CITY OF MERCED
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Merced Civic Center
678 W. 18th Street
Merced, CA 95340
File #: 25-338 Meeting Date: 5/7/2025
Planning Commission Staff Report
Report Prepared by: Francisco Mendoza-Gonzalez, Senior Planner, Development Services Department SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment #24-01, Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment #6, and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1329 (“Paulson Ranch”), initiated by Stonefield Home, Inc., property owner. The General Plan Amendment would amend the Merced General Plan Transportation and Circulation Element by modifying the City of Merced Circulation Plan (Figure
4.1) and all associated maps and descriptions throughout the General Plan, to eliminate Destiny Drive (a collector road) from going through the subject site to Paulson Road (extension). The Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment would modify the design, layout, and circulation of the residential subdivision previously approved for this site. The Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map would subdivide approximately 39.12 acres into 104 residential lots (mostly between 6,000 and 7,000 square feet). The subject site is generally located on the south side of E. Cardella Road, 1,900 feet east of G Street. *PUBLIC HEARING*
ACTION: PLANNING COMMISSION:
Recommendation to City Council
1) Environmental Review #24-07 (Negative Declaration)
2) General Plan Amendment #24-01
3) Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment #6
Approve/Disapprove/Modify
1) Environmental Review #24-07 (Negative Declaration)
2) Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1329
[subject to City Council approval of General Plan Amendment #24-01, and Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment #6]
SUMMARY
The subject site is an undeveloped 39.12-acre parcel located in northeast Merced at 800 E. Cardella Road, located on the south side of Cardella Road, approximately 1,900 feet east of G Street. The General Plan Amendment is being requested to amend the City’s General Plan Circulation Element (Figure 4.1) (Attachment G) to eliminate the collector road of Destiny Drive that would go through the subject site. The Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment would modify the design, layout, and circulation of the residential subdivision previously approved for this site. The Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map would subdivide approximately 39.12 acres into 104 single family lots (mostly CITY OF MERCED Printed on 6/16/2025Page 1 of 4
powered by Legistar™
1 ATTACHMENT 9
File #:25-338 Meeting Date: 5/7/2025
Subdivision Map would subdivide approximately 39.12 acres into 104 single family lots (mostly between 6,000 and 7,000 square feet). Staff is recommending approval with conditions.
RECOMMENDATION
General Plan Amendment, and Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment, Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of Environmental Review #24-07 (Negative Declaration), General Plan Amendment #24-01, Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment #6 (including the adoption of the Draft Resolution at Attachment A) subject to the conditions in Exhibit A, and the findings/considerations in Exhibit B of the Draft Resolution.
Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map
Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Environmental Review #24-07 (Negative Declaration) and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1329 (including the adoption of the Draft Resolution at Attachment B) subject to the conditions in Exhibit A, the findings/considerations in Exhibit B of the Draft Resolution, and contingent upon City Council approval of the General Plan Amendment, and the Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment.
DISCUSSION
Project Description
The subject site is an approximately 39.12-acre parcel (APN: 231-010-021) located at 800 E.
Cardella Road (Attachment C). The subject site is generally located on the south side of E. Cardella Road, 1,900 feet east of G Street. The General Plan amendment is being requested to amend the City’sGeneral Plan Circulation Element (Figure 4.1) to eliminate the collector road of Destiny Drive planned to go through the project site. Due to wetland constraints on the eastern portion of the subject site, Destiny Drive would not be able to go through the project site out to Paulson Road (extended with this project). Gallaway Enterprises conducted a field survey and identified areas where historical flooding from adjacent waterways created wetlands. The map at Attachment I identifies the wetland areas. The proposed subdivision (Paulson Ranch) is designed to avoid these areas.
The subject site has two General Plan designations of Low Density Residential (LD) and High- Medium Density Residential (HMD), and two Zoning classifications of Low Density Residential (R-1- 6) and Medium Density Residential (R-3-2). The subject site is surrounded by a variety of uses which includes to the west by Cruickshank Middle School/undeveloped land, to the south by single-family homes, to the east by undeveloped land, and to the north (across from E. Cardella Road) by agricultural land.
The applicant is requesting approval to develop 104 single-family homes. These lots would range in size between 6,000 square feet and 14,250 square feet, with the majority of the lots being between 6,000 square feet and 7,000 square feet. The General Plan designations of Low Density Residential (LD) and High-Medium Density Residential (HMD) are primarily intended for residential uses. The LD designation allows a residential density between 2 and 6 units per acre, and the HMD designation CITY OF MERCED Printed on 6/16/2025Page 2 of 4
powered by Legistar™
2 File #:25-338 Meeting Date: 5/7/2025
designation allows a residential density between 2 and 6 units per acre, and the HMD designation allows residential density up to 24 dwelling units per acre. The HMD portion of the Project has a density of approximately 4 dwelling units per acre and the LD portion has a density of approximately 3 units per acre, both below the maximum density allowed for each designation. The HMD portion of the project could have a higher density if two or three units are developed on each lot, however, that would put the density at around 12 units per acre, well below the maximum 24 units per acre allowed within the HMD designation.
Surrounding uses as noted in Attachment B.
Surrounding Land Existing Use of Land City Zoning
Designation
City General Plan Land
Use Designation
North Agriculture (across
Cardella Road)
Planned
Development (P-D)
#53
Neighborhood
Commercial (CN)
South Single-Family
Homes
Low Density
Residential (R-1-6)
Low Density
Residential (LD)
East Undeveloped Land Low Density
Residential (R-1-6)
and Commercial
Office (C-O)
Low Density
Residential (LD) and
Commercial Office
(CO)
West Undeveloped Land
and Cruickshank
Middle School
Low Density
Residential (R-1-6)
Low Density
Residential (LD),
Parks and Open
Space (P-OS), and
School (SCH)
Background
The subject site (approximately 39.12 acres) was annexed into the City in 1990, as part of Yosemite Annexation #3 (Annexation No. 173). This annexation incorporated approximately 302 acres of land into the City limits. In conjunction with the annexation, a specific plan was adopted for the annexation site, known as the Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan (Attachment J). The subject site includes land use designations for both Low Density Residential (LD), and High-Medium Density Residential (HMD). This application includes a request to amend the Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan; even though the residential densities are generally consistent with the specific plan, the specific plan layout, design, and circulation would be modified with this proposal. The modifications are being requested to address the wetland constraints found within the subject site, as shown at Attachment I via field survey from Gallaway Enterprises. The subdivision would be designed avoid these wetland areas.
The subject site has remained undeveloped for several decades. According to City records, Tentative Subdivision Map #1249 (Mansionette Estates Unit 3) was approved by the Planning Commission in 2003, for 80 single-family homes on a 25-acre portion of this site. This map expired in 2005.
Findings/Considerations
CITY OF MERCED Printed on 6/16/2025Page 3 of 4
powered by Legistar™
3 File #: 25-338 Meeting Date: 5/7/2025
Please refer to Exhibit B of the Draft Planning Commission Resolution at Attachment A for the Findings related to General Plan Amendment 24-01, and Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment #6. Please refer to Exhibit B of the Draft Planning Commission Resolution at Attachment B for the Findings related to Tentative Subdivision Map #1329.
