Merced Civic Center
678 W. 18th Street
Merced, CA 95340
CITY OF MERCED
Minutes
Planning Commission
7:00 PMWednesday, December 8, 2021
A. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson HARRIS called the Regular Meeting to order at 7:05 PM A.1. Moment of Silence
A.2. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Vice Chair CAMPER led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
B. ROLL CALL
Chairperson Michael Harris, Member Robert Dylina, Member Dorothea White, Member Jose Delgadillo, Vice Chair Mary Camper, Member Jeremiah Greggains, and Member Ronnie DeAnda
Present: 7 -
Absent: 0
C. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Chairperson HARRIS introduced the new Planning Commissioner from District 2, RONNIE DEANDA, to the Commission.
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
A motion was made by Member Camper, seconded by Member Greggains, to approve the Consent Calendar. The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: Chairperson Harris
Member Dylina
Member White
Member Delgadillo
Vice Chair Camper
Member Greggains
Member DeAnda
7 -
No: 0
Absent: 0
D.1 SUBJECT: Planning Commission Minutes of November 3, 2021
December 8, 2021Planning Commission Minutes
ACTION:
Approving and filing the Planning Commission Minutes of November 3, 2021
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Minutes of November 3, 2021
This Consent Item was approved.
E. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ACTION ITEMS
E.1 SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Application # 1257, initiated by Peter Herr, property owner . This application involves a request to allow for a Live/Work Unit at 2125 O Street. The subject site is generally located on the west side of O Street, 100 feet south of W. 22nd Street, within an Office Commercial (C-O) Zone with an Office Commercial (CO) General Plan designation. *PUBLIC HEARING*
ACTION: Approve/Disapprove/Modify
1) Environmental Review #21-14 (Categorical
Exemption)
2) Conditional Use Permit #1257
SUMMARY
Peter Herr /Bellevue Holdings, LLC, is requesting conditional use permit approval to allow for a Live /Work Unit at 2125 O Street (Attachment B). Per Merced Municipal Code Land Use Table 20.10-1 -Permitted Land Uses in the Commercial Zoning Districts, Live /Work Units are allowed in the Office Commercial (C-O) Zone with conditional use permit approval from the Planning Commission. The subject site is located across from the Merced County Library and Merced County Courthouse Park, near the Downtown area. The front portion of the building along O Street would be used for office purposes (future real estate office) and the rear portion of the building would be used for dwelling purposes. City staff have reviewed this request and are recommending approval with conditions.
RECOMMENDATION
Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Environmental Review # 21-14 (Categorical Exemption ), and Conditional Use Permit # 1257, including the adoption of the Draft Resolution at Attachment A subject to the conditions in Exhibit A and the
December 8, 2021Planning Commission Minutes
findings/considerations in Exhibit B.
Associate Planner MENDOZA-GONZALEZ reviewed the report on this item. For further information, refer to Staff Report #21-939.
Public testimony was opened at 7:16 PM
Speaker from the Audience in Favor:
Steve MORGAN, Architect, Merced
There were no speakers in opposition to the project.
Public testimony was closed at 7:17 PM
A motion was made by Member Dylina, seconded by Member Delgadillo, to adopt a Categorical Exemption regarding Environmental Review #21-14, and approve Conditional Use Permit #1257, subject to the Conditions set forth in Exhibit A, and the Findings set forth in Exhibit B (RESOLUTION #4079). The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: Chairperson Harris
Member Dylina
Member White
Member Delgadillo
Vice Chair Camper
Member Greggains
Member DeAnda
7 -
No: 0
Absent: 0
Chairperson HARRIS recused himself before Item E.2 was read, due to his involvement with the Merced County Employees Retirement Association Board.
E.2 SUBJECT: Design Review Permit # 21-01, initiated by Merced County Employee Retirement Association, property owner. This application involves a request to construct a 12,500-square-foot office at 690 W. 19th Street. The 0.41-acre vacant lot is generally located at the
December 8, 2021Planning Commission Minutes
southeast corner of W. 19th Street and N Street, within a Central Commercial (C-C) Zone. *PUBLIC HEARING*
ACTION: Approve/Disapprove/Modify
1) Environmental Review #21-36 (Categorical
Exemption)
2) Design Review Application #21-01
SUMMARY
Merced County Employee Retirement Association is requesting approval to develop a 12,500-square-foot office on a vacant 0.41-acre parcel located at 690 W. 19th Street. This infill lot is located at the southeast corner of N Street and W. 19th Street, within a Central Commercial (C-C) Zone (Attachment B of Planning Commission Staff Report # 21-919). An office is considered a principally permitted use within the C -C Zone .
