To: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
From: Rick Tooker, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Michael Walker, Senior Planner
TITLE:
Title
General Plan Amendment, Rezoning, and Design Review Permit for a 16-unit apartment expansion on property located at 151 Riverside Drive on the west side of Riverside Drive south of Elm Street.
LABEL
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Recommendation
Receive a report on the proposed project and provide direction to staff.
Body
DISCUSSION:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Applicant requests approval of a General Plan and Zoning Amendment to re-designate the land use designation for one parcel at 151 Riverside Drive from Traditional Residential Infill (TRI-148) to Multi-family Residential (MFR-157) and to rezone the parcel from Traditional Residential (RT-5) to Multi-family Residential (RM). The Applicant also requests approval to authorize construction of a 16 unit apartment development. The proposed development is adjacent to and an extension of a 41 unit apartment community (“Existing Bridgeview Apartments”) located at 122 Brown Street.
151 Riverside Drive is developed with a single-family home and detached garage. The Cultural Heritage Commission approved a Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of the residence, a Listed Resource on the City’s Historic Resources Inventory, at their October 13, 2016 meeting. As part of the motion to approve the demolition, the Commission included a condition to make the residence available for relocation prior to demolition. The property also contains a paved area which is being used for parking for the adjacent existing Bridgeview Apartments; however, this parking area was not approved as part of the original development in the 1980s.
This project was also reviewed by the Planning Commission, which on October 20, 2016 expressed its support for workforce housing and affordable units, but because of design had questions about whether this was the appropriate site for an expansion of the existing Bridgeview Apartments. On February 16, 2017, the Commission reviewed the project again and many of the design issues became clearer such as parking, the proximity of the proposed buildings to the property to the north, and the overall scale of the project. However, the Commission ultimately determined that the project was not right for the property because the design issues were a result of the overall density and forwarded a recommendation to the Council to deny the project. This agenda report contains a description of the staff’s recommendation to the Planning Commission to approve the project, as initially proposed and presented in the Commission’s second review of the proposal, and describes the Commission’s basis for recommendation that the project be denied.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
The Applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the Land Use Designation of the property located at 151 Riverside Drive from Traditional Residential Infill to Multi-family Residential. The General Plan designation for the adjacent property to the west containing the 41 unit Bridgeview Apartment, located at 122 Brown Street, is MFR-157, Multi-Family Residential, which provides for attached single-family homes and multi-family units at a density range of 9 to 20 units per acre. Given the size of the existing developed site (1.1 acres), the General Plan provides for between 9 to 21 residential units. The property was originally developed with 20 units; however, the property was approved for an additional 21 units in 1983 as part of an agreement to provide 100% of the units for seniors, the disabled and families of low- or moderate-income. The Applicant proposes the same General Plan designation for 151 Riverside Drive as exists on the adjoining westerly parcel and proposes to construct 16 additional apartments in two new buildings. Three of the units on the property (both the existing Riverside Apartment project and the proposed expansion) will be set aside for very low income households earning 50% or less of the county median income.
The combination of the existing density of 38 units per acre on the westerly parcel and 16 new units on the easterly parcel will result in 40 units per acre which exceeds the maximum density; however, General Plan Residential Development Policy LU 4.4 allows for an increase in project density through density bonuses (consistent with the Housing Element, State Density Bonus Law, and City Supplemental Density Bonus contained in Napa Municipal Code Section 17.52.130(F)) to facilitate the provision of affordable housing. The proposed supplemental density bonus provides for 9 additional housing units on the Riverside Drive parcel, a necessary increase in order to make the development of three very low income housing units feasible on this site.
Staff has also reviewed the project for consistency with all other applicable General Plan policies. In particular, the project complies with policies of the Land Use Element and Housing Element identified below.
LAND USE ELEMENT
One of the fundamental goals of the Land Use Element is “to preserve and enhance the residential character of existing neighborhoods and provide for new residential development consistent with the city's character and urban form.” To help achieve this goal, the Land Use Element includes a series of policies, three of which are listed below followed by a staff response:
LU-3.1 The City shall provide for the efficient development and redevelopment of land within the RUL in order to allow job and housing growth through the end of the planning period.
Staff believes the proposed 16 unit development provides an efficient housing development that will provide housing for a variety of income levels on an underutilized parcel of land. The development will also assist the City in achieving its goals as provided in the Housing Element and the State Housing & Community Development (HCD) as part of Napa’s regional fair share needs allocation (RHNA).
