5 percent of the units in the project as affordable units. The Inclusionary Zoning Regulations allow the payment of fees in-lieu of constructing 40% of the inclusionary units and provides additional alternative methods of compliance with these requirements. The proposed project includes up to 97 units which generates an affordable requirement of up to 12 units as follows.The applicant’s proposal to comply with the City’s Inclusionary Zoning Regulations is outlined in the Planned Development Ordinance and also added as a condition of approval for the tentative map. The inclusionary housing requirement will be satisfied as follows:
•In-Lieu Fee: 40 percent of the total number of inclusionary units within the
15
Page 7 of 11
development shall be satisfied via payment of an “In-Lieu Fee” as provided by the City’s Impact Fee Schedule.
•On-site Affordable Units: 60 percent of the total number of inclusionary units within the development shall be developed on site
•On-site Affordable Units shall be dispersed throughout the neighborhood and constructed concurrently with the market rate units.
•Execution of an agreement imposing appropriate resale controls and/or rental restrictions on the affordable units shall be required in accordance with DMC Chapter 8.68.The Development Agreement also includes the option to pursue an alternative method of compliance as provided by the Dublin Municipal Code. The draft Planning Commission Resolution recommending approval of the Planned Development Rezoning and draft Ordinance providing the details of the proposed zoning are included as Attachments 1 and 2.Vesting Tentative Parcel MapThe application includes a request for Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (VTPM) No. 9306 to create the individual development parcels. The proposed Vesting Tentative Parcel Map would subdivide the 40.16-acre Branaugh property into four parcels as follows:
Table 3. Summary of Parcel Map Parcel Parcel Size(acres)Existing Land Use Proposed Use19.87 Medium Density Residential Residential22.04 Industrial Park Water Quality Facility for Residential317.87 Industrial Park Industrial48.51 Industrial Park IndustrialIn addition, 1.87-acres of the property has been set aside for the future extension of Dublin Boulevard located between Parcel 3 and Parcel 4. The future Dublin Boulevard extension dedication includes a 130-foot right-of-way plus a 10-foot Public Service Easement on both the north and south side of the road. The VTPM is included as Attachment 6.Development Agreement The Applicant has requested approval of a Development Agreement for the project. The Development Agreement would provide security to the Applicant that the City will not change its zoning and other laws applicable to the project for a stated period of time. Additionally, it is a mechanism for the City to obtain commitments from the Applicant that the City might not otherwise be able to obtain. The details of the Development Agreement can be found in Attachment 8. The main points are highlighted below.
16
Page 8 of 11
Project GradingTo accommodate the grading necessary on the property for future development, the Development Agreement allows the property owner to grade the entirety of parcel prior to the construction of the Dublin Boulevard Extension. If grading has not commenced a slope easement adjacent to the Dublin Boulevard frontage shall be dedicated. Affordable HousingThe Development Agreement authorizes the property owner to request an “alternative method ofcompliance” for required affordable units as outlined in the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations section above. The Development Agreement does not commit to a specific alternative method, which would need to be approved by City Council, if requested.Right-of-Way DedicationsAs part of the project, the property owner is required to dedicate land to support the Dublin Boulevard extension and the Collier Canyon Road realignment as part of the Valley Link project. The Development Agreement requires the dedication of Dublin Boulevard to occur no later than three (3) years from the approval date of the VTPM and the dedication of Collier Canyon Road on the first final map.
Community Facilities District for Mitigation Impacts of Dublin Boulevard ExtensionThe Dublin Boulevard Extension project results in direct and indirect impacts on the environment which need to be mitigated prior to construction of the road. The Development Agreement includes working with the property owner on the funding and financing for the Dublin Boulevard Extension-related impacts and project-related impacts. More specifically, it includes the formation of a Community Facilities District for Facilities (CFD) to fund the acquisition of facilities required to mitigate for indirect impacts in association with construction of the Dublin Boulevard Extension. A CFD is a special tax district which would allow the property owner to impose a tax to fund services, public improvements, or infrastructure. The CFD must be formed prior to the filing of the first parcel or final map unless an alternative to mitigate the impacts is approved by the City Engineer. Community Facilities District for Service and Maintenance of Public ImprovementsThe Development Agreement formation of a CFD for the purpose of financing the services and maintenance of public facilities/improvements constructed by the Developer. Public facilities/improvements includes all public streets (including storm drain systems, street lights, and other street appurtenances) within Parcels 1 and 2 (future residential tract), as shown on the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 9306. Eastern Dublin Transportation Impact Fee CreditsThe Development Agreement restricts the Developer from using or applying any Eastern Dublin Transportation Impact Fee (EDTIF) Credits that they have purchased or transferred from any other credit-holder to satisfy Developer’s EDTIF obligations. Floor Area Ratio Flexibility up to .50The proposed project includes an increase to the floor area ratio (FAR) from .35 to .40 for
17
Page 9 of 11
warehousing uses only. The property owner is interested in seeking a General Plan Amendment in the future to allow for a further increase to .50 FAR. The Development Agreement does not commit to the amendment but acknowledges the property owner’s intention.Land Use AmendmentsThe property owner would like flexibility with the future for hybrid uses, specifically for uses such as the sale of wine and wine production. In order to allow these uses, the Applicant would need a General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Industrial Park to General Commercial/Campus Office, and a corresponding amendment to the Planned Development Zoning. The Development Agreement does not commit to the amendment but acknowledges the property owner’s intention.The Planning Commission resolution recommending approval of the Development Agreement is included as Attachment 1. The draft Ordinance approving the Development Agreement is included as Attachment 7 with the Development Agreement itself as Attachment 8.
CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN, SPECIFIC PLAN AND ZONING
ORDINANCE:The proposed Planned Development Rezone and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map are consistent with the City of Dublin General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and the Dublin Zoning Ordinance because the proposed zoning and land division will allow for the implementation of Medium-Density Residential and Industrial Park uses within the project area which has been designated for such uses. Airport Influence Area (AIA)/Overlay Zoning DistrictThe project site is located within the Airport Influence Area (AIA)/Overlay Zoning District and Airport Safety Zone 6 as provided in Chapter 8.35 of the Dublin Municipal Code . This area is designated as an area in which current or future airport-related noise, overflight, safety and/or airspace protection factors may significantly affect land uses or necessitate restrictions on those uses. The AIA is a designation by the Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission.All permitted and conditionally permitted uses set forth in a Planned Development Zoning District that was adopted and in effect prior to August 2012 are considered to be “Existing Land Uses” pursuant to the Livermore Municipal Airport ALUCP. The Alameda County ALUC has no authority over Existing Land Uses unless changes to an Existing Land Use results in an increase of nonconformity with ALUCP policies. The proposed Planned Development Zoning District does not include any new land uses beyond what was allowed in the existing Planned Development Zoning District, including a variety of residential and industrial uses. The Planned Development Zoning District includes increasing the FAR for warehousing uses from 0.35 to 0.40. The Livermore Municipal Airport ALUCP allows warehousing in Safety Zone 6 with no limit to intensity (people/acre), therefore the increase in FAR is consistent with the ALUCP.
REVIEW BY APPLICABLE DEPARTMENT AND AGENCIES:
18
Page 10 of 11
The Building Division, Fire Prevention Bureau, Public Works Department, and Dublin San Ramon Services District reviewed the project and provided conditions of approval where appropriate to ensure that the project is established in compliance with all local ordinances and regulations. Conditions of approval from these departments have been included in the attached Resolution(Attachment 5).
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with State Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared. Prior CEQA analysis for the Fallon East project area includes: 1) the East Dublin General Plan and Specific Plan EIR (1993); 2) the East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation Supplemental EIR (2002); and 3) the Fallon Village Supplemental EIR (2005). Collectively, these three environmental review documents are referred to as the “EDSP EIRs.” Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines and using the City’s Initial Study Checklist, the City assessed whether any further environmental review is required for the proposed project and determined an Addendum to the EDSP EIRs is the appropriate CEQA review. The Addendum is included as Attachment 9. Staff recommends the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council to consider the Addendum to the EDSP EIRs before approval of the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan amendments.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:Two City-led Community Meetings were held on September 7 and 8, 2022, to provide Dublin residents with information about the proposed Branaugh Property project. Four community members attended the meeting on September 7 and five community members attended the meeting on September 8. Staff provided a presentation that included an overview of the City’s development review process and the proposed project. Questions were asked about the Dublin Boulevard extension project, airport noise impacts on the residential development, water supplyfor future development, timing of project development, affordable housing and the impacts to schools.In accordance with State law, a Public Notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the subject property. A Public Notice was also published in the East Bay Timesand posted at several locations throughout the City. To date, the City has not received any comments regarding the project. A copy of this Staff Report was posted on the City’s website and provided to the Applicant. Written public comment received is attached to this report (Attachment 10).
ATTACHMENTS:1) Planning Commission Resolution Recommending Approval
19
Page 11 of 11
2) Exhibit A to Attachment 1 Ordinance Approving Amendments to Planned Development Zoning Ordinance No. 32-05 for Fallon Village and Amending the Zoning Map and Approving a Planned Development Zoning District with Stage 2 Development Plan for Branaugh Property3) Exhibit A to Attachment 2 Architectural Guidelines4) Exhibit B to Attachment 2 Landscape Guidelines5) Exhibit B to Attachment 1 City Council Resolution Approving Vesting Tentative Map No. 9306 for the Branaugh Property6) Exhibit A to Attachment 3 Vesting Tentative Map7) Exhibit C to Attachment 1 Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement Between City of Dublin and BEX Development related to the Branaugh Property Project8) Exhibit A to Attachment 7 Development Agreement9) CEQA Analysis in Support of Addendum10)Public Comment
20
Reso. No. 23-XX, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. 23 – XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN
ADDENDUM TO THE EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORTS, AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING MAP, AMENDMENTS TO PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE NO. 32-05 FOR FALLON VILLAGE, A PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT ZONING STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN, VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP NO. 9306 AND A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE BRANAUGH
PROPERTY PROJECT
PLPA-2021-00014
(APN# 905-0001-004-04)
WHEREAS,the property owner, BEX Development, is requesting approval to subdivide
the 40.16-acre site into four parcels to accommodate proposed residential and industrial
development. The project would allow up to 97 units within 9.87 acres designated Medium-Density
Residential and approximately 527,773 square feet of industrial use on 30.29 acres designated
Industrial Park. Requested approvals include amendments to Planned Development Stage 1
Development Plan (Ordinance No. 32-05 for Fallon Village), a Planned Development Zoning
Stage 2 Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 9306 and a Development
Agreement. These planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the “Branaugh
Property Project” or the “Project;” and
WHEREAS,the 40.16-acre Project site (APN 905-0001-004-04) is located in eastern
Dublin adjacent to the city boundary and along the future Dublin Boulevard extension; and
WHEREAS, the existing General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use
designations are Medium-Density and Industrial Park; and
WHEREAS, the Project site is located within Planned Development zoning district
Ordinance No. 32-05; and
WHEREAS,amendments to Planned Development Ordinance No. 32-05 for Fallon Village
are necessary for consistency with the proposed Stage 2 Development Plan; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Vesting Tentative Parcel Map will allow for the orderly division
of the Branaugh property into four parcels consistent with the City of Dublin General Plan and
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan for the division of land; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Sections 66428 of the Subdivision Map Act provide that a
Tentative Parcel Map may be used when the purpose of the map is to create four or fewer parcels;
and
WHEREAS,the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the CEQA
Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures require that certain projects be
reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and
21
Reso. No. 23-XX, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, prior CEQA analysis for the Project area includes: 1) the Eastern Dublin
General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan EIR (1993); 2) the East Dublin Properties Stage 1
Development Plan and Annexation Supplemental EIR (2002); and 3) the Fallon Village
Supplemental EIR (2005). Collectively, these three environmental review documents are referred
to as the “EDSP EIRs;” and
WHEREAS, in compliance with CEQA, the City prepared a CEQA Addendum for the
Project (the “Addendum”), incorporated by reference; and
WHEREAS, the Addendum reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis of the
potential environmental impacts of the Project, and concludes that the Project would not result in
any new significant impacts or substantially increase the severity of any significant impacts
identified in the EDSP EIRs and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted, and incorporated herein by reference, described
and analyzed the Project for the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, on February 14, 2023, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public
hearing on the Project, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Addendum, the EDSP EIRs, all
above-referenced reports, recommendations, and testimony to evaluate the Project, and the
Planning Commission did further hear and consider all said reports, recommendations, and
testimony hereinabove as set forth before taking any action.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, on the
basis of substantial evidence set forth in the record, including but not limited to, EDSP EIRs, the
Addendum, and all related information presented to the Planning Commission, that the
environmental effects of the proposed Project were sufficiently analyzed and that an Addendum is
the appropriate environmental document for the proposed Project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Project will not result in any new significant impacts
or substantially increase the severity of any significant impacts identified in the previous CEQA
documents and no further environmental review under CEQA is required.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that the City
Council approve an Addendum to the EDSP EIRs and adopt an Ordinance, attached as Exhibit
A and incorporated herein by reference, approving a Planned Development Zoning Stage 1
Development Plan amendment, amending the Zoning Map and approving a Stage 2 Development
Plan based on findings, as set forth in Exhibit A.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that the City
Council approve the Resolution, attached as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference,
approving Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 9306 based on the findings and conditions of
approval, as set forth in Exhibit B.
22
Reso. No. 23-XX, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 3 of 3
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that the City
Council adopt an Ordinance attached as Exhibit C approving a Development Agreement between
the City of Dublin and BEX Development based on findings, as set forth in Exhibit C.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14
th day of February 2023, by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
______________________________
Community Development Director
23
Ord. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 1 of 9
ORDINANCE NO. xx – 23
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AND APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 32-05 FOR FALLON VILLAGE AND
APPROVING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
THE BRANAUGH PROPERTY
PLPA 2021-00014
(APN 905-0001-004-04)
The Dublin City Council does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. RECITALS
A. The Branaugh Property is located in the Fallon Village Project area. Through Ordinance
No. 32-05, the City Council adopted a Planned Development Zoning Stage 1 Development
Plan the Fallon Village Project Area which, among other approvals, established the
maximum number of residential units at 3,108 units for the Fallon Village Project Area.
B. The Applicant, Randy Branaugh, is requesting a Planned Development Zoning Stage 2
Development Plan and amendments to the Stage 1 Development Plan. The proposed
Project would allow up to 97 residential units and 527,773 square feet of industrial uses.
Requested land use approvals include a Planned Development Zoning Stage 2
Development Plan, amendments to the Stage 1 Development Plan, and Vesting Tentative
Parcel Map No. 9306 and a Development Agreement among other related actions. These
planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the “Branaugh Property
Project” or the “Project.”
C. The 40.16-acre Project site (APN 905-0001-004-04) is located in eastern Dublin, north of
Interstate 580 and immediately adjacent to the City limit and urban limit line.
D. Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City
prepared an Addendum for the Project, which reflected the City’s independent judgment
and analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Project. Prior CEQA analysis for
the Project area includes: 1) the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific
Plan EIR (1993); 2) the East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation
Supplemental EIR (2002); and 3) the Fallon Village Supplemental EIR (2005). Collectively,
these three environmental review documents are referred to as the “EDSP EIRs.”
E. Following a public hearing on February 14, 2023, the Planning Commission adopted
Resolution No. 23-xx, recommending approval of the Addendum and the Branaugh
Property Project.
F. The City Council considered the Addendum to the EDSP EIRs, and all above referenced
reports, recommendations, and testimony prior to taking action on the Project.
Attachment 2
24
Ord. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 2 of 9
G. On _________, the City Council adopted Resolution No. xx-23 approving Vesting Tentative
Parcel Map No. 9306.
SECTION 2: FINDINGS
A. Pursuant to Section 8.32.070 and 8.120.050 of the Dublin Municipal Code, the City Council
finds as follows:
1.The proposed Planned Development Zoning District meets the purpose and intent of
Chapter 8.32 in that 1) it provides maximum flexibility and diversification in the
development of property,; 2) maintains consistency with, and implement the
provisions of, the Dublin General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; 3)
protects the integrity and character of both residential and non-residential areas of the
City; 4) encourages efficient use of land for preservation of sensitive environmental
areas such as open space areas and topographic features; 5) provide for effective
development of public facilities and services for the site; 6) encourages use of design
features to achieve development that is compatible with the area; and 7) allows for
creative and imaginative design that will promote amenities beyond those expected in
conventional developments.
2.The proposed amendment would be harmonious and compatible with existing and
potential development in surrounding areas in that 1) the proposed project is located
within the Fallon Village Stage 1 Development Plan area which has a mixed of
residential, commercial and industrial areas; 2) the project’s residential area will be
consistent the planned residential project (East Ranch) to the north and medium
density residential land use to the west and 3) the industrial area to the west is
envisioned to be developed with similar and compatible uses.
3. The subject site is physically suitable for the type, intensity of the zoning districtbeing
proposed in that the proposed density and development standards in the proposed
zoning is consistent with the existing Stage 1 Development Plan and existing land use
designations in the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.
4. The proposed amendment will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons
residing or working in the vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and
welfare in that 1) the proposed amendment addresses the planned design of the
Dublin Boulevard extension and provides for a higher FAR for warehousing uses only
consistent with the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and 2) the
industrial area to the west is envisioned to be developed with similar and compatible
uses.
5. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Dublin General Plan and the Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan in that the proposed land uses are densities are consistent with
existing land use designations in the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.
B. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 32-05 Section 3.2.A.3), the City Council makes the following
findings regarding the amendments to the Stage 1 Development Plan as follows:
1.The proposed use and development is consistent with the General Plan, Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
25
Ord. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 3 of 9
2.The proposed development is consistent with Stage 1 and 2 design guidelines.
3.Appropriate transitions are developed between projects where an industrial use is
adjacent to a different use. These transitions can be created through careful design of
landscaping, consideration of the relationship of the uses to buildings on surrounding
sites, building and circulation layout, and setbacks.
4.The size, scale and intensity of development do not conflict with the character of the
district and adjacent land uses.
5.Adequate space, light, and air along with visual and acoustical privacy are provided.
6.No excessive noise, illumination, unsightliness, odor, smoke, and other objectionable
influences are generated.
7.On and off-site vehicular and pedestrian linkages and circulation are functional and
minimize barriers.
8.Streetscapes and parking lots are varied, create visual interest and are pedestrian
friendly.
9.The development provides access to public transit and services.
10. Adequate on-site parking, including the ability to participate in shared parking, is
provided.
11. Where possible, certain elements should be coordinated and shared, including access
drives; internal circulation; perimeter open space and landscape buffers; service,
loading, and refuse locations; and drainage, detention, and water quality facilities.
C. Pursuant to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Section 4.8.2 related to the increase in FAR
to 0.40 for warehousing uses, the City Council finds as follows:
1.Unique project characteristics which result in reduced impacts relative to other uses in
the same area (e.g., lower traffic generation);
2.Unique project building requirements (e.g., warehouse uses that have large land
coverage requirements but low employment densities); and
3.Extraordinary benefits to the City.
The establishment of the Economic Development Zone (EDZ) and Incentives package was
approved by City Council on May 18, 2021, for properties east of Fallon Road along the Dublin
Boulevard extension. The EDZ encourages investments in the targeted industry sectors
prioritized by City Council, including “Med-Tech” and “Bio-Tech” companies and startups. The
final users of the industrial parcels are unknown and therefore, the Planned Development Stage
2 Development Plan provides flexibility to support uses targeted by the EDZ incentives package.
An FAR of 0.40 for warehousing uses is needed to obtain the building square footage to meet
the users’ needs.
26
Ord. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 4 of 9
SECTION 3. AMENDMENTS TO THE OF STAGE 1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN ORDINANCE
NO. 32-05
Fallon Village Stage 1 Development Plan
On December 20, 2005, the City Council approved a Stage 1 Development Plan for the 1,134-
acre Fallon Village Project, pursuant to Chapter 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. The
Planned Development Stage 1 Development Plan for the Fallon Village Project is amended as
shown below:
5. Site area, proposed densities. The Table in Section 5 (Site area, proposed densities) of
Ordinance 32-05 is amended to add a footnote to the Industrial Park land use, as shown below
to, increase the FAR for the Industrial Park land use on the Branaugh Property to 0.40 FAR as
follows:
Land Use Acreage Density
Single Family Residential 403.6 acres 0-6.0 units/acre
Medium Density Residential 60.1 acres 6.1-14.0 units/acre
Medium High Density
Residential
23.8 acres 14.1-25.0 units/acre
Rural Residential/Agriculture 142.9 acres 1 unit/100 acres
Mixed Use 6.4 acres 0.3-1.00 FAR
General Commercial 72.1 acres 0.20-0.60 FAR
General Commercial/
Campus Office
72.7 acres 0.2-0.80 FAR
Industrial Park 61.3 acres 0.35 / 0.40 FAR
1
Community Park 18.3 acres --
Neighborhood Park 23.6 acres --
Neighborhood Square 8.0 acres --
Open Space 211.2 acres --
Elementary School 21.1 acres --
Semi-Public 4.1 acres 0.50 FAR
Public/Semi-Public 4.5 acres 0.50 FAR
1The maximum FAR for warehousing uses is 0.40 FAR for the Branaugh Property only. For all
other uses and parcels the maximum FAR is 0.35 FAR.
SECTION 4: ZONING MAP AMENDMENT
Pursuant to Chapter 8.32, Title 8 of the City of Dublin Municipal Code the City of Dublin Zoning
Map is amended to rezone the property described below to a Planned Development Zoning
District: 40.16-acres within APN 905-0001-004-04 (the “Property”)
27
Ord. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 5 of 9
A map of the rezoning area is shown below:
SECTION 5. APPROVAL OF STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN
The regulations for the use, development, improvement, and maintenance of the Property are
set forth in the following Stage 2 Development Plan for the entire 40.16-acre project area, which
is hereby approved. Any amendments to the Stage 2 Development Plan shall be in accordance
with Section 8.32.080 of the Dublin Municipal Code or its successors.
Stage 2 Development Plan
The following is a Stage 2 Development Plan pursuant to Chapter 8.32 of the Dublin Zoning
Ordinance. This Development Plan meets all the requirements of a Stage 2 Development Plan
and is adopted as part of the PD-Planned Development rezoning for the Branaugh Property
(PLPA-2021-00014).
The PD-Planned Development District and this Stage 2 Development Plan provides flexibility to
encourage innovative development while ensuring that the goals, policies, and action programs
of the General Plan and provisions of Chapter 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance are satisfied.
1. Statement of compatibility with the Stage 1 Development Plan. The Branaugh Property
Stage 2 Development Plan is consistent with the Stage 1 Development Plan for the Fallon
Village Project area (Ordinance No. 32-05), as amended in Section 3 above.
2. Statement of Uses. Permitted, conditional, accessory and temporary uses are allowed as
set forth in the Stage 1 Planned Development Rezone amendment for Fallon Village in
Ordinance No. 32-05, incorporated herein by reference.
3. Stage 2 Site Plan. The following Stage 2 Site Plan is conceptual. Final site design shall be
determined by the Site Development Review Permit.
28
Ord. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 6 of 9
4. Development Regulations.
Industrial Development Standards
STANDARD
Maximum FAR(1)0.35 / .040
Maximum Building Height (4)(5)35 feet
Maximum Stories 3
Minimum Building Setbacks (2) (3)
Dublin Blvd ROW 25 feet
Adjacent Property 10'10 feet
Building Side to Side 18'18 feet
Minimum Parking Setback(2)
Dublin Blvd ROW 10'10 feet
Entry Street 10'10 feet
Adjacent Property 10'10 feet
Required Parking Refer to Chapter 8.76 of the Dublin Municipal Code
Notes:
(1) The maximum FAR for warehousing uses is 0.40 FAR. For all other uses the maximum FAR is
0.35 FAR.
(2) Setbacks measured from property line or as otherwise noted.
(3) Items such as, but not limited to, air conditioning condensers, porches, chimneys, bay windows,
retaining walls less than 4' in height, media centers, etc. may encroach 2' into the required setback.
Subject to Building Code requirements for access.
(4) Elevator overruns, stair coverings, decorative roof elements, and other architectural or mechanical
appetences on buildings may extend a maximum of 5 feet above the maximum building height.
(5) Proposed construction within 20,000 feet of Airport Runway may require FAA review. Building
height subject to FAA Airspace Obstructions Standards
29
Ord. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 7 of 9
Residential Development Standards
CRITERIA Medium Density Lot Medium Density
Small Lot
Medium Density
Duplex/Triplex
Product Type Single Family
Detached
Single Family
Detached
Attached Multi-Family
Lot Size 4000 SF and Greater 3000 SF and Greater N/A
Typical Lot Width(16)50' Wide and above 40' Wide and Above N/A
Maximum Lot
Coverage (13)(14)
45% Two Story; 55%
One Story
55%N/A
Maximum Building
Height (4)(17)
35'35'40'
Maximum Stories (7)2 2 3
Minimum Front Yard
Setbacks
(1) (2)(11)(16)(18)
Living Area 12'10' to ROW or 8' to
Court
8' to ROW; 20'
Building to Building
Porch 10'8' to ROW or 6' to
Court
6' to ROW; 15' Porch
to Porch
Garage (8)18' Front Load 18' Front Load 4' to ROW/Alley
14' Side Load
Minimum Side Yard
Setbacks
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(10)
Living Area 4'/5' Garage Side 4'/5' Garage Side 0/5'
Porch 4'4'0/5'
Courtyard (6)(15)0'0'0'
Encroachments (3)(3)(3)
Minimum Rear Yard
Setbacks
(1)(2)(9)(11)(13)
Living Area 12' avg per lot.; 5' min
(4)
10' avg per lot.; 5' min
(4)5'(13)
Covered Patio 10'5'N/A
Accessory
Structures
Refer to Chapter 8.40
of Municipal Code
Refer to Chapter 8.40
of Municipal Code
Refer to Chapter 8.40
of Municipal Code
Required Parking
(12)(19)
Refer to Chapter 8.76
of Municipal Code
Refer to Chapter 8.76
of Municipal Code
Refer to Chapter 8.76
of Municipal Code
Maximum
Encroachments(3)
2'2'2'
Minimum Usable
Private Open Space
(SF)
400 S.F with a min.
dimension of 10 ft.
Yard area may be
provided in more than
150 S.F with a min.
dimension of 5 ft
100 SF patio with a
10' min dimension or
a 50 SF upper level
deck with a 5' min
30
Ord. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 8 of 9
one location within a
lot with a min of 80
SF yard or courtyard
area.
inside dimension
Notes:
(1) Setbacks measured from property line or as otherwise noted. Setbacks to "Court" refer to back of
curb.
(2) See following pages for graphic depiction of above standards.
(3) Items such as, but not limited to air conditioning condensers, porches, chimneys, bay windows,
retaining walls less than 4' in height, media centers, etc. may encroach 2' into the required setback of
one side yard, provided a minimum of a 3' flat and level area is maintained for access around the
house.
(4) Subject to the Building Code requirements for access.
(5) Building setbacks shall be subject to review and approval of Building Official for Building Code and
Fire Code issues. Setback to building overhang shall be 3' minimum or as required by current City
Building Code Standards.
(6) Maximum height of a front yard courtyard wall shall be 30" maximum (solid wall) or 42" maximum
(transparent/fence)
(7) The third floor must be stepped back from front and rear elevation to reduce building mass.
(8) Three car garages door and swing in garages are prohibited on lots less than 55' wide.
(9) Retaining walls up to 4' high may be used to create a level usable area. Retaining walls in excess
of 4' to create usable area are subject to review and approval of the Community Development
Director. Retaining walls over 30" in height are subject to safety criteria as determined by the Building
Official.
(10) Where a minimum 5' HOA parcel lies between a lot and an adjacent street, the lot is not
considered a corner lot and interior lot setback standards shall
apply.
(11) At cul-de-sac bulbs, knuckles and similar conditions where lot depths are less than the standard
depth, minimum rear yard setback requirements may be reduced by an amount equal to the min. lot
depth minus the actual depth of the lot (i.e.: 100'-90'=10'). In no case will the rear yard setback be
reduced to less than 10'.
(12) Curbside parking may be counted toward required number of guest spaces. 2 covered side-by-
side spots shall be provided. Tandem spaces may not be utilized to meet the parking requirement.
(13) Rear Multi Family setback refers to property lines not considered ROW.
(14) Driveway apron shall be centered on the garage door. In instances where 3-car front on garages
are utilized the driveway apron shall be centered on the entire front on garage plane.
(15) Courtyard wall to return to side yard fence or front plane of main residential structure.
(16) Lot width dimensions may vary to provide product diversity within each neighborhood, and
atypical lot shapes (i.e. non-rectangular)
(17) Elevator overruns, stair coverings, decorative roof elements, and similar structures can exceed
the building height limit by a maximum of 15 percent.
(18) Minimum front / corner setback to living and porch may be subject to grading and specific location
of top of pad hinge line. A minimum flat distance of 2' should be maintained between foundation and
top of pad hinge.
5. Architectural Guidelines. Please refer to Exhibit A.
6. Landscaping Guidelines.Please refer to Exhibit B.
7. Inclusionary Zoning Regulations. The project shall comply with the Inclusionary Zoning
Regulations (Chapter 8.68) for the provision of affordable housing as a residential
development of 20 units or more.
31
Ord. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 9 of 9
8. Applicable Requirements of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Except as specifically
provided in this Stage 2 Development Plan and the Stage 1 Development Plan (Ordinance
No. 32-05), the use, development, improvement and maintenance of the Property shall be
governed by the provision of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance pursuant to 8.32.060C or its
successor. The closest comparable zoning districts are as follows:
Residential:
R-M Multi-Family Residential District
Industrial:
M-P Industrial Park and M-2 Heavy Industrial Zoning District, whichever is least restrictive.
SECTION 5. POSTING OF ORDINANCE
The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3)
public spaces in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of
the State of California.
SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days following its adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this ___ day of
_______, by the following votes:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
_____________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
City Clerk
32
BRANAUGH
DESIGN GUIDELINES
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA
900.457 33
2
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ................................................................. 3
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES..................................... 4
INDUSTRIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES.................................... 10
SDG Architects, Inc.
3361 Walnut Blvd. Suite 120
Brentwood, CA 94513
925.634.7000
MacKay & Somps
5142 Franklin Dr. Suite B
Pleasanton, CA 94588-3368
925.225.0690
Gates Landscape Artchitecture
2671 Crow Canyon Rd.
San Ramon, CA 94583
925.736.8176
Developed by:
SDG Architects, Inc.
LANCE CRANNELL, AIA LEED AP NCARB
ARCHITECT | PRINCIPAL
VERSION: October 2022
Design Team:
34
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
3
INTRODUCTION
The intent of the Branaugh Design Guidelines is to es-
tablish expectations and to regulate the design of the
residential and industrial uses within the planned de-
velopment. These guidelines are intended to assist the
developer and design professionals in the design of the
architecture, parking, and landscaping within this area.
These guidelines will ensure a high quality development
while maintaining design and marketplace flexibility.
These guidelines are not intended to limit the creativ-
ity of the design professionals. The property is within
The City of Dublin’s East Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP)
and The Fallon Village Stage 1 PD. Guidelines from
those has been incorporated and where appropriate
design concepts have been integrated herein. These
guidelines are separate and specific to this subdivision.
DESCRIPTION
The Branaugh property consists of approximately 40.16
acres within the East Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) and
the Fallon Village Stage 1 PD (PD-1) planning area,
9.87 acres of which is designated Medium density
residential and 30.29 acres of which is designated
Industrial Park (IP) per the EDSP. The project is
proposing 78 units, with the option to provide up to
97 units, within the designated 9.87 acres of
Medium density residential and is consistent with
the approved Stage 1 PD. The area is also
including up to 527,773 SF of industrial buildings on
the 30.29 acres of Industrial Park use, and proposing
an increase in FAR from 0.35, as shown in the
approved PD1, to 0.4. The Branaugh property is
located directly east of the Righetti property, south
of the Croak property, north of Interstate 580 and the
Monte Vista (Town and Country) property, and West
of the Crosby (Livbor Manning) property.
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
35
4
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINESRESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
The Residential Design Guidelines are intended to
serve as a set of guidelines, recommendations, and
requirements to guide property owners, business owners,
developers, architects, and other design professionals
in understanding the objective of providing for well-
designed, attractive, residential development for this
planned development area.
ARCHITECTURAL VOCABULARY
The architectural styles in these guidelines offer a range
of building types and styles that have evolved in Cal-
ifornia since the turn of the 20th century. These styles
represent an inherent attractiveness, informality, and
elegance that have enabled them to remain popular
over an extended period of time. They all have historic
precedents and are visually compatible with one an-
other. These styles possess market appeal, communi-
ty acceptance and can be successfully expressed in
modern merchant built homes.
VARIETY REQUIREMENT
An important goal of the planned community is to de-
velop an interesting mix of plans and elevation styles
and to ensure balanced and varied streetscapes. In
order to achieve this, the following architectural re-
quirements must be met:
UNITS PLANS AND ELEVATIONS
• For single family detached homes, a minimum of
1 plan with 3 elevations shall be provided for every
25 units.
STYLE AND MASSING
• Plans and elevations should be mixed within a
development to avoid repetition of identical fa-
cades and roof lines.
• Houses on corner lots should receive the same
level of articulation on both the front and corner
side facades.
COLORS
• A minimum of 3 different color schemes shall be
provided for each architectural style
• Select color schemes appropriate to the archi-
tectural style
• A minimum of 2 trim colors shall be provided for
each primary base color.
• Wrap colors around details such as wood or
foam window and door trim appropriate to the
architectural style.
• Relate color changes to plane changes and
materials changes.
36
5
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINESGENERAL ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES
ARCHITECTURE
These guidelines aim to promote high quality architec-
tural designs that enhance the character of Dublin.
Neighborhood developments shall utilize architectural
styles that complement each other when grouped
together.
A. ARCHITECTURAL STYLES
The architectural styles have been divided into four ar-
chitectural groups. Each group represents one of the
great movements in the development of architectural
styles in the United States and specifically California.
The styles are grouped as follows:
MEDITERRANEAN• Spanish Eclectic• Monterey
• Tuscan
COTTAGE
• French Country• English Tudor
AMERICAN HERITAGE
• Craftsman
• Arts & Crafts
• Prairie
TRADITIONAL
• Farmhouse
• Classic Revival
• East Coast
Use of these styles are recommended.
B. STREET ENVIRONMENT AND BUILDING
FRONTAGE
Single-family residential development shall efficiently
use the site, and relate to the street.
1. Front porches (or porch elements) are en-
couraged to create an attractive interface with
semi-public front yard areas.
2. The front entry shall be the focal point of the
home. Roof elements, columns, porticos, or other
architectural features shall be utilized.
3. Garages shall be a subordinate feature and
shall not dominate the streetscape.
4. A reduced level of articulation on the less visible
side and rear elevations is acceptable. Parcels on
corner or visible end of a street shall include articu-
lation similar to the front elevation.
C. BUILDING FORM AND ARTICULATION
Building form and articulation includes variation in
wall planes (projections and recesses) and wall height
(vertical relief) as well as variations in roof forms and
heights to reduce the perceived scale of the structure.
1. Residential homes shall incorporate articulation
of all facades, including variation in massing, roof
forms, and wall planes, as well as surface articula-
tion.
2. The highest level of articulation will likely occur
on the front facade and facades visible from pub-
lic streets. Similar and complementary massing,
materials, and details shall be incorporated into
every other structure elevation.
3. Elements and details of homes shall be true to
the chosen architectural style.
Details such as projecting eaves, tapered columns and ex-
posed beams are characteristics of a Craftsman style house
4. Surface detailing shall not serve as a substitute
for well integrated and distinctive massing.
5. Architectural elements that add visual interest,
scale, and character such as recessed or project-
ing balconies, trellises, recessed windows, and
porches are encouraged.
6. Architectural elements such as overhangs,
trellises, projections, and awnings shall be used to
create shadows that contribute to a structure’s
character.
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINESBRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
37
6
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
7. Massing shall accentuate entries and minimize
garage prominence.
The chimney is a featured architectural element along
with window inserts and trim
D. BUILDING HEIGHT
Heights per Section 4 Development Regulations in
Planned Development.
Single-family residential homes shall be one or two sto-
ries. Homes shall have varied heights to create visual
interest in the neighborhood.
This Second Story addition over part of the existing structure
uses the same architectural style, materials and rooflines.
E. ROOF AND UPPER STORY DETAILS
Visual diversity shall be created by incorporating mul-
tiple rooflines and designs while remaining consistent
with the architectural style of the home.
1. A variety of roofs shall be incorporated through-
out the development (e.g., gabled, hipped, dor-
mers, etc.).
2. Multi-form roofs, gabled, hipped, and shed roof
combinations are encouraged to create varying
roof forms, and break up the massing of
the building.
Craftsman roofs feature intersecting gables to create an
interesting building form
3. Full, sloped roofs are strongly encouraged with
both vertical and horizontal roof articulations.
4. Roof overhangs shall be sized appropriately for
the desired architectural style.
5. Exposed gutters and downspouts, unless de-
signed as an outstanding architectural feature
of the overall theme, shall be colored to match
fascia.
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINESRESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
38
77
F. BUILDING MATERIALS AND FINISHES
The use of high quality materials will create a look of
permanence within a project. Materials and colors
shall be varied to generate visual interest in the fa-
cades and to avoid the monotonous appearance
that is sometimes common in some contemporary
residential development projects.
1. Key portions of the facade shall be enhanced
with special materials or color.
The white trim on this house contrasts with the blue siding for a
pleasing appearance
2. Material changes shall occur at intersecting
planes, at inside corners of changing wall planes
or where architectural elements intersect (e.g.,
chimney, pilaster, projection, fence line, etc.)
3. Contrasting but complementary colors shall be
used for trim, windows, doors, and key architectur-
al elements.
4. Roof materials and colors shall be consistent
with the desired architectural style.
5. Visually heavier materials shall be used lower
on the structure elevation to form the base of the
structure.
6. Stucco may be an appropriate building mate-
rial if careful attention is paid to ensure it is appro-
priate to the architectural style of the house (i.e.,
the creamier stucco colors and finishes of a Span-
ish eclectic home would be appropriate).
A heavy material such as brick serves as a strong base for a
house
GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINESBRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
39
An inset window is appropriate for Spanish Colonial style houses
5. In order to enhance privacy, windows on side
elevations shall be staggered and not be posi-
tioned directly opposite of the adjacent structure’s
windows.
6. Where windows have mullions they should be
appropriate to the architectural style of the struc-
ture.
7. Where architecturally appropriate, feature win-
dows shall be generously inset from structure walls
to create shade and shadow detail. The minimum
inset shall be six inches
8. Windows shall be articulated with sills, trim, kick-
ers, shutters, or awnings that are authentic to the
architectural style of the structure.
8
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
G. WINDOWS, DOORS AND ENTRIES
The desired architectural style of the building can be
captured by carefully designing windows, doors, and
entries.
1. Entrances shall be enhanced by using lighting,
landscaping, and architecture detailing.
2. The main entrance to a home shall be clearly
identifiable and shall be articulated with pro-
jecting or recessed forms so as to create a cov-
ered landing that will provide for shelter from the
weather.
3. Window type, material, shape, and proportion
shall complement the architectural style of the
building.
A recessed entry to a house adds interest and provides
protection from the elements
4. Windows shall be located to maximize incom-
ing daylight and reduce the need for indoor light-
ing and promote energy efficiency. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) “Energy Star” windows
with low e-coatings shall be used.
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINESRESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
40
H. GARAGES
When garages are well integrated into a project it will
ensure that they do not dominate front facades.
1. Garage doors shall be recessed a minimum of
3.5 inches from the face of the garage.
2. Garage doors facing the street shall be set back
from the exterior face of the main house or porch
to help reduce their visual impact.
The garage pictured here is set back from the rest of the house
to de-emphasize its visual impact on the streetscape
3. Swing in garages are permitted and shall ad-
here to the setbacks described in this document.
4. Garage doors shall incorporate panels and/or
windows to articulate large planes.
5. Garage standards shall be:
Interior dimensions: twenty by twenty feet clear;
Minimum garage door width of eight feet single,
sixteen feet double; Seven feet minimum height.
9
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINESBRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINESBRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
I. COMPATIBILITY WITH ADJACENT PROPERTIES
Homes shall vary from adjacent neighbors in architec-
tural style, height, and material selection, while still re-
lating to the overall theme of the larger development
as a whole.
Variation in elevation style, colors and materials shall
be used to provide a variety and visual intrest.
41
10
INDUSTRIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
INDUSTRIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
The Industrial Design Guidelines are intended to serve
as a point of reference to guide property owners,
business owners, developers, architects, and other
design professionals in understanding the objective
of providing for well-designed, attractive, high quality
industrial development in the Industrial Area.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Branaugh Industrial is envisioned as an extension of the
community along the future Dublin Boulevard Extension
project. The Branaugh Industrial design concept should
be compatible with the general commercial character
of the nearby industrial parcels. A unique sense of
place can be achieved through rich and varied
contemporary architectural character.
The Branaugh Industrial Architectural Design Guidelines
draw from the surrounding larger, more modern
urban and suburban areas. Both visual and physical
elements of the Branaugh Industrial Park will appeal
to communities because it helps provide a place for
synergy and utility for commerce in an environment
people want to participate in, be part of and enjoy.
The successful development of Branaugh Industrial
depends on many considerations beyond the built
environment. The implementation of these guidelines
will help to provide an initial step in creating the
environment in which the industrial Park will live and
thrive within the community it serves.
These guidelines include a description of design
objectives and stylistic analogs to be incorporated
into the overall architectural concept for Branaugh
Industrial.
BRANAUGH INDUSTRIAL CHARACTER
The overall character and feel of Branaugh Industrial
shall use a variety of cohesive styles, materials,
colors and textures. The use of pattern and scale
will integrate all of the different design principles,
creating a unified project. Elements such as awnings,
windows and storefront glazing will enhance building
articulation. Application of good design principles
should incorporate building scale and proportion, color
theory, lighting, storefront design, landscape design,
as well as keeping modern construction practices in
mind with respect to building development throughout
Branaugh Industrial.
The goal is to create a unique sense of place and that
is complementary to its surroundings.
Branaugh Industrial may consists of several types and
sizes of industrial buildings based on market needs but
the overall design of the Industrial park should have a
consistent theme with minor variations as appropriate
to the building and its use.
The main elements that typically define the character
of Branaugh Industrial are:
• Building Mass & Form
• Materials & Colors
• Contemporary Architectural Style
• Entry features
• Landscape Guidelines
• Parking and Vehicular Circulation
These components are fundamental to the creation
of a successful Industrial Park. They must each be
addressed in regard to design, location, scale and use.
42
11
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
AREA CHARACTER
1. New development, including expansions, ren-
ovations, and any exterior modifications, should
reflect the design characteristics of the commer-
cial and light industrial surrounding area, including
project design, architectural styles, and established
landscape patterns, which are consistent with the
purpose of the City of Dublin’s Site Development
Review Permit.
2. Setback treatments for new buildings from streets
should provide a positive image to the existing
streetscape.
3. Generally, transitions between existing and new
buildings should be gradual. The height and mass
of new projects should not create abrupt chang-
es in close proximity to existing buildings, unless the
area is clearly transitioning to a more intense devel-
opment pattern.
SITE DESIGN
1. Primary site and building entry points are strongly
encouraged to generate visual interest with spe-
cial design features such as decorative or textured
paving, flowering accents, special lighting, monu-
mentation, walls, shrubs, water features, and the
use of sizeable specimen trees.
2. The parking lot should not be the dominant vi-
sual element of the site as viewed from the street.
Locate or place parking lots at the side and rear of
buildings or use parking lot screening to soften their
appearance.
3. On corner sites, establish a prominent streets-
cape presence and add visual interest by either lo-
cating buildings near the intersection to enliven the
streetscape or using landscaping or planter walls to
frame the intersection. Parking areas immediately
adjacent to intersections are discouraged.
4. Project sites should be designed so that areas
used for outdoor storage, and other potentially un-
sightly areas are screened from public view.
5. Consider views from Highway 580 and other
views from above when siting and designing build-
ings, storage yards, utilities, and equipment.
6. Site accessories such as bicycle racks, trash re-
ceptacles, planters, benches, shade structures and
lighting should be designed as an integral part of
the project. The architectural character and use of
materials for these accessories should be consistent
with the overall project design.
7. Structures and site improvements should be lo-
cated and designed to avoid conflict with adja-
cent uses.
8. When appropriate, integrate spaces into a site
plan for use by employees or customers to sit or rest.
INTERFACE WITH RESIDENTIAL USES
1. Loading areas, access and circulation driveways,
trash, and storage areas, and rooftop equipment
should have adequate landscape buffering.
2. Window orientation for industrial buildings should
preclude a direct line of sight into adjacent resi-
dential private open spaces or windows. First floor
windows may be appropriate if screened with ap-
propriate fencing.
3. When industrial buildings back up to residential
properties, the industrial setback should be land-
scaped or screened, as well as functionally and/
or visually combined with residential open space
where possible.
PARKING AND CIRCULATION
1. Vehicular and pedestrian connections between
adjacent developments are a priority within the
area and should be established when feasible.
2. Whenever possible, provide common driveways
for access to more than one site or development
which reduces the number of driveways and con-
tributes to a continuous streetscape.
3. Gates to parking areas shall be located to pre-
vent vehicle stacking or queuing on the street.
4. Gates to parking areas should be designed with
materials and color that are compatible with the
site.
5. Parking areas visible from public streets shall be
separated from buildings by either a raised walk-
43
12
INDUSTRIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
way or landscape strip at least 4 feet wide. Situa-
tions where parking aisles or spaces directly abut
the building are discouraged.
6. Separate vehicles and pedestrians. Design park-
ing areas so that pedestrians walk parallel to mov-
ing cars. Minimize the need for the pedestrian to
cross parking aisles and landscape areas. These
features may be combined with required accessi-
bility requirements.
7. For new development, consider adding a land-
scaped buffer to screen views of automobiles while
permitting views of buildings beyond.
STORAGE YARDS/SERVICE FACILITIES
Providing adequate service facilities is critical to
the efficient functioning of industrial buildings. The
design of these facilities also presents an opportuni-
ty in preventing nuisance (noise, odor, visual) prob-
lems in the future.
1. Where appropriate and feasible, ‘service yards’
are encouraged over the dispersal of service facil-
ities around the site. Service yards should include
provisions for loading, trash bins (in lieu of a trash
enclosure), utility cabinets, utility meters, transform-
ers, and other outdoor mechanical equipment,
when possible.
2. Loading and outdoor storage activities should
be concentrated and located in a manner to mini-
mize nuisances for the surrounding area.
3. All service yards and outdoor storage areas shall
be enclosed or screened from view from local
streets. When designing these facilities, also con-
sider the views from HWY 580, neighboring parcels
and the residential area to the North. Screening
may include walls, buildings, gates, landscaping,
berming, or combinations thereof.
4. Service yards should be located and designed
for easy access by service vehicles and for conve-
nient access by each tenant.
5. The design of service yard walls and similar ac-
cessory site elements should be compatible with
the architecture of the main building(s), and should
use a similar palette of materials and colors.
TRASH ENCLOSURES
1. Trash and storage enclosures should be architec-
turally compatible with the project design. Land-
scaping should be used to screen and deter graffiti.
2. Trash enclosures should be unobtrusive and
should be conveniently accessible for trash dispos-
al and collection.
3. Trash enclosures should be located away from
residential uses to minimize nuisance to adjacent
properties.
4. Trash receptacle design should coordinate with
other streetscape furnishings.
5. Roof structures for trash enclosures should be ar-
chitecturally compatible with buildings on the site.
LOADING AREAS
1. To the fullest extent possible, loading areas and
vehicle access doors should not be visible from
public streets.
2. Loading driveways shall not back onto streets or
encroach into landscaped setback areas.
3. Loading doors should be integrated into building
elevations and given the same architectural treat-
ment where feasible.
UTILITY EQUIPMENT
1. To the fullest extent possible, utility equipment
should be located in a manner which minimizes vis-
ibility from the street or the front of a site.
2. Utility equipment such as electric and gas me-
ters, electrical panels, and junction boxes shall be
screened from view or incorporated into the archi-
tecture of the building.
3. Utility devices, such as transformers and backflow
preventers, should not dominate the front land-
scape area. When transformers are unavoidable in
the front setback area, they should be screened by
an enclosure or thick landscaping, in accordance
with utility company regulations.
44
13
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
4. All utility lines from the service drop to the site
shall be located underground.
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT
1. Mechanical equipment shall be located in
a manner that minimizes visual impact and be
screened from public view by enclosures or land-
scaping on all sides.
2. All mechanical equipment such as compressors,
air conditioners, antennas, pumps, heating and
ventilating equipment, emergency generators,
chillers, elevator penthouses, water tanks, stand
pipes, solar collectors, satellite dishes and Light In-
dustrial communications equipment, and any oth-
er types of mechanical equipment for the building
shall be concealed from view of public streets, and
to the fullest extent possible, public areas of neigh-
boring properties.
3. For new construction, mechanical equipment
shall not be located on the roof of a structure un-
less the equipment can be hidden by building ele-
ments that are designed as an integral part of the
building design.
4. For exterior modifications of existing structures,
all roof-mounted equipment must be screened in
a manner that is compatible with the architecture
and materials of the building.
45
14
INDUSTRIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
may be appropriate on a building that otherwise
reflects the desired vision of the area.
BUILDING ELEMENTS
1. A consistent architectural style should be used for
a building, auxiliary structure, and all related site el-
ements, such as screen walls, planters, trellises, and
street furniture.
2. Expansions to existing buildings should provide for
continuity between the old building and the new
addition. The addition need not strictly match the
existing building, but should include prominent de-
sign elements of the old building or the addition of
architectural elements to the old building to pro-
vide architecture compatibility between old and
new.
3. Building Base – The lowest portion of a building
at grade creates opportunity to establish an ar-
chitectural base. This base may be a projection, a
change in surface texture, or a change in material
or color. The size of the base should be in propor-
tion to the overall size of the building. This is not a
requirement but it is encouraged.
a. Base materials should be highly resistant to
damage, defacement, and general wear and
tear. Pre-cast decorative concrete, stone mason-
ry, brick, slate, and commercial grade ceramic
tile are examples of excellent base materials. The
use of anti-graffiti coating on base materials is en-
couraged.
b. In general, the base materials should appear
“heavier” and “darker” in appearance than the
materials and color used for the building’s main
exterior.
WINDOWS, DOORS, AND OPENINGS
Windows, doors, and other openings should be de-
tailed to emphasize them as important parts of the
building.
1. Building entries should be framed with architec-
tural embellishment for articulation, be visible from
the street, and be easily recognizable.
2. Incorporate articulation (insets, pop outs, wing
walls, etc.) to avoid unrelieved blank walls.
BUILDING PLACEMENT AND DESIGN
1. Buildings shall be designed with wall variations,
such as insets and pop-outs. Façade elements,
such as entryways, windows, etc should face the
primary street frontage(s).
2. Buildings along streets and I-580 shall feature ar-
chitecturally-detailed elevations and views of en-
tries or activity areas.
3. Public entrances and primary building elevations
should be oriented toward the street whenever
possible.
4. Buildings in a single project should create a
positive functional relationship with one another.
Whenever possible, buildings should be clustered.
This prevents long “barrack-like” rows of buildings.
When clustering is impractical, a visual link should
be established between buildings. This link can be
accomplished through the use of landscape, an
arcade system, trellis, colonnade, or other open
structures.
BUILDING DESIGN
The design and placement of industrial buildings
should respond to the general characteristics of
the surroundings as well as to the vision of the In-
dustrial Area.
BUILDING FORM AND SCALE
1. In order to relate to other nearby buildings, when
possible, incorporate interesting building elements
from surrounding buildings.
2. Buildings should contain the three traditional
parts of a building in appropriate proportions: base,
mid section, and top.
3. The scale of new buildings should be compatible
with adjacent buildings. Use transitions to achieve
compatibility between larger buildings next to small
scale buildings; transition techniques should include
building elements of different heights, building or
roof articulation, and building projections such as
covered walkways.
4. Franchise architecture is generally discouraged,
although the use of corporate identifying elements
46
15
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
ROOFS
Roofs should be an integral part of the building de-
sign and overall form of the structure.
1. Roof design may have the appearance of a
full roof reflecting traditional forms (i.e., hipped,
pitched, flat, etc.) and be integrated to the build-
ing, particularly on parapet walls and roof elements
used to screen equipment.
2. Earth-toned or muted and durable roof materials
are strongly encouraged to create a unifying im-
age of an area.
3. Decorative cornices and parapet walls should
be used to screen flat roofs and to delineate the
building’s profile.
4. Vertical roof elements should be used to add in-
terest to horizontally-oriented rooflines.
5. Roof overhangs and arcades are encouraged in
that they complement a building’s design.
FINISH MATERIALS
1. Industrial buildings should be constructed using
durable but attractive materials which convey a
substantial quality appearance.
2. Exterior building treatments, including colors, ma-
terials, and architectural detailing, should be con-
sistent throughout the building.
3. Exterior building colors should generally consist of
earth-toned or neutral colors, with vibrant or bright
colors reserved for trim or accent use.
4. Building materials reflecting natural elements,
such as stone or wood, are strongly encouraged.
47
16
INDUSTRIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
CONTEMPORARY / MODERN
Contemporary / Modern architecture features
clean lines with an emphasis on function. The build-
ing style simplifies the design with less ornamenta-
tion. Decorative moldings and elaborate trim are
eliminated or greatly simplified, giving way to a
clean aesthetic where materials meet in simple,
well-executed joints. An emphasis is placed on
rectangular forms and horizontal and vertical lines.
Materials are often used in well-defined planes and
vertical forms juxtaposed against horizontal ele-
ments for dramatic effect. Low, horizontal massing,
flat roofs, and emphasis on horizontal planes and
broad roof overhangs. The use of traditional ma-
terials in new ways such as wood, brick and stone
simplified ways reflecting a modern aesthetic. Tra-
ditional clapboard siding are replaced with sim-
ple vertical board cladding can be used in large,
smooth planes. Brick and stonework are simple, un-
ornamented, and can be used in rectilinear masses
and planes.
CHARACTERISTICS
• Simple wall planes and surfaces, mass, and vol-
umes.
• Mass and Volume contrasted with glass and fen-
estration.
• Roof types include interesting overhangs or un-
usual linear elements can be mixed to create a
more unique statement flat
roofs with parapet.
• Diverse use of materials and color.
• Simplicity and clarity of forms and elimination of
“unnecessary detail”
EXAMPLES
The following figures depict several types of indus-
trial buildings. This is for reference only and shall not
be considered as a wholly approved design.
Figure 1
48
17
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
Figure 2
Figure 4
Figure 6
Figure 3
Figure 5
Figure 7
EXAMPLES FOR REFERENCE ONLY.
49
18
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Figure 8
Figure 10
Figure 12
Figure 9
Figure 11
EXAMPLES FOR REFERENCE ONLY.
INDUSTRIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
50
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
3361 Walnut Blvd. Brentwood, CA 94513 | 925.634.7000 | sdgarchitectsinc.com
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINESBRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
51
2
LANDSCAPE DESIGN GUIDELINES
CONCEPT
The Branaugh property consists of 9.7 acres of medium
density residential and 30.5 acres of Industrial Park use.
The site will be well-designed through the choices and
arrangement of materials, colors, and textures. The
overall landscape theme provides vibrant, fl owering
plant material that complements architecture and
provides seasonal color while encouraging pedestrian
access and connectivity to and from adjacent uses and
activities.
The residential neighborhood will use the proposed
Central Parkway extension as the primary access.
The neighborhood entrance will be distinct yet
complementary to the character of the adjacent
neighborhood. The proposed landscape will support
a strong, visual identity to the neighborhood. Internal
streets and sidewalks of the residential community are
complemented using a variety of upright deciduous trees
for solar exposure coupled with low growing flowering
groundcover enhancing pedestrian connections to the
public sidewalks.
The non-residential industrial parcels will have access
from the future Dublin Boulevard extension. The industrial
park landscaping will serve a variety of functions,
including softening the edges of development,
screening unattractive views, buffering incompatible
uses, providing shade, and increasing the overall
aesthetic appeal of the site.
DESIGN PRINCIPLES
• Continue the theme and plant palette of east
Dublin, Dublin Boulevard, Central Parkway, and the
surrounding neighborhoods.
• Ensure landscape consistency between the proposed
industrial park and the residential community.
• A well-designed site through the choices and
arrangement of materials, colors, and textures.
• Encourage the industrial park to provide outdoor
amenities to employees, such as pedestrian
circulation and outdoor seating areas.
• Creating environments in which industrial activities
and operations may be conducted with minimal
impact on the natural environment and surrounding
neighborhood.LANDSCAPE FRAMEWORK
1
INDUSTRIAL
PARK
INDUSTRIAL
PARK
RESIDENTIAL
FUTURE DUBLIN BLVD EXT.
I-580
COLLIER CANYON RD.
EAST RANCH
(CROAK)
MONTE
VISTA
LEGEND
main pedestrian
connections
fi re access road
key entry element
landscape buffer
perimeter fence
concrete split rail
fence
RIGHETTI LIVBOR
MANNING
RIGHETTI
52
3
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
NEIGHBORHOOD
Neighborhood Entry
The Residences at Branaugh property share with
Righetti property the primary access, which will come
off the proposed Central Parkway extension within the
proposed East Ranch project. The entry will include
a monument with project branding and thematic
landscaping.
The landscape palette will emphasize the importance
of this space. Accent trees will line the entry on
both sides of the street and provide seasonal color.
Low-growing shrubs and groundcover will provide
continuous interest throughout the year as well as a
colorful understory to the accent trees above. Refer
to Proposed Plant Palette for select plant species and
container sizes.
Neighborhood Streets
Neighborhood streets will provide a well-planned
pattern that guides vehicles and pedestrians throughout
the neighborhood units. Street C and Street B will have
5 foot wide landscaping and a 5 foot wide sidewalk
on both sides of the street. Streets will be landscaped
to provide a comprehensive street scene. Other streets
will have a 5 foot wide sidewalk on both sides to link
the neighborhood together. Textured paving, such as
stamped asphalt, can be utilized in the crosswalk to
visually enhance the pedestrian path of travel.
Street trees should be coordinated with the utilities and
street lights to provide a continuous canopy of trees.
Street trees will be planted and maintained by private
lot owners when there is no designated planting area
within the right-of-way. Additional trees in an irregular
pattern and the screening trees adjacent to building
ends shall be considered to soften the architecture. Low-
growing groundcover, intermediate and background
shrubs will be proposed in a tiered effect to provide a
variety of landscapes with seasonal color and textural
contrast. Refer to the plant palette for suggested plant
species and required sizes.
Entry monument with thematic landscape as a
neighborhood identifi cation
Use of stamped asphalt for the crosswalk and entry
drive is encouraged.
Incorporate street trees in parkway strips or front yard
planting areas
2
1
53
4
LANDSCAPE DESIGN GUIDELINES
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
NEIGHBORHOOD
Fences and Walls
The landscape system includes community theme
walls, fencing, and front yard planting. All elements
of the landscape are intended to convey the special
character and high quality of the community.
In general, fences will be located outside of the view
triangles at intersections. Breaks in fence, removable
sections or gates will be incorporated for maintenance
access of the adjacent utilities, such as water quality
basins, where applicable.
Good Neighbor Fence - The good neighbor fence will
be located between lots. The design is a vertical board
wood fence, 6’ tall with caps and fascia boards. Wood
4x4 posts are located at a minimum of 8’ on center.
Lattice Fence - This fence will be used parallel to the front
of the home. Where side yards abut a residential street,
the lattice fence will also be used. Where the fence is
adjacent to the street, a minimum of 3’ landscape
buffer is provided between walkway and fence.
Open Space Interface Fence - This will occur along the
wildfi re buffer lots where they abut open space. The
fence should not exceed four feet in height.
Concrete Split Rail Fence - This fence is utilized in the
landscape along the southern sidewalks of street B
serving as a thematic element to keep pedestrians out
of water quality basins.
CMU Block Wall - Use split face CMU block wall where
needed to retain throughout the community.
2”x6” Cap
Vertical Wood Lattice
4”x4” Post
2”x4” Bottom Rail
1”x6” Kick Board
1”x8” With 1”
Overlap Each Side
8’-0” MAX
6’-0”
Good Neighbor Fence
Scale: N.T.S.
Lattice Top Fence
Scale: N.T.S.
4 54
5
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
Lti
Open Space Interface Fence
Scale: N.T.S.
Concrete Split Rail Fence
Scale: N.T.S.
CMU Retaining Wall
Scale: N.T.S.
5 55
6
LANDSCAPE DESIGN GUIDELINES
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
NEIGHBORHOOD
Stormwater Quality Basin
The plant material found within the water quality basins
will convey a mosaic effect that demonstrates the
bloom and growth cycles of seasonal grasses in gentle
patterns and large swaths. All plant material found
within the basins will conform with the Alameda County
C.3 Stormwater Technical guidelines and requirements.
Wildfi re Buffer Lot and Fire Access
Eleven lots on the east side of the neighborhood are
identifi ed as a wildfi re buffer lot. Trees along these lots
shall be fi re safe, which have a favorable rating for
plant performance per the Diablo Firesafe Council.
The fi re access road is located on the east side of the
neighborhood. It connects the access road to a
neighborhood street in East Ranch. Fire safe plant
materials shall be considered in the planting strategy.
Fencing adjacent to the fi re access road must conform
to the Dublin Wildfi re Management Plan. Heavy timber
wood fencing with 6’ returns may be used along the
rear property lines. All wood is to be construction-heart
redwood fi re-hardened/heavy timber to meet the
Dublin Wildfi re Management requirements. All wood
should be fi re retardant treated per section 710A.3.2
and 710A.4 7A of the California building code for all
exterior wood products.
Outdoor Site Elements
Street Lighting
All street lighting in the residential neighborhood will
conform to approved City standards. Street lighting
is used for both decoration as well as marking
special pathways and landmarks.
Model: The Lumec L60 LED Hexagonal Lantern series
on 18.5’ tall post is recommended, to match the
current City’s standard.
Mailbox
Clustered mailbox will be used. The mailbox
location/model shall be reviewed and approved
by USPS.
Signage
Signage shall conform to City ordinances.
Wildfi re Buff er Lot Interface
Scale: N.T.S.
Street Lighting
Scale: N.T.S.
6 56
7
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
INDUSTRIAL PARK
Entry
The entry to each development area should be clearly
visible to motorists. Industrial parks should be marked
by entry features. The combined use of landscaping,
and varied hardscape, such as contrasting pavement
colors or materials, banding or pathways interspersed
with alternate paver material, is encouraged.
Monument sign designs should use materials and colors
consistent with the architectural style and landscaping
theme near the entrance of the property. Other
signs shall conform with the City of Dublin Sign Design
Guidelines for Industrial Zones.
Parking Lot
Parking lot landscaping should accent driveways, frame
the major circulation aisles, and highlight pedestrian
pathways. Entrances and exits to and from parking and
loading facilities should be provided in compliance with
applicable City development requirements. Pedestrian
walkways should be accessible, safe, visually attractive,
and well-defi ned by landscaping, site furnishing, and
low-level lighting.
Landscaping should be protected from vehicular and
pedestrian encroachment by raised planting surfaces,
depressed walks, or the use of curbs. Concrete
mow-strips separating turf and shrub areas should be
provided.
Screening and Planting Buffer
Landscape screening should be used to minimize
the visual impact of new development. The industrial
buildings should not detract from the scenic and visual
quality of the residential community. The use of vines
on walls is strongly encouraged in industrial areas to
reduce their visual impact and opportunities for graffi ti.
Parking lots adjacent to and visible from public streets
should be screened from view by using evergreen
hedges or rolling earth berms. For new development,
consider adding a landscaped buffer to screen views
of automobiles while permitting views of buildings
beyond.
Optimize landscape coverage of parking lots.
Shade canopy trees should be provided in tree
wells and at the end of each drive aisle to visually
break up long rows of parked vehicles. Refer to
Dublin Municipal Code for more requirements.
As part of the vision of the Light Industrial Area, a
coordinated theme for signage is recommended.
Landscaping materials that are used for screening
edges of parking lots from the public right-of-
way should be implemented by utilizing one or a
combination of the following:
a. Evergreen hedges, recommended height of 36
inches. The minimum hedge container size should be
5-gallon;
b. Earth berm with a contoured, gradual slope and
ground cover, maximum height 42-inch.
7 57
8
LANDSCAPE DESIGN GUIDELINES
Perimeter Fence
A fence may be used along the property for security
purposes. Landscaping, such as vines and tall hedges,
against the fence, is encouraged to improve the
aesthetics. Gates should be provided in walls or
fences where necessary to allow for emergency or
maintenance access.
Site Lighting
A uniform lighting level shall be provided to ensure
safety and security at night. Lighting fi xture placement
should provide illumination for outdoor areas such as
parking, shipping and receiving, pedestrian walkways,
and work areas.
Short-term Bike Parking
Provide bicycle parking to support employees who
bike to work.
Benches and Trash Receptacles
Other site furniture, such as benches and trash
receptacles, shall be provided to encourage outdoor
activities.
Stormwater Quality Basin
All plant material found within the basins will conform
with the Alameda County C.3 Stormwater Technical
guidelines and requirements.
Post Top Light Bollard Light
Perimeter Fence
Trash and Ash Receptacle Bench Bike Racks
8 58
9
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
PLANTING LIST - TREES
Pistacia chinensis ‘Keith Davey’Acer rubrum Tilia cordata ‘Green Spire’ Prunus x yedoensis
Ulmus parvifolia Lagerstroemia indicaAcer palmatum Quercus lobata
PLANTING DESIGN
Landscaping should enhance the quality of developments by framing and softening the appearance of structures,
defi ning site functions, screening, and buffering adjacent uses. To the fullest extent possible, landscaped areas
should generally incorporate planting utilizing a three-tiered system: 1) trees, and taking into consideration the
width of the planting area; 2) shrubs; and 3) grasses and ground covers, and vines.
9 59
10
LANDSCAPE DESIGN GUIDELINES
Kniphofi a uvaria Agapanthus
Bulbine frutescens Aloe striata Anigozanthos
Teucrium chamaedrysDietes
PLANTING LIST - SHRUBS
Salvia spp.
10 60
11
BRANAUGH DESIGN GUIDELINES
PLANTING LIST - GRASSES, VINES, & GROUND COVERS
Myoporum laetum
Bougainvillea spp.Acacia redolens Ficus pumila
Rosa ‘Carpet Rose’ Calamagrostis ‘Karl Foerster’
Lomandra longifolia
Chondropetalum tectorum
11 61
Reso. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 1 of 13
RESOLUTION NO. xx-23
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 9306
FOR THE BRANAUGH PROPERTY (APN# 905-0001-004-04)
PLPA-2021-00014
WHEREAS,the property owner, BEX Development, is requesting approval to subdivide
the 40.16-acre site into four parcels to accommodate proposed residential and industrial
development. The project would allow up to 97 units within 9.87 acres designated Medium-Density
Residential and approximately 527,773 square feet of industrial use on 30.29 acres designated
Industrial Park. Requested approvals include amendments to Planned Development Stage 1
Development Plan (Ordinance No. 32-05 for Fallon Village), a Planned Development Zoning
Stage 2 Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 9306 and a Development
Agreement. These planning and implementing actions are collectively known as the “Branaugh
Property Project” or the “Project;” and
WHEREAS,the 40.16 acre Project site (APN 905-0001-004-04) is located in eastern
Dublin adjacent to the city boundary and along the future Dublin Boulevard extension; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Vesting Tentative Parcel Map will allow for the orderly division
of the Branaugh property into four parcels consistent with the City of Dublin General Plan and
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan for the division of land; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Sections 66428 of the Subdivision Map Act provide that a
Tentative Parcel Map may be used when the purpose of the map is to create four or fewer parcels;
and
WHEREAS,the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the CEQA
Guidelines and City of Dublin CEQA Guidelines and Procedures require that certain projects be
reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and
WHEREAS, prior CEQA analysis for the Project area includes: 1) the Eastern Dublin
General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan EIR (1993); 2) the East Dublin Properties Stage 1
Development Plan and Annexation Supplemental EIR (2002); and 3) the Fallon Village
Supplemental EIR (2005). Collectively, these three environmental review documents are referred
to as the “EDSP EIRs;” and
WHEREAS, in compliance with CEQA, the City prepared a CEQA Addendum for the
Project (the “Addendum”), incorporated by reference; and
WHEREAS, the Addendum reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis of the
potential environmental impacts of the Project, and concludes that the Project would not result in
any new significant impacts or substantially increase the severity of any significant impacts
identified in the EDSP EIRs and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met;
Attachment 5
62
Reso. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 2 of 13
WHEREAS, following a public hearing on February 14, 2023, the Planning Commission
adopted Resolution No. 23-XX, recommending approval of the Branaugh Property Project, which
resolution is incorporated herein by reference and available for review at City Hall during normal
business hours; and
WHEREAS,a Staff Report dated ________, and incorporated herein by reference,
described and analyzed the Project for the City Council; and
WHEREAS,on _______, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project
at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use independent judgment and considered all
said reports, recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set forth; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Addendum and all above-referenced reports,
recommendations, and testimony to evaluate the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this Resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby make
the following findings and determinations regarding the proposed Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
No. 9306 for the Project:
A.The proposed subdivision map together with the provisions for its design and
improvement is consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan in that:
1) the proposed Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 9306 together with the provisions for
the design and improvements comply with the development standards of the Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan; 2) it is consistent with the land use and acreages of the Dublin
General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; 3) it provides for the extension of
Dublin Boulevard; and 4) respects the Airport Protection Area Line as the limit of
residential development.
B.The subdivision site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of
development in that:1) the design and improvements of Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
No. 9306 are consistent with the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
objectives, polices, general land uses, and programs as they relate to the subject
property in that it is a subdivision for the implementation of Medium-Density Residential
and Industrial Park uses and is designated for these types of developments; 2) the
Project site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development and
is consistent with the land use designations of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and
consistent with the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan as amended and adopted
with this Project; 3) the subject property is a hillside development and generally slopes
from the north east corner to I-580; 4) the project proposes to mass grade the site and
flatten it where necessary to allow for intended future users and create the Dublin Blvd
extension road subgrade; 5) The grading proposed for the project will take into
consideration the hilly terrain and will be designed to avoid excessive cuts and fills; and
6) a slope is proposed between the residential and industrial which provides a buffer
between the uses.
63
Reso. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 3 of 13
C.The tentative tract map is consistent with the intent of applicable subdivision design or
improvements of the tentative tract map are consistent with the city’s general plan and
any applicable specific plan in that: Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 9306 is consistent
with the General Provisions and Development Standards for the Planned Development
Zoning District for the Fallon Village area of which the site is a part, and the proposed
Stage 2 Development Plan adopted with this Project.
D.The subdivision design and proposed improvements will not cause substantial
environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their
habitat in that: 1) Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 9306 will not cause environmental
damage or substantially injure fish or wildlife of their habitat; 2) the project site is located
adjacent to major roads, including I-580 and the future extension of Dublin Boulevard,
on approximately 40.16 acres of land; and 3) the topography of the property consists of
rolling hills; however with an approved grading plan this site is physically suitable for
the type and intensity of Medium-Density Residential and Industrial Park, uses.
E.The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not cause serious public
health concerns in that: 1) the project is consistent with the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan policies and the City’s zoning ordinances enacted for the public health, safety, and
welfare; 2) the project will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing
or working in the vicinity nor will it be detrimental to public health, safety, or welfare; 3)
additionally, no noxious odors, hazardous materials, or excessive noises will be
produced; 4) in order to ensure adequate emergency vehicle access to all portions of
the site access is currently provided via Collier Canyon Road and will be provided from
Croak Road via the Central Parkway Extension approved as part of the East Ranch
Project and the future Dublin Boulevard Extension and 5) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
the City prepared a CEQA Addendum for the Project and, therefore, the proposed
subdivision will not result in environmental damage or substantially injure fish or wildlife
or their habitat or cause public health concerns.
F.The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within
the proposed subdivision; or alternate easements are provided pursuant to Government
Code in that: 1) the design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements, acquired
by the public at large, or access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision; and 2) the City Engineer has reviewed the map and title report and has not
found any conflicting easements of this nature.
G. The design or improvements of the tentative map are consistent with the city’s general
plan and any applicable specific plan in that: 1) the proposed Vesting Tentative Parcel
Map will subdivide the property, which is consistent with the Stage 1 Development Plan
approved for the Fallon Village area, the proposed Stage 2 Development Plan as
adopted for this Project, and the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance, General Plan and
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; and 2) the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map will not alter the
use of the site, which is allowed residential and industrial uses.
H. The subdivision is designed to provide for future passive or natural heating or cooling
opportunities in that: 1) any future development will be required to comply with the
64
Reso. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 4 of 13
California Green Building Code; and 2) landscaping will be provided throughout the
surface parking lot providing natural shading.
I.The tentative tract map, including design and improvement, shall comply with all the
applicable provisions and requirements of the zoning ordinance, the latest municipal
stormwater permit issued to the city by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, this
title, any other ordinance of the city, and the Subdivision Map Act in that: 1) the
proposed Vesting Tentative Parcel Map creates four parcels which is consistent with
the Stage 1 Development Plan approved for the Fallon Village area, the Stage 2
Development adopted for this Project, and the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance, General
Plan, and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; and 2) the Project is compliant with the
California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region Municipal
Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit; 3) the Project would include bioretention areas
and stormwater treatment vaults to ensure consistency with regional C.3 stormwater
treatment; and 4) the Project would include full trash capture devices to ensure
consistency with regional C.10 stormwater treatment requirements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin
hereby conditionally approves Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 9306, attached Exhibit A,for
the Branaugh Property, subject to the following Conditions of Approval:
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to the issuance of
building permits or establishment of use, and shall be subject to Planning Department review and
approval. The following codes represent those departments/agencies responsible for monitoring
compliance of the conditions of approval. [PL.] Planning, [B] Building, [PO] Police, [PW] Public
Works [P&CS] Parks & Community Services, [ADM] Administration/City Attorney, [FIN] Finance,
[F] Alameda County Fire Department, [DSR] Dublin San Ramon Services District, [CO] Alameda
County Department of Environmental Health, [Z7] Zone 7.
#CONDITION TEXT RESPON.
AGENCY
WHEN REQ’D
Prior to:
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1.Approval.This approval is for Vesting Tentative Parcel
Map (PLPA-2021-00014). This approval shall be as
generally depicted and indicated on the Vesting Tentative
Parcel Map No. 9306 prepared MacKay & Somps, dated
December 2022, attached as Exhibit A and other plans,
text, and diagrams relating to this project, and as
specified as the following Conditions of Approval.
PL Ongoing
2.Effectiveness:This Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
approval shall become effective only if the Ordinance
approving the companion Planned Development Zoning
Stage 2 Development Plan becomes effective. Should
such Ordinance not become effective within 12 months of
this approval of this resolution, this approval shall be null
and void.
PL Ongoing
3.Compliance. Applicant/Developer shall comply with the Various Final Map
65
Reso. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 5 of 13
Subdivision Map Act, the City of Dublin Subdivision and
Zoning Ordinances, City of Dublin Title 7 Public Works
Ordinance, which includes the Grading Ordinance, the
City of Dublin Public Works Standards and Policies, the
most current requirements of the State Code Title 24 and
the Americans with Disabilities Act with regard to
accessibility, and all building and fire codes and
ordinances in effect at the time of building permit. Public
improvements constructed by Applicant/Developer to be
paid in whole or in part out of public funds and to be
dedicated to the City are hereby identified as “public
works” under Labor Code section 1771. Accordingly,
Applicant/Developer, in constructing such improvements,
shall comply with the Prevailing Wage Law (Labor Code.
Sects. 1720 and following).
Approval or
Grading Permit
4.Hold Harmless/Indemnification.Applicant/Developer
shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Dublin and its agents, officers, and employees from any
claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Dublin or
its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside,
void, or annul an approval of the City of Dublin or its
advisory agency, appeal board, Planning Commission,
City Council, Community Development Director, Zoning
Administrator, or any other department, committee, or
agency of the City 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 harmless 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
proceedings.
ADM On-going
5.Clarifications and Changes to the Conditions. In the
event that there needs to be clarification to these
Conditions of Approval, the City Engineer and Community
Development Director have the authority to clarify the
intent without going to a public hearing. The City
Engineer and Community Development Director also
have the authority to make minor modifications to these
conditions without going to a public hearing in order for
the Applicant/Developer to fulfill needed improvements or
mitigations resulting from impacts of this project.
PL, PW On-going
PLANNING – PROJECT SPECFIC CONDITIONS
6.Mitigation Monitoring Program. Applicant/ Developer
shall comply with CEQA Addendum for Branaugh
Property dated December 15, 2022, including all
mitigation measures, action programs, and
implementation measures contained in the Eastern
PL, PW Approval of
Improvement
Plans and On-
going
66
Reso. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 6 of 13
8.Conditions of Approval. Applicant/Developer shall
comply with the City of Dublin Public Works Standard
Conditions of Approval contained below (“Standard
Condition”) unless specifically modified by Project
Specific Conditions of Approval below.
PW On-going
9.Fees. At the time of grading permit issuance, the
Applicant/Developer shall pay only those fees
normally due at the time of the grading permit
issuance. All other fees, including, but not limited
to, Planning fees; Building fees; Dublin San Ramon
Services District fees; Public Facilities fees;
Transportation Impact Fees; City of Dublin Fire fees;
Noise Mitigation fees; Inclusionary House In-Lieu
fees; Alameda County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District fees shall be paid at the time of
filing the Final Map, or upon issuance of building
permits as may be applicable to such fees.
Various
Depts
Grading Permit
Dublin General Plan Amendments and Specific Plan EIR,
East Dublin Properties SEIR and Fallon Village SEIR.
Applicant/Developer shall provide to the Planning
Division and Public Works Department a copy of the
mitigation measures maintenance manual and schedule
for reference, including maintenance procedures and
protocols to follow after mitigation reporting is complete.
7.Inclusionary Housing. The proposed project shall
comply with the City of Dublin Inclusionary Zoning
Regulations as follows:
The inclusionary housing requirement is 12.5 percent of
the total number of units within the development and shall
be satisfied as follows unless an alternate method of
compliance is approved by City Council consistent with
the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations:
•In-Lieu Fee: 40 percent of the total number of
inclusionary units within the development shall be
satisfied via payment of an “In-Lieu Fee” as
provided by the City’s Impact Fee Schedule.
•On-site Affordable Units: 60 percent of the total
number of inclusionary units within the
development shall be developed on site.
•On-site Affordable Units shall be dispersed
throughout the neighborhood and constructed
concurrently with the market rate units.
•Execution of an agreement imposing appropriate
resale controls and/or rental restrictions on the
affordable units shall be required in accordance
with DMC Chapter 8.68.
PL On-going
PUBLIC WORKS – GENERAL CONDITIONS
67
Reso. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 7 of 13
PUBLIC WORKS –PERMITS AND BONDS
10.Encroachment Permit. Applicant/Developer shall
obtain an Encroachment Permit from the Public
Works Department for all construction activity within
the public right-of-way. At the discretion of the City
Engineer an encroachment permit for work
specifically included in an Improvement Agreement
may not be required.
PW Permit
Issuance
11.Grading Permit. Applicant/Developer shall obtain a
Grading Permit from the Public Works Department for
all grading.
PW Permit
Issuance
12.Security.Applicant/Developer shall provide faithful
performance security to guarantee the improvements,
as well as payment security, as determined by the
City Engineer (Note: The performance security shall
remain in effect until one year after final inspection).
PW Permit
Issuance
13.Permits from Other Agencies.Applicant/Developer
shall obtain all permits and/or approvals required by
other agencies including, but not limited to:
Army Corps of Engineers
US Fish and Wildlife
Regional Water Quality Control Board
Federal Emergency Management Agency
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Dept. of Transportation (Caltrans)
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)
Livermore-Amador Valley Transit Authority
(LAVTA)
Tri-Valley-San Joaquin Valley Regional Rail
Authority
Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD)
Alameda County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District Zone 7 (Zone 7)
PW Permit
Issuance
PUBLIC WORKS –PARCEL MAP, EASEMENTS AND ACCESS RIGHTS
13.Dedications. All rights-of-way and easement
dedications required by these conditions or
determined necessary by the City Engineer shall be
shown on the Parcel Map. At City Engineer’s
discretion, Applicant/Developer may alternatively
reserve said easements and rights-of-way on the
Parcel Map and dedicate by separate deed
instrument, in form satisfactory to the City Engineer.
PW Approval of
Parcel Map
14. Public Service Easements. A Public Service
Easement (PSE) shall be dedicated along the
project’s frontage to allow for the proper placement of
public utility vaults, boxes, appurtenances or similar
items behind the back-of-sidewalk. Private
PW Approval of
Parcel Map
68
Reso. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 8 of 13
improvements such as fences, gates or trellises shall
not be located within the PSE.
15.Abandonment of Easements. Applicant/Developer
shall obtain abandonment from all applicable public
agencies of existing easements and rights-of-way
within the project site that will no longer be used. Prior
to completion of abandonment, the improvement
plans may be approved if the Applicant/Developer can
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
that the abandonment process has been initiated.
PW Approval of
Parcel Map
16.Acquisition of Easements. Applicant/Developer
shall be responsible for obtaining all on-site and off-
site easements, and/or obtain rights-of-entry from the
adjacent property owners for any improvements not
located on their property. The Applicant/Developer
shall prepare all required documentation for
dedication of all easements on-site and off-site. The
easements and/or rights-of-entry shall be in writing
and copies furnished to the Public Works Department.
PW Approval of
Parcel Map
and/or Grading
Permit
Issuance
17.Approval by Others. The Applicant/Developer will
be responsible for submittals and reviews to obtain
the approvals of all applicable non-City agencies.
PW Approval of
Parcel Map
PUBLIC WORKS -GRADING
18.Grading Plan. The Grading Plan shall be in
conformance with the recommendation of the
Geotechnical Report, the approved Tentative Map,
and the City design standards & ordinances. In case
of conflict between the soil engineer’s
recommendation and the City ordinances, the City
Engineer shall determine which shall apply.
PW Grading Permit
Issuance
19.Geotechnical Engineer Review and Approval. The
Project Geotechnical Engineer shall be retained to
review all final grading plans and specifications. The
Project Geotechnical Engineer shall approve all
grading plans prior to
City approval.
PW Grading Permit
Issuance
20.Grading Off-Haul.The disposal site and haul truck
route for any off-haul dirt materials shall be subject to
the review and approval by the City Engineer prior to
the issuance of a Grading Permit. If the
Applicant/Developer does not own the parcel on
which the proposed disposal site is located, the
Applicant/Developer shall provide the City with a
Letter of Consent signed by the current owner,
approving the placement of off-haul material on their
parcel. A Grading Plan may be required for the
placement of the off-haul material.
PW Grading Permit
Issuance
69
Reso. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 9 of 13
A Transportation Permit or Encroachment Permit may
be required for the haul route, as determined by the
City Engineer, which shall include a pre- and post-
hauling survey of the pavement condition.
Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for repairing
damaged pavement due to hauling operations, as
determined by the City Engineer.
21.Erosion Control Plan. A detailed Erosion and
Sediment Control Plan shall be included with the
Grading Plan submittal. The plan shall include
detailed design, location, and maintenance criteria of
all erosion and sedimentation control measures. The
plan shall also address site housekeeping best
management practices.
PW Grading Permit
Issuance
22.Demolition Plan. The Applicant/Developer’s Civil
Engineer shall prepare a demolition plan for the project,
which shall be submitted concurrent with the
improvement plan package. The demolition plan shall
address the following:
Pavement demolition, including streetlights and
landscaped median islands
Landscaping and irrigation
Fencing to be removed and fencing to remain
Any items to be saved in place and or protected,
such as trees, water meters, sewer cleanouts,
drainage inlets or backflow prevention devices
PW Grading Permit
Issuance
PUBLIC WORKS –CONSTRUCTION
23.Erosion Control Implementation. The Erosion and
Sediment Control Plan shall be implemented between
October 1st and April 30th unless otherwise allowed
in writing by the City Engineer. The
Applicant/Developer will be responsible for
maintaining erosion and sediment control measures
for one year following the City’s acceptance of the
improvements.
PW Start of
Construction
and On-going
24.Archaeological Finds. If archaeological materials
are encountered during construction, construction
within 100 ft of these materials shall be halted until a
professional Archaeologist certified by the Society of
California Archaeology (SCA) or the Society of
Professional Archaeology (SOPA) has had an
opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and
suggest appropriate mitigation measures.
PW Start of
Construction
and On-going
25.Construction Activities. Construction activities,
including the idling, maintenance, and warming up of
equipment, shall be limited to Monday through Friday,
and non-City holidays, between the hours of 7:30 a.m.
PW Start of
Construction
and On-going
70
Reso. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 10 of 13
and 6:00 p.m. except as otherwise approved by the
City Engineer. Extended hours or Saturday work will
be considered by the City Engineer on a case-by-case
basis. Note that the construction hours of operation
within the public right-of-way are more restrictive.
26.Temporary Fencing. Temporary construction
fencing shall be installed along the construction work
perimeter to separate the construction area from the
public. All construction activities shall be confined
within the fenced area. Construction materials and/or
equipment shall not be operated/stored outside of the
fenced area or within the public right-of-way unless
approved in advance by the City Engineer.
PW Start of
Construction
and On-going
27.Construction Noise Management Plan.
Applicant/Developer shall prepare a construction
noise management plan that identifies measures to
minimize construction noise on surrounding
developed properties. The plan shall include hours of
construction operation, use of mufflers on
construction equipment, speed limit for construction
traffic, haul routes, and identify a noise monitor.
Specific noise management measures shall be
provided prior to project construction.
PW Start of
Construction
Implementation
, and On-going
as needed
28.Traffic Control Plan. Traffic Control Plan shall be
submitted for review and approval prior to any work
within the public right-of-way which requires lane
closure. Closing of any existing pedestrian pathway
and/or sidewalk during construction shall be
implemented through the City-approved Traffic
Control Plan and shall be done with the goal of
minimizing the impact on pedestrian circulation.
Traffic Control Plan shall be prepared in accordance
with the latest edition of the CA Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).
PW Start of
Construction
and On-going
as needed
29.Construction Traffic Interface Plan.
Applicant/Developer shall prepare a plan for
construction traffic interface with public traffic on any
existing public street. Construction traffic and parking
may be subject to specific requirements by the City
Engineer.
PW Start of
Construction;
Implementation
, and On-going
as needed
30.Pest Control. Applicant/Developer shall be
responsible for controlling any rodent, mosquito, or
other pest problem due to construction activities.
PW On-going
31.Dust Control Measures. Applicant/Developer shall
be responsible for watering or other dust-palliative
measures to control dust as conditions warrant or as
directed by the City Engineer.
PW Start of
Construction;
Implementation
On-going as
needed
71
Reso. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 11 of 13
32.Dust Control/Street Sweeping. The
Applicant/Developer shall provide adequate dust
control measures at all times during the grading and
hauling operations. All trucks hauling export and
import materials shall be provided with tarp cover at
all times. Spillage of haul materials and mud-tracking
on the haul routes shall be prevented at all times. The
Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for
sweeping of streets within, surrounding and adjacent
to the project, as well as along the haul route, if it is
determined that the tracking or accumulation of
material on the streets is due to its construction
activities.
PW During Grading
33.Construction Traffic and Parking. All construction-
related parking shall be off-street in an area provided
by the Applicant/Developer. Construction traffic and
parking shall be provided in a manner approved by
the City Engineer.
PW Start of
Construction
and On-going
PUBLIC WORKS –EROSION CONTROL & STORMWATER QUALITY
34.Stormwater Source Control.All applicable
structural and operational stormwater source controls
shall be implemented.
PW/ESD Grading Permit
Issuance
35.NOI and SWPPP. Prior to any clearing or grading,
Applicant/Developer shall provide the City evidence
that a Notice of Intent (NOI) has been sent to the
California State Water Resources Control Board per
the requirements of the NPDES. A copy of the Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be
provided to the Public Works Department and be kept
at the construction site.
PW Start of Any
Construction
Activities
36.SWPPP. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) shall identify the Best Management
Practices (BMPs) appropriate to the project
construction activities. The SWPPP shall include the
erosion and sediment control measures in
accordance with the regulations outlined in the most
current version of the Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG) Erosion and Sediment Control
Handbook or State Construction Best Management
Practices Handbook. The Applicant/Developer is
responsible for ensuring that all contractors
implement all storm water pollution prevention
measures in the SWPPP.
PW SWPPP to be
Prepared Prior
to Grading
Permit
Issuance;
Implementation
Prior to Start of
Construction
and On-going
as needed
PUBLIC WORKS -SPECIAL CONDITIONS
37.Dublin Boulevard Dedication. Property Owner shall
dedicate right-of-way in fee for public roadway
purposes for the future Dublin Boulevard extension in
general conformance with the adopted Precise Plan,
the most current design plans on file with the office of
PW Approval of
Parcel Map
72
Reso. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 12 of 13
the City Engineer, and the Vesting Tentative Parcel
Map. Applicant/Developer will receive Eastern Dublin
Transportation Impact Fee (“EDTIF”) credits for
dedication of this right-of-way in the amount specified
in the EDTIF program for right-of-way dedication.
38.Central Parkway Dedication. Property Owner shall
dedicate right-of-way in fee for public roadway
purposes for widening of the future Central Parkway
extension in general conformance with the Vesting
Tentative Parcel Map.
PW Approval of
Parcel Map
39.Slope Easement. Property Owner shall dedicate a
Slope Easement (“SE”) via separate instrument
adjacent to the future Dublin Boulevard frontage if
mass grading has not commenced per the preliminary
grading plan as shown on the Vesting Tentative
Parcel Map. Property Owner shall cooperate with the
City Engineer on the extent of the SE dedication to
accommodate the future Dublin Boulevard extension.
PW Approval of
Parcel Map
40.Collier Canyon Road Dedication. Property Owner
shall dedicate right-of-way in fee or provide an
irrevocable offer of dedication in fee for public
roadway purposes for the widening of Collier Canyon
Road necessary to meet the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan “Industrial Road” street geometric standards.
PW Approval of
Parcel Map
41.Collier Canyon Road Dedication. Property Owner
shall dedicate right-of-way in fee or provide an
irrevocable offer of dedication in fee for public
roadway purposes for the future relocation of Collier
Canyon Road as may be necessary for the future
Valley Link project in general conformance with the
Vesting Tentative Parcel Map, the most current
design plans on file with the office of the City
Engineer. Alternatively, subject to City Engineer
approval, Property Owner can provide an easement
for public roadway purposes which prohibits
construction of any permanent improvements and
structures, as determined by the City Engineer, within
the future right-of-way.
PW Approval of
Parcel Map
42.Private Access Easements. Property Owner shall
reserve on the parcel map and grant via separate
instrument Private Access Easement(s) (“PAE”) for
the purpose of providing legal access to all newly
created parcels to a public roadway. PAE shall be
minimum 26’ wide and shall be recorded concurrently
with the parcel map.
PW Approval of
Parcel Map
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this _ day of ________ 2023 by the following
vote:
73
Reso. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 13 of 13
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
City Clerk
74
Ord. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 1 of 3
Attachment 7
ORDINANCE NO. xx - 23
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND BEX
DEVELOPMENT RELATED TO THE BRANAUGH PROPERTY PROJECT
(PLPA-2021-00014)
(APN 905-0001-004-04)
The Dublin City Council does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. RECITALS
A. The Branaugh Property is located in the Fallon Village Project area. Through Ordinance No.
32-05, the City Council adopted a Stage 1 PD-Planned Development Rezone Amendment
for the Fallon Village Project Area which, among other approvals, established the maximum
number of residential units at 3,108 units for the Fallon Village Project Area.
B. The Applicant, Randy Branaugh, is requesting approval of a Planned Development Zoning
Stage 2 Development Plan and amendments to the Stage 1 Development Plan. The
proposed Project would allow up to 97 residential units and 527,773 square feet of industrial
uses. Requested land use approvals include a Planned Development Zoning Stage 2
Development Plan, amendments to the Stage 1 Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Parcel
Map No. 9306, and a Development Agreement among other related actions. These planning
and implementing actions are collectively known as the “Branaugh Property Project” or the
“Project.”
C. The 40.16-acre Project site (APN 905-0001-004-04) is located in eastern Dublin, north of
Interstate 580 and immediately adjacent to the City limit and urban limit line.
D. Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City
prepared an Addendum for the Project, which reflected the City’s independent judgment and
analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Project. Prior CEQA analysis for the
Project area includes: 1) the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan EIR
(1993); 2) the East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and Annexation
Supplemental EIR (2002); and 3) the Fallon Village Supplemental EIR (2005). Collectively,
these three environmental review documents are referred to as the “EDSP EIRs.”
E.The proposed Development Agreement is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A.
F.The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement
on February 14, 2023, for which public notice was given by law.
G.The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Branaugh
Property Project including the Development Agreement by Resolution No. 23-xx.
75
Ord. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 2 of 3
H.A public hearing on the proposed Development Agreement was held before the City Council
on ______ for which public notice was given as provided by law.
I.The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission, including
the Planning Commission’s reasons for its recommendation, the Agenda Statement, all
comments received in writing, and all testimony received at the public hearing.
SECTION 2: FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS
Therefore, on the basis of: (a) the foregoing Recitals which are incorporated herein, (b) the City
of Dublin General Plan; (c) the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, (d) the EDSP EIRs and Addendum
prepared for the Project; (e) the Staff Report; (f) information in the entire record of proceeding for
the Project, and on the basis of the specific conclusions set forth below, the City Council finds and
determines that:
A.The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses
and programs specified and contained in the City’s General Plan, and in the Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan in that: (a) the Development Agreement incorporates the objectives policies,
general land uses and programs in the General Plan and Specific Plan and does not amend
or modify them; and (b) the Project is consistent with the fiscal policies of the General Plan
and Specific Plan with respect to the provision of infrastructure and public services.
B.The Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations
prescribed for, the land use districts in which the real property is located because the
Development Agreement does not amend the uses or regulations in the applicable land use
district.
C.The Development Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare, and
good land use policies in that the Developer’s Project will implement land use guidelines set
forth in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the General Plan.
D.The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and general
welfare in that the Developer’s proposed Project will proceed in accordance with all the
programs and policies of the General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and future Project
Approvals and any Conditions of Approval.
E.The Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property
or the preservation of property values in that the project will be consistent with the General
Plan, the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and future project approvals.
F.The Development Agreement specifies the duration of the agreement, the permitted uses of
the property, and the obligations of the Applicant. The Development Agreement contains an
indemnity and insurance clause requiring the developer to indemnify and hold the City
harmless against claims arising out of the development process, including all legal fees and
costs.
SECTION 3. APPROVAL
The City Council hereby approves the Development Agreement (Exhibit A to the Ordinance) and
authorizes the City Manager to execute it.
76
Ord. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted XX/XX/2023 Page 3 of 3
SECTION 4. RECORDATION
Within ten (10) days after the Development Agreement is fully executed by all parties, the City
Clerk shall submit the Agreement to the County Recorder for recordation.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE AND POSTING OF ORDINANCE
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its
passage. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause the Ordinance to be posted in at least
three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government
Code of the State of California.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this ___ day of
______, 2023 by the following votes:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
_____________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
City Clerk
77
PARCEL 3
PARCEL 4
103
PARCEL 1
PARCEL 2
PARCEL 5
PARCEL P
404
405 406
403
402 399
PARCEL OO
468
PARCEL NN
434
427
PARCEL FF
425
PARCEL AA
408
464
467
PARCEL LL
458
PARCEL MM
407
433
422
420
459
465
455
429 PARCEL BB
430
428
PARCEL CC
421432
426
423
424
462
431
460
461
456
400
398
401
463
457466
PARCEL QQ
PARCEL RR
PARCEL Q
542
491
480 479 478 477 476 475481
546
496 495 494 493 492497
483 484 485 486 487 488 489482
490
474
545544
543
419
GRADING EASEMENT
TO BE OBTAINED FROM
ADJACENT PROPETY OWNER
GRADING EASEMENT
TO BE OBTAINED FROM
ADJACENT PROPETY OWNER
10' PSE
10' PSE
PARCEL 3
PARCEL 1
PARCEL 4
103
PARCEL 2
N88°41'57"W 760.37'
11
4
.
9
'
315'
53'
206'
54'126'
13'
PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT TO BE
PROVIDED BY TOWN & COUNTRY, LLC
FOR SHARED PRIVATE ACCESS/ROADWAY
ACCESSING BOTH PROPERTIES FROM THE
PLANNED FULLY SIGNALIZED
INTERSECTION WITH DUBLIN BLVD
FUTURE CENTRAL PARKWAY
DEDICATION
SLOPE EASEMENT ALONG
DUBLIN BOULEVARD
TO BE COORDINATED WITH
DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION
PROJECT AND MADE VIA
SEPARATE INSTRUMENT
17.87±AC
PARCEL 3
9.87±AC
PARCEL 1
2.04±AC
PARCEL 2
8.51±AC
PARCEL 4
DEDICATION OF COLLIER CANYON ROAD
ROW SHALL BE PER PROJECT CONDITIONS
AND THE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT.
N89°03'50"W 760.31' BNDY
N0
°
2
5
'
4
5
"
E
1
7
9
3
.
9
5
'
B
N
D
Y
N0
°
2
5
'
4
5
"
E
2
8
0
5
.
6
7
'
B
N
D
Y
N89°03'15"W 378.50' BNDY
N0
°
2
5
'
4
5
"
E
1
0
0
8
.
2
6
'
B
N
D
Y
N88°33'15"W 381.86' BNDY
96
6
.
6
'
41.7'
97
6
.
0
'
82.2'
10
4
9
.
7
'
10
1
6
.
8
'
99.0'
13
0
.
0
'
56
7
.
9
'
56
3
.
0
'
MAP NOTES:
1.OWNER/APPLICANT RANDY BRANAUGH
BEX DEVELOPMENT
19077 MADISON AVE.
CASTRO VALLEY, CA 94546
2.ENGINEER: MACKAY & SOMPS
5142 FRANKLIN DR. SUITE B
PLEASANTON, CA 94588-3355
CONTACT: MARK McCLELLAN/ COLETTE L'HEUREUX
(925) 225-0690
3.AREA SUBJECT TO INUNDATION: NONE (PANEL 0607050002B)
4.SUBDIVIDED AREA: 40.16± ACRES
5.ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 905-0001-004-04
6.WATER/SEWER SYSTEM: TO BE INSTALLED IN CONFORMANCE WITH DUBLIN
SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT (DSRSD) STANDARDS.
7.DRAINAGE: TO BE INSTALLED IN CONFORMANCE WITH
CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARDS.
8.GAS & ELECTRICITY: TO BE INSTALLED IN CONFORMANCE WITH
STANDARDS OF PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO.
9.TELEPHONE: TO BE INSTALLED IN CONFORMANCE WITH
STANDARDS OF SBC.
10.STREET IMPROVEMENTS: PER CITY OF DUBLIN STANDARDS
11.EXISTING ZONING: PD-INDUSTRIAL PARK, PD-MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
12.EXISTING LAND USE: CATTLE GRAZING, DRY LAND FARMING
13.PROPOSED LAND USE: PD-INDUSTRIAL PARK, PD-MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
14.UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFICALLY STATED IN THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, LOCAL AGENCY
APPROVAL OF THIS MAP SHALL CONSTITUTE AN EXPRESS FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED
DIVISION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WILL NOT UNREASONABLY INTERFERE
WITH THE FREE AND COMPLETE EXERCISE OF RIGHTS DESCRIBED IN GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 66436(A)(3)(A)(I).
15.PARCEL DIMENSIONS ARE PRELIMINARY AND SUBJECT TO FINAL ENGINEERING DESIGN.
16.THE APPLICANT RESERVES THE OPTION TO PHASE THE MAPPING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THIS
PROJECT IN VARIOUS COMBINATIONS OF FINAL MAPS/TRACT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS AND/OR
IMPROVEMENT PLANS/IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENTS, ALL AS APPROVED BY THE DIRECTOR OF
PUBLIC WORKS.
17.THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO FILE A FUTURE VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP ON PARCEL 1.
18.THE APPLICANT RESERVES THE OPTION TO FILE FUTURE TENTATIVE PARCEL MAPS ON PARCELS
3 AND 4, OR FILE COMMERCIAL AIRSPACE CONDOMINIUM PLANS ON SAID PARCELS AFTER THE
PARCEL MAP 9306 RECORDATION.
19.IF COLLIER CANYON ROAD RIGHT OF WAY IS NO LONGER NEEDED AFTER THE EXTENSION OF
DUBLIN BLVD IS COMPLETED, PROPERTY OWNER WOULD LIKE TO OBTAIN RIGHT-OF-WAY
REMAINING AFTER VALLEY LINK TAKE TO USE FOR A UTILITY CORRIDOR AND STORM WATER
QUALITY BASIN.
20.IMPROVEMENTS ALONG COLLIER CANYON ROAD WILL BE DEFERRED UNTIL AN APPLICATION FOR
THE SOUTHERN INDUSTRIAL PARCEL IS PROVIDED TO THE CITY.
21.IMPROVEMENTS ALONG CENTRAL PARKWAY WILL BE DEFERRED UNTIL AN APPLICATION FOR THE
RESIDENTIAL PARCEL IS PROVIDED TO THE CITY.
22.IMPROVEMENTS ALONG DUBLIN BLVD. WILL BE DEFFERED UNTIL AN APPLICATION FOR PARCEL
3 OR 4 IS PROVIDED TO THE CITY.
LEGEND:
BOUNDARY LINE
PARCEL LINE
EASEMENT LINE/IOD
EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY
PAE PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT
AIRPORT PROTECTION ZONE LINE
EXISTING PARCEL LINE
BNDY BOUNDARY
IOD IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF DEDICATION
AC.ACRES
PUE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT
ROW RIGHT OF WAY
RIGHT OF WAY
BASIS OF BEARINGS:
THE BASIS OF BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON, IS THE LINE BETWEEN USC&GS TRIANGULATION
STATIONS "FALLON" AND "MOUNT DIABLO TOWER". THE GRID BEARING CALCULATED FROM
PUBLISHED CCS 27 ZONE 3 GRID COORDINATES FOR THIS LINE IS TAKEN AS NORTH 15°44'21"
WEST.
PARCEL PROPOSED OWNER MAINTAINED BY PROPOSED USE
PARCEL 1 BEX DEVELOPMENT BEX DEVELOPMENT
MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
PARCEL 2 BEX DEVELOPMENT BEX DEVELOPMENT
WATER QUALITY FACILITY
FOR MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
PARCEL 3 BEX DEVELOPMENT BEX DEVELOPMENT INDUSTRIAL PARK
PARCEL 4 BEX DEVELOPMENT BEX DEVELOPMENT INDUSTRIAL PARK
DSRSD DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT
LEGEND:
GHAD GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT DISTRICT
SDE PUBLIC STORM DRAIN EASEMENT
ESMT EASEMENT
SDO STORM DRAIN OPEN SPACE
78
PARCEL 3 PARCEL 1
PARCEL 4 103
PARCEL 2
8"W
8"
W
8"W
8"
W
8"
W
8"W
8"
W
8"W
8"W
8"
W
8"W8"W
8"
W
8"W
8"
W
8"
W
8"W
8"
W
427
425
428
426
PARCEL QQ
546
545
544
STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
IN PARKING LOT CONVEYS
UNTREATED DRAINAGE TO
BIORETENTION BASIN
FOR TREATMENT.
DRAINAGE OUTLETS AT
FINISH GRADE OF BASIN
OVERFLOW RISER CONVEYS
TREATED FLOWS TO
STORM DRAIN SYSTEM IN
COLLIER CANYON ROAD
RIGHT-OF WAY
INSTALL STORM DRAIN
IN COLLIER CANYON ROAD
RIGHT-OF-WAY
STORM DRAIN LINE CONVEYS
TREATED DRAINAGE TO
CROAK ROAD, TO BENEFIT
ALL PROPERTIES SOUTH
OF DUBLIN BLVD.
EASEMENTS BETWEEN ALL
OWNERS WILL BE COORDINATED
STORM DRAIN SYSTEM IN PARKING LOT
CONVEYS UNTREATED DRAINAGE TO
BIORETENTION BASIN FOR TREATMENT.
DRAINAGE OUTLETS AT FINISH GRADE OF BASIN
OVER FLOW RISER
IN BASIN CONVERYS
STORM DRAINAGE TO
SDO LINE IN
STORM DRAIN EASEMENT
FUTURE WATER
CONNECTION FOR
RESIDENTIAL
FUTURE SEWER CONNECTION
FOR RESIDENTIAL.
(SEWER TO BE ROUTED
THROUGH PUBLIC STREETS
IN RIGHETTI PROPERTY.
PROPERTY OWNERS WILL
COORDINATE DEVELOPMENT)
FUTURE SECONDARY
WATER CONNECTION
FOR RESIDENTIAL.
(WATER TO BE ROUTED
THROUGH PUBLIC STREETS
IN RIGHETTI PROPERTY.
PROPERTY OWNERS WILL
COORDINATE DEVELOPMENT)
NOTES:
1.SITE PLAN AND UTILITY LAYOUT IN INDUSTRIAL PARK LAND
USE AREAS ARE CONCEPTUAL AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITH
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS. APPLICATION SHOWS SITE
PLAN FOR REFERENCE ONLY. NO IMPERVIOUS AREA IS PROPOSED
WITH THIS APPLICATION.
2.UTILITIES WITHIN DUBLIN BLVD TO BE DESIGNED AND
INSTALLED WITH DUBLN BLVD EXTENSION.
3. STORM DRAIN OPEN SPACE (SDO) INDICATES A STORM
DRAIN LINE THAT CONVEYS STORMWATER FROM UNDEVELOPED
AREAS NOT REQUIRING C3 TREATMENT, OR TREATED
DRAINAGE FROM STORMWATER QUALITY AREAS.
NOTES:
FUTURE VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
TO SUBDIVIDE PARCEL 1
WILL DETAIL UTILITY LAYOUT
IN RESIDENTIAL LAND USE AREA
46' SDE AND DSRSD EASEMENT
FOR SHARED USE BETWEEN USERS
INLET CONVEYS
DRAINAGE FROM
DITCH IN BENCH
TO SDO LINE
STORM DRAIN WITHIN
PUBLIC STREETS TO
COLLECT DRAINAGE
AND CONVEY TO OUTLET
AT BIORETENTION BASINS
FOR TREATMENT.
OUTLETS DESIGNED
TO BUBBLE UP 1'
8"SS
6"SS6"SS
8"SS
8"
S
S
8"SS 6"
S
S
6"SS
6"SS
8"
S
S
15"SD15"SD
48
"
S
D
15"SD 15"
S
D
1
5
"
S
D
15"SD
15"SD15"SD15"SD
1
5
"
S
D
15"SD
15"SD15"SD15"SD15"SD
15
"
S
D
30"SDO
15
"
S
D
15"SD
15"SD15"SD
15"
S
D
15"SD
15"SD
15
"
S
D
15
"
S
D
15"
S
D
15
"
S
D
15
"
S
D
15"SD
15
"
S
D
15"SD
15
"
S
D
15
"
S
D
24
"
S
D
15
"
S
D
O
15
"
S
D
O
15"SDO
15"SD
EX. SPRINT FIBER OPTIC LINE (TO BE
RELOCATED TO PRIMARY JOINT TRENCH LINE
ALONG DUBLIN BLVD
STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
CONNECTS TO ULTIMATE STORM
DRAIN IN DUBLIN BLVD
DIVERSION STRUCTURE
DIVERTS HIGH FLOWS
TO STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
BYPASSING BASIN
48
"
S
D
48
"
S
D
48
"
S
D
15"SD
48"SD
OVERSIZED PIPE IN PARKING LOT
METERS FLOWS TO BASIN
FOR HYDROMODIFICATION.
MAINTAINED BY COMMERCIAL
OWNER/OWNER'S ASSOCIATION.
OVERSIZED PIPE IN PARKING LOT
METERS FLOWS TO BASIN
FOR HYDROMODIFICATION.
MAINTAINED BY COMMERCIAL
OWNER/OWNER'S ASSOCIATION.
DIVERSION STRUCTURE
DIVERTS HIGH FLOWS
TO STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
BYPASSING BASIN
DIVERSION STRUCTURE
DIVERTS HIGH FLOWS
TO STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
BYPASSING BASIN
OVERSIZED PIPE IN
FUTURE PUBLIC STREET
METERS FLOWS TO BASIN
FOR HYDROMODIFICATION
FOR RESIDENTIAL.
MAINTAINED BY HOME
OWNER'S ASSOCIATION.
30"SD
15
"
S
D
24"SD
CONNECT TO
12" ZONE 2
WATER LINE
IN DUBLIN BLVD
CONNECT TO
SEWER MAINLINE
IN DUBLIN BLVD
12"SS INV. 386.5 +/-
CLEAR SIGHT TRIANGLE PER
HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL
CLEAR SIGHT TRIANGLE PER
HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL
15"SD 15"SD
15"SD
15"
S
D
15"SD
1
5
"
S
D
15"SD
15
"
S
D
8"
S
S
8"W
8"W 8"W
8"
W
8"W
8"
W
8"W
15"SD
SW
Q
SW
Q
SW
Q
15
'
S
S
E
15' SSE FOR SHARED SEWER
MAIN ALONG COMMON
PROPERTY LINE, TO BE
PROVIDED BY TOWN AND
COUNTY, LLC.
79
21
PARCEL A
22
24
25
20
26
23
19
16
14
15
18
17
PARCEL B
8
13
11
10
12
9
PARCEL G
PARCEL I
PARCEL H
PARCEL TT
PARCEL UU
PARCEL P
416
395
PARCEL YPARCEL Z
394 393397
PARCEL GG
409
396
451
471
404405
406 403
402
399
PARCEL OO
468
392
PARCEL PPPARCEL NN
454
PARCEL KK
PARCEL HH
434
415
441
PARCEL JJ
437
453
472
427
PARCEL FF
425
PARCEL AA
447
408
470
464
450
467
PARCEL LL
473
439
446
458
PARCEL MM
448
445
452
436
407
438
444
433
449
PARCEL II
440
422
420
459
PARCEL EE
412
465
455
429
PARCEL BB
469
411
430
428
PARCEL CC
418
413
421
PARCEL DD
432
443
442
426
435
423
417
424
462
431
460
461
456
414
400
398
401
463
457
466
410
PARCEL QQ
PARCEL RR
PARCEL Q
PARCEL U
542
503
502
501
500
499
498
519
518
517
516
515
514
513
512PARCEL R
511
510
509
508
507
491
480
479
478
477
476
475
481
546
496
495
494
493
492
497
504
506
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
482
505490474
545
544
543 541 540
419
SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM (BY OTHERS)
SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM (PROPOSED)
EX STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
STORM DRAIN SYSTEM (BY OTHERS)
STORM DRAIN SYSTEM (PROPOSED)
OPEN SPACE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM (BY OTHERS)
OPEN SPACE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM (PROPOSED)
POTABLE WATER SYSTEM (BY OTHERS)
POTABLE WATER SYSTEM (PROPOSED)
RECYCLED WATER SYSTEM (BY OTHERS)
RECYCLED WATER SYSTEM (PROPOSED)
LEGEND
ULTIMATE
12" WATER (ZONE 2) BY OTHERS
(W/ DUBLIN BLVD EXTENSION)
SWQ
SW
Q
SWQ
12" WATER (ZONE 2) BY
EAST RANCH DEVELOPER
STUBBED AT END OF
THEIR FRONTAGE
ZO
N
E
2
W
A
T
E
R
ULTIMATE 18" SS BY OTHERS
(W/ DUBLIN BLVD EXTENSION)
ULTIMATE 48" SD BY OTHERS
(W/ DUBLIN BLVD EXTENSION)
PARCEL 3
PARCEL 1
PARCEL 4 103
PARCEL 2
PARCEL 3
PARCEL 4 103
PARCEL 1
PARCEL 2
PARCEL 5
APPROXIMATE TERMINATION OF ULTIMATE
12" WATER (ZONE 1) BY OTHERS
(W/ DUBLIN BLVD EXTENSION)
ULTIMATE
10" RECYCLED WATER BY OTHERS
(W/ DUBLIN BLVD EXTENSION)
SW
Q
SW
Q
SW
Q
STORM DRAIN IN COLLIER
CANYON ROAD INSTALLED
TO BENIFIT ALL PROPETY
OWNERS TO CROAK ROAD
STORM DRAIN IN UTILITY
EASEMENT
STORM DRAIN IN UTILITY
EASEMENT
DRAINAGE OF INDUSTRIAL SITE
TO BE DISCHARGED TO BIORETENTION
BASINS ALONG DUBLIN BLVD FOR
TREATMENT PER PROVISION C.3.
DRAINAGE OF INDUSTRIAL SITE
TO BE DISCHARGED TO BIORETENTION
BASIN ALONG COLLIER CANYON ROAD FOR
TREATMENT PER PROVISION C.3.
PROPERTY OWNER TO ACQUIRE UTILITY
EASEMENTS ACROSS RIGHETTI AND GH PACVEST
PARCELS FOR STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
AND OVERLAND RELEASE.
INDUSTRIAL SITE
SEWER CONNECTS
TO TRUNK LINE IN
DUBLIN BLVD.
INDUSTRIAL SITE
SEWER CONNECTS
TO TRUNK LINE IN
DUBLIN BLVD.TREATED STORM DRAINAGE FROM
INDUSTRIAL SITE FLOWS TO
STORM DRAIN TO BE INSTALLED
IN COLLIER CANYON ROAD
RIGHT-OF-WAY
STORM DRAIN CONNECTION TO BE EXTENDED
WEST IN CROAK RD ROW TO ULTIMATE
DISCHARGE POINT AT FALLON ROAD
FUTURE 12" WATER (ZONE 2) BY
OTHERS EXTENDED TO DUBLIN
BLVD
PERMANENT SEWER IN
CROAK ROAD TO BE
INSTALLED BY OTHERS
CONNECT RIGHETTI
AND BRANAUGH
RESIDENTIAL SEWER
TO CENTRAL PARKWAY
TREATED STORM DRAINAGE
FOR RESIDENTIAL SITE TO
BE PIPED THROUGH SDE ON
INDUSTRIAL SITE TO
DUBLIN BLVD.
TREATED STORM DRAINAGE
FROM INDUSTRIAL AND
RESIDENTIAL SITES FLOW
TO STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
IN DUBLIN BLVD
CONNECT ZONE 2 WATER
TO CENTRAL PARKWAY
FOR LOOPED SERVICE
TO RIGHETTI AND
BRANAUGH PROPERTY
DRAINAGE OF RESIDENTIAL
SITE TO BE DISCHARGED TO
BIORETENTION BASINS SOUTH
OF FUTURE PUBLIC STREET FOR
TREATMENT PER PROVISION C.3.
SEWER IN RESIDENTIAL SITE
TO FLOW THROUGH RIGHETTI
RESIDENTIAL SITE TO
CENTRAL PARKWAY IN FUTURE
PUBLIC STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY
CONNECT ZONE 2 WATER
TO CENTRAL PARKWAY
FOR LOOPED SERVICE
TO RIGHETTI AND
BRANAUGH PROPERTY
NOTE: DESIGN OF UTILITIES,
LOTTING AND DRAINAGE FOR
RESIDENTIAL SITE WILL BE
INCLUDED IN A
SUBSEQUENT SMALL LOT
VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
1
2
"
Z
O
N
E
2
W
A
T
E
R
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
1
0
"
R
E
C
Y
C
L
E
D
W
A
T
E
R
FU
T
U
R
E
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
T
R
E
E
T
SOUTHERN INDUSTRIAL SITE
CONNECTS TO 12" WATER (ZONE 2)
IN DUBLIN BLVD.
NORTHERN INDUSTRIAL SITE
CONNECTS TO 12" WATER (ZONE 2)
IN DUBLIN BLVD.
STORM DRAIN PROPOSED
BY EAST RANCH
SW
Q
FOR REFERENCE ONLY
CONNECT TO EX 96" SD
(CONNECTION TO BOX
CULVERT AND 96" SD
INSTALLED AS PART OF
DUBLIN BLVD IMPROVEMENTS)
EX 6'x5' DOUBLE BOX CULVERTS
UNDER EX. FALLON RD.
8'x9' BOX CULVERT
CONNECTION BETWEEN
G3 & EX. 6'x5'
EX 84" CULVERT
E
X
G
3
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
96" SD
SEE CONTINUATION ABOVE RIGHT
SEE CONTINUATION BELOW LEFT
80
PARCEL P
405
406
PARCEL NN
427
PARCEL FF
425
408
464
458
PARCEL MM
407
459
465
429
PARCEL BB
430
428
PARCEL CC
426 423
424
462
460
461
463
PARCEL QQ
480
479
478
477
476
475
481
546
474
545
544
543
PARCEL 3 PARCEL 1
PARCEL 4 103
PARCEL 2
PARCEL 3PARCEL 4 103 PARCEL 1
PARCEL 2 PARCEL 5
SW
Q
SW
Q
SW
Q
SW
Q
SW
Q
SW
Q
SW
Q
SW
Q
SW
Q
40
0
41
0
43
0
44
0
45
0
520
510
500
490
44
0
42
0
43
0
40
0
39
0
380
370
430
440
480
470 490500
570
560
550
580
540
530
53
052051
050
049
0480470
460450
390
400 410
38
0
37
0
38
0
39
0
41
0
40
8
41
0
42
0
41
8
42
0
41
8
440
45
0
46
0
47
0
48
0
45
0
46
0
47
0
48
0
47
0
46
8
47
2
46
0
47
0
48
0
49
0
50
0
ABBCC
S
R
PO
N
M
M
L
K
G
H
J W
X
Y
T
V
U
F
I
D
E
Q
W
Y
Z
J-DITCH ALONG PL
CAPTURES DRAINAGE
LIMIT OF GRADING
AT PROPERTY LINE J-DITCH ALONG PL
CAPTURES DRAINAGE
CONFORM GRADING
AT EXISTING
ACCESS EASEMENT
CONFORM GRADING
AT COLLIER CANYON ROAD
CONFORM GRADING
AT COLLIER CANYON ROAD
DAYLIGHT GRADING ONTO
ADJACENT PROPERTY. OWNER TO OBTAIN
GRADING PERMISSION AND GRADING EASEMENT.
GRADING PERMIT TO BE OBTAINED FROM COUNTY
FUTURE ENTRANCE
INTO INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT
FUTURE ENTRANCE
INTO INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT
6' BENCHES EVERY
30' VERTICALLY
MATCH GRADES AT
CENTRAL PARKWAY
DAYLIGHT GRADING ONTO
ADJACENT PROPERTY. OWNER TO OBTAIN
GRADING PERMISSION AND GRADING EASEMENT.
GRADING PERMIT TO BE OBTAINED FROM COUNTY
DAYLIGHT GRADING ONTO
ADJACENT PROPERTY. OWNER TO OBTAIN
GRADING PERMISSION AND GRADING EASEMENT.
GRADING PERMIT TO BE OBTAINED FROM COUNTY
GRADING OF DUBLIN BLVD
ROAD SUBGRADE TO ASSIST
CITY IN CONSTRUCTION
OF FUTURE ROADWAY
4.3' HIGH SLOPE
BANK BETWEEN PADS
20' MAINTENANCE
BENCH
MATCH GRADES WITH
CROAK PROPERTY
CITY OF
DUBLIN LIMIT
NOTES:
1. MASS GRADING TO OCCUR OVER BRANAUGH, RIGHETTI, AND MONTE VISTA
PROPERTIES IN ONE OPERATION TO BALANCE DIRT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF
DUBLIN BLVD AND FOR FUTURE DEVELOPEMENT. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WILL
BALANCE WITHIN EACH "SUPER PAD" SHOWN HERE. "SUPER PADS" DESIGNED AT
SLOPES SHOWN TO ACCOMODATE A WIDE VARIETY OF TYPES OF FUTURE
DEVELOPMENT AND ALLOW FOR ADA ACCESS WITHIN THEM.
2. TEMPORARY DRAINAGE SOLUTION WILL BE REQUIRED FOR RUNOFF COLLECTED
IN J-DITCHES. DESIGN WILL BE DETERMINED IN FINAL DESIGN, BUT MAY
INCLUDE TEMPORARY SETTLEMENT AND/OR DETENTION BASINS AT THE LOCATIONS
OF THE STORMWATER QUALITY BASINS BEFORE IMPERVIOUS AREA IS CREATED.
PARCEL 3PARCEL 4 103 PARCEL 1
PARCEL 2 PARCEL 5
3:
1
3:
1
3
:
1
2:1 2:1
2:1 2:1
2:1
6%
2.5%
2.5%
2.5%
2.5%
2.5%
2.5%
2.5%
2:1
2:1
3
.
4
%
2
:
1
2:1
3:
1
3:
1
3:1
2.5%
2.5%
2.5%
3:1
3:1
3:1
3
:
1
1
.
1
%
6%
2
:
1
2
:
1
GRADING AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT LIMITS
GRADING AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT LIMITS
5.
5
%
5
.
3
%
ESTIMATED GRADING QUANTITIES
CUT (CY)FILL (CY)NET (CY)
RIGHETTI 755,352 389,790 365,562 (CUT)
BRANAUGH 499,704 704,848 205,144 (FILL)
MONTE VISTA 1,236 168,164 166,928 (FILL)
TOTAL 1,256,292 1,262,802 6,510 (FILL)
SW
Q
W
LEGEND:
OVERLAND RELEASE
81
3:1
20'
EX GROUND
PAD
2:1
3:1 MA
X12'
ACCESS
ROAD
PL
FENCE
BNDY / CITY LIMITS 172'± MAX
GRADING EASEMENT 5'
SECTION A
NTS
2.5%
SECTION B
NTS
DAYLIGHT
DAYLIGHT
EX GROUND
160'± MAX
GRADING EASEMENT
1' OVERBUILD
BNDY / CITY LIMITS
5'
2.5%
SECTION C
NTS
DAYLIGHT
EX GROUND
60'± MAX
GRADING EASEMENT
1' OVERBUILD
BNDY /
CITY LIMITS
20'3:1
SECTION D
NTS
DAYLIGHT
EX GROUND
STORM WATER QUALITY BASIN
25'± MAX
GRADING
EASEMENT
5'
3:1
3:1
3:1
2.5%
BNDY
2' OVERBUILD
SWQ BASIN
VARIES 23'± - 34'±
3:1
3:1
2.5%BNDY
2' OVERBUILD
SWQ BASIN
40'± - 43'±
BNDY2' OVERBUILD
3:1
2.5%
BNDY
2' OVERBUILD
SWQ BASIN
3:1
3:1
3:1
2.5%
BNDY /
CITY LIMIT
SWQ BASIN
21'± - 41'±
SEE NOTE
EX GROUND
EX GROUND
EX GROUND
EX GROUND
EX GROUND
SECTION E
NTS
SECTION G
NTS
SECTION H
NTS
SECTION I
NTS
SECTION J
NTS
DAYLIGHT
1' OVERBUILD
BNDY
2:1
J-DITCH
SEE DETAIL SHEET 6
2.5%
SECTION K
NTS
SECTION L
NTS
DAYLIGHT
EX GROUND
BNDY
3:1
1' OVERBUILD
BNDY 1' OVERBUILD
EX GROUND
DAYLIGHT 3:1
2.5%
SECTION M
NTS
DAYLIGHT
1' OVERBUILD
BNDY
2:1
J-DITCH SEE DETAIL SHEET 6
SECTION N
NTS
EX GROUND
EX GROUND
DAYLIGHT
1' OVERBUILD
BNDY
2:1
SECTION O
NTS
EX GROUND
3:1
3:1
SUPER PADSWQ BASIN VARIES3' OVERBUILD
30
'
M
A
X
SECTION T
NTS
2:1
6'
5%
30
'
M
A
X
2:1
5%
6'
2:1
30
'
M
A
X
2.5%
3:13:1
2' BERM
SWQ BASINSWQ BASIN
PL
SECTION F
NTS
VARIES
10'± -
47'±
SWQ BASIN
RESIDENTIAL
4'4'
NATIVE GROUND
WITH HYDROSEED
COMPACTED
GRAVEL
CONCRETE V-DITCH
PER CITY STD. CD-418
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
BNDY /
CITY LIMITS
48' SEE NOTE 1 48'±MIN - 57'± MAX
5'± MIN
21'± MAX
CITY
LIMIT
48' SEE NOTE 1
CITY
LIMIT
51'± MIN - 58'± MAX
5'± -
12'±
51'± MAX/MIN
31'±
3'± - 25'±
64'± MIN- 81'± MAX
GC / CO
19'± - 48'±
INDUSTRIAL
50'±GC/CO
11'± - 68'±
RESIDENTIAL
SUPER PAD
3'± - 65'±
3'± - 40'±
2:1
2:1
2:1
2:1
PAD
PAD
PAD
PAD
PARK
BNDY
BNDY
BNDY
BNDY
5'
L/S
8'
S/W
3'
PSE
1' OVERBUILD
5'
L/S
8'
S/W3'1' OVERBUILD
1' OVERBUILD
EX GROUND
EX GROUND
EX GROUND
EX GROUND
3:1
SECTION P
NTS
SECTION Q
NTS
SECTION R
NTS
SECTION S
NTS
1' OVERBUILD
DAYLIGHT
DAYLIGHT
CONFORM TO EX PAVEMENT
CONFORM TO EX PAVEMENT
1'± - 24'±
20'
PARCEL 2
2'
PL
INDUSTRIAL
56'
FUTURE
PUBLIC
STREET
RESIDENTIAL
PARCEL 1
2'
ROW
ROW/APA
LINE
NOTE:
1.DEDICATION OF ROW TO VALLEY LINK WILL BE MADE
BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT ONCE FINAL REQUIRED ROW
IS DETERMINED.
2.OWNER WOULD LIKE TO OBTAIN REMAINING PORTION OF
COLLIER CANYON ROAD FOR USE AS UTILITY CORRIDOR
AND STORM WATER QUALITY BASIN IF IT IS NO
LONGER REQUIRED FOR ACCESS
RESIDENTIAL
SUPER PAD
1'± - 6'±
6'±
15'± - 47'±
10' EX CALTRANS/SPRINT
UTILITY ESMT
10' SDE
CONCRETE V-DITCH
PER CITY STD. CD-418
20'
12'
ACCESS
ROAD
PL
FENCE4'4'
1' OVERBUILD
NOTE:
1.DEDICATION OF ROW TO VALLEY LINK WILL BE MADE
BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT ONCE FINAL REQUIRED ROW
IS DETERMINED.
2.OWNER WOULD LIKE TO OBTAIN REMAINING PORTION OF
COLLIER CANYON ROAD FOR USE AS UTILITY CORRIDOR
AND STORM WATER QUALITY BASIN IF IT IS NO
LONGER REQUIRED FOR ACCESS
NOTE: DEDICATION OF ROW TO
VALLEY LINK WILL BE MADE BY
SEPARATE INSTRUMENT ONCE FINAL
REQUIRED ROW IS DETERMINED.
82
2.5%2.5%
3:13:1
52'
SECTION Y
NTS
VARIES VARIES
3:1
2.5%
SWQ BASIN
SECTION X
NTS
3:13:1
2' BERM
SWQ BASINSWQ BASIN
BNDY
SECTION U
NTS
1' OVERBUILDBNDY
3:1
SECTION V
NTS
2:1
2:1
3:1
18' SWQ
BASIN
1' OVERBUILD
30
'
M
A
X
6'
5%
2.5%
30
'
M
A
X
J-DITCH
NTS
2:1
M
A
X
2%
2.5'1.5'3"
4'FL
6"
6"
2'
4"
MI
N
1
1 1
1
1'
1'
6"X6"X10 GA MESH
1%
1%
27'± - 41'± SWQ BASIN
3:1
10'
PSE
3:1
16'
SIDEWALK
8'
L/S90'
8'
L/S
8'
S/W
10'
PSE
2.5%
EX GROUND
2.5%
130'
SECTION W
NTS
12' CLASS 1 TRAIL
WITH 2' SHOULDERS
ROW ROW INDUSTRIAL
35'± - 42'±
FUTURE ENTRANCE ROAD
20'
SUPER PAD
56'
FUTURE
PUBLIC
STREET
RESIDENTIAL
2'
ROW
ROW/APA
LINEPL
CONCRETE V-DITCH
PER CITY STD. CD-418
2' OVERBUILD
83
PARCEL 3 PARCEL 1
PARCEL 4 103
PARCEL 2
405
406
PARCEL NN
427
PARCEL FF
425
408
464
458
PARCEL MM
407
459
465
429
PARCEL BB
430
428
PARCEL CC
426 423
424
462
460
461
401
463
PARCEL QQ
475
546
488
489474
STRAW WATTLES
TO BE PLACED AT
EDGE OF PAVEMENT
SILT FENCING TO BE
INSTALLED AT
TOP OF SLOPE,
BOTTOM OF SLOPE
AND EVERY 10' VERTICALLY
SILT FENCING TO BE
INSTALLED AT
TOP OF SLOPE,
BOTTOM OF SLOPE
AND EVERY 10' VERTICALLY
CONSTRUCTION
ENTRANCE CONSTRUCTION
ENTRANCE
CONSTRUCTION
ENTRANCE
SILT FENCING TO BE
INSTALLED AT
TOP OF SLOPE,
BOTTOM OF SLOPE
AND EVERY 10' VERTICALLY
SILT FENCING TO BE
INSTALLED AT
TOP OF SLOPE,
BOTTOM OF SLOPE
AND EVERY 10' VERTICALLY
SILT FENCING TO BE
INSTALLED AT
TOP OF SLOPE,
BOTTOM OF SLOPE
AND EVERY 10' VERTICALLY
SILT FENCING TO BE
INSTALLED AT
TOP OF SLOPE,
BOTTOM OF SLOPE
AND EVERY 10' VERTICALLY
SWQ BASINS TO BE USED
AS TEMPORARY SEDIMENT
BASINS (SEE DETAIL BELOW)
SWQ BASIN TO BE USED
AS TEMPORARY SEDIMENT
BASIN (SEE DETAIL BELOW)
SWQ BASIN TO BE USED
AS TEMPORARY SEDIMENT
BASIN (SEE DETAIL BELOW)
SILT FENCING TO BE
INSTALLED AT
TOP OF SLOPE,
BOTTOM OF SLOPE
AND EVERY 10' VERTICALLY
SWQ BASIN TO BE USED
AS TEMPORARY SEDIMENT
BASIN (SEE DETAIL BELOW)
LEGEND
STRAW WATTLES
HYDROSEED (APPROXIMATE LIMITS)
GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
CATCH BASIN SEDIMENT BARRIER
PERIMETER SILT FENCE
WATER
FERTILIZER (20-20-10)
R BINDER
WOOD FIBER MULCH
SEED
MATERIAL
TOTAL
SEED VARIETY LBS. PER ACRE
ROSE CLOVER 8
CAL POPPY 4
BLUE LUPINE 6
75
LBS/AC. (SLOPE MEASURE.)
2,000 LBS
75 LBS
60 LBS
400 LBS
AS NEEDED FOR APPLICATION
PRELIMINARY HYDROSEED MIX:
REGREEN 36
ZORRO 6
BLANDO 15
THE EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS SHALL BE MIXED AND APPLIED IN APPROXIMATELY THE
FOLLOWING PROPORTIONS:
DEP
T
H
3"-
4
"
SPAC
I
N
G
3' -
4
'
3"-
4
"
SPAC
I
N
G
3' -
4
'
DEP
T
H
8'-1
0
'
D
I
A
.
BIO-
D
E
G
R
A
D
E
F
I
B
E
R
S
STUF
F
E
D
I
N
A
B
I
O
-
DEGR
A
D
A
B
L
E
(
N
O
N
-
P
L
A
S
T
I
C
)
CALI
F
O
R
N
I
A
S
T
R
A
W
W
O
R
K
S
OPEN
N
E
T
NOTES:
DRAINAGE DIRECTION
84
PARCEL 3 PARCEL 1
PARCEL 4 103
PARCEL 2
DMA 3 DMA 2
DMA 1
SWQ 3
SWQ 2
SWQ 1
STORM DRAIN OUTFALL TO SWQ 3 AT
BOTTOM OF SLOPE FROM STORM DRAIN
SYSTEM IN PARKING LOT ABOVE
STORM DRAIN OUTFALL TO SWQ 2 AT
BOTTOM OF SLOPE FROM STORM DRAIN
SYSTEM IN PARKING LOT ABOVE
OVERFLOW RISER TAKES DRAINAGE TO SDO SYSTEM
OVERFLOW RISER TAKES DRAINAGE TO SDO SYSTEM
STORM DRAIN OUTFALL TO SWQ 2 AT
BOTTOM OF SLOPE FROM STORM DRAIN
SYSTEM IN PARKING LOT ABOVE
CHECK DAM AND SPILLWAY (TYP)
OVERFLOW RISER TAKES DRAINAGE TO SDO SYSTEM
SWQ 1
DRAINAGE FROM RESIDENTIAL SITE ENTERS SWQ
1 THROUGH STORM DRAIN OUTFALLS AT BOTTOM
OF SLOPE FROM STORM DRAIN SYSTEM IN
PUBLIC STREETS ABOVE
SDO
D
U
B
L
I
N
B
L
V
D
CO
L
L
I
E
R
C
A
N
Y
O
N
R
O
A
D
IN
T
E
R
S
T
A
T
E
5
8
0
TREATED RUNOFF DISCHARGES TO
CITY SD SYSTEM IN DUBLIN BLVD
SWQ 2
4" PVC PERFORATED
SUBDRAIN
CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL
OVERFLOW RISER
TYPICAL BIO-RETENTION BASIN SECTION
NTS
3:1
M
A
X
3:1 MA
X
NATIVE SOIL BIOTREATMENT SOIL MIX WITH
INFILTRATION RATE
OF 5 IN/HR MIN
SWQ 1 - OVERFLOW RISER DETAIL
NTS
BIORETENTION CELL
3:1
BIORETENTION CELL
3:1
SD PIPE
RIP RAP APRON
NATIVE MATERIALDRAIN
GRATE
NOTES:
1.THE CALCULATIONS SHOWN IN TABLE HEREON ARE BASED ON ALAMEDA COUNTY CLEAN WATER PROGRAM, C.3
STORMWATER TECHNICAL GUIDANCE SEPTEMBER 2019.
2.RAINFALL INTENSITY = 0.2 IN/HR
3.BIORETENTION SOIL MIX TO HAVE A MINIMUM 5 IN/HR INFILTRATION RATE
4.THE PRELIMINARY BASIN SIZING IS BASED ON A SIZING CRITERIA OF (0.2 IN/HR)/(5 IN/HR)=0.04 (4%)
5.EACH SITE WILL COMPLY WITH THE C.10 TRASH CAPTURE PROVISION OF THE MMRP.
6.MAINTENANCE ACCESS TO BIORETENTION BASINS WILL BE FROM ADJACENT STREETS DOWN 3:1 SIDE SLOPES.
IF FENCES ARE PROVIDED AROUND BIORETENTION BASINS, GATES OR GAPS WILL NEED TO BE PROVIDED.
7.DUBLIN BLVD TO PROVIDE TREATMENT FOR ITSELF WITHIN THE PROPOSED ROW.
8.THE IMPERVIOUS AREA NOTED ABOVE IS ESTIMATED FOR FUTURE USES TO SIZE THE BASINS. NO IMPERVIOUS
AREA IS PROPOSED WITH THIS APPLICATION.
DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREA
STORMWATER QUALITY BASIN
LIMITS OF DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREAS
STORM DRAIN OPEN SPACE (SDO)
CONVEYS: HIGH FLOW BYPASS FOR DEVELOPED FLOWS AND
TREATED BIORETENTION BASIN OUTFLOWS
DMA
SWQ
DMA
IMPERVIOUS
RATIO
IMPERVIOUS
AREA (SF)
TOTAL AREA
(SF)
TREATMENT
AREA
REQUIRED (SF)
TREATMENT AREA
PROVIDED (SF)
1 0.65 297,083 457,050 11,883 12,238
2 0.8 498,750 623,437 19,950 20,023
3 0.8 263,082 328,853 10,523 10,713
FOR REFERENCE ONLY
85
PARCEL 3 PARCEL 1
PARCEL 4 103
PARCEL 2
FUTURE VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
OF RESIDENTIAL PARCEL TO
DETAIL FIRE ACCESS,
MAINTENANCE BENCHES,
WILDFIRE BUFFER LOTS
AND FIRE HYDRANT LOCATIONS
427
425
428
426
462
460
461
463
PARCEL QQ
546
545
544
CITY OF DUBLIN
LIMITS
FUTURE ACCESS FOR RESIDENTIAL PARCEL
LEGEND:
FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS ROUTE
CITY LIMITS
FIRE HYDRANT
NOTES:
1. SITE PLAN SHOWN IS CONCEPTUAL AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE
WITH APPROVAL OF A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PACKAGE.
APPLICATION SHOWS SITE PLAN FOR REFERENCE ONLY. NO
IMPERVIOUS AREA IS PROPOSED WITH THIS APPLICATION.
86
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
CITY OF DUBLIN
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
City Clerk
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Fee Waived per GC 27383
Space above this line for Recorderʼs use
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE
CITY OF DUBLIN
AND
BEX DEVELOPMENT, LLC
FOR THE BRANAUGH PROJECT
87
2
THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this “Agreement” or this
“Development Agreement”) is made and entered into for reference purposes on
this day of , 2023, by and between the City of Dublin, a Municipal
Corporation (hereafter “City”), and Bex Development, LLC, a California Limited
Liability Company (hereafter “Developer”) pursuant to the authority of §§ 65864
et seq. of the California Government Code and Dublin Municipal Code, Chapter
8.56. City and Developer are, from time-to-time, individually referred to in this
Agreement as a “Party ,” and are collectively referred to as “Parties.”
RECITALS
A. California Government Code §§ 65864 et seq. (“Development
Agreement Statute”) and Chapter 8.56 of the Dublin Municipal Code (hereafter
“Chapter 8.56”) authorize the City to enter into a Development Agreement for
the development of real property with any person having a legal or equitable
interest in such property in order to establish certain development rights in such
property.
B. Developer owns certain real property (the “Property”) consisting of
approximately 40 acres of land, as more particularly described in Exhibit A,
Legal Description of Property, attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference.
C. Developer has applied for, and City has approved, various land use
approvals in connection with a project consisting of up to 97 residential units
and up to 527,773 square feet of industrial development (the “Project”),
including, without limitation, an amendment to Planned Development Zoning
Ordinance No. 32.-05 Stage 1 Development Plan (Ord. No. ___ adopted on ______,
2023), a Stage 2 Planned Development Rezoning and Development Plan for the
Branaugh Project (Ord. No. ___ adopted by the City Council on ______, 2023),
Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 9306 for the Branaugh Project (Resolution No. ___
adopted on ______, 2023), and this Agreement (approved by the DA Approving
Ordinance (defined below)) (collectively the “Project Approvals ”).
D. City desires the timely, efficient, orderly and proper development of
the Project.
E. The City, in collaboration with the City of Livermore, is the lead
agency that desires to construct a project generally described as the roadway
extension of Dublin Boulevard from Fallon Road to the Dublin city limits,
continuing easterly through unincorporated Alameda County and connecting to
North Canyons Parkway within the City of Livermore, commonly referred to as
88
3
the proposed Dublin Boulevard – North Canyons Parkway Extension Project
("Dublin Boulevard Extension”). On September 3, 2019, the City Council adopted
Ordinance No. 10-19 to establish Right-of-Way Lines for Dublin Boulevard
between Fallon Road and the Eastern City Limit (“Precise Plan”).
F. The Valley Link Rail project (“Valley Link Project”) is a new 47-mile,
7-station passenger rail project that establishes rail connectivity between the Bay
Area Rapid Transit (BART) system at the existing Dublin/Pleasanton BART
Station in Alameda County to the approved Altamont Corridor Express (ACE)
North Lathrop Station in San Joaquin County. The proposed project will impact
existing transportation corridors, including the existing Interstate 580 (“I-580”)
corridor in the City. The Valley Link Project proposes relocation of Collier
Canyon Road to accommodate the passenger rail line. The addition of a new rail
system would require widening of I-580 right -of-way to the north and respective
relocation of Collier Canyon Road (the “Collier Canyon Roadway Relocation”).
G. City and Developer have reached agreement and desire to express
herein a Development Agreement that will facilitate development of the Project
subject to conditions set forth herein.
H. The development of the Property and the Project has been evaluated
in three environmental impact reports certified by the City: (1) Eastern Dublin
General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 91103064; (2) East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development
Plan and Annexation Supplemental EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2001052114);
and (3) Fallon Village Project Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report
(State Clearinghouse Number 2005062010) (collectively, “Prior EIRs”). The Prior
EIRs specifically addressed the General Plan, Specific Plan and Stage 1 Planned
Development Zoning and Development Plan for the Project. An Initial Study was
prepared for the amendment to Planned Development Zoning Ordinance No.
32.-05 Stage 1 Development Plan, Stage 2 Planned Development Rezoning and
Development Plan, a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 9306, and this Development
Agreement to determine whether these approvals will result in any new or
substantially more severe significant environmental impacts than those analyzed
in these prior EIRs or any other standard requiring further environmental
review under CEQA are met (Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA
Guidelines sections 15162 and 15163). The Initial Study determined that these
approvals did not trigger any of the CEQA standards requiring further
environmental review. An Addendum was prepared for these approvals
explaining the basis for finding no further review is required under CEQA
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15164(e). The City Council considered and
89
4
approved the findings in the Addendum (Reso. No. ___ adopted on ______, 2023)
prior to approving the amendment to Planned Development Zoning Ordinance
No. 32.-05 Stage 1 Development Plan, Stage 2 Planned Development Rezoning
and Development Plan, a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 9306, and this
Development Agreement.
I. City has given the required notice of its intention to adopt this
Development Agreement and has conducted public hearings thereon pursuant to
Government Code Section 65867 and Chapter 8.56. As required by Government
Code Section 65867.5, City has found that the provisions of this Development
Agreement and its purposes are consistent with the goals, policies, standards
and land use designations specified in Cityʼs General Plan.
J. On ____________________, 2023, the City of Dublin Planning
Commission, the initial hearing body for purposes of development agreement
review, recommended approval of this Development Agreement pursuant to
Resolution No. ___.
K. On ____________________, 2023, the City Council of the City of
Dublin adopted Ordinance No. ___ approving this Development Agreement (the
“DA Approving Ordinance”). The DA Approving Ordinance took effect on ___,
2023.
NOW, THEREFORE, with reference to the foregoing recitals and in
consideration of the mutual promises, obligations and covenants herein
contained, City and Developer agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
1. Description of Property. The Property that is the subject of this
Agreement is described in Exhibit A.
2. Interest of Developer. Developer has a legal interest in the Property
in that it is the owner of the Property.
3. Relationship of City and Developer. It is understood that this
Agreement is a contract that has been negotiated and voluntarily entered into by
the City and Developer and that neither City nor Developer is an agent of the
other. The City and Developer hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint
venture or partnership between them, and agree that nothing contained herein
90
5
or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as
making the City and Developer joint venturers or partners.
4. Effective Date and Term
4.1 Effective Date. The effective date of this Agreement (“Effective
Date”) is the date upon which the DA Approving Ordinance takes effect.
4.2 Te rm . The term of this Agreement shall commence on the
Effective Date and shall continue for 10 (ten) years thereafter, unless said term is
otherwise extended or terminated as provided in this Agreement (as so extended
or terminated, the “Term”). In the event that any third-party lawsuit is filed
challenging the Cityʼs issuance of the Project Approvals or its compliance with
CEQA, the Term of this Agreement shall be automatically extended for a
duration equal to the time from the filing of such lawsuit to the entry of a final
order dismissing or otherwise finally terminating such lawsuit, which duration
shall include any appeals (“Litigation Extension”). If required by one of the
parties, the other party shall enter into a Clarification pursuant to Section 9.4
below memorializing the length of such Litigation Extension. This Agreement
shall terminate with respect to any for sale residential lot and such lot shall be
released and no longer subject to this Agreement, without the execution or
recordation of any further document, when a certificate of occupancy has been
issued for the building(s) on such lot.
4.3 Optional Extension. Prior to the expiration of the Term of this
Development Agreement, as provided in Section 4.2, Developer may extend the
Term of the Development Agreement. To do so, Developer shall give City written
notice at least 90 days prior to the termination date of the Development
Agreement. At the time Developer provides such notice, Developer shall make a
payment to City in the amount of $250,000 (adjusted for inflation from the
Effective Date using the CPI-U, San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Area) for each
year of extension requested under this provision. Upon receipt of the notice and
the contribution, the City Manager shall approve the extension and shall notify
the Developer in writing that the Term of the Development Agreement has been
automatically extended for an additional time period equal to the time period
requested by Developer under this provision, commencing on the date the
Development Agreement would otherwise have terminated; provided Developer
may exercise its option to extend the Development Agreement no more than five
times, for a maximum total Term of the Development Agreement of fifteen years
(plus any extensions pursuant to Sections 4.2 or 4.3 hereof). Provided there is an
extension period remaining, Developer may request the extension for multiple
91
6
years and provide the payment due for each yearʼs extension. Each extension
shall apply to the entire Property upon payment of one $250,000 (as adjusted in
accordance with this Section 4.3) per year extension payment, even if the
Property is owned by multiple Developers at that time.
4.4 Te rm of Project Approvals. The term of any Project Approvals
(as defined in Recital C) for the Property or any portion thereof, specifically
including without limitation the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 9306, shall be
extended automatically for the Term of this Agreement.
4.4.1 Termination of Agreement. In the event that this
Agreement is terminated prior to the expiration of the Term, the term of any
Project Approval and the vesting period for any final subdivision map approved
as a Project Approval shall be the term otherwise applicable to the approval.
5. Vested Rights/Use of the Property/Applicable Law/Processing
5.1 Right to Develop. Developer shall have the vested right to
develop the Project on the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions
of (i) this Agreement, the Project Approvals (as and when issued), and any
amendments to any of them as shall, from time to time, be approved pursuant to
this Agreement, and (ii) the Cityʼs ordinances, codes, resolutions, rules,
regulations and official policies governing the development, construction,
subdivision, occupancy and use of the Project and the Property including,
without limitation, the General Plan, the Dublin Municipal Code, and the
Specific Plan, the permitted uses of the Property, density and intensity of use of
the Property and the maximum height, bulk and size of proposed buildings, and
the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes that are
in force and effect on the Effective Date of this Agreement (collectively,
“Applicable Law”). In exercising its discretion when acting upon subsequent
project approvals, City shall apply the Applicable Law as the controlling body of
law (within which Applicable Law such discretion shall be exercised).
Notwit hstanding the foregoing or anything to the contrary herein, any
amendment to the Project Approvals shall not become part of the law Developer
is vested into under this Agreement unless an additional amendment of this
Agreement is entered into between Developer and City in accordance with this
Agreement. In the event that such amendments to the Project Approvals are
sought for any distinct portion of the Property or Project, such amendments
shall not require amendment of this Agreement with respect to any other
portion of the Property or Project, except to the extent set forth in such
amendment.
92
7
5.2 Fees, Exactions, Dedications. The City shall not apply to the
Project any development impact fee or any application, processing or inspection
fee (collectively, “Fe es”) that the City first enacts after the Effective Date. Except
as otherwise set forth in this Agreement, City and Developer agree that this
Agreement does not limit the Cityʼs discretion to impose or require (a) payment
of any fees in connection with the issuance of any subsequent project approvals
as necessary for purposes of mitigating environmental and other impacts of the
Project, (b) dedication of any land, or (c) construction of any public
improvement or facilities (collectively “Exactions”). Except as specifically
provided herein, nothing in this Agreement shall limit the Cityʼs ability to
impose existing development impact Fees at rates that are increased beyond the
amounts in effect on the Effective Date or limit Developerʼs ability to challenge
any such increases under state or local law.
5.3 Construction Codes. Notwithstanding the provisions of
Section 5.1 above, to the extent Applicable Law includes requirements under the
state or locally adopted building, plumbing, mechanical, electrical and fire
codes (collectively the “Codes”), the Codes included shall be those in force and
effect at the time Developer submits its application for the relevant building,
grading, or other construction permits to City. In the event of a conflict between
such Codes and the Project Approvals, the Project Approvals shall, to the
maximum extent allowed by law, prevail. For construction of public
infrastructure, the Codes applicable to such construction shall be those in force
and effect at the time of execution of an improvement agreement between City
and Developer pursuant to Chapter 9.16 of the Dublin Municipal Code.
5.4 New Rules and Regulations. During the Term of this
Agreement, the City may apply new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules,
regulations and official policies of the City to the Property which were not in
force and effect on the Effective Date only to the extent they are not in conflict
with the vested rights granted by the Applicable Law, the Project Approvals or
this Agreement. In addition to any other conflicts that may occur, each of the
following new or modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations or official
policies shall be considered a per se conflict with the Applicable Law:
5.4.1 Any application or requirement of such new or
modified ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations or official policies that
would (i) cause or impose a substantial financial burden on, or materially delay
development of the Property as otherwise contemplated by this Agreement or
the Project Approvals, (ii) frustrate in a more than insignificant way the intent or
purpose of the Project Approvals or preclude compliance therewith including,
93
8
without limitation, by preventing or imposing limits or controls in the rate,
timing, phasing or sequencing of development of the Project; (iii) prevent or
limit the processing or procuring of subsequent project approvals; or (iv) reduce
the density or intensity of use of the Property as a whole, or otherwise requiring
any reduction in the square footage of, or total number of, proposed buildings,
structures and other improvements, in a manner that is inconsistent with or
more restrictive than the limitations included in this Agreement and the Project
Approvals; and/or
5.4.2 If any of such ordinances, resolutions, rules,
regulations or official policies do not have general (City-wide) applicability.
5.5 Moratorium Not Applicable. Notwithstanding anything to the
contrary contained herein, if a City ordinance, resolution, policy, directive, or
other measure is enacted or becomes effective, whether by action of the City or
by initiative, and if it imposes a building moratorium which affects all or any
part of the Project, City agrees that such ordinance, resolution or other measure
shall not apply to the Project, the Property, this Agreement or the Project
Approvals unless the building moratorium is imposed as part of a declaration of
a local emergency or state of emergency as defined in Government Code section
8558, provided that to the extent a moratorium applies to all or any part of the
Project then the Term shall automatically be extended for a period of time equal
to the period of the moratorium.
5.6 Revised Application Fees. Notwithstanding section 5.2, any
existing application, processing and inspection fees that are revised during the
Term of this Agreement shall apply to the Project provided that (1) such fees
have general applicability and are consistent with State law limitations that
processing fees not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the
service for which they are charged; (2) the application of such fees to the
Property is prospective; and (3) the application of such fees would not prevent,
impose a substantial financial burden on, or materially delay development in
accordance with this Agreement. By so agreeing, Developer does not waive its
rights to challenge the legality of any such application, processing and/or
inspection fees.
5.7 N ew Taxes . This Agreement shall not prohibit the application
of any subsequently enacted city-wide taxes to the Project provided that (1) the
application of such taxes to the Property is prospective, and (2) the application of
such taxes would not prevent development in accordance with this Agreement.
By so agreeing, Developer does not waive its rights to challenge the legality of
94
9
any such taxes, facially or as applied to its Project or Property, or to claim
exemption from any taxes to the extent allowed by law.
5.8 Development of the Project; Phasing, Timing. Since the
California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo
(1984) 37 Cal. 3d 465, that the failure of the parties therein to provide for the
timing of development resulted in a later adopted initiative restricting the timing
of development to prevail over such partiesʼ agreement, it is the Partiesʼ intent to
cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that this Agreement
contains no requirements that Developer must initiate or complete any action,
including without limitation, development of the Project within any period of
time set by City. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to create nor shall it be
construed to create any affirmative development obligations to develop the
Project, or liability in Developer under this Agreement if the development fails
to occur. It is the intention of this provision that Developer be able to develop
the Property in accordance with its own time schedules and the Project
Approvals.
5.9 Processing. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to
limit the authority or obligation of City to hold necessary public hearings, nor to
limit the discretion of City or any of its officers or officials with regard to
subsequent project approvals that require the exercise of discretion by City,
provided that such discretion shall be exercised consistent with the vested rights
granted by this Agreement, the Applicable Law and the Project Approvals.
6. Property Grading.
6.1 Phasing. For mutual benefit, the Parties desire a mass grading
of the Property prior to the Dublin Boulevard Extension through the Property.
Pursuant to Dublin Municipal Code Section 7.16.170(B), when the intended use
of a site requires approval of a discretionary zoning permit, a grading permit
shall not be issued until said approval . The Parties agree that the intended use,
exclusively for purposes of Dublin Municipal Code Section 7.16.170(B) and this
Section, shall mean the Dublin Boulevard Extension. In accordance with this
Section, Developer may apply for, and City may issue a grading permit,
notwithstanding approval of a discretionary zoning permit for the intended use
of the remainder of the Project site.
6.2 Slope Easement. The Project Approvals require Developer to
dedicate a Slope Easement (“SE”) for that portion of the Property adjacent to the
future Dublin Boulevard frontage, if mass grading has not commenced per the
95
10
preliminary grading plan as shown on the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 9306.
Developer shall cooperate in good faith with the City Engineer on the extent of
the SE dedication necessary to accommodate the Dublin Boulevard Extension.
The SE shall be dedicated by separate instrument, in a form satisfactory to the
City Engineer and City Attorney, prior to the first final or parcel map filed by
Developer within the three-year period referenced in Section 8.1. If a final or
parcel map is not filed by Developer within the three-year period, the SE shall be
dedicated in conjunction with the Dublin Boulevard Extension right-of-way
dedication described in Section 8.1.
7. Affordable Housing.
7.1 Units Required by Regulations. Developer proposes up to 97
residential units on the Property. Pursuant to the Cityʼs Inclusionary Zoning
Regulations (Chapter 8.68 of the Dublin Municipal Code) (the “Regulations”),
developers of more than 20 residential units are required to set aside 12.5% of
the total number of units in the project as affordable units as specified.
7.2 Alternative Compliance Authorized. Under the Regulations,
certain exceptions permit developers to satisfy the obligation other than through
on-site construction. For instance, part of this obligation can be satisfied
through the payment of a fee in-lieu of construction of units. In addition,
developers can satisfy their affordable housing obligations by, among other
mechanisms, obtaining City Council approval of an alternative method of
compliance that the City Council finds meet the purposes of the Regulations.
7.3 Satisfaction of City Requirements. Developer shall satisfy its
affordable housing obligation through compliance with the Regulations.
8. Right-of-Way Dedications.
8.1 Dublin Boulevard Extension. The Project Approvals require
Developer to dedicate a portion of the Property to the City in fee as right-of-way
for the Dublin Boulevard Extension, in general conformance with the adopted
Precise Plan, the most current design plans on file with the office of the City
Engineer at the time of dedication, and the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 9306.
Such dedication shall occur no later than three (3) years from the approval date
of the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 9306. The dedicated right-of-way shall be
shown on the first final or parcel map filed within three-years of the approval
date of Vesting Tentative Map 9306. If a final or parcel map is not filed within the
three -year period, the right-of-way shall be dedicated by a separate deed
instrument, in a form satisfactory to the City Engineer and City Attorney. The
96
11
City shall provide Eastern Dublin Transportation Impact Fee (EDTIF) credit s for
the dedicated right -of-way with the amount of the credits to be determined by
the EDTIF Guidelines.
8.2 Collier Canyon Road Realignment. The Project Approvals
require Developer to dedicate, or make an irrevocable offer of dedication for,
that portion of the Property to the City in fee as right-of-way necessary for the
Collier Canyon Road Realignment, in general conformance with the Vesting
Tentative Parcel Map 9306, and the most current design plans on file with the
office of the City Engineer at the time of dedication. The dedicated right -of-way
shall be shown on the first final or parcel map filed. Alternatively, subject to City
Engineer approval, the right-of-way may be dedicated by an easement deed for
public roadway purposes, in a form satisfactory to the City Engineer and City
Attorney. Any such easement deed shall prohibit construction of any permanent
improvements and structures, as determined by the City Engineer, within the
future right-of-way.
9. Community Facilities District - Mitigation of Dublin Boulevard
Extension Permanent Indirect Impacts.
9.1 Mitigation of Permanent Indirect Impacts. Construction of the
Dublin Boulevard Extension will impact potential habitat for several special-
status species, including California tiger salamander and California red-legged
frog. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Opinion 1 issues for the
Dublin Boulevard Extension project and the mitigation measures of the Dublin
Boulevard Extension projectʼs Environmental Impact Report, require the City to
provide compensatory mitigation for impacts to these speciesʼ habitat. To satisfy
the compensatory mitigation requirements, the City proposes to provide project-
specific mitigation in the form of in-perpetuity preservation, enhancement, and
management of suitable habitat for these species. The impacts are categorized
into permanent direct impacts, permanent indirect impacts, and temporary
impacts. The permanent indirect impacts are identical to the Projectʼs potential
permanent direct impacts resulting from the Projectʼs construction. The
permanent indirect impacts on the Property is approximately 1.34 acres, which
may require a compensatory mitigation at a ratio of 3 to 1, for approximately
4.02 acres.
9.2 Community Facilities District. Developer agrees to cooperate
in the formation of, or annexation into, a community facilities district or
districts established pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities District
Act of 1982 (Gov. Code §§ 53311–53368.3) (the “Mello-Roos Act”) including
97
12
approval of the Rate, Method of Apportionment and Manner of Collection of
Special Tax ("RMA") for the purpose of financing the Cityʼs acquisition of
facilities required for the off-site mitigation of the Dublin Boulevard Extensionʼs
permanent indirect impacts (described in Section 9.1). Developer and City agree
that the boundaries of the district(s) will include all of the Property as more
particularly described in Exhibit A, and that Developer will not contest and will,
for and on behalf of all of the Property, vote in favor of formation of or
annexation into the district(s) prior to filing the first final map. Developer shall
pay its fair share of administrative costs incurred by the City associated with the
formation of and/or annexation into the district(s), as determined by the City
Engineer.
9.3 Alternative Mitigation. Notwithstanding the foregoing, City
agrees that Developer may pursue alternatives to mitigate the impacts described
in Section 9.1. If Developer directly acquires mitigation land or credits, fully
satisfying the mitigation required by Section 9.1 , Developer shall be exempt
from compliance with Section 9.2. The City Engineer shall determine, in their
sole discretion, whether Developerʼs alternative method fully satisfies
Developerʼs mitigation requirements as set forth in Section 9.1.
10. Community Facilities District – Service and Maintenance of
Project Facilities and Improvements.
10.1 Community Facilities District. Developer agrees to cooperate
in the formation of, or annexation into, a community facilities district or
districts established pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities District
Act of 1982 (Gov. Code §§ 53311–53368.3) (the “Mello-Roos Act”) including
approval of the Rate, Method of Apportionment and Manner of Collection of
Special Tax ("RMA") for the purpose of financing the services and maintenance
of certain public facilities/improvements constructed by the Developer.
Developer agrees that the boundaries of the district(s) will include all of the
Property, and that Developer will not contest and will, for and on behalf of all of
the Property, vote in favor of formation of or annexation into the district(s) prior
to filing the first final map. Developer shall pay its fair share of administrative
costs incurred by the City associated with the formation of and/or annexation
into the district(s), as determined by the City Engineer.
10.2 Alternative Method of Compliance. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, City agrees that Developer may alternatively establish a maintenance
fund, in an amount to be determined by the City Engineer, that compensates for
all future maintenance of all public streets (including storm drain systems, street
98
13
lights, and other street appurtenances) within Parcels 1 and 2 (future residential
tract), as shown on the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 9306, for a period of twenty
(20) years after City ʼs acceptance of improvements. If Developer complies with
this Section 10.2 prior to filing the first final map, Developer shall be exempt
from compliance with Section 10.1.
11. Eastern Dublin Transportation Impact Fee Credits. Developer shall
not use or apply any EDTIF credits that it purchased or transferred from any
other cre dit-holder to satisfy Developerʼs obligations set forth herein.
12. General Plan Amendments. City acknowledges that Developer
intends to apply for a General Plan amendment to accommodate the following
changes, which shall be subject to the City Councilʼs sole discretion to approve or
deny, following review and recommendation by the Planning Commission in
accordance with Government Code Section 65350 et seq. and environmental
review to the extent required by the California Environmental Quality Act:
12.1 Increase the Industrial Park designationʼs maximum Floor
Area Ratio to 0.50; and/or
12.2 Change certain Property land use designations from Industrial
Park to General Commercial/Campus Office.
