Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-18-2016 Item 20 Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street Meeting Date: 10/18/2016 FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director Prepared By: Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner SUBJECT: REVIEW OF AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DECISION TO DENY A NEW FOUR-STORY MIXED-USE PROJECT WITH GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL/RETAIL SPACE AND 27 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, INCLUDING A REQUEST FOR A 40% PARKING REDUCTION WITH MECHANICAL PARKING LIFTS. 11% OF THE UNITS IN THE PROJECT WILL BE AFFORDABLE FOR VERY-LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES ARE REQUESTED, INCLUDING A 35% DENSITY BONUS, AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 43-FOOT TALL STRUCTURE WHERE 35 FEET IS NORMALLY ALLOWED. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission denied approval of a use permit for a mixed-use project in the Foothill Boulevard special planning area. Staff has included a resolution (Attachment A) denying the appeal, which would affirm the Planning Commission action to deny the project, based on required findings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution (Attachment B) upholding the appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of a use permit for a mixed-use project at 22 Chorro Street, thereby approving the use permit for a mixed-use project in the Foothill Boulevard special planning area, a 40% parking reduction and the use of mechanical parking lifts, including approval of a height exception as an affordable housing incentive. SITE DATA Applicant San Luis Development Group, LLC Representative Thom Jess, Architect Zoning C-C-SF (Community Commercial with a Special Focus Overlay) General Plan Commercial Site Area 0.55 acres (24,033 s.f.) (3 parcels) Environmental Status Categorically Exempt from environmental review under Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects) of the CEQA Guidelines. 20 Packet Pg. 243 REPORT-IN-BRIEF The applicant submitted an application for approval of a project for a new four-story mixed-use project with 1,600 square feet of ground floor commercial/retail space and 27 residential units. The project includes a 35% density bonus as mandated by State law, because 11% of the units are designated for very-low income households. As one of its affordable housing incentives, the applicant is requesting a 43-foot maximum height for the structure where 35 feet is allowed. The project also includes a request for a combined 40% parking reduction and the use of mechanical parking lifts, as allowed by the Zoning Regulations with the approval of a use permit. The project is located within the Foothill Boulevard/Santa Rosa Special Planning Area and, therefore, required Planning Commission (PC) review and approval (Zoning Regulations, Chapter 17.53: Special Focus Area (S-F) Overlay Zone). The project also requires architectural review by the Architectural Review Commission. On August 24, 2016, the PC reviewed the proposed project and voted to deny the project based on various findings relating to impacts to the health, safety and welfare due to the height of the development and lack of on-site parking (Attachment C, PC Resolution). On August 31, 2016, the applicant appealed the PC’s decision to deny the project (Attachment F, PC Appeal and Supplemental Letter). While the staff recommendation is to uphold the appeal and approve the project (as more fully explained below), the City Council may choose to deny the appeal, thereby upholding the Planning Commission decision. If the City Council chooses to deny the appeal, special findings are needed as required by State law to form an adequate basis for the denial. Staff has provided findings for project denial for the Council’s consideration which are set forth in Attachment A. The staff recommendation to uphold the appeal is reflected in Attachment B. The following discussion provides additional background and analysis of the proposed project and the appeal. DISCUSSION Project Description The project site is an existing 24,033 square foot lot located at the corner of Chorro Street and Foothill Boulevard (Attachment D, Vicinity Map). The site is zoned Community Commercial (C-C) and has a 36 density units per acre, the highest density allowed in the City. The site i s relatively flat, currently vacant, and was last utilized as a gas station. The site is surrounded by the following uses and zoning:  North: C-R-SF (University Square Shopping Center)  South: R-1 (Single family residences)  East: C-C-SF (G. Brothers Restaurant)  West: C-C-SF & R-1 (Jamba Juice, Starbucks, Single family residences) The project proposes to construct a new four-story mixed-use project as described below (Attachment E, Project Plans):  1,600 square feet of ground floor commercial/retail space; 20 Packet Pg. 244  27 residential units (23 two-bedrooms and 4 studios restricted for very-low income households);  A request for a 40% shared/mixed-use/bicycle parking reduction to reduce the required parking from 55 parking spaces to 33 parking spaces; and  113 bicycle parking spaces (80 long-term and 33 short-term). Background The areas discussed below provide important background information on the policy and regulatory environment that shape the review of the project. Although approval of this use permit would result in a building that is taller than adjacent development, staff’s analysis of the project shows that it can be found consistent with the City’s General Plan and Zoning Code. In this case, the policy and regulatory structure favor the production of housing by enabl ing concessions for height and reductions in parking. Taken together with the project’s central location and the incentives and strong protections afforded by State law for housing projects (especially affordable housing), the proposed mixed use project that uses an affordable housing density bonus and height exception to provide more housing than would otherwise be allowed, and which is situated along a major transit, bike, and pedestrian corridor, is on balance consistent with City policies and regulations. These issues are more fully discussed in the followed six subsections. 1. Land Use Element, Chapter 8: Special Focus Area On December 9, 2014, the City Council adopted the new Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) of the General Plan. As a part of the update, a new section was added to the Land Use Element (LUE) that identified Special Planning Areas. The proposed project is located in the Foothill Boulevard/Santa Rosa Special Planning Area,1 which includes property on both sides of Foothill Boulevard between Chorro and Santa Rosa currently developed as commercial centers that include highway and neighborhood serving commercial uses. The Foothill Boulevard/Santa Rosa Special Planning Area encourages the development of mixed-use projects, adjustments in parking and height requirements and improving intersections along Foothill Boulevard. Below is a copy of Policy 8.2.1 from the LUE. 1 Land Use Element Section 8.2.1. Foothill Boulevard / Santa Rosa Area. 20 Packet Pg. 245 2. Housing Element The Housing Element (HE) outlines a series of goals and policies to encourage the development of housing production for all financial strata of the City's population. The City has outlined in HE Goal 2 that housing should be in-line with the Regional Housing Needs Allocation, for the 2014 - 2019 planning period (see Table 1). The project is proposing to construct four very-low income units which are some of the more challenging units to be provided within a private development. The HE further states that affordable housing units should be intermixed and not segregated by economic status and encourages housing development that meets a variety of special needs, including large families, single parents, disabled persons, the elderly, students, veterans, the homeless, or those seeking congregate care, group housing, single-room occupancy or co-housing accommodations, utilizing universal design (HE Policy 8.1). The Housing Element also states that preference for residential be given over commercial uses (Policy 11.1). 20 Packet Pg. 246 In addition, the Housing Element further states:  That the City should continue to consider increasing residential densities above state density bonus allowances for projects that provide housing for low, very low and extremely low income households (Policy 2.17); and  That the City should continue to incentivize affordable housing development with density bonuses, parking reductions and other development incentives, including City financial assistance (Program 6.19). Table 1: Housing Element Table 6: Remaining RHNA need based on dwelling units approved, under construction or built (January 1, 2014 to October 11, 2016) Income Category A B A-B New Construction Need (RHNA) Dwelling Units Approved, Under Construction or Built Remaining RHNA Need, Dwelling Units Extremely-Low (< 31% of AMI) 142 5 137 Very Low (31-50% of AMI) 143 53 90 Low (51-80% of AMI) 179 81 98 Moderate (81-120% of AMI) 202 95 107 Above Moderate (>120% of AMI) 478 4781 0 TOTAL RHNA UNITS 1,144 7121 432 Source: City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department, 2016 1No credit allowed for the number of above moderate units built that exceed RHNA. Actual above moderate units = 1,350. 3. Circulation Element The Circulation Element (CE) states the City’s goals and objectives to increase multi-modal transportation within the City. The CE includes the following Transportation Goals (Section 1.6.1.):  Maintain accessibility and protect the environment throughout San Luis Obispo while reducing dependence on single-occupant use of motor vehicles, with the goal of achieving State and Federal health standards for air quality.  Reduce people's use of their cars by supporting and promoting alternatives such as walking, riding buses and bicycles, and using car pools. One of the Transportation Objectives states, Encourage better transportation habits… Increase the use of alternative forms of transportation and depend less on the single-occupant use of vehicles (Section 1.7.1). The use of public transit, walking and biking are specifically supported by numerous policies in Chapters 3 through 6 of the CE. Further details on the project’s 20 Packet Pg. 247 consistency with Transportation policies and the provision of multi-modal transportation is discussed in the Parking section under Staff Recommendation below. 4. Major City Goal Housing was determined to be one of the most important, highest priority goals for the City to accomplish over 2015-17 financial year. The goal states: Implement the Housing Element, facilitating workforce, affordable, supportive and transitional housing options, including support for needed infrastructure within the City’s fair share. 5. State Housing Density Bonus Law California State law encourages the development of affordable housing and provides density bonuses based on the inclusion of affordable units within a project. In addition to a density bonus, by providing a certain percentage of affordable units within a project (as outlined in Section 17.90.060 of the Zoning Regulations), a developer may receive alternative incentives or concessions for the project. For this project, the developer is setting aside four units for very-low income (11%) which equals a mandated 35% density bonus in accordance with State law and the City’s Zoning Code. Under the State Density Bonus law (Gov. Code section 65915), a public agency is required to grant the incentive or concession unless it makes a written finding, based on substantial evidence, that the concession or incentive would have a specific adverse impact upon public health and safety and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the s pecific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable. “Specific adverse impact” within this statute means 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.”2 In addition, the State Density Bonus law requires a City to waive or modify development and zoning standards that would physically preclude the utilization of the density bonus, incentives, and concessions that the applicant is entitled to on a particular site and may only be denied if the findings above are met (Gov Code section 65915(e)). In other words, State law requires a public agency to relax its development standards to allow for the physical construction of the additional “density units” unless the relaxation of such standards will result in specific adverse impacts within the meaning defined above. 6. Housing Accountability Act The Housing Accountability Act applies to “housing development projects” which includes mixed-use developments consisting of residential and non-residential uses in which non- residential uses are limited to neighborhood commercial uses and to the first floor of the building. The project is a housing development project under the Act. Section 65589.5(d)(2) of the Act states that: 2 Gov. Code section 65589.5(d)(2). 20 Packet Pg. 248 (d) A local agency shall not disapprove a housing development project…for very low, low-, or moderate-income households…or condition approval in a manner that renders the project infeasible for development for the use of very low, low-, or moderate-income households…including through the use of design review standards, unless it makes written findings, based upon substantial evidence in the record, as to one of the following: (2) The development project…as proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income household…a “specific, adverse impact” means 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. Inconsistency with the zoning ordinance or general plan land use designation shall not constitute a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety. Planning Commission Action At the August 24, 2016 meeting, the PC evaluated the proposed mixed-use project and voted 4:1 Commr. Dandekar absent) to deny the use permit (Attachment C, PC Resolution; Attachment H, PC Meeting Minutes). Public Testimony The public provided comments on the project during the PC hearing as well as through written correspondence. A series of repeated themes/concerns were shared by several different individuals. Concerns included: that the project, as proposed, was out of scale and character with the neighborhood and overall too tall; the project interfered with the privacy of the next door neighbors; the site had too many units; the project had too few parking spaces and that the project should have 100 parking spaces to accommodate the “real” number of people living on the site; residents of the project would park on the neighborhood streets that are already impacted; that the project would drive down adjacent property values; and would increase the traffic and congestion at the intersection of Chorro and Foothill. Others shared support for the project stating that it provided much needed housing, made the best use of the corner lot, provided a buffer between Foothill and the residential neighborhood and promoted multi -modal transportation. Planning Commission Findings Following significant public testimony and deliberation, the PC denied the use permit based on the following findings: 1. That the project will be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of those working or residing in the vicinity because the proposed parking reduction is excessive and the height is inconsistent with the General Plan. 2. That the request for reduced parking is inconsistent with San Luis Obispo Municipal 20 Packet Pg. 249 Code section 17.16.060 in that the requested parking reduction is excessive for the proposed use and that the times of the proposed mixed-use parking demand from the various uses will coincide in such a way that it will have detrimental impacts on the surrounding area. 3. That the proposed project height is inconsistent with Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 9.2.1 because the project will block views from Foothill Boulevard which is designated as having moderate scenic value. 