The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem 8.3 Village Policy CITY CLERK File # DWl~II5l..[gJ[D] AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 7, 2004 SUBJECT: PA 04-025 - Village Policy Statement Report Prepared by: Eddie Peabody Jr., Community Development Director ATT ACHMENTS: 1. 2. Village Development Background Study Village Policy Statement ~ 1. 2. 3. Hear Staff presentation Comment on and Approve Village Policy Statement; Direct Staff to develop an action plan and return to a future City Council Meeting; or Instruct Staff to modify the Policy Statement and return to a future City Council meeting with revisions RECOMMENDATION: 4. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: The Fiscal Year 2004-05 budget allowed adequate resources to develop a policy defining the Village Concept. Additional work beyond the development of the Policy will require additional resources. If this Policy is approved and Staff is directed to implement it, Staff will return to the City Council with an Action Plan with Staff and/or Consultant costs. BACKGROUND: The City Council, as a part of the 10-year Strategic Plan, instructed Staff to develop a policy defining a Village Concept for use as a Planning Tool and to identify opportunities to create new villages in Dublin. Staff conducted research and prepared a Background Study (Attachment 1) on the concept of Villages in order to develop a working definition and develop a policy that would be consistent with the City Council's direction. The Background Study contains a brief summary of the history of Villages in America and the development of modem Villages the United States. Based on this information, Staff has prepared a Village Policy Statement (Attachment 2) to guide the creation of Villages 'in the City of Dublin. Background Study and Policy Statement: The Background Study examined a variety of village-type developments in the western United States. The term "village" is used rather liberally to describe both large and smaller development areas. Staff ~__~_________________________________~________________-_______~__M________________.________________~_~_______ COPIES TO: Internal Distribution File copy ITEM NO. M G:\PA#\2004\04-025\CC SR Villages.doc 1 ùb Z-- then analyzed what were the common elements contained in these "villages" in order to synthesize the concept into a working definition that was comprised of certain characteristics. The characteristics were then refined to address how the village concept would fit into existing development in Dublin, as well as the planned villages and possible villages in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area. These characteristics are set forth in the proposed Policy Statement. Additionally, the Policy Statement includes under what circumstances the development of a Village should be considered. Implementation: Once the City Council has considered the Background Study and Policy Statement and provides Staff with direction as to the content and the applicability of the draft Village Policy, Staff could return with an Action Plan which would identify potential new Village Sites and what actions would need to be taken to modify the City's General Plan and Specific Plan Policies to allow for the location of future Villages. Staff would also identify methods to work with property owners to strengthen the identity of existing areas that are presently accepted as Villages. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council; 1) Hear Staff presentation; 2) Comment on and approve Village Policy Statement, 3) Direct Staff to develop an action plan and return to a future City Council Meeting; or 4) Instruct Staff to modify the Policy Statement and return to a future City Council meeting with revisions. :J.D6d. .... \0b\C:; VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT BACKGROUND STUDY Definition of a Villal!e A Village is a form of settlement that contains residential homes, businesses, public uses in a compact readily definable area where people can interact easily and where the mixture of uses and pedestrian linkages foster a sense of community to those who live there. It is a smaller settlement than a Town or City, and is often in modem times located within larger urban areas. The Village has existed as a form of a neighborhood settlement since beginning of civilization. Villages have been an integral form of settlement in Europe for hundreds of years. European settlers brought with them, this style of settlement to the new world. These settlements served as the home for agricultural communities along major roadways, and often included churches, shops, village greens, and schools for the large agricultural areas. They were settlements covering only small areas in size. Later, in America, Villages functioned as the essential living, working and social centers for people, particularly in the East and mid west areas. They became not only community centers, but in many cases local political centers, specifically recognized as established local governmental units in many states. In most suburban communities developed over the past, 50-100 years, the Village has nearly disappeared. The automobile, sprawl development, the rise of the subdivision, multiple builders and the desire for single family