HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 02-18-1992 i ~
.
~ Reqular Meetinq - February 18, 1992
A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held
on February 18, 1992, in the Dublin Civic Center Council Chambers.
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Chairperson Zika.
* * * *
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Barnes, Burnham, North, Rafanelli and Zika;
Laurence L. Tong, Planning Director; Maureen O'Halloran, Senior
Planner; Libby Silver, City Attorney; David K. Choy, Associate
Planner; Carol R. Cirelli, Associate Planner; Delmar Tompkins,
Planning Intern; Brenda Gillarde, Planning Consultant 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
Minutes for the January 14, 21, and 29, 1992 meetings were approved.
* * * *
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Mr. Chuck V'Soske had concerns regarding the Hansen Hill access road.
He indicated that the road exits across the street from his residence
and was concerned about the additional traffic.
Mr. Tong indicated that this item would be more properly addressed
during the public hearing for the Hansen Hill project, which was on
tonight's agenda.
* * * *
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
None
* * * *
Regular Meeting PCM-1992-24 February 18, 1992
[2-18min]
• ~
R
1
PUBLIC HEARINGS
SUBJECT: PA 92-001 Dublin Hiqh School Mobile Home Conditional Use
Permit request to allow the continued use of a mobile home
on the Dublin Hiqh School site for occupancy by security
personnel located at 8151 Village Parkway
Cm. Zika opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Mr. Delmar Tompkins presented the staff report to the Commission and
indicated that Staff recommended approval of the application.
Cm. Burnham had concerns about the trash on the property and asked who
was responsible for taken care of the site.
Mr. Tompkins indicated that there was a groundskeeper that maintained
the property. The fenced yard area was the responsibility of the
tenant of the mobile home.
Cm. Burnham felt that the area had too much trash and needed to be
properly maintained.
Cm. Zika closed the public hearing.
On motion from Cm. Barnes, seconded by Cm. Rafanelli, and with a vote
of 5-0, the Commission adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 92 - 007
APPROVING PA 92-001 DUBLIN HIGH SCHOOL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST
TO ALLOW THE CONTINUED USE OF A MOBILE HOME FOR OCCUPANCY BY SECURITY
PERSONNEL (AS PART OF THE COMMUNITY FACILITY HIGH SCHOOL USE) ON THE
SITE OF DUBLIN HIGH SCHOOL LOCATED AT 8151 VILLAGE PARKWAY IN A
R-1-B-E SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMBINING DISTRICT
SUBJECT: PA 92-002 Resurrection Lutheran Preschool Conditional Use
Permit request to allow the continued operation of a
Preschool Nursery and a Child Care Facility on the site of
the Lutheran Church of the Resurrection located at 7557
Amador Valley Boulevard
Cm. Zika opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report
Mr. Tompkins presented that staff report to the Commission and
indicated Staff was recommending approval of the application.
Ms. Susan Holley, Applicant, had no concerns.
Cm. Zika closed the public hearing.
On motion from Cm. Barnes, seconded by Cm. North, and with a vote of
5-0, the Commission adopted
Regular Meeting PCM-1992-25 February 18, 1992
[2-18min]
• ~
RESOLUTION NO. 92-008
APPROVING PA 92-002 RESURRECTION LUTHERAN PRESCHOOL CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT REQUEST TO ALLOW THE CONTINUED OPERATION OF A PRESCHOOL AND A
CHILD CARE FACILITY (COMMUNITY FACILITIES) AT 7557 AMADOR VALLEY
BOULEVARD IN A PD, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
SUBJECT: PA 91-094 St. Philip Lutheran Church Conditional Use Permit
and Site Development Review approval to allow the expansion
of the church facility and elementary school use by
constructinq a 8,949 square foot fellowship hall that will
accommodate two new classrooms, two meeting rooms and 4,316
square foot multi-purpose room located at 8850 Davona Drive
Cm. Zika opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Ms. Carol Cirelli presented the staff report to the Commission. She
indicated that a letter from the Coral Gate Homeowner's Association
had been received today by the Planning Staff regarding traffic
concerns. This letter had been distributed to the Commission at the
beginning of the meeting.
Ms. Cirelli responded to the letter and indicated that the existing
Conditional Use Permit allowed 175 students. The new Conditional Use
Permit would allow a maximum of 200 students. The classrooms can each
accommodate a maximum of 35 students.
Ms. Cirelli explained the parking requirements for the site. Parking
was based on the largest assembly room occupancy load of the church
facility, which is 289. By calculating one parking space for each
four occupants, the Applicant is required to provide 72 parking
spaces. The Applicant is proposing to provide 74 parking spaces.
