Laserfiche WebLink
SPR No. 2017-09/DBA No. 2017-02 <br />May 21, 2018 <br />Page 4 <br />preempted from denying the Density Bonus Agreement application. Although the City has analyzed <br />the project and has identified several areas of concern, the conditions of approval proposed for the <br />project are intended to address any of the project's potential impacts. <br />Background <br />The Metro East Mixed Use overlay district was adopted in 2007 as a result of interest in developing <br />mixed-use residential and commercial projects in its project area. The regulating plan, which <br />establishes land uses and development standards, allows a variety of housing and commercial <br />projects, including mixed-use residential communities, live/work units, hotels, and offices. Since its <br />adoption, one mixed-use project at 1901 East First Street has been constructed and is occupied. <br />Another affordable rental residential project by the same developer at 2222 East First Street was <br />entitled in September 2017, and a market -rate mixed-use development at 200 North Cabrillo Park <br />Drive is currently entitled. <br />The California Density Bonus law allows developers proposing five or more residential units to seek <br />increases in base density for providing on-site housing units in exchange for providing affordable <br />units on site. To help make constructing on-site affordable units feasible, the law allows developers <br />to seek up to three incentives/concessions and an unlimited number of waivers, which are <br />essentially variances from development standards that would help the project be built without <br />significant burden and without detriment to public health. The first version of the Density Bonus <br />Law was adopted in 1979 and has since been amended at various times. Recent revisions allow <br />affordable housing developers to request incentives/concessions and/or waivers for 100 -percent <br />affordable developments, even if they do not require a numerical density bonus. Moreover, in early <br />2017, the law was amended to restrict the ability of local jurisdictions to require studies to 'justify" <br />the density bonus and requested incentives/waivers and places the onus on local jurisdictions to <br />prove that the incentives/concessions or waivers are not financially warranted. <br />Analysis of the Issues <br />Section 8 of the MEMU regulating plan, Implementation, requires the Planning Commission to <br />review an application for development subject to the provisions of the overlay district. Upon review <br />of the required Site Plan Review (SPR) application, the Planning Commission may take the <br />following actions: approve, approve with conditions, or deny the SPR. The City's Development <br />Review Committee has reviewed the project and finds that it is incompliance with the majority of <br />development standards contained within the MEMU regulating plan, with the exception of the four <br />development standard deviations requested by the applicant indicated in this report. <br />In addition, Section 41-1607 requires an application for a density bonus agreement containing <br />"deviations" (incentives/concessions and/or waivers) to be approved by the Planning Commission. <br />The following subsections analyze the applicant's request for both the Site Plan Review and the <br />Density Bonus Agreement applications. <br />Table 4: Analysis of the Requested Incentives/Concessions (3) and Waiver (1) <br />Standard I Analysis <br />65C-6 <br />