Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 7.A 03/15/2004CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORM' 7. AGENDA BILL March 15, 2004 Agenda Title Resolution adopting a. Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Boulevard Apartments project (03- ZOA- 0405); Meeting Time ❑ 3.00 PM Introduction of an Ordinance rezoning the- property located at 945 ❑ 7:00 PM Petaluma Boulevard North from the, CH- Highway Commercial to the PUD- Planned Unit District; Resolution adopting a Planned Unit Development Plan and Development Standards for Boulevard Apartments Category (check one) ❑ Consent Calendar W Public Hearing ❑ New Business ❑ Unfinished Business ❑ Presentation (Department (Director. Contact Person Phone: Number Community Mike Moore Lynn Goldberg 707 -578 -7920 Development Cost of Proposal N/A Account Number N/A Amount Budgeted N/A Name of Fund: N/A Attachments to Agenda Packetltern 1. Draft Resolution Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration. 2. Draft Ordinance Rezoning 945 Petaluma. Boulevard North 3 Draft Resolution Approving Unit Development Plan and Development Standards for Boulevard Apartments. 4. Location Map 5. Project Description from Buckelew Programs 6. Justification for Reduced' Parking'Requirements 7. Written Understanding Between Buckelew Programs and the City of Petaluma 8. Initial Study and Mitigation Monitoring Plan 9. Planning Commission Staff Report of November 25, 2003 (without attachments) 10. Minutes EXCERPT from Planning Commission Meeting of Nov. 25, 2003 11, Memorandum from Cindie Fahy, Petaluma Police Department 12. - Petaluma Bicycle. Advisory Committee: recommendations 13. Minutes EXCERPT from SPARC Meeting of June 26, 2003 14. Correspondence received 15. Site plan (Exhibit A 1.0) Floor plans (Exhibits A 2:1, 2.2, 3.1, 3.2, 4. 1, and 4.2) Roof plans (Exhibits 2.3, 3.3, and 4.3) Architectural elevations Landscape plan (Exhibit L -1) Preliminary grading and drainage plan (Exhibit C -1) U • Summary Statement The applicant, Buckelew Programs proposes to construct 15 one - bedroom apartments on the project site. Fourteen very low- income individuals with a mental illness will live in the project, as well as an on -site manager. The long- term affordability of the rents will be ensured by the applicant. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal at its meeting of November 25, 2003 and recommended that the Council 1) adopt the Mitigated, Negative Declaration for the project, 2) approve the rezoning of the subject parcels to. PUD- Planned Unit District and 3,) approve the Planned Unit Development Plan and Development Standards subject to a number of conditions. Recommended City Council Action/Suggested Motion 1. Adopt a resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration, including a Mitigation 'Monitoring Plan, for the Boulevard Apartments project. 2. Introduce an Ordinance rezoning the property located at 945 Petaluma Boulevard North (APN 006 -450 -018) from the CH- Highway Commercial to the! PUD- Planned Unit. District 3. Adopt a resolution approving a, Planned Unit Development Plan and Development Standards and associated Conditions of Approval for the Boulevard Apartments Project. Reviewed by Finance Director: ' Reviewed by City Attorney Date: Approved by City Manager Date: Date: Today's Date Revision # and Date Revised: File Code: • • • Q ITY OV PETALUMA CALIFORNIA FEBRUARY 2 2004 AGENDA REPORT FOR BOULEvA.RD.APARTMENTS,PLAN. NED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, REzONING ANDMITIGATED,NEGATIVE 'DECLARATION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Description The applicant proposes to construct 15 one- bedroom apartments ;in three one- and two -story, wood frame buildings (see Attachment 5, Project Description). Fourteen very low- income individuals with a mental :illness will live in the project, as well as an on -site property manager. The long -term affordability: of the rents will be ensured by the applicant. A two -story building fronting, on Petaluma Boulevard North will include a community room, office, and laundry-room- on the first floor, and apartments on ,the' second floor. A patio area on the west side of this building will. provide 'space for outdoor recreation and socialization. Two other apartment buildings will be located in the property's interior. Each apartment will have a private deck or patio. All units 'will be entered directly from the: outside. The nine ground -floor units will be wheelchair - accessible ,(see Attachment 15, Site! Plan, Floor Plans, and Architectural Elevations). The project will be accessed by a single driveway from Petaluma Boulevard North. Twelve uncovered parking spaces, two of which will be handicapped- accessible, will be distributed throughout the site. An emergency vehicle turnaround will be provided on -site. Landscaping will be planted around each - of the buildings.. Trees will be installed .around the entire project perimeter, including street trees on; Petaluma Boulevard North (see Attachment 15, Landscape Plan). Requested Approvals The applicant has applied to the 'City for the rezoning of.the subject property from the Highway Commercial District to the. Planned, Unit District, and the adoption of a Unit Development Plan and Development Standards for they Boulevard Apartments Planned Unii District (see Exhibit A of Attachment 3, Draft Resolution). Following Planning Commission review and City Council approval; - the proposal will be required to receive Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee final. approval for the site, architectural, and landscape plans. General Plan Consistency The project site's General Plan land use designation is "Mixed Use," which::is intended to allow residential uses along with commercial uses, including but not limited to retail commercial, offices, and restaurants. The permitted number of housing units M dependent upon topography, environmental setting, existing and, nearby land uses, proximity to major streets and transit, and distance to shopping and parks. Higher densities (10 -30 units /acre) are allowed where measurable community benefit would be derived; where infrastructure, services, and facilities are available; and where superior design is proposed to ensure an attractive, healthy living environment. The proposed project would have a density of approximately 18 units per acre. The finding can be made that the community will benefit from the provision of affordable housing for the mentally - disabled;. that adequate infrastructure, services, and facilities are available (see discussion in following sections), and that. superior design is proposed and will be ensured through the design review process. Projects that are entirely residential are allowed in areas designated for Mixed Use, only upon the granting ofa conditional use permit subject to "the following findings: 1. The project, will help the City achieve its housing policies relating to housing type, location, .mix or affordability. 2. The project is designed to be compatible with surrounding uses. 3. The project will not have.a detrimental imp_ act on existing, infrastructure - -especially traffic and access to the street network. 4. Thee project; will not have'adetrimental impact on the'City's:inventory of-commercially developable, land, but will actually benefifthe community by bringing residents closer to. commercial and retail services. 5. Superior design will ensure an attractive, 'comfortable, and healthy living `environment. Staff believesathat the: above findings can be made because .the project will help the `City achieve its;goals of providing affordable housing. for special needs groups, it will be compatible with surrounding uses, it will have a minimal.impact on traffic and the street" network the project is less than an acre and would not represent a significant loss of commercial propert y, and the City's design, process will ensure a superior project design. The project would help the City of Petaluma ,meet its share of regional housing need for low - income housing, and is supported by a- number of Housing 'Element policie&-and programs, including the following: Policy 1.2 Encourage the development of housing on underutilized land. Program 4.3 Continue to work `with: non - profit housing organizations to benefit firom their expertise in; and resources: for developing and sup_ porting affordable - housing. Policy 6.4 Promote the pro „vision of disabled - .accessible units and housing for the mentally- and physically- disabled Program 6:13 . Support the construction of housing Specifically designed for the mentally Additionally, Policy 9:;1 calls for the minimizing of impacts of affordable: and special needs housing projects on: existing neighborhoods,through the design review and approval process and by working with project managers. Zonft District Consistency The applcant;requests that the subJec "t property'be rezoned Highway .Commercial 'to Planned Unit D,istrictto -allow for design flexibility: Development in thi's zone requires: approval by the City Council of a t;Development Plan showingthe design of the district, the interrelationship uses, and their relation ,to - the surrounding uses and area, as well as specific development standards for the district. The..applicarit has submitted a Unit Development Plan consisting of a site plan that depicts building„ parking and open space locations ,(Exhibit Al 0), floor plans (Exhibits A 2.1, 2.2, 3.1 3.2 4.1; and 4.2), roof plans (Exhibits.2.3, 3.3, and 4.3), architectural elevations for each building, a landscape plan (Exhibit 4), and a preliminary grading :and drainage plan (Exhibit CA). The applicant' has also drafted Development Standards for the district that 'speci'fy permitted' principal and accessory., uses, maximum height;, minimum lot,area, width and depth; minimum setbacks; and minimum. open space (see, Exhibit A,of Attachment 3, Draft Resolution). Permitted principal uses would be limited to multiple. dwellings. Permitted accessory " uses are based on those found in the Zoning;Ordinance's.residential districts, and'include signs accessory buildings such as, garages and carport's, exempt telecommunications facilities, mini telecommunications facilities; as well as an on- site manager's office, tenant services such as laundry and mail facilities, and a recreational and meeting Toom for the use of tenants and their guests. The proposed maximum building height.oG35 feet' is slightly higher than that of the Garden Apartment Residence District (30'.feet) in order to accommodate a design feature on Building 3. The proposed maximum building coverageof 40 is the: same as that of the�Garden Apartment Residence District. The proposed..mimmum side and rear yards (10 and 15 feet, respectively) will provide adequate setbacks from 'surrounding properties. The proposed zero front yard setback reflects the direction of 3PARC, which preferred to site the primary building, as close as possible to the front property line to bei,consistent with the existing ;commercial development to the south along Petaluma Boulevard. Building' Three will actually be set' back seven feet from the property line to accommodate balconies and bays .on the second floor, and the front steps and ramp. As part of the Unit Development Plan„ 12 parking spaces are proposed for the project. The applicant has submitted a justification for this parking ratio based on the fact that at a 16 -unit apartment complex similar to the proposed project (Margaret Duncan Greene Apartments in Novato) only six of the 16 residents own.cars (see Attachment 6). The applicant expects that tenants of the Boulevard Apartments will follow a-similar pattern regarding car ownership. Each unit will have a single occupant, and only a few of the very.low- income residents are likely to own cars at initial occupancy. As time goes by, a few more residents, may acquire cars since residents will have more affordable rent. However, :experience at Margaret Duncan Green Apartments indicates that even after six :years, less than half of the residents will own cars. Furthermore, the project site is well - served by public transportation and is close to shopping and other services. Therefore, the 12 on -site parking spaces should adequately accommodate both resident and visitor vehicle's. Zoning Ordinance Section 19'A =300, requires that the City Council make, a number of findings to approve the requested, rezoning and Unit Development Plan. The suggested basis for making each finding is outlined in Attachment 2 Draft Ordinance and Attachment'3, Draft Resolution. 