Ms. Cirelli indicated that there were concerns from the Coral Gate
property owners regarding adequate parking and visual impacts caused
by the proposed addition. She indicated that a traffic study had been
done and the project site exceeds the required number of parking
spaces by 2. The project may obstruct the property owner's view of
Alcosta Boulevard; however, this view is not considered a scenic
route. The proposed building height is in compliance with the Zoning
Ordinance.
For the record, Ms. Cirelli indicated that a condition was being added
to Exhibit C that read "The Applicant shall provide at least one
trash receptacle at the site and be responsible for cleaning up and
disposing of school generated trash and litter on-site and off-site
within the neighborhood, and shall maintain the site in a litter free
condition at all times".
She added that Condition #30 of Exhibit D(Site Development Review)
would be revised to indicate that the Applicant would "repair or
remove the existing decorative wall at the corner of Alcosta Boulevard
and Davona Drive and if removed, the area shall be re-landscaped".
Cm. North requested clarification on Condition #16.
Regular Meeting PCM-1992-26 February 18, 1992
[2-18min]
~ ~
Ms. Cirelli explained that the outdoor lighting is required to be
glare shielded. The lighting plans need to be approved by the police
for safety and security requirements.
Cm. North asked for clarification on the parking requirements.
Ms. Cirelli indicated that the parking was based on occupancy loads.
This facility was required to have one parking space per 4 occupants.
Cm. North felt this was not adeguate parking. For instance, when a
wedding is currently held, cars overflow onto neighborhood streets.
Ms. Cirelli explained that the Zoning Ordinance set the parking
standards for the site, which would be considered an assembly type
use. The school and fellowship hall would be used at different times
of the week.
Cm. Zika asked if there was a different parking requirement for the
social hall versus the church facility.
Ms. Cirelli indicated that a convention or meeting hall was required
to have one parking space for each six occupants or one parking space
per 100 square feet of floor area.
Cm. Zika felt that Condition #16 should be clarified to indicate that
there would be a maximum of 296 occupants at any one time. This is
based on the Applicant's provision of 74 parking spaces (296 occupants
divided by 4 seats requires 74 parking spaces).
Ms. Cirelli concurred.
Cm. Burnham and Cm. North felt that the parking requirements were not
adequate and could not meet the needs of the facility.
Ms. Cirelli stated that the Public Works Department reviews the "peak"
hour traffic conditions. They have determined that this project's
traffic would mainly be generated during "off-peak" hours.
Ms. Cirelli indicated that weddings were currently being held at the
facility. The proposed addition would allow the church to have the
receptions located at the facility as well.
Mr. Jeff Adams, Applicant, agreed with Staff's conditions of approval.
He clarified that weddings could have as many as 200 occupants. The
occupants would be at the facility longer; however, there would not be
any additional occupants. There would not be any more than 296 people
at any one time.
Mr. Adams referred to the letter received from the Coral Gate property
owners. He indicated that all of their concerns could be mitigated.
He stated that he had no problem with paying his fair share of the
traffic fee.
Cm. Rafanelli asked if new activities would increase the traffic.
Regular Meeting PCM-1992-27 February 18, 1992
[2-18min]
~ •
Mr. Adams felt that the peak traffic load would not go up. There
might be more trips.
Bill Potter, Coral Gate Homeowners Association, indicated that he had
a good relationship with the church. He was concerned about the
quality of life, parking and traffic problems on Davona Drive, and the
visual impacts caused by the height of the building. He felt that
the children at the church facility needed more adult supervision.
Mr. Potter indicated that the parking, traffic, and height issues have
not adequately been addressed.
Cm. Zika questioned what the visual impacts would be.
Mr. Potter indicated that the back of the units look toward the hills.
Cm. Burnham asked if there was enough parking in the Coral Gate
project.
Mr. Potter indicated no. There were two-car garages for each unit.
He would also like to see the proposed addition be one story.
Dr. Mark Silzer, St. Philip's Church, indicated that the church was on
a limited budget. The existing building was 28 years old and could
not accommodate everyone attending various activities at the facility.
Reverend Sergei Koberg, St. Philip's Church, indicated that the church
have been good neighbors. The proposed addition would provide better
classes and the church was not going into the wedding business. The
parking problems were not being generated from the church. The peak
traffic hours were on the weekends.
David Langtry, 7734 Squirrel Creek Circle, was in favor of the
project. He had two children that attended the facility and the new
addition would provide additional indoor recreational activities.
Carol Eller, 7820 Gate Way, had concerns regarding limited parking.
There was at least 15 cars parked on Davona Drive. The proposed
addition would create additional parking problems for the residence at
Coral Gate. She also had concerns with visual impacts and felt that
the two-story addition would limit sunlight. She felt that the
project should be looked at more carefully.