LU-4.2 The City shall encourage the development of housing for the elderly, disabled, and low-income households in every planning area with residential Pods, where the City determines the development is compatible with surrounding land uses and where site conditions and service capabilities permit. Sites considered especially appropriate for these uses are those accessible to transit, commercial, and medical services. Planned developments, condominiums, and mobile home parks are considered to have unique, self-contained development patterns that can be designed with little impact on the existing development pattern.
The proposed 16 unit development is an expansion of an apartment project that had previously committed units to elderly, low income, and disabled families; however that provision has since expired. As part of the new development, three units will be restricted to families with very low incomes, which is supported by staff.
LU-4.4 The City shall grant density bonuses and other incentives to encourage development of housing affordable to low-income households (as described in the Housing Element).
The combined 57 unit development has a project density of 40 units per acre which exceeds the 20 units per acre density as provided in the General Plan; however, General Plan Residential Development Policies allow for an increase in project density through density bonuses (consistent with the Housing Element, State Density Bonus Law, and City Supplemental Density Bonus) to facilitate the provision of affordable housing.
HOUSING ELEMENT
One of the fundamental goals of the Housing Element is to ensure the development of “a variety of housing types and choices.” To help achieve this goal, the Housing Element includes a series of policies, eight of which are listed below:
H-1.1 Efficient Use of Land. The City shall promote creative and efficient use of vacant and built on land within its RUL to help maintain the City’s pre-eminent agricultural environment and open space.
The proposed 16 unit development provides an efficient housing development that will provide housing for a variety of income levels on an underutilized parcel of land. To the extent that infill parcels may be re-designated and rezoned to include additional housing units, particularly desired apartments for the community’s workforce and units dedicated to affordable housing, within the context of the parcel’s surroundings, staff believes this policy is achieved.
H1.2 Provide Adequate Sites. The City shall maintain an adequate supply of land designated for all types of residential development to meet the quantified housing need of 835 City units and up to 57 County units for the state-mandated time frame of the Housing Element (2015 to January 2023). Within this total, the City shall maintain a sufficient supply of land zoned for multi-family housing to meet the quantitative housing need of 317 lower income and 151 moderate income housing units.
The proposed 16 unit development is consistent with the above policy in that it provides housing units that will help meet the quantified housing needs for the City for both market rate and affordable housing units. Although this particular site was not specifically identified in the City’s Housing Element as a site needed to meet Napa’s RHNA, it is located adjacent to an existing developed apartment project also owned by the Applicant and is within an area of the community where there is a mix of apartments and single family homes.
H1.4 Efficient Use of Sites. The City shall make every effort to approve well-designed projects at the mid to high range of General Plan densities.
The proposed General Plan Amendment will enable expansion of the existing apartment complex. The proposed density achieves this policy direction.
H1.7 Density Bonuses. The City recognizes that density bonuses help achieve housing goals and shall promote their use consistent with the provisions of state law for qualifying lower and moderate income housing development (and child care facilities).
The combined 57 unit development has a project density of 40 units per acre which the General Plan Residential Development Policies allow for an increase in project density through density bonuses (consistent with the Housing Element, State Density Bonus Law, and City Supplemental Density Bonus) to facilitate the provision of affordable housing. The proposed General Plan Amendment will allow for the expansion of the existing apartment complex and provide three deed-restricted units to families in the very low income level.
H-2.1 Support for Affordable Housing. The City shall continue to support and encourage new affordable housing projects.
The proposed 16 unit expansion includes providing three units that will be affordable for very low income households in an area that has a variety of housing types and densities. A recommendation of support for the requested General Plan Amendment and Rezoning would advance this policy.
H-2.2 Mix of Housing. The City shall encourage an increased mix of various types of housing throughout the City to meet community housing needs, provide greater housing choices, and improve transportation choices. In addition to single-family homes, housing choices and the mix of housing in the community should include such types as multi-family, mixed-use, affordable units, supportive housing, Single Room Occupancies (SRO), co-housing and similar types of housing that meet a wide variety of community housing needs.
The combined 57 unit multi-family development will provide a housing type that is currently in demand to satisfy community housing needs and exists generally in this neighborhood including immediately to the west on a parcel that is also owned by the Applicant.
H-2.14 Retain Affordable Units Long-Term. The City shall assure that affordable housing provided through density bonuses, inclusionary programs and other incentives will stay low cost long-term consistent with State law.
Proposed conditions of approval require the Applicant to enter into an agreement to construct three of the housing units to remain at affordable rental price to very low income households for a period of 55 years.
