Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-10-2007 PC Minutes Planning Conlmission Minutes CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, April 10, 2007, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair Schaub called the meeting to order at 7:00p.m. Present: Chair Schaub, Vice Chair Wehrenberg, Commissioners Biddle, King, and Tomlinson; Mary Jo Wilson, Planning Manager; Kit Faubion, Assistant City Attorney; Erica Fraser, Senior Planer; Bryan Moore, Assistant Planner; and Renuka Dhadwal, Recording Secretary. Absent: None ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA - NONE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS The March 27, 2007 minutes were approved as submitted. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - NONE CONSENT CALENDAR - NONE WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - NONE PUBLIC HEARINGS 8.1 P A 03-060 and 06-030 Annexation, General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, Stage 1 Development Plan for Casamira Valley (Moller Ranch), Vargas and Tipper properties, Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (Casamira Valley), Mitigated Negative Declaration (Vargas) and Pre-Annexation Agreement (Legislative Act). Chair Schaub asked for the Staff Report. Ms. Erica Fraser, Senior Planner, presented the specifics of the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Chair Schaub asked if the discussion regarding the demonstration garden would occur during the Stage 2 process. Ms. Fraser indicated that it is partly a Stage 1 issue as well, since the process typically involves setting aside some land for semi-public uses. Chair Schaub asked what the net density was for Casamira Valley/Moller Ranch project. He indicated that he would like to discuss the concept of general average density based on the way the property was configured, versus what is actually being built in the net use of the space. Ms. O'[ormillg Comllllssion 1(tgu~lr 5Weeting 31 ;lpd[ 10, 200? Fraser pointed out that Casamira Valley is a little different. The density for this project has been calculated on the net acres for the site which is at 6.1 and is considered net and gross value. Chair Schaub asked what the net density was for the Vargas project. Ms. Fraser pointed out that it is a little over 13. Chair Schaub further added that if the General Plan indicates developing lower density and if the developer proposes a high density project then it should be a point for discussion. Ms. Fraser pointed out that the Moller Ranch project (Casamira Valley) is different from most projects, as the developer is developing only a smaller portion of the site. Vargas on the other hand, is larger and therefore can include more density within that project. Ms. Mary Jo Wilson, Planning Manager, stated that while the General Plan regulates the land uses, it also has a section that describes how the net and the gross densities are calculated. Chair Schaub wanted to clarify that the affordable housing is not part of the Stage 1 approvals. Ms. Fraser responded that it would be part of the Site Development Review or the Tentative Map process. Cm. Wehrenberg asked when the Stage 2 process would begin. Ms. Fraser pointed out that the properties would need to get annexed in to the City before Stage 2 can commence. Staff anticipates being on the LAFCo agenda in July and the Moller Ranch project will then proceed with Stage 2, after July. Chair Schaub clarified for the Commission that the reason the Frederich property is not included is because it has already been annexed in to the City. Cm. Biddle asked Staff if there is any activity on the Frederich property. Ms. Fraser responded that Vargas and Frederich properties are proposed to be developed as one residential development and the two properties have the same developer. For the Frederich property, the developer on April 3, 2007 asked Council's permission to conduct a study to change the Medium-High and Neighborhood Commercial land uses to Single-Family residential uses. The City Council authorized Staff to conduct a Study for its feasibility. Cm. Biddle commented that it would be nice if the two properties could be processed as one application. Ms. Fraser indicated that Staff is anticipating the developer to bring forward the two properties (Vargas and Frederich) as one development. However, the developer for Vargas is hoping to go through the Stage 1 process and annexation for Vargas before coming forward with a formal application for developing the two properties. Chair Schaub stated that he had looked at the comments received from the agencies regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and noted that they were not significant. He wanted to know if Staff received any responses from the agencies to the City's response to their comments. Ms. Fraser responded that nobody responded to the City's responses. Ms. Wilson indicated that, typically, the City does not receive any comments to the responses. If an agency/person has any issues with the responses, the agency/person would attend the public hearing to address those issues. pfanniug Commission 1(fgufar 5Weeting 32 )lpri{1O, 200? Cm. Biddle wanted to knowm when Moller and Vargas get annexed, what will be left to annex. Ms. Fraser responded that the Redgewick property would be the last property left to be annexed. Hearing no further questions for Staff, Chair Schaub opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to speak. Jim Summers, President of DeSilva Group and applicant for the Moller Ranch project thanked Staff for all of their efforts and stated that he would answer any questions the Commission may have. Cm. Biddle asked who would be responsible for the trail on the property. Mr. Summers pointed out on a map, the different agencies responsible for the different easements. The areas marked as green, which is the Conservation Easement, would be maintained by the Home Owners Association (HOA); the areas marked in blue, adjacent to the drainage would be maintained by the GHAD; and the area marked in brown would be maintained by the HOA. Cm. Biddle wanted to know who would claim ownership to the rural residential portion. Mr. Summers responded that the ownership of the