Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRC_2013-10-23_AgendaPacketCALL TO ORDER CITY OF ATASCA DER 0 DESIGN RE VIE W COMMITTEE A GENDA Committee Meeting Wednesday, October 23, 2013 3:00 PM. City Hall Council Chambers 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, California Roll Call: Chairperson Fonzi Committee Member Kelley Committee Member Anderson Committee Member Dariz Committee Member Kirk APPROVAL OF AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF DRAFT ACTION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 9, 2013 Find us on FaCebooWtl)://www.facebook.com/i)lanningatascadero © City of Atascadero Design Review Committee Agenda DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REVIEW Regular Meeting, October 23, 2013 Page 2 of 5 2. PLN-2099-0024/CUP-2004-0123/DRC-2012-0018 LAS LOMAS VILLAGE APARTMENTS REQUEST TO REMOVE NO -PARKING REQUIREMENT ON CALLE MILANO Property Mike Zappas, Las Lomas Village, 8189 San Dimas Road, Atascadero, CA 93422 Owner/Applicant: Project Title: PLN-2099-0024/CUP-2004-0123/DRC-2012-0018 Woodridge Multi -Family / Las Lomas Village Apartments Project 9000 Calle Milano, Dechado Ct., Ciruela Way, Los Olivos Circle, Atascadero, Location: CA 93422 (San Luis Obispo County) APN's 045-311-014, 045-311-015, 045-311-016 Project The applicant is requesting that the DRC waive the current requirement for Description & installation of No Parking signs on Calle Milano. Proposed The DRC previously reviewed the Las Lomas Village Apartments project on Feb. 16, Request: 2012. At that meeting, the DRC approved minor changes to the elevations and floor plan designs for the 100 Multi -Family apartment units which had been previously approved as part of the Woodridge/Las Lomas Specific Plan. At that meeting, the DRC added a condition to the project which requires the Multi -Family developer to install No Parking signs on Calle Milano. The project owner/applicant has submitted a request to DRC to remove the requirement for No Parking signs in order to continue to allow on -street parking on Calle Milano. The applicant states that this requirement is not applied to the rest of the Las Lomas project, and there is adequate width on the street to accommodate on - street parking. General Plan Designation: High Density Residential (HDR) Zoning District: Specific Plan 1 (Woodridge / Las Lomas) City of Atascadero Design Review Committee Agenda Regular Meeting, October 23, 2013 Page 3 of 5 3. PLN 2013-1478, ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT 2013-1478; REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE Property Owner: Richard Minkel, 6105 San Anselmo Road, Atascadero, CA 93422 Applicant: John Sevo, 1426 S. Willow, Rialto, CA 92376 Project Title: PLN 2013-1478 / AUP 2013-0064 / DRC 2013-0041 Project 6105 San Anselmo Road, Atascadero, CA 93422 Location: APN 049-225-012 (San Luis Obispo County) Project The application is a request for additional signage on the existing gas station Description: pump island canopy structure at 6105 San Anselmo Road. The Atascadero Sign Ordinance limits the amount of signage and color banding to 20 sq. ft. on two (2) sides of the canopy. The applicant is requesting an exception to the Sign Ordinance allowances, as provided per Atascadero Municipal Code Section 9- 15.006, subject to appearance review and findings. The applicant is proposing to install blue color banding, business name and/or logos on all four sides of the canopy, consistent with the Chevron Gas Station corporate design. The signage and color banding proposed on the canopy structure measures approximately 330 sq. ft. in total area. General Plan Designation: GC (General Commercial) Zoning District: CT (Commercial Tourist) Proposed Categorical Exempt Section 15311; Class 11 exemption for construction of new on Environmental site signs. Determination: Recommendation: The Atascadero Design Review Committee (DRC) will review the proposed application at their regular meeting on October 23, 2013 at 3:00 pm. The DRC will make a recommendation to the AUP Hearing Officer regarding the request for additional gas station canopy signage. City of Atascadero Design Review Committee Agenda Regular Meeting, October 23, 2013 Page 4 of 5 4. ZONE CHANGE 2004-0086, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2004-0132, SYCAMORE PLACE (FORMELY VINTAGE HOMES) Applicant: CSRJ Land & Cattle, LLC (CS Nino); 790 Serpa Ranch Road, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Project Title: Sycamore Place (formerly Vintage Homes): Zone Change 2004-0086, Conditional Use Permit 2004-0132; Tentative Tract Map 2004-0055 for a 12 -lot Project Planned Development Subdivision. Project 6709 Atascadero Ave, Atascadero, CA 93422 (Vacant / Under Construction) Location: (San Luis Obispo County) APN 030-281-014, 015, 016. Project The proposed project consists of proposed floor plan modification from two (2) Description: bedroom and a den to three (3) bedroom units. In addition, applicant is proposing Proposed minor fagade changes to the balcony to accommodate the additional bedroom. Environmental Staff is requesting a conformity review for consistency with the Master Plan of Determination: Development. The applicant is not requesting an increase in the size of the footprint of the building, nor total unit size. With the exception of the decreased balcony size, the applicant is not requesting a substantial fagade change. General Plan Designation: High Density Residential — HDR Zoning District: Residential Multiple Family — RMF -20 / PD -25 Proposed Project is consistent with Certified Mitigated Negative Declaration 2005-0050 Environmental Determination: 5. PLN 2008-1314 DOVE CREEK COMMERCIAL CENTER Applicant: Benjamin Efraim, Fortune Companies, 5423 Village Road, Suite 22, Long Beach, California 90808 Project Title: PLN 2008-1314 Dove Creek Commercial Center — Amendment of Project Conditions Project Northwest corner of El Camino Real and Santa Barbara Road, APN 045 -331 - Location: 014. Project The proposed project consists of pre -application review of the potential Description: amendment condition #10 of the conditions of approval for the Dove Creek Commercial Center. Proposed Pre -application — no CEQA analysis has been performed at this stage. Environmental Determination: City of Atascadero Design Review Committee Agenda Regular Meeting, October 23, 2013 Page 5 of 5 COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS AND REPORTS DIRECTOR'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT The next regularly scheduled DRC meeting will be held on October 30th, 2013 at 3:30 pm Agendas, Minutes and Staff Reports are available online at www.atascadero.or� under City Officials & Commissions, Design Review Committee. ITEM NUMBER: 1 DATE: 10/23/13 CITY OF A TASCADERO DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Regular Meeting — Wednesday, October 9, 2013 - 3:30 P.M. City Hall, Room #106 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California CALL TO ORDER — 3:30 pm Chairperson Fonzi called the meeting to order at 3:33 pm. rlollti%I ■ ■ Present: Chairperson Fonzi Committee Member Kelley Committee Member Anderson Committee Member Dariz Committee Member Kirk (excused absence) Staff Present: Community Development Director Warren Frace Senior Planner Callie Taylor Others Present: Chris Dufour (RRM Group) Scott Nowak (Robbins Reid) APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: By Committee Member Anderson and seconded by Committee Member Kelley to approve the Agenda. Motion passed 4.0 by a roll -call vote. (Kirk — absent) PUBLIC COMMENT None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF DRAFT ACTION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2013 MOTION: By Committee Member Dariz and seconded by Committee Member Kelley to approve the consent calendar. Motion passed 4:0 by a roll -call vote. (Kirk — absent) Design Review Committee Draft Action Minutes October 9, 2013 DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REVIEW 2. DOVE