Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 06-15-1992 I . • ~ - r Reqular Meetinq - June 15, 1992 A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on June 15, 1992, in the Dublin Civic Center Council Chambers. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson Zika. * * * * ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Barnes, Burnham, North, Rafanelli and Zika; Laurence L. Tong, Planning Director; Carol R. Cirelli, Associate Planner; and Gail Adams, Recording Secretary. * * * * PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Cm. Zika led the Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. * * * * ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA None * * * * MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING Cm. North noted that his comment on page 96 of the June lst meeting minutes should have read "...all of the incumbents of the Zone 7 board were against allowing water allocation...". With this correction, the minutes for June 1, 1992 were approved. * * * * ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None * * * * WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None , * * * * PUBLIC HEARINGS SUBJECT: PA 92-009 U-Haul Conditional Use Permit/Site Development Review/Variance request to 1) construct a 25,200 square foot storaqe addition; 2} install 8 additional customer/employee parkinq spaces; 3) decrease the RV/boat outdoor storage to Regular Meeting PCM-1992-91 June 15, 1992 [6-15min] . • . ~ 34 spaces; 4) allow an existing 35 foot tall double-faced freestandinq siqn with chanqeable copy; and 5) voluntarily contribute traffic improvement funds in the amount of $6,480.00; located at 6265 Scarlett Court Cm. Zika opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Ms. Carol Cirelli presented the staff report to the Commission. She commented that there was a separate item on the Flanning Commission agenda determining whether the abandonment of the existing cul-de-sac roadway at the northeast portion of the project site was in conformance with the City's General Plan. Ms. Cirelli referred to Condition #14 of Exhibit F and indicated that Staff recommending this condition be modified to specify that only the rear outdoor storage area of RV vehicles be screened with redwood slats or other screening acceptable to the Planning Department. The front display area of the rental vehicles adjacent to Scarlett Court would not be required to have redwood slat screening. Previous conditional use permit approvals did not require the front area to be screened with redwood slats or similar material. The Applicant is not proposing to expand the front outdoor storage or display area for rental equipment. Staff was recommending approval of the application with modifications to Condition #14 of Exhibit F. Cm. North had concerns with the 0' setback on Buildings B, C, and J and asked if this had been cleared with the Fire Department. Ms. Cirelli indicated the Fire Department was aware of this decreased setback and the roadway would be adequate for emergency access. The property would have to be entered from the rear entrance gate, which is required to have a knox lock. Cm. North indicated that this request had basically been approved back in 1986 and asked why the project was not completed at that time. Ms. Cirelli indicated that there was no documentation showing the reason why the project was not completed. The Applicant might be able to answer this question. Cm. Zika thought that the Planning Commission had previous approved a message sign for a auto dealership where the business could put anything they wanted on the readerboard. What was the allowed ratio of inessages? He asked if U-Haul was allowed to do the same thing. Ms. Cirelli commented that she would have to research the files on the Dublin Honda dealership project. Essentially, yes, Dublin Honda was allowed to have Dublin Honda messaqes besides the display of general public interest items. The Dublin Honda sign was to be monitored by Caltrans. The U-Haul sign would be difficult to monitor. The requirements are different. Cm. Zika asked what type of inessages were allowed on U-Haul's sign. Regular Meeting PCM-1992-92 June 15, 1992 [6-15minJ . • • Mr. Tong referred to the draft condition on page 33, Condition #4 which stated that the changeable copy portion of the freestanding sign shall display only items of general interest to the public, which is time, temperature and/or date, and U-Haul's services offered. This condition does allow them to advertise their services provided and hours and dates of operation. Cm. North asked if U-Haul had a special weekend sale could they put this on the sign. Ms. Cirelli indicated that U-Haul would not be allowed to advertise promotional events. They would be required to obtain Planning Department approval for promotional displays or sales events. Cm. North thought that Dublin Honda was allowed to do a certain amount of promotional advertising. Ms. Cirelli indicated yes. Cm. Zika commented that Caltrans was monitoring the Dublin Honda sign and the sign could be seen from the freeway. Couldn't the U-Haul sign be seen from the freeway? Ms. Cirelli indicated that the U-Haul sign could be seen from the freeway. Cm. Barnes commented that advertisinq rental trucks could be considered a "U-Haul service". The Commission and Staff reviewed and discussed the interpretation of Condition #4 shown on page 33 regarding what type of inessages could be displayed. Cm. Zika asked if the Commission were to change this condition to be compatible with Dublin Honda, what would be required from the Commission? Ms. Cirelli indicated that Staff would be able to change the condition at tonight's meeting. Kirk Powell, Applicant, added that the messages that are posted on the sign are sent down from U-Haul's corporate headquarters. Al1 U-Haul businesses have the same messages simultaneously. He wanted to make sure that his client