Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-01-2013 ac ricci ph1RECEIVED OCT 012013 CLERK 'council mcmoRanbum Em DATE: October 1, 2013 AGENDA CORRESPONDENCE TO: City Council Date 1D - VIA: Katie Lichtig, City Manager FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director BY: Pam Ricci, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Public Hearing Item No. 1; Vesting Tentative Map No. 3044 at 3725 Orcutt Road (Wingate Holdings, LLC, applicant) This memo responds to several questions related to the project raised by Council Member Christianson. 1. Why is the total number of 'residential units listed as 142 on PH-1, but listed as 132 on PH-3? The total number of individual residential units in the project is 142 including 45 single-family homes, 33 single-family attached terrace homes, 12 loft -style apartments, and 52 senior flats, as stated at the bottom of PH-1. The discussion under "Affordable Housing Density Bonus & Incentives" in the second paragraph on Page PH-3 is a summary of project density. The 132 number is correct; it refers to the total number of density units (as opposed to the total number of ' residential units which is 142). Any unit with two or more bedrooms has a value of 1.0 (all of the SFDs, Row Houses, & Lofts); however, some of the senior apartments are one -bedrooms with a value of 0.66. Therefore, the density units (42) for the senior apartments is lower than the total number of project units (52). This lowers the overall project density to 132 which is under the 136 units allowed with the 33% density bonus (102 base density + 34 = 136 units). There is a detailed discussion of the zoning, density and affordable housing on pages 7 & 8 of the 8-28-13 Planning Commission report (Attachment 4). 2. What is the status of ARC review of the project? Is it appropriate for the City Council to approve the map before the ARC has completed their review of the development plans? Council Memo — VT< 3044 - Wingate; Project at 3725 Orcutt Road (PH # l ) Page 2 of 2 The ARC reviewed the project conceptually with an introduction to the project on May 6, 2013. The Council is approving the tentative map which establishes the lot pattern, street network and other improvements. Until these features of the development are set, the final design of the housing, landscaping, park, and other improvements cannot occur. This is the reason it has become City practice for the final design review by the ARC to occur after the tentative map is approved by the City Council. It is not, uncommon for project details to be worked out after the tentative map approval is granted but before the final map is returned to Council for final approval and recordation after all conditions have been satisfied. 3. What is the project's requirement for park fees? Unit Type 2013 OASP Park # Units in Total Fee Improvement Fee Project Single -Family $12,719 78 $992,082 Residential Multi -Family $9,359 64 $598,058 Residential $1,591,058 4. Why is the Council considering a complete waiver of park fees if the City's Subdivision regulations say 50% as the maximum? As the staff report states, on pages PHI-4, the applicant is requesting to waive the park fees entirely based on the proposal to dedicate the land and improvements to the City as a public one -acre park. The Subdivision Regulations allow up to one- half of a dedication or fee waiver for a private recreation facility. The option for the entire fee waiver will depend on the final determination of the Parks & Recreation Commission on the suitability of the facility as a public park and its consistency with OASP Program 2.3.4a. The deferral of park fees is listed as an eligible alternative incentive for affordable housing projects listed in Section 17.90.060 of the City's Zoning Regulations. Condition # 54 stipulates that specific plans for the development of the park return to the Parks & Recreation Commission with final approval of the park design by the ARC. In addition to the physical design of the park, the Parks & Recreation Commission would weigh in with a recommendation on the specific terms of any fee waiver. The Commission's recommendation would be considered by the Community Development, Parks & Recreation, and Public Works Directors in definingthe specific terms of the waiver of park fees in the Affordable Housing Agreement (Condition #2 in Section 4 of the Draft Resolution). Please call Pam Ricci at extension #7168 (781-7168) if you have any questions.