Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutD-1 Staff Report - Great Park DiscussionSCHEDULED ITEM D-1 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL VIA: SERGIO GONZALEZ, CITY MANAGER FROM: MATT MARQUEZ, ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: NOVEMBER 16, 2020 SUBJECT: WORKSHOP AND PRESENTATION REGARDING PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF ADDITIONAL TWENTY-THREE (23) HOUSING UNITS AND THE GREAT PARK GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF EAST PROMENADE BETWEEN AZUSA VETERANS WAY AND ROSEDALE AVENUE IN THE ROSEDALE COMMUNITY BACKGROUND: Development of the Rosedale Master Planned Community is essentially complete. A total of 1,227 of the 1,250 authorized homes have been completed, sold, and occupied, leaving 23 unbuilt units remaining within the City approved authorization pursuant to the Monrovia Nursery Specific Plan (MNSP). All public parks, land dedications and required infrastructure improvements within the community have been completed and accepted by the City, except for the Great Park which was planned for construction in an area located on the north side of East Promenade between Azusa Veterans Way and Rosedale Avenue. Completion of the Great Park was delayed due to AUSD’s litigation and uncertainty about the obligation and timing of construction of the K-8 school, which has now been resolved. On November 18, 2019, the City Council authorized the sale of bonds from CFD 2005-1 Improvement Area 2, and $7.25 million of which is allocated to reimburse the District for facilities and $7.0 million of which is allocated for development of the Great Park by RLP. On June 2, 2020, an application for Preliminary Plan Review (PPR) was submitted by Rosedale Land Partners (RLP) for the following: •180 three-story garden style multi-family residences; and •Great Park on 6.23 acres of vacant land The application was subsequently withdrawn and a second PPR application was submitted on August 12, 2020 and it proposed the following: WORKSHOP WAS HELD 11/16/2020 Proposed Development of 23 Housing Units & The Great Park - Rosedale November 16, 2020 Page 2 • Development of the Great Park on 9.1 acres previously designated in the MNSP for a K-8 school, and 23 single family homes on 5.5 acres previously designated for the Joint Use Community Park. • In lieu of dedicating two (2) acres to the City, RLP would dedicate the former 9.1 acre school site to the City, and construct additional recreational amenities as depicted on their site plan, or with such amenities as mutually agreed upon by the City and RLP. • RLP proposes to enter into a MOU with the City to memorialize the amenities to be developed within the Great Park and to identify the necessary and appropriate city approvals for development of the Great Park and the 23 single family homes. Staff conducted a preliminary review of the application and provided an analysis of applicable provisions and suggested changes in a letter dated October 15, 2020. In the letter, staff recommended that RLP submit a written request to determine whether the changes may be accommodated in a Minor Modification that would amend the Regulating Plan contained in the MNSP. Amendments to the Regulating Plan would include changing a portion of the land use designations from “School” to “Park” and “Park” to “Promenade 21”. Additionally, the project’s building typology would have to adhere to Building Types 4 through 7 of the MNSP. Staff believes that without these amendments, it is not possible to evaluate the proposal according to the criteria identified for Minor Modifications. Accordingly, staff provided information on the Minor Modification process outlined in the MNSP and the requirements for compliance. Additional information on the Minor Modification process will be provided later in this report. The existing land use designations of the subject area, as well as the proposed changes are shown in the images below: Proposed Development of 23 Housing Units & The Great Park - Rosedale November 16, 2020 Page 3 Proposed Development of 23 Housing Units & The Great Park - Rosedale November 16, 2020 Page 4 Proposed Development of 23 Housing Units & The Great Park - Rosedale November 16, 2020 Page 5 The letter to RLP also noted that although RLP is proposing to develop 23 single family homes, this component is entirely separate from the Great Park development proposal, as the development of the Great Park was conditioned as part of the original development entitlements and on the City’s cooperation to authorize the bonding capacity for additional improvements and to accommodate the settlement of the RLP/AUSD’s lawsuit. In response to staff’s October 15, 2020 letter, RLP submitted a revised site plan for their 23 unit proposal on November 11, 2020. While staff has not had the opportunity to thoroughly review the updated site plan, staff felt it was still appropriate to introduce the Project to the City Council at this time. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council take the following action: 1) Receive a presentation from staff and provide appropriate comments and direction concerning the design elements. ANALYSIS: MNSP Minor Modification & Amendments The MNSP outlines two options for altering the Plan. It can either be amended by Minor Modification or a Specific Plan Amendment. Minor Modifications According to the MNSP, certain modifications to the Specific Plan text, graphics, and Regulating Map may be exempted from the formal specific plan amendment process. However, Minor Modifications are subject to the review and approval by the Economic and Community Development Director and may not be used to increase the total maximum number of dwelling units authorized by the Specific Plan. Thus, the Minor Modification shall not exceed the total number of 1,250 dwelling units as stated on page 68 of the MNSP (Section C. Maximum Development). A Minor Modification is intended to not materially affect the overall purpose and intent of the Specific Plan as outlined therein and below. Page 70 Section D of the MNSP, Minor Modifications, provides as follows: 1. Minor changes to the Specific Plan text and/or maps that are not extensive enough to be considered a substantial or fundamental change in land use relative to the original approval, as determined by the Community Development Director. 