Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-12-2016 PC Minutes Cis Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, April 12, 2016 CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, April 12, 2016, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza Chair Kohli called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present Chair Koh li; Commissioners Bhuthimethee and Goel; Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director, Kit Faubion, Assistant City Attorney, Martha Aja, Associate Planner; Andrew Russell, Assistant Public Works Director/City Engineer; and Debra LeClair, Recording Secretary. Absent. Vice Chair Mittan and Cm. Do ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA — NONE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS — On a motion by Cm Bhuthimethee and seconded by Chair Kohli, on a vote of 3-0 with Cm Do and Vice Chair Mittan absent, the Planning Commission approved the minutes of the March 22, 2016 meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS — NONE CONSENT CALENDAR — NONE WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - NONE PUBLIC HEARINGS — 8.1 PLPA 2015-00061 Fallon Gateway Major E (Guitar Center) Site Development Review to allow the construction of the Guitar Center within the Fallon Gateway Commercial Center The project includes the construction of a 15,000 square foot building and related site improvements, including parking and landscaping. Martha Aja, Associate Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report Cm Bhuthimethee asked if Dublin Blvd would be extended east with the current project Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director, responded that Dublin Blvd. will be extended but there are no immediate plans that would occur during the construction of the current project. He added that there have been some discussions with Alameda County and Livermore regarding funding to extend Dublin Blvd through to Livermore, at some point in the future Cm Bhuthimethee was concerned about traffic in the future and how the Dublin Blvd. extension would affect the traffic Mr. Baker stated that Dublin Blvd will be extended at some point in the future Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if the Dublin Blvd extension is part of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and if it will be completed in the near future Andrew Russell, Assistant Public Works Director/City Engineer, responded that the current General Plan shows Dublin Blvd being extended to the City limit line to the east with the intent to extend it to North Canyons Parkway in Livermore He added that the current CIP has $400,000 in the current fiscal year to begin the planning process. Cm Bhuthimethee asked what is planned for the area north of Dublin Blvd. on the east side of Fallon Road. Mr Baker pointed out the area on the General Plan Land Use map and stated that at the intersection of Dublin Blvd. and Fallon Road there is open space, but further east there is general commercial and industrial park land uses. Cm Bhuthimethee stated that north of Fallon Gateway there is residential development and asked if there is any commercial zoning in that area Mr Baker answered that there is a small commercial portion directly across Dublin Blvd. near the corner as well as the DSRSD facility and a park area He pointed out the area on the General Plan Land Use map Cm Goel asked for the height of the adjacent, planned and existing, buildings in the center. Ms Aja stated that adjacent tenant space would be Major D and there are no elevations for that tenant at this time. She felt that the Applicant may have more information Cm Goel asked for the allowable height for the shopping center, such as Target. Ms. Aja answered that Target is considerably higher than the current project Cm Goel asked for the height of the Target building Ms Aja stated that she was not aware of the height but that the building is higher than the current project Cm Goel asked for an explanation of the circulation in the shopping center Ms Aja reviewed the circulation on the site plan Cm Goel asked about a corner section that he felt was "non-parkable " Ms. Aja answered yes; the area is not a parking area and stated that trucks would use that area for loading and unloading Cm. Goel asked if the area has the proper turn-arounds for emergency vehicle Ms Aja answered yes, the project was reviewed by Amador Valley Industries and they determined that they can access the trash enclosure She stated that the Fire Department also reviewed and approved the project. Cm Goel asked where the trash enclosure will be located Ms Aja pointed out the location of the trash enclosure and stated that it will be shared by the Guitar Center and future Major C and D Cm Goel asked if the trash enclosure has any protection. Ms Aja answered yes, there is a roof and it is also plumbed to the sewer and meets all the stormwater requirements Cm. Goel felt that the trash enclosure would back against the adjacent buildings but will be screened with plants Ms Aja answered yes, and stated that the materials are compatible with the existing center and pointed out that there is a detail of the trash enclosure in the project plans. Cm Goel was concerned about circulation and tight parking He asked if similar parking standards were