HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-08-2015 PC Minutes °' Planning Commission Minutes
.. , 1
'. t . /�� Tuesday, December 8, 2015
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, December
8, 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, Vice Chair Kohli; Commissioners Do, Bhuthimethee and Mittan; Jeff Baker,
Assistant Community Development Director; Kit Faubion, Assistant City Attorney; Martha Aja,
Associate Planner; and Debra LeClair, Recording Secretary
Absent: None
ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA— NONE
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS — On a motion by Cm Bhuthimethee and seconded by
Cm Mittan, on a vote of 3-0-2, with Cm Kohli and Cm. Do being absent from that meeting, the
Planning Commission approved the minutes of the October 27, 2015 meeting with minor
modifications
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS — NONE
CONSENT CALENDAR— NONE
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS — NONE
PUBLIC HEARINGS —
8.1 PLPA-2015-00043 - St. Raymond's Church Conditional Use Permit and Site
Development Review for the operation of a Pre-School and Community Facility with up to 345
children and a new building and site improvements
Martha Aja, Associate Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report.
Chair Goel asked about the current condition of the drop-off zone and if will it be modified.
Ms Aja pointed out the drop-off zone on the slide She stated that, at the beginning of the
school year, St. Raymond's modified their drop-off and pick-up procedure to prevent queuing
onto Shannon Ave
Chair Goel asked if the school currently has a drop-off zone
Ms Aja answered that they do not currently have a designated drop-off zone
Chair Goel asked how vehicles would circulate through the facility with the new proposal
Ms Aja pointed out the direction of vehicle circulation on the site.
Chair Goel opened the public hearing.
Eric Horn, St. Raymond's Church, explained the current and proposed modification to the
circulation of the site.
Chair Goel asked how the exit would work, and if it would be in conflict with the queue
Mr. Horn explained how the circulation would work with the exit He stated that there will be
enough room in the circulation for two-way traffic
Chair Goel felt that Mr. Horn was trying to maximize the queue length within the parking lot
using a meandering opportunity and then circulate out without conflict.
Mr Hom pointed out the diagram of the site and how the vehicle circulation would work.
Chair Goel invited the Applicant to address the Planning Commission.
Mr. Horn spoke in favor of the project, and thanked Staff and the Planning Commission for their
work on the project He introduced the St Raymond's staff. He spoke regarding the history of
project and the feasibility of a pre-school at St Raymond's. He stated that they have worked
with neighbors over the last six months regarding their concerns and have made adjustments to
the original plan which included moving the building back from property lines and rotating the
placement of the building by 180 degrees. He stated that they have also addressed traffic and
safety issues by implementing a new drop-off and pick-up area and adding stop signs and
landscape modifications to provide better sightlines. He stated that there were also some
concerns regarding balls going over the fence and into the neighbor's yard, and the church
bells, they met with neighbors to resolve these concerns. He stated that their goal is to continue
to be a great neighbor, and encouraged the Planning Commission to approve the project.
Cm. Bhuthimethee asked how many community meetings were held.
Mr. Horn answered that they held five meetings since mid-May.
Cm Do asked how they determined that a pre-school was needed.
Mr. Hom responded that they conducted surveys within the community of St. Raymond's and
also realized that the City of Dublin is a growing community and felt there was a need in the
community for additional pre-schools
Cm. Mittan asked about the current use of the site where the pre-school will be built
Mr. Hom answered that the site is currently being used as two playgrounds.