4. That the proposed project height is inconsistent with the Land Use Element Policy 2.3.9.E Compatible Development: Architecture; the project’s height and scale does not provide a smooth transition between the existing and proposed development. 5. That the proposed project height is inconsistent with the Community Design Guidelines sections 5.3.A.1 and 5.3.C: the project’s height and scale does not provide a smooth transition between the immediate neighborhood. 6. That the proposed project height is inconsistent with the Land Use Element Policy 2.3.9.F Compatible Development: Privacy and Solar Access; the project will overlook onto adjacent properties and does not respect the privacy of neighboring building and outdoor areas. Applicant Appeal On August 31, 2016, the applicant, San Luis Development Group, LLC, filed an appeal of the PC’s decision to deny the project. The appeal form and supplemental letter express concerns that the Planning Commission’s decision for denial was not justified because it is inconsistent with and/or violates local, Federal and/or State laws and policies (Attachment F, PC Appeal and Supplemental Letter). The letter from the applicant highlights that the proposed project is consistent with the City’s General Plan, in particular LUE Section 8.2.1 which describes development within the Foothill Boulevard/Santa Rosa Special Planning Area, the Major City Goal regarding housing, Zoning Regulations regarding parking reductions (Section 17.16.060), and the California Density Bonus Law and Housing Accountability Act. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff carefully evaluated the Planning Commission’s decision and the applicant’s appeal in the context of City Council General Plan goals and policies, the City’s Zoning Code, the State Density Bonus law and Housing Accountability Act. Based on these combination of factors, staff is recommending the City Council uphold the appeal and approve the project. It should be noted that the project will require architectural review and modifications to the project design may be considered by the ARC to the extent that they do not reduce height/density to the point th at would render the project infeasible. 20 Packet Pg. 250 1. Height The applicant is requesting a height exception as a Density Bonus incentive for including four studios for very-low income households within the project (11% of the project is affordable). According to Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.90: Affordable Housing Incentives, the developer may request an incentive or concession, such as a height increase, when providing at least 10% of the units for very-low income households.3 Staff’s rationale for recommending approval of the height exception is several fold: 1. State Density Bonus law allows a developer to request a concession such as a height exception and a public agency must grant that exception unless it can make certain findings. 2. State Density Bonus law further requires a public agency to relax development standards to allow for the physical construction of the “density units.” In this case, the project includes 7 density bonus units, 5 of which are on the top floor. Stated differently, the additional maximum height allowance to accommodate the top floor is needed to build the density units. 3. The request for additional height is consistent with the Land Use policy discussion on building height adjustments for the Foothill Boulevard/Santa Rosa Special Planning Area. In regards to staff’s analysis on this issue, it should first be noted that the 35-foot height restriction is based on current zoning from the prior General Plan. The policy language in the updated LUE suggests that higher height limits are desired for this area when development is in conjunction with mixed use developments.4 This policy states that building height adjustments are appropriate on both sides of Foothill, although the language itself overlaps (“…in this area…” and “…on the North side of Foothill…”).5 Based on this combination of factors, staff is recommending the Council approve the height exception. 3 Zoning Regulations Section 17.90.060.A(2): Alternative or additional incentives. When a developer agrees to construct housing for households of very-low, lower or moderate income households… and desires an incentive other than a density bonus as provided in Section 17.90.040 of this chapter… the developer shall receive the following number of incentives or concessions: (2) Two in centives or concessions for housing developments that include at least twenty (20) percent of the total units for lower income households, at least ten (10) percent for very - low income households, or at least twenty (20) percent for persons and families of moderate income in a common interest development. 4 Once the zoning code update comes forward later on this year, the City Council will tackle the issue of implementing this policy. 5 The Planning Commission had considerable debate on the applicability of this policy within the LUE, especially with regard to building height incentives and whether such incentives were appropriate for the entirety of this planning area or just the area on the north side of Foothill. 20 Packet Pg. 251 2. Neighborhood Compatibility The project site is located in a neighborhood with an eclectic collection of architecture, building heights and site design. The neighborhood includes two large shopping centers, commercial structures separated from the street by parking, gas stations, single family residential units and multi-family structures. The Foothill Boulevard/Santa Rosa Special Planning Area describes redevelopment should include mixed-use development and encourages pedestrian and bike access. Set at the back of sidewalk, the proposed building fosters a pedestrian environment along the project and Foothill. The project is designed to provide a transition between a commercial area and the R-1 residential area by setting the tallest portion of the structure along Foothill Boulevard and provides residential uses adjacent to existing residential uses.6. The proposed project further supports the transition between the R-1 and C-C zone by incorporating various design elements consistent with LUE 2.3.97 which requires compatible development for new housing built within existing neighborhoods. The project provides: an inviting façade towards the street; preserves privacy between the R-1 properties and the subject site by providing landscaping (Attachment E, Project Plans, Sheet L-1) and excluding balconies along the south and east elevations (Attachment E, Project Plans, Sheets A2.1-A2.3 and A3.2-A3.3); preserves solar access for adjacent the R-1 properties (Attachment E, Project Plans, Sheet A5.0); provides street trees and parking is designed to minimize its visual impact from the public street. 6 Land Use Policy 2.3.5. Neighborhood Pattern: The City shall require that all new residential development be integrated with existing neighborhoods. Where physical features make this impossible, the new development should create new neighborhoods. 7 Land Use Policy 2.3.9. Compatible Development: The City shall require that new housing built within an existing neighborhood be sited and designed to be compatible with the character of the neighborhood. Figure 1: Rendering of the project as viewed from the commercial property across Chorro Street looking towards University Square shopping center. 20 Packet Pg. 252 3. Views Concern was expressed that the project would have an impact on viewsheds, in particular the views of Cerro San Luis. Foothill Boulevard is identified within the Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) as a street with moderate scenic value. Policy 9.2.1. states in part that development projects shall not wall off scenic roadways and block views.8 Figure 2 is a portion of the Scenic Roadways and Vistas map of the COSE and Cerro San Luis is not identified with a “cone of view” from Foothill Boulevard. It is important to note that COSE provides policy for the protection of views from public areas such as streets, parks, etc. The project will interrupt a small portion of the view of Cerro San Luis from Foothill Boulevard going westbound. For clarification in response to public comment regarding private views, the project would not impact the existing residential views toward Cerro San Luis and views from the residential properties towards Foothill Boulevard would change because the project site is currently vacant. However, to be clear the City’s policies address views from public spaces and the City does not create or regulate any private viewshed rights. Echoing staff’s reasoning in the height discussion above, various General Plan policies and State law incentivize and otherwise encourage housing development projects to “go up.” Further, the Foothill Boulevard/Santa Rosa Special Planning Area emphasizes that, at least within this particular segment of Foothill, that height adjustments on top of the 35-foot maximum height already established for this zone should be considered. In addition, one significant concern is the extent to which the City’s viewsheds policy identified above constitutes an “objective” standard for purposes of the Density Bonus law and Housing Accountability Act. As a result of these factors, staff recommends that the Council approve the height exception. 8 Conservation and Open Space Element 9.2.1: Views to and from public places, including scenic roadways. The City will preserve and improve views of important scenic resources from public places, and encourage other agencies with jurisdiction to do so. Public places include parks, plazas, the grounds of civic buildings, streets and roads, and publicly accessible open space. In particular, the route segments shown in Figure 11 are designated as scenic roadways. (A) Development projects shall not wall off scenic roadways and block views. Figure 2: Excerpt of Figure 11 of the COSE. The star marks the approximate location of the project site; v) represents "cone of view" Cerro San Luis 20 Packet Pg. 253 4. Parking The project requires 55 spaces (50 spaces for 27 residential units and 5 spaces for 1,600 square feet of commercial space). The residential parking calculation is based on Government Code Section 65915(p)(B) which states that a city cannot require a vehicular parking ratio that exceeds one on-site parking space for a studio or one bedroom and no more than two onsite parking spaces for two to three bedroom units. The applicant is requesting a 40% parking reduction to have a total of 33 required spaces. This request is based on a combination of two separate provisions in the Zoning Code which allow for the reduction in the on-site parking requirements: (1) Mixed Use Parking Reductions; and (2) Bicycle Space Reduction. Mixed Use Parking Reductions (Up to 30%) SLOMC 17.16.060.C states that where two or more uses share common parking areas, the total number of parking spaces required may be reduced by up to 10%, with approval of an administrative use permit. Section 17.16.060.C further states that by approving an administrative use permit, the Director may reduce the parking requirement for projects sharing parking by up to 20%, in addition to the shared parking reduction, for a total maximum parking reduction of 30%, upon finding that the times of maximum parking demand from various uses will not coincide. Bicycle Space Parking Reductions (Up to 10%) The project also includes 30 additional bicycle parking spaces to allow for an additional 10% parking reduction. Section 17.16.060.G(2) states that projects which provide more bicycle and/or motorcycle spaces than required may reduce the required car spaces at the rate of one car space for each five bicycle spaces, up to a 10% reduction, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. All bicycle parking that exceeds the required number of spaces shall be apportioned between short-term and long-term bicycle spaces as stipulated by Table 6.5. The project is required to provide 63 bicycle spaces (58 long term and 5 short term). The applicant is providing 30 bicycle parking spaces for the 10% reduction plus an additional 20 more above and beyond all the requirements for a grand total of 113 spaces (80 long term and 30 short term). This is not an unreasonable inclusion of bicycle parking spaces as the project is anticipated to have an expected occupancy of 100 residents. The design of the project includes a bike lounge, a bike repair area (“bike shop”) and indoor bike storage to incentivize bicycle use by tenants (Attachment F, Project Plans, A2.0). Table 2: Parking calculations proposed and required by code Parking Spaces Proposed1 Standard2 Vehicle 33 55 Bicycle (long-term) 80 58 Bicycle (short-term) 33 5 Notes: 1. Applicant’s project plans submitted 5/20/2016 2. Zoning Regulations Parking was a highly discussed component of the project during Planning Commission review. Discussion included whether there was sufficient off-set between the shared parking for the 20 Packet Pg. 254 commercial space and the residential units to justify the 30% parking reduction. The City’s parking requirements are conservatively based on nationwide parking studies (Institute of Traffic Engineers parking generation manual) which reflects reductions for combinations of uses and multi-modal access to those facilities such as those found in neighborhood commercial areas. The commercial space is expected to have sufficient spaces as it is expected be used at alternate hours during the day when residents are away at work and/or school. All together the project provides 33 vehicle spaces, 3 motorcycle spaces, 33 short-term bicycle spaces and 80 long-term bicycle spaces (a total of 149 spaces). These spaces are available to residents, vis itors and customers of the site. The reduction in parking spaces is consistent with the Transportation Goal discussed in the Circulation Element to reduce people's use of their cars by supporting and promoting alternatives such as walking, riding buses and bicycles, and