Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-14-2007 Adopted Min Sp Mtg (2) Minutes of the City Council of the City of Dublin SPECIAL MEETING - August 14. 2007 A special joint meeting of the Dublin City Council and Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, August 14,2007, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 5 :00 p.m., by Mayor Lockhart. . ROLL CALL PRESENT: Council members Hildenbrand, Oravetz, Sbranti and Scholz, and Mayor Lockhart. Planning Commissioners Biddle, King, Wehrenberg and Chair Schaub ABSENT: Commissioner Tomlinson. .~ PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance to the flag was recited by the Council, Commission, Staff and those present. GRAFTON PLAZA 5 :00 p.m. Mayor Lockhart welcomed all in attendance and stated that the City Council would hold a Study Session with the Planning Commission. Mayor Lockhart explained that there would be an introduction by Staff, a presentation by the Applicant and then public comment. There will then be a discussion between the City Council and Planning Commission and an opportunity for Staff and the Applicant to answer questions and, if there is time, there will be another opportunity for public comment. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14,2007 PAGE 316 Mayor Lockhart asked for the presentation from Staff. 1 STUDY SESSION: Grafton Plaza, a multi-story mixed use development located in Area H, Dublin Ranch including 4 low to mid-rise podium buildings, 3 residential towers combined with office uses, shopkeeper and live/work units, luxury condominiums, a boutique hotel, day spa and associated open space recreation areas and parking, proposed by the Lin family (P A 07-006) Mr. Mike Porto, Project Planner presented the specifics of the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Mr. Porto explained that the overall FAR for the project should not exceed.45 FAR but in some instances it may approach up to .60, as long as the overall FAR does not exceed .45. Mayor Lockhart asked Mr. Porto to define FAR for the audience. Mr. Porto responded with the definition and gave an example. Mr. Marty Inderbitzen, Representative of the Applicant, the Lin family. Mr. Inderbitzen has represented the Lin family for 20 years for the Dublin Ranch Development. Also in attendance is Jim Tong, representative of the Lin family real estate matters, Dave Chadbourne, Principal Planner for the Dublin Ranch project, as well as Rick Aiken, from William Hezmalhalch & Associates. Mr. Inderbitzen presented a detailed description of the project on behalf of the Applicant. Mr. Inderbitzen indicated he would like to discuss some issues he had with the Staff Report. He stated that the Water Quality Basin and the Grafton Plaza should be considered together. He said that it was important because of FAR and density issues. He stated that considering the two parcels together was allowed under the Development Agreement and the Planned Development zoning. He added that residential uses are specifically permitted on this site as long as certain findings can be met. He said that the question of whether this was an appropriate location for a residential project has already been asked and answered. He commented that the zoning is in place and the rezone that would be required is meant to deal with the retail, hotel and spa uses. He felt, in his opinion, that a rezone was not necessary for the residential component of the project. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14,2007 PAGE 317 Mr. Inderbitzen stated that he was confident of the appropriateness of the mix of uses and the orientation to the other uses. Mr. Inderbitzen went on to state that there are many policies in the development plan that support mixed use. He was confused by the idea that a project like this only belongs next to a BART station. The high density project adjacent to BART caters to residents that commute to work elsewhere. Grafton Plaza does the opposite by catering to the resident who wants to live and work in Dublin. If there is a demand for access to BART then they would provide a shuttle service. The goal of the project is to reduce traffic load by keeping residents out of their cars. He further stated that he thought the jobslhousing balance goal of the City has little to do with whether or not jobs and/or housing are north or south of Dublin Blvd. The Applicant's goal is to provide opportunities to reduce traffic because the jobs are matched with housing in a way that should minimize traffic. Mr. Inderbitzen stated, in regards to the Density/Intensity section of the Staff Report, the Applicant has taken the residential uses and stacked them above the non-residential uses in a vertical framework. He felt that the project was a more true mix of uses then side-by- side. Mr. Inderbitzen asked that the Council and Commission not consider the pictures in the Staff Report on page 10 of 14 as he felt they were misleading and not an accurate representation of the project. He indicated that he was not aware of any height limit that applied to this site. He thought the real issue is "how high is high in Dublin" and at what point is it tall enough. He wanted to focus on the issue of height and resolve it so they can move the project forward. Mr. Inderbitzen stated that the Applicant would like to work with the City. He indicated that it was not their intention to force something on the community that was not welcome. Mayor Lockhart asked if the City Councilor Planning Commission members had any questions for Mr. Inderbitzen. Chair Schaub asked, "where did you get the fact that there was no height limit when the Specific Plan says its six stories?" Mr. Inderbitzen responded that he didn't think that it applied to this part of Dublin Ranch. Chair Schaub asked Mike Porto and Staff to help DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 318 them with the answer to that question. Chair Schaub thought the answer was on page 148 of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. Cm. Sbranti said that on Page 8 of the Staff Report it talks about 10 stories but that it applied to the Transit Center. Mayor Lockhart said that unless Mike Porto and Staff have an answer for the question right now that they would come back to that question when the Council and Commission discuss the project. She thought it was a good question but wanted to give them a chance to respond to it and asked Mr. Inderbitzen ifhe wanted to show the flyover before that time. At that point, Mr. Inderbitzen introduced Rick Aiken, Lead Planner for William Hezmalhalch & Associates who presented a detailed description of the project on behalf of the Applicant which included a flyover showing the project. Mayor Lockhart stopped the Applicant's presentation stating that she thought that they all had a good idea of what the project is about and she felt that it was very important that the public, as well as the Council and Commission, be as concise as possible in their comments so that the meeting can be done on time. She stated that it is very important to understand what is being discussed before everyone went on record as to what they like and dislike about the project. She