Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRC_2012-11-15_MinutesAPPROVED CITY OF CITY OF ATAS DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION MINUTES Regular Meeting — Thursday, November 15, 2012 - 3:00 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers 6907 EI Camino Real, Atascadero, California CALL TO ORDER — 3:00 p.m. Chairperson Fonzi called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson Fonzi, Committee Members Kelley, Ward, Cooper Absent: Committee Member DeCarli (excused absence) Staff Present: Community Development Director Warren Frace Associate Planner Callie Taylor Assistant Planner Alfredo Castillo Deputy Director of Public Works -Engineering David Athey Others Present: Recording Secretary Annette Manier APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: By Committee Member Kelley and seconded by Committee Member Ward to approve the Agenda. Motion passed 4:0 by unanimous consent. PUBLIC COMMENT None DRC Action Minutes Nov. 15, 2012 CONSENT CALENDAR Page 2 of 7 (All items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and non -controversial by City Staff and will be approved by one motion if no member of the Committee or public wishes to comment or ask questions.) 1. APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT MINUTES OF OCTOBER 25 2012 MEETING MOTION: By Committee Member Kelley and seconded by Committee Member Ward to approve the minutes. Motion passed 4:0 by unanimous consent. DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REVIEW 2. DRC 2012-0029, PLN 2099-0848, CUP 2005-0157 / TTM 2005-0067 / ZCH 2005-0099 Property Owner: Oakhaven Village, INC Project Title: Oakhaven Village DRC 2012-0029/PLN 2099-0848 / CUP 2005-0157 TTM 2005-0067 ZCH 2005-0099 Project 1155 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA Location: Project Re -design of architectural elevations and floor plans for a previously approved 62 Unit Description: townhouse subdivision. Applicant proposed to reduce the number of stories from three (3) to two (2) as well as revise certain floor plans to add additional bedroom (s). The applicant proposes minimal changes to the previously approved site plan or the number of lots. Assistant Planner Alfredo Castillo gave the staff report and answered questions from the committee. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DELIBERATIONS Committee Member Kelley ■ Driveway and setback questions. Clarification on river rock material use. ■ Density increase with affordable housing and bonus room ability to become a bedroom? ■ Will there be parking allowed along the streets? ■ Can staff work on these bonus rooms? Can there be a balance to make bedrooms more marketable. • Roads — is this project intended to connect to other main arterial roads? DRC Action Minutes Nov. 15, 2012 Page 3 of 7 Committee Member Fonzi ■ Bonus room does not have a closet. Can this be added, and if so, will it increase the parking calculations? ® Is there a place for visitor parking? ® Grassy area in center — what is the use? ® Will there be an HOA? ■ Will applicant hire local contractors? Committee Member Cooper ® Question on parking spaces at the end of the cul-de-sac. Committee Member Ward ® Timeline for the project. Assistant Planner Castillo and Director Frace answered questions from the committee. PUBLIC COMMENT Randy Rea, Architect thanked Assistant Planner Castillo for working with him. He stated they have about 24 additional spaces for guests. The internal driveway is the exact configuration we had before. The 18 -foot driveway complies with the City standard. As far as the bonus room, it acts as a common area for the rest of the house. The DRC asked if he wanted the ability to he Ahle to add a closet. The r" _J today is much simpler to huild and he's trying to make housing as affordable as possible. Prices will be based on how much it will cost to build. Dan Siiverie, President of Oak Haven Village, said they are LEED-certified builders. He likes the oak trees and really wants to protect the trees. Some trees are diseased. It will be a very nice beautiful site and they have hired a landscape architect to do that. They are also affordable housing builders. Interest rates are good so it will be a good opportunity for young people to purchase a home. Mike Bertuccini, EDA — Has been involved since 2003 and has tried to preserve the trees and preserve roads. Mr. Bertuccini answered questions of the committee. Joan O'Keefe — Had questions about the driveways and whether they could accommodate larger cars, like SUV's. 90% of compact spaces are filled with SUV's and pick-ups. Is there a reduction in the number of houses? Chairperson Fonzi closed the public comment period. Assistant Planner Castillo addressed the questions raised by Joan O'Keefe. Mr. Silverie said there are strict CC&R's with regard to parking, but it is difficult control the types of cars which will be parked there. Parking is a problem everywhere. The garage is 19' deep so a larger vehicle could fit in the garage and the smaller vehicle could fit outside. DRC Action Minutes Nov. 15, 2012 Page 4 of 7 MOTION: By Committee Member Kelley and seconded by Committee Member Ward to approve the project with the following modifications: recommend that the applicant and staff work together to have the option of adding a closet in the bonus room, thus converting the unit to a 3rd bedroom, recommend the use of 18 -foot minimum driveway length for parking space. Additional parking areas to be added along streets, look at possible one-way streets to increase parking. Would like to see gated community discussed at Planning Commission and would like the Fire Department to weigh in. Loop road should also be discussed. Motion passed 3:0 by a roll -call vote. Chairperson Fonzi excused herself from the meeting. 