ATTACHMENTS
A) Draft Planning Commission Resolution - General Plan Amendment, and Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan
B) Draft Planning Commission Resolution - Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map C) Location Map
D) Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map
E) Section MMC 20.46.020 - Design Standards for Single-Family Dwellings and Mobile Homes F) MMC 18.16.080 - Information Required (for Tentative Subdivision Maps) G) Modification to General Plan Figure 4.1
H) Close-Up to Figure 4.1 with Conceptual Change
I) Gallaway Enterprises (Wetlands)
J) Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan (Figure 1)
K) Initial Study (Negative Declaration)
L) Presentation
CITY OF MERCED Printed on 6/16/2025Page 4 of 4
powered by Legistar™
4 See Attachment 10 of City Council
Administrative Report #25-592
CITY OF MERCED
Planning Commission
Resolution #4144
WHEREAS, the Merced City Planning Commission at its regular meeting of May 7, 2025, held a public hearing and considered General Plan Amendment #24-01 , and Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment #6 initiated by Stonefield Home, Inc., property owner. The General Plan Amendment would amend the Merced General Plan Transportation and Circulation Element by modifying the City of Merced Circulation Plan (Figure 4.1) and all associated maps and descriptions throughout the General Plan, to eliminate a portion of Destiny Drive (a collector road) from going through the subject site to Paulson Road (extension). The Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment would modify the design, layout, and circulation of the residential subdivision previously approved for this site. The subject site is generally located on the south side of E. Cardella Road, 1,900 feet east of G Street. The subject site is more particularly described as Remainder as shown on the map entitled “Parcel Map for Wathen” recorded in Book 121, Page 2, in Merced County Records; also known as Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 231-010- 021; and,
WHEREAS, the Merced City Planning Commission concurs with Findings/Considerations A through H of Staff Report #2 5-338 ( Exhibit B of Planning Commission Resolution #4144); and,
NOW THEREFORE, after reviewing the City’s Initial Study and Draft Environmental Determination, and fully discussing all the issues, the Merced City Planning Commission does resolve to hereby recommend to City Council adoption of a Negative Declaration regarding Environmental Review #24-07, and recommend approval of General Plan Amendment #24-01, and Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment #6, subject to the Conditions set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Upon motion by Commissioner ____________________, seconded by Commissioner ____________________, and carried by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner(s)
NOES: Commissioner(s)
ABSENT: Commissioner(s)
ABSTAIN: Commissioner(s)
ATTACHMENT A
5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4144
May 7, 2025
Adopted this 7th day of May 2025
____
__________________________
Chairperson, Planning Commission of
the City of Merced, California
AT
TEST:
____
___________________________
Secretary
Exhibits:
Exhibit A – Conditions of Approval
Exhibit B – Findings/Considerations
6 EXHIBIT A
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4144
Conditions of Approval
P
lanning Commission Resolution # 4144
General Plan Amendment #24-01/Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment #6
1. The proposed General Plan Amendment shall be as shown on the Conceptual Revised Circulation Element (Figure 4.1) at Attachment G of Planning Commission Staff Report #25-338.
2. Approval of the General Plan Amendment, and Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendmentare subject to the applicant(s) entering into a written Legislative Action Agreement that they agree to all the conditions and shall pay all City and school district fees, taxes, and/or assessments, in effect on the date of any subsequent subdivision and/or permit approval, any increase in those fees, taxes, or assessments, and any new fees, taxes, or assessments, which are in effect at the time the building permits are issued, which may include public facilities impact fees, a regional traffic impact fee, Mello-Roos taxes— whether for infrastructure, services, or any other activity or project authorized by the Mello-Roos law, etc. Payment shall be made for each pha se
a
t the time of building permit issuance for such phase unless an Ordinance or other requirement of the City requires payment of such fees, taxes, and/or assessments at an earlier or subsequent time. Said agreement to be approved by the City Council prior to the adoption of the ordinance, resolution, or
m
inute action.
3. The proposed project shall comply with all standard Municipal Code and Subdivision Map Act requirements as required by the City Engineering Department.
4. The Project shall comply with all applicable conditions set forth in the resolutions for Annexation No. 173 ( Yosemite Annexation #3) previously approved for this site, unless modified by these conditions.
5. All other applicable codes, ordinances, policies, etc., adopted by the City of Merced shall apply.
6. The developer/owner is required to finance the annual operating costs for police and fire services as well as storm drainage, public landscaping, street trees, streetlights, parks and open space, which may include a financi ng m
echanism such as a Community Facilities District (CFD) or, assessment 7 EXHIBIT A
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4144
district. Procedures for financing these services and on- going maintenance shall be initiated before final map approval or issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building, whichever comes first. 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/owner is required to finance the annual operating costs for police and fire services as well as storm drainage, public landscaping, street trees, streetlights, parks and open space, which may include a financing mechanism such as a Community Facilities District (CFD) or, assessment district. Procedures for financing these services and on- going maintenance shall be initiated before final map approval or issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building, whichever comes first. Developer/Ow ner 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.
8. The developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend (with 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 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.
Furthermore, developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, against any and 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 conditi on of such approval is that the City indemnify and defend (with 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 including, but not limited to, City’s attorney’s fees and costs. If any claim, action, suits, or proceeding 8 EXHIBIT A
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4144
is filed challenging this approval, the developer/applicant shall be required to execute a separate and formal defense, indemnification, and deposit agreement that meets the approval of the City.
9. 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.
9 EXHIBIT B
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4144
Findings and Considerations
Planning Commission Resolution #4144
Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan #6/General Plan Amendment #24-01
FINDINGS/CONSIDERATIONS:
General Plan Compliance and Policies Related to This Application A) The General Plan Amendment portion of this application would amend the General Plan’s Circulation Element (Figure 4.1) to eliminate Destiny Drive (a collector road) from the project site as this road would not be able to extend through the site east ward to Paulson Road due to wetland constraints within the subject site (see Finding C). The General Plan Amendment portion of this application would not amend any of the General Plan land use designations within the project site.
The proposed subdivision ( Paulson Ranch) would create 104 residential lots on 39.12 acres (Attachment D of Planning Commission Staff Report 25-338).
This subdivision complies with the General Plan designations of Low Density Residential (LD) and High to Medium Density Residential (HMD) for this site. The maximum number of units allowed for this site would be approximately 655; the proposed 104 units is below the maximum allowed for this site.
The proposed project, with conditions of approval, will help achieve the following General Plan land use policies:
L-1.2 Encourage a diversity of building types, ownership, prices, designs, and site plans for residential areas throughout the City.
L-1.3 Encourage a diversity of lot sizes in residential subdivisions.
L-1.8 Create livable and identifiable residential neighborhoods.
