Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-27-2011 PC Minutes~~a 3 ~;:~~~ Planning Cornm~ss~on Minutes Tuesday, September 27, 2011 CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, September 27, 2011, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair Brown called the meeting to order at 7:01:10 PM Present: Chair Brown; Vice Chair Wehrenberg; Commissioners Schaub, O'Keefe, and Bhuthimethee; Jeff Baker, Planning Manager; Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner; Mike Porto, Consulting Planner; and Debra LeClair, Recording Secretary. Absent: None ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA -NONE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS - On a motion by Cm. Wehrenberg, seconded by Cm. Bhuthimethee the minutes of the August 23, 2011 meeting were approved. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -NONE CONSENT CALENDAR -NONE WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS -NONE PUBLIC HEARINGS - 8.1 Appeal of a Community Development Director Determination regarding Section 8.76.040.M.2 (Small Tenant Space) and Interpretation regarding Section 8.40.030.G.6 (Retail Sales) as they relate to the proposed Sahara Market expansion at 6783/6777 Dublin Boulevard. Jeff Baker, Planning Manager, stated the Appellant and Staff has requested a continuance in order to continue to work with the property owner to address the issues facing Sahara Market to enable them to open as well as more global issues the property owner has regarding the use of his property. He stated that Staff is still working with the property owner and was not able to resolve the issues before the notice had to be sent out. The Appellant has requested a continuance of their project to be heard on or before December 13, 2011. He stated there is a preliminary agreement and Staff is hopeful they can bring the situation to a resolution. On a motion by Cm. O'Keefe and seconded by Crn. Wehrenberg, on a vote of 5-0, the Planning Commission unanimously accepted the continuance and the matter will be heard on or before 12-13-11: RESOLUTION NO. 11 - XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ~'Ccasarting (,~c~~7z~rrit~sivx 5~~~r"27, f~,11 ~g~ctr ~,~~~~~,~ 117 AFFIRMING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S DETERMINATION REGARDING SECTION 8.76.040.M.2 (SMALL TENANT SPACE) AND INTERPRETATION REGARDING SECTION 8.40.030.G.6 (RETAIL SALES) AS THEY RELATE TO THE PROPOSED SAHARA MARKET EXPANSION 6783/6777 DUBLIN BOULEVARD 8.2 PLPA-2011-00013/00014 Montessori Plus Day Care Center Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review. Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Cm. Schaub asked about a retaining wall. Ms. Bascom answered at the outdoor play area there is a fence on top of a low retaining wall. Cm. Schaub stated there is also a retaining wall on the side of the exit drive. Ms. Bascom answered that is an existing retaining wall and stated there was condition added by the Planning Commission at the July 26, 2011 hearing related to the proposed retaining wall. Chair Brown asked if there will be a maximum of 30 children outdoor for one hour in the morning and a maximum of 30 children for'/2 hour in the afternoon. Ms. Bascom answered yes; a maximum of 30 children will be outside at any one of those periods of time. Cm. Schaub asked if that is a condition. Ms. Bascom answered yes, Condition #16. Chair Brown asked if the height of the fence is 4-6 feet at the play area facing south to Dublin Green. Ms. Bascom answered yes, facing the sidewalk side of the fence. Chair Brown asked if that height would be enough to prevent balls or toys from going into street which could cause problems with traffic or pedestrians. Ms. Bascom felt the Applicant should that question. Mr. Baker stated that they would be subject to State licensing requirements. Cm. Wehrenberg asked to clarify if the conditions added from the last meeting regarding signage for right turn only at the exit would be addressed by the City. Ms. Bascom answered the signage is covered in Condition #10 and Condition #71 which mentions the other signs and pavement markings to be added for traffic safety. ,~ ~~ ,a 118 __ Chair Brown asked if there wil! be a right hand turning restriction while exiting the property onto Dublin Green. Ms. Bascom answered no, the roadway turns to the right and Dublin Green is not a through street. Cm. Schaub asked if the retaining wall at the exit was discussed with the Applicant. He felt the wall is falling down. He suggested that it should be fixed before the day care center opens. Mr. Baker stated there were discussions between the Applicant and the Public Works regarding the retaining wall. He stated the retaining wall does not belong to the Applicant. Cm. Schaub felt it didn't matter who owned it because if it fell onto the road it would still have to be repaired. Cm. Schaub felt the hours of outside play are dictated by State regulations and asked if the City's Conditions of