Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1-18-1988 PC Agenda CITY OF DUBLIN Development Services .. . — Planning'Zoning 829-4916 P.O. Box 2340 Building & Safety 829-0822 Dublin, CA 94568 Er. ineering/Public Works 829-4927 DECLARATION OF POSTING I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Agenda for the Dublin Planning Commission meeting of 198(�, was posted at the DublinLibrary, 7606 Amador Valley Boulevard, Dublin, California, on �- the /Sli 1 of , 198_6 by S.Q U p.m. . Executed this /;'day of d 198 at Dublin, California. Laurence L. Tong Planning Commission Secretary by la • Planning Secretary AGENDA CITY OF DUBLIN PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting - Dublin Library Monday - 7:00 p.m. 7606 Amador Valley Blvd. , Meeting Room January 18, 1988 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 4. ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA 5. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING - January 4, 1988 6. ORAL COMMUNICATION - At this time, members of the audience are permitted to address the Planning Commission on any item which is not on the Planning Commission agenda. Comments should not exceed 5 minutes. If any person feels that this is insufficient time to address his or her concern, that person should arrange with the Planning Director to have his or her particular concern placed on the agenda for a future meeting. 7. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 8.1 Appeal of Zoning Administrator's November 24, 1987, action denying PA 87-140 Amador Automotive Center - Sign Location Variance requests to establish Wall-mounted Business Signs which are not contiguous with the commercial service spaces which they are proposed to identify, 6000 Dougherty Road. (Continued from the Planning Commission meeting of January 4, 1988. ) 8.2 PA 87-174 Goodwill Industries Donation Station Conditional Use Permit request to operate a Goodwill Donation Station truck trailer (25 feet long by 8 feet wide) in the parking lot of the Howard Johnson Hotel site, 6680 Regional Street. 9. NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS 10. OTHER BUSINESS 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' CONCERNS 12. ADJOURNMENT (Over for Procedures Summary) • Regular Meeting - January 18, 1988 A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on January 10, 1988, in the Meeting Room, Dublin Library. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Cm. Barnes, Chairperson. * * * * ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioners Barnes, Burnham, Mack, and Tempel, Laurence L. Tong, Planning Director, Rod Barger, Senior Planner, and Kevin Gailey, Senior Planner. ABSENT: Commissioner Zika. * * * * • PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Prior to leading the Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag, Cm. Barnes called attention to the celebration of Martin Luther King's birthday, and reminded those present to recall his dream, and his dedication and allegiance to this Country. * * * * ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA None. * * * * MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING The minutes of the January 4, 1988, Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented. * * * * ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Joy Sands, 7501 Donohue Drive, expressed concern regarding the future of the trees on the ex-Great Western Savings site on Amador Valley Boulevard at Donohue Drive. - Mr. Tong suggested that it would be proper for Ms. Sands to visit the City offices and look at the planning application file pertinent to the site which was received following a previous telephone conversation he had held with her. Ms. Sands asked members of the Planning Commission whether they would be made aware of the plans for the trees. Regular Meeting PCM-8-10 January 18, 1988 Mr. Tong discussed the procedures followed for Site Development Review applications, and indicated that the Commissioners would receive a copy of the Appealable Action Letter and pertinent conditions of approval when the application has been processed. Cm. Barnes urged Ms. Sands to visit the Planning Department and discuss her concern further with Mr. Tong. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Tong advised that the Commissioners had received five Action Letters, as well as environmental information pertaining to the Hansen Ranch project. He also indicated that they had received a letter pertaining to Item 8.2 on the agenda, PA 87-174 Goodwill Industries donation station. _ * * * * PUBLIC HEARINGS SUBJECT: PA 87-140 Amador Automotive Center - Sign Location Variance request, 6000 Dougherty Road. Cm. Barnes opened the public hearing and called for the Staff Report. Mr. Gailey advised that the Applicant had appealed the Zoning Administrator's November 24, 1987, action denying PA 87-140 Amador Automotive Center Sign Location Variance requests to establish Wall-mounted Business Signs which are not contiguous with the commercial service spaces which they are proposed to identify at 6000 Dougherty Road. He reminded Commissioners that this item was initially heard at the Planning Commission meeting of January 4, 1988, and was continued with direction to Staff to return with a separate draft Resolution for each of the two proposed signs. Mr. Gailey said regarding the sign proposed for Building A - Tenant Space A-3, the Commission directed Staff to supply a draft Resolution which would serve to uphold the Zoning Administrator's action denying that sign. Regarding the sign proposed for Building B - Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10, Mr. Gailey said the Commission directed Staff to supply a draft Resolution which would serve to overturn the Zoning Administrator's action denying that sign. Mr. Gailey reviewed the two situations indicated below which were identified by Staff since the January 4, 1988, Planning Commission meeting and which could potentially result in a tenant frontage orientation situation similar to that encountered by proposed Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10. 1) along the east side of the Tom Huening building, 6767 Dublin Boulevard, and 2) along the north side of the Bedford Properties/Sierra Lane industrial building complex at 6591 Sierra Lane. Mr. Gailey advised the Commissioners that action taken by them on the subject requests may serve to establish a precedent in regards to similar applications received in the future. Regular Meeting PCM-8-11 January 18, 1988 • Doug Bradford, Owner/Applicant, 2694 Bishop Drive, #202, San Ramon, said he would accept the denial of the request for Building A. However, he encouraged the Commission to adopt the draft Resolution (Exhibit B), which would overturn the Zoning Administrator's denial and approve the Sign Location Variance request for Building B. Mr. Bradford requested that Condition #3 of Exhibit B be modified to allow greater flexibility in the sign copy in the event that more than three tenants occupy the building. In response to concerns regarding the copy size of the sign, Mr. Gailey indicated that Condition #3 was proposed to prevent the sign from containing copy running from the top to the bottom of it. He said that would not be feasible aesthetically. Cm. Barnes closed the public hearing. On motion by Cm. Burnham, seconded by Cm. Mack, and by a unanimous vote (Cm. Zika absent), a Resolution was adopted upholding the Zoning Administrator's November 24, 1987, denial of that portion of PA 87-140 Amador Automotive Center - Sign Location Variance request concerning Building A - Tenant Space A-3. RESOLUTION NO. 88 - 002 UPHOLDING THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S NOVEMBER 24, 1987, DENIAL OF THAT PORTION OF PA 87-140 AMADOR AUTOMOTIVE CENTER - SIGN LOCATION VARIANCE REQUEST CONCERNING BUILDING A - TENANT SPACE A-3, 6000 DOUGHERTY ROAD On motion by Cm. Burnham, seconded by Cm. Mack, and by a unanimous vote (Cm. Zika absent), a Resolution was adopted as presented overturning the Zoning Administrator's November 24, 1987, denial of that portion of PA 87-140 Amador Automotive Center - Sign Location Variance request concerning Building B - Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9, and B-10. The Commissioners concurred that the modification to Condition #3 requested by the Applicant not be made. RESOLUTION NO. 88 - 003 OVERTURNING THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S NOVEMBER 24, 1987, DENIAL OF THAT PORTION OF PA 87-140 AMADOR AUTOMOTIVE CENTER - SIGN LOCATION VARIANCE REQUEST CONCERNING BUILDING B - TENANT SPACES B-8, B-9, B-10, 6000 DOUGHERTY ROAD * * * * SUBJECT: PA 87-174 Goodwill Industries Donation Station Conditional Use Permit, 6680 Regional Street. Cm. Barnes opened the public hearing and called for the Staff Report. Mr. Barger advised that the Applicant was requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a Goodwill donation station in the southest corner of the Howard Johnson Hotel site. He indicated that the station would consist of a blue and white truck trailer standing 13 feet in height, with a length of 25 feet and a width of 8 feet. Regular Meeting PCM-8-12 January 18, 1988 Mr. Barger stated that the proposed use appeared to be inappropriate for the property. He said that the subject site contains the Howard Johnson Hotel and the Lord Dublin Restaurant, and that the inclusion of a Goodwill donation station on the site could create an inappropriate mixture of land uses. Mr. Barger reviewed the contents of the January 18, 1988, Staff Report and said it was Staff's recommendation that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution denying the Conditional Use Permit request for a Goodwill donation station. The Applicant was not present. In response to an inquiry by Cm. Burnham, Mr. Barger verified that the Property Owner did not have any concerns regarding the placement of the donation station on the subject site. Mr. Barger referred to the comments contained in a letter from James Swanson, dated January 18, 1988, and distributed to the Commissioners at the meeting, requesting that the request be denied. In response to an inquiry by Cm. Burnham, Mr. Barger indicated that the Applicant seemed to feel that since the Property Owner did not object to the location of the donation station on the proposed site, it would not be necessary to look for an alternate site. Ms. Sands said she was in concurrence with the Staff Report as presented by Mr. Barger. She complimented him on his presentation. Cm. Barnes closed the public hearing. On motion by Cm. Mack, seconded by Cm. Tempel, and by a unanimous vote (Cm. Zika absent) , a Resolution was adopted denying PA 87-174 Goodwill Industries Donation Station Conditional Use Permit. RESOLUTION NO. 88 - 004 DENYING PA 87-174 GOODWILL INDUSTRIES DONATION STATION - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR A 25-FOOT LONG TRUCK TRAILER LOCATED IN THE HOWARD JOHNSON HOTEL SITE PARKING LOT AT 6680 REGIONAL STREET NEW BUSINESS OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. Regular Meeting PCM-8-13 January 18, 1988 OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Tong advised that the Ordinance for the New Ewe application would be presented at the City Council meeting of January 25, 1988_. He said at the last meeting the City Council modified its previous action, providing for a list of specific uses for the Green Store property. He indicated that a tavern would have be authorized through the Conditional Use Permit process. In addition to the New Ewe application, Mr. Tong said the appeal of the Planning Commission's action denying The Good Guys Variance request would be heard at the January 25, 1988, Planning Commission meeting. * * * * PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' CONCERNS The Commissioners expressed appreciation to Kevin Gailey, who is