PDF Return
D.6
To: Board of Supervisors
From: John Kopchik, Director, Conservation & Development Department
Date: July  9, 2019
The Seal of Contra Costa County, CA
Contra
Costa
County
Subject: Habitat for Humanity Pacifica Landing Project

APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE

Action of Board On:   07/09/2019
APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:

VOTE OF SUPERVISORS

AYE:
Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
ABSENT:
John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Contact: Daniel Barrios, (925) 674-7788
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED:     July  9, 2019
David Twa,
 
BY: , Deputy

 

RECOMMENDATION(S):

1. OPEN the public hearing on the Habitat for Humanity Pacifica Landing Project, RECEIVE testimony, and CLOSE the public hearing.  
  

2. FIND that the mitigated negative declaration prepared for the Habitat for Humanity Pacifica Landing Project adequately analyzes the Project's environmental impacts, that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment, and that the mitigated negative declaration reflects the County's independent judgment and analysis.  

  

RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D)
3. ADOPT the mitigated negative declaration for the Project.  
  
4. ADOPT the mitigation monitoring program for the Project.  
  
5. SPECIFY that the Department of Conservation and Development, located at 30 Muir Road, Martinez, California, is the custodian of the documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based.  
  
6. ADOPT Resolution No. 2019/467, amending the General Plan to change the land use designation of the subject property from Single Family Residential-Medium Density (SM) to Multiple Family Residential-Medium Density (MM) (County File #GP13-0001).  
  
7. ADOPT Ordinance No. 2019-16, rezoning the subject property from Single-Family Residential (R-10) and General Agricultural (A-2) to Planned Unit District (P-1) (County File #RZ13-3223).  
  
8. APPROVE a variance from the 5-acre minimum lot size requirement of the Planned Unit District (P-1) to allow the rezoning of the subject 2.42-acre property.  
  
9. ACKNOWLEDGE that the Planning Commission approved the vesting tentative map for the Project and the associated tree permit (County File #SD13-9340), and no appeal of these approvals were filed.  
  
10. APPROVE the Habitat for Humanity Pacifica Landing Townhome Subdivision Project.  
  
11. APPROVE the final development plan for the Project (County File #DP13-3027).  
  
12. APPROVE the findings in support of the Project.  
  
13. APPROVE the Project conditions of approval.  
  
14. DIRECT the Department of Conservation and Development to file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The applicant has paid the necessary application deposits and is obligated to pay supplemental fees to cover all additional costs associated with the application process.

BACKGROUND:

Summary  
  
This hearing is to consider the General Plan amendment, rezoning, and final development plan elements of the proposed Habitat for Humanity Pacifica Landing Project, a 29-unit townhouse development in Bay Point. On April 24, 2019, the County Planning Commission heard the Project and approved the vesting tentative map for the Project and associated tree permit. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed rezoning and final development plan. The Planning Commission’s vote on the proposed General Plan amendment was 3-2 to recommend approval, with two commissioners absent, but did not attain the four affirmative votes required by statute to recommend approval of the General Plan amendment to the Board.  
  
Project Description  
  
The applicant has submitted applications to the Department of Conservation and Development in relation to the Habitat for Humanity Pacifica Landing Project, a 29-unit townhouse development in Bay Point. The proposed project consists of the following:

