HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 5.APart1 12/20/2010W �•
X85$
DATE:. December 20, 2010
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council through City Manager
FROM: Geoff Bradley, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Resolutions to Adopt a Mitigated. Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program; to Approve :a Planned Unit District Unit
Development Plan and Development Standards; and to Approve a Vesting
Tentative Subdivision Map for an 19 -lot (Option BIt 18 lots) Subdivision to Allow
for the Construction of Single - family Homes for the Sunnyslope lI Project
Located within the Sunnyslope Planned Unit District, at 674 Sunnyslope Road.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council review the enclosed Option 'B proposal for the Project,
and if it satisfactorily addresses their concerns expressed at th& public hearing, of February 22,
2010, adopt a Resolution to Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration; Adopt the attached
Resolution Approving a Planned Unit Development Amendment to the Sunnyslope PUD
including the Planned Unit Development Plan and proposed Development Standards for 18
residential units- and. Adopt a Resolution Approving a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map for an
18 4ot subdivision to allow for the construction-of single-family homes for Sunnyslope II
Project. (Attachments 1, 2, and 3)
. BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project at its regular meetings of December 8,
2009 and December 22, 2009. After taking public testimony and deliberating the Commission
forwarded a recommendation to - the City Council to deny the requests to adopt a Mitigated
Negative; Declaration; approve a Planned Unit Development Amendment; to the Sunnyslope
PUD, and adopt a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map .for a 19 -lot subdivision to allow for the
construction of s'ingl'e - family homes for 'Sunnyslope II, located at 674 Sunnyslope Road.
O'n'February 22, 20:1.0, the `City Council considered the Sunnyslope project. Please refer to the
attached City Council staff report relative to the project as it was proposed at that time
i(Attachment 8).; After: receiving public comments, and following Council deliberation, the City
Council .continued the, it6m in order to allow the applicant time to modify the project to address
their comment. ` y q page The� comments are listed b the square bullets on a e 3.
Agenda Review:
Div. Manager_ �'/J City Attorney Finance Director)e City Manager
.Councilrnernber Barrett also 'identified corrections. she considered_ necessary to make the Initial
Study and Mitigated Negative- Declaration adequate to evaluate and mitigate project impacts;
please review the Initial Study Memorandum, Attachment 4 for response to these items.
On March 16, 20 10 the applicant 'submitted a request for' continuance to the June 7 t4 City Council
meeting to allow adequate time for revisions, additional neighborhood outreach and staff review
and analysis. The City Council continued the item to June 7, 2010.
On May 11, 20.1.0 the applicant submitted a subsequent request for continuance to a date
uncertain, citing disagreement about the cost recovery balance,. The City Council continued the
item to August 2, 2010.
On July 12, 20 -10 the applicant submitted a request for continuance to September 13, 2010 due to
a long - planned family vacation. . The;City Council continued the item to September 13, 2010..
On August 24, 2010 the ;applicant submitted a subsequent request for continuance to a date
uncertain. The City Council continued the item to November 15, 2010.
In response to City Council feedback, on November 8, 2010, the applicant submitted Option B,
offered as an alternative .to the 'Project as originally proposed at the February 22, 2010 Council
hearing, with increased tree .preservation, clustering, and parking. Option B also removes the
two affordable housing: units, but adds one more market rate unit, for a total of one less unit than
the original Project.
On November 15, 2010 the applicant requested and was granted a continuance to December 20,
2010.
DISCUSSION
The,applicant held neighborhood meetings on October 19 and December 8, 2010 at the Petaluma
Community Center. The applicant mailed notices to all property owners and residents within a
50Wfoot radius of the project site and to all individuals requesting project notification. The
applicant team presented revised plans and answered questions and 'concerns from those in
attendance. See Attachment 5 pages 3 & 4 "Neighborhood. Outreach." for notes regarding the
October 19 meeting and the final page of Attachment 5' for notes on the December 8 th meeting.
Option B represents the applicant's efforts to address the concerns expressed by Council and the
neighborhood. Plans are included as Attachment 10; the applicant's summary of Option B is
Attachment 5. Council may act on either the original project or the new Option B. However, as
the Council expressed serious concerns with the project as proposed on February 22 and as
Option B appears to address Council's primary concerns, staff has drafted -the attached
Resolutions anticipating Council's preference for Option B over the February 22 version of the
project. Option B is an 18 unit subdivision with no on -site affordable units and. no use of the
State density bonus (the February 22 plan was for 19 units with two on -site affordable units and
use of the State density bonus). One of the upper lots ( #13) was removed and other lots
reconfigured to reduce density in the upper, more steeply sloped portion of the site and to
increase clustering in the lower area. The street width is increased from a private street with
2
parking and sidewalk on just one side to a width that will accommodate parking, sidewalks, and
landscape strips on both. sides. . As well, tree preservation is greatly increased. Review of
proposed houses and lot ;specific development is deferred to a future design review phase,
consistent with the development process of the neighboring subdivisions.. Design standards have
been added to require that houses abutting_ Sunnyslope Road (Lots 1, 3, 17, & 18) face
'Sunnyslope Road and that structures at Lot 5 not exceed one -story in height. The public trail
easement connecting to the urban `separator path easement has been relocated to better work with
existing contours and make the trail more accessible, the path/trail easements are proposed to be
dedicated to the City, and a fund is established to construct and maintain the trails when there is
an abutting connection. A portion of the public connector trail is now proposed to be constructed
when Lot 12 is developed (see Sheet TM -13), in response to neighborhood desire. that emergency
personnel have ready access to the steep private open space in the 'case of a grass fire.
Following is an analysis of how Option B responds to the February 22 Council comments.
• Reconfigure the parcel layout to increase clustering and feathering of density and
• Shift the top lots down to minimize grading on the more : steeply sloped areas of the property:
o The layout is reconfigured; one upslope lot was removed entirely and the revised layout
better demonstrates a clustering of units on the less steep areas farther from the urban
separator.
• Increase parking (parking on both sides of the street was encouraged) and
Provide sidewalk on both sides of the private street:
o The street is redesigned from a 44 width to a 56 width to accommodate parking, a
sidewalk, and a landscape strip on both sides. It is now proposed as a public street as, it
conforms to City standards. The Development Standards and Design Guidelines now
require 2 covered and 2 uncovered parking spaces per lot. This requirement, together
with the Option B redesign to accommodate parking on both sides of the new public
street, will provide parking opportunities greater than a conventional subdivision.
Maximize tree preservation (trees 10 36, 37, 61, and 63 were mentioned specifically):
• Oaks 36, 37, & 63 are proposed for preservation. Oak 61 i's-diseased and recommended
for removal. Buckeye 10 is not a "protected" tree duem to its small size, however the
applicant has chosen to retain it.
• The upper 2.6 acres of the site comprises an oak woodland habitat with a dense canopy
reaching 40 feet in height. This area is within a proposed private open space easement
and the protected trees within the easement are proposed for preservation. This area is
increased by Option B to include oaks 36 & 37.
o Since the Initial Study was written, the applicant has made considerable efforts to
increase tree preservation. In the Initial Study, 12 oaks deemed protected by the IZO
were proposed for removal. Under Option B only four protected trees within in the
Development Area are now proposed for removal; none of these are large and two are
not in good condition. (Two protected oaks, 14 and 61 are diseased or hazardous and
therefore allowed to be removed without mitigation by 17.060.2.c.)
o Protected oaks 18 and' 20 ("each with a 9 inch diameter) are two of four protected oaks
on proposed Lot 4. The applicant has created Option B to preserve the largest two oaks
on the lot: oaks 24 (with a 3 foot diameter) and 22 (with a branched diameter totaling a
19 inches). The appticant also tried to. revise . the plan to preserve Oaks 18 & 20, but
was unable to accommodate them and a building envelope. The applicant proposes
preserving the most desirable and significant of the trees on this lot (21 & 22), while
still accommodating development of the lot, consistent with IZO 17.050.13.
o Protected oak 5`7,(6 inch, diameter) on Lot 10 is proposed for 'removal because it sits in
the middle of the building envelope, making preservation impractical. Its structural
integrity isonly':fair as , a fallen willow has caused it to lean substantially to the north,
making it.a.less 'llan ideal candidate for preservation.
