Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-13-1988 Hansen GPAADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING - December 1 3 r 1 988 An Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Tuesday, December 13, 1988, in the Board Room of the Dublin Unified School District, 7471Larkdale Avenue. The meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m., by Mayor Paul Moffatt. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Jeffery, Vonheeder and Mayor Moffatt. Councilmember Hegarty arrived at the meeting at 7:10 p.m. Councilmember Snyder arrived at the meeting at 7:20 p.m. HANSEN RANCH GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT STUDY, EIR, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PREZONING~ TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP NO. 5766~ AND ANNEXATION REQUEST Staff advised that the purpose of this SPECIAL MEETING is to continue the discussion on issues related to the 147 acre proposed Hansen Ranch Project. Venture Corporation/Hansen Hill Development Corporation is proposing a General Plan Amendment to consider a 245 dwelling unit residential development on this site, which is west of Silvergate Drive and north of Hansen Drive. This public hearing was Continued from the November 29, 1988 Council meeting. At that meeting, the Council began discussions on the four major issues identified as: Issue No. 1: Conflict with Open Space Policies of the General Plan. The project proposes to fill the heavily wooded ravine and develop the area with single family houses. Certain areas with.'slopes over 30% would be graded to allow residential development. Staff requested direction, "Should the General Plan pOlicies be changed to allow residential development on areas that would o~herwise be maintained as open space?" Issue No. 2: Type and Number of Dwelling Units (Land Use Designation and Density) for the Developable Areas. The Applicant's proposal, the Planning Commission's recommendation and Staff's recommendation regarding the type and number of dwelling units are substantially different. The Applicant proposes 174 single family units, 37 patio (zero lot line) units, and 34 townhouses, for a total of 245 units. The Planning Commission recommended a total of 235 units. Staff recommended 129 single family units, 0 patio (zero lot line) units, and 50 townhouses, for a total of 179 units. Staff requested direction, "What is the appropriate type and number of dwelling units for the developable areas?" Issue No. 3: Significant Environmental Impacts on Oak/Bay Woodlands and Stream (Riparian) Corridor. The project would result in the loss of over 600 major trees (over 3' in circumference 2' above ground) primarily in CM-7-371 Adjourned Regular Meeting December 13, 1988 the ravine area and along Martin Canyon Creek. The project would also disturb the stream corridor along Martin Canyon Creek. Staff requested direction, "Should the project avoid impacting the oak/bay woodlands and stream corridor, or are these impacts acceptable based on specific overriding benefits?" Issue No. 4: Significant Environmental Impacts from Mass Grading. The project as proposed would involve approximately 930,000 cubic yards of soil to be moved and a 50' fill in the ravine. The Applicant has indicated that a substantial amount of the "cut" on site would enhance the views from existing houses along Hansen Drive. The project would have balanced amounts of on-site cut and fill to eliminate off haul impacts on residential streets. Staff recommended that the ravine be maintained instead of filled and that the mass grading be substantially reduced or eliminated through a combination of in place recompaction and off haul using the proposed Valley Christian Center road connecting to Dublin Boulevard. Staff requested direction, "Should the project avoid mass grading, or are the associated impacts acceptable based on specific overriding benefits?" At the November 29th meeting, the Council completed discussion and accepted public testimony on issues number 1, 3 and 4. The Council unanimously directed the Applicant to revise the General Plan request to eliminate development or filling of the swale located in the central portion of the site. In addition, some members of the Council indicated interest in reviewing a revised plan with balanced grading (no off haul of dirt)and considering development on the north side of the knolls. On December 6th, the Applicant submitted two revised plans and a letter explaining the plans, which were marked as Plan A and Plan B. Staff felt the information submitted was insufficient to adequately evaluate the General Plan policy implications and environmental impacts. Staff indicated that information not included in the Applicant's revised plan submittal related to 1) acreage definition; 2) unit count/density; 3) conceptual grading and cut and fill plan; and 4) updated conceptual site plan. Staff recommended that the Council direct the Applicant to provide the necessary conceptual plans for the revised plans and continue the item to a specific date, time and place. Mr. Tong stated that the revised plans brought by the Applicant may show some of the necessary information. Cm. Jeffery stated that the Staff Report indicated some of the Council- members did not wish off haul of dirt. She did not feel there was a consensus on this. Mr. Tong referred to the minutes of the November 29th meeting in order to clarify this. Gordon Jacoby advised that on Wednesday following the last meeting, they were asked to prepare 2 plans which have been submitted as Plans A & B. Particularly on Plan B, it took them quite some time to work out what CM-7-372 Adjourned Regular Meeting December 13, 1988 they felt would be a design that would be workable in that area. Part of their submission required a meeting with the adjacent land owner who also has a General Plan Amendment pending. They looked at working together to come up with a scheme