Loading...
11/21/2013 City Council Special Meeting Adopted 12/05/20131 Planning Commission Special Meeting NOVEMBER 21, 2013 I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Sanford 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 Special Planning Commission meeting had been posted on November 15, 2013 at 9:45 a.m. and the amended agenda had been posted November 15, 2013 at 3:00 p.m. Roll Call: Present: Present: Commissioner Brad Bannister; Vice Chair Tom Fischer; Commissioner Richard Gullen; Commissioner Paul Kloecker; Commissioner Kai Lai; Chair Elizabeth Sanford Absent/Excused: Commissioner Christi Garcia Staff Present: Melissa Durkin, Planner II; Shawna Freels, City Clerk; Jolie Houston, Assistant City Attorney; Jenny Knerr, Deputy City Clerk; Susan Martin, Planning Manager; Henry Servin, City Traffic Engineer; Rich Smelser, Public Works Director; III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. October 3, 2013 Motion on Item III.A. Motion to: approve minutes of October 3, 2013. Moved by Vice Chair Tom Fischer; seconded by Commission Richard Gullen Vote: Motion carried 6-0-0-0 Yes: Commissioner Brad Bannister; Vice Chair Tom Fischer; Commissioner Richard Gullen; Commissioner Paul Kloecker; Commissioner Kai Lai; Chair Elizabeth Sanford 2 No: None Abstain: None Absent: Commissioner Christi Garcia IV. PRESENTATION BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC No comments or presentation were made. V. PUBLIC HEARING A. RDO HE 13-02: Harvest Park Phase II, The James Group: request for approval of an RDO housing exemption to allocate 57 RDO units. The subject property is located west of Monterey Street, north and south of Cohansey Avenue. Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 790-06-029 and 030. Planner II Durkin presented the staff report. Commissioner Gullen asked about the condition regarding completing the affordable housing portion in Phase I prior to the issuance of the final map for Phase II. Planner II Durkin stated there is not a condition, but the Commission could recommend that condition. She clarified that the condition states that no future phase of development within the Neighborhood District Development area would be considered until the affordable component was constructed. Commission Lai asked about if Phase II could be approved when the affordable housing condition of Phase I has not been completed. He also asked about the annexation of the property that is in the County. Planner II Durkin stated that the Commission could approve Phase II without the Phase I condition being complete. She also stated that there are 2 pieces of properties that are in the process of being annexed into the City. The other properties are outside of the Urban Service Area (USA). Planning Manager Martin commented that in the arch and site condition 21 refers to the affordable housing component. She stated that this condition could be changed to state that Harvest Park, Phase I affordable housing components needs to be completed before construction starts on Phase II. Assistant City Attorney Houston stated that condition 21 of the arch and site would need to be revised and that there is an issue with the RDO allocation. She stated that she is concerned with the Commission granting an RDO for a project that does not seem to be consistent with the Neighborhood Districts Policy affordable housing. She stated that if it goes to the City Council the Council might want to take a look at this. 3 Vice Chair Fischer asked about the 60 on-street parking spaces and how many are on Church Street. Planner II Durkin stated that most of the parking is on Church Street and there is a few spaced on streets C and D. She also stated that there is parking on both sides of Church Street. Vice Chair Fischer stated that he has received complaints regarding not enough parking at the Meritage development and cars are parking on Church Street. He is concerned that there is not enough parking spaces inside the development and more parking spaces are needed. He does not want the same problems with this development. Planner II Durkin stated that the requirement is 2 garage spaces and in projects like this a full length driveway. She stated that there is an additional 1 parking space per unit for this project. Chair Sanford asked about the RDO Affordable Housing Exemption. She commented that Phase I of the affordable housing should be in place before going forward with Phase II and what recourse does the City have that the affordable component will be built. Planner II Durkin stated that South County Housing represented to the City that they had to find a developer to purchase the property in order to move forward. As far as any recourse, the Commission could place conditions on the Neighborhood District Area. Commissioner Bannister asked about parking on Cohansey. Planner II Durkin stated that Cohansey is an arterial street and that does not allow for parking. Chair Sanford opened the public hearing. James Suner applicant stated that he has joint ventured with South County Housing to provide 100% of the infrastructure for the 2 affordable components. He spoke on Phase I of the project including the infrastructure. He stated that Council made him modified the Neighborhood District to add a new policy that allowed him to get RDO’s in exchange for achieving certain density. He spoke about circulation, the original master plan and art project. He spoke about the new conditions of approval in the staff report that he would like removed. Chair Sanford asked staff to address the new conditions of approval. Planning Manager Martin commented that the conditions are not necessarily for the applicant, but for the decision makers. It’s to make sure the findings can be met to 4 approve the project as presented. She stated that when that does happen staff coordinates with the applicant as soon as possible. Traffic Engineer Servin spoke on the