Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout112525-06.1 Staff Presentation200 Boone Court The Lanes Danville Planning Commission Meeting November 25, 2025 Overview Project Summary State Housing Laws Housing Element General Plan & Zoning Compliance Density Bonus and Waivers Design Improvements Trees CEQA Categorical Exemption Traffic Q & A Project Summary 1.62 Acres (gross) 47 Townhomes plus 2 attached ADUS 110,170 S.F. 3-Stories California Housing Laws State Housing-Related Legislation Housing Element Law (1969) Housing Accountability Act (1982; amended 2017) Housing Crisis Act –SB 330 (2019) Key Impacts of State Laws “Anti-NIMBY” Provisions Objective Development Standards only Streamlined Review Process Max review time = 90 days Max public hearings = 5 Project denial permitted only for findings of “specific adverse impacts” related to health and safety Danville 2023-2031 Housing Element 4+ Year Top-Down Process State → Region → Local State assigns 441,176 units to SF Bay Area regional government (ABAG) ABAG assigns 2,241 units to Danville Danville appeals assignment Local government role: accommodate the assignment by redesignating land Danville redesignated 70+ parcels, including 200 Boone Court More information @ danvilletowntalks.org/housingelement Penalties for Non- Compliance Financial Penalties: Court-imposed fines of up to $100,000 per month (multiplied by a factor of 6 if they are not paid). Loss of Permitting Authority: Suspension of building permit issuance or land use approvals. Legal Suits and Attorney Fees: Court mandated compliance Court suspension of permit issuance Court approval of housing developments on behalf of the community Attorney fees associated with lawsuits State Housing Density Bonus Law Allows more units for affordable units, ~or~ For senior housing developments (no affordability levels are required) Incentives, Concessions, and Waivers Reduced development standards (height, stories, floor area ratio, parking, setbacks, etc.) No limit to the number of waivers requested A waiver can only be denied upon making a finding that the waiver would result in an adverse impact upon health and safety General Plan & Zoning Compliance General Plan Land Use Designation DBD 13: Residential - Multifamily 30-35 units per acre (min/max) Proposed – 30 units/acre Zoning District Multifamily High/Special Applicant Requested Waivers Height Town Ordinance: 35’ Average Applicant Requested: 36’5” average, maximum of 40’ Setback Town Ordinance: 25 feet for front and 20 for sides Applicant Requested: a minimum of 3’2” with an average of 10’ for the front, and minimums of 7’11”, 6’6”, and 12’4” for the sides. Voluntary Design Improvements to Address Neighborhood Concerns Architectural and Landscape Enhancements through the Design Review process: Revised Building Design Added stucco stripping along rear and side elevations to break up the siding Added rafter tails Building Materials and Colors Revised color palette of balconies Landscaping and Improvements Will finalize an agreement with surrounding property owners regarding off-site landscaping, street trees, irrigation, and retaining wall reconstruction Trees Removal 9 protected trees proposed for removal with 4 on-site and 5 on neighboring properties Protected trees require mitigation by planting replacement trees and/or by paying mitigation fees Environmental Review Environmental Review Infill multi-family residential developments are generally exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statutorily Exemption - Section 21080 (AB 130), for projects that: Are consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Are no larger than 20 acres At least two-thirds of the total square footage is dedicated to residential use Have a project site that has been previously developed with an “urban use” Are at least 10 units per acre Transportation Assessment Bicycles and Pedestrians No impacts identified Parking Town Ordinance: 108 DBL Requirement: 73 Requested (Supply): 104 Vehicular Miles Traveled (VMT) The project’s daily VMT per resident was found to be 20.3 in the baseline condition. This value is below the townwide average of 22.0, but above the significance threshold of 18.7, which is 15 percent below the townwide average. This impact was previously identified under the EIR prepared for the implementation of the Housing Element, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations was previously approved by the Town Council. The Applicant will develop a Travel Demand Management Plan to identify reduction strategies as specified in the previously approved EIR Off-Site Improvements The applicant is proposing tree removal and off-site improvements on land owned by the adjacent Walnut Forest HOA. The proposed improvements include the removal and construction of a new retaining wall along Ashley Court and new landscaping, street trees, and irrigation along Ashley Court and Hartley Drive. Any agreement would be a private agreement between the applicant and the Walnut Forest HOA. Should an agreement fail to be reached, the project site plan could be modified so that all improvements would be on-site in a manner substantially consistent with the approved plans. Thank You Questions?