Loading...
07/26/2012 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Adopted 08/23/20121 Planning Commission Minutes Regular Meeting JULY 26, 2012 I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Aulman called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. and led the pledge of allegiance. II. REPORT ON POSTING THE AGENDA AND ROLL CALL Deputy City Clerk Knerr reported the agenda for the regular Planning Commission meeting of July 26, 2012 was posted on July 20, 2012 at 4:50 p.m. Roll Call Present: Commissioner Brad Bannister; Commissioner Tom Fischer; Commissioner Christi Garcia; Commissioner Kai Lai; Commissioner Ermelindo Puente; Vice Chair Elizabeth Sanford; Chair Terri Aulman Staff Present: David Bischoff, Director of Planning and Environmental Services; Don Dey, Transportation Engineer; Melissa Durkin, Planner II; Jolie Houston, Assistant City Attorney; Jennifer Knerr, Deputy City Clerk; Teresa Mack, Senior Civil Engineer III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. June 7, 2012 Motion on Item III.A. Motion: to approve minutes of June 7, 2012, as drafted. Moved by Commissioner Christi Garcia; seconded by vice Chair Elizabeth Sanford Vote: Motion carried 7-0-0-0 Yes: Commissioner Brad Bannister; Commissioner Tom Fischer; Commissioner Christi Garcia; Commissioner Kai Lai; Commissioner Ermelindo Puente; Vice Chair Elizabeth Sanford; Chair Terri Aulman No: None Abstain: None 2 Absent: None IV. PRESENTATION BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC No comments or presentations were made Director Bischoff asked to take Item IX. Informational Items out of order and the Commission agreed. IX. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS A. Current Planning Projects B. Planning Staff Approvals Director Bischoff gave an overview of the Current Planning Projects and Planning Staff Approvals. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS Director Bischoff explained that one staff report will be heard on Items V.A., VII.A. and B. He also explained that the Commission would have to recommend approval of the RDO before the Tentative Map and Architectural and Site could be approved. A. TM 12-01 Tentative Map request to create 91 residential lots, 2 multi-family lots, 6 open space lots, and 4 private alleys, on property zoned ND -PUD (Neighborhood District-Planned Unit Development), located west of Monterey Street, east and west of Wren Avenue, and north and south of the future Cohansey Avenue extension. APN’s: 790-06-016; 029; 030; 031 The James Group, c/o James Suner, applicant. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. RDO-HE 12-02 Residential Development Ordinance Housing Exemption re quest to allot residential units on property zoned ND-PUD (Neighborhood District-Planned Unit Development), located west of Monterey Street, east and west of Wren Avenue, and north and south of the future Cohansey Avenue extension. APN’s: 790-06-016; 029; 030; 031 The James Group, c/o James Suner, applicant. B. AS-PUD 12-04 Architectural and Site request to amend the previously approved master plan to allow the construction of 91 single family homes on property zoned ND- PUD (Neighborhood District-Planned Unit Development), located west of Monterey Street, east and west of Wren Avenue, and north and south of the future Cohansey Avenue extension. APN’s: 790-06-016; 029; 030; 031 The James Group, c/o James Suner, applicant. Planner II Durkin presented the staff report. 3 Commissioner Lai asked about the entrance and exit of traffic into the project. Planner Durkin stated traffic will enter and exit from Wren Avenue. Commission Sanford asked if the bridge would be constructed when the eastern portion of the project is built and if the applicant could re-apply without the bridge. Planner Durkin stated that the original project included the bridge and that was described in the Negative Declaration. The bridge will be built when the eastern portion of the project moves forward. She also stated that if the applicant did not want to build the bridge they would have to go through a new CEQA analysis. Director Bischoff explained that if the CEQA analysis determines that the bridge is not necessary for the eastern portion of the project, the bridge could be eliminated. But if the CEQA analysis states the bridge is necessary for proper circulation through the project, then it would be required. Planner Durkin stated the applicant has told staff they do propose to build the bridge and intersection when the eastern portion of the project develops. Commission Lai asked if there are plans to widen Wren Avenue and if the City would need the County approval since part of the project is outside of the City limits. Planner Durkin stated that at this time there are no plans to widen Wren. Don Dey, Transportation Engineer stated that the project is building Wren to its ultimate configuration with the development. Commissioner Garcia asked about the difference in the p lans that were submitted by the applicant. She also asked if the applicant was aware of the issues from the beginning and is the applicant aware of all the necessary documents that need to be submitted. Planner Durkin stated yes the applicant was aware of all issues and they are aware of all the necessary documents. She stated staff gives the applicant a comprehensive list of comments and areas where the project was incomplete based on what was submitted. Additional comments are given as