HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-26-1998 PC MinutesA regular meeting of the CiD, of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, May 26, 1998, in the
Dublin Civic Center City Council Chambers. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairperson
Jennings.
ROLLCALL
Present: Commissioners Jennings, Johnson, Hughes, Oravetz, and Musser; Eddie Peabody Jr., Community
Development Director; Jeri Ram, Senior Planner; Jerry Haag, Consultant Planner; and Gaylene Burkett,
Recording Secretary. Cm. Hughes arrived at 7:02 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Cm. Jennings led the Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag.
The minutes from the April 28, 1998 meeting were approved as submitted
ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA - None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS -
7.1 97- 34 Athens by Night Conditional Use Permit Status Report
Eddie Peabody, Community Development Director, gave a brief report on the status of the conditional use permit
for the Athens by Night project. He stated that the applicants have not completed the work although they
estimate that the use will be operational by the end of the year. He indicated that staff recommends that staff
report hack to the Planning Commission after the use has been in operation for six months.
PUBLIC HEARING
Cm. Jennings went over the procedures for a public hearing, She stated that there would be speaker forms that
need to be filled out before a speaker can address the Commission..
8.I 98-039 St. Philip Lutheran School Minor Amendment to Site Development Review and
Conditional Use Permit A minor expansion to an existing playground area consisting of
approximately625 sq.ft. The approval also includes relocation of the preschool play ground fence
Regular Meeting 44 May 26, 1998
[5-26 pcmi]
and related improvements within that pla)' area, new landscaping, addition ora parking lot light
pole, relocation ofa utiliD pole, and ancillary landscaping and improvements to the site. The
project is located at 8850 Davona Drive.
Cm. Jennings opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Jeri Ram, Senior Planner, presented the staff report and gave a brief history of the project. The project is a Minor
Amendment to SDR/CUP PA 95-46. It is a minor expansion to an existing playground area consisting of
approximately625 sq.ft. The approval also includes relocation of the preschool play ground fence and related
improvements within that play area, new landscaping, addition of a parking lot light pole, relocation of a utility
pole, and ancillary landscaping and improvements to the site. During the review period for past projects, there
had been public comments therefore staff felt it appropriate to keep this application in the public view. She
indicated that there was a light that may have been an issue, but a light chart showed the light would be ½ foot
candle before it even reached the outside wall. Staffrecommends that the Planning Commission adopt the
resolution approving a minor amendments to this application.
Betty Stark, Principal of St. Phillip School stated that over the past two years, the parents, teachers, and students
have worked to raise funds to improve the play area of the school. She stated that research and planning has
gone in to the project by the Playground Committee of the School Board. The design was created to provide a
safer environment. The proposed changes to the playground would be in compliance with the standards of U.S.
Consumer Product Safety Commission and the ADA. She stated that she was available for any questions.
Cm. Oravetz asked if the ADA was required or was the school doing it on their own.
Ms. Stark stated they did that on their own, and felt it would make the playground more attractive.
Cm. Oravetz asked if they expected a response from the neighbors.
Ms. Stark stated it was a possibility, but none so far.
Ms. Ram stated that the church held a neighborhood meeting, however, no one showed up.
Tom Leanard, Project Coordinator stated some time ago, they submitted plans and they have been under review.
He stated that he was available for questions.
Cm. Oravetz asked if there was a concern from the neighbors regarding the light.
Mr. Leanard stated the Police wanted a I foot candle illumination for safety reasons, but in concern for the
neighbors, they would bring it down to ½ foot candle.
Cm. Jennings closed the public hearing.
On motion by Cm. Oravetz and seconded by Cm. Musser with a vote of 5-0 the Planning Commission
unanimously adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 98 -19
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MINOR ANIENDMENT TO CUP/SDR PA 95-046
ST. PHILIP LUTHERAN SCHOOL
Regular Meeting 45 May 25. 1998
[5-25 pcmi]
8.2
PA 97-018 Jefferson at Dublin Development Agreement An Ordinance approving a
Development Agreement between the City of Dublin and Alameda County Surplus Property Authority.
The Development Agreement is required by the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. Items included in the
Development Agreement include, but are not limited to, the financing and timing of infrastructure;
dedication of parkland; and, the payment of traffic, noise and public facilities impact fees.