using car pools.9 Reductions in parking and a heavy emphasis on bicycle mobility serve this goal and further the objectives of this policy. In addition to putting an emphasis on bicycle mobility, the project is uniquely situated and is located in proximity to grocery stores, restaurants, entertainment, schools, employment and two bus stops, and is easily accessible by walking or public transportation. One bus stop is located right in front of the project and another is directly across the street, allowing service to and from the site. This arrangement encourages better transportation habits and increases the use of alternative forms of transportation and less dependence on the single - occupant use of vehicles (Section 1.7.1).10 The project includes improvements to the existing bus stop with a bus turn out and the construction of a bus stop shelter as a part of the building design (Attachment F, Project Plans, Sheets A2.0 & A3.0). The project location provides residents as well as customer’s various opportunities to access the site and nearby destinations without a vehicle. The applicant is also requesting to incorporate mechanical parking lifts as part of the project. The project is proposing to use a Klaus TrendVario 4100 lift system which pl aces vehicles subterranean with other vehicles parked above, at grade (Attachment F, Project Plans, Sheet 5.1). As proposed, the system parks 27 vehicles, one for each of the residential units. The dimensions of the system allow for a large variety of car models as listed within the Project Plans, Sheet 5.1 (Attachment F). Those vehicles that do not fit into the lift system, have the ability to park in the regular parking stalls provided in the parking garage. The project complies with the findings of approval with added Conditions of Approval No. 4 and 5; (4) The mechanical parking lift shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission for compliance with Community Design Guidelines for compatibility with the building and site design and (5) Prior to building plan approval, the applicant shall record an agreement that runs with the land that mechanical parking systems will be safely operated and maintained in continual operation with the exception of limited periods of maintenance (Attachment A, Draft Resolution A). CONCURRENCES The project has been reviewed by Police, Building, Fire, Public Works, and Utilities staff. Their conditions have been incorporated into the resolution and these departments support the project 9 Circulation Element Transportation Goals, Section 1.6.1. 10 Circulation Element Transportation Objectives, Section 1.7.1 20 Packet Pg. 255 if incorporated conditions of approval are adopted. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The project is both statutorily exempt under Section 15195 and categorically exempt under Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects, Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines, because the project is consistent with General Plan policies for the land use designation, within one-half a mile of a transit stop and is consistent with the applicable zoning designation and regulations. It should be noted that modifications to zoning regulations as required by State Density Bonus law noted above, do not disqualify a project from claiming this exemption. See Wollmer v. City of Berkeley, 193 Cal. App. 4th 1329, 1338 (2011). The project site occurs on a property of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses that has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species as the site is located on an existing developed property and is served by required utilities and public services. FISCAL IMPACT When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, which found that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced. Accordingly, since the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, it has a neutral fiscal impact. There is no fiscal impact associated with the approval of this project. ALTERNATIVES 1. Deny the appeal, thereby denying the project. The Council can deny the project by upholding the PC’s decision and denying the appeal, based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan, Zoning Regulations, and applicable City regulations. 2. Uphold the Appeal and provide direction to the ARC. The Council may uphold the appeal and approve the use permit, but provide additional direction to the ARC regarding issues it should consider during its review of the project’ s design. Attachments: a - Draft Resolution A b - Draft Resolution B c - PC Resolution (denial) - August 24 2016 d - Vicinity Map e - Project plans f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter g - PC Staff Report - August 24 2016 h - PC Meeting Minutes - August 24 2016 20 Packet Pg. 256 R ______ RESOLUTION NO. _________ (2016 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A USE PERMIT FOR A MIXED-USE PROJECT IN THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIAL PLANNING AREA, A 40 PERCENT PARKING REDUCTION AND THE USE OF MECHANICAL PARKING LIFTS AND A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF A HEIGHT EXCEPTION AS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVE AS REPRESENTED IN THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED OCTOBER 18, 2016 (22 CHORRO, USE-2882-2016) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on August 24, 2016 for the purpose of considering a use permit application USE-2882-2016 for a mixed-use project in the Foothill Boulevard special focus area, a 40 percent parking reduction and the use of mechanical parking lifts, and a height exception as an affordable housing incentive to accommodate the development of the proposed project at 22 Chorro Street; and WHEREAS, San Luis Obispo Development Group, LLC, the applicant, filed an appeal of the Planning Commission’s action on August 31, 2016; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following findings to deny the project: 1. That the project will be detrimental to and will have specific adverse impacts on the health, safety, or welfare of those working or residing in the vicinity because the project is inconsistent with the City’s General Plan, Design Guidelines and Zoning Code, specifically with respect to parking, height, setback and compatible development, and there are no feasible methods of satisfactorily mitigating or avoiding these adverse impacts other than disapproval of the project. 2. That per San Luis Obispo Municipal Code (“SLOMC”) section 17.16.060 the project requires 55 spaces on-site parking spaces. The project proposes 33 parking spaces and has requested a 40% parking reduction which is the maximum combined reduction allowed per SLOMC 17.16.060 (C) (mixed-use parking reduction) & (G)2 (bicycle space parking reduction). The Council finds that the adjacent neighborhood is currently impacted by 20.a Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: a - Draft Resolution A (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) Resolution No. _________ (2016) Page 2 R ______ insufficient on-street parking and that additional “spill-over” on street demand from any project within this part of the community will exacerbate those adverse impacts. The Council finds that the justification for the 30% parking reduction based on the mixed use development wholly inappropriate in that the times of the proposed mixed-use parking demand from the two uses will coincide in such a way that it will have detrimental impacts on the surrounding area. In other words, the proposed “mix” of uses and the parking demands from each of those uses is not commensurate with the requested reduction and that, as a consequence, the project will be deficiently parked and vehicles will further impact the surrounding neighborhood. 3. That the proposed setback of zero feet along Chorro Street is inconsistent with Land Use Element Policy 2.3.9.A and the setback requirements of SLOMC 17.16.020.C. For this zone, the setback requirement for a street yard setback equals “As provided in zone of adjacent lot” which, in this case, equals 20 feet due to the R-1 zoning immediately adjacent to the proposed project. The Council finds that the setback requirements as set forth in SLOMC 17.16.020.C establish objective standards to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community and that, as proposed, the proposed project is incompatible with the adjacent neighborhood and fails to provide a smooth transition between the two uses in this regard and adversely impacts the immediately adjacent neighbors by disrupting the neighborhood setback pattern. 4. That the proposed height of 43 feet is inconsistent with Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 9.2.1 and Circulation Element Policy 15.1.2 because the project will block views of Cerro San Luis mountain from Foothill Boulevard which is designated as having moderate scenic value. 5. That the proposed project height is inconsistent with the Land Use Element Policy 2.3.9.E Compatible Development: Architecture; the project’s height and scale does not provide a smooth transition between the existing and proposed development because the existing development immediately surrounding the project is predominantly one story and the proposed development would create an abrupt height differential thus creating a substantial disconnect between the structures within the neighborhood and overwhelm neighboring properties. 6. That the proposed project height is inconsistent with the Community Design Guidelines sections 5.3.A.1 and 5.3.C: the project’s height and scale does not provide a smooth transition between the immediate neighborhood because the existing development immediately surrounding the project is predominantly one story and the proposed development would create an abrupt discrepancy in height and massing and overwhelm the neighboring properties. 7. That the proposed project height is inconsistent with the Land Use Element Policy 2.3.9.F Compatible Development: Privacy and Solar Access; the project will overlook onto adjacent properties and does not respect the privacy of neighboring building and outdoor areas. 20.a Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: a - Draft Resolution A (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) Resolution No. _________ (2016) Page 3 R ______ Section 2. Environmental Review. The project is statutorily exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15270 (Projects which are disapproved). Section 3. Action. Based on the above findings and evidence submitted in support thereof, the City Council does hereby deny use permit application USE-2882-2016. On motion of _____________________, seconded by ______________________ and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this ____ day of ________________ 2016. ____________________________________ Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ________________________________ Carrie Gallagher City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________. _________________________________ Carrie Gallagher City Clerk 20.a Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: a - Draft Resolution A (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) R ______ RESOLUTION NO. _________ (2016 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A USE PERMIT FOR A MIXED- USE PROJECT IN THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIAL PLANNING AREA, A 40 PERCENT PARKING REDUCTION AND THE USE OF MECHANICAL PARKING LIFTS INCLUDING A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION FROM CEQA AND A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF A HEIGHT EXCEPTION AS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVE AS REPRESENTED IN THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED OCTOBER 18, 2016 (22 CHORRO, USE-2882-2016) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on August 24, 2016 for the purpose of considering a use permit application USE-2882-2016 for a mixed-use project in the Foothill Boulevard special focus area, a 40 percent parking reduction and the use of mechanical parking lifts, and a height exception as an affordable housing incentive to accommodate the development of the proposed project at 22 Chorro Street; and WHEREAS, San Luis Obispo Development Group, LLC, the applicant, filed an appeal of the Planning Commission’s action on August 31, 2016; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following findings in support of the project approval that includes a use permit for a mixed-use project in the Foothill Boulevard special focus area, a 40 percent parking reduction and the use of mechanical parking lifts and recommends approval of a height exception as an affordable housing incentive of the proposed project: 1. That the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of those working or residing in the vicinity because the proposed project is consistent with the Foothill Boulevard/Santa Rosa Special Focus Area of the Land Use Element and Zoning Regulations. 20.b Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: b - Draft Resolution B (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) Resolution No. _________ (2016) Page 2 R ______ Findings for Affordable Housing Incentives: 2. That the project is consistent with Housing Element, Goal 2 because the project includes units for very-low income households which helps meet the City’s affordable housing objectives. 3. That with 11 percent of the units restricted for very-low income households, the applicant is entitled up to a 35 percent maximum density bonus under State law and the City’s Municipal Code, Chapter 17.90. Therefore, the proposed density bonus for the project of 35 percent is consistent with established criteria for density bonuses. 4. That the proposed height of 43 feet to accommodate the development of the proposed project is appropriate as an incentive consistent with the Zoning Regulations Section 17.90.060.B(1) that a reduction in site development standards or modification of zoning code requirements or architectural design requirements that exceeds the minimum building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission as provided in Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code. Findings for 40 Percent Parking Reduction: 5. That the proposed project complies with San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Section 17.16.060.A, Parking Space Requirements, in that it satisfies the intent of that section which is “... to minimize the area devoted exclusively to parking and drives when typical demands may be satisfied more efficiently by shared facilities.” Moreover, the project satisfies the requirement for a shared parking reduction specified in San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Section 17.16.060.B because there are multiple uses that share common parking areas. In addition, in accordance with the provisions of Section 17.16.060.C, the times of maximum parking demand from the proposed uses will not coincide. 