would be able to do this so that U-Haul would be in conformance with the rest of the outlets nationwide. Mr. Powell indicated that the basic messages would show the hours and show various information about what U-Haul has to offer and at what price. Not necessarily sale items, just basic services offered. Cm. Zika asked if these messages were in conformance with the condition of approval. Regular Meeting PCM-1992-93 June 15, 1992 [6-15min] • • ~ Mr. Tong indicated that the messages were for ongoing services, yes. Staff was concerned that there was a separate sign application provision that allows for promotional events of a short duration. Bill Herson, U-Haul representative, indicated that U-Haul has had the ' same type of inessages for five years. They are not advertising sales events; the public is given information about what services were available. He felt that the condition of approval was in line with their advertising. He wanted to cooperate with the City's regulations. Mr. Herson commented that back in 1976, U-Haul was looking into building a manufacturing facility; but decided not to continue the project. Mr. Tong stated that Staff has taken a look at the previous conditions for the Dublin Honda project. They were required to obtain a permit from Caltrans for the electronic readerboard sign. The Planning Commission allowed a 2:1 ratio on Dublin Honda advertisement; two Dublin Honda messages for every one community service/general interest message. Dublin Honda was also required to comply with Caltrans' regulations in terms of the length of time each message can be displayed. The impact of this sign is far greater than the U-Haul situation. Cm. Burnham asked how far way from the freeway was the U-Haul sign. Ms. Cirelli indicated 67.5 feet from the Scarlett Court right-of-way. Ms. Cirelli commented that Caltrans is not approving the placement of the electronic readerboard for Dublin Honda because it might affect traffic when the proposed interchange is built. Mr. Tong indicated that the sign was approximately 200' away from the freeway right-of-way. Cm. Zika closed the public hearing. On motion from Cm. Barnes, seconded by Cm. Rafanelli, with Staff's recommended changes to Condition #14 of Exhibit F, and with a vote of 5-0, the Commission adopted RESOLUTION NO. 92-035 A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AND APPROVING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PA 92-009 U-HAUL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW/VARIANCE RE50LUTION NO. 92-036 ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PA 92-009 U-HAUL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW/VARIANCE Regular Meeting PCM-1992-94 June 15, 1992 [6-15min] ~ i • RESOLUTION NO. 92-037 APPROVING PA 92-009 U-HAUL VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW 16 CUSTOMER AND EMPLOYEE PARKING SPACES INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 86 PARKING SPACES AND A 5 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE AND A ZERO FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE (AS A RESULT OF THE ROADWAY DEDICATION AND IMPROVEMENTS CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR THE PROJECT) INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 10 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK LOCATED AT 6265 SCARLETT COURT RESOLUTION NO. 92-038 APPROVING PA 92-009 U-HAUL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AN EXISTING 35 FOOT TALL FREESTANDING SIGN WITH CHANGEABLE COPY AND THE OUTDOOR STORAGE OF RECREATION VEHICLES, PETROLEUM GAS TANKS AND RENTAL VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT LOCATED AT 6265 SCARLETT COURT RESOLUTION NO. 92-039 APPROVING PA 92-009 U-HAUL SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION TO CONSTRUCT A 25,20Q SQUARE FOOT STORAGE ADDITION, TO INSTALL 8 ADDITIONAL CUSTOMER AND EMPLOYEE PARKING SPACES AND VOLUNTARILY CONTRIBUTE TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,480.00 LOCATED AT 6265 SCARLETT COURT Mr. Powell thanked Carol Cirelli for the thorough job she did on the application. There was a large variety of issues and she handled the project very well. NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS SUBJECT: Abandonment of a Portion of the Easement and Right-of-Way for Access (APN 941-550-38, 39) Cm. Zika asked for the staff report. Ms. Cirelli presented the staff report to the Commission. Staff recommended the Commission make findings to the conformity of the abandonment of the easement and right-of-way to the General Plan. Cm. North indicated that several vehicles use the cul-de-sac to turn around in. How long would this area be available? Ms. Cirelli indicated that the City would be constructing the curb and sidewalk extension for connection to the Dublin Boulevard Extension. There would be a curb-cut into the rear driveway of the U-Haul site. U-Haul will be required to construct a recessed rear gate to allow the queuing of vehicles and a area for vehicles to turn around. Mr. Tong indicated that on the other side of the channel, the City would have a roadway connection. Eventually, one side of the channel will handle traffic southward towards Scarlett Court; one side would handle traffic northward towards Dublin Boulevard Extension. Cm. North asked what the status was on the Dublin Boulevard Extension. Regular Meeting PCM-1992-95 June 15, 1992 [6-15min] ~ . ~ J Ms. Cirelli stated that the road extension is proposed to be completed to the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way by October. The road is proposed to be completed to Tassajara Road by the end of the year. On motion from Cm. Rafanelli, seconded by Cm. North, and with a vote of 5-0, the Planning Commission made findings that the Abandonment of the Easement and Right-of-Way for Access was in conformance with Dublin's General Plan. OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Tong indicated that at the