HomeMy WebLinkAbout02 COLUMBUS SQUARE & GROVE AMEND (TTM 16581 & 16582) 07-03-06AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: JULY 3,2006
TO: WilLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: AMENDMENTS TO COLUMBUS SQUARE AND COLUMBUS GROVE
PROJECTS (TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS 16581 AND 16582)
SUMMARY:
This is a request to amend the approval for Tentative Tract Maps 16581 and 16582 for
Columbus Square and Columbus Grove for the following items:
A) To revise the architectural design of Ainsley Park within Columbus Grove;
B) To reduce the size of the recreation building for Columbus Square from 5,467
square feet to 3,765 square feet and provide a more simplified architecture without
towers and decorative parapets;
C) An amendment to Condition 2.2 of Resolution No. 05-40 of Tentative Tract Map
16581 (Columbus Square) to defer completion of the required recreation center
from prior to issuance of the 420th building permit to prior to the 950th building
permit;
D) An amendment to the affordable housing plan to relocate an affordable housing
unit (Camden Place) in Columbus Square from a model home unit to a production
unit in phase one; and,
E) An amendment to the phasing plan of Columbus Square to allow construction of
the senior housing project in eight (8) phases instead of the approved three (3)
phases.
Applicants: lennar Homes on behalf of Moffett Meadows partners llC
COUNCil ALTERNATIVES:
That the City Council:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 06-82 incorporating the Planning Commission's
recommendation to the City Council;
2. Adopt Resolution No. 06-82 incorporating staff's recommended actions; or
3. Take action as deemed appropriate.
City Council Report
July 3, 2006
Villages of Columbus Amendments
Page 2 of 8
FISCAL IMPACT:
The requested amendments are applicant-initiated projects. The applicants have paid
applicable fees for the processing of this project.
ENVIRONMENTAL:
On February 22, 2005, the City Council approved Resolution Nos. 05-035 and 05-38
finding that the Final Environmental Impact StatemenVFinal Environmental Impact
Report for the disposal and reuse of MCAS Tustin was adequate to serve the projects
referred to as Columbus Square and Columbus Grove (Tentative Tract Maps 16581 and
16582), in that no additional impacts were anticipated, and all applicable mitigation
measures were incorporated into the project as required by the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). In addition, projects that are disapproved are not subject to CEQA
process per Section 15270 of the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3.
BACKGROUND:
On February 22, 2005, the City Council approved development of 1,542 residential units
within Planning Areas 4, 5 and 21 of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Attachment A -
Location Map). The approval included Tentative Tract Maps 16581 (Columbus Square)
and 16582 (Columbus Grove), Design Review applications 04-004 and 04-006 and a
density bonus that allowed development of 182 additional units on the Columbus
Square site and an affordable housing plan for providing 266 affordable units. The
project sites also included parks and two recreational centers. The Columbus Grove site
included a 5,132 square foot recreation building to serve a 465-unit community and the
Columbus Square included a 5,467 square foot recreation building to serve an 835-unit
community. The senior housing project included its own pool and recreation center
which was recently approved with the site and development plans for that project.
Both communities known as Villages of Columbus are currently under construction and
the model homes for five (5) of the models were opened on June 17, 2006 and the
remainder of the models with the exception of the senior housing project (Coventry
Court) and Ainsley Park (cluster units requested for revision), are scheduled to open in
July 2006.
Staff has been working diligently with Lennar Homes and William Lyon Homes to
proceed with the plan checking of the project and commencement of construction in a
timely manner. During the plan check process, the applicant made several requests for
minor administrative approvals and, where possible, staff has approved those requests.
However several revisions were viewed by staff to be extensive and that were considered
to have a negative impact on Council's original approval and intent; therefore, staff
requested that a formal application for all the modifications be submitted for consideration
by the Planning Commission and the City Council. The Planning Commission considered
the matter on June 26, 2006, as noted below.
City Council Report
July 3, 2006
Villages of Columbus Amendments
Page 3 of 8
DISCUSSION
On May 3, 2006, a formal application was submitted by the project proponent, which is
described in Attachment B. The following discussion summarizes each request and staff's
concerns.
A) Revise the architectural design of Ainsley Park (cluster duplex units) in Columbus
Grove originally designed as two different architectural styles into one simplified
structure containing two units.
Applicant's Request - The applicant is requesting to revise the architectural design of this
duplex product to simplify the structures so that the same architecture is carried out on
both residences. The proposed elevations include alternatives in the California Bungalow,
Craftsman, Colonial, Monterey, and Victorian architectural styles. The modification is
intended to simplify the structural framing, mechanical and plumbing systems with use of a
uniform roof design, and exterior elements of California Bungalow, Colonial, Craftsman,
Monterey, and Victorian architecture (Attachment C - Submitted Plans).
Staff's Analysis - Ainsley Park was originally designed as two duplex units formed in a
four-unit cluster with interior motor courts, and the architectural design provided for a
distinct and individualized look for each one of the attached units (Attachment D -
Approved Plans). Staff concurs with the applicant that the approved marriage of two
distinct architectural designs as attached units could be improved through the proposed
simplified single architectural design. However, staff believes that the size of the structure
is too large for the proposed California Bungalow and the Colonial styles and is not
recommending approval of this modification. The other architectural styles may be
supported with additional refinement and inclusion of appropriate details. Staff
recommended that the Planning Commission deny this request and direct the applicant to
work with staff to provide a compatible design that suits the approved dominant
architectural styles within the community and continues to provide distinctive character for
both units. On June 26, 2006, the Planning Commission concurred with staff and denied
the proposed modifications and directed the applicant to continue working with staff toward
a resolution of this matter. William Lyon Homes was amenable with this and so noted on
the record.
B1) An amendment to reduce the approved size of the recreation building for
Columbus Square from 5,467 square feet to 3,765 square feet and to revise the
architectural design of the Columbus Square recreation building to a more
simplified architecture without towers and decorative parapets. .
Applicant's Request - The applicant is requesting to reduce the size of the recreation
center due to the significant rise in construction costs and new marketing criteria. The
amendments are also intended to provide for lower maintenance costs and HOA dues
for the future homeowners. The applicant has indicated that the reductions were made
in areas that are typically underutilized and the revised clubhouse would have the
capacity for 173 occupants. In addition, the separate pool building and restrooms are
proposed to be combined into one single building (Attachment C - Submitted Plans).
City Council Report
July 3, 2006
Villages of Columbus Amendments
Page 4 of 8
Staff Analysis - Based upon Tustin City Code Section 9331 (d), the Columbus Square's
1,077 unit project required 8.83 acres of parkland. 3.66 acres of this area was eligible
for park credit, which included 1.66 acres of the main park and two (2) one-acre parks
accessible from Valencia North Loop Road. With the project's approval, a waiver for
parkland requirements for 241 affordable units was also granted in addition to the
granting of a credit for the improvement cost for development of the main park which
reduced the required parkland in-lieu fee to 1.85 acres.
Prior to Council approval, staff considered the proposed size of the recreation center
against what would be the minimum industry standard for 835 residences since a) the
minimum standard size for a neighborhood park is three (3) acres and there are no parks
greater than 1.6 acres in Columbus Square, b) the center should accommodate a variety
of uses and conflicting events, and c) in comparison, if approved the recreation center at
Columbus Square, serving 835 units including 552 multiple family units with no private
yards, would be approximately 1,300 square feet smaller than the recreation center at
Columbus Grove which serves a community of 465 homes including 279 single family
homes with private backyards.
Lennar has indicated that the proposed reduction is requested to provide the
homeowners maintenance ability within the established HOA dues. Staff believes that
the community would not benefit from a smaller size community center and that a
smaller size recreation center would not be sufficient to accommodate a community of
835 residents. On June 26, 2006, the Planning Commission concurred with staff and
recommended that the City Council deny this request.
82) An amendment to revise the architectural design of the recreation building.
Applicant's Request - The applicant is requesting to simplify the architectural design of the
recreation center by removing the tower element from the main building and the easterly
and the westerly courtyard colonnades and eliminating the widow's walk parapet.
