HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-03-29 Packet - Joint Zoning AMENDED AGENDA (3/24/06)
CTTY OF UKZAH
CZTY COUNCTL/PLANNZNG COMMTSSTON
3OZNT I~IEETZNG/PUBLZC WORKSHOP AGENDA
Hillside Zoning Regulation Revisions
UKIAH VALLEY CONFERENCE CENTER
200 School Street
Ukiah, CA 95482
Wednesday, t4arch 29, 2006
5:30- 7:30 p.m.
:1,. CALL TO ORDER
a. City Council- Roll Call
b. Planning Commission - Roll Call
2. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in,
you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you
may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and
not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience
comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda.
3. NEW BUSINESS
a. Discussion and direction - Hillside Zoning Regulations
4. CLOSED SESSION
a. Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Gov't Code Section 54957)
Title: City Manager
5. AD3OURNt4ENT
! hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of the City of Ukiah City Hall, located at 300
Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting set forth on this agenda.
Dated this 24 day of March, 2006.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
The City of Ukiah complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with
disabilities upon request.
CITY OF UKIAH
CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION
.1OINT MEETING/PUBLIC WORKSHOP AGENDA
Hillside Zoning Regulation Revisions
UKZAH VALLEY CONFERENCE CENTER
200 School Street
Ukiah, CA 95482
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
5:30- 7:30 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
a. City Council- Roll Call
b. Planning Commission - Roll Call
2. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA t'TEM~C
The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in,
you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you
may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and
not more-than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience
comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda.
3. NEW BUSINESS
a. Discussion and direction - Hillside Zoning Regulations
4. AD.1OURNMENT
! hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of the City of Ukiah City Hall, located at 300
Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting set forth on this agenda.
Dated this 15 day of March, 2006.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
TO:
City Council and Planning Commission
FROM:
Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development
DATE: March 14, 2006
SUB3ECT: City Council/Planning Commission Public Workshop - Hillside Regulations
Summary: At the direction of the City Council, Staff has arranged a joint city Council/Planning
Commission public Workshop to discuss the Hillside Regulations Revision project. The Workshop
has been schedule for 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, March 29, 2006 at the Ukiah Valley
Conference Center. The purpose of the Council/Commission public workshop is to have both
bodies discuss the existing and draft revised regulations, hear from the interested public, and
provide direction to Staff in terms of how to proceed. Staff has publicized the workshop event with
a display advertisement in the Ukiah Daily .lournal, and direct notice mailing and emailing to
interested parties and media sources.
Enclosed, please find the following background materials:
1. Existing hillside zoning regulations
2. September 17, 2003 City Council workshop Agenda Summary Report
3. Planning Commission recommended revised ordinance
4. September 17, 2003 City Council workshop minutes
5. 2001 Constraints Analysis Report prepared by Leonard Charles and Associates
Recommendation: Review the enclosed material, conduct a public workshop to discuss the
hillside development regulations, and provide direction to Staff.
Background: In September 2003, the City Council conducted a public hearing to consider Planning
Commission recommended revisions to the hillside zoning regulations. The Commission had
conducted four public workshops and four public hearings and was recommending a more
comprehensive set of regulations that what was adopted in 1982.
EXISTING HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
Attachment
9135: ItlLLSIDE LOT SIZE OR-II DISTRICTS:
A Hillside Lot Size (-I-t) District may be combined with any district or portion of a district
defined in this Chapter. The Hillside Lot Size (-H) Districts may be of different designations as
indicated by a numerical suffix. The regulations contained in this Article, and the regulations
governing any district which is combined with a Hillside Lot Size (-t-t) District where not
inconsistent with the regulations set forth in this Article, shall apply in ttillside Lot Size (-H)
Districts. Thc purpose of this Section is to implement the Hillside designation of the General
Plan and provide site standards to promote fire and geologic safety, and aesthetic qualities. The
intent of this District is to:
A. Encourage concentration of dwellings and other structures by clustering and/or high rise to
help save larger areas of open space and preserve the natural terrain;
B.
Encourage the planning, design, and development of building sites in such a fashion as to
provide the maximum in safety and human enjoyment while adapting development to, and
taking advantage of, the best use of the natural terrain;
C. Prohibit, insofar as is feasible and reasonable, padding or filling of building sites in the
hillside areas:
D. Ensure underground installation of utility wires and television lines;
E. Preserve outstanding natural physical features, such as the highest crest of a hill, natural rock
outcroppings, major tree belts, crc;
F. Minimize grading and cut and fill operations consistent with the retention of the natural
character of hill areas;
G. Minimize thc water runoff and soil erosion problems incurred in adjustment of thc tcri'ail~ to
meet on-site and off-site development needs;
It.
Achieve land use densities that arc in keeping with tile General Plan; densities v,,'ill decrease
as tt~c slope of the terrain increases in order to retain tile significant natural feature of the hill
areas. (Ord. 793, §2, adopted 1982)
9136: YARD AND BUILDING SITE REQUIREMENTS IN DESIGNATED
-H DISTRICTS:
The following yard and building site requirements shall replace those in any district with which
any -H District is combined:
Combining Building
District Site Area Lot
Combination (Sq. Ft.) Width
-H-1 8,000 65'
-H-2 10,000 75'
-H-3 15,000
-}t-4 1 Acre
(Ord. 793, {}2, adopted 1982)
Minimum Yards Required:
Front Side Rear
25' 6' 25'
30' One 6' 30'
One 14'
100' 35' 15' 35'
125' 35' 15' 35'
91372 FRONT SETBACK LINES:
In Hillside Lot Size (-H) Districts, no building construction shall be permitted or allowed at any
distance closer to the street right-of-way line along any adjacent street than the distances set forth
in {}9136 for minimum front yards in the particular designated -H District. Comer lots shall be
considered as having a front setback on both adjacent street frontages. (Ord. 793, {}2, adopted
1982)
91382 EXCEPTIONS TO FRONT SETBACK LINES:
The exceptions to the front setback requirement set forth in {}{}9020, 9035 and 9050 shall not
apply in-H Districts. (Ord. 793, {}2, adopted 1982)
91392 HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
Any parcel of land or subdivision having an average ground gradient across any portion of the
property in excess of fifteen percent (15%) shall require a use permit for development. Specific
criteria for density, circulation and lot requirements shall be determined on an individual basis
utilizing geologic and soils reports, vegetation surveys and aesthetic evaluation. Minimum lot
size in this zone shall be ten thousand (10,000) square feet.
A. Minimum Site and Development Standards:
Bo
1. Lot size, retention of land in natural state based upon average slope.
Average Parcel Minimum Percentage of Property
Slope in % Lot Size Retained in Natural State
15-20 10.000 square feet 50
21-25 20,000 square feet 55
26-30 1 acre 80
31-50 5 acres 95
Over 51 10 acres 100
2. Setbacks' Minimum thirty feet (30') from all property lines, and thirty feet (30') from
ridge top or toe of slope for gradient in excess of fifteen percent (15%).
3. Disclosure' Property purchase/sale transaction shall include full disclosure of fact that
property is within fire hazard area.
4. Building Material' No combustible roof material as determined by the Fire Marshal and
the Building Official shall be used on buildings in this zone.
5. Water Supply and Fire Hydrants: The following shall be required:
a. Slopes of twenty percent and less' Two (2) hours supply with fire flow capability of
seven hundred fifty (750) gallons per minute at twenty (20) p.s.i. Fire hydrants maximum
three hundred thirty feet (330') apart with six inch (6") main line.
b. Slopes in excess of twenty percent: Two (2) hour supply with fire flow capability of
five hundred (500) gallons per minute at twenty (20) p.s.i. Fire hydrants maximum six
hundred sixty feet (660') apart with six inch (6") main line.
6. Subdivisions: In subdivision developments with full width City streets, proposed fire
breaks or other separations from wildland areas may have other requirements based upon
specific design.
Use Permit Procedure: Prior to any construction or grading in this district, a use permit shall
be approved by the Planning Commission. The application form and process shall be the
same as that described in §§9225-9239.
Additional information or data may be required as determined necessary by the Director of
Planning. The following reports shall be required with each application.
C. Soil Reports:
1. A soils engineering report shall include data regarding the nature, distribution and strength
of existing soils, conclusions and recommendations for grading procedures, design criteria
for corrective measures and opinions and recommendations covering the adequacy of sites to
be developed.
2. The investigation and subsequent report shall be completed by a professional engineer
registered in the State of California, and experienced and knowledgeable in the practice of
soils mechanics.
3. Recommendations included in the report and approved by the engineer shall be
incorporated into the design plan or specifications.
4. Any area which presents one or more of the following limiting factors shall not be
subjected to development unless the engineer can demonstrate conclusively to the
Commission that these limitations can be overcome in such a manner as to prevent hazard to
life, hazard to property, adverse effects on the safety, use or stability ora public way or
drainage channel and adverse impact on the natural environment.
a. Water table within six feet (6') of the surface at any time of the year.
b. Soils with a high shrink-swell potential.
c. Soils with a unified classification of unstable soil types.
D. Geology Reports:
1. A geology report shall include a description of the geology of the site, conclusions and
recommendations regarding the effect of geologic conditions on the proposed development,
and opinions and recommendations covering the adequacy of sites to be developed.
2. The investigation and subsequent report shall be completed by a professional geologist
registered in the State of Calitbrnia and experienced and knowledgeable in the practice of
engineering geology.
3. Any area which the investigation indicates has geological hazards shall not be subjected to
development unless the geologist can demonstrate conclusively to the Commission that
these hazards can be overcome in such a manner as to prevent hazard to life or limb, hazard
to property, adverse effects on the safety, use or stability of a public way or drainage
channel, and adverse impact on the natural environment.
E. Subsurface Investigations: For both soil and geologic reports, subsurface investigation simll
F.
be performed throughout the area to sufficiently describe the existing conditions.
In particular, subsurface investigations shall be conducted where stability will be lessened by
proposed grading or filli.ng or where any of the following conditions are discovered or
proposed:
1. Fault zones, where past land movement is evidenced by the presence of a fault gorge;
2. Contact zones between two (2) or more geologic formations;
3. Zones of trapped water or high water table;
4. Bodies of intrusive materials;
5. Historic landslides or where the topography is indicative of prehistoric landslides;
6. Adversely sloped bedding plains, short range folding, overturned folds and other geologic
formations of similar importance;
7. Locations where a fill slope is to be placed above a cut slope;
8. Proposed cuts exceeding twenty feet (20') in height, unless in extremely competent rock;
9. Locations of proposed fills exceeding twenty feet (20') in height;
10. Where side hill fills are to be placed on existing slopes steeper than sixteen percent
(16%);
11. Wherever groundwater from either the grading project or adjoining properties is likely to
substantially reduce the subsurface stability.
Hydrology Report:
1. A hydrology report shall include a description of the hydrology of the site. conclusions
and recommendations regarding the effect of hydrologic conditions on the proposed
development, and opinions and recommendations covering the adequacy of sites to be
developed.
2. The investigation and subsequent report shall be completed by a qualified registered
professional, experienced and knowledgeable in the science of hydrology and in the
techniques of hydrologic investigation.
3. Any area which the investigation indicates has hydrological hazards shall not be subject to
development unless the professional can demonstrate conclusively to the Commission that
these hazards can be overcome in such a manner as to prevent hazard to life or limb, hazard
to property, adverse effects on the safety, use or stability of a public way or drainage
channel, and adverse impact on the natural environment.
4. Flood frequency curves shall be provided for the area proposed for development.
G. Vegetation Report:
H.
1. A vegetation report shall include a description of the vegetation environment of the site
(species, height, size, general condition, location), conclusions and recommendations
regarding the effect of proposed development on the site's vegetation, and opinions and
recommendations covering the adequacy of sites to be developed.
2. The investigation and subsequent report shall be completed by a qualified registered
professional, experienced and knowledgeable in the science of botany and in the techniques
of vegetation investigation.
3. Any area which the investigation indicates has rare or endangered flora species shall not
be subjected to development unless the professional can demonstrate conclusively to the
Commission that these can be mitigated.
Structure Elevations: Views of all sides of proposed structures and perspectives of the
proposed development from two (2) different angles.
Grading Plan: The grading plan shall include information concerning the existing physical
characteristics of the area as well as data on anticipated changes as a result of the grading
operation. It will also include a description of the grading process itself which will note
times and exact location of proposed earth-moving activities. The plan shall include:
1. An accurate plot plan showing buildings, roads, utilities or other improvements within the
area and adjacent thereto.
2. A map drawn to a scale approved by the Planning Department showing accurate contours
at two foot (2') intervals of the topography of the property and the area adjacent within
fifteen feet (15'). Elevations to be based on USGS data.
3. Cross-section showing both the original and proposed ground surfaces, with grades,
slopes and elevation noted.
4. Detailed plans of all drainage devices, walls, cribbing, dams or other protective devices to
be constructed in connection or as part of the proposed work.
5. A map showing the drainage area and estimated runoff of the area served by any drains
and proposed methods of runoff disposal.
6. A soil stabilization report including final ground cover, landscaping and erosion control
measures to prevent soil loss when the grading is in process.
7. A description of equipment and methods to be employed in processing and disposing of
soil and other material that is removed from the grading site, including the location of
disposal sites.
8. A schedule showing when each stage of the project will be completed, including
estimated starting and completion dates, hours of operation and days of week of operation.
9. Specifications controlling construction methods and materials in construction of the work,
including:
a. Provisions for control of grading operations within the construction area and on public
roads.
b. Safety precautions to be observed and facilities to be provided.
c. Compliance with laws and local regulations.
d. Control of dust.
e. Other related matters. (Ord. 793, §2, adopted 1982)
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
September 17, 2003
City Council Workshop ASR
AGENDA
SUMMARY
ITEM NO.
DATE: September 17, 2003
Atlochment # ~
REPORT
SUBJECT: CONDUCT PUBLIC WORKSHOP REGARDING DRAFT REVISED
HILLSIDE ZONING REGULATIONS
SUMMARY: At the direction of the City Council, the Planning Commission conducted four
public workshops and four public hearings to prepare new hillside zoning regulations. The
workshops and public hearings were well attended by hillside property owners and
interested citizens, who contributed to the creation of the draft regulations. On July 23,
2003, the Commission concluded its discussions, and formalized a recommended
ordinance to the City Council for consideration. The purpose of this agenda item is to
introduce the Planning Commission's recommended Ordinance to the City Council, and for
the Council to conduct a workshop with Staff, the affected property owners, and the
general public. Staff is also seeking guidance on a number of major topics, which once
resolved, will allow Staff to finalize the "project" and prepare the required environmental
document.
(continued on page 2)
RECOMMENDATION: Receive presentation and conduct a public workshop to discuss
the draft revisions to the hillside zoning regulations, and provide direction to Staff.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL ACTIONS: Do not conduct the public workshop and provide
direction to staff.
Citizen Advised: Public notice provided by mail and publication in the Ukiah Daily Journal.
Requested by: Planning Commission
Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development
Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and David Rapport, City Attorney
Attachments:
1. Draft revised hillside regulations (previously distributed to City Council)
2. Planning Commission minutes of all workshops and public hearings
3. Illustration of the South Helen Avenue parcels
4. Illustration of the Upper and Lower hillside areas
5. General Plan direction concerning the hillside regulations
APPROVED:
Candace Horsley, City Manager
City Council Workshop No. 1
Hillside Zoning Regulations - Page
BACKGROUND: It is estimated that nearly 20% of the City of Ukiah consists of land with a
slope of 15% or greater. All of this land is situated along the City's western flank from Orrs
Creek on the north to Doolin Creek on the south. While the majority of these western hills are
burdened with excessively steep slopes, some areas consist of more gentle slopes where
single family residential development is more feasible. Because hillsides have their own special
character and such factors as topography, hydrology, slope stability, erosion potential, visual
quality, and construction techniques do not apply equally to both hillside and flatland
development, the City's General Plan directs the creation of unique regulations to govern how
development occurs on hillsides.
In February of 1961, the City adopted a "General Plan of Land Use", which included a map
assigning various land use classifications to all the land within the City limits. The hillside area
bordering the western portion of the City was designated "Hillside Residential." The steeper
areas west of that were classified as "Hillside Area." Curiously, the zoning regulations that
followed shortly thereafter to implement the "General Plan of Land Use" did not include a
separate zoning category of the "Hillside Residential or Hillside Area," but rather classified the
areas as R-1 (Single Family Residential).
In August of 1974, the City Council adopted a new General Plan and associated Land Use Map
for the City. The entire western hills were designated as "hillside," and specific polices called
for the preservation of the natural features of hillside areas. Additionally, a land use policy
called for the development of "necessary controls for proper development" in the designated
hillside area. However, it wasn't until 1982, that the City adopted its first zoning regulations for
development in hillside areas. These regulations, which are still in effect, seek to protect the
sensitive resources of the hillside, and to protect down slope property owners.
In 1989, after receiving a report from the City Planning Commission, the City Council directed
staff to form a Hillside Development Committee to develop new standards and regulations for
governing development on the western hills. The purpose was not to discourage development,
but rather to manage it to avoid adverse environmental impacts, degradation of visual quality,
and increased fire danger. The City Council cautioned the purpose of the committee and the
resulting regulations to strike an even balance between managed regulation and over-
regulation, because one of the goals of the Council at that time was to preserve agriculture in
and around the City. They were fearful that if the regulations were too overbearing, it would
direct growth toward the valley's prize agricultural lands. The work of this Committee was
slowed in the early 1990's because the City was embarking on a major General Plan revision
program, and the decision-makers decided to wait until the new General Plan was in place
before entertaining new hillside development regulations.
In 1995, the City adopted a new General Plan, which specifically addressed growth and
development in the western hillside area. This direction has renewed the effort to revise the
regulations adopted in 1982.
