1. The reason provided for the opposing votes was that the two commissioners wanted something else to be developed on their parcel.

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "1. The reason provided for the opposing votes was that the two commissioners wanted something else to be developed on their parcel."

Shon Perry
5 years ago
Views:

THE EXECUTIVE RV AND BOAT STORAGE FACILITY AT 302 RIVER ROAD MEETING DATE: October 16, 2018 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No.

1 Agenda Item #6.2 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DENYING THE APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE EXECUTIVE RV AND BOAT STORAGE FACILITY AT 302 RIVER ROAD MEETING DATE: October 16, 2018 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No , adopting the Initial Study/Negative Declaration, approving the appeal, Tentative Parcel Map No , Conditional Use Permit No , and Site and Architectural Review No for the Executive RV and Boat Storage Facility at 302 River Road. DISCUSSION The applicant, Superior Rio Vista, LLC, has filed a timely appeal of the planning commission s decision denying their request for approval of an Executive RV and Boat Storage Facility. The appellant stated in the attached appeal letter that the planning commission did not provide a fair hearing for the following reasons: 1. The reason provided for the opposing votes was that the two commissioners wanted something else to be developed on their parcel. 2. The proposed use is the best possible use for the city given the options allowed by the zoning ordinance, general plan, and current economy. The front parcel, along River Road, is situated within a flood plain. Since vehicles are easy to move, the proposed use has the least risk for property damage. 3. The appellant claims to have the support of their neighbors and local businesses who recognize that this development will be a huge benefit to the city. The following is staff s response to the appellant s four statements written above: 1. Several Commissioners opined that the riverfront view was an asset and that the proposed use is not the highest and best use of the property. Page 1 of 8

2 2. The property is situated in the I/E (G) Industrial / Employment (General) section of the city. The applicant s proposed project is consistent with this General Plan requirement. The proposed project is Zoned MG (General Manufacturing Industry District) which allows the proposed use subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. 3. The commission expressed concern that the frontage along River Road did not have pedestrian improvements along the front of the subject site. In response to the commissioner s concerns the appellant has revised his project to include a 10- foot wide path along the front of River Road (See Attachment 3: Concept III Path). Since no project has been proposed along the St. Francis Way no frontage improvements are proposed; however, if the Council wishes to approve the project as proposed, staff has included a Condition of Approval requiring the execution of a Deferred Improvement Agreement by the property owner, which agreement is subject to review and approval by the City. The staff report to the planning commission is attached as background information (See Attachment 2). ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS No environmental action is necessary. However, if the City Council were to reverse the Planning Commission s decision, staff recommends the Council review staff s Initial Study/Negative Declaration and adopt it prior to approving the project as proposed. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS No financial impacts to the city were identified. ALTERNATIVES Uphold the Planning Commission s denial. SUBMITTED BY Issac George, Community Development Director Attachments: Resolution Attachment 1 - Appeal dated August 16, 2018 from Superior Rio Vista, LLC. Attachment 2 - Planning Commission Staff Report dated August 8, Attachment 3 - Project Attachments Attachment 4 - Revised Plan showing 10-foot-wide trail. Page 2 of 8

3 RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIO VISTA ADOPTING INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION, APPROVING THE APPEAL, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO , CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO , AND SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW NO FOR THE EXECUTIVE RV AND BOAT STORAGE FACILITY AT 302 RIVER ROAD WHEREAS, Superior Rio Vista, LLC. has submitted applications for a Tentative Parcel Map No , Conditional Use Permit , Site and Architectural Review ; and WHEREAS, Superior Rio Vista, LLC. has submitted applications for a Tentative Parcel Map (No ) to subdivide Assessor Parcel Number consisting of acre (1,082,096 sf) site into 4 parcels, under the provisions of the California Subdivision Map Act and the Rio Vista Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the said Tentative Parcel Map, incorporated herein by reference, has been reviewed by the City Engineer and has found the Map in compliance with the Subdivision Map Act; and WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision is on urban lands previously used as an airport and future developments will occur on parcels or lots varying in size from one-half acre to eight acres in size; and WHEREAS, the potential impacts of the proposed amendment have been assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, and that the approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species due to the previously developed urban uses at the site, and that the proposed application has been processed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072, staff has determined the proposed Project would not have a significant effect on the environment).; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission at it s August 8, 2018 regularly scheduled public hearing received testimony from the applicant (appellant) and public, and considered staff s report written and verbal report, and the whole record before it, and voted to deny the proposed project, and WHEREAS, Superior Rio Vista, LLC, has filed a timely appeal of the planning commission s decision denying their request for approval of an Executive RV and Boat Storage Facility, and WHEREAS, the City Council at the regularly scheduled meeting of October 16, 2018 held a public hearing and received testimony from the appellant and public, and considered staff s report written and verbal report, and the whole record before it. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIO VISTA THAT: 1. The City Council does hereby adopt the Negative Declaration; and Page 3 of 8

