HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.5 E Dublin GP Amendment/Specific Plan AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE : October 8 , 1990
SUBJECT: Format , Schedule and Funding for
Workshops on the East Dublin General
Plan Amendment/ Specific Plan
REPORT PREPARED BY: Ec Brenda A. Gillarde , Project Coordinator
EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1 . August 31 , 1990 letter from City of
Dublin to Alameda County
2 . September 24 , 1990 letter from
Alameda County to City of Dublin
IT
RECOMMENDATIONS : 1 . Review staff report
2 . Approve Staff recommendation to
% proceed with the East Dublin study
and prepare a land use concept
designating the County property as
business park
3 . Discuss the format and content of
the workshops and direct Staff to
make any desired changes
4 . Select dates for the workshops
5 . Determine appropriate title for
study area
6 . Determine if a facilitator should
be retained and direct staff
accordingly
7 . Appropriate $63 , 765 to cover costs
for four workshops and related
planning work. Appropriate $3 , 000
if a facilitator is to be retained.
Total amount : $66 , 765
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: An appropriation of $66 , 765 from
Unallocated Reserves will be necessary.
Of this amount approximately $36 , 400 is
related to the specific plan. These
costs can be recovered by the City at
the time of development application or
approval .
-----------------------------
COPIES TO:
ITEM NO. �
I . BACKGROUND
On August 22 , 1990 the Council directed Staff to conduct a series
of workshops on the East Dublin General Plan Amendment/ Specific
Plan study. Staff has prepared an outline of the workshops and
also estimated costs for conducting the workshops and related
planning work.
II . ISSUES
Before proceeding with the workshops , Staff needed to clarify the
direction the City should take with respect to land uses on the
County of Alameda property in the East Dublin study area . As the
Council is aware , the City presently has an annexation agreement
with the County which stipulates that all the County land be
designated for business park.
The County has indicated an interest in pursuing other land use
options for their property. However , unless the annexation
agreement is amended, the City is legally bound to designate the
County property for business park. On August 31 , 1990 the City
formally requested a decision from the County regarding
renegotiation of the agreement by the end of September (see
Attachment 1 ) . Steve Szaley, Chief Administrator of Alameda
County has submitted a letter to the City stating the County will
be working with economic_ consultants to determine the preferred
land uses for the Santa Rita property (see Attachment 2 ) . The
County requests a 4 to 6 month delay in the East Dublin studies
to allow for completion of their economic and land use analyses .
Staff has evaluated several options in light of the County' s
request . Staff recommends that the City proceed with the East
Dublin study and prepare a land use concept that designates the
County property as business park, per the annexation agreement .
It is conceivable that the County 's economic analyses could take
longer than 6 .months . Staff believes it is extremely important
to keep the East Dublin study moving to ensure its timely
completion. The cost implications of de-veloping a land use
concept showing the County property as business park are
discussed in Section IV of this report .
If the County decides they want something other than business
park on their property and are willing to renegotiate the
annexation agreement , the- City -at that - time can consider two -
options : 1 ) modify the East Dublin plan to provide something
other than business park on the County property; or 2 ) continue
with the East Dublin study, adopt the East Dublin general plan
amendment/specific plan and then consider the County ' s request as
an amendment to the City ' s general plan and the East Dublin
specific plan. In either case , the County will have to assume
all costs for -modifying the East Dublin_ land use map, specific
plan and the general plan amendment . The County would also have
to assume costs for any additional environmental analyses
necessitated by these changes .
-2-
II . DESCRIPTION
A. Overview
General Description of Workshops and Study Sessions
A series of four informal workshops and two formal study sessions
are contemplated. They will continue the discussion begun at the
August 22 study session about the type of community the City
wants to see developed in East Dublin. The first two workshops
and follow up study session will focus on- the general plan land
uses for East Dublin. This will - be accomplished through a
discussion of the type , location , amount and mix of land uses .