joining the Danville Planning Staff, and Audrey Obney, who will be working for the City of Livermore, for their efforts and assistance on behalf of the Planning Commission. Cm. Mack inquired whether or not an application had been received for the site adjacent to the Green Store. Mr. Tong said an application had not been received, but that a restaurant would be a permitted use on that property. He advised that if a request was for a tavern, a modification would have to be made to the Planned Development. Cm. Burnham commented on a previous discussion regarding the reflective striping on curbs throughout the City. He said the rain has caused the striping to look even worse than it did before. He stated that he had watched a man painting the curbs for 45 minutes and was concerned regarding the slowness of his progress. He asked why striping was being used rather than solid paint. Mr. Tong explained that the maintenance workers are contracted and are not necessarily paid by the hour, but by the job. He stated that the original concern was that the paint job was ragged and needed to be redone. He said the reflecting stripes were utilized because it was felt they would be more visible during the evening hours. Cm. Barnes stated that she had heard a number of comments regarding the bulbs on Amador Valley Boulevard. Regular Meeting PCM-8-14 January 18, 1988 Mr. Tong referred to a previous question regarding the signal on Village Parkway and Lewis Avenue. He said the City is looking at trying to fund the installation of that signal sometime during the summer months. He said it was not clear whether this would be accomplished during the current fiscal year or the next. * * * * ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. * * * * Respectfully submitted, • Planning Commission Chairperson Laurence L. Tong Planning Director * * * * Regular Meeting PCM-8-15 January 18, 1988 CITY OF DUBLIN SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: January 18, 1988 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Staff 1 SUBJECT: Appeal of the Zoning Administrator's action denying PA 87-140 Amador Automotive Center - Sign Location Variance Requests, 6000 Dougherty Road. (Continued from the meeting of January 4, 1988.) GENERAL INFORMATION: PROJECT: Appeal of the Zoning Administrator's November 24, 1987, action denying PA 87-140 Amador Automotive Center Sign Location Variance requests to establish Wall-mounted Business Signs which are not contiguous with the commercial service spaces which they are proposed to identify. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Douglas W. Bradford 2694 Bishop Drive, Suite 202 San Ramon, CA 94583 PROPERTY AND 6000 Dougherty Road ZONING: Zoning: PD, Planned Development District (APN: 941-205-21) PREVIOUS ACTION/ANALYSIS: This item was initially heard at the Planning Commission meeting of January 4, 1988. Following the public hearing on the matter, the Commission continued the item to their January 18, 1988, meeting and directed Staff to return with a separate draft Resolution for each of the two signs requested under the subject application. In regards to the sign proposed for Building A - Tenant Space A-3, the Commission directed Staff to supply a draft Resolution which would serve to uphold the Zoning Administrator's action to deny that sign. In regards to the sign proposed for Building B - Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10, the Commission directed Staff to supply a draft Resolution which would serve to overturn the Zoning Administrator's action to deny that sign. Additional Staff analysis after the January 4, 1988, Planning Commission meeting has identified two situations which potentially could result in a tenant frontage orientation situation similar to that encountered by proposed Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10. The two identified situations are: 1) along the east side of the Tom Huening building, 6767 Dublin Boulevard (the structure where Burn's European Motors and other tenants are currently located), and 2) along the north side of the Bedford Properties - Sierra Lane industrial building complex at 6591 Sierra Lane (where Margo's Dance Studio is to be located). While the tenant space layout of the respective buildings does not currently match the situation encountered by Building B on the subject property, there is the potential that tenant spaces could in the future be established which have their sole frontage facing out to a driveaisle and not towards either a public street or an on-site parking area. I COPIES TO: Applicant/Owner Item No. File PA 87-140 As discussed in the previous Planning Commission Staff Report for this item, the Sign Ordinance Regulations would permit establishment of a "Tenant Directory Sign" of up to 12 square feet in size (Section 8-87.50 - Permitted Signs). The Applicant could utilize such a sign to identify the tenants located at the rear of Building B. Such a sign could have a theoretical dimension of 5' width x 2'-4" height with 5"-5 1/2" copy height to identify the three tenants as well as directional information at the top of the sign indicating "Businesses to the Rear". This sign could be established without necessitating a Variance from the Sign Ordinance Regulations. The sign copy dimensions used in this sample Directory Sign are consistent with the dimensions used on the Freestanding Directory Sign identifying Sattlers, Conklin Bros., etc. within the KB Enterprises Shopping Center at 7700 Dublin Boulevard (see Attachment #4). RECOMMENDATION: FORMAT: 1. Open public hearing and hear Staff presentation. 2. Take testimony from Applicant and the public. 3. Question Staff, Applicant and the public. 4. Close public hearing and deliberate. 5. Consider and act on a draft Resolution (Exhibit A) upholding the Zoning Administrator's November 24, 1987, denial of that portion of PA 87-140 Amador Automotive Center Sign Location Variance request concerning Building A - Tenant Space A-3. 6. a) Consider and act on a draft Resolution (Exhibit B) overturning the Zoning Administrator's November 24, 1987, denial of that portion of PA 87-140 Amador Automotive Center request concerning Building B - Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10. OR b) Consider and act on a draft Resolution (Exhibit C) upholding the Zoning Administrator's November 24, 1987, denial of that portion of PA 87-140 Amador Automotive Center Sign Location Variance request concerning Building B - Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10. ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the attached draft Resolution concerning Building A (Exhibit A) and one of the two draft Resolutions concerning Building B (Exhibit B or C), or provide additional direction and continue that matter to the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 1988. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Draft Resolution upholding the Zoning Administrator's denial of that portion of PA 87-140 request concerning Building A - Tenant Space A-3 Exhibit B - Draft Resolution overturning the Zoning Administrator's denial of that portion of YA 87-140 request concerning Building B - Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10 Exhibit C - Draft Resolution Upholding the Zoning Administrator's Denial of that Portion of PA 87-140 Request concerning Building B - Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10 Exhibit D - Sign Location Variance Requests Supplemental Submittals Background Attachments: 1. January 4, 1988, Planning Commission Staff Report (without Attachments) 2. Portion of Approved Building Permit Plans for Building B 3. Site Plan and Sign Sizing Schedule 4. Photograph of Directory Sign for KB Enterprises Shopping Center -2- RESOLUTION NO. 88 - A RESOLUTION OF THE DUBLIN PLANNING COMMISSION UPHOLDING THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S NOVEMBER 24, 1987, DENIAL OF THAT PORTION OF PA 87-140 AMADOR AUTOMOTIVE CENTER - SIGN LOCATION VARIANCE REQUEST CONCERNING BUILDING A - TENANT SPACE A-3, 6000 DOUGHERTY ROAD WHEREAS, Douglas W. Bradford has filed an application for Sign Location Variances from Sections 8-87.33 and 8-87.10 p) and s) of the City's Zoning Ordinance to allow construction of Wall-mounted Business Signs which are not contiguous with the commercial service spaces which they are proposed to identify; and WHEREAS, the application has been reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and has been found to be categorically exempt; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator held a public hearing on said application on November 24, 1987; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Staff Report prepared for the Zoning Administrator's hearing was submitted recommending approval in part of the Variance applica- tion (recommending approval of the proposed Building B - Wall-mounted Business Sign for tenant spaces B-8, B-9, and B-10 and denial of the proposed Building A - Wall-mounted Business Sign for Tenant Space A-3); and WHEREAS, after hearing and considering all said reports, recommendations and testimony, the Zoning Administrator denied both Sign Location Variance requests; and WHEREAS, on December 4, 1987, Douglas W. Bradford, Property Owner and Applicant, filed an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's action; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said appeal on January 4, 1987; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission uphold the Zoning Administrator's action and deny the Sign Location Variance requests; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission heard and considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony as hereinabove set forth; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission continued the matter to their January 18, 1988, meeting and directed Staff to separate the two requests and return to that hearing with a draft Resolution providing for the denial of the proposed Building A - Wall-mounted Business Sign for Tenant Space A-3, and a second, separate draft Resolution providing for the approval of the proposed Building B - Wall-mounted Business Sign for Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10; and WHEREAS, a Supplemental Staff Report was submitted to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission heard and considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony as hereinabove set forth; and M4A'isoty ni4 RA sMcr f9-3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Planning Commission does hereby find, in regards to proposed Building A - Wall-mounted Sign proposed for Tenant Space A-3, that: A. There are no special circumstances related to size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the proposed tenant space or Building A which would warrant granting a Sign Location Variance, in that the visibility of the proposed tenant space is commensurate with others within the immediate vicinity and zone, given Building A's visual relationship to a major arterial roadway (Dougherty Road) and collector street (Sierra Lane). B. There is nothing unique or special regarding the size, shape or topo- graphy of the proposed tenant space or Building A which would preclude the Applicant from maintaining a strict compliance with the locational requirements for Wall Signs. The granting of this Variance would constitute a special privilege and may set a precedent for similar, future Variance requests. C. The granting of this Sign Location Variance would not be detrimental to persons or property in that establishing the proposed Wall Sign would create signage of a uniform design and location of that proposed for the remainder of proposed Building A. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Planning Commission does uphold the Zoning Administrator's action of November 24, 1987, denying that portion of Sign Location Variance PA 87-140 pertaining to proposed Building A - Wall- mounted Sign for Tenant Space A-3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January, 1988. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Planning Director -2- RESOLUTION NO. 88 - A RESOLUTION OF THE DUBLIN PLANNING COMMISSION OVERTURNING THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S NOVEMBER 24, 1987, DENIAL OF THAT PORTION OF PA 87-140 AMADOR AUTOMOTIVE CENTER - SIGN LOCATION VARIANCE REQUEST CONCERNING BUILDING B - TENANT SPACES B-8, B-9, B-10, 6000 DOUGHERTY ROAD WHEREAS, Douglas W. Bradford has filed an application for Sign Location Variances from Sections 8-87.33 and 8-87.10 p) and s) of the City's Zoning Ordinance to allow construction of Wall-mounted Business Signs which are not contiguous with the commercial service spaces which they are proposed to identify; and WHEREAS, the application has been reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and has been found to be categorically exempt; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator held a public hearing on said application on November 24, 1987; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Staff Report prepared for the Zoning Administrator's hearing was submitted recommending approval in part of the Variance applica- tion (recommending approval of the proposed Building B - Wall-mounted Business Sign for tenant spaces B-8, B-9, and B-10 and denial of the proposed Building A - Wall-mounted Business Sign for Tenant Space A-3); and WHEREAS, after hearing and considering all said reports, recommendations and testimony, the Zoning Administrator denied both Sign Location Variance requests; and WHEREAS, on December 4, 1987, Douglas W. Bradford, Property Owner and Applicant, filed an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's action; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said appeal on January 4, 1987; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission uphold the Zoning Administrator's action and deny the Sign Location Variance requests; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission heard and considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony as hereinabove set forth; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission continued the matter to their January 18, 1988, meeting and directed Staff to separate the two requests and return to that hearing with a draft Resolution providing for the denial of the proposed Building A - Wall-mounted Business Sign for Tenant Space A-3, and a second, separate draft Resolution providing for the approval of the proposed Building B - Wall-mounted Business Sign for Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10; and 8 aererrmJ g&1oitcfs a e• sl6 r� WHEREAS, a Supplemental Staff Report was submitted to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission heard and considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony as hereinabove set forth; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Planning Commission does hereby find, in regards to proposed Building B - Wall-mounted Sign proposed for Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10, that: A. There are special circumstances related to the size, configuration, and location of the three proposed subject tenant spaces at the back (west side) of proposed Building B which would warrant granting a Sign Location Variance. The three proposed tenant spaces along the west property boundary have no direct exposure to any public street and therefore identification of those tenant spaces warrants deviation from a strict application of the Ordinance requirements. B. The fact that the three proposed rear tenant spaces are oriented away from any public street constitutes a unique and special circumstance which precludes the Applicant from being able to maintain a strict compliance with the locational requirements for Wall Signs if effective identification is to be established for the subject tenant spaces. The granting of this Sign Location Variance will not constitute a special privilege. C. The granting of this Sign Location Variance will not be detrimental to persons or property in that establishing the proposed Wall Sign would create signage of a uniform design and location of that proposed for the remainder of proposed Building B. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby approve that portion of Sign Location Variance request PA 87-140 pertaining to proposed Building B - Wall-mounted Sign for Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10, subject to the following Conditions of Approval: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to the issuance of a building permit or establishment of the proposed land use activity, and shall be subject to Planning Department review and approval. 1. The Wall-mounted Sign cabinet proposed to identify Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10 in Building B shall be developed substantially in conformance with the plans prepared by the architectural firm of Frank Rupert Bryant, consisting of a single sheet and dated received January 13, 1987. The sign structure shall comply with the following dimensional restrictions: a) Maximum Sign Area — 40 square feet b) Maximum Sign Cabinet Height — 5 feet c) Maximum Sign Cabinet Length — 8 feet 2. Building permits for this structure shall be secured by January 29, 1989, or said approval shall be void. -2- 3. The sign copy utilized on the sign cabinet shall be limited to the names of the tenants in Building B who have no building frontage exposure on either the east or south building elevation of Building B. A maximum of three tenants may be identified by the sign. Sign copy size shall be limited to a range of 6" to 8" in height. A directional information message atop the sign, such as "Businesses to the Rear", may be placed at the top of the sign cabinet. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January, 1988. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Planning Director -3- RESOLUTION NO. 88 - A RESOLUTION OF THE DUBLIN PLANNING COMMISSION UPHOLDING THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S NOVEMBER 24, 1987, DENIAL OF THAT PORTION OF PA 87-140 AMADOR AUTOMOTIVE CENTER - SIGN LOCATION VARIANCE REQUEST CONCERNING BUILDING B - TENANT SPACES B-8, B-9, and B-10, 6000 DOUGHERTY ROAD WHEREAS, Douglas W. Bradford has filed an application for Sign Location Variances from Sections 8-87.33 and 8-87.10 p) and s) of the City's Zoning Ordinance to allow construction of Wall-mounted Business Signs which are not contiguous with the commercial service spaces which they are proposed to identify; and WHEREAS, the application has been reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and has been found to be categorically exempt; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator held a public hearing on said application on November 24, 1987; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Staff Report prepared for the Zoning Administrator's hearing was submitted recommending approval in part of the Variance applica- tion (recommending approval of the proposed Building B - Wall-mounted Business Sign for tenant spaces B-8, B-9, and B-10 and denial of the proposed Building A - Wall-mounted Business Sign for Tenant Space A-3); and WHEREAS, after hearing and considering all said reports, recommendations and testimony, the Zoning Administrator denied both Sign Location Variance requests; and WHEREAS, on December 4, 1987, Douglas W. Bradford, Property Owner and Applicant, filed an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's action; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said appeal on January 4, 1987; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission uphold the Zoning Administrator's action and deny the Sign Location Variance requests; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission heard and considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony as hereinabove set forth; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission continued the matter to their January 18, 1988, meeting and directed Staff to separate the two requests and return to that hearing with a draft Resolution providing for the denial of the proposed Building A - Wall-mounted Business Sign for Tenant Space A-3, and a second, separate draft Resolution providing for the approval of the proposed Building B - Wall-mounted Business Sign for Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10; and WHEREAS, a Supplemental Staff Report was submitted to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission heard and considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony as hereinabove set forth; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Planning Commission does hereby find, in regards to proposed Building B - Wall-mounted Sign proposed for Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10, that: nn� �J 1p " ll�l Fr A&so. rO& Sp c c li-5S, 13-9 avid 13- 10 n A. There are no special circumstances related to size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the proposed three tenant spaces or Building B which would warrant granting a Sign Location Variance. The Sign Ordinance regulations make adequate provision for identification of the tenant spaces without necessitating a Sign Location Variance (Section 8-87.50 - Permitted Signs - Tenant Wall Directory Sign). B. There is nothing unique or special regarding the size, shape or topo- graphy of the proposed tenant spaces or Building B which would preclude the Applicant from maintaining a strict compliance with the locational requirements for Wall Signs. The granting of this Variance would constitute a special privilege and may set a precedent for similar, future Variance requests. C. The granting of this Sign Location Variance would not be detrimental to persons or property in that establishing the proposed Wall Sign would create signage of a design and location compatible with that proposed for the remainder of proposed Building B. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Planning Commission does uphold the Zoning Administrator's action of November 24, 1987, denying that portion of Sign Location Variance PA 87-140 pertaining to proposed Building B - Wall- mounted Sign for Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January, 1988. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Planning Director -2- ; RECEIVED --� , / SIeoN FAf- IA I - ...:�+ / III SR=0S - M 1ANt, �t/ , L ��.F��Gl;tilr AM ar ` le 4----GEM 0-J Y ---3 ' I I PARTIAL ROOF PLAN PARTIAL SOUTH ELEVATION_ 1 !8": 1 '-O" PROJECTING SIGN FASCIA r , �� ~� �� Iz JINN - 1158, , i.-.. BUILDING B - SOUTHWEST CORNER - 6 - AMADOR SQUARE AUTOMOTIVE CENTER . 