HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 92-118 05/18/1992I~esoluti®n NO. sNC.S.
=1 of the City of Petaluma, California
2
3 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
4 PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) FOR A
5 REZONING OF (APN 136-120-24) FROM PCD TO PUD, A UNIT DEVELOPMENT
6 PLAN, SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE MODIFICATION AND TENTATIVE
7 SUBDIVISION MAP FORA 21 UNIT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
8 SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS CRANE GLEN
9
10
11 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered at a public hearing and
12 recommended the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to the California
13 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in conjunction with the following actions:
14
15 1. Rezoning of APN 136-120-24 from Planned Community District (PCD) to Planned
16 Unit Development (PUD)
17
18 2. Conditional approval of the Unit Development Plan for the Crane Glen Subdivision
19 as shown in the site plan received on March 31, 1992, and the floor plans, elevation
20 drawings, and written PUD development standards received on January 17, 1992, all
21 on file in the City of Petaluma Planning Department.
22
23 3. Conditional approval of the Subdivision Ordinance Modification to permit three
24 units to access off a single driveway.
25
26 4. Conditional approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map for the 21 lot Crane Glen
27 subdivision.
28
29 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Petaluma City Council, in reference
30 to the impact and mitigations identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, hereby
31 makes the following finding:
32
33 1. The plan results in the removal of a significant number of mature trees.
34
35 The identified impact will be mitigated to a level of insignificance by the following
36 mitigation measures to be incorporated into the project:
37
38 a. Pine trees numbers 8, 22, 55, 57,& 59 shall be retained. PUD guidelines shall
39 allow the flexibility for property owners to remove the trees (and provide
40 replacements on a 1:1 basis) if the trees are found by a certified arborist to
41 be unhealthy or to pose a hazard, subject to administrative Site Plan and
42 Architectural Review Committee review once other trees in the subdivision
43 are established. The location of the house on Lot 15 must be evaluated by
44 the project arborist (and the map revised accordingly, subject to City staff
45 review and approval) prior to Final Map approval, to insure that adequate
46 setbacks are maintained from the trees.
47
48 b. The five oaks in front of. Lots 16 and 17 shall be retained (trees #85-89).
49 The location of the house and driveways on these lots shall be evaluated by
50 the project arborist to insure that adequate setbacks from the trees are
92-1.1,~ 1
Res. No . .............................. N.C.S.
maintained. The arborist shall make recommendations on whether or not
the grove should be thinned to insure the long term health of the grove. The
removal of any of these trees (upon recommendation of the arborist) shall be
subject to approval by SPARC prior to Final Map approval. Any trees within
this oak grove which are proposed to be removed must be replaced on a 1:1
basis with 24" box. sized trees.
c. The significant grove of oak trees at the southwest corner of the property
shall be preserved (trees #134-136 and 138-145). The owner shall apply for
and receive Heritage Tree status for the large oak tree # 145 and the smaller
tree # 136 and a recorded deed restriction shall be placed on the lot prior to
or concurrent with recordation of Final Map. The project arborist shall
make a recommendation as to whether or not this grove should be thinned to
improve the appearance and health of the grove. The removal of any of
these trees (upon recommendation of the arborist) shall be subject to
approval by SPARC prior to Final Map approval. The applicant shall
provide replacements for any trees in the grove which are to be removed.
d. The applicant shall submit a plan which shows all trees to be retained, all
trees to be removed, and all replacement trees for SPARC review.
e. A supplement to the tree study shall be prepared to evaluate those trees
which are proposed to remain and shall include measures to protect the
health of the trees to be preserved.
f. -The replacement plan shall include the following elements:
i. All trees removed shall be replaced on a 1:1 basis (including a
replacement for the one tree removed from the site prior to the
Planning Commission hearing). Approximately 1/3 of the
replacement trees shall. be 24" box trees to provide immediate visual
impact. A minimum of 127 trees shall be retained and/or replanted
on-site, subject to SPARC review and approval.
ii. Anew windrow of trees shall be planted along the northern property
line as part of providing replacement trees on other portions of the
site. The species and placement of these trees shall be subject to
approval by SPARC.
iii. The applicant shall provide an open space area large enough to
replant a significant number of large trees in a grove pattern toward
the southwest corner of the site. This could be accomplished by
slightly reducing the length of the cul-de-sac to avoid the grove area.
(Note this solution may require the removal of the grove of oak trees
in the front of Lots 16 and 17.)
g. The applicant must insure the health of all replacement trees for at least one
year after they are planted.
h. Deed restrictions shall be placed on lots which contain trees that are
required to be preserved and on those lots on which replacement trees are
planted. The restriction shall indicate that the removal of the trees is only
permitted subject to administrative SPARC review and that replacement
trees will be required. The wording of this restriction shall be subject to
92- lY~d` N.C.S. 2
1 approval by staff. In addition a similar clause relating to the preservation of
2 trees shall be added as a note on the Final Map and to the PUD
3 development standards. Violations of the deed restrictions and PUD
4 standards will be processed as standard Zoning violations through the City's
5 abatement procedures.