Staff's Analysis - The approved recreation building was designed to complement the
Colonial and Georgian architectural style of the homes in Columbus Square which
included steep roofs, brick fa9ades and decorative trims in addition to including a tower
element designed as a landmark and a decorative parapet resembling a widow's walk that
would distinctively emphasize the building as a focal point of the community (Attachment D
- Approved Plans for the Rec. Center). Staff believes that the proposed architecture is too
simplified and lacks the visual interest and importance that the recreation building was
intended to bring to the community. The original architectural design was proposed with
the development plans and should have been included in the project budget and the
revision is not justified at this point of development when all initial phases of the homes are
under construction. On June 26, 2006 the Planning Commission concurred with staff and
denied this request.
C) An amendment to Condition 2.2 of Resolution No. 05-40 of Tentative Tract Map
16581 (Columbus Square) to defer completion of the required recreation center from
prior to issuance of the 420th building permit to prior to the 950th building permit.
City Council Report
July 3, 2006
Villages of Columbus Amendments
Page 5 of 8
Applicant's Request - The applicant is requesting to defer the requirement to provide
additional time for construction of the recreation center since plans for the recreation
center are proposed to be modified under the current proposal. If the modifications are
approved, building construction would not start until July 2006. Lennar has indicated that
construction of the recreation center and private amenities would take approximately
fourteen (14) months to complete, and that the park sites would be completed prior to
issuance of the 950th building permit (Attachment B - Submitted Request).
Staff's Analysis - The 420th building permit threshold was established at project approval to
ensure that the recreation center and the park site would be available to area residents
within a reasonable time of moving into the community. Parks are required to be
constructed within the initial phases of development and in most cases with the model
phase so that homeowners will have immediate access to the community amenities (pool,
barbeque, etc.). It should be noted that recreation buildings and parks associated with
John Laing Homes' Tustin Field I and Tustin Field 1\ projects were buill during the first
phase of construction.
To date, Lennar has been issued approximately 240 building permits over the past 9
months within the Columbus Square project site leaving approximately 180 permits still to
issue before the 420th permit threshold is reached. Past City building practices would
indicate that a 5,467 square foot recreation building would take approximately 6 to 8
months to complete. In addition, staff has previously completed three plan checks for the
original 5,467 square foot recreation building which Lennar allowed to expire in October of
2005. Staff believes that the request to defer this requirement to the 950th building permit
would be excessive and unreasonable, particularly since the delay in construction is due to
Lennar's self-imposed desire to redesign and reduce the size of the recreation center.
On June 26, 2006, the Planning Commission expressed a desire to grant the developer
more time for construction of the recreation center and recommended that the City Council
approve an amendment to defer the requirement of completing the Columbus Square
recreation center from prior to issuance of the 420th building permit to prior to final
inspection of the 420th residential unit.
Staff believes that revising the threshold for completion of the recreation building to final
inspections could place the City into an untenable position where it would be required to
withhold final inspections for units which may have already been sold to new homeowners
waiting to move into the finished units. Staff articulated at the Planning Commission
meeting that staff met with Lennar in April and indicated that staff would not be supportive
of the requested delay and asked the applicant why they did not resubmit the approved
recreation building into plan check so that a permit could be issued and they could
construct that which was approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. If this
condition is modified as noted, staff will not be able to control when plans are submitted by
the applicant, if they will meet current Code requirements, or the level of effort that will be
expended toward obtaining a permit or construction of the facility. To date, staff has not
been successful in urging construction of the applicant's senior facility or recreation facility
pending before the Council. Therefore, staff respectfully disagrees with the Planning
Commission's suggestion and recommends that the City Council direct the applicant to re-
start the permiVconstruction process for the original recreation center and proceed
City Council Report
July 3, 2006
Villages of Columbus Amendments
Page 6 of 8
start the permiVconstruction process for the original recreation center and proceed
expeditiously to satisfy the original requirement. As the deadline approaches, staff can
report back to the City Council whether the applicant has made a good faith effort to
comply with the original requirement. Based upon the applicant's performance and need,
the City Council could reconsider the issue of extensions at that time or grant staff the
ability to resolve this issue. During this time, the applicant can continue to process the
approximately 180 units of permits remaining under the current 420th permit threshold.
D) An amendment to the affordable housing plan to relocate an affordable housing unit
(Low income) within a multiple family product (Camden Place) in Columbus Square
from a proposed model home unit to a production unit in phase one.
Applicant's Request - The applicant has requested the relocation because this is a model
home site and would not be available for immediate occupancy (Attachment E - Submitted
Revision to Affordable Housing Plan). Lennar selected the proposed location of the unit
but no longer desires that the model home be utilized as an affordable unit and is
requesting to relocate this affordable unit to Phase One production unit.
Staff's Analysis - Staff did not recommend approval of the requested relocation because
of the advantages of potential upgrades and a better location (since this unit is located
across from the Community Park).
On June 26, 2006, the Planning Commission indicated that the request was a minor
revision and that since the model home unit would not be available until closing of the
model home complex, the relocation would be beneficial and allow for immediate
occupancy of this unit upon completion. On June 26, 2006, the Planning Commission
recommended that the City Council approve this request.
While staff concurs with the Planning Commission that relocation of the affordable unit to
the Phase One location is relatively minor, staff is concerned that construction and sale of
the affordable unit is fully within the control of the applicant to either pursue or not pursue
(similar to the applicant's decision to not build the recreation building in a timely manner).
With this in mind, staff would recommend that the City Council deny the request and direct
the applicant to work directly with staff on this matter. Staff would be willing to commit to
administratively allowing the relocation of the required affordable unit to a phase one
production unit upon recordation of the sale of that unit to an affordable family. Once
documentation has been provided to staff, the currently required affordable unit would be
released administratively.
E) An amendment to the phasing plan of Columbus Square to allow construction of the
senior housing project in eight (8) phases instead of the approved three (3) phases.
Applicant's Request - Staff was verbally notified by Lennar about a proposed change in
the construction phasing of the senior site and has included this request as part of the
proposed formal application. Lennar Homes has requested that the construction
phasing of the senior housing project be extended to eight (8) phases in addition to
model home and built-out phase instead of the approved three (3) phases due to the
City Council Report
July 3, 2006
Villages of Columbus Amendments
Page 7 of 8
large size of each of the structures that include 24 units (Attachment F - Submitted
Revision to Senior Housing Phasing Plan).
Staff's Analysis - Staff is not recommending approval of this request since this revision
could negatively impact the Planning Commission and City Council's original intent that
the entire project site be developed concurrently. The senior housing project includes 63
percent of the required affordable housing for the Villages of Columbus, and it is
essential that the construction of these units be accomplished proportionately with
construction of the market rate units. Given that this site will have a late start, eight (8)
phases of construction could lead to a major delay in delivering the affordable housing
units and defeat the original intent of the project's phasing. Staff recommended that at
minimum two structures be built concurrently for a total of five (5) phases including
models and built-out as a compromise to allow the developer additional time and lead
the project toward completion within a reasonable time. On June 26, 2006, the Planning
Commission concurred with staff's recommendation and recommended that the City
Council deny the applicants request and approve a revised phasing plan including five
(5) phases.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
When the comprehensive developments were originally presented to the Planning
Commission and the City Council for a recommended action, the recommendation was
based on a comprehensive proposal which also included variations from the required
standards. In summary, these development projects received many allowances so that
quality and livable communities would be developed to accommodate a variety of
households. These allowances included the following:
. Specific Plan Amendments that allowed for new development standards for a new
product type (carriage way units);
. Reduced rear yard setbacks for carriage way units;
. One hundred percent on-street guest parking versus 50 percent;
. Reduced street widths and turning radius;
. Reduced minimum development site size;
. Transfer of affordable housing units between planning areas;
. 182 additional units with approval of a density bonus;
. Density averaging within planning areas;
. Concentration of affordable units in the senior housing project;
. Parkland credit; and,
. Reduction of 3-acre minimum park site to one (1) acre to be eligible for park credit
and accept public use of the parks for in-lieu fees.
In addition, since the project included many deviations from the standard requirements,
one aspect of the project may not have been recommended without another and staff's
recommendation to approve the projects took into consideration the comprehensive
proposal.
City Council Report
July 3, 2006
Villages of Columbus Amendments
Page 8 of 8
On June 26, 2006, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4025 which denied
the proposed architectural modifications to Ainsley park and Columbus Square recreation
center and recommended that the City Council approve: a) an amendment to Condition
2.2 of Resolution No. 05-40 to defer completion of the Columbus Square recreation center
from prior to the 420th building permit to prior to final inspection of the 420th residential unit;
b) an amendment to relocate of an affordable housing unit from a model home site to a
Phase One production unit; and c) a revised phasing plan to allow completion of the senior
housing project from three (3) phases to five (5) phases (Attachment G - Resolution No.
