Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06 VINTAGE RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINUMS -320-438 W. SIXTH STREET & 620-694 S. B STREETAgenda Item 6 Reviewed: AGENDA REPORT City Manager Finance Director N/A MEETING DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2016 TO: JEFFREY C. PARKER, CITY MANAGER FROM: ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2016-01, ZONE CHANGE 2016-001, SUBDIVISION 2016-03/TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17993, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2016-002 AND DESIGN REVIEW 2016-14 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 140 RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS AT 320-438 W. SIXTH STREET AND 620-694 S. B STREET SUMMARY: The project is a request to subdivide a 6.81 -acre lot for condominium purposes to construct 140 residential units, and ancillary uses including a privately owned, publicly accessible passive mini park and other amenities. The site is located on the southwest corner of Sixth Street and B Street. The proposed project requires approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Tract Map, Design Review and Development Agreement. On September 27, 2016, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution Nos. 4325, 4326, 4327 and 4328 recommending that the City Council approve the proposed project and recommended staff communicate public comments related to parking concerns in Old Town Tustin residential neighborhoods to the City Council. On October 18, 2016, the City Council continued this item to November 15, 2016, at the request of the applicant. The applicant requested the continuance to allow time to respond to the Planning Commission's request that they provide additional architectural elevations to the City Council. APPLICANT: Intracorp So Cal-1,LLC PROPERTY OWNER: Van Buren Plaza, LLC 4041 Macarthur Blvd., Ste. 250 PO Box 16562 Irvine, CA 92618 Beverly Hills, CA 90209 FISCAL IMPACT: Entitlements for GPA 2016-01, ZC 2016-001, SUB 2016-03/TTM 17993, DA 2016-002 and DR 2016-004 are applicant -initiated projects and paid for by the applicant. According to the Fiscal Impact Analysis (Attachment C), the project will have a positive impact on the General Fund in the amount of $83,000 annually. City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt: 1. Resolution No. 16-55, finding that the Mitigated Negative Declaration is adequate for GPA 2016-01, ZC 2016-001, SUB 2016-03/TTM 17993 for condominium purposes, DA 2016-002 and DR 2016-004 for the proposed project. 2. Introduce and have first reading by title only of Ordinance No. 1473 for approval of Development Agreement 2016-002 to facilitate the development of an approximate 6.81 acre site and accept public benefits and authorize the City Manager to execute DA 2016-002. 3. Resolution No. 16-56 approving GPA 2016-01 to change the property's General Plan Land Use Designation from Industrial (1) to Planned Community Residential (PCR) 4. Introduce and have first reading by title only of Ordinance 1472 for ZC 2016-001 to change the zoning from Planned Industrial (PM) to Planned Community -(P -C) 5. Resolution No. 16-57 approving SUB 2016-03/Tentative Tract Map 17993 for condominium purposes to subdivide an approximately 6.81 acre site into two (2) numbered lots and one (1) lettered lot and Design Review 2016-004 for the design and site layout of 140 residential condominium units and associated amenities. APPROVAL AUTHORITY: • General Plan Amendment and Zone Change Government Code Sections 65353 through Planning Commission to hold at least recommendation on an amendment to the Council. • Tentative Tract Map: 65355 and Section 65854 requires the one (1) public hearing before a General Plan and a ZC to the City A tentative tract map is required for all subdivisions creating five (5) or more condominiums pursuant to TCC Section 9323b2(a). Section 9321b of the TCC authorizes the Planning Commission to review and take action on tentative maps; however since the proposal includes other entitlement applications that require City Council approval, TTM 17993 is forwarded to City Council for consideration. City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 3 • Design Review: TCC Section 9272 authorizes the Community Development Director to consider a DR application; however, since the proposal includes other entitlement applications that require City Council approval, DR 2016-004 is forwarded to City Council for consideration. Development Agreement: Section 9606 of the Tustin City Code (TCC) requires the Planning Commission consider the proposed DA and make a recommendation to the City Council prior to adoption of a development agreement. The DA is necessary to set forth developers' obligations related to public benefits, non -conforming cell site, and affordable housing provision among other things. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: Site Location The project site is located on the southwest corner of Sixth Street and B Street. The site is located within the Planned Industrial (PM) zoning district (Figure 1) and is designated as Industrial (1) by the City's General Plan (Figure 2). The property consists of a 6.81 parcel and fronts onto Sixth and B Streets, with three (3) access points on Sixth Street and two (2) access points on B Street. The site is developed with the Tustin Freeway Commerce Center, consisting of eleven (11) industrial buildings constructed between 1961 and 1980, and refurbished in the 1990s. The center has been used for a variety of industrial operations over the years. Figure 1 City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 4 An AT&T cell tower and related equipment is located on the east side of the site. The cell tower lease will expire on August 31, 2019. As discussed below, the cell tower and equipment would be removed from the site upon termination of the lease, or sooner. Surrounding uses include commercial and light industrial uses to the east across B Street, single family homes to the north across W. Sixth Street, multi -family residential properties at the northeast corner of W. Sixth Street and B Street, and a two-story self - storage building located to the west side of the subject property. West Sixth Street terminates in a cul-de-sac further to the west, with a condominium complex on the north side of the cul-de-sac and the Boys & Girls Club of Tustin on the south side of the W. Sixth St. The Interstate 5 (1-5) freeway is located to the south of the subject property. The project site is also located directly across W. Sixth Street from the southern boundary of the Cultural Resources District. Project Description The applicant proposes to subdivide a 6.81 -acre lot into three (3) development parcels for condominium