HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-11-2012 PC Study Session Minutes Planning Commission
Study Session
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
CALL TO ORDER
A special meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, December
11, 2012, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair Wehrenberg called the
meeting to order at 6:04:11 PM
ATTENDEES
Present: Chair Wehrenberg, Vice Chair O'Keefe; Commissioners Brown, Bhuthimethee and
Schaub; Luke Sims, Community Development Director; Jeff Baker, Assistant Community
Development Director; Linda Smith, Economic Development Director/Public Information
Officer; and Debra LeClair, Recording Secretary.
ABSENT: None
1.1 Study Session: Proposed Economic Development Element of the General Plan.
Linda Smith, Economic Development Director/Public Information Officer, introduced Ben
Sigman, Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., who interviewed the Commissioners over the
summer for input on the project. She stated the City Council adopted, at their November 6th
meeting, the Economic Development Strategy based on the input received through the
stakeholder process. She stated she appreciated the opportunity to receive their input on the
proposed Draft Goals, Policies and Implementation Measures so that Staff can move forward and
complete the Element process.
Ben Sigman, Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. presented the project as stated in the Staff
Report.
Mr. Sigman stated that he is here to bring the Commission an update on the progress of the
project. He felt the challenge is to translate the adopted Strategy into an appropriate policy
document to be included in the General Plan.
Mr. Sigman stated he would review the Goals, Policies and Implementation Measures with the
Commission to ensure they support the document.
He stated the Strategy was adopted by the City Council in November 2012. Since then, he
assembled the Draft Goals, Policies and Implementation Measures; the purpose of the meeting
tonight is to obtain input from the Planning Commission and the public. He stated Staff will
return to the Planning Commission with a full Draft Economic Development Element Strategy.
He stated the project will go through a CEQA review, as appropriate, it will then be finalized and
included in the General Plan as the Economic Development Element.
tP&znning Commission Decem6er 11,2012
Economic(Development Element of the general Plan 1
Mr. Sigman stated the purpose is to provide a guide or business/operating plan for economic
development for the City which does not exist today. He stated it is consistent with the goals of
the City's economic development function. The purpose of the Element is to codify the Strategy
and set the plan in motion for the City's Economic Development Department.
Mr. Sigman stated that he met with the Planning Commissioners, a variety of business owners,
City Staff and other Stakeholders in the region as well as the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's
Bureau and other economic development agencies. He stated their priorities helped to drive the
Strategy and the draft Element.
Priorities:
Quality of life in Dublin is critical, which he heard mentioned over and over again by the
different stakeholders. It is about maintaining and enhancing the quality of life/quality of
place.
Small business - they spoke extensively with the Chamber of Commerce. He stated there
were comments on the challenges of City permitting and identified some specific issues
that he felt were being addressed, some of which will be part of the Strategy and felt they
should also be part of the Element as well. He stated this is an economic development
project and the Chamber of Commerce wants to support job growth and increase
employment opportunities.
Downtown - focusing on the Downtown was a priority for the business community as well
as the Planning Commission and City Staff which created an emphasis on the Downtown
in the Element.
Goals:
Goal 1 -Economic Vibrancy - sustain long-term economy in Dublin.
Goal 2 - Improve conditions for small businesses.
Goal 3 - Development of Strategic Employment-Supporting Sites.
Goal 4- Achieve the Downtown Vision.
Chair Wehrenberg asked how they wanted the Commission to comment and asked about
streamlining and making it easier for small businesses.
Ms. Smith answered that the format should be open-ended and they are free to ask questions of
either Mr. Sigman, Ms. Smith or Mr. Baker.
Mr. Baker stated the Commission can ask specific questions or go through each of the policies and
see if there's anything they want to talk about, provide feedback or make suggestions before the
document moves on.
Cm. O'Keefe suggested starting with Land Use.
Tlanning Commission (Decem&er 11,2012.
