City Council to hear appeal over townhome project
An appeal over a townhome project at the corner of Harbison and Ulatis drives will go before the Vacaville City Council at tonight’s meeting.
The appeal is in response to the Planning Commission’s decision at its Dec. 15 meeting to reaffirm an environmental impact report and Planned Development for the Harbison Townhomes project.
According to a staff report by Fred Buderi, acting community development director, the commission had previously approved what was known as the Harbison Senior Apartments at its March meeting. The 167-unit project located on a vacant 8.86 parcel was originally billed as a “senior-restricted market rate apartment project.” However, after reviewing market conditions as well as the development of the nearby Casa Dei Vista Apartments on Allison Drive, the applicant —Guardian Commercial Real Estate — decided to no longer limit the apartments to just seniors, Buderi wrote.
One specific concern outlined by the applicant, Buderi wrote, was that most seniors would not be able to afford market-rate rent without subsidies. Furthermore, several Casa Dei Vista residents expressed interest in having a larger outdoor yard area.
“Based on this understanding and other contributing factors, the applicant decided to revise the project,” Buderi wrote.
In November, Guardian Commercial Real Estate submitted a new Planned Development proposal for Harbison Townhomes, now comprising a new 160unit townhome-style rental apartment complex on the site. The project will consist of 64 two-bedroom units and 96 three-bedroom units, as well as 21 threestory buildings, a 7,400 square foot clubhouse, and a swimming pool. Parking consists of 356 covered and uncovered spaces, and the complex is mainly accessible via Harbison Drive with secondary access adjoining Ulatis Drive to the south.
On Dec. 15, a hearing was held by the Commission to consider the planned proposal, environmental determination, public input and staff analysis, Buderi wrote. The commission voted unanimously to reaffirm the General Plan’s EIR and approve a Planned Development for the project.
Eight days later, residents Wendy Breckon and Alicia Minyen filed an appeal over the commission’s decision, contending that the project was approved for “erroneous reasons,” was inconsistent with regulatory documents such as the Housing Element and Municipal Code; the city did not analyze impacts to traffic, schools and parking; and that the Commission appeared to violate the Brown Act “via a serial meeting when members communicated individually with the applicant’s agent from Guardian Commercial Real Estate, LP,” Breckon and Minyen wrote.
Among other things, Breckon and Minyen wrote that the rationale for changing the project from seniorrestricted to non-senior-restricted was misleading.
“The Developer…implied subsidies were not available for senior housing, but this appears not to be the case since subsidies were in fact available this year,” the appellants wrote. “The developer did not provide evidence substantiating the lack of subsidies for senior affordable housing. Such documentation should have been provided to the staff, Commissioners, and the public.”
In a staff rebuttal, Buderi wrote that staff reviewed the appellants’ claims and found them to be without merit due to a lack of evidence to support the claim, further analysis was not required by the California Environmental Quality Act, and that the claims did not meet the threshold for consideration under the Municipal Code, which reads “The appeal shall state specifically why a determination or interpretation is not in accordance with the purposes of this Development Code, where there was an error or abuse of discretion, where the record includes inaccurate information, or how a decision is not supported by evidence in the record.”
Buderi wrote that staff felt the commission’s decision was “correct” and “supported by City planning policies, development approval procedures, and development requirements.”
Staff is recommending the council deny the appeal and affirm the commission’s decision. If approved, the project would be subject to the same conditions of approval adopted by the commission at its Dec. 15 meeting.
In other business, the council will receive a report on the city’s Strategic Plan for the fiscal years 2021 through 2026, and will hold a study session related to the city’s Vehicle Miles Traveled and Energy and Conservation Action Strategy (ECAS).
The council will meet at 6 p.m. tonight. The Zoom link is Cov.zoom.us/s/99569804654?pwd=TENqcXhWcnlmYzEwbmt0MkdkTTdWZz09, and the password is 639925. Participants may also join by phone by dialing 267-831-0333 or 301715-8592 or toll-free at 877853-5257 or 888-475-4499. Participants may dial *67 before the number if they wish to keep their number from being displayed on the screen.
The meeting may also be viewed on Channel 26 or online at Youtube.com/ user/Cityof Vacaville/videos.