6. That the proposed project is consistent with the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Section 17.16.060.G and provides 30 additional bicycle parking spaces (above the bicycle parking required for the project) for a 10 percent parking reduction at the rate of one car space for each five bicycle spaces provided. 7. That the proposed parking reduction will safe, and will not be detrimental to the surrounding area or cause a decline in quality of life because project is located close proximity to grocery stores, restaurants, entertainment, schools, employment and two bus stops allowing for alternative modes of transportation such as walking, biking or taking public transportation. Findings for Mechanical Parking Lifts: 8. That the use of mechanical lift parking results in superior design and implementation of City goals and policies for infill development by placing parking within the structure and screening it from public view. 20.b Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: b - Draft Resolution B (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) Resolution No. _________ (2016) Page 3 R ______ 9. That the mechanical lift parking is adequately screened and, as conditioned, shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission for compliance with Community Design Guidelines for compatibility with the building and site design. 10. That the mechanical lift parking systems complies with all development standards including but not limited to height and setback requirements, and Parking and Driveway Standards with the exception of minimum parking stall sizes which are established by lift specifications. 11. That, as conditioned, the mechanical parking systems will be safely operated and maintained in continual operation with the exception of limited periods of maintenance. 12. That there are no circumstances of the site or development, or particular model or type of mechanical lift system which could result in significant impacts to those living or working on the site or in the vicinity. Section 2. Environmental Review. The project is both statutorily exempt under Section 15195 and categorically exempt under Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects, Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines, because the project is consistent with General Plan policies for the land use designation, within one-half a mile of a transit stop and is consistent with the applicable zoning designation and regulations. The project site occurs on a property of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses that has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species as the site is located on an existing developed property and is served by required utilities and public services. Section 3. Action. The City Council does hereby uphold the appeal of the Planning Commission’s action to deny the proposed project hereby granting final approval of the application USE-2882-2016 for a mixed-use project in the Foothill Boulevard special focus area, a 40 percent parking reduction and the use of mechanical parking lifts and recommends approval of a height exception as an affordable housing incentive at 22 Chorro Street subject to the following conditions: Planning 1. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval by the City of this project, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review (“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim, and City shall fully cooperate in the defense against an Indemnified Claim. 2. The proposed use shall operate consistent with the project description, approved plans, and other supporting documentation submitted with this application unless otherwise conditioned herein. 20.b Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: b - Draft Resolution B (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) Resolution No. _________ (2016) Page 4 R ______ 3. The project shall be forwarded to the Architectural Review Commission to review the project design for consistency with the Community Design Guidelines and the Mixed Use project design standards (Zoning Regulations section 17.08.072). Specific attention shall be given to the compatibility between the adjacent commercial uses and the residential uses. The Architectural Review Commission shall be responsible for taking action on additional project conditions and code requirements as applicable. 4. The mechanical parking lift shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission for compliance with Community Design Guidelines for compatibility with the building and site design. 5. Prior to building plan approval, the applicant shall record an agreement in a form subject to the approval of the City Attorney that runs with the land that mechanical parking systems will be safely operated and maintained in continual operation with the exception of limited periods of maintenance. 6. All regular (non-mechanical lift) parking spaces shall be available for residential tenants, employees and customers free from restrictions. No regular parking spaces shall be individually labeled or allocated. 7. All mechanical lift parking spaces shall be available for all residential tenants. 8. The project shall include 33 parking spaces, 3 motorcycle spaces and 93 required bicycle parking spaces (70 long-term and 23 short-term). 9. The property owner shall be responsible for maintaining and updating the current parking calculation for the commercial component of the project upon the submittal of Planning and Building permits for tenant changes or improvements to ensure the site does not become under-parked. 10. The project shall have a maximum height of 43 feet. The tallest part of the project shall be located along Foothill Boulevard as shown on the submitted project plans. Any alterations increasing the proposed height or the location of the height on the site will require a modification to the use permit. 11. Plans submitted for building permit review shall show the location of all 93 required bicycle parking spaces (70 long-term and 23 short-term) and include product sheets of the proposed bike racks to be used. All bicycle parking spaces included as part of the project shall comply with City’s Municipal Code Section 17.16.060, Table 6.5 and the Community Design Guidelines Section 6.3.F. Transportation 12. Consistent with the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan, the project shall install a bike box on Chorro Street, south of Foothill Boulevard. Building plans shall include the layout and design of the bike box and right turn lane according to design guidance within the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guidelines and design shall be reviewed and approved by City 20.b Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: b - Draft Resolution B (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) Resolution No. _________ (2016) Page 5 R ______ Transportation & Engineering Division prior to installation. The installation may require modifications to the existing pedestrian refuge island. 13. In regards to the bus turnout and facilities, project plans submitted for the building permit shall be consistent with the plans submitted for the use permit. 14. The applicant shall record a public access easement along the Foothill Boulevard frontage of the project which also allows the City to place and maintain bus facilities such as benches, signs, maps, etc. On motion of _____________________, seconded by ______________________ and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this ____ day of ________________ 2016. ____________________________________ Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: _________________________________ Carrie Gallagher City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________. _________________________________ Carrie Gallagher City Clerk 20.b Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: b - Draft Resolution B (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) RESOLUTION NO. PC -1009-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING A USE PERMIT FOR A MIXED-USE PROJECT IN THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIAL FOCUS AREA AS REPRESENTED IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED AUGUST 24, 2016 (22 CHORRO, USE -2882-2016) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on August 24, 2016 for the purpose of considering a use permit application USE -2882-2016 for a mixed-use project in the Foothill Boulevard special focus area, a 40 percent parking reduction and the use of mechanical parking lifts, and a height exception as an affordable housing incentive to accommodate the development of the proposed project at 22 Chorro Street; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Firidiiigs. Based upon all the evidence, the Commission makes the following findings to deny the proposed project: 1. That the project will be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of those working or residing in the vicinity because the proposed parking reduction is excessive and the height is inconsistent with the General Plan. 2. That the request for reduced parking is inconsistent with San Luis Obispo Municipal Code section 17. 16.060 in that the requested parking reduction is excessive for the proposed use and that the times of the proposed mixed-use parking demand from the various uses will coincide in such a way that it will have detrimental impacts on the surrounding area. 3. That the proposed project height is inconsistent with Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 9.2.1 because the project will block views from Foothill Boulevard which is designated as having moderate scenic value. 4. That the proposed project height is inconsistent with the Land Use Element Policy 2.3.9.E Compatible Development: Architecture; the project's height and scale does not provide a smooth transition between the existing and proposed development. 5. That the proposed project height is inconsistent with the Community Design Guidelines sections 5. 3.A.1 and 5. 3.C: the project's height and scale does not provide a smooth 20.c Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: c - PC Resolution (denial) - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) Planning Commission Resolution No. PC -1009-16 USE -2882-2016 (22 Chorro Street) Page 2 transition between the immediate neighborhood. 6. That the proposed project height is inconsistent with the Land Use Element Policy 2.3.9.F Compatible Development: Privacy and Solar Access; the project will overlook onto adjacent properties and does not respect the privacy of neighboring building and outdoor areas. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The project is statutorily exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15270 (Projects which are disapproved). SECTION 3. Action. Based on the above findings and evidence submitted in support thereof, the Planning Commission does hereby deny use permit application USE -2882-2016. On motion by Commissioner Larson, seconded by Commissioner Fowler and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Larson, Malak, Vice -Chair Fowler and Chair Stevenson NOES: Commissioner Knight REFRAIN: None ABSENT: Commissioner Dandekar The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 24`h day of August, 2016. C7 Doug David n, Secretary Planning Commission 20.c Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: c - PC Resolution (denial) - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) R-1 C-R-S C-C-SF R-1 C-C-SF O-PD PF R-1 R-4 C-C-SF FOOTHILLCH O R R O ROUGEOT VICINITY MAP USE-2882-201622 Chorro Street ¯ 20.d Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: d - Vicinity Map (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) 20.e Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 268 20.e Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 269 20.e Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 270 20.e Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 271 20.e Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 272 20.e Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 273 20.e Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 274 20.e Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 275 20.e Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 276 20.e Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 277 20.e Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 278 20.e Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 279 20.e Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 280 20.e Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 281 20.e Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 282 20.e Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 283 20.e Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 284 20.e Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 285 20.e Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 286 20.e Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 287 20.e Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 288 20.e Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 289 20.e Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 290 20.e Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 291 20.e Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 292 SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS GASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGAS GAS GAS GAS WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W W W W W WXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXW SSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEETELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTEW W W W E E E EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE E EE ESSSDSDSDSD SDSDSDSD252.6FS252.4FS251.9FS252.4FS252.6FS249.1FS247.9FS252.6 FF252.4 FF251.9 FFMAX 1.5%250.6FS252.4FS3%250.0 TPMATCH EXIST247.5 TPMATCH EXIST251.4 TPMATCH EXIST252.9 TPMATCH EXIST252.4FS252.4FS250.7 TW250.0 FS250.1FS8%252.3 TW249.6 FS249.3FS249.3FS1.5%251.6BSW/FL248.0FL252.4TC/FL252.9FS251.4 TCMATCH EXIST251.7TC252.2TC1.5%252.4TC251.2 TPMATCH EXIST252.7TC252.8 TPMATCH EXIST251.0TC252.8FS252.1FS249.6TC250.4TC248.2 BSWMATCH EXIST2%2%4.2%4.2%5%2%PROPOSED PUBLICACCESS EASEMENT1.5% 1.5%252.6FS1.5%Ashley&VanceG,C1413 Monterey StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805) 545-0010 (323) 744-0010www.ashleyvance.comC I V I L S T R U C T U R A LSITE CONSTRUCTION NOTES:DRIVEWAY APPROACH AND RAMP PER SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY STANDARD 2110.EXISTING WALL TO REMAINTRASH ENCLOSURE PER SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY STANDARD 9110.VEGETATED SWALE FLOWLINE. ROOF DRAINS AND DOWNSPOUTS TO BE DIRECTED TOWARD SWALE.SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY STANDARD SIDEWALK PER DETAIL 4110, 4120 AND 4910.STRUCTURAL COLUMNSBUILDING WALLSAWCUT AND REPLACE 24" MIN PAVEMENT SECTION, MATCH EXITING STRUCTURAL PAVEMENT SECTION.SEE SAN LUIS OBISPO STANDARD DETAIL 7110 FOR REFERENCE.SIDEWALK UNDERDRAIN PER SAN LUIS OBISPO STANDARD DETAIL 3415.CURB AND GUTTER PER SAN LUIS OBISPO STANDARD DETAIL 4030INSTALL 12" CATCH BASIN WITH ATRIUM GRATE.6" PVC STORM DRAINCURB RAMP PER SAN LUIS OBISPO STANDARD