Economic(Development EThment of the general Tian 2
Mr. Baker suggested starting with Policy 1 - Maintaining an Economic Development Function,
discuss any questions and then move on from there. He explained that Attachment 1 is the
Strategy that the City Council adopted in November and Attachment 2 is the General Plan
Element that builds off the Strategy and is the subject of this Study Session. He stated this is not
the final Element but only the draft Goals, Policies and Implementation Measures.
Cm. Schaub asked what"economic development" means. He asked if this document is meant as
a vision for increasing City revenues. If so, he felt that the City's current mix of revenue is driven
by property tax and sales tax, if that is the goal.
Cm. Bhuthimethee asked Ms. Smith to explain the difference between the Economic Strategy and
the Economic Element.
Ms. Smith answered that economic development looks different in every community. She stated
that within Dublin it has been largely about land development because there has been more room
for growth. She stated that there was a focus on revenue because the City needed to build the
General Fund. The Strategy helps to set the stage for the final phase of economic development
activities that will likely occur within Dublin. She stated that a broad definition of economic
development is to create the conditions that make a community successful both economically and
financially.
Cm. Schaub asked if the Commission would like to go through the goals then he would like to
discuss the Strategy.
Ms. Smith responded that the implementation measures are reflected in the Strategy which are
not as detailed in the Element. She stated that the purpose of the Study Session is focus on the
Element and the Implementation Measures and discuss items that need addressing.
Mr. Baker reminded the Planning Commission that the Strategy was adopted by the City Council
in November 2012, so the document is in place. He added that the Commission is reviewing the
General Plan Element which is Attachment 2.
Cm. Schaub asked how they would handle items that they feel might not have been included in
the Strategy.
Mr. Baker stated they would not be taken into consideration until the next update to the
Economic Development Strategy.
Ms. Smith stated that the Strategy is a 5 year document, and there will be the Strategic Initiative
process in 2013 where they will have the ability to address those issues that are not reflected in
this Strategy documents. She stated that there were many opportunities to provide input for the
Strategy,but ultimately it was the Council that determined what was adopted.
Ms. Smith responded to Cm. Bhuthimethee's question as to the difference between the Strategy
and the Element - the Element is a long term document, being part of the General Plan, and the
Strategy should be a short term/time specific.
4'fanning Commission tDecem5er°11,2012
Economic Development'Tment of the General0?fan 3
Implementation
Mr. Sigman stated he would go through the Implementation Measures first.
Goal 1 - Create conditions for economic vibrancy. He stated they focused on job growth and
economic output such as sales which trickles down to fiscal health; he stated their focus was to
optimize for jobs, sales and economic output.
Cm. Schaub asked what benefit is it to the City to create more jobs.
Mr. Sigman answered creating more jobs is the basis of economic activity that occurs in Dublin
and it gives the residents the opportunity to work in Dublin. He stated the more jobs, the more
money circulating in the economy, more opportunities for everyone.
Ms. Smith responded that, in addition to Mr. Sigmari s comment, there is the indirect impact of
having jobs and the direct impact of filling vacancies etc.
Cm. Schaub and Chair Wehrenberg felt that the fees for water/sewer hook-up should be
addressed in the Implementation Measures. They both felt it was a huge problem for new
businesses.
Ms. Smith stated that the City has a Sewer Capacity Assistance program.
Chair Wehrenberg felt that the program did not address the issue. She felt it was a program
outlining City funding when they should be addressing the source that assesses the fees.
Ms. Smith stated that the water/sewer hook-up fees are an AB1600 fee which is a development
impact fee. When developing infrastructure you must, by law, figure out how to pay for it,
typically it's done through the assessment of an impact fee, which is what DSRSD charges to
connect to their capacity and debt service on capacity. She stated there are a lot of things to
consider regarding the fee structure.
Mr. Baker explained that what is being discussed is the draft Element of the General Plan which is
a long term broad document and there are implementations that become more specific such as the
Economic Development Strategy. He stated that under Goal 1, Policy 1 is Implementation
Measure A which states: "Business Incentive Programs - Maintain incentives..." so the DSRSD the
fee issue is captured but not specific to DSRSD.