H-3.1 High Quality Design and Varied Housing Types. The City shall assure high quality, well designed housing that respects the surrounding neighborhood, and provides for a greater variety of housing options to meet community needs.
The project proposes buildings with a combination of vertical and horizontal lapped siding and balconies similar to the existing multifamily buildings. The change in roof plane, building articulation, and massing provide traditional architectural forms.
Staff believes the project meets the Housing Element goals as outlined. However, the Commission felt the project is too dense, is too impactful on the adjacent single family residential, and that the incentives were not strong enough to overcome these issues with just three affordable units.
ZONING AMENDMENT
The existing Bridgeview Apartment property is located within the RM, Multi-Family Residential District, which provides opportunities for a mix of attached residential developments including medium- and higher-density multi-family apartments, single-family attached units, group residential, live-work housing and larger residential care facilities. The proposed expansion to include 16 additional units at 151 Riverside Drive is occurring on property currently zoned RT-5 (essentially single family homes on 5,000 sq. ft. lots). Staff believes the proposed rezoning to RM would support and implement the General Plan Amendment to MFR and has reviewed the project for consistency with the development standards of the Multi-family Residential zoning district. Staff further believes the project is consistent with applicable standards, with the exception of the proposed concessions requested by the Applicant in exchange for the three affordable housing units as outlined below.
Front Setback - The RM zoning district requires a 20-foot minimum front setback which would be applied to the Riverside Drive frontage. The Applicant is requesting a 12-foot setback to allow for the encroachment of two stairways.
Parking - State Housing Law 65915(p)(1) allows developers of affordable housing projects the ability to use a parking ratio of one parking space per one-bedroom unit and two parking spaces for each two-bedroom unit. The parking layout plan prepared for the development provides a total of 56 spaces for the 41 total housing units, consisting of 16 garage spaces and 40 uncovered spaces, which is three spaces short of the City’s parking space requirements identified above for the combined property. Although the combined property is three spaces short of the required parking, the Applicant is providing 21 new spaces which exceed the required parking for the 16 new units on the Riverside Drive parcel. As part of the new development, the Applicant is also redesigning and providing a more efficient parking layout for the existing 41 unit development.
The Planning Commission determined that the density was too high for the site area when combining the project with the existing Bridgeview Apartments to the west. Further, the Commission expressed concern that there would be inadequate parking on the site resulting in overflow occurring on the public streets around the development. The proposed front setback reduction was not specifically identified as a potential concern.
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
The site is also subject to the :FP-Floodplain Management Regulations, which require that the City's floodplain administrator (Public Words Department) review all on-site improvements. The proposed buildings have been elevated to meet flood requirements. After review of the proposed plans and the Applicant's hydraulic analysis of the project, the Public Works Department has determined that the proposed improvements are consistent with the existing City standards and applicable Federal floodplain criteria.
TRANSITIONAL STANDARDS
Pursuant to Subsection 17.08.040.D of the Zoning Ordinance, properties within the RM zoning district that abut other residential districts are required to comply with transitional standards. These standards are only applicable to development along the northern property line which abuts developed properties within the RT-5 Zoning District. The bordering properties to the west and south of the project site are also designated RM multi-family residential and not subject to the transitional standards. The following is a listing of the standards followed by staff’s analysis of how the standards have been satisfied.
1. Buildings two or more stories in height shall meet side yard requirements by setting the building in 10 feet from the side property line; the third story may be stepped back. Second or higher story decks shall not encroach into the side yard.
The buildings adjacent to the northern property line are located 17 feet from the property line and contain a step down of two feet in height creating variation and reducing scale compared to the plan initially considered by the Planning Commission which was set back just 10 feet without any step downs.
2. A landscaped buffer shall be incorporated into affected side and rear yard areas to address privacy concerns.
A landscape buffer area is located between the buildings and the adjacent property to the north consisting of existing new six foot wood fence and six Trident Maple trees. The buffer will also contain a bio-retention area required to satisfy site absorption and drainage requirements. This fence will shield six feet of the 29 foot tall building from view of the adjacent single family home set back approximately 29 feet from the new building. The remaining view will be filtered through the future tree canopy. These trees could be larger than typical such as possibly 24” box to provide more immediate screening.
3. Fencing or walls shall be required along abutting side and rear yards in materials and design compatible with the project.
A new six foot tall wood board fence has been constructed along the northern property line. This fence could be increased in height to include lattice which is not uncommon between adjoining properties and which could further reduce visibility between the properties.
