Agenda ReportFullerton City CouncilAgenda ReportFullerton City CouncilMEETING DATE: JUNE 21, 2022 Agenda Report
Fullerton City Council
Agenda Report
Fullerton City Council
TO: CITY COUNCIL / SUCCESSOR AGENCY
SUBMITTED BY: ERIC J. LEVITT, CITY MANAGER
PREPARED BY: KELLEE FRITZAL, CONSULTANT / SPECIALIST
BRADLEY J. MISNER, AICP, CONTRACT PLANNER
SUBJECT: THE PINES AT SUNRISE VILLAGE REDEVELOPMENT AT 1144 ROSECRANS AVENUE, 1715/1723 EUCLID STREET AND 1701/1751/1801-1900 EUCLID STREET
SUMMARY
The Applicant proposes redevelopment of a 12.52-acre site located in a portion of the Sunrise Village Shopping Center at the southwest corner of Euclid Street and Rosecrans Avenue. The project involves demolition of 104,300 square feet of existing on-site uses (45% vacancy) and construction of a 153-dwelling unit (DU) residential community, including 49 detached single-family residential homes and 104 townhomes. Additionally, the project will retain an existing 4,000 square foot building currently used by the Red Cross and remodel for commercial purposes.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing for the project on October 27, 2001 and voted 4 – 1 to recommend approval to City Council. City Council held a public hearing on December 7, 2021 and voted 3 - 2 to remand the project back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration, citing a need for the reduction of density, retention of retail space and aesthetic concerns.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 13, 2022 to reconsider a revised project and voted 3 - 2 to recommend City Council approval of the newly proposed project, which included reducing 11 townhome units, elimination of all rooftop decks, revising floor plans for 19 units to include home office space and retention of the existing 4,000 square foot Red Cross building for renovation and reuse. The project now includes demolition of the existing on-site uses, retention of the 4,000 square foot Red Cross building and construction of a residential community with 49 detached homes and 104 attached townhome residential homes.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the following resolutions.:
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XXX - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, INCLUDING ANALYSIS OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT, PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES, STANDARD CONDITIONS, MITIGATION MEASURES AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE PINES AT SUNRISE VILLAGE PROJECT ON A 12.52-ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EUCLID STREET AND ROSECRANS AVENUE RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XXX - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MAJOR SITE PLAN FOR THE RETENTION AND REMODEL OF AN EXISTING 4,000-SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 153-DWELLING UNIT RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY, INCLUDING 49 DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES AND 104 TOWNHOMES ON A 12.52-ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EUCLID STREET AND ROSECRANS AVENUE RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XXX - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TTM 19148 TO CREATE A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION WITH TWO LOTS FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES ON A 12.06-ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EUCLID STREET AND ROSECRANS AVENUE RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XXX - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN REVISION TO CHANGE THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TYPE FROM COMMERCIAL TO LOW / MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ON A 12.06-ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EUCLID STREET AND ROSECRANS AVENUE Introduce the following ordinances. for first reading by title only and waive further reading of the ordinances:
ORDINANCE NO. XXXX - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ZONING AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL (G-C) TO PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - INFILL (PRD-I) ON A 12.06-ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EUCLID STREET AND ROSECRANS AVENUE AND PROVIDE CLARIFING AMENDMENTS TO TABLES 15.20.130.B AND 15.20.140.A FOR CERTAIN STANDARDS INTERNAL TO A DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE NO. XXXX - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE PINES AT SUNRISE VILLAGE ON A 12.52-ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EUCLID STREET AND ROSECRANS AVENUE
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION
The City Manager recommends that if City Council does not believe the project has adequately met the conditions requested when City Council voted 3 - 2 to remand the project back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration, citing a need for the reduction of density, retention of retail space and aesthetic concerns, then City Council may cite the areas that remain in need of review and remand it back to the Planning Commission for further review. For instance, if City Council believes the project has not maintained enough potential for retail in the future on the site, City Council could remand for that purpose in consideration of the request for a zoning amendment.