  1. General Plan amendment: The applicant requests to amend the Land Use Map of the Land Use Element by changing the subject property’s existing Single-Family Residential Medium Density (SM) land use designation to a Multiple-Family Residential Medium Density (MM) designation.
  2.   
  3. Rezoning: The applicant requests to rezone the subject property from Single-Family Residential (R-10) and General Agricultural (A-2) to a new Planned Unit District (P-1) zoning district, with an associated variance from the 5-acre minimum lot size requirement of the Planned Unit District (P-1) to allow the rezoning of the subject 2.42-acre property.
  4.   
  5. Major subdivision: The applicant requests approval of a vesting tentative map to subdivide the subject property into 29 new residential parcels and 6 common space parcels (Approved by the County Planning Commission on April 24, 2019).
  6.   
  7. Final development Plan: The applicant requests approval of a final development plan to allow for the construction of the Project in phases, consisting of the following primary elements:
  • The applicant proposes to construct a townhouse unit on each of the 29 residential parcels, with access provided to the units through two separate 25-foot wide private driveways from Pacifica Avenue. The development will also provide common space areas for the new residents, including three small private parks and open space encompassing the remainder of the property not utilized for residences, access, parking or drainage. The townhomes will be two-story, single-family residential units, and will be developed in tri-plex and five-plex clusters throughout the subject property. The 29 units will be a mix of two-, three-, and four-bedroom residences ranging in living area from approximately 992 square feet up to 1,442 square feet, and with maximum heights of 27 feet. The buildings will have a mix of smooth and horizontal siding, numerous first and second story windows for natural lighting, and alternating roof pitches and directions to reduce the bulk of the buildings.
  •   
  • Off-street parking for the proposed subdivision is provided by 51 uncovered surface parking spaces for the residences and 7 additional guest parking spaces. No garage spaces are provided. The site will be accessed through private driveways connecting the parking areas to Pacifica Avenue.
  •   
  • Four retaining walls are included in the overall site improvements, which range in height from 1.5 to 5 feet. The retaining wall in the northern portion of the site along Pacifica Avenue spans approximately 50 feet and has a maximum height of approximately 2 feet, 4 inches; the wall in the southern portion of the site spans approximately 235 feet overall and ranges in height from approximately 1 foot, 6 inches up to 4 feet, 3 inches; the wall in the southwest portion of the site spans approximately 135 feet overall and ranges in height from approximately 2 feet up to 5 feet; finally, the wall in the western portion of the site spans approximately 85 feet overall and is approximately 2 feet tall.
  •   
  • The proposed project also includes site grading of approximately 3,600 cubic yards of fill to create a level building site for Lots 4-13 and 19-21, and 46,717 square feet of landscaping throughout the project site for site beautification purposes, common areas, and bioretention areas.
  •   
  • The applicant has submitted a preliminary Storm Water Control Plan that provides an underground storm drain system with a bioretention basin. The applicant proposes to tie this bioretention basin to the existing storm drain system in Pacifica Avenue, with the storm water being filtered before it is discharged to the offsite storm drain system.
  •   
  • The project will be constructed in three phases:
  •   
    • Phase 1 will consist of constructing the three residential units on Lots 1-3, a parking lot (Parcel B), landscaping, and associated site improvements (Parcel A). This phase will have its own utility connections and access so that it can be self-sufficient throughout subsequent phase development.
    •   
    • Phase 2 consists of constructing the 13 residential units on Lots 4-13 and 19-21. Phase 2 also includes the installation of all remaining site work, such as access, parking, common areas, drainage improvements, etc. (Parcels C-E), with the exception of the landscaping and flatwork directly adjacent to the remaining 13 building pads for Phase 3.
    •   
    • Phase 3 will consist of the construction of the remaining 13 residential units on Lots 14-18 and 22-29 and their associated landscaping and flatwork directly adjacent to the buildings (Parcel F). Phase 3 will commence upon the completion of Phase 2.
  1. Tree Permit: The applicant requests approval of a tree permit to allow removal of 13 code-protected trees ranging in size from 10 to 48 inches in diameter (Approved by the County Planning Commission on April 24, 2019).
General Information  
  
Site/Area Description:  
  
The Project site is an approximately 2.42-acre vacant lot located at the southeast corner of Driftwood Drive and Pacifica Avenue in Bay Point and is adjacent to the Contra Costa Canal Trail. The site is surrounded by a mix of single-family and multi-family residential of properties, as well as multiple large, vacant agricultural parcels (3+ acres). The property and its surrounding area slope gently from southwest to northeast, with the exception of the hilltop community across the Contra Costa Canal Trail to the south of the subject property. Within the local area, Rio Vista Elementary is directly adjacent to the east, the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station is approximately 2 miles southeast of the property, Port Chicago Highway is located approximately 0.85 miles east of the property, Highway 4 is located approximately 0.63 miles south of the property, and the Suisun Bay is approximately 0.95 miles north.  
  
General Plan:   
  
The Project site is located within the Single-Family Residential Medium Density (SM) General Plan land use designation. As part of the proposed project, the applicant requests approval of a General Plan amendment to change the designation of the Project site to a Multiple-Family Residential Medium Density (MM) designation.  
  