Cm. Jennings opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Jeri Ram, Senior Planner, presented the staff report and gave a brief history of the project. She stated that just
before meeting, Pat Cashman called to say he could not attend, however he agreed with the terms of the
Development Agreement. This is an Ordinance approving a Development Agreement between the City of
Dublin and Alameda County Surplus Property Authority. Procedurally, the Planning Commission makes a
recommendation for approval to the City Council on Development Agreements. The Development Agreement
becomes effective for a term of five years from the date it is recorded. The Development Agreement runs with
the land and the rights thereunder can be assigned. In summary, the important aspects of the Development
Agreement relate to the areas of infrastructure construction, traffic impact fees, public facilities fees and parkland
dedication. Staffrecommendsthat the Planning Commission recommend to City Council adoption of an
Ordinance approving a Development Agreement for the Jefferson at Dublin Project.
Cm. Oravetz asked how the process worked for a Development Agreement
Ms. Ram described how a development agreement worked, how it outlined what fees needed to be paid, and what
portion ora traffic impact fee would be the responsibility of the developer.
Cm. Oravetz asked if the City could ask the developer to kick in extra money to build a soccer or baseball field.
Ms. Ram stated that the Specific Plan requires the City to do a Development Agreement. The City could ask for
extra features with a Development Agreement, but we generally request features related to the project.
Cm. Oravetz asked if Pleasanton and Livermore request extra features.
Mr. Peabody responded that if the other cities do, it is usually part of the Development Agreement. It may be for
good reasons that additional park lands are required or deemed to be required ora developer. He stated that
Alameda County Surplus Property Authority has agreed to give the City more park land than required as part of
this Development Agreement.
Cm. Jennings asked if anyone wished to speak, hearing none, she closed the public hearing.
On motion by Cm. Hughes, seconded by Cm. Johnson, with a 5-0, the Planning Commission unanimously
approved
RESOLUTION NO. 98 - 20
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
FOR PA 97-018 THE JEFFERSON AT DUBLIN PROJECT
8.3 98-010 Park Sierra Apartments Phase II, including Rezoning and Site Development Review
Proposed Zone Change, Site Development Review and Tentative Parcel Map for the second
phase of Park Sierra apartment project on 5.7 acres of land, generally located west of the existing
Regular Meeting 46 May 25, 1998
[5-25 pcmi]
Arroyo Vista housing complex and north of Park Sierra Phase I, at the Iron Horse Trail,
submitted by Shea Properties.
Cm. Jennings asked for the staff report.
Jerry Haag, Consultant Planner presented the staff report and gave a brief history of the project. He stated it was
the second phase of the Shea project. There is one major change between phase one and phase two. The
applicant is committed to making 57 units out of 283 units affordable for at least 15 years. They applied for and
received a tax credit allocation. The units would be mixed between both phases and would not be different at all
from the other units in the complex. Staffsupported this project because it strengthens the cities position on
affordable housing by offering these units to Iow to moderate income. Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission recommend approval to the City Council
Cm. Oravetz asked how phase one could be changed without coming back to the Planning Commission.
Mr. Haag stated that they were not changing any of the physical perimeters.
Mr. Peabody stated the Planning Commission did not approve the rents of the units, just the physical aspects of
the units. The applicant has chosen to use a financing vehicle that will allow those 57 units available for low to
moderate income. There is nothing changed in phase one.
Cm. Oravetz stated that if he knew that at the time of phase one approval, he might have voted differently.
Jerry Haag stated that at the time of approval for phase one, the applicant did not even know that phase two
would get this far. It made better sense to mix the affordable units instead of having a concentrated area of
affordable housing.
Cm. Hughes asked who would maintain the trail.
Mr. Haag stated that it is a public facility and would be maintained by the East Bay Regional Park District or the
Ci~,.
Eddie stated that there are capital improvement programs that the City is pursuing to finish the remainder of the
Iron Horse Trail. It will be deeded to East Bay Regional Park District and they will maintain it.
Cm. Hughes asked if the one driveway would be widened that accesses the first section and the new section.
Mr. Haag responded that the 24 foot driveway was adequate.
Cm. Hughes asked if the Police had any comments.
Mr. Haag stated that the Police did not have any comments on this road.
Cm. Hughes stated the roadway itself would be accessible to the public.
JerD' Haag stated yes. There may be some speed bumps added at a later date because it is a fairly straight access
way. It was about 1000 feet or just under a quarter of mile.
Cm. Johnson asked why there was not another access to Arroyo Vista.
Regular Meeting 47 May 25. 1998
[5-25 pcmi]
J~rD Haag stated there was a significant grading difference between the sites. The applicant may have had one
entD-~vay for security purposes.
Don Gause, Shea Properties, stated that part of the conditions requires to have speed bumps put in, especially
around the trail entrance.
Cm. Musser asked why the street was not meandered.
Mr. Gause stated that was a very specific reason because of the six major utilities along that area. There was a
perfect fit for the street.
Cm. Oravetz asked about moving the gate to the front.
Mr. Gause stated they were trying to blend the two communities together and keep as much open space as
possible.