Mr. Bargo, resident of Coral Gate, had concerns with the height and
parking requirements for the project. The height would obstruct the
residents' view of the hills and the church would not be able to
monitor the occupancy amount for the facility.
Larry Hancock, resident of Coral Gate, had concerns regarding the
visual impacts and limited parking.
Wayne Cristofel, member of the congregation, had no concerns with the
project. He indicated that there were trees behind the homes already
Regular Meeting PCM-1992-28 February 18, 1992
[2-18min]
• i
" to obstruct the view. The proposed addition will be 70 feet from the
townhouses.
Jeff Adams felt that there was some confusion on the setback
requirements for the proposed addition. He clarified the height of
the building and indicated that the lower roof portion of the building
was set back 25 feet from the property line. There are trees on the
property between the Coral Gate development and the fellowship hall,
which will look much fuller during the summer time and one cannot see
through them. He felt that he has done everything possible to
mitigate all of the issues for this project. He reiterated that the
church was not intensifying their existing uses. There was a fixed
occupancy rate of 289 and the proposed addition would allow the same
amount of people.
Robert Patterson felt that the City needed to review their parking
requirements. The parking ordinance may need to be changed.
Cm. Zika closed the public hearing.
Cm. North felt that the parking problems were being created by the
Coral Gate residents, not the church. The Applicant was abiding by
the City's regulations. There might be additional traffic on the
weekends due to the added receptions and felt that additional traffic
studies might be warranted.
Cm. Burnham indicated that there wasn't anything illegal about the
proposal, however he wanted to study the application more carefully
and requested that the item be continued to the next meeting.
Cm. Barnes indicated that weddings were currently being held at the
church and felt that the receptions would not be adding any more
traffic than what was already there. She was in favor of the project.
Cm. Burnham questioned the occupancy load capacities. What was the
building code requirements?
Ms. Cirelli explained that according to the Uniform Building Code, an
assembly area, which includes gymnasiums, conference rooms, etc., have
an occupant load factor (per square feet) of 15. The occupancy load
for the gymnasium portion of the fellowship hall is 288 (4,316 square
feet gym divided by 15 equals 288).
Ms. O'Halloran clarified that the parking rates can be determined by
each person or by occupancy load.
Cm. Zika questioned why there weren't any residents from Davona Drive
that had concerns with parking. He has been to many wedding
receptions where people park on residential streets and there never
seemed to be a parking problem. The church is required to monitor the
site.
Cm. Rafanelli felt that the activities were being held throughout the
week and there would be more hours available. He did not see that
there would be any problems occurring.
Regular Meeting PCM-1992-29 February 18, 1992
[2-18min]
. ~
On motion from Cm. Barnes (adding stated conditions and revising
Condition #16), seconded by Cm. Rafanelli, and with a vote of 3-2, the
Commission adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 92-009
ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PA 91-094 ST. PHILIP LUTHERAN
CHURCH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TO ALLOW THE
EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING CHURCH, PRESCHOOL AND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
FACILITY BY CONSTRUCTING AN 8,949 SQUARE FOOT FELLOWSHIP HALL THAT
WILL ACCOMMODATE TWO NEW CLASSROOMS, TWO MEETING ROOMS AND A MULTI-
PURPOSE ROOM, AND PERMITTING A MAXIMUM OF 200 STUDENTS AT 8850 DAVONA
DRIVE
RESOLUTION NO. 92-010
APPROVING PA 91-094 ST. FHILIP LUTHERAN CHURCH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING CHURCH, PRESCHOOL AND
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FACILITY FOR A MAXIMUM OF 200 STUDENTS, GRADES
PRESCHOOL THROUGH EIGHTH, BY CONSTRUCTING A NEW FELLOWSHIP HALL
LOCATED AT 8850 DAVONA DRIVE
RESOLUTION NO. 92-011
APPROVING PA 91-094 ST. PHILIP LUTHERAN CHURCH SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
TO CONSTRUCT AN 8,949 SQUARE FOOT FELLOWSHIP HALL THAT WILL
ACCOMMODATE TWO NEW CLASSROOMS, TWO MEETING ROOMS AND A 4,316 SQUARE
FOOT MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM LOCATED AT 8850 DAVONA DRIVE
The Commission took a 10-minute break. Upon returning, Cm. Zika
announced that there would not be enough time to hear Item #8.5. This
item would be continued to the March 2nd Planning Commission meeting.
SUBJECT: PA 91-096 Hansen Ranch Conditional Use Permit request to
allow modifications to the Planned Development General
Provisions, and a request for Site Development Review
approval for the first phase (72 units: 68 production homes
and 4 custom lots) of the Hansen Ranch Subdivision,
consistinq of a total of 180 units on the 147 acre site
located west of Silverqate Drive
Cm. Zika opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Mr. David Choy presented the staff report to the Commission. He
indicated that there were minor modifications to Conditions #23 and
#32. The Commission had been given the revised conditions to review
at the beginning of the meeting.
