Pleasanton BART
Existing Physical Site Conditions Opportunities and Constraints Evaluation Oct 16, 2025
17 4. BART’s Basis of Design Criteria
The Basis of Design Criteria memo prepared by BART is included the appendix section of this document (Section 7.c.). These criteria are intended to provide the development team selected in the future with information to develop a comprehensive and project specific Basis of Design and Maintenance Responsibility Matrix. This matrix will be submitted and reviewed by BART to communicate how the development intends to address the operational and design needs of the District. This memo is only an initial statement of criteria- a full list of future will result from site specific field and technical investigations.
The memo covers process-related items and includes criteria under the following headings. A summary of notable criteria is listed below:
• Utilities
o This section sets out criteria for existing, new and relocated utilities, as well as grading and site lighting. It also references other BART standards and permits for adherence.
• Structural Design for Buildings
o This section sets out structural design criteria for any new development and improvements, and references other BART standards, Building and Engineering Codes.
• Station Maintenance and Access
o This section provides specific parameters for service and maintenance access to BART facilities on site. A few key ones that will impact the development footprint and site circulation are reiterated below:
▪ A clearance of at least 10’ to be maintained around the perimeter of all BART structures (including electrical and irrigation facilities). ▪ Service access and loading (along with 2-4 parking stalls) must be provided for the utility housing along the northwest edge of the site.
▪ A clearance of at least 50’ to be maintained around the perimeter of the traction power building at the northeast corner of the site.
o This section provides parameters for station access by BART riders, with a special focus on ADA access.
• Safety and Security
o This section provides helpful reminders around design, identification and signage for emergency access and maintenance areas. It also references CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) principles to be integrated into the design of any new buildings.
• Fire Protection
o This section lists all applicable safety standards for new buildings on BART property.
DRAFT
Pleasanton BART
Existing Physical Site Conditions Opportunities and Constraints Evaluation Oct 16, 2025
18 5. Development Opportunities & Constraints
a. Development potential of the Site
[OPPORTUNITY]
i. High development capacity
The site has multiple density thresholds defined by different regulations/stakeholders.
Considering typical development densities, it could yield up to 1,200-1,300 new units.
ii. Change in site circulation pattern
Based on conversations with BART and City staff and site analysis undertaken thus far, and in keeping with BART’s adopted Station Access Policy and MADG, there is appetite to change the vehicular circulation for this site with respect to the location of drop-offs/pick-ups, bus stops and parking access, with the goal of enhancing the rider experience, increasing pedestrian/bike activity, and reducing the impact of vehicular traffic on the site. However, an accessible drop-off zone that meets Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) should be maintained as close to the station entry as needed. There is significant interest and opportunity to improve pedestrian access to and through the site and to the station entry.
iii. Reduction in BART rider parking usage
The COVID-19 pandemic severely impacted public transit ridership across the nation. The BART system has been slow to recapture the lost ridership and today has a daily ridership of about half that of the pre-pandemic volumes, although BART has been experiencing a consistent 5% growth in ridership in each of the last two years.
This provides an opportunity to plan for reduced BART parking demand as part of any new development. Also, BART staff have expressed the need to consolidate their parking in a single location for ease of access, circulation and management.
There is also the potential to explore maximizing significant existing BART parking infrastructure on the Dublin side of the station. Given the site’s location and likelihood that it will continue to be a “drive to” station for many commuters, maintaining some an appropriate number of on-site rider parking is desirable.
iv. Fire access
Also, fire department access will be required around any new buildings. Alternatives for fire access, and potential limitations on building heights and/or frontage design due to available LPFD equipment will require consultation with the Livermore-Pleasanton Fire Department (LPFD).
v. Service Vehicle access
Site access and circulation will also need to consider the requirements of BART maintenance vehicle and Treasury vehicle access. Maintenance access requirements are laid out in the Basis of Design Criteria memo (section 7.c of this document).
The BART Treasury truck enters the station from the Dublin side via DeMarcus Blvd and departs from the Pleasanton side via Owens Dr. While on site, this truck is usually parked in front of the station entrance for servicing (~30 minutes). The Treasure truck services the station three days a week between 7.30-8.00am.
DRAFT
Pleasanton BART
Existing Physical Site Conditions Opportunities and Constraints Evaluation Oct 16, 2025
19 b. Owens Dr Street Frontage
[OPPORTUNITY]
Based on preliminary discussions with City staff, a road diet (reduction in the number and/ or width of the lanes) may be acceptable for the Owens Drive frontage along the project site.
This would be helpful in siting drop-offs and maximizing the developable area in the site, as well as providing street parking and improving the bike facility along this frontage.
c. Access to adjacent canals
[CONSTRAINT]
The project site is adjacent to the Chabot canal on the west and the Hewlett canal on the east.
Both infrastructure pieces are managed by the Alameda County Zone 7 Water Agency, which needs to be able to access both areas for maintenance. BART has negotiated access easements with Zone 7 which may be relocated as part of the Concept Plan. See existing conditions basemap for current location.
d. Kinder Morgan Gas Line
[CONSTRAINT]
A high-pressure jet fuel petroleum pipeline operated by Kinder Morgan Energy Partners runs alongside the Iron Horse trail. While there is a generous 100’ easement (the original Southern Pacific Pipe Line Company’s federal right of way that is currently managed by Kinder Morgan). for this line, it is still within the project site. During past projects in the city that were also close to this gas pipeline, concerns were raised about building housing close to it. Given these concerns, it is of critical importance for any future development team to be cognizant of the easement and making sure no encroachment occurs. Where possible, it may be appropriate to maintain a wider berth than the easement requires. However, building and safety codes do not limit residential development beyond the easement.
e. Proximity to Freeway
[CONSTRAINT]
Since the project site is directly south of the busy I-580 freeway, it is important to consider the impact of traffic emissions and noise on any new development. The following strategies are a starting point to help address these issues:
• Vegetation for pollution dispersion, especially along the north portion of the site • Physical layout of internal streets to promote air flow and pollutant dispersion. • Thoughtful siting of any proposed outdoor spaces.
• Sound wall improvements to the freeway itself- especially considering more housing may be built on sites adjacent to it.
• Windows in any new development to be selected with appropriate rating to minimize air leakage and control condensation.
• Mechanical systems in any new development to have high efficiency indoor filtration.