13. Amendment or Cancellation.
13.1 Modification Because of Conflict with State or Federal Laws.
The Project and Property shall be subject to state and federal laws and
regulations and this Agreement does not create any vested right in state and
federal laws and regulations in effect on the Effective Date. In the event that state
or federal laws or regulations enacted after the Effective Date of this Agreement
prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement
or require changes in plans, maps or permits approved by the City, the parties
shall meet and confer in good faith in a reasonable attempt to modify this
Agreement to comply with such federal or state law or regulation. Any such
amendment or suspension of the Agreement shall be subject to approval by the
City Council (in accordance with Chapter 8.56). Each Party agrees to extend to
the other its prompt and reasonable cooperation in so modifying this Agreement
or approved plans.
13.2 Amendment of Development Agreement by Mutual Consent.
This Agreement may be amended in writing from time to time by mutual
consent of the Par ties hereto and in accordance with the procedures of the
99
14
Development Agreement Statute and Chapter 8.56. Review and approval of an
amendment to this Development Agreement shall be strictly limited to
consideration of only those provisions to be added or modified. No amendment,
modification, waiver or change to this Development Agreement or any provision
hereof shall be effective for any purpose unless specifically set forth in a writing
that expressly refers to this Development Agreement and signed by the duly
authorized representatives of both Parties.
13.2.1 Partial Amendment. When a Party seeking such an
amendment owns or has an equitable right to only a portion of the whole of the
Property (“Portion”), then such Party may only seek amendment of this
Agreement as directly relates to the Portion, and the Party owning any other
Portion shall not be required or entitled to be a signatory or to consent to an
amendment that affects only another Party's Portion.
13.3 Amendments. Any amendments to this Agreement which
relate to (a) the Term; (b) the permitted uses of the Property as provided in
paragraph 5.1; (c) provisions for “significant” reservation or dedication of land;
(d) conditions, terms, restrictions or requirements for subsequent discretionary
actions; (e) an increase in the density or intensity of use of the overall Project; (f)
the maximum height or size of proposed buildings; or (g) monetary
contributions by Developer as provided in this Agreement, shall be deemed an
“Amendment” and shall require notice or public hearing before the Planning
Commission and the City Council before the Parties may execute an amendment
hereto. The Cityʼs Public Works Director shall determine whether a reservation
or dedication is “significant ” in the context of the overall Project.
13.4 Clarifications. If and when, from time to time, during the Term
of this Agreement, City and Developer agree refinements and clarifications are
necessary or appropriate with respect to the details of performance of City and
Developer hereunder, City and Developer shall effectuate such clarifications
through letter agreements (each, a “Clarification”) approved by City and
Developer, which, after execution, shall be attached hereto as addenda and
become a part hereof, and may be further clarified from time to time as
necessary with future approval by City and Developer. No such Clarification
shall constitute an amendment to this Agreement requiring public notice or
hearing. The City Manager or his or her designee shall have the authority to
determine on behalf of City whether a requested clarification is of such a
character to constitute an Amendment subject to Section 9.3 above or a
Clarification subject to this Section 9.4. The City Manager shall have the
100
15
authority to review, approve, and execute Clarifications to this Agreement
provided that such Clarifications are not Amendments.
13.5 Cancellation by Mutual Consent. Except as otherwise
permitted herein, this Agreement may be canceled in whole or in part only by
the mutual consent of the parties or their successors in interest, in accordance
with the provisions of the Development Agreement Statute and Chapter
8.56. Any fees paid pursuant to this Agreement prior to the date of cancellation
shall be retained by the City.
14. Annual Review.
14.1 Review Date. The annual review date for this Agreement shall
be between July 15 and August 15, 2023, and thereafter between each July 15 and
August 15 during the Term. Review shall be conducted in accordance with
Section 8.56.140 of Chapter 8.56 and the provisions of this Section 11.
14.2 Initiation of Review. The Cityʼs Community Development
Director shall initiate the annual review, as required under Section 8.56.140 of
Chapter 8.56, by giving to Developer thirty daysʼ prior written notice that the City
intends to undertake such review. Not less than thirty days after receipt of the
notice, Developer shall provide evidence to the Director, as reasonably
determined necessary by the Director, to demonstrate good faith compliance
with the material terms and provisions of the Agreement as to the whole or
relevant portion of the Property owned by Developer. The burden of proof by
substantial evidence of compliance is upon Developer.
14.3 Staff Reports. To the extent practical, the City shall deposit in
the mail to Developer a copy of all staff reports, and related exhibits concerning
contract performance at least five days prior to any public hearing addressing
annual review.
14.4 Costs. Costs reasonably incurred by the City in connection
with the annual review shall be paid by Developer in accordance with the Cityʼs
schedule of fees in effect at the time of review.
15. Default.
15.1 Remedies Available. Upon the occurrence of an event of
default, the parties may pursue all remedies at law or in equity which are not
otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in the Cityʼs regulations governing
101
16
development agreements, expressly including, but not limited to, the remedy of
specific performance of this Agreement.
15.2 Notice and Cure. Upon the occurrence of an event of default
by either party, the nondefaulting party shall serve written notice of such default
upon the defaulting party. Subject to a Mortgageeʼs right to cure pursuant to
Section 13.3 hereof, if the default is not cured by the defaulting party within
thirty days after service of such notice of default, the nondefaulting party may
then commence any legal or equitable action to enforce its rights under this
Agreement; provided, however, that if the default cannot be cured within such
thirty day period, the nondefaulting party shall refrain from any such legal or
equitable action so long as the defaulting party begins to cure such default
within such thirty day period and diligently pursues such cure to completion.
Any notice of default given hereunder shall specify in detail the nature of the
failures in performance that the noticing Party claims constitutes the event of
default, all facts constituting substantial evidence of such failure, and the
manner in which such failure may be satisfactorily cured in accordance with the
terms and conditions of this Agreement. During the time periods herein
specified for cure of a failure of performance, the Party charged therewith shall
not be considered to be in default for purposes of (a) termination of this
Agreement, (b) institution of legal proceedings with respect thereto, or (c)
issuance of any approval with respect to the Project. Failure to give notice shall
not constitute a waiver of any default.
15.3 No Damages against City. Notwithstanding anything to the
contrary contained herein, in no event shall damages be awarded against the
City upon an event of default or upon termination of this Agreement.
16. Estoppel Certificate. Either party may, at any time, and from time to
time, request written notice from the other party requesting such party to certify
in writing that, (a) this Agreement is in full force and effect and a binding
obligation of the Parties, (b) this Agreement has not been amended or modified
either orally or in writing, or if so amended, identifying the amendments, and
(c) to the knowledge of the certifying Party, the requesting Party is not in default
in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement, or if in default, to
describe therein the nature and amount of any such defaults. A Party receiving a
request hereunder shall execute and return such certificate within thirty days
following the receipt thereof, or such longer period as may reasonably be agreed
to by the Parties. The City Manager of the City shall be authorized to execute any
certificate requested by Developer. Should the Party receiving the request not
execute and return such certificate within the applicable period, this shall not be
102
17
deemed to be a default, provided that such Party shall be deemed to have
certified that the statements in clauses (a) through (c) of this Section are true,
and any Party may rely on such deemed certification. City acknowledges that a
certificate hereunder may be relied upon by Transferees (as defined in Section
16.2) and Mortgagees (as defined in Section13.1).
17. Mortgagee Protection; Certain Rights of Cure.
17.1 Mortgagee Protection. This Agreement shall be superior and
senior to any lien placed upon the Property, or any portion thereof after the date
of recording this Agreement, including the lien for any deed of trust or mortgage
(“Mortgage ”). Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach hereof shall defeat,
render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith
and for value, but all the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement shall
be binding upon and effective against any person or entity, including any deed of
trust beneficiary or mortgagee (“Mortgagee”) who acquires title to the Property,
or any portion thereof, by foreclosure, trusteeʼs sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure,
or otherwise.
17.2 Mortgagee Not Obligated. Notwithstanding the provisions of
Section 13.1 above, no Mortgagee shall have any obligation or duty under this
Agreement, before or after foreclosure or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, to
construct or complete the construction of improvements, or to guarantee such
construction of improvements, or to guarantee such construction or completion,
or to pay, perform or provide any fee, dedication, improvements or other
exaction or imposition; provided, however, that a Mortgagee shall not be entitled
to devote the Property to any uses or to construct any improvements thereon
other than those uses or improvements provided for or authorized by the Project
Approvals or by this Agreement.
17.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee and Extension of Right to Cure.
If the City receives notice from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of
default given Developer hereunder and specifying the address for service
thereof, then the City shall deliver to such Mortgagee, concurrently with service
thereon to Developer, any notice given to Developer with respect to any claim by
the City that Developer has committed an event of default. Each Mortgagee shall
have the right during the same period available to Developer to cure or remedy,
or to commence to cure or remedy, the event of default claimed set forth in the
Cityʼs notice. The City, through its City Manager, may extend the thirty-day cure
period provided in paragraph 12.2 for not more than an additional sixty days
upon request of Developer or a Mortgagee.
103
18
18. Severability. The unenforceability, invalidity or illegality of any
provisions, covenant, condition or term of this Agreement shall not render the
other provisions unenforceable, invalid or illegal; provided that, if the
unenforceability, invalidation, or illegality would deprive either City or Developer of
material benefits derived from this Development Agreement, or make performance under
this Development Agreement unreasonably difficult, then City and Developer shall meet
and confer and shall make good faith efforts to amend or modify this Development
Agreement in a manner that is mutually acceptable to City and Developer.
19. Attorneysʼ Fees and Costs.
19.1 Prevailing Party. If the City or Developer initiates any action at
law or in equity to enforce or interpret the terms and conditions of this
Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys
fees and costs in addition to any other relief to which it may otherwise be
entitled.
19.2 Third Party Challenge. If any person or entity not a party to
this Agreement initiates an action at law or in equity to challenge the validity of
any the Project Approvals (including this Agreement), the Parties shall cooperate
in defending such action. The Parties hereby agree to affirmatively cooperate in
defending said action and to execute a joint defense and confidentiality
agreement in order to share and protect information, under the joint defense
privilege recognized under applicable law. Developer shall bear its own costs of
defe nse as a real party in interest in any such action, and shall reimburse the
City for all reasonable court costs and attorneysʼ fees expended by the City in
defense of any such action or other proceeding
20. Transfers and Assignments.
20.1 Agreement Runs with the Land. All of the provisions, rights,
terms, covenants, and obligations contained in this Agreement shall be binding
upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective heirs, successors
and assignees, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring the
Property, or any portion thereof, or any interest therein, whether by operation of
law or in any manner whatsoever. All of the provisions of this Agreement shall
be enforceable as equitable servitude and shall constitute covenants running
with the land pursuant to applicable laws, including, but not limited to, Section
1468 of the Civil Code of the State of California. Each covenant to do, or refrain
from doing, some act on the Property hereunder, or with respect to any owned
property, (a) is for the benefit of such properties and is a burden upon such
104
19
properties, (b) runs with such properties, and (c) is binding upon each party and
each successive owner during its ownership of such properties or any portion
thereof, and shall be a benefit to and a burden upon each party and its property
hereunder and each other person succeeding to an interest in such properties.
20.2 Right to Assign. Developer may wish to sell, transfer or assign
all or portions of its Property to other developers (each such other developer is
referred to as a “Transferee”). In connection with any such sale, transfer or
assignment to a Transferee, Developer shall have the right to sell, transfer or
assign to such Transferee any or all rights, interests and obligations of Developer
arising hereunder and that pertain to the portion of the Property being sold or
transferred, to such Transferee, provided, however, that: except as provided
herein, no such transfer, sale or assignment of Developerʼs rights, interests and
obligations hereunder shall occur without prior written notice to City and
approval by the City Manager, which approval shall not be unreasonably
withheld, conditioned, or delayed.
20.3 Approval and Notice of Sale, Transfer or Assignment. The City
Manager shall consider and decide on any transfer, sale or assignment of this
Agreement within ten days after Developerʼs notice, provided all necessary
documents, certifications and other information are provided to the City
Manager to enable the City Manager to determine whether the proposed
Transferee can perform Developerʼs obligations hereunder. Notice of any such
approved sale, transfer or assignment (which includes a description of all rights,
interests and obligations that have been transferred and those which have been
retained by Developer) shall be recorded in the official records of Alameda
County, in a form acceptable to the City Manager, concurrently with such sale,
transfer or assignment.
20.4 Considerations for Approval of Sale, Transfer or Assignment.
In considering the request, the City Manager shall base the decision upon the
proposed assignee's reputation, experience, financial resources and access to
credit and capability to successfully carry out the development of the Property to
completion. The City Manager's approval shall be for the purposes of: a)
providing notice to City; b) assuring that all obligations of Developer are
allocated as between Developer and the proposed purchaser, transferee or
assignee as provided by this Agreement; and c) assuring City that the proposed
purchaser, transferee or assignee is financially capable of performing
Developer's obligations hereunder not withheld by Developer. Notwithstanding
the foregoing, the City Managerʼs approval shall not be required for an
assignment to an entity or entities controlling Developer, controlled by
105
20
Developer, or under common control with Developer, provided that Developer
owns and controls no less than fifty percent of such successor entity or controls
the day-to-day management decisions of such successor entity.
20.5 Release upon Transfer. Upon the transfer, sale, or assignment
of all of Developerʼs rights, interests and obligations hereunder pursuant to
Section 14.2 of this Agreement, Developer shall be automatically released from
the obligations under this Agreement, with respect to the Property transferred,
sold, or assigned, arising subsequent to the date of City Manager approval of
such transfer, sale, or assignment; provided, however, that if any transferee,
purchaser, or assignee approved by the City Manager expressly assumes all of
the rights, interests and obligations of Developer under this Agreement,
Developer shall be released with respect to all such rights, interests and assumed
obligations. In any event, the transferee, purchaser, or assignee shall be subject
to all the provisions hereof and shall provide all necessary documents,
certifications and other necessary information prior to City Manager approval.
20.6 Developerʼs Right to Retain Specified Rights or Obligations.
Developer may withhold from a sale, transfer or assignment of this Agreement
or any portion of the Property transferred, certain rights, interests and/or
obligations which Developer wishes to retain, provided that Developer specifies
such rights, interests and/or obligations in a written document to be appended to
this Agreement and recorded with the Alameda County Recorder prior to the
sale, transfer or assignment of the Property. Developerʼs purchaser, transferee
or assignee shall then have no interest or obligations for such rights, interests
and obligations and this Agreement shall remain applicable to Developer with
respect to such retained rights, interests and/or obligations.
20.7 Partial Assignment. In the event of a partial Transfer, City
shall cooperate with Developer and any proposed Transferee to allocate rights
and obligations under the Development Agreement and the Project Approvals
among the retained Property and the transferred Property. Provided that City
receives a copy of the assignment and assumption agreement by which
Transferee assumes the Transferred rights and obligations associated with the
transferred Property: (i) any subsequent breach with respect to the Transferred
obligations shall not constitute a breach with respect to the retained rights and
obligations of such transferor (or any other Transferee) under the Development
Agreement; (ii) and any subsequent breach with respect to the retained
obligations of transferor (or any other Transferee) shall not constitute a breach
with respect to the Transferred rights and obligations of a Transferee under the
Development Agreement. The transferor and the Transferee each shall be solely
106
21
responsible for the reporting and annual review requirements relating to the
portion of the Property owned by such transferor/Transferee. Any amendment
to the Development Agreement between City and a transferor or Transferee shall
only affect the portion of the Property owned by such transferor or Transferee.
21. Bankruptcy. The obligations of this Agreement shall not be
dischargeable in bankruptcy.
22. Indemnification. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
harmless the City, and its elected and appointed councils, boards, commissions,
officers, agents, employees, and representatives from any and all claims, costs
(including legal fees and costs) and liability for any personal injury or property
damage which may arise directly or indirectly as a result of any actions or
inactions by Developer, or any actions or inactions of Developerʼs contractors,
subcontractors, agents, or employees in connection with the construction,
improvement, operation, or maintenance of the Project, provided that Developer
shall have no indemnification obligation with respect to negligence or wrongful
conduct of the City, its contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees or with
respect to the maintenance, use or condition of any improvement after the time
it has been dedicated to and accepted by the City or another public entity (except
as provided in an improvement agreement or maintenance bond). If City is
named as a party to any legal action, City shall cooperate with Developer, shall
appear in such action and shall not unreasonably withhold approval of a
settlement otherwise acceptable to Developer.
23. Insurance.
23.1 Commercial General Liability Insurance. During the Term of
this Agreement, Developer shall maintain in effect a policy of commercial
general liability insurance with a per-occurrence combined single limit of not
less than $1,000,000. The policy so maintained by Developer shall name the City
as an additional insured and shall include either a severability of interest clause
or cross-liability endorsement. City and Developer agree that such insurance
may include alternative risk management programs, including self-insurance or
a combination of self-insurance and insurance, provided that such alternative
risk management programs provide protection equivalent to that specified
under this Agreement.
23.2 Workers Compensation Insurance. During the Term of this
Agreement Developer shall maintain Workerʼs Compensation insurance for all
persons employed by Developer for work at the Project site. Developer shall
107
22
require each contractor and subcontractor similarly to provide Workerʼs
Compensation insurance for its respective employees. Developer agrees to
indemnify the City for any damage resulting from Developerʼs failure to
maintain any such insurance.
23.3 Evidence of Insurance. Prior to issuance of any permits for the
Project, including grading permits, Developer shall furnish the City satisfactory
evidence of the insurance required in Sections 19.1 and 19.2 and evidence that
the carrier is required to give the City at least fifteen days prior written notice of
the cancellation or reduction in coverage of a policy unless replaced with similar
coverage. The insurance shall extend to the City, its elective and appointive
boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees and representatives and to
Developer performing work on the Project.
24. Sewer and Water. Developer acknowledges that it must obtain water
and sewer permits from the Dublin San Ramon Services District (“DSRSD”)
which is another public agency not within the control of the City. City agrees that
it shall not take any action with DSRSD opposing Developerʼs efforts to reserve
water and sewer capacity sufficient to serve the Project described herein.
25. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement
shall be in writing. Notices required to be given to the City shall be addressed as
follows:
City Manager
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Phone No.: (925) 833-6650
Fax No.: (925) 833-6651
With copies to: City Attorney
Notices required to be given to Developer shall be addressed as
follows:
Bex Development, LLC
Randy Branaugh
19077 Madison Ave.
Castro Valley, CA 94546
108
23
Phone No.: (510) 821-1831
Email: rlbranaughex@gmail.com
A Party may change address by giving notice in writing to the other Party
and thereafter all notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address.
Notices shall be deemed given and received upon personal delivery, or if mailed,
upon the expiration of 48 hours after being deposited in the United States Mail.
Notices may also be given by overnight courier, which shall be deemed given the
following day or by facsimile transmission or email, which shall be deemed
given upon verification of receipt.
26.Agreement is Entire Understanding. This Agreement, including its
exhibits, constitutes the entire understanding and agreement of the Parties and
supersedes all negotiations or previous agreements between the Parties with
respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof.
27.Exhibits. The following documents are referred to in this
Agreement and are attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth
in full:
Exhibit A Legal Description of Property
28.Recitals. The foregoing Recitals are true and correct and are made a
part hereof.
29.Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed by each Party on a
separate signature page, and when the executed signature pages are combined,
shall constitute one single instrument. This Agreement is executed in two
duplicate originals, each of which is deemed to be an original.
30.Recordation. The City shall record a copy of this Agreement within
ten days following execution by all Parties. Thereafter, if this Agreement is
terminated, modified or amended, the City Clerk shall record notice of such
action with the Alameda County Recorder.
31.No Third Party Beneficiaries. Nothing contained in this Agreement
is intended to or shall be deemed to confer upon any person, other than the
109
24
Parties and their respective permitted successors and assigns, any rights or
remedies hereunder.
32. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in
accordance with the laws of the State of California.
33. Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence for each provision of
this Agreement for which time is an element.
34. Further Actions and Instruments. Each Party to this Development
Agreement shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance to the other
Party and take all actions necessary to ensure that the Parties receive the
benefits of this Development Agreement, subject to satisfaction of the conditions
of this Development Agreement. Upon the request of any Party, the other Party
shall promptly execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit if reasonably required,
and file or record such required instruments and writings and take any actions
as may be reasonably necessary under the terms of this Development
Agreement to carry out the intent and to fulfill the provisions of this
Development Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions
contemplated by this Development Agreement.
35. Section Headings. Section headings in this Development
Agreement are for convenience only and are not intended to be used in
interpreting or construing the terms, covenants or conditions of this
Development Agreement.
36. Construction of Agreement. This Development Agreement has
been reviewed and revised by legal counsel for both Developer and City, and no
presumption or rule that ambiguities shall be construed against the drafting
Party shall apply to the interpretation or enforcement of this Development
Agreement.
37. Authority. The persons signing below represent and warrant that
they have the authority to bind their respective Party and that all necessary
board of directorsʼ, shareholdersʼ, partnersʼ, city councilsʼ, or other approvals
have been obtained.
38. Non -Intended Prevailing Wage Requirements. Except for public
improvements constructed by the Developer and to be dedicated to the City
(which are subject to conditions of Project Approval), nothing in this
Development Agreement shall in any way require, or be construed to require,
Developer to pay prevailing wages with respect to any work of construction or
110
25
improvement within the Project (a “Non-Intended Prevailing Wage
Requirement”). But for the understanding of the Parties as reflected in the
immediately preceding sentence, the Parties would not have entered into this
Development Agreement based upon the terms and conditions set forth herein.
Developer and City have made every effort in reaching this Development
Agreement to ensure that its terms and conditions will not result in a Non-
Intended Prevailing Wage Requirement. These efforts have been conducted in
the absence of any applicable existing judicial interpretation of the recent
amendments to the California prevailing wage law. If, despite such efforts, any
provision of this Development Agreement shall be determined by any court of
competent jurisdiction to result in a Non Intended Prevailing Wage
Requirement, such determination shall not invalidate or render unenforceable
any provision hereof; provided, however, that the Parties hereby agree that, in
such event, this Development Agreement shall be reformed such that each
provision of this Development Agreement that results in the Non-Intended
Prevailing Wage Requirement will be removed from this Development
Agreement as though such provisions were never a part of the Development
Agreement, and, in lieu of such provision(s), replacement provisions shall be
added as a part of this Development Agreement as similar in terms to such
removed provision(s) as may be possible and legal, valid and enforceable but
without resulting in the Non-Intended Prevailing Wage Requirement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to
be executed as of the date and year first above written.
111
26
CITY OF DUBLIN
By: _____________________________
Linda Smith, City Manager
Attest:
__________________________
Marsha Moore, City Clerk
Approved as to form
__________________________
John Bakker, City Attorney
DEVELOPER
Randall Lee Branaugh
By: __________________________
Name: _______________________
Its: __________________________
Katherine A Anderson
By: __________________________
Name: _______________________
Its: __________________________
(NOTARIZATION ATTACHED)
5254284.3
112
Order Number: 0718-6598960
First American Title
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Real property in the City of Dublin, County of Alameda, State of California, described as follows:
BEGINNING AT A POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHERN LINE OF THE STATE HIGHWAY
LEADING FROM DUBLIN TO LIVERMORE, KNOWN AS ROAD IV, ALAMEDA COUNTY ROUTE 5, SECTION
B, WITH THE EASTERN LINE OF CROAK ROAD ALSO KNOWN AS COUNTY ROAD NO. 6152, AS SAID
HIGHWAY AND ROAD EXISTED JANUARY 1, 1949; RUNNING THENCE ALONG THE SAID LINE OF THE
STATE HIGHWAY SOUTH 89° 30' EAST (THE BEARING, SOUTH 89° 30' FEET BEING ASSUMED FOR THE
PURPOSE OF THIS DESCRIPTION) 1576.50 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERN CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN
PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO ANSELMO MACHADO, ET UX, RECORDED MARCH 10,
1943 IN BOOK 4345, PAGE 274 OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERN BOUNDARY LINE OF
SAID MACHADO PARCEL OF LAND NORTH 0° 31' WEST 10 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERN
BOUNDARY LINE OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
RECORDED MARCH 3, 1950, BOOK 6038, PAGE 519, SERIES NO. AE-18614, OFFICIAL RECORDS;
THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERN BOUNDARY LINE OF MACHADO PARCEL OF LAND NORTH
0° 31' WEST 67.02 FEET TO THE NORTHERN LINE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED
TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RECORDED FEBRUARY 8, 1968, REEL 2122, IMAGE 473, SERIES NO. BA-
13626 OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERN BOUNDARY LINE OF THE
MACHADO PARCEL OF LAND NORTH 0° 31' WEST 992.98 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO A POINT DISTANT
THEREON NORTH 0° 31' WEST 1060 FEET, FROM THE NORTHERN LINE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND
DESCRIBED IN SAID DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA (6038 OR 519), THE LAST DETERMINED
POINT BEING THE ACTUAL POINT OF COMMENCEMENT; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERN
BOUNDARY LINE OF THE MACHADO PARCEL, NORTH 0° 31' WEST 1791.6 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO
THE NORTHERN LINE OF TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 1 EAST, M.D.B & M.; THENCE ALONG THE LAST
MENTIONED LINE EAST 760.2 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0° 31' EAST 2803 FEET, MORE OF LESS, TO THE
NORTHERN LINE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN SAID DEED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
(2122 OR 473); THENCE ALONG THE LAST MENTIONED LINE WESTERLY 381 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO
THE EASTERN LINE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND RECONVEYED BY PARTIAL RECONVEYANCE EXECUTED BY
TRANSAMERICA TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, RECORDED NOVEMBER 7, 1973, REEL 3548, IMAGE 256,
SERIES NO. 73-149206, OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE LAST MENTIONED LINE NORTH 0°
31' WEST 1005 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE NORTHERN LINE OF THE LAST MENTIONED PARCEL;
THENCE ALONG THE LAST MENTIONED LINE DUE WEST 378.5 FEET TO THE ACTUAL POINT OF
COMMENCEMENT.
APN: 905-0001-004-04
Exhibit A
Legal Description of the Property
113
Branaugh Property
Stage 2 Planned Development
CEQA Addendum
December 15, 2022
Planning Application Number: PLPA‐2021‐00014
114
Branaugh Stage 2 Planned Development
CEQA Addendum
December 15, 2022
Project Overview
This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and assesses the potential environmental impacts of
implementing the proposed project described below. The Initial Study consists of a completed
environmental checklist and a brief explanation of the environmental topics addressed in the
checklist.
The subject of this Initial Study is the Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development project,
which includes development of residential and industrial uses on approximately 40.2 acres in
eastern Dublin within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) area and Fallon Village project
site. Implementation of the proposed project would result in subdivision of the 40.2‐acre site
into four parcels to accommodate proposed residential and industrial development. A total of
78 residential units are proposed with the potential to provide up to 97 units within 9.87 acres
designated Medium‐Density Residential in the General Plan and EDSP. Approximately 527,773
square feet of industrial use is proposed on 30.29 acres designated Industrial Park in the
General Plan and EDSP. In addition, the project proposes to optimize the signal timing at the
intersection of Central Parkway and Sunset View Drive to improve existing traffic operations,
particularly during peak periods.
Prior CEQA Analysis
Prior CEQA analysis includes: 1) the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (1993); 2) the East Dublin Properties Stage I Development
Plan and Annexation Supplemental EIR (2002); and 3) the Fallon Village Supplemental EIR
(2005). Collectively, these three environmental review documents are referred to as the “EDSP
EIRs” or “previous CEQA findings,” and are described below.
Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan EIR (1993)
The Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan EIR and an addendum (Eastern
Dublin EIR) were certified by the City Council on August 22, 1994. This EIR analyzed General
Plan Amendments affecting a 6,920‐acre area and the adoption of the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan (EDSP), which encompassed a 3,328‐acre area and provides a comprehensive planning
framework for future development in Eastern Dublin. The area considered in this EIR included
the project site within the General Plan Amendment area. The Eastern Dublin EIR evaluated the
following impacts:
115
Land Use
Population, Employment and Housing
Traffic and Circulation
Community Services and Facilities
Sewer, Water and Storm Drainage
Soils, Geology and Seismicity
Biological Resources
Visual Resources
Cultural Resources
Noise
Air Quality
Fiscal Considerations
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified the following significant and unavoidable impacts:
Cumulative loss of agriculture and open space land
Cumulative traffic
Extension of certain community facilities (natural gas, electric and telephone
service)
Consumption of non‐renewable natural resources
Increases in energy uses through increased water treatment and disposal and
through operation of the water distribution system
Inducement of substantial growth and concentration of population
Earthquake ground shaking
Loss or degradation of botanically sensitive habitat
Regional air quality
Noise
Alteration of visual character
The City adopted a Mitigation Monitoring Plan, which mitigation measures and monitoring plan
continue to apply to development in eastern Dublin. The City Council also adopted a Statement
of Overriding Considerations (Resolution No. 53–93) in connection with their certification of the
Eastern Dublin EIR.
East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation Supplemental
EIR (2002)
In 2002, the City of Dublin approved an annexation, pre‐zoning, and related PD‐Planned
Development District Stage I Development Plan for the East Dublin Properties area (same area
116
later named “Fallon Village”). The East Dublin Properties project site consists of 1,132 acres
within the EDSP area and includes in its entirety the 40.2‐acre Branaugh Property. An Initial
Study (IS) was prepared to determine if the East Dublin Properties project required additional
environmental review beyond that analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The IS found that many
of the anticipated impacts of the East Dublin Properties project were adequately addressed in
the Eastern Dublin EIR given: 1) the comprehensive planning for the development area; 2) the
Eastern Dublin EIR‘s analysis of buildout under the EDSP land use designations and policies; 3)
the long term 20‐30 year focus of the EDSP and the Eastern Dublin EIR; 4) the fact that the East
Dublin Properties project was specifically contemplated in the Eastern Dublin EIR; and 5) the
fact that the East Dublin Properties project consisted of the same land uses analyzed in the
Eastern Dublin EIR.
Although the IS concluded that the Eastern Dublin EIR adequately analyzed most of the
potential environmental impacts of the East Dublin Properties project, it also identified the
potential for new significant impacts or substantially intensified impacts beyond those
previously analyzed. As a result, the Eastern Dublin EIR was updated and supplemented by the
Programmatic East Dublin Properties Stage I Development Plan and Annexation Supplemental
EIR (2002 Supplemental EIR), which updated the analyses of agricultural resources, biology, air
quality, noise, traffic and circulation, schools, and utilities.
In certifying the 2002 Supplemental EIR, the City adopted a Mitigation Measures and
Monitoring Program and a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Resolution No. 40‐02) for
the following impacts:
Exceedance of Bay Area Air Quality Management District air quality standards
Cumulative loss/degradation of sensitive habitats
Cumulative traffic operations at several intersections, including Dougherty
Road/Dublin Boulevard, Hacienda Drive/Dublin Boulevard, and Fallon Road/Dublin
Boulevard
Freeway operations on Interstate 580 (I‐580) and I‐680.
These mitigation measures continue to apply to development in eastern Dublin, including the
project site.
Fallon Village Supplemental EIR (2005)
In 2005, the City of Dublin considered additional approvals for the 1,132‐acre Fallon Village
area. These requested approvals had three components:
1. Amendments to the General Plan and EDSP to include the entire 1,132‐acre Fallon
Village area and to reflect changes to the land use designations on the site;
2. Revisions to the 2002 approval of the Planned Development Rezone with a Stage I
Development Plan to increase the number of dwellings units by 582 to a total of 3,108
units and increase non‐residential uses from 1,081,725 square feet to 2,503,175 square
feet of commercial and office uses; and
117
3. A Stage 2 Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Map, Development Agreement, and Lot
Line Adjustment for the development of the northernly 488 acres of the Fallon Village
area to allow 1,078 dwelling units, a school, parks and associated use.
The City approved all three components of the Fallon Village project.
On December 6, 2005, the City certified the Final Supplemental Fallon Village Project
Environmental Impact Report (2005 Supplemental EIR) that analyzed the new uses and
revisions to the previous approvals for the Fallon Village project.
The 2005 Supplemental EIR identified potentially significant environmental impacts and related
mitigation measures. The City adopted a Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Program for this
approval that continues to apply to development in the Fallon Village area, including the project
site. In addition, as part of Resolution No. 222‐05, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding
Considerations for the following significant and unavoidable impacts: traffic impact to Dublin
Boulevard/Dougherty Road intersection, cumulative impacts to local roadways, consistent with
the Alameda County Congestion Management Plan, demolition of the Fallon Ranch House and
an increase in regional emissions beyond Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
thresholds.
The City intended this 2005 Supplemental EIR to be used by state or regional agencies in their
review of permits required for development in the Fallon Village area (e.g., California
Department of Fish and Wildlife Streambed Alteration Agreements, California Endangered
Species Act permits, Water Quality Certification or waiver by the Regional Water Quality
Control Board under the Clean Water Act) (see, Draft 2005 Supplemental EIR, p. 27).
Proposed CEQA Analysis in this Document
The proposed project is generally based on the land use designations established by the City of
Dublin General Plan and EDSP. This Initial Study relies on the EDSP EIRs which collectively
evaluated the development of over 3,300 acres in the eastern part of the City.
The City prepared a CEQA analysis using the City’s Initial Study Checklist, dated October 11,
2022, incorporated herein by reference, to assess whether any further environmental review is
required for the proposed project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, the City
determined that no subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration is required for the project and an
Addendum to the EDSP EIRs is the appropriate CEQA review per the following:
No Subsequent Review is Required per CEOA Guidelines Section 15162
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 identifies the conditions requiring subsequent environmental
review. After a review of these conditions, the City determined that no subsequent EIR or
Negative Declaration is required for this project. This is based on the following analysis:
118
a) Are there substantial changes to the project involving new or more severe significant
impacts?
There are no substantial changes to the project as analyzed in the EDSP EIRs. The
proposed project would maintain all existing land uses and development regulations
except for an increase in floor area ratio (FAR) to 0.40 for the warehousing uses in
industrial area. As demonstrated in the Initial Study, the project does not constitute a
substantial change to the EDSP EIRs analysis, will not result in additional significant
impacts, and no additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Are there substantial changes in the conditions which the project is undertaken involving
new or more severe significant impacts?
There are no substantial changes in the conditions assumed in the EDSP EIRs that would
result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts from the project than were
previously identified in the EDSP EIRs. The proposed project would create additional
flexibility to encourage the types of industrial uses prioritized under the City’s Economic
Development Zone (EDZ), which are compatible with the overall character and economic
health of the surrounding industrial area. This is documented in the Initial Study.
c) Is there new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not
have been known at the time of the previous EIR that shows the project will have a
significant effect not addressed in the previous EIR; or previous effects are more severe; or,
previously infeasible mitigation measures are now feasible but the applicant declined to
adopt them; or mitigation measures considerably different from those in the previous EIR
would substantially reduce significant effects but the applicant declines to adopt them?
As documented in the Initial Study, there is no new information showing a new or more
severe significant effect beyond those identified in the EDSP EIRs. Similarly, the Initial
Study documents that there would be no new or different feasible mitigation measures or
alternatives to reduce significant effects of the project which the applicant declines to
adopt. All previously adopted mitigations continue to apply to the project. The EDSP EIRs
adequately describe the impacts and mitigations associated with the proposed
development on portions of the EDSP area.
d) If no subsequent EIR‐level review is required, should a subsequent negative declaration be
prepared?
No subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration is required because there are no significant
impacts of the project beyond those identified in the EDSP EIRs and no other standards
for supplemental review under CEQA are met, as documented in the Initial Study.
119
Conclusion
This Addendum is prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 based on the attached
Initial Study. Through the adoption of this Addendum and related Initial Study, the City
determines that the proposed project does not require a subsequent or supplemental EIR or
Negative Declaration under CEQA Section 21166 or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163.
The City further determines that the EDSP EIRs adequately address the potential environmental
impacts of the proposed project.
As provided in Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, this Addendum need not be circulated for
public review, but shall be considered with the prior environmental documents before making a
decision on this project.
The Initial Study and EDSP EIRs are incorporated herein by reference and are available for
public review during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 12:00
p.m. and 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., in the Community Development Department, Dublin City Hall,
100 Civic Plaza, Dublin CA.
120
Branaugh Property
Stage 2 Planned Development
Environmental Checklist/Initial Study
December 15, 2022
Planning Application Number: PLPA‐2021‐00009
121
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 1
Table of Contents
Background & Project Description 4
Environmental Setting 12
Environmental Checklist 14
Determination 17
Explanation of Environmental Checklist Responses 18
Appendices
A CalEEMod Output Sheets
B Special Status Plant Survey Report
C Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters
D Branaugh and Righetti Property Development –
Listed Species Impacts, Mitigation, and Take Approval Summary
E Cultural Resources Study
F Historic Resources Evaluation
G Branaugh Property Trip Generation Comparison Technical Memorandum
122
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 2
List of Figures
Figure 1: Project Location ......................................................................................................... 174
Figure 2: Aerial Photograph of the Project Site and Surrounding Land Uses ............................ 175
Figure 3: Proposed Parcel Layout .............................................................................................. 176
Figure 4: Overall Site Plan ......................................................................................................... 177
Figure 5: Circulation Plan and Street Sections ‐ Industrial ......................................................... 178
Figure 6: Circulation Plan and Street Sections ‐ Residential ..................................................... 179
Note: All figures are included at the end of the document.
123
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 3
List of Tables
Table A: Proposed Development ................................................................................................... 8
Table B: Proposed Land Uses and Densities Compared to Existing Approved Land Uses and
Densities ....................................................................................................................................... 8
Table C: Project Construction Emissions in Pounds Per Day ....................................................... 37
Table D: Project Operational Emissions ...................................................................................... 40
Table E: Summary of Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands within the Project Site ...................... 64
Table F: Typical Maximum Construction Equipment Noise Levels (Lmax) ................................. 121
Table G: Equipment Noise by Construction Phase .................................................................... 122
Table H: Construction Vibration Damage Criteria ..................................................................... 125
Table I: Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment ........................................... 126
Table J. Existing Transit Facilities ............................................................................................... 145
Table K. Estimated Trip Generation for the Branaugh Property Based on 2022 Proposed Project
.................................................................................................................................................. 152
Table L. Estimated Trip Generation for the Branaugh Property Based on Fallon Village SEIR ... 153
124
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 4
Background & Project Description
Project Title
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Dublin
Community Development Department
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Contact Person and Phone Number
Amy Million
Principal Planner
Phone: 925‐833‐6610
amy.million@dublin.ca.gov
Project Location
The approximately 40.2‐acre project site is located in the eastern portion of Dublin, adjacent to
the city boundary with unincorporated Alameda County (Assessor’s Parcel Number [APN]: 905‐
0001‐004). The project site is located east of Croak Road and south of the future extension of
Central Parkway. The future Dublin Boulevard Extension Project bisects the project site. Figures
1 and 2 provide the regional location and aerial photograph of the project site and surrounding
land uses, respectively.
Project Applicant’s/Sponsor’s Name and Address
Randy Branaugh
BEX Development
19077 Madison Ave
Castro Valley, CA 94546
General Plan Designation
Medium Density Residential (9.8 acres) and Industrial Park (30.29 acres).
Zoning
Planned Development (PD) Ordinance No. 32‐05
125
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 5
Project Description
Project Background and Prior Environmental Review
The project is included in several previous CEQA documents, as noted below.
Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Program EIR (State
Clearinghouse No. 1991103064). A Program EIR for the Eastern Dublin General Plan
Amendment (Eastern Extended Planning Area) and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) was
certified by the City Council in 1993 by Resolution No. 51‐93. This document and its related
addenda collectively are referred to as the Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin EIR evaluated
the following impacts:
Land Use
Population, Employment and Housing
Traffic and Circulation
Community Services and Facilities
Sewer, Water and Storm Drainage
Soils, Geology and Seismicity
Biological Resources
Visual Resources
Cultural Resources
Noise
Air Quality
Fiscal Considerations
The City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Resolution No. 53–93) for the
following impacts:
Cumulative loss of agriculture and open space land
Cumulative traffic
Extension of certain community facilities (natural gas, electric and telephone service)
Consumption of non‐renewable natural resources
Increases in energy uses through increased water treatment and disposal and
through operation of the water distribution system
Inducement of substantial growth and concentration of population
126
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 6
Earthquake ground shaking
Loss or degradation of botanically sensitive habitat
Regional air quality
Noise
Alteration of visual character
The Eastern Dublin EIR was challenged in court and was found to be legally adequate. Two
addenda documents to the Eastern Dublin EIR have been approved by the City as noted above.
East Dublin Properties Supplemental EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2001052114). In 2001 the
Eastern Dublin Property Owners (EDPO) requested annexation, Prezoning, and related
approvals for a 1,120‐acre area within eastern Dublin. The City prepared a Supplemental EIR
(2002 SEIR) to the Eastern Dublin EIR to evaluate potential development within this area. The
2002 SEIR was certified by the City on April 2, 2002, by City Council Resolution No. 40‐02. The
2002 SEIR analyzed annexation of the property to the City of Dublin and Dublin San Ramon
Services District (DSRSD), amendments to the Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan, a Planned Development (PD) Prezoning, and Stage 1 Development Plan. Following
certification of the 2002 SEIR, the City approved a PD Prezoning with related Stage 1 and 2
Development Plans for the site.
The 2002 SEIR analyzed the environmental impacts associated with development of up to 2,526
residential units, 581,090 square feet of commercial use, 840,360 square feet of industrial
space, a junior high school, elementary school, parks and open space uses (the EDPO Project).
Based on an Initial Study prepared in 2001, the 2002 SEIR provided updated analyses for
agricultural resources, biological resources, air quality, noise, traffic and circulation, schools,
and utilities. The City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Resolution No. 40‐02)
for the following impacts:
Exceedance of Bay Area Air Quality Management District air quality standards
Cumulative loss/degradation of sensitive habitats
Cumulative traffic operations at several intersections, including Dougherty
Road/Dublin Boulevard, Hacienda Drive/Dublin Boulevard, and Fallon Road/Dublin
Boulevard
Freeway operations on Interstate 580 (I‐580) and I‐680.
Fallon Village Project Supplemental EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010). A Supplemental
EIR was prepared to amend the previous entitlements to include the entire 1,132‐acre site
within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area and to modify the land uses and roadway
alignments established in the 2002 Stage 1 Development Plan (PD‐1) to allow for future
development of up to 3,108 residential units, up to 2,503,175 square feet of commercial, office,
127
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 7
light industrial, and mixed‐use development, two elementary school sites, parks and open
spaces.
The Fallon Village SEIR evaluated the following impacts:
Land Use and Planning
Traffic and Transportation
Community Services and Facilities
Sewer, Water and Storm Drainage
Soils, Geology and Seismicity
Biological Resources
Visual Resources
Cultural Resources
Noise
Air Quality
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Parks and Recreation.
The Fallon Village SEIR identified significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the traffic
impacts at the Dublin/Dougherty intersection, cumulative impacts to freeway operations on
Interstate 580 (I‐580) and I‐680, traffic levels exceeding County monitoring standards,
demolition of the historic Fallon Ranch House and increase in regional air quality emissions. The
City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Resolution No. 40‐02) for these
impacts.
Proposed Project
The proposed project consists of a Planned Development Rezone with a Stage 2 Development
Plan and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map. Implementation of the proposed project would result in
subdivision of the 40.2‐acre site into four parcels to accommodate proposed residential and
industrial development. A total of 78 residential units are proposed with the potential to
provide up to 97 units within 9.87 acres designated Medium‐Density Residential in the General
Plan and EDSP. Approximately 527,773 square feet of industrial use is proposed on 30.29 acres
designated Industrial Park in the General Plan and EDSP. Table A shows the proposed
development program for the project site. Figure 3 shows the overall site plan.
128
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 8
Table A: Proposed Development
Parcel
Number Use Number of Units/Building Size Gross
Acreage1
Density (dwelling
units/acre)/FAR
1 Residential 78‐97 units2 9.87 8.0‐10.0
2 Bioretention and Slope3
527,773 square feet4 30.29 0.4 3 Industrial Park
4 Industrial Park
TOTAL 97 units
527,773 square feet
40.16
Source: MacKay & Somps (2021)
1 Acreages from prior EDSP and PD‐1 approvals were based on assumed boundary locations. Acreages shown have been updated to match
resolved boundary data.
2 The Stage 2 PD proposes 78 single‐family lots, with an option to add Multi‐Family units (duplex or triplex) to obtain a maximum of 97
units, as evaluated in the prior EIR. The unit breakdown is preliminary and the final lot and unit count would be finalized as part of
subsequent approvals but would not exceed 97 units.
3 Parcel 2 is proposed to include a bioretention basin to treat the stormwater runoff of the public streets and residential lots located in
Parcel 1. Stormwater treatment for the IP portions of the project would be provided by bioretention basins within Parcels 3 and 4.
4 The building square footage is combined for all non‐residential parcels within the project. The maximum building square footage shown
reflects the increase in FAR.
In 2005, the Fallon Village Planned Development (PD) Stage 1 Development Plan (Stage 1 PD)
and SEIR were approved, establishing the land uses and intensities for the Fallon Village
properties. The proposed project would maintain the land uses and associated acreages for the
Branaugh Property as identified in the Stage 1 PD, EDSP and General Plan as shown in Table B
below.
Table B: Proposed Land Uses and Densities Compared to Existing Approved Land Uses and Densities
Proposed Stage 2 PD Existing Approved Stage 1 PD and Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan
Land Use Gross
Acreage1
Number of
Units/
Building Size
Density
(dwelling
units/acre)/
FAR
Gross
Acreage1
Maximum
Number of
Units/
Building Size
Density
Range/Max
FAR (per
EDSP and
Stage 1 PD)
Density
Range/Max
FAR (per
EDSP EIRs)
Medium
Density
Residential
(MDR)
9.87 78‐97 units 8.0‐10
du/acre
9.87 97 6.0‐14
du/acre
10 du/acre
Industrial
Park (IP)
30.29 527,773
square feet
0.4 FAR 30.29 372,002
square feet
0.35 FAR2 0.28 FAR
Total 40.16 40.16
Source: MacKay & Somps (2021)
1 Acreages from prior EDSP and PD‐1 approvals were based on assumed boundary locations. Acreages shown have been updated to match
resolved boundary data.
2 Higher FAR may be approved at the discretion of the City Council based on specified criteria in the EDSP.
129
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 9
As shown in Table B, the project proposes a 0.4 floor area ratio (FAR) for the Industrial Park (IP)
portion of the project site, which is an increase from the maximum 0.35 FAR allowed in the
ESDSP and Fallon Village Stage 1 PD and an increase from the maximum 0.28 FAR evaluated in
the EDSP EIRs. The EDSP provides discretion to the City Council to approve a higher FAR if the
proposed uses meet one or more of the following criteria:
Unique project characteristics which result in reduced impacts relative to other uses in
the same area (e.g., lower traffic generation);
Unique project building requirements (e.g., warehouse uses that have large land
coverage requirements but low employment densities); or
Extraordinary benefits to the City.
The increase in FAR is intended to provide flexibility within the design standards to encourage
the types of industrial uses prioritized under the City’s Economic Development Zone (EDZ),
including medical technology and bio‐technology companies and start‐ups. The parking
requirements for the IP parcel would adhere to the Dublin Municipal Code and future tenants
would be required to provide the appropriate parking as described for the proposed industrial
use.
No changes to the residential portion of the property are proposed.
Access & Circulation
Primary access into the residential neighborhood would be via the proposed extension of
Central Parkway to the north, within the proposed East Ranch (Croak property) development.
The project proposes to optimize the signal timing at the intersection of Central Parkway and
Sunset View Drive to improve existing traffic operations, particularly during peak periods.
Primary access to the IP parcels would be provided by the future Dublin Boulevard extension
via a full access intersection. Potential connections to the adjacent Righetti and Town & County
properties are proposed to allow for internal east‐west connections in addition to Dublin
Boulevard.
The 9.4‐acre IP uses south of Dublin Boulevard would also have potential access from the
adjacent Collier Canyon Road public right‐of‐way, from which the site is currently accessed. If
Collier Canyon Road is abandoned, the right‐of‐way could be used for additional landscaping or
bioretention for the adjacent IP parcel. A portion of Collier Canyon Road may also need to be
reserved for the future Valleylink project. If Collier Canyon Road is not abandoned, Collier
Canyon Road would be improved to provide at minimum 12‐foot‐wide travel lanes and five‐
foot‐wide sidewalks. There would be no direct vehicular or pedestrian circulation between the
residential uses in the northern portion of the project site and the IP uses to the south.
Vehicular and pedestrian circulation between the residential and industrial uses would be
130
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 10
provided indirectly via Central Parkway, Croak Road and Dublin Boulevard. The circulation plan
and street sections for the IP development are shown in Figure 4.
Internal circulation for the residential development would consist of a system of looped streets.
Street C would provide the primary entrance off the proposed extension of Central Parkway.
Street C would provide access to both the Righetti and Branaugh residential parcels. Streets A
and B along the south would also connect the Branaugh neighborhood to the future Righetti
residential neighborhood. The circulation plan and street sections for the residential
development are shown in Figure 5.
Open Space and Landscaping
Although a landscape plan has not yet been prepared for the project site, the Stage 2 PD would
include Landscape Design Guidelines and a planting palette to promote a cohesive landscape
within the residential and industrial areas of the project site, including flowering plants that
complement the site architecture, provide seasonal color, and connect adjacent uses and
activities. The landscaping would also need to comply with the existing criteria in the Stage 1
PD.
Residential Development. The residential development would include a neighborhood entrance
from the proposed extension of Central Parkway with a monument and thematic landscaping.
Flowering accent trees would line the entry on both sides of the street and provide seasonal
color. Low‐growing flowering shrubs and groundcover would provide continuous interest
throughout the year as well as a colorful understory to the accent trees above.
Internal streets and sidewalks of the residential community would include a variety of
deciduous trees for solar exposure coupled with low growing flowering groundcover. Streets C
and B would have five‐foot‐wide landscaping and a five‐foot‐wide sidewalk on both sides of the
street. Other streets would have a five‐foot‐wide sidewalk on both sides to link the
neighborhood together. Street trees would be coordinated with the utilities and streetlights to
provide a continuous canopy of trees. Additional flowering trees in an irregular pattern and the
screening trees adjacent to building ends would be considered to soften the architecture. Low‐
growing groundcover, intermediate and background shrubs would be planted in a tiered effect
to provide a variety of landscapes with seasonal color and textural contrast.
Eleven lots on the east side of the neighborhood would be identified as wildfire buffer lots.
Trees along these lots would be fire safe, which have a favorable rating for plant performance
per the Diablo Firesafe Council. A fire access road would be located on the east side of the
neighborhood, connecting to a neighborhood street in East Ranch to the north. Fencing
adjacent to the fire access road would conform to the Dublin Wildfire Management Plan and
consist of heavy timber wood fencing treated with fire retardant, consistent with the California
Building Code (CBC).
131
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 11
Industrial Development. The entry to each industrial development would be clearly marked
with entry features, including landscaping, varied hardscape and/or monument signs that are
consistent with the architectural style of the building. All signs would conform to the City of
Dublin Sign Ordinance.
Parking lot landscaping would be provided to accent driveways, frame major circulation routes,
and highlight pedestrian pathways. Landscape screening would also be used to minimize the
visual impact of new development. The use of vines on walls may be used to reduce their visual
impact and minimize opportunities for graffiti. Parking lots adjacent to and visible from public
streets would be screened using evergreen hedges or rolling earth berms.
Utilities and Infrastructure
The project site is currently served by overhead electric and communication lines and by
sanitary sewer septic systems and on‐site well water. Existing and proposed utility connections
are discussed below.
Water. Water service would be provided by the Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD).
The proposed project would include the installation of new water lines on the site that would
connect to the proposed potable water and recycled water mains within the future Dublin
Boulevard Extension and proposed potable water main within the future Central Parkway
Extension to the northwest (within East Ranch).
Wastewater. Wastewater service would be provided by DSRSD. New sanitary sewer lines would
be installed within the project site and would tie into proposed sanitary sewer mains within the
future Dublin Boulevard Extension and future Central Parkway Extension to the northwest
(within East Ranch).
Stormwater. The project site is currently largely undeveloped and covered in non‐native
grassland and, therefore, contains minimal impervious surfaces. Upon construction of the
proposed project, approximately 60 percent of the project site would be covered with
impervious surfaces, and the remaining 40 percent would be covered by pervious surfaces,
consisting of the landscaped areas. The proposed project would include approximately 43,151
square feet of bioretention space on the project site that would be used for stormwater quality
control. The proposed project would include multiple bioretention basins and storm drains
throughout the project site, which would connect to downstream hydromodification facilities
prior to discharging to existing/proposed stormdrain pipes. Hydromodification vaults would be
included on‐site to provide flow duration controls for the project. Proposed storm drainage
facilities would conform to the Alameda County C.3 Stormwater Technical Guidelines and
requirements. Runoff from the proposed project would drain to future Dublin Boulevard
Extension and Collier Canyon Road and ultimately to the G3 box culvert along Fallon Road.
132
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 12
Electricity and Gas. Electricity and gas service would be provided to the project site by the
Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E). The proposed project would include connections to
proposed electricity and natural gas lines within the future Dublin Boulevard Extension and
future Central Parkway Extension (within East Ranch).
Demolition, Grading and Construction
The proposed project would include demolition of the existing buildings on the project site.
Construction debris, such as old foundations and structures, would be collected and hauled off
site for disposal. Approximately 100 cubic yards of demolition waste would be generated by the
proposed project.
Cut and fill from project grading would be balanced on‐site. It is anticipated that the maximum
depth of excavation for building pads would be approximately 30 feet and the maximum depth
of utility trenching would be approximately 15 feet.
If approved, construction of the proposed project is anticipated to begin in 2023 or once the
Dublin Boulevard Extension is completed. The proposed project would include phased
construction, which would consist of a demolition phase from 2023 to 2024, grading phase
from 2024 to 2025 and building construction from 2025 to 2026. Overall, construction of the
proposed project is anticipated to last approximately 30 months, and is anticipated to be fully
improved by 2026, with development of the industrial uses pending the completion of the
Dublin Boulevard Extension.
Project Entitlements
The City is the CEQA Lead Agency for the proposed project and will consider the environmental
impacts of the proposed project as part of the project approval process. Permits and approvals
required for the proposed project include a Planned Development Rezone with a Stage 2
Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 9306. In addition, subsequent Site
Development Review Permits would be required for the project. Ministerial actions would be
required for implementation of the project including issuance/approval of grading permits,
encroachment permits, improvements plans, and building permits.
Environmental Setting
Project Site and Existing Facilities
The approximately 40.2‐acre project site is located in the eastern portion of Dublin, adjacent to
the city boundary with unincorporated Alameda County. The site is bounded by the vacant
133
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 13
Righetti and Town & Country properties to the west,1 the East Ranch (Croak property)
development to the north, undeveloped unincorporated Alameda County land to the east and
Interstate 580 (I‐580) to the south. The future Dublin Boulevard Extension bisects the project
site.
Elevations on the project site range from approximately 370 to 580 feet above sea level with
the highest elevations in the northern portion of the parcel, and the lowest elevations along the
southern fence line of the property.
The project site consists primarily of undeveloped grazing ranchland and open space, but also
includes some rural residential development in the northwest and southern portion. The land
uses on nearby properties are largely agricultural, with residential, industrial, open space, and
commercial uses as well. Five habitat types were identified within the project site during plant
surveys: California annual grassland (31.41 acres), seasonal wetland (0.18 acre), developed
(8.23 acres), culvert (0.1 acre), and ephemeral stream (0.04 acre).2
Existing structures on the project site include several houses, a barn and several sheds, located
in the southern portion of the property, and a house located in the northwestern portion of the
property. The agricultural and landscape contracting complex in the southern portion of the
property includes several structures, including the barn, shed and house that were constructed
circa 1958. A second house in this area was constructed circa 1965. The barn retains the original
structure of the three‐bay barn; however, it has been significantly altered over time. The yard
surrounding the barn has been paved with asphalt for use in vehicle loading and parking, and a
modern modular building is located to the immediate west. A single‐story shed (circa 1958) is
located southwest of the barn. Several modern shed buildings are also located in this portion of
the project site. A third house, constructed in 1980, is located in the northwestern portion of
the project site. All of the existing site structures would be demolished as part of the proposed
project.
1 Current plans for the Righetti property would include development of 78 residential units (with the potential
to provide up to 96 units), up to 372,350 square feet of industrial use and up to 321,125 square feet of campus
office/light industrial uses.
2 H.T. Harvey. 2021. Results of Protocol‐level Special‐Status Plant Surveys in Support of the Branaugh Property
Development. May 27.
134
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 14
Environmental Checklist
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected by the Project
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agricultural and Forestry
Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology / Soils Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology / Water
Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population / Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation / Traffic Tribal Cultural
Resources
Utilities / Service
Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings
of Significance
Instructions
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the
parentheses following each question (see Source List, attached). A "No Impact"
answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the
impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls
outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is
based on project‐specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will
not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project‐specific screening
analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off‐site as well
as on‐site, cumulative as well as project‐level, indirect as well as direct, and
construction as well as operational impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur,
then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially
135
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 15
significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially
Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that any effect may
be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when
the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: applies
where incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially
Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must
describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to
a less than significant level.
5. Earlier Analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other
CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR
or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should
identify the following on attached sheets:
a. Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available
for review.
b. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist
were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document
pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c. Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site‐
specific conditions for the project.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to
information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances).
Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate,
include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources
used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats;
however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist
that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9. The explanation of each issue should identify:
o the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question;
and
136
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 16
o the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than
significance
10. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the
project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section
21080.3.1? If so, has consultation begun?
Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments,
lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review,
identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and
reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See
Public Resources Code section 21083.3.2.) Information may also be available from
the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public
Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information
System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also
note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to
confidentiality.
137
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 17
Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and
a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a potentially significant or a potentially significant
unless mitigated impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately
analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects
that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
X
CITY OF DUBLIN
_________________________________ _____________________________
Amy Million, Principal Planner Date
138
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 18
Explanation of Environmental Checklist Responses
Aesthetics
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact than
Identified in the
EDSP EIRs
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not
limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?
X
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site and its surroundings?
(Public views are those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic
quality
X
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
X
Environmental Setting
The project site is located within the southernmost portion of the Eastern Dublin area. As
described in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the southern portion of the Eastern Dublin area is flat,
open, and covered with grasslands and agricultural field crops. The northern portions include
steeper foothills with canyons settled with farms and ranchettes. Much of the Eastern Dublin
area has since been developed consistent with the land uses identified in the EDSP and
subsequent planning approvals.
The project site consists primarily of undeveloped grazing ranchland and open space, but also
includes some rural residential development in the northwest and southern portions of the site.
Developed/landscaped areas consist of parking lots, driveways, a house, and other buildings
associated with the property, and landscaping/planted vegetation. A swale bisects the northern
half of the property, which follows what was likely a historic drainage through the project site.
139
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 19
The project site slopes gently down from the highest elevations in the northern portion of the
parcel to the lowest elevations along the southern fence line of the property.
No designated State scenic highways are located near the project site. However, I‐580 located
just south of the project site, is an eligible State scenic highway and a designated Alameda
County scenic route. The project site is visible from both eastbound and westbound I‐580.
Vehicle headlights and taillights on area roadways, and lighting associated with I‐580, are the
existing sources of light and glare in the project area.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified potentially significant impacts related to standardized tract
development, obscuring distinctive natural features, alteration of hillsides, ridges, and
watercourses, alteration of Dublin’s visual identity as a freestanding city, scenic vistas, and
scenic routes. All of these impacts were determined to be less than significant with
implementation of mitigation measures identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The Eastern Dublin
EIR determined that impacts associated with the alteration of the rural/open space visual
character of the project area and alteration of the visual character of the flatlands would be
significant and unavoidable. Thus, a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted. The
following mitigation measures would apply to the proposed project:
MM 3.8/1.0 Establish a visually distinctive community which preserves the character
of the natural landscape by protecting key visual elements and maintaining views from
major travel corridors and public spaces.
MM 3.8/2.0 Implement the land use plan for the Project site which emphasizes
retention of the predominant natural features, such as ridgelines and watercourses, and
sense of openness that characterize eastern Dublin.
MM 3.8/3.0 Preserve the natural open beauty of the hills and other important visual
resources, such as creeks and major stands of vegetation.
MM 3.8/4.0 Visual impacts of extensive grading shall be reduced by sensitive
engineering design, by using gradual transition from graded areas to natural slopes and
by revegetation.
MM 3.8/4.1 Alterations of existing natural contours shall be minimized. Grading shall
maintain the natural topography as much as possible. Grading beyond actual
development areas shall be for remedial purposes only.
140
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 20
MM 3.8/4.4 Graded slopes shall be re‐contoured to resemble existing landforms in
the immediate area. Cut and graded slopes shall be revegetated with native vegetation
suitable to hillside environments.
MM 3.8/4.5 The height of cut and fill slopes shall be minimized to the greatest degree
possible. Grades for cut and fill slopes should be 3:1 or less whenever feasible.
MM 3.8/5.1 Structures shall not be located where they would obstruct scenic views or
appear to extend above an identified scenic ridgetop (i.e., silhouetted) when viewed
from designated scenic routes.
MM 3.8/6.0 Tassajara Creek and other stream corridors are visual features that have
special scenic value for the planning area. The visual character of these corridors should
be protected from unnecessary alteration or disturbance and adjoining development
should be sites to maintain visual access to the stream corridors.
MM 3.8/7.0 Preserve views of designated open space areas.
MM 3.8/8.1 The City should require that projects with potential impacts on scenic
corridors to submit a detailed visual analysis with development project application.
Applicants will be required to submit graphic simulations and/or section drawn from
affected travel corridors through the parcel in question, representing typical views of
the parcel from scenic routes. The graphic depiction of the location and massing of the
structure and associated landscaping can then be used to adjust the project design to
minimize the visual impacts.
2002 SEIR
The effects of the Eastern Dublin Property Owners (EDPO) Project on visual resources were
addressed in the Initial Study prepared as part of the 2002 SEIR. The Initial Study determined
that the EDPO Project would have no impacts beyond those identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR
because the development footprint and intensity of development was the same as previously
analyzed.
Fallon Village SEIR
No additional impacts or mitigation were identified in the Fallon Village SEIR.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Scenic vistas, views
A scenic vista is defined as a viewpoint that provides expansive views of a highly valued
landscape for the benefit of the general public. Aesthetic components of a scenic vista generally
141
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 21
include: 1) scenic quality; 2) sensitivity level; and 3) view access. The City of Dublin General Plan
identifies the visually sensitive ridgelines located in the open space areas in the Western and
Eastern Extended Planning Areas of the City as scenic resources. I‐580 provides scenic views of
these ridgeline areas and is an Alameda County‐designated scenic route.
Implementation of the proposed project would subdivide the 40.2‐acre site into four parcels to
accommodate proposed residential and industrial development. A total of 78 residential units
are proposed with the potential to provide up to 97 units within 9.87 acres designated
Medium‐Density Residential in the General Plan and EDSP. Residential development would be
two to three stories in height, with a maximum height of 35 to 40 feet. Approximately 527,773
square feet of industrial use is proposed on 30.29 acres designated Industrial Park in the
General Plan and EDSP. The proposed industrial development would be a maximum of three‐
stories high, with a maximum height of 35 feet, which is consistent with the maximum height of
35 feet established in the Fallon Village Stage 1 PD. The proposed development would be visible
from public vantage points, including Collier Canyon Road, the future Dublin Boulevard
Extension, and I‐580, which is an eligible State scenic highway and a designated Alameda
County scenic route.
The Eastern Dublin EIR also contains Figure 3.8‐H, Visually Sensitive Ridgelands, depicting
portions of the Eastern Dublin area that contains ridges and ridgelands which are considered to
be visually sensitive. As identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the lower and hillside areas located
closer to I‐580 with topographic elevations generally ranging between approximately 460 and
480 feet above sea level are designated as “Visually Sensitive Ridgelands‐restricted
development.” As described above, the Eastern Dublin EIR determined that development
associated with implementation of the EDSP would alter the character of existing scenic vistas
and obscure important sightlines. These impacts were determined to be less than significant
with implementation of mitigation measures identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and listed
above.
Consistent with the findings in the Fallon Village SEIR, due to the elevation and existing
topography of the project site, proposed development would continue to limit views of the
primary ridgeline and affect scenic vistas from I‐580 and other public vantage points. Although
the density of the proposed industrial use would be greater than previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs, the general type and massing of buildings would not be significantly different than
analyzed in the EDSP EIRs. The proposed industrial use would be located in the southern
portion of the project site where the elevation is lower and the topography is flatter; thereby
minimizing the potential visual effect of the increased height. However, consistent with the
findings of the Fallon Village SEIR, proposed development would continue to limit views of the
primary ridgeline, designated as scenic resource in the Eastern Dublin EIR.
Consistent with Mitigation Measure 3.8/5.0, identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, the proposed
project would be required to undergo site‐specific design review to ensure the project is
142
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 22
consistent with City of Dublin design standards, property development regulations and
performance standards related to aesthetics and to lessen the severity of visual changes
resulting from the proposed project. Further, the proposed project would be required to
implement other Mitigation Measures (MM 3.8/3.0, MM 3.8/4.0, MM 3.8/4.1, MM 3.8/4.4,
MM 3.8/4.5, MM 3.8/5.1) identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, which include design features to
minimize visual impacts (e.g., sensitive grading, sensitive engineering design, revegetation).
(b) Scenic resources
As described above, I‐580 located just south of the project site, is an eligible State scenic
highway and an Alameda County designated scenic route. The I‐580 scenic corridor is defined as
the area which is both within 3,500 feet on each side of the centerline of I‐580 and visible from
I‐580. Per the City of Dublin General Plan policies, design review would be required for all
projects visible from a designated scenic route in order to enhance a positive image of Dublin as
seen by through travelers.
As described in Section 1.a, the proposed project would alter views from I‐580 and result in a
change in visual conditions, as described in the EDSP EIRs. However, development of the
proposed project would not substantially damage scenic resources, such as trees, rock
outcroppings, or historic buildings, as these resources are not currently present on the project
site. Further, the mitigation measures identified in the EDSP EIRs and the visual policies in the
City of Dublin General Plan would apply to the proposed project, and the proposed project
would be required to undergo site‐specific design review to ensure the project is consistent
with City of Dublin design standards.
(c) Substantially degrade the visual character of public views of the site or surrounding area
Development of the proposed project would alter the existing visual character of the project
area and vicinity by introducing residential and industrial uses onto the existing largely
undeveloped parcel. A total of 78 residential units are proposed with the potential to provide
up to 97 units within 9.87 acres designated Medium‐Density Residential in the General Plan and
EDSP. Residential development would be two to three stories high, with a maximum height of
35 to 40 feet. Approximately 527,773 square feet of industrial use is proposed on 30.29 acres
designated Industrial Park in the General Plan and EDSP. The proposed industrial development
would be a maximum of three‐stories high, with a maximum height of 35 feet, which is
consistent with the maximum height of 35 feet established in the Fallon Village Stage 1 PD. The
proposed project would include establishment of residential and industrial design guidelines to
regulate the design of the residential and industrial uses within the project site. Design
guidelines include variation in roof forms and heights, setbacks for the upper floors, variation in
materials, and earth‐toned colors to minimize the visual scale of proposed structures and
provide visual interest. Landscaping is proposed to promote a cohesive landscape within the
residential and industrial areas of the project site, including flowering plant material that
complements the site architecture, provides seasonal color, and connects adjacent uses and
143
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 23
activities. Implementation of these design elements would further mitigate the visual impact of
the building heights and massing.
As described above, the Eastern Dublin EIR determined that visual impacts associated with the
alteration of the rural/open space character of the project area and alteration of the visual
character of the flatlands would be significant and unavoidable. Other impacts to visual
resources, including impacts to distinctive natural features, scenic vistas, and scenic routes, and
alteration of hillsides, ridges, and watercourses were determined to be less than significant
with implementation of mitigation measures identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Although the
density of the proposed industrial use would be greater than previously analyzed in the EDSP
EIRs, it is limited to warehousing uses only and the general type and massing of buildings would
not be significantly different. Consistent with the findings of the Eastern Dublin EIR, the
proposed project would alter the visual character of the project site, which would be converted
from rural development to urban development, with industrial and residential buildings. The
difference in density would not substantially increase the severity of this previously identified
impact. Therefore, changes to the existing visual environment would be the same as described
in the EDSP EIRs.
The mitigation measures identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the visual policies in the City of
Dublin General Plan would apply to the proposed project. In addition, the proposed project
would be required to undergo site‐specific design review to ensure the project is consistent
with City of Dublin design standards, property development regulations and performance
standards related to aesthetics and to lessen the severity of visual changes resulting from the
proposed project.
(d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
Similar to the development evaluated in the EDSP EIRs, the proposed project would introduce
new light sources to the project site, including new building lighting, light standards along
proposed roadways, parking areas and pedestrian pathways, and loading facilities. At night,
these new sources of light would be visible from a distance; however, the addition of new light
sources associated with the proposed project would generally blend in with lighting proposed
as part of adjacent development projects to the north and west and would represent a
continuation of the existing development within this area of the City. Consistent with City
requirements, exterior lighting would be shielded so that direct glare and reflections are
confined within the boundaries of the project site. Site lighting would be directed downward
and away from adjoining properties and public rights‐of‐way such that no light spillover onto
adjacent properties or streets would occur. In addition, the project site is within Safety Zone 6
of the Livermore Executive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) and development on
the project site must meet the criteria established by the ALUCP prior to development.
144
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 24
Glare is caused by light reflections from pavement, vehicles, and building materials such as
reflective glass and polished surfaces. During daylight hours, the amount of glare depends on
intensity and direction of sunlight. Glare can create hazards to motorists and can be a nuisance
for pedestrians and other viewers. Proposed exterior building materials primarily include stucco
with stone, brick or wood. These non‐reflective building materials would not result in potential
glare impacts within the project site or surrounding areas, and notably at the street level.
Therefore, the proposed project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified aesthetic/visual impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified in
the EDSP EIRs there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to
aesthetic resources beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required.
Source(s)
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
145
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 25
Agricultural and Forestry Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model
to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland
of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,
to non‐agricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
X
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which,
due to their location or nature, could result in conversion
of Farmland to non‐agricultural use or conversion of
forest land to non‐forest use?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest
land to non‐forest use?
X
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which,
due to their location or nature, could result in conversion
of Farmland, to non‐agricultural use or conversion of
forest land to non‐forest use?
X
Environmental Setting
The project site is not used for agricultural production and is not designated Prime Farmland,
Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance on maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. The
surrounding area is characterized by undeveloped open space and residential uses.
The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program categorizes the project site as Grazing Land
and Other Land. Grazing Land is defined as land on which the existing vegetation is suited to the
grazing of livestock. Other Land includes land not included in any other mapping category.
Common examples include low density rural developments; brush, timber, wetland, and
riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing; confined livestock, poultry or aquaculture
facilities; strip mines, borrow pits; and water bodies smaller than forty acres. Vacant and
146
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 26
nonagricultural land surrounded on all sides by urban development and greater than 40 acres is
mapped as Other Land.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified less than significant impacts related to discontinuation of
agricultural uses, loss of farmlands of local importance, indirect impacts resulting from non‐
renewal of Williamson Act contracts, and conversion of non‐urban lands. Although the Eastern
Dublin EIR determined that the loss of agricultural uses within the EDSP was less than
significant, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified the cumulative loss of agricultural lands and open
space as a significant unavoidable impact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations was
adopted for this impact.
2002 SEIR
A review of potential prime agricultural soils within the project area was conducted as part of
the 2002 SEIR. The 2002 SEIR determined that no additional prime agricultural lands occur in
the project area beyond those identified at the time the Eastern Dublin EIR was certified;
therefore, no new significant impacts related to prime agricultural soils or cancellation of
Williamson Act contracts were identified.
Fallon Village SEIR
No additional impacts or mitigation related to agricultural resources were identified in the
Fallon Village SEIR.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(farmland)
As described above, the project site is not used for agricultural production and is not
designated Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance.
Therefore, the proposed project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,
Farmland of Statewide Importance, or any other type of farmland to non‐agricultural uses. No
new impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts to Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance would occur. No additional analysis is required.
(b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a William Act contract
The project site is currently classified as Planned Development (PD) Ordinance No. 32‐05 on the
City’s Zoning Map. The project site is not currently used for agricultural purposes, not zoned for
agricultural uses, and is not protected by, or eligible for, a Williamson Act contract. Therefore,
147
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 27
the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural uses or Williamson
Act contracts.
(c) Conversion of land from Farmland or forest use
As described above, the project site is currently classified as Planned Development (PD)
Ordinance No. 32‐05 on the City’s Zoning Map, which allows for a mix of residential and
industrial uses on the project site. Neither the project site nor the surrounding area is zoned for
agricultural use, forest land, timberland, or timberland production.
(d) Result in loss of forest land or conversion of forest
No forest or timberland exists on the project site or in the surrounding area and the proposed
project would not result in the loss of forest land or the conversion of forest land to non‐forest
use.
(e) Conversion of Farmland, to non‐agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non‐forest
use
None of the project parcels are currently used as farmland or forest land. The proposed project
would not result in the conversion of farmland on or off the project site to non‐agricultural uses
because there are no agricultural uses on or in the immediate vicinity of the project site.
Likewise, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to changes in the existing
environment that could result in the conversion of agricultural land to non‐agricultural uses.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified agricultural impacts, nor result in new significant impacts to
agricultural resources beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required.
Source(s)
California Department of Conservation (DOC). California Farmland Conservancy. California
Important Farmland Finder. Website: maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/ (accessed
June 24, 2021).
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
148
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 28
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
149
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 29
Air Quality
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in the
EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non‐
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
X
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors
adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
X
Environmental Setting
The proposed project is located in the City of Dublin and is within the jurisdiction of the Bay
Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), which regulates air quality in the San
Francisco Bay Area. Air quality conditions in the San Francisco Bay Area have improved
significantly since BAAQMD was created in 1955. Ambient concentrations of air pollutants and
the number of days during which the region exceeds air quality standards have fallen
substantially. In Dublin, and the rest of the Air Basin, exceedances of air quality standards occur
primarily during meteorological conditions conducive to high pollution levels, such as cold,
windless winter nights or hot, sunny summer afternoons.
Within BAAQMD, ambient air quality standards for ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen
dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5), and lead (Pb) have been set
by both the State of California and federal government. The State has also set standards for
sulfate and visibility. BAAQMD is under State non‐attainment status for ozone and particulate
matter standards. BAAQMD is classified as non‐attainment for the federal ozone 8‐hour
standard and non‐attainment for the federal PM2.5 24‐hour standard.
150
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 30
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified that mobile source CO emissions would be less than
significant and construction dust emissions would be less than significant with implementation
of mitigation measures identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. In addition, the Eastern Dublin EIR
identified that impacts associated with construction equipment/vehicle emissions, mobile
source ROG and NOx emissions, and stationary source emissions would be significant and
unavoidable. Thus, a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted. The following
mitigation measures would apply to the proposed project:
MM 3.11/1.0 The City of Dublin shall:
Require watering in late morning and at the end of the day; the frequency of
watering should increase if wind exceeds 15 mph. Watering should include all
excavated and graded areas and material to be transported off‐site. Use
recycled or other non‐potable water resources where feasible.
Require daily cleanup of mud and dust carried onto street surfaces by
construction vehicles.
Require excavation haul trucks to use tarpaulins or other effective covers.
Require that, upon completion of construction, measures shall be taken to
reduce wind erosion. Replanting and repaving should be completed as soon as
possible.
Require that unnecessary idling of construction equipment is avoided.
Require that, after grading is completed, fugitive dust on exposed soil surfaces
shall be controlled using the following methods:
o All inactive portions of the construction site should be seeded and watered
until grass growth is evident.
o Require that all portions of the site shall be sufficiently watered to prevent
excessive amounts of dust.
o Require that, at all times, the following procedures should be followed:
On‐site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 mph.
Use of petroleum‐based palliative shall meet the road oil requirements of
the Air Quality District. Non‐petroleum‐based tackifiers may be required
by the Public Works Director.
151
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 31
The Public Works Department will handle all dust complaints. The Public
Works Director may require the services of an air quality consultant to
advice the City on the severity of the dust problem and additional ways to
mitigate impacts on residents, including temporarily halting project
construction. Dust concerns in adjoining communities as well as the City of
Dublin shall be controlled. Control measures shall be related to wind
conditions. Air quality monitoring of PM levels shall be provided as
directed by the Public Works Director in Dublin.
MM 3.11/2.0 Minimize construction interference with regional non‐project traffic
movement by:
Scheduling receipt of construction materials to non‐peak travel periods.
Routing construction traffic through areas of least impact sensitivity.
Limiting lane closures and detours to off‐peak travel periods.
Providing ride‐share incentives for contractor and subcontractor personnel.
MM 3.11/3.0 Require emissions control from on‐site equipment through a routine
mandatory program of low‐emissions tune‐ups.
MM 3.11/4.0 Require preparation of a construction impact reduction plan that
incorporates all proposed air quality mitigation strategies with clearly defined
responsibilities for plan implementation and supervision.
MM 3.11/5.0 Exercise interagency cooperation with a sub‐regional and on a regional
basis to integrate air quality planning efforts with transportation, transit, and other
infrastructure plans.
MM 3.11/6.0 Maintain consistency among specific development plans and regional
transportation and growth management plans.
MM 3.11/7.0 Implement transportation demand management (TDM) techniques to
reduce mobile source emissions.
MM 3.11/8.0 Optimize the existing transportation system to reduce congestion and
shift travel to non‐peak travel periods.
MM 3.11/9.0 Coordinate levels of growth with roadway transportation facilities
improvements to accommodate travel demand without inducing demand by providing
excess system capacity.
152
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 32
MM 3.11/10.0 Encourage mixed‐use development that provides housing, jobs, goods
and services in close proximity.
MM 3.11/11.0 Require linkage between growth of housing and job opportunities
consistent with a positive sub‐regional contribution to jobs/housing ratio balances.
MM 3.11/12.0 Stationary source emissions associated with Project development should
also be minimized where feasible to reduce overall cumulative impacts. Minimum
energy conservation standards are established in Title 24 of the California Code of
Regulations. Design practice can achieve a slightly greater level of conservation than the
minimum standards. A conservation target level for some fraction of Eastern Dublin
development of 10 percent above the minimum should be implemented as an
appropriate acknowledgement of the desired "environmentally‐friendly" community
character for this Project.
MM 3.11/13.0 Solid waste recycling should be included in all development planning to
ensure that recycling criteria specified in AB‐939 can be most easily met.
2002 SEIR
A review of potential operational air quality impacts was conducted as part of the 2002 SEIR.
The 2002 SEIR determined that no additional operational air quality impacts would occur
beyond those identified at the time the Eastern Dublin EIR was certified; therefore, no new
significant impacts related to air quality were identified.
Fallon Village SEIR
No additional impacts were identified in the Fallon Village SEIR. However, the Fallon Village SEIR
identified the following supplemental mitigation measures that would be applicable to the
proposed project:
SM‐AQ‐1: In addition to the measures identified in Mitigation Measure 3.11/1.0 of the
East Dublin EIR, the City of Dublin shall:
a) Require construction contractors to water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand
or other materials that can be blown by the wind.
b) Require construction contractors to sweep daily (preferably with water
sweepers) all paved access road, parking areas and staging areas at construction
sites.
c) Require construction contractors to install sandbags or other erosion control
measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways.
153
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 33
SM‐AQ‐2: In addition to the measures identified in Mitigation Measure 3.11/5.0‐11.0 of
the East Dublin EIR, the City of Dublin shall require that the following be implemented:
a) The Project proponent should coordinate with LAVTA for the eventual extension
of transit service to the Project area. Project proponents should construct or
reserve necessary right‐of‐way for transit facilities such as bus turnouts/bus
bulbs, benches, etc.
b) Bicycle land and/or paths, connected to community‐wide network should be
provided as part of the Stage 1 Development Plan.
c) Sidewalks and/or paths, connected to adjacent land uses, transit stops, and/or
community‐wide network should be provided as part of the Stage 1
Development Plan.
d) Consider shuttle service to regional transit system or multimodal center.
e) Consider providing a satellite telecommute center for Project residents if this is
feasible in terms of a convenient location.
f) Provide interconnected street network, with a regular grid or similar
interconnected street pattern.
SM‐AQ‐3: Same as Supplemental Mitigation AQ‐2.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Consistency with air quality plans
BAAQMD’s Clean Air Plan is a comprehensive plan to improve Bay Area air quality and protect
public health. The Clean Air Plan defines control strategies to reduce emissions and ambient
concentrations of air pollutants; safeguard public health by reducing exposure to air pollutants
that pose the greatest heath risk, with an emphasis on protecting the communities most
heavily affected by air pollution; and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to protect the
climate. Consistency with the Clean Air Plan can be determined if the project: (1) supports the
goals of the Clean Air Plan; (2) includes applicable control measures from the Clean Air Plan;
and (3) would not disrupt or hinder implementation of any control measures from the Clean Air
Plan.
Clean Air Plan Goals.
The primary goals of the Bay Area Clean Air Plan are to: attain air quality standards; reduce
population exposure and protect public health in the Bay Area; and reduce GHG emissions and
protect climate.
154
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 34
BAAQMD has established significance thresholds for project construction and operational
impacts at a level at which the cumulative impact of exceeding these thresholds would have an
adverse impact on the region’s attainment of air quality standards. The health and hazards
thresholds were established to help protect public health. As discussed below in Section 3b,
implementation of the proposed project would result in less‐than‐significant operation‐period
emissions and, with implementation of implementation of Supplemental Mitigation Measure
SM‐AQ‐1, as modified below, and Mitigation Measures 3.11/2.0 and 3.11/3.0 from the Eastern
Dublin EIR, the project would result in less‐than‐significant construction‐period emissions.
Therefore, the project would not conflict with the Clean Air Plan goals.
Clean Air Plan Control Measures.
The control strategies of the Clean Air Plan include measures in the following categories:
Stationary Source Measures, Transportation Measures, Energy Measures, Building Measures,
Agriculture Measures, Natural and Working Lands Measures, Waste Management Measures,
Water Measures, and Super‐ GHG Pollutants Measures.
Stationary Source Control Measures. The Stationary Source Control Measures, which are
designed to reduce emissions from stationary sources such as metal melting facilities, cement
kilns, refineries, and glass furnaces, are incorporated into rules adopted by BAAQMD and then
enforced by BAAQMD’s Permit and Inspection programs. Since the project would not include
any stationary sources of emissions, the Stationary Source Control Measures of the Clean Air
Plan are not applicable to the project.
Transportation Control Measures. BAAQMD identifies Transportation Control Measures as part
of the Clean Air Plan to decrease emissions of criteria pollutants, toxic air contaminants (TACs),
and GHGs by reducing demand for motor vehicle travel, promoting efficient vehicles and transit
service, decarbonizing transportation fuels, and electrifying motor vehicles and equipment. The
project would subdivide the 40.2‐acre site into four parcels to accommodate proposed
residential and industrial development within the EDSP area. The proposed project would
increase pedestrian connectivity through the site and to adjacent developments, which would
support the ability of employees and residents to use alternative modes of transportation.
Therefore, the project would promote BAAQMD initiatives to reduce vehicle trips and vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) and would increase the use of alternate means of transportation.
Energy Control Measures. The Clean Air Plan also includes Energy Control Measures, which are
designed to reduce emissions of criteria air pollutants, TACs, and GHGs by decreasing the
amount of electricity consumed in the Bay Area, as well as decreasing the carbon intensity of
the electricity used by switching to less GHG‐intensive fuel sources for electricity generation.
Since these measures apply to electrical utility providers and local government agencies (and
not individual projects), the Energy Control Measures of the Clean Air Plan are not applicable to
the project.
155
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 35
Building Control Measures. BAAQMD has authority to regulate emissions from certain sources
in buildings such as boilers and water heaters but has limited authority to regulate buildings
themselves. Therefore, the strategies in the control measures for this sector focus on working
with local governments that do have authority over local building codes, to facilitate adoption
of best GHG control practices and policies. The proposed project would be required to comply
with the latest California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) standards. Therefore, the
Building Control Measures of the Clean Air Plan are not applicable to the project.
Agriculture Control Measures. The Agriculture Control Measures are designed to primarily
reduce emissions of methane. Since the project does not include any agricultural activities, the
Agriculture Control Measures of the Clean Air Plan are not applicable to the project.
Natural and Working Lands Control Measures. The Natural and Working Lands Control
Measures focus on increasing carbon sequestration on rangelands and wetlands, as well as
encouraging local governments to enact ordinances that promote urban‐tree plantings. Since
the project does not include the disturbance of any rangelands or wetlands, the Natural and
Working Lands Control Measures of the Clean Air Plan are not applicable to the project.
Waste Management Control Measures. The Waste Management Measures focus on reducing or
capturing methane emissions from landfills and composting facilities, diverting organic
materials away from landfills, and increasing waste diversion rates through efforts to reduce,
reuse, and recycle. The project would comply with local requirements for waste management
(e.g., recycling and composting services). Therefore, the project would be consistent with the
Waste Management Control Measures of the Clean Air Plan.
Water Control Measures. The Water Control Measures focus on reducing emissions of criteria
pollutants, TACs, and GHGs by encouraging water conservation, limiting GHG emissions from
publicly owned treatment works (POTWs), and promoting the use of biogas recovery systems.
Since these measures apply to POTWs and local government agencies (and not individual
projects), the Water Control Measures are not applicable to the project.
Super‐GHG Control Measures. The Super‐GHG Control Measures are designed to facilitate the
adoption of best GHG control practices and policies through BAAQMD and local government
agencies. Since these measures do not apply to individual projects, the Super‐GHG Control
Measures are not applicable to the project.
Clean Air Plan Implementation.
As discussed above, the proposed project would implement the applicable measures outlined in
the Clean Air Plan, including Transportation Control Measures. Therefore, the project would not
disrupt or hinder implementation of a control measure from the Clean Air Plan. The EDSP EIRs
did not evaluate consistency with the applicable clean air plan; however, because the proposed
156
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 36
project would be consistent with the Clean Air Plan, the proposed project would not result in
any new or more severe impacts compared to those previously identified in the EDSP EIRs.
(b) Violate air quality standards or cause cumulatively considerable air pollutants
Both State and federal governments have established health‐based Ambient Air Quality
Standards for six criteria air pollutants: CO, ozone (O3), NO2, SO2, Pb, and suspended particulate
matter (PM). These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace
with a reasonable margin of safety. As identified above, BAAQMD is under State non‐
attainment status for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 standards. The Air Basin is also classified as non‐
attainment for both the federal ozone 8‐hour standard and the federal PM2.5 24‐hour standard.
Air quality standards for the proposed project are regulated by the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality
Guidelines. According to the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, to meet air quality
standards for operational‐related criteria air pollutant and air precursor impacts, the project
must not:
Contribute to CO concentrations exceeding the State ambient air quality standards;
Generate average daily construction emissions of ROG, NOx, or PM2.5 greater than 54
pounds per day or PM10 exhaust emissions greater than 82 pounds per day; or
Generate average operational emissions of ROG, NOx or PM2.5 of greater than 10
tons per year or 54 pounds per day or PM10 emissions greater than 15 tons per year
or 82 pounds per day.
The following sections describe the proposed project’s construction‐ and operation‐related air
quality impacts and CO impacts.
Construction Emissions. As discussed above, the EDSP EIRs found that that proposed
development would result in significant and unavoidable impacts associated with construction
activities. Mitigation Measures 3.11/1.0, 3.11/2.0, 3.11/3.0, and 3.11/4.0, and SM‐AQ‐1 were
identified, but were insufficient to reduce impacts to a less‐than‐significant level.
During construction of the proposed project, construction dust would affect local and regional
air quality at various times during the build‐out period of the project. The dry, windy climate of
the area during the summer months combined with the fine, silty soils of the region create a
high potential for dust generation. Emissions during the grading phase of construction are
primarily associated with the exhaust of large earth moving equipment and the dust which is
generated through grading activities. Emissions in later stages of construction are primarily
associated with construction employee commute vehicles, asphalt paving, mobile equipment,
stationary equipment, and architectural coatings.
The effects of construction activities would be increased dustfall and locally elevated levels of
PM10 near the construction activity. Depending on the weather, soil conditions, the amount of
157
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 37
activity taking place, and nature of dust control efforts, these impacts could affect existing or
future residential areas within or near the project.
Water or other soil stabilizers can be used to control dust, resulting in emission reductions of 50
percent or more. BAAQMD has established standard measures for reducing fugitive dust
emissions (PM10). With the implementation of these Basic Construction Mitigation Measures,
fugitive dust emissions from construction activities would not result in adverse air quality
impacts.
In addition to dust related PM10 emissions, heavy trucks and construction equipment powered
by gasoline and diesel engines would generate CO, SO2, NOx, ROGs and some soot particulate
(PM2.5 and PM10) in exhaust emissions. If construction activities were to increase traffic
congestion in the area, CO and other emissions from traffic would increase slightly while those
vehicles are delayed. These emissions would be temporary and limited to the immediate area
surrounding the construction site.
Construction emissions were estimated for the project using the California Emissions Estimator
Model (CalEEMod) version 2020.4.0, consistent with BAAQMD recommendations. The
proposed project would include phased construction, which would consist of a demolition
phase from 2023 to 2024, grading phase from 2024 to 2025 and building construction from
2025 to 2026. Overall, construction of the proposed project is anticipated to last approximately
30 months, and is anticipated to be fully operational by 2026, which was included in CalEEMod.
In addition, approximately 100 cubic yards of demolition waste would be generated by the
proposed project, which was also included in CalEEMod. Cut and fill from project grading would
be balanced on‐site. This analysis also assumes the use of Tier 2 construction equipment, as
required by current CARB OFFROAD regulation. Construction‐related emissions are presented in
Table C. CalEEMod output sheets are included in Appendix A.
Table C: Project Construction Emissions in Pounds Per Day
Project Construction ROG NOx
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Dust PM10
Exhaust
PM2.5
Fugitive
Dust PM2.5
Average Daily Emissions 9.7 28.6 0.8 2.6 0.8 0.8
BAAQMD Thresholds 54.0 54.0 82.0 BMP 54.0 BMP
Exceed Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: LSA (November 2021).
BMP = Best Management Practices
As shown in Table C, construction emissions associated with the project would be less than
significant for ROG, NOx, PM2.5, and PM10 exhaust emissions. BAAQMD requires the
implementation of the BAAQMD’s Basic Construction Mitigation Measures (best management
158
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 38
practices) to minimize construction fugitive dust impacts. The EDSP EIRs identified Mitigation
Measure 3.11/1.0 and Supplemental Measure SM‐AQ‐1 to minimize emission of dust. BAAQMD
has since adopted newer and more restrictive standards to reduce construction dust and
construction vehicle emissions to which the project applicant must adhere in order to reduce
this construction impact to a less‐than‐significant level. Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM‐
AQ‐1, as identified in the Fallon Village SEIR, has been modified, as shown below, to include
BAAQMD’s most current Basic Construction Measure. Mitigation Measures 3.11/2.0 and
3.11/3.0 would still be applicable to the proposed project.
SM‐AQ‐1: In addition to the measures identified in Mitigation Measure 3.11/1.0 of the
East Dublin EIR, the City of Dublin shall:
a) Require construction contractors to water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil,
sand or other materials that can be blown by the wind.
b) Require construction contractors to sweep daily (preferably with water
sweepers) all paved access road, parking areas and staging areas at construction
sites.
c) Require construction contractors to install sandbags or other erosion control
measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways.
d) All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas,
and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
e) All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off‐site shall be
covered.
f) All visible mud or dirt tracked‐out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed
using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry
power sweeping is prohibited.
g) All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
h) All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon
as possible.
i) Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or
soil binders are used.
j) Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in
use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the
California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California
Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction
workers at all access points.
159
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 39
k) All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in
accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked
by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior
to operation.
l) A publicly visible sign shall be posted with the telephone number and person to
contact at the City of Dublin regarding dust complaints. This person shall
respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. BAAQMD's phone number
shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
With implementation of Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM‐AQ‐1, as modified above, and
Mitigation Measures 3.11/2.0 and 3.11/3.0, the proposed project would not result in any new
or more severe impacts related to construction period emissions compared to those previously
identified in the EDSP EIRs.
Operational Emissions. The EDSP EIRs found that proposed development would result in
significant and unavoidable impacts associated with operation activities. Mitigation Measures
3.11/5.0, 3.11/6.0, 3.11/7.0, 3.11/8.0, 3.11/9.0, 3.11/10.0, and 3.11/11.0 and SM‐AQ‐2 and SM‐
AQ‐3 were identified but were insufficient to reduce impacts to a less‐than‐significant level.
Long‐term air pollutant emission impacts associated with the proposed project are those
related to mobile sources (e.g., vehicle trips), energy sources (e.g., electricity and natural gas),
and area sources (e.g., architectural coatings and the use of landscape maintenance
equipment).
PM10 emissions result from running exhaust, tire and brake wear, and the entrainment of dust
into the atmosphere from vehicles traveling on paved roadways. Entrainment of PM10 occurs
when vehicle tires pulverize small rocks and pavement and the vehicle wakes generate airborne
dust. The contribution of tire and brake wear is small compared to the other PM emission
processes. Gasoline‐powered engines have small rates of particulate matter emissions
compared with diesel‐powered vehicles.
Energy source emissions result from activities in buildings for which electricity and natural gas
are used. The quantity of emissions is the product of usage intensity (i.e., the amount of
electricity or natural gas) and the emission factor of the fuel source. Major sources of energy
demand include building mechanical systems, such as heating and air conditioning, lighting, and
plug‐in electronics, such as refrigerators or computers. Greater building or appliance efficiency
reduces the amount of energy for a given activity and thus lowers the resultant emissions. The
proposed project would comply with the latest CALGreen Code, which was accounted for in the
analysis.
Typically, area source emissions consist of direct sources of air emissions located at the project
site, including architectural coatings and the use of landscape maintenance equipment. Area
160
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 40
source emissions associated with the project would include emissions from the use of
landscaping equipment and the use of consumer products.
Emission estimates for operation of the project were calculated using CalEEMod. Model results
are shown in Table D. Trip generation rates for the project were based on the project’s trip
generation estimate, as identified in the Transportation Impact Review, which estimates that
the proposed project would generate approximately 2,630 average daily trips.
The primary emissions associated with the project are regional in nature, meaning that air
pollutants are rapidly dispersed on release or, in the case of vehicle emissions associated with
the project, emissions are released in other areas of the Air Basin. The daily and annual
emissions associated with project operational trip generation, energy, and area sources are
identified in Table D for ROG, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5.
Table D: Project Operational Emissions
ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5
Pounds Per Day
Area Source Emissions 17.0 1.2 0.1 0.1
Energy Source Emissions 0.3 2.8 0.2 0.2
Mobile Source Emissions 6.4 6.9 14.1 3.8
Total Project Emissions 23.7 10.9 14.4 4.2
BAAQMD Thresholds 54.0 54.0 82.0 54.0
Exceed Threshold? No No No No
Tons Per Year
Area Source Emissions 3.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Energy Source Emissions 0.1 0.5 <0.1 <0.1
Mobile Source Emissions 0.9 1.1 2.2 0.6
Total Project Emissions 4.1 1.6 2.3 0.6
BAAQMD Thresholds 10.0 10.0 15.0 10.0
Exceed Threshold? No No No No
Source: LSA (November 2021).
The results shown in Table D indicate the project would not exceed the significance criteria for
daily or annual ROG, NOx, PM10 or PM2.5 emissions; therefore, the proposed project would not
have a significant effect on regional air quality.
161
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 41
Localized CO Impacts.The EDSP EIRs found that the project would generate additional traffic
volumes, increasing local levels of carbon monoxide. However, the EDSP EIRs determined that
such increases would be below the standard of air quality significance.
Emissions and ambient concentrations of CO have decreased dramatically in the Bay Area with
the introduction of the catalytic converter in 1975. No exceedances of the State or federal CO
standards have been recorded at Bay Area monitoring stations since 1991. BAAQMD’s 2017
CEQA Guidelines include recommended methodologies for screening and quantifying
concentrations of localized CO levels for intersections that would be in a project vicinity. A
screening level analysis using guidance from the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines was performed to
determine the impacts of the project. The screening methodology provides a conservative
indication of whether the implementation of a proposed project would result in significant CO
emissions. According to BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines, a proposed project would result in a less‐
than‐significant impact to localized CO concentrations if the following screening criteria are
met:
The project is consistent with an applicable congestion management program
established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or
highways, and the regional transportation plan and local congestion management
agency plans.
Project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more
than 44,000 vehicles per hour.
The project would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more
than 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is
substantially limited (e.g., tunnel, parking garage, bridge underpass, natural or urban
street canyon, or below‐grade roadway).
Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with the Alameda County
Transportation Commission’s congestion management programs. The proposed project would
generate approximately 246 AM peak hour trips and 266 PM peak hour trips; therefore, the
project’s contribution to peak hour traffic volumes at intersections in the vicinity of the project
site would be well below 44,000 vehicles per hour. Therefore, the proposed project would not
result in localized CO concentrations that exceed State or federal standards.
(c) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations
Sensitive receptors are defined as residential uses, schools, daycare centers, nursing homes,
and medical centers. Individuals particularly vulnerable to diesel particulate matter are
children, whose lung tissue is still developing, and the elderly, who may have serious health
problems that can be aggravated by exposure to diesel particulate matter. Exposure from diesel
exhaust associated with construction activity contributes to both cancer and chronic non‐
162
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 42
cancer health risks. The closest sensitive receptors to the project site include a residence
located approximately 710 feet east of the project site along Collier Canyon Road.
The EDSP EIRs found that the project would not result in potential impacts related to
substantial pollutant concentrations. Construction of the proposed project may expose
surrounding sensitive receptors to airborne particulates, as well as a small quantity of
construction equipment pollutants (i.e., usually diesel‐fueled vehicles and equipment).
However, construction contractors would be required to implement BAAQMD’s Basic
Construction Mitigation Measures as identified in the Fallon Village SEIR and Supplemental
Mitigation Measure SM‐AQ‐1, as modified above. With implementation of modified
Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM‐AQ‐1, project construction pollutant emissions would be
below BAAQMD significance thresholds. Once the project is constructed, the project would not
be a source of substantial pollutant emissions. Therefore, sensitive receptors are not expected
to be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations during project construction and
operation.
(d) Odors
During construction, the various diesel‐powered vehicles and equipment in use on the site
would create localized odors. These odors would be temporary and are not likely to be
noticeable for extended periods of time beyond the project site. The potential for diesel odor
impacts is, therefore, considered to be less than significant. In addition, once the project is
operational, it would not be a source of odors. Therefore, the proposed project would not
result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial
number of people.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in EDSP EIRs
and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity of the
previously identified air quality impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified in
the EDSP EIRs, as modified above, there would be no new or substantially more severe
significant impacts to air quality resources beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP
EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required.
Source(s)
BAAQMD. 2017. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan. April 19. Website:
www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning‐and‐research/plans/2017‐clean‐air‐
plan/attachment‐a_‐proposed‐final‐cap‐vol‐1‐pdf.pdf?la=en (accessed November 2021).
163
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 43
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7
164
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 44
Biological Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special‐status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat
or other sensitive natural community identified in local
or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally
protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
X
Environmental Setting
The following discussion of biological resources within the project site is based on the results of
the special‐status plant surveys and the wetland delineation prepared for the proposed project
(Appendices B and C).
165
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 45
Habitat Types
The project site consists primarily of undeveloped grazing ranchland and open space, but also
includes some rural development in the northwest and southern portion of the project site. The
land uses on nearby properties are largely agricultural, with residential, industrial, open space,
and commercial uses as well. Five habitat types were identified within the study area during the
plant surveys: California annual grassland (31.41 acre), seasonal wetland (0.18 acre), developed
(8.23 acre), culvert (0.1 acre), and ephemeral stream (0.04 acre). These habitats are discussed
below.
California Annual Grassland
The majority of the study area consists of California annual grassland habitat. Much of this
grassland is currently dominated by a suite of non‐native grasses, such as meadow barley
(Hordeum murinum), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), wild oats (Avena barbata and Avena
fatua), and ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus). Common weedy (and non‐native) forbs include
various species of filaree and geranium (Erodium spp. and Geranium spp., respectively),
shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), and black mustard (Brassica nigra).
Several invasive species occur in the study area, including but not limited to black mustard, wild
oat, and Italian ryegrass (Festuca perennis). There is even less diversity of species in the
southern portion of the study area, where the alkaline soils were mapped, with the small
patches of grassland dominated by filaree and geranium species and ripgut brome.
Developed
This habitat contains existing structures such as buildings, trailers, driveways, and parking lots.
Man‐made drainage ditches were also observed near the parking lot of the developed areas
within the study area. This developed habitat type contains little to no vegetation and is not
suitable for any rare plant species.
Ephemeral Drainage and Culvert
A single ephemeral drainage exists near the center of the study area and runs parallel to the
fence that bounds the Branaugh property to the west. This segment of ephemeral drainage is
rock‐lined and is fed by a culvert from which a small amount of water was observed flowing
during the spring survey. This segment of ephemeral stream is approximately 100 feet long and
10 feet wide and is connected at the downstream end by a culvert which conveys flows under a
road to a seasonal wetland at its downstream end. This stream was verified by the United
States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) as part of the Dublin Boulevard Extension Project
Jurisdictional Determination.
166
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 46
Seasonal Wetland
Seven seasonal wetlands were mapped within the study area. Five of the seasonal wetlands are
situated in subtle depressions within the study area, located adjacent to or within a
swale/saddle between two hills in the northern portion of the study area. Two additional
wetlands are in an excavated ditch west of the developed area. At the time of the spring survey,
these wetlands were saturated with pockets of standing water. The seasonal wetlands were
dominated by hydrophytic vegetation, including Mexican rush (Juncus mexicanus), Italian wild
rye (Hordeum murinum), and English plantain (Plantago lancelota).
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified potentially significant impacts related to direct habitat loss,
indirect habitat loss due to vegetation removal for construction and development activities, and
loss or degradation of sensitive habitat. The Eastern Dublin EIR also identified potentially
significant impacts related to special‐status wildlife, including San Joaquin kit fox, California red‐
legged frog (CRLF), California tiger salamander (CTS), western pond turtle, tri‐colored blackbird,
golden eagle, burrowing owl, American badger, special‐status invertebrates and others.
Mitigation measures were identified to reduce significant impacts. One significant and
unavoidable impact was identified related to the cumulative loss or degradation of botanically
sensitive habitat, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted. The following
mitigation measures would apply to the proposed project:
MM 3.7/1.0 Direct disturbance or removal of trees or native vegetation cover should
be minimized and be restricted to those areas actually designated for the construction
of improvements.
MM 3.7/5.0 All areas of disturbance should be revegetated as quickly as possible to
prevent erosion. Native trees (preferably those species already on site), shrubs, herbs,
and grasses should be used for revegetation of areas to remains as natural open space.
The introduction of non‐native plant species should be avoided.
MM 3.7/14.0 The City should enact and enforce an erosion and sedimentation control
ordinance establishing performance standards to ensure maintenance of water quality
and protection of stream channels. The ordinance should regulate grading and
development activities adjacent to streams and wetland areas and require revegetation
of all ground disturbance immediately after construction to reduce erosion potential.
Until such an ordinance is in place, the City shall require project applicants to provide a
detailed erosion and sedimentation control plan as part of the project submittal.
MM 3.7/16.0 Existing sensitive habitats shall be avoided and protected where feasible.
167
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 47
MM 3.7/17.0 Construction near drainages shall take place during the dry season.
MM 3.7/19.0 The use of rodenticides and herbicides within the Project area should be
restricted to avoid impacts on wildlife. The City shall require any poisoning programs to
be done in cooperation with and under supervision of the Alameda County Department
of Agriculture.
MM 3.7/20.0 The City shall require development applicants to conduct a pre‐
construction survey within 60 days prior to habitat modification (clearing construction
and road site, etc.) to verify the presence of sensitive species, especially the San Joaquin
kit fox, nesting raptors, the red‐legged frog, the western pond turtle, the California tiger
salamander, the tri‐colored blackbird and other species of concern.
MM 3.7/22.0 Maintain a minimum buffer (at least 100 feet) around breeding sites of
the red‐legged frog, California tiger salamander and the western Pond turtle identified
by MM 3.7/20.0.
MM 3.7/27.0 Maintain a minimum buffer (at least 300 feet) around known or those
identified by pre‐construction surveys (MM 3.7/20.0) nesting sites of the burrowing owl
and breeding sites of the American badger during the breeding season to avoid direct
loss of individuals (March – September).
2002 SEIR
The 2002 SEIR determined that implementation of the EDPO project would result in potentially
significant supplemental impacts to seasonal wetlands and intermittent streams, sensitive
habitats not previously analyzed, special‐status plant species, San Joaquin kit fox, California red‐
legged frog (CRLF), special‐status invertebrates, California tiger salamander (CTS), nesting
raptors, golden eagle, burrowing owl, nesting passerines, and bat species. Supplemental
mitigation measures were identified to reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. The
following supplemental mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed project site:
SM‐BIO‐1 (reference only): A Resource Management Plan (RMP) shall be prepared for
the Project area for the City of Dublin’s review and approval prior to or concurrent with
submittal of any land use entitlement requests. The RMP shall include all properties in
the Project area and any necessary off‐site mitigation lands, and address consistency
with local policies, such as the Stream Restoration Program and the Grazing
Management Plan and mitigation measures contained in the Eastern Dublin EIR and this
SEIR (for the full text of this mitigation see Chapter 3.3 [in the SEIR]).
168
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 48
SM‐BIO‐2: Plant surveys, as outlined in United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) protocols, shall be conducted
across the Project area in early spring, late spring, and late summer to confirm presence
or absence of special‐status plant species. Results of these surveys shall be addressed in
the RMP (SM‐BIO‐1) and in project‐level environmental review of all subsequent
development applications in the Project area.
SM‐BIO‐3: Once presence is determined for a special‐status plant species, areas
supporting the species should be avoided to the extent feasible.
SM‐BIO‐4: If a special‐status plant species cannot be avoided, then the area containing
the plant species must be measured and one of the following steps must be taken to
ensure replacement on a 1:1 ratio (by acreage):
a) Permanently preserve, through use of a conservation easement or other similar
method, an equal amount of acreage either within the Project area or off‐site
that contains the plant; or
b) Harvest seeds from the plants to be lost or use seeds from another source within
the Tri‐valley area and seed an equal amount of area suitable for growing the
plant either within the Project area or off‐site. Such area shall be preserved and
protected in perpetuity. If the plants fail to establish after a five‐year period,
then step “a” above must be implemented.
Prior to submittal of a Stage 2 development plan or tentative map, the developer
shall submit a written report to the City for its review and approval
demonstrating how the developer will comply with this mitigation measure,
including the steps it will take to ensure that transplanting or seeding will be
successful.
SM‐BIO‐5: To the extent feasible, implementation of the Project through subsequent
preparation of Stage 2 development proposals on a property‐by‐property basis shall be
designed to avoid and minimize adverse effects to waters of the United States (which
include seasonal wetlands and intermittent streams) within the Project area. Examples
of avoidance and minimization include (1) reducing the size of future individual
development projects within the Project area, (2) design future development projects
within the Project area so as to avoid and/or minimize impacts to waters of the United
States, and (3) establish and maintain wetland or upland vegetated buffers to protect
open water such as streams. In order to protect the particularly sensitive Arroyo willow
riparian woodland and red‐legged frog habitat found in the Fallon Road drainage from
Fallon Road upstream to its terminus, future development projects within the Project
169
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 49
area either shall completely avoid this drainage or limit impacts to bridge crossings (as
opposed to fill) or other such minimally impacting features.
SM‐BIO‐6: To the extent that avoidance and minimization are not feasible and wetlands,
intermittent streams or other waters will be filled, such impacts shall be mitigated at a
2:1 ratio (measures by acreage) within the Project area if feasible, through the creation,
restoration or enhancement of wetlands, intermittent streams or other waters. Such
mitigation area shall be preserved and protected in perpetuity. Prior to submittal of a
Stage 2 development plan or tentative map for any property within the Project area, the
property owner shall submit a written report to the City for its review and approval
demonstrating how the owner will comply with this mitigation measure.
SM‐BIO‐7: If mitigation within the Project area is not feasible, then the developer shall
mitigate the fill of wetlands or other waters at a 2:1 ratio (measured by acreage) at an
off‐site location acceptable to the City Such mitigation area shall be preserved and
protected in perpetuity. Prior to submittal of a Stage 2 development plan or tentative
map, the property owner shall submit a written report to the City for its review and
approval demonstrating how the owner will comply with this mitigation measure.
SM‐BIO‐8: Botanically sensitive habitats shall be included in and shall be protected and
enhanced by implementation of the Resource Management Plan, as outlined in
Mitigation Measure BIO‐SM‐1 above.
SM‐BIO‐9: Future development of properties within the Project area shall comply with
the amended Eastern Dublin San Joaquin Kit Fox Protection Plan which reflects the
latest protocols for kit fox habitat evaluations, presence/absence surveys, pre‐
construction surveys and precautionary construction measures.
SM‐BIO‐10: San Joaquin kit fox habitat shall be included in and shall be protected and
enhanced by implementation of the Resource Management Plan, as outlined in
Mitigation Measure BIO‐SM‐1 above.
SM‐BIO‐11: Focused surveys following USFWS protocol shall be conducted in habitat
considered suitable for CRLF on properties within the Project area which have not
already been surveyed. The current protocol (USFWS 1997b) requires that two daytime
and two nighttime surveys be performed over a suitable four‐day period. Results of
these surveys shall be submitted to the City for review.
SM‐BIO‐12: Specific CRLF habitat areas, including the drainage upstream and east of the
current Fallon Road alignment shall be included in and protected and enhanced by
170
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 50
implementation of the Resource Management Plan, as outlined in Mitigation Measure
BIO‐SM‐1 above.
SM‐BIO‐13: To the extent feasible, development on individual properties within the
Project area shall avoid all areas of identified suitable CRLF aquatic and dispersal
habitat. Specifically, development should avoid aquatic habitat and provide a 300 to
500‐foot buffer on each side of any stream which provides CRLF habitat. Limited
permanent development may occur within this buffer zone (such as a trail through the
length of the buffer zone, or a bridge crossing across the buffer zones) so long as it will
have only minor impacts on the habitat. Limited temporary development activity may
occur within this buffer zone to create trails, install bridges, etc. and to allow for grading
activities along the edge of the buffer zone, so long as such activity will have only minor
impacts on the habitat.
SM‐BIO‐14: If avoidance is infeasible, then mitigation lands providing similar or better
habitat for CRLF at a 3:1 replacement ratio or suitable ratio determined by the USFWS,
shall be preserved and protected in perpetuity. This mitigation, to be proposed in a
mitigation and monitoring plan submitted to the City, shall be required prior to
submittal of the Stage 2 Development Plans and tentative maps for any specific
property within the Project area. In selecting off‐site mitigation lands, preference shall
be given to preserving large blocks of habitat rather than many small parcels, linking
preserved areas to existing open space and other high‐quality habitat, and excluding or
limiting public use within preserved areas. If the identified mitigation lands have been
approved by the City, the following guidelines [outlined in SM‐BIO‐15] implemented
prior to and during construction would reduce impacts to individual CRLF and preserved
CRLF habitat.
SM‐BIO‐15: The following construction‐related CRLF avoidance and protection measures
shall be followed for all future development activity in the Project area, on a property‐
by‐property basis:
Prior to construction, a map shall be prepared to delineate upland areas from
preserved wetland areas.
The wetland construction boundary shall be fenced to prohibit the movement
of CRLF into the construction area and control siltation and disturbance to
wetland habitat. Following installation of fencing, its property location shall be
verified by a qualified biologist. The biologist shall ensure that at no time during
construction is vegetation removed inside of the fenced area. If construction
necessitates the removal of vegetation within the fenced area, additional
mitigation will be required. Additionally, the biologist shall walk the length of
the fence once each construction day to ensure the CRLF are not trapped within
171
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 51
the enclosure. The biologist shall walk the length of the fence more than once a
day in areas where CRLF are most abundant.
Pre‐construction surveys within the construction zone shall be conducted by a
qualified biologist with appropriate permits to handle CRLF. If no CRLF are
detected during these surveys then construction activities may proceed. If CRLF
are found within the construction disturbance zone, they shall immediately be
moved passively, or captured and moved, to suitable upstream sites.
All construction employees shall participate in an endangered species/special‐
status habitat education program to be presented by a qualified biologist prior
to construction activities. The program shall cover such topics as identifying
wetland habitat and areas used by CRLF, identification by CRLF by photos, the
state and federal Endangered Species Acts, and the consequence of violating
the terms of these acts.
All construction adjacent to wetlands shall be regularly monitored to ensure
that impacts do not exceed those included within the protect standards of the
mitigations. Work performed within 500 feet of aquatic habitat shall be
monitored by the biologist, who shall document pre‐project and post‐project
conditions to ensure compliance.
During construction, the biologist shall be on‐site whenever construction within
any aquatic habitats is to occur. Any construction activity within ordinary high
water shall be photo documented by the biologist. In addition, a biologist with
the appropriate permits to relocate CRLF shall be available for construction as
needed.
SM‐BIO‐16: Special‐status invertebrate habitat shall be included in and shall be
protected and enhanced by implementation of the Resource Management Plan, as
outlined in Mitigation Measure BIO‐SM‐1 above.
SM‐BIO‐17: The following vernal pool habitat surveys and mitigation shall be
implemented for each property within the Project area:
Surveys of potential habitat for special status invertebrates are required. If
suitable habitat is identified, then such habitat shall be surveyed to determine
whether it is occupied by special‐status invertebrates. If impacts to occupied
habitat will occur (including direct impact as a result of habitat destruction, and
indirect impact due to disturbance of areas within 250 feet of occupied habitat),
the following measures shall be followed:
a) Preservation: For every acre of habitat directly impacted at least two
vernal pool credits shall be dedicated within a USFWS‐approved mitigation
172
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 52
bank or, in accordance with USFWS evaluation of site‐specific
conservation values, three acres of vernal pool habitat may be preserved
within the Project area or off‐site as approved by the USFWS.
b) Creation: For every acre of habitat indirectly impacted, at least one vernal
pool credit shall be dedicated within a USFWS‐approved mitigation bank,
or, in accordance with USFWS evaluation of site‐specific conservation
values, two acres of vernal pool habitat may be created and monitored
within the Project area or on off‐site as approved by the USFWS.
Vernal pool habitat and associated upland areas which are preserved on‐site
shall be preserved and managed in perpetuity.
All avoided habitat on‐site shall be monitored by a qualified biologist during the
time of construction. The monitoring biologist shall have authority to stop all
activities that may result in destruction or take of listed invertebrate species or
destruction of their habitat. Resumption of construction shall occur after
appropriate corrective measures have been taken. The biologist shall report any
unauthorized impacts to USFWS.
Fencing shall be placed and maintained around any and all preserved vernal
pool habitat.
All on‐site construction personnel shall receive instruction regarding the
presence of listed species and their habitat maintained around any and all
preserved vernal pool habitat.
All on‐site construction personnel shall receive instruction regarding the
presence of listed species and their habitat maintained around any and all
preserved vernal pool habitat.
All on‐site construction personnel shall receive instruction regarding the
presence of listed species and their habitat maintained around any and all
preserved vernal pool habitat.
All on‐site construction personnel shall receive instruction regarding the
presence of listed species and their habitat.
SM‐BIO‐18: California tiger salamander habitat shall be included in and shall be
protected and enhanced by implementation of a Resource Management Plan as
outlined in Mitigation Measure SM‐BIO‐1.
SM‐BIO‐19: If avoidance is infeasible, mitigation lands, providing similar or better
aquatic and upland habitat for California tiger salamander (CTS) at a 1:1 ratio shall be
set aside in perpetuity. Upland habitat shall be mitigated by preserving upland on‐site,
or if necessary, by preserving currently occupied upland tiger salamander habitat off‐
173
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 53
site. Aquatic habitat shall be mitigated by creating an equal number (or acreage) of new
aquatic California tiger salamander breeding areas within the preserved upland habitat.
This mitigation, included in a mitigation and monitoring plan, shall be submitted to the
City prior to submittal of Stage 2 development plans and tentative maps. In selecting
off‐site mitigation lands, preference shall be given to preserving large blocks of habitat
rather than many small parcels, linking preserved areas to existing open space and other
high‐quality habitat, and excluding or limiting public use within preserved areas.
SM‐BIO‐20: A qualified biologist shall conduct pre‐construction surveys for nesting
raptors. If an active nest is found the following mitigation measures shall also be
implemented.
SM‐BIO‐21: If construction must occur during the nesting season, all potential nesting
trees within the footprint of development should be removed prior to the nesting
season to prevent occupied nests from being present when construction begins.
SM‐BIO‐22: Construction should occur between August 1 and February 1 to avoid
disturbance of nesting raptors during the nesting season. This construction window
could be adjusted if monitoring efforts determine that nesting was completed before
August 1.
SM‐B1O‐23: If removal of nesting trees is infeasible and construction must occur within
the breeding season, a nesting raptor survey shall be performed by a qualified biologist
prior to tree disturbance.
SM‐BIO‐24: All active nests shall be identified by flagging and a buffer zone, depending
on the species, shall be established around the nesting tree. Buffer zones shall be no
smaller than 200 feet.
SM‐B1O‐25: If construction is scheduled when young birds have not yet fledged, an
exclusion zone around the nest shall be established or construction shall be delayed
until after the young have fledged as determined by a qualified biologist.
SM‐BIO‐26: Nesting raptor habitat shall be included in and shall be protected and
enhanced by implementation of the Resource Management Plan as outlined in
Mitigation Measure SM‐BI0 1.
SM‐BIO‐27: The territory of the golden eagle nesting pair shall be included in and
protected and enhanced by implementation of a Resource Management Plan, as
outlined in Mitigation Measure SM‐BI0‐1. The protected golden eagle foraging territory
affects areas in the northern portion of the Project area designated for Rural
174
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 54
Residential/ Agricultural uses. Development standards and uses for these areas shall
incorporate the following measures:
Homesites in this portion of the Project area shall be located in valley bottoms
adjacent to existing or planned residential development.
Permitted agricultural uses shall be limited to grazing to maintain suitable golden
eagle foraging habitat.
Rodent control in this portion of the Project area shall be prohibited.
SM‐BIO‐28: If construction is scheduled during the nesting season (February 1 ‐ August
31), preconstruction survey should be conducted on the entire Project area and within
150 meters (500 feet) of the Project area prior to any ground disturbance. To avoid take
of over‐wintering birds, all burrows should be surveyed 30 days prior to ground
disturbance between the months of September 1 and January 31. If ground disturbance
is delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the preconstruction survey, the site
should be resurveyed.
SM‐BIO‐29: If over‐wintering birds are present no disturbance should occur within 150
feet of occupied burrows. If owls must be moved away from the disturbance area,
passive relocation techniques, following CDFG 1995 guidelines, should be used rather
than trapping. If no over‐wintering birds are observed, burrows may be removed prior
to the nesting season.
SM‐BlO‐30: Maintain a minimum buffer (at least 250 feet) around active burrowing owl
nesting sites identified by pre‐construction surveys during the breeding season to avoid
direct loss of individuals (February 1‐ September 1).
SM‐BIO‐31: If removal of unoccupied potential nesting burrows prior to the nesting
season is infeasible and construction must occur within the breeding season, a nesting
burrowing owl survey shall be performed by a qualified biologist within 30 days prior to
construction. Owls present on site after February 1 will be assumed to be nesting on site
or adjacent to the site. All active burrows shall be identified.
SM‐BIO‐32: All active nesting burrows shall have an established 250‐foot exclusion zone
around the burrow.
SM‐BIO‐33: If construction is scheduled during summer, when young are not yet
fledged, a 250‐foot exclusion zone around the nest shall be established or construction
shall be delayed until after the young have fledged, typically by August 31.
175
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 55
SM‐BIO‐34: When destruction of occupied burrows is unavoidable, existing unsuitable
burrows should be enhanced (enlarged or cleared of debris) or new burrows created (by
installing artificial burrows) at a 2:1 ratio on protected lands, as provided for below.
SM‐BIO‐35: A minimum of 6.5 acres of foraging habitat per pair or unpaired resident
bird, shall be acquired, and permanently preserved and protected. The protected lands
shall be adjacent to occupied burrowing owl habitat and at a location acceptable to
CDFG.
SM‐BIO‐36: The project proponent shall provide funding for long‐term management and
monitoring of the protected lands. The monitoring plan should include success criteria,
remedial measures, and an annual report to CDFG.
SM‐BIO‐37: Burrowing owl habitat shall be included in and shall be protected and
enhanced by implementation of the Resource Management Plan as outlined in
Mitigation Measure BIO‐SM‐1.
SM‐BIO‐38: If construction is scheduled to occur during the nesting season (February 1‐
August 15), all potential nesting sites and structures (i.e., shrubs and tules) within the
footprint of development should be removed prior to the beginning of the nesting
season. However, because the removal of grassland habitat is infeasible, mitigation for
impacts to California horned lark are addressed more particularly in Mitigation
Measures SM‐BI0‐39 to SM‐BI0‐41, below.
SM‐BIO‐39: If removal of nesting trees and shrubs within the footprint of development
is infeasible and construction must occur within the breeding season, a nesting bird
survey should be performed by a qualified biologist within 30 days prior to construction.
These surveys shall cover grassland habitat for potential nesting California horned lark.
Birds present on site after February 1 will be assumed to be nesting on‐site or adjacent
to the site.
SM‐BIO‐40: All active nests shall be identified by flagging and a buffer zone, depending
on the species, shall be established around the nest site. Buffer zones can range
between 75 feet to 100 feet.
SM‐BIO‐41: If construction is scheduled during summer, when young have not yet
fledged, an exclusion zone around the nest shall be established or construction shall be
delayed until after the young have fledged, typically by July 15.
176
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 56
SM‐BIO‐42: Habitat for nesting passerines shall be included in and shall be protected
and enhanced by implementation of the Resource Management Plan as outlined in SM‐
B10‐1.
SM‐BI0‐43: A qualified bat biologist shall conduct occupancy surveys of the Project area
to determine whether any mature trees, snags or suitable buildings that would be
removed during future project construction provide hibernacula or nursery colony
roosting habitat.
SM‐BI0‐44: If presence is observed, removal of roost habitat should be conducted at
specific times of the year. Winter roosts are generally occupied between October 15
through January 30 and maternity colonies are generally occupied between February 15
and July 30. If bats are using roost sites that need to be removed, the roosting season of
the colony shall be determined, and the removal shall be conducted when the colony is
using an alternate roost.
SM‐BI0‐45: Habitat for these bat species shall be included in and shall be protected and
enhanced by implementation of the Resource Management Plan as outlined in
Mitigation Measure SM‐B10‐1.
Fallon Village SEIR
The Fallon Village SEIR determined that although the Fallon Village Project proposed a similar
type and density of development analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and 2002 SEIR, due to
changes in the project design and identification of new sensitive habitats not identified in the
EDSP EIRs, new impacts to biological resources, including California tiger salamander, California
red‐legged frog, burrowing owl, and western pond turtle were identified. Supplemental
mitigation measures were identified to reduce these impacts to a less‐than‐significant level.
The following supplemental mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed project site:
SSM‐BIO‐1 (revised). If special‐status plants cannot be avoided, then the area
containing the plant that is to be impacted, and the approximate number of plants to be
impacted, must be determined, and the following steps must be taken:
a) Harvest seeds from the plants to be lost, or use seeds from another source
within the in Livermore and Amador valleys, and their surrounding watersheds,
and seed an area suitable for supporting the plant, either within the Project area
or off‐site, at a level sufficient to replace the impacted individuals at a 1:1 ratio
on an individual plant and basis, and at a ratio no less than 0.5:1 on an occupied
habitat basis. The mitigation site shall be preserved and protected in perpetuity.
If the mitigation site fails to support at least as many plants as were impacted
within a five‐year period, then step "b" below must be implemented.
177
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 57
b) Permanently preserve, through use of a conservation easement or other similar
method, an equal amount of acreage either within the Project area or off‐site
that contains the plant.
Prior to submission of a Stage 2 development plan or tentative map, the
developer shall submit a written report to the City for its review and approval
demonstrating how the developer will comply with this mitigation measure,
including the steps it will take to ensure that transplanting or seeding will be
successful.
SSM‐BIO‐2 (revised) (burrowing owl). During the breeding season (February 1‐August
31) prior to submittal of Stage 2 development proposals for a particular parcel, or during
a subsequent breeding season but prior to the initiation of construction, a survey shall
be conducted according to CDFG protocols to determine whether Burrowing Owls are
present, and if present, the number of nesting pairs of Burrowing Owls present on the
parcel.
SSM‐BIO‐3 (revised) (burrowing owl). Pre‐construction surveys for burrowing owls shall
be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to any ground disturbance between
September 1 and January 31. If ground disturbance is delayed or suspended for more
than 30 days after the survey, the site should be re‐surveyed. If no over‐wintering birds
are present, burrows should be removed prior to the nesting season. If over‐wintering
birds are present, no disturbance should occur within 150 feet of occupied burrows. If
owls must be moved away from the disturbance area during this period, passive
relocation measures must be prepared according to current CDFG burrowing owl
guidelines, approved by CDFG, and completed prior to construction.
SSM‐BIO‐4 (revised) (burrowing owl). If construction is scheduled during the nesting
season (February 1‐August 31), pre‐construction surveys should be conducted on the
entire site‐specific Project area and within 500 feet of such Project area prior to any
ground disturbance. A minimum buffer (at least 250 feet) shall be maintained during the
breeding season around active burrowing owl nesting sites identified in pre‐construction
surveys to avoid direct loss of individuals. Owls present on‐site after February 1 will be
assumed to be nesting on or adjacent to the site unless evidence indicates otherwise. All
active burrows shall be identified. If construction around active nests is scheduled to
occur when nests are active (i.e., if they contain, or are assumed to contain, eggs or un‐
fledged young), a 250‐foot exclusion zone around the nest shall be established or
construction shall be delayed until after the young have fledged, typically by August 31.
If owls are present during the early part of the breeding season, and evidence indicates
that they have not yet begun nesting, they may be passively relocated from the site if
authorized by CDFG.
178
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 58
SSM‐BIO‐5 (revised) (burrowing owl). If destruction of occupied (breeding or non‐
breeding season) burrows, or any burrows that were found to be occupied during pre‐
construction surveys, is unavoidable, a strategy will be developed to replace such
burrows by enhancing existing burrows or creating artificial burrows at a 2:1 ratio on
permanently protected lands adjacent to occupied burrowing owl habitat, and will
include permanent protection of a minimum of 6.5 acres of burrowing owl habitat per
pair or unpaired resident owl. A plan shall be developed and approved by CDFG
describing creation or enhancement of burrows, maintenance of burrows and
management of foraging habitat, monitoring procedures and significance criteria,
funding assurance, annual reporting requirements to CDFG, and contingency and
remediation measures.
Supplemental Mitigation Measure SM‐BI0‐1 (loss or degradation of botanically
sensitive habitats). Impacts to central coast riparian scrub habitat shall be mitigated
through the restoration or enhancement of riparian habitat at a 3:1 ratio (on an acreage
basis), preferably within the proposed aquatic and buffer zone or corridor zone
management areas on‐site. If mitigation within the Project area is not feasible, then the
developer shall mitigate impacts to central coast riparian scrub through the restoration
or enhancement of riparian habitat at a 3:1 ratio (measured by acreage) at an off‐site
location acceptable to the City. Any riparian mitigation areas shall be preserved and
protected in perpetuity. Restored habitat shall be monitored for a period of five years
including preparation of an annual report each year.
Supplemental Mitigation Measure SSM‐BI0‐2 (California red‐legged frog). If avoidance
is infeasible, then mitigation lands providing similar or better habitat for CRLF shall be
preserved and protected in perpetuity. Mitigation will be required at a 3:1 replacement
ratio for essential aquatic habitat (including verified aquatic breeding habitat) and
associated upland habitat within 100 m of essential aquatic habitat, and at a 1.5:1
replacement ratio for dispersal habitat as defined herein (Figure 3.3‐D Exhibit 4.7.4).
Alternately, the latter ratio may be reduced at the discretion of the City if additional
essential aquatic habitat is provided. The amount of reduction shall be proportional to
the amount of additional essential habitat provided, up to a maximum reduction of fifty
percent. Because aquatic breeding habitat and perennial water bodies providing
summer refugia are expected to limit CRLF population size in the dry eastern
Alameda/Contra Costa region more than the availability of suitable upland habitat,
flexibility in this mitigation requirement (i.e., to allow for the creation of ponds to serve
as partial mitigation for impacts to upland habitat) provides an opportunity to create
greater benefit to CRLF populations on a landscape level. This mitigation shall be
proposed in a mitigation and monitoring plan submitted to the City. In selecting off‐site
mitigation lands, preference shall be given to preserving large blocks of habitat rather
179
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 59
than many small parcels, selecting mitigation land within the Livermore and Amador
valleys, and their surrounding watersheds, to account for local loss of proposed critical
habitat, linking preserved areas to existing open space and other high‐quality habitat,
and excluding or limiting public use within preserved areas.
Supplemental Mitigation Measure SSM‐B10‐3 (California tiger salamander). To
compensate for the permanent loss of up to 1.31 acres of aquatic CTS breeding habitat,
developers of individual parcels will create and/or enlarge suitable breeding ponds at a
2:1 ratio (mitigation to impact, on an acreage basis), in or adjacent to areas currently
supporting CTS and with sufficient surrounding upland habitat to provide a high
likelihood of establishment and persistence of a breeding population. In selecting off‐
site mitigation lands, preference shall be given to preserving one large block of habitat
rather than many small parcels, selecting mitigation land within the Livermore and
Amador valleys, and their surrounding watersheds, to account for local loss of proposed
critical habitat, linking preserved areas to existing open space and other high‐quality
habitat, and excluding or limiting public use within preserved areas. Land selected for
mitigation shall be permanently preserved through use of a conservation easement or
similar method and shall be managed for use by CTS by a conservation entity. This
mitigation shall be proposed in a mitigation and monitoring plan submitted to the City
for approval.
Supplemental Mitigation Measure SSM‐BIO‐4 (California tiger salamander). To
compensate for the permanent loss of up to 658.3 acres of upland CTS habitat,
developers of individual parcels will acquire, preserve, and manage suitable upland
habitat at a 1:1 ratio (mitigation to impact, on an acreage basis), in or adjacent to areas
currently supporting CTS and within 2200 feet of a suitable breeding pond. Alternately,
this ratio may be reduced (i.e., to less than 1:1 mitigation for lost upland habitat), at the
discretion of the City, if additional aquatic breeding habitat (beyond that required by
SM‐BIO‐11) is provided. The amount of reduction shall be proportional to the amount of
additional essential habitat provided, up to a maximum reduction of fifty percent.
Because aquatic breeding habitat is expected to limit CTS population size in the dry
eastern Alameda/Contra Costa region more than the availability of suitable upland
habitat, flexibility in this mitigation requirement (i.e., to allow for the creation of
breeding ponds to serve as partial mitigation for impacts to aestivation habitat) may
benefit CTS populations on a landscape level. This mitigation requirement may be
combined with SM‐BIO‐11 from the 2002 SEIR so that the overall mitigation results in
creation/restoration and preservation of breeding ponds (to mitigate impacts to aquatic
breeding habitat according to SM‐BIO‐11) and preservation of associated upland habitat
(to mitigate impacts to upland habitat according to SM‐BIO‐12). In selecting off‐site
mitigation lands, preference shall be given to preserving one large block of habitat
rather than many small parcels, selecting mitigation land within the in Livermore and
180
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 60
Amador valleys, and their surrounding watersheds, to account for local loss of proposed
critical habitat, linking preserved areas to existing open space and other high‐quality
habitat, and excluding or limiting public use within preserved areas. Land selected for
mitigation shall be permanently preserved through use of a conservation easement or
similar method and shall be managed for use by CTS by a conservation entity. This
mitigation shall be proposed in a mitigation and monitoring plan submitted to the City
for approval.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Substantial adverse effect on candidate, sensitive, or special status species
Rare plant surveys were conducted April 9 and 10, 2020, September 29, 2020, and March 25
and April 29, 2021, for early blooming species. The purpose of these surveys was to conduct
protocol‐level, floristic surveys for special‐status plants that were determined to have potential
to occur on the site. No special‐status plants were observed during the protocol‐level surveys
conducted on the project site. Please refer to Appendix B.
In December 2021, a memorandum3 was prepared to provide the project applicant and owner
of the adjacent Righetti property with the acreages of impacts to California red‐legged frog
(Rana draytonii) and California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) habitat that would
result from development of various portions of the project site by the adjacent Trumark
development, the Dublin Boulevard Extension project, the proposed project and the proposed
Righetti development. In addition, the memorandum describes how mitigation would be
provided for the areas being affected by each of these projects, and how incidental take
approval from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW) would be obtained for the lands impacted by these various projects. The
memorandum is provided in Appendix D.
The Fallon Village SEIR identified potentially significant impacts to several special‐status wildlife
species on the project site, including California tiger salamander (CTS) (Ambystoma
californiense), California red‐legged frog (CRLF) (Rana aurora draytonii), burrowing owl (Athene
cunicularia hypogea), golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus),
pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis), and white‐tailed kite (Elanus
leucurus) and American badger (Taxidea taxus). These species are discussed in further detail
below.
California tiger salamander. As described in the Fallon Village SEIR, pools in the vicinity of the
project site provide suitable breeding habitat for CTS, which aestivate in upland areas
3 H.T. Harvey & Associates. 2021c. Branaugh and Righetti Property Development – Listed Species Impacts,
Mitigation and Take Approval Summary. December 8.
181
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 61
surrounding the ponds. Adult or juvenile CTS have been observed in terrestrial areas on the
project site and the Fallon Village SEIR determined that approximately 29.43 acres of upland
habitat for CTS on the project site would be impacted by proposed development. The proposed
project would be required to implement Mitigation Measures 3.7/20.0 through 3.7/22.0, as
identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, SM‐BIO‐18, as identified in the 2002 SEIR, and SM‐BIO‐8
and SM‐BIO‐9, as identified in the Fallon Village SEIR. With implementation of these mitigation
measures, impacts to CTS would be reduced to a less‐than‐significant level.
California red‐legged frog. A 2001 site assessment and focused survey for CRLF detected no
CRLF or any evidence of CRLF breeding on the project; however, suitable dispersal and upland
habitats were considered present in isolated wetland areas and uplands adjacent to aquatic
features. Given their ability to disperse long distances, the dispersion of known or potential
breeding ponds, and the potential habitat for CRLF in Doolan Canyon to the east, dispersing
CRLF could occur on the project site. Per the recent memorandum prepared for the proposed
project,4 development of the proposed project would result in impacts to 31.41 acres of upland
habitat, including USFWS‐designated critical habitat for CRLF, 0.096 acre of wetland habitat and
0.129 acre of stream habitat for CRLF. The proposed project would be required to implement
Mitigation Measures 3.7/20.0 through 3.7/22.0, as identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, SM‐BIO‐
11, SM‐BIO‐12, SM‐BIO‐13, and SM‐BIO‐15 of the 2002 SEIR, and SM‐BIO‐2, as identified in the
Fallon Village SEIR. With implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts to CRLF would
be reduced to a less‐than‐significant level.
Burrowing owl. Technical studies conducted within the Fallon Village Project area determined
that potential foraging habitat is present in grassland, wetlands, and ruderal habitats
throughout the project area, and the project site could provide potential nesting habitat.
Development of the proposed project could result in the loss of suitable burrowing owl nesting,
roosting, and foraging habitat, and potentially the loss of owls and their nests in occupied
burrows. The proposed project would be required to implement Mitigation Measures SM‐BIO‐
28 through SM‐BIO‐37, as identified in the 2002 SEIR, as well as, SM‐BIO‐2, SM‐BIO‐3, and SM‐
BIO‐4, as identified in the Fallon Village SEIR to mitigate impacts to burrowing owls.
Implementation of these measures would ensure impacts to burrowing owls are reduced to
less‐than‐significant levels.
Golden eagle. As described in the Fallon Village SEIR, a pair of golden eagles has successfully
nested northwest of the project site at least since 1990. Documented primary foraging areas for
this pair are to the north and east and the Dublin Ranch project has established a conservation
area that includes this nesting pair of eagles and considerable foraging habitat. In addition,
these eagles also forage over the Fallon Village Project area (especially the northern portion).
The Eastern Dublin EIR and 2002 SEIR identified potentially significant impacts to this species
4 H.T. Harvey & Associates. 2021c. op. cit.
182
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 62
due to loss of foraging habitat, impacts to the nesting site, and potential electrocutions. As
described in the Fallon Village SEIR, it is unlikely that the project site is used for nesting;
however, the site provides suitable foraging habitat for this species. Mitigation Measures
3.7/25.0 and 3.7/23.0, identified in the East Dublin EIR, and SM‐BIO‐27, as described in the
2002 SEIR, establish a golden eagle protection zone, including protected open space land, to
provide suitable foraging habitat for this species. Implementation of these measures would
ensure impacts are reduced to a less‐than‐significant level.
Loggerhead shrike and other nesting birds. As described in the Fallon Village SEIR, loggerhead
shrikes have been observed on numerous occasions on and adjacent to the Fallon Village
Project area. Suitable breeding habitat for this species occurs within central coast riparian scrub
habitat and in trees and shrubs in the area. Suitable foraging habitat is present on the project
site. Implementation of Mitigation Measures SM‐BIO‐38 through SM‐BIO‐42, identified in the
2002 SEIR, which require a preconstruction nesting bird survey be conducted during the nesting
bird season, and establishment of buffer zones around nest sites would reduce potential
impacts to loggerhead shrike and other nesting bird species to a less than significant level.
Pallid bat, Yuma myotis and other bat species. Barns and other structures with appropriate
roosting sites, and possibly crevices within loose tree bark, may supply roosting habitat for
pallid bat and other bat species. Although these species have not been observed within the
project area, based on the availability of suitable roosting habitat, bats could potentially roost
and/or forage on the project site. Implementation of Mitigation Measures SM‐BIO‐43 through
SM‐BIO‐45, identified in the 2002 SEIR, which require that a preconstruction survey be
conducted and limits on removal of potential roosting habitat, would reduce potential impacts
to bat species to a less than significant level.
White‐tailed kite and other raptors. White‐tailed kites forage in grasslands throughout the
Fallon Village Project area and are expected to nest in scattered trees within the project site.
While not specifically described in the EDSP EIRs, impacts to the white‐tailed kite were
evaluated as a protected raptor in the Eastern Dublin EIR (IM 3.7 / O) and the 2002 SEIR (SEIR p.
3.3‐10). Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7/25.0, identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR,
and SM‐BIO‐20 through SM‐BIO‐26, identified in the 2002 SEIR, would reduce potential impacts
to white‐tailed kite and other raptor species to less than significant levels.
American badger. American badger could occur in the grasslands on the project site and could
be affected by destruction of burrows by construction activities such as grading, clearing, and
movement of heavy equipment. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7/20.0 and 3.7/27.0
identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR would reduce potential impacts to American badger to a
less‐than‐significant level.
183
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 63
(b) Substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other natural community
The project site consists primarily of undeveloped grazing ranchland and open space, but also
includes some rural development in the northwest and southern portion. As previously
discussed, five habitat types were identified within the project area during the plant surveys:
California annual grassland (31.41 acre), seasonal wetland (0.18 acre), developed (8.23 acre),
culvert (0.1 acre), and ephemeral stream (0.04 acre). According to the Preliminary Delineation
of Wetlands/Other Waters (Appendix C), approximately 0.028 acre of habitat associated with
an excavated ditch would be considered jurisdictional by the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW); however, while the ditch has a bed and banks, no woody riparian vegetation is
present.
As described further below, the project would permanently impact 0.225 acre of jurisdictional
waters, including seasonal wetlands and other waters present on the project site.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures SM‐BIO‐5 through SM‐BIO‐8, as identified in the 2002
SEIR and SM‐BIO‐1, as identified in the Fallon Village SEIR, would reduce potential impacts to
sensitive natural communities to a less‐than‐significant level.
(c) Substantial adverse effect on wetlands
A delineation of wetlands and other waters was conducted on April 9 and 10, 2020, to assess
the extent of jurisdictional waters that may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA) administered by the USACE, as well as waters of the state that may be
subject to regulation under Section 401 of the CWA and the Porter Cologne Water Quality
Control Act administered by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and CDFW.
The Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters is provided in Appendix C.
In total, approximately 0.124 acre of potentially jurisdictional features as defined by the USACE
were identified within the project, consisting of approximately 0.124 acre of seasonal wetland,
which would also be considered waters of the state. A portion of the 0.124 acre includes 0.028
acre of CDFW jurisdiction. The potentially jurisdictional features identified and delineated
during the April 2020 surveys include two regulatory wetlands and waters features that were
previously mapped on the project site as part of a larger delineation for the Dublin Boulevard‐
North Canyons Parkway Extension Project and were verified by USACE. These features are
located in the center of the project site, have not appreciably changed since the area was
verified in 2019, and include 0.053 acre of seasonal wetlands, and 0.048 acre of other waters
(ephemeral stream/culvert). Table E below provides a summary of jurisdictional waters and
wetlands within the project site.
184
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 64
Table E: Summary of Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands within the Project Site
Feature Acres
Section 404 Wetlands
Seasonal Wetland 0.124
Total Section 404 Waters of the U.S. 0.124
Section 401 Waters of the State
Seasonal Wetland 0.124
CDFW Jurisdictional Habitats 0.028
Total Section 401 Waters of the State 0.124
Wetlands and Waters Previously Verified by the USACE 0.101
Total Jurisdictional Area 0.225
Source: H.T. Harvey & Associates. 2021
Implementation of the proposed project would permanently impact 0.225 acre of jurisdictional
waters, including seasonal wetlands and other waters present on the project site. The 2002
SEIR identified potentially significant impacts to seasonal wetlands and intermittent streams
and included mitigation measures to reduce these impacts to a less‐than‐significant level.
Consistent with Mitigation Measures SM‐BIO‐6 and SM‐BIO‐7, identified in the 2002 SEIR, the
proposed project would be required to mitigate impacts to wetlands at a 2:1 ratio through the
creation, restoration or enhancement of wetlands, intermittent streams or other waters either
on‐site (SM‐BIO‐6) or off‐site (SM‐BIO‐7). With implementation of Mitigation Measures SM‐
BIO‐6 and SM‐BIO‐7, no new impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts related to
wetlands would occur.
(d) Interfere or impede the movement of migratory fish or wildlife
The majority of the study area consists of California annual grassland habitat. Much of this
grassland is currently dominated by a suite of non‐native grasses. A single ephemeral drainage
runs parallel to the fence that bounds the property to the west. This drainage does not form a
connection with any areas of natural habitat as it is connected to culverts at both ends.
As described above, CRLF and CTS may disperse across the project site to breeding habitat off‐
site. In addition, structures and large hollow trees present on the project site could support bat
maternity roosts and vegetation on or adjacent to the project site could provide nesting habitat
for some species of native birds protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the
California Fish and Game Code. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified above
would reduce potential impacts to nesting birds and bat roosts to a less than significant level.
(e) Conflict with local policies or ordinance include tree preservation
The project site is mostly vacant on the northern portion of the site, with agriculture and some
rural residential development in the southern portion of the site. The existing vegetation
185
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 65
consists mostly of grasses, with a few clusters of trees in the far north portion and far south
portion of the site.
Heritage trees and approved street trees are protected under the Dublin Municipal Code,
specifically Sections 7.56, Street Trees, and 5.60, Heritage Trees.
As defined in the Dublin Municipal Code, approved street trees include:
1. Any tree planted within any street right‐of‐way or adjacent easement, which conforms to
the approved streetscape master plan;
2. Any existing tree within the right‐of‐way or adjacent easement, which conforms to the
established species and location in any given area, and which was planted as a required
street tree under the provisions of any improvement agreement, or as otherwise
approved by the City; or
3. Any tree of the approved species and in an acceptable location, which was or may be
planted as a replacement.
Heritage trees include any of the following:
1. Any oak, bay, cypress, maple, redwood, buckeye and sycamore tree having a trunk or
main stem of twenty‐four (24) inches or more in diameter measured at four (4) feet six
(6) inches above natural grade.
2. A tree required to be preserved as part of an approved development plan, zoning permit,
use permit, site development review, or subdivision map;
3. A tree required to be planted as a replacement for an unlawfully removed tree.
For private development projects, a permit is required from the City for the removal of any
heritage tree and the removal/pruning of any approved street tree. In addition, for any
property containing one or more heritage trees, a plan to protect heritage trees must be
prepared and submitted to the City prior to the issuance of a demolition, grading, or building
permit.
Implementation of the proposed project would likely require removal or disturbance of trees to
accommodate proposed development. New trees would be planted as part of the proposed
project, which would replace any trees to be removed. There are no heritage trees or street
trees on the project site.
186
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 66
(f) Conflict with adopted habitat conservation or natural community conservation plans
The project site is located in Conservation Zone 4 of the East Alameda County Conservation
Strategy (EACCS). The City of Dublin utilizes the EACCS as guidance for environmental
permitting for public projects, and private development projects are encouraged to use the
EACCS as a resource. However, the EACCS is neither a Habitat Conservation Plan nor a Natural
Community Conservation Plan, but is a document intended to provide guidance during the
project planning and permitting process to ensure that impacts are offset in a biologically
effective manner. With implementation of the mitigation measures identified above, the
project would be consistent with the EACCS. The project site is not subject to any other
adopted habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Therefore, the
proposed project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation
plan.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified biological resources impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified in
the EDSP EIRs there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to
biological resources beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required.
Source(s)
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
H.T. Harvey & Associates. 2021a. Results of Protocol‐level Special‐Status Plant Surveys in
Support of the Branaugh Property Development (Project # 4423‐01). May 27.
187
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 67
H.T. Harvey & Associates. 2021b. Lands of Branaugh Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and
Other Waters Alameda County, California. January 11.
H.T. Harvey & Associates. 2021c. Branaugh and Righetti Property Development – Listed Species
Impacts, Mitigation and Take Approval Summary. December 8.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
188
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 68
Cultural Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
an archaeological resource pursuant to section 15064.5?
X
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries?
X
Environmental Setting
Background research consisting of a records search at the Northwest Information Center
(NWIC), a review of historical maps and aerial photographs, a search of the Sacred Lands File
(SLF) at the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), and a review of published geological
information were conducted to determine the potential sensitivity for buried historic and
archaeological sites. In addition, a Historic Resources Evaluation (HRE) was prepared to
evaluate the potential significance of the historic‐period farm complex containing four buildings
over 50 years old. These two studies are provided in Appendix E and F, respectively.
A cultural resources records search was conducted on November 6, 2021, by staff at the NWIC
of the California Historical Resources Information System to identify previous archaeological
site records and cultural resource studies within the project site and vicinity. The NWIC, an
affiliate of the Office of Historic Preservation (OHP), is the official State repository of cultural
resources records and reports for Alameda County. The search encompassed the project site
and surrounding 0.5‐mile radius.
The project site contains a historic‐period farm complex (the Collier Ranch) consisting of four
buildings over 50 years old: a circa 1958 shed and two‐story, three‐bay barn, and two mid‐20th
century single‐family homes. These buildings were evaluated for significance as a historical
resource and were found to be not eligible, either individually or as a group, for inclusion on the
California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) or the National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP). The other structures on the project site, consisting of several modern sheds and a circa
1980 single‐story single‐family residence, have not yet reached sufficient age to warrant
evaluation for significance.
189
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 69
Three previous cultural resource studies overlapped the current project site, and another seven
were conducted within a half‐mile radius. No archaeological resources are recorded within the
project boundaries or within a half‐mile of the project site.
A request was submitted to the NAHC to search the Sacred Lands File (SLF) for Native American
cultural resources that may be impacted by the proposed project. The NAHC maintains the SLF
database and is the official State repository of Native American sacred‐site location records in
California. Cody Campagne, NAHC Cultural Resources Analyst, responded to the SLF search
request on February 4, 2022, stating that the results were negative and that there were no
known Native American cultural resources in the project site. The letter noted, however, that
“the absence of specific site information in the SLF does not indicate the absence of cultural
resources in any project area.”
Background research indicated that buildings were present as early as 1949 in the area of the
extant historic‐period farm complex, and also in the southeast corner of the project site. It is
unclear if the former were later demolished or incorporated into the extant farm complex. The
structure in the southeast corner of the project site was removed between 1966 and 1968.
There is high potential for any of these past or existing historical structures to have associated
features, such as wells, refuse deposits, and structural remnants, buried within the project site.
Holocene‐age alluvial deposits are mapped along the bottom of the drainage in the northern
half of the project site, as well as on the valley floor in the southern half of the project site. Soils
information indicates that the alluvium on the valley floor could reach considerable depths. The
project site straddles the interface between the valley floor and adjacent uplands but does not
appear to have been historically in close proximity to a stream. Based on the age of the
landforms present and position in the landscape, there is general potential for the portions of
the project site in the bottom of drainage and on the valley floor to contain (possibly deeply)
buried pre‐contact archaeological deposits. However, these areas likely have relatively low
sensitivity given the distance to the closest historically documented stream.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified potentially significant impacts related to the disruption or
destruction of identified and unidentified prehistoric resources, and disruption or destruction
of identified and unidentified historic resources. Mitigation measures were identified to reduce
potential impacts to a less‐than‐significant level. The following mitigation measures would
apply to the proposed project:
MM 3.9/1.0 All locations of prehistoric resources will need a program of mechanical
and/or hand subsurface testing to determine the presence or absence of midden
deposits associated with the surface indictors of aboriginal presence.
190
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 70
MM 3.9/2.0 All locations containing either midden components or concentrations of
cultural materials located on the surface will be recorded on State of California site
survey forms. The borders of any midden deposits or concentrations of cultural
materials (other than single isolated artifact discoveries) will be staked so that accurate
location maps can be produced by professional survey teams.
MM 3.9/3.0 If it can be demonstrated that these recorded and mapped locations will
be impacted in any manner by future construction or indirectly impacted as a result of
increased access to the area, a plan of evaluative testing of each resource will have to
be devised in order to prepare responsive mitigation measures. Evaluative testing will
consist of the collection and analysis of any surface concentrations of cultural materials,
and the hand excavation and analysis of the scientific content of any midden
components discovered during present or absence testing.
MM 3.9/4.0 The City shall retain the services of a qualified archaeologist to develop a
protection program for prehistoric sites which contain either a surface or subsurface
deposit of cultural materials or information which qualify under Appendix K of CEQA as
“significant” and which are located in areas of the project site where development will
significantly alter the current conditions of the prehistoric resource.
MM 3.9/5.0 The discovery of historic or prehistoric remains during grading and
construction will result in the cessation of such activities until the significant and extent
of those remains can be ascertained by a certified archaeologist.
MM 3.9/6.0 The City of Dublin will require the following series of actions as part of
the application process for development in eastern Dublin: site sensitivity
determination; detailed research and field reconnaissance by a certified archaeologist;
development of a mitigation plan pursuant to the policies of the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan and current CEQA guidelines.
MM 3.9/7.0 All properties with historic resources, which may be impacted by future
development shall be subjected to in‐depth archival research to determine the
significance of the resources prior to any alteration.
2002 SEIR
Cultural resources were addressed in the Initial Study for the 2002 SEIR. No potentially
significant impacts or mitigation measures were identified.
191
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 71
Fallon Village SEIR
The Fallon Village SEIR determined that although the Fallon Village Project proposed a similar
type and density of development analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and 2002 SEIR, due to
changes in the project design and identification of new historic resources not identified in the
EDSP EIRs, new impacts to cultural resources, including potential impacts on unknown
prehistoric resources on the Fallon Enterprises, Jordan and Chen Properties, potential impacts
to the historic Fallon House and at the historic Croak Ranch Homestead could occur. An
assessment of the Collier Canyon Ranch determined that no structures eligible for the CRHR
exist there. Supplemental mitigation measures were identified to reduce potential impacts to
cultural resources on these properties to a less‐than‐significant level; however, none of these
supplemental mitigation measures apply to the proposed project site.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Historic resources
For a cultural resource to be considered a historical resource (i.e., eligible for listing in the
CRHR), it generally must be 50 years or older. Under CEQA, historical resources can include
precontact (i.e., Native American) archaeological deposits, historic‐period archaeological
deposits, historic buildings, and historic districts. CEQA requires agencies considering projects
that are subject to discretionary action to consider the potential impacts on cultural resources
that may occur from project implementation (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5).
As described above, the project site does contain a historic‐period farm complex (the Collier
Ranch) consisting of four buildings over 50 years old. These buildings were evaluated for
significance as a historical resource. They were found to be not eligible, either individually or as
a group, for inclusion on the CRHR or the NRHP. Although these existing buildings would be
demolished as part of the proposed project, this impact would be less than significant as these
buildings do not qualify as historical resources for the purposes of CEQA.
However, there is high potential for past or existing historical structures to have associated
features, such as wells, refuse deposits, and structural remnants, buried within the project site.
These features could be uncovered during ground disturbing activities associated with the
proposed project. Due to the high potential for historic‐period archaeological deposits,
Mitigation Measure 3.9/4.0 from the Eastern Dublin EIR, as modified below, would reduce
potential impacts to a less than significant level.
MM 3.9/4.0 The City shall retain the services of a qualified archaeologist to develop a
protection program for prehistoric and/or historic‐period sites which contain either a
surface or subsurface deposit of cultural materials or information which qualify under
Appendix K of CEQA as “significant” and which are located in areas of the project site
where development will significantly alter the current conditions of the prehistoric
resource. Following demolition of the existing structures, an archaeological monitor
192
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 72
shall observe ground‐disturbing construction activities, including grading, utility
trenching, and foundation‐related excavation, in two areas of the project site: the
general vicinity of the extant historic‐period farm complex and the southeast corner of
the project site).
(b) Archaeological resources
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(c)(1), “When a project will impact an
archaeological site, a lead agency shall first determine whether the site is an historical
resource.” Those archaeological sites that do not qualify as historical resources shall be
assessed to determine if they qualify as “unique archaeological resources” pursuant to
California Public Resource Code (PRC) Section 21083.2.
Although no archaeological resources have been identified at the project site, it cannot be
entirely ruled out that archaeological cultural resources could be encountered during project
construction at the project site. Should archaeological deposits be encountered during project
ground disturbance, a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource
would occur from its demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance
of the resource would be materially impaired (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)(1)). If such
resources are encountered, implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.9/5.0 as identified in the
Eastern Dublin EIR would reduce any potential impacts to archaeological and/or Native
American resources to a less‐than‐significant level.
(c) Human remains
Based on previous archaeological investigation and analysis, there is a low potential for the
disturbance of archaeological cultural resources or human remains. However, in the event that
human remains are encountered at any time during project work, State Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has
made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. The County
Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be Native
American, the County Coroner would notify the NAHC within 24 hours. The NAHC would
determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) per PRC 5097.98. With the permission of
the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the
discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection and make recommendations or preferences
for treatment within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The MLD’s recommendations
may include scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items
associated with Native American burials, preservation of Native American human remains and
associated items in place, relinquishment of Native American human remains and associated
items to the descendants for treatment, or any other culturally appropriate treatment.
Compliance with Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code and PRC Section
5097.98 regarding the treatment of human remains would ensure that potential impacts to
human remains would be less than significant.
193
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 73
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in EDSP EIRs
and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity of the
previously identified cultural resources impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified in
the EDSP EIRs, as modified above, there would be no new or substantially more severe
significant impacts to cultural resources beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP
EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required.
Source(s)
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
LSA, 2021. Historical Resource Evaluation of the Branaugh Property at 1881 Collier Canyon
Road, Dublin, Alameda County, California (LSA Project No.: DUB2101.02). November.
LSA, 2022. Cultural Resource Study for the Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Project, Dublin, Alameda County, California (LSA Project No. DUB2101.02, Phase 2).
February.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
194
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 74
Energy
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in the
EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
13. ENERGY. Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact
due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption
of energy resources, during project construction or
operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
X
Environmental Setting
The project site is located within Fallon Gateway of the EDSP. Commercial and industrial land
within Fallon Gateway, east of Fallon Road, is required to incorporate the following
sustainability practices:
Build off the City’s Complete Streets Policy and incorporate complete streets
concepts within the private development’s circulation system to ensure strong
bicycle, pedestrian and transit connections within and between the private
developments and connections to the City's streets and existing and future transit
hubs.
Strong bicycle and pedestrian connections per the vision and goals of the City's
Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
Electric vehicle charging stations within each development.
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures to reduce the demand of
single occupancy vehicles, such as transit subsidy programs, shuttles,
showers/lockers, bike share programs, parking, mobility and micromobility hubs.
Buildings and related private infrastructure to help with electric grid management,
by incorporating load shifting technologies, solar panels, battery storage and micro‐
grids.
Reduce consumption of materials through reuse or recycling of all municipal solid
waste materials back into nature or the marketplace in a manner that protects
human health and the environment toward zero‐waste goals.
195
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 75
Incorporate smart cities technology infrastructure, and fiber‐optic communications
infrastructure.
Street infrastructure for private drive aisles and streets and public streets certified as
Greenroads.org Gold level or greater, ASCE Envision Rating of Gold or greater or
similar equivalent.
Design and construct buildings that meet the requirements to achieve LEED Gold
status or above.
Electricity
Electricity is a man‐made resource. The production of electricity requires the consumption or
conversion of energy resources (including water, wind, oil, gas, coal, solar, geothermal, or
nuclear resources) into energy. Electricity is used for a variety of purposes (e.g., lighting,
heating, cooling, and refrigeration, and for operating appliances, computers, electronics,
machinery, and public transportation systems).5 In 2020, California consumed approximately
279,510 gigawatt‐hours (GWh) or 279,510,007,246 kilowatt‐hours (kWh).6 Of this total,
Alameda County consumed 10,247 GWh or 10,247,410,444 kWh.7
Natural Gas
Natural gas is a non‐renewable fossil fuel. Fossil fuels are formed when layers of decomposing
plant and animal matter are exposed to intense heat and pressure under the surface of the
Earth over many years. Natural gas is a combustible mixture of hydrocarbon compounds
(primarily methane) that is used as a fuel source. Natural gas is found in naturally occurring
reservoirs in deep underground rock formations. Natural gas is used for a variety of uses (e.g.,
heating buildings, generating electricity, and powering appliances such as stoves, washing
machines and dryers, gas fireplaces, and gas grills).8 In 2020, California consumed
approximately 12,331 million therms or 12,331,530,178 therms, while Alameda County
consumed approximately 366 million therms or approximately 366,465,038 therms.9
5 California Energy Commission, 2018. 2018 Total System Electric Generation. Website:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data‐reports/energy‐almanac/california‐electricity‐data/2019‐total‐system‐
electric‐generation/2018 (accessed November 2021).
6 California Energy Commission, 2021. Energy Consumption Data Management Service. Electricity Consumption
by County. Website: www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx (accessed November 2021).
7 Ibid.
8 U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2019. Natural Gas Explained‐Use of Natural Gas. Website:
eia.gov/energyexplained/index.php?page=natural_gas_use (accessed November 2021).
9 California Energy Commission, 2021. Energy Consumption Data Management Service. Gas Consumption by
County. Website: www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx (accessed November 2021).
196
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 76
Fuel
Petroleum is also a non‐renewable fossil fuel. Petroleum is a thick, flammable, yellow‐to‐black
mixture of gaseous, liquid, and solid hydrocarbons that occurs naturally beneath the earth's
surface. Petroleum is primarily recovered by oil drilling. It is refined into a large number of
consumer products, primarily fuel oil and gasoline. Gasoline is the most used transportation
fuel in California, with 97 percent of all gasoline being consumed by light‐duty cars, pickup
trucks, and sport utility vehicles. Based on fuel consumption obtained from EMFAC2021, vehicle
trips in Alameda County in 2021 are anticipated to consume 133,053,883 gallons of diesel fuel
and 530,048,591 gallons of gasoline.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
At the time the Eastern Dublin EIR was prepared, the Environmental Checklist Form (Appendix
G of the CEQA Guidelines) did not include energy. Therefore, the Eastern Dublin EIR did not
specifically analyze impacts to energy. Utilities and service systems impacts and mitigation
measures, some of which are related to the demand for energy of additional service systems,
were identified and found that the demand for utility extensions and consumption of non‐
renewable natural resources would result in a significant and unavoidable impact. The following
mitigation measures would apply to the proposed project:
MM 3.4/45.0 Demonstration Projects. The City shall require major developers in
eastern Dublin to provide one or more demonstration projects of cost‐effective energy
conservation techniques. Demonstration of techniques such as photovoltaics, which are
not currently cost‐effective, shall be encouraged but not required. The developer shall
be encouraged to coordinate efforts with PG&E in planning and design of demonstration
projects. Options for demonstration projects may include:
Model Homes. Solar water heating, space heating, and demonstration of thermal
mass. Demonstration landscaping for energy and water conservation. Use of
trellises and arbors for shading.