4025).
Although staff understands the Planning Commission's desire to compromise in this
matter, staff's recommendation continues to be for denial of the request with the exception
of the phasing plan.
Based on the above analysis, staff continues to recommend denial of the applicant's
request. However, due to the Planning Commission's action in this matter, staff has
prepared two optional resolutions for Council consideration, the first reflecting the Planning
Commission's recommendations and the second depicting staff's recommendations in this
matter (Attachment H).
Minoo Ashabi
Associate Planner
Elizabeth A. Binsack
Community Development Director
Attachments:
A. Location Map
B - Submitted Request for Amendments
C - Submitted Plans
D - Approved Plans for the Rec. Center
E - Submitted Revision to Affordable Housing Plan
F - Submitted Revision to Senior Housing Phasing Plan
G - Planning Commission Resolution No. 4025
H - Resolution No. 06-82 - Planning Commission's Recommendation
Resolution No. 06-82 - Staff's Recommendation
ATTACHMENT A
Location Map
Project Location Map
Columbus Square (Tract Map 16581)
Columbus Grove (Tract Map 16582)
Planning Area 4
Columbus
Square
.S>~~l~ H~),f".
I' \ '"''"'~:J--~~' .'
'1f';~~!,Cl!1 23 I \ ,I;! II. /_ ,,~' ".,.<.
r('A~ __..,.,..J 1 - (~; / / "<:::"'.
, .. ...; I I / " i"'f"
... ,'" n \ I{f" /) " ,
b. '~ \\ rcel24 ,! -=--~c~/f f ';.'
\( ': " ,~ ~"~ fo'.: I,
,. I,! "~::i;~'., ) ~,,;,\;' I'" Planning re
, '. ' \ ,"V/'," '\ (
" _.l..<:"/ \\ Planning Area 5 \ ......'.........
'!-~--,,-- ii " \ I
I~I' . ,; Ii '" I \\\ ,I', I I!
; II' ~ j' >., I I
'-,-! '.. ..~. f"',
1 1/ :\ j / ; " ' :;;
--"--'i /;, ;s.~ / I';' ";~' :~
,. !/ \ ,-' / ( J ."
,.11 i .. ! l" /.....~ /'./1 " "
I' 1 i . ~ I(~'j.. .-(/
,;-;1~,_~,._~~~ ~ ./ I_~re~..:t
.., ",'~D"'~'
",,',M' ,,,. .,~,
'.' \ c!! I I '" , Grove
1-__-1"1
. '>1 1-_'_1
UftU"c.....w.. !
."..,~,?!;:_':,;~(
~""'"
~"""\;~
ATTACHMENT B
Submitted Request
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST AND LETTER OF JUSTIFICATION
DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT - AINSLEY PARK
Ainsley Park is an 84 unit duplex product located in Columbus Grove. It is designed as
the "entry level" home for this community. Our request involves limited changes to the
floor plans and elevations that we believe are necessary to address building inefficiencies,
market segmentation, and incompatibility in architectural theming. The need for these
changes has become apparent as this product has gone from an approved design concept
through the working drawing process. In particular, we are proposing some changes to
the floor plans to provide greater variation and hence, market segmentation for a broader
range of buyers. However, it is important to note that the footprint of the units remains
relatively unchanged. The architectural massing of the buildings has been modified
mainly within the internal court areas to create a more coherent architectural style. The
concept is for the two units to appear as a larger, single-family detached home, rather
than two attached, but different looking homes. The faltade changes to the perimeter of
the units are very similar to the original concept. Finally, some of the building changes
have been necessary to achieve greater efficiencies with the design of the structural,
mechanical, plumbing and ventilation systems. Changes in roof lines have also been
necessary to ensure prevention from water intrusion and are in keeping with the new
architectural design.
DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT - SOUARE RECREATION CENTER
On April 7th, Lennar submitted architectural revisions for the Columbus Square
Recreation Center. These revisions are included with this application package. Due to
the significant rise in construction costs and new marketing criteria, the recreation
building has undergone focused reductions in size. In addition, these changes were
necessary to provide recreation center that can be maintained over time by the
homeowner's association, based on the HOA dues established. The clubhouse building
has been reduced in square footage from 6,050 square feet to 3,765 square feet in size (a
38% reduction). The reductions were made in areas that are typically underutilized, such
as the lounge area and secondary multipurpose room. The layout of the greatroom,
kitchen, and office remains unchanged. The proposed clubhouse has a total occupancy of
173 people, which is more than sufficient for the range of activities allowed by the HOA.
In addition to the main clubhouse, the separate pool building and restroom building have
been combined into one single building for greater efficiencies. The exterior elevations
remain largely unchanged, with the exception of removing an entry element on the end of
the East courtyard, a bay window at the West end of the clubhouse, and the cupola and
windows walk detail on the roof of the clubhouse building. The landscape plan has been
modified (increased) to address the reduction in building sizes.
CERTIFICATE OF COMPUANCE FOR TIM TRACT 16581. RESOLUTION 05-40.
CONDITION 2.2
This Certificate of Compliance involves a change in Condition 2.2 of Resolution 05-40,
dated February 14,2005. Under this condition, prior to the issuance of the 420th building
permit for production units, Lennar is required to:
. Pull building permits for the senior housing;
. Complete the first footing inspection for the senior housing;
. Complete the first recreation building;
. Complete park facilities.
Lennar believes that the following obligations can be met under the current condition:
. Pull building permits for the senior housing;
. Complete the first footing inspection for the senior housing;
. Complete park facilities (Montgomery Park, Washington Park, and Arlington
Park)
This application request involves the requirement to complete the first recreation building
for Columbus Square. As noted above, the design of this private recreation center has
undergone some modifications. Considering that the revised plans have just been
submitted for building permit, we anticipate that the earliest the construction can begin is
July 2006. The buildings and surrounding park facilities will take no less than 14 months
to complete. Based on our current Building Permit Schedule, we will be ready to pull the
420'h building permit sometime between August and September of 2()()6. Therefore, the
request is either to remove the completion of the recreation facility from Condition 2.2, or
to adjust the threshold to the 950th building permit. We have submitted updated Building
Permit Schedules to the Community Development Department that support this
adjustment.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN AND DENSITY BONUS APPUCATION
AMENDMENT
A second amendment to the Affordable Housing Plan and Density Bonus Application is
being requested. This is a minor amendment that involves the movement of one Low unit
in Camden (Planning Area 5-6, Columbus Square) from its current location in Lot 294 to
Lot 296. This shift is needed in order to build the model home complex within Lot 294.
The new location is essentially two buildings to the east, along the same local road (Lot
U). This amendment affects a change to Figure 4 and Figure 18 of the Affordable
Housing Plan and Density Bonus Application. The statistical tables are not affected.
ATTACHMENT C
Submitted Plans
r----..
, ,G-,el
,2:-,0
)'
c
1
I'
-r l-
I
I
,0,0\7
Hi....~'. -
b --
I -ani ._ '
I ' ..
,
I
I b
I "
.,
I ,
0
0
.-
I o'
.>
.:
I .,
~:!
,1. .
I 0
,
I I , :.J
.
I ,
I .
I -
9.
.'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
:%11 .!
. H
I
,
, .
~_l___
9
..
,
g,
.,
0'
.,
>~
o
v-
,
g,
"
0'
n
"
,,'
!
o
.
.
o
~
.
.
.
.
.
, i -i-
0
, .'
, i
, "'
J
. H
'.
".g~
:I;'~ ;
8 ~ i
~'~ i
",,-I
'n
~
.---'-
J
I H
,
,8'0
.,
"
0"
~.~
,
,
<
.
ci
,
J
.
~
.~
iil_'
! "'
L.
I
.
o
o
.
o
u
N
'.
!l,.--
,: :
'9
..
.l..
---
~' -----
,,0,0"
"O-,sz-----
,9.,101
,,"-,L€:
~_r"",o~, .
- -...,.,
,
1 I
! of: I
"" F-' -~I!I
cd::! - )
~ [I _!_ I
.~ .!~' ",,'
, .
B ~. I
i. r---:
.
o
l
~
3
.
,
&'1
..
"
O'
~'!
o
I .,
---"-~-:iI
...
.,-ri.~
l.,
"
:: Ig
_.------.Ll ~ :
, 't_~'I~
,
"
-- .