DETAIL 4440 AND APPENDIX A.BUS TURN IN PER SAN LUIS OBISPO STANDARD DETAIL 4920.BUS STOP PER SAN LUIS OBISPO STANDARD DETAIL 4930.RESET LID TO GRADERELOCATE VAULT AND RESET TO GRADERELOCATE UTILITY BOX AND RESET LID TO GRADEEXISTING PROPERTY LINEPROPOSED PROPERTY LINEPROPOSED SITE RETAINING WALL4' PAINTED BIKE LINERE-STRIPE CROSS WALKUNDERGROUND RETENTION CHAMBERSPROPOSED PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT010 10 20HORIZONTAL SCALE: FEETNCHORRO STREETFOOTHILL BLVD1236TYP22DRAINAGE NOTE: MAJORITY OF HARDSCAPE IS COVERED BY MULTISTORY BUILDING. STORMRUNOFF WILL BE ROUTED TO THE UNDERGROUND RETENTION CHAMBERS THROUGH ASERIES OF 2ND AND 3RD STORY ROOF DRAIN SYSTEMS OUTLETTING TO VEGETADEDSWALES AND STORM DRAINS. SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLAN FOR 2ND AND 3RD STORYLAYOUT.SITE STATISTICS:21,874 SF AREAEARTHWORK:2,000 CY CUT50 CY FILL11' MAX CUT2' MAX FILLLID STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS, TIER 2PROJECT UTILIZES:xUNDERGROUND RETENTIONxDISCONNECTED DOWNSPOUTSxVEGETATED SWALES455557TYP7TYP411888888910101010101010101414151313161616161617161818191919192020202121222323PROPOSED PUBLICACCESS EASEMENT2412STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS:BSW BACK OF SIDEWALKFF FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONFG FINISHED GRADEFL FLOWLINEFS FINISHED SURFACETC TOP OF CURBTG TOP OF GRATETP TOP OF PAVEMENTTW TOP OF WALLTYP TYPICAL202020PROPOSED PUBLICACCESS EASEMENT252525PROPOSED PUBLICACCESS EASEMENTPROPOSED PUBLICACCESS EASEMENT20.e Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 293 SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGASGAS GAS GAS WWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWW W W WXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXW SSEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEETELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELTELW W W W E E E EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EESSSSSSSSDSDSDSD SDSDSDSDWAshley&VanceG,C1413 Monterey StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805) 545-0010 (323) 744-0010www.ashleyvance.comC I V I L S T R U C T U R A L010 10 20HORIZONTAL SCALE: FEETNSITE UTILITY NOTES:MECHANICAL ROOM4" FIRE WATER. CONNECT TO BUILDING PER CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO STANDARD DETAIL 6590.6" SDR 35 PVC SEWER LATER PER CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO STANDARD DETAIL 6810.SEWER CLEANOUT PER CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO STANDARD DETAIL 6710.INSTALL NEW 1.5" COMMERCIAL WATER METER IN PREVIOUSLY ABANDONED WATER METER BOXINSTALL NEW 2" DOMESTIC WATER METER AND 3/4" IRRIGATION METER PER CITY OF SAN LUISOBISPO STANDARD DETAIL 6210, 6220, AND 6260.2" DOMESTIC WATER SERVICEEXISTING FIRE HYDRANT6" SDR 35 PVC STORM DRAIN.STORM TECH SC-740 UNDERGROUND STORAGE CHAMBERSEXISTING MANHOLE, CLEANOUT AND SEWER LOCATED IN THIS AREA NOT SHOWN IN TOPO.SEWER TO BE ABANDONED, CONTRACTOR SHALL SEVER AND PLUG TIE-IN LOCATION ATDOWNSTREAM MANHOLE.122346588247.6 TG244.6 INV94710STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS:INV INVERTTG TOP OF GRATEGENERAL NOTES:ALL EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE BEST KNOWLEDGE AVAILABLE. ANYEXISTING SEWER LATERALS TO SITE ENCOUNTERED DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BEABANDONED. CONTRACTOR TO POTHOLE ALL POINTS OF CONNECTION AND VERIFY ALLCLEARANCES. MATERIAL DEPTH AND LOCATION SHALL BE IDENTIFIED BY CONTRACTOR. IFTHERE ARE ANY DIFFERENCES FROM PLAN WITH ANY OF THESE ITEMS, ENGINEER OF WORKSHALL BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATELY.1120.e Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 294 20.e Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 295 20.e Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: e - Project plans (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street)20.e Packet Pg. 296 20.f Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 20.f Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 20.f Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 20.f Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 20.f Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a 20.f Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a 20.f Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a 20.f Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a 20.f Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a 20.f Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a 20.f Packet Pg. 307 Attachment: f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a 20.f Packet Pg. 308 Attachment: f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a 20.f Packet Pg. 309 Attachment: f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a 20.f Packet Pg. 310 Attachment: f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a 20.f Packet Pg. 311 Attachment: f - Planning Commission Appeal and Supplemental Letter (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a Meeting Date: August 24, 2016 Item Number: 1 2 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: Review of a new four-story mixed-use project including ground floor commercial/retail space and 27 residential units. The project includes a 35% density bonus, with 11% of the units for very low income households, a request for a 40% parking reduction with mechanical parking lifts, and the construction of a 43-foot tall structure where 35 feet is normally allowed. PROJECT ADDRESS: 22 Chorro Street BY: Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner Phone Number: (805) 781-7574 e-mail: rcohen@slocity.org FILE NUMBER: USE-2882-2016 FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment 1) that approves a use permit for a mixed-use project in the Foothill Boulevard special focus area, a 40% parking reduction and the use of mechanical parking lifts and recommends approval of a height exception as an affordable housing incentive, subject to findings and conditions of approval. SITE DATA Applicant San Luis Development Group, LLC Representative Thom Jess, Architect Submittal Date March 10, 2016 Complete Date June 20, 2016 Zoning C-C-SF, Community Commercial with a Special Focus Overlay General Plan Commercial Site Area .55 acres (24,033 s.f.) (3 parcels) Environmental Status Categorically Exempt from environmental review under Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects) of the CEQA Guidelines. SUMMARY The applicant has submitted a project for a new four-story mixed-use project with 1,600 square feet of ground floor commercial/retail space and 27 residential units. The project includes a 35% density bonus, with 11% of the units designated for very low income households. As one of their affordable housing incentives, the applicant is requesting a 43-foot maximum height for the structure where 35 feet is normally allowed. The project also includes a request for a 40% parking reduction and the use of mechanical parking lifts. The project is located within the Foothill Boulevard/Santa Rosa Special Focus Area and requires Planning Commission review and approval (Zoning Regulations, Chapter 17.53: PC1 - 1 20.g Packet Pg. 312 Attachment: g - PC Staff Report - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) USE-2882-2016 22 Chorro Street Page 2 Special Focus Area (S-F) Overlay Zone). 1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW The Planning Commission’s role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the General Plan, Zoning Regulations, and applicable City standards. 2.0 BACKGROUND The applicant initially submitted their project on March 10, 2016. During the course of review, staff provided feedback to the applicant regarding their proposal. The original proposal included a structure with a height of 50 feet, a parking layout that did not comply with City standards, and the project design was inconsistent with the Community Design Guidelines. The applicant responded by reducing the height 7 feet to a maximum height of 43 feet, redesigning the parking to meet City standards and redesigned the project with new colors, materials and articulation. 3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 3.1 Site Information/Setting Zoning C-C-SF (Community Commercial with a Special Focus Overlay) Site Size 0.55 acres (24,033 s.f.) Present Use & Development Vacant Topography Flat Access Chorro Street and Foothill Blvd Surrounding Use/Zoning North: C-R-SF (University Square Shopping Center) South: R-1 (Single family residences) East: C-R-SF (G. Brothers Restaurant) West: C-R-SF & R-1 (Jamba Juice, Starbucks, Single family residences) 3.2 Project Description The project proposes to construct a new four-story mixed-use project with: • 1,600 square feet of ground floor commercial/retail space; • 27 residential units (23 two-bedrooms and 4 studios restricted for very-low income households); • A request for a 40% shared/mixed-use/bicycle parking reduction to reduce the required parking from 55 parking spaces to 33 parking spaces; and • 113 bicycle parking spaces (80 long-term and 33 short-term). The project also includes a separate application for architectural review that will be reviewed at a later date once the use permit has been approved by the Planning Commission. PC1 - 2 20.g Packet Pg. 313 Attachment: g - PC Staff Report - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) USE-2882-2016 22 Chorro Street Page 3 3.3 Project Statistics Item Proposed 1 Standard 2 Setback Front Yard 0 feet 0 feet Other Yard (max height 35 feet) 10 feet 5 feet Max. Height of Structure(s) 43 feet 35 feet Max. Building Coverage (footprint) 72% 75% Density Units (DU) 25 DU 18 DU (36 DU per acre) Parking Spaces Vehicle 33 55 Bicycle (long-term) 80 58 Bicycle (short-term) 33 5 Notes: 1. Applicant’s project plans submitted 5/20/2016 2. Zoning Regulations 4.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS 4.1 General Plan Special Focus Area On December 9, 2014, the City Council adopted the new Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) of the General Plan (Resolution No. 10586, 2014 Series). As a part of the update, a new section was added to the Land Use Element (LUE) that identified Special Focus Areas (Attachment 4). Section 17.53.020 of the Zoning Regulations states Planning Commission review and approval is required for project located within the Foothill Boulevard/Santa Rosa Special Focus Area (Attachment 5). The section further states that all development within the Special Planning Areas shall adhere to the requirements of the underlying zone district and the provisions for each of the respective Special Planning Areas, as described in Chapter 8 of the Land Use Element. In addition, development objectives within each of the Special Planning Areas shall be interpreted by the Community Development Director or applicable advisory body or commission in order to achieve the development objectives of the Special Focus Areas. Where provisions of the underlying zone and Land Use Element Chapter 8 conflict, Land Figure 1: Perspective view of the project looking southeast from Foothill Blvd. PC1 - 3 20.g Packet Pg. 314 Attachment: g - PC Staff Report - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) USE-2882-2016 22 Chorro Street Page 4 Use Element policies shall take precedence. The proposed project is located in the Foothill Boulevard / Santa Rosa Area,1 which includes land on both sides of Foothill Boulevard between Chorro and Santa Rosa and is currently developed as commercial centers that include highway and neighborhood serving commercial uses (see Figure 2). The LUE policy for the Foothill Boulevard/Santa Rosa Special Focus Area states the City shall work with property owners / developers to redevelop the area as mixed use (either horizontal or vertical mixed use) to include a mix of uses as described under the Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial and Medium High to High Density Residential designations…As part of this project, the City will evaluate adjustments to parking requirements to account for predominant pedestrian and bike access. Building height adjustments in this area can also be considered with mixed use development. Redevelopment plans shall include consideration of improving the existing complex intersections of Foothill/Chorro/Broad… Among other possible incentives, building height adjustments on the North side of Foothill may be considered with mixed use development. The Foothill Boulevard / Santa Rosa Special Focus Area encourages discussion on the development of mixed-use projects, adjustments in parking and height requirements and improving intersections along Foothill Boulevard. The project incorporates various aspects of these concepts which are further supported by other City polices and State housing law as discussed below. 4.2 Affordable Housing Incentives and Height The applicant is requesting the height exception to be able to include four studios or two density units for very-low income households; 11% of the project is affordable. According to Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.90: Affordable Housing Incentives, when a developer agrees to construct at 11% of the total units of a housing development for very-low income households, the director shall grant the developer, upon the developer’s request, a density bonus of 35%.2 In addition to the density bonus, the developer may request an additional incentive or concession, such height increase,3 when providing at least 10% 1 Land Use Element Section 8.2.1. Foothill Boulevard / Santa Rosa Area. 2 Zoning Regulations Section 17.90.040.E 3 Zoning Regulations Section 17.90.060.B(1): A reduction in site development standards or modification of zoning code requirements or architectural design requirements that exceeds the minimum building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission as provided in Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code, including, but not limited to, a reduction in setback and square footage requirements and in the ratio of vehicular parking spaces that would otherwise be required that results in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions. Figure 2: Snapshot of Figure 10: Special Focus Areas from the Land Use Element PC1 - 4 20.g Packet Pg. 315 Attachment: g - PC Staff Report - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) USE-2882-2016 22 Chorro Street Page 5 of the units for very-low income households.4 In addition, under the State Density Bonus law (Gov. Code section 65915), a public agency is required to grant the incentive or concession unless it makes a written finding, based on substantial evidence, that the concession or incentive would have a specific adverse impact upon public health and safety and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable.5 “Specific adverse impact” within this statute means 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.” Gov. Code section 65589.5(d)(2). The project proposes to construct a 43-foot tall structure within a zone that has a maximum height of 35 feet. As discussed above, the proposed density of the project cannot be achieved without additional height. The surrounding neighborhood contains a range of single story and two-story structures; single story buildings are directly adjacent to the site and the University Square Shopping Center, located across the street from the site, contains several two-story structures that are approximately 30 feet tall. The project steps down the height of the building with the highest height of 43 feet along Foothill Boulevard and a lower height of the 32 feet closest to the nearest single family residence (Attachment 3, Project Plans, Sheet A4.0). This is 3 feet lower than the maximum height of 35 feet allowed for the site (C-C zone) as well as what is allowed, with a use permit, in the adjacent residential R-1 zone. Additionally the project is setback 17 feet where a 13.5-foot setback is required. As proposed, the project appears to be consistent with the Land Use policy discussion on building height adjustments for the Foothill Boulevard / Santa Rosa Special Focus Area and with the City’s affordable housing incentives. 