housing have created an urban pattern that favors the shopping center, specific apartment areas and scattered public parks. The alternative to sprawl is simple and timely: neighborhoods of housing, public facilities and schools placed in walking distance of shops, civic services, jobs and transportation - a modem version ofthe traditional Village concept. The Village Concept has thrived only with the advent of the visionary large scale developments in the 1950's and 60's where land planning efforts fostered the development of large scale villages. In modem times, the Village Concept has been used as a specific planning tool in the development of various areas in America. Some examples include: Greenbelt, Maryland; Baldwin Hills, Los Angeles; Columbia, Maryland; Irvine, California; Laguna West, Sacramento County; Reston, Virginia; and in San Diego, California. In summary, the Village has existed as a form of settlement since the beginning of time, and now is re- emerging as a part of contemporary development in cities. Research The idea of the Village concept as a part of future development in Dublin, while not new, has surfaced as a public policy issue that the City Council would like to pursue. The definition of a Village Concept is an important objective that Staff has been asked to complete in 2004-05, so that the City Council may identify opportunities to create new Villages in the future development of Dublin. This research effort covers the history of Villages, what characteristics they exhibit, how they function and their applicability to Dublin's situation. Conclusions were developed ITom this research that formed the basis for a recommended Village Policy for the City. Investigation of Village activities throughout the West and in national literature has revealed that the Village Concept may be coming back. Notable is the resurgence of new infill Villages being established as public policy in San Diego (1999), the continued development of Villages in Irvine (1970 to the present), I ATIAC~MEN11 t~ d%/S- new Village development at Laguna West in the South Sacramento area, South Brentwood and beginning efforts at Mountain House in San Joaquin County. Several directions were noted: . Development of large Villages on undeveloped land as a part of major master plans with significant transportation linkages between areas. Examples are the Irvine villages (600-1200 acres in size) with compact neighborhoods linked to major commerciallpublic uses at the Center corridor of the Village. Designed to have significant boundaries such as major streets, berms and architectural styles that define a boundary for the Villages urban edges. These large Villages contain from 15000-25000 people, and a mixture of housing types and facilities. The character of these Villages is noted by distinctive architecture, landscaping and defined community identity. Additional examples in California include Laguna West, Sacramento (800 acres). The City of Irvine's newest Village, Westbury, is comprised of eight neighborhood districts for a total of 4,270 residential units. Westbury also features two schools, commercial centers and common open space areas. Specific village characteristics of Westbury include individual architectural styles for each neighborhood, a mix of housing products, landscape promenades, a definitive open space spine along the major transportation linkage and a large centralized open space area, The Commons. '~..., ø - ELBMf!1'H.'\n 5enoOl.. . Development of large to small infill Villages in established neighborhood areas (San Diego). As a part of their 1999 Strategic Element, the San Diego City Council adopted an element that was designed to leverage new growth in ways that provide amenities for new development and adjacent neighborhoods that already exist. Emphasis was placed on creating street level activity and vitality with new public art and public spaces, parks and plazas to enhance a sense of community and neighborhood identity. Emphasis was on walkable, street oriented, urban design for new housing and public facilities. Since 1999, the City has defined numerous Village areas and specific programs are underway in many parts of the City (Pilot Village Programs, 1994) - North Park, The 2 ..3 Db I '5" Boulevard Marketplace, Mi Pueblo, The Paseo, Village Center at Euclid and Market), which vary in size fÌ'om 40 ~ 400 acres in size. The Village Center at Euclid Avenue and Market Street provides an example of an infill village in San Diego. This village has a mix of residential, commercial and industrial uses with a total of 839 residential units. The public space within the village includes a community center and pavilion, a 500-seat amphitheater, skate park and a passive park adjacent to the creek. Pedestrianlbicycle trails link to the transit spine that supports the trolley/bus service. A graphic showing the development on Euclid Avenue is illustrated on Page 3. _.,._,~,..__.._~ A Eudid Market Partners · .'.;<.' II~~~,~~~~ II ~~ PROJECT MUL TI~MODAL CIRCULATION PLAN Creek & Passive Park CHOLLA$ VIF:N , MARKE STREET ..~'" .........1IiIiW'.' ~~ ~-"~~"'~. m-",~..... . Lli1 ..')1;1I<~lR!!:"M~ :-r"':':~ .'-. . -- _H. - M NJA srMeET -......"'ti'.·". . .. . . . ... . . 