purposes to accommodate 140 for -sale residential units and ancillary uses including a publicly accessible 3,709 square -foot passive mini -park, onsite private drives, parking for residents and guests, pedestrian walkways and paseos, recreation uses, including a recreation building and swimming pool, walls and landscaping. The 140 residential units would be located within twenty-seven (27) buildings. The applicant proposes to construct the project in seven (7) phases. A complete discussion of the project features is provided under "Design Review" below. General Plan Amendment The proposal is to change the existing Industrial land use designation to Planned Community -Residential (PC -Residential) to accommodate the proposed residential development (Figure 2). am I Subject Property k!!!!j Existing General Plan - I Proposed General Plan - PCR Figure 2 City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 5 The PC -Residential land use designation is intended to provide for diversification in the relationships of various densities, building and open spaces, recognizes that mixed and integrated uses can be compatible, and allows for development of low, medium and high density residential development within a wide range of living accommodations. The project proposes 20.6 dwelling units/acre and is consistent with residential density land use ranges within the Tustin General Plan which allow for a maximum of twenty- five (25) dwelling units per acre. The current land use designations for areas surrounding the project site include Low Density Residential (LDR - up to 7 du/acre) to the north, and High Density Residential (HDR - up to 25 du/acre) to the northeast, Industrial (1) and Old Town Commercial (OTC) to the east, and Industrial (1) and Public /Institutional (PI) to the west. As proposed the project supports the following General Plan Goals and Policies: 1. Policy 1.1: Permit compatible multi -family development to meet regional housing needs where best suited from a standpoint of current development, accessibility, transportation and public facilities. 2. Policy 1.7: As part of the City's attraction to business and industry, provide adequate sites to house future employees. 3. Policy 1.11: Where feasible, increase the amount and network of public and private open space and recreational facilities which will be adequate in size and location to be usable for active or passive recreation as well as for visual relief. 4. Policy 2.2: Maintain consistency between the Land Use Element, Zoning Ordinances and other City ordinances, regulations and standards. 5. Policy 5.8: Improve edge conditions and buffers between older residential neighborhoods and adjacent freeway edges. 6. Policy 6.2: Encourage and promote high quality design and physical appearance in all development projects. 7. Policy 6.11: Encourage the establishment of unique identity in the City's neighborhoods. 8. Policy 8.7: To ensure an orderly extension of essential services and facilities, and preservation of a free-flowing circulation system, continue to require provision of essential facilities and services at the developer's expense where these systems do not exist or are not already part of the City's financed capital improvement program. City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 6 9. Policy 10.2: Review and consider the possible development of residential uses in the Old Town area both as individual residential projects, and integrated above ground floor retail and office uses. 10. Policy 10.3: Encourage outdoor pedestrian spaces, such as courtyards, arcades and open landscaped passages, to be integrated into new development. Pursuant to Government Code Sections 65351 and 65352.3, (SB18) the City is required to conduct consultations with California Native American Tribes when it proposes to amend the General Plan. The City obtained a list of local tribes from the Native American Heritage Commission and provided notification of the required ninety (90) day consultation period which commenced on March 18, 2016. Staff received no responses to this notification. Zone Change The property is currently being used as an industrial park; the zoning is Planned Industrial (PM). Under the existing zoning, the property could not have any dwelling units on the site. The request is to change the zoning from PM to Planned Community District (P -C) (Figure 3). The P -C District is intended to ensure that adequate standards related to the public health, safety and general welfare are observed without unduly inhibiting the advantage of large scale planning for residential, commercial and industrial purposes. The amenities of P -C districts are ensured through the adoption of a Development Plan and written text setting forth the land use relationship and development standards. Figure 3 City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 7 The applicant has submitted the Vintage Planned Community District Regulations (Attachment G), which provide for the development of the community as follows: Table 1 Development Standards As can be seen from the table above, the proposed project meets or exceeds the development standards as identified in the Vintage Planned Community Regulations for the proposed project and is similar to other approved development projects within the City, such as the Tustin Cottages at 1361 EI Camino Real and townhomes developments at Columbus Square in Tustin Legacy. The proposed GPA and ZC would further the objectives for Old Town Tustin by bringing quality residential development with people who would frequent Old Town businesses. Tentative Tract Map 17993 TTM 17993 is a proposal to subdivide the existing 6.81 -acre lot into three (3) parcels for condominium purposes (Figure 4). This would allow for individual ownership of the 140 condominium contained within the twenty-seven (27) buildings. Common areas would be established for vehicular and pedestrian circulation, guest parking and for open space purposes, with a Homeowner's Association (HOA) having responsibility for all common facilities. Also included in the map are proposed easements for public utilities, ingresslegress for emergency and public service vehicles, and public use. Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) would be required for the project. These mechanisms are necessary to provide for the maintenance of the common areas of the complex. Proposed responsibilities of the HOA are identified in Resolution 16-57, Condition 4.1 et. seq. (Attachment 1). TTM 17993 is consistent with the Subdivision Required Proposed Maximum Density 20.6 du/acre 20.6 du/acre Minimum Lot Width 150 feet 150 feet Maximum Lot Coverage 0.45 0.45 Building Height Two Story: 30 ft. Three Story: 42 feet Two Story: 28-30 feet Three Story: 38-42 feet Front Yard Setback 5 feet 5 to 10 feet Interior Side Yard Setback 3 feet 3 to 12 feet Corner Side Yard Setback 5 feet 5 to 6 feet Rear Yard Setback 5 feet 5 to 20 feet Building to Building Separation 10 feet 10 to 24 feet Private Open Space/Unit 80 square feet 80 to 200 square feet Common Open Space/Unit 300 square feet 300 square feet Required covered parking space/unit 2 -car garage (280 total) 2 -car garage (280) Required guest parking/unit 0.25 s aces/unit 35 total 0.49 spaces/unit 69 total Minimum Private Drive Width No Parking: 20 feet With Parkin : 26 feet No Parking: 20-22 feet With Parking: 26 to 38 feet As can be seen from the table above, the proposed project meets or exceeds the development standards as identified in the Vintage Planned Community Regulations for the proposed project and is similar to other approved development projects within the City, such as the Tustin Cottages at 1361 EI Camino Real and townhomes developments at Columbus Square in Tustin Legacy. The proposed GPA and ZC would further the objectives for Old Town Tustin by bringing quality residential development with people who would frequent Old Town businesses. Tentative Tract Map 17993 TTM 17993 is a proposal to subdivide the existing 6.81 -acre lot into three (3) parcels for condominium purposes (Figure 4). This would allow for individual ownership of the 140 condominium contained within the twenty-seven (27) buildings. Common areas would be established for vehicular and pedestrian circulation, guest parking and for open space purposes, with a Homeowner's Association (HOA) having responsibility for all common facilities. Also included in the map are proposed easements for public utilities, ingresslegress for emergency and public service vehicles, and public use. Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) would be required for the project. These mechanisms are necessary to provide for the maintenance of the common areas of the complex. Proposed responsibilities of the HOA are identified in Resolution 16-57, Condition 4.1 et. seq. (Attachment 1). TTM 17993 is consistent with the Subdivision City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 8 Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance and the Vintage Planned Community Regulations. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17993 FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES IN THE CRY OF TUSTIN. COUNTY OF ORANGE STATE OF CALIFORNIA tea.. I rift. i —mu. 'ruin I •.ur. 1 ..as:. i •rut. A.—v...,v CWK Figure 4 Open Space/Parkland Credit To implement the Conservation/Open Space/Recreation Element of the General Plan, TCC Section 9331d requires a subdivider (the developer) to dedicate land or pay a fee in lieu for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing parks to serve the subdivision. TCC Section 9331d2 states that three (3) acres of useable parkland per 1,000 project residents are devoted to local park and recreational purposes. Pursuant to TCC Section 9331d2, 0.0067 acres of parkland per dwelling unit are required to be dedicated for park purposes in a high density development with 15.1-25 dwelling units per acre. Based on the proposed project of 140 residential units, the developer would be required to dedicate 0.938 acres or 40,860 square feet. Lz3 1 �'� L_ � A I I�`F 1 1 ♦ I i I LJ I I I 1 WNW ! L K -L 1 ! L� j i LOT t L J 1 1 1 t i 1 i CWK Figure 4 Open Space/Parkland Credit To implement the Conservation/Open Space/Recreation Element of the General Plan, TCC Section 9331d requires a subdivider (the developer) to dedicate land or pay a fee in lieu for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing parks to serve the subdivision. TCC Section 9331d2 states that three (3) acres of useable parkland per 1,000 project residents are devoted to local park and recreational purposes. Pursuant to TCC Section 9331d2, 0.0067 acres of parkland per dwelling unit are required to be dedicated for park purposes in a high density development with 15.1-25 dwelling units per acre. Based on the proposed project of 140 residential units, the developer would be required to dedicate 0.938 acres or 40,860 square feet. City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 9 Where private open space for park and recreational purposes is provided, owned and maintained by future residents (HOA), as is proposed, a credit of up to twenty-five percent (25%) of the total parkland requirement may be allowed by the City subject to standards set forth in TCC Section 9331 d5. The project would meet all of the above -referenced requirements by providing a total of 58,065 square feet of common open space, which does not include private front yards, porches or setbacks, but would include a swimming pool and recreation building for use by residents, and a publicly accessible 3,709 square -foot passive mini park which would be maintained by the HOA. As summarized in Table 2, below, the project includes 17,185 square feet of common open space above and beyond the requirements under TCC 9331d2. Staff recommends that should the remaining applications be approved, the applicant's request for a parkland credit of 10,215 square feet also be approved. If approved, the amount of the remaining park in -lieu fees for 30,645 square feet would be based on the fair market value as determined by a Master Appraisal Institute (MAI) appraiser in compliance with TCC Section 9331d3 and would be payable to the City at the time of issuance of permits. Table 2 Summary of Open Space Credit Phasing and Cell Tower If approved, the project would be constructed in seven (7) phases as shown below (Figure 5). All public improvements, the recreation building and swimming pool, would be constructed in Phase 1, along with Units 1-14. Should Zone Change 2016-01 be approved for residential use on the project site, the cell tower would become a nonconforming use due to its proximity to residential uses. As such, the current lease that expires on August 31, 2019 cannot be renewed and the cell tower would need to be removed. The Development Agreement allows the cell tower to remain until the lease expires or prior to final occupancy for buildings in Phase (6), whichever occurs first (Condition 3.3, Resolution 16-57). Per Unit Total Required Dedication per TCC 9331 d2 .0067 acres 40,860 sf Common Open Space Provided 415 sf 58,045 sf Requested Private Open Space Credit 25% of 40,860 sf 73 sf 10,215 sf Balance to be paid in in -lieu park fees 30,645 sf Phasing and Cell Tower If approved, the project would be constructed in seven (7) phases as shown below (Figure 5). All public improvements, the recreation building and swimming pool, would be constructed in Phase 1, along with Units 1-14. Should Zone Change 2016-01 be approved for residential use on the project site, the