CITY OF MERCED
SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION
RESOLUTION #503
Hostetler Investments, LLC, and
Bellevue Merced, LLC
Modification of the street alignment
and lot configuration as approved for
VTSM #1280 for Bellevue Ranch
North due to biological constraints.
APPLICANT PROJECT
923 E. Pacheco Blvd., Ste. C
Approximately 520 acres, generally
located, north of Bellevue Road, west
of G Street.
ADDRESS PROJECT SITE
Los Banos, CA 93635
170-060-015; -018; -019; -021; -026; -
027; and -028
CITY/STATE/ZIP APN
(209) 548-9300 Planned Development (P-D) #42
PHONE ZONING
In accordance with Chapter 20.68 of the Merced City Zoning Ordinance, the Merced City Site Plan Review Committee considered and approved Site Plan Review Application #503 on October 13, 2022, submitted by Benchmark Engineering on behalf of Hostetler Investments, LLC, and Bellevue Merced, LLC, property owners, to allow modifications to Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map (VTSM) #1280 for Bellevue Ranch North. The modifications consist of changes to the street alignment and lot configuration due to biological constraints. The p roject site consists of approximately 500 acres of land, generally located north of Bellevue Road, west of G Street. The property has various General Plan designations and is zoned Planned Development (P-D) #42. The project site is more particularly desc ribed as being a subdivision of Lot 4 and a portion of Lot 3 as shown on the map filed in Volume 92 of Parcel Maps at Page 38 through 42, Merced County Records; also known as Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APN’s) 170-060-015; -018; - 019, -021; -026; -027; and -028.
WHEREAS, The Planning staff has conducted an environmental review of the project in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and concluded that Environmental Review #22- 39 is a second tier environmental document, based upon the City's determination that the proposed development remains consistent with the current General Plan and provisions of CEQA Guidelines, Section 15162 [EIR for the Bellevue Ranch Master Development Plan (SCH #92-102055)]. A copy of the Section 15162 Findings can be found at Exhibit 3; and,
WHEREAS, the Merced City Site Plan Review Committee makes the following Findings:
A) The project site consists of approximately 520 acres of land generally located north of Bellevue Road, west of G Street (Exhibit 1).
ATTACHMENT 4
Site Plan Approval #503
October 13, 2022
B) VTSM #1280 is a large lot subdivision containing 29 large lots that would subsequently be subdivided into smaller lots for subdivisions and individual multi- family or commercial projects. The original map is provided at Exhibit 2.
C) Mitigation Measure 4.8.1 of the Bellevue Ranch Master Development Plan (BRMDP) EIR required a biological survey and wetland delineation map be prepared. This was also a condition of approval for VTSM #1280 (refer to Condition #26 of Planning Commission Resolution #2857 at Exhibit 3).
D) The current request to modify the tentative map would result in the elimination of certain roads and a change to the lot configuration as a result of biological resources identified within the project area. Although the modification would eliminate the ab ility to develop on certain lots (villages) within the subdivision, the modified map creates 38 lots. This increase is due to the map better identifying the future phases (villages) to be created with the subsequent small lot maps and identifying additional open space area created due to the biological resources. The proposed modified map is provided at Exhibit 4.
E) VTSM #1280 was eligible for state -granted extensions and has received discretionary extensions from the City making the current expiration date for this map June 10, 2024.
F) The conditions of approval for VTSM #1280 found in Planning Commission Resolution #2857 (Exhibit 3) have been modified by Minor Modification #19-05.
Planning Commission Resolution #2857 found at Exhibit 3 reflects the modification made by Minor Modification #19-05.
G) Bellevue Ranch Master Development Plan Section 1.6.2 "Amendment Process" allows minor modifications deemed to be in substantial conformance with the Master Development Plan and Site Utilization Plan (SUP), as determined by the City of Merced Planning and Engineering Departments, to be approved administratively by the Director of Development Services. On April 1, 2021, an administrative approval was granted for the modification of the lot configuration of Lots “V-21A and V21-B” as shown on Exhibit 5.
H) Due to biological issues found throughout much of the subdivision area, a wetland delineation map was prepared by Gallaway Enterprises, Inc. (Exhibit 6). This map has been submitted to and approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (refer to the letter from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers at Exhibit 7) . In addition to the actual biological areas shown on the map, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulations require a 75- foot buffer area (avoidance area) from the edge of the wetland area. This buffer renders more of the land undevelopable.