• Protected oak 26 (with split trunks at 5 and 7 inch diameters) on Lot 16 is proposed for
removal because it sits in the middle of the building envelope, making preservation
impractical. Both.its general - health and structural integrity are only fair, making it a
less than ideal candidate for preservation.
• Replacement of oaks 18, 20, and 57 in good health shall be at a one to one trunk
diameter basis and replacement of oak 26 in fair health shall be at a two to one trunk
diameter basis, pursuant to t7.065A.1 & 2. That 'is, 30 inches of trunk diameter are
required. The replacement shall be pursuant to 17.065A.3.c.3, and, for example, could
be comprised of fifteen 24-inch box or ten 36 -inch box in -kind replacement trees.
• Reduce /limit house size:
o Individual house size /design is not being proposed at this time. Bulk and mass will be
reviewed by thel Planning Commission as part of the required SPAR review. The
proposed Development Standards now have a maximum 40 % lot coverage ratio.
• Provide a healthy,mix of different housing sizes:
o The homes are not proposed at this time. The Development Standards specify that each
house must appear-as a. custom design, so different house sizes /designs are likely.
• Reconsider the location and design of the inclusionary housing units to better integrate the
units:
o The on- site inclusionary units have been eliminated; the in -lieu housing fees will
instead be paid to the City. The City has an excellent record of leveraging these funds
to construct affordable. housing. With the elimination of the on -site inclusionary units,
the State density bonus is no longer part of this project and the applicant may no longer.
request development concessions. The resulting 18 residential units on 7.6 net acres
results in 2.36 units to 'the net acre, within the .6 to 15. unit to the net acre range
specified by the Very Low Density Residential General Plan land use classification.
• Reorient the houses w. hich have. frontage on Sunnyslope Road to face Sunnyslope Road, to
repeat the orientation pattern of the historic house and
• Limit house to a single story for -those lots adjacent to neighboring . lots on Smith Street:
o The proposed Development Standards and Design Guidelines require orientation to
Sunnyslope for Lots 1, 3, 17, and 18 and specify that development on Lot 5 be limited
to single story in response to neighborhood .concerns.
In addition, at the February 22 hearing the Council requested clarification on a number of
issues that are addressed by the following:
I . The development is anticipated to be for sale.
2. The anticipated timeline for construction would be 18 months to 2 years in a strong real
estate market. The actual .construction timeline will be market driven, but the applicant
does intend to cluster construction activity and does not anticipate any construction
commencing in the nextyear.
3. A funding mechanism for maintenance of private improvements is provided in the form of
the three Maintenance Agreements shown on Sheet TM -7 and provided at Attachment 7. A
Landscape Assessment District for the public right -of -way area, vegetated swales, and
underground detention pipes is proposed, as shown on Sheet TM -7 and provided at
Attachment 7. The applicant proposes a fund to cover the future construction and then
4
maintenance-costs of the Urban Separator trail. and connector trail prior to Final Map
approval. Should Council choose to require the traits be constructed with the project (see
PBAC %Trail discussion below), the Landscape Assessment District. should be conditioned to
include trail maintenance.
4. Regarding the possibility of transplanting existing fruit trees, the applicant is willing to
allow existing trees to be transplanted, but does not propose transplanting. In Option B
olive 6, citrus 6 & 7, and apple 27 are proposed to remain (though they are not protected by
the IZO).
5. Regarding the potential to increase Build It Green points, the Initial Study says the project
was designed to attain a,120 GreenPoints rating, with a project goal of possibly reaching
150- GreenPoints. The Initial Study is based on the homes achieving 120 GreenPoints and
vesting TSM Condition 14 requires this occur. Achieving 120 GreenPoints is notable, as it
'is significantly more than the 50 GreenPoints required for rating by the City's voluntary
green building program (Build It Green). It also exceeds the mandatory CALGreen Tier
One building code, which apply ;as of January 2011.
Initial Study
Please see the memorandum °from.staff to the City Council, at Attachment 4, outlining any effect
of project modifications or new guidelines or plans adopted since the- Initial Study's circulation
for public comment on February 5, 2009. The memorandum, also corrects two :minor Initial
Study language errors and addresses suggestions offered by one Council member at the .last
hearing. Note that none of the 'issues discussed change the conclusions contained in the
Sunnyslope II Initial Study as to environmental impacts of `the project so as to make those
impacts significant or more substantial. than previously studied. The new BAAQMD CEQA
Guidelines and the new Clean Air Plan support a reduction in the. significance of impacts of the
project relating to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions from those analyzed in the Initial
Study, removing the CEQA requirement to adopt a statement of overriding considerations in
connection with any'project approval.
Pedestrian & Bicycle Advisory Committee Option B Recommendations & U.S. Trail Discussion
PBAC supports the Option. B pedestrian and bicycle amenities as proposed and recommend a
number of conditions which are already part of the project including sidewalks on both sides of
the street, public on- street parking, and driveways removed from Sunnyslope Road.
Their primary recommendation :is that the Urban Separator- trail improvements not be delayed
until home construction or beyond. They state that "Delaying the trail installation until a path is
installed on the Lands 'of Jonas as applicant recommends is misguided and certain to create
future misunderstandings with the future owners of Lot 12, Lot 13, and Lot 11, which the city
will bear the expense of clarifying. Those owners will be best served by buying their lots with
the trail in place so that they are not unpleasantly surprised by this, use anticipated in the General
Plan."
They also recommend that the applicant install:
1. At the path connecting the cul -de -sac sidewalk with the Urban Separator trail,
5
® At .least one bench at a. location near shade and with :a. view the surrounding area.
® Turnouts to allow pedestrians to stand 'clear of a. cyclist- coming downhill.
• PBAC encourages the permitted open wire fencing along the downslope side of the
trail as, it crosses lot 12, to reduce possible trespassing and reduce conflicts, and
recommends a gate so that the owners of Lot 12 and 11 can access the upper portion
.of their lot. They also recommend a prohibition on climbing vegetation on this
fence.
2. At the Urban Separator trail,,
® A viewing area/picnic bench(es) at a flat location within the oak woods in the upper
corner of Lot 12, at a location that would allow users of the Urban Separator trail to
travel to said picnic table and enjoy the expansive views and take a rest. PBAC is of
the opinion that creating a viewing area/picnic tables as a destination within Lot 12
upon construction of project improvements (and not delayed until individual home
construction on Lot 12 or further connection to the US path on adjacent properties)
is especially appropriate now for full enjoyment of the Urban Separator trail until
adjacent connections are made.
3. Signage, informing the public that there is a public right of access for pedestrian, dogs on
leash, and cyclists
• At the intersection of Sunnyslope and the internal street and
• At the front of Lot 12 and the beginning of the trail. This sign shall also describe the
entire Petaluma Ring Trail, show the current open - sections to avoid confusion and
frustration, and encourage users to be respectful of adjoining private property.
The Advisory Committee also recommends that the connector trail be ten feet wide. The
connector trail is over terrain of 30% and greater slope; thus, a ten foot wide path would require
extraordinary amounts of grading and retaining walls, the likely loss /impact to protected native
trees, and a far greater visual impact than desired by neighbors, Council, Implementing Zoning
Ordinance, or the General Plan. For these reasons; staff. recommends the connector trail be a
natural - looking deer trail or scramble trail, perhaps with some wood - retaining -soil steps, within
the 10 foot wide easement. This intent is specified by Condition. G; a more detailed design will.
occur during the Improvement Plan stage. The trail material of cleared soil, or as determined
most appropriate by staff, has been accepted by PBAC.
The- timing - of Urban Separator trail improvements, because it is not connected to any other
portion of the Urban'Separator path and as it is not known when or how it will be connected, is at
the direction of the Council. ,Staff has drafted Condition 7 to reflect the applicant's current'
proposal to construct a portion of the connector trail when Lot 12 is developed to provide
emergency personnel access to the upper slope in case of a grass fire. Staff has drafted
Condition 8 to reflect the applicant's current proposal to fund both trails, but have construction
of the trails delayed until a time when the Urban Separator trail would connect with one on an
adjoining parcel. Because of the very steep slopes, native trees, and view impacts, staff
recommends the natural, low - impact, deer /scramble type trail, pursuant to City Engineer and
Planning Division review and approval. Should the Council desire the trails be constructed as
part of the Public Improvements or when Lots 11 and 12 are each developed, staff recommends
3
that Conditions requiring the PBAC recommended signage, fencing on '(at least) the down slope
side -of the easement; bench the connector trail, and picnic table :at the Urban Separator trail be
added. `If the Council at accepts the 'applicant's proposal that the trails be ,constructed when there is
an adjoining connection, then staff recommends that the fund be calculated_ to include the cost of
obtaining, installing, and maintaining the signage, fencing, bench, and picnic table as specified
above; these ' items have been added to Condition 8. Council should be aware of neighborhood
concern about loitering on or around such trails and neighborhood preference that the trails not
occur.
