Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions 2011-142 N.C.S. 09/19/2011 Resolution No. 2011 -142 N.C.S. of the City of Petaluma, California UPHOLDING THE APPEAL BY REGENCY CENTERS AND APPROVING THE MODIFIED SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EAST WASHINGTON PLACE LOCATED AT 980 EAST WASHINGTON STREET, APNs 007 - 031 -001, 007 - 241 -002, 007 - 251 -001, 007- 473 -040 WHEREAS, Regency Petaluma, LLA, submitted an application for Site Plan and Architectural Review ( "SPAR ") for the purposes of developing a 33.74 -acre property with approximately 362,000 square feet of retail and approximately 16,000 square feet of office uses for a development to be called East Washington Place, "the Project "; and, WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on February 8, 2010, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2010 -021A N.C.S., certifying an Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR ") for the Project, in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA "); and, WHEREAS, at said hearing, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2010-021B N.C.S., making CEQA findings, adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and, WHEREAS, at said hearing, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2010-021C N.C.S., approving a Vesting Tentative Map for the Project and making findings, including but not limited to consistency of the Project with the City of Petaluma General Plan 2025 ( "General Plan "); and, WHEREAS, at said hearing, the City Council provided direction to the Planning Commission on items to be addressed as part of the SPAR process; and, WHEREAS, SPAR for the Project was conducted by the Planning Commission at duly noticed public hearings on February 23, 2010 and April 13, 2010 in accordance with the City of Petaluma Implementing Zoning Ordinance, Section 24.010 and, WHEREAS, the Project site plan and architectural plans were approved by Planning Commission Resolution 2010 -04 on April 13, 2010; and was administratively extended for a 6- month period to January 21, 2012; and, WHEREAS, Regency Petaluma, LLA, submitted a revised SPAR application on August 4, 2011; and, WHEREAS, on August 23, 2011, the City of Petaluma Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing of the Project to consider and review modifications to the previously approved SPAR for East Washington Place, including modifications to the approved footprints, architectural detailing and division of buildings M1, M2, M3, M4, M5, M6, S9 and S10 to respond to tenant requirements, and to convert the project anchor's (Target) 8,089 square foot garden center to general retail space. Modifications also included reconfiguration of parking at the south tip of the project site, the addition of parking in front of buildings S9 and S10, and some modifications to landscaping and loading in these same areas of the site; and, Resolution No. 2011 -142 N.C.S. Page 1 WHEREAS, on August 23, 2011, after considering the public testimony and the application materials the Planning Commission's motion to approve the project failed by a vote of 3 -1, however staff has carried forward the Planning Commission comments on the modified project and modifications to the Conditions of Approval as the staff recommendation; and, WHEREAS, on August 25, 2011, an appeal of the August 23, 2011 decision of the Planning Commission was filed by Regency Centers; and, WHEREAS, on September 8, 2011, a public notice of the September 19, 2011 appeal hearing before the City Council was mailed to all residents and property owners within 500 feet of the subject property and to all other interested parties, and a notice of the September 19, 2011 appeal hearing before the City Council was published in the Argus Courier on September 8, 2011; and, WHEREAS, on September 19, 2011, the City Council held a public hearing during which the City Council considered the appeal and received and considered all written and oral public comments for the project, including but not limited to staff report and exhibits, and testimony from all interested persons appearing in the matter; and, WHEREAS, the staff report for the SPAR modifications which is incorporated herein by reference, the modified site plan, elevations, revised preliminary landscape plan, other documents and evidence presented at and before the public hearing on the Project describe the proposed modification and facts sufficiently to evaluate the environmental effects of the proposed modifications. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: 1. The City Council finds that the environmental impacts of the Project were adequately examined in the EIR certified for the East Washington Place Project and: a. There are no substantial changes proposed to the Project which will require revisions of the EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects because there are no changes to type of use or intensity of use; the Project does not increase the total project size or maximum building height; existing mitigation measures to control parking lot glare at the property lines will remain in effect; the revised landscape plan, color, materials and elevations provide sufficient differentiation along the facades of Buildings M2, M3, M4 and M5; the revised landscape plan provides sufficient screening at modified parking aisles; all applicable standards contained in prior conditions, including all mitigation measures adopted with the EIR will remain applicable to the Project; and other portions of the Project, including the main anchor building, interior circulation, Project faces along E. Washington Street and Kenilworth Drive and Project vehicular access are unchanged. The Garden Center was analyzed as retail floor area in terms of parking and traffic. The applicant has identified a specialty natural food store as a potential tenant. This type of use was evaluated in the EIR and in Appendix A to the Draft EIR, the Retail Market Impact Analysis for the project, and is not a change in the project which would require revision of the EIR. Resolution No. 2011-142 N.C.S. Page 2 b. The City is not aware of any substantial changes which have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is being