Zoning:  
  
The Project site is located within Single-Family Residential District (R-10) and General Agricultural District (A-2) zoning districts. As part of the proposed project, the applicant requests approval to rezone the Project site to a project-specific Planned Unit District (P-1).  
  
County Planning Commission Hearing  
  
The County Planning Commission heard the project at the April 24, 2019 hearing. Public testimony at the hearing raised concerns related to off-street parking, density and building design. The Planning Commission discussed the concern with the proposed project's off-street parking, including whether the proposed number of off-street parking spaces and guest parking spaces would be sufficient for a project of this size. The Planning Commission requested that staff provide additional justification to the Board regarding the adequacy of off-street parking. Additional information regarding the proposed project’s off-street parking, information submitted by the applicant regarding parking at other similar projects, and staff’s subsequent efforts with the applicant to increase the proposed project’s off-street parking, is detailed below in the Staff Analysis section. The Commission also discussed the concern that the proposed project may be too dense to fit in with the surrounding community. The Planning Commission approved the vesting tentative map and associated tree permit, contingent upon the Board's approval of the General Plan Amendment, Rezoning, and Final Development Plan. The Commission recommended approval of the rezoning and the final development plan. The Planning Commission’s vote on the proposed General Plan amendment was 3-2 to recommend approval, with two commissioners absent, but did not attain the four affirmative votes required by statute to recommend approval of the General Plan amendment to the Board.  
  
Staff Analysis  
  
Environmental Review:
An Initial Study was prepared for the project. The Initial Study identified potentially significant impacts in the areas of Air Quality, Cultural Resources, Noise, and Tribal Cultural Resources, and proposed mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level. The public review comment period for the Initial Study extended from October 16, 2018 until November 7, 2018. Two comments were received within the comment period from EBMUD and from Mr. Arthur Trout & Mrs. Michelle Crawford Trout, members of the local community. Below is a summary of the comments received and staff’s response to the comments submitted.
  1. East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD): In a letter received November 5, 2018, EBMUD staff provided a response to the environmental review. The response indicated that the subject property is located outside of EBMUD’s Ultimate Service Boundary and water service is not available. Additionally, the project site is located adjacent to the EBMUD Mokelumne Aqueduct, so the applicant will need to follow EBMUD’s Procedure 718 and submit plans for EBMUD’s review.  
      
    Staff Response: The proposed project is not located within the EBMUD service area, as it is a part of the Golden State Water Company’s service area. Regarding projects adjacent to the Mokelumne Aqueduct, staff has included an advisory note to contact EBMUD to determine their development requirements as a part of this project.
  2.   
  3. Mr. Arthur Trout & Mrs. Michelle Crawford Trout of 560 Pacifica Avenue, Bay Point: In a letter dated November 7, 2018, the Trouts outlined their concerns, which are listed below with staff responses to each concern.
    1. Comment: The first concern is with the proposed General Plan amendment to MM and rezone to P-1 to allow a density of 29 units on a 2.42-acre parcel. In their opinion, the proposed project should limit its density to remain within the confines of the existing SM General Plan designation, such as the subdivision to the north on Driftwood Drive.   
        
      Staff’s Response: The site is located within an area that is developed with primarily single-family residential development, but also multi-family residential development and public/semi-public land, such as Rio Vista Elementary School adjacent to the east, trails, parks and open spaces. The project is to subdivide the 2.42-acre property into 29 residential lots with six common area parcels for the private road, open and recreational spaces for the residences, and guest parking. The project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Multiple-Family Residential-Medium Density (MM). This designation allows between 12.0 and 21.9 multiple-family units per net acre, and the 2.42-acre property (1.94 net acres) would allow for between 23 and 42 units. The 29 unit residential subdivision falls well within this range. Additionally, there are two multiple-family residential developments within the immediate area. One is located 0.2 miles east of the property on Pacifica Avenue and Mariners Cove Drive and designated MM, and the other is located approximately 0.06 miles south of the property across the Contra Costa Canal and designated Multiple Family Residential Low Density (ML). Slightly further away, there is a third multiple-family residential development approximately 0.75 miles east on Pacifica Avenue and Port Chicago Highway and designated MM. As such, development of multiple-family residential development of this density is not uncommon for this area of Bay Point. Furthermore, the project's location on Pacifica Avenue is the most appropriate, as it is a thoroughfare for this part of Bay Point and located within a General Plan-designated Transit Corridor and within a Local Transit Service Area. Alternative modes of transportation are within close proximity to the property and are accessible for the proposed housing units.  
        