SUMMARY OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission
is recommending repealing the existing regulations and adopting a complete new set of
development standards for the hillside zoning district. It is also recommending new district
boundaries that would: 1) separate the hillside district into "upper" and "lower" areas; 2)
exclude a number of parcels that did not have hillside characteristics; and 3) expand the hillside
district to the south to capture a number of parcels that do have hillside characteristics.
City Council Workshop No. 1
Hillside Zoning Regulations - Page 2
Summary of Planning Commission Recommendation
Regulation
Allowed and Permitted Land Uses
Maximum Height Standard
Required Site Area
Yard Setbacks
Fencing Standards
Parking Requirements
Explanation of Review Procedures
Required Technical Reports
Infrastructure Requirements
In Current Ordinance?
No
(Same as R1 District)
No
(Same as R1 District- 30')
Yes
8,000 square feet to 1 acre
Yes
25' to 35' front/rear
6' to 15' sides
No
No
No
Yes
In Proposed
Ordinance?
Yes
Yes
20' upper
30' lower
New
Yes
acre to 10 acres
(lower)
to 40 acres (upper)
Yes for projects not
subject to discretionary
review 20' front, and
15' sides and rear
Yes
Setbacks for other
projects to be
determined in the
discretionary review
process
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
(detailed and
expanded)
Yes
(detailed and
expanded)
City Council Workshop No. 1
Hillside Zoning Regulations - Page 3
Architectural and Design Elements
Landscaping Requirements
Second Dwelling Units
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
UPPER AND LOWER AREAS: The Commission felt that the lower hillside area was more
"urban" and less visible than the upper hillside area. Accordingly, Staff was directed to explore
the idea of establishing "upper" and "lower" areas in the hillside zoning district, and to consider
preparing separate regulations for each. In response to this direction, Staff conducted field
visits, reviewed recent aerial photographs, and prepared a preliminary idea of where a line
separating upper and lower hillside areas. An illustration depicting these two areas is included
as Attachment No.4. A larger map will be presented at the public workshop on September 17,
2003. Staff also prepared separate allowed and permitted land uses, minimum site area, and
height regulations for the two areas. In general, the regulations are less restrictive for the lower
area, but still reflect the fact that this area is situated on the hillside.
The only modification to the allowed and permitted land uses in the upper area is to list
residential second units as an allowed use. It is also listed as an allowed use in the lower area.
While no changes were made to the "permitted" land uses in the upper area, Staff added bed
and breakfast establishments and parks, community gardens, and other passive recreational
uses to the lower area. These are permitted land uses in the R1 zoning district, and in Staff's
opinion, are deserving of discussion.
The minimum site area and minimum parcel width for subdividing parcels, and the maximum
building height in the upper area have not changed, but for the lower area, the following changes
are suggested:
Minimum Parcel Size (range depending on steepness): ~ acre to 10 acres rather than 5 to 40
acres.
Width (range depending on steepness): 75 feet to 200 feet rather than 150 feet to 300 feet.
Maximum Buildina Hei.aht: 30 feet rather than 20 feet.
SOUTH HELEN AVENUE PARCELS: There are 58 parcels above Helen Avenue that fit the
criteria for the hillside district (see Attachment No. 4). The parcels are steep, generally very
visible, and have the characteristic soil and vegetation type of the existing hillside district parcels.
Staff is recommending that 28 of the parcels (20 San Jacinta condominiums) be included in the
"lower" area, and 30 parcels be included in the "upper" district. The owners of these parcels
received a formal notice that their parcels were being considered for inclusion in the hillside
zoning district.
OTHER MAJOR DISCUSSION TOPICS: There are a number of other major topics that should
be discussed early in the City Council review process. These include minimum parcel sizes,
second residential units, technical information requirements, and architectural design standards.
City Council Workshop No. 1
Hillside Zoning Regulations - Page 4
Minimum Parcel Sizes: The existing regulations allow for 8,000 square feet to 1 acre sized
parcels to be created depending upon the steepness of the sites. The proposed regulations
allow for parcels in the "lower" area to be % acre to 10 acres, depending upon slope, and 5 to 40
acres in the "upper" area. The Planning Commission concluded that the larger required acreage
in the upper area was appropriate given the visibility of these parcels, and the severity of
development constraints. The Commission was guided by General Plan policies and the
Leonard Charles Western Hi/Is Constraints Analysis. The decision regarding the lower area was
primarily based on this area's lesser visibility, and existing smaller parcels.
Staff is seeking the Council's direction reqardin.q the minimum parcel size requirements.
Residential Second Units: The Planning Commission had lengthy discussions concerning
second units in the hillside zoning district. They considered the Western Hills Constraints
Analysis, as well as testimony from the public. They concluded that: 1) the probable number of
second units in the hillside area was small; 2) second units provide additional valuable housing
stock; and 3) the standards in place for second units would result in carefully designed and sited
structures.
Staff is seeking the Council's direction concerninq second residential units in the hillside zoning
district.
Technical Information Requirements: The Commission increased and detailed the technical
information that must be submitted for hillside development projects. The primary change from
the existing requirements is to expand the soils and geotechnical reports to focus on evaluating
slope stability. This change was the direct result of input from Julie Bawcom and David
Longstreth of the State Division of Mines and Geology. They submitted suggested language
that would provide Staff and decision makers with detailed site specific slope stability information
in which to make informed decisions.
In addition, the Hydrology and Vegetation Report requirements have been expanded, and a
Building Location and Development Siting Report has been added to the requirements.
Staff is seeking the Council's direction concerning the technical information requirements.
Architectural Design Standards: The Planning Commission added a new section to the
requirements entitled, "Architectural and Design Elements." The purpose of these standards is
to ensure that development projects are carefully and creatively designed, and that the height,
bulk, mass, and overall visibility of structures is limited. The standards are also intended to
reduce grading, the alteration of the natural terrain, and the disruption of native vegetation.
Staff is seeking the Council's direction concerning the recommended architectural desiqn
standards.
PURPOSE OF THE WORKSHOP: The purpose of the workshop is to provide a forum for
discussions with affected property owners, interested organizations and agencies, and the
general public about how development should or should not be regulated in the western hillside
area. While the Planning Commission resolved many issues, there are still a number of affected
property owners with concerns about the proposed new regulations. It is hoped that the dialog
will be free-flowing, which could produce creative ideas, positive suggestions, and a sense of
teamwork between the City Council, staff, and the workshop participants. Staff is also seeking
the Council's direction on a number of issues.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: When the project is well-enough defined, Staff will prepare an
Initial Environmental Study to determine the potential impacts resulting from the adoption and
City Council Workshop No. 1
Hillside Zoning Regulations - Page 5
implementation of the new regulations. This document will be considered by the Planning
Commission and ultimately the City Council prior to taking action on an Ordinance establishing
new hillside zoning regulations.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive presentation and conduct a public workshop to discuss the draft
revisions to the hillside zoning regulations, and provide direction to Staff.
City Council Workshop No. 1
Hillside Zoning Regulations - Page 6
.^
n,'
Z
0
m
Z
Z
0
N
,-.-,
z-
<-
,-_
_
. ~.~-~-
' ' o
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
Planning Commission Recommended
Revised Regulations
Attachment # ~
REVISED HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
September 2003
Attached is a copy of the draft revisions to the Hillside regulations as
recommended by the City Planning Commission. The Commission conducted
a series of public workshops and five public hearings, and worked with a very
diverse group of interested citizens over a two-year period to produce the draft
document. It will be presented to the City Council in a public workshop setting
to receive the Council's input and direction. Once this direction is received,
Staff will prepare the required environmental document to comply with the
California Environmental Quality Act, and schedule the Ordinance for City
Council public hearings and final action.
Staff has tentatively set the City Council workshop for September or October
2003. In the meantime, we are posting the document on the City's web site
under "Hot Topics" for additional public review.
Two major recommendations from the Planning Commission are to divide the
hillside district into "upper" and "lower" areas, and to include a number of
parcels above Helen Avenue in the district that were excluded when the
original district was created in 1982. A map showing the suggested "upper"
and "lower" areas, as well as the Helen Avenue parcels is available for review
at the City Department of Planning and Community Development.
For more information, contact the Department of Planning and Community Development at
463-6203.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
Summary of Planning Commission Recommended Ordinance
Regulation
Allowed and Permitted Land
Uses
Maximum Height Standard
Required Site Area
Yard Setbacks
Fencing Standards
Parking Requirements
Explanation of Review
Procedures
Required Technical Reports
Infrastructure Requirements
Architectural and Design
Elements
In Current Ordinance?
No
(Same as R1 District)
No
(Same as R1 Distdct- 30')
Yes
8,000 square feet to 1 acre
Yes
25' to 35' front/rear
6' to 15' sides
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
In Proposed New Ordinance?
Yes
Yes
20' upper
30' lower
Yes
acre to 10 acres (lower)
5 to 40 acres (upper)
Yes for projects not subject to
discretionary review 20' front,
and 15' sides and rear
Setbacks for other projects to
be determined in the
discretionary review process
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
(detailed and expanded)
No
Yes
(detailed and expanded)
Yes
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
Landscaping Requirements
Second Dwelling Units
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
CHAPTER 2
ZONING
ARTICLE 11.
REGULATIONS IN THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
HILLSIDE (R1-H1 I R1-H2) DISTRICT
SECTION'
9135:
9136:
9137:
9138:
9139:
9140:
9141:
9142:
9143:
9144:
9145:
9146:
9147:
9148:
9149:
Applicability
Purpose and Intent
Definitions
Allowed Uses
Permitted Uses
Building Height Limits
Required Site Area
Required Yard Setbacks
Fencing
Required Parking
Development Procedure
Infrastructure Requirements
Architecture and Design Elements
Landscaping and Fuel Modification Requirements
Relief from Requirements
9135: APPLICABILITY: The Single Family Residential Hillside (R1-H1 / R1-H2) Zoning District is
assigned to parcels of land within the Rural Residential (RR) General Plan land use designation with
an average slope of fifteen percent (15%) or more, and that are depicted as R 1 -H 1 or R 1 -H2 on the
official Zoning Map of the City of Ukiah. Development projects in the R1-H1 and R1-H2 Zoning
Districts shall be subject to the Use Permit process, pursuant to the provisions of Section 9144
(Development Procedures) of this Article, unless stipulated otherwise in this Article. All parcels
determined to meet the criteria listed above for inclusion in the R1-H1 and R1-H2 Zoning Districts
shall be mapped accordingly on the City Zoning Map.
9136: PURPOSE AND INTENT: The purpose of the Hillside zoning regulations are to protect
Ukiah's valuable hillside resource. The regulations are intended to manage growth and
development, and assure that it occurs in a manner that preserves the natural and topographic
character and identity of the western hillsides, as well as the diverse environmental resources and
its unique aesthetic qualities. In addition, the regulations are intended to ensure that adequate
infrastructure, fire protection, and emergency services can be provided to future development. The
R1-H2 regulations apply to the upper hillside area, and the R1-H2 regulations apply to the lower
hillside area, as shown upon the official City Zoning Map.
The regulations are meant to primarily address the future development of vacant land on steep
slopes, rather than the remodeling of, or minor additions to existing residences. The discretionary
review process for development is not intended to apply to the rebuilding of a house of substantially
the same size and height on basically the same flat pad as the previous structure. The general
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
purposes of the Hillside Zoning Distdct include:
A. Preserving the functioning of a continuous, diverse, natural hillside ecosystem;
B. Protection of the significant natural and topographic features of the land;
C. Protection of the hillside viewshed as seen from within and outside the City,
D. Preserving wildlife habitat;
E. Protecting soil resources;
F. Minimizing erosion, landslide, drainage, and other onsite and downslope impacts;
G. Preserving the conditions for a healthy watershed;
H. Providing for adequate fire protection and emergency services for the hillside environment and
surrounding areas;
I. Providing adequate infrastructure, and providing for the coordination of development and
infrastructure.
9'137: DEFINITIONS
Accessory Structure or Building: A structure or building accessory or ancillary to a main building
on the same parcel.
Average cross-slope: The average inclined ground surface expressed as a ratio of the vertical
distance (rise), or change in elevation, to the horizontal distance (run).
Building envelope: The area encompassed or disturbed by the construction, placement, or
activities associated with the proposed uses, including but not limited to areas involving grading,
vegetation modification, drainage improvements or alteration, access roads, driveways, easements,
utility installations, infrastructure maintenance, defensible space for fire protection, and outdoor
recreation/living areas. The building envelope shall meet the purposes of this Article and shall not
exceed the maximum building area set forth in Section 9141, excluding accessways.
Building height: The height of a building is measured by drawing a line parallel to, and twenty feet
(R 1 -H 1 ) or thirty feet (R 1 -H2) above the natural slope. This creates a ^building height envelope~ in
which a building must Afit~ without breaking the twenty or thirty foot parallel line.
Building height envelope: The three dimensional area in which a building must "fit" without
exceeding the maximum building height above natural grade.
Discretionary review: The type of permit review process where the decision maker(s) have the
authority to use discretion when acting on the permit. Use Permits, Site Development Permits, and
Variances are examples of permits requiring discretionary review.
Guest Sleeping Building: A guest sleeping building or detached bedroom is a structure not
exceeding 500 square feet in size, and established for the sole purpose of providing sleeping
quarters for family or guests. No cooking or food preparation facilities are permitted in these
buildings.
Ministerial review: As opposed to discretionary review, ministerial review is the type of review
process where no discretion is used when acting on the permit. The decision maker(s) must rely on
the existing standards and codes when determining if the project/permit can be approved. A
building permit is a type of permit that undergoes ministerial review.
Natural grade: The natural slope of the land as it existed prior to human disturbance, such as
grading, filling, or excavation; or, where the natural grade has been modified, the grade existing on
the effective date of this Article.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
Natural area: Land maintained in an essentially natural or undisturbed or unaltered state, including
maintenance of natural grades, drainage pattems, and native vegetation excluding vegetation
modification necessary for defensible space for fire protection.
Ridgeline: A ddgeline is defined as the high meeting point or crest of two slopes that form a hill.
The ddgeline can be on top of a range of hills or mountains, or can be the spur or backbone of a
hillside descending from the top of a mountain range.
Ridge, skyline: The highest elevations or peaks of the westem hills that form the skyline of the
westem hills.
Sensitive areas: The skyline ridge, areas within one hundred feet (100') of any creek or stream,
areas with rare or endangered species.
Special Hazard Areas: Areas subject to hazards due to natural or manmade conditions, such as
geologic instability, erosion, or flooding.
Stream: Stream means a "blue-line" stream as shown on the U.S. Geological Survey maps.
Viewshed: The near and distant panoramic views of the western hills which form a natural
backdrop for the City of Ukiah and the Ukiah Valley, consisting of substantially continuous forest,
with a relative lack of visual scars or distractions caused by topographic or vegetative modification or
obtrusive manmade structures or alterations. The following "gateways" within the City limits,
identified in the General Plan, shall be emphasized in assessing visual impacts: North and South
State Street, Gobbi Street, Perkins Street, Talmage Road, and Low Gap Road.
9138: ALLOWED USES:
.
R1-H1 (upper area): The following uses are allowed in R1-H1 area without discretionary
review, provided they meet all applicable development standards:
A. Accessory buildings not exceeding 500 square feet in area, and fifteen feet in height.
B. Accessory uses normally incidental to single-family residences.
C.
Small Family Child Day Care Home, which provides care for eight or fewer children,
including children under the age of ten years who reside at the home, and conducted within
an existing single family residence.
D.
Home Occupations (as defined in Section 9301) conducted within an existing single family
residence.
E.
Fences not exceeding a maximum height of six feet, excluding non view-obscuring fences,
which may reach a height of eight feet.
F.
Grading activities moving less than 50 cubic yards of earth on slopes of less than 10% and
in areas not identified as environmentally sensitive, such as geologically unstable areas,
drainages, or within one hundred feet (100') of a creek or stream.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
G,
Ho
,
A,
Bo
Co
D.
E.
F.
G.
Ho
9139:
.
A,
a.
Reconstruction of a single-family residence of substantially the same size and height on the
same building pad as the previous structure, provided it meets the height standard contain in
Section 9140 of this Article.
Guest sleeping building/detached bedroom not exceeding 500 square feet in size and not
containing cooking or food preparation facilities.
Second dwelling unit provided it complies with all the standards for residential second
dwelling units contained in the R1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District.
R1-H2 (lower area): The following uses are allowed in R1-H2 area without discretionary
review, provided they meet all applicable development standards:
Accessory buildings not exceeding fifteen feet in height.
Accessory uses normally incidental to single-family residences.
Small Family Child Day Care Home, which provides care for eight or fewer children,
including children under the age of ten years who reside at the home, and conducted within
an existing single family residence.
Home Occupations (as defined in Section 9301) conducted within an existing single family
residence.
Fences not exceeding a maximum height of six feet, excluding non view-obscuring fences,
which may reach a height of eight feet.
Grading activities moving less than 50 cubic yards of earth on slopes of less than 10% and
in areas not identified as environmentally sensitive, such as geologically unstable areas,
drainages, or within one hundred feet (100') of a creek or stream.
Reconstruction of a single-family residence of substantially the same size and height on the
same building pad as the previous structure, provided it meets the height standard contain in
Section 9140 of this Article.
Guest sleeping building/detached bedroom.
Second dwelling unit provided it complies with all the standards for residential second
dwelling units contained in the R1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District.
PERMITTED USES:
R1-HI (upper area): The following uses may be permitted in the R1-H1 area with the
securing of a Use Permit:
Grading activities moving fifty (50) or more cubic yards of earth, or any grading within
environmentally sensitive areas.
Construction of a new Single Family Residence on a vacant previously undeveloped parcel.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
C. Additions of five hundred (500) square feet or more to an existing structure.
D.
E.
F.
G.
Ho
J,
K.
,
A.
Manufactured homes certified under the National Manufactured Home Construction and
Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. section 5401, et seq.) are allowed on individual
residential parcels subject to the following regulations:
.
Foundation System: The manufactured home shall be attached to a permanent
foundation system approved by the City Building Official and designed and
constructed pursuant to section 18551 of the State Health and Safety Code.
2. Utilities: All utilities to the manufactured home shall be installed underground.
.
Roofing Material: The roof covering on all manufactured homes within the
Residential Hillside Zoning District shall have a minimum Class A fire rating. Wood
shingles and shakes, including fire retardant type, are expressly prohibited.
.
Attic and Underfloor Openings: All attic and underfloor openings shall comply with
the applicable California Health and Safety Code requirements.
.
Permits: All applicable building, site development, and encroachment permits
associated with development of residential property shall be secured prior to any on-
site construction.
Construction of all accessory buildings exceeding 500 square feet in area. No accessory
building may exceed 750 square feet in size.
Community Care Facility for more than six (6) persons, but not more than twelve (12)
persons, and conducted in a single-family residence.
Community Care Facility, which provides service for six (6) or fewer persons, with the
residents and operators of the facility being considered a family, and conducted within an
existing single-family residence.
Large Family Child Day Care Home for a minimum of nine (9) to a maximum of fourteen (14)
children inclusive, including children under the age of ten (10) years who reside at the home,
and conducted in a single family residence.
Agricultural uses other than typical residential gardens/orchards.
The modification and/or clearing of vegetation involving an area exceeding 2,000 square
feet, unless otherwise regulated through the discretionary review process in conjunction with
any development proposal. No clearing of vegetation may occur within 100 feet of any
stream or creek, unless it involves the development of a crossing.
Above ground utility infrastructure.
R1-H2 (Lower Area): The following uses may be permitted in the R1-H2 area with the
securing of a Use Permit:
Grading activities moving fifty (50) or more cubic yards of earth, or any grading within
environmentally sensitive areas.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
B. Construction of a new Single Family Residence on a vacant previously undeveloped parcel.
C.
D.
E,
F.
G.
H.
U.
K.
L.
Additions of five hundred (500) square feet or more to an existing structure.
Manufactured homes certified under the National Manufactured Home Construction and
Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. section 5401, et seq.) are allowed on individual
residential parcels subject to the following regulations:
,
Foundation System: The manufactured home shall be attached to a permanent
foundation system approved by the City Building Official and designed and
constructed pursuant to section 18551 of the State Health and Safety Code.
2. Utilities: All utilities to the manufactured home shall be installed underground.
.
Roofing Material: The roof covering on all manufactured homes within the
Residential Hillside Zoning District shall have a minimum Class A fire rating. Wood
shingles and shakes, including fire retardant type, are expressly prohibited.
.
Attic and Underfloor Openings: All attic and underfloor openings shall comply with
the applicable California Health and Safety Code requirements.
.
Permits: All applicable building, site development, and encroachment permits
associated with development of residential property shall be secured pdor to any on-
site construction.
Construction of all accessory buildings exceeding 500 square feet in area. No accessory
building may exceed 750 square feet in size.
Community Care Facility for more than six (6) persons, but not more than twelve (12)
persons, and conducted in a single4amily residence.
Community Care Facility, which provides service for six (6) or fewer persons, with the
residents and operators of the facility being considered a family, and conducted within an
existing single-family residence.
Large Family Child Day Care Home for a minimum of nine (9) to a maximum of fourteen (14)
children inclusive, including children under the age of ten (10) years who reside at the home,
and conducted in a single family residence.
The modification and/or clearing of vegetation involving an area exceeding 2,000 square
feet, unless otherwise regulated through the discretionary review process in conjunction with
any development proposal. No clearing of vegetation may occur within 100 feet of any
stream or creek, unless it involves the development of a crossing.
Above ground utility infrastructure.
Bed and Breakfast establishments.
Parks, community gardens, and other passive type recreational uses.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
9140: BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITS: The height of a building is measured by drawing a line parallel
to, and twenty feet (R 1 -H 1 ) or thirty feet (R 1 -H2) above the natural slope. This creates a ^building
height envelope~ in which a building must ^fit~ without breaking the twenty or thirty foot parallel line.
The following height limits for buildings shall apply:
A.
For single-family dwellings, a maximum height of twenty feet (20') from natural grade in the
R1-H1 (upper) area and thirty feet (30') in the R1-H2 (lower) area.
B. For accessory buildings a maximum height offifteen feet (15') from natural grade.
C.
Relief from the height limits for the primary single-family residence and accessory buildings
may be granted through the discretionary review (Use Permit) process, provided findings are
made that the additional height will not cause significant adverse visual impacts; will not
have a harmful effect on the public health, safety and welfare; will not be inconsistent with
the Ukiah General Plan; and is not inconsistent with any provision of this Article.
9141' REQUIRED SITE AREA
R1-H1 (Upper Area): In the R1-H1 (Upper Area), the required minimum parcel size,
minimum parcel width, and the amount of acreage to be retained in a natural state shall be
determined by the average cross-slope of the parcel according to the following table:
AVERAGE CROSS
SLOPE
O% TO 25%
26% TO 3O%
31% TO 40%
41% TO 50%
51% AND OVER
MINIMUM PARCEL
SIZE
5 ACRES
10 ACRES
15 ACRES
40 ACRES
N/A
MINIMUM PARCEL
WIDTH
150 FEET
200 FEET
250 FEET
300 FEET
N/A
ACREAGE TO BE
RETAINED AS
NATURAL AREA
4.5 ACRES
9.5 ACRES
14.5 ACRES
39.5 ACRES
1 OO%
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
10
R1-H2 (Lower Area): In the R1-H2 (Lower Area), the required minimum parcel size,
minimum parcel width, and acreage to be retained in a natural state shall be determined by
the average cross-slope of the parcel according to the following table:
AVERAGE CROSS
SLOPE
0% TO 25%
26% TO 30%
31% TO 40%
41% TO 50%
51% AND OVER
MINIMUM PARCEL
SIZE
.5 ACRE
I ACRE
2 ACRES
10 ACRES
N/A
MINIMUM PARCEL
WIDTH
75 FEET
100 FEET
150 FEET
200 FEET
N/A
ACREAGE TO BE
RETAINED AS
NATURAL AREA
.25 ACRE
.5 ACRE
1.5 ACRES
9.5 ACRES
100%
A.
The minimum parcel size and width standards pertain to lands proposed for subdivision. The
acreage to be retained in a natural state applies to all parcels subsequent to the adoption of
this Ordinance.
B.
No parcels shall be created by subdivision that have an average cross slope of 50% or
greater, unless designated as permanent open space.
Co
The average cross-slope shall be determined by the project engineer and confirmed by the
City Engineer. The project engineer shall detail the methodology used to determine the
average cross slope, which shall be based on standard engineering practices.
Do
Projects involving cluster development pursuant to Section 9147 (L) are subject to
discretionary (Use Permit) review, but are exempt from the standards contained in this table
to allow for creativity in site planning.
E,
Existing parcels not exceeding five acres in size that were legally created prior to the
adoption of this Article are considered legal parcels of record. Development may occur on
these parcels provided all the development standards are complied with and a Use Permit, if
required, is issued by the Planning Commission.
F. Driveway and roads are exempt from the acreage to be retained in a natural state standard.
9142: YARD SETBACKS REQUIRED: Development projects in the Single-Family Residential
Hillside Zoning District shall include adequate yard setbacks between buildings and property lines to
provide an open rural residential atmosphere.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
11
A. All yard setbacks shall be measured from the proposed structure(s) to the property lines.
a.
Co
Do
9144:
A.
a.
C.
D.
E,
9144:
Ao
Front, side and rear yard setbacks for all structures shall be determined in the discretionary
(Use Permit) review process. Structures not subject to discretionary review shall be setback
a minimum of fifteen feet (15') from the side and rear property lines, and twenty feet (20')
from the front property line.
No building shall be constructed closer than fifty feet (50') to any skyline ridge. Every effort
shall be made to locate all buildings below the top of all ridgelines. If it is demonstrated with
acceptable technical information that the ridgeline (other than a skyline ridge) is the only
geologically stable area in which to build, and that the design of the proposed development
would not have significant adverse visual impacts, then ridgeline development may be
permitted.
No grading or building activities shall occur within one hundred feet (100') from any blue line
stream, as shown on the U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Elledge Peak, 1958) or as defined by
the State Department of Fish and Game. Every effort shall be made to design and site new
roads a minimum of one hundred feet (100') from any blue line stream, unless it is
determined through the discretionary review process that a stream crossing is the only
feasible way to provide access to a particular building site, or based on submitted technical
information, it is determined that all other options would clearly be more damaging to the
environment.
FENCING
The use of fences shall be minimized and located so that natural landforms appear to flow
together and are not disconnected. The primary emphasis shall be on maintaining open
views, protecting wildlife corridors, and maintaining rural, open, and the natural character of
hillside areas.
Fences shall not exceed a height of six feet (6') measured from the lowest side of the fence
and should be limited to those areas where fences of this height are necessary to protect
ornamental landscaping, security, or play areas.
Deer fencing up to a maximum height of eight feet (8') shall be limited to areas around
ornamental landscaping. Larger areas shall not be enclosed unless specific reasons for
keeping deer out have been demonstrated through the discretionary review process.
Only open fencing shall be allowed within twenty feet (20') of a street-adjacent property line.
Fences shall not be allowed within ten feet (10') of a property line if fencing such areas
would impede the movement of wildlife as determined through the discretionary review
process.
REQUIRED PARKING:
The minimum parking area required in Single-Family Residential Hillside District is two (2)
on-site independently accessible spaces for each dwelling unit. The parking requirements
for all other allowed or permitted uses shall be subject to the p~3visions of Section 9198.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
12
a.
Co
D.
Each required on-site parking space or garage space for single family residential uses shall
be a minimum of nine feet (9') in width and nineteen feet (19') in depth.
Each required on-site parking space or garage space for single-family residential uses shall
open directly onto a driveway or aisle and be designed to provide safe and efficient ingress
and egress for vehicles accessing such parking space.
All open area parking spaces shall be screened with vegetation.
9145: DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES: A Use Permit shall be required for all proposed major
vegetation clearing, substantial grading, and development on parcels within the R1-H1 and R1-H2
Zoning District areas. Pursuant to the provisions of the Ukiah Municipal Code, site development
issues and findings shall be incorporated into the Use Permit process. Additions to existing
structures in the R1-H1 area that exceed 500 square feet are also subject to the review and
approval of a Use Permit. The procedures for processing Use Permits shall be consistent with the
provisions contained in Article 20, Chapter 2 of the Ukiah Municipal Code.
A,
Minor Use Permits: The following types of projects shall be considered minor and shall
require the securing of a Minor Use Permit:
1. Additions to existing structures of 500 square feet or more provided no relief is sought
from the other requirements contained in this Article.
.
Grading activities involving 50 to 100 cubic yards of earth, including but not limited to
utility trenching, road repair and maintenance, construction pad development, etc.
Grading activities moving less than 50 cubic yards of earth on slopes of less than 10%
and in areas not identified as environmentally sensitive, such as geologically unstable
areas, drainages, or within one hundred feet (100') of a creek or stream do not require a
Minor Use Permit.
3. Minor amendments to previously approved Minor or Major Use Permits and/or proposed
changes to conditions of approval.
4. Other small and relatively insignificant applications as determined by the Planning
Director to be minor.
All other proposed vegetation, grading, and construction projects shall be considered major,
and a Major Use Permit shall be required.
Bo
Major Use Permits: The following types of projects shall be considered major and shall
require the secudng of a Major Use Permit:
1. Construction of a single family residence.
2. The removal of 2,000 square feet or more of vegetation.
3. Grading activities involving more than 100 cubic yards of earth, including but not limited
to utility trenching, road repair and maintenance, construction pad development, etc.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
13
4. Community Care Facility for more than six (6) persons, but not more than 12 persons,
and conducted in a single-family residence.
5. Large Family Child Day Care Home for a minimum of 9 to a maximum of fourteen (14)
children inclusive, including children under the age of ten (10) years who reside at the
home, and conducted in a single family residence.
6. Agricultural uses other than typical residential gardens/orchards.
7. Accessory structures exceeding 500 square feet in size.
Co
D,
Determination of Minor or Major Use, and of an Allowed or Permitted Use: Whenever a
use is not listed in this Article as a major or minor use, a use permitted by right or a use
subject to a Use Permit in the R1-H1 or R1-H2 Zoning District areas, the Planning Director
shall determine whether the use is minor or major, or appropriate for the zoning district,
either as a right or subject to a Use Permit. In making this determination, the Planning
Director shall find as follows:
1. The use is similar in scope and intensity as a listed minor or major use.
2. That the use would not be incompatible with other existing or allowed uses in the
R1-H1 or R1- H2 Zoning Distdct areas.
3. That the use would not be detrimental to the continuing development of the immediate
area in which the use would be located.
.
In the case of determining that a use not articulated as an allowed or permitted use
could be established with the securing of a Use Permit, the Planning Director shall find
that the proposed use is similar in nature and intensity to the uses listed as permitted
uses. All determinations of the Planning Director regarding whether a use can be
allowed or permitted in the Single Family Residential/Hillside (R1-H) Zoning District
shall be final unless a written appeal to the City Council, stating the reasons for the
appeal, and the appeal fee, if any, established from time to time by City Council
Resolution, is filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) days of the date the decision was
made. Appeals may be filed by an applicant or any interested party. The City Council
shall conduct a duly noticed public hearing on the appeal in accordance to the applicable
procedures as set forth in this chapter. At the close of the public hearing, the City
Council may affirm, reverse, revise or modify the appealed decision of the Planning
Director. All City Council decisions on appeals of the Planning Director's actions are
final for the City of Ukiah.
Findings of Fact: In reviewing a Use Permit application for development within the Hillside
Zoning District, the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal, shall make the
following findings of fact in the review process:
.
The site is physically suitable for the design and siting of the proposed development.
The proposed development does not pose an unacceptable risk in disturbing any
sensitive areas.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
14
E,
F.
G.
Ho
.
The grading, vegetation removal, and excavation proposed in connection with the
development does not pose an unacceptable risk of soil erosion, silting of lower slopes,
landslide damage, flooding, severe scarring or any other geological instability which
would affect health, safety, and general welfare.
3. The proposed development does not adversely impact the aesthetic qualities of the
area, or the views from the valley below.
4. The proposed development is in conformance with the purposes of this Article and the
Vision Statement, Goals and Policies of the General Plan.
5. Fire protection and all emergency services can be adequately provided to the proposed
development.
6. Colors of buildings shall be earth tone, subdued and shall blend with the existing native
vegetation, soils, or other natural hillside colors.
Appeal of Decision: The Planning Commission or City Council on appeal, may approve a
Use Permit for development in the Hillside Zoning District if, after considering the information
presented in the application materials and after considering public testimony at a public
hearing, concludes that the available information supports the findings of fact in Subsection
A above. If the Planning Commission or City Council on appeal determines that substantial
evidence does not support the findings of fact to approve the Use Permit, it shall be denied.
Conditions of Approval: In granting the Use Permit, the Planning Commission, or City
Council, on appeal, may impose conditions as may be deemed necessary and desirable to
protect the public health, safety and general welfare with respect to the findings of fact
required to approve a Use Permit.
Application Submittal' The application for development shall include the following:
1. A fully completed Use Permit or other required discretionary permit review application
form.
.
^ Site Plan, Elevation Drawings, Landscaping Plan, Lighting Plan, a comprehensive
Utility Plan (water, septic, electricity, etc.), all required technical reports, and any other
plans and information needed by the City to fully understand the proposed project.
3. The adopted filing fee, which shall be established from time to time by Resolution
adopted by the City Council in accordance with such procedures as required by law.
Required Technical Reports: The Planning Director shall determine the type of technical
reports to be required based on the size, location, scale, and intensity of the proposed
development; presence of sensitive or hazard prone areas and other physical and biological
characteristics, and any other factors consistent with the purposes of this Article. Where a
full technical report prepared by a professional is not required, the Planning Director may
require the applicant to submit supplemental information necessary to describe the site and
potential project impacts, and to make the determinations and findings required by this
Article.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
15
The Planning Director shall have the authority to waive the requirement for any technical
report if the size, location, scale, and intensity of the proposed development is deemed
minor and incidental, and if the project site is devoid of obvious sensitive environmental
areas. The number and scope of technical studies may not be as important for the lower
hillside areas.
When required, technical reports shall focus on building envelopes, parcels proposed for
subdivision, as well as any additional area that, in the judgment of the professional preparer
and/or the Director of Planning and Community Development is necessary to provide the
information required by this Section necessary to make the determinations and findings
required by this Article.
The following reports/information may be required:
,
Engineering Geologic Report I Minimum Elements for Slope Stability
Evaluation
a. Location Map showing the site relative to the surrounding area.
b. Site Specific Geologic Map.
,
Site plan at a scale of 1 inch = 40 feet or better shall be used with
contour intervals of five feet or better.
2. Existing and proposed grades.
3. Location of all subsurface exploration.
4. Location of all cut and fill slopes and dimensions.
5. Location of all geologic cross sections
o
Location of any restricted use areas, unstable areas, or geologic
setback areas.
.
Location of on-site sewage disposal system, and cross section
showing anticipated path of effluent.
.
Data from previous geologic investigations performed in the site area.
(e.g., investigations by other consultants on this or adjacent
properties).
c. Sub-Surface Exploration
Exploration data to substantiate geometry and geologic conditions
relative to slope stability. This shall include information relative to
deep seated (gross), and shallow seated (surficial) slope stability.
.
Data shall be obtained in such a manner that at least two data sets
can be represented downslope from one another on each geologic
cross section.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
16
d.
eo
.
Detailed log of earth materials observed in test hole borings,
trenches, and/or pits to include characteristics such as bedding
attitudes, joint/fracture spacing, fault zones, location of clay beds, etc.
Geologic Cross Sections
,
Shall be drawn at an undistorted scale (horizontal scale shall equal
vertical scale).
.
