5 - Laserfiche WebLink

P20-0989, Objective Design Standards Planning Commission 2 of 7 The Planning Commission and City Council reviewed the draft ODS at its December 14 and December 20, 2022, meetings, respectively. Since these December 2022 meetings, staff and the professional services team has reviewed and considered feedback provided by the Commission and Council, along with public comments. This subject Planning Commission meeting is to review and consider recommending adoption an updated version of the ODS to City Council to align with adoption of the Housing Element later in January 2023. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission and City Council reviewed a draft of the ODS recently at its December 14 and December 20, 2022, meetings, respectively. In September 2021, the Planning Commission reviewed a previous version of the ODS, that was the first effort to convert the 2012 Housing Site Development Standards and Design Guidelines to objective standards. The Planning Commission agenda reports (without attachments) for the December 2022 and the September 2021, meetings are attached to this agenda report as Exhibit C; this exhibit also includes the excerpted minutes from the September 2021, meeting . Below is a summary of the feedback provided by the Commission and Council at the December 2022, meetings. In addition, prospective developers provided a number of comments on the Housing Element sites ODS, as did a member of the public; these comments are attached to this agenda report in full as Exhibit D. Summary of feedback from Planning Commission and City Council, December 2022 • Clarifying question regarding development standards for sites with density greater than eight dwelling units per approximately one acre (du/ac) and up to 29 du/ac; • Comment regarding “green” features and Reach Code; • Clarifying question and comment regarding affordability requirements and bedroom mix and how they might interface; • A general comment about new development needing to fit into existing neighborhoods • Comment to allow more, smaller units; • Add another “tier” of open space requirements for projects and ensure dimensions of open space correlates to required open space amounts; • Address three types of solid waste receptacles and trash chutes in multifamily buildings; • A comment to require a significant architectural element (e.g., a tower, stepback, colonnade, roof terrace, or increased corner building setback) when a building is located at the end of a view corridor; • A comment that a greater percentage of low water use trees be considered to match the 75-percent requirement for low water use shrubs; • Amend introductory language in Appendix A related to City Council discretion; • Questions and comments regarding units for larger households and affordability mix; • A question regarding historic buildings and consistency with Downtown Specific Plan requirements to retain original facades; • A comment that trash areas should be fully enclosed and bins kept inside; and • Replace photograph of example of tuck-under podium building in appendix.