Cm. Johnson asked how many public parking spaces were available for people to use the trail.
Mr. Gause stated there were eight spaces.
Cm. Oravetz asked how far is the closest Arroyo Vista unit to Park Sierra.
Jerry Haag stated about 50-60 feet.
Cm. Jennings asked where the pedestrian gate would be located.
Mr. Gause showed Cm. Jennings on a map where the gate would be located.
Cm. Jennings was concerned about the people who did not have a car and had to walk from a bus stop with
packages in the rain.
Mr. Gause explained that there will be a pedestrian gate at the traffic bulb. They could walk down the lron Horse
Trail and enter through a keypad entry. He stated that someone on a bicycle could get on Iron Horse Trail and it
could take them to the Bart Station or the downtown area.
Cm. 3ennings stated that there is not a pedestrian access off Dougherty Road.
Mr. Gause stated that there is a bus stop proposed for the area.
Cm. Jennings asked if the abandoned railroad bridge would be done in phase one or phase two.
Mr. Gause stated that the reconditioning is limited to hand rails which will be part of phase one.
Cm. Jennings closed public hearing.
Cm. Oravetz asked how the low housing rate structure would be monitored.
Mr. Haag stated the City is required to enter into an affordable housing agreement with the developer that would
go to City Council and would spell out the conditions.
Cm. Oravetz asked if the Police had any questions or concerns.
Regular Meeting 48 May 25, 1998
[5~25 pcmi]
Mr. Haag stated that the Police Department looked at the conditions and their comments or concerns ~vere
addressed.
Cm. Jennings asked if the conditions identified that the location of the affordable units be dispersed and not
clustered.
Mr. Haag stated it would be addressed in the affordable housing agreement.
Mr. Gause explained that the guidelines are set by the County and the City is contracted to the County.
Cm. Jennings was concerned about the affordable housing. She asked if the affordable units were going to be
dispersed within the entire phase one and two and how it would be monitored.
Mr. Gause stated there is very strict monitoring regulations. There may be some units that are affordable one
month and market rate the next month. It would depend on the availability.
Cm. Johnson asked where others like this were located.
Mr. Gause stated one in Fremont.
Cm. Jennings asked what happened if someone could not be relocated to another affordable housing unit.
Gabrielle Dawson, Operations Director, explained how the process worked. They had 75% success in relocating
people to other housing that met their needs.
Cm. Hughes asked if preference was given to people who are low income and who live in the Valley.
Ms. Dawson responded that there is not an area preference given. Future residents would have to qualify under
income guidelines.
Cm. Jennings asked if there was a vehicle available to the Planning Commission to let their wishes be know, that
Dublin residents that are low income should have a preference to the units.
Ms. Dawson stated that the regulatory agreement is still in the negotiating phase.
Mr. Peabody stated that the Planning Commission could make their wishes known to the Housing Authority.
Cm. Hughes asked how many below market units were available in Dublin at this time.
Mr. Peabody stated that it is a very small amount.
Cm. Musser commended the applicant and staff on this project to include affordable units.
Cm. Oravetz stated he is not sold on the location. He has concerns about the traffic down Dougherty and the
affordable housing units.
Mr. Haag stated that he did not see any traffic concerns on Dougherty Road.
On motion by Cm. Hughes and seconded by Cm. Johnson, with a vote of 4-1, with Oravetz voting against the
project, the Planning Commission adopted:
Regular Meeting 49 May 25, 1998
[5-25 pcmi]
RESOLUTION NO. 98-21
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AND ESTABLISHING FINDINGS AND
GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) REZONING CONCERNING
PA 98-010, PARK SIERRA APARTMENT PROJECT PHASE II, SHEA PROPERTIES
RESOLUTION NO. 98-22
APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR PA 98-010
PARK SIERRA PHASE II APARTMENT PROJECT, SHEA PROPERTIES
RESOLUTION NO. 98-23
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR PA 98-010, PARK SIERRA PHASE II APARTMENT PROJECT, INCLUDING PD REZONING
AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
NEW OR UNFINISHED Business
9.1 Upcoming Planning Schedule
Mr. Peabody went over the upcoming schedule.
There was a brief discussion on the Urban Opportunity Area that came before the City Council last week.
Cm. Hughes asked about the DSTF and what was happening.
Cm. Oravetz stated the first Farmer's Market was scheduled for June 5.
There was a brief discussion on the location for the Farmer's Market, and why it was located at the Plumbery. If
it is looked at as a positive force it will benefit Dublin.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m..
ATTE$./: . ~ . ,
Respectfully submitted,
Planning Commission (~(airperson
Regular Meeting 50
[5-25 pcmi]
May 25.1998