Approval did not meet State's regulations would the Applicant have to come back to the Planning Commission to change it or would Staff be able to make the change. He felt it was not fair to make the Applicant come back to the Commission when it is a State requirement. Ms. Bascom answered Condition of Approval #16 covers the outdoor play time issue and she felt that since there was a study prepared and it is a topic of public interest it would probably not be changed at the Staff level but it would be brought back to the Commission. She suggested that if the Planning Commission wanted to see more flexibility or language added such as "per state requirements" that could be added to the Conditions of Approval. Cm. Wehrenberg did not recall that subject being brought up at the previous meeting. Mr. Baker stated that was a Condition in the original Approval in July; tied directly to the noise study. Based on the Applicant's request, the noise study evaluated noise levels and the condition was prepared and included in the resolution that was approved at that meeting. Cm. Schaub felt it was important to add a "No Entrance"sign should be placed on the pavement on the one way exit road. He stated the graphics on the exit road are faded which could cause a problem. Chair Brown asked if Cm. Schaub meant the exit onto Dublin Green. Cm. Schaub answered yes and felt it was important that people know that the drive is an "exit only." Cm. Wehrenberg agreed that a "No Entrance" sign should be added. Cm. O'Keefe agreed with CM Schaub that an additional sign should be provided and felt it was good that the Applicant will provide the stop sign at the exit drive. Cm. Brown opened the public hearing. He asked the speakers to organize their comments and not repeat comments. tg C'nrra~s~~ssiu .4~~rn~r~r, ?tltl ~~~~ag 119 Ms. Ada Wong, Applicant spoke in favor of the project. Ms. Rupa Norain, Applicant spoke in favor of the project.. She gave a short history of their day care center. She stated they have been operating a preschool in Dublin for 16 years with no problems. She felt they are providing an essential service to the area. Mr. Howard Wong presented a PowerPoint presentation regarding their proposal. The key points are: - Facility is 1 block from current location - Continue with license for 60 children - They have addressed new Conditions of Approval added at the previous meeting. - Exterior is not changing, only interior improvements. - Site improvements including handicap access ramp and curb cuts to the building for ADA compliance - Wrought iron fencing with landscaping and privacy screen and a fully enclosed playground area on the southeast corner of lot. He stated the fence at the current site is 6 feet in height which is a minimum height requirement. - Installation of additional trees and landscaping throughout property. - Installation of trash enclosure. - Hours of operation M-F 7:30am to 6:30pm. - Traffic issues - He stated they encourage carpools, and staggered times for drop-off and pick-up. He presented a graph showing drop-off and pick-up times which showed the children do not all come at one time. - Maximum license is for 60 children; there would not be that. many present at one time; staggered throughout the day and never a time when cars are backed up to the street. - Fully enclosed fenced area located far away from neighbors. Cm. Schaub felt the majority of the children will arrive between 9 and 9:30 and half of the pick- ups are between 12 and 12:30pm. Mr. Wong agreed. Cm. Schaub mentioned the graph which shows there are only a few children being dropped off at a time. Mr. Wong agreed. Cm. Schaub asked if a lot of the children go home at noon. Mr. Wong answered yes. Cm. Schaub felt that in the afternoon session there would be fewer children with a different dynamic then was imagined. Mr. Wong showed the area where the play area will be built. He showed a picture of the view from Dublin Green and felt there was adequate visibility. He felt the addition of the stop sign and pedestrian crossing signs will help the situation. He stated the fence that was discussed previously that was. falling down is not on their property and the owner had tried to have the fence repaired but was unable to get financing. ~~~~6~~z~ ~~z.