To: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
From: Vincent Smith, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Michael Allen, Senior Planner
TITLE:
Title
Harvest Village II
LABEL
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Recommendation
(1) Approve, pursuant to the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Harvest Village Project, first reading and introduction of an ordinance approving a Zoning Amendment to Ordinance O2016-4, (PD-35) Planned Development Overlay District modifying development standards for Harvest Village II at 804 Capitola Drive and direct staff to file a Notice of Determination; and
(2) Adopt, pursuant to the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Harvest Village Project, a resolution approving a Design Review Permit for a Subdivision Map and House Plans and a Tentative Map to subdivide an approximately 1.35-acre property into nine (9) single-family residential lots at 804 Capitola and direct staff to file a Notice of Determination.
Body
DISCUSSION:
The Applicant, Harvest Village, LLC (Beth Farley), requests approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map and Design Review Permit to subdivide an approximately 1.35-acre property into 9 single-family residential lots, a Design Review Permit for the house plans each of which include an attached accessory dwelling unit (ADU), and an amendment to the Planned Development Overlay (PD-35) that had been approved for a prior 9 lot subdivision at the project site. A complete project description is provided in Attachment 5, Project Description, and is summarized below under “Project Description.” The proposed subdivision is located at 804 Capitola Drive, as shown in Figure 1 of Attachment 9, Planning Commission report, which is the site containing an existing home.
Pursuant to Napa Municipal Code (“NMC”) Sections 16.12.010(A) and 17.62.050, an application for a design review permit is required for subdivisions of five or more lots. In conjunction with the application for design review of the subdivision, the Applicant is required to provide home designs for consideration. These physical improvements are subject to review by the City Council. Further, pursuant to NMC Sections 17.42.090 and 17.66.010, a zoning amendment is required to modify a Planned Development.
SITE CONTEXT AND HISTORY
The Project site is located on the eastside of Capitola Drive at the intersection of Capitola Drive and Capitola Court. The property slopes towards Capitola Drive with the eastern-portion of the site approximately 21 feet higher than the western-portion of the site. The site had been developed with a 1,164 square foot single-family home and a 300 square foot shed. However, the home was demolished in 2016 after approval of the previous project (Harvest Village I), but the shed remains. Surrounding uses are exclusively single-family residential.
In 2016, the Planning Commission and City Council approved Harvest Village Subdivision (PL15-0110) on the subject property allowing for a 9-lot subdivision, which subsequently expired on March 15, 2020, following a two-year extension (PL18-0004) from the original date of approval. For informational purposes only, the previous layout is shown on Figure 2 of Attachment 9, “Previously Approved Project”. As part of that approval, Planned Development Overlay (PD-35) was approved allowing special development standards, which remain in effect given that a Planned Development is a zoning action that runs with the land (i.e. does not expire).
ANALYSIS
A. General Plan
The property is located within the Low Density Residential General Plan Designation of the Napa 2040 General Plan. The Low-Density Residential designation consists of single-family residential development with densities ranging from 3.0 to 8.0 units per gross acre. This designation is mainly intended for detached single-family dwellings, but attached single-family units may be permitted, provided each unit has ground-floor living area and private outdoor open space. Mobile homes, and compatible uses such as residential care
facilities are permitted. The proposed single-family residential subdivision provides for a residential density of approximately 6.7 dwelling units per gross acre, and could be found to be compatible with adjacent residential uses in the surrounding area and consistent with the following goals outlined in the Napa 2040 General Plan:
• Policy LUCD 6-2 Promote a diversity of compatible land uses throughout the City to enable people to live close to job locations, have adequate and convenient commercial services, and enjoy public amenities and services such as transit, parks, trails, and schools.
• Goal LUCD 10 Enhance the City’s character and image as a desirable residential, active, and sustainable community, and celebrate the diversity of residents.
• Policy LUCD 10-1 Preserve the character of existing residential neighborhoods while promoting “complete neighborhoods” with safe and convenient access to the goods and services needed for daily life.