Neighborhood Correspondence
One letter was received on December 6, 2010 from Barbara Haushalter expressing concern
regarding density and encouraging open fencing, native oak preservation, minimizing fill, and
maintaining the constructionhours of the Sunnyslope PUD (see condition 16), see Attachment 9.
FINANCIAL, IMPACTS
The project is subject to cost based fee recovery. Processing costs paid to date are approximately
$179,000. As of the first of December, this account has a positive balance.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program
2. Draft Resolution Approving the Sunnyslope II ' PUD Unit Development Plan and
.Development Standards
3. 'Draft Resolution Approving a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map for Sunnyslope II
4. Initial Study Memorandum from Staff, dated December 20, 2010
5. Applicant's Option B Summary, date stamped November 8, 2010 & Summary of December
8, 2010 neighborhood meeting
6. Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee Recommendations; dated November 22, 2010
7. -Draft Landscape Assessment District & Maintenance Agreements, as drafted by the
,applicant, date stamped November 8, 2010
8. 'February 22, 2010 City Council Staff Report (for attachments, see note below)
9. Neighborhood Correspondence: From Barbara Haushalter received December 6,.,20 10
10, 'Plans date stamped December 7, 2010
Fj Items listed below are large in volume and are not attached to this report, but may be viewed
in the City Clerk's office.
® Please see http:// petalunma. grainieus.com/ViewPublisher.php ?view id =3 for links to the
February 22, 2010 City Council Attachments and Hearings
® Please see http:H petaluma. granicus. com /ViewPublisher.php ?view .id =5 for the Planning
Commission ,Staff Reports dated December 8, 2009 and December 22, 2009 and
associated attachments and plans.
1557229.1
7
ATTACHMENT 'I
Option B:
RESOLUTION. OF THE CITY COUNCIL OFTHE CITY OF PETALUMA
ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
MITIGATION MONI'T'ORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR THE SUNNYSLOPE H PROJECT, PURSUANT TO THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMEN`T'AL QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS; an application and vesting tentative subdivision map has been submitted to
subdivide an 8.6 acre parcel at 674 Sunnyslope Road, APN -019 -203 -008 into a 18 -unit single
.family residential subdivision referred to as Sunnyslope II . ( "the Project "), within the
Sunnyslope Area Planned Unit: District ( "PUD "), together with a Unit Development Plan and
amended Development- Standards; and_
WHEREAS, the City prepared an Initial Study for the proposed Project, consistent with
CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15163 and determined that a Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND) was required in order to analyze the potential for new or additional
significant environmental impacts of the Project beyond- those identified in the General Plan
2025 EIR; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated. Negative Declaration for the
Sunnyslope II project based .on the Initial Study was published on February 5, 2009 mailed to all
responsible and affected agencies and posted in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act ( "CEQA" ), 14 California Code of Regulations, Chapter 3 ( "CEQA Guidelines ") and
the City of Petaluma Environmental Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project was
considered at duly noticed Planning Commission hearings on the Project on December 8th and
December 22, 2009, together with;all public comments submitted at or before the hearings; and
WHEREAS; the Initial :Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project was
considered at duly noticed. "City .Council hearings on the Project. on February 22 and December
20, 2010, together with all public comments submitted at or before the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Project is not located.on a site listed on•any.Hazardous Waste Site List
compiled by the State pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code; and,
WHEREAS, the .M.itigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached as Exhibit A
and incorporated herein by reference has been:prepared for the Project to ensure compliance with
adopted mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration;
and,
WHEREAS,, the Initial Study and Mitigated' Negative Declaration and the record of
proceedings on the Project, and all material referenced and/or 'incorporated herein are available
for public review at the City of Petaluma Community Development Department at Petaluma City
Hall during normal business hours. The custodian of documents and other materials which
constitute the record of proceedings"' for the Project is the City of Petaluma Community
Development 'Department English St.; Petaluma CA 949$2 att'n: Tiffany Robbe.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council finds and determines
as follows:
1. The City Council .has reviewed the Initial Study and ,Mitigated Negative Declaration, all
supporting evidence and documentation, and considered public comments provided at or
before the hearing of this. matter.
2. The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration reflect the City Council's
independent judgment and analysis as to the effects of the Project on the environment.
3. Water demand and supply information in the Initial 'Study was updated in a staff
memorandum to the Planning Commission dated December 8, 2009 and incorporated
herein. No new or more significant water supply and/or demand effects other than those
evaluated in the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration were identified as a
result of information contained the December 8, 2009 memorandum.
4. Density, air quality, ,greenhouse gas, ozone, and protected tree information in the Initial
Study was updated in a staff memorandum to the City, Council dated December .20, 2010
and incorporated herein. No new or more significant effects than those evaluated in the
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration were identified as a result of
information contained in the December 20, 2010 memorandum.
Modifications made to the Project after circulation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Initial Study include the elimination of one up -slope lot, enhanced clustering,
removal of on -site density bonus /affordable units, parking and a sidewalk on each side of
the now public street additional protection of existing trees within the. Project, provision
of future pedestrian access to the Urban Separator Pathway, and reduction of the area on
slopes greater than 15% which will be disturbed by grading. The additional measures
have been incorporated into the Project design. and/or, imposed on the Project through
conditions of approval. As analyzed in the record of proceedings, none of the proposed
project modifications and/.or additional mitigation measures and conditions create new or
substantially more "severe environmental effects or gives rise to a fair argument that
significant environmental effects are created by the Project. The enhanced clustering,
additional tree, preservation,. increased parking, and grading, reduction further reduce
effects which are. already determined by the Initial Study and 'Mitigated Negative
Declaration to be less than significant. Recirculation of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Initial Study is therefore not required..
6. Based on its review of the entire record herein, including the MND, the Initial Study, all
supporting, referenced and incorporated documents and all comments received, the City
Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the Project as mitigated will have a
significant effect. on the environment, and that the MND, Initial Study, and supporting
documents provide an adequate description of the impacts of the Project and comply
with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Petaluma Environmental
Guidelines. '
BE I'T FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council:
1. Adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Project and dated February 4,
2009, as supplemented and modified by documents described herein and referenced and
incorporated in the record of proceedings.
2. Adopts..the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program set forth in Exhibit A hereto
and incorporated herein by reference
10
EXHIBIT A .
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Land Use and Planninu
1. In order to -.meet the intent of the General Plan policies for the Urban Separator Pathway,
prior to building permit applications, the applicant shall provide an agreed upon funding
mechanism for the future trail improvements, landscaping, fencing and maintenance for the
Urban Separator Pathway subject to review and approval of the City Engineer and City
Attorney.
Geology and Soils
L The applicant shall incorporate all of the recommendations contained in the Geotechnical
Engineering Investigation (Michelucci & Associates, Inca 2003) for the revised site plan
confirmed in 2008 in the design and implementation ofthe proposed project.
2. In order to reduce erosion and geologic hazards to less- than significant levels, the proposed
project shall incorporate the following standard and project specific conditions of approval:
All construction activities shall comply with the'Un .form Building Code regulations
for seismic safety (i.e:, reinforcing perimeter. and /or load bearing walls, bracing
parapets, etc.)..
The project sponsor shall submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan prepared by a
registered professional engineer as an integral part. of the grading plan. The
Erosion and. Sediment Control Plan shall be subject to review and approval of
Public Works, prior to issuance of a grading permit. The Plan shall include
temporary erosion control measures to be used during construction of cut and fill
slopes, excavation for foundations, and other grading operations at the site to
prevent discharge of sediment and contaminants into the drainage system. The
Erosion and ,Sediment Control Plan shall include the following measures as
applicable:
a.. Throughout the construction process, disturbance of groundcover shall be minimized and
the existing vegetation shall be retained to the extent possible to reduce soil erosion. All
construction and grading activities, including short- term needs (equipment staging areas,
storage areas, and field office locations) shall minimize the amount of land area
disturbed. Whenever possible existing disturbed areas shall be used for such purposes.
b. All drairage- ways, wetland areas and creek channels shall 'be protected from silt and
sediment in storm runoff through the use of silt fences,, diversion berms, and check dams.