:..............1 ~
. u
,
,
I~
.
,
I
o
o
5
N
~
'.RI.1
I
. '
-----r
.
.
"
_:_=:3 lII,
,
'~o'
~ ~I
i I ~ I
!-~
,Ol-,LE'
,,0-,9 ,O',S:
,O-,ll ,-
."
..."......
-.........,-..-.
N
:I!? 0
0' .' 0'0
j; 0' F
e! ~. 8~
.' e: :'
.' :i:~
" "
i"~ N
, I:'
" 0'
~:
o'
. ;;e
.
0
~ c ;
.
. 0
0
" :r~
."
.-
,'0
"'.~
~.
... ."
... .
.
Z N
<( Z
.J 0
Il. <( . .
>-
Pl .J 0 .
Il. 0
Z > . .
<( ~, ~ .
z . 0
.J ~..L'.'
Il. <(
I .J o! >- Z "
.J 1110 -
. Il. ... ~ ; .. ~
~ c z..l "
. Z _:E ..
8 0 o 0( c :
0 u
" 2.~ w "
"I . . "
.;
.- Q) .
~-~
.
N .
.' .
o' 0 !
0' ,
-I .' .' r t
~~ 8' ",
." .'
, 00
~
."
0
:(1;-
o' N
~.: I'J
00 o'
'" ~:
."
o'
,0
."
___~.r':':.'=
F
- -I~-_::ri
J Iii
':
f: ~ : ;
,
r~
-~--l
- {
,~
I
L
~
j
~
I'
1';1
i';1
Iii
li,I,
1:1
~
I~
,
JJ
i
,
"
l
,
~ ~:
< ~,
z\> 0( 0
DI., L:r ,;;
~.~>-;r:."
J~ ~ 0 ;
o(,~ en .. -
~~ Z .J :.
. -,
, ~.
<
"
.
g
.
o
,
,
-,,_.
-....,......-
z
o
I-
<(
>
"'
.J
"'
0:
<(
"'
0:
l'l
Z
<(
.J
..
z
o
I-
<(
>
"'
.J
"'
I-
.J
"'
III
Z
"'
"'
0:
CI
l'l
ell
~ ih~J
~ I;!~ai
il ~ ~ ~ g i.
Ul
Z
<(
.J
..
---
z
o
I-
<(
>
"'
.J
"'
I-
"'
"'
0:
I-
Ul
z
<(
.J
..
z
9
I-
<(
>
"'
.J
"'
>-
"'
.J
.J
<(
.
z
o
>=
.
~ "
.J lit: ~
w ~.
~~ ~ ~ .:
ii" '."
w"! ~ z ~
t ~ .J ~ ~
w ~ II ~ ~
.... z.. =
CI) :c 3 .;
. .
.
z
.
"
.
,
,
L_
l'l
ell
Ul
Z
<(
.J
..
-,-.
v"",.....'..-uv..,_
/
r,
z
2
I-
<(
>
..
.J
..
0:
<(
..
0:
----:
z
o
I-
<(
>
..
.J
..
I-
..
..
0:
I-
III
z
<(
.J
..
z
o
I-
<(
>
..
.J
..
..
..
.J
.J
<(
.
z
o
;:
<
> ,
w .
" .-
w ..
IE:", <( ~ .;;
2,Ll.:
~! ti ~ ~
t, " ~ "
~ Q ~ ~ ~
('l :<3
. .
l'l
Z
<(
.J
..
"
'C
~J
0,
{J
1
I
I-.!i
r '
l'l
<l:l
.
z
~
.
w
~ ;1 :
z ... ~ . ~ e I
;:~ ~~~ >
~ ..I ~ I : ~!. ~
II- 0(;; C ~ ~~ ~j.
: it: Ss~S~~UI
U~~!~~ .
> '
, ,
III
Z
<(
.J
..
-,-
.....-,.........'''...
z
o
I-
<(
>
..
.J
..
I-
.J
..
m
z
..
..
0:
t!)
l'l
<l:l
III
Z
<(
.J
..
"
I
I
;-1.'
~-l:
"
-"
I II
I ,I'
'I -~ 1
z
o
I-
0(
>
'"
.J
'"
0:
0(
'"
0:
'"
Z
0(
.J
..
z
o
I-
0(
>
'"
.J
'"
>-
'"
.J
.J
0(
i
~ ~ ~. ~
< > I ~ ~ I:
~ Ill. -'"8 i
> -I ~.' . ~..
III <II L ill a ~ - 'i!
cr: II. ! ~ : i ~ !
" " -! ~ ii . _ .
0( 0(; . .l~ z
~~~~!I H
.J I-!~ :
8 ~: ~
'"
ell
N
Z
0(
.J
..
z
o
I-
0(
>
'"
.J
'"
I-
'"
'"
0:
I-
Ul
z
Q
I-
0(
>
'"
.J
'"
I-
.J
'"
m
z
'"
'"
0:
l!l
.
Z
o
;:
~ ,
" ,
..J :Ie -, Q
~ ~; ~
O~D.O."
ii:~ >- ~ ;
~: ~ ~ :
Oi ~" :
..... Z_
":( -:
.
N
.
Z
.
"
.
'"
ell
N
Z
0(
.J
..
-,-
.--,...........
z z
Q 0
l- I-
0( 0(
> >
Id Id
.J .J
Id Id
0: I-
0( Id
Id Id
0: 0:
l-
I/)
<t
Z N
0( Z
.J
a.. 0(
.J
a..
I.
z
o
j:
0(
>
Id
.J
Id
>-
Id
.J
.J
0(
. I
9111.. I
.~ lEI 8
ijl.a:HI
UWj!l,
, ~'Il.,l'
z - ~ ....
e~l!IIW
_ 0( ~ ~ =
&..> I
<t
III
N
Z
0(
.J
a..
'~B' ''-,'-
, .
I~.._.-
l;:..,~
z
Q
I-
0(
>
Id
.J
Id
I-
.J
Id
lD
Z
Id
Id
0:
Cl
.
z
o
>=
<
~ Ii
.J ilt:!
III 11::_
~~ ~ ~ ..
~~~'.:
5~ i 3 =
,I Z I :
: :c ~ ...
~ .
.
z
<
"
.
:
<t
III
N
Z
0(
.J
a..
-,-
...._'AlI"IIy..._
.
~
~
z~
~~
0"
~<
u_
-<
>.
~
<
~
"
!I
-
"
~
8
ODD
ODD
~dn
---"11-----
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
,,-
"
"
o DO
U~
~
[I
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
rei ":
L:I I
I;{ '):!;:'!
'i IiI.
n
CI
1:'1
'I
iI
. .
...Jl&l :. H
~:: ~:~ ~~~
>l&I~ig~dh
l&l~~~~~&8~~
~D..~~5d~~~
1&I .J j" ~ ~.., ~ ~
~~ei:8~~~~
.... l&l ~ fl: J;: ~ ~..J
~ ~...~~~~:~~
~~ :~: H~
. ..
. f.C
"
"
..
"I
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
,
,
~
Ii
".
"
"
"
ilia;!
II~
"
IlfhmIiI
IltJIIIq
II ap
,
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
_-!.L_
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
,
~~~
ATTACHMENT D
Approved Plans for Ree. Center and Ainsley Park
LENNAR COMMUNITIES
COLUMBUS SQUARE
REVISED RECREATION CENTER
PRELlMINAR Y LANDSCAPE PLANS
, "-_------4.P
~/'.._,
. - if -
J,:. --- t ' .:.'.<t"i' HERITACE
,-i~__--- ~1'"X~'~ ~ ..;~; J:
....<, ~~
--~ .- . '4
',.:(ci) ~ ~~-"-L~~"T-, '.,' w
, THEME', " -'-~4"'"r r-J....:
-I RAil HNCE' _ --<.......-/.J7'-,
CHARLESTON STREEr . ~ RESTROOM/POOl EQUIPMENT r-'-~r:
~'-i'ROOM ~l:z.z-.....,.
""<\9'1
c I '
"'- ^
~~";>8'
P-68.4
~-1
~;
e
\
)-
.L
~
-.....L,-
38,6
~
POOl
I
r~PO~
OVERHEAD STRUCTURE
t\ \!; i
-p.eB2 -~ OPEN PATIO
. rc,' if '
--r J .- E~.
