City of Brentwood
Home PageContact Us!Back

City Administration

2010 Council Goals and Strategic Plan | City Council Members | Calendar of Events | Elections
eNotification | Sub-Committees| Pledge of Allegiance Sign Ups | Invocation Sign Up
Live Streaming Council Meeting | Streaming PC Help |
Streaming Mac Help |

Current Council Agenda and Past Meeting Information

Past Agendas

 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 27


Meeting Date: October 22, 2002

Subject/Title: Public Hearing: Consideration of Residential Growth Management Program (RGMP) allocations and Development Over Mid-range Densities

Submitted by: Mitch Oshinsky, Community Development Director/Winston Rhodes, Senior Planner

Approved by: John Stevenson, City Manager



RECOMMENDATION
The RGMP Committee recommends that the City Council adopt two Resolutions granting an allocation for 177 dwelling units to Signature Properties and 48 dwelling units to Terra Nova Development allowing both projects to exceed the mid-range density allowed under the General Plan.

PREVIOUS ACTION
The RGMP Committee met on October 3, 2002 to consider the two allocation requests and the proposed project densities, and formulated the above recommendation to the City Council regarding the two applications.

BACKGROUND
Two applications were submitted to be considered during the fourth cycle of the RGMP, as follows:

(1) A request by Signature Properties (Project 1) for the allocation of 177 dwelling units located on the north side of Sycamore Avenue, just east of Windsor Way. The allocation is requested for a 3-year build-out period (2003-2005) as follows: 30 dwellings in 2003, 70-80 dwellings in 2004, and 67-77 dwellings in 2005. 

(2) A request by Terra Nova Development (Project 2) for the allocation of 48 dwelling units located at the northwest corner of Oak Street and Garin Parkway, east of Liberty High School.

The applications were rated by the RGMP Committee based on a set of 10 evaluation criteria that were established as part of the RGMP. A project needs a minimum of 100 points to receive an allocation. Both projects were awarded more than 100 points. Staff initially reviewed the applications and provided a recommendation to the RGMP Committee, which met on October 3, 2002 (a copy of Staff's memo to the Committee with detailed evaluation of each project is attached). When the Committee met to consider Staff's recommendation, there were several questions about the recommended points for two of the rating criterion (Infill Development and Agricultural Enterprise). With respect to the Signature Properties request, the number of points allocated for the infill development criterion (20) was questioned. Staff explained that the project as proposed met the infill criterion because the project site is surrounded on at least two sides by either already developed or developing projects, or sites already approved for subdivision or development. No action was taken to change the number of points allocated. The second criterion point allocation that was questioned was the agricultural enterprise point total for both Signature Properties and Terra Nova Development. Staff explained that neither project was awarded points for this criterion because each project results in the permanent conversion of prime soils and does not propose any benefits for agricultural enterprise. It was mentioned that both projects would be required to mitigate their project’s impact on the loss of agricultural land by paying an agricultural conversion fee of $5,000 per acre. The RGMP Committee allocated five additional points for this criterion to each project and recommended that each project receive an allocation as requested. 

ANALYSIS

Project 1 - Signature Properties

The proposed project is located on approximately 53.3 acres and has a Low Density Residential General Plan designation with a mid-range density of 3.0 dwelling units / acre or 160 dwelling units. The proposed project includes 177 single–family dwellings plus the shelter or 17 dwellings over mid-range.

The project was awarded 110 points by the RGMP Committee and received the bulk of its points in the evaluation categories of affordable /special housing needs, amenities and infrastructure, infill development, and design quality. Special noteworthy project features include the provision of a woman’s shelter to help homeless and/or battered women and children. This would be the first shelter of this kind operated by Shepherd’s Gate to be located in Brentwood and provides an important housing option for up to 18 individuals which is not currently available to this special needs segment of the community. In addition, the project includes a 3.7-acre neighborhood park and generous pedestrian corridors that contribute to a high quality walkable project design. 