~ 120 Cm. Schaub felt when the fence falls dawn it will come down on their driveway and it will still be a problem. Mr. Wong agreed. There was a discussion regarding the retaining wall and fence that is in disrepair on the property next to theirs Mr. Wong stated that safety of the children is of primary concern and discussed the entrance and exit strategy. He stated that the State is responsible for ensuring the safety of the facility both indoor and outdoor and will have to go through State Licensing again for this new location. Mr. Wong summarized his proposal and requested the Planning Commission's support. Chair Brown asked what the student/teacher ratio is when there are 30 children playing in the yard. Ms. Wong answered the required ratio is 1-12 but there are usually at least 4 teachers for 30 children. Chair Brown felt they exceed the State Licensing requirement. Ms. Norain mentioned Cm. Schaub's concern regarding state licensing for outdoor play. She stated that in the current location there is no time limit to be outside, but there is a student ratio requirement and a space requirement of 75 square feet per child. Margo Henry, 7682 Arbor Creek Circle, spoke in opposition to the project. She was concerned about increased traffic, parking problems with the condo project, speeding cars and damage to her cars. She was also concerned about the safety of the children within cars. Audrey Hutchinson, 7725 Woodren Court, spoke in opposition to the project. She was concerned with the closeness of the play area to her home, exit traffic onto Dublin Green and the 7-11 store which is busy. She was also concerned with the exit drive and if it was wide enough or even part of the property. Mary Leoni, 11890 Silvergate Drive, spoke in opposition to the project. She was concerned about additional traffic; the safety of the children in the neighborhood; that an environmental study was not done to address the exhaust from the additional traffic and the additional noise from the play area. Jose Rivera, 11889 Dublin Green Drive, spoke in opposition to the .project. He was concerned about the vacant space within the building and their use of it in the future; possibly more children therefore more traffic. He was .also concerned about food delivery trucks and if they are counted in the 191 additional cars. He was concerned regarding the removal of the bushes on the corner of Silvergate and Dublin Green and replaced with fence which could be an obstruction. He was concerned the location of the trash enclosure and the property line. He stated that the fence is off the property fine and he had an agreement with the property owner that when the fence was repaired they would reposition it on the property line. ~~~~~~ ~~~.~ 121 Cm. Schaub asked which fence he was referring to and if he owned the retaining wall that is falling .down. Mr. Rivera answered no he doesn't own the retaining wall that is falling down he owns the property next to it. Cynthia Santos, 7749 Woodren Court, spoke in opposition to the project. She mentioned that there is no stucco on the building which was mentioned during the last meeting there is only siding. She also wanted to clarify that the building was not previously a medical office where people were in and out all day long. She stated it was an office building supporting the medical industry only. She was concerned about the size of the playground which she felt was 75 square feet per child. She did not agree with the measurements of the playground. She mentioned that State requirements prohibit smoking within 25 feet of a playground and asked if no-smoking signs would be posted by the City. Cm. Schaub stated that the Planning Commission is not the state licensing board and the board will not come into play until after the facility is established. He continued that any issue that is brought up will have to be dealt by the State. Ms. Santos wanted to make the point that there is an issue. Ms. Santos felt the pictures shown by the Applicant were not typical of the visibility on the street and was concerned about the traffic. She was concerned about the parking on Dublin Green, traffic, maintenance of the landscaping and the safety of the neighborhood children. Cm. Schaub mentioned that two of the Commissioners drive Sifvergate every day and are familiar with the traffic on the street. Terry Leoni, former resident at 11890 Silvergate Drive, attorney representing Mary Leoni, spoke in opposition to the project. She was concerned with the notices .that were mailed and asked if there was proof that it was published in the newspaper. Mr. Baker answered that proper notice was given in accordance with State law, published in the local newspaper as well as notices were sent to all property owners. He continued the City went beyond state requirements and also mailed the notice to all occupants within a 300 foot radius of the project. Ms. Leoni felt the City was not following the Zoning Ordinance. She was concerned with the future use of the vacant space within the building and the impact additional tenants would have on the area. She was concerned with the noise level, parking requirements and felt. this had not been adequately addressed by the Commission or any of the reports. She was concerned with the outdoor play hours. She felt the building is in a Commercial office district and that a school is not a permitted use in this area. She felt the Commission was violating Chapter 8 of the Zoning ordinance. She was concerned about the height of the fence would create a visibility problem. She was concerned with the additional air pollution from 191 cars. She felt the noise study did not study a similar facility and therefore was not relevant to this project. She mentioned an easement that she felt had not been addressed. She felt that the Zoning ordinance is there for a reason and the Planning Commission is obligated to follow it. She asked for more research to be done and listening to the opinion of the neighbors. c .. a .