Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCurtner City of Palo Alto (ID # 2921) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action ItemsMeeting Date: 6/11/2012 June 11, 2012 Page 1 of 4 (ID # 2921) Summary Title: 382-384 Curtner Avenue Subdivision Title: Approval of a Tentative Map and Record of Land Use Action to Create Six Residential Condominium Units at 382 and 384 Curtner Avenue From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve the proposed Tentative Map to create six residential condominium units at 382 and 384 Curtner Avenue, based upon findings and conditions contained within the draft Record of Land Use Action (Attachment A). Executive Summary The project would merge two single-family lots at 382 and 384 Curtner Avenue and create six condominium units. Major Architectural Review approval for the project was granted on December 17, 2007 and minor façade changes were approved on May 1, 2008. A condition of the architectural approval is the filing of a Final Map. Approval of the proposed Tentative Map would allow the applicant to prepare a Final Map for Council approval. Background The proposed Tentative Map is based on one that was originally submitted for approval in 1990. After a public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the original map in July 1990. The City Council approved the 1990 Tentative Map on August 13, 1990. On March 18, 1991 the City Council unanimously approved a Final Subdivision Map based on the 1990 Tentative Map. The 1991 Final Map was never recorded. In 2010, the applicant filed a lawsuit against the City that included a request for injunctive relief that would have required the City to record a new Final Map based on the 1991 Final Map. As part of a voluntary no-fault settlement that resolves the lawsuit, the City agreed to a specific time frame for processing a Tentative Map and Final Map that conform to the original 1990- 1991 approvals. Newspaper notice of this hearing was published on May 25, 2012 and postcard notices were mailed to all property owners within a 600’ radius of the project. June 11, 2012 Page 2 of 4 (ID # 2921) Discussion Staff and City departments have determined that the Tentative Map application is in compliance with zoning, subdivision, and other codes and ordinances and is in compliance with the 1990 Tentative Map and the previous Conditions of Approval associated with Architectural Review approvals granted on December 17, 2007 and May 1, 2008. The map would allow the creation of six condominium units on a 13,141 square foot parcel. This subdivision fits within the parameters of the RM-30 zoning. The Tentative Map plan set includes information on the existing parcels and onsite conditions. The drawings are in compliance with the applicable provisions of the City’s Subdivision Ordinance. These plans contain all information and notations required to be shown on a Tentative Map (per PAMC Sections 21.12), and conform to the design requirements concerning the creation of lots, streets, walkways, and similar features (PAMC 21.20). The Tentative Map must be approved unless the Council makes any of the following findings for denial (California Government Code Section 66474): 1. That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The site does not lie within a specific plan area and is consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. The land use designation in the area of the subdivision is multi-family residential. The proposed development is consistent with the land use and zoning designations of the site. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The map is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan policies: (1) Policy L-35 – Establish the South El Camino Real area as a well- designed compact, vital, Multi-neighborhood Center with diverse uses, a mix of one-one-, two- ,and three-story buildings, and a network of pedestrian-oriented streets and ways.; and the Comprehensive Plan land-use designation of multi-family residential. 3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The site can accommodate the proposed development. The site is adjacent to multi-family development. The site is relatively flat and regular in shape. The site is currently served by water, gas, wastewater, electric, and communication services. The site also has standard access for emergency service delivery. 4. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development: June 11, 2012 Page 3 of 4 (ID # 2921) This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The subdivision would be consistent with the site development regulations of the RM-30 zoning district. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The project is a currently developed infill site surrounded by development. 6. That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The subdivision will not cause serious public health problems. The resulting development will not cause a public health problem in that it is designed to provide access for emergency services, will supply necessary utility services, such as sanitation, and is designed per City and State standards to ensure public safety. 