PRIORITY POLICY STATEMENT
This item matches the following Priority Policy Statement:
Fiscal and Organizational Stability.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Applicant pays all City costs associated with application review, processing, environmental analysis, plan check, permitting and inspections. Additionally, the Applicant will pay all associated impact fees related to parks, schools, utilities and others as well as bonds related to off-site improvements or mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
DISCUSSION
The Applicant proposes redevelopment of a 12.52-acre site located in a portion of the Sunrise Village Shopping Center, at the southwest corner of Euclid Street and Rosecrans Avenue. The project involves demolition of 104,300 square feet of existing on-site uses (45% vacancy) and construction of a 153-dwelling unit (DU) residential community, including 49 detached single-family residential homes and 104 townhomes. Additionally, the project will retain an existing 4,000 square-foot building currently used by the Red Cross to remodel for commercial purposes.
The Applicant requests approval of the following applications:
Major Site Plan (ZON-2021-0032) for review of site, architectural and landscape plans.
Tentative Tract Map (SUB-2021-0002 / TTM 19148) to create a residential subdivision with two lots for condominium purposes.
General Plan Revision (LRP-2021-0006) to change the site’s community development type from Commercial to Low / Medium Residential.
Zoning Amendment (LRP-2021-0007) to change the zoning classification from General Commercial (G-C) to Planned Residential Development Infill (PRD-I) and amend certain PRD-I standards.
Development Agreement (LRP-2021-0008) to establish standards that govern development and provide for certain community benefits.
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration to evaluate the potential impacts associated with project construction and operation including a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Major Site Plan (ZON-2021-0032): Site Plan Review and Zoning Standards The Applicant proposes to redevelop a 12.52-acre commercial retail property into a 153- DU residential community, including 49 detached single-family residential DUs and 104 multi-family townhome DUs. The overall requisite project entitlements require a Major Site Plan review to ensure compliance with the Fullerton Municipal Code.
Through the review of the Major Site Plan application, the Applicant would develop the site with single-family residential DUs located on the southern portion of the site (“Lot 1”) and each DU would range from 1,900 to 2,600 square feet in total size. Typical lot sizes would measure 45 feet by 52 feet, with the average unit size of 2,230 square feet. Of the 49 DUs, 24 DUs would have two stories, 12 DUs would have two stories with loft area and 13 DUs would have three stories (up to 36 feet). All units (16 DUs) fronting Paseo Dorado and Euclid Street have two stories. All DUs would have a front-facing two-car garage and private backyard open space. Lot 1 includes 49 open guest parking spaces and a community swimming pool.
The townhome units are located on the northern portion of the site (“Lot 2”) in 21 building clusters. The townhomes would range from 1,400 square feet to 1,950 square feet, with an average size of 1,810 square feet. Each building would contain between three to seven DUs. All townhomes would have three stories (36 feet to roof ridge). All townhome units would provide front entry private patios and second story balconies and will not have any rooftop decks as part of the revised project. Each townhome would provide an attached two-car garage. Lot 2 includes 114 open guest parking spaces and two pocket parks.
The existing commercial building is located on the northern portion of the site (“Lot 3”) and the Applicant will retain and remodel, both interior and exterior, to create two leasable commercial spaces inside of the existing 4,000 square feet.
PRD-I Zoning Standards and Amendments
The Applicant has requested a Zoning Amendment to rezone 12.06-acres of the 12.52-acre site, from General Commercial (GC) to Planned Residential Development-Infill (PRD-I). Per Fullerton Municipal Code (FMC) Section 15.20.110, the PRD-I zone provides standards for infill development on sites less than 40 acres in size. The Applicant has designed this project to the PRD-I standards for the House and Tuck-Under Building Types.
The following zoning table (Table-1) identifies the primary zoning standards that apply to the PRD-I zoning district and demonstrates the project’s compliance with these standards, as amended under the Zoning Amendment application. This is a very important point to clarify, given that the proposed development is a combination of condominium units consisting of detached DUs on small lots and standard multi-unit townhome housing. For these reasons, the Applicant requests specific amendments to the PRD-I standards to reduce setbacks to accommodate the proposed housing types for a small lot (5,000 square feet or less) development.