that would work best for all parties. Handouts were passed around which indicated that with Plan A, there would be a decrease of about 20 homes. To avoid off-haul, they looked at 2 solutions on Plan A. Mr. Jacoby gave a brief description on each of the 2 plans. Taking houses out of the swale was of greatest concern. They are proposing putting fill in the affected area to raise the knoll. A proposed road could not exceed a 15% slope for access. Mr. Jacoby explained the design principle of what they are trying to do. They believe they are consistent with the General Plan. The visual effect was important to keep as a backdrop for the project. Homes would be set down in the saddle to maintain the knolls. Mr. Jacoby next discussed grading issues. They believe the cut and fill would be balanced. They would be saving more trees by moving the road in the custom lot area a little southerly. They have no desire to take the dirt off the site. They favor Plan B. Cm. Snyder questioned in the discussions with Mr. Gleason, if there is a transfer of fill, how will it be accomplished. Mr. Jacoby asked if Cm. Snyder meant physically or legally. Cm. Snyder indicated he meant physically. Mr. Jacoby stated he is assuming it will be brought down the church road and across Dublin Boulevard and onto the other site. This may not be possible, however. Cm. Jeffery questioned with regard to whatever is done, will the area be hidden from the view of those below. She asked if the people who currently live in Dublin will look up the hill and'see the homes. Mr. Jacoby responded no, that from certain areas, one being from the freeway, you would be able to see homes, but there will be trees planted which will grow, and there will be a back drop of a hill. Homes will be visible from some vantage points. They were not sure whether the 2 knolls were considered to be major ridgelines. Under the parks and open space section and the scenic highway section of the General Plan, there is reference to the need for a review of all projects within 500' of or visible from a scenic route. 1-580 is a scenic route. Cm. Jeffery indicated she was not as concerned with the view from 1-580, . as this is a very quick view. Cm. Hegarty stated that some of the hillside development which was approved back in 1978 looks considerably different than what was proposed. When you are on Amador Valley Boulevard, you are able to see ========================================================================= CM-7-373 Adjourned Regular Meeting December 13, 1988 all of the Bordeaux Estates homes. If we allow homes to be built up there, we need to be concerned with the scars that are left and make sure we condition the project to visually correct these scars. Mr. Tong advised that Mr. Jacoby had pointed out 2 of the 3 ridgeline policies. There is a third that is significant which reads, "Use subdivision design and site design review process to preserve or enhance ridgelines, that form the skyline as viewed from freeways, or major arterial streets." This policy has some significant implications for the revised plans which were submitted, and Mr. Tong advised that it continues to be Staff's position that we need to take a look at the General Plan policy implications and the environmental impacts and do a complete analysis of the project. Cm. Snyder felt that relative to Mr. Tong's statement, as we went through this process, one of the reasons for leaving discussion related to the ridgelines to this type of a process, rather than saying yes or no, was that there were some strong feelings that there are some ridgeline situations that aren't as attractive now as they could be by enhancement through development. Cm. Hegarty felt that if the Council allows them to develop, there must be conditions put on to enhance the ridgelines. The developer should know that they won't be able to just go in and cut and fill, put the houses in and leave open space. City Manager Ambrose advised the Council that it Would be appropriate to allow the public to offer testimony before the Council deliberates. Zev Kahnf 11708 Harlan Road advised that he was at the Dublin Sports Grounds this prior weekend, and was surprised that he could easily identify every knoll, ridge and swale from that vantage point. He felt that going further north, it would prObably be even more noticeable. He suggested that the City pick out specific sites in Dublin and view this area from those points as a field trip. He indicated he was opposed to Plan B. Marjorie LaBar, Preserve Area Ridgelands Committee stated that given the fact that last night, the Council approved a large western study, it is really important that something concrete be nailed down. The section of the General Plan needs to be expanded with more concrete language. She questioned how the new portions of this project would impinge on the property being dedicated by Gleason. What may be needed with regard to new water service? This could be an expensive proposition. Bob Anderson, a Winding Trails Lane resident, indicated that he first got involved with this when he learned that there was to be a feeder road a short distance from his bedroom. The developer has worked with them and has agreed to move the road further back. With regard to the proposed changes to the General Plan, he.urged the City Council to stick with the policies adopted. The rules are there, so let's stick with them and save a lot of time. CM-7-374 Adjourned Regular Meeting December 13, 1988 Elliott Healy, 11362 Betlen Drive, felt that an old sales ploy is going on in this situation. We seem to be getting ahead of the game. The first issue should be to decide if we are going to amend the General Plan. There is a lot at stake and as plans for the Hansen Hills will set the policy for the future. If hillside development is rejected, we can preserve Dublin's natural character. Mr. Healy displayed some slides taken in and around the Dublin area