Vacaville planning panel approves 36‑unit North Orchard Oaks with density bonus, design review and tree removals

The Vacaville Planning Commission on Nov. 18 approved the North Orchard Oaks Apartments, a four‑story, 36‑unit project on the northwest corner of West Monte Vista and North Orchard Avenue.

Staff described the proposal as an infill project on a 0.98‑acre lot that would deliver 17 one‑bedroom and 19 two‑bedroom units, reserve two units for very‑low‑income households, and provide 47 on‑site parking stalls. Albert, a city planner, told commissioners the project qualifies for a density bonus and associated concessions because it includes very‑low‑income units and complies with state law including the Housing Accountability Act (SB 330). He said staff concluded the project met the objective design standards and qualifies for a CEQA categorical exemption for infill development (CEQA Guidelines §15332).

The applicant, developer Alex Withers, and architect Ingrid Anderson presented the design as Mediterranean‑style, with a courtyard, rooftop decks and on‑site landscaping. Withers said the team attempted to preserve two mature trees and will work with the Elmira Cemetery District on off‑site tree‑planting to mitigate canopy loss. “We are working with the Vacaville Elmira Cemetery District to plant 150 new trees,” Withers said.

Neighbors raised repeated concerns during the public‑comment period, focusing on tree removal (staff said the applicant seeks a tree removal permit for 26 trees), parking reductions (the project proposes 47 spaces vs. 67 the municipal code references), potential impacts on school drop‑off safety and sight lines at the driveway, solar‑panel shading, and property values. A neighborhood resident, Timothy Randolph, urged the commission to protect a nearby homeowner and asked whether the commission could deny the project; others called for tighter traffic analysis and stronger on‑site mitigation.

Staff and traffic engineers responded that trip estimates using Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) rates produced 13 AM peak‑hour trips and 14 PM peak‑hour trips — below the municipal threshold of 30 peak‑hour trips that triggers a full traffic study — and that driveway placement was conditioned to preserve sight distances. The city’s arborist review and an applicant‑provided arborist report informed the tree‑removal permit recommendation and staff described replacement and off‑site mitigation requirements.

City attorney Jerry reminded commissioners of the legal constraints under state housing law. “The Housing Accountability Act … constrains the ability to deny the project or to reduce its density if it meets objective standards,” he said, warning that improper denial could lead to litigation and statutory fines.

Commissioner Banta moved to adopt a resolution finding the project categorically exempt from CEQA under §15332 and approving the density bonus, major design review and tree removal permit subject to the conditions of approval; Vice Chair Wilkerson seconded. A roll‑call vote recorded yes from all commissioners present and the motion passed.

The commission’s action is a discretionary approval of the listed entitlements and conditions; building permits, final engineering and fire‑department approvals are required before construction can begin. The applicant estimated construction would take approximately one year once permits are obtained. The matter will next proceed through the standard building‑permit and plan‑check process.

Authorities cited in the hearing include the Housing Accountability Act (SB 330), CEQA Guidelines §15332 (infill exemption) and the city’s municipal code sections governing density and design review. The staff report and conditions of approval will be posted with the final action paperwork.