Staff has described the scope of the amendments for the proposed development standards in previous reports and during both the Planning Commission and City Council meetings. However, some of the community still has concerns. Specifically, because the amendments may have not been adequately explained or understood, some community members have concerns that the development does not comply with the PRD-I development standards, namely setbacks and open space requirements. To clarify this issue, it is important to understand that the proposed Zoning Amendment is a twofold request:
A request to rezone the land from General Commercial (GC) to Planned Residential Development-Infill (PRD-I); and A request to amend the PRD-I standards (story limits and reduced setbacks) for small lot developments (5,000 square feet or less) only.
Therefore, as it relates to setbacks, the proposed amendments to the PRD-I standards allow for setbacks of buildings and garages to private streets internal to the site to be a minimum of five feet. The PRD-I standards as currently written, allow for a zero setback on internal side yards, but requires garages setback 15 feet from the street and private open space to have dimensions of at least 15 feet by 15 feet (FMC 15.10.040 (c)). The proposed amendment alleviates the garage setback issue and the required private open space dimension requirements for the House Building Type.
Concerning the private open space, the proposed House Building Type plans incorporate a typical private open space patio design of 12 feet by 20 feet. Technically, the House Building Type requires a patio of 15 feet by 15 feet. however, given that the smaller lots allow for reduced setbacks to 5 feet, the proposed design of the House Building Types will have a 10-to-12-foot rear yard setback and therefore the patios are larger than required, but cannot meet the dimension requirements.
If City Council approves the proposed amendments to the PRD-I standards, recommended by staff, then these standards would apply city-wide to any small lot development with PRD-I zoning. Presently, the PRD-I zoning does not exist in many other areas. Therefore any subsequent development would need to obtain a Zoning Map Amendment to the PRD-I zoning district to utilize the newly amended standards for small lots. Since any rezone request would require review from the Planning Commission and ultimate approval from City Council, staff does not believe this case necessarily sets a precedent, other than the rationale that small lot developments may offer density advantages to the City in the future and the reduced property development standards may help accommodate these types of development projects.
Table 1
Development
Standard
PRD-I
Proposed
Consistent
Detached Unit Setbacks
0-15 feet*
As requested for small lots
Front: 7 feet
Sides: 8 feet, Zero feet
Rear: 10 feet
Yes
Townhome Unit Setbacks
0-15 feet*
As requested for small lots
Front: 10 feet
Sides: Common wall,
8 feet to sidewalks
Rear: 4 feet drive apron
Yes
Height
2 – 3 stories*
2 – 3 stories
Yes
Open Space
15% based on net acreage
Lot 1 – 4.24 net acres
minimum 27,704 sf (approximately 0.64 acre)
Lot 2 – 3.62 net acres
Minimum 26,653 sf (approximately 0.54 acre)
Lot 1 – 66,495 sq. ft.
Lot 2 – 62,602 sq. ft.
Yes
Private Open Space
House Building Type:
15% of lot area and 15 feet by 15 feet*
Tuck-Under Building Type:
None required
12 feet by 20 feet patios; 240 square feet
65 square foot patios
Yes, with amendment
Yes
Parking
Resident – 2.0 per unit Guest – 1.0 per unit
Resident – 306 spaces
Guest – 153 spaces
Resident – 2.0 per unit Guest – 1.0 per unit
Resident – 306 garage spaces
Guest – 153 surface spaces
Yes
*Amendments for Setbacks and Height Proposed
Architecture
The single-family residential units would have a transitional modern architectural style with four color schemes and generally asymmetrical elevations. The project would accomplish architectural distinction through roof eaves, smooth stucco walls and sidings, recessed windows, porch elements and garage doors.
The townhome units would have a contemporary architectural style (with three color schemes) and generally asymmetrical elevations with varying building treatments and façade articulation. Townhome building materials would include horizontal siding, painted stucco in varied but complementary colors, metal awnings, window trim and enhanced doorways and garage doors.
