Loading...
07-17-17 MJSP HORIZONTAL MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 999 TOWN AND COUNTRY ROAD TO: Chair Glasgow and Members of the Planning Commission THRU: Anna Pehoushek Assistant Director of Community Development FROM: Anne Fox Contract Staff Planner SUBJECT CONSENT CALENDAR: Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1856-17, Major Site Plan Review No. 0866-16, Design Review Committee No. 4864-16, Tentative Parcel Map No. 0012-16 and Administrative Adjustment No. 0254-17 – 999 Town & Country Mixed Use (Westcore Town- Country, LLC) at 999 Town and Country Road. SUMMARY The applicant proposes to develop a horizontal mixed-use development project by constructing (1) a new five-story, 262-unit residential apartment building surrounding a six-level parking structure, (2) a new five-level parking structure to serve an existing office building, and (3) related site improvements providing landscaping and resident amenities on a six -acre project site. The project also includes a Tentative Parcel Map to divide the property into two lots, and minor adjustments to development standards that reduce the number of required parking spaces and reduce drive aisle widths within the parking structures. RECOMMENDED ACTION Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 17-17 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 1856-17 AND APPROVING MAJOR SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 0866-16, DESIGN REVIEW NO. 4864-16, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 0012-16 AND ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT NO. 0254-17 ALLOWING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A HORIZONTAL MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 999 TOWN AND COUNTRY ROAD Planning Commission Agenda Item July 17, 2017 Planning Commission Staff Report July 17, 2017 Page 2 AUTHORIZATION/GUIDELINES Orange Municipal Code (OMC) Section 17.08.020 authorizes the Planning Commission to review and take action on Environmental Documentation for a project in conjunction with the review and action on discretionary applications for Major Site Plan Review, Design Review, Tentative Parcel Maps and Administrative Adjustments. Further, when more than one type of application is filed for a single project, the application requiring the highest level of approval shall dictate the review process for the entire group of applications. In this case, the project requires adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and the applications include a Major Site Plan Review, both of which require a final determination at the Planning Commission level. Therefore, the Planning Commission will make the final determination on all the subject applications. The Planning Commission’s action may be appealed to the City Council pursuant to the time periods and requirements established in the OMC for Appeals. PUBLIC NOTICE On or before July 5, 2017, the City sent a Public Meeting Notice to a total of 518 property owners/tenants within a 300-foot radius of the project site, responsible agencies and persons specifically requesting notice. A notice was also published in the Orange City News newspaper on July 5, 2017, and the project site was posted in at least two locations with the notification on that same date. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Mitigated Negative Declaration: The proposed project is subject to environmental review per the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1856-17 has been prepared for this project and is provided for the Planning Commission’s review and consideration (Exhibit B). The Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt this environmental document was mailed to residents, property owners, and tenants within 300’ of the subject property and to responsible agencies. Additionally, the site was posted and it was advertised in the Orange City News on May 3, 2017. The 20-day public review period began on May 3, 2017 and ended on May 23, 2017. Staff received seven comment letters during the public review period from responsible agencies, and responses to those comments have been prepared and were forwarded to the respective authors in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, in advance of the City’s consideration of any determination. Copies of the comment letters and responses can be found in Attachment 5 to this report and must be considered by the Planning Commission prior to taking action. PROJECT BACKGROUND Applicant: Westcore Town-Country, LLC Property Owner: Westcore Properties – Nick Marcos Property Location: 999 Town and Country Road Existing General Plan Planning Commission Staff Report July 17, 2017 Page 3 Land Use Element designation: Urban Mixed Use (UMIX) 1.5-3.0 FAR; 30-60 du/acre Existing Zoning Classification: UMIX (Urban Mixed Use) Old Towne: No Specific Plan/PC: No Site Size: 5.99 Acres (261,226 square feet) Circulation: Ingress/egress to the project site is via Town & Country Road which is classified as a Primary Arterial with an ultimate right- of-way of 100 feet. Existing conditions: The existing six-acre site contains a four-story, 98,551 square foot office building with surface parking lot areas containing a total of 449 parking space. The site is fairly rectangular in shape and is relatively flat. The primary ingress/egress driveway is located on the southeastern boundary of the site directly in front of the existing