However, because the subject site is located within the City ’s Design Review Boundary (generally located in Downtown and west of Downtown - Attachment G of Planning Commission Staff Report # 21-919), the proposal requires a design review permit from the Planning Commission. The design review permit generally focuses on building and site plan aesthetics, but it may also be used to address other issues regarding the site plan, noise, lighting, hours of operation, etc. Staff has reviewed this proposal, and is recommending approval of this application subject to the conditions within the staff report.
RECOMMENDATION
Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Environmental Review # 21-36 (Categorical Exemption ), and Design Review Permit # 21-01, including the adoption of the Draft Resolution at Attachment A subject to the conditions in Exhibit A and the findings/considerations in Exhibit B.
Associate Planner MENDOZA-GONZALEZ reviewed the report on this item. For further information, refer to Staff Report #21-919.
Commissioner GREGGAINS informed the Commission that he is a Merced County Employee, but there is no conflict as he is not a Member of the Board.
Public testimony was opened at 7:31 PM
Speaker from the Audience in Favor:
December 8, 2021Planning Commission Minutes
KRISTY SANTOS, Plan Administrator for MCERA, Merced
There were no speakers in opposition to the project.
Public testimony was closed at 7:37 PM
A motion was made by Member Delgadillo, seconded by Member Dylina, to adopt a Categorical Exemption regarding Environmental Review #21-36, and approve Design Review Permit #21-01 subject to the Conditions set forth in Exhibit A, and the Findings set forth in Exhibit B (RESOLUTION #4078). The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: Member Dylina
Member White
Member Delgadillo
Vice Chair Camper
Member Greggains
Member DeAnda
6 -
No: 0
Absent: 0
Recused: Chairperson Harris1 -
Chairperson HARRIS returned to the dais.
E.3 SUBJECT: Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map # 1317 for University Park II, Phase 2, initiated by Golden Valley Engineering, on behalf of TVC Merced 125, LLC. This application involves the subdivision of approximately 18.98 acres into 125 single-family residential lots ranging in size from 4,479 to 7,317 square feet and a
12,064-square-foot remainder lot. This property is generally located at the northwest corner of La Sierra Avenue and Argosy Drive. ** PUBLIC HEARING**
ACTION: Approve/Disapprove/Modify
1) Environmental Review #21-35 (Categorical
Exemption)
2) Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1317
SUMMARY
The project site is located west of State Route Highway 59, at the northwest corner of La Sierra Avenue and Argosy Drive (Attachment B ).
The proposed subdivision would subdivide 18.98 acres of land into 125
December 8, 2021Planning Commission Minutes
single-family lots (Attachment C of Planning Commission Staff Report 21-937). Planning staff, along with other City staff, have reviewed the project and recommend approval subject to conditions.
RECOMMENDATION
Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Environmental Review # 21-35 (CEQA Section 15183 Findings) and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map # 1317 (University Park II, Phase 2) (including the adoption of the Draft Resolution) subject to the conditions in Exhibit A and the findings /considerations in Exhibit B of Draft Resolution #4080 at Attachment A.
Associate Planner NELSON reviewed the report on this item. For further information, refer to Staff Report #21-937. Staff received one public comment from GERALD WELKER stating that he was generally in favor of the project, but requested that a single-story home be built adjacent to his home. The applicant was receptive to this voluntary request.
Public testimony was opened at 7:51 PM
Speaker from the Audience in Favor:
CHRIS TYLER, Applicant, Modesto
There were no speakers in opposition to the project.
Public testimony was closed at 8:00 PM
Commissioner DELGADILLO requested a modification to Condition #17 as follows:
(Note: Strikethrough deleted language, underline added language.) “17. A minimum 7-foot-tall decorative wall and a 10-foot-wide landscape strip shall be constructed along the project ’s frontage on Highway
59. Developer shall submit landscape /irrigation/wall plans for approval by City Engineer. All walls shall be solid masonry .