I) Based on the approved wetland delineation map, VTSM #1280 could not be constructed as originally proposed.
J) Roads affected by the wetland delineation include (street names are as shown on the originally approved tenta tive map): Old Lake Road, east of North M Circle and the quarter-mile collector north of Farmland (Yosemite Lakes Drive), Barclay Way, and Bobcat Way (an east/west collector street).
Site Plan Approval #503
October 13, 2022
K) The wetland delineation also made the following lots unbuildable as shown on the original tentative subdivision map: a portion of Lot V-25A, Lot V-25B, Lot V- 26, a portion of Lot V-29DB, and Lot V-35B, and a portion of Lot V-36B.
L) The Bellevue Ranch Master Development Plan (BRMDP) anticipated between 4,843 and 6,648 dwelling units, including single-family detached standard homes, single-family detached patio homes, and multi-family units. There are 1,429 units in Bellevue Ranch East (mostly constructed, except the multi-family units), 1,949 units proposed in Bellevue Ranch West (many of the single -family units are constructed, but not all, and no multi-family has been constructed), and 1,814 are proposed for Bellevue Ranch North. This would provide a total of 5,192 units within the Bellevue Ranch area, well below the maximum number of units approved by the BRMDP.
M) Based on the number of units already constructed and proposed for Bellevue Ranch East and West, the BRMDP would have allowed Bellevue Ranch North to construct up to 3,270 additional units. The biological constraints ha ve reduced that number to 1,814, just over one -half of the number of units that could be constructed.
N) Final Subdivision maps to create large lots have been submitted for Villages 21 - 29 and 25- 34. A final subdivision map for a small lot subdivision has been submitted for Village 23.
O) Due to the following reasons, it was determined that the Site Plan Review Committee would be the appropriate body to review this request for modifications to VTSM #1280:
a. The preparation of the wetland delineation map was a mitigation measure of the BRMDP EIR and a condition of approval of VTSM #1280; b. The fact that the subdivision could not be constructed as proposed due to reasons beyond the developer’s control;
c. The fact that the number of dwelling units are being reduced by more than one-half of the number of unit s originally allowed and the overall developable area is also being reduced which, in turn, reduces any potential impacts caused by the development.
P) Per Merced Municipal Code Section 20.68.050 – Site Plan Review Permit, the Site Plan Review Committee may approve an application for a Site Plan Review Permit only if all the following findings can be made:
1. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and any adopted area, specific, community, or neighborhood plan.
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan land use designations for this area including Neighborhood Commercial (CN), Commercial Office (CO), Low Density (LD) Residential, Low -Medium Density (LMD) Residential, High-Medium Density (HMD) Residential, and Park/Open Space (OS) and the Zoning designation of Planned Development Site Plan Approval #503
October 13, 2022
(P-D) #42. The project is also consistent with the Bellevue Ranch Master Development Plan (BRMDP). The number of units is still within the approved number of units ; there are no changes to land use other t han changes to open space to accommodate the biological issues. The circulation within the subdivision would be modified due to the biological constraints, but the modified map still provides connection to all the major arterials and provides sufficient i nternal circulation through a network of collector and local roads to be consistent with the BRMDP.
2. The proposed project complies with all applicable provisions of the zoning ordinance and Municipal Code.
With approval of the conditions found within this r esolution, the proposed project would comply with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code.
3. The design and layout of the proposed project will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of existing and future neighboring properties and structures.
The proposed modifications to the site would not interfere with the use and enjoyment of existing and future neighboring properties and structures. In fact, the changes provide more open space for the area. Additionally, the number of units being constructed in the area is less than originally intended, making the overall density of the area less.
4. The proposed architectural design makes use of appropriate materials, texture and color, and will remain aesthetically appealing and appropriately maintained.
There are no architectural designs proposed with this change. The proposed change only modifies the design of the subdivision.
5. Any proposed landscaping design, including color, location, size, texture, type, and coverage of plan materials, as well as provisions for irrigation, maintenance, and protection landscaping elements, will complement structures and provide an attractive environment.
There are no landscaping designs proposed with this modification. The biological areas would remain in their native state and any other landscaping within the subdivision would be approved with improvement plans for the small lot subdivisions and at the building permit stage for each individual lot or project.
6. The proposed design will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the proposed project.
The proposed project would not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the proposed project. The proposed changes protect biological resources present in the area.
