Agenda packet — Vallejo City Council, June 4, 2024

Hybrid Options are available for members of the public to participate. To participate remotely:

https://ZoomRegular.CityofVallejo.net
Option to join by phone:

Dial (669) 900-6833
Enter Meeting ID: 914 0075 0676#
Press *9 to digitally raise your hand from the phone
For additional instructions on how to speak during public comment, please visit, www.cityofvallejo.net/publiccomment

CALL AND NOTICE OF

SPECIAL MEETING
AT 6:00 PM

OF THE VALLEJO CITY COUNCIL
JUNE 4, 2024

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
555 Santa Clara Street, Vallejo, California

NOTICE: Members of the Public will be able to participate in-person or remotely via Zoom.

City Hall and the Council Chambers will be open to members of the public 30 minutes prior to the start of the meeting.

PUBLIC COMMENT: Members of the Public may provide public comments during the City Council Meeting in person or via ZOOM (https://ZoomRegular.Cityofvallejo.net), or via phone, by dialing (669)
900-6833.

For additional instructions on how to speak remotely during public comment, please visit, www.cityofvallejo.net/publiccomment
VIEW THE MEETING:

There are four different ways you can view this public meeting:
• In Person
• Watch Vallejo local channel 28
• Stream from the City website: www.cityofvallejo.net/Streaming • Join the Zoom webinar:https://ZoomRegular.Cityofvallejo.net

Vallejo City Council Chambers ADA compliant. Devices for the hearing impaired are available from the City Clerk. Requests for disability related modifications or accommodations, aids or services may be made by a person with a disability to the City Clerk's office no less than 72 hours prior to the meeting as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof.

Hybrid Options are available for members of the public to participate. To participate remotely:

https://ZoomRegular.CityofVallejo.net
Option to join by phone:

TO THE MEMBERS OF THE VALLEJO CITY COUNCIL:

You are hereby notified that I do hereby call the Vallejo City Council in special session to consider only the matters stated on the agenda listed below.

NOTICE: Members of the public shall have the opportunity to address the City Council concerning any item listed on the agenda before or during consideration of that item. No other items may be discussed at this special meeting.

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION

4. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

5. ACTION CALENDAR
NOTICE: Members of the public wishing to address the Council on Action Calendar Items may do so in person by signing in to the Public Speaker's kiosk located in the back of the Council Chambers or via ZOOM (https://ZoomRegular.Cityofvallejo.net), or via phone, by dialing (669) 900-6833. Enter Meeting ID: 914 0075 0676#. Press *9 to digitally raise your hand from the phone. Press *6 to unmute/mute. For additional instructions on how to speak remotely during public comment, please visit, www.cityofvallejo.net/publiccomment. Each speaker is limited to five minutes pursuant to Vallejo Municipal Code Section 2.02.420 or as approved A. ADOPT A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPEAL (APP24-0001),

OVERTURNING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF AND
DENYING THE APPLICATION FOR A MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-00008)

TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET Recommendation: Adopt a resolution granting Appeal (APP24-0001), overturning the Planning Commission's approval of and denying the application for a Major Use Permit (UP22-0008) to allow the operation of a charter high school with an enrollment of up to 400 students at 241-255 Georgia Street.

Contact: Gillian Haen, Assistant City Manager
[email protected]

6. ADJOURNMENT

Dated: Friday, May 31, 2024

Hybrid Options are available for members of the public to participate. To participate remotely:

https://ZoomRegular.CityofVallejo.net
Option to join by phone:

Robert H. McConnell, Mayor

I, Dawn Abrahamson, City Clerk, do herby certify that I have caused a true copy of the above notice and agenda to be delivered to each of the members of the Vallejo City Council, at the time and in the manner prescribed by law and that this agenda was posted at City Hall, 555 Santa Clara Street, CA at 5:30 p.m., Friday, May 31, 2024.

Dated: Friday, May 31, 2024

Dawn G. Abrahamson, City Clerk

ACTION ITEM 5.A.

DATE: June 4, 2024
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Gillian Haen, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPEAL (APP24-0001), OVERTURNING THE

PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF AND DENYING THE APPLICATION FOR A MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-00008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS AT 241-255

GEORGIA STREET

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution granting Appeal (APP24-0001), overturning the Planning Commission's approval of and denying the application for a Major Use Permit (UP22-0008) to allow the operation of a charter high school with an enrollment of up to 400 students at 241-255 Georgia Street.

