Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-26-2006 PC Minutes Planning Commission Minutes CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, September 26,2006 in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair Schaub called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Chair Schaub, Vice Chair Wehrenberg, Commissioners Biddle, Fasulkey and King; Jeri Ram, Community Development Director; Mary Jo Wilson, Planning Manager; and Rhonda Franklin, Recording Secretary. Absent: None ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA Chair Schaub suggested placing the Consent Calendar item before the Oral Communications item, and the Planning Commissioners unanimously agreed. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS The September 12, 2006 minutes were approved as submitted. Chair Schaub abstained from the vote due to his absence during the September 12, 2006 meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR 6.1 Hoang Veranda Variance Resolution of Approval (P A 06-050) The Applicant is requesting approval of a Variance to exceed maximum lot coverage of 35% by 3.2% for a veranda addition to a home located at 5747 Kingsmill Terrace. Cm. Fasulkey briefly explained the project for the benefit of Chair Schaub who was absent during the September 12, 2006 public hearing on the project. On a motion by Cm. Fasulkey, seconded by Vice Chair Wehrenberg, and by a vote of 4-0-1, with Chair Schaub abstaining from the vote due to his absence during the September 12, 2006 meeting, the Planning Commission adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 06 - 38 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A V ARlANCE REQUEST TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE OF 35% BY:l:: 3.2% FOR A 420 SQUARE FOOT VERANDA ADDITION TO A RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 5747 KlNGSMILL TERRACE (APN 985-0035-017) P A 06-050 q>{anning Commission 1?rgufar ,,\feeting 106 Scptem6..,. 26, 2006 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 5.1 Planning Commissioner's Discussion of Planning Commission work over the last year. (Chair Schaub) Chair Schaub stated that he would like the Planning Commission to discuss its work over the past year, including what the Planning Commission feels has gone well, opportunities for improvement, and existing processes. Cm. Biddle stated that the Study Sessions are very helpful, and the Planning Commissioners agreed. Cm. Fasulkey asked if Staff agrees that Study Sessions are helpful, and Ms. Mary Jo Wilson, Planning Manager, said yes. Ms. Jeri Ram, Community Development Director, pointed out that not all Planning projects are brought before the Planning Commission as a Study Session. She stated that Staff makes judgment calls on what to present as a Study Session. The Planning Commissioners agreed that Staff is making appropriate decisions on which projects to present as Study Sessions. Cm. King stated that Study Sessions allow the Planning Commission to be a part of the beginning phases of a project. Cm. Biddle stated that Study Sessions allow the Planning Commissioners to request desired design features before the project is finalized. Chair Schaub stated that Study Sessions allow the Planning Commission to brainstorm on a project without having to make an on-the-spot decision. Cm. Fasulkey commented that the quality of projects has greatly improved over the years. Cm. Biddle stated that the Planning Commission's interaction with the public has gone well. He stated that Applicants and presenters who have come before the Planning Commission are willing to speak out, ask questions, and state their positions. Vice Chair Wehrenberg pointed out that there have been very few instances where public speakers before the Planning Commission did not presented pertinent information. Cm. Biddle stated that speaking time-limits could help abbreviate such occurrences. Cm. King stated that he would like to know what the City Council expects the Planning Commission to take into consideration when making decisions on projects. Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that she would like to know about all of the decision-making options available to the Planning Commission. Ms. Ram stated that if the Planning Commission has concerns or issues with a project, it could continue the project to allow the Applicant to work with Staff on resolving the issues. Cm. King stated that he would like the City Council to better understand the decision-making role of the Planning Commission. Ms. Ram explained that the City Council selected the Planning Commissioners to make decisions based on land-use. q>{anning Commission 1?mu~lr :Meeting 107 Scptem6er 26, 2006 Chair Schaub stated that he would like more information on the types of decisions the Planning Commission is making: quasi-judicial, adjudicatory, legislative, etc. Ms. Wilson stated that Staff