HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.1 Parking&GarageZonOrd CITY CLERK
File # ~-~ 4 LS' ~-~~
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 18, 2003
SUBJECT: Public Hearing, PA 03-002, City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance
Amendment, First Reading - Amendment to Chapter 8.12, Zoning
Districts and Permitted Uses of Land; Chapter 8.76, Off-Street Parking
and Loading Regulations; and Chapter 8.100, Conditional Use Permit of
the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. These amendments will allow for the
conversion of garages to living space in R-1, Single Family Residential
zoning districts by means of a Conditional Use Permit.
Report Prepared by deri Ram, Planning Manager and Marnie R. Waffle,
Assistant Planner O~
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Planning Commission Minutes, February 25, 2003
2. Planning Commission Staff Report, February 25, 2003 (includes
Staff Report and Minutes from the January 28, 2003 Planning
Commission meeting)
3. Planning Commission Resolution 03-04 recommending City
Council approval of an amendment to Chapter 8.12, Zoning Districts
and Permitted Uses of Land; Chapter 8.76, Off-Street Parking and
Loading Regulations; and Chapter 8.100, Conditional Use Permit of
the Dublin Zoning Ordinance
4.Ordinance Amending the Dublin Zoning Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: 1. Open Public Hearing and receive Staff presentation;
,~/~/[/~, 2. Question Staff;
3. Take testimony from the Public;
4. Close Public Hearing and deliberate;
5. Waive the reading and introduce the Ordinance to amend the Dublin
Zoning Ordinance.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: No financial impact.
BACKGROUND:
At the November 19, 2002 City Cmmcil meeting, the City Council directed Staff to review an amendment to
the Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. The Dublin Zoning
Ordinance currently requires that each residential dwelling provide two, off-street parking spaces in an
enclosed garage. This parking requirement prevents the conversion of garages to living spaces unless two,
enclosed parking spaces can be provided elsewhere on the lot.
COPIES TO:
ITEM NO. ~
At the City Council's direction, Staff proceeded with an amendment to the Dublin Zoning Ordinance to
remove the word "enclosed" from the parking requirement. Staff prepared a report and presented the
proposed amendment to the Planning Commission on January 28, 2003. The Planning Commission received
Staff's presentation, received public testimony, deliberated, and directed Staff to provide alternatives and
studies to address the following concerns regarding the conversion of garages to living space: 1) traffic and
safety, 2) infrastructure/service impacts, 3) scope of conversions, 4) aesthetics and design standards, and 5)
grand-fathering (Attachment 2, see February 25, 2003 Staff Report Attachment 2 for January 28, 2003
Planning Commission Minutes).
At the February 25, 2003 Planning Commission meeting, Staff returned with a report that addressed the
Planning Commission's concerns and presented a solution to address them (Attachment 2, see February 25,
2003 Staff Report). Staff recommended a Conditional Use Permit process, with the Planning Commission
as the decision making body, to conditionally approve requests to convert garages into living space. In order
for the Planning Commission to approve a Conditional Use Permit, certain findings would have to be made
to address issues such as, compatibility with adjacent properties; adverse impacts to health, safety and
welfare; impacts on property or improvements in the neighborhood; whether the site is physically suitable for
the changes being proposed; and, consistency with development regulations for the zoning district in which
the project is located.
Under the Conditional Use Permit findings, traffic and safety would be reviewed for adverse impacts to, the
subject site; adjacent properties; neighborhood improvements; and, the public health, safety, and welfare.
Impacts to infrastructure or services, including street sweeping and waste receptacle placement, would be
addressed by requiring that two, off-street parking spaces be provided. The scope of conversions would be
bound by the development regulations for the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District, including but
not limited to, heights, setbacks, and lot coverage.
The addition of a new finding, to the conditional use permit findings for garage conversions, would address
design and architecture, allowing the Planning Commission to review and approve the physical appearance
of a proposed garage conversion. This new finding would read:
H. Architectural considerations, including the character, scale and quality of the design, the
architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, building materials and colors,
screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior lighting, and similar elements have been
incorporated into the project and as conditions' of approval in order to insure
compatibility of this development with the development's design concept or theme and
the character of adjacent buildings, neighborhoods, and uses.
The issue of grand-fathering is not applicable to the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments because the
City of Dublin has never allowed the conversion of garages to living space. If the proposed amendments are
adopted, illegal conversions could be legalized and permitted through the Conditional Use Permit and
Building permit processes.
On February 25, 2003, the Planning Commission received Staff's presentation, received public testimony,
deliberated, and indicated its support of Staff's recommendation by adopting a Resolution (Attachment 3)
recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance (Attachment 4) to amend Chapter 8.12, Zoning
Districts and Pernfitted Uses of Land; Chapter 8.76, Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations; and
Chapter 8.100, Conditional Use Permit of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance.
Following the Planning Commission's action, Staff noted that clarification to the text of the new finding for
design and architecture was needed. The following phrase (in italics) was added to the new finding:
H. For the conversion of single family residential garages to living space, architectural
considerations, including the character, scale and quality of the design, the architectural
relationship with the site and other buildings, building materials and colors, ...
By clarifying that the new finding is for the conversion of single family residential garages only, other uses
requiring a conditional use permit, i.e. martial arts studios, churches, massage establishments, will not be
subject to the finding on design and architecture. The City Attorney has reviewed the proposed clarification
to the new finding and determined that the change is minor in nature and does not need to go back to the
Planning Commission for review.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
On August 18, 1997, the City Council adopted Resolution 103-97 finding that the Comprehensive Revision
to the Zoning Ordinance, including Chapter 8.76, Off-Street Parking And Loading Regulations is exempt
from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). It can be seen with certainty that there is no
possibility that revising the Zoning Ordinance in this manner would have a significant effect on the
environment (Section 15061(b)(3). Various changes to the Zoning Ordinance listed above are proposed
which would not increase or create environmental impacts. These changes will have no environmental
impacts and are als0 exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it can be seen
with certainty that there is no possibility that such amendments would have a significant effect on the
environment.
CONCLUSION:
The Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 8.120) requires that all zoning ordinance amendments be heard by the
Planning Commission and following a public hearing, the Planning Commission shall make a written
recommendation to the City Council whether to approve, approve with modifications, or disapprove the
amendment.
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal tO remove the word "enclosed" from the off-street parking
regulations to allow for the conversion of garages to living space and determined that additional studies were
needed in order to address concerns related to, traffic and safety; infrastructure/service impacts; the scope of
conversions; aesthetic and design standards; and, grand-fathering. Staff presented the Planning Commission
with an alternative that addressed their concerns by proposing a Conditional Use Permit process for
reviewing and approving requests to convert garages to living space. The Planning Commission heard the
proposal and recommended that the City Council approve an amendment to Chapter 8.12 Zoning Districts
and Permitted Uses of Land; Chapter 8.76, Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations; and Chapter 8.100
Conditional Use Permit.
Therefore, Staff recommends that the City Council, open the public hearing and receive Staff presentation,
close the public hearing, deliberate, waive the reading, introduce the Ordinance (Attacttrnent 4) to amend the
Dublin Zoning Ordinance, and continue the public hearing to the April 1, 2003, City Council Meeting.
DRAFT
A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on T~esday, February 25~
2003~ in the Dublin Civic Center City Council Chambers. Chairman Fasulkey called the meeting to
order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners,' Fasulkey, Jennin§s, Nassar, King and Machtmes; Jeri Ram, Planning
Manager; Marnie Waffle, Assistant Planner; and Au~mn McGrath~ Recording Secretary
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Cm. Fasulkey led the Commission, Stall and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag.
ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA
The Minutes of February 11, 2003 meeting were approved as submitted.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None
PUBLIC HEARING
8.1 PA 02-041 - General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment for Site 15-A
Emerald Park
®Fannir~ Commission 22 q~e6ruary 25, 2003
~e~tuFar 3feeting
ATTACHMENT I
Staff recommended that the Planning Commission open the public hearing and continue the public
hearing to March 11, 2003.
Cm. Fasulkey opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to address the Commission;
hearing none, he closed the public hearing, and requested a motion to continue Item 8.1 to March
11, 2003.
On motion by Cm. Machtmes, seconded by Cm. Jennings, and a vote of 5-0, the.Planning
Commission unanimously approved continuance to the March 11, 2003 hearing.
On motion by Cm~. Todd, seconded by Cm. King, and a vote of 5-0, the Planning Commission
unanimously approved continuance to ·
8.2 PA 03-002 - Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 8.12, Zoning Districts and
Permitted Uses of Land; Chapter 8.76, Off,street Parking and Loading Regulations; and
Chapter 8.100, Cor~ditional Use Permit. These amendments will allow for the conversion
of garages to living space in R-I, Single Family Residential zoning districts by means of a
Conditional Use Permit.
Ms. Waffle presented the Staff Report and Power point presentation of the proposed Zoning
Ordinance amendments tO the Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land; Off-Street Parking and
Loading Regulations; and Conditional Use Permit (CUP).
Ms. Waffle referenced the January 28, 2003 hearing when this item was originally heard and
continued, and reiterated the concerns expressed by the Commission at that hearing concerning
aesthetic and design standards; impacts on traffic and safety; infrastructure/service impacts; scope
of garage conversions; incorporation of design standards; and grandfathering. She noted that the
Staff Report and amendments reflected Staff's recommendations for addressing and resolving the
Commission's concerns, proposing a CUP process to convert a garage into living space in the R-1
Single Family Residential Zoning District. She also noted that a new Finding would be added to
the CUP (Design/Architecture) to allow the Commission to consider design standards in the CUP
process.
Ms. Waffle distributed a revised copy of the proposed Ordinance (Attachment 5 of the Staff Report)
to the Commissioners and citizens in the audience, noting that specific wording had been
inadvertently omitted from the original version.
®[arming Commission 23 qve6ruary 25, 2003
qLegu[ar ~eetin~
DRAFT
There was extensive discussion between Staff and the Commission regarding specifics of the
proposed amendments.
Cm. King asked questions about t!de amendments, specifically the CUP; and expressed concern
about the parking impacts that could arise from a garage conversion.
Ms. Waffle responded that residents would still be required to maintain two enclosed off-street
parking spaces, but that as part of the CUP application process, a resident could be allowed an
exception to the "enclosed" garage requirement. However, for approval of the CUP, residents
would be required to provide two full size off-street parking spaces. With off-street parking still
required, the parking impacts from a conversion would be minimal or non-existent.
Ms. Waffle noted that the Zoning Ordinance currently states that an enclosed garage must be
"maintained". She stated that by amending the Ordinance, the Planning Commission would be
able to review the parking issues, and other concerns, for each conversion request and CUP.
Cm. King asked about the architectural considerations and how an applicant would be required to
provide design plans for the Commission's review.
Ms. Ram stated that as part of the application material, submittal checklists are provided to all
applicants who apply for a CUP.
Cm. King asked if other cities had design standards or guidblines for garage conversions, and asked
if more specific language'should be used, noting Homeowner Associations' established very specific
guidelines.
Cm. Machtmes recommended that the design standard language for the City of Dublin should
remain less specific for pre-existing homes, as the home designs would be very different and would
require case-by-case consideration.
Both Staff and the Commissioners agreed that the City of Dublin's design standards have
consistently improved over the years and that high quality design could be achieved without
specific and binding language to limit garage conversions.
Cm. King asked how the CC&R's would be addressed if they conflict with City regulations, and
expressed concern that without explidt language, there ~s confusion and misunderstandings. He
noted that it would be beneficial to have disclaimer language to prevent misunderstandings in the
®fanninl7 Commission 24 ~FeSruary 25, 2003
~ettufar ~eeting
DRAFT
interpretation of City regulations and Homeowner Association CC&R's, since often CC&R's have
differing or additional regulations than those mandated by the City.
Cm. Machtmes noted that often citizens have other legal responsibilities that the City is not
involved in, and stated that he believed it would not be the City's place to advise applicants of
those responsibilities. He added that he was not adverse to a reminder that would prompt the
applicant to verify that there were no other legal factors and responsibilities affecting their
application.
