ATTACHMENT 1ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
MEETING DATE: December 16, 2021
PROJECT NAME: Farmhouse Subdivision – 52-lot Planned Development PROJECT LOCATION: 1825 & 1965 S. Union Road, Manteca, CA 95337 (APNs: 226-180-05 & 226-180-16)
APPLICATION NUMBERS: REZ 21-161, PD 21-145 & SDJ 20-99 RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following actions:
Recommend the City Council waive the first reading of the Ordinance amending the zoning district from the R-1 One-Family Dwelling Zoning District to PD Planned Development Overlay (File No. PD 21-145 and REZ 21-161) for the Farmhouse Subdivision; and Adopt Resolution No. 1580 recommending the City Council approve the Tentative Subdivision Map (File No. SDJ 20-99) for Farmhouse Subdivision.
Project InFORMATION
Applicant:
Lewis Family Trust
Property Owner:
Lewis Family Trust
General Plan Designation:
Low Density Residential (LDR)
Zoning:
One-Family Dwelling (R-1)
Proposed Zoning:
Planned Development (PD)
Existing Use:
Almond orchard and two single-family residences
Proposed Use:
52-Lot Planned Development Subdivision
Parcel Size
9.92 acres
Adjacent Uses:
North: Existing almond orchard
South: Low density residential
East: Low density residential
West: Low density residential
CEQA Determination
Exempt per CEQA Section 15183, Projects Consistent with a Community Plan, General Plan, or Zoning Project DescriptioN & LOCATION
The proposed project is a Tentative Subdivision Map, Rezone, and a Planned Development Overlay for a 52-lot Planned Development single-family residential subdivision located at 1825 and 1965 South Union Road.
The site currently consists of an existing almond orchard with a 1918 farmhouse and barn, as well as another single-family home. The site is surrounded by an existing almond orchard to the north, a Planned Development with single-family homes to the south, single-family homes to the east, and single-family homes to the west (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: Vicinity Map – Lewis Estates, 1825 & 1965 S. Union Rd.
Tentative Subdivision Map:
The Tentative Subdivision Map will subdivide the approximately 9.92-acre site into a 52 small-lot Planned Development residential subdivision (see Figure 2 for Tentative Map). The new lots, excluding the existing farmhouse with barn lot and the other existing home lot, will range in size from 4,192 to 9,826 square feet. The typical lot size is approximately 4,600 square feet (50’ x 92’). The existing farmhouse and barn will become one large lot (1 acre), and the other existing home will become a 13,108 square foot lot. The main entrance to the subdivision will be on Union Road. A second connection to the existing portion of Maehl Drive will be constructed on the opposite side of the subdivision to allow for secondary access to the subdivision. A masonry wall will wrap the project’s boundary on Union Road and Woodward Avenue to be consistent with the existing walls on both streets. As a result of the wall, the driveways for the farmhouse and barn lot and other existing home lot will be relocated to the interior roadways of the subdivision.
Figure 2: Tentative Subdivision Map for Farmhouse
The barn on Lot 49 is considered an ancillary use to the existing residential farmhouse and must always accompany a residential use. The barn’s existing side setbacks of four feet will conform to the side setbacks for the PD. If in the future this lot were to be split, the lot with the barn would either need to have a residential home constructed on it, or the barn itself would need to be converted into a residential structure to be in compliance with the Planned Development zoning district.
Planned Development:
The project is requesting a Planned Development Overlay to have flexibility with setback requirements and other development standards in order to create a unique housing product. Per the Municipal Code, a Planned Development Overlay is intended to allow the flexibility in a project so that a developer can create a quality project that is compatible with the surrounding community, preserves site resources, minimizes hazards, and provides a public benefit.
In order to create a unique and superior housing product, the applicant is requesting a reduced side yard setback, reduced front yard setback, and increased height maximum (see Figure 3 below, showing the lot layouts with reduced setbacks in red). Specifically, the Planned Development request is for the lots to have a 4’ side yard setback, a 12’6” front yard setback, and a 35’ building height maximum. The typical standards for the small-lot R-1 zoning district are a 5’ side yard setback, a 15’ front yard setback, and a 30’ building height maximum. This information is also shown in Table 1 on page 11.