Cm. Kohli asked if there are any outstanding issues after conducting five community meetings
Mr. Hom felt that they have addressed all the concerns with the neighbors
Tim Sbranti, Project Chair for the Capital Campaign at St Raymond's, spoke in favor of the
project. He stated that he has been a resident of Dublin and a St. Raymond's parishioner since
r/..nniny r ommnxmn un emtier X, ..W;
kt;encit'v,rnn,/ loge ,ti
1978. He felt that there is a history of St. Raymond's supporting the overall community with the
expansion of the hall, construction of the school and now construction of the pre-school He
stated that the survey found that there was a need among parish families. He stated that the
Dublin population has doubled over the last 15 years, but preschool capacity has not. He felt
that the preschool is a good opportunity to meet the community's needs and concerns and that
the process enhances the existing Conditional Use Permit and will facilitate better use of the
property. He stated that the project is consistent with the zoning, and provides aesthetic as well
as safety improvements to the property while meeting the State and City objective of providing
and expanding public/semi-public uses. He stated that over 600 families have pledged
approximately $2 2 million to make the project a reality. He urged the Planning Commission to
adopt Staff's recommendation and approve the project.
Chair Goel closed the public hearing
Cm. Bhuthimethee stated that she is in favor of the project and felt it is a good design as well as
a good use of space as far as traffic queuing and the addition of an early childhood school will
fulfill some of the community's needs.
Cm. Kohli agreed with Cm Bhuthimethee and stated that he is in favor of the project He felt
that there is a need for more early childhood education programs and was impressed with the
community outreach that was done and resolving the issues to benefit the community.
Cm Do also agree with the other Commissioners and was in favor of the project She felt it was
important for early childhood education and would only improve the community
Cm Mittan asked if there would be an opportunity to make a U-turn at the intersection of
Shannon Ave. and San Ramon Road
Ms Aja pointed out the driveway where only right turns will be allowed, and stated that at the
western property boundary, which is less utilized, a left turn can be made.
Cm. Mitten asked how the area is accessed.
There was a brief discussion regarding the circulation within the site.
Chair Goel re-opened the public hearing
Catherine Deehan, Principal of St Raymond's School, felt that, when the parents leave the
property, they would go around the block, turn right onto San Ramon Road, then around the
next block. She stated that this situation is acceptable to the parents and has kept traffic
moving on Shannon Ave
Cm. Mittan asked if the colors and materials for the proposed project match the current
buildings.
Ms. Deehan answered that the proposed project will match the current building
Cm Mittan asked if the material was stucco
Ms Deehan answered yes
PlannIt.„ I r1;,) ■41 unrmG,r x, 1110
MequI.r'4o.mny, /',9r I '14
Chair Goel closed the public hearing
Chair Goel stated that he is in favor of the project and was impressed with the extent to which
the Applicant went to resolve issues with the community and that 600 families came together to
fund the project. He felt that schools are needed in the community and will provide another
option for Dublin families and will alleviate some other congestion.
Ms Aja mentioned the Form SB 343 which shows modifications to the Conditions of Approval
based on a recent meeting between the Applicant and the neighbors.
Chair Goel stated that the modifications address cut-through traffic, school bells and the walls
for the playground and other compliance issues.
Ms. Aja agreed and stated that the modifications addresses the timing of outdoor play, cut-
through traffic, the school bell system, the location of the wall, a gate added to an existing
garden and requiring any necessary repairs to portions of the fence along the western property
boundary.
On a motion by Cm Do and seconded by Cm. Bhuthimethee, on a vote of 5-0, the Planning
Commission unanimously adopted, with modifications'
RESOLUTION NO. 15-xx
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE OPERATION OF A DAY CARE
CENTER and COMMUNITY FACILITY WITH UP TO 345 CHILDREN AND SITE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT FOR A NEW 2,560 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING AND
RELATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING A NEW ENTRY PLAZA AT
11555 SHANNON AVENUE
(APN 941-0102-001-20)
8.2 PLPA-2015-00056 - Amendments to Dublin Zoning Ordinance Chapter 8.08
(Definitions) and Chapter 8 12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land)
Martha Aja, Associate Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report
Chair Goel asked if the Planning Commission is acting on Chapter 8.08, 8.12, and 5.58.
Ms. Aja responded that the Planning Commission will make a recommendation to the City
Council regarding Chapters 8.08 and 8.12. Chapter 5.58 is in the Municipal Code regarding
Medical Marijuana dispensaries and will be acted on by the City Council.