All exposed surface areas shall be mulched and reseeded and all cut and fill slopes shall
be protected with hay mulch and/or erosion control blankets as appropriate.
c. Material and equipment for implementation of erosion control measures shall be on -site
by October Ist. All grading activity shall be completed by October 15th, prior to the on-
set of the rainy season, with all disturbed areas stabilized and re- vegetated by October
31 st. Upon approval by the Petaluma City Engineer, extensions for short-term grading
11
.may be allowed. The Engineering Section in conjunction with any specially permitted
rainy season grading may require special erosion control measures.
d. All earthwork, grading, trenching, back- filling; and compaction operations shall be
conducted, in accordance with the City's Grading and Erosion Control Ordinance (Title
17, Chapter' 17.31, of the Municipal Code) and shall be reflected on the improvement
plans.
e. All public and/or private `improvements shall' be 'subject to inspection by City staff for
compliance with the approved Improvement Plans, prior to City acceptance.
3. If unique geologic or physical -features are uncovered during grading or other on -site
excavation(s), earthwork within 25 feet of these materials shall be stopped until a certified
professional geolog has-had has had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and
suggest appropriate mitigation(s), as deemed necessary.
Air Quality
L The "Basic Measures and the "Enhanced Measures" listed in, Table 1 shall be incorporated
into the construction plans , for the proposed project. The "Optional: Measures" listed in Table
l shall be incorporated. if further emission reductions are deemed,necessary by the City. Prior
to issuing a grading permit, the City shall review grading_ and construction plans to ensure
these measures have been incorporated.
Table 8 -2
Basic Construction Miti att6n Measures Recdnimended_ for ALL Proposed Projects
1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles graded areas, and unpaved
access.roads).shall be watered two times per day.
2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off -.site shall be covered.
3. All visible mud or dirt track -out, onto adjacent public roads .shall be removed usn g wet power
vacuum street sweepers. at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is' prohibited.
4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph..
5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks be paved shall be completed as soon as possible.
Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are.
used.
6. Idling. times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the
maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the Cal iforma: airborne toxics control measure
Title 13 Section 24:85 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided'
for construction workers at all access points.
7. All construction' equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with
manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and
determined to be running °in proper condition prior to operation.
8. Post a- publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at' the Lead Agency
regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond -and take corrective action within 48 hours.
The Air District's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable
regulations.
12
Source: BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, 4999June 2010
Hydrology and Water Quality
1. In accordance with requirements set by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB),
the applicant shall prepare a. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) per the latest
state requirements to be implemented throughout project 'construction and operation. The
Applicant shall complete and submit: an NOI and appropriate. filing fee to the SWRCB. The
applicant shall file a Notice of Termination (NOT) with the SWRCB upon project
completion. The SWPPP shall. be submitted for review and approval by Public Works prior
to approval of improvement plans or issuance of grading or building permits. City inspectors
shall inspect the improvements and verify compliance prior to acceptance of improvements.
The SWPPP shall comply with San Francisco Bay Area Regional Water Quality Control
Board requirements and:includethe following as appropriate:
All drainage improvement plans shall include 'installation of permanent signs
(concrete stamps or equivalent) at each storm drain inlet. The sign.;at each inlet
shall read "No Dumping, Flows to the Petaluma River" or equivalent, and shall be
installed at the time of construction and verified prior to acceptance , of public
improvements or 'issuance ofa certificate of occupancy.
The project shall comply with General Plan Policy 8- P- 3 "6,requiring no net increase in
storm water runoff.
All construction activities shall be performed in a manner that minimizes the
sediment and/or pollutant entering directly or indirectly into the storm drain
system or ground water. The applicant shall incorporate the following provisions
into the construction plans and specifications, to be verified by the Community
Development Department, prior to issuance of grading or building permits.
13
The applicant shall designate on the' improvement plans construction staging areas
and areas for the storage of any hazardous materials (i.e., motor oil, fuels, paints,
etc.) to be: used during construction. All construction staging areas shall be located
away from any drainage areas to prevent runoff from construction areas from
entering into the: drainage system. Areas designated for storage of hazardous
materials shall include proper containment features to prevent contamination from
entering drainage areas in the event of a spill or leak.
No debris, soil, sand, cement, or washing thereof, or other construction related
materials or wastes, soil or petroleum products or other organic or earthen
material shall be allowed to enter any drainage system. All discarded material
including all
and any accidental spills shall be removed and disposed of at
an approved disposal site. The 'applicant shall designate appropriate disposal
methods and/or facilities on the construction plans or in the specifications.
Pesticides and fertilizers., shall not be applied to public landscape areas during the
rainy season (October 1st -April 15th). The applicant shall utilize Best
Management Practices regarding pesticide/herbicide use and fully commit to
Integrated Pesi Management techniques. The applicant shall be required, when
pesticide/herbidde use occurs, to post appropriate signs warning pedestrians.
The applicant shall submit the required Notice of :Intent for compliance with the
conditions for a general permit under the National Pollutant Discharge Eliminate
System (NPDES) storm water permit for construction activities administered by
the State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board. The conditions
require development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP), which may also meet the City's requirement for an Erosion and
Sediment Control Plan, noted above.
The applicant shall submit a detailed grading and drainage plan for review and
approval by the Public Works Department and Planning Division prior to
approval of a final map improvement plan, grading, or building permit. The
project grading and all site drainage improvements shall be designed and
constructed in conformance with the City of Petaluma "Standard Specifications"
and the Sonoma County Water Agency's "Flood Control Design Criteria ".
Channel modifications and bank stabilization improvements within a natural
stream, channel "shall be designed in conformance with the City's "Restoration
Design, and Management Guidelines ". The drainage plans'; shall, include supporting
calculations of storm drain and culvert size using acceptable enginee "ring methods.
No lot =to -lot drainage shall be permitted. Surface runoff shall be addressed within
each individual lot, and then conveyed to an appropriate storm drain system. All
hydrologic, hydraulic and storm drain system design shall- be subject to review
and approval of the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) and the City
Engineer.
14
Biological. Resources
1. Grading and other construction activities shall be scheduled to avoid the nesting season to the
extent feasible. The nesting season for most birds in Sonoma County extends from February
through September.
2. if construction is to occur :during the breeding season, a .qualified ornithologist shall conduct
pre- construction surveys no more than 15 days prior to the initiation of construction in any
given area. Pre- construction surveys shall be used to ensure that no nests of species protected
by the MBTA or State Code would be disturbed during project implementation.
3. If vegetation is to be removed and all necessary approvals have. been obtained, removal of .
potential nesting substrate (e.g,, bushes, trees grass, buildings, and burrows) shall take place
before nesting season (February) to help preclude nesting. Pre- removal surveys are required
for some species. Removal of vegetation or structures :shall be completed outside of the
nesting season (February though September).
4. If an active nest is found and is greater than half completed, a. qualified ornithologist shall
determine the extent of a construction -free buffer zone to be established around the nest in
consultation with CDFG.
5. A pre - disturbance survey -for roosting bats shall be conducted prior to any removal of trees >12
inches in diameter at 4.5 -feet above grade. Pallid bats will roost in tree branch cavities only 6
inches in diameter. The survey shall be conducted by a_ qualified bat biologist (i.e., a biologist
holding.a CDFG collection _permit and a Memorandum of Understanding with CDFG allowing
the biologist to handle and collect bats). No activities that would result in disturbance to active
roosts shall proceed prior to the completion of pre- disturbance .surveys. If no active roosts are
found, then no further action would be required. If a maternity roost is present, a qualified bat
biologist shall determine. the extent of construction -free zones around active nurseries since
these species are known to abandon young when disturbed. If either a maternity roost or
hibernacula is present, mitigation measure BIO -6 shall be implemented if avoidance of the
occupied tree or structure is possible, and mitigation measure BIO -7 shall be implemented if it
is not possible. CDFG shall also be notified of any active nurseries within the construction
zone.
