Lots 37, 38, 39, and 40 - The limits of the 100-year flood plain did not extend into lots 43 and 44.Exhibit " D" identified the setback ribbon extending within the lots. Compare the Red Line on themap below to the Black Line on the map above.
Lot 41- The Flood Plain did not include the tributary. Comparethe Red line to the Black line onthe map above.
Lots 45 and 46- The setback from the Flood Plain extended to the edge of the buildingpad slopes.Compare the Red Line to the Black Line on the map above.
Lots 43 and 44 - The old setback extended to the edge of the buildingpad slopes. Compare theRed Line to the Black Line on the map above.
Lots 77 and 78, and Sewer Extension- Because the Flood Plain did not identifya tributary, the oldsetback does not extend north of CenturyHills Drive. The pink setback line did not extend to lots 77and 78, or to the sewer extension. Compare the pink setback line to the Encroachment Area forlots 77 and 78, highlighted in orange on / he map above, and to the sewer extension area,highlighted in purple.
Century Hills Drive, Grass Valley Road, the water quality basin and lot 41- The limits of theFlood Plain and the adjacent setback does not extend to the area currently identified as tributariesnorth into the area proposed for Century Hills Drive.) Compare the Red Line to the Black Line onthe map above.
Lots 47, 48, and 49- The old setback was between 175' and 200' to the south of the building padslopes at the closest point. Compare the Red Line to the Black line on the map above.
Lots 50 and 51 - The Flood Plain did not identifythe western tributary, so the old setback is locatedabout 350' south of the Encroachment Area, at the closest point. Compare the Red Line to theBlack Line on the map above.
North End of Crest Haven Drive and Lot 57- The Flood Plain did not identifya tributary, so the oldsetback did not extend nodh of Century Hills Drive. Compare the Red Line to the Black Line on themap above.
Lots 58, 59, 60, 61, and 62- Because the Flood Plain did not identify a tributary, the old setbackdoes not extend north of Century Hills Drive. Compare the Red Line to the Black Line on the mapabove.
Alessandro Dam Access Roart: There are currently 2 roads that provide Riverside County FloodControl with access to the dam. The access road in TM 31930 is the shorter road. The other roadsnakes through a variety of privately owned property and is much longer than the subject road.Also, the County may not have access to the longer road in perpetuity because we understand thatseveral of the property owners intend to develop the land, which would close certain portions of thelonger road.
Both roads are unpaved. Travelingon an unpaved road generates dust (PM10). Therefore, the use of the shorter road would reduce the dust generated by the regular maintenance of the dam.
Also, because Flood Control will be able to use the shorter road in perpetuity, the shorter road is preferable to the longer for that reason also.
The ability to access the dam using the shortest route, and reduce PM10, combined with theability to secure the right to use the shorter road in perpetuity, are exceptional circumstances which do not apply generally to other property in the RC zone or in the neighborhood. These reasonssuggest that the grant of this grading exception is appropriate.
Exception B: Slope Height Exceptions
Crest Haven Drive - TM 31930 is identical to TM 23027, which was designed by Gabel, Cook andAssociates, Engineers, to conform to the natural topographyto the greatest extent possible, and limit grading. The height of the slopes was not a result of the street locations chosen by theengineers. Slope heights are a function of proposed driving speed, the width of the road, and the natural topography. The City imposed a design speed of 25 miles per hour on each of the roads in TM 31930 ( Condition of Approval 48.) The chosen design speed determines the proposed slopeheights for Crest Haven Drive. Designingthe street to comply with a safe driving speed is an exceptional circumstance resulting in slope heights that require variances. 56 provides a potentially important corridor connection, for flora and fauna, between those openspace areas to the north and the main trunk of the arroyo to the south.
Apart from some minor infringementsby several of the proposed pads, a majority of thistributary, and most of the other tributaries present within the map boundaries, will be leftundisturbed, as required by the Grading Ordinance. It is important that these open spaceareas be defined and protected in perpetuity. The applicant has agreed to set aside allungraded portions of the map in an open space conservation easement.