office building. A secondary right in/right out driveway is located along the southwestern boundary of the project site. Surrounding land uses and Zoning: Surrounding properties are primarily commercially developed and are comprised of both office and support retail types of uses. The property is bounded on the north by the SR-22 freeway and on the west by the east-bound SR-22 on/off ramps. Continuing further west on the north side of Town & Country Road is a one-story retail/professional office center and beyond is a three- and four-story apartment development. Immediately adjacent on the east side of the project site is a five-story office building with surface parking lot area. To the south, is the Town & Country Office Park, which consists of a collection of small commercial buildings of one- and two-stories with shared surface parking lot areas. A 16-story office building sits just southwest of the project site across the shared intersection with the SR-22 freeway ramps served by a multi-level, above ground parking garage. Previous Applications/Entitlements: MJSP No. 0480-06, CUP No. 2683-07, CUP No. 2689-07, TPM No. 2007-118, DRC No. 4178-06, and MND No. 1783-06 for a medical office building and parking structure with a shared parking agreement approved on November 19, 2007. Several Time Extensions were granted through State legislation and the City since that approval, the last of which expired on October 15, 2015. The entitlements were never vested. No other historical records were found. Planning Commission Staff Report July 17, 2017 Page 4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant proposes the creation of a horizontal mixed-use development project by adding a separate multi-family residential building to a commercially developed six -acre site that currently contains a four-story, 98,551 square foot office building surrounded by 449 surface parking spaces and related landscape/hardscape improvements. New development at the site would also provide two parking structures, one to serve the new residential component and the other to replace a majority of the surface level parking that serves the existing office building. The entire site would be re-landscaped and new hardscape elements and surfaces would also be added to provide either recreational space for the residents and/or to refurbish the existing commercially developed portion of the site that will remain. Specifically, the applicant proposes construction of a new five-level, approximately 316,541- square-foot, residential building that will provide 262 apartment units. The apartment building is proposed to wrap around six full levels and one partial level of a 453-parking stall parking structure. The apartment building will contain a mix of unit types consisting of 60 studio units, 87 one- bedroom units, 96 two-bedroom units, and 19 three-bedroom units. Access to individual units is from an interior corridor system that ties in with each of the levels of the parking structure. The interior system of corridors also provides access to each assigned, lockable storage area associated with each unit, although two of the unit types (A3 and B3) are provided with their lockable storage accessible from the private deck area associated with those units. All units have a private balcony/deck area with views towards interior courtyard areas containing resident recreational amenities, or are oriented towards Town and Country Road, with ground level units having gated patios and entry “stoops.” The ground floor of the apartment building also contains a 2,684 -square foot leasing office with resident mail area; and a 3,359-square foot combination clubhouse/fitness room. The existing office building will be retained while portions of the associated surface level parking and landscape/hardscape areas will be comprehensively refurbished. No changes are proposed to the office building exterior. A new five level parking structure, providing 345 parking stalls, covered motorcycle parking, and a trash enclosure will be constructed on the northeastern portion of the site to serve the existing office tenant/employees. The remaining surface level parking areas located to the east and south of the existing office building will be restriped to provide an additional 49 parking stalls. The proposal also includes a request to subdivide the property into two lots for the purposes of financing and to allow for separate ownership and management of the development’s residential and commercial components. The subdivision would include reciprocal agreements for ingress/egress, parking, utilities, water quality features, fire access and for shared maintenance responsibilities of all site improvements. Planning Commission Staff Report July 17, 2017 Page 5 Development Standards Required Proposed Code Section Maximum Building Height 45 feet - Building height may exceed the allowed maximum provided no part of the building exceeds ¼ of the horizontal distance between the ground point of the building and nearest single- family residential district boundary. (Note: building height in excess of 45’ is allowed without a Variance or CUP provided that site is not in proximity to single family residential uses.) 72 feet - apartment building surrounding a 6-level parking structure 50 feet - 5-level office building parking structure 17.19.120 Table 17.19.120, Note (i) Maximum Fence Height 42 inches - front yard or corner side yard. 6 feet - All other areas. 