HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7.1 Scarlett Court Specific Plan Study
CITY CLERK
File # D[!fl[I][ll]-[5]L5]
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20,2006
SUR.mCT:
P A 03-063 Scarlett Court Specific Plan Study
Report Prepared hy Erica Fraser, Senior Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
I)
2)
RECOMMENDATION:
c~
~~~
31
41
~
Scarlett Court Area Map
Minutes from the June 18,2002; August 6, 2002; September
3,2002; October 1,2002, and October 21, 2003 City Council
meetings.
Receive Staff presentation;
Receive public testImony;
Deliberate; and
Direct Staft'to prepare Phase I of the Scarlett Court SpeCIfic
Plan to include design, landscape and slgnage guidelines.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
No financial impact at this time.
PRO.JECT DESCRIPTION:
During the Goals and Objectives session for Fiscal Year 2002/2003, the Cit) Council requested Staff, as a
high priority item, to initiate a Speci fic Plan I(lr the Scarlett Court area. The Scarlett Court area is
approximatcly 52 acres in size and consists of approximately 26 parcels. The area is bounded on the west
by Dougherty Road, the north hy Dublin Boulevard, the south by 1-580, and the east by the Iron Horse
Trail right-of-way (see Attachment I). At the time, the City Council was concerned about the potential
development/redevelopment of several large and wlderutilized parcels, including the former Dolan
Lumber parcel. In June 2001, Dolan Lumber ceased operahons and later sold the property to Dublin
Honda (Staff anticipates that Dublin Honda will begin construclIon of their new dealership on this site by
the end of the year). The CIty Council "as also concerned about the aesthetics of thlR area since the
Scarlett Court area is visible from the 1-580 freeway
The area has a General Plan land liRe deRlgnation of Business Park/lndustrial. Outdoor Storage (F.A.R. .25
to 40). The General Plan designation anticipates retail and manufactunng activities conducted outdoors
COPIES TO: In-House Distribution
_____________________________________________________________~MW_______________________________________~~____
Cl:\PA#\2003\O:1:-0ti1 !-icarleu Court Speeil1c Plan\CC:SR o-2o-06.UDC
ITEM NO. 7. I
Page I 01'4
tI
such as construchon matenals storage. The 7,omng ,hstnc! for thc cntire area is M-I (Light lndustnan,
which allows warehousing, industrial, and other similar uses. The M-l "one was originally established
under the County Jurisdiction and has remamed unchanged SlDce the City was incorporated.
The Scarlett Court aTCa currently contains the following uses: building matenal sales, hght mdustrial
uses, outdoor storage, mini storage, auto repair, and new/used automohile sales. The current predominant
use wlthin the area IS auto-related.
On August 6, 2002, the City Conncil held a public hearing to consider the adophon of an Urgency
Ordinance for the Scarlett Court area which would have unposed a moratorium on any discretionary
actIOn mc1udll1g sIte development reVIews, conditIOnal use permits, or building permits which could alter
the appearance or potenlIal uRe of the property; business licenses for a new use or permit; or the
resumption of a use that had been vacant for at least one year prior to the appheatlon. During the meeting,
the City Council provided direction to Staff on the moratonum and asked that Staff bring some options
(alternatives) back to the Council regarding the moratorium, but did not act on the rnoratonum.
The August 6,2002 City Council heating on the moratorium was continued to September 3, 2002. During
that meeting, Staff provided the City Council with three alternatIve optIOns for a moratorium. At the
meetmg, the City Council directed Staff to return to the Council with a draft moratorium ordinance which
prohibited certain nse types while the City worked on the Scarlett Court SpecIfic Plan. The timeframe for
the moratorium was not to exceed two years.
On October I, 2002, the City Council held a public hearing to discuss the dnlfl ordinance which
prohibited certain uses during a moratorium. At the meetmg, the City Council discussed the draft
ordinance and received input from the public on the proposed moratorium (see Attachment 21 and current
projects property ownCTS WCTe pursuing in the area. Based on public testimony, the City Council decIded
to table the matter for one year to give property owners tune to Implement current projects and make
improvements to theIr properties.
On October 21, 2003, Staff provided a report regarding the preparation of the SpeCific Plan which
recommended that the City Council authorize Staff to work on the SpeCIfic Plan without a moratorium. At
the meetmg, the City Council authonzed Staff to contmue preparation of the Scarlett Court Specific Plan.
Since October 2003, Staff has begun work on the Specific Plan; however, the completion of the SpeCIfic
Plan was delayed due to competing high priority goals and the reVle" of several large development
projects in the Scarlctt Court Specific Plan area including the new Honda Dealership and Arlen NeRS
Motorcyeles.
During the Goals and Objectives session for Fiscal Year 2005/2006, the City Council assIgned a hIgh
priority for the completion a Specific Plan for the Scarlett Court area by the end of Fiscal Year 2006/2007
ANALYSIS:
Since 2002 when dlscusRlOnR began about the preparation of a Specific Plan for this area, several parcels
in the area have bcen redeveloped or arc in the development process, mcluding completiOn of the
Volkswagen Dealership, Arlen Ness Motorcyeles, and the new Honda DealershIp which IS currently in
Building Pennit review At this time, Staff is !l!;tt suggesting a moratorium of the uses or the issuance of
permits withm the SpeCIfic Plan Study area at thIS hme, aR was previously discussed by City Council in
the past. The purpose of tonight's meeting is to discuss the Scarlett Court SpeCIfic Plan and receive input
on how the City CounCIl would like to move forward WIth the preparation of the Specific Plan. In order to
20f4
achIeve the City's goals for the area, Staff recommends that the Scarlett Court Specific Plan be prepared
in two phases.
Phase 1
Staff RUggeRts that Phase I include design guidelines {or fayade improvement or new construcl1on,
landRcape guidelines, and signage guidelines. As the buildings begin to age III tins area and new uses
move in, Starr anticipates that cxisting buildings will be remodeled. In order to facilItate healthy growth m
the area and to encourage good design which is compatible WIth the locatIOn ofthe area, design guidelines
could he estahlished. These gUldehnes are especmlly important because the Scarlett Court area is adjacent
the potential Camp Parks development to the north. The area is also VIsible from 1-580 and Dublin
Boulevard.
It is recommended that thc Phase I approval would be in the form of an overlay distnct similar t\l what
the City Council approved in the Historic area. This type of approach would enable the City to facilitate
good design and appropriate slgnage and landscapmg aR properties redevelop.
Phase IT
Staff recommends that land uses and development standards (which will complete the Specific Plan), be
ineluded as a part of Phase II. Traffic impacts are a major issue that will need to be evaluated as part of
the SpecIfic Plan land use and development standards. While the Scarlett Court Specific Plan is a high
pnonty goal for the City Council; another project, Camp Parks, is also a high priority goal. The potentIal
development of the Camp Parks Project as well as proposed land use changes within the Scarlett Court
Area have the potential to effect the traffic Level of Service (LOS) at key interseehons.
The City has been working with the Army Reserve on their plans to develop the Camp Parks Project. The
development plan for the Camp Parks property has not been finalized. Therefore, the City is unable to
determme what, If any, Impacts as a result of the development may occur It is important to understand
what impacts may occur as a result of the development of Camp Parks in order to complete a
comprehensive review of all impacts which may occur as a result of changing tile overall land use patterns
in the area.
StatTreeommends that work on Phasc II of the Specific Plan commence after more infornlatlOl1 1S known
about the Camp Parks proposal.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the Scarlett Court Specific Plan be implemented in the followmg two phaseR:
. Phase 1. Design guidelines, landscape guidelines 811d slgnage guidelines and the adoption of an
overlay zoning diMrict.
. Phase II. Land use designation, permitted and conditionally penmtted land uses.
Should the City Council auth()llze Staff to continue with the prcparation of the Scarlett Court SpecIfic
Plan, Staff would prepaTC Phase I of the draft Specific Plan with the assistance of consultants, as needed.
Staff anticipates that a draft document would be complete in December 2006.
30f4
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council 11 RecelVe Staff presental1on; 21 Receive public testimony; 31
Deliberate; and 41 Direct Staff to prepare Phasc I to include design, landscape and slgnage gUldelmes.
