Loading...
PC RES 2024-022 P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2024-22 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CIT Y OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES THEREBY DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S DETERMINATION THAT THE PROPOS ED PROJECT WHICH INCLUDES 482 UNITS SQUARE(1,173,927 Q RE FEET) DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR SB35/423 MINISTERIA L REVIEW THEREFORE REQUIRING THE FOLLOWING ENTITLEMENTS: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZON E CHANGE, CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE, MAJOR GRADING PERMIT, VARIANCE, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND MAJ OR SITE PLAN REVIEW AS REQUIRED BY THE RANCHO PALO S VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5323 IRONWOOD STREET (CASE NO. PLZC2024-0002). WHEREAS, on January 22, 2024, the Applicant, Verde Estates Inc. pp submitted a Preliminary Application, proposing 482 units market rate and (385 97 affordable units, i.e. 20% of the total units) comprised of 641,193 square feet of building g area. At the time of this submittal the City was still in the process of revisingits Housing g Element and had not adopted a Housing Element that was in substantial compliance with p state housing laws, according to the Department of Housing and CommunityDevelopment ("HCD");p and, WHEREAS, on February 7, 2024, After the required seven-da y ay posting and circulation of the document, the City submits final revised HousingElement rreview; to the HCD for its formal mal and, WHEREAS, on February 13, 2024, The Citycommenced the Tribal bal Consultation process pursuant to Government Code Section 65913.4, commonlyknown as SB Code 35 (Gov't § 65913.4(b)), and, WHEREAS, on March 14, 2024, HCD staff sent an email to the Dire ctor indicating that HCD has no further comments regardingrevisions to the Revised and, Housing Element; WHEREAS, on April 5, 2024, The HCD provided a letter to Staff detailing that the Housing Element addressed most of the statutoryrequirements q but cannot be found in full compliance until the City has completed the Zone Amendme nts: and. WHEREAS, on April 16, 2024, The CityCouncil adopted a � � p revised housing element containing modifications requested by the Department of Housing p s ng and Community Development. On that date, the CityCouncil also adopted opted as an urgency measure an ordinance to establish the Mixed-Use OverlayZone and the Residential Zone Overlay and to rezone two properties. This urgencyordinance, which became came effective immediately upon its adoption, served to rezone the necessary properties to 01203.0049/1 02 1 238.1 P.C. Resolution No. 2024-22 Page 1 of 8 implement the revised Housing Element. Accordingly, the City had adopted a housing element that is in substantial compliance with the applicable state housing laws; and, WHEREAS, on April 18, 2024, The Applicant submitted a Preliminary Application, proposing 482 units (385 market rate, 97 affordable units) comprised of 1,173,927 square feet; and, WHEREAS, on May 12, 2024, The Applicant emailed staff for clarification on the SB35 submittal checklist; and, WHEREAS, on May 15, 2024, Staff emailed the Applicant, noting that the Tribal Consultation was still in progress and to provide a list of questions in writing regarding the submittal requirements; and, WHEREAS, on May 20, 2024, The Applicant noted that the Preliminary Application was submitted on April 171 [sic] and therefore the 30-day deadline for the City to notify any affiliated Tribes had now passed. Additionally, the Applicant inquired about the requested format for the application submittal; and, WHEREAS, on May 21, 2024. Staff emailed the Applicant inquiring if the Preliminary Application submitted April 18 was a new application or a modification to the existing Preliminary Application; and, WHEREAS, on May 22, 2024, The Applicant emailed Staff noting the April 18 was a new Preliminary Application and Staff emailed the Applicant to confirm if the earlier Preliminary Application was being withdrawn and replaced with the April 18 application; and, WHEREAS, on May 23, 2024, The Applicant confirmed via email the Preliminary Application dated January 22 was withdrawn; and, WHEREAS, on June 3, 2024, The Applicant emailed Staff requesting to use the Preliminary Application submitted January 22; and, WHEREAS, on June 5, 2024, Staff provided a letter to the Applicant via email, detailing the Preliminary Application dated January 22, is withdrawn per the correspondence provided on May 23 and due to the new PreliminaryApplication being pp significantly different with regard to the square footages for each building; and. WHEREAS, on June 7, 2024, The Applicant emailed Staff requesting that the Preliminary Application submitted April 18 be considered a modification to the January 22 Preliminary Application, along with supplemental information; and, The email from the Appellant submitting the new Preliminary Application was actually dated April 18. 