Site Plan Approval #503
October 13, 2022
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Merced City Site Plan Review Committee does approve Site P lan Review Application # 503, subject to the following conditions:
1) The proposed project shall be constructed/designed as shown on Exhibit 3 (Modified Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1280).
2) All other applicable codes, ordinances, policies, etc., adopted by the City of Merced shall apply.
3) The project shall comply with all conditions set forth in Planning Commission Resolution #2857, for Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map (VTSM) #1280, except as previously modified or modified by this approval. The applicants shall identify any specific conditions modified by this approval prior to or concurrently with the submittal of the Final Map.
4) The developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend (wit h counsel selected by the City), and hold harmless the City, and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and any officers, officials, employees, or agents thereof, from any and all claims, actions, suits, proceedings, or judgments against the City, or any a gency or instrumentality thereof, and any officers, officials, employees, or agents thereof to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board, or legislative body, including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the project and the approvals granted herein. Furthermore, developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, against any an d all claims, actions, suits, proceedings, or judgments against any governmental entity in which developer/applicant’s project is subject to that other governmental entity’s approval and a condition of such approval is that the City indemnify and defend (w ith counsel selected by the City) such governmental entity. City shall promptly notify the developer/applicant of any claim, action, suits, or proceeding. Developer/applicant shall be responsible to immediately prefund the litigation cost of the City inc luding, but not limited to, City’s attorney’s fees and costs. If any claim, action, suits, or proceeding is filed challenging this approval, the developer/applicant shall be required to execute a separate and formal defense, indemnification, and deposit a greement that meets the approval of the City Attorney and to provide all required deposits to fully fund the City’s defense immediately but in no event later than five (5) days from that date of a demand to do so from City. In addition, the developer/appl icant shall be required to satisfy any monetary obligations imposed on City by any order or judgment.
5) The developer/applicant shall construct and operate the project in strict compliance with the approvals granted herein, City standards, laws, and ordinances, and in compliance with all State and Federal laws, regulations, and standards. In the event of a conflict between City laws and standards and a State or Federal law, regulation, or standard, the stricter or higher standard shall control.
Site Plan Approval #503
October 13, 2022
6) All dedications to the City shall be identified on the Tentative Map (conforming copy).
If there are any questions concerning these conditions and recommendations, please contact Julie Nelson at (209) 385-6858.
October 13, 2022
DATE SIGNATURE
Senior Planner
TITLE
Exhibits:
1) Location map
2) Original VTSM #1280
3) Planning Commission Resolution #2857
4) Modified VTSM #1280
5) Modification of Lots 21-A & 21-B
6) Wetland Delineation Map
7) Letter from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
8) CEQA Section 15162 Findings
OLD LAKE RD
BELLEVUE RD
BARCLAY WAY
G ST
M ST
¯
SUBJECT SITE
Bellevue Ranch North
Disclaimer: This document was prepared for
general inquiries only.The City of Merced
is not liable for errors or ommissions
that might occur.Official information
concerning specific parcels
should be obtained from
recorded or adopted City documents.
SITE PLAN REVIEW #503
MODIFICATIONS TO VTSM #1280
EXHIBIT 1
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 1
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 2
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 3
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 4
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 5
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 6
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 7
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 8
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 9
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 10
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 11
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 12
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 13
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 14
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 15
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 16
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 17
EXHIBIT 2 - Page 18
CITY OF MERCED
Planning Commission
Resolution #2857
WHEREAS, the Merced City Planning Commission at its regular meeting of February 8, 2006, held a public hearing and considered Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1280 (“Large Lot Mapping of Bellevue Ranch Phases 3 and 4”) , initiated by Crosswinds of Bellevue, LLC, applicant for Don and Thelma Grangnani, property owners, to allow the subdivision of 520 acres into 30 lots. The project is located north of Bellevue Road, west of “G” Street (excluding the proposed Farmland High School site), south of Old Lake Road, and generally east of the abandoned Yosemite Valley Railroad within Planned Development (PD #42); also known as Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 052 -230-057, -072, -073, -074, and - 075; and,
WHEREAS, the Merced City Planning Commission concurs with Findings A through P of Staff Report #06-14; and,
WHEREAS, the Merced City Planning Commission does resolve to hereby find that the previous environmental review (Draft Environmental Impact Report for Bellev ue Ranch Master Development Plan – SCH #92102055) remains sufficient and no further documentation is required (CEQA Section 15162); and approves Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1280, subject to the following conditions:
1. The project shall be constructed in accordance with Vesting Tentative Map #1280, as shown on Attachment B of Staff Report #06 -14, subject to conditioned changes. Prior to or concurrent with recordation of the final map, the applicant shall furnish the City with an updated map (11” x 17” and a “pdf” image) of the Bellevue Ranch Master Development Plan showing all approved changes to the BRMDP, as well as providing a word “doc” of the text of the BRMDP to the City.