Mandatory Findings
B) Chapter 20.80 (Zoning Ordinance Amendments) and 20.82 (General Plan Amendments) outlines procedures for considering General Plan Amendments, but does not require any specific findings to be made for approval. In addition to amend specific plans, such as the Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan, there are no specific findings that need to be made.
However, good Planning practice would be to provide objective reasons 10 EXHIBIT B
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4144
for approval or denial. These findings can take whatever form deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission and City Council. Based on State law and case law, the following findings are recommended:
1. The proposed amendment is deemed to be in the public interest.
Due to wetland concerns described under Finding C, the circulation for this site is being redesigned. This includes the request for a General Plan A
mendment to eliminate Destiny Drive (collector road) from goi ng t
hrough the subject site. Doing so allows the developer to re-design the subject site so that it is developable for a residential subdivision while avoiding wetland areas. The proposed amendment is deemed to be i n th
e public interest because it will provide needed housing for the community.
2. The proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the rest of the General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected.
The proposed General Plan Amendment would modify the City’s Circulation Element to eliminate a collector road (Destiny Drive) from going through the subject site, however the General Plan land us e de
signations throughout the subject site would remain the same and consistent with the rest of the General Plan.
In addition, Finding A shows that the proposal meets some of the General Plan Goals and Policies such as allowing the development of residential housing that encourages a diversity of housing stock, encourages a di
versity of lot sizes, and continue to pursue quality single -family homes.
3. The potential impacts of the proposed amendment have been assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.
The proposed project does not include any uses that woul d be de
trimental to the public health, safety, and welfare of the City.
Implementation of the conditions of approval and adherence to all applicable Building Codes, Fire Codes, and City Standards woul d pre
vent the project from having any detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the City as a whole.
11 EXHIBIT B
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4144
4. The proposed amendment has been processed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment has been processed in accordance with all applicable California Government Code sections. In addition, Planning staff has conducted an environmental review (#24-07) of the project in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and a Negative Declaration (see Attachment K of Planning Commission Staff Report #25-338) has been recommended.
Wetlands
C) Gallaway Enterprises conducted a field survey and identified areas where historical flooding from adjacent waterways created wetlands. The map at Attachment I identifies the wetland areas. The proposed subdivision (Paulson Ranch) is designed to avoid these areas, which requires amending the circulation in this area by eliminating the portion of Destiny Drive planned to go through this site, and modifying the circulation previously and housing type approved through the Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan (Attachment J).
Building Elevations
D) The developer has yet to submit building designs for the single-family homes (104 lots). The building design/elevations will be reviewed and approved by Planning Staff prior to issuance of a building permit. The single-family homes shall be required to comply with the City’s minimum design standards for single-family homes as required under Merced Municipal Code Section
20.46.020 - Design Standards for Single -Family Dwellings and Mobile Homes (see Attachment E of Planning Commission Staff Report #25-338).
Traffic/Circulation
E) Traffic From Proposed Development
The project site consists of an undeveloped lot totaling approximately 39.12 acres. The project site fronts an arterial road (E. Cardella Road), with the nearest north- south road being Paulson Road (collector road) currently terminating south of the project site, but would be extended through the subject site up to Cardella Road and down to Yosemite Avenue with this development. Yosemite Avenue and Cardella Road are both designed to carry 12 EXHIBIT B
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4144
large volumes of traffic going through a large portion of the community. The subject site is half a mile east of G Street, which provides access to Highway 99 that connects Merced with other regional communities throughout the State.
The interior roads within the subdivision include two east/west roads, six cul- de-sacs, and two north/south roads. As shown at Attachment D of Planning Commission Staff Report #25-338, the Streets/Courts A through J (except for Street D) would be designed to Local Street standards with 59 feet of right - of-way, which includes street, curb, gutter, park strip, sidewalk, and a public utility easement. Street D would have 100 feet of right-of-way. Paulson Road and Cardella Road would respectively have 84 feet and 148 feet of right -of- way respectively, and include a masonry block wall.
The General Plan would allow a maximum of 655 units within the subject site.
The proposed 104 units would generate less vehicle traffic compared to the maximum density allowed. According to Trip Generation (ITE Report), the average daily trips per unit is 6.59. The proposed project at 104 units would generate approximately 16 % of the average daily trips compared to the maximum density allowed by the General Plan.
In addition, there are several walkable locations within a ¼ mile of the subject site, which include Davenport Park, Cruickshank Middle School, Dignity Health Hospital, Merced College, and the Yosemite & G Crossing Shopping Center (under construction in phases). The existing street network could adequately serve this proposal as it was designed to accommodate a much larger maximum number of units. In addition, the extension of Paulson Road to Cardella Road would provide direct access to existing residents i n the neighborhood wanting to travel north, improving the street network in the area.
Neighborhood Impact
F) The subject site is surrounded by a variety of uses which includes to the west by Cruickshank Middle School/agricultural land, to the south by single-family homes, to the east by undeveloped land, and to the north (across from E.
Cardella Road) by agricultural land. The subject site’s current land use designation is residential and would allow a maximum of 655 residential units. The proposed Paulson Ranch subdivision is consistent with the current land use designation, and at 104 single-family homes would be be low the maximum number of residential units allowed for this site . There are several existing residential subdivisions to the south. This development is not 13 EXHIBIT B
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4144
expected to alter the character of the neighborhood or introduce uses that don’t already exist in the neighborhood.
Public hearing notices were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site. At the time that this report was prepared, the City had not received any comments regarding this project.
Affordability Requirements
G) In 202 3, the City Council updated the City’s Regio nal Housing Needs Allocation Unit Production Plan. A housing affordability requirement is triggered by two qualifiers that need to be met: entitlement type and number of units created. For single-family residential developments, the affordability requirement is triggered by a legislative action agreement (through annexations, general plan amendments, site utilization plan revisions, or zone changes) for projects with over 60 single-family homes (multi-family residential projects are exempt).
In this case, the developer is requesting an entitlement that triggers a legislative action agreement-- a general plan amendment. As shown under Finding A, General Plan Amendment #24-01 is to amend the City’s Circulation Element only (not a land use change request. The land use aspect of the project (104 units on approximately 39 acres) would comply with the Zoning classifications for this site.
Based on this request, the developer is not required to provide affordable housing units (or an in-lieu fee) because the general plan amendment is to amend the City’s Circulation Element (not land use).
Environmental Clearance
H) Most Infill projects over 5 acres or projects that don’t comply with Zoning/General Plan designations require an Initial Study, per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In this case, the proposed land use is consistent with the General Plan land uses, and a General Plan Amendment is being requested to amend the Circulation Element by eliminating a collector road from going through the project site and amending the Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan – thus an Initial Study was required. An Initial Study includes a wide range of analysis required by the State covering an array of subjects including, but not limited to, impacts on vehicle miles traveled, air quality, bi ological resource, public services, cultural resources, and City utilities. Planning staff has conducted an environmental review of the project 14 EXHIBIT B
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4144
in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, and concluded that Environmental Review #24- 07 results in a Negative Declaration as the proposal would not have a significant effect on the environment and does not require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. A copy of the Initial Study with a Negative Declaration can be found at Attachment K of Planning Commission Staff Report #25-338.