~F,~~~~ 122 Cm. Schaub stated the Planning Commission has reviewed many day care centers. He stated that the projects that are submitted to the Planning Commission by Staff would not be submitted unless the project is allowed in the zoning district. He stated there are many businesses that are in the light industrial and commercial zoning district such as churches and recreational facilities for children and these facilities are going into these types of buildings because the rents are lower. He does not believe that Staff would bring a project to the Commission that is not correct.. He continued that the Commission is not the reviewing body that would make a determination for the state requirements for a day care center. Cm. Wehrenberg stated the Planning Commission is here to look at land use only and the appropriateness of the land use within the zoning district. She agreed with Cm. Schaub that we wouldn't be here if the project didn't fit the zoning district. If the Commission cannot make the findings they would not approve it. She continued that during the last hearing she had issues with the project's suitability and that is why Staff added the additional conditions. She continued that the Commission's role is to Took at the land use and ensure that it is suitable for the project. She stated she heard the comments and hopes they have addressed them because the speakers made good points. Cm. Schaub stated that the traffic on Silvergate was rated years ago and he did not feel the traffic is close to the number the street is rated at. He stated Silvergate is rated extremely high on the plans and is expected to have more traffic than it has today. He stated the reason is that there were a lot of homes that were not built except at Schaefer Ranch. Cm. Wehrenberg mentioned that the closure of Neilsen Elementary School also affected the traffic on Silvergate. Chair Brown closed the public hearing. Cm. Wehrenberg asked about an issue Ms. Santos brought up regarding the building materials and asked Staff to confirm. Mr. Baker responded there was a condition that was added by the Commission at the last meeting regarding the finish on the retaining wall; the condition was written to ensure the color of the stucco on the retaining wall would match the building color, not the material Cm. Wehrenberg stated they are not changing the exterior of the building; they are. only installing the playground, landscaping and fencing. Mr. Baker answered yes and mentioned the additional Condition of Approval that was added: "the proposed retaining wall be finished and have a color to match the building." Cm. O'Keefe asked if the Applicant had any plans for the vacant space in the building. Mr. Baker responded there is Condition of Approval #23 that puts restrictions on the use of that space, they would need to obtain approval to ensure there is adequate parking. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if the Applicant wanted to make a change to this project would it be required to be submitted to the Planning Commission or the Planning Department depending on the solution. 123 Mr. Baker answered yes, depending on the solution. Cm. Schaub did a calculation for parking for the remaining vacant area in the building and determined they would need 1-2 spaces if it was used for a warehouse or a restaurant. Mr. Baker stated they would be restricted as to what type of business could go in there because of the parking issue. Cm. Wehrenberg asked the Applicant to clarify Mr. Rivera's statement regarding trucks dropping off food at the facility. Chair Brown opened the public hearing again. Ms. Norain responded there are no trucks that deliver to the school and no food preparation on site. Chair Brown closed the public hearing. Cm. O'Keefe asked about the fence height and the visibility issue. Mr. Baker stated this question was addressed at the last hearing. He stated there is a "Clear Vision Triangle" requirement regarding visibility at a corner.. The corner was reviewed by the Public Works Department and the fence was found to be outside the "Clear Vision Triangle" in an area where it would be permitted without obstructing visibility. Cm. Schaub asked about fencing in a residential neighborhood on a corner. Mr. Baker responded a residential fence in a residential area would be different than this fence. He continued that the fence is allowed in this commercial area and it is outside the visibility area. Cm. Schaub asked about aset-back for the fence. Mr. Baker answered there is a condition that stated the retaining wall should be set back to enable landscaping between the fence and the retaining wall. Cm. O'Keefe asked about the State requirement