6. If active maternity roosts or "hibernacula (hibernating bats) are found, the proposed project shall
be redesigned if possible to avoid the loss of the tree occupied by the roost.
7. If an, active maternity roost is. found and the proposed project: cannot be redesigned to avoid.
rem_ oval of the occupied tree or structure, demolition of that tree of structure shall :commence
before maternity colonies form (i.e., prior to March I st) or after young are flying (i.e., after
July 31st). The disturbance -free buffer zones described in BIO -5 shall remain during the
maternity roost season (lylarch 1 st to July 31 st).
If non - breeding,, hibernating bats are found in a tree scheduled for removal and the proposed
project cannot be redesigned' to avoid removal of the occupied tree or structure, the individuals
shall . be safely evicted, under the direction of a qualified bat biologist (as determined by a
Memorandum of Understanding with CDFG)`, by opening the roosting area to allow airflow -
through the cavity. Trees with roosts that need to be removed shall first be disturbed at dusk,
just prior to removal that, same evening. This action will allow bats to leave during dark hours,
15
thus increasing their chance of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation
during daylight.
8. Natural materials beneath trees in the valley oak woodland habitat area shall be left
undisturbed.
.10. Prior to initiating, any construction activity, including demolition or grading, temporary
protective fencing shall be installed for each protected tree to remain. Fencing shall be
located at the Tree Protection.Zone (TPZ) and shall be illustrated on the Improvement Plans.
The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) represents the area around each tree, or group of trees,
which must be protected at all times with tree protection fencing. Fencing shall serve as a
barrier to prevent encroachment of any type by construction activities, equipment, materials
storage, or personnel. - No encroachment into the MAO, be allowed at any time without
approval from the project- arborist. Any unauthorized entry, into the TPZ shall be a violation
of the Tree Protection Ordinance and shall be subject to enfgrcement through civil, criminal
or administrative remedies including applicable penalties. Contractors and subcontractors
shall direct all equipment and. personnel to remain outside the fenced area at all times until
project is complete, and shall ; instruct personnel and sub- contractors as to the purpose and
importance of fencing and, preservation. The following specific restrictions shall apply
within the TPZ`
a. No grading shall occur within the protective barriers without prior approval by the
Director.
b. No attachments or wires other than those of a protective ,or non- damaging nature shall be
attached to a protected tree.
c. Excavation or. landscape preparation within the protective barriers shall be limited to the
use of hand tools and small hand field power tools and -shall not be of a depth that could
cause root damage.
d. When the existing grade around a protected tree is to be raised the project and/or City
arborist -shall provide written directions on which method(s) may be used to drain liquids
away from the trunk.
e. When the existing grade around a protected tree is to be lowered the project and/or City'
arborist shall provide written directions on which method(s) may be used (terracing,
retaining. wall, etc) to allow the dripline to be left at the original grade.
f. No equipment, solvents, paint, asphalt, or debris of any kind shall be placed,- stored, or
allowed within the protective barrier.
Noise
1. During the construction period, the proposed project shall .incorporate the noise control
measures contained in the noise assessment (Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. 2005). These noise
control measures shall be included on Improvement Plans submitted to the City as follows:
16
a. Noise- generating- construction activities shall be conducted in accordance with Section
21.030.A of the City of Petaluma Zoning Implementing Ordinance. This section limits
construction to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between -9:00 a.m.
and 10:00 p.m. on Saturday, Sunday and on State, Federal or Local Holidays.
b. All internal_ combustion engines shall be equipped with intake and exhaust mufflers that
are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
c. "Quiet" air compressors and other stationary noise sources shall be utilized where
technology exists.
d. Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines shall be prohibited.
e.. Stationary noise generating equipment shall be located as far as. possible from sensitive
receptors when sensitive receptors adjoin or are. near a construction project area. Such
equipment shall be acoustically shielded.
f. The contractor shall prepare `a detailed construction plan: identifying the schedule for
major noise - generating construction activities. The construction plan shall identify a
procedure for coordination .with nearby residences so that construction activities can be
scheduled to minimize noise disturbance.
g. A "disturbance coordinator" shall be designated who would be responsible for
responding to any complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator shall
determine the cause of the-noise complaint (e.g., bad muffler, etc:) and shall require that
reasonable measures be, implemented to correct the problem.
Visual Quality and Aesthetics
1. The applicant shall include a deed restriction for those properties that include the
conservation easement to ensure the permanent reservation of these areas as undeveloped
managed open space. The wording for this deed restriction shall be submitted with the
Final Map.
2. As -the individual .lots on the project site sell, each prospective homeowner shall submit the
architecture and landscaping proposed for the individual :houses for review by the Planning
Commission for Site Plan and Architectural Review (SPAR) to ensure compatibility with
the existing neighborhood and surroundings, and with the approved PUD.
3. All. outdoor lighting associated with the proposed development submitted for Site Plan and
Architectural Review (SPAR) shall conform to the following guidelines:
a. All exterior lighting shall be directed onto the project site and access ways and shielded
to prevent , glare and intrusion onto adjacent residential properties and
natural /undeveloped areas. Plans subrnitted for SPAR review and approval shall
incorporate lighting plans, which- reflect the location and design of all proposed
streetlights, and any other exterior lighting proposed.
b. Development plans shall be designed to avoid vehicular lighting impacts to bedroom
areas and other light- sensitive living areas of any nearby residential lot, home or facility.
Development plans for lots proposed at street intersections or in other potentially light -
sensitive locations shall incorporate architectural or landscape design features to screen
interior living space from headlight glare.
17
c. No illumination shall be installed within the conservation. easement area.
d. The improvement and landscape plans prepared for the project shall reflect the location
and design details of all light fixtures proposed. Said locations and details shall be
reviewed and approved via Site Plan and Architectural Review.
Hazards & Hazardous Materials
1. Prior to construction, the - construction contractor shall prepare a Hazardous Materials
Management Plan for approval by' the City. The plan shall include - specific information on
how the Contractor intends to safely transport and store fuels, oils, coatings, and cement, and
conduct fueling and equipment maintenance operations. In addition, the plan shall describe
measures to contain rinsate resulting from the cleaning of equipment. Rinsate shall not be
allowed to be discharged: to the ground but must be contained and disposed of off site, at a
location designated in the, ,plan. 'The plan shall also include specific : measures to be
implemented in the event of a ; release of a hazardous material into water or onto land. The
Contractor shall be required, to have on hand- at all times- - adequate absorbent materials and
containment booms to handle a spill equivalent to the largest container of fuels or oil in their,
possession.
2. Sampling shall be' conducted to determine the presence or absence of ACM and lead -based
paint in .the existing house. An ACM Investigation shall be performed by an Asbestos
Hazardous Emergency Response Act (AHERA) certified inspector under Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) Title II and certified by Cal. Occupational Safety Health Administration
(OSHA) under State of California rules and regulations (California Code of Regulations,
Section 1529). Surveys for lead -based paint' be conducted prior to restoration of the
existing house on the project site. Lead -based paint and ACM shall be remediated according
to all applicable state and federal regulations.
Cultural Resources
1. The proposed project shall comply with the following recommendations contained in the
report entitled Historic Structures Evaluation of-the House Located at 674 Sunnyslope Road
(Archeological_ Resource ;Service 2008) and in the peer review of that report (Carey & Co.
2007):
;a: The character defining features of the historic ,house shall be retained in the proposed
project and in all future projects.
b. -A window survey of -the house at 674 Sunnyslope Road shall be conducted before any
alterations are undertaken. This survey, to be conducted by a qualified. Historical
Architect, shall include close .inspection of the size, type and condition of all existing
windows, and shall assess the feasibility of repair .instead of, replacement. Based on the
results of the window survey, the existing wood -frame windows shall be repaired, or, if
repair is not feasible, shall be replaced in kind with, wood -frame windows that duplicate
the pane patterns and wood window trim detail of the existing windows.
c. The project sponsor shall explore ways of retaining as much of the distinctive historic
material contained in the interior of the house as possible.