B. Zoning / Planned Development Overly Amendment (PD-35)
The property is located within the RI 5, Single-Family Infill Zoning District, which requires a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet. RI areas include subdivisions typically with regular lot patterns, varied designs, and a limited mix of unit types. Single-family detached developments are permitted within the RI 5 Zoning District. Pursuant to NMC Section 17.62.050, subdivisions of five or more lots require home designs to be submitted with the application for design review of the subdivision. The design review permit is subject to the review and approval of City Council. Further analysis is discussed below in this report.
In addition to the RI 5 zoning, the project has a Planned Development Overlay (PD-35) that was adopted with the former project which has now expired (PL15-0110) Harvest Village I). The PD Overlay District provides for variations to development standards such as setbacks, yards, height, parking, and lot area. The purposes of the PD Overlay District are to: (a) Encourage high quality, innovative, and creative development design, and possibilities for varied or mixed-uses consistent with the General Plan, by allowing flexibility in underlying zoning standards; and (b) Provide a mechanism for preservation of open space, natural, or historic features while continuing to permit efficient use of land.
Although the entitlements for the former project have expired and are no longer in effect, the PD-35 remains an active zoning “overlay” designation (see PD-35 Ordinance, Attachment 4). The previous subdivision proposed a non-standard lot configuration which necessitated variations in the RI-5 development standards. The following are the variations to the RI-5 standards permitted by PD-35 which currently remain in effect for the subject property.
1. Minimum Lot Size - PD-35 reduced from 5,000 square feet to 4,607 square feet.
The private street has been incorporated into each lot thereby eliminating a 10th “common area parcel” that negates the need for a homeowner association. Typically, the street area even if part of the parcel would not count for lot size, but the original PD approval allowed for it. Therefore, all proposed lots meet or exceed the PD-35 minimum lot size of 4,607 square feet so no modification to this standard is requested.
2. Lot Width - PD-35 reduced from 50 feet to 47 feet.
Section 17.08.030 (Zoning District Standards) of the Zoning Ordinance establishes a minimum lot width of 50 feet. All proposed lots exceed 47 feet so no modification to this standard is requested.
3. Front Setback - RI-5 and PD-35 provides for a 20-foot front setback.
Section 17.08.030 (Zoning District Standards) of the Zoning Ordinance and PD-35 establishes a minimum front setback of 20 feet. The Project seeks amendment to PD-35 to allow a 15-foot front setback for Lot 9. All other lots provide a 20-foot setback.
4. Side Setback - PD-35 reduced from 15 feet to 10 feet (Capitola Drive; Lot 1).
Section 17.08.030 (Zoning District Standards) of the Zoning Ordinance establishes a setback of 15 feet from a side property line that is located adjacent to a street. PD-35 established a side setback of 10 feet. Lot 1, the only lot with a street side, provides a 10-foot side setback, therefore no modification to PD-35 is required.
5. Side Yard - PD-35 reduced from 5 feet / 10 feet to 5 feet / 5 feet.
Section 17.08.030 (Zoning District Standards) of the Zoning Ordinance establishes a side yard of 5 feet along one side property line and 10 feet on the opposite side property line. The side yard is allowed at 5 feet on both side property lines by PD-35. All lots provide 5 feet on both sides or greater so no modification to PD-35 is required.
6. Rear Yard - reduction from 20 feet to 15 feet.
Section 17.08.030 (Zoning District Standards) of the Zoning Ordinance establishes a rear yard of 20 feet, however PD-35 established a 15-foot rear yard. All proposed lots provide 15-foot rear yards or greater, so no modification is requested.
7. Guest Parking - guest parking credited on Capitola Drive frontage (Lots 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8 only).
This variation is unnecessary for Harvest Village II which provides guest parking for each home on the new private street and Capitola Drive. This variation is no longer necessary so it will be removed from PD-35.
8. Parking in Setback - accessory second unit and guest parking may be located within the side setback (Lots 4 and 5 only).
This standard is no longer needed for the Project as accessory second units no longer require additional parking spaces and the project does not provide parking within a setback other than on a driveway, so it will be removed from PD-35.