6000 DOUGHERTY ROAD --\ CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: January 4, 1988 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Staff " 1f SUBJECT: Appeal of the Zoning Administrator's action denying PA 87-140 Amador Automotive Center - Sign Location Variance Requests, 6000 Dougherty Road. GENERAL INFORMATION: PROJECT: Appeal of the Zoning Administrator's November 24, 1987, action denying PA 87-140 Amador Automotive Center Sign Location Variance requests to establish Wall-mounted Business Signs which are not contiguous with the commercial service spaces which they are proposed to identify. PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: Douglas W. Bradford 2694 Bishop Drive, Suite 202 San Ramon, CA 94583 PROPERTY AND 6000 Dougherty Road ZONING: Zoning: PD, Planned Development District (APN: 941-205-21) SURROUNDING LAND USE North: PD, Planned Development District - Mini AND ZONING: Warehouse East: PD, Planned Development District - Vacant lands, exterior storage and building supply company South: C-2, General Commercial District - Pac 'n Save Shopping Center West: M-1, Light Industrial District - Business Park with mixed uses APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Section 8-87.33 a) of the Zoning Ordinance establishes maximum dimensional criteria for Wall Signs. The criteria establishes specific dimensions for the Primary and Secondary Frontages of the projection of the business building they identify. Sections 8-87.10 p) and s) , Definitions for Primary and Secondary Building Frontages, establish that sign area accrued and authorized by one frontage may not be attached to any other building frontage. Section 8-93.0 (Variance) indicates that the strict terms of the Zoning Ordinance may be varied in specific cases upon affirmative findings of fact upon each of the following three requirements: a) That there are special circumstances including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, applicable to the property which deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity under the identical zoning classification. b) That the granting of the application will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone. c) That the granting of the application will not be detrimental to persons rior property in the neighborhood or pi 1 i r t,c, sr F roF//fVfSS l COPIES TO: Applicant/Owner Item No. ► I File FA 87-140 Section 8-93.1 - '4 establishes the procedures, required action and effective date for granting or denying a Variance, and indicates the granting of a Variance shall be subject to conditions, limitations and guarantees. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Categorically Exempt NOTIFICATION: Public Notice of the January 4, 1988, hearing was published in The Herald, mailed to adjacent property owners, and posted in public buildings. ANALYSIS: The 2.8+ acre property is currently being developed as a three-building - 40,000 square foot automotive service-retail center (under approvals granted for PA 87-019). The signs which have prompted the subject application involve signage proposed for one tenant space in Building A (Tenant Space A-3) and .,,,,three.tenant.spaces in,Building.B.•(TenantSpaces-B-8--B-9•-and.B-10) %r+s •'_= A quick-service lube/oil change occupancy is proposed in Tenant Space A-3. That space is proposed to be located on the north side of Building A. Two signs are proposed on the north elevation of Building A to identify this tenant space. A third sign for this space is also proposed at the west eleva- tion. These three signs are consistent with the City's Sign Regulations. The fourth sign proposed for Tenant Space A-3 would be along the south building elevation and would not be contiguous with lease space for A-3. This sign • would require approval of a Sign Location Variance prior to its use. If all four signs were authorized for use, Tenant Space A-3 would have more signs than are currently proposed for any other tenant space in the center (all others are proposed for either one or two signs). Despite being one of the smaller tenant spaces, Space A-3 would have an aggregate sign area greater than any other proposed tenant space except for the major tenant proposed in Tenant Space B-1. (Space B-1 is shown to receive 90 square feet of signage, Space A-3 at 70 square feet and Space B-5, the next highest total, at 50 square feet.) Even without approval of the proposed non-contiguous Wall-mounted Sign, Tenant Space A-3 would have signs which would be visible from both Dougherty Road (southbound traffic) and Sierra Lane (eastbound traffic), and as such would be one of only a few of the 15 proposed tenant spaces in the Center that would benefit from some level of visibility from both streets. The three tenant spaces involved with the second portion of the subject request are Tenant spaces B-8, B-9, and B-10, proposed at the rear (west side) of Building B. The front elevations of these three tenant spaces will not be directly visible from either Dougherty Road or Sierra Lane. The proposed 3' x 8' sign would be established at the southwest corner of Building B, parallel to Sierra Lane and lying approximately 250 feet from the street. The sign is proposed to provide directional information regarding the location of these three tenant spaces to vehicles which had come onto the subject property. Prior to granting a Variance, three affirmative findings of fact must be made. The Zoning Administrator's determination at the November 24, 1987, hearing on the three findings was as follows: I. Building A - Wall-mounted Sign for Tenant Space A-3 FINDING A: A. That there are special circumstances including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, applicable to the property which deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity under the identical zoning classification. STAFF RESPONSE: There are no special circumstances related to size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the proposed tenant space or Building A which would warrant granting a Sign Location Variance, in that the visibility of the proposed tenant space is commensurate with others -2- within the immediate vicinity and zone, given Building A's visual relationship to a major arterial roadway (Dougherty Road) and collector street (Sierra Lane). FINDING B g, That the granting of the application will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone. STAFF RESPONSE: There is nothing unique or special regarding the size, shape or topo- graphy of the proposed tenant space or Building A which would preclude the Applicant from maintaining a strict compliance with the locational requirements for Wall Signs. The granting of this Variance would ,,.. constitute-a;special.privilege.and,may.set-a precedent for-similar; future Variance requests. FINDING C C. That the granting of the application will not be detrimental to persons or property in the neighborhood or to the public welfare. STAFF RESPONSE: The granting of,this Sign Location Variance would not be detrimental to persons or property in that establishing the proposed Wall Sign would create signage of a uniform design and location of that proposed for the remainder of proposed Building A. II. Building B - Wall-mounted Sign for Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10 FINDING A: A. That there are special circumstances including size, shape, topography, location of the three proposed tenant spaces at the back (west side) of proposed Building B or surroundings, applicable to the property which deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity under the identical zoning classification. STAFF RESPONSE: There are no special circumstances related to the size, shape, topo- graphy, location or surroundings of the three proposed tenant spaces at the back (west side) of proposed Building B which would warrant granting a Sign Location Variance. The Sign Ordinance regulations make adequate provision for identification of the tenant spaces without necessitating a Sign Location Variance (Section 8-87.50, Permitted Signs - Tenant Wall Directory). FINDING B B. That the granting of the application will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone. STAFF RESPONSE: There is nothing unique or special regarding the size, shape, topo- graphy, location or surroundings of the proposed three subject tenant spaces or Building B which preclude the Applicant from maintaining a strict compliance with the locational requirements for Wall Signs. The granting of this Sign Location Variance would co`'nstitute a special privilege and may set a precedent for similar, future variance requests. FINDING C C. That the granting of the application will not be detrimental to persons or property in the neighborhood or to the public welfare. -3- STAFF RESPONSE: The granting of this Sign Location Variance will not be detrimental to persons or property in that establishing the proposed Wall Sign would create signage of a uniform design and location of that proposed for the remainder of proposed Building B. After receiving testimony from Staff and the Applicants, and after making the above stated determination on the required findings, the Zoning Administrator denied both Sign Location Variance requests. The Applicant subsequently filed an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's action (see Attachment #6). Within the appeal letter, the Applicant provides rebuttal to the findings made by the Zoning Administrator at the November 24, 1987, hearing. ._The.Applicant's._situation-.is not different.from that of several-other-retail- '- ' •- - uses in the City of Dublin. In the case of the signage proposed for Building A, there are many examples of retail uses which have "backs" or "sides" that do not qualify for signage. Examples of this situation include Sattler's and other retail tenants in the KB Enterprise shopping center which have their backs facing the Great Western building. Additional samples pertaining to the Building A situation include the tenant spaces in the Amador Plaza Shopping Center (such as Togos and Supercuts) which are interior tenant spaces set perpendicular to Amador Plaza Road. These businesses, and others, have not been allowed to establish signs where they do not qualify for signage. Similarly, as pertains to the situation involving Tenant Spaces B-8, B-9 and B-10 in Building B, there are many businesses in the C-2 and M-1 Zoning Districts along Village Parkway, Scarlett Court, and Golden Gate Drive which do not have exposure onto a public street. They have not been allowed to have signs that are not contiguous to their tenant spaces. Staff recommends the Planning Commission reaffirm the Zoning Administrator's action on the requests, denying both Sign Location Variance requests. RECOMMENDATION: FORMAT: 1) Open public hearing and hear Staff presentation. 2) Take testimony from Applicant and the public. 3) Question Staff, Applicant and the public. 4) Close public hearing and deliberate. 5) Consider and act on a Draft Resolution upholding the Zoning Administrator's November 24, 1987, action denying the Sign Location Variance requests, or give Staff and Applicant direction and continue the matter. ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the attached Draft Resolution upholding the Zoning Administrator's November 24, 1987, action denying the Sign Location Variance requests submitted under PA 87-140. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Draft Resolution denying the Sign Location Variance Requests submitted under PA 87-140 Exhibit B - Sign Location Variance Requests Submittals Background Attachments: 1. Zoning Map 2. Applicant's Written Statements (September 30, 1987 and October 27, 1987) . 3. November 24, 1987, Zoning Administrator Sff Report (without Attachments) 4. Minutes from November 24, 1987, Zoning Administrator Meeting 5. Zoning Administrator Resolution No. 9-87 6. Appeal Letter dated received December 4, 1987, from Gregg Steele, the Good Guys, Inc. 7. Notice of Appeal -4- • I: . . • . I . 1 • - p . ..,i . . . . fII I • II o .ii II L'a ,. _._ . I ill . .« Cj I" ` dB I iil Ci in 1 � ■„0 iii . . NAZ I. o i;! IAI w. p J : I I !: ? . /_i O l-- N I ' I . ATTACHMENL & Aarirrr ifeF 6iotrl +em,r ; . . ,k4Y1PNe &CY,: ,g . .7111II ....,_ I)1 . - 4'ir • r i 0 < < < < �r < ar < < c •J4c ,—+ LL� tl L cac�b a lbob '° 'g • as 1 z ( s I , I {� -oca 0Jo� _ ol^ o N l� !+ +•is i.�1'1+ «I iJ td :+ :� d iI Eff::.:,+ ' v. . i — w 11 w n J r^ a}Tr C = N T 5 tu.u'/ 9 .v • c--3 a -z - 1' - �� - T T lI _ J) 4E;. r G 1 CG 11-. V 4— k - 4'1 4 ® . . el • c.- _ im T, 1 . _ 41. 4. e — A 00 1'.c rAi_____' 1) r g CO J ' 1 �` 1 J �. t— �'..'/ 'Via::\I.uIuI _ o ( Q I 0 I. Jo. 1 1... 1, 1_ . �. O . , .z._. r--. o I —, 1 1 ` ' .. �O 1 \1 0 • /YV 0'1 \ :/ i 4 \ t-Y . il>\Sil-Nlsr-- 14111ie— .„...N..4. ,� - l } --...,. 0 _ ... -....--,•0 .-: rl0tc:--.z--....;.-,.T:."x :, � c•' - ,s \ 0 „I.ss' S 0 i z=NE ice_- o 1 _ / L _-. t i _ ^ , VEDi' r- i . 