CREEK HIGHWAY 101 LANDSCAPE BUFFER PLN 2099-1066 / DRC 2012-0111 / CUP 2003-0099 Page 2 of 4 Owner / Applicant: Corona Dove Creek, LLC./ Robbins Reed, Inc. Project Title: Dove Creek: PLN 2099-1066 / DRC 2012-0111 / CUP 2003-0099 Project Location: Santa Barbara Rd and EI Camino Real, Highway 101 frontage APN: 045-331-005, 007, 008, 011, 012, 045-333-005, 009, 011, 045-334-001 General Plan: Mixed -Use Planned Development (MU -PD) Zoning: Open Space & RMF -10 with PD -12 Overlay Project Area: 63.3 acres Existing Use: Multi -family Residential Planned Development Currently Under Construction Project Description: The applicant has submitted revised Highway 101 landscape plans which propose to install the required landscape buffer on the project site only, with no new landscape to be installed in the Caltrans right-of-way due to new Caltrans maintenance and installation requirements which would greatly increase costs. Staff Staff recommends DRC make a finding that the applicant's proposed on - Recommendation: site landscape plans are in substantial conformance with the intention of CUP Condition #31, thereby providing adequate screening along the Highway 101 frontage. Landscape would not be installed in the Caltrans right-of-way. Senior Planner Taylor gave a brief presentation to the Design Review Committee, which covered the following; • History of condition proposals & Caltrans process • Caltrans currently wants weed abatement responsibility on HOA — burdensome • Alternative landscape plan proposed — all on Dove Creek property (RRM's visual simulation plans) • Staff recommending approval — consistency finding needed COMMITTEE DELIBERATIONS Committee Member Kelley • Supports proposal • Vines would be nice Committee Member Anderson • Achieves 90% of desired effect Applicant: Chris Dufour (RRM Group) • Liability of fire / plant replacement / freeway adoption (all negatives) Design Review Committee Draft Action Minutes October 9, 2013 Page 3 of 4 Committee Member Dariz • Agrees change is okay • Vines on wall would be nice Chairperson Fonzi • Plant types? Consistency with existing / natives • HOA maintenance process? • Need to ensure watering so plants survive • Wall with no landscape looks bare. Can developer help homeowners plant in backyard there? (Scott — tough to figure out) • Add vines to wall to soften appearance Applicant: Scott Nowak (Robbins Reid) • Will ensure maintenance and watering with HOA • HWY 101 landscape was included in DRE budget; this should be a reduction in maintenance area PUBLIC COMMENT None MOTION: By Committee Member Fonzi and seconded by Committee Member Kelley to approve the applicant's landscape proposal as submitted, with the addition of vines on the wall facing 101 highway. Motion passed by 4:0 by a roll call vote. (Kirk — absent) COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS AND REPORTS None DIRECTOR'S REPORT Next Design Review Committee meeting scheduled for October 23, 2013. ADJOURNMENT - 3:50 pm. MINUTES PREPARED BY: Warren Frace, Community Development Director t:\-- design review committee\minutes\minutes 2013\draft action minutes 10-09-13.docx ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 Atascadero Design Review Committee Report In Brief - Community Development Department Callie Taylor, Senior Planner, (805) 470-3448, ctaylor@atascadero.org PLN 2099-00241 CUP 2004-01231 DRC 2012-0018 Las Lomas Village Apartments Request Regarding No Parking Signs on Calle Milano • .... Applicant:..- Las Lomas Apartments 9111 Calle Milano 000 Calle Milano �.. D - Los Olivos Circlelot rb 7�m ter_►-� is fa- AS045-311-016 PLN -2099-0024 �`• tCl RA@�a:uife� fI U. �� l�fi� `�O ..a112Mi1� Project #: DRC High Density Residential fi-���rJ►ILI��ij fit__ sma fssa General Plan: (HDR) . rim si +r_ �� til St rim rr_� �►� Project Area: • 11 . • . • • • • • - -• • �� ..ie. s.fi fill aVVl��_�La G. Existing 0 Staff DRC review proposed request and provide direction to Staff and the Recommendation: applicant regarding the No Parking signs on Calle Milano. ❑ Applicant has requested the DRC waive the requirement to install the "No Parking" signs on Calle Milano. DRC to decide if current requirement for signs shall be waived or upheld. ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 Background The 100 Multi -Family apartment units at 9000 Calle Milano were originally approved in 2003 as part of the Woodridge/Las Lomas Specific Plan. A Conditional Use Permit/ Master Plan of Development was approved by the Planning Commission in 2004 to adopt details for the project development. The current owner purchased the vacant site in 2011, and proposed some architectural design and floor plan changes for the construction of the ten (10) apartment buildings. The Las Lomas apartment project was originally approved with 80 2 - bedroom units and 20 1 -bedroom units, with loft/office spaces in many units. The new owners proposed to modify the unit make up to allow 20 1 -bedroom units, 60 2 -bedroom units, and 20 3 bedroom units. On February 16, 2012, the Design Review Committee (DRC) approved the design changes, subject to additional conditions and requirements. One of the additional requirements added by the DRC at the February 16, 2012 meeting was to require the Multi -Family developer to install "No Parking" signs on Calle Milano. This requirement was not a condition of the original Specific Plan or Conditional Use Permit, but was added by the DRC to address concerns which the neighbors raised at the DRC meeting. The No Parking signs were added to the subdivision improvement permit plans by City Staff and included as a condition on that permit. Proposed Request Since the apartments were occupied over the summer, staff has requested the owner/applicant install the No Parking signs as required by DRC. In response to staff's numerous requests, the project owner/applicant has recently submitted a request that the DRC to remove the requirement for No Parking signs in order to continue to allow on -street parking on Calle Milano. A letter and email from the applicant is included as Attachment 1 of this report. The applicant states that this requirement is not applied to the rest of the Las Lomas project, and there is adequate width on the street to accommodate on -street parking. With the project still under construction, on-site parking for the tenant, contractors, and visitors is tight. In addition the trailhead to the Las Lomas trail system is open to the general public and located directly across from the apartment's entrance, adding to the need for on - street parking. The City has received letters, emails, and inquiries from several Las Lomas neighbors asking when the No Parking signs are going to be installed, and requesting that the City enforce this requirement as soon as possible. Written correspondence from the neighbors is included as Attachment 2. The neighbors have listed concerns such as safety and the visual appearance of cars parking on the street near the main project entrance. ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 On-site Parking At the February 2012 DRC meeting, the neighbors were concerned that adequate parking would not be provided due the increase in number of bedrooms (20 bedrooms added by applicant in 2012), and not all tenants would use the garages for parking. The Municipal Code also allows a percentage of regular parking spaces to be replaced by motorcycle parking, compact spaces, and bicycle racks. DRC's requirement for no on -street parking on Calle Milano was derived from this discussion in order to assure neighbors that the project's public roads would not be impacted. Based on the number of bedrooms provided, the 100 apartment units require an equivalent of 220 on-site parking spaces. Required parking: The project has provided the required parking through a combination of garage parking, uncovered parking spaces, motorcycle parking, and bicycle racks. ADA accessible spaces and compact spaces also make up a portion of the total parking provided. Upon build out, the apartment project will be constructed with a total of 104 outdoor parking space, 100 garage parking spaces, plus motorcycle and bike parking: The site plan is approved for construction of: • 100 covered spaces provided in garages • 104 uncovered spaces on site in parking lots • 11 motorcycle spaces • At least 6 bike racks 221 equivalent parking spaces provided Currently, four (4) of the ten (10) apartment buildings are completed, with tenants living in these 40 constructed units. The remaining 60 units are still under construction. A portion of the onsite parking has been completed. The project owner has assigned outdoor parking spaces to each unit, and there are several guest spaces available on site. However, it appears that the tenants are currently not utilizing the garage spaces for parking and many garages are being used as storage. In addition, the contractors, prospective tenants coming # of units Spaces required per unit Required spaces 1-BDR Apartments 20 1.5 spaces/unit 30 2-13DR Apartments 60 2.0 spaces/unit 120 3-13DR Apartments 20 2.5 spaces/unit 50 Guest Parking 1 space per 5 units 20 guest spaces Total 100 units 220** spaces required The project has provided the required parking through a combination of garage parking, uncovered parking spaces, motorcycle parking, and bicycle racks. ADA accessible spaces and compact spaces also make up a portion of the total parking provided. Upon build out, the apartment project will be constructed with a total of 104 outdoor parking space, 100 garage parking spaces, plus motorcycle and bike parking: The site plan is approved for construction of: • 100 covered spaces provided in garages • 104 uncovered spaces on site in parking lots • 11 motorcycle spaces • At least 6 bike racks 221 equivalent parking spaces provided Currently, four (4) of the ten (10) apartment buildings are completed, with tenants living in these 40 constructed units. The remaining 60 units are still under construction. A portion of the onsite parking has been completed. The project owner has assigned outdoor parking spaces to each unit, and there are several guest spaces available on site. However, it appears that the tenants are currently not utilizing the garage spaces for parking and many garages are being used as storage. In addition, the contractors, prospective tenants coming ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 to look at the site, and guests do not appear to have enough parking or do not know where to park on site. As a result of these factors, the tenants, guests and contractors have been choosing to parking on Calle Milano to access the site. Photo of Apartment Garage on October 4, 2013 ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 DRC Options: 1. DRC could leave the requirement for the installation of No Parking signs on Calle Milano. The DRC should identify a required timeframe for installation of the signs and specify exactly how far along Calle Milano the No Parking requirement should be enforced. If the applicant does not install the signs within the required timeframe, the City will install the signs and pass the cost on to the apartment project property owner. 2. DRC could choose to waive the requirement for No Parking signs. Since the requirement was added by the DRC, and is not an original condition of approval or mitigation measure for the project, it is within the DRC's authority to remove the requirement completely. 3. DRC could chose to require No Parkign signs on only one side of the street, or within a limited area of the street, or some other modified alternative. The DRC should be specific about the locations where parking is prohibited and specify a timeframe for sign installation and enforcement. 4. DRC could refer this item back to staff for additional review and analysis. Attachments: Attachment 1: Applicant/Owner's Request Letter & Correspondence Attachment 2: Correspondence from Neighbors Attachment 3: Vicinity Map and Specific Plan Map Attachment 4: Site Plan: Las Lomas Apartments Attachment 5: February 16, 2012 DRC Minutes ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 Attachment 1: Applicant/owner's request letter & correspondence October 2, 2013 Dear Ms. Taylor, Thank you for coming out and reviewing our parking situation. We recognize that as a condition of approval In the planning review committee meeting that Las Lomas Village was required to provide no parking signs on Calle Milano. Furthermore we recognize that this was not a condition when the project was originally approved by the city council_ It is not a requirement of any other area in the landscape and lighting district. The street in front of Las Lomas Village is approximately 38 feet wide the other streets where parking is allowed are 30 feet wide. We recognize that we have a parking challenge, we are taking steps to alleviate the situation as outlined in the letter that I gave you at our meeting today. There are some other considerations that we discussed at your visit. Such as the trail head and cars parking too close to our entry. We want to be a good neighbor but we feel that we are being unfairly treated and we respectfully request that our residents, their guests, our construction workers and the trail users be allowed to continue to park on Calle Milano. If necessary, we would like to be on the agenda of the next design review committee meeting. We expect the situation to improve once the construction is complete and all of our parking is complete. As I'm sure you're aware there is a state mandate that projects that provide affordable housing will be given three considerations by the City. To date we have not received one of those considerations. We are requesting that this be one of those considerations. Sincerely, I. Mike Zappas `--� Las Lomas Village FAX ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 Attachment 1: Applicant/owner's request letter & correspondence From: Mike Zappas > To: Callie Taylor; 1^;arren Frace Cc: Las Lomas Village Subject: Parking at Las Lomas and Calle Milano Dear Warren and Callie: Sent: Sun 10/13/2013 10:23 -"M First I would like to apologize that you would have to get involved at this late date with our parking and neighbor relations. You Probably thought that was all behind you. Remember the old adage, "The best laid plans of mice and me often go astray." As planners, I know that is not music to your ears, but we are at the point where plans meet reality. wanted to bring you up to date on the efforts we have made and are continuing to make to meet this challenge. It is not only neighbors that would like a solution, our residents also have brought it up. We decided to first survey the situation to try to determine the root of the problem. We found the following problems: 1) We found that 20 out of 40 residents were using their garage as a storage unit. 2) We have also been counting cars and spaces and found that some of our residents are not using their garage because they don't want to get out of their car to open the garage door. 3) Other of our residents have 3 cars. 4) Some of our residents don't use their assigned space because they want a space in case they have a visitor. 5) One of our residents don't use their garage because both their cars are too big. 6) Some of our spaces go unused because they are either handicapped or for motorcycles. We have no motorcycle users yet. ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 Our plans for dealing with the challenge are as follows. First, continue with our discussions and friendly persuasion that we have started. We call in every tenant that is a potential solution to the challenge and present the problem. We ask for their help in solving the problem and offer our help. We have formulated the following strategies to deal with the problems outlined above. 