Cm. King asked if the Planning Commission would hear ail the CUP reviews for garage
conversions.
Ms. Ram confirmed that rite Planning Commission would review the applications.
Cm. Machtmes asked for clarification on the required two fuIl size off-street parking spaces, which
was shown on the Power point presentation with a house with a single-car garage conversion. He
asked if in that situation would a homeowner be allowed to convert the garage with only a single-
car driveway.
Ms. Ram answered that in that situation a homeowner would not be allowed to have a conversion,
as two full size off-street parking spaces would be required.
Cm. Machtmes also asked for clarification on whether or not new housing projects could be built
without garages.
Ms. Ram stated that the new housing projects are zoned Planned Development (PD) and would
have to apply for a CUP as well as a Site Development Review (SDR).
Cm. Fasulkey opened the public hearing, and asked if anyone from the public wished to address
the Commission.
There were three citizens who addressed the.Commission. They stated that they were against the
recommendation as proposed with a CUP requirement and wanted to have the issue remain a
"parking" issue and have the word "enclosed" removed from the 'Ordinance, as discussed by the
City Council in November 2002.
Mr. Ken Young spoke on behalf of himself and his wife Cindy, and stated that he believed that
there has been a misunderstanding regarding the Council's direction and intent on the parking
Planning Commission 25 q~ebruary 25, 2003
Regular Meeting
DRAFT
ordh~ce. He referenced the ~Tovember lC), 2.002 Ci'L'~ Council meeting m'~d noted t~at he believed
that the Council's intent was to require off-street parking but not require that parking to be
enclosed, thereby removing the word "enclosed" from the ordinance. He stated that he felt ~e
issue at hand was not about garage conversions, but rather about parking. He added that he felt
that the current parking ordinance was discriminatory and inconsistent because a resident could
use the garage for storage (and not use it for parking), yet wouIdbe in compliance; but that once
there is a permanent structure in the garage, it would not be legal or permitted. He stated that he
was against the recommendation as proposed with a CUP requirement, and wanted to have the
word "enclosed" removed from the parking ordinance. He asked if the Commission were to
approve this recommendation, would there be a right of appeal on the CUP application following
Commission adrion.
Cm. Fasulkey stated that there would be a normal appeal process, and encouraged Mr. Young to
contact the Planning Department for information on that process.
Ms. Esther Vigil spoke and stated that she was discouraged following the previous Commission
hearing of this issue, and felt that she was not going to be allowed to continue to use and maintain
the dark room in her garage if the parking ordinance was not changed to allow non-enclosed
parking. She also noted that the presentations did not represent the City of Dublin's conversions,
and that if canopies and the storage of trash in the front of homes was a concern, then she stated
that it should be a separate issue from a parking regulation issue.
Cm. Fasulkey explained that Staff had been directed to provide examples from cities where
conversions were allowed, and obtain information from those cities as to specifics of the process.
t-Ie added that this information was necessary to enable them to make informed decisions on the
issue to better serve the community.
Ms. Linda Lamke spoke and stated that if the City was concerned about the parking issue, then the
violators who do not use their garages (or other off-street spaces for parking) should be cited. She
added that residents should not be required to have enclosed parking and should be able t.o conver~
their living space.
Cm. King advised Ms. Lamke that the Mayor of Dublin is very concerned about the issues under
discussion and encouraged her to email or contact the Mayor about her concerns.
Cm. Fasulkey also encouraged Ms. Lamke to contact the City's Staff if she had complaints or
comments.
Planning Commission 26 qzebruary 2S, 2003
Regular Meeting
DRAFT
When the citizens had finished addressing the Commission, Cm. Fasulkey asked if anyone else
wanted to address the Commission; hearing none, he closed the public hearing, and the
Commission deliberated.
Cm. Jennings stated that she wanted clarification regarding the City Council's intent of the item,
whether it was a parking or garage conversion issue.
Cm. Fasulkey summarized the issue and explained that as an attempt by the City Council to allow
garage conversions, the word "enclosed" was proposed to be removed from the parking
regulations. He noted that the City has never allowed garage conversions, and Councilman Sbranti
had requested consideration to allow conversions. At the January 28 hearing, the Commission had
determined that unmanageable issues resulted from the removal of the word "enclosed", and
expressed concerns about the ramifications, such as parking isSues and the rippling effects to the
neighborhoods, aesthetics, public safety, etc. They had asked Staff to address those resulting issues,
and consequently, Staff undertook the task of addressing the concerns while considering the City
Council's request to allow garage conversions. Therefore, Staff has submitted the recommendation
to amend the Zofling Ordinance and propose a CUP process to convert a garage into living space in
the R-1 Single Family Residential Zoning District.
Cm. Jennings asked what the adjoining cities' policies were on garage conversions and there was
additional discussion between Staff and the Commissi°n about other cities that allow garage
conversions. :'
Upon deliberation, Cm. Fasulkey requested a motion. On motion by Cm. King, seconded by Cm.
Machtmes, and a vote of 4-1, with Cm. Jennings voting against the project, the Planning
Commission approved: ·
RESOLUTION 03-04
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO
CHAPTER 8.12 ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMITTED USES OF LAND;
CHAPTER 8.76 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REGULATIONS; AND,
CHAPTER 8.100 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP), OF THE
DUBLIN ZONING ORDINANCE
PA 03-002
®fanning Commission 27 '~eSruary 25, 2003
~egufar S~4eetirt~
DRAFT
Cm. Fasulkey asked if there was any other new or unfinished business.
NEW' OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS -None
OTHER BUSINESS
Ms. Ram disCUssed the Goals and Objectives Workshop scheduled for March 1, 2003, and gave
specifics of the agenda. She also discussed future City Council and Planning Commission meeting
items.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Planning Manager
G: \ MINUTES \ 2003 \ Planning Commission \ 2-25-03 pc rain. doc
®flannir~ Commission 28 qeeSruary 25, 2003
%egufar 5~eeting
AGENDA STATEMENT ~ ~"~>
PLUG .CO~SSION MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 25, 2003
· SUBJECT: P.A 03-002 City of Dublin, Zoning Ordinance'~Amendment - Amendment to
Chapter 8.12, Zoning Districts and Permitted uses of Land; Chapter 8.76, Off-
Street Parking and Loading Regulations; and ChaPter 8.100, Conditional Use
Permit of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. These amendments will allow for the
conversion of garages to living space in R-I, Single F'mily Residential zoning
districts by means of a Conditional USe Permit. r~J~
£repared by Marnie R. Waffle, Assistant Planner
ATTACHMENTS: 1. January 28, 2003, Plug Commission Staff Report
2. Janu~ 28, 2003, PlYing Commission ·minutes On Zoning
OrdinanCe Amendment tO Chapter 8.76, Off Street Parking and
Loading Regulations
3. Chapter 8.100.060, ConditiOnal Use permit ReqUired FEndings
4. Res01ution recommending the City Council adopt the ordinance
amending the 'Dublin Zoning: Ordinance
5. Ordinance amending Chapter 8.12 Zoning. Districts and Permitted.
Uses of Land; Chapter 8.76, Off-Street Parking and Loading
RegulatiOns; and Chapter 8.100 Conditional Use Permit of the
Dublin Zoning Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: 1. OPen public Hearing and receive Staff presentation;
2. Take tes~ony from the Public;
~3. Question Staff and the Public;
4. Close Public Hearing and deliberate;
5. AdOpt resolution (Attachment 4) recommending the City Council
adopt the Ordinance (Attachment 5) to amend the Dublin Zoning
Ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
.At the January 28, 2003, Planning Commission meeting, Staff brought forth an item, at the request of the
City Council, concerning an amendment to the City's off-street parking requirement for single-family
residential dwellings. The proposed amendment would eliminate the requirement for two, off-street .parking
spaces in an enclosed garage and require only two, off-street parking spaces for the purpose of conVerting
residential garages to living space (Attachment 1).
Staff s report recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution recommending that the City
Council adopt an Ordinance to amend the City's Off-street Parking and Loading Regulations o£ the Dublin
Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission received Staff's presentation, received public testimony,
· deliberated and directed Staff to provide alternatives and studies regarding aesthetics and design standards;
impacts on traffic and safety; infrastructure impacts such as, garbage collection; the scope of potential
conversions; incorporating design standards; and how to address grand-fathering, (Attachment 2).
COPIES TO: In HOuse Distribution
DESCRIPTION:
The Dublin Zoning Ordinance currently requires that each residential dwelling provide two, off-street
parking spaces in an enclosed garage. This parking requirement prevents the conversion of garages to living
spaces unless two, enclosed parking spaces can be provided elsewhere on the lot.
By removing the word "enclosed" from the parking requirement, residents would be able to convert their
garages to living spaces and new homes could be built without garages. Requests to convert garages would
be reviewed upon application for a building permit. The applicant would submit plans showing how they
propose to convert their garage to living space. The Building Department would review the plans for
confomaance with the Uniform Building Code. The Planning Department would also review the plans to
ensure the proper setbacks, lot coverage and height limits were maintained, and that two off-street Parking
spaces could be provided. However, Staff would not have the ability to review the design of the conversion
or impose conditions of approval to mitigate potential impacts from the conversion.
At the Planning Commission meeting on January 28, 2003, the Commission raised the following concerns
regarding the conversion of garages ro living spaces: t) traffic and safety, 2) infrastructure/service impacts,
3) scope of conversions, 4) aesthetics and design Standards, and 5) grand-fathering. Staffhas reviewed those
concerns and developed a solution to address them.
ANALYSIS:
Staff recommends a Conditional Use Permit'process, with the Planning Commission as the decision making
body, in order to conditionally approve requests to convert garages into living space. In order to approve a
Conditional Use Permit, certain findings must be made to address issues such as, compatibility with adjacent
properties; adverse impacts to health, safety and Welfare; impacts on property or improvements in the
neighborhood; whether the site is physically suitable for the changes being proposed; and, consistency w/th
development regulations for the zoning district in wkich the project is located.
In addition to the findings for a Conditional Use Permit, Staff recommends adding a new Finding to address
the design of garage conversions. This new finding would read:
Architectural considerations, including the character, scale and quality of the design, the
architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, building materials and colors, screening
of exterior appurtenances, exterior lighting, and similar elements' have been incorporated into the
project and as conditions of approval in order to insure compatibility of this development with ;he
development's design concept or theme and the character of adjacent buildings, neighborhoods,
and uses.
Traffic and Safety:
Under the Conditional Use permit findings (Attachment 3), traffic and safety concerns would be reviewed
for adverse impacts to, the subject site; adjacent properties; neighborhood 'improvements; and, the public
health, safety, and Welfare. Upon receiving a Conditional Use Permit application, Staff would review- the
proposal and report to the Planning Commission on issues specific to the site such as, whether the subject
site is suitable for the conversion cfa garage to living space; Whether adequate partdng exits on-site to satisfy
two off-street parking spaces; whether on-street parking is available; and, whether adequate site-distance
relationships exist. The Planning Commission would also be able to adopt Conditions of Approval to reduce
any foreseeable impacts on traffic and safety.
inJ~raS~tructurefService Impacts:
Impacts'tO infrastructure or services, including street sweeping and waste receptacle placement, would be
addressedi:~i:req~g that two~ .off, street parking spaces be provided. In order, for a C.ondi.tional USe~P.e~t
to be aP~!~d; an apPliCant WoUld have to .show where on their lot they could provide the two, orr, street
par~'~s. Thi~ r~quirernent would, prevent:the' displacement of vehicle parking to the pUbhc street;
Scope of COnversions:
Development regUlations have been establiShed for every zoning district throughout the City. Conditional
Use Permit apPlications to convert garages to living space would be held to the development regulations for
the residential zoning district in which the dwelling was located. These regulations include~ heights,
setbacks, and lot coverage, Requests to convert garages woUld not impact these regUlations since the
strucmre'is e>/isting and already mee~-s the: heigh;~ .setback~ and lot coverage requirements.
