Loading...
R 3892 RESOLUTION NO. 3892 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. 01- 001 (OTHERWISE KNOWN AS TRACT 1998), PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 01-001, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT CASE NO. 01-002 LOCATED AT JAMES WAY AND LA CANADA WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande adopted Resolution No. 3740 on April 13, 2004 certifying the Revised Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for the project (Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Planned Unit Development 01- 001); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande held a duly noticed public hearings on May 3,2005, June 7, 2005, September 20,2005 and October 4, 2005 on the project, filed by Taos Holding Company/Castlerock Development, to subdivide a 26.9-acre property into twenty-one (21) residential lots and one (1) twenty-two (22) acre open space parcel and adopted Resolution No. 05-1977 recommending that the City Council deny the project, as proposed. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande held a duly noticed public hearing on November 22, 2005 and has reviewed and considered the information and public testimony presented at the public hearing, staff report, Addendum to the certified SEIR, and all other information and documents that are part ofthe public record for the project; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds, after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the following circumstances exist that prevent the City Council from making the findings required in order to approve the project: Tentative Tract Map Findings for denial: 1. The proposed tentative tract map is inconsistent with the goals, objectives, policies, plans, programs, intent and requirements of the Arroyo Grande General Plan (1990) in that development and improvements are proposed adjacent to riparian and other biologically sensitive habitats; specifically over half of the proposed lots intrude into the required 50 foot riparian buffer area, some in close proximity to the top of the creek bank for the east fork of Meadow Creek, which does not adequately mitigate direct and cumulative impacts to biological resources specified in the certified SEIR, and which consequently is contrary to the requirements set forth in the implementation measures for Biological Resources in the Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 5.2, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 2. The site, as shown on the tentative tract map, is not physically suitable for the type and proposed density because the development is not clustered in such a way that allows for all necessary easements, roadways, parking, and improvements without a substantial deviation from requirements set forth in the SEIR; and failure to incorporate to the fullest extent feasible, adequate mitigation measures, RESOLUTION NO. 3892 PAGE 2 specifically, development is proposed directly upon areas identified as habitat for the Federally~listed Endangered and State-listed Rare plant species Pismo c1arkia, . and furthermore, additional development is proposed within required setbacks from identified Pismo clarkia habitat; development is also proposed upon identified riparian and wetland habitat in addition to impacting areas within the associated required setback areas; and proposed development does not avoid slopes greater than 20%. which without mitigation, remain significant impacts that cause damage to and degradation of documented and important biological resources associated with the East Fork of Meadow Creek and Pismo c1arkia and which are integral to maintain public health and welfare. 3. The design of the tentative tract map and/or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial damage to the natural environment, including fish, wildlife or their habitat, the potential impacts have not been adequately mitigated to the extent feasible and a Statement of Overriding Considerations can not be made for all remaining significant impacts; specifically, the resulting impacts to biological resources are not reduced to a level that is considered less than significant due to the proposed intensity of development and improvements (including areas in the vicinity of proposed lots 9, 20 and 21 that impact identified wetlands, in the vicinity of proposed lots 3, 8, 18 and 19 impacting the riparian corridor, in the vicinity the westerly portion of proposed Blossom Valley Road and the vicinity of proposed lots 18, 19 and 20 that are within and adjacent to identified Pismo clarki a habitat); particularly, a Statement of Overriding Considerations can not be made to override impacts to Pismo clarkia, for which, according to expert testimony provided during the public hearings by both the City's consultant and the applicant's biological consultant, scientific evidence does not exist for proven mitigation measures associated with the protection of the plant species, except for avoidance of the identified unique Pismo clarkia habitat, and which is not achieved by the proposed project. Additionally, a substantial number of oak trees are impacted and the project does not incorporate adequate measures such as road design features or locating development or infrastructure that would reduce impacts to oak trees (shown to be approximately one hundred and seventy impacted trees total), particularly in the vicinity of the northernmost . section of Blossom Valley Road and in the vicinity of proposed lots 3 and 17. Furthermore, the project's provisions for the essential long,term protection of the environment through the requirements of, and reliance upon, a Homeowners Association, even with additional