7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The subdivision of the existing parcels will not conflict with easements of any type, in that the subdivision is compatible with the emergency vehicle access and any utility easements that would be required to serve the proposed developments. The above findings are included in Attachment A. Environmental Review This project is categorically exempt from CEQA under CEQA Guideline No. 15332. Attachments: Attachment A: 382-384 Curtner Record of Land Use Action (PDF) June 11, 2012 Page 4 of 4 (ID # 2921) Prepared By: Steven Turner, Advance Planning Manager Department Head: Curtis Williams, Director City Manager Approval: ____________________________________ James Keene, City Manager Page 1 of 4 ACTION NO. _______ RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO OF LAND USE ACTION FOR 382 AND 384 CURTNER TENTATIVE MAP (Curtner Homes LP Applicant) On June 11, 2012, the City Council of the City of Palo Alto approved the Tentative Map to merge two parcels and create six residential condominium units, making the following findings, determination and declarations: SECTION 1. Tentative Map Findings. A legislative body of a city shall deny approval of a Vesting Tentative Map, if it makes any of the following findings (California Government Code Section 66474): 1. That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The site does not lie within a specific plan area and is consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. The land use designation in the area of the subdivision is multi-family residential. The proposed development is consistent with the land use and zoning designations of the site. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The map is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan policies: (1) Policy L-35 – Establish the South El Camino Real area as a well-designed compact, vital, Multi-neighborhood Center with diverse uses, a mix of one-one-, two-,and three-story buildings, and a network of pedestrian-oriented streets and ways.; and the Comprehensive Plan land-use designation of multi-family residential. 3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The site can accommodate the proposed development. The site is adjacent to multi-family development. The site is relatively flat and regular in shape. The site is currently served by water, gas, wastewater, electric, and communication services. The site also has standard access for emergency service delivery. 4. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development: Page 2 of 4 This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The subdivision would be consistent with the site development regulations of the RM-30 zoning district. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The project is a currently developed infill site surrounded by development. 6. That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The subdivision will not cause serious public health problems. The resulting development will not cause a public health problem in that it is designed to provide access for emergency services, will supply necessary utility services, such as sanitation, and is designed per City and State standards to ensure public safety. 7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The subdivision of the existing parcels will not conflict with easements of any type, in that the subdivision is compatible with the emergency vehicle access and any utility easements that would be required to serve the proposed developments. SECTION 2. Approval of Tentative Map. Tentative Map approval is granted by the City Council under Palo Alto Municipal Code (“PAMC”) Sections 21.13 and 21.20 and the California Government Code Section 66474, subject to the conditions of approval in Section 7 of this Record. SECTION 3. Final Map Approval. The Final Map submitted for review and approval by the City Council of the City of Palo Alto shall be in substantial conformance with Page 3 of 4 the Tentative Map prepared by Lea and Braze Engineering, Inc titled “Tentative Map Tract No. 8433 for Condominium Purposes” consisting of three pages dated May 24, 2012 (received May 25, 2012). A copy of this Tentative Map is on file in the Department of Planning and Community Environment. Within two years of the approval date of the Tentative Map, the subdivider shall cause the subdivision or any part thereof to be surveyed, and a Final Map, as specified in Chapter 21.08, to be prepared in conformance with the Tentative Map as conditionally approved, and in compliance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and PAMC Section 21.16 and submitted to the City Engineer (PAMC Section 21.16.010[a]). SECTION 4. Conditions of Approval. The project shall comply with the previous Conditions of Approval associated with the architectural review approvals (07PLN- 00000-00021—December 17, 2007 and 08PLN-00000-00070—May 1, 2008). SECTION 5. Term of Approval. Tentative Map. All conditions of approval of the Tentative Map shall be fulfilled prior to approval of a Final Map (PAMC Section 21.16.010[c]). Unless a Final Map is filed with the County Recorder, and all conditions of approval are fulfilled within a two-year period from the date of Tentative Map approval, or such extension as may be granted, the Tentative Map shall expire and all proceedings shall terminate. Thereafter, no Final Map shall be filed without first processing a Tentative Map (PAMC Section 21.16.010[d]). PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: _________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Director of Planning and Community Environment APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________ Page 4 of 4 Asst. City Attorney PLANS AND DRAWINGS REFERENCED: Those plans prepared by Lea & Braze Engineering, Inc. titled “Tentative Map, Tract 8433, for Condominium Purposes” consisting of three pages, dated May 24, 2012 (received May 25, 2012).