With these areas set aside, there are two options available to maintain this land in its naturalstate. Staff believes it would be most preferable to dedicate these areas either in fee or withan open space easement to an appropriatenon- profit conservation agency with expertise andexperience in managingnatural areas, such as the Riverside Land Conservancy. In the eventa suitable conservation organization cannot be found to accept this property, it isrecommended that a Homeowners Association be formed and chargedwith maintenance andstewardship of these areas. In addition, staff would recommend that an open spacemanagement plan be developedto ensure that a maintenance program is developedfor theopen space. This plan should also specify fencingaround the streets and pads to protect openspace areas.
Biological Considerations
The biological study for the project indicated the presence of coastal sage scrub habitat alongthe easterly project limit, which serves as potential habitat for the federally endangeredCalifornia Gnatcatcher. Since no focused gnatcatcher survey was prepared, the site ispresumed to be occupied. As such, the applicant will be required to prepare a HabitatConservation Plan ( HCP) and obtain an incidental take permit from the U. S. Fish andWildlife Service. The biological study included specific mitigation measures related to whenand how vegetation may be cleared, property mitigation through off- site habitatconservation, proper site access and project area maintenance. These measures have beenincorporatedinto the recommended conditions of approval for the project.
ALUC
This property falls within the jurisdiction of the Riverside County Airport Land UseCommission (ALUC) and is subjectto their review and approval. This map has alreadybeenreviewed and approved by ALUC. A copy of the conditions of approval have been attachedto this report and have been included in the recommended conditions of approval.
Metropolitan Water District Pipeline
A sixty-foot pipeline easement is present in the southeast portion of the map, between Lots12, 13, 15, 16, 19 and 27. The MetropolitanWater District has reviewed the proposed mapand has provided several required conditions. These have been attached to this report and City PlanningCommission April 19, 2001 6
TM 29515
at 3. 93 acres in size. The remainingeight lots have an ANS between 16. 3% and 25. 9% andare required to contain at least two acres. These lots range from 1. 38 to 1. 83 acres in size.
The applicant-preparedvariance justification findings are attached as Exhibit 6. Theapplicant cites topographical and street alignment constraints, along with improved mapdesign and open space retention and maintenance issues as justification for the requestedvariances. In reviewingthe applicant's request, staffis generallysupportive of the requestedvariances. For eight of the nine lots, the applicant has demonstrated that they could complywith the lot size reqnirement by adjnstingproperty lines. In most cases, adjustment of thelot lines to comply with the Code creates a series of awkward, irregularlyshapedlots, muchor' x~ hich is within the open space area and not a usable part of the lot. As such, staff seesno benefit in redrawinglot lines to comply with the letter of the Code and would support lotsize variances to accormnodate a better project design with more logical lot configurations.
The exception is Lot 28, which is approximately 1. 83 acres in size. In this case, minoradjustments between Lots 27 and 28 and minor modifications to adjoiningstreet alignmentswould provide sufficient lot area to provide the required 2 acres in a logical manner. Staffrecommends that the map be modified so that Lot 28 complies with the lot size requirements,and the applicant has agreed to make the necessary modifications.
Lot Width for Lot 20
The RC Zone requires that all lots with an ANS of thirty percent or greater also have aminimum lot width of two hundred feet at the building setback line. Lot 20, with a width of180 feet does not comply with this standard. The applicant indicates that the common lotline between Lots 20 and 21 will be adjusted in order to allow Lot 20 to comply with thestandard.
Open Space Conservation
Apart from the proposed pad grading and street construction, a majority of the land underthis map will be left undisturbed. Much of this undisturbed area lies within protectedtributaries to the Alessandro Arroyo as defined in the City's grading ordinance. As such, itis m~ portantthat these open space areas be defined and protected in perpetuity. Theapplicant has agreed to set aside all ungraded portions of the map in an open spaceconservation easement.
With these areas set aside, there are t~ vo options available to maintain this land in its naturalstate. Staff believes it would be most preferable to dedicate these areas either in fee or withan open space easement to an appropriate non- profit conservation agencies which haveexpertise and experience in managingnatural areas, such as the Riverside Land Conservancy.In the event a suitable conservation organization cannot be found accept this property, it isrecommended that a Homeowners Association be formed and chargedwith maintenance andstewardslfip of these areas. In addition, staff would recommend that an open spacemanagement plan be developedto ensure that a maintenance program is developedfor the Ciiy PlanningCommissioa Dece nber 21 2000 4
TM 29606
Environmental Considerations
There are several important environmental issues associated with this project that are discussed in detail in the initial study, and these issues are summarized below.