Landscaping
The project would provide landscaping on landscaped slopes along Paseo Dorado and Euclid Street, in front and backyard setback areas, recreation areas and pocket parks and along pedestrian walkways. The planting schedule would include various types of trees, including Australian Willow, Italian Cypress, Southern Magnolia, Yew Pine and Fruitless OIive. The project will irrigate all areas requiring slope revegetation planting with an automatically controlled irrigation system. Additionally, the project proposes low water, drought tolerant plants, vines and groundcovers to provide a low maintenance, water efficient landscape pursuant to the City’s Landscape Ordinance No. 3226 (FMC Chapter15.50).
As detailed in the findings contained in Draft Resolution No. 2022-XXX (Attachment 3), the project, as proposed and conditioned, complies with the relevant development standards and design criteria.
Tentative Tract Map (SUB-2021-0002 / TTM 19148)
The project proposes to create a residential subdivision with two lots for condominium purposes and maintain a third lot for the existing commercial building and commercial zoning.
As detailed in the findings contained in Draft Resolution No. 2022-XXX (Attachment 4), the tentative tract map meets the City and State requirements with respect to subdivision.
General Plan Revision (LRP-2021-0006)
The project includes a General Plan Revision to change the site’s General Plan land use designation (community development type) from Commercial to Low / Medium Density Residential. The Low / Medium Density Residential community development type intends “to establish and protect opportunities for households that desire suburban living with a range of housing options, and to provide opportunities for neighborhood support uses and amenities.” Potential land uses include small-lot detached dwellings and attached dwellings, consistent with the proposed project.
Development Standard
Required
Proposed
Meets Requirement
Density
Minimum 6.1 DUs/acre
Maximum 15 DUs/acre
12.7 DUs/acre
Yes
As detailed in the findings contained in Draft Resolution No. 2022-XXX (Attachment 5), the project is consistent with the Low / Medium Density Residential community development type.
Zoning Amendment (LRP-2021-0007)
The project includes a change in the zoning classification to PRD-I, Planned Residential Development – Infill. The PRD-I zone provides standards for predominantly residential infill development on sites less than 40 acres in size. The City establishes development standards based on the type of street or streets on which a site is located and utilizes a combination of Building Types and Frontage Types to ensure a quality development compatible with its surroundings.
The project includes minor amendments to clarify certain PRD-I standards as follows:
In a development with multiple Building Types, the greatest maximum stories may be applied in relation to private streets internal to a site and when an additional story(ies) does not compromise the intent of the Building Type. (Note to Table 15.20.130.B) For a lot (fee-simple or condominium) measuring 5,000 square feet or less used to facilitate small-lot detached dwellings, the setback of buildings and garages to private streets internal to the site is a minimum of five feet. (Note to Table 15.20.140.A) As detailed in the findings contained in Draft Ordinance No. XXXX (Attachment 9), the project design complies with the development standards of the PRD-I zone, as amended.
Development Agreement (LRP-2021-0008)
As authorized in California Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5, the Development Agreement would provide the Applicant with the vested right to construct the development based on project approvals for a period of ten years. The draft Development Agreement includes provisions to extend for two additional five-year terms subject to requirement for developer performance. The Development Agreement Exhibit C identifies proposed community benefits. The Draft Development Agreement identifies that the City will consider the Applicant’s proposal to create a Community Facilities District (CFD) and shall cooperate in good faith to facilitate bond financing of the Project’s eligible public improvements and development impact fees if City Council approves the CFD. City Council will consider the CFD separately at a later date.
The Planning Commission recommended two Development Agreement amendments, discussed as follows, and reflected in Draft Ordinance No. XXXX.
As detailed in the findings contained in Draft Ordinance No. XXXX (Attachment 10), the Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan.
Planning Commission
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 27, 2021 and recommended City Council approval of the Project (See Planning Commission Minutes, Attachment 11) with the following modifications:
Development Agreement Term – Recommended reducing term from ten years (Section 2.4) with two five-year extension options (Section 5.1) to five years with one five-year extension option.
Development Agreement Public Benefits – Recommended adding a creek restoration public benefit (to Exhibit C) for those above-ground portions of the channel along Euclid Street between Rosecrans Avenue and Paseo Dorado should the Applicant find it both technically and financially feasible to construct and maintain.
