Lagoon Valley Self Storage - Outstanding Items (File No.
18-263)VACAVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95688-6908
VIA EMAIL January 11, 2019 Community Development Department
Planning Division Mr. Ron Smith Praxis Properties, LLC. 5701
Lonetree Boulevard, Suite 102 Rocklin, CA 95765
[email protected] SUBJECT: LAGOON VALLEY SELF STORAGE –
OUTSTANDING SUBMITTAL ITEMS
5920 Lagoon Valley Road (APN 0127-040-140) Environmental Review and
Design Review (File No. 18-263)
Dear Ron: Thank you for resubmitting the Lagoon Valley Self Storage
application. Since our last meeting on December 13, 2018, the
Project Review Committee (PRC) has had a chance to review the
resubmittal package. The resubmittal provided much of the requested
information from our initial letter. Below, you’ll find PRC’s
comments regarding other remaining items:
OUTSTANDING SUBMITTAL ITEMS
PLANNING
1. REQUIRED FINDINGS – The resubmittal did not include an
item-by-item response to the required findings for Design Review
and Mitigated Negative Declaration. Please update the project
description to include responses to each required finding. The
required findings for Mitigated Negative Declarations and Design
Reviews are attached (Attachment 1).
2. TREE REMOVAL – The project proposal includes a request to remove
several mature Oak trees. Please update the project description to
describe: (a) the number of trees that require removal; (b) the
reasons why the project cannot be designed around these trees; and
(c) proposed mitigation for the trees proposed for removal.
3. FLOOR AREA RATIO – The project proposal includes a request to
increase the maximum floor area ratio from 0.30 FAR to 0.40 FAR.
The requested exception must be supported by the findings
identified in Section 14.09.084.030.A (Floor Area Ratio) of the
Land Use and Development Code. Please update the project
description to include responses to each required finding
(Attachment 1). Staff has not yet determined whether it can support
the requested exception. As noted in the “courtesy design comments”
below, this exception may not be required if the project is
redesigned to meet certain General Plan policies.
RON ROWLETT DILENNA HARRIS
4. SUPPLEMENTAL STUDIES – The response letter states the utility
analyses are still being prepared (water tank size; fire flow
requirements; design of the proposed septic system, including
location of a reserve drain field). Please note, staff cannot move
forward with the environmental analysis of the project until we
receive and review these studies. These studies would help staff
determine whether or not the project will have a significant impact
to the environment. If the project will have a significant impact
to the environment that cannot be mitigated, then an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) would be required for the project.
FIRE
5. BOAT PARKING – The project description describes boat parking
for 18 boats. Please update the site plan to show the exact
location for all boat parking.
6. BUILDING B – The site plan shows parking stalls under building
B. Fire is concerned with anything parked in these areas because of
the placement of fire hydrants in those same areas. Please confirm
the types of vehicles that will be parked in these stalls.
7. FIRE FLOW – Provide information on what the fire flow will be
for the location. Provide information on the tank and how the fire
flow, tank and pump house complies with the requirements of the
California Fire Code (CFC) and National Fire Protection Association
Standards (NFPA). Sheet C3 currently does not show the proposed
fire water line size.
8. FIRE HYDRANTS – Existing fire hydrant locations are not approved
as currently shown on plans. Fire has concerns about how close they
are to the buildings and hose lays to buildings based on the
proposed locations of the fire hydrants. Please contact Jill
Childers at (707) 449-5482 to identify better locations for the
fire hydrants.
9. SHEET C3 – Sheet C-3 currently states buildings are not proposed
to be sprinkled. Per our local and state codes any building 5,000
square feet or larger in size and residential are required to have
fire sprinklers.
10. SHEET A8 – Sheet A8 shows fire walls separating buildings. What
is the rating of those fire walls and what is the square footage of
each of those separated areas?
11. TURNING TEMPLATE – Fire is still concerned about the turning
template appearing to have apparatus hitting buildings. Please
provide all inside and outside turning radius dimensions to confirm
that fire apparatus will have sufficient turning room to clear all
buildings.
12. FIRE HAZARD – Fire is concerned about what will be placed in
the setback area behind building “B” due to potential fires coming
from the side of the freeway. Please confirm whether the 20 ft.
setback area adjoining the freeway will include any combustible
materials.
3
COURTESY DESIGN COMMENTS
Although courtesy design comments are not required for
completeness, Staff is providing the comments because they require
a redesign of the project.
