Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7.1 Ahmanson Report Tract 5074 oo-& a CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT City Council Meeting Date: January 22, 1990 SUBJECT: Report on Ahmanson Northeast Slope Request by Mrs. Susan Alves (Report by Public Works Director Lee Thompson) EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1) Minutes of January 8, 1990 Meeting 2) - Site Development Review Resolution 88-065 (November 7, 1988) 3) Slides of Area to be Displayed at Meeting RECOMMENDATION/ Receive Staff report and testimony from Mrs. Alves. Provide further direction to Staff if necessary. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None. DESCRIPTION: At the January 8, 1990, City Council meeting, Mrs. Susan Alves expressed concerns regarding the Ahmanson development's downhill slope, which faces Mrs. Alves' rear yard. The City Council directed Staff to meet with Mrs. Alves and, if Mrs. Alves so desired, report back to the Council at the following meeting. On January 17th, the Public Works Director met with Mrs. Alves at the site, reviewed her concerns, and confirmed that she did want this item placed on the agenda. - Following are Mrs. Alves' concerns and Staff's response to those concerns: 1) Mrs. Alves stated that the original developers, Hatfield, had said that the only fences on Mrs. Alves' side of the property would be at the top of the slope. The Ahmanson developers placed open type fences down the slope at the property lines, which Mrs. Alves felt was done without public notice or input. Planning Staff has reviewed the minutes and conditions of approval for the original Hatfield development and found no reference to the location of the proposed fences. There was, however, a noticed hearing at the Planning Commission for a Conditional Use Permit for grading changes and a concurrent Site Development Review. Condition 11 of the Site Development Review speaks to the fencing issue as follows: "The design, location, and materials of all fencing, and of all retaining walls installed by the developer, shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director. Provision of common fences for all side and rear yards shall be the responsibility of the developer. Fencing installed by the developer at the bottom or top of slopes higher than ten feet, and/or fences of rear yards with a high visibility from adjoining down slope areas, may be designed with an open mesh material, subject to review and approval by the Planning Director as regards location and material utilized. " The latter part of this condition covers the subject area, which is visible from the adjoining downslope area, and an open mesh material fence was installed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ITEM NO.� , COPIES TO: Ahmanson Developments Mrs. Susan Alves 2) Trash has been and continues to be present along the slope. Both the Building Inspectors and Public Works Inspectors have instructed the developer on several occasions to pick up trash which has blown over the slope from the model home construction. This trash has been picked up on several occasions by the developer's personnel. The remaining debris on the slope consists of tree limbs which were cut off when the fence was installed. Staff is requiring the developer to clean up these tree limbs prior to Tract acceptance. 3) The ground was not returned to its natural state after construction in the open area. The work performed on this slope by the developer was to install a storm drain from an existing slope concrete ditch down to the bottom where a rip-rap outfall was constructed. A few small mounds of dirt were left from this operation near the bottom of the slope. Staff is requiring that these mounds of dirt be spread out prior to Tract acceptance; however, since it is the rainy season and grass has begun to grow in these areas, the work should not be done until after the rains have stopped. 4) Who will maintain the rip-rap storm drain outfall at the bottom of the slope? The City's policy has been to maintain those pipes that carry water which originates on public streets or property, and that the private property owners maintain storm facilities in those cases where the storm water originates on private property. In this case, the pipe does extend to the cul-de-sac above and accepts public street water. The City will maintain this pipe down to and including the rip-rap outfall. - 5) Slopes were not totally hydroseeded. Ahmanson had the upper part of the slope hydroseeded on December 4th and the lower areas on December 14th and 15th. There are a few small areas where the grass has not taken hold and some small dirt areas left from the fence post holes. Staff is having the developer hand-seed these areas. 