DATE:
July 5, 2023
TO:
Paul Buddenhagen
FROM:
Charles S. Bryant, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:
Study Session: Objective Development Standards
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council review the attached materials and provide comments and direction.
Background
Recent State laws limit the City’s ability to require certain multifamily and mixed use residential development proposals to comply with subjective standards, regulations, and criteria. Instead, State laws allow those projects to undergo streamlined review and/or limit the City’s ability to deny them or reduce density as long as they comply with “objective development standards.” State law generally defines such standards as those that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and that are uniformly verifiable by a benchmark or criterion known prior to application submittal.
On December 20, 2019, the City was awarded an SB 2 Planning Grant from the State Department of Housing and Community Development for preparation of such objective development standards. In June of 2020, the City issued a Request for Proposals, resulting in the selection of Lexington Planning as the consultant for the project. Staff has been working with the consultant to review current documents, conduct stakeholder meetings, and develop the attached changes to the Planning Regulations and Design Guidelines.
The goal of developing objective development standards is to express the residential development standards in Emeryville's plans, regulations, and guidelines as measurable, yes-or-no standards. These objective development standards are intended to be used to evaluate those projects for which State laws limit the City to ministerial review only (meaning that the review does not involve any independent, subjective judgement), or for which State laws otherwise limits the City’s scope of review.
The Planning Commission held a study session on April 22, 2021 to review an Issues and Options Paper discussing requirements and opportunities to streamline the development review process for multifamily and mixed-use residential projects requiring ministerial approval to comply with State law by making targeted changes to the City’s Planning Regulations. The Commission’s comments included the following: objective standards can be too restrictive and should allow for variety and innovation; the standards should include environmental requirements (specifically the Climate Action Plan, Active Transportation Plan, Complete Streets, energy efficiency, and pedestrian and bicycle friendliness); the standards should consider neighborhood impacts (such as shadows) and include building design details addressing glare and bird safety; and the standards should reflect what makes a great housing project The Commissioners expressed appreciation for the detailed review, and concern that their limited time to review the topic was not sufficient to provide direction. It was suggested that a special meeting, focused solely on the topic of objective standards, be held. As a result, a special meeting on Thursday, June 17, 2021 was scheduled.
A City Council study session on the same topic was held on May 18, 2021 with a simplified and more focused presentation than the Planning Commission received at their April 22, 2021 study session. The Council provided feedback on objective standards that largely focused on how projects interface with public space (landscaping, open space, public art, and discards/garbage storage) and insuring the general functionality of a project (delivery areas, bike facilitates, and bike parking). The Council also suggested that residential demolition projects have an objective standard, such as the expense of preservation being compared to the expense of demolition; and that all projects include environmental objective standards, such as building materials, bird safety standards, and requiring residential projects to have 100% electric infrastructure. When asked if the Council would like to hold a joint special study session with the Planning Commission to discuss objective standards, the Council declined, stating that this study session combined with follow-up meetings provided them with adequate opportunities for feedback.
The Planning Commission special meeting held on June 17, 2021 focused on the question “What aspects of design are important to you, and would you want addressed in the objective standards?” The Commission discussion included what makes good design, from public realm improvements and how the building meets the sidewalk, to site planning, massing, articulation and design details. There was a strong desire that the objective standards not lead to housing projects that all look the same, and that the standards not be too prescriptive.
There was general consensus about the importance of the public realm, including the sidewalk, landscape areas and street trees, and street furniture such as lighting and benches. Commissioners opined that building design should seamlessly integrate with the sidewalk area and offer opportunities for engagement through seating, artwork, landscaping, or other design elements. Commissioners agreed that the Greenway is an extraordinary example of the successful implementation of design standards. Commissioners also agreed that projects should underground utilities along the project street frontages. Some Commissioners expressed concerns about locating individual unit entrances on busy streets, such as Powell Street.
In terms of project sites, there was general support for sustainability, both building efficiency and alternative travel modes (i.e., pedestrian and bicycle access and facilities). There was general support for usable open space for tenants and green space at the interface of the private and public realm to the greater community. Some Commissioners expressed a preference for native plantings.
In terms of building design, there was general consensus about the need for articulation and a desire for variety in architectural styles. It was stated that uniqueness can be generated through innovative designs, architecture that reflects historic and site context, public art, and secret pathways. Some Commissioners expressed a desire to study shadows, parking, and privacy impacts to neighbors and existing properties when new buildings are proposed.
There was a desire for standards to protect from undesirable conditions, such as long unvaried façades and rooflines. Additionally, there was support for windows being recessed and detailed. There was not strong interest in regulating building materials. Commissioners also expressed caution not to make standards, such as the current family-friendly guidelines, too onerous for below-market rate projects.
