Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-10-2003 PC Minutes Planning Commission Minutes CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, June 10, 2003, in the Dublin Civic Center City Council Chambers. Chair Fasulkey called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Fasulkey, Jennings, Nassar, Machtmes and King; Richard Ambrose, City Manager; Eddie Peabody, Jr. Community Development Director;John Bakker, Asst. City Attorney;Michael Porto, Planning Consultant;Janet Harbin, Senior Planner;Kristi Bascom, Associate Planner; Marnie Waffle, Assistant Planner; and Maria Carrasco Recording Secretary. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Cm. Fasulkey led the Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA Mr. Peabody recommended the Planning Commission move item 7.2 Fairway Ranch Study Session to the last item on the agenda. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS-May 27, 2003 were approved as submitted. ORAL COMMUNICATION -None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - 7.1 2002-2007 Capital Improvement Program-Update for FY 2003-2004 Mr. Ambrose presented the staff report. He explained that the annual Capital Improvement Program has an update for FY 2003-2004 and that the Planning Commission's role is to determine the conformity of the projects with the General Plan. The items that fall under the definition of a Public Works project have been identified with an asterisk. He asked the Commission to adopt the resolution attached to their staff report and stated that he would be happy to entertain any questions. Cm. Jennings asked for clarification regarding page 54 and 56 and whether they were two separate Parks projects. Mr. Ambrose responded yes. Aznning`'omsrtrssaon June 10,2003 guhr emoting 91 Cm. Jennings asked if the City would be replacing the deck on the south side of the building of the Shannon Community Center during fiscal year 2003-2004. Mr. Ambrose stated no. The City does not have the cost of that project. An engineering study needs to be done to address the flooding problems occurring at the center. Cm. Jennings asked for clarification of page 39 regarding staff time on a project. Mr. Ambrose explained it is the amount of time anticipated per project and not necessarily one staff person's time. Cm. Nassar asked which projects are before the Commission's review. Mr. Ambrose stated the projects identified with an asterisk. Cm. Fasulkey asked if there were any other questions; hearing none he asked for a motion. On motion by Cm. Machtmes, seconded by Cm. King, by a vote of 5-0 the Planning Commission unanimously approved RESOLUTION NO. 03- 28 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING THAT THOSE PROJECTS COVERED IN THE ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN AS PART OF THE 2002-2007 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP), UPDATE FOR FY 2003-2004 OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE ADOPTED CITY OF DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN PUBLIC HEARINGS: PA 03-022 Tri-Valley Clutch Conditional Use Permit for an auto repair and service establishment in an existing building in an M-1 Zoning District. Ms. Bascom presented the staff report. She explained that Tri Valley Clutch is a new auto repair and service establishment specializing in the repair and replacement of clutches for cars and light trucks. The proposed location of the business is 6345 Scarlett Court, which is in an M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the ,'isl137?3rf,1 t,,tztPrmsio;i -- -- ---.._ _. .------------ - - - - ,June 10,200"; R;giliar:11.:ett'7,4,5 92 attached resolution approving a Conditional Use Permit to allow an auto repair and service establishment at 6345 Scarlett Court. Tri Valley Clutch is proposing to occupy one suite in an existing industrial building at 6345 Scarlett Court. The suite occupies approximately 2,764 square feet in the 19,520 square foot building, which was constructed in 1971. Surrounding businesses include Low Price Auto Glass, Diablo Engine and Machine, and Busick Heating and Air Conditioning. Brown and Fessler Electrical Contractors most recently occupied the suite at 6345 Scarlett Court. Tri-Valley Clutch will have three employees at its busiest time. The proposed hours of operation would be Monday through Friday from 8:00-5:30 p.m. and the business would be closed on Saturdays and Sundays. The Conditional Use Permit findings can be made in the affirmative because the building was originally built and intended to be used for industrial and commercial service uses, such as the proposed Auto Repair and Service establishment. Additionally, Staff has proposed Conditions of Approval as part of this use permit that will ensure the proposed use does not have negative impacts on surrounding businesses and users. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution approving a Conditional Use Permit for an auto repair and service establishment in an existing building in an M-1 Zoning District at 6345 Scarlett Court, subject to the attached conditions of approval. Cm. King asked if there would be any visual changes to the building. Ms. Bascom responded no changes were proposed other than changing the sign. Cm. King asked the type of sign is proposed. Ms. Bascom stated the sign material has not been submitted. Cm. King asked the applicant what the sign would be made of. Donald Tupper, Owner of Tri Valley Clutch stated the sign would be made out of plywood. Cm King asked if the signs in the area are made out of plywood Ms. Bascom said the signs of the surrounding businesses are relatively simple. Cm. Fasulkey asked any other questions Doreen Green stated she manages the property and feels the use will be very compatible with the surround uses. She asked for the Commission's approval. l.nunrt,sg,574 June Ids,200.5 45:mu 144-'qefolfqf 93 Cm. Fasulkey closed the public hearing and asked for a motion. On motion by Cm. King, seconded by Cm. Machtmes, by a vote of 5-0, the Planning Commission unanimously approved RESOLUTION NO. 03-29 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR PA 03-022 TO OPERATE AN AUTO REPAIR AND SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT IN AN EXISTING BUILDING WITHIN A M-1 ZONING DISTRICT AT 6345 SCARLETT COURT, ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 941-0550-015-05 8.2 PA 03-020, Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 8.12, Zoning Districts And Permitted Uses Of Land; Chapter 8.64, Home Occupations; Chapter 8.76, Off- Street Parking And Loading Regulations; and, Chapter 8.80, Second Unit Regulations, Of The Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) Ms. Harbin presented the staff report and explained that the Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 8.120) requires that all zoning ordinance amendments (such as the proposed amendment to the Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land, Home Occupations, Off-Street Parking Regulations, and Second Unit Regulations chapters) be heard by the Planning Commission and, following a public hearing, the Planning Commission will make a written recommendation to the City Council whether to approve, approve with modifications or disapprove the amendment. Effective July 1, 2003, AB 1866 amended Government Code Section 65852.2 requiring that municipalities promote the approval of second dwelling units using established standards and ministerial review. The legislative action eliminates the discretionary review or hearing process most cities use to approve a second dwelling unit. The new Code Section allows the City to establish a procedure and criteria in the zoning ordinance for evaluating second dwelling units for parking, height, setbacks, site layout and architecture. Staff is recommending modifications to Development Regulations in the Second Unit Regulations chapter to establish standards to allow second units within any Single Family Residential Districts and Planned Development Districts (if not prohibited by the PD regulations) with issuance of a building permit. The amendment also eliminates the requirement of obtaining a Conditional Use Permit approval from the Zoning Administrator for a second unit. The revision to this section would modify the reference to the subsection for Second Unit parking to be consistent with the previous revisions. The Off-Street and Loading Regulations for Second Units on single family lots is proposed for ,pranning OMMISS1077 ,dune 10,2003 94 modification to reference Section 8.80.040.F, which requires one additional off-street parking space to be provided for the dwelling unit. She explained that the Zoning Ordinance section restricting the number of Home Occupations to no more than two per residence is proposed to be deleted. This would allow an unlimited number of home occupation permits per residence. Based on Staff research, it appears that the number of home occupations per residence may have been restricted for practical reasons, as each business could potentially use a portion of the square footage of the residence. However, with the advent of internet based businesses, a resident could work out of their home and presumably conduct several businesses at one time within a minimal amount of floor area or space. Because of this, Staff suggests deleting this section of the Home Occupation Regulations to remove the restriction. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing and receive Staff presentation and adopt the resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the Ordinance to amend the Dublin Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance). She asked if anyone had any questions. Cm. Machtmes asked if there was an incident that caused staff to bring this project forward. Ms. Harbin stated Staff received inquiries and letters regarding the Home Occupation regulations limit on the number of home occupations. However, the changes in the second unit regulations are to comply with State law. The State sees it as a way to provide additional affordable housing. Cm. Fasulkey asked if the City is required to follow State law. Mr. Bakker stated the State permits second units and without criteria from the City, the City will default to the State law or use the State's regulations on second units. Cm. Fasulkey asked if the City's PD requirements would be modified. Ms. Harbin said the City would not modify those requirements for individual PD's unless a request was made to do so Cm. Fasulkey asked if there were any other questions for staff; hearing none he closed the public hearing and asked for a motion. On motions by Cm.Jennings, seconded by Cm. Nassar,by a vote of 5-0 the Planning Commission unanimously approved :'Cannirw Comnussion ware 10,200 quiar'Metmg 95 RESOLUTION NO. 03-30 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 8.12, ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMITTED USES OF LAND; CHAPTER 8.76, OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REGULATIONS; CHAPTER 8.64,HOME OCCUPATIONS; AND, CHAPTER 8.80, SECOND UNIT REGULATIONS, OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE), PA 03-020 7.2 PA 03-010 Fairway Ranch Study Session - Preliminary review of a Site Development Review, Density Bonus, Tentative Tract Map and Draft Development Agreement for the development of 3 projects; a 322 unit Senior Apartment Project, a 304 unit Multi-Family Apartment Project, and a 304 unit Condominium Project. The Subject site is in Area B of Dublin Ranch between Dublin Boulevard and Central Parkway, east of Keegan St. Cm. Fasulkey reminded the Planning Commission that it was a study session and no action would be taken. Mr. Porto explained that the study session is to acquaint the Planning Commission with the project before the public hearing on June 24th. Marnie Waffle made a power point presentation of the project. The proposed Fairway Ranch project is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, Dublin Ranch Area B,between Dublin Boulevard and Central Parkway, east of Keegan Street. She explained that Fairway Ranch is a proposed affordable housing community of 930 residential units on approximately 24.5 acres of land in Eastern Dublin. There are three components to Fairway Ranch: an affordable senior apartment project, an affordable multi-family apartment project, and a for-sale condominium project. The Applicant is proposing this project in order to satisfy the Inclusionary Zoning (affordable housing) requirements for the remainder of Dublin Ranch. Currently, it is estimated that there are 2,655 residential units left to be developed in Dublin Ranch; of those 2,655 units, the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance requires that 12.5%, or 322 units, be affordable. The Applicant is proposing to construct a total of 587 affordable units throughout the entire Fairway Ranch project. Staff has reviewed the proposed project and determined that it is in conformance with the General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and existing Planned Development Zoning. The purpose for this Study Session is for Staff and the Applicant to introduce the proposed Fairway Ranch project to the Planning Commission. The Study Session will give the Planning <'"miringCommission 96 dune 0,2f?t.3 r''Meeting Commission the opportunity to hear the proposed project before the item is formally brought to Public Hearing at the June 24, 2003, Planning Commission Meeting. Staff has prepared this Staff Report to provide the Planning Commission with the facts relating to the project. The outline format of this report is intended to provide the essential information that describes the project. Staff will provide more detailed information in the presentation to the Planning Commission. In the text that follows, Staff has outlined, 1) how the Fairway Ranch project will be processed, what entitlements are required, and which decision making body will take action on those entitlements; 2) where the project is located; and, 3) what the specifics of the project are. Mr. Porto explained the site plan for the Commission. He stated that it is Staff's intention for the applicant to make a presentation. He concluded his presentation and opened up for questions. Cm. Fasulkey asked if the applicant was available. Marty Inderbitzen, representative for the applicant, introduced the various parties associated with the project. He stated that tonight's presentation is a conceptual plan of the project. There may be minor change at the June 24th Planning Commission meeting. He stated they do not have a presentation for the Commission and are present as a resource. Cm. Machtmes asked about the market assessment for this type of units. Mr. Inderbitzen said the market is strong. The intent of this project is to meet the full obligation for Dublin Ranch for affordable units. To meet the ordinance requirements they had to provide 127 low income units. In addition they put a blend in with for sale condo units. The conceptual model for the rental portion market rate units was taken from Waterford. On the senior portion of the project the City asked for a market study to validate the