Fast-growing vines or other plants shall be planted on or near the wall to deter graffiti and /or a graffiti resistant coating applied to the wall. Details to be worked out with staff.
A motion was made by Member White, seconded by Member Dylina, to adopt a Categorical Exemption regarding Environmental Review #21-35 and approve Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1317, subject to the Conditions set forth in Exhibit A , with a modification to Condition #17 as shown above. (RESOLUTION
December 8, 2021Planning Commission Minutes
#4080). The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: Chairperson Harris
Member Dylina
Member White
Member Delgadillo
Vice Chair Camper
Member Greggains
Member DeAnda
7 -
No: 0
Absent: 0
Commissioner DYLINA recused himself before Item E.4 was read due to a business relationship with the applicant.
E.4 SUBJECT: Zone Change # 428, Tentative Subdivision Map # 1318, and Minor Use Permit # 21-09, initiated by MCP, LLC, property owner .
This application involves a request for a Zone Change from a Low-Density Residential (R-1-6) Zone to a Medium -Density Residential (R-3-2) Zone with an Urban Residential Overlay (R-3-2/UR) at 565, 575, 601, and 609 Q Street. The applicant is requesting to subdivide four parcels (approximately 0.88 acres) into 16 single-family lots ranging in size from 897 square feet to 1,251 square feet with an out-parcel for a shared parking lot (totaling 21,584 square feet). The
0.88-acre subject site is generally located on the west side of Q Street, directly south of West 6th Street. General Plan Amendment # 21-01 from Low Density Residential (LD) to High -Medium Density Residential (HMD) was approved for this site on July 19, 2021. * PUBLIC HEARING*
ACTION: PLANNING COMMISSION:
Recommendation to City Council:
Approve/Disapprove/Modify
1) Environmental Review #21-39 (CEQA Section 15162
Findings)
2) Zone Change #428
Approve/Disapprove/Modify (contingent on City Council
approval of the Zone Change)
1) Environmental Review #21-39 (CEQA Section 15162
Findings)
2) Tentative Subdivision Map #1318
December 8, 2021Planning Commission Minutes
3) Minor Use Permit #21-09
SUMMARY
The subject site is located in southcentral Merced, on the west side of Q Street, south of W. 6th Street, and consists of 4 identical parcels totaling
0.88-acres at 565, 575, 601, and 609 Q Street. The applicant would like to change the sites’ current Zoning designation of Low -Density Residential (R-1-6) to Medium -Density Residential (R-3-2) with an Urban Residential Overlay (R-3-2/UR). The applicant would like to subdivide the subject site into 16 different parcels for single -family homes (with one larger out -parcel reserved for a shared parking lot) on lots ranging in size from 897 square feet to 1,251 square feet, with the parking lot being 21,584 square feet .
The proposed density of 18.18 dwelling units per acre would be within the existing allowed General Plan designation of High -Medium Density Residential (HMD) which allows between 12 to 24 dwelling units per acre .
Staff is recommending approval.
RECOMMENDATION
Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Environmental Review # 21-39 (CEQA Section 15162 Findings), and Zone Change # 428, and approve Tentative Subdivision Map # 1318 and Minor Use Permit # 21-09 (contingent on City Council approval of the Zone Change ), including the adoption of the Draft Resolutions at Attachments A and B subject to the conditions in Exhibit A and the findings/considerations in Exhibit B of each.
Associate Planner MENDOZA-GONZALEZ reviewed the report on this item. For further information, refer to Staff Report #21-918.
There was no one present wishing to speak regarding the project; therefore public testimony was opened and closed at 8:24 PM
A motion was made by Vice Chair Camper, seconded by Member Delgadillo, to recommend to City Council adoption of CEQA Section 15162 Findings regarding Environmental Review #21-39 , and the approval of Zone Change #428 subject to the Conditions set forth in Exhibit A, and the Findings set forth in Exhibit B (RESOLUTION #4077). The motion carried by the following vote:
December 8, 2021Planning Commission Minutes
Aye: Chairperson Harris
Member White
Member Delgadillo
Vice Chair Camper
Member Greggains
Member DeAnda
6 -
No: 0
Absent: 0
Recused: Member Dylina1 -
A motion was made by Vice Chair Camper, seconded by Member White, to adopt CEQA Section 15162 Findings regarding Environmental Review #21-39, and approve Tentative Subdivision Map #1318 and Minor Use Permit #21-09, subject to the Conditions set forth in Exhibit A, and the Findings set forth in Exhibit B (RESOLUTION #4082). The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: Chairperson Harris
Member White
Member Delgadillo
Vice Chair Camper
Member Greggains
Member DeAnda
6 -
No: 0
Absent: 0
Recused: Member Dylina1 -
Commissioner DYLINA returned to the dais.
