HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1987/11/17 Item 15COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
• Item 15
Meeting Date 11 /'. x/87
ITEM TITLE: Density Bonus request for a proposed Thirty-seven-unit
apartment complex at 36, 38 and 54 Woodlawn Avenue
Resolution ~^,~-~ ~~~ Approving a density bonus of si x units
for a total of thirty-seven units at 36, 38 and 54 Woodlawn
Avenue and approving a Housing Cooperation Agreement with
Glenn S. Thomas, James E. Evans, and Richard W. Ninde,
property owners
SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Directo
REVIEWED BY: City Managergf (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X )
T.E.N. Developers, developers of a proposed apartment project at 36, 38 and 54
Woodlawn Avenue, has requested a density bonus of six units under State
Government Code Section 65915. Under this law, a local entity is required to
either approve a density bonus or grant the developers other incentives of
equivalent economic value.
• RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve a density bonus of six units
far the proposed apartment project at 36, 38 and 54 Woodlawn Avenue, and
approve the Housing Cooperation Agreement with the developers outlining the
terms and conditions of the density bonus.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Design Review Committee approved the
project design with the additional density bonus units at their August 6, 1987
meeting, subject to City Council approval of the density bonus. At their
October 14 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council
approve the proposed density bonus.
DISCUSSION:
T.E.N. Developers is proposing to develop a thirty-seven-unit apartment
project for families at 36, 38 and 54 Woodlawn Avenue. Current zoning allows
thirty-one units, and the developer requests an additional six units under the
State's Density Bonus Program. The proposed project would consist of four
one-bedroom apartments, and 33 two-bedroom apartments. Section 65915 of the
California Government Code provides that a developer of multi-family rental
housing can request a density bonus over the underlying zone. In exchange for
the density bonus, a developer must provide a percentage of the total units as
affordable housing for low and moderate income households.
•
• Page 2, Item F5
Meeting Dated // ~/7~~7
In 1985, the City enacted Ordinance 12135 which provides a procedure for the
City to respond to requests by developers for density bonuses under the
provisions of California Government Code Section 65915. Under our policy, a
developer must provide 20% of the total project units prior to the granting of
a density bonus as affordable to low income households (households at or below
80% of the area median income), and 5% of the pre-density project units as
affordable to moderate income households (households at or below 120% and
above 80% of the area median income). Rents on affordable units are
restricted for 25 years. Affordability is defined as rent levels not
exceeding 25% of the monthly income of households in those low and moderate
income categories. As an alternative to granting the density bonus, the City
has the option to grant to the developer other incentives of equivalent
economic value. A copy of the City's ordinance is attached for your review.
If the City Council grants the requested density bonus, the developer has
agreed to rent one, 1-bedroom apartment for no more than $419 a month, and
five, 2 bedroom apartments for no more than $523 a month to low-income
households. Additionally, one, 1-bedroom apartment would have a rent cap of
$628 a month; and one 2-bedroom apartment would have a rent cap of $785 a
month and both would be reserved for moderate-income households. Our
ordinance sets maximum rents that can be charged for restricted units. In
reality, the market rate rents are below the maximum of $628 and $785 set for
the moderate-income units. The developer estimates that they will rent
• non-low income restricted one-bedroom units for $550 a month and non-low
income two-bedroom apartments for $650 a month. The moderate-income
restriction would be beneficial if market conditions change in the future and
rents escalate. Currently, a family of four would have to have an income of
$25,100 a year or less to be eligible to rent the units reserved for
low-income households and $37,700 a year or less to qualify for
moderate-income restricted units. Rents could increase as the median income
figures for the County increase. The units would be restricted for a period
of 25 years. The other units can be rented at market rates. Maximum
restricted rents are calculated using the affordable rent formula described in
our family density bonus policy. According to this formula, monthly rental
rates cannot exceed 25% of the gross monthly income of a four person household
whose income falls at 80% and at 120% of the County median income.
Land Use Considerations
The Planning Department has reviewed the project, and the Design Review
Committee has approved the thirty-seven-unit apartment project conditioned
upon Council approval of the six-unit density bonus. The project would
consist of 33, two-bedroom 2-bath and 4, one-bedroom, 1-bath apartments. The
1.05-acre site would contain two three-story buildings over a 46-space
basement garage. An additional 26 open parking spaces will be located just
west of the apartment structure. Overall height of the project is under 40
feet.
•
Page 3, Item 15
• Meeting Date~1,7%87
The project complies with the R-3 Apartment Residential zone in effect, as
well as the High Density Residential land use designation outlined for this
area by the General Plan. Six units over the 31 units permitted under this
zoning represents a density bonus increase of 19°~. No further review is
required in terms of land use considerations.
The Design Review Committee felt that the proposed density, even with a
three-story configuration, was acceptable based on the architectural plan
submitted by the developer. Parking, landscaping, open space, and traffic
flow are considered adequate for the project of 37 units.
Conclusion
The issue before the City Council is to decide whether or not to grant a
density bonus of six units to the developers of 36, 38 and 54 Woodlawn Avenue,
or to agree to offer equivalent financial incentives. According to State law,
a local jurisdiction does not have the option to deny a density bonus request
without offering equivalent financial incentives. All land issues have
previously been approved, and do not require City Council action. If the
Council votes to approve the density bonus, the City will gain six affordable
housing units for low-income households and a potential for two affordable
moderate-income household units, if market conditions change, both with a 25
year restriction.
• Attached is a Housing Cooperation Agreement between the City and the developer
outlining the terms and conditions of the density bonus. It is recommended
that the Council approve this agreement if they approve the density bonus.
If Council votes to offer equivalent financial incentives, it is recommended
that they refer the issue to staff to consider various alternatives which
would be brought back to the Council for their approval. Financial
equivalency would have to be determined, and such options as cash payment to
the developer, waiver of associated fees, or provision by the City of public
improvements could then be considered.
FISCAL IMPACT: If the Council grants the density bonus request, no funds
would be expended. If the Council votes to offer
equivalent financial incentives, Redevelopment Agency Low
and Moderate Income Housing Funds could be utilized.
WPC 3079H
~:~ ~'_.
~r/~~
by the ciiy co~~ncil' of
Chula Visa, Caf~fornia
Dated
2-
'~' .~
~s' the City Council of
C~ruia Vista. California
Dated
_~ ..