rural residential will be held by the HOA; however, it would eventually end up being owned by the holder of the conservation easement. Chair Schaub asked if that land could be leased out for farming by the holder of the conservation easement. Mr. Summers indicated that it is a possibility. He further added that there would be a cattle grazing fuel management plan to ensure that the fuel levels are kept in check for the area. Ms. Fraser pointed out that the Stage 1 Planned Development for the project includes that the cattle grazing activity will continue in the hills. Furthermore, there is an Eastern Dublin Grazing Management Plan which will regulate the cattle grazing activity on the hills. Cm. Biddle wanted to know if measures were in place for protecting trees and that grazing does not occur along the roads and the creek. Mr. Summers responded that as a part of their work with the biological resource agency, certain measures were being taken to protect sensitive habitat in the area between the roads. Ms. Fraser further added that the developer will be reconstructing the creek by adding numerous trees and would be fixing the creek to restore its original, natural state. Mr. Fred Musser, representative from the Sun Valley Development, also came forward to talk about the Vargas project. Mr. Musser complimented Staff for their hard work and stated that he would be glad to answer any questions that the Commission may have. Chair Schaub pointed out that it is appropriate to discuss the product type being proposed for Vargas. He wanted to ensure that it is stated on record that the Commission has questions and concerns regarding the product type being proposed, since neither this type of product nor the proposed density has been built before. Chair Schaub asked the Assistant City Attorney if it was alright to have a discussion regarding the product type although it is not part of the approval process. Chair Schaub noted that the houses being proposed were too many and too close to each other. Ms. Wilson explained that this particular zoning designation allows for 6.1 O'fannillg Comll1i.wi", 1:I.f[lufar :Meeting 33 jipn"{JO, 200? to 14 dwelling units per acre and is based on gross density as per the General Plan and that there could be a variety of product types designed. The types of dwellings proposed by the applicant are detached and have narrow widths; however, that is not part of the approvals for Stage 1. Ms. Wilson stated that the direction the Planning Commission needs to take is to decide if the land use designation is appropriate for the type of dwellings being proposed as a part of the Stage 1 before the Commission this evening. Cm. King commented that the litmus test for this would be the comments from the people living in the neighborhood indicating how the Planning Commission could approve this project. Cm. King used California Highlands as an example of a similar project that is not well received due to the narrow streets and the resultant access issues. Cm. Biddle, on the contrary, indicated that quality could be achieved through constructing small detached homes. He pointed out that this product type has not yet been constructed in the eastern Dublin area. Ms. Fraser pointed out that California Highlands was designated high density with 25.1 dwellings to 1 acre and hence they are different. Cm. Tomlinson stated that he would not dwell on the issue of the market demand for such product type; however from a planning perspective he wanted to know if the access issues raised during the Study Session were addressed. Ms. Fraser responded that those issues can be brought up during the Stage 2 process. She added that the Planning Commission could guide the applicant by telling them the types of issues that the applicant needs to address for the Stage 2 process. Cm. Tomlinson suggested that he would like to see some kind of common recreation element similar to the Casamira Valley project. Cm. Wehrenberg stated she would like the applicant to address two critical points for Stage 2 and those would be: a) acceptable parking, and b) access issues into the driveway. Cm. Wehrenberg also suggested that the applicants for both projects incorporate some green elements such as solar energy. Cm. King stated that he would support the issue raised by Cm. Wehrenberg. Cm. King suggested that the applicants should wire the dwellings to install solar panels. Cm. King indicated that he would like to know what the cost would be to build the homes with solar energy. Mr. Musser responded that the solar panels would cost $20,000 per house. Mr. Musser added that Sun Valley would be incorporating some green elements in their project based on the Planning Commission's comments during the Study Session; however, the solar panels, due to the cost involved, could be offered as an option to the homeowner to install. Ms. Fraser pointed out that the City does not require green building elements. The current City policy is to provide the developer with a checklist at building permit process, to check-off the green elements being provided and this process could be included for these two projects as well. Chair Schaub commented that he would like: a) parking; b) safety; c) recreation; and d) garbage pick-up issues to be addressed for Stage 2. Mr. Musser responded that his company would be happy to address all the issues raised by the Planning Commission. Pfonnillg Com'tilss!rm 1:I.fgufar 'Weet ing 34 jipri[ 10, 2007 Cm. King noted that there was no commercial zoning listed in the project and he would like to see some commercial uses in the area in terms of reducing traffic. Cm. Biddle asked if the Stage 2 process would commence during late summer. Mr. Musser responded that would be the intent. Chair Schaub commented about affordable units for the Casamira Valley Site 1 and stated that due to the number of homes proposed, there would be a lot of areas that would be maintained by the HOA, and there will be GHAD fees as well and that would add to the cost of purchasing the home and making it less affordable for the homeowner. This would be a point of.discussion for Stage 2 and the City Council would need to make a decision if that is the most affordable way to develop