HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-069 Enea Ofc&Retail Ctr CUP AGENDA STATEMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: May 11, 2004
SUBJECT:
ATTACHMENTS:
PUBLIC HEARING - PA 03-069, Robert Enea Office and Retail
Centers, Conditional Use Permit for Amendments to Planned
Development Zoning District, Site Development Review, Master
Sign Program, and Tentative Parcel Map ~/ .
Report prepared by: Pierce Macdonald, Associate PlannerOll~
Resolution Approving Conditional Use Permit for
Amendments to Planned Development Zoning District PA
98-049 and Approving Site Development Review and Master
Sign Program for 7197 Village Parkway with Development
Plans, attached as Exhibit A, and Master Sign Program,
attached as Exhibit B
Resolution Approving Tentative Parcel Map with Tentative
Parcel Map attached as Exhibit A
Applicant's Written Statement
Ordinance Adopting Planned Development Zoning District
PA 98-049, Adopted on December 15, 1998
RECOMMENDATION:
2.
3.
4.
Open Public Hearing and Hear Staff Presentation;
Take Testimony from the Applicant and the Public;
Close Public Hearing and Deliberate;
Adopt Resolution (Attachment 1) Approving Conditional
Use Permit for Amendments to Planned Development
Zoning District PA 98-049 and Approving Site Development
Review and Master Sign Program for 7197 Village Parkway;
and
Adopt Resolution (Attachment 2) Approving Tentative
Parcel Map.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Robert Enea, of Enea Properties Company, LLC, has submitted an application to develop a 1.02-acre lot at
the southeast comer of the intersection of Village Parkway and Amador Valley Boulevard with a
commercial/retail center and an office building (see Exhibit A of Attachment 1 for Development Plan).
Adjacent uses include the Taco Bell restaurant to the south and two single-family homes to the east on
Amador Valley Boulevard. Other uses in the project vicinity include Oil Changers to the west, the new
Valley Center development to the northeast, and the Arco AM/PM service station to the north.
The property was the site of a former automotive gasoline and service station that closed in the 1990's and
was zoned General Commercial (C-2). In 1998, the City Council studied the highest and best future uses
G:kPA#k2003\03-069 Enea Pre-App\PC Staff Report051104.doc
COPIES TO:
ITEM NO. ~' . 5
Applicant
Property Owner
PA File
of the property, held public hearings, and adopted a Stage 1 and 2 Planned Development (PD) Zoning
District for the property on December 15, 1998. Pursuant to the PD regulations, a range of office,
commercial and eating and drinking establishments are permitted uses in the district. A variety of uses are
conditionally permitted, including health services, on-sale wine and liquor licenses, and other related uses
normally found in a commercial/retail center. Drive-through uses, service stations, and automotive uses
are prohibited. The potential of the site was further studied in the Village Parkway Specific Plan, adopted
by City Council on December 19, 2000, in which the property was identified as an opportunity site and a
primary gateway area. In 2002, the Alameda County Environmental Protection Division issued a closure
letter for the completed clean up at the site.
As proposed, the property would be subdivided into two parcels sharing internal driveway access (see
Exhibit A of Attachment 2 for Tentative Parcel Map). The parcel to the west would be developed into a
multi-tenant, 8,539-square-foot retail center. The parcel to the east would be developed with a 5,582-
square-foot office building with two stories. Due to site constraints and other considerations, the
development proposal requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit to amend two (2) of the provisions
in the existing Planned Development Zoning District. Other permit approvals requested in the proposal
include a Site Development Review and a Tentative Parcel Map.
ANALYSIS:
Conditional Use Permit
The property is currently zoned Planned Development, under the existing zoning PA 98-049. Pursuant to
Section 8.32.080 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission may approve minor amendments to an
adopted Development Plan by means of a Conditional Use Permit upon finding that the amendment(s)
substantially comply with and do not materially change the provisions or intent of the adopted Planned
Development Zoning District Ordinance for the site.
The project would require minor amendments to two (2) development regulations of the existing PD, PA 98-
049: a reduction of the east property line setback from a minimum of 25 feet to 10 feet; and removal of the
requirement for internal vehicle access to the property to the south (the Taco Bell restaurant site).
First Minor Amendment to East Side Yard Setback
As proposed, the commercial/retail building on the new parcel fronting Village Parkway (Parcel A) would
comply with the regulations related to height, setback, and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the existing PD
District (see Attachment 4 for the Planned Development regulations). This parcel would have a 1 O-foot,
landscaped setback along the north and west property lines, which is the minimum for the district, and a
74-foot setback from the east and 50-foot setback from the south property lines. The east and south
setbacks consist primarily of parking areas, landscaping and sidewalks. The single-story commercial
building measures 22.5 feet in height, with a tower element that rises to 36 feet. The maximum allowed
height in the district is 45 feet. The building has an FAR of .30 and the PD District allows a range of .25
to .50.