Chair Goel asked if Staffs recommendation is to prohibit the cultivation and delivery of
marijuana in the City.
Yldnn,rt,I( omm�”,lon De ember 20I
'HPll.ld/'4(fellr„1 'Lie v,
Ms. Aja answered yes, in the future the City may decide to modify the Ordinance, but if there is
no ordinance in place by March 1, 2016 then the City loses local control on the issue.
Chair Goel asked what adjacent cities have done on this legislation
Ms Aja answered that both Pleasanton and San Ramon are moving to ban both commercial
cultivation and delivery of medical marijuana, Livermore Planning Commission will be
considering the item at an upcoming meeting and will recommend banning the commercial
cultivation of medical marijuana
Cm. Kohli asked where the closest medical marijuana dispensary is located from Dublin
Ms. Aja answered the closest dispensary would be located in Hayward.
Cm. Do asked if there have been any applications for a medical marijuana dispensary within
Dublin
Ms Aja answered that there have been calls occasionally regarding dispensaries
Cm Kohli asked if the City would have to approve an application for a dispensary, similar to a
coffee shop, if no Ordinance is passed as of March 1, 2016
Ms. Aja answered that dispensaries are currently not allowed and that would continue to be the
case; however, the way the legislation is written, if there is no Ordinance in place by March 1,
2016 then the individual who would want to do cultivation would need to apply to the State of
California Department of Food and Agriculture to get their license.
Cm. Kohli asked why go to the trouble of obtaining a license from the Department of Food and
Agriculture if the City of Dublin would still not allow the cultivation
Ms. Aja clarified that the Ordinance is regarding the cultivation of medical marijuana within a
commercial or residential district.
Cm Kohli asked if he would be legally allowed to grow marijuana in his home under the State
law if he had a license.
Ms Aja answered yes.
Cm Kohli asked if the reason for the Ordinance is to ensure that the City of Dublin has control
of cultivation within the borders
Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director, answered that dispensaries are
prohibited He stated that the discussion is regarding the cultivation and delivery of medical
marijuana He stated that the City does not have anything in the land use section specific to
cultivation, and the law states that as of March 1, 2016, if no Ordinance is in place, then the City
will never have control of that issue, and control will always be at the State level He stated that
Staff is proposing to enact something now to secure the right to control the issue at a local level
In the future, the City Council could ease the restrictions or eliminate it all together
r/anon„�c ,. ».n u..rninvh, 'n/�
Kr�{uL+'thrnn,L ougr ue
Cm. Kohli asked if the City would be aware of everyone who has a license to cultivate medical
marijuana within the City
Mr. Baker answered that the City would be out of the approval loop It is not clear at this time
what reporting the State would provide.
Cm. Mittan asked if the Ordinance is specifically to restrict cultivation only.
Ms. Aja responded that dispensaries are currently prohibited, however, it is being added to the
Zoning Ordinance to provide clarification She stated that the cultivation component is within
Chapter 5 58 with a definition being added to Chapter 8 08 as well as the land use table in
Chapter 8 12.
Cm Mittan asked if Livermore will be prohibiting dispensaries also.
Ms Aja was unsure
Cm Kohli asked if there were any recommendations from Dublin Police Services.
Ms. Aja answered that Staff has not received any and with such a short time frame Staff has not
had time to do extensive outreach.
Mr Baker stated that the Dublin Police Services is in support of the proposed Ordinance and the
Ordinance is generally in line with guidance from the League of California Cities
Cm Kohli asked how many cities in the state have done something similar
Mr. Baker answered that the legislation is new and felt that most of the cities are dealing with
this issue at the same time
Chair Goel asked if the League of California Cities has taken a position as far as guidance to the
cities
Mr Baker answered that the League of California Cities has provided guidance as far as how to
maintain local control, consistent with what is being proposed
Chair Goel felt that the proposed Ordinance would allow the City to re-evaluate the issue at a
later date
Mr Baker answered yes
Cm. Mittan asked if Oakland and Hayward, who already allow the activity, might submit a partial
ban.
