The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12-04-2023 ARC Agenda Packet Architectural Review Commission AGENDA Monday, December 4, 2023, 5:00 p.m. Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo The Architectural Review Commission holds in-person meetings. Zoom participation will not be supported at this time. INSTRUCTIONS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT: Public Comment prior to the meeting (must be received 3 hours in advance of the meeting): Mail - Delivered by the U.S. Postal Service. Address letters to the City Clerk's Office at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, 93401. Email - Submit Public Comments via email to advisorybodies@slocity.org. In the body of your email, please include the date of the meeting and the item number (if applicable). Emails will not be read aloud during the meeting. Voicemail - Call (805) 781-7164 and leave a voicemail. Please state and spell your name, the agenda item number you are calling about, and leave your comment. Verbal comments must be limited to 3 minutes. Voicemails will not be played during the meeting. *All correspondence will be archived and distributed to members, however, submissions received after the deadline may not be processed until the following day. Public Comment during the meeting: Meetings are held in-person. To provide public comment during the meeting, you must be present in the Council Chambers. Electronic Visual Aid Presentation. To conform with the City's Network Access and Use Policy, Chapter 1.3.8 of the Council Policies & Procedures Manual, members of the public who desire to utilize electronic visual aids to supplement their oral presentation are encouraged to provide display-ready material to the City Clerk by 12:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Contact the City Clerk's Office at cityclerk@slocity.org or (805) 781-7114. Pages 1.CALL TO ORDER Chair Mayou will call the Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission to order. 2.PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA The public is encouraged to submit comments on any subject within the jurisdiction of the Architectural Review Commission that does not appear on this agenda. Although the Commission will not take action on items presented during the Public Comment Period, the Chair may direct staff to place an item on a future agenda for discussion. 3.CONSENT Matters appearing on the Consent Calendar are expected to be non- controversial and will be acted upon at one time. A member of the public may request the Architectural Review Commission to pull an item for discussion. The public may comment on any and all items on the Consent Agenda within the three-minute time limit. 3.a CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - OCTOBER 30, 2023 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES 5 Recommendation: To approve the Architectural Review Commission Minutes of October 30, 2023. 4.PUBLIC HEARING Note: The action of the Architectural Review Commission is a recommendation to the Community Development Director, another advisory body, or to City Council and, therefore, is not final and cannot be appealed. 4.a 460 PACIFIC (ARCH-0110-2023) REVIEW OF A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF A THREE-STORY 6,065 SQUARE FOOT APARTMENT BUILDING, WITH A 26% DENSITY BONUS AND A 100% VEHICULAR PARKING REDUCTION 9 Recommendation: Review the proposed project in terms of its consistency with the Community Design Guidelines and provide comments and recommendations to the Community Development Director. 5.COMMENT AND DISCUSSION 5.a STAFF UPDATES AND AGENDA FORECAST Receive a brief update from Senior Planner Rachel Cohen. 6.ADJOURNMENT The next Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission is scheduled for February 5, 2024 at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo. The Regular Meeting of January 1, 2024 will be cancelled due to the New Years Day holiday. The Regular Meeting of January 15, 2024 will be cancelled due to the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday. LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES are available -- see the Clerk The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7114 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410. Agenda related writings or documents provided to the Architectural Review Commission are available for public inspection on the City’s website, under the Public Meeting Agendas web page: https://www.slocity.org/government/mayor- and-city-council/agendas-and-minutes. Meeting video recordings can be found on the City’s website: http://opengov.slocity.org/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=60946&dbid=0&repo=CityCl erk 1 Architectural Review Commission Minutes October 30, 2023, 5:00 p.m. Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo Commissioners Present: Commissioner Kelley Abbas, Commissioner Robert Arens, Commissioner John Carrion, Vice Chair Brian Pineda Commissioners Absent: Commissioner Michael Clark, Chair Ashley Mayou City Staff Present: Senior Planner Rachel Cohen, Deputy City Clerk Kevin Christian _____________________________________________________________________ 1. CALL TO ORDER A Special Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Architectural Review Commission was called to order on October 30, 2023, at 5:07 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, by Vice Chair Pineda. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA Public Comments: None --End of Public Comment-- 3. CONSENT 3.a CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - OCTOBER 2, 2023, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES Motion By Commissioner Arens Second By Commissioner Abbas Approve the Architectural Review Commission Minutes of October 2, 2023. CARRIED Page 5 of 49 2 4. PUBLIC HEARING 4.a 3805 ORCUTT ROAD (ARCH-0455-2022) REVIEW OF SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS FOR FOUR (4) LOTS IN ENCLAVE AT RIGHETTI. THE PROJECT INCLUDES DEVIATIONS FROM THE STREETSIDE SETBACK AND GARAGE SETBACK STANDARDS Associate Planner Hannah Hanh presented the staff report and responded to Commission inquiries. Applicant representative, TJ Esser, reviewed the needs for the requested exceptions and responded to questions raised. Vice Chair Pineda opened the Public Hearing Public Comments: Travis Fuentez --End of Public Comment-- Vice Chair Pineda closed the Public Hearing Motion By Vice Chair Pineda Second By Commissioner Carrion Recommend to the Community Development Director that the project is consistent with the Orcutt Area Specific Plan and Community Design Guidelines and that the applicant's justifications for requested exceptions to the streetside setback for Lot 1 and the garage setback standard for Lots 1 and 6 are sufficient. Ayes (4): Commissioner Abbas, Commissioner Arens, Commissioner Carrion, and Vice Chair Pineda Absent (2): Commissioner Clark, and Chair Mayou CARRIED (4 to 0) 5. COMMENT AND DISCUSSION 5.a STAFF UPDATES AND AGENDA FORECAST Senior Planner Rachel Cohen provided an update of upcoming projects. Page 6 of 49 3 6. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 5:42 p.m. The next Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Commission is scheduled for November 20, 2023 at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo. The Regular Meeting on November 6, 2023 will be canceled. _________________________ APPROVED BY ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION: XX/XX/2023 Page 7 of 49 Page 8 of 49 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: REVIEW OF A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF A THREE- STORY 6,065 SQUARE FOOT APARTMENT BUILDING, WITH A 26% DENSITY BONUS AND A 100% VEHICULAR PARKING REDUCTION. THE PROJECT IS PROPOSED ON A LOT WITH AN EXISTING RESIDENCE THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE DEMOL BY: Kyle Bell, Housing Coordinator FROM: Rachel Cohen Phone Number: (805) 781-7524 Phone Number: (805) 781-7574 Email: kbell@slocity.org Email: rcohen@slocity.org PROJECT ADDRESS: 460 Pacific APPLICATION #: ARCH-0110-2023 APPLICANT: John Tricamo RECOMMENDATION Review the proposed project in terms of its consistency with the Community Design Guidelines and provide comments and recommendations to the Community Development Director. 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SETTING The proposed project consists of a new 5,722 square foot, three-story (with lofts), residential structure that includes 10 residential dwelling units. The project will demolish the existing residence on the site to allow for the development of the project proposal (Attachment A, Project Plans). In accordance with Zoning Regulations Section 17.140.040, the project includes a density bonus of 26% to increase the density allowance of the property from 4 density units to 5.55 density units, which is rounded to 6 density units under Density Bonus Law (Government Code § 65915). To qualify for the density bonus, the project must provide at least 1 unit (14% of the base density allowance) dedicated to low-income households. The proposed project includes 1 unit to be dedicated to a low-income household. Density Bonus Law mandates that public agencies provide a density bonus and relax development standards through incentives, concessions or waivers if a proposed project includes a prescribed percentage of affordable housing. The project is requesting waivers from the following development standards; maximum height extension of 40 feet where 35 is normally required, 100% parking reduction, side yard setback reduction of 0 feet where 10 feet is normally required along the north property line, and an upper story setback reduction along the west property line for 5 feet where 10 fe et is normally required. The applicant has provided justification statements of the proposed waivers as part of the project description (Attachment D, Affordable Housing Summary). The Community Development Director will review these aspects of the proposal after receiving the ARC’s recommendation. Meeting Date: 12/4/2023 Item Number: 4a Time Estimate: 45 minutes Page 9 of 49 Item 4a ARCH-0110-2023 Architectural Review Commission Report – 12/4/2023 General Location: The 0.09-acre project site is located mid-block along Pacific Street, between the Pacific and Carmel and Beach and Pacific intersections. General Plan and Zoning: High-Density Residential (R-4) zone. Surrounding Uses: East: (R-4) Single-Family Residential West: (R-4) Multi-family Residences North: (C-R) Office South: (R-4) Multi-family Residences 2.0 PROPOSED DESIGN Architecture: Contemporary Design details: Flat roof with expanded eaves, covered awnings, decorative balconies, horizontal windows, stacked bond concrete wall, and street -oriented entryway. Materials and Color: Stucco siding with a smooth finish (off-white), accent stucco siding with a smooth finish (yellow), accent horizontal lap siding (grey-green). 3.0 FOCUS OF REVIEW The Architectural Review Commission’s (ARC’s) role is to 1) review the proposed project in terms of consistency with the Community Design Guidelines, and applicable City Standards; and 2) provide comments and recommendations to the Community Development Director concerning the proposed project design, focusing on building architecture and layout. Community Design Guidelines: https://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=2104 Figure 1: Aerial View of 460 Pacific Figure 2: Rendering from Pacific Street facing North. Page 10 of 49 Item 4a ARCH-0110-2023 Architectural Review Commission Report – 12/4/2023 4.0 COMMUNITY DESIGN GUIDELINES / DISCUSSION ITEMS The proposed development must be consistent with the requirements of the General Plan, Zoning Regulations, and Community Design Guidelines (CDG). Staff has identified the discussion items below related to consistency with CDG. The CDG address specific development types rather than zoning districts, and since the project consists of a residential development in the R-4 zone, staff has applied the following chapters of the CDG to address compatibility of the proposed use and design of the site in context of the neighborhood: Chapter 2 (General Design Principles) and Chapter 5 (Multi-Family and Clustered Housing Design). Highlighted Sections Discussion Items Chapter 2 – General Design Principles §2.1 – Site Design The project site is located on a parcel zoned R-4, with single-family residential use to the east, office use to the north, and multi-family residential uses to the west and south. The project site design and architecture do not appear to fit the context of the neighborhood. The ARC should discuss how the project fits in with the best examples of appropriate site design and architecture in the vicinity of the site. Chapter 5 – Section 5.3 (Infill Development) §5.3.C: Visual Impacts from Building Height The CDG states that infill projects should be consistent with the