Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 08-06-1996 ~;.-.rr-~-_ 4 ~ ~ Regular Meeting August 6, 1996 A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, August 6, 1996, in the Dublin Civic Center City Council Chambers. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 by Commissioner Jennings. * ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Jennings, Geist, Johnson, Lockhart and Zika; Eddie Peabody, Community Development Director; Dennis Carrington, Senior Planner; Ralph Kachadourian, Assistant Planner and Gaylene Burkett, Recording Secretary. * PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Cm. Jennings led the Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. * ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA The minutes of the July 16, 1996, meeting were approved as submitted. ORAL COMMUNICATION None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None PUBLIC HEAAINGS 8.1 PA 96-003 Unocal Service Station/Food Mart/Car Wash Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review at 6401 Dublin Blvd. Unocal is proposing to reconstruct their existing service station which will involve the addition of a new 1,300 square foot `Fast Break' food mart with a 960 square foot drive-through automatic car wash The project will include a new fuel island canopy, dispensers, landscaping, parking, signage, sidewalk and driveway improvements, including minor off-site improvements on the adjacent Pak-N-Save site. Cm. Jennings asked for the staff report. Mr. Kachadourian gave the staff report. He outlined the project. He stated it was a reconstruction of the existing facility with a car wash. Mr. Kachadourian passed out a color drawing of the project. He stated staff recommended approval. Tom DeLuca, Applicant, 76 Broadway, Sacramento, thanked Ralph far all the work and help he provided with the project. He also thanked the Public Works Deparhnent, Lee Thompson, Mehran Sepehri, Tim Tucker and from the Building - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regulaz Meeting C5 August 6, 1996 [8-6pcmi] , • • • Department, Ken Petersen. He said he has also been working closely with Safeway, Inc., and they are in full support of the project. He stated the project was on a fast track basis, and they plan to go out to bid Friday August 9th and with the City's approval, start to build in 30 days. He concluded his presentation. Cm. Johnson asked the hours of operation for the car wash. Mr. DeLuca stated the hours were from 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Cm. Geist asked about the unisex restroom on the site. Mr. DeLuca explained the site plan in the agenda packet has been processed through the City for 6 months, but 2-3 days before Planning Commission packets were distributed they handed out a Unocal Public Relations Flyer that showed wrong information. T'he drawing in the staff report and what the Building Department has approved is the correct drawing, with one restroom. Cm. Zika asked what was the volume of gas pumped per month. Mr. DeLuca stated approximately 175,000 gallons. Cm. Zika asked why only one restroom for the site? Mr. DeLuca stated the restroom design was established by the State of California and adopted through the State by virtue of the Uniform Building Code. He stated that the design of the building was a specific design that they build throughout the State of California. He stated that the restroom was to building code. Cm. Zika stated the building code was the minimum, and felt one restroom would not be sufficient. The brochure underlines both men and women's restrooms. Cm. Zika stated he has 5 kids and when traveling he may drive into a Unocal Station to fill up and use the restroom. It would be very inconvenient to have to wait in line. He felt there should be two restrooms on the site. Mr. DeLuca stated that it was City standards to have unisex restrooms, and that's what information was given to the architect at the beginning of the project process. He felt it was unfair for them to be delayed when they have tried to work with the City from the beginning. Cm. Zika stated that Unocal had just met the minimum building code requirements. The Planning Commission was here to do what was best for the City and the Planning Commission could put extra conditions on if they felt it was necessary. Mr. DeLuca stated that their facility was only a 1,300 square foot facility. Their 2,300 square foot facility has two restrooms. Ralph Salsman, Special Counsel for Unocal, agreed that the discretion will come from the Planning Commission, and asked them to follow the recommendation of staff far the project. He stated the unisex restroom was because of the size of facility, and if required, they would comply with any necessary changes. Cm. Zika asked if there was anything that prevented Unocal from building a larger facility. Mr. Kachadourian stated that originally the Building