1) We are adding language to our lease going forward that forbids the using the garage as storage. If we don't get cooperation on this front we want to talk to you about taking off the garage doors in the next two phases. We will only ask this if our present efforts are not enough to meet the challenge. We have contacted a few of the self storage businesses in town for a reduced rate. One location was full. So far, among the residents we have spoken with, two have decided to clear their garage and start using it. We have offered storage closets. We have offered to help them move heavy items. We will follow up with the ones we have contacted and be more insistent going forward. We know this is the biggest of the solutions. We can solve this challenge with this category alone. We will eventually have to evict those residents that refuse to change on this front. 2) We are offering to give these tenants automatic garage door openers as an incentive to use their garage. 3) We are about to set a price on extra parking places that residents that don't need their extra space, could rent it to another resident. 4) This will have to be changed. I think when we have guest spaces labeled and enforce it this will be revisited and corrected. 5) This resident has agreed to sell one of the large cars and buy a smaller one. 6) We are going to survey our residents to see if any are handicapped, and assign those spaces to them. These are the least expensive solutions and the quickest to implement. We may be able to squeeze a few more spaces in but the site is so tight that even if we eliminate a building or two it would not solve the problem. This is a management challenge and we are up for it. Sincerely, Mike Zappas, owner Nina Hernandez, manager ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 Attachment 1: Applicant/owner's request letter S correspondence From; Las Lomas Village [. Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 5:19 PM To: Subja -ct: ParkIng Tenants of Las Lomas Village" �A I We strive for Las Lomas Village to be a place where everyone enjoys living. The number one concern that has been brought to our attention is "PARKING". The community was designed with garages as their primary tenant parking. Since many of the garages are being used for storage it puts pressure on our community parking situation. In an effort to resolve this we offer the following: 1- We have storage closets available for rent. 2- We have a carpenter on staff that can build storage solutions in your garage (at your expense). 3- We could hold a community garage sale with advertisement paid by Las Lomas Village. Parking in front of your garage is only for loading and unloading... this is inconsiderate towards your co -tenants and is also a safety issue incase emergency vehicles are in need of access. I take no joy in "RED STICKERING" cars but will continue to do so because of the calls that I receive from tenants. Please remember our speed limit is 1OMPH for both tenants and guests. It's a community effort to make Las Lomas Village a great place to live. Thank you— Nina Property Manager Las Lomas Village 9245 Ciruela Way Atascadero, CA 93422 Office Fax Attachment 2: Correspondence from Neighbors October 11, 2013 Warren Frace, Community Development Director City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 R,E: Parking on Calle Milano at Las Lomas Dear Mr. Frace, ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 p AJ,)6gf This letter is response to a notice posted at Las Lomas concerning changing the no parking area on Calle Milano to a parking allowed zone. I will be out of town on the date of the announced meeting, October 23, 2013. This letter will constitute my written objections to the proposed change. 1. Parking on Calle Milano currently causes traffic congestion at the area just uphill from the entry median. Going downhill, it is difficult to see vehicles exiting the apartment property with vehicles parked on the north side of Calle Milano above the apartment entrance. 2. Parking on Calle Milano will cause serious problems if emergency evacuation is needed. In the area of the median there is barely room to squeeze by if a vehicle is parked in that area. There are 100 units planned for the apartment complex. If even a portion of the occupiers of those units park anywhere on Calle Milano there will be a huge number of vehicles permanently congesting our only means of entry and exit from Las Lomas. This is a serious safety consideration. If the proposed town homes are built, and parking is allowed, parking on Calle Milano will significantly increase. The persons occupying the apartments must be required to park on site, or in an area where parking is allowed, not on the main ingress and egress street of Las Lomas. 3. The apartment dwellers all have garages and there is adequate parking available on site in parking lots. The purpose of the gate, as we were told, was to secure the apartment area and the property of the apartment dwellers. That gate is serving very little purpose if the apartment dwellers park their vehicles outside the gate. 4. Parking on Calle Milano will also cause deterioration in our landscaped areas since people will be exiting vehicles and walking onto the landscaped areas. 5. There are several specific vehicles that have been parked on Calle Milano without being moved for extended periods of time. If parking is allowed, more vehicles are likely to be dumped in this area. I hope you will take my comments into consideration and not allow the proposed change in parking on Calle Milano. Very truly yours, N c A re Atascadero, CA 93422 From: Richard Davis To: Callie Taylor Cc: Subject: DRC meeting re No Parking Signs Hi Callie. Vt+hen last we met at the DRC for Las Lomas. I almost asked you about this issue. Now. 5 months later. I have more experience on which to base my opinion ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 Sent. Sun 10'1" 2013 ? 45 Pr.1 As a threshold issue. what has changed from when the developer accepted the DRC recommendation to install NO PARKING SIGNS? "The applicant states that this requirement is not applied to the rest of the Las Lomas Project and there is adequate width on the street to accommodate on -street parking I think this "waiver basis" was also true when the DRC asked for the NO PARKING signs and the developer did not complain then??ll N;'hy now? Re DRC changing its mind: The DRC was fully aware to the width of the streets in the development b%'hat has changed for the DRC to change its position?? The arguments and important development principles that were valid then are certainly valid now. Frankly. I am surprised the DRC would even consider this waiver. Is it not true that there is supposed to be sufficient on-site parking for apt owners?? If more space is needed. the developer should provide it. and not rely on city streets. My arguments against a waiver 1. Pedestrian safety I travel Calle Milano daily and. on at least 3 occasions over the past few months. pedestrians (I assume apt visitors) have darted out from between cars that now park on that street Dangerous for me and theml In response. the developer might suggest crosswalks However. we all know how faithfully pedestrians use such signs Yes. we have cars on Calle Milano south of the apts. However. this is not desired and no rationale for exacerbating the situation. If you were to drive Via Cielo at any time. you would rarely see cars parked thereon This is a "neighborhood look" which is worth preserving whenever possible. 2. Blight: V;'hen the apts are fully occupied. I can well imagine that Calle Milano will become a refuge of boats. RVs. as well as cars The only good news there is that we do not need to spend any money on landscaping. for it will not be visible from the street. 