Ms. Smith stated that it is more specifically defined in the Strategy.
Cm. Brown asked if part of the Strategy to create jobs would be to include offering new
businesses a list of possible employees that reside in Dublin.
Ms. Smith asked if he meant providing data on the skill set of the work force.
Cm. Brown answeredyes.
Pfaanning Commission cDecernfer 11,2012
Economic'eue nt Vaunt of the General Pan 4
Ms. Smith answered yes, and added that the Strategy mentions a consistent amount of the
workforce who lives here, but work elsewhere, which is not unique to Dublin. She stated that 20
years ago, prior to Hacienda Business Park, Pleasanton had 70% out-commute, they've added
30,000 new jobs and they still have 70% out-commute. So while adding jobs will help the regional
footprint it may not help the City's specific footprint. She stated they analyzed the skillsets of the
types of jobs within Dublin and the received data on Dublin's labor force from the Census.
Cm. Schaub felt the majority of jobs in Dublin are in retail. He asked if the car dealerships are
included in retail. Ms. Smith stated that they are. He felt there is a huge difference between
revenue from Toyota and revenue from Panera Bread and thought it can be confusing to have
both in retail.
Cm. O'Keefe stated that there is a 5% vacancy rate for Class A office space and he learned from
Dublin 101 that the City makes more revenue from property taxes than sales tax on commercial
rather than retail. Ms. Smith agreed and stated it depends on the retail business.
Cm. Schaub stated that 42% is property tax and 25% is sales tax.
Cm. O'Keefe asked about a parcel that has requested a zoning change from office space to mixed-
use.
Ms. Smith answered the change is from office space to retail/commercial.
Cm. O'Keefe asked if that use type would net the City more revenue.
Ms. Smith stated there are two requests before the City Council; one is changing the land use
from retail to mixed-use which the City Council will hear the request on December 18, and
currently the City Council has given authorization to study a General Plan Amendment to change
the land use from campus/office to retail/commercial at the corner of Hacienda and Dublin Blvd.
Cm. O'Keefe asked if, by changing the land use (at Hacienda and Dublin Blvd.), the City should
expect more revenue.
Ms. Smith answered that it is more about quality of place development.
Cm. O'Keefe stated that most developers want to maximize profitability by building more single-
family (SFR) homes and the more units built the more property tax revenue for the City. He
asked Mr. Sigman where he felt the City should be with SFR's vs. a more dense residential
development.
Mr. Sigman answered that the study takes the point of view of job creation and economic activity
as the goal. He stated they did not study the fiscal ramifications of the City's use mix, nor did it
determine whether the general fund would be enriched more by a mixed-use project vs. SFR's;
that would be outside the scope of the study. He stated that the study mentions the vacancy rate
and the opportunity for office development on the Alameda County Surplus Property, but the
cP,fanning Commission Decem6er 11,2012
Economic eamelopmznt'Cement of'the genera( n 5
Strategy is about creating job opportunities in the region and a center for economic activity. The
Strategy should create and sustain a good balance of jobs and residents.
Cm. Schaub stated that Mr. Sigman was referring to jobs where people work in the city and asked
if the unemployment mentioned in the study is among the residents or the unemployment among
the businesses in Dublin.
Ms. Smith answered that unemployment is a resident number and cautioned the Commission
that unemployment numbers at the city level are not very reliable.
Mr. Sigman stated that the study focused on what sectors will have job growth. He stated they
found an increase in professional, scientific and technical services which is a highly educated
workforce. Mr. Sigman felt that, though there have not been a lot of office buildings built and
with the vacancy rate below 5%, there is a demand for space. He felt that not everyone wanted to
work in Silicon Valley or San Francisco and Dublin has an opportunity to capture some of that job
growth.
Cm. Brown wanted to comment on Policy 4 - Participate in Regional Economic Development Efforts -
he asked if the City has worked with Livermore and Pleasanton to develop a regional serving
airport to serve the surrounding area. He felt that a lot of businesses would demand those
services.
