HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.1ContPblcHrngStPtrckROWCITY CLERK
File # ❑oao-oo
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: December 4, 1996
SUBJECT: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: PA95-043 Realignment of the
established Right -of Way Line for a New Road Parallel to and South of
Dublin Boulevard Between Golden Gate Drive and Regional Street (the
Parallel Road)
Prepared B Lee Thompson, City Engineer and Jeri Ramer
(Report p Y� P � Y g�
Associate Planner)
EXHIBIT ATTACHED: 1) Letter to Lee Thompson from Liberty House Properties and Lincoln
Property Company Management Services, Inc., dated November 22,
1996.
2) Proposed Realignment Diagram
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Open public hearing
2) Receive Staff Report and public testimony
3) Question Staff and the Public
4) Close public hearing and deliberate
5) Take no action based on property owner's request
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: No financial impact at this time. Costs for acquisition of the land would
be negotiated with the property owners at such time as the City funds this
project as a Capital Improvement Project.
DESCRIPTION:
The realignment of the established right-of-way line for the Parallel Road between Regional Street and Golden
Gate Drive has previously been requested by the affected property owners and has been authorized for study by
the City Council.
BACKGROUND:
In 1987 the City Council adopted the Downtown Specific Plan. A road parallel to and south of Dublin
Boulevard (the Parallel Road) was included in the circulation element of the Plan to improve circulation in the
downtown area.
After several public hearings, a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this Parallel Road was adopted on
September 26, 1988, and the right-of-way line for the Parallel Road between Amador Plaza Road and Regional
Street was approved by the City Council with Planning Commission recommendation, on October 10, 1988.
COPIES TO: Matt Brooks
Lincoln Properties
ITEM NO. "' . I
More recently, a portion of the roadway, from Amador Plaza Road to Golden Gate Drive has been incorporated
into a plan as a continuation of the new 1-680 hook ramps to Amador Plaza Road.
On February 24, 1994, the City Council approved the initiation of a study to realign the approved right-of-way
line between Golden Gate and Regional Street. The Study was initiated at the request of the owners of the
Orchard Supply Shopping Center and the Unisource Building. Since the Study was initiated, the Unisource
Building has been sold to Lincoln Properties.
The Planning Commission heard this item at a public hearing on September 24, 1996. At that time, they
adopted an Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Resolution recommending the City Council
adopt a Resolution of Intention.
The City Council approved the Resolution of Intention at their meeting of October 1, 1996. The Resolution of
Intention was posted for the required time period.
Continued Public Hearing:
On October 14, 1996, staff received a letter from Sandi Nichols, Attorney for Lincoln Properties. The letter
requested a continuance of the October 15, 1996, public hearing in order that her clients might work with the
City to address certain issues. The City Council continued the public hearing to November 4, 1996, to give staff
time to meet with Ms. Nichols. Staff met with Ms. Nichols and Lincoln Properties on October 30, 1996. At
that meeting Lincoln Properties requested a continuance to December 3, 1996, in order to work out some of
their concerns with Mr. Brooks. The City Council continued the public hearing to December 3, 1996.
ANALYSIS~.'
The owners of the Orchard Shopping Center and the former owners of the Unisource Building requested that the
City perform a Study to determine if the approved right of way could be realigned to provide area for
construction of loading docks behind the shopping center. The City approved the initiation of a Study on
February 24, 1994. Carlson Barbee and Gibson, Inc., consulting engineering, prepared the Study to reflect the
two property owners' desires.
Staff has worked on the realignment study since that time. The study was concluded last November, 1995.
Since that time we have met with the property owners several times and exchanged correspondence in an effort
to ensure that they wanted to continue with the realignment of the road. As evidenced by the attached letter
dated November 22, 1996, to Lee Thompson, both property owners have decided to v, Sthdraw their request for a
realignment of the roadway (Exhibit 1). Staff, as noted in previous staff reports, maintains that the existing
alignment is acceptable and no realignment is necessary from the City's standpoint. Should the City Council
decide not to go forward with the realignment, the existing alignment will remain.
Both Liberty House Properties and Lincoln Property Company Management Services, Inc., note their
opposition to the road, realigned or as currently aligned. Staff maintains that the road is necessary to provide
adequate furore circulation in downtown Dublin, as it will be a continuation o£the off-ramp for 1-680. Traffic
will be greatly increased in this area by the installation of the 1-680 hook ramps leading to Golden Gate Dr. In
addition, there will be an intensification of development with resulting traffic when the BART station develops
or if the BART station is abandoned, with the private development on what is now BART lands.
