HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.1 Hall of Justice
CITY CLERK
File # D[g][][ð]-rIJra
~ '=a)-LfO
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 16, 2004
SUBJECT:
ATTACHMENTS:
RECOMMENDATION:
~
PUBLIC HEARING: P A 02-030 - Site Development Review
(SDR) for the East County Hall of Justice (Alameda County
Courthouse)
Report Prepared by: Kristi Bascom, Associate Planner C¥---
1.
2.
3.
Project plans
Project description
Final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact
Statement (EIRÆIS) for the Juvenile Justice Facility and
East County Hall of Justice dated April 2003
Resolution certifying that the City Council reviewed and
considered the Final Environmental Impact
Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) for the
Alameda County Juvenile Justice Facility and East County
Hall of Justice dated April 2003
Resolution approving P A 02-030, a Site Development
Review (SDR) application to construct a 208,408 square foot
building comprised of courtrooms, offices, and associated
facilities on 21.77 acres located on the north side of Gleason
Drive between Madigan and Arnold Drives, and approving
the associated agreement between the City of Dublin and the
County of Alameda regarding the enforcement of Conditions
of Approval for the East County Hall of Justice (attached as
Exhibit A)
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Open public hearing.
Hear Staff presentation.
Take testimony from the Applicant and the public.
Question Staff, Applicant and the public.
Close the public hearing and deliberate.
Adopt the Resolution (Attachment 4) certifying that the City
Council reviewed and considered the Final Environmental
Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS)
for the Alameda County Juvenile Justice Facility and East
County Hall of Justice dated April 2003.
Adopt the Resolution (Attachment 5) approving P A 02-030,
a Site Development Review (SDR) application to construct a
208,408 square foot building comprised of courtrooms,
offices, and associated facilities on 21.77 acres located on the
north side of Gleason Drive between Madigan and Arnold
7.
COPIES TO: Applicant
Property Owner
ITEMNO.~
G:\PA#\2002\02·030 Alameda Co Court House\CC Staff Report doc ltfl:?
~
Drives, and approving the associated agreement between the
City of Dublin and the County of Alameda regarding the
enforcement of Conditions of Approval for the East County
Hall of Justice.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
None.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
In July 2003, Alameda County submitted a proposal to the City of Dublin for Site Development Review of
a proposed courthouse facility on County-owned land north of Gleason Drive. The East County Hall of
Justice (County Courthouse) is proposed as a 208,408 square foot building comprised of courtrooms,
offices, and associated facilities. The project area is 21.77 acres and is located on the north side of
Gleason Drive between Madigan and Arnold, where an East County Government Center has been planned
for several years.
Under the 1993 Annexation Agreement between the City of Dublin and the County of Alameda, the City
has the right to perform design review on any projects proposed on the County Governmental property.
Therefore, although this project is not subject to the normal development standards or land use controls
that would be applicable to a private project, the project is subject to the City of Dublin Site Development
Review regulations.
The County has been planning the construction of a new courthouse facility and a separate juvenile justice
facility in Alameda County for several years. The County has studied various alternative locations for the
two facilities, and two sites in Dublin were being considered for their use. A joint Environmental Impact
Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) was written which examined the potential
environmental impacts for development on all of the sites throughout the County.
At their meeting on May 6,2003, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors certified the EIRÆIS for the
County's Juvenile Justice Facility and East County Hall of Justice and selected the preferred alternatives
for both of these facilities. The Board of Supervisors chose a site in San Leandro as the preferred location
for the new Juvenile Justice Facility, and the County Governmental property in Dublin on Gleason Drive
as the preferred location for the East County Hall of Justice.
On July 7, 2003 the County submitted their application to the City for Site Development Review for the
Courthouse project, proposing the 208,408 square foot County Courthouse building on the County-owned
site on Gleason Drive. Staff reviewed the original application and identified several issues of concern,
including the proposed building height of over 102 feet, architectural incompatibility with surrounding
buildings, and difficult circulation of vehicles and pedestrians on and off the site.
On November 23, 2003, the Planning Commission and City Council held a joint study session to review
the proposed project and to provide individual feedback to the County on the building and site design.