3. Transients,Theft One good thing about on-site parking (and the use of a parking gate) is that the number of people who are able to simply wander (and check out) the premises is reduced. I would think that apt owners would want to limit the number of extraneous visitors to the complex. Did the development plans account for/provide parking for legitimate visitors to the apts?? 4. What is motivating the developer? The obvious reason the developer would want a waiver is that it gives apt owners the ability to rent rooms out to people and thereby increases the rent the developer can charge Hence. a three-bedroom apt owner might rent the third bedroom out to 1-4 people. each of who would need to park his;her car somewhere As I said earlier. if more space is needed. the developer should find that on-sitell I intend to attend this meeting on the 23rd and I will be encouraging my neighbors to do likewise As I prepare my remarks for this meeting. I would benefit from your thoughts/responses/background material relevant to the issues I have raised here Thank you. Richard Davis ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 Attachment 2: Correspondence from Neighbors From: Steve Richey [ > To: Callie Taylor Cc Rachelle Rickard; Marcia Torgerson; l^;arren Frace; Russ Thompson Subject: Re: Las Lomas Neighborhood Hello Calle Just wanted you to know that over the past 10 days I have done a study on street side parking Sent: Sun 9;'29!2013 8:28 AAI have monitered this 4 times a day. The average number of cars parked on Calle Millano is 11.3 per day. have checked am, lunch ,after work and evening. There is trash, damaage to landscape, devaluing inptoperty look as well as poorly parked vehicles. In addition, there have been more than significant parking within the complex. Only 1 time there was not significant parking within the apartment designated parking. What has been noticed because people have left garages open- is that these are not beeing used for vehicle storage. Some are set up as an office, another seems to have been set up as a room, and most that have been visible are set with organized storage. Only a couple of the garages that were open and visable look like they have unpacked boxes. Seems like and actions are showing that the rentors are not concerned with adhereing to the rules and or being respectful to the property. Lastly, I had a discussion with a volunteer police deparment person who goes around and produces tickets for vehicles parked on the street. He was very willing to give notice and warrants to vehicles farther up on Calle Milano and Eliano but was told he is not allowed to give notice to the cars by the apartments. This seems odd and possibly incorrect but with current actions they are speaking the loudest, which is an interpretaion that he must be right. The purpose of my email is to highlight these areas and to follow up on your promise that NO PARKING signs were going up shortly. Can you please define what shortly means. Please advise if the city is going to enforce the no parking signage and please advise a date. If you are not going to follow thru please also notify me so I can then decide what is the next approach. Regards Steve Richey u Attachment 3: Vicinity Map and Specific Plan Site Plan Las Lomas Apartments site 9000 Calle Milano Vft ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 � Ciruetia WaY erc c � .',a11e MylanQ MEMulti-Family Trail Townhomes ` elk Trail Staging/ Tot Lot ' VA., rr.r�yr.�1 Multi -Family Apartments Site Entry • Detention Basins Service Commercial FIF ft;.Custom lots ,SFR 1 &SFR 2 - rr A-1 101 Trail ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 Attachment 4: Site Plan: Las Lomas Apartments Overall Site Plan Las Lomas Apartments y Pool, rental office, gym, -- laundry - MAN f� ©sv ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 Attachment 5: February 16, 2012 DRC Minutes APPROVED HAR 2 ? 2012 � Y rcn CITY OF ATASCADE PLANNING CITY OF ATASCADER DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION MINUTES Regular Meeting - Thursday, February 16, 2012 4:00 P.M. City Hall Conference Room 4 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero, California CALL TO ORDER — 4:00 p.m. Chairperson Fonzi called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson Fonzi, Committee Member Kelley, Committee Member Ward, Committee Member Cooper Absent: Committee Member DeCarli Recording Secretary: Community Development Director Warren Frace Stats Present: Warren Frace, Community Development Director Callie Taylor, Associate Planner Others Present: Mike Zappas Gaylen Little Len Colamarino Nancy Ayres GW Bates APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: By Committee Member Ward and seconded by Committee Member Kelley to approve the Agenda. Motion passed 4:0 by a roll -call vote. (DeCarli Absent) PUBLIC COMMENT None C,ty of Atascadero Design Review Committee Action Minutes ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 February 16.20!2 Page 2 of 4 CONSENT CALENDAR (All items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and non -controversial by City Staff and wai be approved by one motion if no member of the Committee or public wishes to comment or ask questions.) 1. APPROVAL OF THE ACTION MINUTES OF JANUARY 26.2012. MOTION: By Committee Member Kelley and seconded by Committee Member Ward to approve the minutes. Motion passed 3:0 by a roll -call vote. (Fonzi abstained, DeCarli Absent) DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REVIEW 2. LAS LOMAS MULTI -FAMILY Associate Planner Taylor presented the staff report. Issues included the following: • Revised architecture. • Tot lot replaced with gym/pool. PUBLIC COMMENT None Committee Member Kelley - Affordable unit locations. Committee Member Ward - Existing tot lot across street seems ok. Committee Member Cooper - Questions about existing tot lot. Chairperson Fonzi - How will security gate work? Gaylen Little — Little Hidden Oak /open during day. Warren Frace — Fire Dept has reviewed. - Will units have laundry? Gaylen Little — Inside each unit plus on-site building. - Bike storage? Mike Zappas — Each unit will have bike storage area. Committee Member Kelley - On -Site Manager — Yes. ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 City of Atascadero Design Review Committee Action Minutes February 16, 2012 Page 3 of Committee Member Ward - Is there a Landscape Plan? Callie Taylor responded yes. - Planning Commission Review required? Callie Taylor responded no. PUBLIC COMMENT NANCY AYRES — Neighbor ■ Three elevations in Specific Plan / SFR area. ■ Should include variations in apartments, too simple. ■ Worried about three bedroom units / overcrowding concern. ■ Parking concerns / no room for overflow. ■ Halcon Road Stop sign violations / limited sight distance. ■ Concerned with gate / should be allowed for entire project. ■ Lack of slope landscape: Warren Frace — will be required to be landscaped with project ■ Trail maintenance. GW BATES —Neighbor o Toured Hidden Oaks. o Arch style — lack of variety / articulation. Worried about lack of amenities / tot lot. o Tot lot will be impacted by apartment use. Mike Zappas — Paso apartment is the model. Committee Member Kelley - Appreciate Public Comment. - Will be a quality project. - Will follow-up on Stop sign. Nancy Ayres stated that the fire gate does not work. Chairperson Fonzi - Concerned with tot lot impacts / questioned shared pool use? Mike Zappas said he would like the trail loop completed. Chairperson Fonzi - Move gate to bottom. - No parking Calle Milano. - Stop sign improvements. - Change Ciruela Way street name. Committee Member Cooper - Likes architecture / Tot lot sharing ok / shared pool troublesome. - Gate ok in front of apartments. Committee Member Ward - Gate at bottom of street bad idea. - Never seen kids at tot lot. City of Atascadero Design Review Committee Action Minutes ITEM NUMBER: 2 DATE: 10-23-13 February 16, 201_ Page 4 of 4 MOTION: By Committee Member Kelley and seconded by Committee Member Ward to approve the following: • Architecture approved • Drop tot lot for gym/pool • Applicant to work with neighbors on compatibility issues • Security gate ok • No Planning Commission review required • Landscape plan info copies to DRC / HOA Landscape Committee • No parking signs on Calle Milano • Change street name • Share weight room encourages Motion passed 4:0 by a roll -call vote. (DeCarli Absent) COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS AND REPORTS None DIRECTOR'S REPORT None ADJOURNMENT The next regular meetingof the Design Review Committee is scheduled for March 1, 2012. Development Adopted March 22. 