401'4
Scarlett Court Specific Plan Area
\ ~ "~.~
N
SCALE 1 4,703
/~
~J3~. ._.__......L~ --.-..1--.---
200 0 200 400 600
FEET
Attachment 1
/. I
http.llmapguidelmwfIDublin.mwf
Tuesday, June 06, 2006 10 12 AM
'2 t11J:~ "~
AUTHORIZATION FOR INITIATION OF A
SPECIFIC PLAN FOR TRE SCARLrrr COURT AREA AND
REOUEST FOR DIRECTION TO STAFF FOR FUTURE ACTIONS
8:05 p.m. 8.5 (410.55)
Senior Planner Andy Byde presented the Staff Report and advised that dunng
establishment of the Goals & Objectives tor 2002-03, the Crty Council ranked as e hIS.'
pnority goal; the imtiation of e. Specific Plan for the S.:::arlett Court area. The area hac [,
General Plan desl$nahon of Business Park/Industrial: Outdoor Storage (P.A.R. .25 tc
.40). Tne GF designation antlCIpates retail and manufacturing activJ.ues conducted
outdoors such as mobile home or construction materrals storage, The zonins.for the
enure area IS M. 1 (Ll$ht Industrial), whlch allows warehousing-, mdustrial and othe:
similar uses. The M - 1 zomng was o1'l$mally estabhshecl. under the County junsmcnoc.
and has remro.ned unchanged SInce the City was J.TIcorp.:lrated.
M.t. Byde dISCUSSed the issues, s?,,-..cifically: Specific Plan Boundaries. SpecIfic plan (sr.
ImtiahoI1 and Moratormm.
CITY COUNCIL MINL 'TE~
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MEETING
June 18, 2002
PAGE 284
Attachment 2
?~~4
Staff preliminarily Identified the proposed boundaries for the Scarlett Court area:
approximately 26 parcels, consIsting of approxInmtely 52 acres of land, bounded on tn.
west by Dougherty Road, the north by Dublin Boulevard, the south by 1-580 right-of-
way, and the east by the Iron Horse Trail right~of-way.
Mr. Byde stated Staff requested dIrection regardIng the proposed boundaries of the SF
and Staff requested authorization to initiate a SP study for the area. Staff will prepare a
work program, anticipated budget and Requests for Proposal (RFPs) to send out to
consultants. Staff will return at a future meeting to requ!eSt authOrization to send out th"
RFPs and to present a draft work program and anticipated budget amount.
Mr. Byde stated Staff also requests that the City Council prOVide direction as to the
appropriateness of enactmg a moratOrium for the area. If the City Council directs Staff -:.
return to the next Council meeting With a moratorium, the Interim ordinance- would taL
effect inunedIately if adopted by a 4/5 vote of the City Council. State law limits the
InItial term of the ordmance tc 45 days, and further allows for the extension of the
ordmance by 10 months and 1 5 days, and again by one year, foIloWlng a noticed pubhc:
hearing. If a moratorium IS desired, Staff requested that the Council prOVide direction
regarding the scope and the exemptions of the proposed moratoriUm.
Mayor Lockhart discussed the appropriate exemptions listed, WhICh mclude: "(1) IUJ.}-
bUJldir.g pennit submitted pnor to the effective date of the moratorium; (2) any
discretiontuyaehon (and its associated building permit) submitted prior to effective am.
of the moratarium; (3) work ar modificatlOns to a building which Yo'ill not modify the;-
appearance or potential use ,..:'>f fl building or other work deemed necessmy 1:>..1' the
Building Official for the safety a/the xcupants: and (4) proposed new auto sales
franchises." She asked if there have been any?
Mr. Byde stated a building permit has been issued fDr the Dublin Volkswagen project.
Mayor Lockhart stated a number of years ago when we looked at redevelopment, thIS
area came back as one of the few areas which could be conSIdered eligible for
redevelopment. She stated she would like to hear a consultant's opimon on this.
lv'll: Ambrose stated the consultant felt thlS area was too small.
Mayor Lockhart felt thIS area needs a lot of work and thiS may be one of the tools we'L
need to do somethmg with the area. She hates to cancel out the whole concept of
redevelopment In this area.
crTY COliNCIL MINU'iT.s
VOLUME Z 1
REGULAR MI:ETlNG
June 18, 2002
PAGE 285
Y-tr[) 3+
em. McCormick suggested we could reVIew the study and see specifically what they
referred to in that area and what the disqualifiers were.
Mr. Ambrose stated the state legislature has really nghtened the rules on what
redevelopment agenCIes can do. Wha: types of mfrastructure has to be built and powe:.
of condemnation have to be reVlewed.
em. Sbrantl stated he did not feel size should be a deterrent. There are a lot of small
redevelopment agenCIes.
The CIty Council concurred and mdlCated they would like to see the study brought ba: "..
Cm. Zika suggested we look at the State Budget with impacts on redevelopment areas.
They may be in deep trouble.
Mr. Ambrose clarified that Staff should brmg the study back, develop scope of work an.::.
mcorporate a reV1ew of the findmgs of the study.
Mayor Lockhart felt the Council would need to reVlew uses. This is such a great entrar ,-
to our CIty that it deserves It.
Cm. Oravetz stated he supports the concept. ThIS area needs a great deal of help. He rc
this should be down a mton the list, however.
l\1ayor Lockhart pointed out that 1f you put a moratorium on, you may be holding uF
some businesses. Let them come back 'with scope or work and the Councii could ther
prioTItize.
Cm. Zika dISCUSSed timeframes. Staff could come back July 2"" '".,ith a temporary
moratorium and then later WIth a one year moratoTIum. He stated he doesn't want
property owners hung up before they can do somethIng. We need to gIve them some
bnd of dtrection regarding what they can do with their property.
Mr. Byde stated the moratonum could be up to 2 years totaL
em. Sbranti asked how property owners are notified.
Mr. Byde stated we will certainly notify them, based on CIty Council du--e::tion.
Mr. Ambrose asked how much hme shou,ld be gNen to respond.
CITY COUNCIL MINlJ'!'rS
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MEETING
June 18, 2002
PAGE 286
?ao3 if
The Council agreed to 30 days
Mr. Ambrose clarified that Staff should give 30 days notice pnor to the CIty Council
decIding on the moratorIum. The Council could take action at the August 6th CIty
Council meeting.
Cm. Sbranh discussed the vacant Pak N Save lot across the street and asked if this coule
be included a.<; part of the specific plan area? Can we look at the whole area?
lI1ayor Lockhart pointed out we would be placmg a one-year moratonum on the Pak [,.
Save SIte If thIS were to be included.
Cm. Zika stated he would prefer to not include thIS site.
Cm. Sbranb asked how many property owners own the Pak N Save site.
Mr. Foss stated. on the Pak N Save SIte this is owned bySafeway, then you have the Go:f
Mart which is a separate property owner. The gas station is another separate parcel 0:',
the corner.
Cm. Sbranti stated he felt the commumty IS interested in seeing something on the Pak l'
Save SIte, but given thIS information, It would be best to not mclude this.
Michael ReISS spoke on the piece of property formerly known as Dolan Lumber facih::'
located within this area at 6365 Scarlett Court. It IS about 3 1/2 acres in size. He has bee.
workmg WIth Mr. Dolan through one of hIS associates to lease thIS property. He repol'tc~
that he has contacted Z auto franchISes who have a sincere desire to come into the
Dublin market. A third franchIse is yet to Qe contacted, simply because of the tIme
factor, however there are 3 that have a smcere desire to come here. He stated he knov,":
the CIty wants a fresh face on this and he would make many capItal improvements to tJ:,
property to make It more presentable. He intends to renovate the existing facihty by
Installing an atl'lum style showroom on the facility and Install exterior hghtIng and
fencl11g. At some hme in the future, if approved, the intent would be to build a
completely brand new state of the art facility on that location. He can bnng to the CI:- ,-
empioyment potential and capitalize on the synergy of the other auto se!'VlCes. He
estImates approximately $19 milhon in taxable income 'with just the one franchise. Tho
land could easily handle a second franchise. He IS hopeful that if there is a moratoriut"
bemg explored, the exclUSIon of new auto dealerships would be excluded from thIS
moratorium.
Cm. Zika que.~tlOned If we put a moratorium on, do we put It on evervthmg?
CITY CciUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MEETING
Junf' 18, 2002
PAGE 287
CD Vb3 +
Mr. Byde stated it is possible to exclude certain uses.
Mr. Ambrose stated one of the issues to be looked at is do we continue to look at small
parcel development or create incentIves where some of these parcels can be consohdak::.
for a completely dIfferent type of use. An example would be land use desJgnabon for
office complex which could cover several parcels. Our plan could include financial
incenfives for property owners.
Cm. Zika asked about the timeframe for the dealershIps.
Mr. Reiss stated he was in negotiations with one franchIse and originally anticipated an
opening date of July of this year. He started negotiations back In February. He would
look to be able to open by the first of next year. This would be realistic.
Cm. Oravetz made a motion to accept Staff's recommended boundary, to give 30~day
notice of the moratorium and come back August 6th and take it from there. Cm. Sbran:
seconded the motion, whIch was approved by a unammous vote. Staff clarified that th,
motion included adopnon of the Resolution approving the study.
Cm. McCormick stated she is not supportmg exemptmg uses as this time. She would hL
to see a ConditIonal Use Permit ~CUP) reqmred.