ADVANCED PLANNING
13. DESIGN COMPATIBILITY – The project conflicts with GP Policy
LU-P13.7, which calls for the application of the highest
development standards to Highway Commercial areas to ensure that
major entrances to the community are not diminished by
“inharmonious” site development concepts. Staff found the following
issues with the project:
a. SETBACK – The project design conflicts with GP policy LU-P13.10,
because it does not provide an “increased” setback; the project
only provides a 20 ft. setback to the property line. The project
also backs up to the freeway, whereas this GP policy calls for the
City to ensure that new projects do not appear to back up to the
freeway.
b. FAR – Regarding the request for an increase in FAR, the project
is of much greater
scale in terms of building coverage on the site than the
surrounding development in the City (the pottery place and the
adjacent church), thus making it potentially an “inharmonious site
development concept” for the area. The pottery business has a very
small FAR, probably less than 5%, and the church is approximately
15% FAR at buildout of all approved phases according to information
in their file. Exceeding the 30% FAR would be inharmonious with the
existing character of the area.
c. TREE PRESERVATION – While preserving a number of trees, the
project also
proposes removal of some of the larger native oak trees on the
site, such as Trees #10, 12, 13, 14, 17, 24, 26, 27, and 34 which
are prominent in the center of the site and at the northeast corner
of the site near the freeway. Since the project design exceeds the
maximum FAR allowed without an exception to the code, the removal
of these trees is not consistent with GP policy COSP1.14, which
intends to prevent impacts to woodland resources by clustering
development on sites in order to reduce tree removal “to the
maximum extent feasible”. It would be difficult to justify removal
of so many large trees in order to approve more development than
the code normally intends to allow.
Redesign Alternatives: Staff recommends redesigning the site plan
to comply with the above-mentioned policies. It is staff’s opinion
that the project could meet these policies by eliminating Building
B and removing portions of Buildings D, E, F, and H, which will
help avoid impacts to the trees noted above, and achieve an
approximately 0.30 FAR.
4
CURRENT PLANNING
14. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN – Thank you for making changes to the
building design, we appreciate your willingness to work with staff
on the design. As discussed in our previous meeting, the project is
located in a gateway location for the City of Vacaville, which
requires the project to use high quality architecture design as
required by General Plan land use policy LU-P13.7. We believe the
design still needs some improvement and have provided some guidance
in this respect:
a. MASONRY – The proposed building façade should consist primarily
of masonry materials such as cultured stone, brick or other masonry
materials. Accent materials such as metal and glass should be used
to emphasize major architectural features and building corners, as
shown in the picture below. Special consideration should be given
to those building elevations facing Interstate 80 and Cherry Glen
Road. All towers and features above the parapet must contain
four-sided architecture.
b. SETBACK – Towers and architectural features should be offset
approximately 10-15 ft. from adjoining surfaces to reduce the mass
of large buildings (Buildings A, B and I) and emphasize depth. Each
staggered portion should contain different materials and accent
colors, as shown in the picture below.
15. WATER TOWER – Staff is concerned about the water tower
visibility along Cherry Glen
Road. Please provide a rendering of the water tower showing
dimensions for the height and width.
BUILDING
16. BMP DESIGN – The proposed pretreatment design does not appear
to provide sufficient area for treating storm water runoff. Please
provide calculations to show how the project will meet current
Building Code requirements for pretreatment.
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMENT
The Police Department has prepared the comment below. Please note
that their determination will affect the IS/MND because the project
may result in significant impacts to Public Services. We recommend
a meeting with their team to discuss the comment. The Police
Department representative, Sgt. Nathen Benevides, can be reached by
phone at (707) 469-4724 or by email at
[email protected]. 17. SAFETY – Due to the
semi-remote location of the proposed storage facility, the
Vacaville
Police Department recommends a design change to an indoor storage
facility only. The subject site is located in a rural area that
does not have a lot of vehicle and/or foot traffic and the proposed
outdoor facility would create an attraction to those persons
looking to burglarize the storage units, a strain on the resources
provided by the City of Vacaville and the Vacaville Police
Department. The typical security measures incorporated in an
outdoor storage area such as a fence, lights, padlocks, and
cameras, are not going to be a deterrent when the project is
located in a remote area. By incorporating an indoor facility
design, access to the property can be better controlled and
secured. The U-Haul storage facility on E Monte Vista Avenue is
such an example of an indoor storage area in the City of
Vacaville.
Staff would be happy to meet with you to discuss any of the
above-mentioned items. As part of your resubmittal package, please
include a written response to the individual items in this letter.
If you have any questions or if you would like to meet regarding
this letter please do not hesitate to contact me by phone at (707)
449-5364 or by email at
[email protected].
Sincerely, ALBERT ENAULT, Associate Planner Cc: JILL CHILDERS, Fire
Prevention Bureau Manager FRED BUDERI, City Planner JAY SALAZAR,
Chief Building Official SGT. NATHAN BENEVIDES, Traffic
Supervisor
1
DESIGN REVIEW Section 14.09.111.070 Findings Required for Approval.