Selecting the right strategies will require further investigation during the development process. Noise and air quality concerns, while not studied as part of this report, can be overcome with relatively standard technology.
DRAFT
Pleasanton BART
Existing Physical Site Conditions Opportunities and Constraints Evaluation Oct 16, 2025
20 f. Planned infrastructure improvements
[OPPORTUNITY/CONSTRAINT]
i. Iron Horse Trail upgrades
Any new development will need to incorporate the planned improvements to the Iron Horse Trail segment that runs through the project site. See section 1.c.i. of this memo for the scope of the improvements.
ii. Valley Link line and station
The station concept plan will factor in the planned Valley Link line and station as an existing condition. It is crucial for any new development to maintain the anticipated temporary construction easement that would be necessary during the construction of the station and line.
This anticipated easement is shown in the exhibit below.
g. Adjacent Housing development
[OPPORTUNITY]
i. The Galloway Apartments
Across Owens Dr is another TOD project, The Galloway Apartments (site area 8.42 Ac, density ~30DU/Ac) that was completed in 2017. Having a completed project in the immediate context is helpful and shows what the lower end of the allowed density on the project site looks like. This project also has a modified street frontage along Owens Dr that is a good reference for potential similar improvements on the north side.
Figure 0-1: Basemap with planned infrastructure upgrades overlaid DRAFT
Pleasanton BART
Existing Physical Site Conditions Opportunities and Constraints Evaluation Oct 16, 2025
21 ii. Oracle site
The Oracle site is immediately east of the BART
site and has been identified as a housing site in
the 2023-2031Housing Element update. Of the
total site area of 20.61 acres, three vacant acres
on the western side, across from the BART
parcel could be developed with housing. It is
estimated that between 150 and 225 units could
be developed on this site, with the density
ranging from 50-75 DU/ Ac.
The remainder of the site currently consists of
two five-story office buildings and a four-level
parking structure.
h. Other proposed projects nearby
[OPPORTUNITY]
i. Visit Tri-Valley event center
Visit Tri-Valley is in negotiations with the
City of Dublin and Alameda County to
develop a new multiuse event center on
county land just north of the BART
station in Dublin. The facility is intended
to boost local tourism, increase visitor
spending, and create new opportunities
for local businesses. Programming
includes year-round events, including
major sports tournaments, corporate
gatherings, and entertainment shows.
This could generate interesting
adjacencies and help shape the
program for this station concept plan
with respect to non-residential uses.
It is assumed that the event center will likely rely on the recently constructed 507-space Dublin transit center parking garage (also operated by the county), and not the BART garage on the Dublin side. The availability of this county garage for any BART overflow parking will require further analysis.
Figure 0-2: Aerial view of the Oracle site from the 2023- 2031 Housing Element. Hatching represents the 3 acre
portion for development, precise location and size to be determined.
Figure 0-3: Map from the Visit Tri-Valley website showing the location of the proposed event center.
DRAFT
Pleasanton BART
Existing Physical Site Conditions Opportunities and Constraints Evaluation Oct 16, 2025
22 6. Key Takeaways
a. Determining project density and affordability
While the ranges of allowable residential density for this site vary between jurisdictions, the actual density and number of units will be determined by market conditions, feasibility, and the building code. The number of affordable units and their level of affordability will need to be determined carefully (by any future developer selected for this site) to meet BART minimums (which are higher than the City’s requirements and BART's goals.
b. Determining development and BART rider parking requirements
Applicable state laws such as AB 2097 effectively eliminate minimum parking requirements for developments within 0.5mi of a major transit stop (such as a BART station). AB 2923 and MTC policy set a maximum residential parking ratio of 1:1.
Based on estimated demand for BART rider parking spaces, there appear to be more BART parking spaces available on the Dublin side of the station than the demand on the Pleasanton side (not including the County garage on the Dublin side). Other data also reveal that only ~35% of the spaces on the Pleasanton side are used by riders driving from Pleasanton/ areas to the south2, while most of the spaces are used by riders from areas further east (such as Livermore/Tracy).
Notably, driving to the parking facilities on the Dublin side of the station versus the Pleasanton side of the station is virtually the same in terms of time and distance. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that parking on the Dublin side is equally convenient.
To ensure project feasibility and success, it will be critical to analyze and determine the appropriate parking need for both the new development and BART riders on the Pleasanton side. A station access planning and parking management study will be conducted prior to BART releasing its developer Request for Proposals. That study is slated to begin soon, and will include parking analysis to determine the maximum level of on-site BART rider parking to be provided in future development on the site. It is also important that proposed parking numbers are amenable to all stakeholders and ratified to provide certainty to future developers.
c. Site Circulation
It is crucial to maintain access to the various existing and proposed transit infrastructure as well as the other infrastructure and utilities that are accessed from the project site during construction and once the TOD is built. This will impact any proposed circulation and the extent of developable area on the site. It is also important for any circulation and drop-offs to adhere to BART’s MADG where possible. Also, it is important to maintain accessible drop-offs as close to the station entry as needed, while closely adhering to PROWAG.
Opportunities to increase and improve pedestrian and bike circulation throughout the site will also need to be studied. Any interfaces between vehicular and pedestrian circulation (including those with the IHT at Owens Dr) will need to be well managed for a safe and comfortable user experience.
2 Refer to section 7.b of this memo for more information regarding BART rider parking demand/occupancy.
DRAFT
Pleasanton BART
Existing Physical Site Conditions Opportunities and Constraints Evaluation Oct 16, 2025
23 7. Appendix
a. Engineering Due Diligence Report [BKF]
b. Access and Circulation Report [Fehr & Peers]
c. Basis of Design Criteria Memo [BART]
d. Exhibits (11"X17")
DRAFT
BKF ENGINEERS
150 California Street, Suite 600, San Francisco, CA 94111 | 415.930.7900 Date: August 7, 2025 BKF Job Number: 20250482
To: Aaron Welch
Aaron Welch Planning, Inc
[email protected]
Rick Williams
Van Meter Williams Pollock, LLP
[email protected]
From: Shanté Stowell, PE, Engineering Manager
Mike O’Connell, PE, Principal/ Vice President
Subject: Pleasanton BART – Due Diligence Report
1. Introduction
Pursuant to your request, we have completed our preliminary infrastructure due diligence. The purpose of this review is to identify any unusual site-specific issues and special considerations that would add cost beyond the “normal” development costs for a similar project on a different site. In accordance with our scope of work, we have completed the following:
• Collected and reviewed record drawing documents
• Reviewed existing utilities adjacent to the site
• Reviewed various yield study scenarios provided by VMWP • Plotted record boundary and easements
The approximately 15 acre site encompasses the parking lots at the Pleasanton BART Station . The site is bounded by Interstate 580 and Hewlett Canal to the north, Owens Drive to the south, the BART station access road to the east, and Chabot Canal to the west.
