Loading...
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