enforcement provisions, or maintenance district, are speculative and have not been demonstrated to be adequate. Planned Unit Development Findings 1. The proposed planned unit development is not consistent with the goals, objectives, policies. plans, programs, intent and requirements of the Arroyo Grande General Plan (1990) in that development and improvements are proposed upon or immediately adjacent to riparian and other biologically sensitive habitats RESOLUTION NO. 3892 PAGE 3 and are therefore contrary to the requirements set forth'in the implementation measures for Biological Resources in the Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 5.2, attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 2. That the site for the proposed development is not adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, all yards, open spaces, setbacks, walls and fences, parking area, loading areas, roadways, landscaping, and other features required for the reasons as described in the above findings for the Tentative Tract Map. 3. That the improvements required, and the manner of development, does not adequately address all natural and manmade hazards associated with the proposed development and the project site, including, but not limited to slope hazards. Specifically, impacts to geologic resources due are not reduced to a level that is considered less than significant due to the proposed development and improvements in the vicinity of lot 17 that impact slopes greater that 20%. Required CEQA Findings: The required CEQA Findings cannot be made based on the following: 1. Changes or alterations have not been incorporated into the projects which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the FSEIR and Addendum; specifically, impacts B-2, B-3, B-4, G-4 and the cumulative impact to biological resources; 2. The specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the proposed project, including the project enhancements do not outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande denies without prejudice, Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Planned Unit Development Case No. 01-001 and Lot Line Adjustment 01-002, as presented to the City Council on November 22, 2005 and December 13, 2005 and as shown in Exhibits A-E, on file in the Administrative Services Department and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based on the above referenced findings. On motion of Council Member Guthrie, seconded by Council Member Arnold, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Council Members Guthrie, Arnold. Dickens. and Mayor Ferrara None Council Member Costello the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 13th day of December, 2005. RESOLUTION NO. 3B't 2.. PAGE 4 , MAYOR TONY F ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ~. .. .... /' - ,. - ','~'-" ' ...."..~.../ STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: .. ~ ; ,. /0, '/L.-- TIMO HY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY EXHIBIT A ~ 5.2 Ensure that ~II development. including roads. proposed adjacent to riparian and other biologically sensitive habitats avoid signiiicant impacts to such areas. Implementacion Accions: a. Require that new development proposed in such locations be designed co: + minimize or eliminate the pocential for unauthorized encry into che sensitive area; + deace buffer areas adjacent Co the sensitive area, incorporacing the most passive uses of che adjacent properry; + Protect the visual seclusion of forage areas from road inrrusion by providing vegetative buffering;' . + Provide wildlife movement linkages to water sources; + Provide vegetation that can be used by wildfife for cover along roadsides; and + Avoid intrusion of night lighting into the sensitive area. b. If, following a report by a qualified biologist, it is determined that a subdivision design and relared improvemenrs are likely to cause significant adverse damage to biotic resources, exercise authority under the provisions of Government Code Section 66474 and deny the project. 5.3 Preserve existing mature ((ees and vegetation. Implementation Actions:. a. Within ruraf and hillside residential areas, permit only such natural. vegetation to be removed as is necessary to locate homesites and conscruct access roads. b. Require thar healthy marure Crees be preserved and prorected from curring or removal as sec fonh in the City's revised tree ordinance. c. Require that merure trees to be preserved within a developrrienc be protected by enclosing chem wiChin an appropriate construction barrier, such as chain link lencing or OCher means acceptable to the City, prior co the issuance of any grading permit or building permit, and prior to the commencemenr of work. d. Require that the barriers referenced in Item 'd' above are. co remain in place during all phases of conscruction and may not be removed withour the consenr of the City. e. Prohfbit subsrantia/ disruprlon or removal of the srructural or absorpcive roors of mature crees being preserved. f. Prohibit the placemenr of fill macerial wichin che dripiine of mature trees being preserved wichour the approval of a qualified arborisr or landscepe archirecr and consenr of the City. ) g. Prohibit subsranrial comoacrion of che soil within Che drip line of mature crees being preserved. RESOLUTION NO. 3892 OFFICIAL CERTIFICATION I, KELLY WETMORE, City Clerk of the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that Resolution No. 3892 is a true, full, and correct copy of said Resolution passed . and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande on the 13th day of December 2005. WITNESS my hand and the Seal of the City of Arroyo Grande affixed this 14th day of December 2005.