2. Existing Conditions
The approximately 15 acre site is paved with asphalt and contains trees and minor landscaping. A covered pedestrian walkway runs along the north end of the site and provides cover for a bus and taxi pick up and drop off areas. The Iron Horse Regional Trail runs northwest to southeast through the site. At the north end of the site, near where the Iron Horse Trail meets the covered walkway, there are four retail kiosk buildings. There is an enclosure at the northeast corner of the site.
Based on approximate elevation information shown on Google Earth, the site is relatively flat : elevations vary by about 5 feet across the length of the site, resulting in average slopes of 2-3%.
3. Title Review
Copies of the Title Reports are provided for reference in Appendix G. The title reports are separated into West and East parcels.
Based on our review of the Title Reports, the following easements should be noted. These easements are shown on the record boundary exhibit in Appendix K and Parcel Map 3863 in Appendix L.
DRAFT
August 7, 2025
West Parcel (APN: 941-2771-015)
Exception 5: Easement for pipelines and appurtenances for the conveyance of petroleum or natural gas or products derived therefrom, granted to Southern Pacific Pipe Lines, Inc . This easement is shown on the parcel map and the record boundary as a 10’ wide easement located within a 100’ strip at the east side of the west parcel, but the exact location is unknown.
Exception 6: Easement for slope, granted to Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. This easement is shown on the parcel map and the record boundary as an easement of varying width located along the east edge of the west parcel.
Exception 7: Easement for ingress, egress and slope maintenance , granted to Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. This easement is shown on the parcel map and the record boundary as a 14’ wide slope easement and a 15’ wide ingress, egress, and slope easement located along the north edge of the west parcel.
Exception 8: Easement for communications purposes, granted to Southern Pacific Transportation Company and to Southern Pacific Pipelines, Inc. This easement is shown on the parcel map and the record boundary as a 15’ wide easement located along the east edge of the west parcel.
Exception 9: Easement for transit facilities components, granted to the County of Alameda. This easement is shown on the parcel map and the record boundary as a 50’ wide easement located along the east edge of the west parcel.
Exception 10: Easements for utilities, landscape, and public service. On the parcel map and the record boundary, the utility easement is shown as a 100’ wide easement along the east edge of the west parcel, the landscape easement is shown as a 14’ wide easement along the north edge of the west parcel, and the public service easement is shown as a 33’ wide easement along the south edge of the west parcel.
East Parcel (APN: 941-2778-002)
Exception 5: Easement for a line of poles with such wires as second party shall from time to time suspend therefrom for the transmission of electric energy, and for communication purposes , granted to Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). This easement is shown on the parcel map a nd the record boundary as a 25’ wide easement located along the west edge of the east parcel.
Exception 6 : Easement for water pipe line , granted to Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. This easement is shown on the parcel map and the record boundary as a 15’ wide easement located near the west edge of the east parcel.
Exception 7: Easement for a line of poles with such wires as second party shall from time to time suspend therefrom for the transmission of electric energy, and for communications purposes, granted to PG&E. This easement is shown on the parcel map and the record boundary as an easement located near the north edge of the east parcel.
Exception 8: Easement for ingress, egress and slope maintenance , granted to Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. This easement is shown on the parcel map and the record boundary as a slope easement of varying width located at the north edge of the east parcel.
Exception 9: Easements for public service, landscape, and storm drain. On the parcel map and the record boundary, the public service easement is shown as a 33’ wide easement along the south edge of the east parcel, the landscape easement is shown as a 15’ wide easement along the north edge of the east parcel, and the storm drain easement is shown as a 10’ wide easement near the west edge of the east parcel.
DRAFT
August 7, 2025
4. Site Access
Existing site access is provided from Willow Road, a driveway along Owens Drive, and the Bart Station Access Road.
There is additional pedestrian access from Iron Horse Trail and from the walkway to the Dublin/ Pleasanton BART Station to the north. Future access to the site will likely need to maintain the existing pedestrian access through the site to the BART Station and Bus / Taxi access to pick up / drop off areas.
The primary fire access will be provided along Owens Drive. Secondary fire access may be required from fire lanes within the site. California Fire Code Appendix D (adopted in the City of Pleasanton Code of Ordinances section
20.24.010) requires that buildings that are more than 30 feet tall be provided with aerial fire apparatus access, consisting of a 26 foot wide road located between 15 and 30 feet from the building, positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. Owens Drive could serve as an aerial apparatus access road, depending on the building location.
5. Flood Zone
The site is located within FEMA Flood Zone X, 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard. Hewlett Canal and Chabot Canal, which are located adjacent to the site, are located in Zone AE, floodway areas. Floodway areas must be kept free of encroachment so that the 1% annual chance flood discharge can be contained in the channel. Base flood elevations in the canals vary from 328 to 331 in the areas adjacent to the site. The site’s Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) is included as Appendix A.
The building finished floor elevation should be located above the base flood elevation of the adjacent canals . The building finished floor elevation should also be higher than the elevation of the upstream sewer manhole and the crown of the street.
6. Grading
Once the development scenarios are provided to BKF, we will prepare an analysis of any grading considerations for the site.
7. Water System
The water system is owned and operated by the City of Pleasanton. Record drawings indicate that there is a 16-inch DIP water main in Owens Drive and an existing 10-inch DIP water main that runs north-south through the site. An existing 16-inch DIP water service enters the site on the west side, and an existing 10-inch DIP water service enters the site on the east side. Additionally, there is a Zone 7 owned pipe that runs through the site along the alignment of the Iron Horse trail. Zone 7 is a water wholesaler in the county.
There are 4 existing fire hydrants along the property frontage on the north side of Owens Drive. There is one existing fire hydrant within the property near the retail kiosks.
Refer to Appendix B for the water maps provided by the City of Pleasanton.
