The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11-22-1982 Agenda Stmt PA82-003 Naugles, Inc. AGENDA STATEMENT Meeting D~te! Nov~er 22, 1982 SUBJECT . . Appe~l ~f planning applic~tion PA82-003 NAUGLES, INC. EXHIBITS ATTACHED . . Memo from Planning Dttector dated November 18, 1982; Letters from Robert Jacob dated November 3, 1982, and September l7~ 1982. . RECOMMENDATION . . Deny the appeal and approve the project subject to con~di tions. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None DESCRIPTION: Naug.1~,s.,. ,In,c..", was granted a Conditional Use Permit to operate a drive-in restaurant in the General Commercial District. A condition of approval required the propeeed drive-in window to be relo- cated. The applicant appealed the condition. The Staff analysis of the project found potential traffic safety problems with the proposed location of the drive-up window. Staff recommends denying the appeal and approving the project subject to the conditions that: 1) The drive-up window is relocated 2) Adequate vehicle/stacking space is provided 3) The western portion of the site is landscaped 4) The project is completed within one year Exhibit A would implement the Staff recommendation. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- COI!IES TO: .. ITEM NO. TO: Ci ty Council FROM: Planning Direct~r SUBJECT: Appeal of planni~gappli~ation PA82-003 NAUGLES, INC. GENERAL INFORMATION Subject: Conditional Use ~~rm~t to allow a drive-in restaurant Applicant/Appellant: Naug~s, Inc., 2932 East Nutwood Avenue, Fullerton, CA 926}4' ' , Representative: Robert Jacob.,_ The Menlo Company, 1100 Alma Street, Suite 200, ~enlo Park, CA 94025 Property OWner: Jim Lange, 6500 Vi.11age Parkway, Dublin, CA 94568 LOCation: 6568 Village Pa~kway Assessor Parcel Number: 941-1401-21-1 Existing Land Use: Vacant commercial building, formerly a fast food restaurant;" near portion of site undeveloped. Surrounding zoning and Land Use: North - M-l; service station/car wash South - C-2; office build]in:s:., East - C-2; retail stores, i~~luding fast food restaurant West - Freeway Site History: January 1977: Site Devel9P~ent Review approved for a fast food restaurant. ... September 2, 1982: Plan~~n9 ~pplication PA82-003 heard by Zoning Administration. Application was continued to allow the applicant to explore the 20ssibility of entering the site on the north side of the building and exiting on the south. Appl~cant concuFred with ~he continuance. October 7, 1982: Applicanion heard by Zoning Administrator and approved subject to conditions. Applicant appealed the conditmon requiFing the ~location of the drive-up window. APplicable Regulations. A drive-in business in the C-2 ~istrict requires a Conditional Use Permit (Section 8-49.2).' A conditional use requires spe~~al review and appraisal to determine: 1) whether or not the us~ is required by the public need 2) whether or not the us~ will be properly related to other land use, transportation and service facilities . c. _ . 3) whether or not the use, under all circumstances and conditions, will have a substantia~ aftverse effect on health or safety, or be substantially detr~en~al to public weliare or injurious to property or improvemen.ts . 4) whether or not the us~ will be contrary to the specific intent of the zoning distric~. (pection 8-11.0). The stated intent of the C-2 D,is,trict is to provide locations for relatively large areas con~aining facilities for a wide variety of business and commercial a~~iy~ti~s needed to serve the community. Environmental Review: Cateqorically exempt, Clafls 5, Minor Alteration in Land Use Limitation. Notification: Public notice was given by publication, posting, and mail. ANALYSIS: Circulation: The prpposed location of the drive-up widdow may lead to traffic safety pboblems. (See attached diagram). A vehicle leaving the window would cross and block the paah of vehicles entering the parking area. Vehicles blocked fro~ entering the parking area would be stopped in the public right of way and may interrupt traffic flow on Village Parkway. Reasonable parking lot design principles would provide taat: 1. Aisles shall provide for non-congestive flow from and into the street by logical rel~tio~ships with the driveways. 