Public Facilities. Use of solar water heating, space heating, and thermal mass.
Possible use of photovoltaics, wind power, or innovative cooling technology.
MM 3.4/46.0 Site Planning, Building Design, and Landscaping. The City shall require
project applicants to demonstrate that specific site planning, building design, and
landscaping measures have been incorporated into their projects to conserve the use of
energy during construction and long‐term operation. Such measures might include
orientation of lots; buildings and windows; protection of solar access; active and passive
solar applications; use of energy efficient materials; and function of landscaping. These
197
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 77
measures will be incorporated into an energy conservation plan and shall be reviewed
and approved by the City as part of specific development proposals.
2002 SEIR
A review of potential utilities impacts, including energy supply, was conducted as part of the
2002 SEIR. The 2002 SEIR determined that no additional utilities/energy supply impacts would
occur beyond those identified at the time the Eastern Dublin EIR was certified. However, the
2002 SEIR identified the following supplemental mitigation measures that would be applicable
to the proposed project:
SM‐UTS‐1 Require discretionary City review prior to the installation and use of
distributed generators, including emergency generators.
SM‐UTS‐2 Prior to approval of future subdivision maps or Site Development Review
applications (as may be applicable) by the City of Dublin, project developers shall submit
“will serve” letters from PG&E indicating that adequate electricity and natural gas
services are available to serve the proposed development project.
Fallon Village SEIR
No additional impacts or mitigation were identified in the Fallon Village SEIR.
The City of Dublin adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the significant
unavoidable impacts described above, which includes the project.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Wasteful consumption of energy resources
The EDSP EIRs determined that development of the EDSP area would result in a significant and
unavoidable impact due to the consumption of non‐renewable natural resources, including
energy consumption. Mitigation measures are identified in the EDSP EIRs to minimize this
impact. Since preparation of the EDSP EIRs, the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards
contained in Title 24 in the California Code of Regulations have been revised and updated to
include more stringent requirements to prevent the unnecessary consumption of energy. Any
future development on the project site would be required to comply with these standards. In
addition, Chapter 7.94, Green Building, of the City of Dublin Municipal Code encourages
sustainable construction in the following categories: planning and design, energy efficiency,
water efficiency and conservation, materials conservation and resource efficiency and
environmental quality. Furthermore, commercial and industrial land within Fallon Gateway,
east of Fallon Road, is required to incorporate the sustainability practices, as described above.
198
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 78
(b) Conflict with local plan for renewable energy
The proposed project does not contain any features that would conflict with or obstruct a State
or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency and is required to comply with state and
local energy regulations, as described above.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified energy impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified in
the EDSP EIRs there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to energy
resources beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required.
Source(s)
California Energy Commission, 2017. California Gasoline Data, Facts, and Statistics. Website:
www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/transportation_data/gasoline (accessed November 2021).
California Energy Commission, 2018. 2018 Total System Electric Generation. Website:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data‐reports/energy‐almanac/california‐electricity‐
data/2019‐total‐system‐electric‐generation/2018 (accessed November 2021).
California Energy Commission, 2021. Energy Consumption Data Management Service. Electricity
Consumption by County. Website: www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx
(accessed November 2021).
California Energy Commission, 2021. Energy Consumption Data Management Service. Gas
Consumption by County. Website: www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx
(accessed November 2021).
California Public Utilities Commission. 2008. California Long‐Term Energy Efficiency Strategic
Plan. September. Website: cpuc.ca.gov/General.aspx?id=4125 (accessed November
2021).
California Public Utilities Commission. 2019. Renewables Portfolio Standard Program. Website:
cpuc.ca.gov/rps (accessed November 2021).
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
199
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 79
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
PG&E, 2020. Exploring Clean Energy Solutions. June. Website:
https://www.pge.com/en_US/about‐pge/environment/what‐we‐are‐doing/clean‐
energy‐solutions/clean‐energy‐solutions.page?WT.mc_id=Vanity_cleanenergy (accessed
November 2021).
U.S. Department of Transportation, 2017. “Table 4‐23: Average Fuel Efficiency of U.S. Light Duty
Vehicles.” Website:
www.bts.gov/archive/publications/national_transportation_statistics/table_04_23
(accessed November 2021).
U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2019. Natural Gas Explained‐Use of Natural Gas.
Website: eia.gov/energyexplained/index.php?page=natural_gas_use (accessed
November 2021).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
200
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 80
Geology and Soils
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in the
EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated
on the most recent Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the
area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault?
X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic‐related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project,
and potentially result in on‐ or off‐site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18‐1‐B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life
or property?
X
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of wastewater?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
X
201
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 81
Environmental Setting
The project site is located within the Coast Range Geomorphic Province of Northern California.
This province is generally characterized by northwest‐trending mountain ranges and
intervening valleys, which are a reflection of the dominant northwest structural trend of the
bedrock in the region.
The Calaveras Fault separates the lowlands of the Dublin Valley from the hill areas to the west.
The Pleasanton fault zone is located approximately 450 feet west of the project site. Other
active faults in the vicinity of the project site include the San Andreas, Hayward, and Greenville
faults, which are all considered active faults. The project site is not located within a State‐
designated Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone.
The project site straddles a north‐south oriented drainage and extends onto the valley floor
south of the drainage. Elevations range from 580 feet above sea level at the highest points in
the drainage, down to approximately 370 feet above sea level on the valley floor. Published
geologic data identify Pliocene to early Pleistocene Livermore Gravel (Qtlg) deposits along the
hillslopes flanking the drainage in the northern half of the project site. The bottom of the
drainage is mapped as Holocene alluvium (Qa), which extends onto the valley floor in the
southern half of the project site.
Soils in the drainage in the northern half of the project site are mapped as Linne clay loam,
which typically consists of clay loam extending to bedrock at 36 to 40 inches below surface.
Soils on the valley floor in the southern half of the project site include Rincon clay loam,
typically consisting of clay loam, sandy clay, and stratified sandy to clay loam horizons
extending at least 60 inches below surface, and Diablo clay that typically features clay and silty
clay extending at least 60 inches below surface.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified potentially significant impacts related to earthquake ground
shaking, alteration of landforms, expansive soils, landslide and slope stability, and erosion and
sedimentation. With the exception of the primary effects associated with seismic ground
shaking, which was determined to be significant and unavoidable, all other impacts related to
geology and soils would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of the
mitigation measure identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. The following mitigation measures
would apply to the proposed project:
MM 3.6/1.0 The primary effects of ground shaking to structures and infrastructures
can be reduced to a generally acceptable level below failure/loss of life by using modern
seismic design for resistance to lateral forces in construction. Building in accordance
202
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 82
with Uniform Building Code and applicable County and City code requirements should
reduce the potential for structural failure, major structural damage, and loss of life.
However, some structural damage may occur, and it is possible that some
residences/structures and infrastructures will not be safe for occupation/use after a
large earthquake.
MM 3.6/2.0 In relatively flat areas which can be developed with minimal grading (the
southern portion of the Project site and along Tassajara and Cottonwood Creeks):
Locate improvements off (setback from) unstable and potentially unstable
landforms such as landslides, colluvium filled swales, creek banks, and steep hill
slopes.
Remove, stabilize or reconstruct potentially unstable landforms, or
Employ modern design, including appropriate foundation design and applicable
codes and policies, in the construction of improvements that must be located on
potentially unstable landforms or in areas underlain by alluvium with shallow
groundwater levels which could be locally susceptible to liquefaction.
MM 3.6/4.0 Engineered retention structures and surface and subsurface drainage
improvement should be uses as appropriate to improve the stability of sidehill fills and
potentially unstable materials, particularly colluvium not entirely removed by grading.
MM 3.6/5.0 Seismically induced fill settlement can be substantially reduced if fills are
properly designed with keyways and subsurface drainage, and are adequately
compacted (i.e., minimum 90 percent relative compaction as defined by the American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) test method D1557).
MM 3.6/6.0 Design roads, structural foundations, and underground utilities to
accommodate estimated settlement without failure, especially across transitions
between fills and cuts. Potentially unstable stock pond embankments should be
removed in development areas, unless they are reconstructed to current earthquake
design standards.
MM 3.6/7.0 Final design of improvements in the Project site should be made in
conjunction with a design‐level geotechnical investigations and the reports should be
submitted to the City of review prior to issuing any permits. These investigations should
incorporate stability analysis of both natural slopes that could impact planned
improvements, and planned engineered (cut and fill) slopes, assuming saturated
conditions and earthquake shaking. Significant slopes should achieve a minimum factor
of safety against failure of 1.5 for static conditions (where 1.0 is failure) and 1.2 under
203
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 83
design pseudo‐static earthquake loading. A displacement analysis should be performed
for critical slopes to confirm the effectiveness of mitigation measures.
MM 3.6/14.0 The potential impact of expansive soils and rock with respect to Project
improvements can be significantly reduced, or in many cases prevented by the
recognition and characterization of site‐specific conditions, and the formulation of
appropriate design‐level geotechnical investigation conducted for each specific
proposed project.
MM 3.6/15.0 The potential for shrink and swell of expansive soils and rock can be
reduced by controlling moisture and by treatment through measures listed below.
Subsurface drainage alone is not generally effective against the effects of regional
wet/drought cycles. Required measures for a specific project should be based on the
recommendation of the project geotechnical consultant and approved by the City and
include:
Moisture conditioning prior to construction;
Construction of surface and subsurface drainage to control infiltration after
construction;
Lime treatment, which can be used to produce non‐expansive fill.
MM 3.6/16.0 The potential effects of expansive soil can be reduced by appropriate
foundation and pavement design, including those design elements listed below.
Adjustable foundation systems are not generally effective against the effects of
regional wet/drought cycles and are considered undesirable because the
systems require periodic maintenance, and their use should be discouraged.
Appropriate design criteria should be developed by the project geotechnical
consultant and approved by the City:
Founding structural foundations below the zone of seasonal moisture change;
Use of structurally supported floors; and
Removal and replacement with non‐expansive fill beneath structure slabs and
asphaltic concrete.
MM 3.6/27.0 The potential impacts of short‐term construction‐related erosion and
sedimentation can be reduced by timing grading activities to avoid the rainy season as
much as possible, and by implementing one or more of the following interim control
measures, which are designed to prevent concentration of runoff, control runoff
204
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 84
velocity, and trap silt. Required measures for a specific project will be determined by the
City and be a requirement of the grading permit.
Water bars;
Mulch‐and‐net blankets on exposed slopes;
Straw bale dikes;
Temporary culverts and swales;
Sediment traps; and/or
Silt fences.
MM 3.6/28.0 The potential impacts of long‐term erosion and sedimentation can be
reduced by the appropriate design, construction, and continued maintenance of surface
and subsurface drainage of one or more of the following long‐term control measures.
Required measures for a specific project should be based on the
recommendations of the project geotechnical consultants and approved by the
City.
Construction of sediment catch basins at strategic locations to prevent off site
sedimentation from existing and/or potential on‐site sources;
Design and construction of storm sewer systems that incorporate the cumulative
effects of project buildout
Creek bank stabilization and repair of existing gullies;
Revegetation and continued maintenance of graded slopes;
Construction of drainage ditches or cut and fill slopes and/or natural slopes
above developed areas;
Closed downspout collection systems for individual structures;
Design of cut and fill slopes to minimize, as much as possible, natural low
velocity sheet flow runoff; and
Periodic homeowner/landowner maintenance.
2002 SEIR
Geology and soils were addressed in the Initial Study for the 2002 SEIR. No potentially
significant impacts or mitigation measures were identified.
205
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 85
Fallon Village SEIR
The Fallon Village SEIR determined that although the Fallon Village Project proposed a similar
type and density of development analyzed in the Eastern Dublin EIR and 2002 SEIR, due to
proposed changes in grading policies and an increase in the proposed urbanized area, new
impacts related to geology and soils could occur. Potentially significant impacts related to soil
hazards/landslides and increased development were identified. Supplemental mitigation
measures were identified to reduce potential impacts to a less‐than‐significant level. The
following supplemental mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed project:
SM GEO‐1 (potential soil hazards due to alteration in the extent of Project grading).
Prior to construction, design level geotechnical report(s) and corrective grading plan(s)
depicting the locations and depths of landslide repairs, keyways and subsurface drains is
required. The corrective grading plans shall identify appropriate mitigation for graded
slopes. In order to stabilize slopes where unstable geologic materials extend at beyond
proposed development area, geotechnical corrective grading may extend beyond the
limits of improvements and into open space areas. Grading in open space areas shall be
limited to excavations that remove unstable soils and landslide debris and backfilling
excavations with compacted, drained engineer fills. To provide stable construction
slopes, the back slopes of excavated areas may extend up slope and beyond the limits of
mapped slides. The corrective measures used will be typical and configured to conform
at natural slope contours with materials and compaction at the approval of a
geotechnical engineer. This may vary from original grade within repair envelope due to
geotechnical and slope drainage considerations.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Seismic hazards
Potential impacts related to seismic hazards are described below.
Fault Rupture. The project site is not located within or adjacent to an Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zone. Therefore, the project would have no impact related to fault rupture.
Ground Shaking. The project site and the entire San Francisco Bay Area are located in a
seismically active region subject to strong seismic ground shaking. Ground shaking is a general
term referring to all aspects of motion of the earth’s surface resulting from an earthquake and
is normally the major cause of damage in seismic events. The extent of ground‐shaking is
controlled by the magnitude and intensity of the earthquake, distance from the epicenter, and
local geologic conditions. The magnitude of a seismic event is a measure of the energy released
by an earthquake; it is assessed by seismographs that measure the amplitude of seismic waves.
The intensity of an earthquake is a subjective measure of the perceptible effects of a seismic
event at a given point. The Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale is the most commonly used
206
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 86
scale to measure the subjective effects of earthquake intensity. It uses values ranging from I to
XII.
Mapping has been compiled by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) for the likely shaking intensities in the Bay Area
that would have a 10 percent chance of occurring in any 50‐year period. A large earthquake
(magnitude 6.7 or greater) on one of the major active faults in the region would generate
severe (MMI 8) ground shaking at the project site.
The most significant adverse impact associated with strong seismic shaking is potential damage
to structures and improvements. The risk of ground shaking impacts is reduced through
adherence to the design and materials standards set forth in building codes. The City of Dublin
has adopted the 2019 CBC (Title 24, Part 2 of the California Code of Regulations), which
provides for stringent construction requirements on projects in areas of high seismic risk. The
design and construction for the proposed project would be required to conform with, or
exceed, current best standards for earthquake resistant construction in accordance with the
most recent CBC adopted by the City and with the generally accepted standards of geotechnical
practice for seismic design in Northern California, consistent with Mitigation Measure 3.6/1.0,
identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR. In addition, implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.6/7.0,
identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and SM GEO‐1, identified in the Fallon Village SEIR, which
require the preparation and implementation of design level geotechnical report(s) and
corrective grading plan(s), would ensure this impact would be reduced to a less than significant
level.
Liquefaction. Liquefaction is the transformation of loose, fine‐grained sediment to a fluid‐like
state similar to quicksand. This phenomenon occurs due to strong seismic activity and lessens
the soil’s ability to support a structural foundation. The primary factors affecting the possibility
of liquefaction in soil are: (1) intensity and duration of earthquake shaking; (2) soil type and
relative density; (3) overburden pressures; and (4) depth to groundwater. Soil most susceptible
to liquefaction is clean, loose, fine‐grained sands and non‐plastic silts that are saturated.
The California Geological Survey (CGS) has mapped Seismic Hazard Zones that delineate areas
susceptible to liquefaction and/or landslides that require proposed new developments in these
areas to conduct additional investigation to determine the extent and magnitude of potential
ground failure. According to mapping by CGS, the project site is located in an area mapped as a
liquefaction hazard zone. As noted above, Mitigation Measure 3.6/1.0 requires the project
design to comply with the CBC. The CBC provides for stringent construction requirements on
projects in areas of high seismic risk, including liquefaction zones. In addition, implementation
of Mitigation Measure 3.6/7.0, identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and SM GEO‐1, identified in
the Fallon Village SEIR, which require the preparation and implementation of design level
geotechnical report(s) and corrective grading plan(s), would ensure this impact would be
reduced to a less than significant level.
207
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 87
Landslide. As described in the Fallon Village SEIR, the Eastern Dublin area contains documented
landslides ranging from active to dormant and include debris slides and flows, mud flows and
slump rotational slides. The project site is also mapped by the CGS as a landslide zone.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.6/7.0, identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and SM
GEO‐1, identified in the Fallon Village SEIR, which require the preparation and implementation
of design level geotechnical report(s) and corrective grading plan(s), would ensure impacts
related to landslides would be reduced to a less than significant level.
(b) Erosion/topsoil loss
The potential for soil erosion exists during the period of earthwork activities and between the
time when earthwork is completed, and new vegetation is established or hardscape is installed.
Exposed soils could be entrained in stormwater runoff and transported off the project site.
Construction specifications require the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution and Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) prior to any ground disturbance activities as required by the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit (GP) for Construction (Order 2009‐009‐
DWQ). The SWPPP would provide the details of the erosion control measures to be applied on
the project site during the construction period, including Best Management Practices (BMPs)
for erosion control that are recognized by the RWQCB. Additional details regarding the SWPPP
are provided in Section 9, Hydrology and Water Quality. In addition, the proposed project
would be required to comply with Mitigation Measure 3.6/27.0 and Mitigation Measure
3.6/28.0 identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, to reduce short‐ and long‐term erosion and
sedimentation associated with project construction and operation.
(c‐d) Soil stability
Expansive soils are characterized by the potential for shrinking and swelling as the moisture
content of the soil decreases and increases, respectively. Shrink‐swell potential is influenced by
the amount and type of clay minerals present and can be measured by the percent change of
the soil volume. Soils underlying the project site are primarily composed of Linne clay loam (3
to 15 percent slopes and 15 to 30 percent slopes), Rincon clay loam (0 to 3 percent slopes and 3
to 7 percent slopes), and Diablo clay (very deep, 3 to 15 percent slopes), according to the
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web
Soil Survey. All of these soil types are classified as moderately to highly expansive.
The proposed project would be designed and constructed consistent with the most current
earthquake resistance standards for Seismic Zone 4 in the CBC, which includes specifications for
site preparation, such as compaction requirements for foundations. Therefore, the project site
is not anticipated to become unstable as a result of the proposed project, or potentially result
in on‐ or off‐site landslides, liquefaction, lateral spreading or settlement. In addition,
implementation of Mitigation Measures (MM 3.6/4.0, MM 3.6/5.0, MM 3.6/6.0, MM 3.6/7.0,
MM 3.6/14.0, MM 3.6/15.0, MM 3.6/16.0) identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and described
208
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 88
above would reduce potential impacts associated with unstable soils to a less‐than‐significant
level.
(e) Soil capability to support wastewater disposal, including septic
The proposed project would connect to the existing wastewater conveyance system. On‐site
treatment and disposal of wastewater is not proposed for the project; therefore, the proposed
project would have no impacts associated with soils incapable of supporting alternative
wastewater disposal systems.
(f) Paleontological/unique geological resources
No paleontological resources or unique geologic features are known to exist within the project
site and ground disturbance for the proposed project is not expected to extend deep enough to
affect native soils or to impact scientifically important paleontological resources. If such
resources are encountered during ground‐disturbing activities, implementation of Mitigation
Measure 3.9/5.0 as identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR would reduce any potential impacts to
paleontological resources to a less‐than‐significant level.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified geology and soils impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified in
the EDSP EIRs there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to
geology and soils beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required.
Source(s)
California Geological Survey. 2019. California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application. Website:
maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/ (accessed June 21, 2022).
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
209
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 89
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
Metropolitan Transportation Commission and Association of Bay Area Governments. 2018.
Probabilistic Earthquake Shaking Hazard Map. Website: mtc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/
webappviewer/index.html?id=4a6f3f1259df42eab29b35dfcd086fc8 (accessed June 21,
2022).
United States Department of Agriculture. Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web Soil
Survey. Website: websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx (accessed
June 21, 2022).
United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. 1975. Soil Survey of
Alameda County, Western Part. Available online at: www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/
FSE_MANUSCRIPTS/california/CA610/0/alameda.pdf (accessed June 21, 2022).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
210
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 90
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
b) Conflict with applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
X
Previous CEQA Documents
Since certification of the Eastern Dublin EIR, 2002 SEIR, and Fallon Village SEIR, the issue of the
contribution of greenhouse gasses to climate change has become a more prominent issue of
concern as evidenced by passage of Assembly Bill 32 in 2006 and Senate Bill 32 in 2016.
Because the EDSP EIRs have been certified, the determination of whether greenhouse gasses
and climate change need to be analyzed for this project is governed by the law on supplemental
or subsequent EIRs (Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15162
and 15163). Greenhouse gas and climate change is not required to be analyzed under those
standards unless it constitutes “new information of substantial importance, which was not
known and could not have been known at the time the EDSP EIRs were certified as complete”
(CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15162 (a) (3)).
Greenhouse gas and climate change impacts were not analyzed in the EDSP EIRs; however,
these impacts are not new information that was not known or could not have been known at
the time these previous EIRs were certified. The issue of climate change and greenhouse gasses
was widely known prior to the certification of these EIRs. The United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change was established in 1992. The regulation of greenhouse gas
emissions to reduce climate change impacts was extensively debated and analyzed throughout
the early 1990s. The studies and analyses of this issue resulted in the adoption of the Kyoto
Protocol in 1997.
Conclusion
Therefore, the impact of greenhouse gases on climate change was known at the time of the
certification of the EDSP EIRs. Under CEQA standards, it is not new information that requires
211
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 91
analysis in a supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration. No supplemental environmental
analysis of the project's impacts on this issue is required under CEQA.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a‐b) Generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions or conflict with GHG plans or regulations
As discussed above, no additional environmental analysis is required under CEQA Section 21166
and CEQA Guidelines section 15162.
Source(s)
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
212
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 92
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in the
EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe
Impact than
Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within
¼ mile of an existing or proposed school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for
people residing or working in the project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
X
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly,
to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
X
213
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 93
Environmental Setting
The project site consists primarily of undeveloped grazing ranchland and open space, but also
includes some rural residential development, including several houses, a barn and several
sheds, located in the southern portion of the property and a house located in the northwestern
portion of the property. The farm complex in the southern portion of the property includes
several structures, including the barn, shed and house that were constructed circa 1958. A
second house in this area was constructed circa 1965.
According to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared for the East Dublin
Properties, several storage tanks were observed on the project site, associated with the
residence and the former use of the site as Branaugh Excavating. In addition, unlabeled 55‐
gallon drums were observed on the property located within the Golden State Landscaping
Company’s storage and maintenance yard. Numerous potentially hazardous materials and
petroleum‐based product containers were observed across the property. The project site
contains four existing septic systems and several wells. In addition, due to the age of the
existing structures on the project site, the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment determined
that it is conceivable that asbestos‐ containing materials (ACMs) and/or lead‐containing
materials (e.g., lead‐based paint [LBP]) may be present within the structures.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR did not include a discussion of hazards and hazardous materials as an
identified environmental topic area; however, the Eastern Dublin EIR did discuss the potential
for hazardous materials releases as part of the analysis of solid waste disposal and fire
protection. Mitigation measures identified for solid waste disposal are included in Section 18,
Utilities and Service Systems. The Eastern Dublin EIR did identify potentially significant impacts
related to wildfire and fire hazards. Mitigation measures were identified to reduce potential
impacts to a less‐than‐significant level. The following mitigation measures would apply to the
proposed project:
MM 3.5/9.0 Incorporate DRFA recommendations on project design related to access,
water pressure, fire safety and prevention into the requirements for development
approval. Required that the following DRFA design standards are incorporated where
appropriate:
Use of non‐combustible roof materials in all new construction.
Available capacity of 1,000 gallons per minute (gpm) at 20 pounds per square
inch (PSI) fire flow from project fire hydrants on public water mains. For
groupings of one‐family and small two‐family dwellings not exceeding two
214
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 94
stories in height, the fire flow requirements are a minimum of 1,000 gpm. Fire
flow requirements for all other buildings will be calculated based on building
size, type of construction, and location.
A buffer zone along the backs of homes which are contiguous with the wildland
are. This buffer zone is to be landscaped with irrigated (wet banding) or
equivalent fire‐resistive vegetation.
Compliance with DRFA minimum road widths, maximum street slopes, parking
recommendations, and secondary access road requirements.
Require residential structures outside the DRFA’s established response time and
zone to include fire alarm systems and sprinklers.
2002 SEIR
Hazards and hazardous materials were addressed in the Initial Study for the 2002 SEIR. No
potentially significant impacts or mitigation measures were identified.
Fallon Village SEIR
The Fallon Village SEIR determined that because the Fallon Village Project proposed several
land uses changes, including converting the former "Future Study Area" land use designation to
non‐residential land uses, new impacts to related to hazards and hazardous materials could
occur. Potentially significant impacts were identified including the potential for hazards from
release of hazardous materials into the atmosphere from demolition of existing buildings and
remediation of potentially contaminated sites. Supplemental mitigation measures were
identified to reduce potential impacts to a less‐than‐significant level. The following
supplemental mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed project:
SM‐HAZ‐1. Prior to the demolition of any structures identified in the Environmental Site
Assessments as potentially containing ACM's or lead‐based paints, Project developer(s)
shall undertake comprehensive asbestos and LBP surveys of those structures and
implement appropriate ACM and LBP handling and disposal methods based on those
surveys. As recommended in the ENGEO 2005 report, an environmental professional
shall be present during demolition and pre‐grading activities to inspect for potential
environmental contaminants.
SM HAZ‐2 (potential for soil/groundwater contamination and exposure hazards from
existing hazardous materials). As identified in the Environmental Site Assessments for
each property, all observed hazardous or potentially hazardous materials and potential
containers of those materials shall be removed from the properties by licensed waste
contractors prior to building demolition. If no building demolition is required, this
removal shall be completed prior to any grading activities on an individual site. The
215
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 95
contents of potential hazardous material containers shall be identified and disposed of
accordingly, including specific methods to preclude airborne release of materials. All
dumped scrap and miscellaneous material and equipment shall be removed from the
site prior to any on‐site development activities. If recommended in the ESA (i.e.,
Mandeville, Anderson, and Fallon Enterprises properties), an environmental
professional shall view the property during demolition and pre‐grading activities to
ensure compliance with this measure.
SM‐HAZ‐3a (potential for soil/groundwater contamination from subsurface
contamination). A Phase II ESA shall be conducted for the former gas station site north
and west of Croak Road to obtain information with regard to operation, demolition, and
removal of the former gasoline service station in order to better assess the likelihood of
this use having a detrimental impact to soils and water quality at the EBJ Partners site
and adjacent sites. This Assessment shall be completed and approved by the Alameda
County Fire Department prior to any demolition or site grading, whichever is first.
Additionally, a limited subsurface investigation shall be conducted for the EBJ parcel and
adjacent areas of the Anderson and Chen/Tseng properties to better assess whether
impacts to soil and shallow groundwater have resulted from the former gas station.
SM‐HAZ 3b (potential for soil/groundwater contamination from subsurface
contamination). All identified potentially contaminated areas on the Jordan Ranch site
shall be remediated as identified in the Phase I ESA. In addition, as identified in the
Phase II ESA, the Jordan Ranch owner shall inform the Alameda County Environmental
Health Services Department (ACEHSD) of an unauthorized release of fuel hydrocarbons
as diesel and gasoline in the vicinity of the removed underground fuel tank at the site.
The property shall be subject to further subsurface investigations to evaluate the lateral
and horizontal extent of the contamination, and to evaluate whether ground water has
been affected, and shall be remediated as directed by the ACEHSD. Further site
assessment, including soil and groundwater sampling and testing, shall be conducted to
evaluate the horizontal and lateral extent of impact to underlying soils and
groundwater. A limited Phase II ESA, including soil and groundwater sampling, shall be
conducted to evaluate the potential impact on underlying soils and groundwater within
the area of the diesel storage drums, weed killer, and other storage containers in Barn 2,
as well as in the vicinity of the stored fuel containers and farm equipment in Barn 1.
During removal of hazardous material contaminant sources at the Jordan Ranch site, a
qualified environmental assessor shall be present to observe the removal and conditions
exposed during that removal. After the removal of these sources from the site, and any
excavation to remove contaminated soil, additional soil sampling and laboratory testing
shall be conducted to confirm that the contaminated materials have been removed. If
potentially hazardous substances are identified, remediation plan(s) shall be prepared
216
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 96
by a qualified consulting and approved by an appropriate oversight agency. A worker
safety plan shall be included in all remediation plans.
SM‐HAZ 3c (potential for soil/groundwater contamination from subsurface
contamination). A Phase II ESA shall be conducted for the portion of the Fallon
Enterprises property where the buried household garbage dump is located. The
assessment shall include soil sampling and testing to evaluate the potential impact to
underlying soils. The assessment shall be completed and approved by the Alameda
County Fire Department prior to site grading operations. If potentially hazardous
substances are identified in the Phase II ESA, remediation plan(s) shall be prepared by a
qualified consulting and approved by an appropriate oversight agency. A worker safety
plan shall be included in all remediation plans.
SM‐HAZ 3d (potential for soil/groundwater contamination from subsurface
contamination). A Phase II ESA shall be conducted for the portion of the Anderson
property used by Pleasanton Trucking and Materials. That assessment shall include soil
sampling and groundwater testing to evaluate the potential impact to underlying soils. If
potentially hazardous substances are identified in the Phase II ESA, remediation plan(s)
shall be prepared by a qualified consulting and approved by an appropriate oversight
agency. A worker safety plan shall be included in all remediation plans.
SM‐HAZ 3e (potential for soil/groundwater contamination from subsurface
contamination). A Phase II ESA shall be conducted for the portion of the Branaugh
properties used by Branaugh Excavating, Branaugh Transportation, and the Golden
State/Executive Landscaping Companies. That assessment shall include soil sampling
and groundwater testing to evaluate the potential impact to underlying soils. If
potentially hazardous substances are identified in the Phase II ESA, remediation plan(s)
shall be prepared by a qualified consulting and approved by an appropriate oversight
agency. A worker safety plan shall be included in all remediation plans.
SM‐HAZ 3f (potential for soil/groundwater contamination from subsurface
contamination). Upon development of each site, all existing wells shall be abandoned
under permit from Zone 7 Water Agency and in accordance with all applicable
regulations.
SM‐HAZ 3g (potential for soil/groundwater contamination from subsurface
contamination). When, or prior to, the existing structures are demolished, all existing
septic systems and associated leach fields shall be pumped out and removed under
permit from the Alameda County Health Department.
217
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 97
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Exposure to hazardous materials, upset/accident, near school, hazardous materials list
The proposed project would result in the construction of residential and industrial uses.
Residential uses typically do not involve transport, use, or disposal of significant quantities of
hazardous materials. However, the proposed industrial park could include manufacturing,
processing, assembly, fabrication, research and development, printing, warehouse and
distribution, and wholesale and heavy commercial uses, or other uses permitted under the
City’s IP designation that may involve the use, handling, and storage of commercially available
hazardous materials associated with building maintenance, on‐site vehicle use, and
landscaping. These materials would likely include fuels, paints, flammable liquids, pesticides,
and herbicides. However, hazardous materials stored and used at the site would be required to
be managed in accordance with applicable local, State, and federal hazardous materials
regulations that would reduce risks associated with leakage, explosions, fires, or the escape of
harmful gases. The proposed project would generate quantities of hazardous materials similar
in nature, type, and volume to the uses anticipated to be used as part of other foreseeable
residential and industrial development projects anticipated in the EDSP EIRs.
(b) Upset/accident
The Fallon Village SEIR identified potentially significant impacts related to the potential for an
accidental release of hazardous materials associated with historic uses on the project site,
including potential ACM and lead‐based paint within the existing site structures, existing septic
systems and wells, and existing hazardous materials containers (e.g., storage tanks, drums)
present on the project site. However, the Fallon Village SEIR determined that implementation
of Supplemental Mitigation Measures SM‐HAZ‐1, SM‐HAZ‐2, SM‐HAZ‐3e, SM‐HAZ‐3f, and SM‐
HAZ‐3g would reduce this impact to a less‐than‐significant level through pre‐construction
environmental investigations for hazardous materials, appropriate removal of hazardous
materials containers and septic systems, appropriate abandonment of existing wells, and
implementation of appropriate ACM and LBP handling and disposal methods. Conditions on the
project site have not substantially changed since the certification of the Fallon Village SEIR.
During construction, hazardous materials such as fuel, lubricants, paint, sealants, and adhesives
would be transported and used at the project site. Management of these materials at the
project site would be subject to the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit. Compliance with the Construction
General Permit would require preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) designed to reduce the risk of spills or leaks from reaching the
environment. The SWPPP would also include a Spill Response Plan to address minor spills of
hazardous materials. Compliance with SWPPP requirements would ensure that potential
significant hazards associated with routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials
during and after construction would be less than significant.
218
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 98
(c) Near school
The nearest schools to the project site are Cottonwood Creek K‐8 School, located approximately
0.75 mile to the northwest, and Jose Maria Amador Elementary School, located approximately
1.1 mile to the northwest. No schools are located within 0.25 mile of the project site. As
described in Section 8.b, the proposed project would be required to implement Supplemental
Mitigation Measures SM‐HAZ‐1, SM‐HAZ‐2, SM‐HAZ‐3e, SM‐HAZ‐3f, and SM‐HAZ‐3g, which
require pre‐construction environmental investigations for hazardous materials, appropriate
removal of hazardous materials containers and septic systems, appropriate abandonment of
existing wells, and implementation of appropriate ACM and LBP handling and disposal
methods.
(d) Hazardous materials list
Government Code Section 65962.5 states that the California Department of Toxic Substances
shall compile and maintain annually a list of hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective
action as part of the Health and Safety Code. This list is commonly referred to as the Cortese
List. The project site is not located on the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Leaking
Underground Tank Cleanup Site (LUST) or any other Cleanup Program Sites (formerly known as
spills, leaks, investigations, and cleanups or SLIC). These two components comprise the State
Cortese List of known hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5.
(e) Proximity to a public airport
The Livermore Municipal Airport, a public utility airport operated by the City of Livermore, is
located approximately 0.3‐mile south of I‐580, just south and east of the project site. The entire
project site is located within the Airport Influence Area (AIA) and the southern portion of the
site, designated for industrial park use is located within the Airport Protection Area (APA). The
site is located within Safety Zone 6, as designated in the Livermore Municipal ALUCP. New
residential land use designations, or the intensification of existing residential land uses, are
prohibited within the APA. Nonresidential land uses may be allowed within the APA provided
they are consistent with the criteria set forth in the ALUCP. Per Table 3‐2, Safety Compatibility
Criteria in the ALUCP, manufacturing, research and development and industrial uses are
permitted in Safety Zone 6.
The project site is also located within the City’s Airport Overlay Zoning District, which is
coterminous with the AIA, as established by the Livermore Municipal Airport ALCUP. All
permitted and conditionally permitted uses set forth in a PD Zoning District that was adopted
and in effect prior to August 2012 are considered Existing Land Uses consistent with the ALUCP
and do not require review by the ALUC, unless changes to the existing land use results in an
increase of non‐conformity with ALUCP policies or the change would increase the intensity or
density of use.
219
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 99
As outlined in the project description, the project proposes a 0.40 floor area ratio (FAR) for the
IP portion of the project site, which is an increase from the maximum 0.35 FAR allowed in the
EDSP and Fallon Village Stage 1 PD and an increase from the maximum 0.28 FAR evaluated
under the EDSP EIRs. Per the General Plan, the 0.40 FAR is limited to warehousing uses. All
other uses are limited to the maximum FAR of 0.35.
Therefore, the proposed project would not be an incompatible land use, would not add
structures of a height such that it would create a hazard or obstruction, and would not result in
the addition of a characteristic that would create a hazard to air navigation.
(f) Impair implementation of an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan
The Tri‐Valley Local Hazard Mitigation Plan was developed in compliance with State
requirements and also meets the requirements of the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) as the City’s local hazard mitigation plan. The Tri‐Valley Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
provides a uniform hazard mitigation strategy for the Tri‐Valley area, addressing a range of
hazards including, but not limited to, earthquakes, floods and wildland fire. The City of Dublin
also has an adopted Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan and a Local Hazard
Mitigation Plan to assess hazards and mitigate risks prior to a disaster event.
The proposed project would result in the subdivision of the 40.2‐acre site into four parcels to
accommodate proposed residential and industrial development. The proposed project would
be designed to provide adequate access to the site for fire/police/emergency medical service
personnel in the event of an emergency at the project site. In the event of an emergency on the
site, employees and residents could exit the site via Croak Road via the proposed Central
Parkway Extension and the future Dublin Boulevard Extension. Once off the project site,
employees and residents could access I‐580 to exit the City and region. The proposed project
would not interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
Because the proposed project would not substantially alter or block the adjacent roadways, the
proposed project would not be expected to impair the function of nearby emergency
evacuation routes.
(g) Expose people or structures to wildland fires
A wildland fire is a fire occurring in a suburban or rural area which contains uncultivated land,
timber, range, brush, or grasslands. Wildland fires are primarily a concern in areas where there
is a mix of developed and undeveloped lands. The project site is not identified as an area of
moderate, high, or very high fire hazard severity for the Local Responsibility Area. It is identified
as an area of moderate fire hazard severity for the State Responsibility Area, as mapped by the
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). The proposed project would
be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the CBC, California Fire Code, and the
City’s Wildfire Management Plan. In addition, consistent with the City’s entitlement process
and Mitigation Measure 3.5/9.0 in the Eastern Dublin EIR, project plans would be reviewed by
220
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 100
the Alameda County Fire Department to ensure that required fire protection elements are
incorporated into final building plans, including provision of adequate water supply and
pressure, and use of appropriate landscape and building materials.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified hazards and hazardous materials impacts, nor result in new
significant impacts.
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified in
the EDSP EIRs there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to
hazards and hazardous materials beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs,
and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required.
Source(s)
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Dublin, City of. 2022. City of Dublin Municipal Code. Chapter 8.35 Airport Overlay Zoning
District.
ENGEO, 2005. Phase One Environmental Site Assessment, East Dublin Properties, Dublin,
California. May 27.
ESA, 2012. Livermore Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. August.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
221
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 101
Hydrology and Water Quality
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in the
EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP
EIRs
9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface
or groundwater quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
X
(i). Result in substantial erosion or siltation on‐ or off‐
site;
X
(ii). Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on‐
or offsite;
X
(iii). Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or
X
(iv). Impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation?
X
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
X
222
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 102
Environmental Setting
The project site is located within the Alameda Creek watershed which drains to the San
Francisco Bay. The 660‐square‐mile Alameda Creek watershed is the largest watershed in the
Bay Area, extending from Mount Hamilton north to Mount Diablo, east to the Altamont Hills
and west to San Francisco Bay. The project site is located within the jurisdiction of Zone 7 of the
Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Zone 7). The northern portion
of the site is hilly and transitions to relatively flat areas immediately adjacent to the I‐580
freeway.
The project site is located within the San Francisco Bay Hydrologic Region. The San Francisco
Bay RWQCB Basin Plan identifies the Project as being within the Livermore Valley groundwater
basin (Basin ID 2‐10). As defined in DWR Bulletin 118 Update 2003 (California’s Groundwater),
the Livermore Valley Groundwater Basin (DWR Basin 2‐10) extends from the Pleasanton Ridge
east to the Altamont Hills and from the Livermore Uplands north to the Tassajara Uplands. The
Geotechnical Update (ENGEO, 2004) prepared for the EDPO Project indicates that groundwater
depths range from 14 to 40 feet. The Water Quality Report prepared for the Eastern Dublin
Extension Project confirms that groundwater levels are 20 to 25 feet below grade with higher
groundwater levels (10 feet below grade) occurring in the area northwest of the existing I‐
580/Fallon Road interchange. Shallower groundwater may be present along major drainages, in
colluvium‐filled swales, and associated with existing stock ponds.
As described in Section 4, Biological Resources, a single ephemeral drainage exists near the
center of the project site and runs parallel to the fence that bounds the property to the west.
This segment of ephemeral drainage is rock‐lined and is fed by a culvert. This segment of
ephemeral stream is approximately 100 feet long and 10 feet wide and is connected at the
downstream end by a culvert which conveys flows under a road to a seasonal wetland at its
downstream end.
Based on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) published by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) [06001C0329G, dated August 3, 2009], the project site is located
within a 500‐year flood plain.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified potentially significant impacts related to the overdraft of
potential flooding, reduced groundwater recharge, and non‐point sources of pollution.
Mitigation measures were identified to reduce potential impacts to a less‐than‐significant level.
The following mitigation measures would apply to the proposed project:
223
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 103
MM 3.5/44.0 Require drainage facilities that will minimize any increased potential or
erosion or flooding.
MM 3.5/45.0 Require channel improvements consisting of natural creek bottoms and
side slopes with natural vegetation where possible to meet Policy 9.7 above.
MM 3.5/46.0 Storm Drainage Master Plan. Require a Master Drainage Plan be
prepared for each development application prior to development approval. The plan
shall include:
Hydrologic studies of entire related upstream watersheds.
Phase approach and system modeling.
Documentation of existing conditions.
Design‐level analysis of the impacts of proposed development of the existing
creek channels and watershed areas.
Detailed analysis of effects of development on water quality of surface runoff.
Detailed drainage design plans for each phase of the proposed project.
Design features to minimize runoff flows within existing creeks/channels in order
to alleviate potential erosion impacts and maintain riparian vegetation.
MM 3.5/47.0 Flood Control. Require development in the Planning Area to provide
facilities to alleviate potential downstream flooding due to project development. These
facilities shall include:
Retention/detention facilities as appropriate to control peak runoff discharge
rates.
Energy dissipators at discharge locations to prevent channel erosion, as per Zone
7 guidelines. Energy dissipators should be designed to minimize adverse effects
on biological resources and the visual environment; in particular, widespread use
of riprap should be avoided.
MM 3.5/49.0 Plan facilities and select management practices in the Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan EIR area that protect and enhance water quality.
MM 3.5/50.0 Zone 7 supports ongoing groundwater recharge program from the
Central Basin.
MM 3.5/51.0 Develop community‐based programs to educate local residents and
businesses on methods to reduce non‐point sources of pollution. Coordinate such
programs with current Alameda County programs. Such programs include:
224
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 104
Increased availability of liquid recycling centers (i.e., oil, greases, etc.) to reduce
potential for dumping into storm drains.
Programs that educate the public that catch basins and storm drains flow to
creeks, to potable groundwater basins, and to the San Francisco Bay, including a
potential program to paint labels at each catch basin and storm drain to alert
people to these facts.
2002 SEIR
Hydrology and water quality were addressed in the Initial Study for the 2002 SEIR. No
potentially significant impacts or mitigation measures were identified.
Fallon Village SEIR
The Fallon Village SEIR identified two potentially significant impacts associated with an increase
in impervious surfaces, resulting in increased stormwater runoff, which may not comply with
the most recent surface water quality standards and hydromodification standards and, as a
result, could add pollutants to nearby bodies of water. Supplemental mitigation measures were
identified to reduce potential impacts to a less‐than‐significant level. The following
supplemental mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed project:
SM‐ SD‐1 (changed surface water quality standards). The Stage 1 Development Plan
shall require that the water quality source control and hydrologic design
recommendations of the report prepared by ENGEO, Inc. (February 28, 2005) be
implemented for all individual development projects within the Project area.
SM‐ SD‐2 (changed surface water quality hydromodification standards). Development
within the Project area shall comply with the hydromodification provisions of the
Alameda County Clean Water Program as approved by the RWQCB and administered by
the City of Dublin. If no Alameda County Clean Water Program permit has been adopted
at the time individual development proposals are approved by the City the applicant
may be required to submit hydrology and hydrologic analyses to identify specific
increases in storm water runoff into downstream receiving waters. Such reports will be
reviewed by both the City of Dublin and Zone 7 Water Agency. Development projects
will also be required to pay the then‐current Zone 7 Special Drainage Area fee (SDA7‐1)
in effect at the time of development.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Violate water quality or waste discharge requirements or degrade surface or groundwater
quality
Construction activities associated with the proposed project would cause disturbance of soil
during excavation work, which could adversely impact water quality. Contaminants from
225
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 105
construction vehicles and equipment and sediment from soil erosion could increase the
pollutant load in runoff being transported to receiving water during development. Although
surface runoff from the site would likely decrease with the proposed project (due to proposed
stormwater treatment measures), runoff from the proposed landscaped areas may contain
residual pesticides and nutrients (associated with landscaping) and sediment and trace metals
(associated with atmospheric deposition) during operation of the project. Implementation of
mitigation measures Mitigation Measure 3.6/27.0 and Mitigation Measure 3.6/28.0, as
described in Section 6, Geology and Soils, would ensure that potential water quality impacts
associated with project construction are reduced to a less‐than‐significant level. The project
would be required to comply with these mitigation measures.
In addition, because the project would result in the disturbance of greater than one acre of soil,
project implementation is required to comply with the Construction General Permit, which
requires preparation of a SWPPP and implementation of BMPs to reduce the discharge of
construction‐related stormwater pollutants. A SWPPP must include a detailed description of
controls to reduce pollutants and outline maintenance and inspection procedures. Typical
sediment and erosion BMPs include protecting storm drain inlets, establishing and maintaining
construction exits and perimeter controls to avoid tracking sediment off‐site onto adjacent
roadways. A SWPPP also defines proper building material staging and storage areas, paint and
concrete washout areas, describes proper equipment/vehicle fueling and maintenance
practices, measures to control equipment/vehicle washing and allowable non‐stormwater
discharges, and includes a spill prevention and response plan. Compliance with the
requirements of the Construction General Permit and implementation of mitigation measures
Mitigation Measure 3.6/27.0 and Mitigation Measure 3.6/28.0 ensure that the proposed
project would result in less‐than‐significant impacts to water quality during construction.
As the site is currently largely undeveloped, the proposed project would increase the total
amount of impervious surface on the project site. The increase in impervious surface could
result in increased stormwater runoff (both flow rate and volume) from the project site relative
to pre‐project conditions, which may result in hydromodification impacts (i.e., increased
potential for erosion of creek beds and banks, silt pollution generation, or other adverse
impacts on beneficial uses due to increased erosive force). Hydromodification is the alteration
of the natural flow of water through a landscape, and often takes the form of creek channel
erosion. Hydromodification is one of the leading sources of impairment in streams, lakes, and
estuaries.
The proposed project is subject to the conditions of the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP)
(Order No. R2‐2022‐0018 NPDES Permit No. CAS612008). The C.3 Stormwater Technical
Guidance updated in February 2021 as per the Alameda County Clean Water Program, outlines
low impact development (LID) provisions that the MRP permit holders can use during planning
of development activities to manage and reduce occurrences of stormwater runoff pollutant
226
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 106
discharges. These low impact development methods aim to preserve existing natural
landscapes to minimize imperviousness and water quality impacts.
The proposed project would be considered a “regulated project” under the MRP. Provision C.3
of the MRP requires new development and redevelopment projects that would replace more
than 5,000 square feet of existing impervious surfaces to include post‐construction stormwater
control in project designs, including measures for site design, source control, runoff reduction,
stormwater treatment, and baseline hydromodification management. Under the C.3
requirements, the preparation and submittal of a Stormwater Control Plan (SCP) would be
required for the project site. The purpose of a SCP is to detail the design elements and
implementation measures necessary to meet the post‐construction stormwater control
requirements of the MRP. In particular, SCPs must include LID design measures, which reduce
water quality impacts by preserving and recreating natural landscape features, minimizing
imperviousness, and using stormwater as a resource, rather than a waste product. The
proposed project would also be required to prepare a Stormwater Facility Operation and
Maintenance Plan to ensure that stormwater control measures are inspected, maintained, and
funded for the life of the project. Compliance with the C.3 requirements of the MRP would
ensure that operation‐period impacts to water quality would be less than significant.
As outlined in the project description, the proposed project would include approximately
43,151 square feet of bioretention space on the project site that would be used for stormwater
quality control. The proposed project would include multiple bioretention basins and storm
drains throughout the project site, which would connect to downstream hydromodification
facilities prior to discharging to existing/proposed storm drain pipes. Hydromodification vaults
would be included on‐site to provide flow duration controls for the project.
In addition, Mitigation Measure 3.5/46.0, identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, which requires
preparation of a storm drainage plan for the proposed project, and Mitigation Measure SM‐SD‐
2, identified in the Fallon Village SEIR, which requires compliance with Alameda County C.3
requirements, would ensure that potential impacts associated with stormwater runoff would
be reduced to a less‐than‐significant level.
(b) Substantially decrease or interfere with groundwater supplies
Although the proposed project would result in a net increase in impervious surface coverage
compared to the existing condition, the proposed project would include the use of LID,
including multiple bioretention basins and storm drains throughout the site that would retain
and clean stormwater on‐site before discharging it into the municipal stormwater system,
consistent with Provision C.3 of the MRP.
The proposed project would connect to the existing water lines within the vicinity of the project
site and would not require the use of groundwater. Due to the depth of groundwater and the
227
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 107
shallow excavations required for project construction, dewatering is not anticipated during
construction activities.
(c) Substantially alter existing drainage patterns re: erosion/siltation, re: flooding, or degrade
water quality
The proposed project would create new landscaped areas and impermeable pavement
surfaces, which would alter the existing drainage pattern of the project site. However, as
discussed above, the proposed project would be required to comply with the C.3 requirements
of the MRP, standard City development requirements related to stormwater, and mitigation
measures identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and Fallon Village SEIR, including Mitigation
Measure 3.5/47.0, which requires preparation of a flood control plan for the proposed project.
As noted in Section 8.b and 9.a, the proposed project would be required to prepare a SWPPP as
required by the Construction General Permit and consistent with Mitigation Measure 3.6/27.0
and Mitigation Measure 3.6/28.0, identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR, to reduce short‐ and
long‐term erosion and sedimentation associated with project construction and operation.
Required compliance with applicable regulations, implementation of City policies, and the
mitigation measures identified in the EDSP EIRs, would reduce potential impacts of the project
related to changes in drainage patterns to a less‐than‐significant level.
(d) Flood hazard, seiche, or tsunami
As described above, the project site is not located within a flood hazard area mapped by FEMA,
or a mapped tsunami inundation area for Alameda County, and no seismically induced seiche
waves have ever been documented in the San Francisco Bay area. Additionally, the proposed
project would implement various design features to ensure contaminants would be contained.
(e) Water Quality
As noted above, the proposed project would implement various design features to ensure the
proposed project would have a less‐than‐significant impact related to water quality, including
multiple bioretention basins and storm drains throughout the site that would retain and clean
stormwater on‐site before discharging it into the municipal stormwater system, consistent with
Provision C.3 of the MRP. Therefore, the proposed project would not interfere with
groundwater recharge in the vicinity of the project site.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified hydrology and water quality impacts, nor result in new significant
impacts.
228
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 108
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified in
the EDSP EIRs there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to
hydrology and water quality resources beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP
EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required.
Source(s)
California, State of. 2019. California Official Tsunami Inundation Maps. Website:
www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps (accessed June 21, 2022).
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2021. FEMA Flood Map Service Center (map).
Website:
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=1881%20Collier%20Canyon%20Roa
d%2C%20Dublin%2C%20CA#searchresultsanchor (accessed June 21, 2022).
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
229
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 109
Land Use and Planning
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP
EIRs
10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? X
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
X
Environmental Setting
The project site consists primarily of undeveloped grazing ranchland and open space, but also
includes some rural residential development in the northwest and southern portion. Existing
structures on the project site include several houses, a barn and several sheds, located in the
southern portion of the property and a house located in the northwestern portion of the
property.
The project site has General Plan land use designations of Medium Density Residential (9.8
acres) and Industrial Park (30.29 acres). The Medium Density Residential designation allows
attached residential units and typically includes detached, zero‐lot line, duplex, townhouse, and
garden apartment development at a density of 6.1 to 14.0 units per gross residential acre.
The Industrial Park designation allows a wide variety of minimum‐impact, light industrial uses.
Uses allowed within this designation include, but are not limited to, the following:
manufacturing, processing, assembly, fabrication, research and development, printing,
warehouse and distribution, and wholesale and heavy commercial uses provided the activities
do not have significant external effects in the form of noise, dust, glare, or odor. Uses requiring
outdoor storage and service yards are permitted in this designation as long as they do not have
adverse effects on surrounding uses. A maximum FAR of 0.35 and an employee density of 590
square feet per employee are allowed within the Industrial Park designation.
The project site is zoned Planned Development (PD) Ordinance No. 32‐05. The intent of the PD
zoning district is to create a more desirable use of the land, a more coherent and coordinated
development, and a better physical environment than would otherwise be possible under a
single zoning district or combination of zoning districts. A PD district is established through an
adopted Development Plan, which establishes regulations for the use, development,
improvement, and maintenance of the property within the PD district and consists of two
230
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 110
stages. The project site is governed by the Stage 1 Development Plan adopted as part of the
Fallon Village Project.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified less than significant impacts related to the substantial
alteration to existing land use, on‐site project land use conflicts, conversion of non‐urban lands,
potential conflicts with land uses to the south, east and north. A potentially significant impact
was identified related to potential conflicts with land uses to the west, which was determined
to be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.1/1.0, which requires
the City to coordinate with the Army regarding future development proposals in the vicinity of
the U.S. Army’s Parks Reserve Forces Training Area (Camp Parks RFTA). This mitigation measure
does not apply to the proposed project.
2002 SEIR
Land use and planning was addressed in the Initial Study for the 2002 SEIR. No potentially
significant impacts or mitigation measures were identified.
Fallon Village SEIR
The Fallon Village SEIR determined that the expansion of the EDSP planning boundary and the
designation of land uses resulting from the Fallon Village project would be consistent with the
City’s General Plan. No supplemental impacts related to land use and planning were identified.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Physically divide an established community
The physical division of an established community typically refers to the construction of a
feature (such as an interstate highway or railroad tracks) or removal of a means of access (such
as a local road or bridge) that would impair mobility within an existing community, or between
a community and outlying areas. For instance, the construction of an interstate highway
through an existing community may constrain travel from one side of the community to
another; similarly, such construction may also impair travel to areas outside of the community.
The proposed project would subdivide the 40.2‐acre site into four parcels to accommodate
proposed residential and industrial development. Primary access into the residential
neighborhood would be via the proposed extension of Central Parkway to the north, within the
proposed East Ranch (Croak property) development. Primary access to the IP parcels would be
provided by the future Dublin Boulevard extension, which is being planned and implemented by
the City of Dublin. The proposed project would not result in the realignment or closure of any
231
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 111
existing roads. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the physical division of an
established community or adversely affect the continuity of land uses in the vicinity.
(b) Conflict with land use plan, policy, or regulation
The proposed project would subdivide the 40.2‐acre site into four parcels to accommodate
proposed residential and industrial development. The proposed project would be consistent
with the Medium Density Residential land use designation in that number and type of
residential units proposed is consistent with the density allowed under the City of Dublin
General Plan, the EDSP, and subsequent planning entitlements. In addition, the proposed
residential development would be compatible with the mix and intensity of uses located to the
north of the project site, which generally consist of residential and public uses associated with
the East Ranch development approved in December 2021.
As outlined in the project description, the project proposes a 0.40 floor area ratio (FAR) for the
IP portion of the project site, which is an increase from the maximum 0.35FAR allowed in the
Fallon Village Stage 1 PD approval and an increase from the maximum 0.28 FAR evaluated
under the EDSP EIRs. The EDSP provides discretion to the City Council to approve a higher FAR if
the proposed uses meet one or more of the following criteria:
Unique project characteristics which result in reduced impacts relative to other uses
in the same area (e.g., lower traffic generation);
Unique project building requirements (e.g., warehouse uses that have large land
coverage requirements but low employment densities); or
Extraordinary benefits to the City.
As part of the project entitlements and consistent with the EDSP, the City may grant a Planned
Development Rezone to allow for the increased FAR. The proposed project would not conflict
with any applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified land use and planning impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
There are no applicable regulatory requirements or mitigation measures identified in the EDSP
EIRs that are applicable to land use and planning and there would be no new or substantially
more severe significant impacts to land use and planning beyond what has been analyzed in the
previous EDSP EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore,
no further environmental review is required.
232
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 112
Source(s)
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
233
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 113
Mineral Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in the
EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally‐important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
X
Environmental Setting
Minerals are any naturally occurring chemical element or compound, or groups of elements and
compounds, formed from inorganic processes and organic substances including, but not limited
to, coal, peat and oil‐bearing rock, but excluding geothermal resources, natural gas and
petroleum. Rock, sand, gravel and earth are also considered minerals by the Department of
Conservation when extracted by surface mining operations.
Neither the State Geologist nor the California Department of Mines and Geology (CDMG) have
classified any areas in the City as containing mineral deposits that are either of Statewide
significance or the significance of which requires further evaluation.
Previous CEQA Documents
None of the EDSP EIRs indicate that significant mineral resource deposits exist on the project
site. Therefore, no impacts related to mineral resources were identified.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a‐b) Loss of known or identified mineral resource
The project site does not have any mineral extraction areas so there would be no new or
substantially more severe impacts to mineral resources. The proposed project would not result
in the loss of available of a known mineral resource that would be of value of the region and
residents of the state or the loss of availability of any known locally important mineral resource
recovery site.
234
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 114
Conclusion
Because the City does not have any mineral areas, there would be no impact, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required.
Source(s)
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
235
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 115
Noise
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in the
EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP
EIRs
12. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the
project in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards
of other agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive ground borne vibration or
ground borne noise levels?
X
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private
airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
X
Environmental Setting
Noise is usually defined as unwanted sound. Noise consists of any sound that may produce
physiological or psychological damage and/or interfere with communication, work, rest,
recreation, or sleep. Several noise measurement scales exist that are used to describe noise in a
particular location. A decibel (dB) is a unit of measurement that indicates the relative intensity
of a sound. Sound levels in dB are calculated on a logarithmic basis. An increase of 10 dB
represents a 10‐fold increase in acoustic energy, while 20 dB is 100 times more intense and 30
dB is 1,000 times more intense. Each 10 dB increase in sound level is perceived as
approximately a doubling of loudness; and similarly, each 10 dB decrease in sound level is
perceived as half as loud. Sound intensity is normally measured through the A‐weighted sound
level (dBA). This scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear
is most sensitive. The A‐weighted sound level is the basis for 24‐hour sound measurements that
better represent human sensitivity to sound at night.
As noise spreads from a source, it loses energy so that the farther away the noise receiver is
from the noise source, the lower the perceived noise level would be. Geometric spreading
causes the sound level to attenuate or be reduced, resulting in a 6 dB reduction in the noise
level for each doubling of distance from a single point source of noise to the noise sensitive
receptor of concern.
236
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 116
Vibration refers to ground‐borne noise and perceptible motion. Ground‐borne vibration is
almost exclusively a concern inside buildings and is rarely perceived as a problem where the
motion may be discernible, but there is less adverse reaction without the effects associated
with the shaking of a building. Vibration energy propagates from a source through intervening
soil and rock layers to the foundations of nearby buildings. The vibration then propagates from
the foundation throughout the remainder of the structure. Building vibration may be perceived
by occupants as motion of building surfaces, the rattling of items on shelves or hanging on
walls, or a low‐frequency rumbling noise, otherwise referred to as ground‐borne noise.
Typically, sources that have the potential to generate ground‐borne noise are likely to produce
airborne noise impacts that mask the radiated ground‐borne noise. The rumbling noise is
caused by the vibrating walls, floors, and ceilings radiating sound waves. Annoyance from
vibration often occurs when the vibration exceeds the threshold of perception by 10 dB or less.
This is an order of magnitude below the damage threshold for normal buildings.
Typical sources of ground‐borne vibration are construction activities (e.g., blasting, pile driving,
and operating heavy‐duty earthmoving equipment) and occasional traffic on rough roads.
Problems with ground‐borne vibration and noise from these sources are usually localized to
areas within approximately 100 feet of the vibration source, although there are examples of
ground‐borne vibration causing interference out to distances greater than 200 feet. When
roadways are smooth, vibration from traffic, even heavy trucks, is rarely perceptible. For most
projects, it is assumed that the roadway surface will be smooth enough that ground‐borne
vibration from street traffic will not exceed the impact criteria; however, construction of the
project could result in ground‐borne vibration that could be perceptible and annoying.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified that impacts related to the exposure of existing and proposed
development to airport noise would be less than significant. The Eastern Dublin EIR also found
that impacts related to exposure of proposed housing to future roadway noise, exposure of
existing and proposed residences to construction noise, and noise conflicts due to the
adjacency of diverse land uses permitted by plan policies supporting mixed‐use development
would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures identified in the
Eastern Dublin EIR. In addition, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified that impacts associated with
exposure of existing residences to future roadway noise and exposure of proposed residential
development to noise from future military training activities at Camp Parks RFTA and the
County jail would be significant and unavoidable. The following mitigation measures would
apply to the proposed project:
MM 3.10/1.0 Require that an acoustical study be submitted with all residential
development projects located within the future CNEL 60 contour. The goal of the
acoustical study is to show how the interior noise level will be controlled to a CNEL of 45
237
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 117
dB as required by Title 24, Pat II. The Title 24 goal of CNEL 45 should be applied to
single‐family housing.
MM 3.10/2.0 Require that development projects provide for noise barriers or berms
near existing residences to control noise in outdoor use spaces. One possibility is the
construction of solid fences around outdoor use areas. The noise control for existing
residences should be evaluated on a case‐by‐case basis.
MM 3.10/3.0 Require an acoustical study prior to future development in the Tassajara
Foothill Residential, Tassajara Village Center, County Center and Hacienda Gateway sub‐
area to determine if future noise impact from Parks RFT A or the County jail will be
within acceptable limits. The goal of the study will be to identify all potential noise‐
generating operations and determine if future noise levels will exceed the acceptable
levels as defined by the City and Army.
MM 3.10/4.0 Developers shall submit to the City a Construction Noise Management
Program that identifies measures to be taken to minimize impacts on existing planning
area residents. The program will include a schedule for grading and other major noise‐
generating activities that will limit these activities to the shortest possible number of
days. Hours of construction activities shall be limited in keeping with Dublin ordinances.
The Program for construction vehicle access to the site shall minimize construction truck
traffic through residential areas. If construction traffic must travel through residential
areas, then a mitigation plan should be developed. The Program may include barriers,
berms or restrictions on hours.
MM 3.10/5.0 In order to minimize the impact of construction noise, all operations
should comply with local noise standards relating to construction activities. When
construction occurs near residential areas, then it should be limited to normal daytime
hours to minimize the impact. Stationary equipment should be adequately muffled and
located as far away from sensitive receptors as possible.
MM 3.10/6.0 Noise management plans shall be prepared and reviewed as part of
development application for all mixed‐use projects in which residential units would be
combined with commercial, office, or other urban non‐residential uses. The objective of
the noise management plan would be to provide a high‐quality acoustic environment
for residents and nonresidential tenants/ owners by taking steps to minimize or avoid
potential noise problems. The plan would be prepared by a qualified acoustical
consultant. The plan would take into account the concerns of residents, nonresidential
tenants/ owners, and maintenance personnel. The plan should be prepared at an early
stage of the design process. Ideally, the acoustical consultant should provide input to
238
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 118
the architect at a preliminary site plan stage, to make maximum use of detailed site
planning to avoid noise conflicts.
2002 SEIR
A review of potential impacts related to the exposure of proposed and existing housing to noise
levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan, exposure of future commercial,
office and industrial uses to noise levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan,
and exposure of people to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne
noise levels was conducted as part of the 2002 SEIR. The 2002 SEIR determined that no
additional noise impacts would occur beyond those identified at the time the Eastern Dublin EIR
was certified. However, the 2002 SEIR identified the following supplemental mitigation
measures that would be applicable to the proposed project:
SM‐NOISE‐1 Require a noise insulation plan for general commercial (including any
proposed office‐type uses) and industrial land uses to be submitted for all such
development projects located within the future CNEL 70 dBA contour. The plan shall
show how interior noise levels would be controlled to acceptable levels. The acceptable
level will depend on the type of use as set forth in the noise insulation plan. Interior
noise levels could be controlled adequately by using sound‐rated windows in windows
closest to the streets and the freeway.
SM‐NOISE‐2 Except for local deliveries, restrict heavy truck traffic to designated arterial
roadways and truck routes within the Project area and limit the hours of local deliveries
to daytime hours as established by the City.
Fallon Village SEIR
No additional impacts were identified in the Fallon Village SEIR. However, the Fallon Village SEIR
identified the following supplemental mitigation measures that would be applicable to the
proposed project:
SM‐NOISE‐1 (aircraft flyovers). All occupants of the residential dwellings within the
proposed Project shall receive written notification at the time of sale, rental or lease of
the potential for aircraft overflights of the Fallon Village Project area. Written notices
shall be approved by the Dublin Community Development Director.
SM‐NOISE‐2 (future roadway noise affecting proposed residential development). An
acoustical study must be prepared for the project. The study shall show how the project
will meet an indoor goal of 45 dBA CNEL. In addition, the study must show how noise in
outdoor areas will meet the level of a CNEL of 60 dBA (CNEL of 65 dBA at City's
discretion). Based on preliminary site development information it is likely that the
project can meet the indoor goal with regular double‐glazed windows (no special sound
239
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 119
rating). A noise barrier may be required if backyards or other primary outdoor use
spaces are located adjacent to either Croak Road or Upper Loop Road.
SM‐NOISE‐3 (compatibility of school and neighborhood park with future roadway
noise). The design of the elementary school and neighborhood park shall consider noise
reduction measures to comply with City exterior noise exposure limits including but not
limited to appropriate siting of improvements, use of noise barriers and similar noise
reduction techniques as may be needed.
SM‐NOISE‐4 (noise from Upper Loop Road affecting existing residences). Noise from
Upper Loop Road is expected to generate a CNEL in excess of 60 dBA. The existing
homes along the existing alignment of Fallon Road are currently exposed to an Ldn of
about 56 to 59 dBA. It is unlikely but possible that the noise from Upper Loop Road
would cause noise levels to increase by more than 6 dBA at these existing homes.
However, an evaluation of noise from Upper Loop Road on existing dwellings shall be
made and if it is found that the road would increase noise by more than 6 dBA in
backyards of those existing homes, then appropriate noise mitigation measures (i.e.,
roadway alignment or noise barrier) shall be included in the new roadway design.
The City of Dublin adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the significant
unavoidable impacts described above.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Generate noise exceeding standards
The short‐term construction and long‐term noise impacts associated with the proposed project
are described below.
Short‐Term Construction Noise Impacts. Project construction would result in short‐term noise
impacts on the nearby sensitive receptors. Maximum construction noise would be short‐term,
generally intermittent depending on the construction phase, and variable depending on
receiver distance from the active construction zone. The duration of noise impacts generally
would be from one day to several days depending on the phase of construction. The level and
types of noise impacts that would occur during construction are described below.
Table F lists typical construction equipment noise levels (Lmax) recommended for noise impact
assessments, based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a noise receptor,
obtained from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise
Model. Construction‐related short‐term noise levels would be higher than existing ambient
noise levels currently in the project area but would no longer occur once construction of the
project is completed.
240
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 120
Two types of short‐term noise impacts could occur during construction of the proposed project.
The first type involves construction crew commutes and the transport of construction
equipment and materials to the site, which would incrementally raise noise levels on roadways
leading to the project site. Two main categories of trips would be generated by construction
activities: (1) worker commute trips; and (2) haul/delivery truck trips. Heavy equipment would
not be hauled to/from the project site daily; it would be hauled in at the beginning of
construction and hauled out upon completion of construction. Construction trips would occur
throughout the day, but because the hauling trucks are not expected to pass sensitive uses,
there would be no impacts to sensitive uses.
The second type of short‐term noise impact is related to noise generated during site
preparation and the construction of the proposed project. The proposed project would include
phased construction, which would consist of a demolition phase from 2023 to 2024, grading
phase from 2024 to 2025 and building construction from 2025 to 2026. Overall, construction of
the proposed project is anticipated to last approximately 30 months. Construction would be
undertaken in discrete steps, each of which would have its own mix of equipment, and
consequently its own noise characteristics. These various sequential phases would change the
character of the noise generated on the project site. Therefore, the noise levels would vary as
construction progresses. Despite the variety in the type and size of construction equipment,
similarities in the dominant noise sources and patterns of operation allow construction‐related
noise ranges to be categorized by work phase.
Table F lists the maximum noise levels from the Highway Construction Noise Handbook
recommended for noise impact assessments for the loudest anticipated construction that
would be used for the project based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a
noise receptor. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve
one to two minutes of full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power
settings.
241
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 121
Table F: Typical Maximum Construction Equipment Noise Levels (Lmax)
Type of Equipment Acoustical
Usage Factor
Suggested Maximum Sound Levels
for Analysis (dBA Lmax at 50 ft)
Air Compressor 40 80
Backhoe 40 80
Crane 16 85
Dozers 40 85
Excavator 40 85
Forklift 20 85
Generator 50 80
Grader 40 85
Loader 40 80
Paver 50 85
Roller 20 85
Scraper 40 85
Skid Steer Loader 40 80
Tractor 40 84
Trencher 50 82
Water Truck 40 84
Source: Highway Construction Noise Handbook (FHWA 2006).
dBA = A‐weighted decibel
FHWA = Federal Highway Administration
ft = foot/feet
HP = horsepower
Lmax = maximum noise level
Each piece of construction equipment operates as an individual point source. Utilizing the
following equation, a composite noise level can be calculated when multiple sources of noise
operate simultaneously:
𝐿𝑒𝑞 ሺ𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑒ሻ ൌ 10 ∗logଵ ൭ 10
ଵ
ଵ
൱
Table G shows the composite noise levels of the two loudest pieces of equipment for each
construction phase, at a distance of 50 feet from the construction area.
Once composite noise levels are calculated, reference noise levels can then be adjusted for
distance using the following equation:
𝐿𝑒𝑞 ሺ𝑎𝑡 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑋ሻ ൌ𝐿𝑒𝑞 ሺ𝑎𝑡 50 𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑡ሻ െ 20 ∗lo gଵ ൬ 𝑋
50൰
In general, this equation shows that doubling the distance would decrease noise levels by 6 dBA
while halving the distance would increase noise levels by 6 dBA.
242
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 122
Table G: Equipment Noise by Construction Phase
Construction Phase Loudest Equipment Composite Noise Level at
(dBA Leq at 50 ft)
Demolition Excavator 88 Dozer
Grading Excavator 88 Grader
Building Construction Crane 88 Forklift
Paving Paver 88 Roller
Architectural Coating Air Compressor 80
Sources: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2021). Construction Noise Handbook (FHWA 2006).
dBA = A‐weighted decibel
FHWA = Federal Highway Administration
ft = foot/feet
Lmax = maximum noise level
According to the construction schedule, the phases of construction include: (1) demolition; (2)
grading; (3) building construction; (4) paving; and (5) architectural coating. To provide a
conservative estimate, the noise levels were calculated from the edge of the project site,
whereas the construction activities would cover the entire site and often be further from
sensitive receptors. Based on the typical construction equipment noise levels shown in Table G,
noise levels associated with these pieces of construction equipment operating simultaneously
would be approximately 88 dBA Leq at 50 feet.
The closest sensitive receptors to the project site include the residence located approximately
710 feet east of the project site along Collier Canyon Road, resulting in short‐term noise levels
of approximately 65 81 dBA Leq.
Construction equipment would operate at various locations throughout project site and
construction activities at any one receptor location would occur for a limited duration. While
construction‐related short‐term noise levels have the potential to be higher than existing
ambient noise levels in the project area, the noise impacts would no longer occur once project
construction is completed.
As compared to the EDSP EIRs, the proposed project would generate similar noise levels during
construction and would implement the previously required mitigation measures, Mitigation
Measures 3.10/4.0 and 3.10/5.0, to reduce construction related impacts to a less‐than‐
significant level. With implementation of these mitigation measures, the proposed project
would not result in any new or more severe impacts compared to those identified in the EDSP
EIRs.
243
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 123
Long‐Term Off‐Site Traffic Noise Impacts. The EDSP EIRs identified the sources of major noise
affecting the EDSP area to be vehicular traffic stemming from I‐580. The proposed project is
estimated to generate an average daily traffic (ADT) volume of 2,630. The EDSP EIRs identified a
potentially significant impact for future roadway noise as a result of the build out of the EDSP,
which includes the proposed project. Implementation of mitigation measures within the EDSP
EIRs reduces this impact to an insignificant level.
Long‐Term Off‐Site Operation‐Related Noise Impacts. Noise impacts associated with the long‐
term operation of the project must comply with the noise standards specified in the City’s
Municipal Code, which sets a 50 dBA Leq standard for residential land uses. Stationary noise
generated by the proposed project include heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC)
equipment, parking lot activities, and truck delivery and truck unloading activities.
Parking Lot and Loading Activities. Of the on‐site stationary noise sources during operation of
the project, noise generated by delivery truck activity would generate the highest maximum
noise levels. Typical parking lot activities, such as people conversing or doors slamming, would
generate noise levels of approximately 60 dBA to 70 dBA Lmax at 50 feet, while delivery truck
loading and unloading activities would result in maximum noise levels generate a noise level of
75 dBA Lmax at 50 feet based on measurements previously conducted by LSA.
The proposed industrial park uses could include loading activities, which could generate
potential noise sources that could affect noise‐sensitive receptors in the project site vicinity.
However, as discussed above, the closest off‐site sensitive receptors to the project site includes
the residence located approximately 710 feet east of the project site along Collier Canyon Road.
At this distance, loading and unloading activities would only result in maximum noise levels
generate a noise level of 52 dBA Lmax. Peak noise levels from loading and unloading would be
intermittent and when averaged over one hour, these sources would not exceed the City’s 50
dBA Leq standard for residential land uses.
244
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 124
Mechanical Equipment. In addition, adjacent off‐site land uses would be potentially exposed to
stationary‐source noise impacts from HVAC equipment proposed with the project. The project
is expected to have HVAC units serving each building of the project site. The HVAC equipment
could operate 24 hours per day. One HVAC unit would generate a noise level of 72 dBA Leq at
3.3 feet, based on manufacturer testing of typical equipment for such uses. However, based on
the distance of 710 feet, the noise level associated with the operation of the proposed HVAC
equipment would be well below the City’s 50 dBA Leq exterior noise standard for mechanical
equipment. Therefore, the project would not result in generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or any other applicable standards.
Land Use Compatibility. The EDSP EIRs evaluated the noise compatibility of future development
and found that depending on the location of new land uses that may be constructed, future
noise levels within some portions of the Project Area could be incompatible with such uses.
Therefore, the EDSP EIRs identified Mitigation Measures 3.10/1.0, 3.10/3.0, 3.10/6.0 and
Supplemental Measures SM‐NOISE‐1, SM‐NOISE‐2 (future roadway noise affecting proposed
residential development), SM‐NOISE‐3 (compatibility of school and neighborhood park with
future roadway noise), and SM‐NOISE‐4 (noise from Upper Loop Road affecting existing
residences) to reduce future roadway noise and exposure of proposed residential development
to noise.
The City sets forth normally acceptable noise level standards for land use compatibility and
interior noise exposure of new development. The normally acceptable exterior noise level for
residential land uses is up to 60 dBA CNEL. Noise levels of 61 to 70 dBA CNEL are considered
conditionally acceptable when a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements is made and
needed noise insulation features included in the design. Noise levels between 71 and 75 dBA
CNEL are considered normally acceptable and noise levels over 75 dBA CNEL are considered
clearly unacceptable. The normally acceptable interior noise level for residential land uses is 45
dBA CNEL. For industrial land uses, the normally acceptable exterior noise level for residential
land uses is up to 70 dBA CNEL. Noise levels of 71 to 75 dBA CNEL are considered conditionally
acceptable and noise levels over 75 dBA CNEL are considered normally unacceptable.
The noise environment at the project site is dominated by vehicle traffic noise on I‐580. Based
on Figure 9‐2 of the City of Dublin General Plan, traffic noise levels on the project site are
between 60 and 70 dB CNEL. Based on the City’s noise and land use compatibility standards,
this noise level is considered conditionally acceptable for residential land uses and normally
acceptable for industrial land uses. Therefore, the proposed project would be required to
comply with Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measures 3.10/1.0, 3.10/6.0, Supplemental
Measure SM‐NOISE‐1, and Supplemental Measure SM‐NOISE‐2 (future roadway noise affecting
proposed residential development).
245
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 125
Mitigation Measure 3.10/1.0 requires an acoustical study be submitted with all residential
development projects located within the CNEL 60 contours. Mitigation Measure 3.10/6.0
requires preparation of noise management plans as part of development application for all
mixed‐use projects in which residential units would be combined with commercial, office, or
other urban non‐residential uses. Supplemental Measure SM‐NOISE‐1 requires a noise
insulation plan for general commercial and industrial land uses to be submitted for all such
development projects located within the CNEL 70 dBA contour. Supplemental Measure SM‐
NOISE‐2 (future roadway noise affecting proposed residential development) requires an
acoustical study be prepared to show how residential development will meet indoor noise
levels of 45 dBA CNEL and outdoor noise levels of 60 dBA CNEL. Mitigation Measure 3.10/3.0,
Supplemental Measure SM‐NOISE‐3 (compatibility of school and neighborhood park with future
roadway noise), and Supplemental Measure SM‐NOISE‐4 (noise from Upper Loop Road
affecting existing residences) would not be applicable to the proposed project based on the
project site location and proposed land uses.
With implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.10/1.0, 3.10/6.0, Supplemental Measure SM‐
NOISE‐1, and Supplemental Measure SM‐NOISE‐2 (future roadway noise affecting proposed
residential development), the proposed project would achieve an acceptable interior and
exterior noise level in accordance with the land use compatibility guidelines of the Noise
Element of the City’s General Plan.
(b) Generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise
Construction of the proposed project could result in the generation of groundborne vibration.
This construction vibration impact analysis assesses the potential for building damages using
vibration levels in peak particle velocity (in/sec PPV). The criteria for environmental impacts
resulting from ground‐borne vibration are based on the maximum levels for a single event. The
guidelines within the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Manual have been used to determine
vibration impacts (refer to Table H, below).
Table H: Construction Vibration Damage Criteria
Building Category PPV (in/sec)
Reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster) 0.50
Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.30
Non‐engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.20
Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12
Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018), Table 12‐3.
FTA = Federal Transit Administration
in/sec = inches per second
PPV = peak particle velocity
The FTA Manual guidelines show that a vibration level of up to 0.2 in/sec PPV is considered safe
for non‐engineered timber and masonry buildings and would not result in any construction
246
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 126
vibration damage. Therefore, in order to be conservative, the 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold has been
used when evaluating vibration impacts at the nearest structures to the site.
Table I shows the PPV values at 25 feet from a construction vibration source. Bulldozers and
other heavy‐tracked construction equipment (except for vibratory rollers) generate
approximately 0.089 in/sec PPV of groundborne vibration when measured at 25 feet.
Table I: Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment
Equipment Reference PPV (in/sec) at 25 feet
Vibratory Roller 0.210
Hoe Ram 0.089
Large Bulldozer 0.089
Caisson Drilling 0.089
Loaded Trucks 0.076
Jackhammer 0.035
Small Bulldozer 0.003
Sources: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (FTA 2018).
in/sec = inches per second
PPV = peak particle velocity
Construction vibration, similar to vibration from other sources, would not have any significant
effects on outdoor activities (e.g., those outside of residential buildings in the project vicinity).
While vibration from construction activity was not assessed in the EDSP EIRs, the proposed
project is expected to include the use of heavy equipment similar to a large bulldozer. The
distance to the nearest buildings for vibration impact analysis is measured between the nearest
off‐site buildings and the project disturbance areas because vibration impacts occur normally
within the buildings. The formula for vibration transmission is provided below.
PPVequip = PPVref x (25/D)1.5
The closest structure to the project site includes the residence located approximately 710 feet
east of the project site along Collier Canyon Road. At this distance, the closest structure would
experience vibration levels of approximately 0.001 in/sec PPV with the use of heavy equipment
at the property line. Based on this analysis, vibration levels would not exceed any of the
established guidelines considered for damage potential. In addition, short‐term construction
impacts related to ground‐borne vibration or ground‐borne noise would be minimal and
temporary in nature and would cease upon construction.
Once operational, increased traffic on I‐580 and project area roadways also could increase
groundborne vibration caused by the passage of heavy trucks or equipment along nearby
streets. As such, implementation of Supplemental Measure NOISE‐2 was identified to reduce
groundborne vibration from increased levels of heavy traffic to less than significant. With
implementation of Measure SM‐NOISE‐2, the proposed project result in less‐than‐significant
operational vibration impacts.
247
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 127
(c) Excessive noise level near an airport
The project site is located approximately 0.5‐mile northwest of the Livermore Municipal
Airport. Aircraft noise is occasionally audible at the project site; however, no portion of the
project site lies within the 60 dBA CNEL noise contours of this airport nor does any portion of
the project site lie within two miles of any other airfield or heliport. Therefore, the proposed
project would not result in the exposure of people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified noise impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified in
the EDSP EIRs there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to noise
beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for
supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required.
Source(s)
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Dublin, City of. 2020. Municipal Code. December.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2006. Highway Construction Noise Handbook.
Roadway Construction Noise Model, FHWA‐HEP‐06‐015. DOT‐VNTSC‐FHWA‐06‐02. NTIS
No. PB2006‐109012. August
Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Office of Planning and Environment. Transit Noise
and Vibration Impact Assessment. FTA Report No. 0123. September.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
248
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 128
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
249
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 129
Population and Housing
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New
Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact than
Identified in the
EDSP EIRs
13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an
area, either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
X
Environmental Setting
According to the City of Dublin General Plan, in 2010, Dublin’s total population was estimated
at 46,036 and represented 17 percent of the 269,437 residents in the Tri‐Valley area. Data from
the 2020 United States Census indicates that Dublin’s total population has grown to 72,589 and
24,426 housing units.
The project site consists of approximately 32 acres of undeveloped grazing ranchland and open
space and 8 acres of developed rural residential development, consisting of three residential
units, a barn, several sheds and outdoor storage areas used as part of a landscape contractor
business located in the southern portion of the property.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
Section 3.2 in the Eastern Dublin EIR provides the demographics, housing and employment
context for the EDSP. The Eastern Dublin EIR provided a program‐level analysis of the
development potential envisioned for the EDSP Area, including the increased development
potential in the City, the Tri‐valley area, and the entire San Francisco Bay Area. The Eastern
Dublin EIR specifically evaluated new development potential in the EDSP Area of up to 17,970
residential units and approximately 12 million square feet of non‐residential space, including
approximately 5 million square feet of commercial, 4 million square feet of office, and 2 million
square feet of industrial park. No impacts related to population or displacement of existing
housing were identified. Growth‐inducing impacts associated with implementation of the EDSP
were evaluated in Section 5.2 of the Eastern Dublin EIR. Growth‐inducing impacts were
identified for utilities and community services.
250
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 130
2002 SEIR
The 2002 SEIR identified no supplemental impacts resulting from the EDPO project because
population growth associated with the EDPO would not be beyond that anticipated or planned
for in the City of Dublin General Plan and the EDSP.
Fallon Village SEIR
No additional impacts or mitigation were identified in the Fallon Village SEIR.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Population growth
The site is identified in the General Plan and the EDSP for residential and industrial
development and the proposed density and intensity of development is consistent with the
General Plan Land Use designation. The extension of infrastructure onto the project site,
including roadways and utilities that would only serve the proposed development, would not
contribute to or cause additional growth to occur outside of the City boundaries or elsewhere
within the vicinity of the project site, as the project site is surrounded by other properties that
have been designated for development in the City’s General Plan, EDSP and subsequent
planning documents.
The proposed project would generate housing‐related population growth by developing up to
97 residential dwelling units at the project site, which is consistent with the number of
residential units considered and approved as part of the EDSP EIRs. According to the U.S.
Census date, between 2016 and 2020, the City had an average of 2.99 persons per household.
Based upon an average of 2.99 persons per household, and with up to 97 proposed residential
units, the proposed project would increase the City’s population by approximately 290
residents. Based on population estimates prepared for Plan Bay Area 2050,10 this increase
represents about 0.51 percent of the City’s total estimated 2015 population (56,165). The
estimated population generated by the project (290 residents) would represent approximately
0.35 percent of the City’s projected 2040 population (83,595). The population growth
anticipated between 2010 and 2040 is expected to be 36,915; population associated with the
project would represent 0.78 percent of the anticipated growth. The amount of residential
development proposed as part of the current project is consistent with the population growth
anticipated in the City’s General Plan, the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and the Fallon Village
project approvals. Therefore, the proposed project would not induce substantial unplanned
population growth.
10 Association of Bay Area Governments and Metropolitan Transportation Commission. 2018. Plan Bay Area
Projections 2040. May.
251
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 131
In addition, the proposed project would result in development of 527,773 square feet of IP
uses, which is an increase of 155,771 square feet from that considered and approved as part of
the EDSP EIRs. Per the City’s General Plan, the allowed employee density within the IP land use
designation is 590 square feet per employee. Therefore, the proposed project could provide
employment opportunities for up to 894 employees at the project site or 264 additional
employees than previously approved. According to the United States Census Bureau,
approximately 90 percent of Dublin residents worked outside of the City, while 10 percent of
Dublin residents both live and work within the City limits. Using this estimate, approximately 26
additional employees generated by the proposed project would require housing within the City
or would move to the City solely for reasons of employment. These 26 employees could be
accommodated by the residential development proposed as part of the project, other
residential development nearby (e.g., East Ranch, Righetti project), or residential development
being constructed elsewhere in the City.
The project site is designated as IP, which is intended to provide for a wide variety of minimum‐
impact, light industrial uses. Because it is anticipated that uses within the IP designation would
provide employment, the proposed project would not induce substantial unplanned population
growth in the area.
The proposed project would not induce substantial unanticipated population growth in the City,
and the population increase would fall within the increase identified in the City’s General Plan,
including the Housing Element, the EDSP, and the Fallon Village Project approvals.
(b) Housing and resident displacement
The project site contains four existing residences and various agricultural out‐buildings. The
EDSP EIRs determined that due to the limited number of current residents, development of the
project site would not displace substantial number of existing housing units or people;
therefore, no impact was identified.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified population and housing impacts, nor result in new significant
impacts.
There are no applicable regulatory requirements or mitigation measures identified in the EDSP
EIRs that are applicable to population and housing and there would be no new or substantially
more severe significant impacts to population and housing beyond what has been analyzed in
the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required.
252
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 132
Source(s)
Association of Bay Area Governments and Metropolitan Transportation Commission. 2018. Plan
Bay Area Projections 2040. May.
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2020. QuickFacts, Dublin city website:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/dublincitycalifornia/PST040221
(accessed July 21, 2022).
U.S. Census Bureau. 2021. Longitudinal Employer‐Household Dynamics Origin‐Destination
Employment Statistics (2002‐2019). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal‐
Employer Household Dynamics Program, accessed on June 20, 2022, at
https://onthemap.ces.census.gov. LEHD Origin‐Destination Employment Statistics
Version 7.5
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
253
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 133
Public Services
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or need for new or physical altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of
the public services:
a) Fire protection? X
b) Police protection? X
c) Schools? X
d) Parks? X
e) Other public facilities? X
Environmental Setting
The proposed project is located within the City of Dublin and is served by the following existing
public services.
Fire Protection
Fire suppression, emergency medical and rescue services, and other life safety services are
provided to the project area and site by the Alameda County Fire Department (ACFD). There are
three fire stations in Dublin, with the closest to the project site being Fire Station No. 18 at
4800 Fallon Road, approximately 4.4 miles northwest. Back up service to the Project area would
be provided by Fire Station 17, located at 6200 Madigan Road in Dublin.
Police Protection
The Alameda County Sherriff’s Office provides contracted police protection to the project area
and project site. The Dublin Police Services headquarters are located at 6361 Clark Avenue,
west of the project site.
Schools
The project site is served by the Dublin Unified School District, which operates seven
elementary, two middle, one K‐8, one comprehensive high school, and one continuation high
254
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 134
school, within the City of Dublin. The closest schools to the project site include Fallon Middle
School, Jose Maria Amador Elementary School, and Cottonwood Creek K‐8 School.
Parks
The City’s Public Works Department oversees the maintenance of parks and recreational
facilities throughout the City.
Library Services
The Dublin Library is operated by Alameda County Library, with additional funding from the City
of Dublin. The Dublin Public Library is located at 200 Civic Plaza, southwest of the project site.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified potentially significant impacts related to increased demand
for police and fire protection services, fire response to outlying areas, exposure to wildlands
hazards, increased demand for schools and school overcrowding, increased demand for parks
and impacts on existing park and trail facilities. Mitigation measures were identified to reduce
potential impacts to a less‐than‐significant level. The following mitigation measures would be
applicable to the proposed project:
MM 3.4 / l .0 (Policy 8‐4). Provide additional personnel and facilities and revise "beats"
as needed in order to establish and maintain City standards for police protection service
in Eastern Dublin.
MM 3.4/2.0 (Action Program 8D). Coordinate with the City Police Department
regarding the timing of annexation and proposed development, so that the Department
can adequately plan for the necessary expansion of services to the area.
MM 3.4/3.0 (Action Program 8E). Incorporate into the requirements of project approval
Police Department recommendations on project design that affect traffic safety and
crime prevention.
MM 3.4/5.0 Police Review of Proposed Projects. As a part of the development approval
process in Eastern Dublin, the City shall require the Police Department to review and
respond to the planned development with respect to:
Project design layout relating to visibility, security and safety.
Project circulation system and access issues.
Project implications for emergency response times.
255
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 135
Prior to final approval of non‐residential development and improvement plans, the City
Police Department shall review the proposed use, layout, design, and other project
features for police surveillance/ access, security devices, such as alarms and lighting,
visibility, and any other police issues or concerns.
MM 3.4/7.0 (Program 8F). Establish appropriate funding mechanisms (e.g., Mello Roos
District, developer financing with reimbursement agreements, etc.) to cover up‐front
costs of capital improvements (i.e., fire stations and related facilities and equipment).
MM 3.4/9.0 (Program 8H). Incorporate DRFA recommendations on project design
relating to access, water pressure, fire safety and prevention into the requirements for
development approval. Require that the following DRF A design standards are
incorporated where appropriate:
Use of non‐combustible roof materials in all new construction.
Available capacity of 1,000 GPM at 20 PSI fire flow from project fire hydrants on
public water mains. For groupings of one‐family and small two‐family dwellings
not exceeding two stories in height, the fire flow requirements are a minimum
of 1,000 GPM. Fire flow requirements for all other buildings will be calculated
based on building size, type of construction, and location.
A buffer zone along the backs of homes, which are contiguous with the wildland
area. This buffer zone is to be landscaped with irrigated (wet banding) or
equivalent fire‐resistive vegetation.
Automatic fire alarm systems and sprinklers in all nonresidential structures for
human use.
Compliance with DRF A minimum road widths, maximum street slopes, parking
recommendations, and secondary access road requirements.
Require residential structures outside the DRFA's established response time and
zone to include fire alarm systems and sprinklers.
MM 3.4/17.0 (Policy 8‐3). Ensure that new development in Eastern Dublin, including
both residential and non‐residential development, fully mitigates the impact of such
growth on school facilities.
MM 3.4/29.0 (Policy 4‐29). Ensure, as part of the approval process, that each new
development provide its fair share of planned open space, parklands and trail corridors.
256
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 136
MM 3.4/31.0 (Action Program 4N). Calculate and assess in‐lieu park fees based on the
City's parkland dedication ordinance. Credit toward parkland dedication requirements
will only be given for level or gently sloping areas suitable for active recreation use.
2002 SEIR
The 2002 SEIR did not identify any potentially significant supplemental impacts associated with
fire and police protection, schools, parks, and other public facilities.
Fallon Village SEIR
The Fallon Village SEIR did not identify any potentially significant supplemental impacts related
to public services.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Fire protection
The Fallon Village SEIR determined that the additional residential development proposed as
part of the Fallon Village project was assumed as part of the Eastern Dublin EIR and that the
amount of additional non‐residential development could be accommodated with existing fire
personnel and facilities. The proposed project would include development of up to 97
residential units and approximately 527,773 square feet of industrial use on the project site,
resulting in approximately 155,771 square feet of industrial use and 264 additional employees
than were analyzed in the EDSP EIRs. Development of this additional square footage of non‐
residential use could incrementally increase demand for fire protection services. However, the
proposed project is required to adhere to the CBC, the California Fire Code and City of Dublin
codes, ordinance and regulations to minimize fire hazards, including fire prevention and
suppression measures; fire hydrants and sprinkler systems; emergency access; and other similar
requirements. ACFD would continue to provide services to the project site and would not
require additional firefighters to serve the proposed project. The demand for fire protection
services resulting from the proposed project would not require the construction of new or
alteration of existing fire protection facilities to maintain an adequate level of fire protection
service. No physical impacts associated with the provision of fire protection services would
occur.
(b) Police protection
The Fallon Village SEIR determined that the addition of 1,081,725 square feet of non‐residential
land within the Project area would result in an increased number of calls for service to the
Dublin Police Department, primarily related to traffic violations and burglary/ theft. However,
the addition of the non‐residential square footage, in and of itself, would not cause the need to
construct new or expanded Police buildings or other facilities that would result in a
supplemental impact. Therefore, no supplemental impacts were identified.
257
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 137
The proposed project would include development of up to 97 residential units and
approximately 527,773 square feet of industrial use on the project site, resulting in
approximately 155,771 square feet of industrial use and 264 additional employees than were
analyzed in the EDSP EIRs. The increased demand for police protection services resulting from
the proposed project would not be substantial compared to the level of service identified in the
prior environmental review and would not require the construction of new or alteration of
existing police protection facilities to maintain an adequate level of police protection service.
No physical impacts associated with the provision of police protection services would occur.
(c) Schools
The Fallon Village SEIR determined that the number of students expected to be generated by
dwelling units from the Fallon Village Project is below the number of students based on student
generation rates used in the Eastern Dublin EIR analysis; therefore, no supplemental impacts
related to student generation, or the number of students were identified. In addition, the Fallon
Village SEIR determined that adequate facilities have been planned in the Eastern Dublin area
to accommodate students anticipated to be generated by the Fallon Village Project.
The number of residential units proposed as part of the current project are consistent with
those assumed in the EDSP EIRs. Appropriate developer impact fees, as required by State law,
would be assessed and paid by the project applicant to offset any impact to school facilities,
consistent with Mitigation Measure 3.4/17.0 identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR.
(d) Parks
The Fallon Village SEIR determined that the number, location and size of proposed parks would
be sufficient to meet City of Dublin standards and would be consistent with the City of Dublin
Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Further, developers within the Fallon Village Project area
would be required to pay Public Facility Fees to the City of Dublin for individual developments
that do not meet City park dedication standards, consistent with Mitigation Measure 3.4/31.0
in the Eastern Dublin EIR. As described above, the number of residential units proposed as part
of the current project area consistent with those assumed in the EDSP EIRs. The increase in
non‐residential use resulting from the proposed project would not generate significant demand
for additional parks or recreation facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not
contribute to a substantial increase in the population necessitating either construction of new
or alteration of existing park facilities to maintain an adequate level of service. No physical
impacts associated with the provision of park services would occur.
(e) Other public facilities
Residents served by the proposed project would likely patronize public facilities such as local
library branches operated by the Alameda County Library. However, as described above these
residents are within the population assumptions evaluated and approved as part of the EDSP
258
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 138
EIRs; therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to increase the number of library
patrons utilizing public facilities.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified public services impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified in
the EDSP EIRs there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to public
services beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required.
Source(s)
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
259
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 139
Recreation
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in
the Severity
of an Impact
Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
15. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
X
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction
or expansion of recreational facilities which might have
an adverse physical effect on the environment?
X
Environmental Setting
The City of Dublin has a variety of recreational facilities including neighborhood parks,
community parks, community facilities, a senior center, open space areas and a series of trail
networks. According to the City of Dublin Parks and Recreation Master Plan, the City of Dublin
currently has 18 parks, five deeded park sites, and six school parks and City‐owned open space
areas that account for nearly 233 acres of dedicated open space and developed park land. In
addition, the City has over 59 acres of undeveloped parkland that has either been offered for
dedication by landowners or acquired by the City. In addition, the East Bay Regional Park
District (EBRPD) operates the Dublin Hills Regional Park, a large open space park with regional
trail connections. The Iron Horse Trail runs along the Union Pacific/Southern Pacific Railroad
right‐of‐way, connecting Dublin, the Dublin/Pleasanton BART station and the City of
Pleasanton.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified potentially significant impacts related to increased demand
for park facilities, fiscal impacts associated with the provision of new park and recreation
facilities and impacts on the regional trail system and open space connections. Mitigation
measures were identified to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. The
following mitigation measures would be applicable to the proposed project:
MM 3.4/29.0 (Policy 4‐29). Ensure, as part of the approval process, that each new
development provide its fair share of planned open space, parklands and trail corridors.
260
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 140
MM 3.4/31.0 (Action Program 4N). Calculate and assess in‐lieu park fees based on the
City's parkland dedication ordinance. Credit toward parkland dedication requirements
will only be given for level or gently sloping areas suitable for active recreation use.
2002 SEIR
Impacts to existing recreation facilities were addressed in the Initial Study for the 2002 SEIR. No
potentially significant impacts or mitigation measures were identified.
Fallon Village SEIR
The Fallon Village SEIR evaluated the adequacy of parkland proposed as part of the Fallon
Village Project relative to the City’s requirements. The Fallon Village SEIR determined that the
location and sizes of community and neighborhood parkland proposed as part of the Fallon
Village Project was consistent with the current City of Dublin Parks and Recreation Master Plan
so there would be no significant supplemental impacts with regard to provision of City parks.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Increase the use of existing recreation facilities causing deterioration
As discussed in Section 14.d, implementation of the proposed project, which would provide up
to 97 residential units consistent with the level of residential development evaluated in the
EDSP EIRs. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially increase the demand for
park and recreation facilities. Similarly, the proposed project would not increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facilities would occur or be accelerated.
(b) Propose, require new facilities that cause physical effect
The proposed project would not include construction of recreational facilities nor is it required
to construct or expand recreational facilities.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified recreation impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified in
the EDSP EIRs there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to
recreation impacts beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required.
261
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 141
Source(s)
Dublin, City of. 1985. City of Dublin General Plan. February 11. (Amended November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2015. City of Dublin Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
262
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 142
Transportation
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
X
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X
Environmental Setting
The following section describes the existing conditions of the study area, including roadway,
transit, bicycle, and pedestrian networks. The information provided below is summarized from
the Transportation Impact Review provided in Appendix G.
Roadway Network
The roadway network surrounding the project site is described in the following section.
Freeways
Interstate 580 (I‐580) is a generally east‐west freeway that runs south of the project site. I‐580
connects the San Francisco Bay Area to the west and the City of Livermore to the east. The
posted speed limit in the vicinity of the project is 65 miles per hour (mph). Express lanes are
present in both directions and are in effect Monday through Friday from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
263
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 143
Arterials/Collectors/Local Roadways
Dublin Boulevard is a six‐lane divided east‐west roadway that extends west of the project site.
Dublin Boulevard is classified in the City’s General Plan11 as an arterial between its western
limits and Tassajara Road and classified as a collector between Tassajara Road and Fallon Road
(as well as the proposed extension to North Canyons Parkway). On‐street parking is not
permitted along this roadway and the posted speed limit is 45 mph in the vicinity of the project.
Dublin Boulevard is proposed to be extended connecting from its current terminus at Fallon
Road to North Canyons Parkway in Livermore.
Central Parkway is a two‐lane divided east‐west roadway that extends west from Croak Road
west of the project to Sterling. The roadway generally runs through residential land uses and
provides access to Cottonwood Creek K‐8 School near the project. Central Parkway is classified
as an arterial between Tassajara Road and Fallon Road and as a collector for its remaining
extent. On‐street parking is permitted east of Sunset View Drive near the project and in other
segments abutting residential land uses. The posted speed limit is 25 mph in vicinity of the
project. Central Parkway would be extended with the project to provide a connection to the
transportation network for the residential portion.
Croak Road is a north‐south roadway that is currently not accessible to the public near the
project site. Croak Road connects to Fallon Road near I‐580, Central Parkway at its eastern
terminus, and Terracina Drive. The roadway is classified as a local residential roadway between
Central Parkway and Positano Parkway. Once the Dublin Boulevard extension is constructed,
Croak Road will connect Dublin Boulevard and Central Parkway.
Fallon Road/El Charro Road is a north‐south divided roadway that widens from four lanes
south of Central Parkway to six lanes to the north; south of I‐580, Fallon Road becomes El
Charro Road within the City of Pleasanton. Fallon Road is classified as an arterial roadway near
the project site. The roadway primarily serves residential land uses within the City of Dublin,
with some retail located near I‐580. On‐street parking is not permitted along this roadway. The
posted speed limit is 45 mph in the vicinity of the project.
Stoneridge Drive/Jack London Boulevard is an east‐west roadway located south of I‐580; the
roadway is Stoneridge Drive within the City of Pleasanton and Jack London Boulevard within the
City of Livermore. Stoneridge Drive/Jack London Boulevard is classified as an arterial between
Foothill Road and its eastern limits. On‐street parking is not permitted along this roadway. Class
II bicycle lanes are present along much of its length. The posted speed limit is 40 mph in the City
of Pleasanton (Stoneridge Drive) and increases to 45 mph in the City of Livermore (Jack London
11 The City of Dublin General Plan. Chapter 5: Land Use and Circulation – Circulation and Scenic Highways
Element. Amended 2022. https://www.dublin.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/7799/Chapter‐5‐May‐
2020?bidId=
264
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 144
Boulevard). Stoneridge Drive is a 4 to 6‐lane roadway; Jack London Boulevard varies from 2 to 6
lanes.
Tassajara Road is a major north‐south roadway in Dublin that connects to Fallon Road/Camino
Tassajara to the north and the City of San Ramon and Contra Costa County to the south.
Tassajara Road is classified as an arterial roadway within the City of Dublin; south of I‐580
within the City of Pleasanton, the roadway becomes Santa Rita Road. The roadway varies from
two lanes to five lanes and is divided along its southern portion, between Stoneridge Drive and
Dublin Ranch Drive. On‐street parking is not permitted along this roadway. The posted speed
limit is 35 mph within the study area. Class II bicycle lanes are present, except for on the
overpass over I‐580.
Hacienda Drive is a north‐south roadway that provides access to office, residential, and retail
land uses such as Hacienda Crossings and Persimmon Place. Hacienda Drive is classified as an
arterial and ranges from 3 lanes to 6 lanes. On‐street parking is not permitted. The posted
speed limit is 35 mph within the study area.
North Canyons Parkway is an east‐west arterial roadway that will connect to the planned
Dublin Boulevard extension at its present western terminus at Doolan Road. The roadway
merges with Portola Avenue at Collier Canyon Road. It is a four‐lane, divided road with a posted
speed limit of 40 mph near the study area. On‐street parking is generally prohibited and a
bicycle lane is present on both sides of the road. North Canyons Parkway provides access to
commercial and office land uses east of the project site, including several hotels and a Costco
Wholesale warehouse.
Airway Boulevard is a north‐south roadway in Livermore that provides access to I‐580 and the
Livermore Municipal Airport and connects to North Canyons Parkway at its northern terminus.
It is classified as an arterial roadway and is a divided six‐lane road north of Kitty Hawk Rd/I‐580
EB off‐ramp. The posted speed limit is 45 mph. Class II bicycle lanes are present, except for on
the overpass over I‐580.
Transit Facilities
The project area is served by Tri‐Valley Wheels, which provides fixed‐route bus service
operated by the Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA) to Dublin, Livermore,
Pleasanton, and neighboring communities. Wheels also offers a Dial‐A‐Ride Paratransit service
to eligible patrons in Dublin, available wherever fixed‐route service is operating. Three routes
directly serve the area surrounding the project – Route 2, Route 30R (Rapid), and Route 501
(School Route). Currently, Route 30R follows Dublin Boulevard to Fallon Road, where it detours
to I‐580 before connecting to North Canyons Parkway. With the extension of Dublin Boulevard,
this route is likely to use the extension and directly serve the non‐residential portions of the
project which have access via Dublin Boulevard.
265
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 145
The area is also served by Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), with the nearest station being
Dublin/Pleasanton which is located approximately four miles west of the site. Table J provides
details about the bus service that serves the project area.
Table J. Existing Transit Facilities
Route Route
Type Major Destinations Day Times Frequency
2 Fixed
Route
E. Dublin/Pleasanton BART,
Dublin Ranch, Emerald Glen Park,
Fallon Middle School
Weekdays
One AM and one
PM trip to serve
Fallon Middle School
(effective August
2021)
2 per day
30R Rapid
Route
Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory, East Ave., Livermore
Transit Center, Portola Park and
Ride, Las Positas College, N.
Canyons, Dublin Blvd, E. Dublin
BART, Dublin Civic Center, W.
Dublin BART
Weekdays 5:00 AM to 11:00
PM
Every 30
minutes
Weekends 5:00 AM to 11:00
PM Hourly
501
(A, B, and
C)
School
Route
Positano, Fallon Road, Silvera
Ranch, Tassajara Road, Central
Pwky, Dublin HS
Weekdays
One AM and one
PM trip for each
route
2 per day
Source: wheelsbus.com
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
Existing bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the project site include:
Fallon Road has Class II facilities that begin north of Dublin Boulevard
Dublin Boulevard generally has Class II facilities west of Fallon Road but are sometimes
Class III facilities near major intersections such as the eastbound approach to the
intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Fallon Road.
Central Parkway generally has Class II facilities east and west of Fallon Road. However,
there is a Class III facility on Central Parkway eastbound between Fallon Road and
Sunset View Drive.
Stoneridge Drive/Jack London Boulevard has Class II facilities east and west of El Charro
Road.
Airway Boulevard has Class II bicycle facilities south of the I‐580 interchange but there
are no facilities between I‐580 and N. Canyons Parkway.
266
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 146
N. Canyons Parkway has Class II facilities east of Airway Boulevard
Proposed improvements to the bicycle network in the vicinity of the project site primarily
include:
Class I shared use‐pathways on the Dublin Boulevard extension and Croak Road
Class II bicycle lanes on Dublin Boulevard extension, Croak Road, and Fallon Road
between Dublin Boulevard and the I‐580 eastbound ramp terminal intersection.
Class III facilities are proposed along an unconstructed roadway along the north side
of I‐580 east of Fallon Road.
Sidewalks are generally provided along both sides of the road in the vicinity of the project
except at the following locations:
Fallon Road has discontinuous sidewalks on one side of the road or another between
Stoneridge Drive/Jack London Boulevard and Fallon Gateway. North of Fallon Gateway,
sidewalks are only provided on the west side of the road until Central Parkway.
Airway Boulevard does not contain sidewalks along the west side of the road. Similarly,
no sidewalk exists along the south side of N. Canyons Parkway between Doolan Road
and Airway Boulevard.
Sidewalks are also proposed on both sides of the Dublin Boulevard extension and Croak Road
reconstruction when they are built out.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified potentially significant impacts related to increased traffic
associated with implementation of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, including impacts to
freeway, intersection, and roadway operations, transit service extensions, and potential safety
hazards for pedestrians and bicycles at street crossings. Mitigation measures were identified to
reduce most transportation impacts to a less than significant level. These mitigation measures
require construction of new roadways, widening of existing roadways, and improvements to
local freeway facilities to accommodate increased vehicle traffic associated with proposed
development in Eastern Dublin.
Several traffic impacts were determined to be significant and unavoidable, even with
implementation of mitigation. These impacts include impacts to I‐580 between Tassajara Road
and Airway Boulevard (Impact 3.3/B), cumulative freeway impacts (Impact 3.3E), impacts to the
Santa Rita Road/I‐580 eastbound ramps (Impact 3.3/I) and cumulative impacts to Tassajara
Road (Impact 3.3/N). Applicable mitigation measures from the Eastern Dublin EIR include:
267
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 147
MM 3.3/2.0 (Policy 5‐21). Require all non‐residential projects with 50 or more
employees within the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan area to
participate in a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) program. A TSM program
would include strategies to reduce the use of single‐occupant vehicles such as on‐site
distribution of transit information and passes, provision of shuttle services to and from
BART stations, participation in regional ridesharing services, preferential parking for
vanpools and carpools, and flexible or staggered work hours.
MM 3.3/2.1 The Project shall contribute a proportionate amount to regional
transportation mitigation programs as determined by the current study by the Tri‐Valley
Transportation Council. Regional mitigation measures may include implementation of
enhanced rail and feeder bus transit services, construction or upgrading of alternative
road corridors to relieve demand on the I‐580 and l‐680 freeways.
MM 3.3/3.0 The Project shall contribute to the construction of auxiliary lanes on l‐580
between Tassajara Road and Airway Boulevard. The auxiliary lanes would provide LOSE
operations between Tassajara Road and Fallon Road, and LOS D operations between
Fallon Road and Airway Boulevard.
MM 3.3/4.0 The Project should contribute a proportionate share to planned
improvements at the l‐580 /I‐680 interchange and the associated mitigation on adjacent
local streets. The improvements would provide additional capacity on I‐680 north of I‐
580 and would provide LOS D operations.
MM 3.3/5.0 Local jurisdictions shall require that future developments participate in
regional transportation mitigation programs as determined by the current study by the
Tri‐Valley Transportation Council.
MM 3.3/6.0 The City of Dublin shall coordinate construction of additional lanes on all
approaches at the intersection. The required lanes on the northbound approach on
Dougherty Road include two left‐turn lanes, three through lanes (one more than
existing) and one right‐turn lane (one more than existing). The required lanes on the
southbound approach on Dougherty Road include two left‐turn lanes (one more than
existing), three through lanes (one more than existing) and one right‐turn lane. The
required lanes on the eastbound approach on Dublin Boulevard include one left‐turn
lane, three through‐lanes (one more than existing) and one right‐turn lane. The required
lanes on the westbound approach on Dublin Boulevard include two left‐turn lanes, three
through‐lanes and one right‐turn lane. The Project shall contribute a proportionate
share of the improvement costs. The improvements would provide LOS D operations.
MM 3.3/7.0 The City of Dublin shall coordinate with the City of Pleasanton and Ca/trans
to restripe the I‐580 eastbound off‐ramp to provide two left‐turn lanes and one right‐
268
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 148
turn lanes (existing lanes are one left‐turn lane and two right‐turn lanes). The Project
shall contribute a proportionate share of the improvement costs. The improvements
would provide LOS C operations.
MM 3.3/8.0 The City of Dublin shall coordinate with Ca/trans to widen the l‐580
westbound off‐ramp to provide two left‐turn lanes and two right‐turn lanes, and to
modify the northbound approach to provide three through lanes. The Project shall
contribute a proportionate share of the improvement costs. The improvements would
provide LOS B operations.
MM 3.3/9.0 The City of Dublin shall coordinate with the City of Pleasanton and Caltrans
to widen the l‐580 eastbound off‐ramp to provide two left‐turn lanes and two right‐turn
lanes. These improvements would provide LOS E operations. Further improvement to
the level of service could be provided by prohibiting left turns from southbound Santa
Rita Road to eastbound Pimlico Drive during peak periods. This left‐turn prohibition
would require out‐of‐direction travel for drivers wishing to access Pimlico Drive but
would provide level of service D operations. The Project shall be required to contribute
a proportionate share of the improvement costs.
MM 3.3/ 10.0 The City of Dublin shall coordinate with the City of Livermore to modify
the intersection to provide three through‐lanes and a right‐turn lane eastbound, and
two left‐turn lanes and two through‐lanes westbound. The Project shall contribute
proportionate share of the improvement costs. The improvements would provide LOS
operations.
MM 3.3/ 11.0 The City of Dublin shall coordinate with the City of Livermore and Caltrans
to widen the Airway Boulevard overcrossing of l‐580 by 12 feet to provide adequate
storage for northbound left‐turns and widen of the off‐ramp to provide one left and one
left‐right lane. The Project shall contribute a proportionate amount toward the cost of
these improvements. The improvements would provide LOS D operations.
MM 3.3/ 12.0 The City of Dublin shall coordinate with Ca/trans to ensure that
modifications to the l‐580 interchange at Fallon Road/El Charro Road include provisions
for unimpeded truck movements to and from El Charro Road. The Project shall
contribute a proportionate share of improvement costs.
MM 3.3/ 15.2 The Project shall contribute a proportionate amount to the capital and
operating costs of transit service extensions.
MM 3.3/ 16.1 Locate pedestrian and bicycle paths so that their crossings of major
arterial streets coincide with signalized street intersections, providing a signalized
pedestrian and bicycle crossing of the major street.
269
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 149
2002 SEIR
The 2002 SEIR identified potentially significant impacts for several intersections within and
outside of the EDPO project area, as well as roadway segments in the project area. Mitigation
measures were identified to reduce intersection and roadway impacts to a less‐than‐significant
level. In addition, the 2002 SEIR identified cumulative impacts to the Dougherty Road/Dublin
Boulevard intersection, the Hacienda Drive/Dublin Boulevard intersection, and the Fallon
Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection. Mitigation Measures SM‐Traffic‐6, SM‐Traffic‐7, and SM‐
Traffic‐8 were identified to reduce these cumulative impacts; however, the 2002 SEIR
determined that these impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.
SM‐TRAFFIC‐1: Project developers shall contribute a pro‐rata share to the widening of
the I‐580 eastbound off‐ramp approach at Hacienda Drive to add a third eastbound left
turn lane.
SM‐TRAFFIC‐2: Project developers shall contribute a pro‐rata share to the widening of
the northbound Hacienda Drive overcrossing from 3 lanes to 4 lanes including three
through lanes and one auxiliary lane that leads exclusively to the I‐580 westbound loop
on‐ramp. The westbound loop on‐ramp shall be modified as necessary to meet Caltrans'
standards and design criteria. Project developers also shall contribute to widening the
westbound off ramp approach to add a third westbound left‐turn lane.
SM‐ TRAFFIC‐3: Project developers shall contribute a pro‐rata share to construction
which converts the eastbound Santa Rita off‐ramp through lane to a shared left
turn/through lane. Project developers also shall contribute to a traffic signal upgrade
which includes a westbound right‐turn overlap from Pimlico Drive.
SM‐TRAFFIC‐4: The Project developers shall install a traffic signal at the Dublin
Boulevard/Street D intersection at the time development occurs in this area utilizing this
intersection.
SM‐TRAFFIC‐5: The Project developers shall install a traffic signal at the Fallon
Road/Project Road intersection at the time development occurs in this area utilizing this
intersection.
SM‐TRAFFIC‐6: Project developers shall contribute a pro‐rata share to configure the
eastbound Dublin Boulevard approach to include 1 left‐turn lane, three through lane
and two right turn lanes. Project developers shall contribute a pro‐rata share to
configure the west bound Dublin Boulevard approach to include three left‐turn lanes,
two through lanes, and one shared through/right‐turn lane. Project developers shall
contribute a pro‐rata share to configure the northbound Dougherty Road approach to
include three left‐turn lanes, three through lanes and two right‐turn lanes. Project
270
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 150
developers shall contribute a pro‐rata share to configure the southbound Dougherty
Road approach to include two left turn lanes, three through lanes, and one shared
through/right‐turn lane. The I‐580 westbound diagonal on‐ramp from Dougherty Road
shall be widened as necessary to include two single‐occupancy vehicle lanes. In addition,
the City will monitor the intersection for peak hour volumes on a periodic basis, as
described below, and will apply appropriate Project conditions based on the results of
such monitoring.
SM‐TRAFFIC‐7: The Project developers shall construct an additional through lane on
northbound Fallon Road (for a total of four through lanes), construct an additional left‐
turn lane on westbound Dublin Boulevard (for a total of three left‐turn lanes) and
construct an additional through lane on southbound Fallon Road (for a total of four
through lanes). In addition, the City will monitor the intersection for peak hour volumes
on a periodic basis, as described below, and will apply appropriate Project conditions
based on the results of such monitoring.
SM‐TRAFFIC‐8: In addition to the above additional lane configurations (in Supplemental
Mitigation Traffic 7), the Project developers shall pay studies to assess the feasibility of
locating the Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection farther north to allow for a
signalized Project intersection between the I‐580 westbound ramps/Fallon Road
intersection and the Fallon Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection (the "auxiliary
intersection"). This new Project auxiliary intersection should consist of seven
northbound Fallon Road lanes (2 left, 4 through, 1 right), seven southbound Fallon Road
lanes (2 left turn, 4 through, 1 right turn), and 4 lanes for the new Project street; in the
westbound direction three left turn lanes and a shared through/right turn lane; and in
the eastbound direction, two right‐turn lanes, one through and two left turn lanes. If the
studies show that a new Project auxiliary intersection in such location is feasible, the
Project developers shall construct such intersection.
SM‐ TRAFFIC‐9: The Project developers shall be responsible for widening Fallon Road
between 1‐580 and Dublin Road to its ultimate eight lanes and shall be responsible for
widening Fallon Road between Dublin Boulevard and Central Parkway to its ultimate six
lane width. The Project developers shall be responsible for widening Fallon Road
between Central Parkway and Project Road to four lanes. The Project developers also
shall be responsible for widening the Fallon Road overcrossing (between the eastbound
and westbound 1‐580 ramps) from four lanes to six lanes.
SM‐TRAFFIC‐10: The Project developers shall be responsible for widening Central
Parkway between Tassajara Road and Fallon Road from two lanes to four lanes.
271
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 151
Fallon Village SEIR
The Fallon Village SEIR determined that buildout of the Fallon Village Project area would result
in potential impacts to local roadways, impacts to nearby freeways and impacts to transit
services. Supplemental impacts were identified for the Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road
intersection, the Santa Rita Road/1‐580 EB Ramps intersection, the westbound left turn
movement from Central Parkway onto southbound Hacienda Drive. Supplemental Mitigation
Measures SM‐TRA‐1, SM‐TRA‐2, and SM‐TRA‐3 were identified to reduce intersection impacts
associated with the Fallon Village Project; however, the Fallon Village SEIR determined that
even with mitigation, the impact to the Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road intersection would
remain significant and unavoidable.
The Fallon Village SEIR identified cumulative impacts to freeway segments on I‐580 and I‐680 in
the project area and determined that even with implementation of mitigation measures
identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and other improvements proposed by the City of Dublin,
impacts to nearby freeways would remain significant and unavoidable. In addition, the Fallon
Village SEIR determined that traffic generated by the proposed project on I‐580 and I‐680
would exceed the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency monitoring standards for
volumes along these freeways; this impact would also remain significant and unavoidable. The
following supplemental mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed project:
SM‐TRA‐1 (Project contribution to impact to Dublin/Dougherty intersection). Project
developers shall have the following obligations:
a) Advance to the City applicable monies for acquisition of right‐of‐way and
construction of the planned improvements at Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard.
The amount of money advanced to the City shall be based on the developer's fair
share of the deficit (spread over those projects which are required to make up
the deficit) between funds available to the City from Category 2 Eastern Dublin
Traffic Impact Fee funds and the estimated cost of acquiring the right‐of‐way and
constructing the improvements. The City should provide credit for Category 2
Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fees to the developer for any advance of monies
made for the improvements planned for the Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard
intersection.
b) Pay a pro‐rata share of the cost to construct the planned improvements at
Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard through payment of the Eastern Dublin Traffic
Impact Fee. The City of Dublin will implement these improvements.
SM‐TRA‐2 (Project contribution to impact to Santa Rita Road/I‐580 eastbound ramps).
Project developers shall contribute a pro‐rata share of the cost to widen the I‐580
eastbound off‐ramp approach at Santa Rita Road to include a third eastbound left turn
lane.
272
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 152
SM‐TRA‐3 (Project contribution to impact at Central Parkway and Hacienda Drive).
Project developers shall contribute a pro‐rata share of the cost to modify the
westbound approach on Central Parkway at Hacienda Drive to include two left turn
lanes, one through and one right turn lane.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Conflict with applicable transportation plans standards, including bicycle and pedestrian
facilities
Potential conflicts with applicable transportation plans standards, including bicycle and
pedestrian facilities are described below.
Trip Generation
The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition was used to
estimate the number of trips the proposed project would generate. As described in the
Branaugh Property Trip Generation Comparison Technical Memorandum (provided in Appendix
G), the proposed project including 69 single family dwelling units, 28 multifamily dwelling units
and about 528,000 square feet of industrial uses (based on a 0.40 FAR) would generate
approximately 2,636 trips per day, as shown in Table K.
Table K. Estimated Trip Generation for the Branaugh Property Based on 2022 Proposed Project
ITE Code Amount Unit Daily Rate1 Daily Trip
Generation
Single Family Detached 210 69 DU 9.44 652
Multifamily 220 28 DU 7.32 205
Industrial 130 527.773 KSF 3.37 1,779
Total 2,636
Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2022
1Daily Rate from ITE Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition
DU = Dwelling Unit
KSF = Thousand Square Feet
The traffic study for the Fallon Village SEIR used the ITE Trip Generation Manual 7th Edition to
estimate trip generation for Fallon Village. The four land use categories used and the associated
daily trip generation rate from the ITE Trip Generation Manual 7th Edition include:
• Single Family Residential (ITE Code 210 with a daily rate of 9.57 trips per dwelling unit)
• Multifamily Residential (ITE Code 220 with a daily rate of 6.72 trips per dwelling unit)
273
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 153
• Retail (ITE Code 820 with a daily rate of 42.94 trips per thousand square feet)
• Office/Service (ITE Code 710 with a daily rate of 11.01 trips per thousand square feet)
In the Fallon Village SEIR, the residential component of the Branaugh property was listed as
medium density residential (6.1 to 14 dwelling units per acre), which is most similar to the
multifamily residential land use from the ITE Trip Generation Manual 7th Edition. For the non‐
residential portion of the property, 136,000 square feet was assumed to be retail and 236,000
square feet was assumed to be office. Based on these land uses, the estimated daily trip
generation for the Branaugh property in the Fallon Village SEIR was 9,091 daily vehicle trips.
Table L. Estimated Trip Generation for the Branaugh Property Based on Fallon Village SEIR
ITE Code Amount Unit Daily Rate1 Daily Trip
Generation
Multi‐family Residential 220 97 DU 6.72 652
Retail 820 136 KSF 42.94 5,840
Office 710 236 KSF 11.01 2,599
Total 9,091
Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2022
1Daily Rate from ITE Trip Generation Manual 7th Edition
DU = Dwelling Unit
KSF = Thousand Square Feet
As shown in Tables K and L, the proposed project would generate 6,455 fewer daily vehicle trips
compared to the assumptions from the Fallon Village SEIR. Therefore, no new transportation
impacts not previously disclosed would be anticipated based on daily trip generation of the
Branaugh property.
274
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 154
Transit, Bicycle and Pedestrian Impacts
The proposed project is not anticipated to result in new or substantially more severe significant
impacts to transit service, bicyclists and bicycle facilities or pedestrians and pedestrian facilities.
The proposed project is not anticipated to interfere with any plans or policies for transit usage
in the area such as the Dublin Boulevard Extension project, which will have bus pull outs, bus
pads, and passenger pads along the roadway. The project would not construct any off‐site
improvements; therefore, the proposed project would not interfere with the construction of
transit amenities proposed as part of the Dublin Boulevard Extension or affect plans for transit
service in the area.
New bicycle facilities are proposed on the future Dublin Boulevard extension and Croak Road,
which would serve the project site and the proposed project does not include any off‐site
improvements that would affect the construction of these facilities.
Both Central Parkway and Dublin Boulevard are proposed to be extended to provide access to
the project site. These facilities have planned sidewalks on both sides of the road and the
proposed project does not include any off‐site improvements that would affect installation of
these facilities.
(b) Conflict with CEQA Section 15064.3 (b)
The topic of the project’s contribution to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) was not analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs. This impact is not required to be analyzed unless it constitutes new information of
substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the
previous environmental documents were certified as complete (Public Resources Code Section
21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and 15163). VMT was known at the time of the
certification of these EDSP EIRs and could have been analyzed. A change in regulations for
impact analysis under CEQA is not a trigger for further environmental review under
supplemental review standards. The impact of increased traffic was analyzed using other
methods (LOS) at the time of certification of the EDSP EIRs. Under CEQA standards, it is not
considered new information that requires analysis in a Supplemental EIR or negative
declaration.
(c) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
Primary access into the residential neighborhood would be via the proposed extension of
Central Parkway to the north, within the proposed East Ranch (Croak property) development.
Primary access to the IP parcels would be provided by the future Dublin Boulevard extension.
There would be no direct vehicular or pedestrian circulation between the residential uses in the
northern portion of the project site and the IP uses to the south. Vehicular and pedestrian
circulation between the residential and industrial uses would be provided indirectly via Central
Expressway, Croak Road and Dublin Boulevard. The design, construction, and maintenance of
275
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 155
project site access locations, as well, as internal roadways within the project site would be
required to be in compliance with the City’s Municipal Code.
(d) Result in inadequate emergency access
The proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access. Emergency vehicle
access to the residential component of the proposed project would be provided via Central
Parkway, while the industrial component of the proposed project would be accessed via the
proposed Dublin Boulevard Extension project that will connect Dublin Boulevard from Fallon
Road to North Canyons Parkway in Livermore. The design, construction, and maintenance of
project site access locations would be in compliance with the City’s Municipal Code and would
be required to meet all emergency access standards. In addition, through Site Development
Review, emergency services would review proposed plans to ensure that emergency vehicle
access and circulation is adequate.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified transportation impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified in
the EDSP EIRs there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to
transportation beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required.
Source(s)
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
Kittelson & Associates. 2022. Branaugh Property Trip Generation Comparison Technical
Memorandum. December 15.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
276
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 156
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
277
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 157
Tribal Cultural Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in the
EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
17. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature,
place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape,
sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical
resources as defined in Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or
X
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be
significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c)
of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource
Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
X
Environmental Setting
As described in Section 5, Cultural Resources, three previous cultural resource studies
overlapped the current project site, and another seven were conducted within a half‐mile
radius. No archaeological resources are recorded within the project boundaries or within a half‐
mile of the project site.
A request was submitted to the NAHC to search the Sacred Lands File (SLF) for Native American
cultural resources that may be impacted by the proposed project. The NAHC maintains the SLF
database and is the official State repository of Native American sacred‐site location records in
California. Cody Campagne, NAHC Cultural Resources Analyst, responded to the SLF search
request on February 4, 2022, stating that the results were negative and that there were no
known Native American cultural resources in the project site. He noted, however, that “the
absence of specific site information in the SLF does not indicate the absence of cultural
resources in any project area.”
278
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 158
Previous CEQA Documents
The topic of the project’s potential impacts to tribal cultural resources was not specifically
analyzed in the EDSP EIRs. Since certification of the EDSP EIRs, the topic of Tribal Cultural
Resources has been added as a new category in the CEQA checklist. However, the Eastern
Dublin EIR, 2002 SEIR and Fallon Village SEIR, analyzed prehistoric and historic resources and
included mitigation measures related to historical and archaeological resources. These
measures are listed in the cultural resources section of this Initial Study Checklist.
Because the Eastern Dublin EIR, 2002 SEIR, and Fallon Village SEIR have been certified, the
determination of whether tribal cultural resources need to be analyzed for this proposed
project is governed by the law on supplemental or subsequent EIRs (Public Resources Code
section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15162 and 15163). Tribal cultural resources are
not required to be analyzed under those standards unless it constitutes "new information of
substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the
previous EIR was certified as complete” (CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15162 (a) (3)).
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources
As described in Section 5, Cultural Resources, the project site does contain a historic‐period
farm complex (the Collier Ranch) consisting of four buildings over 50 years old. These buildings
were evaluated for significance as a historical resource. However, these resources were
determined to be not eligible, either individually or as a group, for inclusion on the CRHR or the
NRHP. Although these existing buildings will be demolished as part of the proposed project,
these buildings do not qualify as historical resources for the purposes of CEQA.
(b) Significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1
No archaeological resources were identified on the project site as part of the cultural resources
study. Therefore, the City, in its role as lead agency, has determined that the project site is not
a resource significant to a California Native American tribe. Development proposed as part of
the current project would be consistent with the development previously analyzed in the EDSP
EIRs. As described in Section 5, Cultural Resources, implementation of Mitigation Measure
3.9/5.0 as identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR would reduce any potential impacts to
archaeological and/or Native American resources to a less‐than‐significant level.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified tribal cultural, nor result in new significant impacts.
279
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 159
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified in
the EDSP EIRs there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to tribal
cultural resources beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other
CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review
is required.
Source(s)
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
LSA, 2021. Historical Resource Evaluation of the Branaugh Property at 1881 Collier Canyon
Road, Dublin, Alameda County, California (LSA Project No.: DUB2101.02). November.
LSA, 2022. Cultural Resource Study for the Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Project, Dublin, Alameda County, California (LSA Project No. DUB2101.02, Phase 2).
February.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
280
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 160
Utilities and Service Systems
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new
or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm
water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project and reasonably foreseeable future development
during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
X
Environmental Setting
As outlined in the Project Description, the project site is currently served by overhead electric
and communication lines and by sanitary sewer septic systems and on‐site well water. Existing
and proposed utility connections are discussed below.
Water
The Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) provides water service at the project site.
DSRSD is responsible for providing both potable and recycled water to the City of Dublin, and
the Dougherty Valley area of the City of San Ramon in Contra Costa County. DSRSD’s water
service area also includes Camp Parks, the Federal Correctional Institution (FCI), and Alameda
County’s Santa Rita Jail. Zone 7 supplies treated potable water to DSRSD. Treated potable water
281
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 161
enters DSRSD’s distribution system from five metered turnouts from the Zone 7 transmission
system.
To reduce the demand for potable water, DSRSD promotes water recycling and is a member of
the WaterReuse Association. In 1995, DSRSD and EBMUD, through a joint powers agreement,
formed the DSRSD‐EBMUD Recycled Water Authority (DERWA). DERWA serves as a wholesaler
to deliver recycled water to DSRSD and EBMUD, who in turn deliver the recycled water to their
respective service areas. DERWA’s San Ramon Valley Recycled Water Project (SRVRWP)
provides a backbone distribution system that delivers recycled water to both DSRSD and
EBMUD distribution systems. DSRSD’s recycled water treatment facilities deliver recycled water
to the SRVRWP. Recycled water is produced at DSRSD’s wastewater treatment plant at the
Recycled Water Treatment Facility (RWTF). The RWTF produces recycled water that meets the
California Title 22 requirements for unrestricted reuse.
Wastewater
Wastewater collection and treatment services are also provided by DSRSD for the City of
Dublin, City of Pleasanton, Camp Parks, FCI, Santa Rita Jail, and the southern portion of San
Ramon. DSRSD owns and operates a wastewater treatment plant in Pleasanton that has a
capacity of 17 million gallons per day (MGD). The existing wastewater service area
encompasses approximately 13,340 acres, or 20.85 square miles. Within the wastewater
service area there are currently 207 miles of gravity mains, one permanent lift station, and one
temporary lift station. The permanent lift station has 26 feet of force main.
Stormwater
Drainage and flood control in the Eastern Dublin area is the responsibility of the City of Dublin
and Zone 7. Zone 7 is responsible for master planning, overseeing construction coordination
and maintaining major storm drain channels and culverts in Eastern Dublin. The City has
jurisdiction and maintenance responsibility for local storm drains that discharge to the Zone 7
flood control system. Runoff from the project area drains mostly via overland flow, which
eventually collects just north and east of the Fallon Road/I‐580 Interchange where it then flows,
via a double box culvert west under Fallon Road.
Electricity
The East Bay Community Energy provides electricity to Dublin over PG&E’s distribution system.
PG&E provides natural gas service to the San Francisco Bay region and serves the project site.
Solid Waste
The City of Dublin has a Collection Services Agreement with a private solid waste collection
company for residential and commercial garbage collection. The City also has comprehensive
recycling and organics collection programs. All single‐family residences are provided with three
stream collection containers (landfill, recycle, organics) and most commercial and multi‐family
282
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 162
residences subscribe to three‐stream collection service. Beginning January 1, 2022, all service
accounts (with a few exceptions) will be required to subscribe to three‐stream collection
services due to State legislation (SB 1383).
Solid waste generated within the City is deposited at the Altamont Landfill which has a total
estimated permitted capacity of 62 million cubic yards. The Altamont Landfill is approximately
26 percent full and is estimated to reach capacity in January 2029.
Previous CEQA Documents
Eastern Dublin EIR
The Eastern Dublin EIR identified potential significant impacts related to lack of a wastewater
collection system, extension of a sewer trunk line with capacity to serve new developments,
limited treatment plant capacity and wastewater disposal capacity, increased energy use for
wastewater treatment and wastewater disposal, potential failure of the export disposal system,
pump station noise and odors, storage basin odors and potential failure, recycled water system
operations, recycled water storage failure, loss of recycled water system pressure, and
secondary impacts from recycled water system operation. Mitigation measures were identified
to reduce most wastewater impacts to a less than significant level. Impacts associated with
increased energy use for wastewater treatment and disposal were determined to be significant
and unavoidable, even with implementation of mitigation. The following mitigation measures
would apply to the proposed project:
MM 3.5/1.0 (Program 9P). Connection to Public Sewers. Require that all development
in the Specific Plan area be connected to public sewers. Exceptions to this requirement,
in particular septic tank systems, will only be allowed upon receipt of written approval
from the Alameda County Environmental Health Department and DSRSD.
MM 3.5/4.0 (Program 9M). DSRSD Service. Require a "will‐serve" letter from DSRSD
prior to permit approval for grading.
MM 3.5/5.0 (Program 9N). DSRSD Standards. Require that design and construction of
all wastewater systems be in accordance with DSRSD standards.
The Eastern Dublin EIR also identified potential significant impacts related to overdraft of local
groundwater resources, increased demand for water, additional treatment plant capacity, lack
of a water distribution system, inducement of substantial growth, increase in energy usage
through operation of the water distribution system, potential water storage reservoir failure,
potential loss of system pressure, and potential pump station noise. Mitigation measures were
identified to reduce most water impacts to a less than significant level. Impacts associated with
increased energy use for water distribution and population growth were determined to be
283
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 163
significant and unavoidable, even with implementation of mitigation. The following mitigation
measures would apply to the proposed project:
MM 3.5/25.0 Encourage all developments in the Specific Plan and Project to connect to
the DSRSD water system.
MM3.5/26.0 (Program 9A). Water Conservation. Require the following as conditions of
project approval in eastern Dublin:
Use of water‐conserving devices such as low‐flow shower heads, faucets, and
toilets.
Support implementation of the DSRSD Water Use Reduction Plan where
appropriate.
Water efficient irrigation systems within public rights‐of‐way, median islands,
public parks, recreation areas and golf course areas (see Program 9B on Water
Recycling).
Drought resistant plant palettes within public rights‐of‐way, median islands,
public parks, recreation areas and golf course areas.
MM3.5/27.0 (Program 9B). Water Recycling. Require the following as conditions of
project approval in eastern Dublin:
Implementation of DSRSD and Zone 7 findings and recommendations on uses of
recycled water to augment existing water supplies.
Work with DSRSD to explore use of recycled water in eastern Dublin through
potential construction of a recycled water distribution system. Construction of
such a recycled water system will require approval of the use of recycled water
for landscape irrigation by DSRSD, Zone 7 and the San Francisco Bay Regional
Water Quality Control Board.
MM 3.5/37.0 (Program 9E). DSRSD Standards. Require that design and construction of
all water system facility improvements be in accordance with DSRSD standards.
MM 3.5/38.0 (Program 9G). DSRSD Service. Require a "will‐serve" letter from DSRSD
prior to grading permit approval.
Potentially significant impacts related to storm drainage identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR are
described in Section 9.0, Hydrology and Water Quality.
284
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 164
2002 SEIR
The 2002 SEIR did not identify any potentially significant supplemental impacts associated with
water supply, wastewater treatment, stormwater drainage, or other utilities/service systems.
The 2002 SEIR found that the mitigation measures in place from the Eastern Dublin EIR were
adequate and that no new mitigation measures were necessary.
Fallon Village SEIR
The Fallon Village SIER identified no additional impacts related to water supply, wastewater
collection, wastewater treatment capacity, wastewater disposal systems. Two impacts were
identified relative to stormwater drainage, including the potential for stormwater runoff to add
potential pollutants to nearby water bodies and would fail to comply with current
hydromodification standards and surface water quality standards. Mitigation measures were
identified to reduce these impacts to a less than significant level.
SM‐ SD‐1 (changed surface water quality standards). The Stage 1 Development Plan
shall require that the water quality source control and hydrologic design
recommendations of the report prepared by ENGEO, Inc. (February 28, 2005) be
implemented for all individual development projects within the Project area.
SM‐ SD‐2 (changed surface water quality hydromodification standards). Development
within the Project area shall comply with the hydromodification provisions of the
Alameda County Clean Water Program as approved by the RWQCB and administered by
the City of Dublin. If no Alameda County Clean Water Program permit has been adopted
at the time individual development proposals are approved by the City the applicant
may be required to submit hydrology and hydrologic analyses to identify specific
increases in storm water runoff into downstream receiving waters. Such reports will be
reviewed by both the City of Dublin and Zone 7 Water Agency. Development projects
will also be required to pay the then‐current Zone 7 Special Drainage Area fee (SDA7‐1)
in effect at the time of development.
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Require relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas or telecommunications facilities
The proposed project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or
expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunication facilities beyond that which was already anticipated in the EDSP EIRs.
As outlined in the Project Description, new sanitary sewer lines and water lines would be
installed within the project site and would connect to proposed sanitary sewer mains, potable
water and recycled water mains within the future Dublin Boulevard Extension and the future
285
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 165
Central Parkway Extension to the northwest (within East Ranch). The proposed project would
also include connections to proposed electricity and natural gas lines within the future Dublin
Boulevard Extension and future Central Parkway Extension (within East Ranch).
The project site is currently largely undeveloped and covered in non‐native grassland and,
therefore, contains minimal impervious surfaces. Upon construction of the proposed project,
approximately 60 percent of the project site would be covered with impervious surfaces, and
the remaining 40 percent would be covered by pervious surfaces, consisting of the landscaped
areas. The proposed project would include approximately 43,151 square feet of bioretention
space on the project site that would be used for stormwater quality control. The proposed
project would include multiple bioretention basins and storm drains throughout the project
site, which would connect to downstream hydromodification facilities prior to discharging to
existing/proposed stormdrain pipes. Hydromodification vaults would be included on‐site to
provide flow duration controls for the project. Proposed storm drainage facilities would
conform to the Alameda County C.3 Stormwater Technical guidelines and requirements. Runoff
from the proposed project would drain to future Dublin Boulevard Extension and Collier Canyon
Road and ultimately to the G3 box culvert along Fallon Road.
On‐site utility infrastructure necessary to serve the proposed project—including water, sanitary
sewer, drainage, water quality treatment, and dry utilities (e.g., electricity, natural gas, cable)—
would be installed within the project site and would connect to the proposed utility lines within
adjacent roadways, which have already been planned and addressed in the EDSP EIRs.
(b) Sufficient water supply
The Fallon Village SEIR determined that the Fallon Village Project was accounted for in the
DSRSD’s Final Water Service Analysis for Eastern Dublin as well as the 2005 Urban Water
Management Plan (UWMP), and therefore there would be sufficient water supply with existing
entitlements. Since the adoption of the Fallon Village SEIR, the DSRSD has updated the UWMP
(in 2020), which accounts for build out of the Eastern Dublin Area, including the project site.
The 2020 UWMP determined that there would be adequate water supplies to meet demand
through 2040 with existing entitlements. Additionally, consistent with the DSRSD District Code,
the project applicant would be required obtain a certificate of capacity rights from DSRSD, prior
to issuance of a building permit. The certificate of capacity rights, which is part of the
entitlement review process, ensures the DSRSD can adequately serve the proposed project.
Currently, DSRSD’s primary water supply source is purchased potable water from Zone 7,
augmented by recycled water produced at DSRSD’s RWTF. DSRSD also has a groundwater
pumping quota (GPQ) from the local groundwater basin, pumped on its behalf by Zone 7, the
local groundwater basin manager. Imported water from the State Water Project, which is
owned and operated by the Department of Water Resources, is by far Zone 7’s largest water
source, providing approximately 90 percent of the treated water supplied to its customers on
286
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 166
an annual average basis. The proposed project would be served by these systems. DSRSD
anticipates the same water supply mix to be available through 2040. With the projects and
programs implemented by DSRSD and Zone 7, water supplies are projected to meet demands.
The proposed project would be consistent with the type and intensity of development assumed
for the project site in the City’s General Plan, including the EDSP and accounted for in the
UWMP. As stated in the UWMP, DSRSD can meet its water demand under multiple dry years
with diversified supply and conservation measures.
(c) Sufficient wastewater capacity
The Fallon Village SEIR determined that potential development associated with the Fallon
Village Project, including the proposed project, would be within the assumptions included in
DSRSD’s 2005 Wastewater Collection System Master Plan Update. Since the adoption of the
Fallon Village SEIR, the DSRSD has updated the Wastewater Collection System Master Plan (in
2017), which accounts for build out of the project site. The proposed project would be
consistent with the type and intensity of development assumed for the project site in the City’s
General Plan and accounted for in DSRSD’s Wastewater Collection System Master Plan.
(d‐e) Adequate landfill and compliance
Solid waste generated at the project site would be collected by Amador Valley Industries (AVI)
and transferred to Altamont Landfill. The 2002 SEIR evaluated the capacity of solid waste
service providers and disposal facilities to handle solid waste generated by proposed
development in the East Dublin area. The 2002 SEIR determined that the Altamont Landfill had
over 25 years of capacity. According to Cal Recycle, Altamont Landfill (01‐AA‐0009), currently
has a maximum permitted capacity of 11,150 tons per day and a remaining capacity of
65,400,000 tons. The landfill continues to have sufficient capacity to accommodate level of
residential and industrial development proposed as part of the project. Disposal of solid waste
would be required to comply with all federal state, and local statutes and regulations
associated with solid waste. This would include providing receptacles for green waste,
recyclables, and garbage.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified utilities and service system impacts, nor result in new significant
impacts.
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified in
the EDSP EIRs there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to
utilities and service systems beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no
287
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 167
other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental
review is required.
Source(s)
CalRecycle, 2019. Facility/Site Summary Details: Altamont Landfill and Resource Recovery (01‐
AA‐0009). Website: www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/7?siteID=7
(accessed August 23, 2021).
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
West Yost. 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. June. Available online at:
www.dsrsd.com/about‐us/library/plans‐studies (accessed June 12, 2022).
West Yost. 2019. 2017 Wastewater Collection System Master Plan. December. Available online
at: www.dsrsd.com/about‐us/library/plans‐studies (accessed June 12, 2022).
West Yost. 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. June. Available online at:
www.dsrsd.com/about‐us/library/plans‐studies (accessed June 12, 2022).
288
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 168
Wildfire
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in
the Severity
of an Impact
Identified in
the EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP EIRs
18. WILDFIRE. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or
ongoing impacts to the environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including
downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a
result of runoff, post‐fire slope instability, or drainage
changes?
X
Environmental Setting
As described in Section 8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the project site is not identified as
an area of moderate, high, or very high fire hazard severity for the Local Responsibility Area. It
is identified as an area of moderate fire hazard severity for the State Responsibility Area, as
mapped by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE).
Previous CEQA Documents
The EDSP EIRs did not specifically analyze impacts for wildfires as it was not a separate topic for
analysis when the Eastern Dublin EIR, 2002 SEIR and Fallon Village SEIR were completed. Public
services impacts and mitigation measures, some of which relate to the provision of fire services
pertain to wildfires, were identified and are discussed in the public services section.
289
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 169
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
(a) Impair an emergency response plan
As described above, the project site is located within a moderate hazard severity zone as
identified by CALFIRE. The proposed project would be designed to provide adequate access to
the site for fire/police/emergency medical service personnel in the event of an emergency at
the project site. In the event of an emergency on the site, employees and residents could exit
the site via Croak Road via the proposed Central Parkway Extension and the future Dublin
Boulevard Extension. Once off the project site, employees and residents could access I‐580 to
exit the City and region. The proposed project would not substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
(b) Exposure to wildfire
As described in Section 6, Geology and Soils, elevations on the project site range from
approximately 370 feet to approximately 580 feet above sea level. The topography of the
project site ranges from relatively flat in the southern portion near I‐580, to gently rolling hills
to the northeast. A slope is proposed between the residential and industrial portion of the site
to provide a buffer between the uses. Prevailing winds are typically from the west between
February and November and from the north from November to February in the City.
Consistent with City requirements, a Geologic Hazard and Abatement District (GHAD) would be
established. The GHAD would own and maintain improvements and landscape within the
wildfire management area, located within the proposed residential lots adjacent to
undeveloped open space. These areas would include fire safe plants and materials. Seasonal
mowing and trimming maintenance would be performed by the GHAD. GHAD would also
maintain the slope area and fire access road.
The proposed project would not include any design features that could increase the potential
for a wildfire. The proposed project would not exacerbate wildfire risks and thereby expose
project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire.
(c) Require installation or maintenance of infrastructure
As discussed above, the project site is located outside of a VHFHS zone as identified by CALFIRE.
All proposed project components including infrastructure, would be located within the
boundaries of the project site and impacts associated with the development of the proposed
project within the project site have been analyzed herein. Additionally, through Site
Development Review, emergency services would review proposed plans to ensure that
emergency vehicle access and circulation is adequate.
290
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 170
(d) Exposure to flooding or landslides
As described in Section 6, Geology and Soils, the topography of the project site ranges from
relatively flat in the southern portion near I‐580, to gently rolling hills to the northeast. A slope
is proposed between the residential and industrial portion of the site to provide a buffer
between the uses. As part of the proposed project, the project site would be graded to flatten
the site, where necessary, to allow for intended future users. Further, as discussed in Section 9,
Hydrology and Water Quality, the project would be required to implement erosion control
measures during and post‐construction. Following project construction, proposed on‐site
bioretention basins would limit the release of stormwater from the site; therefore, the project
site would not expose people to flooding or landslides as a result of runoff, post‐fire slope
instability or drainage changes.
Conclusion
The project does not propose substantial changes that were not previously analyzed in the
EDSP EIRs that would require major changes to the EIRs. Based on the information in the EDSP
EIRs and this environmental analysis, the project would not substantially increase the severity
of the previously identified wildfire impacts, nor result in new significant impacts.
With adherence to applicable regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified in
the EDSP EIRs there would be no new or substantially more severe significant impacts to
wildfires beyond what has been analyzed in the previous EDSP EIRs, and no other CEQA
standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is
required.
Source(s)
CAL FIRE. 2020. California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Website: egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/
(accessed June 20, 2022).
Dublin, City of. 2017. City of Dublin General Plan, Adopted February 11, 1985 (Amended as of
November 21, 2017).
Dublin, City of. 2002. Final Revised Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2001052114, East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation. March.
Haag, Jerry. 2005. Fallon Village Project, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report,
State Clearinghouse No. 2005062010. November.
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 2016. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. January 7, 1994 (Updated
September 20, 2016).
291
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 171
Wallace Roberts & Todd. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse
Number 91103064. Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan.
December 7.
292
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 172
Mandatory Findings of Significance
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
New Significant
Impact
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of an
Impact
Identified in the
EDSP EIRs
Equal or Less
Severe Impact
than Identified
in the EDSP
EIRs
18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Does the project:
a) Have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self‐sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
X
b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects.)
X
c) Have environmental effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
X
Significant Impacts
As discussed and analyzed in this document, the proposed project would not degrade the
quality of the environment. Additionally, for reasons discussed in the Biological Resources
section, the proposed project, with mitigation, would not substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self‐sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal. Further, for the reasons discussed in the Cultural
Resources section, the proposed project, with mitigation, would not eliminate important
examples of California history or prehistory. Therefore, implementation of the proposed
project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified
significant impact as previously analyzed, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental
review are met. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area.
293
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Page 173
Cumulative Impacts
The proposed project has the potential to result in incremental environmental impacts that are
part of a series of approvals that were anticipated under the EDSP EIRs. The EDSP EIRs
considered the project’s cumulatively considerable impacts where effects had the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment as a result of build‐out of the EDSP. Implementation of
the proposed project, with mitigation, would not result in any new cumulative impacts or
increase the severity of a previously identified significant cumulative impact as previously
analyzed, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met. Therefore, no further
environmental review is required for this impact area.
Substantial Adverse Effects on Human Beings
The proposed project would not create adverse environmental effects that would cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The proposed project
would allow for residential and industrial development. These uses or activities would not
result in any substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, as
discussed throughout this document. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would
not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant
impact as previously analyzed, and no other CEQA standards for supplemental review are met.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required for this impact area.
294
SOURCE: ESRI World Street Map (03/20).
I:\DUB2101.02\Maps\Figure 1_Regional Location.mxd (9/8/2021)
FIGURE 1
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned DevelopmentRegional Location
Project Site
Project Location
0 1000 2000
FEET
295
Collier Canyon RdCollier Canyon Rd
Liv ermore Outlets Dr
Wolf House Dr
W J
a
c
k
L
o
n
d
o
n
B
l
v
d
W J
a
c
k
L
o
n
d
o
n
B
l
v
d
Freisman RdFreisman Rd
Cr
o
a
k
R
d
Cr
o
a
k
R
d
Croak RdCroak Rd
Cr
o
a
k
R
d
Cr
o
a
k
R
d
Central PkwyCentral Pkwy
Collier Canyon Rd
Liv ermore Outlets Dr
Wolf House Dr
W J
a
c
k
L
o
n
d
o
n
B
l
v
d
Freisman Rd
Cr
o
a
k
R
d
Cr
o
a
k
R
d
Croak Rd
Central Pkwy
Las Positas
Golf Course
Commercial
580
Project Site Boundary
10000 500
FEET
SOURCES: Nearmap, 5/22/2021; LSA, 2021
P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\ Graphics\Figure_2.ai (2/4/2022)
FIGURE 2
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development Project
Aerial Photograph of the Project Site and Surrounding Land Uses
296
Collier Canyon RdCollier Canyon Rd
Freisman RdFreisman Rd
Cro
a
k
R
d
Cro
a
k
R
d
Collier Canyon Rd
Freisman Rd
Cro
a
k
R
d
Parcel 1
Parcel 2
Parcel 3
Parcel 4
580
FUTURE DUBLIN BLVD
Project Site Boundary
Parcel Boundaries (approximate)
10000 500
FEET
SOURCES: Nearmap, 5/22/2021; LSA, 2021
P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\ Graphics\Figure_3.ai (2/4/2022)
FIGURE 3
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development Project
Proposed Parcel Layout
297
FEET
2000 100
SOURCE: MacKay & Somps, 4/26/2022
P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\ Graphics\Figure_4.ai (7/20/2022)
FIGURE 4
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development Project
Overall Site Plan
29
8
PERPENDICULAR
PARKING
TRAVEL LANDSCAPE/
SIDEWALKPARKINGLANDSCAPE/
SIDEWALK
PERPENDICULAR
FC FC
LANDSCAPE/
SIDEWALK
LANDSCAPE/
SIDEWALK
FC
TRAVEL TRAVEL
NTS C
NTS B
NTS A
NTS D
PERPENDICULAR
TRUCK PARKING
TRAVEL LANDSCAPE/
SIDEWALKPARKINGLANDSCAPE/
SIDEWALK
PERPENDICULAR
FC FC
TRUCK PARKING
MANEUVER ZONE
ROW ROW
SIDEWALKSIDEWALKLANDSCAPELANDSCAPE
INDUSTRIAL
LANDSCAPEEASEMENT LANDSCAPEEASEMENT
FC
INDUSTRIAL
*STREET SECTION SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY AND DIFFERS FROM STAGE I PD. FINAL DESIGN TO
BE DETERMINED DURING DESIGN PHASE OF THE DUBLIN BOULEVARD EXTENSION PROJECT.
FEET
2000 100
SOURCE: MacKay & Somps, 7/7/2021
P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\ Graphics\Figure_5.ai (9/8/2021)
FIGURE 5
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development Project
CirculaƟon Plan and Street SecƟons - Industrial
29
9
PARKING TRAVEL TRAVEL
PARKING
FC FC
ROW
S/WL/S L/S
ROW
S/W
PARKING TRAVEL TRAVEL
PARKING
FC FC
S/W
BNTS
ROW
S/W
ROW
NTS
TRAVELTRAVELBIKE LANE BIKE LANE L/S S/W
ULTIMATE RIGHT OF WAY
FC FC
S/W
ROW ROW
ULTIMATE TRAVEL WAY
C
ANTS
MOTORCOURTBC BC
NTS D
PSE
FEET
100050
SOURCE: MacKay & Somps, 7/7/2021
P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\ Graphics\Figure_6.ai (9/8/2021)
FIGURE 6
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development Project
CirculaƟon Plan and Street SecƟons - ResidenƟal
30
0
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Appendices
Appendix A
CalEEMod Output Sheets
301
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - The project would subdivide the 40.2-acre site into four parcels to accommodate proposed residential and industrial development. A total of 78
residential units are proposed with the potential to provide up to 97 units within 9.87 acres designated Medium-Density Residential in the General Plan and
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. Approximately 527,773 square feet of industrial use is proposed on 30.29 acres designated Industrial Park in the General Plan
and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.
Construction Phase - The proposed project would include phased construction, which would consist of a demolition phase from 2023 to 2024, grading phase
from 2024 to 2025 and building construction from 2025 to 2026. Overall, construction of the proposed project is anticipated to last approximately 30 months, and
is anticipated to be fully improved by 2026.
Grading -
Demolition - The proposed project would demolish the existing onsite buildings.
Vehicle Trips - Based on the Proposed Transportation Analysis Methodology
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Single Family Housing 69.00 Dwelling Unit 9.57 124,200.00 197
Apartments Mid Rise 27.00 Dwelling Unit 0.30 27,000.00 77
Industrial Park 527.77 1000sqft 30.29 527,773.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
4
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 64
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
2026Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 0.033CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.004N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 1 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
302
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Assuming compliance with BAAQMD Basic Construction Mitigation Measures and use of Tier 2 construction
equipment.