9. Sidewalks - PD-35 eliminated a detached sidewalk on a private street.
New single-family subdivisions that take access from a new private street are required to comply with the Pedestrian-Friendly Street Standards. Subsection 17.52.360.C.2 (Site and Use Regulations) of the Zoning Ordinance requires a four-foot sidewalk separated from the street by a six-foot landscape area. PD-35 allows a curb adjacent sidewalk, therefore the curb adjacent sidewalk proposed by the Project is consistent with PD-35.
10. Curb-Adjacent Landscape Areas - publicly-accessible, landscaped central courtyard in-lieu of curb adjacent landscape area adjacent to private street.
This standard applied to the previous development’s configuration with homes surrounding a central courtyard area and is no longer necessary and will be removed.
11. Fence within Setback - maximum fence height of four feet within the front setback and side setback permitted for a fence of a hog wire frame design (or similar open-paneled fence design).
This was specific to the former project but may be of use to the new project, so it shall remain.
12. Fence within Visibility Area - maximum fence height of four feet within the 10-foot visibility area permitted for a fence of a hog wire frame design (or similar open-paneled fence design).
Notes:
A. Gross square footage includes private street; and
B. Setbacks measured from back of sidewalk on Capitola Drive and edge of private street.
This was specific to the former project but may be of use to the new project, so it shall remain.
Table 1 in the Planning Commission staff report, Attachment 9 shows the PD-35 development standards compared to the proposed project (variations bolded and underlined).
C. Design Review
Pursuant to NMC Sections 16.12.010(A) and 17.62.050, an application for a Design Review Permit is required for subdivisions of five or more lots. In conjunction with the application for design review of the subdivision, the Applicant is required to provide home designs. These physical improvements are subject to the review by the City Council. To approve a Design Review Permit, the City Council is required to make the findings prescribed in NMC Section 17.62.080. Those findings are shown in the “Findings” section of the Planning Commission staff report, (page 13 of Attachment 9) along with Staff’s analysis of each finding.
In addition to the Design Review Permit findings, the project is subject to the City’s adopted Residential Design Guidelines. However, pursuant to the Housing Accountability Act, Government Code Section 65589.5, the City may only apply “objective” development standards and design standards to the project. Therefore, the City may only apply those provisions in the existing Residential Design Guidelines that are objective, which is defined as “a standard involving no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and being uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official.” The project conforms with the objective design standards in the Residential Design Guidelines.
For example, the architecture uses a variety of forms and materials including wood trim, stone veneer, and stucco. The house plans provide for a variety of architectural styles and schemes. The proposed homes vary, but have a coherent architectural composition, while the roofs, walls, and materials gracefully transition from front, side and rear elevations. The proposed massing for each style is also broken up with stepping wall plains and varied roof pitches. These features are consistent with 3.12 “Massing, Transitions and Architectural Design” of the Guidelines which states; “Architecture within each new residential area should use a variety of forms, details and materials” and “Roof forms should be consistent on all parts of the house and garage” and “Larger wall and roof planes should include 3-dimensional design features such as chimneys, balconies, bay windows or dormers”.
D. Proposed House Plans
The Project proposes four (4) house plan options: a single-story and three (3) two-story plan options, each with three style options (A, B, C). Plan 4 also includes an alternate floor plan option that would include an attached ADU. The house plans range from approximately 1,870 to 2,862 square feet in size, as further described in the Planning Commission staff report, Attachment 9.
E. Parking & Circulation
The Project would be served by a private street with a “hammer head” turn around design. As previously mentioned, this non-standard fire truck turn around required and received a design exception from Public Works and Fire Prevention to help the Project achieve the prescribed General Plan density as well as reducing the amount of site grading that would have been required to construct a cul-de-sac on the sloped subject parcel.