Chair Wehrenberg agreed and thought that the airport was being used more by businesses and
mentioned the local conferences where the attendees had to stay in hotels outside the area
because there are limited hotels in the area.
Ms. Smith responded that the airport is reflected in the document as an area asset. She also stated
that, as her role as the City board representative to the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's
Bureau (CVB), she has raised the idea to conduct an asset assessment of the region to determine if
there is a deficit and that the funding for such an assessment should come from the CVB as the
regional body. She stated they heard from several CEO's with similar comments and indicated
that she would be pressing the CVB to give the City direction or offer funding as opposed to a
particular city funding it.
Cm. O'Keefe asked what kind of funding is in the Commercial Facade Improvement grant
program.
Ms. Smith answered that the City allocates $70,000 annually to the program. She stated the City
carried over $70,000 from last year. She added that the City has been working on a facade
remodel on a building on Village Parkway which is part of the parking reduction program. The
City also allocated $70,000 for this fiscal year so there is $140,000 in the fund for this fiscal year.
Cm. O'Keefe asked if there was a lack of applications for the program.
Ms. Smith answered no; there have been 5 applications. She added that the City is being careful
because she felt the first building completed will set the tone for the program. She added the
program was adopted a year ago.
Tanning Commission Decent 6er 11,2012
Economic Deve&pment Element of the general n 6
Cm. O'Keefe asked how much of the funding would go to the first applicant.
Ms. Smith answered that the program allows no more than $70,000 per project. She stated the
applicant would contribute 1/3 and the City the other 2/3 so the project would be approximately
$100,000.
Ms. Smith continued with Policy 2 - Maintaining a Comprehensive Marketing and Branding Plan -
She stated there was some feedback through the interview process, but they were not sure what
the identity of the City is and whether it could be cultivated. She stated there would be an
overarching branding for the City and then a more specific branding for the Downtown. Staff
would also be working with the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority on how to market
the Eastern Dublin Transit Center because there is currently no marketing or outreach being done
regarding the available land.
Cm. Bhuthimethee asked Ms. Smith to explain marketing and branding.
Ms. Smith explained that the City would do a Request for Proposal to firms that specialize in
destination or brand marketing with particular experience with cities or regions and create an
overarching brand identity for the City. She stated that currently the phrase "Dublin, A Great
Place to Grow" is used. Staff would ask the firm the correct way to nurture the marketing and
branding of the downtown area; being authentic to who Dublin is, but also how best to position
the downtown and market it to the region.
Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if the branding company interviewed stakeholders or could the brand
be developed by the community.
Ms. Smith responded that they have not started the implementation schedule as yet.
Cm. Bhuthimethee was concerned with the branding being authentic and not imposed or
contrived, but actually being created by an informed community.
Ms. Smith mentioned that she has 10 years of branding experience before coming to the City of
Dublin. She felt that the firm would first do some observation of their own because others have
different input, some are authentic, and some are not.
Mr. Baker stated that there are three implementation measures which are 1) create the marketing
plan; 2) implement the plan; 3) continue to update. He added that this would be the guide for
how staff resources were allocated, and what the council's direction is for the future.
Cm. O'Keefe asked if the City would hire an outside consultant or use in-house resources.
Ms. Smith answered that the City will hire an outside consultant.
Cm. O'Keefe asked Mr. Sigman if he had any feedback or suggestions on branding.
Planning Commission (December 11,2012
Economic De. nt cEle t of the General Plan 7
Mr. Sigman suggested engaging a professional branding and marketing firm. He felt it was
important to appear professional and he felt that the right firm will review the economic
development Strategy and create an appropriate plan that works for the goals of the City and
captures the character of the City and what the City wants to be in the future.
Cm. Schaub felt it is critical to have a vision of marketing and branding for the downtown area.
Cm. O'Keefe agreed that a professional marketing and branding firm will be important. He
mentioned the study which showed that the current views of Dublin is that of a "well-known
retail destination with a concentration of value oriented shopping." He stated that the City
Council approved a freeway sign that will further accentuate that notion. He wanted to get Ms.