sufficient demand for senior housing. Cm. Jennings asked about the area's median income. Mr. Inderbitzen stated that it was approximately$76,000, which is based on the ABAG numbers. Cm. Jennings asked if the parking is assigned. Robert Cline stated the parking is assigned. Cm. Jennings asked if elevators would be provided in each building of the project. Mr. Cline responded yes. Thinning Commission ,Ju 10,2003 guiaar;leering 97 Cm. Jennings asked the approximate distance from a resident's parking stall to their unit. Mr. Porto said approximately 12 feet. Cm. Machtmes asked if a multi media rendering of the project was available. Mr. Inderbitzen said a model would be available at the next meeting. Cm. Jennings said the project and landscaping is very nice. She asked if the very low, low and moderate will be in this project. Mr. Inderbitzen stated yes. The heaviest concentration of affordability is in the senior and apartment complex. The condo project is a for sale project. Within each of the floors of each project will contain very low, low and moderate incomes households. They have an obligation to maintain the mix of household incomes. Mr. Porto said that when the Commissioners receive their agenda packet for the June 24th meeting it would include the floor plans. Cm. Jennings asked if there would be a visible difference for the units. Mr. Inderbitzen said a person couldn't walk down the hallway and determine which unit is low. Cm. King asked if there was a need for a separate Environmental Impact Report. Mr. Porto said Staff did an initial study and determined no new impacts for the area. Cm. King asked if there are any courtyards for the seniors. Mr. Porto responded that there were courtyards. He showed on the PowerPoint the location of the courtyards. Cm. King asked if it would be a pedestrian friendly environment and what will distinguish this from other condo projects? Ted Youngs stated that instead of lining the street with the perimeter of the building, they have provided courtyards, which are heavily landscaped. It provides a higher quality of living. Cm. King asked what type of retail is proposed and if it will be convenient walking distance. Picts ing Commission gene 10,2003 garar Meeting 98 Mr. Inderbitzen said it would be convenient. The proposal is for a convenience retail store to purchase basic needs such as produce and bread. There is also a possibility of Valley Care Health system within the site and the Police Department has requested a substation. Cm. King asked who would manage the property. Mr. Inderbitzen said an on-site professional management company. Mr. Cline explained that Lincoln Properties have a property management division named Legacy Partners. Mr. Inderbitzen stated that they would provide the City a management and marketing plan for the project. There will be an outreach program within the City to identify qualified individuals that live or work here to get them into this project. It is expected to be a very high quality project. Cm.Jennings asked about the structured spaces. Mr. Porto said exterior spaces exposed to the air and structured spaces are within a parking structure. Cm. Machtmes stated he is a big fan of mixed use. How will the 5,000 sq ft. of retail be used? Mr. Inderbitzen said 2,500 would be for a grocery store type use. Mr. Porto said Staff had concerns with how the retail space would be broken up. Cm. Machtmes asked if there is anything behind the retail. Mr. Porto responded that residential units would be behind the retail. Cm. Machtmes asked if there would be an entrance from the courtyard to the retail. Mr. Porto said he does not have that information at this point. Cm. King asked if they should contact the applicant directly with any further questions. Mr. Peabody advised the Commission that it would not be wise to talk to with the applicant prior to the public hearing on the 24th. He explained that the Commission could deal with their questions through Staff. Yruninnfi7(.'cmrstsszon June 10,2003 %au!'340et zng 99 1 Cm. Fasulkey reminded the Commission of the letter they received from the City Attorney regarding the Commission's role for this project. Mr. Peabody stated it is not a normal legislative Planned Development. Cm. Fasulkey discussed his interest in proving conduits for the project. Cm. Machtmes asked Staff why the recommendation to transfer the Site Development Review to the City Council. Mr. Peabody explained that generally Staff usually does the Site Development Review approval; but since this is a big project the City Council has been specific on reviewing it. Mr. Porto thanked the Commission and concluded his presentation. NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS —None OTHER BUSINESS (Commission/Staff Informational Only Reports) Cm. Machtmes asked for Staff to encourage computer renderings on projects. There was discussion on the pros and cons of computer rendering. ADJOURNMENT—The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Community Development Director 14:2-0ung 017111WStOr June id,2003 R liuGar 100