surrounding residential structures, taller structures should set back upper floors to reduce impacts on adjacent smaller homes. The proposed project does not set back upper floors and the ARC should discuss the project’s proportionality and size, building setbacks and massing, and application of colors and materials relative to the adjacent properties. Chapter 5 – Section 5.4 (Multi-Family and Clustered Housing Design) §5.4.A Site Planning The CDG states that multi-family units that consist of 10 or more units outside of Downtown should separate the units into structures of six or fewer units. Due to the site constraints and number of units, the project does not feasibly appear to be able to comply with separating the units into separate structures. The ARC should discuss whether design changes are necessary to address compliance with CDG for high density multi-family development projects. §5.4.C.1 Façade and Roof Articulation The CDG states that a structure with three or more attached units should incorporate significant wall and roof articulation to reduce apparent scale. It appears the project could benefit from more articulation to Page 11 of 49 Item 4a ARCH-0110-2023 Architectural Review Commission Report – 12/4/2023 5.0 HOUSING ACCOUNTABILITY ACT/DENSITY BONUS LAW The Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Housing Accountability Act and Density Bonus Law provide protections for housing development projects, which include density bonuses. Government Code § 65915(d) (1)(B) and (d)(3) prevent an agency from denying the density bonus or the incentive or concession or refusing to waive or reduce development standards, unless the agency can make a finding based on substantial evidence that the density bonus, the incentive or concession or the waiver or reduction in a development standard causes a “specific, adverse impact” upon the public health, safety, or the physical environment, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact.1 Staff has provided a summary of the Housing Accountability Act and Density Bonus law as it pertains to this project as reference for the ARC (Attachment D, Housing Accountability Act Summary). Although the ARC cannot make recommendations that reduce the number and size of the proposed residential units within the project, the Commission may provide direction to the applicant regarding architecture and site planning which includes items such as architectural features, roof design, colors, materials, site layout, etc. 1 Government Code § 65589.5(j)(1). Definition of ‘Specific, Adverse Impact’: Significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete address the mass and scale of the structure. The ARC should discuss if the proposed design incorporates sufficient façade and roof articulation to reduce the apparent scale. §5.4.C.2 Scale The CDG states that structures with greater height may require additional setbacks at the ground floor level and/or upper levels along the street frontage so that they do not visually dominate the neighborhood. The project provides a setback on the north side of the first floor and angular wall planes on the front façade facing the street but does not step back the upper levels. The ARC should discuss the project’s scale and mass and discuss whether design changes are necessary to reduce the perceived scale of the project within the neighborhood. Page 12 of 49 Item 4a ARCH-0110-2023 Architectural Review Commission Report – 12/4/2023 6.0 PROJECT STATISTICS Site Details Proposed Allowed/Required* Density 6 Density Units (26% Density Bonus) 4 Density Units Setbacks Front Side Rear 10 feet 5-10 feet 0 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet Maximum Height 39.5 (rounded to 40) feet 35 feet Floor Area Ratio 1.51 No limit Max Lot Coverage 53.7% 60% Tree Removals 2 trees (1:1) (supported by the City Arborist) 2 trees (under authority of City Arborist) Affordable Housing On-site (1 low-income units) On-site Public Art Not Required Vehicle and Bicycle Parking Number of Vehicle Spaces EV Spaces 0 (100% reduction) 0 (EV ready) 0 (EV capable) 11 1 (EV ready) 3 (EV capable) Bicycle Spaces Short-term Long-term 2 20 2 20 Motorcycle Parking 0 0 Environmental Status Categorically exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects) 7.0 ACTION OPTIONS 7.1 Recommend approval of the project. An action recommending approval of the application based on consistency with the Community Design Guidelines will be forwarded to the Community Development Director for final action. This action may include specific directions or recommendations for conditions of approval to address consistency with the Community Design Guidelines. 7.2 Continue the project to a hearing date certain, or uncertain. An action continuing the application should include direction to the applicant and staff on pertinent issues, with references to specific CDG. 7.3 Recommend denial the project. An action recommending denial of the application should include findings that cite the basis for denial and should reference inconsistency with the General Plan, Community Design Guidelines, Zoning Regulations, or other policy documents. Should the ARC want to pursue this alternative, Staff recommends that the specific findings under Government Code § 65915(d)(1)(B) and (d)(3) (Density Bonus Law) ar e adequately addressed, as well as the findings required by Government Code § 65589.5(d) (Housing Accountability Act). Page 13 of 49 Item 4a ARCH-0110-2023 Architectural Review Commission Report – 12/4/2023 8.0 ATTACHMENTS A – Project Plans B – Parking Reduction Summary C – Affordable Housing Summary D – Housing Accountability Act Summary Page 14 of 49 460 PACIFIC ST.ENTITLEMENTS PACKAGE, 06/19/2023Prepared by TEN OVER STUDIO93Page 15 of 49 Page 16 of 49 CLIENTJOHN TRICAMOSAN LUIS OBISPO, CAjohn@tricamo.usARCHITECT & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TEN OVER STUDIO539 MARSH ST., SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401805.541.1010CONTACT: JOEL SNYDER joels@tenoverstudio.comPROJECT INFO & DATA T1.0PROJECT INFO & DATA T1.1CONTEXTUAL SITE PLAN T1.2SITE SURVEY T1.3TREE REMOVAL T1.4EXISTNG TREE INFORMATION T1.5PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN PGD-1PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN PUT-2LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN L1.0PLANTING IMAGES L1.1FENCE & WALL DETAILS L1.2MWELO IRRIGATION CALCS. L1.3SITE PLAN A1.0FLOOR PLANS A2.0FLOOR PLANS A2.1EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A3.0MATERIAL BOARD A3.1PROJECT IMAGES A4.1 TO A4.4CONTACTSindex & *-.