conditions of approval including the realignment of Church Street, the addition of bike and pedestrian lanes. Chair Sanford asked about the applicant’s concerns regarding flooding and post development run off. Traffic Engineer Servin stated all development run off is required to be retained on site and condition 26 could be changed to 1’ above BFE. Commissioner Gullen asked about the typo regarding zone X and the bridge on Cohansey. Traffic Engineer Servin stated that zone X could be changed to 1’ above BFE. He spoke on the bridge on Cohansey. Commissioner Lai asked could the strip between the waterway and Church street be adjusted to the West. Traffic Engineer Servin stated that the land should be reserved for future bike lanes with the greatest amount of flexibility. Chair Sanford asked for clarification regarding the curve of Church Street. Traffic Engineer Servin stated that if Church Street would be straightened it would cut to the east and therefore the land could not be developed in the future. He stated that it is to accommodate future development of land. Chair Sanford called the applicant to speak. Mr. Suner stated that the street was on the previous tentative map and has been in the General Plan for years. Dennis Lalor President of South County Housing spoke about South County Housing’s investment in the project and their interest in providing affordable housing. Chair Sanford asked Mr. Lalor what is the timeframe for financing if the project is approved. Mr. Lalor stated he thinks they might be close to getting the necessary subsidies and mortgage assistance to make these affordable. He stated that he cannot guarantee any kind of delivery schedule for financing to get these built. Chair Sanford closed the public hearing. 5 Director of Public Works Smelser stated that conditions cannot be placed on a final map; conditions have to be placed on the tentative map. He stated that Church Street has been on the General Plan and Master Plan, but that is not the design and analysis of traffic circulation. He stated that late information was received from the Water District and that is the reason for the condition. Commissioner Bannister asked about the curve of Church Street. Traffic Engineer Servin explained the realignment of Church Street. Commissioner Kloecker commented that staff and applicant needs more time to resolve issues before coming to Planning Commission. Mr. Suner stated that if he can’t get the condition removed from Council then he will sit down with Mr. Smelser and Mr. Servin. Commissioner Lai commented that safety is very important and the issue needs to be resolved. Chair Sanford asked the applicant about the affordable elements and the feasibility of interspersing the affordable elements between the two phases. Mr. Suner stated that it will be 100% affordable. He talked about financing the project and timeframes for the financing. Commissioner Gullen asked if the Commission could approve the project with the added conditions. Planning Director Martin stated yes the Commission can approve the project and all the additional conditions will be cleaned up and incorporated into the final map. Commissioner Lai asked for clarification on the conditions. Planner II Durkin stated that staff has conceded to the application on condition 26 and agreed to the 1’ above BFE. She stated that the post development run off and street realignment needs to be included in the approval of conditions. Commissioner Kloecker asked about the affordable housing in Phase 1. Planner II Durkin stated this is something the Commission needs to discuss. She stated staff would like clear policy direction from the Commission on how to proceed in the future. Chair Sanford asked for clarification regarding the affordable housing policy. 6 Planner II Durkin stated that the Commission can recommend that a condition is placed on the tentative map that construction cannot start on Phase II until the affordable component is completed in Phase I. Chair Sanford stated with the existing policy, development cannot begin on phase II until the affordable component has broken ground on Phase I. Planner II Durkin stated that the Commission could put a condition that the final map for Phase II could not be issued until the affordable component of phase I is constructed. Planning Manager Martin clarified that a grading permit is the beginning of the development. Assistant City Attorney Houston explained that Mr. Smelser is correct regarding conditions cannot be placed on a final map. She stated that condition have to be placed on the tentative map and a condition in the arch and site regarding the affordable component timeline. She also stated that the Commission needs to make a finding that the tentative map is consistence or generally consistence with the intended goals and policies of the Neighborhood District. Commissioner Lai spoke about completing the affordable component of phase I before phase II could be started. Planner II Durkin stated yes that is the policy. Commissioner Fischer commented that if this is approved without the condition then we would be relying on South County Housing 100% to get their financing, do the construction and if that fell apart then it creates a major impediment to anyone else in the district that wants to develop. Planning Director Martin clarified that we just recently had our Housing Element certified and that would continue to be a problem with not meeting our housing numbers. Commissioner Kloecker stated that he is not sure if we would be able to get a mutual agreement regarding the affordable housing component. Mr. Suner stated that the 32 units could not be built without the bridge. He stated that the infrastructure needs to be in Phase II before the 32 units can be built. Traffic Engineer Servin stated we could make each phase of the project work separately and it is not necessarily tied to be bridge issue. Commissioner