The Planning Commissioners and City Councilmembers reiterated Staff s concerns about the building
architecture and height. Following the joint study session, which provided valuable input to the County
on the City's concerns, City Staff met numerous times with the County Elected Officials, Staff, and their
Architects and Consultants to come to agreement on modifications to the plans to address the pertinent
design issues.
2Jbì
ANALYSIS:
The project plans (Attachment 1) have been revised from the original version to be more compatible with
the adjacent commercial and residential buildings. The architecture has been softened and the building
height lowered, which will help the building relate better to its surroundings. The overall site plan has
been modified to shift the location of the building further to the west to minimize the project's impact on
nearby residential neighborhoods. A detailed written description of the project is included as Attachment
2.
Site Plan
Originally, the 22-acre courthouse site was on the easternmost portion of the greater 40-acre site. The
County has since pushed the site further to the west so that the building would be the greatest distance
away from the residential neighborhood. Also, the County has worked to reconfigure the main entrance
drive to the site as well as improve internal vehicular and pedestrian circulation.
As the building sits on the site, it is over 300 feet from Gleason Drive and sitting on the northwestern most
portion of the site and the furthest distance possible from the residential neighborhood. There is substantial
landscaping that will buffer the building from the businesses and residences on the south side of Gleason
Drive, and there is a 45' bioswale and landscape area that separates the parking lot from Gleason Drive.
Site Circulation and Parkinz
There are three public entrances to the facility, all off Gleason Drive. The main entrance is aligned with
Hacienda Drive, so those visiting the site will drive through the Hacienda/Gleason intersection and directly
into the courthouse parking lot. This will be the main point of access for most visitors. There are two
I other driveways, one at the eastern-most portion of the site and one at the western-most portion, both of
which are right turn in, right turn out driveways.
The main entrance drive leads vehicles directly onto the site and provides access into all of the three main
parking areas as well as the disabled parking area at the north of the site. The parking lots contain a total of
850 parking spaces, including 21 disabled accessible parking spaces, which is more than adequate per the
City's Off Street Parking and Loading section of the Zoning Ordinance. The City does not have a parking
requirement for courthouse facilities, but Section 8.76 of the Zoning Ordinance (Off Street Parking and
Loading) states that for uses not specifically listed in the ordinance, the Director of Community
Development shall determine the parking requirement based upon the requirements for comparable uses
and upon the particular characteristics of the use.
In this case, using a similar parking requirement for an office complex, a 208,408 square foot building
would require 1 space per 350 square feet, or 596 total spaces. This project has more than 250 parking
spaces in excess of that requirement, which should minimize concerns about the potential for courthouse
parking in adjacent neighborhoods or at adjacent businesses.
For pedestrians arriving to the site via foot, bicycle, or public transit, a series of sidewalks and walkways
on site take people from the street to the building entrance. The site is designed so that all pedestrian travel
routes lead safely to the entry plaza in front of the building, and the disabled parking has been located as
close as possible to the main entrance.
Buildinz Heizht and Architecture
The courthouse building is four stories tall with an additional basement-level floor that sits partially below
ground. The building is massed into four portions, including a two-story main entry wing on the eastern
portion of the building, a three-story office portion, a four-story glass atrium that joins the office and
courthouse wings, and the four-story courthouse portion. The three-story office portion of the building is
3't:f3
59 feet above adjacent grade and the courthouse portion of the building is 90 feet 3 inches above adjacent
grade at its highest point. The mechanical equipment for the building was originally roof-mounted.
Because the equipment and screening added over ten feet to the height of the building, it was relocated to
the interior of the building. Additionally, the design of the atrium, which was the building's tallest feature,
has been modified to be more subdued and less obtrusive.
The height of the original building was 102 feet 8 inches from adjacent grade to the top of the highest
architectural feature. The County revised the design of the building so that the tallest architectural features
have been eliminated from the building and now the tallest point of the building is 90 feet 3 inches from
adjacent grade, some of which is screened from view by on-site berms and retaining walls.