also stated that, if the project moved forward, there would be many other opportunities for the public to comment on it. Mayor Lockhart thanked the Applicant for the presentation and opened the public comment period. She indicated that after the public comment period the Council and Commission would have a discussion period. She reminded the audience that there were people here who might have differing opinions on this project and she wanted them to be courteous to everyone's point of view. Ms. Rowena Morgan, resident of Dublin Ranch, spoke against the project. She said that she was pleased to see that they were considering the views of resident but felt that the size of the towers was too high. She stated that she paid a premium for a view lot and felt that those views would be compromised if this project were approved. She made a suggestion that they include solar panels as a way of using natural resources. Mr. Rich Garienti, 8279 Rhoda Ave., Dublin, spoke regarding the needs of our community. He felt the project offered amenities that are nice but he was concerned about whether Dublin had the infrastructure to support the project. He felt that not everyone who lived in the project would work there. He was concerned about transportation and parks, and asked if there are enough parks. He was also concerned about what the project would DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 319 look like to the surrounding area. He stated that he has heard only negative comments regarding the project, no positive comments. He felt that there should be a height limit. Mr. Chris Didato, 3240 Magquire Way, Dublin, Dublin Ranch resident. He spoke against the project. Mayor Lockhart asked the audience to stop the applause and be considerate of others' OpInIOns. Mr. Didato was concerned about parking in the Dublin Ranch area. The other problem he felt was Police coverage. He was concerned about the inventory of condos on the market and that this project would add to that inventory causing property values to be lowered. He stated that the comment "urban core" made him think of Hayward, Union City, Oakland or San Francisco, not Dublin. He thought that lawyers and therapists would not live and work in this kind of condominium project but they would have the means to buy a bigger house. He was also concerned about the size of the development. Mr. Elliot Edge, 4161 Clarinbridge Circle, Dublin, spoke with mixed feelings about the project. He thought the project might be good for the City but would like to see other improvements completed that were promised before this project was approved. He felt the positives of the project are the hotel and spa, extra office space and retail stores. He thought the height on the residential portion would be a drain on schools and cause more back up on 1-580. He was concerned that the project did not help to take the traffic off of 1-580. Ms. Leslie McClane, Dublin, spoke against the project. She stated that the reason she lives in Dublin is because of the small town feeling. If she wanted to live in a city with big buildings she would have moved to San Francisco. Mr. John Johnson, resident of Dublin spoke against the project. He stated that he liked the presentation but the central issue is skyscrapers in Dublin. He felt that if this project was approved precedence would be set. He stated that the reason the Applicant came to Dublin is because all the other surrounding cities rejected the project as too high. He and his neighbors felt that they did not want Dublin to become the urban core of the Tri Valley. He was concerned that the project would increase the already over crowded schools. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 320 Ms. Leanne Marshall, Dublin resident, indicated her strong opposition to the project. She stated that high rise buildings like this project do not belong in the Tri-Valley area. She stated that if the City of Dublin does not have a height limit then one should be developed that limits buildings to 6 stories. She reiterated the fact of overcrowding on 1-580 and that people move to Dublin for the small town feeling. She asked the City Council and Planning Commission to reject the project and not spend any more time or resources on a project that would be a contentious issue. . Ron Boggs, Dublin resident spoke in favor of the project. Gaylene Burkett, Dublin resident stated that she concurs with the other speakers. She felt the project was not appropriate for Dublin. Mayor Lockhart concluded the public comment portion of the meeting and began the Council and Commission discussion period. Mayor Lockhart asked Mike Porto if he would like to respond to the question that was left on the table before the public comment portion of the meeting. Mr. Porto responded that the question was in regard to the height limit. Cm. Sbranti's question was regarding the Transit Center and the "How High is High" study that was done in 2001. Chair Schaub and Vice Chair Wehrenberg referred to the part of the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan (EDSP) that is relative to Tassajara Gateway, of which this site is a part, basically says, "allow buildings up to 6 stories in height at the intersection of Tassajara Road and Dublin Blvd." He indicated that this project is away from this intersection, but because this issue is in this document, it would be part of future discussions. Mr. Porto continued to say that Mr. Inderbitzen brought out a few issues and comments relative to the Staff Report. Mr. Porto indicated that his goal was to get the information in front of the Council, Commission and citizens to gauge the desire for this particular project and receive direction as to how to proceed. Mayor Lockhart asked if the Council and Commission had any questions for Mr. Porto. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 321 Cm. Sbranti commented that one of the things relative to the height issue was a reference made to Walnut Creek. He asked if Mr. Porto knew how high the tallest building in Walnut Creek is. Mr. Porto had asked Staff to look at some surrounding cities before the meeting and distributed those findings to the Council and Commission. Mr. Porto answered that the height limitation in Walnut Creek is 89 feet and most buildings in downtown range between 35 feet and 50 feet. Cm. Sbranti asked how many feet a 21 story building would be. Mr. Porto answered that it varies, but it would be approximately 10-15 feet per floor, therefore, a 21 story building would be approximately 210 feet tall or more. Cm. Sbranti asked about the Kaiser Hospital project and if there was any sense of how tall that project could be. Because this site will be next to the Kaiser site he was trying to get a perspective. Mr. Porto answered that, to his knowledge, no one on the Staffhad seen anything relative to the Kaiser project. Cm. Sbranti asked Vice Chair Wehrenberg how tall the typical Kaiser Hospitals are. Vice Chair Wehrenberg answered that in other projects that she has worked on the range was from 2 to 4 stories and some are at 6 stories, depending on how many beds are planned. A small hospital could be 100 beds, at 4 stories. Cm. Sbranti asked if it could potentially be 2 to 6 stories. Vice Chair Wehrenberg answered that it also depends on how much land is available which would create more of a massing. She continued that in the Los Angeles area the hospital would be taller but in Northern California they normally stay at 2-6 stories. Cm. Kasie Hildenbrand commented that Kaiser owns 52 acres; therefore, she would assume that it would be a large campus with varying buildings based on what Vice Chair Wehrenberg said. Cm. Sbarnti asked if, under the current zoning (understanding that there are some questions regarding the zoning) of Campus/Office, given the acreage of the site and the FAR at its maximum, how many stories could be built if they were to build office. Cm. Sbranti stated that he asked the question from a cost opportunity standpoint, to gauge not only what's around the project but given alternative uses, how much would that differ. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 322 Mr. Porto answered that doing the calculations and depending on how the project will be moved forward, and also looking at how the pieces go together, it could be taller in some areas and more linear in others, different things would be looked at, including a 6 story height limit that the Planning Commission has already referenced. The tallest office building in Dublin is Sybase, at 6 stories, but the highest point of the building is 99 feet. He mentioned the parking around Sybase and the open area between the building and Dublin Blvd. He stated that if there is underground parking, then the building has to spread out further. If surface parking is desired then the building would need to be taller. He indicated that it would be hard to say exactly what it could be but that they would have to look to the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan to give them direction. Chair Schaub stated that it was mentioned how this project might redefine the area but there is very little not already underway, therefore, this does appear to be a fairly unique spot. He asked how many areas do not have Development Agreements associated with them now. Mr. Porto answered that there is the Kaiser site and the General Commercial site that it beyond Fallon Road, the DiManto property, Fallon Village, beyond Fallon Rd in the General Commercial land uses that are along Dublin Blvd., the residential uses behind that, and partial grading is being done by Braddock and Logan in that area. Cm. Hildenbrand asked for clarification because a lot of residents are not familiar with those parcels of land. She stated that when reviewing a project of this nature there is not much land left for it to move forward. Therefore, there would not be an opportunity to repeat this type ofproject over and over again because most of what Mr. Porto is talking about are areas for residential use or smaller types of commercial and a light industrial area. She stated that most of what you see is residential areas. Vice Chair Wehrenberg mentioned that infrastructure was brought up in the Staff Report and asked if there has been a preliminary study. Mr. Porto answered that there was nothing on that because it is so early in the project. Mr. Porto stated, in answer to Cm. Hildenbrand's comments regarding the Fallon Village project east of Tassajara Road, that project has no entitlements other than the general land use concept. There are different zoning designations in that area but the sizes are similar DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 323 to projects west of Fallon Road. He stated that the entitlements for those Stage 2 Planned Developments have not been submitted yet. Cm. Hildenbrand stated that most of those projects are residential type projects; Fallon Village, Casamira, Wallis Ranch, Silvera Ranch, she wanted to ensure that the residents understand the type of developments those are. Cm. Sbranti commented on Vice Chair Wehrenberg's question regarding infrastructure. He mentioned that he assumed that with the Sybase building in Dublin, the Alameda County Fire Department has the capability to reach the top floor of that building. He asked whether there were any similar buildings in their jurisdiction and if they would have the capability to reach a taller building. Mr. Porto stated that they would be looking at that during the land use study. The Alameda County Fire Department is aware of the project, but he had gotten no comments back from them at this time. Cm. Hildenbrand stated that Ms. Morgan brought up a good point about the Green Building standards. She stated that we encourage that and see the Green Building Standards in some of the developments that have been submitted. She asked Mr. Porto if he knew if this project would be putting any Green Building standards in, especially with the towers. Mr. Porto answered that during the preliminary conversations with the Applicant they will be looking at that and will continue those conversations through the process. Cm. Don Biddle indicated that there needs to be an affordable housing component of some kind and thought there should also be a semi-public component of some kind. He also asked if this project would create a park land deficit. Mr. Porto mentioned that the remainder of his presentation would probably answer any further questions and would help the Council and Planning Commission and the Applicant gather their thoughts as we look at the project. Mayor Lockhart asked if there were any other questions. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 324 Mr. Porto continued with his presentation as outlined in the Staff Report. He indicated that there are questions for each item being discussed and he will stop after each question so that the Council and Commission can provide feedback at that point. Mayor Lockhart stated that she would like everyone to be able to gather their thoughts and she will give each person an opportunity to ask and answer questions and give feedback on them and if there are any wrap-up comments at the end of the discussion period that the Council and Commission would like to make on the project in its entirety, then we will make sure there is time to do that. Mr. Porto stated the first question from the Staff Report in the LocationlMixed Use Section which was appropriateness of the location. Do the City Council and Planning Commissionfeel that: · The site is the appropriate location for a mixed use residential/commercial/office development? · The development is appropriate for Campus Office designated land? · The mixture of uses is sufficiently balanced? . A reduction in the number of jobs and a change in a job center area is appropriate? . Specific uses should be added or eliminated/reduced? Mayor Lockhart asked Cm. Morgan King if he had any feedback on the appropriateness of the location. Cm. King stated that he saw nothing wrong with mixed use, it is very consistent with what the Planning Commission has been doing and didn't see any reason not to continue in that direction. Cm. Biddle stated that he saw it as appropriate and that he sees it as another version of the village concept that we've talked about in the past but not really implemented very well. Cm. Sbranti stated he thought it was appropriate for mixed use at that site. Cm. Hildenbrand agreed. Cm. Oravetz agreed. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14,2007 PAGE 325 Cm. Scholz thought it may be appropriate and stated that she would like the opportunity to discuss their thoughts before embarking on a lengthy procedure, and asked if that was possible. Mayor Lockhart answered that the Council and Commission will answer the questions then have an opportunity to wrap-up their thoughts at the end of the discussion period. Chair Schaub thought it was appropriate. Vice Chair Wehrenberg agreed. Mr. Porto moved to the next question. He stated that this project would be using Campus/Office designated land and asked if the Council and Commission felt that this proj ect was appropriate to be put on Mixed use designated land. Cm. King thought that it is appropriate. Cm. Biddle thought that it is appropriate. Cm. Sbranti stated that he thought it was an ideal Mixed Use site but that there was too much residential and not enough Campus/Office in the proposal. Cm. Hildenbrand thought that this is an appropriate use for designated land and stated a supporting reason is, if you look at Bishop Ranch, and Hacienda Business Park, it is all business with no housing. Pleasanton tried to provide housing in that area but it hasn't worked. She felt that with this project the City of Dublin can do it all at one time. She thought that to forsake some of the campus in order to get people to live there, if this project moves forward, it would be an appropriate location. Cm. Oravetz agreed with Cm. Hildenbrand. Chair Schaub asked if we are trading off Campus/Office, he was not sure how much the City is down given the FAR of Campus/Office and what was being proposed. He asked if we were off by 20% from what is zoned there. Mr. Porto answered that he would like the opportunity to analyze the data and submit the numbers to the Council and Commission in order to make a good analysis of what possibly could be there. Mr. Porto continued, as DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14,2007 PAGE 326 Mr. Inderbitzen mentioned, there is the issue of the water quality pond and the FAR that was allocated. Mr. Porto indicated that Staff and the Applicant have had a difference of opinion on that issue. He further stated that through the analysis of the FAR data that issue should be resolved. Vice Chair Wehrenberg agreed that 181,000 square feet seems appropriate, but would like to see the FAR studied further. Mayor Lockhart also stated that the Campus/Office designation is important if we are to encourage people to live work and live in our community. She thought it was something that needed further discussion but liked the fact that residential and office could be mixed in the same building. Cm. Biddle thought it would be appropriate to look at the overall job balance. He stated that in the Staff Report it mentioned that our residential has moved along rapidly but the business and commercial has not. Mayor Lockhart stated that a lot of the residential and business growth goes in cycles. She thought that when you talk about ajobslhousing balance it needs to be more than just a project, we need to look at the whole east Dublin area. She stated that the City just approved a 6 story hospital that will bring more jobs to the area than what was originally approved for at that site. She thought it would be a good exercise in the future to look at the whole area and see where we are in jobs balancing. Mr. Porto stated that the last three questions go together: . The mixture of uses is sufficiently balanced? - There were comments on the amount of Campus/Office. . A reduction in the number of jobs and a change in a job center area is appropriate? - Mr. Porto thought the job center may shift. · Specific uses should be added or eliminated/reduced? Mayor Lockhart asked if there were any questions regarding the last question. Cm. King thought that the project addresses the job balance tentatively. Cm. Biddle stated he did not think that the City needed a hotel in that location. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 327 Cm. Sbranti stated that he thought the balance was off, that there is too much housing, and not enough office. He stated that Mr. Inderbitzen made a good point that this project by itself has a good balance, but not if you look at the entire Dublin Ranch area which was supposed to be the job center. He likes almost everything in the project, especially the hotel concept, as well as the live/work units. He thought that 749 units is too high for residential and 181,000 square feet is too low for Office. Cm. Biddle asked what the difference is between the Live/Work and Shopkeeper units. Mr. Porto explained that there is a slight difference and noted the live/work units would be a professional business office; the attorney, the architect, the civil engineer which would use it as an office setting. The Shopkeeper unit would be building something at that location and selling it there. Cm. King indicated that the City had already approved live/work units across the street from the project site. Cm. Hildenbrand felt that the uses are sufficiently balanced, and that there are unique opportunities at this site that are not available in other areas. She indicated that she likes the hotel's location because if you drove south on Grafton Street from Ted Fairfield Park your experience changes as you go along ending at the boutique hotel. She stated that it was an appropriate location for the hotel. She thought it would be interesting to see if the Applicant could come back with a different balance in the housing and Campus/Office but she is not as concerned about it as Cm. Sbranti. Cm. Oravetz was more concerned about seeing a study on what the potential gain in property tax and sales tax would be if this project was built. He would like to see that study and if the numbers look good then they would talk about balance. He indicated that he thought the hotel is very nice and that this would be the hotel that people will want to stay at when they come to the area. He thought it would be just as nice as the Rose Hotel in Pleasanton but with more amenities and a beautiful view. Chair Schaub stated he would like to see more numbers. Mr. Porto indicated that there would be a fiscal analysis done. Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that for the Planning Commission it will come down to if there is enough parking for the use. She thought that everything in the project is appropriate and all that is missing is a convention center. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 328 Mr. Porto continued with the presentation with the Height and Massing questions: Do the City Council and Planning Commissionfeel that: . The proposed project height and massing is the appropriate for Dublin and this location in particular? . The scale of the structures adjacent to Dublin Boulevard and the interior streets in relation to height is appropriate? . The landscape setback should be studied to ensure that it is commensurate with the size of the building to off set the impact of the building on the street? . The orientation of the tower elements works with the proposal and the visual impacts to the existing community? Cm. Hildenbrand asked, when you look at the Terraces and you look at how large each complex is, in relation to how large or how wide the towers would be because they were saying in their presentation that its more vertical then it is wide and when you were talking about an office space it tends to get wider as it goes up. She thought that the Terraces are quite wide so in relation, would they be as wide, double the size, how can we visualize that. Mr. Porto answered that they don't have specifics but if you look at the overall frontage of the Terraces project, as it fronts onto Dublin Blvd., the proposed project occupies roughly half of the frontage. To give you a perspective, the project would occupy, from the existing entrance point at Clarinbridge Drive, westerly to Grafton Street (a portion of which is not developed as yet) which is where The Promenade would be located. It would be roughly approximately % of the face of the westerly half of The Terraces which is currently being developed. Mr. Porto asked if the answer helped with Cm. Hildenbrand's question. Cm. Hildenbrand answered that she knows the buildings in the project are tall, but how wide would they be. She further stated that if they are only taking up half of the frontage of the Terraces, it doesn't appear to be wide as the 4 story buildings there. Mr. Porto stated that the first 3-5 floors of the buildings are proposed to be massed along Dublin Blvd. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 329 Cm. Hildenbrand asked if they would mirror what you see at the Terraces. Mr. Porto answered yes, that they are proposing to set them back at the 3rd floor but they would mirror the Terraces. He stated that the towers are set back into the project. Cm. Hildenbrand asked if that part of the building would complement The Terraces buildings and then go up. Mr. Porto answered that it would be similar. Mr. Porto continued with presentation as outlined in the Staff Report and gave the questions of Height and Massing to the Council and Commission. Do the City Council and Planning Commissionfeel that: . The proposed project height and massing is the appropriate for Dublin and this location in particular? . The scale of the structures adjacent to Dublin Boulevard and the interior streets in relation to height is appropriate? . The landscape setback should be studied to ensure that it is commensurate with the size of the building to off set the impact of the building on the street? . The orientation of the tower elements works with the proposal and the visual impacts to the existing community? Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that she does not feel that the massing is appropriate for Dublin. She stated that she studied the General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the Dublin Zoning Ordinance and each document addresses the massing issue, and the protection of our hills. She also mentioned that the developer did a very thorough presentation and got everything except the issue of massing. She felt it was just too tall. Chair Schaub indicated that he thought the project has all the aspects that we like and the developers are huge partners with the City of Dublin. He stated that he didn't know if21, 15 or 40 stories is right. He said that it was helpful that the audience wanted to know what they would see. He stated that he didn't know what they will see from Dublin Ranch. He thought that it was important because of the people who bought property with a certain expectation and he didn't think that question was answered. He thought that the project fits but not sure at what height. He mentioned that most of our buildings are 6 stories plus 1 and that we never count the top story. Cm. King commented that the Lin family has brought a lot of projects to the City of Dublin and they have all been first class. He wasn't sure that a building that high would DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 330 be such a drastic departure from what is the norm in the City of Dublin and the Tri-Valley Area that he would really have to listen to what the people of Dublin have to say. He stated that the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan was voted on by the citizens of Dublin and he would not want depart from what was voted on. He stated that he likes the outside-the- box, innovative ideas like this for Dublin. Cm. Biddle stated that there were many positive aspects of the project but has some problems with height. He stated that he likes that the parking is under the structure which makes the height more acceptable. He stated that he would prefer that rather than a shorter building and a bigger asphalt parking lot. He stated that he would compromise with a shorter building but retain most of the aspects of the project. Cm. Sbranti stated he liked everything about the project but thinks the height is too high. He stated that Cm. King referenced the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan which he thought was an important document. He stated that when people bought into that neighborhood there was a certain expectation of a view. He commented that the Council and Commission can look at the tower heights because some of the buildings around the project site are 6 stories. He stated that he would be willing to go a little bit above 6 stories but wanted to stay within the spirit of the existing developments and would want to avoid doubling or tripling the size of the Sybase building. Cm. Hildenbrand disagreed with Cm. Sbranti. She the towers were kept at 6 stories this project would not be different and innovative as Cm. King has mentioned. She thought that looking at the height could be done. She mentioned Foster City and the tower they built. She stated that everyone thought it was the biggest building between Los Angeles and San Francisco and now you don't think anything of it. She mentioned when Justin Herman Plaza was built everyone thought it was the ugliest thing there and now it's a part of the structure of San Francisco. She stated that personally she did not have a huge issue with the height. She thought that 21 stories is a bit tall, but she stated that she wouldn't want to keep the building at 6 stories. She commented that the West Dublin BART Station and the Transit Center that has a mass, they are not as tall, but are a mass of buildings that will have a campus next to it eventually, the Lifestyle Center, Hacienda Crossings, a hospital and potentially other campus projects, then this Project, then move on to a hospital campus style development. She stated that she was not sure this would be the tallest building at potentially 16 to 21 stories, but at some point, it does not seem outrageous to have the Project at that site. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14,2007 PAGE 331 Cm. Sbranti clarified his point that he does not think the Project needs to stay at 6 stories. He meant that in the context of the 5, 7, and 5 (the luxury condos, the boutique hotel and one other building) stories that going a few stories above would be acceptable but he thought that when it is proposed to be double or triple that height then it would be too high. Cm. Oravetz stated that he would not allow the height be the issue that would cause the Council and Commission to reject the project. He agreed with Cm. Sbranti that probably the thought of a 21 story building has shocked some people. He stated that he thought there were a lot of good things about the project. He also stated that he would like to continue to study the height issue. Cm. Scholz was concerned about the height, and felt that it was not appropriate whether it is proposed at 16 or 21 stories. She commented that every person that the Council and Commission had heard from during the Study Session was concerned with the height, with the exception of Mr. Boggs. She stated that all the people that she met during the week were concerned about the height but also about earthquakes. Mayor Lockhart stated that she thought the elements were the most important part of the Project, what can be brought together, the synergy that can be created, the environmental atmosphere that can be set with the Project would weigh heavily for her. She stated that she does not know what the right height is and that there are a lot of questions that have to be answered. She stated that she is interested in something that is a little outside the box and that will give people the opportunity to do what we say we want them to be able to do but have never been able to show them how to do it. She stated that this Project would give the City an opportunity to look at that. She stated that she is definitely interested in finding out more about the Project but was not sure about the 21 stories, she thought that there is a limit to what any community will accept but she stated she would like to pursue the question and see what works for Dublin. Mr. Porto stated that he would like to consolidate the remaining questions and thought that the one that would be of the most interest was regarding the landscape setback. He mentioned a few of the nearby developments and the landscape setbacks in those projects. Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that she thought that the landscape setbacks would depend on how tall the buildings are and that she would not want the building close to the DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 332 sidewalk. She thought that 15-20 feet sounded appropriate but it would depend on the height of the building. Chair Schaub concurred. Cm. Scholz concurred. Cm. Oravetz concurred. Cm. Hildenbrand concurred. Cm. Sbranti stated that he thought the landscape setback at Sybase was a good guide. He mentioned that Sybase is a taller building than the building by the BART station but it doesn't look taller, therefore, he thought that was a good model for us to move forward with the Project. Cm. Biddle concurred and felt that the width vs. height ratio is key to the project. Cm. King concurred. Mr. Porto continued with the Staff Report regarding Density/Intensity Do the City Council and Planning Commissionfeel that: . The proposed number of residential units coupled with the other non-residential uses in the Project in the configuration proposed by the Applicant, are appropriate? . The vertical placement of the residential units in 16 to 21 story towers is preferable to the typical horizontal layout now experienced in Dublin? Mr. Porto stated that the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan only considered Campus/Office uses for this site and the residential uses were not analyzed. He stated that he thought the Council and Commission had given good direction on how they feel about the first question. The next question was mentioned by one of the Commissioners on this subject but not from the rest of the Council and Commission. Currently our approach is to spread the residential units out horizontally but this proposal is to place them vertically. He asked for some input from the Council and Commission. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14,2007 PAGE 333 Mayor Lockhart indicated that the thing that she likes about the vertical orientation is the footprint that it leaves on the ground and the space around it that it leaves for amenities, open space, air and views. She mentioned that for that reason she likes the concept.of trying more vertical housing. She thought that there are people that would like to live in it. She also stated that on the eastern side of the community there are the standard residential homes but when we move into a higher density area, she thought that there were people who would appreciate the view from a higher floor, not necessarily knowing that it is going to be 16 to 20 stories but from a higher floor. She also mentioned that she thought that what the project does for the footprint is good for everybody in the area. Cm. Hildenbrand concurred Cm. Sbranti concurred but thought that it was the same way of looking at the height issue, generally speaking he does not mind residential towers. Cm. Biddle concurred and stated that he likes the concept of the live/work and shopkeeper units. Cm. King concurred. Chair Schaub concurred. Mr. Porto continued with the Staff Report regarding Affordable Housing. The Applicant has proposed no affordable housing in the project. Do the City Council and Planning Commissionfeel that: . Affordable units should be included within the Project? · An alternate method of compliance would be appropriate? Cm. Wehrenberg stated she thought that an alternate method would be acceptable. Chair Schaub stated that he agreed with the Zoning Ordinance for affordable housing. He stated that he thought large buildings with lots of units are perfect for that environment. He was concerned about the total cost of affordable housing for the people who would live there. He stated that there are areas of affordable housing where the fees are $400 to $500 DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14,2007 PAGE 334 per month. He stated that he wanted to make sure that it was affordable and thought that this kind of a facility is good for affordability as long as we know that people can live there comfortably. Cm. Scholz concurred with an alternative method for affordable housing for the project. Cm. Oravetz concurred with an alternative method for affordable housing. He stated that when the Affordable Housing ordinance was initiated it was known that there would be certain projects where the ordinance could be waived and other opportunities would be used. He stated that he thought that this is not an affordable housing area and not that opportunity. He thought that the City was doing good things for affordable housing at The Groves, etc. and rebuilding Arroyo Vista. Cm. Hildenbrand agreed and thought that the City would be massing a lot of affordable housing in one area if we required the developer to build the 12.5% of affordable housing. She stated that going with an alternate method of meeting that ordinance would be preferable. Cm. Sbranti stated that he was willing to look at an alternative location for affordable housing. Cm. Biddle stated that he would like to see as many affordable units as possible on the site and then an alternate site for what can't be filled at the site. He stated that many of the jobs that will be created by the project will be filled by people in that income category. He stated that with more than 750 units there should be room for affordable housing. Cm. King stated that if the height were reduced then there should be fewer units. He asked if these units were not affordable units. Mayor Lockhart answered that they were talking about the median income. He asked if the units would be priced way above the median income. Mayor Lockhart answered that she imagined they would. Cm. King asked if the Lin family has other projects down the road that could meet the requirement. Mayor Lockhart answered that the Lin family has done more than what they were supposed to by massing all the affordable housing in The Groves for what's already planned and built but this project is something different. She stated that it would be the Lin family's responsibility to locate an alternative area. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 335 Cm. Sbranti stated that he would agree to look at the credits and he thought that anything the Lin family has built over and above what their requirement was should be applied to this project, but if there is still a deficiency after the credits from that project are applied, then he thought they should look at alternative compliance. Mr. Porto continued with the Staff Report regarding Parks. He stated that there is no public park component included in this project. Does the City Council and Planning Commission feel that: . Additional parkland, commensurate with the number of residential units, should be provided on-site or off-site? . Alternatives to provide parkland, be negotiated through the development review process as appropriate? Cm. Scholz stated that there definitely needs to be parks and she was concerned that she had not heard anything about play areas for children. She stated that there would be a lot of people in this area and there needed to be recreation areas. Cm. Hildenbrand asked how many acres of park land would this project potentially create. Mr. Porto answered approximately 7.5 acres. Cm. Hildenbrand asked if we included the Historic Park would that make up the deficit that we currently have or would we still be 5 acres short. Rich Ambrose, City Manager answered that based on the last numbers that were given to the Council, and those numbers will be updated as they get into the Public Facility Fee Study update, but the City is approximately 5.3 acres in a deficit position and will be adding approximately 4.2 acres with the Historic Park. He stated that, based on those old numbers, the City is approximately 1.1 acres short. Cm. Hildenbrand asked if this would create another 7.5 acre shortage. Mr. Ambrose stated that they were still doing some studies and looking at some areas that were on the Council's list. Mayor Lockhart included that there are all kinds of things that might give us an opportunity for more park land. Mr. Ambrose stated that they haven't looked at how some of the infill projects have impacted the numbers. He added the example of the Arroyo Vista redevelopment project which is proposing to add another 250 units which would be folded into the park plan also. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 336 Cm. Hildenbrand asked if the Council will receive that information before the project moves forward. Mr. Ambrose answered that if the project moves forward sometime within the next fiscal year they will have better information. Cm. Sbranti commented that the 7.5 acre deficiency only applies if the City approves 749 units and if the developer cut the towers in half or more, the deficiency becomes less. Mr. Ambrose answered that was correct and added that the City standard is 5 acres per 1,000 residents and for a project like this the Quimby Act Ordinance would look at it as 2 persons per unit. Cm. Sbranti stated that he agreed with Cm. Scholz that parkland needs to be on site. He stated that he thought it was a different mix and that if there will be residents in that area, especially a higher density area, then there needs to be a park land component whether it is a plaza or a square or something similar. He mentioned that one of the things in the report talked about play areas on the top of the buildings but he did not want to count those because of the wind. Vice Chair Wehrenberg pointed out that the Water Quality Pond is a walking area. Cm. Sbranti answered that he personally sees that as an environmental mitigation and he knows that it was referenced as a park and he would be willing to consider how that interfaces with some type of a park. He stated that he did not want to say that because there is an environmental water basin, therefore there is a park. Mayor Lockhart indicated that she felt that they needed a lot more information on what kinds of housing units are proposed, and who would be living in those housing. Cm. Hildenbrand stated that in the landscaped areas, which the Applicant talked about, there could be opportunities for some type of play structures. She mentioned the Yerba Buena Gardens where there is a children's play area mixed in with their gardens and that is in a denser project. She was sure that there would be ways they can get play type of experiences for children. She added that she thought it would be interesting to see the mix of people that they expect to have there. She also agreed with Cm. Sbranti that the Water Quality area is not a park. Cm. Scholz indicated that when she talked about play areas she means swings, slides, climbing structures, and real play equipment that little children need to play on. Cm. Hildenbrand stated that that was the kind of play equipment that was at the play center in Yerba Buena Gardens. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14,2007 PAGE 337 Cm. Oravetz stated that the developer could build some of that into this project but he didn't think that this was an area for a park and that it was not an area for affordable housing either. He stated that it was a negotiating tool to work with the developer to create a park in other areas of Dublin. He stated that he would not require the developer to build a park at that site and that the walking area around the lake is sufficient. Mayor Lockhart asked Mr. Porto to wrap-up the presentation. Mr. Porto stated that the Council and Commission gave good direction on all of the issues and asked the Council and Commission to address their comments to the Applicant. Mayor Lockhart asked the Council and Commission to give a sense of whether they would like to see this project back again with some of the questions answered or if they would not want to see the project back. Vice Chair Wehrenberg stated that overall, everything was beautiful, she loved the concept, but what killed the project for her was when the Applicant spoke of the "view corridors." She stated that she does not see them as "view corridor" but as tunnels and buildings that will block our hills and that is not what she wants to see when driving down 1-580. She stated that she is in favor of the project but not at that height. She stated