2. All conditions contained in Resolution #1175 -Amended ("Standard Tentative Subdivision Map Conditions") shall apply.
Extensions and Amendments on
11/4/10, 7/15/11, 7/11/13, 10/10/15,
1/31/19, 11/8/19, 3/12/21,
4/1/21,4/29/21 --See pages 9-11
EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #2857
Feb. 8, 2006/Nov. 4, 2010/July 15, 2011/July 11, 2013/Oct. 10, 2015/ Jan. 31, 2019/Nov. 8, 2019/Mar. 12, 2021/Apr. 1, 2021/Apr. 29, 2021
3. The proposed project shall comply with all standard Municipal Code and Subdivision Map Act requirements as applied by the City Engineering Department.
4. All other applicable codes, ordinances, policies, etc., adopted by the City of Merced shall apply.
5. The Project shall comply with the Project Description (including Table 6.1); the conditions set forth in the Bellevue Ranch Master Development Plan (adopted May 15, 1995 per Resolution #95-34); the Development Agreement f or Bellevue Ranch (approved June 5, 1995); the Bellevue Ranch Final EIR Mitigation Measures (adopted May 15, 1995); and any applicable conditions of approval set forth by the Merced County LAFCO regarding the Bellevue Ranch
Annexation No. 2; previously app roved for this project, except those as modified by this approval.
6. Community Facilities District (CFD) formation is required for annual operating costs for police and fire services as well as storm drainage, public landscaping, street trees, street light s, parks and open space.
CFD procedures shall be initiated completed prior to final map approval for any small lot subdivision. Developer/Owner shall submit a request agreeing to such a procedure, waiving right to protest and post deposit as determined by the City Engineer to be sufficient to cover procedure costs and maintenance costs expected prior to first assessments being received.
7. The developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless the City, and any agency or instrumentality t hereof, and any officers, officials, employees, or agents thereof, from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, and any officers, officials, employees, or agents thereof to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board, or legislative body, including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the project and the approvals granted herein. City shall promptly notify the developer/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding. City shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. Should the City fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, the developer/applicant shall not thereafter be Amended--
See page 10
EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #2857
Feb. 8, 2006/Nov. 4, 2010/July 15, 2011/July 11, 2013/Oct. 10, 2015/ Jan. 31, 2019/Nov. 8, 2019/Mar. 12, 2021/Apr. 1, 2021/Apr. 29, 2021
responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, officials, employees, or agents.
8. The developer/applicant shall construct and operate the project in strict compliance wi th the approvals granted herein, City standards, laws, and ordinances, and in compliance with all State and Federal laws, regulations, and standards. In the event of a conflict between City laws and standards and a State or Federal law, regulation, or standard, the stricter or higher standard shall control.
Circulation
9. Consistent with BRMDP Condition of Approval #91, the Backbone Improvement Plans for the Large Lot Final Map shall be reviewed by the local transit authority to locate appropriate locations an d designs for bus stop facilities on arterial and collector streets.
10. Consistent with BRMDP Conditions of Approval #39 and #40, the necessary right of way as shown in the BRMDP for all major arterials intersections, special intersections, and the “M” Street Transitway shall be dedicated within the large -lot Final Map to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
11. Consistent with BRMDP Conditions of Approval #45 and #75, collector streets fronting commercial, multi-family, churches and public facility sites, such as parks and schools, shall utilize the standard collector 74-foot right of way that includes provisions for on- street parking. This shall be provided on the Final Map of the large lot subdivision.
12. Consistent with BRMDP Condition of Approval #75, collecto r streets that do not have fronting residential lots may utilize the “collector street alternative” design with a 64- foot right of way. This shall be provided on the Final Map of the large lot subdivision.