Official would decide whether to go with 2 restrooms or a unisex restroom. He stated that the Applicant would be receptive to adding a second restroom. Mr. Salsman requested they be able to build the facility as approved. Cm. Johnson asked how many cars would be washed per day? Mr. Salsman responded approximately 150 cars per day. He stated that the car wash process only takes a few minutes. Regulaz Meeting August 6, 1996 [8-6pcmi] f ~ ~ ~ Cm. Johnson asked if they provided adequate room for a person to detail their car themselves. A person may want to dry and vacuum the car, and 5 parking spots does not leave enough of room. Mr. Salsman stated most people who use this type of facility are in a hurry and don't linger on the lot. The reason they use this type of car wash is because they don't want the other types of car wash services. Mr. Kachadourian stated page 14 of 27 of the staff report, condition 10 identifies no additional activities are allowed. Cm. Johnson questioned whether 5 parking spots will be adequate for the store and car wash. Mr. Salsman stated most customers who use the store have their cars in the gas pump area. Cm. Johnson asked the turnover volume far the food mart. Mr. Salsman stated that he did not have that information. Jim Kalamaro, KHR Associates, Consultant to Unocal with expertise in transportation field, stated Public Works had raised some of the questions asked here tonight. This type of store in a service station is primarily a convenience for customers to buy products. It is different than a 7-11 or Circle K type store. Only 15% of the customer base are the type to come use only the store. The other 85% are there to get gas and possibly buy something from the stare. The turnover is incredibly quick. In studies, they have found 5 spaces are adequate. Cm. Johnson asked how may employees at the site? Mr. Kalamaro stated three. Cm. Jennings asked if there was an agreement with Pak n Save to use their parking lot? Mr. Kalamaro stated he was not sure. Cm. Johnson asked where was the nearest station similar to this project. Mr. Salsman stated there were sites off Hengenberger Road in Oakland, and Castro Valley. Mr. Kachadourian stated that on page 13 of the staff report, condition 4 addresses the issue of parking, maintaining the 5 parking spaces and requiring the Applicant to have employee parking on the adjacent Pak n Save side. Cm. Johnson stated that he didn't feel the 5 parking spaces were adequate. He commented that the size of a gas station has nothing to do with the volume of people going through the parking lot. His concern was that the area has a great deal of congestion. Cm. Johnson asked about their demographics and what kind of population base was needed to support a station like this one. Mr. Kalamaro responded that it depends on the competition for the area. He explained the type of car wash going in at Unocal that it will be automated and the car is pulled on a conveyor belt with an individual at the front of the car wash guiding the car through. He stated that the individual will also dry off any area on the car that the blowers may have missed. Cm. Johnson asked if the water was recycled. Andrew Polaski, Architect with Robert Lee and Associates, stated the water was reclaimed and there might be some run off down the storm drain, but most of the water was reclaimed. Cm. Lockhart asked how much water was used per day. Regulaz Meeting August 6, 1996 [8-6pcmi] . ~ • ~ Mr. Polaski stated the washing process uses 15-20 gallons, but most of it is recycled and there might only be 4-5 gallons added per cycle. Cm. Jennings asked if there had been a problem in the past with Unocal losing customers because of their lack of restroom facilities. Mr. Kalamaro stated this is a relatively new program, 2 years old, and they have not had any complaints or problems. Cm. Jennings closed the public hearing. and the Planning Commission deliberated. Cm. Zika stated he had concerns over the restrooms. He thought the lack of a second restroom could create a problem. Cm. Johnson stated he did not feel they had enough room for the facility, with the gas station, car wash and mini-mart. Cm. Geist asked what was the difference in size of the two parcels, Unocal and Shell? Mr. Kachadourian responded that the Shell facility was a much larger parcel. He also stated that Exhibit A on the site plan, page 10 of the staff report, an area to the west of the site, there is a portion of the property that will also be utilized. Cm. Jennings asked for final comments from Ralph. Mr. Kachadourian stated Unocal would not have a problem with adding a second restroom, rather than not see the project go through. They may have to redesign the interiar of the food mart. Cm. Jennings asked if they still would have to meet ADA requirements? Mr. Kachadourian stated yes, the area with cold cases and back storage would probably have to be smaller. Mr. Polaski