E.5 SUBJECT: Density Bonus # 21-01, initiated by UP Holdings, LLC, on behalf of the Stan Short Trust, property owner. This application involves a request to consider Density Bonus # 21-01 which permits an increase in density and provides for concessions to development standards to allow the construction of 65 affordable permanent supportive housing units, a manager ’s unit, and a community /office area within a three -story building on a 1.54-arce parcel, generally located on the west side of Park Avenue, between Olive Avenue and Alexander Avenue. The site has a General Plan Designation of High-Medium Density (HMD) Residential and a Zoning designation of Planned Development (P-D) #4.
ACTION: PLANNING COMMISSION:
December 8, 2021Planning Commission Minutes
Recommendation to City Council
1) Environmental Review #21-43 (Categorical
Exemption)
2) Density Bonus Application #21-01
CITY COUNCIL:
Approve/Disapprove/Modify
1) Environmental Review #21-43 (Categorical
Exemption)
2) Density Bonus Application #21-01
SUMMARY
This is a request to consider Density Bonus # 21-01 which permits an increase in density and provides for concessions and waivers of development standards to allow the construction of 65 affordable permanent supportive housing units, a manager ’s unit, and a community/office area within a three -story building on a 1.54-arce parcel, generally located on the west side of Park Avenue, between Olive Avenue and Alexander Avenue. Staff is recommending the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council. No public hearing is required per state statues or local ordinances.
RECOMMENDATION
Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of Environmental Review # 21-43 (Categorical Exemption) and Density Bonus # 21-01 (including the adoption of the Draft Resolution at Attachment A) subject to the findings /considerations in Exhibit A of the Draft Resolution.
Associate Planner NELSON reviewed the report on this item. For further information, refer to Staff Report #20-956.
The applicant, RYAN WILSON, UP Holdings, was in available via teleconference for questions.
A motion was made by Member Dylina, seconded by Member Greggains, to recommend to City Council adoption of Environmental Review #21-43 (Categorical Exemption) and recommends approval of Density Bonus #21-01, subject to the Findings set forth in Exhibit A (RESOLUTION #4081). The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: Chairperson Harris
Member Dylina
Member White
Member Delgadillo
Vice Chair Camper
Member Greggains
Member DeAnda
7 -
December 8, 2021Planning Commission Minutes
No: 0
Absent: 0
E.6 SUBJECT: Site Plan Review # 487, initiated by UP Holdings, LLC, on behalf of the Stan Short Trust, property owner. This application involves a request to construct 66 multi-family units and a community/office area within a three -story building on a 1.54-arce parcel generally located on the west side of Park Avenue, approximately 150 feet north of Alexander Avenue. The site has a General Plan Designation of High -Medium Density (HMD) Residential and a Zoning designation of Planned Development (P-D) #4. ** PUBLIC HEARING**
ACTION: No Action Required - Application Withdrawn
SUMMARY
This application has been withdrawn by the applicant for consideration by the Planning Commission. The application will be considered by the Site Plan Review Committee at a future meeting. No action is required by the Planning Commission.
RECOMMENDATION
No action is required by the Planning Commission.
This item was withdrawn; therefore no action was required.
E.7 SUBJECT: Cancellation of January 5, 2022, Planning Commission Meeting due to the lack of items
ACTION:
Cancel the Planning Commission Meeting of January 5, 2022 A motion was made by Member Greggains, seconded by Member White, to cancel the Meeting of January 5, 2022, due to a lack of items. The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: Chairperson Harris
Member Dylina
Member White
Member Delgadillo
Vice Chair Camper
Member Greggains
Member DeAnda
7 -
No: 0
Absent: 0
December 8, 2021Planning Commission Minutes
F. INFORMATION ITEMS
F.1 SUBJECT: Report by Planning Manager of Upcoming Agenda Items ACTION
Information only.
