Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-10-2005 PC Minutes Planl1ing COl11111ission Minutes CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, May 10, 2005, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair Schaub called the meeting to order at 7:02pm. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Schaub, Commissioners Biddle, Fasulkey, King, and Wehrenberg; Eddie Peabody, Jr., Community Development Director; Kristi Bascom, Senior Planner; Janet Harbin, Senior Planner; Jeff Baker, Associate Planner; Charity Wagner, Associate Planner; and Maria Carrasco, Recording Secretary. ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA- Mr. Peabody stated that Item 8.3 will be heard before 8.2. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS - The April 26, 2005 minutes were approved as submitted. Chair Schaub stated that he had comments on the minutes earlier this week and those comments have been reflected in the minutes. ORAL COMMUNICATION - At this time, members of the audience are permitted to address the Planning Commission on any item(s) of interest to the public; however, no ACTION or DISCUSSION shall take place on any item which is NOT on the Planning Commission Agenda. The Commission may respond briefly to statements made or questions posed, or may request Staff to report back at a future meeting concerning the matter. Furthermore, a member of the Planning Commission may direct Staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda. Any person may arrange with the Planning Manager (no later than 11:00am, on the Tuesday preceding a regular meeting) to have an item of concern placed on the agenda for the next regular meeting. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS PUBLIC HEARINGS 8.1 P A 05-010 Journey Church - Conditional Use Permit Extension (request for a one-year extension) A one-year extension of an existing Conditional Use Permit for a religious facility within an existing shopping center in a C-l Retail Commercial (with Historic Overlay) Zoning District continued to a date uncertain. Chair Schaub asked for the staff report. Eddie Peabody, Community Development Department Director explained that on April 26, 2005, the Planning Commission received a Staff Report outlining the request from Journey Church for a one-year extension to their Conditional Use Permit, which expired on February 8, 2005. The Commission opened the public hearing, heard the Staff presentation, took testimony from the Applicant and the public, closed the public hearing, and deliberated on the merits of the request. íPÚzn1tin¡J Commissúm tJWeufar 9Jeeting 64 !May lD, ZOO.> Staff's recommendation on April 26, 2005 was for the Planning Commission to consider the application and provide direction on whether Staff should prepare a resolution supporting or denying a one-year extension to the Conditional Use Permit. After the April 26, 2005 meeting, Staff became aware that the Applicant was using the facility for uses other than those described in the written statement. The Applicant is considering whether he would like to amend his Conditional Use Permit application to add the additional uses. Staff expects to bring this item back before the Planning Commission at a later date once this issue has been resolved. The Planning Commission continued the item to a date uncertain. 8.3 PA 05-006 Village Square Dental Center Conditional Use Permit to operate a dental office in the Village Parkway Specific Plan area with a parking reduction for shared parking. Chair Schaub asked for the staff report. Jeff Baker, Associate Planner presented the staff report. He explained that the project is for a Conditional Use Permit for the Village Square Dental Center, which includes a parking reduction for shared parking. The proposed use is located at 7413 Village Parkway and is within the Dublin Village Square Shopping Center. The Applicant is proposing to operate a family dental center, which would provide general dental services. The Specific Plan identifies permitted and conditionally permitted uses within the specific plan area and a dental office is considered a conditionally permitted use. The Specific Plan permits the Zoning Administrator to take action on the item, however the Zoning Administrator referred it to the Planning Commission for decision. The facility will have two employees and operate Monday through Friday from lOam to 7pm and Saturdays from 9am to 5pm and will be closed on Sundays and holidays. The Zoning Ordinance contains parking requirements by use type. A dental office is required to provide one space per 150 sq. ft., which equates to six parking spaces. The shopping center in which the office is proposed to be located contains a mix of existing use types and is required to provide a total of 448 on site parking spaces. However, there are only 313 on-site parking spaces within the center, resulting in a parking shortage of 135 spaces. The center was approved by Alameda County prior to the City's incorporation and the City, upon incorporation, has made amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, which changed the parking requirements. The shopping center was grandfathered in under the previous ordinance. Therefore, new permitted uses have not been reviewed against