SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

1. "No Homes are permitted within the Open Space area (page 22)" —As you can clearly see in the site plan below (mustard color is the limitation of the Designated Development Area by the Specific Plan), Parcel 2 is located almost exclusively in area designated as Open Space. 2. "Open Space surrounding the Hillside Residential is to be permanently preserved", and that "land use standards are to be applied without variance." 3. "In Hillside Residential Areas, all homes sites must be located within the designated development areas as generally depicted on the land use plan. Lot lines may extend into land designated as Open Space, but primary residential buildings and residential accessory structures may only be sited within the designated development areas." (page 25) Surely moving a home completely outside of the Designated Development Area as depicted in the Specific Plan, and onto a hilltop designated as Open Space violates both the letter and spirit of the Specific Plan?? This significant variation must exceed any `wiggle room' the staff has on siting the property?? In an October 2006 memo to the Planning Commission, Wayne Rasmussen, former Principal Planner and project planner for the Specific Plan stated that "due to the environmental constraints in the Hillside Residential areas, the house locations were meant to be fairly precise as represented by the "blob." Yet, despite info to the contrary as highlighted above, Staff and the developer have continued to argue a developer-friendly approach that the "land use plans are not usually meant to be precise, but can be flexible." Staff has pointed to a recent GIS aerial overlay to claim that the Specific Plan was not accurate due to the technology of the time. However, in the case of the Berlogar development, the Designated Development Area is (i) anchored by fence lines and property lines as to give a better reference point, (ii) in a flatter area of the hillside that looks conducive to development, (iii) in an area that can avoid disruption of heritage oaks, and (iv) covers an area large enough to support the development as contemplated in the Specific Plan. Moving the project to almost entirely outside the Designated Development Area, to a hilltop, is an overreach and exceeds any reasonable discretion the Staff may have to compensate for 'margin of error' due to the technology available at the time the Specific Plan. Heritage Oak Trees - We support preservation of the heritage oak trees. Staff and developer have created a `false choice' between the preservation of heritage oak trees and the approval of the proposed Berlogar development. We think a compromise can be reached for a more modest development that conforms more to the development area, preserves heritage oak trees, and does not impose as much upon existing homeowners. In addition, the Winding Oaks road development has planted what appears to be well over 100 new oak trees/box trees. We support mature oak trees and want to see significant and mature planting of trees and other visual mitigations (on site and/or HOA property) ahead of the building construction. Additionally, the proposed location of Parcel 2 is accompanied by a new access road cut into steep hillside that requires a retaining wall of combined height of up to 11 feet that will now directly front the existing homes. We are concerned about the aesthetics and visual mitigation of the wall and traffic (we want it to be natural looking as opposed to cinder blocks). Furthermore, the proposed development allows for a 40' building height, while per the Specific Plan, the height is to be limited to 30'. And the allowance for up to 10,000 sq ft home also seems entirely excessive. Finally, as stated in the letter from Stuart Flashman (HOA attorney), under CEQA, the Vineyard Avenue Corridor Specific Plan incorporates an EIR. Therefore, the provisions of the Specific Plan must be followed especially closely to avoid improperly violating measures identified within the EIR. 2