HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-11-1991 study sessionJOINT PLAN~_NG COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL~_~TUDY SESSION
September 11, 1991
A special joint Dublin Planning Commission and City Council Study
Session meeting was held on September 11, 1991 in the Regional Meeting
Room at the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at
7:38 p.m. by Mayor Snyder.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Councilmembers Burton, Howard, Jeffery, Moffatt, and Mayor
Snyder; Planning Commissioners Burnham, North, Rafanelli, and Zika.
ABSENT: Commissioner Barnes
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Mayor led the Council, Commissioners, Staff, and those present in
the pledge of allegiance to the flag.
wESTERN DUBLIN JOINT STUDY SESSION
Planning Consultant Brenda Gillarde indicated that this was the third
study session on western Dublin. The purpose of the study session was
to receive input and feedback from the Council, Commissioners, and
Community. The topics in this study related to the road over the
Skyline ridge in regard to the visual aspects of the road, how the road
might interrupt the park trail, and the possible traffic and circulation
problems. The options presented are to 1) incorporate the road into the
Specific Plan; 2) have an alternate access road; or 3) not proceed with
the road. Also to be reviewed would be the Hollis Canyon Linear Park.
Dennis Dahlin, consultant for WPM, gave a brief overview of the map of
western Dublin and pointed out the specific areas which were to be
discussed.
Mr. Dahlin explained that in regard to the nature of circulation, in the
current Specific Plan there was only one link between central Dublin and
western Dublin, that being Dublin Boulevard. Due to the fact that there
is a 500 feet rise in elevation, there was no way that a straight
through street could be constructed. There would need to be two access
roads from the Cronin project. The three possibilities were to extend
Brittany Drive, to have a road from Hansen Hills Ranch along Martin
Creek as a fire access road, or to build a road over the ridge. Mr.
Dahlin felt that the traffic created would not be heavy, but be the
leisure Sunday drive type traffic, but there was some concern about
adding traffic to the street.
Several residents from Rolling Hills Drive expressed concern over
increasing traffic on their street. One resident stated that there are
people already treating the residential street as a boulevard and that
@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*
CM- Vol 10 - 343
Study Session Meeting September 11, 1991
there was already a~lerious problem of people ?~eeding up to 60 miles
per hour.
Diana Day indicated that she would not allow her children to play out
front and that the police have already been called numerous times in
regard to speeders. Some of the residents have hosed down cars that
were speeding. She questioned where the Cronin Ranch people would shop.
She was afraid that they would just cut across and use their street.
Marjorie LeBar felt that no matter how the cars came out of the Cronin
development, that a large portion would be dumped onto Silvergate Drive
which she felt already had a traffic problem. She was concerned as to
whether the streets could take the additional impact of traffic. She
was also concerned over the safety of children going to school and to
the parks.
A resident of Rolling Hills Drive stated that the street was steep and
there was a problem backing out of their driveways. More cars would
only increase the problem.
Another resident of Roiling Hills Drive felt that people would try to
avoid the 1-580/I-680 interchange and use this road as a shortcut. The
public road would cross part of the trail corridor, and the visual
impact of the Cronin Development and the road over the ridgeline would
not be good.
Another member of the audience expressed concern that the City was
trying to service the Cronin project at the expense of the ridge and
open space.
Mr. Dahlin indicated that a road over the ridge could damage the park
district's interest in acquiring land. as an open space situation. He
also expressed concern over the visual impact of both the road over the
ridge, as well as the Cronin project which would be over the 740 ft
level line of development.
A resident questioned how the Cronin project would get water since the
project was so high in elevation. Would a well be used?
Mr. Dahlin responded that the present EIR stated that there was adequate
water.
Margaret Tracy indicated that she had read in literature from Zone 7
that there was not enough water for eastern and western Dublin.
Councilmember Jeffery questioned whether the pictures showed the entire
Cronin project.
Mr. Dahlin responded that the pictures showed only one-third of the
project. Eden Development was behind the ridge and therefore not seen
in the picture.
A resident questioned the status of development of Hansen Ranch.
Mr. Tong responded that Bren Company had determined that the market was
not healthy for them to proceed right now so they were working with the
City to create a long term agreement for permits.
@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*
CM- Vol 10 - 344
Study Session Meeting September 11, 1991
Someone in the audience asked who would build the road if Hansen Ranch
was not being developed at this time.
A resident of ROlling Hills Drive expressed his concern that when he
bought his home he was told that there would be no building above him.
He questioned whether the General Plan would have to be amended to allow
for the building.
Mr. Dahlin indicated that even if the Cronin property was built,
Brittany Drive may not be extended.
