Analisa Townhomes SUB, CUP, DR, TR, TDE Application No. Y Analisa Lane (APN: ) Office Commercial (O-C) Office (OF)

Transcription

1 WALNUT CREEK DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AGENDA: February 17, 2016 ITEM 4d. ORIGINATED B: COMMUNIT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING PROJECT NAME APPLICATION TPE APPLICATION # PROJECT LOCATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION ZONING GENERAL PLAN CEQA APPLICANT ARCHTECT STAFF CONTACT Analisa Townhomes SUB, CUP, DR, TR, TDE Application No Analisa Lane (APN: ) A public hearing at which the DRC will consider a recommendation to the Planning Commission regarding a proposal to construct a 12-unit multi-family residential townhome project at the northeast corner of San Miguel Drive and Analisa Lane. The project requires a Conditional Use Permit to allow a multi-family residential use in an Office-Commercial zoned property, a tentative map for 12 townhome (airspace condominiums), design review, a tree removal permit and dripline encroachment permit. Office Commercial (O-C) Office (OF) Categorical Exemption In-Fill Development Projects. (Class 32) Stuart Gruendl, Bayrock Multi-family, LLC; (510) Zsombor Nagy, Bassenian Lagoni Architects; (949) Greg Kapovich (925) x2211 kapovich@walnut-creek.org STATEMENT OF ISSUES: On June 4 th, 2015, Stuart Gruendl of Bayrock Multi-family, LLC (the Applicant ) filed an application to construct a new residential development, the Analisa Townhomes, on a 0.96 acre site fronting San Miguel Drive, adjacent to Analisa Lane. The project includes the removal of three existing single family residential units. The applicant is requesting to redevelop a 41,924 square-foot (0.96 acre) commercial site with a 12-unit townhome project located at 10 Analisa Lane, at the northeast corner of San Miguel Drive and Analisa Lane. The project requires a conditional use permit to establish the multi-family residential use, including setbacks and parking requirements in the Office Commercial zone; Design Review for site design, landscaping, and building architecture; a Tree Removal permit; a Tree Dripline Encroachment and a Tentative Map to create 12 townhome condominiums. The project is subject to the inclusionary housing ordinance.

2 Staff Report Page 2 of 8 Design Review Application No STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Applicant and staff request Design Review Commission (DRC) feedback regarding the Project s proposed site plan, tree removals, parking provisions, setbacks, architecture, materials, color and landscaping. Staff requests that the Commission make positive recommendations to the Planning Commission in terms of the Conditional Use Permit, Tentative Map (TM-9416), Tree Removal Permit and Tree Dripline Encroachment. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Site: The rectangular shaped, 0.96-acre project site is located at the northeast intersection of and has frontage on San Miguel Drive and Analisa Lane. The site consists of three detached single family homes and 15 existing trees, five of which are considered Highly Protected. Curb, gutter, and sidewalk have been installed along San Miguel Drive but abruptly stop north of Analisa Lane. There is no curb, gutter or sidewalk adjacent to the existing single family residences along San Miguel Drive or Analisa Lane. The entire project area slopes upward to the east and is surrounded by office, medical office, and residential uses. The parcel is zoned O-C, Office Commercial and is designated as OF (Office) land use category in the General Plan. An Aerial/Location Map is included as Attachment 1. Project Overview: The Applicant proposes construction of four, two-story triplexes with attached 2-car garages. The submitted site plan shows a combination of 24 covered parking stalls (2 garage stalls for each unit) and 4 uncovered surface stalls that could be utilized for guest parking. The unit types include a mix of three- and four-bedroom townhomes that range in size from 1,700-1,913 square feet for the eight, three-bedroom units to 1,936 square feet for the four, four-bedroom units. Common landscaping is provided throughout the Project, and each unit has a private, fenced-in patio on the first floor. The Project, which supplants the three existing single family residential buildings with 12 new townhomes, yields a net increase of nine dwelling units. Vehicular access to the project site will be provided by Analisa Lane, an existing private street which continues east and provides access to six small-lot single family homes. The applicant is providing off-site improvements in the form of curb, gutter, and sidewalk along the project site frontages of San Miguel Drive and the north side of Analisa Lane. In addition, a six-foot wide pedestrian crosswalk would be provided across Analisa Lane. The project plans, including the site plan, building elevations, landscape, and grading plan are included as Attachment 2. ENVIRONMENTAL: This project is categorically exempt in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section pertaining to in-fill development projects. Projects are characterized as infill projects if they meet the following conditions: a) The project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and all applicable policies as well as with the applicable zoning designation and regulations. In this case, the O-C Zone allows multi-family residential use in an O-C zoned property with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP).