Area Mitigation - Assuming only natural gas hearth.Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 5.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 3.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 3.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 5.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 2 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
303
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 740.00 305.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 50.00 90.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 75.00 260.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 11/6/2026 3/6/2026
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 6/5/2026 3/6/2026
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/10/2023 1/5/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/4/2023 1/3/2025
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/21/2026 3/6/2026
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 8/22/2026 12/22/2025
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 8/5/2023 1/6/2025
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 1/2/2023 9/4/2023
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 4/22/2023 1/8/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 6/6/2026 12/22/2025
tblLandUse LotAcreage 22.40 9.57
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.71 0.30
tblLandUse LotAcreage 12.12 30.29
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 5.44 7.33
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 9.44 9.45
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 3 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
304
2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2023 0.0981 0.9170 0.8496 1.7100e-
003
9.9000e-
003
0.0424 0.0524 2.1200e-
003
0.0395 0.0416 0.0000 149.6543 149.6543 0.0406 3.0000e-
004
150.7605
2024 0.4254 4.2169 3.6657 8.2400e-
003
1.2083 0.1741 1.3824 0.4756 0.1602 0.6358 0.0000 724.8966 724.8966 0.2294 4.2000e-
004
730.7576
2025 0.8308 2.2927 3.0208 8.2900e-
003
0.7783 0.0762 0.8545 0.1461 0.0716 0.2178 0.0000 759.3021 759.3021 0.0857 0.0405 773.4970
2026 3.3379 0.6321 0.9376 2.1500e-
003
0.0770 0.0243 0.1013 0.0208 0.0228 0.0436 0.0000 195.4823 195.4823 0.0303 7.4100e-
003
198.4487
Maximum 3.3379 4.2169 3.6657 8.2900e-
003
1.2083 0.1741 1.3824 0.4756 0.1602 0.6358 0.0000 759.3021 759.3021 0.2294 0.0405 773.4970
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 4 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
305
2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2023 0.0553 1.3922 1.0634 1.7100e-
003
7.4200e-
003
0.0389 0.0463 1.7400e-
003
0.0389 0.0406 0.0000 149.6542 149.6542 0.0406 3.0000e-
004
150.7603
2024 0.2421 6.6701 4.8346 8.2400e-
003
0.5551 0.1737 0.7288 0.2170 0.1737 0.3907 0.0000 724.8958 724.8958 0.2294 4.2000e-
004
730.7568
2025 0.7921 3.8085 3.2781 8.2900e-
003
0.5458 0.1262 0.6720 0.1189 0.1259 0.2448 0.0000 759.3017 759.3017 0.0857 0.0405 773.4966
2026 3.3302 1.1920 1.0440 2.1500e-
003
0.0770 0.0400 0.1170 0.0208 0.0400 0.0608 0.0000 195.4822 195.4822 0.0303 7.4100e-
003
198.4486
Maximum 3.3302 6.6701 4.8346 8.2900e-
003
0.5551 0.1737 0.7288 0.2170 0.1737 0.3907 0.0000 759.3017 759.3017 0.2294 0.0405 773.4966
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
5.81 -62.09 -20.61 0.00 42.83 -19.46 34.57 44.40 -28.70 21.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
3 7-2-2023 10-1-2023 0.2388 0.3405
4 10-2-2023 1-1-2024 0.7848 1.1193
5 1-2-2024 4-1-2024 1.1164 1.6617
6 4-2-2024 7-1-2024 1.1594 1.7266
7 7-2-2024 10-1-2024 1.1721 1.7456
8 10-2-2024 1-1-2025 1.1707 1.7459
9 1-2-2025 4-1-2025 0.6173 0.9648
10 4-2-2025 7-1-2025 0.6191 0.9700
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 5 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
306
11 7-2-2025 10-1-2025 0.6260 0.9808
12 10-2-2025 1-1-2026 1.2256 1.6303
13 1-2-2026 4-1-2026 3.8658 4.4029
Highest 3.8658 4.4029
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 3.5242 0.0186 1.3941 1.4300e-
003
0.1015 0.1015 0.1015 0.1015 10.0016 3.8329 13.8345 0.0197 5.8000e-
004
14.5001
Energy 0.0572 0.5142 0.3925 3.1200e-
003
0.0395 0.0395 0.0395 0.0395 0.0000 1,464.490
6
1,464.490
6
0.1562 0.0280 1,476.737
0
Mobile 0.9477 1.0675 9.0456 0.0193 2.2014 0.0140 2.2155 0.5882 0.0131 0.6012 0.0000 1,833.864
2
1,833.864
2
0.1136 0.0851 1,862.057
2
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 152.1600 0.0000 152.1600 8.9924 0.0000 376.9700
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 40.7042 65.5107 106.2148 4.1913 0.1000 240.7976
Total 4.5291 1.6003 10.8322 0.0238 2.2014 0.1551 2.3565 0.5882 0.1541 0.7423 202.8658 3,367.698
4
3,570.564
1
13.4731 0.2137 3,971.061
9
Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 6 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
307
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 3.0559 0.0142 0.7195 8.0000e-
005
4.4500e-
003
4.4500e-
003
4.4500e-
003
4.4500e-
003
0.0000 8.1099 8.1099 1.2700e-
003
1.3000e-
004
8.1796
Energy 0.0572 0.5142 0.3925 3.1200e-
003
0.0395 0.0395 0.0395 0.0395 0.0000 1,464.490
6
1,464.490
6
0.1562 0.0280 1,476.737
0
Mobile 0.9477 1.0675 9.0456 0.0193 2.2014 0.0140 2.2155 0.5882 0.0131 0.6012 0.0000 1,833.864
2
1,833.864
2
0.1136 0.0851 1,862.057
2
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 152.1600 0.0000 152.1600 8.9924 0.0000 376.9700
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 40.7042 65.5107 106.2148 4.1913 0.1000 240.7976
Total 4.0608 1.5959 10.1576 0.0225 2.2014 0.0580 2.2595 0.5882 0.0571 0.6452 192.8642 3,371.975
4
3,564.839
5
13.4547 0.2132 3,964.741
3
Mitigated Operational
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/4/2023 1/5/2024 5 90
2 Grading Grading 1/8/2024 1/3/2025 5 260
3 Building Construction Building Construction 1/6/2025 3/6/2026 5 305
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
10.34 0.27 6.23 5.67 0.00 62.58 4.12 0.00 62.97 13.08 4.93 -0.13 0.16 0.14 0.21 0.16
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 7 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
308
4 Paving Paving 12/22/2025 3/6/2026 5 55
5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 12/22/2025 3/6/2026 5 55
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Residential Indoor: 306,180; Residential Outdoor: 102,060; Non-Residential Indoor: 791,660; Non-Residential Outdoor: 263,887; Striped
Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 780
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 8 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
309
3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 4.5100e-
003
0.0000 4.5100e-
003
6.8000e-
004
0.0000 6.8000e-
004
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0964 0.9131 0.8348 1.6500e-
003
0.0424 0.0424 0.0394 0.0394 0.0000 144.4663 144.4663 0.0405 0.0000 145.4778
Total 0.0964 0.9131 0.8348 1.6500e-
003
4.5100e-
003
0.0424 0.0469 6.8000e-
004
0.0394 0.0401 0.0000 144.4663 144.4663 0.0405 0.0000 145.4778
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Use Cleaner Engines for Construction Equipment
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 44.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 266.00 97.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 53.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 9 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
310
3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 4.0000e-
005
2.8200e-
003
6.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.5000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
3.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
1.2000e-
004
0.0000 1.2400 1.2400 4.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
004
1.2996
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.6300e-
003
1.1200e-
003
0.0141 4.0000e-
005
5.0400e-
003
3.0000e-
005
5.0600e-
003
1.3400e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.3600e-
003
0.0000 3.9480 3.9480 1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
3.9832
Total 1.6700e-
003
3.9400e-
003
0.0148 5.0000e-
005
5.3900e-
003
5.0000e-
005
5.4300e-
003
1.4400e-
003
4.0000e-
005
1.4800e-
003
0.0000 5.1880 5.1880 1.5000e-
004
3.1000e-
004
5.2827
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 2.0300e-
003
0.0000 2.0300e-
003
3.1000e-
004
0.0000 3.1000e-
004
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0536 1.3882 1.0486 1.6500e-
003
0.0388 0.0388 0.0388 0.0388 0.0000 144.4661 144.4661 0.0405 0.0000 145.4776
Total 0.0536 1.3882 1.0486 1.6500e-
003
2.0300e-
003
0.0388 0.0409 3.1000e-
004
0.0388 0.0391 0.0000 144.4661 144.4661 0.0405 0.0000 145.4776
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 10 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
311
3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 4.0000e-
005
2.8200e-
003
6.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.5000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
3.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
1.2000e-
004
0.0000 1.2400 1.2400 4.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
004
1.2996
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.6300e-
003
1.1200e-
003
0.0141 4.0000e-
005
5.0400e-
003
3.0000e-
005
5.0600e-
003
1.3400e-
003
2.0000e-
005
1.3600e-
003
0.0000 3.9480 3.9480 1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
3.9832
Total 1.6700e-
003
3.9400e-
003
0.0148 5.0000e-
005
5.3900e-
003
5.0000e-
005
5.4300e-
003
1.4400e-
003
4.0000e-
005
1.4800e-
003
0.0000 5.1880 5.1880 1.5000e-
004
3.1000e-
004
5.2827
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.2 Demolition - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 2.7000e-
004
0.0000 2.7000e-
004
4.0000e-
005
0.0000 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 5.6100e-
003
0.0522 0.0493 1.0000e-
004
2.4000e-
003
2.4000e-
003
2.2300e-
003
2.2300e-
003
0.0000 8.4990 8.4990 2.3800e-
003
0.0000 8.5585
Total 5.6100e-
003
0.0522 0.0493 1.0000e-
004
2.7000e-
004
2.4000e-
003
2.6700e-
003
4.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
2.2700e-
003
0.0000 8.4990 8.4990 2.3800e-
003
0.0000 8.5585
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 11 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
312
3.2 Demolition - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 1.7000e-
004
4.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.0718 0.0718 0.0000 1.0000e-
005
0.0753
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 9.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
7.8000e-
004
0.0000 3.0000e-
004
0.0000 3.0000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
0.0000 8.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2265 0.2265 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.2284
Total 9.0000e-
005
2.3000e-
004
8.2000e-
004
0.0000 3.2000e-
004
0.0000 3.2000e-
004
9.0000e-
005
0.0000 9.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2983 0.2983 1.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
005
0.3037
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 1.2000e-
004
0.0000 1.2000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1500e-
003
0.0817 0.0617 1.0000e-
004
2.2800e-
003
2.2800e-
003
2.2800e-
003
2.2800e-
003
0.0000 8.4990 8.4990 2.3800e-
003
0.0000 8.5585
Total 3.1500e-
003
0.0817 0.0617 1.0000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
2.2800e-
003
2.4000e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.2800e-
003
2.3000e-
003
0.0000 8.4990 8.4990 2.3800e-
003
0.0000 8.5585
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 12 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
313
3.2 Demolition - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 1.7000e-
004
4.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.0718 0.0718 0.0000 1.0000e-
005
0.0753
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 9.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
7.8000e-
004
0.0000 3.0000e-
004
0.0000 3.0000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
0.0000 8.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2265 0.2265 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.2284
Total 9.0000e-
005
2.3000e-
004
8.2000e-
004
0.0000 3.2000e-
004
0.0000 3.2000e-
004
9.0000e-
005
0.0000 9.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2983 0.2983 1.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
005
0.3037
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 1.1874 0.0000 1.1874 0.4700 0.0000 0.4700 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.4135 4.1604 3.5624 7.9800e-
003
0.1716 0.1716 0.1579 0.1579 0.0000 700.5759 700.5759 0.2266 0.0000 706.2404
Total 0.4135 4.1604 3.5624 7.9800e-
003
1.1874 0.1716 1.3590 0.4700 0.1579 0.6279 0.0000 700.5759 700.5759 0.2266 0.0000 706.2404
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 13 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
314
3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 6.1600e-
003
4.0200e-
003
0.0533 1.7000e-
004
0.0203 1.0000e-
004
0.0204 5.4000e-
003
9.0000e-
005
5.4900e-
003
0.0000 15.5234 15.5234 4.2000e-
004
4.1000e-
004
15.6551
Total 6.1600e-
003
4.0200e-
003
0.0533 1.7000e-
004
0.0203 1.0000e-
004
0.0204 5.4000e-
003
9.0000e-
005
5.4900e-
003
0.0000 15.5234 15.5234 4.2000e-
004
4.1000e-
004
15.6551
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.5343 0.0000 0.5343 0.2115 0.0000 0.2115 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.2327 6.5842 4.7189 7.9800e-
003
0.1713 0.1713 0.1713 0.1713 0.0000 700.5750 700.5750 0.2266 0.0000 706.2395
Total 0.2327 6.5842 4.7189 7.9800e-
003
0.5343 0.1713 0.7057 0.2115 0.1713 0.3828 0.0000 700.5750 700.5750 0.2266 0.0000 706.2395
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 14 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
315
3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 6.1600e-
003
4.0200e-
003
0.0533 1.7000e-
004
0.0203 1.0000e-
004
0.0204 5.4000e-
003
9.0000e-
005
5.4900e-
003
0.0000 15.5234 15.5234 4.2000e-
004
4.1000e-
004
15.6551
Total 6.1600e-
003
4.0200e-
003
0.0533 1.7000e-
004
0.0203 1.0000e-
004
0.0204 5.4000e-
003
9.0000e-
005
5.4900e-
003
0.0000 15.5234 15.5234 4.2000e-
004
4.1000e-
004
15.6551
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.4226 0.0000 0.4226 0.0496 0.0000 0.0496 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.3500e-
003
0.0419 0.0395 9.0000e-
005
1.7000e-
003
1.7000e-
003
1.5600e-
003
1.5600e-
003
0.0000 8.1759 8.1759 2.6400e-
003
0.0000 8.2420
Total 4.3500e-
003
0.0419 0.0395 9.0000e-
005
0.4226 1.7000e-
003
0.4243 0.0496 1.5600e-
003
0.0512 0.0000 8.1759 8.1759 2.6400e-
003
0.0000 8.2420
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 15 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
316
3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 7.0000e-
005
4.0000e-
005
5.8000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
6.0000e-
005
0.0000 6.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1769 0.1769 0.0000 0.0000 0.1783
Total 7.0000e-
005
4.0000e-
005
5.8000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
6.0000e-
005
0.0000 6.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1769 0.1769 0.0000 0.0000 0.1783
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.1902 0.0000 0.1902 0.0223 0.0000 0.0223 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.7200e-
003
0.0769 0.0551 9.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
003
2.0000e-
003
2.0000e-
003
2.0000e-
003
0.0000 8.1759 8.1759 2.6400e-
003
0.0000 8.2420
Total 2.7200e-
003
0.0769 0.0551 9.0000e-
005
0.1902 2.0000e-
003
0.1922 0.0223 2.0000e-
003
0.0243 0.0000 8.1759 8.1759 2.6400e-
003
0.0000 8.2420
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 16 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
317
3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 7.0000e-
005
4.0000e-
005
5.8000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
6.0000e-
005
0.0000 6.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1769 0.1769 0.0000 0.0000 0.1783
Total 7.0000e-
005
4.0000e-
005
5.8000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
6.0000e-
005
0.0000 6.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1769 0.1769 0.0000 0.0000 0.1783
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1764 1.6086 2.0749 3.4800e-
003
0.0681 0.0681 0.0640 0.0640 0.0000 299.1761 299.1761 0.0703 0.0000 300.9343
Total 0.1764 1.6086 2.0749 3.4800e-
003
0.0681 0.0681 0.0640 0.0640 0.0000 299.1761 299.1761 0.0703 0.0000 300.9343
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 17 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
318
3.4 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0126 0.5545 0.1674 2.4500e-
003
0.0821 3.2800e-
003
0.0854 0.0238 3.1400e-
003
0.0269 0.0000 238.8276 238.8276 4.9800e-
003
0.0353 249.4740
Worker 0.0773 0.0484 0.6675 2.1400e-
003
0.2711 1.2700e-
003
0.2724 0.0721 1.1700e-
003
0.0733 0.0000 202.3128 202.3128 5.0400e-
003
5.0900e-
003
203.9565
Total 0.0899 0.6029 0.8349 4.5900e-
003
0.3533 4.5500e-
003
0.3578 0.0959 4.3100e-
003
0.1002 0.0000 441.1405 441.1405 0.0100 0.0404 453.4305
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1394 3.0385 2.3057 3.4800e-
003
0.1166 0.1166 0.1166 0.1166 0.0000 299.1757 299.1757 0.0703 0.0000 300.9339
Total 0.1394 3.0385 2.3057 3.4800e-
003
0.1166 0.1166 0.1166 0.1166 0.0000 299.1757 299.1757 0.0703 0.0000 300.9339
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 18 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
319
3.4 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0126 0.5545 0.1674 2.4500e-
003
0.0821 3.2800e-
003
0.0854 0.0238 3.1400e-
003
0.0269 0.0000 238.8276 238.8276 4.9800e-
003
0.0353 249.4740
Worker 0.0773 0.0484 0.6675 2.1400e-
003
0.2711 1.2700e-
003
0.2724 0.0721 1.1700e-
003
0.0733 0.0000 202.3128 202.3128 5.0400e-
003
5.0900e-
003
203.9565
Total 0.0899 0.6029 0.8349 4.5900e-
003
0.3533 4.5500e-
003
0.3578 0.0959 4.3100e-
003
0.1002 0.0000 441.1405 441.1405 0.0100 0.0404 453.4305
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0321 0.2930 0.3780 6.3000e-
004
0.0124 0.0124 0.0117 0.0117 0.0000 54.5011 54.5011 0.0128 0.0000 54.8214
Total 0.0321 0.2930 0.3780 6.3000e-
004
0.0124 0.0124 0.0117 0.0117 0.0000 54.5011 54.5011 0.0128 0.0000 54.8214
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 19 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
320
3.4 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 2.2500e-
003
0.1004 0.0301 4.4000e-
004
0.0150 5.9000e-
004
0.0156 4.3300e-
003
5.7000e-
004
4.9000e-
003
0.0000 42.7104 42.7104 9.0000e-
004
6.3100e-
003
44.6135
Worker 0.0133 8.0200e-
003
0.1150 3.8000e-
004
0.0494 2.2000e-
004
0.0496 0.0131 2.0000e-
004
0.0133 0.0000 36.0179 36.0179 8.4000e-
004
8.8000e-
004
36.3002
Total 0.0156 0.1084 0.1451 8.2000e-
004
0.0644 8.1000e-
004
0.0652 0.0175 7.7000e-
004
0.0182 0.0000 78.7283 78.7283 1.7400e-
003
7.1900e-
003
80.9136
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0254 0.5535 0.4200 6.3000e-
004
0.0212 0.0212 0.0212 0.0212 0.0000 54.5010 54.5010 0.0128 0.0000 54.8213
Total 0.0254 0.5535 0.4200 6.3000e-
004
0.0212 0.0212 0.0212 0.0212 0.0000 54.5010 54.5010 0.0128 0.0000 54.8213
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 20 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
321
3.4 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 2.2500e-
003
0.1004 0.0301 4.4000e-
004
0.0150 5.9000e-
004
0.0156 4.3300e-
003
5.7000e-
004
4.9000e-
003
0.0000 42.7104 42.7104 9.0000e-
004
6.3100e-
003
44.6135
Worker 0.0133 8.0200e-
003
0.1150 3.8000e-
004
0.0494 2.2000e-
004
0.0496 0.0131 2.0000e-
004
0.0133 0.0000 36.0179 36.0179 8.4000e-
004
8.8000e-
004
36.3002
Total 0.0156 0.1084 0.1451 8.2000e-
004
0.0644 8.1000e-
004
0.0652 0.0175 7.7000e-
004
0.0182 0.0000 78.7283 78.7283 1.7400e-
003
7.1900e-
003
80.9136
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 3.6600e-
003
0.0343 0.0583 9.0000e-
005
1.6700e-
003
1.6700e-
003
1.5400e-
003
1.5400e-
003
0.0000 8.0077 8.0077 2.5900e-
003
0.0000 8.0725
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 3.6600e-
003
0.0343 0.0583 9.0000e-
005
1.6700e-
003
1.6700e-
003
1.5400e-
003
1.5400e-
003
0.0000 8.0077 8.0077 2.5900e-
003
0.0000 8.0725
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 21 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
322
3.5 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.4000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
1.1700e-
003
0.0000 4.7000e-
004
0.0000 4.8000e-
004
1.3000e-
004
0.0000 1.3000e-
004
0.0000 0.3538 0.3538 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.3566
Total 1.4000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
1.1700e-
003
0.0000 4.7000e-
004
0.0000 4.8000e-
004
1.3000e-
004
0.0000 1.3000e-
004
0.0000 0.3538 0.3538 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.3566
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 3.7200e-
003
0.0805 0.0692 9.0000e-
005
2.6700e-
003
2.6700e-
003
2.6700e-
003
2.6700e-
003
0.0000 8.0077 8.0077 2.5900e-
003
0.0000 8.0724
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 3.7200e-
003
0.0805 0.0692 9.0000e-
005
2.6700e-
003
2.6700e-
003
2.6700e-
003
2.6700e-
003
0.0000 8.0077 8.0077 2.5900e-
003
0.0000 8.0724
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 22 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
323
3.5 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.4000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
1.1700e-
003
0.0000 4.7000e-
004
0.0000 4.8000e-
004
1.3000e-
004
0.0000 1.3000e-
004
0.0000 0.3538 0.3538 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.3566
Total 1.4000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
1.1700e-
003
0.0000 4.7000e-
004
0.0000 4.8000e-
004
1.3000e-
004
0.0000 1.3000e-
004
0.0000 0.3538 0.3538 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.3566
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Paving - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0215 0.2017 0.3426 5.4000e-
004
9.8400e-
003
9.8400e-
003
9.0500e-
003
9.0500e-
003
0.0000 47.0453 47.0453 0.0152 0.0000 47.4256
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0215 0.2017 0.3426 5.4000e-
004
9.8400e-
003
9.8400e-
003
9.0500e-
003
9.0500e-
003
0.0000 47.0453 47.0453 0.0152 0.0000 47.4256
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 23 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
324
3.5 Paving - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 7.5000e-
004
4.5000e-
004
6.4900e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.7900e-
003
1.0000e-
005
2.8000e-
003
7.4000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.5000e-
004
0.0000 2.0311 2.0311 5.0000e-
005
5.0000e-
005
2.0470
Total 7.5000e-
004
4.5000e-
004
6.4900e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.7900e-
003
1.0000e-
005
2.8000e-
003
7.4000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.5000e-
004
0.0000 2.0311 2.0311 5.0000e-
005
5.0000e-
005
2.0470
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0219 0.4727 0.4065 5.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0157 0.0157 0.0157 0.0000 47.0452 47.0452 0.0152 0.0000 47.4256
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0219 0.4727 0.4065 5.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0157 0.0157 0.0157 0.0000 47.0452 47.0452 0.0152 0.0000 47.4256
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 24 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
325
3.5 Paving - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 7.5000e-
004
4.5000e-
004
6.4900e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.7900e-
003
1.0000e-
005
2.8000e-
003
7.4000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.5000e-
004
0.0000 2.0311 2.0311 5.0000e-
005
5.0000e-
005
2.0470
Total 7.5000e-
004
4.5000e-
004
6.4900e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.7900e-
003
1.0000e-
005
2.8000e-
003
7.4000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
7.5000e-
004
0.0000 2.0311 2.0311 5.0000e-
005
5.0000e-
005
2.0470
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.5551 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 6.8000e-
004
4.5800e-
003
7.2400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
2.1000e-
004
2.1000e-
004
2.1000e-
004
2.1000e-
004
0.0000 1.0213 1.0213 6.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.0227
Total 0.5558 4.5800e-
003
7.2400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
2.1000e-
004
2.1000e-
004
2.1000e-
004
2.1000e-
004
0.0000 1.0213 1.0213 6.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.0227
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 25 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
326
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 4.8000e-
004
3.0000e-
004
4.1200e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.6800e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.6800e-
003
4.5000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.5000e-
004
0.0000 1.2499 1.2499 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
1.2601
Total 4.8000e-
004
3.0000e-
004
4.1200e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.6800e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.6800e-
003
4.5000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.5000e-
004
0.0000 1.2499 1.2499 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
1.2601
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.5551 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.6000e-
004
9.4100e-
003
7.3300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
3.8000e-
004
3.8000e-
004
3.8000e-
004
3.8000e-
004
0.0000 1.0213 1.0213 6.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.0227
Total 0.5556 9.4100e-
003
7.3300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
3.8000e-
004
3.8000e-
004
3.8000e-
004
3.8000e-
004
0.0000 1.0213 1.0213 6.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.0227
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 26 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
327
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 4.8000e-
004
3.0000e-
004
4.1200e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.6800e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.6800e-
003
4.5000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.5000e-
004
0.0000 1.2499 1.2499 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
1.2601
Total 4.8000e-
004
3.0000e-
004
4.1200e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.6800e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.6800e-
003
4.5000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.5000e-
004
0.0000 1.2499 1.2499 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
1.2601
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 3.2613 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 4.0200e-
003
0.0269 0.0425 7.0000e-
005
1.2100e-
003
1.2100e-
003
1.2100e-
003
1.2100e-
003
0.0000 6.0002 6.0002 3.3000e-
004
0.0000 6.0083
Total 3.2653 0.0269 0.0425 7.0000e-
005
1.2100e-
003
1.2100e-
003
1.2100e-
003
1.2100e-
003
0.0000 6.0002 6.0002 3.3000e-
004
0.0000 6.0083
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 27 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
328
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 2.6500e-
003
1.6000e-
003
0.0229 8.0000e-
005
9.8400e-
003
4.0000e-
005
9.8900e-
003
2.6200e-
003
4.0000e-
005
2.6600e-
003
0.0000 7.1765 7.1765 1.7000e-
004
1.7000e-
004
7.2328
Total 2.6500e-
003
1.6000e-
003
0.0229 8.0000e-
005
9.8400e-
003
4.0000e-
005
9.8900e-
003
2.6200e-
003
4.0000e-
005
2.6600e-
003
0.0000 7.1765 7.1765 1.7000e-
004
1.7000e-
004
7.2328
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 3.2613 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.6800e-
003
0.0553 0.0431 7.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
2.2300e-
003
2.2300e-
003
2.2300e-
003
0.0000 6.0001 6.0001 3.3000e-
004
0.0000 6.0083
Total 3.2639 0.0553 0.0431 7.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
2.2300e-
003
2.2300e-
003
2.2300e-
003
0.0000 6.0001 6.0001 3.3000e-
004
0.0000 6.0083
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 28 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
329
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 2.6500e-
003
1.6000e-
003
0.0229 8.0000e-
005
9.8400e-
003
4.0000e-
005
9.8900e-
003
2.6200e-
003
4.0000e-
005
2.6600e-
003
0.0000 7.1765 7.1765 1.7000e-
004
1.7000e-
004
7.2328
Total 2.6500e-
003
1.6000e-
003
0.0229 8.0000e-
005
9.8400e-
003
4.0000e-
005
9.8900e-
003
2.6200e-
003
4.0000e-
005
2.6600e-
003
0.0000 7.1765 7.1765 1.7000e-
004
1.7000e-
004
7.2328
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 29 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
330
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.9477 1.0675 9.0456 0.0193 2.2014 0.0140 2.2155 0.5882 0.0131 0.6012 0.0000 1,833.864
2
1,833.864
2
0.1136 0.0851 1,862.057
2
Unmitigated 0.9477 1.0675 9.0456 0.0193 2.2014 0.0140 2.2155 0.5882 0.0131 0.6012 0.0000 1,833.864
2
1,833.864
2
0.1136 0.0851 1,862.057
2
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Apartments Mid Rise 197.91 132.57 110.43 406,672 406,672
Industrial Park 1,778.60 1,340.54 654.44 4,078,051 4,078,051
Single Family Housing 652.05 658.26 589.95 1,487,539 1,487,539
Total 2,628.56 2,131.37 1,354.82 5,972,262 5,972,262
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by
Apartments Mid Rise 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3
Industrial Park 9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 28.00 13.00 79 19 2
Single Family Housing 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Apartments Mid Rise 0.554285 0.058871 0.188253 0.120585 0.022598 0.005697 0.010798 0.007525 0.000977 0.000545 0.026246 0.000848 0.002771
Industrial Park 0.554285 0.058871 0.188253 0.120585 0.022598 0.005697 0.010798 0.007525 0.000977 0.000545 0.026246 0.000848 0.002771
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 30 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
331
Single Family Housing 0.554285 0.058871 0.188253 0.120585 0.022598 0.005697 0.010798 0.007525 0.000977 0.000545 0.026246 0.000848 0.002771
5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 898.1050 898.1050 0.1453 0.0176 906.9856
Electricity
Unmitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 898.1050 898.1050 0.1453 0.0176 906.9856
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.0572 0.5142 0.3925 3.1200e-
003
0.0395 0.0395 0.0395 0.0395 0.0000 566.3857 566.3857 0.0109 0.0104 569.7514
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.0572 0.5142 0.3925 3.1200e-
003
0.0395 0.0395 0.0395 0.0395 0.0000 566.3857 566.3857 0.0109 0.0104 569.7514
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 31 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
332
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise
226305 1.2200e-
003
0.0104 4.4400e-
003
7.0000e-
005
8.4000e-
004
8.4000e-
004
8.4000e-
004
8.4000e-
004
0.0000 12.0765 12.0765 2.3000e-
004
2.2000e-
004
12.1483
Industrial Park 8.54992e
+006
0.0461 0.4191 0.3521 2.5100e-
003
0.0319 0.0319 0.0319 0.0319 0.0000 456.2564 456.2564 8.7400e-
003
8.3600e-
003
458.9677
Single Family
Housing
1.83744e
+006
9.9100e-
003
0.0847 0.0360 5.4000e-
004
6.8500e-
003
6.8500e-
003
6.8500e-
003
6.8500e-
003
0.0000 98.0527 98.0527 1.8800e-
003
1.8000e-
003
98.6354
Total 0.0572 0.5142 0.3925 3.1200e-
003
0.0395 0.0395 0.0395 0.0395 0.0000 566.3857 566.3857 0.0109 0.0104 569.7514
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 32 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
333
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise
226305 1.2200e-
003
0.0104 4.4400e-
003
7.0000e-
005
8.4000e-
004
8.4000e-
004
8.4000e-
004
8.4000e-
004
0.0000 12.0765 12.0765 2.3000e-
004
2.2000e-
004
12.1483
Industrial Park 8.54992e
+006
0.0461 0.4191 0.3521 2.5100e-
003
0.0319 0.0319 0.0319 0.0319 0.0000 456.2564 456.2564 8.7400e-
003
8.3600e-
003
458.9677
Single Family
Housing
1.83744e
+006
9.9100e-
003
0.0847 0.0360 5.4000e-
004
6.8500e-
003
6.8500e-
003
6.8500e-
003
6.8500e-
003
0.0000 98.0527 98.0527 1.8800e-
003
1.8000e-
003
98.6354
Total 0.0572 0.5142 0.3925 3.1200e-
003
0.0395 0.0395 0.0395 0.0395 0.0000 566.3857 566.3857 0.0109 0.0104 569.7514
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 33 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
334
5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise
104394 9.6589 1.5600e-
003
1.9000e-
004
9.7544
Industrial Park 9.06186e
+006
838.4377 0.1356 0.0164 846.7284
Single Family
Housing
540492 50.0084 8.0900e-
003
9.8000e-
004
50.5029
Total 898.1050 0.1453 0.0176 906.9856
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 34 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
335
Use only Natural Gas Hearths
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise
104394 9.6589 1.5600e-
003
1.9000e-
004
9.7544
Industrial Park 9.06186e
+006
838.4377 0.1356 0.0164 846.7284
Single Family
Housing
540492 50.0084 8.0900e-
003
9.8000e-
004
50.5029
Total 898.1050 0.1453 0.0176 906.9856
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 35 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
336
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 3.0559 0.0142 0.7195 8.0000e-
005
4.4500e-
003
4.4500e-
003
4.4500e-
003
4.4500e-
003
0.0000 8.1099 8.1099 1.2700e-
003
1.3000e-
004
8.1796
Unmitigated 3.5242 0.0186 1.3941 1.4300e-
003
0.1015 0.1015 0.1015 0.1015 10.0016 3.8329 13.8345 0.0197 5.8000e-
004
14.5001
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating
0.3816 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
2.6517 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.4690 0.0104 0.6772 1.3900e-
003
0.0975 0.0975 0.0975 0.0975 10.0016 2.6591 12.6607 0.0186 5.8000e-
004
13.2979
Landscaping 0.0218 8.2500e-
003
0.7170 4.0000e-
005
3.9700e-
003
3.9700e-
003
3.9700e-
003
3.9700e-
003
0.0000 1.1738 1.1738 1.1400e-
003
0.0000 1.2023
Total 3.5242 0.0186 1.3941 1.4300e-
003
0.1015 0.1015 0.1015 0.1015 10.0016 3.8329 13.8345 0.0197 5.8000e-
004
14.5001
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 36 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
337
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating
0.3816 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
2.6517 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 7.0000e-
004
5.9900e-
003
2.5500e-
003
4.0000e-
005
4.8000e-
004
4.8000e-
004
4.8000e-
004
4.8000e-
004
0.0000 6.9361 6.9361 1.3000e-
004
1.3000e-
004
6.9773
Landscaping 0.0218 8.2500e-
003
0.7170 4.0000e-
005
3.9700e-
003
3.9700e-
003
3.9700e-
003
3.9700e-
003
0.0000 1.1738 1.1738 1.1400e-
003
0.0000 1.2023
Total 3.0559 0.0142 0.7195 8.0000e-
005
4.4500e-
003
4.4500e-
003
4.4500e-
003
4.4500e-
003
0.0000 8.1099 8.1099 1.2700e-
003
1.3000e-
004
8.1796
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 37 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
338
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 106.2148 4.1913 0.1000 240.7976
Unmitigated 106.2148 4.1913 0.1000 240.7976
7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise
1.75916 /
1.10903
1.7980 0.0575 1.3800e-
003
3.6466
Industrial Park 122.047 /
0
99.8221 3.9868 0.0951 227.8319
Single Family
Housing
4.49563 /
2.8342
4.5948 0.1470 3.5200e-
003
9.3191
Total 106.2148 4.1913 0.1000 240.7976
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 38 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
339
7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise
1.75916 /
1.10903
1.7980 0.0575 1.3800e-
003
3.6466
Industrial Park 122.047 /
0
99.8221 3.9868 0.0951 227.8319
Single Family
Housing
4.49563 /
2.8342
4.5948 0.1470 3.5200e-
003
9.3191
Total 106.2148 4.1913 0.1000 240.7976
Mitigated
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 39 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
340
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 152.1600 8.9924 0.0000 376.9700
Unmitigated 152.1600 8.9924 0.0000 376.9700
Category/Year
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise
12.42 2.5212 0.1490 0.0000 6.2460
Industrial Park 654.43 132.8434 7.8508 0.0000 329.1138
Single Family
Housing
82.74 16.7955 0.9926 0.0000 41.6101
Total 152.1600 8.9924 0.0000 376.9700
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 40 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
341
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise
12.42 2.5212 0.1490 0.0000 6.2460
Industrial Park 654.43 132.8434 7.8508 0.0000 329.1138
Single Family
Housing
82.74 16.7955 0.9926 0.0000 41.6101
Total 152.1600 8.9924 0.0000 376.9700
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 41 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
342
11.0 Vegetation
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:16 PMPage 42 of 42
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
343
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - The project would subdivide the 40.2-acre site into four parcels to accommodate proposed residential and industrial development. A total of 78
residential units are proposed with the potential to provide up to 97 units within 9.87 acres designated Medium-Density Residential in the General Plan and
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. Approximately 527,773 square feet of industrial use is proposed on 30.29 acres designated Industrial Park in the General Plan
and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.
Construction Phase - The proposed project would include phased construction, which would consist of a demolition phase from 2023 to 2024, grading phase
from 2024 to 2025 and building construction from 2025 to 2026. Overall, construction of the proposed project is anticipated to last approximately 30 months, and
is anticipated to be fully improved by 2026.
Grading -
Demolition - The proposed project would demolish the existing onsite buildings.
Vehicle Trips - Based on the Proposed Transportation Analysis Methodology
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Single Family Housing 69.00 Dwelling Unit 9.57 124,200.00 197
Apartments Mid Rise 27.00 Dwelling Unit 0.30 27,000.00 77
Industrial Park 527.77 1000sqft 30.29 527,773.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
4
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 64
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
2026Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 0.033CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.004N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 1 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
344
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Assuming compliance with BAAQMD Basic Construction Mitigation Measures and use of Tier 2 construction
equipment.
Area Mitigation - Assuming only natural gas hearth.Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 5.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 3.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 3.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 5.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 2 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
345
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 740.00 305.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 50.00 90.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 75.00 260.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 11/6/2026 3/6/2026
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 6/5/2026 3/6/2026
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/10/2023 1/5/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/4/2023 1/3/2025
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/21/2026 3/6/2026
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 8/22/2026 12/22/2025
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 8/5/2023 1/6/2025
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 1/2/2023 9/4/2023
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 4/22/2023 1/8/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 6/6/2026 12/22/2025
tblLandUse LotAcreage 22.40 9.57
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.71 0.30
tblLandUse LotAcreage 12.12 30.29
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 5.44 7.33
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 9.44 9.45
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 3 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
346
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 2.3107 21.5716 20.0175 0.0402 0.2380 0.9987 1.2367 0.0511 0.9291 0.9802 0.0000 3,888.459
7
3,888.459
7
1.0532 7.6800e-
003
3,917.080
4
2024 3.2687 32.4047 28.1684 0.0635 9.3679 1.3362 10.7041 3.6973 1.2293 4.9266 0.0000 6,151.900
9
6,151.900
9
1.9470 7.4400e-
003
6,201.536
5
2025 142.1232 27.9679 40.7233 0.0940 9.3679 1.1316 10.4995 3.6973 1.0411 4.7384 0.0000 9,401.105
6
9,401.105
6
1.9462 0.3518 9,541.523
5
2026 142.0769 26.6996 40.3171 0.0929 3.4007 1.0347 4.4354 0.9169 0.9678 1.8848 0.0000 9,310.854
5
9,310.854
5
1.4184 0.3434 9,448.636
7
Maximum 142.1232 32.4047 40.7233 0.0940 9.3679 1.3362 10.7041 3.6973 1.2293 4.9266 0.0000 9,401.105
6
9,401.105
6
1.9470 0.3518 9,541.523
5
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 4 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
347
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 1.3033 32.7510 25.0480 0.0402 0.1796 0.9147 1.0943 0.0423 0.9146 0.9569 0.0000 3,888.459
7
3,888.459
7
1.0532 7.6800e-
003
3,917.080
4
2024 1.8611 51.2664 37.1682 0.0635 4.3059 1.3341 5.6400 1.6878 1.3340 3.0218 0.0000 6,151.900
9
6,151.900
9
1.9470 7.4400e-
003
6,201.536
5
2025 141.7956 51.2636 45.2533 0.0940 4.3059 1.7034 5.6400 1.6878 1.7013 3.0218 0.0000 9,401.105
6
9,401.105
6
1.9462 0.3518 9,541.523
5
2026 141.7493 50.5243 44.8472 0.0929 3.4007 1.7027 5.1034 0.9169 1.7006 2.6176 0.0000 9,310.854
5
9,310.854
5
1.4184 0.3434 9,448.636
7
Maximum 141.7956 51.2664 45.2533 0.0940 4.3059 1.7034 5.6400 1.6878 1.7013 3.0218 0.0000 9,401.105
6
9,401.105
6
1.9470 0.3518 9,541.523
5
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
1.06 -71.02 -17.87 0.00 45.51 -25.63 34.97 48.17 -35.59 23.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 5 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
348
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 99.4736 1.7139 115.1169 0.2029 15.2039 15.2039 15.2039 15.2039 1,632.118
2
540.6118 2,172.730
0
2.0618 0.1152 2,258.604
0
Energy 0.3136 2.8176 2.1508 0.0171 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 3,421.004
4
3,421.004
4
0.0656 0.0627 3,441.333
7
Mobile 6.4257 6.0019 55.0687 0.1240 13.9780 0.0858 14.0638 3.7230 0.0799 3.8030 13,014.35
26
13,014.35
26
0.7182 0.5444 13,194.52
27
Total 106.2129 10.5334 172.3364 0.3439 13.9780 15.5064 29.4844 3.7230 15.5005 19.2236 1,632.118
2
16,975.96
88
18,608.08
70
2.8456 0.7223 18,894.46
04
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 16.9895 1.1669 8.4239 7.2900e-
003
0.1310 0.1310 0.1310 0.1310 0.0000 1,387.035
4
1,387.035
4
0.0403 0.0252 1,395.541
3
Energy 0.3136 2.8176 2.1508 0.0171 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 3,421.004
4
3,421.004
4
0.0656 0.0627 3,441.333
7
Mobile 6.4257 6.0019 55.0687 0.1240 13.9780 0.0858 14.0638 3.7230 0.0799 3.8030 13,014.35
26
13,014.35
26
0.7182 0.5444 13,194.52
27
Total 23.7288 9.9864 65.6434 0.1484 13.9780 0.4335 14.4115 3.7230 0.4276 4.1507 0.0000 17,822.39
23
17,822.39
23
0.8241 0.6322 18,031.39
77
Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 6 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
349
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/4/2023 1/5/2024 5 90
2 Grading Grading 1/8/2024 1/3/2025 5 260
3 Building Construction Building Construction 1/6/2025 3/6/2026 5 305
4 Paving Paving 12/22/2025 3/6/2026 5 55
5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 12/22/2025 3/6/2026 5 55
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
77.66 5.19 61.91 56.86 0.00 97.20 51.12 0.00 97.24 78.41 100.00 -4.99 4.22 71.04 12.46 4.57
Residential Indoor: 306,180; Residential Outdoor: 102,060; Non-Residential Indoor: 791,660; Non-Residential Outdoor: 263,887; Striped
Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 780
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 7 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
350
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Use Cleaner Engines for Construction Equipment
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 44.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 266.00 97.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 53.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 8 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
351
3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.1062 0.0000 0.1062 0.0161 0.0000 0.0161 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.2691 21.4844 19.6434 0.0388 0.9975 0.9975 0.9280 0.9280 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Total 2.2691 21.4844 19.6434 0.0388 0.1062 0.9975 1.1037 0.0161 0.9280 0.9441 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 1.0500e-
003
0.0639 0.0155 2.9000e-
004
8.5500e-
003
5.4000e-
004
9.0900e-
003
2.3400e-
003
5.1000e-
004
2.8600e-
003
32.1489 32.1489 1.0600e-
003
5.0900e-
003
33.6935
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0406 0.0233 0.3586 1.0700e-
003
0.1232 6.1000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.6000e-
004
0.0333 109.3267 109.3267 2.7600e-
003
2.5900e-
003
110.1686
Total 0.0416 0.0872 0.3741 1.3600e-
003
0.1318 1.1500e-
003
0.1329 0.0350 1.0700e-
003
0.0361 141.4757 141.4757 3.8200e-
003
7.6800e-
003
143.8621
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 9 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
352
3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.0478 0.0000 0.0478 7.2400e-
003
0.0000 7.2400e-
003
0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.2617 32.6638 24.6739 0.0388 0.9135 0.9135 0.9135 0.9135 0.0000 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Total 1.2617 32.6638 24.6739 0.0388 0.0478 0.9135 0.9613 7.2400e-
003
0.9135 0.9208 0.0000 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 1.0500e-
003
0.0639 0.0155 2.9000e-
004
8.5500e-
003
5.4000e-
004
9.0900e-
003
2.3400e-
003
5.1000e-
004
2.8600e-
003
32.1489 32.1489 1.0600e-
003
5.0900e-
003
33.6935
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0406 0.0233 0.3586 1.0700e-
003
0.1232 6.1000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.6000e-
004
0.0333 109.3267 109.3267 2.7600e-
003
2.5900e-
003
110.1686
Total 0.0416 0.0872 0.3741 1.3600e-
003
0.1318 1.1500e-
003
0.1329 0.0350 1.0700e-
003
0.0361 141.4757 141.4757 3.8200e-
003
7.6800e-
003
143.8621
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 10 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
353
3.2 Demolition - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.1062 0.0000 0.1062 0.0161 0.0000 0.0161 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.2437 20.8781 19.7073 0.0388 0.9602 0.9602 0.8922 0.8922 3,747.422
8
3,747.422
8
1.0485 3,773.634
5
Total 2.2437 20.8781 19.7073 0.0388 0.1062 0.9602 1.0664 0.0161 0.8922 0.9083 3,747.422
8
3,747.422
8
1.0485 3,773.634
5
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 1.0400e-
003
0.0639 0.0156 2.9000e-
004
8.5500e-
003
5.4000e-
004
9.0900e-
003
2.3400e-
003
5.2000e-
004
2.8600e-
003
31.6486 31.6486 1.0600e-
003
5.0200e-
003
33.1698
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0379 0.0208 0.3342 1.0300e-
003
0.1232 5.8000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.4000e-
004
0.0332 106.6142 106.6142 2.4900e-
003
2.4200e-
003
107.3970
Total 0.0389 0.0847 0.3498 1.3200e-
003
0.1318 1.1200e-
003
0.1329 0.0350 1.0600e-
003
0.0361 138.2627 138.2627 3.5500e-
003
7.4400e-
003
140.5668
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 11 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
354
3.2 Demolition - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.0478 0.0000 0.0478 7.2400e-
003
0.0000 7.2400e-
003
0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.2617 32.6638 24.6739 0.0388 0.9135 0.9135 0.9135 0.9135 0.0000 3,747.422
8
3,747.422
8
1.0485 3,773.634
5
Total 1.2617 32.6638 24.6739 0.0388 0.0478 0.9135 0.9613 7.2400e-
003
0.9135 0.9208 0.0000 3,747.422
8
3,747.422
8
1.0485 3,773.634
5
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 1.0400e-
003
0.0639 0.0156 2.9000e-
004
8.5500e-
003
5.4000e-
004
9.0900e-
003
2.3400e-
003
5.2000e-
004
2.8600e-
003
31.6486 31.6486 1.0600e-
003
5.0200e-
003
33.1698
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0379 0.0208 0.3342 1.0300e-
003
0.1232 5.8000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.4000e-
004
0.0332 106.6142 106.6142 2.4900e-
003
2.4200e-
003
107.3970
Total 0.0389 0.0847 0.3498 1.3200e-
003
0.1318 1.1200e-
003
0.1329 0.0350 1.0600e-
003
0.0361 138.2627 138.2627 3.5500e-
003
7.4400e-
003
140.5668
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 12 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
355
3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.2036 0.0000 9.2036 3.6538 0.0000 3.6538 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 1.3354 1.3354 1.2286 1.2286 6,009.748
7
6,009.748
7
1.9437 6,058.340
5
Total 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 9.2036 1.3354 10.5390 3.6538 1.2286 4.8823 6,009.748
7
6,009.748
7
1.9437 6,058.340
5
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0505 0.0278 0.4456 1.3800e-
003
0.1643 7.8000e-
004
0.1651 0.0436 7.1000e-
004
0.0443 142.1522 142.1522 3.3200e-
003
3.2200e-
003
143.1960
Total 0.0505 0.0278 0.4456 1.3800e-
003
0.1643 7.8000e-
004
0.1651 0.0436 7.1000e-
004
0.0443 142.1522 142.1522 3.3200e-
003
3.2200e-
003
143.1960
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 13 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
356
3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 4.1416 0.0000 4.1416 1.6442 0.0000 1.6442 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.8106 51.2386 36.7226 0.0621 1.3333 1.3333 1.3333 1.3333 0.0000 6,009.748
7
6,009.748
7
1.9437 6,058.340
5
Total 1.8106 51.2386 36.7226 0.0621 4.1416 1.3333 5.4749 1.6442 1.3333 2.9775 0.0000 6,009.748
7
6,009.748
7
1.9437 6,058.340
5
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0505 0.0278 0.4456 1.3800e-
003
0.1643 7.8000e-
004
0.1651 0.0436 7.1000e-
004
0.0443 142.1522 142.1522 3.3200e-
003
3.2200e-
003
143.1960
Total 0.0505 0.0278 0.4456 1.3800e-
003
0.1643 7.8000e-
004
0.1651 0.0436 7.1000e-
004
0.0443 142.1522 142.1522 3.3200e-
003
3.2200e-
003
143.1960
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 14 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
357
3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.2036 0.0000 9.2036 3.6538 0.0000 3.6538 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.9012 27.9429 26.3311 0.0621 1.1309 1.1309 1.0404 1.0404 6,008.281
4
6,008.281
4
1.9432 6,056.861
4
Total 2.9012 27.9429 26.3311 0.0621 9.2036 1.1309 10.3345 3.6538 1.0404 4.6942 6,008.281
4
6,008.281
4
1.9432 6,056.861
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0475 0.0250 0.4176 1.3300e-
003
0.1643 7.4000e-
004
0.1650 0.0436 6.8000e-
004
0.0443 138.7377 138.7377 3.0100e-
003
3.0200e-
003
139.7137
Total 0.0475 0.0250 0.4176 1.3300e-
003
0.1643 7.4000e-
004
0.1650 0.0436 6.8000e-
004
0.0443 138.7377 138.7377 3.0100e-
003
3.0200e-
003
139.7137
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 15 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
358
3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 4.1416 0.0000 4.1416 1.6442 0.0000 1.6442 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.8106 51.2386 36.7226 0.0621 1.3333 1.3333 1.3333 1.3333 0.0000 6,008.281
4
6,008.281
4
1.9432 6,056.861
4
Total 1.8106 51.2386 36.7226 0.0621 4.1416 1.3333 5.4749 1.6442 1.3333 2.9775 0.0000 6,008.281
4
6,008.281
4
1.9432 6,056.861
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0475 0.0250 0.4176 1.3300e-
003
0.1643 7.4000e-
004
0.1650 0.0436 6.8000e-
004
0.0443 138.7377 138.7377 3.0100e-
003
3.0200e-
003
139.7137
Total 0.0475 0.0250 0.4176 1.3300e-
003
0.1643 7.4000e-
004
0.1650 0.0436 6.8000e-
004
0.0443 138.7377 138.7377 3.0100e-
003
3.0200e-
003
139.7137
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 16 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
359
3.4 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.1000 4.1468 1.2773 0.0190 0.6570 0.0254 0.6824 0.1891 0.0243 0.2134 2,039.518
7
2,039.518
7
0.0427 0.3013 2,130.386
7
Worker 0.6313 0.3325 5.5543 0.0177 2.1851 9.8800e-
003
2.1950 0.5796 9.0900e-
003
0.5887 1,845.211
2
1,845.211
2
0.0401 0.0402 1,858.192
4
Total 0.7314 4.4793 6.8316 0.0367 2.8421 0.0353 2.8774 0.7687 0.0334 0.8021 3,884.729
9
3,884.729
9
0.0828 0.3415 3,988.579
1
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 17 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
360
3.4 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0809 23.5544 17.8738 0.0270 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Total 1.0809 23.5544 17.8738 0.0270 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.1000 4.1468 1.2773 0.0190 0.6570 0.0254 0.6824 0.1891 0.0243 0.2134 2,039.518
7
2,039.518
7
0.0427 0.3013 2,130.386
7
Worker 0.6313 0.3325 5.5543 0.0177 2.1851 9.8800e-
003
2.1950 0.5796 9.0900e-
003
0.5887 1,845.211
2
1,845.211
2
0.0401 0.0402 1,858.192
4
Total 0.7314 4.4793 6.8316 0.0367 2.8421 0.0353 2.8774 0.7687 0.0334 0.8021 3,884.729
9
3,884.729
9
0.0828 0.3415 3,988.579
1
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 18 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
361
3.4 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0979 4.1226 1.2589 0.0186 0.6570 0.0253 0.6823 0.1892 0.0242 0.2133 2,002.136
1
2,002.136
1
0.0425 0.2957 2,091.301
6
Worker 0.5962 0.3028 5.2455 0.0172 2.1851 9.4100e-
003
2.1945 0.5796 8.6600e-
003
0.5883 1,803.106
4
1,803.106
4
0.0366 0.0380 1,815.344
4
Total 0.6940 4.4254 6.5044 0.0358 2.8421 0.0347 2.8768 0.7688 0.0328 0.8016 3,805.242
5
3,805.242
5
0.0791 0.3337 3,906.646
0
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 19 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
362
3.4 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0809 23.5544 17.8738 0.0270 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Total 1.0809 23.5544 17.8738 0.0270 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0979 4.1226 1.2589 0.0186 0.6570 0.0253 0.6823 0.1892 0.0242 0.2133 2,002.136
1
2,002.136
1
0.0425 0.2957 2,091.301
6
Worker 0.5962 0.3028 5.2455 0.0172 2.1851 9.4100e-
003
2.1945 0.5796 8.6600e-
003
0.5883 1,803.106
4
1,803.106
4
0.0366 0.0380 1,815.344
4
Total 0.6940 4.4254 6.5044 0.0358 2.8421 0.0347 2.8768 0.7688 0.0328 0.8016 3,805.242
5
3,805.242
5
0.0791 0.3337 3,906.646
0
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 20 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
363
3.5 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0356 0.0188 0.3132 1.0000e-
003
0.1232 5.6000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.1000e-
004
0.0332 104.0533 104.0533 2.2600e-
003
2.2700e-
003
104.7853
Total 0.0356 0.0188 0.3132 1.0000e-
003
0.1232 5.6000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.1000e-
004
0.0332 104.0533 104.0533 2.2600e-
003
2.2700e-
003
104.7853
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 21 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
364
3.5 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9311 20.1146 17.2957 0.0228 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.0000 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9311 20.1146 17.2957 0.0228 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.0000 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0356 0.0188 0.3132 1.0000e-
003
0.1232 5.6000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.1000e-
004
0.0332 104.0533 104.0533 2.2600e-
003
2.2700e-
003
104.7853
Total 0.0356 0.0188 0.3132 1.0000e-
003
0.1232 5.6000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.1000e-
004
0.0332 104.0533 104.0533 2.2600e-
003
2.2700e-
003
104.7853
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 22 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
365
3.5 Paving - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0336 0.0171 0.2958 9.7000e-
004
0.1232 5.3000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 4.9000e-
004
0.0332 101.6789 101.6789 2.0600e-
003
2.1400e-
003
102.3691
Total 0.0336 0.0171 0.2958 9.7000e-
004
0.1232 5.3000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 4.9000e-
004
0.0332 101.6789 101.6789 2.0600e-
003
2.1400e-
003
102.3691
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 23 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
366
3.5 Paving - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9311 20.1146 17.2957 0.0228 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.0000 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9311 20.1146 17.2957 0.0228 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.0000 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0336 0.0171 0.2958 9.7000e-
004
0.1232 5.3000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 4.9000e-
004
0.0332 101.6789 101.6789 2.0600e-
003
2.1400e-
003
102.3691
Total 0.0336 0.0171 0.2958 9.7000e-
004
0.1232 5.3000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 4.9000e-
004
0.0332 101.6789 101.6789 2.0600e-
003
2.1400e-
003
102.3691
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 24 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
367
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 138.7770 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e-
003
0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Total 138.9479 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e-
003
0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.1258 0.0663 1.1067 3.5300e-
003
0.4354 1.9700e-
003
0.4374 0.1155 1.8100e-
003
0.1173 367.6549 367.6549 7.9900e-
003
8.0100e-
003
370.2413
Total 0.1258 0.0663 1.1067 3.5300e-
003
0.4354 1.9700e-
003
0.4374 0.1155 1.8100e-
003
0.1173 367.6549 367.6549 7.9900e-
003
8.0100e-
003
370.2413
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 25 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
368
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 138.7770 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1139 2.3524 1.8324 2.9700e-
003
0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Total 138.8909 2.3524 1.8324 2.9700e-
003
0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.1258 0.0663 1.1067 3.5300e-
003
0.4354 1.9700e-
003
0.4374 0.1155 1.8100e-
003
0.1173 367.6549 367.6549 7.9900e-
003
8.0100e-
003
370.2413
Total 0.1258 0.0663 1.1067 3.5300e-
003
0.4354 1.9700e-
003
0.4374 0.1155 1.8100e-
003
0.1173 367.6549 367.6549 7.9900e-
003
8.0100e-
003
370.2413
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 26 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
369
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 138.7770 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e-
003
0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Total 138.9479 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e-
003
0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.1188 0.0603 1.0452 3.4200e-
003
0.4354 1.8800e-
003
0.4373 0.1155 1.7300e-
003
0.1172 359.2656 359.2656 7.2900e-
003
7.5700e-
003
361.7040
Total 0.1188 0.0603 1.0452 3.4200e-
003
0.4354 1.8800e-
003
0.4373 0.1155 1.7300e-
003
0.1172 359.2656 359.2656 7.2900e-
003
7.5700e-
003
361.7040
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 27 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
370
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 138.7770 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1139 2.3524 1.8324 2.9700e-
003
0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Total 138.8909 2.3524 1.8324 2.9700e-
003
0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.1188 0.0603 1.0452 3.4200e-
003
0.4354 1.8800e-
003
0.4373 0.1155 1.7300e-
003
0.1172 359.2656 359.2656 7.2900e-
003
7.5700e-
003
361.7040
Total 0.1188 0.0603 1.0452 3.4200e-
003
0.4354 1.8800e-
003
0.4373 0.1155 1.7300e-
003
0.1172 359.2656 359.2656 7.2900e-
003
7.5700e-
003
361.7040
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 28 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
371
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 6.4257 6.0019 55.0687 0.1240 13.9780 0.0858 14.0638 3.7230 0.0799 3.8030 13,014.35
26
13,014.35
26
0.7182 0.5444 13,194.52
27
Unmitigated 6.4257 6.0019 55.0687 0.1240 13.9780 0.0858 14.0638 3.7230 0.0799 3.8030 13,014.35
26
13,014.35
26
0.7182 0.5444 13,194.52
27
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Apartments Mid Rise 197.91 132.57 110.43 406,672 406,672
Industrial Park 1,778.60 1,340.54 654.44 4,078,051 4,078,051
Single Family Housing 652.05 658.26 589.95 1,487,539 1,487,539
Total 2,628.56 2,131.37 1,354.82 5,972,262 5,972,262
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by
Apartments Mid Rise 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3
Industrial Park 9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 28.00 13.00 79 19 2
Single Family Housing 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 29 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
372
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Apartments Mid Rise 0.554285 0.058871 0.188253 0.120585 0.022598 0.005697 0.010798 0.007525 0.000977 0.000545 0.026246 0.000848 0.002771
Industrial Park 0.554285 0.058871 0.188253 0.120585 0.022598 0.005697 0.010798 0.007525 0.000977 0.000545 0.026246 0.000848 0.002771
Single Family Housing 0.554285 0.058871 0.188253 0.120585 0.022598 0.005697 0.010798 0.007525 0.000977 0.000545 0.026246 0.000848 0.002771
5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.3136 2.8176 2.1508 0.0171 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 3,421.004
4
3,421.004
4
0.0656 0.0627 3,441.333
7
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.3136 2.8176 2.1508 0.0171 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 3,421.004
4
3,421.004
4
0.0656 0.0627 3,441.333
7
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 30 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
373
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Apartments Mid
Rise
620.015 6.6900e-
003
0.0571 0.0243 3.6000e-
004
4.6200e-
003
4.6200e-
003
4.6200e-
003
4.6200e-
003
72.9429 72.9429 1.4000e-
003
1.3400e-
003
73.3764
Industrial Park 23424.4 0.2526 2.2965 1.9291 0.0138 0.1745 0.1745 0.1745 0.1745 2,755.817
1
2,755.817
1
0.0528 0.0505 2,772.193
6
Single Family
Housing
5034.08 0.0543 0.4639 0.1974 2.9600e-
003
0.0375 0.0375 0.0375 0.0375 592.2444 592.2444 0.0114 0.0109 595.7638
Total 0.3136 2.8176 2.1508 0.0171 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 3,421.004
4
3,421.004
4
0.0656 0.0627 3,441.333
8
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 31 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
374
Use only Natural Gas Hearths
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Apartments Mid
Rise
0.620015 6.6900e-
003
0.0571 0.0243 3.6000e-
004
4.6200e-
003
4.6200e-
003
4.6200e-
003
4.6200e-
003
72.9429 72.9429 1.4000e-
003
1.3400e-
003
73.3764
Industrial Park 23.4244 0.2526 2.2965 1.9291 0.0138 0.1745 0.1745 0.1745 0.1745 2,755.817
1
2,755.817
1
0.0528 0.0505 2,772.193
6
Single Family
Housing
5.03408 0.0543 0.4639 0.1974 2.9600e-
003
0.0375 0.0375 0.0375 0.0375 592.2444 592.2444 0.0114 0.0109 595.7638
Total 0.3136 2.8176 2.1508 0.0171 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 3,421.004
4
3,421.004
4
0.0656 0.0627 3,441.333
8
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 32 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
375
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 16.9895 1.1669 8.4239 7.2900e-
003
0.1310 0.1310 0.1310 0.1310 0.0000 1,387.035
4
1,387.035
4
0.0403 0.0252 1,395.541
3
Unmitigated 99.4736 1.7139 115.1169 0.2029 15.2039 15.2039 15.2039 15.2039 1,632.118
2
540.6118 2,172.730
0
2.0618 0.1152 2,258.604
0
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
2.0912 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
14.5300 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 82.6099 1.6223 107.1505 0.2024 15.1598 15.1598 15.1598 15.1598 1,632.118
2
526.2353 2,158.353
5
2.0479 0.1152 2,243.878
6
Landscaping 0.2425 0.0916 7.9664 4.2000e-
004
0.0441 0.0441 0.0441 0.0441 14.3765 14.3765 0.0140 14.7255
Total 99.4736 1.7139 115.1169 0.2029 15.2039 15.2039 15.2039 15.2039 1,632.118
2
540.6118 2,172.730
0
2.0618 0.1152 2,258.604
0
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 33 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
376
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
2.0912 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
14.5300 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.1258 1.0753 0.4576 6.8600e-
003
0.0869 0.0869 0.0869 0.0869 0.0000 1,372.658
8
1,372.658
8
0.0263 0.0252 1,380.815
9
Landscaping 0.2425 0.0916 7.9664 4.2000e-
004
0.0441 0.0441 0.0441 0.0441 14.3765 14.3765 0.0140 14.7255
Total 16.9895 1.1669 8.4239 7.2800e-
003
0.1310 0.1310 0.1310 0.1310 0.0000 1,387.035
4
1,387.035
4
0.0403 0.0252 1,395.541
3
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 34 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
377
11.0 Vegetation
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
8.0 Waste Detail
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:17 PMPage 35 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
378
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - The project would subdivide the 40.2-acre site into four parcels to accommodate proposed residential and industrial development. A total of 78
residential units are proposed with the potential to provide up to 97 units within 9.87 acres designated Medium-Density Residential in the General Plan and
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. Approximately 527,773 square feet of industrial use is proposed on 30.29 acres designated Industrial Park in the General Plan
and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan.
Construction Phase - The proposed project would include phased construction, which would consist of a demolition phase from 2023 to 2024, grading phase
from 2024 to 2025 and building construction from 2025 to 2026. Overall, construction of the proposed project is anticipated to last approximately 30 months, and
is anticipated to be fully improved by 2026.
Grading -
Demolition - The proposed project would demolish the existing onsite buildings.
Vehicle Trips - Based on the Proposed Transportation Analysis Methodology
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Single Family Housing 69.00 Dwelling Unit 9.57 124,200.00 197
Apartments Mid Rise 27.00 Dwelling Unit 0.30 27,000.00 77
Industrial Park 527.77 1000sqft 30.29 527,773.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
4
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 64
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
2026Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 0.033CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.004N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 1 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
379
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Assuming compliance with BAAQMD Basic Construction Mitigation Measures and use of Tier 2 construction
equipment.
Area Mitigation - Assuming only natural gas hearth.Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 5.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 3.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 3.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 5.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 2 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
380
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 2
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 740.00 305.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 50.00 90.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 75.00 260.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 11/6/2026 3/6/2026
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 6/5/2026 3/6/2026
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/10/2023 1/5/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/4/2023 1/3/2025
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 8/21/2026 3/6/2026
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 8/22/2026 12/22/2025
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 8/5/2023 1/6/2025
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 1/2/2023 9/4/2023
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 4/22/2023 1/8/2024
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 6/6/2026 12/22/2025
tblLandUse LotAcreage 22.40 9.57
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.71 0.30
tblLandUse LotAcreage 12.12 30.29
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 5.44 7.33
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 9.44 9.45
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 3 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
381
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 2.3117 21.5807 20.0025 0.0401 0.2380 0.9987 1.2367 0.0511 0.9291 0.9802 0.0000 3,880.740
7
3,880.740
7
1.0536 8.0900e-
003
3,909.489
0
2024 3.2702 32.4112 28.1511 0.0634 9.3679 1.3362 10.7041 3.6973 1.2293 4.9266 0.0000 6,141.846
1
6,141.846
1
1.9475 7.8000e-
003
6,191.638
1
2025 142.1457 27.9737 40.5156 0.0924 9.3679 1.1316 10.4995 3.6973 1.0411 4.7384 0.0000 9,240.569
2
9,240.569
2
1.9467 0.3601 9,383.640
2
2026 142.1007 27.0282 40.1364 0.0914 3.4007 1.0348 4.4355 0.9169 0.9679 1.8848 0.0000 9,154.258
1
9,154.258
1
1.4249 0.3512 9,294.546
0
Maximum 142.1457 32.4112 40.5156 0.0924 9.3679 1.3362 10.7041 3.6973 1.2293 4.9266 0.0000 9,240.569
2
9,240.569
2
1.9475 0.3601 9,383.640
2
Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 4 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
382
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 1.3043 32.7602 25.0330 0.0401 0.1796 0.9147 1.0943 0.0423 0.9146 0.9569 0.0000 3,880.740
7
3,880.740
7
1.0536 8.0900e-
003
3,909.489
0
2024 1.8626 51.2729 37.1509 0.0634 4.3059 1.3341 5.6400 1.6878 1.3340 3.0218 0.0000 6,141.846
1
6,141.846
1
1.9475 7.8000e-
003
6,191.638
0
2025 141.8181 51.2695 45.0456 0.0924 4.3059 1.7035 5.6400 1.6878 1.7014 3.0218 0.0000 9,240.569
2
9,240.569
2
1.9467 0.3601 9,383.640
2
2026 141.7731 50.8528 44.6664 0.0914 3.4007 1.7028 5.1035 0.9169 1.7007 2.6176 0.0000 9,154.258
1
9,154.258
1
1.4249 0.3512 9,294.546
0
Maximum 141.8181 51.2729 45.0456 0.0924 4.3059 1.7035 5.6400 1.6878 1.7014 3.0218 0.0000 9,240.569
2
9,240.569
2
1.9475 0.3601 9,383.640
2
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
1.06 -70.79 -17.93 0.00 45.51 -25.63 34.97 48.17 -35.60 23.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 5 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
383
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 99.4736 1.7139 115.1169 0.2029 15.2039 15.2039 15.2039 15.2039 1,632.118
2
540.6118 2,172.730
0
2.0618 0.1152 2,258.604
0
Energy 0.3136 2.8176 2.1508 0.0171 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 3,421.004
4
3,421.004
4
0.0656 0.0627 3,441.333
7
Mobile 5.7869 6.8860 58.8708 0.1171 13.9780 0.0859 14.0638 3.7230 0.0800 3.8030 12,290.94
76
12,290.94
76
0.8071 0.5947 12,488.35
37
Total 105.5741 11.4175 176.1384 0.3370 13.9780 15.5064 29.4844 3.7230 15.5006 19.2236 1,632.118
2
16,252.56
39
17,884.68
21
2.9345 0.7727 18,188.29
15
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 16.9895 1.1669 8.4239 7.2900e-
003
0.1310 0.1310 0.1310 0.1310 0.0000 1,387.035
4
1,387.035
4
0.0403 0.0252 1,395.541
3
Energy 0.3136 2.8176 2.1508 0.0171 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 3,421.004
4
3,421.004
4
0.0656 0.0627 3,441.333
7
Mobile 5.7869 6.8860 58.8708 0.1171 13.9780 0.0859 14.0638 3.7230 0.0800 3.8030 12,290.94
76
12,290.94
76
0.8071 0.5947 12,488.35
37
Total 23.0900 10.8705 69.4455 0.1415 13.9780 0.4336 14.4115 3.7230 0.4277 4.1507 0.0000 17,098.98
74
17,098.98
74
0.9129 0.6826 17,325.22
87
Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 6 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
384
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/4/2023 1/5/2024 5 90
2 Grading Grading 1/8/2024 1/3/2025 5 260
3 Building Construction Building Construction 1/6/2025 3/6/2026 5 305
4 Paving Paving 12/22/2025 3/6/2026 5 55
5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 12/22/2025 3/6/2026 5 55
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
78.13 4.79 60.57 58.02 0.00 97.20 51.12 0.00 97.24 78.41 100.00 -5.21 4.39 68.89 11.65 4.75
Residential Indoor: 306,180; Residential Outdoor: 102,060; Non-Residential Indoor: 791,660; Non-Residential Outdoor: 263,887; Striped
Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 780
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 7 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
385
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Use Cleaner Engines for Construction Equipment
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 6 15.00 0.00 44.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 9 266.00 97.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 53.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 8 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
386
3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.1062 0.0000 0.1062 0.0161 0.0000 0.0161 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.2691 21.4844 19.6434 0.0388 0.9975 0.9975 0.9280 0.9280 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Total 2.2691 21.4844 19.6434 0.0388 0.1062 0.9975 1.1037 0.0161 0.9280 0.9441 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 9.8000e-
004
0.0676 0.0157 3.0000e-
004
8.5500e-
003
5.4000e-
004
9.0900e-
003
2.3400e-
003
5.1000e-
004
2.8600e-
003
32.1792 32.1792 1.0600e-
003
5.1000e-
003
33.7252
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0416 0.0288 0.3434 9.9000e-
004
0.1232 6.1000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.6000e-
004
0.0333 101.5775 101.5775 3.1300e-
003
2.9900e-
003
102.5455
Total 0.0426 0.0963 0.3592 1.2900e-
003
0.1318 1.1500e-
003
0.1329 0.0350 1.0700e-
003
0.0361 133.7567 133.7567 4.1900e-
003
8.0900e-
003
136.2707
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 9 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
387
3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.0478 0.0000 0.0478 7.2400e-
003
0.0000 7.2400e-
003
0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.2617 32.6638 24.6739 0.0388 0.9135 0.9135 0.9135 0.9135 0.0000 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Total 1.2617 32.6638 24.6739 0.0388 0.0478 0.9135 0.9613 7.2400e-
003
0.9135 0.9208 0.0000 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 9.8000e-
004
0.0676 0.0157 3.0000e-
004
8.5500e-
003
5.4000e-
004
9.0900e-
003
2.3400e-
003
5.1000e-
004
2.8600e-
003
32.1792 32.1792 1.0600e-
003
5.1000e-
003
33.7252
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0416 0.0288 0.3434 9.9000e-
004
0.1232 6.1000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.6000e-
004
0.0333 101.5775 101.5775 3.1300e-
003
2.9900e-
003
102.5455
Total 0.0426 0.0963 0.3592 1.2900e-
003
0.1318 1.1500e-
003
0.1329 0.0350 1.0700e-
003
0.0361 133.7567 133.7567 4.1900e-
003
8.0900e-
003
136.2707
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 10 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
388
3.2 Demolition - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.1062 0.0000 0.1062 0.0161 0.0000 0.0161 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.2437 20.8781 19.7073 0.0388 0.9602 0.9602 0.8922 0.8922 3,747.422
8
3,747.422
8
1.0485 3,773.634
5
Total 2.2437 20.8781 19.7073 0.0388 0.1062 0.9602 1.0664 0.0161 0.8922 0.9083 3,747.422
8
3,747.422
8
1.0485 3,773.634
5
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 9.8000e-
004
0.0676 0.0158 2.9000e-
004
8.5500e-
003
5.4000e-
004
9.0900e-
003
2.3400e-
003
5.2000e-
004
2.8600e-
003
31.6788 31.6788 1.0600e-
003
5.0200e-
003
33.2014
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0390 0.0257 0.3212 9.6000e-
004
0.1232 5.8000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.4000e-
004
0.0332 99.0731 99.0731 2.8400e-
003
2.7800e-
003
99.9731
Total 0.0400 0.0933 0.3370 1.2500e-
003
0.1318 1.1200e-
003
0.1329 0.0350 1.0600e-
003
0.0361 130.7519 130.7519 3.9000e-
003
7.8000e-
003
133.1746
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 11 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
389
3.2 Demolition - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.0478 0.0000 0.0478 7.2400e-
003
0.0000 7.2400e-
003
0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.2617 32.6638 24.6739 0.0388 0.9135 0.9135 0.9135 0.9135 0.0000 3,747.422
8
3,747.422
8
1.0485 3,773.634
5
Total 1.2617 32.6638 24.6739 0.0388 0.0478 0.9135 0.9613 7.2400e-
003
0.9135 0.9208 0.0000 3,747.422
8
3,747.422
8
1.0485 3,773.634
5
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 9.8000e-
004
0.0676 0.0158 2.9000e-
004
8.5500e-
003
5.4000e-
004
9.0900e-
003
2.3400e-
003
5.2000e-
004
2.8600e-
003
31.6788 31.6788 1.0600e-
003
5.0200e-
003
33.2014
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0390 0.0257 0.3212 9.6000e-
004
0.1232 5.8000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.4000e-
004
0.0332 99.0731 99.0731 2.8400e-
003
2.7800e-
003
99.9731
Total 0.0400 0.0933 0.3370 1.2500e-
003
0.1318 1.1200e-
003
0.1329 0.0350 1.0600e-
003
0.0361 130.7519 130.7519 3.9000e-
003
7.8000e-
003
133.1746
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 12 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
390
3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.2036 0.0000 9.2036 3.6538 0.0000 3.6538 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 1.3354 1.3354 1.2286 1.2286 6,009.748
7
6,009.748
7
1.9437 6,058.340
5
Total 3.2181 32.3770 27.7228 0.0621 9.2036 1.3354 10.5390 3.6538 1.2286 4.8823 6,009.748
7
6,009.748
7
1.9437 6,058.340
5
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0520 0.0342 0.4283 1.2800e-
003
0.1643 7.8000e-
004
0.1651 0.0436 7.1000e-
004
0.0443 132.0975 132.0975 3.7900e-
003
3.7100e-
003
133.2975
Total 0.0520 0.0342 0.4283 1.2800e-
003
0.1643 7.8000e-
004
0.1651 0.0436 7.1000e-
004
0.0443 132.0975 132.0975 3.7900e-
003
3.7100e-
003
133.2975
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 13 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
391
3.3 Grading - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 4.1416 0.0000 4.1416 1.6442 0.0000 1.6442 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.8106 51.2386 36.7226 0.0621 1.3333 1.3333 1.3333 1.3333 0.0000 6,009.748
7
6,009.748
7
1.9437 6,058.340
5
Total 1.8106 51.2386 36.7226 0.0621 4.1416 1.3333 5.4749 1.6442 1.3333 2.9775 0.0000 6,009.748
7
6,009.748
7
1.9437 6,058.340
5
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0520 0.0342 0.4283 1.2800e-
003
0.1643 7.8000e-
004
0.1651 0.0436 7.1000e-
004
0.0443 132.0975 132.0975 3.7900e-
003
3.7100e-
003
133.2975
Total 0.0520 0.0342 0.4283 1.2800e-
003
0.1643 7.8000e-
004
0.1651 0.0436 7.1000e-
004
0.0443 132.0975 132.0975 3.7900e-
003
3.7100e-
003
133.2975
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 14 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
392
3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.2036 0.0000 9.2036 3.6538 0.0000 3.6538 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.9012 27.9429 26.3311 0.0621 1.1309 1.1309 1.0404 1.0404 6,008.281
4
6,008.281
4
1.9432 6,056.861
4
Total 2.9012 27.9429 26.3311 0.0621 9.2036 1.1309 10.3345 3.6538 1.0404 4.6942 6,008.281
4
6,008.281
4
1.9432 6,056.861
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0490 0.0308 0.4025 1.2400e-
003
0.1643 7.4000e-
004
0.1650 0.0436 6.8000e-
004
0.0443 128.9424 128.9424 3.4500e-
003
3.4800e-
003
130.0645
Total 0.0490 0.0308 0.4025 1.2400e-
003
0.1643 7.4000e-
004
0.1650 0.0436 6.8000e-
004
0.0443 128.9424 128.9424 3.4500e-
003
3.4800e-
003
130.0645
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 15 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
393
3.3 Grading - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 4.1416 0.0000 4.1416 1.6442 0.0000 1.6442 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.8106 51.2386 36.7226 0.0621 1.3333 1.3333 1.3333 1.3333 0.0000 6,008.281
4
6,008.281
4
1.9432 6,056.861
4
Total 1.8106 51.2386 36.7226 0.0621 4.1416 1.3333 5.4749 1.6442 1.3333 2.9775 0.0000 6,008.281
4
6,008.281
4
1.9432 6,056.861
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0490 0.0308 0.4025 1.2400e-
003
0.1643 7.4000e-
004
0.1650 0.0436 6.8000e-
004
0.0443 128.9424 128.9424 3.4500e-
003
3.4800e-
003
130.0645
Total 0.0490 0.0308 0.4025 1.2400e-
003
0.1643 7.4000e-
004
0.1650 0.0436 6.8000e-
004
0.0443 128.9424 128.9424 3.4500e-
003
3.4800e-
003
130.0645
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 16 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
394
3.4 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0962 4.3880 1.3220 0.0190 0.6570 0.0255 0.6825 0.1891 0.0244 0.2135 2,042.562
9
2,042.562
9
0.0424 0.3021 2,133.645
5
Worker 0.6523 0.4101 5.3533 0.0165 2.1851 9.8800e-
003
2.1950 0.5796 9.0900e-
003
0.5887 1,714.934
4
1,714.934
4
0.0459 0.0462 1,729.857
7
Total 0.7485 4.7980 6.6753 0.0355 2.8421 0.0354 2.8775 0.7687 0.0335 0.8022 3,757.497
3
3,757.497
3
0.0883 0.3483 3,863.503
2
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 17 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
395
3.4 Building Construction - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0809 23.5544 17.8738 0.0270 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Total 1.0809 23.5544 17.8738 0.0270 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0962 4.3880 1.3220 0.0190 0.6570 0.0255 0.6825 0.1891 0.0244 0.2135 2,042.562
9
2,042.562
9
0.0424 0.3021 2,133.645
5
Worker 0.6523 0.4101 5.3533 0.0165 2.1851 9.8800e-
003
2.1950 0.5796 9.0900e-
003
0.5887 1,714.934
4
1,714.934
4
0.0459 0.0462 1,729.857
7
Total 0.7485 4.7980 6.6753 0.0355 2.8421 0.0354 2.8775 0.7687 0.0335 0.8022 3,757.497
3
3,757.497
3
0.0883 0.3483 3,863.503
2
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 18 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
396
3.4 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Total 1.3674 12.4697 16.0847 0.0270 0.5276 0.5276 0.4963 0.4963 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0939 4.3626 1.3032 0.0187 0.6570 0.0253 0.6824 0.1892 0.0242 0.2134 2,005.175
1
2,005.175
1
0.0422 0.2964 2,094.549
5
Worker 0.6183 0.3734 5.0663 0.0160 2.1851 9.4100e-
003
2.1945 0.5796 8.6600e-
003
0.5883 1,675.971
6
1,675.971
6
0.0419 0.0437 1,690.038
8
Total 0.7122 4.7359 6.3695 0.0346 2.8421 0.0348 2.8769 0.7688 0.0329 0.8017 3,681.146
7
3,681.146
7
0.0841 0.3401 3,784.588
3
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 19 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
397
3.4 Building Construction - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0809 23.5544 17.8738 0.0270 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Total 1.0809 23.5544 17.8738 0.0270 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,556.474
4
2,556.474
4
0.6010 2,571.498
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0939 4.3626 1.3032 0.0187 0.6570 0.0253 0.6824 0.1892 0.0242 0.2134 2,005.175
1
2,005.175
1
0.0422 0.2964 2,094.549
5
Worker 0.6183 0.3734 5.0663 0.0160 2.1851 9.4100e-
003
2.1945 0.5796 8.6600e-
003
0.5883 1,675.971
6
1,675.971
6
0.0419 0.0437 1,690.038
8
Total 0.7122 4.7359 6.3695 0.0346 2.8421 0.0348 2.8769 0.7688 0.0329 0.8017 3,681.146
7
3,681.146
7
0.0841 0.3401 3,784.588
3
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 20 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
398
3.5 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0368 0.0231 0.3019 9.3000e-
004
0.1232 5.6000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.1000e-
004
0.0332 96.7068 96.7068 2.5900e-
003
2.6100e-
003
97.5484
Total 0.0368 0.0231 0.3019 9.3000e-
004
0.1232 5.6000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.1000e-
004
0.0332 96.7068 96.7068 2.5900e-
003
2.6100e-
003
97.5484
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 21 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
399
3.5 Paving - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9311 20.1146 17.2957 0.0228 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.0000 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9311 20.1146 17.2957 0.0228 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.0000 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0368 0.0231 0.3019 9.3000e-
004
0.1232 5.6000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.1000e-
004
0.0332 96.7068 96.7068 2.5900e-
003
2.6100e-
003
97.5484
Total 0.0368 0.0231 0.3019 9.3000e-
004
0.1232 5.6000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 5.1000e-
004
0.0332 96.7068 96.7068 2.5900e-
003
2.6100e-
003
97.5484
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 22 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
400
3.5 Paving - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9152 8.5816 14.5780 0.0228 0.4185 0.4185 0.3850 0.3850 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0349 0.0211 0.2857 9.0000e-
004
0.1232 5.3000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 4.9000e-
004
0.0332 94.5097 94.5097 2.3600e-
003
2.4600e-
003
95.3029
Total 0.0349 0.0211 0.2857 9.0000e-
004
0.1232 5.3000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 4.9000e-
004
0.0332 94.5097 94.5097 2.3600e-
003
2.4600e-
003
95.3029
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 23 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
401
3.5 Paving - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9311 20.1146 17.2957 0.0228 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.0000 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9311 20.1146 17.2957 0.0228 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.6670 0.0000 2,206.745
2
2,206.745
2
0.7137 2,224.587
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0349 0.0211 0.2857 9.0000e-
004
0.1232 5.3000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 4.9000e-
004
0.0332 94.5097 94.5097 2.3600e-
003
2.4600e-
003
95.3029
Total 0.0349 0.0211 0.2857 9.0000e-
004
0.1232 5.3000e-
004
0.1238 0.0327 4.9000e-
004
0.0332 94.5097 94.5097 2.3600e-
003
2.4600e-
003
95.3029
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 24 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
402
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 138.7770 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e-
003
0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Total 138.9479 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e-
003
0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.1300 0.0817 1.0666 3.2800e-
003
0.4354 1.9700e-
003
0.4374 0.1155 1.8100e-
003
0.1173 341.6975 341.6975 9.1400e-
003
9.2100e-
003
344.6709
Total 0.1300 0.0817 1.0666 3.2800e-
003
0.4354 1.9700e-
003
0.4374 0.1155 1.8100e-
003
0.1173 341.6975 341.6975 9.1400e-
003
9.2100e-
003
344.6709
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 25 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
403
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2025
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 138.7770 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1139 2.3524 1.8324 2.9700e-
003
0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Total 138.8909 2.3524 1.8324 2.9700e-
003
0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.1300 0.0817 1.0666 3.2800e-
003
0.4354 1.9700e-
003
0.4374 0.1155 1.8100e-
003
0.1173 341.6975 341.6975 9.1400e-
003
9.2100e-
003
344.6709
Total 0.1300 0.0817 1.0666 3.2800e-
003
0.4354 1.9700e-
003
0.4374 0.1155 1.8100e-
003
0.1173 341.6975 341.6975 9.1400e-
003
9.2100e-
003
344.6709
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 26 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
404
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 138.7770 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1709 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e-
003
0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Total 138.9479 1.1455 1.8091 2.9700e-
003
0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 0.0515 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.1232 0.0744 1.0095 3.1800e-
003
0.4354 1.8800e-
003
0.4373 0.1155 1.7300e-
003
0.1172 333.9342 333.9342 8.3500e-
003
8.7000e-
003
336.7370
Total 0.1232 0.0744 1.0095 3.1800e-
003
0.4354 1.8800e-
003
0.4373 0.1155 1.7300e-
003
0.1172 333.9342 333.9342 8.3500e-
003
8.7000e-
003
336.7370
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 27 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
405
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2026
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 138.7770 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1139 2.3524 1.8324 2.9700e-
003
0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Total 138.8909 2.3524 1.8324 2.9700e-
003
0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0154 281.8319
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.1232 0.0744 1.0095 3.1800e-
003
0.4354 1.8800e-
003
0.4373 0.1155 1.7300e-
003
0.1172 333.9342 333.9342 8.3500e-
003
8.7000e-
003
336.7370
Total 0.1232 0.0744 1.0095 3.1800e-
003
0.4354 1.8800e-
003
0.4373 0.1155 1.7300e-
003
0.1172 333.9342 333.9342 8.3500e-
003
8.7000e-
003
336.7370
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 28 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
406
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 5.7869 6.8860 58.8708 0.1171 13.9780 0.0859 14.0638 3.7230 0.0800 3.8030 12,290.94
76
12,290.94
76
0.8071 0.5947 12,488.35
37
Unmitigated 5.7869 6.8860 58.8708 0.1171 13.9780 0.0859 14.0638 3.7230 0.0800 3.8030 12,290.94
76
12,290.94
76
0.8071 0.5947 12,488.35
37
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Apartments Mid Rise 197.91 132.57 110.43 406,672 406,672
Industrial Park 1,778.60 1,340.54 654.44 4,078,051 4,078,051
Single Family Housing 652.05 658.26 589.95 1,487,539 1,487,539
Total 2,628.56 2,131.37 1,354.82 5,972,262 5,972,262
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by
Apartments Mid Rise 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3
Industrial Park 9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 28.00 13.00 79 19 2
Single Family Housing 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 29 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
407
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Apartments Mid Rise 0.554285 0.058871 0.188253 0.120585 0.022598 0.005697 0.010798 0.007525 0.000977 0.000545 0.026246 0.000848 0.002771
Industrial Park 0.554285 0.058871 0.188253 0.120585 0.022598 0.005697 0.010798 0.007525 0.000977 0.000545 0.026246 0.000848 0.002771
Single Family Housing 0.554285 0.058871 0.188253 0.120585 0.022598 0.005697 0.010798 0.007525 0.000977 0.000545 0.026246 0.000848 0.002771
5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.3136 2.8176 2.1508 0.0171 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 3,421.004
4
3,421.004
4
0.0656 0.0627 3,441.333
7
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.3136 2.8176 2.1508 0.0171 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 3,421.004
4
3,421.004
4
0.0656 0.0627 3,441.333
7
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 30 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
408
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Apartments Mid
Rise
620.015 6.6900e-
003
0.0571 0.0243 3.6000e-
004
4.6200e-
003
4.6200e-
003
4.6200e-
003
4.6200e-
003
72.9429 72.9429 1.4000e-
003
1.3400e-
003
73.3764
Industrial Park 23424.4 0.2526 2.2965 1.9291 0.0138 0.1745 0.1745 0.1745 0.1745 2,755.817
1
2,755.817
1
0.0528 0.0505 2,772.193
6
Single Family
Housing
5034.08 0.0543 0.4639 0.1974 2.9600e-
003
0.0375 0.0375 0.0375 0.0375 592.2444 592.2444 0.0114 0.0109 595.7638
Total 0.3136 2.8176 2.1508 0.0171 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 3,421.004
4
3,421.004
4
0.0656 0.0627 3,441.333
8
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 31 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
409
Use only Natural Gas Hearths
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Apartments Mid
Rise
0.620015 6.6900e-
003
0.0571 0.0243 3.6000e-
004
4.6200e-
003
4.6200e-
003
4.6200e-
003
4.6200e-
003
72.9429 72.9429 1.4000e-
003
1.3400e-
003
73.3764
Industrial Park 23.4244 0.2526 2.2965 1.9291 0.0138 0.1745 0.1745 0.1745 0.1745 2,755.817
1
2,755.817
1
0.0528 0.0505 2,772.193
6
Single Family
Housing
5.03408 0.0543 0.4639 0.1974 2.9600e-
003
0.0375 0.0375 0.0375 0.0375 592.2444 592.2444 0.0114 0.0109 595.7638
Total 0.3136 2.8176 2.1508 0.0171 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 0.2167 3,421.004
4
3,421.004
4
0.0656 0.0627 3,441.333
8
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 32 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
410
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 16.9895 1.1669 8.4239 7.2900e-
003
0.1310 0.1310 0.1310 0.1310 0.0000 1,387.035
4
1,387.035
4
0.0403 0.0252 1,395.541
3
Unmitigated 99.4736 1.7139 115.1169 0.2029 15.2039 15.2039 15.2039 15.2039 1,632.118
2
540.6118 2,172.730
0
2.0618 0.1152 2,258.604
0
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
2.0912 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
14.5300 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 82.6099 1.6223 107.1505 0.2024 15.1598 15.1598 15.1598 15.1598 1,632.118
2
526.2353 2,158.353
5
2.0479 0.1152 2,243.878
6
Landscaping 0.2425 0.0916 7.9664 4.2000e-
004
0.0441 0.0441 0.0441 0.0441 14.3765 14.3765 0.0140 14.7255
Total 99.4736 1.7139 115.1169 0.2029 15.2039 15.2039 15.2039 15.2039 1,632.118
2
540.6118 2,172.730
0
2.0618 0.1152 2,258.604
0
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 33 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
411
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
2.0912 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
14.5300 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.1258 1.0753 0.4576 6.8600e-
003
0.0869 0.0869 0.0869 0.0869 0.0000 1,372.658
8
1,372.658
8
0.0263 0.0252 1,380.815
9
Landscaping 0.2425 0.0916 7.9664 4.2000e-
004
0.0441 0.0441 0.0441 0.0441 14.3765 14.3765 0.0140 14.7255
Total 16.9895 1.1669 8.4239 7.2800e-
003
0.1310 0.1310 0.1310 0.1310 0.0000 1,387.035
4
1,387.035
4
0.0403 0.0252 1,395.541
3
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 34 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
412
11.0 Vegetation
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
8.0 Waste Detail
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 11/2/2021 2:18 PMPage 35 of 35
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
413
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Appendices
Appendix B
Special Status Plant Survey Report
414
983 University Avenue, Building D Los Gatos, CA 95032 408.458.3200 www.harveyecology.com
May 27, 2021
Randall Branaugh
Bex Development
19077 Madison Avenue
Castro Valley, CA 94546
Subject: Results of Protocol-level Special-Status Plant Surveys in Support of the Branaugh Property
Development (Project # 4423-01)
Dear Mr. Inderbitzen:
H. T. Harvey & Associates is pleased to submit this letter report describing the results of special-status plant
surveys conducted on the Branaugh property at 1881 Collier Canyon Rd., Dublin, California (APN 905-1-4-4).
Technical biological studies conducted in support of the Dublin Boulevard-North Canyons Parkway Project
by H. T. Harvey & Associates and others identified several special-status plant species that may occur within
the alignment including portions that bisect the Branaugh property. In order to support California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis of future development of the property, H. T. Harvey & Associates
has conducted two rounds of protocol-level surveys for special-status plant species within the approximately
39.9-acre property. The surveys were conducted according to California Native Plant Society (CNPS) and
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) protocols for assessing project impacts on special-status
plant species. No special-status plant species were observed and based on the results of the surveys are
considered absent from the property. The following letter report describes the methods and results of our
survey.
Methods
The study area considered for this survey included the entirety of the Branaugh property (APN 905-1-4-4)
located in the city of Dublin, California, Alameda County, north of I-580, and located between Croak Road to
the west and Dolan Road to the east. The study area is located within the Livermore, California U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangle. Elevations within the study area range from approximately 370 to 580
feet (ft) North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) (Google Inc. 2021), with the highest elevations
in the north portion of the parcel, and the lowest elevations along the southern fence line of the property.
Prior to conducting field work, H. T. Harvey & Associates ecologists reviewed available background materials
including aerial images (Google Inc. 2021), a USGS topographic map, the CDFW’s California Natural Diversity
Database (CNDDB 2021), as well previous reports conducted for nearby projects, primarily the Dublin
Boulevard-North Canyons Parkway Project (H. T. Harvey & Associates 2019). For the purposes of this report,
the “project vicinity” is defined as the area within a 5-mile radius surrounding the project study area.
415
2
H. T. Harvey & Associates
In addition, we reviewed all species on current CNPS California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) 1A, 1B, 2A, and 2B
lists occurring in the project region, which is defined as the Livermore, California USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles
and surrounding eight quadrangles (Diablo, Tassajara, Byron Hot Springs, Dublin, Altamont, La Costa Valley,
Mendenhall Springs, and Niles, California). Quadrangle-level results are not maintained for CRPR 3 and 4 species,
so we also conducted a search of the CNPS Inventory records for these species occurring in Alameda County
(CNPS 2021). In addition, we queried the CNDDB (2021) for natural communities of special concern that
occur within the project study area.
Site Visits
Two rounds of rare plant surveys of the project study area were conducted by H. T. Harvey & Associates.
Surveys occurred on April 9th and 10th, 2020 and September 29th, 2020, and on March 25th and April 29th, 2021
for early blooming species. The purpose of these surveys was to conduct protocol-level, floristic surveys for
special-status plants that were determined to have potential to occur on the site. The first round of surveys
conducted on April 9 and 10th, 2020 by plant ecologists Jill Pastick, M.S. and Brad Comito, B.S. The surveys
were conducted over the course of two days in simultaneous with the jurisdictional wetland delineation. The
second round of rare plant surveys was conducted by plant ecologists Jill Pastick, M.S. and Andrew Dilworth,
B.S. on September 29th, 2020 for late flowering species such as Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp.
congdonii) and San Joaquin spearscale (Extriplex joaquinana). Prior to the September 29, 2020 survey, a reference
site in Santa Clara County (Sunnyvale Baylands Park: CNDDB Occurrence #18) was visited by Ms. Pastick to
confirm that Congdon’s tarplant was in bloom and was identifiable.
The special-status plant surveys were conducted according to protocols described by CNPS (2001) and CDFW
(2018). This requires that surveys are floristic in nature, i.e. that all species encountered during the survey area
identified to species, and that the surveys are conducting during time periods that coincide with blooming times
for special-status plants that have potential to occur on the site. During the surveys, the plant ecologists walked
the entirety of the study area with meandering transects, approximately 50-100 feet apart, for full coverage of
the site, with a greater intensity of survey effort spent in areas that were less disturbed and represent a higher
potential for occurrence of special-status plant species.
Results
The CNPS (2021) and CNDDB (2021) identify 81 special-status plant species as potentially occurring in at least
one of the nine USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles containing or surrounding the project alignment for species with
a CRPR 1 and 2, or in Alameda County for CRPR 3 and 4 species. Based on a background review of general
habitats and geologic substrates of the study area, as well as previous surveys conducted of the project area, a
majority of these species were able to be eliminated from consideration for at least one of the following reasons:
(1) absence of suitable habitat types; (2) lack of specific microhabitat or edaphic requirements; (3) the elevation
range of the species is outside of the range of the project study area; and/or (4) the species is presumed
extirpated from the project region. A previous Caltrans Natural Environment Study (NES) prepared for the
Dublin Boulevard-North Canyons Parkway Project (H. T. Harvey & Associates 2019), which includes a central
portion of the Branaugh property, determined that twenty-two species were considered to have some potential
416
3
H. T. Harvey & Associates
to occur on or near the study area. Table 1 lists these species along with their habitat requirements, blooming
periods, and potential for occurrence within the Branaugh property. These species that were targeted during
the two rounds of surveys conducted of the Branaugh parcel.
417
4
Table 1. Special-status Plant Species, Their Status, and Potential Occurrence on the Branaugh Property
Name *Status Habitat Results of Survey
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Rare Species
Heartscale
(Atriplex cordulata var.
cordulata)
CNPS
Rank 1B.2
Chenopod scrub, meadows and
seeps with saline or alkaline soils;
valley and foothill grassland in
sandy soils; 0–560 ft.
Species absent. There is marginally suitable habitat in the form
of seasonal wetlands. However, these wetlands are of low
quality, dominated by non-native hydrophytes and grasses. This
species is known primarily from the Livermore Wetlands Preserve
in eastern Alameda County. Due to a lack of suitable, high
quality valley and foothill grassland, and a lack of sandy soils
throughout the study area, this species is determined to be
absent from the study area.
Crownscale
(Atriplex coronata var.
coronata)
CNPS
Rank 4.2
Chenopod scrub, valley and foothill
grassland, vernal pools in clay
alkaline soils; 0–1,935 ft.
Species absent. There are some seasonal wetlands mapped
throughout the study area, however, these wetlands are not
alkaline and are of generally low quality, dominated by non-
native hydrophytes and grasses. Only a small section of alkaline
California annual grassland occurs in the southern portion of the
study area. This species is known primarily from the Livermore
Wetlands Preserve in eastern Alameda County. Due to a lack of
suitable, high quality valley and foothill grassland, and a lack of
sandy throughout the study area, this species is determined to
be absent from the study area.
418
5
Name *Status Habitat Results of Survey
Brittlescale
(Atriplex depressa)
CNPS
Rank 1B.2
Chenopod scrub, valley and foothill
grassland, vernal pools in clay
alkaline soils; 0–1,050 ft.
Species absent. There is marginally suitable habitat throughout
the study area in the form of California annual grassland. A
nearby CNDDB record, Occurrence #65, in Livermore,
California, showed the species growing in an annual grassland.
However, the California annual grassland within the study area
was dominated by ruderal grass species, such as wild oats and
bromes, and lacks a diversity of native forbs. Thus, suitable
habitat was not present within the study area and the species is
determined to be absent in the study area.
Lesser saltscale
(Atriplex minuscula)
CNPS
Rank 1B.1
Chenopod scrub, playas, valley
and foothill grassland in clay
alkaline soils; 45–655 ft.
Species absent. This species is known primarily from the
Livermore Wetlands Preserve in eastern Alameda County. There
is marginally suitable habitat in the southern portion of the study
area in the form of California annual grassland with alkaline soils.
However, the California annual grassland within the study area
was dominated by ruderal grass species, such as wild oats and
bromes, and lacks a diversity of native forbs. This species is
determined to be absent from the study area.
Congdon’s tarplant
(Centromadia parryi ssp.
congdonii)
CNPS
Rank 1B.1
Valley and foothill grassland in
depressions, swales floodplains with
alkaline soils; usually disturbed
areas; 0–755 ft.
Species absent. The statewide population includes 91
occurrences, and of these, approximately 20 occur within the
immediate vicinity of the study area. The CNDDB has recorded
up to 114,000 individuals of Congdon’s tarplant to the west of
the study area, between Fallon Road and Croak Road (CNDDB
Occurrence #11). Congdon’s tarplant was targeted during the
September 2020 survey, which was conducted at a time when
the species would have been apparent if it were present. No
Congdon’s tarplant was observed on-site.
419
6
Name *Status Habitat Results of Survey
Hispid bird's beak
(Chloropyron molle ssp.
hispidum)
CNPS
Rank 1B.1
Saline marshes, playas, and flats
within valley and foothill grassland;
0–510 ft.
Species Absent. Suitable habitat is absent from the study area.
No saline marshes, playas, or flats were mapped within the
property. This species is known primarily from the Livermore
Wetlands Preserve in eastern Alameda County. A single CNDDB
record has been mapped in Alameda County (Occurrence
#15). This occurrence was recorded in an alkali grassland/alkali
sink scrub, which was not observed within the study area.
Therefore, this species is determined to be absent from the
property.
San Joaquin spearscale
(Extriplex joaquinana)
CNPS
Rank 1B.2
Chenopod scrub, meadows and
seeps, playas, valley and foothill
grassland in alkaline soils; 0–2,740 ft.
Species absent. Marginally suitable habitat and suitable alkaline
soils occur near the southern portion of the study area. The
statewide population is composed of approximately 111 extant
occurrences; and of these, 11 are or were within the immediate
vicinity of the study area. The CNDDB has recorded several
occurrences near the study area, some of which have likely
been extirpated by recent development. The species was not
observed in the seasonal wetland habitat in the southern during
the April 2020 or September 2020 surveys. Thus, it is determined
to be absent from the study area.
Diablo helianthella
(Helianthella castanea)
CNPS
Rank 1B.2
Broadleafed upland forest,
chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal scrub, riparian woodland,
valley and foothill grassland
generally in rocky alluvial soils; 195–
4,265 ft.
Species absent. Suitable habitat is absent from the study area.
This species is known from two nearby occurrences of this
species are mapped north of the study area in Alameda
County, (CNDDB 2021, Occurrences # 93 and 94) which is
located within a 5-mi radius of the study area. These populations
were observed on the north facing slopes of open grassland
with scattered shrubs and valley oak trees (CNDDB 2021), which
was not observed within the study area. Therefore, this species is
determined to be absent from the property.
420
7
Name *Status Habitat Results of Survey
Hogwallow starfish
(Hesperevax caulescens)
CNPS
Rank 4.2
Drying shrink-swell clay of shallow
vernal pools and flats/depressions
in Valley and foothill grassland;
sometimes in alkaline soil; 0–1,655 ft.
Species Absent. Only marginally suitable habitat was mapped
within the study area, in the form of depressions in California
annual grassland habitat at the southern portion of the study
area. This species is known mainly from the Diablo Range in
Alameda County. No CNDDB occurrences have been mapped
for this species in Alameda County. This species is determined to
be absent from the study area.
Ferris’s goldfields
(Lasthenia ferrisiae)
CNPS
Rank 4.2
Wet saline flats and vernal pools
with clay soils; 65–2,295 ft.
Species Absent. Suitable habitat is absent from the study area.
No saline flats or clay vernal pools were mapped within the
study area. Additionally, no CNDDB occurrences have been
mapped in the study area vicinity. Therefore, this species is
determined to be absent from the study area.
Little mousetail
(Myosurus minimus ssp. apus)
CNPS
Rank 3.1
Wet fields, vernal pools (alkaline
soils), streambanks in valley and
foothill grassland; 65–2,100 ft.
Species absent. Only marginally suitable habitat is present in the
study area. No alkaline vernal pools were mapped within the
study area, and the mapped drainage did not provide suitable
habitat. This species is known primarily from the Livermore
Wetlands Preserve and the Diablo range in eastern Alameda
County. This species was not detected during the 2020 focused
plant surveys and is determined to be absent from the study
area.
421
8
Name *Status Habitat Results of Survey
Cotula navarretia
(Navarretia cotulifolia)
CNPS
Rank 4.2
Occurs in wetlands with heavy soils
within chaparral, cismontane
woodland, valley and foothill
grassland; 10–6,005 ft.
Species absent. Only marginally suitable habitat in present in
the study area, in the form of California annual grassland
throughout the study area. The species is known primarily from
the Livermore Wetlands Preserve and the Diablo range in
eastern Alameda County. However, the California annual
grassland within the study area was dominated by ruderal grass
species, such as wild oats and bromes, and lacks a diversity of
native forbs. Thus, suitable habitat was not present within the
study area and the species is determined to be absent in the
study area.
Adobe navarretia
(Navarretia nigelliformis ssp.
nigelliformis)
CNPS
Rank 4.2
Valley and foothill grassland in clay
depressions, vernal pools; 325–3,280
ft.
Species absent. Only marginally suitable habitat was mapped
within the study area in the form of the seasonal wetlands in the
central portion of the study area. This species was not observed
during the protocol-level surveys that were conducted when
this species would have been apparent and identifiable.
Therefore, this species is determined to be absent from the study
area.
Prostrate vernal pool
navarretia
(Navarretia prostrata)
CNPS
Rank 1B.1
Coastal scrub, meadows and
seeps, valley and foothill grassland,
vernal pools; 5–3,970 ft.
Species absent. A CNDDB occurrence record exists for a small
population of prostrate vernal pool navarretia occurring to the
west of the study area (CNDDB occurrence #61). This polygon is
non-specific, but appears to be centered on a portion of
seasonal wetlands near the junction of Fallon Rd. and Croak
Rd., east of the study area. Marginally suitable habitat occurs
for this species in the seasonal wetlands, though no Navarretia
species were observed during the spring 2020 surveys. This
species is determined to be absent from the study area.
422
9
Name *Status Habitat Results of Survey
Lobb’s aquatic buttercup
(Ranunculus lobbii)
CNPS
Rank 4.2
Vernal pools and ponds in
cismontane woodland, North Coast
coniferous forest, valley and foothill
grassland; 45–1,540 ft.
Species absent. Suitable habitat for this species is not present on
the Branaugh property. This species is determined to be absent
from the study area.
Caper-fruited tropidocarpum
(Tropidocarpum
capparideum)
CNPS
Rank 1B.1
Valley and foothill grassland in
alkaline soils; 0–1495 ft.
Species absent. There is marginally suitable habitat within the
study area, in the form of steep slopes within the grassland
habitat. A single CNDDB occurrence is located within a 5-mi
radius of the study area (CNDDB 2021, Occurrence #11),
however, this occurrence is from 1897, and has not been
observed since. All other CNDDB occurrences in Alameda
County are historic and recorded east of the project area in the
Altamont Hills. This species was not detected during the 202
focused surveys, which were conducted at a time of year when
the species would have been blooming and apparent if
present. Due to the dominance of non-native grasses and forbs
in the grassland on the site, and only small areas mapped as
alkaline soils, suitable habitat for this species is limited. Therefore,
this species is determined to be absent from the study area.
Special-Status Species Code Designations
FE = Federally listed Endangered
FT = Federally listed Threatened
FC = Federal Candidate for listing
SE = State listed Endangered
ST = State listed Threatened
SC = State Candidate for listing
CSSC = California Species of Special Concern
SP = State Fully Protected Species
423
10
H. T. Harvey & Associates
Site Conditions
The climate in the vicinity of the study area is coastal Mediterranean, with most rain falling in the winter and
spring, and with dry summers. Mild cool temperatures are common in the winter. Hot to mild temperatures are
common in the summer. Climate conditions in the study area include a 30-year average of approximately 16.11
inches of annual precipitation with a monthly average temperature range from 48.0ºF to 72.2ºF (PRISM Climate
Group 2021). Precipitation in the study area was lower than the normal range of precipitation for the 12-month
period leading up to the delineation. Total precipitation recorded in the area from April 2019 through March
2020 was 12.2 inches, which is approximately 75% of the 30-year average (1981-2010) for that same time period
(PRISM Climate Group 2021). These conditions were considered when assessing the biotic habitats present
within the study area, and the potential for species to occur.
Four soil types occur in the study area: Diablo clay, very deep, 3 to 15 percent slopes; Linne clay loam, 15 to
30 percent slopes; Linne clay loam 15 to 30 percent slopes, MLRA, and Rincon clay loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes
(NRCS 2021). Diablo clay and Linne clay loam soils are alkaline soils, with the former being considered mildly
alkaline and the latter being moderately alkaline.
Biotic Habitats
The study area consists primarily of undeveloped grazing ranchland and open space, but also includes some
rural development in the northwest and southern portion. The land uses on nearby properties are largely
agricultural, with residential, industrial, open space, and commercial uses as well. Five habitat types were
identified within the study area during the plant surveys: California annual grassland (31.41 ac), seasonal wetland
(0.18 ac), developed (8.23 ac), culvert (0.1 ac), and ephemeral stream (0.04 ac). Appendix B provides
representative photos of these habitats in the study area.
California Annual Grassland: The majority of the study area consists of California annual grassland habitat
(Photos 1, 2, and 3; Appendix B). Much of this grassland is currently is dominated by a suite of non-native
grasses, such as meadow barley (Hordeum murinum), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), wild oats (Avena barbata and
Avena fatua), and ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus). Common weedy (and non-native) forbs include various species
of filaree and geranium (Erodium spp. and Geranium spp., respectively), shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana),
and black mustard (Brassica nigra).
Several invasive species occur in the study area, including but not limited to black mustard, wild oat, and Italian
ryegrass (Festuca perennis). There is even less diversity of species in the southern portion of the study area, where
the alkaline soils were mapped, with the small patches of grassland dominated by filaree and geranium species
and ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus).
Developed: This habitat contained existing structures such as buildings, trailers, driveways, and parking lots.
Man-made drainage ditches were also observed near the parking lot of the developed areas within the study
424
11
H. T. Harvey & Associates
area. This developed habitat type contained little to no vegetation, and was not suitable for any rare plant
species.
Ephemeral Drainage and Culvert: A single ephemeral drainage exists near the center of the study area and
runs parallel to the fence that bounds the Branaugh property to the west. This segment of ephemeral drainage
is rock-lined and is fed by a culvert from which a small amount of water was observed flowing during the spring
survey. This segment of ephemeral stream is approximately 100 feet long and 10 feet wide and is connected at
the downstream end by a culvert which conveys flows under a road to a seasonal wetland at its downstream
end. This stream was verified by the USACE as part of the Dublin Boulevard Extension Project Jurisdictional
Determination.
Seasonal wetland: Seven seasonal wetlands were mapped within the study area. Five of the seasonal wetlands
are situated in subtle depressions within the study area, located adjacent to or within a swale/saddle between
two hills in the northern portion of the study area. Two additional wetlands are in an excavated ditch west of
the developed area. At the time of the spring survey, these wetlands were saturated with pockets of standing
water. The seasonal wetlands were dominated by hydrophytic vegetation, including Mexican rush (Juncus
mexicanus), Italian wild rye (Hordeum murinum), and English plantain (Plantago lancelota). Typical seasonal wetland
habitat within this large complex is depicted in Photos 5 (Appendix B).
Results of Special-status Plant Survey
No special-status plants were observed during the protocol-level surveys conducted on the property in 2020.
The winter season preceding the surveys (spring 2020) experienced below average precipitation. Precipitation
in the 2019–2020 winter season was approximately 61% of the normal annual precipitation (PRISM Climate
Group 2021). Below average precipitation conditions could result in some special-status species, particularly
those with an annual life cycle, not being as abundant, and therefore not as apparent. Congdon’s tarplant was
observed elsewhere in the bay area in September 2020 just prior to the fall survey conducted on the Branaugh
property, therefore if this species were present on-site, we are confident we would have observed it. With
respect to the suite of species that are typically found in alkali seasonal wetland, vernal, or valley and foothill
grassland habitat (adobe navarretia, cotula navarretia, prostrate vernal pool navarretia, hogwallow starfish,
Ferris’s goldfields, brittlescale, crownscale, heartscale, lesser saltscale, hispid bird's beak, little mousetail, and
Lobb’s aquatic buttercup), these species are typically found in a particular habitat types, such as those found in
the Springtown Alkali Sink ecosystem to the east of the study area. The seasonal wetlands and the alkaline
grasslands that were observed on the Branaugh property are not similar to those unique habitats, and
characteristic species that are indicative of those habitats were not observed on the property. In addition, the
dominance of non-native species such as Italian rye grass and bristly ox-tongue and bur clover, would preclude
those vernal pool species listed above in Table 1. Therefore, despite the below-average rainfall conditions, all
special-status plant species are determined to be absent from the site.
425
12
H. T. Harvey & Associates
Please let us know if you have any questions regarding these results.
Sincerely,
Kelly Hardwicke, Ph.D.
Principal Plant Ecologist
426
13
H. T. Harvey & Associates
References
[CDFW] California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2018. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to
Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities. State of California,
California Natural Resources Agency. Accessed May 2021 from
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/conservation/survey-protocols#377281280-plants
[CNDDB] California Natural Diversity Database. 2021. Rarefind 5.0. California Department of Fish and
Wildlife. Accessed May 2021 from http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/mapsanddata.asp.
[CNPS] California Native Plant Society. 2001. Botanical Survey Guidelines. Accessed May 2021 from
https://cnps.org/wpcontent/uploads/2018/03/cnps_survey_guidelines.pdf
[CNPS] California Native Plant Society. 2021. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (7.0 and 9.0 online
editions). Accessed May 2021 from http://www.cnps.org/inventory.
Google Inc. 2021. Google Earth Pro (Version 7.1.5.1557 ) [Software]. Available from earth.google.com.
H. T. Harvey & Associates. 2019. Dublin Boulevard-North Canyons Parkway Extension Project, Natural
Environment Study. Prepared for Cities of Dublin and Livermore. Regional Transportation Plan
Number: 17-01-0048.
[NRCS] Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2021. Web Soil Survey. U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Accessed May 2021 from http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov.
PRISM Climate Group. 2021. Online PRISM Data Explorer. Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. Accessed
May 2021 from: http://www.prism.oregonstate.edu/
427
Branaugh Property
Results of Special Status Plant Survey A-1 H. T. Harvey & Associates
May 26, 2021
Appendix A. Plants Observed
Family Scientific Name Common Name
Anacardiaceae Schinus molle Peruvian pepper tree
Apiaceae Foeniculum vulgare Fennel
Sanicula bipinnatifida Purple sanicle
Arecaceae Washingtonia robusta Fan palm
Asteraceae Carduus pycnocephalus Italian thistle
Centaurea solstitialis Yellow star thistle
Cynara cardunculus Cardoon
Erigeron canadensis Horseweed
Helminthotheca echioides Bristly ox-tongue
Hypochaeris glabra Smooth cat's ear
Lactuca serriola Prickly lettuce
Matricaria discoidea Pineapple weed
Silybum marianum Milk thistle
Sonchus arvensis ssp. arvensis Field sowthistle
Sonchus asper Sticky sandspurry
Betulaceae Alnus sp. Alder
Boraginaceae Amsinckia menziesii Common fiddleneck
Amsinckia tessellata Bristly fiddleneck
Brassicaceae Brassica nigra Black mustard
Capsella bursa-pastoris Shepard's purse
Hirschfeldia incana Summer mustard
Lepidium nitidum Shining peppergrass
Raphanus sativus Wild radish
Sinapis arvensis Charlock mustard
Caryophyllaceae
Spergularia macrotheca var.
macrotheca Sticky sandspurry
Stellaria media Chickweed
Convolvulaceae Convolvulus arvensis Field bindweed
Cyperaceae Carex sp. sedge
428
Branaugh Property
Results of Special Status Plant Survey A-2 H. T. Harvey & Associates
May 26, 2021
Family Scientific Name Common Name
Fabaceae Medicago polymorpha Bur medic
Trifolium hirtum rose clover
Trifolium sp. Clover
Vicia sativa Spring vetch
Vicia villosa Vetch
Geraniaceae Erodium botrys Big heron bill
Erodium cicutarium red stemmed filaree
Erodium moschatum Musky stork's bill
Geranium dissectum Cutleaf geranium
Geranium molle Crane's bill geranium
Juncaceae Juncus mexicanus Mexican Rush
Malvaceae Malva nicaeensis Bull mallow
Malvella leprosa Alkali mallow
Myrtaceae Eucalyptus sp. Eucalyptus
Orobanchaceae Castilleja exserta ssp. exserta Owl's clover
Plantaginaceae Plantago lanceolata Narrowleaf plantain
Poaceae Avena barbata Slender oats
Avena fatua Wild oat
Bromus diandrus Ripgut brome
Bromus hordeaceus Soft brome
Cynosurus echinatus Annual dogtail
Festuca perennis Italian rye grass
Hordeum murinum Foxtail barley
Stipa tenuissima Mexican feathergrass
Poa annua Annual blue grass
Polemoniaceae Gilia tricolor Bird's eye gilia
Polygonaceae Rumex conglomeratus Clustered dock
Rumex crispus Curly dock
Rubiaceae Sherardia arvensis Field madder
Salicaceae Populus nigra Lombardy poplar
Themidaceae Dichelostemma capitatum Blue dicks
429
Branaugh Property
Results of Special Status Plant Survey A-3 H. T. Harvey & Associates
May 26, 2021
Family Scientific Name Common Name
Ulmaceae Ulmus parvifolia/pumila Chinese Elm
Urticaceae Urtica dioica common nettle
430
Branaugh Property
Results of Special Status Plant Survey B-1 H. T. Harvey & Associates
May 26, 2021
Appendix B. Photo Documentation
Photo 1. Photo representative of California annual grassland habitat in the
southern portion of the study area. View to the southwest.
Photo 2. Photo of California annual grassland habitat located in the central
portion of the study area. View to the north.
431
Branaugh Property
Results of Special Status Plant Survey B-2 H. T. Harvey & Associates
May 26, 2021
Photo 4. Photo of the ephemeral drainage located along the eastern
boundary at the center of the study area. View to the north.
Photo 5. Photo representative of seasonal wetland habitat throughout the
swale that runs through the center of the study area. View to the south.
432
Branaugh Property
Results of Special Status Plant Survey B-3 H. T. Harvey & Associates
May 26, 2021
433
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Appendices
Appendix C
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters
434
983 University Avenue, Building D Los Gatos, CA 95032 408.458.3200 www.harveyecology.com
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters
Alameda County, California
Project #4423-01
Prepared for:
Randall Branaugh
Bex Development
19077 Madison Avenue
Castro Valley, CA 94546
Prepared by:
H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
435
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters i H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Executive Summary
On April 9 and 10, 2020, H. T. Harvey & Associates’ biologists performed a delineation of wetlands and other
waters on the Branaugh property in Dublin, California within Alameda County, California. Approximately 40
acres were surveyed for jurisdictional waters (wetlands and other waters) that may be subject to regulation under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The survey
also delineated the extent of waters of the state that may be subject to regulation under the Section 401 of the
CWA and the Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act administered by the Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). The on-site determination took
into account drier than normal conditions during the 2019/2020 winter season relative to the 30-year normal,
and the results are based on the conditions present at the time of the surveys. The study area is located in the
San Francisco Bay East (Hydrologic Unit Code 18050004) watershed.
In total, approximately 0.124 acre of potentially jurisdictional features as defined by the USACE were identified
within the study area. These include approximately 0.124 acre of Section 404 wetlands as seasonal wetland.
These seasonal wetlands would also be considered waters of the state, subject to regulation by the RWQCB
under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act and under the Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act as well as
CDFW jurisdictional features. A swale depicted on National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps as palustrine,
emergent, persistent, temporarily flooded bisects the northern portion of the project site, and was investigated
as part of this study. The feature does not exhibit surface hydrologic connections to drainages upstream or
downstream, indicators of a true bed and banks or indicators of regular surface flows such as the presence of
Ordinary High Water Marks were lacking; as such, this feature was not considered jurisdictional, aside from
where seasonal wetlands meeting three parameters occurred in the swale.
The potentially jurisdictional features identified and delineated during the April 2020 surveys include two
regulatory wetlands and waters features that were previously mapped on the Branaugh property as part of a
larger delineation for the Dublin Boulevard-North Canyons Parkway Extension Project, and were verified by
USACE to be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act by the USACE (File No. 2017-
00145S) (USACE 2019). These features are located in the center of the study area, have not appreciably changed
since the area was verified in 2019, and include 0.053 ac of Section 404 wetlands as seasonal wetlands, and 0.048
ac of Section 404 other waters as ephemeral stream and culvert.
436
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters ii H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Habitat Type Acres
Total Section 404 Wetlands 0.124
Seasonal wetland 0.124
Total Waters of the U.S. 0.124
Total Section 401 Waters of the State 0.124
Seasonal wetland 0.124
Total CDFW Jurisdictional Habitats 0.028
Wetlands and Waters Verified by USACE in 2019 for the Dublin Boulevard Project
on Branaugh Property 0.101
Total Non-jurisdictional Areas 39.642
Wetland Delineation Study Area Total 39.867
437
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters iii H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Table of Contents
Section 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Study Area Description .......................................................................................................................................... 1
Section 2. Survey Methods ..................................................................................................................................... 8
2.1 Identification of Jurisdictional Waters ................................................................................................................. 8
2.1.1 Identification of Section 404 Jurisdictional Wetlands (Special Aquatic Sites) ....................................... 9
2.1.2 Identification of Section 404 Jurisdictional Other Waters...................................................................... 11
2.2 Identification of Waters of the State .................................................................................................................. 12
2.3 Identification of CDFW Jurisdiction ................................................................................................................. 13
Section 3. Survey Results and Discussion ......................................................................................................... 14
3.1 Observations, Rationales, and Assumptions ..................................................................................................... 17
3.1.1 Background Information ............................................................................................................................. 17
3.1.2 Precipitation Data .......................................................................................................................................... 17
3.1.3 Site Conditions and Observations .............................................................................................................. 18
3.1.4 Rationale for Sample Point Choice ............................................................................................................ 18
3.1.5 Photo Points................................................................................................................................................... 20
3.2 Identification of Potential Section 404 Wetlands ............................................................................................. 21
3.2.1 Seasonal Wetlands ......................................................................................................................................... 22
3.3 Identification of Potential Section 404 Other Waters ..................................................................................... 22
3.3.1 Ephemeral Stream ......................................................................................................................................... 23
3.4 Identification of Section 401 Potentially Jurisdictional Waters of the State ................................................ 23
3.5 Identification of CDFW Potentially Jurisdictional Habitats ........................................................................... 23
3.6 Wetlands and Waters Previously Verified by USACE .................................................................................... 24
3.7 Areas Not Meeting the Regulatory Definition of Waters of the U.S. ........................................................... 24
Section 4. Literature Cited .................................................................................................................................... 26
Figures
Figure 1. Vicinity Map .................................................................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2. Study Area Map .............................................................................................................................................. 3
Figure 3. USGS Topographic Map .............................................................................................................................. 4
Figure 4. NRCS Soils Map ............................................................................................................................................ 5
Figure 5. NWI Map ........................................................................................................................................................ 7
Figure 6. Biotic Habitats and Photo Points Map ..................................................................................................... 15
Figure 7. Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and Waters ................................................................................... 16
Tables
Table 1. Soil Type, Texture, Drainage Classification, and Hydric Soil Status for Soil Types Occurring
within the Study Area .................................................................................................................................... 6
Table 2. Wetland Indicator Status Categories for Vascular Plants ...................................................................... 10
Table 3. Summary of Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands within the Delineation Study Area ...................... 14
Table 4. Summary of Sample Point Locations and Results .................................................................................. 19
Table 5. Coordinates and Rationale for Photo Points........................................................................................... 20
438
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters iv H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Appendices
Appendix A. Plants Observed in the Study Area ................................................................................................ A-1
Appendix B. NRCS Soil Survey Report for the Study Area .............................................................................. B-1
Appendix C. USACE Arid West Wetland Data Forms and OHWM Datasheets ......................................... C-1
Appendix D. Photos of the Study Area ................................................................................................................ D-1
Appendix E. Aquatic Resources Table ................................................................................................................. E-1
Appendix F. Signed statement from the property owner(s) allowing USACE personnel to enter the
property ....................................................................................................................................................... F-1
List of Preparers
Kelly Hardwicke, Ph.D., Principal, Senior Plant and Wetland Ecologist
Mark Bibbo, M.S., Senior Plant Ecologist
Jillian Pastick, M.S., Plant Ecologist
Bradley Comito, B.S., Plant Ecologist
439
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 1 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Section 1. Introduction
1.1 Study Area Description
The delineation study area is in the city of Dublin, California, Alameda County, north of I-580, in between
Croak Road to the west and Dolan Road to the east. (Figure 1). The study area comprises the Branaugh property
at 1881 Collier Canyon Rd., Dublin, California (APN 905-1-4-4) (Figure 2). The wetland delineation described
in this report focused on the undeveloped, vegetated areas of the property, but the entirety of the Branaugh
parcel was surveyed. The study area is located within the Livermore, California U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
7.5-minute quadrangle (Figure 3). Elevations within the study area range from approximately 370 to 580 feet
(ft) North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) (Google Inc. 2020), with the highest elevations in the
north portion of the parcel. A portion of the property intersects with the project boundary for the Dublin
Boulevard-North Canyons Parkway Extension Project, which was the subject of a wetland delineation study in
2018. USACE issued a preliminary jurisdiction determination (PJD) and a verified delineation map on October
31, 2019 (File No. 2017-00145S) (USACE 2019) for that project, including a portion of the subject property.
The climate in the vicinity of the study area is coastal Mediterranean, with most rain falling in the winter and
spring, and summers being dry. Mild cool temperatures are common in the winter. Hot to mild temperatures
are common in the summer. Climate conditions in the study area include a 30-year average of approximately
16.11 inches of annual precipitation with a monthly average temperature range from 48.0ºF to 72.2ºF (PRISM
Climate Group 2020).
Figure 4 shows the soil units mapped by the National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) within the study
area, and Table 1 summarizes the associated texture, drainage classification, landform setting, and hydric soil
status (NRCS 2020a, b) for the four soil types found within the study area.
440
1 0 10.5
Miles
N:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
4
4
0
0
\
4
4
2
3
-
0
1
\
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
W
e
t
D
e
l
\
F
i
g
1
V
i
c
i
n
i
t
y
M
a
p
.
m
x
d
a
k
a
i
s
e
r
Study Area Location
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
January 2021
Lands of Branaugh - Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters (4423-01)
PacificOcean
MONTEREY
SANTA CLARA
ALAMEDA
SAN BENITO
STANISLAUS
SAN JOAQUIN
CONTRA COSTA
SANTA CRUZ
SAN MATEO
MERCED
MARIN
SAN FRANCISCO
Salinas
Oakland
San Jose
Stockton
Hollister
Santa Cruz
San Rafael
Redwood City
San Francisco
Detail
California
0 20
Miles
Project Vicinity
441
Easte
rn
Portio
nCroakRd
580
Collier
C
anyon Road
Branaugh Property APN - 905-1-4-4
Figure 2. Study Area Map
January 2021
N:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
4
4
0
0
\
4
4
2
3
-
0
1
\
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
W
e
t
D
e
l
\
F
i
g
2
S
t
u
d
y
A
r
e
a
M
a
p
.
m
x
d
Lands of Branaugh - Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters (4423-01)
600 0 600300
Feet
Legend
Study Area
442
Figure 3. USGS Topographic Map
January 2021
N:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
4
4
0
0
\
4
4
2
3
-
0
1
\
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
W
e
t
D
e
l
\
F
i
g
3
U
S
G
S
T
o
p
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
M
a
p
.
m
x
d
Lands of Branaugh - Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters (4423-01)
2,000 0 2,0001,000
Feet
Legend
Study Area
Livermore, California U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangle
443
LaD
LaD
LaC
RdA
DvCRdB
LaC
DvCYmA
DvC
LaD
CdB
LaC
Figure 4. NRCS Soils Map
January 2021
N:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
4
4
0
0
\
4
4
2
3
-
0
1
\
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
W
e
t
D
e
l
\
F
i
g
4
S
o
i
l
s
M
a
p
.
m
x
d
Lands of Branaugh - Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters (4423-01)
600 0 600300
Feet
Legend
Study Area
NRCS Soil Map Units
Soil Code Description
DvC - Diablo clay, very deep, 3 to 15 percent slopes
LaC - Linne clay loam, 3 to 15 percent slopes
LaD - Linne clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes
RdA - Rincon clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
RdB - Rincon clay loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes
Source: Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS),
United States Department of Agriculture
444
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 6 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Table 1. Soil Type, Texture, Drainage Classification, and Hydric Soil Status for Soil Types
Occurring within the Study Area
Soil
Symbol
Soil Name Soil Texture Drainage
Classification
Landform Hydric
Status
RdB Rincon clay loam, 3 to
7 percent slopes
Clay loam Well drained Fans/footslope/valley
floors/toeslope
Yes
DvC Diablo clay, very
deep, 3 to 15 percent
slopes
Clay Well drained Hills/backslope No
LaC Linne clay loam 15 to
30 percent slopes
Clay loam Well drained Hills/backslope No
LaD Linne clay loam 15 to
30 percent slopes,
MLRA
Clay loam Well drained Hillslopes/mountain
slopes/backslope
No
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map of the study area is depicted in
Figure 5. The NWI identified a single aquatic feature within the study area (NWI 2020). The feature is mapped
as a freshwater emergent wetland (PEM1A) and generally aligns with the area mapped as a non-jurisdictional
swale in the study area, as well as the six seasonal wetlands associated with the swale. NWI maps are based on
interpretation of aerial photography, limited verification of mapped units, and/or classification of wetland types
using the classification system developed by Cowardin et al. (1979). These data are available for general
reference purposes and do not necessarily correspond to the actual presence or absence of jurisdictional waters.
445
PEM1C
PEM1A
R4SBCx
PEM1A
PEM1A
R4SBC
R4SBA
PEM1A
PEM1Cx
PSSC
PUBHh
R4SBC
R4SBC
1,300 0 1,300650
Feet
N:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
4
4
0
0
\
4
4
2
3
-
0
1
\
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
W
e
t
D
e
l
\
F
i
g
5
N
W
I
M
a
p
.
m
x
d
a
k
a
i
s
e
r
Figure 5. National Wetlands Inventory Map
January 2021
Lands of Branaugh - Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters (4423-01)
NWI Code Description
PEM1A - Palustrine, Emergent, Persistent
Temporary Flooded
PEM1C - Palustrine, Emergent, Persistent
Seasonally Flooded
PEM1Cx - Palustrine, Emergent, Persistent
Seasonally Flooded, Excavated
PSSC - Palustrine, Scrub-Shrub, Seasonally Flooded
PUBHh - Palustrine, Unconsolidate Bottom,
Permanently Flooded, Diked/Impounded
R4SBA - Riverine, Intermittent, Streambed,
Temporary Flooded
R4SBC - Riverine, Intermittent, Streambed,
Seasonally Flooded
R4SBCx - Riverine, Intermittent, Streambed,
Seasonally Flooded, Excavated
Legend
Study Area
National Wetlands Inventory
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Riverine
Source: NWI 2020
446
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 8 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Section 2. Survey Methods
Before the delineation survey was conducted, topographic maps and aerial photos of the study area were
obtained and reviewed from several sources, such as the USGS topographic map (Figure 3), NRCS soils map
(Figure 4), NWI (Figure 5), Google Earth software (Google Inc. 2020), and UC Santa Barbara Library's
collection of historic aerial photography (UCSB 2020).
On April 9th and 10th, 2020, H. T. Harvey & Associates plant ecologists, Jill Pastick, M.S., and Brad Comito,
B.S., surveyed the study area identified in Figures 1 and 2. The purpose of the survey was to identify the extent
and distribution of wetlands and other waters that may be subject to regulation by the USACE, RWQCB, and
CDFW. Weather conditions on April 9th and 10th, 2020, were cool to warm, dry, and clear. Approximately three
days prior to the survey the region received a significant rain storm event, totaling about one and a half inches
over a 72-hour period.
Ms. Pastick and Mr. Comito performed a technical delineation of wetlands and other waters in a 39.9 ac area
identified on the accompanying figures as the wetland delineation study area. The delineation was performed
in accordance with the Corps of Engineers 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual (Corps Manual; Environmental
Laboratory 1987). Additionally, the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid
West (Version 2.0) (Regional Supplement) (USACE 2008a) was followed to document site conditions relative to
hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. Ms. Pastick and Mr. Comito performed preliminary
mapping of the extent and distribution of wetlands and other waters of the U.S. that may be subject to regulation
under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) as well as waters of the state that may be subject to regulation
under the Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act, which is administered by the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB). The following sections present descriptions of the methods used to identify Section
404 jurisdictional waters (wetlands and other waters).
2.1 Identification of Jurisdictional Waters
The “Routine Determination Method, On-Site Inspection Necessary (Section D)” outlined in the Corps Manual
(Environmental Laboratory 1987), and the updated data forms, vegetation sampling methods, and hydric soil
and hydrology indicators developed for the Arid West Regional Supplement (USACE 2008a) were used to
examine the vegetation, soils, and hydrology on site. This three-parameter approach to identifying wetlands is
based on the presence of a prevalence or dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland
hydrology.
In addition to applying these survey methods, we compiled this report in accordance with guidance provided
in Updated Map and Drawing Standards for the South Pacific Division Regulatory Program (USACE 2016a) and Information
Requested for Verification of Corps Jurisdiction (USACE 2016b). These documents list the information that must be
submitted as part of a request for a jurisdictional determination, including:
447
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 9 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
• Vicinity map (Figure 1)
• Study area map (Figure 2)
• USGS quadrangle map (Figure 3)
• Soils map (Figure 4)
• NWI map (Figure 5)
• Biotic habitats map (Figure 6)
• Preliminary identification of waters map (Figure 7)
• Plant species observed (Appendix A)
• Current soil survey report (Appendix B)
• Data forms for wetlands sample points and ordinary high water mark (OHWM) datasheets (Appendix C)
• Written rationale for sample point choice (Section 3.1, “Observations, Rationales, and Assumptions”)
• Color photos (Appendix D)
• Aquatic resources table (Appendix E)
• Signed statement from the property owner allowing access (Appendix F)
During the survey, the study area was examined for topographic features, drainages, alterations to site hydrology
or vegetation, and recent significant disturbance. A determination was then made as to whether normal
environmental conditions were present at the time of the field survey. In the field, the techniques used to
identify wetlands included digging soil pits to sample soil from various depths, observing the vegetation growing
near the soil sample points, and characterizing the current surface and subsurface hydrologic features present
near the sample points through both observation of indicators and direct observation of hydrology. Features
meeting wetland vegetation, soil, and hydrology criteria were then mapped in the field using a Trimble
GeoXT™ GPS unit capable of submeter accuracy.
2.1.1 Identification of Section 404 Jurisdictional Wetlands (Special Aquatic Sites)
Where wetland field characteristics were present, the surveyors examined vegetation, soils, and hydrology using
the Routine Determination Method outlined in the Corps Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and the
updated data forms, vegetation sampling methods, and hydric soil and hydrology indicators developed for the
Arid West Regional Supplement (USACE 2008a).
Hydrophytic Vegetation. Plants that can grow in soils that are saturated or inundated for long periods of
time, which contain little or no oxygen when wetted, are considered adapted to those soils and are called
hydrophytic. There are different levels of adaptation, as summarized in Table 2. Some plants can only grow in
soils saturated with water (and depleted of oxygen), some are mostly found in this condition, and some are
448
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 10 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
found equally in wet soils and in dry soils. Plants observed at each of the sample sites were identified to species,
where possible, using The Jepson Manual, Vascular Plans of California, Second Edition (Baldwin et al. 2012). The
wetland indicator status of each species was obtained from the Arid West 2016 Regional Wetland Plant List
(Lichvar et al. 2016). Wetland indicator species are designated according to their frequency of occurrence in
wetlands. For instance, a species with a presumed frequency of occurrence of 67 to 99% in wetlands is
designated a facultative wetland indicator species. The wetland indicator groups, indicator symbol, and the
frequencies of occurrence of species within wetlands, provided as a percentage, are shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Wetland Indicator Status Categories for Vascular Plants
Indicator Category Symbol Frequency (%) of Occurrence in Wetlands1
Obligate OBL >99 (Almost always is a hydrophyte, rarely in
uplands)
Facultative wetland FACW 67 – 99 (Usually a hydrophyte but occasionally
found in uplands)
Facultative FAC 34 – 66 (Commonly occurs as either a hydrophyte
or non-hydrophyte)
Facultative upland FACU 1 – 33 (Occasionally is a hydrophyte, but usually
occurs in uplands)
Upland UPL <1% (Rarely is a hydrophyte, almost always in
uplands)
Not Listed NI Considered to be an upland species
1 Based on information contained in the Corps Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987).
2 Plant species that are not listed in the Arid West 2016 Regional Wetland Plant List (Lichvar et al. 2016) are considered
UPL species in Appendix A – Plants Observed in the Study Area
Obligate and facultative wetland indicator species are hydrophytes that occur “in areas where the frequency and
duration of inundation or soil saturation produce permanently or periodically saturated soils of sufficient
duration to exert a controlling influence on the plant species present” (Environmental Laboratory 1987).
Facultative indicator species may be considered wetland indicators when found growing in hydric soils that
experience periodic saturation. Plant species that are not on the regional list of wetland indicator species are
considered upland species. A complete list of the vascular plants observed within the study area, including their
current indicator statuses, has been provided in Appendix A.
Hydric Soils. Up to 18 inches of the soil profile were examined for hydric soil indicators. The National
Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS) defines a hydric soil as one formed under conditions of
saturation, flooding or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the
upper 12 inches of soil (NRCS 2010). Hydric soils include soils developed under sufficiently wet conditions to
support the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic vegetation. In general, evidence of a hydric soil includes
characteristics such as reducing soil conditions, soils with bright mottles and/or low matrix chroma, and soils
listed as hydric by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) on the National Hydric Soils List (NRCS 2020b).
Reducing soil conditions can also include circumstances where there is evidence of frequent ponding for long
449
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 11 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
or very long duration. A long duration is defined as a period of inundation for a single event that ranges from
7 days to a month and very long is greater than one month (Environmental Laboratory 1987).
Munsell Soil Notations (Munsell 2009) were recorded for the soil matrix of each soil sample. The Munsell color
system is based on three color dimensions: hue, value, and chroma. A brief description of each component of
the system is described below, in the order they are used in describing soil color (i.e., hue/value/chroma):
1. Hue. The Munsell Soil Color Chart is divided into five principal hues: yellow (Y), green (G), purple (P),
blue (B), and red (R), along with intermediate hues such as yellow-red (YR) and green-yellow (GY).
Example of commonly encountered hue numbers include 2.5YR, 10YR, and 5Y.
2. Value. Value refers to lightness, ranging from white to grey to black. Common numerical values for value
in the Munsell Soil Color Chart range from 2 for saturated soils to 8 for faded or light colors. Hydric soils
often show low-value colors when soils have accumulated sufficient organic material to indicate
development under wetland conditions, but can show high-value colors when iron depletion has occurred,
removing color value from the soil matrix. Value numbers are commonly reported as 8/, 2.5/, and 6/.
3. Chroma. Chroma describes the purity of the color, from “true” or “pure” colors to “pastel” or “washed
out” colors. Chromas commonly range from 1 to 8, but can be higher for gleys. Soil matrix chroma values
that are 1 or less, or 2 or less when mottling is present, are typical of soils that have developed under
anaerobic conditions. Chroma numbers are listed, for example, as /1, /5, and /8.
The NRCS Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2020a) was consulted to determine which soil types have been mapped in
the study area (Table 1, Figure 4). Detailed descriptions of these soil types are provided in Appendix B.
Wetland Hydrology. Wetland hydrology encompasses all hydrologic characteristics of areas that are
periodically inundated or have soils saturated to the surface at some time during the growing season. Wetland
hydrology indicators provide evidence that the site has a continuing wetland hydrologic regime. Primary
indicators might include visual observation of surface water (A1), high water table (A2), soil saturation (B1),
and hydrogen sulfide odor (C1). Secondary indicators might include a passing score for the FAC-neutral test
(D5) and saturation visible on aerial imagery (C9). Each of the sample points was examined for positive field
indicators (primary and secondary) of wetland hydrology, following the guidance provided in the Regional
Supplement.
2.1.2 Identification of Section 404 Jurisdictional Other Waters
Surveys were also conducted within the study area for “other waters”, which includes lakes, slough channels,
seasonal ponds, tributary waters, non-wetland linear drainages, and salt ponds. Such areas are identified by the
(seasonal or perennial) presence of standing or running water and generally lack hydrophytic vegetation. In
non-tidal or muted tidal waters, USACE jurisdiction extends to the ordinary high water mark (OHWM), which
is defined in 33 CFR Part 328.3 as “the line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated
by physical characteristics, such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character
450
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 12 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
of the soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation or the presence of litter and debris.” No potentially jurisdictional
other waters were mapped within the study area.
In concert with USACE’s efforts to revise the wetland delineation manuals and make them more specific to
different geographic regions of the United States, as described above, efforts have been initiated by USACE to
develop an OHWM delineation manual. In particular, two relatively recent publications have attempted to
further refine the definition of OHWM and the delineation of the OHWM in the Arid West (including
California):
• A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region
of the Western United States: A Delineation Manual (USACE 2008b)
• Updated Datasheet for the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West
Region of the Western United States (USACE 2010)
For the purposes of the current study, two OHWM transects were surveyed in the field, based on the
topography of the site. However, these transects were determined to lack natural geomorphic field indicators
to suggest the presence of an OHWM or indicators of regular surface flows. Rather, the feature was designated
as a swale, and thus not considered jurisdictional other waters.
2.2 Identification of Waters of the State
The Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne) broadly defines waters of the State as “any
surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state.” Because Porter-
Cologne applies to any water, whereas the CWA applies only to certain waters, California’s jurisdictional reach
overlaps and may exceed the boundaries of waters of the U.S. For example, Water Quality Order No. 2004-
0004-DWQ states that “shallow” waters of the State include headwaters, wetlands, and riparian areas. Where
forested riparian habitat is not present, jurisdiction is taken to the top of bank or levee. Where forested habitat
occurs, the outer canopy of any riparian trees rooted within top of bank may be considered jurisdictional as
these trees can provide allochthonous input to the channel below.
On April 2, 2019, the SWRCB adopted the State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged
or Fill Material to Waters of the State. In these new guidelines, riparian habitats are not specifically described
as waters of the state but instead as important buffer habitats to streams that do conform to the State Wetland
Definition. The Procedures describe riparian habitat buffers as important resources that may both be included
in required mitigation packages for permits for impacts to waters of the state, as well as areas requiring permit
authorization from the RWQCBs to impact.
The 2019 Procedures also clarify that wetland-upland boundaries for wetlands comprising waters of the State
should be set using the USACE delineation framework (Environmental Laboratory 1987, USACE 2008a), with
one important distinction. Some areas in California function as wetlands despite lacking abundant wetland
vegetation. For example, non-vegetated playas, tidal flats, and some types of seasonal wetlands provide a variety
451
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 13 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
of wetland functions, including water filtration, groundwater recharge, and the support of wetland wildlife.
While USACE procedures require 5% vegetative cover to be considered a wetland rather than “other waters”,
the RWQCB has determined that no such minimum vegetative cover is necessary for an area to be considered
a wetland under the State Wetland Definition. Waters of the state were identified within the study area.
2.3 Identification of CDFW Jurisdiction
Ephemeral and intermittent streams, rivers, creeks, dry washes, sloughs, blue line streams on USGS maps, and
watercourses with subsurface flows fall under California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) jurisdiction.
Canals, aqueducts, irrigation ditches, and other means of water conveyance may also be considered streams if
they support aquatic life, riparian vegetation, or stream-dependent terrestrial wildlife. A stream is defined in
Title 14, California Code of Regulations §1.72, as “a body of water that flows at least periodically or
intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and that supports fish and other aquatic life. Jurisdiction
does not include tidal areas such as tidal sloughs unless there is freshwater input. This includes watercourses
having surface or subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation.” Using this definition,
CDFW extends its jurisdiction to encompass riparian habitats that function as a part of a watercourse. California
Fish and Game Code §2786 defines riparian habitat as “lands which contain habitat which grows close to and
which depends upon soil moisture from a nearby freshwater source.” The lateral extent of a stream and
associated riparian habitat that would fall under the jurisdiction of CDFW can be measured in several ways,
depending on the particular situation and the type of fish or wildlife at risk. At minimum, CDFW would claim
jurisdiction over a stream’s bed and bank. Where riparian habitat is present, the outer edge of riparian vegetation
is generally used as the line of demarcation between riparian and upland habitats. Though no ephemeral streams
were mapped within the new study areas (outside the area already delineated by the USACE), CDFW
jurisdictional habitats (seasonal wetlands) were mapped within the study area within an excavated ditch (SW6).
452
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 14 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Section 3. Survey Results and Discussion
The following vegetation/land cover types were mapped within the study area: (1) annual grassland, (2)
developed/landscaped, and (3) seasonal wetland. (Figure 6). Fifteen sample points (SPs) and two OHWM
transects were examined to identify jurisdictional features (Figure 7; Appendix C). Within the study area,
approximately 0.124 ac of potentially jurisdictional wetlands regulated by USACE, RWQCB, and/or CDFW
were identified (Table 3). The results of the delineation are described below.
Table 3. Summary of Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands within the Delineation Study Area
Habitat Type Acres
Total Section 404 Wetlands 0.124
Seasonal wetland 0.124
Total Section 404 Waters of the U.S. 0.124
Total Section 401 Waters of the State 0.124
Seasonal wetland 0.124
Total CDFW Jurisdictional Habitats 0.028
Wetlands and Waters Verified by USACE in 2019 for the Dublin Boulevard Project
on Branaugh Property 0.101
Total Non-jurisdictional Areas 39.642
Wetland Delineation Study Area Total 39.867
453
Collier Canyon
R
d
580
Photo 18
Photo 19
Photo 9
Photo 8
Photo 7
Photo 6
Photo 5
Photo 4Photo 3
Photo 2
Photo 1
Photo 13Photo 12
Photo 17
Photo 14
Photo 16
Photo 15
Photo 11
Photo 10
Figure 6. Biotic Habitats and Photo Points Map
January 2021
N:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
4
4
0
0
\
4
4
2
3
-
0
1
\
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
W
e
t
D
e
l
\
F
i
g
6
B
i
o
t
i
c
H
a
b
i
t
a
t
s
M
a
p
.
m
x
d
Lands of Branaugh - Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters (4423-01)
200 0 200100
FeetAerial Source: DigitalGlobe (08/19/17)
Legend
Study Area
Photo Points (Appendix D)
Habitats
California Annual Grassland (31.41 ac)
Culvert (0.01 ac)
Developed (8.23 ac)
Ephemeral Stream (0.04 ac)
Seasonal Wetland (0.18 ac)
Photo 13 Photo 12
Inset 1
Photo 4Photo 3
Photo 11
Photo 10
Inset 2
Inset 3
454
Collier Canyon
R
d
580
-121.836103,
37.709222
-121.833401,
37.701535
SW1
SW2
SW3
SW4
SW5
SW6
OHWM 1
OHWM 2
SP4SP3
SP2SP1
SP5
SP9
SP8SP7SP6
SP12
SP13
SP10
SP14 SP15
SP11
SW4-2018
ES2-2018C4-2018
C5-2018
Figure 7. Preliminary Identification of Waters
January 2021
N:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
4
4
0
0
\
4
4
2
3
-
0
1
\
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
W
e
t
D
e
l
\
F
i
g
7
P
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
I
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
W
a
t
e
r
s
.
m
x
d
Lands of Branaugh - Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters (4423-01)
200 0 200100Feet
Aerial Source: DigitalGlobe (08/19/17)
Legend
Study Area
Sample Points
Photo Points
OHWM Transects
Area of Preliminary Jurisdictional
Determination by USACE (File No. 2017-00145S)
Upland
Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S and State
Other Waters
Culvert
Ephemeral Stream
Wetlands
Seasonal Wetland
SW1
Inset 1
SW6
SP4SP3
Inset 2
Delineated by USACE (File No. 2017-00145S)
1 inch = 200 feet
455
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 17 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Additionally, a previous delineation carried out in 2018 and verified by USACE in 2019 for the Dublin
Boulevard-North Canyons Parkway Extension Project covers a portion of the study area. This portion of the
study area contains 0.101 ac of jurisdictional wetlands and waters and is shown on Figure 7. The PJD and
verified map issued by USACE on October 31, 2019 for that area includes 0.053 ac of seasonal wetland (SW4-
2018 on Figure 7), 0.043 ac of ephemeral stream (ES2-2018), and 0.005 ac of culverts (C4-2018 and C5-2018).
Information assembled during this investigation and pertinent to the identification of jurisdictional wetlands
and other waters is presented in the first five appendices of this report. In addition, Appendix E provided at
the end of this document is included as an electronic attachment in Microsoft Excel format, per USACE
(2016b) guidelines.
• Appendix A—Plants observed in the study area
• Appendix B—NRCS Soil Survey of Alameda County, California
• Appendix C—USACE Arid West Wetland Data Forms and OHWM Transect Forms
• Appendix D—Photos of the study area
• Appendix E—Aquatic Resources Table
• Appendix F—Signed statement from the property owner(s) allowing USACE personnel to enter the
property and collect samples during normal business hours.
3.1 Observations, Rationales, and Assumptions
Site conditions observed during the delineation survey are reported here, along with pertinent background
information and precipitation data.
3.1.1 Background Information
The preliminary delineation assumes that normal circumstances prevailed at the time of the April 2020 survey,
and results are based upon the conditions present at the time of the survey. The survey was performed using
the “Routine Method of Determination” using three parameters, as outlined in the Regional Supplement.
Elevations in the study area range from approximately 370 ft to approximately 580 ft above sea level (Figure 3)
(Google 2020). The topography of the study area ranges from relatively flat in the southern portion near I-580,
to gently rolling hills to the northeast. The topography slopes slightly southward, and the ephemeral stream
within the study area follows a course similar to other nearby drainages in draining from north to southwest.
The study area is located within the San Francisco Bay East (Hydrologic Unit Code 18050004) watershed.
3.1.2 Precipitation Data
The survey took place in the spring of 2020, at the end of the rainy season. Relative to the 30-year climate
normal (16.11 inches annually), precipitation in the study area was lower than the normal range of precipitation
456
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 18 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
for the 12-month period leading up to the delineation. Total precipitation recorded in the area from April 2019
through March 2020 was 12.2 inches, which is approximately 75% of the 30-year average (1981-2010) for that
same time period (PRISM Climate Group 2020). Total precipitation recorded in the study area was drier than
normal during the 2019/2020 winter season as well, which began with significant rains in November 2019, but
then included a drier than usual January, February and March. Total precipitation recorded in the area from
November 2019 through March 2020 was 7.4 in, which is approximately 56% of the 30-year average (1981-
2010) for that period, and would be considered below the normal range of precipitation (PRISM Climate Group
2020). These conditions were taken into account when assessing the biotic habitats present on the site. A
significant rain storm event, totaling about one and a half inches over a 72-hour period had occurred three days
prior to the wetland delineation field survey, which allowed for observations of ponding and saturation. Despite
the below average annual precipitation, boundaries of wetlands remained clear owing to the presence of
hydrophytic vegetation and hydrology indicators. No standing water was observed at the time of the survey.
3.1.3 Site Conditions and Observations
The majority of the study area is California annual grassland and developed/landscaped (Figure 6).
Developed/landscaped areas consist of parking lots, driveways, a house, and other buildings associated with
the property, and landscaping/planted vegetation. A swale bisects the northern half of the property, which
follows what was likely a historic drainage through the study area. Aerial imagery dating to 1950 (UCSB 2020)
indicates this drainage once conveyed natural and artificial runoff from surrounding upland pastures. However,
this swale does not appear to have perennial hydrology and lacks distinct indicators of bed and banks. Two
OHWM data transects were collected and document a lack of apparent bed and bank channel morphology,
despite a topographic position in a saddle between two hills.
There was no water present at the time of the survey in the swale in the northern portion of the property,
however water was observed flowing out of a culvert in the central portion of the study area, C4-2018, into
ES2-2018. From ES2-2018 water enters the culvert C5-2018 to discharge into SW4-2018/SW6. Similar flows
were observed in April 2019 during the USACE verification visit. Seasonal and perennial wetland vegetation
occupies low-lying areas associated with the swale and ES2-2018 (Figure 6 and 7). These areas likely receive
runoff from hillslopes and the nearby driveway located to the west. These six wetland features that were
observed within or near the swale and within the excavated ditch on the southern portion of the site were
mapped as seasonal wetlands.
3.1.4 Rationale for Sample Point Choice
Fifteen sample points and two OHWM transects were selected to document conditions in representative
jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional areas (Figure 7, Appendix C). Rationale and findings for wetland data form
sample point locations are summarized in Table 4.
457
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 19 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Table 4. Summary of Sample Point Locations and Results
Name Sampling Rationale Hydrophytic
Vegetation?
Hydric Soil? Wetland
Hydrology?
Overall Wetland
Assessment
SP1 Placed to investigate a
slight depression at the
base of man-made
drainage.
No Yes Yes
(Roadside
and irrigation
runoff)
The hydrology
observed in this
location comes
from an adjacent
roadside ditch and
irrigation. The area
does not meet the
three parameter
wetland criteria.
SP2 Placed in the slightly
higher ground adjacent
SP1.
No No No Upland position;
this area does not
meet the three
parameter
wetland criteria.
SP3 Placed to investigate a
depression south of the
previously verified
seasonal wetland.
Yes Yes Yes This area is a three
parameter
wetland.
SP4 Placed in uplands as a
paired point to SP3.
No No No Upland; this area
does not meet the
three parameter
SP5 Placed at the north end
of the mapped culvert
from the USACE
determination.
No No No Upland; this area
does not meet the
USACE wetland
criteria.
SP6 Placed to investigate a
slight depression next to
the driveway.
Yes No No This area does not
meet the three
parameter
wetland criteria.
SP7 Placed in uplands
adjacent SP6.
No No No Upland; this area
does not meet the
three parameter
wetland criteria.
SP8 Placed to investigate a
slight depression in an
area that was historically
saturated, and may have
been a former stock
pond.
No No No This area does not
meet the three
parameter
wetland criteria.
SP9 Placed to investigate
uplands adjacent to SP8.
No No No Upland; this area
does not meet the
three parameter
wetland criteria.
SP10 Placed to investigate a
depression along the
swale.
Yes Yes Yes This area is a three
parameter
wetland.
458
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 20 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Name Sampling Rationale Hydrophytic
Vegetation?
Hydric Soil? Wetland
Hydrology?
Overall Wetland
Assessment
SP11 Placed in uplands as a
paired point to SP10.
No No No Upland position;
this area does not
meet the three
parameter
wetland criteria.
SP12 Placed to investigate a
depression along the
swale.
Yes Yes Yes This area is a three
parameter
wetland.
SP13 Placed in uplands as a
paired point to SP12.
No No No Upland; this area
does not meet the
three parameter
wetland criteria.
SP14 Placed to investigate a
depression at the
northernmost end of the
swale.
No No No This area is not a
three parameter
wetland.
SP15 Placed to investigate
uplands in the northern
portion of the study area.
No No No Upland; this area
does not meet the
three parameter
wetland criteria.
OHWM-1 was placed perpendicular to the swale in the northernmost portion of the wetland delineation study
area (Appendix C; Appendix D, Photo 16). OHWM-2 was placed perpendicular to the swale in the middle of
the wetland delineation study area (Appendix C; Appendix D, Photo 17). This feature is a non-jurisdictional
swale, with no or very weak indicators of a bed and bank. There was no flowing water was observed at the time
of the survey. The swale is slightly wider at the northern end of the study area (OHWM-1), and decreases in
width towards the southern end. Field indicators of an OHWM such as obvious bed and banks, shelving, or
knick points were lacking. Surfacewater was present at the outlet of the C4-2018 pipe, where it then flows into
ES2-2018. C4-2018 connects to an underground pipe for some unknown length. It does not appear that there
is a surface hydrologic connection between the swale and ES2-2018 or C4-2018
3.1.5 Photo Points
Photo point labels, coordinates, and rationales for photo documentation are presented in Table 5 and depicted
on Figure 6. Photos are presented in Appendix D.
Table 5. Coordinates and Rationale for Photo Points
Label Latitude, Longitude Depiction
Photo 1 37°42'8.18"N , 121°50'4.90"W Area of slight depression in the middle of a corral
receiving run-off from a roadside drainage.
Determined not to be a 3-parameter wetland (SP-1).
Photo 2 37°42'8.01"N , 121°50'4.87"W Point taken on slight higher ground in corral adjacent
to SP-1 (SP-2).
459
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 21 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Label Latitude, Longitude Depiction
Photo 3 37°42'13.22"N , 121°50'4.95"W 3-parameter seasonal wetland on the western
boundary of the study area (SP-3, SW6 ) adjacent to
a seasonal wetland from USACE determination (SW4-
2018).
Photo 4 37°42'13.24"N , 121°50'4.84"W Paired upland point (SP-4).
Photo 5 37°42'18.16"N , 121°50'6.12"W Sample point at the southern end of the previously
mapped ephemeral stream. Grassland dominated
by upland grasses and forbs northwest of the swale.
Photo 6 37°42'21.33"N , 121°50'9.29"W Determined not to be a 3-parameter wetland (SP-6).
Photo 7 37°42'21.60"N , 121°50'8.01"W Sample point to investigate uplands (SP-7).
Photo 8 37°42'21.63"N , 121°50'6.49"W Sample point to investigate uplands (SP-8).
Photo 9 37°42'22.19"N , 121°50'6.15"W Sample point to investigate uplands (SP-9).
Photo 10 37°42'24.17"N , 121°50'6.75"W 3 Parameter seasonal wetland (SP10, SW5).
Representative photo of the seasonal wetlands
observed along the swale.
Photo 11 37°42'24.31"N , 121°50'6.45"W Paired upland point to SW-5 (SP-11)
Photo 12 37°42'31.23"N , 121°50'6.91"W 3 Parameter seasonal wetland (SP12, SW1).
Representative photo of the seasonal wetlands
observed along the swale.
Photo 13 37°42'31.26"N , 121°50'7.13"W Paired upland point to SP-12 (SP-13).
Photo 14 37°42'33.13"N , 121°50'6.90"W Sample point to investigate uplands in northern
portion of the study area (SP-14).
Photo 15 37°42'32.96"N , 121°50'4.70"W Sample point to investigate area at northern end of
the swale (SP-15).
Photo 16 37°42'31.99"N , 121°50'6.80"W OHWM-1 transect across the swale in the northern
portion of the study area.
Photo 17 37°42'28.67"N , 121°50'7.43"W OHWM-2 transect across the swale in the central
portion of the study area.
Photo 18 37°42'20.26"N , 121°50'6.99"W Representative photo of annual grassland habitat
within the study area.
Photo 19 37°42'10.03"N , 121°50'3.76"W Representative photo of developed habitat within
the study area.
3.2 Identification of Potential Section 404 Wetlands
In general, areas that were considered to be wetlands included stands of hydrophytes and/or areas determined
to be ponded and/or saturated for long duration. Approximately 0.0.124 ac of potential USACE jurisdictional
wetlands were identified within the study area (Figure 7).
460
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 22 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
3.2.1 Seasonal Wetlands
Seasonal wetlands generally result from spring rain and typically occur in slight depressions in open fields, or at
the base of hillslopes. Surface water may be lacking during the summer and fall, but seasonal wetlands typically
support hydrophytic plants year-round. Six seasonal wetland features were mapped within the study area.
Seasonal Wetlands (SW1, SW2, SW3, SW4, SW5, SW6, and SW4-2018). Seven seasonal wetlands were
mapped along the ephemeral stream within the study area (Figure 7; Appendix C; Appendix D, Photos 3, 10,
and 12). Five of the seasonal wetlands are situated in subtle depressions within the study area, located adjacent
to, and within the swale in the northern portion of the study area. Two additional wetlands (SW4-2018 and
SW6) are located in the western portion of the study area, in a swale west of the developed area. These two
features are mapped as separate features because SW4-2018 was part of the 2019 PJD and SW6 is a continuation
of this feature to the south of that original verification boundary (USACE 2019). Both of these mapped features
are part of the same wetland that are located in the swale that would have been the continuation of the historic
drainage through the property. At the time of the delineation, which took place at the end of the rainy season,
these seasonal wetlands were relatively dry, with SW4-2018/SW6 being the exception. At the time of the survey,
these wetland was saturated with pockets of standing water. This feature also likely receives additional runoff
from the developed area immediately to the east, which includes a landscape supply center that would contribute
regular inputs of runoff. Each of these wetlands contained hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soil features,
including redox features.
Vegetation. The seasonal wetlands were dominated by hydrophytic vegetation, including Mexican rush (Juncus
mexicanus, FACW), Italian wild rye (Hordeum murinum, FAC), and English plantain (Plantago lancelota, FAC).
Soils. The soils within these wetlands were primarily clay. These soils were considered to be hydric based on
the presence of redox features, including prominent redox concentrations in the top twelve inches of a dark
soil (hydric soil field indicator F6).
Hydrology. At the time of the survey, surface water, a high water table or soil saturation were not observed at
SW1, SW2, SW3, SW4, and SW5. Primary hydrology indicators observed at these features include soil cracking,
inundation visual on aerials, and water-stained leaves. Additionally, each of these features occurs in a landscape
position, a low topographic position and shallow depression, which would suggest the presence of seasonal
ponding. At SW6, observed primary indicators of hydrology include presence of surface water and saturation.
3.3 Identification of Potential Section 404 Other Waters
Within the study area, no potentially jurisdictional Section 404 other waters were mapped. The other waters
previously verified by the USACE in 2019 are discussed below.
461
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 23 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
3.3.1 Ephemeral Stream
In general, areas that were considered to be ephemeral stream include topographically low lying drainages with
a bed and a bank, and which convey periodic and intermittent flow occurring immediately following storm
events. Ephemeral stream within the study area is limited to the while 0.048 ac previously verified by USACE
in 2019 (Figure 7).
Ephemeral Stream (ES2-2018). A segment of ephemeral stream within the study area (ES2-2018) was
delineated and verified by USACE in 2019. This segment of ephemeral drainage is rock-lined and is fed by a
culvert (C4-2018) from which a small amount of water was observed flowing during the 2020 delineation.
During the USACE site visit in April 2019, several days after a previous rain event, water was also observed
emanating from this culvert. This segment of ephemeral stream is approximately 100 feet long and 10 feet wide
and is connected at the downstream end by a culvert (C5-2018), which conveys flows under a road to a seasonal
wetland, SW4-2018, at its downstream end. At the time of the 2020 survey, which took place after more recent
rains than in 2019, water was still discharging from C4-2018. It should be noted that ES2-2018 and SW4-2018
may have some connection to groundwater, possibly through the underground piping, and be considered short-
term intermittent rather than fully ephemeral.
Downstream of ES2-2018, the ephemeral drainage is apparent south of SW6 where it flows off the Branaugh
property and onto the property to the west and north of Interstate 580. The course of its flow when it reaches
Interstate 580 could not be determined as part of this wetland delineation survey, because we did not have
access to that location.
3.4 Identification of Section 401 Potentially Jurisdictional Waters of
the State
The extent of Section 401 waters of the state (RWQCB jurisdiction) in the study area includes a total of 0.297
ac, including areas within Section 404 jurisdiction as described above. Waters of the state within the study area
include all waters of the U.S., and cover approximately 0.124 ac of seasonal wetlands (Figure 7). Characteristics
of waters of the state within the study area are described above in Sections 3.2 and 3.3.
3.5 Identification of CDFW Potentially Jurisdictional Habitats
The extent of CDFW jurisdictional habitats in the new study area includes a total of 0.028 ac, which includes
areas within Section 404/401 jurisdiction as described above. The new study area contains the continuation of
an excavated ditch that captures flows from ES2-2018. Though the ditch has a bed and banks, there is no
woody riparian habitat as defined by CDFW (Figure 7).
462
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 24 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
3.6 Wetlands and Waters Previously Verified by USACE
The study area includes a portion of the property in which a previous wetland delineation identified wetlands
and waters of the U.S., which were then subsequently verified by USACE to be Section 404 wetlands and waters
the U.S. These features are located in the center of the study area, and include ES2-2018, SW4-2018, C4-2018,
and C5-2018 as shown on Figure 7 (USACE File No. 2017-00145S; USACE 2019). These areas were inspected
by the delineators during the April 2020 surveys and no substantive alterations has occurred since the area was
verified.
3.7 Areas Not Meeting the Regulatory Definition of Waters of the U.S.
Approximately 39.642 acres of the study area do not meet the regulatory definition of state or federal waters,
wetlands, or riparian habitats. These portions of the study area consist of California annual grassland,
developed/landscaped areas, and ditches excavated in uplands and carrying primarily roadside or irrigation
runoff (Figure 6). These ditches occur in upland landscape positions and do not meet the USACE or RWQCB
criteria for wetlands, or the CDFW criteria for riparian areas.
Twelve of the fifteen wetland data form sample points were in upland areas (Appendix C, SP1, SP2, SP4, SP5,
SP6, SP7, SP8, SP9, SP11, SP13, SP14, and SP15). Non-jurisdictional uplands include the following land cover
types: annual grassland and developed. These vegetation types occur in upland landscape positions and do not
meet the USACE criteria for wetlands or other waters. Vegetation in the annual grassland is typically dominated
by upland grass and forb species, such as ripgut brome, wild oats, and black mustard. Soils were observed to
be clay and clay loam with no mottles and no other indicators of regular inundation (i.e., organic buildup or
streaking).
OHWM transects were performed to investigate the broad swale in the northern portion of the project site.
Vegetation within this swale is characterized the California annual grassland described above, except where
seasonal wetlands are present.
SP1 was dug to investigate a slight depression in the middle of a corral in a largely disturbed and developed
portion of the study area. The roughly 300 square foot are is at the base of a ditch used to direct landscaping
and agricultural run-off excavated in the southwest corner of the study area. The entire corral area in this
location is relatively level (Appendix D, Photo 1, 2). Some ponding was present, as were subtle redox features
in the soil. However, hydrophytic vegetation was not dominant, and instead the area was dominated by upland
forbs such as filarees (Erodium spp., UPL) and mallow (Malva nicaeensis, UPL), which appear to be dominant
even in years with average rainfall. The depression likely only receives water from stormwater and road run-off
for brief periods during the heaviest storm events and the sprinkler system associated with the developed
portion of the study area. The area surrounding SP1 is not expected to be a wetland.
463
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 25 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Man-made drainage ditches were also observed near the parking lot of the developed areas within the study
area. These drainages were likely built to collect storm run-off from the parking areas, and were not found to
have a connection to the ephemeral streams, or other waters features on site such as SW6. Because they were
ditches dug in uplands, draining uplands, and do not appear to re-constructions of historic drainages they were
considered to be non-jurisdictional.
464
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 26 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Section 4. Literature Cited
Baldwin, B. G., D. H. Goldman, D. J. Keil, R. Patterson, T. J. Ronatti, and D. H. Wilken (eds.). 2012. The
Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California. 2nd Edition. University of California Press, Berkeley,
California.
Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats
of the United States. U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.
Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Home Page.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Department of the
Army.
Google Inc. 2020. Google Earth Pro (Version 7.1.5.1557) [Software]. Accessed April 2020 from
http://earth.google.com.
Lichvar, R. W., D. L. Banks, W. N. Kirchner, and N. C. Melvin. 2016. Arid West 2016 Regional Plant List. The
National Wetland Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Prepared for the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers.
Munsell. 2009. Soil Color Charts, Munsell Color X-rite. Grand Rapids, Michigan.
[NRCS] Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the U.S.: A Guide
for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils (Version 7.0). U.S. Department of Agriculture. Prepared
with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils.
