REPORT TO PLANNING AND DESIGN COMMISSION City of Sacramento

Transcription

1 REPORT TO PLANNING AND DESIGN COMMISSION City of Sacramento I Street, Sacramento, CA PUBLIC HEARING April 27, 2017 To: Members of the Planning and Design Commission Subject: The Greenbriar Project (P11-093) A request for the future development of residential, commercial, open space, and related uses on 577± acres within the Greenbriar Planned Unit Development. A. Environmental Determination: Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Greenbriar; B. Mitigation Monitoring Plan: Mitigation Monitoring Plan; C. Development Agreement between the City of Sacramento and The Greenbriar Project Owner LP; D. Amendments to the Greenbriar Finance Plan rescinding the 2008 Greenbriar Finance Plan (Resolution ) and adopting the proposed 2017 Greenbriar Finance Plan; E. Amendments to the 2035 General Plan land use diagram to change the land use designation for various parcels in accordance with the revised Greenbriar Planned Unit Development; F. Rezone various lots within the Greenbriar Planned Unit Development; G. Amendments to the Greenbriar Planned Unit Development Schematic Plan and Development Guidelines; H. Adopt the Greenbriar Mixed Income Housing Strategy and rescind the 2008 Greenbriar Inclusionary Housing Plan (Resolution ); I. Tentative Master Parcel Map to subdivide 577± acres into 63± master parcels; J. Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 312.7± gross acres into 1,284± parcels for phase 1 of the Greenbriar project; 1

2 K. Tentative Map Design Deviations for the proposed tentative maps for driveway depth, private alleys, dead-end street stubs, dead-end alleys, non-standard intersections, and non-standard street; and L. Site Plan and Design Review with deviations for the proposed tentative maps for lot size and lot depth. Location/Council District: South of Elkhorn Boulevard, West of State Highway 99, North of Interstate 5, and East of Lone Tree Road Assessor s Parcel Numbers: , -067, -068, -069, -070, -071, -076, -077, through -081, -083, -085, and -087 Council District: 1 Recommendation: Staff recommends the Planning and Design Commission forward to City Council a recommendation of approval for items A through L, based upon the findings of fact listed in Attachment 1. This recommendation is based upon the conclusion that overall the project is consistent with the previously approved Greenbriar project (M05-046/P05-069) and with adopted applicable policies and goals of the City s General Plan. City Council has final approval over items A through L above. Contact: Arwen Wacht, Associate Planner, (916) awacht@cityofsacramento.org Teresa Haenggi, Senior Planner, (916) , thaenggi@cityofsacramento.org Applicant: Drew Kusnick, Integral Communities, (925) Hartz Avenue, Suite 202, Danville, CA Owner: John Stanek, The Greenbriar Project Owner, LP, a Delaware Limited Partnership, (949) San Joaquin Plaza, Suite 100, Newport Beach, CA (The general partner for The Greenbriar Project Owner, LP is The Greenbriar Project Owner GP, LLC and the limited partners are Greenbriar Joint Venture Project, LP and North Natomas SAC Region, LP.) Planning and Wood Rodgers, (916) Engineering: 3301 C Street, Sacramento, CA

3 Subject: The Greenbriar Project (P11-093) April 27, 2017 Figure 1: Aerial of Project Site Summary: The applicant is requesting entitlements to allow for the future development of approximately 577± acres into 2,956± residential units (2,428± single-unit dwellings and 528± multi-unit dwellings), three commercial sites, open space/habitat buffers, open space/freeway buffers, six park sites, a community center, a lake/detention basin, a light rail station and park-and-ride facility, school site, and various landscape corridors and related facilities. This application consists of: 1) a modification to the Greenbriar development previously approved by the Planning Commission and City Council in 2008 (M05-046/P05-069); and 2) next stage entitlements to allow for the future development of this site. Modifications to Previously Approved Project. Several amendments and/or updates are required to the previously approved project to address their proposal: Replacing the 2008 Greenbriar Finance Plan (Resolution ) with an updated 2017 Greenbriar Finance Plan; 3

4 Subject: The Greenbriar Project (P11-093) April 27, 2017 Amendments / refinements to the 2035 General Plan land use diagram and zoning designations for consistency with the updated proposal; Revisions to the Greenbriar Planned Unit Development (PUD) Schematic Plan and Guidelines for consistency with the updated proposal; and Replacing the 2008 Greenbriar Inclusionary Housing Plan (Resolution ) with an updated 2017 Greenbriar Mixed Income Housing Strategy. Next Stage Entitlements. The next stage entitlements the applicant is requesting include: Development Agreement; Tentative Master Parcel Map; Tentative Subdivision Map for phase 1 of the Greenbriar development (north of the future location of Meister Way); Tentative Map Design Deviations; and Site Plan and Design Review with deviations for the proposed tentative maps. No house plans are proposed at this time. Future site plan and design review entitlements will be necessary prior to development of the residential, community center, and commercial portions of the site. Figure 2: Aerial of Project Site 4

5 Subject: The Greenbriar Project (P11-093) April 27, 2017 Background Information: On November 1, 2005, the City adopted various resolutions to initiate an amendment to the City s Sphere of Influence (SOI) and the annexation of the Greenbriar Farms area. On September 19, 2007, LAFCo approved the SOI amendments for the Greenbriar Farms Development (LAFC 10-05). On January 29, 2008, the City Council approved entitlements for the annexation and future development of a 577± acre master planned community, known as Greenbriar (M / P05-069). The approved entitlements allowed the potential development for the following: 2,991± dwelling units; 41± acres of parks; a 30± acre habitat buffer; a 40± acre detention basin/lake; 288,000± square feet of commercial, including a 7± acre retail/light rail station (LRT) site; a 28± acre freeway buffer with pedestrian/bike path; and a 10± acre elementary school site. On April 2, 2008, LAFCo approved the City of Sacramento Reorganization (Annexation and Related Detachment) of the Greenbriar territory (LAFC 02-08). Figure 3: Illustrative Land Use Plan for Previously Approved Greenbriar Project (M05-046/P05-069) The applicant is now requesting second-stage entitlements and refinements to the previous approval to allow for the future development of the Greenbriar Planned Unit 5