DISCUSSION
In an effort to clearly delineate objective regulations from subjective review, subjective language in the Planning Regulations was either made objective, or moved to the Design Guidelines. Proposed changes to the Planning Regulations are summarized below under “Summary of Changes to the Planning Regulations”, and indicated in their entirety in the attached redline version of the Planning Regulations (see Attachment 1). Likewise, all items in the Emeryville Design Guidelines that were objective, or could be made objective, are proposed for moving to the Planning Regulations. Changes to the Design Guidelines are summarized below under “Summary of Changes to the Design Guidelines”. The resulting “clean” version of the Design Guidelines is shown in Attachment 2, and a matrix detailing the revisions is shown in Attachment 3.
Summary of Changes to the Planning Regulations
Section 9-3.404: specifies the location of the Neighborhood Retail Overlay Zone.
Section 9-4.202: includes modifications that simplify and clarify language pertaining to height and bulk.
Section 9-4.202(f)(1) and (2) are new sections that provide requirements for vertical and horizontal articulation.
Table 9-4.204(e) (Community Benefits and Bonus Points): is modified to simplify the Public Open Space point calculation, and add a new category (8) for Designing Convertible Parking Garages for Adaptive Reuse.
Section 9-4.301: includes modifications to make the determination of corner lots objective and add features allowed in required yards.
Table 9-4.301(a) (Minimum Setbacks): is modified to simplify setback requirements.
Section 9-4.302: simplifies and clarifies court requirements.
Section 9-4.303: simplifies and clarifies open space requirements, and adds Public Park Requirements that addresses the implementation of “Other Park Opportunities” identified in the General Plan and Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan.
Section 9-4.406: includes specifics about off-street parking in the RM zone and curb cut restrictions on San Pablo Avenue and 40th Street.
Section 9-4.408: includes updates and clarifications to the bicycle parking requirements to address ongoing concerns brought up at the Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) about bicycle parking design and requirements.
Section 9-4.504: now specifies that stormwater management measures may count toward landscaping requirements, but not towards common open space requirements.
Section 9-4.507: includes language clarifying from which views roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened.
Section 9-4.508: is a new section that specifies when utility undergrounding is required.
Section 9-4.602: now directly references the documents entitled “Emeryville Water Efficient Landscape Prescriptive Requirements for Smaller Landscapes” and “Emeryville Water Efficient Landscape Prescriptive Requirements for Larger Landscapes.” Section 9-4.703: adds language specifying requirements related to pedestrian access.
Section 9-4.704: is modified to reference the document entitled “Guide to Requirements for a Discards Collection Plan for New and Remodeled Projects,” making the language in the section redundant, necessitating the removal of subsection (b).
Section 9-4.706: is a new section that contains specifications for residential windows.
Section 9-4.707: is a new section that requires that all projects comply with applicable requirements of the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen).
Section 9-4.708: and Table 9-4.709(a): are new and contain public improvements, specifically addressing sidewalks, largely relocated from the Design Guidelines.
Section 9-4.803: now includes specific language about applicable distances of bird-safe requirements from plants and water features.
Article 12 of Chapter 5 (Preservation of Structures): now incorporates references to California Government Code Section 66300(d)(2)(F)(vi) (SB 330) so that “protected units” require City Council approval for demolition, whereas non-protected units may be demolished without City Council approval. Subsequently, Section 9-5.1206(b)(2) now has an additional finding that Council must make for the replacement of protected residential units: d. The circumstances described in California Government Code Section 66300(d)(2)(A) through (D) apply to the project.” These provisions generally relate to replacement of protected units and fair treatment of their occupants.
Section 9-5.1402, for the applicability of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) now explicitly refers to State Law, stating “Should any provisions of these regulations be determined inconsistent with State law requirements for accessory dwelling units, State law shall prevail.” This provision is necessary because State law regarding ADUs changes virtually every year.
Section 9-5.2004: is now expanded, incorporating the Family Friendly Design standards from the Design Guidelines that have been made objective.
Section 9-5.2008: the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) section has been simplified. Previously, a study was required and the section suggested that various TDM options “may” be included. Now, projects are required to include measures chosen by the applicant from a menu of options.
Section 9-5.2009: Multi-Unit Residential Design and Amenities is a new section largely incorporating previously subjective statements from the Design Guidelines.
Section 9-7.304: is a new section that explicitly includes Objective Design Review under the category of Zoning Compliance Review: “As part of zoning compliance review, any multi-unit residential development application that requires exterior modifications or new construction shall be subject to objective design review per Section 9-7.404(a). Also, if the project meets the contribution requirements of Section 3-2.403, then public art requirements shall apply.
Section 9-7.404(a): is a new section explaining how objective design review operates in conjunction with zoning compliance review.
Section 9-7.404(a): for new construction of residential units, Minor Design Review was previously only available for single or two unit developments. Section 9-7.404(a)(2) expands this to included “New construction or alteration of Multi-Unit residential uses with fewer than 10 units.” Section 9-7.404(a)(6) is modified to be consistent with Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO) designations of “small” and “large” landscaping projects.