2012 1lcityha11%cdv1pmnt%— dre design review committo6minutes%minutes 20121action minutes 2-16-12.docx Owner: Applicant: Address: APN: ITEM NUMBER: 3 DATE: 10-23-13 Atascadero Design Review Committee Report In Brief - Community Development Department Callie Taylor, Senior Planner, (805) 470-3448, ctaylor@atascadero.org PLN 2013-1478 / AUP 2013-0064 / DRC 2013-0041 Chevron Gas Station Canopy Signage Request Richard Minkel John Sevo 6105 San Anselmo 049-225-012 General Plan: General Commercial (GC) ! °° Zoning: Commercial Tourist (CT) Project Area: 0.63 acres ° Existing Use: 76 Gas Station Proposed: Approximately 330 sq. ft. signage & color banding to be located on the gas station pump island canopy 6105 San Anselmo Staff Staff recommends that the DRC review the proposed signage and Recommendation: provide a recommendation to the Administrative Use Permit Hearing Officer regarding the proposed exception request for additional signage in excess of code requirements ❑ Additional gas station canopy signage and color banding proposed in excess of sign ordinance allowances Analysis: The applicant is in the process of converting the existing 76 station at 6105 San Anselmo to a Chevron station. As part of the rebranding, new building and pump island canopy signage is proposed. The Atascadero Sign Ordinance has specific limitations regarding the amount of signage and color banding that may be displayed on gas station canopies. The sign ordinance allows up to 20 square feet of signage and color banding on two (2) sides of ITEM NUMBER: 3 DATE: 10-23-13 the canopy structure. The existing 76 station pump island canopy structure on the subject site complies with the ordinance requirements, and is painted a tan color all four sides, with a small logo on only two sides. Any new signage or replacement of signage must comply with the current code. 9-15.005 Allowed signs (a)(7) Gas Station Canopies. In addition to the signs allowed above, a maximum of twenty (20) square feet signs, logos and or color banding shall be permitted on no more than two (2) sides of a pump island canopy structure. The remainder of the pump canopy fascia shall be of an architectural treatment consistent with site architecture. 9-15.004 Sign design standards. (i) Color banding. The installation or painting of high croma color banding on buildings and structures shall be defined as a sign and shall be subject to the same size restrictions as other signs. (Ord. 400 § I (part), 2002 Photo of Existing Pump Island Canopy AMC Section 9-15.006 allows the sign area or other limitations of the Sign Ordinance to be modified through approval of an Administrative Use Permit, subject to findings and appearance review. The applicant is proposing to install signage and/or color banding on all four sides of the existing gas station pump island as part of the business rebranding. Total canopy signage and high croma color banding proposed measures approximately 330 square feet in total area. The front and rear sides (which are visible driving towards :Li ITEM NUMBER: 3 DATE: 10-23-13 the site on San Anselmo Road) are proposed to have blue color banding at approximately three (3) feet in height along the 47 -foot length of the canopy. The Chevron name would be installed on these two sides in white illuminated letters, at approximately 23 square feet in size each. The right and left sides of the canopy are proposed with a smaller blue color band (approximately 12 inches in height) across the entire 23 length of the canopy. The Chevron logo (approximately five (5) square feet in size) would be located on the left side of the canopy facing San Anselmo Road. In addition to the signs, LED strip lighting is proposed along the entire length on all four sides of the canopy. Logos and Color Banding Proposed on Canopy Structure -. -- M . u�ammo m *M O� J " &E 'W F� SCM .MEL "'Ca WTE CANOPY DECK LOCENWE TO E PREP end PAMID WHrFr I E KC94 mom DPME➢ Pau WE IP [1tNK. V M11M01171 X a"[ rE RO l011111� ' / MEM CIE Raw EIMTON W Y6Y V Y! 1M yu'E N 1YCi r ellrz wMmE Im sDO tcxnc � uanmao i i!201 �I I � q I�w Irl U iW In addition, the existing monument sign, pole sign, building signage, and pump dispenser signage would also be changed out to rebrand the existing gas station as a Chevron. The signage proposed on these other structures is consistent with Municipal Code requirements and previous site approvals, and does not require any special findings through the Administrative Use Permit process. Attachments: Attachment 1: Aerial Photo Attachment 2: Site Plan Attachment 3: Canopy Plan View ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 10-23-13 Attachment 1: Aerial Photo Attachment 2: Site Plan ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 10-23-13 MWDUM M.0 w1a da 00 " FM aw vow WK To KM-- 4WPAL011% 0 16 um w" so on= so ON arm TM VW hop ran f sm r -mm (0 71 um Sof War SITE PLAN orae -Jnr -T-0 Attachment 3: Canopy Plan View o Pow SPNPP� (N) Chevron WORDMARK O Ir � � I O Z I C N Z I C x J w v I � B I Z � I � Q H I I Z I L- (N) Chevron WORDMARK (E) CANOPY 7 FRONT A 147'-3" EXISTING CANOPY PLAN VIEW I I I I I I I I I I I I ITEM NUMBER: 3 DATE: 10-23-13 I I I ^ I _ I ---- i W I I � I I C I I I I I � I ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 10-23-13 Atascadero Design Review Committee Report In Brief - Community Development Department Alfredo R. Castillo, AICP, Assistant Planner, (805) 470-3436, acastillo@atascadero.org Sycamore Place — 6907 Atascadero Avenue Floor Plan Revisions & Fagade Redesign Master Plan of Development Conformity Review Owner: CSRJ Land & Cattle, LLC (CS �p�� 00 ,003�U 2°t� 0 030-28102 Nino) Sycamore Place -12 a Address: 6709 Atascadero Avenues units Project#: CUP 2004-0132 / ZCH 2004-`'`m 0086 =$ ° ab � General Plan: High Density Residential (HDR)�ry0 A 2 QO2 Ng X10 A.e Zoning: Residential Multi -Family (RMF- 20) / PD -25 p` M10p° Project Area: 1 acre site for 12 single family units onm individual lots Existing Use: Under Construction Recommendation: Recommend Approval Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee find the proposed floor plan modifications in conformance with the approved amendment to the master plan of development. ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 10-23-13 Background Sycamore Place (formerly Vintage Homes) is a project that includes the development of twelve (12) single family residential units that was approved by the City Council on February 22, 2005. The approval established a Planned Development Overlay Zone, and Zone Map Amendment to establish a PD -25 Overlay Zone over the subject site with a corresponding Master Plan of Development (CUP) and vesting Tentative Tract Map. The existing site consists of three individual lots and is located along Atascadero Avenue at the terminus of Sierra Ave. The project included the demolition of 4 existing residential units (completed). The Property went into foreclosure in 2007. The Planning Commission approved a reconsideration of the vesting Tentative Tract Map in February 2013. The previous project owner submitted building plans in the spring of 2005, including Final Map. On -Site Improvement Plans and Grading Plans were approved by the City in 2006. Building Plans were submitted in 2005 but were never approved and are now a part of the City's Dormant Permit Program. A new applicant has taken over the project and has re- submitted building plans and site plans for the City's review and approval. o 9. 