this project. Hearing no further comments, Chair Schaub closed the public hearing. Cm. Wehrenberg asked when the Tipper property would come back for a change to the density. Ms. Fraser responded that Staff will be unable to answer that now, since the intent of the development is unknown. Cm. Biddle commented that topography plays a large role in the development of these properties. On a motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by Cm. King and by a vote of 5-0-0, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 07 -12 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF A SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CASAMIRA V ALLEYjMOLLER RANCH PROJECT AND TIPPER PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6861 AND 7440 TASSAJARA ROAD (APN 985-0001-001 AND 986-0004-001) P A 03-060 RESOLUTION NO. 07-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE VARGAS PROJECT, A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSDERATIONS P A 06-030 pfimnillg Comnmsiotl 1:I.fgllfar :Meeting 35 ;lpri[ 10, 20tJ? RESOLUTION NO. 07-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECT STAFF TO FILE AN APPLICATION WITH THE ALAMEDA COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCo) TO ANNEX THE CASAMIRA V ALLEY/MOLLER RANCH, TIPPER AND VARGAS PROPERTIES TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 243.18 ACRES TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN AND THE DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT (DSRSD) P A 03-060 AND 06-030 RESOLUTION NO. 07-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND AN EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE A PORTION OF THE CASAMIRA V ALLEY/MOLLER RANCH PROPERTY FROM LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND TO INCLUDE THE CASAMIRA V ALLEY/MOLLER RANCH PROPERTY IN THE EASTERN DUBLIN SPECIFIC PLAN AND TO CHANGE A PORTION OF THE V ARGAS PROPERTY FROM MEDIUMIlllGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL P A 03-060 AND 06-030 RESOLUTION NO. 07-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PREZONE AND A STAGE 1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR CASAMIRA V ALLEY/MOLLER RANCH LOCATED AT 6861 TASSAJARA ROAD (APN 985-0001-001) P A 03-060 RESOLUTION NO. 07-17 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PREZONE AND A STAGE 1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR V ARGAS LOCATED AT 7020 TASSAJARA ROAD (APN 986-0004-002-01) P A 06-030 O'[ollnillg Comll1i.I'sion 1:I.fgufar :,Weeting 36 jipri[ 10, 200? Chair Schaub recessed the meeting for three minutes at 8:06. Chair Schaub called the meeting to order at 8:09. 8.2 P A 03-063 Scarlett Court Design Guidelines, General Plan Amendment and Amendments to Title 8, Zoning Ordinance, of the Dublin Municipal Code to add Chapter 8.34, Scarlett Court Overlay Zoning District; amend Chapter 8.104, Site Development Review; and amend the Zoning Map to add an overlay zoning designation for the Scarlett Court area. (Legislative Action). Chair Schaub asked for the Staff Report. Ms. Erica Fraser, Senior Planner, presented the specifics of the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Cm. Biddle noted that due to the time lapse between Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Scarlett Court project, the proposed document would serve as guidelines for development in the area. Ms. Fraser responded that in the absence of a specific plan, tools such as zoning ordinance amendment, zoning overlay district, the general plan amendment and the proposed guidelines would act as a tool to define the design for development in the area. Cm. Tomlinson commented that this was a very well done document. Hearing no other comments or questions for Staff, Chair Schaub opened the public hearing. Doreen Green, Property Manager of Buscik-Gearing, stated that in the absence of the documentation she would not know how this would impact her. Chair Schaub reassured Ms. Green that this would not impact existing property owners; it would only impact future developers. Ms. Fraser pointed out that this would affect her property only if she proposes to do exterior modifications to her buildings. Hearing no further questions, Chair Schaub closed the public hearing. Chair Schaub thanked staff for making all the changes at a short notice. On a Motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by Cm. seconded by Wehrenberg, and by a vote of 5-0-0 the planning commission adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 07 - 18 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SCARLETT COURT DESIGN GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 8.34 TO THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE) ESTABLISHING THE SCARLETT COURT OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT, ADDING SECTION 8.104.030.J TO THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE) RELATING TO SCARLETT COURT Plannmg Comltllssion 1I.mil~lr '-Weelin,q 37 )lfJri[ 10, 200? OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, AND AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO ADD AN OVERLAY ZONING DESIGNATION TO THE SCARLETT COURT AREA. P A 03-063 RESOLUTION NO. 07 -19 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE POLICIES RELATED TO THE SCARLETT COURT PLANNING AREA IN SECTION 2.2, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL LAND USE P A 03-063 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). Ms. Wilson invited the Planning Commission to the City San Ramon on Tuesday, June 5th for a GHAD seminar. Ms. Wilson informed the Planning Commission that the Safeway in the downtown area will be repainting the building with contemporary colors. Cm. Biddle asked, statute-wise, what is included in the Stage 1 and Stage 2 development processes. Ms. Wilson indicated that she would email the section of the zoning ordinance describing each development process, to each Commissioner. Cm. King reminded staff about the architecture education he had requested at a previous meeting. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 8:29 p.m. Respectfully submitted, f7~~ Planning Commission Chair ArrEST: ~ HJ;\'Vi 1/ UJ l Planning Mcw\.ger !J'fairni"8 Commission <i(fgufar 9deeti"8 38 Jtprifl0, 2007