15 CITY OF MERCED
Planning Commission
Resolution #4145
WHEREAS, the Merced City Planning Commission at its regular meeting of May 7 , 2025, held a public hearing and considered Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1329 (“Paulson Ranch”), initiated by Stonefield Home, Inc., property owner. This application involves a request to subdivide approximately
39.12 acres into 104 single-family lots ranging in size between 6,000 square feet and 14,250 square feet. The subject site is generally located on the south side of E. Cardella Road, approximately 1,900 feet east of G Street at 800 E. Cardella Road; also known as Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 231-010-021; and, WHEREAS, the Merced City Planning Commission concurs with Findings A through L of Staff Report #25-338; and,
WHEREAS, the Merced City Planning Commission concurs with the Findings for Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map Requirements in Merced Municipal Code Section 18.16.80, 18.16.90, and 18.16.100 as outlined in Exhibit B; and, NOW THEREFORE , after reviewing the City’s Initial Study and Draft Environmental Determination, and fully discussing all the issues, the Merced City Planning Commission does adopt a Negative Declaration regarding Environmental Review #24-07, and approve Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1329, subject to the Conditions set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Upon motion by Commissioner ____________________, seconded by Commissioner ____________________, and carried by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner(s)
NO
ES: Commissioner(s)
ABSENT: Commissioner(s)
ABSTAIN: Commissioner(s)
ATTACHMENT B
16 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4145
May 7, 2025
Adopted this 7th day of May 2025
____
__________________________
Chairperson, Planning Commission of
the City of Merced, California
AT
TEST:
____
___________________________
Secretary
A
ttachment:
Exhibit A – Conditions of Approval
Exhibit B – Findings
17 EXHIBIT A
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4145
Conditions of Approval
Planning Commission Resolution #4145
Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map # 1329
1. The proposed project shall be constructed/designed as shown on Attachment D (Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map for Paulson Ranch).
2. All conditions contained in Resolution #1175- Amended ("Standard Tentative Subdivision Map Conditions") shall apply.
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 developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend (with 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 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. Furthermore, developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, against any and 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 condit ion of such approval is that the City indemnify and defend (with 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 including, 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 agreement that meets the approval of the City Attorney and to provide all required deposits to fully fund the 18 EXHIBIT A
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4145
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/applicant shall be required to satisfy any monetary obligations imposed on City by any order or judgment.
6. 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.
7. 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 lights, parks and open space. CFD procedures shall be initiated before Fin al Map approval.
Developer/Owner shall submit a request agreeing to such a procedure, waiving right to protest and post deposit as determined by the Development Services Director to be sufficient to cover procedure costs and maintenance costs expected prior to first assessments being received.
8. All dwellings shall be designed to include fire sprinklers as required by the California Fire Code.
9. Fire hydrants shall be installed along street frontages to provide fire protection to the area. The hydrants shall meet all City of Merced standards and shall comply with all requirements of the City of Merced Fire Department. Final location of the fire hydrants shall be determined by the Fire Department.
10. Plans shall meet current codes at the time of building permit application submittal. Building permit applications shall comply with the newest enacted California Building Codes. Plans shall be drawn by a licensed California design professional.
11. At the building permit stage, the site plans for each lot shall include a minimum 3 -foot by 6- foot concrete pad located in the side yard or backyard for the storage of 3 refuse containers.
12. The developer shall use proper dust control procedures during site development in accordance with San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District rules.
19 EXHIBIT A
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4145
13. The single-family lots shall comply with the design standards found under MMC Section 20.46.020 - Design Standards for Single -Family Dwellings and Mobile Homes (Attachment E of Planning Commission Staff Report #25-338).
14. Each lot shall provide a parking garage for a minimum of one vehicle.
15. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from public view.
16. Each lot within the subdivision shall be provided with one driveway. No residential driveways shall front on any arterial or collector street.
17. The project shall comply with all requirements of the California Building Code and all flood requirements of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), as well as the requirements for the California Urban Level of Flood Protection (CA 200-year flood).
18. The project shall comply with all the Post Construction Standards required to comply with state requirements for the City’s Phase II MS- IV Permit (Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System).
19. The applicant shall provide a minimum 36 inches of coverage between the top of the sewer line and the surface of the street , or as otherwise required by the City Engineer.
20. All landscaping within the public right -of-way shall comply with state and local requirements for water conservation. All irrigation provided to street trees or other landscaping shall be provided with a drip irrigation or micro-spray system and shall comply with the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MMC Section 20.36.030).
21. All undeveloped areas shall be maintained free of weeds and debris.
22. Prior to final inspection of any home, all front yards and side yards exposed to public view shall be provided with landscaping to include ground cover, trees, shrubs, and irrigation in accordance with Merced Municipal Code Section 20.36.050. Irrigation for all on-site landscaping shall be provided by a drip system or micro-spray system in accordance with the State’s Emergency Regulation for Statewide Urban Water Conservation or any other state or City mandated water regulations dealing with the current drought conditions. All landscaping shall comply with the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MMC Section 20.36.030).
20 EXHIBIT A
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4145
23. A minimum 6-foot-tall masonry wall shall be installed along Cardella Road and Paulson Road. The wall shall include anti- graffiti coating.
Graffiti shall be removed within 7 days or as determined to be a reasonable timeframe by the Director of Development Services.
24. Landscaping shall be provided between the block wall and the sidewalk along Cardella Road and Paulson Road . This strip of land shall be dedicated to the City and maintained through the Community Facilities District during the Final Map stage, as required by the City Engineer.
25. Sewer manholes shall be installed as required by the Engineering Department (if needed).
26. The applicant shall dedicate all necessary street right- of-way and easements as needed for irrigation, utilities, drainage, landscaping, and open space during the Final Map stage as required by the City Engineer.
27. Additional right -of-way improvements on non- arterial streets , such as road widening beyond the City standard, would not be eligible for Public Facilities Impact Fee reimbursement.
28. Dedication of all necessary easements will be made as shown on Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1329 and as needed for irrigation, utilities, drainage, landscaping, open space, and access.
29. The developer shall provide all utility services to each lot, including sanitary sewer, water, electric power, gas, telephone, and cable television. All new utilities are to be undergrounded.
30. The turning radii for the access roads are 33 feet inside, and 47 feet outside. The cul-de-sac bulbs shall have a minimum diameter of 96 feet and shall be posted as “no parking” in compliance with Fire Department Standards adopted by Merced Municipal Code Section 17.32.
31. The developer shall i nstall appropriate street name signs and traffic control signs with locations, names, and types approved by the City Engineer.
32. As required by Merced Municipal Code Section 17.04.050 and
17.04.060, full public improvements shall be installed/repaired if the permit value of the project exceeds $100,000.00. Public improvements may include, but not be limited to, repairing/replacing the sidewalk, curb, gutter, and street corner ramp(s), so that they comply with ADA standards and other relevant City of Merced/State/Federal standards and regulations.
