The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06-23-2015 PC Minutes Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, June 23, 2015 CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, June 23, 2015, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair Goel called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Chair Goel; Commissioners Do, Bhuthimethee and Mittan; Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director; Kit Faubion, City Attorney; Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner; and Debra LeClair, Recording Secretary. Absent: Vice Chair Kohli ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA — NONE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS — On a motion by Cm. Do and seconded by Cm. Mittan, on a vote of 4-0, with Vice Chair Kohli absent, the Planning Commission approved the minutes of the May 26, 2015 meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS — NONE CONSENT CALENDAR — NONE WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS — NONE PUBLIC HEARINGS — 8.1 PLPA-2015-00028 Amendments to Dublin Zoning Ordinance Chapters 8.08 (Definitions), 8.40 (Accessory Structures and Uses Regulations), and 8.76 (Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations) Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report. An SB 343 form was submitted to the Planning Commission to update the definition of Massage Establishment in the City Council Ordinance. Cm. Do asked how "vehicle" is defined in the context of the proposed Ordinance and if that definition applies to bicycles, etc. Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director, answered that the current Ordinance does not allow vehicle painting and was related to automobile type vehicles. He stated that there have been some cases where an automobile was being painted which did not have a motor or it was a boat trailer, etc. He stated that the intent of the Ordinance is to eliminate noxious odor from painting in a residential area. Chair Goel asked why not reference the vehicle code. l't:arn:.rzcf Cotn'rassrorr -June 2 '�t(i id�3f;11{i?'rirg Ms. Bascom answered that Staff was not aware if the vehicle code references motorized or non- motorized vehicles. She stated that the goal was to make the Ordinance clear that there should be no painting of any vehicles, motorized or non-motorized. She stated that, in discussions with Code Enforcement Staff, this change would provide the clarity they needed to enforce the Ordinance in the field. Chair Goel asked if trailers would be considered vehicles. Mr. Baker answered yes and stated that this change provides enough flexibility to implement the Ordinance in a reasonable manner. Chair Goel felt that a trailer does not fit in the definition of a vehicle. He asked if there is a definition for a trailer in the Ordinance. He wanted to ensure that the intent is covered in the Ordinance regarding trailers. Mr. Baker stated that Staff looks at the intent of the Ordinance, uses a reasonableness standard, and would refer to other sections of the Zoning Ordinance for guidance. While there is no specific definition of a vehicle, there is a definition of an "inoperable vehicle" which is a "car, motor home, truck, van, boat, commercial vehicle or other vehicles or similar as determined by the Community Development Director..." He stated that there has been an issue in the past where someone felt that what they were painting was not a motorized vehicle (such as a car body without a motor); removing the word "motorized" will provide clarity. Cm. Do asked for the definition of sound and how much is too much sound/noise. Mr. Baker responded that noise is a relative term, where Staff may have to use a reasonableness perspective, and gave an example of an air compressor drill or other loud noises which could be a nuisance. Cm. Mittan asked if the Ordinance references "what a reasonable person would assume..." Kit Faubion, City Attorney, stated that the Zoning Ordinance has a general provision for interpreting and making determinations by the Community Development Director. She stated that if the content is close enough or can be interpreted as a reasonable person would, then the Director has the discretion to deal with the issue. She stated that the term "motorized" is a good example because the vehicle is either motorized or not and that would be something that would constrain an interpretation that might otherwise be unreasonable. Chair Goel asked if the Ordinance would apply to a homeowner repairing his/her own vehicle on their driveway. Mr. Baker answered that it does apply. He stated that there has been a long standing regulation restricting vehicle repair to a garage where it is not visible from the street. Chair Goel asked about repairing a flat tire. Mr. Baker answered that the City again uses a reasonableness approach to enforcement and it is unlikely that an occasional flat tire would raise to the level of enforcement; however, this is opposed to a situation where a resident is running a tire repair business in their driveway, or a chronic issue such as resident that is tearing apart a motor for months. Zel Chair Goel asked if there is an assumption that there will be no driveway on lots of 4,000 sf or less. Ms. Bascom answered yes; small lot, single-family cluster homes typically have no driveway, or could be clustered around a common driveway, but there are typically no individual driveways for each unit. She stated that smaller lots are required to have two enclosed garage spaces and one additional parking space per unit within 150 feet. Ms. Faubion mentioned that, while not common in Dublin, there are instances where there are alley-loaded garages without a driveway. Chair Goel asked what the purpose is of stating the driveway issue in larger lots if the other parking space could be within 150 feet of the unit. Ms. Bascom responded that, for lots greater than 4,000 sf, the parking space does not necessarily have to be on the street but could be on the driveway and be counted as a parking space. Cm. Do asked if a future developer can count the driveway as part of the parking requirement for their project. Ms. Bascom answered that the City currently allows the developer to count the driveway as parking. She stated that the only item not mentioned in the Ordinance is that the parking space could be provided on the driveway or on the street. Chair Goel asked if the words "enclosed garage" would also be for a "common garage." Ms. Bascom answered yes; not just covered but enclosed. Typically a single-family home or townhome does not have a common garage which is more typical for apartments or condominiums which have different parking requirements. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if this Ordinance would apply to all new construction. Ms. Bascom answered that the Ordinance would apply to any units. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if the Ordinance would apply to a secondary unit. Ms. Bascom answered that there are different parking requirements for second units. Ms. Bhuthimethee asked about the SB 343 form with the revised City Council Ordinance attached that amended the Massage Establishment definition. Mr. Baker responded that there were a couple of definitions that were amended as part of the Massage regulations; however, this definition was not included in the amendments to the Massage Ordinance, and some of the language in this definition conflicts with the revised Massage regulations. Chair Goel opened the public hearing and with no speakers, closed the public hearing. lime 2.4,20 i.S On a motion by Cm. Do and seconded by Cm. Bhuthimethee, on a vote of 4-0, with Vice Chair Kohli being absent, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 15 - 05 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO DUBLIN ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTERS 8.08 (DEFINITIONS), 8.40 (ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND USES REGULATIONS), AND 8.76 (OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REGULATIONS) EFFECTIVE CITY-WIDE NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS — NONE OTHER BUSINESS - NONE 10.1 Brief INFORMATION ONLY reports from the Planning Commission and/or Staff, including Committee Reports and Reports by the Planning Commission related to meetings attended at City Expense (AB 1234). 10.2 Mr. Baker informed the Planning Commission that there will tentatively be meetings on both July 14th and 28th ADJOURNMENT — The meeting was adjourned at 7:26:06 PM Respectfully submitted, Planning Lommission Chair ATTEST: I Jeff Ba er Assistant Community Development Director G:IMINUTES120151PLANNING COMMISSIOM06.23.15 FINAL PC MINUTES(CF).docx 1<inning('='ininissinn .!rate Z.Y. 2ol Regular ik ttr:.I Page i j.: