UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
Minutes [all categories]
Grass Valley Planning Commission Minutes - December 19,2006
|next newest topic | next oldest topic|
|Author||Topic: Grass Valley Planning Commission Minutes - December 19,2006|
posted 01-19-2007 04:19 PM
GRASS VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION December 19, 2006
2.0 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Emanuel
3.0 ROLL CALL
Members present were Chairman Dale White, Commissioners Gloria Hyde, David Emanuel, Eleanor Kenitzer, and Commissioner Ralph Silberstein. Staff present was Community Development Director Joe Heckel, Planning Director Tom Last, Associate Planner Dan Chance, Senior Civil Engineer Trisha Tillotson and Administrative Clerk Barb Carman.
Motion by: Commissioner Hyde moved to approve the agenda.
Motion by: Commissioner Silberstein moved to approve the minutes with revisions as noted.
None at this time.
7.1 Planning Application (06PLN-33) for a lot line adjustment for Jason and Debbie Costa and Corey and Amy Hutson located at 418 Chapel Street (APN 29-080-50) in the R-1 (Single Family) Zoning District. Environmental Assessment: Categorically exempt.
Motion by: Commissioner Hyde moved to remove the item from the consent calendar and placed it in item 10.1 for review.
Roll Call vote:
8.1 Planning Application (06PLN-37) for a Tentative Map for Nevada County Builders Exchange for the creation of four (4) condominium units located within a building under construction at 149 Crown Point Court (APN 09-700-64) in the SP1-A (Whispering Pines Specific) Zoning District. Environmental Assessment: Categorically exempt.
Chairman White called for the item at 7:10 p.m.
Tom Last Planning Director prepared a power point presentation and discussed the proposed condominium map.
Presentation by applicant:
Mr. Nelson stated that there are no issues with the conditions as stated in the staff report.
Commissioner Hyde questioned the access to the upper units.
Kevin Nelson noted there are stairs on the south western side of the building as well as interior stairs.
Commissioner Hyde requested that the common area shown on the plans at the rear of the building be renamed to a utility area. She also asked that interior common area be designated as an entry area or hall.
Commissioner Hyde questioned the location of the handicapped ramp.
Tom Last, Planning Director noted that the project had previously been approved by the Development Review Committee. If handicapped access to 2nd floor was required, it would have been a building department requirement at the time of plan check.
Commissioner Silberstein asked what the intended usage of the upper units would be.
Mr. Ivy stated that the square footage of the upper floor did not require an elevator. Any proposed owner would not be required to provide public access or have the public attend.
Mr. Nelson stated that a portion of the upstairs of unit #1 was for storage.
Commissioner Kenitzer no questions
Commissioner Emanuel no questions
Chairman White opened the Public Hearing at 7:25 p.m., there being no comment he closed the Public Hearing.
Motion by: Commissioner Hyde moved to approve item subject to findings and conditions as noted in staff report.
Final Conditions of Approval for 06PLN-37
1. Tentative Map Application 06PLN-37 shall expire and become null and void in three years from this date, or December 19, 2009, or unless an extension is granted by the Planning Commission.
2. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City in any action or proceeding brought against the City to void or annul this discretionary land use approval.
3. Prior to recordation of the map, a Grading Permit, as conditioned for 04DRC-62 on November 16, 2004, shall be completed and all improvements described on the plans shall be completed or the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City Engineer to complete the grading and public improvements; and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing the construction of all grading and improvements shown on the plans. Any necessary right-of-way required to complete the improvements will be acquired by the applicant at his/her expense.
4. The applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for review and approval a Parcel Map prepared by a Licensed Surveyor, or Registered Civil Engineer licensed to survey in the State of California, in accordance with the California Subdivision Map Act; and shall pay all appropriate fees for map check and recording.
5. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R’s) applicable to this subdivision shall be submitted for review by the City Engineer, Planning Division staff and the City Attorney prior to recording the map. The CC&R’s shall identify the applicable entity for the maintenance of the driveway, parking area, landscaping, detention facilities, and open space in the common area.
6. Prior to recording the Final Map, the applicant shall install all public improvements described on the Improvement Plans and necessary utilities or provide adequate security for such improvements and utilities in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, as determined by the City Engineer.
7. All previous conditions of approval for Development Review Application 04DRC-62 shall be incorporated by reference and remain part of this approval.
8.2 Three-month review of Planning Application (06PLN-029) for the “Hospitality House Welcome Center” to determine if the operation located at 230 South Church Street (APN 08-364-14) in the "P" (Public) Zoning District is in compliance with the conditions of approval adopted by the City Council on October 24, 2006. Environmental Assessment: Categorically exempt.
Chairman White called for the item at 7:27 p.m.
Tom Last, Planning Director presented the item and noted that the only change in operations has been in the location of the bus pick up from South School Street to South Church Street. There have not been any complaints received by the Planning Department.
Questions of staff:
Commissioner Kenitzer questioned Chief Foster on how the Grass Valley Police Department feels on this program. She asked if he feels the need to return within 6-8 weeks and if there is any concern or anxiety from citizens.
Chief Foster noted that he had received an email from Steve Enos concerning complaints by merchants who are in fear of retaliation. His suggestion was to contact the local businesses and was not aware of any. The Safeway store area seems to have an increase in panhandling and transients some of which are homeless, but some that have been involved in situations are transients that are not guests with Hospitality House. He noted that loitering is a problem, but the Police Department does not have sufficient structure to deal with it. They have a good working relationship with the Hospitality House and at this point it is a success story.
Commissioner Hyde asked where people are supposed to go during the day.
Chief Foster did not have an answer, but noted that there is an ordinance in place prohibiting loitering. The parking lots, parks and such have anit-loitering regulations posted and they have not had an influx of people being downtown without a purpose.
Commissioner Silberstein asked for clarification on the calls.
Chief Foster stated that on some of the calls, they are unable to locate the people in question when they arrive at the site. He confirmed that five (5) of the fifteen (15) calls were related to guests. He recommended that the Planning Commission continue with the permit and have a review sooner to affirm with the community that they are meeting their needs and that they are meeting conditions of the permit.
Bob Reel, Volunteer
Georgie Coulter, South Church Street
Bob Schrader 12323 Pepperwood Circle, Auburn.
Howard Levine, GVDA Executive Director
Mary O’Brien 228 Success Mine Loop, Volunteer Coordinator
There being no further comment, Chairman White closed the Public Hearing at 8:13 p.m.
Commissioner Emanuel approves of the use and feels they are an asset to the community. He would like to see it continue.
Commissioner Kenitzer commended the Police Department for their involvement with the community on this issue. She feels it is worthwhile and glad that we can offer such a place. Education for the community can take a while but she understands the desire for a review sooner in order to accommodate the community. The Safeway area has been a long standing problem prior to this project.
Commissioner Silberstein asked if Hospitality House closed, where will they go. He is happy with the success stories and feels it is an excellent program. He is sensitive to the community and is in favor of a long term use permit. He feels that the Planning Commission could be offered as a forum if problems should arise.
Chief Foster stated that the community might have better comfort with a review sooner.
Commissioner Hyde noted that the program is scheduled to continue to April 30, 2007. So if another review is scheduled for three months, the program will be almost over. She is in agreement with Commissioner Silberstein for long term approval. She would like to have the review at the end of the program.
Don Lee stated that the sheltering process occurs until April 30, 2007. They are planning to keep the facility open during daylight hours after that.
Chairman White stated that it may review prior to April 30th or May 15th
Motion by: Commissioner Hyde moved to adopt the findings and conditions and approve the long term use of this site with a revision to Condition #4 to that the use permit is valid until May 15th 2007, and that finding #5 requires an additional compliance review period.
Revised Conditions of Approval for 06PLN-29
7. Prior to commencement of the use, the center shall provide the Community Development Department for the review by the Police Chief, written copies of policies and procedures for screening Overnight Center clients. Emphasis will be placed on the rules and procedures for sex offenders. All future proposed changes to the policies and procedures shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for the review by the Police Chief.
15. If the Police Chief determines that the operation of the Hospitality House poses an immediate threat to public safety, the Police Chief shall provide written notice to the applicant that operations authorized by Planning Permit (06PLN-29) shall immediately cease. The identification of an immediate threat to public safety and the procedure to notify and affect a cessation of operations shall be in accordance with City Municipal Code 1.15.010. Upon receiving the written notice, the applicant shall immediately cause to cease all activities authorized by Planning Permit (06PLN-29). The action by the Police Chief to require the applicant to cease all operations shall be temporary and should not exceed sixty (60) days. If the Police Chief recommends permanent cessation of operations and all rights allowed under the Permit, the matter shall be deferred to the Planning Commission for conducting a duly noticed public hearing to consider whether Planning Permit (06PLN-29) should be continued as valid or revoked. The public hearing of the Planning Commission shall be noticed as a revocation hearing during which the applicant may present evidence that all issues documented by the Police Chief have been addressed. The Commission would have the discretion to continue the use with or without conditions or to revoke Planning Permit (06PLN-29).
8.3 Continued Public Hearing on Tentative Map Application (06PLN-16) and Planned Unit Development (06PLN-17) for Ridge Road Associates for the creation of 49 single family homes located at 2521 Ridge Road and 161 Upper Slate Creek Road (APN's 08-090-35 & 47) in the R-1 (Single Family) Zoning District. Environmental Assessment: Negative Declaration.
Chairman White called for the item at 8:30 p.m.
Dan Chance, Associate Planner presented the item noting the background of the project. He noted that a subcommittee has been appointed by the City Council to address the traffic problems on Ridge Road. The goals include both projects being reviewed by the City Council to handle the recommendations of subcommittee. The City Council has requested that the item be approved and moved on to the City Council for action. He noted that narrowing Ridge Road may provide traffic calming solutions. He reviewed the alternatives for approval or denial of the project.
Commissioner Emanuel asked if the improvements on Ridge Road would require a change in the lot sizes that front Ridge Road.
Dan Chance, Associate Planner noted that road would be narrowed so no changes would be required.
Commissioner Emanuel asked about improvements to Upper Slate Creek Road.
Commissioner Hyde asked if the Planning Commission approved the project would they be forwarding two options since the Emergency Vehicle Access ( EVA) may not exist unless improvements can be made to Upper Slate Creek Road.
Commissioner Silberstein asked about the new connection boundary on the south side along Upper Slate Creek Road.
Commissioner Kenitzer had no questions.
Andy Cassano, Nevada City Engineering
8:55 p.m. Commissioner Emanuel steps down and exits the meeting.
Mr. Cassano requested that the Planning Commission honor the City Council’s request to review the project. He noted that they may be using Ryans Lane, or Upper Slate Creek Road if it becomes available.
Questions of applicant:
Commissioner Hyde asked how they could take Ryans Lane out of functionality as a primary access. She also suggested that lot 8 be squared off and that a solid fence along be built to reduce the noise.
Commissioner Silberstein questioned lot 30 in order to create a 50 foot distance to the Grass Valley canal to prevent possible encasement of the canal by NID.
Chairman White asked whether Mr. Sauer had been contacted regarding Upper Slate Creek Road.
Chairman White opened the Public Hearing at 9:03 p.m., there being no comment he closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Kenitzer feels that the City Council needs to deal with both projects and would like to refer it on to them.
Commissioner Silberstein would like the house location on lot 30 adjusted. He would also like to see a street cross section proposed by the Engineering Department and is opposed to the project unless traffic ingress and egress is addressed. He is concerned about the safety and congestion on and off of Ridge Road if access to Upper Slate Creek Road and Ryans Lane should be right turn only ingress and egress.
Dan Chance, Associate Planner noted that 6 foot fences are discouraged along the roadway for site distance purposes.
Chairman White stated that moving the project onto the City Council is a good idea. If design changes occur, it will return to the Planning Commission for review and approval.
Motion by: Commissioner Hyde moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the Tentative Map and the Planned Unit Development subject to the findings and conditions as noted with revisions to the Lot Line for Lot 8 being straightened and a fence installed within the sight distance, and the house on lot 30 be relocated to 50 feet away from the canal to meet the City Council standards.
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE
3. The Planning Commission reviewed Tentative Map 06PLN-16 and Planned Unit Development 06PLN-17 at its August 15, 2006, September 19, 2006, October 17, 2006, November 21, 2006 meetings.
5. The Planning Commission finds that a Mitigated Negative Declaration can be adopted for Tentative Map 06PLN-16 and Planned Unit Development 06PLN-17, in accordance with the provisions of the CEQA. On August 15, 2006, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing that included review of the Negative Declaration. After conducting a public hearing on august 15, 2006, the Planning Commission finds that the Negative Declaration addresses the impacts for the project through the mitigation measures described therein.
6. The Planning Commission has independently reviewed, analyzed and considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to making its recommendation to the City Council on this project, and the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the City of Grass Valley.
7. The proposed subdivision, with a proposed density of approximately four residential units per acre would allow 37 residential units to be consistent with the Grass Valley General Plan’s Urban Low Density (ULD) land use designation’s density of 1 to 4 residential units per acre, however the use of the State Density Bonus allows the increased density to 49 residential units (with the provision of 8-lower income units).
14. The Grass Valley Planning Commission reviewed Tentative Map 06PLN-16 and Planned Unit Development 06PLN-17 at its August 9, 2006 public hearing and recommended adoption to the City Council with findings and conditions in support of the project.
1. The applicant shall file a Notice of Determination, including payment of associated fees, in the office of the County Clerk within (5) days after the approval date of the project. The applicant shall provide a copy of the notice to the City. Upon filing the Notice of Determination, the applicant will be required to pay the State Fish and Game Fee.
2. The project shall be constructed in accordance with the plans approved by the City Council for Tentative Map 06PLN-16 and Planned Unit Development 06PLN-17 unless changes are approved by the Planning Commission prior to commencing such changes, minor design change may be approved by the Community Development Department as determined appropriate by the Community Development Director. Any deviation from the approved plans without prior approval of the Planning Commission may constitute grounds for revocation of Tentative Map 06PLN-16 and Planned Unit Development 06PLN-17 Applications. Any plan for phasing the project shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Commission.
3. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Grass Valley in any action or proceeding brought against the City of Grass Valley to void or annul this discretionary land use approval.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED:
4. The applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for review and approval, an improvements and grading plan prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer; shall obtain a Grading Permit; and shall pay all appropriate fees for plan check and inspection at the time of permit issuance. The grading and improvement plans shall include roadway slopes and elevations, curb, gutters, sidewalks, street lights, striping and signing, paving, water and sewer pipelines, storm drains, and necessary easements, in accordance with City Standards.
On sheet 1 of the tentative map, a note mentions that permeable pavement and walkways may be utilized. Permeable pavement in the public right-of-way will not be allowed unless a design exception is approved by the City Council or the City Engineer.
5. The applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for review and approval, a detailed Soils and Geology Report certified by a Civil Engineer registered in the State of California and qualified to perform soils work. In addition to the California Building Code requirements, the report shall specify the pavement structural sections for the proposed roadways and existing roadway in relation to the proposed T.I.’s. The grading plan shall incorporate the recommendations of the approved Soils Report. Mitigation Measure 1
6. The applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for review and approval, drainage plans, hydrologic, and hydraulic calculations prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer. The drainage plans and calculations shall indicate the following conditions before and after development:
Quantities of water, water flow rates, major watercourses, drainage areas and patterns, diversions, collection systems, flood hazard areas, sumps and drainage courses. Hydrology shall be in accordance with the City of Grass Valley Improvement Standards and Specifications and Storm Drainage Master Plan.
Drainage improvements/channels downstream of the project must be evaluated for capacity and improvements made at the developer’s expense, if needed. Drainage easements will be required for downstream drainage facilities crossing private property. Mitigation Measure 2
8. The developer shall post a cash deposit (to be cashed) in the amount of $10,000 with the City for erosion and temporary drainage and/or sedimentation control of the project site as determined appropriate by the City Engineer. A detailed grading, permanent erosion control and landscaping plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department prior to commencing grading. Erosion control measures shall be implemented in accordance with the approved plans. Any expenses made by the City to enforce the required erosion control measures will be paid by the deposit.
9. If any of the improvements which the applicant is required to construct or install is to be constructed or installed upon land in which the applicant does not have title or interest sufficient for such purposes, the applicant shall do all of the following at least 60 days prior to the filing of the final or parcel map for approval pursuant to Government Code Section 66457:
a. Notify the City of Grass Valley in writing that the applicant wishes the City to acquire an interest in the land which is sufficient for such purposes as provided in Government Code Section 66462.5;
b. Supply the City with (i) a legal description of the interest to be acquired, (ii) a map or diagram of the interest to be acquired sufficient to satisfy the requirements of subdivision (e) of Section 1250.310 of the Code of Civil Procedure, (iii) a current appraisal report prepared by an appraiser approved by the City which expresses an opinion as to the current fair market value of the interest to be acquired, and (iv) a current Litigation Guarantee Report;
c. Enter into an agreement with the City, guaranteed by such cash deposits or other security as the City may require, pursuant to which the applicant will pay all of the City's cost (including, without limitation, attorney's fees and overhead expenses) of acquiring such an interest in the land.
10. The applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for review and approval, a traffic report identifying the T.I.‘s for the developments roadways and for that portion of Ridge Road fronting the property.
11. The project applicant shall incorporate BMPs to control erosion and sedimentation of the canal during grading and installation of infrastructure, during all construction activities, and during project operation. The final drainage report (submitted per City requirements) shall include descriptions and/or plan drawings demonstrating the use of BMPs. BMPs for this project shall include the following measures, but may also include additional or alternative measures as determined appropriate and as approved by the City of Grass Valley:
12. The applicant shall offer to dedicate to the City for public use, all the public streets right-of-way or easements necessary to install, maintain, and re-install all public improvements described on the tentative map plans.
13. The project applicant/developer shall prepare and implement a post-development Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) in accordance with the NPDES Phase II Rule. The components of the SWMP shall include protection from flooding, protection and enhancement of the stream environment, prevention of erosion and adverse effects on water quality, incorporation of regional stormwater management goals, and minimization of the project’s potential adverse impacts. BMPs shall be included in the plan, as well as a mitigation monitoring program to ensure long-term success of the BMPs. The purpose of this mitigation measure is to provide a plan for ensuring that structural BMPs constructed as part of the proposed project are maintained appropriately such that they continue to perform their intended function as long as the project site is occupied. The SWMP shall address site-specific drainage characteristics, stormwater conveyance systems, discharge points, potential sources of runoff quality impacts, specific structural BMPs that have been constructed as part of the project, recommended operational BMPs, a maintenance program for structural BMPs, a monitoring program designed to evaluate the need for BMP modifications or additional BMPs, and identification of specific parties responsible for implementing each part of the plan. Specific BMPs shall be developed in consultation with the City of Grass Valley and based upon the State Water Resources Control Board general guidelines for development of BMPs. Examples of Best Management Practices that could be incorporated into the SWMP include the following:
14. A Dust Mitigation Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District and City Engineer. Dust mitigation measures shall be implemented in accordance with the approved Dust Mitigation Plan. The dust mitigation plan and improvement plans shall include the following notes:
a. The applicant shall be responsible for ensuring that all adequate dust control measures are implemented in a timely manner during all phases of project development and construction.
15. The project developer shall adhere to the following tree protection measure as noted on the project site plans during any construction activities for this project:
This measure and accompanying drawing shall be included on all final grading and construction plans.
16. The applicant shall obtain a Timber Harvest Permit (or appropriate exemption) from the California Department of Forestry, and shall obtain a tree removal permit from the Grass Valley Public Works Department. Prior to the removal of trees measuring 8-inches (DBH) or larger, the applicant shall provide the City with a Reforestation Bond, or suitable security, in the amount of $10,000, to guarantee diligent prosecution of the project after clearing the site. The Reforestation Bond shall be surrendered by the applicant upon abandonment of the project, or failure to obtain and prosecute the grading and building permits, within six months of removing any tree (8-inch DBH, or larger).
17. The applicant shall submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the City for acceptance, file a Notice of Intent with the California Water Quality Control Board and comply with all provisions of the Clean Water Act. Mitigation Measure 5
18. The applicant shall install street light standards and luminaries of the design, spacing, and locations approved by the City Engineer.
19. No trucks may transport excavated material off-site unless the loads are adequately wetted and either covered with tarps or loaded such that the material does not touch the front, back, or sides of the cargo compartment at any point less than six inches to the top of the cargo compartment. Also, all excavated material must be properly disposed of in accordance with the City’s Standard Specifications.
20. The improvement/grading plans shall include a two-way left turn lane from Ridge Road onto Ryan’s Lane and all improvements as shown and described on the tentative map and Ridge Road Overview Plan. Improvements along Ridge Road are the responsibility of the developer including any reconstruction that may be needed in order to meet City Standards (i.e. if the existing culverts in Ridge Road do not have sufficient cover over the pipes with the construction of the curb, gutter, and sidewalk, than the applicant will be responsible for adjusting the existing culvert and repairing the pavement). The Ridge Road Overview Plan does not adequately address the need for a sidewalk from proposed Lot 6 to Upper Slate Creek Road. The applicant will be responsible for installing a sidewalk at this location which may involve relocating an NID vault. The applicant shall be responsible for widening Ridge Road along the property frontage so that a half street section of the City’s Collector Street Standard is constructed, including curb, gutter, and sidewalk.
21. The applicant shall submit sewer calculations for the proposed development and any calculations necessary to verify the existing sewer system’s ability to carry the additional flow created by the development. If improvements to the Slate Creek Lift Station are required to accommodate the projects additional flow, it will be the responsibility of the developers.
22. The developer shall be responsible for constructing a sewer line from the project site to the existing sewer manhole on Slate Creek Road near Douglas Avenue. The sewer line shall be sized such that surrounding properties, such as those properties previously identified in the proposed Slate Creek Sewer Assessment District, will be able to connect to the sewer line. If the sewer line must be oversized in order to allow the surrounding properties connection, the developer may enter into an agreement for reimbursement per the Subdivision Map Act.
23. The twenty (20) foot emergency vehicle access easement shall be gated at both ends with an approved gate system of the Fire Marshall and City Engineer.