Figure 3: Proposed Setbacks for lots in Farmhouse Subdivision
ANALYSIS
The proposed Planned Development Overlay and Tentative Subdivision Map are analyzed with respect to conformance with:
Manteca General Plan
Manteca Zoning Ordinance
Manteca Climate Action Plan
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
General Plan Compliance
The project site has a LDR General Plan land use designation. (See Figure 4.) The LDR land use designation requires a density range of 2.1 to 8.0 dwelling units per acre. The project meets these density and land use requirements at 5.24 dwelling units per acre. Per the General Plan, the density range allows substantial flexibility in selecting dwelling unit types and parcel configurations to suit particular site conditions and housing needs. The types of development anticipated in LDR includes small and clustered residential lots, as well as conventional large lot detached homes. Therefore, this proposed subdivision of mostly small lots complies with the intent of this land use designation.
Figure 4: General Plan Land Use Designation Map. Project site outlined in orange.
In addition to complying with the LDR land use designation density and use, the proposed project complies with the following General Plan goals and policies:
Land Use Policy LU-P-49: The City shall give priority to in-fill development and new development contiguous to existing developed areas, whenever practical.
Community Design Goal CD-1: Retain the compact and cohesive community form of the City.
Analysis: The project site for Farmhouse is located within City limits, surrounded mostly by existing development, deeming it to be in-fill development. It is contiguous to existing residential developed areas to the east, west, and south of the project site, and seamlessly fits into the surrounding developed area. Further, promoting in-fill development opportunities is a way to ensure a more compact form of growth for the City. By recommending approval of this project, this is a way of encouraging compact growth and minimizing urban sprawl.
Community Design Policy CD-P-7: The City shall implement neighborhood design standards in the Residential districts that contribute to the overall character of the neighborhood by emphasizing traditional residential features that enhance the sense of community, ensure a safe pedestrian orientation, and minimize the visual prominence of garages.
Community Design Implementation CD-I-3: Approve and apply neighborhood design standards.
Analysis: The Farmhouse Subdivision includes Planned Development Guidelines, which consist of neighborhood design standards that will provide the framework for a high-quality development. These guidelines address architectural form and character, as well as the standards and style for landscaping, lighting, fencing, signage, and setbacks.
The farmhouse architecture described in the Guidelines is a traditional style, with features to create a pedestrian scale. The Guidelines describes the farmhouse style as “simple by nature, with primary roof forms designed for functionality and purpose, accent roofs to add character and style and to bring a pedestrian scale to the streetscape (PD, p-10).” The PD Guidelines requires that the garages must be recessed from the front façade a minimum of 5’ (PD, p-10).
Community Design Goal CD-11: To the extent possible, new development shall retain or incorporate visual reminders of the agricultural heritage of the community.
Community Design Policy CD-P-50: In order to retain a visual reminder of the agricultural heritage, the City will permit the use of non-fruiting species, such as flowering pear and plum, as secondary accent trees in landscape corridors along major streets. The primary street tree shall provide a shade canopy over the street and sidewalk.
Goal LU-8: To reinforce strong urban design, quality development and a compact city form.
Community Design Goal CD-3: Establish distinct, attractive identities for neighborhoods, gateways, and commercial areas.
Analysis: The Farmhouse Subdivision will include the existing farmhouse and barn, which are visual reminders of the community’s agricultural heritage (see Figure 5, Existing Site Conditions). As noted in the Guidelines, Farmhouse is a planned neighborhood that is designed provide a nod to the site’s past. The neighborhood is “designed to preserve the existing agrarian structures and lend subtle design cues to blend past and present seamlessly, allowing the new neighborhood to stand next to the existing site’s structures in harmony (PD, p-23).” The Guidelines further describe the farmhouse style as “based on a farmhouse vernacular that is at once nostalgic and re-imaged to establish a distinctive character within the City of Manteca. (PD, p-10).” It adds that the traditional style will be emphasized by the use of traditional siding materials, such as lap siding or board and batten siding, combined with masonry and shutters, to create a “picturesque and textural streetscape (PD, p-10).” The elevations illustrating this design are shown in Figure 6.
A distinct entry to the development will be created by the installation of flowering trees on both sides of the neighborhood entry. Per the Guidelines, “the trees will function as waypoint markers, while also honoring the history of the site as a fruiting tree orchard (PD, p-23).” The Farmhouse entry sign will be illuminated by overhead barn lights, which draws inspiration from historical agricultural and industrial lighting from the early 20th Century (PD, p-23).