^------~ ,1 i-T
~~'6~~TY~~~'-;
I ".Iil'
-::~t~:~,,~ rl,,;l' ,
-~" 1
, I,'
l I !~',
I
-0::1
'-
1,
(,'%:
~i-'
~_. -('..
.,
,,^ ,-
-""""-.
''''/~
ill,'
';I 1/.
rj/
....
20 40
Q
~
i!'~iE:'
SCAlE;r.2O'-()"
D....TE: FEBRUAA'f 21, 2008
...""
I
!:II
.;;,r
j~l.
I
:.n. 1m ~
'" i I Ii,: iI'i i: It.,
~ Ii' hl'i~ ,I, ,I q '.f~l
z Jd, '!il;ai~ II!'! 11' .,.l;;;!i
0: , 1,5 '!!;.. .~s ' 'I I' pl\!P.i
c' ~!:, lJ2!>ii~,h!!lli!L~:llill:'ni
is ~1I1 '~!i;!II:'~I'!. '''I'dl!l~,l
~ ~.!!! ~1~~:t~~~~~!!!!~~~;:I~iI~~
'.
I,!
,.
il
" III
"
"'"
'.,
~I
'"
~ " '
"IB -"<'
~~/,/ EJ
......."-
~. r/
,,3,::r'I....
~
"
-
...
''>"
,-n~.JmIIII~
--,.,..
-
........-
NUSfU 3l:M'lOS Sl'llMIf1O:>
I
II
J~
~'"
Z
0:
""
"-
(Y
o
o
-"
L
-"
~
:J
e-
U
u
e-
u
'"
0:
Ui
w
,
o
; l,l~ 'I~ 11:11 ~
~ a~p' I', 'h
';i! \" I !a
~~~R~. ~ jI ~It
c
i i,
!lId! III' ",.1 Z
" ~ ~I ' 'i!1il'
I: l;n!lI:t:i~l; ~
I i Ih:l!il'~n~'.' ~
; dll!:ot;.!II~.:ln
I.. Il ~II' ~ 11'1111
1:!i!~~ilii:..!III!
. ,On!
~,~/ ....~.;~.t,... 7"
,~,x#", l',.j~:,iJ':\i,~"~,
" .
,
CT.
nn___-_-:==,"'1 ~.
-!, ~
~ ~
/
.
. '
)B>l:
//'///'" ""'"
//'
>.,.
" "'"
" 't
~ /'
,'. ~
///
,,'
13-
-'"
--'-
i~..-. i '>-"r!l
{@ II
~@ II
,
.{r~en
< IH:
-"
D-
(}'
0
0
-"
~
co
z
<
CD
<
-"
en
-"
<
'"
:J
e-
u
''"
e-
I
u
'"
0:
'"
n
-"
CD
Z
0: :>
-" 0
D- O
(lJ '"
e-
o: Ul
-" ".
en '"
-" , .
<
"
:J D-
e- :J
U 0
w
e- w
I -"
() 0
'" 0
0: D-
I
"
\~EH
"1~6r
~<~I
~~Eh
I
Cf1
""'
"
! ' i 1111 I
I! !llid! ." I bl'
Il I,!n!h~~~!!il
II! I!'!! il'li: ~ I'!i i;
1I~lIlm 11!J;cr,1i
o
z
Cf1
Z
o
-
'"
>
""'
~
""'
:::J " .. ~" ~...". ~ ~ ",
.,.
~'!i
r
I:
I"
I
I
i
i
\
\
t
,\
\
:rn_lWlIlOOI'l'-
DDlIW.1 RllfT1Il
"""'"
fOIld013I\iII"-
NI1Snl 3HVnOS snewmo:>
1lO-~1VJJJWlIfIlIJ.N3mwd30-!SlIIl
II' ,I 1111111' ~,o
I II '.I.\.i.ll.l:
I ~ 1 IIII W!
I "1' ~l~ I '
{- )-'''--:. ""
ii
i
!
I
I
,I
.~
~"
i
~,il
-t.
.<
e,
_m;l'J"'
i
i
i1
,I,
"If.
i 1
~/1 ~ ~ ! -q ~g
"i I.d. d i I,.~ 'I
o l .I~. !!! i! h; Ii!.
70 - ~,I.~" IAi~ ,h
. I 'I'" '" .
vJe. -. taw ii
Ll 01 ,lI II i'o~ u'
9~ Ill' iI' -'lin:!lI';'!
u" I; ~ _ ~ ~ I t
~~Qtlii; ~:~.~~~I~~~!~i
, ,-~!
i"
"
/
(
I
I
,
I.
I~
I
i
,
P:
I'
~ili
-it;.
--TO"
-
,.
~B
e
I .-
E.E~,
EE
t E
o:J,"
EE'"
11II
III
-- \
i~
,
~ ..i}
,~
b
'.
~
"
"
<
u
~
'"
VI
;7
C
I
""
>
u.
c:
lY
o
rY
u.
e-
x
u.
.;;
vo
;7
C
e-
t)
"
v:
'"
c
cc
:5
C
C
lY
,
VI
U.
lY
"
oJ) rl
o
u.
<5
o
n
"
6~Er
.i~~
"!hi!
~"
O'
..
i
~ I ' I
(f>;" !~ll I
L..J P ,~ I
~ i q j .j! Ilq
v I 11'- 1.111111
: iI~1I51:! j:B
!;.. ,. - .. . - ~ . .....,
~
:m_____
_..,~
II'
--=
NIlSfU 3YVnos snewmoo
'"
:5
CY
C.
f
X
I,'
C.
"'
cO
T
cc
C
~
".
,
"
"
<
~
"'
z
CJ
e-
<:
>
c.
LC
1
I
i
I
1
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
1
.'-'
_1~E~f.
~, I
- ,; .
j~
..
I I
, I ill i Ii
! I 'I 'II !;;! i;
-II ~',' i'~ ,oi
~.. i'~lf~~~~!!!i'
il~ ~i ftl i~~,~~J
!I: !~! li:!!! !Iia ~ I
; ill. Ill! h , ~,~ 8311
. . ~ 0 .. ." ~ ~" . .
. ,
. ti"l" I!
~ 1 ,!I: I! ,Ii I Ii
\i i din',; ll~ II !iI
I 111",1,.1.. ,," elitE
L ~l ,- ',llll":' 1"1 !lIli'.
<( ~ ',11,1' "I i'I, Ii . I
0" ;did i!I:!:ill~'il91:lli!1
6 ~!l1I i,ll :iill1i 1'1 'I \'Ii I ! "
g ~ I!!!.i. ~I~~:dl~b ~;I~i ~~.! ~!.
L . ,j
~t-
, ,
! !
i
I
:m_..._'-
_11>>.,......
-
.....---
Nllsm 3HYnOS snSWnlOO
1.I~tT!11'-G1
: '.,1..1 n
"
07"~
.'
,!b' \S,,@ l! ~
-.~.i '<t
"I'~ :---
" .. ,16 I
Iliiil "-'" ,I ~
J~.II V1
pEJ
I
I
,
I j>-
:. ~~
,
, 1
'Ji
;-',J;
'YII
-~
~ ,
Iii
S1~
~i
=
@
z
<(
-"
Q.
<r
o
o
,
"
w
U1
::>
o
T
CIl
::>
-"
l)
: i
I
, I
~
I'
ii
,. ~
Bel
I!
g==rB
,I
1
,'" 8
" "
".
'0'
"
....1
~
";:,;
"
Ii
1
:~!
i:r:
.i.-
~
',,, -f
, ~;
~
'<
,;
I"
I
!
''''
~
-93
hi
m~
""
: I
llr-:,~
"
" l
III
II
8
'~
, i
1 8
......
"
"O-'!',
,. "
'"
!
I '
,
'~I I
~: I
! !
,
---"
"(L'
,
;i~
n
''''
';!
.,o~ ,~'-
.,q ,'11
~
~'
-;:;:"
mIl
---"rrI"--C'-t'rI-- rrJ--
-~,
___________...............................1
~ ! ,
~
l
~ !
.
I~I
mm:J
i
;
LJ
.._~
1
o
~
Jra :C f ~
I
i
I~ I
d~
@ ~ ~ Ii ~
"I~i!
, '
~
~
, '
\,1...,.,
I I
I
I
~
~
....
i. ~..
Iii
,
,-~ " ~ ~.-. 0 " 11
l!l 2 Ii! i ~
i. e ~ ~ I'.
