RESOLUTION NO. RES- 2019- 086
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ROSA DENYING AN
APPEAL AND MAKING FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS AND APPROVING A DENSITY BONUS FOR ROSELAND VILLAGE MIXED USE, LOCATED AT 665, AND 883 SEBASTOPOL ROAD — ASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBERS 125- 111- 037 AND 125- 101- 031 FILE NUMBERS — PRJ 17- 075, DB 19- 001
WHEREAS, anapplicationfor DensityBonusrequestingathirty-two percent (32%) densityincreaseandthreeconcessions/incentiveswassubmittedto thePlanningandEconomic DevelopmentDepartment by MidPen Housing Corporation (Applicant) for the developmentof RoselandVillage Neighborhood Center ( Project), a mixed -useproject that includes 175 residential units, 75 of which are designatedfor very low and low income occupants, for the propertieslocatedat 665and883SebastopolRoad, Assessor'sParcelNumbers125-111-037and 125- 101- 031; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant proposesto construct fourteen (14) units for Very Low income households and fourteen ( 14) units for Low income households, which exceeds the minimumpercentageof theunitsallowedundertheGeneralPlanto qualify for therequested 32% densitybonusasrequiredby Section20-31.060of theCity of SantaRosaZoningCode; and WHEREAS, pursuant to StateDensity Bonus Law and the City Density Bonus and Other DeveloperIncentiveordinance, theApplicantis entitledto a thirty-two percent (32%) density increase and three concessions or incentives; and
WHEREAS, The Applicant hasrequestedthe City grant three concessionsfrom the Zoning Codethat arenecessaryto help ensurethe financial feasibility of the Project:
AffordableHousingDevelopmentTiming (ZoningCodeSection20-31.100.H.1):
This concessionwill allow phaseddevelopment of two apartmentbuildings with 100 market rate units on Lot 2 in Phase 2 before the affordable units on Lot 1 in Phase 3.
The construction of the affordable housing apartmentbuilding will exceedallowed residential density and thus requires the density bonus as well as the concessions regardingthetiming andlocationof affordablehousingunits.
2. DensityBonusaffordablehousingconstructionlocation (ZoningCodeSection20-
31. 100. H. 2): The dispersed affordable unit concession will allow the construction of separate market rate and affordable unit apartment buildings This concession is allowed pursuantto Zoning Code section20-31.1OO.H.2 provided the applicant demonstratesthat the dispersalrequirementswill reducethe financing feasibility of the project.
3. ReducedParking (ZoningCodeSection20-36.040): The requested 18% parking reductionwouldallow theprojectto bedevelopwith 323parkingspaceswhen393 areotherwise required. 175 spaceswould be reservedfor residents; the remaining spaceswould be available to the public at all times. Without this reduction the Reso. No RES- 2019- 086
Attachment 7
plannedRoselandVillage projectwouldhaveto includestructuredparkingto accommodateanother70parkingspacesonthesite. Thereis no unusedsurfacearea on the site to accommodatetheseadditional spaces. The traffic impact study found peakparking demandon the site is 322 spaces.
WHEREAS, StateDensity Bonus Law, California Government Code Section 65915 statesthat where a housing project meetscertain criteria for a density bonus, the applicant may requestandtheCity shallgrantregulatoryconcessionsor incentives, asisthecasewith this Project, when:
1. The requestedconcessionsor incentives provide for affordable housing costs, as defined by statelaw, in that:
e The Affordable Housing Development Timing ( Zoning Code Section 20-
31. 1OO.H. 1) concession will ( 1) allow the sale of Lot 2 for the market apartment buildings to help fund the infrastructure neededto construct the affordable apartmentbuilding on Lot 1, and (2) avoid financing delay that will threatenthe financialfeasibilityof theaffordablehousingcomponentof theplannedRoseland Village project.
e TheDensityBonusaffordablehousingconstructionlocation (ZoningCode Section 20-31.100.H.2) concessionwill allow the construction of separatemarket rate and affordable unit apartmentbuildings andthus avoid likely financing delay and cost associatedwith blended affordable and market rate housing projects:
This delayincreasesthemarketratedeveloper'scarryingcost, which in turn will reducethe value of Lot 2 and the level to which the saleof Lot 2 may contribute to fundinfrastructureneededto constructaffordablehousingunitson Lot 2.
TheReducedParking (ZoningCodeSection20-36.040) wouldallow theproject avoidthecostof constructingstructuredparkingfor 70cars. Thisconcessionwill thus result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide affordable housing.