3 Staff Report Page 3 of 8 Design Review Application No b) The proposed development occurs within the city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENC AND CODE COMPLIANCE: The site is designated OF (Office) by the General Plan and zoned O-C (Office Commercial). The Office land use designation is intended to provide high quality administrative, professional, and general business offices that meet local and regional office space demands. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, which allows multi-family residential uses in commercial zoning districts provided the development complies with applicable zoning regulations. The O-C zoning district allows multi-family residential uses with approval of a Conditional Use Permit, with density and parking requirements to be determined by the Planning Commission. The General Plan supports multi-family development in some commercial districts, as Goal 2 in Chapter 4 encourages housing development that helps to reduce the increase in traffic congestion. Policy 2.1 encourages the development of flexible policies and regulations that facilitate new housing development, and finally Action directs the City to permit multi-family housing in commercial districts through a CUP, subject to project density and development regulations to protect the existing urban form. Staff supports redevelopment of this site with a multi-family residential use as it will further enhance the economic vitality of the surrounding office and medical office uses, as well as the nearby Core Area. The proposed project density is 12.5 dwelling units per acre, which is comparable to the range of the Multi-Family Low Density (MFL) General Plan designation of 6.1 to 14 dwelling units per acre. For comparison, the single family residential development, adjacent to the east at the end of Analisa Lane, has a density of 7.9 du/ac, which also falls within the range of the Multi-Family Low Density (MFL) land use designation. The General Plan land use category and zoning designations for the neighboring single family development is also OF and OC, respectively. The proposed project is subject to Section , Inclusionary Housing Fee, requiring the applicant to either set aside certain ownership units for low income housing candidates or pay a fee to the affordable housing fund. The current rate is $15.00 per square foot. The applicant has indicated that he will pay the fee. The Project requires compliance with the Walnut Creek Municipal Code ( WCMC ), including provisions in Chapter 1 (Subdivision Ordinance) and Chapter 2 (Zoning Ordinance) of Title 10, as well as Chapter 3 of Title 8 (Tree Preservation Ordinance). There are no specific plans or overlay zones that apply to the Project site.

4 Staff Report Page 4 of 8 Design Review Application No ANALSIS: Site Layout: As noted above, the Project area measures approximately 0.96 acre in size. The four proposed two-story triplex structures are oriented east and west. The footprints and floor plans of each building are identical. The buildings alternate between two architectural styles (A and B) starting with building A closest to San Miguel Drive. Building separation distances range from 28 to 33 feet. The distance separation setbacks create enough space for outdoor patio areas or a twoway auto plaza, providing access to the attached garages. The front porch areas represent the only outdoor space for each unit. In addition, outdoor access to the front porch area is rather narrow with the proposed four-foot wide paseo walkway. Each unit contains an attached two-car garage on the first floor with 480 cubic feet of storage area above the parking stalls. Although the proposed storage area, hanging above the garage parking stalls is unconventional and not readily accessible, staff finds that the minimum requirement to provide at least 200 cubic feet of additional storage space was intended for multi-family developments without the convenience of a garage. The requirement was meant to ensure tenants had adequate storage space. In this case, the proposal includes a two car garage capable of providing additional storage opportunity. The proposed 480 cubic feet of storage space above the parking stalls represents additional storage space above and beyond the storage that could be utilized in the garages. As a result, staff supports the storage areas as proposed. The applicant is providing 28 parking stalls in total, which staff finds as adequate to meet the needs of a 12-unit multi-family residential project. Typically, minimum parking standards would require 2.25 parking stalls for every 3 or 4 bedroom unit. However, Title 10 dictates minimum parking standards to be determined by the Planning Commission for residential uses locating in commercial zones. The following table illustrates that this proposal would adhere to minimum parking standards if it was locating on a residentially zoned property. Pursuant to Title , the following parking standards apply to Multi-family residential uses: Parking Requirement Use Multi-family Residential Gross Floor Area or Number of Units Eight 3- bedroom units Four 4- bedroom units Parking Ratio 2.25 spaces per unit 2.25 spaces per unit Required Provided Compliance Parking Parking Regular Handicapped Handicapped Regular TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED Staff is seeking DRC feedback on all aspects of the site layout. 18 9