[NRCS] Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2020a. Web Soil Survey. U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Accessed April 2020 from http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov.
[NRCS] National Resource Conservation Service. 2020b. National Hydric Soils List. Accessed April 2020
from http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/use/hydric/.
[NWI] National Wetlands Inventory. 2020. Wetlands Mapper. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Accessed April
2020 from http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Wetlands-Mapper.html.
[NOAA NWS] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Weather Service. California
Nevada River Forecast Center. Observed Precipitation Data. Accessed April 2020 from
https://www.cnrfc.noaa.gov/
PRISM Climate Group. 2020. Online PRISM Data Explorer. Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.
Accessed April 2020 from http://www.prism.oregonstate.edu/.
[UCSB] University of California Santa Barbara Library. 2020. Digital Aerial Photo Collections. Accessed April
2020 from https://www.library.ucsb.edu/src/airphotos
465
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters 27 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
[USACE] U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2008a. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0). September 2008. U.S. Army Engineer Research
and Development Center.
[USACE] U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2008b. A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High
Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States: A Delineation Manual.
ERDC/CRREL TR-08-12.
[USACE] U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Updated Datasheet for the Identification of the Ordinary High
Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States. ERDC/CRREL TN-
10-1.
[USACE] U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2016a. Updated Map and Drawing Standards for the South Pacific
Division Regulatory Program.
[USACE] U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2016b. Information Needed for Verification of Corps Jurisdiction,
San Francisco District. Revised April 2016.
https://www.spn.usace.army.mil/Portals/68/docs/regulatory/2%20-%20Info%20Req.pdf
[USACE] U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2019. Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination, Dublin Boulevard-
North Canyons Parkway Extension, Alameda County, California (File No. 2017-00145S). Letter from
Naomi Schowalter, Senior Project Manager Dated October 31, 2019.
466
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters A-1 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Appendix A. Plants Observed in the Study Area
467
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters A-2 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Family Scientific Name Common Name WIC Anacardiaceae Schinus molle Peruvian pepper tree FACU Apiaceae Foeniculum vulgare Fennel UPL
Sanicula bipinnatifida Purple sanicle UPL Arecaceae Washingtonia robusta Fan palm FACW Asteraceae Carduus pycnocephalus Italian thistle UPL Centaurea solstitialis Yellow star thistle UPL Cynara cardunculus Cardoon UPL Erigeron canadensis Horseweed UPL Helminthotheca echioides Bristly ox-tongue FAC Hypochaeris glabra Smooth cat's ear UPL Lactuca serriola Prickly lettuce FACU Matricaria discoidea Pineapple weed FACU Silybum marianum Milk thistle UPL Sonchus arvensis ssp. arvensis Field sowthistle FACU Sonchus asper Sticky sandspurry FAC Betulaceae Alnus sp. Alder FACW Boraginaceae Amsinckia menziesii Common fiddleneck UPL Amsinckia tessellata Bristly fiddleneck UPL Brassicaceae Brassica nigra Black mustard UPL Capsella bursa-pastoris Shepard's purse FACU Hirschfeldia incana Summer mustard UPL Lepidium nitidum Shining peppergrass FAC Raphanus sativus Wild radish UPL Sinapis arvensis Charlock mustard UPL Caryophyllaceae Spergularia macrotheca var. macrotheca Sticky sandspurry FAC Stellaria media Chickweed FACU Convolvulaceae Convolvulus arvensis Field bindweed UPL Cyperaceae Carex sp. sedge FAC-OBL Fabaceae Medicago polymorpha Bur medic FACU Trifolium hirtum rose clover UPL Trifolium sp. Clover UPL Vicia sativa Spring vetch FACU Vicia villosa Vetch UPL Geraniaceae Erodium botrys Big heron bill FACU Erodium cicutarium red stemmed filaree UPL Erodium moschatum Musky stork's bill UPL Geranium dissectum Cutleaf geranium UPL Geranium molle Crane's bill geranium UPL Juncaceae Juncus mexicanus Mexican Rush FACW Malvaceae Malva nicaeensis Bull mallow UPL Malvella leprosa Alkali mallow FACU Myrtaceae Eucalyptus sp. Eucalyptus UPL
468
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters A-3 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Family Scientific Name Common Name WIC Orobanchaceae Castilleja exserta ssp. exserta Owl's clover UPL Plantaginaceae Plantago lanceolata Narrowleaf plantain FAC Poaceae Avena barbata Slender oats UPL Avena fatua Wild oat UPL Bromus diandrus Ripgut brome UPL Bromus hordeaceus Soft brome FACU Cynosurus echinatus Annual dogtail UPL Festuca perennis Italian rye grass UPL Hordeum murinum Foxtail barley FACU Stipa tenuissima Mexican feathergrass UPL Poa annua Annual blue grass FAC Polemoniaceae Gilia tricolor Bird's eye gilia UPL Polygonaceae Rumex conglomeratus Clustered dock FACW Rumex crispus Curly dock FAC Rubiaceae Sherardia arvensis Field madder UPL Salicaceae Populus nigra Lombardy poplar UPL Themidaceae Dichelostemma capitatum Blue dicks FACU Ulmaceae Ulmus parvifolia/pumila Chinese Elm UPL Urticaceae Urtica dioica common nettle FAC
469
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters B-1 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Appendix B. NRCS Soil Survey Report for the Study Area
470
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Alameda Area,
California
4423-01 Branaugh Property
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
April 30, 2020471
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/
portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil
Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
2
472
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,
audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice
and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or
call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.
3
473
Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2
How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5
Soil Map..................................................................................................................8
Soil Map................................................................................................................9
Legend................................................................................................................10
Map Unit Legend................................................................................................11
Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11
Alameda Area, California................................................................................13
DvC—Diablo clay, very deep, 3 to 15 percent slopes.................................13
LaC—Linne clay loam, 3 to 15 percent slopes............................................14
LaD—Linne clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, MLRA 15.........................16
RdA—Rincon clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes...........................................18
RdB—Rincon clay loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes...........................................19
References............................................................................................................21
Glossary................................................................................................................23
4
474
How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous
areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous
areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and
limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length,
and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and
native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil
profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The
profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the
soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is
devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other
biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource
areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that
share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water
resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey
areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that
is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the
area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind
of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and
miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific
segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they
were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict
with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a
specific location on the landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented
by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to
verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them
to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character
of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
5
475
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a
unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components
of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way
diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such
landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite
investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape,
and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the
soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at
specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller
number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color,
depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for
content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil
typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists
interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed
characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the
soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through
observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new
interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other
sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of
specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management
are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same
kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on
such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over
long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example,
soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will
have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict
that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
Custom Soil Resource Report
6
476
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,
fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
Custom Soil Resource Report
7
477
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of
soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
8
478
9
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
41
7
3
3
0
0
41
7
3
4
0
0
41
7
3
5
0
0
41
7
3
6
0
0
41
7
3
7
0
0
41
7
3
8
0
0
41
7
3
9
0
0
41
7
4
0
0
0
41
7
4
1
0
0
41
7
4
2
0
0
41
7
3
3
0
0
41
7
3
4
0
0
41
7
3
5
0
0
41
7
3
6
0
0
41
7
3
7
0
0
41
7
3
8
0
0
41
7
3
9
0
0
41
7
4
0
0
0
41
7
4
1
0
0
41
7
4
2
0
0
602400 602500 602600 602700 602800 602900 603000
602400 602500 602600 602700 602800 602900 603000 603100
37° 42' 36'' N
12
1
°
5
0
'
2
1
'
'
W
37° 42' 36'' N
12
1
°
4
9
'
4
9
'
'
W
37° 42' 2'' N
12
1
°
5
0
'
2
1
'
'
W
37° 42' 2'' N
12
1
°
4
9
'
4
9
'
'
W
N
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84
0 200 400 800 1200
Feet
0 50 100 200 300
Meters
Map Scale: 1:5,010 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
479
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:20,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Alameda Area, California
Survey Area Data: Version 13, Sep 16, 2019
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Apr 29, 2019—May
10, 2019
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Custom Soil Resource Report
10
480
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
DvC Diablo clay, very deep, 3 to 15
percent slopes
6.8 16.7%
LaC Linne clay loam, 3 to 15 percent
slopes
2.9 7.1%
LaD Linne clay loam, 15 to 30
percent slopes, MLRA 15
25.1 61.5%
RdA Rincon clay loam, 0 to 3
percent slopes
0.2 0.6%
RdB Rincon clay loam, 3 to 7
percent slopes
5.7 14.0%
Totals for Area of Interest 40.8 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
Custom Soil Resource Report
11
481
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
Custom Soil Resource Report
12
482
Alameda Area, California
DvC—Diablo clay, very deep, 3 to 15 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hb3b
Elevation: 300 to 1,700 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 15 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 57 degrees F
Frost-free period: 240 to 280 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Diablo and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Diablo
Setting
Landform: Hills
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Alluvium derived from shale and siltstone
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 15 inches: clay
H2 - 15 to 42 inches: silty clay
H3 - 42 to 60 inches: silty clay
Properties and qualities
Slope: 3 to 15 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to moderately saline (0.0 to 8.0
mmhos/cm)
Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.2 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
13
483
Minor Components
Altamont
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Linne
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Clear lake
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Basin floors
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Pescadero
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Basin floors
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
LaC—Linne clay loam, 3 to 15 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hb3l
Elevation: 700 to 1,700 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 15 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 57 degrees F
Frost-free period: 240 to 260 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Linne and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Linne
Setting
Landform: Hills
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Down-slope shape: Convex
Custom Soil Resource Report
14
484
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from sandstone and shale
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 36 inches: clay loam
H2 - 36 to 40 inches: weathered bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 3 to 15 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0
mmhos/cm)
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Altamont
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Diablo
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Clear lake
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Basin floors
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Pescadero
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Basin floors
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Custom Soil Resource Report
15
485
LaD—Linne clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, MLRA 15
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2w63l
Elevation: 110 to 1,560 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 22 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 61 degrees F
Frost-free period: 300 to 365 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Linne and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Linne
Setting
Landform: Hillslopes, mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, side slope
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from calcareous shale
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 9 inches: clay loam
A1 - 9 to 14 inches: clay loam
A2 - 14 to 29 inches: clay loam
AC - 29 to 32 inches: sandy clay loam
Ck - 32 to 36 inches: fine sandy loam
Cr - 36 to 51 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 35 to 50 inches to paralithic bedrock
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
16
486
Minor Components
Diablo
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes, hillslopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, side slope
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Ecological site: CLAYEY (R015XD001CA)
Hydric soil rating: No
Altamont
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Hillslopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Clear lake
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Drainageways
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Pescadero
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Drainageways, depressions
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope, dip
Down-slope shape: Convex, concave
Across-slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Haploxerolls, landslides
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Slumps, landslides
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Head slope
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
17
487
RdA—Rincon clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hb4j
Elevation: 10 to 600 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 16 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 57 degrees F
Frost-free period: 260 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Rincon and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Rincon
Setting
Landform: Fans, valley floors
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread, talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from sandstone and shale
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 16 inches: clay loam
H2 - 16 to 52 inches: sandy clay
H3 - 52 to 60 inches: stratified sandy loam to clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0
mmhos/cm)
Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
18
488
Minor Components
Clear lake
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
San ysidro
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Pleasanton
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
RdB—Rincon clay loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hb4k
Elevation: 10 to 600 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 16 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 57 degrees F
Frost-free period: 260 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Rincon and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Rincon
Setting
Landform: Fans, valley floors
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread, talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from sandstone and shale
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 16 inches: clay loam
H2 - 16 to 52 inches: sandy clay
H3 - 52 to 60 inches: stratified sandy loam to clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 3 to 7 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Custom Soil Resource Report
19
489
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0
mmhos/cm)
Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
San ysidro
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Pleasanton
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Clear lake
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
20
490
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric
soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/
detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084
21
491
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,
the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook
296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf
Custom Soil Resource Report
22
492
Glossary
Many of the terms relating to landforms, geology, and geomorphology are defined in
more detail in the following National Soil Survey Handbook link: “National Soil
Survey Handbook.”
ABC soil
A soil having an A, a B, and a C horizon.
Ablation till
Loose, relatively permeable earthy material deposited during the downwasting
of nearly static glacial ice, either contained within or accumulated on the surface
of the glacier.
AC soil
A soil having only an A and a C horizon. Commonly, such soil formed in recent
alluvium or on steep, rocky slopes.
Aeration, soil
The exchange of air in soil with air from the atmosphere. The air in a well
aerated soil is similar to that in the atmosphere; the air in a poorly aerated soil is
considerably higher in carbon dioxide and lower in oxygen.
Aggregate, soil
Many fine particles held in a single mass or cluster. Natural soil aggregates,
such as granules, blocks, or prisms, are called peds. Clods are aggregates
produced by tillage or logging.
Alkali (sodic) soil
A soil having so high a degree of alkalinity (pH 8.5 or higher) or so high a
percentage of exchangeable sodium (15 percent or more of the total
exchangeable bases), or both, that plant growth is restricted.
Alluvial cone
A semiconical type of alluvial fan having very steep slopes. It is higher,
narrower, and steeper than a fan and is composed of coarser and thicker layers
of material deposited by a combination of alluvial episodes and (to a much
lesser degree) landslides (debris flow). The coarsest materials tend to be
concentrated at the apex of the cone.
23
493
Alluvial fan
A low, outspread mass of loose materials and/or rock material, commonly with
gentle slopes. It is shaped like an open fan or a segment of a cone. The
material was deposited by a stream at the place where it issues from a narrow
mountain valley or upland valley or where a tributary stream is near or at its
junction with the main stream. The fan is steepest near its apex, which points
upstream, and slopes gently and convexly outward (downstream) with a gradual
decrease in gradient.
Alluvium
Unconsolidated material, such as gravel, sand, silt, clay, and various mixtures of
these, deposited on land by running water.
Alpha,alpha-dipyridyl
A compound that when dissolved in ammonium acetate is used to detect the
presence of reduced iron (Fe II) in the soil. A positive reaction implies reducing
conditions and the likely presence of redoximorphic features.
Animal unit month (AUM)
The amount of forage required by one mature cow of approximately 1,000
pounds weight, with or without a calf, for 1 month.
Aquic conditions
Current soil wetness characterized by saturation, reduction, and redoximorphic
features.
Argillic horizon
A subsoil horizon characterized by an accumulation of illuvial clay.
Arroyo
The flat-floored channel of an ephemeral stream, commonly with very steep to
vertical banks cut in unconsolidated material. It is usually dry but can be
transformed into a temporary watercourse or short-lived torrent after heavy rain
within the watershed.
Aspect
The direction toward which a slope faces. Also called slope aspect.
Association, soil
A group of soils or miscellaneous areas geographically associated in a
characteristic repeating pattern and defined and delineated as a single map
unit.
Available water capacity (available moisture capacity)
The capacity of soils to hold water available for use by most plants. It is
commonly defined as the difference between the amount of soil water at field
moisture capacity and the amount at wilting point. It is commonly expressed as
inches of water per inch of soil. The capacity, in inches, in a 60-inch profile or to
a limiting layer is expressed as:
Custom Soil Resource Report
24
494
Very low: 0 to 3
Low: 3 to 6
Moderate: 6 to 9
High: 9 to 12
Very high: More than 12
Backslope
The position that forms the steepest and generally linear, middle portion of a
hillslope. In profile, backslopes are commonly bounded by a convex shoulder
above and a concave footslope below.
Backswamp
A flood-plain landform. Extensive, marshy or swampy, depressed areas of flood
plains between natural levees and valley sides or terraces.
Badland
A landscape that is intricately dissected and characterized by a very fine
drainage network with high drainage densities and short, steep slopes and
narrow interfluves. Badlands develop on surfaces that have little or no
vegetative cover overlying unconsolidated or poorly cemented materials (clays,
silts, or sandstones) with, in some cases, soluble minerals, such as gypsum or
halite.
Bajada
A broad, gently inclined alluvial piedmont slope extending from the base of a
mountain range out into a basin and formed by the lateral coalescence of a
series of alluvial fans. Typically, it has a broadly undulating transverse profile,
parallel to the mountain front, resulting from the convexities of component fans.
The term is generally restricted to constructional slopes of intermontane basins.
Basal area
The area of a cross section of a tree, generally referring to the section at breast
height and measured outside the bark. It is a measure of stand density,
commonly expressed in square feet.
Base saturation
The degree to which material having cation-exchange properties is saturated
with exchangeable bases (sum of Ca, Mg, Na, and K), expressed as a
percentage of the total cation-exchange capacity.
Base slope (geomorphology)
A geomorphic component of hills consisting of the concave to linear
(perpendicular to the contour) slope that, regardless of the lateral shape, forms
an apron or wedge at the bottom of a hillside dominated by colluvium and
slope-wash sediments (for example, slope alluvium).
Bedding plane
A planar or nearly planar bedding surface that visibly separates each
successive layer of stratified sediment or rock (of the same or different lithology)
Custom Soil Resource Report
25
495
from the preceding or following layer; a plane of deposition. It commonly marks
a change in the circumstances of deposition and may show a parting, a color
difference, a change in particle size, or various combinations of these. The term
is commonly applied to any bedding surface, even one that is conspicuously
bent or deformed by folding.
Bedding system
A drainage system made by plowing, grading, or otherwise shaping the surface
of a flat field. It consists of a series of low ridges separated by shallow, parallel
dead furrows.
Bedrock
The solid rock that underlies the soil and other unconsolidated material or that
is exposed at the surface.
Bedrock-controlled topography
A landscape where the configuration and relief of the landforms are determined
or strongly influenced by the underlying bedrock.
Bench terrace
A raised, level or nearly level strip of earth constructed on or nearly on a
contour, supported by a barrier of rocks or similar material, and designed to
make the soil suitable for tillage and to prevent accelerated erosion.
Bisequum
Two sequences of soil horizons, each of which consists of an illuvial horizon
and the overlying eluvial horizons.
Blowout (map symbol)
A saucer-, cup-, or trough-shaped depression formed by wind erosion on a
preexisting dune or other sand deposit, especially in an area of shifting sand or
loose soil or where protective vegetation is disturbed or destroyed. The
adjoining accumulation of sand derived from the depression, where
recognizable, is commonly included. Blowouts are commonly small.
Borrow pit (map symbol)
An open excavation from which soil and underlying material have been
removed, usually for construction purposes.
Bottom land
An informal term loosely applied to various portions of a flood plain.
Boulders
Rock fragments larger than 2 feet (60 centimeters) in diameter.
Breaks
A landscape or tract of steep, rough or broken land dissected by ravines and
gullies and marking a sudden change in topography.
Custom Soil Resource Report
26
496
Breast height
An average height of 4.5 feet above the ground surface; the point on a tree
where diameter measurements are ordinarily taken.
Brush management
Use of mechanical, chemical, or biological methods to make conditions
favorable for reseeding or to reduce or eliminate competition from woody
vegetation and thus allow understory grasses and forbs to recover. Brush
management increases forage production and thus reduces the hazard of
erosion. It can improve the habitat for some species of wildlife.
Butte
An isolated, generally flat-topped hill or mountain with relatively steep slopes
and talus or precipitous cliffs and characterized by summit width that is less
than the height of bounding escarpments; commonly topped by a caprock of
resistant material and representing an erosion remnant carved from flat-lying
rocks.
Cable yarding
A method of moving felled trees to a nearby central area for transport to a
processing facility. Most cable yarding systems involve use of a drum, a pole,
and wire cables in an arrangement similar to that of a rod and reel used for
fishing. To reduce friction and soil disturbance, felled trees generally are reeled
in while one end is lifted or the entire log is suspended.
Calcareous soil
A soil containing enough calcium carbonate (commonly combined with
magnesium carbonate) to effervesce visibly when treated with cold, dilute
hydrochloric acid.
Caliche
A general term for a prominent zone of secondary carbonate accumulation in
surficial materials in warm, subhumid to arid areas. Caliche is formed by both
geologic and pedologic processes. Finely crystalline calcium carbonate forms a
nearly continuous surface-coating and void-filling medium in geologic (parent)
materials. Cementation ranges from weak in nonindurated forms to very strong
in indurated forms. Other minerals (e.g., carbonates, silicate, and sulfate) may
occur as accessory cements. Most petrocalcic horizons and some calcic
horizons are caliche.
California bearing ratio (CBR)
The load-supporting capacity of a soil as compared to that of standard crushed
limestone, expressed as a ratio. First standardized in California. A soil having a
CBR of 16 supports 16 percent of the load that would be supported by standard
crushed limestone, per unit area, with the same degree of distortion.
Canopy
The leafy crown of trees or shrubs. (See Crown.)
Custom Soil Resource Report
27
497
Canyon
A long, deep, narrow valley with high, precipitous walls in an area of high local
relief.
Capillary water
Water held as a film around soil particles and in tiny spaces between particles.
Surface tension is the adhesive force that holds capillary water in the soil.
Catena
A sequence, or “chain,” of soils on a landscape that formed in similar kinds of
parent material and under similar climatic conditions but that have different
characteristics as a result of differences in relief and drainage.
Cation
An ion carrying a positive charge of electricity. The common soil cations are
calcium, potassium, magnesium, sodium, and hydrogen.
Cation-exchange capacity
The total amount of exchangeable cations that can be held by the soil,
expressed in terms of milliequivalents per 100 grams of soil at neutrality (pH
7.0) or at some other stated pH value. The term, as applied to soils, is
synonymous with base-exchange capacity but is more precise in meaning.
Catsteps
See Terracettes.
Cement rock
Shaly limestone used in the manufacture of cement.
Channery soil material
Soil material that has, by volume, 15 to 35 percent thin, flat fragments of
sandstone, shale, slate, limestone, or schist as much as 6 inches (15
centimeters) along the longest axis. A single piece is called a channer.
Chemical treatment
Control of unwanted vegetation through the use of chemicals.
Chiseling
Tillage with an implement having one or more soil-penetrating points that
shatter or loosen hard, compacted layers to a depth below normal plow depth.
Cirque
A steep-walled, semicircular or crescent-shaped, half-bowl-like recess or
hollow, commonly situated at the head of a glaciated mountain valley or high on
the side of a mountain. It was produced by the erosive activity of a mountain
glacier. It commonly contains a small round lake (tarn).
Custom Soil Resource Report
28
498
Clay
As a soil separate, the mineral soil particles less than 0.002 millimeter in
diameter. As a soil textural class, soil material that is 40 percent or more clay,
less than 45 percent sand, and less than 40 percent silt.
Clay depletions
See Redoximorphic features.
Clay film
A thin coating of oriented clay on the surface of a soil aggregate or lining pores
or root channels. Synonyms: clay coating, clay skin.
Clay spot (map symbol)
A spot where the surface texture is silty clay or clay in areas where the surface
layer of the soils in the surrounding map unit is sandy loam, loam, silt loam, or
coarser.
Claypan
A dense, compact subsoil layer that contains much more clay than the overlying
materials, from which it is separated by a sharply defined boundary. The layer
restricts the downward movement of water through the soil. A claypan is
commonly hard when dry and plastic and sticky when wet.
Climax plant community
The stabilized plant community on a particular site. The plant cover reproduces
itself and does not change so long as the environment remains the same.
Coarse textured soil
Sand or loamy sand.
Cobble (or cobblestone)
A rounded or partly rounded fragment of rock 3 to 10 inches (7.6 to 25
centimeters) in diameter.
Cobbly soil material
Material that has 15 to 35 percent, by volume, rounded or partially rounded rock
fragments 3 to 10 inches (7.6 to 25 centimeters) in diameter. Very cobbly soil
material has 35 to 60 percent of these rock fragments, and extremely cobbly
soil material has more than 60 percent.
COLE (coefficient of linear extensibility)
See Linear extensibility.
Colluvium
Unconsolidated, unsorted earth material being transported or deposited on side
slopes and/or at the base of slopes by mass movement (e.g., direct
gravitational action) and by local, unconcentrated runoff.
Custom Soil Resource Report
29
499
Complex slope
Irregular or variable slope. Planning or establishing terraces, diversions, and
other water-control structures on a complex slope is difficult.
Complex, soil
A map unit of two or more kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas in such an
intricate pattern or so small in area that it is not practical to map them
separately at the selected scale of mapping. The pattern and proportion of the
soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas.
Concretions
See Redoximorphic features.
Conglomerate
A coarse grained, clastic sedimentary rock composed of rounded or subangular
rock fragments more than 2 millimeters in diameter. It commonly has a matrix of
sand and finer textured material. Conglomerate is the consolidated equivalent
of gravel.
Conservation cropping system
Growing crops in combination with needed cultural and management practices.
In a good conservation cropping system, the soil-improving crops and practices
more than offset the effects of the soil-depleting crops and practices. Cropping
systems are needed on all tilled soils. Soil-improving practices in a conservation
cropping system include the use of rotations that contain grasses and legumes
and the return of crop residue to the soil. Other practices include the use of
green manure crops of grasses and legumes, proper tillage, adequate
fertilization, and weed and pest control.
Conservation tillage
A tillage system that does not invert the soil and that leaves a protective amount
of crop residue on the surface throughout the year.
Consistence, soil
Refers to the degree of cohesion and adhesion of soil material and its
resistance to deformation when ruptured. Consistence includes resistance of
soil material to rupture and to penetration; plasticity, toughness, and stickiness
of puddled soil material; and the manner in which the soil material behaves
when subject to compression. Terms describing consistence are defined in the
“Soil Survey Manual.”
Contour stripcropping
Growing crops in strips that follow the contour. Strips of grass or close-growing
crops are alternated with strips of clean-tilled crops or summer fallow.
Control section
The part of the soil on which classification is based. The thickness varies
among different kinds of soil, but for many it is that part of the soil profile
between depths of 10 inches and 40 or 80 inches.
Custom Soil Resource Report
30
500
Coprogenous earth (sedimentary peat)
A type of limnic layer composed predominantly of fecal material derived from
aquatic animals.
Corrosion (geomorphology)
A process of erosion whereby rocks and soil are removed or worn away by
natural chemical processes, especially by the solvent action of running water,
but also by other reactions, such as hydrolysis, hydration, carbonation, and
oxidation.
Corrosion (soil survey interpretations)
Soil-induced electrochemical or chemical action that dissolves or weakens
concrete or uncoated steel.
Cover crop
A close-growing crop grown primarily to improve and protect the soil between
periods of regular crop production, or a crop grown between trees and vines in
orchards and vineyards.
Crop residue management
Returning crop residue to the soil, which helps to maintain soil structure,
organic matter content, and fertility and helps to control erosion.
Cropping system
Growing crops according to a planned system of rotation and management
practices.
Cross-slope farming
Deliberately conducting farming operations on sloping farmland in such a way
that tillage is across the general slope.
Crown
The upper part of a tree or shrub, including the living branches and their foliage.
Cryoturbate
A mass of soil or other unconsolidated earthy material moved or disturbed by
frost action. It is typically coarser than the underlying material.
Cuesta
An asymmetric ridge capped by resistant rock layers of slight or moderate dip
(commonly less than 15 percent slopes); a type of homocline produced by
differential erosion of interbedded resistant and weak rocks. A cuesta has a
long, gentle slope on one side (dip slope) that roughly parallels the inclined
beds; on the other side, it has a relatively short and steep or clifflike slope
(scarp) that cuts through the tilted rocks.
Custom Soil Resource Report
31
501
Culmination of the mean annual increment (CMAI)
The average annual increase per acre in the volume of a stand. Computed by
dividing the total volume of the stand by its age. As the stand increases in age,
the mean annual increment continues to increase until mortality begins to
reduce the rate of increase. The point where the stand reaches its maximum
annual rate of growth is called the culmination of the mean annual increment.
Cutbanks cave
The walls of excavations tend to cave in or slough.
Decreasers
The most heavily grazed climax range plants. Because they are the most
palatable, they are the first to be destroyed by overgrazing.
Deferred grazing
Postponing grazing or resting grazing land for a prescribed period.
Delta
A body of alluvium having a surface that is fan shaped and nearly flat;
deposited at or near the mouth of a river or stream where it enters a body of
relatively quiet water, generally a sea or lake.
Dense layer
A very firm, massive layer that has a bulk density of more than 1.8 grams per
cubic centimeter. Such a layer affects the ease of digging and can affect filling
and compacting.
Depression, closed (map symbol)
A shallow, saucer-shaped area that is slightly lower on the landscape than the
surrounding area and that does not have a natural outlet for surface drainage.
Depth, soil
Generally, the thickness of the soil over bedrock. Very deep soils are more than
60 inches deep over bedrock; deep soils, 40 to 60 inches; moderately deep, 20
to 40 inches; shallow, 10 to 20 inches; and very shallow, less than 10 inches.
Desert pavement
A natural, residual concentration or layer of wind-polished, closely packed
gravel, boulders, and other rock fragments mantling a desert surface. It forms
where wind action and sheetwash have removed all smaller particles or where
rock fragments have migrated upward through sediments to the surface. It
typically protects the finer grained underlying material from further erosion.
Diatomaceous earth
A geologic deposit of fine, grayish siliceous material composed chiefly or
entirely of the remains of diatoms.
Custom Soil Resource Report
32
502
Dip slope
A slope of the land surface, roughly determined by and approximately
conforming to the dip of the underlying bedrock.
Diversion (or diversion terrace)
A ridge of earth, generally a terrace, built to protect downslope areas by
diverting runoff from its natural course.
Divided-slope farming
A form of field stripcropping in which crops are grown in a systematic
arrangement of two strips, or bands, across the slope to reduce the hazard of
water erosion. One strip is in a close-growing crop that provides protection from
erosion, and the other strip is in a crop that provides less protection from
erosion. This practice is used where slopes are not long enough to permit a full
stripcropping pattern to be used.
Drainage class (natural)
Refers to the frequency and duration of wet periods under conditions similar to
those under which the soil formed. Alterations of the water regime by human
activities, either through drainage or irrigation, are not a consideration unless
they have significantly changed the morphology of the soil. Seven classes of
natural soil drainage are recognized—excessively drained, somewhat
excessively drained, well drained, moderately well drained, somewhat poorly
drained, poorly drained, and very poorly drained. These classes are defined in
the “Soil Survey Manual.”
Drainage, surface
Runoff, or surface flow of water, from an area.
Drainageway
A general term for a course or channel along which water moves in draining an
area. A term restricted to relatively small, linear depressions that at some time
move concentrated water and either do not have a defined channel or have only
a small defined channel.
Draw
A small stream valley that generally is shallower and more open than a ravine
or gulch and that has a broader bottom. The present stream channel may
appear inadequate to have cut the drainageway that it occupies.
Drift
A general term applied to all mineral material (clay, silt, sand, gravel, and
boulders) transported by a glacier and deposited directly by or from the ice or
transported by running water emanating from a glacier. Drift includes
unstratified material (till) that forms moraines and stratified deposits that form
outwash plains, eskers, kames, varves, and glaciofluvial sediments. The term is
generally applied to Pleistocene glacial deposits in areas that no longer contain
glaciers.
Custom Soil Resource Report
33
503
Drumlin
A low, smooth, elongated oval hill, mound, or ridge of compact till that has a
core of bedrock or drift. It commonly has a blunt nose facing the direction from
which the ice approached and a gentler slope tapering in the other direction.
The longer axis is parallel to the general direction of glacier flow. Drumlins are
products of streamline (laminar) flow of glaciers, which molded the subglacial
floor through a combination of erosion and deposition.
Duff
A generally firm organic layer on the surface of mineral soils. It consists of fallen
plant material that is in the process of decomposition and includes everything
from the litter on the surface to underlying pure humus.
Dune
A low mound, ridge, bank, or hill of loose, windblown granular material
(generally sand), either barren and capable of movement from place to place or
covered and stabilized with vegetation but retaining its characteristic shape.
Earthy fill
See Mine spoil.
Ecological site
An area where climate, soil, and relief are sufficiently uniform to produce a
distinct natural plant community. An ecological site is the product of all the
environmental factors responsible for its development. It is typified by an
association of species that differ from those on other ecological sites in kind
and/or proportion of species or in total production.
Eluviation
The movement of material in true solution or colloidal suspension from one
place to another within the soil. Soil horizons that have lost material through
eluviation are eluvial; those that have received material are illuvial.
Endosaturation
A type of saturation of the soil in which all horizons between the upper
boundary of saturation and a depth of 2 meters are saturated.
Eolian deposit
Sand-, silt-, or clay-sized clastic material transported and deposited primarily by
wind, commonly in the form of a dune or a sheet of sand or loess.
Ephemeral stream
A stream, or reach of a stream, that flows only in direct response to
precipitation. It receives no long-continued supply from melting snow or other
source, and its channel is above the water table at all times.
Custom Soil Resource Report
34
504
Episaturation
A type of saturation indicating a perched water table in a soil in which saturated
layers are underlain by one or more unsaturated layers within 2 meters of the
surface.
Erosion
The wearing away of the land surface by water, wind, ice, or other geologic
agents and by such processes as gravitational creep.
Erosion (accelerated)
Erosion much more rapid than geologic erosion, mainly as a result of human or
animal activities or of a catastrophe in nature, such as a fire, that exposes the
surface.
Erosion (geologic)
Erosion caused by geologic processes acting over long geologic periods and
resulting in the wearing away of mountains and the building up of such
landscape features as flood plains and coastal plains. Synonym: natural
erosion.
Erosion pavement
A surficial lag concentration or layer of gravel and other rock fragments that
remains on the soil surface after sheet or rill erosion or wind has removed the
finer soil particles and that tends to protect the underlying soil from further
erosion.
Erosion surface
A land surface shaped by the action of erosion, especially by running water.
Escarpment
A relatively continuous and steep slope or cliff breaking the general continuity of
more gently sloping land surfaces and resulting from erosion or faulting. Most
commonly applied to cliffs produced by differential erosion. Synonym: scarp.
Escarpment, bedrock (map symbol)
A relatively continuous and steep slope or cliff, produced by erosion or faulting,
that breaks the general continuity of more gently sloping land surfaces.
Exposed material is hard or soft bedrock.
Escarpment, nonbedrock (map symbol)
A relatively continuous and steep slope or cliff, generally produced by erosion
but in some places produced by faulting, that breaks the continuity of more
gently sloping land surfaces. Exposed earthy material is nonsoil or very shallow
soil.
Esker
A long, narrow, sinuous, steep-sided ridge of stratified sand and gravel
deposited as the bed of a stream flowing in an ice tunnel within or below the ice
(subglacial) or between ice walls on top of the ice of a wasting glacier and left
Custom Soil Resource Report
35
505
behind as high ground when the ice melted. Eskers range in length from less
than a kilometer to more than 160 kilometers and in height from 3 to 30 meters.
Extrusive rock
Igneous rock derived from deep-seated molten matter (magma) deposited and
cooled on the earth’s surface.
Fallow
Cropland left idle in order to restore productivity through accumulation of
moisture. Summer fallow is common in regions of limited rainfall where cereal
grain is grown. The soil is tilled for at least one growing season for weed control
and decomposition of plant residue.
Fan remnant
A general term for landforms that are the remaining parts of older fan
landforms, such as alluvial fans, that have been either dissected or partially
buried.
Fertility, soil
The quality that enables a soil to provide plant nutrients, in adequate amounts
and in proper balance, for the growth of specified plants when light, moisture,
temperature, tilth, and other growth factors are favorable.
Fibric soil material (peat)
The least decomposed of all organic soil material. Peat contains a large amount
of well preserved fiber that is readily identifiable according to botanical origin.
Peat has the lowest bulk density and the highest water content at saturation of
all organic soil material.
Field moisture capacity
The moisture content of a soil, expressed as a percentage of the ovendry
weight, after the gravitational, or free, water has drained away; the field
moisture content 2 or 3 days after a soaking rain; also called normal field
capacity, normal moisture capacity, or capillary capacity.
Fill slope
A sloping surface consisting of excavated soil material from a road cut. It
commonly is on the downhill side of the road.
Fine textured soil
Sandy clay, silty clay, or clay.
Firebreak
An area cleared of flammable material to stop or help control creeping or
running fires. It also serves as a line from which to work and to facilitate the
movement of firefighters and equipment. Designated roads also serve as
firebreaks.
Custom Soil Resource Report
36
506
First bottom
An obsolete, informal term loosely applied to the lowest flood-plain steps that
are subject to regular flooding.
Flaggy soil material
Material that has, by volume, 15 to 35 percent flagstones. Very flaggy soil
material has 35 to 60 percent flagstones, and extremely flaggy soil material has
more than 60 percent flagstones.
Flagstone
A thin fragment of sandstone, limestone, slate, shale, or (rarely) schist 6 to 15
inches (15 to 38 centimeters) long.
Flood plain
The nearly level plain that borders a stream and is subject to flooding unless
protected artificially.
Flood-plain landforms
A variety of constructional and erosional features produced by stream channel
migration and flooding. Examples include backswamps, flood-plain splays,
meanders, meander belts, meander scrolls, oxbow lakes, and natural levees.
Flood-plain splay
A fan-shaped deposit or other outspread deposit formed where an overloaded
stream breaks through a levee (natural or artificial) and deposits its material
(commonly coarse grained) on the flood plain.
Flood-plain step
An essentially flat, terrace-like alluvial surface within a valley that is frequently
covered by floodwater from the present stream; any approximately horizontal
surface still actively modified by fluvial scour and/or deposition. May occur
individually or as a series of steps.
Fluvial
Of or pertaining to rivers or streams; produced by stream or river action.
Foothills
A region of steeply sloping hills that fringes a mountain range or high-plateau
escarpment. The hills have relief of as much as 1,000 feet (300 meters).
Footslope
The concave surface at the base of a hillslope. A footslope is a transition zone
between upslope sites of erosion and transport (shoulders and backslopes) and
downslope sites of deposition (toeslopes).
Forb
Any herbaceous plant not a grass or a sedge.
Custom Soil Resource Report
37
507
Forest cover
All trees and other woody plants (underbrush) covering the ground in a forest.
Forest type
A stand of trees similar in composition and development because of given
physical and biological factors by which it may be differentiated from other
stands.
Fragipan
A loamy, brittle subsurface horizon low in porosity and content of organic matter
and low or moderate in clay but high in silt or very fine sand. A fragipan appears
cemented and restricts roots. When dry, it is hard or very hard and has a higher
bulk density than the horizon or horizons above. When moist, it tends to rupture
suddenly under pressure rather than to deform slowly.
Genesis, soil
The mode of origin of the soil. Refers especially to the processes or soil-forming
factors responsible for the formation of the solum, or true soil, from the
unconsolidated parent material.
Gilgai
Commonly, a succession of microbasins and microknolls in nearly level areas or
of microvalleys and microridges parallel with the slope. Typically, the microrelief
of clayey soils that shrink and swell considerably with changes in moisture
content.
Glaciofluvial deposits
Material moved by glaciers and subsequently sorted and deposited by streams
flowing from the melting ice. The deposits are stratified and occur in the form of
outwash plains, valley trains, deltas, kames, eskers, and kame terraces.
Glaciolacustrine deposits
Material ranging from fine clay to sand derived from glaciers and deposited in
glacial lakes mainly by glacial meltwater. Many deposits are bedded or
laminated.
Gleyed soil
Soil that formed under poor drainage, resulting in the reduction of iron and other
elements in the profile and in gray colors.
Graded stripcropping
Growing crops in strips that grade toward a protected waterway.
Grassed waterway
A natural or constructed waterway, typically broad and shallow, seeded to grass
as protection against erosion. Conducts surface water away from cropland.
Custom Soil Resource Report
38
508
Gravel
Rounded or angular fragments of rock as much as 3 inches (2 millimeters to 7.6
centimeters) in diameter. An individual piece is a pebble.
Gravel pit (map symbol)
An open excavation from which soil and underlying material have been
removed and used, without crushing, as a source of sand or gravel.
Gravelly soil material
Material that has 15 to 35 percent, by volume, rounded or angular rock
fragments, not prominently flattened, as much as 3 inches (7.6 centimeters) in
diameter.
Gravelly spot (map symbol)
A spot where the surface layer has more than 35 percent, by volume, rock
fragments that are mostly less than 3 inches in diameter in an area that has
less than 15 percent rock fragments.
Green manure crop (agronomy)
A soil-improving crop grown to be plowed under in an early stage of maturity or
soon after maturity.
Ground water
Water filling all the unblocked pores of the material below the water table.
Gully (map symbol)
A small, steep-sided channel caused by erosion and cut in unconsolidated
materials by concentrated but intermittent flow of water. The distinction between
a gully and a rill is one of depth. A gully generally is an obstacle to farm
machinery and is too deep to be obliterated by ordinary tillage whereas a rill is
of lesser depth and can be smoothed over by ordinary tillage.
Hard bedrock
Bedrock that cannot be excavated except by blasting or by the use of special
equipment that is not commonly used in construction.
Hard to reclaim
Reclamation is difficult after the removal of soil for construction and other uses.
Revegetation and erosion control are extremely difficult.
Hardpan
A hardened or cemented soil horizon, or layer. The soil material is sandy, loamy,
or clayey and is cemented by iron oxide, silica, calcium carbonate, or other
substance.
Custom Soil Resource Report
39
509
Head slope (geomorphology)
A geomorphic component of hills consisting of a laterally concave area of a
hillside, especially at the head of a drainageway. The overland waterflow is
converging.
Hemic soil material (mucky peat)
Organic soil material intermediate in degree of decomposition between the less
decomposed fibric material and the more decomposed sapric material.
High-residue crops
Such crops as small grain and corn used for grain. If properly managed, residue
from these crops can be used to control erosion until the next crop in the
rotation is established. These crops return large amounts of organic matter to
the soil.
Hill
A generic term for an elevated area of the land surface, rising as much as 1,000
feet above surrounding lowlands, commonly of limited summit area and having
a well defined outline. Slopes are generally more than 15 percent. The
distinction between a hill and a mountain is arbitrary and may depend on local
usage.
Hillslope
A generic term for the steeper part of a hill between its summit and the drainage
line, valley flat, or depression floor at the base of a hill.
Horizon, soil
A layer of soil, approximately parallel to the surface, having distinct
characteristics produced by soil-forming processes. In the identification of soil
horizons, an uppercase letter represents the major horizons. Numbers or
lowercase letters that follow represent subdivisions of the major horizons. An
explanation of the subdivisions is given in the “Soil Survey Manual.” The major
horizons of mineral soil are as follows:
Custom Soil Resource Report
40
510
O horizon: An organic layer of fresh and decaying plant residue.
L horizon: A layer of organic and mineral limnic materials, including
coprogenous earth (sedimentary peat), diatomaceous earth, and marl.
A horizon: The mineral horizon at or near the surface in which an accumulation
of humified organic matter is mixed with the mineral material. Also, a plowed
surface horizon, most of which was originally part of a B horizon.
E horizon: The mineral horizon in which the main feature is loss of silicate clay,
iron, aluminum, or some combination of these.
B horizon: The mineral horizon below an A horizon. The B horizon is in part a
layer of transition from the overlying A to the underlying C horizon. The B
horizon also has distinctive characteristics, such as (1) accumulation of clay,
sesquioxides, humus, or a combination of these; (2) prismatic or blocky
structure; (3) redder or browner colors than those in the A horizon; or (4) a
combination of these.
C horizon: The mineral horizon or layer, excluding indurated bedrock, that is
little affected by soil-forming processes and does not have the properties typical
of the overlying soil material. The material of a C horizon may be either like or
unlike that in which the solum formed. If the material is known to differ from that
in the solum, an Arabic numeral, commonly a 2, precedes the letter C.
Cr horizon: Soft, consolidated bedrock beneath the soil.
R layer: Consolidated bedrock beneath the soil. The bedrock commonly
underlies a C horizon, but it can be directly below an A or a B horizon.
M layer: A root-limiting subsoil layer consisting of nearly continuous, horizontally
oriented, human-manufactured materials.
W layer: A layer of water within or beneath the soil.
Humus
The well decomposed, more or less stable part of the organic matter in mineral
soils.
Hydrologic soil groups
Refers to soils grouped according to their runoff potential. The soil properties
that influence this potential are those that affect the minimum rate of water
infiltration on a bare soil during periods after prolonged wetting when the soil is
not frozen. These properties include depth to a seasonal high water table, the
infiltration rate, and depth to a layer that significantly restricts the downward
movement of water. The slope and the kind of plant cover are not considered
but are separate factors in predicting runoff.
Igneous rock
Rock that was formed by cooling and solidification of magma and that has not
been changed appreciably by weathering since its formation. Major varieties
include plutonic and volcanic rock (e.g., andesite, basalt, and granite).
Illuviation
The movement of soil material from one horizon to another in the soil profile.
Generally, material is removed from an upper horizon and deposited in a lower
horizon.
Custom Soil Resource Report
41
511
Impervious soil
A soil through which water, air, or roots penetrate slowly or not at all. No soil is
absolutely impervious to air and water all the time.
Increasers
Species in the climax vegetation that increase in amount as the more desirable
plants are reduced by close grazing. Increasers commonly are the shorter
plants and the less palatable to livestock.
Infiltration
The downward entry of water into the immediate surface of soil or other
material, as contrasted with percolation, which is movement of water through
soil layers or material.
Infiltration capacity
The maximum rate at which water can infiltrate into a soil under a given set of
conditions.
Infiltration rate
The rate at which water penetrates the surface of the soil at any given instant,
usually expressed in inches per hour. The rate can be limited by the infiltration
capacity of the soil or the rate at which water is applied at the surface.
Intake rate
The average rate of water entering the soil under irrigation. Most soils have a
fast initial rate; the rate decreases with application time. Therefore, intake rate
for design purposes is not a constant but is a variable depending on the net
irrigation application. The rate of water intake, in inches per hour, is expressed
as follows:
Very low: Less than 0.2
Low: 0.2 to 0.4
Moderately low: 0.4 to 0.75
Moderate: 0.75 to 1.25
Moderately high: 1.25 to 1.75
High: 1.75 to 2.5
Very high: More than 2.5
Interfluve
A landform composed of the relatively undissected upland or ridge between two
adjacent valleys containing streams flowing in the same general direction. An
elevated area between two drainageways that sheds water to those
drainageways.
Interfluve (geomorphology)
A geomorphic component of hills consisting of the uppermost, comparatively
level or gently sloping area of a hill; shoulders of backwearing hillslopes can
narrow the upland or can merge, resulting in a strongly convex shape.
Custom Soil Resource Report
42
512
Intermittent stream
A stream, or reach of a stream, that does not flow year-round but that is
commonly dry for 3 or more months out of 12 and whose channel is generally
below the local water table. It flows only during wet periods or when it receives
ground-water discharge or long, continued contributions from melting snow or
other surface and shallow subsurface sources.
Invaders
On range, plants that encroach into an area and grow after the climax
vegetation has been reduced by grazing. Generally, plants invade following
disturbance of the surface.
Iron depletions
See Redoximorphic features.
Irrigation
Application of water to soils to assist in production of crops. Methods of
irrigation are:
Basin: Water is applied rapidly to nearly level plains surrounded by levees or
dikes.
Border: Water is applied at the upper end of a strip in which the lateral flow of
water is controlled by small earth ridges called border dikes, or borders.
Controlled flooding: Water is released at intervals from closely spaced field
ditches and distributed uniformly over the field.
Corrugation: Water is applied to small, closely spaced furrows or ditches in
fields of close-growing crops or in orchards so that it flows in only one direction.
Drip (or trickle): Water is applied slowly and under low pressure to the surface
of the soil or into the soil through such applicators as emitters, porous tubing, or
perforated pipe.
Furrow: Water is applied in small ditches made by cultivation implements.
Furrows are used for tree and row crops.
Sprinkler: Water is sprayed over the soil surface through pipes or nozzles from
a pressure system.
Subirrigation: Water is applied in open ditches or tile lines until the water table is
raised enough to wet the soil.
Wild flooding: Water, released at high points, is allowed to flow onto an area
without controlled distribution.
Kame
A low mound, knob, hummock, or short irregular ridge composed of stratified
sand and gravel deposited by a subglacial stream as a fan or delta at the
margin of a melting glacier; by a supraglacial stream in a low place or hole on
the surface of the glacier; or as a ponded deposit on the surface or at the
margin of stagnant ice.
Custom Soil Resource Report
43
513
Karst (topography)
A kind of topography that formed in limestone, gypsum, or other soluble rocks
by dissolution and that is characterized by closed depressions, sinkholes,
caves, and underground drainage.
Knoll
A small, low, rounded hill rising above adjacent landforms.
Ksat
See Saturated hydraulic conductivity.
Lacustrine deposit
Material deposited in lake water and exposed when the water level is lowered
or the elevation of the land is raised.
Lake plain
A nearly level surface marking the floor of an extinct lake filled by well sorted,
generally fine textured, stratified deposits, commonly containing varves.
Lake terrace
A narrow shelf, partly cut and partly built, produced along a lakeshore in front of
a scarp line of low cliffs and later exposed when the water level falls.
Landfill (map symbol)
An area of accumulated waste products of human habitation, either above or
below natural ground level.
Landslide
A general, encompassing term for most types of mass movement landforms
and processes involving the downslope transport and outward deposition of soil
and rock materials caused by gravitational forces; the movement may or may
not involve saturated materials. The speed and distance of movement, as well
as the amount of soil and rock material, vary greatly.
Large stones
Rock fragments 3 inches (7.6 centimeters) or more across. Large stones
adversely affect the specified use of the soil.
Lava flow (map symbol)
A solidified, commonly lobate body of rock formed through lateral, surface
outpouring of molten lava from a vent or fissure.
Leaching
The removal of soluble material from soil or other material by percolating water.
Custom Soil Resource Report
44
514
Levee (map symbol)
An embankment that confines or controls water, especially one built along the
banks of a river to prevent overflow onto lowlands.
Linear extensibility
Refers to the change in length of an unconfined clod as moisture content is
decreased from a moist to a dry state. Linear extensibility is used to determine
the shrink-swell potential of soils. It is an expression of the volume change
between the water content of the clod at 1/3- or 1/10-bar tension (33kPa or
10kPa tension) and oven dryness. Volume change is influenced by the amount
and type of clay minerals in the soil. The volume change is the percent change
for the whole soil. If it is expressed as a fraction, the resulting value is COLE,
coefficient of linear extensibility.
Liquid limit
The moisture content at which the soil passes from a plastic to a liquid state.
Loam
Soil material that is 7 to 27 percent clay particles, 28 to 50 percent silt particles,
and less than 52 percent sand particles.
Loess
Material transported and deposited by wind and consisting dominantly of silt-
sized particles.
Low strength
The soil is not strong enough to support loads.
Low-residue crops
Such crops as corn used for silage, peas, beans, and potatoes. Residue from
these crops is not adequate to control erosion until the next crop in the rotation
is established. These crops return little organic matter to the soil.
Marl
An earthy, unconsolidated deposit consisting chiefly of calcium carbonate mixed
with clay in approximately equal proportions; formed primarily under freshwater
lacustrine conditions but also formed in more saline environments.
Marsh or swamp (map symbol)
A water-saturated, very poorly drained area that is intermittently or permanently
covered by water. Sedges, cattails, and rushes are the dominant vegetation in
marshes, and trees or shrubs are the dominant vegetation in swamps. Not used
in map units where the named soils are poorly drained or very poorly drained.
Mass movement
A generic term for the dislodgment and downslope transport of soil and rock
material as a unit under direct gravitational stress.
Custom Soil Resource Report
45
515
Masses
See Redoximorphic features.
Meander belt
The zone within which migration of a meandering channel occurs; the flood-
plain area included between two imaginary lines drawn tangential to the outer
bends of active channel loops.
Meander scar
A crescent-shaped, concave or linear mark on the face of a bluff or valley wall,
produced by the lateral erosion of a meandering stream that impinged upon and
undercut the bluff.
Meander scroll
One of a series of long, parallel, close-fitting, crescent-shaped ridges and
troughs formed along the inner bank of a stream meander as the channel
migrated laterally down-valley and toward the outer bank.
Mechanical treatment
Use of mechanical equipment for seeding, brush management, and other
management practices.
Medium textured soil
Very fine sandy loam, loam, silt loam, or silt.
Mesa
A broad, nearly flat topped and commonly isolated landmass bounded by steep
slopes or precipitous cliffs and capped by layers of resistant, nearly horizontal
rocky material. The summit width is characteristically greater than the height of
the bounding escarpments.
Metamorphic rock
Rock of any origin altered in mineralogical composition, chemical composition,
or structure by heat, pressure, and movement at depth in the earth’s crust.
Nearly all such rocks are crystalline.
Mine or quarry (map symbol)
An open excavation from which soil and underlying material have been
removed and in which bedrock is exposed. Also denotes surface openings to
underground mines.
Mine spoil
An accumulation of displaced earthy material, rock, or other waste material
removed during mining or excavation. Also called earthy fill.
Mineral soil
Soil that is mainly mineral material and low in organic material. Its bulk density
is more than that of organic soil.
Custom Soil Resource Report
46
516
Minimum tillage
Only the tillage essential to crop production and prevention of soil damage.
Miscellaneous area
A kind of map unit that has little or no natural soil and supports little or no
vegetation.
Miscellaneous water (map symbol)
Small, constructed bodies of water that are used for industrial, sanitary, or
mining applications and that contain water most of the year.
Moderately coarse textured soil
Coarse sandy loam, sandy loam, or fine sandy loam.
Moderately fine textured soil
Clay loam, sandy clay loam, or silty clay loam.
Mollic epipedon
A thick, dark, humus-rich surface horizon (or horizons) that has high base
saturation and pedogenic soil structure. It may include the upper part of the
subsoil.
Moraine
In terms of glacial geology, a mound, ridge, or other topographically distinct
accumulation of unsorted, unstratified drift, predominantly till, deposited
primarily by the direct action of glacial ice in a variety of landforms. Also, a
general term for a landform composed mainly of till (except for kame moraines,
which are composed mainly of stratified outwash) that has been deposited by a
glacier. Some types of moraines are disintegration, end, ground, kame, lateral,
recessional, and terminal.
Morphology, soil
The physical makeup of the soil, including the texture, structure, porosity,
consistence, color, and other physical, mineral, and biological properties of the
various horizons, and the thickness and arrangement of those horizons in the
soil profile.
Mottling, soil
Irregular spots of different colors that vary in number and size. Descriptive
terms are as follows: abundance—few, common, and many; size—fine,
medium, and coarse; and contrast—faint, distinct, and prominent. The size
measurements are of the diameter along the greatest dimension. Fine indicates
less than 5 millimeters (about 0.2 inch); medium, from 5 to 15 millimeters (about
0.2 to 0.6 inch); and coarse, more than 15 millimeters (about 0.6 inch).
Mountain
A generic term for an elevated area of the land surface, rising more than 1,000
feet (300 meters) above surrounding lowlands, commonly of restricted summit
area (relative to a plateau) and generally having steep sides. A mountain can
Custom Soil Resource Report
47
517
occur as a single, isolated mass or in a group forming a chain or range.
Mountains are formed primarily by tectonic activity and/or volcanic action but
can also be formed by differential erosion.
Muck
Dark, finely divided, well decomposed organic soil material. (See Sapric soil
material.)
Mucky peat
See Hemic soil material.
Mudstone
A blocky or massive, fine grained sedimentary rock in which the proportions of
clay and silt are approximately equal. Also, a general term for such material as
clay, silt, claystone, siltstone, shale, and argillite and that should be used only
when the amounts of clay and silt are not known or cannot be precisely
identified.
Munsell notation
A designation of color by degrees of three simple variables—hue, value, and
chroma. For example, a notation of 10YR 6/4 is a color with hue of 10YR, value
of 6, and chroma of 4.
Natric horizon
A special kind of argillic horizon that contains enough exchangeable sodium to
have an adverse effect on the physical condition of the subsoil.
Neutral soil
A soil having a pH value of 6.6 to 7.3. (See Reaction, soil.)
Nodules
See Redoximorphic features.
Nose slope (geomorphology)
A geomorphic component of hills consisting of the projecting end (laterally
convex area) of a hillside. The overland waterflow is predominantly divergent.
Nose slopes consist dominantly of colluvium and slope-wash sediments (for
example, slope alluvium).
Nutrient, plant
Any element taken in by a plant essential to its growth. Plant nutrients are
mainly nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium, sulfur, iron,
manganese, copper, boron, and zinc obtained from the soil and carbon,
hydrogen, and oxygen obtained from the air and water.
Organic matter
Plant and animal residue in the soil in various stages of decomposition. The
content of organic matter in the surface layer is described as follows:
Custom Soil Resource Report
48
518
Very low: Less than 0.5 percent
Low: 0.5 to 1.0 percent
Moderately low: 1.0 to 2.0 percent
Moderate: 2.0 to 4.0 percent
High: 4.0 to 8.0 percent
Very high: More than 8.0 percent
Outwash
Stratified and sorted sediments (chiefly sand and gravel) removed or “washed
out” from a glacier by meltwater streams and deposited in front of or beyond the
end moraine or the margin of a glacier. The coarser material is deposited nearer
to the ice.
Outwash plain
An extensive lowland area of coarse textured glaciofluvial material. An outwash
plain is commonly smooth; where pitted, it generally is low in relief.
Paleoterrace
An erosional remnant of a terrace that retains the surface form and alluvial
deposits of its origin but was not emplaced by, and commonly does not grade
to, a present-day stream or drainage network.
Pan
A compact, dense layer in a soil that impedes the movement of water and the
growth of roots. For example, hardpan, fragipan, claypan, plowpan, and traffic
pan.
Parent material
The unconsolidated organic and mineral material in which soil forms.
Peat
Unconsolidated material, largely undecomposed organic matter, that has
accumulated under excess moisture. (See Fibric soil material.)
Ped
An individual natural soil aggregate, such as a granule, a prism, or a block.
Pedisediment
A layer of sediment, eroded from the shoulder and backslope of an erosional
slope, that lies on and is being (or was) transported across a gently sloping
erosional surface at the foot of a receding hill or mountain slope.
Pedon
The smallest volume that can be called “a soil.” A pedon is three dimensional
and large enough to permit study of all horizons. Its area ranges from about 10
to 100 square feet (1 square meter to 10 square meters), depending on the
variability of the soil.
Custom Soil Resource Report
49
519
Percolation
The movement of water through the soil.
Perennial water (map symbol)
Small, natural or constructed lakes, ponds, or pits that contain water most of the
year.
Permafrost
Ground, soil, or rock that remains at or below 0 degrees C for at least 2 years. It
is defined on the basis of temperature and is not necessarily frozen.
pH value
A numerical designation of acidity and alkalinity in soil. (See Reaction, soil.)
Phase, soil
A subdivision of a soil series based on features that affect its use and
management, such as slope, stoniness, and flooding.
Piping
Formation of subsurface tunnels or pipelike cavities by water moving through
the soil.
Pitting
Pits caused by melting around ice. They form on the soil after plant cover is
removed.
Plastic limit
The moisture content at which a soil changes from semisolid to plastic.
Plasticity index
The numerical difference between the liquid limit and the plastic limit; the range
of moisture content within which the soil remains plastic.
Plateau (geomorphology)
A comparatively flat area of great extent and elevation; specifically, an extensive
land region that is considerably elevated (more than 100 meters) above the
adjacent lower lying terrain, is commonly limited on at least one side by an
abrupt descent, and has a flat or nearly level surface. A comparatively large
part of a plateau surface is near summit level.
Playa
The generally dry and nearly level lake plain that occupies the lowest parts of
closed depressions, such as those on intermontane basin floors. Temporary
flooding occurs primarily in response to precipitation and runoff. Playa deposits
are fine grained and may or may not have a high water table and saline
conditions.
Custom Soil Resource Report
50
520
Plinthite
The sesquioxide-rich, humus-poor, highly weathered mixture of clay with quartz
and other diluents. It commonly appears as red mottles, usually in platy,
polygonal, or reticulate patterns. Plinthite changes irreversibly to an ironstone
hardpan or to irregular aggregates on repeated wetting and drying, especially if
it is exposed also to heat from the sun. In a moist soil, plinthite can be cut with a
spade. It is a form of laterite.
Plowpan
A compacted layer formed in the soil directly below the plowed layer.
Ponding
Standing water on soils in closed depressions. Unless the soils are artificially
drained, the water can be removed only by percolation or evapotranspiration.
Poorly graded
Refers to a coarse grained soil or soil material consisting mainly of particles of
nearly the same size. Because there is little difference in size of the particles,
density can be increased only slightly by compaction.
Pore linings
See Redoximorphic features.
Potential native plant community
See Climax plant community.
Potential rooting depth (effective rooting depth)
Depth to which roots could penetrate if the content of moisture in the soil were
adequate. The soil has no properties restricting the penetration of roots to this
depth.
Prescribed burning
Deliberately burning an area for specific management purposes, under the
appropriate conditions of weather and soil moisture and at the proper time of
day.
Productivity, soil
The capability of a soil for producing a specified plant or sequence of plants
under specific management.
Profile, soil
A vertical section of the soil extending through all its horizons and into the
parent material.
Proper grazing use
Grazing at an intensity that maintains enough cover to protect the soil and
maintain or improve the quantity and quality of the desirable vegetation. This
practice increases the vigor and reproduction capacity of the key plants and
Custom Soil Resource Report
51
521
promotes the accumulation of litter and mulch necessary to conserve soil and
water.
Rangeland
Land on which the potential natural vegetation is predominantly grasses,
grasslike plants, forbs, or shrubs suitable for grazing or browsing. It includes
natural grasslands, savannas, many wetlands, some deserts, tundras, and
areas that support certain forb and shrub communities.
Reaction, soil
A measure of acidity or alkalinity of a soil, expressed as pH values. A soil that
tests to pH 7.0 is described as precisely neutral in reaction because it is neither
acid nor alkaline. The degrees of acidity or alkalinity, expressed as pH values,
are:
Ultra acid: Less than 3.5
Extremely acid: 3.5 to 4.4
Very strongly acid: 4.5 to 5.0
Strongly acid: 5.1 to 5.5
Moderately acid: 5.6 to 6.0
Slightly acid: 6.1 to 6.5
Neutral: 6.6 to 7.3
Slightly alkaline: 7.4 to 7.8
Moderately alkaline: 7.9 to 8.4
Strongly alkaline: 8.5 to 9.0
Very strongly alkaline: 9.1 and higher
Red beds
Sedimentary strata that are mainly red and are made up largely of sandstone
and shale.
Redoximorphic concentrations
See Redoximorphic features.
Redoximorphic depletions
See Redoximorphic features.
Redoximorphic features
Redoximorphic features are associated with wetness and result from alternating
periods of reduction and oxidation of iron and manganese compounds in the
soil. Reduction occurs during saturation with water, and oxidation occurs when
the soil is not saturated. Characteristic color patterns are created by these
processes. The reduced iron and manganese ions may be removed from a soil
if vertical or lateral fluxes of water occur, in which case there is no iron or
manganese precipitation in that soil. Wherever the iron and manganese are
oxidized and precipitated, they form either soft masses or hard concretions or
nodules. Movement of iron and manganese as a result of redoximorphic
processes in a soil may result in redoximorphic features that are defined as
follows:
Custom Soil Resource Report
52
522
1.Redoximorphic concentrations.—These are zones of apparent
accumulation of iron-manganese oxides, including:
A.Nodules and concretions, which are cemented bodies that can be
removed from the soil intact. Concretions are distinguished from
nodules on the basis of internal organization. A concretion typically
has concentric layers that are visible to the naked eye. Nodules do not
have visible organized internal structure; and
B.Masses, which are noncemented concentrations of substances within
the soil matrix; and
C.Pore linings, i.e., zones of accumulation along pores that may be
either coatings on pore surfaces or impregnations from the matrix
adjacent to the pores.
2.Redoximorphic depletions.—These are zones of low chroma (chromas less
than those in the matrix) where either iron-manganese oxides alone or both
iron-manganese oxides and clay have been stripped out, including:
A.Iron depletions, i.e., zones that contain low amounts of iron and
manganese oxides but have a clay content similar to that of the
adjacent matrix; and
B.Clay depletions, i.e., zones that contain low amounts of iron,
manganese, and clay (often referred to as silt coatings or skeletans).
3.Reduced matrix.—This is a soil matrix that has low chroma in situ but
undergoes a change in hue or chroma within 30 minutes after the soil
material has been exposed to air.
Reduced matrix
See Redoximorphic features.
Regolith
All unconsolidated earth materials above the solid bedrock. It includes material
weathered in place from all kinds of bedrock and alluvial, glacial, eolian,
lacustrine, and pyroclastic deposits.
Relief
The relative difference in elevation between the upland summits and the
lowlands or valleys of a given region.
Residuum (residual soil material)
Unconsolidated, weathered or partly weathered mineral material that
accumulated as bedrock disintegrated in place.
Rill
A very small, steep-sided channel resulting from erosion and cut in
unconsolidated materials by concentrated but intermittent flow of water. A rill
generally is not an obstacle to wheeled vehicles and is shallow enough to be
smoothed over by ordinary tillage.
Custom Soil Resource Report
53
523
Riser
The vertical or steep side slope (e.g., escarpment) of terraces, flood-plain steps,
or other stepped landforms; commonly a recurring part of a series of natural,
steplike landforms, such as successive stream terraces.
Road cut
A sloping surface produced by mechanical means during road construction. It is
commonly on the uphill side of the road.
Rock fragments
Rock or mineral fragments having a diameter of 2 millimeters or more; for
example, pebbles, cobbles, stones, and boulders.
Rock outcrop (map symbol)
An exposure of bedrock at the surface of the earth. Not used where the named
soils of the surrounding map unit are shallow over bedrock or where “Rock
outcrop” is a named component of the map unit.
Root zone
The part of the soil that can be penetrated by plant roots.
Runoff
The precipitation discharged into stream channels from an area. The water that
flows off the surface of the land without sinking into the soil is called surface
runoff. Water that enters the soil before reaching surface streams is called
ground-water runoff or seepage flow from ground water.
Saline soil
A soil containing soluble salts in an amount that impairs growth of plants. A
saline soil does not contain excess exchangeable sodium.
Saline spot (map symbol)
An area where the surface layer has an electrical conductivity of 8 mmhos/cm
more than the surface layer of the named soils in the surrounding map unit. The
surface layer of the surrounding soils has an electrical conductivity of 2
mmhos/cm or less.
Sand
As a soil separate, individual rock or mineral fragments from 0.05 millimeter to
2.0 millimeters in diameter. Most sand grains consist of quartz. As a soil textural
class, a soil that is 85 percent or more sand and not more than 10 percent clay.
Sandstone
Sedimentary rock containing dominantly sand-sized particles.
Custom Soil Resource Report
54
524
Sandy spot (map symbol)
A spot where the surface layer is loamy fine sand or coarser in areas where the
surface layer of the named soils in the surrounding map unit is very fine sandy
loam or finer.
Sapric soil material (muck)
The most highly decomposed of all organic soil material. Muck has the least
amount of plant fiber, the highest bulk density, and the lowest water content at
saturation of all organic soil material.
Saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat)
The ease with which pores of a saturated soil transmit water. Formally, the
proportionality coefficient that expresses the relationship of the rate of water
movement to hydraulic gradient in Darcy’s Law, a law that describes the rate of
water movement through porous media. Commonly abbreviated as “Ksat.”
Terms describing saturated hydraulic conductivity are:
Very high: 100 or more micrometers per second (14.17 or more inches per
hour)
High: 10 to 100 micrometers per second (1.417 to 14.17 inches per hour)
Moderately high: 1 to 10 micrometers per second (0.1417 inch to 1.417 inches
per hour)
Moderately low: 0.1 to 1 micrometer per second (0.01417 to 0.1417 inch per
hour)
Low: 0.01 to 0.1 micrometer per second (0.001417 to 0.01417 inch per hour)
Very low: Less than 0.01 micrometer per second (less than 0.001417 inch per
hour).
To convert inches per hour to micrometers per second, multiply inches per hour
by 7.0572. To convert micrometers per second to inches per hour, multiply
micrometers per second by 0.1417.
Saturation
Wetness characterized by zero or positive pressure of the soil water. Under
conditions of saturation, the water will flow from the soil matrix into an unlined
auger hole.
Scarification
The act of abrading, scratching, loosening, crushing, or modifying the surface to
increase water absorption or to provide a more tillable soil.
Sedimentary rock
A consolidated deposit of clastic particles, chemical precipitates, or organic
remains accumulated at or near the surface of the earth under normal low
temperature and pressure conditions. Sedimentary rocks include consolidated
equivalents of alluvium, colluvium, drift, and eolian, lacustrine, and marine
deposits. Examples are sandstone, siltstone, mudstone, claystone, shale,
conglomerate, limestone, dolomite, and coal.
Custom Soil Resource Report
55
525
Sequum
A sequence consisting of an illuvial horizon and the overlying eluvial horizon.
(See Eluviation.)
Series, soil
A group of soils that have profiles that are almost alike, except for differences in
texture of the surface layer. All the soils of a series have horizons that are
similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Severely eroded spot (map symbol)
An area where, on the average, 75 percent or more of the original surface layer
has been lost because of accelerated erosion. Not used in map units in which
“severely eroded,” “very severely eroded,” or “gullied” is part of the map unit
name.
Shale
Sedimentary rock that formed by the hardening of a deposit of clay, silty clay, or
silty clay loam and that has a tendency to split into thin layers.
Sheet erosion
The removal of a fairly uniform layer of soil material from the land surface by the
action of rainfall and surface runoff.
Short, steep slope (map symbol)
A narrow area of soil having slopes that are at least two slope classes steeper
than the slope class of the surrounding map unit.
Shoulder
The convex, erosional surface near the top of a hillslope. A shoulder is a
transition from summit to backslope.
Shrink-swell
The shrinking of soil when dry and the swelling when wet. Shrinking and
swelling can damage roads, dams, building foundations, and other structures. It
can also damage plant roots.
Shrub-coppice dune
A small, streamlined dune that forms around brush and clump vegetation.
Side slope (geomorphology)
A geomorphic component of hills consisting of a laterally planar area of a
hillside. The overland waterflow is predominantly parallel. Side slopes are
dominantly colluvium and slope-wash sediments.
Silica
A combination of silicon and oxygen. The mineral form is called quartz.
Custom Soil Resource Report
56
526
Silica-sesquioxide ratio
The ratio of the number of molecules of silica to the number of molecules of
alumina and iron oxide. The more highly weathered soils or their clay fractions
in warm-temperate, humid regions, and especially those in the tropics, generally
have a low ratio.
Silt
As a soil separate, individual mineral particles that range in diameter from the
upper limit of clay (0.002 millimeter) to the lower limit of very fine sand (0.05
millimeter). As a soil textural class, soil that is 80 percent or more silt and less
than 12 percent clay.
Siltstone
An indurated silt having the texture and composition of shale but lacking its fine
lamination or fissility; a massive mudstone in which silt predominates over clay.
Similar soils
Soils that share limits of diagnostic criteria, behave and perform in a similar
manner, and have similar conservation needs or management requirements for
the major land uses in the survey area.
Sinkhole (map symbol)
A closed, circular or elliptical depression, commonly funnel shaped,
characterized by subsurface drainage and formed either by dissolution of the
surface of underlying bedrock (e.g., limestone, gypsum, or salt) or by collapse
of underlying caves within bedrock. Complexes of sinkholes in carbonate-rock
terrain are the main components of karst topography.
Site index
A designation of the quality of a forest site based on the height of the dominant
stand at an arbitrarily chosen age. For example, if the average height attained
by dominant and codominant trees in a fully stocked stand at the age of 50
years is 75 feet, the site index is 75.
Slickensides (pedogenic)
Grooved, striated, and/or glossy (shiny) slip faces on structural peds, such as
wedges; produced by shrink-swell processes, most commonly in soils that have
a high content of expansive clays.
Slide or slip (map symbol)
A prominent landform scar or ridge caused by fairly recent mass movement or
descent of earthy material resulting from failure of earth or rock under shear
stress along one or several surfaces.
Slope
The inclination of the land surface from the horizontal. Percentage of slope is
the vertical distance divided by horizontal distance, then multiplied by 100.
Thus, a slope of 20 percent is a drop of 20 feet in 100 feet of horizontal
distance.
Custom Soil Resource Report
57
527
Slope alluvium
Sediment gradually transported down the slopes of mountains or hills primarily
by nonchannel alluvial processes (i.e., slope-wash processes) and
characterized by particle sorting. Lateral particle sorting is evident on long
slopes. In a profile sequence, sediments may be distinguished by differences in
size and/or specific gravity of rock fragments and may be separated by stone
lines. Burnished peds and sorting of rounded or subrounded pebbles or cobbles
distinguish these materials from unsorted colluvial deposits.
Slow refill
The slow filling of ponds, resulting from restricted water transmission in the soil.
Slow water movement
Restricted downward movement of water through the soil. See Saturated
hydraulic conductivity.
Sodic (alkali) soil
A soil having so high a degree of alkalinity (pH 8.5 or higher) or so high a
percentage of exchangeable sodium (15 percent or more of the total
exchangeable bases), or both, that plant growth is restricted.
Sodic spot (map symbol)
An area where the surface layer has a sodium adsorption ratio that is at least
10 more than that of the surface layer of the named soils in the surrounding
map unit. The surface layer of the surrounding soils has a sodium adsorption
ratio of 5 or less.
Sodicity
The degree to which a soil is affected by exchangeable sodium. Sodicity is
expressed as a sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) of a saturation extract, or the
ratio of Na+ to Ca++ + Mg++. The degrees of sodicity and their respective ratios
are:
Slight: Less than 13:1
Moderate: 13-30:1
Strong: More than 30:1
Sodium adsorption ratio (SAR)
A measure of the amount of sodium (Na) relative to calcium (Ca) and
magnesium (Mg) in the water extract from saturated soil paste. It is the ratio of
the Na concentration divided by the square root of one-half of the Ca + Mg
concentration.
Soft bedrock
Bedrock that can be excavated with trenching machines, backhoes, small
rippers, and other equipment commonly used in construction.
Custom Soil Resource Report
58
528
Soil
A natural, three-dimensional body at the earth’s surface. It is capable of
supporting plants and has properties resulting from the integrated effect of
climate and living matter acting on earthy parent material, as conditioned by
relief and by the passage of time.
Soil separates
Mineral particles less than 2 millimeters in equivalent diameter and ranging
between specified size limits. The names and sizes, in millimeters, of separates
recognized in the United States are as follows:
Very coarse sand: 2.0 to 1.0
Coarse sand: 1.0 to 0.5
Medium sand: 0.5 to 0.25
Fine sand: 0.25 to 0.10
Very fine sand: 0.10 to 0.05
Silt: 0.05 to 0.002
Clay: Less than 0.002
Solum
The upper part of a soil profile, above the C horizon, in which the processes of
soil formation are active. The solum in soil consists of the A, E, and B horizons.
Generally, the characteristics of the material in these horizons are unlike those
of the material below the solum. The living roots and plant and animal activities
are largely confined to the solum.
Spoil area (map symbol)
A pile of earthy materials, either smoothed or uneven, resulting from human
activity.
Stone line
In a vertical cross section, a line formed by scattered fragments or a discrete
layer of angular and subangular rock fragments (commonly a gravel- or cobble-
sized lag concentration) that formerly was draped across a topographic surface
and was later buried by additional sediments. A stone line generally caps
material that was subject to weathering, soil formation, and erosion before
burial. Many stone lines seem to be buried erosion pavements, originally
formed by sheet and rill erosion across the land surface.
Stones
Rock fragments 10 to 24 inches (25 to 60 centimeters) in diameter if rounded or
15 to 24 inches (38 to 60 centimeters) in length if flat.
Stony
Refers to a soil containing stones in numbers that interfere with or prevent
tillage.
Custom Soil Resource Report
59
529
Stony spot (map symbol)
A spot where 0.01 to 0.1 percent of the soil surface is covered by rock
fragments that are more than 10 inches in diameter in areas where the
surrounding soil has no surface stones.
Strath terrace
A type of stream terrace; formed as an erosional surface cut on bedrock and
thinly mantled with stream deposits (alluvium).
Stream terrace
One of a series of platforms in a stream valley, flanking and more or less
parallel to the stream channel, originally formed near the level of the stream;
represents the remnants of an abandoned flood plain, stream bed, or valley
floor produced during a former state of fluvial erosion or deposition.
Stripcropping
Growing crops in a systematic arrangement of strips or bands that provide
vegetative barriers to wind erosion and water erosion.
Structure, soil
The arrangement of primary soil particles into compound particles or
aggregates. The principal forms of soil structure are:
Platy: Flat and laminated
Prismatic: Vertically elongated and having flat tops
Columnar: Vertically elongated and having rounded tops
Angular blocky: Having faces that intersect at sharp angles (planes)
Subangular blocky: Having subrounded and planar faces (no sharp angles)
Granular: Small structural units with curved or very irregular faces
Structureless soil horizons are defined as follows:
Single grained: Entirely noncoherent (each grain by itself), as in loose sand
Massive: Occurring as a coherent mass
Stubble mulch
Stubble or other crop residue left on the soil or partly worked into the soil. It
protects the soil from wind erosion and water erosion after harvest, during
preparation of a seedbed for the next crop, and during the early growing period
of the new crop.
Subsoil
Technically, the B horizon; roughly, the part of the solum below plow depth.
Subsoiling
Tilling a soil below normal plow depth, ordinarily to shatter a hardpan or
claypan.
Custom Soil Resource Report
60
530
Substratum
The part of the soil below the solum.
Subsurface layer
Any surface soil horizon (A, E, AB, or EB) below the surface layer.
Summer fallow
The tillage of uncropped land during the summer to control weeds and allow
storage of moisture in the soil for the growth of a later crop. A practice common
in semiarid regions, where annual precipitation is not enough to produce a crop
every year. Summer fallow is frequently practiced before planting winter grain.
Summit
The topographically highest position of a hillslope. It has a nearly level (planar
or only slightly convex) surface.
Surface layer
The soil ordinarily moved in tillage, or its equivalent in uncultivated soil, ranging
in depth from 4 to 10 inches (10 to 25 centimeters). Frequently designated as
the “plow layer,” or the “Ap horizon.”
Surface soil
The A, E, AB, and EB horizons, considered collectively. It includes all
subdivisions of these horizons.
Talus
Rock fragments of any size or shape (commonly coarse and angular) derived
from and lying at the base of a cliff or very steep rock slope. The accumulated
mass of such loose broken rock formed chiefly by falling, rolling, or sliding.
Taxadjuncts
Soils that cannot be classified in a series recognized in the classification
system. Such soils are named for a series they strongly resemble and are
designated as taxadjuncts to that series because they differ in ways too small to
be of consequence in interpreting their use and behavior. Soils are recognized
as taxadjuncts only when one or more of their characteristics are slightly
outside the range defined for the family of the series for which the soils are
named.
Terminal moraine
An end moraine that marks the farthest advance of a glacier. It typically has the
form of a massive arcuate or concentric ridge, or complex of ridges, and is
underlain by till and other types of drift.
Terrace (conservation)
An embankment, or ridge, constructed across sloping soils on the contour or at
a slight angle to the contour. The terrace intercepts surface runoff so that water
soaks into the soil or flows slowly to a prepared outlet. A terrace in a field
Custom Soil Resource Report
61
531
generally is built so that the field can be farmed. A terrace intended mainly for
drainage has a deep channel that is maintained in permanent sod.
Terrace (geomorphology)
A steplike surface, bordering a valley floor or shoreline, that represents the
former position of a flood plain, lake, or seashore. The term is usually applied
both to the relatively flat summit surface (tread) that was cut or built by stream
or wave action and to the steeper descending slope (scarp or riser) that has
graded to a lower base level of erosion.
Terracettes
Small, irregular steplike forms on steep hillslopes, especially in pasture, formed
by creep or erosion of surficial materials that may be induced or enhanced by
trampling of livestock, such as sheep or cattle.
Texture, soil
The relative proportions of sand, silt, and clay particles in a mass of soil. The
basic textural classes, in order of increasing proportion of fine particles, are
sand, loamy sand, sandy loam, loam, silt loam, silt, sandy clay loam, clay loam,
silty clay loam, sandy clay, silty clay, and clay. The sand, loamy sand, and
sandy loam classes may be further divided by specifying “coarse,” “fine,” or
“very fine.”
Thin layer
Otherwise suitable soil material that is too thin for the specified use.
Till
Dominantly unsorted and nonstratified drift, generally unconsolidated and
deposited directly by a glacier without subsequent reworking by meltwater, and
consisting of a heterogeneous mixture of clay, silt, sand, gravel, stones, and
boulders; rock fragments of various lithologies are embedded within a finer
matrix that can range from clay to sandy loam.
Till plain
An extensive area of level to gently undulating soils underlain predominantly by
till and bounded at the distal end by subordinate recessional or end moraines.
Tilth, soil
The physical condition of the soil as related to tillage, seedbed preparation,
seedling emergence, and root penetration.
Toeslope
The gently inclined surface at the base of a hillslope. Toeslopes in profile are
commonly gentle and linear and are constructional surfaces forming the lower
part of a hillslope continuum that grades to valley or closed-depression floors.
Custom Soil Resource Report
62
532
Topsoil
The upper part of the soil, which is the most favorable material for plant growth.
It is ordinarily rich in organic matter and is used to topdress roadbanks, lawns,
and land affected by mining.
Trace elements
Chemical elements, for example, zinc, cobalt, manganese, copper, and iron, in
soils in extremely small amounts. They are essential to plant growth.
Tread
The flat to gently sloping, topmost, laterally extensive slope of terraces, flood-
plain steps, or other stepped landforms; commonly a recurring part of a series
of natural steplike landforms, such as successive stream terraces.
Tuff
A generic term for any consolidated or cemented deposit that is 50 percent or
more volcanic ash.
Upland
An informal, general term for the higher ground of a region, in contrast with a
low-lying adjacent area, such as a valley or plain, or for land at a higher
elevation than the flood plain or low stream terrace; land above the footslope
zone of the hillslope continuum.
Valley fill
The unconsolidated sediment deposited by any agent (water, wind, ice, or mass
wasting) so as to fill or partly fill a valley.
Variegation
Refers to patterns of contrasting colors assumed to be inherited from the parent
material rather than to be the result of poor drainage.
Varve
A sedimentary layer or a lamina or sequence of laminae deposited in a body of
still water within a year. Specifically, a thin pair of graded glaciolacustrine layers
seasonally deposited, usually by meltwater streams, in a glacial lake or other
body of still water in front of a glacier.
Very stony spot (map symbol)
A spot where 0.1 to 3.0 percent of the soil surface is covered by rock fragments
that are more than 10 inches in diameter in areas where the surface of the
surrounding soil is covered by less than 0.01 percent stones.
Water bars
Smooth, shallow ditches or depressional areas that are excavated at an angle
across a sloping road. They are used to reduce the downward velocity of water
and divert it off and away from the road surface. Water bars can easily be
driven over if constructed properly.
Custom Soil Resource Report
63
533
Weathering
All physical disintegration, chemical decomposition, and biologically induced
changes in rocks or other deposits at or near the earth’s surface by atmospheric
or biologic agents or by circulating surface waters but involving essentially no
transport of the altered material.
Well graded
Refers to soil material consisting of coarse grained particles that are well
distributed over a wide range in size or diameter. Such soil normally can be
easily increased in density and bearing properties by compaction. Contrasts
with poorly graded soil.
Wet spot (map symbol)
A somewhat poorly drained to very poorly drained area that is at least two
drainage classes wetter than the named soils in the surrounding map unit.
Wilting point (or permanent wilting point)
The moisture content of soil, on an ovendry basis, at which a plant (specifically
a sunflower) wilts so much that it does not recover when placed in a humid,
dark chamber.
Windthrow
The uprooting and tipping over of trees by the wind.
Custom Soil Resource Report
64
534
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters
C-1 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Appendix C. USACE Arid West Wetland Data Forms and
OHWM Datasheets
535
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project Site: Branaugh Property Wetland Delineation City/County: Dublin/ Alameda Sampling Date: April 10, 2020
Applicant/Owner: Randy Branaugh State: California Sampling Point:SP1
Investigator(s): J. Pastick; B. Comito Section/Township/Range:T3S R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flats Local Relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR):LRR-C Lat: 37.702264 Long: -121.834662 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Rincon clay loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes NWI classification NA
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes X No
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
Remarks:
Point taken to investigate a very slight depression in the middle of an otherwise level corral in a largely distubed and developed portion of the study area.
The roughly 300 square foot area is at the base of a ditch used to direct landscaping and agricultural run-off excavated in the southwest corner of the
study area.
VEGETATION
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )Absolute
Cover %
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0 (A)
2.
3.Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:1 (B)
4.
Total Cover:Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0%(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x 1 =
4.FACW species x 2 =
5.FAC species x 3 =
Total Cover:FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft x 5 ft)UPL Species x 5 =
1.Erodium cicutarium 9 X UPL Column totals (A)(B)
2.Malva parviflora 1 UPL
3.Prevalence Index = B/A =
4.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5.Dominance Text is >50%
6.Prevalence Index is 3.01
7.Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
Total Cover:10 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present.1.
2.Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Total Cover:Yes No X
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 90 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0
Remarks:
Ruderal vegetation
536
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type
1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-20 10 YR 2/1 97 5 YR 4/6 3 C M clay loam
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Reduced Vertic (F18)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C)Depleted Matrix (F3)Other (Explain in Remarks)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D)X Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Vernal Pools (F9)3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type: None
Depth (inches):NA Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No
Remarks:
Some hydrogen sulfide odor present. Algae on soil.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
X Surface Water (A1)Salt Crust (B11)Water Marks (B1) (Riverine)
High Water Table (A2)Biotic Crust (B12)Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine)
Saturation (A3)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine)
Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) X Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-stained Leaves (B9)Other (Explain in Remarks)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):1
Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Saturation Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):4 Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Some scattered ponding observed, however, this could have been from run-off from neraby roadside ditch and recent rain. Ground appears to be
compacted.
537
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Arid West Region
Project Site: Branaugh Property Wetland Delineation City/County: Dublin/ Alameda Sampling Date: April 10, 2020
Applicant/Owner: Randy Branaugh State: California Sampling Point: SP2
Investigator(s): J. Pastick, B. Comito Section/Township/Range: T3S R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flats Local Relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR): LRR-C Lat: 37.702223 Long: -121.834654 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Rincon clay loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes NWI classification NA
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Yes X No
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Point taken to examine areas in corral adjacent to SP1. Lower than average rainfall for this time of year.
VEGETATION
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute
Cover %
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1. Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
0 (A)
2.
3. Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
1 (B)
4.
Total Cover: Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
0% (A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3. OBL species x 1 =
4. FACW species x 2 =
5. FAC species x 3 =
Total Cover: FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft x 5 ft) UPL Species x 5 =
1. Erodium cicutarium 85 X UPL Column totals (A) (B)
2. Hordeum murinum 15 UPL
3. Prevalence Index = B/A =
4. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5. Dominance Text is >50%
6. Prevalence Index is 3.01
7. Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
8.
Total Cover: 100 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present.
1.
2. Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Total Cover: Yes No X
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0
Remarks:
Ruderal annual-forb dominated vegetation.
538
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-18 10 YR 3/2 100 M clay loam Many fine roots
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Reduced Vertic (F18)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C) Depleted Matrix (F3) Other (Explain in Remarks)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Vernal Pools (F9) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type: None
Depth (inches): NA Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Water Marks (B1) (Riverine)
High Water Table (A2) Biotic Crust (B12) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine)
Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine)
Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-stained Leaves (B9) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): NA
Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): NA
Saturation Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): NA Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
539
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project Site: Branaugh Property Wetland Delineation City/County: Dublin/ Alameda Sampling Date: April 10, 2020
Applicant/Owner: Randy Branaugh State: California Sampling Point:SP3
Investigator(s): J.Pastick, B. Comito Section/Township/Range:T3S R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local Relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR):LRR-C Lat: 37.703649 Long: -121.834692 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Diablo clay, very deep, 3 to 15 percent slopesto 7 percent slopes NWI classification PEM
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes X No
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
Remarks:
Lower than average rainfall for this time of year. Point taken to investigate a depression south of the previously verified USACE determined seasonal
wetland. Point taken in SW6.
VEGETATION
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )Absolute
Cover %
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:1 (A)
2.
3.Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:2 (B)
4.
Total Cover:Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:50%(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x 1 =
4.FACW species x 2 =
5.FAC species 20 x 3 = 60
Total Cover:FACU species 7 x 4 = 28
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft x 5 ft)UPL Species 2 x 5 = 10
1.Helminthotheca echioides 20 X FAC Column totals 34 (A) 98 (B)
2.Bromus diandrus 2 UPL
3.Hordeum murinum 5 X FACU Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.88
4.Erigeron canadensis 2 FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5.Dominance Text is >50%
6.X Prevalence Index is 3.01
7.Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
Total Cover:26 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present.1.
2.Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Total Cover:Yes X No
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 66 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0
Remarks:
Seasonal wetland vegetation dominated by bristly ox-tongue.
540
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP3
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type
1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-5 10 YR 3/1 100 clay loam rocky
5-20 10 YR 3/1 93 2.5 YR 3/6 7 C M clay loam Photo @ 11:24 am
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Reduced Vertic (F18)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C)Depleted Matrix (F3)Other (Explain in Remarks)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D)X Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Vernal Pools (F9)3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type: None
Depth (inches):NA Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No
Remarks:
Hydroden sulfide odor present. Soil moist, some rocks on the top layer
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Salt Crust (B11)Water Marks (B1) (Riverine)
X High Water Table (A2)Biotic Crust (B12)Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine)
Saturation (A3)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine)
Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
X Water-stained Leaves (B9)Other (Explain in Remarks)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):1
Water Table Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):11 in
Saturation Present?Yes X No Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Saturated soil; water present, contiguous with verified USACE wetlands to the north; water table present at 11 in; Algal mats on soil surface.
541
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project Site: Branaugh Property Wetland Delineation City/County: Dublin/ Alameda Sampling Date: April 10, 2020
Applicant/Owner: Randy Branaugh State: California Sampling Point:SP4
Investigator(s): J. Pastick, B. Comito Section/Township/Range:T3S R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local Relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR):LRR-C Lat: 37.703649 Long: -121.834657 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Diablo clay, very deep, 3 to 15 percent slopesto 7 percent slopes NWI classification NA
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes X No
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
Paired upland point to SP3. Lower than average annual precipitation for this time of year.
VEGETATION
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )Absolute
Cover %
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0 (A)
2.
3.Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:2 (B)
4.
Total Cover:Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0%(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x 1 =
4.FACW species x 2 =
5.FAC species x 3 =
Total Cover:FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft x 5 ft)UPL Species x 5 =
1.Helminthotheca echioides 8 FAC Column totals (A)(B)
2.Bromus diandrus 25 X UPL
3.Lactuca serriola 5 FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =
4.Erigeron canadensis 12 X FACU
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5.Dominance Text is >50%
6.Prevalence Index is 3.01
7.Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
Total Cover:50 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present.1.
2.Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Total Cover:Yes No X
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 50 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0
Remarks:
Ruderal annual grassland vegetation.
542
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP4
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type
1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-18 10 YR 3/1 90 clay Many fine roots
10 YR 4/4 10
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Reduced Vertic (F18)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C)Depleted Matrix (F3)Other (Explain in Remarks)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Vernal Pools (F9)3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type: None
Depth (inches):NA Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Salt Crust (B11)Water Marks (B1) (Riverine)
High Water Table (A2)Biotic Crust (B12)Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine)
Saturation (A3)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine)
Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-stained Leaves (B9)Other (Explain in Remarks)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
543
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project Site: Branaugh Property Wetland Delineation City/County: Dublin/ Alameda Sampling Date: April 9, 2020
Applicant/Owner: Randy Branaugh State: California Sampling Point:SP5
Investigator(s): J. Pastick, B. Comito Section/Township/Range:T3S R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): flats Local Relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0-1
Subregion (LRR):LRR-C Lat: 37.705005 Long: -121.835008 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Linne clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, MLRA 15 NWI classification NA
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes X No
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
Point taken to investigate the area just north of the mapped culvert in the previously verified USACE map. Lower than average annual precipitation for
this time of year.
VEGETATION
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )Absolute
Cover %
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0 (A)
2.
3.Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:2 (B)
4.
Total Cover:Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0%(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x 1 =
4.FACW species x 2 =
5.FAC species x 3 =
Total Cover:FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft x 5 ft)UPL Species x 5 =
1.Avena fatua 30 X UPL Column totals (A)(B)
2.Hordeum murinum 25 X FACU
3.Brassica nigra 10 UPL Prevalence Index = B/A =
4.Bromus diandrus 10 UPL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5.Festuca perennis 5 FAC Dominance Text is >50%
6.Carduus pycnocephalus 3 UPL Prevalence Index is 3.01
7.Geranium molle 2 UPL Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.Lysmachia arvensis T FAC
Total Cover:85 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present.1.
2.Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Total Cover:Yes No X
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 15 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0
Remarks:
Annual grassland vegetation.
544
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP5
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type
1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-2 7.5 YR 4/1 100 sandy clay Rocky, many fine roots
2-8 10 YR 4/1 70 sandy clay
10YR 5/4 30 clay
8-18 10YR 4/1 95 clay
10YR 5/4 5
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Reduced Vertic (F18)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C)Depleted Matrix (F3)Other (Explain in Remarks)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D)X Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Vernal Pools (F9)3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type: None
Depth (inches):NA Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
Lighter color soils in the matrix below two inches are likely from soil mixing and did not appear to be redox features.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Salt Crust (B11)Water Marks (B1) (Riverine)
High Water Table (A2)Biotic Crust (B12)Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine)
Saturation (A3)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine)
Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-stained Leaves (B9)Other (Explain in Remarks)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Insufficient indicators.
545
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project Site: Branaugh Property Wetland Delineation City/County: Dublin/ Alameda Sampling Date: April 9, 2020
Applicant/Owner: Randy Branaugh State: California Sampling Point:SP6
Investigator(s): J. Pastick, B. Comito Section/Township/Range:T3S R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flats Local Relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR):LRR-C Lat: 37.705914 Long: -121.835930 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Linne clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, MLRA 15 NWI classification NA
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes X No
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
Sample point take to investigate a slight depression next to the driveway. Lower than average annual precipitation for this time of year.
VEGETATION
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )Absolute
Cover %
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:1 (A)
2.
3.Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:1 (B)
4.
Total Cover:Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:100%(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x 1 =
4.FACW species x 2 =
5.FAC species x 3 =
Total Cover:FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft x 5 ft)UPL Species x 5 =
1.Festuca perennis 45 X FAC Column totals (A)(B)
2.Hordeum murinum 15 FACU
3.Bromus hordeaceaous 15 FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =
4.Avena fatua 10 UPL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5.Bromus diandrus 5 UPL X Dominance Text is >50%
6.Brassica nigra 5 UPL Prevalence Index is 3.01
7.Erodium moschatum 3 UPL Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.Geranium molle 2 UPL
Total Cover:100 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present.1.
2.Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Total Cover:Yes X No
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0
Remarks:
The grassland vegetation in this location is dominated by Italian rye grass, which in this case is exhibiting the features of an upland grass. Other co-
dominant species of grasses and forbs are upland species.
546
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP6
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type
1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-5 10 YR 3/1 100 clay loam Many fine roots
5-18 10 YR 2/1 100 clay loam
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Reduced Vertic (F18)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C)Depleted Matrix (F3)Other (Explain in Remarks)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Vernal Pools (F9)3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type: None
Depth (inches):NA Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Salt Crust (B11)Water Marks (B1) (Riverine)
High Water Table (A2)Biotic Crust (B12)Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine)
Saturation (A3)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine)
Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-stained Leaves (B9)Other (Explain in Remarks)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Insufficient indicators. Area receives runoff from the driveway.
547
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project Site: Branaugh Property Wetland Delineation City/County: Dublin/ Alameda Sampling Date: April 9, 2020
Applicant/Owner: Randy Branaugh State: California Sampling Point:SP7
Investigator(s): J.Pastick, B. Comito Section/Township/Range:T3S R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): flats Local Relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0-1
Subregion (LRR):LRR-C Lat: 37.705990 Long: -121.835571 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Linne clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, MLRA 15 NWI classification NA
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes X No
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
Sample point taken to investige uplands in this area. Lower than average annual precipitation for this time of year.
VEGETATION
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )Absolute
Cover %
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0 (A)
2.
3.Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:1 (B)
4.
Total Cover:Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0%(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x 1 =
4.FACW species x 2 =
5.FAC species x 3 =
Total Cover:FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft x 5 ft)UPL Species x 5 =
1.Hordeum murinum 55 X FACU Column totals (A)(B)
2.Bromus diandrus 15 UPL
3.Avena sp.10 UPL Prevalence Index = B/A =
4.Festuca perennis 10 FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5.Erodium moschatum 7 UPL Dominance Text is >50%
6.Sisymbrium officinale 3 UPL Prevalence Index is 3.01
7.Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
Total Cover:100 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present.1.
2.Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Total Cover:Yes No X
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0
Remarks:
Annual grassland vegetation.
548
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP7
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type
1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-2 10 YR 3/3 100 clay loam Many fine roots
2-18 10 YR 3/2 100 clay loam Rocky soils
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Reduced Vertic (F18)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C)Depleted Matrix (F3)Other (Explain in Remarks)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Vernal Pools (F9)3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type: None
Depth (inches):NA Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Salt Crust (B11)Water Marks (B1) (Riverine)
High Water Table (A2)Biotic Crust (B12)Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine)
Saturation (A3)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine)
Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-stained Leaves (B9)Other (Explain in Remarks)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Upland landscape position.
549
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project Site: Branaugh Property Wetland Delineation City/County: Dublin/ Alameda Sampling Date: April 9, 2020
Applicant/Owner: Randy Branaugh State: California Sampling Point:SP8
Investigator(s): J. Pastick, B. Comito Section/Township/Range:T3S R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flats Local Relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR):LRR-C Lat: 37.705978 Long: -121.835138 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Linne clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, MLRA 15 NWI classification NA
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes X No
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
Placed in to investigate a slight depression in an area that was historically saturated and may have been a former stock pond. Lower than average
annual precipitation for this time of year.
VEGETATION
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )Absolute
Cover %
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:1 (A)
2.
3.Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:2 (B)
4.
Total Cover:Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:50%(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
4.FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
5.FAC species 45 x 3 = 135
Total Cover:FACU species 12 x 4 = 48
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft x 5 ft)UPL Species 45 x 5 = 225
1.Festuca perennis 45 X FAC Column totals 102 (A) 408 (B)
2.Brassica nigra 30 X UPL
3.Bromus diandrus 10 UPL Prevalence Index = B/A = 4
4.Hordeum murinum 7 FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5.Bromus hordeaceus 5 UPL Dominance Text is >50%
6.Carduus pycnocephalus 5 FACU Prevalence Index is 3.01
7.Cynosorus echinatus T UPL Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
Total Cover:100 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present.1.
2.Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Total Cover:Yes No X
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 % Cover of Biotic Crust
Remarks:
Annual grassland vegetation dominated by italian rye grass and other annual grasses and forbs.
550
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP8
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type
1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-3 10 YR 3/2 100 sandy clay Many fine roots
3-18 10 YR 5/4 30 sandy clay
10YR 4/1 70 sandy clay Sand pockets
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Reduced Vertic (F18)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C)Depleted Matrix (F3)Other (Explain in Remarks)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Vernal Pools (F9)3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type: None
Depth (inches):NA Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
Lighter color soils in the matrix below three inches are likely from soil mixing and did not appear to be redox features.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Salt Crust (B11)Water Marks (B1) (Riverine)
High Water Table (A2)Biotic Crust (B12)Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine)
Saturation (A3)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine)
Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6)X Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-stained Leaves (B9)Other (Explain in Remarks)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Sample point was taken in a location that appeared on historic aerials to have once been a stock pond. No current indicators of hydrology were
observed.
551
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project Site: Branaugh Property Wetland Delineation City/County: Dublin/ Alameda Sampling Date: April 9, 2020
Applicant/Owner: Randy Branaugh State: California Sampling Point:SP9
Investigator(s): J. Pastick, B. Comito Section/Township/Range:T3S R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): flats Local Relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR):LRR-C Lat: 37.706128 Long: -121.835051 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Linne clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, MLRA 15 NWI classification NA
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes X No
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
Sample point taken to investigate uplands in the area. Lower than average annual precipitation for this time of year.
VEGETATION
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )Absolute
Cover %
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0 (A)
2.
3.Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:3 (B)
4.
Total Cover:Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0%(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x 1 =
4.FACW species x 2 =
5.FAC species x 3 =
Total Cover:FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft x 5 ft)UPL Species x 5 =
1.Brassica nigra 45 X UPL Column totals (A)(B)
2.Carduus pycnocephalus 20 X UPL
3.Hordeum murinum 20 X FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =
4.Bromus diandrus 10 UPL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5.Geranium dissectm 5 UPL Dominance Text is >50%
6.Prevalence Index is 3.01
7.Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
Total Cover:100 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present.1.
2.Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Total Cover:Yes No X
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0
Remarks:
Annual grassland vegetation.
552
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP9
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type
1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-3 10 YR 3/2 100 sandy clay Many fine roots
3-18 10 YR 5/4 30 sandy clay
10YR 4/1 70 sandy clay Pockets of sand
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Reduced Vertic (F18)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C)Depleted Matrix (F3)Other (Explain in Remarks)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Vernal Pools (F9)3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type: None
Depth (inches):NA Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
Lighter color soils in the matrix below three inches are likely from soil mixing and did not appear to be redox features.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Salt Crust (B11)Water Marks (B1) (Riverine)
High Water Table (A2)Biotic Crust (B12)Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine)
Saturation (A3)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine)
Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-stained Leaves (B9)Other (Explain in Remarks)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Upland landscape position.
553
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project Site: Branaugh Property Wetland Delineation City/County: Dublin/ Alameda Sampling Date: April 9, 2020
Applicant/Owner: Randy Branaugh State: California Sampling Point:SP10
Investigator(s): J. Pastic, B. Comito Section/Township/Range:T3S R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flat Local Relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR):LRR-C Lat: 37.706706 Long: -121.835220 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Linne clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, MLRA 15 NWI classification PEM 1A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes X No
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
Remarks:
Sample point taken to characterize seasonal wetlands along the swale - Point taken inside SW5. Lower than average annual precipitation for this time of
year.
VEGETATION
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )Absolute
Cover %
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:2 (A)
2.
3.Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:2 (B)
4.
Total Cover:Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:100%(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x 1 =
4.FACW species x 2 =
5.FAC species x 3 =
Total Cover:FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft x 5 ft)UPL Species x 5 =
1.Juncus mexicanus 40 X FACW Column totals (A)(B)
2.Plantago lancelota 20 X FAC
3.Trifolium sp. 15 FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =
4.Festuca perennis 15 FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5.Bromus diandrus 2 UPL X Dominance Text is >50%
6.Helminthotheca echioides 2 FAC Prevalence Index is 3.01
7.Medicago polymorpha 2 FACU Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.Hordeum murinum 2 FACU
Total Cover:100 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present.1.
2.Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Total Cover:Yes X No
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0
Remarks:
Seasonal wetland vegetation dominated by Mexican rush.
554
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP10
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type
1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-8 10 YR 3/2 100 clay
8-12 10 YR 5/4 97 2.5 YR 3/6 3 C M clay
12-18 10YR 4/1 90 2.5 YR 3/6 10 C M clay
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Reduced Vertic (F18)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C)Depleted Matrix (F3)Other (Explain in Remarks)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D)X Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Vernal Pools (F9)3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type: None
Depth (inches):NA Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No
Remarks:
Soil not saturated, but moist at 12 inches.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Salt Crust (B11)Water Marks (B1) (Riverine)
High Water Table (A2)Biotic Crust (B12)Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine)
Saturation (A3)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine)
Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Crayfish Burrows (C8)
X Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6)X Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-stained Leaves (B9)Other (Explain in Remarks)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Wetland vegetation occurs in a depression that is seasonally inundated.
555
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project Site: Branaugh Property Wetland Delineation City/County: Dublin/ Alameda Sampling Date: April 10, 2020
Applicant/Owner: Randy Branaugh State: California Sampling Point:SP11
Investigator(s): J. pastick, . Comito Section/Township/Range:T3S R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flat Local Relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 1-2
Subregion (LRR):LRR-C Lat: 37.706712 Long: -121.835125 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Diablo clay, very deep, 3 to 15 percent slopesto 7 percent slopes NWI classification NA
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes X No
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
Paired upland point to SP10. Lower than average annual precipitation for this time of year.
VEGETATION
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )Absolute
Cover %
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:1 (A)
2.
3.Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:2 (B)
4.
Total Cover:Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:50%(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
4.FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
5.FAC species 25 x 3 = 75
Total Cover:FACU species 5 x 4 = 20
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft x 5 ft)UPL Species 50 x 5 = 250
1.Bromus diandrus 35 X UPL Column totals 100 (A) 345 (B)
2.Festuca perennis 25 X FAC
3.Geranium mollis 10 UPL Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.45
4.Brassica nigra 5 UPL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5.Hordeum murinum 5 FACU Dominance Text is >50%
6.FACU Prevalence Index is 3.01
7.Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
Total Cover:80 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present.1.
2.Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Total Cover:Yes No X
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 20 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0
Remarks:
Annual grassland vegetation.
556
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP11
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type
1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-5 7.5 YR 3/2 100 clay many fine roots
5-18 10 YR 4/1 100
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Reduced Vertic (F18)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C)Depleted Matrix (F3)Other (Explain in Remarks)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Vernal Pools (F9)3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type: None
Depth (inches):NA Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
Soil is dry in the upper 18 inches.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Salt Crust (B11)Water Marks (B1) (Riverine)
High Water Table (A2)Biotic Crust (B12)Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine)
Saturation (A3)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine)
Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-stained Leaves (B9)Other (Explain in Remarks)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Upland landscape position.
557
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project Site: Drier conditons than normal for this time of year.
(Lower than average rain fall).
City/County: Dublin/ Alameda Sampling Date: April 9, 2020
Applicant/Owner: Randy Branaugh State: California Sampling Point:SP12
Investigator(s): J. Pastick, B. Comito Section/Township/Range:T3S R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flat Local Relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR):LRR-C Lat: 37.708634 Long: -121.835238 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Linne clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, MLRA 15 NWI classification PEM1A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes X No
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
Remarks:
Sample point taken in seasonal wetland, SW1. Lower than average annual precipitation for this time of year.
VEGETATION
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )Absolute
Cover %
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:2 (A)
2.
3.Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:2 (B)
4.
Total Cover:Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:100%(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x 1 =
4.FACW species x 2 =
5.FAC species x 3 =
Total Cover:FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft x 5 ft)UPL Species x 5 =
1.Juncus mexicanus 35 X FACW Column totals (A)(B)
2.Festuca perennis 25 X FAC
3.Geranium molle 15 UPL Prevalence Index = B/A =
4.Helminthotheca echioides 10 FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5.Medicago polymorpha 5 FACU X Dominance Text is >50%
6.Bromus diandrus 3 UPL Prevalence Index is 3.01
7.Hordeum murinum 3 UPL Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.Avena fatua 2 UPL
Total Cover:98 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present.1.
2.Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Total Cover:Yes X No
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 2 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0
Remarks:
Seasonal wetland vegetation dominated by Mexican rush and Italian rye grass.
558
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP12
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type
1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-5 10 YR 2/1 100 clay roots to 5 in; patches of small rocks
and sand
5-20 10 YR 2/1 95 2.5 YR 3/6 5 C M clay
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Reduced Vertic (F18)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C)Depleted Matrix (F3)Other (Explain in Remarks)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D)X Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Vernal Pools (F9)3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type: None
Depth (inches):NA Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No
Remarks:
Distinct redox concentrations below the top five inches.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Salt Crust (B11)Water Marks (B1) (Riverine)
High Water Table (A2)Biotic Crust (B12)Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine)
Saturation (A3)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine)
Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
X Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-stained Leaves (B9)Other (Explain in Remarks)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Inundation visible on aerial - wetland feature is situated in a depression along the ephemeral stream that is seasonally inundated.
559
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project Site: Branaugh Property Wetland Delineation City/County: Dublin/ Alameda Sampling Date: April 10, 2020
Applicant/Owner: Randy Branaugh State: California Sampling Point:SP13
Investigator(s): Jillian Pastick Section/Township/Range:T3S R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local Relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 5
Subregion (LRR):LRR-C Lat: 37.708640 Long: -121.835297 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Diablo clay, very deep, 3 to 15 percent slopesto 7 percent slopes NWI classification NA
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No X
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
Upland paired point to SP12. Lower than average annual precipitation for this time of year.
VEGETATION
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )Absolute
Cover %
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0 (A)
2.
3.Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:2 (B)
4.
Total Cover:Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0%(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x 1 =
4.FACW species x 2 =
5.FAC species x 3 =
Total Cover:FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft x 5 ft)UPL Species x 5 =
1.Brassica nigra 35 X UPL Column totals (A)(B)
2.Bromus diandrus 25 X UPL
3.Festuca perennis 10 FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =
4.Hordeum murinum 10 FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5.Geranium molle 10 UPL Dominance Text is >50%
6.Helminthotheca echioides 5 FAC Prevalence Index is 3.01
7.Avena fatua 5 UPL Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.Lactuca serriola 3 FACU
Total Cover:103 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present.1.
2.Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Total Cover:Yes No X
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0
Remarks:
Annual grassland vegetation.
560
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP13
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type
1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-3 10 YR 4/1 100 clay pockets of sand
3-10 10 YR 4/1 60
2.5 Y 5/4 40
10-18 10 YR 4/1 80
2.5 Y 5/4 20
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Reduced Vertic (F18)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C)Depleted Matrix (F3)Other (Explain in Remarks)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Vernal Pools (F9)3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type: None
Depth (inches):NA Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
Lighter color soils in the matrix below three inches are likely from soil mixing and did not appear to be redox features.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Salt Crust (B11)Water Marks (B1) (Riverine)
High Water Table (A2)Biotic Crust (B12)Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine)
Saturation (A3)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine)
Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-stained Leaves (B9)Other (Explain in Remarks)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Upland landscape position.
561
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project Site: Branaugh Property Wetland Delineation City/County: Dublin/ Alameda Sampling Date: April 9, 2020
Applicant/Owner: Randy Branaugh State: California Sampling Point:SP14
Investigator(s): J. Pastick, B. Comito Section/Township/Range:T3S R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local Relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 18
Subregion (LRR):LRR-C Lat: 37.709194 Long: -121.835273 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Linne clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, MLRA 15 NWI classification NA
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes X No
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
Sample point take to investigate a slight depression at the northernmost point of ephemeral stream (ES1). Lower than average annual precipitation for
this time of year..
VEGETATION
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )Absolute
Cover %
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0 (A)
2.
3.Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:1 (B)
4.
Total Cover:Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0%(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x 1 =
4.FACW species x 2 =
5.FAC species x 3 =
Total Cover:FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft x 5 ft)UPL Species x 5 =
1.Avena fatua 60 X UPL Column totals (A)(B)
2.Vicia sativa 18 FACU
3.Carduus pycnocephalus 8 UPL Prevalence Index = B/A =
4.Brassica nigra 5 UPL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5.Festuca perennis 5 FAC Dominance Text is >50%
6.Trifolium sp. 2 OBL-
UPL
Prevalence Index is 3.01
7.Erodium sp. 3 UPL Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.Gilia tricolor T UPL
Total Cover:101 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present.1.
2.Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Total Cover:Yes No X
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0
Remarks:
Annual grassland vegetation.
562
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP14
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type
1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-2 10 YR 4/1 100 clay many fine roots
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Reduced Vertic (F18)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C)Depleted Matrix (F3)Other (Explain in Remarks)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Vernal Pools (F9)3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type: None
Depth (inches):NA Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Salt Crust (B11)Water Marks (B1) (Riverine)
High Water Table (A2)Biotic Crust (B12)Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine)
Saturation (A3)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine)
Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-stained Leaves (B9)Other (Explain in Remarks)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No indicators of hydrology observed.
563
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project Site: Branaugh Property Wetland Delineation City/County: Dublin/ Alameda Sampling Date: April 9, 2020
Applicant/Owner: Randy Branaugh State: California Sampling Point:SP15
Investigator(s): J. pastick, B. Comito Section/Township/Range:T3S R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flat Local Relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR):LRR-C Lat: 37.709145 Long: -121.834662 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Linne clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, MLRA 15 NWI classification NA
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes X No
Are
Vegetation
Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
Placed to investigate uplands in the northern portion of the study area. Lower than average annual precipitation for this time of year.
VEGETATION
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )Absolute
Cover %
Dominant
Species?
Indicator
Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0 (A)
2.
3.Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:2 (B)
4.
Total Cover:Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:0%(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x 1 =
4.FACW species x 2 =
5.FAC species x 3 =
Total Cover:FACU species x 4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft x 5 ft)UPL Species x 5 =
1.Bromus diandrus 25 X UPL Column totals (A)(B)
2.Hordeum murinum 20 X FACU
3.Carduus pycnocephalus 12 UPL Prevalence Index = B/A =
4.Vicia sativa 10 FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5.Geranium molle 10 UPL Dominance Text is >50%
6.Helminthotheca echioides 8 FAC Prevalence Index is 3.01
7.Medicago polymorpha 8 FACU Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.Festuca perennis 8 FAC
Total Cover:98 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present.1.
2.Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Total Cover:Yes No X
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 2 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0
Remarks:
Annual grassland vegetation.
564
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: SP15
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type
1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-18 10 YR 3/1 100 clay Many fine roots in the top 5 in
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)Reduced Vertic (F18)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C)Depleted Matrix (F3)Other (Explain in Remarks)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Vernal Pools (F9)3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic.Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type: None
Depth (inches):NA Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Salt Crust (B11)Water Marks (B1) (Riverine)
High Water Table (A2)Biotic Crust (B12)Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine)
Saturation (A3)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine)
Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-stained Leaves (B9)Other (Explain in Remarks)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA
Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches):NA Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Upland landscape position.
565
Arid West Ephemeral and Intermittent Streams OHWM Datasheet
Project: Date:Time:
Project Number:Town:State:
Stream:Photo begin file#: Photo end file#:
Investigator(s):
Location Details:
Projection:Datum:
Coordinates:
Checklist of resources (if available):
Stream gage data
Gage number:
Period of record:
History of recent effective discharges
Results of flood frequency analysis
Most recent shift-adjusted rating
Gage heights for 2-, 5-, 10-, and 25-year events and the
most recent event exceeding a 5-year event
Procedure for identifying and characterizing the floodplain units to assist in identifying the OHWM:
1. Walk the channel and floodplain within the study area to get an impression of the geomorphology and
vegetation present at the site.
2. Select a representative cross section across the channel. Draw the cross section and label the floodplain units.
3. Determine a point on the cross section that is characteristic of one of the hydrogeomorphic floodplain units.
a) Record the floodplain unit and GPS position.
b) Describe the sediment texture (using the Wentworth class size) and the vegetation characteristics of the
floodplain unit.
c) Identify any indicators present at the location.
4. Repeat for other points in different hydrogeomorphic floodplain units across the cross section.
5. Identify the OHWM and record the indicators. Record the OHWM position via:
Mapping on aerial photograph GPS
Digitized on computer Other:
Y / N Do normal circumstances exist on the site?
Y / N Is the site significantly disturbed?
Potential anthropogenic influences on the channel system:
Brief site description:
Aerial photography
Dates:
Topographic maps
Geologic maps
Vegetation maps
Soils maps
Rainfall/precipitation maps
Existing delineation(s) for site
Global positioning system (GPS)
Other studies
566
Wentworth Size Classes
567
Project ID:Cross section ID:Date:Time:
Cross section drawing:
OHWM
GPS point: __
Indicators:
Change in average sediment texture
Change in vegetation species
Change in vegetation cover
Comments:
Floodplain unit:Low-Flow Channel Active Floodplain Low Terrace
GPS point: ___________________________
Characteristics of the floodplain unit:
Average sediment texture: __ ________
Community successional stage:
NA Mid (herbaceous, shrubs, saplings)
Early (herbaceous & seedlings)Late (herbaceous, shrubs, mature trees)
Indicators:
Mudcracks Soil development
Ripples Surface relief
Drift and/or debris
Presence of bed and bank
Benches
Other: ___________________
Other:____________________
Other: ___________________
Comments:
Break in bank slope
Other:
Other:____________________
________________________
________
Total veg cover: _____ Tree: __ _% Shrub: _____% Herb: _____%
568
Arid West Ephemeral and Intermittent Streams OHWM Datasheet
Project: Date:Time:
Project Number:Town:State:
Stream:Photo begin file#: Photo end file#:
Investigator(s):
Location Details:
Projection:Datum:
Coordinates:
Checklist of resources (if available):
Stream gage data
Gage number:
Period of record:
History of recent effective discharges
Results of flood frequency analysis
Most recent shift-adjusted rating
Gage heights for 2-, 5-, 10-, and 25-year events and the
most recent event exceeding a 5-year event
Procedure for identifying and characterizing the floodplain units to assist in identifying the OHWM:
1. Walk the channel and floodplain within the study area to get an impression of the geomorphology and
vegetation present at the site.
2. Select a representative cross section across the channel. Draw the cross section and label the floodplain units.
3. Determine a point on the cross section that is characteristic of one of the hydrogeomorphic floodplain units.
a) Record the floodplain unit and GPS position.
b) Describe the sediment texture (using the Wentworth class size) and the vegetation characteristics of the
floodplain unit.
c) Identify any indicators present at the location.
4. Repeat for other points in different hydrogeomorphic floodplain units across the cross section.
5. Identify the OHWM and record the indicators. Record the OHWM position via:
Mapping on aerial photograph GPS
Digitized on computer Other:
Y / N Do normal circumstances exist on the site?
Y / N Is the site significantly disturbed?
Potential anthropogenic influences on the channel system:
Brief site description:
Aerial photography
Dates:
Topographic maps
Geologic maps
Vegetation maps
Soils maps
Rainfall/precipitation maps
Existing delineation(s) for site
Global positioning system (GPS)
Other studies
569
Wentworth Size Classes
570
Project ID:Cross section ID:Date:Time:
Cross section drawing:
OHWM
GPS point: __
Indicators:
Change in average sediment texture
Change in vegetation species
Change in vegetation cover
Comments:
Floodplain unit:Low-Flow Channel Active Floodplain Low Terrace
GPS point: ___________________________
Characteristics of the floodplain unit:
Average sediment texture: __ ________
Community successional stage:
NA Mid (herbaceous, shrubs, saplings)
Early (herbaceous & seedlings)Late (herbaceous, shrubs, mature trees)
Indicators:
Mudcracks Soil development
Ripples Surface relief
Drift and/or debris
Presence of bed and bank
Benches
Other: ___________________
Other:____________________
Other: ___________________
Comments:
Break in bank slope
Other:
Other:_________________
________________________
________
Total veg cover: _____ Tree: __ _% Shrub: _____% Herb: _____%
571
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters D-1 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Appendix D. Photos of the Study Area
Photo 1. Sample point SP-1. Point taken to investigate an area of recent inundation in low spot in
a corral. Location was determined not to be a three parameter wetland, and was likely receiving
runoff from a nearby roadside ditch. Photo direction = east.
Photo 2. Upland point (SP-2) Point taken on slight higher ground in corral adjacent to SP-1. Photo
direction = east.
572
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters D-2 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Photo 3. Sample point SP-3. Location determined to be a seasonal wetland, connecting to a
previously mapped seasonal wetland, SW04-2018 (USACE 2019). Photo direction = south.
Photo 4. Paired upland point (SP-4) to wetland sample point SP-3. Photo direction = southeast.
573
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters D-3 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Photo 5. Sample point SP-5, located at the north end of a previously mapped culvert. This area
was determined not to be a wetland. Photo direction = southeast.
Photo 6. Wetland sample point SP-6. This location was determined to not be a three parameter
wetland. Photo direction = east.
574
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters D-4 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Photo 7. Sample point SP-7, taken to investigate uplands. Photo direction = west.
Photo 8. Sample point SP-8, taken to investigate uplands. Location determined not to be a three
parameter wetland. Photo direction = southwest.
575
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters D-5 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Photo 9. Sample point, SP-9, taken to investigate uplands. Photo direction = southwest.
Photo 10. Wetland sample point SP-10. Location determined to be a three parameter seasonal
wetland. Photo direction = west.
576
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters D-6 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Photo 11. Paired upland point (SP-11) to wetland sample point SP-10. Photo direction = southwest.
Photo 12. Wetland sample point SP-12. Location determined to be a seasonal wetland. Photo
direction = south.
577
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters D-7 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Photo 13. Paired upland point (SP-13) to SP12. Photo direction = southeast.
Photo 14. Paired upland point (SP-14) to sample point SP-15. Photo direction = west.
578
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters D-8 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Photo 15. Photo of sample point location SP-15. This location was located adjacent to the
ephemeral stream, and was determined not to be a wetland. Photo direction = west.
Photo 16. Location of OHWM-1, taken in the northern portion of the study area. Photo direction =
north.
579
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters D-9 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Photo 17. Location of OHWM-2 transect. Photo direction = south.
Photo 18. Representative photo of California annual grassland habitat found throughout the
majority of the study area. Photo direction = east.
580
Lands of Branaugh
Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands/Other Waters D-10 H. T. Harvey & Associates
January 11, 2021
Photo 19. Representative photo of the developed habitat, located primarily in the southern
portion of the study area. Photo direction = north.
581
E-
1
Appendix E. Aquatic Resources Table
Waters Name Cowardin Code HGM Code Measurement Type Amount Units Waters Type Latitude Longitude Local Waterway
SW1 PEM Depress Area 0.004 ACRE NRPWW 37.708646 -121.835232 Cottonwood Creek
SW2 PEM Depress Area 0.006 ACRE NRPWW 37.708315 -121.835329 Cottonwood Creek
SW3 PEM Depress Area 0.050 ACRE NRPWW 37.707865 -121.835384 Cottonwood Creek
SW4 PEM Depress Area 0.006 ACRE NRPWW 37.707235 -121.835377 Cottonwood Creek
SW5 PEM Depress Area 0.014 ACRE NRPWW 37.706719 -121.835243 Cottonwood Creek
SW6 PEM Depress Area 0.081 ACRE NRPWW 37.703756 -121.834689 Cottonwood Creek
582
F-1
Appendix F. Signed statement from the property owner(s)
allowing USACE personnel to enter the property
I, Randall Branaugh, will allow Corps personnel to enter my property (APN 905-1-4-4) in the City of Dublin,
Alameda County, California to collect samples during normal business hours. The property is not land-locked,
therefore permission from the adjacent property owner(s) in order to provide access is not necessary.
Thank you,
Randall Branaugh
Bex Development
19077 Madison Avenue
Castro Valley, CA 94546
510.881.1828
rlbranaughex@gmail.com
583
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Appendices
Appendix D
Branaugh and Righetti Property Development –
Listed Species Impacts, Mitigation, and Take Approval Summary
584
983 University Avenue, Building D Los Gatos, CA 95032 408.458.3200 www.harveyecology.com
Memorandum
December 8, 2021 Projects #2480-03 and 4423-01
To: Randy Branaugh / Milton and Matthew Righetti
From: Steve Rottenborn and Jeff Wilkinson, H. T. Harvey & Associates
Subject: Branaugh and Righetti Property Development – Listed Species Impacts,
Mitigation, and Take Approval Summary
The purpose of this memo is to provide the Branaughs and Righettis (hereafter “Landowners”) with the acreages
of impacts to habitat of the California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) and California tiger salamander (Ambystoma
californiense) (listed species) that will result from development of various portions of their properties by Trumark
development, the Dublin Boulevard Extension (DBE) project, and their own projects; describe how mitigation
will be provided for the areas being affected by each of these projects; and describe how incidental take approval
from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
(collectively, the “agencies) will be obtained for the lands impacted by these various projects.
In addition to development by the Landowners, the Branaugh and Righetti properties will be impacted by two
other projects. Trumark is developing land north of the Branaugh and Righetti properties and will be grading
onto both properties, as indicated in Figure 1. Trumark will obtain incidental take approval from the agencies for
their impacts on listed species, and will provide mitigation for their impacts on the Branaugh and Righetti
properties as though their activities result in permanent impacts to listed species habitat. The City of Dublin is
planning the DBE project, which will bisect both properties. The City has received a Biological Opinion (BO)
from the USFWS for the DBE project (USFWS 2020) and will be obtaining an Incidental Take Permit from the
CDFW for impacts to California tiger salamanders. The DBE project will result in three types of impacts on listed
species:
• Direct, permanent impacts consist of the permanent conversion of the current natural habitats (e.g.,
grassland and wetlands) to development (e.g., road and associated shoulders and other infrastructure,
including the permanent City right-of-way).
• Direct, temporary impacts consist of construction-related impacts, such as grading and staging within
the City’s construction right-of-way, for the DBE project that will be restored to natural habitats after
completion of the project.
585
2
H. T. Harvey & Associates
• Indirect, permanent impacts consist of impacts due to the isolation of natural habitats after completion
of the DBE project so that listed species will not be able to freely disperse between these habitats and
other occupied habitats in the region.
We expect mitigation from all the projects considered here (Trumark, DBE, and the individual Landowners’
development projects) to be required in accordance with ratios established by the East Alameda County
Conservation Strategy (EACCS; ICF International 2010) and the Programmatic BO for the EACCS (USFWS
2012). Those ratios vary between the two listed species considered here; based on the location of the impact vs.
mitigation areas; and based on whether impacts and/or mitigation occurs in critical habitat (impacts on the
northern portions of both the Branaugh and Righetti properties will affect California red-legged frog critical
habitat). Because the location(s) of the mitigation area(s) for these various projects are not yet known with
certainty, the mitigation ratios have not yet been established. However, the mitigation options that the City of
Dublin is investigating for the DBE (and that are likely to be available to the Landowners) are located in areas
where the average mitigation ratio will be approximately 3:1 (mitigation:impact) for permanent impacts and 1:1
for direct, temporary impacts.
In order to better describe these impacts and required mitigation, we have illustrated six zones of impacts on the
properties that vary with respect to which project will impact them, whether those impacts are temporary vs.
permanent, and whether impacts are direct vs. indirect (Figure 1). Ultimately, we understand that the entirety of
both parcels will be permanently impacted with respect to listed species 1. We have also provided a table for each
property listing the amount (in acres) of impacts and required mitigation, and the parties deemed responsible for
providing this mitigation for each zone of impact in Figure 1 (Tables 1 and 2). These zones of impacts and
required mitigation are described below.
Table 1. Branaugh Property Impacts and Mitigation
Zone
Impacts (ac)
Required Mitigation for
Permanent Impacts (ac)1
Mitigation to be Provided
by Others (ac)
Remaining or Reimbursement
Mitigation to be Provided by
Branaugh (ac)
1 1.32 3.96 3.962 0.00
2 26.48 79.44 0.00 79.44
3 1.85 5.55 1.853 3.70
4 0.44 1.32 1.324 0.00
5 0.06 0.18 0.185 0.125
6 1.22 3.66 3.666 3.666
Total 31.37 94.11 17.08 86.92
1 Assumes a mitigation ratio of 3:1, though the ultimately required ratios may vary depending on the mitigation site location
2 Mitigation provided by Trumark (3:1)
3 Partial mitigation (1:1) provided by City of Dublin for direct, temporary impacts during DBE construction
4 Mitigation provided entirely by City of Dublin for direct, permanent impacts from DBE (3:1)
5 Partial mitigation (1:1) provided by City of Dublin for direct, temporary impacts during DBE construction; additional mitigation (2:1)
provided by City of Dublin for indirect, permanent impacts from DBE to be reimbursed by Branaugh
6 Mitigation provided by City of Dublin for indirect, permanent impacts from DBE (3:1) to be reimbursed by Branaugh
1 Some of the wetland areas at the southern edge of the Righetti property are unlikely to be impacted directly, but
because development will separate these wetlands from source populations of listed species, the USFWS and CDFW
are expected to consider these areas “lost” to listed species and therefore permanently impacted.
586
3
H. T. Harvey & Associates
Table 2. Righetti Property Impacts and Mitigation
Zone
Impacts (ac)
Required Mitigation for
Permanent Impacts (ac)1
Mitigation to be Provided
by Others (ac)
Remaining or
Reimbursement Mitigation to
be Provided by Righetti (ac)
1 1.26 3.78 3.782 0.00
2 26.38 79.14 0.00 79.14
3 2.30 6.90 2.303 4.60
4 2.04 6.12 6.124 0.00
5 1.83 5.49 5.495 3.665
6 15.56 46.68 46.686 46.686
Total 49.37 148.11 64.37 134.08
1 Assumes a mitigation ratio of 3:1, though the ultimately required ratios may vary depending on the mitigation site location
2 Mitigation provided by Trumark (3:1)
3 Partial mitigation (1:1) provided by City of Dublin for direct, temporary impacts during DBE construction
4 Mitigation provided entirely by City of Dublin for direct, permanent impacts from DBE (3:1)
5 Partial mitigation (1:1) provided by City of Dublin for direct, temporary impacts during DBE construction; additional mitigation (2:1)
provided by City of Dublin for indirect, permanent impacts from DBE to be reimbursed by Righetti
6 Mitigation provided by City of Dublin for indirect, permanent impacts from DBE (3:1) to be reimbursed by Righetti
Zone 1 consists of upland habitat in the northern portions of the properties that will be graded by Trumark.
Trumark is currently obtaining take approval from the agencies for impacts on the listed species and will be
providing the mitigation acreages for these impacts. We are assuming that Trumark will be required to provide
mitigation for direct, permanent impacts on listed species at a ratio of 3:1 for the acreage that they will grade. If
there is lag time between Trumark’s impacts and any impacts by development of the Landowners’ properties,
habitat conditions could improve in Trumark’s impact areas (e.g., restoration of grassland and return of mammals
that create burrows for frogs and salamanders), and it is possible that the Landowners will be required to obtain
USFWS and CDFW take approval for their eventual impacts to these areas. However, it is our opinion that the
agencies should not require additional compensatory mitigation when the Landowners impact those areas.
Zone 2 consists of upland habitat on the properties between Zone 1 (the areas to be graded by Trumark in the
north) and the areas of direct, temporary impacts from the DBE. Any impacts on listed species from proposed
development in areas of Zone 2 will require the Landowners to obtain take approval from the agencies, and
provide the required mitigation for these impacts (assumed to be at a ratio of approximately 3:1 for permanent
impacts), per the EACCS.
Zone 3 consists of habitat north of the DBE that will undergo direct, temporary impacts from the DBE project.
Therefore, the City will provide mitigation acreage at a 1:1 ratio (assuming those impacts occur prior to impacts
by the Landowners’s development activities). When these Zone 3 lands are subsequently impacted by the
Landowners’ development projects, we expect that the Landowners will need to provide additional mitigation at
a ratio of approximately 2:1 (to achieve the total 3:1 ratio required for permanent impacts). If there is lag time
between DBE’s temporary impacts and subsequent development of the Landowners’ properties, the City would
restore natural habitat in Zone 3, and habitat conditions could improve (e.g., restoration of grassland and return
of mammals that create burrows for frogs and salamanders). In that case, it is possible that the Landowners will
be required to obtain USFWS and CDFW take approval for their eventual impacts to these areas. However, it is
our opinion that the agencies should not require compensatory mitigation at a total ratio (including mitigation
provided by both the City and Landowners combined) of more than approximately 3:1. If the Landowners’
587
4
H. T. Harvey & Associates
development activities disturb Zone 3 before this area is disturbed by the DBE, then the Landowners may be
responsible for all mitigation (at the full 3:1 ratio).
Zone 4 consists of natural habitat (excluding developed areas, which are not listed species habitat) on the
properties that will undergo direct, permanent impacts on the listed species from the DBE project (i.e., will
become the road, shoulders, and associated infrastructure). The City has obtained take approval of listed species
from the USFWS and is in the process of obtaining take approval of listed species from the CDFW and will
provide mitigation acreages for these direct, permanent impacts at a ratio of approximately 3:1 per the EACCS.
Zone 5 consists of natural habitat (excluding developed areas) on the properties south of the DBE that will
undergo direct, temporary impacts from the DBE project. In addition, the DBE will isolate these areas from
breeding habitat for listed species north of the DBE, thus resulting in indirect, permanent impacts on the listed
species through the effective loss of habitat. The City will provide mitigation at a ratio of approximately 3:1, as
though Zone 5 is permanently impacted by the DBE project. Of this mitigation, we expect that the City will take
responsibility for mitigation at a 1:1 ratio for the DBE project’s direct, temporary impacts (assuming those impacts
occur prior to impacts by the Landowners’s development activities) and will require the Landowners to reimburse
the City for the additional 2:1 mitigation when they develop Zone 5. If the Landowners’ development activities
disturb Zone 5 before this area is disturbed by the DBE, then we expect the Landowners to be responsible for
all mitigation (at the full 3:1 ratio).
Zone 6 consists of natural habitat (excluding developed areas) on the properties south of the DBE project that
will not undergo any direct impacts from DBE construction (i.e., will not be graded or used for staging during
the DBE project, and will thus remain natural habitat). However, because the DBE will isolate these areas from
breeding habitat north of the DBE, the City and agencies are considering Zone 6 to undergo indirect, permanent
impacts from the DBE project. Therefore, the City will provide mitigation at a ratio of approximately 3:1 for
these impacts and will require the Landowners to reimburse the City for all of that mitigation when they develop
Zone 6.
Each of the Landowners will be required to obtain incidental take approval for listed species prior to development
of their properties. At a minimum, the Landowners would need incidental take approval for development of
Zone 2. However, the agencies may require take approval for any areas that have any habitat value (i.e., natural
or restored grassland habitat, or any areas with small mammal burrows) at the time when a Landowner’s
development impacts that habitat. Depending on the lag between Trumark and DBE construction and
construction by the Landowners, it is possible that the Landowners may need to obtain incidental take approval
for all zones except Zone 4. However, we will work with the Landowners to try to obtain USFWS and CDFW
concurrence that mitigation is not needed twice for the same area, so that the total mitigation provided by all
parties for any particular area does not exceed 3:1.
We recommend that the Landowners consult with the City, USFWS, and CDFW in a joint meeting to obtain
concurrence regarding how the Landowners will be required to seek incidental take approval on the listed species
for a project (i.e., in which zones) and what the required mitigation for the Landowners’ approval will ultimately
be, with the intent of avoiding any over-mitigation (i.e., greater than a 3:1 ratio in total, in any given area.
588
5
H. T. Harvey & Associates
References
ICF International. 2010. EACCS East Alameda County Conservation Strategy. October 2010.
[USFWS]. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2012. Programmatic Biological Opinion for U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) Permitted Projects Utilizing the East Alameda County Conservation Strategy that May
Affect Federally Listed Species in East Alameda County, California. 08ESMFOO-2012-F-0092-1, May 31,
2021.
[USFWS]. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2020. Formal Consultation on Dublin Boulevard-North Canyons
Parkway Extension Project in Alameda County, California. 08ESMF00-2020-F-1476, December 18, 2020.
589
BranaughRighetti
Figure 1. California Red-legged Frog and California Tiger SalamanderHabitat Impacts on the Branaugh and Righetti Properties
December 2021
N:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
4
4
0
0
\
4
4
2
3
-
0
1
\
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
\
C
R
L
F
a
n
d
C
T
S
I
m
p
a
c
t
s
B
r
a
n
a
u
g
h
a
n
d
R
i
g
h
e
t
t
i
.
m
x
d
(2480-01/4423-01)
Parcels
Zone 1 - Trumark Permanent Impacts
Zone 2 - Landowner Permanent Impacts
Zone 3 - Dublin Boulevard Extension Direct, Temporary Impacts/Landowner Permanent Impacts
Zone 4 - Dublin Boulevard Extension Direct, Permanent Impacts
Zone 5 - Dublin Boulevard Extension Direct, Temporary and Indirect, Permanent Impacts/Landowner Permanent Impacts
Zone 6 - Dublin Boulevard Extension Indirect, Permanent Impacts/Landowner Permanent Impacts
300 0 300150
Feet
I-580
Collier C anyon
R
oad
590
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Appendices
Appendix E
Cultural Resources Study
591
CARLSBAD CLOVIS IRVINE LOS ANGELES PALM SPRINGS POINT RICHMOND RIVERSIDE ROSEVILLE SAN LUIS OBISPO
157 Park Place, Pt. Richmond, California 94801 510.236.6810 www.lsa.net
February 7, 2022
Amy Million Principal Planner City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568
Subject: Cultural Resource Study for the Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development Project, Dublin, Alameda County, California (LSA Project No. DUB2101.02, Phase 2)
Dear Ms. Million:
LSA prepared this study to meet the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and implementing regulations (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.). The purpose of the study was to: (1) identify cultural resources that may meet the CEQA definition of a historical resource (California Public Resources Code [PRC] §21084.1) or unique archaeological resource (PRC §21083.2), and that may be impacted by the proposed project; (2) identify human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries; and (3) recommend mitigation, additional study, or consultation outreach that may be required to address potential impacts to such resources and/or remains.
LSA Archaeologist/Cultural Resources Analyst Kendra Kolar, M.A., conducted the background research and prepared this technical report. LSA Archaeologist Lennon Fanning conducted the field survey. The methods and results of these tasks are described in this report, and recommendations are provided based on the findings.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
The proposed project site is located in Section 2 of Township 3 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Base Line Meridian, as depicted on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Livermore, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle (Attachment A: Figure 1). The project site sits east of Croak Road and north of Interstate 580 on the eastern edge of Dublin, adjacent to unincorporated Alameda County. The approximately 40.2-acre parcel (Assessor’s Parcel Number [APN] 905-01-004-04) consists primarily of undeveloped grazing ranchland and open space, but it also includes two areas of rural residential development (Attachment A: Figure 2). Existing structures include a circa 1958 barn and shed, two mid-20th century single-family homes, and several modern sheds all comprising a farm complex in the southern portion of the project site. A third house, built in the 1980s, sits in the northwest corner of the project site.
The proposed project would involve demolishing all existing structures and subdividing the project site into four parcels to accommodate new residential and industrial development. A total of 78 residential units would be constructed on 9.87 acres (with the potential to provide up to 97 units). Approximately 527,773 square feet of industrial use is planned for the remaining 30.29 acres. The
592
2
2/7/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\Archaeo report\LSA_Cultural Study_Branaugh.docx)
proposed project would include three bioretention basins and storm drains throughout the project site, which would connect to a downstream hydromodification facility. Hydromodification vaults would be included on the site to provide flow duration controls for the project. Proposed maximum depths of construction-related excavation would be approximately 30 feet for building pads and approximately 15 feet for utility trenching, bioretention basins, storm drains, and hydromodification vaults.
The project site straddles a north-south oriented drainage and extends onto the valley floor south of the drainage. Elevations range from 580 feet above sea level at the highest points in the drainage, down to approximately 370 feet above sea level on the valley floor. Published geologic data identify Pliocene to early Pleistocene Livermore Gravel (Qtlg) deposits along the hillslopes flanking the drainage in the northern half of the project site, including the location of the existing ca. 1980 house (Dibblee 2006). The bottom of the drainage is mapped as Holocene alluvium (Qa), which extends onto the valley floor in the southern half of the project site, where the farm complex is located.
Soils in the drainage in the northern half of the project site are mapped as Linne clay loam, which typically consists of clay loam extending to bedrock at 36 to 40 inches below surface (NRCS 2022). Soils on the valley floor in the southern half of the project site include Rincon clay loam, typically consisting of clay loam, sandy clay, and stratified sandy to clay loam horizons extending at least 60 inches below surface, and Diablo clay that typically features clay and silty clay extending at least 60 inches below surface.
Currently and historically, the nearest source of water is Cottonwood Creek, which flows out of Doolan Canyon to the east before feeding into Arroyo Las Positas roughly 0.2 miles southeast of the project site.
BACKGROUND RESEARCH
LSA conducted background research consisting of a records search at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC), a review of historical maps and aerial photographs, a search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) at the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), and a review of published geological information to gauge buried site sensitivity. The results of these tasks are summarized below and are used to assess the potential for undiscovered archaeological deposits within the project site.
NWIC Records Search
A cultural resources records search was conducted on November 6, 2021, by staff at the NWIC of the California Historical Resources Information System to identify previous archaeological site records and cultural resource studies within the project site and vicinity. The NWIC, an affiliate of the Office of Historic Preservation (OHP), is the official State repository of cultural resources records and reports for Alameda County. The search encompassed the project site and surrounding 0.5-mile radius.
The project site contains a historic-period farm complex (the Collier Ranch) consisting of four buildings over 50 years old: a circa 1958 shed and two-story, three-bay barn, and two mid-20th century single-family homes. These buildings were evaluated for significance as a historical resource. They were found to be not eligible, either individually or as a group, for inclusion on the California
593
3
2/7/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\Archaeo report\LSA_Cultural Study_Branaugh.docx)
Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) or the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The other structures on the project site, consisting of several modern sheds and a circa 1980 single-story single-family residence, have not yet reached sufficient age to warrant evaluation for significance.
Three previous cultural resource studies overlapped the current project site, and another seven were conducted within a half-mile radius. All of these are summarized in Table A. No archaeological resources are recorded within the project boundaries or within a half-mile of the project site.
Table A: Previous Cultural Resource Studies Within 0.5 Miles
Title, Author, Year Study Type/Location Results
An Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Proposed
Pipeline Routes and Reservoir Locations, Livermore-
Amador Valley Water Management Agency, Alameda
County, California. Edward M. Love, Miley Paul Holman, and David Chavez. 1976 (NWIC Report No. S-000898)
Archaeological field survey (partially within 0.5 miles of project site)
P-01-000046 (CA-ALA-000026/H) P-01-000063 (CA-ALA-000043) P-01-000065 (CA-ALA-000045) *all recorded more than 0.5 miles from project site
Cultural Resource Evaluation of the Bezley Mining
Project on Croak Road and Highway 580 in the County
of Alameda. Robert Cartier. 1982 (NWIC Report No. S-004924)
Archaeological field survey (within 0.5 miles of project site)
None
Archaeological Reconnaissance of the SMP-18 Quarry
Area (APN 99 B-3200-4-4) Near Livermore, Alameda
County, California. Randy S. Wiberg. 1984 (NWIC Report No. S-007105)
Archaeological field survey (overlaps project site)
None
Archaeological Inspection of Proposed Righetti Quarry,
Alameda County, California. Miley Paul Holman. 1985 (NWIC Report No. S-007376)
Archaeological field survey (overlaps project site)
None
A Report of Findings for the Johnson Prezoning No. 2-
313, Annexation No. 150-84, Tentative Tract Map No.
5393, Alameda County, California. Miley Paul Holman. 1985 (NWIC Report No. S-008893)
Archaeological field survey and excavation (partially within 0.5 miles of project site)
1 unrecorded buried midden site (location not obtained)
A Cultural Resources Study for the North Livermore
Master Plan/Specific Plan, Environmental Impact
Report, Alameda County, California. Randy S. Wiberg, Randall Dean, and Miley P. Holman. 1998 (NWIC Report No. S-020335)
Archaeological and architectural/historical field survey, evaluation (partially within 0.5 miles of project site)
P-01-000067 (CA-ALA-000047) P-01-002197 P-01-002200 P-01-002201 P-01-002202 *all recorded more than 0.5 miles from project site 31 unrecorded historic resources & 1 prehistoric isolate (locations not obtained)
1881 Collier Canyon Road, Livermore (Collier Ranch),
Eastern Dublin Properties Resource Management Plan,
Supplemental Cultural Resources Review - Built
Environment, City of Dublin, Alameda County (APN
905-0001-004-04). Colin I. Busby. 2004 (NWIC Report No. S-030611)
Architectural/historical field survey and evaluation (overlaps project site)
unrecorded Collier Ranch complex
594
4
2/7/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\Archaeo report\LSA_Cultural Study_Branaugh.docx)
Table A: Previous Cultural Resource Studies Within 0.5 Miles
Title, Author, Year Study Type/Location Results
Historic Property Survey Report: I-580 Eastbound HOV
Lane Project: Hacienda Drive to East of Greenville
Road, 04-Ala-580 KP 12.6/30.7 (PM R7.8/19.1), EA
04258-290810, Alameda County, California. M. Kate Lewis. 2006 (NWIC Report No. S-031701 and a−b)
Archaeological and architectural/historical field survey (partially within 0.5 miles of project site)
P-01-000262 P-01-000263 P-01-002197 P-01-002204 P-01-010779 P-01-010780 P-01-010781 *all recorded more than 0.5 miles from project site Possibly 1 unrecorded midden deposit
Collocation ("CO") Submission Packet, FCC Form 621,
Driving Range, BA-02129A. Lorna Billat. 2006 (NWIC Report No. S-032276)
Archaeological and architectural/historical field survey (within 0.5 miles of project site)
None
Historic Property Survey Report for the I-580
Westbound High Occupancy Vehicle Lane Project,
Greenville Road to San Ramon/Foothill Roads,
Alameda County, California: 4-Ala-580, P.M.
8.29/21.43, EA 29082K. Brian F. Byrd. 2008 (NWIC Report No. S-035826)
Archaeological and architectural/historical field survey (within 0.5 miles of project site)
None
Source: Compiled by LSA (2022).
Historical Map and Photograph Review
In order to assess the potential for historic-period archaeological deposits, LSA reviewed historical topographic maps and aerial photographs to identify whether buildings or structures were present in the past within the project site (Table B). To summarize, the earliest structures documented within the project site were built by 1949 in the area of the extant historic-period farm complex and in the southeast corner of the project site at the intersection of Collier Canyon Road and the driveway extending along the eastern boundary of the project site. It is unclear if these early buildings in the area of the farm complex were later demolished or incorporated into the extant farm complex. The structure in the southeast corner of the project site was removed between 1966 and 1968.
Table B: Historical Map and Aerial Photograph Review
Map/Photograph Results 1906 Pleasanton USGS topographic quadrangle (1:62,500) Project site is undeveloped. No structures present. Cottonwood Creek shown to the east following approximately its current alignment. An east-west oriented road abuts the south end of the project site. 1941 Pleasanton USGS topographic quadrangle (1:62,500) Same as previous map with the addition of a structure west of the project site at the end of an unimproved road. The east-west road is labeled as Highway 50.
595
5
2/7/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\Archaeo report\LSA_Cultural Study_Branaugh.docx)
Table B: Historical Map and Aerial Photograph Review
Map/Photograph Results 1953 Livermore USGS topographic quadrangle (1:24,000) The structure and road west of the project site are no longer depicted (although they do appear in aerial photos until 1979). A structure (possibly a residence) and an outbuilding are shown within the project site at the end of an unimproved road in the area of the extant farm complex. Another structure is shown in the southeast corner of the project site at the intersection of what is now Collier Canyon Road and the driveway leading into the project site. 1961 Livermore USGS topographic quadrangle (1:24,000) Two possible residences are located at the end of the unimproved road; the outbuilding in that location is no longer shown. The possible residences, along with a rectangular outbuilding in the location of the extant barn, are depicted in the area of the extant farm complex within the project site. The structure in the southeast corner of the project site is no longer shown. 1968 Livermore USGS topographic quadrangle (1:24,000) There is no change from the previous map. 1973 Livermore USGS topographic quadrangle (1:24,000) A road following the current alignment of Collier Canyon Road is depicted, replacing the previous street access to the project site. 1980 Livermore USGS topographic quadrangle (1:24,000) There is no change from the previous map. 1949 aerial photo Structures are present in the area of the extant mid-century houses, and there appears to be fenced pasture or corrals and possibly a structure in the vicinity of the extant barn location. A structure is visible in the southeast corner of the project site, at the intersection of what is now Collier Canyon Road and the driveway leading into the project site, which was noted on the 1953 USGS map. 1958 aerial photo The extant historic-period farm complex structures appear to be present. 1960, 1966, 1968 aerial photos These photos generally show modifications to the farm complex. The structure in the southeast corner of the project site disappears between 1966 and 1968. 1979, 1982, 1987 aerial photos These photos document modern development within the project site, including construction of the house in the far northwest corner, which appears on the 1987 photo, but not the 1982 photo. Source: Compiled by LSA (2022).
NAHC Sacred Lands File Search
LSA submitted a request to the NAHC to search the SLF for Native American cultural resources that may be impacted by the proposed project. The NAHC maintains the SLF database and is the official State repository of Native American sacred-site location records in California.
Cody Campagne, NAHC Cultural Resources Analyst, responded to the SLF search request on February 4, 2022, stating that the results were negative and that there were no known Native American cultural resources in the project site (Appendix B). He noted, however, that “the absence of specific site information in the SLF does not indicate the absence of cultural resources in any project area.”
596
6
2/7/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\Archaeo report\LSA_Cultural Study_Branaugh.docx)
Mr. Campagne provided a list of Native American individuals to contact for additional information regarding the potential for cultural resources in the project site.
LSA understands that the City of Dublin is responsible for conducting Native American consultation, per Assembly Bill 52, for this project.
Geoarchaeological Review
Fundamentally, there is an inverse relationship between landform age and the potential for buried pre-contact archaeological deposits. Pleistocene-age landforms (1.8 million years to ca. 11,500 cal B.P.) predate human occupation of the region; archaeological deposits on these landforms, if present, would be located at or near the surface. In contrast, landforms that formed during the Holocene (ca. 11,500 years ago to the present) may contain buried surfaces (paleosols) that would have been available in the past for human habitation (Meyer and Rosenthal 2007).
Geoarchaeological studies in the region identify landform age, type, and position in the landscape as important criteria for assessing the potential for buried archaeological deposits. In their regional geoarchaeological study and sensitivity model, which included nine San Francisco Bay Area counties, Meyer and Rosenthal (2007) identified Holocene-age landforms as having a general potential for containing buried pre-contact archaeological deposits. They further determined that pre-contact archaeological sites tend to be situated at the base of hills near sources of water, and on stream terraces, and buried beneath a few inches to several feet of alluvial soils.
As discussed earlier in this report, Holocene-age alluvial deposits are mapped along the bottom of the drainage in the northern half of the project site, as well as on the valley floor in the southern half of the project site. Soils information indicates that the alluvium on the valley floor could reach considerable depths. Although the project site straddles the interface between the valley floor and adjacent uplands, it historically does not appear to have been in close proximity to a stream. Thus, according to Meyer and Rosenthal’s criteria, portions of the project site do have general potential for buried pre-contact archaeological deposits based on the age of the landforms present and position in the landscape. However, these areas likely have low to moderate sensitivity given the distance to the closest historically documented stream.
FIELD SURVEY
Lennon Fanning, LSA Archaeologist, conducted a pedestrian survey of the project site on December 14, 2021. Photographs from the survey are provided in Attachment C. The survey was conducted in approximately 5.5 meter-wide transects, oriented magnetic east-west, and included periodic meandering to access exposed soil and avoid cattle.
At the time of the survey, the project site consisted primarily of open field covered in low green grass. A sizably steep hill occupied the northern part of the project site, which sloped to the south toward a paved area containing an operational business, houses, and parking lot. The grass was generally dense, although thinner and sparse in a few areas. Surface visibility varied, depending on the grass cover, from 15 to 40 percent, with some opportunities to examine soil exposed in vehicle tracks, cattle tracks, and rodent burrow back dirt.
597
7
2/7/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\Archaeo report\LSA_Cultural Study_Branaugh.docx)
The soil consisted of black silt/clay with gravel that included well-rounded pebbles and cobbles as well as broken pieces of sand- or claystone. Modern trash was scattered throughout the open field. Bird and rodent bone were observed in a few rodent burrow back dirt piles. No archaeological deposits were noted.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
No archaeological resources were identified within the project site during the course of this study. The project site does contain a historic-period farm complex (the Collier Ranch) consisting of four buildings over 50 years old: a circa 1958 shed and two-story, three-bay barn, and two mid-20th century single-family homes. These buildings were evaluated for significance as a historical resource. They were found to be not eligible, either individually or as a group, for inclusion on the CRHR or the NRHP. Other structures on the project site, consisting of several modern sheds and a circa 1980 single-story single-family residence, have not yet reached sufficient age to warrant evaluation for significance. These existing buildings will be demolished as part of the proposed development.
Background research indicated that buildings were present as early as 1949 in the area of the extant historic-period farm complex, and also in the southeast corner of the project site. It is unclear if the former were later demolished or incorporated into the extant farm complex. The structure in the southeast corner of the project site was removed between 1966 and 1968. There is high potential for any of these past or existing historical structures to have associated features, such as wells, refuse deposits, and structural remnants, buried within the project site.
Holocene-age alluvial deposits are mapped along the bottom of the drainage in the northern half of the project site, as well as on the valley floor in the southern half of the project site. Soils information indicates that the alluvium on the valley floor could reach considerable depths. The project site straddles the interface between the valley floor and adjacent uplands, but does not appear to have been historically in close proximity to a stream. Based on the age of the landforms present and position in the landscape, there is general potential for the portions of the project site in the bottom of drainage and on the valley floor to contain (possibly deeply) buried pre-contact archaeological deposits. However, these areas likely have relatively low sensitivity given the distance to the closest historically documented stream.
Recommendations
Due to the high potential for historic-period archaeological deposits, LSA recommends archaeological monitoring of ground-disturbing construction activities in two areas of the project site: the general vicinity of the extant historic-period farm complex and the southeast corner of the project site, as shown in Attachment A: Figure 3. Following demolition of the existing structures, a qualified archaeologist should be contracted to monitor all ground-disturbing construction activities in these two areas, including grading, utility trenching, and foundation-related excavation.
No additional investigation is recommended at this time for the remainder of the project site given the relatively low sensitivity for pre-contact archaeological deposits. Recommendations are provided below should unanticipated pre-contact or historic-period materials be encountered during construction activities.
598
8
2/7/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\Archaeo report\LSA_Cultural Study_Branaugh.docx)
Accidental Discovery of Archaeological Deposits
The following procedures should be followed in the event that archaeological deposits are identified inadvertently during project activities, and an archaeologist is not present on the site:
If deposits of pre-contact or historical archaeological materials are encountered
during project activities, all work within 25 feet of the discovery should be redirected
and the qualified archaeologist should assess the situation, consult with agencies as
appropriate, and make recommendations for the treatment of the discovery. Project
personnel should not collect or move any archaeological materials. Archaeological
materials can include flaked-stone tools (e.g., projectile points, knives, and choppers)
or obsidian, chert, basalt, or quartzite toolmaking debris; bone tools; culturally
darkened soil (i.e., midden soil often containing heat-affected rock, ash and charcoal,
shellfish remains, bones, and other cultural materials); and stone-milling equipment
(e.g., mortars, pestles, and handstones). Pre-contact archaeological sites often
contain human remains. Historic-period materials can include wood, stone, concrete,
or adobe footings, walls, and other structural remains; debris-filled wells or privies;
and deposits of wood, glass, ceramics, metal, and other refuse.
It is recommended that impacts to archaeological cultural resources be avoided by project activities. If such deposits cannot be avoided, the Applicant should, in consultation with the City and (if applicable) local California tribal groups, evaluate the significance of the find under CEQA. If the find is determined to qualify as a historical resource (PRC §21084.1) or unique archaeological resource (PRC §21083.2), impacts to the deposit will need to be avoided or such impacts must be treated. If treatment is required, a plan should be developed in consultation with the Applicant and City to mitigate, avoid, or minimize impacts to cultural resources. Treatments may consist of, but are not necessarily limited to, systematic recovery and analysis of archaeological deposits; recording the resource; preparation of a report of findings; accessioning recovered archaeological materials at an appropriate curation facility; and community outreach. All reports produced as part of the evaluation and treatment of cultural resources identified during the project shall be submitted to the City for review and comment. All final documents should be submitted to the NWIC.
Accidental Discovery of Human Remains
In the event that human remains are encountered at any time during project work, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the County Coroner would notify the NAHC within 24 hours. The NAHC would determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) per PRC 5097.98. With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection and make recommendations or preferences for treatment within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The MLD’s recommendations may include scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials, preservation of Native American human remains and associated items in place, relinquishment of Native American human remains and associated items to the descendants for treatment, or any other culturally appropriate treatment.
599
9
2/7/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\Archaeo report\LSA_Cultural Study_Branaugh.docx)
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
LSA Associates, Inc.
Kendra Kolar, M.A. Cultural Resources Analyst Attachment: A: Project Figures Figure 1: Project Site Location Figure 2: Aerial Photo of the Project Site Figure 3: Areas of Recommended Archaeological Monitoring B: NAHC SLF Results C: Field Survey Photos
600
10
2/7/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\Archaeo report\LSA_Cultural Study_Branaugh.docx)
REFERENCES CITED
Dibblee, Jr., Thomas W. 2006 Geologic Map of the Livermore Quadrangle, Contra Costa and Alameda Counties,
California. 1:24,000. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California. Electronic document, https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/mapview/?center=-121.826,37.711&zoom=15 (accessed January 2022).
Meyer, Jack, and Jeffrey Rosenthal 2007 Geoarchaeological Overview of the Nine Bay Area Counties in Caltrans District 4. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc., Davis, California.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) 2022 Web Soil Survey. Electronic document, https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx (accessed January 2022).
NETRONLINE 2022 Historic Aerials. Electronic document, https://historicaerials.com/viewer# (accessed January 2022).
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 1906 Pleasanton, Calif., 1:62,500 topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C. 1941 Pleasanton, Calif., 1:62,500 topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C. 1953 Livermore, Calif., 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C. 1961 Livermore, Calif., 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C. 1968 Livermore, Calif., 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C. 1973 Livermore, Calif., 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C. 1980 Livermore, Calif., 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C.
601
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE S TUDY F EBRUARY 2022 B RANAUGH P ROPERTY S TAGE 2 P LANNED D EVELOPMENT P ROJECT D UBLIN, A LAMEDA C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA
P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\Archaeo report\LSA_Cultural Study_Branaugh.docx (02/07/22)
ATTACHMENT A
PROJECT FIGURES
Figure 1: Project Site Location Figure 2: Aerial Photo of the Project Site Figure 3: Areas of Recommended Archaeological Monitoring
602
SOURCE: USGS 7.5-minute Topo Quads -Livermore, Calif. (1980).
I:\DUB2101.02\GIS\Maps\Branaugh Property\Cultural\Figure 1_Project Site Location.mxd (1/25/2022)
FIGURE 1
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development ProjectDublin, Alameda County, CaliforniaProject Site Location
Project Site
Project Location
0 1000 2000
FEET
Regional Location
603
SOURCE: Nearmap (09/2021).
I:\DUB2101.02\GIS\Maps\Branaugh Property\Cultural\Figure 2_Aerial Photo of Project Site.mxd (2/3/2022)
FIGURE 2
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development ProjectDublin, Alameda County, CaliforniaAerial Photo of Project Site
0 200 400
FEET
LEGEND
Project Site
604
SOURCE: Nearmap (09/2021).
I:\DUB2101.02\GIS\Maps\Branaugh Property\Cultural\Figure 3_Areas of Recommended Archaeological Monitoring.mxd (2/2/2022)
FIGURE 3
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development ProjectDublin, Alameda County, CaliforniaAreas of Recommended Archaeological Monitoring
0 200 400
FEET
LEGEND
Project Site
Archaeological Monitoring Areas
605
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE S TUDY F EBRUARY 2022 B RANAUGH P ROPERTY S TAGE 2 P LANNED D EVELOPMENT P ROJECT D UBLIN, A LAMEDA C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA
P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\Archaeo report\LSA_Cultural Study_Branaugh.docx (02/07/22)
ATTACHMENT B
NAHC SLF RESULTS
606
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor
NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
Page 1 of 1
February 4, 2022
Kendra Kolar
LSA Associates, Inc.
Via Email to: Kendra.Kolar@LSA.net
Re: Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development Project, Alameda County
Dear Ms. Kolar:
A record search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF)
was completed for the information you have submitted for the above referenced project. The
results were negative. However, the absence of specific site information in the SLF does not
indicate the absence of cultural resources in any project area. Other sources of cultural
resources should also be contacted for information regarding known and recorded sites.
Attached is a list of Native American tribes who may also have knowledge of cultural resources
in the project area. This list should provide a starting place in locating areas of potential
adverse impact within the proposed project area. I suggest you contact all of those indicated;
if they cannot supply information, they might recommend others with specific knowledge. By
contacting all those listed, your organization will be better able to respond to claims of failure to
consult with the appropriate tribe. If a response has not been received within two weeks of
notification, the Commission requests that you follow-up with a telephone call or email to
ensure that the project information has been received.
If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify
me. With your assistance, we can assure that our lists contain current information.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at my email
address: Cody.Campagne@nahc.ca.gov.