The new office building on the parcel fronting Amador Valley Boulevard (Parcel B) would comply with
height, FAR and most setback requirements of the existing PD, described above. The office building is
two-stories, measuring 32 feet in height. The FAR of this portion of the project is .36. Parcel B would
have a setback of 10 feet along the north and west property lines, consisting primarily of landscaping, and
a setback of 107 feet to the south property line, consisting of parking area. A new setback of 10 feet for
both levels of the building along the east property line would be established with Planning Commission
approval of the first minor amendment to the PD District, described below.
The first PD amendment would change the existing east side yard setback of 15 feet for the first story and
25 feet for the second story of the office building to the amended regulation of 10 feet for both stories
along the east side yard setback. The original purpose of the larger setback was to buffer the residential
properties to the east from any potential adverse impacts. The proposed amendment substantially
complies with and does not materially change the provisions or intent of the adopted Planned
Development Zoning District Ordinance for the site because the Project Applicant has addressed potential
adverse impacts to residential uses in the following manner:
· An office use, which typically has fewer visitors, more limited hours of operation, and less
activity than other uses, is proposed for the parcel adjacent to the residential uses instead of
the range of commercial and office uses allowed by the PD District.
· The project is massed toward the northern portion of the site, which provides a 59-foot
building separation between the office building and the single-family dwelling at 7140
Portage Road, and a 74-foot building separation between the office building and the single-
family-residence at 7126 Portage Road.
· A translucent film will be applied to the windows on the second floor and European
Hornbeam trees are proposed in the Conceptual Landscaping Plan (page L-1 included with
Attachment 1) to be planted along the east side of the office building to protect the privacy
of adjacent residents while emitting natural light to the interior of the building.
· Lighting fixtures will be located in the center of the parcel away from the residential
properties and located low over the exit doors, and lighting will be further screened by the
existing 6-foot block wall along the rear property line of the residential lots.
Second Minor Amendment to Vehicular Access Across the South Propert); Line
The Robert Enea project requires a second minor amendment to change the Planned Development
regulations to allow a pedestrian access across the south property line as an alternative to vehicle access.
The existing Planned Development District regulations require that vehicular access shall be maintained
between the subject property and the property to the south. This requirement was added to the Planned
Development District to comply with the policy of the previous Downtown Specific Plan, adopted in
1987, encouraging internal vehicular circulation among adjacent properties. The site's existing adjacent
use, a Taco Bell restaurant, currently operates a drive-through window along the south property line. Due
to the small size of the project site, the necessary parking space and parking lot design of the proposed
development, and the current use of the adjacent property as a drive-through restaurant, the creation of an
internal vehicle access to the southern adjacent property is infeasible.
However, the current Village Parkway Specific Plan, adopted in 2000, encourages more general
"linkages" among adjacent properties. The original policy encouraging internal vehicular circulation
among adjacent properties has been replaced by policies encouraging shared driveway access, limited
driveway curb cuts, shared parking, and enhanced pedestrian connections. Consistent with the Village
Parkway Specific Plan, the Applicant has designated a location for future pedestrian access to the property
to the south across the shared property line. The future pedestrian access will be landscaped until the
adjacent property is redeveloped and a pedestrian path may be created. Pursuant to the draft Resolution
included as Attachment 1, any permanent structure that would obstruct future pedestrian access would be
prohibited from being constructed along the south property line (Condition #39).
Site Development Review
Pursuant to PD 98-049 regulations and the provisions of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance Chapters 8.104 and
8.84, the Applicant has applied for Site Development Review approvals for the site plans, floor plans, building
elevations, landscaping plans, signs and other project plans, as well as a Master Sign Program, consistent with
the design standards established for the PD District.
Architectural Design, Building Orientation and Landscape Design
The architectural design of the Enea Office and Retail Centers is consistent with PD District design
standards and the Village Parkway Specific Plan. The architectural style is contemporary with traditional
"Turn-of-the-Century Downtown" architectural elements, such as trellis details, cornice details, towers,
clerestory windows, and multi-form roofs. The site layout utilizes an interior parking lot with enhanced
pedestrian access and allows for a future internal pedestrian path to the property to the south to be used
when the adjacent property is redeveloped. The buildings are oriented towards the sidewalk to create an
attractive pedestrian environment, pursuant to Specific Plan goals. The landscape design features
enhanced pedestrian and driveway access points, outdoor seating areas, planter pots along sidewalks, and
a landscaped dry pond and bioswales. The pond and bioswales have been utilized in the landscape design
to improve water quality. In addition, a plaza feature is planned at the northwest comer of the site. The
plaza feature is described in detail in the following section.