Gnatcatcher Considerations
The biological studyfor the project indicated the presence of coastal sage scrub habitat alongthe easterly project limit, which serves as potential habitat for the federally endangeredCalifornia Gnatcatcher. Since no focused gnatcatcher survey was prepared, the site is presumed to be occupied. As such, the applicant will be required to prepare a HabitatConservation Plan ( HCP) and obtain an incidental take permit from the U. S. Fish andWildlife Service. The biological study included specific mitigation measures related to whenand how vegetation may be cleared, properly mitigation through off- site habitat conservation, proper site access and project area maintenance. These measures have been incorporated into the recorrm~ended conditions of approval for the project.
Wildlife Corridor
The central drainage feature ( behind Lot 7- 16 and between Lots 29-33) is an importantlinkage between approximatelyfourteen acres of open space preserved within TM 26109 tothe southeast and the main branch of the Alessandro Arroyo to the northwest ( See Exhibit5). The crossing of Chateau View Drive and related fill slopes will effectively create a barrier to animal movement along this corridor. Staff' believesit is important to maintain opportunities for movement alongthis corridor. As such, it is recommended that a functionalwildlife corridor be provided under Chateau View Drive, as determined by a qualifiedbiologist and approved by the Plamfing Department. Options for maintainingthe corridormay include the installation of one or more large culverts under the roadway, retention of a short natural span area under the roadway, or other alternative deemed appropriate by the biologist.
Neighborhood Compatibility Considerations
This map will accommodate a public street system and typical RC zoned subdivision of asize and configuration similar to what is found in the surroundingarea. With the conditions regardingthe establishment of open space areas and minimized grading, this map should be compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood and sensitive to the existingnatural features on- site.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Planning Commission:
APPROVE Subdivision Case TM 29606, subjectto the recommended conditions of approval and based on the following findings:
Cily PlanningCommission Decenber 21, 2000 g
TM 29606
Lot $ 8: LOt 38 has an ANS of 19. 85% and a width at the building line of about 110' 20' narrower than the minimum ' width at the building line imposed by the RC zone).
Lot 38 is narrow and deep, and is part of a 4-~ot cluster including lots 37- 40. Each lot in the cluster takes access directly from Century Hills Drive. Alternatively, lots 37- 40 could have been arranged around a cul- de-sac: However, the present configuration of narrow but deep lots was preferred because it provides for open space lot 91, adjacent to lots 37- 40 to the south. The addition of 20' at the building line would result in a practical difficulty. The design cunently aims to maximize the size of the open space lots proposed for conservation. To insist on strict compliance with the lot width requirement,~ would elevate lot width to a level of prominence which would potentially jeopardize the conservation of open space.
Lot 44: Lot 44 has an ANS of 22. 27% and a width at the building tine of about 50' 80' narrower than the minimum width requirement). Lot 44 is part of a 2- lot cluster, and shares a common boundary line with lot 43. Strict compliance with the lot width standard would require lot 44 to expand into a square or wide rectangular shape, similar to the shape of traditional subdivision lots. However, because the Alessandro Arroyo surrounds lot 44, such an expansion to the west would be prohibited by the Grading Ordinance, would reduce the open space area, and therefore would result in a practical difficulty.
Lot 49: Lot 49 has an ANS of 34. 57% and a width at the building line of about 36' 164' narrower than the minimurn width requirement of 200' for lots with an ANS of greater than 30%). Strict compliance with the lot width standard would require lot 49 to expand into the ~ traditional square shape commonly found in residential tract subdivisions. The expansion of lot 49 to the west would reduce the adjacent open space lot 88, and conflict with the location of the existing Riverside County Flood Control access road. Strict compliance with the lot width standard would result in practical difficulties, because ( i) the location of the Flood Control access road interferes with the abitity to expand the lot in the only available direction, to the west, and ( ii) the expansion of tot 49 to the west would reduce the open space in lot 88.
Lot 52: Lot 52 has an ANS of 21. 28% and a width at the building line of about 60' 70' narrower than the minimum width requirement). Stdct compliance with the lot width standard could be achieved by reducing the length of the private driveway to lot 52 and extending the private access road. This alternative would increase grading because a private 2- lane access road is twice as wide as the one- lane ddveway currently proposed.
This variance request provides for the reduction in grading that accompanies the flag lot type design.
