No preview available
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