Plaza Feature and Opportunity Site
The site of the Enea Office and Retail Centers is identified in the Village Parkway Specific Plan, Section
6.3 (page 21), as both an opportunity site, a primary gateway, and site for a plaza amenity. The Enea
project provides a plaza feature as an extension of the sidewalk at the northwest comer of the property to
enhance the pedestrian experience. The plaza measures approximately 800-square-feet and provides
enhanced paving, landscaping, a trellis overhang, and low bench walls compatible with other features on
Village Parkway. As conditioned, the plaza and landscaping will be maintained by the Applicant, and the
design of the plaza will be coordinated with the design of the Village Parkway Street Improvement
Project, to be undertaken by the City.
Future Restaurant Tenant Design
The future tenants of the new buildings are not known at this time and they would be subject to the permitted
and conditionally permitted uses specified in the PD regulations. Although it is unknown whether a restaurant
will choose to locate at the site, the commercial/retail building has been designed to accommodate a small
eating and drinking use, such as a coffee shop or ice cream vendor, in a 600-square-foot tenant space. The
development has been designed to anticipate DSRSD sewer requirements and accommodate the additional
parking necessary for a restaurant use. An analysis of the Traffic and Parking component of the project
follows.
Tra_f_fic and Parkiny~
The Village Parkway Specific Plan reviewed the traffic impacts of the commercial development potential
of the site and found that there would be a less-than-significant impact on transportation systems in the
vicinity. City Staff conducted a supplemental traffic analysis of the project-specific traffic impacts in
March of 2004. Staff determined that the total AM peak hour trips projected for the project totaled 14 and
the total PM peak hour trips totaled 44. This small increase in vehicle trips can be managed by the existing
roadway systems without adverse impacts to adjacent properties or residents. The project will participate
in the City's voluntary Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee to offset any additional impacts to the traffic
systems.
4
The parking provided in the Enea proposal is subject to Zoning Ordinance regulations. Pursuant to
Chapter 8.76, Off-Street Parking and Loading, parking provided for the Office and Commercial Centers
meets or exceeds Zoning Ordinance regulations. A detailed parking analysis is illustrated in Table 1. Enea
Parking Tabulation, below:
Table 1. Enea Parking Tabulation
Parcel A Building Area Parking Requirement Parking Provided Percentage of
Parking Spaces
Commercial/Retail 8,539 square feet 29 Spaces (1:300) 19 Standard Spaces 59.37%
11 Compact Spaces 34.38%
2 Accessible Spaces 6.25%
Subtotal 32 Spaces 100%
Parcel B Building Area Parking Requirement Parking Provided Percentage of
Parking Spaces
Office 5,582 square feet 22 Spaces (1:250) 14 Standard Spaces 63.64%
7 Compact Spaces 31.82%
1 Accessible Spaces 4.54%
Subtotal 22 Spaces 100%
Total 14,121 square feet 51 Spaces 54 Spaces 105.9%
The three (3) additional parking spaces in excess of the required retail parking on Parcel A would allow a
future Eating and Drinking use to occupy a 600 square-foot lease space within the retail building and meet
Zoning Ordinance parking requirements. Additional floor area beyond 600 square feet could be created in
the future subject to Zoning Ordinance regulations, Section 8.76.050.
Sign Program
The Master Sign Program proposed for the project would allow wall signs and monument signs at
appropriate locations (see Exhibit B of Attachment 1). The walls signs would consist of individual
channel letters measuring up to two (2) feet in height. Creative signs that deviate from this standard
would be allowed pursuant to review and approval of a Site Development Review Waiver and landlord
approval. Three (3) monument signs, measuring 66-inches in height, would be used to list tenant names
and the addresses of the centers. As conditioned, these monument signs would be coordinated with the
colors and materials of the buildings, and white, internally illuminated backgrounds would be prohibited.
Tentative Parcel Map 8407
Dublin Municipal Code Title 9 regulations govern the division of larger parcels into two or more parcels
of land. In summary, the intent of the law is to coordinate lot design, street patterns, fights-of-way,
utilities and public facilities; to assure that public improvements are not a burden to the community; and
to protect public health, safety, and general welfare, consistent with City policies and laws. The proposed
project includes the subdivison of the existing 1.017-acre-lot into two lots, one 28,931-square-foot lot
(Parcel B to the west) and one 15,385-square-foot lot (Parcel A to the east). The purpose of the
subdivision is to make the Office and Retail components of the project independent of each other. The
two parcels would share a common driveway access off of Village Parkway.