6 Subject: The Greenbriar Project (P11-093) April 27, 2017 Development (PUD) area. The current proposal would allow for: 2,956± residential units (2,428± single-unit dwellings and 528± multi-unit dwellings); 31± acres of parks; 30± acres of habitat buffer; a 41± acre detention basin/lake; 30± acres of commercial, including a 3± acre retail/light rail station (LRT) area; a 2± acre private community center site; 27± acres of freeway buffer with a pedestrian/bike path; and a 10± acre elementary school site. The applicant is proposing these refinements to the previous approval to allow for: additional larger residential lots; revisions to park sites to address recommendations from Parks; revisions to the multi-family parcels; and the addition of a community center. Figure 4: Currently Proposed Illustrative Land Use Plan (P11-093) The Greenbriar Development Project is a transit-oriented, mixed-density residential and retail/ commercial development proposed on the Greenbriar Project Site with associated infrastructure to be constructed on adjacent lands. The terms Greenbriar Development Project or proposed project refer to the project in its full scope, which includes construction of a mixed-use development on the Greenbriar Project Site, off-site infrastructure improvements, establishment of several habitat reserves, and implementation of the Greenbriar Conservation Strategy. The Greenbriar Conservation 6

7 Strategy includes the establishment of reserves and implementation of other proposed conservation measures that would increase mitigation and reserve sites in the Natomas Basin and will assure that the Greenbriar Project (with its conservation strategy) will not compromise the effectiveness of the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan. The Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan (NBHCP), approved by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife in 2003, establishes the overall conservation program for the development of a 17,500-acre portion of the Natomas Basin. The Greenbriar Project Site where the mixed-use development would be constructed and the Off-Site Improvement Lands where off-site infrastructure improvements would occur are located within the boundaries of the NBHCP Plan Area, but are not within the City of Sacramento or Sutter County Permit Areas, as defined by the NBHCP, where take of NBHCP Covered Species was previously authorized. As a result, the potential effects of the development on the Greenbriar Project Site and Off-Site Improvement Lands were not evaluated in the NBHCP. Because the Greenbriar Development Project would result in additional development and reserve establishment that was not addressed in the NBHCP, the Greenbriar Conservation Strategy establishes as part of the project description conservation measures incorporated into the Greenbriar Project to avoid and minimize impacts to Giant garter snake and the other State and Federally listed species covered in the NBHCP. The Greenbriar Conservation Strategy is designed to offset the impacts resulting from the Greenbriar Project and help achieve the NBHCP s goals and objectives. Public/Neighborhood Outreach and Comments: The proposal was routed to the following associations: Natomas Chamber of Commerce, Natomas Community Association (NCA), Natomas Park Master Association (NPMA), North Natomas Alliance (NNA), North Natomas Community Association (NNCA), North Natomas Community Coalition (NNCC), Terrace Park Neighborhood Association (TPNA), Environmental Council of Sacramento (ECOS), WalkSacramento, and Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates (SABA). The site was posted more than 10 days prior to the hearing and public notices for this hearing were mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the subject site. Staff received comments from the North Natomas Community Coalition (NNCC) (see Attachment 3). Agency Comments: Staff has received comments from various outside agencies on the subject project. City staff has included these comments as conditions of approval and/or as attachments to this report. Staff received a letter from the North Natomas Transportation Management Association (NNTMA) (see Attachment 4) and Sacramento County Department of Technology (see Attachment 5). Environmental Considerations: The City Council approved program-level entitlements for the Greenbriar Development Project in As part of that process, on January 29, 2008 the City Council certified the EIR for the project and adopted the Mitigation Monitoring Program (Resolution No ). The City and Sacramento 7

8 Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) served as co-lead agencies for the environmental document. Certification of the EIR was accompanied by adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP). The MMP remains in effect. The approvals in 2008 did not include development-level approvals. The project site has seen minimal activity since 2008, and no grading has occurred. As discussed below, the City has reviewed and updated the environmental review that was conducted for the Greenbriar project that was approved in The City has prepared an Addendum to the certified Final Environmental Impact Report, which concludes that the original EIR is adequate under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to identify and evaluate the physical changes in the environment that would occur with adoption of the modifications to the Greenbriar Project Description, including the Conservation Strategy and the implementation of the Greenbriar project. Three documents are included with the Addendum: Environmental Checklist, which discusses the physical effects of the project as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in relation to the original EIR. Effects Analysis, which discusses the potential effects of the Greenbriar project and its Conservation Strategy on the operating conservation program of the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan (NBHCP). Conservation Strategy, which identifies the actions included in the Greenbriar Project that the project proponent will take to satisfy its obligations to avoid and minimize take of protected species, including establishment of reserves and other conservation measures. These documents were circulated for public comment and have been extensively discussed with the United Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The documents may be reviewed online at Development/Planning/Environmental/Impact-Reports. Use of the EIR Certified in 2008 and the Addendum The current proposal requests entitlements that would allow development of the site. These are discretionary actions and require compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City may utilize the prior EIR, but must also determine (a) whether substantial changes in the project are proposed that would require major revisions to the EIR, (b) whether substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project would be undertaken have occurred, and (c) whether new information of substantial importance is available. Each of these inquiries focuses on whether the City identifies new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. The City also examines whether new mitigation measures, which the applicant refuses to implement, might be available. This process is set forth in CEQA Guidelines section