Figure 5: Existing Site Conditions Showing Agricultural Elements Figure 6: Elevation Plans and Lighting for Farmhouse Subdivision Figure 7: Artist Rendering of Project Entry at Farmhouse Subdivision Figure 8: Artist Rendering of Project Entry at Farmhouse Subdivision Community Design Policy CD-P-15: Major arterial streets shall include a common landscape theme that includes primary street trees, groundcover, sidewalks, bus shelters where required, and lighting applied throughout the City.
Analysis: According to the General Plan Existing Conditions Report, both Union Road and Woodward Avenue are arterial roads. The PD Guidelines states that the design plan along these roads will be a continuation of the same plant material with a continuation of existing sidewalks. Street lighting will be installed per the Engineering Department’s standards, similar to existing street lighting already existing on Union Road and Woodward Avenue.
The City shall promote infill development that completes gaps in the circulation system.
Analysis: This subdivision will complete the roadway and sidewalk improvements that are currently missing at the southwest corner of Union Road and Woodward Avenue.
Community Design Policy CD-P-44: Provide minimal levels of street, parking, building, site and public area lighting to meet safety standards and provide direction.
Analysis: This subdivision is required to provide minimum levels of site lighting in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. The improvement plans showing lighting information will also be compliant with the regulations regarding nearby sensitive users and will avoid light-spillover onto the neighboring homes to the west and south. The lighting plan for the project will provide directional shielding for all exterior lighting to minimize the annoyance of direct or indirect glare, which will be an added benefit for the neighboring residences.
Zoning ORDINANCE compliance
The project site is currently zoned R-1 which allows for substantial flexibility in selecting dwelling unit types and parcel configurations to suit site conditions and housing needs. The types of dwelling units include small and clustered lots, as well as conventional large-lot detached homes. As the Zoning Map shows below, the project site is surrounded by similarly zoned developments, some of which are also R-1 subdivisions with PD overlays.
Figure 11: Zoning Map. Project site outlined in orange.
Planned Development
The applicant is requesting a Planned Development Overlay to have flexibility with setback and height requirements in order to create a unique housing product. As stated in the Zoning Ordinance, the purpose of a Planned Development is to provide a process to allow diversity in the relationship between buildings and open spaces and to create interesting physical environments. Additionally, a Section 17.10.140.A further emphasizes that a PD Overlay is intended to allow flexibility to create a quality project that is compatible with the surrounding community, preserves site resources, minimizes hazards, and provides a public benefit in a way that the traditional development standards will not allow.
Although the applicant is requesting a PD Overlay to adjust the requirements for the front yard setbacks, side yard setbacks and building height, all other development standards of the R-1 Small Lot development standards will be met, including density, lot size, open space minimums, and land use. The table below identifies the existing R-1 Small Lot development standards and the proposed standards for the Farmhouse Subdivision. The deviations from the R-1 standards are shown in red.
Table 1: Development Standards for R-1 Zone, per MMC Table 17.26.020-2 R-1 Zone Small Lot Standard
Farmhouse
Subdivision
Minimum Density (du/ac)
2.1 5.24
Maximum Density (du/ac)
8.0 5.24
Minimum Lot Depth
35’
(Typ.) 92’6”
Minimum Lot Width
70’
(Typ.) 50’
Front Yard Setback
15’
12’6”
Side Yard Setback
5’
4’
Street Side Yard Setback
10’
10’
Rear Yard Setback
10’
10’
Building Height
30’
35’
Open Space
40%
40%
Use
Small lots, clustered lots, conventional large-lot detached residences Mostly small-lot Planned Development subdivision
Planned Development Findings:
The Planning Commission must make the following findings in order to recommend approval to City Council for the PD Overlay:
The proposed project does not exceed the total density allowed under the base Zoning District or the General Plan land use designation.
Analysis: The density range for LDR/R-1 is 2.1 to 8.0 dwelling units per acre. The project’s proposed density is 5.24 dwelling units per acre, which complies with the land use designation and zoning density requirements.