Other issues -will also be discussed such as circulation, open
space and recreation. Workshops 3 and 4 and Study Session 2 will
focus on the detailed guidelines , standards and performance
criteria for the specific plan. These factors will affect the
shape and character of the East Dublin community.
Workshop. Format
The workshops are an opportunity for public involvement prior to
additional study sessions and formal public hearings by the
Planning Commission and City Council . Each workshop is designed
to be informational as well as interactive . They are envisioned
as informal gatherings and will be held in the regional -meeting
room. The -workshops- will- be approximately 3 hours long,
beginning at 6 :30 p.m. and-ending about 9 : 30- p.m. . Each workshop
has a specific theme and purpose , and they build consecutively
upon each other . Specific products will be created at the end of
each workshop:
Professional Facilitator
Staff believes it would be desirable to retain a professional
facilitator for- the workshops . A facilitator would set the pace
of each workshop, keep the participants on track and ensure that
the- desired results are obtained at the end of each session . The
City has contacted Ms . Arlene Willet-s , who has previously worked
with the City Council , Planning Commission and Staff on a team
building workshop. Ms . Willets is currently retained by the City
of -Pleasanton as facilitator for their ridgeland planning
committee . The costs associated with retaining Ms . Willets are
discussed in Section III of this staff report .
Tri-Valley Planning Forum
The -League of Women Voters will be sponsoring a Tri-Valley
community planning forum. This forum will- focus- on 1 ) future
development in the Tri-Valley (as expressed by current general
plans and development proposals in the cities of San Ramon ,
Pleasanton, Livermore and Dublin ) ; 2 ) potential problems created
by anticipated development in the Tri-Valley area ; and 3 )
-3-
innovative ways to design communities to address the potential
problems with future growth in. the Tri-Valley.
Tentatively, the panel of speakers will include a land use
economist who has extensively studied the Tri-Valley, a
California developer who is building a pedestrian oriented
community in Sacramento and a local land use planner/architect
who is presen-tly engaged in designing innovative , pedestrian
friendly - communities . The forum is scheduled for early to mid-
November , which will fall after the first East Dublin workshop.
All Commissioners and Council members are encouraged to attend as
the information discussed will have direct application to East
Dublin . Particularly critical are such issues as the amount and
mix of commercial and residential development , roadway -
capacities , pedestrian orientation , the relationship of East
Dublin to adjacent communities and the effect of development in
neighboring communities on East Dublin.
B. Detailed Description of Workshops and Study Sessions
WORKSHOP 1 • GENERAL PLAN LAND USES- PART I
Purpose : To discuss , in a public forum, the desired land uses
for East Dublin
Format and Content :
A. Workshop convenes with the Council and Commission sitting at
one table in the front of the room
B. Facilitator explain procedures
C. Consultant identifies concerns previously expressed about
the amount , location and intensity of land uses in East
Dublin. For each concern , consultant discusses various
optional approaches . Key concerns thus far identified are :
the relationship of the Santa Rita property land
uses and the remainder of East Dublin
the relationship of East Dublin to the existing
Dublin community
the type of commercial center desired in East
Dublin
the mix and location of single and multifamily
residential uses
the desired size of East Dublin in terms of
population, dwelling units , jobs and the
jobs/housing ratio
-4-
- the inclusion of a pedestrian/mass transit
oriented "green spine" through East Dublin
the desirability of having a sports park in East
Dublin and its appropriate location
the-elimination of residential and other high
occupancy uses in the Livermore Airport protection
zone
C. Workshop participants break into small discussion groups ,
discuss options for each conce-rn and identify the preferred
approaches . - A Council and Commission member will be present
at each discussion group table .
D. Group-reconvenes and consultant lists the preferred
approaches for each concern as voiced by the various
discussion groups .