undertaken which will require major revisions of the EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects because of the short passage of time between FIR certification in 2010 and this application; the minor nature of the proposed changes as described above; the continued progress of the East Washington/101 Interchange project which is expected to go to bid and begin construction in 2011 -2012; and the lack of substantial changes since February 2010 to General Plan buildout projections and other major development projects evaluated in the EIR. c. The City is not aware of any new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified as complete and which has since become available which would show a new significant effect not previously discussed in the EIR; or that significant effects previously discussed would be substantially more severe than shown in the EIR; or that mitigation measures previously found infeasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project but the Project proponents have declined to adopt them; or that mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant impacts of the Project, but the Project proponents have declined to adopt them. 2. The City Council further finds that no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required for the Project pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby upholds the appeal and approves the Modified Site and Architectural Plans for the Project and authorizes construction of site improvements for the Project contained in said plans based on the findings made below and subject to conditions of approval attached as Exhibit A hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and finds as follows: 1. The Project as conditioned will conform to the intent, goals and policies of the Petaluma General Plan 2025. The City Council determined in Resolution No. 2010-021C that the Project, together with its design and improvements and as conditioned by said resolution, is consistent with the General Plan. Neither the modifications made to the Project in the course of this SPAR nor the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit A have modified the Project in any fashion which would create inconsistencies with the General Plan. 2. The Project, as conditioned, will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community because it conforms to the Petaluma Implementing Zoning Ordinance ( "IZO "). The Project site is zoned MU1B, Mixed Use, and the City Council in Resolution No. 2010-021C determined that the uses proposed for the Project were consistent with the Mixed Use, MU1B zoning for the site. The Project landscaping plan, as conditioned, and provisions for tree removal and replacement are consistent with IZO Chapters 14 and 17, respectively. Neither the modifications made to the Project in the course of this SPAR nor the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit A have modified the Project in any fashion which would create inconsistencies with the IZO. All Conditions of Approval contained in the Planning Commission Resolution No. 2010 -04 are incorporated herein by reference. Resolution No. 2011-142 N.C.S. Page 3 3. The proposed architecture and site plan, as conditioned, conform to the requirements of SPAR as set forth in Section 24.010 of the Implementing Zoning Ordinance because: a. Quality materials are used appropriately and the Project is in harmony and proportion to the surrounding structures; The Project employs stone, slate, and wood trim with stucco in variety of natural tones with accent color. The buildings are proportioned compatibly with retail uses across East Washington Street and active and seasonal uses of the Fairgrounds property. The largest Project structures are located at the rear of the Project, separated from the existing residential development across Highway 101 by Highway 101 freeway improvements which are also large in scale and by Project landscaping behind the Project structures. Landscape and street frontage improvements along Johnson Drive and Kenilworth Drive provide buffering and a transition from the fairly large, but single story Swim Center and the Skate Park to the adjacent two -story Project buildings S1 — S4, using open space plaza areas. b. The architectural style is appropriate for the project and is compatible with other structures in the immediate neighborhood; The Project employs a contemporary architectural style that is distinct from similar projects of scale and use. This includes layers of wall massing between primary anchor stores to create more visually interesting facades, use of broad roof overhangs, foreground arcades and covered canopies. The consistent color palette acts to unify the project while the aforementioned treatments and use of stone and slate provide distinction and add to the overall visual character. This visual character will complement other retail, commercial, recreational, and seasonal uses in the immediate neighborhood. The change of the Garden Center into retail building area represents only a minor change in the appearance of the building. c. The siting of the new structures is comparable to the siting of other structures in the immediate neighborhood; The siting of the Project structures is comparable to siting of similar structures along the Project frontages and in the immediate neighborhood. The siting of smaller structures along the Project frontages complements and does not overwhelm these other structures in the neighborhood, and the siting of larger structures toward the rear of the Project creates a tiered visual aesthetic when viewed from the immediate neighborhood. The largest Project structures are located at the rear of the Project, separated from the existing residential development across Highway 101 by Highway 101 freeway improvements which are also large in scale and by extensive screening from Project landscaping behind the Project structures. Landscape and street frontage improvements along Johnson Drive and Kenilworth Drive provide buffering and a transition from the fairly large, but single story Swim Center improvements and the Skate Park to the adjacent two -story Project buildings SI — S4, using open space plaza areas. The Fairgrounds