      The 2005-2020 Contra Costa County General Plan contains policies related to providing an adequate supply of housing and encouraging infill development on under-utilized sites within urbanized areas where necessary utilities already are installed. Although the proposed project would increase the overall density for the surrounding area compared to its current condition, the proposed project provides necessary housing units in compliance with the goals and policies of the County General Plan.
    2.   
    3. Comment: The trees proposed for removal are utilized by turkeys and owls. An appropriate survey of the trees should be done prior to removing the trees, and the trees should be adequately replaced.   
        
      Staff’s Response: The subject property is currently vacant. As discussed in the CEQA Initial Study’s Biology section, the subject property is not located within a significant ecological resource area, as shown in Figure 8-1 of the County General Plan (Significant Ecological Area and Selected Locations of Protected Wildlife and Plans Species Areas). As the site is not located in a known significant ecological resource area, the site is not anticipated to contain protected species in the trees proposed for removal. However, staff has included conditions of approval #24, 25 and 26 to require a pre-construction survey to ensure that no harm will come to any protected species or nesting areas.   
        
      Additionally, on any property proposed for development approval, the Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance requires tree alteration or removal to be considered as part of the project application. The proposed project includes a request to remove 13 code-protected trees ranging in size from 10 to 48 inches in diameter. The proposed tree removal has been evaluated by CDD staff pursuant to the Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance, as well as the project plans for construction of the new townhomes, driveways, storm water control, and other site improvements. As the project includes the removal of code-protected trees, a tree permit is required in order to remove the trees. As such, staff has provided the required findings for approval and standard conditions of approval for restitution in order to reasonably restore the natural resources on-site.
    4.   
    5. Comment: The 49 off-street parking spaces included for the 29 proposed residences and 5 proposed off-street guest parking spaces will not be sufficient for the project. As the 29 proposed townhomes are a mixture of 2-, 3- and 4-bedroom units, their assumption is each residence will have at least two vehicles. This off-street parking shortage will increase the utilization of on-street parking on Pacifica Avenue, which would create safety issues due to its width, being on a bus route, and its utilization for drop-off and pick-up for Rio Vista Elementary School.  
        
      Staff’s Response: As the project includes a request to rezone the property to P-1, there is not a defined minimum off-street parking requirement. The Bay Point Planned Unit District (P-1) and the Multiple-Family Residential (M-17) zoning district are the closest comparable development standards for a project of this nature and density. Both the Bay Point P-1 and the M-17 zoning district require two off-street parking spaces and 0.25 guest parking spaces for units that contain two or more bedrooms. The proposed project includes 49 off-street parking spaces for the 29 proposed units, which results in a 1.69 space per unit ratio. There are also five guest spaces proposed for the 29 units, which results in a 0.17 space per unit ratio. The proposed project includes nearly two spaces for every unit, so it is anticipated that larger units will be allotted more parking than the smaller units. At the hearing on April 24, 2019, The Planning Commission requested that staff provide additional justification to the Board regarding the adequacy of off-street parking. Additional information regarding the proposed project’s off-street parking, information submitted by the applicant regarding parking at other similar projects, and staff’s subsequent efforts with the applicant to increase the proposed project’s off-street parking, is detailed below in the Off-Street Parking portion of the Staff Analysis section.  
        
      Although these ratios do not meet comparable parking standards for the Bay Point P-1 and M-17 zoning district, there are alternative factors to consider in reviewing this project. According to Figure 5-3 of the Transportation and Circulation Element, the subject property is located within a Transit Corridor and within Local Transit Service Area, and there is a bus stop adjacent to the property that provides access to public transit, such as other bus lines and BART. Therefore, staff finds that the proposed project provides sufficient off-street parking for the 29 new residential units.
    6.   
    7. Comment: The access road inside the development area appears to be insufficient for emergency services.   
        