stated that the building could accommodate the extra restroom at the expense of display area. Mr. Peabody stated that the project may be approved with the second bathroom, we could put the condition in or we could continue the project. Cm. Zika stated he could live with putting the condition in and let staff and the Applicant work out the details. He stated that their may be another alternative, and build the second restroom on the south side of the building. Mr. Kachadourian stated the Fire Departtnent could have a problem with placing the restroom outside. The Fire Department wants enough access from the gas pumps to the curb of the building. Mr. Polaski stated the second restroom would be within the confines of the existing building. Mr. DeLuca commented that if the condition was added to require the second restroom, the project would not have to be continued and we would work with the architect on where the second restroom would go. He stated that he would like the direction from the Planning Commission to add another condition that the applicant should provide a second restroom subject to the approval of the project. Mr. Kachadourian read the condition to be added, "the Applicant shall provide an additional restroom to the food mart building to the satisfaction of the Building Official and the Community Development Director." Mr. DeLuca agreed with the condition. Regulaz Meeting August 6, 1996 [8-6pcmi] • 4 • • Dennis Carrington, Senior Planner read the condition for the record, "the Applicant shall provide an additional restroom to the food mart building which is architecturally compatible to the building and to the satisfaction of the Building Official and the Community Development Director." On motion by Cm. Geist, seconded by Cm. Zika and with the added condition as stated above, with a vote of 4-1, with Cm. Johnson voting against the project, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted Resolution No. 96 - 27 ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE FOR PA 96-003 UNOCAL 76 SERVICE RECONSTRUCTION AND EXPANSION Resolution No. 96 - 28 APPROVING PA 96-003 UNOCAL 76 SERVICE STATION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A NEW 24- HOUR SERVICE STATION TYPE `A' FACILITY WITH A 1,300 SQUARE FOOT `FAST BREAK' FOOD MART AND A NEW 960 SQUARE FOOT DRIVE-THROUGH AUTOMATIC CAR WASH, LOCATED AT 6401 DUBLIN BOULEVARD, WITHIN THE C-2, GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. Resolution No. 96 - 29 APPROVING PA 96-003 UNOCAL 76 SERVICE STATION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 24-HOUR SERVICE STATION TYPE ~A' FACILITY WITH A 1,300 SQUARE FOOT `FAST BREAK' FOOD MART AND A 960 SQUARE FOOT DRIVE-THROUGH AUTOMATIC CAR WASH, LOCATED AT 6401 DUBLIN BOULEVARD, WITHIN THE G2, GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. 8.2 PA 96-023 Dougherty Shell Service Station Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review at 5933 Dougherty Rd. C& J Cox Corporation with Shell Oil Company is proposing to build a new service station facility, to be constructed on two parcels at the northeast corner of Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road, on the current site of Harrison's Marine Center. This project involves the construction of a new 2,340 square foot BTD' food mart store with an attached 900 square foot automatic drive-through car wash. The project will include a 60' x 78' fuel island canopy with new landscaping and signage, and sidewalk and driveway improvements along the Dougherty Road and Dublin Boulevard frontages. Additional off-site access and driveway improvements will be made on the City owned remnant parcel adjacent to the project site. Mr. Kachadourian gave the staff report. He outlined the project. Staff recommended approval of the project. Mr. Kachadourian stated condition #40 was inadvertently left off and he passed out a copy of the condition. Chris Christiansen, Applicant, stated they have no problems with any of the conditions. Cm. Johnson asked where another station like this was? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regulaz Meeting 69 August 6, 1996 [S-6pcmi] • . • ~ Mr. Christiansen stated that there was one in Blackhawk, Hercules and Morgan Hill. Cm. Johnson asked if Shell has received any favorable comments for the site in Blackhawk? Mr. Christiansen stated that they do not follow Shell standards and that they have received good comments for the station in Blackhawk. Cm. Johnson stated the station in Blackhawk was the worst thing in the area. He felt better lighting was necessary. Mr. Christiansen stated the station was 50 feet away from homes in Blackhawk and that may be the reason far the bright lighting. Cm. Jennings stated she would not use a service station that was dimly lit. Cm. Johnson stated it was important also how it looks at night, as well as the in the day. He felt there was not enough room for