Initial domestic water demand is estimated to be 390,000 gpd (based on 1,300 units and 300 gpd/unit consumption). 300 gpd water consumption estimate is based on 2005 Pleasanton Plan 2025 for multi family use.
Fire flow demand will be based on the gross building area and construction type for the building. Once development scenarios that include gross building area and construction type are provided to BKF, we will prepare an est imate of the required fire flow. The city has provided a fire flow analysis dated May 2025, which is included for reference in Appendix B. The fire flow analysis shows that the city’s system can provide a fire flow of 5,408 Gallons per Minute (GPM) at an on-site hydrant while maintaining the minimum residual pressure of 20 psi, but that this flow results in velocities in the main above the maximum velocity of 10 feet per second (fps). When velocities are constrained to 10 fps maximum, the on -site hydrant can produce a maximum fire flow of 2,447 GPM. Since the city’s modeling assumed all fire flows would be provided from a single point on the project site, the city system may be able to supply a higher fire flow while maintaining the maximum required velocity if multiple connection points are used. If DRAFT
August 7, 2025
fire flows above 2,447 GPM are required, additional modeling should be performed to ensure the city system can meet the required demand.
8. Recycled Water System
The City of Pleasanton owns and maintains a recycled water distribution system that provides water that can be used for landscape irrigation in lieu of using potable water. Per the City’s Recycled Water Distribution map, there are no recycled water pipes located in Owens Drive in the area where the project has frontage, but a 6-inch recycled water pipe appears to dead end near the southeast corner of the project site along Owens Drive. The project should anticipate extending this 6-inch line, likely from Willow and Owens to create a looped system.
Recycled water use is estimated to be 7,000 GPD, based on 26 gallons/SF/year, and assuming that 15% of the 14.9- acre site is landscape. The 26 gallons/SF/year estimate comes from the City of Redwood City Landscaping Water Demand projection, as the City of Pleasanton does not provide demand projections for landscape water usage.
Refer to Appendix C for the recycled water maps provided by the City of Pleasanton.
9. Sanitary Sewer System
The sewer system in the area is owned and operated by the City of Pleasanton. An 8-inch VCP sewer main is located in Owens Drive west of Willow Road, and a 12-inch VCP sewer main is located in Owens Drive east of Willow Road.
A 6-inch sanitary sewer main runs through the site, connecting the BART station to the sewer main in Owens Drive.
Refer to Appendix D for the sewer map provided by the City of Pleasanton.
Estimates for sanitary sewer average dry weather flow 254,000 gpd, based on a 0.65 factor applied to water demands stated in section 7 above. The 0.65 factor is based on the estimate provided in the 2005 Pleasanton Plan 2025 for multi-family residential. Peak dry weather flow is estimated to be 440 GPM, assuming flows are spread across a 24-hour day, with a peaking factor of 2.5.
10. Storm Drain System
The storm drain system in the area is owned and operated by the City of Pleasanton and Alameda County. In Owens drive near the west side of the project site, a city -owned 24-inch storm drain main flows to the intersection with Willow Road, and a city-owned 42-inch storm drain flows from the intersection with Willow Road to Chabot Canal, where it outfalls i nto the Canal. In Owens drive near the east side of the project site, a 60 -inch storm drain main flows toward Iron Horse Trail, where it meets a county -owned 66-inch storm drain main that runs through the project site along Iron Horse Trail. Some existing catch basins on the project site flow to the city mains in Owens Drive, others flow to the county main in Iron Horse Trail, and others discharge directly into Hewlett Canal to the north.
Refer to Appendix D for the storm drain map provided by the City of Pleasanton.
11. Stormwater Quality
The project would create more than 10,000 square-feet of impervious surface and will therefore be required to treat stormwater runoff as outlined in Provision E.12 of the Phase II Small MS4 General Permit. Provision E.12 requires Low Impact Development (LID) techniques to reduce runoff, treat stormwater, and provide baseline hydromodification management to the extent feasible. LID techniques primarily include infiltration and stormwater re-use. If infiltration will not be feasible on this site, landscape-based LID techniques such as bioretention areas are acceptable as an alternative compliance measure. Stormwater treatment strategies often compete with other site functions within the development so it is important to coordinate treatment areas early in the design process.
The project may be eligible for LID treatment reduction credits based on being an affordable housing project. These credits would reduce the amount of bioretention treatment facilities required, but would require stormwater to be treated by a proprietary stormwater media filter instead. In order to qualify for LID treatment reduction credits, the DRAFT
August 7, 2025
project would need to be primarily residential and have a minimum gross density of 40 dwelling units per acre. For a 15 acre site, this would require at least 600 dwelling units ; the project is currently projected to have a maximum of 1,300 dwelling units, which would meet this requirement. The project would need to be considered a preserved housing project with deed restriction running at least 55 years, at rent/mortgage rates (including utilities) no greater than 30 percent of the area median household income (AMI) limits adjusted for household size. Additionally, the project would need to demonstrate the technical or economic infeasibility of treating the stormwater with on-site, off-site, or regional LID treatment measures, including demonstrating technical constraints that preclude the use of any onsite landscaped areas for LID treatment.
If the project meets these requirements, it would be eligible for LID treatment reduction credits based on the percentage of dwelling units that are in each Area Median Household Income (AMI) category. If all units are free to tenants and do not charge any rent / mortgag e, up to 100% of the stormwater may be treated with non -LID treatment methods. Refer to Appendix E for the Special Projects Worksheet used within Alameda County to determine the LID treatment reduction credits a project may qualify for.
If the project doe s not meet the criteria for LID treatment reduction or treatment with a proprietary stormwater media filter is not preferred, the project will need to install LID treatment such as bioretention areas. Assuming the
14.9 acre site is 85% impervious, the esti mated required treatment facility area for the project is approximately 22,000 square feet (0.5 acres).
12. Hydromodification Management
Changes in the timing and runoff from a site, known as hydromodification, can damage or erode natural creeks and channels. Since 2007, Hydromodification Management (HM) techniques have been required in the Bay Area in areas susceptible to hydromodification. The project site is located in an area susceptible to hydromodification, based on the susceptibility map included in Appendix F. Projects in this area are required to comply with HM requirements if they create and/or replace one acre of more of impervious surface and increase impervious surface over pre-project conditions.