the current parking requirements. However, conditionally permitted uses, such as the subject project, provide the City with an opportunity to review the project against current parking requirements. The Zoning Ordinance allows a parking reduction for shared parking with a Conditional Use Permit and may be granted if a report by a registered traffic engineer shows that the findings can be made, a sufficient number of spaces is provided to meet the parking demands, the uses will not conflict with each other, and overflow parking will not adversely affect any adjacent uses. A parking study was prepared by Omni Means to identify the existing parking demand for the overall center as well as the sub-areas within the center. The City's Traffic Engineer reviewed the results of the study and determined that there are a sufficient number of available parking spaces to satisfy the demand created by the existing and proposed uses and that the uses will not conflict with each other. The Planning Commission must make findings for the reduction. Mr. Baker indicated that Staff has prepared a resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit and a resolution denying the Conditional Use Permit. íPÚzn1tin¡J Commissúm CJ!.ølJufar 9Jeeting 65 !May lD, ZOO.> Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing, take testimony from the Applicant and the public, close the public hearing and deliberate and either adopt the resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit to allow the project, or adopt the resolution denying the use. Mr. Baker concluded his presentation and stated he was available to answer any questions. Cm. King asked if the space is currently occupied. Mr. Baker stated the dental office has completed their tenant improvements and have been granted occupancy. Cm. King asked how long have they been in the space. Mr. Baker stated they received approval for the tenant improvements in December 2004 and completed the improvements in March 2005. Cm. King asked how long has the dental office been operating. Mr. Baker he believes they have been open on a limited basis since March 2005. Cm. King asked what occupied the space prior to the dental office. Cm. Biddle stated there have been a number of businesses in that area. There was a tattoo parlor at one time and a health store. Mr. Baker stated the most recent tenant was a health food store. Cm. Wehrenberg stated that she does not see how a dental office could operate with only 2 employees. Mr. Baker stated the Applicant could address that question. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if there are any other proposed expansions for that center. Mr. Baker stated no. The center is completely built out. Chair Schaub opened the public hearing and invited the Applicant to address the Commission. Dr. Maria Bravo stated she would like to address the question regarding the number of employees. She stated there would be two full time employees; a front desk receptionist and a dental assistant. Cm. Wehrenberg stated there would be a long wait for patients. Dr. Bravo stated she is planning to see a maximum of eight patients per day scheduled an hour apart. Chair Schaub asked if anyone else wished to speak on the item; hearing none he closed the public hearing. Cm. King does not see parking a problem for the center. Cm. Wehrenberg stated that there were problems with the pavement along the back of the center. She stated that it is unsafe for employees to park along the back and asked if there is a method of getting it more secure with lighting. íPÚznning Commissúm CJ!.øgufar !Meeting 66 !May 10, ZOO'> Mr. Peabody stated that Staff could pass that message on to the property owner and encourage him to put some lighting back there. Cm. Biddle stated that the study indicates that the businesses in the center have peak hours that are staggered. It also works well in the way it was constructed because of the large area behind the center. It allows for the loading and unloading and parking. Chair Schaub stated that this is a request for a 29% parking reduction. Parking will be a common issue that will be brought before the Commission with most projects. How does this differ from the Enea project discussed at the last meeting? The difference is there is a lot of available parking along the back of the center. There is a lot more give in this center. If the parking overflows it does not overflow into a residential area. It overflows up Village Parkway where there is lots of space to turn around, or it overflows back towards the freeway into a commercial area. Cm. Biddle stated that he agrees with Chair Schaub. There is also 30 years of history within this center. Cm. Wehrenberg stated that this traffic study is a little more in depth than what was presented 2 weeks ago. The peak hours for the businesses are staggered, which helps. Chair stated that as a Commissioner he would like to see more of the background data, and statistics on the various pieces to understand the math that put the study together. On motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by Cm. Wehrenberg, by a vote of 5-0 the Planning Commission unanimously approved RESOLUTION NO. 05 - 26 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A DENTAL OFFICE TO OPERATE IN THE VILLAGE