9 Consistent with the requirements of section 15162, the City has examined the current project proposal in light of the circumstances that now exist, information that is now available and potential mitigation measures. This examination is set forth in an Environmental Checklist that examines each of the environmental issue areas. Based on the Environmental Checklist the City has determined that none of the circumstances described in Section is present, and that only minor changes are required in the EIR that was previously certified for the Greenbriar project. Mitigation Measure 6.5-1, which requires coordination to determine the timing of construction of a new fire station that would serve the project site, can now be satisfied. The applicant and City have identified an off-site location for the fire station. The resulting change in the proposed project would include construction of approximately 30 single-family residences. These changes would not result in any significant effects not identified in the environmental document, and no recirculation is required. State and federal endangered species acts requirements The Greenbriar project site is located in the Natomas Basin, which is home to various animal and plant species protected under state and federal law as endangered or threatened species. Applicants for projects that could have an adverse effect on protected species (generally referred to as take ) must obtain approval from the state (California Department of Fish and Wildlife or CDFW) and the federal (United States Fish and Wildlife Service or USFWS) resource agencies authorizing the activities in question. Project impacts on biological resources, as a result, have been one of the primary areas of project review since the 2008 approval. The City obtained authorization in 2003 to undertake development in North Natomas. This authorization followed the adoption of the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan (NBHCP) in 2003 by the City of Sacramento, Sutter County, the USFWS and CDFW. The remaining party to the NBHCP was The Natomas Basin Conservancy (TNBC), the organization that has the responsibility of managing the NBHCP conservation program, including acquisition, management and operation of the habitat requirements under the plan. The NBHCP identifies 22 sensitive species that could be adversely affected by development within the Natomas Basin. The City has ongoing responsibilities under the NBHCP that include monitoring the plan s progress in protecting species, and enforcing avoidance and minimization measures identified in Chapter V of the NBHCP. The NBHCP is available for online review at the TNBC website at The NBHCP identified a land area in which the City could approve development, known as the City s Permit Area, comprising 8,050 acres. Within the Permit Area private developers pay a fee to TNBC, and may then utilize the City s Incidental Take Permit (ITP) to demonstrate compliance with the state and federal laws protecting endangered species. The Greenbriar project area was not included within the City s Permit Area, and as part of the 2008 approval was required to demonstrate compliance with state 9

10 and federal law by adopting its own habitat conservation plan. (Mitigation Measure ) The habitat conservation plan referenced in Mitigation Measure anticipated that the applicant would proceed under section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). Following discussions with the City, USFWS and CDFW, the applicant proposed moving forward under section 7 of the ESA. That process has included identification of a federal permit that would be required for the project (a permit to fill waters of the United States under the Clean Water Act) and a federal permitting agency (the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or ACOE). The ACOE, consistent with the requirements of the ESA consulted with USFWS to determine whether issuance of the permit would have an adverse effect on any protected species. This process eventually resulted in the preparation of a biological assessment (BA) and, when approved, would result in the issuance by the US Fish and Wildlife Service of its biological opinion (BO) and its terms and conditions. As part of this effort, the Greenbriar applicant proposed a conservation strategy with a goal of minimizing impacts on protected species. This conservation strategy calls for the establishment of approximately 557 acres of on- and off-site reserves, representing a 1.03:1 ratio (area preserved: area impacted). The Project s reserves will be enhanced, preserved, and managed in perpetuity. Land uses at the reserves will be consistent with the intended habitat types and ratios of the NBHCP reserve system, which are composed of 50 percent rice, 25 percent managed marsh, and 25 percent upland. The Greenbriar Development Project proposes acres of rice (46.6%), acres of managed marsh (25.8%), and acres of upland habitat (27.6%). The development and implementation of the conservation strategy, and the requirements imposed by the ACOE as part of its review, biological opinion and permitting, satisfy the substantive purposes of the original mitigation requiring a habitat conservation plan. The City discussed this mitigation measure in detail in the Environmental Checklist discussion as part of its circulation of the documents for public comment. Project effects on the NBHCP Conservation Strategy The NBHCP applies to the 53,537-acre land area of the Natomas Basin. While the NBHCP takes the entire land area into consideration, only the City of Sacramento and the County of Sutter rely on the NBHCP to support the incidental take permit requirements of state and federal law. The NBHCP implements an Operating Conservation Program to adequately minimize and mitigate the effects of take of covered species due to development authorized by the NBHCP for the City of Sacramento and County of Sutter. One aspect of the strategy was to limit development by the City and County of Sutter to 17,500 acres when combined with development within Metro Air Park, which has its own HCP. 10

11 The parties to the NBHCP entered into an Implementation Agreement (IA) as part of the NBHCP adoption process. One of the provisions of the IA requires the City to undertake a reevaluation of the Plan and Permits, a new effects analysis, potential amendments and/or revisions to the Plan and Permits, a separate conservation strategy and issuance of Incidental Take Permits for that additional development (NBHCP, IA, section 3.1(a)) The City has completed these required analyses, which were circulated with the Addendum for public review and comment. The City received written comments from The Natomas Basin Conservancy and Metro Air Park, which have been included with the staff report. Environmental staff have participated in project review, discussions with agencies, work of the consultants and circulation of the various documents discussed above for public comment. The Manager of Environmental Planning Services has determined, following this review, that the Addendum is the appropriate environmental document required by CEQA. Policy Considerations Flood Hazard Zone: State Law (SB 5) and Planning and Development Code chapter require that the City must make specific findings prior to approving certain entitlements for projects within a flood hazard zone. The purpose is to ensure that new development will have protection from a 200-year flood event or will achieve that protection by The project site is within a flood hazard zone and is an area covered by SAFCA s Improvements to the State Plan of Flood Control System, and specific findings related to the level of protection have been incorporated as part of this project. Even though the project site is within a flood hazard zone, the local flood management agency, SAFCA, has made adequate progress on the construction of a flood protection system that will ensure protection from a 200-year flood event or will achieve that protection by This is based on the SAFCA Urban level of flood protection plan, adequate progress baseline report, and adequate progress toward an urban level of flood protection engineer s report that were accepted by City Council Resolution No on June 21, General Plan Consistency: The proposal is consistent with the following 2035 General Plan goals and policies: Land Use (LU): GOAL LU 1.1 Growth and Change. Support sustainable growth and change through orderly and well-planned development that provides for the needs of existing and future residents and businesses, ensures the effective and equitable provision of public services, and makes efficient use of land and infrastructure. GOAL LU 1.2 Sustainable Sacramento Strategy. Support statewide and regional effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, fund transportation improvements, and meet housing needs. 11