The architecture of the building as originally proposed was out of context with the surrounding buildings
and had no relation to any civic buildings in Dublin. Staff requested that the building facades be
redesigned to give them more of a horizontal emphasis that would lessen the apparent height and soften the
appearance of the building. The County's architectural team was able to accomplish this and now the main
features of the building (windows, reveal lines, variations in colors and building materials) draw more of a
line around the building instead of emphasizing the building's height.
Buildinf! Materials and Colors
The building will be constructed with pre-cast concrete blocks and a blend of glass types: both a see-
through and spandrel glass curtainwall glazing system in the office and courthouse portions of the building
as well as a glass channel system in the atrium. The colors proposed for the building are subtle earth tones
and will look very natural with the concrete material.
Buildinf! Function and Amenities
The East County Hall of Justice includes 13 courtrooms and their support agencies, including court
administration and jury services, a cafeteria, family and children's services, district attorney, and public
defender, among others. The building is designed to accommodate approximately 315 employees and will
be open weekdays from 8:00-5:30 p.m. Several nights a week, night court may be held, which would
extend the operating hours until 9:00 p.m. Other night meetings and public functions may occasionally be
held at the building.
Site Landscavinz
Alameda County is pursuing Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification for the
building and site, so great attention has been given to site landscaping, on-site water retention through
bioswales and using permeable surfaces for parking areas. The landscape palette chosen for the site
includes a wide range of native plants, trees, and grasses, and will provide an interesting compliment to the
building.
In order to accommodate the water retention facilities planned for the site, there are substantial landscape
buffers around the perimeter of the site and in the parking areas, which will eventually grow to screen
much of the site and provide a noise and visual buffer.
At the entrance to the building, there is a public plaza and sitting area that will serve building users as well
as the public at large. The public plaza will also be used as the drop off area for vehicles delivering people
to the site. The plaza hardscape and landscape areas will provide an attractive welcome area to the main
entrance of the building.
4'b7
Site Security
In addition to the three (3) entrance drives onto the site from Gleason Drive, there is also a secured
entrance off Broder Drive on the north side of the site where detainees will enter and exit the site and the
building. Behind the secured area is also where the judicial parking area is located. All detainees will
arrive at the site via bus at the Broder Drive entrance, enter a secured sallyport, and exit the vehicle. The
detainees will be brought inside the building and the bus will exit the secured sallyport into the secured
parking area, and then the bus will leave the site. Once inside the building, detainees travel through
separate corridors than the public or the judiciary, and there are holding cells on site for short-term
detention.
Visitors, jurors, and employees coming to the courthouse will enter the building via the main entrance and
pass through the security area at this location.
Site Develovment Review (SDR) findinzs
The project, as proposed and as conditioned, is consistent with the purpose and intent of Chapter 8.104 of
the Dublin Zoning Ordinance (Site Development Review). The project, as conditioned, is consistent with
the policies and land use designations of the Dublin General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and is
consistent with the Planned Development Zoning for the site.
The project, as proposed and as conditioned, 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 general welfare. In
addition, the approved site development, including site layout, structures, vehicular access, circulation and
parking, setbacks, height, walls, public safety and similar elements, have been designed to provide a
desirable environment for the development.
The Applicant has given careful attention to design the project to be physically compatible with the site
and to ensure that impacts to views and topographic features have been addressed to the greatest degree
possible. Additionally, considerations to the architectural compatibility of the building with the
surrounding residential and commercial uses have been addressed and mitigated while still maintaining
the operational requirements of the court facility. The character, scale and quality of the design, building
materials and colors, exterior lighting, and similar elements have designed to ensure compatibility of this
development with the character of adjacent buildings, neighborhoods, and uses.
In all, the County has made substantial design modifications to the building and site to ensure that the
City's initial concerns about the project were addressed. The resulting project is a building and site that
fits well with other civic buildings in Dublin and has the potential to be an asset to the community.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
Staff requested that the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council on this project
but refer its hearing jurisdiction to the City Council, pursuant to Section 8.96.020.C.3 of the Dublin
Zoning Ordinance, which states that "At any point in the project review process the Planning Commission
may transfer original hearing jurisdiction to the City Council at its discretion because of policy
implications, unique or unusual circumstances, or the magnitude of the project." The City Council
indicated its concern about the original design and neighborhood compatibility of the project at the
November 23, 2003 joint study session, and expressed an interest in having approval authority over this
proj ect.