3. PLN 2008-1280, EAGLE RANCH Applicants: Eagle Ranch, LLC / RRM Design Group Project Title: PLN 2008-1280: Eagle Ranch Specific Plan Project Auio� + tv tho ('i+ +h + �. h ... J .r.. J� vii S SCu a wv'e0LU1 i i uvui ivai y Location: Project Update DRC on revised project design: Description: • Revised Site Plan; lot sizes increased & number of units reduced. • Proposed Phasing Plan • Road sections • Village Center site plan • Atascadero Ave. intersection proposal Greg Smith, property owner, spoke about the project and the process. With all of the communication, they have made considerable changes to the project, and their goal is to move forward in starting an Environmental Impact Report. He stated that they have gotten to a point where they are now getting very specific questions which they need the EIR studies in order to answer. Victor Montgomery from RRM Design Group will be making the presentation. Victor Montgomery, RRM Design Group, said that the changes have resolved many of the issues. Since 2008, we have had applicant outreach meetings, Planning Commission, Design Review and City Council meetings (15 public meetings) to talk about Eagle Ranch. He showed the latest site plan (Exhibit A). In general, all lots smaller than '/z -acre have been deleted. The Village Center has been relocated further south in order to preserve the "big valley" as undeveloped open space at the center of the project site. The Village Center will contain a small amount commercial retail, 69 -units of senior housing, 12 -units of DRC Action Minutes Nov. 15, 2012 Page 5 of 7 workforce housing, and a public park. 20% of the senior housing is proposed to be affordable units. The resort is still located in same location. Applicant met with Ortega neighbors. Based on meetings, they changed lots near Ortega to 1 -acre or larger and worked with the Fire Department for a road connection with a system of gates. San Diego Road west will have an open road connection per Fire Department requirements. The commercial site along the highway 101 remains. The Atascadero Unified School District is working to locate a middle school on another site, not on Eagle Ranch. They have spent a considerable amount of time looking at Atascadero Avenue with the traffic consultant and have developed several options and narrowed it down to two options. RRM met with the Atascadero Avenue and Ortega Road neighbors last night. Prior plans had 680 detached residences. The new plan has 494, which means the count has dropped close to 200 units. Overall, the project is smaller than it was in March. Associate Planner Taylor said that W -Trans (EIR Traffic Consultant) sent maps today showing where the new traffic will be located. Mr. Montgomery gave updates on trip counts which would result to the Eagle Ranch project. Ms. Taylor showed the map on the screen, showing that most of the traffic would use the southern Santa Barbara interchange. Victor Montgomery went through the list of City Council's concerns and addressed each ,e that had come yup at the last meeting in nnarch 2012 Mr. Montgomery talked about the supplemental packet of neighborhood comments that was just distributed, and said he understands the concerns. They will not be able to go much further with the project without further study. He is urging the Council to let them get started on the EIR so these issues can be further addressed. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DELIBERATIONS Committee Member Ward commented that the project is being put together with so much input from the neighbors. He has read the letters and he doesn't know how a perfect solution can be worked out. He hopes concerns are satisfied. He wants to see, and believes it will be, a wonderful project for the City of Atascadero. Committee Member Kelley said that at the last City Council meeting, it was decided that there will be no decisions made here today. There was not enough notice given for the neighborhood meetings prior to the DRC meeting. He wants to make sure everyone has the opportunity to speak. DRC Action Minutes Nov. 15, 2012 Page 6 of 7 PUBLIC COMMENT The following members of the public spoke during the public comment section.- Nancy ection; Nancy Spitzer (9015 San Diego Road) and Pam Kressiey (11000 Atascadero Avenue) showed a video of Atascadero Ave. flooding from 1995. They are concerned with the project entrance proposed at this location on Atascadero Ave. and referred to a letter written by Ms. Kressley's engineer regarding flooding (letter included in supplemental packet.) Additional information submitted by Nancy Spitzer to the DRC for the record. (Exhibit B) Committee Member Kelley said that any drainage analysis and any flooding issues will be studied and addressed during the EIR process and by City staff. Terence Grebel stated that he would like to see all options which have been considered for the Atascadero Ave. entrance at San Diego Road. He had a list of comments which were included in the supplemental packet. He has a meeting scheduled with Russ Thompson to discuss. Vehicular & pedestrian safety is still one of his