*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
777
[ [ [
[
[
[
[
[
[ [ [
[
[
[[[
[
[
[ [ [ [
[ [ [ [ [ [ [
[
[
[
[
[
[
[ [
[
[
[
[
[
[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[ [
[
[ [ [ [ [
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
PW-127-3
Locus 1
Barn
V ehicle 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 RECREATION
SKETCH MAP
Primary #
HRI #
Trinomial:
*Drawn By: N.Fino
Resource Name or # (Assigned by Recorder): PW-127-3
*Date: 5/17/2019
778
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*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 The original barn doors on the west -facing side have been replaced by modern, roll -up utility doors.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 singl e-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 landsca ped 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.
779
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*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; USG S 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 B arn, 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 agricu ltural 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 significa nce 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 20 th 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
780
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*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 immedi ate landscape since 1968. However, the feeling and association have changed, as the complex is used for storag e 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, althoug h 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 FrameFinde r 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 Aer ial 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).
781
DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*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, Oa kland, 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, Cal ifornia. 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.
782
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*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.
783
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*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.
784
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*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.
785
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*Recorded by: P. Zingerella *Date: November 2018 Continuation Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
House 2, facing northeast.
Shed, facing north.
786
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*Recorded by: P. Zingerella *Date: November 2018 Continuation Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information
Shed, facing northeast.
Modern chickencoup, facing northwest.
787
City of Dublin Branaugh Property Stage 2 Planned Development Initial Study | Appendices
Appendix G
Branaugh Property Trip Generation Comparison Technical Memorandum
788
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
789
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 790
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.
791
Reso. No. 23-01, Item 6.1, Adopted 02/14/2023 Page 1 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. 23 – 01
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 acr es designated Industrial Park. Requested approvals include a mendments 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
792
Reso. No. 23-01, Item 6.1, Adopted 02/14/2023 Page 2 of 3 WHEREAS, p rior 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 A ddendum 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 si gnificant 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, includ ing 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.
793
Reso. No. 23-01, Item 6.1, Adopted 02/14/2023 Page 3 of 3 BE IT FURTHE R 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 14th day of February 2023, by the following vote:
AYES: AINI, GRIER, THALBLUM, TYLER, WRIGHT
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
______________________________
Community Development Director
794
Branaugh Property
City Council
March 7, 2023
795
Project Location
Alameda
County
City of
Dublin
City of
Livermore
City of
Pleasanton
I‐580
Fallon Road
796
Proposed Project
3 9.87 acres
797
Project Applications
4 • Planned Development Rezone
― Stage 1 Development Plan Amendment (Ordinance No. 32-05) ― Stage 2 Development Plan
• Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
• Development Agreement
798
Vesting T entative Parcel Map
5 799
Planned Development Rezone
• Existing PD Ordinance No. 32-05
• Stage 1 Development Plan Amendment
• Stage 2 Development Plan
― Development Standards
― Architectural Standards
― Landscaping
― Inclusionary Housing
6 800
PD- Development Standards
7 Residential:
• Single Family and Attached Multi-family
• Setbacks, lot coverage, parking, etc.
• Height Limit – 35 feet (SFR) and 40 feet (MFR)
Industrial:
• Setbacks, floor area ratio (FAR), parking, etc.
― .40 FAR for warehousing uses and .35 FAR for all other uses • Height Limit – 35 feet
801
PD - Architectural Styles
802
PD –Landscape Guidelines
803
Development Agreement
• Project Grading / Dublin Boulevard Extension
• Affordable Housing
• Right-of-Way Dedications
• Community Facilities District
– Mitigation Impacts of Dublin Boulevard Extension
– Service and Maintenance of Public Improvements
• Eastern Dublin Impact Fee Credits
• Floor Area Ratio Flexibility
• Land Use Amendments
804
Environmental Review
• Prior CEQA Analysis
– Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan EIR (1993)
– East Dublin Properties Stage 1 Development Plan and
Annexation Supplemental EIR (2002)
– Fallon Village Supplemental EIR (2005)
• Addendum
– Equal or Less Severe Impacts
805
Planning Commission Review
• February 14, 2023
• Resolution No. 23-01
― Recommended Approval
806
Recommendation
Conduct the public hearing, deliberate and take the following actions:
1) Waive the reading and INTRODUCE an Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map and Approving Amendments to Planned Development Ordinance No. 32-05 for Fallon Village and Approving a Planned Development Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan for the Branaugh Property;
2) Adopt a Resolution Approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 9306 for the Branaugh Property; and
3) Waive the reading and INTRODUCE an Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement Between the City of Dublin and BEX Development Related to the Branaugh Property Project.
807
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
Agenda Item 8.1
DATE: March 7, 2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT: Designation of Agency Labor Negotiators for Unrepresented Employees: City Manager and City Attorney
Prepared by: Marsha Moore, MMC, City Clerk
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The City Council will consider the appointment of two Councilmembers as representatives for the City Manager’s annual review and performance evaluation, including discussion of compensation matters, and two Councilmembers as representatives for the City Attorney’s annual review and performance evaluation, including discussion of compensation matters.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Appoint two Councilmembers as representatives for the City Manager’s annual review and performance evaluation, including discussion of compensation, and appoint two Councilmembers as representatives for the City Attorney’s annual review and performance evaluation, including discussion of compensation.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None.
DESCRIPTION:
The Brown Act allows the City Council to meet in closed session to discuss the performance of employees that report to the City Council. Additionally, it allows the City Council to meet in closed session with its designated representatives – usually referred to as “labor negotiators” – to discuss the compensation of such employees. Any final action on the proposed compensation must be taken in open session.
The City Council will consider and discuss the appointment of two Councilmembers to serve as the City’s representatives for the City Manager’s annual review and performance evaluation including discussion of compensation, and two Councilmembers as the City’s representatives in the 808
performance evaluation process and in labor negotiations with the City Attorney.
It has been the City’s custom for many years to appoint the labor negotiators prior to reviewing the City Manager’s and City Attorney’s performance. Doing so allows the negotiators to have compensation discussions with the City Manager and City Attorney during or after the review process. At the end of the process, the representatives will report their recommendations to the City Council in open session. The last time such committees were convened was 2022; the two designated labor negotiators for the City Manager were Vice Mayor McCorriston and Councilmember Josey, and the two designated labor negotiators for the City Attorney were Mayor Hernandez and Councilmember Hu.
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:
None.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:
The City Council Agenda was posted.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
809