Project 2 – Terra Nova Development

The proposed project is located on approximately 3.3 acres and has a High Density Residential General Plan designation with a mid-range density of 15.5 dwelling units / acre or 51 dwelling units. The proposed project includes 80 senior apartments with 32 units proposed to have affordability controls. The affordable units are exempt from the RGMP and therefore the allocation request is only for the 48 market-rate units. The proposed project is 29 units over mid-range. The project does qualify for a density bonus under state law of at least 25 percent due to the number of affordable units and senior units proposed. 

The project was awarded 140 points by the RGMP Committee and received the bulk of its points in the evaluation categories of affordable / special housing needs, amenities and infrastructure, infill development, design quality, and development priority. Special noteworthy project features include the provision of apartments for seniors, affordable units, a recreation building and pool for project tenants. 

FISCAL IMPACT
None

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolutions No. ___and ___.
2. Memorandum from Staff to the RGMP Committee, dated September 26, 2002
3. Location Map



RESOLUTION NO. ___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD GRANTING A 17- UNIT DENSITY BONUS AND AN ALLOCATION FOR 177 DWELLING UNITS TO SIGNATURE PROPERTIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR THE RESIDENTIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (RGMP) FOR THE CYCLE ENDING JULY 30, 2002.

WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2326 adopting a Residential Growth Management Program (RGMP) to provide for the review and evaluation of residential growth in the City of Brentwood on July 6, 2001, and effective July 1, 2001; and

WHEREAS, on September 11, 2001, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2363, amending Resolution No. 2326, the RGMP; and

WHEREAS, the RGMP provides for the submittal of applications for dwelling unit allocations in three separate cycles during the fiscal year, beginning in July, with the first submittal deadline being July 30; and

WHEREAS, an application was submitted by Signature Properties for 177 dwelling units and an 18-person homeless shelter; and

WHEREAS, Staff reviewed said application with respect to the criteria established by the RGMP and recommended a specific point total be awarded; and

WHEREAS, Staff prepared a memorandum to the RGMP Committee including the recommended point total and corresponding rationale for awarding said points based in part on information submitted by the applicant in support of its application; and 

WHEREAS, the RGMP Committee conducted a noticed public meeting on October 3, 2002, to consider Staff's recommendation after reviewing the memorandum from Staff and all available information related to the application; and

WHEREAS, the RGMP Committee recommended to the City Council that the application receive a total of 105 points; and

WHEREAS, a minimum of 100 points is needed to receive an allocation and the applicant was notified of the point total recommended by the RGMP Committee; and

WHEREAS, on October 22, 2002, the City Council held a public hearing and reviewed all available information, including the application, correspondence from the applicant, Staff's memorandum to the RGMP Committee, the report prepared by Staff to the Council on the recommendation of the RGMP Committee, and public testimony; and

WHEREAS, consideration of this application is determined to be covered by the general rule that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. In this case, where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3)), in that any granting of an allocation for dwelling units will need to be followed by an appropriate Tentative Subdivision Map application to receive an actual entitlement, including the appropriate level of environmental review in compliance with CEQA.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Brentwood hereby finds and determines as follows:

Section 1. The foregoing recitals and Staff report statements are found and determined to be true and correct.

Section 2. The City Council finds that Signature Properties, has achieved the minimum required total of 100 points and grants the requested allocation of 177 dwelling units in accordance with its application.

Section 3. The City Council finds that this action is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, and directs Staff to file the Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk.

PASSED AND ACCEPTED by the City Council of the City of Brentwood at their regular meeting of October 22, 2002, by the following vote:






































RESOLUTION NO. ___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD GRANTING A 51-UNIT DENSITY BONUS AND AN ALLOCATION FOR 48 DWELLING UNITS TO TERRA NOVA DEVELOPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR THE RESIDENTIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (RGMP) FOR THE CYCLE ENDING JULY 30, 2002.

WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2326 adopting a Residential Growth Management Program (RGMP) to provide for the review and evaluation of residential growth in the City of Brentwood on July 6, 2001, and effective July 1, 2001; and

WHEREAS, on September 11, 2001, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2363, amending Resolution No. 2326, the RGMP; and

WHEREAS, the RGMP provides for the submittal of applications for dwelling unit allocations in three separate cycles during the fiscal year, beginning in July, with the first submittal deadline being July 30; and

WHEREAS, an allocation application was submitted by Terra Nova Development for 48 dwelling units; and

WHEREAS, Staff reviewed said application with respect to the criteria established by the RGMP and recommended a specific point total be awarded; and

WHEREAS, Staff prepared a memorandum to the RGMP Committee including the recommended point total and corresponding rationale for awarding said points based in part on information submitted by the applicant in support of its application; and 

WHEREAS, the RGMP Committee conducted a noticed public meeting on October 3, 2002, to consider Staff's recommendation after reviewing the memorandum from Staff and all available information related to the application; and

WHEREAS, the RGMP Committee recommended to the City Council that the application receive a total of 135 points; and

WHEREAS, a minimum of 100 points is needed to receive an allocation and the applicant was notified of the point total recommended by the RGMP Committee; and

WHEREAS, on October 22, 2002, the City Council held a public hearing and reviewed all available information, including the application, correspondence from the applicant, Staff's memorandum to the RGMP Committee, the report prepared by Staff to the Council on the recommendation of the RGMP Committee, and public testimony; and

WHEREAS, consideration of this application is determined to be covered by the general rule that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. In this case, where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3)), in that any granting of an allocation for dwelling units will need to be followed by an appropriate Tentative Subdivision Map application to receive an actual entitlement, including the appropriate level of environmental review in compliance with CEQA.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Brentwood hereby finds and determines as follows:

Section 1. The foregoing recitals and Staff report statements are found and determined to be true and correct.

Section 2. The City Council finds that Terra Nova Homes Development has achieved the minimum required total of 100 points and grants the requested allocation of 48 dwelling units in accordance with its application.

Section 3. The City Council finds that this action is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, and directs Staff to file the Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk.

PASSED AND ACCEPTED by the City Council of the City of Brentwood at their regular meeting of October 22, 2002, by the following vote:





































COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM


DATE: September 26, 2002

TO: Residential Growth Management Program (RGMP) Committee
Mike McPoland, Mayor
Bill Hill, City Councilman
Bob Brockman, Planning Commission Vice-Chairman
Chris Becnel, Planning Commissioner

FROM: Mitch Oshinsky, Community Development Director
Mike Leana, Chief of Planning
Winston Rhodes, Senior Planner

SUBJECT: Evaluation of RGMP Applications - Cycle Ending July 30, 2002


Background

This represents the fourth cycle for the RGMP since it became effective on July 1, 2001. Two allocation applications for this cycle were submitted by the July 30th deadline. Project 1 is from Signature Properties for the allocation of 177 lots located on the north side of Sycamore Avenue, just east of Windsor Way. Project 2 is from Terra Nova Development for the allocation of 48 apartments located at the northwest corner of Oak Street and Garin Parkway.

Project 1 – Signature Properties 

The proposed project is located on the Bonnickson property, which was annexed into the City in November 2001. The property has a Low Density Residential General Plan designation and is zoned PD-45 as a “shell” planned development at 3 du/ac. The mid-range density for this project site is 160 dwelling units. The Housing Sub-committee has previously received information about the proposed homeless shelter for women and children included within this project. The applicant is requesting a multi-year 177-unit allocation with a 3-year anticipated build-out period (2003 –2005) as follows: 30 dwellings in 2003, 70-80 dwellings in 2004, and 67-77 dwellings in 2005. This allocation can be made several ways including all at one time or phased out differently over multiple years. If the Committee thinks an allocation is warranted, staff requests further direction on the recommended phasing of the allocation. 