13. Consistent with BRMDP Condition of Approval 10.05 and Mitigation Measure 4.12.1, a minimum 15-foot wide landscape buffer area shall be required along all project areas fronting on “G” Street, “R” Street, Old Lake Road, and Bellevue Road. A solid decorative masonry wall shall be provided in this buffer area.
EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #2857
Feb. 8, 2006/Nov. 4, 2010/July 15, 2011/July 11, 2013/Oct. 10, 2015/ Jan. 31, 2019/Nov. 8, 2019/Mar. 12, 2021/Apr. 1, 2021/Apr. 29, 2021
14. Street names to be approved by City Engineer.
15. Offer for dedication, by Final Map, all collector and arterial street rights-of-way and all necessary easements and as needed for irrigation, utilities, drainage, landscaping, and open space.
16. “M” Street s hall be constructed to a 94-foot minor -arterial standard from Bellevue Road to 200 feet south of the PG&E transmission line corridor. Alternatively, other improvements may be accepted by the City based on a traffic study showing anticipated impacts and recommended improvements.
Public Utilities and Services
17. The adopted BRMDP includes an elementary school site within Village 25A. The Merced City School District is examining use of this and other sites within Bellevue Ranch Phases 3 and 4 for an elementary school. Applicants of subsequent small lot tentative maps shall not seek City of Merced Planning Commission review and action earlier than May 1, 2006, unless the City and District agree that the subject small lot project is not a desirable elementary sc hool site.
After this date, the City will process applications for formal action even in the event the school district has not identified a site. The currently designated elementary school site on the BRMDP north of Bellevue Road will be regarded as the future elementary school site unless amended through subsequent applications.
18. Consistent with BRMDP Mitigation Measure 4.14.6, prior to approval of Final Map, the project applicant shall submit all plans for review to affected electric utilities.
19. The propo sed sewer line master plan for the subdivision shall be modified to include sewer infrastructure improvements to surrounding areas of the Project site in a manner that is consistent with the North Merced Sewer Master Plan, provide flexibility in system des ign, and allow the subject project to use the “R” Street trunk line in the short- term, as determined by the City Engineer and Director of Development Services. Depending upon the determinations made in accordance with Condition of Approval #20 (see below) , these may include improvements such as a sewer line in Barclay stubbed to Old Lake; a dry line pipe in Bellevue Road from the Barclay pump station EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #2857
Feb. 8, 2006/Nov. 4, 2010/July 15, 2011/July 11, 2013/Oct. 10, 2015/ Jan. 31, 2019/Nov. 8, 2019/Mar. 12, 2021/Apr. 1, 2021/Apr. 29, 2021
to the intersection of “G” Street; and Bellevue Road sized to serve lands shown in the North Merced Sewer M aster Plan that will use the “R” Street sewer trunk line; and a dry line pipe in Bellevue Road from the Barclay pump station to the intersection of “R” Street and Bellevue Road. The City will, in accordance with City Code, reimburse the applicant for the i ncreased costs associated with the larger pipe. No easement for the “59” trunk line is needed in “R” Street.
20. The sewer system of the Project shall comply with the City of Merced’s North Merced Sewer Master Plan. However, the interim use of the “R” Street line may be permitted if adequate capacity in the sewer line and downstream pump stations for Phases 3 and 4 of Bellevue Ranch, and other interim users of the “R” Street sewer trunk line is determined to exist. The applicant shall pay their fair share o f any costs related to this determination.
21. Prior to signature of the Final Map, the City Engineer shall confirm that the applicant’s proposed sewer system, including those features noted in Conditions #19 and #20, will be constructed with a pump station that in the long-term permits sewage to be pumped to the “59” sewer trunk line.
22. The developer shall supply a storm -drainage master plan with calculations and pipe slopes to substantiate the proposed storm - drainage layout prior to Final Map approval.
23. The se wer lift station and accompanying lines must be built in conjunction with the first phase of construction. At time of construction, both the sewer and storm drain lines shown in Village - 30A and Village 23 must be in a utility easement and have a gravel road over them for City access and maintenance, unless placed within a paved road right-of-way.
24. Prior to signature of the Final Map, the applicant shall provide the City Engineer with a map showing the preliminary number, location, and size of wells required by the City. Upon further review of these sites, dedication of well sites shall occur as part of the small- lot TSM Final Map.
EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #2857
Feb. 8, 2006/Nov. 4, 2010/July 15, 2011/July 11, 2013/Oct. 10, 2015/ Jan. 31, 2019/Nov. 8, 2019/Mar. 12, 2021/Apr. 1, 2021/Apr. 29, 2021
Safety
25. Consistent with BRMDP Conditions of Approval #22 and #24, the applicant shall dedicate as part of the large- lot TSM Final Map, an acceptable fire station site to the City of Merced. Details to be worked out with the Fire and Planning Departments.
Biological and Cultural Resources:
26. Consistent with BRMDP Mitigation Measure 4.8.1, prior to issuance of grading permits for the large lot tentative map, the project applicant shall produce a wetlands delineation consistent with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual or subsequent standards and obtain verification of the wetlands delineation by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). The applicant shall consult with the City Planning Department and demonstrate compliance with the COE requirements.
27. Consistent with BRMDP Mitigation Measure 4.8.2, prior to issuance of grading permits for the large lot tentative map in a ffected wetlands areas, the project applicant shall secure a permit to fill wetlands consistent with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and the corresponding 1603 Streambed Alteration permit required by the State of California. Such permit shall include a wetlands mitigation plan consistent with the policy of “no net loss in wetlands acreage or value.” The applicant shall consult with the City, the Department of Fish and Game, and the COE during the preparation of this plan to develop a consolidated miti gation program, within the guidelines of the COE.
28. Consistent with BRMDP Mitigation Measure 4.8.3, prior to issuance of grading permits for the large lot tentative map, the Project applicant shall hire a qualified biologist to conduct late spring surveys of vernal pools for Dwarf Downingia. If species are confirmed on the project site, mitigation measures consistent with the most current listing status of the species shall be prepared and submitted to the City for inclusion in the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project.
29. Consistent with BRMDP Mitigation Measure 4.8.4, prior to issuance of grading permits for the large lot tentative map, the Project applicant shall comply with Mitigation Measure 4.8.4 dealing with fairy EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #2857
Feb. 8, 2006/Nov. 4, 2010/July 15, 2011/July 11, 2013/Oct. 10, 2015/ Jan. 31, 2019/Nov. 8, 2019/Mar. 12, 2021/Apr. 1, 2021/Apr. 29, 2021
shrimps and tadpole shrimps. S ee Mitigation Measure 4.8.4 for details.
30. Consistent with BRMDP Mitigation Measure 4.6.5, prior to issuance of grading, demolition, or building permits, the applicant shall complete an Archeological Site Record Form. See MM 4.6.5.
Open Space:
31. Consistent with BRMDP Condition of Approval #7, the applicants of subsequent small lot tentative subdivision maps shall dedicate as part of the Final Map, all lands designated as “Park” on the Master Development Plan or otherwise agreed upon by the applicant and City.
32. The Fahrens Creek flood channel/open space corridor shall be dedicated by Final Map, including creekside dedication set forth in the City of Merced General Plan, Open Space Policy 1.2.b, stating:
“Continue to acquire a minimum 50 -feet dedication from the centerline (or 25-feet from the crown, whichever is greater) of all creeks within the planning area in order to maintain these open space areas as natural riparian preserves and recreation areas.” Prior to or concurrent with submittal of a Final Map, the a pplicant shall provide the Department of Development Services with a plan showing the following aspects of Fahrens Creek (southeast side only), as well as field staking typical cross- sections of Fahrens Creek denoting these aspects, including: (1) propose d 25-foot trail on northwest side of creek; (2) existing 100 -foot MID easement; (3) annual average high- water mark of creek; (4) the existing MID service road; and (5) existing/proposed 20-foot drainage easement on the southeast side of creek. The Final Map shall include the creekside dedication area consistent with City Policy and the determination made by City Staff based on said plan and an investigation of the site.
33. A Conditional Use Permit is required prior to any grading permits and/or construction o f any improvements within the Fahrens Creek corridor, including but not limited to, bicycle/pedestrian paths, tree plantings, habitat installation, aesthetic enhancement, landscape design and landscape construction plans, with input from the EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #2857
Feb. 8, 2006/Nov. 4, 2010/July 15, 2011/July 11, 2013/Oct. 10, 2015/ Jan. 31, 2019/Nov. 8, 2019/Mar. 12, 2021/Apr. 1, 2021/Apr. 29, 2021
California De partment of Fish and Game (Consistent with BRMDP Condition of Approval #20).