In order to comply with HM requirements, the project would need to implement flow duration stormwater control measures (such as large detention systems) to ensure that post-project stormwater discharge rates and durations match pre -project discharge rates and durations. Analysis using the Bay Area Hydrology Model would also be required. Since the existing site discharges stormwater to two different storm drain systems and multiple outfalls to Hewlett Canal, the analysis would need to show that discharge rates and durations are not increased at any o f the existing outfall locations. This may require separate flow duration stormwater control measures for each outfall.
Since the existing project site is mostly impervious, we recommend that the project seek to decrease the total impervious area on the site, so that the project will not be subject to HM requirements. Decreasing the impervious area can be achieved by providing landscaped areas, bioretention areas, and / or green roofs. If needed, the project may also implement pervious pavement to further decrease the impervious area of the site.
DRAFT
BKF ENGINEERS
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A – FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
APPENDIX B – PLEASANTON WATER BASE MAPS AND FIRE FLOW TEST APPENDIX C – PLEASANTON RECYCLED WATER BASE MAPS
APPENDIX D – PLEASANTON SEWER AND STORM DRAIN BASE MAPS
APPENDIX E- PG&E ELECTRICAL BASE MAPS
APPENDIX F – PG&E GAS BASE MAPS
APPENDIX G -KINDER MORGAN PETROLEUM BASE MAPS
APPENDIX H – ALAMEDA COUNTY SPECIAL PROJECTS WORKSHEET
APPENDIX I – HMP SUSCEPTIBILITY MAP
APPENDIX J – TITLE REPORT
APPENDIX K - RECORD BOUNDARY EXHIBIT
DRAFT
BKF ENGINEERS
APPENDIX A – FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250
Feet
Ü
SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT
SPECIAL FLOOD
HAZARD AREAS
Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE)
Zone A, V, A99
With BFE or Depth Zone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR
Regulatory Floodway
0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areas
of 1% annual chance flood with average
depth less than one foot or with drainage
areas of less than one square mile Zone X
Future Conditions 1% Annual
Chance Flood Hazard Zone X
Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to
Levee. See Notes. Zone X
Area with Flood Risk due to LeveeZone D
NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone X
Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Zone D
Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer
Levee, Dike, or Floodwall
Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance
17.5 Water Surface Elevation
Coastal Transect
Coastal Transect Baseline
Profile Baseline
Hydrographic Feature
Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE)
Effective LOMRs
Limit of Study
Jurisdiction Boundary
Digital Data Available
No Digital Data Available
Unmapped
This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of
digital flood maps if it is not void as described below.
The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap
accuracy standards
The flood hazard information is derived directly from the authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map was exported on 4/22/2025 at 7:01 PM and does not
reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and time. The NFHL and effective information may change or
become superseded by new data over time.
This map image is void if the one or more of the following map elements do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels, legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers, FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for
regulatory purposes.
Legend
OTHER AREAS OF
FLOOD HAZARD
OTHER AREAS
GENERAL
STRUCTURES
OTHER
FEATURES
MAP PANELS
8 B 20.2
The pin displayed on the map is an approximate
point selected by the user and does not represent
an authoritative property location.
1:6,000
121°54'6"W 37°42'17"N
121°53'29"W 37°41'48"N
Basemap Imagery Source: USGS National Map 2023
BKF ENGINEERS
APPENDIX B – PLEASANTON WATER BASE MAPS AND FIRE FLOW TEST
CITY OF PLEASANTON
5859 OWENS DRIVE
FIRE FLOW ANALYSIS
May 2025
Prepared by:
May 2025 1 City of Pleasanton
5859 Owens Drive
Fire Flow Analysis
May 5, 2025
City of Pleasanton
3333 Busch Rd
Pleasanton, CA 94566
Attention: Ryan Ravalin
Chief Utilities System Operator
Subject: 5859 Owens Drive – Fire Flow Analysis
Hi Ryan,
We are attaching our completed Fire Flow Analysis results for the hydrant located in the Pleasanton Bart Parking Lot, north of Owens Drive, as well as some brief discussions of assumptions, tabulated analysis results, and conclusions.
ASSUMPTIONS
• Analysis is performed using the City’s existing domestic water system hydraulic model.
• Fire flow requirement for the existing commercial development is 2,500 gpm for a duration of 2 hours based on the City’s Master Plan.
• Minimum pressure criteria of 20.0 psi for fire flows based on the City’s Master Plan.
• Maximum velocity criteria of 10.0 ft/s for fire flows, excluding hydrant laterals, based on the City’s Master Plan.
• Analysis is conducted under Maximum Day Demand conditions. • Fire flow analysis performed during low tank water levels based on the current 7- day fill/drain cycle operations.
• PRVs are in service.
• Hydrant elevation is assigned via DEM records and validated using Google Earth.
Smart Planning Our Water Resources
May 2025 2 City of Pleasanton
5859 Owens Drive
Fire Flow Analysis
PURPOSE
The purpose of this technical memorandum is to provide the recipient with an understanding of the capabilities of the City of Pleasanton’s water distribution system under fire flow conditions. The hydraulic model evaluates the maximum flow capacity of the distribution system at the closest hydrant to 5859 Owens Drive. The analysis below includes a modeled simulation of four different scenarios highlighting the flow and residual pressure in each scenario respectively.
Scenario 1: The first scenario is under static conditions where the system is in its existing state with no fire flow stressors.
Scenario 2: The second scenario is under the design fire flow which is prescribed by the System Performance and Design Criteria based on the City’s Water Distribution Capacity Master Plan. The design fire flow is applied to determine if the distribution system is capable of supplying both the minimum required flow and its resultant residual pressure with no constraints applied.
Scenario 3: The third scenario is under the 20.0 psi system wide minimum pressure during fires which is prescribed by the System Performance and Design Criteria based on the City’s Water Distribution Capacity Master Plan. This scenario is a test to determine the maximum flow the distribution system is capable of supplying at the hydrant location while maintaining the 20.0 psi minimum pressure constraint.
Scenario 4: The fourth scenario is under both the 20.0 psi minimum pressure constraint as well as the maximum velocity constraint of 10.0 ft/s which are prescribed by the System Performance and Design Criteria based on the City’s Water Distribution Capacity Master Plan. This scenario is a test to determine the maximum flow the distribution system is capable of supplying at the hydrant location while maintaining both the 20.0 psi minimum pressure constraint and the 10.0 ft/s maximum velocity constraint.