Bannister stated that Phase I was approved and the bridge did not have to be built, so why is that an issue now. Mr. Bannister asked Mr. Lalor if he could get funding to build Phase I without being attached to Phase II. 7 Mr. Lalor stated that this was originally one project and they could not get funding for something that big. He stated that he can’t afford to put in infrastructure and construct the affordable part. He stated that it needs to be one project to finance and construct the project. Commissioner Bannister asked then why in 2012 when the phase I was approved with the affordable portion being part of it. Mr. Lalor stated that he was not under the impression or felt that he had to build the affordable units at that time as part of Phase I; he did not feel he had to get on it. Chair Sanford asked Mr. Lalor if this is a joint venture then why is your name not on the application and why is the affordable portion separate. Mr. Lalor stated he is the owner and it is a collaborative with Mr. Suner. He stated that it is scheduled for development in a year from next spring. Assistant City Attorney Houston asked Planner II Durkin for clarificatio n on what was the affordable housing approval from last year. Planner II Durkin stated she does not believe that any conditions were placed on the affordable component. She stated they are a requirement of the Neighborhood District design. Chair Sanford asked if it is not spelled out in the conditions isn’t it part of the Neighborhood District policy. Planner II Durkin stated that to be consistence with the policy each phase of a project needs their affordable components completed before moving onto th e next phase. Commissioner Bannister stated that he had spoken with Mr. Suner and Mr. Lalor before the meeting. Commissioner Fischer asked at what stage could a condition be placed on a project beyond the final map and could a condition be place on construction. Chair Sanford stated that the time would be that evening. Planner II Durkin stated that condition could be placed prior to grading and on the arch and site. Assistant City Attorney Houston commented that there is a condition of the tentative map that states the applicant must receive approval of the RDO exemption and the arch and site review application and if there is a condition of the timing and the phasing of the arch and site; the tentative map does reflect over to the arch and site. 8 Planning Manager Martin read language regarding condition of the affordable housing component if the Commission would like to use it. Commissioner Gullen comments that how he understands the language is that the infrastructure could be built for Phase II; the affordable component would have to be built for Phase I, before any construction of Phase II begins. Mr. Suner states that if the Commission does not let him build the 57 homes before the affordable units in Phase I, then it kills the project. Commissioner Gullen asked the applicant if the affordable component of phase I be constructed parallel to the construction of phase II after the infrastructure has been completed. Mr. Suner states yes, and then Mr. Lalor can get his financing in place. He also stated that he can’t guarantee any timeframe of when the affordable components can be built. Commissioner Gullen asked Mr. Suner if he could place a timeframe on when the affordable component could be built, what timeframe would that be. Mr. Suner stated on the 50th certificate of occupancy. Assistant City Attorney Houston asked Mr. Suner again to state for the record what timeframe. Again, Mr. Suner stated on the 50th certificate of occupancy on phase II. Mr. Suner stated there are conditions on the project that the bridge needs to be built before the 57th certificate of occupancy is issued and Church Street is to be built before the 20 th unit is built. Assistant City Attorney Houston commented that condition 21 is very vague and needs to be clarified. Mr. Suner stated that since the bridge needs to be completed before the 57 th certificate of occupancy is issued and he feels condition 21 should read the same but change it to the 50th unit. Then the majority of the financing is still in place. Commissioner Kloecker stated it looks like financing is the issue. Chair Sanford stated the Commission will take a break. Chair Sanford reconvened the meeting. Commissioner Fischer commented that if it was condition on the 50th or 57th home and South County Housing cannot get financing the affordable component may never be built. If a number is placed on condition 21 then it could be the 10th certificate of 9 occupancy. Commissioner Gullen asked Mr. Suner if he has underwriting guidelines from your lender that has any specifics in regards to phasing or conditions that needs to be satisfied for construction of the affordable housing component. Mr. Suner replied yes the 57 units will carry 100% of the financing and the affordable units are not part of the financing. Commissioner Gullen asked if there are any conditions by the lender in regards to timing of the completion of the market rate units. Mr. Suner replied yes there will be. It’s like a line of credit; they give us the infrastructure up front then 20 units and as those units sell then another 20 and so on. Chair Sanford stated that her interpretation of the language, the project does not met that interpretation. Commissioner Gullen stated that the Commission could pick a number to be placed on condition 21. He stated that market rate units have to go forward in order to finance the affordable units. Commissioner Fischer stated that the applicant mentioned that he gets his financing in 20 unit increments so prior to the issuance of the 21st building permit. Chair Sanford asked the applicant about conditioning prior to the issuance of the 21 st building permit. Mr. Suner stated he has to analysis this. He stated that if the project could move forward with this condition he is fine with it. Motion on Item V.A. Motion: to adopt a resolution recommending approval of RDO HE 13-02 as requested. Moved by Commissioner Richard Gullen, seconded by Vice Chair Tom Fischer. Vote: Motion carried 6-0-0-1 Yes: Commissioner Brad Bannister; Vice Chair Tom Fischer; Commissioner Richard Gullen; Commissioner Paul Kloecker; Commissioner Kai Lai; Chair Elizabeth Sanford No: None Abstain: None 10 Absent: Commissioner Christi Garcia B. Tentative Map TM 13-06: request to subdivide approximately 17 acres into 57 single-family residential lots, 1 multifamily lot, 1 commercial lot, and 3+/- acres of common area. Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 790-06-029 and 030. The City Council adopted a Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for this project in March 2007. Motion on Item V.B. Motion: to adopt a resolution recommending approval of TM 13-06, including all staff conditions with the exception of condition 26 being 1 foot rather than 2 feet . Moved by Vice Chair Tom Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Richard Gullen. Vote: Motion carried 6-0-0-1 Yes: Commissioner Brad Bannister; Vice Chair Tom Fischer; Commissioner Richard Gullen; Commissioner Paul Kloecker; Commissioner Kai Lai; Chair Elizabeth Sanford No: None Abstain: None Absent: Commissioner Christi Garcia C. Architectural & Site A/S 13-26: An architectural & site review application for planned unit development review of a 57-lot single family subdivision. Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 790-06-029 and 030. The City Council adopted a Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for this project in March 2007. Commissioner Bannister stated he would rather see masonry fences instead of wooden. He does not like the mixture of shingle and tile roofs. Lots that back up the Me ritage Home project should have trees for a consistence look. He stated that the sidewalk should not be against the fence line, there should be landscaping between the sidewalk and fence line. Planning Manager Martin asked Assistant City Attorney Houston if some of the comments were on the tentative map how is that addressed and what action can be taken. Assistant City Attorney Houston commented that direction can be given to staff to work with the applicant or a memo can go the Council stating this was brought up after the tentative map was approved and condition 15 speaks on the fence abutting Cohansey Avenue. 11 Planning Manager Martin stated that the Commission can give staff approval to make those adjustments with the applicant’s concurrence on the conditions that are attached to the resolution approved by City Council. Commissioner Bannister stated he would like condition 15 changed to a masonry fence instead of stucco columns with a wooden fence. Motion on Item V.C. Motion: to adopt a resolution recommending approval of A/S 13-26, with the following additional conditions, that all roofs be tile, that condition 15 be amended to include a masonry wall on all lots that side or back up to a street and with landscaping between the sidewalk and fence and for Council and staff to look into landscaping Cohansey on the median strip also with a modification to condition 21 to read as follows: "The affordable components of Harvest Park Phases I and II shall be constructed prior to the issuance of building final of the 21st unit of Phase II. Moved by Commissioner Brad Bannister, seconded by Commissioner Richard Gullen. Vote: Motion carried 6-0-0-1 Yes: Commissioner Brad Bannister; Vice Chair Tom Fischer; Commissioner Richard Gullen; Commissioner Paul Kloecker; Commissioner Kai Lai; Chair Elizabeth Sanford No: None Abstain: None Absent: Commissioner Christi Garcia VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Residential Development Ordinance: RDO Status Report Update Planner II Durkin presented the staff report. There were no comments or questions from the Commission VII. NEW BUSINESS None VIII. CORRESPONDENCE None 12 IX. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS A. Current Planning Projects B. Planning Staff Approvals Planning Manager Martin gave a brief summary of the current planning projects and staff approvals. X. PRESENTATIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION None XI. ORAL REPORTS BY COMMISSION MEMBERS A. City Council Meeting of October 7 & 21 meetings and November 4 & 18 meetings. Commissioner Bannister gave a brief summary of the October 7 & 21 meetings. Commissioner Lai gave a brief summary of the November 18 meetings. B. Housing Advisory Committee Chair Sanford stated she is unable to attend the meetings since the meet the same time the General Plan Advisory Committee meets. C. Historic Heritage Committee Commissioner Garcia was absent and no report was given. D. Arts & Culture Commission Commissioner Bannister gave a brief summary of the meeting. E. South County Joint Planning Advisory Committee Commissioner Kloecker stated that there was no meeting. F. Street Naming Committee Commissioner Lai stated that there was no meeting. G. Development Standards Task Force Commissioner Bannister stated that there was no meeting. 13 H. Sign Ordinance Review Task Force Chair Sanford stated that there was no meeting. I. General Plan Advisory Committee Vice Chair Fischer gave a brief summary of the first two meeting. XII. PLANNING DIVISION MANAGER REPORT Planning Manager Martin thanked the Commission for having patience regarding correspondence from staff. Commissioner Gullen commented that he attended the County Planning Commissioner Association Conference in San Jose. The first day was about water and the second day was a toured the Santa Clara purification plant and the new 49’ers stadium and their use of recycled water. XIII. ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT None. XIV. PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR REPORT None. XV. ADJOURNMENT at 9:36 p.m.