over the last 20 years and summarized by asking that the Dublin City Council please not give away the store. Ray Alsdorf, Winding Trails Lane indicated that he has lived here only one year, but has been in the Valley about 35 years. Dublin's foothills are unique. If this is approved, this could open up the floodgate for development all the way to Castro Valley. He felt the question was, "Are we going to save our foothills or open them up for development?" He expressed concern that we seem to be competing with San Ramon and Pleasanton. We have a chance to keep Dublin unique. Mr. Alsdorf also expressed concerns related to traffic congestion and school impacts. The Police Department patrols the Silvergate area quite heavily now and the area where Silvergate Drive meets Dublin Boulevard cannot handle any additional traffic. The General Plan policies should be used and we should keep Dublin unique. Cm. Vonheeder was concerned that Staff has not had the opportunity to respond to the new information. There is no Staff analysis available and she was uncomfortable making any decisions at this time. Cm. Snyder suggested that Gordon Jacoby take 3 or more real estate flag poles and put them on the site. People could then better identify what we are discussing. Mr. Jacoby indicated that they had also considered placing some balloons up there at the level of the top of the roof lines. Cm. Hegarty indicated he is not convinced of exactly where the ridges are that we are trying to preserve. In looking at the Pulte Homes, it necessitates that we settle where the major ridgelines actually are that we want to protect. Cm. Hegarty stated that he hears the comments from the people, but we took this land in so we could control the development. It's not practical to say we won't allow it to develop. The County LAFCO Board could take this area away from Dublin. Mr. Ambrose advised that the City indicated to LAFCO that it would serve this area when the time came for development to occur. As a result of Livermore's constant rejection of proposals, LAFCO took some areas away from them and those areas are now subject to approval and control by the County. We have a responsibility to manage what occurs in these areas. If we refuse, the County can take this out of our sphere of influence. Cm. Hegarty stated we have a responsibility to address all the issues. He is unwilling to scar up our hills, but we can make the developer work with us by telling them what we want.. The knolls are a very sensitive ========================================================================= CM-7-375 Adjourned Regular Meeting December 13, 1988 issue and development should occur properly. We will be discussing density in the future, and the Council is still a long way from completion regarding these discussions. Cm. Vonheeder stated that when we did the General Plan, we had a great deal of difficulty in defining major ridgelands. We wanted to allow someone to come in from the development community who might enhance the area. We have an opportunity to now consider this, but she did not feel there was enough information presented. She felt that major changes were being proposed from what the original EIR addresses. Mr. Jacoby did not feel that this was the case; most of the issues have been addressed in the EIR. He did agree, however, that putting up sign posts would be helpful. Cm. Jeffery reiterated her concern related to the view from other streets of homes proposed for the saddle area. Mr. Healy's slides were very interesting and remind us how Dublin looked before the hills started to develop. Whatever goes into the area can be made to look very nice. Mayor Moffatt reported that the meeting will be continued so the applicant can provide information identified by Staff in order to evaluate changes made in the plan, plus they will be providing some markers on the site. Cm. Hegarty requested that the applicant bring in something which shows where the roads will be, where the custom lots will be; etc. Mr. Tong asked if Staff should do a comprehensive review of the ridgeline policy. Mayor Moffatt stated that as we move along, this can be clarified. He would like to see a comprehensive review. Mr. Tong indicated that Staff could do an analysis of not only this project in terms of ridgelines, but also take a look at providing some graphics as viewed from major arterials. Slides and/or a video of the ridgelines as viewed from the major arterials could be provided. The contract consultant could do this. Cm. Jeffery indicated she would prefer to know some costs before we proceed with this. Cm. Vonheeder stated she did not wish to turn this into a major project, but rather.just take some pictures from around town. Cm. Hegarty requested that the applicant make sure that the Planning Department is in agreement with the buildable acreage when it comes to the Council to discuss the densities. Mr. Healy ~advised that he would be glad to donate the film and go out with Staff to take the pictures. He felt we should not see any houses on any ridges wherever you are in Dublin. CM-7-376 Adjourned Regular Meeting December 13, 1988 Zev Kahn asked if LAFCO doesn't like what we are d area away from us? ,lng will they take the Cm. Hegarty advised that if we do not respond reasonably, they might take it away from us. He would perceive this as being if the City Council were to say there will be no development on the west side of Dublin. It is not reasonable to make this kind of a statement. We don't want to loose control. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Moffatt announced that the next meeting on the Hansen Hill development project will be on Tuesday, January 10th at 7:00 p.m. The location will be determined by Staff. There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 8:48 p.m. ========================================================================= CM-7-377 Adjourned Regular Meeting December 13, 1988