12 GOAL LU 2.1 City of Neighborhoods. Maintain a city of diverse, distinct, and wellstructured neighborhoods that meet the community s need for complete, sustainable, and high-quality living environments, from the historic downtown core to wellintegrated new growth areas. LU Complete and Well-Structured Neighborhoods. The City shall promote the design of complete and well-structured neighborhoods whose physical layout and land use mix promote walking to services, biking, and transit use; foster community pride; enhance neighborhood identity; ensure public safety; are familyfriendly and address the needs of all ages and abilities. LU Transit-Oriented Development. The City shall actively support and facilitate mixed-use retail, employment, and residential development around existing and future transit stations. LU Development along Freeways. The City shall promote high-quality development character of buildings along freeway corridors and protect the public from the adverse effects of vehicle-generated air emissions, noise, and vibration, using techniques as: Requiring extensive landscaping and trees along the freeway fronting elevation. Establish a consistent building line, articulating and modulating building elevations and heights to create visual interest. Include design elements that reduce noise and provide for proper filtering, ventilation, and exhaust of vehicle air emissions. LU Walkable Blocks. The City shall require new development and reuse and reinvestment project to create walkable, pedestrian-scaled blocks, publicly accessible mid-block and alley pedestrian routes where appropriate, and sidewalks appropriately scaled for the anticipated pedestrian use. GOAL LU 4.2 Suburban Neighborhoods. Encourage the creation of more complete and well-designed suburban neighborhoods that provide a variety of housing choices and mix of uses that encourage walking and biking. GOAL LU 5.2 Suburban Centers. Promote more attractive, pedestrian-friendly suburban centers that serve surrounding neighborhoods and businesses at local gathering places where people shop and socialize. GOAL LU 5.4 Regional Commercial Centers. Establish major mixed-use activity centers through development and reinvestment in existing regional commercial centers that are vibrant, regionally-accessible destinations where people live, work, shop, and congregate in a mix of retail, employment, entertainment, and residential uses. LU Mixed-Use Neighborhoods. The City shall require neighborhood design that incorporates a compatible and complementary mix of residential and 12

13 nonresidential (e.g. retail, parks, schools) uses that address the basic daily needs of residents and employees. GOAL LU 9.1 Open Space, Parks, and Recreation. Protect open space for its recreational, agricultural, safety, and environmental value and provide adequate parks and open space areas throughout the city. Housing (H): GOAL H 1.2 Housing Diversity. Provide a variety of quality housing types to encourage neighborhood stability. H Mix of Uses. The City shall actively support and encourage mixed-use retail, employment, and residential development around existing and future transit stations, centers, and corridors. H A Range of Housing Opportunities. The City shall encourage a range of housing opportunities for all segments of the community. H Housing Type Distribution. The City shall promote an equitable distribution of housing types for all income groups throughout the city and promote mixed income neighborhoods rather than creating concentrations of below-market housing in certain areas. GOAL H 2.1 Adequate Sites. Provide adequate housing sites and opportunities for all households. GOAL H 2.2 Development. Assist in creating housing to meet current and future needs. Mobility (M): GOAL M 1.2 Multimodal System. Increase multimodal accessibility (i.e., the ability to complete desired personal or economic transactions via a range of transportation modes and routes) throughout the city and region with an emphasis on walking, bicycling, and riding transit. M Direct Access to Stations. The City shall ensure that development projects located in the Central City and within ½ mile walking distance of existing and planned light rail stations provide direct pedestrian and bicycle access to the station area, to the extent feasible. M Light Rail Extensions and Enhancements. The City shall support the extension of light rail service to Sacramento International Airport, further extension in South Sacramento, and other improvements to facilities such as the 65 th Street, Royal Oaks, and Swanston stations. 13

14 GOAL M 4.2 Complete Streets. The City shall plan, design, operate and maintain all streets and roadways to accommodate and promote safe and convenient travel for all users pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and persons of all abilities, as well as freight and motor vehicle drivers. Utilities (U): GOAL U 1.1 High-Quality Infrastructure and Services. Provide and maintain efficient, high-quality public infrastructure and services throughout the city. U Joint-Use Facilities. The City shall support the development of joint-use water, drainage, and other utility facilities as appropriate in conjunction with schools, parks, golf courses, and other suitable uses to achieve economy and efficiency in the provision of services and facilities. Education, Recreation, and Culture (ERC): GOAL ERC 2.2 Parks, Community and Recreation Facilities and Services. Plan and development parks, community and recreation facilities, and services that enhance community livability; improve public health and safety; are equitably distributed throughout the city; and are responsive to the needs and interests of residents, employees, and visitors. Environmental Resources (ER): GOAL ER 2.1 Natural and Open Space Protection. Protect and enhance open space, natural areas, and significant wildlife and vegetation in the city as integral parts of a sustainable environment within a larger regional ecosystem. The proposal is for a complete and well-structured neighborhood whose physical layout and land use mix promote walking to services, biking, and transit use; fosters community pride; enhances neighborhood identity; ensures public safety; is familyfriendly and addresses the needs of all ages and abilities. The project, as proposed, supports sustainable growth and change through orderly and well-planned development that provides for the needs of existing and future residents and businesses, ensures the effective and equitable provision of public services, and makes efficient use of land and infrastructure. The proposal also supports statewide and regional efforts to fund transportation improvements and meet housing needs. Staff believes the proposal is consistent with the intent of the applicable goals and policies of the 2035 General Plan. ENTITLEMENT REVIEW: Tentative Master Parcel Map Map Design: A master parcel map subdivides large tracts of land into smaller parcels for the purpose of later selling or otherwise transferring the parcels for further 14