Planning Manager ESPINOSA went over items for the next several Planning Commission meetings.
F.2 SUBJECT: Calendar of Meetings/Events
Dec. 6 City Council, 6:00 p.m.
8 Planning Commission, 7:00 p.m.
14 Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Commission, 4:00 p.m. (Special Meeting)
20 City Council, 6:00 p.m.
22 Planning Commission, 7:00 p.m. (Cancelled due to Holiday) 28 Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Commission, 4:00 p.m. (To be Cancelled)
Jan. 3 City Council, 6:00 p.m.
5 Planning Commission, 7:00 p.m. (To be Cancelled)
18 City Council, 6:00 p.m. (Tuesday)
19 Planning Commission, 7:00 p.m.
G. ADJOURNMENT
Clerk's Note: The Regular Meeting adjourned at 9:20 PM
A motion was made by Member Greggains, seconded by Member Delgadillo, to adjourn the Regular Meeting. The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: Chairperson Harris
Member Dylina
Member White
Member Delgadillo
Vice Chair Camper
Member Greggains
Member DeAnda
7 -
No: 0
Absent: 0
December 8, 2021Planning Commission Minutes
CITY OF MERCED
BY:
KIM ESPINOSA, SECRETARY
MERCED CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVED:
MICHAEL HARRIS, CHAIRPERSON
MERCED CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MERCED
Planning Commission
Resolution #4077
WHEREAS, the Merced City Planning Commission at its regular meeting of December 8, 2021, held a public hearing and considered Zone Change #428, initiated by MCP, LLC, property owner. This application involves a request for a Zone Change from a Low-Density Residential (R-1-6) Zone to a Medium-Density Residential (R-3-2) Zone with an Urban Residential Overlay (R-3-2/UR) at 565, 575, 601, and 609 Q Street. The 0.88-acre subject site is generally located on the west side of Q Street, directly south of West 6th Street. General Plan Amendment #21-01 from Low Density Residential (LD) to High-Medium Density Residential (HMD) was approved for this site on July 19, 2021. The subject sites are more particularly described as Parcels 1, 2, 3, and 4 as shown on the map entitled "Parcel Map for Samuel E. and Kathie K. Bartholomew" recorded in Volume 103, Page 45, in Merced County Records; also known as a portion of Assessor's Parcel Number (APN) 032-183-039, 032-183-040, 032-183-041, and 032-183-042; and, WHEREAS, the Merced City Planning Commission concurs with Findings/Considerations A through J (Exhibit B) of Staff Report #21-918; and, NOW THEREFORE, after reviewing the City's Draft Environmental Determination, and discussing all the issues, the Merced City Planning Commission does resolve to hereby recommend to City Council adoption of a California Environmental Quality Act Section 15162 Findings regarding Environmental Review #21-39, and recommend approval of Zone Change #428 subject to the Conditions set forth in Exhibit A, and the Findings set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Upon motion by Commissioner CAMPER, seconded by Commissioner DELGADILLO, and carried by the following vote:
A YES: Commissioners Camper, DeAnda, Delgadillo, Greggains, White, and Chairperson Harris
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Commissioner Dylina
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4077
December 8, 2021
Adopted this 8th day of December 2021
ATTEST:
'Secretary
Attachments:
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
Exhibit B - Findings
Chairperson, Planning Commission of
the City of Merced, California
Michael Harris
Conditions of Approval
Planning Commission Resolution #4077
Zone Change #428
1. The proposed project shall be constructed/designed generally as shown on Exhibit 1 (parcel map/site plan - Attachment D of Planning Commission Staff Report #21-918, except as modified by the conditions.
2. All other applicable codes, ordinances, policies, etc., adopted by the City of Merced shall apply.
3. The developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend (with counsel selected by the City), and hold harmless the City, and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and any officers, officials, employees, or agents thereof, from any and all claims, actions, suits, proceedings, or judgments against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, and any officers, officials, employees, or agents thereof to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board, or legislative body, including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the project and the approvals granted herein. Furthermore, developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, against any and all claims, actions, suits, proceedings, or judgments against any governmental entity in which developer/applicant's project is subject to that other governmental entity's approval and a condition of such approval is that the City indemnify and defend (with counsel selected by the City) such governmental entity. City shall promptly notify the developer/applicant of any claim, action, suits, or proceeding. Developer/applicant shall be responsible to immediately prefund the litigation cost of the City including, but not limited to, City's attorney's fees and costs. If any claim, action, suits, or proceeding is filed challenging this approval, the developer/applicant shall be required to execute a separate and formal defense, indemnification, and deposit agreement that meets the approval of the City Attorney and to provide all required deposits to fully fund the City's defense immediately but in no event later than five (5) days from that date of a demand to do so from City. In addition, the developer/applicant shall be required to satisfy any monetary obligations imposed on City by any order or judgment.