that the use is fine. Chair Schaub concurred and would like to see the project come back for further discussion. Cm. Scholz thought it was a beautiful presentation, but thought the Council should look carefully at it. She mentioned that only one person here tonight supported it. She was concerned about the community support. She suggested that before any decision is made we ask for some visualization. She shared an experience in San Francisco where balloons were hoisted into the air specifically to show how high a building would be. She stated that there was not enough input tonight and that there needed to be a study on the shadowing effect of the buildings and that the Council and Commission need to listen to the citizens of Dublin. She stated that she felt the play and recreation areas are very important so that citizens do not have to drive 3 or 4 miles to a park. She stated that she thought the project had some good qualities but believes it needs more careful study relevant to the height. She felt that she was not able to support the project as it is but would like to see it back with modifications. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 338 Cm. Oravetz thanked the Staff for setting up the study session and stated he felt that the information and input from the Planning Commission as well as the citizens of Dublin are very important and helpful. He stated that since the meeting was televised there would be lots of public input which will be helpful. He stated that when he makes a decision regarding a project that he does not look at one thing but at the entire project. He stated that there is nothing about the project that he doesn't like, the hotel, the spa and what it will bring to the City of Dublin and what it will do for the image of Dublin. He stated that a few years ago the Council was talking about "Digital Dublin" and considering some good sized buildings on Dublin Blvd. Then the Dot.Com crashed and all that went away. He felt that this project could bring the City back on the map. He thought that the 21 story building is something that the community is going to struggle with but he stated that he was not going to throw the project out because of esthetics. He felt that they could work out the problems with the project. He stated that he was 100% for this project coming back. He urged the community to look at the fly-over and look at the amenities that the project will bring to Dublin. He stated that there has never been anything like this done in the valley and asked "why not?" He stated that he would like to see the project back. Cm. King concurred and would like to see it back with changes on the height. He asked how the project will relate to the Promenade as a town center, it seems there will be two different destination points competing against each other. Cm. Biddle concurred and would like the project to come back and address some of the concerns stated tonight, including the height issue. Cm. Sbranti concurred and wants to see it come back. He stated that he sees this project as a catalyst for the Promenade. He was concerned with the height and stated that the Council and Commission have heard the citizens. He mentioned that he felt that there were too many residential units and not enough square footage of office. He wanted to remind the Council that when the EDSP was done there was a very careful economic study done on balancing and would be very cautious in skewing that balance. He was very concerned that this project might skew that balance. Cm. Hildenbrand concurred with Cm. Oravetz and does not want to see this project not come back based on height. She stated that she took notes on all the comments and the majority of the comments related to height, views and that this project is not what we have here in the valley, etc. She stated that she agrees with those issues but she does not want DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 339 to turn the project down simply because of those comments. She mentioned all the other amenities attached to the project are wonderful and a unique opportunity for Dublin. She stated that Dublin is in the forefront when it comes to building. She stated that the City did not build when Pleasanton and Livermore built, we're building today. She stated that they were able to build suburban communities where you build houses and strip malls, but the City of Dublin challenged with affordable housing and building villages and pedestrian friendly avenues. She stated that she would not want to turn down the project because neighboring cities do not have buildings like these. She commented that other cities in the area are trying to figure out how to bring housing to their business centers and that is what Dublin is doing now. She stated that she is in favor of bringing the project back. Mayor Lockhart stated that she wants to see it back and that there are a lot of questions. She stated that she heard the concerns from the speakers and the audience. She stated that that there will be many opportunities for the community to have discussion on the project but that it is very preliminary at this point. She stated that this is the first step and that out of a population of 44,000 there are a number of opinions that haven't been shared as yet and she looks forward to hearing from a lot more citizens. She stated that she wanted to make sure that we are not overloading the schools. She also stated that there is a new high school as well as a middle school and a number of elementary schools coming into Dublin. She also felt that we need to be more futuristic. She asked about our future of Dublin. She mentioned that people will move to our community, live here, will have families and those families are going to grow up and they are going to want to stay near the schools that they graduated from and families that they grew up with. She commented that the community will grow and it is not just strangers that are coming into the community, but it will grow from within. She felt that we need to be ready for that and we need to look at housing as a necessity not just an amenity. Not only for our families but other families that come here to work and live in the area. She felt that we need to keep that in mind as well as saving the environment and saving the land, saving the footprint and maybe being a little higher than we ever thought we would be might be the answer to that. She stated that she understands the concerns about the height and the issues around that. She commented that the Council will look at all elements of the project and put together a project that everyone in Dublin can be proud of. Mayor Lockhart thanked staff and the Applicant for their presentation as well as the public for sharing their time. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14,2007 PAGE 340 ADJOURNMENT . There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m. to the next regular Council meeting of August 14,2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Minutes prepared by Debra LeClair, Seretary. AmST:~L dt~ Intenm CIty Clerk DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VOLUME 26 SPECIAL MEETING August 14, 2007 PAGE 341