6) Mrs. Alves was told when she moved into her house that the property behind her house was "open space." She asked how she could be sure that the zoning is not changed and structures built behind her house in the future. That specific parcel was designated as "open space" under the original PD Zoning by Nielsen; however, Mr. Nielsen retained ownership of the parcel when the remainder of the project was sold to Hatfield Development. Any rezoning proposal on this property would be noticed to all property owners within three hundred feet of the parcel, and public hearings would be held at both the Planning Commission and City Council. On more recent projects, the City has either required scenic easements over open space areas, required deed restrictions, or required an offer of dedication to the public for open space areas. Staff will be available for questions regarding any of these items. -2- REGULAR MEETING - January 8, 1990 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, January 8, 1990, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7: 33 p.m. , by Mayor Paul Moffatt. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Hegarty, Jeffery, Snyder, Vonheeder and Mayor Moffatt. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. Tract 5074 Susan Alves, 11541 Padre Way advised the Council that finally something had been done with the garbage coming from the Images Homes - project. The developers have not yet, - however, planted or hydroseeded the areas to return them to their natural state. Ms. Alves requested that this issue be placed on a future agenda as she did not feel that it was fair that they had to wait so long to get satisfaction. City Manager Ambrose advised that Public Works Director Thompson was ill and requested that Assistant City Engineer Lierly respond. Mr. Lierly advised that they have hydroseeded and erosion control is in place. It was his understanding that all the slopes which have been graded have been hydroseeded. Mayor Moffatt suggested that -Ms. Alves get in touch with the Engineering Department for a status report. Cm. Hegarty felt the Council should direct Staff to bring back a report on the requirements of this particular project and see to it that they do what they were supposed to do. Cm. Hegarty felt that Ms. Alves should understand, however, that the City only has the ability to mandate certain conditions. Mayor Moffatt felt she should talk to the Engineering Department before she makes the decision to have the item placed on the agenda. Ms. Alves stated she would like it to be placed on an agenda, so she will know once and for all what is going on. CM - 1990 - 1 Regular Meeting January 8, 1990 RESOLUTION NO. 88 - 065 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ APPROVING THE SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION PA 88-077 AHMANSON DEVELOPMENT, INC. TRACT 5074, 69 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS ON A 34 ACRE SITE WHEREAS, Robert Ragle, representing Ahmanson Development, Inc. property owners of Tract 5074, submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit to modify the approved grading plans and Conditions of Approval relating to grading of Tract 5074 and an application for Site Development Review to construct 69 single family detached homes (941-2776-36 through 62 and 941- 2777-1 through 53) ; and . WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held public hearings on the matter at their regularly scheduled meeting on October 3, 1988 and November 7, 1988 and held a Field Trip Study Session to the project site on October 22, 1988; and WHEREAS, proper notice of the October 3, 1988, Planning Commission hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Site Development Review be approved subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all said reports and recommendations as herein above set forth; and WHEREAS, this application has been reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been prepared for this project as it will not have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby find: 1. The Site Development Review request is substantially consistent with 'the intent and requirements set forth within the Conditions of Approval covering this property specifically as set forth by Resolution No. 17-84 of the Dublin City Council (PA 83-073; Tentative Map Extension) , the Findings and General Provisions for the 1478th Zoning Unit approved by Alameda County on July 20, 1981, and Resolution No. 85-33 of the Dublin Planning Commission (PA 85-038; Conditional Use Permit) as amended by Resolution No. 88-064 of the Dublin Planning Commission (PA 88-077 Ahmanson Development, Conditional Use Permit) . 2. The approval of the Site Development Review will be consistent with the Dublin General Plan. 3. The proposed Site Development Review request will not have a significant environmental impact. 4. The Site Development Review request is appropriate -for the subject property in terms of being compatible to existing land uses in the area, will be visually attractive, will not overburden public services, and will provide housing of a type and cost that is desired in the City of Dublin. 5. The proposed Site Development Review request will not have substantial adverse effects on health or safety or be substantially detrimental to the public welfare, or be injurious to property or public improvements. 