4. The developer/applicant shall construct and operate the project in strict
EXHIBIT A
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4077
compliance with the approvals granted herein, City standards, laws, and ordinances, and in compliance with all State and Federal laws, regulations, and standards. In the event of a conflict between City laws and standards and a State or Federal law, regulation, or standard, the stricter or higher standard shall control.
5. All projects on this site shall comply with Post Construction Standards in accordance with the requirement for the City's Phase II MS-4 Permit (Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System).
6. All landscaping on the site shall be in compliance with the City's Water Efficient Landscaping and Irrigation Ordinance (Merced Municipal Code Section 17.60) and all state-mandated conservation and drought restrictions as well as the City's Zoning Ordinance Section 20.36 - Landscaping.
7. Irrigation for all onsite landscaping shall be provided by a low-volume system in accordance with the State's Emergency Regulation for Statewide Urban Water Conservation or any other State or City- mandated water regulations dealing with drought conditions.
8. All landscaping in the public right-of-way shall comply with the most recently adopted water regulations by the State and City addressing water conservation measures. If turf is proposed to be installed in medians or park strips, high quality artificial turf ( approved by the City Engineer and Development Services Director) shall be installed.
9. The developer shall use proper dust control procedures during site development in accordance with San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District rules.
10. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from public view (details to be worked out with staff during the building permit stage).
11. The proposal shall comply with Merced Municipal Code Section
20.46.020 - General Design Standards for Single-Family Dwellings, required for single-family homes in any Zoning district within the City.
12. The Engineering Department may require the applicant to make additional public improvements during the building permit stage (such as repairing damaged sidewalk for projects exceeding valuation of $100,000.00.
EXHIBIT A
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4077
Page2
Findings and Considerations
Planning Commission Resolution #4077
Zone Change #428
FINDINGS/CONSIDERATIONS:
General Plan Compliance and Policies Related to This Application A) With the proposed Zone Change with Urban Overlay, the proposed project would conform with the General Plan designation of High-Medium Density Residential (HMD) and proposed zoning of Medium-Density Residential (R-3-2) with an Urban Residential Overlay. At 16 units on 0.88 acres, the density shall be 18 dwelling units/acre, which conforms to the HMD designation, which allows densities of 12 to 24 dwelling units/acre.
The Housing Element of the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan includes policies supporting higher densities.
Policy H-1.1 Support Increased in Residential Zoning Districts This proposal offers an opportunity for a higher density project to provide needed housing within the City.
Policy 1.1.e Encourage Alternate Housing Types
The proposed project would include 16 single-family homes on independent lots.
This provides a different housing type to meet the growing need of housing within the community and supports this policy of providing alternate housing types.
Policy 1.8b Prioritize City efforts to encourage residential development by focusing on in-fill development and densification within the existing City Limits.
The proposed project is on an in-fill site and meets the density requirements of the City's High-Medium Density Residential classification.
The following are Land Use Policies and Implementing Actions of the General Plan that could be met with the proposed project.
Findings - Zone Change/ Urban Overlay
B) Chapter 20.80 (Zoning Ordinance Amendments) outlines procedures for considering Zone Changes, but does not mention adopting Overlay Zones. Merced Municipal Code Section 20.22.040 - Urban Residential (/UR) Overlay Zones, discusses the intent of the UR Zone with development standards, but does not require any specific findings to be made for approval. However, Planning practice would be to provide objective reasons for approval or denial, but these can take whatever form deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission and City Council. Based on State law and case law, the following findings are recommended:
1. The proposed amendment is deemed to be in the public interest.
The proposed amendment is deemed to be in the public interest because it will provide needed housing for residential projects.