15 Subject: The Greenbriar Project (P11-093) April 27, 2017 subdivision or for the purpose of securing financing, together with planning and construction of infrastructure elements. The applicant is proposing a tentative master parcel map (Exhibit 8A) to subdivide 577± acres into 63± master parcels. Master parcels are created so that portion of the project can be sold off to individual builders and the associated infrastructure can be phased with individual lot development. Some of the master parcels (especially the residential lots) may be further subdivided into smaller buildable lots (as is the case with the Tentative Subdivision Map the applicant is proposing for Phase 1, which will be discussed below). Figure 5: Proposed Tentative Master Parcel Map 15

16 Circulation: The roadway that provides east-west circulation for this site is Elkhorn Boulevard to the north. State Highway 70/99 is adjacent to the property to the east and Interstate 5 is adjacent to the property to the south, but neither provides a direct connection to the property. Traffic Impact Analysis: The Greenbriar Project as currently proposed remains substantially the same as the previously approved project (M05-046/P05-069) in terms of land use patterns. Circulation impacts are anticipated to be similar to those described in the described in the circulation analyses prepared for the Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Report (SFEIR) and Final EIR. Some traffic operations would improve due to the reduced number of housing units and acreage for commercial development, but overall conclusions regarding impact level would remain the same. Therefore, the conclusions contained in the EIR remain valid and no further analysis is required. Transit: Sacramento Regional Transit (RT) has reviewed the project and has provided comments and conditions specific to providing for the future installation of a Light Rail corridor, station, and park and ride facility, and for future bus turnouts, stops, and/or shelters. Tentative Subdivision Map The applicant is proposing a Tentative Subdivision Map (Exhibits 8B and 8C) for Phase 1 of the Greenbriar project, located north of the future location of Meister Way. The tentative subdivision map proposes to subdivide approximately acres into 1,489 residential units (for 1,267 single-unit detached dwellings and 222 multi-unit dwellings), two park sites, two commercial sites, a SMUD substation lot, a community center lot, and various landscape corridors, open space, habitat buffers, freeway buffers, detention basin / lake, private alleys, and guest parking lots, as detailed below: Table 1: Tentative Subdivision Map Components Village/Lot Size of Parcels Zoning: Description: No.: (gross acre / net acre): Village / 2.6 R-1A-PUD 37 units (35 x 80 lots - alley) Village 2A 12.6 / 9.2 R-1-PUD 55 units (60 x 110 lots) Village 2B 13.3 / 10.2 R-1-PUD 63 units (60 x 110 lots) Village 3A 14.6 / 10.9 R-1-PUD 79 units (55 x 100 lots) Village 3B 8.2 / 5.9 R-1-PUD 43 units (55 x 100 lots) Village 4A 11.1 / 7.7 R-1A-PUD 62 units (50 x 100 lots) Village 4B 6.6 / 4.7 R-1A-PUD 38 units (50 x 100 lots) Village 5A 12.2 / 8.6 R-1A-PUD 74 units (45 x 100 lots) Village 5B 11.5 / 8.4 R-1A-PUD 77 units (45 x 100 lots) Village / 4.0 R-1A-PUD 52 units (35 x 90 lots alley) Village 7A 8.3 / 5.5 R-1A-PUD 72 units (35 x 90 lots alley) Village 7B 4.8 / 3.1 R-1A-PUD 39 units (35 x 90 lots alley) Village / 6.1 R-1A-PUD 62 units (41 x 90 lots) 16

17 Village / 12.3 R-1A-PUD 124 units (41 x 90 lots) Village 10A 8.8 /5.8 R-1A-PUD 85 units (41 x 68 lots) Village 10B 5.4 / 3.6 R-1A-PUD 51 units (41 x 68 lots) Village / 5.7 R-1A-PUD 73 units (41 x 68 lots) Village 12A 10.5 / 7.4 R-1A-PUD 63 units (50 x 100 lots) Village 12B 8.8 / 6.4 R-1A-PUD 55 units (50 x 100 lots) Village / 4.9 R-1A-PUD 63 units (35 x 80 lots alley) Lot A 8.2 / 7.4 R-3-PUD 222 units (multi-family residential) Lot B 13.3 / 12.4 A-OS-PUD Community Park Lot C 17.0 / 16.4 SC-PUD Regional Shopping Center Lot D 13.1 / 10.7 SC-PUD Regional Shopping Center Lot E 2.7 / 1.4 SC-PUD Paseo Lot F 2.9 / 2.0 A-OS-PUD Neighborhood Park Lot G 0.0 / Paseo Lot H 0.0 / Paseo Lot I 10.5 / 10.5 A-OS-PUD Detention Basin / Lake Lot J 9.3 / 9.3 A-OS-PUD Detention Basin / Lake Lot K-N 0.0 / 0.3 R-1-PUD / R-1A-PUD Landscape Lot O 1.4 / 1.0 R-3-PUD SMUD Substation Lot P-Z & AA- R-1-PUD / 0.0 / 1.5 CC R-1A-PUD Landscape Lot DD & EE 0.0 / 0.2 R-1A-PUD Guest Parking Lot FF-HH 0.0 / 1.4 R-1A-PUD / Landscape SC-PUD Lot II 9.1 / 9.1 A-OS-PUD Open Space / Freeway Buffer Lot JJ 14.9 / 14.9 A-OS-PUD Open Space / Habitat Buffer Lot KK-SS 0.0 / 3.2 R-1A-PUD Private Alley Lot TT 3.2 / 1.9 A-OS-PUD Community Center Lot UU-XX 0.0 / 0.4 R-1A-PUD Guest Parking Roads 16.5 / Roads Total Phase / ,489 dwelling units 17