21 EXHIBIT A
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4145
33. All public im provements shall be provided as required by the City Engineer. All improvements shall meet City Standards.
34. The developer shall provide construction plans and calculations for all landscaping and public maintenance improvements. All such plans shall conform to City standards and meet approval of the City Engineer.
35. All entryway and subdivision signs shall be administratively approved by Planning Staff prior to the issuance of a building permit.
36. The Caltrans corner vision triangle standards may be used over the City’s standard found under MMC 20.30.030 – Corner Vision Triangles, for the lots determined appropriate by the Director of Development Services.
37. Development is not allowed within the wetland areas identified in Attachment I of Planning Commission Staff Report #25 -338. Should development be proposed within this area in the future, the developer shall provide studies concluding that wetlands no longer existing in this area.
38. The approval of VTSM #1329 is contingent upon City Council approving G eneral Plan Amendment #24-01 and Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment #6.
22 EXHIBIT B
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4145
Findings and Considerations
Planning Commission Resolution #4145
Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1329
FINDINGS/CONSIDERATIONS:
General Plan Compliance and Policies Related to This Application A) The General Plan Amendment p ortion of this application would amend the General Plan’s Circulation Element (Figure 4.1) to eliminate Destiny Drive (a collector road) from the project site as this road would not be able to extend through the site eas tward to Paulson Road due to wetland constraints within the subject site (see Finding B). The General Plan Amendment portion of this application would not amend any of the General Plan land use designations within the project site.
The proposed subdivision (Paulson Ranch) would create 104 single-family homes on 39.12 acres (Attachment D of Planning Commission Staff Report 25-338). This subdivision complies with the General Plan designations of Low Density Residential (LD) and High to Medium Density Residential (HMD) for this site. The maximum number of units allowed for this site would be approximately 655, the proposed 104 units is below the maximum allowed for this site.
The proposed subdivision would achieve the following General Plan Land Use Policies:
L-1.2 Encourage a diversity of building types, ownership, prices, designs, and site plans for residential areas throughout the City.
L-1.3 Encourage a diversity of lot sizes in residential subdivisions.
L-1.8 Create livable and identifiable residential neighborhoods.
Wetlands
B) Gallaway Enterprises conducted a field survey and identified areas where historical flooding from adjacent waterways created wetlands. The map at Attachment I identifies the wetland areas. The proposed subdivision (Paulson Ranch) is designed to avoid these areas, which requires modifying the circulation in this area by eliminating the portion of Destiny Drive planned to go through this site, and modifying the circulation previously approved through the Northeast Yosemite Specific plan (Attachment J).
23 EXHIBIT B
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4145
Traffic/Circulation
C) The project site consists of an undeveloped lot totaling approximately 39.12 acres. The project site fronts an arterial road (E. Cardella Road), with the nearest north- south road being Paulson Road (collector road) currently terminating south of the project site, but would be extended through the subject site up to Cardella Road and down to Yosemite Avenue with this development. Yosemite Avenue and Cardella Road are both designed to carry large volumes of traffic going through a large portion of the community. The subject site is half a mile east of G Street, which provides access to Highway 99 that connects Merced with other regional communities throughout the State.
The interior roads within the subdivision include two east/west roads, six cul- de-sacs, and two north/south roads. As shown at Attachment D of Planning Commission Staff Report #25-338 the Streets/Courts A through J (except for Street D) would be designed to Local Street standards with 59 feet of right - of-way, which includes street, curb, gutter, park strip, sidewalk, and a public utility easement. Street D would have 100 feet of right-of-way. Paulson Road and Cardella Road would respectively have 84 feet and 148 feet of right -of- way respectively, and include a masonry block wall.
The General Plan would allow a maximum of 655 units within the subject site.
The proposed 104 units would generate less vehicle traffic compared to the maximum density allowed. According to Trip Generation (ITE Report), the average daily trips per unit is 6.59. The proposed project at 104 units would generate approximately 16 % of the average daily trips compared to the maximum density allowed by the General Plan. The existing and proposed street network could adequately serve this proposal.
In addition, there are several walkable locations within a ¼ mile of the subject site, which include Davenport Park, Cruickshank Middle School, Dignity Health Hospital, Merced College, and the Yosemite & G Crossing Shopping Center (under construction in phase s). The existing street network could adequately serve this proposal as it was designed to accommodate a much larger maximum number of units. In addition, the extension of Paulson Road to Cardella Road would provide direct access to existing residents i n the neighborhood wanting to travel north, improving the street network in the area.
24 EXHIBIT B
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4145
Parking
D) The proposal would satisfy the City’s standard parking requirements for single-family homes. The standard parking requirement for single -family homes is one parking space per unit. Each single -family would have a 2- car garage.
Public Improvements/City Services
E) The developer would be required to install all streets, utilities, and other improvements within the subdivision and around the subdivision to be up to City Standards (Condition # 27 and #30). This includes connecting roads to the subdivision such as Paulson Road and Dunn Road.
Each lot would be required to pay fees for sewer and water connections at the building permit stage. In addition, each lot within the subdivision would be required to meet the City’s storm drainage and run -off requirements for the City’s MS-IV permit (Condition #18).
Building Elevations
F) The developer has yet to submit building designs for the single-family homes (104 lots). These homes shall be required to comply with the City’s minimum design standards for single-family homes as required under Merced Municipal Code Section 20.46.020 - Design Standards for Single-Family Dwellings and Mobile Homes (see Attachment E of Planning Commission Staff Report #25- 338 and Condition #13 of Planning Commission Resolution #4145).
Affordability Requirements
G) In 2023, the City Council updated the City’s Regi onal Housing Needs Allocation Unit Production Plan. A housing affordability requirement is triggered by two qualifiers that need to be met: entitlement type and number of units created. For single-family residential developments, the affordability requirement is triggered by a legislative action agreement (through annexations, general plan amendments, site utilization plan revisions, or zone changes) for projects with over 60 single -family homes (multi -family residential projects are exempt).
In this case the developer is requesting an entitlement that triggers a legislative action agreement --a general plan amendment. As shown under Finding A, General Plan Amendment #24-01 is to amend the City’s Circulation Element only (not a land use change request). The land use aspect of the project (104 25 EXHIBIT B
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4145
units on approximately 39 acres) would comply with the Zoning classifications for this site.
Based on this request, the developer is not required to provide affordable housing units (or an in- lieu fee) because the general plan amendment is to amend the City’s Circulation Element (not land use)
Site Design
H) As shown on the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map (Attachment D of Planning Commission Staff Report #25- 338), the proposed design of the subdivision includes 2 interior east/west streets, 6 cul -de-sacs, and 2 north/south streets. There would be a masonry block wall around the northern and eastern portions of the subdivision on the back of the lots along Paulson Road and Cardella Road. Paulson Road would provide access to other arterial streets such as Cardella Road (north) and Yosemite Avenue (south).