~ ~ Ii
~ I
I
I,
. ,
i I
:~ID
:i_
.'
! :~
--'lrll
lC' --.J1:L.....dJ
;" .
! ~
lJ ,.,.
.H-,olt 11
1 - ~ , "",,,10,0 tl ~-.u..,-,. ~ ..
. . I i ~ II
i I I ~ ~ Ii
I I: ,
!
I:
I
I
"
~
~
~8
z-
~::>"
~~<!:
-'-Q
Q.Z:::!
"'::>
0.,
...
::;
~
-t
-;
z8
<'"
"'I:"
z~z
<10&-25
~~=
u;l
tIJ
I-
Z
~
...
~
~
~~
-::>"
Z"z
;:S:Sc
cr..z:
"'::>
0.,
...
6
~ '.:J
BL:.
IF-! I
z8
;~~
;:St:c
"'::i=
u;l
I
I
I
1
~
;:5
...
--......-..m.' ..". ".'
--
- n_
-" -----
, .
- .--
'I--~- -- .
--
l;c =--
, ' rE.u'~"I'1
,i ~
L....\.r-'~ :1 '--,
" f-~l~l~b' f
i [-I t.; ,,-'1'~
'1-1 J.o".i:::'.~lll'
: i ;~,L -ee,
'['""f~'~L
11,1 ~ , iH~Cj ] I'
jjr[i'!+.n_1
,I "\')'
I.,.'~cl' ~,"
'll....- "
l' 1'"
cl,f:! I.lff H=rlD
'+k, , t I::tLJ
, EBJD
/
~
~8
_:z",
:zi~
::S<~
..-0
:z....
",-
o::l
~..
:;
~
c';;=1~:--~:_ c"-1,:q
.t: J~~Ji"
"e,,-f-f.C1"1
-.r' ",1
~"I'-;'jIU
r_,__ -I rfol
t-'
" 1
'1 I
" I
I,
III!I ! I
:z8
",<'"
:z~"
:5t:~
":i~
u::l
..
III i
II !
l;;:
::J
o
u
lfi
u.I
""
~
:z8
",<'"
:zX"
:5E~
o..;;S~
u::l
..
~
~8
_:z",
:zi~
::S<~
..-0
:z....
",-
O::l
~..
~
>-
u.I
....
....
..(
~
~
!a
c_
_ r--:-c-:----:- _
=- --~~ -- ~~c::- --_
, - -
: I~
,C
mmm
[[]
~
3:
9
<8
~-
"'::l"
Z"'z
<<-
~-Q
A.Z:::!
""::l
0",
~
:l
<5
'''~l
~
,I
,I i!
z8
..~;;
Zj;;Z
::5<9
.....-
u~
~
::s
8
z
l.Ll
l.Ll
IX
\.,)
re=1l
~
1.,1,.
!:
Ii,
Ii:
I
, I
'II
z8
<-
":I:"
Z~Z
<....-
....l~Q
"':i=
U~
~
~8
Z_
"'::l"
z"'z
::5:SiS
A..Z::!
~i
~
:l
<5
~
-l
-l
<(
.~,""
" Sl ........'-,9 " ,,",!:l:
~ I ..",;;:,-~~ - -- -- 11 """'"'j :1 t
. ~, oI,IJ..'~. ,
"' II
I ~I . I
~; ! I, ~ I ~ I!' ~
. ~ I .
II ~ I 0 I ~ ! ~I !~
II d 'i
: I I
I'
I.,
I' '
j:1 -I
"'11
'~~.
1:IUj
I (
~B
\
! 11,
'.II'W.I'....'.'il
1:- ,,- ,
'II '1" I
'1,11,11,
,'1,1 I' ,
I ~. , "i
"1' [, :, ,I
II " 1 ~" : ':
" 'ii :';,
I-
;Z
~
i I.L.
l i I ~ ~
I I ~ ~ .
~
z8
"'I:-
z~"
:st::~
o..;:i;l
U::J
..
8i~!i
"
Be::' ,J
....8
",<'"
z:z"
:sg~
cr..o9
u-
::J
..
! g"':-ILJ
II EHfF' _I ITJ:
, "
. '
z8
-~'"
z~"
::St::~
o..;:i;l
uil
....8
".<-
z:Z"
::sg~
cr..o9
uS
..
~
IX
~
P=11
~
"1111
1i.1:
:!I
ii',!!
1"1'
,. I
,
Ii
:z8
;~::;
<~2:;
.......'"
o..:.i=
U::l
..
....~
<-
"I-I..:
:z:z_
.to~
oJ .... c
~8E
ii
:,1
, 'TI Dill},
"
....8
",<'"
:z:z<.:l
.to:!':
oJ....'"
0..0....
U5
..
:z~
-:S ~
:z ~ -
~ I; ~
A. a ~
ii
~
::::l
o
U
Z
LLI
LLI
""
I.::l
~
....I
....I
<(
ATTACHMENT E
Submitted Revision to Affordable Housing Plan
E E E ~
0 E 0
0 0 0 0
0 ~ E e -6
-6 E E 0 ." ~
~ .Q ~ .Q
.Q :t ~ 0 e .Q ~
0 e ." 0 ~
~ €. "0 "0 ~ ~ ~
~ ~ .Q
.Q .Q :t
M 0 0 N M
C c ! ! ~ c c
~ ~ ~ ~
a: a: N M a: a:
c c c ,
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0 0 a: a: a: ... ...
-' -' W W
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "0 "0
:1' :1' 0 0 0 0
-' -' -' ::; ::;
.. N "' M '" '" ..
DIDIDi]1
(.JJ
==:> L...L.....I
=<::::>0:::::
:::;:E ....::c:
==:> ==:>
o s;;r
~
z
w~
0:: a.
<(UJ
J f-;;
-Ill
a(/)~
(J) f- ~~
-I-(J)
(J) Z Ll~
JJh
1-0
a1 UJ ~~
" .J I-Ll
lI::: m ~
J ~~
.J 0 I-
O~
U~
lL
~
r
.',r_,."_,,,,""'"'.''''_''''''' ,,'"., """.,,,,,,,, _."",..." ",-,""',""
j!! i I if 11j, ~~ i:1Il1l1
! ~ Ii: Iiiil . 'I"" I
: _ -" I' i~,!:; ~ I I
,_ - _,l"
II( ~ ;; ~ _ ~ Q i!l t;
~
,L
f: !
.!i; ~ J
]f f
~ ~
<
U
"
u
(,i ::I
t~ j I
> 1 . ~
~ ~ ?J -Iii
~ ~ "~ ~
~ ~ l< ~
~ "
~ i
u
II
I'
!>
'1
"
I
I
-CO:NNE~r6~
-It
il
r~
Ii l I!
"l ~ ;: ~ ~ .
II., ! ! I
!II~ ~ ~ bbb
" !
! . !
i! I !! I !
Ii' ,!! I
IIHI! II!
I I
~L
i ..; ~
. o'P-o
. ~,
~~c.,.,..yJ>f-
~~.
~i' '
w--_.
",' :
<Ji I I
I
I"
'"
I
c..
U
"
"
.;
~~
we
ZI
~g,
..~
"e
zo
C5
....;=
~..
i~
~ "g
me
!1lg
lE'2
o
c
c
3
ATTACHMENT F
Submitted Revision to Senior Housing Phasing Plan
..
~
~~
~t,)
~~
~~
~~
8
II
I
----------------------- ~ -;
------ -II"
---- .--.:;a--"
]/A _ ~ ..
"~3NNO' ~. I
a --- \ a
- .,.- ~
.
! (
,''' ---
' '- ---
! --
j
i
i
i
!
!
!
!
!
!
...1
:::>:
~!
-.:'
!
!
i
i
!
i
;j
~J
"'!
i
i
I
I
--
; ; : i I : i i ,.
f'll
;;(
1,1
J
"l
.../1
I I
I' :
II . ..1
-T
i i
!
Ii i
~ I I g
Ii -~'! .~'
'" 5 III IIIII
u.
~
~ I_ m.