4.3 Chorro/Foothill Intersection The project includes the widening of Chorro Street at the intersection of Foothill for a bike box and expansion of the right turn lane (see Figure 3). A bike box is a set of road markings located at signalized intersections that allows bicycles a head start when the traffic signal changes from red to green. Adding the bike box to the Chorro/Foothill intersection will improve the bicycle circulation at this intersection and is consistent with the 2013 Bicycle 4 Zoning Regulations Section 17.90.060.A(2): Alternative or additional incentives. When a developer agrees to construct housing for households of very-low, lower or moderate income households… and desires an incentive other than a density bonus as provided in Section 17.90.040 of this chapter… the developer shall receive the following number of incentives or concessions: (2) Two incentives or concessions for housing developments that include at least twenty (20) percent of the total units for lower income households, at least ten (10) percent for very-low income households, or at least twenty (20) percent for persons and families of moderate income in a common interest development. 5 See Government Code section 65915(d). Figure 3: Proposed bike lane leading to the new bike box indicated in green. The expansion of the right turn lane is indicated in orange. Full engineering specifications will be included as part of the building plans. PC1 - 5 20.g Packet Pg. 316 Attachment: g - PC Staff Report - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) USE-2882-2016 22 Chorro Street Page 6 Transportation Plan 6 and Circulation Element Policy 4.1.6: Bikeway Development with Road Improvements of the Circulation Element which states: the City shall construct bikeways facilities as designated in the Bicycle Transportation Plan when: A) The street section is repaved, restriped, or changes are made to its cross-sectional design; or B) The street section is being changed as part of a development project. 4.4 Parking The project requires 55 spaces (50 spaces for 27 residential units and 5 spaces for 1,600 square feet of commercial space). The applicant is requesting a 40% parking reduction to have a total of 33 required spaces. Zoning Regulations Section 17.16.060.B states that where two or more uses share common parking areas, the total number of parking spaces required may be reduced by up to 10%, with approval of an administrative use permit. Section 17.16.060.C further states that by approving an administrative use permit, the Director may reduce the parking requirement for projects sharing parking by up to 20%, in addition to the shared parking reduction, for a total maximum parking reduction of 30%, upon finding that the times of maximum parking demand from various uses will not coincide. The commercial space is expected to be used at alternate hours during the day when residents are away at work and/or school. The project also includes 30 additional bicycle parking spaces for 10% parking reduction. Section 17.16.060.G(2) states that projects which provide more bicycle and/or motorcycle spaces than required may reduce the required car spaces at the rate of one car space for each five bicycle spaces, up to a 10% reduction, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. All bicycle parking that exceeds the required number of spaces shall be apportioned between short-term and long-term bicycle spaces as stipulated by Table 6.5. The applicant is providing 50 additional bicycle parking spaces with 30 of the spaces to further reduce the parking requirements by 5.5 spaces. The design of the project includes a bike lounge, a bike repair area (“bike shop”) and indoor bike storage to incentivize bicycle use by tenants (Attachment 3. Project Plans, A2.0). The project is located in close proximity to grocery stores, restaurants, entertainment, schools, employment and two bus stops. Due to this location, the site and the surrounding area are easily accessible by walking, biking or taking public transportation. One bus stop is located right in front of the project and another is directly across the street, allowing to and from service to the site. The project includes improvements to the existing bus stop with a bus turn out and the construction of a bus stop shelter as a part of the building design (Attachment 3, Project Plans, Sheets A2.0 & A3.0). The project location provides residents as well as customers various opportunities to access the site and nearby destinations without a vehicle. The applicant is also requesting to incorporate mechanical parking lifts as part of the project. The project is proposing to use a Klaus TrendVario 4100 lift system which places vehicles subterranean with other vehicles parked above, at grade (Attachment 3, Project Plans, Sheet 5.1). As proposed, the system parks 27 vehicles, one for each of the residential units. The dimensions of the system allow for a large variety of car models as listed within the Project Plans, Sheet 5.1 (Attachment 3). Those vehicles that do not fit 6 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan. Appendix A. North Chorro Intersection Enhancement. Intent: To address conflict potential in the common direction movement (north on Chorro to west on Foothill) from the right hand lane that allows both left turning and straight through traffic movement. Project Description: For northbound Chorro bicycle traffic at Foothill Blvd: Modify the intersection/provide facilities, to reduce conflict possibility between left (west) turning bike traffic, and straight through motor vehicle traffic. Notes: Possible solutions could include a Bike Box, a bicycle specific signal phase, or lane movement configuration changes. Bike counts taken in 2008 show that the intersections of Santa Rosa/Foothill was the second highest with a count of 314. PC1 - 6 20.g Packet Pg. 317 Attachment: g - PC Staff Report - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) USE-2882-2016 22 Chorro Street Page 7 into the lift system, have the ability to park in the regular parking stalls provided in the parking garage. The project complies with the findings of approval with added Conditions of Approval No. 4 and 5; (4) The mechanical parking lift shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission for compliance with Community Design Guidelines for compatibility with the building and site design and (5) Prior to building plan approval, the applicant shall record an agreement that runs with the land that mechanical parking systems will be safely operated and maintained in continual operation with the exception of limited periods of maintenance (Attachment 1, Draft Resolution). 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The project is categorically exempt under Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects; Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines, because the project is consistent with General Plan policies for the land use designation and is consistent with the applicable zoning designation and regulations. It should be noted that modifications to zoning regulations as required by State Density Bonus law noted above, do not disqualify a project from claiming this exemption. See Wollmer v. City of Berkeley, 193 Cal. App. 4th 1329, 1338 (2011). The project site occurs on a property of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses that has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species as the site is located on an existing developed property and is served by required utilities and public services. 6.0 WATER AVAILABILITY Since the adoption of the 2014 General Plan Land Use Element (LUE), the City acquired an additional annual allocation of 2,102 acre feet of water from Nacimiento Reservoir, bringing the total annual available to 5,482 acre feet per year. This brings the City’s total annual availability to 12,109 acre feet, previously 10,007. In addition to this, the City is currently expanding its groundwater program, while concurrently designing the upgrade to the Water Resource Recovery Facility to allow highly treated wastewater to become a potable water source. The 2015 Urban Water Management Plan projected that the City’s total annual residential and non- residential water demand will be 7,496 acre feet at buildout (year 2035 with a population of 57,200) as evaluated under the 2014 LUE. This estimation uses 117 gallons per capita day consumption (gpcd), though the current usage is only 90 gpcd. As a baseline comparison, the total City annual water demand in 2015 was approximately 4,772 acre feet; 40% of the available water supply. The available annual water supply (12,109 acre feet) far exceeds the LUE projected annual buildout demand (7,496 acre feet). Since the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, water use and demand associated with the development is anticipated and included with LUE buildout projections. 7.0 ALTERNATIVES 1. Continue the project with direction to the applicant and staff on pertinent issues. 2. Deny the project based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan, Zoning Regulations, or other policy documents. 8.0 ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Resolution PC1 - 7 20.g Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: g - PC Staff Report - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) USE-2882-2016 22 Chorro Street Page 8 2. Vicinity Map 3. Project Plans 4. Land Use Element Section 8: Special Focus Areas, Policy 8.2.1. 5. Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.53 PC1 - 8 20.g Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: g - PC Staff Report - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) RESOLUTION NO. XXXX-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A USE PERMIT FOR A MIXED-USE PROJECT IN THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIAL FOCUS AREA, A 40 PERCENT PARKING REDUCTION AND THE USE OF MECHANICAL PARKING LIFTS INCLUDING A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION FROM CEQA AND A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF A HEIGHT EXCEPTION AS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVE AS REPRESENTED IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED AUGUST 24, 2016 (22 CHORRO, USE-2882-2016) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on August 24, 2016 for the purpose of considering a use permit application USE-2882-2016 for a mixed-use project in the Foothill Boulevard special focus area, a 40 percent parking reduction and the use of mechanical parking lifts, and a height exception as an affordable housing incentive to accommodate the development of the proposed project at 22 Chorro Street; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Commission makes the following findings in support of the project approval that includes a use permit for a mixed-use project in the Foothill Boulevard special focus area, a 40 percent parking reduction and the use of mechanical parking lifts and recommends approval of a height exception as an affordable housing incentive of the proposed project: 1. That the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of those working or residing in the vicinity because the proposed project is consistent with the Foothill Boulevard / Santa Rosa Special Focus Area of the Land Use Element and Zoning Regulations. Findings for Affordable Housing Incentives: 2. That the project is consistent with Housing Element, Goal 2 because the project includes units for very-low income households which helps meet the City’s affordable housing objectives. ATTACHMENT 1 PC1 - 9 20.g Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: g - PC Staff Report - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) Planning Commission Resolution No. PC-XXXX-16 USE-2882-2016 (22 Chorro Street) Page 2 3. That with 11 percent of the units restricted for very-low income households, the applicant is entitled up to a 35 percent maximum density bonus under State law and the City’s Municipal Code, Chapter 17.90. Therefore, the proposed density bonus for the project of 35 percent is consistent with established criteria for density bonuses. 4. That the proposed height of 43 feet to accommodate the development of the proposed project is appropriate as an incentive consistent with the Zoning Regulations Section 17.90.060.B(1) that a reduction in site development standards or modification of zoning code requirements or architectural design requirements that exceeds the minimum building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission as provided in Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code, including, but not limited to, a reduction in setback and square footage requirements and in the ratio of vehicular parking spaces that would otherwise be required that results in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions. Findings for 40 Percent Parking Reduction: 5. That the proposed project complies with San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Section 17.16.060.A, Parking Space Requirements, in that it satisfies the intent of that section which is “... to minimize the area devoted exclusively to parking and drives when typical demands may be satisfied more efficiently by shared facilities.” Moreover, the project satisfies the requirement for a shared parking reduction specified in San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Section 17.16.060.B because there are multiple uses that share common parking areas. In addition, in accordance with the provisions of Section 17.16.060.C, the times of maximum parking demand from the proposed uses will not coincide. 6. That the proposed project is consistent with the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Section 17.16.060.G and provides 30 additional bicycle parking spaces (above the bicycle parking required for the project) for a 10 percent parking reduction at the rate of one car space for each five bicycle spaces provided. 