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION
After review of the entire record, the Council found the appeal had merit and directed staff to draft a resolution for denial of Major Use Permit (UP22-0008).

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
LEVINE ACT: Government Code 84308
This item is subject to the Levine Act. City elected and appointed officials, including candidates for City elected office, (City Officers) who have received a contribution of more than $250 within 12 months prior from a party, participant, or their representatives involved in this proceeding may do either of the following: (1) disclose the contribution on the record and recuse themselves from this proceeding; OR (2) return the portion of the contribution that exceeds $250 within 30 days from the time the elected official knew or should have known about the contribution and participate in the proceeding.

All parties, participants, and their representatives must disclose on the record of this proceeding any contribution of more than $250 made to the City Officers, such as the Mayor and/or Councilmembers, within 12 months prior to the date of the proceeding. City Officers are prohibited from accepting, soliciting, or directing a contribution of more than $250 from a party, participant, or their representatives during a proceeding and for 12 months following the date a final decision is rendered.

See Resolution attached as Exhibit A hereto.

FISCAL IMPACT
This action will have no impact on the General Fund.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Per Section 15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves.

Date: June 4, 2024
Subject: ADOPT A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPEAL (APP24-0001), OVERTURNING THE

PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF AND DENYING THE APPLICATION FOR A MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-00008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET

Page 2 ends

ATTACHMENTS

1. Ex. A__Reso. 06-4-2024 Elite Denial_CAO Stamp

CONTACT
Gillian Haen, Assistant City Manager
[email protected]

RESOLUTION NO. 24-_____ N.C.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VALLEJO GRANTING APPEAL (APP24-0001), OVERTURNING THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S

APPROVAL OF AND DENYING THE APPLICATION FOR A MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
WHEREAS, on July 7, 2022, Elite Public Schools (Applicant) submitted an application for a Major Use Permit to allow the operation of a new public charter high school with an enrollment of up to 400 students (Project) in an existing two-story building at 241-255 Georgia Street (Project Site); and
WHEREAS, the Project Site has a General Plan land use designation of District– Downtown Waterfront; and
WHEREAS, the Project Site is located in the Arts and Entertainment District in the Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Project Site has a zoning designation of Downtown-Mixed-Use (DMX); and
WHEREAS, on March 18, 2024, after giving all public notices required by State law and the City of Vallejo Municipal Code, the City of Vallejo Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing and approved the project; and WHEREAS, on March 28, 2024, the Planning Division received a timely appeal from Paul L. Beeman and Donna Beeman, requesting that the City Council overturn the Major Use Permit approval; and
WHEREAS, after giving due notice to the Appellant, the Applicant, all interested parties and the public, the Appeal came before the City Council for a de novo public hearing on April 23, 2024, which hearing was continued to April 30, 2024; and WHEREAS, the Appellant, the Applicant, supporters of the application, those opposed to the Application and interested and neutral parties were given ample opportunity to participate in the public hearing by submittal of oral and/or written comments prior to the close of the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the testimony and evidence, both written and oral, provided at and prior to the close of the public hearing, as well as all other evidence and information contained in the Record, which Record is maintained in the offices of the City of Vallejo Planning Division; and

2 WHEREAS, the public hearing on the Appeal was closed by the City Council on April 30, 2024; and
WHEREAS, at the public hearing of April 30, 2024, the City Council deliberated, voted to grant the appeal, overturn the Planning Commission’s approval of and deny the application for a major use permit (UP22-0008) to allow the operation of a charter high school with an enrollment of up to 400 students at Georgia Street and directed staff to prepare a resolution in accordance therewith.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council, having heard, considered and weighed all the evidence in the Record presented on behalf of all the parties and being fully informed of the Application, the City Planning Commission’s decision, and the Appeal, hereby makes the following findings and determinations:

I. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
The Record of Proceedings (“Record”) upon which the City Council bases its decision on the project at issue herein, includes, but is not limited to:

1. The application, including all accompanying plans and maps, submitted to the City by the Applicant;

2. All plans and studies submitted by the Applicant and its representatives;

3. The environmental document (categorical exemption) prepared for the project and the appendices and technical reports cited in and/or relied upon in preparing same;

4. The notice of appeal and all accompanying statements and materials;

5. All final staff reports, final decision letters and other final documentation and information produced by or on behalf of the City;