used at Persimmon Place. Ms. Aja answered that the current project meets the parking standards in the Zoning Ordinance, but was not familiar with the parking at Persimmon Place Cm Goel asked if the landscaping will be similar to the landscaping across the main driveway at the gas station Ms Aja answered yes, and referred him to the Applicant for more information Chair Kohli asked if there were parking spaces along Major D Ms Aja answered yes. Chair Kohli asked how many total trees exist around the Guitar Center and specifically along Dublin Blvd Ms. Aja deferred the question to the landscape architect Chair Kohli opened the public hearing. Dave Chadbourne, representing the Applicant, spoke in favor of the project David Blair, MCG Architecture, spoke in favor of the project Cm. Bhuthimethee referred to page Al 5 which shows some wood siding but could not locate the material on the elevations Mr Blair answered that the material palette is the standard selection of materials used throughout the center but they will not be using wood siding on this building. Cm Bhuthimethee mentioned the raised planters along the front of the building on the east and north elevations, she felt they are beautiful but was unsure if the planters are shown on the architecture or landscape plans Mr Blair referred the Planning Commission to the architectural floor plan, Page Al 1 He stated that the northeast side shows the wrap around planter and also the smaller planter on the left side of the doors. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if they are stormwater flow-through planters. Mr. Blair answered no Cm Bhuthimethee asked about the City's Commercial Design Guidelines that encourages store frontages to face the street Ms Aja felt that Cm Bhuthimethee was referring to the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan Mr. Baker answered that there are Citywide commercial design guidelines and project specific design guidelines are part of the PD Cm Bhuthimethee asked if the location of the storefront is consistent with the PD. Mr Baker answered yes. Cm Bhuthimethee felt that the east elevation is attractive but that the north side, which faces Dublin Blvd , could use enhancement She stated that the reason she asked about the Dublin Blvd extension project is that the traffic will increase in the future and the north side of the building which faces Dublin Blvd. which will be well traveled She felt that the building is turning its back to Dublin Blvd She felt that the other elevations are more enhanced in comparison and was concerned about the building elevations facing Dublin Blvd Mr. Blair responded that they tried to make each side look differently by bringing in materials that wrap around the building He stated that the east elevation has more landscaping along the street and there will be more of a sense of the front door Cm. Bhuthimethee felt that the landscaping is separated by the sidewalk Chair Kohli agreed and felt that the north elevation is plain, especially if facing Dublin Blvd He asked if there could be some symmetry to the right side of the north elevation and suggested having the planter on the left continue on the right to enhance it Cm. Bhuthimethee felt that the other elevations are attractive and, since the north elevation will be the most visible from Dublin Blvd , it should be further enhanced Chair Kohli discussed what is seen while driving into the shopping center from Dublin Blvd. and the landscape treatment to the right of the driveway. Cm Goel agreed with Cm Bhuthimethee and was also concerned with the elevation facing Dublin Blvd There was a discussion regarding the enhancements to the north elevation Roman DeSoto, R3 Studios, landscape architect, stated that there is a triangulated double row of London Plane trees along Dublin Blvd. and that in some places along Dublin Blvd. there are three layers of trees. He discussed the view from Dublin Blvd which would be a canopy effect The understory plane is a combination of some plant material already used along the completed portion to the east. He stated that the shrubs will not be over three feet high which is designed to keep things low for security purposes as well as screening of parked vehicles. He stated that the corner monument will be an exact mirror of the existing monument He stated that there are a lot of trees along the entrance to the site Cm. Bhuthimethee stated that she likes the design and the materials being used. She requested that there be more articulation on the right side of the north elevation Chair Kohli felt that there are layers of trees from Dublin Blvd into the area, so there is a natural screen with the trees Mr. Baker asked the Applicant team to speak to the orientation of the building and how it will be viewed from Dublin Blvd. Mr DeSoto stated that the benefit of having the triangulation of the trees is that circulation is not parallel to the building but at an angle. He stated that the entry from the west to east there are a number of trees, including existing trees to the west of the project. He stated that the building will be screened because of the alignment of the trees at the entrance He continued with a discussion regarding the trees and the screening of the building Cm Bhuthimethee stated that she did not want to screen the building