2024. P.C. Resolution No. 2024-22 Page 2 of 8 WHEREAS, on June 12, 2024, HCD provided a letter to Staff confirming that the City's Housing Element adopted April 16, 2024, and completed actions (Zoning Amendments to Increase Housing Development Potential) met the statutory requirements as described in the April 5, 2024 HCD letter, and therefore is in substantial compliance with State Housing Element Law; and, WHEREAS, on July 2, 2024, the Applicant met with staff at the public counter. Staff noted that the Tribal Consultation was still in progress; and, WHEREAS, on July 11, 2024, The Applicant emailed Staff regarding requesting the status of the Tribal Consultation and Staff emailed the Applicant that the Tribal Consultation was still in progress. Staff noted that should the Applicant wish to submit an application prior to the conclusion of the Tribal Consultation, the project would be processed per the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code. Staff provided a project fee statement and relevant submittal materials. Staff noted that following the conclusion of the tribal consultation, should it be determined that the proposed project meets all SB35 requirements, the pertinent fees would be refunded; and, WHEREAS, on July 15, 2024, The Applicant emailed Staff noting the project was based on SB35/423 and Housing Accountability Act Builder's Remedy, therefore certain planning entitlements and discretionary reviews would not be required. The Applicant provided an updated copy of the fee statement with strikethrough for the fees they felt were not applicable; and, WHEREAS, on July 18, 2024, Staff provided a letter to the Applicant reiterating that the Preliminary Application submitted on January 22 was withdrawn and resubmitted as a new Preliminary Application on April 18. Staff noted that at the time of the April 18 submission, the City had adopted Housing Element that was substantially compliant with housing element law, thus the project does not qualify for Builder's Remedy protection. Additionally, the project does not qualify as an SB 35 project, as it is not compliant with the General Plan and Zoning Code. Staff noted the Applicant can submit the project for review by the Planning Division, pending payment of the unedited City invoice provided on July 11, 2024; and, WHEREAS, on July 29, 2024, The Applicant emailed staff requesting to appeal the decision outlined in the July 18, 224 correspondence; and, WHEREAS, on August 5, 2024, Staff provided the Applicant via email instructions to process the appeal; and, WHEREAS, on August 8, 2024, Staff received a timely written Appeal Letter with fee from the Applicant/Owner at 5323 Ironwood Street; and, WHEREAS, on August 19, 2024, Staff provided a letter to the Applicant/Appellant via email, noting Staff is in receipt of the filed Appeal; and, P.C. Resolution No. 2024-22 Page 3 of 8 WHEREAS, on August 27, 2024, The Applicant/Appellantprovided a lett er via email with supplemental Appeal information; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code (RPVMC)p §17.80.050(C), an appeal hearing before the PlanningCommission shall be set within 90 days of the filing of the appeal, or no later than November 6, 2024; and WHEREAS, on September 12, 2024, pursuant to RPVMC §17.80.090, . a public notice announcing the Planning Commission's consideration of the appeal on Octob er ber 8, 2024, was provided to the Appellant, property owners within a 500-foot radius of the project site, interested parties and published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News; and , WHEREAS, on September 25, 2024, The Applicant/Appellant requested lin k q a to pay the invoice dated July 10, 2024; and, WHEREAS, on September 30, 2024, The Applicant/Appellant provided a letter via email with supplemental Appeal information; and,WHEREAS, on October 1, 2024, Staff provided the link for payment via email p Y and The Applicant/Appellant paid the fee for consideration of the project required applications. Jpp cations. However, q the appeal request was not withdrawn; and, WHEREAS, on October 8, 2024, the PlanningCommission held a duly-noticed. y oticed public hearing to consider the appeal, at which time all interested parties were e given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES HEREBY FI ND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated p d herein by reference. Section 2: The Planning Commission has considered the basis for the appeal offered by the Appellant, and finds