2. The requested concessions or incentives would not have a specific adverse impact uponpublichealthandsafetyor physicalenvironmentor anyrealpropertylistedin the California Register of Historical Resourcesin that the submitted environmental assessment, includingahistoricalstudy, andreviewby city agenciesfoundtheproject would not have a specific adverse impact.
3. The requestedconcessionsor incentives would not be contrary to stateor federal law in thattheprojecthasbeenreviewedby city agenciesandfoundto complywith applicableregulationsincludingstateandfederallaws; and
WHEREAS, thePlanningCommissionheldaduly noticedpublic hearingon February 28, 2019, ontheapplicationatwhich all thosewishingto beheardwereallowedto speakor presentwrittencommentsandothermaterials; and
Reso. No RES- 2019- 086
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission consideredthe application, the staff reports, oral and written, the General Plan and zoning on the subject property, the testimony, written comments, andothermaterialspresentedatthepublichearing, madecertainfindingsand approvedthe requestedDensity Bonus andthe requestedthree concessionsfrom the Zoning code; and
WHEREAS, an appeal of the Planning Commission' s action was filed on March 7, 2018 by RobertNellessen, representingJohnPaulsen (Appellant), seekingreviewby theCity Council pursuantto City Code Chapter20-62; and
WHEREAS, the Project has been found in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and is exempt from further review:
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the Project is consistent with the GeneralPlan, RoselandArea/SebastopolRoadSpecificPlan, andzoning, for eachof which an Environmental Impact Report ( EIR) was certified, and there are no environmental effects peculiar to the Project or the Project site, not previously analyzed in the prior EIRs.
2. Pursuantto CEQAGuidelinesSection15182, thedensity, design, andinfrastructure plannedundertheproposedprojectisconsistentwiththeadoptedSpecificPlanin thatthelevel andintensityof theproposeddevelopmentsandthelocationsof the developments are consistent with the Specific Plan. No special circumstances or potentialnewimpactsrelatedto theProjecthasbeenidentifiedthatwouldnecessitate further environmental review beyond the impacts and issuesalready disclosedand analyzed in the Specific Plan EIR. The Specific Plan EIR adequatelyaddressed environmental issues related to the development of the entire Specific Plan area, including the subject property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after consideration of the appeal and the reports, documents, testimony, andothermaterialspresented, andpursuanttherequirementsof Chapter20-31 (Densitybonusandotherdeveloperincentives) of theZoningCode, theCouncil of theCity of SantaRosadeniestheappeal, affirmsthedecisionof thePlanningCommission, and approvesa thirty- two percent (32%) DensityBonusandthree (3) requestedconcessionsand incentives for the Project subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to the issuanceof a building permit for the construction of the affordable housingbuilding onLot 1of theRoselandVillage Subdivision, theApplicantshall enterinto adensitybonushousingagreementwith theSantaRosaHousingAuthority toprovidefourteen (14) very -lowandfourteen (14) lowincomeunitsrestrictedfora periodof 55-yearswith, ataminimum, theprovisionssetforthin ZoningCode Section 20- 31. 100( B).
2. Priorto thecertificateof occupancyfor theaffordablehousingbuilding on Lot 1of theRoselandVillage Subdivision, theApplicantshallprovideevidencethatthe47 affordablehousingunitsnot subjectto thedensitybonushousingagreementwith the Reso. No RES- 2019- 086
SantaRosaHousing Authority are subjectto an affordability agreementwith Sonoma County.
3. Pursuantto Zoning Code Section 20-31.100.H, Generalprovisions for density bonusesand incentives/concessions, Location and designof affordable housing, the units designatedfor very -low and low income occupantsshall:
a. Be of a similar unit type/size to the overall Housing Development; and b. Be consistent in terms of their exterior design such as their appearance, materials and quality of exterior finish.
BE IT FURTHERRESOLVEDthattheCouncilfinds anddeterminesthatthedensity bonusandconcessionsand incentives would not be grantedbut for the applicability and validity of eachandeveryoneof theaboveconditionsandthatif anyoneor moreof theabovesaid conditions are invalid, this entitlement to density bonusand concessionsand incentives would nothavebeengrantedwithout requiringothervalid conditionsfor achievingthepurposesand intent of such approval.
IN COUNCIL DULY PASSED this 25th day of June, 2019
AYES: ( 7) Mayor Schwedhelm, Vice Mayor Rogers, Council Members Combs, Fleming, Olivares, Sawyer, Tibbetts
NOES: ( 0)
ABSENT: ( 0)
ABSTAIN: ( 0)
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Oerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Ci ttorney
cnrc
Mayor
Reso. No RES- 2019- 0.86