By adding constraints to each of the scenarios, we are able to identify any limiting factors hindering the maximum flow the distribution system is capable of supplying at the specified hydrant location.
May 2025 3 City of Pleasanton
5859 Owens Drive
Fire Flow Analysis
ANALYSIS RESULTS
FH (30400015 @ ROW, 10-inch main)
o Scenario 1: The distribution system at the hydrant location has a static pressure of 63.6 psi during maximum day demands, under no fire flow stressors. o Scenario 2: The distribution system at the hydrant location can satisfy the fire flow requirement of 2,500 gpm for 2 hours while maintaining a residual pressure of 52.5 psi which is above the minimum pressure constraint of 20.0 psi. o Scenario 3: The distribution system at the hydrant location can produce a maximum fire flow of 5,408 gpm while maintaining the pressure constraint of 20.0 psi.
o Scenario 4: The distribution system at the hydrant location can only produce a maximum fire flow of 2,447 gpm while adhering to both the pressure constraint of
20.0 psi and the velocity constraint of 10.0 ft/s.
o The fire flow analysis results are documented in Table 1.
Table 1: Fire Hydrant – 30400015 @ ROW, 10-inch main
Scenario Type Flow
(gpm)
Residual
Pressure (psi)
1 Static 0 63.6
2 Design Fire Flow
(City Criteria) 2,500 52.5
3 Under Pressure
Constraint 5,408 20.0
4 Under Pressure
and Velocity
Constraint
2,447 52.9
Note:
Hydrant elevation of 333 ft.
May 2025 4 City of Pleasanton
5859 Owens Drive
Fire Flow Analysis
INDIVIDUAL HYDRANT LIMITATIONS
The fire flow analysis in this report includes results simulated by the hydraulic model along distribution mains and does not account for individual hydrant limitations.
The hydraulic model predicts the capability of the distribution system to deliver water at the selected hydrant “location” and does not limit the flow based on the individual hydrant capacity nor lateral limitation. Most hydrants with 4-inch connections typically extract water at a rate of 1,500-2,000 gpm depending on their size, length, and hydrant type. Fire engine trucks can also impact water flow based on the size of their water tank and pump. Fire marshals indicate that individual fire engines can pump up to 2,000 gpm.
When the required fire flow water extraction value exceeds 1,500-2,000 gpm, multiple hydrants become necessary to meet the demand. There is a maximum spacing requirement between hydrants that is based on the prescribed flow, where a higher flow requirement (industrial/commercial/institutional) necessitates more hydrants with reduced spacing between them. Maximum hydrant spacing is documented in the International Fire Code (ICC IFC-2021).
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The hydrant closest to 5859 Owens Drive was able to supply the commercial fire flow requirement of 2,500 gpm for 2 hours while maintaining a residual pressure above 20 psi. The distribution system can supply up to 5,408 gpm while maintaining a residual pressure of 20 psi, however pipeline velocities will exceed the 10 ft/s criteria. Figure 1 documents the available fire flows under each scenar io and also identifies the pipe that exceeds the maximum velocity constraint of 10 ft/s during a 2,500 gpm ( Scenario 2) and 5,408 gpm (Scenario 3) fire flow. The maximum available fire flow while maintaining a 20-psi residual pressure and pipeline velocities under 10 ft/s is 2,447 gpm.
It should be noted that since the fire flow requirement is larger than a single fire hydrant’s limitation of 1,500-2,000 gpm, multiple hydrants are needed to supply this fire flow requirement.
Sincerely,
AKEL ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
Tony Akel, P.E.
Senior Principal
1616 16 16
10 10
12 12
1616
1.5 ft/s2.5 ft/s1.7 ft/s1.7 ft/s1.7 ft/s1.7 ft/s
1.4 ft/s
1.4 ft/s
3.2 ft/s5.4 ft/s3.6 ft/s3.6 ft/s3.6 ft/s3.7 ft/s
3.1 ft/s
3.1 ft/s
WILLOW RD
OWENS DR
·|}þI580
Modeled Hydrant ID: 30400015
• Hydrant Elevation: 333 ft
• Static Pressure: 63.6 psi
• Pressure Zone: Lower
• Residual Pressure at 2,500 gpm: 52.5 psi
• Available FF at 20 psi: 5,408 gpm
• Available FF at 20 psi and 10 ft/s: 2,447 gpm
5859 Owens
Drive
10.2 ft/s22.1 ft/s
G!.