Glen Brown, consultant for Cronin Project, requested that a traffic
study be done to see if there would be more or less traffic onto Rolling
Hills Drive and Silvergate Drive. He asked if East Bay Parks District
would be addressing the trail corridor. He indicated that another water
zone would be established to service the homes in the Cronin Project.
Mr. Thompson, Public Works Director for Dublin, explained that a lot of
reverse curves would be needed to keep at a 12% grade due to the
steepness of the area. He also indicated that Zone 7 had 4 to 5 years
of water stored underground, but that they did not have the pumping
capacity. State water had been cut off due to the drought, but he was
hopeful that the drought would be over soon.
Councilmember Jeffery asked how the visual impact would differ between
an access road and a public road.
Mr. Thompson responded that if it was not a public street, that there
would not be any many standards to meet.
Mr. Thompson indicated that the number of roads and types of roads
depended on the number of units to service in the project. If there
were over 75 units, there would need to be two access roads. 75 units
and less required one paved road and one emergency vehicle access road.
25 units or less required one paved road.
A resident inquired if 75 units could be built instead of 125 units.
Mr. Dahlin stated that there was a high cost to develop in this area so
there had to be a certain number of units built to make it fiscally
possible to build. 125 units had been planned.
A resident expressed concern about the removal of trees for the
development.
Mr. Dahlin indicated that there could be a reduction in the number of
trees removed.
Another resident expressed concern that the development could start and
then stop like Ahmanson, leaving the hillside scarred.
A member of the audience asked that since the Cronin project needed two
access roads, could it be done without the extension of Brittany Drive.
Mr. Dahlin indicated that there would be much grading needed to extend
Brittany Drive.
@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*
CM- Vol 10 - 345
Study Session Meeting September 11, 1991
A resident asked how the dirt would be removed and what the timeframe
would be.
Mr. Dahlin responded that the dirt would be left on the site.
Another resident asked if the dirt would be taken to fill the canyon?
Mr. Dahlin responded yes.
One member of the audience indicated that the fact that Brittany Drive
was steep would increase the temptation to speed. He stated that one of
the attractions for buying there had been that the General Plan
indicated that there would be no more building above. His expectation
was that the road would not be a through way. Now the rules were going
to be changed in the middle of the game. He felt that there would be a
loss of quality of life to benefit others. He hoped that other
alternatives would be considered.
Glen Brown felt it was unfair to say that 3,000 trips would be made. He
again requested that a traffic study be made.
A resident questioned if an access road was built, what was the
guarantee that that road would not be turned into a public road later.
Another resident felt that with the Cronin development in the middle of
the traffic pattern, that temptation would be created when 1-680 became
a parking lot for people to use the road as a shortcut to get home
through other people's front yards.
Mr. Dahlin responded that that could arise, but he was not sure people
would want to wind their way through the streets.
Linda Prat, Advanced Planning for EBRPD, expressed some concerns of
EBRPD. There has been a Master Plan for many years. This area could be
unique if left undeveloped. There was the possibility of a major ridge
trail corridor where local and others could enjoy. The proposed ridge
road would bisect the ridge trail cutting it in half and taking away the
open trail experience. It would also create management problems in
relation to grazing by creating two grazing units. The proposed road
would also cut through the wild life corridor for animals. The major
grading needed would damage the open space and could create public
safety issues. The Park District might be favorable to an access road
rather than a public road, but they would prefer to keep the open space.
Councilmember Jeffery asked if the Park District had money allocated for
the trail.
Ms. Prat responded that she was not familiar with the money aspects.
Councilmember Jeffery asked if Ms. Prat was aware that this land had
been overgrazed.
Ms. Prat responded that the .Park District was very good at grazing
management and that they moVed the cattle around.
Councilmember Moffatt asked how the park would be accessed.
@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*
CM- Vol 10 - 346
Study Session Meeting September 11, 1991
Ms. Prat answered that there would be a staging area in Eden Canyon and
Donlan Canyon with local access trails linking up.
Councilmember Moffatt asked if Rolling Hills Drive and Brittany Drive
would be used.
Ms. Prat responded yes.
Councilmember Moffatt questioned how the land would be obtained.
Ms. Prat responded that land was usually obtained through dedications.
Councilmember Moffatt asked if after obtaining the land through
dedication, could the land then be sold off.
Ms. Prat stated that the land would not be sold.
Councilmember Moffatt questioned the timeframe for the opening of a
park.
Ms. Prat responded that she was not sure, but that it was possible for
it to open fairly soon.