42 inches for front patio walls at ground-level units Between 3 to 6 feet fences and walls in all other area 17.19.140 Residential Density Dwelling Units Per Acre (Net) Minimum: 30 units Maximum: 60 units 43.7 du/ac 17.19.120 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for non- residential Minimum: 1.5 Maximum: 3.0 (Note: Where the proposed new infill development, together with existing development falls below the required minimum FAR for the site, the overall development shall not be required to conform.) 0.37 FAR 17.19.120 Table 17.10.120, Note (b) Landscaping Setbacks and open areas of the site not occupied by buildings shall be landscaped, including surface parking lot areas 28,646 square feet – open space areas, street-scape, entries, corridors between buildings and structures. 14,226 square feet – surface parking lot areas. 17.19.160 Lot Dimensions Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width 40,000 square feet 100 feet Lot 1: 138,598 square feet Lot 2: 122,628 square feet 308 feet 17.19.120 Planning Commission Staff Report July 17, 2017 Page 6 Minimum Open Space (Residential) Fifteen percent (15%) of the total floor area of the dwelling units shall be provided as private and/or common open space = 35,089 square feet. Common open space to have recreational amenities at a ratio of one for every 25 units = 10 amenity points. A maximum of twenty-five percent (25%) of the total open space requirement may be satisfied by 40 square foot private open space = 8,772 square feet. 39,479 square feet total open space, with 28,646 square feet as common resident amenities. 12 amenity points for 10 resident amenity types. – 10,833 square feet of qualifying private open space 17.19.090 D. Parking Residential 458 spaces 412 spaces (10% reduction) 1 Table 17.34.060.A Guest Parking Residential 52 spaces 47 spaces (10% reduction) 1 Table 17.34.060.A Parking Office 394 spaces 4 spaces/1,000 square feet GFA up to 250,000 square feet 394 spaces total 49 surface level 345 parking structure Table 17.34.060.B Setback, Front 10 feet 10 feet (New residential) Table 17.19.120 Setback, Rear 0 feet 12 feet (New residential) Table 17.19.120 Setback, Interior Side Setback, Street Side 0 feet 10 feet 10 feet (New office parking structure) 40 feet (Caltrans ROW ramp to new residential) Table 17.19.120 Building Separation 25 feet for window wall to window wall for building heights 61-80 feet 40 feet between residential and office building 17.19.090 Lighting Directed and shield to on-site Lighting plan shows shielding of lighting to on site 17.12.030 Signs Subject to Sign Program approval by Design Review Committee Sign Program approval deferred – signage shown is conceptual 17.36.060 A.3 Note 1: Administrative Adjustment to reduce the number provided to serve the residential component of the project is being requested. A total of 510 parking spaces would be required to serve the unit mix of the 262 apartment units, including guest spaces. A total of 459 parking spaces will be provided for residents and their guests within the residential parking structure, a deficiency of 51 spaces or a ten percent (10%) reduction. Planning Commission Staff Report July 17, 2017 Page 7 APPLICATION(S) REQUESTED/ REQUIRED FINDINGS Major Site Plan Review: The applicant is requesting approval of a Major Site Plan to construct a new five-story, 262-unit residential apartment building surrounding a six-level parking structure, a new five-level parking structure to serve an existing office building, and related site improvements creating a horizontal mixed-use development. Required Findings: 1. The project design is compatible with surrounding development and neighborhoods. 2. The project conforms to City development standards and any applicable special design guidelines or specific plan requirements. 3. The project provides for safe and adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulation, both on- and off-site. 4. City services are available and adequate to serve the project. 5. The project has been designed to fully mitigate or substantially minimize adverse environmental effects. Design Review Committee: The applicant is requesting approval of a Design Review application for the architectural design, landscaping, and streetscape improvements associated with the proposed horizontal mixed-use development. Required Finding: 1. The project design upholds community aesthetics through the use of an internally consistent, integrated design theme and is consistent with all adopted specific plans, applicable design standards, and their required findings. Tentative Parcel Map: The applicant is requesting approval of a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide a six-acre site to create two parcels. Required Findings: 1. The proposed map is consistent with the General Plan. 2. The design of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development. 4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. Planning Commission Staff Report July 17, 2017 Page 8 Administrative Adjustment: The applicant is requesting approval of an Administrative Adjustment to reduce the required number of parking spaces overall for the residential component by 51 spaces (10% reduction) and reduce by one-foot (4% reduction) the width of the drive aisle in the residential parking structure. Required Findings: 1. The reduction in standards will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare of persons residing or working on the subject property or in the vicinity. 