Product : A list of preferred approaches for each concern
WORKSHOP 2 • GENERAL PLAN LAND USES FOR EAST DUBLIN - PART II
r pose To complete the discussion of general plan land uses
for East Dublin
Format and Content :
A. Workshop convenes with Council and Commission sitting at one
table in -front of the room
B. Consultant discusses results of group discussions at the
previous workshop and notes where-problems/conflicts may
arise from the recommended approaches
C. Commission and Council individually comment on the preferred
approach for each concern
Product : A list of changes to the preliminary general plan land
use map for East Dublin , based on public,. Commission and Council
members comments on the preferred approach to each land use
concern
STUDY SESSION 1: REVIEW OF MODIFIED PRELIMINARY GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE MAP FOR EAST DUBLIN
Purpose : To present the modified preliminary plan and receive
any further comcient from the Council , Commission or public.
-5-
Format and Content_
A. Meeting will be held in the Council chambers with Council
and Commission members seated at the dais
B. Staff presents modified preliminary plan
C. Public , Commission and Council members comment on plan
Product : A list- of additional revisions to the preliminary
general plan land use map
WORKSHOP 3 • COMMUNITY PLANNING IN EAST DUBLIN - PART I
Purpose : To discuss , in a public forum, community character and
design for residential and commercial development in East Dublin.
Note : Workshops 3 and 4 will occur after the consultant has
prepared preliminary specific plan guidelines and performance
standards . These guidelines and standards will be used to
determine the shape , layout and character of development in East
Dublin based on the preliminary general plan land use map.
Workshop 3 will focus on residential and commercial development ;
Workshop 4 will focus on parks , recreation areas and roads .
Format and Content :
A. Group convenes in - regional meeting room with Council/
Commission sitting up front
B. Facilitator explains procedures
C. Consultant describe-s the guidelines/standards for
residential and commercial deve-lopment , focusing on how they
will shape the East Dublin community
D. Participants break into small groups to discuss the
guidelines/ standards and how they should be changed or
modified
E. Group reconvenes and consultant lists recommendations for
changes, modifications , additions to the guidelines/
standards discussed
Product : List of changes to guidelines/standards for residential
and commercial development
WORKSHOP 4 • COMMUNITY PLANNING IN EAST DUBLIN - PART II
Purpose : Complete discussion of preliminary specific plan
guidelines/standards , focusing on parks , recreation areas , roads
and circulation.
-6-
Format.--and Content :
Same as Workshop 3 except the topics will be parks , recreation
areas , roads and circulation guidelines/standards .- Other
guidelines/standards will be addressed as necessary.
Product : List of changes to the guidelines/standards discussed
STUDY SESSION 2 • PRELIMINARY SPECIFIC PLAN GUIDELINES/STANDARDS
Purpose: To- review, in a public forum, the results of the
workshop discussions on specific plan guidelines/standards
Format and CoQteyit_,-
Same as Study Session 1 but the topic will be preliminary
specific plan guidelines/standards
Product : List of any further changes to the preliminary specific
plan guidelines/standards
PROPOSE RKSHOP/STUDY SESSION DATES
The workshops and study sessions have-been scheduled to allow for
additional- public input at Grit-ical junctures during the general
plan land-use/specific plan guidelines phase of the East Dublin
planning process .
Workshop 1 : GP Land Uses Wednesday, November 14
Workshop 2 : GP Land Uses Tuesday, December 4 or
Wednesday, December 5
Study Session 1 : GP Land Uses Monday, -December 17 or
Tuesday, December 18
After Study Session l the consultants will prepare the
preliminary specific plan guidelines/standards . Workshops 3 and
4 and Study Session 2 , which address these standards, - will be
held in early 1991 . A staff report detailing those dates will be
prepared later for the Council .
C. Study Area Title
Some concern was expressed at the August 22 study session about
the title of the study area. Comment was received that the title
"East- Dublin" created an- impression that the study area was not
connected to existing Dublin.