Councilmember Moffatt questioned if camping and bicycling would be
allowed.
Ms. Prat answered that this would be a passive park, so camping would
not be allowed. With single lane trails, bicycles would'not be allowed,
but if there were access roads, bicycles could be used.
Ms. LaBar indicated that a trail along Martin Creek to Hansen would be
simple to link. People Would be on foot so there would not be a great
impact in the neighborhood in regard to traffic. Donlon Canyon should
be kept whole.
Glen Brown asked the size of the grazing area.
Ms. Prat responded that 200 acres was one management unit.
A resident questioned the geological stability of the area. Was there a
fault line through the area?
Brenda Gillarde responded that there was not a fault line where the road
was proposed.
One resident indicated that since this study was addressing growth and
impacts, that this gift of nature should continue to be respected
because once the road is built, other roads could be created to branch
off of it.
Ms. LaBar questioned whether an alternate route for the emergency access
road could be shown as part of the map. She felt that there would be
considerable amount ~f grading, fencing, and movement of cattle.
Mr. Dahlin responded that it would be quite minor, comparable to a jeep
trail.
@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*
CM- Vol 10 - 347
Study Session Meeting September 11, 1991
Libby Silver indicated that land use that falls under the General Plan
can be amended, but once an owner dedicated property as open space it
becomes permanently open space and can not be changed.
Mayor Snyder reassured the audience that this session was not a decision
making time. This was a study for the community to indicate their
concerns. An EIR would be created to identify the positives and
negatives and would be brought back in a draft form for further
discussion.
A resident indicated that he had bought his home in 1976 with the
attraction being the ridge line. He has slowly watched the ridge line
die. It was being killed.
A member of the audience who is a trail advocate expressed that she had
been in a lot of ridge parks and that there was not over grazing. In
fact, the parks were well cared for and a pleasure to go through. She
would like to see this area preserved because there was a need to have a
place like this close to you.
Commissioner Burnham asked what percentage of the Cronin Development was
shown on the picture.
Mr. Kennedy of CADP responded that about one-third was shown.
Commissioner Burnham asked what an emergency access road was.
Chief Ritter explained that there was a standard. For I to 24 units, 1
full public street was required. For 25 -74 units, I full public street
and I emergency access which was not open to the public was required.
For 75 units and over, two full public roads were required. An
emergency access road is an all weather road that could support the
weight of fire vehicles. Grades over 15% were generally not allowed.
Commissioner Zika questioned what the blue road represented.
Chief Ritter responded that this road already existed, but that it was a
crude road used for emergencies.
A resident pointed out that if winds blow west to east, smoke will block
the open road.
Chief Ritter responded that it would be something the fire department
would have to deal with.
Commissioner Burnham indicated that if the proposed ridge road was a
dirt road, that he had no problem. But he would have a problem if the
road was paved. In an aside, he indicated that now the people on
Rolling Hills Drive know how the people on Silvergate felt with the
additional traffic due to their development.·
Commissioner Zika indicated that all he saw were negatives and wondered
why it should continue to be studied.
Commissioner Rafanelli could see reasons to look at this, but he did not
want to negatively impact the existing neighborhoods. He wondered if
@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@,@*@.@*@.@*@.@*@*@.@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@.
CM- Vol 10 - 348
Study Session Meeting September 11, 1991
stop signs and speed~ltumps could help the speed~r~i9 problem. He was in
favor of parks and open space using the natural beauty. He supported an
emergency access road rather than a full public road.
Commissioner North asked if there were any other options for other
roads. Could a third road be included in the area?
Mr. Dahlin responded that the area was too steep and would create major
environmental problems to go through Martin Creek. Audience responded
with loud "NO."
Mr. Tong, Planning Director, stated that the Donlon Canyon project had
been approved and had the entitlements. There would be 300 apartments
and 17 lots with some permanent open space.
Councilmember Burton indicated that his response might not be popular,
but he felt that the new road would relieve traffic in the neighborhood
~by having cars go over the hill and not come down into the City. The
road was important for circulation and safety. There must be
flexibility and there was a need to get traffic out of downtown Dublin.
This road could even be important to the people of Rolling Hills Drive
and Silvergate. Safety and accessibility were the important issues. He
was not concerned with the separating of the grazing. He also could not
see stopping the road for a few hikers. As to the visual impact, as a
native California, he has had to adjust to people coming to California.
The City has to provide for people coming here.
Councilmember Jeffery felt that there was a need to protect the hills.
She was against using Hansen Road, but she had no problem with an access
road. She also had a problem with bringing the traffic down Brittany
Drive.