Project 2 – Terra Nova Development

The proposed senior apartment project has a General Plan designation of High Density Residential and is zoned PD-30 as a “shell” planned development with a range of 11 – 20 du/ac. The mid-range density for this project site is 50 dwelling units. The applicant has requested a density bonus under State law (G.C. Section 65915) because at least 50% of the units are proposed for seniors and 20% of the units are proposed for lower income households. The project has been previously presented to the Housing Sub-Committee for feedback on the proposed density and design. The proposed senior development includes a total of 80 apartments with 32 units proposed to have affordability controls including 18 units proposed for low-income senior households. Affordable units are exempt from the RGMP allocation process. Consequently, an allocation of 48 units is requested. 


Analysis

Staff has reviewed both applications with respect to the evaluation criteria that were adopted as part of the RGMP. The applications received a certain number of points for each criterion and the total is shown at the end of the narrative. Staff's intent in reviewing the application was to maintain consistency with the review of previous applications relative to the following criteria:

1. Does the project provide housing for a range of incomes and lifecycles? Does it include a minimum of 10% of housing affordable to low or very low income households through inclusionary housing, and/or provide other assistance for affordable housing for low or very low income: families, the disabled, seniors, credentialed school teachers, East Diablo Fire Protection District firefighters, City of Brentwood public employees, and/or agricultural farm workers? (50 points possible)


Project 1

The applicant has indicated that the project would provide a shelter for the protection of 18 homeless women and children. Service priority would be given to women residing in Brentwood, then women employed within Brentwood, then women residing in Contra Costa County. Consideration would be given to other women if space were available after the three priority groups have been served. Staff recommends 40 points due to the unique nature of this facility and the lack of existing housing options for this special housing needs group in Brentwood. According to the City’s Police Department there have been 125 – 175 domestic violence cases annually in the City since 1997. The majority of these cases involve women and children. The number of cases has been rising from a low of 127 in 1999 to a high of 175 in 2001. Even with aggressive prosecution, the number of cases is anticipated to rise as the City’s population increases. The proposed shelter could accommodate up to 18 potential (1-person) households. Eighteen households represents approximately 10% of the 177 households that would occupy the proposed project and would provide an alternative housing option for women and children seeking safe housing and protection from abuse in their current residences.

Project 2

The applicant has indicated that the project would include 32 low and moderate-income units that would have 30-year affordability controls. The balance of the units would be market rate. Half of the affordable units (16 units) or 20% of the total project units would be priced at levels affordable to low income households. Staff recommends 40 points due to the range of housing affordability levels proposed, the senior and/or disabled housing opportunities proposed and identified as needed in the General Plan Housing Element. 

2. Does the project provide on-site and/or off-site amenities and or infrastructure (other than standard requirements and improvements) through a Development Agreement, in addition to required facilities, which are desirable for the City as a whole? (30 points possible)

Project 1

The applicant is proposing to extend Garin Parkway from Sycamore to the north property boundary and Sycamore Avenue from its current location to the eastern boundary of the project site. This infrastructure would be required as part of standard City requirements. In addition, to the homeless shelter discussed above, the applicant is proposing to provide a 3.7- acre park within the project. This would exceed the required parkland by approximately 1 acre. Staff recommends 15 points be awarded for this criterion since the project would help add parkland beyond what is required in a portion of the City with a very small supply of available public recreation space.

Project 2

The applicant is proposing a gazebo with a decorative pond and fountain situated in an open space area adjacent to a recreation building and swimming pool. The recreation building is proposed to have a 500-book library, a reading room, exercise equipment area with a treadmill and stationary bicycle, big screen television, and computer station with internet access for project residents. The applicant is also proposing the installation of an off-site sheltered bus stop at Oak and Second Street to improve transit service in the Downtown area for Brentwood residents. Staff recommends 30 points be awarded due to the variety of active and passive recreation amenities proposed for senior tenants and the proposed sheltered bus stop available for all Brentwood residents to use.

3. Does the project propose to rehabilitate existing units in the City and make them available for very low or low-income households? (20 points possible)

Project 1

The applicant did not respond to this criterion and Staff recommends that 0 points be awarded for this criterion since it is not applicable to this project. 