cell tower would become a nonconforming use due to its proximity to residential uses. As such, the current lease that expires on August 31, 2019 cannot be renewed and the cell tower would need to be removed. The Development Agreement allows the cell tower to remain until the lease expires or prior to final occupancy for buildings in Phase (6), whichever occurs first (Condition 3.3, Resolution 16-57). City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 10 r ----------------------------- ly--iiia`s3:r---------------------- 1 E a i rwas�r 1 1 Ri/�t E peg �warewR _ ��s R�ar��►� K 28 A 4 p so 47 , 1 r 1 x7 ato+aac 'V 42 7p St i �r dig t �gg go at 1 1• P17 r J6 45 w -•-w arwww Temporary cell tower location r � Ori t? Jt 16w,' A ?x WT I # 4k r� br•' !' w 40 Figure 5 Outside Agencies The local agency (City of Tustin) is required to transmit one (1) copy of the proposed tentative map to other local agencies having jurisdiction. As such, a copy of proposed TTM 17993 was transmitted to outside agencies having jurisdiction over a title interest in the subject property for review and/or recommendations as required by Sections 66453 — 66455.7 of the California Government Code (Article 3 of the Subdivision Map Act). The City received two (2) letters from Caltrans dated June 13, 2016 and June 15, 2016, respectively. The June 15, 2016 correspondence was an amendment to its earlier letter dated June 13, 2016, and added the following pertinent comments: • Caltrans is currently working on a project (EA OK670) which proposes to widen Northbound 1-5 freeway within proposed development limits. As a result of the i s E a i t t r� Temporary cell tower location r � Ori t? Jt 16w,' A ?x WT I # 4k r� br•' !' w 40 Figure 5 Outside Agencies The local agency (City of Tustin) is required to transmit one (1) copy of the proposed tentative map to other local agencies having jurisdiction. As such, a copy of proposed TTM 17993 was transmitted to outside agencies having jurisdiction over a title interest in the subject property for review and/or recommendations as required by Sections 66453 — 66455.7 of the California Government Code (Article 3 of the Subdivision Map Act). The City received two (2) letters from Caltrans dated June 13, 2016 and June 15, 2016, respectively. The June 15, 2016 correspondence was an amendment to its earlier letter dated June 13, 2016, and added the following pertinent comments: • Caltrans is currently working on a project (EA OK670) which proposes to widen Northbound 1-5 freeway within proposed development limits. As a result of the City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 11 widening, there is a possibility of acquiring approximately twenty (20) feet to accommodate project needs. As a result of the Caltrans comment, Condition 5.1A of Resolution No. 16-57 requires the developer provide notification to potential home buyers that the project could be impacted should Caltrans proceed with an expansion of the 1-5 freeway that necessitates the acquisition of twenty feet (20') of the south side of the project site. Specifically, the project sound wall and guest parking could be impacted. Should Caltrans proceed with a project in the future that would impact the property, the developer has provided an Alternative Parking Study (Exhibit B, Resolution 16-57) that verifies that required guest parking could still be met onsite. Condition 4.5S of Resolution No. 16-57 requires that if a Caltrans expansion does impact the property, the project sound wall and guest parking would be reconstructed in accordance with the Alternative Parking Study by the HOA. Design Review Twenty-seven (27) residential buildings containing four (4) to eight (8) attached residential condominium units are proposed at the site (Figure 6). Of these twenty seven (27) buildings, ninety-two (92) units would be located within the Melrose Place product type and forty-eight (48) units would be located within the Veranda Court product type. Melrose Place homes would range in size from 1,700 to 2,300 square feet and would have four (4) variations of the floor plan grouped in four (4) to eight (8) units per building. The Melrose Place homes would be located on Lot 1 along the W. Sixth & B street frontages. Veranda Court homes would range in size from 1,400 to 1,700 square feet, with three variations of the floor plan grouped in four (4) units per building. The Veranda Court homes would be located on Lot 2 along the southern boundary of the property adjacent to the 1-5 freeway. Each of the residential units in both product types would have an attached two -car garage for resident parking. The Melrose Place units fronting W. Sixth Street would be two stories with a maximum height of 30 feet and would have a single -story porch element and front -door entrance on W. Sixth St. to provide a more complementary interface with the residential nature of existing homes across W. Sixth St. Two (2) of the Melrose Place units on B Street would have a two-story frontage element with the remainder of the attached units being three - stories with a maximum height of forty-two (42) feet and a front door entry along B Street. The remainder of the buildings would face the swimming pool area, an internal paseo or walkway. City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 12 Figure 6 Due to the close proximity of residential housing units to the 1-5 Freeway, a twenty (20) foot sound wall would be constructed on the southern boundary of the property. The wall would be designed to provide sound attenuation from the freeway as identified in the MND prepared for this project. The project, if approved, would be required to demonstrate that the residential units on the south side of the property would be improved with noise attenuating building construction and not exceed an interior noise level of forty-five (45) decibels as required by the Tustin General Plan. Submittal of an acoustical report at the time of plan check is required to verify that that the building construction will be able to meet this requirement. (See Mitigation Measure MM N-1 Exhibit A, Resolution 16-55 and Condition No. 8.1 of Resolution No. 16-57). As part of the project, the developer would construct a curb extension, or "bulb -out" (see Figure 6) on the northeast corner of the site. The curb extension will provide additional landscape area and monument signage at the project entry. The bulb -out also serves to slow through traffic and turning vehicles by physically and visually narrowing the intersection and enhancing pedestrian safety by increasing pedestrian visibility and City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 13 shortening crossing distances. The City plans to complete the remainder of the intersection with bulb -outs in the future, pending funding. Site