Cm. Do asked if the cultivation component is not specifically in the Zoning Ordinance and that is
why the Ordinance is being proposed
Ms. Aja answered that cultivation is currently not in the Zoning Ordinance or in Chapter 5 58
d/dnn m/l mm�mram,n L„rmnrr A,.;o]r
Wo uLr-Vernn,l Page u.
Cm. Do asked if the proposed Ordinance is adopted, would the residents who currently cultivate
marijuana be in violation
Ms. Aja answered yes
Chair Goel opened the public hearing.
Adam Pine, Sunol, spoke in opposition to the proposed Ordinance. He stated that he works for
a company that delivers medical marijuana to this area He stated that they do not have a brick
and mortar facility in the City of Dublin but operates his facility in unincorporated Alameda
County in an agricultural zone. He stated that he supports local regulation as opposed to State
level only He continued that San Jose, Oakland and Vallejo enacted Ordinances to examine
the issue and came up with acceptable rules for these facilities to operate with their city. He
stated that Oakland, San Francisco, San Jose and San Leandro adopted an ordinance that
allows the city to have control, and will allow a certain number of dispensaries. He stated that
they have quite a few patients in the area, and asked if they would still be allowed to service
these patients, who are in wheelchairs and unable to travel. He felt that the facilities in Hayward
are not ideal, the better facilities are in Oakland and San Jose. He felt that the proposed
Ordinance would require people to go further away to obtain medical marijuana. He stated that
his business imposes stringent requirements for drivers and utilizes background checks, and
tries to employ every possible regulatory measure.
Cm. Kohli asked if his business also cultivates the marijuana.
Mr Pine answered that the law was designed to allow collective farms People who aren't able
to cultivate join a collective The cannabis was grown on their behalf and processed and
distribute under a non-profit status He stated that his business is set up similarly; they cultivate
approximately 90% of the cannabis in an agricultural area; they process and distribute it
themselves
Cm Kohli asked if they purchase from licensed growers
Mr. Pine answered that the things that they procure are specialty items that require a
commercial license, but they never procured medicine from any other grower other than own
facility
Cm Kohli asked if the process to obtain a license for cultivation is a rigorous process or is it
easy to obtain and how has that impacted the industry.
Mr. Pine answered that, before the new bills were signed, it was an unofficial business. They
incorporated as non-profit through the State of California and set the business up as a
collective He felt it was simple to obtain the non-profit status. He stated that they are compliant
at the State level but, there are no permits in the local level They try to work with cities that do
not have a ban He stated that his team members are all community members who grew up in
the area and would like to continue to be part of the community.
Chair Goel closed the public hearing.
Cm. Bhuthimethee asked how the proposed Ordinance would affect delivery
P(dvnind r rnrmu»,nr llurml,yr v 201±
'Xequlur'Hr.hnrl ✓d4[ JX
Ms. Aja answered that Chapter 5.58 is proposed to be amended to prohibit deliveries within the
City of Dublin.
Cm Bhuthimethee asked if that means anyone coming from outside the City of Dublin would be
prohibited from delivering medical marijuana to people within the City of Dublin
Ms. Aja answered yes
Cm. Mittan asked if the City Council has considered the consequences of banning deliveries
leaving patients to obtain the medicine themselves or someone else for them, outside the City.
Cm. Kohli felt that it was unclear if a resident would be able to possess medical marijuana but
would not be able to have it delivered within the City.
Cm. Bhuthimethee was concerned that if a resident were unable to leave to obtain the medical
marijuana themselves then they could be incapacitated
Mr. Baker stated that the proposed Ordinance would not allow a business to deliver to a patient
with the City, but a caregiver could obtain the items outside of the City for the patient. He stated
that the Planning Commission is making a recommendation to the City Council regarding
Chapter 8 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission could recommend approval of
the Ordinance as is; could recommend modifications now, or could recommend future
consideration of easing the restriction and then, when time allows, taking a closer look at the
issue. He stated that the timing of the law did not allow thorough analysis regarding unintended
consequences of cultivation and delivery that should be reviewed. He felt that there is not
enough time to effectively understand the community's interest and potential impacts.