2. Minor changes to the Specific Plan that would not have a substantial adverse impact on surrounding properties, as determined by the Community Development Director. 3. Minor changes to the Specific Plan that would not alter any findings contained in the environmental document prepared for the approval, as determined by the Community Development Director. 4. Minor changes to the Specific Plan that would not affect the total maximum number of dwelling units and overall development area as approved in the Specific Plan. Proposed Development of 23 Housing Units & The Great Park - Rosedale November 16, 2020 Page 6 5. Minor changes to the Specific Plan that would not affect the ability to meet infrastructure and service provisions contained in the Specific Plan. 6. Minor changes to the Specific Plan that would not significantly affect the overall design and visual quality of the planned community. 7. Minor changes to the Design Guideline criteria when character of the specific product and the exact dimensions of the site may impact the ability to develop a more desirable product type. 8. Examples: The following are examples of Minor Modifications that do not require a Specific Plan Amendment and are subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development: a) Minor landscape and streetscape design modifications that are consistent with the design guidelines contained in this Specific Plan. b) Final facility sizing and precise location of water, sewer, and storm drainage improvements when directed by the City Engineer. c) Revisions to roadways shown on “Circulation Plan” when the centerline moves less than two hundred (200) feet, and no other aspects of the Specific Plan are significantly affected as a result. d) Off-site connections or four-way intersections for roadways shown on “Circulation Plan” when already reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development and the City Engineer. e) Alignment of hiking trails. f) Minor revisions to the “Conceptual Phasing Plan.” g) Specific modifications of a similar nature to those listed above, deemed minor by the Director of Community Development, that are in keeping with the intent of the Specific Plan and in conformance with the General Plan. 9. Minor Modification applications must include findings that demonstrate consistency with the Specific Plan goals and objectives. The Director shall render a decision on a Minor Modification application within ten (10) working days of the date the application is deemed complete. The decision of the Director is subject to a twenty (20) da appeal period. Appeals are heard by the City’s Planning Commission. Additionally, the Director has the discretion to refer any request for a minor modification to the “Zoning Administrator” for a public hearing. Specific Plan Amendments Alternatively, the requirements for Specific Plan Amendments are outlined on page 70 Section F of the MNSP. It provides as follows: “In accordance with the California Government Code Section 65450 (et. seq.) Specific Plans shall be prepared, adopted, and amended in the same manner as General Plans, except that Specific Plans may be adopted by resolution or by ordinance. The Specific Plan may be amended, as necessary, in the same manner that it was adopted. Such amendments shall follow the procedures set forth in the Zoning Ordinance". Proposed Development of 23 Housing Units & The Great Park - Rosedale November 16, 2020 Page 7 In this case, the MNSP was placed on the ballot by the City Council and was voted on by Azusa voters. Thus, the City’s position has been that amendments that do not qualify as Minor Modifications, must be approved by a vote of the people, subject to review as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Development Process Staff outlined the development process for the applicant’s proposals in the October 15th correspondence to them. The following information provides an outline of said processes: 1. Development Process: a. Preliminary Plan Review – separate submittals required for the proposed park and proposed residences. b. Formal Applications i. Specific Plan Minor Modification – Subject to review and approval of the Director of Economic & Community Development. At minimum, the following amendments would be required for the subject proposal. Park: 1. Chapter 2 – Land Plan from School to Park 2. Chapter 4 – The Code – Regulating plan from School to Park Housing: 1. Chapter 2 – Land Plan from School to Housing 2. Chapter 4 – The Code – Regulating Plan from Park to Housing ii. Design Review – Planning Commission and City Council review required. Separate applications required for each of the project components listed below. 1. Park 2. Housing iii. Subdivision Map Act – Planning Commission and City Council review required. Park: 1. Additional information is needed from the applicant to determine related requirements. Housing: 1. Tentative tract map. The City’s Planning application form will be used for the different components of the project. Separate applications will need to be submitted for the proposed park and residences. 