HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-12-2001 PC MinutesA regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday,
June 12, 2001, in the Dublin Civic Center City Council Chambers. Chairperson
Johnson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners, Johnson, Musser, Nassar and Fasulkey; Eddie Peabody, Jr.,
Community Development Director; Andy Byde, Associate Planner; and Maria Carrasco,
Recording Secretary.
Absent: Cm. Jennings
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Cm. Johnson led the Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledge of allegiance
to the flag.
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS
The minutes from the April 24, 2001 meeting were approved as submitted.
ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA - None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS- None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
7.1
2001-2002 Update to the 2000-2005 Capital Improvement Program
{CIP) Approval of CIP projects and their conformance with the City's
General Plan.
Cm. Johnson asked for the staff report.
Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
32 June 12, 2001
Richard Ambrose, City Manager presented the staff report. He explained that the
Commissioners role is to determine whether the Public Works projects planned for
2001-2002 fiscal year are in conformity with the General Plan.
Mr. Ambrose identified the projects that are proposed in the Five Year Capital
Improvement Program as:
General Improvements
Civic Center Library (Phase I)
Emerald Glen Fire Station
Civic Center Trailer Annex
Fallon Fire Station
Senior Center Housing Evaluation
Community Improvements
Freeway Underpass Art at Dublin Boulevard & Amador Valley Boulevard
Arroyo Vista Project Improvements - Roof Repair
Sidewalk Safety Repair
Sidewalk Reconstruction Underneath 1-680 on Dublin Boulevard & Amador
Valley Boulevard
Audible Pedestrian Signals
Village Parkway Median Landscaping - Dublin Boulevard to Amador Valley
Boulevard
Street Banner Art Project
Bus Shelters
Downtown Improvements Implementation - Phase I
Parks
Shannon Center Doors
Heritage Center Storage Building
Emerald Glen Park
Dublin Ranch Neighborhood Parks
Dublin Sports Grounds Renovation
Senior Center
Community Theater
Sports Park
Dublin Swim Center Roof Replacement
Murray School Bell Tower
Murray Schoolhouse Improvements
Street Projects
Dublin Boulevard Underground Utilities - Village Parkway to Sierra Court
1-580 & San Ramon Road Freeway Interchange Improvements
Eastern Dublin Arterial Street Improvements
1-580 & Tassajara Road Freeway Interchange Improvements
Plannin,~ Commission 33 June 12, 2OOl
Re,~Iar Meettn~
1-580 & Fallon Road Freeway Interchange Improvements
Annual Street Overlay Program
Eastern Dublin Street Right-of-Way Acquisition
Alamo Canal Bike Path Project - Amador Valley Boulevard to Iron Horse Trail
Connection
Dougherty Road Improvements - Houston Place to 1-580
Dublin Boulevard Widening - Dougherty Road to Scarlett Drive
Dublin Boulevard Improvements - Village Parkway to Sierra Court
Annual Slurry Seal Program
Traffic Signal at Dougherty Road and Willow Creek Road
Traffic Signal Upgrade - Village Parkway / Amador Valley Boulevard
Village Parkway U-Turn Lane at Davona Drive
Mr. Ambrose stated he was available to answer questions from the Commission.
Cm. Fasulkey asked if there are any plans for an underground utility district along
Village Parkway
Mr. Ambrose stated PG&E controls the under grounding projects. Their recent
bankruptcy has placed funding up in the air. The City has adequate funds allocated
for under grounding utilities for the segment of Dublin Boulevard between Village
Parkway and Sierra Court. The Dublin Boulevard widening project requires the
utilities to be relocated which is a high priority.
Cm. Nassar asked the reason for changing the Shannon Center doors.
Mr. Ambrose stated the doors are very old and need to be replaced. The Shannon
Center is 30 years old. It will need additional renovations and improvements in the
future.
Cm. Johnson asked if the Shannon Center parking lot would be repaired?
Mr. Ambrose responded yes.
Cm. Johnson asked if the widening of Dublin Boulevard to Dougherty Road would be
completed soon.
Mr. Ambrose stated no; based on the ultimate build out of the City.
Cm. Johnson stated the intersection at Dougherty Road and Dublin Boulevard gets
busy at certain times of the day. He asked if the City plans to widen the corner of
Dougherty Boulevard for two northbound turning lanes onto Dublin Boulevard and
whether the widening would impact those businesses?
Planntnd~ commission 3'1- June ~ z, 2OOl
Regular Meettn/l
Mr. Ambrose stated the traffic engineers are currently reviewing the Transit Center
project, the accumulative traffic from Dougherty Valley, and the balance of Eastern
Dublin. That intersection will require significant improvements in the near future.