Aesthetics: and Design standards:
The additiOn of a new finding, to the' conditional use permit fi~idings, for garage, e0nversions.~ would
specifically-ad,eSS design and'ar6tu'~eemre, .and. allow the P!mg C'0~issi0n ~0 review and:approve the
physical appearance of a proposed garage, conversion. ConditiOns 'of approval could be adopted to ,reduce
adverse viSUal impacts and impr0~e the qU~i~' of the design.
While the conversion of one-, two- or three-car garages to living spaces t3~pically alters the exterior of a
residential dwelling, this is not always the case. According to the Uniform Building Code, a converted
garage can retain the existing garage door allowing the home to maintain its outward appearance 'and
preserve the uniformity x~4thin the neighborhood. Retaining the garage door is optional and is nor required
by the Building Code,
Other jurisdictions which have allowed garage conversions provide examples of various designs used to
incorporate a garage conversion into the overall design of a home and the neighborhood. Design elements
commonly include, uniform colors and materials; architectural features such as, style of windows, armings,
stone or brick overlays; and, articulation of building wails.
Designl Elements! Uniform Colors & Ma~terials~ Awnings, Windows, Design Elements: Uniform C01ors & IV :AtticO:!ati0'n of Building
Roof Pitch Wall, Windows
Design'Eletments:. W!ndows &;.ShUtters Design Ejemen[s! uniform Colors & Materiais w 9ws:
Design Elements:None Design Elements: -Uniform Colors & Materials, Windows
Gran'd~athering:
Garage conversions constructed with permits under Alameda County would have been grand-fathered When
the City Of Dublin adopted the ordinance to eliminate the ability to convert a garage bY requiring two, off-
street parking spaces in an enclosed garage. The exact number of garage conversions built under Alameda
County, or prior to the City adopted ordinance to eliminate conversions, is not known. To the best of"Staff' s
knowledge, only one garage conversion t~as been permitted since the City incorporated. While it is nor
known hoW many illegal conversions exist, there are currently three under code enforCement action. If the
proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments are adopted, illegal conversions can be legalized and permitted by
going through the Conditional Use Permit and Building Permit processes.
Amendment:
Attached is a draft Ordinance that would address the Planning Commissions concerns and implement the
City CounciFs direction. In essence, the Zoning Ordinance continues to require two, enClOSed, off-Street
parking spaces per Si!~gle-family residential unit. However, if someone wants to convert their garage to a
living space, so that they would no longer' be~ able to park vehicles inside, they may be able' to do so. In order
to convert a garage to living space, the resident would be required to submi~ an application for a Conditional
Use Permit~ with the Planning Commission as the decision making body. All Conditional Use Permit
findings, in¢tu~ting the additional finding for 'design/arch/tec~ considerationS~ would have to be met and
any foreseeable adverse impacts addressed, pr/or to approval o~ througt~ Conditions of Approval. The
applicant would be required to show that two, full-size, off-street parking spaces can be provided, in an
approved area on their lot, prior to converting their garage. For example, if they can provide two, full-size
parking spaces on the driveway, that would satisfy the regulations. In addition, garage conversions would
have ro comply with all other City regulations (building permit, em.).
Environmental Review:
On August 18, 1997, the City Council adopted Resolution 103-97 finding that the Comprehensive Revision
to the Zoning Ordinance, including Chapter 8.76, Off-Street Parking And Loading Regulations is exempt
from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). It can be seen with certainty' that there is no
possibility that revising the Zoning Ordinance in this manner would have a significant effect on the
environment (Section 15061(b)(3). Various changes to the Zoning Ordinance listed above are proposed
4
which would not increase or create environmental impacts. These chank,.o will have no environmental
impacts and are also exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it,:~ be seen
with certainty that there is no possibility that such amendments would have a significant effect on the
environment. ' ·
cONCLUSION:
The Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 8.120), requires that all zoning ordinance amendments (such as the
proposed amendments to Chapter 8.12 Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land; Chapter 8.76, Off-
Street Parking and Loading Regulations; and Chapter 8.t00 Conditional Use Permit) be heard by the
Plann/ng Commission and following a public hearing, the Planning Commission shall make a written
recommendation to the City Council whether to approve, approve with modifications, or disapprove the
amendment. The proposed Ordinance (Attachment 5) implements City Council direction and addresses
Planning Commission concerns.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing and receive Staff presentation, take
testimony from the public, question Staff and the public, close the public hearing, deliberate and adopt
resolution (Attachment 4) recommending that the City Council adopt the Ordinance (Attachment 5) to
amend the DubLin Zoning Ordinance.
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
LOCATION: Citywide
ASSESSOR PARCELS: Various
GENZ
SPECIFIC PLAN
DESIGNATION: Various
EXISTING ZONING
AND LAND USE: Various
AGEND'A·STATEMENT
PLANING GOMMISSION 'MEETING DATE: JANUARY 28, 2003
SUBJECT: PA 03.002 CitY of. Dii~lin; zoning ,Ordinance' Amendment - Amendment .to
Chapter 8.76, Off-Sweet parking and Loading Regulations of the Dublin Municipal
Code (Zoning Ordinance)
Prepared by Jeff Ram, Plarming Manager (~-"~'
~TTACHMENTS:
1. November t9/2002, C.i~y Council Agenda Statement
N~vember','l 9~ 2002, City, C.ouriciI minutes on Report on Residential
O~,S~e.~t parking
3. P~esolati0n recommending.the City Council adopt the ordinance
amending ~he'Dublin MUnicipal Code (Zoning Ordinance)
4. Ordinance' amending,Chapter 8.76:Off-Street Parking and Loading
Regulations of the Dublin Municipal Code.
RECOMMENDATION: 1. Open Public Hearing and receive Staff presentation;
: .... 2. Take Iest~ony from~the :PubliC';~ '
3, Q~iestion Staff and the Public;
4. Cl°se?ublie He~ing' a~d deliberate;
5. ,:: AdOPt!reSOlution (Attachment 3) re¢ommendingthe City Council
adopt the Ordinance (Attachment 4) m amend the Dublin Municipal
Code.
BACKGROUND: .:~
At the Nove~er 19, 2002i'City c0unci[mee~ing, Staff broUght f,o_~ ~,iiem at ~e req~e.s! o£
CoUnCilmember Tim Sbmnfi to consider modification of the City s enclosed park/ng requn'ement ~or single-
family residential dwelling units by eliminating the requirement for two enclosed off-street Parking spaces
and requiring only two off-street parking spaces (Attachment 1). The purpose o£the modifications would be
to allow conversation of garages to provide additional living space in single-family residential dwelling
Staff's report recommended that if the City Council would like Staff to work on the amendment, additional
studies and information would be provided in a further report. The City CoUncil received Staff's
presentation, deliberated and directed Staff to prepare the amendment without the add/fional studies
(Attachment 2).
Amendment:
Attached is a draft Ordinance that would implement the City Council's direction. In essence, the Ordinance
continues to require two off-street parking spaces Per single-family residential unit. However, it removes the
requirement to enclose the spaces. Therefore, if someone wishes to modify their garage so that they would
COPIES TO: In House Distribmion
~:\p^~2~03~05-0~2~°~ staff r*por~DOG
not be able to park vehicles in it, they may'b~ able to do so. ~': order' to convert the garage, the applicant
would have to show. thar'they can provide the required parking elsewhere in an approved'area on:the lot. For
example, if they can provide two full-size parking spaces on the driveway, that would satisfy the regulations.
In addition, they would have to comply with all other City regulations (building permit, etc.).
Environmental Review:
On August 18, 1997, the City Council adopted Resolution 103-97 fmding that the Comprehensive Revision
to the Zoning Ordinance, including Chapter 8.76, Off-Street Parking And Loading Regulations: is exempt
from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA;). It. can:be seen with certainty that there is no
possibility that revising the Zoning Ordinance in this manner would have a significant effect on the
environment (Section 15061(b)(3). Various changes to the-MuniCipal-Code listed above are proposed which
would not increase or create environmental impacts. These changes wilt have no environmental impacts and
are also exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it can be seen with
certainty that there is no Possibility that SUch- amendments would have a significant effect on the
environment.
CONCLUSION:
The Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 8.120), requires that all zoning ordinance amendments (such as this
proposed amendment to the Off-Street Parking Regulations).be. heard by the Planning Commission and
following a public hearing, the Planning Commission shall make a written recommendation to the City
Council whether to approve, approve with modifications or disapprove the amendment.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning commission open the public hearing and receive Staff presentation, take
testimony from the public, question Staff and the public, close the public hearing, deliberate and adopt
resolution (Attae~ent 3)reco~ending that the City Council adopt the Ordinance (Attachment 4) to
a/nend the' Dublin MuniCiPal Code)
2
CI~'Y.CLERK ·
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY-COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 19, 2002
SUBNECT: Residential OffStr~et parking - Discussion of City Requirements
Report.Prepared by: Jeri Ram, Planning Manager ~
ATTAINT: 1. 'Section 8~76~070.14 o£Zoning Ordinance
'2. Plam~ng DiViSion Work. l~rogram Staff Report dated 10/15/02
RECOMIV/E'NI)ATION: 1, · Receive staffpresenlatJon
,,,,~~ Give Staff direction on whether ~dclitional studies should be done on
this issue and if it should be added to Staff's work program.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None at ~this ~ime.
DESCRIPTION:
Councilmember Tim Sbranti has requested that the City Council consider modification of the City's
enclosed parking requirement by eliminating the requirement for tw9 enclosed off-street parking spaces
and requiring only two off, slxeet parking spaces.
In May 1982 (after incorporation) the City of Dublin adopted the Alameda County Zoning Ordinance as
the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Over time, the City gradually amended and modified the Zoning
Ordinance to address the City of Dublin's needs and issues. Under the Alameda County Zoning
Ordinance and the early City'ofDubtin Zoning Ordinance, two off-street parking spaces were required for
single.family residential dwelling ufiits. There was nora requirement for the parking spaces ~o be
enclosed or covered; however, there was a requirement that the two off-street.parkingspaces coUld'n0t be
parked in a required front yard or the street side yard 0fa comer lot. This had the effect of not allowing
for g~ge ConverSions as. there was .generally nowhere else .to park the. oars off-street.
As the City developed on the west side of Doughtery Road, all the single-family regidentiai units were
built'in a conventional style with two eargarages'aud standard driveway lengths. Lot sizes were larger, in
general, tha. u they are today in the newly developing areas. These larger lots enable more on, street
parking as the distances between driveways where parking is allowed is longer than on the narrower lots.
When the Eastern Dublin' Speoific Plan was :approved in 1987, the Plan called for Planned Development
Zoning Dis~xiets as part of its implementation strategy. This strategy allows for variations in zoning
standards (inclUding off-street parking) to aeeomm0date different types of dwelling units.
Additionally, the plan's vision is for an urban type of environment. As a result, this more urban plan
creates smaller, narrower anddenser lot configurations. These narrower lots. have less on-street parking,
G:~Agendas~2O02~CCSRoffstreetparkingl 1.19.02.DOC COPIES TO: In-House Distribution
. ........ 8.4
,, . .
~.the~e 'is. ie~s:sPaee be~een driveways. Additionally, some of the streets are private and have restricted
on~S~i· park~areaS. Some streets, in fact, do not allow on-s~reet parking at ail and special guest
~,~eas ~ P~dedTSOme of the residential designs vary the from yard setbacks. This variation in
front yard setbacks may also create shorter &iveways than are ~nventional. These driveways do not
enable the parking of o~ off street, as the:.aut0~biies W0uld extend on to the sidewalk. In short, the
design of the s~ivision andsite d~VelbPm~n~: reqleW:::6f~e'h°~es did not anticipate conversion of the
garage to another use.
In 1997, the C~ of ~biin ComPleted: a comprehensive revlon to :the City of Dublin Zoning~ce.
