Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-17-2009 Adopted CC Min Jt MtgMINUTES OF A JOINT CITY COUNCIL/ ti ` PLANNING COMMISSION - -~ $z ~ ~l `~ ~ SPECIAL MEETING -November 17 2009 A special joint meeting of the Dublin City Council and Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, November 17, 2009, in the City Council Chambers. The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m., by Mayor Sbranti. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Biddle, Hart, Hildenbrand, Scholz, and Mayor Sbranti. Vice Chair King; and Commissioners Brown, Schaub, and Swalwell. ABSENT: Planning Commission Chair Wehrenberg PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance to the flag was recited by the City Council, Staff and those present. STUDY SESSION PA 07-036: Downtown Dublin Specific Plan. The purpose of the Joint City Council/Planning Commission Study Session is to discuss the proposed land use concept for the Specific Plan Area, the proposed "Development Pool" (square footage available for Intensification/development) of properties in the Specific Plan Area and the proposed Community Benefit Program for the use of the Development Pool. Erica Fraser, Senior Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Bill Wiseman, RBF Consulting, also presented the project. He stated he has been working on the preparation of the Draft Downtown Dublin Specific Plan (DDSP) and has a working copy of the document. He indicated there are some issues that require input from DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES i VOLUME 28 `~o~ SPECIAL MEETING i~~~~s~ November 17, 2009 \\\ '~ GciFOR~'m the City Council for direction before putting together a formal administrative draft and then a draft document for public review. Mr. Wiseman stated there are two key objectives for this evening: 1) ways to encourage or stimulate development consistent with the guiding principles by establishing uses by district; and 2) improve the quality of downtown and encourage development. He stated they would be reviewing the downtown area as a whole and looking at a Community Benefit Program and related development densities. Mr. Wiseman stated the study area has 284 acres, 2.5 million square feet and 10,000 parking spaces. He mentioned the 5 planning areas and stated when the original plans were adopted the land uses were defined by parcel and were very specific; commercial, retail and retail/office. He felt that did not provide much flexibility. He stated that, at the previous workshop, the panel reviewed breaking the whole area into 3 districts: Retail, Transit Oriented and Village Parkway. He proposed looking at a range of potential uses which can occur within any of those three districts. He stated the ultimate range of land uses needs to be determined by each district and the development capacity will be determined later. Mr. Wiseman felt this approach gives greater flexibility, responds to market conditions and encourages more mixed-use districts which are fundamental to one of the guiding principles which is to create a more usable downtown with a variety of uses and can encourage a mix of uses that makes it more functional and can encourage night uses. Mr. Wiseman discussed density and Floor Area Ratio (FAR). He then discussed the FAR for the different districts and the range of uses. He stated Staff needed direction on how to reassess the FAR and make them more consistent across all three districts. Mr. Wiseman discussed a development pool which is a density bonus with some type of community benefit for public improvements in the downtown area. The development pool is the amount of square footage that the City would use to assess each project, and what kind of benefit are we getting in return. He mentioned some of the advantages of using the Community Benefit Program; 1) it provides a mechanism to fund improvements and benefits the community; 2) it improves the City's competitive position in the regional retail market; and 3) a viable downtown will help sustain long-term sales tax revenues for the City. Cmr. Schaub asked when the draft EIR will come to the Planning Commission. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 2 VOLUME 28 ~~~" SPECIAL MEETING 1~~~~~ November 17, 2009 ~\ '~ Gclr+oc~~'s Mr. Wiseman answered they planned to bring both the Draft EIR and the Draft Downtown Specific Plan to the Planning Commission in March 2010. He stated there are also specific deadlines for the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) grants. Cmr. Schaub asked if the Planning Commission needed to approve the Draft EIR before reviewing the specific plan and asked if the Planning Commission would review both documents together. Ms. Fraser stated the draft documents would be circulated for public review for 45 days. At that time the Planning Commission would receive a copy of the draft documents. She continued that, at the Planning Commission public hearing, they would be taking action on the Specific Plan as well as the EIR but the two documents must be reviewed and acted on together. Mr. Wiseman mentioned that the Planning