Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8 - COUNCIL READING FILE_c_02-26-2020 PC Staff Report & Draft MinutesPLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: Development review of a 296-unit multi-family residential project within the NG-30 zoned portion of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan area, and a Vesting Tentative Tract Map (Tract 3150) subdividing a portion of Tract 3096 from two existing lots into twelve to provide for 296 airspace condominiums with minor exceptions to the open space requirements for common interest subdivisions. Includes a determination that the project is consistent with the certified Final EIR for San Luis Ranch Specific Plan and therefore exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). PROJECT ADDRESS: 1035 Madonna Road BY: John Rickenbach, Contract Planner Phone Number: 805-610-1109 Email: JFRickenbach@aol.com FILE NUMBER: ARCH-0459-2019 & FROM: Tyler Corey, Principal Planner SBDV-0747-2019 RECOMMENDATION 1.Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment 1) approving the development plan based on findings and subject to conditions of approval. 2.Recommend approval to the City Council of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) as described in the Draft Resolution (Attachment 2) based on findings and subject to conditions of approval. SITE DATA Applicant Representative General Plan and Zoning Site Area Environmental Status MI San Luis Ranch, LLC Jacob Grossman Neighborhood General-30 (NG-30; allows multi-family residential under the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan) 10.6 acres Exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15182 (Residential Projects Implementing Specific Plans) SUMMARY The applicant, MI San Luis Ranch, LLC, has proposed a 296-unit multi-family housing project on a 10.6-acre parcel within the 131.3-acre San Luis Ranch Specific Plan area along Madonna Road, roughly midway between Oceanaire Drive and Dalidio Drive. The parcels were established through an approved tentative map (VTTM 3096), which includes the entire San Luis Ranch Specific Plan (SLRSP) area. The project is intended to be consistent with the requirements of the SLRSP. The project site is zoned NG-30, which envisions up to 30 units per acre subject to various standards included in the SLRSP. Meeting Date: February 26, 2020 Item Number: 2 The project site has been previously approved for grading and off-site public improvements associated with the development of the SLRSP, the previous approvals also account for all tree removals and utility infrastructure. This project is specific to the on-site improvements associated with the residential development (Attachment 3, Project Plans and VTTM). The proposed project consists of 296 residential condominiums and several accessory structures and amenities as outlined in the list below: •(8) three-story buildings with 12-units each, providing 96-condominium units in total. Each 12-unit building is comprised of (6) 951 square feet (SF) two-bedroom units and (6) 1,140 SF three-bedroom units. •(6) three-story buildings with 20-efficiency lofts, for a total of 120-condominium units ranging in size from 380 SF to 580 SF. These are designed to be reviewed and processed as condominiums. •(80) three-story townhome condominium units configured in two- to six-unit attached townhome buildings. Three different three-bedrooms plans each are proposed, ranging in size from 1,423 SF to 1,611 SF. •(1) One-story community clubhouse “The Harvest Club” that is 1,627 SF with associated outdoor pool and activity areas. •(10) Bicycle storage structures (40 bicycles per structure). •The project also includes trash enclosures, mail kiosks, signage, fencing, pedestrian paseos that include outdoor activity and play amenities, shared streets/plazas, a creek walk, tot lot, children’s gardens, and natural play areas. 1.0 PLANNING COMMISSION’S PURVIEW The Planning Commission’s role is to review for consistency with the General Plan1, San Luis Ranch Specific Plan (SLRSP)2, Zoning Regulations3, Subdivision Regulations4, Community Design Guidelines (CDG)5, and applicable City development standards. Planning Commission (PC) review is required for projects which include more than 10 residential units. 2.0 PREVIOUS REVIEW The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) reviewed the proposed project design (ARCH- 0459-2019) on December 2, 2019 for consistency with the SLRSP Design Guidelines and Community Design Guidelines (CDG). The ARC determined that the project was consistent with applicable design guidelines, and recommended approval to the PC (Attachment 4, ARC Staff Report and Meeting Minutes). The ARC’s purview does not include review of the subdivision component of the project (SBDV 0747-2019). 1 General Plan: Land Use Element Chapter 2 (Conservation and Development of Residential Neighborhoods), Housing Element Chapter 3 (Goals, Policies and Programs) 2 SLRP: Chapter 3 (Neighborhood Form) 3 Zoning Regulations Article 3 (Regulations and Standards Applicable to All Zones) and Article 8 (Housing -Related Regulations) 4 Subdivision Regulations: Chapter 16.12 (Vesting Tentative Maps) and Chapter 16.17 (Common Interest Subdivision, Airspace Subdivisions, and Condominium Conversions) 5 CDG: Chapter 2 (General Design Principals), Chapter 5 (Residential Project Design), and Chapter 6 (Site Planning and Other Design Details 3.