Q.; "
I
iiiH
DilDO
lliiii
DDDCI
ATTACHMENT G
Resolution No. 4025
ATTACHMENT G
Planning Commission Resolution No. 4025
RESOLUTION NO. 4025
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING
PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO DESIGN REVIEW
APPLICATIONS 04-004 AND 04-006 FOR AINSLEY PARK AND
COLUMBUS SQUARE RECREATION CENTER AND
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DENY PROPOSED
MODIFICATIONS TO TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS 16581 TO
REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE RECREATION CENTER, AND
RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE
RELOCATION OF AN AFFORDABLE UNIT AND AN AMENDMENT
TO SENIOR HOUSING PHASING PLAN TO ALLOW COMPLETE
CONSTRUCTION WITHIN FIVE (5) PHASES INCLUDING THE
MODEL HOMES AND BUILD-OUT FOR THE PROJECTS
LOCATED IN PLANNING AREAS 4, 5 AND 21 OF MCAS TUSTIN
KNOWN AS COLUMBUS SQUARE AND COLUMBUS GROVE
I. The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby find as follows:
A. An application was filed by Lennar Homes on behalf of Moffett Meadows
Partners on May 3, 2006, to modify Design Review applications 04-004
and 04-006, Tentative Tract Maps 16581 and 16582 and Affordable
Housing Plan to simplify the architectural design of Ainsley Park cluster
units, reduce the size of the Columbus Square recreation center from 5,467
to 3,765 square feet and simplify the architectural design, defer completion
of the Columbus Square recreation center from the 420th building permit
to the 950th building permit, relocate an affordable unit in Camden Place
from a model home site to a phase one production unit, and revise the
phasing plan for senior housing to eight (8) construction phases for the
project sites located within planning Area 4,5 and 21 of MCAS Tustin.
B. The properties are located at the southwest comer of Edinger Avenue and
West Connector and Harvard Avenue south of Moffett Avenue within
Planning Areas 4, 5 and 21 of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan designated as
Low Density and Medium Density Residential and the MCAS Tustin
Planned Community General Plan land use designation.
C. Low density and Medium density residential development is permitted in
Planning Areas 4, 5, and 21 of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and the
proposed amendments will not modify the approved uses.
D. On February 22, 2005, the City Council approved the site and
architectural design of 1,077 residential units in Columbus Square and
465 units in Columbus Grove with adoption of Resolutions 05-37 and 05-
40.
E. A public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly noticed and held
on June 26, 2006.
Resolution No. 4025
Page 3
The Planning Commission is recommending that the City Council approve a
revision to Condition 2.2 of Resolution No. 05-40 to defer the requirement
for completion of the recreation center from prior to issuance of the 420111
building permit to prior to final inspection of the 420111 residential unit to allow
the developer more time for construction of the Columbus Square
recreation center.
J. An amendment to the affordable housing plan to relocate an affordable
housing unit (Low income) within a multiple family product (Camden
Place) in Columbus Square from a proposed model home unit to a
production unit in phase one was requested.
The Planning Commission is recommending that the City Council approve
the proposed relocation of an affordable unit from a model home unit in
Camden Place to phase one so that this unit is available for occupancy
upon completion.
K. An amendment to the phasing plan of Columbus Square to allow
construction of the senior housing project in eight (8) phases instead of
the approved three (3) phases was requested.
The Planning Commission is recommending that the City Council deny
the proposed phasing plan with eight (8) phases since this revision could
negatively impact the Planning Commission and City Council's original
intent that the entire project site be developed concurrently. The senior
housing project includes 63 percent of the required affordable housing for
the Villages of Columbus, and it is essential that the construction of these
units be accomplished proportionately with construction of the market rate
units. Given that this site will have a late start, eight (8) phases of
construction could lead to a major delay in delivering the affordable
housing units and defeat the original intent of the project's phasing. As a
compromise, the Planning Commission is recommending that the City
Council approve an amendment that would allow construction of minimum
two structures concurrently for a total of five (5) phases including models
and built-out to allow the developer additional time and lead the project
toward completion within a reasonable time.
L. When the comprehensive developments were presented to the Planning
Commission and the City Council for a recommended action, the
recommendation was based on a comprehensive proposal which also
included variations from the required standards. In summary, these
development projects received many allowances so that quality and livable
communities would be developed to accommodate a variety of households.
These allowances included the following:
. Specific Plan Amendments that ailowed for new development
standards for a new product type (carriage way units);
. Reduced rear yard setbacks for carriage way units;
Resolution No. 4025
Page 5
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
CITY OF TUSTIN )
I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning
Commission Secretary of the City of Tustin, Califomia; that Resolution No. 4025
was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning
Commission, held on the 2611\ day of June, 2006.
?2;"L,;t',AL?; ~- Ai-..
ELIZABETH A. BINSACK
Planning Commission Secretary
ATTACHMENT H
City Council Resolution No. 06-82
Resolution No. 06-82
Reflecting Planning Commission Recommendations
RESOLUTION NO. 06-82
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL DENYING: THE PROPOSED
ARCHITECTURAL MODIFICATIONS TO AINSLEY PARK; DENYING
THE PROPOSED SIMPLIFICATION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL
DESIGN AND REDUCTION IN SIZE OF THE COLUMBUS SQUARE
RECREATION CENTER; APPROVING THE RELOCATION OF AN
AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT; DENYING AN AMENDMENT TO THE
PHASING PLAN FOR SENIOR HOUSING TO ALLOW COMPLETE
CONSTRUCTION WITHIN EIGHT PHASES BUT APPROVING A
MODIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE SENIOR HOUSING
PROJECT WITHIN FIVE PHASES INCLUDING THE MODEL HOMES
AND BUILD-OUT; AND DENYING DEFERRAL OF THE COMPLETION
OF THE RECREATION CENTER FROM PRIOR TO THE 420TH
BUILDING PERMIT TO PRIOR TO THE 950TH BUILDING PERMIT BUT
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION 05-40 FOR
DEFERRAL TO PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION OF THE 420TH
RESIDENTIAL UNIT FOR THE PROJECTS LOCATED IN PLANNING
AREAS 4, 5 AND 21 OF MCAS TUSTIN KNOWN AS COLUMBUS
SQUARE AND COLUMBUS GROVE (TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS 16581,
165852 AND DESIGN REVIEW 04-004 AND 04-006)
I. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows:
A. An application was filed by Lennar Homes on behalf of Moffett Meadows
Partners on May 3,2006, to modify Tentative Tract Maps 16581 and 16582
and Affordable Housing Plan to reduce the size of the Columbus Square
recreation center from 5.467 to 3,765 square feet and simplify the
architectural design, defer completion of the Columbus Square recreation
center from the 420th building permit to the 950th building permit, relocate an
affordable unit in Camden Place from a model home site to a phase one
production unit, and revise the phasing plan for senior housing to eight (8)
construction phases for the project sites located within planning Area 4, 5
and 21 of MCAS Tustin. An amendment to revise the architectural design of
the Ainsley Park duplex product to simplify the structures so that the same
architecture is carried out on both residences was requested by the
applicant.
B. The properties are located at the southwest corner of Edinger Avenue and
West Connector and Harvard Avenue south of Moffett Avenue within
Planning Areas 4, 5 and 21 of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan designated as
Low Density and Medium Density Residential and the MCAS Tustin
Planned Community General Plan land use designation.
C. Low density and Medium density residential development are permitted in
Planning Areas 4, 5, and 21 of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and the
proposed amendments will not modify the approved uses.
Exhibit A
Resolution No. 06-82
Lennar's Amendments
Page 2
D. On February 22, 2005, the City Council approved the site and
architectural design of 1,077 residential units in Columbus Square and
465 units in Columbus Grove with adoption of Resolutions 05-37 and 05-
40.
E. A public hearing was duly noticed and held by the Planning Commission
on June 26, 2006, and by the City Council on July 3, 2006.
F. An amendment to revise the architectural design of the Ainsley Park duplex
product to simplify the structures so that the same architecture is carried out
on both residences was requested by the applicant.
The City Council denies the requested revisions and directs the applicant to
work with staff to provide a compatible design for Ainsley Park that suits the
approved dominant architectural styles within the community and continues
to provide distinctive character for both units.
G. An amendment to reduce the approved size of the recreation building for
Columbus Square from 5,467 square feet to 3,765 square feet was
requested and simplify the architectural design with removing the towers
and decorative parapets.
The City Council denies the proposed architectural revisions and denies the
proposed modifications to reduce the size of the Columbus Square
recreation center since the center should accommodate a variety of uses
and conflicting events, and if approved the recreation center at Columbus
Square (a community of 835 total units including 552 multiple family units
with no private yards) would be approximately 1,300 square feet smaller
than the recreation center at Columbus Grove (a community of 465 homes
including 279 single family homes with private backyards). Considering that
there are 835 single family and multiple family residential units in
Columbus Square, the community would not benefit from a smaller sized
community center.