2. AAtwo-way driveway shall lead into a two-way aisle. 2. Reversal of the 'right:hand ~ule' of driving for two-way aisles or closely adjacent o~e-~ay drives is hot acceptbble. The following comments reg~rdin9 the proposed circulation were received during the application rev~e~ process: Road Dept. - There can be on-site operation,:l problems when exiting traffic crosses enterijig ~raffic~ Fire Dept. - Establishmen~ ~f divider to channelize vehicles to the drive-up window may impai.r, the normal flow of traffic within the parking lot. Police - Service window should be located further back allowing more space to exit than pla~s' 9~11 for. A relocation of the drive~up~i~d~, ~way from the street would minimize the traffic safety problems and congestion at the entrance to the parking lot. Landscaping: The undeveloped ~estern portion of the site is without landscaping and tends to collect trash. Landscaping would make the project more attractive and appealing. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denying the appeal making the findings and approving the project subject to con.di.tio~,s ,as follows: Find 'fhat: 1) The project is require~ by the public need for drive-in restaurant facilities. 2) The project is properly ~ituated in relation to other land use, transportation, and seFv~c~ facilities. 3) The project, as conditioned, will not have substantial adverse effects on health or s~fe~y or be substantially detrimental to public weliare or inju~i~us to property or improvements. 4) The puoject will be consistent with the intent of the C-2 District to provide for business and commercial activities to serve the communi ty . - . ' Approve the project subject tbethe following specific conditions: 1) Relocate drive-up wind9w on south or west side of building to almow a minimum of 45 ft. from the public right of way, for 2 full-size vehicles tp ~afely stop while a full-size vehicle leaves the drive-up wi~do~. The drive-up window location and parking layout shall b~ ~o, the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 2) Provide vehiclesstackinq spage for a minimum of 5 full-size vehicles. 3) Submit a landscaping polan for the western portion of the site to the Planning Director..~~e ?lanning Director shall approve the landscaping plan, incl.udip9a.naut.omatic irrigation system, prior to application f9r .a ,building permit. The project's architect or landscape architect shall certify in writing that the landscaping as apPFo~e~ is installed prior to the final building inspection anF 0~9~Pa.~cy of the project. 4) The prgject shall be i~pl~.nted in substantial compliance with the approved plans an~ma.~erials on file with the Planning Department. 5) The Conditional Use Permit shall expire November l8, 1982, unless the Building PePni.t is .s.ecured and the project is substan- tially completed. The_C~nditional Use Permit shall be revocable for cause prior to tha~ ~i~~ in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance. The attached exhibit inclu~es the necessary findings and conditions. On , 1982, tpe City Council of the City of Dublin took the following actions.. regarding planning application 'A82-003 NAUBLES, INC., a categoric~l ~xemption and conditional use pemmit to allow a drive-in restaurant in a C-2 General Commercial District at 6568 Village Parkway, DUblin, Assessor Parcel Number 94l-l401-21-l: A. Found the project to be cat~gorically exempt, Class 5, Minor alteration in Land Use L~mitation. B. Found the following regarding the Conditional Use Permit: 1) The project is required by the public need for drive-in restaurent facilities.: 2) The project is properly situated in relation to other land use, transportation, and seFvige facilities. 3) The project, as conditioned, will not have substantial adverse effects on health or safety or be substantially detrimental to public welfare or injurious to property or improvements. 