Access Access to the site includes the following: Two (2) through -way private drives from W. Sixth Street to B Street • Three (3) alleys from W. Sixth Street Although the project increases the number of driveways currently serving the industrial uses by two (2), the number of driveway approaches should the project site be developed with a single-family residential development, could result in nine (9) or more driveway approaches. Parking As mentioned above, each residence would have an attached two -car garage for resident parking. The Planned Community Regulations require a minimum of 0.25 guest parking spaces per unit, or thirty-five (35) uncovered spaces. The project proposes a total of sixty-nine (69) guest parking spaces, in addition to a two -car enclosed garage for each unit. Staff has recommended a condition of approval that the project CC&Rs require that garages be kept free from storage or other impediments that would prevent two (2) cars parking in the garage and that this requirement be enforced by the HOA to maintain the open parking spaces for guests (Condition 4.5K.3 and K.4 of Resolution No. 16-57). City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 14 Guest parking for the project would be located along the southern boundary adjacent to the sound wall. The throughway private drives and parking in this location help to separate the residential uses from the Interstate 5 freeway and, together with the private drive, provides a 50'-6" setback from the southern property line. The maximum distance from guest parking to the furthest unit would be approximately 550 feet, or less than a two (2) minute walk (Figure 7). Architecture The project includes two (2) townhouse product types (Melrose Place and Veranda Court) to be constructed in four (4) architectural styles inspired by Cottage, Craftsman, Farmhouse and Spanish period influences (see Architectural Plans, Attachment B) in an effort to acknowledge and complement the historic homes in the Cultural Resources District across W. 6th Street. Each residential unit would have an attached two -car garage. The buildings would be two (2) to three (3) stories, with two-story frontages placed on W. Sixth and B Street frontages (Figures 8 and 9). While all of the buildings would have similarities in design, each style has individual characteristics that differentiate the architecture and make the facades unique. Within each style are variations on the theme which include different color schemes and number of attached units, porch and front entry styles, fagade finish materials (stucco or siding), roofing material, window style and trim, porch and balcony railing, front door and garage door styles, plant shelves, shutter design, and on the Spanish -style building, eyebrow awnings over windows. Buildings with a three-story wall have a stringcourse, or horizontal band, which help to break up the appearance of a three-story wall. Staff has reviewed the proposed materials and has found them to be of high quality and varied architectural styles. Roof top mechanical equipment would be fully enclosed within a parapet, and other electrical equipment and wiring would be stored within "false" chimneys to screen from public view. The project provides a building design and orientation reminiscent of the single-family detached residences along W. Sixth Street while still allowing for the massing necessary for a multifamily project constructed in the 21st Century. The project will enhance the streetscape along W. Sixth Street with buildings which engage the street and provide detailing and features along the frontage as seen in single family residences. The project is sensitive to the Cultural Resources District and responds well to the streetscape. Enhancement of the visual character of the site and surroundings will occur as a result of the project. Analysis of DR 2016-004 has determined that the location, size, architectural features, and general appearance of the proposal will not impair the orderly and harmonious development of the area, the present or future development therein, or the occupancy as a whole. City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 15 f -amp � . cwvarmu.cansoae, .wavoro.o. r� Figure 8: Sixth Street Frontage I� a • �rw�wmv-eanao�: a 2 • on.,.,nnva.� a�ro" Figure 9: Architectural Styles Open Space and Landscape Concept Each unit would have a private entrance and a private yard, patio or balcony between eighty (80) square feet and 200 square feet. Most front yards would have a small accent tree or a larger tree and would be fully landscaped. A recreation building/clubhouse and swimming pool would be located along the project frontage. The one-story recreation building would be designed in a Craftsman style with a central porch and gable at the entrance (Figure 10). The recreation building would provide housing for the pool equipment, a lounge area with a kitchen, and restrooms for pool users. The pool area would be furnished with tables and chairs, cabanas and lounge chairs and a built-in in bar-b-que for use by residents. The site also has two (2) passive open space areas of approximately 2,815 and 2,416 square feet for use by residents. (Figure 10) City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 16 Figure 10 The project proposes three (3) paseos in the Melrose Place units and five (5) paseos in the Veranda Court units (Figure 11). These paseos would provide passive recreational open spaces for walking, sitting or gathering in small groups. The paseos would include outdoor furnishings including chairs and coffee tables, a fire table and chairs, and overhead string lighting. In addition, landscaped pathways would provide walking amenities, and generally provide pedestrian circulation throughout the development. TYPICAL'MTLAOSE PLACE' PA/IO �dnwl Figure 11: Paseo Concept MR TYPICAL '-I.ax as tuLL-r -w; City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 17 The landscape palette includes a variety of drought tolerant plant materials including groundcovers, shrubs, succulents and trees (Figure 12). All landscaping would be in compliance with the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Figure 12: Landscape Concept Plan Relationship with Downtown Commercial Core Specific Plan The project site is located within the proposed boundary of the Downtown Commercial Core Specific Plan (DCCSP) and is one of two parcels currently zoned for industrial use within the boundary. The DCCSP was commissioned by the City Council to create an active, vibrant and cohesive community. The goals of the DCCSP include: • Create an active and vibrant community • Create connection among residential neighborhood and commercial areas. • Foster a walkable and bikeable environment that is accessible to residents, workers