SU0006254 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The proposed project would provide lots of various sizes, ranging from less than 6,000 square feet to 13,500 square feet. These lots would presumably be developed with homes for above moderate households at various price points. However, six of these lots would be developed with small (700 square feet or Igss)second unit dwellings that could be rented or leased to moderate or low income households. Thus, the project would further Master Plan and Specific Plan III policies concerning housing diversity and the provision of affordable housing for households at every income level. — PLEP. The Public Land Equity Program (PLEP)ordinance requires the owner of each proposed — subdivision in Mountain House to dedicate 21.2 percent of the land area of said subdivision to the applicable public agency in satisfaction of that subdivision's fair-share contribution for ("qualifying") public lands in Mountain House. (Qualifying public lands are public lands shown on the Mountain _ House Master Plan and include school sites, parks, some open space lands, Arterial roads, and some Collector streets.)For the purposes of the Public Land Equity Program (PLEP), the public land dedication requirement for the project is 2.7 acres(21.2% X 12.72 acres in the project) whereas the actual amount of qualifying public land shown by the Master Plan for the project is — zero. The resulting "Public Land Deficit" is, therefore, 2.7 acres. As a result, the applicant will need to correct this deficit using one or more of the methods specified by the PLEP ordinance. Proposed Units versus Planned Units Approval of the subdivision would result in the development of 53 single-family, Low Density Residential (R-L)units,whereas the number specified by Specific Plan III for the project site is 48. — Under Specific Plan III (Implementation Measure 3.2.5.4(a)),this 5 unit increase is permissible. Golden State Investments LP has not utilized 8 Medium-High Density Residential (R-MH)units in the recently approved Regents Gate subdivision to which it was otherwise entitled by Specific Plan III. The wastewater that would have been generated by these R-MH units is equivalent to that generated by 5 R-L units. As required by Specific Plan III, Golden State Investments LP has assigned this residential-based wastewater allocation to the project applicant, Golden State Investments II LP, which is a different owner,via an Assignment Agreement. (See Appendix 5) Continued Use of Private Road The Community Development Department(CDD) has received two letters from the attorney representing Ricardo Esquivel (see Appendix 6), who is the property owner immediately west of the Altamont Heights Project site. The attorney, Richard G. Hyppa, states that his client is concerned that approval of the project would adversely affect his continued use of the 30-foot — wide easement that he uses as a private road for access to and egress from his property. While the Tentative Map shows that the lot lines for parcels 46, 47, 50, and 52 extend to the middle of this easement, no development within the easement would be allowed.As noted in the project description of the staff report, the agricultural fence would be constructed along the eastern boundary of the 30-foot wide right-of-way access easement,thereby allowing unimpeded use of the private road. Loss of Riparian Habitat/Wetland Developers of projects in the Specific Plan III area are required to obtain the services of a biologist to delineate potential waters of the United States at the project sites, including any wetlands, — ponds, irrigation canals, and drainage courses (SPIER Mitigation Measure 4.10-10). If such waters exist and would be filled in, authorization for the fill must be secured from the United States Army Corps of Engineers ("Corps of Engineers")via the Section 404 permitting process. — A jurisdictional wetland delineation study prepared by EIP Associates (Draft Wetland Delineation 16