Cm. Zika stated he felt if we nohce people of a possible moratormm, we can still approve
Ii CUP for somethmg in the area. ThiS would have to be called out m the Ordinance.
Cm. Sbranti agreed that he dId not want to see any exemptions at this pomt. People car
come talk to them m the meantime. We should nohce everybody.
ClanficatIon was made that they're not going forward with the moratormm at this time
On mohon of em. Oravetz, se~onded by Cm. Sbranh, and by unammous vote, the
Council adopted
RESOLUTION NO.1 06 - 02
AUTHORIZING THE INITIATION OP A SPECIF"IC PLAN
FOR THE SCARLETT COURT AREA
..
CTIYCOUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 21
REG! TU\R MEETING
June 18, 2002
PAGE 288
1 U[) ~tf
cheery. They spoke of mmimum wage issues and the impact of the insurance industry
1hey are not expecting to open a lot of new hotels, but they are holding their own and
they do see an increase in rooms rented over last year. She stated she truly enjoyed the
DHS graduation; It was a beautIful ceremony. She attended and enjoyed the Golden
MedIC event held at FARKS last Saturday. People came In fromal! over the country anc
set up self-contamed operatIng rooms. TIus was a very eye-opening experience and tc
lIsten to remarks about the value of our base was tremendous. She attended a Waste
Management planning authorrty meeting today and they approved two compostIng
prOjects in the County; Materrals Recovery Inc., and at Altamont Land Fill to provide
opportumty for County to take food, green clIppings, and save the land fill a lot. Thes"
two projects will be about $1 S million to get gOIng. This is all out of Measure D monc:":
She will attend the affordable housing conference tomorrow.
+
CLOSED SESSION
At 9:30 p.m., the City Council went back mto closed seSSIon for consideration of Item 0=.-
At 9:45 p.m., Mayor Lockhart announced that there was no reportable action.
+
ADJOURNMENT
11.1
There bemg no further busmess to come before the Council, the meeting was aqlOurne:
at 9;45 p.m.
ATTEST:
~
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MEETING
June 18, 2002
PAGE 295
.,.,....., 1~~.1.1, .'''~ ., .", , .' '~I~" .,,.,.~<,.,...
~!Tb3f
CONSIDER.l\.TION OF URGENCY ORDINANCE
ESTABLrSHrNG A MORATORIUM II\: SCARLETI COURT AREA
8:17 p.m. 6.3 (410-20)
Mayor Lockhart apened the publIc hearing.
Senior Planner Andy Byde presented the Staff Report and advised that i.n June of Z002,
the City Council voted to initiate and define the Scariett Court Area Specific Plan and
directed Staff to provide notification to the tenants and property OVl'Ilers withm the
Scarlett COUl": Area that the Council 1E considering a moratorium for the area.
Mr. Byde discu.ssed: Moratorium; Concern of BusL'1esses regarding the Moratorium:
Moratorium Process; Environmenta, Rev1ew, and Recievelopment.
Mr. Byde stated Staff recommended that following the public hea!'ing, the Council
determine if nunisterial and discretionary actIOns could negatively impact the outcome
of the desired Specific Plan (SrI. and if the scope and o:cephons propose..d in the draft
Ordinance are determined to be appropriate. waive the reading and adopt the
Ordinance on aE Urgency Basis which will impose Ii moratorium on any mi.mstenal ane
discretionary actions: -OR- if the scope and exceptions proposed by Staff are not
appropriate then direct Staff to modify the Ordinance; -OR~ if the City Council
determines thai no negative impact .,vill result on the anticipated SP, then take no
additional action; and :iI~a1Jy, n'view the prevlou, Redevelopment StLtdy and provide
appropriate direction to Staff.
If approved tonight, the moratorium would go into efiecHor 45 days and then be
brought back on September 17th.
CITY COUNCIL MINl:TES
VOLUME Z 1
REGULAr; MSETL'<G
August 6, 2002
F'AGE S67
q Ub~ t
Cm. Sbranti questioned when Specific Plans were done for Village Park'Way and BART, if
the CIty adopted a moratorium during those processes?
Mavor Lockhart advised that the City chd not in those instances, but did one in the
. .
historic district.
Cm. Zika asked if we made a commitment to El Monte RV that they could replace theIr
building?
City Attorney Elizabeth Silver stated the City had to acquire a building and the City paid
for the building. There is no agreement or obligation on the part of the City to allow
construction of a building on that parcel different than any other approval process to gr,;
a building.
Cm. Sbranh asked if another alternative of not doing moratoriwn could be considered,
but where the City Council could review specific proposals.
Ms. Silver advised that this would require changes to a number of provisions to the
Zoning Ordinance because of the number of possible applications. The Municipal Cod,
would have to be changed with regard to builchng permits, etc.
Cm. Oravetz indicated he would like to e>,,"plore Cm. Sbranti's idea after the public
hearing.
Mayor Lockhart read into the record a statement submitted by Kevin Peters (Genera]
Manager) Dubhn Auto Center, 6015 Scarlett Court. "The Sonic Automotive Group hilS
invested hetwilv into the &"81'letf Ct. area witli the Dublin Auto Center. We have
.
~oncern that the growth moratorium could effect our investment. We are not clear on
the pro]XJsal and would like to learn more before providing comment. "
Don Price, El Monte RV, 6301 Scarlett Court, stated with regard to the obligation to
replace their buildmg, the City never told them they would get a replacement building,
but it was always an understanding that the back building is a vital part of their
operation. They submitted their architectural plans and they are currently in for revie.v,-,
He was not sure they met the time requirements. They are in for plan check now. Hopes
they will be allowed to go forward with their building.
Jeff Jacobson, 6500 Scarlett Court, stated he, owns the Miracle Auto Painting business,
whIch has been there for almost 30 years. His concern is arc we trying to tie this to the
whole development of Scarlett Court. How much time do they actually have there? He
ha~ a long term lease
CITY COUNCIL MINl'TIS
VOLUME Z I
REGULAR MEETING
August 6, 2002
PAGE 368
lD~~t
Mayor Lockhart stated she felt the SP will help them deal with these issues.
Ms. Silver stated there was a verbal inquiry and Staff sent a letter e:!..l'laining that there
are no particular plans at this particular time.
Public Works Director Lee Thompson stated we have the widening of Dougherty Road af
part of the 5 year Clr and part of the TIF program. We do anhcipate widening there
either mn.1: year or the following year. There are a number of road configurahons that
could occur and which we will look at in the study.
Steve Miller, Attorney representing interests of Busick Properties, stated they own light
indll.strial space which t.\-tey lease to tenants and have for the last 30 years. They rely on
having new tenants come in when old tenants leave. They are concerned that this
moratoriUl\i would hamper this interest with the one year vacancy provision which
would preclude new tenant from gomg in and new business licenses. They won't do thif
if they can't get a business license. The implementation of this ordinance is a bit
premature. It would make more sense to have an the information to see if
redevelopment makes sense before you implement this moratorium. Holding off does
not financially ltnpact the City in any way. They urged an abundance of caution on the
Council's part prior to making a drastic decision affecting the prope.rty owner's part
regarding their land.
Mayor Lockhart clarified Ulat the moratorium is not tied to a redevelopment study. They
just asked that this be, brought back for review.
Mr. Ivfiller stated em. Sbranti made a suggestion that on a case-by-case basis, we
evalllilte changes in use. This makes more sense than an outright ban on uses. Tuey
would request that their interests are given the same dignity as auto dealerships.
Peter McDonald stated he was here on behalf of Mike Fitzpamck, related to the Dolan
Lumber Site, 6.5 acres. They support the idea of doing a SF, but imposition of thiS
moratorium ordinance is excessive and would be counterproductive. They suggest that
any new uses be subject to a CUP and go through some kind of City review. If you have
the power to prohibit something, you have the power to allow it with conditions. They
would prefer some kind off! use peTItut basis to allow things to happen. The real threat
is the thought that the CIty ....rill not allow any new substantial buildings. Prohibition
against use of existing buildmg is most troubling. This comes right out of the planning
books from Berkeley and Santa Monica. He stated he would be very disappomted to
have Dublin get into that kind of a planning policy. This could become an opportunity
to have public/private partnership. The Dolan property is a natural for redevelopment.
II-iT, Dolan IS 82 years old and doeS11't want to make an~' changes in the property right
em' COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MEETINL..
August 6. 2002
PAGE 369
111J3+
now. They encouraged a cooperative process to look at best use. They are negotiating
with It boat retailer, a substantial company. They don't need to do any major building
e1.-pansions, A look at long term uses - the boat dealership fits what you would expect I,
come out of the SF for the area. They don't have strong feelings one way or the other
regarding redevelopment, A moratonum would not play well with a jury. They would
like to see a moratorium that allows properhes to improve during the process.
Michael Fitzpatrick, representing Dolan Lumber Company, stated they are currently
negotiating with a boat company. This property was not in good housekeepmg fashion
in the P!lst, He came in about a year ago and worked on cleaning up the entire properr;:.