Council's June 8th meeting, the Council directed Staff to come back with a second resolution on the Western Dublin project. This second resolution would show the Milestone site to have a rural residential land use designation, which would allow up to 2 dwelling units. The same conditions as previously recommended would apply for the Eden Development site. This item will go back before the City Council on July 13th. Mr. Tong indicated that on June 9th, the Council reviewed the budget. They adopted the budget, with the City Manager's recommended cut backs. One of the cut backs involved limited travel and training for the entire City, including the Planning Commission. He commented that the State has indicated they might be looking into eliminating the motor vehicle in-lieu fees to all cities which would severely affect the City's budget. It could mean additional cut backs or layoffs. The Commission and Staff discussed various budget concerns. Mr. Tong indicated that at the next Cauncil meeting on June 22nd they would be reviewing the non-conforming sign status report. Cm. North commended the City Manager for not accepting a pay increase to help with the budget situation. Mr. Tong referred to the Commission's concerns regarding the PG&E signage located on the fence on Scarlett Court and indicated that the directional signage for both the Dodge Dealer and PG&E conformed to the Zoning Ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION'S CONCERNS Cm. North referred to the "BP" gas stations that might pull out of Northern California. He was concerned that these businesses would not take care of their tank leakages once they were gone. Mr. Tong was unaware of BP's situation. He had heard that Unocal was eliminating some of their stations due to low volumes. He indicated that the gasoline tanks were regulated by the fire and environmental health departments. Cm. Burnham referred to Orchard Supply's sidewalk sale that had occurred recently. He indicated that they had to move their merchandise indoors because of the City's regulations regarding these Regular Meeting PCM-1992-96 June 15, 1992 [6-15min] ~ ~ + type of events. This created a loss of sales for them. He felt that these types of sales created a lot of revenue for the City and asked why they were not allowed. Mr. Tong indicated that the City Council's policy only allowed arts and crafts fairs or City sponsored events. The Council has been consistent with not allowing sidewalk sales. They also had concerns with allowing peddlers to market their products in front of established businesses. Cm. North indicated that Toys R Us had a sidewalk sale just recently. Why were they allowed? Mr. Tong indicated that they were not in compliance with the City's regulations. Cm. Burnham felt that the City should modify their policy. Orchard Supply lost a lot of money. Cm. Barnes concurred. She wanted to see changes made regarding sale events. Now that Home Depot is open, businesses like Orchard needed to have special sales to pull in more customers. These sales would give the City additional revenue as well. Mr. Tong commented that the City Council had reviewed a request to study the outdoor sales regulations. However, the Council had made this study one of several priority items. Cm. Barnes asked if the Commission could recommended that this study be moved up to a higher priority. Mr. Tong stated that the Commission could suggest this to the City Council. The Commission asked Staff how they would go about making such a request; would a memorandum or a resolution be required? Mr. Tong felt that a consensus type memorandum would be appropriate. Cm. Burnham asked if the regulations could be changed under a Variance request. Mr. Tong indicated no, the Zoning Ordinance could not allow for this type of activity as a"use" variance. Cm. North asked if Staff could go back to Toys R Us and let them know that outdoor sales were not allowed. He wanted to make a formal complaint about their activities. Mr. Tong indicated that Staff's Zoning Investigator's hours were Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. It was difficult to monitor weekend activities. However, Staff would notify Toys R Us of the City's regulations. Regular Meeting PCM-1992-97 June 15, 1992 [6-15min] ! ~ The Commission felt that the Council should reconsider sidewalk sale events for established businesses. Peddlers, however, should not be allowed. They requested Staff to draft a memorandum requesting the Council look at changing the City's regulations on outdoor sale events. Cm. Burnham referred to a proposal to have a freeway exit ramp off of I-680 starting at Shamrock Ford and ending in the Enea Plaza site. He asked Staff if they had any information on this. Mr. Tong indicated there were preliminary plans available on the hook ramps. The southbound hook ramp would run into the Enea Plaza center. The northbound hook ramp would start where Two-Pesos Restaurant was located. This project, however, has not received funding from the State. Cm. Burnham was concerned with the traffic that would be generated onto Dublin Boulevard. He asked if there would also be a fly-over going east on I-580. Mr. Tong explained the proposals for the flyover and hoak ramps. The Enea Plaza might benefit from the freeway access. He agreed that there would be a shift of traffic loads and that Dublin Boulevard would be affected. Cm. Barnes asked what the agenda look like for the next meeting. Mr. Tong indicated that presently there were two public hearing items, Enterprise Rent-a-Car and Little Kids Learning Center. Cm. Rafanelli asked if an East Dublin public hearing had been scheduled. Mr. Tong indicated that the meeting had been postponed until the release of the Draft EIR for the project. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ 7 ~ p; ~~lannin ommis ' n hairperson ` G La rence L. Tong Planning Director Regular Meeting PCM-1992-98 June 15, 1992 [6-15min]