PC 09/22/99 - Laserfiche WebLink

Craig Champion, 777 Califomia Avenue, Palo Alto, Development Manager for Summerhill Homes, noted that he believes there are four prime reasons why this application merits the Commission's support. The first is that the project is conformance with the General Plan and the PUD zoning for the site. He noted that the mid-point of the PUD zoning permits 72 units and the application is currently for 31, which is well below the mid-point permitted. He advised that the project is in conformance with other agencies and that no variances are being sought. Mr. Champion noted that the second reason is related to neighborhood and community issues. He advised that they have been working extensively with staff to try to create a site plan that meets the overall community acceptance standards for lot size and conformance with the 40% FAR and a greater minimum sideyard setback. He noted that they believe the materials and colors for the homes are consistent with the neighborhood. He stated that the project opens up the Arroyo by creating a linear park and tot lot and provides improvements for Rose Avenue. He noted that they intend to complete the paving of Rose Lane and the sidewalks. He noted that he has some letters of support, and noted that Mrs. Lorraine Fisher had to leave the meeting, but did provide a letter of support. Mr. Champion advised that the third reason is related timing, noting that Summerhill has been working with the Nolans for over a year, but the project was held up due to the City initiating a rezoning of the property, and that the plan was formally submitted to staff in May and there have been delays as the project was amended from 38 lots to 31. The fourth reason is because of the impact a post CAPP zoning would have on the project and the Nolans. He referenced the City's report which states that the project would be reduced from a mid-point maximum of 72 units to 13 units. He noted that this is an extreme impact. Mr. Champion noted that the moderately-priced housing issue has only very recently come up. He stated that as an alternative to the staff recommendation, the applicant is suggesting granny-flat apartment units over detached garages. He advised that they would like the opportunity to study staffs solution further and they are not prepared to accept the proposal until they have further explored the details, and would try to do so prior to any tentative map consideration. He noted that it is important for the Nolans to maintain the 1.8-acre parcel as it is for as long as they are there, but in the event they sell the parcel it revert to the underlying zoning of the surrounding area (R-1-10,000). Mr. Champion indicated that they are willing to work with staff on evaluating the alternative drainage solution, but they cannot commit to it because they have not had the opportunity to study it yet. He stated that the original understanding regarding the improvements south of Rose Avenue was that it would just be an extension of what was proposed for the other projects on the west side of Rose Avenue (an eight-foot wall with landscaping in front of it). He noted the original application provided for that. He advised that they are prepared to work with staff and the Fairgrounds to come up with a solution that works for everyone. He noted that they are prepared to install the improvements, but it was not clear to them that it would be a homeowner's association maintenance obligation, as it is not HOA property, it is City or County property. He stated that with regard to the linear park and tot lot, they would draft the CCR's to incorporate any other future project on Rose Avenue in the maintenance district and the park would be open to the public. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7 September 22, 1999