Commission would recommend approval of the documents to the City Council who would make the final approval. Cmr. King asked if this proposal is in lieu of a City proposal. Mr. Wiseman answered no; this proposal is to obtain direction from the City Council and Planning Commission on the concept of how development will be allowed and whether the City wanted to have a development pool. He continued that this is part of the land use chapter of the specific plan and this document would determine how it will happen. Cmr. King stated the materials received for tonight's meeting states "a typical land use plan would not meet the intent of the guiding principles. " He asked if that meant that the proposal would discard the typical land use plan. Mr. Wiseman answered it means that the typical land use plan defines uses at the parcel level, but this proposes an overlay with a range of uses within a district that would give the City more flexibility as to what the development would be at the district level. Cmr. King stated he understands the "overlay" but stated it must overlay something. He felt this proposal is not a plan if the City is waiting to see what the developers want to do. Mr. Wiseman responded that the City will define a range of uses which would empower the City to determine what kind of project is to be developed. He mentioned the mixed- DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 3 VOLUME 28 of ~, SPECIAL MEETING 19;~~~~ ,~ November 17, 2009 ~\~'~~~ ~~~ ~~ use where it could be determined that there would be office above and ground floor restaurants; which is in response to a Guiding Principle brought up by Cmr. King regarding more nightlife. He continued if the range of uses is defined, then the City can define the uses and determine the type of development. He stated that the Specific Plan is written with guidelines which determine the kinds of uses the City is looking for, the types of finishes on the buildings, etc. The City would actually have more ability to define the quality and the type of development in each district. Cmr. King responded he still did not believe this proposal is a plan. He felt that if there is a range of uses and the City is waiting for a developer to decide what and where to build a development, then it really isn't a plan. He mentioned the Planning Commissioners attend a Planning Institute every year and one of the seminars is "How to Create a Vibrant Civic Center." He stated they learned that there are a lot of specific concepts that create a vibrant civic center and he did not see where they will it be addressed in this process. He stated the concepts have not been addressed yet. Mr. Wiseman felt that Cmr. King should look at how the Specific Plan is organized with a detailed set of development standards which dictate how physically you want a building to look, the setback requirements and parking, etc. Then there are the guidelines that determine how it will function and look. He stated those tools that will define any project will be in the Specific Plan; how it will look and how it will be built. He stated the land use as an overlay for the districts will retain flexibility so that the City is not so specific that no development occurs at all. He felt this would give the City flexibility to be able to respond to market conditions. Mayor Sbranti suggested Cmr. King meet with Staff or Mr. Wiseman for clarification. Cm. Hart asked if the individual districts will have different ranges of use or will they all be the same. Mr. Wiseman responded the districts will have different ranges of use for what is appropriate in each district. Cm. Scholz asked if the proposal will take a specific plan and then decide how to use it. Mr. Wiseman responded that the City will be deciding how to organize the land use chapter and use the guiding principles as a stepping stone for how the City Council wants DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES a VOLUME 28 .~°~~ SPECIAL MEETING i~~~~~ November 17, 2009 ~~ '~ %~ ~~ ~~ it to look. He felt that after tonight's meeting the City Council will be able to see the big picture. Mayor Sbranti stated the City Council is looking at policy statements within the Specific Plan and not a real plan but policy statements that will guide development. Mr. Wiseman stated the City Council is giving Staff strategic direction that will guide the policy direction. Cmr. Brown asked to clarify that the developer would not pay into the community benefit unless they will use some of the development pool. Mr. Wiseman answered yes. He explained the developer has a base FAR that they would be allowed to build to and if they wanted to build a denser FAR they would pay into the Community Benefit Program and the agreement would be negotiated between the individual developer and the City. Cmr. Brown asked if a developer who does not use the pool would not pay into the Community Benefit Program. Mr. Wiseman answered yes. Cm. Hart asked if the developer did not pay into the development pool then they would not have the option of increasing the density above the base FAR. Mr. Wiseman answered yes. Mayor Sbranti stated within a district there are permitted uses and asked if there will be caps within the district on a specific permitted use. Mr Wiseman answered yes. He continued different uses generate different traffic, etc. at different times of the day. He stated the City wants flexibility but also wants to ensure that the traffic on Dublin Blvd., for example, will not be adversely affected. Mayor Sbranti stated with the caps within the district there would not be 500,000 square feet of retail and the cap could be 100,000 square feet of office and certain districts will have a lower count than other districts. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES s VOLUME 28 `,~oe~ei. SPECIAL MEETING i;~~~;~ November 17, 2009 ~~ ~ /~ ~'1GIFpR~~ Mr. Wiseman responded the best way to look at this is so that the flexibility stays at the broadest level with a capacity by district that can be met with different types of uses, but once the capacity is met, it cannot be exceeded. Mayor Sbranti mentioned that a use on Village Parkway with a .20 FAR would be allowed to go to .35 FAR without pulling from the development pool, by right, as a permitted use; some landowners could increase their FAR without going into the pool. Ms. Fraser answered yes, that is correct. Cm. Hart asked if there is a way to quantify the true difference between the baseline, the development pool and the cap. Mr. Wiseman answered yes. If base density is identified, the cap will be driven by the traffic and the traffic engineers will be able to tell by district the ultimate capacity. Cm. Hart asked what the baseline is. Mr. Wiseman responded that they can use the proposed baseline identified in the DDSP or the ultimate capacity. Cm. Hart asked if traffic is the only factor. Mr. Wiseman responded that traffic was used because it is a key element and the others (water, storm drain and sewer) did not seem to be a big issue. Cm. Hart felt those items needed to be part of any equation. He felt that when it is noted that only the traffic is used in the equation it doesn't give the big picture of what is really included. Mayor Sbranti stated the EIR will be a guiding force in terms of defining the capacity for each district, for each type of use. Cmr. Schaub asked for an explanation of the districts. He felt that there are 2 retail districts and 1 transit district and asked if the EIR will determine what the base and capacities are by districts. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 6 VOLUME 28 ~ ~ SPECIAL MEETING 19,`~~~ ~~ November 17, 2009 ~`~'~~~ ~it~reu~ Ms. Fraser answered yes but it is different for each district. She stated Staff is proposing a .35 FAR in the retail district and Village Parkway district; two separate districts with the same name. Cmr. Schaub felt that was not clear from the presentation. Ms. Fraser stated Staff reviewed the Village Parkway area, where there are smaller properties and the current maximum FAR is .35 and Staff is recommending that the FAR remain the same. She stated this would allow the smaller businesses to expand/improve if they were able. Cmr. Schaub asked what Staff is proposing for the other retail district. Ms. Fraser answered Staff is proposing a base of .35 FAR due to the large scale retail operations, i.e. Target, Home Expo, etc. that exist in the area. She continued this would be giving them a small increase because their buildings are very large already. It is the same baseline FAR as Village Parkway but it will mean different things in both districts. Cmr. Schaub asked if when the Planning Commission receives the EIR they will be able to understand the capacity of Village Parkway and will be able to establish baseline and capacity for the retail and transit oriented districts. Ms. Fraser answered yes. She stated the purpose of tonight's meeting is to discuss with both the City Council and Planning Commission the direction Staff is moving so that Staff does not expend time, money and resources if the panel wants to go in different direction. Mayor Sbranti asked if there will be integration of uses between the different districts. Ms. Fraser responded there will be common uses in each district, i.e. restaurant uses will be allowed in all three districts. Mayor Sbranti commented that the Streetscape Master Plan and Community Design Element which have common features. He stated he did not want to go back to having three different specific plans that are very different. He wanted to ensure that this would be an integrated plan for the entire area. Ms. Fraser stated that Staff is using the guiding principles as a base and trying to focus certain developments in certain areas. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ~ VOLUME 28 ~~or ~ SPECIAL MEETING i"~~~~~ November 17, 2009 ~~ ~ /~ Cmr. Brown asked why the FAR of .35 proposed in the Retail District is a reasonable number. Ms. Fraser answered there are typically very large buildings in the current retail district and although .35 FAR may sound low it actually equates to very large expansions of those buildings. She stated that if the City is trying to encourage property owners to develop their property and they want to go over a certain FAR and provide a community benefit there is a base at which it needs to start. For example, Target is at a .29 FAR, if they were allowed to go up to .35 FAR that would allow them to add 22,000 square feet to their building which is a significant number. Mayor Sbranti suggested reading the questions and obtaining feedback from the panel. 