The proposed project is superior to development that could occur under the development standards of the base district in the following two ways:
a: Superior site design:
Analysis: The Farmhouse Subdivision offers a unique and superior product because of its desirable floor plans and architectural style and details, which are detailed in the PD Guidelines. Some of the design enhancements of the homes include the following:
Homes shall have appropriate massing and roofs consistent with the farmhouse style.
Masonry shall be applied authentically, wrapping outside corners and terminating at inside corners.
Homes shall have accent roofs - these add character and style, and bring a more pedestrian scale to the streetscape.
Homes will not have stone or brick scattered over stucco to mimic building age which is not appealing or authentic.
Where wood siding is specified, cement-like material will be an acceptable material in order to promote longevity and ease of maintenance.
Grooved plywood siding and vinyl siding will not be permitted.
House lights will complement the architectural style.
When shutters are used, each shutter shall be sized to one-half of the entire adjacent window width, such that if the shutters were closed, they would completely cover the window.
Garages will be recessed from the front façade a minimum of 5 feet.
Through the incorporation of these elements, and the more comprehensive design guidelines listed in the PD Guidelines, this subdivision will ensure a thematic and cohesive streetscape, which “is a defining feature of enduring neighborhoods (PD, p-10),” and will create a superior product to what could normally be achieved under the standard developments of the R-1 zone. b: Reduced impacts on surrounding properties, in terms of privacy, access to sunlight, shadow, views, building bulk, noise, or other types of negative impacts, beyond what would be achieved under existing requirements:
Analysis: An emphasis on creating a physical development that fosters an “eyes on the street” environment will increase the sense of safety and sense of community. This sense of safety will be a positive impact not only for the residences of this subdivision, but will have a spillover effect for the surrounding properties, fostering true community within the City.
The proposed project incorporates best site planning practices for quality design and compatibility with surroundings.
Analysis: The project incorporates best site planning practices for quality design through the implementation of the guidelines and standards detailed in the PD Guidelines. The Guidelines include good urban design principles and architectural details to ensure quality design and pedestrian-friendly scale streetscapes.
Compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods will be ensured as the project site is being developed with lot sizes compatible with the LDR land uses surrounding the site. The wall and sidewalk that will surround the subdivision will be a continuation of the existing wall and sidewalk and landscape plan that are installed at the adjacent subdivisions.
The proposed project incorporates high quality architectural design and durable materials.
Analysis: Farmhouse Subdivision consists of a well thought-out and high quality design aesthetic based on the farmhouse style. The homes’ materials are an appropriate choice for creating this timeless yet contemporary farmhouse feel, with materials such as horizontal lap siding or board and batten siding. Additional decorative secondary façade materials such as brick or stone and shutters will be used.
The proposed project shall not be substantially detrimental to adjacent property and will not materially impair the purposes of this Title or the public interest.
Analysis: The Farmhouse project was reviewed and has been conditioned to not be detrimental to adjacent property owners in that this project will meet the City’s rear yard setback standards and will provide the amount of landscaping required by City code. This project will be required to maintain all other standards, including performance standards, to ensure there is no detriment to adjacent properties and will not materially impair the purposes of this Title or the public interest.
Tentative Subdivision Map Findings:
The subdivision of land is governed by the Subdivision Map Act and Title 16 of the Manteca Municipal Code. The Planning Commission may recommend approval for a Tentative Subdivision Map if the Subdivision Map Act findings from Section 66474 of the Map Act can’t be made, in addition to the four findings in Chapter 16.09.040 of the Municipal Code. The Subdivision Map Act findings and the additional findings in Chapter 16.09.040 of the Municipal Code are discussed below:
Subdivision Map Act (66474): A legislative body of a city or county shall deny approval of a tentative map, if it makes any of the following findings:
That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451.
Analysis: This project is consistent with the General Plan for the LDR land use designation in that it consists of mostly small-lot residential homes, as well as a few conventional sized lots. It meets the density requirements of LDR (2.1 to 8.0 dwelling units per acre) with 5.24 dwelling units per acre. This project is not a part of a Specific Plan.
That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.
Analysis: The project’s subdivision design complies with the intent of the General Plan to allow small-lot residences in the LDR land use category, as this project consists of mostly small-lot residences, as well as a few conventional large lot detached residences. This project is not part of a Specific Plan.
That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development.