for .playground space per child. Mr. Baker responded that is a State licensing requirement based. on number of children and there is a Condition of Approval that requires the Applicant to obtain a license from the State. Cm. O'Keefe asked about the accuracy of the noise study. Mr. Baker stated that the noise study was done by a noise expert that is on contract with the City. He stated they did a comparison with an existing day care center and found it be in compliance with the Conditions of Approval limiting the hours of the day care operation. Chair Brown asked for Staff to clarify the traffic that is anticipated with regards to the 191 cars mentioned in the traffic study. ,.. _ ._ as ~ ~a. x~, ~~~ 124 Mr. Baker responded the City's Traffic Engineer reviewed the project and did afollow-up review of the project with a more in-depth analysis after the hearing in July. She provided a memo that addressed some of the issues (Attachment 6 of the Staff Report). She included information regarding roadway capacity and whether this is a suitable site to accommodate the traffrc that would be generated. She found the facility to be within the capacity of the roadway. He stated there would be more traffic but within reasonable limitations. Cm. Schaub commented that the Commission has approved many day care centers and the same issues and questions have come up each time. He stated that most or all of the concerns go away when the project is complete. He wanted everyone to understand that the Commission will discuss making findings regarding land use issues, safety and health requirements, circulation and impacts to traffic and parking, public compatibility, and zoning consistency; these are some of the findings they must be able to meet for every project. He stated they try to do it correctly and they rely on Staff. He stated he could make the findings. Cm. Wehrenberg agreed with Cm. Schaub. She felt the issues from the last hearing had been resolved through the added Conditions of Approval. She stated she listened to the neighbors' and heard their concerns and stated she is well aware of the traffic issues in the area. She felt the parking issue needs to be addressed with the condo complex not with this Applicant. Cm. Schaub asked if people are parking on one side and walking across four lanes of traffic and the landscaping median strip. Cm. Wehrenberg answered yes. She understands the neighbors and felt they brought up very good points regarding the traffic at the 7-11. She felt the public officials and police need to be more involved with the 7-11 issue. She felt that with additional traffic signage they could make the facility safe. The zoning is applicable for the area and she agreed that the Applicant must obtain a State License and will not be allowed to open until they do. She stated she could make the findings. Cm. Schaub stated if the Applicant must make changes to the project because of the State licensing requirements it will need to be submitted to the Planning Commission for approval. Cm. O'Keefe agreed with Cm. Wehrenberg. He stated he would also be concerned about some of the issues but must rely on the data provided and the studies conducted. He felt he could make the findings and commended Staff for adding the condition for signage at the exit and the addition of the no-entrance sign. Chair Brown could make the findings for the Conditional Use Permit as well as the Site Development Review. He felt there were good points made by the residents, but if they have additional zoning ordinance questions he encouraged them to go to the Planning Department and speak with Staff who can clarify any issues. Cm. Schaub mentioned that the Zoning Ordinance can also be found on the City's website. Cm. Schaub asked to add to Condition #71 a "do not enter" sign visible from Dublin Green. Cm. Wehrenberg stated that one of the speakers mentioned an easement on the property and felt there is only a storm drain easement. ~~.~~~~~ ~, 125 Mr. Baker stated that would be the only easement other than Public Utility easement. On a motion by Cm. Schaub and seconded by Cm. O'Keefe, on a vote of 5-0, with the following addition to Condition of Approval #71: "The Applicant shall install an exit only sign at the driveway located on Dublin Green Drive,"the Planning Commission unanimously adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 11 - 25 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE MONTESSORI PLUS DAY CARE CENTER LOCATED AT 11900 SILVERGATE DRIVE (APN 941-0103-011-01) 8:20:43 PM 8.3 PLPA 201 1-00031- BJ's Restaurant and Brewhouse Conditional Use Permit to amend the Planned Development Plan and Site Development Review for an 8,376 square foot restaurant building within the Fallon Gateway Center Mike Porto, Consulting Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Cm. Schaub stated that this development is a Planned Development (PD), unlike other types of facilities where there may be an additional restaurant space