6. All oral and documentary evidence received by the City Planning Commission and City Council prior to and during the public hearings on the application and appeal;

7. All documentary evidence and correspondence regarding the application and the appeal received by staff prior to the public hearings on the application and/or the appeal;

8. All matters of common knowledge and all official enactments and acts of the City, including without limitation: (a) the City of Vallejo General Plan 2040 and its related EIR; (b) the Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan and its related EIR; (c) the updated 2021 Zoning Code and its Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration; (d) the Vallejo Municipal Code; (e) other applicable City of Vallejo policies and regulations; and (f) all applicable state and federal laws, rules, regulations, reports, records and projections related to development within the City of Vallejo and its surrounding areas.

II. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT:

Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15270, CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves.

III. FINDINGS RELATING TO THE GRANTING OF THE APPEAL
Based on the Record as a whole, the City Council hereby makes the following findings with regard to the granting of the appeal:
3 1. FINDING:

As alleged by the Appellant, the proposed Project is incompatible with the existing and permitted land uses within the zoning district as set forth in Section IV.A.4 below.

2. FINDING:

As alleged by the Appellant, the proposed Project will adversely affect the livability and appropriate development of abutting properties and the surrounding neighborhood as set forth in Section IV.A.5 below.

3. FINDING:

As alleged by Appellant, the Project is inconsistent with the Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan and Design Guidelines Policies as set forth in Section IV.A.2 below.

4. FINDING:

As alleged by the Appellant, the Project is inconsistent with the applicable provision of the Zoning Code as set forth in Section IV.A.1 below.

IV. FINDINGS RELEVANT TO THE OVERTURNING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DECISION AND DENIAL OF THE MAJOR USE PERMIT A. FINDINGS RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF A MAJOR USE PERMIT (16.606.03)

1. FINDING:

The proposed Project does not comply with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Code and all other titles of the Vallejo Municipal Code (16.606.03.A).

FACTS IN SUPPORT:

The proposed Project does not satisfy the requirements of Section 16.335.02 of the Zoning Code relating to schools, as set forth in Sections IV.B.1-5, below.

2. FINDING:

The proposed use is inconsistent with the Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan (16.606.03B).

FACTS IN SUPPORT:

The proposed Project is inconsistent with Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan Policy 4.2.2:

Promote a variety of retail uses that serve the local community and contribute to an active pedestrian environment in that a school use does not itself constitute a retail use and would not promote retail uses in the Downtown. A school by its nature is not open to the general public, serving only students, parents, and staff and therefore would not attract 4 retail shoppers and ordinary pedestrians. And as community members have testified, the everyday occurrence of 400 high schoolers spilling out of the building after school and rushing to get to school each morning would detract from a pedestrian-friendly environment.

The proposed Project is inconsistent with Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan Policy 4.3.3:

Promote Central Downtown as Vallejo’s Arts and Entertainment district, in that a high school use serves adolescent children and is inharmonious with arts and entertainment uses such as theaters, music venues, cafes, and bars. The presence of 400 high schoolers in the Downtown would likely discourage the development of such uses and thwart the policy goal of creating a vibrant pedestrian friendly commercial destination. Since the Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan envisions a corridor with restaurants, wine bars, and lounges and since one of the criteria evaluated when reviewing an ABC license is proximity to a school, the presence of the school might hinder a future license, thus adversely affecting the desired development in the Downtown area.

The proposed Project is inconsistent with Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan Policy 5.1.4:

Maintain and enhance Georgia Street as the primary retail corridor with a “Main Street” character in that the reuse of an existing office building as a high school does not reflect careful, pedestrian focused design and detailing called for by the policy. As many persons testified, the everyday occurrence of 400 high schoolers spilling out of the building after school and rushing to get to school each morning would detract from a pedestrian-friendly environment. Additionally, the school would not add any commercial component to Downtown.

The proposed Project is inconsistent with Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan Policy 5.3.2:

Maximize on-street parking in Downtown to provide a buffer between the street and sidewalk zones in that it proposes to convert the 11 existing parallel parking spaces in front of the school on Georgia Street into a loading and unloading zone for approximately four hours per day during drop-off and pick-up hours, which would remove any buffer between the street and sidewalk. The Project also proposes to remove, permanently, 9 of the existing 16 on-street parking spaces along Sacramento Street for an additional drop- off and pick-up zone. Of the 7 remaining parking spaces along Sacramento Street, 2 would be marked as accessible drop-off spots where parking would not be allowed at any time of day.