concerns; wants crosswalk and stop sign. Concerned about traffic speeds where road is straightened. Doesn't want northern Atascadero Road entrance at all; should remove it in order to remove impacts. Paul Hyman said that the process needs to be slowed down. He wants to help with the planning. The project should have an internal road only so that there are no impacts to Atascadern RnAd, second units are proposed; lnrhnt imrnart Will these have? They chni dr"1 go back to the original 452 lots. 20 years of construction from the project would be a problem. Need to address viewscape & nightscape. Mr. Hyman wants to see a marketing study to show that the homes are actually going to sell. Nancy Hyman asked the applicants to have another meeting for more dialogue. She stated that 3 weeks' notice is needed for a neighborhood meeting. Need a better setting for the next meeting in order to get all of the neighbors together. Committee member Kelley addressed questions that arose during public comment. He stated that the next neighborhood meeting will be done as a workshop. It should be a public location, and City staff should attend. Director Frace stated that there was a supplemental packet distributed today with letters referred to during public comment. Committee member Kelley closed the public comment period. There was no action taken by the Design Review Committee. There will be another Eagle Ranch meeting in the near future. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS AND REPORTS None DRC Action Minutes Nov. 15, 2012 DIRECTOR'S REPORT None ADJOURNMENT - 4:55 p.m. MINUTES PREPARED BY: Annette Manier, Recording Secretary The following exhibits are available in the Community Development Department: Exhibit A —Maps Exhibit B - Nancy Spitzer letter and exhibits Adopted 12-13-12 t:\— design review committee\minutes\minutes 2012\action minutes 11-15-12.am.docx Page 7 of 7 Design Review Committee November 15, 2012 Dear Committee Members, Exhibit A DRC 11-15-12 Many of the changes to the Eagle Ranch Project are good ideas, including the number of lots, larger size of lots, and moving the Village closer the the 101/Santa Barbara Interchange. I believe the project could have many benefits for the residents and be an asset the community. My concerns lie in the location of the proposed entrance on Atascadero Avenue north of San Diego Road. It seems strange to me, that this proposed entrance is only .7 of a mile from the Santa Barbara main entrance, when this project is so large. Although I have many traffic and circulation concerns, deer crossing, etc., I want to address flooding. Flood Zone — Video & California Department of Water Resources Maps The proposed new intersection is a very short distance from the edge of Ll e Zone A -100' year - flood zone. Even m y y property, just outside the flood zone, has a huge lake almost every year. Yesterday afternoon, I along with about 30 other residents, met with Mr. Smith and Mr. Montgomery on San Diego Road just north of Atascadero Avenue. I asked Mr. Montgomery where the flood zone was. His associate said it was near the Santa Barbara/101 Interchange. It is true, there is a flood zone there. I asked about where we were standing. They acted like flooding was not a problem there. When I confronted them with the fact that they were standing in a Zone A, 100 year flood zone, they tried to deny it's existence. Mr. Montgomery said that would all be addressed in the EIR. I, and others, were astounded that he did not seem to know. They were working with staff. Were they aware? It is my understanding, that the latest plan includes removing the hill just north of the intersection, and straightening and lowering Atascadero Avenue. This creates some serious problems. We are providing you with a letter from KVC Consulting Engineer, Keith Crowe, Registered Professional Engineer, State of California, addressed.to Pam Kressley of 11001 Atascadero Avenue. He is very familiar with her property and the culvert, as he completed a flood hazard study for her back in 1993. His conclusion is that even if additional measures are installed, the volume of runoff reaching the culvert will be increased unless all the runoff from the development is stored in terminal basins. He goes on the say that the increase in volume means that more water will reach the culvert inlet, even if it comes at a slower rate. If the culvert becomes plugged, a very likely event for culverts draining hillside watersheds, there is significant likelihood water will top the road and risk flooding her property. His conclusion ---- it is his opinion that significant development on the Eagle Creek Ranch could put her residence in significant jeopardy. Not only would it affect her residence, but those downstream, a number of which are actually located in Zone A. You might recall, that a few years ago one of the culverts near the intersection of San Diego and Colorado, downstream of the Kressley's, became clogged, and that flooding made the intersection impassible. City crews came out and it took quite a while before the road became accessible. Pam has a story about her culvert and debris. It is apparent the construction o of a new Atascadero Road intersection uphill of San Diego, and the extensive grading proposed, may cause significant flooding and damage to downstream properties, and potential litigation for the City, who has received notice of and is aware of the flooding issues. This improvement is