4 2. The City Council of the City of Rio Vista does hereby overturn the Planning Commission s denial of Superior Rio Vista, LLC s request for approval of the Parcel Map, Conditional Use Permit, and Site and Architectural Review for the proposed Executive RV and Boat Storage facility at 302 River Road Rio Vista, CA 94571, subject to the following conditions: 1. The following conditions apply to Superior Rio Vista, LLC. as the sub-divider and/or subsequent owners or builders who may purchase parcels or lots within the subject Parcel. 2. This map is subject to applicable District, Local, City, County, and State laws, ordinances, regulations, standards and policies. 3. The safety and security of the project must satisfy Local, County, and State ordinances, California Building Code, and California Occupational Safety and Health Association (CAL/OSHA). 4. Improvements must comply with current American with Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards and regulations. 5. If, during development and construction, artifacts of prehistoric or historic occupation are discovered, development and construction activities, which might disturb or destroy such artifacts or evidences, must be ceased until the development/construction site can be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist and a recommendation made as to their preservation and/or recordation. All such actions must be consistent with all state laws. 6. If, during development and construction, artifacts of prehistoric or historic occupation are discovered, development and construction activities, which might disturb or destroy such artifacts or evidences, must be ceased until the development/construction site can be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist and a recommendation made as to their preservation and/or recordation. All such actions must be consistent with all state laws. If historical resources are found on the property during construction the contractor must stop work and immediately contact the City of Rio Vista Community Development Director or his/her designee at (707) ; and Bryan Much, Coordinator Northwest Information Center Sonoma State University 150 Professional Center Drive, Suite E Rohnert Park, CA Office (707) Cell (707) nwic@sonoma.edu a) If human remains are found on the property during construction the contractor must stop work and immediately contact the City of Rio Vista Community Development Director or his/her designee at (707) , and Solano County Coroner s Office at (707) If the coroner determines the site is not a crime scene and that the discovery is Native American human remains (pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section Page 4 of 8

5 of the Health and Safety Code), property owner must immediately notify those persons it believes to be most likely descended from the deceased Native American. The descendants may, with the permission of the owner of the land, or his or her authorized representative, inspect the site of the discovery of the Native American human remains and may recommend to the owner or the person responsible for the excavation work means for treatment or disposition, with appropriate dignity, of the human remains and any associated grave goods. The descendants must complete their inspection and make recommendations or preferences for treatment within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. b) Upon the discovery of Native American remains, the landowner must ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located, is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred, as prescribed in this section, with the most likely descendants regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains. The landowner must discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants preferences for treatment. (1) The descendants preferences for treatment may include the following: (A) The nondestructive removal and analysis of human remains, and items associated with Native American human remains. (B) Preservation of Native American human remains and associated items in place. (C) Relinquishment of Native American human remains and associated items to the descendants for treatment. (D) Other culturally appropriate treatment. 7. All construction at the site must comply with Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District and City regulations regarding the reduction of air emissions resulting from the project, if applicable. 8. New construction, substantial improvement, and other proposed new development of any structure within the parcel must comply with FEMA regulations and a Flood Elevation Certificate must be submitted prior to final sign-off of the building permits. 9. Utilities must be installed underground in accordance with each of the utility company requirements and with the City requirements. 10. Noise during construction must be mitigated to the fullest reasonable extent. The City may impose restrictions such as limitation of hours of operation to daylight hours or other appropriate and reasonable measures. 11. Building permits must not be issued unless the builders have submitted a letter from the Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources which states that Page 5 of 8