Section 9-7.407: now includes clarification to major and minor design review findings, and adds a new finding in subsection (d) regarding objective standards “The project is consistent with objective standards, including but not limited to standards listed in Section 9-7.1604(a).” Article 16 of Chapter 7: is a new article explaining Ministerial and Discretionary Approvals, and includes a cross-referenced list of objective standards that apply to all projects.
Chapter 8 of Title 9: some existing terms have been updated in the definitions section of the Planning Regulations (Section 9-8.206(m) Floor Area; 9-8.216(xx) Public Open Space), and new definitions have been added (Section 9-8.215(a) Objective Design Review; Section 9-8.215(j) Open Space, Public).
Section 3-2.403 in Title 3 (Finance) is updated to correctly reference Sections of the Planning Regulations modified by changes listed above.
Summary of Changes to the Design Guidelines
All items in the Design Guidelines that were objective, or could be made objective, are proposed to be moved to the Planning Regulations. Consequently, only subjective design guidelines remain. As part of the review process, some design guidelines were removed, or language was modified. This was done to provide clarity, remove redundancies, and improve the efficiency and user-friendliness of the document. Once finalized, a checklist of all the design guidelines will be created for applicants to fill out and submit as part of the application process. Changes include:
The addition of six new design guidelines pertaining to bicycle lockers (B-6), Bicycle Facilities (B-7), Convertible Parking Structure Design (B-9), Pedestrian-Scaled Lighting (G-23), Kitchen Cabinets (G-23), and Multi-Unit Corridors (J-9).
Reducing the size of the Design Guidelines. The current Design Guidelines contain 237 guidelines, whereas the revised Design Guidelines have 150. In addition to the reasons stated above, 6 of the 87 removed guidelines were redundant with the Planning Regulations, including several from the Sign and Family Friendly sections (which have mostly been made objective and moved to the Planning Regulations).
Pictures have been updated. All pictures will contain captions explaining their content and state the guideline(s) that the picture is related to. The updated photos use examples almost exclusively from Emeryville, highlighting projects and features already in place throughout the city.
These changes, detailed in the matrix in Attachment 3, result in the Design Guidelines being reduced from a current length of 80 pages, to a revised length of 43 pages (see Attachment 2).
Committee Review
The BPAC reviewed the Planning Regulations and Design Guidelines sections related to pedestrians and bicycles at their June 5, 2023 meeting. The BPAC unanimously recommended approval of the regulations with the following modifications: including installation requirements for outdoor bike racks, adding a design guideline recommending the consideration of adding a cross bar to staple racks to accommodate a wider variety of bicycles, and include adaptive bicycles in the description of Large Bicycles (already included in the attached Planning Regulations). Additionally, the BPAC agreed with staff’s recommendation of developing a guidelines document for the installation of bike racks in the public right of way, to be referenced in the Planning Regulations.
At their June 20, 2023 meeting, the Transportation Committee will review the same items that the BPAC reviewed at their June 5, 2023 meeting addressing pedestrian and bicycle related portions of the Planning Regulations and Design Guidelines. This will be reported verbally at the June 22, 2023 Planning Commission meeting and the July 5, 2023 City Council meeting.
At their June 21, 2023 meeting the Parks and Recreation Committee will review the portions of the Planning Regulations related to parks and open space. This will be reported verbally at the June 22, 2023 Planning Commission meeting and the July 5, 2023 City Council meeting.
At their June 28, 2023 meeting, the Housing Committee will review the portions of the Planning Regulations related to Family-Friendly Design. This will be reported verbally at the July 5, 2023 City Council meeting.
Based on the comments received at the above meetings and the July 5, 2023 City Council meeting, revisions and modifications are anticipated to take place during the summer of 2023. Committees will be revisited, as needed, during September 2023, with final versions of the Planning Regulations and Design Guidelines tentatively scheduled to be considered by the Planning Commission for recommendation in September 2023, and by the City Council for approval in October 2023.
Fiscal Impact
None.
Staff Communication with the Public
Objective Development Standards were, or will be, reviewed at the public meetings listed above in the “Committee Review” section.
Conflict of Interest
There is no conflict of interest.
CONCLUSION
Staff requests that the City Council review, and provide comments and direction on, the proposed changes to the Planning Regulations and Design Guidelines to implement objective development standards, as summarized above and detailed in the attachments to this staff report.
PREPARED BY: Navarre Oaks, Associate Planner
Approved and Forwarded to the
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE:
Paul Buddenhagen, City Manager
Attachments
Redline of the proposed revised Planning Regulations
Clean version of the proposed revised Design Guidelines Matrix of proposed changes to the Design Guidelines
Study Session: Objective Development Standards
City Council Meeting | July 5, 2023
City of Emeryville
CALIFORNIA
MEMORANDUM