0 P tiilk o N�O OO O Q7(t?7j O� 030-207 C08 N � `gJ` 00 OHO 030-211-030 j . Subject Site 0,�o �2 �a �: o3o-za 2919.,; "k , O 0,�1 010 030-282.02 ^meg Volo -� o°o 030-292 0?9 tib' 00 $h 008 0`� o 0,?a oo �-'m 030.2g2 p2' 30'2ffi.003 00J 20j9 0101,11-018 30 030.282.022 3jZ 0j8 O � 0 30-282 07q 030-373-028 1l o .»7.0j ro „+ p30.282-015 N 030-173.027 m p5030-286-003 8�0 Z 030-286-004 030.372-024030-373- 009 030-288-002 2�A16 0 030-266-001 30- 030-373-018 030-283-008_: O� 030-282-033 282-027 ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 10-23-13 As a part of the building permit submittal, the applicant is proposing three (3) bedroom units for Plan A, Plan A reverse, and Plan B, which is different than the approved master plan of development that was approved by the City Council in 2005. Any changes to the master plan of development that includes floor plan changes or elevation changes require a consistency review by the City's Design Review Committee. Staff is requesting that the DRC review the proposed floor plan modifications and provide Staff with a conformity review. The DRC should provide input and provide recommendations and direction on the following items: ❑ Review the proposed floor plan and elevation modifications for consistency with the approved Master Plan. Proposed Floor Plan Modifications The 2005 approved master plan of development included two floor plan types: Type 1 (Plan A) and Type 2(Plan B). Ten (10) units were to be developed as Type 1 units and two (2) units were to be developed as Type 2 units. The applicant is proposing changes to the Type 1 Plan Approved 2005 Master Plan of Development Elevations Type 1 Plan i` IL ion �=i ie "MIRE 11 EEC" FLUB FLOM J - - SE."FLOOR _- - A'F _ Fly- FLg7¢ REAR ELEVATION SCALE, VA- +1'.W SIDE ELEVATION SCALE, W . I' -O' ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 10-23-13 There are two changes the applicant is proposing to the Type 1 unit: 1. Convert to three bedrooms 2. Eliminate upstairs balcony on side of unit (balcony remains on front of unit) Approved Type 1 Floor Plan 24'-0' Side balcony 5 1 7 cow •) t ro°yse.°val 1 r r,TM s"R�ec S - (GC.2C1 4" 1110 -0G PL.dJfD GUM G[ Ontdl Ti - •.s -o7 Roo -a 2Sf ^�`•' Front balcony m Mfg L pio' T41 GEft ■ i SECOND FLOOR PLAN SCALE . 114' . 1-0' Proposed Type 1 Floor Plan Revision I FIRST FLOOR PLAN SCALE, P/4'. 1'-0' 3'd - - ,�■., T I w/ closet FIRST FLOOR PLAN SCALE, P/4'. 1'-0' UPPER FLOOR PLAN LOWER FLOOR PLAN vc. i -d irc 1-c 'd 3'd - - Bedroom w/ closet Am, minx Front 1 � � J C: UPPER FLOOR PLAN LOWER FLOOR PLAN vc. i -d irc 1-c 'd Elevation Changes Approved SIDE ELEVATION &GALE : 1/41 = i, -o,, Proposed SIDE ELEVATION W= T-0" Window with architectural trim ITEM NUMBER: DATE ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 10-23-13 Staff Analysis The applicant has been diligent in crafting the proposed floor plan changes to maintain architecture consistency with the Master Plan. The exterior changes to the elevation appear to be consistent with the intent of the Master Plan. There are no Planned Development or parking restrictions that limit the number of bedrooms in the project, therefore staff has no objection to the revised floor plans. There is a slight, 28 square foot increase to the overall size of the units that does not affect master plan consistency. Parking: Parking for the project is based on the Planned Development Overlay (PD -25) regulations. PD -25 contains specific language in regards to parking an allows up to 4 bedrooms with two parking spaces. Atascadero Municipal Code Section 9-3.670 — Establishment of Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 25 (u) A one -car garage (minimum eleven (11) feet by twenty (20) feet) shall be required for attached residential units. A two- (2) car garage (minimum twenty (20) feet by twenty (20) feet) shall be required for detached residential units. (v) The total number of parking spaces shall be provided as follows: (1) Two (2) spaces per unit for units with less than four (4) bedrooms. One additional space for each additional bedroom. All spaces must be located on the individual lot; (2) Guest parking provided at a ratio of one space per every three (3) units.* (Ord. 469 §2, 2005) * Guest parking may not be located adjacent to the public street frontage The applicant is not modifying the approved site layout. As approved, the applicant is proposing to build a one -car garage (although the units are considered detached, however they share a common foundation) with a driveway that will accommodate an additional vehicle. Staff is recommending that the driveway length be a minimum of 20 -feet in order to accommodate a vehicle, consistent with the approved master plan of development. The development contains four (4) guest parking spaces that are consistent with the PD requirements. Since the applicant is proposing only 3 -bedroom units, the proposed parking meets the minimum requirements for PD -25. Staff Recommendation: Staff is recommending the DRC find the following changes consistent with the Master Plan of Development: 1. All units to have three bedrooms. 2. Second story side balcony to removed and replaced with architectural quality window. ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 10-23-13 Attachments: Attachment 1: 2005 Approved Site Plan Attachment 2: 2005 Approved Elevations Attachment 3: 2013 Applicant Proposed Sections ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 10-23-13 Attachment 1: 2005 Approved Site Plan BAY aewoevir ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 10-23-13 Attachment 2: 2005 Approved Elevations SITE SECTION VINTAGE HOMES 1e 6709-6735 Araecadcn> Avc .we u° mu axe A-2 SITE SECTIONS ITEM NUMBER: 4 DATE: 10-23-13 Attachment 3: 2013 Proposed Applicant Sections i Rmnae BUILDING SECTION —va•=ra — �Z BUILDINGSE=N U va•-�•a �B BUILDING SECTION Vt'- r -o' ITEM NUMBER: 5 DATE: 10/23/13 Atascadero Design Review Committee V' Report In Brief - Community Development Department � Warren Frace, Community Development Director wfrace@atascadero.org /470-3488 PLN 2008-1314 Dove Creek Commercial Center Proposed Amendments to Conditions of Approval NW corner of EI Camino Real / Santa Barbara Road Applicant: Ben Efraim, Fortune Realty, LLC, 5423 Village Road, Step 200, Long Beach, CA 90808 `' S i � Property YOwner: Atascadero Partners, LLC o p `Yry O Address: 8155 & behind 8165 EI Camino Real ®° e APN: 045-331-014 General Plan: Mixed Use Planned Development (MU -PD) Zoning: Commercial Retail / Planned Development 12 (CR/PD-12) Project Area: 5.20 acres Proposed Use: Master Planned Shopping Center (Conditional Use Permit 2003-0099) ❑ Review of proposed amendment to Master Plan of Development condition #10. Project Background The Dove Creek project was approved by the City Council in September 2004 as a Mixed Use Planned Development project with 279 residential units and a 60,000 square foot commercial center. The project was original entitled by Bermant Development that sold the project to Centex Homes after approval. Centex Homes lost the project in bankruptcy during the recession and the project was acquired and is being finished by Corona Land Company. The commercial site is owned by Atascadero Partners LLC. ITEM NUMBER: 5 DATE: 10/23/13 2004 Master Plan of Development ..�•ti »� ••�•. VILLAGE E Open Spoc. �. � .. � • . � • • ' rasn.ao vc..vy / � i � 4 R� IownhomM .1r L VCourtlord VILLAGE D M Hones _ �. Spae. lingo Fon- y •� He^�'S r.e9HMlo♦d ♦♦ � '= VILLAGE CA s ♦ J/ 6 O �lAGE vnhomcs CouiYad,� 60 ♦ Is �r�, Hanes 'Qa♦�`%ale �St • Village Center �. o Neghbor►ood \� � III 6G� i0 Y O0. 1T • GO��n 6 14 THE VILLAGES OF DOVE CREEK Exhibit B -Land Use Concept .ak. oo—:xco L�ooro +s'8+c'ds nox.ov . 