+% *, )+ **)& !$" !$" # ARCHITECT, TEN OVER STUDIO INC.04/18/2023 ARCHITECT TEN OCIVIL ENGINEERABOVE GRADE ENGINEERING245 HIGUERA ST., SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401805.540.5115CONTACT: SCOTT STOKESscott@abovegradeengineering.comPage 17 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com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age 18 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 06/19/2023T1.13$5.,1*5(48,5(' 86( 81,7&2817256) 3$5.,1*)$&725 63$&(65(48,5('5(6,'(17,$/678',2%' %'81,76 727$/5(48,5(' 727$/3529,'(' $'$63$&(6 86( 63$&(63529,'(' $'$)$&725 $'$5(48,5('5(6,'(17,$/ 2)63$&(6 5(4 '727$/ 3529,'('727$/ 9$167'(95(48,5(' 86( 63$&(63529,'(' (9)$&725 (95(48,5('5(6,'(17,$/ (9&$3$%/((95($'<5(4 '727$/ 3529,'('727$/ 9$167'(902725&<&/( 86( 63$&(63529,'(' 3$5.,1*)$&725 02725&<&/(5(4 '5(6,'(17,$/ #63&6 5(4 '727$/ 3529,'('727$/ 127(3$5.,1*)$&7256$5(%$6('21&$'(1,6,7<%218667$78(6(&7,21S$3$5.,1*5('8&7,21,65(48(67('$1',61(&(66$5<72&203/(7(7+(352-(&7$77+($//2:(''(16,7<9(+,&8/$53$5.,1*&$/&8/$7,216127(3$5.,1*)$&7256%$6('21&$'(16,7<%2186/$:$'8V127&2817(',13$5.,1*81,7&28175(6,'(17,$/ 81,76 81,7 5(4 '727$/ 6+2577(50 /21*7(50 727$/3529,'(')52176(7%$&. ,181,7 &2857<$5' 727$/ %,.(3$5.,1*3529,'('%,&<&/(3$5.,1*&$/&8/$7,216%,.(3$5.,1*5(48,5('81,7&2817256) 6+2577(50 /21*7(50 727$/5(48,5('%,.(3$5.,1*63$&(6$5(3529,'(',16,'(($&+67)/22581,7'(',&$7('*5281')/225%,.(/2&.(563$&($1',181,7%,.(3$5.,1*63$&(6,63529,'(')25($&+1'$1'5')/22581,76+2577(503($.5$.67</(63$&(6$5(3529,'('$'-$&(17727+(%8,/',1*(175<'(16,7<%21860,1,080/2:$))25'$%/( '(16,7<%2186'(16,7<$//2:(' '(16,7<81,765281'8372'(16,7<81,76'(16,7<&$/& 81,77<3(678',2%(' %(' 727$/352326(' $))25'$%/(81,76'(16,7<81,76#$))25'$%/( '85281'68372'8%'/2:,1&20(81,7 '8$&5(6'(16,7<$//2:('81,7&2817 '8)$&725 '(16,7<81,76'(16,7<81,763$5&(/'(16,7<&$/&8/$7,216%$6('(16,7<$//2:('/276,=(81,7 6,=(6)6) !6) %' %' %'),567)/225 81,7 ;81,7 ;81,7 ;6(&21')/225 81,7 ;81,7 ;81,7 ;7+,5')/225 81,7 ;81,7 ;81,7 ;81,7 ;727$/ $))25'$%/(81,76 81,7 6,=(6)6)6%' %' %' ;727$/ $&&(66,%/(81,76$//*5281')/22581,766+$//%($'$37$%/($1'21$1$&&(66,%/(5287(727$/81,76 $9(5$*(81,76) 81,77<3(6$9(5$*(81,76,=(727$/81,76) &29 ''(&.6) 0$,12&&6) ,1&,'(17$/6) $&&(6625<6) %/'*727$/),567)/225 6(&21')/225 7+,5')/225 1(7%8,/',1*$5($86( 52201$0( 0$,12&&6) ,1&,'(17$/6) $&&(6625<6)),567)/225 5 81,7 5 81,7 5 81,7 &,5&8/$7,21 727$/ $5($ 6(&21')/225 5 81,7 5 81,7 5 81,7 &,5&8/$7,21 727$/ $5($ 7+,5')/225 5 81,7 5 81,7 5 81,7 5 81,7 &,5&8/$7,21 727$/ $5($ 1(7)/225$5($638%/,& 35,9$7(&29 ''(&. %/'*727$/),567)/225 6(&21')/225 7+,5')/225 23(163$&(&$/&8/$7,21606/19/202393Page 19 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 06/19/2023T1.2C-RC-RC-RC-SR-4R-4R-4C-DC-DR-4R-4PROJECTSITEEXISTING BUILDING ON SITE TO BE DEMOLISHED22-STORY APARTMENT BUILDING11-STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL32-STORY APARTMENT BUILDING64-STORY MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT5123582-STORY APARTMENT BUILDING83-STORY SENIOR LIVING FACILITY776PROJECT SITE FROMDOWNTOWN CONCEPT PLAN44THE SITE’S SURROUNDING CONTEXT CONTAINS BUILDINGS IN A WIDE RANGE OF STYLES - FROM CRAFTSMAN STYLE HOUSES (3), MISSION STYLE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS (4), AND MID CENTURY APARTMENTS (8). IN ADDITION, THE SURROUNDING BUILDINGS RANGE IN HEIGHT. THE BUILDINGS ADJACENT AND ACROSS FROM THE PROPERTY ARE 2-STORY APARTMENT BUILDINGS (1) & (6). THERE IS ALSO A LARGE 3-STORY SENIOR LIVING FACILITY IN THE SAME BLOCK (7). THE ECLECTIC MIX OF STYLES AND BUILDING HEIGHTS CONTRIBUTE TO THE OVERALL LOOK AND FEEL OF THIS DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD AND OPEN UP THE POSSIBILITIES OF WHAT CAN BE PLACED ON OUR SITE (2). FINALLY, THE PROJECT SITE AS DEPICTED IN THE REVISED DOWNTOWN CONCEPT PLAN SHOWS A RECTANGULAR SHAPED BUILDING THAT ENCOMPASSES THE MAJORITY OF THE SITE. OUR PROJECT’S SITE DESIGN SHARES THIS VISION AND HELPS TO BRING DENSITY AND MUCH NEEDED HOUSING TO THIS AREA OF DOWNTOWN SAN LUIS OBISPO.CONTEXTUAL SITE PLAN06/19/20239306/19/202393Page 20 of 49 PROJECT SITE(EXISTING BUILDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED)PARKING TO BE RESTRIPED PER A1.0 AREA NOT IN SCOPE.Page 21 of 49 PROJECT SITEtree #1TREE removaltree #2legendEXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVEDQTY: 2Page 22 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 06/19/2023EXISTING TREE INFORMATIONTREE 1SPECIES: Pittosporum tenuifolium (Thin Leaved Pittosporum)SIZE: 20-25’ TALL x 12-15’ WideCONDITION / HEALTH: Good overall, some co-leaders & included barkREGIONALLY NATIVE: NoVIEW FROM WEST VIEW FROM EASTVIEW FROM SOUTHVIEW FROM WESTTREE 2SPECIES: Maytenus boaria (Mayten)SIZE: 15’ TALL x 12’ WideCONDITION / HEALTH: Moderate overall, trunk has a lean, unbalanced canopy, interfering with overhead linesREGIONALLY NATIVE: No12VIEW FROM SOUTHEASTVIEW FROM EASTT1.506/19/202393Page 23 of 49 Page 24 of 49 Page 25 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 06/19/2023LANDSCAPE SITE PLANL1.0PACIFIC STREET(N) MULTI-FAMILYBUILDINGNOT IN SCOPE12234467109511111282222229KEYNOTESCONCRETE ADA RAMPSTREET TREEMAIN ENTRY PORCHPRIVATE PATIO SPACEPEDESTRIAN PASEO AND PATIO W/ INTERLOCKING PAVERSSHORT TERM BIKE PARKING (4)CONCRETE ACCESS WALKWAYSIDE YARD FENCINGLONG TERM BIKE PARKINGMECHANICAL EQUIPMENT PAD42" MIN. HEIGHT WALL, LEVEL TOPPRIVATE PATIO GATE12345678910111206/19/202393Page 26 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 06/19/2023L1.1SHOESTRING ACACIA VARIEGATED SMOOTH AGAVEDIAMOND HEIGHTS CARMEL CREEPERSPIRAL ALOECALISTOGA CALIFORNIA FUCHSIAEUROPEAN GREY SEDGETREESQTYBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMESIZEREMARKS2 Acacia stenophylla / Shoestring Acacia 24"box Size: to 30' Tall & 10'-20' WideWUCOLS PF: < .1SHRUBSQTYBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMESIZEREMARKS7 Agave desmetiana `Variegata` / Variegated Smooth Agave 1 gal Size: to 3' Tall & WideWUCOLS PF: .1-.39 Aloe polyphylla / Spiral Aloe 1 gal Size: 2' Tall & WideWUCOLS PF: .4-.610 Carex divulsa / European Grey Sedge 1 gal Size: 18" Tall x 2' WideWUCOLS PF: .1-.33 Ceanothus griseus horizontalis 'Diamond Heights' / Diamond Heights Carmel Creeper 1 gal Size: 1' Tall x 4-6' WideWUCOLS PF: .1-.318 Epilobium canum `Calistoga` / Calistoga California Fuchsia 1 gal Size: 2' Tall x 2' WideWUCOLS PF: .1-.3PLANT SCHEDULEplanting images06/19/202393Page 27 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 06/19/2023)52179,(:NOTES:1. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO APPROVE HARDWOOD FINISHES2. STRUCTURAL ENGINEER TO VERIFY FENCE POST SIZING AND SPACING PRIOR TO FABRICATION.2 X 4 CAP RAIL4 X 4 REDWOOD POST1 X 6 REDWOOD BOARD2 X 4 TOP RAIL2 X 4 BOTTOM RAIL6"6'-0"8'-0" MAX.&52666(&7,219,(:6'-0"4 X 4 REDWOOD POST2 X 4 CAP RAIL2 X 4 TOP RAIL1 X 6 REDWOOD BOARDFGFGSTACKED BOND CONCRETE CMUWALL W/ STEEL REINFORCEMENTSECTIONELEVATIONPRIVATE PATIOEXTERIOR BUILDING WALLCONCRETE FOOTING PERSTRUCTURALLANDSCAPE AREA4'-6"L1.2fence & wall details2. cmu block wall1. 6’-0” wood privacy fence06/19/202393Page 28 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 06/19/2023L1.3mwelo irrigation calculations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age 29 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 06/19/2023A1.0SITE PLANNOPARKINGNOPARKINGCCCC (E) COMMERCIALBUILDING(APPROX. 4450 SF)(E) COMMERCIALBUILDINGAPPROX. 1450 SF)PACIFIC ST.NOPARKING(N) MULTIFAMILYRESIDENTIALBUILDINGSIDEWALK10'-0"SETBACKTRANSFORMER FORMULTIFAMILY BLDG.MCOURTYARDADJACENT PROPERTYNOT IN SCOPEACCESSIBLE PATHOF TRAVEL TO (N)TRASH ENCLOSURE5'-0"NO BUILD & NO PARKINGEASEMENT3-YD15'-6"14'-0"(N) TRASHENCLOSURE65G65G3-YDUPDECKDECKMECH.PAD16'-0"5'-0"6'-6"23'-0"38'-0"59'-0"PAELECTRICAL MSB5'-0"SETBACKSHORT TERMBIKE PARKING(3 SPACES MIN.)C RAISED PLANTER TO MARK5'-0" NO BUILD/NO PARK ZONE(RE-STRIPED TO 26 SPACES)5'-0"SETBACKNSCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"01684232LEGENDPROPERTY LINEACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVELFENCE LINESETBACKPAVERS - REFER TO LANDSCAPE SHEETS06/19/202393Page 30 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 06/19/2023A2.01ST FLOOR PLANSCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”W/DW/D11'-8"5'-712"3'-5"5'-712"11'-8"13'-1112"8'-5"11'-1"9'-2"PATIOPATIOMECH.PADUPUP81,7101402 SF81,7102402 SFBEDROOMBEDROOM11'-912"10'-9"7'-9"14'-0"BEDROOMBEDROOMW/D2'-312"81,7103910 SFFIRERISER2'-312"10'-9"7'-9"14'-0"13'-2"5'-6"8"5'-6"16'-9"W/DW/D28'-6"11'-2"11'-10"7'-6"11'-912"13'-1112"8'-5"11'-1"11'-512"81,7201432 SF81,7202402 SF81,7203910 SFBEDROOM BEDROOMDECKDECKBEDROOMBEDROOMW/D2'-312"2ND FLOOR PLANSCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”0N81/8" = 1'-0"SCALE:4211606/19/202393Page 31 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 06/19/2023A2.13RD FLOOR PLANSCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”MEZZANINE FLOOR PLANSCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”9'-3"8"5'-6"16'-9"18'-0"8'-5"11'-2"11'-10"6'-512"8"5'-1012"10'-1"23'-6"7'-6"12'-8"15'-10"81,7301432 SF81,7302360 SF81,7303382 SF81,7304475 SFBEDROOMBEDROOMDECKDECKDECK1DECKOPEN TO BELOW(MEZZ:155 SF)(MEZZ: 171 SF)OPEN TO BELOW9'-1112"8'-5"9'-612"13'-1112"8'-012"10'-712"5'-11"13'-1112"9'-612"5'-512"6'-3"6'-8"8'-012"5'-1112"13'-412"0N81/8" = 1'-0"SCALE:421161. ACCESS STAIR SHALL BE DESIGNED AS A 1-HR RATED SHAFT. OPENINGS INTO THE SHAFT SHALL BE RATED FOR 45 MINUTES AND SHALL BE SELF-CLOSING. DETAILS TO BE PROVIDED AT THE PERMIT DOCUMENTS STAGE OF THE PROJECT,2. A FIRE ALARM SYSTEM IS REQUIRED FOR THIS BUILDING. DETAILS WILL BE PROVIDED AS A DEFERRED SUBMITTAL AT THE PERMIT DOCUMENTS STAGE OF THE PROJECT,floor plan GENERAL notes1. ROOF ACCESS LADDER AND HATCH ABOVEfloor plan keynotes06/19/202393Page 32 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 06/19/2023A3.0EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSHEIGHT LIMIT 35'-0"13213321011AVG. NAT GRADE0'-0"1ST FLOOR1'-0"2ND FLOOR11'-0"3RD FLOOR21'-0"MEZZANINE31'-0"TOP OF ROOF39'-6"AVG. NAT GRADE0'-0"1ST FLOOR1'-0"2ND FLOOR11'-0"3RD FLOOR21'-0"MEZZANINE31'-0"TOP OF ROOF39'-6"HEIGHT LIMIT 35'-0"14510697EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATIONWEST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION.(<127(6PROPERTY LINEHEIGHT LIMIT PER ZONING ORDINANCESETBACK LIMITATIONS PER ZONING ORDINANCEAIR & LIGHT EASEMENTSANTA BARBARA STYLE STUCCO EXTERIOR WALL FINISHCHARCOAL GREY COLORED VINYL WINDOWSHORIZONTAL FIBER CEMENT SIDINGNOT USEDSTACKED BOND CONCRETE BLOCK WALLMETAL GUARDRAILMETAL TRELLIS1234567891011HEIGHT LIMIT 35'-0"1324AVG. NAT GRADE0'-0"1ST FLOOR1'-0"2ND FLOOR11'-0"3RD FLOOR21'-0"MEZZANINE31'-0"TOP OF ROOF39'-6"HEIGHT LIMIT 35'-0"315567AVG. NAT GRADE0'-0"1ST FLOOR1'-0"2ND FLOOR11'-0"3RD FLOOR21'-0"MEZZANINE31'-0"TOP OF ROOF39'-6"06/19/202393Page 33 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 06/19/2023A3.1MATERIAL BOARDLA HABRA - COLOR TBDMFR TBD FINAL PATTERN TBDDARK BRONZE METAL TRIMCANOPIES & RAILING POSTSCUSTOM FABRICATED METAL GUARDRAIL CHARCOAL FINISHCONCRETE BLOCK WALLSTACKED BOND EXTERIOR STUCCOSMOOTH, FINE SAND ACRYLIC JELDWEN OR EQUALVINYL WINDOWSINTEGRAL CHARCOAL GRAY COLORLA HABRA - COLOR TBD EXTERIOR STUCCOSMOOTH, FINE SAND ACRYLICJAMES HARDIE - COLOR TBDHORIZONTAL LAP SIDINGFIBER CEMENTPEAK BICYCLE RACKSSHORT TERM BIKE RACKPOWDER COAT PAINT FINISHMFR TBD.LONG TERM BIKE STORAGE LOCKERS1-STORY, PAINTED METAL FINISHNUVO LIGHTING - NO. 183552988 EXTERIOR LIGHT SCONCEFULL CUTOFF - COMPLIANT WITH CITY OF SLO NIGHTTIME PRESERVATION ORDINANCE06/19/202393Page 34 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 06/19/2023A4.1view from pacific st. looking north06/19/202393Page 35 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 06/19/2023A4.2view from pacific st. looking south06/19/202393Page 36 of 49 Page 37 of 49 Page 38 of 49 Ten Over Studio, Inc. 805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com Page 11 of 2 ALTERNATE PARKING SUMMARY 460 PACIFIC ST. PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 9/13/2023 PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project proposes a new 10-unit multifamily housing development in a high-density residential zone near downtown San Luis Obispo, CA. The project will contain (2) Studio apartments, (6) 1-BD apartments, and (2) 2-BD apartments. The development will also seek up to a 26% density bonus by providing 14% low income affordable units. The affordable unit also qualifies the project for (3) incentives which result in identifiable cost reductions and/or are necessary to make the project feasible at the permitted density. The project is not seeking any incentives to achieve the density. The project is requesting a waiver for alternate parking requirements as detailed below. PROJECT DATA 460 Pacific St. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 APN 003-512-010 Gross Lot Area: 0.09 acres (3,800 SF) Zoning: R-4 (High Density Residential) WAIVER DESCRIPTION Per zoning regulations, the Project requires 11 parking spaces on site. Due to physical limitations of the site and identifiable cost reductions, the Project proposes an Alternate Parking Requirement, a 100% vehicular parking reduction. 1. Due to site size constraints, parking is not feasible on the site while trying to provide housing at the allowed density. Providing parking creates significant and identifiable physical constraints to the site that would reduce the amount of housing units that could be created on the site. Providing parking in lieu of housing is contradictory to the State Housing mandates. 2. There are significant and identifiable cost reductions by eliminating the need to construct parking facilities on the site which make the overall project infeasible if parking is required. 3. While the project presents some deed restricted affordable units, all units are affordable by design due to the downtown nature of the residential project. As such, these units are intended to be most attractive to those who want to live and work downtown and don't want, need, or possibly cannot afford a car and other costs associated with car ownership and ongoing use of a car. TRIP REDUCTION PLAN The Project proposes several measures and programs/incentives to reduce the need for single-occupant vehicular travel to and from the site. In addition, the project presents deed restricted affordable units which are documented to generate lower trips than market rate housing. Similarly, the Office of Planning and Research’s Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, recommends a less than significant vehicle miles traveled presumption for affordable housing uses since “[a]dding affordable housing to infill locations generally improves jobs-housing match, in turn shortening commutes and reducing VMT.” This evidence of lower trips and vehicle miles traveled further supports reduced parking. INFORMATION/TENANT INCENTIVES 1. Bus passes with an incentive by the Developer to subsidize the first month of bus pass use. 2. A bulletin board will be posted in the entry/mail area with information regarding www.iRideshare.org, carpool/vanpool opportunities, bicycle maps and public transit maps/schedules for viewing by residents and their guests. Page 39 of 49 Ten Over Studio, Inc. 805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com Page 22 of 2 3. Finally, for those who want, need, or can afford a car, the City of SLO has the Residential Overnight DROP PROX program that is available for downtown residents. Developer will contribute $100 per quarter to a resident who has a car if they participate in the DROP PROX program for the storage of their car. CONVENIENCE (SEE ATTACHED SHEET T1.0 FOR REFERENCE) 1. The project is located .2 miles to the nearest bus stop and .2 miles to the second nearest bus stop. 2. The project is .8 miles from the Downtown Transit Center. 3. The project is located 1 block from the edge of the Downtown core, and Employees of nearby business will be able to walk/bike to their homes for breakfast, lunch, or dinner, instead of driving. For example, The County Government Building and County Courthouse are within 9 blocks of the proposed project and employees will be able to walk/bike home before/during/after work and will not need to use their car. 4. The project is .4 miles from the soon to be constructed future parking garage at Nipomo and Monterey Streets and .4 miles from the current parking garage at Marsh and Chorro Streets. In addition, there are two other nearby parking structures at Palm and Morro Street. There are many options for using the public parking garages within close proximity to this site. 5. Ultimately, this is a downtown walkable project that will be attractive to those who don’t own or need vehicles. There are various nearby walking and biking trails for use for those without a car and will encourage continued foot/bike traffic throughout the city. Please feel free to contact me directly with any questions regarding the project’s design intentions. Sincerely, Jennifer Korge jenniferk@tenoverstudio.com Page 40 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 05/17/23COUNTY GOVERNMENT BUILDING (.8 MILES)DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CENTER (.8 MILES)BUS STOP 1(.2 MILES)BUS STOP 2(.2 MILES)PROJECT SITETRAIN STATION(.9 MILES)FUTURE PARKING GARAGE (.4 MILES)MARSH PARKING GARAGE (.4 MILES)0.5 MILE RADIUS AROUND PROJECT SITETRANSPORTATION& AMENITIES MAPT1.0PALM PARKING GARAGE (.6 MILES)MORRO PARKING GARAGE (.7 MILES)GROCERY STORE (.9 MILES)CONVENIENCE STORE (.3 MILES)PHARMACY(.3 MILES)ELEMENTARY SCHOOL(.7 MILES)EMMERSON PARK (.1 MILES)LEMON GROVE LOOP TRAILHEAD (.4 MILES)MITCHELL PARK (.6 MILES)HAWTHORNE PARK (.7 MILES)Page 41 of 49 539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA805.541.1010info@tenoverstudio.com460 PACIFIC ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 05/17/23T1.1Hill StBishop StSydneElla StFixlini S t Branch StWoodbridge StSouth StOsos St AuPalm StNipo m o St Peach StHigh StMorr o St Islay StBroa d StSBuchon StMontereyMarsh StPismo StHiguera StJohns o n A v e PROJECT SITESources:City of San Luis Obispo Existing & Proposed Bicycle NetworkShared-Use PathBicycle LaneBicycle RouteBicycle/Pedestrian AccessNeighborhood GreenwaySchoolPark or Open SpaceRailTrailsSan Luis ObispoExisting| ProposedProtected Bicycle Lane100 Page 42 of 49 Ten Over Studio, Inc. 805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com Page 1 of 3 AFFORDABLE HOUSING SUMMARY 460 PACIFIC ST. PLANNING APPLICATION SUBMITTAL 9/13/2023 PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project proposes a new 10-unit multifamily housing development in a high-density residential zone near downtown San Luis Obispo, CA. The project will contain (2) Studio apartments, (6) 1-BD apartments, and (2) 2-BD apartments. The development will also seek up to a 26% density bonus by providing 14% low income affordable units. The affordable units also qualify the project for (3) incentives which result in identifiable cost reductions and/or are necessary to make the project feasible at the permitted density. The project is not seeking any incentives to achieve the density as described further below in this letter. PROJECT DATA 460 Pacific St. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 APN 003-512-010 Gross Lot Area: 0.09 acres (3,800 SF) Zoning: R-4 (High Density Residential) BASE DENSITY R-4 has an allowable base density of 24 units/net acre. However, regardless of the calculation, at least 4 base density units shall be allowed on each parcel. BONUS DENSITY The project is proposing 10 overall residential units as part of the project, one of which will be a 2- bedroom low income unit. This calculates the overall project to provide a minimum 14% of the units as low income, which entitles the project to a 26% density bonus per the City’s Density Bonus chart and the Statutes in Govt. Code 65915 through 65918. Per the Density Bonus chart, the project density will be calculated as 6 DU’s: 4 Base DUs X 26% = 5.04 DU’s, but rounds up to 6 DU’s Page 43 of 49 Ten Over Studio, Inc. 805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com Page 2 of 3 INCENTIVES Project is allowed up to 3 qualifying incentives based on providing 10% low income units, and is requesting no qualifying incentives. WAIVERS While the project is not requesting any incentives, the project is requesting 3 Waivers from Development Standards. WAIVER 1: ALTERNATE PARKING REQUIREMENTS The project proposes a 100% vehicular parking reduction. See Alternate Parking Summary letter dated 09/13/2023 for further information. WAIVER 2: HEIGHT LIMIT EXCEPTION The Project proposes a height limit exception as it relates to overall building height. The project is located in the R-4 zone which allows for a maximum height limit for the zone of 35'-0" from average natural grade. The Project is requesting an allowance to achieve an overall building height of approximately 39'-6" above natural grade. Compliance with the 35’ maximum height would result in removal of the mezzanine of the 3rd floor units. The removal of the mezzanine level would make the 3rd floor units less desirable. The additional 4’-6” in height is requested at the back of the property which is adjacent to the rear C-R zone which has a maximum height limit allowed of 45’ above average natural grade. We have limited the additional height being requested to the back portion of the project (approximately 16’ in depth) that is closest to the C-R zone and does not go above the C-R zone maximum height. The incentive will not result in any specific adverse impacts to public health or safety as the request for additional height is integral to two particular units that would have the same access for egress that the other 3rd floor units would have. It should also be noted that the overall height of the finish floor of the project has been raised 1’-6” higher than the existing structure finish floor on the site to account for the City’s regulations on flood control. Page 44 of 49 Ten Over Studio, Inc. 805.541.1010 539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA info@tenoverstudio.com tenoverstudio.com Page 3 of 3 REDUCTION OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS In addition to the 2 qualifying incentives the Project is also requesting a reduction of development standards from the City of SLO Land Use Ordinances as allowed by the affordable housing Statutes in Govt. Code 65915 (e)(1). As provided in Density Bonus Statutes, the City may not apply such development standards, except where necessary to mitigate or avoid a specific adverse impact upon health, safety, or the physical environment. Therefor, refusal to grant a reduction or waiver of such a “physically precluding” development standard would need to be supported by a finding describing a specific adverse impact upon health, safety, or the physical environment, to be avoided by application of the standard. In the case of this Project, we are requesting a setback exception to achieve the density proposed. The side and rear setbacks will maintain a minimum 5'-0" setback at the ground level per City of SLO standards, but will exceed the setback reductions as the building height increases as indicated in Table 2-11, Figure 2-6 of SLO Zoning Code section 17.22.020. At it’s maximum, the 3rd floor will extend 5’-0” into the 10’-0” setback required at the higher height. The height limit exception being requested is required to achieve the allowable density on the site. The additional 5’-0” setback required at the upper floors creates a physical size constraint to the building that would make the size of the studio units physically unusable space. Please feel free to contact me directly with any questions regarding the project’s design intentions. Sincerely, Jennifer Korge, jenniferk@tenoverstudio.com Page 45 of 49 Page 46 of 49 State Housing Accountability Act and Density Bonus Law Summary State Housing Accountability Act and Density Bonus Law. The Housing Accountability Act (HAA), codified in Government Code § 65589.5, applies to any “housing development project”, and was amended last year to include “mixed‐use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses with at least two‐thirds of the square footage designated for residential use.” Government Code § 65589.5(h)(2)(B)1. As such, if the project complies with all applicable objective standards, then certain findings are required in order for the agency to lawfully (1) deny the project; or (2) reduce or impose conditions which have the effect of reducing the project’ s density. In 2017, the State legislature amended the HAA to require that the findings be supported by a preponderance of the evidence in the record and the agency bears the burden of proof. By design, the legislature has crafted the findings to be difficult for agencies to make findings to deny a project. Specifically, in order to deny a HAA project or reduce density, the agency must find that: “The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be developed at a lower density...and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact…other than disapproval…or the approval…at a lower density” Gov. Code § 65589.5(j)(1)(A)&(B) A “specific, adverse impact” is defined to mean a “significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.” Government Code § 65589.5(j)(1). Accordingly, the City Council may only lawfully deny the project or reduce its density if it determines the project or the additional density causes a specific adverse health or safety impact. Standards such as “compatibility” can be lawfully used to impose design conditions but cannot be used to deny a housing project or reduce density. The reason is because the standard of compatibility is subjective in nature and not necessarily related to public health and safety