Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report Item 4.D 10/7/2013 1ge nc °'Ito 4.D L • r85a . DATE: October 7, 2013 TO: Honorable Mayorand.Members of the City Council through City Manager FROM: Tiffany Robbe, Senior Planner -r siZ,_ Heather Hines, Planning Manager AWII SUBJECT: Resolution to,modify Condition 11 of_City;Council Resolution No. 2009-076 (Logan Place�Unit.Development Plan and Development.Standards) to eliminate the'requirementforinstall'ation of agate,to the adjacent Bounty Farm located at 1200 Petaluma Boulevard North RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council consider the staff report and adopt a resolution to modify Condition 11 of City Connell Resolution No. 2009-076 (Logan Place Unit Development Plan and Development Standar"ds). to°eliminate the requirement for installation of a gate to the adjacent Bounty Farm (Attachment1). BACKGROUND On October 7, 2008 Burbank Housing:submitted an application for a:Rezoning and Site Plan and Architectural Review for Logan Place Affordable Housing project located at 1200 Petaluma Boulevard.North. The project consisted,of 66 multi-family affordable housing units, including 6 studios, 12 one-bedroom, 21 two'bedroom, and 27 three-bedroom:apartment units in four 3-story buildings and one 4-story podium building (Attachment 2). The project incorporates on-site amenities such as large outdoor common areas, a turf, play area, two play structures, a sport/basketball court, laundry" facilities, an indoor community room with kitchen, and office space for both,property management and community service uses. Logan Place will be managed by Burbank Housing with an on-site,resident manager, a community service coordinator, and a maintenance crew. The-units will rent at rates affordable to those earning 30% to 60% of the area median Meome and Will:be affordable for at least 55 years. On April 14', 2009',the,Planning'Commission recommended approval of the Logan Place PUD to allow a 66-unit multi-family affordable rental housing' community constructed by Burbank Housing. On May 18, 2009 the City Council adopted Ordinance No.. .2325 (Logan Place PUD) and associated Resolution No. 2009-076 approving the 'Logan Plaice-Unit Development Plan. At said Agenda Review: City Attorneys Finance Director City Manager 1 hearing a requirementtoinstall a gate allowing direct pedestrian.access between the Logan Place property and neighboring Petaluma Bounty Farm (which fronts on Shasta Avenue) was added to the resolution at the direction of the City Council and with the expressed willingness of Burbank Housing. Condition 1;1 ,was added, which reads, "No fence along the northern property line is required. A gate to The.Bounty:Farm=(along the southern boundarybis-required." On June 25, 2009 the Site Plan and Architectural.Review Committee considered the project design, including the gate that had been,incorporated into the site plan in response to the City Council's condition. SPAR was approved although no specific discussion of the gate was included in the approval letter. When construction level plans;were developed for building,permit'submittal a grade change of approximately three feet between the Logan Place propefty.and the Petaluma Bounty farm site was identified. No grade change had previously been anticipated';during the City Council hearing or in relation to the requirement for a gate between the two properties. The City's Building Official confirmed that installation of a gate would be required to be ADA accessible, including an ADA accessible path-to the gate. To accomplish this:requirement and to address the three foot grade change at the property line, the architect found that extensive concrete ramping was necessary. The work required to meet the applicable ADA requirem"ents would require elimination of a significant area,of;approved landscaping,.addition of a significant amount of hardscape, (which the City Council had expressly worked to reduce), and alteration of the approved site plan. In addition to changes to:theapproyed site plan, the requirementao install the.gatewas estimated to have an additional-cost of$15,000:to $20,000(Attachment 4). Additionally, Petaluma Bounty has indicated that significant=ii surancelimitations prohibit open access to their-'property the neighboring,property. For"these reasons.Burbank Housing;requested that the project be found to be in substantial conformance with the:approved project without,incorporating the gate called for by Condition No. 11 of City Council resolution 2009-076. PianningCommission The Planning Commission_reviewed the request to eliminate therequirement for installation of a gate to Bounty Farm on.September 24, 2013. After hearing lfrom Planning;and Housing staff and from representatives of Burbank Housing:and Bounty Farm'„the Commission unanimously voted to recommend the modification to,the City Council (6,ayes'and I. absent) and adopted Planning Commission Resolution •2013''-18: The Planning Commission staff report and Resolution are ,provided as Attachments 5 and:6`:_ At the Planning Commission meeting, Elece'Hempel representing Bounty Farms, Pascal Sisich of Burbank Housing, and the City's Housing Administrator Bonne Gaebler stated reasons in addition to those described above,for requesting that the gate requirement be eliminated. Ms. Hempel clarified."that Bounty Farms is a production farm that invites.;the public in for specific programs;:,and not a "community garden"where neighbors have a'plot. As a production farm, they find open accesstundesirable; the:primary concerns ,being;the possibility of accidents, crop damage, and harvest loss. Ms. Hempel explained that the'desire,of Bounty Farm is that nearby residents' access the farm in the same manner as the rest of the community. Mr. Sisich highlighted that the site .plan modifications necessary to accommodate the ADA gate and sidewalk would also interfere with the vegetative swales and/or storm drains necessary for water quality purposes. Additionally; Mr. Sisich stated that the cost estimate provided (see Attachment 4).was likely low given cost increases and the cost of satisfying the water quality requirement in 2. an alternate way. He also expressed property management concerns associated with having'a gate onto private property. Both Burbank Housing and Petaluma Bounty highlighted their continued intent to have collaborative programs between,the,two non.-profits. Environmental'Review, An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative, Declaration was prepared for the Logan Place project, which assessed the environmental impacts of the project and was by.the Petaluma City Council on May 18, 2009 (R'esolution:No2009-072). The project is under construction and has been reviewed for consistency`With all Mitigations and conditionsofthe project approval. There is no substantial change in circumstances under which the Logan Place project was evaluated and this project presents.no new information of substantial importance relating to the prior environmental evaluation.