Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 01-21-1992 i r Il~,.-9 tr Reqular Meetinq - Januarv 21, 1992 A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on January 21, 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; David K. Choy, 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 The January 6, 1992 minutes were approved, as corrected. * * * * ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None * * * * WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Tong indicated that the Commission had received two letters for their review regarding the Western Dublin project. * * * * PUBLIC HEARINGS SUBJECT: PA 91-095 John Knox Presbyterian Church Conditional Use Permit/5ite Development Review request to allow an ~approximate 790 square foot addition to accommodate increased office space within the existinq John Knox Regular Meeting PCM-1992-18 January 21, 1992 [1-21min] ~ • ~ Presbyterian Church facility, and temporary use of an office trailer durinq construction located at 7421 Amarillo Road. Cm. Zika opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Mr. David Choy presented the staff report to the Commission. Staff was recommending approval of the application. Mr. Joseph DeCredico, Applicant, had no concerns or comments. Cm. North asked why the trash enclosure was located so far away from the building. Mr. Choy indicated that the trash enclosure was located at the northeast corner of the site because this was the least disruptive area for traffic circulation. It also allows the trash company enough space to maneuver their equipment. Cm. Zika closed the public hearing. On motion from Cm. Rafanelli, seconded by Cm. North, and with a vote of 5-0, the Commission adopted RESOLUTION NO. 92-001 APPROVING PA 91-095 JOHN KNOX PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING CHURCH FACILITY AND THE LOCATION OF A TEMPORARY OFFICE TRAILER AT 7421 AMARILLO ROAD RESOLUTION NO. 92-002 APPROVING PA 91-095 JOHN KNOX PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION FOR AN ADDITION TO THE EXISTING CHURCH FACILITY LOCATED AT 7421 AMARILLO ROAD SUBJECT: PA 91-099 Hansen Ranch/Bren Company Development Aqreement between the City of Dublin and The Bren Company to extend the approval time on a previously approved sinqle family residential project and to require the Developer to qravel a portion of the existinq off-site fire/~eep trail ad~acent to the northern property line (continued from the January 6, 1992 Planninq Commission meeting) Cm. Zika asked for the staff report. Mr. Tong presented the staff report to the Commission. He recommended the Commission approve the resolutions recommending the City Council adopt the Negative Declaration and Development Agreement for this application. Cm. North referred to item #4 of the staff report on page #4. He asked if this road was for emergency vehicles only. Mr. Tong explained that the road would be for public access and maintenance purposes. It would allow the public to utilize the creek. There was potential for a linear park in that area. Regular Meeting PCM-1992-19 January 21, 1992 [1-21min] _ • ~ Cm. North asked for clarification on where the roads within the project were located. Mr. Tong identified the roads on the aerial photo. He indicated that there were access roads into the project from Silvergate Drive and the Valley Christian Center. There would be access to Martin Canyon Creek from the new streets in the Hansen project. Cm. Zika asked if the City was responsible for the creek maintenance. Mr. Tong indicated yes. The provisions in the existing approvals allowed the Applicant to dedicate the creek to the City. The Applicant is now responsible and will be installing a fence on both sides of the creek. Cm. North asked for clarification on the order of approvals. Was the Development Agreement being approved before the Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review? Mr. Tong indicated yes because the proposal calls for payment of park dedication in-lieu fees no later than April 1, 1992 and Staff anticipates bringing the Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review to the Planning Commission in February. Cm. Zika asked why the City was extending the project approval for eight years. Mr. Tong indicated that Staff felt this was a reasonable amount of time. Cm. Zika had concerns that this would not give the Developer any incentive to finish the project. Cm. Zika asked if the Commission did not approve the Development Agreement, would the housing in-lieu fees be paid? Mr. Tong indicated that under the existing approvals, the applicant would not have to pay housing in-lieu fees. Cm. Zika asked when the in-lieu park dedication fees were payable. Mr. Tong indicated that under the proposal, park dedication in-lieu fees need to be paid by April 1, 1992. The City was counting on this money to pay for park improvements. The Development Agreement guarantees that these fees will be available on time. Mr. Toohey, Applicant, gave a brief history of the project. He indicated that the Final Map would be ready around the 15th of April and hopes to break ground on that day. There was a substantial investment in the property; however, since the housing market is currently very slow, he was requesting the eight years to give his company time to complete the project. They would be making creek improvements and the standard homes would be built first. Regular Meeting PCM-1992-20 January 21, 1992 [1-21min] ~ • Mr. Toohey felt that the eight year extension was not unreasonable and urged the Commission to approve the application. Cm. Burnham asked for clarification on the eight year extension. He felt that this might cause the project to drag out for a long period of time. Mr. Toohey indicated that the custom homes might take a long time. If one home was built per week, it would be some time before the project was completed. He was just lookinq for a little protection. Mr. Tong added that the existing construction related time frames would