improvements including the speedway are interspersed with large open areas of parking, and have a comparable mix of structures and open areas as to the Project site. Resolution No. 2011-142 N.C.S. Page 4 d. The bulk, height, and color of the new structures are comparable to the bulk, height, and color of other structures in the immediate neighborhood; The bulk and massing of the Project has been appropriately scaled to the site and its surroundings. Smaller -scale buildings have been placed toward the Project frontages along East Washington Street, Johnson Drive, and Kenilworth Drive across from similar - scaled buildings for retail and related uses as well as the Swim Center and Skate Park. Building placement along the Project's E. Washington Street frontage is designed to fulfill the policies for the E. Washington Corridor Sub -Area in the General Plan 2025, which prescribe a desired urban frontage type and scale for this Project frontage. The smaller bulk, height and design of the Project features along East Washington Street, Johnson Drive and Kenilworth Drive will complement adjacent structures in the immediate neighborhood. The largest Project structures are located at the rear of the Project, separated from the existing residential development across Highway 101 by Highway 101 freeway improvements which are also large in scale and by extensive screening from Project landscaping behind the Project structures. Furthermore, the former building M6 has been greatly reduced in size, and building M1 has also been reduced in size to accommodate size increases in buildings S9 and S10. The redistribution of square footage and the elimination of one of the "major" sub- anchor buildings do not lengthen the internal facade frontage along the southeastern portion of the Modified Project and do not increase overall building elevations. Conditions required by Planning Commission Resolution 2010 -04 intended to make the rear of the M series buildings along Highway 101 more pleasing to freeway viewers still apply to the Modified Project. Landscape and street, frontage improvements along Johnson Drive and Kenilworth Drive provide buffering and a transition from the fairly large, but single story Swim Center and the Skate Park to the adjacent two -story Project buildings S1 — S4, using open space plaza areas. The scale of the improvements at the Fairgrounds such as the speedway is an adjacent large structure and use within the immediate neighborhood and is comparable to the proposed project in terms of bulk and height. Color palettes have been selected which emphasize natural and earth tones compatible with surrounding structures. The change of the Garden Center into retail building area does not change the bulk or mass of the main anchor building. e. The landscaping is in keeping with the character and design of the site; and As conditioned, the Project includes numerous landscape elements, include a wide variety of trees, hedges, shrubs and, flowering plants that will provide aesthetic and shade features for project users and will complement the overall site design. Landscaping will be drought - tolerant and will feature tree species that are compatible with local climate and soil conditions. f. Ingress, egress, internal traffic circulation, off - street automobile and bicycle parking facilities and pedestrian ways have been designed to promote safety and convenience. The Project provides multiple ingress and egress locations for maximum vehicular traffic efficiency and circulation. The internal traffic circulation will largely separate truck/delivery vehicles from pedestrian and bicycle users, and internal pathways and site design will optimize pedestrian and bicycle use to all aspects of the project. Bicycle Resolution No. 2011-142 N.C.S. Page 5 parking facilities have been provided at key Project locations and vehicular parking has been provided per all applicable provisions of Chapter 11 of the Implementing Zoning Ordinance, As conditioned, the changes to Buildings MI, S9 and S10 in the Modified Project preserve the pedestrian and bicycle pathway and gateway entrance to the Project from the 101 pedestrian overpass, and include display windows or windows with a view into stores to promote safety. All window designs shall be reviewed and approved by Community Development Department staff prior to issuance of building permits to ensure that window designs are adequate in terms of depth, color and materials to complement project building design. As conditioned, the Modified Project will also add a pedestrian plaza area at the southernmost entrance to the Project between buildings M4 and M5. Under the power and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City. REFERENCE: 1 hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the • -•.ro •d as to Council of the City of Petaluma at a Regular meeting on the 19 day of September, f. m: 201 I, by the following vote: Ci. ttorney AYES: Albertson, Harris, Vice Mayor Healy, Kearney. NOES: Barrett, Renee ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Mayor Glass ATTEST: , u 1 —' Are t ` I , ! r • City Clerk Vice Mayor Resolution No. 2011-142 N.C.S. Page 6 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2011 -142 N.C.S. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL From Planning: l . 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 from the Mitigation Monitoring Program in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) as notes. 2. The plans submitted for building permit review shall be in substantial compliance with the plan sets by Johnson Lyman Architects dated July 21, 2011 and August 15, 2011, or as amended per direction of the Planning Commission and /or these conditions of approval. Final architectural details are subject to the approval of the Community Development Director and shall be of comparable quality to the original April 13, 2010 Site Plan and Architectural Review approval. 3. All Mitigation Measures adopted by Resolution No. 2010-021B and all Conditions of Approval adopted by Resolution No. 2010-021C and Resolution No. 2010 -04 are herein incorporated by reference as conditions of Project approval. 