'II . . .. .".fCIb:~'~~"",",,!):b VALENCIA PARK Civic Node Community Civic Node Major Streets PedestlianIBlcycle Unks MTD8 Right of Way Bridges Chotlas Creek Tributaries ...... ...... - - ~- ....,.. LINCOLN PARK l ;1; ""'" ..... . . . Development of small Villages in undeveloped areas such as South Brentwood Village (140 acres) Camarillo Gateway Villages (200 acres). In smaller City (10,000 - 50,000 people) urban areas, the emphasis has been on a pedestrian scale village development. Brentwood is a recent example of several Village areas that have a mixture of housing types, schools and public facilities within an easy pedestrian scale walkable area of a quarter mile in circumference. Standards in this village included neighborhood design based on wakable area distance of a quarter mile, a Village green surrounded by retail, day care and 30% ofthe site set aside for office and commercial development Major streets, walls and berms form urban edges that define the Village areas. The '"new urbanism" 3 ¥ Dò' s- approach of the project has been developed by Peter Calthorpe the noted architect. Emphasis has been on design of pedestrian access, tract linkages and architecturally different housing projects. Several builders have been involved in this project. The City of Roseville has a concept plan for a Village Center on undeveloped land. This plan calls for the village to have a walkable scale with streets laid out in a traditional grid pattern. A mixture of land use types will surround a village green at the center of the village. The Village Center will include 405 townhouses, 407 apartments, l4-acres of commercial uses, an II-acre church/school site and a 9-acre park site with ball fields. Major streets and a viUage streetscape plan will define the urban edge of the village. A graphic on City of RoseviUe concept Village Plan is shown on Pages 5. 'r""'_ "!~'t:'rì;.r " ,'f.!j¡¡ "'- 'f I f'r¡-- ~~"~_._.~------------,-----,._-_. Camrillo Gateway South Brentwood Village 4 Figure 10-1: Village Center Illustrative Plan City of Roseville 5 N E9 2ho' 4ðo' - - tJ ð'bJ 6 1.2 Db I 5"' Examples of Villaee Characteristics Village Large Size Mixture of Activity Trails / BoundarieslEdges Future Small Housing N odes/U ses Pedestrian Applicability walkabilitv to Dublin Westbury - Large 640 Yes, 8 Open Space Yes, Major Streets Too large Irvine Acres neighborhoods spines parks/trails 4270 units major retail area. School center commons Village Small 115 Yes, 839 units Commercial Pedestrian Major streets Possible use Center - acres / Industrial bike trails creeks San Diego uses to transit community trolley / center bus South Small 140 Yes, 522 units Retail/ Pedestrian Major streets Possible use Brentwood, acres mixed Industrial/ trails, park CA Church Camarillo Small 250 1200 units Retail/ Park, Major streets Possible use Gateway - acres mixed Commercial Linear Camarillo community trails center, school, community gardens Village Small 140 Apartment / Commercial Park site, Major streets Possible use Center - acres Townhomes area, church Pedestrian Roseville 812 units / School, trails Village Green Summarv of Research The review of various Village development recently completed has demonstrated that certain attributes should be considered in developing Village Characteristics for Dublin: · Very large Village projects (i.e.: Irvine, Laguna West) may not be possible in Dublin, because large flat undeveloped sites that can handle the scale of 600 and up acres are in limited supply in Dublin. · Smaller sized Village areas can be possible in Dublin, as sites smaller than 600 acres are still available. · All Villages have a mixture of housing types that are interrelated. · All have some form of activity nodes (retail, open space, community centers, church, schools, village green, etc) that contribute to the character ofthe Village. · Pedestrian trails, bike trails, linear walkways are found in all examples that link residential areas to activity areas, transit and other public uses. 6 - -1Jrsb I ~ . Major streets serve as boundaries for the Villages and activities and public access within the Villages are focused inside the Villages. AnalV8is of Dublin's Past and Current DeveloDment In the beginning, Dublin was "Village" in the classical sense. Serving as a stop on the San Jose/Sacramento route for both, the Spaniards, Mexicans and the emerging Californians, the early days found Dublin as a small settlement where traveler could find water, a resting place and a settlement along the major route north to south. The City's History reflects the early Donlon settlement located at Dublin's present historical sites. For many decades in the late 1800 and early 1900's, Dublin served as a major stopping point on the East/West and North/South routes through the Tri Valley area. In the decades before incorporation, development in Dublin was guided by the policies of Alameda County. The community served as a commercial crossroad for the Tri-Valley area and as residential development occurred in the late 1950's and 1960's, separate subdivisions were developed along San Ramon Road. Since that time, individual developments (both single-family and multi-family) were built throughout the western section of the City. After establishment of the City and adoption of the first General Plan the City continued to develop in the typical suburban fashion. In 1993-94, the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan was adopted for the area east of Camp Parks. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan speaks of two "Village Centers", Fallon Village and Tassajara Village (Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Document PP 52-54). These Village Centers were mixed-use areas that would provide commercial centers for the outlying residential areas that would be located outside the Town Center (Area G). Their purpose was to provide a higher density, socially active pedestrian oriented zone to serve as a center for the outlying areas. Located along major streets (Tassajara Road and Fallon Road), they were proposed to provide commercial convenience shopping and services closer to nearby residential areas, as well as public facilities, schools and higher density residential areas. Characteristics proposed were: Size Dwelling Units Commercial Sq. Ft. Schools Parks Tassajara Village (Tassajara Road at Fallon Road) 273 acres 1,132 112,000 1 2 Fallon Village (Central Avenue, East of Fallon Road) 142 acres 1,118 149,000 2 2 A conceptual map of Tassajara Village Center and Fallon Village Center is shown on Pages 8 & 9. 7 -- 8 VZ:; I '::> , raUon Parh,,,, Tassajara Village Center 8 C¡Ùò IS- ,- I¡III~gfl Sh¡;¡'PPM~ S'ru'l GGlflwlIY ViII_g. CDml1Mlrcl' Cllnle, /'~ Gate-wilY . . ,~eì~hbOfhood Patk ! / \ / \ $"00 / / G.,:;: ./ / Trllnsit Spin. Fallon Village Center These Village Centers were not envisioned to be directly separate contained villages, because their original purpose was to serve as commercial and public service areas for the more suburban outlying residential areas (North Tassajara Road and East of Fallon Road). Now due to environmental considerations and the realignment ofTassajara Road, the future Tassajara Village may be difficult to build in the exact location identified in the Specific Plan unless the General Plan and Specific Plan are modified in the future. The Fallon Village concept may be possible when the area east of Fallon Road has been evaluated in the upcoming EDPO General Plan/Specific Plan Study. VillafIes and Dublin in the Future As noted in the research above, Villages can be large or small. Many ofthe large Village Concepts exist in cities or areas that have large areas of undeveloped land (Columbia, Irvine) or are in areas oflarge cities that are using infill techniques to create Villages in already developed areas (San Diego). Dublin has specific characteristics that suggest that a smaller size area for the future may be better if new Villages are to be established here. These characteristics are: 1. The development of the Dublin Ranch and Santa Rita properties by two major landowners has left only a few large undeveloped areas in the City for potential new Village sites. 2. Several redeveloping areas which could lend themselves to a compact, pedestrian scale mixture of 9 JDûÒ IS' residential, commercial and public uses in the future (Transit Center areas, Downtown Specific plan areas) 3. Sites currently undeveloped and which are not in the Dublin Ranch or Santa Rita area have topographic, environmental and physical constraints which may limit the size and numbers of new Village opportunities. As identified above in the chart (Examples of Village Characteristics) and in the summary of the research done, specific Village characteristics have been developed by Staff that fit the scale of potential Village areas in the future in Dublin. These characteristics could be used for both new and redeveloping sites. 1. A Village location should be compatible with the local environment including topography. It should respect constraints, roadways and environmental considerations. 2. A Village should have a mixture of housing types, densities and affordability and should support a range of age and income groups. 3. Activity nodes (commercial areas, community facilities and public/private facilities) should be easily accessible to areas in the Villages. 4. Trails, pedestrian walkways and street linkages should be established to bring the parts and elements of the Village together. 5. The Village should have a strong "edge" defining the boundaries. This could include major streets, architectural or landscaped areas. 6. Village size should reflect development that promotes pedestrian walkability, permits a sufficient mixture of residential and public/private uses and convenient commercial areas. 7. Specific identity should be fostered for the Village areas (special signage, unique design elements, public plazas etc.) Town Center - Area G Staff evaluated recent projects to determine if they had been designed with the Village characteristics noted above. One project fits the characteristics of a Village. In 2000, the Town Center project between Central Parkway and Dublin Blvd, Keegan Street and Brannigan Street was approved by the City Council. It featured a mixed-use project, including a commercial center, public spaces, parks and pedestrian linkages between the residential areas and the Town Center area. The 86-acre site contained 1396 units, 25 acres of commercial and public uses. It contains urban design standards that create a strong architectural identity, a definable "edge" bounded by major streets and a recognizable character as a self-contained area for upwards of 3000 people. Commercial development is anticipated when a critical number of people are in the East of Tassajara Road area. In 2004, an adjacent parcel (Fairway Ranch) containing 930 units, of which the majority were affordable rental units was approved and is under construction. 