      Staff’s Response: The Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD) has reviewed the proposed plans. As proposed, the project’s internal access road is sufficient for emergency access, but the project sponsor will be required to submit building plans to CCCFPD for review and approval prior to beginning construction.
General Plan Consistency: The current General Plan land use designation for the subject property is Single-Family Residential-Medium Density (SM). The project involves an amendment to the General Plan designation from SM to Multiple-Family Residential-Medium Density (MM). The intent of the MM General Plan land use designation is to promote the orderly establishment of medium-density residential development. This designation allows between 12.0 and 21.9 multiple-family units per net acre, and sites can range up to 3,349 square feet. With an average of 2.5 persons per unit, population densities would normally range between about 30 to about 55 persons per acre. The proposed 29-unit subdivision of the 2.42-acre property would result in a density of 14.98 units per net acre, which falls well within the density range for the proposed MM designation. Furthermore, the project involves the construction of a new multi-family development including 29 new residences, which is consistent with the uses allowed in MM.  
  
The subject property is located within the Urban Limit Line (ULL) and is consistent with the following policies of the Land Use Element:
  • Policy 3-8: Infilling of already developed areas shall be encouraged. In accommodating new development, preference shall generally be given to vacant or under-used sites within urbanized area, which have the necessary utilities installed with available remaining capacity, before undeveloped suburban lands are utilized.
  • Policy 3-28: New residential development shall be accommodated only in areas where it will avoid creating severe unmitigated adverse impacts upon the environment and upon the existing community
The subject property is under-utilized, as it is vacant. Additionally, a four-lot minor subdivision was approved in 2009, which was never exercised. A higher-density project would be more appropriate, as it is an infill project in an already-developed area in-between single- and multiple-family residential uses. Additionally, all necessary utilities are available for the proposed project. The project would be a suitable transition from the high-density single-family and multi-family properties to the south and east to the medium-density single-family residence to the north. There are two multiple-family residential developments within the immediate area. One is located 0.2 miles east of the property on Pacifica Avenue and Mariners Cove Drive and designated MM, and the other is located approximately 0.06 miles south of the property across the Contra Costa Canal and designated Multiple Family Residential Low Density (ML). Slightly further away, there is a third multiple-family residential development approximately 0.75 miles east on Pacifica Avenue and Port Chicago Highway and designated MM. As such, development of multiple-family residential development of this density is not uncommon for this area of Bay Point. As shown in the CEQA Initial Study, the proposed project would not create unmitigated adverse impacts on the environment or the existing community. The Initial Study identified potentially significant impacts in the areas of Air Quality, Cultural Resources, Noise, and Tribal Cultural Resources, and proposed mitigation measures to reduce them to less-than-significant levels.  
  
The following Transportation Policy of the County’s Transportation Element also supports the project.  
  • Policy 5-24: Use of alternative forms of transportation, such as transit, bike, and pedestrian modes, shall be encouraged to provide basic accessibility to those without access to a personal automobile and help minimize automobile congestion and air pollution.
  
According to Figure 5-3 of the Transportation and Circulation Element, the subject property is located within a Transit Corridor and within Local Transit Service Area. Alternative modes of transportation are within close proximity to the property and are accessible for the proposed housing units.  
  
The project is also consistent with the following Housing Goal and Policy of the County’s Housing Element.
  • Goal 6: Provide adequate sites through appropriate land use and zoning designations to accommodate the County’s share of regional housing needs.
  •   
  • Policy 7.3: Encourage P-1 zoning areas with concentrations of applicants seeking variances.
  
The County’s General Plan also provides goals and policies that promote and encourage projects, such as this subdivision project within the Bay Point area. Goal 6 of the County’s Housing Element identifies the need to provide adequate sites with the appropriate land use and zoning designations to accommodate the County’s share of regional housing. The project will be providing 29 residences on a property that is underutilized, adjacent to other properties with residences, and within close proximity to public spaces, public transit and commercial uses. Policy 7.3 of the County’s Housing Element encourages P-1 zoning in areas with concentrations of variances sought. The project includes the rezoning of the property to P-1, which is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation of MM. The variance to the lot area for P-1 (where a minimum of five acres is required) is also consistent with properties within the County that are less than five acres and have been rezoned to P-1. Overall, the 29 residential lot subdivision with six common area parcels complies with the proposed MM General Plan land use designation and applicable General Plan policies.  
  