and visitors • Preserve and cultivate design character that enhances the community sense of place and build upon the historic downtown. The key findings from three community workshops were that the community desired more street life, community vitality and events, transformation of vacant and underutilized lots and improved parking. The resultant vision for Old Town Tustin included, with positive input from the community, the following: City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 18 • Vibrant: An active, dynamic economy and experience • Cohesive: An engaged interwoven community with great design • Connected: A walkable, bikeable destination with strong transit and auto access • Memorable: An attractive, welcoming downtown with a unique sense of place The proposed project implements these goals by adding population/residents to DCCSP to frequent businesses (shopping and dining) and create an opportunity to gather to reinvigorate the area. The project applies design features to create walkable and bikeable environment along with common area to encourage public gathering. The project's interface also respects the adjacent historic homes and the cultural district as a whole by using compatible architectural style and massing. Affordable Housing State Housing Element law mandates that local governments adequately plan to meet the existing and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community. In compliance with State Housing Law, Goal 1 of the Tustin General Plan Housing Element is to provide an adequate supply of housing to meet the need for a variety of housing types and the diverse socio-economic needs of all community residents. In furtherance of this goal, the City is proposing to adopt a requirement that fifteen percent (15%) of all new housing construction be made affordable to very low, low or moderate income households in specified percentages or that an in -lieu fee is paid to the City which the City will then use for development of affordable housing. In that this requirement is not yet in place and, for the benefit to the developer of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to change the land use designation and allow for residential densities as well as a vested right to construct the project as discussed herein, the DA contains a provision that the developer pay the City in -lieu fees which would allow the City to invest in affordable housing at another location within the City. Development Agreement To strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning, and reduce the economic risk of development, the California Legislature adopted the Development Agreement Statute of the Government Code. Pursuant to the statute, a City may enter into an agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of such property and establish certain development rights therein. TCC Chapter 9600 sets forth the process for which development agreements are to be considered. The general purpose of DA 2016-002 is to assure the developer, in return for developer's commitment to project, the City will in turn remain committed to the development of the site and the Planned Community Regulations. These assurances City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 19 require the cooperation and participation of the City and developer and could not be secured without mutual cooperation and commitment to the comprehensive planning that has resulted in the DA and Planned Community Regulations. The DA includes, but is not limited to, the following terms of the agreement: • The term of DA 2016-002 will be for five (5) years, unless the term is terminated, modified or extended by circumstances set forth in DA 2016-002. • The permitted uses on the property, the density and intensity of the use and development standards applicable to the project. • A vested right to carry out and develop the project site in accordance with DA 2016-002 and DR 2016-004, should the GPA and ZC be approved. • Public benefits including public access to a privately owned and maintained 3,709 square foot passive mini park along W. Sixth Street and the provision for private recreational facilities including a swimming pool, recreation building, and pedestrian paseos, in return for credit toward park in -lieu fees. • Payment of affordable housing in -lieu fees. • Removal of an existing on-site cell tower and related ground equipment upon expiration of the existing cell tower lease. • Construction phasing for the project to ensure timely completion of the project. • Construction of an intersection "bulb out" at the southwest corner of W. Sixth Street and B Street and associated street striping on B Street. • Payment of Street and Highways Improvements fees for future intersection and signal improvements. • A non -illuminated sign identifying "Old Town Tustin" to be placed on the south side of the sound wall adjacent to the Interstate 5 freeway. Old Town Tustin Sign along Interstate 5 Freeway MW City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 20 TCC Section 9601 requires that a fiscal impact statement be submitted along with an application for a DA in order for the City to determine whether or not the project will fiscally impact the City. The attached Fiscal Impact Analysis assesses the revenues and costs of the project in relation to the existing land use (Attachment C). The current fiscal performance of the existing industrial improvements and business activity, according to the Fiscal Impact Assessment prepared for the project, is a fiscal burden on the City of approximately $1,600 per year due to low taxable property value per acre and the provision of public services. The analysis indicates that the project would generate approximately $155,000 per year in revenue to the City from property tax and sales tax, which would be offset by services provided by police, fire and recreation/maintenance services in an approximately amount of $72,000.00, or an overall net revenue projection of $83,000.00 annually. Ordinance 1473 has been prepared in support of City Council consideration of DA 2016-002, subject to any non -substantive modifications as may be determined necessary as may be approved by the City Manager's Office, or as recommended by the City's Special Counsel or the City Attorney. In addition, staff recommends that the City Manager be authorized to take such actions, and execute such documents and instruments, as deemed necessary or desirable to implement the terms of the DA and all attachments to the DA and other documents as necessary as provided by Ordinance 1473. Environmental Review In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared to evaluate the project's potential environmental Impacts (Exhibit A of Resolution No. 16-55). The topics studied included, among