6 development at any of the parcels hereby created will not be affected by active or potential abandoned oil wells at the site. 12. Prior to issuance of building permits builders must provide to the City a preliminary soils report to address all improvements, as may be required by the City Engineer. 13. Grading of the site must comply with engineering standards so as to protect properties on the Parcel and neighboring properties. All grading plans must be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer. 14. Rights-of-way and utility improvements must comply with City s Improvement Design Standards. The required improvements include, but are not limited to, roadway construction, striping, curb, gutter, sidewalk, drive approaches, wheelchair ramps, street lighting and signage. 15. All facilities required by fire department and law enforcement for continuous service of the Parcels which must include, but are not limited to, easements for vehicle turnaround areas, turnaround area full section paving, manholes, cleanouts, blow offs, fire hydrants, valves, drainage structures, lighting and any other improvements needed to provide such services 16. Owners must construct potable water system for each parcel or lot created, per the standards, conditions and policies of the City, and must have water improvement plans and specifications approved by the City. 17. Owners must construct sanitary sewers and connections for each parcel or lot created, per the standards, conditions and policies of the City, and must have sewer improvement plans and specifications reviewed and approved by the City. 18. All building permits for the development of the parcels or lots is subject to verification of the wastewater treatment plant capacity and domestic water availability prior to issuance of the building permit. 19. The owner must identify all private wells and septic systems. 20. The owner must install individual public sewer and water services for each proposed parcel. 21. The owner must install curb, gutter and sidewalk on the St. Francis Way frontage. 22. The owner must install an 8" fire loop per the Fire Chief and City Engineer approval. 23. The owner must provide a Grading Plan and Utility Plan for the relocation of the existing overhead utility pole line. 24. The owner must obtain a Caltrans encroachment permit for required improvements for Highway 84 (River Road). Page 6 of 8

7 25. The owner must provide the design of a drainage system to comply with City of Rio Vista small MS4 permit. 26. The owner must provide available documentation relating to existing and/or future conditions or restrictions relating to the existing gas well. 27. The owner must provide a clearance around propane tank and filling station as per California Fire Code (CFC). 28. The owner must provide a secondary Egress from Residence required (can be an emergency deployable ladder). 29. Trash enclosures are not allowed in building, clearance as per CFC. 30. Project is subject to all other Fire Department access and CFC requirements including Gates and Knox box requirements. 31. The owner must provide available documentation relating to existing and/or future conditions or restrictions relating to the existing gas well. 32. The owner must obtain National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits from the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of grading or building permit issued by the city of Rio Vista. 33. The owner must obtain an ingress and egress easement agreement from Caltrans prior to issuance of the final occupancy permit. 34. The project shall be in substantial compliance with the city of Rio Vista Planning Department s 14-page File Copy plan set date stamped Received February 1, 2018 prepared by DOMUM, architects. 35. The Parcel Map shall be compliant with the plans prepared by Laugenour and Meikle, civil engineers. 36. Prior to expiration of the Tentative Parcel Map the applicant shall file the final Parcel Map. 37. The property owner shall enter into a Deferred Improvement Agreement for improving Street improvements, including, curb, gutter and sidewalk, prior to the issuance of grading or building permits for the project. Page 7 of 8

8 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 16 TH day of OCTOBER I, JOSE JASSO, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF RIO VISTA, HEREBY CERTIFY the foregoing resolution was introduced and passed at a regular meeting of the Rio Vista City Council by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Jose Jasso, MMC, City Clerk Page 8 of 8

CITY OF RIO VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: January10, 2018 CITY OF RIO VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM #4.2 PREPARED BY: Lamont Thompson, Planning Manager SUBJECT: Vesting Tentative Tract No. 2017-001: To consider