Smith's thoughts knowing that our consultants have identified that Dublin is a well-known retail
destination with a concentration of value oriented shopping and Staff has recommended that the
City articulate and emphasis that notion.
Chair Wehrenberg felt that notion should not be emphasized and Cm. Schaub agreed.
Cm. O'Keefe then asked for Ms. Smith's personal opinion as the Economic Development Director,
and he understood that there is an economic development component of having the sign and
having brands and more people understand that certain destinations exist which will gain
incremental revenue. However; in his discussions with the City Manager and the Assistant City
Manager, there was no value determined on how much revenue the City expects to gain. He
stated that they know it will be marginal, but how much revenue is not known. He asked Ms.
Smith if she was involved in the issue.
Ms. Smith answered no.
Cm. O'Keefe stated that, on one hand, there will be an incremental sales tax increase but the
amount is unknown. He felt that should have been vetted through. He continued that, on the
other hand, the City is further branding our city as a well-known retail value oriented shopping
destination. He stated that Ms. Smith went into this with her eyes wide open and asked for her
feedback.
Ms. Smith responded that was someone's opinion and factually there are 7 miles of freeway
frontage in Dublin which makes us, if we're being authentic, along Dublin Blvd. a place for
commercial/retail activity. She stated that is how land development typically works; land values
are greater, they support retail uses and the City has encouraged through their land use planning
retail and commercial uses. She stated that is the framework in which Dublin works in and the
City is a very linear community along Dublin Blvd. that has been planned for commercial
development. The opinion that Cm. O'Keefe shared was someone's opinion about value.
Cm. Schaub felt that what Cm. O'Keefe was saying is it would be of valuable to try to come up
with a specific economic forecast for what each improvement would do for the city. He felt that if
the City were a business they would do that. He mentioned the improvements at Golden Gate
Drive and asked what would be the return on the investment on that project. He felt that was
hard to say but it would be of value to determine, in more specific terms, what the City thinks
will be accomplished.
TGanning Commission (December 11,2012
Economic cDevetpment"ECement of the general Wan 8
Cm. O'Keefe felt that Staff has been engaged in this endeavor with the consultants for a while,
and there is no urgency to have the sign built or approved, there isn't and that is not an opinion.
There is no need to have the sign built now. Knowing that the City will have this action and goal
of marketing and branding and knowing that the sign is a key piece, why don't we wait and
encourage the City Council to hold off until an expert, outside marketing company can give
advice on what the branding should be and if this sign would fit into that.
Ms. Smith addressed Cm. O'Keefe saying that she felt she could not provide an answer that
would be satisfactory. She added that the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan (DDSP) addressed a
regional sign and that took place long before any work was done on this Strategy.
Mr. Baker added that the Strategy has already been adopted and what the Planning Commission
should focus on is providing comments or feedback on the Element which is Attachment 2.
Mr. Baker led a renewed discussion of the draft Element.
Goal 2- Improve Conditions for Small Businesses
Cm. Bhuthimethee liked the policy that is being proposed and asked if there was a way to enlist
small businesses to help create the City's identity. She felt that would address the Commission's
concern regarding large commercial retail businesses competing with the small businesses.
Goal 3 - Development of Strategic Employment-Supporting sites.
Chair Wehrenberg asked if the City would consider building shell buildings as in the economic
development corporation idea.
Ms. Smith responded that a building shell is a costly endeavor. She felt that Class A office
buildings generally have a similar look and, if there was an opportunity to create a master plan or
design for a building, particularly the area adjacent to the transit center site, that may be
something to explore so that the buildings would already be approved. Then if a developer came
to the City with a project we could have one ready to go.
Chair Wehrenberg agreed and suggested the City could defer the development fees until the
building is leased out.
Ms. Smith stated that the Surplus Property Authority holds significant fee credits and it would be
something that the City would need to have them agree to.
Cm. Schaub stated that was done with the Fallon Gateway project where the pads were approved
and when Dick's Sporting Goods came to the City the pad was ready to go.