4. The above requirements may be waived or modified by the decision-making body if the abutting property is devoted to nonresidential use, if the location or design of existing development is such that the above requirements are not necessary to provide an appropriate transition, or if an alternative design provides a superior transition.
A waiver or modification from these requirements is not requested by the Applicant. Staff believes that the proposed fencing and buffer along the northern perimeter of the project site satisfy the transitional standards, albeit there are additional measures that could be implemented at the direction of the Council such as the size of trees to be planted and additional fence height.
DENSITY BONUS
In accordance with the California Government Code Section 65915, the Applicant has requested a density bonus and a Supplemental Density Bonus under Section 17.52.130(F) of the Napa Municipal Code to allow for a project density of 40 units an acre (100%). In complying with the density bonus provisions, the Applicant will be providing three units that will be remain available to very low income level households for 55 years. Government Code Section 65915 provides that the local government shall grant one density bonus and provide the Applicant with incentives or concessions for the production of affordable housing units. Under the City’s Supplemental Density Bonus section, density bonuses (or additional incentives or concession) in excess of the maximum amount provided for under the State Density Bonus Law may be granted up to a maximum of 100%. Accordingly, the Applicant has requested a concession to allow two stairwells to encroach up to eight feet into the front setback along Riverside Drive thereby reducing the front setback from 20 feet to 12 feet, and a concession of a parking reduction of three spaces for the combined property. Use of the on-site parking ratio is consistent with the State Density Bonus Law.
The Applicant will be required to construct the affordable units at the same time as the market-rate units. The right to a density bonus or any other concession, incentive, or waiver as provided in state law and the City’s regulations cannot be transferred to another development. Additionally, the Applicant is required to provide the City a yearly accounting of the total project units occupied and vacant, the total occupied and vacant units designated for lower income households or very low income households, and rents charged.
Staff believes the Applicant’s project meets the qualifications for these concessions because the project will provide three affordable housing units for very low income households. The Applicant will be required to enter into a contract/agreement with the City to ensure the long term affordability of the units. The proposed project also meets the requirements set forth in the Zoning Ordinance as an affordable housing project, and therefore Staff supports the requested concessions. As noted above and throughout the agenda report, the Planning Commission believed that the design of the project was inconsistent with the adjoining single family development to the north and as a result did not support the project. Some project design changes were implemented into a revised design since the Commission formulated its recommendation, which were recommended by the Commission to help address the mass and scale issue. However, there were other issues of concern identified by the Commission (e.g., parking and density) that were not addressed.
DESIGN REVIEW
Section 17.62.050 of the Zoning Ordinance requires approval of a Design Review Permit for tentative maps and new multi-family projects. The project will be accessed off a main driveway from Riverside Drive on the eastern side of the project site. An existing driveway is located along Brown Street on the western side of the project site. The proposed buildings are located adjacent to Riverside Drive. The development will consist of two new residential buildings with eight units each. The proposed buildings will be 31 feet tall, two story walk-ups with garage parking on the ground floor for all of the units. A reconfigured parking lot is located between the new buildings and existing buildings to the west.
The proposed exterior materials of the buildings include composite siding in horizontal lap siding and vertical configuration on the gables and composition shingle roofing to complement the existing multi-family buildings. Landscaping includes a combination of shade trees, ornamental trees, shrubs, and ground covers. The plans also include a community garden, garden paths, and bio-retention areas.
Residential Design Guidelines Analysis
Based on the principles of the Residential Design Guidelines, the proposed multi-family development should be designed to reflect the scale, rhythm and street orientation of Napa’s traditional neighborhoods. The design guidelines include the following principles to address project compatibility, followed by staff’s analysis of the Applicant’s efforts to comply with each principle:
Site Plan
a. Entry drives to multi-family housing developments should be designed to create a positive identity for the project. Landscape and site design should frame and distinguish entry drives. Site entries should distinguish themselves with added texture or use of contrasting materials.
The development is served by an existing driveway off of Brown Street and a new driveway off of Riverside Drive. Due to the infill nature of this project, the ability to create landscaped entrances typical in larger multi-family developments is limited and is not in keeping with the existing development or surrounding area. The proposed buildings will be parallel to Riverside Drive and will serve as the identity to the project.
b. Parking should be unobtrusive and not disrupt the quality of common spaces and pedestrian environments of multi-family development. Parking should be distributed throughout the site in discrete courts and garages.