Project 2

The applicant did not respond to this criterion and Staff recommends that 0 points be awarded for this criterion since it is not applicable to this project. .

4. Does the project incorporate energy efficient design, layout, landscaping, construction and materials of an active or passive nature, which exceed those otherwise required by Title 24? (20 points possible)

Project 1

The applicant has indicated that all of the proposed homes would include features, which meet PG&E’s “Comfort Home” Program criteria that exceed Title 24 energy conservation standards. The proposed features include high-efficiency furnaces, super-efficient air conditioners, tightly sealed air ducts and energy saving windows. The applicant has also indicated that drought-tolerant landscaping will be utilized in all common areas. In addition, high reflective pavement is proposed within portions of the proposed development. Staff has reviewed the proposed energy savings from these features and recommends 5 points for this criterion based on what the applicant has stated will be provided for the project. Staff is receptive to providing more points if additional energy savings features are proposed for the project. 

Project 2

The applicant did not respond to this criterion and Staff recommends that 0 points be awarded for this criterion since it is not applicable to this project. Staff is receptive to providing points if proposed energy savings features information is provided. 


5. Does the project propose to develop job generating land uses, or otherwise assist economic development, in conjulction with the development of dwelling units? (40 points possible)

Project 1

The applicant has indicated that the project would provide jobs at the women’s shelter but that the exact number is not known and the economic development impact of the project is very limited due to the non-profit status of the shelter operator. Staff therefore recommends that 5 points be awarded for this criterion. 

Project 2

The proposed project would provide several property management and maintenance jobs and will have a potentially beneficial economic development impact due to its close proximity to downtown commercial uses. Staff recommends that 10 points be awarded for this criterion since it is helps support economic development activity within the downtown area. 

6. Is the project proposed for a site that is considered to be in-fill? That is, is the project site surrounded on at least two sides by either already developed or developing projects, or sites already approved for subdivision or development, or sites which have a housing allocation? (20 points possible)

Project 1

The proposed site is bordered on the west by an already developed residential area along Windsor Way and on the south by two approved residential subdivisions (William Lyon Homes –TSM 8424 for 252 lots and Schuler Homes – TSM 8413 for 113 lots). Consequently, the project site meets the criterion for a site to be considered an in-fill. Staff recommends that the maximum of 20 points be given for this criterion. 

Project 2

The proposed site is bordered on the north by an approved residential subdivision (Schuler Homes –TSM 8413 for 113 lots) and on the west by an approved 2.7-acre neighborhood park site. The project site is also in close proximity to the main Brentwood Post Office located southwest of the project site. The project site meets the criterion for a site to be considered an in-fill. Staff recommends that the maximum of 20 points be given for this criterion. 


7. Does the project preserve prime soils for agricultural use on sites within the City, or otherwise provide benefits for agricultural enterprise? (15 points possible)

Project 1

The proposed project would result in a loss of approximately 53 acres of productive agricultural land within the City. The applicant did not respond to this criterion and Staff recommends that 0 points be awarded for this criterion since no project benefits for agricultural enterprise are proposed. 


Project 2

The proposed project would result in a loss of approximately 3.3 acres of productive agricultural land within the City. The applicant did not respond to this criterion and Staff recommends that 0 points be awarded for this criterion since no project benefits for agricultural enterprise are proposed. 



8. Does the project demonstrate high quality, innovative design and product type, demonstrate maximum provisions for pedestrian and bicycle use, and reflect progressive planning principles such as Smart Growth, Neotraditional design, and/or the Ahwanee Principles; and has the developer exhibited a high level of past performance in the quality of their development projects? (20 points possible)