2. Outreach: a. Community Outreach i. In coordination with the Parks and Recreation Commission, the City’s Community Resources Department will spearhead a city-wide effort to provide all community members the opportunity to participate in the park development process. Eventually, a formal recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission will come before the Council for consideration and approval considering not only the budget available to build the park but as important, ongoing maintenance and programming needs. Proposed Development of 23 Housing Units & The Great Park - Rosedale November 16, 2020 Page 8 3. The Great Park – Open Space Design Guidelines: The Monrovia Nursery Specific Plan includes design guidelines for open space. At minimum, the following would be required: a. “The south end, adjacent to the Promenade, will provide opportunities for community festivals and exhibits”. (MNSP Page 20) b. “Area for Community gatherings will be located in the Great Park providing a transition to the Promenade District. Provisions for public exhibits will be included”. (MNSP Page 20) c. “Active playing fields will include two multi-purpose playing fields”. (MNSP Page 20) d. “An interpretive and/or botanical garden and children’s play area will be included”. (MNSP Page 20) 4. Great Park Neighborhood – Neighborhood Design Guidelines: The MNSP includes neighborhood design guidelines. The proposed housing units would be subject to the standards for the Great Park Neighborhood. Also included is a list of permissible building typologies. For the proposed residences, the following building typologies would be permissible: 1. Building Type 4 – Courtyard 2. Building Type 5 – Residential Attached (3-Story) 3. Building Type 6 – Residential Attached (2-Story) 4. Building Type 7 – Residential Detached 5. CEQA: The MNSP has a certified Environmental Impact Report. This proposal is technically under the same scope. However, an analysis of the potential impacts of a larger park than originally contemplated would need to be conducted, although staff does not anticipate any new significant impacts to be created. 6. Miscellaneous: The MNSP includes a significant amount of information related to parks and residential development within the project area. The following items are relevant to the subject proposal and must be addressed in the design of both the proposed park and housing projects. a. Connection to the Park Required – the Specific Plan includes language that implies a connection is needed between the Promenade and the Park. “The Promenade forms a walkway and community gathering area that connects the Great Park with the transit plaza. The result is that the residences in the Promenade District are within a short walk of public open space and gathering areas” (MNSP Page 78). This must be considered and addressed in the design of the proposed residential layout. b. The Great Park, “Incorporates a botanical garden along street edges”; “Homes frame the southern edge of the Great Park”; “The Great Park functions as a village square, promoting community gathering and recreation”. (MNSP Page 10) Proposed Development of 23 Housing Units & The Great Park - Rosedale November 16, 2020 Page 9 c. Street Pattern – “Garages and off street parking shall be accessed via private drives located behind buildings”. (MNSP Page 45) d. Street Character – “All building types shall be rear loaded with no garages taking direct access form the backbone street grid”. (MNSP Page 45) e. “The Promenade links the transit plaza on the east with the Great Park to the west”. (MNSP Page 76) f. Human Scale Development – “In the park neighborhoods, the living portion of the homes is pulled forward on the lot and the garage is de-emphasized. Instead of walking next to a row of sterile garage doors, pedestrians will be treated with architectural variety and the opportunity for community interaction. The same standard applies in the Promenade District”. (MNSP Page 78) It should be noted that the review and decision making processes may differ for each component and the timelines may not run parallel. CONCLUSION: As detailed in this report, there are many different components to the applicant’s proposal and its related processing. Therefore, staff felt it was appropriate to provide the City Council with an introductory presentation at this time. At the conclusion of staff’s presentation, the City Council will have an opportunity to ask questions and provide appropriate feedback. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: This item (Workshop/Discussion) is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under the State CEQA Guidelines because the proposed action as it is not a “project” and has no potential to result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment. 14 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 15268, 15378(a). FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this action at this time. Staff will return to Council for approval of all actions with fiscal impacts. Prepared by: Reviewed and Approved: Matt Marquez Sergio Gonzalez Economic & Community Development Director City Manager Reviewed by: Marco A. Martinez City Attorney Proposed Development of 23 Housing Units & The Great Park - Rosedale November 16, 2020 Page 10 Attachments: 1) 23 Unit Proposal – November 11, 2020 2) Great Park Concept – November 11, 2020 3) 23 Unit Proposal – August 12, 2020 4) 180 Unit Proposal – June 2, 2020 Proposed Development of 23 Housing Units & The Great Park - Rosedale November 16, 2020 Page 11 ATTACHMENT 1 – 23 UNIT PROPOSAL – NOVEMBER 11, 2020 – CURRENT PROPOSAL Proposed Development of 23 Housing Units & The Great Park - Rosedale November 16, 2020 Page 12 ATTACHMENT 2 – GREAT PARK CONCEPT – NOVEMBER 11, 2020 Proposed Development of 23 Housing Units & The Great Park - Rosedale November 16, 2020 Page 13 ATTACHMENT 3 – 23 UNIT PROPOSAL – AUGUST 12, 2020 – PREVIOUS SUBMITTAL Proposed Development of 23 Housing Units & The Great Park - Rosedale November 16, 2020 Page 14 ATTACHMENT 4 – 180 UNIT PROPOSAL – JUNE 2, 2020 – PREVIOUS SUBMITTAL Proposed Development of 23 Housing Units & The Great Park - Rosedale November 16, 2020 Page 15