24. After completion of the grading and improvement installation, the following reports, in accordance with the California Building Code, shall be submitted to the City Engineering Department:
25. Prior to initiating grading and/or construction of the site improvements for the project, the developer shall initiate the following:
26. Final landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Planning prior to grading permit issuance. Landscape design shall comply with all provisions of Article 16C of the Grass Valley Zoning Ordinance regarding water efficiency and shall comply with Section 14-21(a) of the Grass Valley Zoning Ordinance which requires that a minimum of 20 percent of the improved project site area be devoted landscaping. Landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans.
27. Surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist for any nesting raptors and special status species within the proposed development area. All surveys shall be completed prior to issuance of a grading permit. Should any special status species or nesting raptors be found onsite, the project applicant shall work with the California Department of Fish and Game and/or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to establish appropriate mitigation measures to avoid or lessen any impacts to special status species. If necessary, the project applicant and the California Department of Fish and Game and/or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service shall establish a mitigation program, which shall be submitted to the City of Grass Valley Planning Division for approval prior to issuance of a grading permit for the project site. If any nesting raptors are found onsite, the mitigation program shall include preservation of active nest trees. Mitigation Measure 8
28. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the project developer shall prepare an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan pursuant to CCR Title 17 Section 93105. The Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan must be submitted and approved by the Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District (NSAQMD) prior to any surface disturbance, including vegetation clearing. The Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan shall include the provisions of the Construction Emission, Asbestos Dust, Fugitive Dust, and Erosion Control Plan. The Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan shall also include any additional measures required by the State of California or the Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District. The Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan shall be approved by the Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District prior to issuance of any grading permits. Mitigation Measure 9
29. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant/developer shall locate all staging areas for equipment as far as possible from existing residential areas. The staging areas shall be indicated on the grading plans submitted to the City of Grass Valley for review and approval. Mitigation Measure 10
30. The Grading and Improvement Plans must be signed by a representative of the Nevada Irrigation District (NID) before the City Engineer will approve the plans and issue the Grading Permit.
31. The location of the single family residence on Lot 30 shall be setback from the Nevada Irrigation District (NID) ditch at the required distance set forth by NID.
32. The roadway entering from Upper Slate Creek Road shall be modified to limit the impacts on the residential unit on Lot 8. This may include reconfiguration of the turning radius along both ends of the property. The plans shall include a six-foot fence along the roadway, while maintaining adequate line of sight at the intersections at both ends of the property.
DURING CONSTRUCTION, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL APPLY:
33. That prior to any work being conducted within the State, County or City right-of-way, the applicant shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from the appropriate Agency.
34. If any hazardous waste is encountered during the construction of this project, all work shall be immediately stopped and the Nevada County Environmental Health Department, the Fire Department, the Police Department, and the City Inspector shall be notified immediately. Work shall not proceed until clearance has been issued by all of these agencies.
35. Prior to final preparation of the subgrade and placement of pavement base materials, all underground utilities shall be installed and service connections stubbed out behind the hardscape improvement. Public utilities, Cable TV, sanitary sewers, and water lines, shall be installed in a manner which will not disturb the street pavement, curb, gutter and sidewalk, when future service connections or extensions are made.
36. Both temporary and permanent erosion control plans shall be submitted for review and approval along with the grading plan. Permanent erosion control measures shall include hydro-seeding of all graded slopes within 60 days of completion of grading. Erosion control measures shall be installed prior to October 15.
37. The developer shall keep adjoining public streets free and clean of project dirt, mud, materials, and debris during the construction period.
38. Where soil or geologic conditions encountered in grading operations are different from that anticipated in the soil and/or geologic investigation report, or where such conditions warrant changes to the recommendations contained in the original soil investigation, a revised soil or geologic report shall be submitted by the applicant, for approval by the City Engineer. It shall be accompanied by an engineering and geological opinion as to the safety of the site from hazards of land slippage, erosion, settlement, and seismic activity.
39. Prior to placing the initial lift of asphalt and after all aggregate base is placed, all public sewer pipelines and storm drain pipelines shall be video inspected at the expense of the contractor/developer. All videotapes shall be submitted to the City. If any inadequacies are found, they shall be repaired prior to the placement of the final lift of asphalt.
40. The contractor shall comply with all Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) requirements.
41. A Grading Permit, as described above, shall be issued by the City Engineer and all improvements described on the plans shall be completed or the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City Engineer to complete the grading and public improvements; and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing the construction of all grading and improvements shown on the plans. Any necessary right-of-way required to complete the improvements will be acquired by the applicant at his/her expense.
42. The applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for review and approval a Final Map prepared by a Licensed Surveyor, or Registered Civil Engineer licensed to survey in the State of California, in accordance with the California Subdivision Map Act; and shall pay all appropriate fees for map check and recording.
43. Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall provide to the Community Development Director an acceptable method, such as a homeowners association, tenant agreement, and/or CC&R’s to maintain the common areas for the residential areas, and possibly the roadways, and detention facilities. The subdivider shall provide the appropriate documentation for review by the Community Development Director, City Engineer and City Attorney.
44. The developer proposes that Lots A, C, and D are to be dedicated to the City of Grass Valley and maintained through a developer created Landscaping and Lighting District in accordance with the State of California Landscaping and Lighting Act. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, the applicant shall provide all documentation and pay all necessary City costs and fees for the formation of a Lighting and Landscaping District for the subdivision.
Lot D will need be wide enough to accommodate the necessary right-of-way to meet the City’s Minor Residential Street Standard. This could be achieved by obtaining the necessary right-of-way from the SEO property to the south or by deleting Lot 8. Any access to Upper Slate Creek Road will require dedication to the City for the right-of-way and improvement of Upper Slate Creek Road from Ridge Road to the southern property line of Lot D to meet the City’s Minor Residential Street Standard.
Lot B will not be owned or maintained by the City of Grass Valley. A Homeowner’s Association or other acceptable organization will need to be formed for the ownership and maintenance of Lot B.
Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, the applicant shall provide all documentation and pay all necessary City costs and fees for the formation of a Maintenance District for the maintenance of the subdivision’s detention basin.
45. The project applicant/developer shall pay their fair share for the improvements at the intersection of Ridge Road/Sierra College Drive/Morgan Ranch Road. The Ridge Road/Sierra College Drive/Morgan Ranch Road intersection improvements shall be installed and operational prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy for the proposed project. Mitigation Measure 7
46. Subdivider shall dedicate land, or pay a fee in-lieu of dedication, for park and recreation purposes in accordance with the City’s Subdivision Ordinance.
47. Subdivider shall provide an easement to the City for the purpose of a trail connection to the Litton Trail.
48. As shown on Sheet 3 of the tentative map, if an easement is not obtained from the “SEO” property for the proposed sidewalk across from Lot 9, then the roadway will need to be shifted to the north to allow for the construction of the entire street section within the subdivision. If the roadway is adjusted and the proposed home on Lot 9 does not meet setback requirements, Lot 9 shall be deleted and the area of the Lot evenly distributed among Lots 10 through 13.
49. Lot lines for those lots adjacent to Ridge Road may need to be adjusted to allow for the construction of the sidewalk and bus stop along Ridge Road. The bus stop pullout area must be designed to be at least eight (8) feet wide, not including the bike lane, fifty (50) feet long, a minimum of thirty (30) foot tapers, and have a bus stop pad installed to Nevada County and ADA standards.
50. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, the applicant shall provide for the City review and approval:
• A set of deed restrictions which would be applied to, and recorded against, the title of not less than 8 of the residential units and sets forth affordability restrictions for the purchase and future resale of each property. The deed restrictions shall include measures that; 1) ensure the purchase price of the “set aside” unit will be affordable to individuals or families within or below the 80% of median income range, as determined for Nevada County by Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and qualify for the City’s HOME Grant down payment assistance program or similar program; 2) ensure the future resale of the “set aside” unit will based upon its sales price or value of the residence on the original sales price plus an annual increase that is tied to the CPI, and 3) ensure that preference for future resales of the “set aside” unit are given to local residents within the 80% of the median income range (per a marketing plan administered by the City);
• An agreement executed between the developer and City that requires the developer to; 1) cooperate with the City in the preparation and implementation of a marketing plan for the “set aside” unit to ensure that preference is given to local residents and /or families; 2) the “set aside” unit would be evenly distributed throughout and sequenced with the development of the project; and, 3) the exterior and interior of the “set aside” unit would be designed and furnished in a similar style and quality as all of the housing units.
• A set of deed restrictions that would apply to, and be recorded against all properties within the project and that provides effective notice of this single “set aside” units and its future resale restrictions.
PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND EXONERATION OF BONDS, OR OTHER FORM OF SECURITY, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED:
51. Sufficient surety (Maintenance Bond) guaranteeing the public improvements for a period of one year shall be provided.
52. "As-built" plans, signed by the Engineer of Record, must be submitted to the City Engineer's office on Mylar and a CD with an AutoCAD (or equivalent) drawing of the public improvements.
53. Pay all development impact fees including Regional Transportation Mitigation Fees, Local Circulation Fees, Sewer and Water Connection Fees (NID), Drainage, Fire, Police, Administrative, School, Park and Recreation Fees in accordance with the City’s Fee Schedule.