Variance C - Land Locked Parcels
TM 31930 is proposed as a private community, with gates proposed atthe north end of Crest Haven Drive and at the east end of Century Hills Drive. The placement of gates at the entrances to TM 31930 caul; es the access roads to become private. Technically, TM 31930 creates landlocked lc,ts, because the zoning code defines a lot as having access to a public street. Because none of the lots in TM 31930 have direct access to a public street, each lot is technically landlocked. In actuality, none of the lots are landlocked because access to each lot is provided, and for this reason this variance request is sometimes referred to as a " technical" variance.
Lots 50 and 53
Lot 50 contains 3 knoll tops, and lot 53 contains one knoll top. The lots straddle the access road and form a cluster th at eliminates a front slope on lot 53 and an eastern slope on ~ ot 50.
Factual Support for Lots 43 / 44, 45 / 46, and 50 / 53: The presence of knoll tops is an exceptional circumstance in the surrounding neighborhood and amongst other RC zoned property. For example, TM 29606 ( see the map attached as Exhibit " A") ( the closest approved tract map to the subject property, located south of the Alessandro Arroyo), contains one knoll top that is the site of the only clustered lots. Of the 32 residential lots approved in TM 29606, only two ( lots 29 and 30) share a knoll top. TM 31852 ( see the map attached as Exhibit " B") contains 4 knoll tops (lots 1, 2, 4, and 13) out of 13 lots or 31. 1%). Tm 32042 contains 2 knoll tops (lots I and 7) out of 8 lots ( or 25%).
Lot 51
The proximity of Lot 51 ( i) to the west boundary of the underlying property, and ( ii) to the existing Riverside County Flood Control (" RCFC") access road, are exceptional circumstances which effect the size and shape of Lot 51 and do not apply generally to other property in the RC zone or iin the neighborhood. Although the east lot line for Lot 51 could be extended to the southeast to increase the size of the parcel, it would reduce the width of the adjacent open spac,~ corridor at the narrowest point.
Lots 50, 51 and 63
at 3. 93 acres in size. The remairdngeight lots have an ANS between 16. 3% and 25. 9% andmc ~, qtn ec to contain a~. least t~,,(, acres These lots range fi' om I ~° to 1. 83 acres.in size.
The applicant-prepared variance justification findings are attached as Exhibit 6. The applicant cites topographical and street aligmnent constraints, along ~vith improved mapdesign and open space retention and maintenance issues as justification for the requestedvariances. In reviewing the applicant's request, staff is generallysupportive of the requestedvariances. For eight of the nine lots, the applicant has demonstrated that they could complywith the lot size requirement by ac[ justingproperty lines. In most cases, adjustment of thelot lines to comply with the Code creates a series of awk~vard, irregularlyshapedlots, muchof which is within the open space area and not a usable part of the lot. As such, staff sees no benefit in redrawinglot lines to comply with the letter of the Code and would support lotsize variances to accor,~-~odatc a bet-ret project d~ signwith more logical lot cotffigurations.
The exception is Lot 28, which is approximately 1. 83 acres in size. In this case, minor adjustments between Lots 27 and 28 and minor modifications to adjoiningstreet alignmentswould provide sufficient lot area to provide the required 2 acres in a logical manner. Staffrecorrm~ends that the map be modified so that Lot 28 complies with the lot size requirements,and the applicant has agreed to make the necessary modifications.
Lot Width for Lot 20
The RC Zone requires that all lots with an ANS of thirty percent or greater also have a minimum lot width of two hundred feet at the building setback line. Lot 20, ~ith a width of180 feet does not comply with this standard. The applicant indicates that the cormmon lotline between Lots 20 and 21 xvill be adjusted in order to allow Lot 20 to comply with thestandard.
Open Space Conservation
Apart from the proposed pad grading and street construction, a majority of the land underthis map will be left undisturbed. Much of this undisturbed area lies within protectedtributaries to the Alessandro Arroyo as defined in the City's grading ordinance. As such, itis important that these open space areas be defined and protected in perpetuity. Theapplicant has agreed to set aside all ungraded portions of the map in an open spaceconservation easement.