7. That the proposed parking reduction will safe, and will not be detrimental to the surrounding area or cause a decline in quality of life because project is located close proximity to grocery stores, restaurants, entertainment, schools, employment and two bus stops allowing for alternative modes of transportation such as walking, biking or taking public transportation. Findings for Mechanical Parking Lifts: 8. That the use of mechanical lift parking results in superior design and implementation of City goals and policies for infill development by placing parking within the structure and screening it from public view. ATTACHMENT 1 PC1 - 10 20.g Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: g - PC Staff Report - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) Planning Commission Resolution No. PC-XXXX-16 USE-2882-2016 (22 Chorro Street) Page 3 9. That the mechanical lift parking is adequately screened and, as conditioned, shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission for compliance with Community Design Guidelines for compatibility with the building and site design. 10. That the mechanical lift parking systems complies with all development standards including but not limited to height and setback requirements, and Parking and Driveway Standards with the exception of minimum parking stall sizes which are established by lift specifications. 11. That, as conditioned, the mechanical parking systems will be safely operated and maintained in continual operation with the exception of limited periods of maintenance. 12. That there are no circumstances of the site or development, or particular model or type of mechanical lift system which could result in significant impacts to those living or working on the site or in the vicinity. Section 2. Environmental Review. The project is categorically exempt under Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects; Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines, because the project is consistent with General Plan policies for the land use designation and is consistent with the applicable zoning designation and regulations. The project site occurs on a property of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses that has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species as the site is located on an existing developed property and is served by required utilities and public services. Section 3. Action. The Planning Commission does hereby approve the use permit application USE-2882-2016 for a mixed-use project in the Foothill Boulevard special focus area, a 40 percent parking reduction and the use of mechanical parking lifts and recommends approval of a height exception as an affordable housing incentive at 22 Chorro Street subject to the following conditions: Planning 1. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval by the City of this project, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review (“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim, and City shall fully cooperate in the defense against an Indemnified Claim. 2. The proposed use shall operate consistent with the project description, approved plans, and other supporting documentation submitted with this application unless otherwise conditioned herein. ATTACHMENT 1 PC1 - 11 20.g Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: g - PC Staff Report - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) Planning Commission Resolution No. PC-XXXX-16 USE-2882-2016 (22 Chorro Street) Page 4 3. The project shall be forwarded to the Architectural Review Commission to review the project design for consistency with the Community Design Guidelines and the Mixed Use project design standards (Zoning Regulations section 17.08.072). Specific attention shall be given to the compatibility between the adjacent commercial uses and the residential uses. The Architectural Review Commission shall be responsible for taking action on additional project conditions and code requirements as applicable. 4. The mechanical parking lift shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission for compliance with Community Design Guidelines for compatibility with the building and site design. 5. Prior to building plan approval, the applicant shall record an agreement that runs with the land that mechanical parking systems will be safely operated and maintained in continual operation with the exception of limited periods of maintenance. 6. All regular (non-mechanical lift) parking spaces shall be available for residential tenants, employees and customers free from restrictions. No regular parking spaces shall be individually labeled or allocated. 7. All mechanical lift parking spaces shall be available for all residential tenants free from restrictions. 8. The project shall include 33 parking spaces, 3 motorcycle spaces and 93 required bicycle parking spaces (70 long-term and 23 short-term). 9. The property owner shall be responsible for maintaining and updating the current parking calculation for the commercial component of the project upon the submittal of Planning and Building permits for tenant changes or improvements to ensure the site does not become under-parked. 10. The project shall have a maximum height of 43 feet. Any alterations increasing the proposed height will require a modification to the use permit. 11. Plans submitted for building permit review shall show the location of all 93 required bicycle parking spaces (70 long-term and 23 short-term) and include product sheets of the proposed bike racks to be used. All bicycle parking spaces included as part of the project shall comply with City’s Municipal Code Section 17.16.060, Table 6.5 and the Community Design Guidelines Section 6.3.F. Transportation 12. Consistent with the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan, the project shall install a bike box on Chorro Street, south of Foothill Boulevard. Building plans shall include the layout and design of the bike box according to design guidance within the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guidelines and design shall be reviewed and approved by City Transportation & ATTACHMENT 1 PC1 - 12 20.g Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: g - PC Staff Report - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) Planning Commission Resolution No. PC-XXXX-16 USE-2882-2016 (22 Chorro Street) Page 5 Engineering Division prior to installation. The installation may require modifications to the existing pedestrian refuge island. On motion by , seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: REFRAIN: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of adopted this 24th day of August, 2016. _____________________________ Doug Davidson, Secretary Planning Commission ATTACHMENT 1 PC1 - 13 20.g Packet Pg. 324 Attachment: g - PC Staff Report - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) DRAFT Minutes PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday, August 24, 2016 Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order on Wednesday, August 24th, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Chair Stevenson. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Daniel Knight, John Larson, Ronald Malak, Vice-Chair John Fowler, and Chairperson Charles Stevenson Absent: Commissioner Hemalata Dandekar Staff: Deputy Director of Development Review Doug Davidson, Associate Planner Rachel Cohen, Special Projects Manager Marcus Carloni, Transit Manager Gamaliel Anguiano, Transportation Operations Supervisor Jake Hudson, Assistant City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere and Recording Secretary Brad T. Opstad PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, spoke on recently traveling through multiple American cities wherein strategies were developed that overcome existing zoning laws to accommodate for increased low-income housing. Camille Small, San Luis Obispo, spoke as a concerned neighborhood advocate about affordable housing being developed in different ways. PUBLIC HEARING 1. 22 Chorro Street. USE-2882-2016: Review of a new four story mixed-use project including ground floor commercial/retail space and 27 residential units. The project includes a 35% density bonus, with 11% of the units for very low income households, a request for a 40% parking reduction with mechanical parking lifts, and the construction of a 43-foot tall structure where 35 feet is normally allowed, with a categorical exemption from environmental review; C-C-SF zone; San Luis Obispo Development Group, applicant. Deputy Director Davidson introduced Planner Cohen to make the staff report presentation. 20.h Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: h - PC Meeting Minutes - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT of August 24th, 2016 Page 2 APPLICANT PRESENTATION Thom Jess, Arris Studio Architects, presented PowerPoint slides and discussed the site as having been identified in the Land Use Element as a prime location for housing. COMMISSION DISCUSSION Commissioner Larson noted one particular piece of Agenda Correspondence, recommending he recuse himself from consideration of a project and cited employment conflict of interest; clarified the circumstances and provided reasons behind his intention to not recuse. Chair Stevenson commented on the small amount of square-footage for retail space; asked for a definition of a “bike lounge”; indicated the layout shows significantly relocated property line and inquired whether it was newly required as a right-of-way alignment; addressed whether setback along Chorro Street is in alignment with other setbacks for the residential area. PUBLIC COMMENT Kerry Brown, Victor Waytek, Linda Shinn, Terry Bauer, Delilah Curtis, Thomas Athanasion, Lydia Mourenza, Mila Vujovich-LaBarre and Elizabeth Nicholson, San Luis Obispo, spoke as residents of Rougeot Place neighborhood adjacent to, and in objection of the project; commented on: the project’s being out-of-scale and out-of-character with the neighborhood; noted incompatibility with surrounding residential and commercial areas; expressed concern with the waiving of parking for residential uses and the inevitable parking overflow encroaching on the neighborhood; highlighted traffic congestion, affecting the turn on the southern side of Foothill and Chorro; and the contribution of downward propelling of property values. David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, read a correspondence from Alan Cooper, pertaining to the City’s need for the small yield of proposed low-income units leading to excessive exemptions for the developer. Lea Brooks, San Luis Obispo, spoke as a representative of Bike SLO County, shared enthusiasm for green bike lane box at the challenging intersection; shared concern for the parking overflow impacting the residential neighborhood. Martha Miller, San Luis Obispo, expressed support for the project because it provides an increase in housing and pedestrian traffic. Myron Amerine, San Luis Obispo, spoke as a bicycle advocate, concerning the Foothill corridor’s auto traffic being overly dense in an area with a significant bicycling population. Carolyn Smith, San Luis Obispo, compared this project unfavorably to a massive project on Taft Street and urged for a height reduction. 20.h Packet Pg. 326 Attachment: h - PC Meeting Minutes - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT of August 24th, 2016 Page 3 Odile Ayral, San Luis Obispo, shared concurrence with the correspondence posted online, voicing opposition to the project; stated that any site located on a former gas station demands an Environmental Impact Report. Betty DeHaan, San Luis Obispo, shared concerns regarding the number of parking spaces to which the project is reducing and the currently dangerous turns out of parking lots on Chorro Street. Jeff Eckles, San Luis Obispo, spoke as the Executive Director of Home Builder’s Association of the Central Coast; requested that the Commission keep their discussion within the context of the need for community housing. Grant Robbins, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the project from a standpoint of a local employer who cannot attract or maintain talent for his business due to the unavailability of housing. Bob Mourenza, San Luis Obispo, regarded the project as expensive and high-density student housing; voiced opposition to the project. Anne Hodges, San Luis Obispo, expressed anger at what she termed as a “deceptive site”. Camille Small, San Luis Obispo, shared concerns regarding the turn south on Chorro from Foothill, becoming overly congested. Steve Delmartini, San Luis Obispo, echoed comments of Public Commenters Eckles and Robbins, in his support of the project. David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, opined that the entire discussion on housing in the City is leaderless and is without proper guidelines. Chair Stevenson offered a ten-minute recess. COMMISSION DISPOSITION Chair Stevenson inquired about the property re-allocation for a right-of-way as an accommodation to density. Commissioner Malak asked for clarification on commercial zoning on first floor and the size & quality of the available affordable housing. Chair Stevenson remarked on his not being able to support the project, due to its numerous conflicts with the Land Use Circulation Element and inconsistencies with the General Plan. Commissioner Knight shared concerns about the environmental impacts, based on the property’s prior use as a gasoline station. 20.h Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: h - PC Meeting Minutes - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT of August 24th, 2016 Page 4 Commissioner Larson inquired about the height adjustment and the flexibility provided for it in the Special Study Area; Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere clarified that the height exception was not based on policy but that the request for it is a concession allowed by the density bonus law. Commissioner Larson commented that the Chorro setback is an important issue in his estimation; acknowledged difficulty in supporting the first finding, concerning with detriment to health, safety, and welfare within the vicinity. Commissioner Malak shared concerns regarding the project’s incompatibility with the neighborhood and its effect on views, privacy and parking; requested removal of the rooftop deck. Attorney Ansolabehere provided Resolution of a denial template for the Commission’s articulation of necessary reasons for a denial as required by the State via Housing Accountability Act. Commissioners Larson and Fowler suggested being open to continuance; Chair Stevenson indicated that a denial might be preferred by the Applicant insofar as it provides the right of an appeal; Applicant Loren Riehl explained that making adjustments to the height would not be financially feasible but that additions to parking could be feasible. ACTION: UPON MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LARSON, SECONDED BY VICE-CHAIR FOWLER, the Planning Commission denied a Use Permit for a mixed-use project in the Foothill Boulevard Special Focus Area; on the following 4:1:0:1 vote: AYES: Larson, Fowler, Malak, Stevenson NOES: Knight ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Dandekar Chair Stevenson commended the public for their articulation of concerns. 