CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: September 16, 2019
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. ___-19, A
RESOLUTION OF FINDINGS AND CERTIFYING AN
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH# 2019049104), AND
ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM FOR THE PROJECT, INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE
NO. ____ APPROVING A PUD REZONING AND PUD CONCEPT PLAN
AMENDMENT, AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. ____-19
APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, DEVELOPMENT
PLAN PERMIT, AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PERMIT (PLN 18-
0198) FOR A NEW CAMBRIA HOTEL, INCLUDING SITE
IMPROVEMENTS AT 3131 AND 3195 NORTH MAIN STREET AND 1531 OAK PARK BOULEVARD (ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS 170-092-050, 054, 055, 057, 058, 059)
SYNOPSIS
This is a public hearing to consider recommendations from the Architectural Review Commission and the Planning Commission to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report, approve a General Plan Amendment, adopt an ordinance approving a Planned Unit Development District (PUD) and Concept Plan, and approve related land use entitlements (Development Plan, Architectural Review Permit) for the Cambria Hotel (“Project”) and related site improvements. The site is proposed to be rezoned from the existing RB-Retail Business zoning district to a PUD (Planned Unit Development District). The Architectural Review Commission and Planning Commission both recommend approval of the project.
DISCUSSION
Project Description
The City Council is holding a public hearing to consider recommendations concerning PLN 18- 0198, consisting of a General Plan Amendment, Development Plan Permit, Architectural Review Permit, and PUD and Concept Plan (Rezoning) for a Cambria Hotel submitted by Stratus Development Partners. The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) and Planning Commission (PC) have held public hearings on the matter and both recommend approval to the City Council.
The Architectural Review and Development Plan Permits are for a three and four story, approximate 49 foot tall building with architectural features up to 59 feet tall, 95,957 square feet hotel building, including 155 guest rooms, lobby area, office, meeting rooms, fitness facility, laundry and other hotel supportive areas. The hotel also includes an outdoor pool area that will be surrounded by a six foot tall wall. Review of the project also includes review of the parking lot and proposed landscaping for the site. This review will also include removal of all trees at the property except for one significantly sized oak tree that is located in the southwestern area of the property.
Note: PHMC Section 18.30.060.D (PUD/PPD) of the Zoning Ordinance: A development plan, architectural review permit, and/or any associated permits may be submitted for review concurrently with a PUD plan. In a concurrent submittal, the City Council shall be the final decision-maker on all applications after considering recommendations from the PC and/or ARC.
The applicant has elected to submit all related entitlement applications concurrently; consequently, the City Council will consider the ARC and PC recommendations as part of the requested project.
The proposed PUD “Concept Plan” is based on the development standards for the Retail Business Zoning District and addresses the following:
1. Land use schedule defining land use categories.
2. Development regulations.
3. Design guidelines/criteria, including landscaping.
4. General Plan consistency.
The City is also proposing to amend the General Plan to establish a new land use overlay designation for visitor-serving uses with accompanying goals, policies, programs, and updated standards including allowing a floor area ratio of up to 100% for specified uses within the proposed overlay. The overlay designation is currently proposed for only the hotel project site.
Background
The site is comprised of several existing parcels located at the southern gateway to Pleasant Hill, with direct frontage on North Main Street, facing toward the 680 Freeway. It is located within the Commercial and Retail General Plan land use designation and within the Retail Business (RB) zone district. The site is currently developed with a Black Angus Restaurant (recently vacated), parking lot, vacant space, and an approximately 2,500 square foot building. Adjacent uses include a mortuary to the south (Walnut Creek); two single family residences to the west (Walnut Creek); Oak Park Boulevard to the north and North Main Street to the east.
Initially, the applicant made a presentation to the Planning Commission in April 2018 to introduce the project. Subsequently, the proposed project has had three study sessions with either the Planning Commission (July 2018) or Architectural Review Commission (April and September 2018). The applicant also conducted a community meeting at the Pleasant Hill Library to gain additional feedback from the public. Lastly, a public scoping meeting on the project was held by the Planning Commission in September 2018.