2. The issuance of the adjustment does not compromise the intent of the Zoning Code. ANALYSIS/STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES Issue 1: Integrated Design Architecture The proposed architectural style of the new apartment building is contemporary and is designed to respond to the building’s location and the surrounding architectural forms, particularly the horizontal character of the existing office building on the site. The design elements of the new apartment building include finished plaster painted white (Extra White) or black (Iron Ore) with reveals and limestone of a color that responds to the existing office building which will remain as is. The other elements include the use of metal railings (Monorail Silver), vinyl windows, aluminum storefront, and entry stoops. The plans demonstrate the depth of building offsets and features on the building. The building elevations oriented towards the SR-22 and the on-ramps provide geometric sculptural elements and include two possible design alternatives to these elevations for the Design Review Committee’s subsequent consideration prior to the issuance of building permits, included as a Conditions of Approval. The proposed architectural style of the office building parking structure is also contemporary with the concrete painted using the same background color (Extra White) of the new apartment building, with the horizontal levels painted in a beige tone (Nantucket Dune) to compliment the apartment building’s limestone accents and to tie in with the existing office building finish. Landscape New landscape and hardscape elements tie the existing office building with the newly created residential building on the western portion of the site to create an integrated appearance consistent with the OMC design criteria for horizontal mixed-use development. Specifically, the hierarchy of trees provides visual cues to site and building entry points. The palette includes a large vertical tree (Lemon Scented Gum), large canopy trees (Olive and London Plane), columnar trees (Giant Timber Bamboo and Giant Bird of Paradise), a large accent trees (Jacaranda) and Palms (Date and Fern). These trees form the back-bone for the remaining palette of trees that are more pedestrian-scaled and provide color. This part of the palette proposes small canopy trees (Crape Myrtle, Dragon, Southern Magnolia, and Brisbane Box) and a small accent tree (Chitalpa). Planning Commission Staff Report July 17, 2017 Page 9 Lighting The top deck of both parking structures proposes to utilize an LED luminaire fixture mounted on 15-foot high poles located in the center aisle of the parking deck avoiding placement along the roof edge. Sheet E1.1 provides additional conceptual details regarding other contemporary fixtures types to be used within the project. However, a condition as requested by the Design Review Committee has been added to the list of Conditions of Approval concerning the future review of a lighting plan for the enhanced lighting elements of the project prior to issuance of a building permit. Amenities Resident amenities for the proposed apartment building include a pool courtyard, club house, par course workout path, dog park, gym, barbeque areas, bicycle kitchen and basketball court. Access and Circulation The vehicular access for the proposed horizontal mixed-use development is provided via an existing, full-access driveway off Town and Country Road directly in front of the office building; with a new, restricted-access driveway right-in/right-out located approximately 125 feet to the west also off Town and Country Road. The limited use of palm trees is at the primary entry drive to give emphasis and assist with way-finding as suggested by the Design Review Committee. The overarching criteria for consideration of Design Review approval is an internally consistent and integrated design theme, and Staff believes that the applicant’s proposal meets that objective and the Design Review Committee recommended approval of the design. Two conditions were requested; both of which have been included in the draft Planning Commission Resolution, provided as Attachment 1. A copy of the June 7, 2017 minutes is also provided as Attachment 4 for the Commission’s reference. Issue 2: Waiver of Certain Parking Requirements OMC Section 17.34.020 stipulates that parking and loading regulations shall apply to every newly constructed building, reconstructed or structurally altered building, or buildings used for another purpose. The standards are considered the minimum requirement. The applicant is seeking relief from two development standards for the residential component of the horizontal mixed-use development on the site. The following describes the requests:  For an apartment project, the OMC requires calculation for the total number of required parking spaces based upon a ratio assigned per unit type associated with the nu mber of bedrooms. Additionally, regardless of number of bedrooms, all units are to equally be provided with a fractional guest space. Based upon these requirements and the unit mix, the residential component of the project is required to provide a total of 510 parking spaces. The project seeks to reduce the number of spaces provided by ten percent (10%) or 51 spaces, to provide a total of 459. Of the 459, 47 would remain as unassigned spaces, with 412 to be assigned to units. The project applicant has based their request upon the conclusions drawn from a parking study of similar types of residential apartment buildings Planning Commission Staff Report July 17, 2017 Page 10 when located within urban settings to demonstrate the “average” ratio needed. This analysis is provided as Attachment 3.  