other issues: aesthetics; air quality; cultural resources; greenhouse gas emissions; noise; public services; traffic; and, utilities. Where it was determined necessary to reduce potential environmental impacts relating to biological resources, cultural resources, geology/soils, hazards and hazardous materials, and noise to a level of less than significant, the IS/MND identifies mitigation measures. In addition, the MND has analyzed all the concerns brought up at the Planning Commission hearing and has addressed the comments (see Resolution 16-55, Exhibit E, Responses to Comments to IS/MND). Tustin's Water Services Manager, Arturo Valenzuela, advised the Planning Commission that the City's Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) was last updated in 2015 and provides for complete build out of the City water service area. Mr. Valenzuela indicated that there is adequate water to serve this development. As part of the environmental review, an architectural survey was conducted for nine (9) of the eleven (11) existing buildings on the site, those considered historic -age because they City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 21 were constructed prior to 1971 (forty-five (45) years or older), and were evaluated for eligibility for listing on the California Register of Historic Resources. None of the nine (9) buildings were found to be eligible for listing and do not retain sufficient integrity for listing. These buildings were not considered significant cultural resources based on the evaluation. In addition, Phase I and Phase II subsurface soil testing was conducted at the project site to identify potential soil contamination that may have resulted from the existing industrial uses on the site. The results were mainly insignificant; however, two samples contained marginal results that exceed residential standards. As a result, Mitigation Measure H-1 requires the developer to remove or remediate the soil in those locations and to conduct additional testing in the location of the residential structures once the soil has been removed/remediated. If any testing reveals contamination in excess of EPA Regional 9 Residential Regional Screening Level thresholds, a hazardous materials specialist will be required to determine methods to minimize pollutants. Impacts were considered less than significant after the implementation of mitigation. Further, the IS/MND determined that no extremely hazardous substances are anticipated as a result of project construction or operation. Prior to demolition of the site, building materials would be carefully assessed for the presence of lead-based paint and asbestos and removal would need to comply with State and federal regulations. The IS/MND concluded that compliance with existing laws and regulations resulted in a less than significant impacts to residents, workers, or any other sensitive receptor in the vicinity of the proposed project. The MND also addressed construction impacts on the adjacent neighborhood, related to air quality and noise. With implementation of existing Policies, Plans, and Procedures and Project Design Features related to dust control and construction hours, all impacts were considered less than significant and no mitigation measures were necessary. As a lead agency for a private development project, the City of Tustin must initiate consultation with all California Native American tribes that request consultation as part of the CEQA review process pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1(b). The City notified and offered consultation about this project on March 18, 2016 to three California Native American Tribes that had previously requested notification. The City entered into consultation with the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh on April 14, 2016 and concluded consultation on May 25, 2016. As a result of the consultation, Mitigation Measure C3 has been included in the MND and requires the developer to retain a Native American monitor to provide monitoring services during construction activities that may disturb native soils to a depth of eighteen (18) inches or more below the surface. City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 22 The draft IS/MND was made available for public review from July 27, 2016, to August 26, 2016, consistent with CEQA's 30 -day public review period for draft IS/MND documents. A Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was: (1) posted at City Hall and the County Clerk's office; (2) published in the Orange County Register; and (3) mailed to owners of all properties within 300 feet of the project site. Comments were received from the State Clearinghouse, Department of Transportation (Caltrans), OCFA, South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), and four residents. Although not required by CEQA for an MND, the City prepared written responses to the comments, as provided in Resolution 16-55. The response to comments includes revisions to the IS/MND text and figures as a result of the comments received by agencies and interested persons as described. Additional comments on the IS/MND were made at the Planning Commission on September 18, 2016, after the close of the IS/MND public review period. The City of Tustin has considered the new comments and determined that they do not constitute the type of significant new information that requires recirculation of the IS/MND for further public comment under CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5. The new comments do not indicate that the project will result in a significant new environmental impact not previously disclosed in the Vintage IS/MND nor that there would be a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified environmental impact that will not be mitigated. Public Comments at Planning Commission At the Planning Commission meeting on September 27, 2016, fifteen (15) individuals commented on the project. Of the fifteen (15), twelve (12) expressed concerns and/or opposition to the project and three (3) spoke in favor (See Planning Commission Draft Minutes, Attachment D). Those in favor of the project indicated that the project would support struggling businesses by bringing new customers into Old Town Tustin; the City's desire to have a thriving Main Street needs people to walk to businesses and restaurants and enjoy the City and the project would help meet that goal. The supporters of the project felt that the project was more than adequately parked. Those individuals who opposed the project identified concerns with insufficient parking and increased traffic through residential neighborhoods in Old Town Tustin. Ongoing concerns of those opposed include overflow parking into neighborhoods from existing multi -family developments and some commercial