Shall be drawn at the same scale as the map they are depicted on
(regional geologic map and/or site specific map).
,
Shall show the location of all geologic data relative to sub-surface
explorations including but not limited to characteristics such as
bedding attitudes, joint/fracture spacing, faults and fault zones, shear
zones, folds, zones of contortion or crushing, location of clay beds,
landslide debris, unconsolidated surficial deposits, existing artificial
(manmade) fill, proposed artificial fill, proposed grades, depth to
competent bedrock, top soils, etc.
o
Shall show extrapolation of geologic features between sub-surface
data points.
5. Surface and ground water conditions.
Discussion and Analysis
.
The Analysis shall comply with the standard guidelines adopted as
California Division of Mines and Geology Note Number 44 and
Special Publications S.P. 117.
.
A general discussion of regional geologic conditions and geologic
conditions underlying site.
3. A discussion about any slope stability problems.
4. A discussion of seismic hazards
°
A discussion of any off-site geologic conditions that may pose a
hazard to the site or properties (upslope and downslope) that may be
adversely affected by the proposed construction.
o
A statement regarding location of potential ground water that may
develop within the slope during and/or after major storm seasons and
measures needed for ongoing stability.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
17
.
Detailed logs of earth materials observed in test holes (pit, boring,
trench) to include characteristics such as bedding attitudes,
joint/fracture spacing, faults and fault zones, shear zones, folds,
zones of contortion or crushing, location of clay beds, landslide
debris, unconsolidated surficial deposits, existing artificial (manmade
fill), proposed artificial fill, proposed grades, depth to competent
bedrock, top soils, etc.
,
A discussion of on-site sewage disposal system and its potential
effects on slope stability.
.
A statement regarding the suitability of the proposed development
from a geologic standpoint.
10.
Specific recommendations regarding cut slope stability, seepage
and drainage control, or other design cdteria to mitigate geologic
hazards.
11.
A statement that requires foundation inspections, grading
inspections, plan review by the consulting Engineering Geologist.
12.
The Engineering Geologist shall sign and stamp building and/or
grading plans pdor to the submittal of a Building Permit.
,
Soils EngineeringlGeotechnical Engineering Report/Minimum Elements for
Slope Stability
a. A location map showing site relative to general vicinity.
b. A site specific grading plan and map.
A site plan at a scale of linch = 40 feet or better shall be used with
contour intervals of five feet or better.
2. Existing and proposed grades.
3. The location of all subsurface exploration.
4. The location of all cut and fill slopes and dimensions.
5. The location of all geotechnical cross sections
.
The location of any restricted use areas, unstable areas, or
geotechnical setback areas.
.
The location of existing and proposed building locations, roads,
utilities, on-site sewage disposal system(s), other improvements, and
location of Special Hazard Areas.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
18
.
.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Data from previous geotechnical investigations performed in the site
area (e.g., investigations by other consultants on the subject and
adjacent properties).
A plan of all drainage devices, retaining walls, cribbing or other
protective devices to be constructed.
Soil stabilization and runoff diversion plan including details of
permanent drainage impacts resultant from the project and detailed
erosion control measures and final ground cover and landscaping of
disturbed areas.
A detailed site winterization plan if deemed necessary by the City
Engineer.
Any other information determined to be applicable by the City
Engineer.
A work schedule detailing when each stage of the project will be
complete, the hours of operation and days of the week of operation.
Include accurate dates to the approval of the City Engineer for the
purpose of scheduling grading inspections by the City Engineer=s
office.
All grading activity shall be completed between April 15 and
October 1 of each calendar year subject to the following criteria:
ao
Grading shall cease after any rainfall exceeding 1/4 inch
(.25) in any 24 hour period and shall not recommence
until such time as the City Engineer approves.
bo
Grading shall cease if rainfall saturates the soil to such a
level as to affect the safe operation capabilities of grading
equipment.
c. A winterizing plan shall be provided to the approval of the
Director of Public Works.
Grading shall not be initiated or proceed outside the dates listed
above, except for emergency repairs for the protection of the public
safety and approved by the Director of Planning and the City
Engineer.
If any sepentine or ultramafic rocks are found during construction the
Mendocino County Air Quality Management Distdct shall be
contacted and the provisions of the Air Toxic Control measures for
Naturally Occuring Asbestos (California Code of Regulations 93105
and/or 93106), of conforming Distdct regulations if any, shall be
followed.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
19
d.
e.
Upon completion of grading activity for which a detailed grading plan has
been required, a written report shall be filed with the City Engineer stating the
work performed, final disposition of materials used in grading, relative
compaction levels, and certification that all grading has been completed
according to the approved grading plan, and extent of cuts and soil
stabilization methods.
Any other information determined to be applicable by the City Engineer.
Geotechnical Cross Sections
.
Shall be drawn at an undistorted scale (horizontal scale shall equal
vertical scale).
.
Shall be drawn at the same scale as the map they are depicted on
(regional geologic map and/or site specific map).
.
Shall show the location of all geologic data as provided by the
Certified Engineering Geologist, including but not limited to
characteristics such as bedding attitudes, joint/fracture spacing,
faults and fault zones, shear zones, folds, zones of contortion or
crushing, location of clay beds, landslide debris, unconsolidated
surficial deposits, existing artificial (manmade fill), proposed artificial
fill, proposed grades, depth to competent bedrock, top soils, etc.
.
Shall show extrapolation of geologic features between sub-surface
data points.
5. Shall show surface and ground water conditions.
Slope Stability Analysis and Calculation of Factor of Safety.
New buildings may be constructed upon a site that is adjacent to cut, fill, or
natural slopes provided:
.
The slopes have an evaluated factor of safety of at least 1.5 against
deep-seated static failure.
a.
The potential failure surface used in the analysis shall be
composed of arcs, planes or other shapes considered to yield
the lowest factor of safety and to be most appropriate to the
soil and geologic site conditions.
b. The potential failure surface having the lowest safety factor
shall be used in the analysis.
Loadings to be considered are gravity loads of potential
failure mass, seepage forces and external loads. The
potential for hydraulic head is to be evaluated and its effects
included when appropriate. Soils below the piesometdc
surface shall be assumed saturated.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
20
g,
,
do
An appropriate mathematical analysis method shall be
chosen for the case analyzed. Simple planar failure surfaces
can be analyzed by force equilibrium methods. Spencer's
Method shall include kinematically admissible (smooth
transitioning) surfaces and not be used with structural
resisting elements. Bishops's Method shall only be utilized for
circular failure surfaces. Taylor's Method shall only be used
for homogeneous simple slopes.
The slopes have an evaluated factor of safety of at least 1.5 against
surficial failure, or adequately designed protective devices are
recommended that will protect the construction and adjacent
properties from the hazard of mud and debds flow.
ao
Evaluation of the slope surface for safety factor against
surficial failure shall be based either on analysis procedures
for an infinite slope with seepage parallel to the slope
surface. For the infinite slope analysis, the assumed depth of
soil saturation shall be a minimum of three feet and
consistent with the depth to firm bedrock. The Engineering
Geologist shall provide the depth to firm bedrock based on
sub-surface investigation. Soil strength characteristics used
in analysis are to be obtained from representative samples of
surficial soils that are tested under conditions approximating
saturation.
,
The slopes have an evaluated factor of safety of at least 1.1
against seismic deep-seated failure.
ao
Pseudo-static acceleration of 0.15g with a factor of safety
of 1.1 shall be the minimum acceptable for seismic
stability of slopes. Seismic stability shall be demonstrated
in accordance with California Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication S.P. 117.
Matedal Properties
.
Soil properties including unit weight and shear strength
parameters (cohesion and friction angle) shall be based on
field and laboratory tests. Tests shall be made on an
appropriate number of samples removed from sub-surface
explorations (e.g., test pits, borings, trenches) that represent
the materials in a particular slope. At least one test shall be
made on the weakest plane or matedal in the area under test
and shall be made in the direction of anticipated slippage.
.
Testing of earth materials shall be performed in accordance
with standard engineering/test practices.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
21
h.
.
Shear strength parameters used in stability evaluations may
be based upon peak test values where appropriate.
Parameters not exceeding residual test values shall be used
for previous landslides, along bedding planes, highly distorted
bedrock, clay seams, fault zones, landslide shear surfaces,
overconsolidated fissured clays, and organic topsoil zones
under fill.
.
Prior to shear tests, samples are to be soaked to
approximately a saturated moisture content. Saturated shear
tests shall be performed with the samples inundated in water
during testing. Shearing strain rates/conditions are to be
consistent with the materials types and drainage conditions
used in analysis.
,
An arbitrary residual angle of shearing resistance of six
degrees and cohesion of 75 pounds per square foot may be
used to represent the strength on bedding and in landslide
debris in lieu of parameters determined by laboratory testing.
.
Soil strength characteristics of off-site slope materials may be
based upon tests of similar materials or nearby properties
when both the engineering geologist and the soil engineer
demonstrate a basis for assuming that the off-site materials
possess strength characteristics equivalent to the matedal
tested.
Discussion and Analysis
.
Shall comply with the standard guidelines adopted as
California Division of Mines and Geology Note Number 44
and Special Publications S.P. 117.
.
An assessment of potential geotechnical hazards affecting
the site and upslope and downslope off-site properties.
.
A statement regarding location of potential ground water that
may develop within the slope during and/or after major storm
seasons and measures needed for ongoing stability.
,
Description of sub-surface exploration and sampling
methods.
.
A complete description of shear test procedures and test
specimens.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
22
.
Shear strength plots that include the identification of sample
tested, whether values reflect peak or residual strengths,
shearing strain rate, moisture content at time of testing, and
approximate degree of saturation.
.
Comment on sample selection and a stated opinion that the
samples test represent the weakest matedal profile along with
the potential failure path. The Engineering Geologist may
determine potential failure surfaces based on sub-surface
exploration.
,
Calculations and failure surface cross sections (geotechnical
cross sections) used in stability evaluations.
,
General comments as to the stability of slopes from the
effects of earthquakes conceming ground rupture, landslides,
and differential movement.
10.
Detailed logs of earth materials observed in test holes (pit,
boring, trench) to include characteristics such as bedding
attitudes, joint/fracture spacing, faults and fault zones, shear
zones, folds, zones of contortion or crushing, location of clay
beds, landslide debris, unconsolidated surficial deposits,
existing artificial (manmade fill), proposed artificial fill,
proposed grades, depth to competent bedrock, top soils, etc.
11.
Recommended drainage devices including subdrain systems
below fills and behind stabilization structures.
12.
Discussion of any proposed on-site sewage disposal system
and its potential effects on slope stability.
13.
A statement that requires foundation inspections, grading
inspections, plan review by the consulting soils engineer
and/or geotechnical engineer.
14.
The soils engineer and/or geotechnical engineer shall sign
and stamp building and/or grading plans prior to construction.
15.
Signature and stamp of California licensed soils engineering
and/or geotechnical engineer.
The Engineering Geologic Report, Soils Engineering/Geotechnical Engineering
Report, Hydrology Report, and Grading Plan may be combined into one overall
comprehensive report to avoid duplication of data.
.
Hydrology Report prepared by a registered civil engineer, registered geologist or
hydrologist, experienced and knowledgeable in the science of hydrology and the
necessary techniques of hydrologic investigation. The report shall include, but may
not be limited to, the following information:
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
23
,
ao
bo
A description of the hydrology of the site, conclusion and recommendations
regarding the effect of hydrologic conditions on the proposed development,
and recommendations covering the adequacy of sites to be developed.
A drainage plan shall be included detailing runoff and drainage control and
assessing the need for siltation traps and velocity attenuation devices within
runoff areas. A temporary drainage plan shall be required for drainage and
runoff control during construction and/or prior to implementation of
permanent measures.
The report shall identify any areas which are unsuitable for development
because of hydrologic constraints.
d,
The location of all springs, drainages, creeks, streams, and existing wells on
and within 500 feet of the subject property.
Vegetation Report prepared by a qualified professional botanist experienced in the
techniques of vegetation management. The report shall include:
ao
A description of the vegetative environment of the site, conclusions and
recommendations regarding the effect of proposed development on the site
vegetation.
bo
A vegetation management strategy specifying the degree and nature of
vegetative loss resulting from the project, and a landscape replacement
proposal for the project, consistent with the defensible space requirements
contained in Section J of this Chapter.
Co
Identification of rare or endangered species on the site, and a strategy to
avoid the disturbance of these species.
d.
A description of general soil characteristics based upon the needs and
requirements of the existing vegetation.
So
For projects involving only vegetation modification and/or removal, a "Site
Plan" shall be required that shows the existing vegetation and the details for
modification and/or removal. ^ written description of the proposal shall also
be required.
Any other information determined by the author to be pertinent to the site and
the proposed development project.
go
Upon completion of grading activity for which a detailed grading plan has
been required, a written report shall be filed with the City Engineer stating the
work performed, final disposition of materials used in grading, relative
compaction levels, certification that all grading has been completed
according to the approved grading plan, and extent of cuts and soil
stabilization methods. This report shall be certified and signed by the project
engineer.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
24
9146:
A.
h. Any other information determined to be applicable by the City Engineer.
.
Building Location and Development Siting Report that shall include the following
information:
a.
An explanation of how the proposed roads, buildings, and fire protection
zones (brush management areas) will be sited in a manner that is consistent
with the purposes and provisions of this Article.
b.
An analysis of how the topography, ridge lines, creeks, drainage, vegetation,
and soils have dictated the proposed locations of all roads, buildings, and
other site development components.
Co
The report must describe a creative and thoughtful site planning effort that
proposes a development project accommodating the constraints on a parcel,
rather than altering the physical nature of the property to accommodate the
development project.
6. Architectural Design Plans that shall include the following information:
a.
A detailed Site Plan sufficient to fully illustrate all aspects of the proposed
project and adjoining land uses.
b. Elevation drawings of all proposed structures.
c. A floor plan of the proposed structure.
do
Any other project related information requested by the Planning Director, City
Fire Marshal, Director of Public Works, or the Director of Public Utilities.
INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS: All infrastructure required for the development of
property within the Single Family Residential Hillside Zoning Distdct shall be subject to the
following requirements:
Access Routes - General:
.
Access routes shall follow the natural contours of the hillside to minimize cut and fill, and
shall not be constructed along the skyline ridge or in areas which are highly visible from
the Highway 101 corridor. All roadway requirements shall be subject to the approval of
the City Engineer based upon his/her assessment of access needs of the subject
property and surrounding properties for future development capacity.
2. Parking and turnaround areas shall be designed and constructed, and shall incorporate
vegetation (both existing and introduced) so as to minimize impacts to the viewshed.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
25
B. Primary Access Routes:
Co
°
,
o
o
o
All primary access routes shall be a minimum width of eighteen feet (18') measured from
edge of pavement to edge of pavement, unless it is demonstrated with appropriate
findings through the discretionary review process that 1) such a width would have a
significant adverse impact on the environment; and 2) a lesser width with design features
such as periodic turn-outs, could adequately accommodate and provide adequate
access for all emergency vehicles.
Eighteen inch (18") graveled shoulders shall be provided on both sides of the road,
unless cleady infeasible.
All access routes shall be surfaced with a minimum of 6 inches (6") of aggregate base
and 2 inches of asphaltic concrete installed to City of Ukiah specifications.
The maximum gradient shall not exceed fifteen percent (15%) for any portion of the
roadway, unless it is determined in the discretionary review process with appropriate
findings that 1) achieving this standard would result in significant adverse impacts on the
environment; 2) a steeper roadway would not preclude efficient emergency vehicle
access; and 3) no feasible altemative route that would comply with the fifteen percent
(15%) standard exists.
"No Parking" zones shall be designated along the length of either side of the roadway,
except as otherwise approved by the City Engineer and City Fire Marshal.
The minimum radius for curves in a primary access road shall be fifty feet (50'), unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer and City Fire Marshal.
Curbs and gutters shall be required when they would fill a missing gap in a curb and
gutter system, or when the extension of an existing curb and gutter system is deemed
logical and appropriate by the City Engineer. Curb and gutter improvements shall not be
required if it is determined that such improvements would have a significant adverse
impact on the environment.
One-Way Access Routes:
1. One-way access routes shall serve a maximum of ten (10) parcels.
.
Minimum width shall be 12 feet (12'). Roadway shall be measured from edge of
pavement to edge of pavement.
o
All one-way access routes shall be surfaced with a minimum of 6 inches of
aggregate base and 2 inches of asphaltic concrete.
o
One-way routes shall connect at both ends to a two-way primary access route,
excluding any road or street that has been accepted by the City as a public road or
street.
,
The maximum length for one-way access routes serving up to ten (10) parcels shall
be 1,000 feet. Turnouts or other requirements adequate for public safety purposes
may be required by the City Fire Marshal or City Engineer.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
26
.
The maximum gradient shall not exceed fifteen percent (15%) unless it is determined
in the discretionary review process with appropriate findings that 1) achieving this
standard would result in significant adverse impacts on the environment; 2) a steeper
roadway would not preclude efficient emergency vehicle access; and 3) no feasible
altemative route exists that would comply with the fifteen percent (15%) standard.
.
"No Parking" zones shall be designated along the length of both sides of the
roadway.
D. Cul-De-Sacs:
1. Cul-de-sacs may service any number of units or parcels.
,
Minimum width for a cul-de-sac shall be eighteen feet (18') measured from inside
face-of-berm to inside face-of-berm. If the cul-de-sac exceeds 300 feet in length,
its terminus shall have a minimum radius of 50 feet. Altematively, a hammerhead
turnaround to provide emergency vehicles with a three-point tumaround ability may
be provided if the design is found acceptable by the City Fire Marshal.
.
The maximum gradient shall not exceed fifteen percent (15%) unless it is determined
in the discretionary review process with appropriate findings that 1) achieving this
standard would result in significant adverse impacts on the environment; 2) a steeper
roadway would not preclude efficient emergency vehicle access; and 3) no feasible
altemative route exists that would comply with the 15% standard.