Engineering Conditions of Approval – Recommended modifying Traffic Engineering Condition #13 to also add the bus stop at Paseo Dorado / Euclid such that the developer improves the three bus stops likely frequented by future residents of the project (Euclid / Rosecrans being the other two).
The Applicant raised no objections with the original recommendations of the Planning Commission and has subsequently indicated concurrence with these modifications by staff.
Staff presented the same Development Agreement terms at the Planning Commission meeting on April 13, 2022 as recommended by the Planning Commission on October 27, 2021 and the Applicant still agrees with the terms as initially recommended by the Planning Commission. Ultimately, the Planning Commission voted 3 - 2 to recommend approval of the project and the Development Agreement to City Council.
Environmental Review
The City, as Lead Agency, prepared a Draft Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration to identify the potential environmental impacts associated with the construction and implementation of the project in conformance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines. The Initial Study analyzed the project with respect to the following environmental factors:
CEQA Environmental Factors
Aesthetics
Geology / Soils
Population / Housing
Agriculture and Forestry
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Public Services
Resources
Hazards / Hazardous Materials
Recreation
Air Quality
Hydrology / Water Quality
Transportation
Biological Resources
Land Use / Planning
Tribal Cultural Resources
Cultural Resources
Mineral Resources
Utilities / Services Systems
Energy
Noise
Wildfire
The analysis found Less than Significant Impacts or No Impacts for all the environmental factors excepting Geology / Soils and Hazards / Hazardous Materials for which the analysis identified three mitigation measures which reduce the impacts to Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Geology / Soils mitigation measure requires compliance with the recommendations from the Geotechnical Investigation and establishes protocols in the unlikely discovery of any paleontological resources. The Hazards / Hazardous Materials mitigation measure requires coordination with the Department of Toxic Substances Control with respect to remediation for the former Sunrise Cleaners dry cleaning use. Attachment 14 includes the Draft Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures summarized in Attachment 14.
One agency (OCTA) and 57 interested parties commented on the project. None of the comments received resulted in the need to recirculate the Draft Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration or prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Attachment 15 includes the letters and responses. Many commenters raised questions on traffic, infrastructure impacts and project density. The Response to Comments document provides a summary discussion for each of these topics for ease of review on these common areas of concern.
Furthermore, to address the revised project including the reduction of eleven townhome units and the retention of 4,000 square feet for commercial purposes, staff prepared additional environmental analysis to ensure that the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration adequately addressed the impacts of the project as modified. The environmental consistency analysis concluded that no further CEQA analysis would be required due to the revised project in that there would be no new or unforeseeable impacts due to the project revisions.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 – PowerPoint Presentation
Attachment 2 – Draft Resolution No. 2022-XXX – Mitigated Negative Declaration Attachment 3 – Draft Resolution No. 2022-XXX – Major Site Plan Attachment 4 – Draft Resolution No. 2022-XXX – Tentative Tract Map Attachment 5 – Draft Resolution No. 2022-XXX – General Plan Revision Attachment 6 – Resolution Exhibit Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Attachment 7 – Resolution Exhibit Standard Conditions
Attachment 8 – Resolution Exhibit Engineering Conditions Attachment 9 – Draft Ordinance No. XXXX – Zoning Amendment Attachment 10 – Draft Ordinance No. XXXX – Development Agreement Attachment 11 – Planning Commission Minutes dated October 27, 2021 Attachment 12 – City Council Minutes dated December 7, 2021 Attachment 13 – Planning Commission Minutes dated April 13, 2022 Attachment 14 – Draft Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration1 Attachment 15 – Final Initial Study
Attachment 16 – Environmental Consistency Findings dated March 17, 2022 Attachment 17 – Site Plan and Elevations
Attachment 18 – Visual Impact Analysis
Attachment 19 – Landscape Plans
Attachment 20 – Civil Plans
1 Technical Appendices available upon request and at: https://www.cityoffullerton.com/government/departments/community-and-economic- development/planning-zoning/development-activity The Pines at Sunrise Village
June 21, 2022 - Page 5