buildings (Steven's Square) leaving insufficient parking spaces for residents on their streets. Frequently mentioned were City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 23 "drop off" parking on residential streets where individuals would park their vehicles and are picked up by others, leaving their vehicle parked overnight and sometimes for multiple days. Complaints about driveways being blocked, safety issues, property damage, trash and debris left on the street and inability to set trash containers on the street for trash pick-up were expressed. In general, many speakers felt that parking solutions for the Old Town Tustin area should be explored and addressed. In response, staff explained that the existing parking condition may be, in part, the result of residents using their garages for storage instead of parking, overcrowding in residential units, apartment housing with insufficient and/or inconvenient parking and construction of additional units without the benefit of a permit (illegal units). This multi- faceted issue should be addressed comprehensively and on a citywide basis, but should not burden new development, particularly when the project proposes parking that exceeds the requirements contained in the TCC. Other concerns that were expressed include street racing after hours; the already impacted intersections at EI Camino Real/Red Hill and Newport Avenues at the 1-5 Freeway entrance; increased traffic on Sixth Street and B Streets; and question on the accuracy of the traffic study prepared for the project. Other specific concerns about the project were related to high density and the negative impact on the small-town community feel of Old Town Tustin by adding too many new residents at one time. Some speakers indicated that the design of the project was not compatible with Old Town Tustin and that it would be more appropriate in newer developments such as Tustin Ranch and Legacy. Other comments included concerns that (1) the development will require water to serve the development during a period of drought and insufficient water supplies; (2) health issues such as West Nile Virus and Zika Virus; (3) the property has historical significance; (4) that the public notice was insufficient; and (5) hazardous waste on the project site. Public Outreach On June 27, 2016, the applicant presented the project to the Tustin Historical Society. On June 28, 2016, the applicant presented the project to Tustin Preservation Conservancy in a private home. On July 14, 2016, the applicant presented the project to the Tustin Chamber of Commerce at its Business Economic Development Committee (BEDC) meeting. On July 18, 2016, the applicant hosted a neighborhood meeting at the Tustin Community Center at the Tustin Marketplace. City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 24 On July 27, 2016, the Community Development Department posted a Notice of Intent to Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration and Public Review Period in the Orange County Register. On July 27, 2016, the Community Development Department created a project webpage on the City's website which provides information related to the project and a link to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. On August 31, 2016, the applicant presented the project followed by a question and answer session at a community meeting hosted by the Tustin Preservation Conservancy in a private home. Approximately 30 to 35 individuals attended each of these meetings. On September 15, 2016, the City mailed a Notice of Public Hearing and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration to a total of 41 property owners within a 300 foot radius of the project site, and to 32 persons specifically requesting notice. Notification was posted in 2 locations on the project site on that same date. On October 6, 2016, the Community Development Department published a Notice of Public Hearing and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration in the Tustin News. On October 6, 2016, the Community Development Department mailed a Notice of Public Hearing and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration to 41 property owners within 300 feet of the project, to 32 persons specifically requesting notice. On November 3, 2016, the Community Development Department mailed and emailed an expanded notification to 114 individuals on the Downtown Commercial Core Specific Plan (DCCSP) mailing and email list. Over the period between Fall, 2014 and Spring, 2016, between 70 and 90 people participated in three (3) City -hosted community workshops for the DCCSP. The workshops included visioning, concept development and presentation of the plan. The City received positive comments and input from residents and business owners in attendance. Planning Commission Action On September 27, 2016, the Planning Commission considered the project and adopted Resolution Nos. 4325, 4326, 4327 and 4328 recommending that the City Council approve the proposed project. A copy of the Draft Planning Commission Minutes, which include Commissioner comments and approved resolutions, are provided in Attachment D. City Council Report November 15, 2016 Intracorp So Cal -1, LLC Page 25 In making the recommendation, the Planning Commission found the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the site was adequate; that the project is consistent with the Tustin City Code; that the site is physically suitable for the development; that the project will contribute to the support of commercial activity in Old Town Tustin; that the project will provide additional housing stock to the community; that the project is well designed and would have adequate infrastructure; that removal of the existing cell tower and equipment is appropriate; and that the Development Agreement and Fiscal Impact Statement provide for the orderly development of the project and that the project will have a positive fiscal impact on the City. The Planning Commission also requested that staff communicate the parking concerns addressed by residents in the Old Town area to the City Council. Elaine Dove Senior Planner, AICP IlAux., stina Willkom Assistant Director - Planning Attachments: �Z- Elizabeth A. Binsack Director of Community Development A. Location Map B. Submitted Plans C. Fiscal Impact Analysis D. Planning Commission Minutes of September 27, 2016, and Resolution No. 4325, 4326, 4327 and 4328 E. City Council Resolution No. 16-55 (Mitigated Negative Declaration) F. City Council Resolution No. 16-56 (General Plan Amendment) G. Ordinance No. 1472 (Zone Change) H. Ordinance No. 1473 (Development Agreement) I. City Council Resolution No. 16-57 (Tentative Tract Map and Design Review) J. Public Correspondence received after Planning Commission, September 27, 2016