4 NCIIME gi 3 _ _ . cc'(t F i 'I." ttJ(s 2 . . . . f l Lit::i 1 J .y N J.. T, YN tkS (MI , - �'� s c3 seCt 7 i A > jam \ ks,� r-i ct O \ •• : ' ' t . 3..'' C `� �` :'=.' - Misr,., R • ' F Ti . _1 r 1J a ! _=a �.J f f ,L -` cam.. cf. `c�=��___� a• - , ,' : _:k •• . • Fig - i i'& pigI i4c- r = -- `1" .-f. a t.:. 1 :4: A - t: Mir C x c c o' aGe- ;�` �' ' - - : ftak"\--% • ,en .• , „......„ • • .,___ .____... ... t-6 t`4. :,Z. ' \ • _ — . 0 k. n-� _ :.....t.. "o - : *cn ' - %"Z ,;-r '-' ,nI '� ` ,. ' •v_: -ice ; c. * P � D .. ` �.r '`J f 'rJ/1 1 �I r� Cal -'wr'.+ j -_ -- o - ;F ' l `{ t� —'I ':::.% O it 2etz:4-r ',/� .. 2...; r t, 1> i .`, tc"..2) il4ira "_ - It's r� I. L - -f•.•. = •: 1 U_ n Ish.r r .►� , - • _ n o z,Z ,+! o J �, 01 Ii - n •memo. 1 i \V' .. - a -i --1 ; f r r• D -•J. L1 - t o -4ii. z b j fl N a. 1 : �'Kam' > C g r2 i $ „,,, ,,, .,.t. I-t ' :: r #-itiri- /Tr 9 _ ,........ ,....,.., , ..�� rI< f br ir � ' .c - F D; t 1.. Z2rmei +�, �7 {t. r i • .• ri------ - .,. A..litrr: ''''.0) t'"'' • l'-, Nb-f,----ritar•' . - 4:, ';_,Am"t14,94 WA • gyp N. : d ATTACHMENT f Diar(.uritcy f igrnl AZ KE5 ENreAe459S Ito Pr►ti Or CAN le CITY OF DUBLIN PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: January 18, 1988 TO: Planning Commission �y(� FROM: Planning Staff�8 SUBJECT: PA 87-174 Goodwill Industries Donation Station Conditional Use Permit, 6680 Regional Street. GENERAL INFORMATION: PROJECT: Conditional Use Permit to operate a Goodwill donation station truck trailer (25 feet long by 8 feet wide) in the parking lot of the Howard Johnson Hotel site. APPLICANT: Goodwill Industries Attn.: Anthony Cossette 1301 30th Avenue Oakland, CA 94601 PROPERTY OWNER: Louise H. Clark 6680 Regional Street Dublin, CA 94568 LOCATION: 6680 Regional Street ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: 941-1500-47-3 PARCEL SIZE: 5.61 acres GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Office/Retail EXISTING ZONING Howard Johnson Hotel and Lord Dublin Restaurant AND LAND USE: C-1, Retail Business District SURROUNDING LAND USE North: C-1, Bowling Alley AND ZONING: South: Flood Control and Highway I-580 East: C-1, Restaurant West: Flood Control and Highway I-580 ZONING HISTORY: S-421 and C-2418 - The Alameda County Planning Director approved a Site Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit for a 93-unit motel and restaurant (Howard Johnson Motor Lodge) and five signs - March 15, 1972. S-595X and C-3206 - In April, 1977, approval was granted to add 48 units to the Motor Lodge. S-777X and C-3787 - In May, 1980, an additional 22 units were approved for the Motor Lodge. S-600 - A Site Development Plan for the Willow Tree Restaurant was approved by the Alameda County Planning Director on June 23, 1977. �7f COPIES TO: Applicant y Owner ITEM NO. V File PA 87-174 PA 83-002 - On March 28, 1983, the Dublin City Council approved a request to rezone the subject property from Light Industrial (M-1) and Highway Frontage (H-1) to Retail Business (C-1). PA 83-011 - A Site Development Review approval was granted on May 16, 1983, to allow a 550 square foot addition and remodeling to take place at the main lobby area of the motel. PA 84-026 - On June 18, 1984, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review for a 77-unit addition to the existing motel. PA 86-081 - On September 15, 1986, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit for a 28 foot tall Freestanding Sign on the rear portion of the site. On October 14, 1986, the Zoning Administrator denied without prejudice a Variance request to consider the existing Freestanding Sign as a Directional Sign. On November 3, 1986, the Planning Commission upheld the Zoning Administrator's decision denying the Variance request. On November 24, 1986, the City Council continued the Applicant's appeal. On January 22, 1987, the Applicant withdrew his appeal. PA 87-014 - On March 2, 1987, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit for a second Freestanding Sign at the entrance to the site and a Variance to allow: 1) the Freestanding Sign not to be located within the middle one-third of the site; 2) to allow the sign to exceed the maximum permitted sign area based on setback; and 3) to allow the sign to exceed maximum permitted height based upon setback. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: The Downtown Dublin Specific Plan establishes policies and standards to control development within the downtown area. Section 8-48.2 q) Conditional Uses: C-1 Districts allow "recycling centers when operated in conjunction with a Permitted use on the same premises" subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Section 8-94.0 states that conditional uses must be analyzed to deter- mine: 1) whether or not the use is required by the public need; 2) whether or not the use will be properly related to other land uses, transportation and service facilities in the vicinity; 3) whether or not the use will materially affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity; and 4) whether or not the use will be contrary to the specific intent clauses or peformance standards established for the district in which it is located. Section 8-94.4 states the approval of a Conditional Use Permit may be valid only for a specified term, and may be made contingent upon the acceptance and observance of specified conditions. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Categorically Exempt, Class 4 (e) NOTIFICATION: Public Notice of the January 18, 1988, hearing was published in The Herald, mailed to adjacent property owners, and posted in public buildings. ANALYSIS: The Applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a Goodwill Donation Station in the southeast corner of the Howard Johnson Hotel site (see Attachment B). The donation station consists of a blue and white truck trailer standing 13 feet in height, with a length of 25 feet and a width of 8 feet (see Attachment C). As proposed, the truck trailer would occupy approximately four parking spaces. The temporary loss of the parking spaces does not create a problem since the property would continue to comply with on-site parking requirements as established in the Dublin Zoning Ordinance and the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan. -2- The proposed hours of operation for the station are 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., seven days a week. A Goodwill employee will be present at the trailer during operating hours. The purpose of the station is to receive donations of items used to provide vocational training services for the handicapped. The City Zoning Ordinance does not list a specific category for this use, however, the use is considered similar to a recycling center which requires a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed use appears to be inappropriate for the property. The site contains the Howard Johnson Hotel and the Lord Dublin Restaurant. These uses coincide with one another in supportive fashion. On the other hand the inclusion of a Goodwill Donation Station on this site could create an inappropriate mixture of land uses. It is Staff's opinion that a Goodwill donation trailer would be more appropriate on a site located in the Light Industrial (M-1) District or on a site that contains a supermarket or shopping center. To be more specific, the following locations would potentially be more appropriate than the one proposed: in the service alley between Ward's and Mervyn's; on either the south or east side of the Oshman's Sporting Goods building; in the Pak 'n Save parking lot set back away from the Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road frontages; and, in the parking lot of the shopping center located on the southest corner of San Ramon Road and Alcosta Boulevard. In each case, the less visible the trailer becomes the more feasible the application becomes. Location and visibility are key issues which must be considered. Each of the above sites contains retail activities which provide a service to the general public. These activities would coincide more appropriately (than a hotel and restaurant) with the donation activities generated by the proposed activity. There is another problem with the proposed location of the trailer on the Howard Johnson site. Although it would not be visible from any Dublin Street, it would be highly visible from Interstate 580. This would not be conducive to creating a positive image of the City. The Downtown Dublin Specific Plan (excerpts included as Attachment 1) sets forth policies for the subject site. This project does not comply with the following policies: 1. The project does not improve the visual appearance of the downtown area. 2. The project does not provide landscaping as a buffer nor as an attractive urban design feature. 3. The project does not improve relationships between land uses in the area. On the contrary, it could prove to be detrimental to the downtown area. 4. Retail, hotel and commercial recreation land uses are encouraged in Zone 2 of the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan. The proposed use does not fit into either of these land use categories. Because Staff has reservations about this use, and because it might not comply with the standards of the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan, it is recommended that the Planning Commission deny this Conditional Use Permit request. However, if the Planning Commission finds that the proposal can be conditioned so that it complies with the standards of the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan, while at the same time be operated in an acceptable fashion, a resolution for approval with appropriate conditions has been provided for your consideration. -3- RECOMMENDATION: FORMAT: 1) Open public hearing and hear Staff presentation. 2) Take testimony from Applicant and the public. 3) Question Staff, Applicant and the public. 4) Close public hearing and deliberate. 5) a) Adopt draft Resolution denying Conditional Use Permit PA 87-174, Goodwill Industries Donation Station; or b) Adopt draft Resolution conditionally approving application; or c) Give Staff and Applicant direction and continue the matter. ACTION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commisison adopt the Resolution denying PA 87-174 Conditional Use Permit for Goodwill donation station. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Resolution of Denial Exhibit B: Resolution of Approval Background Attachments: 1. Excerpts from the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan as they apply to this proposal. 2. Partial Site Plan 3. Elevations 4. Photographs 5. Location Map 6. Application Form -4- RESOLUTION NO. 88 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN DENYING PA 87-174 GOODWILL INDUSTRIES DONATION STATION - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR A 25 FOOT LONG TRUCK TRAILER LOCATED IN THE HOWARD JOHNSON'S HOTEL SITE PARKING LOT AT 6680 REGIONAL STREET WHEREAS, Anthony Cossette, representing Goodwill Industries, filed an application for a Conditional Use Permit to locate a 25-foot long truck trailer for a donation station in the Howard Johnson's Hotel site parking lot at 6680 Regional Street; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said application on January 18, 1988; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the request is categorically exempt in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending the application be denied; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission heard and considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby find: A. The use is not required by the public need at the proposed location in that a Goodwill Donation Station would serve the public more appropriately on an industrial or retail commercial site, more so than on a site that contains a hotel and restaurant. B. The use is inappropriate for the site in that a Goodwill Donation Station does not properly relate to the hotel and restaurant activities on the subject property. C. The use, if permitted under all circumstances and conditions of this particular case, would materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property or improvements in the area, as all applicable regulations will be met. D. The use will be contrary to the specific intent, clause or performance standards of the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan in that: 1. The project does not improve visual appearance of the downtown area. 2. The project does not provide landscaping as a buffer nor as an attractive urban design feature. 