6
7 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Petaluma City Council, in reference to the
8 impacts and mitigations identified in the previously certified FEIR for the Corona/Ely
9 Specific Plan, hereby makes the following findings:
1. The project will contribute to the increase in the number of planning area
automobile trips.
The identified impact will be mitigated to a level of insignificance by the following
mitigation measure to be incorporated into the project:
The developer must contribute a fair share towards the construction of required
transportation circulation improvements.
2. The project will contribute to an expected increase in runoff volumes.
The identified impact will be mitigated to a level of insignificance by the following
mitigation measure to be incorporated into the project:
The developer must comply with the City's erosion control standards during
construction and must pay storm drainage impact fees.
3. The project as a part of the Corona Ely Specific Plan Area will contribute to the
need for a new pressure Zone for water supply.
The identified impact will be mitigated to a level of insignificance by the following
mitigation measure to be incorporated into the project:
The developer must contribute a fair share towards construction of Pressure Zone
IV improvements and pay the City's standard water connection fee.
4. The project will require an extension of the sewer lines.
The identified impact will be mitigated to a level of insignificance by the following
mitigation measure to be incorporated into the project:
The developer is responsible for the cost of extending a new sewer line into the
project from the new common main and pay the connection fees.
5. The project will contribute cumulatively to the increase in the number of school
children.
The identified impact will be mitigated to a level of insignificance by the following
mitigation measure to be incorporated into the project:
The developer will be required to pay school impact fees.
92-'1t8. N.C.S. 3
.~
.
6. The project is located on Sonoma Mountain Parkway and must install landscaping
in the public right-of-way along this street and the internal street. This will create a
need for maintenance of the landscaping on publicly owned land.
The identified impact will be mitigated to a .level of insignificance by the following
mitigation measure to be incorporated into the project:
The developer must participate in the landscape assessment district for all
landscaping on public lands.
7. The project is located along Sonoma Mountain Parkway, a major arterial and noise
source.
The identified impact will be mitigated to a level of insignificance by the following
mitigation measure to be incorporated into the project:
The developer shall be responsible for the cost of installation of the noise barrier
along the property's Sonoma Mountain Parkway frontage. The applicant will be
responsible for providing improvement plans for the Sonoma Mountain Parkway
frontage. The plans shall include a minimum six foot high barrier to the
specifications of the Sonoma Mountain Parkway Design Guidelines. Said frontage
improvements shall coordinate with the adjacent Mountain Valley Improvement
Plans and any future plans for the Baptist Church and shall be subject to approval
by SPAIZC.
8. The project area has been identified as having a moderate to high potential for
liquefaction. General Plan policies relevant to geology and soils include provisions
for drainage and erosion control during construction, geotechnical reports and soils
analyses, and use and enforcement of building and safety standards.
The identified impact will be mitigated to a level of insignificance by the following
mitigation measures to be incorporated into the project:
a. The development shall be designed in conformance with the
recommendations of the preliminary soil evaluation done for the site.
b. Construction shall be designed to occur during the dry months of the year,
and adequate erosion control should be used. The developer shall
implement construction period dust control measures such as water
sprinkling, proper scheduling of major dust generating activities, and
storage pile covering.
9. No detailed archaeological field survey of the Planning Area has been completed.
The identified impact will be mitigated to a level of insignificance by the following
mitigation measures to be incorporated into the project:
In the event that archaeological remains are encountered during grading, work
shall be halted temporarily and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted for
evaluation of the artifacts and to recommend future action. The local Indian
community shall also be notified and consulted in the event any archaeological
remains are uncovered.
92-11 ~ N.C.S.
4
i
f
1 IN CONCLUSION, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Petaluma City Council does
2 hereby adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration on said project, and in connection with
3 this approval makes the following findings pursuant to State and local guidelines:
1. On the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received there is no substantial
evidence that the project as mitigated will have a significant effect on the
environment.
2. An initial study has been conducted by this lead agency, which has evaluated the
potential for this project to cause an adverse effect -- either individually or
cumulatively -- on wildlife resources. For this purpose, wildlife is defined as "all wild
animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians, and related ecological communities,
including the habitat upon which the wildlife depends for its continued viability."
(Section 711.2, Fish and Game Code).
3. There is no evidence that the proposed project would have any potential for adverse
effect on wildlife resources.
cranendr/dd3
Under the powex and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City.
REFERENCE: I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the Approved as to
Council of the City of Petaluma at a (Rewlar) (E1~~~~1~j~~kmeeting fO~'
on the .:_ 18Lh.-.-..... day of ..............._._..._.......1~Iay..-.......---......., 19.92.., by the ;:~
following vote: ..................•-• - -- - - • -
City Attorney
AYES: Davis, Cavanagh, obel, lvelson, P~Iayor l~illigoss
NOES: None
ABSENT: mad, V- ~Z oroolse~ - `
ATTES'T': -~ :............. ...:y..- ---1~~~~-G.C.-~-~.L/'~---•-~-----•:,_.-----..-..... ._ ---•------'-.-.....-----•-•--......------•--•----• --• ---•-•--•---- -....-.
City Clerk Mayor
Council File .r.y....... .........................
CA 10-85 Res. No. ...9.4 ~...~-"~-~.. _... N.C.S.