Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.1 Attch 2 PC Minutes 09-28-2010 G~~~ O~ DpBlr~ ll/ ~ \11 ` 8 Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, September 28, 2010 CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, September 28, 2010, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair King called the meeting to order at 7:00:27 PM Present: Chair King; Vice Chair Brown; Commissioners Schaub, and Wehrenberg; Jeff Baker, Planning Manager; Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner; Marnie Waffle, Senior Planner; Jamie Rojo, Assistant Planner; and Debra LeClair, Recording Secretary. Absent: Cm. Swalwell ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA - Jeff Baker, Planning Manager requested approval of the minutes be postponed until the end of the meeting so that Cm. Swalwell can join the meeting. The Commission agreed. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - NONE CONSENT CALENDAR - NONE WRITTLW COMMUNICATIONS - f 7.1 Consideration of whether the acquisition of the 67t acres of the Schaefer Ranch Property by the East Bay Regional Park District is consistent with the Dublin General Plan. Jamie Rojo, Assistant Planner presented the, project as outlined in the Staff Report. Cm. Schaub mentioned he visited the park and felt Schaefer Ranch and Discovery Homes did a fabulous job with the park and it is a good addition to the City of Dublin. On a motion by Cm. Wehrenberg and seconded by Cm. Brown, on a vote of 4-0-1, with Cm. Swalwell being absent, the Planning Commission approved: RESOLUTION NO. 10- 44 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION / OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RESOLUTION F DING THAT THE ACQUISITION OF 67± ACRES OF LAND BY THE EAST BAY R GIONAL PARK DISTRICT LOCATED IN THE SCHAEFER RANCH DEVELOPM NT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY OF DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN (APN'S 941-2832-001 THROUGH 941-2842-008) Tanning Commission september28, 2010 fgularWeeting 111 ATTACHMENT 2 7:08:50 PM Cm. Swalwell joined the meeting. PUBLIC HEARINGS - 8.1 PLPA 2010-00012 Natural Health Care Center - Conditional Use Permit. Jamie Rojo, Assistant Planner presented the project as outlined/in the Staff Report. Cm. Brown asked if the Applicant is adding massage therapy to the other therapies already being done. Ms. Rojo answered yes. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if the Applicant has made, any changes to the building. Ms. Rojo answered at the time they applied for their Building Permit most of the work had already been completed. Cm. Schaub asked if all the tenants in the shopping center were noticed regarding this meeting. Ms. Rojo answered yes; all tenants in the shopping center were noticed as well as all property owners within a 300 foot radius. Cm. Schaub felt the shopping center is busiest at 12:30 pm because of the two restaurants located there. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if Custom Fireplace is still remodeling. Jeff Baker, Planning Manager answered Custom Fireplace, which operates in this shopping center, had purchased thg, property next door and was building a new facility but they no longer control the site. Chair King asked if the a are any vacancies in the center. Ms. Rojo answered t ere are no vacancies. Chair King opened the public hearing and having no speakers closed the public hearing. Cm. Swalwell ha no issues. Cm. Brown co curred with the findings. Cm. Wehre erg agreed with the findings and felt because of the hours of operation it is a shared parking situation and had no issue with the reduction of 7 parkin tails. Cm. Schau had no issues. Aanning Commission Septem6er28, 2010 ftgurarweeting 112 On a mo : on by Cm. Schaub and seconded by Cm. Worenberg, on a vote of 5-0, the Planning Commissio \proved: RESOLI '[LQN NO. 10-45 A RESOLUTION gV THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF''T'HE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE OPERATION OF A MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT AND FOR A PARKING REDUCTION FOR SHARED PARKING 7151 AMADOR PLAZA ROAD (AP 941-0305-032) / PLPA 010-00012 8.2 PA 09-027 Kidango Day Care Center Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review. Marnie Waffle, Senior Planner presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Cm. Schaub asked if the facility has already been built and if so, how long it has been in operation. Ms. Waffle answered the facility has been in operation since June 2009. She continued Staff started meeting with the Dublin Unified School District (DUSD in March 2009. Kidango was relocated from the Arroyo Vista site due to the redevelopment project there. Staff worked with the school district on the application and Kidango formally applied in June 2009 at approximately the same time they obtained their clearance from Community Care Licensing to operate. Cm. Schaub asked if the Applicants were not aware they needed to come to the Planning Commission. Ms. Waffle stated this was discussed in the initial conversations with the DUSD in March 2009 because the property is owned by the school district and there was a question as to whether they were exempt from having to obtain a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) from the City. She continued it was promptly determined this was a private enterprise, not a school district function; therefore they were required to obtain a CUP through the City process and Site Development Review for the existing shade structures and proposed play equipment. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if the Applicant had completed building upgrades such as fire sprinklers and fire alarm systems. Ms. Waffle answered the Applicant worked with Dublin Fire Prevention to obtain the necessary approvals prior to opening. 41onning Commission Septem6er28, 2010 Wfgu(armeeting 113 Chair King referred to the discussion on noise in the Staff Report which references a fence that will reduce the sound level and asked if the fence currently exists. Ms. Waffle answered yes; it is an existing wood fence. She explained that wood fences typically reduce a decibel reading by 5, but because the existing fence has gaps between the slats the noise study gave it a 3 decibel reduction. Chair King asked if the Applicant is proposing to do anything to filter out the sound. Ms. Waffle answered no. Chair King opened the public hearing. John Fong, Applicant, spoke in favor of the project. He stated he has been aware of the noise concern by the neighbors and the concern regarding the signs in front of the facility. He stated so far they have done their best to try to answer and oblige the neighbors. Chair King asked if some of the neighbors wanted to discuss the noise issue with him. Mr. Fong answered they had been visited by a neighbor with concerns about the "sound wall" which is a wall with hanging pots, pans and noisemaking devices that is part of their educational program. He stated they were unaware of the impact to the neighbors and when it was brought to their attention they moved them. Cm. Swalwell asked Mr. Fong to explain the "sound wall." Minu, Kidango Child Care Center Director, answered there were some musical instruments as well as pots and pans with wooden spoons but the neighbors thought the noise was too loud so they were moved. The activity has now been eliminated. Cm. Brown asked if the Applicant has considered any other mitigation for sound that would be reasonable to neighbors. Minu answered the children only just started and are learning how to play and they talk about being considerate of others during circle time and stated it takes time. Chair King asked if the children stay at the center the entire day and asked how much time they spend outside. Minu answered the center is open from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm with 3 classrooms, 2 full-day programs and 1 half-day program with two sessions. She stated the full-day program spends less then 45 minutes in the morning and 45 minutes in the afternoon after nap time outside. She stated each classroom goes outside at separate times and there are less then 24 children on the playground at any one time. She stated for the part-time program the morning session spends from 11:00am to 11:30am outside and the afternoon session is from 2:30pm to 3:00pm. T&nning Commission Septem6er28, 2010 ~Rfflgufarweeting 114 Chair King asked if the full-day program spends a total of 1 1/2 hour outside, two 45 minutes sessions. Minu answered yes, each classroom and in the afternoon they combine the classes because there are fewer children. Cm. Wehrenberg mentioned the schedule states from 4:30 pm to 6:00 pm there is "free choice," and asked if that means indoors only. Minu answered yes, indoors. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if the current play structures are appropriate for their age. Mr. Fong answered yes. He stated the old, remaining play structures are appropriate for ages 5- 12 but their children are up to 5 years old. Cm. Swalwell asked if the center serves only Dublin residents or outside Dublin. Mr. Fong stated they have determined 95% of the children come from the neighborhood and the other 5% are from Livermore or Pleasanton. Cm. Swalwell asked if by the "neighborhood" he meant the west Dublin area or all of Dublin. Mr. Fong answered 95% come from Dublin. Chair King asked how many children attend the center now. Minu answered there are 72 children. Chair King asked if there is a waiting list. Minu answered there is a waiting list for the full-day program. Cm. Wehrenberg stated not all of the children are outside at the same time, usually 48 at a time. Minu responded usually 24 children are outside at one time. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if the play structure is appropriate for 2 year olds. Minu answered the age for their children is from 3 to 5 years old. Cm. Brown asked if the entire area where the proposed play structure and the two shade structures are located is fenced off. Mr. Fong answered yes. Oanning Commission September28, 2010 Wrgularmeeting 115 Robert Fehd, 11737 Ladera Drive, was concerned about the height and placement of the play structure, the placement of the shade structure, privacy issues, noise issues, no notification to the neighbors for a meeting with the Applicant in April, reduction in property values and not being able to use his yard. He submitted pictures to the Planning Commission showing his yard and the proximity of the play structure. Joyce Jordan, 11730 Ladera Drive was also concerned with the noise level, privacy, and the height of the play structure. She suggested moving the play structure to another location on the property away from the residences. Julie Fehd, 11737 Ladera Drive, she is representing neighbor Tania Pittson, 11723 Ladera Drive, she asked to read a letter urging the Planning Commission to vote no on the proposal. Cm. Schaub stated Mrs. Fehd could read the letter but no opinion would be given since the person who wrote the letter was not in attendance. Ms. Fehd read a letter from Ms. Pittson which encouraged the Planning Commission to vote no on the proposal. She was concerned with the play area directly behind her fence, the safety of her animals, and felt the center invades her right-to-privacy and the right to a quiet and peaceful existence. She was very concerned with the noise which has caused her stress and also felt the center decreases the value of their homes. She stated she never had a problem with Nielsen Elementary School or the after-school program. Ms. Fehd agreed with Ms. Pittson s concerns. Ms. Fehd stated the play schedule for Kidango is nonstop outdoor play from 9:00 am until noon with each group coming out after the other. Jeff Van Holle, 11685 Ladera Drive, stated his home backs up to the front of the school. He was concerned with the banners located at the front of the school. He stated they caused a traffic problem and had asked the school 3 times to move them and then moved them himself. He stated comments referring to Nielsen Elementary School being similar to Kidango and felt this was not the case. He was concerned regarding noise, traffic, the constant movement of people and the children being in one area as opposed to over the entire site. Cm. Swalwell asked Staff when they learned construction was taking place on the shade and play structures. Ms. Waffle stated Staff was not aware of the shade structures until they were in the CUP process and not until after meeting with the school district in March 2009. Cm. Swalwell asked when the play structure was constructed. Ms. Waffle stated, according to the resident, it was constructed in July 2010. Mr. Baker stated when Staff met with the school district the shade structures were in existence. During those meetings it was determined that approvals fell under the City's jurisdiction. The applicant was made aware that they would need SDR approval prior to installing the play Planning Commission Septem6er28, 2010 vgurarWeeting 116 structure. The yet unconstructed play structure was made part of the application, but the play structure was recently constructed without permits or approvals from the City. Chair King asked Mr. Van Holle if he received an invitation from the Applicant to meet with them. Mr. Van Holle answered no and suggested the Applicant confused the public outreach with the announcement of the school's open house. Cm. Brown asked if the shade structures were part of Nielsen Elementary School. Ms. Waffle stated they were installed for Kidango which is why they fall under the City's jurisdiction. She continued if they were constructed by the school district as part of Nielsen they would be regulated by the State not the City. Cm. Brown asked if they were constructed before Kidango opened. Mr. Baker stated that they were installed for the purposes of Kidango prior to their opening and became part of the requirement to obtain approval through the City. Cm. Schaub was concerned with the timing of the construction of the structures and asked Staff to explain what was built and when it was built. Ms. Waffle answered that the chain-link fence and the shade structures were already in place in March 2009 when Staff began meeting with the school district. Cm. Schaub asked if Kidango was open at that point. Ms. Waffle answered in June 2009 they officially received approvals from Fire Prevention and Community Care Licensing to open the facility which was the same time the City received the application for the CUP. Cm. Swalwell was concerned that once the City knew Kidango was operating without approvals and Staff knew it was the City's responsibility why were they allowed to continue to build and to build so close to homes. He asked why they were not told to stop until the Planning Commission took action on the CUP. Mr. Baker answered that the City was not aware of the shade structures until after they were built. Kidango had received State licensing so they were operating with the day care licensing through the State. He continued, through the conversations with the school district it was determined the improvements require permits through the City, they were told not to do any further improvements until approval had been granted by the City. He stated the options were to either make them take it down or work with them to make them legal. Cm. Swalwell stated the City did not