Community Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA (707)

Transcription

1 Community Development Department Planning Division 1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660 Napa, CA (707) PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 23, 2014 AGENDA ITEM 8.B: UP, DR VINO BELLO TRAILER EXTENSION III I. GENERAL INFORMATION PROJECT SUMMARY: Request for a two-year extension on the use of a timeshare sales trailer at the Vino Bello Timeshare Resort. LOCATION OF 865 Bordeaux Way PROPERTY: APN GENERAL PLAN: ZONING: CP-720, Corporate Park IP-A:AC, Industrial Park: Airport Compatibility overlay APPLICANT: Wyndham Worldwide Phone: (407) c/o Ted Hunter 6277 Sea Harbor Drive Orlando, FL STAFF PLANNER: Kevin Eberle, Senior Planner Phone: (707) LOCATION MAP

2 Vino Bello Trailer Extension III # II. BACKGROUND AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The following is a history of the project site as it relates to this application: April 2004 May 2006 November 2006 Planning Commission approves a 182-unit timeshare hotel. Staff approves Administrative Permit # for a temporary timeshare sales trailer for one year ending on May 1, Applicant submits Use Permit Application # to extend use of trailer for five years. In March 2007, the Planning Commission approves the Use Permit, but limits its use for three additional years rather than five. Applicant appeals Planning Commission action to City Council, who approves use of trailer for five years through June 20, March 2012 Staff approves a minor amendment to Use Permit # extending the use to June 20, In that approval letter, the applicant is advised that any further extension requests would require Planning Commission approval, and staff would not support any further extensions. On July 9, 2013, the applicant submitted this use permit application to extend the use of the sales trailer two years through June 20, The applicant has indicated in his attached Project Description that it is their intent to construct a permanent sales trailer building as part of the future expansion of the Meritage Hotel. That expansion is being planned for the vacant 9-acre property owned by the Meritage Hotel across Bordeaux Way to the north. Although staff has performed a preliminary review of a conceptual plan for that project, no formal application has been submitted at this time. III. PROJECT CONTEXT The Resort is located within the Napa Valley Commons corporate park adjacent to the 323-room Meritage Hotel. The Resort shares certain facilities with the Meritage Hotel including parking and guest reception. Surrounding land uses include State Highways 221 and 29 to the east and south, the Meritage Hotel to the west, and vacant industrial land to the north. The 3,529 square foot modular building is situated between the timeshare buildings and the existing parking lot adjacent to Bordeaux Way in an area which was proposed for landscaping on the original hotel plan. The building has a flat roof and stucco finish.

3 Vino Bello Trailer Extension III # SITE PLAN IV. ANALYSIS A. General Plan The property has a General Plan designation of CP-720, Corporate Park. This designation allows for a variety of manufacturing, warehousing, office, public and quasipublic uses, and similar compatible uses in a campus like setting. Support commercial uses such as hotels are allowed on a limited basis. The General Plan Land Use Element states that [d]evelopment in the [Corporate Park] designation shall have integrated design requirements including extensive landscaping and unifying design features. The low quality design of this building is incompatible with the high quality hotel design on the same property. It lacks most of the quality features found on the hotel building including articulated facades, exterior window framing, and pitched roofs. Goal LU-5 of the General Plan is [t]o encourage attractive, well-located commercial development to serve the needs of Napa residents, workers and visitors. Staff believes that the low quality appearance of this modular building is inconsistent with this goal. B. Specific Plan The project site falls within the Airport North/ Bedford Industrial Park Specific Plan. The Specific Plan identifies this property as within Tract IP-A(H). Tract IP-A(H) allows for professional and business offices, research and development, light industrial uses, retail and service uses primarily to service the industrial park, and hotel and recreation facilities primarily to serve the industrial park. The timeshare sales trailer would be considered an ancillary use to the timeshare hotel.