The Project proposes to include a two-car garage and sufficient space for two (2) vehicles in each driveway, providing a total of four () off-street spaces per home. In addition, there would be sufficient street frontage along Capitola Drive for six (6) spaces and three (3) spaces on the private street for a minimum of one additional vehicle on-street to satisfy the guest parking requirements of one (1) space per unit pursuant to NMC Section 17.54.040. An off-street parking space is not required pursuant to NMC Section 17.52.015 because the ADU would be located within one-half (1/2) mile walking distance of a public transit stop, which waives the one (1) parking space requirement. The closest bus stop is located on Third Street, near the intersection with Silverado Trail and Coombsville Road, which is less than the one-half mile (approximately 2,400 feet) walking distance to any lot within the subdivision.
F. Tentative Map
As shown in Attachment 6, Tentative Map, the Applicant is proposing to subdivide an approximately 1.35-acre property into 9 single-family residential lots served by a non-standard “hammer head” private street. A Design Exception request must be approved by the Public Works Director and Fire Marshall for the non-standard street turn-around design. The Applicant demonstrated that the hammer head facilitated achieving the minimum density while also reducing site grading, thereby reducing environmental impacts that would have been associated with the amount of grading and retaining wall construction needed for a conventional cul-de-sac or the perimeter road of the former project. Based on these facts, the Public Works Director and Fire Marshall approved the Design Exception. The subdivision layout allows for an east-west alignment for southern solar exposure for most of the homes.
The residential lots would range from 4,889 to 7,166 square feet and provide a minimum of 55-feet in width and a depth of approximately 80-feet. The private street is comprised of portions of each lot with a shared access easement overlay to avoid the need for an association.
PLANNING COMMISSION
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 19, 2024. The Commission heard a report from Staff, followed by a presentation by the Applicant team. The Commission heard from one member of the public who was a neighboring resident. She indicated that she was not opposed to the project but asked whether Capitola Drive would be extended. Staff explained that the street would be extended when development applications for the two primarily undeveloped parcels south of the project site are processed. The Commission spoke in recognition of Bob Massaro and his commitment to green building. They very quickly motioned to recommend approval of Mr. Massaro’s project.
The Planning Commission unanimously recommend approval of the application by a vote of 4-0-1 (one Commissioner was absent).
FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
No direct financial impacts to the General Fund have been identified with this application.
CEQA:
City staff recommends that the City Council determine that the potential environmental effects of the Project fall within the scope of and were adequately analyzed by the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program that was adopted by City Council on March 1, 2016, in conjunction with the approval of the previous Harvest Village Subdivision Map by Resolution R2016-23, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
The revised Harvest Village II proposes the same number of units as the original Harvest Village with similar home sizes and utilizes a reduced vehicular access street design. The road ending in a hammerhead configuration surrounded by the homes is by far more environmentally sensitive than the previously approved loop road that would have surrounded the entire development site. Given the site’s sloped topography, the loop road would have required significantly more site grading, paving and retaining walls than the hammerhead road will require. Also, there have been no changes to the surrounding circumstances that would result in any new potentially significant environmental effects. Accordingly, the previously adopted MND has adequately identified that there will be no impacts associated with the revised Project, and that there have been no substantial changes which would require major revisions, no changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, there is no new information of substantial importance, and no previously reviewed impact areas have substantially changed. Therefore, staff has determined that a subsequent environmental review document is not required and has prepared a Notice of Determination.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
ATCH 1 - Ordinance
ATCH 2 - Resolution
ATCH 3 - CEQA Resolution R2016-23
ATCH 4 - Initial Study
ATCH 5 - PD-35 Ordinance
ATCH 6 - Project Description
ATCH 7 - Tentative Map
ATCH 8 - House Plans
ATCH 9 - Landscape Plan
ATCH 10 - Planning Commission Report
NOTIFICATION:
Notice that this application was received was provided by the City on December 11, 2023, and notice of the scheduled public hearing was provided on November 8, 2024, by US Postal Service to all property owners within a 500-foot radius of the subject property. Notice of the public hearing was also published in the Napa Valley Register on November 9, 2024, and provided to people previously requesting notice on the matter at the same time notice was provided to the newspaper for publication. The Applicant was also provided a copy of this report and the associated attachments in advance of the public hearing on the project.