plans are revised and submitted to staff by the applicant. The outstanding item needed to make the application complete is the landscaping plan. Commissioner Sanford inquired about the detention basins. She state d the open space designated has not changed but its purpose has. Planner Durkin showed the February 27 plan submittal and stated the plans do not show the detention basin. She then showed the April 12 plan submittal and stated the 4 plans now show the detention basin. She stated , as shown on the April plans, the detention basins would be six feet deep or deeper, very difficult to landscape and could not be used for recreational purposes. Staff asked the applicant to redesign the area with most of the water detention below ground thereby allowing the surface to be flat for landscaping and useable open space for recreation. The applicant to -date has not submitted a design showing that change. Commissioner Puente stated he liked the idea of the Paseo. Chair Aulman opened the public hearing on Items V.A., V II.A. and B. James Suner thanked Kristi Abrams for working with him. He showed a PowerPoint presentation. He stated that he could not get the project financed as previously approved. Commissioner Garcia asked if the project already had an RDO allocation, why it was being requested again. Commissioner Garcia asked the change in allocation of market rate verses afford able units is due to the deed restriction or is there another reason why there was such a drastic change proposed in allocation. Mr. Suner stated it was just the solution we can up with rather than reallocate. Chair Aulman asked if South County Housing is prepared to build the apartments if this project goes forward. Mr. Suner replied Dennis Lalor of South County is in the audience and would answer that question. Commissioner Bannister asked would this project have been approved six years ago if it wasn’t deed restricted. He also stated he liked the idea of the Paseos. Mr. Suner stated he is not sure, he thinks it might have been. Chair Aulman asked if the previous landscape plan will be used or if the applicant intends to submit a new landscape plan. Mr. Suner stated he can use the previous landscape plan as a template. Dennis Lalor of South County Housing spoke on affordable housing in Gilroy. He spoke on the history of the project and their intention to complete the project in the future if funding is available. Commissioner Sanford asked when the east side of the project would be developed. 5 Mr. Lalor stated that State financing is very limited; he hopes sources would come available in the next couple of years and then the project could move forward. Chair Aulman asked about placing time limits on the project and what would happen if the affordable housing was not built within that time. Director Bischoff stated South County Housing would have to renew or re -apply for the approvals of the units in the future. Skip Spiering spoke on Neighborhood Districts. He also spoke on the project and the redesign. Vadim Kotlyar of Vickery Lane spoke on the proposed setback from his property. He stated he had questions for James Suner. Assistant City Attorney Houston stated Mr. Kotlyar needed to address the Commission and this is not the time to ask Mr. Suner questions. Carlos Soliz homeowner on Vickery Lane stated he has concerns with construction of the project and maintaining privacy at his home. He also stated that he has concerns with the parks in regards to drugs, drinking, garbage and graffiti. He stated he is concerned with his home value going down. Mr. Kotlyar spoke again about privacy, setbacks and using Vickery Lane current homeowner’s fences instead of building new fences for the project. He spoke about his home value going down with lower prices for the homes being built behind him. Assistant City Attorney Houston stated Mr. Suner would like to answer the questions. Mr. Suner stated the set back is 10 feet not 4 feet. He stated Harvest Parks was approved before the Vickery Lane homes were built . He stated he is willing to work with the homeowners. Commissioner Bannister asked if homes at the southeast end could be moved north by the park. Mr. Suner stated no, due to traffic issues in regards to cars moving along the back fence. He stated it is too late to redesign. Chair Aulman closed the public hearing. Director Bischoff asked if the Commission has any question in regards to Mr. Suner, Mr. Lalor or Mr. Spiering. The Commission had no comments or questions. 6 Director Bischoff spoke on South County Housing and the affordability of housing in Gilroy. He stated that when the project was first approved it was 75% affordable and 25% market rate. Now they are asking for 75% market rate and 25% affordable. The Commission needs to decide if the change in the percentage of affordability is appropriate. He stated the landscape plan is a requirement of our City Code and is intended to be reviewed by the Commission to determine if it meets our City standards and provide the level of quality expected. Chair Aulman asked what is being proposed regarding affordable versus market rate housing and what is the break down. Planner Durkin spoke on the Affordable Housing Exemption Policy and what the policy requirements are. She showed what Mr. Suner has proposed for this project and spoke on the RDO allocations that were received in the past. Commissioner Lai asked what is the difference between affordable housing and