They are not here to contradict the City's plans. They are here to work with property
owners to get a fair shake. You should not bite off the. hand that feeds you. This is a
very large company, which will create a potentially large tax ror Dublin,
Robert Cope, Rocklin, representing Cope & McPheters Marine passed out brochures to
the Council. (No a~y Ivas provided to the City Oerk 1...11' the record) He stated. they ari.
in 10 locations in 3 states. They represent some very hIgh end products in their specifk
market and over the years have become very good partners in the communities where
they have developed. Their goal is to apply for a special use permit and do their magic
in the area. They have no plans to change the property other than cleanliness and
painting andto fix what's broken. The revenue they will bring will add to the
community,
Michael Reiss, San Ramon, stated he is interested ill the Dolan Lumber Company, but
doesn't have 56 years of business behind him. He is an entrepaneaur. He provided one
copy only of his business plan to the Mayor. He hopes to seek exception regarding autc
franchises. He has been in the industry for 20 years, has the necessary capItalization
and has been in contact with one manufa..-"'turer franchise. There are S viable franchisu
which could go into that property, His initial plan is to bring one with intention of
putting second facility on the premises in the near future. With Chris Foss' help, he
initially hoped to put a new facility on the property immoomtely. Alternative would be
to improve existing property and install atrium style shov.'l'oom. He hopes to tap into
auto related synergy. They will create new jobs for the City and Will create about $18
million annually in taxable revenue. He would hope to create a state of the art facility
which would put a very nice face on the City of Dublin.
Mr. McDonald clarified neither of these people have leases on the property,
Glenn Kierstead, owner of Dublm Security Storage since 1980 stated they e1.-panded
their property in 198'7 and have 90,000 square reet of storage and minl-storage. They
would like to expand and build out the facility. They are totally landlocked and have tlC
em' COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME Z 1
REGULAR MEETING
August 6, 2002
PAGE 370
It~3+
frontage on Scarlett or Dublin Boulevard. The redevelopment report identified 1 5
blighted properties. He asked which properties these were.
Mr. Byde stated this was from the redevelopment feasibility analysis. They evaluated in
1999 and 2000 what was a quick thumbnail analysis of whether redevelopment was
feasible.
This was a legal and financial exercise. The goal will be determined. by the Sf to be
conducted.
Mr Kierstead stated many properties were affected by the September 11 th disaster and
they see some ripple effects. He asked that the City Council consider elimmating the
lease provision and allow properties influx or process of development be considered on
an mdividua.! basis for improvement to their property.
Sid Corrie, 7950 Dublin Boulevard, stated they have a 3-acre site, one acre with II 20-
year lease. Quite some time ago they started a subdivision process. They watched this
whole process evolve and they had an understanding they could continue with their lot
split. It! reading this, it says no subdivision allowed. He sees no reason why they would
not be allowed to continue with the lot split. He's glad to see the Council working on the
entire idea. A lot of places in the Bay Area could take lessons from Dublin's Staff. Are
we really going to do some redevelopment? It appears that the private sector is
competing for this property. It sounds like the auto uses are already allowed. They are
happy fot' the whok process to evolve, but would like to continue with their lot split.
Mayor Lockhart stated she regretted even mentioning the redevelopment study that wa~
done a couple of YGars aso.
1\1a.yor Lockhart closed the public hearins.
RECESS
9:06 p.m.
Mayor Lockhart called fat' a short recess. The meeting: reGonvened at fI:18 p,m., 'with
Cm. Zika absent.
+
Mayor Lxk:h1m advlsed that due to the fact that Cm. Zilal was ill and left abruptly, she
would suggest that thIs item be continued to the first September Council meeting.
em' COUNCIL MINLlES
VOLUME .2 I
REGULAR MEETING
August 6. 2002
PAGE 371
l~~??t
Mayor Lockhart stated. she would like City Council discussion related to the SF and
concept for the area. The City will drop the word "redevelopment". She requested ideas
on concepts of what the Council wants to see in the SF study. What is the purpose and
what kInd of questIons do we want answered in the study?
em. Sbranti pointed out it is the gateway to the City and he felt all would like to see a
more attractive gateway to the City. Wok at access to the businesses and infrastructure
and can we do better WIth that land. He sees this as a commercial center. It is right on
the freeway and felt it is best for commercial uses. He likes the idea of auto row or boat~.
There IS private redevelopment taking place and he would like to see this accelerate. H,
wDuld-like to see a vibrant commercial area.
em. McCormick stated she has the same vision for the area and would like to see it
linked with the transit corridor. Regarding the process, use a cur rather than
moratorium. Is this possible?
Mr. Byde advised that currently M-l zoning requires the majority of uses pennitted by a
cur to be acted upon by the Planning CommissIOn.
Mayor Lockhart stated her question is, if CUPs are required in that area. could the CIty
Council review these instead of the Planning Commission?
Mr. Byde stated the City Council could elect to be the hearing body if this is their desire.
Ms. Silver elaborated that if the Council were considering instances where CUPs were
allowed, they would be in the context of the existing zoning on the property. Some are
pennitted uses and some are conditIoned.. Rather than the Planning Commission
approving these, the City Conncil could approve them.
Mr. Bydc reviewed permitted uses. Just about every use related to auto requITes a use
permit.
Mayor Lockhart asked if it is possible with a CUP to limit the time of the use? If a study
takes Z years, could they limit it to a year after the end of the study?
Mr. Byde stated yes with significant qualifiers. Significant improvements could be mad,
and it could be problematic to do this.
Ms. Silver advised that with regard to a term limit on a CUP, the general rule IS a perml'
runs with the land. If an applicant requested a cur for a limited duration, it could
em' COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 21"
REGULAR MEETING
August 6, 2002
PAGE 372
I t4~,+
terminate, but the City Council or Planning CommissIOn should not assume that a time
limit could be placed on a CUP.
Ms. Silver stated the moratorium is very straight forward. Case law is clear that there is
no liability on the part of the City and legal protection IS provided to the City from
damages from delay in getting approval to develop the property. There are exceptions
proposed and more exceptions can be added.
Mayor Lockhart asked if they take existing uses and include them as exceptions in the
moratorium, then at the end of that period of time, and after SP study, they could do as
they've done with other studies and change zoning and move forward?
Ms. Silver stated they can look at all uses and permitted uses and can say the
moratorium, except for approvals, can be granted for the follO\ving uses. Of the ten
permitted, we like g of those so we will except those g from the moratorium, as an
example.
Mayor Lockhart stated her vision is to retain the nature of th", automotive industry In
that area and she would also like the SF to cons1der light industrial such as a Llg.ltt
Industrial Park because this 1S valuable to the community and the valley. Dublin is a
City that would look at uses which have been there for a long time and want to keep
those businesses In the community. This area is such a gateway and it looks bad. Her
greatest hope is we can retain boats, cars, whatever, but be proud of what we see when
we look there. The building is very old and a SF IS to look at improving the area.
Cm. Sbranti stated the fact that the area qualified for redevelopment says something.
Cm. Oravetz stated he felt what we really want is a facehf! in the area. The moratorium
seems to not be supported by the property owners. 'Ibey have a month to come up with
some different ideas if they put this off until September. Can we go back to the clrawinS
board and see if the moratorium is the right way to go'? We need to figure out how we
get a facelift without a moratorium.
Mayor Lockhart stated she felt we can protect the City and protect busmesses. She aske..
if the SF 'will affect the plans for the dead end where Nissan is to go through?
Mr. Byde stated this will be evaluated..
Mayor L.:x:kltart stated improving the roadway and unckrgrounding the wires will
certainly improve the area. We Ji:!"e trying to find a way to clean up the area.
. CIH COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 21
REG! TLAR MEETING
August 6, 2002
PAGE 373
I?~?t
Mr. Ambrose clarified that the City Council is trying to find some mIddle ground. Stafi
will try to come up vd.th some options with no moratorium.
Mayor Lockhart stated in the meantime, it is business as usual.
Cm. Sbranti requested that we lookat what the allowed uses are, The problem is if you
have- a different set of roles for one particular area as opposed to the rest of the City, thi.~
could cause problems.
Mayor Lockhart pointed out this is no different than what we did on Village Parkway.
On motion of Cm. Oravetz; seconded by Cm. McCormick, and by majority vote (Cm.
Zika absent), the Council continued this item to the September 3,2002 meeting.
.
CIVIC CENTER LIBRARY ITJRNTI1JRE BID A W AID
9:40 p.m. 7.1 (600-30/350-20)
Parks & Facilities De\re1opment Manager Henna Lichtenstein presented the Staff Report
and advised that the Library Furnishmgs BId Proposal consists of readmg tables, web-pa.
stations, circulation desk, reference desk, seating and lounge chairs for the library's
public spaces. A total of 5 bids were received WIth the low bid of $462,778 submitted by
InteITa Inc. Their bid was found to be non-responsive as they could not fulfiIl the
bonding requirements of the bid proposal. The next lowest responsible bidder was Agati.
