Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-14-2005 Special Study Session-Dublin Rnch Area F Planning C0111111ission Study Session Minutes CALL TO ORDER A Special Study Session meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, June 14,2005, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair Schaub called the meeting to order at 6:00pm. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Schaub, Commissioners Biddle, Fasulkey, King and Wehrenberg; Jeri Ram, Planning Manager; Michael Porto, Planning Consultant; and Renuka Dhadwal, Recording Secretary. 1.1 Study Session - Dublin Ranch Area F Mike Porto presented staff report. The project is called Dublin Highlands by the Developer, Toll Brothers. He described the project in detail as outlined in the Staff report. He indicated that the Developer, the Architects and the Landscape Architect would be presenting the different products and the landscaping of the project to the Planning Commission for their review. John Paynter thanked the Planning Commission for the opportunity of presenting the project. He stated that this is a unique project with extensive topography on a large parcel. It was a challenge designing a site plan that would best fit the project, based on the site conditions. He indicated that Toll envisioned a multi-family community, although some single-family homes are being provided. This was done to obtain open space and hide the retaining walls within the multi- family development. He then briefly talked about Toll Brothers and summarized all the projects that they had worked on. David Senden, KTGY Architects, gave a detailed description regarding the architecture for the project, the Hill town concept, pedestrian accessibility, parks, schools and other recreational amenities planned for the project. Cm. Schaub wanted to know if the area slated for the school was acceptable to the District. Mr. Porto responded that it was acceptable to the school and the Parks and Community Services Department of the City. Cm. Fasulkey asked for the school acreage. Mr. Porto responded that it was 10 to 10.50 acres. Cm. Fasulkey asked if the proposed park would be a publicly deeded park. Mr. Porto stated that there would be a 5-acre Neighborhood Park and 2-acre Neighborhood Square owned by the City. Cm. Wehrenberg asked Staff to define a Neighborhood Square. Mr. Porto stated that according to the Parks & Community Services Master Plan a Neighborhood Square is a 2-acre passive element. A Neighborhood Park is an active element which includes a sports field. Cm. Fasulkey asked if the Architect was familiar with the City of Dublin's policy of Village Concept and how did KTGY tie in that factor with the current design. Mr. Porto responded that he would like to answer the question. He pointed out that the proposed project is not a village in ('ommissum JUNf 14, 2005' accordance with the City of Dublin's Village Concept Action Plan. It is a series of neighborhoods that when combined are creating a 'village' type development at this location. He further added that there is no commercial land uses planned in this project. He pointed out on the map that the Village commercial for Dublin Ranch will be located south of this project in the Area G development. Cm. Fasulkey asked if there was a way to create a village plan as established by the City with commercial uses in the project. Mr. Porto responded that it would involve a General Plan Amendment and a Specific Plan Amendment and the Applicant is not proposing to do that at this point. Cm. Fasulkey asked if there was any way to design the project with a 'village concept' within it. Ms. Ram responded that the land uses for the eastern Dublin area have been zoned in a way that there would be neighborhoods adjacent to the 'Villages' which would not have commercial uses within them. She gave an example of Area G which was designated as a Village area with commercial uses and would serve the neighborhoods adjacent to it as well. She pointed out that on July 2151, an Action Plan for Villages will be heard by the City Council which would identify areas that could be converted to Villages and certain existing areas that are Villages. Cm. Schaub had traffic concerns based on the density of the project. Mr. Porto pointed out that the traffic for the project was analyzed as part of the Environmental Impact reports and Mitigated Negative Declaration and was based on the density of the project. The project has an approved Stage 1 PD and is currently proposing a Stage 2 PD which involves architecture, streets and landscape patterns, setbacks and other elements which form the detailed aspect of zoning. Cm. Wehrenberg stated that she liked the concept and wanted to know the distance from the Park to the school. The Architect responded that it was a quarter to a third of a mile from the Park to the school. Cm. Wehrenberg also commented on the proposed bridge linking the elementary school with the park. Cm. Fasulkey and Cm. Wehrenberg stated that they liked the bridge design. Cm. Schaub wanted to ensure that none of the doors on the units open to Gleason Drive. The Architect responded that none of the doors for the units opened to Gleason Drive. Ted Youngs, VTBS Architects, explained the architecture and design for Villages 5 and 10. Roman DeSota, vanderToolen Associates, Landscape Architect for the Developer, walked through the landscaping plan in detail for the entire project. Cm. Fasulkey asked what would the speed limit be on Grafton? Mr. Porto responded that he believes it will be between 25-35 mph. He further added that Grafton is not intended to be an arterial road. Cm. Schaub commented on the materials being used for the various landscaping elements. Cm. Schaub asked if the Homeowners Association will be maintaining all the landscaping in the area. Mr. Porto responded that there will be an HOA and related fees for maintenance of the landscaping. {'omun'ssiun 2 jwU' 1-1; 20U5 Cm. Schaub wanted to ensure a better control on the maintenance of the landscape so it did not degenerate over the years. Mr. John Bakker, Assistant City Attorney, explained that when the CC&Rs are drafted they include a provision that the HOA is responsible for maintaining the landscape and in the event that it fails to maintain it, the City will intervene and maintain the landscaping but will eventually bill the HOA for that maintenance. Cm. Wehrenberg commented that she liked the project based on the concept. Cm. Biddle commented that he likes the project and feels that it is going in the right direction. He doesn't have any major concerns. He pointed Qut that he likes the concept of building to the topography instead of flattening it and rebuilding it. He likes the way the garages have been tucked away under the units rather than letting them dominate the units. Mr. Porto summarized the next step in the process. Hearing no other comments Cm. Schaub closed the study session at 7:10p.m. 3 j!i1U' 14, 200j'