18
2. If deposits of prehistoric or historic archaeological materials, including but not limited to
charcoal, obsidian or chest flakes, .grinding bowls, shell fragments, bone, pockets 'of dark,
friable soils, glass, metal ceramics, wood or similar debris, are discovered during grading,
trenching, or other on -site excavation(s), earthwork within 25 feet of these materials shall be
stopped until a professional archaeologist certified by the Registry of Professional
Archaeologists (RPA) has, had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and
suggest appropriate mitigation(s), as deemed necessary.
3. If paleontological resources are uncovered during grading or other on -site excavation(s),
earthwork within 25 feet of these materials shall be stopped until a certified professional
archaeologist/paleontologist has had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find
and suggest appropriate mitigation(s), as deemed necessary.
4. If human remains are encountered work within 25 feet of the, discovery shall be redirected
and the County Coroner. notified immediately. At the same time, an archaeologist shall be
contacted to evaluate the situation. Project personnel shall, not collect or move any human
remains and associated materials. If the human remains are of Native American origin, the
Coroner must notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours of
identification. The Native American Heritage Commission would identify a Native
American Most Likely Descendent (MLD) to inspect the ,site and provide recommendations
for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave goods. Upon completion of the
evaluation, a report shall be prepared documenting the methods and results, as well as
recommendations for the treatment of human remains and any associated cultural materials,
as appropriate and in. coordination with the recommendations of the MLD. The report shall
be submitted to the City and the Northwest Information Center.
Mitigation Measures/Monitorin�
Implementation:
The applicant shall be required to obtain all required permits from responsible
agencies and provide proof of compliance to the City prior to issuance of grading
permits or approvals of improvements plans.
2. The applicant shall incorporate all applicable code provisions and required conditions
into the design_and improvements plans and specifications for the project.
3. The applicant shall notify all employees, contractors, and agents involved in the
project implementation of all conditions applicable to the project and shall ensure
compliance with such conditions. Applicant shall notify all assigns and transfers of
the same.
4. The applicant shall provide for the cost of any conditions that involves on- going .
operations on the site or long - range improvements, such as archaeological resources,
etc.
Monitoring:
1. The Building Division, Planning Division, Engineering Section and Fire Departments
shall review the improvement and construction plans for conformance with the
approved project description and all applicable codes, .conditions and permit
19
requirernerits prior to approval of a site design review, improvement plans, grading
plans, or building permits.
2.. The Planning Division shall ensure that the applicant has,obtained applicable required
permits from all. responsible agencies and that the plans and specifications conform to
the permit requirements prior to the issuance of grading or building permits.
3. Prior to acceptance of improvements or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, all
improvements shall be subject to inspection by City staff for compliance with the
project description, permit conditions, and approved development or improvement
plans.
Construction Measures:
1. The .applicant shall designate a project manager with, .authority to implement all
conditions of approval arid provide name, address, and phone numbers to the City
prior to issuance of any grading permits and signed by the contractor responsible for
construction.
2. Required during construction shall be listed as conditions on the building or grading
permits and signed by the contractor responsible for construction.
3. City inspectors shall insure that construction activities occur with the approved plans
and conditions of approval.
4. If deemed appropriate by the City, the applicant shall arrange a pre- construction
conference with the construction contractor, City staff and responsible agencies to
review the conditions of approval prior to the issuance of grading and building
permits.
1558282.1
20
A'T'TACHMENT 2
Option B
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY'OF PETA,LUMA
APPROVING A PLANNED, UNIT "DISTRICT UNIT DEVELOPMENT
PLAN AND DEVE LOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE SUNNYSLOPE II
PROJECT, APN: 019 -203 -008
WHEREAS, an application and vesting tentative map has been submitted to subdivide
an 8.6 acre parcel at 674 Sunnyslope Road, APN -019- 203 7008 into a 18 -unit single family
residential subdivision referred to as Sunnyslope II, within the Sunnyslope Area Planned Unit
District ( "PUD "), together with a Unit Development. Plan and amended Development Standards
( "the Project "); and
WHEREAS, on June 3, 1991, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1856 N.C.S.,
prezoning this portion of the Sunnyslope Area to PUD and establishing maximum development
potential for APN 019- 203 -008;, and
WHEREAS, on June 3, :1991, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 91 -152 N.C.S.,
establishing as PUD development standards for the Sunnyslope Area the provisions of the R -1
20,000 residential zoning district as established in the former City of Petaluma Zoning
Ordinance; and
WHEREAS Resolution No. 91 -152 N:C.S. further provides that "At the discretion of the
City Planning Commission and the City Council, minimum parcel size and minimum lot
dimensions may be altered as appropriate to promote the most environmentally - sensitive and
land - efficient lotting patterns without, however, exceeding maximum development potential as
noted in the attached Exhibit.A; and
WHEREAS, the City of Petaluma General Plan 2025 ( "General Plan ") at Policy I -P -5
provides in pertinent part, "The unit yield calculation historically used in the Sunnyslope
Assessment District, per the 1985 annexation, is superseded by the density ranges in the General
Plan.... "; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan establishes Very Low Density Residential as the land use
for APN 019- 203 -008, with a density range of 0,6 to 2.5 dwelling units per net acre; and
WHEREAS, on December Stn and December 22, 2009, the Planning Commission
conducted duly noticed hearings on the Project and after consideration of all documents and
evidence submitted, recommended Project denial as set forth in Planning 'Commission
Resolutions No. 2009 -04, 2009 -05 and 2009 -06, respectively; and
WHEREAS on December 20, 2010, in compliance with the Californi m
a Environental
Quality Act ( "CEQA "), '14 California Code of Regulations, Chapter 3 ( "CEQA Guidelines ") and
the City of Petaluma Environmental Guidelines, the City Council approved a mitigated negative
declaration and mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the Project; and
21
WHEREAS, on February 22 and December 20, 2010 the City Council held a duly
noticed public hearing to rconsider the, Project, including the proposed PUD Unit Development
Plan and amended PUD Development Standards.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council finds and
determines as follows:
The PUD Unit Development Plan.for the Project consists of the Vesting Tentative
Map, Sheets TM -1 through TM -15 .dated December 7, 2010, as modified by
conditions of approval contained in the Resolution Approving Vesting Tentative
Map presented 'and approved by the City Council on December 20, 2010, all
mitigation measures adopted for the Project, and the PUD Development Standards
and Design Guidelines for the Sunnyslope II Project attached hereto as Exhibit A
and incorporated herein by reference.
2. The Project as proposed in the PUD Unit Development Plan is consistent with the
General Plan in that:
a. The Project.residential development consistent with the General Plan land use
designation for the site. The density of 1.8 units for the Project is consistent
with Ge'eral.Plan Policy 1 -P -5, and the General Plan density range for the site
calculated. on net acreage of approximately 7.62 acres using the Very Low
Residential density range of 0.6 to 2.5 dwelling units per net acre, resulting in
a range for the Project `between 4.9 and 19 total units.
b. The Project includes .a 20 foot wide pedestrian access easement to be dedicated
to the City as a portion of the Urban Separator Pathway, consistent with
General Plan Policy I -P -21.
c. The Project includes a 10 foot wide public access easement allowing public
trail access from Sunnyslope Road through the Project connecting to the
Urban Separator Pathway, at such time as the Urban Separator .Pathway is
connected on either side of the Project.
d. The Project protects approximately 2.6 acres of hillside area in--the .upper
portion, of the site with a scenic -open space easement; , locating residential
development lower on the site, consistent with General Plan Policy :1 -P -16.
3. The :Project is consistent with the Implementing Zoning Ordinance in that the
Project site. is zoned PUD, and the Unit Development: Plan and Development
Standards result in a more desirable use of land and a better physical environment
than would, be, provided by any single zoning. district or combination of zoning
districts, because the home sites are located at lower elevations on the site and a
private scenic open space easement affecting the upper portion of the site will
protect approximately 30 percent, or 2.6 acres of the site as permanent open
space. The Project incorporates elements and standards which meet. the
requirements of Implementing Zoning Ordinance Chapter 19.
22
4. The Project is proposed on property which has a suitable relationship to one or
more thoroughfares, with 'a private road through the Project, and access onto
Sunnyslope Road, a public street, which is adequate to carry traffic generated by
the development as determined in project traffic analysis contained in the Initial
Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration.