EXHIBITB
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4077
Page I
2. The proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the rest of the General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected.
The proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the rest of the General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected.
3. The potential impacts of the proposed amendment have been assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.
The proposed project does not include any uses that would be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare of the City. Implementation of the conditions of approval and adherence to all applicable Building and Fire Codes and City Standards would prevent the project from having any detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the City.
4. The proposed amendment has been processed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Planning staff has conducted an environmental review (#21-39) of the project in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and a CEQA Section 15162 Findings are being recommended (see Attachment J of Planning Commission Staff Report #21-918).
Traffic/Circulation
C) The project site is in southcentral Merced, approximately 1.5 miles from Downtown,
0.75-miles from State Route 59, and 1 mile south of State Route 99. The project site is bounded by local roads, with the nearest north-south bound road being Q Street, and the nearest east-west bound road being 8th Street. 8th Street connects with R Street, which is considered a Major Arterial Road and designed to carry large volumes of traffic traveling throughout the community. R Street also provides access to both Highway 59 and Highway 99, that connect Merced with other regional communities throughout the State.
The subject site is currently entitled for 12 units (up to 3 units per parcel can be allowed under current accessory dwelling unit laws), the proposed 16 units would generate a relatively minimal increase in vehicle traffic. According to Trip Generation (ITE Report) the average daily trips per unit is 6.59. At 12 units, that would total 79 trips per day, and at 16 units it would total 105 trips per day which would equate to a 25% increase in trips correlating to the 25% increase in number of residential units. The Engineering Department believes that the existing street network could adequately serve this proposal.
The increase in density would result in less vehicle miles traveled to surrounding uses such as Tenaya Middle School, Margaret Sheehy Elementary, McNamara Park, and Golden Valley Health Centers.
EXHIBITB
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4077
Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, alternative modes of transportation were assessed with the previous Initial Study (Environmental Review #21-04) and are available within a 1.5 mile distance of the site. The Merced County Bus provides services with several stops nearby (within a ¼ mile) along R Street linking the residents to the M 1 Route. The Amtrak (passenger train service) is located within 1.5 miles providing services to the greater California area and connections to travel across the county. The closest airport is Merced Regional Airport, located approximately 1 mile to the east.
Parking
D) The Zoning Ordinance requires 1 space of parking for each single-family home which requires 16 parking spaces for this site. The applicant is providing 31 parking spaces, which exceeds the parking required for this project.
In addition, the site is located close to several alternative modes of transportation such as bike lanes, and bus stops that link with rail service (Amtrak) and the Merced Regional Airport. Bicycle parking would be provided as required by the California Green Code, and reviewed during the Building Permit stage.
Public Improvements/City Services
E) Water
There is a water line in Q Street along the frontage of the subject sites. The City's water supply would be sufficient to serve the proposed project. Each lot shall have water lateral connections from Q Street.
Sewer
The Merced Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) recently finished two major upgrades (Phase IV and Phase V) to improve the quality of the treated water, referred to as plant effluent, and to improve the quality ofbiosolids and methods of treatment.
The Merced Wastewater Treatment Plant is now one of the most advanced facilities in the state. It is capable of treating up to 12 million gallons of influent a day. The proposed project is estimated to generate approximately 1,280 - 1,600 gallons of wastewater per day (based on 80-100 gallons/day per residential unit). The additional wastewater generated by the project would be approximately 0.0133% of the overall capacity of the WWTP.
There is sufficient capacity at the WWTP, and the existing lines along the back portion of the properties (western portion) have enough capacity to accommodate the additional wastewater and transmit it to the WWTP for processing. Each lot shall have sewer lateral connections from the western portion of the property.
Public Improvements
The Engineering Department may require the applicant to make additional public improvements during the building permit stage (such as repairing damaged sidewalks), per for projects exceeding valuation of $100,000.00.
EXIITBITB
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4077
Building Design
F) There would be a single-family home on each lot, for a total of 16 units within the subject sites (Attachment D of Planning Commission Staff Report #21-918). The specific details of the homes, such as floor plans and elevations are shown at Attachments E and F of Planning Commission Staff Report #21-918. However, the proposal shall comply with Merced Municipal Code Section 20.46.020 - General Design Standards for Single-Family Dwellings, required for single-family residential homes in any Zoning district within the City. The applicant currently has no plans to add any accessory dwelling units (ADU's) in addition to the 16 units, however, ADU's are allowed in single-family developments per current codes.