that they are without merit for the reasons described below: A. While the Appellant alleges that the project as submitted should qualify for the exception to the requirement that a project having to be consistent with the applicable zoning and general plan set forth in Government Code, section 65589.5(d)(5), "the Builder's Remedy" and the ministerial review, and ap proval process set forth in Government Code, section 65913.4 ('SB 35/423"), the J roject p does not qualify because at the time the Applicant submitted the operative Preliminary Application, the City had adopted a HousingElement and the implement required zoning to implement the Housing Element all of which was in substantial compliance with state Housing Element law. P.C. Resolution No 2024-22 Page 4 of 8 Based on HCD's letter of April 5, 2024, which indicated that the City's draft Housing g Element met the statutory requirements but would not be in substantial compliance until the requisite zoning code amendments are adopted, on April 16, 2024 the City Council determined that the Negative Declaration adopted on August 11, 2022, as amended by Addendum No. 1, adequately analyzed the impacts from the adoption and implementation of the Revised Final 2021-2029 Housing Element, and following the public hearing adopted Resolution No. 2024-16 approving a General pP g Plan Amendment for the City's Revised Final 2021-2029 Housing Element, a General Plan Amendment for the Land Use Element and Land Use Map, and a Local Coastal Plan (Coastal Specific Plan) Amendment to effectuate the 2021- 2029 Housing Element. The City Council also adopted Resolution No. 2024-17 to forward to the California Coastal Commission the amendments to the Local Coastal Program (LCP) Coastal Specific Plan and zoningrelated to the 6th map Cycle Housing Element actionsin the Coastal Zone, consistent with State Law. Additionally, in order to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, on April 16, 2024 the CityCouncil unanimously y adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 678U approving zoning amendments inclusive of Zoning Map amendments and development standards for AccessoryDwelling g Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs), to immediately including the Housing Element, rezoningsufficient sites to accommodate the City's regional housing needs allocation by adopting ado tin the implementation actions to effectuate the City's Revised Final 2021-2029 Housing Element. As such, the Housing Element was in substantial compliance with Housing g Element Law on April 16, 2024, as indicated by HCD on April 5. Therefore, at the p time of the April 18 submission, the City's Housing Element was substantially compliant with the relevant state housing laws, thus the preliminary application lication submitted onApril 18 does not qualify for Builder's Remedyprotection. Additionally, y, the project does not qualify as an SB 35 project, as it is not compliant with the General Plan and Zoning Code. Based on the Preliminary Application materials submitted on April 18, the Planning g Commission has determined the proposed project does not qualify for the a Y ministerial review and approval process set forth in Government Code, section 65913,4 or the Builder's Remedy exception set forth in Government Code, section 65589.5(d)(5). B. The Appellant asserts that Staff is selectively interpreting the communication p g regarding the filing date of the preliminary application to achieve a predetermined outcome, however, staff has been clear in all correspondence with the Appellant, and the complete email correspondence from May 12 — October 1 is included in the staff report record. There is nothing selective about how staff interpreted these P communications, Appellant was very clear and unequivocal about their intentions. P.C. Resolution No. 2024-22 Page 5 of 8 C. The Appellant asserts the Preliminary Application submitted on April 18 was supplemental to the January 22 Preliminary Application. However, the preliminary Y application submitted on January 22 provided for 637,042 square feet of residential and 641,193 total square footage, while the one submitted on April 18 changed the anticipated square footage to 765,283 of residential space and 1,173,927 total square footage. The increase in construction square footage in the April 18 o preliminary application is 54% over the construction square footage in the January Y 22 preliminary application, necessitating a new PreliminaryApplication pursuant to Government Code, section 65941.1(c) D. The Appellant claims per Assembly Bill (AB) 1886, "a jurisdiction is in compliance as of the date of the Housing and Community Development de artment'sp (HCD) letter finding the adopted housing element in substantial .com liance Anyother