--Therefore, no-additional CEQA analysis is required. DISCUSSION Condition 1.1' of the, City Council was added as a way to ,facilitate access and programing between the two non-profitsorganizations (Burbank Housing and`Petaluma Bounty). As plans for Logan Place evolved from design review level to construction levels;the issue of a gate-along;the south property line became an ;increasingly difficult condition to satisfy. Because of grade changes,ADA,requirements ,insurancelimitations, and the production farm-nature of the Bounty Farm, the€installation of agate has proven to be an infeasible requirement for the Logan Place development Additionally, the costs associated with these issues have proven to be substantial for an affordable :housing project with extremely limited funding. The two non-profit organizations haveeach,expressed a desire and commitment to offering programming to,involve Logan Place residents with the neighboring Petaluma Bounty' Farm. Staff believes that this commitment touches on the intent of the required gate=and'eliminates the significant challenges in incorporating a gate betweentheRtwo:properties. As such, staff recommends that4:thexsecond sentence of 11 (A gate to The Bounty Farm (along.the,;southern boundary) is required.)'be eliminated. FINANCIAL.IMPACTS' Thisis a cost:recovery project with„all costs of processing(the•application paid by the The cost recovery,accountmaintainss a positive balance. ATTACHMENTS Attachment.1 : DraftResolution of theCity of Petaluma City Council to Modify'Condition 11 of Previously Approved Resolution 2009-076 for Logan Place Unit Developnieiit:Plan Attachment 2: SiterPlan?as approved,by SPARC:millne 25, 2009 Attachment 3: City Council,Resolution 2009-076 (Legan(Rlace), Attachment 4:, Letter from Burbank Housing;dated,September14, 2'011 Attachment 5: Planning Commission staff report of September 24,,3013 without attachments (as they are the same asiAttachments2- 4 above) Attachment 6: Planning Commission'Resolution 201318. 3 • • ATTACHMENT,! RESOLUTION.OF THE'CIT.Y OF PETALUMACITY`COUNCIL MODIFYING CONDITION�I1.OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED;RESOLUTION.2009-076 FOR LOGAN PLACE UNIT'DEVELOPMENT PLAN 08-SPC-0525 WHEREAS; Section`19 040.E1,ofthetCity of,Petaluma Implementing..Zoning Ordinance acknowledges that modification of an 'approved. Unit Development may be necessary and desirable from timeto'tune, and WHEREAS,, Section 19:040:E.3. of the City of Petaluma Implementing Zoning Ordinance specifies that modification of:an approved UnihDevelopment Plan shall be-made by resolution of the City Council-after receipt:of recommendation of the Planning,Commission, and WHEREAS, on .April, 1,7;. 2009 at a „duly noticed. public hearing the Planning Commission recommended City Council approval of the Logan Place PUD, and associated Development: Plan to allow ;a 66-unit multi-family affordable ,housing` community to be constructed and managed by Burbank Housing; and WHEREAS, on May 18, 2009rat.,a duly noticed public hearing the.City.Council adopted Ordinance No 2325 (Logan Place PUD) and associated resolution No 2009=076 approving the LoganrPlaceithnit DevelopmentMari; and WHEREAS; at the May 18„2009 meeting the ;City Council added condition 11 to Resolution `No. 2009-076 requiring, the installation of a gate along the south property line to allow pedestrian access between•the Logan'Place;development and theiadjacent Petaluma Bounty Farm;and WHEREAS; on June 25, 2009 the Site. Plan and Architectural Review Committee approved the final design; of the Logan Place `Project',; including the gate that,had been incorporated intoithe site plandin response to the'City Council's condition; and WHEREAS„during the development of constructiori level plans am approximately three • foot grade difference was determined to exist between the Logan Place property and the neighboring land leased by Petaluma Bounty, where no grade change had previously been anticipated; and. WHEREAS; it was 'determined that the installation•of!a gate would,require extensive concrete ram in to meet allaapplicable.ADA requirements=for theTate and associated path and • P g; resulting in significant;chariges to the approved site?plan,and WHEREAS,, the requirement to install the gate;would have significant financial and. insurance related impacts' to the two non-profit groups which 'were not ranticipated during: approval ofthe Unit'Development Plan;;and WHEREAS, Burbank Housing:hasr"equested that Condition.11,be modified toaelirninate the requirement,to.install a,gatebetween.Logan Place and the Petaluma,Bounty Farm; and. WHEREAS, on September 24,`2013, the Planning 'Commission considered the request and related staff report and received and considered all written •and oral public testimony submitted up to theatime o_f the public:hearing in accordance the City of Petaluma Implementing Zoning•Ordinance;„and. WHEREAS, at that.hearing,;the Planning Commission.unanimously:recommended that the;City ;Council modify Condition '1'1 to eliminate the requirement to install a gate between. Logan.Placeland the.Petaluma:Bounty Farm; and 1 - I WHEREAS; on October. 7, 2013; the City Council considered the ,request and,related' staff report and repeived and considered all written.and:oral;publictestimony submitted up to'the time-of the public hearing in accordance°the City of Petaluma Implementing.Zoning Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE;'BE -IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby finds; that the proposed modiffeatioristo the Logan Place Unit Development Plan;to eliminate the requirement to install a gate would not significantly "alter thetapproved:project or unit development:plan and that,all findings made by the City Council for the original approval of the plan remain_in place as follows: • The Unit Development Plan clearly results-in amoredesirable=use of land and inra.belter physical environment than would,be possible underany single szoning,districf The Logan-Place project creates a'neighborhood,at 23.5, units to the, acre with ample. usable and centrally :Ideated open and community ;space (rather than requiring more parking than needed or one type of height separation when another type will ',serve as well), making development ofthisland under the Logan Place,PUD more,desirable than development under standard Furthermore, the e;66 residential units,will rent at a rate affordable for those earning 30 to 60 tot the areasmedian?income and will be affordableiforat least55 years furthering the City'affordable housing,;goals. Eliftnnation of the,gate between Logan Placetand Petaluma Bounty,cproperties.,dOes1nOt significantly alter the isite layout'fr6m. that originally approved by the City Council with the Unit Dev"elopinent Plan. • Ti e;PUD,District is proposed on property'which has a suitable relationship to one,or more ,thoroughfares and said thoroughfare; is adequate, to carry any additional traffic generated by the development,) The Protect sits directly, on Petaluma Boulevard North and access to.the 66 apartment units will be via one .of'two proposed or existing driveways The traffic impact study prepared a e for the proposed ioo woul bean project concluded that-levels of service (LOS) at the studied, changed at LOS A,, in the existing ;condition, if project traffic' were,added. The study also concluded that the intersection would beat LOS C in the morning and LOS D.in:the evening under both the futuro conditions, scenario and the future, plus, project conditions .scenario. In conclusion when the subject site, is fully developed' the study intersection.is expected' to operate Oat the ,same level in both the existing and the projected future condition, with or without the project. The proposed modification to Condition 11 does not 'alter the ;studied traffic patterns or volumes associated With'the Logan.n.Place project. • The;plan for"the proposed development,presents a unified and organized arrangement of buildings and service facilities which are appropria'te in relation to adjacent or nearby properties,and adequate läiidscaping and/or screening is included if necessary to insure compatibility: SPARC was supportive of Logan Place Site plan and;elevations .The,project landscaping;. plan;called for trees to'besplanted along.all of the property lines that adjoinnexisting uses. as well as:Petaluma.Boulevard North. -Elimination,of'the required gatefion the,southern property boundary will preserve the approved landscaping plan that was reviewed and approval by SPARC and will not alter the arrangement of the buildings or service facilities. 