H. An amendment to Condition 2.2 of Resolution No. 05-40 of Tentative
Tract Map 16581 (Columbus Square) to defer completion of the required
recreation center from prior to issuance of the 420lh building permit to prior
to the issuance of the 950th building permit was requested.
The City Council hereby denies the request to defer construction of the
Columbus Square recreation center prior to the issuance of the 950th
building permit but approves an amendment to Condition 2.2 of Resolution
No. 05-40 to defer the requirement of completing the recreation center from
prior to issuance of the 420111 building permit to prior to the 420th final
inspection of residential units.
Exhibit A
Resolution No. 06-82
Lennar's Amendments
Page 3
I. An amendment to the affordable housing plan to relocate an affordable
housing unit (Low income) within a multiple family product (Camden
Place) in Columbus Square from a proposed model home unit to a
production unit in phase one was requested.
The City Council hereby approves the proposed modifications to relocate
an affordable from the Camden Place model home complex to a Phase
One production unit.
J. An amendment to the phasing plan of Columbus Square to allow
construction of the senior housing project in eight (8) phases instead of
the approved three (3) phases was requested.
The City Council denies the proposed phasing plan with eight (8) phases
since this revision could negatively impact the Planning Commission and
City Council's original intent that the entire project site be developed
concurrently. The senior housing project includes 63 percent of the
required affordable housing for the Villages of Columbus, and it is
essential that the construction of these units be accomplished
proportionately with construction of the market rate units. Given that this
site will have a late start, eight (8) phases of construction could lead to a
major delay in delivering the affordable housing units and defeat the
original intent of the project's phasing. As a compromise, the City Council
approves an amendment that would allow construction of minimum two
structures concurrently for a total of five (5) phases including models and
built-out to allow the developer additional time and lead the project toward
completion within a reasonable time.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 3rd
day of July, 2006.
DOUG DA VERT
MAYOR
PAMELA STOKER
CITY CLERK
Exhibit A
Resolution No. 06-82
Lennar's Amendments
Page 4
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE) SS
CITY OF TUSTIN )
I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin,
California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of
the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 06-82 was duly
passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 3rd day
of July, 2006, by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
PAMELA STOKER
CITY CLERK
Resolution No. 06-82
Reflecting Staff Recommendations
RESOLUTION NO. 06-82
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL DENYING: THE PROPOSED
MODIFICATIONS TO AINSLEY PARK, THE SIMPLIFICATION OF THE
ARCHITECTURE AND REDUCTION OF THE SIZE OF THE COLUMBUS
SQUARE RECREATION CENTER, DEFERRAL OF CONSTRUCTION
OF THE RECREATION CENTER UNTIL THE 950lh BUILDING PERMIT,
THE RELOCATION OF AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT; AND AN
AMENDMENT TO THE PHASING PLAN FOR THE SENIOR HOUSING
PROJECT TO EIGHT PHASES BUT APPROVING THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT WITHIN FIVE
PHASES FOR THE PROJECTS LOCATED IN PLANNING AREAS 4, 5
AND 21 OF MCAS TUSTIN KNOWN AS COLUMBUS SQUARE AND
COLUMBUS GROVE (TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS 16581, 165852 AND
DESIGN REVIEW 04-004 AND 04-006)
I. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows:
A. An application was filed by Lennar Homes on behalf of Moffett Meadows
Partners on May 3, 2006, to modify Tentative Tract Maps 16581 and
16582 and Affordable Housing Plan to reduce the size of the Columbus
Square recreation center from 5,467 to 3,765 square feet and simplify the
architectural design, defer completion of the Columbus Square recreation
center from the 420th building permit to the 950th building permit, relocate
an affordable unit in Camden Place from a model home site to a phase
one production unit, and revise the phasing plan for senior housing to
eight (8) construction phases for the project sites located within planning
Area 4, 5 and 21 of MCAS Tustin. An amendment to revise the Ainsley
Park architectural design of this duplex product to simplify the structures
so that the same architecture is carried out on both residences was also
requested by the applicant.
B. The properties are located at the southwest corner of Edinger Avenue and
West Connector and Harvard Avenue south of Moffett Avenue within
Planning Areas 4, 5 and 21 of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan designated as
Low Density and Medium Density Residential and the MCAS Tustin
Planned Community General Plan land use designation.
C. Low density and Medium density residential development are permitted in
Planning Areas 4, 5, and 21 of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and the
proposed amendments will not modify the approved uses.
D. On February 22, 2005, the City Council approved the site and
architectural design of 1,077 residential units in Columbus Square and
465 units in Columbus Grove with adoption of Resolutions 05-37 and 05-
40.
E. A public hearing was duly noticed and held by the Planning Commission
on June 26, 2006, and by the City Council on July 3, 2006.
Exhibit A
Resolution No. 06-82
Lennar's Amendments
Page 2
F. An amendment to revise the architectural design of the Ainsley Park duplex
product to simplify the structures so that the same architecture is carried out
on both residences was also requested by the applicant.
The City Council denies the requested revisions and directs the applicant to
work with staff to provide a compatible design for Ainsley Park that suits the
approved dominant architectural styles within the community and continues
to provide distinctive character for both units.
G. An amendment to reduce the approved size of the recreation building for
Columbus Square from 5,467 square feet to 3,765 square feet was
requested and simplify the architectural design with removing the towers
and decorative parapets.
The City Council denies the proposed architectural revisions and denies the
proposed modifications to reduce the size of the Columbus Square
recreation center since the center should accommodate a variety of uses
and conflicting events, and if approved the recreation center at Columbus
Square (a community of 835 total units including 552 multiple family units
with no private yards) would be approximately 1,300 square feet smaller
than the recreation center at Columbus Grove (a community of 465 homes
including 279 single family homes with private backyards). Considering that
there are 835 single family and multiple family residential units in
Columbus Square, the community would not benefit from a smaller size
community center.
H. An amendment to Condition 2.2 of Resolution No. 05-40 of Tentative
Tract Map 16581 (Columbus Square) to defer completion of the required
recreation center from prior to issuance of the 420lh building permit to prior
to the 950lh building permit was requested.
The City Council hereby denies the request to amend Condition 2.2 of
Resolution No. 05-40 to defer the requirement of completing the Columbus
Square recreation center from prior to issuance of the 42010 building permit
to prior to the 950th building permit.
The City Council determined that linking the threshold to final inspections
could impact future homeowners desiring to move into their new home. The
City Council may consider granting additional time in the future pending the
expression of a good faith effort by the developer to construct the approved
recreational building prior to the expiration of the current 420th building
permit deadline.
I. An amendment to the affordable housing plan to relocate an affordable
housing unit (Low income) within a multiple family product (Camden
Place) in Columbus Square from a proposed model home unit to a
production unit in phase one was requested.
Exhibit A
Resolution No. 06-82
Lennar's Amendments
Page 3
The City Council hereby denies the request to relocate an affordable from
the Camden Place model home complex to Phase One of the production
unit but directs the applicant to work with staff to administratively permit
the relocation once a replacement unit is constructed and sold to an
affordable family.
J. An amendment to the phasing plan for Columbus Square to allow
construction of the senior housing project in eight (8) phases instead of
the approved three (3) phases was requested.
The City Council denies the proposed phasing plan with eight (8) phases
since this revision could negatively impact the Planning Commission and
City Council's original intent that the entire project site be developed
concurrently. The senior housing project includes 63 percent of the
required affordable housing for the Villages of Columbus, and it is
essential that the construction of these units be accomplished
proportionately with construction of the market rate units. Given that this
site will have a late start, eight (8) phases of construction could lead to a
major delay in delivering the affordable housing units and defeat the
original intent of the project's phasing. As a compromise, the City Council
approves an amendment that would allow construction of minimum two
structures concurrently for a total of five (5) phases including models and
built-out to allow the developer additional time and lead the project toward
completion within a reasonable time.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 3rd
day of July, 2006.
DOUG DA VERT
MAYOR
PAMELA STOKER
CITY CLERK
Exhibit A
Resolution No. 06-82
Lennar's Amendments
Page 4
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE) SS
CITY OF TUSTIN )
I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin,
California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of
the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 06-82 was duly
passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 3rd day
of July, 2006, by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
PAMELA STOKER
CITY CLERK