The corner of Dougherty Road and Dublin Boulevard will need to be widened and it
will impact those businesses.
Cm. Johnson asked whether the traffic projections are based on the busiest time of
the day.
Mr. Ambrose responded the projections are based on the Average Daily Traffic (ADT)
and peak hour traffic.
Cm. Johnson stated there are two eastbound lanes at Dublin Boulevard at Dougherty
Road and only one left lane and right turn lane. That intersection is only busy in the
early mornings or late evenings. It may be advantageous for the City to let that
intersection sit for six months before making any future changes. He asked if
additional turning lanes are planned for Dublin Boulevard at Dougherty Road.
Mr. Ambrose stated changes to that intersection are not proposed for the upcoming
year. Based on the General Plan policy that intersection cannot exceed a Level of
Service "D".
Cm. Johnson asked if the City implements traffic studies to monitor an area and
whether the projections are accurate.
Mr. Ambrose responded yes.
Cm. Johnson asked if any traffic projections have been incorrect. Lee Thompson,
Public Works Director responded the studies usually underestimate the traffic.
Mr. Ambrose stated Dublin Boulevard has become part of the 1-580 Smart Corridor
project. Dublin Boulevard functions as a freeway. There is a lot of traffic that exits at
Foothill-San Ramon Road, to Dublin Boulevard and gets back on the 1-580 freeway at
Tassajara Road.
Cm. Johnson stated widening Dublin Boulevard would increase the traffic. The area
will never be pedestrian friendly.
Mr. Ambrose stated that area is not viewed as pedestrian oriented. Dublin Boulevard
is the only major arterial for the City but there will be a definite effort to manage and
improve the flow of traffic over the next few years.
Cm. Johnson thanked the City Manager for his time.
Cm. Fasulkey asked how the City is doing financially.
P,e~lu~ar Meetin~
35 June 12, 2001
Mr. Ambrose stated the City is solid but the financial picture could change.
Cm. Nassar asked if there are any plans for soccer fields.
Mr. Ambrose responded yes, at Emerald Glen Park.
On motion by Cm. Musser, seconded by Cm. Nassar, and with a vote of 4-0-1, with
Cm. Jennings absent, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 01-09
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
FINDING THAT THE 2000-2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN {CIP) UPDATE
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN IS CONSISTENT WITH THE
ADOPTED CITY OF DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN
PUBLIC HEARING
8.1
PA 01-007 Montessori Plus Conditional Use Permit and Negative
Declaration for the expansion of 40 children to 60 children, located at
7234-40 San Ramon Road, Strouds Plaza (to be continued to the July 1 O,
200~)
Cm. Johnson asked for the staff report.
Mr. Peabody advised the Commission that a Negative Declaration is required for the
Montessori Plus project and Staff recommends the hearing be continued to July 10,
2001 Planning Commission meeting.
On motion by Cm. Fasulkey, seconded by Cm. Musser the Planning Commission
continued PA 01-007 Montessori Plus Conditional Use Permit and Negative
Declaration to July 10, 2001 Planning Commission meeting.
8.2
PA 00-010 Valley Center Site Development Review and Planned
Development Rezone to construct a new 8,260 square foot building at
the corner of Village Parkway and Amador Valley Boulevard and modify
the existing building and parking lot known as the Valley Center.
Cm. Johnson asked for the staff report.
Andy Byde, Associate Planner advised the Commission that the applicant has
requested a Site Development Review to construct a new 8,260 square foot building at
the northwest corner of Village Parkway and Amador Valley Boulevard. Additionally,
Planntn~ Commission
P.e,~ular Meetind~
36 June 12, 2001
the project proposes to complete a fagade improvement to the existing building and
improve the parking lot known as the Valley Center. The existing Valley Center will be
accessed from two points along Amador Valley Boulevard, while the proposed building
at the corner will be accessed via the parking lot of the Valley Center and a new-
shared driveway along the northern property line. An attractive landscaped feature is
proposed at the corner of Village Parkway and Amador Valley Boulevard with
enhanced landscaping, widened sidewalk, and an entry trellis. The proposed project's
parking demand has been calculated based on City code requirements for general
retail and restaurant use. The retail rate requires one parking space per 300 square
feet of gross leasable area (GLA), the office rate requires one parking space per 250
square feet, and restaurants require one parking space per 100 square feet. Based on
the existing tenants within the Valley Center and the proposed square footage of the
corner building, the project's parking supply of 85 parking spaces is adequate to serve
the intended uses. The project lies within the Village Parkway Specific Plan area with
a Retail/Office designation. Retail/Office uses include a range of general retail uses,
as well as professional, business, corporate, medical and dental buildings. A new
Planned Development (PD) Rezone is proposed to establish General Provisions and
Development Regulations for the project and to make the current zoning on the corner
parcel and the parcel where the Valley Center is located, consistent with one another.