5 Staff Report Page 5 of 8 Design Review Application No Building Setbacks: The project is subject to the O-C development standards, which require an average front yard setback of 15 ; side yard setback of 10 ; and rear year setback of 10. The goal of the average setback is to encourage public plazas, courtyards, extensive landscape or similar public amenities that are visible and accessible from the street. As proposed, the project is providing a front yard setback at over 31 feet along San Miguel Drive. Additionally, the project proposes a 10-foot side yard setback along the north property line, a 10-foot street side setback along the south property line (Analisa Lane), and a variable 10- to 21-foot setback along the rear (eastern) property line. As the following chart illustrates, the proposed setbacks adhere to minimum O-C zoning regulations and are sufficient to preserve the natural light, air and privacy for each of the units. In addition, many of the existing trees located along the north property line, adjacent to the medical office complex would remain on-site. As a result, the trees offer long term visual benefits within this 10-foot wide setback to help screen the building mass. Pursuant to Title , the following development standards apply in the O-C zone : Standard Required/Allowed Provided Compliance Min. Lot Area N/A 41,847 SF N/A Max. Height 25 Feet 25 Feet Min. Setbacks Front (west) Side (north) Street Side (south) Rear (east) 15 Foot Average 10 Foot Average 10 Foot Average 10 Foot Average 31 Feet Max. Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) Storage Space for Residential Units 200 cubic feet per 480 cubic feet per unit unit Mech. Equipment Screened Screened Although the project is subject to the development standards outlined by the O-C (Office) zoning district, the proposed multi-family development is inherently different than that of an office building. For these reasons, staff has provided the following chart to illustrate how the project would adhere to the minimum development standards outlined by the M-1 (Multi-family residential) zoning district, which is more aligned with the proposed 12-unit townhome project. Pursuant to Title , the following development standards apply in the M-1 zone : Standard Required/Allowed Provided Compliance Min. Lot Area 5,000 SF 41,847 SF Max. Height 30 Feet 25 Feet Min. Setbacks Front (west) Side (north) Street Side (south) Rear (east) 15 Feet 8.75 Feet 6.25 Feet 31 Feet Max. Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.)

6 Staff Report Page 6 of 8 Design Review Application No Storage Space for Residential Units 200 cubic feet per 480 cubic feet per unit unit Mech. Equipment Screened Screened Access: Street widths are determined by the type of use and number of units. In this case, Analisa Lane would serve the proposed 12 units in addition to the existing six residential units located to the east of the subject site. According to the City s Street Standards, a total of 18 residential units would typically require 32 feet of street width on a 42-foot wide right-of-way. This width would accommodate two 9-foot wide traffic lanes (one in each direction), two 7-foot wide parking lanes, and a five foot wide sidewalk on one side (See Street Standards excerpts, Attachment 4). However, the proposed project includes two driveways off of Analisa Lane to provide access to the residential garages. Due to sight visibility concerns regarding vehicle ingress/egress at these driveways, the city Traffic Engineer would not allow the 7-foot wide parking lane along the north side of Analisa Lane. Furthermore, the street abuts an existing parking lot to the south, which has access to Analisa Lane. The city Traffic Engineer advised against placing a five-foot wide sidewalk along the south side of the street, abutting the parking lot. Finally, the existing cross section of Analisa Lane which currently serves the six existing single family units to the east of the subject site maintains 30 feet of pavement, on-street parking along the south side and no sidewalks. For these reasons, the City Engineer has recommended Analisa Lane be 33.5 feet in width. The proposal consists of a 25-foot wide traffic lane, a five foot wide sidewalk along the north side of Analisa Lane with painted red curbs for no parking, and a 3.5-foot wide public utility easement. Staff notes that individual air conditioner units are located within these public utility easements and will need to be relocated. The City Engineer will need to make findings that the Planning Commission must consider before approving any exceptions to the street standards. In addition, the street will remain private and the portion along the project frontage will be maintained through the formation of a Homeowner s Association. Staff supports the street design as proposed. Building Height: The Zoning Ordinance established a 25-foot height limit on the property. The height definition allows for minor height variations up to 12 feet for elevator shafts and small architectural features. The structures, as proposed, will meet the 25-foot height limit at the highest ridgeline. Several small architectural elements, such as parapets and clerestories will exceed this limit. Staff recommends the DRC comment on the architectural elements regarding their intended purpose to provide variety to the City skyline. Architecture: The proposal includes four, two-story triplex buildings. The applicant has proposed two different building models labeled as Building A and Building B on the submitted elevation drawings. Two of the structures will utilize the Building A design and two will use the Building B design. Each of the designs will implement two different color pallets, creating four unique buildings. The Building A model includes a two-story, three-unit building with a contemporary blend of glass, smooth stucco, corrugated metal siding, metal fascia and el dorado stone. Flat roof projections punctuate the rooflines and offer some variation to the otherwise horizontal roofline that rises 25 feet above grade.