1 -2 o The naturdl.and scenic qualities`,of the\site,are p*otected'with;adequate available public and private/spaces designated on the'Unit.De1'elopnent Plan, The project site lacks:any significant natural:or:scenic qualities with the exception of the 0 05-a cre wetlands which fall un der°the'jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers, who, in a letter :dated, August 2009, permitted the wetlands to be filled based on conditions that kinclude purchase of the e4[iivalent amount of seasonal wetland credits. The project includes„many amenities;including;large 'outdoor'common,areas, a turf play area, two play;structures, a spur t/basketball`court, and.an,indoor community room with a kitchen. A third of the apartments have a private deck, or patio; Modification to Condition 11,to eliminate theTate!will not change the interior,layout=of the site. Access to the, Petaluma Bounty farm will be within a shot walk and=the two non-profit organizations (Burbank Housing,and Petaluma Bounty).have indicated a commitment:to Collaboration in programming, between the residents of Logan Place and the .adjacent • farm.. bhe d vel pmeto then s bjeePproperty in the'manner proposed by,the applicant will not e. Tlie develo rnent o thus” p lic,welfare will be'in the best interests of the City and will bein keeping with the general intent and' spirit of the; ,zoning' regulations of the City of Petaluma, with the:Petaluma General Plan; and withany applicable plans adopted by the City. An' nitial study that evaluated potential environmental impacts 'associated with the project determined that no .significant unmitigated environmental effects would result from the Logan Place development, The project will help the City meet its goals for providing affordable _housing for families and :individuals; It is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance General Plan,and Housing,Element. Elimination of the required gate will not create a ,:situation detrimental to the ,public welfare or an inconsistency with applicablerzohing regulations°or General P-lah policies, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does;hereby modify Condition 1 of'City Council Resolution No '20091076' to eliminate the sentence reading; A gate to The Bounty Farm(alongthe southern boundary) is required: • 13 L '✓", { 1?.. 9 Inc 4'1 = ? 'Q ��\ ICI k)Sw rn 1. v�w®R.) � Z 0 \\ n2, L sco • \ I Z ,.. , , \,� , \ , i' 44a ' � 0 I: N ' �1a 1i►.��.� '\�\ • ♦• i 0 -N. '411 b. _ . . jr...H---`7* trikp.taly? N .1®;( . �ll N', 1 1. gl4.. i �' t� \\\ \\ —� : z ' a A> ��y .t . / I `\ c °.- fin '._ E a s I 0 / / .....„.. L___ a.®s.ur .` / �1mnc,; % g ., Et �e:6 _ � !1 � .1 _ y 9 of e�o�keU�Cn;�♦, y v x ,'eiu'I �® OD f 1r ° jY goo ��� -11��/ 1./ / coeet - zcu `S p�MM lit; 1 -0' �' •���•• / Ao I i r 48.0 co a a AA m 0 I ��,y�. i �®�.., 1 x C © 41 !mil m 1 /qv/ i \,�L{ x, 01 144,1 1 0 5 z 111/ � & \sea =- Z a ti 111141411 i cg° ail C1a 88 m �tl, si,�, i w�■•.:Vi_ I 41.-04,(-- ,,m esteit i 4.��e'\ i iOZ i it „ Minna II t NMI d • �, 1 U ° BU DING 3 1n1 BLOCK Al A-II • I. BLCCKA-I ii aeo ill: Iz110.n,. u I �. 1zlsso.Tn. BLOCK B, olUlaeo.Flar 0/1111eo_Ftnr ,' —— . 1 __ iii �I � i ' i� i § §. ..! .- -- lit1 r 1�1� I � i 1 �j '4Te�� a4 ! er . cg �. C X10 rl ESI�9III f t-i JIIIIIf : ItI; 1 i q � . II/171 �.,, P ' III I I rfaj p. i S1 .. ..,,E it,,„,:i' 1, - : ®^, ', IIse r��l� J J t' Il I I_I ,,,, rl -IP "�I 1 IS 11 nm BLOCK A=11 , IIIIIIII 11 i ji a I BLOCK AI ' BU DING 4 ' .. I O 1 (2)318 TR 1n1 BLOC : o/l anaDo gar' REM 0/12111/00 RAT III I °y I o/lzl,eo.RAT ■, �' Imo. j 3 lI 1 _ . l'.2.1) r ■� _��� r� o = 1 .� I� a1 91 I y `---y lili...ditninn ini imalnirillM j m - w ar . i. . y; - o , >. I IV m t 1 } .16TH' v S3114'10"E 227.70 T.p 17r 231 1TA IT-0'4 Y+1 y N ATTACHMENT 3 Resolution No. 200.9 .076; N C:S, ofTthe City of Pet-alum- APPROVING°THE UNIT"DEVELOPMENT PLAN,AND 'DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS EORTHE LOAN PLACEPLLANNED UNIT DEVELOPVIENT,;APN 019M20-013; . 'WHEREAS,the Planning Conunission filed City Council its report set'fortli'in its:minutes of,April 14,;2009,recommending:approval,of a`'Unit.Development Plan'and ',Development Standards^for theLogan Place Planned Unit Development('theProject');and WHEREAS,the City'Council held a•noticed public,hearing-on said Unit Development: Plan;and'Develgpment Standards+on May 18 2009;and WHEREAS,on May'1.8,x2009; incompliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)"; 14 Califorri&Code of;Regulations'Sections'1'5000 et,seq:;(CEQA.Guidelines) and the Cityof Petaluma Environmental Guidelines, thecity'Cd"uncil adopted R'esolution.No. 2009 adopting a"mitigated negative?declaration of;environmental;effect for'the Project., NOW,;THEREFORE.REIT RESOLVED thaHhe City.Council doeslereby1ind: The'Plan clearlyfesults ima more`destrableuse'ofland'and in;a 'tietter,physical 'environment'thanwould` e.possible,under anysingle'zoningdisiricl; . , Creating a'neig hborhood,at;253 units'to the acre with ample; usable, and:centrally located open and community space=(rather than requiring more ;parking than needed or one type of`height;,separatlon,when.ahother,type will7serve%as well), makes the development of'this,land,under the1Logan Place PUD%more desirable than development under standardMUla zoning., Furthermore, the resultant 66 units will rent at a,rate affordable for those: earning, 30% to 60% of the area median income and will be affordable foraat least,55 years, furthering the City's affordable'housing goals:. 2, the PUD District is.proposed'on property which has a'.suitable`,relanonsliip•:to one or more: thoroughfdee,`s, and said thoroughfare is adequate to carry ,any. additional traffic generated'by the:deyelopment. The Project sits directly on Petaluma Boulevard North and access to the 66 apartment-unitsrwill be}via„one of two.proposed or existing driveways:, The traffic impactstudyprepared for'the proposed:project concluded that the levels ofiservice (LOS)atithe studied,intersection .would,'be unchanged at LOS A; in the existing condition if,ProjecV,traffic were added. The study, also concluded that the intersection would;be,at,LOS C in the morning;and LOS,D in the evening,;under both the futurecondittons scenario and the future plus project conditions scenario:, In:conclusion,]when the subject site is ifUlly developed, the study'intersection;is expected to operate at the same level in both the existing,and the projected future condition with or'without,the project; `3 - L. ;RCSOIuUOn No.2009„0961N.C$e, Page 1 3. The plan for the proposed development presents al unified and organized arrangement of buildings and service facilities which are appropriate in relation to adjacent Or nearby properties and adequate landscaping and/or screening is included if necessary to insure compatibility. SPARC was supportive of the preliminary site plan. The project's preliminary landscaping plan calls.for trees to be planted along all of the property lines that adjoin existing uses as well as Petaluma Boulevard North. 