Furniture with a bid of $480,909.
Cm. McConnick stated she was very happy to see green materials considered for the
library.
On motlon of Cm. Sbranh, seconded by Cm. McCormick, and by majority vote (em. Zil:."
absent), the Council adopted
RESOLUTION NO, 144 - 02
CONTRACT NO. 02-11
CIVIC CENTER LIBRARY FURNITURE
R.EJECTING BID OF INTERRA, INC., AS NON-RESPONSIVE
and
CITY COUNCIL MINIJTES
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MELlING
August 6. 2002
PAGE 374
I (P DQ3Y-
ADJOURNMENT
.
11.1
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned
at 12:15 a.m.
ATTEST:
(l
Mayor
~
CIT'Y COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUM!: 21
REc..lJl..AR MEETING
August 6, 2002
PAGE 391
\lift
PUBLIC HEARING
CONSIDERATION OF URGENCY ORDINANCE
ESTABLISHING A MORA.TORIl[M IN SCARLIT!' COURT AREA
8:56 p.m. 6.3 (410.20)
Mayor Lockhart opened the public hearing.
Senior Planner Andy Byae presented the Staff Report. 'This item was continued from the'
August 6, 2002 City Council meeting. At this meeting, the CIty Council heard the
proposed moratorium, as well as concerns from business and property owners regardins
the impacts of the moratorium. The Council then voted to continue the item and
directed Staff to evaluate additional alternatives to the proposed moratorium.
Mr. Byde discussed the proposed moratorium and the moratorium process.
Alternatives for consideration included:
Alternative 1: Modify Zoning Ordinance to Require CUPs for uses during the term of thl
SF Study.
Alternative 2: Prohibiting Certain Use Types dUring the term of the SF or a maximum 01
2 years.
Alternative 3: Limiting Modifications of Properties over 2.5 N:res.
Mr. Byde presented an analysis of the 5 options currently before the City Council,
including the proposed moratorium, Alternative 1, Alternative 2, Alternative 3, and the
No Action option.
Staff recommended that the Council determine if ministerial and discretionaev actions
.
could negatively impact the outcome of the desired SP; and a) if the scope and exception~
proposed in draft Ordinance are determined to be appropriate; waive the reading and or,
an urgency basis, ADOF'T Ordinance which will impose a moratorium on any
ministerial and discretionary actions (subject to the excephons listed in the A..,>;enda
Statement): - OR - b) if the scope and excephons proposed by Staff are not apprOpriate
then provide d1l'ection to Staff on the 4 remaining options listed in the Agenda
Statement.
Mr. Byde stated option Z could allow the El Monte replacement buildmg.
crry COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MEETING
September 3. 2002
PAGE 404
I ~ 11JJ"?> If'
Cm. Sbranti noted that under alternative 1 this would not prohibit the City from taking.
He asked for elaboration on this.
Mr. Byde explamed that the City Council would have to make the necessary findings and
there is a potential for exposure to litigation.
Cm. Zib. asked if, under alternate g, any proposal on a site more than 2.5 acres befol,"e
the study is done, they would have to come before the City Council anyway?
Mr. Byrle stated it would prohibit the City from acting on it unless the ordinance is
changed.
Cm. Zika stated baSICally all bets are off for a year and a half.
Mr. Ambrose clarified it could be proce,ssed. but the City Council couldn't act on it.
Cm. Zika asked if back on alternate 2, they could only approve those items not lined out
or as modified by Council?
Mayor Lockhart asked how alternatives 1, 2 and g might affect Mr. Corrie 'with dividin~
his g parcels.
Mr. Byde replied that alternates 1 and 2 would have no affect, but it would be prohibitec
under alternative g.
Mayor Lockhart asked with regard to the maintenance building for EI Monte RV - they
would not be affected by any of these alternatives.
Mr. Byde stated this was correct, but it must still go through the SDR process. They are
currently in the plan checking process.
Mayor Lockhart commented on the metal building on the lumber yard site and
expressed concern about this. If they had an allowed use, how would we deal with this
building?
Mr. Byde stated it goes ba\:k to what extent can we make appropnate findings under a
CUP as descril.'led in our Ordinance. The newer uses all have new buildings - all
proposed new buildings, they weren't required to have them. Could we require them to
make substantial changes?
cm COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MEETING
Septenlber3, 2002
PAGE 405
1C111bS ~
Ms. Silver stated in order to grant a CUP, certain findings have to be made, and it has to
be on a case-by-case basis. There, could be facts made requiring modifications to the
building. Structures must be compatible with other structures in the vicmity. Since the
last uses have included new buildmgs, the Planning Commission could potentially find
that the proposal was not going to be compatible with other land uses in th~ area and
they could deny a CUP. If you can deny a cur, this includes the power to make
conditions.
Carl Aaron, Ironwood Drive, stated he noticed this item at the last meeting and stated he
has no financial or family connechon to it, except to shop there. He has been in the
same house since 196:: and shopped at Dolan Lumber. the Smog Station, and was happy
to hear that the shops and uses in that area are a good thing to have. He stated he agree~
Wlth this. Mr. Dolan roed not too long ago. He talked about a commendation Mike
Dolan received years ago where he loaned some large timbers as a result of an aCCident
on the freeway. He adVIsed that he has not come to an opinion about the moratorium.
Stuart Ross. Lafayette, CA. landlords of 6500 Scarlett Court, Miracle Auto Shop stated he
wrote a letter to Mr. Byde and thought in 1998 their property was to be taken fora righ',
turn from Dougherty Road. Given that a condemnation achon is likely to occur in the
ne1.."t few years, he rod not see a benefit to inclucie their parcel in the SF study and
requested exemption.
Michael Reiss, San Ramon, CA stated he was here regarding the fanner Dolan Lumber
Company, at 6365 Scarlett Court. He reminded the City Council of comments made by
the party also interested in the property to turn the property inte a Marine Center. He
stated he. has a vision for the property. He has been in contact with a total of 3 auto
franchises who are very interested in this property. His initial plan is to install an atrium
style showroom, which will block out the rear of the property Additionally, plans
would be to re-blacktop the area, install new perimeter feneing, new lighting and
eventually thiS will catalyst the area. He has all intention to build new state of the art
facility that will face out toward the freeway. He intends to tap ante the synergIes of
surrounding businesses. This will create jobs for people in the Dublin area and prod-ue.'
$18 million in taxable revenue. He has a vision of erecting 4 facilities on the total 6.5
acres and erecting a new Dublin auto mall. He hopes the City Council will allow sales
and service of automobiles on this property.
Glenn Kierstead, commented on the State Law which requires finciings be made related
to health, safety and welfare. I'le.asked how this affects public health, safety and
welfare?
,Mr. Byde referenced the second page of the ordinance,
em' ,"":OUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MEETING
September 3, 2002
PAGE 406
-t 0 'b~y"
"WHEKEAS, untimely chmges of uses withm the Are8 during the time that the City completes
the Specific PiB.n could ultimately frustrate the aty's long tenn efforts to ensure the Il.l'eII is
properlT devdopedas properties become suitable for reuse, either by allowing the initiation of
uses incompotJbk with those recommended by the Specific PllUI study or by directly preventing
the use- of pr-.Jperfies ItS recommended m the study; IUId
WHEREAS, based on the foregoing, the atT wancD fi17ds that oJJowing development to conti17uc
to occur in a disorgmized fashion JXJses a current I1.ttd immediate threat to the public health,
SIlietJ'md welfa.re because it will likely CRUse land use incompotibilities; md
WHEKEAS, the City Council finds that the approval of additional subdivisions, use permits,
variances, building permits, or my other applicable discretionary permit, except for building
pennits tmd discretionsl')' pennits submitted prior to September 3. 2002, which would allow the
modification of the properties within the Scarlett wurt a.ree., therefore would result in that
thri':/lt to public health, SIlkl)' I1.ttd welfa.re. >>
He stated there is a concern and the findings are articulated that uses that go forward
without a SF, those uses could jeopardize the health, safety and welfare.
l'vlayor Lock.l1art stated the SF has always been designated for the entire area south of
Dublin Boulevard, which we feei needs a SF,
Mr. Hyde stated land use incompatibilities are what the specific actions are intended to
prevent.
1\1r. Kierstead disagreed and stated he did not feel this addresses health. safety and
welfare. He has a mini -storage facility behInd one of the dealerships and behind 84
Lumber and he is land locked. He has no visibility. His parcels are abovl.! 2.5 acres and
they plan to do some expansions and he asked if this will prohibit the expansion. The
eA-pansion they are planning requires no variance.