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS The proposed project must conform to the standards and limitations of General Plan, SLRSP, and any applicable aspects of the Zoning Regulations, and Engineering Standards that are not otherwise addressed in the SLRSP which apply to the overall development plan approval including the subdivision component. Staff has evaluated the project and identified discussion items for the PC to consider, including direction provided by the ARC related to design guidelines. 3.1 Consistency with the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Upon its adoption in 2017, the SLRSP became the primary guiding land use regulatory document for the area it encompassed. Figure 2 shows the land use map within the SLRSP, and the proposed project area coincides with the NG-30 land use designation shown on that map. A specific plan is a tool for the systematic implementation of a general plan. It effectively establishes a link between implementing policies of the general plan and the individual development proposals in a defined area. In the case of the SLRSP, it addresses the broad range of planning issues and policies typically covered in the City’s General Plan or zoning ordinance, from land use, circulation, site planning standards, design guidelines, landscape design requirements, project phasing, and infrastructure requirements. Figure 1: Condominium (12-pack) concept character rendering Figure 2: San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Land Use Map In many cases, it establishes standards that go beyond those included in the General Plan, or that are tailored to the needs of the project site. For that reason, the project will be evaluated against the requirements of the SLRSP to determine consistency with City planning policies. In certain instances, the SLRSP defers to the City’s zoning requirements, and where this is the case, it is noted in the analysis that follows. The applicant’s analysis of project’s design consistency is found on Sheet A2 of the project plans. The project has been reviewed for consistency with the SLRSP policies, in order to present a project that meets the intent of the Specific Plan and fully implements the goals for development of the San Luis Ranch Area. The ARC has reviewed the project and recommended the PC find the project consistent with Community Design and Specific Plan Guidelines. The proposal provides a variety of public/community open space features, including a central green area, shared streets and plazas, a creek walk, children’s gardens, a tot lot, natural play area, and pedestrian paseos. Conceptually, the Specific Plan shows a more centrally located open space component. The proposed project includes more dispersed open spaces and a community center. The project provides 263 SF of community open space per unit, while the SLRSP requires only 100 SF per unit. The project also has access to the proposed park in the single-family neighborhood (NG-10 within the Specific Plan) to the south and has improved access to Laguna Lake Park. 3.2 Consistency with Affordable Housing Requirements The City has recognized housing as an important issue. The City’s 2017-19 Financial Plan identifies affordable housing as a Major City Goal. The City’s Housing Element includes numerous policies and programs that support incentives, such as density bonuses, to provide housing for low, very low and extremely low-income households. The SLRSP as conceived accounts for a 20% density bonus for achieving affordable housing goals, and the project as proposed reflects this. Both the SLRSP and the Development Agreement for the project require that development within the Specific Plan area include sufficient affordable housing to be consistent with Housing Element policies related to this issue (the SLRSP and Development Agreement are consistent with one another). In both documents, development in the NG-30 zone is required to provide 26 deed- restricted units that are affordable to very low-income households. The Housing Plan within the Development Agreement also requires that the project provide 10 deed-restricted workforce housing units (i.e., affordable to households earning from 121-160% of the area’s median income) within the NG-30 zone. The proposed project provides the required affordable and workforce housing units, and their location is shown on Sheet A54 of the applicant’s plan set, but also shown in Figure 3 below. As shown in Figure 3, all 26 affordable units would be the smaller “efficiency units” and would be clustered in two adjacent buildings as shown in green in the figure. Although the number of deed restricted units in this NG-30 portion of the SLRSP is consistent with the SLRSP and Development Agreement, the cluster concept which keeps the dedicated “very low” units within the “efficiency unit” portion of the project is not consistent with Housing Element Policy6. The mix of deed restricted affordable units should be representative of the overall product mix in the NG-30 portion of the project including size, basic quality, appearance, and amenities. Condition No. 14 (Draft Resolution, Attachment 1) has been provided to require the locations of the 26 deed- restricted “very low” income level affordable units to be dispersed throughout the development and be representative of the overall product mix consistent with Housing Element Policy. With respect to the workforce housing requirement, the affordable housing proposal appears to demonstrate the 10 deed-restricted workforce units are sufficiently intermixed among the housing products among the different housing products throughout the project site. Condition No. 14 also includes language to ensure the sizes of the workforce