Councilmember Howard expressed concern over the visual impact of the
proposed road. She also was concerned that there would be only two
access roads out. She did not like the idea of traffic coming down
Silvergate.
Councilmember Moffatt indicated that he would like to keep the options
open and free. An access road was needed. He agreed with Councilmember
Burton that the road would create free flowing traffic. He did have a
concern over scarring the hills. Was there some way the area could be
camouflaged with trees or canyon 'roads through the open space. Tilden
Park had two major roads and was able to keep the scarring to a minimum
with little effect on the flora and animals.
Mayor Snyder expressed a concern with the road. He felt that the road
violated the concept of privacy in the area. The cost and mitigation
was unnecessary for whatever was developed on Cronin Ranch.
The second item under discussion was the Cronin Ranch project being
alloWed to develop above the 740 ft elevation level.
Mr. Dahlin explained that the City policy was to not allow development
above the 740 ft elevation level. The General Plan stated that there be
no silhouette on the skyline. The Cronin Ranch project would not be on
the skyline, but there would be a loss of open space and a loss of
trees. Reducing the number of units in the project would reduce the
@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*
CM- Vol 10 - 349
Study Session Meeting September 11, 1991
visual impact, but W~% does the reduction in th~=~'number of units do to
the economic viability of the project.
Commissioner Burnham questioned where Hansen Hills appeared on the
picture.
Mr. Dahlin responded that Hansen Hills was hidden bY Montgomery Ward
because it was lower in elevation.
A member of the audience suggested that the 740 ft elevation mark be
added to the pictures and maps for reference.
Commissioner North questioned how many homes could be built if the
project was kept below the 740 ft level.
Ms. Tracy reiterated' that Zone 7 made a statement that there was not
enough water for the new areas.
A resident stated that development along the ridge already had scars.
It was not acceptable to continue developing if the ridge was trying to
be preserved.
Another resident indicated that this development was not considered
affordable housing. This housing would be beyond the reach of 90% of
the people. It was horrible. The City should be thinking in terms of
what was needed in the way of housing needs.
A member of the audience asked if the roads would be put in prior to the
development. Would there be use of the roads while the construction was
going on.
Mr. Dahlin resPonded that these would be custom homes with the roads
being built first and the homes built as they were sold.
A member of the audience asked what the price tag on these homes would
run.
Glen Brown indicated that it would be difficult to know the cost at this
time. Factors such as access, infrastructure, number of lots would need
to be considered.
A resident asked about the grading and the effect on the prevailing
winds.
Mr. Dahlin responded that there could Possibly be an effect, 'bUt the
ridgeline would not have.gaps.
Another resident indicated that he was aware that there had to be
change, but that it was important to know aboUt the changes and get
together to make better changes. Their lives were in the City's hands.
Commissioner Burnham felt that there were not enough details, but he was
in favor of staying below the ridge line.
Commissioner Zika was concerned over the violation of the policy by
allowing development above the 740 ft level. He felt it would ruin the
@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*
CM- Vol 10 - 350
Study Session Meeting September 11, 1991
character of the C~-~y, but he also felt that-~here was not enough
detail.
Commissioner Rafanelli was concerned about the visual impact. He felt
the City should hang onto the ridgeline. He saw the rape of the
northwest. He was aware that there had to be growth, but he felt it
should be directed.
Commissioner North questioned the availability of water. He had seen
the projected growth of Livermore and Pleasanton. He would hate to see
us stop our plans if there was enough water. He would like to see the
ridgeline remain, but there needed to be balance and compromise on the
ridgeline.
Councilmember Burton felt the picture was misrepresenting. More trees
could be planted. There were mitigating measures to reduce the impact.
An economic evaluation should be made to determine the number of units
that could be reduced.
Councilmember jeffery indicated the development should be kept off the
upper ridge. The 740 ft level should be kept. Homes should be kept off
the hills.
Councilmember Howard indicated that she needed more information. She
felt the pictures were deceiving. She felt that this project was the
same as what the City has now.
Councilmember Moffatt felt the homes should be built on the knoll to
preserve the horizon line. He wanted to minimize the impact. There
were very few custom homes in Dublin. The homes could be built with
constraints of the land layout. He had no problem with the project
being higher than 740 ft level as long as the visual impact was alright.
Mayor Snyder indicated that it was deceiving to look at the property
with no landscaping. Briarhill 20 to 30 years ago would seem the same.
Although the General Plan stated that no development should be above the
740 ft level, it was with %he understanding that each case could be
reviewed individually.