Mr. Ambrose stated the Staff Report shows one of the prohibited uses would be a vehicle
storage yard.
Mr. Byde stated option 3 would limit 'with regard to lot si7-e.
Mayor Lockhart stated options 2 and S would limit his ability during the SF i'>tudy.
Mr. Kierstead requested that the City Council put themselves in his position. He asked
them to consider the three issues of safetv health and welfare and stated he did not feel
they can make these findings as a Council. The City can control the development out
there and you don't need a mandai<: to tell them how to develop.
CITY COUNCIL MINIJTES
VOLUME Zl
REGULAR MEETING
September 3. 2002
PAGE 407
1.1~3+
Doreen Green, Amarillo Road stated she was representing 2 landowners in the area,
Busick and Gearing. They have multi~tenants, She has been a homeowner since 1965
and invalved in local business since .1970. She has a rapport with the City and its
growth. The first thing that confused her was that they were cansidered. a blight area.
As tar as restrictions an use .of buildings, we are saying some uses will not be permitted
anymare; variaus uses that all give something ta the cammunity. Tney provide a great
many jobs and put money back into the coffers of the City. There are a tremendous
amount of autos being sold out there. There are ather uses that need to be addressed.
Their tenants .offer a very unique service. In today's business climate, private
development vd.!l take ca!'€ of'the area III due course as the need arises. She agreed tha:
an their property they do nat have the highest and best use. They would like to improve
the property further to go along with the improvement .of the City. At the end of the las:
meeting, there was some dISCussion about property ovmer representatives meeting with
City Staff to thrash out some of the issues. She stated she hoped the CIty wauld ,gIve
them an .opportunity t.ohave this meeting before forcing this down their throats. This
could cost owners money.
Peter MacDonald. Pleasanton, stated they oppose the maratorium in virtually all its
farms. particularly alternatives :2 and 3. The .ordinance, as proposed, is like taking a
baseball bat after a fly. If yau go with a moratorium approach, you stop redevelopment
that yau want to happen. It 'wi.ll get 111 the way 'wi.th redevelopment that the Council
wants. He stated Mr. Reiss does not have a lease-on the property. They are also
negatiating with the boat company. The market isn't creating blight, but is dying to pu~
that property back in use. '!hey favar a sr, provided they don't end up with a
moratorium that keeps them from 2 years of rent on this praperty. Just let it happen.
TIus is a freeway commercial location. He Stated he thought the direction was to allow
the City Staff to go back and work with the property .owners ana it was ultimately
decided that the City felt there was no need to meet. He distributed a document to the
Council making suggestions related to a possible approach to an Interim Ordinance.
(NOTE: No COPT was given to the L-lt)' Clerk for inclusion in the record) He stated thif
was what they wanted to gG over with Staff. They would like to have a chance to came
up with options.
em. Oravetz commented this sounds a lot like .option 1.
Mr. MacDonald stated what they prapose is far simpler than option 1. Everything in the
area would. require a use permit. Then they could see if the UBe is compatible. This
would be far simpler for the Zoning Administrator and for Staff.
Mr. Ambrose stated Staff has not seen this proposaL
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MEETING
September S. 2002-
PAGE 408
1- 2.'1] ~~
Ms. Silver stated she just read it and felt paragraph Z is too vague. The stale law that
authorizes a moratorium allows the City Council to adopt an interim ordinance to
prohibIt any uses that may be in conflict with a sr. In her opinion, a moratorium
ordinance has to focus on uses. Alternative 2 does not prohibit all uses, it allows a
number of uses. The purpose of this statute is to allow the City Council, when
considering changes to a GP or SP or zoning, to say lefs put everything on hold while we
decide what we want to corne out of the process. The Counoil dId this several years age>
on Village Parkway.
Cm. Sbranti asked fundamentally how this is different from option 1
Ms. Silver stated option 1 lays out a clearer process. Mr. MacDonald's appears to not
follow a standard process, but provides too much discretion to the Zonms Administrator
without guidance.
Cm. Zika asked if his proposal would be subject to the same disadvantages as option 1.
Ms. Silver stated what he is proposing is very indefinite and not as structured as
alternative 1.
Mark Harvey, Dublm Honda, stated he came tonight to make sure he does not qualify
for any of the alternatives. He stated he thought No.2 sounds good as long as we don't
mclude used cars.
Don Price, EI Monte RV, stated he thought they had gotten in under the wire, but now
wasn't sure. He submitted his plans the day before the deadline for plan check.
Mr. Byde stated the SDR section requires that for any new building in excess of 1,000
square feet, the City mUBt make findings and discrehonary items had to be submitted
prior to that date. His item was submitted as a building permit. This was what he
referenced.
l\1r. Price stated he wants to fit in wherever he can get his buildmg, He is rnnnmg abou:
800 motor homes through this building. \Vhen it rains, it is really tough with a fleet thef
SIZe. They want theIr semce building.
Elpi Abulencia stated he wanted to make the Council stronger in ItS direction and
decision. Based on his business experience, he asked why don't we simplify the playins
field. Why not go with No.1? The Mayor said previously, "daily we face the problem 01
growth and strive to understand people and to know who we are and where we are
going". Along 'wlth the sustainabil.ity resource. effort, he suggeste.d we find out what tho
.
em' COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME Zt
REGULAR MEETING
September 3, 2002
PAGE 409
~? ob';f-'
people want really, what the owners want and tenants want and in mterest of savi.ng
time, have a strong foot of what we are going to do, not just a moratorium and
something that v.ill precipitate conflict and disharmony among the people.
Mayor I.ockhart dosed the public hearing.
em. Zib stated he felt it is unfortunate that Staff and the property ov.'l1ers could not
meet. Peter's idea could e>..-pose the city to claims of takIng property. This whole area if
not blighted, but we are saying it is an entrance to the City and with modifications to
Dublin Boulevard and' Dougherty Road so we can do this without piecemealing it. He
would be willing to entertain alternates 2 or 3, which seem to offer the greate&i
flexibility to property ov.'l1ers. This would allow us to develop some comprehensive plan
on what we ultimately want to do with the area.
Mayor Lockhart stated she felt this would give owners a year to deal with some sort of tJ.
plan. The Council has the responsibility to look at th1S for the benefit of the entire
community. We are not asking people to make changes tomorrow, but look at changes
that could be accommodated with a SF. We are trymg to do the least amount of damage
to everyone and we can best do this as part of an overall SF. She felt alternative Z gets
closest to doing this \\ith listing businesses to include and those to exclude. This gives
the business community direction on where the. plan is going.
Mr . Byde stated it is reasonable to expect this could be done in 13 or 14 months.
Mr. Ambrose stated we have involved property owners and business oV'mers heavily in
the past. The issue is what do we do in the interim.
Cm. McCormick stated she was leaning toward option 2 a~ this gives the most flexibility
to the property owners. We're not tr')ing to put anybody out of business. She would like
to see somethins as flexible as possible while we are planning for the future.
Cm. Sbranti stated he doesn't like option 3, and feels option Z is better than a strict
moratorium. This has been done m the past. He agreed with Cm. Zika that it is
unfortunate that a meeting has not taken place between property owners, businesses an:
Staff. We should look to make sure they all have frontages through the SF process and
look at circulation. With optIOn 1, he still felt this gives flexibility.
Cm. Oravetz stated he was sticking with option 1. He did not feel it isa threat to health
safety and welfare. We do want to change that area. Option I gives the business
OVl'l1ers the control they need to continue to operate their businesses. He was agamst a
CITY COUNCILMINlTES
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MEETING
September 3, 2002
PAGE 410
"l4"1J ~f
moratorium at this time, but was all for doing something different out there, He
supports alternative I
em. McCormick asked if we adopt option Z, how this will affect the Corrie property and
Miracle Auto Painting?
Mr. Ambrose stated all properties are covered, but relate only to shaded uses, Permitted
uses are identified in the Staff Report. It doosn't preclude everything.
Cm. Sbranti felt the sooner we get the SF done, businesses will benefit and he felt ophon
2 will still allow some uses. The Village Park-way prbcedent worked well.
Cm. Oravetz felt we will make a very unlevel playing field for them to compete in
Dublin. We win be tying their hands with option 2.
Mayor Lockhart disagreed.
Cm. Oravetz asked if Staff should also go back and look at Mr. MacDonald's options.
Mr. Ambrose stated the City Council could add or delete uses at this time.
Cm. Sbranti asked about a contractor's office - is this just small office space'!
Mr. Byde responded it is generally equipment storage associated w'ith contracting.
Cm, Sbranti asked about recreational facility mdoor
Mr. Byde stated this would be a gymnasium or arcade. There's a whole list of about 20
that fall into this category.
Cm. McCormick asked about an automobile vehicle storage lot and if this would be
prohibited.
Mr. Byde stated it would not be prohibited under his current use, but it couldn't go
forward during the term of the moratorium.