Resident parking is located throughout the development in a combination of garage and surface spaces. The location of the proposed parking spaces will not disrupt the quality of the common spaces within the development because the location of the garages places the majority of the parking spaces under the proposed buildings. A reconfigured parking lot between the new buildings and existing buildings will provide a more efficient design and will allow for greater delineation of landscape areas and common spaces.
c. Services for multi-family development should not be visible from public areas. Trash bins, utility meters, transformers, and other service elements should be enclosed or otherwise concealed from view.
The trash and recycling area for the development complies with the Solid Waste and Recycling Enclosure Standards. A condition of approval requires that a Waste Reduction and Recycling Plan be approved prior to issuance of any building permits. Any new utilities will be screened from view.
d. Projects should be designed to integrate with adjacent development. Neighborhood and architectural design concepts should provide for a transition in scale.
The project design places the new buildings parallel to Riverside Drive. The building locations and orientation will provide an appropriate transition between the proposed development and the existing uses. The proposed buildings will face Riverside Drive and the interior of the project. The buildings will “side” to the adjacent property to the north, designed to minimize privacy impacts. The design of the new buildings will complement the existing buildings in material and style by providing a combination of vertical and horizontal lapped siding and balconies. Per previous Commission recommendation, the new buildings will be of an earth tone color and the existing buildings will be repainted to match in the future.
e. Common open areas and parks provide gathering places, add livability and value: Encourage usable common open space in larger housing developments, considering higher heights, increased densities or decreased setbacks on some portions of the site as a tradeoff for providing such amenities.
The new residential units are oriented facing onto landscape areas with garage parking access oriented between the buildings. The proposed development includes a community garden, barbeque and seating area on the north side of the existing apartment buildings and landscape areas which add livability and value to the proposed development and conforms with the useable open space requirements.
Common Area
a. New multi-family projects should provide common spaces that are physically defined and socially integrated into the site plan as gathering places.
The proposed common areas are located throughout the development. The design guidelines suggest that multi-family development provide both common and private open space for each unit consistent with development standards in the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed common spaces encourage social interaction through barbeque areas, seating areas, and a community garden. The site design includes entries that overlook landscape areas and first and second floor balconies.
Architectural Design
New multi-family projects should fit into the surrounding neighborhood, reflect local architectural traditions, and respond to Napa’s climate.
a. Architectural styles and features found in traditional Napa neighborhoods or in historic structures on or around the site should be reflected in the design of new housing. Multi-family projects should utilize a unifying theme and a common vocabulary of forms and architectural elements.
The residential buildings are two-story walk-ups with attached tuck-under one car garages. Balconies and gables are proposed on each building. Varying roof heights and building planes serves to break up the perceived bulk of the buildings. The ends of the buildings also step down in height to provide transition to the property to the north. The residential buildings have been designed with a common vocabulary of forms and architectural elements. All of the buildings will feature composite siding in either a vertical or lap siding application to complement the existing multi-family buildings. All of the proposed buildings feature window-trim detail and roof elements with composition roofing shingles. The units feature windows that are aligned with each other and other building elements to provide a harmonious appearance. The change in roof plane and building articulation/massing present interesting elevations that are not overly repetitive and provide traditional architectural forms. The new buildings will complement the existing multi-family buildings by providing a combination of vertical and horizontal lapped siding and balconies similar to the existing buildings.
b. Building forms should use varying roof heights, setbacks and wall planes to break up the perceived bulk of buildings. Long, unbroken volumes and large, unarticulated wall and roof planes should not be permitted. Façades should have 3-dimensional elements, such as chimneys, balconies, bay windows or dormers, to break up large wall and roof surfaces. Every façade should possess an overall design concept that is well composed and articulated, and of consistent quality.
The design of the proposed development provides architectural features to develop a scale compatible with the existing multi-family buildings. Balconies and roof gables create a reduced sense of scale. The hierarchy of fenestration treatment, detailing, and exterior wall materials provides visual interest when seen from a distance or from a pedestrian level. Each elevation provides the same quality as the front elevation by continuing the lapped siding, window details, and balconies. The proposed palette of materials conveys an image of quality and durability.
c. Upper floors of taller buildings should be incorporated into the design of roof “attic space”. Roof forms should reflect their context. While traditional sloping roofs, such as gable or hip roofs are generally preferred, there may be instances (such as adjacent to a traditional commercial district) where flat roofs may be allowed if screened from public view by continuous parapets or by pitched roofs.