4. The natural and'scenic'qualities of the site are protected, with adequate available public and'private spaces designated on the Unit Development Plan. The project,site lacks any significant natural or scenic qualities,with the exception of the 0.05-acre wetlands which fall under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers,who, in a.letter dated August 2009,permitted the wetlands to be filled,based on conditions that include purchase of the equivalent amount of seasonal wetland credits. The site plan proposes many amenities including large outdoor common areas, a turf play area, two play structures, a sport/basketball court, and an indoor'community room with a kitchen. A.third of the apartments will have a private deck-or patio. 5. The development of the subject property, in the manner proposed by the applicant, will not be detrimental to the public welfare, will be in the best interests of the City, and will be in keeping with the general intent and spirit of the zoning regulations of the City of Petaluma, with the Petaluma General Plan, and with any applicable plans adopted by the'City; An Initial Study that evaluated potential environmental impacts associated with the project determined that no significant 'unmitigated environmental effects would result from this proposal. The project will help-the City meet its goals for providing,affordable housing for families and individual. It is consistent with the Zoning:Ordinance, General Plan, and Housing Element. BE IT FURTHER,RESOLVED that this Resolution shall become effective upon the effective date of Ordinance No 2325 N'C.S., Approval of Rezoning to a Planned Unit District (PUD) for Logan Place," which is thirty (30) days after the date of the adoption of said ordinance by the Petaluma;City Council. BE IT FURTHER,RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve, pursuant to the provisions of Zoning Ordinance No. 2300 N.C.S. and based upon the evidence contained in the record of proceedings and/or received at or before the hearing of this matter, the Logan Place Unit Development Plan set forth in Exhibit A and the Development Standards for the Logan Place Planned Unit set forth in Exhibit B, subject to the conditions set forth below. 3- 2 Resolution No.2009-076 N.C.S. Page 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Logan Place Planned`Unit Development 1200 Petaluma.'BoulevardNorth, APN 007-020=013 Project 08-SPC-0525-CR From the Planning Division (778-4301) 1. Before issuance of any development permit, the applicant,shall revise the site plan or other first sheet of the-office and job site copies of the,Building.Permit plans to list these Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Measures as notes. 2. The plans.submitted for building permit review shall be'in substantial compliance with the Unit Development'Plandate stamped April 6, 2009. 3. All mitigation measures adopted in conjunction withahe,Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Logan Place are herein incorporated by reference as conditions of project approval. 4. Upon approval by the City Council, the applicant shall pay4he,Notice,of Determination fee to, the Planning Division. The check shall be m ade,payable to the County Clerk. Planning staff will,file the Notice of Determination with the County Clerk's office within five (5) days ofreceiving,Council approval, The StateDDepartment of Fish and Game has eliminated the fee exemption for projects determined to have a de minimis effect on fish and wildlife and requires that an environmental filing fee be paid, (as required under Fish and Game Code Section 7111.4d) to the Sonoma County Clerk on or before the filing of the Notice of Determinationu(as of'January 2009, the fee is'$1,993, contact them at 944- 5500 to confirm). 5. Prior to building permif approval, the plans shall note the installation of high efficiency heating equipment (90% or higher heating/furnaces) and low NOx water heaters (40 or less) in compliance with'policy-4-P-1"5D (red'ucing.emissiops in residential units). 6. Prior to building or grading permit approval, all plans: shall,note the following and all construction contracts shall include;the same ;requirements (or measures shown to be equally effective; as approved'by Community Development Department), in,compliance with,General Plan policy"4-P-16: • Maintain construction equipment engine$'in good'condition and in proper tune per manufacturer's specification for the duration.of construction; • Minimize idling time of construction _related equipment, including heavy-duty equipment,;motor vehicles, and portable equipment; • Use alternative fuel construction equipment ;(i.e., compressed natural gas, liquid petroleumigas;and unleaded gasoline); • Use add-on control devices such as,diesel oxidation catalysts or particulate filters; • Use diesel equipment that meets the ARB's,2000 or newer certification standard for off-road heavy-duty diesel'engines; • Phase construction of the project; and • Limit the hour's of operation of heavy duty equipment. 3 3 Resolution No.2009-076 N.C.S. Page 3 7. Prior to SPARC review, the ap1icaht shall submit; the GreenPomts,Checklist showing that the project is designed to achieve 140 GreenPoints under the Multi-family Build It Green program: Priors to building,permit issuance, the Checklist shall be submitted and the budding permit plans-shall depict/note.thelrelevant measures. Prior to building permit final, the'project (or each unitor building)shall be GreenPoint Rated for 140 points: 8. Prior to issuance of any grading,or building permits,,Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee shall review and approve site plan design, building design, PUD Development Standards;; colors and materials, landscaping, signage, and lighting. Specifically, SPARC shall: a. Ensure good quality'lighting near the exterior bicycle rack locations. b. Review circulation signage;and require PBAC's direction that: • Clear and visible signage=is located at the southern, shared-use driveway to alert drivers to the possibility of encountering bicyclists and pedestrians when exiting and entering the site; • Cautionary pedestrian signage for vehicular drivers needs to be optimally visible to drivers. • Cautionary vehicular signage for pedestrians needs to optimally visible to pedestrians and cyclists. c. Ensure that the southern driveway is designed and signed'to discourage non-resident vehicles from entering projecttsite at this driveway. d. Consider white Or light colored roofing material ("cool,roofs") on roofs not used for solar`purposes. e. Reduce the potential:heat:island effect coming off the parking lot behind the podium building by using,light,colored materials on the, ground or by using shade trees or shade structures (perhaps'solar'shades) over the asphalt: f. Look at tree design as a means of reducing heat gain to the buildings and look at incorporating some fruit treesinto the landscape plan. g. Consider the incorporation of some larger balconies. • h. Pay special attention to the color and materials of the,podium building. 