added. For this particular project the parking is one space per 100 square feet of floor area that is accessible to customers; plus one space per 200 square feet for food .preparation area. Mr. Porto agreed. He continued when the original PD was approved Staff calculated the parking according to the ratio that the Planning Commission had approved for the Dublin Green project; this project mirrors those parking standards. Mr. Baker mentioned that the standards have been changed in the Zoning Ordinance; they are now 1/100 of customer accessible area and 1/300 square feet of non-accessible floor area. Cm. Schaub wanted to ensure that it is known that the parking regulations are strict for restaurants. Cm. Wehrenberg asked what the square footage is for shop #7. Mr. Porto answered approximately 6,400 square feet. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if the 227 extra parking spots will be sufficient. Mr. Porto answered the 227 additional parking stalls were over and above the requirements for the uses that were proposed originally, which included Shop #7. There was a requirement for approximately 1,200 parking stalls for the overall center for the uses that were proposed of which the Shop #7 space was included. He continued the project is still exceeding the parking requirements. :~ . ~.~.=~ ~=t~mS~r~2<, ~~zr ~;u.__~~ 126 Cm. Wehrenberg was concerned about the location of the project with the main entrance facing I-580. Mr. Porto answered yes it is facing I-580. Cm. Wehrenberg asked how many stalls are at the front of the building and asked if it is appropriate to have the restaurant facing away from the center. Mr. Porto answered instead of talking about parking he wanted to talk about practical difficulty. He continued the drive aisle at the back of the building is built, constructed and existing. He stated there is a very large G-3 storm drain facility that runs adjacent to the corner of the building. If the entrance was facing the other way the front door would have very little space with no adjacent parking. He stated there was a significant difficulty with the storm drain because it can't be built over. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if that is because the original plan was for 3 separate shops and now they are combining two. Mr. Porto answered no. The storm drain line clipped each corner of the buildings when shops 8 and 9 were proposed there. The G-3 storm drain channel is the major drainage for all of Dublin Ranch, Jordan Ranch, the Croak Property, and Positano and was installed many years ago, before there was development. anticipated on the site. Cm. Wehrenberg asked for more information on the original layout. Mr. Porto directed the Commission to page C-4 of the project plans which are the grading and utility plans. He stated the outline of the storm drain easement can be seen across the parking area and adjacent to the building. Cm. Wehrenberg asked if the buildings were originally facing toward the Target store. Mr. Porto stated that those shops were originally double-sided. Cm. Wehrenberg remembered the front and back entrances. She was concerned about looking at the back of the restaurant, but said that is where the mural panels are located. Cm. Schaub was OK with the restaurant not facing Target. Chair Brown stated when comparing the proposed to existing parking areas it appears that by combining shops 8 and 9 into one building and redrawing the parking lot it seems to be cutting off or changing the parking design originally designed for the 3 shops. Mr. Porto answered yes. He continued there is another access point to the ring road that was not there before. He pointed out the access road exit and entrance on the slide. Chair Brown asked if Mr. Porto was pointing out the access road. Mr. Porto stated the slide was showing a crosswalk. The crosswalk is to get the people from this facility onto the future Shop #7 and over to the central walkway that goes across the site. a ~~~~~~z<, ~~~:r 127 He referred the Commission to the Staff Report on page 3, which is the site plan of the entire center. He continued in the gold area there is a pedestrian pathway that goes all the way across the Target parking lot to the front door of Target. Chair Brown asked if the road in front of the restaurant is a one way road Mr. Porto answered no, it is a two way road and mentioned that the Fire Department would not approve it otherwise. Chair Brown asked where the outdoor seating is located. Mr. Porto pointed out the east end on the northeast side of building. Chair Brown asked what kind of wall will be there. Mr. Porto answered there will be a solid lower and clear upper wall. Chair Brown asked what kind of signage will be visible from I-580. Mr. Porto referred the Commission to the cover sheet of Attachment 4 which shows the BJ's logo over the entry with Brewhouse on one side and Restaurant on the other and a small Take- out sign over the canopy. This is consistent with the Master Sign