give Kidango permission to build the shade structure. (Planning Commission September28, 2010 fgufar `Meeting 117 Mr. Baker responded Kidango had built the shade structures before they came to Staff and the City became aware of the issue. Cm. Swalwell asked if the play structure was built without the City's approval as well. Mr. Baker stated the instructions to Kidango were that they needed a permit for the play structure and were told not to build it until they obtained approvals, but they went ahead and built it. Cm. Schaub asked if Staff knew when the play structure was built. Ms. Waffle stated she had a conversation with the Applicant regarding the play structure and a portion of the funding for the play structure came from City Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds and the Applicant felt they would lose their funding if they did not purchase and install the play equipment. Mr. Baker suggested Mr. Fong could speak to why the chose to construct the equipment without approval from the City. Cm. Swalwell asked Mr. Fong to return to the podium to answer questions. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if there is a possibility of lowering the upper part of the play structure which would eliminate the privacy issue with the neighbors. Cm. Swalwell stated to the Applicant the concerns are clear they built the structure without approvals and understood the situation regarding the CDBG funds, but he was concerned with the closeness of the play structure to the residences and asked what can be done to move the structures away from the residences to reduce the noise. Mr. Fong agreed that is a valid concern. He stated DUSD recommended the "best" location for Kidango and the school district stated the entire campus is used by the community and the school district placed them in that location so that the public could still use the facility. He continued the school district placed them in that location so that if Nielsen Elementary School opened again there would be minimal impact on the facility, Cm. Wehrenberg asked if the play structure can be modified or lowered. Mr. Fong was unsure without looking at the components and consulting with the manufacturer. Mr. Baker stated the height would be verified at plan check and Staff would verify they are consistent with the plan that is before the Commission tonight. If approved, the play equipment would be required to be consistent with the height and setback as shown on the plans. The draft CUP Resolution contains conditions which regulate outdoor activities and may address the Commission's concerns. Cm. Brown asked the Applicant if the reason they put the play area in the current location is because the school official advised them to place it there. Mr. Fong answered yes. T&nning Commission septem6er28, 2010 4(egufarweeting 118 Cm. Brown asked if they considered any other alternative locations. Mr. Fong answered they considered the grass area and also the basketball court area, but the school district did not want to compromise the basketball court. Cm. Swalwell asked what Mr. Fong's plan would be if the Planning Commission instructed them to work it out with the school district to move the structure within 30 days. He asked what his plan would be for the children if that were the case. Mr. Fong answered that would need to be a joint decision with the different departments of the school. A discussion followed regarding the new play structure and the difference from the original elementary school play structure. Chair King closed the public hearing. Chair King asked if the item could be continued to another date to give the Applicant an opportunity to work with the neighbors to resolve their issues which would be agreeable to all parties. Mr. Baker stated the Planning Commission could condition the project to address their concerns or continue the item and provide direction to the Applicant regarding what they would like to see such as; noise abatement, moving the equipment and working with the Applicant as well as the school district. Cm. Wehrenberg was concerned with the set backs for the new play structure and wanted to ensure they were verified. Mr. Baker responded the plans have a set back that is identified and, if approved, Staff would verify the play equipment is in the correct location and if not they would be required to move it. Cm. Wehrenberg stated she does not have a problem with the day care center but could not make the findings regarding health and safety and felt they are not operating under the Conditions of Approval now. Mr. Baker pointed out the Conditions of Approval that limit the outdoor play time and address concerns raised by the residents and the Commission. Cm. Wehrenberg stated she would want verification of the set backs, and suggested the play structure be relocated to another area. Cm. Swalwell agreed with Cm. Wehrenberg and felt he did not want to approve the CUP and preferred to stop the operation until the issues can be resolved. He stated he supports the day care center but felt the play structures are too close to the homes. He stated he would not T&nning Commission September 28, 