Cm. Barnes asked Staff who was responsible in naming the streets for
the project.
Mr. Choy indicated the Applicant chooses the names.
Ms. O'Halloran clarified that the City ultimately approved the names
picked by the Applicant.
Regular Meeting PCM-1992-30 February 18, 1992
[2-18min]
• !
' Michael Toohey, Applicant, had concerns regarding the revised
Condition #32, which required screening along the back of Lots 1-4.
He felt that this was not a visibility problem for the existing
Kaufman and Broad development. He indicated that he would take care
of the screening for his own potential buyers and requested Condition
#52 be deleted. He had no concerns with the other conditions of
approval.
Cm. North asked for clarification on Condition #31. Who was
responsible for the tree maintenance.
Ms. Marti Buxton indicated that there were CC&R's that would cover the
homeowners association's responsibility.
Steve DeGallon, resident of Kaufman & Broad development, had concerns
with the main access road to the new site. There would be traffic
circulation problems. This road was very close to his property.
Mr. Choy explained that the developer was required to widen Dublin
Boulevard at Silvergate and that intersection would be reconfigured to
accommodate the additional traffic generated by the project. He
reminded the Commission that these issues have already been reviewed
and the Tentative Map was approved. He also indicated that the
Negative Declaration was consistent with the original Environmental
Impact Report.
Ms. O'Halloran indicated that the basic project was already approved
two years ago. Some of the larger units have been modified to create
smaller units. The Site Development Review and minor modifications to
the Conditional Use Permit were being discussed at tonight's meeting.
Cm. North said that this meant the letter received from the concerned
resident was not in scope with this meeting.
Ms. 0'Halloran indicated that this was correct. The Tentative Map,
General Plan Amendment, Planned Development, Prezoning, and
Environmental Impact Report were already discussed and approved at
previous meetings.
Mr. DeGallon indicated that he did not live in the area when these
meetings were being held.
Ms. Diana Day had concerns with the screening requirements for this
project. She requested that trees would be a natural, attractive
screening.
Cm. Burnham indicated that if a problem with the project occurred
after the approval, who was responsible for it.
Mr. Tong indicated that it depended on the problem. For instance, if
vehicle lights were shining into other people's property, it would be
the homeowner's responsibility.
Mr. Tong reminded the audience that the West Dublin project was
currently under review. People may want to keep up with this project.
Regular Meeting PCM-1992-31 February 18, 1992
[2-18min]
~ ~
Cm. Zika closed the public hearing.
Cm. Burnham felt that the second sentence of the revised Condition #32
should be deleted.
Mr. Choy added that there should be language indicating Planning
Director review and approval of the screening plan.
Mr. Tong had no problems with the revisions as long as the Planning
Director was required to review the plan. This would give a sense of
protection for all concerned.
On motion from Cm. North, seconded by Cm. Rafanelli, and with a vote
of 5-0, the Planning Commission adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 92-012
ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PA 91-096 HANSEN RANCH CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT/SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
RESOLUTION NO. 92-013
APPROVING PA 91-096 HANSEN RANCH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR A
MINOR MODIFICATION TO THE APPROVED GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR THE HANSEN
RANCH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
RESOLUTION NO. 92-014
APPROVING PA 91-096 HANSEN RANCH SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REQUEST FOR
THE FIRST PHASE (LOTS 1- 72) OF THE 180 LOT HANSEN RANCH PROJECT
NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
OTHER BUSINESS
Mr. Tong indicated that the second reading for the Hansen Hill
Development Agreement and the Management Audit ordinances would be
heard at the February 14th City Council meeting. Updated reports on
CDBG funds, nonconforming signs, TVHC and HCD would also be reviewed.
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' CONCERNS
Cm. North requested that the direction of the site plans be more
clearly marked. A"north arrow" should be used on all site plans.
Cm. Burnham asked for an update on the Donlan Canyon project.
Mr. Tong indicated that the Paragon Group has backed out of the
project. The Applicant is currently looking for a builder. This
project is waiting for the Hansen Hill development to be underway
because of the access roads that link the two projects. The Site
Development Review application has been denied, without prejudice,
because it was deemed incomplete.
Regular Meeting PCM-1992-32 February 18, 1992
[2-18min]
~ •
~ Cm. North discussed the standard parking requirements and felt that
the City's parking ordinance may need to be looked at.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
~
~
i
Planni Commis on Chairperson
~
Laurence L. Tong
Planning Director
Regular Meeting PCM-1992-33 February 18, 1992
[2-18min]