The hearing noticed for this evening is for the realignment of the Parallel Road. It is not a hearing or protest
.,...hearing for the existing roadway alignment. Should the City Council decide to take no action, the existing
~lignment will remain.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council conduct a public hearing, deliberate, and take no action on the proposed
realignment.
G:\PA95-043\ccsr5
Nove~be~ 22~ ~9~6
City Engineer
city of Dublin
100 civic Plaza
Dublin, California
~..~=~ ~eali=nment of Right-of-Way Line for_New
Between Golden Gate Drzve and Regional S~reet
~k File No. _0~70-40
Dear Mr. ThOmpson:
Lincoln property Company (,Lincoln") as agent.fo~
Dublin Pro erties, InC. an~ Ardenbrook, In=.,_
_. ~= ~,~ =aralle1 to and south of Dublin Bou~gva~9
!i~ for a n__ 5-7- £-. --~ ---=--al Str~t (the ,,NeW'Koaa";.
~per~e~e any prior oo~nts prey=curly submitted by either
party ·
Be=au~e the comments se~ fort~ here may' be perceived by
~ositiun, we believe some historic
=he City as a c/~nge in ~ you know, th~ war~house ~ite now
back,round is ~elpf~l. ~n~ the ~hoppin~ center site, were
by Dublin properties,' Inc.
nh~ city P ? --~--~ -~- --osition to %he roa~ at the public
hearing. Over hi~ o~jection, and th~ objection Of otherm,
ordinance No. 19-88 was a~opted to e~tablish the right-of-way for
the N~w Road.
Thereof=er, i9 1~94, th~ owner~hip of the ~hoppin~
as ....... ~- ~- --e~ a reali~nment of th~ rzght-of-way
~ine$ adopted for ~_he New Road ~n 1988. A= ~a= =~me, n~wever,
Lee Thompson
November 22, 1996
Page 2
it waG believed by those parties ~hatthe warehouse might be
converted to retail uses due to doubts about its economic
viability az industrial property.
In 1995, however, the warehouse parcel was pt~rchased by
Dublin Properties, Inc. To, ay, it is leased solely for
industrial purposes. Indmm~, as Lincoln has previously e~pressed
(as has the shopping center), the construction of the New Road
will seriously impact its abiligy to provide adequate parking,
truck access and truck staging =o perform its lease obligations.
Consequently, af=e~ receiving no%ice that the City
in=ended to proceed with ~he proposed realzgnment despit? the
apparent lack of inter~st by either Lincoln or ~he shopping
defer any hearing on the
tar. Lincoln suggested that.the City. L~
an ~ ..... : .... ~ to allow ~t to mee= with Matt Broak~, the
shopping oenter's agent, to better understand and determina the
shopping center's view of the proposed aotion- The parties have
now had a chance to meet, and have jointly prepared these
oo~e/%ts for the city's consideration.
First, neither Lincoln nor Dublin Shopping Center see
an~ need for a roa~ parallel to an~ ~ou~h of .D~blin .B.oulevar.~
~e%ween Go],ae, n ~a%e Drive and Regi?na.1 Stree_t .but
as an undue hardship. The D~tbl~i~ su~_l~_ess.:e.n=.er:
Lincoln, has suoce~fully been. lea.~e= zo.r.x.n:us=rla.~.
~ ~ no uresemt intention =o change r~a=. use.
thaC w?uld trzgger tha hoed for the road. The possible BART -
extension and freeway offr~p once contemplated appear
indefinitely stalled due to lack of funding.
~urth~r, both Dublin Shopping Canter and Lincoln are
c~ncerne~ about the negative impact on t.h.e vel?,
th? NeW
similarly, ~ey are each co .
perform under their rezpective leas~? should the New Road {under
either the old or proposed alignmen ; be constructed.
As the partie~ have pr~_viou~ly mentioned,
concerned about the subs=antiaI mone=ary damages they will
sustain ~ue to the loss of parking and non-conforming use created
by the New Road.
additional issues relevant to =he propuseu r 9 at Che
time of the public hearing.
?age
~d to emend any ~eneral and/or spec/rio plan in which tBe right-
of-way is n~ included, ~ on ~e la~ of for~e~l~ n~ed,
~e nega~i~ i~ ~ the ~sociat~ propOSes, ~d ~ la~ of
f~ fo= ~ N~ Road.
In closing, ~he l~r~/es wlf~ ~o express their
~recia~on for
r~l~~t once cunt~lated
~iven ~ ~ent o~hip ~d uss~ of the pr~ties, howmv~,
naith~ ~e N~w Road nor
dashed.
DUBT.?M ISHO~IN'~
Tfn'~ P.¢~
TOTRJ- P. 82