01 - Laserfiche WebLink

22. Public Hearing: PUD-84, Frank Berlogar— Consider introduction of an Ordinance approving the PUD Development Plan to subdivide an approximately 37.4-acre site located at 88 Silver Oaks Court into three single-family residential lots: two lots measuring approximately 1.2 acres and 1.9 acres for custom homes; and one lot measuring approximately 34.3 acres for the existing dwelling and accessory structures Planning Manager Stern presented the staff report, stating that the applicant is requesting a PUD approval to subdivide an approximately 37.4 acre site located at 88 Silver Oaks Court,into three single- family residences. The site, which is identified as Lot 22 in the Vineyard Area Corridor Specific Plan, extends south from Silver Oaks Court. It contains a private driveway running north-south that leads to the existing Berlogar residences, an ephemeral creek area and steep slopes. The portion of the site being proposed for subdivision also contains approximately 25 mature oaks trees, most of which are Blue Oak. Ms. Stem reviewed the Specific Plan's Land Use Plan as it relates to the subject site and surrounding area She called particular attention to several tan colored "blobs" denoting hillside development areas, one of which contains a "3" to indicate that the Specific Plan envisioned planning for three units on this site Mr. Berlogar is requesting a subdivision into only two units there, with the remainder of the parcel being retained as his personal home and caretaker unit. She reviewed the site and lots as proposed by the applicant. Lot 1, comprised of 1.2 acres, would be accessed by a private road off of Silver Oaks Court that would ultimately wrap around to end at Lot 2. Lot 1 is a split level lot, with the home extending down the hillside consistent with its slope. Lot 2 is currently proposed as a flat pad lot. Lot 3 again contains the remainder of the parcel which includes the existing residence and caretaker unit. As a result of feedback from both the neighbors and a workshop with the Planning Commission, the applicant has looked at options to lower the elevation of Lot 2 in order to address some of the visual and privacy concerns of the adjacent Silver Oaks neighborhood. Alternative 1 lowers the pad elevation of Lot 2 from the 515 feet proposed to 510 feet. Alternative 2 goes even further and lowers the pad elevation to 500 feet. Neither alternative presents any change to Lot 1. During its consideration of the project, the majority of the Planning Commission recommended Alternative 1 although there were two members who would have preferred Alternative 2. Ms. Stern presented a comparison between the proposal and each alternative, primarily focusing on the pad elevation of Lot 2. As might be expected, lowering the pad does create the need for additional grading and off-haul of dirt. Alternative 1 increases this slightly from 6,10.0 cubic yards of off-haul needed under the original proposal; however Alternative 2 essentially doubles this 12,000 cubic yards of dirt. She also showed a depiction of the distance between Lot 2 and the rear of Lots 7 and 9 in the Silver Oaks Court development, noting that it varies some between Alternatives 1 and 2 due to changes in the shape of the pad and building envelope. Staff has and continues to recommend.Altemative 1 as the preferred alternative, though recognizes that the applicant is willing to accept to Alternative 2 if that is the Council's preference. Both homes would be subject to design guidelines, similar to those of the Silver Oaks Estates, rather than absolute definitions of their final design. Staff and the Planning Commission received a number of comments from Silver Oaks neighbors, most of which related to concerns over privacy, noise and visual impacts. Ms. Stem stated that home nearest to Silver Oaks neighbors would be located at least 220 feet from the rear property line of lots on Silver Oaks Court. She also noted that staff and the applicant have developed a number of conditions of approval, outlined in the memo on the Council dais, that require landscaping measures to mitigate the appearance of both road and retaining wall. Staff believes that the additional noise generated by the two new homes will be fairly minimal. City Council Minutes Page 6 of 15 April 15,2014