54. If an approved secondary emergency access can not be developed, all buildings in the project will need to be provided with fire sprinkler system.
55. An on-site system of fire hydrants will need to be installed every 500 feet along the roadway access to all areas. Minimum fire flow of 1000 (one-thousand) gallons per minute @ 20 psi residual will be needed for all structures enclosed floor space, including the garages, up to 3600 (three-thousand-six-hundred) square feet. Larger fire flow will be needed for larger structures.
56. The fire hydrant system shall be installed and operating prior to any building materials for the structures being brought to the site.
57. All flammable, combustible and ladder fuels on the property, within 100 feet of any structure shall be removed.
58. Fire roadway access, during construction, shall designed to handle fire equipment, and will be reviewed by the Fire Department.
59. Prior to the issuance of the Building Permit, the applicant shall address all necessary water connections to Nevada Irrigation District. The connection shall include the water service line and meters for each unit.
60. Sewer backflow preventers will be required for all homes meeting the requirements of the CBC.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY:
61. The applicant shall either install the four-way stop at the Ridge Road and Slate Creek Intersection, or pay their fair share for those intersection improvements as determined by the City Engineer. Plans for the Ridge Road and Slate Creek Intersection improvements shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.
62. Tentative Map 06PLN-16 and Planned Unit Development 06PLN-17 Applications shall be subject to revocation or modification by the Planning Commission if the Commission finds that there has been a) noncompliance with any of the forgoing conditions, or b) the Commission finds that the use for which this permit is hereby granted is so exercised as to be substantially detrimental to persons or property in the neighborhood of the use. Any such revocation shall be preceded by a public hearing noticed and heard pursuant to the City of Grass Valley City Code.
63. All mitigation measures as referenced in the Initial Study and Environmental Impact Report and as modified by the City Council shall be complied with.
64. The Tentative Map shall expire in three years. An extension of the permits may be extended with approval by the Planning Commission.
9. NON PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
See item 7.1
Planning Application (06PLN-33) for a lot line adjustment for Jason and Debbie Costa and Corey and Amy Hutson located at 418 Chapel Street (APN 29-080-50) in the R-1 (Single Family) Zoning District. Environmental Assessment: Categorically exempt.
Chairman White called for the item at 9:15 pm.
Dan Chance, Associate Planner presented the item and noted that the reconfiguration would realign a non-conforming size lot.
Tim Shad, Initial Point, representing applicant
Commissioner Hyde is concerned the proximity to the apartments nearby.
Tim Shad noted that the property has been cleaned up.
Commissioner Hyde stated that new development code would allow lots to be 6000 square feet, and she would like the new lot to represent that.
Chairman White called for the public hearing, there being no comment he closed the hearing.
Motion by: Commissioner Hyde moved that lot be increased to a minimum of 6000 square feet.
11.2 Review of City Council Items
Idaho Maryland Mine was also reviewed and modifications have been discussed and what steps are involved.
Commissioner Silberstein asked when the EIR would be up for public hearing.
Mr. Heckel noted that the Initial Study will need to be prepared first and then the EIR process will start, most likely in six months.
Joe Heckel, Community Development Director noted that the Ordinance will be focused on the 1872 townsite.
Chairman White appointed Commissioner Kenitzer to act as liaison to the subcommittee.
11.4 Future Meetings, Hearings and Study Sessions
Prior to the Planning Commission meeting on that date there may be multiple sites to view it from. The Commission agrees to start the January 16, 2007 meeting at 6:00 p.m.
The Development Code subcommittee will give a brief update to the City Council in January and then will conduct a Public Hearing later in January. They would like creek issue to be ready for City Council by the January meeting.
11.5 Status of Special Development Areas (SDA’s)
Joe Heckel, Community Development Director noted that screening is occurring by City Council at this time. The Northstar project is the next application up for possible review or it might move on to Kenny Ranch depending on the response from the Northstar applicant. There could be concerns about how many projects would be allowed to be processed in order to provide meaningful public input.
12.0 Brief Announcements/Reports by Planning Commission Members
None at this time.
13.0 Community Development Director Report
Joe Heckel, Community Development Director noted that an Economic Specialist, Jeri Amemdola has been hired. He also noted that Barb Carman has been promoted to Planning Technician and that a replacement clerk will be hired soon.
Motion: Commissioner Hyde moved to adjourn at 9:40p.m.
All times are PST
|next newest topic | next oldest topic|
Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.38c
Copyright, The City of Grass Valley
Website design and hosting by New Press
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 1999.
Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.38c