Staff suggests renaming the study area "Dublin East" or "Eastern
Dublin" to better reinforce the connection with the existing
-7-
community. - If the Council has additional suggestions for study
area titles , they should discuss them and select an appropriate
title . If the title is changed, the Council should also rename
the West Dublin study area.
IV FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
A. WRT Costs
The present contract with WRT does not include funds to conduct
the workshops, nor does it contain funds for major revisions to
the land use concept . WRT has prepared an estimate of the time
and materials required to conduct the additional work. The total
amount is $63 , 765 . The figures include costs associated with
preparing a land use concept that reflects business park on the
County' s property.
B. Retention of a Facilitator
Staff has also considered retaining a professional facilitator
for the workshops . As explained previously, a facilitator -would
set the pace of each workshop and keep the discussion on target
for the evening ' s agenda. Staff has contacted Ms . Arlene Willits
about the possibility of working -with the City as the facilitator
for the workshops . The preliminary estimate for retaining Ms .
Willits as workshop faci-litator for the four workshops is $3 , 000 .
C. Funding Sources
Up to this point , the East Dublin study has been primarily funded
by property owners . There have been three previous requests of
property-owners for additional funds. Since the request to
conduct workshops was made by the Council , Staff believes it may
be appropriate for the City to provide the funding for additional
consultant time to conduct the workshops and make revisions to
the land use plan. The workshops will provide additional
opportunities for public input .
It is recommended- that $662765 be appropriated from Unallocated
Reserves to conduct the four workshops , amend the land use plan
and retain a professional facilitator .
IV CONCLUSIONS
The Council needs to consider the following items and take
appropriate action :
1 . Approve the Staff recommendation to proceed with the East
Dublin study and prepare a land use concept that designates
the County property as business park, per the annexation
agreement
2 . Approve the format and content of the workshops .
-8-
3 . Select the workshop dates .
4 . Determine the appropriate title for the east and west Dublin
study areas .
5 . Determine if a facilitator should be retained.
6 . Determine if City should fund additional costs . If funded
by the City, appropriate $66 , 765 from Unallocated Reserves .
-9-
I rof
August 31 , 1990
Steven C . szalay
County Administrator
County of Alameda
1221 Oak Street, suite 555
Oakland, CA 94612
RE: Santa Rita Land Use Designation
Dear Mr . your letter of August 14, 1990 indicating it is Your
I am in receipt Of for the Santa Rita
desire to have a proposal or a plan for a proposal
of September . I assume t t tagreement efers to the land
property by the end tax annexaion . if this
use and accompanying property
assumption is not correct, please let me know.
Since our meeting of AugusC-
4- 13 , the City of Dublin Planning CommissiO-11
il held a public workshop to review Concept No . 4 and NO - 5
and City Council
prepared by the City' s Planning Consultant . At that workshop, the
that further
public and individual Commission and Council members felt some of
pu necessary apd that there may not be support for
refinement was nec to that
identified in Concept No. 4 . Subsequent
the land use concepts iden City' s Planning Staff to determine the City' s
workshop, I met with the
action with respect to continuing the development of the East
course of of my Staff that due to the size and
Dublin plan . it was the consensus
it would be impossible for
critical location of the Santa Rita property, he refinement of the
the City' s Planning Consultant to continue work on t
until the County indicated its desired land use concept
East Dublin Plan guaranteed
for the Santa Rita property, if different from the land use guarant-
the County in the City current Property Tax Annexation Agreement .
whatever happens on the County property affects the
This is true because East Dublin
balance of land use, circulation, etc . on adjacent
properties . discussions regarding the Dublin Boulevard
You may recall in our
Extension and Freeway Areements , you expressed a great concern that the
g
City move the East Dublin Plan expeditiously and complete the Plan by
91 . The City is also concerned with the impact of any delay .