inconsistent with many aspects of the General Plan, as I pointed out in the email previously sent by myself and Pam Kressley. We believe that this proposed intersection should be abandoned, as there are just too many problems associated with it. There is much more factual information available, but I would like to conclude with the emotional. This project has brought together members of the neighborhood, some who had been strangers. Many of these residents have resided in their homes, including myself, for more than 20 years. There is a common thread that binds us: We love this neighborhood and are passionate about it. Please don't destroy it. Nancy Spitzer 9015 San Diego Road a Em Ct N 0 0 N 0 0 IV w51-1 :4. U4 a - W (D n w 00 0 a - w 1 Best Available Map(BAM) Web Viewer Print Page 0 http://gis.bam.water.ca.gov/bam/?do=print IEPATd1lVT CSF .......:.. .... WATER RESOMC.ES. Floodplain Information (Latitude: 35.448574561728876, Longitude: -120.65061092376709) Floodplain Layer 100 -Year 200 -Year 500 -Year FEMA Effective ✓N N/A N FEMA Preliminary N N/A N DWR Awareness N N/A N/A Regional/Special Studies I N N/A N USACE Comp. Stui� IN IN N 5 tifg Ni n Map data 02014,gpc County: San Luis Obispo ✓ Floodplain layer on Y: The location is within the floodplain N: The location is not within the floodplain N/A: Data not available Floodplains are displayed using semi transparent colors. When viewing overlapping floodplains, the combination of multiple semi transparent colors will not match the legend colors. For accurate color representation, view floodplains individually. Legend: ---- River/Stream Centerline 100 -Year Floodplains FEMA Effective Disclaimer: The BAM does not replace existing FEMA regulatory floodplains shown on Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). For more information on tt FEMA regulatory floodplains, please contact FEMA directly. The BAM floodplains identify potential flood risks that may warrant further studies or analyses for land use decision making. The floodplains shown delineate areas with potential exposure to flooding for three different storm events: one with storm flows that have a 1 % chance of being equaled or exceeded in any year (100 -year), one with storm flows that have a 0.5% chance of being equaled or exceeded in any year (200 -year), and one with storms flows that have a 0.2% chance c being equaled or exceeded in any year (500 -year). These flows and resulting flooded area are based on the best available floodplain information and may not identify all areas subject to flooding. The floodplain map is best viewed and printed in color, 1 of 1 11/14/12 12:48 PM 2 CL. ol N cv N j April 18, 2012 Pam Kressley 11001 Atascadero Avenue Atascadero, Ca 93422 Dear Pam; KEITH V. CROWE, PE, PLS CONSULTING ENGINEER In September of 1993 I completed a study of the flood hazard to your property at 11001 Atascadero Avenue. Your residence lies adjacent to an unnamed tributary to the North Fork of Paloma Creek. I found your house to be relatively safe from the 100 -year flood on the creek. However, at that time (almost 20 years ago) I cautioned you to be watchful of upstream development. The reason I expressed this concern is the culvert under Atascadero Avenue. Your residence is near a relative low point on the road. The culvert goes under the road at this same low point. The concern is the culvert. If the culvert fails to carry all the water approaching from upstream then the water will overflow onto the road and toward your residence. In my opinion, the culvert probably does not meet current design standards with regard to capacity. Further, it is normal practice to provide a "safe overflow path" should the culvert fail. Unfortunately, I don't see a safe overflow path and if water tops the culvert I believe there is a significant risk that your residence will be flooded. My opinion of the marginal (at best) capacity of the culvert is supported by your observations of water ponding nearly to the point of flooding Atascadero Road during heavy rains in recent years. The development of Eagle Ranch will decrease the capacity of the watershed tributary to this culvert to absorb rainfall. This means that, if not properly mitigated, there will be an increase in the rate at which water reaches this culvert thereby increasing the risk of flooding to your residence. Even if measures are installed that will mitigate the increased runoff rate, the volume of runoff reaching the culvert will be increased unless all the runoff from the development is stored in terminal basins. P.O. Box 832 ® A iMCai ERo CA 9342 3-0832 ® PFtoNF.: (voic`L ANL) f:AX): (805) 464-0975 E-MAii : KVCP.owE(r10LART R.Nrr or: KVCRm,F,va)GRouNDUP.BX, WE13: www.GiOo NbuP.BL The increase in volume means that more water will reach the culvert inlet — even if it comes at a slower rate. If the culvert becomes plugged — a very likely event for culverts draining hillside watersheds — there is a significant likelihood water will top the road and risk flooding your property. In conclusion, it is my opinion significant development on the Eagle Creek Ranch could put your residence in significant jeopardy. Sincerely; V, Keith V. Crowe 10 ril i�- (JFESSi0 , 40 Lic. No. 31,581 Exp 12/12 P.O. Box 832 ® A'C'ASCADERO C:A 93423-0832 ® PHONE E: (VOICE_ AND FAX): (805) 464-0975 E -Malt_: KVCRowE(a)CHARTERNE OR KVCrzowrc<?,GE�ot?tiDUP.Bz WE13: www.GROUNDUP.BZ Exhibit B DRC 11-15-12 0 C) C) C) C) LO 0 0 LO LULO 0 C) 0 () co LLJ