Through these public meetings, various issues have been raised by both the public and by Commissioners. The issues raised include concerns regarding the proposed height/number of stories, the architectural treatment of the rear of the building, privacy for adjacent residential uses, traffic, parking, noise, lighting, construction related impacts, preservation of the existing large oak tree, drainage, and area flooding concerns. As a result of the input received, revisions were made to the project and presented to the Architectural Review Commission for consideration of a recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council.
The Architectural Review Commission reviewed the proposed project at its July 18, 2019 meeting.
At the meeting, the Commission discussed the project and collected public input. Comments and direction were provided to the applicant and the item was continued to the August 1, 2019 ARC Meeting. At that meeting, the Commission reviewed the proposed modifications and recommended approval of the Architectural Review Permit and proposed Planned Unit Development District (Rezoning) and Concept Plan.
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project at its August 13, 2019 meeting. At the meeting, the Commission discussed the project and received public input. The Commission reviewed the proposed project, considered the Architectural Review Commission recommendations, and recommended approval to the City Council, which included the proposed General Plan Amendment, Rezoning/Planned Unit Development & Concept Plan, Development Plan, Architectural Review Permit, and Environmental Impact Report and associated Mitigation Measures.
Since the recommendation by the Planning Commission, additional public comments have been received on the proposed project (Attachment 17). Both comments are related to concerns with this, and recent projects, that have not provided a public good as part of the project approval.
Analysis
A. General Plan Amendment
The site’s current General Plan designation is Commercial and Retail. As defined in the General Plan, Commercial and Retail includes shopping centers, banks, hotels, personal services, entertainment and cultural venues, restaurants, auto sales and service, and ancillary offices. This land use designation has an allowed density, in this case, floor area ratio, of up to 0.40.
To accommodate the proposed project, a General Plan Amendment is proposed. The General Plan Amendment would establish a new land use type, Tourist Commercial. It would be defined as noted below:
Tourist Commercial provides for commercial retail and service uses oriented toward tourists and other visitors to the community. The designation includes hotels, motels and related facilities, and visitor-serving businesses. Project development shall have a Floor-Area Ratio maximum of 1.00.
In addition, the amendment would make conforming changes to the Development Potential table contained in the General Plan and add a new Community Development Program and Economic Strategy Goal, all contained in Exhibit A of Attachment 1.
Adoption of this amendment would allow the proposed project to be better consistent with the General Plan and would better define the land use classification when hotel projects that have higher floor area ratio’s (FAR) are proposed. The land use classification will better identify areas where the City desires to accommodate visitor centric uses. The land use classification would allow commercial uses that provide benefits to the City in terms of the potential revenue that could be generated from visitors of these use types. Further detail of the projects consistency with various General Plan Goals, Policies and Programs is contained in Attachment 1.
B. Conformance with the Zoning Ordinance
The project site is currently zoned RB-Retail Business, which allows a hotel as a permitted use.
The applicant is proposing to rezone the project site to a PUD to provide site specific development standards for the project. A summary of the projects consistency with the current RB-Retail Business zoning district and the proposed development standards contained in the PUD Concept Plan, are provided later in this staff report.
C. Proposed Operations
As with any other hotel, it would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The hotel would have special hours of operations related to the outdoor pool, which would be open 10:00AM to 10:00PM on a daily basis. The project includes a solid six foot tall wall around the outdoor pool area. This, in combination with the perimeter solid wall around the larger project site, will minimize noise effects to surrounding properties.
D. PUD Concept Plan
The proposed PUD “Concept Plan” addresses the following:
1. Land use schedule defining land use categories.
2. Development regulations.
3. Design guidelines/criteria, including landscaping.
4. General Plan consistency.
The project site is currently zoned RB (Retail Business). A hotel use is a permitted use for the existing zoning district. The applicant is proposing to rezone the site to a PUD to facilitate the project. The PUD proposes various modifications to site development standards related to setbacks, number of stories, building height, floor area ratio, site landscaping, and parking development provisions.
Attachment 13 contains a table that provides development standards of the current RB-Retail Business zoning district and the proposed standards through the PUD Concept Plan.