6in•rp trees ieanl nTIOla wakNy] M Sfree+'ecs Si'Qb;only 4s ' Cour•suo Hanes - Tow-Ytvnes II■H—Scao Cor-vr..roty Csnsor varwtucm Not to Scale The project included a five (5) acre commercial parcel that was intended for up to 60,000 square feet of retail development. Prior to the project approval, the entire site was zoned for commercial development. During the hearing process the City Council was concerned with the potential loss of sales tax if 60 acres of commercial land was rezoned to residential. To address this concern, the City Council added Condition #10 to the Master Plan of Development (see following). The purpose of Condition 10 was to ensure the developer built at least 45,000 square feet of retail space as quickly as possible. To incentivize the developer, Condition 10 has two major provisions: 1. The developer had to post a $400,000 bond that the City could withdraw $40,000 per year the commercial project was not built, to make up for lost sales tax; and, 2. The property would transfer to the City of Atascadero on July 1, 2016 if a permit for the commercial project was not issued. z ITEM NUMBER: DATE 2004 Master Plan of Development Condition 10 FWOn 10. Prior to map recordation, the applicant shall deposit $400,000 to the going City to be placed in an interest bearing account. If a building permit for a minimum of 45,000 square feet has not been issued by July 1, 2006, the City shall withdraw $40,000 from the account. If, in each successive year on July 1, 2007 through July 1, 2015, a building permit has not been issued for a minimum of 45,000 square feet, the City shall withdraw $40,000. At such time that the building permit is issued for a minimum of 45,000 square feet, the remaining balance shall be refunded to the applicant. j If a building permit has not been issued for a minimum of 45,000 square feet by July 1, 2016, the applicant shall convey the commercial site to the City. A memorandum of option or deed of trust shall be recorded concurrent with map recordation that assures the City that It can acquire the commercial site, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Departrnent and City Attorney. C i ni,�zi-i z In 2008, PMB Development optioned the commercial property and processed a Master Plan Amendment to build the center with Tractor Supply Hardware as the anchor. This amendment was approved by the Council in March 2009. The Tractor Supply project would have met the requirements of Condition 10, but ultimately, the developer could not finance the project and the project did not move forward. However, the Tractor Supply Master Plan remains the approved project for the site. _ EL LAM IIV PEAL -- THE VILLAGES OF DOVE CREEK::: ATASCADERO, CA A COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER 3 vJu�S IBJ �I� ITEM NUMBER: 5 DATE: 10/23/13 Proposed Amendments After four years of inaction on the commercial parcel there is a new potential buyer/developer for the commercial parcel. Ben Efraim of Fortune Realty, LLC has the property in escrow and would like to purchase the property if changes can be made to Condition #10. Mr. Efraim raised his project issues at the City Council's September 24, 2013 review of Economic Hot Spots. The Council added the Dove Creek Commercial parcel to the Economic Development Hot Spot list and directed staff to work with the applicant to bring the project conditions to the Design Review Committee for review. 4 2013 Economic Development Hot Spot List Status City Council Update 9124113 Future Projects 1 DeCOU Lumber Property • DeCou site purchased by Don Giessinger. • Stylehouse furniture opening in old hardware store • Don interested in hiring an architect for site planning 2 West Front Village Restaurant Pads • Purchased by Costal Communities • Marty Mohamed 760:996-0888: 3. Dove Creek Commercial Parcel . In escrow with Ben Efraim • Take to DRC to review project conditions and project options. Active Projects 1 Home Depot Springhill Center • Spring Hill Suite Hotel under construction 2. Walmart ! Annex (Del Rio site) • General plan amendment ! EIR approved • City consultants preparing interchange roundabout plans. • Appeal Lawsuit pending 3. Downtown t Hoff Property • Conditional use permit approved by City Council in August 2013 4_ Colony Square • Phase 2 CUP amendment approved • Building pad re -fencing done • Marketing and tenant recruitment coordination on-going Backburner Projects Spencers Center Spencer's Market closed l',lontecito Road abandoned motel . Abandoned motel units have been demolished • Site marketing package prepared by staff K -M art Shopping Center corner . Sears./K-Mart opposed to corner property sale Stafftried several times to suggest alternatives Development will be difficult. ITEM NUMBER: DATE Mr. Efraim has submitted the following request for DRC's consideration: Fortune Realty September 5. 2013 Mr. Warren Frace, Director of Community Development City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Ave, Atascadero CA 93422. 10/23/13 Fortune Realty, LLC Tel (310) 394-3622 office*fortuneco.us 5423 Village Road, Sucre 200, Long Beach, California 90806 RE: Dove Creek Commercial / Proposed Amendments to the Memorandum of Development Condition as of 09-17-12 Dear Warren, Following our recent meeting at City Hall in connection with providing the City with a proposal to modify the language of the existing Development Conditions on page 5 of the September17. 2012 document, under section 10, 1 suggest the following changes A. When the existing sum(s) currently in the interest bearing account (which the former property owner set-up in favor of the City) is withdrawn by the City in its entirety. the new property owner(s), shall have no further obligations to pay the City any monies if by July 1, 2015 a building permit has not been issued for a minimum of 45.000 square feet. B. If a building permit has not been issued for a minimum of 45.000 square feet by July 1 2016, the City of Atascadero shall have no rights whatsoever to compel or require that the new property owner convey the commercial site to the City. C. The new property owner shall secure a minimum of five thousand (5.000) square feet of building permits by December 26 2016 and build -out a minimum of five thousand (5.000) square feet of commercial on the site by December 26, 2017. The new property owner may develop the entire site to the maximum square feet currently entitled for commercial development. All entitlements for the entire site shall remain in full force and effect through December 26. 2023. D. The new property owner may subdivide the site into three or four smaller parcels, and elect to develop one or more structures on one or more subdivided parcels ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 10/23/13 Kindly review the proposed amendments and contact me by early next week if possible. with your input so that we may be able to finalize the language and move forward. It would be very helpful if this matter can be finalized and an agreement inked before Thanksgiving. I would like to have an executed agreement with the City that encompasses these modifications well before the December 26. 2013 escrow deadline, in order to close the escrow. We would like to start inviting neighbors for their input by Q-1 of 2014. and market the site to "marquee" businesses, lodging establishments and anchor type tenants by Q-2 of 2014. Our goal is to market the site and the Project to potential tenants. establish the best approach for a successful development and finalize a site -plan based on commitments from businesses who wish to move to Dove Creek by early 2015. By Q-3 of 2015 we would like to submit building plans to the City. begin securing construction financing for the Project. and commence construction by 2016.The expected completion of the initial phase (depending on pre -leasing activity and commitments in- place) would be 2017 or earlier. A preliminary site plan is attached for your review and comment. We are working on one or two more versions to allow for a marquee type business, or a motel/B&B. Sincerely: 4 7, Benjamin Efraim Enclosure. ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 10/23/13 :w ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 10/23/13 Staff Recommendation Staff is recommending the DRC review Mr. Efraim's proposed condition amendments, and provide direction to staff on how to proceed with an amendment application. Note: Any Master Plan Amendment will require both a Planning Commission and City Council hearing. \\cityhall\cdvlpmnt\- 08 pins\pin 2008-1314 dove creek pd cup amendment - tractor supply\13.10.23 dre efraim amendment.docx