1. Should the City allow uses based on the Specific Plan District rather than a Land Use Designation? Or, would a typical land use plan, with specific allowable uses for each property, be more appropriate? • Cmr. Brown felt it should be based on the Specific Plan District which gives more flexibility. • Cmr. Swalwell agreed with Staff's recommendations. He felt the City needs to be flexible and adapt to the changing times and look at what people are doing with their property versus what we'd like them to do. • Cmr. Schaub felt it was a good idea. • Cmr. King felt this is a plan to not plan. He asked where is that being mentioned that the City wants a certain use in a certain area. He felt it was completely off the track of where the Planning Commission had been going for the last 3-4 years. He felt the plan is saying that the City shouldn't worry about where they want things to be built, public spaces and the factors of what and where we want things built in order to build a vibrant downtown. He felt the plan was saying that the City only wants the flexibility for bigger block sizes. He stated that the Planning Commission was given the "Opportunities, Issues and Strategies" report which explains what's wrong with the current downtown. It says "the very large block sizes, wide and busy roadways, large building footprints and expansive parking lots creates an environment that is dominated by automobiles. " He felt the proposal was a plan to encourage more of the same. He was unclear how this proposal would change the area to create a pedestrian friendly City. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES s VOLUME 28 ~~oF SPECIAL MEETING ~;~~~°~ November 17, 2009 ~\ '~ /~ ~`1GIFpR~ • Mavor Sbranti asked Cmr. King if he would like to see a land use plan similar to the current one. He continued that the current specific plan land use plan is very specific by parcel. He stated the other three Planning Commissioners are supporting the land use plan by district; Cmr. King would like to keep it similar to the current specific plan, i.e. specific land use designation by parcel. • Cmr. King answered yes, that is the direction he felt the City should be going in and thought they were going in. He responded that if this were an overlay to a plan that is specific; which says what development the City would like to see where and if it's allowing flexibility to change that then he would agree with flexibility. He felt this goes beyond flexibility, this only says the City wants the flexibility to approve whatever the builders want to build and nowhere does the City say we want this element in a specific space in order to create a pedestrian friendly experience. • Mayor Sbranti felt Cmr. King was clearly opposed and wanted to clarify that what Cmr. King is supporting is basically the current specific plans that have been in place since 2000 which are parcel specific. He then asked Cmr. King if that is what he wants. • Cmr. King stated he was not saying the current plan was perfect but he liked the concept. • Cm. Hart supports the Staff's recommendation but would be cautious regarding density. • Cm. Scholz also supports Staff recommendation. • Cm. Biddle supports the concept of a development plan and sticking to the guiding principles based on the district. • Cm.Hildenbrand supports Staff recommendations and felt the flexibility is good and a greater mixed-use is good. She felt there hasn't been any development and unless the City tears everything down and rebuilds it, and reconfigure streets, the City will still be faced with the challenge of making the area walkable. She felt that if the City can encourage a different type of use there may be more people coming to the area. She continued the City Council has asked to fix this downtown specific plan in the past and so far the plan has not changed conceptually to encourage development in the community. She continued that she is willing to give this specific plan a try to see how it works. • Mayor Sbranti also agreed with Staff recommendations but felt the City is being flexible but felt there are still constraints within each district. There is DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 9 VOLUME 28 ~~ or ol,~ SPECIAL MEETING i;~~~~~ November 17, 2009 ~~ ~ /~ ~4G1 R~~ still a definition of how much office space, etc. and that will vary based on different circumstances. He felt it is a different way of doing things because the specific plans that have been here since the early 80's are parcel specific. He felt that this new plan is a different way of doing things. 