PUD Special Findings for Size
The proposed project site is approximately 2.5 acres in size. Establishment of a Planned Unit Development District (PUD) is required to be on a minimum site of four acres. The City may approve a PUD on a site with no less than two acres; however, a finding that special site characteristics exists is required. To address the finding, the special site characteristics that exists for this site are as follows:
The site is located at the southern end of the City and is primarily surrounded on two sides by the City of Walnut Creek and major thoroughfares on the other two. Thus, the site is constrained that minimizes the opportunity to be larger than the proposed size.
The nature of the city limits and the adjacent roadways results in a project site that is relatively shallow and long. Thus, allowing development standard deviations would result in an improved project that can better be considerate to adjacent uses.
Additional findings for the proposed PUD and rezoning can be found in Attachment 3.
Fencing/Walls
The project proposes various fencing and walls as summarized below:
The applicant proposes to construct a five foot tall concrete masonry unit (CMU) wall on the southern boundary. Based on direction from the ARC, the wall has been extended to be approximately 15 feet back of the property line (until that point, it could be no taller than three feet). Thus, the Concept Plan is proposed to be amended to allow this extension as it would normally be required to be five feet tall outside of the 25 foot front yard setback.
The applicant proposes to add a one foot (height) extension, where appropriate, and to construct a new seven foot tall CMU wall (where no wall currently exists) on the western property boundary to provide additional privacy and separation to properties to the west. The project proposes to have a six foot tall masonry wall surrounding the outdoor pool area.
One of the comments letters, in response to the Draft EIR, noted concerns about not having a barrier (solid wall) to separate the uses to the south from construction activity. While the project proposes a five foot tall wall, the timing of construction is not noted, thus, the ARC recommended a condition that the property line wall on the southern edge of the site to be designed and completed prior to grading and building foundation completion. This would help to reduce noise and visual impacts as the majority of construction continues at the site.
Parking
As noted in the Development Regulations table in Attachment 13, the project proposes 132 parking spaces for the proposed project (the project originally had 133 spaces, but due to comments from the Architectural Review Commission, the site was reduced to one less parking space to allow increased landscaping and improved circulation).
In addition, the site is located within a priority development area (PDA). As noted in the zoning ordinance, sites within a PDA are allowed to have a 15% reduction in required parking. This reduction is allowed primarily since PDA’s are within proximity to transit services, in this case, the Pleasant Hill BART Station. This, in combination with shuttle services proposed by the applicant, is expected to satisfy parking demand. The traffic impact assessment report reviewed parking and noted that parking was sufficient for the site. The report also recommends the following:
Monitor project parking demand between 6 months and 1 year of occupancy. The parking monitoring shall include parking demand observations on a weekday and a weekend, establish the level of Transportation Network Companies (TNC, ex. Uber and Lyft) activity, and use of the proposed shuttle. This monitoring shall take into consideration the occupancy levels at the time of data collection and project parking demands with full occupancy.
Should potential parking shortfalls be identified with full occupancy, implement additional parking demand management strategies, that could include:
o Valet Parking
o Employee Transit Passes
o Increased shuttle hours
o TNC Subsidies
The proposed concept plan notes a request to allow a parking ratio of 0.83 per room, however, staff recommends that this number be modified to 0.85 per room. A summary of other parking development provisions is provided below:
Parking Development Provisions
• Electric Vehicle Facilities - Seven electric vehicle (EV) parking spaces are proposed; however, it is not clear if all seven spaces would have the necessary electric charging equipment. Thus, staff recommends that all seven EV spaces be required to have the necessary electric charging equipment.
• Parking Lot Lighting - The project plans include new, updated, outdoor lighting for the parking lot. The existing parking lot lighting on the site does not comply with current lighting standards that limit off-site light spillage. Thus, the new parking lot lighting, in compliance with current City ordinance provisions would result in less off-site light spillage and would better protect the night sky. In responding to comments from the ARC on site plan design, the project included moving parking lot light fixtures. With the movement of parking lot lighting, dark areas within the parking lot were created. Thus, staff recommends that parking lot lighting be revised to ensure no dark areas in the parking lot for safety and security purposes and that compliance with the zoning ordinance is completed.