Housing Element Compliance: In order to assess whether this residential development application is in any way subject to the requirements of California Government Code Section 65863, staff reviewed the site inventory for the adopted 2014 Housing Element and determined that the subject property is among the parcels listed in the inventory of residential sites that were relied upon to meet the County’s share of regional housing needs. The subject property is listed as providing 23 units at a “Low or Very Low” affordability level. This project includes 29 units, where four units will be deed restricted pursuant to the County’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, three units will be deed restricted pursuant to a Neighborhood Stabilization Program award of funds, and 22 units will be market-rate units. Although this project proposes 16 fewer lower income units than identified in the County’s Housing Element sites inventory, the developer is seeking other affordable housing funding sources with a goal to sell all townhomes at below-market rates. Finally, the County’s Housing Element site inventory currently has a surplus of approximately 266 lower income units. Although this project will result in a reduction of 16 lower income units from the estimated 23 lower income units for the site, there is sufficient capacity on other identified sites that can accommodate the County’s unmet share of the regional housing need for this cycle of the Housing Element.  
  
Zoning Compliance: The subject property is located within both the Single-Family Residential (R-10) Zoning District and the General Agricultural (A-2) Zoning District. The project involves a rezoning of the property from R-10 and A-2 to a Planned Unit District (P-1). The project involves the subdivision of the subject property into 29 residential lots with six parcels for the private road and common areas. The 29 new townhomes will be two-story, single-family residential units, and will be developed in triplex and five-plex clusters around the subject property. The 29 units will be a mix of two-, three- and four-bedroom residences ranging in living area from approximately 992 square feet up to 1,442 square feet.   
  
There are no minimum lot sizes, height, or setback requirements in the P-1 Zoning District. However, in approving a Planned Unit District, the development must be a residential environment of sustained desirability and stability, and in harmony with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Further, the P-1 zoning is intended to provide flexibility of site design, building massing, setbacks, and height. The proposed subdivision is found to be consistent with the neighborhood that includes one-story and two-story homes, within a residential developed area, which includes both single-family and multi-family residential developments. The proposed project is located on a property that is a good balance between the medium-density and high-density single-family residential properties to the north of the property and the multi-family and single-family residential properties to the south and east.   
  
Off-Street Parking: In response to the Commission's and Mr. Trout's concern regarding the off-street parking, the applicant submitted information to staff on May 17, 2019, outlining the parking provided in other Habitat for Humanity projects that were similar in scope and nature to this project, which is attached. These documents, prepared originally in 2014, analyzed parking ratios for their projects Kinsell Commons in Oakland, Brookflield Court in Oakland, Pleasant Creek Homes in Walnut Creek, 4369 Central Avenue in Fremont, and Sequoia Grove in Hayward. These projects all consist of townhome development in a mixture of two-, three-, and four-bedroom configurations, such as with this Pacifica Landing project. Kinsell Commons provided a 1:1 ratio for 22 units, Brookfield Court provided a 1.83:1 ratio for 12 units, Pleasant Creek Homes provided a 1.8:1 ratio for 10 units, 4369 Central Avenue provided a 1.83:1 ratio for 30 units, and Sequoia Grove provided a 2:1 ratio for 10 units. These developments assigned parking spaces based on a unit's number of bedrooms. Two-bedroom units received one space, and three- and four-bedroom units received two spaces, unless within a close proximity to transit in which they would only require one. The Pacifica Landing project will also be assigning parking spaces to units in this same manor. Habitat for Humanity has found that their affordable housing projects are served generally by parking ratios of 1.8:1, as the majority of the homebuyers are single-car households due to their income level. As such, off-street parking is not in high demand unlike market-rate housing developments.  
  