The proposed buildings incorporate a gabled roof design on the fronts of each of the buildings. Decorative gable roof vents have been added to provide visual relief to the roof plane. The ends of the buildings step down in height to serve as a better transition to the adjacent property to the north.
d. In response to single-family context, smaller multi-family developments should strive to have the appearance of gracious single-family homes. Outbuildings, such as community buildings, management offices, club houses, or freestanding parking garages should incorporate design features, materials and colors of the residential buildings.
The designs of the proposed buildings incorporate architectural features such as balconies and gabled roof designs to the fronts of the buildings to reduce building mass. A varied roof line also serves to break up the mass of the building and provide a better transition to adjacent properties.
e. Stairways, fences, trash enclosures and other accessory elements should be designed as integral parts of the architecture. These should not be visible features at the ends of streets or driveways. Manufactured components attached to the outside of buildings such as stairways and sheds should be prohibited.
The proposed balconies and stairwells are in keeping with the compatibility of the existing multi-family buildings. The Applicant has requested a concession to allow the stairwells on Building 6 to encroach up to eight-feet into the front setback. Staff supports this request as the building placement and configuration are both necessary to facilitate the inclusion of affordable housing units. A recessed lattice treatment is provided below the lower balconies and under the stairwells.
Staff believes the request meets the residential design guidelines, understanding that there is a mix of housing design and types in the vicinity of the project site. However, the Commission expressed concerns related to design issues including that the scale of the project is out of character for the adjacent single family homes.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SUMMARY
As noted previously in the agenda report, on October 20, 2016 the Planning Commission conducted a review of the application and continued the item, identifying several design issues for the applicant to address.
February 16, 2017 the Planning Commission considered the proposed project. During the hearing the Applicant stated his intent for the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning requests and an advocate for the Applicant spoke in support of the project. The Commission also received testimony from five speakers that expressed concerns about the project, including impacts resulting from parking, design, and density.
During deliberation, the Commission was generally supportive of the concept of multi-family units and the provision of both workforce housing and affordable housing on the property; however, the Commission raised concerns specific to the project site regarding the density of the project, building design, parking, and site layout. Specifically, Commissioners expressed the following concerns:
- Provide a larger setback along the northern property line (at least 20-feet);
- Provide more landscaping on the north side or incorporate a type of “green wall”;
- Remove stairwells from the north sides of the buildings;
- Provide at least one parking space per unit - not supportive of the reduced parking concession;
- Provide more amenities for the residents;
- reduce the scale of the project which is very obtrusive and insensitive to the adjacent property owners;
- Consider reducing the units since 16 may just be too many exacerbating the higher density of the existing Bridgeview Apartments to the west.
After receiving a recommendation by staff to approve the project based on the project design and the significance of additional workforce and affordable housing in an area with a mix of residential units and types, the Commission deliberated whether to continue the item to provide the applicant an opportunity to make further changes to the project or to make a formal recommendation. The Applicant indicated that he would prefer to have the Commission make a formal recommendation to the City Council and present to Council the merits of the project
At the conclusion of the hearing the Planning Commission voted 4-0-1 to reject the staff recommendation and forwarded a recommendation to the City Council to deny the project.
REVISED PLANS
Upon the recommendation for denial from the Planning Commission, the Applicant continued to work with staff to incorporate some of the changes into the project plans identified by the Commission as problem areas (e.g., setbacks, massing, landscaping, etc.). The updated plans (see Attachment 2) contain the following changes:
- Increased the setback along the northern property line from 10 feet to 17 feet to be in line with the north setback of the existing apartments on the westerly parcel;
- Provided additional landscaping (six Trident Maple trees) on the north side of the buildings;
- Reduced the overall height of the buildings from 32’-6” to 31’-2” and further reduced the ends of the buildings to 29’-6” by reconfiguring the end units on each building; and
- Reconfigured the stairs on the upper floors to minimize privacy concerns for the property to the north
FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
No direct financial impacts to the City have been identified with this application.
CEQA:
City staff recommends that the City Council determine that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the City Council, that the Recommended Action, as analyzed in the Initial Study prepared for Bridgeview Apartments dated September 30, 2016, will have significant effect on the environment; and that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15074.
DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
ATCH 1 - Planning Commission staff report dated February 16, 2016 and draft minutes excerpt
ATCH 2 - Project plans
NOTIFICATION:
Mailing by US Postal Service was provided to all property owners within a 500-foot radius of the subject property and persons requesting such notice and attending previous hearings regarding development on the subject parcel; legal notices of public hearing were published in the Napa Valley Register at least 10 days prior to the hearing date.