Hydraulic Analysis
City of Pleasanton
Figure 1
5859 Owens Drive
Fire Flow Analysis
Updated: May 7, 2025
File Path: P:\xGIS\GIS_Projects\Pleasanton\Studies\250505-5859OwensDr_FF\PLE_Fig1_5859OwensDr_FF_050525.aprx 5 GIS
0 100 20050
Feet
Legend
Existing System
G!. Modeled Hydrant
2 .9 ft/s 2,500 gpm FF Velocity
2.9 ft/s 5,408 gpm FF Velocity
Pipes by Diameter
8" or Less
10" - 12"
14" or Greater
PRELIMINARY
Modeling Assumptions:
1. Maximum Day Demands
2. Tank Drain Cycle
3. Low Tank Levels
Modeling Assumptions:
1. Maximum Day Demands
2. Tank Drain Cycle
3. Low Tank Levels
4. Minimum Pressure of 20 psi
5. Maximum Velocity of 10 ft/s
Design Fire Flow:
2,500 gpm for a duration
of 2 hours
BKF ENGINEERS
APPENDIX C – PLEASANTON RECYCLED WATER BASE MAPS
DSRSD Facilities
WWTP
Recycled Water
Pump Station
Recycled Water Pipelines
Phase 1A
Clean Water Revival
Valley Ave Extension
Existing
Potential Users
Served by Phase
1A Alignment
Waterbody
O0 1,500 3,000
Feet
pw:\\PHX-POP-PW.Carollo.local:Carollo\Docum ents\Client\CA\Pleasanton\ 8889A00\Data\GIS\Figure 6.7 Recommended Alternative Potential Customers and Pipeline Alignment.mxd Modify Total in table PleasantonGIS/raw/20130613
Add Deleted, Phase 1B to 1A, and new Phase1;
Now: \\PLEASGIS_DATA\GIS_Data\Utilities\RecycledWater\
RecycledWaterMapNovem ber2014.mxd
PleasantonGIS/raw/20141121
All 1B > 1A; add C WR N ow: \\PLEASGIS_DATA\GIS_D ata\Utilities\RecycledWater\RecycledWaterMapFebruary2015.m xd/raw/20150219 Change 1B pipes on SRR > 1A, extend CWR line on ElCharro > Existing 18; Now: \\PLEASGIS_DATA\GIS_Data\Utilities\RecycledWater\RecycledWaterMapMarch2015.m xd-3/5/2015 Replace Gibraltar and add Valley Ave Ext from AC AD
Upd: \\PLEASGIS_DATA\GIS_Data\Utilities\RecycledWater\RecycledW aterM apSept2016.mxd - 09/13/2016-rw !(
!(
!(!(
!(!(!(
!(!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!( !(!(
!(
!(
!( !(!(
!(!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(!(
!(!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
DSRSD
WWTP
§¨¦
Tassajara
Reservoir
§¨¦
I680
I580
Stoneridge Dr
Valley Ave
Hopyard Rd
W Las Positas Blvd
Mohr Ave
1st St
Santa Rita Rd
Central Pkwy
Owens Dr
Dublin Blvd
Black Ave
Bernal Ave
W
illow R
d
Hacienda Dr
Kottinger Dr
Chabot Dr
M
ain St
Rose Ave
Johnson Dr
Vine St
Kam
p Dr
Parkside Dr
M
artin Ave
Santos Ranch Rd
Vineyard Ave
Harvest Rd
Gibraltar Dr
Busch Rd
Denker Dr
Rheem Dr
Churchill Dr
Payne Rd
del Valle Pkwy
Blackbird D r
Mavis Dr
Regency Dr
Valley Trails Dr
Dorm
an Rd
M
ason St
Cam
pus Dr
Concord St
Flagstone Dr
Stoneridge M
all Rd
Olive Dr
Norton W
ay
Deer Oaks Dr
Siena St
Park Pl
Stoneridge Dr
Ashwood D
r
Addison W
ay
Dublin Blvd
Hacienda Dr
Rosewood Dr
Santa Rita Rd
Tassajara Rd
San Ram
on Rd
Hopyard Rd
Valley Ave
Foothill Rd
Dublin Blvd
Dougherty Rd
Fallon Rd
12''
12''
20''
6''
12''
2''
12''
12''
6''
6''
4''
2''
16''
2''
20''
8''
6''
8''
6''
6''
6''
4''
6''
6''
8''
8''
24''
8''
8''
16''
6''
12''
6''
12''
6''
12''
6''
6''
16''
6'' 8''
6''
8''
8''
12''
18''
20''
Phase 1
Recycled Water Distribution System
5.51 Project Site
BKF ENGINEERS
APPENDIX D – PLEASANTON SEWER AND STORM DRAIN BASE MAPS
LAVWMA SEWER PIPE
SYMBOLOGY
MANHOLE
STORM DRAIN INLET
PUMP STATION
SEWER RISER
STORM DRAIN OUTFALL
FLOW DIRECTION SYMBOL
STORM DRAIN WALL
JOINT
LUG
SEWER PLUG
WATER HYDRANT
ADDRESS
NON-CONNECTING PIPES
GRID LINE
CAMP PARKS SEWER PIPE
DSRSD SEWER PIPE
SEWER MAIN
PRIVATE SEWER MAIN
ABANDONED SEWER PIPE
ABANDONED STORM DRAIN PIPE
PRIVATE STORM DRAIN PIPE
STORM DRAIN V-DITCH
STORM DRAIN MAIN
SEWER \ STORM DRAIN
WYE
VAULT
105
104
503
502
36"
24"
39"
39"
6"
6"
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
UKN
UKN
1002'
242'
140'
RCP
80' D 9.22
100'
95'
94'
RCP18" 68'
D 11.11
D 9.22
D 8.97
D 9.14
CAMP PARKS SEWER SYSTEM
70'
192'
310'
54'
325'
PVC
VCP
PVC
PVC
VCP
VCP
8"
39"
8"
8"
39"
39"
6"
VCP
VCP
105
104
103
102
101
503
502
500
501
100
101
104 101
100
200201
300
400
36"
24"
36" 24"
39"
39"
6"
6"
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
UKN
UKN
1002'
142'
152'
140'
242'
140'
CITY OF PLEASANTON
SEWER\STORM DRAIN SYSTEM FACILITIES
INTERSTATE 580
A.C.F.C. & W.C.D.
OWENS
CHABOT CANAL
DR
B1D4
B1D1B1D2C1C1
C1C3
C2A1 B2B2 B2B1
B1D3
B1D4
98'
6"
KN
PVC
PVC
120'
80'
243'
D 8.60
500
401
400
101
500
100
CAMP PARKS SYSTEM
120'
80'
243'
66"
RCP
RCP
245'
98'
70'
6"
6"
KN
PVC
PVC
CAMP PARKS SYSTEM
6"
UKN
350'05'
500
401
400
CP
D 8.60
500
100
103
101
6"
UKN
CITY OF PLEASANTON
SEWER\STORM DRAIN SYSTEM FACILITIES
C1C3OWENS
A.C.F.C. & W.C.D.