The Cotton Wood Bike Path Easement (25 feet wide) would be located on the south side of Cotton Wood Creek. On the north side of the creek would be a storm basin shown as Lot B (approximately 0.85 acres). Lot A (approximately
5.18 acres) would be located within northeast portion of the subject site and would be remain undeveloped, as a field survey by Gallaway Enterprise found this area to contain wetlands to be avoided (see Condition #37).
The interior local streets would have 59 feet of right -of-way that includes a 34-foot-wide road, and on both sides of the street contain a 7- foot-wide park strip, 5 -foot-wide sidewalk, an d 10- foot-wide public utility easement.
Portions of the perimeter of the subdivision would be surrounded by a masonry block wall along Paulson Road and Cardella Road.
Landscaping
I) Each lot within the subdivision shall be provided with front yard landscaping in compliance with Merced Municipal Code Section 20.36.050 (Landscaping) that requires all exterior setback areas, excluding areas required for access to the property to be landscaped (Condition #22).
For landscaping within public right -of-way, the developer shall install landscaping in front of the block walls along Paulson Road and Cardella Road.
Landscaping in this area would be reviewed by the City prior to installation.
The landscaping within this area would be maintained by the Community Facilities District.
26 EXHIBIT B
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4145
Neighborhood Impact/Interface
J) The subject site is surrounded by a variety of uses which includes to the west by Cruickshank Middle School/agricultural land, to the south by single-family homes, to the east by undeveloped land, and to the north (across from E.
Cardella Road) by agricultural land. The subject site’s current land use designation is residential and would allow a maximum of 655 residential units. The proposed Paulson Ranch subdivision is consistent with the current land use designation, and at 104 single-family homes would be below the maximum number of residential units allowed for this site. There are several existing residential subdivisions to the south. This development is not expected to alter the character of the neighborhood or introduce uses that don’t already exist in the neighborhood.
Public hearing notices were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site. At the time that this report was prepared, the City had not received any comments regarding this project.
Tentative Subdivision Map Requirements/Public Comments Received K) Per Merced Municipal Code (MMC) Section 18.16.080 – Information Required, a tentative subdivision map shall include all of the requirements shown at Attachment F of Planning Commission Staff Report #25- 338. Said requirements include stating the location of the subject site, the name of the subdivision, and showing the layout of the proposed lots. MMC 18.16.090 – Required Statement requires the applicant to provide a statement that explicitly states any deviations from tentative subdivision m ap requirements, standard drawings, or Zoning laws. MMC 18.16.100 - Public Hearing – Generally, requires a public hearing to review and approve a tentative subdivision map in conformance with the Subdivision Map Act.
Per the California Environmental Quality Act , a public hearing notice was mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject site and published in a qualifying newspaper, Merced County Times, three weeks prior to this meeting. In addition, staff reached out to local utility companies, local school districts, and other relevant government agencies to solicit comments. At the time this report was prepared, staff had not received comments from utility companies.
27 EXHIBIT B
OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #4145
Environmental Clearance
L) Most Infill projects over 5 acres or projects that don’t comply with Zoning/General Plan designations require an Initial Study, per the Californi a E
nvironmental Quality Act (CEQA). In this case, the proposed land use is consistent with the General Plan land uses, and a General Plan Amendment is be
ing requested to amend the Circulation Element by eliminating a collector road from going through the project site – thus an Initial Study was required.
An Initial Study includes a wide range of analysis required by the State covering an array of subjects including, but not limited to, impacts on vehicle miles traveled, air quality, biological resource, public services, cultural resources, and City utilities. Planning staff has conducted an environmental review of the project in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, and concluded that Environmental Review #24- 07 results in a Negative Declaration as the proposal would not have a significant effect on the environment and does not require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. A copy of the Initial Study with a Negative Declaration can be found at Attachment K of Planning Commission Staff Report #25-338. 28 E DUNN RD
CARDELLA RD
W
HITE DOVE AVE
ROBIN DR
PLEASANT LN
PA
ULSON RD
TEAL CT
ROBIN CT
CRESCENDO AVE
FAVIER DR
OSPREY ST
MERCY AVE
CANOPY C
T
DUNN RD
DESTINY DR
DOM
INICA
N DR
CORMORANT DR
N GA
RDNER AVE
E CARDELLA RD
¯
Subjec Site
APN: 231-020-021
Undeveloped
(Land Use - Commercial)
Cruickshank
Middle School
Undeveloped
(Low Density Residential)
Undeveloped
(Land Use - Commercial)
Undeveloped
(Low Density Residential)
ATTACHMENT C
29 -
DRNN/NW
LEGEND
EX!SnNC
-&,
,.
PROPOSED
---0-
...
STAHDAROJMNHOi.£ ----------- ------------
1141l'R LIN( -- -[Eii]--- -Cfilu-
SANfTAR'f S[WfR ---�--- �
STORIIDRAJN ---�-- �
0-----(;-
�--il
OIRCC'1ION OF FLOW ---2Ql_
TOP OF CIJR8 EUV/IOON
�
c------0
c------0
.....Qfll_
""""""""""" -----------17&;>-- N/'
C<NTS.GUTTER'"°
""""'""""'""' ,,.,.,.,,,,..,,
fr �IS �«il:8
c:i;!
i:5t
�� "'"ss:.��-�
':,<o
�� <>t:l��
;,:°'
g�
�
M£RC£0 CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
APN: 231-010-005
LOW DENSITY R£SIO£NT/AL (R-1-6}
�
__.�
VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR:
PAULSON RANCH
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF TH£ R£MAIN0£R OF PARCEL 3, AS SHOWN ON TH£ PARCEL MAP FOR SPALDING G. WATHEN, FIL£0 IN BOOK 121 OF PARCEL MAPS, AT PAGES 1 TO 3, M£RC£0 COUNTY RECORDS, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANG£ 14 £AST, MOUNT 0/ABLO MERIDIAN CITY OF M£RC£0, COUNTY OF M£RC£0, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA
MORRIS S MICHN£R & TIMOTHY F RAZZARI
& BILL/£ K TR
OWNER SUBDMDER
�gp�' LLC
BO/Ji£VARD,SUrrEClOS
8ANOS,CA9J6.J5
STAT£1J£NT OF SUBDMDER
�O
P�O
INC.
BOIJL£VARD,SU!Tf:Cl0S
8Af/OS,Ol9J6J!i
I ASSESSORSPIIRCE/._NO: 231-010-0()2
2. f-{/S:J:ff,///':Ji,/'l.�;gf:!'TIAI..;
LOW O£NSfTY R£S100ll/Al..; HIGH
J. EXISTING ZONING: R-J-2 (MEDIUM DENSllYRESIDEllnAJ.), R-1-6 (LOW DENSnY IDIDOITW)
£R0SJ0M C0NrR0L PER CITY OF 111£RCfO ORO/NAIIC£S ,WO STANf>1RDS.
S. Fl?ONTYARDDEF'rHSANDBUJll)/H(;SEfBACKl/NESPERCfTYOF
MERCEDORDINANCESIIND STANfW?DS.
6. WMDi'SUPPI.Y:fl'(CflYOFM£RCUJ_
7. S£111M£DISPOW:BYCllYOFM£RCED.
8.Sl�DRAJNAG£:[l'(CfTYOF/J£RCED.
9T Rff�,4N()LOCltOONSl«J.LBEfJIT<Rl.!!NEDBrC/TYOFMfRCm.
10.ALLIN-TRACT/IIPROVEMOflSANDPU81.ICF"-Cl/fl/ESIWLLB£/NSTALl..£D OR CONSTRUCTED AT THE nl,1£0FDEVELOPMENT
GENERAL NOTES
r SrRfITIIIP/?01/f:MENTS SHN.L BE INSrALLED Pffi crrr OF MERCED STANCW?O SPEC/F/CATK!NS.
2. NOAR<AS SUBJ£CTTOINUNDATK!NBYTHE:I/ICCHANCEANI/UAL
FLOOD Afl/T
J. TOTAL Nlt:A OF THIS SUBOMSION IS J9.I ACRE:S:J: COHT!,JNIIIG 104 Rf5JlJDllW._LO/S.
r/1£: SU6DMD£R 11£R8Y RESERVES THE RIGHr TO FIL£ MULr1PlE SU8DMSKJNI.IAPSAS SITFORrHBYTHESUBDIVISJONWPACT,
ARTICLE4,SECTION66 456 .I
5. A GENERAL PU.NAMEND/,IEHrAPPUCATION"'1U8EFILED
CONCURRENTLYW!TH THIS/MP.
-z.= �
APN: 231-010-001
LOW DENSITY R£SIO£NT/AL (R-1-6)
I
j I I ,
!, I I I
a, I 61 j M M JIU
i I
"- • I�
- ; J_la
/
77 1
ii I ,/
i
I
, .,. 1 ., 1 ., r·11 ,, 1 ,, f:l ,. I ., j , � .....----- - .. LOT ;i· R£MAINO£R , �-�-�L _l_ � 1-_------ I - � �IIIIMD ---��- I
ANTHONY MARTIN SR & /,/EL/NA GUARDANAPO TRUSTEES I
APN: 231-010-009
OFFICE COMMERCIAL (C-0), LOW DENSITY R£SIO£NTIAL (R-1-6), ANO LOW DENSITY R£SIO£NTIAL (R-1-5).
� ..... ,,.
. .
Cffi, ...
".
� .. -. .
INDEX
SHEET NO DESCRIPTION
I cm-E1I SHEET
I LOToaENfllOII Pl.AN (flOUrHJ
3 LOT OIIIBISION Pl.AN (NOllfHJ
4 CONCEPTUAL ORADINO PLAN (flOUrHJ
6 CONCEP1VAL tJRADINQ PLAN(NORTH)
• CONCEP'1VAL COIIPOSl1E U11LITY Pl.AN (SOU11IJ
100' STREET D 59' LOCAL STREET T CONCEP'1VAL COIIPOSl1E U11LITY Pl.AN (NORTH) �
-=�
84' PAULSON ROAD
�,.
,-L ___ I
'
�
��
--L_
• ·:r -
1 ll [. J g - �----148' CARDELLA ROAD
�
;;;
Q..<.o l
� ......
�'?as �8�
;��O oc,
��� ill��
T
c.:, "'!Z�j
a: hw� --
W§!jZ:l ,.
(3!!!� z ;}�W:3!:o:::.=:: liiia: ;a
<C c; c
""" ;!; 5 1111: ffi� ::cw,. ,!;o,
Oi!!!Z'.'.!ii;w i!E,a
a:io,i,
111
JOBNO�
IMTE�
�n----"--------
om -"
""'-'----"--"""-
""""
NUMBER
1 OF 7 SHEETS
ATTACHMENT D
30 31
32 33
34 35
36 Chapter 20.46 – RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS
Sections:
20.46.010 Purpose
20.46.020 Design Standards for Single-Family Dwellings and Mobile Homes
20.46.030 General Design Standards for Multi-Family Dwellings
20.46.040 Specific Design Standards for Multi-Family Dwellings
20.46.010 Purpose
This chapter establishes design standards for residential uses, in addition to regulations set forth in Chapter 20.08 (Residential Zones), except that parking, location, and address requirements in Section 20.46.020 do not apply to accessory dwelling units.
20.46.020 Design Standards for Single-Family Dwellings and Mobile Homes A. Applicability. The following standards shall apply to all single -family developments and mobile homes, unless exceptions from individual standards are granted through a Minor Use Permit per Section 20.68.020.
B. Siding. No shiny or reflective exterior siding materials, which are more reflective than semi-gloss paint, shall be permitted.
C. Exterior Walls.
1. Materials shall extend to the ground where
a unit is mounted at grade -level or the top
of the solid concrete or masonry perimeter
foundation where an above -grade
foundation is used.
2. Materials shall be limited to stucco, wood,
brick, stone, glass, or decorative concrete
block. No tin or other metallic exterior wall material shall be used.
3. Materials shall be the same as or complementary to the wall materials and roofing materials of the dwelling unit.
D. Windows.
1. All windows, doors, and gable ends shall be architecturally treated with a trim.
2. No shiny or reflective materials shall be permitted for trim which are more reflective than semi-gloss paint.
ATTACHMENT E
37 CHAPTER 20.46 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS
E. Roof.
1. Roof Pitch Slope. The slope or inclination of a pitched roof shall be no less than a ratio of 4 inches vertical rise for each 12 inches horizontal run (4:12).
2. Projection. Overhanging eves shall be at
least 12 inches from the exterior vertical walls.
3. Materials.
a. Roofs shall be composed of non-wood or
fire-retardant-treated wood shingles or shake
shingles, non-reflective and matte -finish metal,
rock or concrete or adobe or composition tile, or
other similar materials commonly used in the
area.
b. Fascia boards shall be used on all sides of the structure to screen exposed elements, like rafters and vents, and to give the roof a finished edge. c. Roofing materials for a garage or carport shall be the same as the wall materials and roofing materials of the dwelling unit.
4. Mechanical and Utility Equipment. All mechanical and utility equipment shall be screened from the public right-of-way.
F. Parking. Each unit shall have at least 200 square feet of off-street parking outside of required setback areas.
G. Width. Each unit shall have a width of at least
20 feet.
H. Location. Each dwelling shall face or have
frontage upon a street or permanent means of
access to a street by way of a public o r private
easement other than an alley. Such easements
shall not be less than 10 feet in width.
I. Landscaping. All front yards, and all side yards exposed to public view on corner lots, shall be landscaped with drought-tolerant ground cover, trees, and shrubs, including but not limited to , City street trees. Underground irrigation of the required landscaping shall be required. All shall be installed prior to occupancy. (Refer to Chapter 20.36.)
J. Foundation. All homes and mobile homes must be attached to a permanent foundation system that complies with all building codes of the City.