Mr. Dahlin introduced Hollis Canyon Linear Park for discussion. Hollis
Canyon Linear Park would be a new type of parkland. It would be left in
a natural, open space. It would be unique. It would be for walking and
bicycling. There was an existing reservoir. Ownership, liability,
policing, and maintenance would need to be determined. This could be 1)
a dedicated City park, 2) a landscape and lighting district for local
residents, or 3) a homeowner's association, making it a private park.
We need to determine who would benefit by the park. It could be a
Citywide asset though it was remote from other parts of Dublin.
A resident questioned the width of the trails.
Mr. Ambrose responded that a fiscal evaluation had not been done as yet.
The purpose of this discussion should be conceptual rather than in terms
of cost.
Ms. LaBar indicated that this was the kind of recreational amenity that
she was in favor of. Hallelujah, it was about time. She would not mind
@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*
CM- Vol 10 - 351
Study Session Meeting September 11, 1991
paying a couple of do~/lars more to her tax bill~-f she was going to get
this kind of park. This park presented quite interesting possibilities.
Another resident indicated that he thought that Eden Canyon was going to
have to do major changes with a lot of grading. Mr. Dahlin responded
that it would be left as it is.
A resident questioned where the park was in reference to specific
streets and backyards. Mr. Dahlin responded that the park was not close
to any existing homes.
One resident cautioned that a lot of grading should not be done, but to
preserve the natural values.
A member of the audience asked if horses would be allowed to go through
the park. Mr. Dahlin responded that there should be some consideration
of areas for horses.
Another resident expressed concern over the width of the bicycle trails.
He did not want vehicles to be able to use the trails. Mr. Dahlin
responded that it would be comfortable for bicycles to go in both
directions, but that there would be only emergency access for vehicles.
Cordelia Morris questioned how the park would go through the Morris
property? Mr. Dahlin responded that there was an easement, but that the
details needed to be worked out.
Ms. Morris indicated that it was a private road.
A resident questioned whether motorized or non-motorized vehicles would
be allowed. Mr. Dahlin responded non-motorized.
One resident felt the quality of life will be gone if the City allowed
bikers and picnickers. There would be no way to stop the traffic.
Mike McKissick of Eden Development said that Eden had no rights
regarding the Morris property and if the Morris family chose not to
participate in the park that the park and road could exist on either ~
side of their property.
Ms, Morris indicated that the Morris family did not want the quality of
their life impacted by the development.
Commissioner Burnham liked the concept, but stated that the details
would have to be worked out between the City and the property owners.
Commissioner Zika also liked the concept, but he was concerned about the
cost of maintaining and policing the area, as well as insurance.
Commissioner Rafanelli agreed conceptually with the idea, but would like
to have the management of the park addressed later.
Commissioner North also agreed with the concept, but needed more
details.
Councilmember Burton felt if a person bought a home near the area, they
would not want an attractive nuisance. The area belonged with the
@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*
CM- Vol 10 - 352
Study Session Meeting September 11, 1991
people who live there, therefore it should not'~o~ made a public park.
He felt it belonged with the development of the area and should not be a
City park.
Councilmember Jeffery stated that this new development should add to
Dublin rather than detract from Dublin. This park had unique features.
She felt the park should be shared by everyone.
Mayor Snyder asked Mr. McKissick about gating. Mr. McKissick responded
that gating was an option for part of the area. Hollis Canyon Road
would be an open public thoroughfare with public access, later phases of
the project had potential for gating.
Councilmember Jeffery felt it should be a publiC access park.
Councilmember Howard liked the concept, but needed to know the costs to
the City.
Councilmember Moffatt enjoyed and encouraged parks, but if the park was
City owned,' it could be expensive. He would like to see the park
incorporated in the East Bay Regional Parks District, or have it put on
the ballot due to the heavy expenditure. If the whole City was willing
to pay, he felt it was a good idea.
Mayor Snyder enjoyed the concept. It would be unique to have this
facility, but he wondered whether it should be part of the private
development. He was not so concerned with the maintenance costs.
People would utilize and enjoy the park, but he felt the plan should be
studied more.
Brenda Gillarde stated that the next step would be to finish the EIR,
which would be ready in early November. She summarized the discussions
by stating that there seemed to be minimal support for the ridge road to
be a public road, but as an access road, it would be alright. There was
concern about allowing the Cronin development above the 740 ft elevation
level, but that more information was needed. The concept of the Hollis
Canyon Linear Park was liked, but that more information as to costs
would need to be provided.
Mayor Snyder adjourned the session at 10:23 p.m.
ATTEST:
@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*
CM- Vol 10 - 353
Study Session Meeting September 11, 1991