In designing a parking lot or structure, the OMC requires a minimum two-way drive aisle measuring 25 feet in width. The plans show a one-foot reduction for the drive aisle width within the residential parking structure, which represents a four percent (4%) adjustment. Staff believes that both of the above requests for Administrative Adjustment can be supported. The reduction in the overall number of parking spaces is justified by an analysis of similar residential apartment projects within urban settings where employment centers are in close proximity and where alternative modes of transportation are readily available. Further, the mixed-use development combines residential and office uses on the same site, where typical hours that generate a need for parking spaces are opposite each other. Therefore, residents and their guests will be able to utilize the office parking spaces on the project site during evenings and weekends. The reduction in the width of the drive aisles allows for the overall footprint of the building to be less, providing additional land area for landscaping and resident amenities. With the approval of the Administrative Adjustment, the issue is considered resolved. Issue 3: Environmental Impact/Mitigation The analysis contained in the MND determined that implementation of the project may result in significant environmental effects without mitigation. Acting as the Lead Agency, the City determined potential impacts may result from the project related to the following environmental factors: Air Quality, Cultural Resources, Geology/Soils, Hazards & Hazardous Materials, Transportation/Traffic, and Tribal Cultural Resources. CEQA Guidelines requires that mitigation measures be identified for such impacts in an effort to reduce such impacts to a less than significant level and that mitigation be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other legally binding instruments. The MND includes mitigation measures that have been incorporated into the conditions of approval as part of the draft Planning Commission Resolution provided as Attachment 1. Section 4 of the MND provided in Exhibit B summarizes the project’s significant impact, mitigation measure, and level of significance after mitigation. Incorporation of the mitigation measures into the project results in a reduction of significant impact to a less than significant level to the environmental factors listed above. With the adoption of the MND by the Planning Commission, the issue is considered resolved. Issue 4: Public Comments The City received seven comment letters during the public review period for the MND. None of the comments were from the public at-large. The comments were generated by responsible agencies that included: Caltrans, Santiago Creek Greenway Alliance, South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA), Orange County Public Works (OCPW), Kennedy Commission and Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA). Only two of the commenting agency’s remarks (Caltrans and SCAQMD) required additional analysis or corrections to the MND. Caltrans requested an analysis of an additional intersection and SCAQMD provided minor edits to the Mitigation Measures to correct for the referenced year. Staff prepared response comments to all correspondence received and forwarded those responses in compliance with CEQA. The comments received and the responses are provided as Attachment 5. With the Planning Commission Staff Report July 17, 2017 Page 11 concurrence of the Planning Commission of this information in light of the whole record when acting to adopt the MND for the project, the issue would be resolved. ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION Staff Review: The Streamlined, Multi-Disciplined, Accelerated Review Team (SMART) originally considered the formal application along with plans and technical reports on July 8, 2016, September 21, 2016, January 11, 2017, and again on March 8, 2017, and recommended approval of the proposal subject to standard conditions. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee reviewed the proposal on May 3, 2017, continued it to June 7, 2017, and then recommended approval with conditions by a vote of 4-0, which have been included in the draft Planning Commission resolution. The minutes from both of these meetings are provided as Attachment 4 to this report. ATTACHMENTS/EXHIBITS Attachments to Report: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 17-17 2. Vicinity Map 3. Linscott, Law & Greenspan – Parking Analysis – December 16, 2016 4. Design Review Committee Minutes, May 3, 2017 and June 7, 2017 5. Comments Received/Responded – MND No. 1856-17 Exhibits provided to the Planning Commission: A. Submitted Plans date labeled July 17, 2017 B. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1856-17 cc: Nick Markos Westcore Properties 4435 Eastgate Mall, Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92121 n:\cdd\plng\applications\tentative parcel maps\tpm 0012-16 town & country mu\pc\pc staff report 07-17-17.doc