The proposed Project is inconsistent with Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan Policy 5.5.3:

Ensure that new developments, infill projects and building additions enhance the pedestrian environment at street level in that the proposed pick-up and drop-offs would necessarily encroach upon the sidewalk in front of the school, thereby impeding ordinary pedestrian traffic. Moreover, the everyday occurrence of 400 high schoolers spilling out of the building after school and rushing to get to school each morning would detract from rather than enhance the pedestrian environment.

3. FINDING:

The subject parcel is not physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed (16.606.03C).

FACTS IN SUPPORT:
5 The Project Site is not physically suitable for a High School use. The subject parcel is developed with an existing office building that faces onto Georgia Street, with no setback between the building and the sidewalk. The parcel is only .70 acres in size and cannot accommodate those accessory uses customarily found in conjunction with high schools, such as gymnasiums, stadiums, performing arts facilities, and auditoriums. Because the parcel is fully developed with an existing building, there is no outdoor space available for recreation. A small parking area at the rear of the building will be utilized for commercial deliveries, as there is no other available space on or adjoining the parcel.

The parcel has no on-site parking or off-site parking, which means that those students and staff members who drive to school must find their own parking.

The proposed Project would convert 11 parking spaces on Georgia Street into a pick-up and drop-off area for students during mornings and afternoons. Further, the proposed Project would permanently remove 11 parking spaces on Sacramento Street to serve as a secondary pick-up and drop-off area. And because there is no setback between the building and the public sidewalk, student pick-ups and drop-offs would necessarily encroach upon the sidewalk, thereby impeding ordinary pedestrian traffic.

4. FINDING:

The proposed use is incompatible with existing and permissible land uses within the zoning district and the general area in which the proposed use is to be located which [factors] may include but not be limited to size, intensity, hours of operation, number of employees, or the nature of the operation (16.606.03D).

FACTS IN SUPPORT:

The operation of a high school serving 400 adolescents and 50 staff in an existing building, with no dedicated on- or off-site parking and no surrounding open space to act as a buffer, would place an undue burden on the existing uses in the district relating to traffic and parking in particular. Approximately 120 students and up to 50 staff would drive to the school each weekday and have to find parking. That large number of persons arriving and leaving the school at approximately the same time each morning and afternoon would likely interfere with the professional offices, restaurants, bars and other commercial uses within the immediate vicinity.

In addition, the presence of a school would add an additional layer of review to any future applicant for an ABC license and could serve as a contributing factor for the rejection of such a license. As the Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan envisions a corridor with restaurants, wine bars, and lounges, and as one of the criteria evaluated when reviewing an ABC license is proximity to a school, the presence of a school may hinder an application for a future license and adversely affect the future permissible development in the Downtown area.

5. FINDING:

The physical location or placement of the use on the site is incompatible with and would adversely affect the livability or appropriate development of abutting properties and the surrounding neighborhood (16.606.03.E).
6 FACTS IN SUPPORT:

The location of the proposed use on the site is not compatible with and will adversely affect the livability and appropriate development of abutting properties and the surrounding neighborhood. For example, there is a professional office use within 27 feet of the proposed high school building. As the school is proposed for up to 400 students and 50 staff, it is reasonable to assume that the school would be disruptive to that use.

Additionally, the traffic consultant predicted that approximately 120 students would drive to the school. Up to another 50 staff members might also drive. As the Project does not include any designated on- or off-site parking, the impact to the circulation in the downtown would be significant, as Georgia Street is a single-lane two-way street. The traffic consultant further predicted that vehicle traffic would back up into the intersections, causing a safety hazard. The analyst therefore proposed a condition be placed on the Applicant to submit a traffic control plan to the City for its approval. This condition renders the City responsible for the plan and poses an unacceptable risk of liability to the City. In addition, the owner of the building directly east of the proposed site testified at the public hearings that the operation of the school would likely cause him to need to install parking control gates at the entrance to his parking lot on York Street to ensure that his tenants would have sufficient places to park.

The Georgia Street corridor area is envisioned as having a vibrant pedestrian presence, with a focus on commercial retail uses and restaurants, cafes, and art and music venues.