Sincerely,
Cody Campagne
Cultural Resources Analyst
Attachment
CHAIRPERSON
Laura Miranda
Luiseño
VICE CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash
PARLIAMENTARIAN
Russell Attebery
Karuk
SECRETARY
Sara Dutschke
Miwok
COMMISSIONER
William Mungary
Paiute/White Mountain
Apache
COMMISSIONER
Isaac Bojorquez
Ohlone-Costanoan
COMMISSIONER
Buffy McQuillen
Yokayo Pomo, Yuki,
Nomlaki
COMMISSIONER
Wayne Nelson
Luiseño
COMMISSIONER
Stanley Rodriguez
Kumeyaay
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Christina Snider
Pomo
NAHC HEADQUARTERS
1550 Harbor Boulevard
Suite 100
West Sacramento,
California 95691
(916) 373-3710
nahc@nahc.ca.gov
NAHC.ca.gov
Cody Campagne
607
Amah MutsunTribal Band of
Mission San Juan Bautista
Irene Zwierlein, Chairperson
3030 Soda Bay Road
Lakeport, CA, 95453
Phone: (650) 851 - 7489
Fax: (650) 332-1526
amahmutsuntribal@gmail.com
Costanoan
Costanoan Rumsen Carmel
Tribe
Tony Cerda, Chairperson
244 E. 1st Street
Pomona, CA, 91766
Phone: (909) 629 - 6081
Fax: (909) 524-8041
rumsen@aol.com
Costanoan
Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of
Costanoan
Ann Marie Sayers, Chairperson
P.O. Box 28
Hollister, CA, 95024
Phone: (831) 637 - 4238
ams@indiancanyons.org
Costanoan
Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of
Costanoan
Kanyon Sayers-Roods, MLD
Contact
1615 Pearson Court
San Jose, CA, 95122
Phone: (408) 673 - 0626
kanyon@kanyonkonsulting.com
Costanoan
Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe
of the SF Bay Area
Monica Arellano, Vice
Chairwoman
20885 Redwood Road, Suite 232
Castro Valley, CA, 94546
Phone: (408) 205 - 9714
marellano@muwekma.org
Costanoan
North Valley Yokuts Tribe
Katherine Perez, Chairperson
P.O. Box 717
Linden, CA, 95236
Phone: (209) 887 - 3415
canutes@verizon.net
Costanoan
Northern Valley
Yokut
North Valley Yokuts Tribe
Timothy Perez,
P.O. Box 717
Linden, CA, 95236
Phone: (209) 662 - 2788
huskanam@gmail.com
Costanoan
Northern Valley
Yokut
The Ohlone Indian Tribe
Andrew Galvan,
P.O. Box 3388
Fremont, CA, 94539
Phone: (510) 882 - 0527
Fax: (510) 687-9393
chochenyo@AOL.com
Bay Miwok
Ohlone
Patwin
Plains Miwok
Wilton Rancheria
Jesus Tarango, Chairperson
9728 Kent Street
Elk Grove, CA, 95624
Phone: (916) 683 - 6000
Fax: (916) 683-6015
jtarango@wiltonrancheria-nsn.gov
Miwok
Wilton Rancheria
Dahlton Brown, Director of
Administration
9728 Kent Street
Elk Grove, CA, 95624
Phone: (916) 683 - 6000
dbrown@wiltonrancheria-nsn.gov
Miwok
Wilton Rancheria
Steven Hutchason, THPO
9728 Kent Street
Elk Grove, CA, 95624
Phone: (916) 683 - 6000
Fax: (916) 863-6015
shutchason@wiltonrancheria-
nsn.gov
Miwok
Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom
Valley Band
Kenneth Woodrow, Chairperson
1179 Rock Haven Ct.
Salinas, CA, 93906
Phone: (831) 443 - 9702
kwood8934@aol.com
Foothill Yokut
Mono
1 of 2
This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of
the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resource Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.
This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources assessment for the proposed Branaugh Property Stage 2
Planned Development Project, Alameda County.
PROJ-2022-
000386
02/04/2022 09:53 AM
Native American Heritage Commission
Native American Contact List
Alameda County
2/4/2022
608
The Confederated Villages of
Lisjan
Corrina Gould, Chairperson
10926 Edes Avenue
Oakland, CA, 94603
Phone: (510) 575 - 8408
cvltribe@gmail.com
Bay Miwok
Ohlone
Delta Yokut
2 of 2
This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of
the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resource Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.
This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources assessment for the proposed Branaugh Property Stage 2
Planned Development Project, Alameda County.
PROJ-2022-
000386
02/04/2022 09:53 AM
Native American Heritage Commission
Native American Contact List
Alameda County
2/4/2022
609
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE S TUDY F EBRUARY 2022 B RANAUGH P ROPERTY S TAGE 2 P LANNED D EVELOPMENT P ROJECT D UBLIN, A LAMEDA C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA
P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\Archaeo report\LSA_Cultural Study_Branaugh.docx (02/07/22)
ATTACHMENT C
FIELD SURVEY PHOTOS
610
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE S TUDY F EBRUARY 2022 B RANAUGH P ROPERTY S TAGE 2 P LANNED D EVELOPMENT P ROJECT D UBLIN, A LAMEDA C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA
P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\Archaeo report\LSA_Cultural Study_Branaugh.docx (02/07/22) C-1
Photo C-1. Overview to south of valley floor within project site showing extant historic-period farm complex.
Photo C-2. Overview to north toward drainage in north half of project site.
611
C ULTURAL R ESOURCE S TUDY F EBRUARY 2022 B RANAUGH P ROPERTY S TAGE 2 P LANNED D EVELOPMENT P ROJECT D UBLIN, A LAMEDA C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA
P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\Archaeo report\LSA_Cultural Study_Branaugh.docx (02/07/22) C-2
Photo C-3. Example of rodent bone in exposed soil.
612
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Appendices
Appendix F
Historic Resources Evaluation
613
CARLSBAD
FRESNO
IRVINE
LOS ANGELES
PALM SPRINGS
POINT RICHMOND
RIVERSIDE
ROSEVILLE
SAN LUIS OBISPO
157 Park Place, Pt. Richmond, California 94801 510.236.6810 www.lsa.net
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 8, 2021
TO: Amy Million, Principal Planner, City of Dublin
FROM: Michael Hibma, Associate/Architectural Historian, LSA
SUBJECT: Historical Resource Evaluation of the Branaugh Property at 1881 Collier Canyon
Road, Dublin, Alameda County, California (LSA Project No.: DUB2101.02).
Dear Ms. Million,
LSA prepared a Historical Resource Evaluation (HRE) of a historic‐period farm complex containing
four buildings over 50 years old: a circa 1958 two‐story, three‐bay barn, two mid‐20th century single
family homes, and a detached shed on a 39.8‐acre property (APN 905‐01‐004‐04), in a semi‐rural
setting just within a portion of the eastern boundary of the City of Dublin, Alameda County,
California (project site) (Appendix A: Figures 1 and 2). The proposed project would demolish the
existing buildings in the project site. A separate, single‐story single‐family residence constructed at
the northwestern corner of the project site circa 1980 has not yet reached sufficient age to warrant
evaluation for significance as a historical resource and is not addressed in this HRE.
LSA understands the project site was previously evaluated in 2004 for California Register of
Historical Resources (CRHR) as part of the Eastern Dublin Properties Resource Management Plan
(RMP) and again in 2019 for National Register of Historic Palaces (NRHP) eligibility as part of the
Dublin Boulevard North Canyons Parkway Extension Project. The earlier study, in the form of a
Supplemental Cultural Resources Review for built environment resources was prepared by cultural
resources staff of San Leandro‐based Basin Research Associates, who found the project site’s built
environment not eligible for individual or collective significance under any of the evaluative criteria
of the CRHR. The later study, in the form of an Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) was prepared by
cultural resource staff of Walnut Creek‐based PaleoWest, who found the project site’s built
environment was not eligible under any of the evaluative criteria of the NRHP. The ASR was Caltrans
archaeologists reviewed and approved the ASR’s findings on September 27, 2019.
Despite the 2004 Basin Research Associates study, LSA understands the project site’s status as a
historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) remains
unaddressed. To address this gap, this HRE included a review of the Basin Research Associates and
PaleoWest studies for information about the design, construction history, and ownership of the
buildings in the project site. An LSA architectural historian also conducted a supplemental field
review to document existing conditions to determine the status of the historic‐period farm complex
at the southeastern corner of the project site using the evaluative criteria of the California Register
of Historical Resources (CRHR) fund at §5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code (PRC).
614
8/2/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\HRE\LSA_HRE_Branaugh_Property_(11.2021).docx) 2
Based on background research and field observations, LSA concludes that the historic‐period farm
complex in the project site is not eligible for inclusion in the CRHR due to a lack of historical
significance. As such, the farm complex does not appear to be a historical resource for the purposes
of CEQA. The methods, analysis, and conclusions of this HRE are presented in the sections that
follow. See Appendix B for Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 Series forms record
update evaluation of the historic‐period farm complex utilizing the evaluative criteria of the CRHR.
Michael Hibma, M.A., AICP, completed the analysis. Mr. Hibma is an architectural historian at LSA’s
Point Richmond office and has over 14 years of experience in cultural resources management. He
holds an M.A. in History from California State University, Sacramento; meets the Secretary of the
Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards as an architectural historian and historian (Title 36
CFR Part 61); and is certified by the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP #32009).
BACKGROUND RESEARCH
Records Searches
LSA reviewed the results of a record search requested by PaleoWest of the project site and a 0.25‐
mile radius on February 8, 2017 (NWIC File #16‐1157) by staff of the Northwest Information Center
(NWIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System, Sonoma State University, Rohnert
Park. The NWIC, an affiliate of the State of California Office of Historic Preservation, is the official
State repository of cultural resource records and reports for Alameda County. An additional records
search (NWIC File #17‐1264) was completed on November 3, 2018, using a wider one‐mile radius. A
third records search (NWIC File #21‐0679) was completed on November 6, 2021, using a ½‐mile
radius.
As part of the review of the previous NWIC records search results, LSA also reviewed the following
local and State inventories for built environment cultural resources in and adjacent to the project
site:
California Inventory of Historic Resources (California Department of Parks and Recreation 1976);
Five Views: An Ethnic Historic Site Survey for California (California Office of Historic Preservation
1988);
California Points of Historical Interest (California Office of Historic Preservation 1992);
California Historical Landmarks (California Office of Historic Preservation 1996);
An Architectural Guidebook to San Francisco and the Bay Area (Cerny 2007);
A Living Legacy: Historic Architecture of the East Bay (Wilson 1987); and
Built Environment Resource Directory: Alameda County (California Office of Historic Preservation
2021). The directory includes the listings of the NRHP, National Historic Landmarks, CRHR,
California Historical Landmarks, and California Points of Historical Interest.
615
8/2/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\HRE\LSA_HRE_Branaugh_Property_(11.2021).docx) 3
Results. The records searches identified one previously recorded cultural resource within the
project site.
1881 Collier Canyon Road, Livermore (Collier Ranch). This resource was identified by Basin
Research Associates in November 2004 as part of a supplemental cultural resources review in
support of the Eastern Dublin Properties Resource Management Plan (RMP). Basin Research
reviewed documentation prepared for the RMP, conducted a pedestrian field survey, and
prepared a CRHR‐based evaluation of the buildings in the project site. The Basin Research
evaluation found that the Collier Ranch does not appear either individually or as a group to be
eligible for the [CRHR] (Basin Research Associates 2004). No other resources within the project
site were identified.
The records search identified five previously identified cultural resources within one mile of the
project site.
P‐01‐002114/CA‐ALA‐508/H, 4J Ranch Site;
P‐01‐000124/CA‐ALA‐000394, Pleasanton Meadows Site;
P‐1‐001776, JR‐3 (Channelized canal segment);
P‐01‐002122/CA‐ALA‐516H, GD‐6 (remains of a homestead); and
P‐01‐010526, Livermore Airport Prehistoric/Historic Site.
LSA reviewed the online Built Environment Resources Directory and identified the following
resources added after the PaleoWest evaluation:
PW‐127‐3; 1818 [sic] Collier Canyon Road.1 On November 7, 2019, the Office of Historic
Preservation assigned California Historical Resource Status Code of 6Y to this resource indicating
that this resource was “[d]etermined ineligible for NR[HP] by consensus through Section 106
process – Not evaluated for CR[HR] or local listing” (OHP 2021).
PW‐127‐4; 1421 Collier Canyon Road (east of and adjacent to the project site). On November 7,
2019, the Office of Historic Preservation assigned California Historical Resource Status Code of
6Y to this resource indicating that this resource was “[d]etermined ineligible for NR[HP] by
consensus through Section 106 process – Not evaluated for CR[HR] or local listing” (OHP 2021).
Map Review
LSA reviewed the following maps for historical information about the project site and its vicinity:
1 It appears this address in incorrect. 1818 Collier Canyon Road does not correspond to a current physical
address. LSA believes the correct address is 1881 Collier Canyon Road, i.e., the project site.
616
8/2/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\HRE\LSA_HRE_Branaugh_Property_(11.2021).docx) 4
Pleasanton, Calif., 15‐minute topographic quadrangle (U.S. Geological Survey 1906, 1941, 1953,
and 1961); and
Livermore, Calif., 7.5‐minute topographic quadrangle (U.S. Geological Survey 1953, 1961, 1968,
1973, and 1980.
Results. The Pleasanton, Calif., 15‐minute quadrangles depict the project site as largely
undeveloped land. An unnamed road to Livermore is depicted roughly corresponding to modern
Interstate 580. In 1941, the project site shown with one black square, indicating the presence of an
earlier building since demolished (barns and other substantial outbuildings are shown by the USGS
by an uncolored square or rectangle). The Inman School is clearly named at the southeastern corner
of intersection of then‐U.S. Highway 50 and modern Doolan Road. By 1953, no changes are shown in
the project site. A new square building shape is shown east of and adjacent to the project site, this
may correspond to modern day 1421 Collier Canyon Road /APN 905‐001‐0102 and ;‐302 (PaleoWest
Resource Number PW‐127‐4).
By 1961, one additional residential building is depicted in the project site and is accessed via an
unpaved driveway and the rectangular uncolored shape is depicted where the modern barn building
is. The black square shape near the road shown in 1953 is no longer depicted USGS 1906, 1941,
1953, and 1961). Subsequent maps show intensifying development south of and across four‐lane
U.S. 50 and Interstate 580, examples include the Livermore Airport, the Las Positas Golf Course, and
the Santa Route Rehabilitation Center. An increasing level of development, mostly south of the
highway continues through the 1980s. A notable change is the construction of the modern Airway
Boulevard and Collier Canyon Road off‐ramp structure and the modern alignment of Collier Canyon
Road (USGS 1968, 1973, and 1980).
FIELD REVIEW
LSA architectural historian Michael Hibma reviewed the exterior of the buildings in the project site
at 1881 Collier Canyon Road and vicinity on October 14, 2021. The purpose of the review was to
characterize their architectural style and to identify alterations.
Project Site Description
The project site contains a historic‐period farm complex north of Interstate 580 along the edge of
the Diablo Range foothills that form the northern boundary of the Amador Valley. The complex
contains four detached buildings: a two‐story barn, two single‐family residences, and a detached
shed or workshop. A separate detached, single‐story, single‐family residence at the far northwestern
corner of the property. The project site also includes an oval‐shaped parking lot south of the barn, a
covered seating area, paved drives ways and lawns and landscaped areas near the detached
residences. The project site also contains vehicles and equipment storage areas.
Alterations observed generally consisted of textured, non‐original stucco cladding, signage, modern
replacement fenestration, modern replacement entrances, vegetation, and security lighting. These
buildings are modest examples of a general Vernacular style architecture and is similar in visual
617
8/2/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\HRE\LSA_HRE_Branaugh_Property_(11.2021).docx) 5
appearance to contemporary residential and agricultural outbuildings in rural eastern Alameda
County and rural areas statewide.
Property Ownership1
An evaluation of the project site prepared in November 2018 by cultural resources staff PaleoWest
indicated the project site was entirely within Rancho Santa Rita, an 8800‐acre grant given to Jose
Dolores Pacheco in 1839 and used for cattle grazing. In 1854 Samuel Barclay Martin bought Rancho
Santa Rita. Eight years later Martin sold Owen Paul Sutton and Elias Nelson Conway 640 acres of
land in Murray Township that included the project, Three years alter in 1865 Conway and Sutton
sold San Lorenzo resident and merchant Augusts Melville Church land that included the project site.
He resided on his ranch by the late 1860s and 1870s. In 1872, he deed a portion of his land to the
Inman School District. By 1877, Church sold and moved to Oakland.
In 1878, Owen R. Owen had purchased 320 acres north of Positas Creek from Church. There is no
indication that Owen lived in what would become the present project site. In 1900, the parcel
belonged to R.S. Farrelly and in 1910 to H. Farrelly. In 1927, the Farrelly Ranch was sold and the
property’s then‐new owner appears to have settled on the parcel, by 1939 per an aerial photograph,
as one building was shown, what appears to be a small house to the east of Croak Road. In 1934, the
owner, Alice M. Short, deeded a portion of the land to the State of California, likely for the
construction of the highway. However, the evidence reviewed suggests that these individuals did
not live at or conduct their work at the project site.
HISTORICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT
Please see Appendix B for DPR 523 Series forms. A full historical context is provided in the ASR.
ELIGIBILITY EVALUATION
Background research, including a records search, a literature review, archival research, and a field
review by an architectural historian identified one potential built environment cultural resource
more than 50 years old in the project site: an historic‐period farm complex at 1881 Collier Canyon
Road. Please see Appendix B for DPR 523 Series forms, which contain a CRHR‐based eligibility
evaluation of the building as a Continuation Sheet Update to the PaleoWest DPE 523 from record
prepared in November 2018 by PaleoWest cultural resource staff.
CONCLUSION
PaleoWest previously evaluated the historic‐period farm complex at 1881 Collier Canyon Road in
November 2018. The project site contains a two‐story, three‐bay barn, two mid‐20th century
houses, and a shed. Modern modular sheds and containers less than 50 years old are also present
on site and are associated with operation of current businesses. The evaluation in the PaleoWest
ASR found the historic‐period farm complex was ineligible for inclusion in the NRHP due to a lack of
a historical significance. Based on the results of this HRE, LSA concurs with the 2004 Basin Research
1 This section is adapted from an Archaeological Survey Report for the Dublin Boulevard‐North Canyon
Parkway Extension, Alameda County, California. 2019. Pages 20‐21. PaleoWest Archaeology, Walnut
Creek, California. On file at Caltrans District 4, 111 Grand Avenue, Oakland, California. See Appendix D.
618
8/2/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\HRE\LSA_HRE_Branaugh_Property_(11.2021).docx) 6
Associates’ and the 2018 PaleoWest findings that the farm complex in the project site at 1881 Collier
Canyon Road is not eligible for inclusion in the CRHR or NRHP under any significance criteria. For
these reasons, the project site’s built environment do not appear to qualify as historical resources
for the purposes of CEQA (PRC §21084.1).
Sincerely,
Michael Hibma, M.A., AICP
Associate/Architectural Historian
Attached: Appendix A Figures 1 and 2
Appendix B DPR 523 Series Forms ‐ PW‐127‐3; 1881 Collier Canyon Road
619
8/2/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\HRE\LSA_HRE_Branaugh_Property_(11.2021).docx) 7
REFERENCES CONSULTED1
California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP)
1988 Five Views: An Ethnic Historic Site Survey for California. California Department of Parks and
Recreation, Sacramento.
1992 California Points of Historical Interest. California Department of Parks and Recreation,
Sacramento.
1996 California Historical Landmarks. California Department of Parks and Recreation,
Sacramento.
2001 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Historical Resources. California
Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento.
2021 California Historical Landmarks: Alameda. Electronic document,
http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21388, accessed various.
2021 Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD) – Alameda County. Electronic document,
https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=30338&fbclid=IwAR0llwakK0TWEKbwaJaRY6N64TdqxX
B64bN4kJTcLB_9ONg5Md9t2f88gLs, accessed various.
Basin Research Associates
2004 1881 Collier Canyon Road, Livermore (Collier Ranch) Eastern Dublin Properties Resource
Management Plan (RMP) area Supplemental Cultural Resources Review ‐ Built Environment
City of Dublin, Alameda County (APN 905‐0001‐004‐04). Basin Research Associates, San
Leandro. On file at NWIC, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park (S‐30611).
Cerny, Susan Dinkelspiel
2007 An Architectural Guidebook to San Francisco and the Bay Area. Gibbs Smith Publisher, Santa
Barbara, California.
PaleoWest
2018 Archaeological Survey Report for the Dublin Boulevard North Canyon Parkway
Extension, Alameda County, California. DPR 523 from record: 1881 Collier Canyon Road/PW‐
1274‐3. On File with Caltrans District 4, Oakland, California.
ParcelQuest
2021 Assessor’s Parcel Information. Electronic document, http://www.parcelquest.com/,
accessed various.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
1906 Pleasanton, Calif., 15‐minute topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C.
1941 Pleasanton, Calif., 15‐minute topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C.
1 For a full set of references consulted, please see the DPR523 forms in Appendix B of this report.
620
8/2/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\HRE\LSA_HRE_Branaugh_Property_(11.2021).docx) 8
1953 Pleasanton, Calif., 15‐minute topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C.
1961 Pleasanton, Calif., 15‐minute topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C.
1953 Livermore, Calif., 7.5‐minute topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C.
1961 Livermore, Calif., 7.5‐minute topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C.
1968 Livermore, Calif., 7.5‐minute topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C.
1973 Livermore, Calif., 7.5‐minute topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C.
1980 Livermore, Calif., 7.5‐minute topographic quadrangle. USGS, Washington, D.C.
Wilson, Mark A.
1987 A Living Legacy: Historic Architecture of the East Bay. Lexikos Press, San Francisco, California.
Woodbridge, Sally B., John M. Woodbridge and Chuck Byrne
1992 San Francisco Architecture: The Illustrated Guide to Over 1,000 of the Best Buildings, Parks,
and Public Artworks in the Bay Area. Chronicle Books, San Francisco, California.
2005 San Francisco Architecture: An Illustrated Guide to the Outstanding Buildings, Public
Artworks, and Parks in the Bay Area of California. Ten Speed Press, Toronto, Canada.
621
8/2/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\HRE\LSA_HRE_Branaugh_Property_(11.2021).docx) 9
APPENDIX A: MAPS
Figure 1: Regional location and Project Site
Figure 2: Project Site
622
SOURCE: ESRI World Street Map (03/20).
I:\DUB2101.02\Maps\Figure 1_Regional Location.mxd (9/8/2021)
FIGURE 1
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned DevelopmentRegional Location
Project Site
Project Location
0 1000 2000
FEET
623
SOURCE: USGS 7.5-minute Topo Quads -Livermore, Calif. (1980).
I:\DUB2101.02\GIS\Maps\Branaugh Property\Cultural\Records Search Map.mxd (10/4/2021)
FIGURE 2
Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned DevelopmentDublin, Alameda County, California
Project Site
0 1000 2000
FEET
LEGEND
Project Site
624
8/2/22 (P:\DUB2101.02 Branaugh\PRODUCTS\Cultural\HRE\LSA_HRE_Branaugh_Property_(11.2021).docx) 10
APPENDIX B: DPR SERIES 523 FORMS – PW‐127‐3; 1881 COLLIER CANYON ROAD,
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA
625
State of California – The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 1 of 6 Resource Name: PW-127-3
Recorded by: Michael Hibma, M.A., AICP Date: 11/1/21 Continuation X Update
L3. Description
This record serves as an update for a historic-period farmstead at 1881 Collier Canyon Road. This farm complex is
comprised of four buildings over 50 years old: a circa 1958 two-story, three-bay barn, two mid-20th century single family
homes, and a detached shed on a 39.8-acre property (APN 905-01-004-04), in a semi-rural setting just within a portion of
the eastern boundary of the City of Dublin, Alameda County. Basin Research Associates previously evaluated this
resource in 2004 for California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligibility. In 2019, PaleoWest conducted a
National Register of Historic Palaces (NRHP) eligibility as part of the Dublin Boulevard North Canyons Parkway
Extension Project. PaleoWest prepared an Archaeological Survey Report that was reviewed and accepted by Caltrans in
2019. Both Basin Research Associates and PaleoWest found the farm complex not eligible under any CRHR or NRHP
evaluative criteria. PaleoWest designed this resource as PW-127-3. On November 7, 2019, the Office of Historic
Preservation assigned California Historical Resource Status Code of 6Y to this resource indicating that this resource was
“[d]etermined ineligible for NR[HP] by consensus through Section 106 process – Not evaluated for CR[HR] or local
listing.” The farm complex is therefore not a historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). This farm complex was identified and recorded on November 1, 2021, in support of a proposed demolition
project.
L9. Remarks
This continuation sheet update was prepared by LSA Associates architectural historian Michael Hibma, M.A., AICP on
November 1, 2021. This addendum updates the DPR 523 form record prepared in November 2018 by PaleoWest in
support of the Archaeological Survey Report for the Dublin Boulevard North Canyon Parkway Extension Project,
prepared by Evan Tudor Elliot M.A., RPA. The evaluation in the PaleoWest ASR found the historic-period farm complex
was ineligible for inclusion in the NRHP due to a lack of a historical significance. This update addresses the farm
complex’s status as a historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) via the
CRHR evaluative criteria. Mr. Hibma visited the project site on October 14, 2021, to inspect the built environment,
identify its notable elements, and apply the CRHR evaluative criteria to the earlier PaleoWest resource record.
Based on the results of this HRE, LSA concurs with the 2004 Basin Research Associates’ and the 2018 PaleoWest
findings that the farm complex in the project site at 1881 Collier Canyon Road is not eligible for inclusion in the CRHR or
NRHP under any significance criteria due to a lack of historical significance. For these reasons, the project site’s built
environment do not appear to qualify as historical resources for the purposes of CEQA (PRC §21084.1).
References
Basin Research Associates
2004 1881 Collier Canyon Road, Livermore (Collier Ranch) Eastern Dublin Properties Resource Management
Plan (RMP) area Supplemental Cultural Resources Review - Built Environment City of Dublin, Alameda
County (APN 905-0001-004-04). Basin Research Associates, San Leandro. On file at NWIC, Sonoma State
University, Rohnert Park (S-30611).
LSA Associates
2021 Historical Resource Evaluation of the Branaugh Property at 1881 Collier Canyon Road, Dublin, Alameda
County, California. LSa Associates, Point Richmond, California.
PaleoWest
2018 Archaeological Survey Report for the Dublin Boulevard North Canyon Parkway
Extension, Alameda County, California. DPR 523 from record: 1881 Collier Canyon Road/PW-127-3. On
File with Caltrans District 4, Oakland, California.
DPR 523L (1/95) 626
State of California – The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 2 of 6 Resource Name: PW-127-3
Recorded by: Michael Hibma, M.A., AICP Date: 11/1/21 Continuation X Update
L8a. Photographs (continued)
PW127-3. Barn building. South and east façades, view northwest. LSA photograph, 11/1/21.
PW127-3. Barn building. North façade, view south. LSA photograph, 11/1/21.
DPR 523L (1/95) 627
State of California – The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 3 of 6 Resource Name: PW-127-3
Recorded by: Michael Hibma, M.A., AICP Date: 11/1/21 Continuation X Update
L8a. Photographs (continued)
PW127-3. House 1. West and south façades, view northeast. LSA photograph, 11/1/21.
PW127-3. House 1. West and north façades, view southeast. LSA photograph, 11/1/21.
DPR 523L (1/95) 628
State of California – The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 4 of 6 Resource Name: PW-127-3
Recorded by: Michael Hibma, M.A., AICP Date: 11/1/21 Continuation X Update
L8a. Photographs (continued)
PW127-3. House 2. South and east façades, view northwest. LSA photograph, 11/1/21.
PW127-3. House 2. East and north façades, view southwest. LSA photograph, 11/1/21.
DPR 523L (1/95) 629
State of California – The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 5 of 6 Resource Name: PW-127-3
Recorded by: Michael Hibma, M.A., AICP Date: 11/1/21 Continuation X Update
L8a. Photographs (continued)
PW127-3. Shed. South and west façades, view northeast. LSA photograph, 11/1/21.
PW127-3. Shed. South and east façades, view northwest. LSA photograph, 11/1/21.
DPR 523L (1/95) 630
State of California – The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 6 of 6 Resource Name: PW-127-3
Recorded by: Michael Hibma, M.A., AICP Date: 11/1/21 Continuation X Update
L8a. Photographs (continued)
PW127-3. Chicken coop. North and west “façades”, view southeast. LSA photograph, 11/1/21.
PW127-3. View southeast towards farm complex. Interstate 580 and Livermore Valley beyond.
LSA photograph, 11/1/21.
DPR 523L (1/95) 631
DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
Page 1 of 13 *Resource Name or #: PW-127-3
P1. Other Identifier: N/A
*P2. Location: Not for Publication Unrestricted *a. County: Alameda
and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.)
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Livermore, CA Date: 1961 (1980) T; R; ¼ of ¼ of Sec ; SB B.M.
c. Address: 1881 Collier Canyon Road City: Livermore Zip: 94551
d. UTM: Zone: 10; 602824 mE/ 4173568 mN
e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate): The property is located north of
Collier Canyon Road and north of Interstate 580 at the base of the foothills on the northern edge of Amador Valley, within APN
905-01-004-04
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
This resource is a historic-period farm complex on the northern edge of Amador Valley. It currently retains four buildings over 50
years in age: a ca. 1958 barn, two mid-20th-century single family residences, and a shed. A single-family residence constructed ca.
1980 is located on the northwest portion of the property. Modern modular sheds and containers associated with operation of the
current business are also located on the property. The property also includes hardscaped such as paved areas and landscaped
vegetation.
(See continuation sheet)
*P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP33. Farm/ ranch
*P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.)
P5b. Description of Photo: (
View of barn, facing northwest, 11/16/18
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources:
Historic
Prehistoric Both
Ca. 1958 (Barn, Shed, House 1), ca. 1965
(House 2); ca. 1980 (House 3); Aerial
photographs and maps
*P7. Owner and Address:
Branaugh Robert D TR Trust
*P8. Recorded by:
P. Zingerella
PaleoWest
1870 Olympic Boulevard
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
*P9. Date Recorded: November 2018
*P10. Survey Type: Intensive pedestrian
*P11. Report Citation:
Wildt, Jennifer, and Evan Tudor Elliott. 2018. Archaeological Survey Report for the Dublin Boulevard North Canyon Parkway
Extension, Alameda County, CA. On File with Caltrans District 4
*Attachments: NONE Location Map Sketch Map Continuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record
Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record
Artifact Record Photograph Record Other (List):
P5a. Photo or Drawing (
632
DPR 523B (1/95) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
Page 2 of 13 *NRHP Status Code:
*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) PW-127-3
B1. Historic Name: N/A
B2. Common Name: 1881 Collier Canyon Road
B3. Original Use: Farm/ranch B4. Present Use: Landscaping business
*B5. Architectural Style: Vernacular
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations)
Barn: constructed ca. 1958 (NETR Online 2018); Shed: constructed ca. 1958 (NETR Online 2018); House 1: constructed ca. 1958
(NETR Online 2018); House 2: constructed ca. 1965 (NETR Online 2018); House 3: constructed ca. 1980 (NETR Online 2018).
*B7. Moved? No Yes Unknown Date: N/A Original Location: N/A
*B8. Related Features: N/A
B9a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: Unknown
*B10. Significance: Theme: Area:
Period of Significance: Property Type: Applicable Criteria:
(Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
Owen R. Owen had purchased 320 acres north of Positas Creek from Church by 1878 (Thompson and West 1878). There are no
structures or roads/trails depicted at the location of P-127-3 on the 1878 map, and no indication that Owen lived at this location on
the property. Owen was a Welsh immigrant who began farming on the Doughtery Ranch near Dublin between 1863 and 1869. He
married Mary E. Murphy, a native of Alvardo in Alameda County in 1878 and the pair had three sons, two of which were living in
1883 (Woods 1883:957). According to the 1870 United States Census records for Murray Township, O.W. Owen was a 30-year-old,
Welsh-born laborer sharing a residence with 16 other male laborers between the ages of 23 and 38, born in Mexico, Ireland,
Prussia, France, Scotland, and the United States. The residences enumerated before and after Owen’s were both occupied by
Chinese-born male laborers.
In 1900, the parcel belonged to R.S. Farrelly (Nusbaumer and Boardman 1900), and in 1910 to H. Farrelly (Haviland 1910). No
buildings are depicted at this location on the 1906 USGS Pleasanton 15-minute topographic quadrangle. Robert S. And Henrietta
Farrelly were childless, elderly Pennsylvania-born farmers and real estate investors who, in 1900, lived on San Leandro Road
between San Leandro and Elmhurst. By 1910, the 72-year-old Henrietta Farrelly was widowed and living supported by her own
income, some of which was drawn from renting or leasing properties like this property.
After her death in late 1927, her Murray Township property was put up for sale along with six other properties owned by Mrs.
Farrelly (Oakland Tribune 25 March 1928). The subdivided property’s new owner appears to have settled on the parcel, as at the
time of 1939 and 1940 aerial photographs at least four buildings and at least two additional structures are present within what
appear to be a small farm oriented toward Highway 50 to the south, with trails crossing the fields connecting to the nearby
property at 1421 Collier Canyon Road to the southeast. Research has yielded no additional information regarding Owen,
Murphey, the Farrellys, or any other owners or tenets on the property.
(See continuation sheet)
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: N/A
*B12. References:
Refer to Continuation Sheet
B13. Remarks:
N/A
*B14. Evaluator: J. Castells
*Date of Evaluation: November 2018
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
Please See Attached Sketch Map
633
State of California - The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATIONLOCATION MAP
Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial:
Page 3 of 11
*Map Name: Livermore
Resource Name or # (Assigned by Recorder): PW-127-3
*Scale: 1:24000 *Date of MAP: 1981
DPR 523J (1/95)*Required Information
¯
0 1,000500
Meters
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 10.125
Miles
PW-127-3
634
[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[
[
[
[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[ [[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[
[
[
[
[
[
[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[
[
[
[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
PW-127-3
Locus 1
Barn
Vehicle yard
House 1
House 2
Shed
Modern Shed
Modern Shed
Locus 2
House 3
0 500250
Feet
¯
Site Boundary
Locus
Structure
Pavement
Dirt Road
[ [ [Fence
DPR 523J (1/95)*Required Information
State of California - The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATIONSKETCH MAP
Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial:
Page 11 of 11
*Drawn By: N.Fino
Resource Name or # (Assigned by Recorder): PW-127-3
*Date: 5/17/2019
635
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 5 of 13 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) PW-127-3
*Recorded by: P. Zingerella *Date: November 2018 Continuation Update
*P3a. Description:
Barn: The barn, located in the northern portion of the property, retains the original structure of the three-bay barn constructed ca.
1958. The building has been significantly altered over time. It measures 85 feet east-west by 35 feet north-south. The central two-
story section of the barn has east-facing loft doors and an extant pulley hanging from a beam extending from the east-west aligned
roof ridge-line. There are single-story, shed-roofed bays on the north and south sides of this central portion. All roofing on the
original portions of the barn is corrugated metal sheet. The south-facing side of the barn has been altered to provide an entrance to
the business housed within the building. Reinforced barn- and garage-style doors, as well as modern French doors used for
pedestrian access, have been installed near the eastern end of the south-facing side. Most windows on all sides of the barn are
modern vinyl- and aluminum-frame sliding or double-hung replacements, framed by wide white-painted trim to evoke a historic
barn look. The original barn doors on the west-facing side have been replaced by modern, roll-up utility doors. A large garage
extension with roll-up utility doors on its west and north sides extends from the northern eave of the two-story central bay. The
western two-thirds of this northern extension has a flat roof, while the eastern third slopes toward the east. Roofing on the
extension is corrugated metal on the western portion, and what appears to be composition sheeting on the eastern portion. The
building appears to be set on a concrete slab. The yard surrounding the barn has been paved with asphalt for use in vehicle
loading and parking, and a modern modular building is located to the immediate west.
Shed: A single-story rectangular shed constructed ca. 1958. The building has horizontal wood siding exterior and tarpaper sheet
roofing on its low-pitched single-gable roof, measuring 32 feet east-west by 30 feet north-south. It is located approximately 180 feet
southwest of the barn. The shed has swinging double utility doors on the western portion of the south-facing side and a centrally-
located single entrance door. A single-shed roofed storage area open on all sides and roofed with tarpaper extends from the
eastern eave of the shed. A single window on the west-facing side has been partially boarded shut. Though much of the
foundation is obscured by debris, the shed appears to sit on a combination of concrete foundation and concrete slab.
House 1: A single-story single-family residence located nearest the driveway leading from Collier Canyon Road constructed ca.
1958. House 1 is a rectangular, single-story building with stucco siding measuring 40 feet east-west by 35 feet north-south. It has a
recessed entranceway on its south-facing side and relatively small, rectangular aluminum-frame windows on all sides. A sliding
modern aluminum-frame patio door accesses a small landscaped yard area on the north side of the building, and a corrugated
metal canopy supported by wood frame and posts shades a modern entrance door on the east side of the building. The shallow-
pitched single-gable roof has composition sheet roofing. This building appears to be well-maintained and is currently occupied.
House 2: A single-story, rectangular single-family residence constructed ca. 1965. The building features vertical wood siding and a
flat-peaked shallow-pitched tarpaper roof is located approximately 260 feet southeast of the barn, and 50 feet southeast of the
shed. Systematically placed sections of 1x4 lumber have been attached to the roof and soffits to secure the tarpaper roofing. The
south-facing entrance side of the house symmetrically placed wood-trimmed rectangular aluminum-frame slider windows
flanking a modern entrance door. The north-facing rear side of the house has two aluminum-frame sliding patio doors opening to
small, slightly elevated scrap-wood decks. A small lean-to utility shed has been constructed on the east-facing side below a small,
aluminum-frame window.
House 3: House 3 is a one-story single-family residence constructed ca. 1980. The building had an L-shaped plan with a medium-
pitched cross-gabled roof. The primary entrance is located on the eastern portion of the south elevation and is recessed under a
portion of the roof that extends into a covered patio. A wraparound wooden deck extends from a portion of the south elevation,
around the east elevation, and to a portion of the north elevation of the east-west oriented portion of the building. The east
elevation of the east-west oriented portion of the building includes a row of large windows with fixed transoms centered on the
elevation. Additional fenestration on the building includes sliding windows. A covered patio is located at the corner of the north
elevation of the east-west oriented portion of the building and the east elevation of the north-south oriented portion of the
building.
636
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 6 of 13 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) PW-127-3
*Recorded by: P. Zingerella *Date: November 2018 Continuation Update
*B10. Significance (Continued):
Though only two buildings are shown at this location on the 1953, 1961, 1968, and 1973 Livermore USGS topographic quadrangles,
aerial photographs from 1939, 1940, 1950, 1958, and 1965 show a useful development sequence for the three remaining buildings
(Aero Exploration Co. 1950; Cartwright Aerial Surveys 1965; Cartwright and Co. 1958; Fairchild Aerial Surveys 1939, 1940; USGS
2018). The east-west oriented barn currently standing at the northern end of the property was constructed at its current location
between 1950 and 1958, replacing a smaller barn oriented north-south that appears to have been built between 1939 and 1940, but
removed by the 1950 aerial photograph. House 1 and the shed are both depicted on the 1958 aerial and House 2 was constructed
ca. 1965 (NETR Online 2018).
House 3 is located in the northern portion of the parcel but was constructed ca 1980, but there is no indication that it is directly
associated with the historical uses of the property (NETR Online 2018).
The historical significance of PW-127-3 is evaluated here by applying the procedure and criteria for the National Register of
Historic Places (NRHP). While there are multiple structures on the parcel, they represent an extended period of residential and
agricultural development as a complex. The individual extant buildings that predate 1968, namely the Barn, House 1, House 2, and
the Shed, are considered individually and the resource is also considered as a whole for NRHP eligibility.
Criterion A: This resource does not meet Criterion A for association with events that have made a significant contribution to the
broad patterns of our history. The property represented a family farm or ranch from the early-mid 20th century and thus is
associated more broadly with the mid-20th century agricultural of Amador Valley and the outskirts of Livermore. During the mid-
20th century the dominant historical pattern was the expansion of suburbs into the formerly agricultural outskirts, rather than the
development of agriculture itself (Corbett 2005). Agriculture was firmly established in the region at the time of the property’s
construction and there is no indication that this property was historically significant in establishing or growing the agricultural
economy in the area. The resource could not be tied to any particular labor force or immigrant group. While certainly participating
in a broader pattern of agricultural development, the property at PW-127-3 is not a particularly good representative of or directly
associated with historical events or themes of local, state, or national significance. House 3 was constructed ca. 1980 and was
constructed well after the period of historical use of the property. The building is not directly related to the potential historical
significance of the property. It is recommended that PW-127-3 is not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion A.
Criterion B: This resource does not meet Criterion B for any direct association with lives of significant persons in our past. Archival
research has provided little information regarding the lives of the previous owners and tenants on the property. The paucity of
information regarding individuals specifically associated with the property is suggestive of the lack of historical significance of
those individuals. Research yielded no indication of association between PW-127-3 or any of the individual buildings and any
historically significant individuals or groups within the region, state, or nation. It is recommended that PW-127-3 is not eligible for
listing on the NRHP under Criterion B.
Criterion C: This resource does not meet Criterion C for embodying the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of
construction; or as a representative work of a master; or for possessing high artistic values. The individual buildings on the
property are common and unremarkable examples of these building types. Many barns, sheds, and single-family homes of similar
construction and design were built throughout California and the United States during the 20th century and these building
represent neither the oldest examples not the most distinctive examples of these property types. There is no indication that the
layout of these buildings represents a master plan of development that would represent a departure from standard housing and
farming practices in the region. House 3 was constructed ca. 1980 and was constructed well after the period of historical use of the
property. The building is not directly related to the potential historical significance of the property. While the architect and builder
of the buildings on the property was not identified, it is unlikely that these buildings represent the work of a master. Therefore,
this resource and the buildings are recommended as not eligible for the NRHP under Criterion C.
(See continuation sheet)
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 7 of 13 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) PW-127-3
637
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 2 of 13 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) PW-127-3
*Recorded by: P. Zingerella *Date: November 2018 Continuation Update
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
*Recorded by: P. Zingerella *Date: November 2018 Continuation Update
*B10. Significance (Continued):
Criterion D: The buildings located on the parcel at 1881 Collier Canyon Road has not and is not likely to yield important
information that furthers our knowledge of prehistory or of the history of the community, state, or nation, and as such is not
significant under NRHP Criterion D. This evaluation does not include any potential historical archaeological deposits that may be
related to the property.
The integrity of the complex is generally retained in the aspects of location and setting, with little changing in the immediate
landscape since 1968. However, the feeling and association have changed, as the complex is used for storage and for landscaping
business rather than farming and ranching. The design of the complex has been significantly changed since the mid-20th century
and the workmanship of the complex is generally not apparent. The materials are somewhat unchanged, although areas are paved
when they were once pastures. The constituent buildings all appear to have been extensively modified over the last half century
and only retain aspects of location, setting, and partially the aspects of workmanship and materials.
*B12. References (Continued):
Aero Exploration Co. (AEC)
1950 Aerial Photograph, Flight BUT-1950, Frame 3G-117. Taken 3/12/1950 by Aero Exploration Co. for the USDA
Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service. UCSB Map and Imagery Library’s FrameFinder database on
October 15, 2018. Available at http://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/
Cartwright Aerial Surveys (CAS)
1965 Aerial Photograph, Flight CAS-65-130, Frame 13-151. 1:12,000 scale. Taken 3/12/1965 by Cartwright Aerial Surveys
for the California Division of Highways. UCSB Map and Imagery Library’s FrameFinder database on October 15,
2018. Available at http://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/.
Cartwright and Co. (CAC)
1958 Aerial Photograph, Flight BUT-1958, Frame 2V-143. 1:12,000 scale. Taken 8/10/1958 by Cartwright and CO. for the
USDA Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service. UCSB Map and Imagery Library’s FrameFinder database
on October 15, 2018. Available at http://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/
Clerk-Recorder’s Office, County of Alameda
1862 Deed from Samuel B. Martin to Owen P. Sutton, May 9 (recorded June 6). Microfilm book M, Page 266-267. County
of Alameda Clerk-Recorder’s Office, Oakland, CA.
1872 Deed from A.M. Church to Trustees of the Inman School District, May 18 (filed May 27). Microfilm book 84, Page 53.
County of Alameda Clerk-Recorder’s Office, Oakland, CA.
Fairchild Aerial Surveys (FAS)
1939 Aerial Photograph, Flight C-5750, Frame 288-54. 1:20,000 scale. Taken 8/02/1939 by Fairchild Aerial Surveys for the
USDA Agricultural Adjustment Administration. UCSB Map and Imagery Library’s FrameFinder database on
October 15, 2018. Available at http://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/.
1940 Aerial Photograph, Flight BUT-1940, Frame 341-58. 1:20,000 scale. Taken 6/08/1940 by Fairchild Aerial Surveys for
the USDA Agricultural Adjustment Administration. UCSB Map and Imagery Library’s FrameFinder database on
October 15, 2018. Available at http://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/
Finn, Richard
2018 Livermore City Historian. Personal conversation with Kari Lentz, December 19, 2018, at the History Center Museum.
H Haviland, P.A.
1910 Official Map of Alameda County, California. Tribune Publishing Company, Oakland, CA
(Continued).
638
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 8 of 13 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) PW-127-3
*Recorded by: P. Zingerella *Date: November 2018 Continuation Update
*B12. References (Continued):
La Croze, John
1860 Plat of the Santa Rita Rancho [Alameda County, Calif.] finally confirmed to John Yountz, administrator of estate of
José Dolores Pacheco. Bancroft Library, Land Case Map E-346.
NETR Online
2018 Historic Aerial Photograph Database search for Livermore, CA. Accessed at: https://www.historicaerials.com
Nusbaumer, G. L. and W. F. Boardman
1900 The Official Map of Alameda County, California. Tribune Publishing Company, Oakland, CA.
Oakland Tribune
1928 Notice of Sale of Real Property, Estate of Henrietta Farrelly. Oakland Tribune. 25 March: Page M-
5, C1. Oakland.
Thompson and West
1878 Alameda County Map No. 7. In Official and historical atlas map of Alameda County, California. Thompson and
West, Oakland, CA.
Wood, M.W.
1883 History of Alameda County, California, including its geology, topography, soil, and productions. Pacific Press,
Oakland, CA.
United States Geological Survey (USGS)
1906 USGS Pleasanton 1:62,500 scale topographic quadrangle.
639
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 9 of 13 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) PW-127-3
*Recorded by: P. Zingerella *Date: November 2018 Continuation Update
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
Barn, south and east sides, facing northwest.
Barn with landscaping display, facing northeast.
640
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 10 of 13 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) PW-127-3
*Recorded by: P. Zingerella *Date: November 2018 Continuation Update
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
Barn, rear side, facing southeast.
House 1, facing east-northeast.
641
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 11 of 13 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) PW-127-3
*Recorded by: P. Zingerella *Date: November 2018 Continuation Update
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
House 1, rear side, facing southwest.
House 2, front and side, facing northwest.
642
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 12 of 13 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) PW-127-3
*Recorded by: P. Zingerella *Date: November 2018 Continuation Update
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
House 2, facing northeast.
Shed, facing north.
643
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 13 of 13 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) PW-127-3
*Recorded by: P. Zingerella *Date: November 2018 Continuation Update
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
Shed, facing northeast.
Modern chickencoup, facing northwest.
644
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development
Initial Study | Appendices
Appendix G
Branaugh Property Trip Generation Comparison Technical Memorandum
645
Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Technical Memorandum
This technical memorandum presents the vehicle trip generation for the proposed development of the
parcel known as the Branaugh property, located north of I-580 in Dublin, California. Development of this
property and its impact on the transportation system have been studied in previous Environmental Impact
Reports (EIRs) in 1992, 2002, and 2005 – this technical memorandum is intended to provide a comparison
between the trip generation assumed in the 2005 SEIR1 document with the 2022 proposed development
plan.
Branaugh Property
The property is located on an approximately 40-acre site designated as Medium Density Residential and
Industrial Park by the City of Dublin’s General Plan (2022) and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (2022). The
project site currently consists primarily of undeveloped grazing ranchland and open space, but also
includes some rural residential development in the northwest and southern portion. This site is located north
of I-580 and east of Fallon Road in Dublin, CA (parcel 905-0001-004-04)
2005 SEIR Assumptions
Based on Table 3 from the Initial Study contained in Appendix 8.1 of the 2005 SEIR, the Branaugh property
would develop 9.7 acres as 97 medium density residential units and 30.5 acres as 372,000 square feet of
general commercial/campus office. Since general commercial and campus office have different trip
generating rates, the 372,000 square feet was divided into the component land uses.
Determination of the component land uses was based on the traffic study2 completed for the 2005 SEIR.
This traffic study assumed two types of land uses for the non-residential components of the project including
retail and office. To split the 372,000 square feet into retail and office components, Kittelson reviewed the
estimated employment numbers that were used in the travel demand model for the 2005 traffic study. The
traffic analysis zones containing the Branaugh property (TAZ 50794 and TAZ 50789) were assumed to be
about 37% retail and 63% office employees. Therefore, the 372,000 total square footage was proportioned
based on these ratios resulting in 136,000 square feet (37%) being devoted to retail and 236,000 square feet
(63%) to office.
1 Fallon Village Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, 2005
2 Fallon Village Traffic Study, August 2005 prepared by TJKM Transportation Consultants
155 Grand Avenue, Suite 505
Oakland, CA 94612
P 510.839.1742
December 15, 2022 Project# 26585
To: Shanna Guiler, Associate/Environmental Planner
LSA
157 Park Place
Point Richmond, CA 94801
From: Aaron Elias
RE: Branaugh Property Trip Generation Comparison
646
December 15, 2022 Page 2
Branaugh Property Trip Generation Comparison
Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
2022 Proposed Project
The 2022 proposed project is proposing to use 30.29 acres of the Branaugh property for industrial
warehousing with a floor area ratio of up to 0.4 and with no retail or office components. Based on a 0.4 FAR
and a 30.29-acre site, the total building size could be up to 527,773 square feet. This is larger than the
assumed 372,000 square feet from the 2005 SEIR but industrial land uses are a less intensive trip generator
than office and retail land uses. The residential component of the project would remain the same as the
SEIR with a total of 97 residential units but split into 69 single family homes and 28 multifamily units.
Trip Generation
Trip generation is a key factor in transportation analyses whether a level of service analysis or a vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) analysis is being performed. This section compares the estimated daily trip generation
for the Branaugh property in the 2005 SEIR with what the trip generation is estimated to be with the 2022
proposed project. A 2022 proposed project trip generation that is less than the 2005 SEIR trip generation
would mean the 2022 proposed project fits within the trip generation envelope of what was studied in the
2005 SEIR and additional impacts not disclosed in the previous environmental document would be
anticipated. A trip generation in 2022 higher than what was studied in the 2005 SEIR could potentially result
in new impacts and would need to be studied in more detail.
2005 SEIR Trip Generation
The traffic study for the 2005 SEIR used the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual
7th Edition to estimate trip generation for Fallon Village. The four land use categories used and the
associated daily trip generation rate from the ITE Trip Generation Manual 7th Edition include:
• Single Family Residential (ITE Code 210 with a daily rate of 9.57 trips per dwelling unit)
• Multifamily Residential (ITE Code 220 with a daily rate of 6.72 trips per dwelling unit)
• Retail (ITE Code 820 with a daily rate of 42.94 trips per thousand square feet)
• Office/Service (ITE Code 710 with a daily rate of 11.01 trips per thousand square feet)
The residential component of the Branaugh property was listed as medium density residential (6.1 to 14
dwelling units per acre). This is most similar to the multifamily residential land use from the ITE Trip Generation
Manual 7th Edition. For the non-residential portion of the property, 136,000 square feet was assumed to be
retail and 236,000 square feet was assumed to be office as described in the previous section. Based on
these land uses, the estimated daily trip generation for the Branaugh property in the 2005 SEIR is shown in
Table 1. As shown, the Branaugh property is estimated3 to have produced 9,091 daily vehicle trips in the
2005 SEIR.
Table 1: Estimated Trip Generation for the Branaugh Property Based on 2005 SEIR
ITE Code Amount Unit Daily Rate Daily Trip Generation
Multifamily Residential 220 97 DU 6.72 652
Retail 820 136 KSF 42.94 5,840
Office 710 236 KSF 11.01 2,599
Total: 9,091
Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2022
Daily Rate from ITE Trip Generation Manual 7th Edition
DU = Dwelling Unit
KSF = Thousand Square Feet
3 The exact trip generation used is unknown since these documents analyzed overall trip generation of Fallon Village
647
December 15, 2022 Page 3
Branaugh Property Trip Generation Comparison
Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
2022 Proposed Project
The current 2022 proposal is more specific than the 2005 SEIR with a proposed residential component with
69 single family dwelling units, 28 multifamily dwelling units and about 528,000 square feet of industrial uses
based on a 0.40 FAR. To estimate the trip generation of these land uses, Kittelson used the latest version of
the ITE Trip Generation Manual which is the 11th Edition. The three land use categories used and the
associated daily trip generation rate from the ITE Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition include:
• Single Family Residential (ITE Code 210 with a daily rate of 9.44 trips per dwelling unit)
• Multifamily Residential (ITE Code 220 with a daily rate of 7.32 trips per dwelling unit)
• Industrial (ITE Code 130 with a daily rate of 3.37 trips per thousand square feet)
Table 2 shows the resulting daily trip generation which was about 2,636 trips per day.
Table 2: Estimated Trip Generation for the Branaugh Property Based on 2022 Proposed Project
ITE Code Amount Unit Daily Rate1 Daily Trip Generation
Single Family Detached 210 69 DU 9.44 652
Multifamily 220 28 DU 7.32 205
Industrial 130 527.773 KSF 3.37 1,779
Total: 2,636
Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2022
1Daily Rate from ITE Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition
DU = Dwelling Unit
KSF = Thousand Square Feet
Conclusion
This technical memorandum documented the trip generation for the Branaugh property studied as part of
the 2005 SEIR for Fallon Village and the estimated trip generation for the same property based on the 2022
development plan. As shown in Table 1 and Table 2, the 2022 development plan generates 6,455 fewer
daily vehicle trips compared to the assumptions from the 2005 SEIR. This results in the 2022 development
plan fitting within the envelope of what was previously studied and no new transportation impacts not
previously disclosed would be anticipated based on daily trip generation of the Branaugh property.
648
649
STAFF REPORT
Planning Commission
Page 1 of 12
Agenda Item 8.1
DATE:February 14, 2023
TO:Planning Commission
SUBJECT:Study Session East Ranch SDR (PLPA-2022-00018)Prepared by: Amy Million, Principal Planner
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:The Applicant, Trumark Homes, is processing a Site Development Review Permit which includessix residential neighborhoods and a landscape master plan for the East Ranch project. The East Ranch project develops a 165.5-acre site with a 573-unit residential project consisting of six neighborhoods, two neighborhood parks totaling 11.5 acres, and a two-acre Public/Semi-Public site. The Planning Commission will hold a Study Session to review the Site Development Review Permit for the six residential neighborhoods and landscape master plan. No action will be taken at this Study Session.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Receive presentations from Staff and the Applicant on the proposed project.
DESCRIPTION:The 165.5-acre East Ranch project site (formerly referred to as the Croak Property) is an undeveloped parcel located within the Fallon Village area of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The site is located north of Interstate 580, east of Fallon Road and the Jordan Ranch development, south of the Positano development, and adjacent to the City’s eastern city limit as shown in Figure 1 below. The undeveloped site generally increases in elevation from south to north with large background hills in the northeast portion of the property. The project site has General Plan land use designations of Single-Family Residential and Medium Density Residential. The site also has existing Planned Development Zoning with a Stage 1 Development Plan (Ordinance No. 32-05 and Ordinance No. 45-08).
650
Page 2 of 12
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
BackgroundOn November 9, 2021, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve aPlanned Development Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 8563 and a Heritage Tree Removal Permit for the East Ranch project (Resolution No. 21-08). On December 7, 2021, the City Council introduced a Planned Development Ordinance and approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 8563 and a Heritage Tree Removal Permit (Resolution No. 140-21). On December 21, 2021, the City Council approved a Planned Development ZoningStage 2 Development Plan (Ordinance No. 11-21). On December 23, 2021, pursuant to Elections Code Section 9238, subd. (b)(2)(B), a proposed summary of a referendum against Planned Development Zoning Ordinance No. 11-21 was submitted. To qualify, the referendum petition needed to contain signatures of at least 10% of the registered Dublin voters or a minimum of 3,439 signatures. The referendum petition was determined to be sufficient for filing and was delivered to the Alameda County Registrar of Voters on January 27, 2022, for signature examination. The Registrar of Voters determined that the petition contained the minimum number of valid signatures necessary to qualify the referendum for consideration by City Council.
651
Page 3 of 12
On March 1, 2022, the City Council accepted the City Clerk’s Certificate of Petition certifying the sufficiency of the referendum petition against Planned Development Zoning Ordinance No. 11-21and repealed Ordinance No. 11-21 (Ordinance No. 02-22). The Housing Accountability Act (HAA) (Government Code Section 65589.5) expressly precludes the City from requiring a rezone when a project is consistent with the general plan. This rule applies even when the existing zoning is inconsistent with the general plan, as was the case here. The Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 8563, was not subject to the referendum and, therefore, remains in effect. On May 3, 2022, the City Council approved modifications to Condition of Approval Nos. 6 and 7 of the Vesting Tentative Map (Resolution No. 40-22). The request was submitted by the Applicant pursuant to the HAA and amended the two conditions of approval to comply with the objective standards of the City’s Inclusionary Zoning Regulations. Project’s Relationship to State Housing Laws and PolicyThe Applicant designed the project under state housing laws which limit the City’s discretion on the project. The HAA, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (Senate Bill 330), and various other state laws prevent or restrict the ability to deny projects that are consistent with applicable, objective standards in effect at a time when the application is deemed complete. The East Ranch project is designed to be consistent with the applicable objective standards of the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, the existing Planned Development Zoning Stage 1 Development Plan(Ordinance No. 32-05 and Ordinance No. 45-08), and other policies, as a means of limiting the City’s discretion. The HAA prohibits the City from denying applications for such projects absent an immediate threat to public health or safety that cannot be mitigated, as determined by objective standards that were in place when the application was submitted. In essence, the HAA provides that once a city designates a site for housing in its General Plan, it must allow that housing to be developed except in very limited circumstances involving immediate threats to public health and safety. Because none of the exceptions are present here, approval of the Site Development Review Permitapplication is mandated by the HAA. The Planning Commission is limited in their discretion to deny or modify the proposed project.Current ProjectThe East Ranch project includes development of a 165.5-acre site with a 573-unit residential project consisting of six neighborhoods, two neighborhoodparks totaling 11.5 acres, and a two-acre Public/Semi-Public site as shown in Figure 2 below.
652
Page 4 of 12
Figure 2. East Ranch Illustrative Site Plan
This Planning Commission Study Session provides an opportunity to review the proposed architecture and landscape for the six neighborhoods and the landscape master plan for all common spaces, excluding the two public parks. No decisions will be made at this Study Session. The design of the public parks is subject to the City’s park planning process and the development of the Public/Semi-Public parcel will be completed under a separate application. The project will be brought back to the Planning Commission for a future public hearing and a decision. The applications to be considered at a future public hearing include:1.Site Development Review Permit approval for six neighborhoods that include the construction of 459 conventional single-family homes, 14 zero lot line single-family homes, and 100 townhomes;and2.Site Development Review Permit approval for a landscape master plan.Site Plan and CirculationThe overall site plan and circulation for the East Ranch project was approved with the Vesting Tentative Tract Map. For reference, the project includes improvements and widening of Croak Road that would complete the connection from the Positano neighborhood to the north to Central Parkway and would eventually be improved further south to connect with the future Dublin Boulevard extension. In the ultimate configuration, Croak Road will intersect the future Dublin Boulevard extension and provide primary access to East Ranch from the south. South of the project site, Croak Road will be improved and widened to provide interim access from the project site to the existing Fallon Road intersection. During this interim condition, primary access to East Ranch would come from the west, via Central Parkway, or from the north, via Positano Parkway.
653
Page 5 of 12
In addition, the project will extend Central Parkway into the project and provide access to future development of the GH PacVest, Righetti, and Branaugh properties to the south. Both Croak Road and Central Parkway extension will be improved to their ultimate configuration within the project site. Primary access into the East Ranch neighborhoods and parks will be from Croak Road north of Central Parkway. Neighborhood Architecture, Colors and MaterialsWhile each neighborhood focuses on different product types, they all utilize certain forms, materials, and colors. The six neighborhoods share a similar design aesthetic that is characterized by high-quality design that promote both visual compatibility and variety. The architectural styles draw from the project site’s agrarian setting of the rolling hills and its relationship to the surrounding area and existing residential neighborhoods. The architectural styles proposed include a mixture of traditional and contemporary styles under the Agrarian and California style umbrella. Both traditional and contemporary versions of the classic California Farmhouse blend with a California Cottage and Prairie Revival, mixed with Contemporary California architecture, including Craftsman that connects the past with the current and future character of Dublin. The Applicant describes these styles as follows:
Traditional Farmhouse.This is the rootstock for many East Ranch neighborhoods, giving itself over to a range of interpretations, hybrids and variations. At its simplest, it is defined by understated detail, utilitarian functionality and practical charm that reflect a back-to-nature lifestyle. Traditional Farmhouse homes are typically simple in massing, often with covered porches and gabled roofs, wood columns and posts.
Contemporary.Contemporary architecture shook-up the California style scene for decades in the mid-1900s and is returning with the high desire for single-story living with a strong connection to nature. As the need for large homes is replaced with the need for sunlight and breeze, New-Century Modern architecture will reintroduce clerestory windows, open-beam ceilings, and indoor/outdoor courtyards and atriums.For each neighborhood, the Traditional Farmhouse architecture is accented with batten siding and brick veneer. The various Contemporary architecture is emphasized through lap siding, stucco and brick veneer. Each architectural elevation has eight color and material schemes providing a variety for each style within the individual neighborhoods. More detailed descriptions of the housing types and design features within each neighborhood are described below.Neighborhood 1Neighborhood 1 is located on the northern portion the site and designed with the largest lots within the community. The 5.5-acre northern park, which is one of the two public parks, will be located to the west of Neighborhood 1 across Croak Road. This neighborhood consists of 99 single-family detached homes and two zero lot line homes. The two-story single-family homes range in size from 4,414 square feet to 4,883 square feet. Neighborhood 1 is the only neighborhood that is designed with garages to accommodate three cars. Neighborhood 1 floor plans are also designed to accommodate an optional ADU on the ground floor in lieu of a bedroom suite. The optional ADU is either located in the rear of the home (Plan 1) or the front of the home behind the third car garage (Plan 2). The plan options are on Sheets N1- A1.1.1 and N1-A2.1.1, respectively (Attachment 1).
654
Page 6 of 12
The architectural styles are a mix of Contemporary Cottage and Prairie and Traditional Farmhouse. An example of the architecture for Neighborhood 1 is shown in Figure 3. A complete detail of the proposed color and material schemes are provided in the project plans on Sheet N1-A4.0.0 (Attachment 1).Figure 3. Neighborhood 1 Sample Architecture
Neighborhood 2Neighborhood 2 straddles the east and west side of Croak Road in the northern portion the site. The 5.5-acre public park is located immediately north of Neighborhood 2. This neighborhood consists of 96 single-family detached homes and two zero lot line homes. All homes within Neighborhood 2 are two-story with unit sizes ranging from 3,658 square feet to 3,881 square feet. Neighborhood 2 floor plans are designed to accommodate an optional ADU on the ground floor in lieu of bedroom suite. The optional ADU is located in the front of the home (Plan 2). The plan option is on Sheet N2-A2.1.0 (Attachment 2).The architectural styles are a mix of Contemporary Cottage, Contemporary Prairie and Traditional Farmhouse. An example of the architecture for Neighborhood 2 is shown in Figure 4. A complete detail of the proposed color and material schemes are provided in the project plans on Sheet N2-A4.0.0 (Attachment 2).Figure 4. Neighborhood 2 Sample Architecture
Neighborhood 3Neighborhood 3 is centrally located within the project site and to the south of Neighborhood 1. This neighborhood consists of 85 detached single-family homes and six zero lot line homes. Thesingle-family two-story homes range in size from 3,658 square feet to 3,881 square feet. The architectural styles are a mix of Contemporary Cottage, Contemporary Prairie and Traditional Farmhouse. Neighborhood 3 floor plans are designed to accommodate an optional ADU on the ground floor in lieu of an additional bedroom. The optional ADU is either located in the front of the
655
Page 7 of 12
home creating a covered courtyard space by the front entry (Plan 1) or at the rear of the home behind the covered outdoor room (Plan 2). The plan options are on Sheets N3-A1.1.0, N3-A1.1.1,and N3-A2.1.0 (Attachment 3).The architectural styles are a mix of Contemporary Cottage, Contemporary Prairie and Traditional Farmhouse. An example of the architecture for Neighborhood 3 is shown in Figure 5. A complete detail of the proposed color and material schemes are provided in the project plans on Sheet N3-A4.0.0 (Attachment 3)Figure 5. Neighborhood 3 Sample Architecture
Neighborhood 4Neighborhood 4 is located west of Croak Road adjacent to the existing Jordan Ranch neighborhoodand consists of 85 detached single-family homes.The single-family two-story homes range in size from 2,608 square feet to 2,928 square feet. The architectural styles are a mix of Contemporary Cottage and Prairie and Traditional Farmhouse. An example of the architecture for Neighborhood 4 is shown in Figure 6. A complete detail of the proposed color and material schemes are provided in the project plans on Sheet N4-A4.0.0 (Attachment 4)Figure 6. Neighborhood 4 Sample Architecture
Neighborhood 5Neighborhood 5 is located on the southeast portion of the site. Neighborhood 5 deviates from the conventional single-family neighborhood and provides a mix of 84 “motor court homes” which are detached single-family homes designed in groups of four around a motor court, 10 conventional detached single-family homes fronting along with street and 4 zero lot line homes. These two-story homes range in size from 1,621 square feet to 1,671 square feet. The architectural styles are a mix of Contemporary Cottage, Prairie and Craftsman and Traditional Farmhouse.An example of the architecture for Neighborhood 5 is shown in Figure 7. A complete detail of the proposed color and material schemes are provided in the project plans on Sheet N5-A4.0.0 (Attachment 5)
656
Page 8 of 12
Figure 7. Neighborhood 5 Sample Architecture
Neighborhood 6Neighborhood 6 is located on the southern portion of the site along the extension of Central Parkway adjacent to the 6-acre public park. This neighborhood includes 100 residential units in two different types of rowhomes including the standard row townhome and duet townhomes with a private yard. The standard row townhomes are designed with a mix of three and four units. The standard row homes are three-stories and duet row townhomes with private yards are two-stories. All rowhomes range in size from 1,915 square feet to 2,104 square feet. An example of the various architecture for Neighborhood 6 is shown in Figures 8, 9 and 10. A complete detail of the proposed color and material schemes are provided in the project plans on Sheet N6-A7.0.0 (Attachment 6)Figure 8. Neighborhood 6 Sample Architecture –Three-Story Rowhomes (3 Units)
Figure 9. Neighborhood 6 Sample Architecture –Three-Story Townhomes (4 Units)
657
Page 9 of 12
Figure 10. Neighborhood 6 Sample Architecture –Two-Story Duets
Zero Lot Line HomesA total of 14 zero lot line homes are located within the single-family neighborhoods 1, 2, 3 and 5. These zero lot line single-family homes are detached on three sides and share a side lot line on one side.These units come in two floor plans of 1,359 square feet and 1,344 square feet. The purpose of these units to provide affordable housing units dispersed through the neighborhoods. The architectural styles of these homes is Traditional Farmhouse.An example of the architecture for the zero lot line homes is shown in Figure 11. A complete detail of the proposed color and material schemes are provided in the project plans on Sheet N0-A3.0.0 (Attachment 7)Figure 11. Zero Lot Line Sample Architecture
Landscape Master PlanThe emphasis for East Ranch is getting outdoors and connecting with nature through the incorporation of neighborhood parks, pocket parks, multi-use trails, restful overlooks and meandering footpaths that weave together the neighborhoods which culminate in a series of public and semi-public outdoor spaces. The Landscape Master Plan includes concepts for the proposed streetscape plan, stormwater quality basins, utility screening, neighborhood pocket park, trail connections, fencing and walls. The Landscape Master Plan also illustrates various site elements such as the lighting, decorative hardscape and trench gates that will be installed throughout the community. Many of these items, including the tree and plant palette, site lighting, fences and walls, were outlined in the Planned Development Stage 1 Development Plan. However, the Landscape Master Plan provides detail on where the various landscape elements are to be located and provides a project-specific plant selection consistent with the Stage 1 Development Plan.The Landscape Master Plan is included as Attachment 8. Compliance with the Applicable Objective Standards
658
Page 10 of 12
As described above, the East Ranch project was submitted under the HAA and is therefore subject to the applicable objective standards in place at the time the application is deemed completed. In addition to the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, the Planned Development Stage 1 Development Plan (Ordinance No. 32-05) provides objective development standards such as lot coverage, building height, setbacks and parking. Additionally, standards applicable to private yard requirements for the Medium-Density Land Use Designation were established by Ordinance No. 45-08. This Ordinance applies only to Neighborhood 6. For the purposes of the East Ranch project, the development standards “Low and Medium Density Single Family Detached Small Lots” are applied to Neighborhoods 1-4, the conventional detached single-family homes in Neighborhood 5 and the zero lot line homes. Table 1 below provides the details of Neighborhoods 1-5 and the Zero Lot Line homes consistency with the applicable object zoning standards from Ordinance No. 32-05.Table 1. PD Ordinance No. 32-05 Objective Standards v. Neighborhoods 1-5& Zero Lot LineLow and Medium Density Single Family DetachedSmall Lots Neighborhoods 1 -4 Neighborhood 5*Zero Lot Line (ZLL)
TypicalNeighborhoodLot Size 2500 SF and greater N1 7,205 SF and greaterN2 5,777 SF and greaterN3 5,610 SF and greaterN4 4,080 SF and greaterN5 3,606 SF and greaterZLL 2,967 SF and greaterMaximumLot Coverage 55%N1 44.6%N2 45%N3 45%N4 51.3%N5 45.7%ZLL 45.8%
MaximumBuildingHeight 38’N1 31’-6”N2 31’-1”N3 31’-2”N4 29’-1”N5 29’-10”ZLL 26-10”MaximumStories 3 2MinimumFront YardSetbacksLiving Area 12'12’Porch 10'10’Front-on Garage Less than 5’ or 18' 18’MinimumSideYard SetbacksTwo-story to Two-story 0 or 4' min. N1-4 4’ZLL 0’ Corner Lot (setback from street side) 9’9’Porch /Courtyard 4’4’MinimumRearYardSetbacksLiving Space 10' avg. per lot, 5' min. 5’ min, 10’ avg
659
Page 11 of 12
*Note: Only applies to the conventional detached single-family homes in Neighborhood 5The mix of product types in Neighborhood 5 include motor court homes, conventional detached single-family homes and zero lot line homes. The Planned Development Stage 1 Development Planprovides objective standards for court homes, but only Medium Density court homes. The motor court homes within the East Ranch development are Low Density and therefore there are noapplicable standards for the proposed motor court homes. The applicant has chosen to be generally consistent with the “Medium Density Single Family Detached Small Lots/Court Home”standards but deviates from the front and street side yard setbacks. The conventional detached single-family homes and zero lot line homes in Neighborhood 5 are subject to the objective standards of the “Low and Medium Density Single Family Detached Small Lots.” Similar to the motor court homes in Neighborhood 5, the Planned Development Zoning Stage 1 Development Plan does not include objective standards for the row townhome development in Neighborhood 6, therefore the only objective standards applicable to Neighborhood 6 are in PD Ordinance No. 45-08 for private rear yards. The yard requirements of Ordinance No. 45-08 are as follows: a. 50%of the units within the Existing Medium Density land designation use on the Croak and Jordan Properties shall provide private yards that meet the following minimum development standards:i. Minimum 400 s.f. of contiguous private, flat yard area;ii. Minimum dimension of 18'x18'; andiii. Include privacy fencing.b. Common areas shall be provided for additional units that do not provide private yards that meet the standards noted above.Neighborhood 6 is consistent with this standard as noted on the minimum setback exhibit on Sheet N5-C.0 (Attachment X). Inclusionary ZoningThe City’s Inclusionary Zoning Regulations (DMC Chapter 8.68) require all new residential projects of 20 units or more to construct 12.5% of the total number of units as affordable units. The units shall reflect the range of numbers of bedrooms provided in the project as a whole but may be smaller in size. The proposed East Ranch project generates a requirement to provide 72 affordable units.Pursuant to the Resolution No. 40-22, the project will comply with the Inclusionary Ordinance by conforming to the objective standards in that Ordinance as follows:
Usable Yard(s)300 SF total flat area. Min. Dimension 8’. Yard area may be provided in more than one location within a lot.Min. rear yard area -220 SF. Min. courtyard area -80 SF.
300 SF total flat area. Minimum dimension of 8'. Yard area may be provided in more than one location within a lot, with a minimum 80 SF yard or courtyardParking SpacesRequired 2 covered and 1 guest 2 covered and 1 guestNOTE: N1 has 3 covered and 1 guest
660
Page 12 of 12
In-Lieu Fee: 40 percent of the total number of units within the development (29 units) shall be satisfied via payment of an “In-Lieu Fee” as provided by the City’s Impact Fee Schedule.
On-site Below Market Rate Units: 60 percent of the total number of units within the development (43 units) shall be developed on site, with 40 percent of those (17 units) for low-income households and 60 percent of those (26 units) for moderate-income households.
Below Market Rate Units shall be dispersed throughout all the neighborhoods, in rough proportion to the number of market rate units in each neighborhood and constructed concurrently with the market rate units in the same neighborhood.
Execution of an agreement imposing appropriate resale controls and/or rental restrictions on the affordable units shall be required in accordance with DMC Chapter 8.68.
The Applicant/Developer shall implement and conform to all objective requirements of DMC Chapter 8.68.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:The Planning Commission is holding a Study Session on the proposed Site Development Review Permits for the East Ranch project and no formal action will be taken at this time. The Study Session is not subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as it does not have the potential to result in a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect change in the environment and, thus, does not meet the definition of a project under CEQA Guidelines Section 15378.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:Although not required for study sessions, a public notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the proposed project to advertise the project and this Study Session. A public notice also was published in the East Bay Times and posted at several locations throughout the City. The project was also included on the City’s development projects webpage. A copy of this Staff Report has been provided to the Applicant.ATTACHMENTS:1) Project Plans – Neighborhood 12) Project Plans – Neighborhood 23) Project Plans – Neighborhood 34) Project Plans – Neighborhood 45) Project Plans – Neighborhood 56) Project Plans – Neighborhood 67) Project Plans – Zero Lot Line Homes8) Landscape Master Plan
661
NEIGHBORHOOD 1
662
P/SP
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
OPEN SPACE
(BASIN)
OP
E
N
S
P
A
C
E
(
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
)
OPEN SPACE
(WETLAND)
OPEN SPACE
(BASIN)
BASIN
SE
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
S
E
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
LO
Y
A
L
T
O
N
R
O
A
D
PANORAMA DRIVE
T
A
B
L
E
M
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
S TERRACINA DR
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
CR
O
A
K
R
D
STREET A
STREET B
ST
R
E
E
T
J
STREET K
STREET L
ST
R
E
E
T
N
STREET O
STREET M
ST
R
E
E
T
S
ST
R
E
E
T
T
ST
R
E
E
T
C
ST
R
E
E
T
Y
ST
R
E
E
T
Z
COURT U
STREET V
STREET B
CENTRAL PARKWAY
CENTRAL PARKWAY STREET R
ST
R
E
E
T
X
ST
R
E
E
T
W
STREET Q
STREET P
CR
O
A
K
R
D
LOOP H
LOOP H
STREET G
STREET B
ST
R
E
E
T
I
STREET F
STREET E
STREET D
STREET A
COURT A
COURT B
COURT C
COURT E
COURT F
CO
U
R
T
G
COURT H
CO
U
R
T
I
CO
U
R
T
J
COURT KCOURT L
COURT S
COURT R
COURT QCOURT V
COURT U
COURT T
COURT M
CO
U
R
T
N
CO
U
R
T
O
CO
U
R
T
P
ST
R
E
E
T
C
STR
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
ST
R
E
E
T
T
STREET P
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
ACCESS
ROAD
ACCESS
ROAD
PROPOSED
TRAIL
EVA/
ACCESS ROAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
NEIGHBORHOOD SUMMARY
NEIGHBORHOOD TYPICAL LOT
SIZE UNITS GROSS
ACREAGE (±)DENSITY
1 65'x100'99 30.1 3.3 DU/AC
2 55'x95'96 23.4 4.1 DU/AC
3 50'x110'85 19.5 4.5 DU/AC
4 49.5'x80'85 16.8 5.1 DU/AC
5 48'x70' Cluster 94 17.6 5.4 DU/AC
6 Attached Multi-Family 100 10.4 9.6 DU/AC
1, 2, 3, & 5 Zero-Lot Single Family
Units 14 N/A(1)
Croak Rd and Central
Pkwy Extension 8.0
TOTAL 573 125.8 4.5 du/ac
C.0
NOTE:
(1) GROSS ACREAGE FOR ZERO LOT PRODUCTS IS INCLUDED IN EACH INDIVIDUAL
NEIGHBORHOOD GROSS ACREAGE METRIC.
66
3
66
4
13
15
14
16
PLAN 1A PLAN 2BPLAN 3C
18
'
4'
5
'
M
I
N
.
A
V
G
.
1
0
'
5'
M
I
N
.
AV
G
.
1
0
'
5
'
M
I
N
.
A
V
G
.
1
0
'
4'
4'
4'
4'
9'
1
8
'
18
'
10
'
1
2
'
12
'
1
2
'
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1
MINIMUM SETBACK EXHIBIT
N1-C.0
TYPICAL CONDITION
NOMINAL LOT SIZE: 6500 SF
LOT COVERAGE: 55% MAX
NOTE: ALL SETBACK DIMENSIONS ARE
MINIMUMS AND NOT TO SCALE
300 SF total flat area with a minimum dimension of 8'.Yard area may be provided in more than one locationwithin a lot, with a minimum 80 SF yard or courtyardarea.
66
5
92
93
94
95
96
97
9899
100
91
90
89
88
87
8685
84
75
73
74
79
76
77
78
81
80
82
13
10
11
12
15
14
16
69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
PARCEL C
61
60
59
58
57
PARCEL B
56
27
33
28
29
30
31
18
25
32
26
17
55
54
52
53
39
35
36
45
38
37
51
50
49
48
47
46
42
44
43
40
41
101
PARCEL G
PARCEL D
PARCEL E
34
21
22
23
24
20
19
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
83
MJR 2
PARCEL F
72
70
71
MJR 1
PARCEL A
27
MJR
30
40
38
39
29
31
22
24
23
21
28
26
44
25
50
47
48
49
52
51
53
46
42
41
43
45
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
19
3
32
33
23
2221
1112
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
PARCEL A
1
PARCEL C
PARCEL A
3
4
2
1
22
21
24
23
PARCEL A
5554
56
57
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
STREET A
STREET K
STREET L
STREET
U
STREET V
21
3 *21
222324
20
19
56
27 3328293031
18
25 3226
17
55
54
52
53
39
35
36
45
38
37
5150494847464244434041
8
4
5
6
7
9
83
91
90
89
88
87868584
75
73
74
79
76
77
78
81 80
82
13
10
11
12
15
14
16
69
68
67
66
65
646362
61
60
59
58
57
56
3332
17
55
54
52
53
515049
72
70
71
9293
94
95
96979899100101
1
2
3
16
34
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3 21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3
21
3 2
1
3
2
1
2
1
3
3**
*** ***********
1
2 3*
1
2
3*
1
2
1
2
3
3
3
3 3 3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
*******
**
**
*
1
2
12
12 12
12
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
21
3
21
3
21
3
2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
*
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
3
2
1
*
*1
2
3
23
1
23
1
23
1
23
1
23
1
23
1 23
1 23
1 23
1
*2
3
1 *2
3
1
**
1
2
*
**
OPEN SPACE
GHAD PARCEL
LANDSCAPE
LANDSCAPE
ACCESS ROAD
ACCESS ROAD
EVA/
ACCESS ROAD
EVA/
ACCESS ROAD
LANDSCAPE PARCEL
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
A
R
C
E
L
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Legend
2
1
3
All Plan 1's fit on this lot
All Plan 2's fit on this lot
All Plan 3's fit on this lot
Zero-Lot Line Unit Location
Wildfire Buffer Lots*
NEIGHBORHOOD 1
Nominal Lot Size: 65'x100'
Number of SFD Lots: 99
Number of Zero-Lot Line Units: 2
Total: 101 Units
C.1
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
N1-C.1
*Refer to Lot Coverage Table (Sheet
N1-C.2) for specific elevation lot coverage
fit.
NOTES
1. Plan fit shown is per setback requirements. Lot Coverage fit
for each plan and elevation may restrict plotting. Refer to Sheet
N1-C.2 for lot coverage requirements.
2. Individual floor plans may be placed next to or across the
street from each other. In no case will the same architectural
elevation or color scheme be allowed next to or across the
street from each other, unless they are a different individual
floor plan.
3. The applicant reserves the right to change the unit mix and
plan locations illustrated on this plan in accordance with these
notes if it is within substantial conformance with the approved
SDR.
4. Setback requirements can be found on C.0 Minimum
Setback Exhibit.
66
6
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1 N1-C.2.1
LEGEND
NA/1- ZERO-LOT LINE PRODUCT ONLY (REFER TO N0-C.1 FOR LOT COVERAGE INFORMATION FOR ZERO-LOT LINE LOTS)LOT COVERAGE TABLE
66
7
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1 N1-C.2.2
LOT COVERAGE TABLE
66
8
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1 N1-C.2.3
LOT COVERAGE TABLE
66
9
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
92
93
94
95
96
97
9899
100
91
90
89
88
87
8685
84
75
73
74
79
76
77
78
81
80
82
13
10
11
12
15
14
16
69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
PARCEL C
61
60
59
58
57
PARCEL B
56
27
33
28
29
30
31
18
25
32
26
17
55
54
52
53
39
35
36
45
38
37
51
50
49
48
47
46
42
44
43
40
41
101
PARCEL G
PARCEL D
PARCEL E
34
21
22
23
24
20
19
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
83
MJR 2
PARCEL F
72
70
71
MJR 1
PARCEL A
37
27
MJR
30
40
38
39
32
29
31
22
24
23
21
28
26
44
25
50
47
48
49
52
51
53
46
42
41
43
45
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
19
3
32
33
23
22
21
1112
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
PARCEL A
1
PARCEL C
PARCEL A
49
62
3
5
4
2
1
22
20
21
24
23
PARCEL A
5554
56
57
58
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
STREET A
STREET K
STREET L
STREET M
ST
R
E
E
T
S
COURT U
COURT V
OPEN SPACE
GHAD PARCEL
LANDSCAPE
LANDSCAPE
ACCESS ROAD
ACCESS ROAD
ACCESS ROAD
OPEN SPACE/LANDSCAPE
LANDSCAPE
PARCEL
30 31
18
25 3226
17
55
54
52
53
35
36
45
38
37
5150494847464244434041
34
21222324
20 19
56
27 332829
39
2
3
15
14
16
58
571
4
5
6
11
13
12
60
59
83
9293
94
91
90
89
88
87868584
75
79
76
77
78
81 80
82
65
646362
61
101
95
96979899100
8
7
9
10
72
70
71
73
74
69
68
67
66
S
T
R
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1
PARKING PLAN
N1-C.3
PARKING SUMMARY
TOTAL NH1 UNITS: 101 (2 ZERO LOT LINE UNITS)
REQUIRED PARKING: 2 COVERED + 1 GUEST
GARAGE SPACES: 301
STREET PARKING SPACES: 147
DRIVEWAY PARKING: 198
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED: 646 (6.4 SPACES/UNIT)
NOTES:
1)STREET PARALLEL PARKING WILL BE
UNMARKED
2)DRIVEWAYS WITH GUEST PARKING HAVE A
MINIMUM 18' LENGTH
3)PARKING SHOWN ASSUMES WIDEST
DRIVEWAY FOR 3-CAR WIDE GARAGES.
ADDITIONAL STREET PARKING MAY BE
AVAILABLE IF HOUSE HAS NARROWER
DRIVEWAYS FOR 2-CAR GARAGES WITH A
SIDE ENTRY GARAGE (REFER TO
ARCHITECTURE SHEETS FOR GARAGE
LAYOUT OPTIONS)
LEGEND
STREET PARALLEL PARKING LOCATIONS (1)
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
67
0
5554
56
57
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
STREET A
STREET K
STREET L
STREET U
STREET V
ST
R
E
E
T
C
92
93
94
95
96
97
9899
100
91
90
89
88
87
8685
84
75
73
74
79
76
77
78
81
80
82
13
10
11
12
15
14
16
69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
PARCEL C
61
60
59
58
57
PARCEL B
56
27
33
28
29
30
31
18
25
32
26
17
55
54
52
53
39
35
36
45
38
37
51
50
49
48
47
46
42
44
43
40
41
101
PARCEL G
PARCEL D
PARCEL E
34
21
22
23
24
20
19
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
83
MJR 2
PARCEL F
72
70
71
MJR 1
PARCEL A
9293
94
95
96979899100
91
90
89
88
87868584
75
73
74
79
76
77
78
81 80
82
13
10
11
12
15
14
16
34
21222324
20 19
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
83
69
68
67
66
65
646362
61
60
59
58
57
56
27 3328293031
18
25 3226
17
55
54
52
53
39
35
36
45
38
37
5150494847464244434041
101
72
70
71
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
FH
F
H
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH FH
FH
F
H
F
H
F
H
FH
FH
FH
FH
9
6
'
9
6
'
OPEN SPACE
GHAD PARCEL
LANDSCAPE
LANDSCAPE
ACCESS ROAD
ACCESS ROAD
EVA/
ACCESS ROAD
LANDSCAPE PARCEL
LANDSCAPE
PARCEL
36
'
3
6
'
36'
36'36
'
3
6
'
36'
3
6
'
3
6
'
36'
36
'
36
'
36'
36.7'
36'
36'
20' EVA
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1
FIRE ACCESS PLAN
N1-C.4
LEGEND
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
FIRE DEPARTMENT ON-SITE ACCESS ROUTE
FH
NOTES:
1.BACKBONE STREETS TO BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD 2
2.CROAK ROAD TO BE CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF PHASE 1
BACKBONE
3.STREET A (UP TO STREET U) TO BE CONSTRUCTED AS PART
OF PHASE 2 BACKBONE
FIRE HYDRANT DETAIL
NTS
36'
20'
20'
28'
CLEAR
8' PARKING
67
1
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
92
93
94
95
96
97
9899
100
91
90
89
88
87
8685
84
75
73
74
79
76
77
78
81
80
82
13
10
11
12
15
14
16
69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
PARCEL C
61
60
59
58
57
PARCEL B
56
27
33
28
29
30
31
18
25
32
26
17
55
54
52
53
39
35
36
45
38
37
51
50
49
48
47
46
42
44
43
40
41
101
PARCEL G
PARCEL D
PARCEL E
34
21
22
23
24
20
19
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
83
MJR 2
PARCEL F
72
70
71
MJR 1
PARCEL A
5554
56
57
58
72
70
71
9293
94
95
96979899100
91
90
89
88
87868584
75
73
74
79
76
77
78
81 80
82
13
10
11
12
15
14
16
34
21222324
20 19
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
83
69
68
67
66
65
646362
61
60
59
58
57
56
27 3328293031
18
25 3226
17
55
54
52
53
39
35
36
45
38
37
5150494847464244434041
101
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
STREET A
STREET K
STREET L
STREET M
COURT U
COURT V
ST
R
E
E
T
C
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
OPEN SPACE
GHAD PARCEL
LANDSCAPE
LANDSCAPE
ACCESS ROAD
ACCESS ROAD
EVA/
ACCESS ROAD
LANDSCAPE PARCEL
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
A
R
C
E
L
S
T
R
E
E
T
U
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1
GARBAGE PICK-UP PLAN
N1-C.5
LEGEND
NEIGHBORHOOD GARBAGE PICK-UP ROUTE
NOTE: NEIGHBORHOOD 1 RESIDENTS WILL PLACE GARBAGE BINS
ALONG THE PUBLIC STREET
GARBAGE BINS (SEE DETAIL BELOW)
GARBAGE BIN DETAIL
NTS
30"
TYP
30
"
TY
P
3'3'
67
2
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1
UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE TABLE
N1-C.6.1
UDO Status Lot Numbers Reason for "Exception"Options for UDO compliant entry Total number of
lots
UDO compliant to front
door from sidewalk via
driveway with a slope
gradient of 5% or less
N/A N/A
UDO compliant to front
door from sidewalk via
driveway with a slope
gradient between 5%
and 8.33%
1) This is a hillside development with steep
streets combined with the CBC requirement
for lot drainage which results in a greater
elevation difference between finish pad and
sidewalk and thus steeper slopes on
driveways and walkways to the front door.
Access via driveway, compliant to section
1114A.2 of the CBC.
UDO compliant with
"Exceptions"
(Driveway slope
gradient between 8.33%
and 12%)
1) This is a hillside development with steep
streets combined with the CBC requirement
for lot drainage which results in a greater
elevation difference between finish pad and
sidewalk and thus steeper slopes on
driveways and walkways to the front door.
1) Access from sidewalk to front door via
driveway with a slope gradient between
8.33% and 12%
2) Access to home by parking in garage and
entering home through garage door with
optional ramp
TOTAL:
*
X
*
67
3
PARCEL B
56
27
33
28
29
30
31
18
25
32
26
17
55
54
52
53
39
35
36
45
38
37
51
50
49
48
47
46
42
44
43
40
41
PARCEL E
34
21
22
23
24
20
19
PARCEL F
S TERRACINA DR
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
STREET A
STREET K
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
B
O
W
5
7
1
.
1
5
BO
W
5
7
9
.
9
0
BO
W
5
8
4
.
0
3
BO
W
5
8
5
.
9
2
P5
9
5
.
4
P5
9
9
.
8
P6
0
3
.
4
P
6
0
6
.
4
P6
0
7
.
4
P587.4P585.2P581.2
P606.4
P577.0
P605.1P603.8P602.0P600.3P597.5
P604.9P603.1 P606.5P601.4P599.0P596.2P593.2P590.2P586.6P582.5
P594.4P591.2P587.7
P573.0
P568.5
P578.5
P
5
6
1
.
5
P
5
6
4
.
9
P
5
6
7
.
7
P
5
7
0
.
7
P575
.
5
P5
7
2
.
8
P583.7
P564.4
GL581.5 GL587.7GL585.5GL573.3
GL568.8
GL564.7
G
L
5
6
1
.
8
G
L
5
6
5
.
2
G
L
5
6
8
.
0
G
L
5
7
1
.
0
GL57
5
.
8
GL
5
7
3
.
1
GL606.7GL605.2GL603.4 GL606.8GL601.7GL599.3GL596.5GL593.5GL590.5GL586.9GL582.8GL578.8
GL605.4GL604.1GL602.3GL600.6GL597.8GL594.7GL591.5GL588.0GL584.0
GL
6
0
7
.
7
G
L
6
0
6
.
7
GL
6
0
3
.
7
GL
6
0
0
.
1
GL
5
9
5
.
7
FF606.1FF604.8FF603.0FF601.3FF598.5FF595.4FF592.2FF588.7FF584.7
FF607.4FF605.9FF604.1 FF607.5FF602.4FF600.0FF597.2FF594.2FF591.2FF587.6FF583.5FF579.5
FF588.4FF586.2FF582.2FF574.0
FF569.5
FF565.4
F
F
5
6
2
.
5
F
F
5
6
5
.
9
F
F
5
6
8
.
7
F
F
5
7
1
.
7
FF57
6
.
5
FF
5
7
3
.
8
FF
5
9
6
.
4
FF
6
0
0
.
8
FF
6
0
4
.
4
F
F
6
0
7
.
4
FF
6
0
8
.
4
B
O
W
5
6
6
.
2
8
B
O
W
5
6
2
.
1
9
56
27
3328293031
18
25
32
26
17
55
54
52
53
39
35
36
45
38
37
5150494847464244434041
34
21
22
23
24
20
19
7.
3
2
%
7.
0
4
%
7.
4
4
%
7.
5
6
%
7.
6
8
%
7.
2
8
%
7.
9
6
%
7.
6
4
%
7.
7
6
%
8.
0
8
%
7.
9
3
%
5.3
5
%
7.72%
7.92%
6.92
%
6.32%
5.
6
0
%
4.
6
4
%
5.
5
2
%
4.
6
8
%
4.
4
4
%
4.
7
6
%
4.
4
8
%
3.
8
8
%
5.
3
6
%
8.
1
6
%
3
.
3
6
%
4.2
5
%
5.67%
4.93%
5.05%
5.31
%
1
0
.
3
4
%
1
0
.
5
%
8
.
8
8
%
6.
4
%
5.
8
8
%
7.
1
2
%
BOW 593.87
BOW 5
9
8
.
2
6
BOW 6
0
1
.
6
7
BOW 603.23
BOW
6
0
4
.
0
6
BO
W
6
0
4
.
7
8
BO
W
6
0
4
.
7
8
BO
W
6
0
3
.
2
6
BO
W
6
0
1
.
4
9
BO
W
5
9
9
.
7
1
BO
W
5
9
7
.
4
8
BO
W
5
9
4
.
5
8
BO
W
5
9
1
.
6
1
BO
W
5
8
8
.
6
4
BO
W
5
8
5
.
1
4
BO
W
5
8
0
.
9
7
B
O
W
5
7
6
.
8
2
BO
W
5
7
4
.
0
0
BOW 572.12
BOW 569
.
6
2
BOW 56
6
.
8
0
BOW 5
6
3
.
9
7
BOW
5
6
0
.
4
9
BO
W
5
8
2
.
6
0
BO
W
5
8
6
.
8
4
BO
W
5
9
0
.
1
2
BO
W
5
9
3
.
5
3
BO
W
5
9
6
.
6
9
BO
W
5
9
9
.
4
1
BO
W
6
0
1
.
1
8
BO
W
6
0
3
.
1
3
BO
W
6
0
4
.
0
6
*
X
X
********
************
*
*****
***
*
*
***
FF578.0
P577.0FF578.0GL577.3
GL
5
7
7
.
3
576.74577.67
BO
W
5
7
5
.
3
1
B
O
W
5
7
3
.
5
7
12
.
0
0
%
1
2
.
0
0
%
X X
ACCESS ROAD
ACCESS ROAD
X
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1
UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE EXHIBIT
N1-C.6.2
NEIGHBORHOOD 1:
99 Units
Typical Lot Size: 65'x100' Single
Family Homes
UDO Compliant/Exception - Primary Residence and Secondary
Unit. For units with driveway slope gradient between 8.33% and
12%, Units are compliant through options 1 & 2 below:
1. Access from sidewalk to front door via driveway with a
slope gradient between 8.33% and 12%
2. Access to home by parking in garage and entering home
through garage door with optional ramp.
Notes:
1. For all Primary Residences and Secondary Units, the
home builder shall offer to the home buyer a portable
ramp that can be placed at the exterior door to the
Primary Unit, and if a Secondary Unit is provided, to the
exterior door of the Secondary Unit.
2. House plans, model, and setbacks illustrated here are
conceptual and subject to change.
1. The units are part of Vesting Tentative Tract 8563.
2. The neighborhood is located on a hillside, with
moderate slopes and terrain.
3. All driveway slopes labeled on this exhibit are
based on the calculated slope along the steeper
driveway side.
X
KEY
P - Pad Elevation
FF - Finished Floor Elevation
BOW - Back of Walk Elevation
GL - Garage Lip Elevation
UDO - Universal Design Ordinance
Based on the following site conditions, the Project proposes the
methods outlined in the Legend to meet the intent of the
"Mandatory to offer" UDO requirement for an exterior accessible
route to a primary or other entrance consistent with City Zoning
Code 7.90.060.
EXTERIOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE
FOR UDO COMPLIANCE
LEGEND
UDO Compliant - Primary Residence and Secondary Unit. Some
units require driveway slope gradient to 8.33% max. This
designation assumes pedestrian walks to entry from public sidewalk
via the driveway
*
SEE SHEET N1-C.6.3
67
4
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
91
90
89
88
87
8685
84
75
73
74
79
76
77
78
81
80
82
13
10
11
12
15
14
16
69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
PARCEL C
61
60
59
58
57
PARCEL B
56
18
17
101
PARCEL G
PARCEL D
21
19
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
83
MJR 2
72
70
71
MJR 1
27
MJR
30
40
38
39
32
29
31
28
44
50
47
48
49
52
51
53
46
42
43
45
3
4
2
1
22
20
21
24
23
PARCEL A
STREET A
STREET L
STREET M
STREET U
STREET V
ST
R
E
E
T
C
P5
6
9
.
3
P
5
7
3
.
3
P
5
7
8
.
1
P
5
8
3
.
1
P
5
8
8
.
1
P5
9
5
.
4
P5
9
9
.
8
P587.4P585.2P581.6
P577.0
P570.8
P573.0
P575.9 P582.0
P618
.
1
P588.
0
P593
.
9
P59
9
.
7
P6
0
5
.
0
P6
1
2
.
1
P6
1
6
.
5
P
5
6
9
.
7
P
5
8
6
.
3
P
5
8
4
.
6
P
5
8
1
.
1
P
5
6
8
.
0
P
5
7
8
.
1
P
5
7
4
.
6
P571.6
P5
6
8
.
3
P
5
6
5
.
4
P
5
6
2
.
9
P
5
6
0
.
3
P
5
5
7
.
8
P
5
5
5
.
1
P
5
5
1
.
8
P5
4
8
.
1
P6
1
4
.
8
FF
6
0
9
.
6
FF6
0
4
.
4
FF5
9
9
.
5
FF570.6
FF574.5 FF578.8
FF5
9
5
.
3
FF59
1
.
4
FF587
.
1
FF582.9
P547.6
P553.0
P557.9 P561.8 P564.5
P567.5
P571.
0
P577
.
3
P580
.
2
P548.5
P562.6
P565.1
P552.8
P556.9 P560.0
P567.9
P571.
6
P581
.
2
P577
.
5
GL581.9 GL587.7GL585.5GL573.3
GL
5
9
5
.
7
G
L
5
8
8
.
4
GL
5
6
9
.
6
G
L
5
7
3
.
6
G
L
5
7
8
.
4
G
L
5
8
3
.
4
GL571.1
GL576.2 GL582.3
GL588
.
3
GL59
4
.
2
GL6
0
0
.
0
GL
6
0
5
.
3
GL
6
1
2
.
4
GL
6
1
6
.
8
GL61
8
.
4
GL569.9
GL573.8 GL578.1
GL59
0
.
7
GL586
.
4
GL582.2
GL
6
0
8
.
9
GL6
0
3
.
7
GL5
9
8
.
8
GL5
9
4
.
6
GL
6
1
5
.
1
G
L
5
8
6
.
6
G
L
5
8
4
.
9
G
L
5
8
1
.
4
G
L
5
7
8
.
4
G
L
5
7
4
.
9
GL571.9
GL
5
6
8
.
6
GL547.9
GL553.3
GL558.2 GL562.1 GL564.8
GL567.
8
GL571
.
3
GL57
7
.
6
GL58
0
.
5
GL548.8
GL562.9
GL565.4
GL553.1 GL557.2 GL560.3
GL568.
2
GL571
.
9
GL58
1
.
5
GL57
7
.
8
G
L
5
7
0
.
0
G
L
5
6
8
.
3
G
L
5
6
5
.
7
G
L
5
6
3
.
2
G
L
5
6
0
.
6
G
L
5
5
8
.
1
G
L
5
5
5
.
4
G
L
5
5
2
.
1
GL
5
4
8
.
4
FF588.4FF586.2FF582.6FF574.0
F
F
5
7
0
.
7
F
F
5
6
9
.
0
F
F
5
6
6
.
4
F
F
5
6
3
.
9
F
F
5
6
1
.
3
F
F
5
5
8
.
8
F
F
5
5
6
.
1
FF
5
5
2
.
8
FF
5
4
9
.
1
F
F
5
8
7
.
3
F
F
5
8
5
.
6
F
F
5
8
2
.
1
F
F
5
7
9
.
1
F
F
5
7
5
.
6
FF572.6
FF
5
6
9
.
3
FF549.5
FF563.6
FF566.1
FF553.8
FF557.9 FF561.0
FF568.
9
FF572
.
6
FF58
2
.
2
FF57
8
.
5
FF548.6
FF554.0
FF558.9 FF562.8 FF565.5
FF568.
5
FF572
.
0
FF57
8
.
3
FF58
1
.
2
P569.6
P573.5 P577.8
P586.
1
P581.9
P60
3
.
4
P59
8
.
5
P59
4
.
3
P590
.
4
FF571.8
FF576.9 FF583.0
FF589
.
0
FF59
4
.
9
FF6
0
0
.
7
FF
6
0
6
.
0
FF
6
1
3
.
1
FF
6
1
7
.
5
FF61
9
.
1
FF
5
7
0
.
3
F
F
5
7
4
.
3
F
F
5
7
9
.
1
F
F
5
8
4
.
1
F
F
5
8
9
.
1
FF
5
9
6
.
4
FF
6
0
0
.
8
P6
0
8
.
6
FF
6
1
5
.
8
9293
94
95
96
979899100
91
90
89
88
878685
84
75
73
74
79
76
77
78
81 80
82
13
10
11
12
15
14
16
72
70
71
69
68
67
66
65
6463
62
61
60
59
58
57
56
18 17
55
101
21
20
19
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
83
B
O
W
5
7
1
.
1
5
BO
W
5
7
9
.
9
0
BO
W
5
8
4
.
0
3
BO
W
5
8
5
.
9
2
B
O
W
5
7
9
.
4
3
BO
W
5
6
9
.
0
5
BO
W
5
7
4
.
5
7
BO
W
5
6
8
.
6
0
BO
W
5
7
2
.
4
6
B
O
W
5
7
6
.
6
6
B
O
W
5
8
0
.
8
4
B
O
W
5
8
5
.
0
0
B
O
W
5
8
6
.
4
3
B
O
W
5
8
9
.
2
2
B
O
W
5
9
3
.
1
1
B
O
W
5
9
2
.
3
5
B
O
W
5
9
8
.
1
2
BOW 597.37
BO
W
6
0
1
.
7
1
BO
W
6
0
4
.
4
7
BOW
6
0
6
.
9
0
BOW
6
1
0
.
5
1
BOW 614.67
B
O
W
6
1
6
.
4
7
B
O
W
6
1
4
.
3
5
B
O
W
5
7
8
.
0
0
B
O
W
5
7
5
.
7
4
B
O
W
5
7
5
.
7
6
B
O
W
5
8
0
.
5
0
6.32%
6.66%
6.77%
6.27
%
6.3
8
%
7.1
7
%
7.
0
5
%
5.
5
5
%
6
.
1
2
%
6
.
3
6
%
6
.
3
1
%
6
.
5
3
%
2.
8
5
%
7.
5
6
%
8.
1
0
%
6
.
0
6
%
5.
8
2
%
8.
4
4
%
6
.
0
6
%
6
.
3
1
%
6
.
2
2
%
5
.
9
3
%
5
.
7
5
%
6
.
0
9
%
5.
6
7
%
5.
4
9
%
4.0
7
%
5.9
8
%
5.1
6
%
5.98
%
5.24%
5.05%
4.41%
8
.
8
8
%
8.
0
0
%
5.
8
8
%
7.
1
2
%
6.63%
6.55%
6.78%
6.93%
6.74
%
6.8
6
%
6.4
9
%
6.6
9
%
7.
9
9
%
7.
0
2
%
7.
2
5
%
7.
1
0
%
7
.
8
8
%
7
.
1
8
%
7
.
0
4
%
7
.
3
6
%
6
.
7
7
%
8
.
1
5
%
5.
7
6
%
5.
8
0
%
5.
2
1
%
4
.
1
7
%
4
.
2
6
%
4
.
1
3
%
4
.
2
7
%
6
.
1
1
%
5
.
1
3
%
8
.
5
4
%
BO
W
5
4
5
.
8
6
BO
W
5
5
1
.
3
1
BO
W
5
5
6
.
2
6
B
O
W
5
5
9
.
9
6
B
O
W
5
6
2
.
8
5
B
O
W
5
6
5
.
8
6
B
O
W
5
6
9
.
2
6
BO
W
5
4
7
.
4
1
BO
W
5
5
1
.
7
0
BO
W
5
5
5
.
9
4
BO
W
5
5
9
.
2
9
B
O
W
5
6
1
.
8
7
B
O
W
5
6
4
.
4
0
B
O
W
5
6
7
.
1
7
B
O
W
5
7
0
.
4
3
BOW 568.18
BOW 566.
5
1
BOW 56
3
.
8
4
BOW 5
6
1
.
3
0
BOW
5
5
8
.
7
5
BOW
5
5
6
.
2
2
BOW
5
5
3
.
6
2
BOW
5
5
0
.
2
6
BOW
5
4
6
.
2
0
BOW 585.5
0
BOW 583
.
7
0
BOW 5
8
0
.
1
6
BOW
5
7
6
.
9
7
BOW
5
7
3
.
6
7
BOW
5
7
0
.
4
7
BOW
5
6
7
.
6
3
BOW 586.42
BOW 58
1
.
4
3
BOW
5
7
6
.
5
8
BOW
5
7
1
.
7
5
BOW
5
6
7
.
5
3
BOW 593.87
2.
4
2
%
X
X
X
*****
***************
*
*
**************
*
*********
*********
*********
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1
NEIGHBORHOOD 1:
99 Units
Typical Lot Size: 65'x100' Single
Family Homes
UDO Compliant/Exception - Primary Residence and Secondary
Unit. For units with driveway slope gradient between 8.33% and
12%, Units are compliant through options 1 & 2 below:
1. Access from sidewalk to front door via driveway with a
slope gradient between 8.33% and 12%
2. Access to home by parking in garage and entering home
through garage door with optional ramp.
Notes:
1. For all Primary Residences and Secondary Units, the
home builder shall offer to the home buyer a portable
ramp that can be placed at the exterior door to the
Primary Unit, and if a Secondary Unit is provided, to the
exterior door of the Secondary Unit.
2. House plans, model, and setbacks illustrated here are
conceptual and subject to change.
1. The units are part of Vesting Tentative Tract 8563.
2. The neighborhood is located on a hillside, with
moderate slopes and terrain.
3. All driveway slopes labeled on this exhibit are
based on the calculated slope along the steeper
driveway side.
X
KEY
P - Pad Elevation
FF - Finished Floor Elevation
BOW - Back of Walk Elevation
GL - Garage Lip Elevation
UDO - Universal Design Ordinance
Based on the following site conditions, the Project proposes the
methods outlined in the Legend to meet the intent of the
"Mandatory to offer" UDO requirement for an exterior accessible
route to a primary or other entrance consistent with City Zoning
Code 7.90.060.
EXTERIOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE
FOR UDO COMPLIANCE
LEGEND
UDO Compliant - Primary Residence and Secondary Unit. Some
units require driveway slope gradient to 8.33% max. This
designation assumes pedestrian walks to entry from public sidewalk
via the driveway
*
N1-C.6.3
UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE EXHIBIT
SEE SHEET N1-C.6.2
67
5
92
93
94
95
96
97
9899
100
91
90
89
88
87
8685
84
75
73
74
79
76
77
78
81
80
82
13
10
11
12
15
14
16
69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
PARCEL C
61
60
59
58
57
PARCEL B
56
27
33
28
29
30
31
18
25
32
26
17
55
54
52
53
39
35
36
45
38
37
51
50
49
48
47
46
42
44
43
40
41
101
PARCEL G
PARCEL D
PARCEL E
34
21
22
23
24
20
19
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
83
MJR 2
PARCEL F
72
70
71
MJR 1
PARCEL A
37
27
MJR
30
40
38
39
32
29
31
22
24
23
21
28
26
44
25
50
47
48
49
52
51
53
46
42
41
43
45
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
19
3
32
33
23
22
21
1112
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
PARCEL A
1
PARCEL C
PARCEL A
49
62
3
5
4
2
1
22
20
21
24
23
PARCEL A
5554
56
57
58
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
STREET A
STREET K
STREET L
STREET M
ST
R
E
E
T
S
COURT U
COURT V
S
T
R
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
LEGEND
GHAD OWNED AND MAINTAINED(6)(8)
CITY OWNED AND MAINTAINED
HOA OWNED AND MAINTAINED
CITY OWNED AND CFD MAINTAINED(1)(2)(3)
GHAD OWNED AND GHAD/HOA MAINTAINED(7)
PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED(4)(8)
SEMI PUBLIC OWNED AND MAINTAINED
NOTES:
(1)ALL STREETS ARE PUBLIC.
(2)ALL PARKWAY STRIPS WITHIN CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY TO
BE HOA MAINTAINED.
(3)PARK FRONTAGE SIDEWALKS ALONG NEIGHBORHOOD
STREETS TO BE HOA MAINTAINED. IF FUTURE PARK
DESIGN REMOVES AND RELOCATES THE SIDEWALK,
THE NEW SIDEWALK WILL THEN BE CITY MAINTAINED.
(4)STREETS, COMMON LANDSCAPE, AND BUILDING
EXTERIORS WITHIN MEDIUM DENSITY PARCEL WILL BE
HOA MAINTAINED. ENCLOSED YARD SPACE TO BE
PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED.
(5)FRONT YARD LANDSCAPE ON ALL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS
ARE PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED.
(6)PROPOSED TRAIL CONNECTIONS TO BE GHAD OWNED
AND MAINTAINED.
(7)GHAD WILL MAINTAIN SLOPE STABILITY, REPAIR,
MOWING, FIRE ACCESS ROAD (INCLUDING DRAINAGE
DITCH) AND WEED ABATEMENT. HOA WILL MAINTAIN
DECORATIVE LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, AND TRASH
REMOVAL.
(8)RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING OR ASSOCIATED WITH
PRIVATE LOTS ARE TO BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED.
RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING COMMON
AREA/LANDSCAPE ARE TO BE HOA MAINTAINED.
RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING TRAILS WITHIN GHAD
PARCELS ARE TO BE MAINTAINED BY GHAD.
(9)NEIGHBORHOOD 6 ENCLOSED BACK AND SIDE YARDS
FOR FEE SIMPLE LOTS WILL BE PRIVATELY
MAINTAINED. ALL EXTERIOR ELEMENTS OF THE FEE
SIMPLE AND CONDOMINIUM DWELLING UNITS WILL BE
HOA MAINTAINED.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1
MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY PLAN
N1-C.7
67
6
11/29/2022
677
11/29/2022
678
18
'
-
0
"
10
0
'
-
0
"
recycle trash compost
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
12
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
20
'
-
0
"
A
v
g
.
;
1
0
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
5'-0" Min.
22
'
-
0
"
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
Ga
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
5'-0"55'-0"5'-0"
4'-0" Min.
65'-0"
W/H
5'-0"
9'
-
0
"
6'
-
6
"
6'-6"
First Floor
2163 SQ. FT.
55
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
0
"
Formal
Dining
16'-0" x 13'-6"
Informal
Dining
16'-0" x 11'-10"
Great Room
20'-0" x 18'-0"
Flex /
Opt. ADU/
Suite
16'-0" x 12'-9"
Bedroom 4
Suite
14'-4" x 11'-0"
walk in
pantry/
Opt. Prep
Kitchen
Butler's
pantry
coats/storage
UP
19R
16'-11"21'-2"16'-11"
4'
-
0
"
51
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
0
"
5'-0"21'-0"24'-10"5'-0"
Opt. Covered
Outdoor Room
22'-1" x 10'-0"
6'
-
0
"
Garage
30'-1" x 20'-0"
Entry
Pdr.Bath
5
micro/Pantry
36" slide
in range
/ oven
19
'
-
0
"
Porch
4'
-
0
"
9'-2"
1'
-
6
"
20
'
-
6
"
12
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
4'
-
0
"
a/cpad
W D
Laund.
Bonus / Opt.
Bedroom 5 Suite
17'-2" x 13'-8"
Bedroom 2
Suite
16'-0" x 11'-0"
Bedroom 3
Suite
14'-3" x 11'-3"W.I.C.
40'-0" l.f.
Primary
Bedroom
16'-0" x 16'-0"
Primary
Bath
Second Floor
2251 SQ. FT.
open to
below
DN
19R
55'-0"
16'-11"21'-2"
4'
-
5
12"
51
'
-
0
"
51
'
-
0
"
opt.
dr.
Bath
2
11'-7"2'-8"
2'
-
0
"
4'
-
0
"
2'-8"
16'-11"
Bath
3
linen
5 eq.
shelves
Seat
60" x 60"
3'
-
8
"
3'
-
6
"
6'
-
6
"
3'
-
6
"
4'
-
0
"
4'-0"
11'-0"
Clg.
low
linen
21'-0"17'-1"16'-11"
Bath
4
2'
-
0
"
4 BEDROOMS + BONUS
OPT. BEDRM 5 SUITE
5.5 BATHS
OPT. ADU
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A1.1.0
FLOOR PLAN 1A
2,163 S.F. 1ST FLOOR
2,251 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
4,414 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
663 S.F. GARAGE
217 S.F. OPT. COVERED
OUTDOOR ROOM
101 S.F. 'A' PORCH
1,659 S.F. 1ST FLOOR (EXCLUDES 504 S.F. ADU)
2,251 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
3,910 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
11/29/2022
67
9
recycle trash compost
Cable
Elect.
W/H
5'-0"
9'
-
0
"
6'
-
0
"
6'-0"
First Floor
1643 SQ. FT.
Formal
Dining
16'-0" x 13'-6"
Informal
Dining
16'-0" x 12'-4"Great Room
20'-0" x 18'-0"
Bedroom
14'-4" x 11'-0"
walk in
pantry/
Opt. Prep
Kitchen
Butler's
pantry
coats/storage
UP
19R
Opt. Covered
Outdoor Room
21'-2" x 10'-0"
Garage
30'-1" x 20'-0"
Entry
Pdr.
Bath
5
micro/Pantry
36" slide
in range
/ oven
Porch
Living
16'-0" x 12'-9"ADU
504 SQ. FT.
Bedroom 5
Suite
17'-2" x 13'-10"
DN
19R
4'
-
0
"
Bath
4
Opt. Bedroom 5
Wall Std. Door Opt.
a/cpad
a/cpad
ADU 504 S.F.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A1.1.1
PLAN 1 OPTIONS
11/29/2022
68
0
Front Elevation 1A
Traditional Farmhouse
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A1.2.0
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1A
1A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Wood Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
68
1
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
3
1
'
-
3
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A1.2.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1A
1A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Wood Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
68
2
recycle trash compost
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
W/H
Formal
Dining
16'-0" x 13'-6"
Suite
14'-4" x 11'-0"
walk in
pantry/
Opt. Prep
Kitchen
Butler's
pantry
coats/storage
Garage
30'-1" x 20'-0"
Entry
Porch
First Floor
2149 SQ. FT.
a/cpad
Bonus / Opt.
Bedroom 5 Suite
17'-2" x 13'-8"
Bedroom 3
Suite
14'-3" x 11'-3"W.I.C.
40'-0" l.f.
Second Floor
2251 SQ. FT.
DN
19R
Bath
3
5 eq.
shelves
4'
-
0
"
low
linen
Bath
4
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A1.3.0
FLOOR PLAN 1B
99 S.F. 'B' PORCH
11/29/2022
68
3
Front Elevation 1B
Contemporary Cottage
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A1.3.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1B
1B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Metal Awnings
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
68
4
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
3
1
'
-
3
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A1.3.2
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1B
1B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
68
5
recycle trash compost
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
W/H
First Floor
2149 SQ. FT.
Formal
Dining
16'-0" x 13'-6"
Suite
14'-4" x 11'-0"
walk in
pantry/
Opt. Prep
Kitchen
Butler's
pantry
coats/storage
Garage
30'-1" x 20'-0"
Entry
Porch
a/cpad
Bonus / Opt.
Bedroom 5 Suite
17'-2" x 13'-8"
Bedroom 3
Suite
14'-3" x 11'-3"W.I.C.
45'-0" l.f.
Second Floor
2251 SQ. FT.
DN
19R
Bath
3
5 eq.
shelves
4'
-
0
"
low
linen
Bath
4
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A1.4.0
FLOOR PLAN 1C
79 S.F. 'C' PORCH
11/29/2022
68
6
Front Elevation 1C
Contemporary Prairie
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A1.4.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1C
1C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
68
7
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
3
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
2'
-
0
"
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A1.4.2
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1C
1C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
68
8
5:12
RIDGE
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
6:12
4:12 6:12
5:12
ROOF PLAN 1A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
VA
L
L
E
Y
VA
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VA
L
L
E
Y
VA
L
L
E
Y
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
5:12
RIDGE
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
6:12
4:12
5:12
ROOF PLAN 1B
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
VA
L
L
E
Y
VA
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VA
L
L
E
Y
VA
L
L
E
Y
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
4:12
4:12
RIDGE
4:
1
2
RI
D
.
4:
1
2
RI
D
.
4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:12
4:12
ROOF PLAN 1C
OVERHANG : 24"4:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
HIP HI
P
VALLEY
HI
P HIP
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
VA
L
L
E
Y
VALLEY
HI
P
VA
L
L
E
Y
HI
P
VA
L
L
E
Y
HI
P
HI
P
HI
P
V
A
L
L
E
Y
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
VA
L
L
E
Y
4:
1
2
VALLEY
VAL
L
E
Y
4:
1
2
VALLEY
VAL
L
E
Y
R.
HIP
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 4 8 12
08/11/2022
scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"N1 - A1.5.0
PLAN 1 ROOF PLANS
11/29/2022
68
9
11/29/2022
690
trash
compost
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
W/H
First Floor
2130 SQ. FT.
Garage 1
20'-1" x 20'-0"
recycle
Morning
Room
17'-1" x 17'-1"
Great Room
35'-1" x 19'-3"
Garage 2
18'-6" x 11'-6"
Kitchen
Entry
Opt. Covered
Outdoor Room
25'-0" x 10'-0"
walk in
pantry/
Opt. Prep.
Kitchen
Porch
Pdr.
1
36" slide
in range
/ oven
UP
19
R
7'
-
0
"
9'
-
0
"
6'-0"6'-6"
drop
zone
Bedroom 5
Suite/
Opt. ADU
16'-0" x 17'-8"
micro/Pantry
coats/storage
Bath
5
opt.
cabs.
10
0
'
-
0
"
24
'
-
0
"
44
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
21
'
-
0
"
5'-0"7'-0"18'-0"30'-0"5'-0"
65'-0"
12
'
-
0
"
56
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
20
'
-
0
"
A
v
g
.
;
5'-0" Min.
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
Ga
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
4'-0" Min.
12
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
10
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
a/cpad
W.I.C.
46'-0" l.f.
Primary
Bedroom
17'-1" x 18'-0"
Primary
Bath
Second Floor
2535 SQ. FT.
Bath
3
Bedroom 2
Suite
15'-9" x 12'-0"
Bedroom 3
Suite
14'-9" x 13'-3"
Laund.
open to
below
Bonus
16'-3" x 13'-6"
12
'
-
0
"
44
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
7'-0"18'-0"30'-0"
56
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
14'-3"8'-7"8'-612"21'-0"
Bath
2
WD
low
linen
Se
a
t
84" x 60"
opt.
dr.
3'-6"6'-0"3'-6"
DN
19
R
11'-0"
Clg.
linen
5 eq.
shelves
Bedroom 4
Suite
13'-4" x 11'-6"
Bath
4
Pdr.
2
4'
-
1
"
low
linen
5'
-
6
"
5'
-
6
"
5 BEDROOMS + BONUS
5 BATHS / 2 PDRS
OPT. ADU
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A2.1.0
FLOOR PLAN 2A
2,130 S.F. 1ST FLOOR
2,535 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
4,665 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
433 S.F. GARAGE
234 S.F. GARAGE
250 S.F. OPT. COVERED
OUTDOOR ROOM
45 S.F. 'A' PORCH
1,767 S.F. 1ST FLOOR (EXCLUDES 363 S.F. ADU)
2,535 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
4,302 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
11/29/2022
69
1
Garage 2
18'-6" x 11'-6"
Pdr.
1
UP
19
R
Bedroom 5
Suite/
Opt. ADU
16'-0" x 17'-8"
coats/storage
opt.
Kitchenette
Bath
5
Opt. ADU
a/cpad
ADU
363 SQ. FT.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A2.1.1
FLOOR PLAN 2 OPT. ADU
ADU 363 S.F.
11/29/2022
69
2
Front Elevation 2A
Traditional Farmhouse
Left Elevation
+/
-
1
1
'
-
6
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A2.2.0
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2A
2A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Wood Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
69
3
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
1
3
1
'
-
6
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
11
'
-
0
34"
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A2.2.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2A
2A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Wood Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
69
4
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
Garage 1
20'-1" x 20'-0"
Garage 2
18'-6" x 11'-6"
Entry
Porch
1
UP
19
R
Bedroom 5
Suite/
Opt. ADU
16'-0" x 17'-8"
coats/storage
First Floor
2130 SQ. FT.
Second Floor
2535 SQ. FT.
Bath
3
Bedroom 3
Suite
14'-9" x 13'-3"
Laund.
open to
below
WD
low
linen
DN
19
R
linen
5 eq.
shelves
Bedroom 4
Suite
13'-4" x 11'-6"
Bath
4
Pdr.
2
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A2.3.0
FLOOR PLAN 2B
46 S.F. 'B' PORCH
11/29/2022
69
5
Front Elevation 2B
Contemporary Cottage
+/
-
1
1
'
-
6
"
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A2.3.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2B
2B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Metal Awnings
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
69
6
Right Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
1
3
1
'
-
6
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
11
'
-
0
34"
F.F.
P.L.
Rear Elevation
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A2.3.2
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2B
2B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
69
7
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
First Floor
2130 SQ. FT.
Garage 1
20'-1" x 20'-0"
Garage 2
18'-6" x 11'-6"
Entry
Porch
1
UP
19
R
Bedroom 5
Suite/
Opt. ADU
16'-0" x 17'-8"
coats/storage
Second Floor
2535 SQ. FT.
Bath
3
Bedroom 3
Suite
14'-9" x 13'-3"
Laund.
open to
below
WD
low
linen
DN
19
R
linen
5 eq.
shelves
Bedroom 4
Suite
13'-4" x 11'-6"
Bath
4
Pdr.
2
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A2.4.0
FLOOR PLAN 2C
47 S.F. A' PORCHOR
11/29/2022
69
8
Front Elevation 2C
Contemporary Prairie
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A2.4.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2C
2C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
69
9
Right Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
1
2
8
'
-
4
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
Rear Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A2.4.2
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2C
2C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
70
0
6:12
6:12
RIDGE
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
V
A
L
L
E
Y
ROOF PLAN 2A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"6:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :6:
1
2
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
6:
1
2
4:12
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
6:12
6:12
RIDGE
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
V
A
L
L
E
Y
ROOF PLAN 2B
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"6:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :6:
1
2
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
6:
1
2
4:12
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
4:12
4:12
RIDGE
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
ROOF PLAN 2C
OVERHANG : 24"6:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:
1
2
4:12
HI
P
HI
P
VALLEY
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VA
L
L
E
Y
VA
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
HIP
HIP
HIP
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
HI
P
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
1'
-
0
"
1'-0"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 4 8 12
08/11/2022
scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"N1 - A2.5.0
PLAN 2 ROOF PLANS
11/29/2022
70
1
11/29/2022
702
25
'
-
0
"
10
0
'
-
0
"
trash
compost
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
12
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
20
'
-
0
"
A
v
g
.
;
5'-0" Min.
12
'
-
0
"
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
Ga
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
5'-0"5'-0"
4'-0" Min.
W/H
First Floor
2203 SQ. FT.
19
'
-
0
"
Garage 1
20'-6" x 20'-0"
9'
-
0
"
recycle
10
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
Dining
18'-1" x 12'-8"
Great Room
20'-0" x 22'-0"
Garage 2
18'-7" x 11'-6"
60
'
-
0
"
47
'
-
0
"
Pdr.
1
6'-6"6'-0"
10'-3"19'-0"25'-9"
6'
-
0
"
Bedroom 5
Suite /
Opt. Expaned Suite
12'-0" x 13'-2"
Kitchen
Entry Flex
13'-0" x 15'-1"
7'-412"
Opt. Covered
Outdoor Room
21'-6" x 10'-0"
10
'
-
0
"
55'-0"
drop
zone
walk in
pantry/
Opt. Prep.
Kitchen
Porch
micro/oven
UP
19R
36" slide
in range
/ oven
Bath
6
9'
-
0
"
9'
-
0
"
19
'
-
0
"
vol.
Clg.
coats/storage
a/cpad
10'-3"19'-0"25'-9"
Bath
4
Bath
2 Bath
3
open to
below
Bedroom 2
Suite
14'-8" x 13'-0"
Bedroom 3
Suite
11'-10" x 13'-0"
Bedroom 4
Suite
12'-2" x 13'-3"
48" x 60"
W.I.C.
52'-0" l.f.
Primary
Bedroom
18'-1" x 16'-6"
Primary
Bath
Second Floor
2680 SQ. FT.
Bonus
16'-6" x 17'-11"
6'
-
7
"
47
'
-
6
"
9'
-
0
"
21'-5"7'-412"6'-212"20'-0"
5'
-
1
1
"
54
'
-
1
"
9'
-
0
"
Laund.
opt.
dr.
DN
19
R
D W
open to
below
11'-0"
Clg.
Linen
5 eq.
shelves
Pdr.
2
se
a
t
low
wall
low linen /
vanity
5'
-
0
"
high
glass
9'
-
0
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A3.1.0
FLOOR PLAN 3A4 BEDROOMS + BONUS
OPT. BEDRM 5 SUITE
5.5 BATHS
2,203 S.F. 1ST FLOOR
2,680 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
4,883 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
437 S.F. GARAGE 1
236 S.F. GARAGE 2
210 S.F. OPT. COVERED
OUTDOOR ROOM
131 S.F. 'A' PORCH
11/29/2022
70
3
Sleeping
12'-0" x 13'-2"
Entry
UP
19R
Bath
6
vol.
Clg.
Opt. Bedroom 5 Expanded Suite
Living
12'-10" x 13'-3"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A3.1.1
PLAN 3 OPTIONS
11/29/2022
70
4
Front Elevation 3A
Traditional Farmhouse
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A3.2.0
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3A
3A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Wood Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
70
5
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
6
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
11
'
-
0
34"
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A3.2.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3A
3A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Wood Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
70
6
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
First Floor
2203 SQ. FT.
Garage 1
20'-6" x 20'-0"
Garage 2
18'-7" x 11'-6"
Bedroom 5
Suite
12'-0" x 13'-2"
Entry 13'-0" x 15'-1"
Porch
Bath
6
vol.
Clg.
Bath
4
Bath
2 Bath
3
open to
below
Bedroom 2
Suite
14'-8" x 13'-0"
Bedroom 3
Suite
11'-10" x 13'-0"
Bedroom 4
Suite
12'-2" x 13'-3"
Second Floor
2672 SQ. FT.
Laund.
D W
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A3.3.0
FLOOR PLAN 3B
131 S.F. 'B' PORCH
11/29/2022
70
7
Front Elevation 3B
Contemporary Cottage
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A3.3.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3B
3B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Metal Awnings
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
70
8
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
6
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
11
'
-
0
34"
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A3.3.2
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3B
3B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
70
9
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
First Floor
2203 SQ. FT.
Garage 1
20'-6" x 20'-0"
Garage 2
18'-7" x 11'-6"
Bedroom 5
Suite
12'-0" x 13'-2"
Entry 13'-0" x 15'-1"
Porch
Bath
6
vol.
Clg.
Bath
4
Bath
2 Bath
3
open to
below
Bedroom 2
Suite
14'-8" x 13'-0"
Bedroom 3
Suite
11'-10" x 13'-0"
Bedroom 4
Suite
12'-2" x 13'-3"
Second Floor
2672 SQ. FT.
Laund.
D W
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A3.4.0
FLOOR PLAN 3C
131 S.F. 'C' PORCH
11/29/2022
71
0
Front Elevation 3C
Contemporary Prairie
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A3.4.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3C
3C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
71
1
Right Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
7
'
-
6
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
11
'
-
0
34"
F.F.
P.L.
Rear Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N1 - A3.4.2
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3C
3C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
71
2
ROOF PLAN 3A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"6:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
6:12
6:12
RIDGE
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:12
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
VALL
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
VAL
.
PI
T
C
H
BR
E
A
K
4:12
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
ROOF PLAN 3B
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"6:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
6:12
6:12
RIDGE
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:12
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
V
A
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
4:12
VAL
L
E
Y
RI
D
G
E
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
ROOF PLAN 3C
OVERHANG : 24"4:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
4:12
RIDGE
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:12
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:124:12 4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
HIP HIP
VALLEY
VALLEY
VAL
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
HI
P
VA
L
L
E
Y
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
HI
P
HIP
HIP
HIP
HIP
HIP
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
1'
-
0
"
1'-0"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 4 8 12
08/11/2022
scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"N1 - A3.5.0
PLAN 3 ROOF PLANS
11/29/2022
71
3
11/29/2022
714
ENTRY
PORCH
GARAGE
INFORMALDINING
FORMALDINING
BEDROOM 4SUITE
GREAT ROOM
BATH 5
POWDER
FLEX/ OPT. ADUSUITE
OPT. COVEREDOUTDOOR ROOM
BUTLER'SPANTRY
WALK IN/PANTRY
COATS/STORAGE
KITCHEN
U14
U14
U14 U13U15
U6 U8U4 U10
U17
U16
U14
U14
6'
-
7
"
5'-11"5'-6 1/2"5'-5 1/2"
3'
-
8
"
11'-8 1/2"15'-3"3'-7"7'-6 1/2"10'-8"6'-3"
4'-2"4'-7"3'-8"4'-2"4'-7"1'
-
1
1
1
/
2
"
8'
-
1
1
"
1'
-
4
1
/
2
"
5'
-
6
3
/
4
"
4'
-
1
1
3
/
4
"
W.I.C.
1'-9"2'-0 1/2"3'-9 1/2"1'-9"
3'-7"3'-6"
1'-9"3'-10 1/2"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 05/19/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTESNOTES
MANDATORY TO INSTALL:
1.HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND
CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1126A.6
2.ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES
AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1
OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1136A.
3.THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING
CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC
CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRICAL CODE, SEC. 1126A.
U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR. AT ENTRY
DOOR PER CBC CH. 11, SEC. 1136A.2.
MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR.
U2 NOT USED
U3
U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR
WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT
PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM/BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2.
U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
REFER TO SHEET GN-3 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND
REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION.
U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR
POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3 OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING
OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA. CIRCLE, 48" X 60"
RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE
PURCHASER/OWNER.
U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING
THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 & CBC CH. 11A, SEC.
1134A.5 & SEC. 1135A.6.
U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.1
FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER/BATH, OR
LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.2, OPT. 2
U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.7.
U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE
LAVATORY/SINK, PER CBC CH. 11A, SEC. 1134A.8 & OPT.4
U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND
TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.8.
U13 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1133A.6.
U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER/OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST
A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING
OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE
18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER
SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"
X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR,
DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT
THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNE, PER CBC CH. 11, SEC.
1133A.2.
U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR
REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11, SEC. 1133A.4.1.1.
U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT
SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, PER CBC CH. 1136A.
U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO.
21-07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 & CBC CH. 11A,
SEC. 1119A. INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST
AND COST OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
WALL LEGEND
2X6 WALL
2X4 WALL
7.90.130
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL IN ALL VISIT-ABLE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS:
1. HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARDWARE NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING OR
TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A.
2. ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS OR
LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A.6.
3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTACLE
OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY
WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A OR APPLICABLE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL
CODE.
2. FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
7.90.090
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A KITCHEN IS
LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL:
1. SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC.1133A.4.1.1.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN GENERAL NOTES:
7.90.060
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL:
1. WHERE AT LEAST ONE DOORBELL IS PROVIDED
FOR THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRY DOOR, ONE THAT
IS BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM THE FINISHED
FLOOR MUST BE INSTALLED PER CBC 1136A.2.
7.90.080
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A POWDER ROOM OR
BATHROOM IS LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY
LEVEL:
1. GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT CONSISTENT WITH
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2 FOR THE WATER CLOSET
AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB.
NOT USED
U18 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT LEAST ONE BEDROOM ON THE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL WITH ALL COMPONENTS
MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7.90.130. A
CLOSET SHALL HAVE AT LEAST A THIRTY-TWO INCH (32") NET
OPENING AND ADJUSTABLE CLOSET RODS AND SHELVING.
4 "UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH
BUYER TO FILL OUT.
PER CITY OF DUBLIN'S REQUIREMENT:
"UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO
EACH BUYER TO FILL OUT.
NOTE:
FOR ALL INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE, SEE
STANDARD 1ST FLOOR AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHEETS.UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE_FLOOR PLAN 1
N1 - A5.0.011/29/2022
71
5
GARAGE 1
GARAGE 2
ENTRY
BEDROOM 5 SUITE / OPT. ADU
POWDER 1 BATH 5
KITCHENDROPZONE
WALK IN PANTRY/OPT. PREP. KITCHEN
GREAT ROOM
MORNINGROOM
PORCH
U14U14
U14U14
U16
U14 U13U15
U6 U8U4 U10
OPT. COVEREDOUTDOOR ROOM
3'-6"4'-6"4'-1 1/2"4'-10"4'-10"8'-2 1/2"
6'-3 1/2"5'-9 1/2"8'-11"
6'
-
1
"
4'-6 1/2"1'-9"
4'-3 1/4"4'-3 1/4"
U17
1'-9"3'-7"3'-5"
2'
-
1
1
1
/
2
"
3'
-
1
0
1
/
2
"
8"
12'-3"
4'
-
0
"
W.I.C.
4'-0 1/2"1'-9"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 05/19/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTESNOTES
MANDATORY TO INSTALL:
1.HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND
CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1126A.6
2.ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES
AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1
OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1136A.
3.THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING
CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC
CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRICAL CODE, SEC. 1126A.
U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR. AT ENTRY
DOOR PER CBC CH. 11, SEC. 1136A.2.
MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR.
U2 NOT USED
U3
U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR
WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT
PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM/BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2.
U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
REFER TO SHEET GN-3 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND
REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION.
U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR
POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3 OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING
OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA. CIRCLE, 48" X 60"
RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE
PURCHASER/OWNER.
U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING
THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 & CBC CH. 11A, SEC.
1134A.5 & SEC. 1135A.6.
U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.1
FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER/BATH, OR
LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.2, OPT. 2
U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.7.
U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE
LAVATORY/SINK, PER CBC CH. 11A, SEC. 1134A.8 & OPT.4
U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND
TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.8.
U13 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1133A.6.
U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER/OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST
A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING
OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE
18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER
SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"
X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR,
DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT
THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNE, PER CBC CH. 11, SEC.
1133A.2.
U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR
REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11, SEC. 1133A.4.1.1.
U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT
SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, PER CBC CH. 1136A.
U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO.
21-07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 & CBC CH. 11A,
SEC. 1119A. INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST
AND COST OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
WALL LEGEND
2X6 WALL
2X4 WALL
7.90.130
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL IN ALL VISIT-ABLE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS:
1. HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARDWARE NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING OR
TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A.
2. ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS OR
LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A.6.
3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTACLE
OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY
WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A OR APPLICABLE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL
CODE.
2. FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
7.90.090
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A KITCHEN IS
LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL:
1. SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC.1133A.4.1.1.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN GENERAL NOTES:
7.90.060
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL:
1. WHERE AT LEAST ONE DOORBELL IS PROVIDED
FOR THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRY DOOR, ONE THAT
IS BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM THE FINISHED
FLOOR MUST BE INSTALLED PER CBC 1136A.2.
7.90.080
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A POWDER ROOM OR
BATHROOM IS LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY
LEVEL:
1. GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT CONSISTENT WITH
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2 FOR THE WATER CLOSET
AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB.
NOT USED
U18 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT LEAST ONE BEDROOM ON THE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL WITH ALL COMPONENTS
MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7.90.130. A
CLOSET SHALL HAVE AT LEAST A THIRTY-TWO INCH (32") NET
OPENING AND ADJUSTABLE CLOSET RODS AND SHELVING.
4 "UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH
BUYER TO FILL OUT.
PER CITY OF DUBLIN'S REQUIREMENT:
"UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO
EACH BUYER TO FILL OUT.
NOTE:
FOR ALL INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE, SEE
STANDARD 1ST FLOOR AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHEETS.UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE_FLOOR PLAN 2
N1 - A5.1.011/29/2022
71
6
DINING
OPT. COVEREDOUTDOOR ROOM
U14 U14
U14 U14
KITCHEN
WALK IN PANTRY/OPT. PREP. KITCHEN
U16
U14 U13U15
GREAT ROOM
BEDROOM 5 SUITE / OPT. EXPANED SUITE
GARAGE 2
GARAGE 1
PORCH
3'-8 1/4"3'-8 1/4"
ENTRY
POWDER 1
U6 U8U4 U10
BATH 6
FLEX
U17
2'
-
4
"
3'
-
6
"
3'
-
2
"
11'-11"8'-11 1/2"5'-4"
2'
-
0
"
3'
-
9
1
/
2
"
6'
-
5
"
3'-3 1/2"5'-2 1/2"
3'-7"1'-9"
DROPZONE 7'-4 1/2"
U7 U8
5'-2"3'-10"4'-3"3'-5"3'-0"1'-9"
W.I.C.
5'-3"14'-3 1/2"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 05/19/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 1Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTESNOTES
MANDATORY TO INSTALL:
1.HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND
CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1126A.6
2.ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES
AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1
OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1136A.
3.THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING
CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC
CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRICAL CODE, SEC. 1126A.
U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR. AT ENTRY
DOOR PER CBC CH. 11, SEC. 1136A.2.
MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR.
U2 NOT USED
U3
U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR
WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT
PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM/BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2.
U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
REFER TO SHEET GN-3 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND
REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION.
U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR
POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3 OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING
OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA. CIRCLE, 48" X 60"
RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE
PURCHASER/OWNER.
U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING
THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 & CBC CH. 11A, SEC.
1134A.5 & SEC. 1135A.6.
U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.1
FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER/BATH, OR
LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.2, OPT. 2
U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.7.
U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE
LAVATORY/SINK, PER CBC CH. 11A, SEC. 1134A.8 & OPT.4
U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND
TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.8.
U13 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1133A.6.
U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER/OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST
A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING
OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE
18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER
SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"
X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR,
DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT
THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNE, PER CBC CH. 11, SEC.
1133A.2.
U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR
REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11, SEC. 1133A.4.1.1.
U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT
SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, PER CBC CH. 1136A.
U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO.
21-07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 & CBC CH. 11A,
SEC. 1119A. INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST
AND COST OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
WALL LEGEND
2X6 WALL
2X4 WALL
7.90.130
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL IN ALL VISIT-ABLE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS:
1. HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARDWARE NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING OR
TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A.
2. ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS OR
LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A.6.
3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTACLE
OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY
WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A OR APPLICABLE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL
CODE.
2. FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
7.90.090
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A KITCHEN IS
LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL:
1. SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC.1133A.4.1.1.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN GENERAL NOTES:
7.90.060
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL:
1. WHERE AT LEAST ONE DOORBELL IS PROVIDED
FOR THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRY DOOR, ONE THAT
IS BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM THE FINISHED
FLOOR MUST BE INSTALLED PER CBC 1136A.2.
7.90.080
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A POWDER ROOM OR
BATHROOM IS LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY
LEVEL:
1. GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT CONSISTENT WITH
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2 FOR THE WATER CLOSET
AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB.
NOT USED
U18 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT LEAST ONE BEDROOM ON THE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL WITH ALL COMPONENTS
MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7.90.130. A
CLOSET SHALL HAVE AT LEAST A THIRTY-TWO INCH (32") NET
OPENING AND ADJUSTABLE CLOSET RODS AND SHELVING.
4 "UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH
BUYER TO FILL OUT.
PER CITY OF DUBLIN'S REQUIREMENT:
"UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO
EACH BUYER TO FILL OUT.
NOTE:
FOR ALL INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE, SEE
STANDARD 1ST FLOOR AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHEETS.UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE_FLOOR PLAN 3
N1 - A5.2.011/29/2022
71
7
11/29/2022
0 5 10 20
N1-L1.11
NEIGHBORHOOD 1 TYPICAL FRONT YARDS
PLANTING NOTE:
For lots that are adjacent to open space, or deemed a
“Fire Lot”, refer to the Diablo Firesafe Council list as
well as the approved plant list in the landscape design
guidelines for fire safe plants recommendations.
71
8
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
719
P/SP
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
OPEN SPACE
(BASIN)
OP
E
N
S
P
A
C
E
(
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
)
OPEN SPACE
(WETLAND)
OPEN SPACE
(BASIN)
BASIN
SE
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
S
E
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
LO
Y
A
L
T
O
N
R
O
A
D
PANORAMA DRIVE
T
A
B
L
E
M
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
S TERRACINA DR
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
CR
O
A
K
R
D
STREET A
STREET B
ST
R
E
E
T
J
STREET K
STREET L
ST
R
E
E
T
N
STREET O
STREET M
ST
R
E
E
T
S
ST
R
E
E
T
T
ST
R
E
E
T
C
ST
R
E
E
T
Y
ST
R
E
E
T
Z
COURT U
STREET V
STREET B
CENTRAL PARKWAY
CENTRAL PARKWAY STREET R
ST
R
E
E
T
X
ST
R
E
E
T
W
STREET Q
STREET P
CR
O
A
K
R
D
LOOP H
LOOP H
STREET G
STREET B
ST
R
E
E
T
I
STREET F
STREET E
STREET D
STREET A
COURT A
COURT B
COURT C
COURT E
COURT F
CO
U
R
T
G
COURT H
CO
U
R
T
I
CO
U
R
T
J
COURT KCOURT L
COURT S
COURT R
COURT QCOURT V
COURT U
COURT T
COURT M
CO
U
R
T
N
CO
U
R
T
O
CO
U
R
T
P
ST
R
E
E
T
C
STR
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
ST
R
E
E
T
T
STREET P
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
ACCESS
ROAD
ACCESS
ROAD
PROPOSED
TRAIL
EVA/
ACCESS ROAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
NEIGHBORHOOD SUMMARY
NEIGHBORHOOD TYPICAL LOT
SIZE UNITS GROSS
ACREAGE (±)DENSITY
1 65'x100'99 30.1 3.3 DU/AC
2 55'x95'96 23.4 4.1 DU/AC
3 50'x110'85 19.5 4.5 DU/AC
4 49.5'x80'85 16.8 5.1 DU/AC
5 48'x70' Cluster 94 17.6 5.4 DU/AC
6 Attached Multi-Family 100 10.4 9.6 DU/AC
1, 2, 3, & 5 Zero-Lot Single Family
Units 14 N/A(1)
Croak Rd and Central
Pkwy Extension 8.0
TOTAL 573 125.8 4.5 du/ac
C.0
NOTE:
(1) GROSS ACREAGE FOR ZERO LOT PRODUCTS IS INCLUDED IN EACH INDIVIDUAL
NEIGHBORHOOD GROSS ACREAGE METRIC.
72
0
72
1
25 272426PLAN 3CPLAN 2BPLAN 1A
AC
5'
M
I
N
.
AV
G
.
1
0
'
5'
M
I
N
.
AV
G
.
1
0
'
5'
M
I
N
.
AV
G
.
1
0
'
4'
4'
4'
4'
4'
9'
18
'
18
'
18
'
12
'
12
'
10
'
10
'
12
'
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
MINIMUM SETBACK EXHIBIT
N2-C.0
TYPICAL CONDITION
NOMINAL LOT SIZE: 5225 SF
LOT COVERAGE: 55% MAX
NOTE: ALL SETBACK DIMENSIONS ARE
MINIMUMS AND NOT TO SCALE
300 SF total flat area with a minimum dimension of 8'.Yard area may be provided in more than one locationwithin a lot, with a minimum 80 SF yard or courtyardarea.
72
2
13
10
11
12
15
14
16
60
59
58
57
PARCEL B
56
35
34
21
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
PARCEL A
6
12
10
9
11
8
7
3
5
4
2
1
17
19
15
18
22
20
21
24
23
16
1413
PARCEL A
MJR
71
64
83
76
53
59
1
2
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
80 81
85
82
84
50 51 52
5554
56
6263
66 65
67
73
72
69 70
68
7475
78 77
79
PARCEL F
60
57
58
61
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
PARCEL G
2 1
*
37
27
MJR
30
40
35
36
38
39
34
33
32
29
31
22
24
23
21
28
26
44
25
50
47
48
49
52
51
53
46
42
41
43
45
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1
2
3
4
20
19
PARCEL B
25
13
20
3
34
31
41
37
38
39
40
44
42
43
45
MJR A
32
28
29
33
36 35
27
2324
26
17
18 19
2221
1112
15 14
16
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
PARCEL A
1
30
PARCEL C
PARCEL A
25
13
20
3
34
31
41
37
38
39
40
44
42
43
45
3228
29
333635
27 232426
17 18 19 2221
1112151416
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
1
30
27
40
29
22
24
23
21
28
26
44
25
50
47
48
49
52
51
53
46
4241
43
45
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
19
37
30
35
36
38
34
33
32
31
5
6
7
8
9
1234
39
2 1
3
1
2 1
3
2 1
3
2 1
3
2 1
3
2 1
3
2 1
3
2 1
3
2 1
3
2 1
3
2 1
3
2 1
3
2 1
3
2 1
3
2 1
3
1 1
3
2
1
3
2
12
3
12
3
12
3
12
3
12
3
12
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
12
3
12
3
12
3
12
3
12
3
12
3
12
3
12
3
12
3
12
3
12
3
12
3
12
3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
1
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*3*
3*
2
2
3
3
2
3
2
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
/
S
E
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
LANDSCAPE
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
N2-C.1
Legend
1
3
All Plan 1's fit on this lot
All Plan 2's fit on this lot*
All Plan 3's fit on this lot*
Zero-Lot Line Unit Location
Wildfire Buffer Lots*
*Refer to Lot Coverage Table (Sheet
N2-C.2) for specific elevation lot coverage
fit. CA room options may not be available
per lot coverage requirement.
NOTES
1. Plan fit shown is per setback requirements. Lot Coverage fit for each plan
and elevation may restrict plotting. Refer to Sheet N2-C.2 for lot coverage
requirements.
2. Individual floor plans may be placed next to or across the street from each
other. In no case will the same architectural elevation or color scheme be
allowed next to or across the street from each other, unless they are a different
individual floor plan.
3. The applicant reserves the right to change the unit mix and plan locations
illustrated on this plan in accordance with these notes if it is within substantial
conformance with the approved SDR.
4. Setback requirements can be found on C.0 minimum setback exhibit.
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
Nominal Lot Size: 55'x95'
Number of Motorcourt/SFD Lots: 96
Number of Zero-Lot Line Units: 2
Total: 98 Units
2
72
3
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
LOT COVERAGE TABLE
N2-C.2.1
LEGEND
NA/1- ZERO-LOT LINE PRODUCT ONLY. REFER TO N0.C.1 FOR LOT COVERAGE FOR ZERO-LOT LINE LOTS
NA/2- EXCEEDS LOT COVERAGE OF 45%
72
4
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
LOT COVERAGE TABLE
N2-C.2.2
LEGEND
NA/1- ZERO-LOT LINE PRODUCT ONLY. REFER TO N0.C.1 FOR LOT COVERAGE FOR ZERO-LOT LINE LOTS
NA/2- EXCEEDS LOT COVERAGE OF 45%
72
5
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
LOT COVERAGE TABLE
N2-C.2.3
LEGEND
NA/1- ZERO-LOT LINE PRODUCT ONLY. REFER TO N0.C.1 FOR LOT COVERAGE FOR ZERO-LOT LINE LOTS
NA/2- EXCEEDS LOT COVERAGE OF 45%
72
6
37
27
MJR
30
40
35
36
38
39
34
33
32
29
31
22
24
23
21
28
26
44
25
50
47
48
49
52
51
53
46
42
41
43
45
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1
2
3
4
20
19
PARCEL B
25
13
20
3
34
31
41
37
38
39
40
44
42
43
45
MJR A
32
28
29
33
36 35
27
2324
26
17
18 19
2221
1112
15 14
16
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
PARCEL A
1
30
PARCEL C
PARCEL A
37
27
30
40
35
36
38
39
34
33
32
29
31
22
24
23
21
28
26
44
25
50
47
48
49
52
51
53
46
4241
43
45
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1234
20
19
13
20
3
34
31
41
37
38
39
40
44
42
43
45
3228
29
333635
27 232426
17 18 19 2221
1112151416
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
1
25
30
LANDSCAPE
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
/
S
E
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
LANDSCAPE
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
PARKING PLAN
N2-C.3
PARKING SUMMARY
TOTAL NH2 UNITS: 98 (2 AFFORDABLE UNITS)
REQUIRED PARKING: 2 COVERED + 1 GUEST
GARAGE SPACES: 196
STREET PARALLEL PARKING: 143
DRIVEWAY PARKING: 192
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED: 531 (5.4 SPACES/UNIT)
NOTES:
1)STREET PARALLEL PARKING WILL BE UNMARKED
2)DRIVEWAYS WITH GUEST PARKING HAVE A MINIMUM 18'
LENGTH
LEGEND
STREET PARALLEL PARKING LOCATIONS (1)
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
72
7
37
27
MJR
30
40
35
36
38
39
34
33
32
29
31
22
24
23
21
28
26
44
25
50
47
48
49
52
51
53
46
42
41
43
45
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1
2
3
4
20
19
PARCEL B
25
13
20
3
34
31
41
37
38
39
40
44
42
43
45
MJR A
32
28
29
33
36 35
27
2324
26
17
18 19
2221
1112
15 14
16
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
PARCEL A
1
30
PARCEL C
PARCEL A
33
32
29
31
22
24
23
21
28
26
44
25
50
47
48
49
52
51
53
46
4241
43
45
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1234
20
19
37
27
30
40
35
36
38
39
34
25
30
13
20
3
34
31
41
37
38
39
40
44
42
43
45
3228
29
333635
27 232426
17 18 19 2221
1112151416
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
1
FH
FH
FH
F
H
F
H
F
H
F
H
F
H
F
H
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
F
H
LANDSCAPE
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
/
S
E
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
LANDSCAPE
35
.
6
4
'
36'
36'
36'
36'
36'
36'
36'
3
5
.
8
8
'
3
6
'
32.78'
36
'
40.35'
36
'
36'
36'
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
FIRE ACCESS PLAN
N2-C.4
LEGEND
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
FIRE DEPARTMENT ON-SITE ACCESS ROUTE
FH
NOTES:
1.BACKBONE STREETS TO BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD 2
2.CROAK ROAD TO BE CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF PHASE 1
BACKBONE
3.STREET A (UP TO STREET U), STREET B (UP TO STREET C),
AND CENTRAL PARKWAY EXTENSION TO BE CONSTRUCTED
AS PART OF PHASE 2 BACKBONE
FIRE HYDRANT DETAIL
NTS
36'
20'
20'
28'
CLEAR
8' PARKING
72
8
37
27
MJR
30
40
35
36
38
39
34
33
32
29
31
22
24
23
21
28
26
44
25
50
47
48
49
52
51
53
46
42
41
43
45
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1
2
3
4
20
19
PARCEL B
25
13
20
3
34
31
41
37
38
39
40
44
42
43
45
MJR A
32
28
29
33
36 35
27
2324
26
17
18 19
2221
1112
15 14
16
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
PARCEL A
1
30
PARCEL C
PARCEL A
13
20
3
34
31
41
37
38
39
40
44
42
43
45
3228
29
333635
27 232426
17 18 19 2221
1112151416
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
1
33
32
29
31
22
24
23
21
28
26
44
25
50
47
48
49
52
51
53
46
4241
43
45
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1234
20
19
37
27
30
40
35
36
38
39
34
25
30
LANDSCAPE
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
/
S
E
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
LANDSCAPE
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
GARBAGE PICK UP PLAN
N2-C.5
LEGEND
NEIGHBORHOOD GARBAGE PICK-UP ROUTE
NOTE: NEIGHBORHOOD 2 RESIDENTS WILL PLACE
GARBAGE BINS ALONG THE PUBLIC STREET
GARBAGE BINS (SEE DETAIL BELOW)
GARBAGE BIN DETAIL
NTS
30"
TYP
30
"
TY
P
3'3'
72
9
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE TABLE
N2-C.6.1
UDO Status Lot Numbers Reason for "Exception"Options for UDO compliant entry Total number of
lots
UDO compliant to front
door from sidewalk via
driveway with a slope
gradient of 5% or less
N/A N/A
UDO compliant to front
door from sidewalk via
driveway with a slope
gradient between 5%
and 8.33%
1) This is a hillside development with steep
streets combined with the CBC requirement
for lot drainage which results in a greater
elevation difference between finish pad and
sidewalk and thus steeper slopes on
driveways and walkways to the front door.
Access via driveway, compliant to section
1114A.2 of the CBC.
UDO compliant with
"Exceptions"
(Driveway slope
gradient between 8.33%
and 12%)
1) This is a hillside development with steep
streets combined with the CBC requirement
for lot drainage which results in a greater
elevation difference between finish pad and
sidewalk and thus steeper slopes on
driveways and walkways to the front door.
1) Access from sidewalk to front door via
driveway with a slope gradient between
8.33% and 12%
2) Access to home by parking in garage and
entering home through garage door with
optional ramp
TOTAL:
*
X
*
73
0
PARCEL A
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
19
25
13
20
3
34
31
41
37
38
39
40
44
42
43
45
MJR A
32
28
29
33
36
35
27
23
24
26
17
18
19
22
21
11
12
15
14
16
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
PARCEL A
1
30
PARCEL C
PARCEL A
53
49
50 51
52
55
54
56
57
58
PARCEL G
BO
W
5
4
1
.
2
8
BO
W
5
4
0
.
9
5
BO
W
5
4
0
.
3
8
BO
W
5
3
9
.
7
7
BO
W
5
4
5
.
6
5
BO
W
5
3
8
.
1
8
BO
W
5
3
5
.
9
3
BO
W
5
4
5
.
6
5
BO
W
5
4
3
.
8
0
BO
W
5
4
0
.
7
0
BO
W
5
3
7
.
6
0
BO
W
5
3
4
.
1
2
BOW 545.85
BOW 548.94
BOW 549.41
BOW 547.55
BOW 543.18
BOW 538.32
BOW 533.62
BOW 531.52
BOW 531.63
BOW 522.93
BOW 525.64
BOW 527.78
BOW 529.21
BOW 530.51
BOW 531.84
BOW 533.1
8
BOW 534.
5
4
BOW 535.
9
4
BOW 536.
6
5
P
5
5
5
.
9
P
5
5
4
.
9
P
5
5
3
.
3
P
5
5
0
.
7
P
5
4
7
.
8
P
5
4
4
.
5
P
5
4
1
.
2
P
5
3
7
.
9
P
5
3
4
.
6
P
5
3
1
.
4
P
5
2
7
.
7
P5
2
3
.
9
P5
2
0
.
2
G
L
5
2
4
.
2
G
L
5
2
6
.
9
G
L
5
2
8
.
7
G
L
5
3
0
.
2
G
L
5
3
1
.
5
G
L
5
3
3
.
3
G
L
5
3
4
.
9
G
L
5
3
6
.
3
G
L
5
3
7
.
7
G
L
5
3
8
.
6
GL532.2 GL531.4 GL530.6 GL529.8 GL528.9 GL528.2
GL529.3GL533.0 GL529.8GL530.7GL531.5GL532.3
GL535.7GL546.8 GL539.2GL542.2GL545.2
GL543.0
GL546.8
GL542.6 GL542.0 GL540.6
GL545.1
GL541.0 GL537.7
GL
5
3
3
.
4
GL
5
3
3
.
2
GL
5
3
5
.
2
GL
5
4
0
.
1
GL
5
4
5
.
0
GL
5
4
9
.
0
GL
5
5
1
.
3
GL
5
5
0
.
4
GL
5
4
7
.
7
BOW 55
4
.
8
7
BOW 55
4
.
3
2
BOW 55
4
.
7
7
BOW 55
4
.
2
6
BOW 552
.
7
2
BOW 552
.
6
0
BOW 549.
7
8
BOW 550.
2
4
BOW 547.5
6
FF532.9 FF532.1 FF531.3 FF530.5 FF529.6 FF528.9
FF530.0FF533.7 FF530.5FF531.4FF532.2FF533.0
FF536.4FF547.5 FF539.9FF542.9FF545.9
FF543.7
FF547.5
FF543.3 FF542.7 FF541.3
FF545.8 FF541.7 FF538.4
FF
5
3
4
.
1
FF
5
3
3
.
9
FF
5
3
5
.
9
FF
5
4
0
.
8
FF
5
4
5
.
7
FF
5
4
9
.
7
FF
5
5
2
.
0
FF
5
5
1
.
1
FF
5
4
8
.
4
F
F
5
2
4
.
9
F
F
5
2
7
.
6
F
F
5
2
9
.
4
F
F
5
3
0
.
9
F
F
5
3
2
.
2
F
F
5
3
4
.
0
F
F
5
3
5
.
6
F
F
5
3
7
.
0
F
F
5
3
8
.
4
F
F
5
3
9
.
3
P5
2
3
.
9
P
5
2
6
.
6
P
5
2
8
.
4
P
5
2
9
.
9
P
5
3
1
.
2
P
5
3
3
.
0
P
5
3
4
.
6
P
5
3
6
.
0
P
5
3
7
.
4
P
5
3
8
.
3
P531.9 P531.1 P530.3 P529.5 P528.6 P527.9
P529.0P532.7 P529.5P530.4P531.2P532.0
P535.4P546.5 P538.9P541.9P544.9
P542.7
P546.5
P542.3 P541.7 P540.3
P544.8 P540.7 P537.4
P5
3
3
.
1
P5
3
2
.
9
P5
3
4
.
9
P5
3
9
.
8
P5
4
4
.
7
P5
4
8
.
7
P5
5
1
.
0
P5
5
0
.
1
P5
4
7
.
4
F
F
5
5
6
.
9
F
F
5
5
5
.
9
F
F
5
5
4
.
3
F
F
5
5
1
.
7
F
F
5
4
8
.
8
F
F
5
4
5
.
5
F
F
5
4
2
.
2
F
F
5
3
8
.
9
F
F
5
3
5
.
6
F
F
5
3
2
.
4
F
F
5
2
8
.
7
FF
5
2
4
.
9
FF
5
2
1
.
2
G
L
5
5
6
.
6
G
L
5
5
6
.
2
G
L
5
5
5
.
2
G
L
5
5
3
.
6
G
L
5
5
1
.
0
G
L
5
4
8
.
1
G
L
5
4
4
.
8
G
L
5
4
1
.
5
G
L
5
3
8
.
2
25
13
20
3
34
31
41
37
38
39
40
44
42
43
45
3228
29
333635
27 232426
17 18 19 2221
1112151416
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
1
30
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
19
7.
3
7
%
7.
0
5
%
6.
9
4
%
3.
5
6
%
4.
9
1
%
12
.
0
0
%
7.
5
6
%
4.
9
1
%
5.
9
8
%
6.
4
1
%
6.
8
3
%
6.
7
7
%
7.
6
4
%
7.
7
3
%
7.
7
7
%
7.
8
1
%
7.
4
7
%
8.
5
1
%
5.
6
2
%
4.
2
4
%
4.
3
4
%
4.
3
8
%
4.
0
0
%
4.
5
0
%
8.33%
7.52%
7.52%
7.37%
6.32%
4.28%
4.28%
3.98%
5.45%
5.50%
7.90%
6.23%
8.07%
6.19%
7.77%
7.60%
6.75%
7.17%
7.56%
5.42%
3.63%
4.11%
5.10%
5.34%
5.34%
8.37%
7.96%
23
.
3
4
'
23
.
4
2
'
23
.
3
4
'
23
.
3
4
'
23
.
4
2
'
23
.
4
2
'
23
.
4
2
'
23
.
3
4
'
23
.
4
2
'
23
.
4
2
'
23
.
4
2
'
23
.
4
2
'
23.42'
23.42'
23.42'
23.42'
23.42'
23.42'
23.42'
23.42'
23.42'
23
.
4
9
'
23
.