2. Should the City establish a base FAR for each District before a developer is required to use the Development Pool? Or, should the City allow development (FAR) up to the maximum allowed pursuant to the Specific Plan? • Cmr. Schaub felt the concept of FAR's is not a very clear way to look at a district. He continued FAR's are only a part of what is reviewed for a project. He felt this is the most complex part because it speaks to capacity and how that is determined, but did not feel that FAR is the complete answer as to how the City wants a district to look. • Cmr. Schaub was in support, but when the DDSP comes back to the Planning Commission they will have a long discussion about it. • Cmr. King was not in support. • Cmr. Brown asked to clarify the second part of the question regarding the specific plan talking about the existing FAR which was shown on the graph. Ms. Fraser answered that the within the districts a developer can build up to a base FAR that the City has established and after that they must pull from the development pool. She asked if the panel wants to set a maximum FAR pursuant to the EIR which would allow Applicants to build up to that maximum and not require them to apply for additional FAR but would be allowed by right to build to the maximum. • Cmr. Brown supported the district FAR concept. • Cmr. Swalwell was in support of the district FAR concept. • Cm. Biddle was in support of the development pool concept and supports district FAR concept. • Cm. Scholz was in support of the development pool concept and supports district FAR concept. • Cm. Hart was in support of the development pool concept and supports district FAR concept but was still concerned about density. • Mayor Sbranti was also in support and felt by having a base FAR some property owners who are currently under that to still go up without pulling DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES io VOLUME 28 ~ SPECIAL MEETING 19;~~~* ,~ November 17, 2009 ~\~~j~~ `~IFOR~ from the development pool. He felt if there is someone who wants to do something very innovative they could pull from the development pool. 3. If the City establishes a base FAR for each District, should the base be established as .35 for the Village Parkway and Retail Districts and .SO for the Transit-oriented District? • Cmr. Brown felt it was a good step to begin with. • Cmr. Swalwell agreed with Cmr. Brown that this is a good start. • Cmr. King supported the base FAR. • Cmr. Schaub was unsure that FARs will solve the problem in the future. He felt the Transit Oriented Districts will not look like we thought they would two years ago. He did not feel there would be a developer willing to build the densities that were built earlier. He was concerned that the transit oriented districts will look different and did not want it to look too different in the planning because there is no way to know what it will look like in the future. He felt there might be more retail in the area because no developer wants to build residential housing there. He was in support of .50 FAR for retail. But felt the City needed to look at what a transit oriented district looks like and if FAR's will satisfy landowners and residents' need for certain projects in certain areas. • Cm. Hart was in support. • Cm. Hildenbrand was in support. • Cm. Scholz was in support. • Cm. Biddle felt it was a good place to start. • Mayor Sbranti was in support. Mayor Sbranti suggested discussing questions 4 and 5 together in the interest of time and felt there needs to be a broader discussion on these two questions at a future meeting. 4. Should the City establish a Community Benefit Program to provide a benefit to the community in exchange for allowing developers to use the Development Pool? S. Are there any benefits to the community you would like to see included in the Community Benefit Program? • Cmr. Schaub felt these issues were not land use decisions. He did not feel that parts of the Community Design Element and Downtown Specific Plan DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES i i VOLUME 28 `~ ~ ~~ SPECIAL MEETING i;~~~~~ November 17, 2009 ~\ ~ /~ Gt~r~ot~~'`D should be part of the Community Benefit Program and felt it was up to the City Council to decide these issues. He voted yes. • Mayor Sbranti suggested that part of the Community Benefit Program could be performance based to either waive or lower the Community Benefit Program as an incentive to encourage activity. Mayor Sbranti asked Cmr. Schaub if he would count plazas as part of the Community Benefit Program where a landowner would dedicate an area as part of the Community Benefit Program as a public plaza. • Cmr. Schaub stated he would rather see a list of benefits that would be discussed by the City Council and Planning Commission and come up with a consensus on whether it is a planning issue but agreed that public plazas should be part of the list. • Cmr. King felt that this is an abdication of what the Planning Commission has been working toward and will result in a hodge-podge of development, but he felt these two questions could save the project. He felt it could create an inspirational design for a vibrant, pedestrian friendly, city center through a community benefit