6. General site considerations, including site layout, orientation and the location of buildings, vehicular access, circulation and parking, setbacks, public safety and similar elements have been designed to provide a desirable environment for the development. -1- 7. General architectural considerations including the character, scale and quality of the design, the architectural relationship, with the site and other buildings, building materials, colors and similar elements have been incorporated in order to insure compatibility of this development with its design concept and the character of adjacent buildings and uses. 8. General landscape considerations including the locations, provisions for irrigation, maintenance and protection of landscaped areas and similar elements have been considered to insure visual relief to complement buildings and structures and to provide an attractive environment for the public. 9. The site is physically suitable for the proposed development in that the site is indicated to be geologically satisfactory for the type of development proposed in locations as shown, provided geological consultants' recommendations are followed and the site is in a good location regarding public services and facilities. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission finds that Site Development Review PA 88-077 is an integral part of the Planned Development (PD) Zoning of the subject property; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby approve Site Development Review PA 88-077 subject to the following conditions: CONDITIONS OF APRPOVAL: Unless otherwise specified the following conditions shall be complied with prior to issuance of the building or grading permits. Each item is subject to review and approval by the Planning Department unless otherwise specified. 1. Except as specifically modified or elaborated upon by the conditions listed below, site development of the 34 acre - 69 unit single family residential/common open space Tract 5074 shall conform to the Conditions of Approval established by Resolution No. 88-064 of the Dublin Planning Commission approved on November 7, 1988, for PA 88-077, Ahmanson Development Tract 5074; Conditional Use Permit. This approval supersedes previous Site Development . Review approvals for Tract 5074. 2. Development shall be generally consistent with the following items labeled Exhibit A as modified by the Conditions of Approval on file with the Dublin Planning Department: a. Tract 5074 Site Development Plan consisting of 6 sheets, prepared by Wilsey & Ham dated received by the Planning Department August 24, 1988. b. Floor Plan and Elevations prepared by Bassenian/Lagoni Architects dated received by the Planning Department July 25, 1988 (Floor Plans) and August 19, 1988 (Elevations) . 3. Unless otherwise stipulated in these Conditions of Approval or by subsequently approved Site Development Reviews covering the lots in this project, development of the single family residential lots in this project shall conform to the following design criteria: Front Setback - 20' minimum Rear Setback - 20' minimum (with a 15' minimum clear and level area from building to adjoining top or toe of any engineered slope area steeper than a three-horizontal-to-one-vertical ratio) . Sideyards - 5' minimum and 15' aggregate minimum (The minimum sideyard shall be increased to a width of 6' to 8' wherever feasible, and shall include a 5' minimum width clear zone for circulation and maintenance purposes -2- adjoining the structure placed on each lot which shall be clear and level. Wherever feasible a 10' clear and level zone, for possible future vehicular access to rear yard areas and for maintenance purposes (exclusive of any 4' lift or drop where front-to-rear split level units are established) , shall be provided _ adjoining the structure placed on each lot in this subdivision. This 10' clear and level zone shall be provided along the sideyard adjoining the garage wherever feasible) . Street-Side Sideyard Setback - 15' minimum Except as specifically modified by the above listed design criteria, or as established elsewhere in the .Conditions of Approval for this project, the lots developed in this project shall be subject to the guidelines of the R-1-B-E; Single Family Residential Combining District (with 7,000 square foot minimum lot size and 70' minimum average width) as regards both land use restrictions and minimum/maximum development criteria. 4. The following lots are exempt from the 15' minimum clear and level rear yard setback requirement: Block 2, Lot 17 Block 2, Lot 18 5. The Applicant shall provide rear yard decks for Block 3, Lots 6 and 7, in lieu of providing the 15 foot minimum clear and level rear yard area. Said decks shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits for the units on said lots. 6. The Applicant shall modify the Site Development Plan for Tract 5074 to eliminate the retaining walls and incorporate front to back split lots on the following lots: Block 2, Lot 1 Block 3, Lots 2 Block 3, Lot 10 Block 3, Lot 17 7. The Applicant shall eliminate the retaining wall on Block 3, Lot 22. 8. The Applicant shall reducE_ the height of the retaining wall to 1 foot maximum on Block 3, Lot 21. 