because she felt it is an attractive building but only wanted more articulation on the elevation that faces Dublin Blvd Cm Goel referred the Planning Commission to Sheet Al 2 of the project plans and asked about the 2,200 square feet of solar zone Mr Blair responded that, the new building code requires developers to identify future solar panel locations on the roof He stated that there is no intent to install solar panels on the building at this time but they must indicate the location on the plans for solar panels to be installed in the future Cm Goel asked about the height of the adjacent buildings compared to their building. Mr Chadbourne responded that the highest building is Target at 38 feet with varying parapets at different heights He stated that the side of the Guitar Center building that faces Dublin Blvd. is 24 feet Cm Goel asked about the height of the Chevron site Mr Chadbourne answered that the shops buildings are all 24 feet to 28 feet in height. Cm Goel asked if he felt that the current project building would be consistent in height with the rest of the shopping center buildings Mr Chadbourne answered that the current project is comparable in height to the shops buildings Chair Kohli asked what the estimated total number of trees is on the site Mr DeSoto answered that there are approximately 38 proposed trees for the Guitar Center site Chair Kohli closed the public hearing Cm Bhuthimethee was concerned with the right side of the north elevation and felt that the most visible side along Dublin Blvd should have more articulation. Cm Goel felt that the project is well designed but was concerned about parking, but since the Traffic Engineers, City Engineer and the Fire Department all approved it he was in support He noted that some of the community has issues with other parking facilities that are being built. Chair Kohli noted Cm Goel's concerns and acknowledged he would like to see solar panels installed in the future Cm Bhuthimethee stated that she would like to add a Condition of Approval for the Applicant to work with Staff to create more articulation on the right side of the north elevation Chair Kohli stated that he would support adding that condition Mr. Baker asked the Planning Commission if they could be more specific for the condition Cm Bhuthimethee responded that she would support anything that is consistent with the other elevations, such as the continuation of the raised planter or green screens Mr Baker asked if the Planning Commission felt that the Condition of Approval should be: The Applicant shall work with Staff to further articulate the right side of the north elevation with elements consistent with the other elevations of the building The Planning Commission concurred with the proposed wording of the condition. On a motion by Cm Bhuthimethee and seconded by Cm. Goel, on a vote of 3-0-2, with Vice Chair Mittan and Cm Do being absent, the Planning Commission adopted, with an added condition as stated by Staff. RESOLUTION NO. 16-06 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF MAJOR E (GUITAR CENTER) TOTALING 15,000 SQUARE FEET ON APPROXIMATELY 1.5 ACRES WITHIN THE FALLON GATEWAY RETAIL CENTER NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS - 9 1 Five-Year Capital Improvement Program 2016-2021, Finding of General Plan Conformance for Proposed Fiscal Year 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 Projects. Andrew Russell. Assistant Public Works Director/City Engineer, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report Cm. Bhuthimethee asked why there are so many new parks projects Mr Russell answered that this is a 5 year CIP and because of funding, not all of the parks projects will start in the first year. He stated that many of the parks are associated with current development and some have public art components which doubles the parks CIP He stated that parks are funded through the Public Facilities fee He spoke regarding the other large parks that are in the CIP and their budget. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked why there is so much fluctuation in the budget. She asked why so much is budgeted in 16-17 and not as much in 18-19 Mr Russell answered the parks projects are dependent on the public facilities fees and those fees are paid as development impact fees, therefore, the funding for those projects follows the issuance of building permits Recently there has been a big push for issuance of building permits and the public facilities funds that have built up enables the City to build the parks within the next two years There was a discussion regarding parks funding and timing of parks construction Cm. Bhuthimethee asked why some parks, that were to be paid for by the developer, are listed in the CIP Mr Russell answered that, although there is an agreement for the construction of a park, it is still included in the CIP in the event that something changes and also the developer receives fee credits Cm Goel asked if the Dougherty Road improvement will start construction this year Mr. Russell answered that the project is currently out to bid with the opening scheduled on April 26'" and hopes construction will begin in the summer Cm Goel asked about the Dublin Blvd/Sierra Court to Dublin Court project. Mr Russell responded that there is a lane drop on east