this project. Cm. Zika asked how many gallons per month were they expecting to get out of this site? Mr. Christiansen replied approximately 200,000 to 225,000. Cm. Johnson asked how many cars washed per day? Mr. Christiansen stated 150 to 200 and they would start out free, but may change at the owners discretion. They recapture and reuse 90% of the water, and it will be a cloth wash. Mr. Kachadourian stated the Alcosta station was owned by C J Cox and this station was a joint venture of C J Cox and Shell Oil. Cm. Jennings closed the public hearing. Cm. Johnson had the same concerns on this project as the last one. Parking was bad and lighting could be improved. Cm. Geist stated the Shell station she goes to is packed with 2 parking spaces and they are never used. People run in while their car is parked at the pumps or they go through the car wash and drive out. On motion by Cm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Geist and with a vote of 4-1, with Cm. Johnson voting against the project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 96 - 30 ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE FOR PA 96-023 DOUGHERTY SHELL SERVICE STATION/FOOD MART/CAR WASH Regulaz Meeting ']Q August 6, 1996 [8-6pcmi] ~ , ~ ~ Resolution No. 96 - 31 APPROVING PA 96-023 DOUGHERTY SHELL SERVICE STATION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE OPERATION OF A NEW 24-HOUR SERVICE STATION TYPE `A' FACILITY WITH A 2,340 SQUARE FOOT `ETD' FOOD MART AND A 900 SQUARE FOOT AUTOMATIC DRIVE-THROUGH CAR WASH, LOCATED AT 5933 DOUGHERTY ROAD, WITHIN THE G2, GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT. Resolution No. 96 - 32 APPROVING PA 96-023 DOUGHERTY SHELL SERVICE STATION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 24-HOUR SERVICE STATION TYPE `A' FACILITY WITH A 2,340 SQUARE FOOT ~ETD' FOOD MART AND A NEW 900 SQUARE FOOT DRIVE-THROUGH AUTOMATIC CAR WASH, LOCATED AT 5933 DOUGHERTY ROAD, WITHIN THE G2, GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. 9. N~W OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS 9.1 Amendments to Zoning Ordinance to bring it into conformity with current planning practice, and meet the requirements of law. Cm. Jennings asked for the staff report. Mr. Peabody indicated the Zoning Ordinance that we are now using is the one we adopted from the County in 1967 and it needs to be updated. He asked the Planning Commission for ideas on how to best proceed with this project. Mr. Carrington presented the staff report. He asked the Planning Commission for direction and to prioritize the areas of the Zoning Ordinance that they would like to see amended. He stated the City Council gave this a high priority project, but however did not fund the project. The project would be done in-house, without the benefit of consultants. He stated that the Zoning Ordinance should be completed in January or February 1997. He went over the various areas of the ordinance that need to be amended. Cm. Zika asked about parking, the current ordinance requires too many spaces. He stated that his concern was with the size of the space. His suggestion was not to allow compact spaces. Mr. Carrington stated our current ordinance does not address compact spaces at all. He stated which he thought were the top 10 areas that need to be addressed, such as height for residential structures, home occupation, fences, open space and many other areas. Cm Zika asked what the difference was between a highway commercial and regular commercial. Mr. Carrington stated highway commercial was an outdated term and there is not a need for highway commercial now. Cm. Zika stated he would like to see second units addressed and better set backs. Mr. Peabody stated that opportunity does exist, and some developers and builders are doing that now. Mr. Carrington outlined several parking issues such as commercial vehicles in parking lots, retail parking requirements, guest parking for multi family housing, RV parking etc. He felt landscaping issues for commercial and industrial zones need to be addressed. Mr. Carrington asked the Planning Commission if there were any other areas they would like to see addressed. Cm. Jennings asked about front yard maintenance enforcement issues in this ordinance. Regulaz Meeting 71 August 6, 1996 [8-6pcmi] • . . Mr. Carrington stated that issue was addressed by the Property Maintenance Ordinance. He stated that was something we could take a look at. Mr. Peabody stated that we can write some things to the ordinance that will relate property maintenance. Cm. Johnson asked if we had an anti-ugly ordinance? Mr. Carrington stated yes, however, it was not part of the Zoning Ordinance. Cm. Jennings asked where tattoo parlors are in the ordinance. Mr. Carrington stated that he didn't think they were regulated. Cm. Johnson asked if he owned a home in Dublin and rented it out but did not maintain it, does the City enforce maintenance on it? Mr. Carrington stated that it falls under the Property Maintenance Ordinance and the owner is notified that the property needs to be maintained. Cm. Johnson asked why a business licenses was not required for rental properties. He stated it was a business. Mr. Peabody stated that he was not aware of any City that required a property owner who rented out their property to have a business license. Cm. Jennings stated that there were 18 items that are high priority for the zoning ordinance. 