9. The Applicant shall apply for lot line adjustments for lots with lot lines located within slope areas. Said lot lines shall be relocated two feet in from the top of slopes prior to issuance of grading permits, subject to review and approval of the Planning Director and Public Works Director. 10. Slope areas with a gradient steeper than three-horizontal-to-one-vertical created in conjunction with this project with the resultant slope height in excess of seven (7) feet shall be planted with 15-gallon sized trees within sixty (60) days of the site's rough grading. Planting ratios to be observed for these areas shall be one tree per 1,000+ square feet of slope area. In addition to the trees required at rear and/or side slope areas, a minimum of two on-site trees shall be provided by the developer along the frontage of the lots established by this development. These trees shall be of a minimum size of 15-gallons and shall be of a species determined acceptable by the Planning Department. Trees in slope areas of individual lots and within the common open areas shall be irrigated and shall be maintained by the developer until the individual units are initially occupied and the ownership of the common open areas is assumed by the Homeowner's Association of this project. Irrigation of trees within individual lots shall be by separate irrigation systems to be the responsibility of the future individual property owners. 11. The design, location and materials of all fencing, and of all retaining walls installed by the developer, shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director. Provision of common fences for all side and rear yards -3- shall be the responsibility of the developer. Fencing installed by the developer at the bottom or top of slopes higher than ten feet, and/or fences of rear yards with a high visibility from adjoining down slope areas, may be designed with an open mesh material, subject to review and approval by the Planning Director as regards location and material utilized. 12. Stem access areas into the common open space areas shall be graded to accommodate vehicular entry. Final grading plans for these areas shall be subject to review and approval by the Public Works Director, Dougherty Regional Fire Authority and Dublin Police Department as regards maximum horizontal and cross slopes. Provision of bollards and/or gated access entrys to these areas from adjoining public streets shall be subject to review and approval by the same three parties. 13. To the greatest degree feasible, the site grading and drainage established shall be coordinated to provide smooth, uniform slopes and integrated drainage systems with adjoining project subject to review and approval of the Public Works Director. 14. The adjoining lands identified as the 3.5+ acre common open space area - Parcel "D" of Tentative Map 4859 shall be retained within the remaining, unsubdivided portion of the Nielsen Ranch holding. Access to this area shall be provided between Lots 15 and 16 of Block 3 - Tract 5074. 15. Project grading performed within 25 feet of the drip line of existing on-site or off-site trees shall be addressed by a horticultural report and the recommendations and findings of that report incorporated into the grading and improvement plans of this project. 16. Prior to final inspection on any unit, the developer shall confer with the local postal authorities to determine the type of mail receptacles necessary and provide a letter stating their satisfaction with the type of mail service to be provided. Specific locations for such units shall be to the satisfaction of the Postal Service. _. 17. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a detailed phasing plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director indicating phasing of construction and installation of project structures, roads, drainage improvements, improvements with common open areas and required landscaping and irrigation improvements. 18. Signs established for project identification (as regards to number, size, location, copy and design) shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director prior to installation. 19. The Applicant shall comply with all applicable Dougherty Regional Fire Authority requirements. 20. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall submit a letter documenting that the ordinance requirements of the Fire Department have been satisfied. 21. To apply for building and/or grading permits, the Developer shall submit six (6) sets of construction plans and two (2) sets of Site Plans of each individual lot within the subdivision to the Building Department for plan check. Each set of plans shall have attached an annotated copy of the Final Action Letter. The notations shall clearly indicate how all Conditions of Approval will be complied with. Construction plans will not be accepted without the annotated Final Action Letter attached to each set of plans. The Developer will be responsible for obtaining the approvals of all participating non-city agencies prior to the issuance of building permits. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of November, 1988. AYES: Commissioners Barnes, Burnham, Mack and Zika NOES: None ABSENT: None ATTEST: Planning Commission person Planning Director -4-