The revised Ordinm~xc~ included a':new requirement
street parking spaces in an enclosed garage. Although Planned Development Zoning Districts have the
ability tO V~ from ~ae P~g ~equireme~is, 'ifil plarmed Developmem Zoning Districts for ~ingle::
family detaC~hed ~t~':that ~ City has aPProved include the req~ent for two off-street parking spaces
in an en¢1osed garage.
During the past year, Staffhas opened several ¢ode,enforeemen'c:¢ases'relating to iltegal
eonv~Si°n~ :S~:~S w0rkefl '~th tile:homeowners and informed them of~eir options under the Zoning
Orainmee. opo0ns are: ·
1. 'Applying for a variance and having it approved,~ ,: Oran~ing of a variance by the Planning
Commission or City Council is difficult, as the decision-makers must make all five ffmdings
required by State law. One of these fmdings is that there is something physically unusual.
about the tot that deprives the property owners from developing flaeir property as others in their
z0ning cti~e~ Very few reSidemial sixes in Dublin fit.in~ this category.
2. Apply ~o change the Zoning Ordinance to allow for garag~ conversions by removing.the
requirement for two off-stree~ enclosed spaces; and
3. Remm ~e garage to'.its required use. This involves removing smaetures mad walls,
Ifth~- Ci~ CoUncil WOuld like Staff to further explore the possibili~ o£ amending~the off-street parking
requiremen~:~;£or single;£amilY residential dwelling units, xo .allow for garage ConversiOns; issues that
w0~d ~d tO' be addressed include:
The ability to allow for garage conversions throughout the City when the developmem pm'terns in
Eastern Dublin were specialty ~Iored for a certain partdng configuration;
Equity iSSUeg if one POrtion of the City can convert their garages while the other portion of the City
Adeq~4ac¥ Of on-street parking to accommodate those who wish to convert their gm-age as
aU~0m°~iIe~ 'have bee0me'l~rger and'imany families: have more than two e~r~;
· Loss of sighti]nes along reS'iden~ial s~reets which may increase vehicular and pedestrian accidents;
TI~e e~nange in the streetscape pattern of reSidential areas as more and more ears move on to the
street and off private properties.
Additionally, th~S it~m would need io be added to Staff's work progrnm and other high priority projects
may ~e longer to accomplish (see Attachment 2).
P ... ~,,..,~.,,-,~,,~:,'- .............. ..... ..... ii th.andconauctasurvcy Y ~
rcport,.cxarmnmg,,thc iibove issues !~'greater". ep · '
which citiesallow garage Conv~mons and Whichdo not.
RECOMMENDATION':
Receive Staff prcsmimtion and give S~ direction on'whether additional studies Should be done on this
issue.and if it should .be added to Staff's work program.
OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REGULATIONS
='~ , , .*. : .~.C~apter 8,76
'11
l.' Tree removal/replacemenL ~ere'the majof-i~ Of ~in:a
proposed parldng lot) in a non-reSidential ~arePr°POsedt° be'rern°v~ for
aesthetic reasons, or for the pm'pose ofin~n~asing visibility fq~ ~gnage, that
ri~noval, or rc-ptaaeauent shall be pursuaut to Site DevelOpment'P,.eView.
P, canovat of:tre~ in phases shall not relieve the applicant of this obligation.
m. Impacts to sidewalks/paving. Tree species ~hall
~g of sidewalks or pavemcmt. Tr~s shall be planted wi~b~, "root barriers"
and provided' with proper irrigation to assure dec'p, root syst~ns and ~ rr/~uimum
of Iifdng of sidewalks and p~vemmt.
m Driveway buffers. Driveways ~ multiple residential projects t~cated in the 1~-
' M zoning d~strict shall be separated, from living quarters by a. landscaped buffer
to the satisfaction of the Dir~or of Community Development.
13. Lighting. ?axking ~reas shall have lighting capable of providing adeqtmte illumination
for security and safety. The minimum requirement is t foot candle, main~ed across
the surface of thc parking area. Lighting standards shall be energy-e~vient and in scale
with the height and use of thc strucUtre. Any ilb~m~ua~ion, including security lighting
shall be d~ away fi:om adjoining properties and public rights-of-way.
14. Location of Required. Parking Spaces
a. Single f~mi~y lot.
Principal residence. All parking spaces shall be located on the
same parcel as the residence they serve, tmtess provided as a
Kesideatial Parking Lot by th~ Zouing Arlmlui~"cmtor pursuant to
a Conditional Use Permit. The most distant parking space in a
Kesidential Parking Lot shall be not more than !50 feet fram the
re~ideaces they serve. Parking spaaes required by tl~is Chapter
shall be looated within an onalosed garage. Other than the two
required garaged parking spaces, a maximum of two vehicles
(w'nich shall include, but not be tlrai,ed to, an automobile, car,
truck, or Kecroational Vehicle) may be parked in tho following
areas if screened by a 6 foot high feace or wall and if at least one
side yard is unobstructed ~o a widthof36 inches: Areas !, 2:
3b and 4. Additional parking may occur in area Sa. Parking ',m
area 5b shall b~ as required by Section 8.76.060.E22- .No parking
shall occur in area 5e eXcept as permitted by Section
8.76.060.E.4. See Figure 76-2. parldng ia a driveway shall
compensate for required enetosed garage parking. No parking
shall oet'ur in Area 6.
City of. Dublin Zoning Ordinance 76-~ 4 R~s~d November I, 2002
· OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REGULATIONS.
Chapter 5.76
5c 5~ 5b
~ ' STREET
Fi '" ':2 1. KearYattt ·
gure 76 ' ' 2. ~'~e~ Ke~ Y~d ~d r~ ofr~Jd~
::'3. Side~Y~' '
· b~ Side Y~
4. ~ be~ side Y~ md si~e o~r~d~ce
5. From Y~
b. ~ea'b~
~t
~mt Side'~
6. ~b~em ~ront
r~sid~ce; - ·
Z Second Unit parking. Patki_'ng for a Second Unit may b~ located
in'th~ Side: Sc-$back ff~spech6caily.~nitted'by a Conditional Use
p~t-a~rov~d by ~e Zoning Admi~istraxor. The C~nditionat
· .."~C,,., .: :..- ....... · , ' "~
Use P~t sh~tI requn~ ~ c~rb ~ be,proxadod to, Cty
Sumdards and that au Bnc~oachmcnt Pc~u'nit be ~mted by tl~
Director of Public Works. The p~ucipal rc~id~ce shall comply
with the ~t~n~s of this Chapter.
City of Dub'Eh Zoning O-~dlnance 76-15 Revised November 1, 2002
-- CITY CLERK
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: OctOber 15, 20D2
SUB,rECT: Community Dovelopm~nt DePartment, Plam~ing Division Work
Program Status
Report Prepared by: Jeri Ram, Planning Manager
ATTAINT: 1. W~rk Program Status Chart
REcoM1VIENDATION: ~l~.eceive sta.ffpresentation
' FINANCIAL STATE1VI~NT: None at this time.
DESC~FYION:.
Attachment 1 is the Work Program for the Plarming Division of .t~e Comraun/ty Deve!opmem :
Department. This list includes the City CoundFS h/gh priority projects as ident//ied in the Goals and
~.b..jeCfives 2002~2003, the'General Plan Amendment and Specific Phn Ameni/ment Stuflies as authorized
i~/~e City CounciI, other long-range and eu~rentPtanning projects, and code eaffor¢~rnent. Over the past
fey? months, the work program has s/EM~oanfly changed by the add/fion of two nee General
Amendment Studies and the discuss/on at;,th6LCity Cmmcil of the Poslponeme.,nt of the Scarlett Court
Moratorium at the. City Counc/l meeting of October !, 2002.
As the City CoUncil can see from the attached Work Program; Staffis mak/ng progress on the majority .of
the projects. The City ha.s conlr~ted with anew planrfing consultant who will ass/st w/th some of the
mt' planning Pr0je'ets. At' the Cit~ C0Une/1 meeting o£ October 1, 2002, the City Council postponed
the s'cart~tt Court Moratorium for'one, year; The City Council also indicated that they would
postponing Sta~wOrk.oli tho $carletI CoUr: Specific Plan for'one year in order to give the property
owners an opporttmity to undertake positive changes with/n the area. As a result of removing the
Court Spec/fie Plan from the Pl~rming D/vision's Work Program this year, Staff wilt have more t/me to
work on other h/gh priority goals of the City Council, that Sta/Y~ not to date begun.
Staffing:
The D/Vis/on wilt have .S'Planner on leave from Oetob~ 18~ 2092i through Felsmm3, 1 ~, 2003. in
add/ti0n, One i~tanneris'st/lI'on'militarg leave. WhiIe th/s is unfortunate, Staff will be abIe to move.
forw~ anti complete the highPrior/ty :m,.. jeers on.schedule: us'rog, consultant resources, with th~ exception
of the I-Iist°ric District,Specific .l~ian and the Streetsc~e Guid¢t/nes project, which will b~e delayed by
several months.
o:~u00~~ COPIES TOi ln~t:/ouse Distn'~ut/on
Community Development Department
Pls~nin~ DiviSi~/i~ork Pro~am'~Status'Oct°ber' 200~
2. 'Underway
3. Corn Court Specific'Plan Delayed one
Not Started 2003
4.. certain
AlarnillaS Store are
· 5. 'co'riii~!et~!i;eZoning of DowntbWn Specific Coaplete
plan Amen. 2002
6. De~10p ' and/or ordinanc~'to Underway
the
7.
8.
g. ~ent Ptan for - Underway
11. Complete Sllve Nearly
12. Evaluate Juvenile Hail/Courth°~ proposal Delayed by TBD
..
General
14, IKEA G~A/$PA, PD~ SDR :.
16. 'valley Chi~t~an Center Master:Plan PD
17. Sustatnabillty Inventory ~c. 2002
18. Bancor Alc, osta Project I Underway 2003
lg. Bancor Pal( & 9ave Underway 2003
20. zo Amendment Residential Temp Signs Underway
21. Ja[isoo SDR Underway I Dec.. 2002
22. Dublin Ranch Area A Neighborhoods Underway 'Nov. 2002
SDPJCUP ":; '
23. Legacy Partners PD Delayed by 'I T~D
applicant.
t "Project ...... Status COMPL'ETION
24. Zoning Ordinance Amendments ... Complete Oct. 20'~2
25. Honda PD, SDR Underway Dec. 2002
- 28. Gerleml Plan integration Underway Dec. 2002
27. GPA for reple=ing General Plan Maps Underway Dec. 2002
28. TH Valley Aut~ SDR Complete Aug, 2002
2g~' Palace Auto SDR ....... Nearly Oct. 2002
Complete ........
30, Pistone sDR Delayed by TBD
HOA
31. Tamarck Va'danc~ Nearly Nov. 2002
ComPlete ..
32. Black Mountain Implementation Underway t April 2003
33, Black Mountain lot 7 SDR ,. UnderwayI Feb. 2003
34. Quarry Lane SDR Underway Feb. 2003
35. Cottonwood MSP Nearly N°v. 2002
... Complete ....
36. Code Enforcement On-going
37. Dublin Ranch Area G implementation Undenvay jan. 2005
38. Dublin Ranch Area A Implementation Underway Jan. 2004
39. Castle Companies ~1180" Scerlett Place t Underway May 200,3
, Duefs..tmplamentationI '
....40. lronhorsa Trail Apartments lmpten~en~tion Underway May 2003
41. Waterford implementation Underway April 2003
42. Gallucci Coilisi0n Canter SDR Underway Feb. 2003
43. Ago~-a SDP,/CUP D~Jayed by TBD
App!icant
44. Shell MSP Delayed by TBD
Applicant
45. Greenbrier Phase II1, PD SI)R, TM Underway June. 2003
;46. EDPO Land Use Plan Update RMP required 'rBD
, ,, to be completed ..........