9. All lighting shall be glare-free, hooded, and downcast in order to prevent glare into bicyclists' and pedestrians' eyes.. 10. Should use,of the southerly driveway result in,;safety:concerns,.the City may limit access at this driveway to right turns in and out. 11. No fence along the northern.property line is required. A gate to The Bounty Farm (along the southern`boundary) is required. 12. The following points taken from Burbank Housing's May 4th letter to Mike Estoumes of Lakeville Auto Body(Attachment'3) are hereby added:as conditions: a. The shared driveway shall be "de-emphasized',' as a Logan Place entry. There will not be a"Logan`Place sign at the entrance to the shared driveway. b. If approved by SPARC, signage will be placed in the shared driveway stating that there is no Logan Place guest'parking available from the southerly driveway. If, at 3 - 4 Resolution No.:2009-076:N.C.S. Page 4 the time of the SPARC hearing,Lakeville Auto Bodydesires it and SPARC approves it,the applicant shall paint "No Logan Place,guesfparking"on theshared driveway. c. The 39 parking spaces accessible from the shared ;driveway shall be assigned to tenants. d. An addendum shall be included in the standard tenant lease informing all new residents that the northerly driveway is the only access point for visitors and that all visitor parking spots are. available only through the northerly driveway. The addendum will also acknowledge the abutting location of an auto body facility and note that,in the normal course of business there may besome noise. e. The Logan Place resident manager will work closely with Lakeville Auto Body staff to monitor the shared driveway and if necessary, advise=and warn Logan residents if any use a Lakeville parking,spot. f. If desired by Lakeville.Auto Body, the Logan Place applicant is willing to provide a reasonable amount of- additional signage on the Lakeville Auto Body site, including parking warnings on each.Lakeville parking stall, prior to completion of Logan Place. 13. In the event that archaeological remains are encountered during grading, work shall be halted temporarily and:a-qualified archaeologist shall.;beconsulted for evaluation of the artifacts and to recommend.future action. The local Native American community shall also be notified and consulted in the event any archaeological'.remains are uncovered. 14. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold' 'harmless the City and its officials, boards, commissions;agents,. officers and employees ("lndemnitees") from any claim, action or proceeding against Indemnitees to attack, set aside, void or annul any of the approvals of the project to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law. To the extent permitted by applicable law, the applicant's,duty to defend, indemnify and hold harmless in accordance'with this condition shall apply-to any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought.conderhing the project, not just such claims, actions or proceedings brought within the tinie'period provided for inapplicable State and/or local statutes. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding concerning the Project. The City shall cooperate fully in the defense. Nothing, contained in this condition shall prohibit the City from participating in the defense of any claim, action,,or proceeding, and if the. City chooses to do so, applicant shall reimburse City for attorneys' fees and costs incurred by the City to the maximum extent permitted bylaw. From the Engineering Division (778-4301): Prior to issuance of a building permit(unless otherwise noted), the following conditions shall be addressed. 15. Prior to building permit approval, an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for pedestrian and bicycle through`travel along the northern driveway,from_Petaluma sBoulevard North to the eastern property boundary shall be submitted to the,City. City staff shall be responsible for processing.and recording the irrevocable offer of dedication. 16. Prior to final inspection, the applicant shall reimburse the owner of Lakeville Autobody for any oversized components of utilities that will be used to serve the Logan Place developments The applicant shall.coordinate directly with,the owner of Lakeville 3- 5 Resolution No.2009-076 N.C.S. Page 5 Autobody'and provide the City sufficient evidence that any necessary paybacks have occurred. 17. Frontage improvements shall be installed per the civil engineering site plan set dated April 6, 2009' .including, but not limited to, new concrete, sidewalk removal and replacement of broken curb and gutter, pedestrian ramps, streetlights, crosswalks, landscaping, fire.hydrants, etc. 18. All existing overhead utilities along the project frontage'or traversing the site shall be placed underground. 19. The necessary right of way shall be dedicated along the Petaluma Blvd. North project frontage to the City of Petaluma. 20. An emergency vehicle access,easement is required along the northern parking lot drive aisle from Petaluma Blvd.North to the rear property line. 21. Grade conforms along the project frontage shall conform to the existing street section/bike,lane to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Striping and pavement marking shall be replaced in kind. 22. The project shall provide for zero net storm water runoff for the 10-year event to the adjacent lands of Stonitsch and.property located at 41 Shasta Avenue. 23. Sonoma County Water-Agency and Zone 11A review and approval is required. 24. Site work shall generally conform to the site improvements as shown on the plans provided with the application. 25. All work shall conform.toethelatest City standards. 26. All improvements 'shall be ADA accessible. All new pedestrian ramps shall have detectible warning surfaces (truncated domes) installed. 27. Gallons per minute data for the proposed project shall be provided for the purposes of sizing the domestic water meter and supply line. City standard backflow prevention, by pass meter, control valves, etc shall be installed at the service connection to the existing water main. 28. Prior to final inspection/issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the developer shall enter into a City sub-metering agreement for domestic water supply. 29. All existing unused water and sewer mains shall be identified on construction drawings and abandoned per City standards. 30. The developer, shall comply with the City's phase 11 storm water management plan including submittal of`a notice of intent and storm water pollution prevention plan to the State and City. 3- 6 Resolution No.2009-076 N.C.S. Page 6 31. Joint trench' plans are required with the building permit/public improvement plan submittal. 32. Prior to final inspection/issuance of a certificate of occupancy, all public improvement work shall be completed. 33. Maintenance declarations shall-be provided for shared facilities. 34. All new on-site storm drain water and sewer shall be privately owned and maintained. 