Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-06-1990 Adopted CC Min Study SessionSPECIAL WORKSHOP STUDY SESSION MEETING - December 6, 1990 A special joint Dublin Planning Commission and City CoUncil workshop study session meeting was held on December 6, 1990, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m., by Mayor Snyder. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Burton, Howard, Jeffery, Moffatt, and Mayor Snyder; Planning Commissioner Burnham. ABSENT: Commissioners Barnes and Zika. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. EAST DUBLIN PLANNING WORKSHOP Planning Consultant Brenda Gillarde recapped the last meeting (Workshop #1) held on November 15, 1990. Among the topics discussed were positive attributes about existing Dublin. Comments made included easy access to shopping, good mix of housing, city close but country quiet, excellent schools, and uncluttered hills and open space. Some ideas for the future Dublin were also discussed, including additional recreational facilities, access to open space, additional transportation, a retail/commercial core, mixed densities, affordable housing for the homeless/seniors, housing affordability for local workers, pedestrian pockets and utilization of the frontage of 1-580. Arlene Willits discussed the procedures for the meeting and indicated that this meeting would not be the final opportunity for public input and requested that the public be aware of their time on the floor in order to give everyone an opportunity to speak. Steve Hammond, WRT, gave background information regarding office, industrial and business parks. The Council, Commission and members of the audience were asked what type of employment generating uses were needed and the desired jobs/housing balance. Mr. Hammond advised that the real estate market should be considered when deciding how much additional office/business park space will be developed. Commissioner Burnham asked what the current percentage of business versus residential development was in Dublin. CM- Vol 9 - 334 Workshop Study Session Meeting December 6, 1990 Mr. Tong, Planning Director, indicated that there were approximately 400-600 acres of non-residential development in Dublin which equaled one-quarter of the developed area of the City. A member of the audience asked how much office space could be leased at the Hacienda Business Park. Mr. Martinelli, Alameda County Planning Department, indicated that there was approximately 600 acres available. Mr. Fairfield discussed the potential for Dublin to develop commercial and office space. He felt that 200 acres was a conservative estimate and that now was the time to be more aggressive. He did not want the City to have to go back later to try and make accommodations. Mr. Martinelli indicated that the 200 acre figure was based on an early ABAG allocation for the Tri-Valley area. A 1300-1400 acre demand through 2010 was a much more realistic figure. Ms. Marjorie LaBar felt that there were other revenue generators besides business parks. There were many good uses that could be accommodated within an airport buffer zone. Other comments that were discussed included: needed construction/ electronic industry sites for corporation yards, suppliers, etc.; mixed office uses; heavy industrial uses that could be used as a buffer zone; market flexibility/logical progression to react to current and upcoming needs. Commissioner Burnham questioned if there was any need for Dublin to compete with the Hacienda and Bishop Ranch business parks. Mayor Snyder commented that Dublin needed to keep an open mind and maintain a good jobs/housing balance. Cm. Burton felt that the 2010 buildout figures were over estimated. We should think about developing interim land uses, such as a golf course, RV park and mobile homes -- let the market determine what is needed. Cm. Jeffery felt that there should be certain types of development such as large community facilities, a centralized retail core, neighborhood services -- enough for everyone to use. We should develop uses that the Tri-Valley needs such as someplace to hold large gatherings. She had no problems with industrial uses, however they should be environmentally safe - no smoke stacks. The market would control how much office space was needed. Cm. Moffatt felt that the 1-580 frontage had great visibility and should be developed with commercial uses, such as hotels, auto malls, etc. Strip commercial, mixed uses could be considered - the market demand could determine what to develop. CM- Vol 9 - 335 Workshop Study Session Meeting December 6, 1990 Cm. Howard agreed with Cm. Jeffery. She felt that retail and light industry should be considered. Cm. Jeffery felt that strip commercial was not a good idea. There would be transportation problems. She felt that a retail core should be considered. Cm. Moffatt felt that the 1-580 frontage was an asset. The area could be divided into separate commercial areas. Cm. Burton felt that manufacturing uses should not be discouraged - Camp Parks would be a prime location. Environmentally safe industry should be looked into, perhaps as