2. Citywide. OTHER-3400-2016: Review and recommendation to City Council of the draft Short Range Transit Plan, FY 2017-2021; City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department, applicant. Deputy Director Davidson introduced Transit Manager Anguiano to make presentation on the revised draft of the Short-Range Transit Plan (SRTP). Transit Manager Anguiano emphasized and highlighted the SRTP’s purpose, critical points and the various public input processes which assisted in its development. COMMISSION DISCUSSION Vice-Chair Fowler shared concern regarding Islay bus stop off Tank Farm Road. 20.h Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: h - PC Meeting Minutes - August 24 2016 (1469 : Appeal of PC decision for a mixed-use project located at 22 Chorro Street) RECEIIJ D THENewspaper of the Central Coast OCT 10 2016 r -1 -1 LSL-0ally CI,E! MB ,.M 3825 South Higuera • Post Office Box 112 • San Luis Obispo, California 93406-0112 • (805) 781-7800 In The Superior Court of The State of California In and for the County of San Luis Obispo AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION AD # 2712790 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO OFFICE OF CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss. County of San Luis Obispo I a1n a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen and not interested in the above entitled matter; I am now, and at all times embraced in the publication herein mentioned was, the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation, printed and published daily at the City of San Luis Obispo in the above named county and state; that notice at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was published in the above-named newspaper and not in any supplement thereof — on the following dates to wit; OCTOBER 7, 2016, that said newspaper was duly and regularly ascertained and established a newspaper of general circulation by Decree entered in the Superior Court of San Luis Obispo County, State of California, on June 9, 1952, Case #19139 under the Government Code of the State of California. I certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. A4�11 I I Lt � . bU4'MV_� (Sign ire of Principal Clerk) DATED: OCTOBER 7, 2016 AD COST: $190.24 6 CMOF filffIlL M OHISPO SAN LUIS OBISPO CRY COUNCIL NOTICE OF PUBLIC NEARING The San Luis Obispo City Council 10tes all interested persons to altend a pLiblic hearing on Tuesday, October 18, 2016, at 6:011 p.m, In the City Hall Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Lula Obi- spo, California, relative to the following: 1. AEvlj~W OF AN .APPEAL OF THE PLAMINI)NCi COM_t MIDN'S DECiS9N TQ l HfY A NEYIIFoulR•S7ti7R .. ISE PAOdECT_ 411 --TF1 QROUNDFes' gQRR _C.QMMERCIALLRAIL SPACE AND 27 ?199IDENTIAL UNITS,IC MMQA. g- qu�sx FOR A ��nt�- TION WIT M CHAN.IF_AL PAMINP LIFE �1�4_ OF THE I�N17�iN _7HE PROJECT .1ILk 0— AFFOADA%�E Foo VERY -LOW INCOM9 X10 jFlQLO$ AHD AFFOROAfHLE HOss15lH 1NCW JV!"� 9R1; FiECUE$1�,,IpfGLUI]INQ A 36% 09NSR'Y BONUS, AND THE _CQN- STIR CTION gF A 43. OOT TAt MUCTURE WH1gR1__J5 EgF Is NO - NA V ALLOWED [22 CH4RRO T� A public hearing to consider an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to de- ny a use permit for a mixed-use project in the Foothill Boulevard Special Planning Area, a 40 percent parking reduction and the use of mechanical parfting lifts and a recornmendalton of approval of a height ex- ception as an affordable housing incentive located at'22 Chorro Street. (USE -2882• 2016) The City Council may also discuss other hearings or business items before or ;0tw the items listed above. If you challenge the proposed project in court, you may be limit- ed to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written corre- spondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Reports for this meeting will be available for review in the City Clerk's Office and on- llne al j±nrw-siocllv.ora on Wednesday, Oc- tober 12, 2016, lease call the City Clark's Office al (805) 731-7100 for more Informa- tion. 7110 City Council meeting will be late- vlsed live on Charter Cable Channel 20 and live streaming on www.slocity.org. Carrie Gallagher City Clerk City of San Luis Obispo 00101mr 7, 2016 2712790 22 Chorro Street ARCH-2882-2016 October 18, 2016 Appellant: San Luis Development Group, LLC Recommendation Adopt a resolution upholding the appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of a use permit for a mixed-use project at 22 Chorro Street,thereby approving the use permit for a mixed-use project in the Foothill Boulevard special planning area,a 40%parking reduction and the use of mechanical parking lifts,including approval of a height exception as an affordable housing incentive. 2 Site Information 3 Zone: C-C-SF Size: .55 acres (24,033 s.f.) General Plan: Commercial Currently Vacant G. Brothers SmokehouseFoothill Rougeot University Square Shopping Center Ferrini Square ResidentialBroad Site Information 4 Zone: C-C-SF Size: .55 acres (24,033 s.f.) General Plan: Commercial Currently VacantFoothill RougeotBroad C-R-SF C-C-SF R-1 C-C-SF Site Information 5 Project Description 6 Project Description 7 Project Description 8 Bike Box Bus TurnoutRight lane turnout Background 9 1.Land Use Element,Chapter 8:Special Focus Area 2.Housing Element 3.Circulation Element 4.Major City Goal 5.State Housing Density Bonus Law 6.Housing Accountability Act 10Land Use Element Land Use Element 11 Land Use Element Policy 8.2.1 The Foothill Boulevard / Santa Rosa Special Planning Area encourages: The development of mixed-use projects, Adjustments in parking and building heights, and Improving intersections along Foothill Boulevard. Housing Element 12 Remaining RHNA need based on dwelling units approved, under construction or built (January 1,2014 to October 11 , 2016) Income Category A B A-B New Construction Need (RHNA) Dwelling Units Approved, Under Construction or Built Remaining RHNA Need, Dwelling Units Extremely-Low (< 31% of AMI) 142 5 137 Very Low (31-50% of AMI)143 53 90 Low (51-80% of AMI)179 81 98 Moderate (81-120% of AMI)202 95 107 Above Moderate (>120% of AMI) 478 4781 0 TOTAL RHNA UNITS 1,144 7121 432 Housing Element 13 Policy 8.1:Encourage housing development that meets a variety of special needs… Policy 11 .1:Where property is equally suited for commercial or residential uses,give preference to residential use. Policy 2.17:…consider increasing residential densities above state density bonus allowances for projects that provide affordable housing. Program 6.19:…incentivize affordable housing development with density bonuses,parking reductions and other development incentives… Circulation Element 14 Transportation Goals &Objectives Maintain accessibility and protect the environment throughout San Luis Obispo while reducing dependence on single-occupant use of motor vehicles... Reduce people's use of their cars by supporting and promoting alternatives such as walking,riding buses and bicycles,and using car pools. Encourage better transportation habits…Increase the use of alternative forms of transportation and depend less on the single-occupant use of vehicles. Major City Goal 15 Implement the Housing Element,facilitating workforce, affordable,supportive and transitional housing options, including support for needed infrastructure within the City’s fair share. State Housing Density Bonus Law 16 California State law encourages the development of affordable housing and provides density bonuses based on the inclusion of affordable units within a project. In addition to a density bonus,by providing a certain percentage of affordable units within a project,a developer may receive alternative incentives or concessions for the project. State law requires a public agency to relax its development standards to allow for the physical construction of the additional “density units”unless the relaxation of such standards will result in specific adverse impacts. Housing Accountability Act 17 Section 65589.5(d)(2)of the Act states that: A local agency shall not disapprove or condition approval in a manner that renders the project infeasible for development for the use of very low,low-,or moderate- income households…including the use of design review standards,unless it makes written findings,based upon substantial evidence in the record. Housing Accountability Act 18 Section 65589.5(d)(2)of the Act states that: The development project…as proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety,and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable. Inconsistency with the zoning ordinance or general plan land use designation shall not constitute a specific,adverse impact upon the public health or safety. Planning Commission Action 19 On August 24,2016 the PC evaluated the proposed mixed-use project and voted 4:1 to deny the use permit. Planning Commission Action 20 The PC made findings that: The parking reduction was excessive and would not be sufficiently off-set and have detrimental impacts on the surrounding residential area. The overall height and scale of the project was found to be: Inconsistent with the General Plan and Community Design Guidelines; Not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood; Blocked views from Foothill Boulevard;and Interfered with the privacy of adjacent residential neighbors. Appeal 21 On August 31,2016,San Luis Development Group,LLC, filed an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision for denial. Appeal 22 The appeal stated that: The PC’s decision is inconsistent with and/or violates local,Federal and/or State laws and policies;and The proposed project is consistent with: LUE Section 8.2.1:Special Planning Areas; Major City Goal regarding housing; Zoning Regulations regarding parking reductions;and The California Density Bonus Law and Housing Accountability Act. Staff Recommendation 23 1.Height 2.Neighborhood Compatibility 3.Views 4.Parking Height 24 Staff’s rationale for recommending the height exception is several fold: State Density Bonus law allows a developer to request a concession such as a height exception and a public agency must grant that exception unless it can make certain findings. State Density Bonus law further requires a public agency to relax development standards to allow for the physical construction of the “density units.”The additional maximum height allowance is needed to build the density units. The request for additional height is consistent with the Land Use policy discussion on building height adjustments for the Foothill Boulevard/Santa Rosa Special Planning Area. Neighborhood Compatibility 25 Neighborhood Compatibility 26 43 ft. ~32 ft.Residential PropertyFoothill Boulevard Neighborhood Compatibility 27 Front Elevation West Elevation Neighborhood Compatibility 28 Landscape Plan Existing Trees New Trees New Street Trees Neighborhood Compatibility 29 9 AM 12 PM 3 PM Winter Solstice Shading Model Neighborhood Compatibility 30 South Elevation Views 31 Cerro San Luis Parking 32 The project requires 55 parking spaces (50 spaces for 27 residential units and 5 spaces for 1,600 square feet of commercial space). The project provides 33 vehicle parking spaces and 113 bicycle parking spaces: 30% reduction for shared parking 10% reduction by providing 30 bicycle parking spaces 33Parking 750 feet to Grocery store, restaurants, bike shop 800 feet to Church ¼ mile to Hospital 350 feet to Grocery store, drug store, gym, restaurants, bank 200 feet to Restaurants ½ mile to Cal Poly ¼ mile to Pacheco Elementary 1 mile to Downtown Parking 34 Recommendation Adopt a resolution upholding the appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of a use permit for a mixed-use project at 22 Chorro Street,thereby approving the use permit for a mixed-use project in the Foothill Boulevard special planning area,a 40%parking reduction and the use of mechanical parking lifts,including approval of a height exception as an affordable housing incentive. 35 Questions/Comments 36 37 Project Site Acreage: 1.34 Zoning: C-C Allowable Density: 48 d.u. Acreage: 0.56 Zoning: C-C Allowable Density: 20 d.u. Acreage: 1.58 Zoning: R-4 Allowable Density: 38 d.u. 38 39 Planning Commission Action 40 The PC denied the use permit based on the following findings: 1.That the project will be detrimental to the health,safety,or welfare of those working or residing in the vicinity because the proposed parking reduction is excessive and the height is inconsistent with the General Plan. 2.That the request for reduced parking is inconsistent with San Luis Obispo Municipal Code section 17.16.060 in that the requested parking reduction is excessive for the proposed use and that the times of the proposed mixed-use parking demand from the various uses will coincide in such a way that it will have detrimental impacts on the surrounding area. 3.That the proposed project height is inconsistent with Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 9.2.1 because the project will block views from Foothill Boulevard which is designated as having moderate scenic value. 4.That the proposed project height is inconsistent with the Land Use Element Policy 2.3.9.E Compatible Development:Architecture;the project’s height and scale does not provide a smooth transition between the existing and proposed development. 5.That the proposed project height is inconsistent with the Community Design Guidelines sections 5.3.A.1 and 5.3.C:the project’s height and scale does not provide a smooth transition between the immediate neighborhood. 6.That the proposed project height is inconsistent with the Land Use Element Policy 2.3.9.F Compatible Development:Privacy and Solar Access;the project will overlook onto adjacent properties and does not respect the privacy of neighboring building and outdoor areas. Planning Commission Action 41 Public testimony included that the project: Was out of scale and character with the neighborhood and overall too tall; Interfered with the privacy of the next door neighbors; Had too many units; Too few parking spaces and should have 100 parking spaces to accommodate the “real”number of people living on the site; Residents would park on the neighborhood streets that are already impacted; Would drive down adjacent property values;and would increase the traffic and congestion at the intersection of Chorro and Foothill. Planning Commission Action 42 Other public testimony included that the project: Provided much needed housing; Made the best use of the corner lot; Provided a buffer between Foothill and the residential neighborhood;and Promoted multi-modal transportation. Project Analysis: Intersection Improvements 43 Staff Recommendation 44 Affordable Housing Incentives and Height The developer is requesting a 35%density bonus and a height exception 11 %of units are set aside for very-low income households The project proposes to construct a 43-foot tall structure within a zone that has a maximum height of 35 feet State Housing Density Bonus Law 45 “Specific adverse impact”within this statute means 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.”