Analysis: The site is physically suitable for this type of development. It is relatively flat with no physical impediments or restrictive easements. Road infrastructure and services are already available at this site, making it suitable for this type of development.
That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
Analysis: The required density for a parcel of this land use and zone (LDR/R-1, 9.92 acres) is 2.1 to 8.0 dwelling units per acre. This project meets the density requirements at 5.24 dwelling units per acre. Therefore, the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of the development.
That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
Analysis: A Modified Initial Study/15183 Checklist was completed for this project. The Initial Study states that impacts conflicting with the adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan have been adequately addressed in the General Plan EIR, as the General Plan EIR anticipated buildout of the project site.
The design of this project will not cause environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, as this project is in the ‘Urban’ designated habitat zone. However, this site is still subject to the SJCOG Habitat survey to determine if any sensitive species are present on the site. Should sensitive species be located on site, appropriate mitigation measures established by SJCOG Habitat will be followed.
That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems.
Analysis: As approved and conditioned, the design of this project will not cause serious health problems. This development will be required to comply with all standards, including performance standards, and regulations pertaining to health and safety found in the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
The Modified Initial Study/15183 Checklist states that the project will not expose any sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of localized carbon monoxide (CO) or toxic air contaminants (TACs) during construction or operation.
That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.
Analysis: This site has been found to have no conflicting easements on site.
Manteca Municipal Code Section 16.09.040: In addition to the requirements governing approval of the tentative map set forth in the Subdivision Map Act, the following considerations and findings shall be made:
Subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, the State CEQA Guidelines, the City Council shall review and consider any applicable environmental documents.
Analysis: A Modified Initial Study/15183 Checklist was prepared to disclose potential environmental effects of the proposed project. All areas of study were found to have been adequately addressed in the General Plan EIR, concluding that the criteria for requiring further CEQA review was not met.
In reaching a decision upon the tentative subdivision map, the City Council shall consider the effect of that decision on the housing needs of the region and balance these needs against the public service needs of its residences and available fiscal and environmental resources.
Analysis: The proposed project will provide the opportunity to create additional housing in the City on an underutilized parcel. The subdivided parcel will promote the development of 52 new homes, providing variation in the types of detached single-family housing available in Manteca. The site is located within City limits in an established neighborhood, where all utilities and City services are already located. Goal H-2 of the 2016 Housing Element Update states that infill residential development is listed as one type of development that the City will promote as a way to provide additional housing within City limits, without expanding the City’s physical boundaries. This project is exactly the type of project that this policy is referring to in that more housing is being provided for the Manteca community without negatively impacting the health, safety, and welfare of existing residents or straining existing city services. The project will not have a negative effect on the housing needs of the region and staff analysis has balanced the regional housing needs against the public service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources.
In reaching a decision upon the tentative subdivision map, the City Council shall consider the design of the subdivision as it provides for future passive and natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision, as required by Government Code Section 66473.1.
Analysis: All floor plans have windows on all facades on both stories, to optimize the potential for passive cooling. This project will also be required to comply with any applicable California Building Code requirements that may promote passive and natural heating or cooling.
The tentative subdivision map may be approved or conditionally approved by the City Council if it finds that the proposed land division, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the general plan, any applicable specific plan, and all applicable provisions of this code.
Analysis: As discussed in this staff report, the project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of LDR and supports many General Plan goals and policies. It is also consistent with the Zoning Code Requirements for One-Family Dwelling zoning with a Planned Development Overlay to provide for the creativity to build a unique project.
Zoning Amendment Findings:
The PD Overlay is considered a rezoning, even though the underlying zoning district of R-1 will remain the same and the project adheres to the R-1 development standards with the exception of some setback and height dimensions. In order to approve the rezoning, the Planning Commission must make the following findings to recommend approval to City Council:
The proposed Zoning Amendment (text or map) is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs.
Analysis: As discussed, the Zoning Map Amendment is consistent with the intent of the General Plan for the Low-Density Residential zone, in that this development consists of a mostly small-lot residential subdivision.
The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.
Analysis: As approved and conditioned, this project will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City, in that it is required to follow all City codes, including performance standards. If at any time this project is deemed to be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City, the Police and Code Enforcement Departments will be notified for review and possible citation.
