Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-09-2016 PC Minutes Ci II / 111 t9 '- -. Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, August 9, 2016 1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE TO THE FLAG A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, August 9, 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 Kohli; Commissioners (Cm.) Do and Goel; Luke Sims, Community Development Director; Kit Faubion, Assistant City Attorney; Marnie Delgado, Senior Planner; and Anastasia Nelson, Recording Secretary. Absent: Cm. Bhuthimethee, Cm. Mittan 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS — NONE 3. CONSENT CALENDAR — 3.1 Minutes of the July 12, 2016 Planning Commission Meeting. On a motion by Cm. Goel and seconded by Cm. Do, on a vote of 3-0-2 with Cm. Bhuthimethee and Cm. Mittan being absent, the Planning Commission approved the minutes of the July 12, 2016 meeting. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS — NONE 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS — 5.1 PLPA-2015-00033 Moller Ranch/Tassajara Hills Site Development Review Permit iNg Marnie Delgado, Senior Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Cm. Goel felt that, when the project was reviewed in 2012/2013, the proposal was for larger lots with bigger houses and asked if the project was changed. Ms. Delgado responded that, in 2012/2013, the Planning Commission reviewed the Vesting Tentative Map which created the 370 lots and the current Site Development Review submittal is substantially the same. She stated that, at the time the Planning Commission reviewed the Vesting Tentative Map, the project did not include a Site Development Review, and therefore they would not have reviewed any home design. Cm. Goel felt that there was a reduction in lot sizes and density from the original project. Ms. Delgado responded that there has been no change. Cm. Goel asked if the Applicant will speak to the trail and the connection to the park that is proposed. Planning Commission August 9,2016 lcgufar.Meeting Tag e 182 Ms. Delgado answered there were certain design elements that were approved as part of the Planned Development Zoning, such as the design of the trail and some streetscape landscaping. She stated that those items do not require a separate SDR Permit approval and suggested that the Applicant speak to those items. Cm. Goel was concerned that the original vision for the project was an old ranch style with a main entrance that would set the stage for how the development would look. He wanted to ensure that the architecture elements of the proposed project would match that original vision. Ms. Delgado answered yes; the architecture of the homes, with the low stone wall themes throughout, will tie into elements of the entry as well. Cm. Goel asked if the Applicant would provide public art for the park. Ms. Delgado asked Cm. Goel if he was referring to the time frame for building the park. Cm. Goel asked if there was a timeline for building the park. Ms. Delgado answered that she was not aware of the timeline for building the park and would let the Applicant speak to that issue. Chair Kohli opened the public hearing. Rick Nelson, Toll Brothers, Applicant, answered questions that had been addressed to Ms. Delgado. He stated that the park is a public park and they have been in discussions with City Staff regarding the development of park. He further stated that the lot sizes are the same as what was approved for the Stage 1 and 2 PD. Mr. Nelson spoke in favor of the project. He thanked Staff for their hard work; especially Ms. Delgado. Mr. Nelson introduced Michael Stone with Bassonian Lagoni who designed the 45 foot frontage and 50 foot frontage products as well as the clubhouse. He also introduced Jonathan Jaeger with KTGY Architecture and Planning who designed the 55 foot frontage lot product. He noted that the landscape design was developed by Gates and Associates. Staff members from MacKay and Somps were also available to answer questions. Michael Stone, Bassonian Lagoni, spoke regarding the design of the various single-family styles and floor plans for the two smaller lot sizes in the project.. Jonathan Jaeger, KTGY Architecture and Planning, spoke regarding the design of the larger homes. Mr. Stone continued with a brief presentation regarding the design and features of the Clubhouse and community pool. Smita Mehta, Dublin Resident, spoke regarding the project. She was concerned with the rodent problem since construction for the project began and about additional housing which, she believed, would increase the problem. She expressed her worry that rodents will find a permanent home in her neighborhood at Fallon Crossings. She stated that the residents are (Planning Comm.,>Ion august 9,2016 gular'1eeting using an exterminator every two months costing $139 per visit and asked the Applicant how they can solve the problem. Mr. Nelson stated he is not sure the rodent problem is only from his project. He felt that it is a short-term situation and that it should subside when the grading is completed which should be spring 2017. He apologized for the problem. Cm. Goel referred the Planning Commission to Sheet C.8.1. of the project plans regarding the Universal Design Ordinance and the exceptions to the driveway slope. He stated that there is mention of compliance and an optional ramp. He asked why they took this approach. Mark McClellan, Mackay and Somps, stated that the Universal Design Ordinance is a policy that is worked through with every project directly with Gregory Shreeve, Building Official in the Building Department. He stated that the sheet that was referenced was taken directly from the City policy which breaks down every lot as to how it will comply with the Ordinance. He explained that the approach that was taken was consistent with the City requirements. Cm. Goel referred the Planning Commission to Sheet C.8.6. of the project plans. He felt that one of the things driving the high percentage of setback of garages was the elevation at the center of the roadway. He asked why the Applicant did not lower the overall elevations outside the drainage. Mr. McClellan referred the Planning Commission to Sheet C.8.6 as an example and pointed out the road on that sheet. He stated that the homes on the south side are the ones that have compliance of slopes between 8.3% and 12%. He stated that on the other side of the street the slopes are 8.3% or less, which is common and creates a "stair-stepping" effect. Cm. Goel asked Mr. McClellan to explain the terracing between the units where the houses are backed-up against each other with approximately a 20 foot differential. He stated that, in the Toll Brothers development where he lives, the same type of terracing was done and there tends to be an issue. Mr. McClellan felt