The design of Tentative Parcel Map 8407 was reviewed by City Staff and found to be consistent with the
City of Dublin General Plan, Village Parkway Specific Plan and the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Any
special requirements identified by City Staff and interested agencies during the review of the Tentative
Parcel Map have been incorporated as Conditions of Approval of the draft Resolution (Attachment 2). As
5
conditioned, the Applicant and City Staff will coordinate the timing of the completion of street
improvements along Village Parkway and Amador Valley Boulevard and the project's construction. The
Applicant shall be responsible for establishing and maintaining street trees and tree grates along Village
Parkway and Amador Valley Boulevard. The City shall complete enhanced sidewalk paving, enhanced
light fixtures, new street furniture and new traffic signals as part of the overall Village Parkway Street
Improvement project to be undertaken by the City.
Conformance with Village Parkway Specific Plan and Dublin General Plan
As outlined above, the proposed Enea Office and Retail Centers project would be consistent with the
development standards, allowed uses, architectural guidelines, infrastructure, and goals of the General Plan and
Village Parkway Specific Plan. The project is within the Retail/Office land use designation of the Dublin
General Plan and the proposed development is consistent with that designation. The office and
commercial/retail portions of the project combined are a FAR of .33, which is within the allowable
development intensity of the Village Parkway Specific Plan. The allowed uses are consistent with the land uses
envisioned in the Village Parkway Specific Plan to revitalize this downtown area and develop a more enhanced
pedestrian-oriented business center.
Public Comments
A Public Hearing Notice was mailed to property owners, residents, and tenants within a 300-foot radius of
the project property. A copy of the notice was advertised in the Valley Times. As of the writing of this
report, no comments have been received from the Public.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State guidelines and City
enviro~rnental regulations require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that
environmental documents be prepared. On December 19, 2000, the Dublin City Council adopted the
Village Parkway Specific Plan and companion Initial Study/Negative Declaration. City Staff have
determined that the current project at 7197 Village Parkway is consistent with the Initial Study/Negative
Declaration prepared for the Village Parkway Specific Plan in December 2000 as it anticipated similar
commercial development on the site.
Site-specific potential impacts were reviewed for the project including potential hazardous materials and
potential traffic impacts. In the past, underground fuel tanks were removed from the property, the site of a
former gas station. A Phase I Environmental Assessment Report was prepared by Clayton Group
Services, Inc. on May 30, 2003 for the removal of the underground tanks. The Phase I Report concluded
that clean up of remaining hazardous materials on the site was satisfactory. A Condition of Approval has
been included in the draft Resolution (Attachment 1) requiring the Applicant/Developer to follow the
recommendations found in the Phase I Environmental Assessment Report.
In addition to the review of the removal of underground fuel tanks, City Staff conducted a supplemental
traffic analysis of the project-specific traffic impacts of the project in March of 2004. Staff determined
that the total AM peak hour trips projected for the project totaled 14 and the total PM peak hour trips
totaled 44. The analysis concluded that these trips were within the scope of the traffic analysis conducted
in the Village Parkway Specific Plan Negative Declaration and these trips would not reduce the level of
service at any intersection or redirect traffic into residential neighborhoods. Furthermore, the project will
participate in the City's voluntary Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee to offset any additional impacts to the
traffic systems.
CONCLUSION:
The Enea Office and Commercial Centers would replace a vacant former gas station at a prominent comer
at the intersection of Village Parkway and Amador Valley Boulevard. The proposal meets the goals and
requirements of the property as envisioned in the Village Parkway Specific Plan and the Plmmed
Development District, PA 98-049, by creating a neighborhood-serving commercial center, with a mix of
complementary uses, enhanced architectural design and pedestrian amenities, and a plaza feature at an
important gateway to the City. City Staff have reviewed the project and attached draft Conditions of
Approval that will mitigate any potential adverse impacts of the project.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1) open public hearing and hear the Staff presentation;
2) take testimony from the Applicant and the Public; 3) close the public hearing and deliberate; and, 4)
adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) approving a Conditional Use Permit for minor amendments to the
Planned Development District, PA 98-049, and approving a Site Development Review and Master Sign
Program; and 5) adopt a Resolution (Attachment 2) approving Tentative Parcel Map 8407.
7
GENERAL INFORMATION:
APPLICANT:
Robert Enea, Enea Properties Company, LLC
190 Hartz Avenue, Suite 260, Danville 94526
PROPERTY OWNER:
Village Parkway Partners, LLC
190 Hartz Avenue, Suite 260, Danville 94526
LOCATION:
7197 Village Parkway, Dublin, CA 94568
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
Retail/Office
EXISTING ZONING
AND LAND USE:
Planned Development Zoning District, PA 98-049
G:\PA#~2003\03-069 Enea\ PC Staff Report 042704.doc
8