Chair Goel felt that the City has not had the opportunity to do proper outreach or public
involvement beyond the item at the Planning Commission.
Mr Baker agreed
Chair Goel felt that Staff's recommendation is to put the hardest restrictions now and then
loosen up the restrictions at a later time. He was concerned that the City may be potentially
impacting those with a current medical need, and asked if there are services currently being
provided within the City of Dublin
Cm Bhuthimethee felt that she understands that Staff is trying to keep control within the City;
however, she did not want to shut the door on these patients, even temporarily, and there is no
guarantee as to when the Ordinance would be rewritten
Cm. Mittan asked what the penalties would be for delivering within the City of Dublin
Ms. Aja answered that would be a violation of the Zoning Ordinance.
Kit Faubion, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the violator would be subject to administrative
citation through the City's Code Enforcement process.
Ms. Faubion explained the process for an Ordinance and the time it takes before the Ordinance
becomes effective.
Kamm, nmmn.,e„ ba.rmbu n,1 I f
Ho,;,(a, ❑teh,,j Page L)
Chair Goel asked if the Planning Commission continued this item to do further analysis would
push the item into 2016
Ms. Faubion answered yes.
Chair Goel urged the Planning Commissioners who are feeling that they don't have enough
information and want to continue the item, to consider that if there is nothing in place by March
1, 2016 the City will lose the option to control this issue He felt that, if there is concern, that
when the Planning Commission makes a motion that they state their concerns. He felt that this
is a sensitive subject but that the Planning Commission should take action whether following
Staffs recommendation or a different recommendation and asked if follow up items
recommended to the City Council would be appropriate.
Ms. Faubion answered yes; it would be appropriate to make a recommendation agreeing with
Staff with their concerns stated
Chair Goel asked if the Planning Commission can make a recommendation regarding timelines
and stated that he was concerned about putting a potential freeze hold on a situation that is
currently going on, but it would be a recommendation not a requirement
Mr. Baker responded that the City Council could set a potential timeframe, but the Planning
Commission could make a recommendation.
Chair Goel stated that he was trying to put into context what may be considered to give the
Planning Commission some guidance He asked if there were any other guidance elements
that need to be discussed
Cm Bhuthimethee stated that Mr Baker had mentioned that there was some possibility of
easing what is in the proposed Ordinance and wanted to discuss that.
Chair Goel suggested that the Planning Commission follow Staffs recommendation because he
felt that to change the Ordinance at this point would confuse the public
Cm. Bhuthimethee asked what Staff would suggest regarding easing the proposed Ordinance at
this point
Mr. Baker responded that because Staff has not heard from the community on this subject, or
had an opportunity to fully research options, they have no specific recommendation at this time.
He stated that essentially the proposed Ordinance would prohibit the cultivation and delivery of
medical marijuana and felt that the discussion could include some easing of those restrictions.
Ms. Faubion stated that there is no basis for identifying a different option because Staff does not
have the information. She felt that it could be developed in the future and once the timeline is
met then Staff can conduct public outreach
Cm Kohli was concerned with a prohibition act and felt that it would be difficult to repeal the
Ordinance in the future. He felt that the item description posted on the agenda was not clear
and that some people did not understand what the issue was. He was concerned with such an
extreme Ordinance.
Az,;,;;;;,,c ? »r,rn,bir x,au,
Kw /n tier(mg r,.Q. nm
Cm. Do stated that she is in support of Staffs recommendation because of the deadline issue
She felt that, once the City has met the deadline, they will do the right thing and ascertain what
the community's feelings are towards this subject and move forward from there She felt that
the Planning Commission is discussing this item from personal feelings because they do not
know the community's feelings on the subject. She felt that the Planning Commission has
concerns regarding people who legitimately need medical marijuana in the community and the
number of people is not known nor how it will affect them.