program, but if all the Downtown Specific Plan is saying is the developer can build a bigger box if they add public art in front of the building then the City is back to county planning. He felt that if the City was very ambitious with questions 4 and 5 then a real plan could be accomplished, but he felt there was nothing in the plan currently to create a distinctive, pedestrian friendly, vibrant downtown. Jeri Ram, Community Development Director, asked if Staff could ask the panel for their comments regarding the Development Pool. She stated there will be more detailed information on the Community Benefit Program brought to the panel at a future meeting. • Mayor Sbranti felt there was a general consensus regarding the Community Benefit Program and having afollow-up discussion. • Cm. Hart disagreed and wanted to ensure that the City does not rely totally on the Community Benefit Program for access to the development pool. He was concerned with the inference that the City would allow increased density versus access to the development pool. • Mayor Sbranti stated the panel will look at the Community Benefit Program at a future time. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES is VOLUME 28 ~yoe' ~ SPECIAL MEETING 19,~~~,~ November 17, 2009 `~ Gc~FOR~'m • Cm. Hart felt question #5 is a Staff question and could not be answered at this time. • Cm. Hildenbrand agreed with Cm. Hart. • Cm. Biddle suggested that there may be a community benefit that a developer may propose that the City has not thought of and suggested the list should be flexible. Mayor Sbranti opened the public comment period. Hearing none he closed the public comment period. Mayor Sbranti asked for the next steps. Ms. Fraser answered the next steps will be to take the feedback from the panel and continue with the completion of the analysis for the EIR. She stated they are working on the EIR; the traffic study and all the other environmental studies as well. She stated Staff will return to the panel to discuss the Community Benefit Program at a later date. She continued the panel will be reviewing the draft Specific Plan and the EIR in the late winter or early spring. The final EIR will be completed in the spring 2010 and the Planning Commission would act on it summer 2010 then the formal public hearings would occur. Cmr. Swalwell asked what the consensus is from the business and development community about this new Downtown Specific Plan. Ms. Fraser answered there have been no calls so it is hard to say. She felt there would be comments when the draft Specific Plan is available for review. Mayor Sbranti referred to Cmr. King's point that the panel is looking at policy issues that will go into the plan but not looking at an actual plan. Cmr. King stated his understanding was there would not be a plan. Mayor Sbranti answered that there would be a plan and asked Cmr. King to be patient until the plan is available for review. He stated the panel has adopted some policies for the plan and he will have the opportunity to review the plan. He felt that FAR matters in the areas where there are under utilized parking lots in the downtown. He felt that DUBLIN CITY COUNCILlPLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 13 VOLUME 28 ~aF~~ SPECIAL MEETING 19;~~~,~ November 17, 2009 ~~l'~~ because the City has increased the FAR someone could take those vast parking lots and create a mini retail site that is walkable. He disagreed that the FAR would not do anything to address pedestrian friendliness. He felt that increasing FAR will potentially increase the walkablility of the area because it would provide incentive to develop the unused parking lots that are auto-centric commercial activity. He felt that the development pool would allow some very innovative ideas to create shopping districts and public parks. He felt that one of the flaws of the current Downtown Specific Plan was that the City would like to put a park on someone's property. He felt they all agreed that the City would like the park, but who is the property owner that will dedicate 5 acres of their land and build a City park. He encouraged the panel to keep an open mind and wait to see the details of the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan. Cmr. Schaub felt the City needs to build "people-density" downtown to make it successful. He felt there needs to be residents living there or the City would need to bring in a major destination. He felt that if there is no way to bring thousands of people to the downtown there is no market for it. Mayor Sbranti agreed that in order for the downtown to be successful there needs to be destination opportunities or a potential housing mix. Mayor Sbranti thanked everyone and stated he looks forward to continued discussions on the project. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 7:02 p.m. in memory of Staff Sgt. Sean Diamond and our fallen troops. Minutes prepared by Debra LeClair, Secretary. f"~ J ~-- Mayor ATTEST:G~iu~ ~ ~~ City Clerk DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES i4 VOLUME 28 `~ogDo SPECIAL MEETING i;~~~~~ November 17, 2009 `\ ~4L1 R~~