The Director of the Planning Commission, as applicable, when
approving a Design Review project, shall make findings of
fact.
These findings shall include but not be limited to, the
following:
That the project is consistent with the goals, objectives, and
policies of the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and the
Development Code;
That the proposed project is consistent with the standards and
regulations of the applicable zoning district, and is consistent
with any other approvals for the site;
That the subject site is suitable for the type and intensity of use
or development proposed, and that the design, size, and other
physical characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with
adjacent uses, or with adjacent natural resources;
That the proposed uses will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare of the community;
That adequate public facilities and services are available to serve
the site or will be made available concurrent with the proposed
development;
That projected traffic levels and levels of service are, or as
result of conditions of approval, will be consistent with the
policies of the Transportation Element of the General Plan;
That the project is consistent with any design guidelines adopted
pursuant to Section 14.01.003.020(C) of Division 14.01,
Administration, of this Title, for the type of use or structure
proposed.
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Section 14.03.023.050 Findings
Necessary to Adopt a Negative Declaration. Prior to adopting a
negative declaration, the City shall consider the proposed negative
declaration together with any comments received during the public
review process:
A negative declaration shall be adopted subject to the finding that
based upon the initial study and comments received, there is no
substantial evidence that the project will have a significant
effect on the environment. In addition, the decision-maker shall
make the following findings:
The project does not have the potential to substantially degrade
the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of
major periods of California history or prehistory;
The project does not have the potential to achieve short-term
environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals;
The project does not have environmental effects which are
individually limited but are cumulatively considerable;
The project will not have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly;
The negative declaration reflects the independent judgment of the
City of Vacaville, acting as lead agency for the project.
2
FLOOR AREA RATIO INCREASE The maximum floor area ratio, or FAR,
standards for each commercial zoning district shall be as specified
in Table 14.09.084.01 of this chapter. An exception to the floor
area ratio standards may be approved by the decision-maker for uses
of a lower intensity than uses generally permitted within the
applicable zoning district. The decision-maker shall consider the
intensity of the proposed use, the availability of public
facilities and infrastructure to serve the use, and the projected
traffic levels of service.
An exception to the FAR standards may be approved when the
decision-maker determines the following:
The proposed use and structure for which the exception to the FAR
standards is
approved shall have a lower employee density or a lower peak hour
traffic generation than uses generally permitted within the
applicable zoning district;
Public facilities and services are available to serve the proposed
use and structure; and
The scale of the proposed building is compatible with surrounding
development.
SUBJECT: LAGOON VALLEY SELF STORAGE – OUTSTANDING SUBMITTAL
ITEMS
PLANNING
1. REQUIRED FINDINGS – The resubmittal did not include an
item-by-item response to the required findings for Design Review
and Mitigated Negative Declaration. Please update the project
description to include responses to each required finding. The
r...
2. TREE REMOVAL – The project proposal includes a request to remove
several mature Oak trees. Please update the project description to
describe: (a) the number of trees that require removal; (b) the
reasons why the project cannot be designed around t...
3. FLOOR AREA RATIO – The project proposal includes a request to
increase the maximum floor area ratio from 0.30 FAR to 0.40 FAR.
The requested exception must be supported by the findings
identified in Section 14.09.084.030.A (Floor Area Ratio) of
th...
4. SUPPLEMENTAL STUDIES – The response letter states the utility
analyses are still being prepared (water tank size; fire flow
requirements; design of the proposed septic system, including
location of a reserve drain field). Please note, staff
cannot...
FIRE
5. BOAT PARKING – The project description describes boat parking
for 18 boats. Please update the site plan to show the exact
location for all boat parking.
6. BUILDING B – The site plan shows parking stalls under building
B. Fire is concerned with anything parked in these areas because of
the placement of fire hydrants in those same areas. Please confirm
the types of vehicles that will be parked in the...
7. FIRE FLOW – Provide information on what the fire flow will be
for the location. Provide information on the tank and how the fire
flow, tank and pump house complies with the requirements of the
California Fire Code (CFC) and National Fire Protectio...
8. FIRE HYDRANTS – Existing fire hydrant locations are not approved
as currently shown on plans. Fire has concerns about how close they
are to the buildings and hose lays to buildings based on the
proposed locations of the fire hydrants. Please cont...
9. SHEET C3 – Sheet C-3 currently states buildings are not proposed
to be sprinkled. Per our local and state codes any building 5,000
square feet or larger in size and residential are required to have
fire sprinklers.