Chair Goel reminded the Planning Commissioners that their purview is to make a
recommendation and cannot direct Staff.
Cm. Do stated that she would support Staffs recommendation but would make the
recommendation to the City Council to reach out to the community
Cm Mittan was concerned that the people who need medical marijuana will not have a voice on
this issue Because the number of people in need is unknown, their voice will be drowned out
by the people who do not want the Dublin community to turn into "Berkeley or Oakland " He felt
that the issue will not be revisited and merely fade away.
Chair Goel stated that he understands the other Commissioners' feeling but he personally has
no attachment to the issue He stated that he would be in support of a recommendation to
move forward as is and also making a recommendation to City Council to bring this issue for
evaluation at a future date
Cm Bhuthimethee agreed with Chair Goel and with Staffs recommendation to maintain local
control She was in support of Chair Goel's suggestion of making a recommendation to the City
Council to bring the item back for future consideration and that the proposed Ordinance is
considered only a placeholder She stated that she agrees with Cm Kohli that an outright ban
is not the ideal situation.
Chair Goel stated that the recommendation is an outright ban.
Cm. Kohli asked if Chair Goel would agree that by recommending to the City Council to move
forward with the proposed Ordinance is an outright ban.
Chair Goel stated that the Staff recommendation is an outright ban.
Cm Kohli responded that if the Planning Commission approves the Resolution then they are
recommending that City Council move forward with essentially an outright ban.
Chair Goel agreed and stated that, even if the Planning Commission makes a recommendation
for further study, it is still an outright ban
Cm. Bhuthimethee was not in support of an outright ban and also agreed that it is a sensitive
topic
Cm. Kohli felt that it would be irresponsible to go forward without all the information and
recommend a ban on all activity at the local level and maybe go back and revisit the issue He
21-arm n,;■ ormn ul,m Derrthrr N, ai
'MI qu&i' 14 lcmp, Pyle NI
stated that he believes in the State government. He stated that he cannot support this
Ordinance as proposed
On a motion by Cm. Do and seconded by Chair Goel, on a vote of 3-2, the Planning
Commission adopted
Ayes: Chair Goel, Cm. Do, Cm Mittan
Nays Cm Kohli and Cm. Bhuthimethee
RESOLUTION 15-15
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTERS 8.08 (DEFINITIONS) AND 8.12 (ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMITTED USES
OF LAND) OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROHIBIT MEDICAL MARIJUANA
DISPENSARIES AND CULTIVATION IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS WITHIN THE
CITY OF DUBLIN
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 Chair Goel asked if the application for the Schaefer Ranch project has changed since it
was denied by the Planning Commission Mr. Baker answered that the project has not
changed and will be heard at the December 15, 2015 City Council meeting. However,
there has been some clarification regarding the timing of a donation from Discovery
Builders for park maintenance.
10 3 Cm. Bhuthimethee asked for an update on the modifications requested by the Planning
Commission regarding the Trumark/Regional project. Mr. Baker answered that those
modifications were part of the Conditions of Approval and the Applicant has not submitted
drawings as yet but Staff will work with them to ensure compliance He stated that he will
update the Planning Commission assuming that the project moves forward.
10 4 Mr Baker informed the Planning Commission that the meeting scheduled for December
22, 2015 is cancelled and the election of a new chair and vice chair will be held at the
meeting scheduled on January 12, 2016
10 5 Mr Baker reminded the Planning Commission that the Planning Commissioner's
Academy is scheduled for March 2-4, 2016 in San Ramon with more information to
follow.
r(Jnvvy(nmmnuU,m Uc.rm(na R, 220)5
M(2 ((r a.nN faqir 102
ADJOURNMENT—The meeting was adjourned at 8 29 06 PM
Respec ully submitted,
Cm
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST
Jeff By
Assistant Community Development Director
G IMINUTES120151PLANNING COMMISSIOM12 8 15 FINAL PC MINUTES(CF)docx
Pio:now!rmnuruan Uereml8 a 'III•
'Xtqufa.:110 Imq 1],1r 101