K. Addresses. The street address number of the house shall be displayed on the front wall of the house clearly visible from the street and shall be a minimum height of 4 inches with a ½ inch stroke (or as otherwise required in the California Residential and Fire Codes.)
38 18.16.080 ‐ Information required.
Every tentative map shall be clearly and legibly reproduced. The following information shall be shown on, or accompanying, the map:
1. A key or location map on which is shown the general area in cluding adjacent property, subdivisions and roads;
2. The tract name, date, north point, scale and sufficient leg al description to define location and boundaries of the proposed subdivision;
3. Name and address of rec orded owner or owners;
4. Name and address of the subdivider;
5. Name and business address o f the person who prepared the map;
6. Acreage of proposed subdivi sion to the nearest tenth of an acre;
7. Contours at six-inch intervals to determine the general slo pe of the land and the high and low point thereof;
8. The locations, names, widths, approximate radii of curves a nd grades of all existing and proposed roads, streets, highways, alleys and ways in and adjacent to the proposed subdivision or subdivision to be offered for dedication;
9. Proposed protective covenants;
10. Location and description of all easements;
11. Locations and size of all existing and proposed public utilities;
12. Proposed method of sewage and stormwater disposal;
13. Location and character of all existing and proposed public open space in and adjacent to the subdivision and a statement of intention with regard to park land dedication or payment of a fee in lieu thereof;
14. Lot layout, approximate dim ensions and area in square feet of each irregular lot and lot numbers;
15. City limit lines occurring wit hin the general vicinity of the subdivision;
16. Classification of lots as to intended land use, zone, and density;
17. Approximate bearings and d istances to quarter-section boun ds within the general vicinity of the subdivision;
18. Proposed public improvements;
19. Statement as to whether the subdivision is to be recorded in stages;
20. Existing use and ownership of land immediately adjacent to the subdivision;
21. Preliminary title report issued not more than sixty days p rior to filing of the tentative map;
22. The outline of any existing buildings and indication of an y to remain in place and their locations in relation to existing or proposed street and lot lines;
ATTACHMENT F
39 23. Location of all existing trees and indication of those pro posed to remain in place, standing within the boundaries of the subdivision;
24. Location of all areas subje ct to inundation or storm water overflow, the location, width and direction of flow of all watercourses and i ndicate flood zone classification;
25. Elevations of sewers at proposed connection.
(Ord. 1533 § 1, 1984: Ord. 1358 § 3, 1980: Ord. 1342 § 2 (part), 1980: prior code § 25.32(c)).
18.16.090 ‐ Required statement.
A statement shall be presented by the subdivider in written form accompanying the map and shall contain justification and reasons for any exceptions to provisions of this title, the standard drawings or for any amendments to or variation from the zoning law, which may be requested in conjunction with the subdivision proposed. (Ord. 1533 § 2, 1984: Ord. 1342 § 2 (part), 1980: prior code § 25.33).
18.16.100 ‐ Public hearing—Generally.
The planning commission shall review the tentative map at a public hearing to determine whether it is in conformity with the provisions of law and of this title and upon that basis, within the time allowed in the Subdivision Map Act. (Ord. 1358 § 4, 1980: Ord. 1342 § 2 (part), 1980: prior code § 25.34(a)). 40 CITY OF MERCED CIRCULATION PLAN Figure
4.1 ATTACHMENT G
The GPA would modify the Circulation Element
to eliminate Destiny Road (a collecotr road) from crossing the subject site.
41 The portionofDestiny
DrivethroughSubject
SitetobeEliminated
ATTACHMENT H
42 ATTACHMENT I
43 ATTACHMENT J
44 PAULSON RANCH SUBDIVISION
GPA #24-01
NORTHEAST YOSEMITE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT #6
VTSM #1329
STONEFIELD HOME, INC.
104 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES
NORTHEAST MERCED
ATTACHMENT L
104
ENTITLEMENT PROCESS (2 STEPS)
• Recommendations to the City Council:
• General Plan Amendment: Amend the City’s Circulation Element to eliminate a collector road (Destiny Drive) from going through this site
• Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment: Amend this previously approved specific plan (from the 1990’s) to accommodate this new subdivision layout • Planning Commission Action:
• Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map: Subdivision 39.12 acres into 104 single-family lots with some remainder lots
105
CITY-SCALE CONTEXT
106
107
ZONING
• Subject Site has two General Plan designations and two Zoning classifications. GP designations are LDR and HMD. Zoning classifications are R-1-6 and R-3-2.
• Based on the residential density allowed, the maximum number of units would be 533. The proposed 104 units are below the maximum allowed.
GENERAL PLAN
108
WETLAND CONSTRAINTS
• Gallaway Enterprises conducted a field survey
and identified areas where historical flooding
from adjacent waterways created wetlands. The
proposed subdivision (Paulson Ranch) is
designed to go around these areas, which
requires eliminating a collector road (Destiny
Drive) from the site (GPA #24-01) and
amending the previously approved Northeast
Yosemite Specific Plan.
109
110
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
111
NORTHEAST YOSEMITE SPECIFIC PLAN
•Specific plan approved
with annexation into City
limits, during the 1990’s.
•Circulation and
subdivision layout being
redesigned because of
wetlands along eastern
portion of project site.
112
39.12 Acres
104 Total Lots
• Lots – 6,000 s.f. to 14,250 s.f.
• Paulson Road would extend
utilities and vehicle access north
to Cardella Road
39.12 Acres
104 Total Lots
• Lots – 6,000 s.f. to 14,250 s.f.
• Paulson Road would extend
utilities and vehicle access north
to Cardella Road
113
Lot A (5.18 AC) undevelopable
due to wetlands
Remainder Lot
114
25-foot-wide Bike Path on
South Side of Cotton Wood
Creek
Lot B (Storm Basin) 0.85 AC 115
116
CONDITIONS
(RESOLUTION #4145)
•Conditions #23 & #24: A 6-foot-tall block wall required along Cardella Road and Paulson Road (addressing safety and noise concerns). Landscaping shall be provided in front of the CMU wall for beautification and to deter graffiti. •Condition #28: Dedication of all necessary easement shall be made with TSM #1329 as needed (for utilities, irrigation, drainage, landscaping, access, etc.) •Condition #37: Development is not allowed within wetland areas identified in Attachment I. Future development in this area shall require studies concluding that development is allowed within these areas.
117
PUBLIC COMMENTS
•Public hearing Notices were published in a qualifying newspaper and mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. •Staff reached out to utility companies and other agencies to solicit comments. •Staff did not receive public comments from property owners at the time this presentation was prepared
118
RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL
•Approve/Disapprove/Modify:
•Environmental Review #24-07 (Negative Declaration)
•General Plan Amendment (GPA) #24-01
•Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment #6
119
DIRECT ACTION
•Approval/Disapprove/Modify:
•Environmental Review #24-07 (Negative Declaration)
•Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map #1329
•(approvals would be contingent upon CC approval of GPA, and the Specific Plan Amendment)
QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? CONCERNS?
120