bound Dublin Blvd from 3 lanes to 2 lanes in front of the Tralee Center He stated that the project will implement the General Plan and build it to 6 lanes with on-street bike lanes, it will reconstruction the sidewalk, curb and gutter along that stretch and include some enhancements and to the sports grounds frontage. He stated that there is an element of the project that is utility undergrounding that will be funded by PG&E and he is hoping that the project will start towards the end of the year Cm Goel asked about the Dublin Blvd extension project and if the mention of it in the CIP is strictly for getting the project ready for the environmental phase. Mr. Russell answered that the City Council appropriated $400,000 in the current fiscal year to start the initial preliminary engineering and environmental work. He stated that this is an $80 million project in both Dublin and Livermore's General Plans to have Dublin Blvd. connect to North Canyon Parkway He stated that there is a regional need to have the parallel route connection and provide a reliever to the freeway. Cm Goel asked, if there was an opportunity for funding earlier, would the project be able to move forward Mr Russell explained that, in order to receive funding, the project and some others were submitted as part of the Alameda Countywide Transportation Plan. He stated that the project was submitted and included in that plan as well as the Dougherty Road project and Dublin Blvd. project. Cm Goel asked about the Scarlett Drive/Iron Horse Trail extension Mr. Russell responded that the project is currently in the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee program which identifies the area of Scarlet Drive between Dublin Blvd. and Dougherty Road. Cm. Goel asked if the Iron Horse Trail is already there. Mr Russell answered yes; but the road that goes along with it is not complete. He stated that the Dougherty Road project included a segment of Scarlett Drive and was split out as a separate project in order to focus on Dougherty Road, Scarlett Drive would be completed later. He stated that the Scarlett Drive/Iron Horse Trail project is a condition of the Dublin Crossing development and anticipated that to be completed by the developer when the project moves forward Chair Kohli asked if the future project dollar amounts are part of the $81 2 million mentioned in the presentation Mr Russell answered that they are not Chair Kohli asked, if there is an opportunity to move up or accelerate the development of a park, can funds be reallocated for those project Mr. Russell answered that would be at the pleasure of the City Council He stated that the City Council can change the budget if there is a new funding source or grant. They may choose at the budget adoption to make the changes On a motion by Cm Goel and seconded by Cm. Kohli, on a vote of 3-0-2, with Vice Chair Mittan and Cm Do absent, the Planning Commission adopted' RESOLUTION NO. 16 - 07 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN FINDING CONFORMITY WITH THE ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN FOR PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS PROPOSED TO OCCUR DURING FISCAL YEAR 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 AS PRESENTED IN THE CITY OF DUBLIN FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 2016-2021 –�- 9.2 Rules for conducting Planning Commission meetings Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report Cm Bhuthimethee asked about debate and voting and recent actions where commissioners clarified the reason they voted a particular way She asked if the new rules encourage Commissioners to explain their vote She asked if that could be included in the rules Kit Faubion, Assistant City Attorney, responded that the Brown Act requires that votes are announced, but there is no requirement to explain the vote. She stated that the assumption is that the Planning Commissioners have listened to the Staff Report and read the information and, based on that, made a decision Cm Bhuthimethee mentioned a written communication regarding abstention. Cm Goel stated that the memo from John Bakker, City Attorney, was regarding abstentions and stated that the Planning Commission's responsibility as an appointed city official is to make a specific choice, either in favor or opposing and abstentions are not well received Ms Faubion stated that abstentions are not favored in this type of setting, because it is the Planning Commissions job to vote on any project brought to them and an abstention is seen as not doing that job She stated that occasionally there will be an abstention for an economic conflict of interest and, according to the Brown Act, the commissioner must abstain and leave the room and also explain the nature of the conflict On a motion by Cm. Goel and seconded by Cm. Kohli, on a vote of 3-0-2, with Vice Chair Mitten and Cm Do absent, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted RESOLUTION NO. 16-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ADOPTING RULES FOR CONDUCTING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS 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) ADJOURNMENT—The meeting was adjourned at 8 19 49 PM Respectfully submitted, Plan ommission Chair ATTEST Jeff Bak er��� Assistant Community Development Director