3. The project does not improve relationships between land uses in the area. 4. Retail, hotel and commercial recreational land uses are encouraged in Zone 2 of the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan. The proposed donation station does not fit into either of these land use categories. -1- BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission denies the Conditional Use Permit request in PA 87-174. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January, 1988. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Planning Director -2- RESOLUTION NO. 88 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING PA 87-174 GOODWILL INDUSTRIES DONATION STATION - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR A 25 FOOT LONG TRUCK TRAILER LOCATED IN THE HOWARD JOHNSON'S HOTEL SITE PARKING LOT AT 6680 REGIONAL STREET WHEREAS, Anthony Cossette, representing Goodwill Industries, filed an application for a Conditional Use Permit to locate a 25-foot long truck trailer for a donation station in the Howard Johnson's Hotel site parking lot at 6680 Regional Street; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said application on January 18, 1988; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the request is categorically exempt in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending the application be conditionally approved; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission heard and considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby find: a. The use is required by the public need in that it provides a location for the general public to drop off reusable items. b. The use would be properly related to other land uses and transportation and service facilities in the vicinity. c. The use, if permitted under all circumstances and conditions of this particular case, will not materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property or improvements in the area, as all applicable regulations will be met. d. The use will not be contrary to the specific intent clause or performance standards established for the district in which it is to be located in that conditions have been applied to insure conformance with the Zoning Regulations. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby approve said application as shown in accordance with the Site Plan and elevations on file (PA 87-174) with the Dublin Planning Department and subject to the following conditions: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to issuance of building permit or establishment of proposed land use activity and shall be subject to Planning Department review and approval. 1. The donation station truck trailer shall be located in the Howard Johnson's Hotel site parking lot as generally depicted in the Site Plan and elevations on file in PA 87-174. 2. The donation station shall not interfere with or obstruct vehicular access or movement within the parking lot. rm 1 LXHIBIT s..e. 3. The donation trailer shall be equipped with a "skirt" which fully encloses its lower portions from the ground up to the bottom edges of the trailer. It shall be provided on all four sides of the trailer. This is required as a means of making this appear to be a more permanent accessory structure. Detailed plans of the "skirt" shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. Once approved by Planning, the skirt shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans. The skirt shall be fitted prior to this facility opening for business. 4. The donation trailer, it's skirt and steps shall all be painted to match the colors of the hotel/restaurant facility. 5. Landscape and Irrigation Plans (drawn to scale by a liscensed landscape architect) for the planter areas around the proposed trailer shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The plans shall include mounding, berming and substantial utilization of plant materials that will fully screen this trailer from view of Interstate 580. Once the plans have been approved by Planning, the landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with approved plans. This shall occur prior to locating the Goodwill donation trailer on the subject site. The improvements shall be maintained in proper working order as long as this trailer is located on this site. Plant materials shall be replaced as necessary, in order to maintain this area as a substantial buffer (when found necessary by the Planning Department). 6. The Applicant shall be responsible for maintaining the donation station (including the parking lot surrounding the truck trailer) in a clean and orderly manner. No items shall be left outside the truck trailer at any time. 7. The Applicant shall provide on-site signage indicating hours of operation and a telephone number for use in case of emergency. In addition, the signs shall indicate that no items are to be left outside the truck trailer during non-operating hours. Said signage shall be limited to two signs with maximum 24 square feet sign area. 8. At least two dumpsters are to be kept on the site at all times. They shall be located on the north side of the trailer and shall be in place prior to this donation station opening for business. 9. This permit shall expire January 29, 1989, and shall be revocable for cause in accordance with Section 8-90.3 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January, 1988. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Planning Director -2- • Dublin Downtqwn Specific Plan V iMta-rch 6, 1 uQ 6yG2- o • . (R-1 with Replacement Pages as Revised Q.) by Planning Commission) WURSTER , BERNARDI AND EMMONS , INC r — ' A Dublin "Restaurant Row" with restaurants, specialty shops, entertainment uses and second story offices is encouraged along Amador Plaza Road. r Other special requirements are established to improve the visual appearance of downtown, protect adjacent residential areas and encourage increased pedestrian connections among projects. Central Block Improvements • A conceptual plan is suggested for review and discussion by property owners and merchants located within the major central area of Downtown Dublin. The plan encourages greater vehicular and pedestrian access among the various portions of the block , a clearer identification of entries from adjacent streets , and additional landscaping to improve the visual environment. It further encourages intensification of development by the selected infill of buildings where a substantial oversupply of parking spaces • exist. A major feature of the concept is 'the potential for creating a structure and/or plaza space for a combination of public and private use. Since the downtown area does not currently contain an area where public events can be held, this element of the concept could assist in creating a greater civic focus within the area for the benefit of both city 42) residents and downtown businesses. Urban Design Improvements _ The image and identity of downtown with the City of Dublin will be enhanced by a series of public urban design improvements which will be complementary to those recently implemented by the City. They will consist of improvements to major downtown entries , the creation of continuity theme elements located in the medians of the major boundary streets , entry pylons to major projects and landscape and �•• pedestrian amenity improvements along the proposed Dublin Restaurant Row. Designs will emphasize colorful banners which may be change seasonably to support downtown promotional efforts and will utilize the repetition of a Downtown Dublin logo. Implementation and Funding The Specific Plan implementation and funding strategies emphasize a public/private partnership which includes flexibility and the. utilization of a variety of funding sources and methods. Costs of implementing the improvements and programs for which some certainty of interest and scope 410 • 2..."SPECIFIC PLAN POLICIES A. GENERAL 1) The emphasis of Downtown Dublin upon regional retail uses shall be maintained. " 2)" Improved relationships among downtown developments 10iii shall be encouraged and required. 3) Contingency plans to insure the retention of automob dealerships within the City of Dublin shall be prepared. - 4) The City shall seek to enhance the image of Downtown Dublin as a source of community pride. B. CIRCULATION 1) The City shall consider the location of a B.A.R.T. Station in the downtown area after evaluating the actual impacts of the Park-and-Ride facility and estimated impacts of a transit station. 2) Circulation improvements shall be limited to normal street and intersection improvements without extraordinary elements such as elevated fly-overs or similar measures . 3) Downtown development shall not depend upon additional freeways ramps from Interstate Eighways. 4) Emphasis shall be placed upon the improvement of downtown pedestrian circulation where appropriate. 5) The quantity of future development in the downtown area shall be limited to a level consistent with a realistic and affordable level of circulation improvements. • 6) An annual report shall be prepared for the City Council on Downtown traffic conditions at least annually to determine whether any future development limits or controls are necessary. 7) Internal vehicular and pedestrian circulation among . adjacent projects shall be encouraged.__ 8) The City shall work with regional transit agencies and will consider all regional transportation programs which might have positive impacts upon Downtown Dublin. 9) The City shall consider plans which propose new points of access to San Ramon Road. 10 An increase of height over a portion or all of the site up to that specified in the Development Standards may 111 be granted if the city finds that such an increase would not be detrimental to adjacent residents. 11) The city shall seek the creation of a downtown plaza • space for joint public and private uses. • • • E. URBAN DESIGN 1) Additional public improvements within the downtown arez • shall be used to identify the area more strongly with the City of Dublin. 2) The City shall require adequate landscaping between sidewalks and parking lots. 3) The City shall encourage and require a high level building, landscaping and signing quality. 4) Properties adjacent to the freeways shall be required Et- to adequately landscape the edges of their property as part of any development approval. 5) The use of tar and gravel roofs shall be discouraged. 6) Substantial areas of sloped roofs shall be encouraged. 410 7) • The use of colorful fabric awnings shall be encouraged. 8) A strong pedestrian environment shall be encouraged along Amador Plaza Road. 9) Uses along San Ramon Road shall be encouraged to increase their orientation toward that street and to • implement appropriate building and landscape improvements. F. IMPLEMENTATION AND FUNDING 1) Implementation of the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan shall be considered a joint public and private sector effort. The City shall re-evaluate the plan implementation progress annually to determine whether private sector participation and cooperation warrants the continuation of projected public funding levels. 2) The City shall consider the establishment a city-wide Business License Fee Program. 