35. A public improvement plan application is required for'Sall frontage work and all on-site work within public, easements. A public improvement- agreement package including necessary bonds and insurance is required. From the Fire Marshal (7784398), 36. Prior to building;,permit'issuance, ensure that the angle of approach/departure meets the Department's ladder .truck clearances (the gradient for the north entry fire apparatus access road at approxii:riately`12% is acceptable). 37. Prior to building permit,issuance, submit detail for `-`speed bumps" along the north access for Departmental review and approval. 38. The basketball court near the south side access drive shall' remain open and clear and final design is subject to the review and approval of the Fire and Public Works Departments. 39. Prior to issuance of the building permit, proolof the required,:fire flow shall be provided to the Fire Marshal's of1be. The FMO will not;accept.less than minimum fire flow and pressure and it will be the developer's responsibility to make private and/or public improvements to the system to meet the water-flow demand of the project. Minimum fire flow for buildings)shall be calculated as specified;in the 2007 California Fire Code Appendix B, `Fire Flow Requirements for Buildings: Please be advised that if building fire flow calculations cannot be made at the time of project submittal, the following fire flows shall apply: Single- and Two-Family Residential:. 100 GPM at 20 psi residual. 40. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the plans shall note;the size of the fire line, and it shall meet the fire flow requirements of the sprinkler system design. 41. All building/s (or portions thereof) shall be protected by an automatic fire sprinkler system as required by the,City of Petaluma Municipal Code and shall conform to NFPA 13 requirements: The fire sprinkler system shall be provided with central station alarm system designed in accordance with NFPA 72. A local alarm shall be provided on the exterior of the building AND.a normally occupied location"in"the interior of the building. All systemsv,require three sets of plans to be submitted to the Fire Marshal's office for review and approval 3-1 Resolution No 2009-076 N.C.S. Page 7 From the Water Resources and Conservation Department (778-4699) 42. Prior to SPARC review;,the landscape plans shall be submitted to the Department for Water Conservation Ordinance review and direction. 43. Prior to building permit issuance, the landscape plans shall be 'submitted to the Department for Water°Conservation,Ordinance review and approval. Under the power and-authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City: REFERENCE: I hereby certify,theforegoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the /ppro ed !to Council of the,City of Petaluma at a Regular meeting on the l° day of June,2009, its m: by the following vote: �/ City Att ey AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: • ATTEST: e a - S ,, I \ / ° 6 it; Clerk Ma'yor` �/ 3-E Resolution No.2009-076 N.C.S. Page 8 ATTACHMENT 4 BURBANK HOUSING DEVELOPMENT L0PME COLORA'T'ION 790 Sonoma Avenue • Santa Rosa.,CA 95404 • badc@burbankhousing.org (707) 526-9782 • Fax (707) 526-9811 September 14,2011 Tiffany Robbe City of Petaluma _ _ _ __ 11 English Street Petaluma,CA 94952 Re:Logan Place,request to remove:condition of gate access to adjoining property Dear Tiffany: When Logan Place was approved-by SPARC in 2009,our site plan showed gate access to the adjoining property,currently being used as a Community Garden.The gate was added based on a SPARC member's suggestion that it Would be nice to allow Logan,residents direct access to the Garden.While the inclusion ofthe gate was never made a formal,condition,it does appear on the approved set of plans. lam writing to request that the gate on our plans be disregarded.While Nye thought the gate would be nice,we have since determined:that adding:this gate is impractical.because ritcompromises other project goals,and may trigger expensive ADA requirements. Specifically,accommodating the gate to the Garden would be a challenge and impractical in the following ways: 1. Grade differences and ADA compliance: Given the gade;difference,between our site and the Garden site,adding.a gate would require a ramp system.Since this gate would presumably be available to all tenants,we believe that we;viillbe required to make it ADA compliant. 2. Reduced planted aria:and storm water treatment Given the newlyupdated storm water mitigation requiremiehts,we need to utilize as much of landscaped area for bio retention and treatment.A ramp system would reduce planted area,and require a redesign of other areas to.provide areas fdr storm water remediation,;and,would add more concrete at the expense of planted green areas. 3. Cost prohibitive:We estimate that adding the gate/ramp,will result in an additional cost of 15,000-20,000 to the project. We are under pressure to contain costs and eliminate unessential features if they'are not of direct and tangible benefit The idea of providing access to the Garden space was just a passing comment at SPARC.If the complexity and costs of the gate was known then,1 believe the conversation would have ended at SPARC.Therefore,_for these reasons,I am asking that you approve the deletion of the gate from our plans. Sincerely, 4 Pascal Sisich CTA Non-Prolit Organization Serving Sonoma County 4 _. ATTACHMENT 5 CITY 'OF PETALUMA STAFF REPORT Community Deve/opment Department,Planning"Division,-11 English Street,Petaluma,CA 94952 (707) 778-4470 Fax(707) 778-4498 E-mai l::planning@ei.petaluma.ca.us DATE: September24, 2013 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6 TO: PlanningCommission FROM: Tiffany R'obbe, Senior Planner REVIEWED BY: Heather Hines,Planning Manager SUBJECT: Logan Place 1200 Petaluma Boulevard North Modification to PUD Resolution File No. 08-SPC-0525 -• = tRE1i D1�11�11 NDAT1ON r..u8w�a':�1- i a i--` ! f3 Staff recommends that the P.lanning'Commission adopt a.Resolution recommending that the City Council modify Condition Ll' of City Council Resolution No 2009-076 (Logan Place Unit Development Plan and-Development-Standards) to eliminate the requirement for installation of a gate to,the adjacent Bounty.Fa-rm,. subject to the findings set forth in the attached resolution (Attachment A). ` ' iuu .MIRRQJE @T SVNI3S:rt > '' ? Project: Logan Place (under construction) 1200 Petaluma Boulevard North A PN: 007-241-002 Project Planner: Tiffany Robbe, Senior Planner Project Applicant: Burbank Housing Developinent'Corporation 790 Sonoma Avenue Santa Rosa, CA 95404 Nearest Cross.Street: Shasta Avenue Property Size: 2.6 acres Site Characteristics: Construction on the site is currently 95% completed with approved 66-unit affordable housing project (Logan Place). The 2.6-acre Logan Place Condition'll Modification 1200 PBN 08-SPC-0525 Page 1 5- I project site is located 'on the east side of Petaluma Boulevard North, at 1200 Petaluma Boulevard North, just north of Shasta Avenue between Lakeville, Auto .Body and the Sheet Metal Workers Union Hall. Surrounding uses include an urban community farm, Petaluma Bounty Farm. Existing Use: Approved 66-unit multi-family affordable:rental housing coimmunity (Logan Place) Zoning: Planned Unit District(PUD): Logan Place GP Land Use: Mixed Use . _. a; *1i BACKGROUND/PROJECTtDESGRIPTION_ .:m- On October 7, 2008 Burbank Housing submitted an application for a Rezoning and Site Plan.and Architectural Review for. Logan Place Affordable Housing project located at 1200 Petaluma Boulevard