18 Subject: The Greenbriar Project (P11-093) April 27, 2017 Figure 6: Proposed Tentative Subdivision Map Vehicular Circulation and Parking: The project site is bounded by Elkhorn Boulevard and farmland (County) to the north, rural residences and Metro Air Park (County) to the west, Interstate 5 to the south and State Highway 70/99 to the east. The project site is accessed from Elkhorn Boulevard, which ranges from a two to four-lane roadway that runs east/west along the north side of the property. Elkhorn Boulevard continues westward through Metro Air Park (MAP) and ends at Power Line Road also continues eastward until it turns into Greenback Lane as it crosses Interstate 80. The ultimate build-out of Elkhorn Boulevard will be for a six-lane roadway (three lanes in both directions), a landscape median, on-street bike lanes, separated sidewalks, and landscape corridors / public utility easements (P.U.E.s). 18

19 Subject: The Greenbriar Project (P11-093) April 27, 2017 Figure 7: Proposed Elkhorn Boulevard Street Section The proposed development of Meister Way from Metro Air Park (to the west) to across State Highway 70/99 into North Natomas (to the east) is proposed as a four-lane roadway (two lanes in both directions) with on-street bike lanes, on-street parking on one side of the roadway, separated sidewalks, a median, 12.5 P.U.E.s, and 40 light rail corridor on one side. Variations of the roadway are provided where Meister Way crosses the habitat buffer into Metro Air Park to the west and also as Meister Way begins to turn into a flyover over State Highway 70/99 and land in North Natomas to the east. Figure 8: Proposed Meister Way Street Section Various other entry, collector, residential and private alleys are provided through the Greenbriar project site. All proposed public streets and private alleys will be constructed to City standards, except for the standards detailed in the applicant s request for Tentative Map Design Deviations, which is discussed later in this report. Pedestrian Circulation: Separated sidewalks per the City s Pedestrian Friendly standards are proposed at throughout the project site. The applicant shall install a bicycle/pedestrian trail within the landscape corridor and freeway buffer area adjacent to Interstate 5 to the south and State Highway 70/99 to the east, that will also be a joint 19

20 Subject: The Greenbriar Project (P11-093) April 27, 2017 use with the proposed maintenance road for the SMUD 69kV lines within this corridor (see Exhibit 8D). The location, access points and design of the bicycle/pedestrian trails shall be to the satisfaction of the applicable City departments and agencies with easements within the freeway buffer area. Figure 9: Open Space / Freeway Buffer Joint Use Section Adjacent to Master Parcel 42 Walls and Fencing: A six-foot masonry wall is proposed on the south side of Elkhorn Boulevard, adjacent to the proposed backyards of the single-unit dwelling (west of the main entry into the Greenbriar project area. A special wall to prevent interactions between the habitat buffer to the west and the proposed residences is proposed along the west side of the Greenbriar project area. Park Sites and Open Space: Various landscape lots, landscape corridors, parks and open space lots are planned for Phase 1 of this development. Lots B and F will serve as community and neighborhood park sites for public usage. Lot II will serve as an open space / habitat buffer. Lot JJ will serve as a joint use open space / freeway buffer, that will house several easements, including future 69 kv lines and maintenance road for SMUD, and bike/pedestrian path. Subdivision Review Committee: On March 21, 2017, the Subdivision Review Committee, with all ayes, voted to recommend approval of the proposed master tentative parcel map, tentative subdivision map, and tentative map design deviation, subject to conditions of approval. Staff finds that overall the Tentative Master Parcel Map and Tentative Subdivision Map are consistent with the policies of the General Plan (in that the proposed maps provide for a complete and well-structured neighborhood, whose physical layout and land use mix promote walking to services, biking, and transit use) and Title 17 of the City Code (as discussed in the Tentative Map Design Deviation and Site Plan and Design Review sections of this report). The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed and suited for the proposed density; the design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or 20

21 substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife and their habitat, and the design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use, of, property within the proposed subdivision. The project will not overly burden the sewer system, nor will it preclude future passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities. Tentative Map Design Deviation: The zoning administrator, planning and design commission, or city council, in accordance with the provisions of chapter of the Sacramento City Code, may grant, conditionally grant, or deny requests by a subdivider for modifications from the following requirements or standards for approval of a tentative map: 1. Chapter design standards for subdivisions; and 2. Chapter improvement requirements for subdivisions The applicant is requesting the approval of the following tentative map design deviations for their tentative maps: Driveway Depth: Reduce the maximum driveway depth from 20 to 18 for the 41 x 90 and 41 x 68 single-unit dwelling lots in Villages 8, 9, 10A, 10B, and 11 (see Exhibit 8C Section 6) Private Alleys: To allow private alleys for the proposed alley-loaded single-unit dwelling lot areas in Villages 1, 6, 7A, 7B, and 13 (See Exhibit 8C Section 1) Dead-End Street Stubs: To allow for several dead-end street stubs for the alleyloaded single-unit dwelling lot areas in Villages 1, 2B, 6, 7A, 7B, 11, 12A, and 13 (see Exhibit 8C Section 2) Dead-End Alleys: To allow for several dead-end alleys for the alley-loaded single-unit dwelling lot areas in Villages 1, 6, 7A, 7B, and 13 (see Exhibit 8C Section 3) Non-Standard Intersections: To allow for a non-standard intersection for a major collector residential roadway (Street 3 at Elkhorn Boulevard) (see Exhibit 8C Section 4) Non-Standard Street: To allow a non-standard street section for Street 39 in Villages 10A and 10B (see Exhibit 8C Section 5) The applicant has provided an overall map for the locations of the deviations (see Exhibit 8C) and written justifications for each of their request deviations, which are included with each of the listed above exhibits for each deviation. Public Works has reviewed the proposed tentative map design deviations and found them acceptable. 21