2. B ACKGROUND: SPARC.Prelimiwa Review The Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee conducted a.preliminary architectural and site plan review, of the proposal 'on June 26 2003 (see Attachment E. SPARC Minutes). In general, the Committee found the site plan to be well- designed, with good buffers from neighboring properties. In response to the Committee':s comments, the following changes have been made to the project's design: ® The board and batten ;has been revised to horizontal siding on all of the elevations. Stucco has been incorporated on the elevations of the other buildings to relate more to the street -front building. ® - The wood boards with the 'X' design has been removed from the skin of the buildings. The 'X' design has been incorporated into the stair and guard railings of all three buildi " which, consists of perforated metal screen with recycled. plastic lumber as the structure creating the X. Shading devices of recycled plastic lumber have been. added to the east, west, and south facing Windows On I the two buildimgs in the west portion of - the site, which will reduce .solar gain, and therefore, reduce glare and cooling -needs duringthe summers. EAT!qing Commission, Review The proposal was reviewed. by the Planni ommissio nn 'C ,at their November 25 91 20.03 meeting. Attached we the staff report and the approved-minutes from that tneeting (Attad s . 9 and 10). At their Jmd the Commission voted : unani mo usly ­ 91 to recommend that; the City Council: 1) adopt the Mitigated Negative. Declaration for Botilevar& Apartments'. 2) approve - proposed rezoning! from CH ffighwaiy Commercial to PUD-Planned Unit District, and 3)� approve the proposed Unit Development Plan and Development. Standards for the Boulevard Apartments PUD. As part of their action, the Pla.ftming Commission recommended that a written. understanding between Buckelew d Programs, the City Petaluma be eprovided to the City Council as to the operational characteristics of the facility, including: • Selection of the project's property management firm • Sonoma County Mental Health Department's and Buckelew Programs' role in ,tenant screening I and on-going support • Restnictions onincome eligibility of tenants • Preference given to Petaluma residents.fouteriancy to the extent allowed by law y • Designation -of a meigh borhood Ii aison:person from, Buckelew - and a commitmentui meet with neighborhood. representatives as needed A Written Understanding between,B Poke lew and the City fliat incorporateincorporates' rn these items is included as Attachment 7. Execution of this Understanding is required by Condition of Approval Nbmber2 in the,attached draft resolution 3). The Commission al so recommended that SPARC be directed,to address: • Project amenities provided for its residents, including,outdoor seating and socialization opportunities • A mote detailed landscape plan fortheip TOJ J ect. These have been included as Condition of Approval Number 4 in. the draft resolution (Attachment 3). Emgggng I Calls for Service At the Planning Commission hearing and.. subsequently during the public :comment. period at several City Council heari'n g members of the t expressed concern potential pbli over. the, number and type of emergency Police and Fire calls that this facility could generate. Aant:;wrnail expressing these same concerns and. new information alleging that a similar tucktldw facilit yin Novato has experienced increased calls for emergency. service was received the'C . ommunity ­: - ­ Pl anning 9, , � Y Development Department, after the Planning Commission hearing and is -attached as correspondence:(Aftachment 44). In an effort to address these co'nce ms, C aptain aptain Steve Hood of the Petaluma Police ice, Department • was asked to conduct:an investigation of the,actual demand for.ernergericy services at the Novato facility and possibly at other Buckeldw flieflitie N orth Bay. C_ ain Hood will report on his findings directly to the,Council at the public hearing ffirrthi& item. 3. ALTERNATIVES • a. The City Counci[may accept the recommendation. from the Planning Commission to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration, approve the requested rezoning and Unit Development Plan, and Development Standards, as conditioned by the Planning Commission. b. The City Council may deny the above requests. 4. FINANCIAL IwACTs This is aprivate development project subject to standard cost recovery fees and any applicable City Special Development Fees. This project has received city financial assistance in the . form of Petaluma Community Development Commission (PCDC) Housing Fund monies. 5. CONCLUSION The Planning Commission found that the proposed rezoning to the PUD Planned Unit District, the Unit Development Plan; and the Development Standards for the Boulevard Apartments PUD would not create any significant environmental impacts that the proposed project would be consistent with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and the Municipal Code; and recommended that the City Council approve the project, subject to conditions of approval. • 6. OUTCOMES OR PERFORMANCE 1VIEASUREMENTS THAT WILL, IDENTIFY SUCCESSOR COMPLETION: N/A 7. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission and Staff recommend that the City Council: 1) adopt a resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Boulevard ,Apartments, 2) approve an ordinance to rezone the subject property from CH- Highway Commercial to PUD- Planned Unit District, and 3) adopt a resolution approving a Planned Unit Development Plan and Development Standards for.Boulevard Apartments. SXC -City Counci l\Reports\buckefew02O2O4.doc