34. As part of the design/construction of the north-south collector street bridge located between “M” Street and “G” Street north of Bellevue Road, provision for a safe multi- use (pedestrian/bicycle) path shall be made to provide connection between trail segments within the community park, nearby PG & E power line corridor easement, and Fahrens Creek (consistent with BRMDP Conditions of Approval #49 and #59). The City may opt to permi t road-grade crossings of the creek instead of bridge under -crossings, due to factors such as: the need or desire for a continuous separated Class I bike-path; bridge and pathway engineering constraints; encroachment into the creek; and safety issues.
35. The storm drain improvements for the park/basin site locations must be built in conjunction with the first phase of construction.
36. The master design layout for the City park site shall be prepared by the applicant and requires City review and action.
37. Park dedication must include completed street frontage improvements.
38. Developer shall provide Landscape/irrigation/wall plans for all areas to be maintained by City.
39. Project infrastructure improvement plans shall include the provision of adequately sized utilities adjacent to school sites consistent with the Bellevue Ranch Master Development Plan.
40. The backbone improvement plans shall include and the applicant shall construct as part of TSM #1280 all of Farmland west of “G” Street; all of Barclay Road north of Bellevue Road; and all of “M” Street north of Bellevue Road. The city will work with the applicant and other property owners within and adjacent to the Bellevue Ranch Master Development Plan to ensure that each pays their fair share for these improvements.
Upon motion by Commissioner Ward, seconded by Commissioner Fisher, and carried by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Amey, Ward, Fisher, Acheson, Burr, and EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #2857
February 8, 2OO6/November 4, 2010/July 15, 2011/July 11, 2013/0ct.10, 2015/ Jan. 31, 2019/Nov. 8, 2019/Mar. 12, 2021/Apr. 1, 2021/Apr. 29, 2021 AYES: Commissioners Amey, Ward, Fisher, Acheson, Burr, and Chairman Shankland
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: Commissioner Conte
Adopted this 8th day of February, 2006
ATTEST:
Chairman, Planning Commission of
the City of Merced, California
n:shared:plalllling:PC Resolutions:#2856 GPA SUP for BR North Large Lots November 4, 2010: On July 15, 2008, the State of California gave a one year extension to all active (not expired) tentative maps that were otherwise scheduled to expire on or before December 30, 2010. On July 15, 2009, the State of California gave a second two-year extension.
Therefore, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1280 hereby has its ex piration date extended to February 8, 2013.
EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #2857
Feb. 8, 2006/Nov. 4, 2010/July 15, 2011/July 11, 2013/Oct. 10, 2015/ Jan. 31, 2019/Nov. 8, 2019/Mar. 12, 2021/Apr. 1, 2021/Apr. 29, 2021
July 15, 2011: On July 15, 2011, the State of California gave a 24- month extension to all active (not expired) tentative maps that were otherwise scheduled to expire on or before January 1, 2014. Therefore, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1291 hereby has its expiration date extended to February 8, 2015.
July 11, 2013: On July 11, 2013, the State of California gave a 24 - month extension to all active (not expired) tentative maps that were approved on or after January 1, 2000. Therefore, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1291 hereby has its expiration date extended to February 8, 2017.
October 10, 2015: On October 10, 2015, the State of California gave a 24- month extension to all active (not expired) tentative maps that were approved on or after January 1, 2002, and not later than July 11, 2013.
Therefore, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1291 hereby has its expiration date extended to February 8, 2019.
January 31, 2019: On January 31, 2019, the Site Plan Review Committee approved the extension of Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1280 (“Large Lot Mapping of Bellevue Ranch Phases 3 and 4”) for one year. The new expiration date is February 8, 2020.
November 8 , 2019: Minor Modification # 19-05 was administratively approved by the Development Services Director. This approval amended Condition #6 of Planning Commission Resolution #2857.
March 12, 2021 : Settlement Agreement executed between the City of Merced; Bellevue Merced, LLC ; and Hostetler Investments, LLC. This resulted in Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map being extended 90 days from the effective date of said Agreement (March 12, 2021). The new expiration date is June 10, 2021.
April 1, 2021: Director of Development Services, Scott McBride, administratively approved minor changes in the lot configuration for Lots V- 21A and V- 21B pursuant to the authority granted by Section 1.6.2 “Amendment Process” of the Bellevue Ranch Master Development Plan.
EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #2857
Feb. 8, 2006/Nov. 4, 2010/July 15, 2011/July 11, 2013/Oct. 10, 2015/ Jan. 31, 2019/Nov. 8, 2019/Mar. 12, 2021/Apr. 1, 2021/Apr. 29, 2021
April 29, 2021 : On April 29, 20 21, the Site Plan Review Committee approved the extension of Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1280 (“Large Lot Mapping of Bellevue Ranch Phases 3 and 4”) for three years.
The new expiration date is June 10, 2024. .
EXHIBIT 3
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 1
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 2
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 3
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 4
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 5
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 6
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 7
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 8
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 9
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 10
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 11
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 12
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 13
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 14
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 15
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 16
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 17
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 18
EXHIBIT 4 - Page 19
EXHIBIT 5
EXHIBIT 6
EXHIBIT 7
Statutory Exemptions. State code number:
_______________________________________________
Notice of Exemption Appendix E
From: (Public Agency): ____________________________
To: Office of Planning and Research
P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 _______________________________________________Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 County Clerk
(Address)
___________________________
___________________________
County of: __________________
Project Title: ____________________________________________________________________________ Project Applicant: ________________________________________________________________________ Project Location - Specific:
Project Location - City: ______________________ Project Location - County:
Description of Nature, Purpose and Beneficiaries of Project:
_____________________
Name of Public Agency Approving Project: _____________________________________________________ Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: ________________________________________________ Exempt Status: (check one):
Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1); 15268);
Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a));
Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c));
Reasons why project is exempt:
Lead Agency
Contact Person: ____________________________
Area Code/Telephone/Extension: _______________
If filed by applicant:
1. Attach certified document of exemption finding.
2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No
Signature: ____________________________ Date:
Signed by Lead Agency
Signed by Applicant
Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21110, Public Resources Code. Date Received for filing at OPR:
Reference: Sections 21108, 21152, and 21152.1, Public Resources Code. _______________
Categorical Exemption. State type and section number: ___ _____________________ ______________________________________________
______________ Title: _______________________
Revised 2011
X
EXHIBIT 8
The California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Section 15162 Findings:
A
pplication: Site Plan Review #504 for modifications to Tentative Subdivision Map #1280 E
nvironmental Review #22-39
Assessor Parcel Number or Location: Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN): 170-060-015; -018; -019, - 021; -026; -027; -028
Previous Initial Study/EIR Reference: This site was previously reviewed through Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Bellevue Ranch Master Development Plan (SCH #9212055) Or
iginal Project Date: The Environmental Impact Report was approved on May 15, 1995, by the Merced City Council.
Section A - Previous Studies
Ye s No
1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project that will require major revisions of the previous project EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects? X
C
omment/Finding: The proposed project is consistent with the previous environmental review. No substantive changes are proposed. The total number of units being constructed is less than originally proposed. The proposed modifications are due to compliance w ith mitigation measures adopted with the EIR for the Bellevue Ranch Master D evelopment Plan which required a biological analysis to determine if there were any biological issues in the area.
Yes No
2. Substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken that will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects?
X
C
omment/Finding: There have been no changes in the circumstances under which the project is undertaken that would require major revisions in the previous EIR . There are no new significant environmental effects or substantial increases in the severity of previously identified environmental effects, and the area under consideration remains the same area previously evaluated. The proposed modifications are due to compliance w ith mitigation measures adopted with the EIR for the Bellevue Ranch Master D evelopment Plan which required a biological analysis to determine if there were any biological issues in the area.
Yes No
3. New information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been know with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, has been revealed? (If “Yes” is checked, go to Section “B” below) X
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Section 15162 Findings
Comment/Finding: There is no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known with the reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was adopted. The proposed modifications are a result of compliance with mitigation measures outlined in the EIR.
Section B - New Information
Yes No
A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration.
X
Yes No
B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR.
X
Yes No
C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
X
Yes No
D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
X
Comment/Finding: All previously identified mitigation measures will be enforced with this project including payment of Public Facility Impact Fees. Therefore, the resulting impacts are no greater than those previously analyzed and the previously imposed mitigation measures remain sufficient to address all impacts from this project.
On the basis of this evaluation, in accordance with the requirements of Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines:
1. It is found that subsequent negative declaration will need to be prepared.
2. It is found that an addendum Negative Declaration will need to be prepared.
3. That a subsequent EIR will need to be prepared.
X 4. No further documentation is required.
Date: September 30, 2022
Prepared By:
_________________________________
Julie Nelson,
Senior Planner