A high school with a population of 400 students is an overly intensive use for this area and would place an undue burden on the neighborhood, which is comprised of small businesses, including two family-owned restaurants.

B. FINDINGS RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF A USE PERMIT FOR A SCHOOL (16.335.02)

1. FINDING:

The proposed Project location is not appropriate for a school use (16.335.02.A.3.a).

FACTS IN SUPPORT:

The location of the Project is not appropriate for use as a high school. The Project Site is fully developed with an existing office building on a parcel measuring .70 acres in size. It therefore cannot accommodate accessory uses customarily found in conjunction with high schools, such as gymnasiums, stadiums, performing arts facilities, and auditoriums.

Because the Project Site is fully developed, there is no outdoor space available for outdoor recreation.

The location is further inappropriate for use as a high school in that an estimated thirty percent (30%) of the students will be driving to the school. At full capacity, four hundred (400) students times thirty percent (30%) equals one hundred twenty (120) cars every day.

Because the proposed Project is not dedicating any off-site parking, it is reasonably foreseeable that the street parking within blocks of the projected site will be taken by the school and would adversely affect adjacent uses.

2. FINDING:
7 Adjacent uses to the proposed Project will be adversely affected (16.335.02.A.3.a).

FACTS IN SUPPORT:

The proposed Project will adversely affect adjacent uses. For example, there is a professional office use within 27 feet of the proposed high school building. As the school is proposed for up to 400 students and 50 staff, it is reasonable to assume that the school would be disruptive to that use. The owner of the building directly east of the proposed site testified at the public hearings that the operation of the school would likely cause him to need to install parking control gates at the entrance to his parking lot on York Street to ensure that his tenants will have sufficient places to park. Additionally, the traffic consultant predicted that approximately 120 students would drive to the school. Up to another 50 staff members might also drive. As the Project does not include any designated on- or off-site parking, the impact to the circulation in the downtown would be significant. The traffic study commissioned to evaluate the proposed Project predicted that during peak hours, vehicle traffic would back up into the intersections, causing a safety hazard and impacting adjacent businesses.

A high school with a population of 400 students is an overly intensive use that would place an undue burden on adjacent uses, including the professional office mentioned above and a small family-owned restaurant.

3. FINDING:

Adequate access and student drop-off areas and required off-street parking is not provided (16.335.02.A.3.b).

FACTS IN SUPPORT:

There is insufficient capacity on the sidewalk in front of the building to accommodate the drop off and pick up of up to 400 students and ordinary pedestrian flow. The traffic study concluded that the drop-offs and pick-ups would lead to traffic and blocked intersections on Georgia, Sacramento and other streets in the downtown during peak periods. The traffic study identified this as a significant impact that could be mitigated by imposing a condition of approval that the Applicant submit a traffic safety plan. Such plan would need to be approved by the City, rendering the City potentially liable in the event of accidents or injuries. The traffic study did not observe or consider drop-offs and pick-ups at any existing Vallejo schools, which have traffic delays of up to 30 minutes or more.

4. FINDING:

Outdoor play areas are not appropriately sized, furnished with facilities and equipment, safe, and secure (16.335.02.A.3.c).

FACTS IN SUPPORT:

The proposed Project does not include any outdoor play areas or facilities, as there is no available outdoor space on the parcel. The Applicant has proposed using Wilson Park to satisfy this requirement. However, as Wilson Park is a public park, it must remain open to the residents of the community.
8 5. FINDING:

Parent drop-off areas, queueing areas for pick up, bus loading areas if provided, and on- site parking are not separated from walkways to allow students to enter and exit the school grounds safely (16.335.02.D.2).

FACTS IN SUPPORT:

The proposed Project provides for parent drop-off areas, which immediately abut the public sidewalk. Thus, there is no separation between the drop-off areas and the walkways.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that based on the findings above, and the Record as a whole, the City Council hereby GRANTS the appeal, OVERTURNS the Planning Commission’s approval of the Major Use Permit for the Project, and DENIES Major Use Permit # 22-0008.

Adopted by the City Council of the City of Vallejo at a special meeting held on June 4, 2024 with the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:
________________________________________

ROBERT MCCONNELL
City of Vallejo City Council
Attest:
________________________________________

DAWN ABRAHAMSON, CITY CLERK
City of Vallejo City Clerk

Vallejo City CouncilJune 4, 2024

Vallejo City Council
June 4, 2024