Summer 19 L he East Dublin Plan to
However, in order to accommodate your review Of t on
Dublin Plan development, the City will delay further work
the East Dublin Land Uses Concepts only until September 30 , 1990 . If .by
the East o the City a request to revise
that date, the county has not submitted t ment,
concept and revise the Property Tax Annexation Agree
the land use conc that the e unty dg tcurrent the CitY will assume nt stand . At land use designation and Propty Tax Annexation Agreement
that point, the City will direct its Planning Consultant to begin the
I-r. Z ilk tell , k7
refinement of Land Use Concept No. 5 which implements the provisions the
the current Property Tax Annexation Agreement . As you know, the
Planning Consultant is on a fixed ers are financially responsible .
contract or County,
as the sponsoring property
Therefore, it would appear equitable for any requests from the County
for significant changes in the land use on the Santa Rita property
received after ts of the Cou ty.k on Concept No. 5 to be
the sole financial responsibility
As you indicated in your letter of August 13 , 1990 ,
the City is also
concerned that the City and County work towards a speedy resolution to
this issue and complete the East Dublin Plan in an expeditious manner.
I look forward to hearing from you by the end of September, if not
before .
Sincerely,
Richard C . Ambrose
City Manager
RCA: slh
cc : Sponsoring Property owners
City Council
Planning Commission
Larry Tong, Planning Director
Adolph Martinelli , Alameda County Planning
-2-
RECEIVED'
Or 4t
C O U N T Y A D M 1 N 1 S T R A T O
RS EP P. 8 1990
y% CITY, ,OF DUBLIN
c�ciron�'`r
SUSAN S. MURANISHI
STEVEN C. SZALAY ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
September 24, 1990
Richard Ambrose
City Manager
City of Dublin
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94566
(L'
Dear Mr. Ambrose:
/ Subject:r SANTA RITA LAND USE DESIGNATION
You have requested that the County indicate its interest in changing the
land use designation from that guaranteed in the existing Annexation Agreement
and renegotiating that Agreement. The County cannot finalize any decision on
the optimum land uses for the County property by September 30, 1990 and
therefore I understand that, if the City feels compelled to proceed at this
time, the Consultant' s study will be completed on the basis of the land use
designations in the Annexation Agreement.
We have some concerns with the City' s proposal to continue totdevelop
the
Concept 4, the mixed use alternative for the County' s property,
exclusion of Concept 5 which is more consistent with the Annexation Agreement
uses . This concept did not appear to be well received by your own City
Council . In addition, the EIR will require that the alternative land uses be
fully analyzed. The Annexation Agreement itself might allow some residential '
uses in that it calls for land use, planning and zoning no less than the
intensity, use and density standards in effect with Hacienda Business Park.
We note that the Hacienda
plan include
publacn uses .
uses
In contrast. t _
identified in Concept 4.
It has become clear to the County in our internal discussions and
discussions with consultants over the last 4 to 6 weeks that a responsible
decision by the County on the preferred land uses for this property will
require a market and financial feasibility study. This work would be best
performed by an outside consulting firm. As we have previously indicated, the
Santa Rita property is the keystone of the County' s real property development
program and an integral part of the County' s long—term financial well—being.
Critical decisions as to the appropriate land use can therefore only be made
after proper consideration and analysis as to their financial impact. Our
current plan is to request proposals from three economic consulting firms
within the next
economic as
be
possible after p
forthcoming after 4 to 6 months .
ATTACHMENT �,.
Richard Ambrose 40 _2— p Se tember 24, 1990
As your staff indicated in their August 22 report to the joint City
Council /Planning Commission Study Session, one option is to delay the planning
process until an agreement can be reached between the City and the County. We
would consider that to be the prudent option and, of course, our preferred
alternative. We further believe that the results of our economic analysis
could provide valuable information to your General Plan and Specific Plan
Study. Please call if you would like to discuss this further.
Sincerely,
Steven zalay
County Administ a r
SCS:MB:rh
cc: Each Member, Board of Supervisors
County Counsel
4024c