4) The project will be consistent with the intent of the C-2 District to provide fOF b~si~ess and commercial activities to serve the community. C. Approved the project ~ubject to the following specific conditions: 1) Relocate drive-up window on south or west side of building to allow a minimum of 45 ft. from the public right of way, for 2 i full-size vehicles to ~a(ely stop while a full-size vehicle lea.es the drive-up window. The drive-up window locationsand parking layout shall b~ t~' the satisfactiDn of the Planning Director. 2) Provide stacking space for ,a minimum of 5 full-size vehicles. 3) Submit a landscaping pian for the western portion of the site to the Planning Directc;r. 'The- Planning Director shall approve the landscaping plan, ~n~ludin9 an automatic irrigation system, prior to application f9r ~ bu~lding permit. The project's archi architect or landscpp~~~chitect shall certify in writing that the landscaping as apPFo~ed is installed prior to the final building inspection anft 09c~pancy of the project. 4) The project shall be ~plem~nted in substantial compliance with the approved plans an~ma~e~ials on file with the Planning Deparment. 5) The Conditional Use Pemmit shall expire movember 18, 1983, unless the Building pe:cmit is secured and the project is substantially complete~. ~ The Conditional Use Permit shall be ewvmcable for cause prior to that time in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance. .- rs\ Arbyx@ ~~ THE MENLO COMPANY 1100 ALMA STREET. MENLO PARK, CAliFORNIA 94025 . (415) 327-7200 November 3, 1982 f\C(.;1:IYED NOV 51982 CITY OF DUBLIN Mr. Richard Ambrose City Manager The City of Dublin P.O. Box 2340 Dublin, CA 94568 Re: Action of City Council on appeal of planning application PA82-003 Dear Mr. Ambrose: On October 25, 1982 the City Council of the City of Dublin acted on our appeal in this matter. We were not present to express our position as we did not receive notice of the hearing. While it is our understanding that your records show that notice was sent to us at the above address, our office has never received the notice nor did we learn of the hearing until after it occurred. We have also been advised that Naugles, Inc. did not receive notice of the hearing. The appeal was filed as we believed that the Council would listen to our. position and fairly consider our problem. Accordingly, we definitely intended to be present to present our position. The Menlo Company is the General Parter of a Limited Partnership that owns the building and is the ground lea see . The Menlo Company filed the appeal because the previous action of this City had a substantial adverse impact on its ability to use it's property. Please consider this letter a request that this matter again be placed on the Coupcil's agenda for hearing on November 8, 1982. If for any reason, this is not possible please contact me at once. Sincerely, RMJ: rp L--~J I / (fA { '-<..J J r,C.'<:> t-~ ~ I (I' () I ;: L.- Jb 1-1) H. "" 1~(2.;'rJ j,J~l..J,c-~'. t.,},~ L, I,~ /:1--.. 1/ h 2/82 0 LL._ ( ( RECEIVED, SSP 1 rl1982 ( THE MENLO COMPANY COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE BROKERAGE DUBLIN PlANNING' 1100 ALMA STREET, SUITE 200 . MENLO PARK, CALIFORNIA 9402' . (41') 327-7200 \Jwv I ~ . . ....~.,cc;41(r;'~.. ". .' ,t\ A\ :' \ ^ ""'-r.;:~'<',' """'/...<',' ';.:' :", ,"".' " ' \.LllAIA'vwv.. .~. lri.. '''''".,'.' L.'~ '-. "" ' ' .' " ' ~; ~ '~".".~~"~' .~\.4~'J--' . , ~ l.(J"U ~ V"D ~"~'~ \:k, 1J~ '\L ~ ..' ~ ( ) bJL1. ~~ ~. lDAOuAAM 1\, ~ ~ (~~~~.' W tiu.~ ~-dr ~m" . \'IJ.M.' '~\n lM1- ()..A.~ . . Id A J.O ltD IJ . A..ut 'fu u:ff j) ~ fWl) ,~'~~ ~ ;E:;i.~. ~, ." ....~ ~-~."~ ~ 'lL ~ ~ U\MVv1 ~..~ .~.~.'UJ.~ ~~ ~ """""~"':"""~:~"""'~~~' ~,1. j=& . '~. ' ."" .' o. ". '.. .' .'... "',:'"::",:"',,, "..~". '. ............ .......... '" .... .d),"~' ffnC.UP , . . .' '.' , . .' " - . ." " ";"'-"', .". .'.' '. .' -. '.-. '.. -',' "'.-' .'.'.' '. .' . ":,:.:...~..,>,,,,: "iL'.'",:'::, .",""'" .......,::'........:'.:.. '. '~. '. ".\AJ.AA1:J..f) O.Al~OH. '6JJ.U " ,.~., _......... ~.. ~J~~'~- '.' . ~""'\JJ ~ ~ ~ uMl "i> ~~ Llow~N. ~~ ~ ~ · ~ /l, _ ~...J ~'I~ ~ ~ \W C'-.l-~ ~ ~ ~ - -~ -W ~ {. ~'~I~ ~(IJt4~l.-