PARKWAY SPECIFIC PLAN AREA WITH A PARKING REDUCTION FOR SHARED PARKING AT THE PROPERTY AT 7413 VILLAGE PARKWAY (APN 941-0197-070) P A 05-006 8.2 P A 04-030 Sky Martial Arts Conditional Use Permit to operate an Indoor Recreational Facility in the Village Parkway Specific Plan area with a parking reduction for shared parking. Chair Schaub asked for the staff report. Mr. Baker, Associate Planner presented the staff report. He explained that the Applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to operate an indoor recreational facility with a parking reduction for shared parking. The tenant will be located immediately adjacent to the dental office in the Village Square Shopping Center. The Specific Plan provides conditionally permitted uses as well as permitted uses. The martial arts studio is considered an indoor recreational facility and required a Conditional Use Permit to operate. The City first came aware of the martial arts studio through the Code Enforcement Officer. The owner of Sky Martial Arts has been actively working with the City to rectify this situation. The facility teaches martial arts to all ages, and operates Monday through Friday from llam to 9pm, íPÚznning Commissúm tJWeufar !Mming 67 !May 10, ZOO'> Saturday from lOam to lpm and is closed on Sundays and holidays. The facility has been in operation for approximately 2 1/2 years. The parking requirement is one space for every 50 sq. ft. for the studio area and one space for 250 sq. ft. for any office space. Therefore the parking requirement for Sky Martial Arts is 25 parking spaces. The parking study revealed that they were operating at 73% capacity on their parking. When the parking study was done the martial arts studio was already in operation. The continued operation of the facility would not provide additional parking impacts. The City's traffic engineer reviewed the parking study in relation to this use and determined there were not conflicts and little opportunity for a potential of overflow parking. Staff has prepared both a resolution for approval and a resolution for denial of the Conditional Use Permit application. The conditions on the approval resolution would limit the total number of employees and students to 25 at anyone time. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing, take testimony from the public, close the public hearing and deliberate and either adopt the resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit to allow the use or adopt a resolution denying the Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Baker stated that the Applicant was not available, concluded his presentation and stated he was available to answer any questions. Chair Schaub asked how the parking studies account for overlap. There could be 15 kids in the class and 15 kids waiting for class, which are 30 kids. Does the formula take into account 15 kids or 307 Mr. Baker stated the formula does not address that, however, some of the students will be dropped off and will not require a parking space, and there is a fluctuation in class sizes. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if Fitness 2000 went through a Conditional Use Permit process. Mr. Baker responded yes. Cm. Wehrenberg stated that the study indicates Fitness 2000 is driving the majority of the parking. Cm. Fasulkey asked for clarification on the parking study as some of the counts exceed 100%. Ray Kuzbari, Sr. Civil Engineer stated that Omni Means did the traffic study. When the count is over 100% it states that there were more cars parked than the number of parking spaces, including the back of the center. Cm. King asked what formula was used to arrive at 25 parking spaces. Mr. Kuzbari stated the 25 spaces are based on the Zoning Ordinance and square footage. Cm. King asked if the parking burden is less than what the formula would indicate. Mr. Kuzbari stated the formula is on the conservative side based on the Zoning Ordinance. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if there have been any complaints regarding the center. Mr. Baker responded no complaints regarding this use. Chair Schaub closed the public hearing. He commented that, for the record, putting handicapped parking spaces into the count is something that should be addressed in the future. íPÚznning Commissúm tJWeufar ?Jeeting 68 ?Jay 10, ZOO'> On motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by Cm. King by a vote of 5-0, the Planning Commission unanimously approved RESOLUTION NO. 05 - 27 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AN INDOOR RECREATIONAL FACILITY TO OPERATE IN THE VILLAGE PARKWAY SPECIFIC PLAN AREA WITH A PARKING REDUCTION FOR SHARED PARKING AT THE PROPERTY AT 7425 VILLAGE PARKWAY (APN 941-0197-070) P A 04-030 8.4 PA 04-041 New Automotive Dealership Site Development Review and Conditional Use Permit General Motors is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit to amend the acreages described in the General Motors Auto Mall Development Plan and Site Development Review to construct a new 32,453 square foot auto sale and service establishment on Parcel C and an inventory lot for vehicles affiliated with General Motors Auto Mall on parcel B of the General Motors Auto Mall on John Monego Court. Chair Schaub asked for the staff