still be in effect. Because of the housing market situation, the eight year provision provided for a continuing slow market. He indicated that existing and new Federal and State mandated ordinances would still apply. Cm. Zika had a concern that the developer would try to sell the property as soon as possible after the approvals were done. Mr. Toohey indicated that people were interested in the property all of the time. However, they had no plans on selling the property. Clark Morrison, Attorney for the Applicant, referred to paragraph 16.1 of the Development Agreement. He indicated that The Bren Co. would need to come back to the City Council for appraval if the property was transferred. Cm. Zika closed the public hearing. On motion from Cm. Barnes, seconded by Cm. Burnham, and with a vote of 5-0, the Commission adopted RESOLUTION NO. 92-003 RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PA 91-099 HANSEN HILL RANCH PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RESOLUTION NO. 92-004 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PA 91-099 HANSEN HILL RANCH PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SUBJECT: PA 91-067 Dublin Municipal Ordinance Amendment Management Audit relatinq to the Administrative Conditional Use Permit, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Development Review process, and establishment of a Zoninq Clearance process (continued from the January 6, 1992 Planninq Commission meeting) Cm. Zika asked for the staff report. Ms. Maureen O'Halloran presented the staff report to the Commission. She indicated that the City Attorney's comments had been incorporated into the staff report. Staff recommended the Planning Commission adopt the resolutions recommending City Council approval of the application. Regular Meeting PCM-1992-21 January 21, 1992 [1-21min] i ~ Cm. Zika felt that tenants should be notified of public hearings as well as the property owners. Some property owners are not concerned about the situations occurring around their property since they do not occupy the building. Mr. Tong indicated that Staff already exceeds the legal requirements for public hearing notifications. Staff publishes the notice in the newspaper, posts the notice at various locations, and notifies property owners within 300 feet of the property. He indicated that it would be hard to identify the tenants and Staff would have to do two separate mailings. Cm. Burnham asked what type of cost would it be for the City. Staff could require the Applicant to make out the mailing lists. Mr. Tong indicated that the second mailing list would create additional time for the Applicant in order to track the tenants. It would take Staff additional time to check the list and mail out the notices. Cm. North referred to page 23, section 24, item #1. He had a concern with the 5 day appeal period. Mr. Tong indicated that this rule was consistent with Administrative Conditional Use Permit time frames. One of the intents of this ordinance was to streamline the planning process. The zoning clearance approval would be for very minor project. Some of the Commissioners had concerns with the 5-day appeal period. For example, the Applicant might receive the notice without having enough time available to appeal the project. Cm. North referred to page 5, item #B. He felt that these projects were not of a minor nature and indicated that there needed to be sufficient amount of time to appeal. Ms. O'Halloran clarified that the items Cm. North was referring to were conditional uses requiring "Zoning Administrator" approval. These items required a 10 day appeal period. Cm. Burnham referred to the Dublin Mini-Storage project that had been approved just recently. He indicated that he had not received a notice on this item. Mr. Tong indicated that he should have received the letter today. Cm. Zika closed the public hearing. ~ On motion from Cm. Barnes, seconded by Cm. Burnham, and with a vote of 5-0, the Commission adopted RESOLUTION NO. 92-005 RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PA 91-067 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT MANAGEMENT AUDIT Regular Meeting PCM-1992-22 January 21, 1992 [1-21min] , # ~ RESOLUTION NO. 92-006 RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF PA 91-067 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT MANAGEMENT AUDIT NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS None OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Tong indicated that the City Council had reviewed the mid-year financial situation and concluded that there was a short fall in the general fund of approximately $500,000. The Council decided to defer City wide items, such as travel, training, furniture and fixture expenses, etc. The attendance at the Planning Commission Institute will not be funded by the City. There were some exceptions, such as the Disaster Training. Mr. Tong indicated that at the January 27th meeting, the Council will be reviewing the Zoning Ordinance Amendment regarding Massage Establishments, the Site Development Review Guidelines, status of the nonconforming signs, and the Alameda County East County Plan. Mr. Tong also indicated that the Planning Commission meeting on February 3rd has been cancelled. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' CONCERNS The Commission discussed the dinner arrangements for the City's lOth anniversary banquet. Cm. Burnham asked what the status was on the proposed BART stations. Mr. Tong indicated that it was his understanding that both stations were in the design process. There was not enough money for both stations. The eastern station would be built first. The parking would be split between Pleasanton and Dublin. Preliminary work would be completed for the West Dublin station. Staff has not seen any of the design work as of yet. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ - annin Commiss' n Chairperson ~ Laurence L. Tong Planning Director Regular Meeting PCM-1992-23 January 21, 1992 [1-21minJ