10 1/6Ò'5' (") I ""C e¡ ~ ~ 1m I':; Town Center Project (Area G) Fairway Ranch Neighborhood Park Conclusion The characteristics for potential new Villages in Dublin as noted above, were developed from written descriptions of modem Villages that Staff researched, and modified to fit within Dublin constraints. A Village Concept can be an important planning tool in the development of the City in the future; offering the ability to create a sense of place which allows a mix of residential types, densities and land available for convenient commercial, public and private facilities and park areas. A critical mass of residential development can foster some possible commercial uses as well as the opportunity for public uses, small park areas and possible pedestrian scale to create the establishment of good pedestrian access between the parts ofthe community where possible. The size of the Village should reflect the use of major streets, open space and or environmentally sensitive areas to form a strong identifiable "edge" to separate it from nearby areas. C:\Background as on 8-27~04am,rtf Bibliography 11 - /;;;. lfÒ' ':j 1 City of Irvine Urban Design Implementation Plan. 1977 Wallace, McHarg, Roberts and Todd 2 Eastern Dublin Spec(fic Plan, as amended to Nov 1.2002 Wallace, Roberts and Todd 3 General Planfor the City of Irvine, /973 Wilsey and Ham 4 Crossroads, Hamlet, Village Town. 2004 Randall Arendt, American Planning Association- Planning Advisory Service 5 Strategic Framework Element, City of San Diego, 1999 City of San Diego 6 Strategic Framework Action Plan, City of San Diego. 1999 City of San Diego 7 Guidelinesfor Future Development. City of San Diego, 1992 City of San Diego 8 City of Villages Public Involvement, City of San Diego, 1999 9 City of Dublin. General Plan. as amended to November 1992. City of Dublin 10 Dowtown Core and West Dublin BART Specific Plan. City of Dublin, 2000, City of Dublin 11 City of Dublin Ten Year Strategic Plan, adopted 2004 City Council of Dublin 12 The next American Metropolis. Peter Ca/thorpe, 1993 12 / 3 c);;" / s- u CITY OF DUBLIN VILLAGE POLICY STATEMENT WEST HEVATlON NORTH HEVATION SEPTEMBER 7, 2004 1 ATTACHMENT 2., F-I Cì-) 5" c- VILLAGE POLICY Introduction The Policy described below is not a Planning legal requirement for new development. This Policy Statement is a definition of a Village used to refine and enhance special areas in the community that already contain some of the characteristics of villages. In addition, this Policy provides direction on what characteristics comprises the Dublin Village Concept. This concept can be used as a template for the development of new villages in the future. The development of this Policy is based on a Background Document dated September 7, 2004. Aoolicabilitv This Policy will be used by the City to identify possible Village sites in both new development areas and redeveloping sites. An Action Plan will be developed by Staff with specific recommendations on: 1. Possible Village Sites 2. Later modifications to the General Plan and Specific Plans to mandate the location and characteristics of Villages. Only when changes are made to the Planning documents noted above will this Policy become a legal requirement. The Villaee Policv A Village is defined as a physical development of land that has been designed to encourage compact development of an area which integrates a variety of housing types and densities with community facilities, civic and educational uses. Commercial and industrial uses may also be located in Villages. An emphasis on pedestrian-friendly design should be required. Villages should have these characteristics: 1 A Village location should be compatible with the local environment including surrounding land uses and topography. It should respect constraints, roadways and environmental considerations; 2 A Village should have a mixture of housing types, densities and affordability and should support a range of age and income groups; 3 Activity nodes (commercial areas, community facilities and public/private facilities) should be easily accessible; 4 Trails, pedestrian walkways and street linkages should be established to bring the parts and elements ofthe Village together; _ 5 The Village should have a strong "edge" defining the boundaries. This could include major streets, architectural or landscaped areas; 2 - - )~ (T ~ h '-- . 6 Village size should reflect development that promotes pedestrian walkability, permits a sufficient mixture of residential and public/private uses and convenient commercial areas. 7 Specific identity should be fostered for the Village areas (special signage, unique design elements, public plazas etc.) Imvlementation An Action Plan to determine potential Village sites and appropriate modifications to the City's General Plan and Specific Plan to include development of Villages in appropriate locations in Dublin shall be prepared by Staff for review and adoption by the Planning Commission and City Council. 3