p letters do not constitute a finding of substantial compliance. Section 65585.03 of the Government Code, as added by Section 1 of this act, is declaratoryof existing g law and does not represent a change." However, the legislation goes into effect on January 1, 2025, and therefore is not effective as of the date of this appeal hearing g and was not in effect at the time of the Director's determination. Furthermore, the legislation does not apply in the circumstance were a city, first submits its Housing Element to the Department of Housing and Community ("HCD")Develo ment for p its review and approval before adopting the Housing Element. The City submitted the revised Housing Element to HCD for its review and approval which was obtained on April 5, 2024 before it adopted the Housing Element on April 16, 2024. E. While the Appellant alleges that the City's actions are in clear violation of State Density Bonus Law, The City has not denied any incentives or waivers of development standards provided for under state Density Bonus law, as the Appellant only recently submitted their development application. City staff is in the process of determining completeness of the application. Furthermore, Appellant's claims regarding the City allegedly violating state Density Bonus law are irrelevant to the Director's determination that the project does not qualify for the SB 35 ministerial review process or the Builders Remedy. F. The Appellant asserts that the City Violates the affordable HousingStreamlined process by denying this housing project, specifically by failing to act within the required timelines for Tribal Consultation and not providing details regarding the g g tribal consultation. Upon the submittal of the preliminary application dated Januar y 22 Staff commenced the Tribal Consultation on February 13, 2024. Staff sent a letter requesting 10 local tribes to engage in the tribal consultation process. As a result, two tribes, Tongva Nation and Kizh Nation requested to engage a e in the tribal consult. The Kizh Nation requested to engage in tribal consult on February 23. Thereafter, on February 29 Staff emailed to inquire if the tribe would like the developer included in the consult process. Additionally, the Tongva Nation requested to engage tribal consult on April 2, on April 22 Staff emailed to inquire if the tribeincludedq would like the developer in the consult process. Neither tribe approved the developer's participation in the Scoping Consultation, as required a by P.C. Resolution No. 2024-22 Page 6 of 8 Government Code, section 65913.4(b)(2)(C). Accordingly, staff proceeded with the required consultation process without the participation of the Appellant. City staff provided the Appellant an update via email on July 11, 2024 noting that the Tribal Consultation had not yet concluded with the Kizh Nation, but provided the conditions requested by the Tongva Nation. Section 3: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings included in the Staff Report, Minutes and other records of proceedings, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby adopts P.C. Resolution No. 2024- 22, denying the Appellant's appeal and upholding the Community Development Director's determination that the proposed project which includes 482 units (1,173,927 square feet) does not qualify for SB35 ministerial review or fall within the Builders Remedy exception and therefore requires the following entitlements: General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Certificate of Compliance, Major Grading Permit, Variance, Environmental Review and Major Site Plan Review as required by the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code for the property located at 5323 ironwood street (case no. PLZC2024-0002). Section 4: Any interested person aggrieved by this decision or by any portion of this decision may appeal to the City Council. The appeal shall set forth in writing the grounds for appeal and any specific action being requested by the appellant. Any appeal letter must be filed within 15 calendar days of the date of this decision, or by 5:30 PM on Wednesday, October 23, 2024. A $3,100.00 appeal fee must accompany any appeal letter. If no appeal is filed timely, the Planning Commission's decision will be final at 5:30 PM on Wednesday, October 23, 2024. P.C. Resolution No. 2024-22 Page 7 of 8 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of October 2024, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS BRACH, CHRISTEN, CHURA, GEORGE, O'CONNOR, VICE-CHAIR NULMAN, AND CHAIR SANTAROSA NOES: NONE ABSTENTIONS: NONE RECUSALS: NONE ABSENT: NONE tr, Ron Santarosa Chair Br rbes, Director of Community Development: and, Secretary of the Planning Commission P.C. ResoIut1on No. 2024-22 Page 8 of 8