would make sure this information is included in future Staff Reports. Chair Schaub and Cm. Fasulkey stated that John Bakker, City Attorney, is a great help to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commissioners agreed. Cm. King stated that he would like clarification on what determines whether a project is brought before the Planning Commission or handled at Staff level. Ms. Ram explained that auch decisions are made at Staff's discretion in accordance with the Municipal Code. Cm. Biddle commented that the community appears to be more sensitive to changes to existing land-uses than adding new land-uses to raw land. Chair Schaub asked for Planning Commission feedback on how the Planning Commission meetings are being chaired. Cm. Fasulkey and Cm. Biddle commented that perhaps the role of the Chair should be to opine on a project near the end of the Planning Commission's deliberation. Vice Chair Wehrenberg commented that the Chair should be careful about speaking for the entire Commission when each Commissioner's opinion may differ. Cm. King stated that he appreciates that the Chair gives each Planning Commissioner plenty of time to voice their opinion, and the Planning Commissioners agreed. Cm. Biddle stated that he feels the Planning Commission works very well together, and the Planning Commissioners and Staff agreed. Chair Schaub asked for Planning Commission feedback on the Planning Commission packets. Chair Schaub stated that he would like to see graphics from commercial developers on par with graphics from residential developers. Ms. Wilson stated that Staff would continue to require better graphics from commercial developers and applicants in general. Chair Schaub asked if the Planning Commission could continue an item at its discretion, and Ms. Ram said yes. Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that she appreciates the thoroughness and succinctness of the Planning Commission minutes, and the Planning Commissioners agreed. Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that she would like Staff's presentations to include aerials and photos of the surrounding areas and buildings of a project site, and the Planning Commissioners agreed. Ms. Wilson stated that Staff would include these documents as a part of Staff Reports. Cm. King stated that he is impressed by the City's aspiration for excellence. He stated that he appreciates the City's investment in the Planning Commission by sending them to events such as the Planners Institute. He further stated that his trust in Staff continues to increase. He complimented the Planning Commissioners on having the best interest of the City in mind. Cm. Biddle complimented Staff on the Staff Reports, but wondered if there is an opportunity to use less paper for Staff Reports. Ms. Wilson stated that Staff would continue to explore ways to q>{anning Commission 1?mll~lr 5\feeting 108 Scptem6er 26, 200(i refine Staff Reports. Chair Schaub stated that he would like Staff Reports to more clearly state the findings that have to be made. Ms. Wilson stated that findings would be clearly stated as a part of the Staff Report. Chair Schaub asked for Planning Commission feedback on the upcoming Design Element of the General Plan for future projects. He stated that he would like to have a joint meeting with the City Council to discuss an interim design element while Staff works on completing the Community Design Element and Downtown Specific Plan. Cm. King agreed and stated that it would be helpful if an interim design concept was developed. Ms. Ram explained that Staff would begin work on the Community Design Element first, and then work on the Downtown Specific Plan would begin soon after. She stated that a joint workshop with the City Council on the Community Design Element would take place near the end of the year. She pointed out that the Planning Commission could always give input to the City Council through the Goals & Objectives and League of California Cities meetings. Cm. Wehrenberg stated that she would like to see recycle stations at parks. Ms. Ram stated that Staff would forward this suggestion to the Parks & Community Service Director. Cm. Biddle stated that he would like this type of Planning Commission discussion to be annual, and the Planning Commissioners agreed. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - NONE PUBLIC HEARINGS - NONE NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS - NONE OTHER BUSINESS 10.1 Brief INFORMATION ONLY reports from the Planning Commission and/or Staff, including Committee Reports and Reports by the Planning Commission related to meetings attended at City Expense (AB 1234). The Planning Commission did not have any items to report. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 8:21 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: ~~ q>{anniug Commission 1?rguf.1r 5\feeting 109 Scptem6er 26, 2006