Project 1 

The applicant has indicated that the proposed homes will include 7 different plans with 21 elevations utilizing five different architectural styles. The homes include typical single-family design features found in homes throughout Brentwood. The applicant is proposing a 3.7-acre neighborhood park centrally located within the project with a 30’-wide pedestrian corridor along the proposed extension of Garin Parkway and a 40’ pedestrian corridor along eastern edge of the project site. The project also includes pedestrian access point at the ends of proposed cul-de-sacs abutting Garin Parkway to promote walking within the site. The proposed women’s shelter is located in the southeast corner of the site and is proposed to have design features to match surrounding homes. The project is consistent with Smart Growth and Ahwanee principles because it is an in-fill development, includes features that encourage pedestrian and bicycle use, contains neighborhood open space that is placed so as to encourage the attention and presence of people throughout the day. It should also be noted that Signature Homes has exhibited a high level of past performance in the quality of homes built within the City. Staff recommends that 15 points be awarded for this criterion, based on the proposed location, layout, and features of the subdivision and the past development performance of Signature Homes.







Project 2 

The applicant proposes seven 2-story apartment buildings clustered around a pool and recreation building within a central open space area for residents and generous landscaping along the southern and eastern edges of the project site. The project will locate residents in close proximity to the downtown and transit service. The project is consistent with Smart Growth and Ahwanee principles because it is an in-fill development and contains neighborhood open space that is placed so as to encourage the attention and presence of people throughout the day. The applicant is proposing high quality design features and amenities including decorative wrought iron fencing, gabled covered parking roofs, a bus turnout and bus shelter that matches the project’s architecture, as well as a recreation building and pool for tenant and visitor use. Staff recommends that 15 points be awarded for this criterion, based on the proposed location, layout, and features of the project.


9. Is the project proposed for a location which has been identified by the City as being particularly prioritized for development or redevelopment, such as the Downtown, Northeast Brentwood, or along the Highway 4 Bypass? (15 points possible)

Project 1

The proposed project is located along the eastern edge of the present City boundary The project would help extend infrastructure to an isolated area of the City and help implement the City’s Circulation Plan by making improvements to Sycamore Avenue and Garin Parkway. These improvements may help facilitate infrastructure improvements in the Downtown area. However, the project is not located in an area, which has been particularly prioritized for development or redevelopment. The project will add traffic to existing collector roadways without providing alternative routes. Based on this review, Staff recommends that 5 points be awarded for this criterion. 

Project 2 

The proposed project is located on a prominent corner two blocks from the downtown core and places seniors in close proximity to the post office, City Hall, health clinic, library, City Park, as well as downtown businesses. Staff recommends that 15 points be awarded for this criterion. 


10. Is the project a continuing project - a second or later phase of a multi-phase project where construction has begun on at least one previous phase and public improvements have been started? (10 points possible)

Project 1

The proposed project is not a continuing project and, therefore, Staff recommends that 0 points be awarded for this criterion. 






Project 2

The proposed project is part of Planned Development 30. Previously approved single-family development within the area is contingent upon approval of the development design for this project site. Staff recommends that 5 points be awarded for this criterion. 


Recommendation

Staff recommends that the RGMP Committee award 105 points for the allocation application for Project 1 and 135 points for the application for Project 2, based on the two applicant proposals and the evaluation of the criteria as stated above. By awarding a minimum of 100 points for each of these applications, the Committee would be recommending that the City Council approve the allocation of as many as 257 of the 650 annual available units during this RGMP cycle depending on the phasing of the allocation for Project 1.



Recommended Project Point Summary

Rating Criterion & Maximum Points Available Project 1 – Signature Project 2 – Terra Nova
1. Affordable / Special Housing Needs – 50 40 40
2. Amenities and Infrastructure – 30 15 30
3. Housing Rehabilitation – 20 0 0
4. Energy Efficiency – 20 5 0
5. Job Generation – 40 5 10
6. Infill Development – 20 20 20
7. Agricultural Enterprise – 15 0 0
8. Design Quality – 20 15 15
9. Development Priority – 15 5 15
10. Ongoing Project –10 0 5
TOTAL 105 135

Attachments

Project 1 Site Plan and Project Information
Project 2 Site Plan and Project Information

City Administration
City of Brentwood City Council
150 City Park Way
Brentwood, CA 94513
(925) 516-5440
Fax (925) 516-5441
E-mail allcouncil@brentwoodca.gov