Program. Chair Brown asked if that is all the signage. Mr. Porto stated there were other signs facing into the parking lot and #acing south to the freeway and all shown on the sheet mentioned. Cm. Schaub mentioned there will be one of the panels on the Fallon Gateway .pylon sign that is quite high, bright and very noticeable. Chair Brown opened the public hearing. Joan Leguay, Director of Property Development, BJ's Restaurant, 7755 Center Avenue, Suite 300, Huntington Beach, CA, spoke in favor of the project. She was pleased to work with Mike Porto and the City and felt the restaurant would be a beautiful addition to Dublin. She stated she was there to answer any questions. Cm. Wehrenberg asked what their schedule is for opening. Ms. Leguay answered they hope to be under construction in November with approximately 6 months until opening which would make it April 2012. She stated they plan to hire over 200 employees and will hire from the local community. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked which way Shop #7 faces. Mr. Porto answered Shop #7 faces both ways, with parking on both sides. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if there is enough space to provide a walkway to connect Shop #7 to the restaurant. ~~ ~ 128 Mr. Porto stated yes; it was all calculated into the original plan. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if there is enough space for a connection between BJ's and Shop #7. Mr. Porto stated that there is currently a temporary connection to get to the pedestrian pathway to get to Target and that pathway will remain open. Cm. Bhuthimethee predicted that everyone coming out of Shop #7 will want to go to BJ's and felt connecting them somehow would be a good idea. Mr. Porto stated there is currently a connection from the main entrance of the building across to a walkway to the front door. He stated the front will act more tike a back because it is facing Fallon Road .and did not want to have the back of the .building facing Fallon Road so the Planning Commission required the back of the building to look more like the front, similar to the way Buffalo Wild Wings is set up now. Cm. Wehrenberg asked Ms. Leguay if she took into consideration the wind in Dublin and what type of wall is planned for the outdoor dining area. Ms. Leguay responded they were aware of the wind problem and positioned the patio to account for the wind. She stated the wall will be a stone wall which will match the exterior of the building with a glass wind screen on top. She continued there would. be umbrellas and heaters and they will make it very comfortable. Cm. O'Keefe mentioned that sustainability is important to Dublin and asked what type of sustainability initiatives BJ's Corporation has in place and what they are. Ms. Leguay answered they are complying with City requirements through the building permit process; .recycling, screened roof equipment (heating and AC units) and a Cool Roof as well as the State of CA has significant requirements that must be complied with. She stated that they would be expected to comply with all requirements in order to pull building permit. Mr. Baker mentioned .that there is a Condition of Approval regarding the Green Building standard code that they would be required to meet. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked how the murals will they be applied. Ms. Leguay answered they are stretched canvas over a frame which is a 3m product. The graphic patterns will be on the back of the building; there will be 4 murals stretched over a frame and washed with concealed LED lights that will run above the mural. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked how the panels will be maintained. Ms. Leguay answered there have been no issues, but if there were any problems they would replace them right away. Chair Brown closed public hearing. ~ar.~iir ar~~~ 129 Cm. Wehrenberg felt there needs to be another crosswalk to connect to the parking field to the west. Mr. Porto answered the goal in this project for pedestrian connectivity was to get them onto the pathways created through the parking lot so the people aren't walking behind cars. They created long open elements that go across the parking lot to connect the shop buildings back to the majors. He stated that if additional crosswalks were created they would lead to nowhere. Cm. Wehrenberg felt there was one crosswalk that goes to shop 7 but nothing to connect in other areas. She felt there was a safety issue coming from Target to BJ's. Mr. Porto stated he sees the concern but once they are across the drive aisle they will be at a dead end. He felt there must be somewhere to put them and if a pedestrian pathway is created behind the cars the drive aisle will be narrowed which will be a problem for fire access and maneuverability of cars because the drive aisle will be less than the required width. He offered to work with the Traffic Engineer to try to establish a way to get people across the drive aisle