Site Design
G) The project site consists of 4 rows ( each row having 4 homes) aligned perpendicular along Q Street. Each row of homes would be separated in the middle by a 6-foot-gap.
Even though the parcels would remain independent, there would be some common space between the parcels. The homes would be located on the western portion of the subject site, and the parking and access would be located along the eastern portions of the subject sites - closer to Q Street. There would be one 26-foot-wide driveway located along Q Street. The parking area is located immediately behind the driveway and consists of 31 parking stalls and two sets of trash enclosures along eastern and western portions of the parking lot. Two walkways would create a pedestrian path between the parking lot and entrances to each residential unit. Each parcel would have a back yard that is at least 10 feet deep.
Landscaping
H) Landscaping and irrigation shall be required to meet the City's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.
Neighborhood Impact/Interface
I) The subject site is located within an older portion of the City that was generally developed between the 1900's and the 1950's. As such, there are a variety of properties that were developed prior to adoption of development standards or unified local codes. This has resulted in a neighborhood containing a variety of parcel shapes/sizes, and buildings that are unique in their development with many properties having secondary or multiple dwelling units on one parcel. Even though the majority of these parcels are zoned for single-family homes, there are several parcels within a 1,000-foot-radius that have two, three, or more units that are considered legal non- conforming. In addition, 190 feet north of the subject sites, there is a small area zoned Medium Density Residential with a similar concept to what is being proposed by the applicant (multiple independent lots with cross-access and parking agreements).
Given the context of the surrounding multifamily units within legal non-conforming lots, and nearby Medium Density Residential Zone, staff is of the opinion that the proposed multifamily project is compatible with the character of the neighborhood.
EXHIBITB
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4077
Page4
Public hearing notices were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject sites three weeks prior to the public hearing. As of the date this report was prepared, staff has not had any comments from the public regarding the project.
Environmental Clearance
J) The Planning staff has conducted an environmental review (#21-39) of the project in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and a CEQA Section 15162 Findings is being recommended (see Attachment J of Planning Commission Staff Report #21-918).
EXHIBITB
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4077
CITY OF MERCED
Planning Commission
Resolution #4082
WHEREAS, the Merced City Planning Commission at its regular meeting of December 8, 2021, held a public hearing and considered Tentative Subdivision Map #1318, and Minor Use Permit #21-09, initiated by MCP, LLC, property owner. The applicant is requesting to subdivide four parcels (approximately 0.88 acres) into 16 single-family lots ranging in size from 897 square feet to 1,251 square feet with an out-parcel for a shared parking lot (totaling 21,584 square feet) at 565, 575, 601, and 609 Q Street. The 0.88-acre subject site is generally located on the west side of Q Street, directly south of West 6th Street. The subject sites are more particularly described as Parcels 1, 2, 3, and 4 as shown on the map entitled "Parcel Map for Samuel E. and Kathie K. Bartholomew" recorded in Volume 103, Page 45, in Merced County Records; also known as a portion of Assessor's Parcel Number (APN) 032-183-039, 032-183-040, 032-183-041, and 032-183-042; and, WHEREAS, the Merced City Planning Commission concurs with Findings/Considerations A through K (Exhibit B) of Staff Report #21-918; and, WHEREAS, the Merced City Planning Commission concurs with Findings/Considerations for Minor Use Permits in Merced Municipal Code Section
20.68.020 (E) and other Considerations as outlined of Staff Report #21-918; and, WHEREAS, the Merced City Planning Commission concurs with Findings/Considerations for Tentative Subdivision Maps in Merced Municipal Code Section 18.16.080 and other Considerations as outlined of Staff Report #21-918; and,
NOW THEREFORE, after reviewing the City's Draft Environmental Determination, and discussing all the issues, the Merced City Planning Commission does resolve to hereby adopt a California Environmental Quality Act Section 15162 Findings regarding Environmental Review #21-39, and approve Tentative Subdivision Map #1318 and Minor Use Permit #21-09, subject to the Conditions set forth in Exhibit A, and the Findings set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Upon motion by Commissioner CAMPER, seconded by Commissioner WHITE, and carried by the following vote:
Michael Harris