report. Charity Wagner, Associate Planner presented the staff report. She stated that the request is for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review to construct an automotive dealership. The project site consists of two vacant parcels located east of Tassajara Creek, west of John Monego Court, south of Dublin Boulevard, and north of Interstate 580. These two parcels are owned by General Motors Corporation and are identified as Parcels B and C. The proposed project consists of a Conditional Use Permit to modify the lot acreages described in the Development Plan, Site Development Review for the development of a 32,453 square foot auto sale and service establishment on Parcel C and an inventory lot for automobiles within the General Motors Auto Mall on Parcel B. The project would allow for the construction of a new auto dealership upon vacant properties at the terminus of John Monego Court, south of the existing Dublin Buick Pontiac GMC Dealership. The proposed project requests a modification to the lot sizes described in the Development Plan. In accordance with Chapter 8.32 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission may grant minor amendments to an adopted Development Plan by means of a Conditional Use Permit upon a finding that the requested amendment complies with and does not materially change the provisions or intent of the Planned Development Zoning District. The Applicant requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit to modify the lot sizes described within the adopted Development Plan. The Applicant is also requesting approval of a Site Development Review for new construction in excess of 1,000 square feet, unless otherwise specified in the Development Plan of a Planned Development Zoning District. Approval of a Site Development Review is subject to findings related to compliance with General Plan policies. There is sufficient parking being provided onsite in accordance with the City's Parking Regulations. The applicable City departments and agencies have reviewed this application, and their comments have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for the project. The proposed project is consistent with the Dublin General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. íPÚznning Commissúm tJWeufar :Meeting 69 ?Jay 10, ZOO.> Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing, close the public hearing and deliberate and adopt a resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit to amend acreages described in the General Motors Auto Mall Development Plan and a Site Development Review to construct a 32,543 square foot auto sales and service establishment on parcels Band C of the General Motors Auto Mall. Chair Schaub opened the public hearing. He asked if there was anyway of putting in the conditions that the lots used for storage do not have razor wire or chain link fences. Ms. Wagner stated that an amendment to the condition could state that cyclone fence and razor wire fencing would be prohibited. Cm. King asked what is to the north end of the project. Ms. Wagner stated that to the north end is Parcel B, which abuts the existing Pontiac/Buick/GMC site. Chair Schaub stated that in the future it would be helpful to see what is adjacent to the proposed projects under review. Cm. Fasulkey asked if there is a technical term that would require a decorative type fence. Mr. Peabody stated that what's in the staff report covers a specific wrought iron fence for the project. Cm. Wehrenberg suggested that a condition be added that prohibits cyclone/industrial type fences. Cm. King asked if there are cinder block walls or fences. Ms. Wagner stated no. Cm. King stated he would like to avoid cinder blocks. Ms. Wagner referred the Commission to the materials board for review. Cm. Biddle asked if the drainage from the site is away from the creek. Ms. Wagner stated yes. Chair Schaub invited the applicant to speak. The Applicant did not wish to speak; Chair Schaub closed the public hearing. Cm. Biddle stated that he liked the comment in the staff report that there is sufficient parking. Cm. Wehrenberg asked about the Hummer Dealership project across the freeway in Pleasanton. Gregg Butterfield, General Motors, stated that they are moving from Pleasanton to Dublin. Randy Parker, General Motors, stated that for the record they are the number 5 Hummer dealership in the country. On motion by Cm. Biddle, seconded by Cm. Fasulkey, by a vote 5-0, with an additional condition regarding fencing, the Planning Commission unanimously approved íPÚznning Commission Cß.ølJufar ?Jeeting 70 '.May 10, ZOO.> RESOLUTION NO. 05 - 28 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO MODIFY ACREAGES DESCRIBED IN THE GENERAL MOTORS AUTO MALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A NEW 32,453 SQUARE FOOT DEALERSHIP AND INVENTORY LOT ON PARCELS BAND C OF THE GENERAL MOTORS AUTO MALL P A 04-041, APNS 986-0016-003 and 986-0016-004 NEW OR UNFINISHED - None OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Peabody discussed the upcoming projects. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 8:00pm. A~4/}- Respectfully submitted, ¡;¡~~ Planning Commission Chairperson Community Development Director íPÚzn1tin¡J Commissúm Cß.ø1Jufar !Meeting 71 ?Jay 10, ZOO'>