The project is consistent with the General Plan and Village Parkway Specific Plan; and
in conclusion, staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the resolution
recommending City Council approve the PD Rezoning and Site Development Review
Cm. Fasulkey asked how Staff determined the list of allowed uses for this area.
Mr. Byde stated the uses identified in the staff report are allowed under a
Neighborhood Retail zoning district.
Mr. Peabody stated the permitted uses currently exist for the center. The intent of the
Planned Development Rezone is to focus on the center and fagade treatments; not to
make significant changes to permitted uses. There are long-term tenants in the
center.
Cm. Fasulkey asked if the permitted uses were negotiated.
Mr. Byde responded yes. Staff also used the list of permitted uses that were adopted
by the City Council for site across the street.
Cm. Musser asked how the rezone would affect the existing coffee drive through.
Mr. Byde stated it would be a legal non-conforming use.
Cm. Nassar stated the architectural designs are very similar to the commercial
projects the Commission has recently reviewed. Were there any thoughts on
alternative architecture?
Plannln,~ C. om;ngsion 37 June 12, 2001
Refft/~r Mee~i~
Mr. Byde stated the parcel is fairly small and does not allow much flexibility on
developing the site.
Cm. Johnson asked if the applicant was available.
Peter Shutts, Architect on the project, thanked Andy Byde, Anne Kinney, and Mike
Stella for his dedication. He also thanked Larry Cannon for his encouragement and
assistance to meet Dublin's needs and as an anchor for Village Parkway. He
discussed the architectural features and drive aisle for the center. He stated there
isn't any issues with the staff report and are in agreement with the conditions of
approval. He was available to answer any questions from the Commission.
Cm. Musser was concerned that the color of the roof appeared red in the picture
displayed.
Mr. Shutts stated the color would not be red. The roof will be earth tone and won't
over power the center.
Steve Jukes, Project Manager stated the color is closer to burgundy.
Mr. Byde stated there is a condition of approval that the roof materials are reviewed
and subject to the approval of the Community Development Director.
Cm. Fasulkey asked whether the owners of Fandangos were contacted about the
project.
Mr. Shutts stated they have made numerous attempts to speak with the owner of
Fandangos but they haven't responded. They would like the opportunity to purchase
the building to include it or demolish it.
Cm Fasulkey asked the view of the Fandangos building?
Mr. Shutts stated the way the properties are currently situation, the parking is
balanced with the building. There is more value to have that as a developed pad site
with a new building.
Cm. Fasulkey asked if the City has any options on the issue?
Mr. Byde stated the City's options are limited. The Economic Development Director
has made several calls to the owner but the property owner isn't interested.
Mr. Peabody the City could only take action if it was a health or safety issue.
Cm. Johnson asked if there were any other questions.
Plannin~ Commission 38 June 12, 2001
Regular Meetindl
Saverio Delucca, adjacent property owner stated he is in favor of the project. The
project is the first domino to start beautifying the Village Parkway area.
Cm. Johnson asked if there were any other questions or comments; hearing none he
closed the public hearing.
Cm. Musser asked for the color and materials board be presented to the Planning
Commission.
Cm. Fasulkey stated he would like to see something done with the Fandangos
building. He stated it will be a significant improvement to the area and complimented
the architecture.
Cm. Johnson asked for a motion.
On motion by Cm. Fasulkey, seconded by Cm. Nassar, with Condition 20 modified,
and a vote of 4-0-1, with Cm. Jennings absent, the Planning Commission
unanimously adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 01-010
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING THE SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
FOR PA 00-010 THE VALLEY CENTER
RESOLUTION NO. 01-011
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AND ESTABLISH
FINDINGS, GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A PD, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONE
FOR PA 00-010, VALLEY CENTER
UN'FII~SHED BUSINESS
None
NEW BUSINESS
Mr. Peabody informed the Commission of upcoming agenda items.
39
June 12, 2o01
AJOURlqMENT
Being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
Community Development Director
R e ~ t f~il~y/>s~l b wfl t/t~d,
Plan n 'lng~Cj~nmis sion Chairperson
Plannin~ Comratssion ~0 June 12, 2OOl
RedJuJar Meetin~