that Cm. Goel was speaking about the tiered effect where the lots are stepped up the slope. He felt that was a natural way to respect the land forms and not flatten the project area, which they did not want to do and that City policy does not allow. He stated that, by trying to reduce the slopes and keep the setback, it tends to place the houses further apart. He stated that there are restrictions on what the homeowner can do on the lower lots in terms of plantings that could block the view of the other lots. He stated that the owners of the upper lots, who bought the homes for the views, will want to maintain those views. He stated that he worked with Ms. Delgado to ensure that those rear yards have restrictions and are included in the SDR document. He stated that they have experience with of open-view fencing and noted it was only appropriate when there is a certain vertical differential. Cm. Goel referred the Planning Commission to Sheet A.1.3.1 of the project plans which shows the 45 foot frontage lot homes. He felt that the Spanish elevation plan seems plain, when compared to the Tuscan or Mediterranean elevation plans and asked for an explanation. Mr. Stone responded that the elevation is indicative of Spanish style architecture and the style, throughout California, is based on the California Missions. He stated that there are more formal elevations in Spanish architecture, but that is not what they choose to do. He spoke to the ,funning(Ammo,ion iugust 9,2016 gular Meeting different elevation enhancements for the Spanish style that they believed were more appropriate for this location. Cm. Goel felt that the Italian Villa elevation shown on Sheet A3.2.1 is different than the one shown in the presentation. He felt that the elevations were plain and didn't have the character that other elevations had, and asked for an explanation. Mr. Jaeger answered that the style in the design guidelines lends themselves to the features the architects used in designing the project. Chair Kohli was concerned with the appearance of the borders around the windows on elevation 2.E as he felt that they blend in with the wall too much. He asked if they could darken those borders so that the windows "pop" more. Cm. Goel shared some feedback from the Homeowners Association where he lives. He stated that they felt that the club house has insufficient shading and suggested adding more shading to the club house area. Mr. Stone responded that there are three outdoor shaded areas on the floor plan for the club p p house; an outdoor living space right off the entry; another off the kitchen to the south; the outdoor living space that is shared by the kitchen and the multi-purpose room which is a roof cover element shown earlier in the presentation; then a shaded BBQ area, off the multi-purpose room to the west; also, there are roof covered cabanas that run across the club house building and the restroom on the north side. He stated that there will be umbrellas offered with chairs around the pool area. Mr. Nelson stated that there is a significant amount of cabanas along the south side and up it against the park. Cm. Goel stated he liked the design of the club house but felt that the three main covered areas are not by the pool, and that the cabanas are all at the shallow end of the pool. Mr. Nelson referred the Planning Commission to Sheet C.3 which shows the location of the cabanas along south and east side. Cm. Goel asked about the material that will be used for the cabanas. Linda Gates, Gates and Associates, stated that the material for the cabanas would be wood and fabric. Cm. Goel asked Ms. Gates to speak to the connectivity of the park and the community. Ms. Gates spoke regarding the landscaping design for the project and the connectivity of the community and the park/trail system. Cm. Goel asked what type of landscape materials will be used. Ms. Gates spoke regarding the landscaping materials and the trees that will be planted by the creek. LPhnning Cn,; :on ular!Meeting Chair Kohli liked the indoor/outdoor style and asked if Toll Brothers has developed that type of project in other parts of Dublin or surrounding areas. Mr. Nelson stated that they have been designing projects like this for the last three years. He mentioned projects in other communities where they used this type of design. He stated that, this type of design usually includes large back yards. He stated that they tried to make the yards as large as possible with grading and the introduction of retaining walls. Chair Kohli closed the public hearing. Cm. Goel felt that the project overall has nice features but was not convinced on the architectural elements and was unhappy with the comments regarding the restrictions of the Design Guidelines directing the architecture. He was concerned with the attractiveness of the design, felt the houses are too close together, and that the lot utilization will not allow for larger yards. He was reluctant to approve the project. Cm. Do liked the first two architectural styles but did not like the larger home design. She liked the design of the clubhouse. She stated that she likes the open space and design of the overall project. She was also concerned with the tiering of the project and the issues that it brings up between neighbors. Chair Kohli stated that he likes the design and felt that the indoor/outdoor style is unique. He shared Cm. Goel's concerns about the tiered yard issue, but felt it was an east Dublin concern driven by the hilly terrain. He felt the project is too dense and that less homes and more space would be better. He felt that it will be a great community to add to Dublin and likes the club house. He stated that he can make the findings. He felt that the rodent issue could go beyond this project and wanted to ensure that Staff will respond to the resident regarding her concerns. Luke Sims, Community Development Director, stated that the Public Works Department will contact the resident regarding the rodent problem. On a motion by Cm. Do and seconded by Cm. Kohli, on a vote of 2-1 , Cm. Goel voted no, the Planning Commission adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 16-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 370 SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS AND A PRIVATE CLUBHOUSE AT MOLLER RANCH/TASSAJARA HILLS 6861 TASSAJARA ROAD 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS — NONE 7. NEW BUSINESS - NONE 8. OTHER BUSINESS - NONE (pca ,ung Co;,;misston — ^— august.9,2016 9 egufasMeeting 9. ADJOURNMENT — The meeting was adjourned at 8:14:14 PM p.m. Respectfully submitted, Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: Luke-Sims, P Community Development Director GIMINUTES120161PLANNING COMMISSIOM08.09 16 FINAL PC MINUTES(CF)docx Tranning Commission ,August 9,2016 2cgu(ar96eting (Pa g e I 87