HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8.1 Dublin Villlage Historic Area SP
CITY CLERK
File # Offi[][ll]-[3J[5J
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 3,2006
SUBJECT:
ATTACHMENTS:
RECOMMENDATIO~ry/ 1)
\ 2)
3)
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Request for an Initiation of a Specific Plan Amendment Study for
the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan
Report prepared by Kristi Bascom, Senior Planner
1)
Resolution authorizing the Initiation of a Dublin Village
Historic Area Specific Plan Amendment Study
Planning Commission meeting minutes from July 11,2006
City Council meeting minutes of August 1, 2006
Map of the proposed amendment area
2)
3)
4)
Receive Staff presentation;
Receive public comment; and
Adopt the Resolution authorizing the Initiation of a Dublin
Village Historic Area Specific Plan Amendment Study
(Attachment 1).
None.
Background
On August 1,2006, the City Council adopted the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan. Prior to the
Plan's adoption by City Council, the item was considered by the Planning Commission at the July 11,
2006 Planning Commission meeting. At that meeting, the Planning Commission questioned why three
parcels along Dublin Boulevard were not included in the boundary of the Specific Plan. The Planning
Commission expressed their interest in including three additional properties in the Specific Plan boundary
for the purposes of ensuring that any redevelopment of these properties would be in compliance with the
Specific Plan's Design Guidelines and for the purposes of ensuring consistency of the public streetscape
(Attachment 2). The three parcels were identified as follows and are shown in the Attachment 4:
· 11746 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-004) - property is owned by Kenneth and
Patricia Burger and contains two office buildings
· 11700 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-005-02) - property is owned by Oleg and
Linda Dubney and contains one office building
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COPY TO: File
Property Owners in the proposed Specific Plan Amendment area <" 1
' ITEM NO. 11.
Page 1 of2
G:\PA#\2002\02-074 Historical Study\Specific Plan\SP Amendment\CC Staff Report SPA 3 parcels.doc
. 11684 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-007-01) - property is owned by the
Briarhills of Dublin Cabana Club and contains one building and a swimming pool.
ANALYSIS:
The Planning Commission adopted Resolution 06-19 on July 11, 2006, which included a recommendation
to the City Council that the Specific Plan boundary be revised to include the three additional parcels
described above. These three parcels were not included within the original boundary of the' Specific Plan
because the boundary was drawn to be contiguous with the boundary of the moratorium area the City
Council approved on October 7, 2003. The moratorium area boundary was based on the location of the
area's remaining historic resources and drawing as tight a boundary around those resources as possible.
On August 1, 2006, the City Council (Attachment 3) adopted the Specific Plan. At that meeting the
Council also directed Staff to return to the City Council with a request to initiate a Specific Plan
Amendment to study the addition of the three parcels outlined by the Planning Commission. Adding the
three parcels to the Specific Plan boundary will ensure that if any of the properties are redeveloped in the
future, they will be designed in conformance with the Specific Plan Design Guidelines and in the
appropriate context with the future Dublin Historic Park Master Plan, which will be located across the
street.
Following the City Council direction for Staff to prepare a request to initiate a Specific Plan Amendment
Study, Staff sent a letter to the three affected property owners advising them of the proposal to include
their property in the Specific Plan Area. At the time of the writing of this Staff Report, Staff had not
received any feedback from the property owners on whether or not they supported the concept.
If the City Council authorizes a General Plan Amendment Study, Staffwill:
· Conduct public outreach and continue to contact the property owners ofthe three parcels to inform
them of the Specific Plan Amendment study and to solicit their input on being included in the
Specific Plan area;
· Prepare a new Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the inclusion of the additional
parcels and notice the environmental document for the appropriate public review period as
required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
· Analyze the proposal in relation to other City policies, documents, and Capital Improvement Plans
and make recommendation on the inclusion of the three parcels in the document to the Planning
Commission and the City Council.
The above actions would take approximately 3-6 months to complete, given the public review periods
required for CEQA documents.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) Receive Staff presentation; 2) Receive public comment; and
3) Adopt the Resolution authorizing the Initiation of a Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan
Amendment Study (Attachment 1).