4. The maximum length of a cul-de-sac shall not exceed 2,640 feet.
o
All roadways shall be surfaced with a minimum of 6 inches of aggregate base and 2
inches of asphaltic concrete.
.
No parking zones shall be designated along the length of both sides of the roadway,
except as otherwise approved by the City Engineer and City Fire Marshal.
E. Private Driveways:
,
A private driveway may serve more than 2 units or parcels if it would result in less
environmental damage than constructing separate individual driveways, and
adequate emergency services can be provided.
.
Private driveways shall be paved to the approval of the City Engineer and City Fire
Marshal.
.
Private driveways shall be a minimum of 12 feet (12') in width measured from road
edge to road edge for one residence, and eighteen feet (18') for two of more
residences. Less than eighteen foot (18') may be allowed through the discretionary
review process if it is demonstrated with appropriate findings that 1) such a width
would have a significant adverse impact on the environment; 2) a lesser width with
design features such as periodic tum-outs, could adequately accommodate and
provide adequate access for all emergency vehicles; and 3) the eighteen feet (18')
would have a significant adverse impact on the environment.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
27
Fo
O.
.
.
,
,
The maximum gradient shall not exceed fifteen percent (15%) for a driveway
exceeding fifty feet (50') in length. Driveways less than fifty feet (50') in length,
where any portion of a building is not more than one hundred and fifty feet (150')
from the roadway may have a maximum gradient of twenty percent (20%).
Maximum length of private driveways shall not exceed five hundred feet (500') and
conform to all gradient requirements of this chapter.
Turnarounds are required within fifty feet (50') of a residence, and shall be designed
in a hammerhead-T or terminus bulb and provide adequate maneuverability to the
approval of the City Fire Marshal.
Driveways shall enter public/private streets in such a manner as to maintain
adequate lines of sight. The design shall be subject to the review and approval of
the City Engineer.
8. Driveways shall be designed with existing contours to the maximum extent feasible.
.
The requirements of E (3), (4), and (5) above may be modified by the Planning
Commission in the discretionary review process to serve legally existing lots on the
effective date of this Article, subject to any additional requirements and approval of
the City Engineer and City Fire Marshall, and a finding by the Planning Commission
that (a) compliance is not reasonably feasible due to the lot size, location, design or
other factors, (b) compliance would deprive the owner of rights similar to others in
the RI-H1 or RI-H2 areas, and (c) the modification would not materially affect the
applicable purposes of this Article set forth in Section 9135.
Turnouts:
.
Turnouts shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') in width and thirty feet (30') in length
with fifteen foot (15') tapers at both ends. Turnouts shall be surfaced with all-
weather surfacing to the approval of the City Engineer.
,
Parking and turnaround areas are to be constructed so as to be visually screened
from surrounding properties.
Gate Entrances:
.
Gate entrances shall be at least two feet (2') wider than the width ofthe traffic lane(s)
serving that gate.
.
All gates providing access from a road to a driveway shall be located at least twenty
five feet (25') from the roadway.
.
Where a one-way road with a single traffic lane provides access to a gated entrance,
a forty-foot (40') turning radius shall be used.
4. Gates shall not be located on a grade that exceeds fifteen percent (15%).
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
28
J.
.
Key pads/opening devices shall be approved by the Fire Marshal and located to
allow operation from emergency vehicles.
Water Supply and Fire Protection:
.
Water shall be supplied by City of Ukiah or furnished by individual well systems.
Extension of existing water mains are to be at developer-s expense. Wells shall
comply with all requirements of the Mendocino County Environmental Health
Department.
.
In addition to normal domestic requirements, water supply and infrastructure for fire
protection shall be provided according to the National Fire Protection Act (NFPA).
.
Water mains shall be six inch (6") minimum. Dead end mains shall be eight inch (8")
minimum.
.
All fire hydrants shall be identified with blue reflective markers as specified in the
State Fire Marshal=s Guidelines for Fire Hydrant Markings along State Highways
and Freeways.
.
All dwelling units shall be equipped throughout with fire sprinkler systems that
comply with NFP^ 13-D Standard in One and Two-Family Dwellings and Mobile
Homes, latest edition, or NFPA 13-R Standard in Residential Occupancies up to
Four Stodes in Height, latest edition.
6. Exterior protection sprinklers shall be placed in a perimeter around any dwelling unit.
.
All private water storage facilities shall be sized consistent with the requirements of
the City Fire Department and are to be aesthetically screened by trees of a minimum
15-gallon size and compatible with surrounding species. Below grade underground
storage is encouraged.
o
Any person that owns, leases, controls, operates, or maintains any building or
structure in the hillside zoning distdct that has a substantial amount of flammable
matedal as determined by the City Fire Marshal, shall at all times do all of the
following:
a°
Maintain around and adjacent to such building or structure a firebreak made
by removing and clearing away, for a distance of not less than thirty feet (30')
on each side thereof or to the property line, whichever is nearer, all
flammable vegetation or other combustible growth. Clearance is to be
completed by trimming or mowing rather than scraping or grading. This
requirement does not apply to trees, ornamental shrubbery, or similar plants
which are used as ground cover, if they do not form a means of rapidly
transmitting fire from the native growth to any building or structure.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
29
.
10.
bo
Maintain around and adjacent to any such building or structure additional fire
protection or firebreak, made by removing all brush, flammable vegetation, or
combustible growth other than trees which is located from thirty feet (30') feet
to 100 feet from such building or structure or to the property line, whichever
is nearer, as may be required by the Fire Chief if he finds that, because of
extra hazardous conditions, a firebreak of only thirty feet (30') around such
building or structure is not sufficient to provide reasonable fire safety.
Clearance is to be completed by trimming or mowing rather than scraping or
grading. Grass and other vegetation, located more than thirty feet (30') from
such building or structure, less than 18 inches in height above the ground
may be maintained where necessary to stabilize the soil and prevent erosion.
Co
Remove that portion of any tree that extends within ten feet (10') of the outlet
of any chimney or stovepipe.
d,
Maintain any tree adjacent to or overhanging any building free of dead or
dying wood.
eo
Maintain the roof of any structure free of leaves, needles, or other dead
vegetative growth.
Provide and maintain at all times a screen over the outlet of every chimney or
stovepipe that is attached to any fireplace, stove, or other device that burns
any solid or liquid fuel. The screen shall be constructed of non-flammable
matedal with openings of not more than one-half inch in size.
All buildings shall have a permanently posted address that shall be placed at each
driveway entrance to the access roadway, and visible from both directions of travel
along the road. In all cases, the address shall be posted at the beginning of
construction and shall be maintained thereafter, and the address shall be visible and
legible from the road on which it is addressed. Off-site addressing and directional
arrows may be approved through the discretionary review process for residences. All
addressing shall comply with the City of Ukiah Fire Department specifications.
Maintenance of Defensible Space Measures:
a,
To ensure continued maintenance of properties in conformance with these
standards and measures and to assure continued availability, access, and
utilization of the defensible space provided for in this Article during a wildfire,
provisions for annual maintenance shall be included in the development
plans and/or shall be provided as a condition of the Use Permit, Parcel Map
or Subdivision Map approval.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
30
11. Disposal of Flammable Vegetation and Fuels:
a.
Disposal, including chipping, burying, burning or removal to an approved
disposal facility, of flammable vegetation and fuels caused by site
development and construction, road and driveway construction, and fuel
modification shall be completed prior to completion of road construction or
final inspection of a building permit, whichever is appropriate.
12. Roofing Material:
a.
The roof covering on any structure regulated by this ordinance shall have a
minimum Class ^ fire rating. Wood shingles and shakes, including fire
retardant treated type, are expressly prohibited.
13. Private Water Storage:
ao
Private water storage and/or emergency supply capabilities may be required
by the Fire Marshal.
K. Sewage Disposal:
1. Any development within two hundred feet (200') of an existing City sewer main shall be
required to connect to the City sewer system at the developer=s expense.
,
Development further than two hundred feet (200') from an existing City sewer main may
be allowed to utilize on-site sewage disposal systems provided the following standards
are met:
a.
Not more than one dwelling unit per system on any parcel, except that second
units may be connected to the system serving the primary residence, provided it
is approved by the Mendocino County Environmental Health Department, as
provided for in the Ukiah Municipal Code.
b.
On-site sewage disposal systems shall comply with all pertinent regulations of
the Mendocino County Environmental Health Department, as provided for in the
Ukiah Municipal Code.
C,
Prior to the approval of any Tentative Subdivision Map, Parcel Map, Boundary
Line Adjustment, or Certificate of Compliance application, the applicants shall
receive approval of standard on-site sewage disposal systems or alternative
systems for each proposed parcel or lot from the Mendocino County
Environmental Health Department or the City of Ukiah, whichever has jurisdiction
for the proposed systems.
L. Utilities:
.
All utilities shall be undergrounded, unless determined to be infeasible, because of
physical constraints. Any above ground utility infrastructure requires a Use Permit from
the Planning Commission.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
31
U.
9147:
A.
2. All non-City supplied services such as telephone, cable television, or natural gas shall be
undergrounded.
Pedestrian Facilities:
.
Public pedestrian walkways shall be incorporated into the design of public streets within
new subdivisions. Walkways may consist of paved or unpaved paths within the public
street right-of-way or within a dedicated public easement in an alternative location. Final
walkway design shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.
2. Public pedestrian right-of-ways/walkways may be provided by subdivision applicants
proposing private streets.
,
Public pedestrian right-of-ways/walkways may be required along private streets in new
subdivisions, provided a City Council adopted public trails plan includes the subject
property and a feasible walkway route, and the appropriate legal findings can be made to
support the requirement.
ARCHITECTURAL AND DESIGN ELEMENTS: All buildings shall be designed to reduce
the height, bulk, mass, and overall visibility of structures, and to facilitate screening with
natural vegetation or landscaping, and reduce grading and alteration of the natural terrain.
The following architectural and design elements shall be included/incorporated in all
proposed development projects in the RI-H1 and RI- H2 Zoning Distdct areas:
,
Alterations to natural contours and slopes, grading, cut and fill, and retaining walls shall
be minimized by using building techniques which reflect the natural topography of the
site. When cut and fill is unavoidable, restoration with vegetated permeable surfaces
shall be preferred over paving or impermeable surfaces.
.
A plan for the conservation of the natural vegetation of the subject property including
mature trees, and restoration using native, fire resistive vegetation. Non-native,
noninvasive vegetation which may be used sparingly to compliment the design should be
confined to sprinkled areas, and single specimens of trees, ornamental shrubbery, or
similar plants which are used as ground cover may be used if they do not form a means
of rapidly transmitting fire from the native growth to any building or structure.
,
Foundation types utilizing stepped levels which minimize grading, cut and fill, and the
need for retaining walls are encouraged, provided they are consistent with the spirit and
intent of the other architectural and design regulations contained in this Article.
4. Passive and active solar heating is encouraged. "Blue Max" construction, tdple-paned
windows, and other energy efficient construction materials/techniques are encouraged.
.
Extedor lighting shall be subdued, Iow wattage, and directed onto the immediate area
intended for lighting (pathway, entryway to residence, etc.) and away from adjacent
residential properties, the night sky, or out towards the valley below.
6. Street and pedestrian walkway lighting shall be minimized to that required for safety, and
shall not shine skyward or out towards the valley below.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
32
,
.
.
10.
11.
No grading involving the movement of more than fifty (50) cubic yards orthe construction
of any structure shall occur within one hundred (100) feet from any creek or stream.
Every effort shall be made to design and site new roads a minimum of one hundred
(100) feet from any creek or stream.
Project design shall avoid crossing natural drainages where possible. Where necessary,
bridges constructed over natural or man-made drainages shall be designed and
constructed so as to minimize riparian vegetation, habitat, stream channel, and erosion
impacts.
New drainage channels shall be placed in the least visible locations, and shall receive a
naturalizing treatment such as native rock and landscaping so that they appear to as a
natural part of the environment.
Development shall be located and designed to be subordinate to the natural setting. The
prominence of construction should be minimized by such devices as placing buildings so
that they will be screened by vegetation, rock outcroppings and depressions in the
topography.
Buildings shall conform to the natural contours of a site. Alteration of unique rock
outcroppings and landforms shall be avoided. Design techniques such as multiple level
structures following natural slopes are required.
12. Buildings shall be sited near the toe of a slope, rather than on the ddge.
13.
Colors of buildings shall be earth-tone, subdued and blend with the existing native
vegetation.
14. Large gable roof ends on downhill elevations shall be avoided.
15.
16.
17.
18.
The shape, color, and texture of roof treatments shall blend and harmonize with the
overall building design and surrounding natural environment. Multiple rooflines shall be
encouraged to avoid box-like designs.
Excessive glare, reflection, and lighting is prohibited. Methods such as limiting reflective
window and building surfaces, screening with vegetation or other materials, facing
reflective surfaces to the side or rear of the property, directing exterior lighting
downward, and using Iow watt bulbs/systems shall be required.
Access roads, driveways, parking areas and turnouts, and other improvements shall be
located and designed to minimize impacts to the viewshed.
Swimming pools shall be carefully sited on parcels to avoid areas of geologic instability.
Swimming pools shall include the necessary equipment to utilize the water in the event
of a structural or wildland fire. Swimming pools shall not be built of fill material.
19. Retaining walls shall not be used to create large, fiat yard or swimming pool areas.
20.
Retaining walls taller than five feet (5') are discouraged. The use of multiple-terraced,
lower retaining structures is strongly preferred. Terraced retaining walls shall be
separated by al least three feet (3') and include appropriate landscaping.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
33
B. Clustering Buildings:
9148:
A.
B,
.
Generally, buildings should be clustered in the most accessible, least visually prominent,
and most geologically stable portion or portions of the site. Clustering is especially
important on open hillsides. A greater separation of buildings may be preferable on
wooded hillsides to save trees. The prominence of construction can be minimized by
such devices as placing buildings so that they will be screened by wooded areas, rock
outcroppings and depressions in the topography.
2. Proposed cluster developments shall be subject to the Planned Development review
process contained in Article 14, Chapter 2 of the Ukiah Municipal Code.
.
.
.
Building sites for each proposed parcel or lot shall be shown on proposed Tentative
Subdivision Maps, Parcel Maps, Boundary Line Adjustments, and Certificate of
Compliance applications. Every effort shall be made to cluster the building sites/pads in
the least visually prominent area on the site, and at the same time, they shall be sited to
avoid excessive tree removal, and impacts on creeks and streams.
Yard setbacks and building separations for cluster development projects shall be
determined in the Planned Development review process.
Proposed subdivision projects may propose to cluster building pads in the most
geologically stable and least visually prominent portions of a site. In such a case, the
transfer of density and resulting lot sizes may be approved if the decision makers make
the following findings:
ao
Clustering the development is necessary to avoid unstable soils, sensitive plant
and animal habitats, areas that would impact natural drainages areas and
creeks, and visually prominent areas, or otherwise achieve the purposes of this
Article; and
bo
The resulting lot sizes are not less than 2 acre in gross size and the total density
does not exceed the maximum density that would otherwise be allowed on the
property; and
Co
The area on the overall parcel from which density is transferred is restricted in
perpetuity from future subdivision or development as required to effect the
density transfer.
LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS: All development proposals shall include a Landscape
Management Plan that is prepared by a landscape professional. All proposed Landscape
Management Plans shall comply with the following requirements:
Landscaping shall be proportional to the building elevations, with emphasis on screening
structures from the valley below.
Landscape plantings shall consist of native species, with an emphasis on those that are
drought tolerant, fire resistant, and compatible with the vegetation in the hillside area.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
34
C,
Turf grasses, shallow rooted ground covers, and high water using trees and shrubs are
strongly discouraged.
O.
Non-native trees and other plants that could spread, become noxious weeds, or dramatically
alter the character of the hillside area shall not be introduced.
E.
All landscape plantings required for visual screening shall be of sufficient size, health and
intensity so that a viable and mature appearance can be attained in a reasonably short
amount of time.
F,
Native deciduous trees shall constitute the majodty of the trees proposed along the south
and west building exposures; non-deciduous native species shall be restricted to areas that
do not inhibit solar access.
G. Landscape Management Plans shall include an automatic in'igation system.
H.
Landscape lighting shall be kept to a minimum and shall not cause significant glare or
reflection that could impact the Highway 101 corridor.
All required landscaping for residential development projects approved through the
discretionary review process shall be adequately maintained.
J,
Healthy existing mature trees on development project sites shall be preserved and
incorporated into the proposed landscape management plan.
K.
The Landscape Management Plan shall be designed consistent with the "defensible space"
requirements in Section 9145(J) of this Article, and shall be in substantial conformance with
the "Fuel Modification Plan Guidelines For Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones" prepared
by the State of California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, and on file with the
City Fire Marshal.
L.
The Planning Director, Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission, or City Council, in
consultation with the City Fire Marshal, shall have the authority to modify the required
elements of a landscape management plan depending upon the size, scale, intensity, and
location of the development project.
9149: RELIEF FROM REQUIREMENTS
Ao
Relief from the requirements contained herein is as provided in the various
sections. Where no process for relief is provided, a Variance application may be
submitted seeking relief from the requirements contained in this Article. Any
Variance application shall be subject to the process as listed in Article 20,
Chapter 2 of the Ukiah Municipal Code.
Hillside Zoning Regulations
City Council Public Workshop No. 1
September 2003
35
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
September 17, 2003
City Council Workshop Minutes
Attachment # ~/~
b. Approved Budget Amendment in the Amount of $4,275 to Water System
Improvement Project, Account 820.3908.250.000, For Additional .Costs To The
Federal Emergency Management Agency Floodway Study;
c. Approved Notice of Completion for 2002 STIP Construction of Sidewalk Al,
State Street, Specification No. 02-22;
d. Rejected Claim for Damages Received from Lennie Richards and R~ to
Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund;
e. Approved Phase II Fence Improvements For the Ukiah Municip the
Amount of $8,500;
f. Waived Bid Proposal Irregularity and Awarded Contract to
Inc. for Street Striping 2003, Specification Number 12 in Amount
$25,746.16.