Chair Wehrenberg added that the City would be taking a risk, but the risk would be short term
because the building would have a tenant sooner. She felt that there were many people looking
for office space and there isn't much available in most cities.
nning Commission tDecemler 11,2012.
Economic oelopa nt ECement of f thie general Flan 9
Ms. Smith stated that the process for the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority is to go to
the Board of Supervisors for approval of land use first. She stated that Alameda County holds the
fee credits, and not much of the fees are paid to the City. Part of the land transaction would be to
make it more attractive to the county.
Cm. Schaub asked if the Cisco buildings were considered filled.
Ms. Smith responded that the Ross Corporation has purchased the three buildings and they are in
the process of interior demolition and will start construction in 2013.
Policy 2- Support Downtown Business Attraction and Development Efforts
Mr. Baker stated this policy is to coordinate and promote those activities and the implementation
measures will conduct outreach efforts and participate in coordinated activities with the
landowners and business owners.
Cm. Schaub felt that the City must get the branding right. He felt the DDSP created a framework
for a vision, but that hiring a professional branding firm to help with the Downtown area would
be critical. He suggested that the Regional Street area could be an opportunity, but understood
there are CC&R's for the area that could be an impediment to that type of improvement.
Goal 4 - Achieve the Downtown Vision
Chair Wehrenberg felt that if the City wants to have a walkable, friendly downtown area there
are things that can be done to achieve the look and feel that they want.
Cm. Bhuthimethee agreed with the Commissioners regarding the Downtown and felt it is
g t o other Commissione s eg g
important to do visioning and asked if the Commission could revisit the DDSP to get a more
shared vision with the property owners and community. She pointed out a section in the
Strategy that states to "expedite development progress Downtown" and she felt that if they want
to expedite development she felt it was important to look at the specific plan. She mentioned that
Mr. Sigman made a comment at the City Council meeting stating "richness of place" and really
liked that phrase. She wondered if the specific plan has enough information to give that feeling
to the Downtown. She felt that other specific plans have more specific information regarding the
color, patterns and width of sidewalks, what types of site furniture there should be, and the
overall character of the area. She felt the DDSP did not show those sorts of details.
Mr. Baker responded that the DDSP was adopted in 2011 after extensive community outreach
and input over a two year period. He stated there will be Strategic Initiative meetings with the
City Council and the Commissions in the spring and that would be an opportunity to raise the
issue with the City Council for their consideration as part of the work program. He added that, at
this point, there are no plans to have the DDSP on the work program, nor would this cover a
specific plan amendment.
Cm. Bhuthimethee felt that if they want to define a character or identity for the Downtown, the
DDSP would be a place to start.
cPlannin1 Commission December 11,2€112
Economic(Development Element of the general Plan 10
Mr. Baker suggested Cm. Bhuthimethee bring that up at the workshop with the City Council.
Cm. Schaub suggested including Fallon Gateway in the Strategy as one of the key business areas.
He stated there were over 350,000 people at the Paragon Outlet Mall in Livermore and he felt it
was an easy area to development more commercial businesses.
Cm. O'Keefe asked Mr. Sigman to elaborate on his analysis on the weaknesses of market depth in
the City's attached housing market.
Mr. Sigman responded that, with the recession, there was a shift in the residential real estate
market and while interviewing developers they expressed greater interest in pursuing a more
traditional real estate product such as a detached single-family home.
Mr. Baker thanked the Commission and stated Staff will incorporate their thoughts and feedback
from this meeting. He stated that Staff is also working on refreshing the General Plan by
updating the information. The Commission will review the proposed updates along with the
final draft Economic Development Element in early 2013 and then it will move on to the City
Council for adoption.
ADJOURNMENT -The meeting was adjourned at 7:03:26 PM
Respectfully submitted,
Planning Commission
ATTEST:
i�
Assis nt ommunity Development Director
G:\MINUTES\2012\STUDY SESSIONS\PC SS Econ Dev Element GP 12.11.12.doc
('Canning Commission Decem6er 11,2012
Economic(Dave y r, nt'Element of the generaRPlan 11