North: The project consisted of 66 multi-family affordable.housing units, including 6 studios, 12 one-bedroom, 21 two=bedroom, and 27 three-bedoon apartment units in four 3-story buildings and one 4-story podium building (Attachment B). The project incorporates on-site amenities such as large outdoor common areas, a turf play area; two play structures, a sport/basketball' court, laundry facilities, an indoor community room with kitchen, and office space for both property management and community service;uses. Logan Place will be managed by Burbank Housing with an on-site resident manager, a community service coordinator, and a maintenance crew. The units will rent at rates affordable,to those earning 30% to 60% of the area median income and will,be"affordable,for at least,55'years. On April 14, 2009 the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Logan Place PUD to allow a 66-unit multi-family affordable' rental housing community constructed by Burbank Housing. On May 18, 2009 the City Council adopted Ordinance No 2325' (Logan Place PUD) and associated Resolution No 2009-076 approving the Logan Place Unit Development Plan. At said hearing,a requital-lent to install a gate allowing direct pedestrian,access between the Logan Place property and neighboring Petaluma,Bounty Farm (which frontsion'Shasta Avenue) was added to the resolution at the direction of the City Council and with'tbe expressed willingness of Burbank Housing. Condition 11 was;added, the second sentence of which read, A gate to The Bounty Farm (along the southern boundary) is required." On June 25, 2009 the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee considered the project design, including,the gate that had been incorporated into the site plan in response to the City Council's condition. SPAR.was approved although no specific discussion of the gate was included in the approval letter. When construction level plans were developed for building permit submittal a grade change of approximately`three feet between the Logan Place,property and the Petaluma Bounty farm site Logan Place'Condition 11:Modification 1200 PBN 08-SPC-0525 Page 2 5 - Z was identified. No grade -change had previously been anticipated "during the City Council hearing or in relation to the requirement for a gate between the two properties. The City's Building Official confirmed that installation of a gate would be required to be ADA accessible, including an ADA accessible path to the gate. To accomplish:this requirement and to address the three foot grade change,at the property line, the architect found that extensive concrete ramping was necessary. The work required.to meet the applicable ADA requirements would require elimination of a significant area of approved landscaping, addition a significant amount of hardscape (which the City Council had expressly worked to reduce), alteration of the approved site plan. In addition to changes to the approved site plan, the requirement to install the gate was estimated to have an additional cost of,$15;000 to $20,000 (Attachment D): Additionally, Petaluma Bounty has indicated that significant insurance limitations>prohibitopen access to their property from the neighboring property. For these reasons Burbank Housing requested thatthe project be found to be in substantial conformance.with the approved project without incorporating the gate called for by Condition"No. 1,1 of City Council resolution 2009-076. �r --wrs ,reg rr�'.. . .;:t a'� k3:. STrAFF,ANt1LYSISf .. y --�o-�m Condition 11 of the City Council was added as a way to 'facilitate access and programing between the two.non-profitorganizations (Burbank Housing and Petaluma Bounty). As plans for Logan Place evolved from design review level to construction levels the issue of a gate along the south property line became an increasingly difficult condition 'to satisfy. Because of grade changes, ADA requirements, and insurance limitations the installation of a'gate has proven to be an infeasible requirement for the Logan Place development, Additionally, the costs associated with these issues have proven+to be substantial for an affordable housing project with extremely limited funding. The two non-profit organizations haveeach expressed a desire and commitment to offering programming to involve Logan Place residents with the neighboring Petaluma Bounty Farm. Staff believes that this commitment touches on the intent of the required gate and eliminates the significant challenges in incorporating agate between.theltwo properties. As such, staff recommends that<the•second sentence of Condition 11 be eliminated. QT.:414,TN-M. trc NMENTAL REAEW • k r e 71 ' An Initial..Study/Miti'gated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Logan. Place project, which assessed the'+environmental`impacts of the project and was approved by the Petaluma City Council on May 18,'2009 (Resolution No 2009-072). The projectis under.construction and has been reviewed for consistency:with all mitigations and conditions of:the project approval. There is no substantial change in circumstances under Which the Logan Place project was evaluated and,this project presents no new information of substantial importance relating to the prior environmental evaluation.. Therefore, no additional CEQA analysis is required. Logan Mace Condition 11 Modification 1200 PBN 08-SPC-0525 Page 3 5- 3 ,- �. '�� , � ;� nt 5REGQMMENpATaIOIV GMIN e ,: _, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution recommending'that the City Council modify Condition 11 of City Council Resolution No 2009-076 (Logan Place Unit Development Plan and Development Standards) to eliminate the requirement for installation of a gate to the adjacent Bounty Farm, subject to the findings set.forth in the attached resolution (Attachment A). ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Draft Resoluti'on Attachment B: Site Plan.as.approved by SPARC on June 25, 2009 Attachment C: City Council Resolution 2009-076.(Logan Place) Attachment D: Letter from Burbank`Housing dated September 14, 2011 Logan-Place,-/Condition 1'1 Modification 1200 PBN 08-SPC-0525 Page 4 5 - 4 ATTACHMENT 6 RESOLUTION NO.2013=18 CITY OF PETALUMA 'PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL MODIFY CONDITION 11 OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED RESOLUTION 2009-076 N.C.S. FOR LOGAN''PLACE UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN APN 007-241-002 08-SPC-0525 WHEREAS, Section 19.040.E. of the City of Petaluma Implementing Zoning Ordinance acknowledges that modification of an approved Unit Development may be necessary and desirable from time to time; and, WHEREAS, Section 19.040.E:3. of the City of Petaluma Implementing Zoning Ordinance specifies that modification of an approved Unit Development Plan shall be made by resolution of the City Council after receipt of recommendation of the Planning Commission; and, WHEREAS, on April 17, 2009 at'a duly noticed public hearing the Planning Commission recommended City Council approval of the Logan Place PUD and associated. Development Plan to allow a 66-unit multifamily affordable housing community to be constructed and managed by Burbank Housing; and, WHEREAS, on May 18, 2009 of a duly noticed public hearing the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2325 N.C.St (Logan Place PUD) and associated resolution No. 2009-076 N.C.S. approving