10. SHEET A8 – Sheet A8 shows fire walls separating buildings. What
is the rating of those fire walls and what is the square footage of
each of those separated areas?
11. TURNING TEMPLATE – Fire is still concerned about the turning
template appearing to have apparatus hitting buildings. Please
provide all inside and outside turning radius dimensions to confirm
that fire apparatus will have sufficient turning room ...
12. FIRE HAZARD – Fire is concerned about what will be placed in
the setback area behind building “B” due to potential fires coming
from the side of the freeway. Please confirm whether the 20 ft.
setback area adjoining the freeway will include any co...
COURTESY DESIGN COMMENTS
ADVANCED PLANNING
13. DESIGN COMPATIBILITY – The project conflicts with GP Policy
LU-P13.7, which calls for the application of the highest
development standards to Highway Commercial areas to ensure that
major entrances to the community are not diminished by
“inharmoni...
a. SETBACK – The project design conflicts with GP policy LU-P13.10,
because it does not provide an “increased” setback; the project
only provides a 20 ft. setback to the property line. The project
also backs up to the freeway, whereas this GP policy ...
b. FAR – Regarding the request for an increase in FAR, the project
is of much greater scale in terms of building coverage on the site
than the surrounding development in the City (the pottery place and
the adjacent church), thus making it potentially ...
c. TREE PRESERVATION – While preserving a number of trees, the
project also proposes removal of some of the larger native oak
trees on the site, such as Trees #10, 12, 13, 14, 17, 24, 26, 27,
and 34 which are prominent in the center of the site and
at...
CURRENT PLANNING
14. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN – Thank you for making changes to the
building design, we appreciate your willingness to work with staff
on the design. As discussed in our previous meeting, the project is
located in a gateway location for the City of Vacavi...
a. MASONRY – The proposed building façade should consist primarily
of masonry materials such as cultured stone, brick or other masonry
materials. Accent materials such as metal and glass should be used
to emphasize major architectural features and bu...
b. SETBACK – Towers and architectural features should be offset
approximately 10-15 ft. from adjoining surfaces to reduce the mass
of large buildings (Buildings A, B and I) and emphasize depth. Each
staggered portion should contain different material...
15. WATER TOWER – Staff is concerned about the water tower
visibility along Cherry Glen Road. Please provide a rendering of
the water tower showing dimensions for the height and width.
BUILDING
16. BMP DESIGN – The proposed pretreatment design does not appear
to provide sufficient area for treating storm water runoff. Please
provide calculations to show how the project will meet current
Building Code requirements for pretreatment.
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMENT
17. SAFETY – Due to the semi-remote location of the proposed
storage facility, the Vacaville Police Department recommends a
design change to an indoor storage facility only. The subject site
is located in a rural area that does not have a lot of
vehi...
Attachment 1 - Required Findings for Approval.pdf
DESIGN REVIEW
A. These findings shall include but not be limited to, the
following:
1. That the project is consistent with the goals, objectives, and
policies of the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and the
Development Code;
2. That the proposed project is consistent with the standards and
regulations of the applicable zoning district, and is consistent
with any other approvals for the site;
3. That the subject site is suitable for the type and intensity of
use or development proposed, and that the design, size, and other
physical characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with
adjacent uses, or with adjacent natural resources;
4. That the proposed uses will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare of the community;
5. That adequate public facilities and services are available to
serve the site or will be made available concurrent with the
proposed development;
6. That projected traffic levels and levels of service are, or as
result of conditions of approval, will be consistent with the
policies of the Transportation Element of the General Plan;
7. That the project is consistent with any design guidelines
adopted pursuant to Section 14.01.003.020(C) of Division 14.01,
Administration, of this Title, for the type of use or structure
proposed.
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
A. A negative declaration shall be adopted subject to the finding
that based upon the initial study and comments received, there is
no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant
effect on the environment. In addition, the decision-m...
1. The project does not have the potential to substantially degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of
a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to e...
2. The project does not have the potential to achieve short-term
environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals;
3. The project does not have environmental effects which are
individually limited but are cumulatively considerable;
4. The project will not have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly;
5. The negative declaration reflects the independent judgment of
the City of Vacaville, acting as lead agency for the project.
FLOOR AREA RATIO INCREASE
A. An exception to the FAR standards may be approved when the
decision-maker determines the following:
1. The proposed use and structure for which the exception to the
FAR standards is approved shall have a lower employee density or a
lower peak hour traffic generation than uses generally permitted
within the applicable zoning district;
2. Public facilities and services are available to serve the
proposed use and structure; and
3. The scale of the proposed building is compatible with
surrounding development.
2019-01-11T16:26:04-0800