Page 2 of2
\0() \
RESOLUTION NO. - 06
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
*****************************************
AUTHORIZING THE INITIATION OF A SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT STUDY FOR
THE DUBLIN VILLAGE HISTORIC AREA SPECIFIC PLAN TO INCLUDE THREE
ADDITIONAL PARCELS
WHEREAS, a Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Amendment Study has been
recommended by the Dublin Planning Commission and directed by the Dublin City Council to include
three parcels not originally considered for inclusion in the Specific Plan area; and
WHEREAS, the three additional parcels are as follows:
· 11746 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-004) -owned by Kenneth and Patricia Burger
and contains two buildings
· 11700 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-005-02) -owned by Oleg and Linda Dubney
and contains one building
· 11684 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-007-01) -owned by the Briarhills of Dublin
Cabana Club and contains one building and a swimming pool; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended inclusion of these three parcels on Dublin
Boulevard to ensure their compliance with the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan's Design
Guidelines and for the purposes of ensuring consistency in the public streetscape; and
WHEREAS, Section 65453 of the State of California Government Code states that an amendment
to a Specific Plan shall be in a manner specified by the legislative body; and
WHEREAS, the initiation request has been reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and was found to be Categorically Exempt under Section
15306, Class 6 of the State CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, a Staff report was submitted outlining the issues surrounding the request; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and consider all such reports, recommendations, and
testimony hereinabove set forth and supports the initiation of a Specific Plan Amendment Study for the
inclusion of three parcels in the Dublin Historic Area Specific Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Dublin does
hereby approve the Initiation request for a Specific Plan Amendment Study for the three parcels as
identified above.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin on this 3rd
day of October 2006, by the following votes:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
B. J 10 . 3
G:\PA#\2002102-074 Historical StudylSpecific PlanlSP AmendmentlCC Reso SPA 3 parcels. doc
Attachment 1
Planlling Commissiol'l Mil1lltes
2~ iD
CALL TO ORDERlROLL CALL
A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, July 11,
2006 in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair Schaub called the meeting to
order at 7:00 p.m.
Present: Chair Schaub, Vice Chair Wehrenberg, Commissioners Biddle, Fasulkey, and King;
Mary Jo Wilson, Planning Manager; Kristi Bascom, Senior Planner; John Bakker, Assistant City
Attorney; Diane Lowart, Parks & Community Services Director; and Rhonda Franklin,
Recording Secretary.
ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA - NONE
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS
The June 27, 2006 minutes were approved as submitted. Cm. Biddle abstained from the vote
due to his absence during the June 27, 2006 meeting.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - NONE
CONSENT CALENDAR - NONE
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - NONE
PUBLIC HEARINGS
8.1 Public Art Program - Amendment to the Dublin Municipal Code - Resolution
recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance adding Chapter 8.58
and Amending Chapter 8.104.070 of the Dublin Municipal Code (Zoning
Ordinance) relating to the Public Art Program. The Ordinance requires a Public
Art Contribution for all new non-residential development and all new
residential development projects in excess of 20 residential units. This item is
continued to a future Planning Commission meeting.
Chair Schaub acknowledged that the item has been continued to a future Planning Commission
meeting.
8.2 P A 02-074 Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and General Plan
Amendment - The proposed project consists of the following components: 1)
Adoption of a Resolution recommending City Council adoption of the Draft
Initial StudyfMitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
Program; and 2) Adoption of a Resolution recommending City Council approval
of a General Plan Amendment and the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area
Specific Plan.
q>fcJnnil/fJ Comrlmsi(l/t
'1?mUt.lr ''rf.i'eiill[J
66
.July 11, 1006
Attachment 2
Chair Schaub asked for the Staff Report.
3 Cl() \0
Ms. Kristi Bascom, Senior Planner, presented the specifics of the project as outlined in the Staff
Report.
Chair Schaub asked why the boundaries of the Specific Plan did not include the properties
located at 11684, 11700, 11740, and 11750 Dublin Boulevard ("the four buildings"). Ms. Bascom
explained that a consulting firm was hired to assess the boundaries based on the identification
of the remaining historic resources in the area.
Cm. Fasulkey asked if the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the Green Store to operate as a
church had an expiration date, and Ms. Bascom said no. Ms. Bascom stated that the CUP could
expire if the church was inactive for 12 months. Cm. Fasulkey asked if the CUP was
transferable to another church. Ms. Bascom said yes and further stated that the CUP runs with
the land. Cm. Biddle asked if the CUP only applies to church usage, and Ms. Bascom said yes.
