The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About0006_1_PA 2016-107 - SRPage 1 of 4 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL To:Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From:Grant Yates, City Manager Prepared by: Damaris Abraham, Senior Planner Date:February 14, 2017 Subject:Planning Application No. 2016-107 (Cottage Lane)– A request by Frontier Communities for the approval of building design and construction of 41 single- family residential units. Recommendation adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2016-107 (RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2016-25) IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP); and, adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2016-107 (RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2016-25) PROVIDING BUILDING DESIGNS FOR 41 SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS, FOR TRACT MAP NO. 32996, LOCATED WITHIN THE COTTAGE LANE SPECIFIC PLAN. Background On August 23, 2005, the City Council approved the Cottage Lane Specific Plan (CLSP) and its related applications (Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) No. 2005-02, Tentative Tract Map (TTM) No. 32996, and Residential Design Review (RDR) No. 2005-06) which entitled an infill residential project on an approximately 12-acre site that included 48 detached single family residential units and a 20,000 square foot (SF) neighborhood park. Tract Map No. 32996 was finalized and recorded on December 14, 2006. Some improvements have already been put in place by the previous owner. Five of the lots (Lots 1, 2, 3, 48, and 49) have already been built out to completion and various easements have already been recorded. The current owner of the property has filed this application in order to continue with development of the remaining site as the previous design review application (RDR 2005-06) has expired. In addition, the applicant has prepared and submitted a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for this project to meet current development standards. As a result of the WQMP, Lots 24 and 25 will be utilized for the detention basin in addition to Lot 49. Page 2 of 4 On January 17, 2017, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed Project by a vote of 4-0. As part of their action, a Condition of Approval was added that requires plans for the private park to be submitted prior to the issuance of the 20th Certificate of Occupancy and construction to commence prior to the issuance of the 31st Certificate of Occupancy. Discussion Project Request and Location The applicant is requesting approval of Planning Application No. 2016-107 (Residential Design Review No. 2016-25) for the design and construction of 41 single-family residential units, preliminary plotting, conceptual wall and fence plan, including a new model home complex and related improvements (Project). The Project is located in Tract Map No. 32996, Lots 4 through 46, 49, 50, and 51 (APNs: 379-490-004 thru 010, 379-491-001 thru 039) located within the Cottage Lane Specific Plan (CLSP). The Project is located northwesterly of Riverside Drive, southeasterly of Machado Street, and northeasterly of Grand Avenue. Environmental Setting EXISTING LAND USE ZONING GENERAL PLAN Project Site Vacant Single Family Detached (SFD) - CLSP Specific Plan North Residential Single Family Residential (R-1)Low Medium Residential South Vacant High Density Residential (R-3)Medium Density Residential East School Public Institutional (PI)Public Institutional West Multi-Family The Village at Lakeshore Specific Plan Specific Plan Project Description Below is a description of the various design components and features of the proposed Project, including floor plans, architecture, preliminary plotting of production units, and the conceptual wall and fence plan. Floor Plans The Project proposes three (3) different single-family detached plans, as described below: Plan 1: Two-story 1,893 square foot units with three bedrooms; 2.5 baths; family room; dining room; kitchen; laundry; porch; loft; and two-car garage. As an option, the loft can be replaced with a fourth bedroom. Plan 2: Two-story 2,189 square foot units with four bedrooms; 3 baths; family room; dining room; kitchen; laundry; porch; loft; and two-car garage. As an option, the loft can be replaced with a fifth bedroom. Plan 3: Two-story 2,466 square foot units with four bedrooms; 3 baths; great room; living room; kitchen; laundry; porch; loft; and two-car garage. As an option, the loft can be replaced with a fifth bedroom. Page 3 of 4 The proposed Project will be developed with three (3) plans; Plan 1 will account for 12 units (29.3%), Plan 2 will account for 15 units (36.6%), and Plan 3 will account for 14 units (34.1%). The proposed plotting provides an appropriate mixture of plan and elevations types to ensure variety in the streetscape. Architecture and Treatments To provide variation in the models and floor plans, the proposed Project would offer three architectural styles and treatments, including Spanish, Traditional, and Craftsman Architectural Styles. The Spanish Style includes low profile “S” concrete roof tiles, Spanish style clay accent vent, accent color window and door trim, decorative exterior lights, and fiberglass shutters. The Traditional Style includes concrete flat tile roofs, brick accent columns and wainscot, accent color window and door trim, decorative exterior lights, and fiberglass shutters. The Craftsman’s Style includes concrete flat tile roofing, store accent columns and wainscot, 6x12 wood corbels, accent color window and door trim, decorative exterior lights and fiberglass shutters. Lots with elevations visible from public view will have additional features and treatments. Examples of these enhancements include additional wood shutters, and enhanced windowsills and treatment. Model Home Complex The proposed model home complex will feature Plans 1, 2 and 3 and will be located on lots 4, 5 and 6. The temporary sales trailer and parking will be on lots 7 and 8. The proposed complex provides a designated handicap access space, full landscape and hardscape improvements, trees, and shrubs. Conceptual Wall and Fence Plan The Conceptual Wall and Fence Plan for the project shows walls and fences that are consistent with the CLSP. Perimeter walls will be decorative block as outlined in the CLSP. Landscaping The proposed landscaping plan has been designed to complement the different architectural styles. The proposed landscaping has been designed to meet all water efficiency standards. Analysis The proposed Project has been reviewed for consistency with the General Plan, the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), and the CLSP. The proposed project meets all required development standards as identified in the CLSP. The CLSP was subject to a consistency finding with the General Plan prior to adoption. The proposed project is consistent with the provisions of the CLSP and is therefore found to be consistent with the General Plan. The Design Review Committee that includes staff from Planning, Building and Safety, Fire, and Engineering have reviewed the proposed Project, and have conditioned the Project so as to Page 4 of 4 mitigate any concerns. The Project’s architecture, landscaping, walls, and fences have resulted in a well-designed residential project. Environmental Determination Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, staff has determined the proposed Project would not have a significant effect on the environment and no new environmental documentation is necessary because all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). All potentially significant impacts have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to the earlier MND and none of the conditions described in Section 15162 exist. MND No. 2005-02 prepared for CLSP and TTM 32996 was adopted by the City Council on August 23, 2005. The proposed Project is consistent with the CLSP and TTM 32996 and does not conflict with the findings and discussions contained in MND No. 2005-02. No substantial changes which require major revisions to the MND exist and no new information of substantial importance which require revisions to the earlier MND exist. Therefore, no further environmental documentation is necessary. Fiscal Impact The time and costs related to processing this Project have been covered by the Developer Deposit paid for by the applicant. No General Fund budgets have been allocated or used in the processing of this application. The approval of the Project does not fiscally impact the City’s General Fund. Mitigation Measures to protect the City fiscally have already been included in the Conditions of Approval. Exhibits A – MSHCP Resolution B – RDR Resolution C – Conditions of Approval D – Vicinity Map E – Aerial Map F – Design Review Package