4. All revised parking plans, landscaping plans, lighting plans, pedestrian and bicycle circulation paths, and other changes in the plan set are required to be submitted. 5. The color and materials shown in the modified plans shall be revised to reintroduce a greater variety as shown in the originally approved SPAR package. 6. High windows shall be incorporated at rear elevations along Highway 101 frontage for both visual interest and access to natural light. 7. There shall be a pedestrian plaza in front of buildings S9 and S10 that forms an aesthetically inviting gateway environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. Buildings S9 and S 10 may not have right - angled corners cutting into this plaza. 8. There shall be no parking spaces proposed in front of buildings S9 and S10, to maintain a pedestrian edge along building frontages. 9. There shall be display windows or windows showing the interior of shops incorporated on the sides of buildings S9 and 310 along the pedestrian pathway leading to the pedestrian overpass, for visual interest and also the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists. All window designs shall be reviewed and approved by Community Development Department staff prior to issuance of building permits to ensure that window designs are adequate in terms of depth, color and materials to complement project building design. 10. There shall be an additional pedestrian plaza between the proposed buildings M5 and M6 on the plan set dated July 21, 201 1, with a gathering space and seating area to provide an environment similar to the pedestrian plaza in front of buildings S9 and S10, and including enhancement, setback, and /or rounding of the corner of M5 similar to that required of S9 and S10 in Condition of Approval #6. 11. Plans shall be revised to incorporate a strong pedestrian connection to M6 that continues the entry /promenade feel and connects M6 to M5 and the other tenant spaces along that frontage. Resolution No. 2011-142 N.C.S. Page 7 12. Plans shall be revised to maintain a 20 foot wide sidewalk along the frontage of the new M3 and greater articulation shall be incorporated into the architectural design of M3 to break up the massing of the single larger tenant space. 13. It shall be demonstrated on diagrams where the revised bicycle paths and pedestrian walkways are proposed, and that these are consistent with the April 13, 2010 SPAR approval and prior Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee Conditions of Approval. 14. The number of proposed automobile and bicycle parking spaces shall conform with Implementing Zoning Ordinance Sections 11.060 and 11.090, and this shall be demonstrated through calculations. 15. The revised landscaping plan shall remain consistent with the April 13, 2010 SPAR approval, with the focus remaining at pedestrian areas and throughout parking areas. All modified or new parking areas shall meet landscaping requirements in the SPAR guidelines, and proposed changes shall maintain parking lot landscaping consistent with approved plans. Parking lot tree diamonds shall be located approximately every four parking spaces. The landscaping plan is subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. 16. Loading docks shall be recessed into the buildings in a manner consistent with the originally approved plan set. Any modifications are subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. 17. The new open wedge at the rear of M3 /M4 shall be enclosed so as not to become a maintenance issue. 18. Truck Access and Fire Department Connections (FDC) are subject to the approval of the City's Fire Marshal. 19. Any relocation of trash enclosures resulting from modifications shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. The applicant shall submit plans to demonstrate this. 20. The locations of paratransit stops shall be maintained on front of formerly proposed buildings Ml/S9, and M5 (now labeled as M2 /S9 and M4). Any minor modifications are subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. 21. Any proposed changes to the lighting plan shall not deviate from the intent and conditions of the original SPAR approval, and are subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. 22. The related project improvement plans including the Final Map and on -site improvements and grading plan shall be revised to be consistent with the modified site plan as approved by the Planning Commission. 23. The revised site plan shall be approved with the proposed change to remove the Garden Center from the proposed building A1 and replaced with indoor retail space. The exterior may be revised, but shall include architectural features that incorporate green screens and window grills in the elevations proposed on April 13, 2011. The walls bordering that space shall not be revised as blank featureless walls. The revised elevations are subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. 24. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officials, boards, commissions, agents, officers and employees ( "Indemnitees ") 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 Government Code section 66474.9. To the extent permitted by Government Code section 66474.9, the applicant's duty to Resolution No. 201 1 -142 N.C.S. Page 8 defend, indemnify and hold harmless in accordance with this condition shall apply to any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought concerning the Project, not just such claims, actions or proceedings brought within the time period provided for in applicable State and /or local statutes. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action or proceeding concerning the subdivision. 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 by Government Code section 66474.9. From the Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee: 25. The two crosswalks along the route of the bike /pedestrian overpass near buildings S9 and S 10 shall be raised crosswalks with in- pavement flashing lights triggered by motion detectors (instead of pushbuttons). Additionally, the applicant shall install in- ground pavement lighting with pole mounted flashers (trigger by button or motion) at the following locations: a. Kenilworth Drive pedestrian crossing at the southern end of the project. Resolution No. 2011-142 N.C.S. Page 9