Laserfiche WebLink
L Comments Relating to Possible Additional Master Plan and Specific Plan <br /> 111 Amendments. <br /> 1. Height of Walls. Both the Master Plan (Section 4.2.7, Policy(e))and the Specific Plan III <br /> document(Section 4.2.8.1) specify that all walls (not just community walls and sound walls) are <br /> not to exceed seven feet in height, not including berming. However, the Mills Associates 10 <br /> Environmental Checklist notes that subdivision plans for Altamont Heights call for extensive <br /> grading that.will require retaining walls ranging in height from 8'10"to 16 feet along the northern <br /> property line. The retaining wall along the northern property line will be a crib wall that would be <br /> visible to Grant Line Village residents to the north/northwest of the project site. <br /> If the applicant wants to develop the subject property with said retaining walls as proposed, both <br /> a Master Plan amendment and a Specific Plan amendment would be needed to exempt retaining <br /> walls from the seven foot height limitation for walls. <br /> 2. Landscape Buffer. The Specific Plan III document requires that a landscape buffer at least 8 <br /> feet wide and an agricultural fence shall be provided on properties adjacent to Grant tine Village <br /> (Specific Plan Ili, Implementation Measures 3.2.3.3 (c)and (e)). Although project plans show the <br /> location of the agricultural fence adjacent to Grant Line Village, they do not include a landscaped <br /> buffer as required by the implementation measure. As a result, CDD has added a condition <br /> (COA##8)to affirm the Specific.Plan h implementation measure. <br /> If the applicant wants to develop the subject property without a landscape buffer as proposed, a <br /> Specific Plan amendment would be needed to remove that requirement. <br /> 3. Agricultural Setback. The Specific Plan III document requires a minimum 40-foot setback <br /> from agricultural operations for proposed residential development (i.e., dwellings) if said <br /> agricultural operations are expected to continue [Specific Plan III, Implementation Measure <br /> 3.2.4.3 (d)]. This may have an impact on the residential development of lots 1 and 12. <br /> If the applicant determines that residential development of lots 1 and 12 would be negatively <br /> affected by this requirement and if the applicant wants to develop the subject property as <br /> proposed, a Specific Plan amendment would be needed to remove or change that requirement. <br /> 4. Neighborhood Entry. Both the Master Plan and the Specific Plan ill document require a <br /> neighborhood entry at the intersection of F Street and Delta College (Master Plan, Figure 4.18— <br /> Community Entries Location Plan; Specific Plan III, Figure 4-19—Entries Location Plan). <br /> If the applicant wants to develop the subject property without the Neighborhood Entry as <br /> proposed, a Master Plan amendment and a Specific Plan amendment would be needed to <br /> remove the Neighborhood Entry symbol. <br /> 11. Comments Relating to the Environmental Review/Processing Schedule. <br /> CDD is in the process of reviewing the environmental discussion (Environmental Checklist) <br /> prepared by Mills Associates for the project. CDD's determination of whether or not the proposed <br /> project presents substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the SPIII EIR <br /> was certified will affect the timing for processing the Altamont Heights Project. If the determination <br /> is that there are no impacts associated with the proposed project that were not previously <br /> assessed in the SPIII EIR and that there is no new available information which was not known at <br /> the time the SPIII EIR was certified, no additional environmental documentation would be a <br /> required and the proposed November 2nd PC hearing date could be met. On the other hand, if <br /> CDD determines that additional mitigation measures are needed for the project, an Initial Study f <br /> and either a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration would be required. This <br /> would have an adverse affect on the processing schedule, since additional time would be needed <br /> to accommodate the circulation/review of the Initial Study and Negative Declaration or Mitigated <br /> Negative Declaration. The following recommended conditions may change depending on the <br /> resolution of the above issues. <br /> 2 <br />