1. permitted and conditional uses 2. parking 3. accessory structures and uses 4. setbacks 5. landscaping 6. height 7. home occupations 8. fences, walls and hedges 9. non-conformity 10. planned developments 11. hillside regulations 12. telecommunications 13. useable open space 14. design criteria 15. combining districts 16. bicycle storage 17. highway commercial 18. second units Cm. Jennings asked if anyone had any other items they want added? Hearing none, there was consensus that staff look at the first top 10 as outlined on page 3 of the staff report. Mr. Carrington outlined the work program option. He stated that they would be looking at the rules and responsibility of the Planning Commission, City Council and Zoning Administrator. He stated that most ordinances are trying to make the permit process much faster by allowing approval at lower levels of administration. The ordinance needs to be edited to read clearly. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regular Meeting '72 August 6, 1996 [8-6pcmi] . s • He went over the work program and stated that Staff has come up with 3 options 1) To address one issue before the Zoning Ordinance Steering Committee every two weeks; 2) To address the same number of issues per month, with one meeting a month with the Zoning Ordinance Committee and to address the Planning Commission once a month with an update; 3) To not form a Zoning Ordinance Committee and to meet directly with the Planning Commission on a regular basis. Mr. Peabody gave the reason why option 2 was favorable and stated the chairperson could appoint with the consent of the Commission during the process. Mr. Carrington gave a background of how the sign ordinance committee worked, and asked the Planning Commission for their input for this steering committee. Cm. Jennings asked why a committee was necessary if it was mainly a clean up issue? Couldn't staff do the clean up and present the finished ordinance to the Planning Commission for approval? Mr. Peabody stated why a committee would be advantageous. It would help to have input from the Planning Commission. Cm. Jennings asked which option the Commissioner preferred. It was the consensus of the Commissioners that option 2 be used. Cm. Jennings appointed Cm. Zika and Cm. Johnson to the committee. Cm. Zika had some concerns with the appointment. He stated that he did not have the time. Cm. Jennings asked for any volunteers. Cm. Johnson accepted the appointment. A lengthy discussion was held trying to convince Cm. Zika to be on the committee. Cm. Zika stated he would try to give the committee some time. Mr. Peabody stated that staff would do most of the dirty work. Staff will be very flexible and accommodating as possible. Cm. Jennings continued on with the meeting. 9.2 Amending the adopted Dublin Planning Commission Rules of Procedure regarding meetings dates. Cm. Jennings asked for the staff report. Mr. Peabody presented the staff report, and stated that the City Council will meet the first and third Tuesday of the month due to the meetings being televised. He stated that the Planning Commission should consider moving their meetings to the second and fourth Tuesdays at 730 p.m. On motion by Cm. Jennings, seconded by Cm. Zika and with a vote of 5-0 the Planning Commission unanimously agreed to meet on the 2nd and 4th Tuesdays at 7:30 p.m. and adopted Resolution No. 96-33 AMENDING THE ADOPTED DUBLIN PLANNING COMMISSION RULES OF PROCEDURE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regular Meeting 73 August 6, 1996 [8-6pcmi] ~ , ~ ~ ~ 10. 4THER BUSINESS (Commission/Staff Informational Only Reports~ Cm. Johnson asked about the permit process of drilling a well on private property. Gaylene Burkett, Recording Secretary stated that they needed permission from Zone 7 per a discussion with Cece Farias in the Building Deparhnent. Cm. Johnson asked if we could call Zone 7 and have an inspector drop by to make sure things are done well? Mr. Peabody replied yes. Cm. Johnson talked about the temporary signs on businesses in Dublin. He stated that there are too many signs and banners in Dublin. Mr. Peabody stated that staff will be discussing this issue with the City Council at their August 13 meeting. 11. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, . . • Planning Commission C erson ATTEST: ~ ~ Community Development Directar Regulaz Meeting '74 August 6, 1996 [8-6pcmi]