units are comparable to the market mix. 6 Housing Element (HE) Policy 4.1: “Within newly developed neighborhoods, housing that is affordable to various economic strata should be intermixed rather than segregated into separate enclave s…” HE Policy 4.2: “Include both market-rate and affordable units in apartment and residential condominium projects and intermix the types of units. Affordable units should be comparable in size, appearance and basic quality to market -rate units.” Figure 3: Proposed Location of Affordable and Workforce Housing 3.3 Consistency with the Zoning Regulations The SLRSP includes standards and requirements that in many cases supersede those in the Zoning Regulations. These include issues such as allowed land uses, setbacks, building heights, landscaping, and signage, among others. In other cases, the SLRSP defers to the zoning regulations, notably for issues such as lighting, parking (in some cases), walls/fences. Table 1 summarizes the project’s characteristics, providing context within the framework of both the SLRSP and application zoning regulations. The project is consistent with applicable Zoning Regulations. 3.4 Consistency with the Subdivision Regulations The subdivision component of the project (Vesting Tentative Tract Map - VTTM) requires a Planning Commission recommendation and final approval by the City Council. The VTTM provides for private ownership of the various multi-family housing products. The SLRSP includes lot requirements within the NG-30 zone, however the Subdivision Regulations also include additional requirements for common interest subdivisions. As the project is an airspace condominium project, additional requirements of the Subdivision Regulations address issues related to private open space, common open space, common recreational facilities, storage and laundry facilities. The differences between what is proposed and required under the City’s subdivision requirements are summarized in Table 2 under Section 4.0 of this staff report. With the exception of the minor exceptions discussed below for open space, the proposed project meets or exceeds these requirements, especially with respect to common open space and recreation facilities, storage and laundry facilities (see Section 3.1 of this staff report for additional discussion related to public/common open space). The applicant requests two exceptions to the subdivision requirements that relate to private and common open space. These include: 1. Private open space dimensions to be 10 feet by 5 feet, rather than the required 10 feet by 6 feet for Unit Types B and D within the Efficiency Buildings (totaling 48 units). 2. Total combined private and common open space for the entire development to be 391 SF per unit, rather than the required 400 SF per unit. The proposed project exceeds open space requirements identified for the Specific Plan (Table 1, below) and deviations from the standard Subdivision Regulation open space requirements are very minor. The project also provides a desirable range of unit configurations and units sizes including efficiency units which range from 380-580 square feet and which are the only units that do not fully meet the standard Subdivision Regulations for private open space. Findings for the requested exceptions to the Subdivision Regulations, pursuant to Section 16.17.110.C have been incorporated into the Draft Resolution (Attachment 2) recommending final approval of the Subdivision to the City Council. 3.5 Architectural Review Commission Directional Items The ARC recommended three directional items to be reviewed and evaluated prior to taking final action on the project design. The applicant has made the following changes in response to the directional items: ARC Directional Item #1: The applicant should revise the proposed signage on the Condo Buildings to be better integrated into the architectural character of the structures. Response: The applicant has eliminated the signage above the entries for the Condo Buildings, as the entries do not face any street or parking area and signage was determined to be unnecessary at this location. ARC Directional Item #2: The applicant should revise the proposed signage plan to provide illumination on the proposed directional signage. Response: The applicant has added a note to the project plans (Sheet A7) that the directory signage will include illumination that is compliant with the City’s Municipal Code. ARC Directional Item #3: The applicant should consider providing a lighter color palette and more variation related to articulations and materials of the townhome buildings. Response: The applicant has revised the townhome buildings to provide a lighter color scheme and improved variation between materials. The ARC was specifically concerned with the contrast between board and batten, trim boards, and stucco with no variation in roofing materials. The ARC was also concerned with the articulation of the townhomes in specific locations, the ARC made a recommendation to replace a portion of the vertical lap siding with horizontal siding in the center of the building (Figure 4 & 5). The applicant has responded to the ARC concerns and incorporated the comments into the project plans. Figure 4: Rendering of Townhome Building 300, revised (left) previous ARC review (right) Figure 5: Rendering of Townhome Building 600B, revised (left) previous ARC review (right) 4.0 PROJECT STATISTICS Table 1 - Development Review Project Statistics Site Details Proposed Allowed/Required Number of Dwellings 296 Up to 299 Building Setbacks 10 feet along Madonna