buffers. Mr. Ambrose commented that the planning staff needed to focus on land uses. It would be helpful if comments were directed as to how much and where these land uses should occur. Mayor Snyder indicated that we were in a very competitive situation and it was very difficult to define or itemize such land uses. Mr. Ambrose indicated that we cannot just let uses occur - that would be poor planning. We need to be more specific in order to designate land uses on the General Plan map. Cm. Burton felt that highway commercial should be considered for the freeway frontage. Cm. Jeffery wanted to see the same 75% residential and 25% commercial ratio as Dublin currently has. Cm. Moffatt felt that Dublin needed major intersections with commercialized pockets, with residential development closer to the foothills. Cm. Jeffery felt that Dublin could not compete with Hacienda and Bishop Ranch business parks and felt that additional office/retail space was needed. She indicated that industrial business parks could be developed adjacent to the freeway. Cm. Burton wanted to see highway commercial uses along the freeway. Also commercial uses should be located on a north/south axis. Together this would create a good grid concept. Mayor Snyder felt that it was difficult to visualize how much was needed and where to put the specific land uses. Cm. Jeffery did not want to see business parks where the land was not being utilized at night and/or on the weekends. Cm. Moffatt felt that hi-rise residential areas along the freeway would be permissible. CM - Vol 9 - 336 Workshop Study Session Meeting December 6, 1990 Cm. Jeffery wanted to avoid residential neighborhoods along the freeway. Mr. Fairfield commented that the various concerns presented so far were not in conflict with Concept #5. Mr. Hammond described the current traffic system. The Commission, Council and members of the audience were asked how should land uses and the transportation system be arranged. Comments included: a trolley system with connections to BART; an additional BART station; create an expressway on Fallon Road connecting with Bollinger Canyon; move Dublin Boulevard further north; redesign Hacienda Drive; additional bus routes; bike lanes/trails directly to schools and shopping areas. Some concerns included: Doolan/Fallon Road could not accommodate buses because of the grade and the freeway is near capacity. Commissioner Burnham indicated that he had trouble committing himself. He would like to see high density commercial along the freeway. Cm. Jeffery commented that the residential areas needed to be protected from traffic. She would like to see cozy streets and bike lanes. She doesn't want to see all grids on straight roads like San Francisco. Transportation concerns needed to be considered for the Tri-Valley area, not just Dublin. Cm. Moffatt liked to see the pedestrian pocket concept and preferred not to see a straiqht grid system. Cm. Burton advised that the arterials needed the capacity for a light rail system. He would like to see two main arterials; one going north and south; one going east and west; with pedestrian pockets inside. Cm. Howard liked the light rail option and did not want to see houses backing up against the freeway or streets. Buildings should be designed to aid transit with good bicycle/pedestrian/auto interface and design. Mayor Snyder indicated that all roads should be accessible to public transit and that a joint powers agreement needs to be considered. Ms. Willits summarized the comments, which included no houses facing arterial corridors; good grid system; bike lanes/bus/light rail needed; transportation center concept; and various modes of transportation. A member of the audience requested that a trolly system not be used and indicated that it was not a feasible transportation system. Mayor Snyder indicated that whatever system we use should be a regional transportation system. CM- Vol 9 - 337 Workshop Study Session Meeting December 6, 1990 Mr. Hammond discussed the park/recreation facilities located in Dublin. The Commission, Council and members of the audience were asked 1) how much and what kinds of park/recreation facilities should be provided in East Dublin? and 2) how much and what kinds of community facilities should be considered for East Dublin? For example, should we have a certain percentage of neighborhood parks, a citywide park, golf courses, and/or hiking trails. Comments from the audience included: unique community park to give the area popularity; miniature golf course; pedestrian trails/hiking; create a focal point (i.e., Lake Merritt - lakes are a valued attraction); major public facilities (i.e., library, conference center); create a major park facility in the foothills protecting it from the strong winds; cultural facilities like small theaters; regional trail network; amphitheaters; parks should be created in concert with housing development; make sure there are enough facilities for everyone's needs. Some of the concerns included: parks should not be located by main arteries, prison areas, Camp Parks (i.e., "super" park designated in Concept #4 