Motion carried by the following roll call vote:
Smith, Baldwin, and Mayor Larson. NOES: Nc
cilmembers Rodin, Anderser
lone. ABSENT: N~
7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON
James Mulheren, stated that he is the self appointe
and inquired as to wh the American flag was not
Hall on September 11 t~/in commemoration of Patriot's Day.
~an for the 911 majority,
half mast in front of City
Michael Decker expressed hi,,
Officer and the City is doing
n that the City has
Animal Control
Mark Oswell explained that he
has been growing marijuana on a
commercial enterprise and also
on
er that :s.
Ukiah and that a person
~is should be treated as a
8. NEW BI
J~
R~
PI~
PI
Ukiah City
irector stated the
·
Draft Revised Hillside Zoning
e of this agenda item is to introduce the
· ' of the existing Zoning Ordinance to the
Io conduct a public workshop to further discuss
the draft revi,,
and
expand
hillside
Lnd provide direction to staff on a number of major outstanding
topics as the adoption of a new set of development standards and the
new that would separate the hillside district into "upper"
exc lumber of parcels that do have hillside characteristics, and
~illside di to the south to capture a number of parcels that do have
He summal
essentially
Ilside
ell
d the Planning Commission's recommendation to Council, which is
the existing Hillside Regulations and adopt new Regulations for the
~g District. He went on to discuss other recommendations of the
i. Some of the issues controversial in nature are the proposed expansion of
parcel size requirement for the upper areas, the concept of allowing for
units, expansion of the technical information requirements, and the design
for hillside residential development.
Regular City Council Meeting
September 17, 2003
Page 2 of 14
He further advised that staff did not prepare an environmental document for the 'Draft
Ordinance Regulations so that the City Council would have the opportunity t¢
and/or make changes to the Planning Commission's initial ~n
seeking guidance on the new issues, and once resolved, will allow staff
Preliminary Draft Hillside Regulations, and prepare the required
document.
Councilmember Baldwin asked a series of questions
factor as to the quantity of land that must remain natural to the
developments constitute accessory uses that are normall~
residences.
th
what
Director Stump responded there was no discussi
area ratio and/or lot coverage standard, noting n,
page 7 of the Regulations, Section 9141,
amount of acreage to be retained as a
of average cross slope. He also stated that such
swimming pool, tennis court, garden area, and other
single-family residence.
Site
restricting or creating a rio(
exists. He reference(
demonstrates the
the percentage
uses would include a
of uses found around a
Councilmember Andersen ~n
parcel divisions were determi
how the concept
and lower
Director Stump stated tha~
was to conduct fieldwork, review aE
from various vantage points in the
for each of the
were more
g mc erse re~
parcel c
divisi~ rmination.
the upper ar
closer t~
The divi~
fieldwork was
and lower divisions
utilization of binoculars
he assessor's parcel number
~rder to determine which parcel
as opposed to those upper parcels
not uniform because of the individual
cst beneficial component to making the
Councilme~
requirement si
as to how the minimum 30-foot vegetation
a building was derived.
looking
reaso
it came in part from the defensible space requirements
le development and what seemed appropriate for fire
g the underbrush is for fuel modification for fire.
Andersen inquired about how the regulations within the City limits
regulations outside the City limits in the general vicinity, especially in the
len Avenue and where it comes into the City limits.
ump explained that most of the land outside the City limits in the hillside
40-acre minimum parcels and classified as Suburban Residential. There are
~rban standards in the City's regulations than in the County's regulations for the
acre minimum.
Regular City Council Meeting
September 17, 2003
Page 3 of 14
Councilmember Rodin inquired about discussions' with'the applicant concerning
undergrounding of utilities and firebreaks with regard to visibility.
Director Stump explained that the Planning Commission
landscaping and trees be planted while the native flammable vegetation
terms of undergrounding utilities, the typical way it was been done in
trenching, which disturbs the earth. He explained that new technol~
micro tunnel utility lines and it's a much less disruptive way of tren(
I
h
to
Councilmember Smith inquired about the height limits for
Why the 30 foot restriction for the lower and 20 feet for th~
par(
Director Stump explained that the primary reason
visible and the taller the structures, the more ws
this project is to blend the development in
Planning Commission's views on this matter.
rezoning as one whole package. If the City Council
a particular topic back to the Commission, he would be
Commission and then continue the process that staff is
take it back as one package.
the upper area is more high
of the intents
He discuSsed the
prefer doing the'
~t they wanted to remand
return it to the Planning
on, and
Mayor Larson inquired if th~
also inquired if there was a
criteria that apply equally throughc
that was used to arrive at classifyin(j
category. He
context of formulating
eted in the same sense
Director Stum
there should
they could
and too
ende(
Commission struggled with that and felt
/-parcel analysis. They decided
it would be too time consuming
~ssion struggled with the situation, they
Councilme bout attachment 5 that lists General Plan
Implementatio~ sures that provide a rationale for doing the hillside ordinance. He
:hat several measures that mention the preservation of open space
access t trails from the valley are missing. He inquired as to what
in the enh~ recreation and public access of the hills.
Director
and noted t
He went
contained
;d that there is a section under Pedestrian Facilities on page 28
was discussed in detail with the public and affected property owners.
discuss the three provisions relative to public pedestrian walkways
Planning Commission's recommendation.
'ublic comment period opened.
Regular City Council Meeting
September 17, 2003
Page 4 of 14
Members of the audience that spoke in support of the proposed Hillside Zoning
regulations or further regulations for hillside developments were: Susan Cuff and Fred
Koeppel,
Scott Miller, Mendocino County Division of Environmental Health, was
that as the prOperties are developed, the City could extend sewer '
not possible, the County would be happy to continue its relationshi
pursue other septic options for the developer.
~hat
or
Members of the audience that spoke against the proposed Hillside Z
any additional regulations fOr hillside developments wer
Grauber, Scott Butler, and Brian Manning,
regulati,
ecker,
Members of the audience that requested there
matter were: James Mulheren, Tim Pletcher, J~
Pletcher, Jan Moore, George Rau, Mary
Christenson, Al Beltrami, and Eric Crane.
research concerning th
bert Krause,
de la Peza, David
8:40 p.m.: Public comment period closed.
8:40 p.m.: Recessed
8:53 p.m.: Reconvened.
Councilmember Baldwin
Commission to review s.
conceivably give the Paths,
to study the trail and access issues.
the Planning
;ide district that could
(POSCC) a chance
Councilm~ was of the
regarding units
felt there i,, at the heigl'
recomm Iion that send
with dire~ s for them
that there were many people who spoke
could be developed in the western hills· He
areas more closely. It was his
Iire package back to the Planning
ew the document and hold more public
Councilmt
al say, he
the vari<
· make
sending
areas iderby
dersen discussed the Helen Avenue issue. Although Council has
if the City Council wanted to expend its time on the entire
when the Planning Commission has been charged to
to the City Council. In conclusion, he felt that
:k to the Planning Commission made sense, with specific
uncil to be reviewed.
Councilme~
the
Rodin was of the opinion that if Council sends the document back to
ommission, it will still come back to the Council for review.
explained that by sending the document back to the Commission, it
for residents of the Helen Avenue area to voice their concerns to the
Commission. He expressed a need for specific direction to Staff and the
with regard to those things Council wants further input and delineation.
Regular City Council Meeting
September 17, 2003
Page 5 of 14
There has been concern with height limits and the need for further discussion
concerning second units. There was also concern expressed regarding public
recreational access. He disagreed and thought that it is not a zoning issue.
City Attorney Rapport explained that part of the Initial Study is
and whether they can be mitigated, and that would determine
Declaration or an EI R should be prepared.
Mayor Larson noted that other concerns raised by the
concerns, concerns related to irrigation requirements,
irrigation of the project, the issue of group homes and
exclude larger projects in the same sense that they wOul
or three story apartment buildings on the hillside as
also noted that there was some comment about g~
flat land development having some parity and
He inquired as to architectural review of secon~
a second unit in the hillside district is less
lans
the
excl~
water isSues. He
s for hillside development an(
felt it ~s a valid
if th, that apply to
unit.
Director Stump advised that the second unit ordin~
the City Council would regulate second units in the hil
ordinance there are some architE LI compatibility requirem
architecture standards for seco~
was recently adopted by
In the recent
invasion, and
Discussion continued with
the western hillside and drilling
concerning the issue of metering the
of the water.
well
e custo
~nstructing a home on
There was discussion
aying the City for their use
Director the
g nical
Rau me~ Id be
open to Mr. Rau's input concerning the
be required. He noted that Mr.
s to the City.
M~
to be very
Idin concurred that the information may prove
expressed concern regarding the upper and lower parcels
investigation. He stated that other jurisdictions have
:els. He inquired as to the meaning of what would be
residential atmosphere". He noted that it seems there are
with regard to the reports that are being asked and "maybe
;xplained that it should be adequately defined. He noted that on page 11
the Planning Director's responsibility, it states, "the Planning Director
and felt there is an interesting twist in that if the Planning Director
~mething and it's negative towards the developer, then they can appeal
City Council. He thought that it should follow the usual procedure of
Planning Commission before it comes to the City Council.
Regular City Council Meeting
September 17, 2003
Page 6 of 14
Director Stump advised that the language Councilmember Andersen referred to is
contained in the Municipal Code and has been there for some time.
Councilmember Andersen noted that he is very sympathetic to the
design and that he is a little uneasy with telling people what specific type
can build when they own property that they expect to develop. A descri
tones" does not help him determine paint color. He wanted to find
specific or provide a range so'people will know what is expected of
know who would judge what is the best design.
ike "eart
~ more
to
Director Stump stated that the intent is not to dictate a cert lesign
creativity in a meaningful look at the hillside and a mean' designing a
home that works with the topography, and works will and not
against it. In terms of "earth tones" they are it blending in with the n~
environment.
Mayor Larson suggested deleting specific
on the ability to blend in and not conflict with the surro~
and instead focus
features.
Councilmember Baldwin explained that one issue he h;
structures allowed. It was his o
accessory buildings. He felt th
something could be
Ordinance. He noted that ti
need to acquire easements and o
that the idea of identifying some
a parallel process for a trail plan ar
this process. HE
concerning
required".
· ion that it seems very I~
~s one of the hugest
if se
buildoL
number of
are unlimited
thought that
are left in the
~ it infeasible, we
If the City Attorney says
linance, there is a need for
;asements plan that parallels
age 27 says, "Shall be required to hookup"
of the speakers used the words "may be
Dire
feet
However,
from the
ms."
It goe:
'egulation
version says "Any development within 200
required to connect." That is the City Code.
hat says, "Development further than 200 feet
main "may" be allowed to utilize on site sewage disposal
say that an "on site sewage disposal system shall comply with
County Environmental Health.
Mayor
criteria th
elevation
places. Ve
ability with
,n there be more discussion and focus on the specific
~ke for regulations in the upper and lower zones. He didn't think that
issue because some higher places are less visible than lower
and existing density are other criteria's. There should be some
e Ordinance to allow, through discretionary review, to take into account
s of a parcel that lend themselves to a higher or lower degree of
parcel that is high up and invisible from the highway doesn't necessarily
eet the same design standards as a parcel that is at a much lower elevation.
Regular City Council Meeting
September 17, 2003
Page 7 of 14
Director Stump summarized that the Council is requesting the Planning Commission
look at the height limits of the upper areas, the idea of second units or no second units,
reevaluate the Helen Avenue parcels and provide a forum for those property to
be involved, look at the upper and lower level criteria and analyze that
provide for those things mentioned by Mayor Larson, and discuSs whether
issue. He noted that Council also wants Staff to look at the day care h
state preemption, and staff investigation as to whether the City is b~ law
and whether some high impact uses could be excluded on the hill: also
some consensus of the Commission to look at the design of
dictating color and allowing some flexibility. Also, the way in whi
crafted it appears that someone can have an unlimited
do have to keep a certain amount of the area in
Commission to have further discussions and anal~
metering of water.
also look into the-
Councilmember Smith explained that his
higher than 20 feet since there is a 30-foot
unsure if there are restrictions on architectural desigr
24-foot height would limit it.
whethe
to be a little bit
level. He was
20 feet as opposed to
Director Stump advised that it's
height limitation through the dis~
does not require a variance
he Ordinance that if
process, they
required of
exceed the
~est to do that. It
It was the consensus of thl
look
Director Stump advised that he
Commission study th
ample notice lng to be
the ation back to the Planning
not~ Dy the City Council and provide
in the process.
2B-946
8.
Public Work"
in q
The
remove
roots of
house.
who are
Two Redwood Trees Located in the City
Standley
Engineer Steele provided a report on the history of the
requested Council's approval of Staff's recommendation to
the adjacent right-of-way to 1200 West Standley Street.
nt property owners, have requested that the City of Ukiah
from the right-of-way along their property frontage. The
'ees are causing damage to a retaining wall at the front of the
She
at Staff is of the opinion that if the trees remain there will be liability for
~ for damage caused by the root system and that adequate modifications
,stem would harm the trees such that it would, result in even greater liability
and property. Based on these risks, it is Staff's recommendation, supported
~commendation from REMIF and the arborist, that the two trees should be
Regular City Council Meeting
September 17, 2003
Page 8 of 14
A1-FACHMENT NO. 5
2001 Hillside Constraints Analysis
Prepared by
Leonard Charles and Associates
UKIAH WESTERN HILLS
CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
Leonard Charles & Associates
UKIAH WESTERN HILLSIDE
CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
November, 2001
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
Ukiah Planning and Community Development Department
300 Seminary Drive
Ukiah, California 95482
Leonard Charles and Associates
7 Robie Court
San Anselmo, California 94960
415.454.4575
Table of Contents
Page
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
Purpose of the Study
Executive Summary
Methodology and Report Format
Study Area Description
Buildout Potential
Environmental Constraints and Impacts
A.
B.
C.
D.
F_
F.
H.
I.
J.
Geology and Soils
Vegetation
Wildlife
Hydrology
Fire Hazard
Aesthetics
Traffic and Circulation
Public Services
Recreation
Summery of Constraints on the Six Major Parcels
1
2
5
7
11
13
13
19
24
32
36
42
45
53
56
59
Table of Figures
Following Page
Location Map
Study Area Characteristics
Geologic and Hydrologic Features
Table of Tables
Page
Study Area Parcels
Minimum Lot Size
9
11
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The City of Ukiah is in the process of developing new regulations guiding future
development on hillside lots. These regulations will replace the existing hillside
regulations in the Zoning Ordinance (i.e., "Article 11: Regulations in Hillside Lot Size (-H)
Districts," hereafter called the hillside regulations). The purpose of this current study is to
assess the effects of development under existing hillside regulations in the Western
Hillside area (hereafter called the Study Area) on the environment. Figures 1 and 2 show
the boundaries of the Study Area assessed in this report.
It is not the purpose of this report to describe site-specific constraints for individual
properties within the Study Area. These site-specific assessments will be conducted
dudng preparation of development applications or as part of the City's CEQA review of
those applications. The intent of this report is to provide the City with an overview of
sensitive resources in the Study Area and to describe the possible range of constraints
and impacts that could result from future development.
Historically, there has been no to very little residential development of the Study Area,
with the main exceptions being homes constructed on the lower eastern slopes where
driveway extensions from City streets were possible. Most of the Study Area is too
steep and rugged to allow feasible residential development. However, as homesites
become increasingly rare in the region along with an increasing desire by some citizens
to develop large homes with panoramic views, there is increasing interest in developing
these remote and rugged sites. The recent Hull/Piffero Subdivision application for five
residential lots near the southwest comer of the Study Area is an example of this recent
interest in developing the area. The City is concemed that such development could result
in potentially significant environmental impacts as well as result in potential risks to future
residents of the area as well as residents of the City of Ukiah and other adjacent areas.
To ensure the orderly development of the Study Area is consistent with environmental
and engineering standards as well as policies and regulations included in the City's
General Plan, Municipal Ordinance, and other planning documents, the City has
contracted to have this background report prepared. The background report will be one
tool used in developing the City's new hillside development regulations.
UKIAH
HIGH
i
SCHOOL
UKIAH MUNICIPAL
GOLF COURSE
UKIAH MUNICIPAL
GOLF' COURSE
GROVE
PARK
i
Figure 1
PROJECT LOCATION
~.,~,,~ Ukiah Western Hills Study Area
COUNTY
YOKAYO
SCHOOL
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
I1.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Study Area is a highly constrained piece of land, which is a major reason why little
development has occurred here in the past. This report identifies a range of likely major
development constraints and possible environmental impacts that would result if
development were allowed.
It is estimated that as many as 66 new residences could be constructed on the Study
Area given the basic slope-density requirements of the City's existing hillside regulations.
Given other requirements of the hillside regulations and the City's General Plan, it is likely
that less development than the maximum 66 residences would actually be allowed and
approved. However, this report assumes that the maximum of 66 residences is possible.
Of these 66 residences, 46 would be allowed on the 6 larger western parcels that
compdse 48 percent of the Study Area.
The following summary includes the main constraints that would or should reduce this
maximum buildout potential as well as the principal environmental impacts that would
result if this buildout were to occur:
The entire Study Area is a Very High Fire Hazard Sevedty Zone. Even if new
residences are constructed of tire-resistive materials, provided standard vegetation
clearance and trimming, and provided required minimum fireflows, it is possible to
likely that new residences would be destroyed by a major wildfire starting on or
crossing the Study Area. There is no to little chance that firefighters would try to
make a stand at residences surrounded by heavy fuels on steep slopes if a major
wildfire was threatening the area.
Development of 66 new homes and future residential use of those homes will
substantially increase the dsk of fire ignitions in the area. Under proper weather
conditions, such ignitions could threaten not only residents of the Study Area but
urban neighborhoods to the east and other areas.