3) The city shall establish a Traffic Monitoring Program to periodically assess current and projected traffic impacts and shall take appropriate actions to revise the downtown or other area plans to maintain traffic congestion at levels acceptable to the City. 12 4. DEVELOPMENT PLAN A. LAND USE PLAN 1) OVERVIEW Downtown Dublin includes a mix of retail stores, offices, restaurants, auto dealerships, warehousing an auto-oriented retail and service establishments as shown on Diagram 7. Occupancy rates are high and the area has performed well economically over recent year= However, two major downtown retailers have recently moved from the area and competition is increasing in the Tri-Valley Area where Downtown Dublin is being challenged by new retail and office areas which have been planned as integrated developments with carefully interrelated parts, a high degree of visual appeal , well-designed common areas and substantial pedestrian amenities. Downtown Dublin, while containing a good mix of retail and service uses to attract shoppers , is difficient in these features and suffers substantially from a development pattern which lacks 40Fe focus and offers little in the way of visual appeal . In addition, one of Downtown Dublin's greatest assets - the ease of reaching the area by car and moving quickly among the various downtown areas is being threatened by increased freeway and local street congestion. If Downtown Dublin is to continue to function as a strong retailing center , development controls are necessary to avoid the creation of a level of traffic congestion which would discourage shoppers from patronizing the area. Improvements contained in the Circulation Plan should allow reasonable traffic conditions for a new regional transit facility, a hotel and approximately 675 ,000 square feet of additional develooment. Market projections have indicated the likely demand for around 500 ,000 square feet of new development over the next 15 years. (See Item F or the Appendix for a Summary of Estimated Market Demand. ) Finally, some areas of downtown, such as the auto dealership properties , are susceptible to future major land use changes and need special attention. The primary objectives of the Land Use element of this Specific Plan are shown on Diagram 8 and summarized as follows : a) Encourage the retention of automobile dealerships but develop contingency plans for their potential relocation. 24 , P.\ . • i . . . ., . ',1: . :._. • .) I ...a, . .. ..i . . „..,,,,e vivi,„,,--16, . . • , . -i: • . .. •... , _. .......... .,„• is%. .. • . .. .. ...,-. 4 a— • -• 00 . . ** ot, .•,•:, ..• gr 11 •IL*04y, c,%8( •••• • t• \\%\• 44 0 g. rorl.r- V't ° % % -r .. 0 • a. 1140 011VA 010 .• \g III° is.v II" . , •• sr" Imp we, Am --. s.....,;\1.0 • __,Aie• -<, to: ..:glow. • 4r. - No. ..,,,... .... .. :. . WM ge • #4,-04.Sits•-ak,:,:•:.,i ,q‘ 0-1' • ' - .: - 11-` •Filr• :#4, it _AWII. vss ,:...../I 4 , 0, • ' . ' . 4:4-'`4*ylotkirigisiii.11.1 ....,_.:•:K\t,0,.t , ,,t I,—•sis . ,., .0 .....• .0,— ,..e,,,,,, ......... -... .......--..,.. ity - .01:4 sd° • , tr . '= %% ' \:'::% V.:"....• 1111"; / " ,.7,, I 4 ... ---- :-----' . •, ----- .1 ..‘\..\_\,...k.k..\. ,..----__....------;* \:•:•:•'''''.:.:i::' :::t : 1 , . , .',•• :',.--: V-fr:i0,..4,4/,.4tab,,, %:::*•:•. -::-::-'1.z• __,..-------''-'-`,--',-, -:.-::::f ... ••,•;.• ..----', 111 ....,. •7 •,•.',\ . :,:f.........:. ----------------- -: - -_--___.----.---:;:.Z-,......:, ••::::\ - / --- , -------\ . _.-- ...-- 4 ./.•/.../.:.; .• O ---\ \.-.-f. __...----;........:::-":-.*.:::•:::::.1,. 1 . ,\-./// v..::::"--- .... :.•::-.'•:.*.-1.7:::. I 1 y v ....-..-:.-.—_____-_-_----_--•-?::::::-..y....:::\., ( • crj ..,- '-'----2.,., :::-..,:-.2-------.-...,;;;;;;, /--------- •:•-:::•••:. -.:: .:-..::: ,,,,,... ..:..., ::::.11.:,::. ••::•:•• - •:::-•-:::::•:- .• t.G..--_—..-:,-„ . ----- *::•:::::: :::.:;.:::::..,.:::: ,,,,.-.--...--if.:.i. j.:::::.::. . . „ .. , . : ..':::..::::'*:*'/Z::.::::. ..:.:::!--f.f.: :*::•:.*...P.:..f.f.i- 4 . ...... . . ., .. '''-- — .. , : -.'....,::::.?p•ii../10... .::::::: IiiiSif'.:i:: :., 4 • ,,_,,,..........:...• f77.TX .- 1"...".. • ' '!. .'.... ..-:;,, . -•::',...:i..::::::;.;;I:'::. .__.------:-_-__::::::::::::- •''- .. . . •::-,;iv-- .'''''....-','IS:'.', .____..-- --71.:- :Z------ ----- - '. Al. --------- -------5.------.----------- . C:3 Lt. Industrial Retail - General \-,:,,i; •1‘,. iv./ I= Hotel UM Retail - Restaurant - \:::::::-•:•;.:•::::-_-:/.." - =I Public Use 123 Retail - Automotive . Eal Mixed Use E= Fin. & Office Cl Vacant El2 Comm. - Recreation • Existing Land Uses DUBLIN DOWNTOWN PLAN . DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA . . • . • . • 25 Diagram 7 • b) Plan for the future accommodation of a regional transit station within the downtown. c) Develop'ra greater mix 'of uses to increase downtown vitality and encourage greater development intensity without increased traffic congestion. d) Establish development standards to encourage greater intensity near Amador Valley Boulevard to reduce congestion at the Dublin Boulevard/San Ramon Road intersection. e) Encourage more full service, dinner house-type restaurants. f) Allow increased development without requiring additional parking in those area where parking ratios are currently excessive relative to the actual need. g) Encourage the development of a high quality Restaurant Row and pedestrian oriented shopping street. 2) LAND USE ZONES The goals and requirements for commercial uses downtown are different from those in other parts of Dubin and require a more defined set of development standards than provided in the City' s zoning ordinance. To accomplish this , eleven special Development Zones have been established within the downtown area as shown on Diagram 9 . Development standards for each of the zones will vary slightly in order to tailor future development -more closely to the City' s downtown _objectives. In general , the zones are as follows: Zone 1: Office/Commercial Currently occupied by the one of the two 3-story buildings in Downtown Dublin, this zone will continue as a mix of retail , office and service commercial use Zone 2: General Commercial Currently developed with a mix of retail, office, ho. and commercial recreation uses including one 3-story building , this area is constrained from substantial development intensification by. the traffic capacity limitation of 'Dublin Boulevard and the Dublin Boulevard/San Ramon Road intersection. A mix of USE tom will continue to be encouraged but retail , hotel anc 464 commercial recreation uses rather than office use w: be encouraged. 27 ' 0 \\ \\\ ___ '‘ 11 7:-.--"k.\ Lil.r...0 \ \ V) \ \.....> .....7.\ . ti ,,, . t \ \ f \\...\ \.j \I .?4%,. , .- '::off ��' \ ----- 'Co -'''...\'1 .,, Cfe.A. :. .--;: -7.4ivq' \ 0\ \ , As______, ,....„ , ,,,,,, ._,..;_- = „.. ..,,,..,, , , , ,.....„ ... . , ,, „....-- ,.(.\\\ .. ..,v.,\ ,0:.,s,s, \ ------13------.•:1"."....:"------;'----..‘ ' "\--/1<\-\\'-:5-1.1) ...\% ' ., \V\ I 1 ‘ ' \ ,,,- ic...../ >-.-=-- - /A %/' \N\.\--1--::-A.-‘ , '(\_ . A -- ,,,,„,- i ,/' ),----i' . , \ •,7veKS. 1, ( 1 - -\74 //e-'-'''- 7 - .7tr, :,.-%.* 4004 4' k. ,\<'- -\\ *'A 1 - 'fq, - /-=- - - yr,,--,-----2,‘":.;,, - • . .‘..,.-,. •vss, ./ •• ••\. ‘. 11\1:\:\\\1\-Ap..1 ., 7 tt —‘,\.\ - *.'i -- \‘'s 1 \ _ '---- 1 a -.--- . .- ,, ,,'\ .,t,—, ', ' \ ) - . < ',dc'ffir 7 n, i c-,° ,-4;-___—, \ - \\,...---_-_-:—:—, ::,.0 9., \\_ 2.\ ,._. u/ it.t_ i- txf. ( '-,_____,) -\ -- )-%., 2-\ 31,?-,( 7,: , •f- ..____,,,, \ \-\ ., # ."1." - '1 J-____- ...-.- , \ , ____:,-,-,:-..-; \ -r__,---______--!.- ..--- ci-1,:p.1 \\,e,<3,,,,Nii„ / & • 30 1 >' ---cvr. .. v%—\_ _.., 4-..- c.2- v.,\ \., (..,...,....\ ) -....L________,------ c, , -y.:.--...,:\\1\\_ q -' i', .\ . '''\' '\,-:,-,2-.--‘ - , . _ - . - ._ - \\,. .1 ,:\ 1 V 7 t„)./-= / i/ 1 i , zt--.:- -. '1 \ --x --::\ . ‘- A 3 \ --- , 'vr , ;) ,ct:: 3\ , ,,,,a, ____, .........,„. ,,„ „ , , ,E__, ;„, „,_,„ ‘ _: ___, ..„, _., ,_, ,,,/,,,. ,,,,,, , , ,, „ ,,,,,\_ _,,,,„,,,,, _=__ ___ __2_ ______........ ___ 7.... ---- ow'. ___ -H\ - • 1 ____ ....-- . ../.____-/ \ _____,' ------- f \ \ / --__:______\.- \\ \ \41 , 1 , O Development Zones Map • DUBLIN DOWNTOWN PLAN , Eat 4) DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA R-1 26 Diagram 9 5) ZONING ORDINANCE MODIFICATIONS . The Zoning Ordinance will be amended to allow properties within Downtown Dublin to be designated as part of a Downtown Overlay Zoning District to supplement the current zoning designations. Land uses, development • standards and interim uses will be as outlined in the Development Standards for each Downtown Development Zon and the supporting diagrams outlining special requirements. The Zoning Ordinance and Map will be changed to implement the purposes of the Downtown Specific Plan. To the extent that such changes are adopted as part of the Specific Plan, they will be reviewed and approved a: part of the regular procedures for amendment of the Zoning Ordinance. Permits for new construction and other property • improvements will be subject to conformance with the Specific Plan, and to the requirements of both the underlying district and the overlay zone, or the more restrictive of the two. Where a subject is not addressed by the overlay zone , the existing provisions of the Zoning Ordinance will remain in effect. 6) DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS In order to tailor land uses and development characteristics more closely to the goals and needs of Downtown Dublin, special Development Standards will • govern future change within the downtown area. Table C contains land use , development intensity, and building height standards. For the purposes of these standards , "Service Commercial" • uses which are to be located on the ground floor of structures are to be interpreted as businesses which are x compatible with and strongly supportive of the primary downtown retail character. Uses which would be • substantially disruptive to retail continuity or which are inappropriate to the goals and policies of this Specific Plan will not be allowed. The following standards shall apply to all areas of the downtown: a) Parking lots shall be screened by low walls and/or landscaping from adjacent streets. 410 b) Parking lots shall contain a minimum of 20% of their surface area in landscaping. R-1 35 I1 1.411‘,0 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IS Q 4 DOWNTOWN DUBLIN Table C ...... 1\3 y / • DEVELOPMENT ZONES LAND USES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 RETAIL STORES • • • • • • • • • I OFFICES .... • C•J • • • 0 0 0 ® • • FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS • • • • • • • • • • RESTAURANTS (NON FAST FOOD) • • • • • • • • • • • HOTEL/MOTEL C.) * �� * 1 •SERVICE COMMERCIAL • • • • • • • • • • COMMERCIAL• N RECREATION/ O (�� • O /�1 0 --4?). (�1 n _ ENTERTAINMENT /l/ C�J ® ® (/ • RESIDENTIAL @• (••••••••* •) • (•) • •� •) 1,, AUTOMOBILE SALES/SERVICE A cr, _ A •DRIVE-IN BUSINESS (a) ( ) (.) C•) AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATION (•) U 0 • •CN DISTRICT SHOPS& SERVICE • • AUTOMOBILE REPAIR FACILITIES L A A •M-1 DISTRICT USES A I REGIONAL TRANSIT FACILITIES •) •7 •OTHER C-1 DISTRICT USES / / ________...----- II OTHER C-2 DISTRICT USES L .--- OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS -k -r t�tti��W++��.ltl1%'FLOOR AREA RATIOf 0.45 0.30 0.3U 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.35 0.30 0.50 0.30 0.30 �( AIt6.441 E BLDG.HEIGHT (FEET) 45 45 45* 45'• 45 45 45 35 45 ( 35 35 • PERMITTED O CONDITIONAL USE A PERMITTED ON AN INTERIM BASIS f/I PPROVAL AAS SUPPORTAIOVE OFS DOWNTOW WN GOALS O LIMITED TO SECOND FLOOR OR ABOVE SPACE ONLY '#-45'-MAX-WITIMP-TO'T5'-WI_TH-A-CONIXTIONAL-USE-PERMFf ■ PERMITTED LAND USES WILL BE DEFINED AS THE ZONING APPROVAL OF ANY PROPOSAL IN_EXCESSOFTHIS-HMIT-SNALE-REQUIRE ORDINACE IS AMENDED AN-AMENDMENT-TO-THIS-PLAN. (/ ' -X 11,v IA,C.I=Ce4.56'10 n1 ILK. fir;_IJ41T/)N!3 nn/�( C-LGC,:. •i'��INCLUDING FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS I`J Arcn�'�T)T mAy Pam:��)��'-e0 r�F-o';��fl -/'�' Ut_JGLOF/";v:RGtCt)'JF',2o Lk Ste. . VISUAL APPEARANCE FROM SAN RAMON ROAD IMPORTANT \� BUILDING HEIG 1MITED\ \ \.J ; ��� DC. ENTRIES 2 STORIES A ACE T-TO n 1� ctir, -* ORIENTED TO PRO- RTY ES a' \ AMADOR PLAZA RD. is' MIN. LANDSCAPED \C�••,..