5
7
'
23
.
4
9
'
23
.
4
9
'
23
.
4
9
'
23
.
5
7
'
24
.
2
'
23
.
4
2
'
23
.
4
2
'
23
.
4
2
'
23
.
4
2
'
26
.
5
8
'
23.42'
23.42'
23.42'
23.3'
23.04'
23.03'
23.05'
23.04'
23.03'
23.01'
24.31'
24.43'
22.97'
23.19'
24.57'
24.1'
24.12'
24.13'
24.13'
BO
W
5
3
0
.
9
7
BO
W
5
3
0
.
4
9
BO
W
5
2
9
.
6
8
BO
W
5
2
8
.
8
7
BO
W
5
2
8
.
0
5
BO
W
5
2
7
.
2
4
BO
W
5
2
7
.
1
4
BO
W
5
2
7
.
9
6
BO
W
5
2
8
.
7
7
BO
W
5
2
9
.
5
8
BO
W
5
3
0
.
4
0
BO
W
5
3
0
.
8
8
X**
** * *
***************
** ** *
** ***
X
X
*********
*
************
FF545.8P544.8
GL
5
4
5
.
1
545.47544.54
BO
W
5
4
1
.
6
7
BO
W
5
4
3
.
3
6
10
.
1
7
'
7.
2
9
'
12
.
0
0
%
XX
12
.
0
0
%
LANDSCAPE
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE EXHIBIT
N2-C.6.2
NEIGHBORHOOD 2:
96 Units
Typical Lot Size: 55'x95' Single
Family Homes
UDO Compliant/Exception - Primary Residence and Secondary
Unit. For units with driveway slope gradient between 8.33% and
12%, Units are compliant through options 1 & 2 below:
1. Access from sidewalk to front door via driveway with a
slope gradient between 8.33% and 12%
2. Access to home by parking in garage and entering home
through garage door with optional ramp.
Notes:
1. For all Primary Residences and Secondary Units, the
home builder shall offer to the home buyer a portable
ramp that can be placed at the exterior door to the
Primary Unit, and if a Secondary Unit is provided, to the
exterior door of the Secondary Unit.
2. House plans, model, and setbacks illustrated here are
conceptual and subject to change.
1. The units are part of Vesting Tentative Tract 8563.
2. The neighborhood is located on a hillside, with
moderate slopes and terrain.
3. All driveway slopes labeled on this exhibit are
based on the calculated slope along the steeper
driveway side.
X
KEY
P - Pad Elevation
FF - Finished Floor Elevation
BOW - Back of Walk Elevation
GL - Garage Lip Elevation
UDO - Universal Design Ordinance
Based on the following site conditions, the Project proposes the
methods outlined in the Legend to meet the intent of the
"Mandatory to offer" UDO requirement for an exterior accessible
route to a primary or other entrance consistent with City Zoning
Code 7.90.060.
EXTERIOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE
FOR UDO COMPLIANCE
LEGEND
UDO Compliant - Primary Residence and Secondary Unit. Some
units require driveway slope gradient to 8.33% max. This
designation assumes pedestrian walks to entry from public sidewalk
via the driveway
*
SE
E
S
H
E
E
T
N
2
-
C
.
6
.
3
73
1
1
2
3
4
PARCEL A
37
27
MJR
30
40
35
36
38
39
34
33
32
29
31
22
24
23
21
28
26
44
25
50
47
48
49
52
51
53
46
42
41
43
45
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1213
14
15
16
17
18
1
2
3
4
20
19
PARCEL B
PARCEL A
6
12
10
9
11
8
7
3
5
4
2
1
13
5
6
7
89
1011
1
2
3
4
37
30
40
35
36
38
39
34
33
32
29 31
12131415
27 28
4446
42
41
43
45
1617
18
20
19
22
24
23
21
2625
47
48
49
50
52 5153P573.3
P570.6
P556.3
P555.9
P554.3
P567.6
P565.9
P555.9
P554.9
P553.3
P550.7
P547.8 P544.5 P541.2 P537.9 P534.6
P551.9 P549.3
P546.3 P543.1 P539.7
P5
3
3
.
6
P
5
3
7
.
6
P
5
4
1
.
6
P
5
4
6
.
0
P
5
4
8
.
4
P564.3
P562.6
P560.7
P559.
0
P531.4 P527.7
P523.9
P520.2
P516.8
P513.3
P510
.
9
P5
1
0
.
4
P5
0
9
.
8
P5
0
9
.
4
P527.6
P539.6 P536.6
P529.5
P522.
6
P517.
9
P513.
4
P513.6
P511.3
P525.3
P522.3
P519.3
P516.3
FF528.6
FF540.6 FF537.6
FF530.5
FF523
.
6
FF518
.
9
FF514
.
4
FF514.6
FF526.3
FF523.3
FF520.3
FF517.3
FF574.3
FF571.6
FF557.3
FF556.9
FF555.3
FF568.6
FF566.9
FF556.9
FF555.9
FF554.3
FF551.7
FF548.8 FF545.5 FF542.2 FF538.9 FF535.6
FF552.9 FF550.3
FF547.3 FF544.1 FF540.7
FF
5
3
4
.
6
F
F
5
3
8
.
6
F
F
5
4
2
.
6
F
F
5
4
7
.
0
F
F
5
4
9
.
4
FF565.3
FF563.6
FF561.
7
FF560
.
0
FF532.4 FF528.7 FF524.9
FF521.2
FF517.8
FF514.3
FF51
1
.
9
FF
5
1
1
.
4
FF
5
1
0
.
8
FF
5
1
0
.
4
FF512.3
GL573.6 GL570.9
GL556.6 GL556.2
GL554.6
GL567.9
GL566.2
GL556.2
GL555.2
GL553.6
GL551.0
GL548.1 GL544.8 GL541.5 GL538.2 GL534.9
GL552.2
GL549.6 GL546.6 GL543.4 GL540.0
GL
5
3
3
.
9
G
L
5
3
7
.
9
G
L
5
4
1
.
9
G
L
5
4
6
.
3
G
L
5
4
8
.
7
GL564.6
GL562.9
GL561.
0
GL559
.
3
GL531.7 GL528.0
GL524.2
GL520.5
GL517.1
GL513.6
GL51
1
.
2
GL
5
1
0
.
7
GL
5
1
0
.
1
GL
5
0
9
.
7
GL527.9
GL539.9 GL536.9
GL529.8
GL522
.
9
GL518
.
2
GL513
.
7
GL513.9
GL511.6
GL525.6
GL522.6
GL519.6
GL516.6
2
4
.
3
1
'
2
4
.
4
3
'
2
2
.
9
7
'
2
3
.
1
9
'
2
2
.
8
8
'
2
4
.
5
7
'
2
4
.
1
'
2
3
.
0
3
'
2
3
.
0
9
'
2
4
.
1
2
'
2
3
.
0
8
'
2
4
.
1
3
'
2
3
.
0
7
'
2
4
.
1
3
'
2
3
.
1
'
24
.
1
3
'
24
.
1
3
'
24
.
1
3
'
24
.
1
5
'
23
.
6
5
'
23
.
1
6
'
23
.
1
6
'
24
.
1
5
'
24
.
1
5
'
23
.
1
6
'
24
.
1
4
'
23
.
1
6
'
23
.
1
5
'
24
.
0
3
'
1
9
.
9
1
'
1
9
.
7
7
'
23.42
'
23.42
'
26.46
'
26
.
3
4
'
23
.
4
2
'
24
.
5
9
'
27
.
4
3
'
2
6
.
6
8
'
2
7
.
0
2
'
31.75'
26.18'
26.27'
25.89'
26.73
'
2
2
.
6
8
'
2
2
.
6
8
'
2
2
.
6
8
'
2
2
.
6
8
'
2
2
.
6
8
'
2
2
.
6
8
'
22
.
4
9
'
26
.
5
2
'
B
O
W
5
5
4
.
8
7
B
O
W
5
5
4
.
3
2
BOW 540.56
BOW 536.05
BOW 531.78
BOW 545
.
1
0
BOW 5
4
8
.
2
4
B
O
W
5
5
4
.
7
7
B
O
W
5
5
4
.
2
6
B
O
W
5
5
2
.
7
2
B
O
W
5
5
2
.
6
0
B
O
W
5
4
9
.
7
8
B
O
W
5
5
0
.
2
4
B
O
W
5
4
7
.
5
6
B
O
W
5
4
6
.
8
2
B
O
W
5
4
3
.
5
2
B
O
W
5
4
4
.
4
9
B
O
W
5
4
1
.
4
1
BO
W
5
4
0
.
2
2
BO
W
5
3
6
.
9
2
BO
W
5
3
8
.
4
4
BO
W
5
3
3
.
6
2
BO
W
5
3
0
.
2
9
BO
W
5
2
6
.
5
8
BO
W
5
2
5
.
9
7
BO
W
5
2
4
.
1
5
BO
W
5
2
2
.
8
5
BO
W
5
2
1
.
0
7
BO
W
5
1
7
.
9
7
BO
W
5
1
9
.
1
4
BO
W
5
1
5
.
4
6
BO
W
5
1
4
.
8
9
BO
W
5
1
1
.
9
7
BO
W
5
1
1
.
9
0
B
O
W
5
1
0
.
4
2
BOW 5
0
9
.
5
6
BO
W
5
0
9
.
9
4
BOW 5
0
9
.
0
0
BOW 5
0
8
.
4
4
BO
W
5
7
1
.
9
4
B
O
W
5
6
9
.
4
6
B
O
W
5
6
6
.
6
8
B
O
W
5
6
4
.
9
3
B
O
W
5
6
3
.
3
0
B
O
W
5
6
1
.
6
7
B
O
W
5
6
0
.
0
5
B
O
W
5
5
8
.
4
2
B
O
W
5
3
8
.
1
2
BO
W
5
3
4
.
9
5
BO
W
5
2
7
.
9
6
BO
W
5
2
1
.
1
3
BO
W
5
1
6
.
2
6
BO
W
5
1
2
.
2
4
5
.
4
2
%
3
.
6
3
%
4
.
1
1
%
5
.
1
0
%
5
.
3
4
%
5
.
3
4
%
5
.
3
4
%
5.
3
4
%
5.
3
4
%
5.
8
9
%
5.
9
2
%
5.
6
3
%
5.
6
7
%
6.
8
4
%
7.
1
3
%
4
.
9
2
%
5
.
3
0
%
4.87
%
4.70
%
4.76
%
5.
5
4
%
8.
2
8
%
7.
3
3
%
6.
9
8
%
7.
5
3
%
6
.
4
4
%
6.68%
7.24%
5.23%
4.73%
2.06%
3
.
8
2
%
4
.
1
3
%
5
.
3
5
%
5
.
6
5
%
5
.
5
2
%
5
.
3
0
%
6
.
2
8
%
6.
0
1
%
8.
2
9
%
7.
3
5
%
7.
0
0
%
6.
5
7
%
6.
2
3
%
8.
2
0
%
6.
7
1
%
8
.
5
6
%
9
.
0
8
%
8
.
7
8
%
8
.
4
4
%
8
.
1
3
%
8
.
3
7
%
7
.
9
6
%
****************
*
*
*
*
*
**
**
**
**
**
**
*
*
*
*
*
********
**X X X X X
LANDSCAPE
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE EXHIBIT
N2-C.6.3
NEIGHBORHOOD 2:
96 Units
Typical Lot Size: 55'x95' Single
Family Homes
UDO Compliant/Exception - Primary Residence and
Secondary Unit. For units with driveway slope gradient
between 8.33% and 12%, Units are compliant through
options 1 & 2 below:
1. Access from sidewalk to front door via driveway
with a slope gradient between 8.33% and 12%
2. Access to home by parking in garage and entering
home through garage door with optional ramp.
Notes:
1. For all Primary Residences and Secondary Units,
the home builder shall offer to the home buyer a
portable ramp that can be placed at the exterior
door to the Primary Unit, and if a Secondary Unit
is provided, to the exterior door of the Secondary
Unit.
2. House plans, model, and setbacks illustrated here
are conceptual and subject to change.
1. The units are part of Vesting Tentative Tract 8563.
2. The neighborhood is located on a hillside, with
moderate slopes and terrain.
3. All driveway slopes labeled on this exhibit are
based on the calculated slope along the steeper
driveway side.
X
KEY
P - Pad Elevation
FF - Finished Floor Elevation
BOW - Back of Walk Elevation
GL - Garage Lip Elevation
UDO - Universal Design Ordinance
Based on the following site conditions, the Project
proposes the methods outlined in the Legend to meet the
intent of the "Mandatory to offer" UDO requirement for
an exterior accessible route to a primary or other
entrance consistent with City Zoning Code 7.90.060.
EXTERIOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE
FOR UDO COMPLIANCE
LEGEND
UDO Compliant - Primary Residence and Secondary Unit.
Some units require driveway slope gradient to 8.33% max.
This designation assumes pedestrian walks to entry from
public sidewalk via the driveway
*
SEE SHEET N2-C.6.2
N2-C.6.3
73
2
13
10
11
12
15
14
16
60
59
58
57
PARCEL B
56
35
34
21
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
PARCEL A
37
27
MJR
30
40
35
36
38
39
34
33
32
29
31
22
24
23
21
28
26
44
25
50
47
48
49
52
51
53
46
42
41
43
45
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
1
2
3
4
20
19
PARCEL B
25
13
20
3
34
31
41
37
38
39
40
44
42
43
45
MJR A
32
28
29
33
36 35
27
2324
26
17
18 19
2221
1112
15 14
16
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
PARCEL A
1
30
PARCEL C
PARCEL A
6
12
10
9
11
8
7
3
5
4
2
1
17
19
15
18
22
20
21
24
23
16
1413
PARCEL A
MJR
71
64
83
76
53
59
1
2
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
80 81
85
82
84
50 51 52
5554
56
6263
66 65
67
73
72
69 70
68
7475
78 77
79
PARCEL F
60
57
58
61
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
PARCEL G
LEGEND
GHAD OWNED AND MAINTAINED(6)(8)
CITY OWNED AND MAINTAINED
HOA OWNED AND MAINTAINED
CITY OWNED AND CFD MAINTAINED(1)(2)(3)
GHAD OWNED AND GHAD/HOA MAINTAINED(7)
PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED(4)(8)
SEMI PUBLIC OWNED AND MAINTAINED
NOTES:
(1)ALL STREETS ARE PUBLIC.
(2)ALL PARKWAY STRIPS WITHIN CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY TO
BE HOA MAINTAINED.
(3)PARK FRONTAGE SIDEWALKS ALONG NEIGHBORHOOD
STREETS TO BE HOA MAINTAINED. IF FUTURE PARK
DESIGN REMOVES AND RELOCATES THE SIDEWALK,
THE NEW SIDEWALK WILL THEN BE CITY MAINTAINED.
(4)STREETS, COMMON LANDSCAPE, AND BUILDING
EXTERIORS WITHIN MEDIUM DENSITY PARCEL WILL BE
HOA MAINTAINED. ENCLOSED YARD SPACE TO BE
PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED.
(5)FRONT YARD LANDSCAPE ON ALL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS
ARE PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED.
(6)PROPOSED TRAIL CONNECTIONS TO BE GHAD OWNEDAND MAINTAINED.
(7)GHAD WILL MAINTAIN SLOPE STABILITY, REPAIR,
MOWING, FIRE ACCESS ROAD (INCLUDING DRAINAGE
DITCH) AND WEED ABATEMENT. HOA WILL MAINTAIN
DECORATIVE LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, AND TRASH
REMOVAL.
(8)RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING OR ASSOCIATED WITH
PRIVATE LOTS ARE TO BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED.
RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING COMMON
AREA/LANDSCAPE ARE TO BE HOA MAINTAINED.
RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING TRAILS WITHIN GHAD
PARCELS ARE TO BE MAINTAINED BY GHAD.
(9)NEIGHBORHOOD 6 ENCLOSED BACK AND SIDE YARDS
FOR FEE SIMPLE LOTS WILL BE PRIVATELY
MAINTAINED. ALL EXTERIOR ELEMENTS OF THE FEE
SIMPLE AND CONDOMINIUM DWELLING UNITS WILL BE
HOA MAINTAINED.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
MAINTENANCERESPONSIBILITY PLAN
N2-C.7
73
3
11/29/2022
734
11/29/2022
735
23
'
-
5
"
Garage
21'-6" x 23'-0"
95
'
-
0
"
recycle
trash
compost
W/H
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
12
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
15
'
-
0
"
A
v
g
.
;
5'-0" Min.
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
G
a
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
4'-0" Min.
5'-0"
47
'
-
0
"
18
'
-
4
"
12
'
-
0
"
18
'
-
1
1
"
18
'
-
4
"
5'
-
0
"
Flex
14'-6" x 12'-1"
Bedroom 4
Suite
14'-6" x 12'-0"
Bath
5
Entry
Porch
6'
-
0
"
First Floor
1734 SQ. FT.
6'-6"9'-0"
12
'
-
0
"
30
'
-
3
"
walk in
pantry
11
'
-
5
"
Courtyard
20'-0" x 12'-0"
Opt. Covered
Outdoor Room
23'-0" x 10'-0"
Great Room
23'-6" x 17'-0"
Dining Room
15'-1" x 12'-0"
Pdr.
45'-0"5'-0"
55'-0"
6'
-
3
"
UP
19R
3'
-
6
"
Storage
6'-5"16'-0"22'-7"
6'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
5'-0"29'-7"15'-5"5'-0"
10
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
7'-2"
36" slide
in range
/ oven
1'
-
7
"
micro/Panty
a/cpad
W.I.C.
40'-0" l.f.
Second Floor
1924 SQ. FT.
60" x 66"
Seat
Primary
Bedroom
18'-6" x 15'-0"
Primary
Bath
Bedroom 2
Suite
11'-6" x 11'-9"
45'-0"
6'-5"16'-0"22'-7"
19
'
-
1
"
30
'
-
3
"
3'
-
6
"
6'
-
3
"
44
'
-
9
"
3'
-
1
0
"
8'-7"12'-1012"14'-1112"
Opt. Bedroom 5
30'-012"
9'
-
0
"
4'-212"
low
linen
8'-7"
D
W
Bath
2
Bedroom 3
Suite
11'-7" x 12'-3"
Bedroom 5
12'-0" x 13'-10"
low
linen
10'-0"
Clg.
3'
-
7
"
Bath
3
2'
-
0
"
Bath
4
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
16'-4" x 13'-10"
Bath
4
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A1.1.0
PLAN 1 FRONT ELEVATIONS4 BEDROOMS + LOFT
OPT. BEDROOM 5
5.5 BATHS
1,734 S.F. 1ST FLOOR
1,924 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
3,658 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
526 S.F. GARAGE
230 S.F. OPT. COVERED
OUTDOOR ROOM
57 S.F. 'A' PORCH
11/29/2022
73
6
Front Elevation 1A -
Traditional Farmhouse
11
'
-
3
12"
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A1.2.0
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1A
1A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Wood Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
73
7
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
10
'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
2
"
F.F.
P.L. at Primary
P.L.
F.F.
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A1.2.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1A
1A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Wood Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
73
8
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
Bedroom 4
Suite
14'-6" x 12'-0"
Bath
5
Entry
Porch
First Floor
1734 SQ. FT.
Courtyard
20'-0" x 12'-0"
7'-2"
Second Floor
1924 SQ. FT.
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
16'-4" x 13'-10"
D
W
Bedroom 3
Suite
11'-7" x 12'-3"
Bath
3
Bath
4
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A1.3.0
FLOOR PLAN 1B
57 S.F. 'B' PORCH
11/29/2022
73
9
Front Elevation 1B -
Contmeporary Cottage
11
'
-
3
12"
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A1.3.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1B
1B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Metal Awnings
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
74
0
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
10
'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
2
"
F.F.
P.L. at Primary
P.L.
F.F.
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A1.3.2
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1B
1B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
74
1
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
Bedroom 4
Suite
14'-6" x 12'-0"
Bath
5
Entry
Porch
First Floor
1734 SQ. FT.
Courtyard
20'-0" x 12'-0"
7'-2"
Second Floor
1924 SQ. FT.
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
16'-4" x 13'-10"
D
W
Bedroom 3
Suite
11'-7" x 12'-3"
low
linen
Bath
3
Bath
4
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A1.4.0
FLOOR PLAN 1C
64 S.F. 'C' PORCH
11/29/2022
74
2
Front Elevation 1C -
Contemporary Prairie
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A1.4.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1C
1C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
74
3
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
10
'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
8
'
-
1
"
F.F.
P.L. at Primary
P.L.
F.F.
10
'
-
0
34"
10
'
-
0
34"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A1.4.2
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1C
1C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
74
4
5:12
5:12
RIDGE
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
ROOF PLAN 1A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
6:
1
2
RI
D
.
6:12
RI
D
G
E
R.
6:12
RI
D
.
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VA
L
L
E
Y
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
VAL
L
E
Y
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
5:12
5:12
RIDGE
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
ROOF PLAN 1A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
6:
1
2
RI
D
.
6:12
RI
D
G
E
R.
6:12
RI
D
.
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
VAL
L
E
Y
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
4:12
4:12
RIDGE
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
ROOF PLAN 1C
OVERHANG : 24"4:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:12
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
RIDGE
RIDGE
R.
RI
D
.
RI
D
G
E
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:
1
2
HI
P
HI
P
VA
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
VALLEY
VALLEY
VALLEY VA
L
L
E
Y
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
HIP
HIP
HIPHIP
HIP
HIP HIP
HIP
HIP
HIP
HIP
HI
P
HIP
HIP4:
1
2
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 4 8 12
08/11/2022
scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"N2 - A1.5.0
PLAN 1 ROOF PLANS
11/29/2022
74
5
11/29/2022
746
19
'
-
0
"
Garage
21'-0" x 20'-0"
95
'
-
0
"
recycle
trash
compost
W/H
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
12
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
15
'
-
0
"
A
v
g
.
;
1
0
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
5'-0" Min.
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
G
a
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
4'-0" Min.
43
'
-
6
"
32
'
-
6
"
Flex
14'-7" x 11'-0"
Great Room
19'-1" x 28'-0"
Entry
Kitchen
Porch
16
'
-
6
"
First Floor
1873 SQ. FT.
Opt. Covered
Outdoor Room
22'-0" x 10'-0"
12
'
-
0
"
38
'
-
9
"
16
'
-
0
"
5'-0"29'-6"15'-6"5'-0"
5'-0"45'-0"5'-0"
21'-6"20'-0"
10
'
-
0
"
7'-612"
micro/
walk in
pantry/
Opt. Prep
Kitchen
3'-6"
28
'
-
3
"
9'-0"7'-0"
6'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
4'
-
9
"
UP
19R
drop
zone
Pdr.
Bedroom 4
Suite
12'-3" x 11'-0"
Bath
5
36" slide
in range
/ oven
pantry
7'
-
0
"
15
'
-
0
"
A
v
g
.
;
10
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
13'-0" Clg.
2'
-
0
"
Living
14'-9" x 11'-0"
Pdr.
Bedroom
12'-3" x 11'-0"
Bath
5
a/cpad
Opt. ADU
419 S.F.
Second Floor
1958 SQ. F.T
DN
19
R
W.I.C.
42'-0" l.f.
Primary
Bedroom
17'-3" x 17'-0"
Primary
Bath
72" x 60"
Bedroom 2
Suite
11'-0" x 11'-0"
Bedroom 3
Suite
11'-0" x 11'-4"Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
13'-0" x 22'-0"
low
linen
3'
-
0
"
42
'
-
6
"
3'-6"41'-6"
33
'
-
9
"
11
'
-
9
"
11'-4"33'-8"
D W
Laund.
Bath
2
Bath
3
Bath
4
Seat
low wall
10'-0"5'-912"
low
linen
10'-0"
Clg.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A2.1.0
PLAN 2 FLOOR PLAN
4 BEDROOMS + BONUS
OPT. BEDROOM 5
OPT. ADU
5.5 BATHS
1,873 S.F. 1ST FLOOR
1,958 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
3,831 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
460 S.F. GARAGE
215 S.F. OPT. COVERED
OUTDOOR ROOM
45 S.F. 'A' PORCH
1,454 S.F. 1ST FLOOR (EXCLUDES 419 S.F. ADU)
1,958 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
3,412 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
11/29/2022
74
7
Front Elevation 2A -
Traditional Farmhouse
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A2.2.0
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2A
2A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Wood Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
74
8
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
9
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
10
'
-
0
34"
10
'
-
0
34"
F.F.
P.L. at Primary
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A2.2.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2A
2A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Wood Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
74
9
Garage
21'-0" x 20'-0"
trash
compost
W/H
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
Flex
14'-7" x 11'-0"
Entry
Porch
First Floor
1873 SQ. FT.
7'-612"
Bedroom 4
Suite
12'-3" x 11'-0"
Bath
5
Second Floor
1958 SQ. F.T
19R
Bedroom 2
Suite
11'-0" x 11'-0"
Bedroom 3
Suite
11'-0" x 11'-4"Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
13'-0" x 22'-0"
D W
Laund.
Bath
2
Bath
3
Bath
4
low
linen
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A2.3.0
FLOOR PLAN 2B
101 S.F. 'B' PORCH
11/29/2022
75
0
Front Elevation 2B -
Contemporary Cottage
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A2.3.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2B
2B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Metal Awnings
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
75
1
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
9
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
10
'
-
0
34"
10
'
-
0
34"
F.F.
P.L. at Primary
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A2.3.2
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2B
2B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
75
2
Garage
21'-0" x 20'-0"
trash
compost
W/H
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
Flex
14'-7" x 11'-0"
Entry
Porch
First Floor
1873 SQ. FT.
7'-612"
Bedroom 4
Suite
12'-3" x 11'-0"
Bath
5
Second Floor
1958 SQ. F.T
19R
Bedroom 2
Suite
11'-0" x 11'-0"
Bedroom 3
Suite
11'-0" x 11'-4"Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
13'-0" x 22'-0"
D W
Laund.
Bath
2
Bath
3
Bath
4
low
linen
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A2.4.0
FLOOR PLAN 2C
70 S.F. 'C' PORCH
11/29/2022
75
3
Front Elevation 2C -
Contemporary Prairie
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A2.4.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2C
2C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
75
4
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
8
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
10
'
-
0
34"
10
'
-
0
34"
F.F.
P.L. at Primary
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A2.4.2
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2C
2C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
75
5
ROOF PLAN 2A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"6:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
5:12
RIDGE
6:12
4:12
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
5:12
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:12
PITCHBREAK
VA
L
L
E
Y
V.
V
A
L
L
E
Y
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
ROOF PLAN 2A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"6:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
5:12
RIDGE
5:12
5:12
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
5:12
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
5:12 VA
L
L
E
Y
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VA
L
L
E
Y
RIDGE
5:12
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor RoomOutdoor Room
ROOF PLAN 2C
OVERHANG : 24"4:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
4:12
4:12
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:12
4:12
HIP HI
P
VA
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
HIP
HI
P
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
HIP
HIP
HI
P
HI
P
HI
P
HIP
R.
4:12
HI
P
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 4 8 12
08/11/2022
scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"N2 - A2.5.0
PLAN 2 ROOF PLANS
11/29/2022
75
6
11/29/2022
757
18
'
-
0
"
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
95
'
-
0
"
55'-0"
recycle
trash
compost
W/H
5'-0"
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
12
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
15
'
-
0
"
A
v
g
.
;
1
0
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
5'-0" Min.
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
G
a
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
4'-0" Min.
5'-0"45'-0"
50
'
-
0
"
27
'
-
0
"
15
'
-
5
"
52
'
-
7
"
19
'
-
0
"
coats/storage
UP
19R
9'
-
0
"
Opt. Covered
Outdoor Room
20'-5" x 10'-0"
20'-6"16'-2"8'-4"
Formal
Dining Room
15'-6" x 12'-4"
Bedroom 4
Suite
12'-0" x 12'-0"
Great Room
21'-6" x 16'-6"
Informal
Dining Room
14'-4" x 14'-0"
walk in
pantry/
Opt. Prep
Kitchen
Butler's
pantry
Bath
5
Entry
Kitchen
Porch
Work Shop
12'-0" x 12'-1"
10
'
-
0
"
Pdr.
8'
-
0
"
5'-0"28'-1"5'-0"
6'
-
0
"
5'-0"6'-0"
First Floor
1845 SQ. FT.
16'-11"
7'-1"
micro/
36" slide
in range
/ oven
pantry
1'
-
7
"
1'
-
6
"
13
'
-
1
1
"
12
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
a/cpad
open to
below
Second Floor
2030 SQ. FT.
Primary
Bedroom
17'-0" x 18'-0"
Primary
Bath
Bedroom 2
Suite
12'-2" x 11'-6"
Bedroom 3
Suite
11'-0" x 11'-9"
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
16'-2" x 14'-9"
DN
19R
Opt. Bedroom 5
45'-0"
51
'
-
7
"
45'-0"
21'-0"24'-0"
7'
-
9
"
43
'
-
1
0
"
Dr.Opt.
Bath
2
Bath
3
D
W
open to
below
W.I.C.
26'-0" l.f.
78" x 54"
open to
below
Bedroom 5
Suite
16'-2" x 14'-9"
Bath
4
Bath
4
high
glass
Se
a
t
low
linen
W.I.C.
13'-0" l.f.Storage
4'
-
1
1
"
low
linen
Laund.
Shelf
9'-0"
high
glass
10'-0"
Clg.
1'
-
0
"
4 BEDROOMS + LOFT
OPT. BEDRM 5
5.5 BATHS
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A3.1.0
FLOOR PLAN 3A
1,845 S.F. 1ST FLOOR
2,030 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
3,875 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
579 S.F. GARAGE
206 S.F. OPT. COVERED
OUTDOOR ROOM
26 S.F. 'A' PORCH
11/29/2022
75
8
Front Elevation 3A -
Traditional Farmhouse
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A3.2.0
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3A
3A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Wood Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
75
9
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
10
'
-
6
34"
+/
-
3
1
'
-
1
"
F.F.
P.L. at Primary
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A3.2.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3A
3A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Wood Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
76
0
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
trash
compost
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
coats/storage
Formal
Dining Room
15'-6" x 12'-4"
Bedroom 4
Suite
12'-0" x 12'-0"
Bath
5
Entry
Porch
Pdr.
First Floor
1833 SQ. FT.
7'-1"
open to
below
Second Floor
2022 SQ. FT.
Bedroom 3
Suite
11'-0" x 11'-9"
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
16'-2" x 14'-9"
DN
19RBath
2
Bath
3
D
W
below
low
linen
Laund.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A3.3.0
FLOOR PLAN 3B
58 S.F. 'B' PORCH
11/29/2022
76
1
Front Elevation 3B -
Contemporary Cottage
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A3.3.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3B
3B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Metal Awnings
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
76
2
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
10
'
-
6
34"
+/
-
3
1
'
-
1
"
F.F.
P.L. at Primary
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A3.3.2
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3B
3B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
76
3
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
trash
compost
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
coats/storage
Formal
Dining Room
15'-6" x 12'-4"
Bedroom 4
Suite
12'-0" x 12'-0"
Bath
5
Entry
Porch
Pdr.
First Floor
1833 SQ. FT.
7'-1"
open to
below
Second Floor
2022 SQ. FT.
Bedroom 3
Suite
11'-0" x 11'-9"
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
16'-2" x 14'-9"
DN
19RBath
2
Bath
3
D
W
below
low
linen
Laund.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A3.4.0
FLOOR PLAN 3C
56 S.F. 'C' PORCH
11/29/2022
76
4
Front Elevation 3C -
Contemporary Prairie
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A3.4.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3C
3C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
76
5
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
10
'
-
0
34"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
4
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N2 - A3.4.2
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3C
3C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
11/29/2022
76
6
5:12
5:12
RIDGE
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:12
ROOF PLAN 3A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
RI
D
G
E
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
4:12at Std. Condition
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
5:12
5:12
RIDGE
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
RI
D
G
E
4:12
ROOF PLAN 3B
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
RI
D
G
E
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
4:12at Std. Condition
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
7:12
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
7:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:12
4:12
R.
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
4:12
VALLEY
ROOF PLAN 3C
OVERHANG : 24"4:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
4:12
HIP
HIP
VALLEY
4:12
4:
1
2
HIP
RI
D
G
E
HIP
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
HIP
4:
1
2
4:12at Std. Condition
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
4:12
4:
1
2
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 4 8 12
08/11/2022
scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"N2 - A3.5.0
PLAN 3 ROOF PLANS
11/29/2022
76
7
11/29/2022
768
PORCH
3'-7"3'-7"
U14
U14 U14
U14
ENTRY
GARAGE
BEDROOM 4SUITE
BATH 5
FLEXPOWDERWALK IN/PANTRY
U16
GREAT ROOM
COURTYARD
KITCHEN
DINNINGROOM
U17
U14 U13U15
U6 U8U4 U10
U7 U8
OPT. COVEREDOUTDOOR ROOM
3'-8"3'-8 1/2"4'-7 1/2"5'-9"
3'-7"5'-4 1/2"1'-10 3/4"
4'
-
7
"
2'-9 1/2"3'-3"4'-3 1/2"6 1/4"
1'
-
1
1
1
/
2
"
6'
-
9
"
5'-7"3'-7"1'-9"4'-6"
1'
-
3
1
/
2
"
5'
-
5
1
/
2
"
2'-3"
4'
-
3
1
/
2
"
7'
-
1
0
1
/
2
"
4'-10"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 05/19/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTESNOTES
MANDATORY TO INSTALL:
1.HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND
CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1126A.6
2.ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES
AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1
OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1136A.
3.THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING
CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC
CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRICAL CODE, SEC. 1126A.
U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR. AT ENTRY
DOOR PER CBC CH. 11, SEC. 1136A.2.
MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR.
U2 NOT USED
U3
U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR
WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT
PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM/BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2.
U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
REFER TO SHEET GN-3 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND
REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION.
U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR
POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3 OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING
OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA. CIRCLE, 48" X 60"
RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE
PURCHASER/OWNER.
U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING
THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 & CBC CH. 11A, SEC.
1134A.5 & SEC. 1135A.6.
U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.1
FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER/BATH, OR
LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.2, OPT. 2
U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.7.
U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE
LAVATORY/SINK, PER CBC CH. 11A, SEC. 1134A.8 & OPT.4
U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND
TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.8.
U13 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1133A.6.
U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER/OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST
A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING
OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE
18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER
SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"
X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR,
DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT
THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNE, PER CBC CH. 11, SEC.
1133A.2.
U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR
REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11, SEC. 1133A.4.1.1.
U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT
SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, PER CBC CH. 1136A.
U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO.
21-07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 & CBC CH. 11A,
SEC. 1119A. INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST
AND COST OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
WALL LEGEND
2X6 WALL
2X4 WALL
7.90.130
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL IN ALL VISIT-ABLE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS:
1. HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARDWARE NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING OR
TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A.
2. ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS OR
LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A.6.
3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTACLE
OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY
WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A OR APPLICABLE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL
CODE.
2. FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
7.90.090
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A KITCHEN IS
LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL:
1. SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC.1133A.4.1.1.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN GENERAL NOTES:
7.90.060
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL:
1. WHERE AT LEAST ONE DOORBELL IS PROVIDED
FOR THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRY DOOR, ONE THAT
IS BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM THE FINISHED
FLOOR MUST BE INSTALLED PER CBC 1136A.2.
7.90.080
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A POWDER ROOM OR
BATHROOM IS LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY
LEVEL:
1. GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT CONSISTENT WITH
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2 FOR THE WATER CLOSET
AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB.
NOT USED
U18 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT LEAST ONE BEDROOM ON THE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL WITH ALL COMPONENTS
MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7.90.130. A
CLOSET SHALL HAVE AT LEAST A THIRTY-TWO INCH (32") NET
OPENING AND ADJUSTABLE CLOSET RODS AND SHELVING.
4 "UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH
BUYER TO FILL OUT.
PER CITY OF DUBLIN'S REQUIREMENT:
"UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO
EACH BUYER TO FILL OUT.
NOTE:
FOR ALL INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE, SEE
STANDARD 1ST FLOOR AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHEETS.UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE_FLOOR PLAN 1
N2 - A5.0.011/29/2022
76
9
ENTRY
FLEX
3'-9 1/4"3'-9 1/4"
BATH 5
U6 U8U4 U10
U7 U8
BEDROOM 4SUITE
GARAGE
WALK IN/PANTRY
KITCHEN
GREAT ROOM
DINNINGROOM
OPT. COVEREDOUTDOOR ROOM
POWDER
U16
3'-8"3'-8"3'-8"4'-0 1/2"6'-5 1/2"
U17
U14
U14U14
U14
U14 U13U15
1'-9"3'-5"3'-7"12'-9"
6'
-
5
"
2'-11 1/2"6'-3 1/2"2'-3 1/2"3'-11 1/2"
2'
-
1
1
/
2
"
3'
-
0
"
1'
-
5
1
/
2
"
3'
-
1
0
"
3'
-
2
1
/
2
"
3'
-
2
1
/
2
"
1'
-
1
1
/
2
"
5'
-
0
"
7'
-
7
1
/
2
"
2'
-
1
1
1
/
2
"
3'
-
6
"
11
'
-
5
1
/
2
"
PORCH
4'-6 1/2"4'-8 1/2"2'-3 1/2"1'-9"2'-2 1/2"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 05/19/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTESNOTES
MANDATORY TO INSTALL:
1.HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND
CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1126A.6
2.ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES
AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1
OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1136A.
3.THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING
CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC
CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRICAL CODE, SEC. 1126A.
U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR. AT ENTRY
DOOR PER CBC CH. 11, SEC. 1136A.2.
MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR.
U2 NOT USED
U3
U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR
WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT
PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM/BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2.
U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
REFER TO SHEET GN-3 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND
REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION.
U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR
POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3 OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING
OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA. CIRCLE, 48" X 60"
RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE
PURCHASER/OWNER.
U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING
THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 & CBC CH. 11A, SEC.
1134A.5 & SEC. 1135A.6.
U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.1
FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER/BATH, OR
LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.2, OPT. 2
U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.7.
U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE
LAVATORY/SINK, PER CBC CH. 11A, SEC. 1134A.8 & OPT.4
U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND
TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.8.
U13 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1133A.6.
U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER/OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST
A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING
OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE
18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER
SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"
X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR,
DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT
THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNE, PER CBC CH. 11, SEC.
1133A.2.
U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR
REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11, SEC. 1133A.4.1.1.
U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT
SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, PER CBC CH. 1136A.
U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO.
21-07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 & CBC CH. 11A,
SEC. 1119A. INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST
AND COST OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
WALL LEGEND
2X6 WALL
2X4 WALL
7.90.130
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL IN ALL VISIT-ABLE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS:
1. HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARDWARE NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING OR
TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A.
2. ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS OR
LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A.6.
3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTACLE
OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY
WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A OR APPLICABLE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL
CODE.
2. FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
7.90.090
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A KITCHEN IS
LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL:
1. SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC.1133A.4.1.1.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN GENERAL NOTES:
7.90.060
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL:
1. WHERE AT LEAST ONE DOORBELL IS PROVIDED
FOR THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRY DOOR, ONE THAT
IS BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM THE FINISHED
FLOOR MUST BE INSTALLED PER CBC 1136A.2.
7.90.080
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A POWDER ROOM OR
BATHROOM IS LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY
LEVEL:
1. GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT CONSISTENT WITH
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2 FOR THE WATER CLOSET
AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB.
NOT USED
U18 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT LEAST ONE BEDROOM ON THE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL WITH ALL COMPONENTS
MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7.90.130. A
CLOSET SHALL HAVE AT LEAST A THIRTY-TWO INCH (32") NET
OPENING AND ADJUSTABLE CLOSET RODS AND SHELVING.
4 "UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH
BUYER TO FILL OUT.
PER CITY OF DUBLIN'S REQUIREMENT:
"UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO
EACH BUYER TO FILL OUT.
NOTE:
FOR ALL INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE, SEE
STANDARD 1ST FLOOR AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHEETS.UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE_FLOOR PLAN 2
N2 - A5.1.011/29/2022
77
0
KITCHEN
U14
U14
U14
U16U14U13U15
GREAT ROOM
INFORMAL DINNING ROOM
FORMAL DINNING ROOM
BEDROOM 4SUITE
BATH 5
POWDER
GARAGE
WORK SHOP
ENTRY
PORCH
OPT. COVEREDOUTDOOR ROOM
3'-7"3'-6"
WALK IN/PANTRY
BUTLER'SPANTRY
3'-9"3'-10"4'-5"3'-9 1/2"4'-8 1/2"
U17
U7 U8
U6 U8U4 U10
1'
-
9
"
1'
-
1
1
"
4'-5 1/2"5'-0"
4'
-
0
"
4'
-
2
1
/
2
"
9'
-
9
1
/
2
"
2'
-
1
1
"
5'-5"2'-0 1/2"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 05/19/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 2Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTESNOTES
MANDATORY TO INSTALL:
1.HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND
CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1126A.6
2.ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES
AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1
OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1136A.
3.THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING
CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC
CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRICAL CODE, SEC. 1126A.
U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR. AT ENTRY
DOOR PER CBC CH. 11, SEC. 1136A.2.
MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR.
U2 NOT USED
U3
U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR
WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT
PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM/BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2.
U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
REFER TO SHEET GN-3 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND
REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION.
U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR
POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3 OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING
OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA. CIRCLE, 48" X 60"
RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE
PURCHASER/OWNER.
U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING
THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 & CBC CH. 11A, SEC.
1134A.5 & SEC. 1135A.6.
U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.1
FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER/BATH, OR
LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.2, OPT. 2
U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.7.
U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE
LAVATORY/SINK, PER CBC CH. 11A, SEC. 1134A.8 & OPT.4
U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND
TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.8.
U13 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1133A.6.
U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER/OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST
A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING
OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE
18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER
SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"
X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR,
DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT
THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNE, PER CBC CH. 11, SEC.
1133A.2.
U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR
REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11, SEC. 1133A.4.1.1.
U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT
SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, PER CBC CH. 1136A.
U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO.
21-07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 & CBC CH. 11A,
SEC. 1119A. INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST
AND COST OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
WALL LEGEND
2X6 WALL
2X4 WALL
7.90.130
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL IN ALL VISIT-ABLE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS:
1. HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARDWARE NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING OR
TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A.
2. ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS OR
LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A.6.
3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTACLE
OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY
WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A OR APPLICABLE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL
CODE.
2. FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
7.90.090
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A KITCHEN IS
LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL:
1. SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC.1133A.4.1.1.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN GENERAL NOTES:
7.90.060
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL:
1. WHERE AT LEAST ONE DOORBELL IS PROVIDED
FOR THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRY DOOR, ONE THAT
IS BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM THE FINISHED
FLOOR MUST BE INSTALLED PER CBC 1136A.2.
7.90.080
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A POWDER ROOM OR
BATHROOM IS LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY
LEVEL:
1. GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT CONSISTENT WITH
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2 FOR THE WATER CLOSET
AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB.
NOT USED
U18 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT LEAST ONE BEDROOM ON THE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL WITH ALL COMPONENTS
MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7.90.130. A
CLOSET SHALL HAVE AT LEAST A THIRTY-TWO INCH (32") NET
OPENING AND ADJUSTABLE CLOSET RODS AND SHELVING.
4 "UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH
BUYER TO FILL OUT.
PER CITY OF DUBLIN'S REQUIREMENT:
"UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO
EACH BUYER TO FILL OUT.
NOTE:
FOR ALL INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE, SEE
STANDARD 1ST FLOOR AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHEETS.UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE_FLOOR PLAN 3
N2 - A5.2.011/29/2022
77
1
11/29/2022
N2-L2.1
0 5 10 20
2
NEIGHBORHOOD 2 TYPICAL FRONT YARDS
PLANTING NOTE:
For lots that are adjacent to open space, or deemed a
“Fire Lot”, refer to the Diablo Firesafe Council list as
well as the approved plant list in the landscape design
guidelines for fire safe plants recommendations.
77
2
NEIGHBORHOOD 3
773
P/SP
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
OPEN SPACE
(BASIN)
OP
E
N
S
P
A
C
E
(
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
)
OPEN SPACE
(WETLAND)
OPEN SPACE
(BASIN)
BASIN
SE
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
S
E
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
LO
Y
A
L
T
O
N
R
O
A
D
PANORAMA DRIVE
T
A
B
L
E
M
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
S TERRACINA DR
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
CR
O
A
K
R
D
STREET A
STREET B
ST
R
E
E
T
J
STREET K
STREET L
ST
R
E
E
T
N
STREET O
STREET M
ST
R
E
E
T
S
ST
R
E
E
T
T
ST
R
E
E
T
C
ST
R
E
E
T
Y
ST
R
E
E
T
Z
COURT U
STREET V
STREET B
CENTRAL PARKWAY
CENTRAL PARKWAY STREET R
ST
R
E
E
T
X
ST
R
E
E
T
W
STREET Q
STREET P
CR
O
A
K
R
D
LOOP H
LOOP H
STREET G
STREET B
ST
R
E
E
T
I
STREET F
STREET E
STREET D
STREET A
COURT A
COURT B
COURT C
COURT E
COURT F
CO
U
R
T
G
COURT H
CO
U
R
T
I
CO
U
R
T
J
COURT KCOURT L
COURT S
COURT R
COURT QCOURT V
COURT U
COURT T
COURT M
CO
U
R
T
N
CO
U
R
T
O
CO
U
R
T
P
ST
R
E
E
T
C
STR
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
ST
R
E
E
T
T
STREET P
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
ACCESS
ROAD
ACCESS
ROAD
PROPOSED
TRAIL
EVA/
ACCESS ROAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
NEIGHBORHOOD SUMMARY
NEIGHBORHOOD TYPICAL LOT
SIZE UNITS GROSS
ACREAGE (±)DENSITY
1 65'x100'99 30.1 3.3 DU/AC
2 55'x95'96 23.4 4.1 DU/AC
3 50'x110'85 19.5 4.5 DU/AC
4 49.5'x80'85 16.8 5.1 DU/AC
5 48'x70' Cluster 94 17.6 5.4 DU/AC
6 Attached Multi-Family 100 10.4 9.6 DU/AC
1, 2, 3, & 5 Zero-Lot Single Family
Units 14 N/A(1)
Croak Rd and Central
Pkwy Extension 8.0
TOTAL 573 125.8 4.5 du/ac
C.0
NOTE:
(1) GROSS ACREAGE FOR ZERO LOT PRODUCTS IS INCLUDED IN EACH INDIVIDUAL
NEIGHBORHOOD GROSS ACREAGE METRIC.
77
4
77
5
34 35 3633
P1-A
AC
P3-C
P2-B
5'
M
I
N
.
AV
G
.
1
0
'
5'
M
I
N
.
AV
G
.
1
0
'
5'
M
I
N
.
AV
G
.
1
0
'
4'
4'
4'
4'
4'
9'
18
'
18
'
18
'
12
'
12
'
12
'
AC
AC
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 3
MINIMUM SETBACK EXHIBIT
N3-C.0
TYPICAL CONDITION
NOMINAL LOT SIZE: 5500 SF
LOT COVERAGE: 55% MAX
NOTE: ALL SETBACK DIMENSIONS ARE
MINIMUMS AND NOT TO SCALE
300 SF total flat area with a minimum dimension of 8'.Yard area may be provided in more than one locationwithin a lot, with a minimum 80 SF yard or courtyardarea.
77
6
92
93
94
95
96
97
9899
100
91
90
89
88
87
8685
84
79
78
81
80
82
101
PARCEL G
8
9
83
MJR 2
52
39
27
MJR
78
68
49
50
65
66
67
63
71
64
70
86 8988878485 90
83 82 81 80 79 7677
73
74
75
72
91
58
51
59
54
60
56
61
53
62
57
55
47
41
38
43
46
45
40
48
37
44
42
26
34
29
25
31
35
28
36
32
33
30
6
12
10
9
11
8
7
3
5
4
2
1
17
19
15
18
22
20
21
24
23
16
1413
PARCEL A
69
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
61 62 63
64
65
66
12
7
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/CPA
D
A/C
PA
D
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
P1 P2RP2
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
P1 P2RP2
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
P1 P2R P2 P1R
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P1R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/C PADA/CPAD
FOOTPRINTP1
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINTP1RFOOTPRINTP1
A/C PADA/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R FOOTPRINTP1
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R FOOTPRINTP1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINTP1
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R FOOTPRINTP1
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
FOOTPRINTP1R FOOTPRINTP1
A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2
2
1 3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1 1 1 1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
11
1
11
1
1
111111111
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
2 2 2 2 2 2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2 2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
22
222222222
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
3
3
3
3
3 3 3 3 3 3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3 3
3
3
3
3
3 3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3 3
3
3
3
3
3
3 3
3
3
3
3 3
3 3
3 3
3
3
3
33
3
33
3
3
3
33333333
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
OPENSPACE
ACCESSROAD
50
637172
58
51
59
54
60
56
61
53
62
57
55
47
41
38
43
46
45
40
48
37
44
42
26
34
29
25
31
35
28
36
32
33
30
6
12
523927
49
10
9
11
8
7
3
5
4
2
1
17
19
15
18
22
20
21
24
23
16
1413
PARCEL A
65
6667
6371
6470
86 8988878485 90
83 82 81 80 79 7677
73
74
75
72
91
78
68 69
2ADU
2
22
2
2
2
2
22
2
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 3
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
N3-C.1
Legend
2
1
3
All Plan 1's fit on this lot
All Plan 2's fit on this lot
All Plan 3's fit on this lot
Zero-Lot Line Unit Location
*For specific lot coverage information for all
plan types please see Sheet C.2
NOTES
1. Individual floor plans may be placed next to or across the street from each
other. In no case will the same architectural elevation or color scheme be
allowed next to or across the street from each other, unless they are a different
individual floor plan.
2. The applicant reserves the right to change the unit mix and plan locations
illustrated on this plan in accordance with these notes if it is within substantial
conformance with the approved SDR.
3. Setback requirements can be found on C.0 minimum setback exhibit.
NEIGHBORHOOD 3
Nominal Lot Size: 50'x110'
Number of Motorcourt/SFD Lots: 85
Number of Zero-Lot Line Units: 6
Total: 91 Units
77
7
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 3
LOT COVERAGE TABLE
N3-C.2.3
LEGEND
NA/1- ZERO LOT LINE PRODUCT ONLY ON THIS LOT
NA/2 - PLAN DOES NOT FIT DUE TO LOT COVERAGE
NA/3- PLAN ONLY FITS WITH ADU REAR SETBACK (PER DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE CH 8.80.03)
77
8
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 3
LOT COVERAGE TABLE
N3-C.2.2
LEGEND
NA/1- ZERO LOT LINE PRODUCT ONLY ON THIS LOT
NA/2 - PLAN DOES NOT FIT DUE TO LOT COVERAGE
NA/3- PLAN ONLY FITS WITH ADU REAR SETBACK (PER DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE CH 8.80.03)
77
9
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 3
LOT COVERAGE TABLE
N3-C.2.3
LEGEND
NA/1- ZERO LOT LINE PRODUCT ONLY ON THIS LOT
NA/2 - PLAN DOES NOT FIT DUE TO LOT COVERAGE
NA/3- PLAN ONLY FITS WITH ADU REAR SETBACK (PER DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE CH 8.80.03)
78
0
37
MJR
40
35
36
38
39
44
43
45
1
52
39
27
MJR
78
68
49
50
65
66
67
63
71
64
70
86 8988878485 90
83 82 81 80 79 7677
73
74
75
72
91
58
51
59
54
60
56
61
53
62
57
55
47
41
38
43
46
45
40
48
37
44
42
26
34
29
25
31
35
28
36
32
33
30
6
12
10
9
11
8
7
3
5
4
2
1
17
19
15
18
22
20
21
24
23
16
1413
PARCEL A
69
12
7 5239
45
40
48
37
44
42
26
34
29
25
31
35
28
36
32
33
30
27
78
68
49
50
65
6667
6371
6470
86 8988878485 90
83 82 81 80 79 7677
73
74
75
72
91
58
51
59
54
60
56
61
53
62
57
55
47
41
38
43
46
6
1210
9
11
8
7
3
5
4
2
1
17
19
15
18
22
20
21
24
23
16
1413
PARCEL A
69
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
ACCESSROAD
OPENSPACE
A/CPA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/CPA
D
A/C
PA
D
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 3
PARKING PLAN
N3-C.3
PARKING SUMMARY
TOTAL NH3 UNITS: 91
REQUIRED PARKING: 2 COVERED + 1 GUEST
GARAGE SPACES: 182
STREET PARALLEL PARKING: 196
DRIVEWAY PARKING: 182
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED: 560 (6.1 SPACES/UNIT)
NOTES:
1)STREET PARALLEL PARKING WILL BE UNMARKED
2)DRIVEWAYS WITH GUEST PARKING HAVE A MINIMUM 18'
LENGTH
LEGEND
STREET PARALLEL PARKING LOCATIONS (1)
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
78
1
37
MJR
30
40
35
36
38
39
34
33
32
29
31
28
44
42
41
43
45
1
2
3
52
39
27
MJR
78
68
49
50
65
66
67
63
71
64
70
86 8988878485 90
83 82 81 80 79 7677
73
74
75
72
91
58
51
59
54
60
56
61
53
62
57
55
47
41
38
43
46
45
40
48
37
44
42
26
34
29
25
31
35
28
36
32
33
30
6
12
10
9
11
8
7
3
5
4
2
1
17
19
15
18
22
20
21
24
23
16
1413
PARCEL A
69
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
61 62 63
64
65
66
12
6
7
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/CPA
D
A/C
PA
D
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
P1 P2RP2
A/C PADA/CPAD
A/C PAD
P1 P2RP2
A/C PADA/CPAD
A/C PAD
P1 P2R P2 P1R
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P1R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/C PADA/CPAD
FOOTPRINTP1
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
A/CPAD
FOOTPRINT
P2
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINTP1RFOOTPRINTP1
A/C PADA/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R FOOTPRINTP1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R FOOTPRINTP1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINTP1
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R FOOTPRINTP1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
FOOTPRINTP1R FOOTPRINTP1
A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2
523927
MJR
78
68
49
50
65
6667
6371
6470
86 8988878485 90
83 82 81 80 79 7677
73
74
75
72
91
58
51
59
54
60
56
61
53
62
57
55
47
41
38
43
46
45
40
48
37
44
42
26
34
29
25
31
35
28
36
32
33
30
6
1210
9
11
8
7
3
5
4
2
1
17
19
15
18
22
20
21
24
23
16
1413
PARCEL A
12
69
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
OPENSPACEFH
FHFH
FH
FH
FHFH
FH
FHFH
F
H
FH
FH
FH
FH FH
FH
FH
FH
ACCESSROAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 3
FIRE ACCESS PLAN
N3-C.4
LEGEND
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
FIRE DEPARTMENT ON-SITE ACCESS ROUTE
FH
FIRE HYDRANT DETAIL
NTS
36'
20'
20'
28'
CLEAR
8' PARKING
78
2
92
93
94
95
96
97
9899
100
91
90
89
88
87
8685
84
79
78
81
80
82
101
PARCEL G
8
9
83
MJR 2
37
MJR
30
40
35
36
38
39
34
33
32
29
31
28
44
42
41
43
45
1
2
3
52
39
27
MJR
78
68
49
50
65
66
67
63
71
64
70
86 8988878485 90
83 82 81 80 79 7677
73
74
75
72
91
58
51
59
54
60
56
61
53
62
57
55
47
41
38
43
46
45
40
48
37
44
42
26
34
29
25
31
35
28
36
32
33
30
6
12
10
9
11
8
7
3
5
4
2
1
17
19
15
18
22
20
21
24
23
16
1413
PARCEL A
69
12
6
7
45
40
48
37
44
42
26
34
29
25
31
35
28
36
32
33
30
6
1210
9
11
8
7
3
5
4
2
1
17
19
15
18
22
20
21
24
23
16
1413
PARCEL A
523927
78
68
49
50
65
6667
6371
6470
86 8988878485 90
83 82 81 80 79 7677
73
74
75
72
91
58
51
59
54
60
56
61
53
62
57
55
47
41
38
43
46
69
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
OPENSPACE
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/CPA
D
A/CPA
D
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 3
GARBAGE PICK UP PLAN
N3-C.5
LEGEND
NEIGHBORHOOD GARBAGE PICK-UP ROUTE
NOTE: NEIGHBORHOOD 3 RESIDENTS WILL PLACE GARBAGE BINS
ALONG THE PUBLIC STREET AT THE END OF PRIVATE DRIVEWAYS
GARBAGE BINS (SEE DETAIL BELOW)
GARBAGE BIN DETAIL
NTS
30"
TYP
30
"
TY
P
3'3'
78
3
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 3
UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE TABLE
N3-C.6.1
UDO Status Lot Numbers Reason for "Exception"Options for UDO compliant entry Total number of
lots
UDO compliant to front
door from sidewalk via
driveway with a slope
gradient of 5% or less
N/A N/A
UDO compliant to front
door from sidewalk via
driveway with a slope
gradient between 5%
and 8.33%
1) This is a hillside development with steep
streets combined with the CBC requirement
for lot drainage which results in a greater
elevation difference between finish pad and
sidewalk and thus steeper slopes on
driveways and walkways to the front door.
Access via driveway, compliant to section
1114A.2 of the CBC.
UDO compliant with
"Exceptions"
(Driveway slope
gradient between 8.33%
and 12%)
1) This is a hillside development with steep
streets combined with the CBC requirement
for lot drainage which results in a greater
elevation difference between finish pad and
sidewalk and thus steeper slopes on
driveways and walkways to the front door.
1) Access from sidewalk to front door via
driveway with a slope gradient between
8.33% and 12%
2) Access to home by parking in garage and
entering home through garage door with
optional ramp
TOTAL:
*
X
*
78
4
92
93
94
95
96
97
9899
100
91
90
89
88
87
8685
84
79
78
81
80
82
101
PARCEL G
8
9
83
MJR 2
37
MJR
40
35
36
38
39
44
43
45
1
52
39
27
MJR
78
68
49
50
65
66
67
63
71
64
70
86 8988878485 90
83 82 81 80 79 7677
73
74
75
72
91
58
51
59
54
60
56
61
53
62
57
55
47
41
38
43
46
45
40
48
37
44
42
26
34
29
25
31
35
28
36
32
33
30
6
12
10
9
11
8
7
3
5
4
2
1
17
19
15
18
22
20
21
24
23
16
1413
PARCEL A
69
62
746766
PARCEL N
63 70
PARCEL O PARCEL P
71
64 6865 7269 73
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
PARCEL C
PARCEL E
10
9
8
19
5
18
4
15
1
14
11
2
3
6
7
12
16
13
20
17
98
PARCEL Q
75
76
PARCEL V
97
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
61 62 63
64
65
66
12
7
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/CPA
D
A/C
PA
D
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
P1 P2RP2
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
P1 P2RP2
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
P1 P2R P2 P1R
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P1R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/C PADA/CPAD
FOOTPRINTP1
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINTP1RFOOTPRINTP1
A/C PADA/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R FOOTPRINTP1
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R FOOTPRINTP1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINTP1
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R FOOTPRINTP1
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
FOOTPRINTP1R FOOTPRINTP1
A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2
P5
3
1
.
5
FF
5
3
2
.
5
GL
5
3
1
.
8
45
40
48
37
44
42
26
34
29
25
31
35
28
36
32
33
30
69
27
78
68
49
50
65
6667
6371
6470
86 8988878485 90
83 82 81 80 79 7677
73
74
75
72
91
58
51
59
54
60
56
61
53
62
57
55
47
41
38
43
46
5239
6
12
9
11
8
7
3
5
4
2
17
19
15
18
22
20
21
24
23
16
1413
PARCEL A
10
BOW 528.78
27.59'
10.95%
P5
3
3
.
4
FF
5
3
4
.
4
GL
5
3
3
.
7
25.5'
BOW 531.91
BOW 534.76
7.02%
BOW 537.58
BOW 540.96
P5
3
6
.
2
P5
3
9
.
1
P5
4
2
.
4
P5
4
5
.
1
FF
5
3
7
.
2
FF
5
4
0
.
1
FF
5
4
3
.
4
FF
5
4
6
.
1
GL
5
3
6
.
5
GL
5
3
9
.
4
GL
5
4
2
.
7
GL
5
4
5
.
4
6.82%
7.14%
6.82%
6.63%
P5
3
0
.
4
P5
3
3
.
2
P5
3
6
.
2
P5
3
9
.
2
P5
4
2
.
8
P5
4
5
.
2
FF
5
3
1
.
4
GL
5
3
0
.
7
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
BOW 529.29
BOW 532.19
BOW 535.21
BOW 538.20
BOW 541.53
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
28.37'
FF
5
3
4
.
2
FF
5
3
7
.
2
FF
5
4
0
.
2
FF
5
4
3
.
8
FF
5
4
6
.
2
GL
5
3
3
.
5
GL
5
3
6
.
5
GL
5
3
9
.
5
GL
5
4
3
.
1
GL
5
4
5
.
5
5.53%
5.06%
5.1%
6.15%
5.92%
5.14%
GL
5
3
9
.
9
GL
5
4
3
.
5
GL
5
4
6
.
6
GL
5
4
9
.
7
GL
5
5
2
.
8
GL
5
5
4
.
7
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
BOW 551.51
BOW 548.38
BOW 545.26
BOW 542.14
BOW 538.913.83%
5.25%
5.33%
5.53%
4.79%
5.14%
BOW 543.82
BOW 543.65
26.4'
BOW 553.48
BOW 532.63
BOW 529.77
BOW 526.82
BOW 532.65
BOW 526.38
BOW 538.41
BOW 541.46
BOW 544.25
BOW 547.08
BOW 549.89
BOW 553.02
BOW 555.01
BOW 534.22
BOW 534.42
27.5'
25.5'
25.5'
28.68'25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
27.54'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
27.26'
P5
2
8
.
5
P5
2
7
.
9
P5
3
0
.
7
P5
3
3
.
6
P5
3
4
.
1
P5
3
5
.
9
P5
3
5
.
3
P5
4
0
.
4
P5
4
3
.
1
P5
4
5
.
8
P5
4
8
.
7
P5
5
1
.
7
P5
5
4
.
5
P5
5
6
.
6
FF
5
2
9
.
5
FF
5
2
8
.
9
FF
5
3
1
.
7
FF
5
3
4
.
6
FF
5
3
5
.
1
FF
5
3
6
.
9
FF
5
3
6
.
3
GL
5
2
8
.
8
GL
5
2
8
.
2
GL
5
3
1
.
0
GL
5
3
3
.
9
GL
5
3
4
.
4
GL
5
3
6
.
2
GL
5
3
5
.
6
FF
5
4
1
.
4
FF
5
4
4
.
1
FF
5
4
6
.
8
FF
5
4
9
.
7
FF
5
5
2
.
7
FF
5
5
5
.
5
FF
5
5
7
.
6
GL
5
4
0
.
7
GL
5
4
3
.
4
GL
5
4
6
.
1
GL
5
4
9
.
0
GL
5
5
2
.
0
GL
5
5
4
.
8
GL
5
5
6
.
9
FF
5
4
1
.
3
FF
5
4
4
.
2
FF
5
4
7
.
3
FF
5
5
0
.
4
FF
5
5
3
.
5
FF
5
5
5
.
4
P5
5
4
.
4
P5
5
2
.
5
P5
4
9
.
4
P5
4
6
.
3
P5
4
3
.
2
P5
4
0
.
3
4.11%
4.98%
4.82%
5.02%
7.9%
6.86%
9.49%
8.31%
7.61%
7.25%
7.53%
8.27%
6.98%
6.93%
P5
3
4
.
0
P5
3
5
.
5
P5
3
8
.
3
P5
3
9
.
9
FF
5
4
7
.
8
P5
4
8
.
5
P5
5
1
.
0
P5
5
4
.
0
P5
5
7
.
2
P5
5
9
.
7
P5
6
1
.
0
FF
5
3
5
.
0
FF
5
3
6
.
5
FF
5
3
9
.
3
FF
5
4
0
.
9
P5
4
6
.
8
GL
5
4
8
.
8
FF
5
5
2
.
0
FF
5
5
5
.
0
FF
5
5
8
.
2
FF
5
6
0
.
7
FF
5
6
2
.
0
GL
5
3
4
.
3
GL
5
3
5
.
8
GL
5
3
8
.
6
GL
5
4
0
.
2
GL
5
4
7
.
1
FF
5
4
9
.
5
GL
5
5
1
.
3
GL
5
5
4
.
3
GL
5
5
7
.
5
GL
5
6
0
.
0
GL
5
6
1
.
3
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
28.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
27.18'
BOW 532.53
BOW 534.62
BOW 537.30
BOW 539.07
BOW 546.01
BOW 547.63
BOW 549.97
BOW 552.93
BOW 556.13
BOW 560.11
4.38%
4.59%
5.37%
5.37%
5.22%
4.59%
4.27%
3.96%
5.1%
4.63%
6.94%
BOW 558.83
P524.1P523.1P522.2P521.2P520.2P519.2P518.6 FF525.1FF524.1FF523.2FF522.2FF521.2FF520.2FF519.6
GL524.4GL523.4GL522.5GL521.5GL520.5GL519.5GL518.9
25
.
5
'
25
.
5
'
25
.
5
'
25
.
5
'
25
.
5
'
25
.
5
'
25
.
5
'
27
.
8
6
'
BO
W
5
2
3
.
1
2
BO
W
5
2
2
.
6
1
BO
W
5
2
1
.
4
5
BO
W
5
2
0
.
9
5
BO
W
5
1
9
.
5
8
BO
W
5
1
8
.
9
7
BO
W
5
1
7
.
6
0
BO
W
5
1
6
.
9
6
6.
9
6
%
7.
4
5
%
6%
7.
5
3
%
6.
0
8
%
7.
6
5
%
7.
0
2
%
5.
0
2
%
P5
1
6
.
0
P5
2
0
.
5
P5
2
5
.
0
P5
2
9
.
4
P
5
3
3
.
7
P
5
3
8
.
1
P
5
4
1
.
2
FF
5
1
7
.
0
FF
5
2
1
.
5
FF
5
2
6
.
0
FF
5
3
0
.
4
F
F
5
3
4
.
7
F
F
5
3
9
.
1
F
F
5
4
2
.
2
GL
5
1
6
.
3
GL
5
2
0
.
8
GL
5
2
5
.
3
GL
5
2
9
.
7
G
L
5
3
4
.
0
G
L
5
3
8
.
4
G
L
5
4
1
.
5
25.5'
25.5'
24.59'
BOW 539.4
0
BOW 536.70
BOW 532.37
BOW 528.07
BOW 523.7
6
BOW 519.
1
2
BOW 514.
5
1
24.88'
24.8'
24.8'
24.81'
7.2%
6.59%
6.19%
6.55%
6.55%
6.82%
8.54%
P532.4P531.4P529.4P528.4P526.3P525.3P523.7P522.7 FF533.4FF532.4FF530.4FF529.4FF527.3FF526.3FF524.7FF523.7
GL532.7GL531.7GL529.7GL528.7GL526.6GL525.6GL524.0GL523.0
P511.9
P512.7 P515.5 P516.5 P518.1 P519.1
P5
2
7
.
9
P5
2
8
.
9
P5
3
1
.
6
P5
3
3
.
1
P5
3
5
.
3
P5
3
7
.
7
P5
3
9
.
7
P5
2
2
.
9
P5
2
4
.
7
P5
2
6
.
8
P5
2
8
.
9
P5
3
1
.
1
P5
3
2
.
6
25
.
5
'
25
.
5
'
25
.
5
'
25
.
5
'
25
.
5
'
25
.
5
'
25
.
5
'
25
.
5
'
BO
W
5
2
1
.
9
0
BO
W
5
2
2
.
7
0
BO
W
5
2
4
.
5
1
BO
W
5
2
7
.
1
2
BO
W
5
2
8
.
0
7
BO
W
5
3
0
.
4
6
BO
W
5
3
1
.
5
1
BO
W
5
2
5
.
3
1
4.
3
1
%
5.
1
%
4.
2
7
%
5.
0
6
%
6.
2
%
6.
3
9
%
4.
8
6
%
4.
6
7
%
FF
5
2
8
.
9
FF
5
2
9
.
9
FF
5
3
2
.
6
FF
5
3
4
.
1
FF
5
3
6
.
3
FF
5
3
8
.
7
FF
5
4
0
.
7
GL
5
2
8
.
2
GL
5
2
9
.
2
GL
5
3
1
.
9
GL
5
3
3
.
4
GL
5
3
5
.
6
GL
5
3
8
.
0
GL
5
4
0
.
0
BOW 526.10
BOW 528.11
BOW 530.12
BOW 532.30
BOW 534.51
BOW 536.71
BOW 538.81
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.53'
26.67'
8.24%
4.27%
6.98%
4.31%
4.27%
5.04%
4.46%
FF512.9
FF513.7 FF516.5 FF517.5 FF519.1 FFL520.1
FF
5
2
3
.
9
FF
5
2
5
.
7
FF
5
2
7
.
8
FF
5
2
9
.
9
FF
5
3
2
.
1
FF
5
3
3
.
6
GL512.2 GL513.0
GL515.8 GL516.8 GL518.4 GL519.4
GL
5
2
3
.
2
GL
5
2
5
.
0
GL
5
2
7
.
1
GL
5
2
9
.
2
GL
5
3
1
.
4
GL
5
3
2
.
9
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25.5'
25
.
5
'
25
.
5
'
26
'
25
.
8
7
'
26
'
25
.
8
7
'
BO
W
5
1
0
.
2
9
BO
W
5
1
1
.
2
1
BO
W
5
1
3
.
6
2
BO
W
5
1
4
.
5
4
BO
W
5
1
6
.
7
8
BO
W
5
1
7
.
6
8
BOW 521.06
BOW 523.25
BOW 525.29
BOW 527.30
BOW 529.51
BOW 530.92
8.39%
6.86%
7.1%
7.45%
7.41%
7.76%
6.
7
5
%
6.
3
5
%
8.
6
9
%
8.
4
3
%
6.
8
9
%
7.
3
8
%
A/CPA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/CPA
D
A/C
PA
D
10'
P531.2FF532.2
GL531.5
GL
5
3
1
.
5
BOW 528.61 531.375 STEPS
8'28.42'
BOW 529.94 53
0
.
9
0
2.14%12%
P512.4FF513.4
GL
5
1
2
.
7
GL512.7
8'
28.42'
51
1
.
7
5
3.34%
12%
512.59
10'
P5
4
1
.
5
FF
5
4
2
.
5
GL
5
4
1
.
8
GL541.8
15.7'
8'29.25'BOW 540.25
BOW 542.25541.69
12%2.02%
3.58%
*
X
***
*******
**
****
*******
********
******
******
X****************
X****
*******
******
P524.1FF525.1
GL524.4
*
XX
X
X
X
XX
X
X 54
1
.
2
1
BOW 510.
7
9
BOW 509.
2
3
X
6 STEPS
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
OPENSPACE
UNIVERAL DESIGN ORDINANCE EXHIBIT
N3-C.6.2
NEIGHBORHOOD 3:
85 Units
Typical Lot Size: 50'x110' Single
Family Homes
UDO Compliant/Exception - Primary Residence and
Secondary Unit. For units with driveway slope gradient
between 8.33% and 12%, Units are compliant through
options 1 & 2 below:
1. Access from sidewalk to front door via driveway
with a slope gradient between 8.33% and 12%
2. Access to home by parking in garage and entering
home through garage door with optional ramp.
Notes:
1. For all Primary Residences and Secondary Units,
the home builder shall offer to the home buyer a
portable ramp that can be placed at the exterior
door to the Primary Unit, and if a Secondary Unit
is provided, to the exterior door of the Secondary
Unit.
2. House plans, model, and setbacks illustrated here
are conceptual and subject to change.
1. The units are part of Vesting Tentative Tract 8563.
2. The neighborhood is located on a hillside, with
moderate slopes and terrain.
3. All driveway slopes labeled on this exhibit are
based on the calculated slope along the steeper
driveway side.
KEY
P - Pad Elevation
FF - Finished Floor Elevation
BW - Back of Walk Elevation
GL - Garage Lip Elevation
UDO - Universal Design Ordinance
Based on the following site conditions, the Project
proposes the methods outlined in the Legend to meet the
intent of the "Mandatory to offer" UDO requirement for
an exterior accessible route to a primary or other
entrance consistent with City Zoning Code 7.90.060.
EXTERIOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE
FOR UDO COMPLIANCE
LEGEND
UDO Compliant - Primary Residence and Secondary Unit.
Some units require driveway slope gradient to 8.33% max.
This designation assumes pedestrian walks to entry from
public sidewalk via the driveway
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 3
78
5
92
93
94
95
96
97
9899
100
91
90
89
88
87
8685
84
79
78
81
80
82
101
PARCEL G
8
9
83
MJR 2
37
MJR
40
35
36
38
39
44
43
45
1
52
39
27
MJR
78
68
49
50
65
66
67
63
71
64
70
86 8988878485 90
83 82 81 80 79 7677
73
74
75
72
91
58
51
59
54
60
56
61
53
62
57
55
47
41
38
43
46
45
40
48
37
44
42
26
34
29
25
31
35
28
36
32
33
30
6
12
10
9
11
8
7
3
5
4
2
1
17
19
15
18
22
20
21
24
23
16
1413
PARCEL A
69
62
746766
PARCEL N
63 70
PARCEL O PARCEL P
71
64 6865 7269 73
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
PARCEL C
PARCEL E
10
9
8
19
5
18
4
15
1
14
11
2
3
6
7
12
16
13
20
17
98
PARCEL Q
75
76
PARCEL V
97
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
61 62 63
64
65
66
12
7
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/CPA
D
A/C
PA
D
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
P1 P2RP2
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
P1 P2RP2
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
P1 P2R P2 P1R
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P1R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/C PADA/CPAD
FOOTPRINTP1
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINTP1RFOOTPRINTP1
A/C PADA/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R FOOTPRINTP1
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R FOOTPRINTP1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINT
P1
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINTP1
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R FOOTPRINTP1
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
FOOTPRINTP1R FOOTPRINTP1
A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2R
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINTP2
LEGEND
GHAD OWNED AND MAINTAINED(6)(8)
CITY OWNED AND MAINTAINED
HOA OWNED AND MAINTAINED
CITY OWNED AND CFD MAINTAINED(1)(2)(3)
GHAD OWNED AND GHAD/HOA MAINTAINED(7)
PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED(4)(8)
SEMI PUBLIC OWNED AND MAINTAINED
NOTES:
(1)ALL STREETS ARE PUBLIC.
(2)ALL PARKWAY STRIPS WITHIN CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY TO
BE HOA MAINTAINED.
(3)PARK FRONTAGE SIDEWALKS ALONG NEIGHBORHOOD
STREETS TO BE HOA MAINTAINED. IF FUTURE PARK
DESIGN REMOVES AND RELOCATES THE SIDEWALK,
THE NEW SIDEWALK WILL THEN BE CITY MAINTAINED.
(4)STREETS, COMMON LANDSCAPE, AND BUILDING
EXTERIORS WITHIN MEDIUM DENSITY PARCEL WILL BE
HOA MAINTAINED. ENCLOSED YARD SPACE TO BE
PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED.
(5)FRONT YARD LANDSCAPE ON ALL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS
ARE PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED.
(6)PROPOSED TRAIL CONNECTIONS TO BE GHAD OWNED
AND MAINTAINED.
(7)GHAD WILL MAINTAIN SLOPE STABILITY, REPAIR,
MOWING, FIRE ACCESS ROAD (INCLUDING DRAINAGE
DITCH) AND WEED ABATEMENT. HOA WILL MAINTAIN
DECORATIVE LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, AND TRASH
REMOVAL.
(8)RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING OR ASSOCIATED WITH
PRIVATE LOTS ARE TO BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED.
RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING COMMON
AREA/LANDSCAPE ARE TO BE HOA MAINTAINED.
RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING TRAILS WITHIN GHAD
PARCELS ARE TO BE MAINTAINED BY GHAD.
(9)NEIGHBORHOOD 6 ENCLOSED BACK AND SIDE YARDS
FOR FEE SIMPLE LOTS WILL BE PRIVATELY
MAINTAINED. ALL EXTERIOR ELEMENTS OF THE FEE
SIMPLE AND CONDOMINIUM DWELLING UNITS WILL BE
HOA MAINTAINED.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 3
MAINTENANCERESPONSIBILITY PLAN
N3-C.7
78
6
11/29/2022
787
11/29/2022
788
28
'
-
3
"
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
11
0
'
-
0
"
Recycle
Trash
Compost
12
'
-
0
"
First Floor
1,383 s.f.
Entry
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
G
a
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
12
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
Fr
o
n
t
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
21
'
-
9
"
10
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
Re
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
UP
19R
ZoneDrop
PantryWalk-In
W/H
Great Room
30'-1" x 18'-7"
Kitchen
Pdr.Flex
12'-0" x 13'-9"
Dining
15'-1" x 14'-0"
BEDROOM 4
SUITE /
Opt. ADU
13'-0" x 16'-1"
311 S.F.
Opt. Covered
Outdoor Room
20'-0" x 10'-0"
6'
-
0
"
8'
-
6
"
5'-0"6'-6"
Opt. Covered
Courtyard
24'-0" x 10'-4"
22
'
-
4
"
Bath
3
10
'
-
4
"
33
'
-
7
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
5'-0"
5'-0"35'-0"
5'-0"40'-0"
5'-0"
13'-11"5'-1"21'-0"
5'-0"12
'
-
0
"
14
'
-
1
"
2'
-
2
"
50
'
-
0
"
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
5'-0" Min.4'-0" Min.
40'-0"
16'-0"19'-0"
Elect.
Cable
21
'
-
9
"
15
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
Av
e
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
A/CPad
A/CPad
Opt. 6080 Fr. Dr.
Opt. 3680Barn Dr.
3'
-
2
"
6'-1"
12'-1012"6'-112"
13'-11"5'-1"
4'
-
0
12"
flr abv.Line of 2nd
Second Floor
1,808 s.f.
DN
19R
Primary
Bedroom
17'-3" x 18'-7"
Primary
Bath
W.I.C.
45'-0" l.f.
Bedroom 3
11'-3" x 11'-0"
Opt. Bedroom 5
Dr.Opt.
40'-0"
52
'
-
2
"
Bedroom 2
12'-1" x 11'-6"
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
11'-4" x 16'-0"
12'-2"16'-7"11'-3"
40'-0"
33
'
-
7
"
16
'
-
5
"
2'
-
2
"
Bedroom 5
11'-4" x 14'-4"
Laund.
Bath
2
60" x 48"
Seat
SpaceWork
SpaceWork
5'
-
1
1
"
11'-4"
Linen
ADU
13'-0" x 16'-1"
311 S.F.
Bath
3
A/CPad
Opt. ADU
311 s.f.
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A1.1.0
PLAN 1 FLOOR PLAN
1,694 S.F. 1ST FLOOR
1,808 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
3,502 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
449 S.F. GARAGE
190 S.F. OPT. COVERED
OUTDOOR ROOM
166 S.F. 'A' PORCH
0 4 8 12
1,383 S.F. 1ST FLOOR (EXCLUDES 311 S.F. ADU)
1,808 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
3,191 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
4 BEDROOMS + LOFT
OPT. BEDROOM 5
3.5 BATHS
SCALE 3/16"=1'0"
11/29/2022
78
9
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
Compost
First Floor
1,383 s.f.
Bedroom 4
Suite /
Opt. ADU
13'-0" x 16'-1"
311 S.F.
Opt. Covered
Courtyard
24'-0" x 10'-4"
Bath
3
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Elect.
Cable
Second Floor
1,808 s.f.
Bedroom 3
11'-3" x 11'-0"
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 4
11'-4" x 16'-0"
Laund.
Bath
2
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
Compost
First Floor
1,383 s.f.
Bedroom 4
Suite /
Opt. ADU
13'-0" x 16'-1"
311 S.F.
Opt. Covered
Courtyard
24'-0" x 10'-4"
Bath
3
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Elect.
Cable
Second Floor
1,808 s.f.
Bedroom 3
11'-3" x 11'-0"
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 4
11'-4" x 16'-0"
Laund.
Bath
2
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
0 2 4 8 N3 - A1.1.1
PLAN 1 ADDEDNAPLAN 1B
PLAN 1C
147 S.F. 'C' PORCH
147 S.F. 'B' PORCH
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
11/29/2022
79
0
Front Elevation 1A -
Traditional Farmhouse
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A1.2.0
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1A
1A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Stucco Finish
Decorative Posts
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
79
1
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
11
'
-
0
34"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
10
'
-
0
34"
10
'
-
0
34"
F.F.
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
+/
-
2
9
'
-
2
"
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A1.2.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1A
1A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Stucco Finish
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
79
2
Front Elevation 1B -
Contemporary Cottage
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A1.3.0
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1B
1B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stucco Finish
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
79
3
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
11
'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
2
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A1.3.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1B
1B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stucco Finish
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
79
4
Front Elevation 1C -
Contemporary Prairie
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A1.4.0
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1C
1C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stucco Finish
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
79
5
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
11
'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
5
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A1.4.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1C
1C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stucco Finish
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
79
6
ROOF PLAN 1A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12
RI
D
.
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
3:
1
2
PI
T
C
H
BR
E
A
K
VAL.
VAL.
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RIDGE
5:12
5:12
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
3:12
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
ROOF PLAN 1B
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
6:12
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
VA
L
.
VA
L
.
V
A
L
.
R.
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
.
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
RIDGE
5:12
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room3:12
ROOF PLAN 1C
OVERHANG : 24"RAKE : 12"4:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
4:12
4:12
RIDGE
VALLEY
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
3:
1
2
3:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
4:12
RI
D
.
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
VA
L
.
HIP
HIP
HI
P
HIP
HIP
HI
PHI
P
HI
P
4:12
4:12
4:12
HI
PHIP
4:12
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
HI
P
4:
1
2
VA
L
L
E
Y
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 4 8 12
N3 - A1.5.0
PLAN 1 ROOF PLANS
SCALE 3/16"=1'0"
11/29/2022
79
7
11/29/2022
798
18
'
-
0
"
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
11
0
'
-
0
"
Recycle
Trash
Compost
12
'
-
0
"
First Floor
1,456 s.f.
45
'
-
6
"
17
'
-
0
"
Entry
46
'
-
6
"
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
G
a
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
12
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
Fr
o
n
t
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
19
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
15
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
51
'
-
6
"
Covered
Outdoor Room
16'-2" x 17'-0"
Bedroom 5
Suite/
ADU
15'-3" x 13'-3"
317 s.f.
ZoneDrop PantryWalk-In
W/H
Great Room
27'-3" x 18'-0"
10'-0" clg.
Kitchen
Pdr.
Porch
5'-0"
12'-6"20'-2"
5'-0"
Bath
4
5'-0"
16'-3"23'-9"
5'-0"
UP
19R
coats/storage
6'
-
0
"
7'
-
6
"
5'-10"6'-0"
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
6'-6"
4'
-
6
"
8080 sl. gl. dr.
opt.w/d
40'-0"
linenlow
Bedroom 4
Suite
11'-7" x 11'-0"
Bath
3
7'-4"
5'-0" Min.4'-0" Min.
40'-0"
Elect.
Cable
Opt. 9080 Multi-Slider
PadA/C
PadA/C
Second Floor
1,776 s.f.
DN
19R
Primary
Bedroom
16'-4" x 18'-0"
Primary
BathW.I.C.
44'-0" l.f.
Bedroom 2
13'-0" x 11'-10"
Bedroom 3
13'-9" x 12'-8"
Laund.belowopen to
47
'
-
6
"
40'-0"
3'
-
1
0
"
43
'
-
8
"
21'-0"19'-0"
dr.opt.
Loft/
Opt. Bedroom 6
Suite
18'-6" x 13'-11"Bath
2
linenlow
40'-0"
Dry Off
Seat
54" x 72"
Area
10
'
-
0
"
ADU
15'-3" x 13'-3"
317 s.f.
Bath
4
opt.w/d
Opt. 9080 Multi-Slider
PadA/C
DN
19R
Bedroom 6
Suite
12'-10" x 11'-8"
Opt. Bedroom 6 Suite
Opt. ADU
317 s.f.
Bedroom 5
Suite/
ADU
Below
Bath
5
Covered
Outdoor
Room
Below
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A2.1.0
PLAN 2 FLOOR PLAN
1,773 S.F. 1ST FLOOR
1,776 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
3,549 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
435 S.F. GARAGE
276 S.F. OPT. COVERED
OUTDOOR ROOM
39 S.F. 'A' PORCH
1,456 S.F. 1ST FLOOR (excludes 317 S.F. ADU)
1,776 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
3,232 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
5 BEDROOMS + LOFT
OPT. BEDROOM 6 / BA. 5
4.5 BATHS
0 4 8 12
SCALE 3/16"=1'0"
11/29/2022
79
9
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
First Floor
1,456 s.f.
Entry
Porch
coats/storage
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height linenlow
Bedroom 4
Suite
11'-7" x 11'-5"
Bath
3
Elect.
Cable
Second Floor
1,776 s.f.
DN
19RBedroom 2
13'-0" x 11'-10"
Bedroom 3
13'-9" x 12'-8"
Bath
2
Loft/
Opt. Bedroom 5
Suite
18'-6" x 13'-11"
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
First Floor
1,456 s.f.
Entry
Porch
coats/storage
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
6'-6"
linenlow
Bedroom 4
Suite
11'-7" x 11'-5"
Bath
3
Elect.
Cable
Second Floor
1,776 s.f.
DN
19RBedroom 2
13'-0" x 11'-10"
Bedroom 3
13'-9" x 12'-8"
Bath
2
Loft/
Opt. Bedroom 5
Suite
18'-6" x 13'-11"
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A2.1.1
PLAN 2 ADDEDNA
41 S.F. 'B' PORCH
0 2 4 8
PLAN 2B
PLAN 2C
57 S.F. 'C' PORCH
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
80
0
Front Elevation 2A -
Traditional Farmhouse
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A2.2.0
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2A
2A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
80
1
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
11
'
-
0
34"
+/
-
3
1
'
-
2
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A2.2.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2A
2A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
80
2
Front Elevation 2B -
Contemporary Cottage
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A2.3.0
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2B
2B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
80
3
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
11
'
-
0
34"
+/
-
3
1
'
-
2
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A2.3.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2B
2B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
80
4
Front Elevation 2C -
Contemporary Prairie
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A2.4.0
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2C
2C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
80
5
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
11
'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
2
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A2.4.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2C
2C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
80
6
ROOF PLAN 2A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
RIDGE
RI
D
G
E
RI
D
G
E
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12
6:12
5:12
5:12
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
VAL
L
E
Y
ROOF PLAN 2B
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
RIDGE
RI
D
G
E
RI
D
G
E
RI
D
G
E
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12
5:12
5:12
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
ROOF PLAN 2C
OVERHANG : 24"RAKE : 12"4:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
HIP
HI
P
HIP HIP
HI
P
HIP
RI
D
G
E
V
A
L
L
E
Y
4:12
VA
L
L
E
Y
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
HIP
VA
L
L
E
Y
HI
P
VALLEY 4:12
RIDGE
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 4 8 12
N3 - A2.5.0
PLAN 2 ROOF PLANS048 12
SCALE 3/16"=1'0"
11/29/2022
80
7
11/29/2022
808
25
'
-
6
"
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
11
0
'
-
0
"
Recycle
Trash
Compost
12
'
-
0
"
73
'
-
1
0
"
First Floor
1,796 s.f.
50
'
-
4
"
Informal
Dining
14'-5" x 13'-0"
Great Room
21'-7" x 17'-6"
Formal
Dining
12'-0" x 12'-0"
Bedroom 4
Suite
12'-0" x 11'-0"
Porch
Entry
Kitchen
coats/storage
PantryButler's
Work Shop
10'-1" x 10'-7"
5'-0"
5'-0"6'-0"
6'
-
0
"
8'
-
6
"
W/H
ZoneDrop
Pantrywalk-in
UP
19R
Pdr.
12
'
-
0
"
8'
-
4
"
5'
-
2
"
5'-0"
20'-512"6'-712"12'-11"
5'-0"
50'-0"
40'-0"
34
'
-
2
"
10
'
-
0
"
24
'
-
2
"
40'-0"5'-0"
Opt. Covered
Outdoor Room
24'-6" x 10'-0"
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
G
a
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
12
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
Fr
o
n
t
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
10
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
15
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
5'-0" Min.4'-0" Min.
31
'
-
5
12"
Elect.
Cable
15'-6"24'-6"
linenlow
Bath
3
vol.
6'-2"
Second Floor
1,823 s.f.
DN
19R
W.I.C.
28'-0" l.f.
Bath
2
Primary
Bedroom
18'-0" x 17'-2"
Primary
Bath
Bedroom 3
11'-3" x 12'-0"
Bedroom 2
12'-10" x 11'-0"Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5/
Bath 4
13'-0" x 17'-9"
Dr.Opt.
Laund.
linenlow
51
'
-
4
"
7'
-
0
"
44
'
-
4
"
10
'
-
0
"
W.I.C.
12'-0" l.f.
GlassHigh
10
'
-
6
"
Opt. Bedrm 5 / Bath 4
60" x 60"
7'
-
0
"
DN
19R
Bedroom 5/
Bath 4
13'-0" x 11'-11"
linenlow
Bath
4
40'-0"
belowopen tobelowopen to
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A3.1.0
PLAN 3 FLOOR PLAN4 BEDROOMS + LOFT
OPT. BEDROOM 5 / BA 4
3.5 BATHS
1,796 S.F. 1ST FLOOR
1,823 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
3,619 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
553 S.F. GARAGE
245 S.F. OPT. COVERED
OUTDOOR ROOM
38 S.F. 'A' PORCH
0 4 8 12
SCALE 3/16"=1'0"
11/29/2022
80
9
First Floor
1,796 s.f.
Bedroom 4
Suite
12'-0" x 11'-0"
Porch
Entry
coats/storage
UP
19R
Elect.
Cable
linenlow
Bath
3
vol.
Second Floor
1,823 s.f.
DN
19R
Bedroom 3
11'-3" x 12'-0"
Laund.
belowopen to
First Floor
1,796 s.f.
Bedroom 4
Suite
12'-0" x 11'-0"
Porch
Entry
coats/storage
UP
19R
Elect.
Cable
linenlow
Bath
3
vol.
6'-2"
Second Floor
1,823 s.f.
DN
19R
Bedroom 3
11'-3" x 12'-0"
Laund.
belowopen to
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A3.1.1
PLAN 3 ADDEDNA
31 S.F. 'B' PORCH
0 2 4 8
PLAN 3B
PLAN 3C
36 S.F. 'C' PORCH
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
81
0
Front Elevation 3A -
Traditional Farmhouse
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A3.2.0
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3A
3A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
81
1
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
11
'
-
0
34"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
6
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A3.2.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3A
3A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
81
2
Front Elevation 3B -
Contemporary Cottage
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A3.3.0
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3B
3B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
81
3
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
11
'
-
0
34"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
6
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A3.3.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3B
3B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
81
4
Front Elevation 3C -
Contemporary Prairie
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A3.4.1
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3C
3C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
81
5
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
11
'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
8
'
-
8
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022 N3 - A3.4.2
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3C
3C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Stucco Finish
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
0 2 4 8
SCALE 1/4"=1'0"
11/29/2022
81
6
ROOF PLAN 3A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
RIDGE
RIDGE
RI
D
G
E
RI
D
G
E
RI
D
G
E
RI
D
G
E
4:12
4:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:12
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
6:12
4:12
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
ROOF PLAN 3B
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
RIDGE
RI
D
G
E
RI
D
G
E
RI
D
G
E
4:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
4:12
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:12
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
VA
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
4:12
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
OVERHANG : 24"RAKE : 12"4:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
RI
D
G
E
4:12
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:12
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:12
RI
D
G
E
4:
1
2
4:12
4:12
4:124:
1
2
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
HIP
VALLEY
HI
P
VA
L
L
E
Y
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
HI
PHIP
3:12Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
4:
1
2
HIP
VA
L
L
E
Y
4:12
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
VA
L
L
E
Y
VALLEY
RIDGE
ROOF PLAN 3C
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 4 8 12
N3 - A3.5.0
PLAN 3 ROOF PLANS048 12
11/29/2022
81
7
11/29/2022
818
FLEX
GARAGE
DININGROOM
U14
U14
U14
U14
U16
KITCHEN
GREAT ROOM
ENTRY
POWDER
DROPZONE W.I.C
OPT. COVEREDCOURTYARD
OPT. COVEREDOUTDOOR ROOM
U13 U14 U15
DR TEMP3080 FR
30
8
0
X
1
3
/
4
"
S
.
C
.
30
8
0
X
1
3
/
4
"
S
.
C
.
30
8
0
X
1
3
/
4
"
S
.
C
.
3080
U17
U17
6'-0 1/2"4'-6 1/2"3'-4"
2'-3 1/2"3'-8"4'-11"8'-9 1/2"1'-4"2'-2"3'-11 1/2"
2'
-
1
1
/
2
"
3'
-
8
"
9"
2'
-
8
3
/
4
"
3'
-
8
"
3'
-
7
1
/
4
"
U4 U6 U8 U10
30
5
0
S
H
N3 -
PLAN 1 FLOOR PLAN
0 4 8 12
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 07/14/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTESNOTES
MANDATORY TO INSTALL:
1.HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND
CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1126A.6
2.ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES
AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1
OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1136A.
3.THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING
CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC
CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRICAL CODE, SEC. 1126A.
U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR. AT ENTRY
DOOR PER CBC CH. 11, SEC. 1136A.2.
MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR.
U2 NOT USED
U3
U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR
WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT
PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM/BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2.
U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
REFER TO SHEET GN-3 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND
REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION.
U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR
POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3 OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING
OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA. CIRCLE, 48" X 60"
RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE
PURCHASER/OWNER.
U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING
THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 & CBC CH. 11A, SEC.
1134A.5 & SEC. 1135A.6.
U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.1
FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER/BATH, OR
LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.2, OPT. 2
U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.7.
U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE
LAVATORY/SINK, PER CBC CH. 11A, SEC. 1134A.8 & OPT.4
U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND
TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.8.
U13 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1133A.6.
U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER/OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST
A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING
OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE
18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER
SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"
X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR,
DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT
THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNE, PER CBC CH. 11, SEC.
1133A.2.
U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR
REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11, SEC. 1133A.4.1.1.
U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT
SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, PER CBC CH. 1136A.
U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO.
21-07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 & CBC CH. 11A,
SEC. 1119A. INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST
AND COST OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
WALL LEGEND
2X6 WALL
2X4 WALL
7.90.130
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL IN ALL VISIT-ABLE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS:
1. HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARDWARE NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING OR
TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A.
2. ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS OR
LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A.6.
3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTACLE
OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY
WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A OR APPLICABLE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL
CODE.
2. FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
7.90.090
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A KITCHEN IS
LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL:
1. SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC.1133A.4.1.1.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN GENERAL NOTES:
7.90.060
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL:
1. WHERE AT LEAST ONE DOORBELL IS PROVIDED
FOR THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRY DOOR, ONE THAT
IS BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM THE FINISHED
FLOOR MUST BE INSTALLED PER CBC 1136A.2.
7.90.080
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A POWDER ROOM OR
BATHROOM IS LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY
LEVEL:
1. GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT CONSISTENT WITH
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2 FOR THE WATER CLOSET
AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB.
NOT USED
U18 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT LEAST ONE BEDROOM ON THE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL WITH ALL COMPONENTS
MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7.90.130. A
CLOSET SHALL HAVE AT LEAST A THIRTY-TWO INCH (32") NET
OPENING AND ADJUSTABLE CLOSET RODS AND SHELVING.
4 "UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH
BUYER TO FILL OUT.
PER CITY OF DUBLIN'S REQUIREMENT:
"UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO
EACH BUYER TO FILL OUT.
NOTE:
FOR ALL INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE, SEE
STANDARD 1ST FLOOR AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHEETS.
A5.0.011/29/2022
Bedroom 4
Suite
81
9
U14 U15
30
8
0
X
1
3
/
4
"
S
.
C
.
30
8
0
X
1
3
/
4
"
S
.
C
.
U14
U14
U14
U14
DR
T
E
M
P
30
8
0
F
R
3050 SH
30
8
0
3080
U16
U13
U4 U6 U8 U10
2'-3 1/2"3'-8"5'-10"5'-9 1/2"3'-5"
5'-7 1/2"6'-6"3'-8"
3'-0"3'-6"
2'
-
0
3
/
4
"
2'
-
5
3
/
4
"
2'
-
9
3
/
4
"
2'
-
3
1
/
2
"
10
'
-
9
1
/
2
"
2'
-
1
1
/
2
"
1'-5"4'-4 1/2"6'-8 1/2"
7'
-
0
3
/
4
"
4'
-
7
"
3'
-
0
3
/
4
"
GARAGE
DROPZONE
KITCHEN
DININGROOM GREAT ROOM
COVEREDOUTDOOR ROOM
POWDER
ENTRY
BEDROOM 4
PORCH
BATH 3
COATS/STORAGE
WALK-INPANTRY
U17
U17
3'-1 1/2"9'-4 1/2"
U7 U8
N3 -
PLAN 2 FLOOR PLAN
0 4 8 12
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 07/14/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTESNOTES
MANDATORY TO INSTALL:
1.HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND
CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1126A.6
2.ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES
AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1
OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1136A.
3.THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING
CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC
CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRICAL CODE, SEC. 1126A.
U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR. AT ENTRY
DOOR PER CBC CH. 11, SEC. 1136A.2.
MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR.
U2 NOT USED
U3
U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR
WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT
PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM/BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2.
U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
REFER TO SHEET GN-3 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND
REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION.
U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR
POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3 OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING
OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA. CIRCLE, 48" X 60"
RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE
PURCHASER/OWNER.
U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING
THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 & CBC CH. 11A, SEC.
1134A.5 & SEC. 1135A.6.
U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.1
FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER/BATH, OR
LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.2, OPT. 2
U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.7.
U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE
LAVATORY/SINK, PER CBC CH. 11A, SEC. 1134A.8 & OPT.4
U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND
TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.8.
U13 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1133A.6.
U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER/OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST
A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING
OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE
18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER
SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"
X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR,
DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT
THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNE, PER CBC CH. 11, SEC.
1133A.2.
U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR
REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11, SEC. 1133A.4.1.1.
U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT
SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, PER CBC CH. 1136A.
U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO.
21-07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 & CBC CH. 11A,
SEC. 1119A. INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST
AND COST OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
WALL LEGEND
2X6 WALL
2X4 WALL
7.90.130
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL IN ALL VISIT-ABLE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS:
1. HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARDWARE NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING OR
TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A.
2. ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS OR
LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A.6.
3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTACLE
OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY
WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A OR APPLICABLE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL
CODE.
2. FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
7.90.090
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A KITCHEN IS
LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL:
1. SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC.1133A.4.1.1.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN GENERAL NOTES:
7.90.060
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL:
1. WHERE AT LEAST ONE DOORBELL IS PROVIDED
FOR THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRY DOOR, ONE THAT
IS BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM THE FINISHED
FLOOR MUST BE INSTALLED PER CBC 1136A.2.
7.90.080
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A POWDER ROOM OR
BATHROOM IS LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY
LEVEL:
1. GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT CONSISTENT WITH
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2 FOR THE WATER CLOSET
AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB.
NOT USED
U18 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT LEAST ONE BEDROOM ON THE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL WITH ALL COMPONENTS
MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7.90.130. A
CLOSET SHALL HAVE AT LEAST A THIRTY-TWO INCH (32") NET
OPENING AND ADJUSTABLE CLOSET RODS AND SHELVING.
4 "UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH
BUYER TO FILL OUT.
PER CITY OF DUBLIN'S REQUIREMENT:
"UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO
EACH BUYER TO FILL OUT.
NOTE:
FOR ALL INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE, SEE
STANDARD 1ST FLOOR AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHEETS.
A5.1.011/29/2022
82
0
U16
GARAGE
KITCHEN
POWDER
BEDROOM 4
PORCH
COATS/STORAGE
FORMALDINING
U13
DR
T
E
M
P
30
8
0
F
R
3050 SH
4'-0"4'-0"4'-0"
GREAT ROOM
U4 U6 U8 U10ENTRY
BATH 3
U14
U14
U14
U14
U14
U17DROPZONE
INFORMALDINING
WALK-INPANTRY
3'-10"5'-0"2'-0 1/4"5'-11"2'-4"
30
8
0
X
1
3
/
4
"
S
.
C
.
3080
30
8
0
3080 X1 3/4" S.C.
3'
-
1
1
/
2
"
1'
-
3
3
/
4
"
5'
-
3
"
1'
-
4
1
/
2
"
9'
-
2
"
3'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
1'
-
2
1
/
2
"
5'-3 1/2"5'-0"2'-7 1/2"
1'-4"3'-8"
3'
-
1
1
1
/
2
"
2'
-
3
1
/
2
"
5'
-
8
"
6'-2 7/16"6'-3 9/16"
N3 -
PLAN 3 FLOOR PLAN
0 4 8 12
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 07/14/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 3Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTESNOTES
MANDATORY TO INSTALL:
1.HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND
CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1126A.6
2.ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES
AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1
OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1136A.
3.THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING
CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC
CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRICAL CODE, SEC. 1126A.
U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR. AT ENTRY
DOOR PER CBC CH. 11, SEC. 1136A.2.
MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR.
U2 NOT USED
U3
U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR
WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT
PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM/BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2.
U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
REFER TO SHEET GN-3 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND
REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION.
U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR
POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3 OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING
OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA. CIRCLE, 48" X 60"
RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE
PURCHASER/OWNER.
U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING
THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 & CBC CH. 11A, SEC.
1134A.5 & SEC. 1135A.6.
U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.1
FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER/BATH, OR
LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.2, OPT. 2
U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.7.
U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE
LAVATORY/SINK, PER CBC CH. 11A, SEC. 1134A.8 & OPT.4
U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND
TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.8.
U13 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1133A.6.
U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER/OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST
A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING
OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE
18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER
SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"
X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR,
DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT
THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNE, PER CBC CH. 11, SEC.
1133A.2.
U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR
REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11, SEC. 1133A.4.1.1.
U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT
SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, PER CBC CH. 1136A.
U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO.
21-07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 & CBC CH. 11A,
SEC. 1119A. INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST
AND COST OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
WALL LEGEND
2X6 WALL
2X4 WALL
7.90.130
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL IN ALL VISIT-ABLE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS:
1. HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARDWARE NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING OR
TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A.
2. ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS OR
LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A.6.
3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTACLE
OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY
WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A OR APPLICABLE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL
CODE.
2. FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
7.90.090
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A KITCHEN IS
LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL:
1. SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC.1133A.4.1.1.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN GENERAL NOTES:
7.90.060
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL:
1. WHERE AT LEAST ONE DOORBELL IS PROVIDED
FOR THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRY DOOR, ONE THAT
IS BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM THE FINISHED
FLOOR MUST BE INSTALLED PER CBC 1136A.2.
7.90.080
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A POWDER ROOM OR
BATHROOM IS LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY
LEVEL:
1. GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT CONSISTENT WITH
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2 FOR THE WATER CLOSET
AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB.
NOT USED
U18 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT LEAST ONE BEDROOM ON THE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL WITH ALL COMPONENTS
MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7.90.130. A
CLOSET SHALL HAVE AT LEAST A THIRTY-TWO INCH (32") NET
OPENING AND ADJUSTABLE CLOSET RODS AND SHELVING.
4 "UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH
BUYER TO FILL OUT.
PER CITY OF DUBLIN'S REQUIREMENT:
"UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO
EACH BUYER TO FILL OUT.
NOTE:
FOR ALL INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE, SEE
STANDARD 1ST FLOOR AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHEETS.
A5.2.011/29/2022
82
1
07/15/202201/27/2023
0 5 10 20
N3-L1.1
PLANTING NOTE:
For lots that are adjacent to open space, or deemed a
“Fire Lot”, refer to the Diablo Firesafe Council list as
well as the approved plant list in the landscape design
guidelines for fire safe plants recommendations.
3
NEIGHBORHOOD 3 TYPICAL FRONT YARDS
82
2
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
823
P/SP
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
OPEN SPACE
(BASIN)
OP
E
N
S
P
A
C
E
(
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
)
OPEN SPACE
(WETLAND)
OPEN SPACE
(BASIN)
BASIN
SE
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
S
E
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
LO
Y
A
L
T
O
N
R
O
A
D
PANORAMA DRIVE
T
A
B
L
E
M
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
S TERRACINA DR
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
CR
O
A
K
R
D
STREET A
STREET B
ST
R
E
E
T
J
STREET K
STREET L
ST
R
E
E
T
N
STREET O
STREET M
ST
R
E
E
T
S
ST
R
E
E
T
T
ST
R
E
E
T
C
ST
R
E
E
T
Y
ST
R
E
E
T
Z
COURT U
STREET V
STREET B
CENTRAL PARKWAY
CENTRAL PARKWAY STREET R
ST
R
E
E
T
X
ST
R
E
E
T
W
STREET Q
STREET P
CR
O
A
K
R
D
LOOP H
LOOP H
STREET G
STREET B
ST
R
E
E
T
I
STREET F
STREET E
STREET D
STREET A
COURT A
COURT B
COURT C
COURT E
COURT F
CO
U
R
T
G
COURT H
CO
U
R
T
I
CO
U
R
T
J
COURT KCOURT L
COURT S
COURT R
COURT QCOURT V
COURT U
COURT T
COURT M
CO
U
R
T
N
CO
U
R
T
O
CO
U
R
T
P
ST
R
E
E
T
C
STR
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
ST
R
E
E
T
T
STREET P
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
ACCESS
ROAD
ACCESS
ROAD
PROPOSED
TRAIL
EVA/
ACCESS ROAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
NEIGHBORHOOD SUMMARY
NEIGHBORHOOD TYPICAL LOT
SIZE UNITS GROSS
ACREAGE (±)DENSITY
1 65'x100'99 30.1 3.3 DU/AC
2 55'x95'96 23.4 4.1 DU/AC
3 50'x110'85 19.5 4.5 DU/AC
4 49.5'x80'85 16.8 5.1 DU/AC
5 48'x70' Cluster 94 17.6 5.4 DU/AC
6 Attached Multi-Family 100 10.4 9.6 DU/AC
1, 2, 3, & 5 Zero-Lot Single Family
Units 14 N/A(1)
Croak Rd and Central
Pkwy Extension 8.0
TOTAL 573 125.8 4.5 du/ac
C.0
NOTE:
(1) GROSS ACREAGE FOR ZERO LOT PRODUCTS IS INCLUDED IN EACH INDIVIDUAL
NEIGHBORHOOD GROSS ACREAGE METRIC.
82
4
82
5
82
6
6665
67
5'
M
I
N
.
AV
G
.
1
0
'
5'
M
I
N
.
AV
G
.
1
0
'
5'
M
I
N
.
AV
G
.
1
0
'
4'
4'
4'
4'
4'
9'
18
'
18
'
18
'
12
'
10
'
12
'
PLAN 2B PLAN 1A PLAN 3C
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
MINIMUM SETBACK EXHIBIT
N4-C.0
TYPICAL CONDITION
NOMINAL LOT SIZE: 3960 SF
LOT COVERAGE: 55% MAX
NOTE: ALL SETBACK DIMENSIONS ARE
MINIMUMS AND NOT TO SCALE
300 SF total flat area with a minimum dimension of 8'.Yard area may be provided in more than one locationwithin a lot, with a minimum 80 SF yard or courtyardarea.
82
7
5
6
7
8
9
3
4
PARCEL B
13
45
1112
10
35
MJR
71
64
83
76
53
59
24
21
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
PARCEL C
16
14
PARCEL E
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
80 81
85
82
84
50 51 52
5554
56
6263
66 65
67
73
72
69 70
68
7475
78 77
79
PARCEL F
60
57
58
30
37 36
34
39
27
28 29
3231
33
26 25
23
19
22
20
61
9
15
38
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
17
18PARCEL D
PARCEL G
1C
1
1C
1C
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3 1
2
3 1
2
3 1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
35
71
64
83
76
53
59
24
21
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
PARCEL C1614
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
80 81 858284
50 51 52 5554 56
62636665
PARCE
L
A
PARCEL
B
17
18
PA
R
C
E
L
D
67
7372697068
7475787779
60
57
58
30
37 36 34
39
27 28 29 3231 33
26 25 23
19 2220
61
9
15
38 1
2
3
1
2
3
2
3
12
3
1
2
3
1
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
23
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
23
1
23
1
23
1
23
1
23
1
2
3
1
23
1
23
1
23
1
23
LANDSCAPE
PARCEL
1
2
3
23
23
23
TRAIL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
N4-C.1
Legend
1 All Plan 1's fit on this lot
Plan 1C only fits on this lot
All Plan 2's fit on this lot
All Plan 3's fit on this lot*
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
Nominal Lot Size: 49.5'x80'
Total SFD Lots: 85
2
3
1C
*Refer to Lot Coverage Table (Sheet
N4-C.2) for specific elevation lot coverage
fit.
NOTES
1. Plan fit shown is per setback requirements. Lot Coverage fit for each plan
and elevation may restrict plotting. Refer to Sheet N4-C.2 for lot coverage
requirements.
2. Individual floor plans may be placed next to or across the street from each
other. In no case will the same architectural elevation or color scheme be
allowed next to or across the street from each other, unless they are a different
individual floor plan.
3. The applicant reserves the right to change the unit mix and plan locations
illustrated on this plan in accordance with these notes if it is within substantial
conformance with the approved SDR.
4. Setback requirements can be found on C.0 minimum setback exhibit.
82
8
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
LOT COVERAGE TABLE
N4-C.2.1.1
* Plan 1C Only fits on lot per setbacks & grading
82
9
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
N4-C.2 LOT COVERAGE TABLE -C.2.2 LOT COVERAGE TABLE----.2
* Plan 1C Only fits on lot per setbacks & grading
N4-C.1.2
83
0
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
N4-C.2 LOT COVERAGE TABLE -C.2.3 LOT COVERAGE TABLE----.3
* Plan 1C Only fits on lot per setbacks & grading
N4-C.1.3
83
1
5
6
7
8
9
3
4
PARCEL B
13
45
1112
10
35
MJR
71
64
83
76
53
59
24
21
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
PARCEL C
16
14
PARCEL E
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
80 81
85
82
84
50 51 52
5554
56
6263
66 65
67
73
72
69 70
68
7475
78 77
79
PARCEL F
60
57
58
30
37 36
34
39
27
28 29
3231
33
26 25
23
19
22
20
61
9
15
38
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
17
18PARCEL D
PARCEL G
78 7779
39
27 28
26 25 23
19 2220
9
71
64
83
76
53
24
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
80 81 858284
50 51 52 5554 56
6263666567
7372697068
7475
60
57
58
61
PARCEL B
59
30
37 36 34
29 3231 33
38 35
13
12
1516 1417
18
TRAIL
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
PARKING PLAN
N4-C.3
PARKING SUMMARY
TOTAL NH4 UNITS: 85
REQUIRED PARKING: 2 COVERED + 1 GUEST
GARAGE SPACES: 170
STREET PARALLEL PARKING: 111
DRIVEWAY PARKING: 170
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED: 451 (5.3 SPACES/UNIT)
NOTES:
1)STREET PARALLEL PARKING WILL BE UNMARKED
2)DRIVEWAYS WITH GUEST PARKING HAVE A MINIMUM 18'
LENGTH
LEGEND
STREET PARALLEL PARKING LOCATIONS (1)
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
83
2
5
6
7
8
9
3
4
PARCEL B
13
45
1112
10
35
MJR
71
64
83
76
53
59
24
21
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
PARCEL C
16
14
PARCEL E
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
80 81
85
82
84
50 51 52
5554
56
6263
66 65
67
73
72
69 70
68
7475
78 77
79
PARCEL F
60
57
58
30
37 36
34
39
27
28 29
3231
33
26 25
23
19
22
20
61
9
15
38
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
17
18PARCEL D
PARCEL G
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
TRAIL
60
57
58
39
61
PARCEL B
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
50 51 52 5554 5653
59
78 7779
30
37 36 34
27 28 29 3231 33
26 25 23
19 2220
38
80 81 858284
6263666567
7372697068
7475
35
71
64
83
76
24
21
1718 1516 14
9
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
36
'
3
6
'
36'
36
'
36'
36'
26.12'
47.66'
47.16'
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
FIRE ACCESS PLAN
N4-C.4
LEGEND
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
FIRE DEPARTMENT ON-SITE ACCESS ROUTE
FH
FIRE HYDRANT DETAIL
NTS
36'
20'
20'
28'
CLEAR
8' PARKING
83
3
5
6
7
8
9
3
4
PARCEL B
13
45
1112
10
35
MJR
71
64
83
76
53
59
24
21
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
PARCEL C
16
14
PARCEL E
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
80 81
85
82
84
50 51 52
5554
56
6263
66 65
67
73
72
69 70
68
7475
78 77
79
PARCEL F
60
57
58
30
37 36
34
39
27
28 29
3231
33
26 25
23
19
22
20
61
9
15
38
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
17
18PARCEL D
PARCEL G
TRAIL
35
24
21
1718 16 14
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
30
37 36 34
39
27 28 29 3231 33
26 25 23
19 2220
15
38
53505152 5554 56
71
64
83
76
80 81 858284
6263666567
7372697068
7475787779
59
60
57
58
61
PARCEL B
1
2
3
13
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
9
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
GARBAGE PICK UP PLAN
N4-C.5
LEGEND
NEIGHBORHOOD GARBAGE PICK-UP ROUTE
NOTE: NEIGHBORHOOD 4 RESIDENTS WILL PLACE GARBAGE BINS
ALONG THE PUBLIC STREET.
GARBAGE BINS (SEE DETAIL BELOW)
GARBAGE BIN DETAIL
NTS
30"
TYP
30
"
TY
P
3'3'
83
4
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE TABLE
N4-C.6.1
Symbol
on C.6.2 UDO Status Lot Numbers Reason for "Exception"Options for UDO compliant entry Total number of
lots
UDO compliant to front
door from sidewalk via
driveway with a slope
gradient of 5% or less
N/A N/A
UDO compliant to front
door from sidewalk via
driveway with a slope
gradient between 5%
and 8.33%
1) This is a hillside development with steep
streets combined with the CBC requirement
for lot drainage which results in a greater
elevation difference between finish pad and
sidewalk and thus steeper slopes on
driveways and walkways to the front door.
Access via driveway, compliant to section
1114A.2 of the CBC.
UDO compliant with
"Exceptions"
(Driveway slope
gradient between 8.33%
and 12%)
1) This is a hillside development with steep
streets combined with the CBC requirement
for lot drainage which results in a greater
elevation difference between finish pad and
sidewalk and thus steeper slopes on
driveways and walkways to the front door.
1) Access from sidewalk to front door via
driveway with a slope gradient between
8.33% and 12%
2) Access to home by parking in garage and
entering home through garage door with
optional ramp
TOTAL:
*
X
*
83
5
35
MJR
71
64
83
76
53
59
24
21
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
PARCEL C
16
14
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
80
81
85
82
84
50
51
52
55
54
56
62
63
66
65
67
73
72
69
70
68
74
75
78
77
79
PARCEL F
60
57 58
30
37
36
34
39
27
28
29
32
31
33
26
25
23
19
22
20
61
9
15
38
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
17
18
PARCEL D
PARCEL G
5
FL
4
8
1
.
0
L
P
FL
4
6
9
.
6
L
P
FL
4
7
0
.
7
3
H
P
P47
2
.
7
P47
4
.
8
P47
7
.
7
P48
0
.
6
P48
3
.
4
P48
5
.
9
P48
8
.
4
P490
.
9
P493
.
4
P496.
0
P498.7
P501.1
P502.8
P4
7
2
.
0
P4
7
2
.
5
P4
7
3
.
0
P4
7
3
.
5
P4
7
4
.
1
P509.0P512.7P515.8P518.6P521.3
P4
7
3
.
0
P4
7
3
.
4
P4
7
2
.
4
P4
7
3
.
7
P4
8
6
.
3
P4
8
6
.
0
P4
8
4
.
9
P4
8
3
.
8
P4
8
3
.
3
P4
8
4
.
2
P4
8
5
.
1
P4
8
6
.
1
P4
8
7
.
0
P4
8
7
.
5
P4
9
7
.
4
P4
9
9
.
8
P5
0
2
.
1
P5
0
4
.
4
P50
7
.
3
P509.
3
P5
0
5
.
0
P4
9
5
.
6
P4
9
7
.
3
P4
9
9
.
2
P5
1
8
.
9
P5
1
0
.
1
P5
1
7
.
9
P5
1
6
.
0
P5
1
4
.
0
P5
1
2
.
1
P5
1
9
.
4
P5
0
9
.
9
P5
1
8
.
2
P5
1
6
.
1
P5
1
4
.
0
P5
1
1
.
8
P5
2
4
.
3
P5
2
3
.
6
P5
2
2
.
1
P5
2
0
.
7
P5
1
9
.
2
P5
1
7
.
6
P5
2
5
.
7
P5
2
4
.
7
P5
2
3
.
4
P5
2
2
.
1
P5
2
0
.
8
P5
1
9
.
4
P5
1
8
.
4
P5
0
1
.
2
P5
0
3
.
3
P
4
8
7
.
4
P512.6P515.5P518.2P520.8P523.4P525.5P525.8P526.2P527.5P530.3
FF4
7
3
.
7
FF4
7
5
.
8
FF4
7
8
.
7
FF4
8
1
.
6
FF4
8
4
.
4
FF4
8
6
.
9
FF4
8
9
.
4
FF49
1
.
9
FF49
4
.
4
FF497
.
0
FF499.
7
FF502.1
FF503.8
FF
4
7
3
.
0
FF
4
7
3
.
5
FF
4
7
4
.
0
FF
4
7
4
.
5
FF
4
7
5
.
1
FF510.0FF513.7FF516.8FF519.6FF522.3
FF
4
7
4
.
0
FF
4
7
4
.
4
FF
4
7
3
.
4
FF
4
7
4
.
7
FF
4
8
7
.
3
FF
4
8
7
.
0
FF
4
8
5
.
9
FF
4
8
4
.
8
FF
4
8
4
.
3
FF
4
8
5
.
2
FF
4
8
6
.
1
FF
4
8
7
.
1
FF
4
8
8
.
0
FF
4
8
8
.
5
FF
4
9
8
.
4
FF
5
0
0
.
8
FF
5
0
3
.
1
FF
5
0
5
.
4
FF5
0
8
.
3
FF510
.
3
FF
5
0
6
.
0
FF
4
9
6
.
6
FF
4
9
8
.
3
FF
5
0
0
.
2
FF
5
1
9
.
9
FF
5
1
1
.
1
FF
5
1
8
.
9
FF
5
1
7
.
0
FF
5
1
5
.
0
FF
5
1
3
.
1
FF
5
2
0
.
4
FF
5
1
0
.
9
FF
5
1
9
.
2
FF
5
1
7
.
1
FF
5
1
5
.
0
FF
5
1
2
.
8
FF
5
2
5
.
3
FF
5
2
4
.
6
FF
5
2
3
.
1
FF
5
2
1
.
7
FF
5
2
0
.
2
FF
5
1
8
.
6
FF
5
2
6
.
7
FF
5
2
5
.
7
FF
5
2
4
.
4
FF
5
2
3
.
1
FF
5
2
1
.
8
FF
5
2
0
.
4
FF
5
1
9
.
4
FF
5
0
2
.
2
FF
5
0
4
.
3
F
F
4
8
8
.
4
FF513.6FF516.5FF519.2FF521.8FF524.4FF526.5FF526.8FF527.2FF528.5FF531.3
GL
4
7
2
.
3
GL
4
7
2
.
8
GL
4
7
3
.
3
GL
4
7
3
.
8
GL
4
7
4
.
4
GL
4
7
3
.
3
GL
4
7
3
.
7
GL
4
7
2
.
7
GL
4
7
4
.
0
GL
4
8
6
.
6
GL
4
8
6
.
3
GL
4
8
5
.
2
GL
4
8
4
.
1
GL
4
8
3
.
6
GL
4
8
4
.
5
GL
4
8
5
.
4
GL
4
8
6
.
4
GL
4
8
7
.
3
GL
4
8
7
.
8
G
L
4
8
7
.
7
GL
4
9
7
.
7
GL
5
0
0
.
1
GL
5
0
2
.
4
GL
5
0
4
.
7
GL5
0
7
.
6
GL509
.
6
GL4
7
3
.
0
GL4
7
5
.
1
GL4
7
8
.
0
GL4
8
0
.
9
GL4
8
3
.
7
GL4
8
6
.
2
GL4
8
8
.
7
GL49
1
.
2
GL49
3
.
7
GL496
.
3
GL499.
0
GL501.4
GL503.1
GL
5
0
5
.
3
GL
4
9
5
.
9
GL
4
9
7
.
6
GL
4
9
9
.
5
GL
5
0
1
.
5
GL
5
0
3
.
6
GL
5
1
9
.
2
GL
5
1
0
.
4
GL
5
1
8
.
2
GL
5
1
6
.
3
GL
5
1
4
.
3
GL
5
1
2
.
4
GL
5
1
9
.
7
GL
5
1
0
.
2
GL
5
1
8
.
5
GL
5
1
6
.
4
GL
5
1
4
.
3
GL
5
1
2
.
1
GL
5
2
4
.
6
GL
5
2
3
.
9
GL
5
2
2
.
4
GL
5
2
1
.
0
GL
5
1
9
.
5
GL
5
1
7
.
9
GL
5
2
6
.
0
GL
5
2
5
.
0
GL
5
2
3
.
7
GL
5
2
2
.
4
GL
5
2
1
.
1
GL
5
1
9
.
7
GL
5
1
8
.
7
GL512.9GL515.8GL518.5GL521.1GL523.7GL525.8GL526.1GL526.5GL527.8GL530.6
GL509.3
GL513.0GL516.1GL518.9GL521.6
35
47 46 45 44 43 42 41 40
80
81
85
82
84
50
51
52
55
54
56
62
63
66
65
67
73
72
69
70
68
74
75
78
77
79
605758
3037
36
34
39
27
28
29
32
31
33
26
25
23
19
22
20
61
9
15
38
7164
837653
59
24
21
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
16
14
49 48
17
18
9.65%
9.53%
9.64%
9.70%
9.75%
9.37%
10.89%
4.39%
5.58%
5.31%
5.47%
5.20%
4.33%
9.64%
10.56%
10.56%
10.62%
10.08%
11.16%
5.04%
6.07%
6.28%
5.91%
6.12%
5.74%
11.65%
9.59%
9.32%
9.59%
10.40%
10.08%
8.07%
7.91%
7.53%
6.77%
6
.
8
7
%
8
.
3
9
%
12
.
4
2
%
10
.
7
4
%
11
.
2
9
%
11
.
4
5
%
11
.
5
8
%
10
.
2
1
%
6.
8
2
%
9.
6
4
%
9.
8
6
%
11
.
0
0
%
7.
4
5
%
7.
6
4
%
7.
9
6
%
9.
3
3
%
9.
8
0
%
9.
6
9
%
8.
6
4
%
8.
7
4
%
8.
6
6
%
8.
0
2
%
7.
7
5
%
7.
4
8
%
7.
4
2
%
7.
3
1
%
8.
1
3
%
8.
5
6
%
8.
9
9
%
8.
3
8
%
7.53%
7.91%
7.91%
7.86%
5.29%
8.94%
9.64%
10.40%
9.70%
3.25%
5.36%
5.69%
5.47%
8.27%
10.46%
10.13%
10.35%
10.02%
10.02%
11.62%
BOW 524.04
BOW 523.24
BOW 521.92
BOW 520.61
BOW 519.30
BOW 517.97
BOW 516.69
BOW 517.10
BOW 518.54
BOW 519.99
BOW 521.42
BOW 522.87
BOW 523.79
BOW 515.14
BOW 517.08
BOW 518.27
BOW 513.21
BOW 511.27
BOW 517.92
BOW 516.55
BOW 514.45
BOW 512.34
BOW 510.24
BOW 508.14
BOW 509.34
BO
W
5
2
0
.
2
1
BO
W
5
1
7
.
4
9
BO
W
5
1
4
.
6
3
BO
W
5
1
1
.
2
4
BO
W
5
0
7
.
4
5
BO
W
5
0
1
.
3
1
BO
W
4
9
9
.
7
9
BO
W
4
9
7
.
3
7
BO
W
4
9
4
.
6
8
BO
W
4
9
2
.
2
0
BO
W
4
8
9
.
7
5
BO
W
4
8
7
.
3
0
BO
W
4
8
4
.
8
3
BO
W
4
8
2
.
3
5
BO
W
4
7
9
.
4
0
BO
W
4
7
6
.
4
2
BO
W
4
7
3
.
4
4
BOW
4
7
1
.
3
2
BOW 470.91
BOW 471.34
BOW
4
7
3
.
0
7
BOW 472.35
BOW 471.84
BOW 472.23
BOW 471.92
BOW 471.38
BOW 470.91
BOW 48
5
.
4
6
BOW 485.95
BOW 485.45
BOW 484.49
BOW 483.53
BOW 482.57
BOW 481.69
BOW 486.00
BOW 485.31
BOW 484.15
BOW 483.09
BO
W
5
2
8
.
5
7
BO
W
5
2
5
.
9
8
BO
W
5
2
4
.
7
2
BO
W
5
2
4
.
8
4
BO
W
5
2
3
.
8
6
BO
W
5
2
1
.
4
8
BO
W
5
1
8
.
9
2
BO
W
5
1
6
.
3
6
BO
W
5
1
3
.
7
8
BO
W
5
1
0
.
6
1
BOW 5
0
5
.
8
9
BOW 503.21
BOW 500.94
BOW 498.71
BOW 496.45
BOW 503.15
BOW 501.83
BOW 499.78
BOW 493.73
BOW 495.68
BOW 497.73
B
O
W
5
0
7
.
7
9
X*X
X X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X X X X X X X X*X
*
*
*
*
*
X
X
X
X
X
X
*
*
*
*
**
*
*
*
*
**
******
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
*
*
*
*
*
*
X
X
X
X
X
X *
*
*
*
*
*
X
X
X
X
X
X
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE EXHIBIT
N4-C.6.2
NEIGHBORHOOD 4:
96 Units
Typical Lot Size: 55'x95' Single
Family Homes
UDO Compliant/Exception - Primary Residence and Secondary
Unit. For units with driveway slope gradient between 8.33% and
12%, Units are compliant through options 1 & 2 below:
1. Access from sidewalk to front door via driveway with a
slope gradient between 8.33% and 12%
2. Access to home by parking in garage and entering home
through garage door with optional ramp.
Notes:
1. For all Primary Residences and Secondary Units, the
home builder shall offer to the home buyer a portable
ramp that can be placed at the exterior door to the
Primary Unit, and if a Secondary Unit is provided, to the
exterior door of the Secondary Unit.
2. House plans, model, and setbacks illustrated here are
conceptual and subject to change.
1. The units are part of Vesting Tentative Tract 8563.
2. The neighborhood is located on a hillside, with
moderate slopes and terrain.
3. All driveway slopes labeled on this exhibit are
based on the calculated slope along the steeper
driveway side.
X
KEY
P - Pad Elevation
FF - Finished Floor Elevation
BOW - Back of Walk Elevation
GL - Garage Lip Elevation
UDO - Universal Design Ordinance
Based on the following site conditions, the Project proposes the
methods outlined in the Legend to meet the intent of the
"Mandatory to offer" UDO requirement for an exterior accessible
route to a primary or other entrance consistent with City Zoning
Code 7.90.060.
EXTERIOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE
FOR UDO COMPLIANCE
LEGEND
UDO Compliant - Primary Residence and Secondary Unit. Some
units require driveway slope gradient to 8.33% max. This
designation assumes pedestrian walks to entry from public sidewalk
via the driveway
*
83
6
5
6
7
8
9
3
4
PARCEL B
13
45
1112
10
35
MJR
71
64
83
76
53
59
24
21
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
PARCEL C
16
14
PARCEL E
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
80 81
85
82
84
50 51 52
5554
56
6263
66 65
67
73
72
69 70
68
7475
78 77
79
PARCEL F
60
57
58
30
37 36
34
39
27
28 29
3231
33
26 25
23
19
22
20
61
9
15
38
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
17
18PARCEL D
PARCEL G
5
9
8
10
MJR
LEGEND
GHAD OWNED AND MAINTAINED(6)(8)
CITY OWNED AND MAINTAINED
HOA OWNED AND MAINTAINED
CITY OWNED AND CFD MAINTAINED(1)(2)(3)
GHAD OWNED AND GHAD/HOA MAINTAINED(7)
PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED(4)(8)
SEMI PUBLIC OWNED AND MAINTAINED
NOTES:
(1)ALL STREETS ARE PUBLIC.
(2)ALL PARKWAY STRIPS WITHIN CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY TO
BE HOA MAINTAINED.
(3)PARK FRONTAGE SIDEWALKS ALONG NEIGHBORHOOD
STREETS TO BE HOA MAINTAINED. IF FUTURE PARK
DESIGN REMOVES AND RELOCATES THE SIDEWALK,
THE NEW SIDEWALK WILL THEN BE CITY MAINTAINED.
(4)STREETS, COMMON LANDSCAPE, AND BUILDING
EXTERIORS WITHIN MEDIUM DENSITY PARCEL WILL BE
HOA MAINTAINED. ENCLOSED YARD SPACE TO BE
PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED.
(5)FRONT YARD LANDSCAPE ON ALL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS
ARE PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED.
(6)PROPOSED TRAIL CONNECTIONS TO BE GHAD OWNED
AND MAINTAINED.
(7)GHAD WILL MAINTAIN SLOPE STABILITY, REPAIR,
MOWING, FIRE ACCESS ROAD (INCLUDING DRAINAGE
DITCH) AND WEED ABATEMENT. HOA WILL MAINTAIN
DECORATIVE LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, AND TRASH
REMOVAL.
(8)RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING OR ASSOCIATED WITH
PRIVATE LOTS ARE TO BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED.
RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING COMMON
AREA/LANDSCAPE ARE TO BE HOA MAINTAINED.
RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING TRAILS WITHIN GHAD
PARCELS ARE TO BE MAINTAINED BY GHAD.
(9)NEIGHBORHOOD 6 ENCLOSED BACK AND SIDE YARDS
FOR FEE SIMPLE LOTS WILL BE PRIVATELY
MAINTAINED. ALL EXTERIOR ELEMENTS OF THE FEE
SIMPLE AND CONDOMINIUM DWELLING UNITS WILL BE
HOA MAINTAINED.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
MAINTENANCERESPONSIBILITY PLAN
N4-C.7
83
7
838
839
5'-0"40'-0"4'-6"
49'-6"
17
'
-
0
"
45
'
-
0
"
18
'
-
0
"
80
'
-
0
"
30
'
-
8
"
19
'
-
0
"
12
'
-
6
"
6'
-
1
0
"
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-6"
Entry
Great Room
18'-7" x 30'-1"
Bath
3
Bedroom 4
11'-0" x 11'-6"
Kitchen
Opt. Covered
Outdoor Room
UP
19R
6'
-
6
"
First Floor
1,179 s.f.
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
6'-0"4'-0"
4'
-
1
1
"
8'
-
4
"
6'
-
6
"
Cable
Elect.
w/h
Trash
Compost
Recycle
5'-012"
10
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
6'
-
6
"
12'-9"27'-3"
17
'
-
0
"
5'-0"4'-6"
5'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
A
v
g
.
;
5
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
4'-0" Min.
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
G
a
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
4'-0" Min.
5'
-
0
"
M
i
n
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
To
O
u
t
d
o
o
r
R
o
o
m
pada/c
MICRO/
PANTRY
22'-10"
8'
-
0
"
Porch
19'-11"20'-1"Second Floor
1,429 s.f.
W.I.C.
23'-0" l.f.
Bedroom 2
11'-0" x 12'-0"
Bedroom 3
11'-0" x 11'-5"
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
11'-0" x 13'-9"
Primary
Bedroom
17'-0" x 15'-3"
Primary
Bath
Laund.
DN
19R
Bedroom 5
11'-0" x 10'-6"
Dr.Opt.
40'-0"
30
'
-
8
"
6'
-
1
0
"
6'
-
6
"
38
'
-
0
"
11'-4"12'-9"
27'-3"12'-9"
2'
-
0
"
4'
-
6
"
1'
-
6
"
5'
-
0
"
OPT. Bedrm 5
15'-11"
Low Linen w/
Opt. Uppers
4'
-
6
"
Bath
2
1'
-
6
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
FLOOR PLAN 1A
N4 - A1.1.0
4 BEDROOMS + LOFT
OPT. BEDRM 5 SUITE
3 BATHS
1,179 S.F. 1ST FLOOR
1,429 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
2,608 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
432 S.F. GARAGE
266 S.F. OPT. COVERED
OUTDOOR ROOM
49 S.F. 'A' PORCH
84
0
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-6"
Entry
Porch
First Floor
1,179 s.f.
Bedroom 2
11'-0" x 12'-0"
Bedroom 3
11'-0" x 11'-5"
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
11'-0" x 13'-9"
Low Linen w/
Opt. Uppers
Second Floor
1,429 s.f.
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-6"
Entry
First Floor
1,179 s.f.
Bedroom 2
11'-0" x 12'-0"
Bedroom 3
11'-0" x 11'-5"
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
11'-0" x 13'-9"
Low Linen w/
Opt. Uppers
Second Floor
1,429 s.f.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N4 - A1.1.1
PLAN 1 ADDEDNA
PLAN 1B
PLAN 1C
15 S.F. 'C' PORCH
195 S.F. 'B' PORCH
84
1
Front Elevation 1A-
Traditional Farmhouse
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
8
'
-
1
0
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N4 - A1.2.0
PLAN 1A EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
1A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Cementitious Lap Siding
Decorative Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
84
2
Front Elevation 1B -
Contmeporary Cottage
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
8
'
-
1
0
"
F.F.
P.L.
F.F.
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N4 - A1.3.0
PLAN 1B EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
1B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stucco Finish
Brick Veneer
Decorative Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
84
3
Front Elevation 1C -
Contemporary Prairie
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONAL
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
7
'
-
2
"
F.F.
P.L.
F.F.
Left Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N4 - A1.4.0
PLAN 1C EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
1C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stucco Finish
Brick Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
84
4
4:
1
2
Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
4:
1
2
ROOF PLAN 1A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
5:12
5:12
RIDGE
3:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12 6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
R.
4:12
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
4:
1
2
Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
4:
1
2
ROOF PLAN 1B
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
5:12
5:12
RIDGE
5:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12 6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
R.
4:12
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
VALLEY
4:
1
2
Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
4:
1
2
ROOF PLAN 1C
OVERHANG : 24"4:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
HIP
HI
P
VAL
L
E
Y
HI
P
VA
L
L
E
Y
HI
P
VALLEY
HI
P
HI
P
HIP
HIP
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
HI
P
RIDGE
R.
RI
D
G
E
R.
HIPHIP
VALLEY
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 4 8 12
08/11/2022
scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"N4 - A1.4.0
PLAN 1 ROOF PLANS
84
5
846
First Floor
1311 s.f.
5'-0"4'-6"
49'-6"
40'-0"
46
'
-
0
"
16
'
-
0
"
53
'
-
0
"
18
'
-
0
"
80
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
Bath
3
Trash
Compost
Recycle
UP
19R
Kitchen
Dining
17'-7" x 10'-7"
walk-in
pantry
Entry
Garage
21'-0" x 20'-0"
Porch
Bedroom 4
11'-0" x 11'-0"
Great Room
22'-0" x 17'-1"
Opt. Covered
Outdoor Room
22'-0" x 10'-0"
PADA/C
6'
-
0
"
7'
-
6
"
4'-0"6'-0"
linen
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
W/H
low
Cable
Elect.
21'-6"18'-6"
10
'
-
0
"
1'
-
8
"
38
'
-
6
"
7'
-
6
"
5'-0"21'-112"6'-1012"12'-0"4'-6"
10
'
-
0
"
A
v
g
.
;
5
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
4'-0" Min.
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
G
a
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
8'
-
0
"
M
i
n
F
r
o
n
t
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
10
'
-
0
"
A
v
g
.
;
5
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
4'-0" Min.
MICRO
10
'
-
0
"
1'
-
0
"
1'
-
0
"
5'
-
4
"
6"
Second Floor
1440 s.f.
laund.
Primary
Bedroom
17'-7" x 16'-6"
W.I.C.
28'-0" l.f.
Bedroom 2
11'-2" x 12'-0"
Bedroom 3
12'-5" x 11'-8"
Primary
Bath
Bath
2
DN
19R
Bedroom 5
12'-3" x 11'-1"
Opt. Bedrm 5
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
17'-8" x 11'-1"
38
'
-
1
"
40'-0"
6'
-
5
"
2'
-
7
"
36
'
-
6
"
Opt.
Dr.
0"
5'
-
4
"
2'
-
1
"
21'-1112"18'-012"
21'-6"18'-6"
7'
-
6
"
Low
Linen
60 x 42
3'-8"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
FLOOR PLAN 2A
N4 - A2.1.0
4 BEDROOMS + LOFT
OPT. BEDRM 5 SUITE
3 BATHS
1,311 S.F. 1ST FLOOR
1,440 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
2,751 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
456 S.F. GARAGE
216 S.F. OPT. COVERED
OUTDOOR ROOM
60 S.F. 'A' PORCH
84
7
Bath
3
Trash
Compost
Recycle
UP
19R
Kitchen
walk-in
pantry
Entry
Garage
21'-0" x 20'-0"
Porch
Bedroom 4
11'-0" x 11'-0"
linen
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
W/H
low
Cable
Elect.
First Floor
1311 s.f.
laund.
Bedroom 2
11'-2" x 12'-0"
Bedroom 3
12'-5" x 11'-8"
Bath
2
DN
19R
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
17'-8" x 11'-1"
Low
Linen
Second Floor
1440 s.f.
Bath
3
Trash
Compost
Recycle
UP
19R
Kitchen
walk-in
pantry
Entry
Garage
21'-0" x 20'-0"
Porch
Bedroom 4
11'-0" x 11'-0"
linen
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
W/H
low
Cable
Elect.
First Floor
1311 s.f.
laund.
Bedroom 2
11'-2" x 12'-0"
Bedroom 3
12'-5" x 11'-8"
Bath
2
DN
19R
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
17'-8" x 11'-1"
Low
Linen 3'-8"
Second Floor
1440 s.f.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N4 - A2.1.1
PLAN 2 ADDEDNA
PLAN 2B
PLAN 2C 75 S.F. 'C' PORCH
54 S.F. 'B' PORCH
84
8
Front Elevation 2A -
Traditional Farmhouse
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
29
'
-
1
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONALLeft Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N4 - A2.2.0
PLAN 2A EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
2A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
84
9
Front Elevation 2B -
Contemporary Cottage
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
29
'
-
1
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONALLeft Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N4 - A2.3.0
PLAN 2B EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
2B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stucco Finish
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
85
0
Front Elevation 2C -
Contemporary Prairie
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
7
'
-
1
0
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
NOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONALLeft Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N4 - A2.4.0
PLAN 2C EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
2C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Lap Siding
Stucco Finish
Stone Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
85
1
ROOF PLAN 2A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
5:12
4:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
VA
L
L
E
Y
5:12
4:12
4:12
ROOF PLAN 2B
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
5:12
4:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
VA
L
L
E
Y
5:12
4:12
4:12
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
VA
L
L
E
Y
ROOF PLAN 2C
OVERHANG : 24"4:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
4:12
4:12
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
R.
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:12
4:12
RIDGE
HI
P
HIP
VALLEY
HI
P
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
HI
P
HI
P
4:12
4:12
4:12
HI
P
HI
PHIP
VA
L
L
E
Y
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 4 8 12
08/11/2022
scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"N4 - A2.4.0
PLAN 2 ROOF PLANS
85
2
853
First Floor
1361 s.f.
20'-0" x 20'-0"
Garage
Entry
Porch
5'-0"4'-6"
49'-6"
40'-0"
36
'
-
4
"
12
'
-
8
"
13
'
-
0
"
18
'
-
0
"
80
'
-
0
"
Trash
Compost
Recycle Kitchen
walk-in
pantry
Great Room
18'-7" x 26'-4"
Opt. Covered
Outdoor Room
20'-5" x 10'-0"
UP
19R
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
6'
-
0
"
4'
-
6
"
4'
-
5
12"
7'-0"8'-6"
w/h
coats/storage
4'-6"20'-112"5'-0"
20'-6"19'-6"
10
'
-
0
"
A
v
g
.
;
5
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
4'-0" Min.
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
G
a
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
4'-0" Min.
11
'
-
8
"
55
'
-
4
"
13
'
-
0
"
MICRO
Bath
3
Bedroom 4
11'-6" x 11'-0"
linenlow
1'
-
0
"
7'-6"12'-412"
2"
6'
-
2
"
A/CPAD
Second Floor
1567 s.f.
Bath
2
Bedroom 2
11'-0" x 11'-6"
Bedroom 3
11'-5" x 11'-7"
opt. linen W.I.C.
31'-0" l.f.
DN
19R
Primary
Bedroom
18'-7" x 15'-6"
Primary
Bath
Laund.
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
16'-5" x 11'-0"
20'-6"19'-6"
40'-0"
5'
-
1
0
"
3'
-
3
"
33
'
-
7
"
12
'
-
8
"
8'-7"12'-412"19'-012"
1'
-
0
"
5'
-
1
0
"
3'
-
3
"
46
'
-
3
"
4'-812"4'-812"7'-0"
dr.opt.
Low Linen w/
Opt. Uppers
Bedroom 5
11'-10" x 11'-0"
Opt. Bedrm 5
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
4 BEDROOMS + LOFT
OPT. BEDRM 5 SUITE
3 BATHS
1,361 S.F. 1ST FLOOR
1,567 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
2,928 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
428 S.F. GARAGE
205 S.F. OPT. COVERED
OUTDOOR ROOM
60 S.F. 'A' PORCH FLOOR PLAN 3A
N4 - A3.1.0
85
4
20'-0" x 20'-0"
Garage
Entry
Porch
Trash
Compost
Recycle Kitchen
walk-in
pantry
UP
19R
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
w/h
coats/storage
MICRO
Bath
3
Bedroom 4
11'-6" x 11'-0"
linenlow
First Floor
1353 s.f.
Bath
2
Bedroom 2
11'-0" x 11'-6"
Bedroom 3
11'-5" x 11'-7"
DN
19R
Laund.
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
16'-5" x 11'-0"
Low Linen w/
Opt. Uppers
Second Floor
1567 s.f.
First Floor
1353 s.f.
20'-0" x 20'-0"
Garage
Entry
Porch
Trash
Compost
Recycle Kitchen
walk-in
pantry
UP
19R
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Cable
Elect.
w/h
coats/storage
MICRO
Bath
3
Bedroom 4
11'-6" x 11'-0"
linenlow
Second Floor
1567 s.f.
Bath
2
Bedroom 2
11'-0" x 11'-6"
Bedroom 3
11'-5" x 11'-7"
DN
19R
Laund.
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
16'-5" x 11'-0"
Low Linen w/
Opt. Uppers
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N4 - A3.1.1
PLAN 3 ADDEDNA
PLAN 3B
PLAN 3C 35 S.F. 'C' PORCH
35 S.F. 'B' PORCH
85
5
Front Elevation 3A -
Traditional Farmhouse
Right Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
7
'
-
6
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
Rear ElevationNOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONALLeft Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N4 - A3.2.0
PLAN 3A EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
3A - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Board & Batt Siding
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Posts
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
85
6
Front Elevation 3B -
Contemporary Cottage
Right Elevation
Rear ElevationNOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONALLeft Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N4 - A3.3.0
PLAN 3B EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
3B - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Decorative Gable End Detail
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
85
7
Right Elevation
Rear ElevationNOTE: OUTDOOR ROOM SHOWN IS OPTIONALLeft Elevation
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
08/11/2022
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N4 - A3.4.0
PLAN 3C EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
3C - Material Legend:
Composition Shingle Roofing
Cementitious Lap Siding
Brick Veneer
Enhanced Head and Sill Trim
85
8
ROOF PLAN 3A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"4:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
3:12
4:12
3:12
4:124:12
4:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
RIDGE
VA
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VA
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VA
L
L
E
Y
ROOF PLAN 3B
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"4:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
4:12
3:12
4:124:12
4:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
RIDGE
VA
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
VA
L
L
E
Y
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
4:12 VA
L
L
E
Y
ROOF PLAN 3C
OVERHANG : 24"4:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
Roof at Optional Outdoor Room
3:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
RI
D
G
E
R.
RI
D
G
E
VA
L
L
E
Y
VALLEY
HIP HIP
HIP
HI
P
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
V
A
L
L
E
Y
HI
P
HIP
HI
P
HIP
VA
L
L
E
Y
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 4 8 12
08/11/2022
scale: 3/16" = 1'-0"N4 - A3.4.0
PLAN 3 ROOF PLANS
85
9
860
GARAGE
ENTRY
PORCH
GREAT ROOM
DINNINGROOM
KITCHENBEDROOM 4
BATH 3
COATS/STORAGE
U14
U14
U14
U14 U13U15
U16 OPT. COVEREDOUTDOOR ROOM
U6 U8U4 U10
3'-11 1/2"2'-4 1/2"
U17
3'-8"5'-1 3/4"3'-11 1/4"
3'-7"5'-11 1/2"2'-2 1/2"
8'
-
0
"
3'
-
0
"
3'
-
3
"
1'
-
9
"
5'-0"1'-3 1/2"1'-6"3'-2 1/2"5 1/2"5'-8 1/2"
6"
3'
-
1
1
"
2'
-
2
1
/
2
"
2'
-
6
3
/
4
"
2'
-
1
1
1
/
2
"
15'-7 1/2"
5'-3 1/2"
2'
-
1
"
17
'
-
4
1
/
2
"
1'
-
2
1
/
2
"
UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTESNOTES
MANDATORY TO INSTALL:
1.HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND
CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1126A.6
2.ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES
AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1
OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1136A.
3.THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING
CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC
CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRICAL CODE, SEC. 1126A.
U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR. AT ENTRY
DOOR PER CBC CH. 11, SEC. 1136A.2.
MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR.
U2 NOT USED
U3
U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR
WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT
PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM/BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2.
U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
REFER TO SHEET GN-3 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND
REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION.
U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR
POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3 OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING
OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA. CIRCLE, 48" X 60"
RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE
PURCHASER/OWNER.
U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING
THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 & CBC CH. 11A, SEC.
1134A.5 & SEC. 1135A.6.
U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.1
FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER/BATH, OR
LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.2, OPT. 2
U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.7.
U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE
LAVATORY/SINK, PER CBC CH. 11A, SEC. 1134A.8 & OPT.4
U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND
TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.8.
U13 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1133A.6.
U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER/OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST
A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING
OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE
18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER
SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"
X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR,
DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT
THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNE, PER CBC CH. 11, SEC.
1133A.2.
U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR
REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11, SEC. 1133A.4.1.1.
U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT
SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, PER CBC CH. 1136A.
U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO.
21-07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 & CBC CH. 11A,
SEC. 1119A. INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST
AND COST OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
WALL LEGEND
2X6 WALL
2X4 WALL
7.90.130
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL IN ALL VISIT-ABLE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS:
1. HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARDWARE NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING OR
TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A.
2. ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS OR
LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A.6.
3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTACLE
OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY
WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A OR APPLICABLE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL
CODE.
2. FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
7.90.090
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A KITCHEN IS
LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL:
1. SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC.1133A.4.1.1.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN GENERAL NOTES:
7.90.060
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL:
1. WHERE AT LEAST ONE DOORBELL IS PROVIDED
FOR THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRY DOOR, ONE THAT
IS BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM THE FINISHED
FLOOR MUST BE INSTALLED PER CBC 1136A.2.
7.90.080
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A POWDER ROOM OR
BATHROOM IS LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY
LEVEL:
1. GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT CONSISTENT WITH
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2 FOR THE WATER CLOSET
AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB.
NOT USED
U18 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT LEAST ONE BEDROOM ON THE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL WITH ALL COMPONENTS
MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7.90.130. A
CLOSET SHALL HAVE AT LEAST A THIRTY-TWO INCH (32") NET
OPENING AND ADJUSTABLE CLOSET RODS AND SHELVING.
4 "UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH
BUYER TO FILL OUT.
PER CITY OF DUBLIN'S REQUIREMENT:
"UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO
EACH BUYER TO FILL OUT.
NOTE:
FOR ALL INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE, SEE
STANDARD 1ST FLOOR AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHEETS.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 05/19/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
PLAN 1 FRONT ELEVATIONSUNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE_FLOOR PLAN 1
N4 - A5.0.0
86
1
3'-6 1/2"2'-6"
ENTRY
PORCH
GARAGE
BATH 3
BEDROOM 4
COATS/STORAGE
DINNINGROOM
GREAT ROOM
KITCHEN
U14
U14
U14
U16
U14 U13U15
OPT. COVEREDOUTDOOR ROOM
U6 U8U4 U10
U7 U8
8'
-
1
1
/
2
"
13
'
-
8
"
2'-2 1/2"3'-9 3/4"1'-11 3/4"4'-0"
3'
-
1
1
1
/
2
"
5'
-
3
1
/
2
"
1'
-
1
1
/
2
"
3'-2"8'-10"
1'
-
9
3
/
4
"
3'
-
8
"
6'
-
5
"
4'-5"3'-8"3'-10"5'-3 1/2"4'-3 1/2"
1'
-
4
"
9'
-
2
"
UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTESNOTES
MANDATORY TO INSTALL:
1.HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND
CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1126A.6
2.ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES
AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1
OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1136A.
3.THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING
CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC
CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRICAL CODE, SEC. 1126A.
U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR. AT ENTRY
DOOR PER CBC CH. 11, SEC. 1136A.2.
MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR.
U2 NOT USED
U3
U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR
WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT
PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM/BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2.
U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
REFER TO SHEET GN-3 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND
REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION.
U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR
POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3 OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING
OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA. CIRCLE, 48" X 60"
RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE
PURCHASER/OWNER.
U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING
THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 & CBC CH. 11A, SEC.
1134A.5 & SEC. 1135A.6.
U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.1
FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER/BATH, OR
LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.2, OPT. 2
U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.7.
U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE
LAVATORY/SINK, PER CBC CH. 11A, SEC. 1134A.8 & OPT.4
U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND
TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.8.
U13 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1133A.6.
U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER/OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST
A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING
OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE
18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER
SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"
X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR,
DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT
THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNE, PER CBC CH. 11, SEC.
1133A.2.
U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR
REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11, SEC. 1133A.4.1.1.
U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT
SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, PER CBC CH. 1136A.
U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO.
21-07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 & CBC CH. 11A,
SEC. 1119A. INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST
AND COST OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
WALL LEGEND
2X6 WALL
2X4 WALL
7.90.130
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL IN ALL VISIT-ABLE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS:
1. HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARDWARE NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING OR
TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A.
2. ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS OR
LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A.6.
3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTACLE
OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY
WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A OR APPLICABLE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL
CODE.
2. FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
7.90.090
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A KITCHEN IS
LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL:
1. SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC.1133A.4.1.1.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN GENERAL NOTES:
7.90.060
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL:
1. WHERE AT LEAST ONE DOORBELL IS PROVIDED
FOR THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRY DOOR, ONE THAT
IS BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM THE FINISHED
FLOOR MUST BE INSTALLED PER CBC 1136A.2.
7.90.080
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A POWDER ROOM OR
BATHROOM IS LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY
LEVEL:
1. GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT CONSISTENT WITH
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2 FOR THE WATER CLOSET
AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB.
NOT USED
U18 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT LEAST ONE BEDROOM ON THE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL WITH ALL COMPONENTS
MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7.90.130. A
CLOSET SHALL HAVE AT LEAST A THIRTY-TWO INCH (32") NET
OPENING AND ADJUSTABLE CLOSET RODS AND SHELVING.
4 "UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH
BUYER TO FILL OUT.
PER CITY OF DUBLIN'S REQUIREMENT:
"UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO
EACH BUYER TO FILL OUT.
NOTE:
FOR ALL INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE, SEE
STANDARD 1ST FLOOR AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHEETS.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 05/19/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
PLAN 1 FRONT ELEVATIONSUNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE_FLOOR PLAN 2
N4 - A5.1.0
86
2
ENTRY
PORCH
GARAGE
BATH 3
BEDROOM 4
COATS/STORAGE
GREAT ROOM
KITCHEN
DINNINGROOM
U6 U8U4 U10
U7 U8
3'-2"9'-2 1/2"
3'
-
1
1
1
/
2
"
5'
-
3
1
/
2
"
1'
-
1
1
/
2
"
1'
-
4
1
/
2
"
9'
-
2
"
4'
-
6
"
3'
-
8
"
6'
-
5
"
OPT. COVEREDOUTDOOR ROOM
3'-8"3'-8"3'-8"5'-2 1/2"4'-3 1/2"
U16
U14
U14U14
3'-6 1/2"3'-1 1/2"2'-1 3/4"3'-5 3/4"2'-2 1/4"4'-6 3/4"
7'
-
0
"
4'
-
4
1
/
2
"
12
'
-
0
1
/
2
"
U17
U14 U13U15
UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTESNOTES
MANDATORY TO INSTALL:
1.HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND
CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1126A.6
2.ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES
AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1
OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1136A.
3.THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING
CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC
CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRICAL CODE, SEC. 1126A.
U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR. AT ENTRY
DOOR PER CBC CH. 11, SEC. 1136A.2.
MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR.
U2 NOT USED
U3
U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR
WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT
PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM/BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2.
U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
REFER TO SHEET GN-3 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND
REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION.
U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR
POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3 OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING
OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA. CIRCLE, 48" X 60"
RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE
PURCHASER/OWNER.
U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING
THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 & CBC CH. 11A, SEC.
1134A.5 & SEC. 1135A.6.
U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.1
FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER/BATH, OR
LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.2, OPT. 2
U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.7.
U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE
LAVATORY/SINK, PER CBC CH. 11A, SEC. 1134A.8 & OPT.4
U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND
TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.8.
U13 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1133A.6.
U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER/OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST
A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING
OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE
18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER
SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"
X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR,
DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT
THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNE, PER CBC CH. 11, SEC.
1133A.2.
U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR
REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11, SEC. 1133A.4.1.1.
U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT
SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, PER CBC CH. 1136A.
U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO.
21-07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 & CBC CH. 11A,
SEC. 1119A. INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST
AND COST OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
WALL LEGEND
2X6 WALL
2X4 WALL
7.90.130
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL IN ALL VISIT-ABLE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS:
1. HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARDWARE NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING OR
TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A.
2. ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS OR
LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A.6.
3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTACLE
OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY
WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A OR APPLICABLE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL
CODE.
2. FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
7.90.090
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A KITCHEN IS
LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL:
1. SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC.1133A.4.1.1.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN GENERAL NOTES:
7.90.060
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL:
1. WHERE AT LEAST ONE DOORBELL IS PROVIDED
FOR THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRY DOOR, ONE THAT
IS BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM THE FINISHED
FLOOR MUST BE INSTALLED PER CBC 1136A.2.
7.90.080
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A POWDER ROOM OR
BATHROOM IS LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY
LEVEL:
1. GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT CONSISTENT WITH
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2 FOR THE WATER CLOSET
AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB.
NOT USED
U18 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT LEAST ONE BEDROOM ON THE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL WITH ALL COMPONENTS
MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7.90.130. A
CLOSET SHALL HAVE AT LEAST A THIRTY-TWO INCH (32") NET
OPENING AND ADJUSTABLE CLOSET RODS AND SHELVING.
4 "UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH
BUYER TO FILL OUT.
PER CITY OF DUBLIN'S REQUIREMENT:
"UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO
EACH BUYER TO FILL OUT.
NOTE:
FOR ALL INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE, SEE
STANDARD 1ST FLOOR AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHEETS.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 05/19/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 4Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com 0 2 4 8
PLAN 1 FRONT ELEVATIONSUNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE_FLOOR PLAN 3
N4 - A5.2.0
86
3
11/29/2022
N4-L3.1
0 5 10 20
4
NEIGHBORHOOD 4 TYPICAL FRONT YARDS
PLANTING NOTE:
For lots that are adjacent to open space, or deemed a
“Fire Lot”, refer to the Diablo Firesafe Council list as
well as the approved plant list in the landscape design
guidelines for fire safe plants recommendations.
86
4
NEIGHBORHOOD 5
865
P/SP
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
OPEN SPACE
(BASIN)
OP
E
N
S
P
A
C
E
(
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
)
OPEN SPACE
(WETLAND)
OPEN SPACE
(BASIN)
BASIN
SE
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
S
E
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
LO
Y
A
L
T
O
N
R
O
A
D
PANORAMA DRIVE
T
A
B
L
E
M
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
S TERRACINA DR
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
CR
O
A
K
R
D
STREET A
STREET B
ST
R
E
E
T
J
STREET K
STREET L
ST
R
E
E
T
N
STREET O
STREET M
ST
R
E
E
T
S
ST
R
E
E
T
T
ST
R
E
E
T
C
ST
R
E
E
T
Y
ST
R
E
E
T
Z
COURT U
STREET V
STREET B
CENTRAL PARKWAY
CENTRAL PARKWAY STREET R
ST
R
E
E
T
X
ST
R
E
E
T
W
STREET Q
STREET P
CR
O
A
K
R
D
LOOP H
LOOP H
STREET G
STREET B
ST
R
E
E
T
I
STREET F
STREET E
STREET D
STREET A
COURT A
COURT B
COURT C
COURT E
COURT F
CO
U
R
T
G
COURT H
CO
U
R
T
I
CO
U
R
T
J
COURT KCOURT L
COURT S
COURT R
COURT QCOURT V
COURT U
COURT T
COURT M
CO
U
R
T
N
CO
U
R
T
O
CO
U
R
T
P
ST
R
E
E
T
C
STR
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
ST
R
E
E
T
T
STREET P
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
ACCESS
ROAD
ACCESS
ROAD
PROPOSED
TRAIL
EVA/
ACCESS ROAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
NEIGHBORHOOD SUMMARY
NEIGHBORHOOD TYPICAL LOT
SIZE UNITS GROSS
ACREAGE (±)DENSITY
1 65'x100'99 30.1 3.3 DU/AC
2 55'x95'96 23.4 4.1 DU/AC
3 50'x110'85 19.5 4.5 DU/AC
4 49.5'x80'85 16.8 5.1 DU/AC
5 48'x70' Cluster 94 17.6 5.4 DU/AC
6 Attached Multi-Family 100 10.4 9.6 DU/AC
1, 2, 3, & 5 Zero-Lot Single Family
Units 14 N/A(1)
Croak Rd and Central
Pkwy Extension 8.0
TOTAL 573 125.8 4.5 du/ac
C.0
NOTE:
(1) GROSS ACREAGE FOR ZERO LOT PRODUCTS IS INCLUDED IN EACH INDIVIDUAL
NEIGHBORHOOD GROSS ACREAGE METRIC.
86
6
86
7
34 37
74
38
70
PARCEL P
71
7273
A/
C
PA
D
PL
A
N
3
A/
C
PA
D
PL
A
N
1
A/
C
PA
D
PL
A
N
2
A/
C
PA
D
PL
A
N
2
X
18'
18'18'
18'
5' MIN.
AVG. 10'
5' MIN.
AVG. 10'
5' MIN.
AVG. 10'
5' MIN.
AVG. 10'
4'4'
4'4'
8'
4'
4'
4'
11
'
4'
4'
4'
11
'
8'
23
A/C PAD
PLAN 3
5'
M
I
N
.
AV
G
.
1
0
'
4'4'
1
8
'
8
'
1
1
'
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 5
MINIMUM SETBACK EXHIBIT
N5-C.0
MOTORCOURT LOADED
NOMINAL LOT SIZE: 3360 SF
LOT COVERAGE: 55% MAX
NOTE: ALL SETBACK DIMENSIONS ARE
MINIMUMS AND NOT TO SCALE
250 SF total flat area with a minimum dimension of 8'.Yard area may be provided in more than one locationwithin a lot, with a minimum 80 SF yard or courtyardarea.
