Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-04-13; Housing and Redevelopment Advisory Committee Ad Hoc; MinutesDATE OF MEETING: April 13, 1981 TIME OF MEETING: 7:OO P.M. PLACE OF MEETING: Council Chambers MEETING OF: HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Vice-chairman Hall at 7:07 P.M. ROLL CALL Present - Vice-chairman Hall, Members Ward, Hayes, Helton, Runzo, Sanchez, and Moralez. Chairman Chriss arrived at 7:15 P.M. Also present was Council Liaison Anear. Ab ent - Member Carney.. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of the Workshop Meeting, held March 9, 1981, were approved as submitted. Minutes of the Adjourned Meeting, held March 16, 1981, were tabled to allow the Committee time to review same. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: DRB 1/11 - Home Savings and Loan Drew Aitken gave a staff report on the matter, and passed around photographs of similar buildings at other sites for the Committee to review. With the aid of wall exhibits, Mr. Aitken showed the project design, and explained that the project exceeds the Design Manual Standards for coverage, and provides more landscaping than would be required. close down all curb cuts on Elm Avenue, and will utilize the alley as an exit for the drive-thru. ingress and egress will be Madison. Mr. Aitken concluded by showing a rendering submitted by the applicant, which ties the landscaping to the site. He added that the proposal will The main point of Member Ward indicated that the Planning Staff is concerned about access for this property onto Elm Avenue. He added that the feeling of the Engineering and Planning,Departments is to restrict the access to zero access onto Elm Avenue. Member Ward stated his feeling that he does not want to see the applicant held up in his project, over the issue of whether or not there will be access onto Elm Avenue; and suggested that the Committee consider the possibility of having the Redevelopment Agency make the decision early on. Council Member Anear indicated that Council would be discussing the issue of the processing of applications in the Redevelopment Area at the next meeting, to be held April 14, 1981. Jack Henthorn, Director of Housing and Redevelopment, explained that issue to be addressed at the April 14, 1981 meeting is the processing process of the plan. He continued that he has met with the Planning Director, and discussed thr existing process, and they are certain that same can be improved. v HEMBERS \t Hall Ward Hayes Helton Runzo Sanchez Moralez MINUTES HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE April 13, 1981 Page 2 Mr. Henthorn continued to explain the development process, and in response to Member Ward's suggestion of the Redevelop- ment Agency being able to enter this process, he explained that the appeal would most likely go to the City Council on a referral basis. Council Member Anear then explained the procedures observed by the City Council, when they decide not to uphold a Planning Commission decision. He added that if the two Staffs can get together on the matter, to deal with any disagreements, it will not hold up the developer. Committee discussion reflected on access to the property, and use of the alley. Chairman Chriss inquired if Redevelopment had the authority to pass on land use items, without going before the Planning Commission on variances and conditional uses. Mr. Henthorn responded that they did, from this point on. Member Ward addressed Alan Siegel, representing the applicant, and inquired if there would be any objection to conditioning the project at this point with a right turn only out of the alley. Mr. Siegel stated they would have no objection, and could place a sign designating same. Discussion then reflected stacking at the drive-thru facility, and the actual design of the drive-thru facility; parking, and traffic flow. Mr. Henthorn pointed out that the elimination of the curb cuts eliminates all the curb cuts between Jefferson and Madison; and according to the engineers, alley opportunity is something that catches a motorists eye. Member Hayes suggested that'lhe doors at the entrance be made to look less institutionalized, and inquired if they could be wooden, as suggested by Member Sanchez, instead of plate glass. She stated that it would blend in more with the Village atmosphere. Member Hayes also inquired if the applicant has considered providing seating or benches where people could sit and rest. Mr. Siegel indicated that the applicant could provide same, possibly in the vestibule area. With regard to changing the front entry as far as materials, Mr. Siegel pointed out that it would not go with the overall design of the building, as it is now. The Committee found that DRB #ll meets the criteria and is consistent with the Village Design Manual, and recommended approval of same, subject to the following conditions: 1) 2) 3) Approval of a sign program prior to issuance of a building permit. Approval of a landscape plan prior to issuance of a building permit. Approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the City Planning Commission or the Redevelopment Agency. The Committee also recommended to the Planning Commission that the alley is to be the only curb cut on the block betweer Jefferson and Madison, due to the fact that the applicant is giving up two curb cuts that he formerly had. The Committee also recommended to the City Engineer that the alley be a posted right turn egress from the alley. MEMBERS ! Hall Ward Hayes Helton Runzo Sanchez Moralez Chriss NLZNUTES HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE April 13, 1981 Page 3 Vice-chairman Hall then turned the meeting over to Chairman Chriss. Chairman Chriss requested that Items No. 5 and 8 be moved up on the agenda, due to the fact that there were people present to hear same. The Committee concurred. DRB 1/13 - North Coast Printers, Inc. With the aid of wall exhibits, the staff report was presented by Drew Aitken, essentially as contained in the written staff report. Mr. Aitken indicated that Mr. Hicks, representing the applicant, was present to answer any questions. Discussion reflected on parking, landscaping, and public improvements. Member Hayes stated her opinion that there should be some footing incorporated into the landscape plan for pedestrians. Mr. Hicks indicated that if he does not shelter certain areas of the building, they will be subject to graffiti; therefore, possibly shrubbery or some form of landscaping might be used to protect same. He also pointed out that from Oak Street to Walnut, there are only two residential dwellings on the west side of the street; and there is quite a bit of residential to the east side of Tyler Street. He stated his opinion that it would be in the Citys' best interest, as far as safety, to channel pedestrian traffic to the east side of the street, due to the heavy equipment that will be in the area. Following discussion, the Committee approved DRB 1/13, subject to the following conditions, and directed Staff to forward a copy of this report and the Committee's actions to the Planning Commission: 1) 2) 3) Approval of a landscape plan prior to issuance of a building permit. Approval of a sign program prior to issuance of a building permit. Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for off-site parking by the Planning Commission, or Redevelopment Agency, prior to the issuance of a building permit. RECESS Chairman Chriss called a recess at 8:20 P.M., and the Committee reconvened at 8:33 P.M., with eight members present Incentive Housing ProDosal Jack Henthorn gave a report on the matter, essentially as contained in the information statement of the staff report. He indicated that Peter Templeton, a representative from th Planning Center, was present to answer questions about the use of similar approaches in other cities in southern California. Mr. Henthorn continued, explaining the provisions of the program, and indicated that there would be no resale control. He requested any input or questions relative to the proposal from the Committee, and indicated that if the Committee felt comfortable with this type of approach to meeting housing needs, Staff would like to pass same along to the City Counci WERS Hall Ward Hayes Helton Runzo Sanchez Moralez Chriss MINUTES HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE April 13, 1981 Page 4 Mr. Henthorn continued, and indicated that in talking with members of the Housing Committee from the Chamber of Commerce, they are not totally committed to the proposal as it exists, verbatum. He added that it is recognized that there may be changes necessary in order to make the program work. Member Hayes inquired why Housing and Redevelopment were not included in the matter. Mr. Henthorn responded that if there is to be a study session set up on the item, the Committee would be invited. He added that on a Staff level, he has been involved with other Department Heads that have been involved in same. Discussion reflected provisions for small car parking, and surface parking; and reduction of building standards to allow the development of low, moderate, and affordable housing. Mr. Peter Templeton addressed the Committee, and indicated that he is a Principal of the Planning Center, and gave some background on himself. of communities throughout southern California and other areas on different kinds of affordable housing, and explained the program as proposed. He stated they are working in a lot Member Hall stated his opinion that he sees no problem with the City and the builder working closely together; however, he expressed concern with maintenance of the property, after the builder is out of the picture. Mr. Templeton discussed resale controls, and referred to . Orange County as an example. Member Hall also expressed concern over waiving parking requirements. Mr. Templeton referred to a study done on parking by a Research Group.' in Orange County, on several projects that had been built. He explained that one of the things they found was that once parking spaces were assigned, there remained a lot of empty stalls. When spaces were not assigned, they found that it opened up a large number of parking spaces. Mr. Templeton concluded that you have to look at the merits of each proposal. Member Runzo inquired if low, moderate, and affordable housing was something that was required of the City. Mr. Henthorn explained that the City can not bring qualified people into this area from outside because of the housing costs. He stated that the question is whether the City wants to provide housing opportunities for the people who are going to make up the industrial and commercial base. He added that there is direction from the State to provide for this type of affordable housing. Member Ward discussed costs and interest rates, costs of products including reduction of standards and dollar subsidy, and innovative planning techniques. Council Member hear indicated that he submitted an idea to the Housing Committee of the Chamber of Commerce, to put a blend of houses in, i.e., smaller, intermediate, and larger houses; allowing a decrease in the lot size for the smaller houses. He stated this would be a way to have affordable housing; however, he has not heard anything on this concept. MEMBERS 1 I i -7 MINUTES HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE April 13, 1981 Page 5 Member Ward explained the chain of events that led to the incentive housing proposal for the planned unit development. He stated that the Planning Department has indicated that they had never heard of combining all the things suggested, together in one project, to accomplish a goal. He stated his feeling that the Planning Department has become a regulatory agency, as well as the Planning Commission. Discussion reflected suggestions for team work efforts on the part of the City and the developers. Jack Henthorn pointed out that neither side gives up anything getting into the negotiations, and the final contract has to be something that both parties agree upon. He added that there is nothing that stipulates that the entire tract or proposal has to be affordable units, and he anticipates that this would be the exception rather than the rule. Following discussion, the Committee agreed to pass the proposal to the City Council with its recommendations, along with a request that Housing and Redevelopment be included in the Chamber Housing Committee, and a request for further indept study with regard to financing methods from both the public and private sectors, and innovative planning techniques. Priority Permit Processing Jack Henthorn gave a report on the matter, essentially as contained in the information statement of the staff report. Discussion reflected the plan check process and inspection of a project. The Committee recommended, with favor, the study of the Building and Safety Director in the processing of multi-unit projects; and encourage consideration of same for all sub- divisions or multi-unit development throughout the City, regardless of whether it is low cost, affordable, or regular housing. Streetscape Plan Design Contract The Committee appointed Members Ward and Helton to participate in contract negotiations for the design service. Redevelopment Plan Time Table The Committee adopted the time schedule for the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan. Discussion then reflected Exhibits A and B of the Redevelop- men t Plan . -. MEMBERS Hall Ward Hayes Helton Runzo Sanchez Moralez Chriss Hall Ward Hayes Helton Runzo Sanchez Moralez Chriss Hall Ward Hayes Helton Runzo Sanchez Moralez Chriss 5 v ” i’ ? - K K K K K K Y Y Y Y c c c c E E E E E E E E MINUTES .. . - HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE April 13, 1981 Page 6 MEMBERS I ADDOintment of New Chairman Chairman Chriss requested that the Committee consider the appointment of a new Chairman at the next meeting. ADJOURNMENT By proper motion the meeting was adjourned at 10:30 P.M., to Monday, April 20, 1981 at 4:OO P.M. at the Harding Street Community Center. Respectfully Submitted, Ann R. Alleman Minutes Clerk DUE TO THE TIME FACTOR, ALL OTHER ITEMS ON THE AGENDA WERE TABLED TO THE NEXT MEETING. TRANSCRIPTS ARE KEPT ON FILE UNTIL APPROVAL OF MINUTES. 3 r: , ..