47. DSRSD Water council on-going '. .... . "'"'""'""~ :' ",',,,'"
48. American Tire SDR. Underway Oct. 2002
49: Downtown Monument program... Underway Nov. 2002
Ms. Lowart stated we will mail to everyone who came to.last night s meetingand will
ask. Toll.Brothers to .,invite ail new-'people. ...
Mayor Lockhar~ requested that the)' also state the date the Parks & Community Services
Commission Will be discussingthis.. · ....
Kasie Hildentxand suggested something be included in the HOA letter.
Mayor ~~ stated'one of the criteria, she would.like to see included is' the .
neighbOrhood makeup. We have quite an Asian influence and maybe we should take
this into.consideration. Also, have inlmt from the developers.
Ms. Lowart stated the developers were represented at the meeting last night. They
presented alternatives with different:elements and.asked..the'peopleto pick and choose
from the alternatives.
Mr../~anbrose' poin~,xt out. ~ item deals with naming the.park rather than design issues.
Ms. Lowart state,December t 6~.will. be flae next meeting.
Consensus of~the: Council was to pat. this off, .Even~.thou.-g,h .this is a..n. eighbort~ood park,, it
belongs to the whole community. Stuff should get feedback from the next mee~ and
then take it to the Parks & Community Services Commission and then to the City
I~¥~qlDENTIAL OFF-STREET'PARKING - DISCUSSION OF crrY'~Q~~
10:46 para. $.4 (450~Z0) '
Planning Manager jeri Ram presented the StaffReport and gave.historical.~omfion-
t0arkim$ req~ment bY e~ti~$ the requirement tor two enmosea orr~'srre , par
;, aces"~ind hcl~$ 0hy tw° °ffz~treet payt.,aces: ..~ ' · ·
Ms. Ram stated fi. the.City Council woUlCt iike Staff .to ~er ~xp,lore,,t. he
mending, the pff-~* parking req~,ents~or~ "~5~f~mil~ ~c~temn.g umm m arrow
for garage ¢0n'cers~o-ns', issues that wotfld, need'to m' .actaressea m ·
CITg, COUNCII~ ~$
· VOLUM~ Z ~
REGUL~K;ME~NG
November. ~ .9~ 2002
PAG~ 587
I) The ability to'allow for garage conversions tlirou~out, the City when the
development patterns in Eastern Dublin were sp~cialty.~$/lored for a, ccr~in park/n~
configuration;
2) Equity issues ff one portion of the City can conver$ thei~ garages while the 'other
portion of the City canno~,
$) Adequacy of on-street parking to accommodate those who wish to conver~
garage as au~mObiles,have becOm~ tarter and many families have.more ~u..~o cars;
4) Loss of sight lines along residential streets which m~y increase'vehicular and
pexiesi~ian accidents; and
5) The Changein the s~tscape pa~ern of~esidenfial.~areas as more and more cars move
on to the s~reet and off private properties.
AdClj'fionally~ ~s:item woUld.'neeCt tO be added ~o Sfaff~s work pro~r~n:and other high
priority projects may take longer to accomplish. As 10a_~ of a_ny ~ddftional work
authorized by the City Cou~fl on"this item, Stuff would prepare a S~ Repor~
examining the above issues in ~eater dep~ and conduc~ a survey of Bay Area
juri~cfions to see.W~ch :.cities allow garage conversions and which· da no~, and
implications.
MmTr Ros~, Doreen Cour~ stated this affects people living in. the community. She is a
recen~ resident moving here from. the Peninsula. This is a community and she has got~n
to know people who ~ivc D~b~ its sisnificance and its character. There are a lot of
cars on ~he s~_ There:is no :m~.. b!e·St~rage in mos~ ·o£ the homes. So mmty of rite
garages are filled to caPa¢i~ wit1 s~.' This measure seems dire~cl ina
measure which would affect so many people not able to park their cars in .~.their garages.
It seems unenforceable and/f it is, it seams a little bit too big brother. It WOuld
affect people~..contributir~g members~ v~ho,a~e ~rying to live productive liws and add
fikis ¢ommun/W.
more congestion in the sire~ts. Hedc~sn~t S%how making on~::simplc Change taking
away %nctoscd' Would take away anything. You ~ must prOVide 2 off street parking
spaces, He,did not/eel:them would b~ a ~ move to co~lvert garages. This·
could b~a situation: where.an .elder parent.~°ffiCl'.haV¢ a' !oW! of'PriV~Y, Thcr~ arc
legitimate scenarios wl ere.he co a see forwara, wo : suu have
provide 2 spaces. Some of the inequities are created by ~ homeo~rs ~O~iatfon.
~.en:yoU live. in certa~.!~arts, of town, there am pluses and minuses. Every.
cITY COUNCIL'M!NU~$
VO~U/Vm~ Z i
RE'G~K.~MEETtNG
N ovem bet '~ 9, .'2002
PAGE:' 5:88
neighborhood takes on a different character. This ordinance is overly punitive~ as
written. He did not £eel this change is that complicated. We have to only remove the
word ~enclosed".
Cm. Zika' stated he lives in a neighborhood where almost every house has at least one car
in the garage and one car in the driveway. He has to put his garbage can out early in
order to have a place to put it on the strut. He gets calls orr a regular basis where peopIe
don't have room to put their garbage cans out. He pointed out that the new requirement
for garbage bins requires I7 feet.
Mayor Lockhart stated parking orr the street is not illegal If we were really serious
about this, probably 95% of the City could be citecL
Cm. Oravetz stated he ILkes garage conversions for mother-in-law units; particularly if
we could use some of these uniis toward our affordable housing goals. Most of the
people orr his street have $ or 4 cars.
Mr. Peabody stated SOme cities allow garage conversions and some do not. There are a
variety of reasons. Some have protu-bited this due to aesthetic reasons. It is a mixed bag.
Mayor Lockhar~ stated she felt people won't go out an do conversions no maiter what the
City Council says.
Mr. Ambrose talked about code enforcement issues that staff deals with such as boat or
KV storage.
Cm. Sbranti stated he did not feel there wilt be a large rush of people going oul and
doing garage conversions. Given the housing needs, there are a lo~ of reasons people
may go forward with tkis type of thiug. He did not feel this will have an impact one way
or the other on sire. et parking.
Cm. Oravetz asked if he converted his garage, Could he get credit for an affordable unit
Mr. Peabody explained that it may be an illegal use. If it were a second unit, he would
have to get permits and pay fees and provide parking for that unit.
Cm. McCormick stated she felt converted garages and parking are two different subjects.
This has to do wifl~ wording to remove requirements for covered parking spaces.
Mayor Lockh~ stated she felt if you jus~ take the word "covered" out, this would fix it.
CITY CO~UNCIZ M/NIYI~S
VOLUME 21
KEGULAK MEETING
November ] 9, 2002
PAGE 589
Cm. Orave~' as~ fi'this would just open "_?andors's Box"?
Mr. Peabody stated as a practical mat~er, we advise people in the older ~x~ion of Dublin
to.~t ~ addition on~ their house. In many cases, the garage conversions are ~alked
aborn as.~g work spies m' larger family r~':ramer ~n. dwellings £or re~tiVes.
Cm. ~ranfi ~ted the teat ~m~'is i~o~ abOut garage cOnVersions, bm parking space,
Cm. McCormick stated people have stuff and they can't get cars into their garage
anyway. ' : '
Ms,..Ram stated they could take this to the Planning Commission and then back to the
On motion of Cm. Sbramti,.seconded by Mayor Lock_ha~, and by majority vote,
~Cfl ~ Staff t0.bring the issue to take out of the Ordinance the requiremem for
2 enc!~a off Street spaces ~ the Flanning CO~SSiOn az~.City CounciI,. Cm, Z~
vC~d '~: oppOsition:,~ ~e moti6n; : .
FISCAL YEAR 200£-05 GOAL~ & OBfECTIVE$ STATUS KEPORT
AND. C~AL INIt~O~NT i~O.G~ .$~HEDULE
~l:I6p.m. 8.5 (100-$0)
City Manage~:.Richard Ambrose advi~ that staff had prep~ a bi'monthly status
repor~ of $~a~ progress :towards the objectives assj~ed by~e.City Co~Cil' as
October $ t, 2002. As of'that date, a tofiI of 12 of S6 objectives have ~n ComPleted.
With respect to high priority objectives, a total of I2 out of 77 trove been completed.
There.have, been 10 major, additiona!assignments since Ap~ 2002, one. Of which has
been completed.
The CIP includes SO projects tim, are funded in FY 2002'-05. FoUr Projects have been
complement since the program was aPproved in June of 2002.
The CotmciI thanked Staff for. the reporL.
crrY co~a~ ~
VO~UMg ~
~GO~: MELTING
NoVember ?~9, 2002
PAGE sgo
RESOLUTION NO. 03-
A RESOLUTION OF TI-IE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT
CHAPTER 8.76, OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REGULATIONS OF THE
~CIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE)
pA 03-002
WHEREAS, the comprehensive revision to the Zoning Ordinance (Ordinance 20-97) was
adopted by the City Council on September 2, 1997; and
WHEREAS, Staff has prepared a Staff report dated January 28, 2003, analyzing the
amendment to the Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said amendments to the
Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance), on January 28~ 2003, for which proper notice was given in'
accordance with California State Law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission at its January 28, 2003, meeting considered all written
and oral testimony submitted at the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the amendment is consistent with the City of Dublin General Plan because it
relates to residential uses in residemial zones.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby
recommend that the City Council f'md that the proposed amendment to Chapter 8.76, Off-Street Parking
and Loading Regulations (PA 03-02), have no possibility for a significant effect on the environment
(CEQA, Section 15061(b)(3)), that the amendments are consistent with the General Plan and any
applicable Specific Plan, and does recommend that the City Council amend said chapters of the
Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) as shown in Attachment 4 to the January 26, 2003, Planning
Commission Staff report for PA 03-002.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28~ Day Of January 2003.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST;
Planning Manager
G:~A#X2003\03~002XPC reso 1-25-03.DOC
ORDINANCE NO.
AMENDING c TER,S,76 oFF.sT ET I'ARK G AND
LOADING REGULATIONS (ZONING ORDINANCE) PA 03-002
WHE~AS} ih~'.City of:Dablin has' determined that the Off, Street parking and Load/rig
Regulati6ns bS;th¢ Dub.ii~..M~elPaI C°de (Chapter 8.76) must be revised to more effeCtiVely 'regulate
development 'within the City; and : ~
WHEREAS, On August 18, 1997, the City Council adopted Resolution 103-97 finding that the
Comprehensi:¢e Revision to Re ZOning Ordinate was exempt, from C-EQA.. VarioUs changes t0"the
Municipal Code listed above would also not create environmental impactS. These changes are also
exempt from CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that such amendments
would have a si~ficant effect On the environment (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061(b)(3)~;~.~d
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a properly noticed pubic hearing on this project
on January:28;~ 2003, and did .adopt Resolution 03-xx recommending ~that .the City Council approve
amendments to Title 8 (Zoning'Ordinance) of the Municipal Code; and
WI-IEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on ; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the City Council approve the
Ordinance Amendment; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to section 8.120.050.B of the Dublin Municipal Code)the City Council
finds that the Ordinance Amendment is consistent with the Dublin General Plan; and
WI-IEREAS, the City Council did hear and use its independent judgment and consider all said
reports, recommendations.and testimony, hereinabove set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows:
Section 1.
Section 8.76.670.A.14.a.1 'ofthe Dublin Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
"14. Location of Required Parking Spaces
a. Single family lot. ..