Chair Schaub opened the public hearing.
Mr. Friedrich WeIss, resident in the area, inquired about the proposed redevelopment of the
Springs Apartments and about additional visitor parking for the Park expansion. Ms. Bascom
explained that there is no proposal to make any changes to the Springs Apartments. She stated
that there is a proposal for additional parking along Donlon Way, as well as a new parking lot
to serve a potential future Park.
Cm. King asked if Alamilla Springs would be restored. Ms. Bascom stated that it is not a part of
the Historic Park Master Plan; however, one of the implementation measures in the Specific
Plan is to work with the property owner of Alamilla Springs.
Chair Schaub suggested including the four buildings in the Specific Plan to enhance the historic
ambience along Dublin Boulevard.
Cm. Biddle asked if properties within the Specific Plan would have to conform to the Design
Guidelines should the properties undergo exterior alteration, and Ms. Bascom said yes. Ms.
Bascom added that the Design Guidelines were adopted by the City Council in January 2005.
Chair Schaub pointed out that the Petco store was recently painted and does not comply with
the Design Guidelines. Ms. Mary Jo Wilson, Planning Manager, stated that Staff would look
into this.
Chair Schaub asked about the term "Dublin lots." Ms. Bascom stated that "Dublin lots" is a
Geographical Information Systems (GIS) term used to evaluate how lots in Dublin relate to
other lots in the Tri-Valley area.
Chair Schaub stated that he would like to see unfamiliar or infrequently used terms, including
acronyms, defined in the Specific Plan to eliminate confusion and facilitate better understanding
of the Specific Plan.
:j>(armmfJ Commission
1?Jtl/uklr ~\1eetinf{
67
]ufy ll, 200n
Chair Schaub suggested that the Design Guidelines should be clearer on the appropriate style~:O ru
a tower element and on the meanings of "pedestrian-oriented scale" and "traditional
neighborhood design" as discussed on pages 34 and 55 of the Specific Plan.
Chair Schaub pointed out that the last sentence of the discussion on multiplex homes on page
56, should read "If a multiplex home's design is to resemble a single family home, it can be placed
adjacent..." instead of "Because its design resembles a single-family home..."
Chair Schaub suggested that guidelines on the use of synthetic materials should be included in
the discussion of building materials on page 62 of the Specific Plan, and Cm. Fasulkey agreed.
Vice Chair Wehrenberg interjected that the language used in the Specific Plan would probably
be easily understood by those in the architecturalj design field. She stated that the discussion
on building materials does not eliminate the use of any material.
Vice Chair Wehrenberg asked what would happen to the Kennel. Ms. Bascom stated that
nothing is proposed for the Kennel. Vice Chair Wehrenberg confirmed that 1) only five parcels
would change Land-Use Designation, and 2) the remaining parcels would have to conform to
the Design Guidelines upon exterior alteration, and Ms. Bascom said yes.
Cm. Fasulkey suggested that guidelines on the use of recycled materials should be included in
the Design Guidelines. Chair Schaub asked if the Guidelines are open to using synthetic or
recycled building materials. Ms. Wilson stated that the Guidelines could be open to alternative
materials as long as the design criterion is met. Ms. Bascom pointed out that the intent of the
Design Guidelines is to guide each project towards conforming to the desired look and feel of
the area.
Cm. Biddle stated that he appreciates the detail and specificity of the Design Guidelines, as well
as an attempt towards recreating an era that no longer exists.
Cm. Fasulkey noted that the middle picture on page 33 is inconsistent with the sign guidelines
on page 44 of the Specific Plan. Ms. Bascom stated that page 33 is referring to the architectural
style and character. Cm. Fasulkey suggested that it be corrected to avoid any
misunderstanding.
Cm. Fasulkey noted that the last sentence on page 49 of the Specific Plan implies that
"... .fluorescent colors must be avoided" instead of ".. . should be avoided." Ms. Bascom stated
that the word "must" is not used because the document serves as a guideline. Cm. King
suggested that the document should use the word II must" if fluorescent signs are unwanted in
the area. Mr. Jolm Bakker, Assistant City Attorney, explained that the guidelines are designed
to allow flexibility.
Cm. King reiterated that he would like to see descriptive terms and phrases better defined.
Cm. Biddle asked about the timeframe for the Historic Area streetscape improvements. Ms.