FRONT LOADED
NOMINAL LOT SIZE: 3360 SF
LOT COVERAGE: 55% MAX
NOTE: ALL SETBACK DIMENSIONS ARE
MINIMUMS AND NOT TO SCALE
250 SF total flat area with a minimum dimension of 8'.Yard area may be provided in more than one locationwithin a lot, with a minimum 80 SF yard or courtyardarea.
86
8
92
PARCEL D
MJR
41
51
50
53
55
PARCEL I
PARCEL J
36
35
40
39
45
44
43
46
PARCEL K
49
4748
PARCEL L
56
PARCEL M
59
52
54 5857 62
34
37
74
38
67
42
66
61
60
PARCEL N
63
70
PARCEL O
PARCEL P
71
64
68
65
72
69
73
PARCEL APARCEL BPARCEL CPARCEL EPARCEL F
10
9
22 819 518 415 11411
2367121613201721
23
PARCEL G
24
25
32
29
26
27
PARCEL H
31
28
3033
PARCEL R
PARCEL W
86
PARCEL S
PARCEL T
88
85
83
89
84
82
80
PARCEL U
93
81
98
PARCEL Q
79 7578
76
PARCEL V
96
77
97
94 95909187
PARCEL X
1 1
6
1
7
2
8
2
9
4
4
4
5
6
0
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
92
MJR
41
51
50
53
55
36
35
40
39
45
44
43
4649
4748
56 5952
54 5857 62
34
37
74
38
67
42
66
61
60 63
70
71
64
68
65
72
69
73
10
9
22 819 518 415 11411
2367121613201721
23
2425
32
29
26 27
31 28
3033
86
88
85
83
89
84
82
80
93
81
98
79 7578
76
96
77
97
94 95909187
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1 1 1
1
1
1
1 1 1
1
1
1
2
2 2 2
2
2
2
2
22
2
22 2
2
2
2
2X
3
2X
3
2X
3
2X
3
2X3 2X3 2X3 2X3 2X3 2X3
2X3 2X3 2X3 2X3 2X3 2X3
2X
3
2X
3
2X 3 2X 33
3 2X
2X
3
2X
2X
3
2X
3
2X
3
2X
3
3
2X
2X
3 3
2X
3
2X
3
2X
3
2X
2X 32X3 2X 32X3 2X 32X3 2X 32X3 2X 32X3
2X
3
2X
32X
2X 3
**********
3
**
*
* * *
*
*
3
3
1
23
3 3
2
1
2
3 1
2
3 1
2
3 1
2
3 1
2
3 1
2
3 1
2
3 1
2
3
33
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2 3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
3
3 1
2
3 1
2
3 1
2
3 1
2
3 1
2
3
3 3 3 1
2
3 1
2
3 1
2
3
3 3
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
1 2
3
3
+
+
+
+
+
+
++
OPEN SPACE
BASIN
ACCESS ROAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 5
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
N5-C.1
Legend
2
1
3
All Plan 1's fit on this lot
All Plan 2's fit on this lot
Plan 2X fits on this lot
All Plan 3's fit on this lot
Zero-Lot Line Unit Location
Wildfire Buffer Lots
Lots Adjacent to Open Space(4)*
*For specific lot coverage information for all
plan types please see Sheet N5-C.2
NEIGHBORHOOD 5
Minimum Lot Size: 48'x75'
Number of Motorcourt/SFD Lots: 94
Number of Zero-Lot Line Units: 4
Total: 98 Units
2X
NOTES
1. Individual floor plans may be placed next to or across the street from each
other. In no case will the same architectural elevation or color scheme be
allowed next to or across the street from each other, unless they are a different
individual floor plan.
2. The applicant reserves the right to change the unit mix and plan locations
illustrated on this plan in accordance with these notes if it is within substantial
conformance with the approved SDR.
3. Setback requirements can be found on C.0 minimum setback exhibit.
4. Lots adjacent to undeveloped land may not be subject to the Wildfire
Management Ordinance if the adjacent properties receive approval of a
tentative map, master tentative map, or development agreement.
+
86
9
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 5
LOT COVERAGE TABLE
N5-C.2.1
LEGEND
NA/1- ZERO LOT LINE PRODUCT ONLY ON THIS LOT
NA/2 - PLAN DOES NOT FIT DUE TO SETBACKS
87
0
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 5
LOT COVERAGE TABLE - C.2.2LOT COVERAGE TABLEN5-C.2.2
LEGEND
NA/1- ZERO LOT LINE PRODUCT ONLY ON THIS LOT
NA/2 - PLAN DOES NOT FIT DUE TO SETBACKS
87
1
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 5
LOT COVERAGE TABLE
C.2.3.3
LEGEND
NA/1- ZERO LOT LINE PRODUCT ONLY ON THIS LOT
NA/2 - PLAN DOES NOT FIT DUE TO SETBACKS
87
2
52
39
27
MJR
78
68
4950
6566
67
63
71
64
70
86
89
88
87
84
85
90
83
82
81
80
79
76
77
737475 72
91
58
51
59
54
6056 61
53
6257
55
47
41 38
43 4645
40
48
37
44
42
26
34
29 25
31 35
28
363233
30
69
92
PARCEL D
MJR
41
51
50
53
55
PARCEL I
PARCEL J
36
35
40
39
45
44
43
46
PARCEL K
49
4748
PARCEL L
56
PARCEL M
59
52
54 5857 62
34
37
74
38
67
42
66
61
60
PARCEL N
63
70
PARCEL O
PARCEL P
71
64
68
65
72
69
73
PARCEL APARCEL BPARCEL CPARCEL EPARCEL F
10
9
22 819 518 415 11411
2367121613201721
23
PARCEL G
24
25
32
29
26
27
PARCEL H
31
28
3033
PARCEL R
PARCEL W
86
PARCEL S
PARCEL T
88
85
83
89
84
82
80
PARCEL U
93
81
98
PARCEL Q
79 7578
76
PARCEL V
96
77
97
94 95909187
PARCEL X
1 1
6
1
7
2
8
2
9
4
4
4
5
6
0
12
13
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPADA/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
DA/
C
PA
D
A/C PAD
A/
C
PA
D
12
'
4'
12'11
'
11
'
12.1
9
'
12
.
6
1
'
13.14
'
10'
80
93
81
98
79 7578
76
96
77
97
94 95909187
92
41
51
50
53
55
36
35
40
39
45
44
43
4649
4748
56 5952
54 5857 62
34
37
74
38
67
42
66
61
60 63
70
71
64
68
65
72
69
73
10
9
22 819 518 415 11411
2367121613201721
23
2425
32
29
26 27
31 28
3033
86
88
85
83
89
84
82
OPEN SPACE
BASIN
ACCESS ROAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 5
PARKING PLAN
N5-C.3
PARKING SUMMARY
TOTAL NH5 UNITS: 98
REQUIRED PARKING: 2 COVERED + 1 GUEST
GARAGE SPACES: 196
STREET PARALLEL PARKING: 144
DRIVEWAY PARKING: 196
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED: 536 (5.5 SPACES/UNIT)
NOTES:
1)STREET PARALLEL PARKING WILL BE UNMARKED
2)DRIVEWAYS WITH GUEST PARKING HAVE A MINIMUM 18'
LENGTH
LEGEND
STREET PARALLEL PARKING LOCATIONS (1)
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
87
3
12
13
92
PARCEL D
MJR
41
51
50
53
55
PARCEL I
PARCEL J
36
35
40
39
45
44
43
46
PARCEL K
49
4748
PARCEL L
56
PARCEL M
59
52
54 5857 62
34
37
74
38
67
42
66
61
60
PARCEL N
63
70
PARCEL O
PARCEL P
71
64
68
65
72
69
73
PARCEL APARCEL BPARCEL CPARCEL EPARCEL F
10
9
22 819 518 415 11411
2367121613201721
23
PARCEL G
24
25
32
29
26
27
PARCEL H
31
28
3033
PARCEL R
PARCEL W
86
PARCEL S
PARCEL T
88
85
83
89
84
82
80
PARCEL U
93
81
98
PARCEL Q
79 7578
76
PARCEL V
96
77
97
94 95909187
PARCEL X
52
39
27
MJR
78
68
4950
6566
67
63
71
64
70
86
89
88
87
84
85
90
83
82
81
80
79
76
77
737475 72
91
58
51
59
54
6056 61
53
6257
55
47
41 38
43 4645
40
48
37
44
42
26
34
29 25
31 35
28
363233
30
69
81
.
5
'
81
.
5
'
81
.
5
'
81
.
5
'
81
.
5
'
81
'
81
.
5
'
81
.
5
'
81
'
81.5'
81.5'
81.5'
101.12'
81.5'
81
.
5
'
81.5'
81
.
5
'
81
.
5
'
81
.
5
'
81
.
5
'
81
.
5
'
66
61
60 63
70
71
64
68
65
72
69
73
10
9
22 819 518 415 11411
2367121613201721
23
2425
32
29
26 27
31 28
3033
86
88
85
83
89
84
82
92
41
51
50
53
55
36
35
40
39
45
44
43
4649
4748
56 5952
54 5857 62
34
37
74
38
67
42
80
93
81
98
79 7578
76
96
77
97
94 95909187
1 1
6
1
7
2
8
2
9
4
4
4
5
6
0
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
RFO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P1
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P1
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
OPEN SPACE
BASIN
ACCESS ROAD
FH
FHFH
FH
F
H
FH
FHFH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 5
FIRE ACCESS PLAN
N5-C.4
LEGEND
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
FIRE DEPARTMENT ON-SITE ACCESS ROUTE
FH
ROUTE TO CROAK ROAD VIA STREET B
ROUTE TO CROAK ROAD VIA CENTRAL PARKWAY
FIRE HYDRANT DETAIL
NTS
36'
20'
20'
28'
CLEAR
8' PARKING
87
4
52
39
27
MJR
78
68
4950
6566
67
63
71
64
70
86
89
88
87
84
85
90
83
82
81
80
79
76
77
737475 72
91
58
51
59
54
6056 61
53
6257
55
47
41 38
43 4645
40
48
37
44
42
26
34
29 25
31 35
28
363233
30
69
92
PARCEL D
MJR
41
51
50
53
55
PARCEL I
PARCEL J
36
35
40
39
45
44
43
46
PARCEL K
49
4748
PARCEL L
56
PARCEL M
59
52
54 5857 62
34
37
74
38
67
42
66
61
60
PARCEL N
63
70
PARCEL O
PARCEL P
71
64
68
65
72
69
73
PARCEL APARCEL BPARCEL CPARCEL EPARCEL F
10
9
22 819 518 415 11411
2367121613201721
23
PARCEL G
24
25
32
29
26
27
PARCEL H
31
28
3033
PARCEL R
PARCEL W
86
PARCEL S
PARCEL T
88
85
83
89
84
82
80
PARCEL U
93
81
98
PARCEL Q
79 7578
76
PARCEL V
96
77
97
94 95909187
PARCEL X
1 1
6
1
7
2
8
2
9
4
4
4
5
6
0
12
13
10
9
22 8191815 11411
27121613201721
23
66
61
60 63
70
71
64
68
65
72
69
73
22 19 18
20 1721
23
2425
32
29
26 27
31 28
3033
86
88
85
83
89
84
82
80
93
81
98
79 7578
76
96
77
97
94 95909187
92
41
51
50
53
55
36
35
40
39
45
44
43
4649
4748
56 5952
54 5857 62
34
37
74
38
67
42
5 4
36
OPEN SPACE
BASIN
ACCESS ROAD
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPADA/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
DA/
C
PA
D
A/C PAD
A/
C
PA
D
12
'
4'
12'11
'
11
'
12.1
9
'
12
.
6
1
'
13.14
'
10'
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 5
GARBAGE PICK UP PLAN
N5-C.5
LEGEND
NEIGHBORHOOD GARBAGE PICK-UP ROUTE
NOTE: NEIGHBORHOOD 5 RESIDENTS WILL PLACE GARBAGE BINS
ALONG THE PUBLIC STREETAND PRIVATE COURTS
GARBAGE BINS (SEE DETAIL BELOW)
GARBAGE BIN DETAIL
NTS
30"
TYP
30
"
TY
P
3'3'
87
5
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 5
UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE TABLE
N5-C.6.1
UDO Status Lot Numbers Reason for "Exception"Options for UDO compliant entry Total number of
lots
UDO compliant to front
door from sidewalk via
driveway with a slope
gradient of 5% or less
N/A N/A
UDO compliant to front
door from sidewalk via
driveway with a slope
gradient between 5%
and 8.33%
1) This is a hillside development with steep
streets combined with the CBC requirement
for lot drainage which results in a greater
elevation difference between finish pad and
sidewalk and thus steeper slopes on
driveways and walkways to the front door.
Access via driveway, compliant to section
1114A.2 of the CBC.
UDO compliant with
"Exceptions"
(Driveway slope
gradient between 8.33%
and 12%)
1) This is a hillside development with steep
streets combined with the CBC requirement
for lot drainage which results in a greater
elevation difference between finish pad and
sidewalk and thus steeper slopes on
driveways and walkways to the front door.
1) Access from sidewalk to front door via
driveway with a slope gradient between
8.33% and 12%
2) Access to home by parking in garage and
entering home through garage door with
optional ramp
TOTAL:
*
X
*
87
6
52
39
27
MJR
78
68
4950
6566
67
63
71
64
70
86
89
88
87
84
85
90
83
82
81
80
79
76
77
737475 72
91
58
51
59
54
6056 61
53
6257
55
47
41 38
43 4645
40
48
37
44
42
26
34
29 25
31 35
28
363233
30
69
92
PARCEL D
MJR
41
51
50
53
55
PARCEL I
PARCEL J
36
35
40
39
45
44
43
46
PARCEL K
49
4748
PARCEL L
56
PARCEL M
59
52
54 5857 62
34
37
74
38
67
42
66
61
60
PARCEL N
63
70
PARCEL O
PARCEL P
71
64
68
65
72
69
73
PARCEL APARCEL BPARCEL CPARCEL EPARCEL F
10
9
22 819 518 415 11411
2367121613201721
23
PARCEL G
24
25
32
29
26
27
PARCEL H
31
28
3033
PARCEL R
PARCEL W
86
PARCEL S
PARCEL T
88
85
83
89
84
82
80
PARCEL U
93
81
98
PARCEL Q
79 7578
76
PARCEL V
96
77
97
94 95909187
PARCEL X
1 1
6
1
7
2
8
2
9
4
4
4
5
6
0
12
13
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
RFO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P1FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P1
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
P2
R
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPADA/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
DA/C
PA
D
A/C PAD
A/
C
PA
D
12
'
4'
12'11
'
11
'
12.1
9
'
12
.
6
1
'
13.14
'
10'
80
93
81
98
79 7578
76
96
77
97
94 95909187
92
41
51
50
53
55
36
35
45
44
43
4649
4748
56 5952
54 5857 62
34
37
74
38
67
42
66
61
60 63
70
71
64
68
65
72
69
73
10
9
22 819 518 415 11411
2367121613201721
23
2425
32
29
26 27
31 28
3033
86
88
85
83
89
84
82
40
39
P5
5
9
.
5
P5
5
9
.
6
P5
5
7
.
6
P5
5
7
.
8
P5
5
0
.
1
P5
5
0
.
4
P5
4
8
.
4
P5
4
8
.
7
P5
3
9
.
1
P5
3
9
.
3
P5
3
7
.
3
P5
3
7
.
4
P5
3
2
.
6
P5
3
2
.
8
P5
3
0
.
9
P5
3
1
.
0
P5
2
9
.
9
P5
3
0
.
0
P5
2
8
.
8
P5
2
9
.
4
FF
5
6
0
.
5
FF
5
6
0
.
6
FF
5
5
8
.
6
FF
5
5
8
.
8
FF
5
5
1
.
1
FF
5
5
1
.
4
FF
5
4
9
.
4
FF
5
4
9
.
7
FF
5
4
0
.
1
FF
5
4
0
.
3
FF
5
3
8
.
3
FF
5
3
8
.
4
FF
5
3
3
.
6
FF
5
3
3
.
8
FF
5
3
1
.
9
FF
5
3
2
.
0
FF
5
3
0
.
9
FF
5
3
1
.
0
FF
5
2
9
.
8
FF
5
3
0
.
4
560.04
GL
5
5
9
.
9
558.14
GL
5
5
8
.
1
550.64
GL
5
5
0
.
7
GL
5
4
9
.
0
GL
5
3
9
.
6
GL
5
3
7
.
7
533.09
GL
5
3
1
.
3
530.44
GL
5
3
0
.
3
529.34
GL
5
2
9
.
7
TC 557.80TC 557.54
11.67%3.11%
TC 548.62TC 548.36
11.56%3.56%
TC 537.48TC 537.22 S=
0
.
1
1
7
8
11.78%3.00%5.61%3.33%
6%4.11%
TC 530.96TC 530.70TC 529.22TC 528.96 S=
0
.
0
5
6
1
18'18'18'18'18'18'18.54'18'
8'
548.94539.64537.84533.14531.44
6
S
T
E
P
S
8'8'8'8'8'8'8'8'
5
S
T
E
P
S
6
S
T
E
P
S
4
S
T
E
P
S
P5
3
0
.
9
P5
3
0
.
6
P5
3
0
.
2
P5
3
0
.
2
P5
2
8
.
5
P5
2
7
.
9
P5
2
7
.
3
P5
2
7
.
2
P5
2
6
.
0
P5
2
5
.
2
P5
2
5
.
2
P5
2
5
.
3
P5
2
5
.
9
P5
2
5
.
3
P5
2
5
.
5
P5
2
6
.
1
P5
2
7
.
7
P5
2
7
.
2
P5
2
7
.
4
P5
2
7
.
9
P5
2
8
.
8
P5
2
8
.
3
FF
5
3
1
.
9
FF
5
3
1
.
6
FF
5
3
1
.
2
FF
5
3
1
.
2
FF
5
2
9
.
5
FF
5
2
8
.
9
FF
5
2
8
.
3
FF
5
2
8
.
2
FF
5
2
7
.
0
FF
5
2
6
.
2
FF
5
2
6
.
2
FF
5
2
6
.
3
FF
5
2
6
.
9
FF
5
2
6
.
3
FF
5
2
6
.
5
FF
5
2
7
.
1
FF
5
2
8
.
7
FF
5
2
8
.
2
FF
5
2
8
.
4
FF
5
2
8
.
9
FF
5
2
9
.
8
FF
5
2
9
.
3
GL531.2 53
1
.
1
4
53
0
.
7
4
GL530.5
GL528.8 52
8
.
4
4
GL527.6
52
7
.
7
4
GL526.3
GL525.5
52
5
.
7
4
52
5
.
8
4
GL526.2GL525.6
52
6
.
0
4
GL526.4
GL528.0
52
7
.
7
4
52
7
.
9
4
GL528.2
GL529.1
52
8
.
8
9
TC
5
2
9
.
4
5
TC
5
2
9
.
1
9
TC
5
2
4
.
1
4
TC
5
2
3
.
8
8
TC
5
2
6
.
0
1
TC
5
2
5
.
7
6
TC
5
2
6
.
9
0
TC
5
2
6
.
6
4
9.
7
2
%
7.
2
8
%
10
.
8
9
%
6%
12
%
9%
2.
1
7
%
2.
4
4
%
7.
2
2
%
7.
5
6
%
TC
5
2
4
.
8
5
3.
9
5
%
BO
W
5
3
9
.
5
1
BO
W
5
4
6
.
2
9
BO
W
5
2
7
.
1
8
BO
W
5
2
7
.
5
1
8.
8
3
%
BO
W
5
5
9
.
5
7
BO
W
5
5
4
.
9
5
BO
W
5
5
0
.
1
1
BO
W
5
3
4
.
8
5
BO
W
5
3
1
.
8
9
BO
W
5
2
9
.
2
2
BO
W
5
2
8
.
1
4
2
S
T
E
P
S
P5
1
7
.
5
P5
1
8
.
2
P5
2
2
.
2
P5
2
1
.
2
P5
2
0
.
5
P5
2
1
.
5
P5
1
7
.
8
P5
1
7
.
2
P5
1
5
.
9
P5
1
6
.
5
P5
2
0
.
5
P5
1
9
.
7
P5
1
9
.
1
P5
1
9
.
6
P5
1
6
.
2
P5
1
5
.
6
P5
1
4
.
2
P5
1
4
.
8
P5
1
8
.
6
P5
1
7
.
8
P5
1
3
.
9
P5
1
4
.
5
P5
1
7
.
3
P5
1
6
.
9
FF
5
1
8
.
5
FF
5
1
9
.
2
FF
5
2
3
.
2
FF
5
2
2
.
2
FF
5
2
1
.
5
FF
5
2
2
.
5
FF
5
1
8
.
8
FF
5
1
8
.
2
FF
5
1
6
.
9
FF
5
1
7
.
5
FF
5
2
1
.
5
FF
5
2
0
.
7
FF
5
2
0
.
1
FF
5
2
0
.
6
FF
5
1
7
.
2
FF
5
1
6
.
6
FF
5
1
5
.
2
FF
5
1
5
.
8
FF
5
1
9
.
6
FF
5
1
8
.
8
FF
5
1
4
.
9
FF
5
1
5
.
5
FF
5
1
8
.
3
FF
5
1
7
.
9
518.04
GL
5
1
8
.
5
GL
5
2
2
.
5
521.74521.04
GL
5
2
1
.
8
GL
5
1
8
.
1
517.74516.44
GL
5
1
6
.
8
GL
5
2
0
.
8
520.24519.64
GL
5
1
9
.
9
GL
5
1
6
.
5
516.14514.74
GL
5
1
5
.
1
GL
5
1
8
.
9
518.34
514.54
GL
5
1
4
.
8
GL
5
1
7
.
6
517.44
TC 517.63TC 517.37
TC 520.36TC 520.10
TC 515.74
TC 518.72TC 518.46
TC 514.36TC 514.10
TC 516.82 TC 517.08
TC 516.00
4.11%3.89%
10.11%4.33%
4.44%4.22%
11.56%8%
4.83%4.06%
11.89%9.44%
18'
18'
18'18'18'18'18'
18'18'18'18'18'
P5
1
7
.
0
P5
1
7
.
9
P5
2
0
.
3
P5
2
1
.
2
P5
2
3
.
3
P5
2
3
.
3
P5
1
9
.
4
P5
1
8
.
4
P5
2
3
.
9
P5
2
3
.
9
P5
2
0
.
4
P5
1
9
.
4
P5
2
0
.
2
P5
2
1
.
2
P5
2
2
.
0
P5
2
1
.
0
P5
2
2
.
4
FF
5
1
8
.
0
FF
5
1
8
.
9
FF
5
2
1
.
3
FF
5
2
2
.
2
FF
5
2
4
.
3
FF
5
2
4
.
3
FF
5
2
0
.
4
FF
5
1
9
.
4
FF
5
2
4
.
9
FF
5
2
4
.
9
FF
5
2
1
.
4
FF
5
2
0
.
4
FF
5
2
1
.
2
FF
5
2
2
.
2
FF
5
2
3
.
0
FF
5
2
2
.
0
FF
5
2
3
.
4
517.54
GL
5
1
8
.
2
GL
5
2
0
.
6
521.74 523.84
GL
5
2
3
.
6
GL
5
1
9
.
7
518.94
524.43
GL
5
2
4
.
2
GL
5
2
0
.
7
519.94 520.74
GL
5
2
1
.
5
GL
5
2
2
.
3
521.54 522.94
P5
2
5
.
0
P5
2
4
.
0
P5
2
4
.
3
P5
2
5
.
3
P5
2
7
.
9
P5
2
8
.
1
P5
2
7
.
7
P5
2
8
.
0
P5
2
7
.
7
P5
2
5
.
7
P5
2
5
.
1
FF
5
2
6
.
0
FF
5
2
5
.
0
FF
5
2
5
.
3
FF
5
2
6
.
3
FF
5
2
8
.
9
FF
5
2
9
.
1
FF
5
2
8
.
7
FF
5
2
9
.
0
FF
5
2
8
.
7
FF
5
2
6
.
7
FF
5
2
6
.
1
GL
5
2
5
.
3
524.54 524.84
GL
5
2
5
.
6
GL528.2
GL528.4
GL
5
2
8
.
0
52
8
.
5
4
52
8
.
2
4
GL
5
2
6
.
0
525.63
TC 518.32 TC 518.58
TC 522.87 TC 523.13
TC 519.98 TC 520.24
TC 523.28 TC 523.54
TC
5
2
6
.
3
4
TC
5
2
6
.
0
8
18'
18.54'18'
18'18'18'
18
'
18
'
11.78%7.67%
5.94%3.94%
11.44%8.44%
BO
W
5
2
1
.
4
4
BO
W
5
2
2
.
4
0
BOW 524.35
BOW 525.13
BOW 526.09
BOW 52
6
.
5
4
5
S
T
E
P
S
8'
8'
18'
8'8'
6
S
T
E
P
S
5
S
T
E
P
S
9.18%
6
S
T
E
P
S
11.44%
10.89%
11
.
4
4
%
11
.
7
8
%
BO
W
5
2
0
.
1
2
BO
W
5
1
9
.
1
6
BO
W
5
1
8
.
4
8
BO
W
5
1
7
.
5
2
BO
W
5
1
6
.
8
4
BO
W
5
1
5
.
8
8
BO
W
5
2
0
.
0
7
BO
W
5
1
9
.
0
9
BO
W
5
1
8
.
1
3
BO
W
5
1
7
.
4
3
BO
W
5
1
6
.
4
7
BO
W
5
1
5
.
6
5
BOW 516.09
BOW 518.46
BO
W
5
2
1
.
1
4
BO
W
5
2
1
.
9
6
BO
W
5
2
2
.
9
2
18'
18'
11.72%
11.89%
7.
5
%
5
S
T
E
P
S
5
S
T
E
P
S
5
S
T
E
P
S
5
S
T
E
P
S
6
S
T
E
P
S
11
'
8'8'8'8'8'
8'
11
'8'
3
S
T
E
P
S
BOW 523.86
BOW 524.47
BOW 525.42
5
S
T
E
P
S
6
S
T
E
P
S
4
S
T
E
P
S
8'
8'
18
'
18.54'
18'
18'18'
18
'
18
'
18
'
18
'
18
'
18
'
18
'
18
.
5
4
'
18
'
18
'
18
'
BOW 529.56
BOW 528.00
BOW 526.89
BOW 525.33
BOW 524.22
BOW 522.66
8'
8'
8'
8'
8'
8'
5
S
T
E
P
S
5
S
T
E
P
S
4
S
T
E
P
S
8'8'8'8'8'8'
4
S
T
E
P
S
8'
8'
8'8'8'
4
S
T
E
P
S
4
S
T
E
P
S
4
S
T
E
P
S
BO
W
5
2
7
.
0
8
5.42%
3
S
T
E
P
S
3
S
T
E
P
S
3
S
T
E
P
S
3
S
T
E
P
S
4
S
T
E
P
S
3
S
T
E
P
S
3
S
T
E
P
S
3
S
T
E
P
S
4
S
T
E
P
S
3
S
T
E
P
S
3
S
T
E
P
S
2
S
T
E
P
S
2
S
T
E
P
S
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
P5
4
5
.
1
FF
5
4
6
.
1
GL545.4
28
.
4
2
'
8'
BO
W
5
4
3
.
7
3
544.69
12
.
0
0
%
2.
5
0
%
8
'
B
O
W
5
2
3
.
7
3
524.53
3.
0
3
%
1
2
%
P5
2
5
.
3
FF
5
2
6
.
3
GL525.6
35
.
3
1
'
P5
4
5
.
1
FF
5
4
6
.
1
54
5
.
2
9
BO
W
5
4
2
.
2
6
6
S
T
E
P
S
P5
2
5
.
3
FF
5
2
6
.
3
52
5
.
4
9
BO
W
5
2
3
.
2
9
13
.
3
'
10
'
9'
11.25'
*X
X
XX*X*X
XX**X
XXXX
*
*
X
X
X
X
XX
X X X
*
*
*
**
X
X
X
X
*
*
X
X
X
X
X
XX
X
X
X
**
XX
X*
X
X
*
X X X X X X
X X X X*
******
X X X X X X
X X X X X
XXX
12
.
8
5
'
5.
8
7
%
6.
6
2
%
2%
**
BOW 526.19
BO
W
5
2
3
.
0
5
8'X
5
S
T
E
P
S
5
S
T
E
P
S
*
8'
2
S
T
E
P
S
4
S
T
E
P
S
X
X
X
2
S
T
E
P
S
X
OPEN SPACE
BASIN
ACCESS ROAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 5
UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE EXHIBIT
N5-C.6.2
NEIGHBORHOOD 5:
94 Units
Typical Lot Size: 48'x70' Single
Family Homes
UDO Compliant/Exception - Primary Residence and
Secondary Unit. For units with driveway slope gradient
between 8.33% and 12%, Units are compliant through
options 1 & 2 below:
1. Access from sidewalk to front door via driveway
with a slope gradient between 8.33% and 12%
2. Access to home by parking in garage and entering
home through garage door with optional ramp.
Notes:
1. For all Primary Residences and Secondary Units,
the home builder shall offer to the home buyer a
portable ramp that can be placed at the exterior
door to the Primary Unit, and if a Secondary Unit
is provided, to the exterior door of the Secondary
Unit.
2. House plans, model, and setbacks illustrated here
are conceptual and subject to change.
Front door location
1. The units are part of Vesting Tentative Tract 8563.
2. The neighborhood is located on a hillside, with
moderate slopes and terrain.
3. All driveway slopes labeled on this exhibit are
based on the calculated slope along the steeper
driveway side.
KEY
P - Pad Elevation
FF - Finished Floor Elevation
BW - Back of Walk Elevation
GL - Garage Lip Elevation
UDO - Universal Design Ordinance
Based on the following site conditions, the Project
proposes the methods outlined in the Legend to meet the
intent of the "Mandatory to offer" UDO requirement for
an exterior accessible route to a primary or other
entrance consistent with City Zoning Code 7.90.060.
EXTERIOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE
FOR UDO COMPLIANCE
LEGEND
UDO Compliant - Primary Residence and Secondary Unit.
Some units require driveway slope gradient to 8.33% max.
This designation assumes pedestrian walks to entry from
public sidewalk via the driveway
X*
87
7
MJR
78
68
65
66
67
63
71
64
70
86 8988878485 90
83 82 81 80 79 7677
73
74
75
72
91
56
55
43
42
31
30
69
92
PARCEL D
MJR
41
51 5053
55
PARCEL I
PARCEL J 36 354039
45
44
43
46
PARCEL K
49
47
48
PARCEL L
56
PARCEL M
59
52
54
58
57
62
3437
74
38
67
42
66
61
60
PARCEL N
63 70
PARCEL O PARCEL P
71
64 6865 7269 73
PARCEL C
PARCEL E
PARCEL F
10
9
22
8
19
18
15
14
11
7
12
16
13
20
17
21
23
PARCEL G
24
25
32
29
26
27
PARCEL H
31
28
30
33
PARCEL R
PARCEL W
86
PARCEL SPARCEL T
88 85
83
89 84
82
80
PARCEL U
93
81
98
PARCEL Q
79
75
78
76
PARCEL V
96 77
97
94
95
90
91
87
PARCEL X
1
16
17
28
29
44
45
60
12
13
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINTP2R
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINT
FOOTPRINT
FOOTPRINT
FOOTPRINT
P2R
FOOTPRINTP2R
LEGEND
GHAD OWNED AND MAINTAINED(6)(8)
CITY OWNED AND MAINTAINED
HOA OWNED AND MAINTAINED
CITY OWNED AND CFD MAINTAINED(1)(2)(3)
GHAD OWNED AND GHAD/HOA MAINTAINED(7)
PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED(4)(8)
SEMI PUBLIC OWNED AND MAINTAINED
NOTES:
(1)ALL STREETS ARE PUBLIC.
(2)ALL PARKWAY STRIPS WITHIN CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY TO
BE HOA MAINTAINED.
(3)PARK FRONTAGE SIDEWALKS ALONG NEIGHBORHOOD
STREETS TO BE HOA MAINTAINED. IF FUTURE PARK
DESIGN REMOVES AND RELOCATES THE SIDEWALK,
THE NEW SIDEWALK WILL THEN BE CITY MAINTAINED.
(4)STREETS, COMMON LANDSCAPE, AND BUILDING
EXTERIORS WITHIN MEDIUM DENSITY PARCEL WILL BE
HOA MAINTAINED. ENCLOSED YARD SPACE TO BE
PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED.
(5)FRONT YARD LANDSCAPE ON ALL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS
ARE PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED.
(6)PROPOSED TRAIL CONNECTIONS TO BE GHAD OWNED
AND MAINTAINED.
(7)GHAD WILL MAINTAIN SLOPE STABILITY, REPAIR,
MOWING, FIRE ACCESS ROAD (INCLUDING DRAINAGE
DITCH) AND WEED ABATEMENT. HOA WILL MAINTAIN
DECORATIVE LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, AND TRASH
REMOVAL.
(8)RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING OR ASSOCIATED WITH
PRIVATE LOTS ARE TO BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED.
RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING COMMON
AREA/LANDSCAPE ARE TO BE HOA MAINTAINED.
RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING TRAILS WITHIN GHAD
PARCELS ARE TO BE MAINTAINED BY GHAD.
(9)NEIGHBORHOOD 6 ENCLOSED BACK AND SIDE YARDS
FOR FEE SIMPLE LOTS WILL BE PRIVATELY
MAINTAINED. ALL EXTERIOR ELEMENTS OF THE FEE
SIMPLE AND CONDOMINIUM DWELLING UNITS WILL BE
HOA MAINTAINED.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 5
MAINTENANCERESPONSIBILITY PLAN
N5-C.7
87
8
11/29/2022
879
11/29/202211/29/2022
880
18
'
-
0
"
70
'
-
0
"
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
Recycle
Trash
Compost
37
'
-
0
"
15
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
9'
-
1
0
12"
54'-0"
4'-0"39'-0"11'-0"
4'-0"21'-11"17'-1"
First Floor
1,076 s.f.
10
'
-
0
"
A
v
g
.
;
5
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
4'-0" Min.
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
G
a
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
8'
-
0
"
M
i
n
F
r
o
n
t
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
PantryMicro
UP
19
R
coats/storage
Entry
Porch
Great Room
23'-11" x 15'-6"
Kitchen
Bath
3
Bedroom 4
12'-0" x 11'-0"
w/h
3'-6"6'-0"
6'
-
0
"
5'
-
3
"
6'
-
0
"
PadA/C
16
'
-
1
12"
15
'
-
0
"
18
'
-
0
"
3'-0"8'-0"
8'-0" Min.
Elect.
Cable
3'-0"8'-0"
70
'
-
0
"
7'
-
0
"
1'
-
0
"
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height 5'
-
9
12"
10' clg.
3'-6"
DN
19
R
Primary
Bedroom
15'-1" x 17'-3"
Bedroom 2
13'-2" x 11'-8"
Bedroom 3
13'-1" x 11'-6"
Second Floor
1,393 s.f.
Primary
Bath
4'
-
5
12"
Laund.
WorkSpace
Bath
2 linenlow
Cl.
Dr.Opt.
W.I.C.
25'-0" l.f.
7'
-
2
"
36'-6"2'-6"
17
'
-
8
12"
22
'
-
4
"
3'
-
1
1
12"
4'
-
8
12"
35
'
-
4
"
21'-11"17'-1"
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 2 4 8
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N5 - A1.1.0
PLAN 1 FLOOR PLAN
4 BEDROOMS
3 BATHS
1,076 S.F. 1ST FLOOR
1,393 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
2,469 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
440 S.F. GARAGE
105 S.F. 'A' PORCH
11/29/202211/29/2022
88
1
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
Trash
Compost
First Floor
1,076 s.f.
UP
19
R
coats/storage
Entry
Porch
Bath
3
Bedroom 4
12'-0" x 11'-0"
w/h
Elect.
Cable
DN
19
R
Bedroom 3
13'-1" x 11'-6"
11th
riser
Second Floor
1,393 s.f.
Primary
Bath
WorkSpace
Bath
2 linenlow
Cl.
Dr.Opt.
W.I.C.
25'-0" l.f.
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
Entry
Porch
Bath
3
Bedroom 4
12'-0" x 11'-0"
Second Floor
1,393 s.f.
DN
19
R
Bedroom 3
13'-1" x 11'-6"
Second Floor
1,076 s.f.
Primary
Bath
4'
-
5
12"
WorkSpace
Bath
2 linenlow
Cl.
Dr.Opt.
W.I.C.
25'-0" l.f.
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 2 4 8
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N5 - A1.1.1
PLAN 1 ADDEDNA
105 S.F. 'B' PORCHPLAN 1B
PLAN 1C
105 S.F. 'C' PORCH
11/29/2022
88
2
Front Elevation 1A - Traditional Farmhouse
ALLEY ELEVATION
ROOF PLAN 1A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
5:12
5:12
RIDGE
VALLEY
VA
L
L
E
Y
RI
D
G
E
5:12
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:12
5:
1
2
Right Elevation 1A - Traditional Farmhouse
FRONT ELEVATION
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
9
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
Left Elevation
4 PACK 'A'
PLAN 1 PLAN 3R
PLAN 3RPLAN 2R
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 2 4 8
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
N5 - A1.2.0
PLAN 1A EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
KEY MAP
11/29/2022
88
3
Front Elevation 1B - Contemporary Cottage
ALLEY ELEVATION
ROOF PLAN 1B
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
5:12
5:12
RIDGE
VALLEY
VA
L
L
E
Y
RI
D
G
E
5:12
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:12
5:
1
2
Right Elevation 1B - Contemporary Cottage
FRONT ELEVATION
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
9
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
Left Elevation
4 PACK 'A'
PLAN 1 PLAN 3R
PLAN 3RPLAN 2R
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 2 4 8
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
N5 - A1.3.0
PLAN 1B EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
KEY MAP
11/29/2022
88
4
Front Elevation 1C - Craftsman
ALLEY ELEVATION
ROOF PLAN 1C
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
5:12
5:12
RIDGE
VALLEY
VA
L
L
E
Y
RI
D
G
E
5:12
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:12
5:
1
2
Right Elevation 1C - Craftsman
FRONT ELEVATION
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
9
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
Left Elevation
4 PACK 'A'
PLAN 1 PLAN 3R
PLAN 3RPLAN 2R
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 2 4 8
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
N5 - A1.4.0
PLAN 1C EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
KEY MAP
11/29/2022
88
5
11/29/2022
886
70
'
-
0
"
VARIES
VARIES39'-0"4'-0"
18
'
-
0
"
14'-4"4'-0"
10
'
-
0
"
A
v
g
.
;
5
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
4'-0" Min.4'-0" Min.
8'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
F
r
o
n
t
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
G
a
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
20'-6"
12
'
-
2
"
39
'
-
1
0
"
6'-0"5'-3"
6'
-
4
"
8'
-
0
"
4'
-
1
"
7'-2"2'-0"
17
'
-
0
"
18
'
-
1
1
"
70
'
-
0
"
12
'
-
2
"
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
Recycle
Trash
Compost
First Floor
1,102 s.f.
A/CPad
w/h
Pantry
MircoBuilt-in
UP
19
R
Bath
3
Entry
Porch
Kitchen
Bedroom 4
11'-1" x 11'-8"
Great Room
26'-4" x 16'-2"
coats/storage
alt. porchcondition
6'-0"5'-3"
6'
-
4
"
8'
-
0
"
4'
-
1
"
Elect.
Cable
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
3'-6"
10' clg.
13
'
-
0
"
8'
-
1
1
"
5'
-
0
"
40
'
-
1
0
"
4'
-
6
"
8'
-
0
"
4'
-
6
"
39'-0"
20'-6"2'-0"2'-2"
1'-0"
Second Floor
1,532 s.f.
DN
19R
W.I.C.
29'-0" l.f.
Primary
Bedroom
15'-0" x 14'-1"
Laund.
60"X42"
Bedroom 3
11'-6" x 12'-0"
linenlow
linenlow
Primary
Bath
Dr.Opt.
Bedroom 2
12'-9" x 11'-0"Bath
2
D
W
Loft/
Opt. Bedrm 5
12'-9" x 12'-7"
7'
-
0
"
14'-4"
13
'
-
2
"
2'
-
0
"
12
'
-
8
"
DN
19R
Bedroom 5
12'-9" x 10'-6"
Opt. Bedroom 5
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 2 4 8
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N5 - A2.1.0
PLAN 2 FLOOR PLAN
4 BEDROOMS + LOFT
OPT. BEDRM 5
3 BATHS
1,102 S.F. 1ST FLOOR
1,532 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
2,634 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
431 S.F. GARAGE
140 S.F. 'A' PORCH
11/29/2022
88
7
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
G
a
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
Recycle
Trash
Compost
First Floor
1,102 s.f.
w/h
Pantry
MircoBuilt-in
UP
19
R
Bath
3
Entry
Porch
Bedroom 4
11'-1" x 11'-8"
Great Room
26'-4" x 16'-2"
coats/storage
alt. porchcondition
Elect.
Cable
10' clg.
Second Floor
1,532 s.f.
DN
19R
Laund.
11th
riser
Bedroom 3
11'-6" x 12'-0"
linenlow
linenlow
Dr.Opt.
Bedroom 2
12'-9" x 11'-0"Bath
2
D
W
Loft/
Opt. Bedrm 5
12'-9" x 12'-7"
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
Recycle
Trash
Compost
First Floor
1,102 s.f.
w/h
Pantry
MircoBuilt-in
UP
19
R
Bath
3
Entry
Porch
Bedroom 4
11'-1" x 11'-8"
Great Room
26'-4" x 16'-2"
coats/storage
alt. porchcondition
Elect.
Cable
10' clg.
Second Floor
1,532 s.f.
DN
19R
Laund.
Bedroom 3
11'-6" x 12'-0"
linenlow
linenlow
Dr.Opt.
Bedroom 2
12'-9" x 11'-0"Bath
2
D
W
Loft/
Opt. Bedrm 5
12'-9" x 12'-7"
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 2 4 8
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N5 - A2.1.1
PLAN 2 ADDEDNA
PLAN 2B
PLAN 2C
140 S.F. 'B' PORCH
140 S.F. 'C' PORCH
11/29/2022
88
8
Front Elevation 2A - Traditional Farmhouse
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12
6:12
VALLEY
VA
L
L
E
Y
ROOF PLAN 2A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"6:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
RI
D
.
RID.
6:12
RIDGE
6:
1
2
Right Elevation 2A - Traditional Farmhouse
FRONT ELEVATION
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
8
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
Left Elevation
4 PACK 'A'
PLAN 1 PLAN 3R
PLAN 3RPLAN 2R
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 2 4 8
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
N5 - A2.2.0
PLAN 2A EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
KEY MAP
11/29/2022
88
9
Front Elevation 2B - Contemporary Cottage
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12
6:12
VALLEY
VA
L
L
E
Y
ROOF PLAN 2B
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"6:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
RI
D
.
RID.
6:12
RIDGE
6:
1
2
Right Elevation 2B - Contemporary Cottage
FRONT ELEVATION
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
8
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
Left Elevation
4 PACK 'A'
PLAN 1 PLAN 3R
PLAN 3RPLAN 2R
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 2 4 8
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
N5 - A2.3.0
PLAN 2B EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
KEY MAP
11/29/2022
89
0
Front Elevation 2C - Craftsman
RI
D
G
E
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12
6:12
VALLEY
VA
L
L
E
Y
ROOF PLAN 2A
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"6:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
RI
D
.
RID.
6:12
RIDGE
6:
1
2
Right Elevation 2C - Craftsman
FRONT ELEVATION
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
8
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
Left Elevation
4 PACK 'A'
PLAN 1 PLAN 3R
PLAN 3RPLAN 2R
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 2 4 8
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
N5 - A2.4.0
PLAN 2C EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
KEY MAP
11/29/2022
89
1
11/29/2022
892
8'
-
0
"
70
'
-
0
"
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
Recycle
Trash
Compost
48'-0"
48
'
-
6
"
13
'
-
6
"
5'-0"38'-0"5'-0"
18
'
-
0
"
38
'
-
6
"
5'-0"11'-11"6'-5"19'-8"5'-0"
First Floor
1,156 s.f.
A/CPAD 10
'
-
0
"
A
v
g
.
;
5
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
R
e
a
r
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
4'-0" Min.4'-0" Min.
8'
-
0
"
M
i
n
.
F
r
o
n
t
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
18
'
-
0
"
M
i
n
G
a
r
a
g
e
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
7'
-
9
"
coats/storage
Linen
Bath
3
Bedroom 4
11'-0" x 13'-2"
UP
19R
Great Room
27'-7" x 16'-2"
Entry
Kitchen
Porch
Pantry
MircoBuilt-in
6'
-
0
"
7'
-
6
"
3'
-
6
12"
6'-0"5'-3"
w/h
Elect.
Cable
2'
-
3
"
70
'
-
0
"
13
'
-
6
"
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
10' clg.
Second Floor
1,453 s.f.
Primary
Bedroom
15'-0" x 15'-10"
Primary
Bath
Bedroom 2
11'-0" x 13'-7"
Bedroom 3
13'-3" x 11'-0"
Bath
2
DN
19R
W.I.C.
26'-0" l.f.
Laund.
Opt. Bedroom 5
48"X42"
DN
19R
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
16'-7" x 13'-6"
Bedroom 5
11'-0" x 13'-6"
40
'
-
6
"
38'-0"
21'-1"16'-11"
2'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
38
'
-
6
"
6'
-
0
"
2'
-
0
"
LinenLow
Opt.Dr.
W.
D.
4'
-
4
12"
8'-0"
6'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
3'
-
6
"
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 2 4 8
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N5 - A3.1.0
PLAN 3 FLOOR PLAN
4 BEDROOMS + LOFT
OPT. BEDROOM 5
3 BATHS
1,156 S.F. 1ST FLOOR
1,453 S.F. 2ND FLOOR
2,609 S.F. TOTAL LIVING
428 S.F. GARAGE
43 S.F. 'A' PORCH
11/29/2022
89
3
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
Compost
First Floor
1,156 s.f.
coats/storage
Linen
Bath
3
Bedroom 4
11'-0" x 13'-2"
UP
19R
Entry
Porch
Elect.
Cable
Second Floor
1,453 s.f.
riserBedroom 2
11'-0" x 13'-7"
Bedroom 3
13'-3" x 11'-0"
Bath
2
DN
19R
Laund.
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
16'-7" x 13'-6"
LinenLow
W.
D.
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
Compost
First Floor
1,156 s.f.
coats/storage
Linen
Bath
3
Bedroom 4
11'-0" x 13'-2"
19R
Entry
Porch
Elect.
Cable
Second Floor
1,453 s.f.
Bedroom 2
11'-0" x 13'-7"
Bedroom 3
13'-3" x 11'-0"
Bath
2
DN
19R
Laund.
Loft / Opt.
Bedroom 5
16'-7" x 13'-6"
LinenLow
W.
D.
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 2 4 8
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N5 - A3.1.1
PLAN 3 ADDEDNA
PLAN 3B
PLAN 3C
43 S.F. 'B' PORCH
43 S.F. 'C' PORCH
11/29/2022
89
4
Front Elevation 3A -
Traditional Farmhouse
RIDGE
RI
D
G
E
RI
D
G
E
5:12
5:12
5:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
VAL
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
ROOF PLAN 3B
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
1
0
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
Left Elevation
4 PACK 'A'
PLAN 1 PLAN 3R
PLAN 3RPLAN 2R
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 2 4 8
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
N5 - A3.2.0
PLAN 3A EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
KEY MAP
11/29/2022
89
5
Front Elevation 3B -
Contemporary Cottage
RIDGE
RI
D
G
E
RI
D
G
E
5:12
5:12
5:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
VAL
L
E
Y
VAL
L
E
Y
V
A
L
L
E
Y
ROOF PLAN 3B
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"5:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
1
0
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
Left Elevation
4 PACK 'A'
PLAN 1 PLAN 3R
PLAN 3RPLAN 2R
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 2 4 8
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
N5 - A3.3.0
PLAN 3B EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
KEY MAP
11/29/2022
89
6
Front Elevation 3C -
Craftsman
RI
D
G
E
RI
D
.
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
4:
1
2
ROOF PLAN 3C
OVERHANG : 12"RAKE : 12"4:12 U.N.OROOF PITCH :
RI
D
G
E
RI
D
.
4:
1
2
Right Elevation
Rear Elevation
10
'
-
0
34"
9'
-
0
34"
+/
-
2
8
'
-
2
"
F.F.
P.L.
P.L.
F.F.
Left Elevation
4 PACK 'A'
PLAN 1 PLAN 3R
PLAN 3RPLAN 2R
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 11/18/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
07/15/2022
0 2 4 8
scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
N5 - A3.4.0
PLAN 3C EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
KEY MAP
11/29/2022
89
7
11/29/2022
898
PORCH
ENTRY
POWDER
GARAGE
KITCHEN
GREAT ROOM
DININGROOM
BEDROOM 4
3080 X1 3/4" S.C.
3080 X1 3/4" S.C.
DR
T
E
M
P
3050 SH
30
8
0
F
R
U14
U14
U14
U16
U13 U14 U15
6'
-
7
"
3'
-
6
"
10
'
-
1
1
"
3'-9 1/2"2'-6 1/2"1'-9 1/2"6'-9"
2'
-
1
0
1
/
2
"
5'
-
4
1
/
2
"
2'
-
8
3
/
4
"
3'
-
4
3
/
4
"
14'-7"18'-4"3'-8"2'-5"
6'-3"
6'
-
1
1
/
2
"
2'
-
1
1
/
2
"
3080
30
8
0
U4 U6 U8 U10
U14
N5 -
PLAN 1 FLOOR PLAN
0 2 4 8
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 07/14/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTESNOTES
MANDATORY TO INSTALL:
1.HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND
CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1126A.6
2.ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES
AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1
OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1136A.
3.THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING
CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC
CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRICAL CODE, SEC. 1126A.
U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR. AT ENTRY
DOOR PER CBC CH. 11, SEC. 1136A.2.
MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR.
U2 NOT USED
U3
U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR
WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT
PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM/BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2.
U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
REFER TO SHEET GN-3 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND
REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION.
U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR
POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3 OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING
OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA. CIRCLE, 48" X 60"
RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE
PURCHASER/OWNER.
U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING
THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 & CBC CH. 11A, SEC.
1134A.5 & SEC. 1135A.6.
U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.1
FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER/BATH, OR
LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.2, OPT. 2
U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.7.
U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE
LAVATORY/SINK, PER CBC CH. 11A, SEC. 1134A.8 & OPT.4
U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND
TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.8.
U13 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1133A.6.
U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER/OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST
A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING
OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE
18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER
SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"
X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR,
DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT
THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNE, PER CBC CH. 11, SEC.
1133A.2.
U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR
REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11, SEC. 1133A.4.1.1.
U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT
SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, PER CBC CH. 1136A.
U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO.
21-07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 & CBC CH. 11A,
SEC. 1119A. INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST
AND COST OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
WALL LEGEND
2X6 WALL
2X4 WALL
7.90.130
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL IN ALL VISIT-ABLE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS:
1. HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARDWARE NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING OR
TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A.
2. ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS OR
LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A.6.
3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTACLE
OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY
WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A OR APPLICABLE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL
CODE.
2. FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
7.90.090
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A KITCHEN IS
LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL:
1. SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC.1133A.4.1.1.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN GENERAL NOTES:
7.90.060
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL:
1. WHERE AT LEAST ONE DOORBELL IS PROVIDED
FOR THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRY DOOR, ONE THAT
IS BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM THE FINISHED
FLOOR MUST BE INSTALLED PER CBC 1136A.2.
7.90.080
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A POWDER ROOM OR
BATHROOM IS LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY
LEVEL:
1. GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT CONSISTENT WITH
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2 FOR THE WATER CLOSET
AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB.
NOT USED
U18 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT LEAST ONE BEDROOM ON THE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL WITH ALL COMPONENTS
MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7.90.130. A
CLOSET SHALL HAVE AT LEAST A THIRTY-TWO INCH (32") NET
OPENING AND ADJUSTABLE CLOSET RODS AND SHELVING.
4 "UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH
BUYER TO FILL OUT.
PER CITY OF DUBLIN'S REQUIREMENT:
"UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO
EACH BUYER TO FILL OUT.
NOTE:
FOR ALL INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE, SEE
STANDARD 1ST FLOOR AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHEETS.
A5.0.011/29/2022
89
9
PORCH
ENTRY
POWDER
GARAGE
KITCHEN
GREAT ROOM
DININGROOM
BEDROOM 4
3080 X1 3/4" S.C.
3080 X1 3/4" S.C.
DR
T
E
M
P
3050 SH
30
8
0
F
R
U14
U14
U16
U13 U14 U15
7'
-
5
"
3'
-
5
"
3'
-
1
1
/
2
"
2'-9"3'-2"1'-10"6'-7"
4'
-
1
1
/
2
"
2'
-
0
3
/
4
"
5'
-
4
1
/
4
"
4'
-
2
"
7'-9 1/2"8'-6"3'-8"9'-11 1/2"
6'-7"
4'
-
0
3
/
4
"
2'
-
1
1
/
2
"
3080
30
8
0
9'
-
1
1
1
/
2
"
12
'
-
1
1
/
2
"
U14
9'-1"
U14
U17
U17
U4 U6 U8 U10
0 2 4 8
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"N5 -
PLAN 2
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 07/14/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTESNOTES
MANDATORY TO INSTALL:
1.HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND
CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1126A.6
2.ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES
AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1
OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1136A.
3.THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING
CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC
CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRICAL CODE, SEC. 1126A.
U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR. AT ENTRY
DOOR PER CBC CH. 11, SEC. 1136A.2.
MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR.
U2 NOT USED
U3
U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR
WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT
PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM/BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2.
U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
REFER TO SHEET GN-3 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND
REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION.
U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR
POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3 OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING
OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA. CIRCLE, 48" X 60"
RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE
PURCHASER/OWNER.
U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING
THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 & CBC CH. 11A, SEC.
1134A.5 & SEC. 1135A.6.
U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.1
FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER/BATH, OR
LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.2, OPT. 2
U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.7.
U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE
LAVATORY/SINK, PER CBC CH. 11A, SEC. 1134A.8 & OPT.4
U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND
TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.8.
U13 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1133A.6.
U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER/OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST
A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING
OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE
18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER
SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"
X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR,
DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT
THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNE, PER CBC CH. 11, SEC.
1133A.2.
U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR
REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11, SEC. 1133A.4.1.1.
U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT
SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, PER CBC CH. 1136A.
U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO.
21-07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 & CBC CH. 11A,
SEC. 1119A. INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST
AND COST OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
WALL LEGEND
2X6 WALL
2X4 WALL
7.90.130
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL IN ALL VISIT-ABLE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS:
1. HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARDWARE NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING OR
TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A.
2. ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS OR
LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A.6.
3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTACLE
OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY
WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A OR APPLICABLE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL
CODE.
2. FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
7.90.090
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A KITCHEN IS
LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL:
1. SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC.1133A.4.1.1.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN GENERAL NOTES:
7.90.060
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL:
1. WHERE AT LEAST ONE DOORBELL IS PROVIDED
FOR THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRY DOOR, ONE THAT
IS BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM THE FINISHED
FLOOR MUST BE INSTALLED PER CBC 1136A.2.
7.90.080
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A POWDER ROOM OR
BATHROOM IS LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY
LEVEL:
1. GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT CONSISTENT WITH
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2 FOR THE WATER CLOSET
AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB.
NOT USED
U18 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT LEAST ONE BEDROOM ON THE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL WITH ALL COMPONENTS
MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7.90.130. A
CLOSET SHALL HAVE AT LEAST A THIRTY-TWO INCH (32") NET
OPENING AND ADJUSTABLE CLOSET RODS AND SHELVING.
4 "UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH
BUYER TO FILL OUT.
PER CITY OF DUBLIN'S REQUIREMENT:
"UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO
EACH BUYER TO FILL OUT.
NOTE:
FOR ALL INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE, SEE
STANDARD 1ST FLOOR AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHEETS.
A5.1.011/29/2022
1 FLOOR PLAN
90
0
PORCH
BATH 3
GARAGE
KITCHEN
GREAT ROOMDININGROOM
BEDROOM 4
3080 X1 3/4" S.C.
30
8
0
X
1
3
/
4
"
S
.
C
.
DR
T
E
M
P
3050 SH
30
8
0
F
R
U14
U14
U16
U13 U14 U15
14
'
-
3
1
/
2
"
2'
-
0
"
1'-9 1/2"3'-9 1/2"2'-0 1/2"5'-5 1/2"
3'
-
9
1
/
2
"
5'
-
0
"
1'
-
1
0
3
/
4
"
7'
-
7
"
10'-0 1/8"8'-0 3/4"3'-8"10'-0 5/8"
3'-1 1/2"
2'
-
1
1
1
/
4
"
3'
-
1
1
"
30
8
0
7'
-
2
1
/
2
"
13
'
-
7
1
/
2
"
U14
6'-2 1/2"
U14
U17
U4 U6 U8 U10
30
8
0
30
8
0
U7 U8
ENTRY
W.I.C
3'-11 1/2"
6"
6"
6'
-
0
"
5
1
/
2
"
3'
-
9
"
8'-7 1/2"
5 1/2"1'-10 1/2"2'-4"7'-1"
N5 -
PLAN 3 FLOOR PLAN
0 4 8 12
UNIV. DESIGN KEYNOTESNOTES
MANDATORY TO INSTALL:
1.HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARWARE NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND
CONSISTEN WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1126A.6
2.ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROL OR LIGHT SWITCHES
AND CONTROLS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1
OR THE CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1136A.
3.THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTABLES OUTLETS, LIGHTING
CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY WITH CBC
CHAPTER 11A OR APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRICAL CODE, SEC. 1126A.
U1 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: PROVIDE DOORBELL MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM FINISHED FLOOR. AT ENTRY
DOOR PER CBC CH. 11, SEC. 1136A.2.
MANDATORY TO OFFER: EYEHOLE AT ENTRY DOOR MOUNTED
BETWEEN 42" AND 44" FROM FINISHED FLOOR.
U2 NOT USED
U3
U4 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT FOR
WATER CLOSET (TOILET) AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB AT
PRIMARY FLOOR POWER ROOM/BATHROOM CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2.
U5 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
REFER TO SHEET GN-3 AND CITY OF DUBLIN ORDINANCE 21-07
FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ALL REQUIREMENTS AND
REGULATIONS RELATED TO THIS UNIVERSAL DESIGN OPTION.
U6 MANDATORY TO OFFER: CLEAR SPACE IN THE BATH OR
POWDER ROOM CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3 OR OUTSIDE OF THE SWING
OF THE DOOR AND EITHER A 48" DIA. CIRCLE, 48" X 60"
RECTANGLE OR 60" DIA. CIRCLE AT THE OPTION OF THE
PURCHASER/OWNER.
U7 MANDATORY TO OFFER: A BATHTUB OR SHOWER MEETING
THE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 & CBC CH. 11A, SEC.
1134A.5 & SEC. 1135A.6.
U8 MANDATORY TO OFFER: GRAB BARS INSTALL CONSISTENT
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.1
FOR THE WATER CLOSET (TOILET), SHOWER/BATH, OR
LAVATORY, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
U9 MANDATORY TO OFFER: LAVATORY OR SINK INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.2, OPT. 2
U10 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WATER CLOSET (TOILET) INSTALLED
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.7.
U11 MANDATORY TO OFFER: REMOVABLE CABINETS UNDER THE
LAVATORY/SINK, PER CBC CH. 11A, SEC. 1134A.8 & OPT.4
U12 MANDATORY TO OFFER: WHERE INSTALLED, MIRROR AND
TOWEL BARS AT ACCESSIBLE POWDERS OR BATHS
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A,
SEC. 1134A.8.
U13 MANDATORY TO INSTALL: KITCHEN SINK CONTROLS NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1133A.6.
U14 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT KITCHEN, ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING AT THE PURCHASER/OWNER'S OPTION, AT LEAST
A 30" X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF THE SINK (COUNTING
OPEN ACCESS UNDERNEATH, IF AVAILABLE) OR AT LEAST ONE
18" WIDE BREADBOARD AND /OR AT LEAST 18" IN COUNTER
SPACE AT A 34" HEIGHT OR AND COMBINATION THEREOF, A 30"
X 48" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF REFRIGERATOR,
DISHWASHER AND ANY OTHER MAJOR KITCHEN APPLIANCE AT
THE OPTION OF THE PURCHASER/OWNE, PER CBC CH. 11, SEC.
1133A.2.
U15 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ADJUSTABLE SINK AND /OR
REMOVABLE UNDER-SINK CABINETS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11, SEC. 1133A.4.1.1.
U16 MANDATORY TO OFFER: HOOD FAN CONTROLS AT LIGHT
SWITCH LEVEL OR LOWER LEVEL, PER CBC CH. 1136A.
U17 MANDATORY TO OFFER: ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR ROUTE
CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORDINANCE NO.
21-07 CITY OF DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE 7.90.070 & CBC CH. 11A,
SEC. 1119A. INTERIOR ROUTES INSTALLED AT THE REQUEST
AND COST OF THE PURCHASER/OWNER.
WALL LEGEND
2X6 WALL
2X4 WALL
7.90.130
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL IN ALL VISIT-ABLE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS:
1. HAND-ACTIVATED DOOR HARDWARE NOT
REQUIRING TIGHT GRASPING, PINCHING OR
TWISTING OF THE WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH
THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A.
2. ROCKER LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS OR
LIGHT SWITCHES AND CONTROLS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI A117.1 OR THE CBC
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A.6.
3. THE INSTALLATION OF ALL RECEPTACLE
OUTLETS, LIGHTING CONTROLS AND
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROLS THROUGHOUT THE
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT MUST COMPLY
WITH CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1126A OR APPLICABLE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL
CODE.
2. FAUCETS AND HANDLES NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.5.3.
7.90.090
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A KITCHEN IS
LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL:
1. SINK CONTROLS NOT REQUIRING TIGHT
GRASPING, PINCHING, OR TWISTING OF THE
WRIST AND CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CBC CHAPTER 11A, SEC.1133A.4.1.1.
UNIVERSAL DESIGN GENERAL NOTES:
7.90.060
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL:
1. WHERE AT LEAST ONE DOORBELL IS PROVIDED
FOR THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRY DOOR, ONE THAT
IS BETWEEN 42" AND 48" FROM THE FINISHED
FLOOR MUST BE INSTALLED PER CBC 1136A.2.
7.90.080
A. MANDATORY TO INSTALL WHEN A POWDER ROOM OR
BATHROOM IS LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY
LEVEL:
1. GRAB BAR REINFORCEMENT CONSISTENT WITH
CHAPTER 11A, SEC. 1134A.7.2 FOR THE WATER CLOSET
AND SHOWER OR BATHTUB.
NOT USED
U18 MANDATORY TO OFFER: AT LEAST ONE BEDROOM ON THE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL WITH ALL COMPONENTS
MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 7.90.130. A
CLOSET SHALL HAVE AT LEAST A THIRTY-TWO INCH (32") NET
OPENING AND ADJUSTABLE CLOSET RODS AND SHELVING.
4 "UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH
BUYER TO FILL OUT.
PER CITY OF DUBLIN'S REQUIREMENT:
"UNIVERSAL DESIGN CHECKLIST" TO BE PROVIDED TO
EACH BUYER TO FILL OUT.
NOTE:
FOR ALL INFORMATION NOT SHOWN HERE, SEE
STANDARD 1ST FLOOR AND 2ND FLOOR PLAN SHEETS.
EAST RANCH P:\19604\e-files-in\24x36_Wallis Ranch CAD Border\logos\TrumarkHomes-(PMS)Logo2.jpgDUBLIN, CA 07/14/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 5Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com A5.2.011/29/2022
90
1
07/15/202201/27/2023
N5-L2.1
0 5 10 20
PLANTING NOTE:
For lots that are adjacent to open space, or deemed a
“Fire Lot”, refer to the Diablo Firesafe Council list as
well as the approved plant list in the landscape design
guidelines for fire safe plants recommendations.
5
NEIGHBORHOOD 5 TYPICAL FRONT YARDS
90
2
NEIGHBORHOOD 6
903
P/SP
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
OPEN SPACE
(BASIN)
OP
E
N
S
P
A
C
E
(
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
)
OPEN SPACE
(WETLAND)
OPEN SPACE
(BASIN)
BASIN
SE
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
S
E
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
LO
Y
A
L
T
O
N
R
O
A
D
PANORAMA DRIVE
T
A
B
L
E
M
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
S TERRACINA DR
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
CR
O
A
K
R
D
STREET A
STREET B
ST
R
E
E
T
J
STREET K
STREET L
ST
R
E
E
T
N
STREET O
STREET M
ST
R
E
E
T
S
ST
R
E
E
T
T
ST
R
E
E
T
C
ST
R
E
E
T
Y
ST
R
E
E
T
Z
COURT U
STREET V
STREET B
CENTRAL PARKWAY
CENTRAL PARKWAY STREET R
ST
R
E
E
T
X
ST
R
E
E
T
W
STREET Q
STREET P
CR
O
A
K
R
D
LOOP H
LOOP H
STREET G
STREET B
ST
R
E
E
T
I
STREET F
STREET E
STREET D
STREET A
COURT A
COURT B
COURT C
COURT E
COURT F
CO
U
R
T
G
COURT H
CO
U
R
T
I
CO
U
R
T
J
COURT KCOURT L
COURT S
COURT R
COURT QCOURT V
COURT U
COURT T
COURT M
CO
U
R
T
N
CO
U
R
T
O
CO
U
R
T
P
ST
R
E
E
T
C
STR
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
ST
R
E
E
T
T
STREET P
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
ACCESS
ROAD
ACCESS
ROAD
PROPOSED
TRAIL
EVA/
ACCESS ROAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
NEIGHBORHOOD SUMMARY
NEIGHBORHOOD TYPICAL LOT
SIZE UNITS GROSS
ACREAGE (±)DENSITY
1 65'x100'99 30.1 3.3 DU/AC
2 55'x95'96 23.4 4.1 DU/AC
3 50'x110'85 19.5 4.5 DU/AC
4 49.5'x80'85 16.8 5.1 DU/AC
5 48'x70' Cluster 94 17.6 5.4 DU/AC
6 Attached Multi-Family 100 10.4 9.6 DU/AC
1, 2, 3, & 5 Zero-Lot Single Family
Units 14 N/A(1)
Croak Rd and Central
Pkwy Extension 8.0
TOTAL 573 125.8 4.5 du/ac
C.0
NOTE:
(1) GROSS ACREAGE FOR ZERO LOT PRODUCTS IS INCLUDED IN EACH INDIVIDUAL
NEIGHBORHOOD GROSS ACREAGE METRIC.
90
4
90
5
11
A/C
PAD
A/C
PAD
A/C
PAD
A/C
PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PADA/C PAD
3'
4'4'
5'
3'
4'
4'
3'3'
9'
4'
3'
5'
3
'
D/
W
5'
3'
D/
W
3'
D/
W
3'
D/
W
5'
2'
A/C
PAD
A/C
PAD
A/C
PAD
A/C
PAD
A/C
PAD
A/C
PAD
P1 P2RP2 P1 P2RP2
FRONT LOT LINE
3'3'
4'
4'
(
P
O
R
C
H
)
4'
4'4'
0'0'
4'
3
'
4'
SECOND/THIRD
FLOOR OVERHANG
2'
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 6
MINIMUM SETBACK EXHIBIT
N6-C.0
TYPICAL CONDITION
DUETS/TOWNHOMES WITH PRIVATE YARDS
NOTE: ALL SETBACK DIMENSIONS ARE
MINIMUMS AND NOT TO SCALE
400 SF yard that includes an 18' x 18' flat areaor 150 SF with a minimum dimension of 5 ft.
TYPICAL CONDITION
ROW TOWNHOMES
NOTE: ALL SETBACK DIMENSIONS ARE
MINIMUMS AND NOT TO SCALE
100 SF patio with a 10' min. dimension or a 50 SFupper level deck with a 5' min. inside dimension
90
6
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PADA/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
61 62 63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70 71 72
PARCEL A
****************
****************
************
****************
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 6
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
N6-C.1
NEIGHBORHOOD 6
Duet Townhomes: 60
Three-Story Row Townhomes: 40
Total: 100 Units
NOTE: Setback requirements can be found on C.0 minimum setback exhibit.
6000SF±
COMMON
OPEN
SPACE
*60 Units with 400 SF
yard that includes 18'x18'
flat area or 150 SF with a
minimum dimension of 5 ft.
Common open space in
Parcel A provided for
remaining units.
90
7
84 85
83 82
30
92
PARCEL T
88
89
PARCEL U
93
98
PARCEL V
96
97
94
95
90
91
87
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
61 62 63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70 71 72
PARCEL A
11
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PADA/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 6
PARKING PLAN
N6-C.2
PARKING SUMMARY
TOTAL NH6 UNITS: 100
REQUIRED PARKING: 2 COVERED + 1 GUEST
GARAGE SPACES: 200
STREET PARKING: 68
OFF STREET PARKING: 18(1)
DRIVEWAY PARKING: 32(2)
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED: 318 (3.2 spaces/unit)
OTHER REQUIRED PARKING
ACCESSIBLE STALLS: 2 PROVIDED (1 VAN ACCESSIBLE)
NOTES:
1)OFF STREET PERPENDICULAR SPACES INCLUDES 2 REQUIRED ACCESSIBLE
SPACES (1 VAN ACCESSIBLE + 1 STANDARD ACCESSIBLE)
2)DRIVEWAYS WITH GUEST PARKING HAVE A MINIMUM 18' LENGTH
LEGEND
PARALLEL PARKING
PERPENDICULAR PARKING
DRIVEWAY PARKING
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
90
8
84 85
83 82
30
92
PARCEL T
88
89
PARCEL U
93
98
PARCEL V
96
97
94
95
90
91
87
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
61 62 63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70 71 72
PARCEL A
11
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PADA/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
114.42'
15
'
15
'
18
.
7
7
'
15
'
15
'
22
'
22
'
19
.
4
7
'
26.47'
27.32'
17'25'
75.41'
83.3'
R20'
R20'
R20'
R
2
0
'
R20'R20
'
R2
0
'
R20'
R2
0
'
R20'
R
2
0
'
R20'
R
2
0
'
R20'
R
3
5
'
R30'
R
3
0
'
17.3'24.39'
22
'
R35
'
R20'
R20'
31
'
26'
R20'
125.37'
41.47'
26'
R20'
26
'
45.67'
R2
0
'
24
'
26'
26
'
R20'
R
2
0
'
R20'
26
'
R20'
26
'
58.67'
R20'
R
2
0
'
26'
35.89'
59.81'
36
'
26'
26
'
R20
'
R
2
0
'
36'
36'
26
'
24
'
36'
36'
36'
26
'
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
R15
'
R
1
5
'
R
2
0
'
R
1
5
'
R20
'
R15
'
R
2
0
'
R20
'
R
2
0
'
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 6
FIRE ACCESS PLAN
N6-C.3
LEGEND
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
FIRE DEPARTMENT ON-SITE ACCESS ROUTE
FH
ROUTE TO CROAK ROAD VIA STREET B
ROUTE TO CROAK ROAD VIA CENTRAL PARKWAY
LADDER ACCESS TO BUILDING OVER 30'
NOTE:
1.ROW TOWNHOMES ARE PROPOSED TO BE 3-STORIES
AND OVER 30'. DUET TOWNHOMES PROPOSED TO BE
2-STORY AND UNDER 30'
2.STREET PARKING IS PROPOSED ON STREETS B, C, & D.
NO STREET PARKING IS PROPOSED ALONG CENTRAL
PKWY.
3.STREETS WILL BE PRIVATE SO FIRE TRUCK CAN CROSS
CENTERLINE. RADII AT INSIDE WHEEL PATH OF TRUCK
WILL MEET 20' MIN.
PROPOSED RED CURB (NO PARKING)
ALONG STREET T
PUBLIC STREET FIRE HYDRANT DETAIL
NTS
36'
20'
20'
28'
CLEAR
8' PARKING
NOTE: PRIVATE ALLEYS HAVE NO PARKING
MINIMUM INSIDE TURN RADIUS
90
9
84 85
83 82
30
92
PARCEL T
88
89
PARCEL U
93
98
PARCEL V
96
97
94
95
90
91
87
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
61 62 63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70 71 72
PARCEL A
11
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PADA/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 6
GARBAGE PICK UP PLAN
N6-C.4
LEGEND
NEIGHBORHOOD GARBAGE PICK-UP ROUTE
NOTE: NEIGHBORHOOD 6 RESIDENTS WILL PLACE GARBAGE BINS
ALONG THE PRIVATE STREET
ROUTE TO CROAK ROAD VIA CENTRAL PARKWAY
PROPOSED RED CURB (NO PARKING)
ALONG STREET T
GARBAGE BINS (SEE DETAIL BELOW)
GARBAGE BIN DETAIL
NTS
30"
TYP
30
"
TY
P
3'3'
91
0
11
84 85
83 82
30
92
PARCEL T
88
89
PARCEL U
93
98
PARCEL V
96
97
94
95
90
91
87
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
61 62 63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70 71 72
PARCEL A
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PADA/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
***
*
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 6
ACCESSIBILITY PLAN
N6-C.5
*
LEGEND
ACCESSIBLE PARKING LOCATIONS
ACCESSIBLE UNIT LOCATIONS
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE
91
1
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 6
UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE TABLE
N6-C.6.1
Symbol
On C.6.2 UDO Status Lot Numbers Reason for "Exception"Options for UDO compliant entry Total number of
lots
UDO compliant to front
door from sidewalk via
driveway with a slope
gradient of 5% or less
N/A N/A
UDO compliant to front
door from sidewalk via
driveway with a slope
gradient between 5%
and 8.33%
1) This is a hillside development with steep
streets combined with the CBC requirement
for lot drainage which results in a greater
elevation difference between finish pad and
sidewalk and thus steeper slopes on
driveways and walkways to the front door.
Access via driveway, compliant to section
1114A.2 of the CBC.
UDO compliant with
"Exceptions"
(Driveway slope
gradient between 8.33%
and 12%)
1) This is a hillside development with steep
streets combined with the CBC requirement
for lot drainage which results in a greater
elevation difference between finish pad and
sidewalk and thus steeper slopes on
driveways and walkways to the front door.
1) Access from sidewalk to front door via
driveway with a slope gradient between
8.33% and 12%
2) Access to home by parking in garage and
entering home through garage door with
optional ramp
TOTAL:
*
X
*
91
2
P1P2R P2 P1R
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
P1
P2
R
P2
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
P1
P2
R
P2
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
P1
P2
R
P2
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
P1 P2RP2
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
P1 P2RP2
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
P1P2R P2 P1R
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
P1P2R P2 P1R
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
P1 P2R P2 P1R
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PADA/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
11
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
61 62 63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70 71 72
PARCEL A
92
PARCEL T
88
89
PARCEL U
93
98
PARCEL V
96
97
94
95
90
91
87
84 85
83 82
30
14'
12.6'
16.3'19
.
4
'
16
.
3
'
13
.
7
'
13
'
13
'
14'
14'
14'
12
'
12
'
12
'
20.4'
13.3'
18
'
18
'
40.5'
15
.
9
'
15
.
2
'
20'4'
4'
4'
4'
4'
4'
5'5'
7.
8
'
7.
8
'
6'
5.
5
'
5.
5
'
7.
4
'
7.
4
'
6'
7.
4
'
6.7'
6'
6.7'
11.7'
5'5'
5'5'5'
18
'
18
'
18
'
36
.
7
'
18
'
18
'
5'
18
'
18
'
18
'
5'
11.8'
5'
5'5'5'
508
.
8
4
50
8
.
0
3
507
.
6
2
505
.
6
0
504
.
9
9
504
.
1
3
P509.30P509.30P508.10P508.10P506.00P506.00P504.20P504.20
FF510.30FF510.30FF509.10FF509.10FF507.00FF507.00FF505.20FF505.20
GL509.60GL509.60GL508.40GL508.40GL506.30GL506.30GL504.50
P503.60
P503.60 P505.50 P505.50 P507.40 P507.40 P509.30 P509.30FF504.60 FF506.50 FF506.50 FF508.40 FF508.40 FF510.30 FF510.30
504.21 506.11 506.11 508.01 508.01 509.91
509.91
FF504.60
P510.00P510.00
P506.80P506.80P504.80P504.80
P505.30 P505.30 P507.30 P507.30 P510.40 P510.40
F511.00FF511.00
FF507.80FF507.80FF505.80FF504.80
FF506.30 FF506.30 FF508.30 FF508.30 FF511.40 FF511.40
50
5
.
4
1
50
5
.
9
1
50
7
.
9
1
511.01
P511.20P511.20P509.00P509.00P507.00P507.00P504.90P504.90
P506.50 P506.50 P509.20 P509.20 P511.90 P511.90 P514.60 P514.60
FF512.20FF512.20FF510.00FF510.00FF508.00FF508.00FF505.90FF505.90
FF507.50 FF507.50 FF510.20 FF510.20 FF512.90 FF512.90 FF515.60 FF515.60
511.8150
9
.
6
1
50
7
.
6
1
50
5
.
5
1
50
7
.
1
1
50
7
.
1
1
509.81
50
9
.
8
1
512.51
51
2
.
5
1
515.21
51
5
.
2
1
P516.70P516.70P514.20P514.20P511.60P511.60P510.10P510.10
P512.60 P512.60 P513.50 P513.50 P515.60 P515.60 P516.70 P516.70
FF517.70FF517.70FF516.20FF515.20FF512.60FF512.60FF511.10FF511.10
FF513.60 FF513.60 FF514.50 FF514.50 FF516.60 FF516.60 FF517.70 FF517.70
GL517.00GL517.0GL514.50GL514.50GL511.90GL510.40GL510.40
51
3
.
2
1
513.21 514.11
51
4
.
1
1
516.21 516.21 517.31
51
7
.
3
1
514
.
4
1
513
.
8
9
515
.
0
6
51
2
.
8
2
31.21'
512
.
0
9
511
.
4
9
509
.
5
4
50
8
.
4
7
2.
0
0
%
7.
2
8
%
3.
7
2
%
4.
3
1
%
2.
0
0
%
4.
2
2
%
18
.
4
'
18
.
5
'
18
.
4
'
10
.
7
2
%
13
.
1
1
%
0.
0
2
%
9.
3
3
%
13
.
3
9
%
14
.
3
9
%
50
4
.
2
1
5'
50
5
.
4
1
507.41
50
7
.
4
1
510.61
51
1
.
0
1
507.91
50
5
.
9
1
511.81509.61507.6150
5
.
5
1
504
.
7
3
506
.
0
1
507
.
9
1
508
.
5
3
504
.
1
2
506
.
6
3
2%
2%
2%
5'5'
3 steps 3 steps3 steps506
.
0
7
507
.
8
7
508
.
2
6
506
.
5
4
51
0
.
4
9
508
.
4
7
511
.
0
5
50
8
.
8
6
7.87%
5.82%
3 steps
8.
3
'
4 steps
51
0
.
6
1
2%4 steps
511
.
5
6
510
.
2
8
508
.
2
4
506
.
1
9
504
.
1
9
504
.
9
7
508
.
3
0
511
.
0
0
513
.
7
0
3 steps3 steps3 steps
3 steps 3 steps 3 steps
5'5'5'
4.
9
2
%
516
.
6
0
516
.
1
7
514
.
7
2
513
.
3
5
51
3
.
0
6
3%
2%
5'5'5'
2 steps 3 steps 1 step
502
.
8
6
503
.
2
2
510
.
1
9
509
.
6
0
50
4
.
8
1
9.8'
10.5'
4 steps
10.01%23
.
7
'
1.
1
8
%
505
.
6
8
503
.
7
6
504
.
2
3
50
6
.
0
9
28
.
2
'
24
.
2
'
5.
8
5
%
1.
1
1
%
23
.
7
'
23
.
7
'
7.
0
8
%
0.
7
6
%
0.
5
4
%
11.7'
9.88%
505
.
8
1
1.
2
6
%
23
.
7
'
23
.
7
'
23
.
7
'
507
.
8
6
509
.
9
0
1.
0
5
%
1.
2
2
%
23
.
7
'
23
.
7
'
23
.
7
'
507
.
6
8
2.
4
%
2.
4
1
%
2.
4
%
510
.
3
8
513
.
0
8
51
0
.
7
1
51
7
.
3
1
511
.
5
7
51
6
.
2
6
506
.
6
5
514
.
3
1
517
.
4
1
36
.
7
'
11
.
0
5
%
6.
9
1
%
23
.
7
'
23
.
7
'
0.
0
8
%
23
.
7
'
0.
4
%
36
.
5
'
2.
8
8
%
37
.
6
'
** *
* *****X
X XX X X
*XX
X X**
50
9
.
9
1
2%
*
*X
X X
5'
*XXXXXXX
XXXXXXX4 steps
515
.
6
1
23
.
7
'
X
***
X X X X X X X *
X X X X X
*
3 steps
1.
6
9
%
51
1
.
4
1
5'5'
18
'
18
'
18
'
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 6
UNIVERSAL DESIGN ORDINANCE EXHIBIT
N6-C.6.2
NEIGHBORHOOD 6
Duet Townhomes: 60
Three-Story Row Townhomes: 40*
Total: 100 Units
*Row Townhomes to provide accessible units and path as shown on sheet
N6-C.5
UDO Compliant/Exception - Primary Residence and
Secondary Unit. For units with driveway slope gradient
between 8.33% and 12%, Units are compliant through
options 1 & 2 below:
1. Access from sidewalk to front door via driveway
with a slope gradient between 8.33% and 12%
2. Access to home by parking in garage and entering
home through garage door with optional ramp.
Notes:
1. For all Primary Residences and Secondary Units,
the home builder shall offer to the home buyer a
portable ramp that can be placed at the exterior
door to the Primary Unit, and if a Secondary Unit
is provided, to the exterior door of the Secondary
Unit.
2. House plans, model, and setbacks illustrated here
are conceptual and subject to change.
Front door location
1. The units are part of Vesting Tentative Tract 8563.
2. The neighborhood is located on a hillside, with
moderate slopes and terrain.
3. All driveway slopes labeled on this exhibit are
based on the calculated slope along the steeper
driveway side.
KEY
P - Pad Elevation
FF - Finished Floor Elevation
BW - Back of Walk Elevation
GL - Garage Lip Elevation
UDO - Universal Design Ordinance
Based on the following site conditions, the Project
proposes the methods outlined in the Legend to meet the
intent of the "Mandatory to offer" UDO requirement for
an exterior accessible route to a primary or other
entrance consistent with City Zoning Code 7.90.060.
EXTERIOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE
FOR UDO COMPLIANCE
LEGEND
UDO Compliant - Primary Residence and Secondary Unit.
Some units require driveway slope gradient to 8.33% max.
This designation assumes pedestrian walks to entry from
public sidewalk via the driveway
X*
91
3
84 85
83 82
30
92
PARCEL T
88
89
PARCEL U
93
98
PARCEL V
96
97
94
95
90
91
87
11
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PADA/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
61 62 63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70 71 72
PARCEL A
LEGEND
GHAD OWNED AND MAINTAINED(6)(8)
HOA OWNED AND MAINTAINED
GHAD OWNED AND GHAD/HOA MAINTAINED(7)
DUETS (FEE SIMPLE)(9)
SEMI PUBLIC OWNED AND MAINTAINED
CONDOMINIUMS(9)
CITY OWNED AND MAINTAINED
CITY OWNED AND CFD MAINTAINED(1)(2)(3)
NOTES:
(1)ALL STREETS ARE PUBLIC.
(2)ALL PARKWAY STRIPS WITHIN CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY
TO BE HOA MAINTAINED.
(3)PARK FRONTAGE SIDEWALKS ALONG
NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS TO BE HOA MAINTAINED.
IF FUTURE PARK DESIGN REMOVES AND RELOCATES
THE SIDEWALK, THE NEW SIDEWALK WILL THEN BE
CITY MAINTAINED.
(4)STREETS, COMMON LANDSCAPE, AND BUILDING
EXTERIORS WITHIN MEDIUM DENSITY PARCEL WILL
BE HOA MAINTAINED. ENCLOSED YARD SPACE TO BE
PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED.
(5)FRONT YARD LANDSCAPE ON ALL SINGLE FAMILY
LOTS ARE PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED.
(6)PROPOSED TRAIL CONNECTIONS TO BE GHAD
OWNED AND MAINTAINED.
(7)GHAD WILL MAINTAIN SLOPE STABILITY, REPAIR,
MOWING, FIRE ACCESS ROAD (INCLUDING DRAINAGE
DITCH) AND WEED ABATEMENT. HOA WILL MAINTAIN
DECORATIVE LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, AND TRASH
REMOVAL.
(8)RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING OR ASSOCIATED
WITH PRIVATE LOTS ARE TO BE PRIVATELY
MAINTAINED. RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING
COMMON AREA/LANDSCAPE ARE TO BE HOA
MAINTAINED. RETAINING WALLS SUPPORTING
TRAILS WITHIN GHAD PARCELS ARE TO BE
MAINTAINED BY GHAD.
(9)NEIGHBORHOOD 6 ENCLOSED BACK AND SIDE
YARDS FOR FEE SIMPLE LOTS WILL BE PRIVATELY
MAINTAINED. ALL EXTERIOR ELEMENTS OF THE FEE
SIMPLE AND CONDOMINIUM DWELLING UNITS WILL
BE HOA MAINTAINED.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/29/2022
NEIGHBORHOOD 6
MAINTENANCERESPONSIBILITY PLAN
N6-C.7
91
4
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
EAST RANCH NEIGHBORHOOD N 6
SHEET INDEX
ARCHITECTURE
A0.1.0 SHEET INDEX
A1.0.0 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN + PROJECT DATA
A.1.1.0 CODE ANALYSIS
A2.0.0 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - TOWNHOUSE - 3 PLEX _ A STYLE
A2.0.1 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - TOWNHOUSE - 3 PLEX _ A STYLE
A2.0.2 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - TOWNHOUSE - 3 PLEX _ B STYLE
A2.0.3 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - TOWNHOUSE - 3 PLEX _ B STYLE
A2.1.0 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - TOWNHOUSE - 4 PLEX _ A STYLE
A2.1.1 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - TOWNHOUSE - 4 PLEX _ A STYLE
A2.1.2 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - TOWNHOUSE - 4 PLEX _ B STYLE
A2.1.3 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - TOWNHOUSE - 4 PLEX _ B STYLE
A2.2.0 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - DUET_ PLAN 1 & PLAN 1_ A STYLE
A2.2.1 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - DUET_ PLAN 1 & PLAN 1_ B STYLE
A2.3.0 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - DUET_ PLAN 1 & PLAN 2_ A STYLE
A2.3.1 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - DUET_ PLAN 1 & PLAN 2_ B STYLE
A2.4.0 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - DUET_ PLAN 2 & PLAN 2_ A STYLE
A2.4.1 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - DUET_ PLAN 2 & PLAN 2_ B STYLE
A3.0.0 BUILDING PLANS - TOWNHOUSE -3 PLEX
A3.1.0 BUILDING PLANS - TOWNHOUSE -4 PLEX
A3.1.0 BUILDING PLANS - TOWNHOUSE -4 PLEX
A3.2.0 BUILDING PLANS - DUET - PLAN 1 & PLAN 1
A3.3.0 BUILDING PLANS - DUET - PLAN 1 & PLAN 2
A3.4.0 BUILDING PLANS - DUET - PLAN 2 & PLAN 2
A5.0.0 UNIT PLANS - TOWNHOUSE_ PLAN 1
A5.0.1 UNIT PLANS - TOWNHOUSE_ PLAN 2
A5.1.0 UNIT PLANS - DUET_ PLAN 1
A5.1.1 UNIT PLANS - DUET_ PLAN 2
A6.0.0 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS-TOWNHOUSE
A6.0.1 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS-TOWNHOUSE
A6.1.0 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS-DUET
A6.1.1 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS-DUET
A6.1.2 ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS-DUET
A7.0.0 MATERIAL COLOR SCHEMES
N6 - A0.1.0
SHEET INDEX
91
5
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/
C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C
PA
D
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PAD A/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/C PADA/C PAD A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD A/CPAD
A/C PADA/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/CPAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
TOWMHOUSE DUET
3 PLEX _ A COLOR SCHEME
3 PLEX _ B COLOR SCHEME
4 PLEX _ A COLOR SCHEME
4 PLEX _ B COLOR SCHEME
DUET PLAN 1 & PLAN 1_ A COLOR SCHEME
DUET PLAN 1 & PLAN 1_ B COLOR SCHEME
DUET PLAN 1 & PLAN 2_ A COLOR SCHEME
DUET PLAN 1 & PLAN 2_ B COLOR SCHEME
DUET PLAN 2 & PLAN 2_ A COLOR SCHEME
DUET PLAN 2 & PLAN 2_ B COLOR SCHEME
PROJECT DATA
TOTAL UNITS: 100 du total
TOWNHOUSE
CONSTRUCTION TYPE: TYPE VB
OCCUPANCY: R-2 TOWNHOUSE
FIRE SPRINKLER: NFPA 13D
BUILDING HEIGHT: +/- 39'-6"
See A2.0.0 - A2.1.3 for elevations and A3.0.0 - A3.1.1 for building plans
DUETS
CONSTRUCTION TYPE: TYPE VB
OCCUPANCY: R-3
FIRE SPRINKLER: NFPA 13D
BUILDING HEIGHT: +/- 30'-0"
See A2.2.0 -A2.4.01for elevations and A3.2.0 - A3.4.0 for building plans
Designation of 4 complying units to be based on
grading design - see Civil Engineering plan Sheet
ACCESSIBLE UNITS
4 Multi-story dwelling units shall comply with
accessible and adaptable requirements of
CBC 1102A.3. [10% of total multi-story dwelling units]
NOTES:
1. Refer to Civil sheets for all property lines,
easements, site dimensions, accessible unit
locations, etc.
2. Refer to Landscape Sheets for landscape
design, dimensions and detailed information.
STREET B
ST
R
E
E
T
C
CENTRAL PARKWAY
N
0 25' 50' 100'
N6 - A1.0.0
ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN
COLOR AND STYLISTIC VARIATIONS & PROJECT DATA
91
6
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
MAXIMUM AREA OF EXTERIOR WALL
OPENINGS:
(CRC TABLE R302.1.(2))
FIRE RESISTIVE RATING REQUIREMENTS
FOR PROJECTIONS BASED ON FIRE
SEPARATION DISTANCE:
(PER CRC TABLE R302.1(2))
APPLICABLE CODES:
2019 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE (CRC)
2019 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC)CHAPTER 11A AS REQUIRED PER CRC R320
2019 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE
2019 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE
2019 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE
2019 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE
TITLE 24, PART 6, CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE (2019 EDITION)
FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE > 3' SHALL BE ZERO (0) (NON-RATED)
FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE < 3' SHALL BE ONE (1) - (1 HOUR)
REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN, A1.0.0 FOR SEPARATION DISTANCES.
FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE > 3' SHALL BE UNLIMITED (UNRATED)
FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE < 3' SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED
FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE > 3' SHALL BE ZERO (0) (NON-RATED)
FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE 2' < 3' SHALL BE 1-HOUR ON THE UNDERSIDE
REFER TO SITE PLAN FOR FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCES
TOWNHOUSE: A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNIT CONSTRUCTED
IN A GROUP OF THREE OR MORE ATTACHED UNITS IN WHICH
EACH UNIT EXTENDS FROM FOUNDATION TO ROOF AND WITH A
YARD OR PUBLIC WAY ON AT LEAST TWO SIDES.
DEFINITIONS:
[ PER CRC R202 ]
R2-TOWNHOUSE CONDOMINIUMS (PER CRC):
3-STORY TOWNHOUSE
R-2 (TOWNHOUSE CONDOMINIUM)
U (PRIVATE GARAGES)
NFPA 13-D - AS ALLOWED FOR TOWNHOUSES PER CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE
SECTION 903.3.1.3 AND CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE SECTION R 313.1.1
VB
40 FEET
3 STORIES (3 STORIES PROPOSED)
THE CRC DOES NOT PUT AREA LIMITATIONS ON TOWNHOUSES
PER CRC R302.2 EACH TOWNHOUSE CONDOMINIUM SHALL BE
SEPARATED BY A COMMON WALL CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT PLUMBING OR
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, DUCTS OR VENTS RUNNING VERTICALLY IN
THE COMMON WALL CAVITY. PER CRC R 302.2 ITEM 7 THE COMMON WALL
SHALL BE NOT LESS THAN 1-HOUR FIRE RATED.
OCCUPANCY GROUP:
(CRC 1.1.3.1)
EXTERIOR WALL RATING:
(CRC TABLE R302.1(2))
ELECTRIC METERS ARE PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED IN COMMON HOA
MAINTAINED CLOSETS AT THE END OF EACH BUILDING AND RUN THROUGH THE
BUILDING LATERALLY IN A NON-RATED SOFFIT RACEWAY LOCATED IN THE
GARAGES, BEFORE TERMINATING AT EACH UNIT. ACCESS EASEMENTS EXIST
FOR USE AND MAINTENANCE OF THE UTILITY RACEWAY. THROUGH
PENETRATIONS OF THE 1-HOUR RATED COMMON WALL SEPARATING UNITS BY
ELECTRICAL LINES SHALL BE PROTECTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CRC R 302.4.1
& R 302.4.1.2 BY PROVIDING A THROUGH PENETRATION FIRESTOP SYSTEM.
UTILITIES APPROACH/ THROUGH
PENETRATIONS:
(CRC R302.4.1)
DWELLING UNITS IN A BUILDING CONSISTING OF FOUR OR MORE CONDOMINIUM UNITS SHALL
MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE CHAPTER 11A - MULTISTORY
DWELLINGS.
REFER TO SITE PLAN FOR MORE INFORMATION AND LOCATION OF ACCESSIBLE UNITS.
MULTI-DWELLING BUILDINGS WITH LESS THAN 4 UNITS ARE EXEMPT FROM ACCESSIBILITY
REQUIREMENTS. 10% OF THE REMAINING UNITS THAT ARE NOT EXEMPT MUST BE MADE
ACCESSIBLE BASED ON CBC SECTION 1102.3.1
ACCESSIBILITY:
(PER CRC R320.1)
MAXIMUM AREA OF EXTERIOR WALL
OPENINGS:
(CRC TABLE R302.1.(2))
FIRE RESISTIVE RATING REQUIREMENTS
FOR PROJECTIONS BASED ON FIRE
SEPARATION DISTANCE:
(PER CRC TABLE R302.1(2))
APPLICABLE CODES:
2019 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE (CRC)
2019 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC)
2019 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE
2019 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE
2019 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE
2019 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE
TITLE 24, PART 6, CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE (2019 EDITION)
FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE > 3' SHALL BE ZERO (0) (NON-RATED)
FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE < 3' SHALL BE ONE (1) - (1 HOUR)
REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN, A1.0.0 FOR SEPARATION DISTANCES.
FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE > 3' SHALL BE UNLIMITED (UNRATED)
FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE < 3' SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED
FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE > 3' SHALL BE ZERO (0) (NON-RATED)
FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE 2' < 3' SHALL BE 1-HOUR ON THE UNDERSIDE
REFER TO SITE PLAN (SHEET A1.10) FOR FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCES
DWELLING: ANY BUILDING THAT CONTAINS ONE OR TWO
DWELLING UNITS USED, INTENDED, OR DESIGNED TO BE BUILT,
USED, RENTED, LEASED, LET OR HIRED OUT TO BE OCCUPIED,
OR THAT ARE OCCUPIED FOR LIVING PURPOSES.
DEFINITIONS:
[ PER CRC R202 ]
R3-TWO-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS (PER CRC):
DUET(FEE SIMPLE)
R-3(TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS)
U (PRIVATE GARAGES)
NFPA 13-D
40 FEET
3 STORIES (2 STORIES PROPOSED)
THE CRC DOES NOT PUT AREA LIMITATIONS ON TWO-FAMILY DWELLING
UNITS
PER CRC R302.3 EACH DWELLING UNIT SHALL BE SEPARATED FROM EACH
OTHER BY WALL HAVING NOT LESS THAN A 1-HOUR FIRE-RESISTANCE
RATING .FIRE-RESISTANCE-RATED WALL ASSEMBLIES SHALL EXTEND TO
AND BE TIGHT AGAINST THE EXTERIOR WALL, AND WALL ASSEMBLIES SHALL
EXTEND FROM THE FOUNDATION TO THE UNDERSIDE OF THE ROOF
SHEATHING.
OCCUPANCY GROUP:
(CRC 1.1.3.1)
FIRE SPRINKLERS:
(CRC R313)
ALLOWABLE HEIGHT:
ALLOWABLE STORIES:
(CRC 1.1.3)
ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA:
TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS
SEPARATION:
(CRC R302.3)
EXTERIOR WALL RATING:
(CRC TABLE R302.1(2))
UTILITY METERS WILL BE LOCATED ON EACH INDIVIDUAL LOT FOR THE
DUETS AND THERE WILL BE NO THROUGH PENETRATIONS OF THE RATED
WALLS SEPARATING THE TWO-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS.
UTILITIES APPROACH:
FIRE SPRINKLERS:
(CRC R313)
CONSTRUCTION TYPE:
ALLOWABLE HEIGHT:
ALLOWABLE STORIES:
(CRC 1.1.3)
TOWNHOUSE UNIT SEPARATION:
(CRC R302.2.2)
ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA:
N6 - A1.1.0
CODE ANALYSIS
91
7
+/
-
3
9
'
-
6
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
9
'
-
6
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
FRONT- A STYLELEFT- A STYLE
FRONT LEFT PERSPECTIVE- A STYLE
Material Legend:
1. Stucco - Fine Sand Finish
2. Fiber Cement Lap Siding
3. Fiber Cement Board and Batten Siding
4. Not Used
5. Canopy
6. Metal Railing
7. Metal Garage Door
8. Unit Address
9. Light Fixture
10. Entry Door
11. Composition Shingle Roof
Notes:
Refer to Landscape Sheets
for Landscape design,dimensions,
and detailed information
113221689510323116
N6 - A2.0.0
3 PLEX ELEVATIONS - A STYLE
TOWNHOUSES
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
91
8
+/
-
3
9
'
-
6
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
9
'
-
6
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
REAR- A STYLERIGHT- A STYLE
REAR RIGHT PERSPECTIVE- A STYLE
Material Legend:
1. Stucco - Fine Sand Finish
2. Fiber Cement Lap Siding
3. Fiber Cement Board and Batten Siding
4. Not Used
5. Canopy
6. Metal Railing
7. Metal Garage Door
8. Unit Address
9. Light Fixture
10. Entry Door
11. Composition Shingle Roof
Notes:
Refer to Landscape Sheets
for Landscape design,dimensions,
and detailed information
1132189723116 1
N6 - A2.0.1
3 PLEX ELEVATIONS - A STYLE
TOWNHOUSES
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
91
9
+/
-
3
9
'
-
1
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
9
'
-
1
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
FRONT- B STYLELEFT- B STYLE
FRONT LEFT PERSPECTIVE- B STYLE
Material Legend:
1. Stucco - Fine Sand Finish
2. Fiber Cement Lap Siding
3. Fiber Cement Board and Batten Siding
4. Not Used
5. Canopy
6. Metal Railing
7. Metal Garage Door
8. Unit Address
9. Light Fixture
10. Entry Door
11. Composition Shingle Roof
Notes:
Refer to Landscape Sheets
for Landscape design,dimensions,
and detailed information
112221689510122116
N6 - A2.0.2
3 PLEX ELEVATIONS - B STYLE
TOWNHOUSES
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
92
0
+/
-
3
9
'
-
1
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
9
'
-
1
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
REAR- B STYLERIGHT- B STYLE
REAR RIGHT PERSPECTIVE- B STYLE
Material Legend:
1. Stucco - Fine Sand Finish
2. Fiber Cement Lap Siding
3. Fiber Cement Board and Batten Siding
4. Not Used
5. Canopy
6. Metal Railing
7. Metal Garage Door
8. Unit Address
9. Light Fixture
10. Entry Door
11. Composition Shingle Roof
Notes:
Refer to Landscape Sheets
for Landscape design,dimensions,
and detailed information
1112289722116 13
N6 - A2.0.3
3 PLEX ELEVATIONS - B STYLE
TOWNHOUSES
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
92
1
+/
-
3
9
'
-
6
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
9
'
-
6
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
FRONT- A STYLELEFT- A STYLE
FRONT LEFT PERSPECTIVE- A STYLE
Material Legend:
1. Stucco - Fine Sand Finish
2. Fiber Cement Lap Siding
3. Fiber Cement Board and Batten Siding
4. Not Used
5. Canopy
6. Metal Railing
7. Metal Garage Door
8. Unit Address
9. Light Fixture
10. Entry Door
11. Composition Shingle Roof
Notes:
Refer to Landscape Sheets
for Landscape design,dimensions,
and detailed information
11322168951032311633
N6 - A2.1.0
4 PLEX ELEVATIONS - A STYLE
TOWNHOUSES
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
92
2
+/
-
3
9
'
-
6
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
9
'
-
6
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
REAR- A STYLERIGHT- A STYLE
REAR RIGHT PERSPECTIVE- A STYLE
Material Legend:
1. Stucco - Fine Sand Finish
2. Fiber Cement Lap Siding
3. Fiber Cement Board and Batten Siding
4. Not Used
5. Canopy
6. Metal Railing
7. Metal Garage Door
8. Unit Address
9. Light Fixture
10. Entry Door
11. Composition Shingle Roof
Notes:
Refer to Landscape Sheets
for Landscape design,dimensions,
and detailed information
1132189723116 12
N6 - A2.1.1
4 PLEX ELEVATIONS- A STYLE
TOWNHOUSES
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
92
3
+/
-
3
9
'
-
1
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
9
'
-
1
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
FRONT- B STYLELEFT- B STYLE
FRONT LEFT PERSPECTIVE- B STYLE
Material Legend:
1. Stucco - Fine Sand Finish
2. Fiber Cement Lap Siding
3. Fiber Cement Board and Batten Siding
4. Not Used
5. Canopy
6. Metal Railing
7. Metal Garage Door
8. Unit Address
9. Light Fixture
10. Entry Door
11. Composition Shingle Roof
Notes:
Refer to Landscape Sheets
for Landscape design,dimensions,
and detailed information
112221689510122116
N6 - A2.1.2
4 PLEX ELEVATIONS - B STYLE
TOWNHOUSES
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
92
4
+/
-
3
9
'
-
1
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
9
'
-
1
"
Level 2
Level 1
10
'
-
3
/
4
"
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
3
1
'
-
5
"
Level 3
9'
-
3
/
4
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
REAR- B STYLERIGHT- B STYLE
REAR RIGHT PERSPECTIVE- B STYLE
Material Legend:
1. Stucco - Fine Sand Finish
2. Fiber Cement Lap Siding
3. Fiber Cement Board and Batten Siding
4. Not Used
5. Canopy
6. Metal Railing
7. Metal Garage Door
8. Unit Address
9. Light Fixture
10. Entry Door
11. Composition Shingle Roof
Notes:
Refer to Landscape Sheets
for Landscape design,dimensions,
and detailed information
1112289722116 132
N6 - A2.1.3
4 PLEX ELEVATIONS - B STYLE
TOWNHOUSES
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
92
5
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
8
'
-
3
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
8
'
-
3
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
8
'
-
3
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
8
'
-
3
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
FRONT LEFT PERSPECTIVE- A STYLE
Material Legend:
1. Stucco - Fine Sand Finish
2. Fiber Cement Lap Siding
3. Fiber Cement Board and Batten Siding
4. Not Used
5. Canopy
6. Metal Railing
7. Metal Garage Door
8. Unit Address
9. Light Fixture
10. Entry Door
11. Composition Shingle Roof
Notes:
Refer to Landscape Sheets
for Landscape design,dimensions,
and detailed information
FRONT RIGHT PERSPECTIVE- A STYLE
1121137931
31 112131
10
N6 - A2.2.0
ELEVATIONS - A STYLE - PLAN 1 & PLAN 1
DUET
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
LEFT- A STYLE FRONT- A STYLE
REAR- A STYLERIGHT- A STYLE
92
6
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
1
0
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
8
'
-
3
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
1
0
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
1
0
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
1
0
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
FRONT LEFT PERSPECTIVE- B STYLE
Material Legend:
1. Stucco - Fine Sand Finish
2. Fiber Cement Lap Siding
3. Fiber Cement Board and Batten Siding
4. Not Used
5. Canopy
6. Metal Railing
7. Metal Garage Door
8. Unit Address
9. Light Fixture
10. Entry Door
11. Composition Shingle Roof
Notes:
Refer to Landscape Sheets
for Landscape design,dimensions,
and detailed information
FRONT RIGHT PERSPECTIVE- B STYLE
1111379211
1123
10
211
N6 - A2.2.1
ELEVATIONS - B STYLE - PLAN 1 & PLAN 1
DUET
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
LEFT- B STYLE FRONT- B STYLE
REAR- B STYLERIGHT- B STYLE
92
7
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
9
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
9
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
9
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
9
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
LEFT- A STYLE
FRONT LEFT PERSPECTIVE- A STYLE
Material Legend:
1. Stucco - Fine Sand Finish
2. Fiber Cement Lap Siding
3. Fiber Cement Board and Batten Siding
4. Not Used
5. Canopy
6. Metal Railing
7. Metal Garage Door
8. Unit Address
9. Light Fixture
10. Entry Door
11. Composition Shingle Roof
Notes:
Refer to Landscape Sheets
for Landscape design,dimensions,
and detailed information
FRONT- A STYLE
REAR- A STYLERIGHT- A STYLE
FRONT RIGHT PERSPECTIVE- A STYLE
11 2 1137910133111
311131110 112 3131
N6 - A2.3.0
ELEVATIONS - A STYLE - PLAN 1 & PLAN 2
DUET
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
92
8
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
0
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
0
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
0
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
0
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
FRONT LEFT PERSPECTIVE- B STYLE
Material Legend:
1. Stucco - Fine Sand Finish
2. Fiber Cement Lap Siding
3. Fiber Cement Board and Batten Siding
4. Not Used
5. Canopy
6. Metal Railing
7. Metal Garage Door
8. Unit Address
9. Light Fixture
10. Entry Door
11. Composition Shingle Roof
Notes:
Refer to Landscape Sheets
for Landscape design,dimensions,
and detailed information
FRONT RIGHT PERSPECTIVE- B STYLE
112 4379103211
32 1131110 23 2
2
N6 - A2.3.1
DUET ELEVATIONS - B STYLE - PLAN 1 & PLAN 2
DUET
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
LEFT- B STYLE FRONT- B STYLE
REAR- B STYLERIGHT- B STYLE
11
92
9
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
1
0
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
9
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
9
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
2
9
'
-
9
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
FRONT LEFT PERSPECTIVE- A STYLE
Material Legend:
1. Stucco - Fine Sand Finish
2. Fiber Cement Lap Siding
3. Fiber Cement Board and Batten Siding
4. Not Used
5. Canopy
6. Metal Railing
7. Metal Garage Door
8. Unit Address
9. Light Fixture
10. Entry Door
11. Composition Shingle Roof
Notes:
Refer to Landscape Sheets
for Landscape design,dimensions,
and detailed information
FRONT RIGHT PERSPECTIVE- A STYLE
11 1119331111
11 3
37103
3 1111 10 3
N6 - A2.4.0
DUET ELEVATIONS - A STYLE- PLAN 2 & PLAN 2
DUET
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
LEFT- A STYLE FRONT- A STYLE
REAR- A STYLERIGHT- A STYLE
1
1 1
93
0
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
0
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
0
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
0
"
Level 2
Level 1
va
r
i
e
s
9'
-
3
/
4
"
T.O.Plate
T.O.Roof
+/
-
2
0
'
-
1
"
9'
-
3
/
4
"
+/
-
3
0
'
-
0
"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
FRONT LEFT PERSPECTIVE- B STYLE
Material Legend:
1. Stucco - Fine Sand Finish
2. Fiber Cement Lap Siding
3. Fiber Cement Board and Batten Siding
4. Not Used
5. Canopy
6. Metal Railing
7. Metal Garage Door
8. Unit Address
9. Light Fixture
10. Entry Door
11. Composition Shingle Roof
Notes:
Refer to Landscape Sheets
for Landscape design,dimensions,
and detailed information
FRONT RIGHT PERSPECTIVE- B STYLE
11 1119331111
11 3
37103
3 1111 10 3
1
1 2
N6 - A2.4.1
DUET ELEVATIONS - B STYLE - PLAN 2 & PLAN 2
DUET
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
LEFT- B STYLE FRONT- B STYLE
REAR- B STYLERIGHT- B STYLE
1
93
1
44
'
-
0
"
68'-0"
3-Plex Building - First Floor
Plan 2R Plan 1 Plan 2
46
'
-
0
"
68'-0"
3-Plex Building - Second Floor
Plan 2R Plan 1 Plan 2
43
'
-
0
"
68'-0"
3-Plex Building - Third Floor
Plan 2R Plan 1 Plan 2
3-Plex Building - Roof Plan_ A Style
Plan 2R Plan 1 Plan 2
4:12
4:12
4:12 4:12
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
4:12 4:12
4:12 4:12
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
3-Plex Building - Roof Plan_ B Style
Plan 2R Plan 1 Plan 2
4:12
4:12
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
4:12 4:12
4:12 4:12
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
4:124:12 4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com N6 - A3.0.0
3-PLEX_BUILDING PLANS
TOWNHOUSES
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
93
2
44
'
-
0
"
89'-2"
4-Plex Building - First Floor
Plan 2R Plan 1 Plan 2Plan 1R
46
'
-
0
"
89'-2"
4-Plex Building - Second Floor
Plan 2R Plan 1 Plan 2Plan 1R
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com N6 - A3.1.0
4-PLEX_BUILDING PLANS
TOWNHOUSES
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
93
3
43
'
-
0
"
89'-2"
4-Plex Building - Third Floor
Plan 2R Plan 1 Plan 2Plan 1R
4-Plex Building - Roof Plan_ A Style
Plan 2R Plan 1 Plan 2Plan 1R
4:12
4:12
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
4:12 4:12
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
4:12 4:12
4:12
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
3:12
4:12
4:12
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
4:12
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
4:12
3:12
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
5:
1
2
4:12 4:12
4:12 4:12
4-Plex Building - Roof Plan_ B Style
Plan 2R Plan 1 Plan 2Plan 1R
4:12
4:12 4:12
4:12 4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com N6 - A3.1.1
4-PLEX_BUILDING PLANS
TOWNHOUSES
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
93
4
Duet Building_P1 & P1 - First Floor
Plan 1Plan 1
Plan 1Plan 1
Duet Building_P1 & P1 - Second Floor
Dr.Opt.
DN
17
R
Dr.Opt.
DN
17
R
Plan 1Plan 1
Duet Building_P1 & P1 - Roof_ A Style
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
5:12
3:12
5:12
5:12
6:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12
6:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12
6:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12 6:
1
2
6:
1
2
Plan 1Plan 1
Duet Building_P1 & P1 - Roof_ B Style
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com N6 - A3.2.0
BUILDING PLANS - PLAN 1 & PLAN 1
DUET
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
93
5
W/H
Duet Building_P1 & P2 - First Floor
Plan 2Plan 1
Dr.Opt.
DN
17
R
Plan 2Plan 1
Duet Building_P1 & P2 - Second Floor
Plan 2Plan 1
Duet Building_P1 & P2 - Roof_ A Style
5:12
5:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
5:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12
6:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12
6:12
6:12
4:
1
2
6:12
6:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
4:12
6:
1
2
6:12
6:12
6:
1
2
Plan 2Plan 1
Duet Building_P1 & P2 - Roof_ B Style
6:
1
2
6:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com N6 - A3.3.0
BUILDING PLANS - PLAN 1 & PLAN 2
DUET
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
93
6
W/HW/H
Duet Building_P2 & P2 - First Floor
Plan 2Plan 2
Plan 2Plan 2
Duet Building_P2 & P2 - Second Floor
Plan 2Plan 2
Duet Building_P2 & P2 - Roof_ A Style
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12
6:12
8:12
6:12
4:
1
2
6:
1
2
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:12
4:
1
2
4:12
4:12
6:
1
2
6:12
6:
1
2
6:12
6:12
6:12
6:
1
2
Plan 2Plan 2
Duet Building_P2 & P2 - Roof_ B Style
6:
1
2
6:12 6:
1
2
6:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12
6:
1
2
6:
1
2
6:12
6:12
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com N6 - A3.4.0
BUILDING PLANS - PLAN 2 & PLAN 2
DUET
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
93
7
First Floor
339 s.f.
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
45
'
-
6
"
21'-0"
Recycle TrashCompost
UP
17
R
Bath
3
Entry
Porch
Bedroom 4
11'-9" x 11'-2"
PADA/C
storage
(112 c.f.)
storage
(85 c.f.)
Min. of 200 C.F.
of storage required
241 c.f provided
W/H
storage
(44 c.f.)
2'-8"x3'-6"
shelf 5' abv
garage flr.
UP
17
R
Porch
Bath
3
Entry
Bedroom 4
11'-9" x 10'-6"
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
45
'
-
6
"
21'-0"
First Floor
Accessible Unit
354 s.f.
W/H
Compost Trash
Recycle
storage
(140 c.f.)
storage
(63 c.f.)
48" x 30"Clr. Space
6'-7"
8'
-
1
0
"
30
6
8
3068
3068
Min. of 200 C.F.
of storage required
203 c.f provided
48" x 30"Clr. Space
2'
-
1
0
"
3'
-
0
"
3'
-
0
"
PADA/C
45
'
-
6
"
21'-0"
DN
17
R
UP
18R
Pdr
Dining Room
16'-5" x 11'-6"
Great Room
16'-5" x 14'-0"
Kitchen
Pantry
4'
-
0
"
6'
-
0
"
6'-8"7'-1"6'-8"
Deck
14'-5" x 6'-0"
Second Floor
782 s.f.
10' Clg.
10' Clg.
10' Clg.
Micro/
44
'
-
0
"
21'-0"
DN
18
R
linenopt.
Dryer
below
counter
Washer
below
counter
linenlow
W.I.C.
15'-6" l.f.
Primary
Bedroom
14'-9" x 13'-9"
Primary
Bath
Bedroom 2
10'-0" x 10'-0"
Bedroom 3
10'-0" x 11'-0"
Bath
2
Third Floor
873 s.f.
opt.
42" x 60"
Barn dr.
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com N6 - A5.0.0
PLAN 1_UNIT PLANS
TOWNHOUSES
4 BEDROOMS
3.5 BATHS
1,994 S.F.
As Accessible Unit 2,009 S.F.
0 2 4 8
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
93
8
23'-4"
PADA/C
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
17
R
UP
RecycleTrash
Compost
W/H
44
'
-
1
0
"
21
'
-
1
"
22
'
-
1
1
"
2'
-
0
"
3'
-
0
"
First Floor
378 s.f.
coats/storage
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-0"
Entry
Bedroom 4
11'-6" x 12'-4"
Bath
3
Meters
storage
(214 c.f.)
Meters
Min. of 200 C.F.
of storage required
214 c.f provided
18
R
UP
DN
17R
pantrywalk-in
8'
-
0
"
6'
-
0
"
4'-0"6'-0"
44
'
-
6
"
23'-4"
2'
-
6
"
3'-912"17'-212"
21
'
-
1
"
24
'
-
1
1
"
2'-4"
belowopen to
Second Floor
810 s.f.
Pdr
Kitchen
Great Room
16'-3" x 23'-9"
Deck
16'-3" x 6'-0"
10' Clg.
10' Clg.
4'-10"
Pantry
Micro/
12'-0"11'-4"
18
R
DN
23'-4"
12'-0"11'-4"
44
'
-
6
"
1'
-
6
"
3'-912"17'-212"
20
'
-
1
"
22
'
-
1
1
"
3'
-
0
"
2'-4"
Third Floor
916 s.f.
Bedroom 2
11'-3" x 10'-0"Bedroom 3
11'-0" x 10'-2"
W.I.C.
21'-0" l.f.Primary
Bedroom
15'-0" x 13'-0"
Primary
Bath
Laund.
Bath
2
Barn dr.opt.
6'
-
2
12"
2668Pr.
low
linen
W.I.C.
21'-0" l.f.Primary
Bedroom
15'-0" x 13'-0"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
THIRD FLOOR -ALT 1 ( SEE ELEVATIONS)
N6 - A5.0.1
PLAN 2_UNIT PLANS
TOWNHOUSES
4 BEDROOMS
3.5 BATHS
2,104 S.F.
0 2 4 8
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
93
9
First Floor
819 s.f.
Porch
Entry
Kitchen
Dining Room
12'-3" x 12'-8"
Great Room
15'-11" x 14'-4"
Garage
20'-0" x 22'-8"
Pdr.
media
wall
ac pad
64
'
-
6
"
3'
-
6
"
2"29'-6"4'-0"
4'
-
2
"
CompostTrash Recycle
w/h
2"
33'-6"
37
'
-
2
"
10
'
-
0
"
4'
-
6
"
50
'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
6'-0"3'-8"
6'
-
0
"
7'
-
0
"
64
'
-
6
"
m
i
n
.
4'
-
0
"
m
i
n
.
4'
-
0
"
m
i
n
.
4'-0" min.
10
'
-
0
"
m
i
n
.
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
9'
-
8
"
13'-0"16'-6"
Elect.
4'-0"
UP
17R
19'-9"9'-9"
storage
(158 c.f.)
6'-4"7'-6"
7'-6" x 2'-8"
shelf 5'-0" above F.F.
for additional Storage
87 c.f.
Rear yard
400 s.f. Min.
w/ a 18' min. dim.
20'-6" x 19'-8"
403 s.f.
8'-0"
Clg. Hgt.
7'-0"
Clg. Hgt.
36'X36'
MIN. LEVEL
LANDING AT
EXTERIOR DOOR
Pantry
Micro/
Second Floor
1,096 s.f.
W.I.C.
17'-0" l.f.
Primary
Bedroom
15'-8" x 16'-6"
Primary
Bath
Bedroom 2
11'-3" x 11'-0"
Bedroom 3
11'-3" x 12'-6"
Laund.
linenlow
Dr.Opt.
3'
-
2
"
37
'
-
2
"
8'
-
8
"
29'-6"
4'
-
2
"
38
'
-
8
"
7'
-
2
"
19'-9"9'-9"
DN
17
R
1'
-
6
"
16'-7"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com N6 - A5.1.0
PLAN 1_UNIT PLANS
DUET
3 BEDROOMS
2.5 BATHS
1,915 S.F.
0 2 4 8
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
94
0
First Floor
818 s.f.
41
'
-
0
"
18
'
-
6
"
Kitchen
Entry
Garage
20'-0" x 20'-4"
Great Room
21'-9" x 14'-6"
media
wall
Bedroom 4
10'-11" x 10'-6"
Bath
3
ac pad
W/H
Comp.
TrashRecycle
64
'
-
6
"
5'
-
0
"
4'
-
0
"
m
i
n
.
3'-6"5'-6"
10'-6"31'-10"
2"
42'-6"
10'-0" min.
2"32'-4"10'-0"
10'-0" min.
storage
(116 c.f.)
Indicates 20' x 20'
clear garage space
7'-6" Min. Clg. Height
Elect.
storage
(50 c.f.)
UP
17R
2'-0"4'-8"
2'
-
8
"
3'
-
6
"
7'
-
5
"
6'
-
0
"
3'
-
8
12"
4'-10"
3'-2"
Rear yard
400 s.f. Min.
w/ a 18' min. dim.
30'-6" x 18'-6"
564 s.f.
36'X36'
MIN. LEVEL
LANDING AT
EXTERIOR DOOR
5'-9" x 2'-8"
shelf 5'-0" above F.F.
for additional Storage
34 c.f.
Pantry
Micro/
Second Floor
1,126 s.f.
Bath
2
Bedroom 2
11'-6" x 11'-0"
Bedroom 3 /
Opt. Loft
11'-6" x 12'-5"
Laund.
W.I.C.
23'-3" l.f.
Primary
BathroomDr.Opt.
linen
DN
17R
Primary
Bedroom
14'-6" x 16'-3"
33'-4"
1'-6"31'-10"
42
'
-
6
"
3'
-
1
12"
22
'
-
4
"
15
'
-
6
12"
12'-512"14'-1"5'-312"6"
5'-6"
Opt. Loft
Bath
2
Loft
17'-6" x 12'-9"
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com N6 - A5.1.1
PLAN 2_UNIT PLANS
DUET
4 BEDROOMS
3 BATHS
1,944 S.F.
0 2 4 8
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
94
1
NTS
Light Fixture Unit Address
Entry Door
Composition Shingle Roof
3. Plan 1 Rear
Metal Railing
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
2. Plan 2 Front Right Corner
4. Plan 2 Rear Right Corner
Stucco
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten Siding
Entry Canopy
Fiber Cement
Lap Siding
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten Siding
Corbel
Light Fixture Unit Address
Metal Garage Door
Composition Shingle Roof
Metal Railing
Stucco
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten Siding
Trellis
Fiber Cement
Lap Siding
Corbel
Meter Cabinet Door
Stucco
Corbel
N6 - A6.0.0
ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS
TOWNHOUSE- A STYLE
1. Plan 1 Front Entrance
94
2
3. Plan 1 Rear
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
2. Plan 2 Front Right Corner
4. Plan 2 Rear Right Corner
Light Fixture Unit Address
Entry Door
Composition Shingle Roof
Metal Railing
Stucco
Entry Canopy
Fiber Cement Lap Siding
Bracket
Light Fixture Unit Address
Metal Garage Door
Composition Shingle Roof
Metal Railing
Stucco
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten Siding
Trellis
Fiber Cement Lap Siding
Meter Cabinet Door
Stucco
Bracket
N6 - A6.0.1
ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS
TOWNHOUSE- B STYLE
NTS
1. Plan 1 Front Entrance
94
3
1. DUET P1 & P1 _ A Style
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
2. DUET P1 & P1 _ A Style
4. DUET P1 & P1 _ B Style 3. DUET P1 & P1 _ B Style
Unit Address
Entry Door
Composition Shingle Roof
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten Siding
Fiber Cement Lap Siding
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten Siding
Composition Shingle Roof
Light Fixture
Stucco Metal Garage Door
Post
Unit Address
Stucco
Post
Entry Door
Composition Shingle Roof
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten Siding
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten Siding
Light Fixture
Metal Garage Door
Unit Address
Fiber Cement
Lap Siding
Post
Unit Address
Post
Fiber Cement
Lap Siding
Composition
Shingle Roof
Composition Shingle Roof
N6 - A6.1.0
ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS
DUET P1 & P1- A & B STYLE
NTS
94
4
1. DUET P1 & P2 _ A Style
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
2. DUET P1 & P2 _ A Style
4. DUET P1 & P2 _ B Style 3. DUET P1 & P2 _ B Style
Unit Address
Entry Door
Composition Shingle Roof
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten Siding
Fiber Cement Lap Siding
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten Siding
Composition Shingle Roof
Light Fixture
Stucco Metal Garage Door
Post
Unit Address
Stucco
Post
Entry Door
Fiber Cement
Board
and Batten Siding
Unit Address Entry Door
Composition Shingle Roof
Fiber Cement
Lap Siding
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten Siding
Composition Shingle Roof
Light Fixture
Fiber Cement
Lap Siding
Metal Garage Door
Post
Unit Address
Post
Entry Door
Fiber Cement
Board
and Batten Siding
Fiber Cement
Lap Siding
N6 - A6.1.1
ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS
DUET P1 & P2- A & B STYLE
NTS
94
5
1. DUET P2 & P2 _ A Style
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com
2. DUET P2 & P2 _ A Style
4. DUET P2 & P2 _ B Style 3. DUET P2 & P2 _ B Style
Unit Address
Composition Shingle Roof
Stucco
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten Siding
Composition Shingle Roof
Light Fixture
Stucco
Metal Garage Door
Post
Unit Address
Entry Door
Fiber Cement
Board
and Batten Siding
Stucco
Entry Door
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten
Siding
Post
Unit Address
Composition Shingle Roof
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten Siding
Composition Shingle Roof
Light Fixture
Metal Garage Door
Unit Address
Entry Door
Fiber Cement
Board
and Batten Siding
Entry Door
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten
Siding
PostPost
Fiber Cement
Board and Batten
Stucco
Stucco
N6 - A6.1.2
ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS
DUET P2 & P2- A & B STYLE
NTS
Stucco
94
6
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD 6Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com N6 - A7.0.0
MATERIAL COLOR SCHEME
94
7
07/15/202201/27/2023
N6-L3.1
01530 60
6
NEIGHBORHOOD 6 TYPICAL FRONT YARDS
Shade Tree
Acer rubrum ‘Armstrong’ , Red Maple
Tilia Cordata ‘ Green Spire’; Little Leaf Linden
Evergreen Tree
Accent Tree
Small Tree
07/15/202211/29/2022
94
8
PLANTING NOTE:
For lots that are adjacent to open space, or deemed a
“Fire Lot”, refer to the Diablo Firesafe Council list as
well as the approved plant list in the landscape design
guidelines for fire safe plants recommendations.
PLANTING NOTE:
For lots that are adj acent to op en sp ace, or deemed a
“Fire Lot”, refer to the Diablo Firesafe Council list as
well as the ap p roved p lant list in the landscap e desig n
g uidelines for fire safe p lants recommendations.
07/15/202201/27/2023
N6-L3.2
0 5 10 20
6
NEIGHBORHOOD 6 TYPICAL FRONT YARDS DUET
07/15/202211/29/2022
94
9
07/15/202201/27/2023
N6-L3.3
0 5 10 20
PLANTING NOTE:
For lots that are adjacent to open space, or deemed a
“Fire Lot”, refer to the Diablo Firesafe Council list as
well as the approved plant list in the landscape design
guidelines for fire safe plants recommendations.
6
NEIGHBORHOOD 6 TYPICAL FRONT YARDS TOWNHOUSE - 3PLEX & 4PLEX
TOWNHOUSE - 3PLEX TOWNHOUSE - 4PLEX
07/15/202211/29/2022
95
0
1
6
2
7 8
9
43
5
1
2
6
7
8
3
4
5
Decorative Orchard Trees
Seating Opportunities
Screen Trees
Screen Shrubs
Decomposed Granite Picnic Area
Park Primary Entry
Accent Tree, typ.
Decorative Split Rail Fence
Decorative Orchard Trees
Seating Opportunities
S creen Trees
Screen Shrubs
Decomp osed Granite Picnic Area
Park Primary Entry
Accent Tree, typ.
Decorative Split Rail Fence
07/15/202201/27/2023
N6-L3.4
0 5 10 20
6
NEIGHBORHOOD 6 TYPICAL FRONT YARDS AMENITY SPACE
07/15/202211/29/2022
95
1
ZERO LOT LINE
952
P/SP
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
OPEN SPACE
(BASIN)
OP
E
N
S
P
A
C
E
(
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
)
OPEN SPACE
(WETLAND)
OPEN SPACE
(BASIN)
BASIN
SE
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
S
E
R
I
E
S
O
F
B
A
S
I
N
S
LO
Y
A
L
T
O
N
R
O
A
D
PANORAMA DRIVE
T
A
B
L
E
M
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
S TERRACINA DR
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
CR
O
A
K
R
D
STREET A
STREET B
ST
R
E
E
T
J
STREET K
STREET L
ST
R
E
E
T
N
STREET O
STREET M
ST
R
E
E
T
S
ST
R
E
E
T
T
ST
R
E
E
T
C
ST
R
E
E
T
Y
ST
R
E
E
T
Z
COURT U
STREET V
STREET B
CENTRAL PARKWAY
CENTRAL PARKWAY STREET R
ST
R
E
E
T
X
ST
R
E
E
T
W
STREET Q
STREET P
CR
O
A
K
R
D
LOOP H
LOOP H
STREET G
STREET B
ST
R
E
E
T
I
STREET F
STREET E
STREET D
STREET A
COURT A
COURT B
COURT C
COURT E
COURT F
CO
U
R
T
G
COURT H
CO
U
R
T
I
CO
U
R
T
J
COURT KCOURT L
COURT S
COURT R
COURT QCOURT V
COURT U
COURT T
COURT M
CO
U
R
T
N
CO
U
R
T
O
CO
U
R
T
P
ST
R
E
E
T
C
STR
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
U
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
C
R
O
A
K
R
D
ST
R
E
E
T
T
STREET P
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE
ACCESS
ROAD
ACCESS
ROAD
PROPOSED
TRAIL
EVA/
ACCESS ROAD
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA 11/29/2022
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
NEIGHBORHOOD SUMMARY
NEIGHBORHOOD TYPICAL LOT
SIZE UNITS GROSS
ACREAGE (±)DENSITY
1 65'x100'99 30.1 3.3 DU/AC
2 55'x95'96 23.4 4.1 DU/AC
3 50'x110'85 19.5 4.5 DU/AC
4 49.5'x80'85 16.8 5.1 DU/AC
5 48'x70' Cluster 94 17.6 5.4 DU/AC
6 Attached Multi-Family 100 10.4 9.6 DU/AC
1, 2, 3, & 5 Zero-Lot Single Family
Units 14 N/A(1)
Croak Rd and Central
Pkwy Extension 8.0
TOTAL 573 125.8 4.5 du/ac
C.0
NOTE:
(1) GROSS ACREAGE FOR ZERO LOT PRODUCTS IS INCLUDED IN EACH INDIVIDUAL
NEIGHBORHOOD GROSS ACREAGE METRIC.
95
3
95
4
10
9
A/C PAD
A/C PAD
FOOTPRINT
P2
FOOTPRINT
P1
4'
4'
0'
10
'
5'
M
I
N
.
AV
G
.
1
0
'
18
'
EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/28/2022
ZERO LOT LINE
MINIMUM SETBACK EXHIBIT
N0-C.0
ZERO LOT LINE
NOMINAL LOT SIZE: 3360 SF
LOT COVERAGE: 55% MAX
NOTE: ALL SETBACK DIMENSIONS ARE
MINIMUMS AND NOT TO SCALE
300 SF total flat area with a minimum dimension of 8'.Yard area may be provided in more than one locationwithin a lot, with a minimum 80 SF yard or courtyardarea.
11/29/2022
95
5
LOT COVERAGE TABLE
N0-C.1EAST RANCH DUBLIN, CA
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
11/28/2022
ZERO LOT LINE
95
6
11/29/2022
957
EAST RANCH
LANDSCAPE MASTER PLAN
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA
JANUARY 2023
958
IntroductionSECTIONA
959
AEast Ranch Landscape Master Plan Introduction 3
Introduction
VISION
The East Ranch community sits in the hills adjacent to Croak Road in Dublin.
The land is approximately 165 acres that currently contains seasonal grasses and
views of the Dublin Valley. The pastoral setting inspires the simplistic California
Farmhouse character that will permeate the features of the community. The
proximity to the growing greater Dublin area is apparent but a rural feel is
maintained with the experience of Croak Road and the intentional landscape
palette. This community will emphasize getting outdoors and connecting with
nature. Multi-use trails, parks, and tree lined walkways will weave together the
neighborhoods in a integrated green network.
The landscape character defi nes the sense of place as refi ned yet rustic agrarian
California. Materials and elements such as native grasses, drought tolerant
planting, low stone walls and rhythmic planting patterns will embellish an
agrarian tone.
PURPOSE
This document provides guidelines and visual inspiration to the character,
style and implementation of the common open space parcels and streetscapes
throughout the project. The Figure below indicates areas included in the
purview of this landscape master plan. The Public Parks are not included in this
document.
d
960
AEast Ranch Landscape Master Plan Introduction 4
Note:
Refer to Stormwater Management
Plan in the VTM for any information
on the Stormwater Quality Basins
Neighborhood 1
65’X100’ Lot
Potential Future Site for
a DSRSD water tank.
Pocket Park
(Preliminary Location)
Neighborhood 3
50’x110’ Lot
91 Homes
Neighborhood 4
49.5’X80’
85 Homes
Neighborhood 6
Medium Density
100 Homes
Neighborhood 5
Motorcourts
98 Homes
Main Entrance
Secondary Entrance
SWQ2
SWQ3
SWQ1
2.0 Acres
Public Park
5.5 Acres
Public Park
Open Space
1.7 Acres
RR/A
19.5 Acres
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
CR
O
A
K
R
O
A
D
CENTRAL PKWY
Neighborhood 2
55’X95’ Lot
East - 53 Homes
West - 45 Homes
6.0 Acres
SWQ5
SWQ7
SWQ6
(includes 2 affordable units)
(includes 4 affordable units)
(includes 4 affordable units)
(includes 6 affordable units)
101 Homes
(includes 2 affordable units)
Public/
Semi-Public
Summary
Total Units: 573
Total Gross Acres: 125.8
THE PROJECT
The East Ranch site plan provides a mix of recreation opportunities including a
separated sidewalk pathway network, two public parks and open space.
961
StreetscapesBSECTION
962
BStreetscapes 6East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
HOA MAINTAINED LANDSCAPE AREAS
963
BStreetscapes 7East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Croak Road is the Main Spine of the East Ranch community. It serves at the greenbelt connection
between the Northern and Southern parks and trail network. The sloped edges emphasize the valley
of the roadway and contributes to the rural character. On the west side of Croak Road there is split rail
fence that serves to delineate the boundary between the right-of-way and the bioretention area.
Croak Road
12’ walk
Trench Grate
Parkway Strip
Open Space Trees:
- Quercus Agrifolia
- Aesculus Californica
- Schinus Molle
Street Tree
- Ulmus x ‘Frontier’
Stormwater Quality
Basin
Split Rail Fence
964
BStreetscapes 8East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Central Parkway transitions from a wider street section on its west edge which includes a landscape
median and separated sidewalks. At the roadway transitions into the neighborhood the travel lanes side
is reduced and bike lane continues.
Central Parkway Extensions
Scale: 1/16”= 1’-0”
Scale: 1/16”= 1’-0”
Central Parkway Extension: 92’ ROW
Central Parkway Extension: 59’ ROW
Scale: 1/16”= 1’-0”Central Parkway Extension: 64’ ROW
965
BStreetscapes 9East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Phase 2 Backbone Streets
Major Neighborhood Streets will provide a combination of monolithic and separated sidewalk
experiences with on-street parking and 10-foot travel lanes.
Scale: 1/16”= 1’-0”
Scale: 1/16”= 1’-0”
Scale: 1/16”= 1’-0”
Major Neighborhood Street: 61’ ROW
Major Neighborhood Street: 46’ ROW
Major Neighborhood Street (Medium Density Frontage): 56’ ROW
966
BStreetscapes 10East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Roundabouts
The roundabouts on Croak Road contribute to the overall landscape theme as well as anchor two main
entries into the community. The center of the roundabouts will have a circular planting area with low-
growing groundcover and ornamental grasses. Landscape boulders and public art can also be found here.
The median islands that help direct traffi c will include decorative pavers. These focal pieces will weave
together the agrarian aesthetic and tie-in the overall landscape palette of adapted plants and natural
materials. The roundabouts will work to slow through traffi c. At at intersections and pedestrian crossings,
adequate sight distance shall be provided. Landscaping at these areas shall not be taller than 30”, to keep
the sightlines clear of any obstructions.
Scale: 1” = 30’-0”
Shrubs and low
landscape boulders
Flowering Accent
Shrubs at Corners
Split Rail Fence
Split Rail Fence
Split Rail Fence
Conceptual Location
of Future Signage
Accent Trees
Accent Trees Concrete Apron
Permeable Pavers in
Median Islands
Stamped AC
Pedestrian Crossings
Bike On/Off Ramps
Bike On/Off Ramp
Future Public Park
967
BStreetscapes 11East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Main Community Entry
The Main Community Entry is the fi rst impression to the East Ranch Community. It is the formal
announcement of arrival to the East Ranch community. It transitions from journey to destination through
the design of the round-about. The setback at the arrival point creates an opportunity for landscape
emphasis and branding. The landscape palette designates importance and emphasis for this space. The
subtle character established here is carried throughout the rest of the spine and collector roads. This Main
Entry Road utilizes a separated sidewalk when possible to allow for safe pedestrian circulation. On- street
parking and street trees assist in buffering pedestrians from vehicular traffi c. Parkway strip will prioritize
low water use shrubs and trees.
Scale: 1” = 30’-0”
Scale: 1/16”= 1’-0”Section A: Entry Road: 59’ ROW
Flowering Shrubs
Landscape on Slope
Street Trees:
Quercus Suber
8’ Sidewalk
Low Retaining Wall
Entry Sign
Split Rail Fence
Public Park
Open Space Trees:
- Quercus Agrifolia
- Aesculus Californica
- Schinus Molle
968
BStreetscapes 12East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Secondary Community Entry
The Secondary Community Entry is found at the intersection of Central Parkway and Croak Road. This
entry corner greets visitors who are approaching from the south. This landscape area allows pedestrians
to traverse it by using the trail connection that winds its way up the slope. The setback at the arrival
point also creates an opportunity for landscape project branding. This Secondary Entry will have fl owering
groundcover planting along its perimeter edges as well as a split rail fence that fl anks the sidewalks. The
trees planted on the landscaped slope are to be in a natural confi guration and will be a mix of oaks and other
species native to the region.
Scale: N.T.S
Flowering Shrubs
Stormwater
Quality
Maintenance
Access Break in
Fence, 1 per basin
Flowering Shrubs
Landscape on Slope
Split Rail Fence
Trail Connection
Open Space Trees:
- Quercus Agrifolia
- Aesculus Californica
- Schinus Molle
Possible Entry
Sign Location
969
BStreetscapes 13East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
The Water Quality Basins that fl ank Croak Road, and line the southern property line will form the
southernmost edge of East Ranch. The plant material found within will take on a mosaic effect that
demonstrates the bloom and growth cycles of seasonal grasses in gentle patterns and large swaths. All
plant material found within the basins will conform with the Alameda County C.3 Stormwater Technical
guidelines and requirements.
Stormwater Quality Basins - No. 1
Bio Sod
Groundcover
Arctostaphylos
Densifl ora
Open Space Trees:
- Quercus Agrifolia
- Aesculus Californica
- Schinus Molle
Street Tree
(Pistacia chinensis - ‘Keith
Davey’ Chinese Pistache
Maintenance Access
Split Rail Fence
Wetland (by others)
970
BStreetscapes 14East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Stormwater Quality Basins - No. 2
Bio Sod
Groundcover
Flowering Shrubs
Arctostaphylos
Densifl ora
Ceanothus
‘Yankee Point’
Groundcover on Slope
Open Space Trees:
- Quercus Agrifolia
- Aesculus Californica
- Schinus Molle
Split Rail Fence
971
BStreetscapes 15East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Stormwater Quality Basins - No. 3
Scale: 1” = 40’-0”
Bio Sod
Bulbine Dietes Sidewalk
Split Rail Fence Good Neighbor Fence
8’ Walk
Flowering
Groundcover
Split Rail
Fence
Open Space Trees:
- Quercus Agrifolia
- Aesculus Californica
- Schinus Molle
Arctostaphylos
Densifl ora
972
BStreetscapes 16East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Utility Screening
Existing Screened Utility Box
Salerno Drive, Positano Development
Existing Screened Utility
Positano Parkway, Positano Development
P.G.&E. Pad Mounted PMH-4
Pad Size: 60.5” x 49”
Cabinet Size: 43”w x 57”d x 63”h
Utility Box Screening Plan
• Adapt grading to minimize the use of retaining walls. If retaining walls
are required limit height to 30” and construct with tan mansonry block
walls.
• Blend visually into setting with the use of landscaping while
maintaining required clearances.
P.G.&E Pad Mounted PMH-9
Pad Size: 80.5” x 88”
Cabinet Size: 82”w x 77”d x 67”h
973
Common Open SpaceCSECTION
974
CCommon Open Space 18East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Common Landscape Areas
This Pocket Park on Parcel O shall include a meandering walkway, a mounded turf area, benches, rock
out-croppings and balance log features that play into the rural and eclectic space in between homes and
walkway networks.
Parcel O Pocket Park
Concrete Walk
Bench Pad & Trash
Turf Mound
Balance Log
Climbing Boulder
Landscape Boulder
Pedestrian Light
Conceptual Site Plan
Scale: 1” = 40’-0”
975
CCommon Open Space 19East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
The pass-through connection at Parcel C to Panorama Drive, is designated to be pedestrian access only.
The path fi nal design and location has yet to be fi nalized. Options include a sloped walkway, a switch-
back style ramp, and a staircase. The landscape around the portion of the pathway inside of the GHAD
parcel will remain as-is. As the path enters Parcel C on East Ranch the landscape will transition to a more
intentional feel with low groundcover and accent shrubs, along with bioretention. Larger trees will also be
planted to visually signify the paths entry point.
Common Landscape Areas
Parcel C - Panorama Drive Connection
Scale: 1” = 60’-0”
Scale: 1” = 30’-0”
Existing view from Panorama DriveExisting view from Panorama Drive
Concrete Walk
Shade Tree
Oak Tree
Groundcover
Options:
Sloped Walkway
Ramp
Stairs
976
CCommon Open Space 20East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Fire Access Road
Common Landscape Areas
East Ranch has several open space pass-through parcels containing rustic footpaths that will allow entry to the fi re access road
along the project’s eastern edge. These parcels will be landscaped with fi re safe plant materials. The footpaths will be surfaced
with a gravel material that will be stabilized allowing vehicles to traverse it. The access points at the end of cul-de-sacs will
be bordered by a concrete split-rail fence allowing access to the fi re road on either side. Both the building and plant material
in these areas are to be fi re resistant.
Rustic Footpaths
Flowering
Groundcover
Rail Fence
Fire Access Road
Stabilized Gravel Bands
Screen Shrubs
Low Groundcover
Typical Conceptual Pass-through
Scale: 1” = 30’-0”Typical Cul-De-Sac Interface
Scale: 1” =60’-0”
Oak Trees
977
CCommon Open Space 21East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Common Landscape Areas
The sloped landscape area between Neighborhoods 1 and 2 will have a natural character with a planting design to prevent
erosion. Various groundcovers will help to stabilize the slope as well as informal tree clusters. Sporadic clumpings of
ornamental grasses will decorate the back of the sidewalk along with oak trees and accent trees.
Neighborhood 3 Slope
Overall Sloped Area at Neighborhood 3
Scale: 1” = 100’-0”
Overall Sloped Area at Neighborhood 3
Scale: 1” = 30’-0”
Oak Tree Clusters
Flowering Groundcovers
Accent Trees
Interior View Fence
Ornamental Grasses
978
CCommon Open Space 22East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Common Landscape Areas
Open Spaces areas within the GHAD that are graded will be hydroseeded to reduce erosion. All areas undisturbed will be left
in their natural state. Yearly maintenance will be required per GHAD guidelines.
GHAD
979
CCommon Open Space 23East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Park
Park
A
Pocket
Park
LEGEND
Maintenance Accessway
Wildfire Lots Adjacent to Open Space (Lots subject
to City’s Wildfire Management Plan)
Wildfire Lots Adjacent to Undeveloped Land
(Lots adjacent to undeveloped land may not be
subject to the Wildfire Management Ordinance if
the adjacent properties receive approval of a ten-
tative map, master tentative map or Development
Agreement. )SECTION A - RESIDENTIAL BACKYARD AT OPEN SPACE
Common Landscape Areas
Geological Hazard Abatement District (GHAD) to own and maintain improvements and landscape within the wildfi re
management area. GHAD assessments will fund this maintenance.
Fire safe plants and materials is required to use within the Wildfi re Manage Area. Seasonal mowing and trimming maintenance
shall be performed within this area, by the GHAD.
Wildfi re Management Plan
980
Materials + DetailsDSECTION
981
DMaterials + Details 25East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Park
Pocket
Park
Park
SWQ3
SWQ2
SWQ1
SWQ8
Legend
Metal View Fence
Interior View Fence
Barbed Wire Fence
Concrete Split Rail Fence
Wildfire Lots Adjacent to Open Space
Wildfire Lots Adjacent to Future Developed Land
Fencing Plan
Design Concept
The neighborhood landscape system includes community theme fencing
(good neighbor, split rail, view and open space), front yard planting. All
elements of the landscape are intended to convey the special character and
high quality of the community.
Breaks in fence, removable sections, or gates will occur for maintenance
access of adjacent bioretention where applicable. Fences will be located
outside of the view triangles at intersections.
Scale: 1” = 500’
982
DMaterials + Details 26East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Site Walls + Fences
CMU Retaining Wall Scale: 3/8”=1’
Location:
Used throughout the community in between lots or where needed to retain.
Location:
Occurs in the landscape along sidewalks and roadways in varying locations serving
as a thematic element.
Concrete Split Rail Fence Scale: N.T.S.
CMU Block
MFR: GS2 Block
983
DMaterials + Details 27East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Site Walls + Fences
Interior View Fence Scale: 3/8”=1’
Location:
Occurs along rear yards abutting Croak Road on the west side.
Metal T-Post Braided and Smooth
wire to be 12-1/2” guage
10’-0” MAX
BETWEEN T-POSTS 6”
6’-0”1’-6”
1’-6”
1’-6”
Barbed Wire Fence Scale: N.T.S.
Location:
Located along the eastern property line.
984
DMaterials + Details 28East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Location:
Occurs along rear yards where they abut open space. Also may be used
when the elevation between rear yards is greater than 20’.
Location:
Occurs along switch-back trail leading to Panoramo Drive. Guard rail shall
be placed along the low side of the walk adjacent to the slope down, see
sheet C-19 for more info.
Metal View Fence Scale: 3/8”=1’
Metal Guard Rail Scale: 3/8”=1’
985
DMaterials + Details 29East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Ground Plane Materials
STAMPED ASPHALT
•Manufacturer: Asphalt Impressions
•Product: Streetprint
•Model: 12” Tile & Stacked Brick
•Color: Concrete Grey
CONCRETE PAVERS (IN MEDIANS)
•Manufacturer: Calstone
•Product: Narrow Joint Permeable Pavers
•Model: 6”x9”x3 1/8”
•Color: Oak Barrel Gray
RAIL FENCE
•Manufacturer: American Precast
•Product: Woodcrete Rails
•Model: 3 Rail Fence
•Color: Southern Blush
TRENCH GRATES
•Manufacturer: Iron Age
•Product: 12” Wide Trench Grate
•Model: Ground Swell
•Color: Cast Iron
986
DMaterials + Details 30East Ranch Landscape Master Plan
Lighting
STREET LIGHTS
All street lighting in East Ranch will conform to
approved City standards. Street lighting is directional
guidance well as to indicate areas of emphasis.
•The Lumec L60 LED Hexagonal Lantern series
on 18.5’ tall post is recommended, to match the
current City’s standard.
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTS
All lighting in East Ranch will conform to approved
City standards. Pedestrian scale lighting is used for
decoration as well as to mark special pathways and
landmarks.
•The Lumec L60 LED Hexagonal Lantern series on
12’ tall post is recommended, to match the current
City’s standard.
BOLLARD LIGHTS
All lighting in East Ranch will conform to approved City
standards. Bollard lighting is used for safety and path of
travel indication.
•The Lumec Domus Bollard Small DOSB1 is
recommended in a colro matching street and
pedestrian lighting.
987
Landscape PaletteESECTION
988
Landscape Palette 32East Ranch Landscape Master Plan E
Park
Pocket
Park
Park
Street trees to
match existing
Central Pkwy
Streetscape.
Enhanced Open Space
Mix Tree Species shoud
be fire safe along the fire
lots. Typ.
Trees in Enhanced Open
Space Mix along the the
street shall be the species
that was selected under
the Dublin Master Plan
list.
SWQ6
SWQ7
SWQ8
SWQ1
SWQ5
SWQ2
SWQ3 SWQ4 Scale: 1” = 500’
Legend
Ulmus x ‘Frontier’Frontier Hybrid Elm
Acer rubrum ‘Armstrong’Red Maple
Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak (Fire Safe)
Tilia Cordata ‘Green Spire’Little Leaf Linden
Prunus x yedoensis ‘Akebono’ Yoshino Cherry
Lagerstroemia x ‘Natchez’Crepe Myrtle
Enhanced Open Space Mix
Design Concept
The street trees patterns and structure will be use to emphasize
entries, create edges, provide privacy, and integrate open space.
All street trees and enhanced open space mix trees along fi re lots
are to be comprised of fi re safe varieties
Street Tree Plan
989
Landscape Palette 33East Ranch Landscape Master Plan E
Street Trees
Ulmus x ‘Frontier’ - Frontier Hybrid Elm
Acer rubrum ‘Armstrong’ - Red Maple Tilia Cordata ‘Green Spire’ - Little Leaf Linden
Prunus x yedoensis ‘akebono‘ - Yoshino CherryQuercus agrifolia - Coast Live Oak (Fire Safe)
Lagerstroemia indica x fauriei ‘Natchez’ - Natchez Crapte Myrtle
Street trees will be deciduous to demonstrate the seasons and patterns of nature. The street trees will be used to defi ne the
neighborhoods. Use fi re safe plant species along the fi re lot.
990
Landscape Palette 34East Ranch Landscape Master Plan E
STREET TREES The following street tree species are listed within the Dublin Streetscape Master Plan.
BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME EVERGREEN DECIDUOUS RECLAIMED
WATER
WUCOLS FIRE
SAFE
Acer rubrum ‘Armstrong‘Red Maple x M
Lagerstroemia indica ‘Natchez’Crape Myrtle x x L
Ulmus x ‘Frontier’Frontier Hybrid Elm xxL
Prunus x yedoensis ‘akebono‘Yoshino Cherry x M
Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak x x VL x
Tilia cordata Little leaf Linden x M
ACCENT TREES
BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME EVERGREEN DECIDUOUS RECLAIMED
WATER
WUCOLS FIRE SAFE
Arbutus unedo Strawberry Tree x x L x
Acer buergerianum Triden Maple x M
Acer palmatum Japanese maple x M
Albizia julibrissin Persian silk tree x L
Cercis canadensis Eastern Redbud x M
Chitalpa tashkentensis Chitalpa x x L
Citrus Citrus x x M x
Cotinus coggygria Smoke Tree x L
Ginkgo biloba Maidenhair Tree x x M
Lagerstroemia indica Crape Myrtle x L
Laurus nobilis Sweet Bay x L
Melaleuca linariifolia Flaxleaf paperbark x x L
Olea europaea Olive (non-fruiting)x x V L
Punica granatum Pomegranate x L x
Prunus sargentii Sargent Cherry x M x
Quercus lobata Valley Oak x x L
991
Landscape Palette 35East Ranch Landscape Master Plan E
RESIDENTIAL SCREENING TREES
ENHANCED OPEN SPACE TREES
BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME EVERGREEN DECIDUOUS RECYCLED
WATER
WUCOLS FIRE
SAFE
Carpinus betulus European Hornbeam x M
Dodonaea viscosa Hopseed Bush x x L
Garrya elliptica Silk tassel tree x L
Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon x x L
Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia x M
Metrosideros excelsa New Zealand Christmas Tree x x L x
Nyssa sylvatica Sour Gum x M
Prunus caroliniana Carolina Laurel Cherry x (may be salt
sensitive)
Lx
Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas Fir x L
Rhamnus alaternus Italian Buckthorn x L x
Rhus lancea African sumac x L x
Xylosma congestum Shiny xylosma x x L
BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME EVERGREEN DECIDUOUS RECLAIMED
WATER
WUCOLS FIRE
SAFE
Aesculus californica California Buckeye x VL x
Arctostaphylos manzanita Manzanita x VL
Callistemon viminalis Bottlebrush x x L x
Cercis occidentalis Western Redbud x VL x
Geijera parviflora Australian Willow x M
Gleditsia triacanthos Honey Locust x x L
Olea europaea Olive (non-fruiting)x x VL
Platanus racemosa California Sycamore x M
Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak x x VL x
Quercus robur fastigiata English Oak x x M
Quercus suber Cork Oak x x L
Schinus molle California Pepper Tree x x VL x
Umbellularia californica California Bay x M
992
Landscape Palette 36East Ranch Landscape Master Plan E
ACCENT SHRUBS
TALL SHRUBS
Plants should be selected and spaced appropriately to ensure mature and healthy growth. A variety of fl owering, variegated,
and evergreen shrubs should be mixed to maintain visual interest and seasonal diversity.
BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME RECYCLED
WATER
DEER
RESISTANT
WUCOLS FIRE SAFE
Agapanthus spp. Lily of the Nile x x M x
Agave spp.Agave x L x
Aloe striata Carol Aloe x x L
Anigozanthos spp.Kangaroo Paw x L
Buxus microphylla var. japonica Japanese Boxwood x M
Bulbine frutescens Stalked Bulbine x L
Coreopsis spp.Coreopsis x x L
Dasylirion wheeleri Spoon Yucca x VL
Dianella tasmanica Tasman Flax Lily x M
Hemerocallis Day Lily x M x
Hesperaloe parviflora Red Yucca x L x
Heuchera spp.Coral Bells M x
Iris douglasiona Pacific Coast Iris x L x
Kniphofia uvaria Devil’s Poker/ Red Hot Poker x L x
Lantana spp.Lantana x x L x
Liriope muscari Lily Turf x M
Penstemon spp.Penstemon x M
Teucrium chamaedrys Germander x L
Tulbaghia violacea Society Garlic x L x
Verbena Verbena x L
BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME RECYCLED
WATER
DEER
RESISTANT
WUCOLS FIRE SAFE
Abelia spp.Abelia x M
Arbutus unedo ‘Compacta’Compact Strawberry Bush x L x
Arctostaphylos Manzanita L
Buddleia davidii Butterfly Bush x M
Camellia japonica Japanese Camelia x M
Carpenteria californica Bush Anemore x M
Euonymus japonica Spindle Tree x L
Feijoa sellowiana Pineapple Guava M x
Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon x L
Lavatera maritima Tree Mallow x L
Ligustrum texanum Waxleaf Privet x x M x
Loropetalum chinensis Chinese Fringe Flower x L
Myrica californica Wax Myrtle x x M x
Myrsine africana African Boxwood L
Nerium oleander Dwarf Pink Oleander x x L x
Prostanthera ovalifolia Mint Bush x L
Rhamnus californica Coffeeberry x x L x
Ribes spp.Currant x x L x
993
Landscape Palette 37East Ranch Landscape Master Plan E
Plants should be selected and spaced appropriately to ensure mature and healthy growth. A variety of fl owering, variegated,
and evergreen shrubs should be mixed to maintain visual interest and seasonal diversity.
MEDIUM SHRUBS
GRASSES
BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME RECYCLED
WATER
DEER
RESISTANT
WUCOLS FIRE SAFE
Bouteloua gracilis Blue Grama Grass x x L
Calamagrostis Karl Foerster feather reed grasses x x M
Carex spp.Sedge x x M
Chondropetalum tectorum Small Cape Rush x L
Festuca spp.Fescue x L
Helictotrichon sempervirens Blue Oat Grass x x L
Juncus patens California Gray Rush x L
Leymus condensatus `canyon prince`Canyon Prince Wild Rye x x L
Lomandra longifolia Dwarf Mat Rush x L
Muhlenbergia spp.Muhly x L
Pennisetum alopecuroides Dwarf Fountain Grass x x L
Pennisetum setaceum ‘Rubrum’Red Fountain Grass x x L
BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME RECYCLED
WATER
DEER
RESISTANT
WUCOLS FIRE SAFE
Asparagus densiflorus ‘Myers’Foxtail Fern x M
Callistemon ‘Little John’Dwarf Cottlebrush x L x
Cistus spp.Rock Rose x L x
Coleonema spp.Breath of Heaven x M
Dietes spp.Fortnight Lily x L x
Epilobium canum California Fuchsia x L
Escallonia Escallonia x M
Euphorbia rigida Silver Spurge x L
Grevillea ‘Noelii’Grevillea x L
Myrtus communis ‘Compacta’Dwarf Myrtle x L
Nandina spp.Nandina/Heavenly Bamboo x x L
Nepeta x faassenii Catmint x L
Nephrolepis cordifolia ’California’California Fern M
Nerium oleander ‘Petite’Oleander x L x
Olea europaea ‘Montra’Little Ollie x x VL
Perovskia atriplicifolia Russian Sage x L
Phormium tenax sp.New Zealand Flax x L
Pittosporum tobira Dwarf Mock Orange x L x
Rhaphiolepsis indica Indian Hawthorn x L
Salvia spp. Sage x x L
Teucrium fructicans Bush Germander x L
Sedum spp.Stonecrop x L x
Viburnum tinus compacta Viburnum x M
Westringia fruticosa Coast Rosemary x x L
994
Landscape Palette 38East Ranch Landscape Master Plan E
Plants play an important role in the function of landscape-based stormwater treatment measures. Refer to Alameda
Countywide Clean Water Program for more plants suitable for use in stormwater treatment measures.
TREES in Stormwater Treatment Area
SHRUBS & GRASSES in Stormwater Treatment Area
BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME EVER-
GREEN
CA
NATIVE
DROUGHT
TOLERANT
WUCOLS FIRE
SAFE
Achillea millefolium Common Yarrow x x L x
Arctostaphylos densiflora ‘McMinn’Manzanita ‘McMinn x x x L
Arctostaphylos ’Emerald Carpet’Manzanita ‘Emerald Carpet’ x x x M
Baccharis pilularis ‘Twin Peaks’Coyote Brush Prostrate x x x L
Ceanothus spp.Ceanothus x x L
Chondropetalum tectorum Cape Rush x x L
Deschampsia cespitosa Tufted Hairgrass x x L
Juncus patens Blue Rush x x x L
Leymus triticoides Creeping Wildrye x x x L
Limonium perezii Sea Lavender x x L
Lotus scoparius Deerweed x x VL
Mimulus aurantiacus Common Monkeyflower x x VL
Muhlenbergia rigens Deergrass x x x L
Nepeta spp Catmint x L
Sisyrinchium bellum Blue-eyed Grass x x x VL x
Zauschneria californica California Fuchsia x x x L x
BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME EVER-
GREEN
CA
NATIVE
DROUGHT
TOLERANT
WUCOLS FIRE
SAFE
Cercis occidentalis Redbud x x H
Lagerstroemia spp.Crape Myrtle x L
Koelreuteria paniculata Goldenrain Tree x M
Nyssa sylvatica Sour Gum x M
Platanus acerifolia ‘Columbia’London Plane Tree x M
Platanus racemosa California sycamore x x M
Quercus agrifolia California live oak x x x VL x
995
Landscape Palette 39East Ranch Landscape Master Plan E
Recommended shrubs and groundcover are non-invasive and suited to the site. Plants with similar watering needs should be
planted together to prevent under or over watering.
GROUNDCOVER
VINES
BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME RECYCLED
WATER
DEER
RESISTANT
WUCOLS FIRE SAFE
Acacia redolens Acacia x x VL
Achillea millefolium Yarrow Lx
Baccharis pilularis Coyote Brush x L
Ceanothus griseus California Lilac x L
Correa spp.Australian Fuchsia x L
Cotoneaster dammeri Bearberry Cotoneaster x x L x
Coprosoma kirkii ‘Verde Vista’Prostate Mirror Plant x L
Dymondia margaretae Silver Carpet x L x
Erigeron glaucus ‘Sea Breeze’Seaside Daisy)x L
Erigeron karvinskianus Santa Barbara Daisy L x
Gazania spp.Gazania x M x
Geranium spp. Hardy Scented Geramium x M
Juniperus spp.Juniper x L
Limonium perezii Sea Lavender x L x
Myoporum parvifolium Myoporum x L x
Pelargonium peltatum Ivy Geramium x L x
Pyracantha coccinea Scarlet Firethorn x L
Oenothera speciosa childsii Mexican Evening Primrose x L
Osteospermum fruticosum African Daisy x L x
Rosa ‘Carpet Rose’Carpet Rose x x M
Rosmarinus spp.Rosemary x x L
Senecio serpens Blue Chalk Sticks L x
Stachys byzantina Lamb’s Ears x L
Trachelospermum jasminoides Star Jasmine x x M x
Vinca minor Periwinkle M x
BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME RECYCLED
WATER
DEER
RESISTANT
WUCOLS FIRE SAFE
Bougainvillea spp.Bougainvillea x L
Ficus pumila Creeping Fig x M
Hardenbergia violacea Purple Vine Lilac M
Jasminum spp.Jasmine x M / L
Lonicera japonica Honeysuckle M
Parthenocissus quinquefolia Virginia Creeper x M
Solanum jasminoides Potato Vine M x
Wisteria sinensis Wisteria x M
996
26