2010 fgufar.9Keeting 119 approve the CUP and wanted to have them cease any activity on the play structure for 30 days. He stated the day care center could continue but not the play structure. Cm. Swalwell was concerned the play structure was built without the City's approval and felt they could have bought the structure and housed it until the CDBG funds were allocated. There was a discussion regarding a 30 day suspension for the use of the play equipment. Mr. Baker stated the Planning Commission could put a time limit on when the item was to come back to the Commission but the enforcement of the use of not legally permitted equipment would go through the Code Enforcement process. He stated the City cannot take down the equipment but must work through the process. A discussion followed regarding the Applicant's CDBG funds which have not been received yet. He continued in order to receive the CDBG funds the Applicant would need to be a "legally permissible use" by a certain date which is coming up quickly. He continued if the CUP is not approved by that time they would lose the CDBG funding. Chair King felt there may be some things that can be done now to mitigate the noise. He suggested the Applicant meet with the individuals that have spoken tonight and possibly the entire neighborhood and come up with steps to solve the noise issues to their satisfaction. He stated the Planning Commission has approved many day care centers compatible with the rights of the residents adjacent to them. He felt the Commission should give the Applicant and the residents a chance to work it out and return to the Commission within 30 days. Cm. Swalwell suggested the Planning Commission wait to approve the CUP until they return. He felt they should cease operations of the play structure during the 30 days. He asked if the 30 day timeframe would be within the CDBG deadline. Mr. Baker answered he would need to verify the date. He felt there were two issues, noise and a related but separate issue of the play equipment. He stated there are conditions that restrict the outdoor activities, and according to the residents, the Applicant is not adhering to that condition. He referred to the Condition of Approval #18 concerning the outdoor play time. A discussion followed regarding the outdoor play hours and the number of children allowed at any one time. There was a concern about how Condition of Approval #18 was written and if it was adequate and agreeable to the Applicant. Cm. Brown stated he supports the business of Kidango and felt it is needed in the community; he would support a 30 day moratorium on the use of the play structure and encouraged the Applicant to investigate with the school district how they can accommodate the neighbor's concerns. He suggested talking with the neighbors and then returning with a plan that is agreeable to all parties involved. Cm. Schaub suggested the Planning Commission should list the issues they feel are problems and agreed with Cm. Swalwell regarding no operation of the play equipment for 30 days. He continued during the 30 day period the Applicant should work out the issues with the mlanning Commission Septem6er28, 2010 WsgufarMeeting 120 neighbors then return to the Commission with the solutions. If the solutions are not agreed to the Commission will change the Conditions of Approval. He felt that the 30 days will give the Commission time to obtain more information regarding setbacks, height and outdoor play time according to State guidelines. He felt it was not the fault of the Applicant because of the confusion regarding whose jurisdiction it was to approve the structures. Cm. Schaub suggested listing the concerns on behalf of the residents and put the item on the schedule for the next meeting. Cm. Swalwell felt it would be a nice gesture by the Applicant to stop outdoor play immediately. Cm. Wehrenberg suggested verifying the setbacks first. Chair King stated the Commission consensus is to list the Commissions concerns, they should cease operation on the play structure for 30 days, meet with the neighbors and then return to the Commission with the solutions they reached. Mr. Baker stated the Conditions of Approval in the Resolution, including the condition regarding outdoor activities, was agreed on by the Applicant and the play structure was built without approval. The issues were: 1) Hours required for the children to be outdoors consistent with the State requirements. 2) Noise mitigation measures, reducing the hours of outdoor play (noise) 3) Set backs verified (privacy) 4) Move the play structure to another location (privacy) On a motion by Cm. Schaub and seconded by Cm. Swalwell, on a vote of 5-0, the Planning Commission continued the item to a date certain, October 26, 2010, with instructions to the Applicant to resolve the setback, noise and privacy issues with the neighbors: RESOLUTION NO. 10-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE KIDANGO DAY CARE CENTER 7500 AMARILLO ROAD (APN 941-0101-003-03) PA 09-027 8.3 PLPA-2 0045 Amendments to Chapter 8.108 (Temporary Use Permit) of the Zoning Ord, ce. T&nning Commission Septem6er 28, 2010 fgufarWeeting 121