Diane Lowart, Parks & Community Services Director, stated that streetscape improvements
would take place over the next three years. Cm. Biddle asked about the timeframe for the
Historic Park improvements. Ms. Lowart stated that the City Council has to take action on the
(j>f{mniI18 ('ommisn-oll
1?mUt:.lr ~tfctt InfJ
68
Jufy 11, 20V6
!5bb \ C
Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments, and the Mitigated Negative Declaration before it
can consider the Historic Park Master Plan.
Cm. King stated that he likes the objective of creating of an entry plaza as discussed on page 5 of
the Specific Plan. Ms. Bascom stated that it will be implemented if the Draft Historic Park
Master Plan is approved by the City Council.
Cm. King asked for clarification on the five parcels included in the proposed land-use
designation changes, and Ms. Bascom pointed them out on the diagram.
Chair Schaub stated that he would like to see the four buildings included in the boundary of the
Specific Plan.
Vice Chair Wehrenberg asked about the response to the Initial Study jMitigated Negative
Declaration public review period. Ms. Bascom stated she received comments from two State
agencies and questions from property owners in the area.
Cm. Biddle asked if the Initial Study jMitigated Negative Declaration would have to be revised
if the Specific Plan boundary was amended to include the four buildings, and Ms. Bascom said
yes. Cm. Biddle asked if this Initial Study jMitigated Negative Declaration would have to be
amended if zoning was amended within the boundaries of the Specific Plan, and Ms. Bascom
said no.
Cm. King asked if the Draft Historic Park Master Plan would come before the Planning
Commission, and Ms. Bascom said no.
Chair Schaub questioned the Planning Commission on whether it would like to recommend to
City Council inclusion of the four buildings into the Specific Plan boundarYI and the Planning
Commission unanimously answered in the affirmative.
Chair Schaub noted that for future documents, he would like to see descriptive terms and
phrases better defined. Ms. Wilson stated that Staff would be able to appropriately interpret the
Specific Plan as it is currently written. .
The Planning Commission complemented Staff on the level of detail and the amount of guiding
information contained in the Specific Plan.
Hearing no further comments, Chair Schaub closed the public hearing.
Cm. Biddle asked for examples of what is not covered by the Specific Plan. Ms. Bascom
explained that interior modifications are not covered by the Specific Plan.
On a motion by Vice Chair Wehrenberg, seconded by Cm. Biddle, and by a vote of 5-0-0, the
Planning Commission unanimously adopted:
Pfarmil7g Commission
'i?.rguklr 5\1.eeti118
RESOLUTION NO. 06-18
69
.JlIfy 11, lOU6
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
lJ'Cb 1'0
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR THE DUBLIN VILLAGE HISTORIC AREA SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT
PA 02-074
On a motion by Vice Chair Wehrenberg; seconded by Cm. Biddle; with a suggestion to
"recommend to the City Council the inclusion of the properties located at 11684,11700, 11740, and
11750 Dublin Boulevard into the boundary of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan"; and by a
vote of 5-0-0; the Planning Commission unanimously adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 06-19
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE DUBLIN VILLAGE
HISTORIC AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AND RELATED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
PA 02-074
NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Chair Schaub commented that Staff should consider using a professional editor to proofread
significant documents. The Planning Commissioners commented that they liked the idea.
OTHER BUSINESS
10.1 Brief INFORMATION ONLY reports from the Planning Commission and/or
Staff, including Committee Reports and Reports by the Planning Commission
related to meetings attended at City Expense (AB 1234).
The Planning Commission did not have any items to report.
ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 8:04 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
~~
Planning Commission Chair
--~'--~.~__..~~_.:t.
:?{anni71!J Commission
rx.rfluf.<1r :Veeting
70
ju(v 11, 201J6
lyt;IO
PUBUC HEARINGS
Public Hearing
Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment
7:12 p.m. 6.1 (410-55/420-30)
Mayor lDckhart opened the public hearing.
A letter was submitted to the City Council prior to the meeting from
George B. Speir, law Offices of Miller Starr Regalia, who represented
Berkeley land Company, Inc., owner of the Dublin Square Shopping
Center located at 11759 Dublin B:mlevard, in which the Berkeley land
Company requested that the City Council reject the plan and permit its
property to be redeveloped.
