Title
Public Hearing to Consider (1) the Planning Board’s Recommendation to Approve a Vesting Tentative Map and Density Bonus Application to Permit Construction of 52 Units on a 2.78 Acre Parcel Located at 2100 Clement Avenue, and (2) Adoption of Resolution Approving Vesting Tentative Map 10305 and Density Bonus Application for the Development of 52 Homes on 2.78 Acres of Land at 2100 Clement Avenue. The Proposal is Categorically Exempt from Review Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 Infill Development Projects. (Community Development 481001)
Body
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Elizabeth D. Warmerdam, Interim City Manager
Re: Public Hearing to Consider (1) the Planning Board’s Recommendation to Approve a Vesting Tentative Map and Density Bonus Application to Permit Construction of 52 Units on a 2.78 Acre Parcel Located at 2100 Clement Avenue, and (2) Adoption of Resolution Approving Vesting Tentative Map 10305 and Density Bonus Application for the Development of 52 Homes on 2.78 Acres of Land at 2100 Clement Avenue The Proposal is Categorically Exempt from Review Under the California Environmental Quality Act Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 Infill Development Projects
BACKGROUND
On July 13, 2015, the Planning Board unanimously approved a resolution recommending that the City Council approve a Vesting Tentative Map and Density Bonus application for City Ventures Home Builders (the applicant) to construct 52 residential units and publicly accessible open space on a 2.78-acre property located at 2100 Clement Avenue. The subject property is zoned for residential use and is designated in the General Plan Housing Element as a housing opportunity site.
At a future date, the Planning Board will hold a public hearing to review the final park design details, the final Street Tree Preservation and Replacement Plan, and the final design review application with the architectural elevations for each building. Although the Planning Board has not approved the final Design Review application, the applicant’s complete Density Bonus application does include all of the proposed elevations, and floor plans, and other submittals, as required by the Density Bonus Ordinance.
The Vesting Tentative Map is attached as Exhibit 1 and the Density Bonus application is attached as Exhibit 2.
DISCUSSION
The July 13, 2015 Planning Board action recommending City Council approval of the Vesting Tentative Map and Density Bonus application was the result of a six-month community planning process that included three Planning Board public hearings and numerous meetings with the adjacent neighbors at the site. The attached Planning Board staff reports (Exhibits 3 and 4) provide a more detailed description of the project and the major issues that were discussed throughout the community planning process. The major revisions to the plan that occurred as the result of community input and Planning Board direction included, but were not limited to, the following:
• The number of units in the project was reduced from 59 to 52 units.
• The size of the proposed park was increased from about 6,000 square feet to approximately 14,000 square feet.
• The park was moved from the interior of the site to Eagle Avenue to be more inviting for the entire neighborhood.
• The interior circulation system was redesigned to minimize impacts on the neighborhood.
• Pedestrian and bicycle access was provided through the site between Eagle Avenue and Clement Street.
As the result of the community planning process and the important changes made to the project plans, all of the public speakers at the July 13, 2015 meeting spoke in favor of the project, and the Planning Board unanimously recommended that the City Council approve the Vesting Tentative Map and Density Bonus application.
When recommending the project to the City Council, the Planning Board made a modification to the staff-recommended conditions of approval. Since the July 13, 2015 Planning Board action, several neighbors have expressed concern about the Planning Board’s decision to remove one of the recommended conditions of approval regarding parking.
As with many new residential projects in Alameda, the immediate neighbors to the proposed project are concerned about the project’s impact on the availability of parking in the neighborhood. Although every unit in the project includes a two-car garage, many neighbors expressed concerns that the new residents would use their two-car garages for storage and park their cars in the guest parking spaces or on the public streets in the neighborhood. Many existing residents in the area have limited, or no, off-street parking and rely on the supply of public street parking for their automobiles.
Although use of private garages is difficult to enforce, the project Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) provide an important opportunity to inform new residents that if they own cars, they are expected to use their garages to park their cars and that the homeowners association has an obligation to enforce these requirements. To help ensure that new residents use their two-car garages to store their cars and not their personal belongings, staff recommended that the Planning Board require a condition of approval that read as follows:
“The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R’s) shall include strict rules and stiff financial penalties that prohibit the use of garages for storage or any activity that prevents use of the garage for parking and that prohibit the use of the guest parking areas by project residents.”
The staff-recommended condition was developed in consultation with the applicant and the neighbors and a review of similar conditions placed on residential projects in other jurisdictions.
The Planning Board eliminated the condition from its resolution based upon the following arguments:
• The condition appears to restrict or unduly regulate residents’ private use of private space within their residences. As written, the original condition would prevent the use of garages for storage even if the resident did not own two cars.
• The condition gives the impression that the City would enforce the requirement, when in fact, the Homeowners Association would be responsible for enforcement.
• It would be hard, if not impossible, for the city to monitor compliance with the condition if current or future residents, or the homeowners association, chose to ignore the requirement or not enforce it adequately.
• The existing residents in the neighborhood do not have such a condition imposed on them, which creates different rules for different residents in the neighborhood.
After discussion with the neighbors, and consideration of Planning Board’s concerns about the original condition, staff prepared the following condition for City Council consideration. The language below differs from staff’s original condition in that the new language focuses on where the new residents park their cars instead of how they can or cannot use their garage if they don’t own two automobiles. If the City Council wishes to re-insert a condition regarding parking, the Council could approve the following proposed condition:
“The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R’s) shall include prohibitions and a monitoring process to ensure that residents who own vehicles park their vehicles in their garages. The CC&Rs shall include strict rules and financial penalties to enforce these requirements. Enforcement of this condition shall be the sole responsibility of the Homeowners Association.”
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Approval of the Vesting Tentative Map has no financial impact on the General Fund.
MUNICIPAL CODE/POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
As described in this staff report and attachments, the proposed applications are consistent with the City of Alameda General Plan and the Alameda Municipal Code.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15332 In-Fill Development Projects. The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation, policies and zoning designations and regulations. The proposal is located within the city limits on a project site of less than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. The site has been developed and operated as a light manufacturing and warehousing facility since the 1940s. As documented in the Project Initial Study, the project would not result in significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality or water quality. The site is adequately served by all required utilities and public services. As documented in the General Plan and Housing Element, the site is adequately serviced by existing services and will be paying Development Impact Fees to fund additional off-site park space, transportation improvements, and public safety improvements.
RECOMMENDATION
Hold a public hearing to (1) consider a planning board recommendation to approve a Vesting Tentative Map and Density Bonus Application to permit construction of 52 units on a 2.78 acre parcel located at 2100 Clement Avenue, and (2) adopt a resolution approving a Vesting Tentative Map and Density Bonus Application to permit construction of 52 units on a 2.78 acre parcel located at 2100 Clement Ave.
Respectfully submitted,
Debbie Potter, Community Development Director
By:
Andrew Thomas, Assistant Community Development Director
Financial Impact Section reviewed,
Elena Adair, Finance Director
Exhibits:
1. Vesting Tentative Map
2. Density Bonus Application
3. June 22, 2015 Planning Board Staff Report
4. July 13, 2015 Planning Board Staff Report