Cm. McCormick stated she would consider moving this one off the list.
The Council agreed to take this one off the list
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MEETING
September 3, 2002
PAGE 411
1?'~ ~t
Mr. Byde suggested that in order for Staff to meet with property owners, that this item be
brought back to the Octooor 1 st meeting.
On motion of Cm. McCormick, seconded by Mayor Lockhart. and by majority vote, the
Council directed. Staff to return to the Council in October with option 2 and add back
auto vehicle storage lot. Additionally, Staff was directed to meet with property owners
and have them indicate what other uses they want included during the 14 months. Cm
Oravetz votedm opposition to the motion.
.
FUBUC HEARING
AMENDMENTS TO THE SMOKING POLLUTION CONTROL ORDINA.1',/CE
10;2~ 6.4 (560-90)' , //
Mayor Lock'h.J.rt opened the public hearin;;;. ./'
~ -'
Administrative 'st Jason Behnnann presented the Staff Rep9l1" and advised that the
purpose ofthis Ordin ce is to bring the existing provisions o(Chapter 5.5() of the
Dublin Municipal code ulating smoking into conformjty with recent changes in StatE
Law and to add additional ~. ssible restrictions on $ltlokin:;.;- in enclosed and
unenclosed public places and ces of employmel1f: 'The am~ndments would change
the Ordinance as follows: ", ' '
1. Prohibit the retailing of tobacco---produpts or tobacco paraphernalia by means of a
self-service display. 'x '
2. Prohibit smoking in dining areas-fuli re part of a restaurant, business, non-profi'
entity, place of employment, of located any public place.
3. Prohibit smoking v;,:ithin areasonab1e dista ce from any entrance, opening, or
vent into an area in wh}Ch smoking is prohib' d except while actively passing Ole
the way to another q.estmation and without en . g or crossing any area in whkh
smoking is prohil;lited.
4. Prohibit smoktn"g in common areas of multi-family . dings including, but not
limited to',wartments, condominiums, retirement fadIi ' s, and nursing homes.
Cm. Orave}Z asked if the city has ever issued warnings or citatiom re ed to outdoor
dining/'
Mr. Behrmann staled yes, we've probably had half a dozen complaints in the last few
years. Dublin Police Services does send out units occasionally to make sure violations
are not occurring.
C[T\' COUNCIL MINl1TES
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MEGTING
September 3, 2002
PAGE 412
tiP OO~t
Cm. Zib stated he attended the Chamber of Commerce barbeque on August 21st and
this was really nice.
It was reported that the Tri -Valley Convention & Visitors Bureau recently installed their
new officers.
Cm. Sbranti stated he went to the Chamber event also. In addition, he went to a
Shakespeare event at Concannon.
.
CLOSED SESSION
At 12:57 a.m., the Council went back into closed session for consideration of items 2, 3
and 4.
2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING L/TIGA nON - Government Code S~ion
54956.9(a) Name of Case: Goodland Landscape v. CIty of Dublin, Alam9da Superior Court No.
2002042262
3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING L1T1GA TlON - Government Code Seation
54956.9(a) Name of Case: Dubrey v City of Dublin, Alameda Superior Court No. 2002057128
4. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING L1T1GA nON - Government Code Soction
54956.9 subdivision(a) Nama of Cass: City of Dublin v Dublin Land Co., Aiameda Superior Court No.
V.01810o-Z
REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTION
Mayor Lockhart advised that there was no reportable action.
.
ADJOURNME~'T
11.1
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned
at 1:30 a.m.
ArrEST:
.FIt
crTY COUNCIL MINliTES
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MEETING
September 3, 2002
PAGE 428
11t'[}t
PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDERATION OF
URGENCY" MORATORIUM ORDINAl'ilCE IN SCARLETT COURT AREA
8:24 p.m.
6.<1
..
(410-20)
No Staff liteport was presrmted This item was continued from the September S" 2iJ02
City Coun,,'iJ meeting, Sf which time the L.ounoil directed Staff to meet with business elld
property owners in the o.refl.; o.nd to prepare an urgency ordinl111ce to implement
Alternative 2 wluch would promNt all new uses that are currently permitted ti.nd
conditionally permitted in the area during the term of the moratorium, which willIes, g'
. least a.s long as the Specific Pltf11 Stuc{v, but no more than two years toW. Additional!.).
the City Council directed Staff to 11m1ove "Automobilrt-/Velncle Storage Lot" a.s Ii
prohibited use.
Mayor Lockhart su&,o-ested that because we have hacia considerable amount of comme
on this and there is not a great deal of support on tile part 0f the businesses for a
. moratorium, she would like to see an .opportunity 0ffered to a110w them to move rOr'l'T2.Td
v.-.J.th their plans and table this for one year. This could be readdressed in a year to see LJ
there ~ major crumges that have. oocu..'Ted.
ern. Oravetz stated he would agree.
Cm, Sltranti clarified we woukin't do the Specific Plan for one year and, there will be H2
moratorium.
,-
cm' COUNCIL lvm,,,,'TES
VOLU1vq.: Z 1
REGULAR MEETING
QGtober 1, 2002
PAGE 501
~ fit;? f
Mayor Lockhart stated we would. allow them to come in as they normally would. for pl.c.'
approvals.
Cm. Sbranti pointed out Staff has been given a lot of prqjeots and they arecurrentIy
mundated.
Cm. McCormick asked if the intention is to bring this back in a year and do some
planning.
Mayor Lockhart replied yes, we would give them a year to do what they need to do.
Cm. Sbranti stated hdelt doing a Specrlk Plan in a year will be more compatible
because we will know what the area will look like. .
Cm. Zika clarified that this woul.J.be all the uses currently allowed and If a use goe, 11"
and they have a 10 years lease . . .
City Attorney Silver stated if the City Council wants to they can table this issue as it
relates to the Specific Plan smce it was not part of the item before the Council tonight.
and direct Staff to bring back the Specific Plan for considerat-ion and discussion by the
Council, or they can formally direct Staff to not do any work.
Cm. Oravetz made a motion to table. this and direct Staff to not do any work on this.
Mayor Lockhart opened the public hearing.
Doreen Green, Amarillo Road, reprcsentlltg Busick and Geary, stated most or their
contractors have small spaces, which they use for offices and paperwork. TIte-y com, "'.
in the morning and they have a nice quiet time during the day. Dublin should be glac_ -, .
have some of these national companies. They are an asset rather than a detriment an:
should not be pushed away. The bogey man is still there and they will have to come
back again. Everybody's in a fright mode with the economic situation. They thougb;
they could put up a faqade in front of their building and they want to provide the
where\vithal 10 allow these companies to e)'-1st rather than chasing them away. V,,r e ,.,"- .
.lust have a seascape of automobile dealers. TIley should be allowed' to use the curren:
uses rather than the suggested changes. She stated she was happy to hear tile City
Coun~il is tabling this to give people time for thought. They hope to proYl.de a bette:'
curbsl.de new than what they'w got. They would like to continue providing space 10>
these small businesses to co exist in the City.
.'-
crT\' COUNCIL MIl\'lJ'rES
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MEETING
October 1, 2002
PAGE 502
"""'-""".
._""~.:::,.;"..,,,~~:,,:.\~,,,~.,,~'i.,~',.::::~.:':~
l~.~,'~i:: .:..;.;_."~t'-'~~,, ":>.",:,~.;:........-"-,........-.;;;:,.,,,...~.-
""?Otl1.~ Ii
W'r..OwP( U.T
Peter MacDonald, Main Street, Pleasanton, stated he felt this li a step ir, the nght
dire:::tion. Every use in Dublin is su'ttject to a SOR by City Staff sc there is a control i:
sornethi11g star'".s to happen.mone year, hopefully the~~ 'will have a consensus !ron'.
everybody on what needs to be done.
Peter McGaw, Walnut Creek, stated he felt the proposal is art excellent one and they
support it. He was concerned ab::)ut lack o~ engagement between Staff and pwp<".rty
owners. He stated he hopes the Council 'will encourage Staff R tall: w prOj;?e:ty o'wnO':",
liS ftus item mmes back ir, EVea!'.
.
Glen Kie::stead, Regional Street; stated he. applauaoo the decision tc take this off the
agend.? for a year. T:.'lerr mini -storage program. has art eA-pansion planned ane wiL. com.
. forward withir, the next 2 months. They plar, to spend some money on exposure 1:0
D-..lblin B::l. ulevard and tinE 1,000 so f: area. He reauested clari."icatloll - the issue of F.' ~
. .
was brought up when they talked about thiE before. OUtsid.e. wall to outside wall is
measureC: and ~nakes no mention of outside parkins spaces.
l\~yor Lockhart ::lar".iied that what was on the agenda, was cor.sideratio1''c of art urgenc-
ordinance. She suggested that he work with the Economic Development DJ.t'eCtot anc~
City Attomey on tlm specific issue.