4 Vino Bello Trailer Extension III # The Specific Plan states the following: Tract A Development Areas are located at the principal entrances to the project where they are the most visible both to visitors to the project and the City of Napa. Tract A Development Areas will require the highest standard of site planning, architecture and landscaping and will generally attract business and professional office uses. Staff believes the proposed continued use of the modular sales building does not reflect the highest standard of architecture. C. Zoning The project site is zoned IP-A: AC, Industrial Park: Airport Compatibility Overlay District. The IP-A zoning district is intended to provide for offices, research and development, light industrial and limited hotel accommodations and retail and service uses primarily serving the industrial park. Hotels are identified as a conditional use in the IP-A District. The timeshare sales trailer would be considered an ancillary use to the timeshare hotel. Since the hotel is a conditional use, the modification of the hotel site plan with the addition of what now has become a long-term timeshare sales office would require use permit approval. It is not possible to approve this use under the Temporary Use provisions of the Code in Section because it defines temporary uses as lasting generally 3 months or less. D. Design Review The modular building has a flat roof and stucco exterior. The entrance is located on the north side under a large trellis. The building has a horizontal trim band, along with trim near the windows and a large cornice at the roof edge. Several air conditioner units protrude from the back (south) wall of the building. The building is painted a light yellow with white trim to match the existing timeshare buildings. The area adjacent to the building has been landscaped. The project site does not fall within the area subject to the Soscol Corridor/Downtown Riverfront Design Guidelines; however, the City Council has directed staff to apply the design principles within the Guidelines to other commercial projects as appropriate. The intent of the Guidelines is to ensure a high quality of design. Staff has reviewed the project for consistency with the Guidelines, and has identified the following areas of inconsistency: Every building should have a defined base. The building does not have an architectural base element. Recessed entries are recommended. The building has a flush entry.

5 Vino Bello Trailer Extension III # Glass should be inset a minimum of 3 inches from the exterior wall, especially on stucco buildings. The windows are inexpensive in appearance, and are flush mounted. Roofs should provide visual interest. recommended. Peaked gable-end roofs are generally The building has a flat roof, which is inconsistent with this guideline and with the design of the hotel buildings. Side and rear building facades should have a level of trim and finish compatible with the front façade. Although the facades are similar, the rear façade has several, large unattractive wallmounted air conditioning units which are highly visible to hotel guests. FRONT OF MODULAR WITH HOTEL IN BACKGROUND E. Other Issues Besides the design issues with building, there are other issues related to public safety. The building lacks fire sprinklers which would be required for this type of use. The applicant was initially allowed to establish the use in a building without fire sprinklers, because it was going to be a temporary use. At this point, the City Building Official has indicated that the use can no longer be considered temporary, and if allowed to continue, the building would have to be retrofitted with fire sprinklers.

6 Vino Bello Trailer Extension III # F. Environmental Review Projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section of the CEQA Guidelines. V. PUBLIC NOTICE Notice of the public hearing was provided by US Postal Service on January 10, 2014 to all property owners within a 500-foot radius of the subject property. Notice of the public hearing was also published in the Napa Valley Register on January 10, 2014 and provided to people previously requesting notice on the matter, at the same time the notice was provided to the newspaper for publication. Legal notice included a general explanation of the matter to be considered and any related permits, identification of the location of the property involved where site specific, a description of the date, time and place of the public hearing, the identity of the hearing body, and a statement consistent with the Code of Civil Procedure regarding the time limit to commence any legal challenge and matters that may be raised by such challenge. VI. REQUIRED FINDINGS A. Use Permit The proposed project does not meet all of the following required findings for approval of the use permit: 1) The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, applicable specific plans, the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district and overlay district in which the site is located. The proposed continued use of this unattractive modular building is inconsistent with Goal LU-5 of the General Plan to encourage attractive, well-located commercial development to serve the needs of Napa residents, workers and visitors. The project is also inconsistent with the stated intent in the Airport North/ Bedford Industrial Park Specific Plan for Tract A Development Areas to have the highest standard of architecture. 2) The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, or to the general welfare of the City. The continued use of this unattractive building results in detrimental effects to the public welfare in terms of lowering the quality of the built environment in the City. 3) The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance would allow for the possibility of this use subject to the discretionary approval of a use permit and a design review permit by the Planning Commission.