deed restricted housing. Planner Durkin spoke what is needed to comply with our Affordable Housing Policy and the homes are deed restricted. Commissioner Sanford stated she would like to re-open the public hearing. She asked about the detention basin, was there a change in the laws and is this the reason why the change in the map. Planner Durkin answered yes there have been changes to State laws. She stated she is confident that the applicant could come up with part underground and aboveground detention that would allow the open space area to be used for recreation. Assistant City Attorney Houston commented on Mr. Suner’s request for density bonus or incentives and asked if that was through the State density bonus law and through the City’s Ordinance. She stated that density bonus or incentives should be noted in the beginning of the application process. She also stated that the final map is not discretionary and you cannot solve conditions at the final map. All issues of conditions are met on the tentative map. Chair Aulman re-opened the public hearing. Mr. Suner state he agreed that the final map is not discretionary and explained his earlier comments. He is concerned about the requirement for the specific landscaping plan. Mr. Lalor spoke again stating they are going from a 25% to 75% ratio and flipping it. He stated he would like a conversation about the precedents that are possibly being set by the Commission. He stated that his project would ultimately be affordable, but he is not 7 sure when South County Housing would be able to build the apartments. Chair Aulman closed the public hearing. Planner Durkin stated landscaping plans have always been a requirement with the Architectural and Site review process for approval. This gives staff a chance to review, make comments and the applicant to change plans if necessary. The plans are finalized through the building permit process. Commissioner Garcia commented on the home values and concerns of the neighbors. She stated that she would like to see the pricing structure of the new homes. Commissioner Sanford indicated she would like to see the applicant and staff work together and come back to the Commission. She stated it seems that the project was rushed to the Commission and would like to see more time put into the project. Chair Aulman agreed that she would like to see the project come back to the Planning Commission before going to City Council. Commissioner Puente stated it’s a good project and would like to see it come back. Assistant City Attorney stated the Commission needs to give specific directions to the applicant and staff on what they would like to see in the project. Commissioner Sanford stated she would like to see the homes backing on Cohansey with the improved landscaping, the detention basin, open space and she would like to see the landscaping plan. Director Bischoff asked Commissioner Sanford about the articulating walls. Commissioner Sanford stated she would like to see the project follow city policy. Commissioner Fischer stated the RDO allotment does not meet the criteria. Also, he stated he is concerned with the CEQA requirements and CEQA does not cover the South County Housing portion of the project. He feels the RDO and CEQA requirements need to be resolved before coming back to Commission. Commissioner Bannister stated he has concerns with the RDO request. He stated that there are some gray areas and the RDO should not be set in stone. He is also concerned with the parks, detention basin, the landscaping and the wall on Cohansey. Motion on Items V.A., VII.A and B. Motion: to continue the Harvest Park project to August 23 special meeting for the purpose of staff and the applicant working together to resolve the issues raised by the Commission. 8 Moved by Vice Chair Elizabeth Sanford, seconded by Commission Christi Garcia Vote: Motion carried 6-1-0-0 Yes: Commissioner Brad Bannister; Commissioner Tom Fischer; Commissioner Christi Garcia; Commissioner Ermelindo Puente; Vice Chair Elizabeth Sanfor d; Chair Terri Aulman No: Commissioner Kai Lai Abstain: None Absent: None VI. OLD BUSINESS None VIII. CORRESPONDENCE None X. PRESENTATIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION None XI. ORAL REPORTS BY COMMISSION MEMBERS A. City Council Meeting of June 18, 2012 and July 16, 2012 Commissioner Garcia gave a brief summary of the June 18, 2012 meeting. Vice Chair Sanford gave a brief summary of the July 16, 2012 meeting. B. Housing Advisory Committee Vice Chair Sanford gave a brief summary of the meeting. C. Historic Heritage Committee Commissioner Garcia stated that there is no report. D. Arts & Culture Commission Commissioner Bannister stated that there was no meeting. 9 E. South County Joint Planning Advisory Committee Chair Aulman stated that there was no meeting. F. Street Naming Committee Commissioner Puente stated that there was no meeting. G. Climate Action Plan Stakeholder Advisory Committee Commissioner Lai stated that there was no meeting. H. Development Standards Task Force Commissioner Fischer stated that there was no meeting. I. Sign Ordinance Review Task Force Vice Chair Sanford stated that there was no meeting. XII. PLANNING DIVISION MANAGER REPORT None XIII. ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT None XIV. PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR REPORT None XV. ADJOURNMENT at 9:10 p.m. _______________________________ /s/ Susan Johnson, Deputy City Clerk