Mayor Lockhart dosed pubh.:- hearing.
On motion of Cm. Oravetz, seconaed by em. M:::ComUck, an6. by unanimous vote., tho
City Council agreed to table tit::'. issue for a penod of one year.
...
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
VOLUME 21
REGULAR MEETING
October 1 , 2002
PAGE 503
"-3o~;~
AD)Om:NMEI\T'f
11.1
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjoun1c..:.
at 9:46 p.m.
ATffi",' c%~~d-
-', i\y Clerk
U
C~A/ffV ~
/ ! bAavor
(/ ~
~
CITI~ COUNCIL MINu"TES
VOLUME Z 1
REGULAR MEETING
October 1, 2002
PAGE 513
31~ ?t
;/
~
...
SCARLE'ITCOlJRT SPBCll-1C PLAN STlTY FA 03~(\eS
11:09 p.m. 7.4 (410-551
Associate Planner Kristi Bascom presented the Staff Report.
In October of 2002, the City Council delayed the development of the Scarlett CelL"'!: S::
Study for one year. Staff is now requesi:111g Council authorizatIon to continue the
ci.e\relopment of the Plan. The COrrL'11.unity Dev-elopment Department has budgeted
5'70,000 for the completion of the SF in Fiscal Year 2003-04, including :;.4-J,000 fa: c.....
economic study and $&0,000 for internal circu1atJ.on study.
em. Sbranti cla.."'ified that Staff is not re-commenmm; e moratorium and asked why 1L
longer. . ... ........---- -.. ~ .
1'1':,5. Bascom discussed the cOllSlderable amount of testimony last vear.
." "'" .. ~..,
,Meyor Lxk..ltali questioned whether Staff got any feedback regarding any plans for t.:,
aI""...a.
Ms. Bascom stated Staff recentlv met with a future applicant of the Dolan LUm'Der site,
but is not aware of anything dse such as new proposals.
CITY COUNCIL MINl'TES
YOLUM:I 22
REGULAR MEETING
October 21, 2003
PAGE 647
Attachment 2
32~~1
Wayne. Abbott, Miracle Auto Painting, stated Staff passed out to property owners and
business owners an agenetil statement and in the background, it says City Staff is
attempting to plan the area and. intersection that directly affects their property. Thb_,
under a err for the risht hand tum and they've been told to anticipate the project to
commence within 30 days, but the agenda statement says Staff would like to hold off 011
the tu.rn lane until the plan is done for the entire area. He stated they are confused abJ'__,
this and asked for some guidance.
lvu\ Thompson stated it is listed in the CIF for Staff to begin environmental and
appraisals and the thing we would like to hold off on is how the west end of Scarlett
Drive is handled. We ",ill need tIJpurchase those properties right ne>..--t to existing
Dougherty Road and an appraisal is tentatively supposed to be done by April. We are
pretty much on the same.> time frame as the property owner pulling out of the proper::'
Mr. Ambrose explained that the issue is what happens to Scarlett Court when Dougherr,
Road is widened.
Peter MacDonald stated he was here on behalf of Mike Fitzpatrick, owner of the fonne!
Dolan Lumber site. He thanked the City Council for put.ting this off for a year so they
can work on get.ting the property sold. He understands the City needs to go forward
with the SP process. He stated he feels it is 'wise not to put a moratorium on. Micha",:
Dolan died and during the time before they had to file the state tax documents in earty
l\1ay, Chris Foss let anyone interested get in touch with them. They put out a reque&:: fOe
proposals and had a number of conversations and narrowed down to 2 serious peopl~
they are in discussions with. They think t...'lJey have the potential to have a real deal and
bring a proposal to the City. If they don't get one of these deals, they are concerned
about the protection of their tenants and don't want to rush people who have been th<:,"""
for a long time. They want to give them at least 90 days. They have developed some
guidelines for talking to people. They are looking for commercial uses in the area. TIll'
is a gateway to the City and plan on having it looked at very carefully. They would li!:
to have the SF say this. Desi$nate It commercial to C2 zoning district or something
equivalent and some type of PUD oveday for the..entire area. Not sure it has to say a
heck of a lot more than this. Basically the Scarlett Court i.ntersection with Dublin
Boule,"ard is gone. Scarlett Drive is being widened from 2 to 4 lanes. The traffic
situation is not that complicate& You already did the economic study for the
redevelopment area, so he was not sure what an additional study will tell you. The-
market will tell you mu(;h more quickly titan an economic study. On the property jus. 0
the north of them, the Nohr property, there is a use permit for a car. lot. You have to h,
respectful of the uses there and allow some time between the time the SF gets adopted
~~
CITY COl"NCIL MIJ\:.LTTES
VOLUME 22
RLGULAR MEETING
October 21, 2003
PAGE 648
~3~~
and the transition. They hope to bring back to the City a user agreement to lead the
redevelopment of the. area.
Glenn Kierstead stated his project is further down Scarlett Court; 7 acres used for pubL"
stopage. They are land locked. They are a step child over there. TIley support a
commercial classification for the property. Not sure what ilie focus of the study WOk Ii
be. He would like some resolution as they are ready to e:>..-pand and cannot in CU1Tem
configuration.
Doreen Green, Busick Air Conditioning, stated she has approached Staff during th" pc:s;
year and was told Staff had received no direction from t.~e City Council and' was told. ck
whatever you were gomg to do. They have painted their building, repainted trim and
tidied up the other two buildings and put in some blacki:op renewal and slurry seal.
Hopefully; -the improvements they have made will be acceptable. They have 100%
occupancy in the area and some of the tenants have be<3n there since 1973. TIley arc'
providing a use that should be acceptable to the City and if you have any other thing;,
you want them to do, they will be happy to look at this.
Wayne Bennett representing Mike Nohr stated he was concerned based on past dealin~:'
with the City. A SF' is indeed specific and tries to tlt'all the land uses together. Mr. Nt,.:
has been there over S 1 years and feels it .is an appropriate use that generates sales fay . J~'
the City. There is an economic concern and they felt a land use permit term of one yea"
may be a little too short. They also support not having a moratorium.
Ralph Gil stated this is the first time he has spoken. He is right next door to Miracle'6
building and asked what is going to happen to his building? Does he have to get a
lawyer?
Mr. Thompson stated we are gettmg going with environmental and this property ha'
tenants and we would have to do a relocation study. We have the actual budget for
acquisitions in the next year so we would do appraisals this year and next year we
would talk about mabng an offer on the business. TItis would be the first part of the
ne:ld fiscal year, so around July of 2004.
Cm. Sbranti asked if we are looking at only ilie Miracle side of the intersection?
Mr. Thompson stated when the Union 76 Gas StaUOH went in on the southwest corn,. .',
we actually got most of the right-of-way needed. We will actually need some on thE
north west corner also. It also affects the Pak 'N Save sitl::.
CITY COrNelL MINl'TES
,TOLUME 22
REGCLAR MEETING
October 21, 2003
PAGE 649
3~1
Mayor Lockhart stated as Dublin grows there win be naturally occurring changes in t;-,_ :
area. The most curious part is circulation around there is really rather odd.
Mr. Ambrose advised that we know how wide Dougherty Road needs to be to mitigate
the impacts, but a study needs to be done. This is an opportunity for the City Council Ie
indicate their preferred uses for the property with a SF and some new uses.
Mayor Lockhart stated everything around this is in transition and in the process of
changing. It is important that this piece not be.. 16ft out. This 1st:> everybody's benefit,'
de this study. Circulation is crucial. She stated she has always felt automotive works 12.
this area. We need to do it right. This is too importimtan area to just say l&'gsee Wfu;:
happens.
em. Sbranti stated he has a preference on properties. that are vacant or und.erutilized !, :.'
commercial. This 1S a good opportumty for some conunercial development and auto .,
also a priority for the area.
Cm. Oravetz agreed and stated this is the gateway to our community and a lot of peo~' :"
in Dublin want to see a change there.
Vro. McCormick stated there will bd. community meetings with property ov,'Uers, She
asked when these will start up.
Ms. Bascom stated Staff ",ill come back with a work plan. She anticipates that it will b.
sometime nel..i: Spring.
Mayor Lockhart clarified that while we are doing this, businesses in the area can stin
move forward with their plans.
Mr. Ambrose pomted out if the City received an application, the City Council mayb\
faced with having to deal with thlS pnor to the completion of the specific plan.
On mohon of em. Oravetz. seconded by \lm. McCormick, and by unanimous vote (Cn'_.
Zika absent), the Council authorized Staff to continue the Scarlett Court Specific Plare
Study.
..A..
-......- '
CITY COl'NCIL l\1I!'it:-tts
VOU~l\1E 22
REGULAR MEETING
October 21, 2003
PAGE 650