5. The plan for the Project presents a unified and organized arrangement of buildings
and service facilities 'which 'are_ appropriate in, relation to adjacent or nearby
properties.' The .Project is ' entirely residential, with density of 18 units on 6.04
gross acres., resulting in just less than 3 units per gross acre. Surrounding
neighborhoods are residential and range from the Suncrest, Pinnacle, and Premo
subdivisions to the west at approximately I unit per gross acre to the Westridge
subdivision to the east with a gross density of approximately 4.5 units per gross
acres. The Project will be largely consistent with the visual character of the wider
area, which consists primarily of low density residential development with
undeveloped open. space on the steeper slopes. The. Project development
standards require landscaping that serves as a transition between structures and
natural terrain. Mitigation Measure AES -2 requires a Site Plan and Architectural
Review hearing and approval for construction and landscaping plans for each
home to ensure'compatibility with the existing neighborhood and surroundings.
6. The natural, and scenic qualities of the site , are protected by the 2.6 acre private
open space easement, by preservation and protection of trees, by landscaping
approval subject to Site Plan and Architectural Review, by location of home sites
on the lower portion of the site and by dedication of a segment of Urban Separator
Pathway to the City for public use.
7. The development ofthe Project in the manner proposed will not be detrimental to
the public welfare, will be in the best' interests of the City and as described above
will be in keeping with the general intent and spirit of the zoning regulations of
the City of Petaluma; with the Petaluma General Plan and with any applicable
plans adopted by the City.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT on the basis of the above findings, the City
Council hereby approves and adopts the Unit Development Plan for the Project and the PUD
Development Standards and Design Guidelines for the Sunnyslope II Project attached hereto as
Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.
1377808.2
23
EXHIBIT A
PUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR THE
SUNNVSLOPE "11 SUBDIVISION
(Revised for Option B)
1. PURPOSE:
A. The purpose of this document is to provide written standards for the
development of the Sunnyslope II Subdivision. The overall objective is to provide
specific standards and guidance for individual lot development in a hillside area
abutting the Urban Separator Path and Urban Growth Boundary. All
development shall be in accordance with the standards as outlined in the City of
Petaluma Implementing Zoning Ordinance (IZO) except as noted where
development may vary as allowed under Chapter 19 (Planned Unit District) or
where it may be more restrictive.
B. In addition to this document all lot owners or any other interested parties shall
reference the City Council Resolutions and Ordinances -approving the Mitigated
Negative Declaration, Planned Unit District (PUD) Development Plan, the
Tentative Subdivision Map, subdivision construction documents and the Final
Subdivision Map including all Planning Commission.` Site Plan and Architectural
Review (SPAR) approvals for the project.
2. PROCEDURES FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
A. The City of Petaluma Planning Commission in their roll for site plan and
architectural review (SPAR) shall review the grading, drainage, architecture, site
plan, and landscaping plans for all lots prior to construction document submittals
and issuance of a building permit. This procedure shall also be required for any
future alterations, additions or new structures except for those minor alterations
which shall be determined by the Planning Director in accordance with IZO
Chapter 24 (Administrative Procedures) Section 24.010 B.
B. All buyers of lots shall be given a copy of these PUD Development Standards
by the seller /developer prior to time of purchase of the property.
3. ZONING AND USES:
A. All permitted uses, conditionally permitted uses, specific'uses allowed with
special permit, accessory uses, and uses not allowed shall be in accordance with
the IZO Chapter 4 (Zone Districts) for the R -2 Zoning District as specified in
Table 4.2
B. One temporary sales or construction trailer by builder or developer is allowed
during the construction and /or sales of homes. Said temporary trailer must be
located 20 feet from any property line shared with an existing adjoining neighbor.
24
C. All other zoning requirements shall be in accordance with IZO Chapter 19
(Planned Unit District) where applicable.
4. SITE GRADING
A. All grading and retaining walls for streets and individual lot development shall
be in accordance with IZO Chapter 16 (Hillside Protection) Section F
B. All grades for streets, privately shared driveways and individual lot driveways
shall not exceed a slope of 18 %.
C. All grading activities for shall be completed prior to October 15 unless
specifically approved by the City Engineer. Erosion Control Measures shall be
installed per the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to said date.
D. All grading and other related construction practices shall conform to the
geotechnical investigation report prepared by Michelucci & Associates on file at
the City of Petaluma.
E. No lot -to -lot drainage shall be allowed except in areas as shown on the
approved PUD Site Development Grading Plan. Surface run -off that is collected
within each individual lot shall be conveyed to an approved outlet or surface
dispersion area. In order to minimize erosion, surface drainage on slopes
exceeding 25% shall be directed to erosion resistant swales. Swales shall be
connected to an approved outlet or surface dispersion area.
5. SINGLE LOT DEVELOPMENT
A. All single lot development shall be in accordance with IZO Chapter 16:
(Hillside Protection) Section 16.060
B. At Lots, 1, 3, 17, and 18: Single family residences shall be oriented to face
Sunnyslope Road. There shall be no vehicular access off of Sunnyslope Road.
C. At Lot 5: No structure shall exceed one -story.
D. At Lots 10, 11, 12, and 13: Land in the private open space easement shall be
maintained in a natural state with no man -made structures, paving, retaining
walls, or grade changes allowed (except within the public trail easements). Only
landscaping improvements that utilize native plants planted in a natural way are
allowed.
E. At Lot 18 (the existing Neunfeldt house: 674 Sunnyslope Road):
i. Restoration of the existing house located is subject to the requirements as
outlined by Mitigation Measure AR -1 and VTSM Condition 74. See also
the reports prepared by Architectural Resource Services and Carey and
Company on file at the City of Petaluma.
ii. Any future modification to the Neunfeldt house shall be subject to the
25
Secretary of the Interior Standards. The report by ARS found that the
house appears eligible for listing on the local register. Character defining
features shall be retained in all future projects; these include the double -
hipped roof on the front dormer, the decorative eave brackets below the
dormer roof and at the house corners, the large bay windows, and the
entry porch with round columns.
F. All protected trees as specified on Sheet TM -4 shall be preserved. Lots 4, 6,
16, 17, and 18 have Protected Trees within their building envelopes. See
Section 11 D below;. prior to design review hearing, their root zones must be
verified and development may not impact Protected Trees. Note also, those non -
protected trees designated by Sheet TM -4, both in and outside of building
envelopes, which shall be preserved at time of original home construction.
G. Architectural design shall reflect a "custom" appearance, which is sensitive
to lot- specific topography and site design issues (e.g. proximity to trees and
neighboring developments, views, etc.). House plans that are to be repeated
shall incorporate architectural design changes for exterior elevations so that no
two home exteriors will look alike.
H. The architectural treatments utilized on the street elevations of each of the
approved house designs are encouraged for use around the sides and rear
elevations of the buildings.
I. Side, rear or setback garage door entrances shall be encouraged where
possible.
J. Muted, earth tone colors are required on all painted surfaces; except the
existing Neunfeldt house at Lot 18, which may be painted as historically
appropriate.
6. LOT SIZES AND LOT COVERAGE
A. Lot sizes shall be as shown on the approved PUD Plan. No further
subdivision of these lots shall be permitted.
B. The maximum building footprint coverage for all lots, including all accessory
structures, covered decks, covered patios and carports shall not exceed 40
percent of the lot,. Coverage shall not include roof overhangs, open wood decks
or open patios and paved impervious areas.
7. SETBACKS
A. Setbacks for all primary and accessory dwelling structures and for any
portion of an accessory structure containing habitable space shall be as shown
on the approved PUD Plan.
B. Structures outside the building setbacks will be limited to single story non-
26
occupancy structures, patios, decks, and swimming pools in accordance with IZO
Chapter 4. (Zone Districts) for the R -2 Zoning District as specified in Table 4.8,
with the added restriction that such structures not exceed 12 feet pursuant to the
measurement specified by Section 8 Height, below.
8. HEIGHT LIMITATION -
A. Building heights for all individual lots exceeding an average slope of 10%
shall be subject to IZO Chapter 16 (Hillside Protection) Section 16.060 I.
B. Building heights for all individual lots with an average slope of less than 10%
(Lots 1 - 6 and 17 - 18) shall be subject to IZO R2 standard Table 4.8 (25 feet) as
defined on IZO definitions page 178.
9. ON -SITE PARKING
A. All individual lot development shall provide a minimum of two covered and
two uncovered parking spaces for a single family residence.