The Planning Commission reviewed the project application at their meeting on November 9, 2004. No
members of the public spoke on the project, and the discussion among the Commissioners was brief. The
one comment made was to ask the County to ensure that the paving material in the vehicle and pedestrian
5"b7
plaza area in front of the building is decorative and not plain concrete. The Commission voted 4-0 to
recommend approval ofthe project to the City Council.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The County of Alameda prepared a joint Environmental Impact Report and Environmental Impact
Statement (EIR/EIS), dated April 2003, to determine the potential environmental impacts occurring as a
result of the proposed project (Attachment 3). The Final EIR/EIS concluded that the preferred alternative
for the location of the East County Hall of Justice was in Dublin at the subject site. The EIRÆIS
identified mitigation measures to address the environmental impacts identified and the Final EIR/EIS and
accompanying mitigation measures were adopted the Alameda County Board of Supervisors on May 6,
2003.
Alameda County is the lead agency for this project, and the City is a responsible agency under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As a responsible agency, the City's role is limited.
Rather than certify the lead agency's document as adequate, the decision-making body of a responsible
agency is required only to certify that it reviewed and considered the information contained in the EIR/EIS
prepared by the lead agency, according to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15050, Subdivision (b) (See
Attachment 4). The project as proposed is consistent with the project at described in the EIRÆIS.
At their meeting on November 9, 2004, the Planning Commission voted 4-0 in favor of recommending
that the City Council certify it reviewed and considered the EIR/EIS.
PUBLIC NOTICING:
Notices of the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings were sent to all property owners
and occupants within 1000 feet of the subject site, and in some cases even further. All residences between
Hacienda Drive and Tassajara Creek and north of Summer Glen Drive received notice, and all businesses
between Hacienda Drive and Arnold Road north of Central Parkway received notice of the public
hearings. The notices sent for this project well exceeded the State requirement to notify owners and
occupants within 300 feet. A public notice was also published in the Valley Times on Saturday October
30, 2004.
CITY OF DUBLIN/ALAMEDA COUNTY AGREEMENT:
Because of the unique nature of this project where the City of Dublin has Site Development Review
authority but will not be issuing subsequent building permits, an alternative method of ensuring the
Applicant's compliance with the Conditions of Approval for the project had to be developed. The City
Attorney, in cooperation with the County Counsel, drafted an agreement regarding the enforcement of
Conditions of Approval for the East County Hall of Justice. The Agreement is an exhibit to the SDR
approval resolution and the Conditions of Approval for the project are contained within the Agreement
(Attachment 5).
Subsequent to the City Council's approval of the Agreement and the Conditions of Approval contained
therein, the Agreement will be acted on by the County Board of Supervisors on November 30, 2004. The
City's Site Development Review approval will become effective only after the agreement is executed by
both parties.
This application has been reviewed by the applicable City departments and agencies, and their comments
have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council: (1) Open public hearing, (2) Hear Staff presentation, (3) Take
testimony from the Applicant and the public, (4) Question Staff, Applicant and the public, (5) Close the
61f.)Î
public hearing and deliberate, (6) Adopt the Resolution (Attachment 4) certifying that the City Council
reviewed and considered the Final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement
(EIR/EIS) for the Alameda County Juvenile Justice Facility and East County Hall of Justice dated April
2003, and (7) Adopt the Resolution (Attachment 5) approving PA 02-030, a Site Development Review
(SDR) application to construct a 208,408 square foot building comprised of courtrooms, offices, and
associated facilities on 21.77 acres located on the north side of Gleason Drive between Madigan and
Arnold Drives, and approving the associated agreement between the City of Dublin and the County of
Alameda regarding the enforcement of Conditions of Approval for the East County Hall of Justice.
711b1