Additionally, in December 2011, the City of San Diego generated a study analyzing parking in affordable housing projects. The key findings made by the City were that parking demand rises with higher incomes (i.e. market-rate housing projects), the 21 affordable housing projects they studied have approximately half as much demand for parking as market-rate developments, parking demand was lower in areas with transit nearby, and, in all developments, overnight parking occupancy was less than the amount of parking supplied, ranging from approximately 40 to 75% for most projects with only two above 85%. In two examples found within Contra Costa County, this trend of lower off-street parking demand is confirmed. Emerson Arms, located at 326 Ward Street in Martinez, contains 32 units and 32 parking spaces (1:1 ratio). According to TransForm's Green Trip Parking Database, the development only utilizes 15 of the 32 spaces, approximately 47%. Coggins Square Apartments, located at 1316 Las Juntas Way in Contra Costa Centre, contains 87 units and 116 parking spaces (1.33:1 ratio). According to the same database, the development utilizes 78 of the 116 parking spaces, approximately 67%. Overall, these developments actually require 0.47 and 0.9 spaces per unit, respectively.  
  
As the project includes a request to rezone the property to P-1, there is not a defined minimum off-street parking requirement. The Bay Point Planned Unit District (P-1) and the Multiple-Family Residential (M-17) zoning district are the closest comparable development standards for a project of this nature and density. Both the Bay Point P-1 and the M-17 zoning district require two off-street parking spaces and 0.25 guest parking spaces for units that contain two or more bedrooms. The Planning Commision expressed concerns about the lack of available off-street parking spaces for the project. To address this concern, staff worked with the applicant, who agreed to provide four additional off-street parking spaces. This resulted in a new total of 51 off-street parking spaces for the proposed dwelling units (1.76 spaces per unit) and 7 guest parking spaces (0.24 spaces per unit). Comparatively, the Bay Point P-1 and M-17 district would require 58 spaces for the residences and 7 spaces for guests. The 4 additional parking spaces are located in the middle portion of the property on the proposed Parcel D, near the southern property line, and adjacent to Unit #19. These 4 additional spaces would be tandem spaces connected to spaces #43 – 46 and would be include two spaces assigned to dwelling units and two for guest parking. This results in a new total of 51 off-street parking spaces for the proposed dwelling units (1.76 spaces per unit, where two spaces per unit is the comparable requirement in the M-17 district) and seven guest parking spaces (where seven guest spaces is the comparable requirement in the M-17 district).   
  
The proposed project includes nearly two spaces for every unit, and larger units will be allotted more parking than the smaller units. The assigned number of parking spaces is based on a unit's number of bedrooms. Habitat for Humanity assigns one- and two-bedroom units one space, and three- and four-bedroom units two spaces. Although these ratios do not fully meet comparable parking standards for the Bay Point P-1 and M-17 zoning district, there are alternative factors to consider in reviewing this project. According to Figure 5-3 of the Transportation and Circulation Element, the subject property is located within a Transit Corridor and within Local Transit Service Area, and there is a bus stop adjacent to the property that provides access to public transit, such as other bus lines and BART. In reviewing the off-street parking requirements of the County, considering Habitat for Humanity's analysis of their past projects, and affordable housing parking analysis conducted by the City of San Diego, staff finds that the proposed project will be sufficiently served by the 51 off-street parking spaces and seven off-street guest parking spaces.  
  
Building Design: Public testimony at the Planning Commission hearing on April 24, 2019, raised concerns that the Project’s building design would result in a visually unpleasing continuous wall along Pacifica Avenue. As a result, staff added condition of approval #29 to require landscape screening along Pacifica Avenue.  
  
Conclusion  
  
In conclusion, the proposed project will be consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, including providing greatly needed housing units on an infill property adjacent to transit. The project is also consistent with the intent and purpose of the proposed P-1 district, as explained above. Therefore, staff recommends that the County Board of Supervisors approve the General Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Final Development Plan, and related actions.

CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:

In the event that the proposed project is not approved, the applicant will not obtain approval of the required General Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Development Plan entitlements needed to allow the proposed 29-unit townhome subdivision project in Bay Point. Furthermore, negative action by the Board of Supervisors would prevent the establishment of the four deed-restricted low-affordability units currently provided by the proposed project and the potential for all 29 units to be low- or very low-affordability units, when the County is 465 units short of its required Regional Housing Needs Allocation for low-, very low- and moderate-affordability units.

AgendaQuick©2005 - 2024 Destiny Software Inc., All Rights Reserved