B. Any accessory dwelling unit shall provide a minimum of one additional
covered parking space per bedroom, in accordance with 'IZO 7.030E.
10. LANDSCAPE DESIGN
A. All landscaping and street trees within the public right of way shall be
accordance with the PUD Street Tree Master Plan (Improvement Plans)
B. Landscaping for the front yards of.individual lots shall be in accordance with
IZO Chapter 14 (Landscaping and Screening) and shall be subject for review and
approval by the Planning Commission as a part of any single lot development
application.
C. Each property owner is responsible for installing irrigation, landscaping, and
perpetual maintenance of areas on private property except as identified in the
Landscape Assessment District (LAD) exhibits for this project.
D: All trees shall be a minimum of 15 gallons in size unless otherwise specified;
smaller (5 gallon) may be considered in areas not subject to high pedestrian
access or based onsite specific and design purposes. All trees shall be installed
to City planting and, staking standards. All shrubs shall be a minimum five- gallon
size. All planted areas not improved with lawn or other groundcover material
shall be protected with a two -inch deep bark mulch as a temporary measure until
the ground cover'is established.
E. Under the canopy/Tree Protection Zone of any Preserved Protected Tree
(see VTSM), no landscaping, irrigation, or any other modification will be
permitted, unless first deemed appropriate by a licensed arborist.
11. TREE PRESERVATION
27
A. All tree removal on the site is subject to the criteria as specified in IZO
Chapter 17 (Tree Preservation), the PUD Tree Preservation Exhibit and as
directed in the Tree Preservation Report prepared by Becky Deckles, project
arborist, on file at the City of Petaluma.
B. All identified trees to be removed on the PUD Tree Preservation Plan shall
not be removed until such time that specific street, driveway, utility, or individual
lot grading commences.
C. Protected trees approved for removal shall be mitigated in accordance with
IZO Chapter 17 (Tree Preservation) Section 17.065.
D. Prior to design review the root zones of all protected trees designated to be
saved and located within the building envelope shall be verified by the project
arborist to ensure single lot development does not impact said trees. The
arborist shall also review and deem appropriate any landscape, irrigation, or
other proposed modification within/ the canopy or root zone of all protected tress
(see VTSM).
E. Under the canopy/Tree Protection Zone of any Preserved Protected Trees
(see VTSM), no landscaping, irrigation, or any other modification will be
permitted, unless first deemed appropriate by a licensed arborist.
12. FENCES
A.. 6 -foot high solid fencing shall be allowed on property lines within 100 feet
from the house. All other fencing shall be open wire unless shown differently on
the City- approved Sunnyslope II fencing plan.
B. Optional use of lattice or trellising to provide additional screening above a 6-
foot solid fence, where a 6 -foot solid fence is. permitted, not to exceed 8 feet in
height and at least 50% open, shall be subject to Staff review and approval at
time of fence permit application.
C. Open wire fencing shall be constructed in accordance with the specifications
a's outlined in the IZO 16.050.E.5 and shall not exceed 6 feet in height.
D. Open wire fencing and only open wire ,fencing shall be allowed in the private
open space (where, not in conflict with any easement).
E. Within the front and street side setback, fencing may not.exceed 42 inches.
13. FIRE SPRINKLERS
Per City of Petaluma Ordinance 2084, all new, residences (including bathrooms
over 5.5 square feet, closets over 24 square feet, or 3, feet deep, and in other
attached structures) shall have fire sprinkler systems designed and installed in
accordance with NFPA 13 -D. These systems shall be calculated for two -head
activation for the most remote two heads. Activation of the fire sprinkler system
shall sound an interior alarm that will notify normally occupied spaces.
14. CONSTRUCTION
A. Construction activities shall comply with applicable IZO and Municipal Code
Performance Standards (noise, dust, odor etc.).
B. All City- authorized grading and construction. activity shall be as stated by
VTSM Condition 16:
Improvement plans and all building permit plans shall indicate that all
construction activities shall be limited to Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. to
5 :00 p.m; this includes truck traffic to and from the site. Interior -only work
may be conducted on Saturdays from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Construction is
prohibited on Sundays and all federal, state,. and local holidays. This
condition is more restrictive than the construction hours stated in Article 21
(Performance Standards) of the Zoning Ordinance because of the Project's
proximity to residential uses and to mirror Sunnyslope PUD Mitigation
Measure Noise b.1. When' there is construction on the site, a sign shall be
posted with the name and telephone number of the designated "disturbance
coordinator" (see Mitigation Measure Noise 1g) and the permitted
construction hours.
29
ATTACHMENT 3
Option. B
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF PETAg,UMA
APPROVING A VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR THE
S TNNYSLOPE II PROJECT, APN 019 -203 -008
WHEREAS, an application and vesting tentative subdivision map has been submitted to
subdivide an 8.6 acre parcel at 674 Sunnyslope Road APN 019- 203 -008 into a 18 -unit single
family, residential subdivision. referred to as Sunnyslope lI, within the Sunnyslope Area Planned
Unit District ( "PUD "), together with a PUD Unit Development Plan. and Development Standards
( "the Project "); and
WHEREAS, on December 8th and December 22, 2009, the Planning Commission
conducted duly noticed hearings on the Project and after consideration of all documents and
evidence submitted, recommended Project denial as set forth in Planning Commission
Resolutions No. 2009 -04, 2009 -05 arid2009 -06, respectively; and
WHEREAS on December., 20, 2,010, in compliance °with °.the California Environmental
Quality Act ( "CEQA "), 14 California Code of Regulations, Chapter 3 ( "CEQA Guidelines ") and
the City of Petaluma Environmental Guidelines, the City Council approved a mitigated negative
declaration and mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the Project; and
WHEREAS, on February 22 and December 26, 2010 the City Council held duly noticed
public hearings to consider the Project, including the proposed. Vesting Tentative Subdivision
Map.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City council finds and determines as
follows:
1. The proposed Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map, as conditioned, is consistent with the
provisions of Title: 20„ Subdivisions, of the Petaluma Municipal Code (Subdivision
Ordinance) and the California Subdivision Map Act.
2. The proposed subdivision,, together with provisions for its. design and 'improvements; is
consistent with the City of Petaluma General Plan 2025 (General Plan) because:
a. . Residential :density of 18 units for the Project is consistent with the General :Pl'an
land use designation: for the site, with General Plan Policy 1 -P -;5, and with the
General Plan density range for the site, calculated on net acreage of
approximately 7.62 acres using the Very Low Residential density range of 0.6 to
2.5 dwelling units per net acre, resulting in a range for the Project between 4.9
and 19 total units.
b. The Project includes a 20 foot wide pedestrian access easement to be dedicated to
the City as a _portion of the Urban Separator Pathway, consistent with General
Plan Policy I 7 P -21.
30
c. The Project includes- a 1:0. foot wide public accesseasement allowing public trail
access from Sunnyslope Road through the Project connecting to the Urban
Separator Pathway, at such time as the Urban Separator Pathway is connected on
either side of the Project. .
d. The Project protects approximately 2.6 acres of hillside area in the upper portion
of the site with a scenic open space easement locating residential development
lower on the site, consistent with General Plan Policy 1 -P -16.
The proposed subdivision, together with provisions for its design and improvements, will
not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare because adequate public
facilities exist or will be installed, including roads, sidewalks, water, sewer, storm drains,
and other infrastructure.
4. The Project is consistent with the City of Petaluma Implementing Zoning Ordinance
because the Project site is zoned PUD, and the Project, including the Unit Development
Plan and Development Standards, incorporates elements and standards which meet the
requirements of Implementing Zoning Ordinance Chapter 19.
The Project site is; physically suitable for the density and the type of development
proposed because the density for the Project is consistent with the General Plan density
range for the site; development is sited on portions of the site with slopes less than 30 %;
the upper portion the Project adjacent to the Urban Separator Pathway is protected by a
scenic open space easement; and the site accommodates a Project which is generally
compatible in character of use and physical design with surrounding uses.
6. As concluded in the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted for the
Project, neither the design of the, subdivision nor the proposed improvements is likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially or avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that on the basis of the above findings, the Petaluma
City Council approves the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map, subject to the conditions of
approval set: forth in Exhibit A hereto.
31