1. Principal residence. Ali parking spaces shall be located on the same parcel as the residence
they serve, unless provided as a Residential Parking Lot by the Zoning Administrator
pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit. The most distant parking space in a Residential
Parking Lot shall be ~ot ~o~e than 1'50 feet from the residences they serve. P~Pdng :pacc~
....................... ,.,... an enclc:ed garage. Other than the two
required_gazagad off-street :parking spaces, a maximum Of two vehicles (which shall include,
but not be limited to, an automobile,, car, truck or Recreational Vehicle) may be parked in the
following areas if screened by a 6 foot high fence or wall and if at least one side yard is
unobstructed to a width of 36 inches: Areas 1, 2, 3a, 3b, 4. Additional parking may occur in
area 5a if the reauired tw° off-street parking spaces is provided in an enclosed garage.;
G:~A#k2003\03-002\ORD-strikeout-underline. DOC
Parking in area 5b shall be as required by Section 8.76.060. E.2. No parking shall occur in
area 5c except as permitted by Section 8.76.060E.R. See Figure 76-2."
SectiOn 2
Section 8.76.080 Parking Requirements by Use Type of the Dublin Municipal Code shall be amended as
follows:
"RESIDENTIAL USES
RESIDENTIAL USE TYPES NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQI.JIREI)
Agricultural Housing 2 per dwelling
Boarding House 2 per dwelling, plus .5 per.sleeping room
Caretaker Residence 2 per dwelling
Community Care Facility/Small 2 per dwelling
Dwelling.
Multi-Family
· Studio 1 covered or garaged per dwelling plus guest parking
(see below)
1 Bedroom 1 covered or garaged per'dwelling plus guest parking
(see below)
2+ Bedrooms 2 ~:overed or garaged per dwelling plus guest parking
see below)
Senior Citizen Apartments 1 covered or garaged per dwelling plus guest parking
(see below)
Guest Parking Projects with 10 or more dwellings shall provide one
additional space for every 2 dwelling units
Single Family/Duplex/Mobile Home 2 full size spaces ;m enclosed $arr, ges. per dwelling,..
Farm Mobile Home 2 per dwelling
Large Family Day Care Home (7-12) 2 per dwelling, plus 1 space for every employee not ,'
residing in the home, plus one loading space for every
4 children at the facility
Mobile Home 2 per dwelling
Mobile Home Park 2 per dwelling, plus 1 guest space for every 2
dwellings
Residential Use Secondary to 2 per dwelting
Commercial Use
Second Unit I parking space, see Section __ relating to Second
Units
Small F~rnily Day Care (1-6) Not regulated
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
on this day of ,2003, by the following votes:
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Abstain:
2
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held. on Tuesday, January 28,
2003, in the Dublin Civic Center City Council Chambers. Chairperson FasulkeY called the meeting
to order at 7~00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: COmmissioners, Fasulkey, Jennings, Nassar, King and Machtmes; Jeri Ram, Planning
Manager; Marrde Waffle, Assistant Planner; John Bakker, City Attorney; and Autumn McGrath,
Recording Secretary
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Cm. Fasulkey led the Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag.
ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA
The Minutes of .December 10, 2002 were approved as submitted; the minutes of January 14, 2003
meetings were approved with correction.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None
®fanning Commission 9 ~anuary 28, 2003
~(egu~r 9~eetint7
PUBLIC HEARING
8.1 PA 03-002 - Zoning Ordinance-Amendment to Chapter 8.76, Off-Street Parking' and
Loading Regulations
Ms. Ram gave a background of the item, noting that the City Council had directed Staff to present
to the Commission an item that would consider a modification of the City's enclosed parking
requirements for single-family residential dwelling units. She explained that by eliminating the
requirement for two enclosed off-siTeet parking spaces and requiring only ~wo o'ff-s~reet parking
spaces, garage conversions would be possible.
Ms. Waffle presented a Power point presentation of the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment to
the off-street parking and loading regulations, and discussed the reasons that the community may
benefit from allowing garage conversions, as well some of the issues that may arise as a result of
garage conversions.
Ms. Ram reminded the Commission that in order to implement an ordinance change, the Planning
Commission would need to make a recommendation to the City Council, for approval or approval
with changes or conditions. She added that the Commission could recommend to not approve the
ordinance change.
Cm. King asked if the only change in the proposed Zoning Ordinance as presented was eliminating
the word "enclosed" from the text.
Ms. Ram stated that the change was also in the qualifier in the chart of the ordinance, explaining
that the ordinance was changed in two places.
Cm. Nassar asked questions about the off-street parking that would be required if the garage
conversion was allowed, and how the on-street parking would be impacted.
Ms. Ram explained that if a homeowner wanted to convert the garage, they would be required to
show that they had two full-size off-street parking spaces, which translates into using the driveway
in most cases. She added that by eliminating the garage as a potential place for parking vehicles, a
multi-car family couId potentially use the street as well to park their vehicles.
Cm. Nassar asked if there have been studies to predict use of the street for parking if the enclosed
garage-parking requirement was eliminated.
Planning Commission 10 Januar~ 28, 2003
Regular 91eeting
Ms. Ram answered that there have been no studies, and that it would be hard to predict since it
would vary from person to person.
Cm. King asked if the regulations were changed, what the impact would be t° the Homeowners'
Association regulations that might apply.
Ms. Ram stated that the City does not enforce Homeowners' Association regulations.
Cm. Jennings expressed concern that the issue at hand was removing the word "enclosed" from the
parking regulations, but that the issue appeared to actually be an issue of garage conversions. She
noted that these were separate issues and asked how these issues would come under the same
ordinance.
Ms. Ram answered that the City Council had recommended that Staff remove the word "enclosed"
for the purpose of allowing garage converSions, and that the presentation by Staff was to provide a
balanced view of the issue.
Cm. Machtmes asked if there are currently any regulations or restrictions for on-street parking,
such as how much time, how many cars, etc.
Ms. Ram stated that there are no restrictions except in Eastern Dublin where some plarmed
developments allow parking ordy on one side of the street due to the narrow streets.
Cm. Fasulkey asked if a P0ll had been conducted of other cities polities for garage conversion.
Ms. Waffle noted that there had not been spedfic studies, but that based on the information she had
received while in contact with other'cities in California, the majority do not allow garage
conversion unless the parking requirement can be met.
Cm. King asked if the dries that allow conversion (when the parking requirement was met)
required design standards.
Ms. Waffle stated that she did not have sufficient information to answer that question, but knew of
one dry that allowed garage conversions when the parking requirement was met that had design
standard requirements as well.
®Fanning Commission 11 January 28, 2003
Regular Meeting
Ms. Ram stated that if design standards were a concern, the Commission could recommend a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process that would allow all conversions to be heard by the Plann/n~
Commission.
There were questions and discussion between Staff and the Commission regarding specifics of the
parking ordina, nce, the consequences of the proposed change, and the possible impact to the
community.
Cm. Fasutkey noted for the record that the City received 13 letters from citizens of Dublin who
were in favor of the amendment' and. requested that the parking ordinance be amended to allow
garage conversion and non-enclosed parking. He then opened the public hearing and asked if
anyone from the public wished to address the Commission.
There were four citizens who addressed the Commission in favor of amending the parking
Ordinance to allow garage conversion.
Ms. Esther Vigil stated that she has been a homeowner in Dublin since 19791 and has converted a
portion of her garage for a dark room. She noted that she did not obtain permits at the time to save
on costs, and had been advised that if the ordinance were not amended to allow garage
conversions, she would be required to take down her dark room or apply for a variance. She added
that she is still able to park in her garage, while other neighbors use their garages for storage,
thereby parking on the street or driveway. She stated that she was in favor of amending the
parking ordinance.
Mr. Fernando Carranza stated that he has been a resident of Dublin since 1987, and.wanted to
advise the Commission that he was in favor of amending the parking ordinance to allow garage
conversions. He noted that large families needed to convert their garages to provide additional
housing area.
Ms. Catherine Brown spoke and stated that she had understood the issue to be off-street parking,
rather than garage conversion. She stated that she was in favor of eliminating the word "enclosed"
from the parking regulations in order to allow homeowners to use their garages for storage or other
uses. She noted that her famiIy needed to store items in the garage since they did not have a
basement and had a small yard which could not contain a storage shed. She added that due to the
high costs of housing in the Bay Area, homeowners are not always able to move into larger homes
as their family sizes grow, and needed to be able to convert their garages to provide more living
space.
Planning Commission 12 January 28, 2003
Regular pSeeting
Mr. Glenn Stapleton stated that he has been a resident at his current address in Dublin for 27 years
and was in favor of amending the parking regulations ordinance to enable use of the garage for
other purposes than enclosed parking for vehicles.
When the citizens had finished addressing the Commission, Cm. Fasulkey asked if anyone else
wanted to address the Commission; hearing none, he closed the public hearing, and the
Commission deliberated.
Cm. King asked what the conversion requirements were for the City.
Mr. Gregory Shreeve, Building Official, gave testimony regarding the permits required for garage
conversions and information regarding requirements of different conversion uses.
Cm. Machtmes expressed support for garage conversions, providing the normal building and
business requirements were met.
Cm. Jennings noted that as a general rule other cities do not allow garage conversions and that the
City could have consequences that result from garage conversions, citing a situation where a
conversion resulted in a massive fire. She also reiterated that she thought the parking regulations
and garage conversions should be separate issues.
Ms. Ram stated that if the Commission wanted more study on the issues of concern that'Staff could
be directed to further investigate and report back to the Commission with the findings.
Upon deliberation, Cm. Fasulkey stated in summary that the Commission needed to provide Staff
with direction on how to proceed, and needed to determine if there was concurrence with the
Council's direction and intent of the ordinance change. He added that if the Commission could
concur with the intent, Staff could be directed to provide alternatives and studies regarding
aesthetics and design standards; impact on traffic and safety; infrastructure impact issues such as
garbage collection; how broad the scope of potential.conversions would be; how to incorporate
design standards; and how to address "grandfathering":
Cm. Fasulkey then asked for a straw poll, and Cm. Nassar, Cm. King and Machtmes were agreeable
to the intent of the Council's ordinance subject to further studies and further criteria for garage
conversion. Cm. Jermings stated that she did not have sufficient information to concur with the
intent.
Planning Commission 13 January 28, 2003
Regular Meeting
Cm. Fasulkey asked for a motion to continueltem 8.1 to date uncertain; on motion by Cm~ King,
seconded by Cm. Machtmes, and a vote of 5-0, the Planning Commission unanimously approved to
continue the matter.
NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS
9.1 Brown Act and Political Reform Act Requirements Presentation and Outline
Mr. Bakker presented the outline prepared bY the City Attorney that discusses two of the State
laws, the Brown Act and Political Reform Act Requirements, which he explained and defined for
the Commissioners.
There was discussion between Mr. Bakker and the Commissioners about specifics of the Brown Act,
which requires that at/'meetings must be open, including Commissions, and prevents discussion of
issues that are within' the subject matter jurisdiction by a majority of the Commissioners outside of
a meeting. He also discussed the Political Reform Act Requirements, which states that they may
not take action on matters that would be a financial conflict Of interest.
Mr. Bakker informed the Commission about the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC), which
is a body that can provide formal legal advice and also informal advice over the telephone. He
encouraged the Commissioners to contact the City Attorney's office or the FPPC for questions
regarding the Political Reform Act Requirements.
OTHER BUSINESS
Ms. Ram reminded the Commission of the League of Cities Conference on March 20-22, 2003, and
acknowledged that all of the Commissioners except for Cm. Nassar are scheduled to attend.
Ms Ram advised the Commission about the Commercial Linkage Study Committee that is
investigating the impact on housing due to the business development. She noted that the findings
of the study would mean a fair fee on new commercial construction and reported that the
Commercial Linkage Study Committee needed a Planning Commission appointed member from
the business community. She asked if any of the Commissioners were interested in serving on this
'Committee.
Cm. Nassar stated that he would be interested in serving on the Commercial Linkage Study
Committee, and asked for details about the time required for serving on the Committee.
q[anning Commission 14 ~Tanuary 28, 2003
~egu[ar ~eeting
Ms. Ram 9eia~:d:.i~a~ :sb~....es~ate~.,.~. ~e ~,.s~!¥ic~ ~n,~e Committee to be six to eight monks,
possibly four hours a month. '
Cm. Fasulkey asked for a recommendation to appoint Cm. NasSar to the Committee; on motion by -
Cm. King, seconded by Cm. Je~$s, Cm. Nassar was appointed to the Commercial Linkage Stndy
Committee.