• Other Provisions – As noted in the proposed PUD standards, other provisions related to parking space dimensions, landscape widths, landscape entrance median, etc. are not in compliance with standard parking provisions. To provide adequate parking, maximize space within the site and result in a high-quality development, these adjustments to standards are proposed as part of the PUD.
Compensating Benefits
When considering a General Plan Amendment one of the findings is that the amendment is deemed to be in the public interest. In addition, approval of a PUD is justified in part due to compensating benefits of the PUD plan. The proposed project includes the following to satisfy both provisions:
Public Art - The City General Plan includes a Program (Community Development Program
8.2) and the City Wide Design Guidelines recommends the installation of public artwork for large/major projects. As proposed, no art is included. Consequently, staff recommends requiring submittal of a public art plan for ARC review and approval prior to building permit issuance. The Architectural Commission supported the installation of artwork as part of the project conditions of approval.
Public Infrastructure Improvements – The project will include making landscape related improvements (including new lighting for City Identification Signs) within the median of North Main Street and the applicant will be extending the sidewalk along Oak Park Boulevard beyond their frontage, in a western direction towards Pleasant Valley Drive.
Undergrounding of Utility Poles – The project will improve the appearance of a portion of North Main Street by undergrounding existing overhead utility poles.
Improved Utilization of the Property – The project will improve an existing underutilized property, a portion which is vacant, and improve the landscaping at the site and include a new hotel that will provide additional lodging options to visitors of the City and providing improved City revenues to be used throughout the City, to the benefits of the residents of Pleasant Hill.
Monetary Contribution – The applicant is making a $50,000 dollar contribution to the City to be used for either the City of Pleasant Hill affordable housing programs or for a potential future pedestrian bridge near the future City library.
E. Engineering Comments
The Engineering Division has provided conditions of approval related to the project. Many of the conditions are related to public right-of-way improvements that are located within frontage areas of the project site. This includes provisions related to undergrounding existing above-ground utility lines. The applicant is willing to underground all of the poles except for the pole at the northeast corner of the property (closest to the Oak Park Boulevard overpass).
The applicant is concerned that the difficulty to relocate/underground this pole and resulting costs would be prohibitive to complete, thus, is requesting that this pole not be relocated/undergrounded. The Architectural Review Commission did not recommend removal of the pole at the northeast corner of the property; however, the Planning Commission recommended that the same pole be removed from the site, and at a minimum be place on the northern side of Oak Park Boulevard, before the overpass. Thus, staff is requesting direction from the City Council.
A summary of the engineering related conditions of approval include the following (Engineering Conditions of Approval):
Extension of a current ADA and City-compliant sidewalk extending east to Pleasant View Drive.
Two street lights along Oak Park Boulevard, westerly past the property frontage. New landscaping to be planted within the median of North Main Street.
CEQA
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Pleasant Hill intends to issue an Environmental Impact Report (EIR, SCH#2019049104) for this project. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) prepared for this project (Attachment I-2) was available for public review from April 17, 2019 through May 31, 2019 at the Planning Division and on the City of Pleasant Hill webpage at www.pleasanthillca.org. The Draft EIR has identified potential project issues requiring mitigation in the following areas: Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology/Water Quality, Noise. After mitigation measures are incorporated, the project would not have any significant unavoidable impacts, nor impacts which would be cumulatively considerable.
The Final EIR and associated Mitigation Measure Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) were also prepared for the project. Multiple public comments/responses were received and included in the Final EIR. The proposed Final EIR is included as Attachment 6 & 7.
Summary of Environmental Impact Report
The EIR concludes that no significant unavoidable environmental impacts would result from the project. While the EIR identified various potentially significant environmental effects, these were all reduced to a less than significant level with incorporation of mitigation measures:
Air Quality Impacts
The EIR identifies standard mitigation for air quality impacts during construction activities.
Biological Impacts
The EIR requires preconstruction breeding bird surveys prior to ground disturbance or tree removal during the nesting season. In addition, tree removal and replacement plans are required and submitted as part of the current submittal application.