should not be considered). Cm. Jeffery wanted to see adult oriented uses such as golf courses, an amphitheater, tennis courts. She felt the current ratio for neighborhood park facilities for the City was adequate. Parks should also have plenty of amenities, more than just a single use (like a sports park). Cm. Howard wanted to see public facilities such as a public gym, senior center and intermediate care facilities. Cm. Burton felt that passive open space should be considered versus active park/recreational areas for undeveloped areas. He would like to see senior centers with care facilities and living accommodations. Cm. Jeffery commented that a super park concept could be considered; however all property owners needed to share the impact of that park. Cm. Moffatt felt that the lake concept was a good concept, as well as art theaters, sports fields, large community centers with activities/events. Mayor Snyder wanted to see multi-purpose facilities such as gymnasiums, theaters, golf courses - public/private, post office, and joint use facilities. Cm. Burton indicated that a theme park could be considered. Cm. Moffatt indicated that in-lieu fees should be required to fund recreational facilities. Mr. Hammond discussed appropriate uses for the areas surrounding Camp Parks, Santa Rita and BART. The Commission, Council and members of the audience.were asked 1) What types of uses were appropriate to be CM - Vol 9 - 338 Workshop Study Session Meeting December 6, 1990 located adjacent to Camp Parks? Santa Rita? BART? and 2) What types of uses should be permitted in the area proposed as the Airport Protection Area? Concerns regarding the inmates of the Santa Rita jail facility were discussed. Transportation availability for the released individuals should be considered so that once released, they were not just wandering around the area. Buffer possibilities were: construction of a speedway, golf course between Camp Parks and jail facility, and commercial/industrial uses. A member of the audience indicated that a bus stopped in front of the facility four times a day. Mr. Pat Adams reminded everyone that there was one mile between Santa Rita and Tassajara Road. He felt that there should be additional transportation available for the jail facility. Public business entities and general commercial should be considered for these areas. Mr. Adolf Martinelli indicated that there were 16 designated acres for a buffer zone around the Santa Rita facility, then 70 acres for public uses - sheriff's training center, commercial, CHP office, etc. Cm. Moffatt and Cm. Burton felt that the facilities were adequately screened. Cm. Howard did not want to see residential development in the close proximity of these facilities. Offices/commercial uses should be considered. Mayor Snyder felt that industrial uses should be considered. Cm. Burton felt that commercial/industrial uses should be considered between Camp Parks and the Santa Rita jail. Comments regarding land uses around the future BART station were: need for high density housing and/or office facilities; transit oriented development; mixture of residential and commercial; condominiums; and multi-level parking for BART/commercial areas. Single-family detached housing should not be considered. Cm. Jeffery wanted to allow high-density residential areas with possible bike trails. Single-family homes should not be allowed. Cm. Burton requested that commercial/office and/or high density structures be considered. Cm. Howard felt that high density housing would be appropriate. Cm. Moffatt indicated that transportation access to and from the area was very important. Mayor Snyder felt that high density housing should be considered. CM- Vol 9 - 339 Workshop Study Session Meeting December 6, 1990 Comments regarding possible land uses for the proposed Airport Protection Area were: commercial; warehouse/food processing uses; hotels; industrial parks. Residential, schools, malls, hospitals should not be considered. Commissioner Burnham had a concern with using the area for office space. There were more people in an office building than in a residential area. Cm. Burton indicated that it was the noise concern not the safety concern for the buffer zone. Cm. Moffatt indicated that it could be used as a transportation corridor and used for low intensity industrial and business uses. Dublin needed to be involved with the Livermore airport. Cm. Jeffery disagreed that this land should be a protection zone for the Livermore airport. It was Dublin's land. The freeway frontage should be used for business or industrial uses. She reminded everyone that the Airport Commission was an advisory board. Mayor Snyder felt that public services and low density employment or a transportation corridor would be appropriate. Ms. Brenda Gillarde thanked everyone for attending the meeting. The comments and concerns heard tonight will be translated into a preliminary land use map and brought back to the next joint study session on December 18, 1990. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m. CM- Vol 9 - 340 Workshop Study Session Meeting December 6, 1990