Due to the lack of connecting or looped roads, future residents would have one
potentially narrow, twisting, and steep road to evacuate dudng a fire or other natural
catastrophe. Unless major firebreaks are developed along these roads, the roads
may be overrun by a fast-moving wildfire thereby trapping residents or injudng or
killing evacuees caught on the roads at the time the fire passes. Access roads
would exceed City standards and typical fire requirements for lengths of dead-end
roads.
· The more new residences allowed in the Study Area, the more homes and lives that
will be at dsk and the greater the dsk of a wildfire starting on the Study Area.
Due to steep slopes, it is unlikely that new access roads into the Study Area (other
than minor driveways serving small parcels located on lower slopes adjacent to the
east side of the Study Area) could be approved, due to potential geologic instabilities,
erosion and sedimentation of Gibson Creek and other receiving waterways,
substantial loss of vegetation and wildlife habitat, and the visual effects of new and
necessarily wide (if constructed to be fire safe and meet City standards) access
roads.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Because it is unlikely that new roads from the east would be allowed to serve new
development on the larger western parcels, access to these parcels would need to
be extensions from existing roads or upgrading existing roads to meet City standards.
Given slope and other geologic constraints as well as other constraints, it would be
difficult to construct these access extensions and improvements.
Homesite development would be constrained by the lack of level building sites. Site
geology is not suitable for fill grading to create fiat building sites. Hillside building sites
are constrained by landsliding and unstable slopes, erosion potential, and potential
lack of suitable leachfield sites.
Buildout of the Study Area would cause a cumulatively significant loss of open space
supporting native vegetation and wildlife.
Development of some sites may be constrained by the presence of special status
species of wildlife and vegetation.
Development would potentially cause erosion, increased runoff, and transport of
urban pollutants to Gibson Creek and other waterways, thereby adversely affecting
the Federally Threatened steelhead trout population and other aquatic species in
Gibson Creek and possibly other waterways. Study Area buildout could have a
significant adverse cumulative impact on fish and aquatic species
Loss of habitat, fragmentation of remaining habitat, and the presence of domestic
dogs and cats could have a significant cumulative impact on wildlife.
Additional runoff from new development may cause flooding or the need for drainage
system improvements to Gibson Creek and two storm drain systems south of Gibson
Creek. Unless such improvements are made, additional Study Area development
could cause or increase flooding in developed parts of the City.
Future development would be constrained by City hillside regulations and General
Plan policies regarding protection of views from the Valley. Even if design and siting
mitigations are required for new development, there would be a cumulative change in
the views of the Study Area from many vantage points in Ukiah and the Valley.
Additional night lighting would also cause a substantial change in nighttime views. It
is likely that these changes in the viewshed would be considered a significant
cumulative impact.
Vegetation clearance around homes and along roads to meet fire safety requirements
will open up the Study Area and make roads and homes visible from vantage points
on the Valley floor.
New traffic would add traffic to the City street system and may cause existing
congested intersections on main artedal streets to operate at lower Levels of
Service.
Additional traffic will aggravate existing speeding and traffic safety problems on West
Standley Street.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
New development may be constrained by the ability of police and emergency medical
personnel to promptly respond to calls for emergency service.
New development may be constrained by a lack of water and lack of suitable
leachfield locations.
New development could limit the City's ability to construct a trail network and parks on
the Study Area.
The existing ability to develop second homes on legal parcels could more than double
the number of new homes allowed in the Study Area, although second units are
limited to a maximum of 1,000 square feet in size. While it is unlikely this number of
second homes would or could be developed due to the numerous site constraints
summarized above, the addition of even some additional second residences would
result in even more significant environmental effects as regards erosion, slope
stability, loss of native plant and wildlife habitat, increased dsk of fire ignitions,
increased numbers of people and residences at risk from a wildfire, changes in
views, loss of recreational potential, increased traffic on residential streets, and
demand for public services.
The six largest properties on the Study Area contain 237 acres, and 46 additional
new residences could be constructed, on these parcels. It is estimated that site
constraints would limit new house construction to 20-30 new homes. However,
even 20-30 new residences would result in most of the impacts summarized above.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
III.
METHODOLOGY AND REPORT
FORMAT
Methodology
The following methodology was used to prepare this report:
· Background data were supplied by the City Planning and Community Development
Department.
· The report preparers interviewed Planning and Community Development Department
staff to identify key issues and report direction.
· Assessor's parcel data were reviewed to determine existing parcels, parcel size,
and development on the Study Area.
· Topographic maps and other data on Study Area slopes were reviewed to estimate
the maximum number of residences that would be allowed given existing hillside
regulations.
· Field surveys of all roads leading to the Study Area were conducted along with
surveys of adjacent residential neighborhoods in the City of Ukiah.
· Walking and ddving field surveys were conducted for those portions of the Study
Area that the City was able to obtain permission to cross. These surveys included:
· The road leading through the Nix property to the site of the Hull/Piffero
Subdivision.
· The road leading to the City-owned property (old fish hatchery site) on the
north bank of Gibson Creek.
· The road paralleling the north side of Gibson Creek.
· Mendocino Place and ~e road lading to the water tank above the end of
Mendocino Place.
· The driveway/road to the east end of the Due property.
· Lookout Ddve.
· The road on the Bittenbender property.
· Low Gap Regional Park.
· Existing reports addressing Study Area resources were compiled and reviewed.
· Consultations were held with the following individuals:
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Chadey Stump, Ukiah Planning and Community Development Director
Diana Steele, Ukiah Department of Public Works
Chds Dewey, Ukiah Police Department
Chuck Yates, Ukiah Fire Department
George Borecky, Ukiah Water and Wastewater
Jim Looney, Ukiah Public Works Department, Superintendent of Streets
Sarah Nussaman, Califomia Department of Fish and Game
· A preliminary draft report was submitted to City staff for review.
· This draft report was prepared.
Format
The remainder of this report contains a summary description of the Study Area, a
calculation of the buildout potential for the Study Area, and a discussion of the
environmental constraints on future development of the Study Area. It is not the purpose
of this report to describe site-specific impacts that might result from specific future
development proposals in the Study Area, as such an analysis would depend on the
particulars of the project application and the development site. However, this report does
provide some indication of the likely significant environmental effects that could occur if
buildout development were to occur. Such impact discussions are restricted to the areas
of the environment addressed in this report, namely geology and soils, vegetation,
wildlife, hydrology, traffic and circulation, aesthetics, public services, and recreation.
Other areas of potential impact (e.g., noise, air quality, and cultural resources) would
need to be assessed in the CEQA documents required for future discretionary actions.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
IV.
STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION
The Study Area contains most of the larger properties on the west side of the City of
Ukiah that are currently zoned RI-H (Hillside Residential). There are a number of
additional parcels that are zoned RI-H east of the Study Area. However, City staff
determined that most of these parcels were already developed with homes and were too
small to allow additional subdivision. The Study Area includes the larger lots that may
have future development potential.
The Study Area contains much of the ridge that borders the west side of the city. While
there are some residences along the lower slopes of the Study Area, most of the Study
Area is undeveloped wildland. The ridge is quite steep in most locations and heavily
vegetated pdmadly by Montane Hardwood-Conifer vegetation. The canyon containing the
easterly flowing Gibson Creek dissects the Study Area. This canyon contains redwood
trees and other dpadan vegetation near the creek. The northem edge of the Study Area
is bounded by the incised canyon containing Orrs Creek. Orm Creek and the area to the
south are part of Low Gap Regional Park. Further south, the Study Area is bordered on
the east by Low Gap Regional Park, the Ukiah Munidpai Golf Course, and residential
development that has extended along the base of the ddge, and, in some places slightly
up the ddge and into the Study Area.
This wildland immediately adjacent to the urban development of Ukiah provides a distinct
"edge" to the city and visually forms the western backdrop of the community. Whereas
most California cities have rural residential development bordering the edges of the
community, Ukiah has the unique situation of a wildland virtually at the city's doorstep.
Currently, the Study Area is not used for agriculture or timber harvesting, it provides
habitat for native vegetation and wildlife. While there are residences along the Study
Area's eastern border (i.e., at or near the bottom of the ddge), there are virtually no
residences in the steeper sections of the area.
Most of the Study Area is contained in one large block extending from Orrs Creek on the
north to Hillview Avenue on the south. There is one small section of the Study Area to
the south. This small area is located off the west end of Mendocino Place.
-
There are a number of old firebreaks and old ranch roads through the Study Area (as
shown on Figure 2). The most obvious (i.e., 'most visible) is a road starting on West
Standley Avenue south of Gibson Creek that leads to the Nix property. The owner of the
Nix property also graded a large building envelope on the upper slopes of the Study Area
south of Gibson Creek, and this graded area is quite visible from vadous vantage points
in the Ukiah Valley. A residence is currently being constructed on the Nix property.
This access road would also provide access to the Hull/Piffero property in the southwest
comer of the Study Area. There is a current subdivision proposal for this 40-acre parcel
that would create five lots on that property. The road to the proposed building sites is
quite visible from numerous vantage points on the Valley floor.
Other roads include an unpaved road that starts near the end of West Standley Street
and travels west off the Study Area; this road parallels the north side of Gibson Creek.
This road provides access to the one existing residence on the Study Area that is not
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
immediately adjacent or near the Study Area's eastern edge. It also provides access to a
summer residence further west off the Study Area.
There is an existing unpaved read that starts at the Bittenbender residence west of
Highland Avenue and switchbacks up the hill on the Bittenbender property. This road
provides access only to portions of the Bittenbender property.
Lookout Drive is a narrow, paved City street that provides access to three existing
residences and several undeveloped parcels. This road starts at the south end of
Highland Court.
There are 33 existing residences on the Study Area. There is an approved residence on
the Nix property that is currently being constructed. There is a current application to
create five building sites and develop one residence on the Hull/Piffero property. The City
Council recently adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project.
The Study Area comprises approximately 495 acres, all but 16 acres are within the main
block of the area. Table 1 shows the parcels on the Study Area, the approximate size of
each parcel, its zoning, and whether it has an existing residence. The information
describing parcel size in Table 1 is based on a review of Assessors Parcel Maps. For
many smaller parcels, the size of the property was approximated since the AP Maps do
not provide a precise size; however, the parcel size estimates are sufficient for a
planning level' of analysis. This table should not be considered as a complete parcel list,
as a few smaller parcels on the east side of the Study Area shown on the AP Maps
available to the report preparers may have been subdivided into additional parcels. The
column in Table 1 describing "potential units" is based on the report preparers' and City
staff's review of USGS topographic maps, aedal photographs, and the large scale maps
prepared by the Califomia Division of Mines and Geology (Landslides and Engineering
Geology of the Western Ukiah Area, Central Mendocino County, California, Sydnor and
Sowma-Bawcom, 1991).
A review of these maps and data shows that virtually every parcel in the Study Area has
an average cross slope of 30 percent or greater. Thus, the estimate of the maximum
number of new units is based on the hillside regulations requirement that a minimum 5-
acre parcel.would be required for each new residence.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Table 1
Study Area Parcels
Assessors Parcel Number "' Approximate Acreage Zoning Exist- Poten-
lng tial New
Units Units
001-020-69 (Low Gap 40.0 P-F 0 0
Regional Park) ,
001-020-70 (Low Gap 8.0 P-F 0
Regional Park)
001-020-12 (City of Ukiah) 40.0 P-F 0 0
001-440-2 1.6 R-1 H-2 1 0
001-440-9 0.7 R-1 H-2 0 0
001-440-11 1.4 R-1 H-2 1 0
,
001-440-8 0.2 R-1 H-2 0 1
001-440-4 1.0 R-1 H-2 I 0
001-440-6 0.15 R-1 H-2 0 1
001-440-5 2.8 R-1 H-2 I 0
,
001-410-25 0.3 R-1 H-2 I 0
001-410-26 0.2 R-1 H-2 I 0
001-410-17 0.4 R-1 H-2 1 0
001-410-16 1.5 R-1 H-2 0 1
001-410-18 1.5 R-1 H-2 0 1
,
001-410-19 1.5 R-1 H-2 I 0
001-410-20 1.4 R-1 H-2 0 1
001-030-1 (City of Ukiah) 57.0 P-F & 0 0
R-1 H-2
001-030-3 (Nix) 26.6 R-1 H-2 0 5
001-030-4 0.5 R-1 H-2 0 1
001-030-5 (McKibbin) 40.0 R-1 H-2 0 8
001-030-6 (Eiffert) 2.0 R-1 H-2 I 0
001-040-1 (Nix) 40.0 R-1 H-2 0 7
001-040-2 (Duwe) 40 0 R-1 H-2 0 8
001-040-4 (Bittenbender) 50.0 R-1 H-2 0 10
001-040-14- 13.0 R-1 H-2 0 2
001-040-45 (Hull/Piffero) 40.0 R-1 H-2 0 8
001-040-59 3.5 R-1 H-2 I 0
001-040-61 2.0 R-1 H-2 0 1
001-040-65 10.0 R-1 H-2 0 1
,
001-040-66 3.0 R-1 H-2 1 0
001-040-67 3.0 R-1 H-2 0 1
001-040-68 3.0 R-1 H-2 I 0
001-120-2 3.0 R-1 H-2 0 1
001-120-4 1.1 R-1 H-2 1 0
001'120-10 0.2 R-1 H-2 I 0
001-120-24 0.2 R-1 H-2 1 0
. ,
001-120-25 0.2 R-1 H-2 I 0
001-120-29 1.3 R-1 H-2 0 1
001-120-30 3.5 R-1 H-2 I 0
001-120-34 2.5 R-1 H-2 0 I
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Assessors Parcel Number Approximate Acreage Zoning Exist- Poten-
ing rial New
Units Units
,
001-130-47 0.6 R-1 H-2 0 1
001-130-52 1.0 R-1 H-2 0 1
001-160-9 0.2 R-1 H-2 1 0
001-160-10 0.2 R-1 H-2 1 0
001-160-11 1.4 R-1 H-2 1 0
001-160-12 0.1 R-1 H-2 I 0
, ,
001-160-56 0.3 R-1 H-2 0 1
001-190-8 8.0 R-1 H-2 1 0
001-190-10 1.4 R-1 H-2 1 0
· ,
001-190-11 0.4 R-1 H-2 1 0
001-200-13 4.4 R-1 H-2 0 1
001-230-8 7.0 R-1 H-2 I 0
001-230-9 1.7 R-1 H-2 1 0
001-271-8 0.8 R-1 H-2 1 0
001-271-14 0.3 R-1 H-2 I 0
·
001-271-15 1.1 R-1 H-2 I 0
001-271:-18 0.1 R-1 H-2 0 1
,,
001-271-19 1.0 R-1 H-2 I 0
001-420-15 1.0 R-I H-2 I 0
001-420-29 1.5 R-1 H-2 1 0
,
001-420-30 1.0 R-1 H-2 1 0
001-420-31 ' 12.0 R-1 H-2 0 1
, ,
001-420-33 2.0 R-1 H-2 1 0
,
Total 495.75 34 66
!
10
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Vs
BUILDOUT POTENTIAL
Development of properties on the Study Area is subject to the regulations contained in
"Article 11: Regulations in Hillside Lot Size (-H) Districts" of the City Zoning Ordinance.
These regulations include the following:
New development in the RI/H zone shall require a use permit. The maximum number
of new lots (i.e., minimum lot size) shown on Table 2 would be allowed only if
development complied with other provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and General
Plan.
· Based on the average slope for the parcel, the following minimum lot size and amount
of land to be retained in a natural state apply:
Table 2
Minimum Lot Size
Average Parcel Slope in
Percent.
15-20 %
20-25%
25-30%
Minimum Lot Size
10,000 square feet
20,000 square feet
1 acre
Percentage of Property
Retained in Natural State
50%
55%
80%
31=50% 5 acres 95%
i Over 51% 10 acres 100%
According to this Table, new development would not be allowed on parcels where
the average slope exceed 51 percent. However, this could result in a property
owner not being able to develop his property, possibly in conflict with legal dghts to
develop some use on a property. This inconsistency will be addressed in the revised
hillside regulations.
All projects are required to submit a soils engineering report that establishes criteria
for project grading.
All projects are required to submit a geology report that includes construction
recommendations.
All projects must submit a hydrology report to assess potential hydrologic effects on
the project and off-site hydrologic impacts.
A vegetation report is required of all projects that describes impacts of the project on
the vegetation. All rare and endangered species must be assessed, and areas
containing such species shall not be developed
Structure elevations and perspectives of the proposed development from two
different perspectives must be supplied.
A grading plan that includes erosion control is required.
11
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
In addition to these specific hillside regulations, any future development would need to be
found to be consistent with policies and programs of the City's General Plan and other
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. The General Plan contains a number of policies and
programs aimed at protecting natural resources and ensuring adequate public services
and public safety
Based on a review of the available topographic maps and other data and on the minimum
parcel size shown in Table 2, a maximum of 66 residences could be constructed in the
Study Area. This number of possible residences would be unlikely to actually be built
given site constraints and access limitations. In addition, many of the small lots on the
east side of the Study Area would likely not be subdivided even if that were possible,
since owners would often desire to have a large view lot for their home. However, it is
possible that this number of units could be constructed given existing zoning regulations.
Table 1 shows the maximum number of new residences per parcel.
Of these 66 new units, 20 residences could be developed on the lower eastem slopes of
the Study Area where access might be provided by pdvate ddveway extensions from
the existing public street system to the east. Forty-six (46) new units could be
constructed on the 6 privately owned, larger parcels in the western part of the Study
Area (at higher elevations); these 6 larger, privately owned parcels contain about 237
acres of the total 496 acres in the Study Area, or about 48 percent of the area.
Second Units
Currently, City hillside regulations allow for the construction of second units (limited to a
maximum size of 1,000 square feet) on a legal parcel. This provision would allow for
potentially more than twice as many new units as previously described (since some small
lots that have an existing dwelling could also be developed with a second home on those
parcels). However, it is extremely unlikely this number of second units would ever be
realized for the following reasons:
Most parcels on the Study Area are already so constrained that it would be difficult to
identify and develop feasible homesites for primary residences. Finding additional
homesites for second units would be as or more difficult.