22 Although the property is 577± acres, the property is also surrounded by County land to the north and west, an open space / habitat buffer to the west, Interstate 5 to the south, and State Highway 70/99 to the east, and overall the project is constrained in how the proposed development can and cannot interact with these surrounding uses. In order to allow for the development of a master planned development that complies with the majority of the tentative map design standards and General Plan policies (providing a grid network, efficiency through density, alley access, parking and service access and design, transit-oriented development, walkable blocks, direct access to stations, and emergency access), staff believes these existing conditions make it undesirable in this case to conform to the strict application of these regulations. The cost to the subdivider of strict or literal compliance with the regulations is not the sole reason for granting these deviations. Overall the proposed alleys and nonstandard street sections are not proposed to cost less to construct than a standard section. The requested deviations for private alleys and non-standard street sections will allow for a wider variety of single-unit residential densities and product types. The deviations will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or be injurious to the other properties in the vicinity. The requested deviations will allow for the development of a wider variety of single-unit dwelling residences, minimize the number of visible garages and maximize the living space / eyes on the street in the proposed neighborhoods. The proposed design deviations will not create hazardous conditions. The requested design deviations are in accord with the intent and purposes of Title 17 and is consistent with the intent of the General Plan policies, in that the requested design deviations allow for the development of a master planned development that complies with the majority of the tentative map design standards and General Plan policies (providing a grid network, efficiency through density, alley access, parking and service access and design, transit-oriented development, walkable blocks, direct access to stations, and emergency access). Overall, the proposed development and requested design deviations are consistent with the goals and policies of the 2035 General Plan and the requirements of Title 17 of the Sacramento City Code. Site Plan and Design Review with Deviations The Greenbriar project is subject to the applicable requirements of the Planning and Development code, the Greenbriar Planned Unit Development (PUD) guidelines and the applicable Residential and Commercial Design Principles. The tentative subdivision map for phase 1 of the Greenbriar project requires an entitlement for Site Plan and Design Review, which addresses the overall layout and design of the site. Site Plan and Design Review includes the authority to approve or require deviations that are more or less restrictive than the applicable design guidelines, setback standards, and development standards. The applicant is requesting deviations 22

23 to the standard R-1A lot size for several of the Villages, as discussed below under Table 7: Development Standards. The applicant is not currently proposing construction of the commercial and residential lots. Future development of the commercial and residential properties shall be subject to the approval of subsequent Site Plan and Design Review applications. Lot Design: Details for the proposed residential and non-residential lots are noted in Tables 2 and 3 below: Table 2: Residential Lots Village # Lot Sizes Number of Units Net Acreage Proposed Density Allowed Density 1 35 x A 60 x B 60 x A 55 x B 55 x A 50 x B 50 x A 45 x B 45 x x A 35 x B 35 x x x A 41 x B 41 x x A 50 x B 50 x x Lot A Multi-Family Total 1,

24 The project also contains the following non-residential parcels: Table 3: Other Lots Lot # Net Acreage Description Lot B 12.6 Community Park Lots C and D 16.4 and 10.7 Regional Shopping Center Lots E, G, and H 1.4, 0.3., 0.2 Paseo Lot F 2.0 Neighborhood Park Lots I and J 10.5 and 9.3 Lake / Detention Basin Lots K N, P-Z, AA- 3.3 Landscape CC, FF-HH and YY Lot O 1.0 SMUD Substation Lots DD, EE, and 0.6 Guest Parking UU-XX Lot II 9.1 Open Space / Freeway Buffer Lot JJ 14.8 Open Space / Habitat Buffer Lots KK-SS 3.2 Private Alleys Lot TT 1.9 Community Center The lot sizes, units and density are consistent with the proposed PUD Guidelines and Schematic Plan. The residential density is also consistent with the proposed Suburban Neighborhood Low Density, Suburban Neighborhood Medium Density, and Suburban Neighborhood High Density designations for the General Plan. The proposed singleunit dwelling lot dimensions are compared with development standards for the R-1 and R-1A zones and are noted in the table below: Village # Req. Req. Single-Unit Dwelling (R-1) zone Table 4: Development Standards Zoning Lot Size: Lot Width / Depth: Minimum of: Minimum of: 5,200 sq. ft. (int.); 52 (int.); 62 6,200 sq. ft. (corner) / 100 (corner) Single-Unit or Duplex Dwellings (R- 1A) zone Minimum of: 2,900 sq. ft. Minimum of: 20 (int.); 38 corner / 80 Deviation? 1 R-1A-PUD 2,800 sq. ft. 35 x 80 Yes (lot size) 2A/B R-1-PUD 6,600 sq. ft. 60 x 110 No 3A/B R-1-PUD 5,500 sq. ft. 55 x 100 No 4A/B R-1A-PUD 5,000 sq. ft. 50 x 100 No 5A/B R-1A-PUD 4,500 sq. ft. 45 x 100 No 6 R-1A-PUD 3,150 sq. ft. 35 x 90 No 7A/B R-1A-PUD 3,150 sq. ft. 35 x 90 No 8 R-1A-PUD 3,690 sq. ft. 41 x 90 No