the Logan Place Unit Development Plan; and, WHEREAS, at the May 18,, 2009 meeting the City Council added condition 11 to Resolution No. 2009-076 N.C.SI.requiring the installation of a gate along the,south property line to - allow pedestrian access:between the Logan Place development and the adjacent Petaluma Bounty Farm; and • WHEREAS, on June 25,2009 the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee approved the final design of the Logan Place Project, including the-gate that had been incorporated into the site plan in response to the City Council's condition; and, WHEREAS, during the development of construction level plans a three foot grade difference was determined to exist between the Logan Place property and the neighboring Petaluma Bounty property where no grade change had previously been anticipated; and, WHEREAS, it was determined that the installation of a gate would require extensive concrete ramping to meet all applicable ADA requirements for the gate and associated path and resulting in significant changes to the approved site plan; and, WHEREAS, the requirement to install the gate would have significant financial and insurance related impacts to the two non-profit groups which were not anticipated during approval of the Unit'Development'Plan; and, WHEREAS, Burbank Housing has requested that Condition 1.1 be'modified to eliminate the requirement to install a gate between Logan Place and the Petaluma Bounty Farm; - 1 Planning,Commission Resolution No.2013-18 Page 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby finds that the proposed modifications to the Logan Place Unit Development Plan.to eliminate the requirement to install a gate would not significantly alter the approved.project'or unit development plan and that all findings made',.by the City Council for the original,approval of the plan remain in place as follows: • The Unit Development Plan.clearly results in a more desirable use of land and in a better physical environment than would be possible under any single zoning district. The Logan Place project creates a neighborhood at 23.5 units to the acre with ample usable and centrally located open and community space (rather than requiring more parking than needed or one type of height separation when another type will serve as well), making development of this land under the Logan Place PUD more desirable than development under standard MUIA zoning. Furthermore, the 66 residential units will rent at a rate affordable for those earning 30 to 60 of the area median income and will be affordable for at least 55 years furthering the City affordable housing goals. Elimination of the,gate between Logan Place and Petaluma Bounty properties does not significantly alter the site layout from that originally approved by the City Council with the Unit Development Plan. • The PUD District is proposed on property which has a,suitable relationship to one or more thoroughfares anct said thoroughfare is adequate to carry any additional traffic generated by the development. The Project sits directly-on :Petaluma Boulevard'North and access to the 66 apartment units will be via one of two proposed or existing driveways. The traffic impact study prepared for the proposed''prbjectconcluded that levels of service (LOS) at the studied intersection would be unchanged at LOS A, in the' existing condition, if project traffic were added. The study also concluded that the intersection would be at LOS C in the morning and LOS a in the evening under both the future conditions scenario and the future plus project conditions scenario. In conclusion when the subject site is fully developed the study intersection is expected to operate at the same level in both the existing and the projected future condition, with orwithbOt-the project. The proposed modification to Condition 11 does not alter the studied traffic patterns or volumes associated with the Logan Place project. • The plan for the proposed development presents a unified and organized arrangement of buildings and service facilities;which are appropriate,in'relation to adjacent or nearby properties and adequate landscaping and/or screening is included if necessary to insure compatibility. SPARC<was supportive of Logan Place site plan and'elevations. The project landscaping plan called for trees to be.planted along all:of the property lines that adjoin existing uses as well as Petaluma Boulevard North. Elimination of the required gate on the southern property boundary Will preserve the.approved':landscaping plan that was reviewed and approved by SPARC and, will not alter the arrangement of the buildings or service facilities: • The natural.and scenic:qualities of the site are protected with adequate available public and private:spaces,designated.on the Unit Development,Plan. The project site lacks iany significant natural or:scenic qualities with the exception of the 0.05-acre wetlands which fall under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers, who in a letter dated August 2009, permitted the wetlands to be filled based on conditions that include.,purchase of the equivalent amount of seasonal wetland credits. The project - 2. P,Ianning.Commission Resolution.No.2013-18 Page 2 includes many amenities including large outdoor common areas, a turf play area, two play structures, a sport/basketball court, and an indoor community room with a kitchen. A third of the apartments have a private deck or patio. Modification to Condition 11 to eliminate the gate-will not change the interior layout of the site. Access to the Petaluma Bounty farm,will be within a short walk and the two non-profit organizations (Burbank Housing and Petaluma Bounty) have indicated a commitment to collaboration in programming between-the residents of Logan Place and the adjacent farm. • The development of the subject property in the manner proposed by the applicant will not be,detrimental to the publicwelfare will be in the best interests of the City and will be in keeping with the general intent and spirit of the zoning regulations of the City of Petaluma, with the Petaluma General Plan, and with any applicable plans adopted by the City. —An Initial Study that evaluated potential environmental impacts associated with the project determined that no significant unmitigated environmental effects would result from the Logan Place development. The project'Will ,help the City meet its goals for providing affordable housing for families and individuals. It is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance General Plan and Housing Element. Elimination of the required gate will not create a situation detrimental,to the public,welfare or an'inconsistency with applicable zoning regulations,or General Plan policies. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval to the City Council to modify condition 1.1 to eliminate the required gate on the southern property boundary between Logan Place and the Petaluma Bounty Farm. ADOPTED this 241h day of September, 2013, by the following vote: 1 es v4am.rz=n..�a, s r ?:C 6 + �y �, pg 4 .1 o- Com-rmissionlMe,mbaer Ay� stain ;' Benedetti-Petnic• X Lin X Mario X Councilmember Miller X Chair Pierre X Wick X Vice ChairWolpert X Jennifer Pierre, Chair ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Heather Hines, Committee Secretary Eric Danlyi City Attorney -3 Planning Commission Resolution No.2013-18 Page 3