and the HAA requires the specific adverse impact be based on objective health and safety standards. Also, even if the City identifies a specific adverse impact, the City has the obligation to prove that “there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact… other than the disapproval of the housing development project or the approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at a lower density.” Government Code § 65589.5(j)(1)(B). Density Bonus Law. It should be noted that the protections in the HAA and the density bonus provisions in the Density Bonus Law (DBL), discussed below, work in concert with one another. Specifically, Government Code § 65589.5(j)(3) states that: “…the receipt of a density bonus pursuant to § 65915 shall not constitute a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development 1 Government Code § 65589.5 (h)(2)(B) Mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses with at least two thirds of the square footage designated for residential use. Page 47 of 49 ARCH‐0110‐2023 (460 Pacific Street) Page 2 project is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity, with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision specified in this subdivision.” In other words, the legislature has determined that the benefits afforded by the DBL do not render the protections in the HAA inapplicable. The DBL, codified in Government Code § 65915, mandates that public agencies provide a density bonus and relax development standards through incentives, concessions or waivers if a proposed project includes a prescribed percentage of affordable housing. The level of the density bonus and the number of incentives or concessions is dependent on the amount of affordable housing provided and the level of affordability. A city cannot require a developer to provide a greater percentage of units or deeper level of affordability than prescribed by the statute in order to qualify for the density bonus. See Latinos Unidos del Valle de Napa y Solano v. County of Napa, 217 Cal. App. 4th 1160 (2013). For this project, the applicant is requesting a density bonus that would increase the total number of density units to 5.5, rounded up to 6 density units pursuant to Section 17.140.040.B, resulting in a 26% density bonus. To receive a 26% density bonus (Gov. Code § 69515(f)(2)), the applicant must provide 14% of base units restricted to low income households, as outlined in Zoning Regulation Chapter 17.140.040(E), which equals 1 low income unit. The applicant has proposed 1 two‐bedroom unit to be dedicated to low‐income units. Gov. Code § 65915(d)(2)(C) and Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.140.070(A) states that one (1) incentive or concession shall be granted for housing developments that include at least 10% for low income households. The City must also ensure that the affordable units will remain affordable for 55 years and that the rents will not exceed those permitted by State law (Gov. Code § 65915(c)(1). On top of this requirement, Gov. Code § 65915(e)(1) mandates that “in no case may a city…apply any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this [the DBL].” In other words, the DBL law requires a city to relax its development standards in order for the project to physically incorporate the additional units permitted under the law. Similar to the HAA, there are protections for projects using the DBL. No grounds are provided that would allow a city to deny a density bonus; rather, "a city … shall grant one density bonus…." (Gov. Code § 65925(b)(1); see also Wollmer v. City of Berkeley, 193 Cal. App. 4th 1329, 1330 (2011) ("Wollmer") ("Section 65915 mandates that local governments provide a density bonus…" (emphasis added). Developers can also request modifications of development standards by requesting either incentives/concessions (they are the same) or waivers. Incentives or concessions refer to “regulatory incentives” that provide “identifiable and actual cost reductions” to provide for the affordable housing (Gov. Code § 65915(k)); in other words, they are provided to allow for modifications that result in an actual reduction of costs to the project so the affordable housing is economically feasible. Waivers of development standards are provided under Government Code § 65915(e) if the usual development standards would “physically preclude” a development from being constructed with the density bonus requested; a project with a 35% greater density may require modifications of development standards to fit on a site. Necessary waivers may only be denied if the agency can make a finding based on substantial evidence that the waiver is contrary to state or Page 48 of 49 ARCH‐0110‐2023 (460 Pacific Street) Page 3 federal law, would have an adverse impact on property listed on the California Historical Register, or would cause a “specific, adverse impact” upon the public health, safety, or the physical environment, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact. The definition of “specific, adverse impact” is the same as that in the HAA – i.e. a “significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.” This project includes four waivers of otherwise applicable property development standards that include; (1) maximum height extension of 40 feet where 35 is normally required, (2) 100% parking reduction, (3) side yard setback reduction of 0 feet where 10 feet is normally required along the north property line, and (4) an upper story setback reduction along the west property line for 5 feet where 10 feet is normally required. The stated purpose of these modifications is to allow for the physical construction of the additional density units. Under density bonus law, this modification is properly analyzed as a waiver, not an incentive. In order to deny these waivers, the City would be required to make the statutory findings based on the standards as discussed and defined above. Again, to use the example noted above, the City cannot simply deny the waivers based on findings that the reduction in site development standards is not “compat ible” with the neighborhood. Under State law, the City must identify either a violation of state or federal law, an impact on a historic property, or a specific adverse impact on the public health, safety, or the physical environment that is directly caused by the waiver, and determine that there is no feasible way to satisfactorily mitigate it or find an alternative. Page 49 of 49