7 Vino Bello Trailer Extension III # B. Design Review The proposed project does not meet all of the following required findings for approval of the design review permit: 1) The project design is in accord with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan design policies. The proposed continued use of this unattractive modular building is inconsistent with Goal LU-5 of the General Plan to encourage attractive, well-located commercial development to serve the needs of Napa residents, workers and visitors. The project is also inconsistent with the stated intent in the Airport North/ Bedford Industrial Park Specific Plan for Tract A Development Areas to have the highest standard of architecture. 2) The project design is consistent with applicable Design Review Guidelines adopted by the City Council. The project is inconsistent with several design guidelines of the Soscol Corridor/Downtown Riverfront Design Guidelines as identified in the January 23, 2014 Planning Commission staff report. 3) The design review permit is in accord with provisions of this Title and will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity of the development site, or to the public health, safety or general welfare. The continued use of this unattractive building results in detrimental effects to the public welfare in terms of lowering the quality of the built environment in the City. VII. STAFF COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION Now that this building has been in place for more than seven years, it can no longer be considered temporary. After the approval of two subsequent extensions of this use beyond its initial one-year approval, staff has no expectation that the applicant would be ready to remove it in two years. As discussed above, the project is inconsistent with the General Plan, the Specific Plan and the Design Guidelines. Approval of this use permit and design review permit would set a precedent for a lowered design standard in the City s commercial and industrial areas. Based upon the project not meeting the required findings for approval of the use permit and design review permit, staff recommends denial of the applications. VIII. ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDATION Direct staff to return to the Commission with a resolution documenting findings from the record of the hearing to support approval of the proposed project. Continue the application with direction for project modifications.

8 Vino Bello Trailer Extension III # IX. REQUIRED ACTIONS Applications for final action by the Planning Commission: 1. Adopt a resolution denying the design review permit and use permit. DOCUMENTS ATTACHED 1. Draft Resolution 2. Applicant s Project Description 3. Aerial Photo 4. Plan Drawings Prepared by: Kevin Eberle Senior Planner c: Applicant

9 RESOLUTION NO. PC A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NAPA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DENYING A USE PERMIT AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT FOR THE VINO BELLO TRAILER EXTENSION III (PL ) (APN ) WHEREAS, Ted Hunter has submitted an application for a Use Permit and Design Review Permit to continue the use of a temporary modular sales trailer at the Vino Bello Timeshare Resort at 865 Bordeaux Way; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Napa, State of California, held a noticed public hearing on January 23, 2014 on the subject application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Napa as follows: Section 1. The Planning Commission finds that the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section of the Guidelines (Categorical Exemptions; Class 3) which exempts commercial buildings under 10,000 square feet. Section 2. The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regards to the Use Permit application: 1) The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, applicable specific plans, the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the District and Overlay District in which the site is located. The proposed continued use of this unattractive modular building is inconsistent with Goal LU-5 of the General Plan to encourage attractive, well-located commercial developments to serve the needs of Napa residents, workers and visitors. The project is also inconsistent with the stated intent in the Airport North/ Bedford Industrial Park Specific Plan for Tract A Development Areas to have the highest standard of architecture. 2) The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, or to the general welfare of the City. The continued use of this unattractive building results in detrimental effects to the public welfare in terms of lowering the quality of the built environment in the City. Resolution No. PC Page 1 of 3

10 3) The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance would allow for the possibility of this use subject to the discretionary approval of a Use Permit and a Design Review Permit by the Planning Commission. Section 3. The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regards to the Design Review Permit application: 1) The project design is in accord with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan design policies. The proposed continued use of this unattractive modular building is inconsistent with Goal LU-5 of the General Plan to encourage attractive, well-located commercial developments to serve the needs of Napa residents, workers and visitors. The project is also inconsistent with the stated intent in the Airport North/ Bedford Industrial Park Specific Plan for Tract A Development Areas to have the highest standard of architecture. 2) The project design is consistent with applicable Design Review Guidelines adopted by the City Council. The project is inconsistent with several design guidelines of the Soscol Corridor/Downtown Riverfront Design Guidelines as identified in the January 23, 2014 Planning Commission staff report. 3) The Design Review Permit is in accord with provisions of this Title and will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity of the development site, or to the public health, safety or general welfare. The continued use of this unattractive building results in detrimental effects to the public welfare in terms of lowering the quality of the built environment in the City. Section 4. The Planning Commission hereby denies the Use Permit and Design Review Permit applications based upon the preceding findings. Resolution No. PC Page 2 of 3

11 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Napa at a regular meeting of said Commission held on the 23 rd day of January, 2013 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Commission Resolution No. PC Page 3 of 3

12

13

14

15

16

17