With these areas set aside, there are two options available to maintain this land in its naturalstate. Staff believes it would be most preferable to dedicate these areas either in fee or withan open space easement to an appropriate non- profit conservation agencies which haveexpertise and experience in managing natural areas, such as the Riverside Land Conservancy.In the event a suitable conservation organization cannot be found accept this property, it isrecommended that a Homeowners Association be formed and chargedwith maintenance and stewardship of these areas. In addition, staff would recommend that an open spacemanagement plan be developedto eusure that a maintenance program is developedfor the
EXHIBIT A
Ci~ Planning Cmnmission December 21. 2000 ( 5 of 9) TIM 29606
Section V esource Conservation
sensitive speciesmay be required to mitigate the impa~ta of proposedhabitat changes. '
Poliey NR 2. 4 The City shall cooperate with the County, State and Federal governments to protect the Stephens' KangarooRat (SKR) by complying with the terms of the adopted short- term SKR l~ bitat Conservation Plan, including provisions for develop- ment regulations, mitigation fees, and the acquisition and operationof Sycamore Canyon Wilderness Park as an SKR
reserve. The City shall encourage land donations or the dedication of land in lieu of park fees for the acquisition of additional portions of Sycamore Canyonas part of the park.
Policy NR 2.5 The Cily should participate with tile County, State, and Federal Governments in developing and implementing both a long- term Habitat Conservation Plan for the Stephens' Kangaroo Rat and a county-wide multi- SpeciesHabitat
Conservation Plan.
Policy NR 2. 6
Policy NR 2. 7
The City shaJl endeavor w protect native plant communities in the General Plan Area, including the inland ~ age ~ ernh, riparian and vernal pool habitats.
The City should protect and enhance known wildlife migra- ory corridors and help create new corridors whenever
possible.
Policy NR 2.8 The City should establish program< to identify, map and monitor the habitat for sensitive species listed in Exhibit 8 Page III - 10), or for other species added to the State or Federal listings of rare, threatened or endangeredspecies, Recommendations for Implementation - Natural Resources ( NR) I- NR 1: Continue to refine regulations limiting the development of areas with unstable soils, steep terrain, floodplains, arroyos and other critical environmental and hazardous areas.
1- NR 2: Develop regulations estabhshing grading standards m ensure soil stability and to minimize negative aesthetic impacts,
I- NR 3: Modify the subdivision and zoning regulations to expand the use of d~ signreview and designguidelinesto regulate building heig~hl, building spacing, landscaping, grading and street alignment to retain ridgeline areas in ~eir natural state to the greatest extent possible, V- 22
GENERAL PLAN
EXHIBIT D ~
3 of 4)
City of Riverside
I- NR 4:
Section V Resource Cons' ervatloq
Require developmentswhich include properly identified as potentialhabitat for the rare or endangered species listed in Exhibit 8
proposed developmenton the affected rar~ or endangere~ s1~¢i~$ and to propose strategiesfor minimizing those effects.
I- NR 5: Continue active participation in Federal, State and local efforts to preserve rare, threatened and endangered species in the General Plan Area.
I- NR 6: Require site specific biological assessment and appropriate mitigationmeasures for all developments of property containing native plantcommunities and other potential habitats for sensitive species listed in Exhibit g (Page HI - 10).
1- NR 7: Implement a program of research and field work to identify and mapareas of habitat for sensitive species. Revise Exhibit 9 (Page III - 12) to reflect the results of this analysis. Periodically review and update this habitat information.
Energy
Adequate and affordable energy is critical to the overall quality of life and economic growth of the City of' Riverside. Energy sources are used for transportation, lighting,space heating and cooling and the operation of machinery and appli.anees. Energypolicies relate both to energy supply and to the amount and type of energy that Cityresidents and businesses consume. The City's ability to affect energy supply is limited primarily to electricity supplied by the Publio Utilities Department. The consumptionof energy can be regulatedeffectivelythrough vehicular trip reduction incentives ( such as mixed use zoning and increased densities) in areas where publictransportation is available, and through the establishment of energy- effioientconstruction requirements.
Because . ofthe importance of energy to the quality of life and economic health of the commumty, energy consumptionshould be managedin an imaginative and prudentfashion. Critical factors affectingthe supply and consumption of energy resources include the following:
the reliability of energy delivery, including electricity and natural gas; the affordability of energy, especially electricity;
City of Riverside
ensuringequity among all energy customers while accommodatingusers with special needs;
encouraging energy conservation and effective load management;
EXHIBIT D
4 of 4) V- 23
GENERAL pLAN