Senior Planner Kristi Bascom presented the Staff Report and advised that
the project included consideration of a Specific Plan and related General
Plan Amendments for the Dublin Village Historic Area, which consisted of
approximately 38 acres of land generally located northwest of San Ramon
Road and 1-580. The Specific Plan area included commercial, residential,
public, and business park! industrial properties surrounding the
intersection of Donlon Way and Dublin fuulevard.
Mayor lDckhart noted that there had been conversation as to whether the
City would want to explore the possibility of taking over the maintenance
and control of the Alamilla Springs, which was included in the Historical
District, and asked if this would be the appropriate time to include the
discussion.
City Attorney Bizabeth Silver advised that part of the Specific Plan
described the Springs as an important cultural and biological resource, and
that the City should consider working with the property owner to renovate
the remnant of the Springs and honor its historical significance and that
the City should work in partnership with property owner to study the
feasibility of restoring the Springs to its natural state. If the City Council
adopted this Specific Plan, then City Staff could contact the property owner
and talk to them about how that might occur. One thing that the City
could suggest would be a maintenance easement over the property, which
would allow the City to maintain the Springs. This would not require any
additional action by the Council because the adoption of the Specific Plan
included steps along those lines.
Attachment 3
~ZD (0
Ms. Bascom advised that one of the follow-up measures of the Specific Plan
Implementation Plan was to conduct that feasibility study, so it was already
folded into the overall plan.
Cm. McCormick noted that the Staff Report indicated that the Planning
Commission recommended the inclusion of three other parcels next to the
area, which might delay this process by 3-6 months. If the Council moved
forward with this plan tonight, could the other three parcels come back at
another time?
Ms. Bascom indicated that the Council could direct staff to process an
amendment to the specific plan. The parcels in question were on the
corner of Hansen Drive and Dublin fuulevard.
Georgean Vonheeder- Leopold, representing Dublin Historical Preservation
Association (DHPA), advised that the DHPA currently owned two parcels,
but only one was included in the Specific Plan. She asked what was the
plan for the other parcel.
Ms. Bascom advised that one of the parcels currently had a land use
designation Parks & Recreation, so Staff was not recommending a land use
change on that parcel.
Mary Beth Acuff, Dublin resident, urged the Council to get control over the
Alamilla Springs, as well as the setback. The Heritage & Cultural Arts
Commission had talked about using that setback area as part of the City's
parks and recreation area as, perhaps, a small walking park with an
historical designation.
Bill &haub, Planning Commission Chair, advised that the Planning
Commission felt that the additional three parcels should be included in the
Specific Plan so the Plan did not finish in the middle of a road, but was
completed to the other side so the entire area became part of the vision. He
complimented Planning Staff for putting together an excellent planning
document.
Mayor Lockhart closed the public hearing.
Cm. Zika made a motion to adopt the Resolutions.
Cm. Hildenbrand seconded the motion.
'9t I
Vm. Oravetz asked if the Council needed to include the inclusion of the
three parcels in this future in this motion.
Cm. McCormick stated that it would be important to include those parcels
and should be included somewhere in the motion, but expressed concern
about delaying this action.
City Attorney Silver advised that the Council's intent was clear to Staff and
it need not be included in the motion. Staff would bring the issue back for
the Council to formally initiate the General Plan process for those three
parcels.
On motion of Cm. Zika, seconded by Cm. Hildenbrand and by unanimous
vote, the Council adopted
RESOWTION NO. 148 - 06
ADOPTING 1HEMITIGATFD NFGATIVEDECIARATION AND
A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FUR 1HEDUBUN VIllAGE
HISTORIC AREA SPECIFIC PIAN PROJECT, P A 02 - 0 74
and
RESOWTION NO. 149 - 06
APPROVING 1HEDUBUN VIllAGE HISTORIC ARPA SPECIRC PIAN
AND REI.ATFD GENERAL PlAN AMENDMENTS
..
>
......
......
~
~
=-
=
(t>
=
......
".
\
\
~ ~
~,,~
'''",,",
""
"
"-,
Exhibit 3
Dublin Village
Historic Area
Specific Pia n
Boundary
Fr<:i"way
Stre<:its
- Dublin Lots
Buildl119S
II:::] Sp"Clfic Plan ArB6
~
.AiJ gutl 200f
: ~ni;'~:'i
lC(!
ie(
~CFe-et
O~;;:
C>
cf!
e
cee
t',1~1