Cultural Resource Impacts
The EIR identifies standard mitigation measures for cultural resource protection (i.e. monitoring, discovery procedures, reporting, etc.).
Geology
The EIR notes that the project will be required to meet standard storm water and run-off mitigation requirements (i.e. obtain applicable permits from the State Water Resources Control Board, incorporate best management practices, prepare a Storm water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) and submit a Storm water Management Program (SWMP) to ensure proper treatment of storm water during construction activities.
Hazardous Materials
The project is expected to comply with State and Local provisions related to asbestos, lead-based paint and mold if any is found on the site prior to any demolition of existing structures.
Noise Impacts
To ensure the project would not generate noise levels in excess of standards established by the City, particularly during construction activities, standard mitigation measures are proposed i.e. specific standards for operating equipment, locate noise generating uses as far away from sensitive receptors as possible, minimize idling equipment, limit noise producing construction activities during the week. In addition, roof top equipment is required to be screened to be an effective noise barrier.
The EIR also includes an alternatives analysis including evaluation of the following project alternatives: no project/no build; reduced height hotel and retail development option. The retail development option and the proposed hotel project (not reduced height hotel) are tied as the most environmentally superior options. The EIR also notes that the retail development option, would generally have increased impacts compared to the proposed project.
Since all of the impacts of the proposed project can be reduced to a less than significant level and no significant unavoidable impacts remain, findings rejecting alternatives are not required. The proposed CEQA findings are included in a separate resolution as Attachment 2.
Public Comments Associated with CEQA Document (EIR)
The City received multiple comment letters on the prepared Draft and Final Environmental Impact report (EIR). The comments and responses to these comments are provided in the Final EIR (Attachment 7).
FISCAL IMPACT
None
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made through posting of the City Council agenda on the City’s official notice bulletin board, in the City Clerk’s office, at the Pleasant Hill Library, and at the Pleasant Hill Police Department. The agenda and staff report are posted on the City’s web page and are available in the City Clerk’s office. In addition, a notice of the public hearings and a Notice of Availability of the DEIR, was mailed to each residence and/or owner of properties within 500 feet (+/-) of the project site. Notices were also sent to all applicable/required public and private agencies. In addition, notice for the public hearing was posted at the site, posted on the City’s Changeable Message Board at City Hall and additional notice was published in the Contra Costa Times Newspaper on August 26, 2019.
RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION
Conduct the public hearing and introduce the proposed ordinance, adopt the proposed resolution certifying the project EIR as adequate and complete and adopt the proposed resolution approving the project subject to the recommended findings and conditions.
ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDED ACTION
1. Introduce the proposed ordinance and/or adopt proposed resolution with modifications.
2. Provide further direction to staff pertaining to the proposed ordinance and/or proposed resolution and continue consideration to a subsequent City Council Meeting.
3. Do not introduce the proposed ordinance and/or adopt the proposed resolution.
ATTACHMENT(S):
1 – Proposed Resolution – Project
Exhibit A – General Plan Amendment & Map
Exhibit B – Proposed Conditions of Approval
2 – Proposed Resolution – CEQA
3 – Proposed Draft PUD Ordinance
Exhibit A-1 – PUC Concept Plan and Exhibit A-2 Rezoning Map 4 – Project Plans
5 – Applicant Information, including Photo Simulations
6 – Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)
Exhibit A – Appendices
7 – Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) & Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program 8 – July 18, 2019 Architectural Review Staff Report (no attachments) 9 – August 1, 2019 Architectural Review Staff Report (no attachments) 10 – Architectural Review Commission Resolution No. 2-19 11 – August 13, 2019 Planning Commission Staff Report (no attachments) 12 – Planning Commission Resolution No. 11-19 and No. 12-19 13 – Proposed Development Standards Table Comparison
14 - Development Plan Analysis
15 - Public Hearing Notice
16 – Location Map
17 - Public Comments (excluding those on the Environmental Impact Report) Prepared by: Troy Fujimoto, Acting City Planner
Approved by: June Catalano, City Manager