7 Staff Report Page 7 of 8 Design Review Application No The Building B model is also a two-story, three-unit building but utilizes glass, smooth stucco, batt and board, metal awnings, Bahama shutters, wood fascia, and longboard finish material to accomplish the contemporary blend. Shed roof projections are used to punctuate the rooflines. The architect s use of varying materials, colors, and elevation and roofline articulation is evident throughout the project except along the south elevations facing Analisa Lane. Staff feels that much more articulation is warranted on what are large unadorned wall expanses on such a prominent elevation clearly visible from Analisa Lane and San Miguel Drive. Staff is seeking DRC feedback regarding these elevations which could benefit from the incorporation of additional windows, awnings, El Dorado stone and further wall plane articulation. Landscaping and Trees. The Project requires the removal of six trees total, including four highly protected species (Tree No. 71, an 11-inch Valley Oak; Tree #72, a 27-inch Coast Live Oak; Tree No. 74, an 11-inch Valley Oak; Tree No. 75, a ten-inch California Black Walnut). (Please see Sheet C3 of Attachment 2). The proposed development will encroach upon the drip lines of several trees around the north property line, though protection measures have been offered by the Project Arborist. The City Arborist has reviewed the current arborist report, including the proposed conditions for tree protection zones and drip line encroachment, and is supportive of the tree replacements and landscaping, as shown on Sheets L1 and L2 of the revised plans. The City Arborist recommends approval to remove all four Highly Protected trees. A copy of the Project arborist report, which has been reviewed by staff, is included as Attachment 4. The planting plan shows retention of nine trees. All nine of the trees to be preserved are located offsite immediately adjacent to the north property line of the Project area. The trees to remain include a 23-inch Valley Oak, a Fire Thorn, three Glossy Privets, and four Xylosmas. The Project proposes planting 23 new trees of varying species throughout the site. This includes new 24-inch box Red Maple street trees along San Miguel Drive and Analisa Lane. In addition, new ground level landscaping is provided in the front yard, north side yard and rear yard in the form of 24- inch box Purple Leaf Plums, 24-inch Golden Rain, and 15-gallon Maindenhair trees. In an effort to offset the heavy gray concrete appearance of the proposed auto court, the applicant has proposed drivable grass pavers along the north portion of both auto courts. In concert with the City Arborist s recommendation, staff does not support any landscaping below tree #61, only mulch. Approximately 20% of the site consists of landscaping, which adheres to minimum standards. Staff believes the landscaping and tree removal plans allow the DRC to make a positive recommendation to the Planning Commission. Retaining Walls. The Applicant revised several aspects of the Project, including retaining walls, which have been redesigned in harmony with the existing topography. A series of curvilinear retaining walls gradually step through the site and create smoother transitions in height and utilize stone material to blend with the natural environment. Privacy Issues. Staff believes the proposed design revisions to the fence along the rear (east) property line (e.g., Units 10, 11 and 12) reflect the Applicant s sensitivity to, and attempts to address, the concerns expressed by the adjacent homeowners (See Sheet L4, Attachment 2). These property owners expressed privacy concerns and wanted the applicant to provide additional screening beyond a six-foot tall wood fence. The applicant revised the drawings to include a 2-

8 Staff Report Page 8 of 8 Design Review Application No foot tall lattice atop the fence, bringing the total height of the structure to eight feet. As the adjacent property would sit up to three feet below the subject site, the eight-foot tall fence would be constructed atop a three-foot high retaining wall subjecting the adjacent homeowner to an eleven-foot tall barrier in the side yard. This is excessive and staff is seeking DRC s comments given that the adjacent property owner is requesting this fence. Next Steps. Should the Design Review Commission wish to see design revisions return prior to proceeding to Planning Commission, a second study session will be scheduled. Should the DRC provide a positive recommendation on the current set of plans, a public hearing with the PC would be scheduled for consideration of Project Entitlements (i.e., Conditional Use Permit, Tentative Map, tree removals and drip line encroachment permits). Consideration of a final Design Review (DRC) would occur subsequent to any action by the Planning Commission. COMMISSION ACTION REQUESTED: Staff recommends the Design Review Commission: 1) Review and comment on the following topics: Site design Building architecture and materials (including the architectural elements in excess of 25 feet) Landscape plan (including fence height) Tree Removals 2) Provide an affirmative recommendation of the project to the Planning Commission. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Aerial/Location Map 2. Revised project plans, dated January 27, Project arborist report, dated January 27, Street Standard Excerpts Prepared by: Greg Kapovich Associate Planner O:\CDD\PLANNING\1Project Files\15-000\ Analisa Townhomes SUB, CUP, DR, TE (GDK)\Council and Commissions\DRC\ DRC SR.doc