. Ms. Ram discussed the' Goals and Obj:e¢~ves meeting to be held on March 1, 2003, and advised the
Commissioners that she would forward the specifics ~o them shortly.
Ms. Ram discussed' ~Jhe future City Council and Planning CommisSion m~efing items.
ADIOURNMENT
The meeting was adjoUrned at 9:00 p,m, /'
Respec~lly Submitted,
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Planning Manager
G: \ MINUTES \ 2003 \ Planning Commission \ 1-28-03 pc mira doc
®[an~ir~ Commission 15 ]anuar~ 28, 2003
~e~u[ar 9~[eetir~
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Chapter 8~100
CHAPTER 8.100 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
8.100.010 Purpose. The purpose of this Chapter is to establish a procedure for conditionally
approving or denying land uses, including related structures, that are not clearly
permitted or prohibited because of their unique nature. Such uses and related
structures would only be approved if their effect on the surrounding environment
can be made acceptable through the application of conditions of approval.
8,100.020 Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit. The uses and related structures
requiring a Conditional Use Permit shall be limited to those in Chapter 8.12,
Zoning Districts And Allowable Uses Of Land, for each zoning district, and
elsewhere in this Ordinance.
8.100.030 Application. The Applicant shall submit a complete application pursuant to
Chapter 8.124, Applications, Fees and Deposits, accompanied by a fee and/or
deposit and such materials as are required by the Director of Community
Development.
8.100.040 Notice and Hearings. Conditional Use Permit applications shall be considered at
a Public hearing with notice pursuant to Chapter 8.132, Notice and Hearings.
8.100.050 Concurrent Consideration. When a Conditional Use Permk is required for a
project which is also subject to a Zoning Ordinance Amendment, Specific Plan,
Specific Plan Amendment, or General Plan Amendment, k shall be approved,
conditionally approved, or denied by the same decision-maker or body for those
actions.
8.100.060 Required Findings. The following findings shall all be made in order to approve
a Conditional Use Permit:
A. The proposed use and related structures is compatible with other land uses, transportation
and service facilities in the vicinity.
B. k will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the
vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare.
C. It will not be injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood.
D. There are adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation, and public utilities and
services to ensure that the proposed use and related structures would not be detrimental to
the public health, safety, and welfare.
E. The subject site is physically suitable for the type, density and intensity of the use and
related structures being proposed.
City o£ Dub/in Zoning Ordinance 100-1 September, 1997
ATTACHMENT
CONL.. iONAL USE PERMIT Chapter 8.100
F. It will not be contrary to the specific intent clauses, development regulations, or
performance standards established for the zoning district in which it is located.
G. It is consistent with the Dublin General Plan and with any applicable Specific Plans.
8.100.070 Action. The decision-makers for Conditional Use Permits shall be the Zoning
Administrator or thePlarming Commission, as .specified in the Land Use Matrix
in Chapter .8.12, Zoning Districts And Permitted Uses Of Land. The Planning
Commission or the Zoning Administrator shall hold a public hearing, and after the
public hearing is closed may, based on evidence in the public record, and the
findings above, approve, conditionally approve, or deny a Conditional Use Permit
by resolution.
8.100.080. Amendments.
A. Minor Amendment. The Community Development Director or his/her designee shall
determine that a minor amendment to a Conditional Use Permit is in substantial
conformance with the Conditional Use Permit if it is a minor project as described below,
is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, and is consistent
with the conditions of approval.for the permit. It is not the intent of this Chapter that a
series of Minor Amendments be used to circumvent the need for a new Conditional Use
Permit. A minor project shall include any of the following:
t. The cumulative physical expansion of any structUre approved in the original
Conditional Use Permit by no more than t,000 square feet.
2. The expansion or intensification of use by no more than 10% of the original use.
3. Relocation of a use within the same property or structure.
4. A-maximum 25% increase or decrease in hours of operation.
B. Other Amendments. The process for amending a Conditional Use Permit shall be the
same as the process for approving a Conditional Use Permit except that the decision-
maker for such Conditional Use Permit shall be the same decision-maker that ultimately
approved the Conditional Use Permit including any approval on appeal, or by referral.
8.100.090 Building Permits. Building Permits shall not be issued except in accordance
with the terms and conditions of the Conditional Use Permit approval.'
8.100.100 Procedures. The procedures set forth in Chapter 8.96, Permit Procedures, shall
apply except as otherwise prov. ided in this Chapter.
City of Dublin Zoning OrdinanCe 100-2 September, 1997
RESOLUTION NO. 03-
A RESOLUTION oF THEp~-ANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO
CHAPTER 8.12 ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMITTED USES OF LAND;
CHAPTER 8.76 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REGULATIONS; AND,
CHAPTER 8.100 CONDITONAL USE PERMIT, OF THE
DUBLIN ZONING ORDINANCE, PA 03-002
WHEREAS, a comprehensive revision to the Zoning Ordinance (Ordinance 20-97) was adopted by the
City Council on September 2, t997; and
WHEREAS, Councilmember Tim Sbranti requested that the City Council consider modification of the
City's enclosed parking requirement by eliminating the requirement for two, off-street parking spaces in an
enclosed garage to allow for the conversion of garages to living space; and
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2002', Staff presented a report to the City Council' regarding the City's
current requirements for residential off-street parking; and
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2002, the City Council directed Staff to prepare an Ordinance
amendment to remove the requirement for two, off-street parking .spaces in an enclosed garage to allow for the
conversion of garages to living space; and
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2003, Staff presented a report to the Planning Commission regarding an
amendment to Chapter 8.76, Off-street Parking~d Loading Regulations of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2003, the Planning Commission directed Staff to provide alternatives and
studies regarding the amendment to Chapter 8.76, Off-street Parking and Loading Regulations of the Dublin
Zoning Ordinance and its impact on garage conversions; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 8.I2, Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land; Chapter 8.76, Off-street
Parhng and Loading Regulations; and Chapter 8.100, Conditional Use Permit, must be revised to more
effectively regulate off-street parking and the conversion of garages in the City of Dublin; and
WHEREAS, on August 18, 1997, the City Council adopted Resolution 103-97 finding that the
Comprehensive Revision to the Zoning Ordinance, including Chapter 8.12 Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses
of Land; Chapter 8.76 Off-street Parking and Loading Regulations; and Chapter 8.100 Conditional Use Permit
regulations, is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The various changes to the
Zoning Ordinance listed above would also not create environmental impacts. These changes are exempt from
CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that such amendments would have a
significant effect on the environment (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061 (b) (3)); and
WHEREAS, Staff has prepared a Staff Report dated Pebruary 25, 2003 analyzing the amendment to the
Dublin Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Planning commission held a public hearing on said amendments to the Dublin Zoning
Ordinance on February 25, 2003, for which proper notice was given in accordance with California State Law;
and
~~AS, the Plmg Commission did hear and use their independent judgment and coff~idefed all
said reports, recommendationS;and testimony hereinabove set forth.
_ ~;OW, THEREFORE,'BE IT RESOLVED TItAT the' Dublin ?lanning Commission does hereby recommend
that the City Council find that the proposed amendments to Chapter 8.12, Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses
of Land; Chapter 8.76, Off-street Parking and Loading Regulations; and Chapter 8.100, Conditional Use Permit,
have no possibility for a significant effect on the environment (CEQA, Section 15061 (b) (3)), that the
amendments are consistent with the General Plan, and does recommend that the City Council amend said
chapters of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance as shown in Attachment 5 to the February 25, 2003 Staff Report for
PA 03-002.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Planning Commission Chairperson
,TTEST:
Planning Manager
G:~PA#L2003\03-002~C Reso 2-25-03.doc
ORDINANCE NO. ~
AN ORDINANCE'OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN .
AMENDING CHAPTER 8.12 ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMITTED
USES OF LAND; 'CHAPTER 8.76 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING
REGULATIONS; A.ND~ CHAPTER 8.100 CONDITONAL USE PERMIT, OF THE
DUBLIN ZONING ORDINANCE, PA 03-002
WHEREAS, the City of Dubtin has determined that, the Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land of
the Dublin Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 8.12); Off-street Parking and Loading Regulations of the Dublin Zoning
Ordinance (Chapter 8.76); and Conditional Use Permit regulations of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance (Chapter
8.100), must be revised to more effectively regulate development within the Cky; and
WHEREAS, on August 18, 1997, the City Council adopted Resolution t 03-97 finding that the
Comprehensive Revision to the Zoning Ordinance, including Chapter 8.12 Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses
of Land; Chapter 8.76 Off-street Parking and Loading Regulations; and Chapter 8.100 Conditional Use Permit
regulations, is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The various changes to the
.Zoning Ordinance listed above would also not create environmental impacts. These changes are exempt from
CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that such amendments would have a
significant effect on the enviromnent (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061 (b) (3)); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a properly noticed public hearing on this project on
February 25, 2003, and did adopt Resolution 03- recommending that the City Council approve
amendments to the Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on April 1, 2003; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the City Council approve the Zoning
Ordinance Amendments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8.120.050.B of the Zoning Ordinance,' the City Council finds that the
Ordinance Amendments are consistent with the Dublin General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use its independent judgment and consider all said reports,
recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows:
Section 1'
Section 8.12.050, Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Land Uses, of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance is
amended to read as follows:
RESIDENTIAL USE TYPES
Residential Use Type I A R-1 I R-2 R-3 R-4 C-O C-N C-1 C-2 I M-P M-1 /M~-2 :~
i ~q'esidential C°nversi°n °ft i
Garage to Living Space - C/PC ......... ! _
Section 2 ....
SeCtion 8.76.070.A. 14, Location of Required Parking Spaces, of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance is amended to
'~,ad as follows:
a. Single family lot.
Principal residence. 'All parking spaces shall be located on the same parcel as the
residence they serve, unless provided as a.Residential Parking Lot by the Zoning
Administrator pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit. The most distant parking space in a
Residential Parking Lot shall be not more than 150 feet from the residences they serve.
Parking spaces required by this Chapter shall be located within an enclosed garage,
except if permitted elsewhere on a lot pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit for the
purposes of converting a residential garage to living space. Other than the two required
garaged parking spaces, a maximum of two vehicles (which shall include, but not be
timited to, an automobile, car, mick, or Recreational Vehicle) may be parked in the
following areas if screened by a 6 foot high fence or wall and if at least one side yard is
unobstructed to a width of 36 inches: Areas 1, 2, 3a, 3b and 4. Additional parking may
occur in area 5a. Parking in area 5b shall be as required by Section 8.76.060.E.2. No
parking shall occur in area 5c except as permitted by Section 8.76.060.E.4. See Figure
76-2. Parking i'n a driveway shall not compensate for required enclosed garage parking
unless permitted pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit for the purposes of converting a
residential aarage to living space. No parking shall occur in Area 6.
Section 3
action 8.76.080, Parking Requirements by Use Type, of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance is amended to read as
follows:
B. Residential Use Types. Residential Use Types shall provide off-street parking spaces as follows:
~s~DENTIAL USE TYPEs NUMBER'OF PA~NG SPACES.REQUIReD
Single F~mily/Duptex/Mobile Home
Lots of 4,000 square feet or less 2 in enclosed.garage per dwelling* plus one on-street
parking space per dwelling unit within 150 feet of that
dwelling unit.
Lots greater than 4,000 square feet 2 in enclosed garage per dwelling*
* Except if permitted elsewhere on a tot pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit for the purposes of converting a residential
gara,ae to living space.
Section 4
Section 8.100.060, Required Findings, of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance is amended to read as follows:
Archi. tectural considerations, including the character, scale and quality of the design, the
architectural relationship with the site and other bulletin,s, buildin~ materials and colors.
screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior iighting, and 'similar elements have been
incorporated into the project and as conditions of approval in order to'insure compatibility of th;~s
'development with th~ Jevelopment's design concept or theme and the character o~adiacent ?~ .....
buildings, neighborhoods~ and uses.