INTERSTATE 580
DR
HEWLETT CANAL
C1C3
B1D2 C1C1 C1C2
C1C4
C2A2C2A1B2B2
B1D4
D
4 101
500
400
200
105
403
402401
400
203
202
201
109 108
503
24"
36"
36"
42"
24"
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
256
2708"
6"6"
12"
6"6"
12" 6"
8"
12"
12"12"
VCPVCP
VCP
VCPVCP
VCP VCP
VCP
VCP
VCPVCP
44'80'
212'
52'93'
254'
114'
295'
216'
276'153'
RCP
RCP
42"
18"
307' 80'
D 11.37
D 13.32
D 9.22
D 12.36
D 15.24
D 14.05
D 15.43
D 14.41
D 15.75
D
4 RCP
30"
450'
206
207
RCP
46'
RCP18"
46'
D 7.40
D 7.93
200
D 8.10
408
404405
406
407
D 7.58
D 7.36
44'80'
212'
52'93'
254'
162'
104'
64'
65'
72'
65'
114'
295'
216'
100'
95'
188'
276'153'
174'
156'
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
66"
72"
18"
72"
18"
42"
24'
24'
18"
30"
360'
247'
116'
238'
63'
307'
88'
88'
90'
D 11.37
D 13.32
D 12.46
D 11.11
D 9.22
D 8.61
D 8.84
D 9.14
D 9.14
D 12.36
D 14.75
D 14.83
D 14.35
D 15.24
D 14.05
D 15.43
D 12.35
D 14.46
D 14.41
D 15.75
501
D 8.98
8"
VCP
350'
8"
VCP
299'
300
D 10.54
4 6"6"
12"
6"6"
12"
15"
6"
6"
6"
6"
6"
6"
8"
12"
6"
6"
8"
6"
12"12"
8"
8"
VCPVCP
VCP
VCPVCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VC
VCPVCP
VCP
VCP
101
500
400
200
105
403
402401
400
203
202
201
109 108
107
503
100
2 210
501
100
102
103
104
105
106
101
102
103
104
RCP
18"
42"
24"
36"
36"
42"
24"
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
85'
256
2708"
CITY OF PLEASANTON
SEWER\STORM DRAIN SYSTEM FACILITIES
CHABOT DR
A.C.F.C. & W.C.D.
CHABOT CANAL
WILLOW RD
B2B2
B1D3B1D4C1C3
C2A1
C2A3 B2B4 B2B3
B2B1
B2B2
OWENS DR
30"
D 9.70
D 7.93
D 7.96
D 9.15
8"
6"
6"
UKN
UKN
UKN
120'
D 12.84
6"
12"
VCP
VCP
75' RCP
RCP
18"
24"
88'
217'D 9.92
D 8.23
D 13.61
400
100
404
403
402
401
400
101
100
120'
D 12.65
D 12.84
D 11.10
24"
30"
18"
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
RCP
70'
437'
D 9.70
D 9.80
D 7.93
D 7.96
D 9.15
D 7.28
D 8.80
8"
8"
6"
6"
UKN
UKN
UKN
UKN
ALAMEDA COUNTY
D 15.33
D 13.67D 13.61
D 15.83
D 14.63
326'
63'
105'
75'
50'
276'
343'
78'
350'
105'
350'
500
401
400
104
103
102101100
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
12"
6"
6"
6"
6"
12" 12"6"
15"
6"
12"
D 12.13
D 9.92
D 9.67
D 10.09
D 8.23
D 9.65
RCP
RCP
RCP
18"
18"
60"
18"
24"
60"
VCPVCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
VCP
88'
75'
320'
65'
217'
217'
RCP
RCP
RCP
501
500
408
407
406
405
404
403
402
401
400
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
104
103
102
101
100
CITY OF PLEASANTON
SEWER\STORM DRAIN SYSTEM FACILITIES
C2A1
OWENS DR
C2A1
B1D4 C1C3 C1C4
C2A2
C2A4C2A3B2B4
B2B2
BKF ENGINEERS
APPENDIX E – PG&E ELECTRICAL BASE MAPS
580
ChabotDr
Owens Dr
24 Hour
Fitness
Mercedes-Benz
of Pleasanton
580 580
46 W
illow
Rd
W
illow
Rd
Willow
Rd
Owens Dr
Hacienda Dr
Kaiser
PG&E Joint Pole Map
Esri Community Maps Contributors, California State Parks, © OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Conduit
<all other values>
In Service
Proposed - Install
Deactivated
Support Structure
<all other values>
Electrolier, Customer Owned, Metered
May 28, 2025
0 0.05 0.10.03 mi
0 0.08 0.160.04 km
1:4,514
When using PG&E's JUMP website to display selected pole information, PG&E may include and display pole attachment data that was received from third parties. PG&E is obligated to accept this data from third parties and make it available to the end user. The data presented in PG&E's JUMP website may not be .completely accurate. In accordance with the CPUC's Track 2 Decision on Attachment Data on Pole Owner's Databases in D.21-10-019 it is the responsibility of the information requestor to verify and validate the information in accordance with all existing safety requirements
Motel 6
Pleasanton
Tommy T's
Comedy and
Steakhouse
Chevron
Platinum
Dental Partners
Burger King
Specialty's
BEST
WESTERN
PLUS
Pleasanton Inn
580 580
Scarlett Ct
45 ChabotDr
Owens Dr
Black Bear
Diner
Shell
Nation's Giant
Hamburgers
24 Hour
Fitness
El Molino
Mercedes-Benz
of Pleasanton
580 580
Arnold Rd
Dublin/Pleasanton
Station
W
illow
Rd
W
illow
Rd
Willow
Rd
Owens Dr
PG&E Joint Pole Map
Esri Community Maps Contributors, California State Parks, © OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Conduit
<all other values>
In Service
Proposed - Install
Deactivated
Support Structure
<all other values>
Electrolier, Customer Owned, Metered
May 28, 2025
0 0.05 0.10.03 mi
0 0.08 0.160.04 km
1:4,514
When using PG&E's JUMP website to display selected pole information, PG&E may include and display pole attachment data that was received from third parties. PG&E is obligated to accept this data from third parties and make it available to the end user. The data presented in PG&E's JUMP website may not be .completely accurate. In accordance with the CPUC's Track 2 Decision on Attachment Data on Pole Owner's Databases in D.21-10-019 it is the responsibility of the information requestor to verify and validate the information in accordance with all existing safety requirements
SCARLETT CT
IRON HORSE PKWY
CHABOT DR
DE MARCUS BLVD
W
ILLOW
RD
ARNOLD RD
ALTAMIRANO AVE
I-580 E
I-580 W
OWENS DR
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community °
ELECTRIC TRANSMISSIONPacific Gas & Electric Company
PLEASE CALL U.S.A. AT
LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO
EXCAVATING IN THIS AREA
Dial 811
APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS
VERIFY BY HAND TOOLS
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO.
Date: 6/4/2025
1 inch = 100 feet
"WARNING: Confidential, Proprietary Information.
This document contains confidential, proprietary
information that is the sole property of Pacific Gas
and Electric Company (PG&E) and is intended for
use only by authorized PG&E employees and agents.
Copyright Pacific Gas and Electric Company 2025"
Printed on: 06/04/2025
Reference PG&E's GIS for the most current information.