The amendment has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Analysis: In compliance with CEQA, a modified Initial Study/15183 Checklist was completed for this project. Based on the Checklist, the proposed project would not result in potentially significant impacts beyond what was originally contemplated in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This is demonstrated in the analysis contained within this Modified Initial Study/15183 Checklist.
If a map amendment, the site is physically suitable (including absence of physical constraints, access, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and provisions of utilities) for the requested zoning designations and anticipated land uses/development.
Analysis: The site is relatively flat and has no physical obstructions. Roadway improvements already exist along the frontage’s property. The site is surrounded by residential developments to the east, west, and south, making it a compatible use for the area. The project meets the required density calculation, and conforms to the type of development expected with a standard R-1 development.
If a text amendment, the amendment is internally consistent with other applicable provisions of this Zoning Code.
Analysis: This project does not include a text amendment.
CLIMATE ACTION PLAN COMPLIANCE
On October 15, 2013, the Manteca City Council approved and adopted the Air Quality Element Update and Climate Action Plan in response to the passing of Assembly Bill AB32. The intent of this plan is to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions in both private and public sector development.
The project complies with the following Climate Action Plan strategies:
CAP Strategy: Compact Development CD-1: The City shall encourage projects consistent with the development densities allowed by the General Plan and are contiguous to existing development meet compact development criteria.
Analysis: This project is consistent with the development density allowed in the LDR land use designation, and it is contiguous to existing residential development to the west and south. As discussed above, it is also a compact development, minimizing urban sprawl.
CAP Strategy: Pedestrian Oriented Development POD-2: The City shall require sidewalks and/or pedestrian paths in all residential projects. The sidewalks should be wide enough to allow side-by-side walking and room for passing to increase comfort and convenience for walkers (5 to 6 feet).
Analysis: As part of the amenities of this project, sidewalks will be installed along every lot frontage, as well as the missing sidewalk segment of sidewalk on both Union Road and Woodward Avenue, creating an improved walking experience for the residents in this subdivision and for the neighbors in the surrounding neighborhoods.
CAP Strategy: Water Conservation (WC) WC-1: The City shall continue to implement water conservation measures to comply with the Model Water Efficient Landscape requirements that implement the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill 1881, Laird).
Analysis: The front yards of the homes will utilize low-water-use planting, and turf lawns will not be installed in the front yards. This project is required to comply with the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, per Assembly Bill 1881.
Municipal Strategies - Urban Forestry (UF) UF-2: The City of Manteca will consider the following goals and actions when revising its urban forestry program:
Increase public and private tree plantings citywide
Use canopy trees along new major roadways and in new developments Analysis: This project will increase the amount of both public and private tree plantings and will use flowering trees along Woodward Avenue and Union Road. The project will require all front yards to have landscaping, including a tree, which means a minimum of 52 new trees will be planted, not including the trees along Woodward Avenue and Union Road.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
A Modified Initial Study/15183 Checklist was prepared to disclose potential environmental effects of the proposed project. Under Section 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines, where a project is consistent with the use and density established for a property under an existing general plan or zoning ordinance for which the City has already certified an EIR, additional environmental review is not required “except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site.” If such requirements are met, the examination of environmental effects is limited to those which the agency determines, in an initial study or other analysis:
Are peculiar to the project or the parcel on which the project would be located; Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning action, general plan or community plan with which the project is consistent; Are potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior EIR prepared for the general plan, community plan or zoning action; or Are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior EIR.
The Modified Initial Study/15183 Checklist for Farmhouse Subdivision determined that the proposed project would not result in potentially significant off-site impacts. The proposed project would also not result in potentially significant cumulative impacts that were not evaluated in the City’s General Plan EIR. The Initial Study can be found here: https://www.ci.manteca.ca.us/CommunityDevelopment/Planning%20Division/Pages/Planning-Division-Documents.aspx Report prepared by: Mallorie Fenrich, Associate Planner Attachments:
Planning Commission Resolution 1580
Exhibit A (Tentative Subdivision Map)
Exhibit B (Conditions of Approval)
City Council Ordinance
Planned Development Guidelines Document
Reviewed by:
Lea Simvoulakis, Senior Planner/Acting Planner Manager Date Approved by:
Chris Erias, Development Services Director Date
ATTACHMENT 1
City of Manteca Planning Commission
AGENDA REPORT