Road 5 feet Creek Setbacks 35 feet from Prefumo Creek; 20 feet from Cerro San Luis Channel 35 feet from Prefumo Creek; 20 feet from Cerro San Luis Channel (per Municipal Code 17.70.170) Maximum Height of Structures 40 feet; 3 stories 40 feet; 3 stories (Per SLRSP Table 3-3) Maximum Building Coverage 70.5% 100% (per SLRSP Table 3-3) Private Yard/Outdoor Space Multifamily 118 SF per unit, 60 SF for upper level units 100 SF per unit, 50 SF for upper level units Townhomes 191 SF per with at least one space with min dimension of 8 feet 100 SF per unit with at least one space with min dimension of 8 feet (Per SLRSP Table 3-3) Community Open Space 77,765 SF (360 SF/unit) 21,600 SF (100 SF/unit) (Not required for Townhomes, per SLRSP Table 3-3) Signage Compliant with Table 3-11 SLRSP Table 3-11 Parking Automobile spaces 491 (322 covered; 11 ADA) 394 (80 covered; 8 ADA) Bicycle Parking (Long Term) Short Term 600 70 592 60 Motorcycle Parking 25 25 Electric Vehicle Parking 26% EV ready; 61% EV capable 10% EV ready; 50% EV capable Table 2 – Common Interest Subdivision Project Statistics Site Details Proposed Allowed/Required Private Open Space 100 SF per unit, 50 SF for upper level units (SLRSP) Minimum dimensions of 10 feet by 5 feet 100 SF per unit, 50 SF for upper level units (SLRSP) Minimum dimensions of 10 feet by 6 feet Common Open Space 263 SF per unit 100 SF per unit Combined Total Open Space 391 SF per unit 400 SF per unit Common Recreation Facilities 263 SF per unit of outdoor recreation facilities 40 SF per unit of outdoor recreation facilities Storage 200 cubic feet per unit 200 cubic feet per unit Laundry Facilities Washer and dryer provided within each unit One washer and dryer per each 10 units 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The project, including the VTTM and development facilitated by that VTTM, is consistent with the certified Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for SLRSP and exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15182 (Residential Projects Implementing Specific Plans). On July 18, 2017, the City Council certified the FEIR for the SLRSP and approved the SLRSP through Council Resolution 10822 (2017 Series). A Final Supplemental EIR to address modifications to the phasing plan within the SLRSP was certified by the City Council on July 17, 2018, through Council Resolution 10927 (2018 Series). All mitigation measures adopted as part of the SLRSP FEIR and FSEIR that are applicable to the proposed project are carried forward and applied to the proposed project to effectively mitigate the impacts that were previously identified. The project is exempt from the provisions of the CEQA under Government Code §65457 because the project consists of a residential development and is consistent with the SLRSP, which was approved following certification of the SLRSP FEIR in 2017. No Supplemental Environmental Impact Report is required pursuant to Public Resources Code §21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 because: 1) the project does not include or require any revisions to the certified SLRSP FEIR or FSEIR; 2) no substantial changes would occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken, and no revisions to the SLRSP FEIR or FSEIR are required; and 3) no new information of substantial importance is available that was not already known at the time the SLRSP FEIR and FSEIR were certified. With respect to the requested exceptions to the Subdivision Regulations, these exceptions are minor as described in Section 3.4 of this staff report and do not conflict with the Subdivision Map Act and do not have the potential to result in any adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, the project is in substantial conformance with the intent of the SLRSP, including requirements related to project design, including open space. For that reason, the existing certified CEQA documentation related to the SLRSP and VTTM is adequate to address issues related to the requested exceptions to the Common Interest Subdivision Development Standards as outlined in the Subdivision Regulations. 6.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS The project has been reviewed by various City departments and divisions including; Planning, Engineering, Transportation, Natural Resources, Building, Utilities, and Fire. Comments have been incorporated into the draft resolution as conditions of approval. 7.0 ALTERNATIVES 1. Continue project. An action to continue the items should include a detailed list of additional information or analysis required. 2. Deny the project. An action denying the application should include findings that cite the basis for denial and should reference inconsistency with the General Plan, Community Design Guidelines, SLRSP, Zoning Regulations or other policy documents. Should the PC want to pursue this alternative, Staff recommends that the specific findings under Government Code § 65915(d)(1)(B) and (d)(3) are adequately addressed. 8.0 ATTACHMENTS 1.Draft Resolution – Development Plan Approval 2.Draft Resolution – Vesting Tentative Tract Map 3.Project Plans & Vesting Tentative Tract Map 4.ARC Staff Report and Draft Meeting Minutes 12-2-19 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda, City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo Minutes - Draft Planning Commission Minutes - Draft Planning Commission Regular Meeting Wednesday, March 11, 2020 CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Planning Commission was called to order on Wednesday, March 11, 2020 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Chair Wulkan. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Robert Jorgensen, Steve Kahn, John McKenzie, Nicholas Quincey, Charles Stevenson, Vice-Chair Hemalata Dandekar and Chair Mike Wulkan Absent: None Staff: Community Development Director Michael Codron, Principal Planner Tyler Corey, Assistant City Attorney Charles Bell, and Deputy City Clerk Kevin Christian Pledge of Allegiance 1. PRESENTATION City Manager Derek Johnson provided a presentation on “SLO Forward”. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA John Fowler PUBLIC HEARINGS Prior to introduction of the item, Commissioner Kahn recused himself and left the Chamber. 2. Project Address: 1035 Madonna; Case #: ARCH-0459-2019 & SBDV-0747-2019; Zone: C/OS-SP, R-4-SP; MI San Luis Ranch, LLC, owner and Coastal Community Builders, applicant. Development review of a 296-unit multi-family residential project within the NG- 30 zoned portion of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan area, and a Vesting Tentative Tract Map (Tract 3150) subdividing a portion of Tract 3096 from two existing lots into twelve to provide for 296 airspace condominiums with minor exceptions to the open space requirements for common interest subdivisions. Includes a determination that the project is consistent with the certified Final EIR (Environmental Impact Report) for San Luis Ranch Specific Plan and therefore exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 11, 2020 Page 2 of 4 Contract Planner John Rickenbach summarized the staff report, reviewed direction given by the Architectural Review Commission, and responded to Commission inquiries. Applicant representative Scott Martin, Principal Architect RRM Design Group, summarized the project focus area goals, provided a review of all components of the project, and responded to Commission inquiries. Chair Wulkan opened the public hearing. Public Comments Brett Cross Chair Wulkan closed the public hearing. Community Development Director Michael Codron, project developer Walter Heiberg, applicant representative Scott Martin, and San Luis Ranch Biologist LynneDee Althouse responded to further Commission questions, specifically addressing Lot 10. ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR DANDEKAR, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER JORGENSEN, CARRIED 6-0-1-0 (Commission Kahn recused) to adopt a Resolution entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 296-UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITHIN THE NG-30 ZONED PORTION OF THE SAN LUIS RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AREA, AND A DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CERTIFIED FINAL EIR FOR SAN LUIS RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AND EXEMPT FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA); AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED MARCH 11, 2020 (1035 MADONNA ROAD, ARCH-0459-2019);” with conditions and findings revised as presented by staff and modification of Condition # 15 A to clarify that affordable housing may be clustered into one or more buildings, removing the language “shall”, and Condition #15 B to add “in addition to the 34 very-low income affordable housing units already required on the NC site through previous project entitlements” at the end of the condition Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 11, 2020 Page 3 of 4 ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER McKENZIE, SECOND BY VICE CHAIR DANDEKAR, CARRIED 6-0-1-0 (Commission Kahn recused) to adopt a Resolution entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP WITHIN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 3096 TO CREATE CONDOMINIUM OWNERSHIP SPACE WITHIN THE 296 UNITS APPROVED BY DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL ARCH-0459-2019 WITHIN THE NG-30 ZONE OF THE SAN LUIS RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN, WITH REQUESTED EXCEPTIONS TO THE MINIMUM DIMENSIONS OF PRIVATE OPEN SPACE, AND THE TOTAL COMBINED PRIVATE AND COMMON OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT FOR EACH UNIT, AND A DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CERTIFIED FINAL EIR FOR SAN LUIS RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AND EXEMPT FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA); AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED MARCH 11, 2020 (1035 MADONNA ROAD, SBDV-0747- 2019);” with conditions and findings revised as presented by staff and adding a condition that Lot 10 be considered for a possible passive pocket park. RECESS The Commission recessed from 8:34 to 8:42. The meeting reconvened with all members present. 3. General Plan Annual Report Housing Intern Graham Bultema presented the staff report and responded to Commission inquiries. The Commission provided general input for clarification and clerical revisions to the report. Chair Wulkan opened the public hearing. Public Comments None Chair Wulkan closed the public hearing ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KAHN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER QUINCEY, CARRIED 7-0-0 to receive and file the General Plan Annual Report. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 11, 2020 Page 4 of 4 COMMENT AND DISCUSSION 4. Agenda Forecast – Principal Planner Tyler Corey provided an update of upcoming projects. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:12 p.m. The next Regular Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, March 25, 2020, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: XX/XX/2020