and give them a place to land. He stated that all the median islands in the gold area are already constructed and all the landscaping is installed. Cm. Schaub agreed with Cm. Wehrenberg. Cm. Wehrenberg asked how much parking is needed for BJ's. Mr. Baker answered a total of 93 spaces. Mr. Porto stated it is anticipated that some people will park in the gold area and walk across to the restaurant. Mr. Baker mentioned this project is similar to the Waterford center where there is a Safeway and then pad buildings around the edge of the center and there is a path on the north end but not the south end and people cross over which is not an uncommon situation. Cm. Schaub did not agree and was concerned with the access road. He felt that the access road is the only way that people will drive out of the parking spaces. He felt that there needs to be someplace for people to get to and from the area, not just Shop #7. He felt that it would be a very busy access road. There was a discussion regarding a possible additional walkway from BJ's to the Target and its placement. Mr. Porto suggested, at the Commission's direction, he will discuss with the Traffic Engineer a way to create a crosswalk with access around the building on both sides. Cm. Wehrenberg suggested having the crosswalks lighted for safety. She stated that she understood that the parking and landscaping is installed. Mr. Porto stated that the area in gold is Target's property and not in the Applicant's control. Cm. O'Keefe asked about the center of the gold area where there is a thicker area running through the parking lot. ~~~~~~E~-~~~~ ~, 130 Mr. Porto answered that is landscaping which complies with bioswale requirements and water quality and water clearing. Cm. Wehrenberg felt that with future projects the review will be more in depth. Mr. Porto stated that when the project was originally brought to the Commission there was a plan with pedestrian connectivity throughout the site. The connectivity on the site has not changed; the crosswalk is still in the same place with a walkway system along the drive aisle. Cm. Wehrenberg responded the element that has changed is that BJ's doesn't have a front and back entrance. She felt that was the element that has changed her thought process. Mr. Porto stated the City cannot. go onto Target's property and dictate signals or lighting change. He felt they may be able to stripe a crosswalk with no problem, but there must be somewhere to take them. Cm. Wehrenberg felt that Target would welcome BJ's with the additional business they will bring to the center. She stated she would appreciate any effort to address her concerns. Mr. Porto agreed. Cm. Wehrenberg felt the original project was planned for nicely but things change and the Commission does their best to help businesses come to Dublin. She stated she appreciated all the new jobs. She supported the project, liked the colors, the building and everything but was still concerned about the safety of the pedestrians coming from Target since the parking is across the street from the field of parking. Chair Brown felt he could make the findings for the Conditional Use Permit and SDR. He concurs with comments made by Cm.'s Wehrenberg and Schaub regarding the crosswalk issue and felt it needs to be addressed. Mr. Porto agreed to address their concerns. Cm. O'Keefe stated he likes the project and can make the findings. On a motion by Cm. Schaub and seconded by Cm. Wehrenberg, on a vote of 5-0, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 11 - XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO AMEND THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR FALCON GATEWAY (PA 08-034) BY COMBINING DEVELOPMENT SHOP SITES 8 AND 9 AND TO ALLOW UP TO 8,376 SQUARE FEET OF DEVELOPMENT ON THE COMBINED SHOP SITE FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS FALCON GATEWAY SHOPPING CENTER LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DUBLIN BOULEVARD AND FALCON ROAD ~C~, Za ~ rirc-i,z%€ ~7C~3t£~?Zitc721, &~~.~ ``w,<;-__ . _ 131 RESOLUTION NO. 11 - XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR FALCON GATEWAY TO CONSTRUCT A 8,376 SQUARE FOOT FREE-STANDING FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT AND BREWHOUSE BUILDING LOCATED ON A SITE FORMERLY IDENTIFIED AS SHOPS 8 AND 9 NEAR THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SITE AT FALCON ROAD AND THE ON-RAMP TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 580 PLPA 2011-00031 NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS -NONE OTHER BUSINESS -NONE 10.1 Brief INFORMATION ONLY reports from including Committee Reports and Reports meetings attended at City Expense (AB 1234). the Planning Commission and/or Staff, by the Planning Commission related to ADJOURNMENT -The meeting was adjourned at 9:04:28 PM ATTEST: ..~ Jeff Ba e Planning anager Res ectfully s ed, n Brown Chair Planning Commission G:IMINUTES120111PlANN/NG COMMISSIOM09.27.11 DRAFT PC Minutes.docx '~~u~rc ~ _~ ~. ~ 132