25 Subject: The Greenbriar Project (P11-093) 9 10A/B 11 12A/B 13 R-1A-PUD R-1A-PUD R-1A-PUD R-1A-PUD R-1A-PUD 3,690 sq. ft. 2,788 sq. ft. 2,788 sq. ft. 5,000 sq. ft. 2,800 sq. ft. April 27, x x x x x 80 No Yes (lot size / depth) Yes (lot size / depth) No Yes (lot size) As shown in the chart above, only the proposed 35 x 80 and 41 x 68 lots will not meet the minimum lot size and/or lot depth for the R-1A zone. The typical development plans for both types of lots are shown below and demonstrate that the lots with proposed deviations for lot depth and/or size can accommodate a single-unit dwelling: Figure 10: Typical Development for 35 x 80 Lots Alley Loaded Garages 25

26 Subject: The Greenbriar Project (P11-093) April 27, 2017 Figure 11: Typical Development for 41 x 68 Lots The proposed development is consistent with the goals and policies of the 2035 General Plan policies, in that the proposal: provides for a complete and well-structured neighborhood, with a mix of uses; is consistent with existing master planned developments in the surrounding North Natomas area, while still promoting diversity in housing types and densities; provides transit-oriented development and encourages walking and biking; and protects and enhances existing and proposed open space. Overall, the proposed development is consistent with the single family residential design principles and the purpose and intent of the design guidelines and development standards of the proposed Greenbriar PUD Guidelines and Sacramento City Code. The proposed tentative subdivision map with the proposed deviations for lot sizes and depth will encourage a viable neighborhood of enduring value, encourages the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists, and this type of alternative design solution is encouraged, which is consistent with the design principles. The project has been analyzed by City departments and it is determined that as proposed and conditioned, all streets and other public access ways and facilities, parking facilities, and utility infrastructure will be adequate to serve the proposed development and comply with all applicable design guidelines and development standards. The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in that the project will provide a variety of single-unit dwellings, multi-unit dwellings, commercial sites that are compatible in size and height to the other existing developments in the North Natomas area. The development will provide additional housing and commercial uses for the adjacent Metro Air Park development, while maintain separations between the habitat area to the west, the farmland to the north, and the highways and freeways to the east and south. 26

27 The proposed development will ensure energy consumption is minimized and use of renewable energy sources is encouraged in that staff recommends that the project, to the extent possible, incorporate green building methods in the construction of the proposed structures. The proposed development is not detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, of welfare of persons residing, working, visiting, or recreating in the surrounding neighborhood and will not result in the creation of a nuisance in that: 1) the proposal provides a variety of residential products and density for people looking for senior, market rate, rental, and/or ownership housing for persons working or wanting to live in the neighborhood; 2) the proposed development has been designed to be compatible with the existing uses surrounding the property (habitat and Metro Airpark to the west, farmland to the north, and freeways/highways to the east and south); 3) the project will provide passive and active open space, parks, and landscaping for the future and existing residents in the overall area; and 4) the proposal will provide additional residential and commercial uses to the neighborhood, while supporting the future light rail station and providing additional bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicular connections through the area. Staff supports the lot size and depth deviations for these two proposed housing products and finds that overall the tentative master parcel map, tentative subdivision map, and tentative map design deviations are consistent with the intent of the applicable General Plan policies, Planning and Development Code requirements, and the proposed Greenbriar PUD Guidelines, in that: 1) the requested deviations are consistent with the intent of the minimum lot size and depth requirements for the R-1A zone in that the proposed single-unit dwelling lots will still provide the intended open area and minimum setbacks required for single-unit development in the R-1A zone; 2) overall, the proposal provides a variety of residential products and density for people looking for senior, market rate, rental, and/or ownership housing for persons working or wanting to live in the neighborhood; 2) the proposed development has been designed to be compatible with the existing uses surrounding the property (habitat and Metro Airpark to the west, farmland to the north, and freeways/highways to the east and south); 3) the project will provide passive and active open space, parks, and landscaping for the future and existing residents in the overall area; and 4) the proposal will provide additional residential and commercial uses to the neighborhood, while supporting the future light rail station and providing additional bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicular connections through the area. The applicant will be required to submit subsequent entitlement applications for Site Plan and Design Review for the future development of the residential and non-residential uses for Phase 1 of the Greenbriar project. The requested deviations will allow the efficient development of the subject site in a manner that is compatible with the proposed land uses and is consistent with the General Plan. Additional Site Plan and Design Review will be required for the development of these lots to ensure that setback and lot coverage requirements are met. Overall the proposed tentative maps meet the density of the General Plan 27

28 Subject: The Greenbriar Project (P11-093) April 27, 2017 designation and the design of the tentative maps are supported by the Subdivision Review Committee. Planned Unit Development (PUD) Schematic Plan and Guidelines: The applicant is requesting to amend the Greenbriar PUD Schematic Plan and Guidelines to reflect the current proposal. The PUD Guidelines Amendment will establish new specific development standards, such as lot coverage, setbacks, and additional development criteria to ensure orderly development within the PUD (Exhibit 6B). The proposed PUD Schematic Plan Amendment will address the refinements the applicant is proposing for the development (Exhibit 6A). The proposed PUD Schematic Plan and Guidelines Amendments are consistent with 2035 General Plan policies and the proposed designations, and the requirements of the Planning and Development Code for PUD Amendments. Therefore, staff is supportive of the proposed PUD Schematic Plan and Guideline Amendments. Figure 12: Proposed PUD Schematic Plan 28