„, .......,^1 oO �� ����/ ��• ��� ETBACK REQ'D. V ON PEDESTRIAN i y �• �A 0G 4 `/ \�,\.\\1-jik i\��� �\\'� U NMENT REQ'D. l'ii\W��' 1000. � ���'iA� � oar \t„-. ,„<,\ ,rt —).‘c,- * e .47u, SO ,,,--A \ -\\* - ,,,A. "z -1A _ • � ?, 1oi''' -4? it �%,, .�'\� 1 ! .vo\"e4's s t.\\ O 'O Illy 0:4:;:;\\\\_�Z . •�%tl p ! %: *.1 1. r e` ,f,..„.„-, . ....::: :...:.::.::.:::.:.: „....:... „ _:..: 3,..\ i,,,r,,,,.„ ►ec \ \,IF ::.:::„,„ ::.,:,:::.:. ,,..._ . '17 I ":'7::.::'.:•t-'.::•i`:::i -"::i:•iS:::•:•:iiii::. '�� �0 •gyp • .-.. T ; �� s,�-,- �y ' � IBLIC AND DIT.O L ECIALTY 111 ��� �'I RETAIL USES E\��U E0 STRONG PEDESTRIAN CC t� CTION TANTIAL LA SCAPIl G ENCOURAGED SU� N \ 1 . REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS TO INTERNAL CIRCULATION AND PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING ENCOURAGED NEW ROADWAY AND LANDSCAPED PEDESTRIAN WAY REQUIRED . INTEGRATED PROJECT WITH PUBLIC FOCAL POINT COMMERCIAL USES AND REGIONAL TRANSIT PARKING DESIRED O Special Site Development Requirements - DUBLIN DOWNTOWN PLAN • : DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA R-1 37 Diagram 12 c) Roof top equipment which can be seen from the downtown area, adjacent freeways, off-ramps and overpasses shall be screened from view. In addition , the Specific Site Development Requirements described on Diagram 12 will be applied to each affected properties. Development standards not identified in this Specific Plan will generally be as required for C-i Districts in the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. However, each new development 'or property change will be subject to Site Development Review as prescribed by Sections 8- 95 .0 through 8-95 .8 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance unless exempted from such review by the Planning Director on the basis of being of minor impact. Special review shall be given to those properties adjoining residentially-zoned property and more stringent site development and architectural design requirements may be imposed to mitigate impacts upon those residential properties. Where potential mitigation measures to eliminate undesirable impacts 41(0-1, on adjacent residential properties are felt by the City to be insufficient, additional landscaped setbacks and lower height restrictions may be imposed. B. CENTRAL BLOCK IMPROVEMENT PLAN 1) EXISTING CONDITIONS Bounded by Dublin Boulevard, Amador Plaza Road, A.mador Valley Boulevard and Regional Street the Central Block is the hub of downtown. Located within this superblock are a number of separate properties and large anchor stores which have established the retail image of Dublin. The major buildings on the site are grouped into two shopping centers facing opposite directions. This arrangement has left a service corridor running north and south through the center of the block. The other uses within the block have been pushed to the perimeter and separated from the retail center by parking. These uses include the City' s Public Library, a service station, several restaurants, and a movie theater complex. The following existing conditions are noteworthy: • a) A poor circulation route links the stores and parking in the Central Block b) A surplus of parking resources exists c) Little or no concern has been shown for pedestrian circulation and amenities R-1 38 . • ^l ri••1 [..._.L.----------7------ 11 I � , z ,,‘ , ' 1 0. . `-` 1 V' * , i It k .,,. , ,I ED5 UG . 1;. - I , DUBLIN FUNNINGI . n ,- til �` \ /- j Z ' 0 ca / 1 I , .s �� /� . v� ` • /a X - / CA• 70 -o• N `+ /-- /- — o ' ,� � ./ .I' ' 1 1 • I , '3 / , ' 1,1 -ID . 17 ,0.1 jelbmii.,t . 0 .. , ' \ 'a.t" ,1 i'to e I • '.O• .�1 Z�� TS r t � L1�x 'y t p . r;;*.-',.... -''.',4.j, ",i,',1:..t. ••'?",...,.;:• . V'', 1.:', ' ;_ Z i `�, I \ .• : \ AL.1,;,\ _.\.,.., e "X '. --,v, 1 _ • ATTACHMENT "2, C) Goodwill Industries of the Greater East. Bay Poem DONATION STATION 8' = 1 E � IOC I . NMco 25' Eimminiitta 111111111•111111 P i A BACK VIEW c7 SIDE VIEW (FRONT) (REAR) 0 \ . LENGTH: 25' HEIGTH: 13' WIDTH: 8' RECEIVED raiL",/, -ia 7 tS (L/ri"n vm e eOor a h 0/ )n i00{ DUBUN PLANNING ' y`, , t jI rot/ t.F ' ' • , - j Orr+ ' -- ... -- s DONATION STATION goodwill „a 1 • •A ` ,�, ti I .:' ' �,t r _; padII , � JUMtUhlSIN i Oripi 11 --- ------ji•• " i"— 1 r\ - I __ • I :•3'1 r- 1 * _ a etc; s 1 i*y`r, ___— e ` 1 —'I I-_ - 'i� .1 /// mi;r ern;fa.u;r; o�udu .. gD 'C151997 DUBuN PLANNTN° ; T1CHMENT 1 _ I It\1A �C ` ' PD N P .�, . �,� MIs �1�■.- p.� .^ .$�,ord.N,1�J• l s a R D-2UC R-$-D-3\ C-1 S , : Gs n L sw ronmsn. l'. .Qd.Nu. �• n1 w s • 0 Pn , ,, _ 1 r,\as-oss "\5-111 , A c-o '..i0 \.------ \ \C2 i. � °.6 ...- �e .BOG. .. `\ �-v -?. 1 , it.' , ... ,,,,,. s,.., t /Rr yr1s 11111AS T1L , SP,,�•4 7U'ML\N PD .'la'. C-7 looms 1 c.c.ord.No.4.85 M � ` S.R.R.S.P. .0 rd.No.,n-,4 \✓/ / Pn81.076 '001A 'Inn Jr `` • 1'n8J-4 % -./ mo N1 $0„ ,01 4'�,, S.R.R.S.if, .� C-2 :5- .0.' -10Ni. nial ell ... • 0% ‘ PD c * tt • ‘...=-1 C-2 \.... Is 1 'ri'- '''-'1‘.- r 411 n i$16* i V.f &O t. C-1 A. -i: ,.I ** • 41t4 '*.' ' # no. • E ito /� • 1 - V G = -...,(1: 4.. 9 It z oG nutt , C-1 rc mac, M-1-I3- ` ,% :t f,• c R-j1.- H-1 AA � ";;:- ° J 1 , 04 ,OSJ,` N3 YD \ CITY OF DUBIIt/ 0 \ �\.C-.O c NO.OU-GO ' -DUD' _ sirs i� t! ; ... --------------------------------------------------------- N 2 c.r --------------- f • CITY OF DUBLIN P.O. Box 2340 Dublin,CA 94568 (415)829-4600 Planning Department RECEIVED, (415) 829-4916 6500 Dublin Blvd. Suite D Eff.: 1/84 Dublin CA 94568 U L C PLANNING APPLICATION FORM DUBLIN PLANNING Notes to Applicant: * Please discuss your proposal with Staff prior to completing the Planning Application form. * All items related to your specific type of application must be completed. * Since this is a comprehensive application form, some of the items might not apply to your specific application. * Please print or type legibly. * Attach aril;tional sheets if necessary. ,p 3� I. AUTHORIZATION OF PROPERTY OWNER A. PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, I, as property owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do,authorize the filing of this application. I understand that conditions of approval are binding. I agree to be bound by those conditions, subject only to the right to object at the hearings or during the appeal period. LoutrE CLM Name: av-za Capacity: Property Owner Address —,to68 Daytime Phone: (45) R. .% -775.0 q 71 idol n , C A ✓+S( ( ) Signature: ce(trt,,,LO.E CQ..4 Date: � 3, (c)E 11111—PLICAN] OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: In signing this application, I, as applicant, represent to have obtained authorization of the property owner to file this 'application. I agree to be bound by conditions of approval, subject only to the right to object at the hearings on the application. If this application has not been signed by the property'owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to file this application and agreement to conditions of approval, subject only to the right to object t the hearings or during the appeal period. // Hare: �?Ilnd� C , cc-P //pi�� Capacity: ,e` irr,t/7Z-a - Address(7eorlG✓��I.r+Ilu, &if eib,t,c4,-C./gt Daytime Phone: (SQS') /36 ; i;;1 vs) 52/- nS Signatures_- Date: ��-/dam'/ II. CERTIFICATION • I certify that I have the authorization of the property owner to file this application. I further certify that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct. Name: Capacity: Address: Daytime Phone: ( ) ( ) Signature: Date: (OVER) ATTACHMENT G iii.-GENERAL DATA REQUIRED /�7� A. Address or Location of Property: �jf D /E9J1Pn a ✓A yi B. Assessor Parcel Number(s): /f/ - /S'Od 97- 3 C. Site area: D.Present Zoning: E. Existing Use of Property: d! )n F. Zoning and Existing Use Of Surrounding Property: Zone Existing Uses - North: - South: .• - East: • • - West: •• G. Detailed Descri t/ion of Proposed Use of Property: / 1,07 CzGG aJ P ev,Y oon /L7t�i {rdm '7�4.. neCrJ D✓)iic..eizE.� d�+yr a. t. e ror+ /oAM � .5;317Pj�f- (Continue on separate /sheet if necessary) Iv. TYPE OF APPLICATION Check type of planning permit(s) being requested: ❑ Administrative Conditional Use Permit 0 Rezoning ❑ Boundary Adjustment ❑ Sign J$Conditional Use Permit ❑ Site Development Review ❑ General Plan Amendment 0 Subdivision Map ❑ Planned Development 0 Variance ❑ Other: • v. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A. Planned Development: (See Planned Development Rezoning Submittal Requirements) B. Subdivision Map: (See Subdivision Map Submittal Requirements) C. Any Other Planning Permit: (See General Submittal Requirements) vI. PROCESSING (See_Planning Application Cover Letter) vii. REFERENCE PHONE NUMBERS Most questions related to the Planning Application should be directed to the Dublin Planning Department, however, some concerns might be addressed directly by another appropriate department or agency: 1. City of Dublin: 2. Dublin San Ramon Services District: Building Inspection:(415) 829-0822 Fire: (415) 829-2333 Engineering: (415) 829-4916 Water, Sewer, Garbage: (415) 828-0515 Planning: (415) 829-4916 Police: (415) 829-0566 3. Zone 7 - Alameda County Flood Control: (415) 443-9300 RECEIVED James W. Swanson 6491 Eden Street DUB�ti PLANING Dublin, CA 94568 January 18, 1988 Dublin Planning Commission 6500 Dublin Blvd. Dublin, CA 94568 Chairman and Commissioners: I read in this mornings Valley Times that your Commission is considering giving permission to Goodwill Industries to park one of their trailers near Howard Johnson on Regional Blvd. My nephew works for Goodwill Industries in Southern California. It is his job to supervise the operation of such trailers in that area and to seek permission of the local authorities to locate them in places such as is being considered in Dublin. He tells me that he has a never ending problem trying to make sure that the conditions of their permits are met. He says that the problem is that when the Goodwill worker is not there people come and dump all kinds of junk on the ground. This happens at night and when the workers are at lunch or if someone is sick or late to work. Even when the worker comes, the mess cannot be taken care of. Small stuff can be loaded into the trailer. Big stuff like mattresses, refrigerators, chests and dressers are too heavy and wind up on the ground. There is no solution to the problem. My nephew says he just lies when he goes to the hearings. Otherwise he would lose his job. But he says that no one has come up with a solution. A few years back, there was a Goodwill trailer back of Orchard Supply. The same problems that I am describing existed there. A trailer is up in San Ramon by Safeway. Sometimes it is neat. Other times it is filthy. Our community should not allow a situation that will be a continuing problem. Besides the mess that is sure to happen, the stuff that is outside attracts people to come and steal or just throw the junk around. Our city is working hard to improve its appearance. I think it would be best to have Goodwill and Salvation Army and the other groups continue making pickups at peoples homes. For a short time there was also a trailer near Montgomery Ward. I found that it had the same problems as my nephew describes. I support the Goodwill idea but don't think Dublin should tolerate something that will be a continuing problem. Sincerely, P.S. I only found out about this today. I can't come to your meeting, but felt strongly about this and wanted to write this letter.