S__ection 5 - Severabilitv
The provisions of this Ordinance are:seVerable and if any provision, clause, sentence, Word or part thereof is
held illegal, invalid, unconstitutional, or inapplicable to any person or circumstances, such illegality, invalidity,
unconstitutionality, or inapplicability shall not affect or impair any of the remaining provisions, clauses,
sentences, sections, words or parts thereof of the ordinance or their applicability'm other persons or
circumstances.
Section 6 - Effective Date and Posting of Ordinance
This ordinance shall take effect and be in force th/ny (30) days from and after the date of its final adoption. The
City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause th/s Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the
City of Dublin in accordance with Section 39633 of the Government Code of California.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin on this 1st day of April
2003; by the following votes:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
G:X~PA#~2003\03-002\CC-ord.doc
Section 2 ~: ,~ ~ .... ~'
Section 8.76.070.A.14, Location of Required Parking Spaces, of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance is amended to
read as follows:
a. Single family lot.
1. Principal residence. All parking spaces shall be located on the same parcel as the
residence they serve, unless provided as a Residential Parking Lot by the Zoning
Administrator pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit. The most distant parking space in a
Residential Parking Lot shall be. not more than 150 feet from the residences they serve.
Parking spaces required by this Chapter shall be located within an enclosed garage,
except that two. full-size, unenclosed parking spaces may be permitted elsewhere on a lot
pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit for the purposes of converting a residential garage
to living space. Other than the two required garaged parking spaces, a maximum of two
Vehicles (which shall include, but not be limited to, an automobile, car, truck, or
Recreational Vehicle) may be parked in the following areas if screened by a 6 foot high
fence or wall and if at least one side yard is unobstructed to a width of 36 inches: Areas
1, 2, 3a, 3b and 4. Additional parking may occur in area 5a. Parking in area 5b shall be
as required by Section 8.76.060.E.2. No parking shall occur in area 5c except as
permitted by Section 8.76.060.E.4. See Figure 76-2. Parking in a driveway' shall not
compensate for required enclosed garage parking unless two. full-size, unenclosed
parking spaces are permitted pursnsnt to a Conditional use Permit for the purposes of
converting a residential garage to living space. No parking shall occur in Area 6.
Section 3
Section 8.76.080, Parking Requirements by Use Type, of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance is amended to read as
follows:
B. Residential Use Types. Residential Use Types shall provide off-street parking spaces as follows:
Single FamilY/Duplex/Mobile Home
Lots of 4,000 square feet or less 2 in enclosedgarage per dwelling*_ plus one on-street
parking space per dwelling unit within 150 feet of that
dwelling unit.
Lots greater than 4,000 square feet 2 in enclosed garage per dwelling*
Except if two, full-size, unenclosed parking spaces are permitted elsewhere on a lot pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit
for the purposes of converting a residential garage to living space.
Section 4
Section 8.100.060, Required Findings, of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance is amended to read as follows:
H. Architectural considerations, including the character, scale and quality of the desi..eh, the
architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, building materials and colors,
screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior lighting, and similar elements have been
incorporated into the proiect and as conditions of approval in ~,~der to insure compatibiiit¥ ~f this
development with the development's design concept or theme and the character of adiacent
buildings, neighborhoods, and uses.
Section 5 - SeverabiliW.,
The provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if any provision, clause, sentence, word or par~ thereof is
held illegal, invalid, unconstitutional, or inapplicable to any person or circumstances, such illegality, invalidity,
unconstitutionality, or inapplicability shall not affect or impair any of the remaining provisions, clauses,
'sentences, sections, words or parts thereof of the ordinance or their applicability to other persons or
circumstances.
Section 6 - Effective Date and Posting of Ordinance
This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its final adoption. The
City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the
City of Dublin in accordance with Section 39633 of the Government Code of California.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin on this 1st day of April
2003, by the following votes:
AYE S:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
G :~PA#X2003\0~-002\CC-ord.do
DRAFT
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ~,.~:3'~ ~7~"'
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO
CHAPTER 8.12 ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMITTED USES OF LAND;
CHAPTER 8.76 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REGULATIONS; AND,
CHAPTER 8.100 CONDITONAL USE PERMIT, OF THE
DUBLIN ZONING ORDINANCE
PA 03-002
WHEREAS, a comprehensive.revision to the Zoning Ordinance (Ordinance 20-97) was adopted by the
City Council on September 2, 1997; and
WHEREAS, Council member Tim Sbranti requested that the City Council consider modification of the
City's enclosed parking requirement by eliminating the requirement for two, off-street parking spaces in an
enclosed garage to allow for the conversion of garages to living space; and
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2002, Staff presented a report to the City Council regarding the City's
current requirements for residential off-street parking; and
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2002, the City Council directed Staff to prepare an Ordinance
amendment to remove the requirement for two, off-street parking spaces in an enclosed garage to allow for the
conversion of garages to living space; and
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2003, Staff presented a report to the Planning Commission regarding an
amendment to Chapter 8.76, Off-street Parking and Loading Regulations of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2003, the Planning Commission directed Staffto provide alternatives and
studies regarding the amendment to Chapter 8.76, Off-street Parking and Loading Regulations of the Dublin
Zoning Ordinance and its impact on garage conversions; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 8.12, Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land; Chapter 8.76, Off-street
Parking and Loading Regulations; and Chapter 8.100, conditional Use Permit, must be revised to more
effectively regulate off-street parking and the conversion of garages in the City of Dublin; and
WHEREAS, on August 18, 1997, the City Council adopted Resolution 103-97 finding that the
Comprehensive Revision to the Zoning Ordinance, including Chapter 8.12 Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses
of Land; Chapter 8.76 Off-street Parking and Loading Regulations; and Chapter 8.100 Conditional Use Permit
regulations, is exempt fi.om the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The various changes to the
Zoning Ordinance listed above would also not create environmental impacts. These changes are exempt from
CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that such amendments would have a
significant effect on the environment (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061 (b) (3)); and
WHEREAS, Staffhas prepared a Staff Report dated February 25, 2003 analyzing the amendment to the
Dublin Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said amendments to the Dublin Zoning
Ordinance on February 25, 2003, for which proper notice was given in accordance with California State Law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use their independent judgment and considered ail
said reports, recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Dublin Planning Commission does hereby .
recommend that the City Council find that the proposed amendments to Chapter 8.12, Zoning Districts and
Permitted Uses of Land; Chapter 8.76, Off-street Parking and Loading Regulations; and Chapter 8.100,
Conditional Use Permit, have no possibility for a.significant effect on the environment (CEQA, Section 15061
(b) (3)), that the amendments are consistent with the General Plan, and does recommend that the City Council
amend said chapters of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance as shown in Attachment 5 to the February 25, 2003 Staff
Report for PA 03-002.
pASsED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 25th day of February 2003, by the following vote:
AYES: Cm. Fasulkey, Nassar, King and Machtmes
NOES: Cm. Jennings
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Planning Manager
G:kPAgk2003\03-002~PC Reso 2-25-03.do¢
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
AMENDING CHAPTER 8.12 ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMITTED
USES OF LAND; CHAPTER 8.76 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING
REGULATIONS; AND, CHAPTER 8.100 CONDITONAL USE PERMIT, OF THE
DUBLIN ZONING ORDINANCE, PA 03-002
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin has determined that, the Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land of
the Dublin Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 8.12); Off-street Parking and Loading Regulations of the Dublin Zoning
Ordinance (Chapter 8.76); and Conditional Use Permit regulations of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance (Chapter
8.100), must be revised to more effectively regulate development within the City; and
WHEREAS, on August 18, 1997, the City Council adopted Resolution 103-97 finding that the
Comprehensive Revision to the Zoning Ordinance, including Chapter 8.12 Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses
of Land; Chapter 8.76 Off-street Parking and Loading Regulations; and Chapter 8.100 Conditional Use Permit
regulations, is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The various changes to the
Zoning Ordinance listed above would also not create environmental impacts. These changes are exempt from
CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that such amendments would have a
significant effect on the environment (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061 (b) (3)); and
WHEREAS, the Plarming Commission did hold a properly noticed public hearing on this project on
February 25, 2003, and did adopt Resolution 03- recommending that the City Council approve
amendments to the Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on April 1, 2003; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the City Council approve the Zoning
Ordinance Amendments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8.120.050.B of the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council finds that the
Ordinance Amendments are consistent with the Dublin General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and use its independent judgment and consider all said reports,
recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows:
Section 1
Section 8.12.050, Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Land Uses, of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance is
amended to read as follows:
RESIDENTIAL USE TYPES
Residential Use Type A R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 C-O C-N C-1 C-2 M-P M-1 M-2
Residential Conversion of
Garage to Living Space - C/PC ..........
ATTACH EHT
Section 2
Section 8.76.070.A. 14, Location of Required Parking Spaces, of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance is amended to
read as follows:
a. Single family lot,
1. Principal residence. All parking spaces shall be located on the same parcel as the
residence they serve, unless provided as a Residential Parking Lot by the Zoning
Administrator pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit. The most distant parking space in a
Residential Parking Lot shall be not more than 150 feet from the residences they serve.
Parking spaces required by this Chapter shall be located within an enclosed garage,
except that two, full-size, unenclosed parking spaces may be permitted elsewhere on a lot
pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit for the purposes of converting a residential garage
to living space. Other than the two required garaged parking spaces, a maximum of two
vehicles (which shall include, but not be limited to, an automobile, car, truck, or
Recreational Vehicle) may be parked in the following areas if screened by a 6 foot high
fence or wall and if at least one side yard 'is unobstructed to a width of 36 inches: Areas
1, 2, 3a, 3b and 4. Additional parking may occur in area 5a. Parking in area 5b shall be
as required by Section 8.76.060.E.2. No parking shall occur in area 5c except as
permitted by Section 8.76.060.E.4. See Figure 76-2. Parking in a driveway shall not
compensate for required enclosed garage parking unless two, full-size, unenclosed
parking spaces are permitted pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit for the purposes of
converting a residential garage to living space. No parking shall occur in Area 6.
Section 3
Section 8.76.080, Parking Requirements by Use Type, o£the Dublin Zoning Ordinance is amended to read as
follows:
B. Residential Use Types. Residential Use Types shall provide off-street parking spaces as follows:
RESIDENTIAL USE TYPES NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED
Single Family/Duplex/Mobile Home
Lots of 4,000 square feet or less 2 in enclosed garage per dwelling* plus one on-street
parking space per dwelling unit within 150 feet of that
dwelling unit.
Lots greater than 4,000 square feet 2 in enclosed garage per dwelling*
* Except if two, full-size, unenclosed parking spaces are permitted elsewhere on a lot pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit
for the purposes of converting a residential garage to living space.
Section 4
Section 8.100.060, Required Findings, of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance is amended to read as follows:
H. For the conversion of single family residential garages to living space, architectural
considerations, including the character, scale and quality of the design, the architectural
relationship with the site and other buildings, building materials and colors, screening of exterior
appurtenances, exterior lighting~ and similar elements have been incorporated into the project
and as conditions of approval in order to insure compatibility of this development with the
development's design concept or theme and the character of adjacent buildings, neighborhoods,
and uses.
Section 5 - Severability
The provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if any provision, clause, sentence, word or part thereof is
held illegal, invalid, unconstitutional, or inapplicable to any person or circumstances, such illegality, invalidity,
unconstitutionality, or inapplicability shall not affect or impair any of the remaining provisions, clauses,
sentences, sections, words or parts thereof of the ordinance or their applicability to other persons or
circumstances.
Section 6 - Effective Date and Posting of Ordinance
This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its final adoption. The
City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the
City of Dublin in accordance with Section 39633 of the Government Code of California.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin on this 1st day of April
2003, by the following votes:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
G 5PA#X2003\03-002\CC-ord.doc