· Most future owners would likely construct large view homes. Such owners do not
typically develop second units for renters, though guest homes are possible.
The costs of developing a residence in this constrained area would make it unlikely
that property owners would develop second units to be used as rentals. Again,
guest homes are possible.
While large numbers of second homes are not likely to be built, such construction is
certainly possible given existing City regulations. Though this report is not intended to
provide recommendations, it is noted that State law allows the City to adopt an ordinance
which precludes second homes from specified areas so long as the City makes
appropriate findings that second homes in said area would have "specific adverse
impacts on the public health, safety, and welfare," (California Govemment Code, Title 7,
Section 65852.2[c]).
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Vi.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS AND
IMPACTS
This section of the report describes what environmental impacts can be expected if the
66 residences allowed under existing hillside regulations were constructed. Each
subsequent subsection describes the pertinent environmental resources, how those
resources constrain future development, and the range of impacts that can be expected
if development were to occur. The constraints section of each analysis begins with a
brief summary of some of the more pertinent regulatory policies and standards
established by the City or other public agencies. Each section ends with conclusions
regarding constraints and impacts.
Aa
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
1. Setting
The geology of the area and geological constraints on development are best described in
Landslides and Engineering Geology of the Western Ukiah Area, Central Mendocino
County, California (Sydnor and Sowma-Bawcom, 1991). This report was prepared at
the request of the City and is a contribution to the State's Landslide Hazard Identification
Program. The purpose of the report was to evaluate landslides and related geologic
hazards in the Study Area (and elsewhere in Ukiah) and to make recommendations for
future safe development in the area. As such, this report is the basic geologic planning
document that should guide future development of the Study Area.
That report (page 10) includes the following summary of the basic geology of the area:
The heterogeneous bedrock within the western hills of Ukiah is composed of the
Franciscan Complex (also termed the Franciscan Assemblage), principally
metasedimentary units which trend northwestward and are in structural (tectonic)
contact with each other (Blake and Jones, 1981). The Ukiah Valley is believed
to be a relatively young pull-apart basin filled with coarse sediments of Pliocene
and Pleistocene age (Heam and others, 1988; McLaughlin and Nilsen, 1982;
Warren, 1981).
Most of the northern Coast Ranges are composed of Franciscan Complex, which
has been divided into several regional "belts": the Coastal Belt and the Central
Belt. In turn, these regional belts are subdivided into formational units,
according to how well they are exposed in outcrops and can be geologically
mapped. However, some of the units are termed melange (meaning mixed), so
the smallest mappable units are themselves a mixed assemblage.
The Study Area contains two units: Lookout Peak graywacke and Low Gap Road
melange. The Lookout Peak graywacke is the predominant geologic unit in the Study
Area; it underlies most of the Study Area with the exception of the north end and small
areas along stream channels.
The Low Gap Road melange unit contains several sub-units, including serpentine and
chert. This melange is present in the northern end of the site. In addition, the Study Area
13
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
contains small amounts of the surficial geologic unit called Quatemary alluvium. These
alluvial soils are found along the easternmost section of Gibson Creek.
2. Constraints
Regulatory Standards
The City General Plan contains the following policies and implementation measures:
· Protect people and property from landslides (Policy SF-2.2).
The existing City Hillside Zoning regulations require the following:
· Minimize fill for building pad construction, as far as feasible. Preserve the highest
crest of a hill.
· Minimize grading and cut and fill operations consistent with the natural character of
the hill area.
· New development shall avoid landslides and be shown to be safe from future
landsliding and seismic damage.
· Soils engineering and geological reports are required to demonstrate building
feasibility and conformance with the above-listed objectives.
Grade and Bedding Plane Constraints on Road Construction
The 1991 report states that hillslopes in the Study Area are "exceptionally steep
(averaging 25 to 40 degrees, or about 48 to over 90 percent) in the northern section of
the Study Area. To the south in the Gibson Creek watershed, slopes remain steep,
ranging from about 30 to 60 percent slopes. Throughout most of the Study Area the rock
bedding planes dip 30 to 40 degrees northeastward. Together, steep slopes and the
trend of the bedding planes mean that road construction is best (i.e., more stable over the
long term) on southfacing slopes.
The 1991 report observed that the then new access road that leads to the Nix property
travels along the northfacing slope above Gibson Creek. The authors of the 1991 report
stated that grading this steep access road (50-60 percent cross slopes) resulted in some
erosion problems and three wedge-failure landslides. The report notes that a similar road
constructed on the north side of the Gibson Creek channel (i.e., on a southfacing slope)
showed no landsliding. The report concludes that cut-slope orientation is the controlling
factor for slope stability, given the same rocks and bedrock structure.
Steep Slopes
The Study Area contains very steep slopes. The existing hillside regulations (Table 2)
require large lots (5-acre minimum) on such slopes. Given the above-described difficulty
in grading fiat building platforms on such slopes, homesites would be limited to
topographic breaks or need to be constructed on the grade. For example, while
technically the proposed Hull/Piffero development site would be allowed a maximum of 8
14
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
units (based on a minimum parcel size of 5 acres and a 40 acre-parcel), application is
sought for only 5 building sites. A study done as part of the Hull/Piffero Subdivision
application describes how the adjacent 40-acre parcel to the north has one existing
building pad but that there were no other additional, feasible building sites.
One of the principal constraints is the difficulty in constructing access roads to the
undeveloped property in the Study Area. Because roads cannot exceed 20 percent
grade (and should not exceed 15 percent grade), roads traveling up the ridge must
traverse and switchback the contours to reach higher elevations. For example, the road
that would serve the proposed Hull/Piffero Subdivision would be about 6,000 feet long
despite the site only being about 3,000 feet west of the eastem Study Area boundary.
Construction of these long access roads on steep cross slopes is difficult and has the
potential for causing landslides and soil erosion with subsequent adverse effects on fish
and aquatic wildlife. In addition, constructing new roads 18-20 feet wide requires
considerably more grading than the road width since cut and fill grading on either side of
the road is required to construct a stable road bed. This extensive grading would result
in the loss of numerous trees and other vegetation and result in visual scars, all
constraints which are discussed further in subsequent sections of this report.
The difficulty in developing new access roads to currently undeveloped parcels would
further limit the number of feasible building sites since it would be difficult to create an
extensive road network that would provide access to scattered and distant building sites
on a larger parcel. It is likely that building sites would need to be clustered near feasible
access road extensions.
Landslides
Several landslides on the Study Area were mapped in the 1991 report. They are shown
on Figure 3 and include:
There is a significant debds slide at about elevation 1,040 feet, west of the end of
Clay Street. The 1991 report notes that this landslide is a good example of how
landslides can occur on the face of a steep ridge, and how future homesites should
be evaluated for conditions on adjacent uphill property as well as the building site
itself.
A debris flow area is located south of Mendocino Place and north of Cochran
Avenue. This area generated a significant debds flow in the winter of 1972-1973.
Uphill from this debds flow site is a large "oval erosional feature" which the 1991
report authors believe to be a landslide.
Three wedge-failure landslides are located on the road from West Standley Avenue
to the Nix property. These landslides were caused by grading the road in the
northeast facing slopes, as discussed previously.
There is a landslide just to the south of the area graded for a residence on the Nix
property. This slide extends onto the adjacent property where the Hull/Piffero
Subdivision is proposed.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
· There is a large landslide on the north side of Gibson Creek to the west of the Study
Area.
· All areas underlain by serpentine (the main areas are shown on Figure 3) are
particularly susceptible to landslides.
Seismic Hazard
The Study Area can expect to experience strong ground motion dudng an earthquake on
the nearby Maacama fault or the more distant San Andreas fault. Such earthquakes
could induce additional landsliding. The worst effects from an earthquake would be from
one on the Maacama fault, located about 2-2.5 miles to the east. The maximum credible
earthquake for this fault is predicted to be 7.0 while the maximum probable earthquake is
predicted to be 6.5. This earthquake would generate a 0.Tg peak horizontal acceleration
in bedrock. The main impact of such an earthquake would be ground shaking. Surface
displacement along a fault trace, ground rupture, differential compaction/seismic
settlement, and liquefaction would all be Iow to very Iow probabilities. Seismically-
induced landsliding would be a moderate probability.
1991 Report Recommendations
The 1991 report provided the following recommendations to guide future development in
the Study Area;
The rocks in the Study Area are not adequate to be used for fill for roads or homes.
The grading code (Chapters 29 and 70 of the UBC) should be followed. All building
pads should be over-excavated a minimum of 3 feet, then replaced by a uniform
blanket of engineered fill. Fill slopes should not exceed 2:1, which means that grading
building platforms in most of the Study Area would not be possible (because the
slopes are too steep to accommodate a 2:1 fill slope). Building sites on steeper
ground would need to use an alternate type of foundation system that did not require
a fiat building platform. There are topographic breaks along certain ddges that can
provide adequate grades to create a fiat building site with less than 2:1 fill slopes.
However, access to those topographic breaks may be infeasible due to steep slopes
to the east.
· Future access roads should be constructed on south facing slopes. Additional roads
are discouraged on the north facing slope of the Gibson Creek Canyon.
· All water tanks should be assessed by a structural engineer to ensure the tanks can
withstand seismic shaking.
· Areas upslope from building platforms should be checked for geologic stability and
large, loose boulders.
Connection to public sanitary sewers is recommended. However, if hillside septic
systems are proposed, they should be planned and located by an engineering
geologist or geotechnical engineer to avoid incipient landslide problems. They should
not be located below the residence, but located diagonally downslope.
16
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Soils
The Study Area contains the following three soil types:
Hopland Loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes (141) soil type is located in the northern end
of the Study Area on lower slopes to the east. There is also a small amount of this
soil type at the southemmost end of the main Study Area block.
· Hopland-Maymen-Etsel complex, 50 to 75 percent slopes (144) soil type is located on
the eastem portion of the south facing slope of Gibson Creek canyon.
Hopland-Wohly loams, 50 to 75 percent slopes (151) are located on higher slopes at
the north end of the Study Area, south of Gibson Creek and in the small southemmost
pieces of the Study Area.
These three soil types have similar characteristics as outlined below:.
· Moderately deep soil and well drained;
· Moderately slow permeability;
· Very high erosion hazard;
· Poody suited to homesite development due to depth to bedrock, Iow soil strength, and
high erosion hazard;
· Low to moderate water capacity;
· Low to moderate shrink-swell potential; and
· Leachfield constraints due to Iow percolation rate and shallow bedrock.
3. Conclusions
Development of as many as 66 new residences would have at least the following
impacts:
Constructing new access roads and possibly upgrading existing roads leading from
existing City streets into the Study Area would require extensive grading to meet
minimum requirements for traffic and emergency access. In addition to the specific
geologic effects described below, this grading would require removal of substantial
amounts of vegetation with subsequent visual impacts.
Road construction could generate substantial erosion. Even if Best Management
Practices (BMPs) for erosion control are required and implemented, it is possible that
erosion could occur during construction.
· New roads cut into steep cross slopes could be subject to landslides. This is
particularly true for roads on northfacing slopes.
Roads would be subject to failure dudng severe seismic events. While roads may be
constructed to meet geotechnical requirements established for each project, it is
unlikely that the conditions established in those site-specific geotechnical reports
would address the potential stability of all new road sections dudng major seismic
events. Even small road failures can result in residents and emergency vehicles
17
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
being cut off. Such landslides could result in substantial erosion to Gibson Creek or
other waterways.
Homesite development is limited by slopes and the ability to grade a level building
platform. Homes constructed on fill can fail on most Study Area slopes and soils. Fill
slopes are subject to erosion. While these constraints exist, the recent geotechnical
investigations for the Hull/Piffero Subdivision site concluded that the five proposed
residences could be constructed on that site without substantial dsk of failure.
If fill is allowed, based on site-specific geotechnical studies, the rocks on the site are
generally not suitable as fill material, and imported or engineered fill would likely be
required.
· Homesites in this steep terrain are subject to landsliding from existing or seismically-
induced landslides both above and below the homesite.
Home or road construction near the mapped landslides, debds flow areas, and
erosional features could aggravate landsliding and debds flows in those areas
thereby affecting existing residences and roads as well as new homes and roads on
the Study Area.
· Improperly sited leachfields can cause landsliding and soil erosion.
· Water tanks required to serve new development could fail dudng seismic events.
Sites with slopes exceeding 50 percent are considered too steep to develop with
homesites. Existing City hillside regulations require that sites with average slopes of
51 percent or greater are to be retained as open space.
· Areas containing serpentine are especially subject to landsliding. In addition, grading
in serpentine soils can result in significant air pollution and health problems.
· Constraints on road development would limit the availability of feasible homesites to
sites near the main access road serving larger parcels.
Due to slope constraints and potential for future erosion and landsliding, it is unlikely that
major new access roads can be constructed from the east onto the Study Area. Figure
3 shows areas of greatest concern (i.e., known and suspect landslides, serpentine
areas, and northfacing slopes unsuitable for road construction). However, it is noted
that if a larger region including valley areas were mapped for constraints, the entire
Study Area would be mapped as "high constraint" due to the steep slopes and other
geologic and soil conditions described above.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
B. VEGETATION
1. Setting
This section of the report is based on reviews of existing reports and maps as well as
field surveys of those portions of the Study Area where the report preparers had
access. Originally, it was intended to have a botanist survey the entire Study Area, but
this task could not be done due to access constraints.
The Study Area is heavily vegetated with primarily native species of trees, shrubs,
grasses, and herbaceous plants. The basic vegetation community type is Mixed
Evergreen Forest, element code 81100; the nomenclature for plant communities is taken
from the Califomia Natural Diversity Data Base Natural Community descriptions (Holland,
1986). This is a plant community that contains a mix of trees and shrubs that may
dominate nearby habitats, such as Coast Live Oak Forest (81310), Tan Oak Forest
(81400), Upland Redwood Forest (82320), Alluvial Redwood Forest (82310, Upland
Douglas Fir Forest (82420), Knobcone Pine Forest (83210) as well as vadous chaparral
communities. Within the Study Area vadous types of trees or chaparral may dominate
depending on the slope steepness and orientation, soil type, presence of water, and
other microclimatic conditions.
The basic Mixed Evergreen Forest community is typically located on slopes at elevations
from 200-3,000 feet. The community typically borders Redwood Forest or Douglas Fir
Forest. Common species include Douglas fir, coast redwood, Califomia bay, Oregon
white oak, Califomia black oak, madrone, tan oak, and knobcone pine. Oaks tend to be a
more dominant element of the woodland at lower elevations. For example, the secondary
east-west ridge just to the south of the Gibson Creek canyon is heavily vegetated with
oaks. Conifers, while a part of the woodland mix throughout the Study Area, tend to
become more dominant at higher elevations and in the Gibson Creek canyon.
Within this overall community type, there are locations where site-specific conditions
have resulted in the dominance of certain species to the degree that the vegetation type
could be described as a different type. For example, the Hull/Piffero property was
surveyed by a botanist in May, 2000 (McBride, 2000). That survey indicated that site
vegetation appears to be a Closed Cone Coniferous Forest (Knobcone Pine Forest,
element code 83210), though there is a component of redwood trees that may, in time,
change the character and definition of the site plant community. Dominant trees and
shrubs include: knobcone pine, tan oak, madrone, redwood, 3 species of manzanita,
chamise, intedor live oak, chinquapin, ceanothus, toyon, serviceberry, and poison oak.
Groundcover is sparse due to overstory shading and included milkwort, brome,
bedstraw, sanicula, Iousewort, and other associated species. Cleared areas on the site
include silver hairgrass, brome, soaproot, wooly sunflower, wild rose, blow wives,
tarweed, lotus, gold wire, cat's ear, microseds, pussy ears, and associated species.
The area along Gibson Creek as well as other scattered locations contains Upland
Redwood Forest (82320). A survey of the creek showed the following species alder,
big leaf maple, redwood, periwinkle, ivy, California bay, Oregon white oak, toyon, plum,
blackberry, spikenard, French broom, wild rose, maidenhair fem, sword fern, madrone,
Douglas fir, poison oak, and tan oak. The area supports a mature second growth
redwood forest, with redwoods averaging 36-40 inches DBH (diameter at breast height).
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Several locations on upper slopes support redwood trees, but these are not typical
redwood stands. Field surveys of the Hull/Piffero site as well as sites further down the
access road to this site showed numerous stands of small redwoods. These trees do
not appear to be stump sprouts from historically logged larger trees. Rather, they appear
to be redwoods growing on the edge of their required microclimate and soils. The trees
tend to be short and less than 4 inches DBH.
There are areas of Northern Mixed Chaparral (37110) spread throughout areas of the
Study Area Common species are vadous species of manzanita, chamise, mountain
mahogany, ceanothus, and poison oak.
There are also scattered grasslands with the vadous woodland and shrub communities.
Grasslands are more dominant at lower slopes on the east side of the Study Area,
especially north of Gibson Creek.
Special Status Species
There are few rare or special status plant species listed for the Ukiah area. The
botanical report prepared for the Hull/Piffero Subdivision site included a review of the
California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) for potential rare and endangered species
in the area. The four species potentially found on the Study Area include:
Burke's goldfields (Lasthenia burke/~. This species is typically found in vernal pools
and wet meadows or near swamps. They were not found on the Hull/Piffero
property. Though it is possible that this species could inhabit some areas of the
Study Area, it is unlikely given the plant's requirements.
Baker's meadowfoam (l_irnnanthes Baker/~. This species is typically found in vernal
pools and wet meadows or near swamps. They were not found on the Hull/Piffero
property. Though it is possible that this species could inhabit some areas of the
Study Area, it is unlikely given the plant's requirements.
Great bumet (Sanguisorba officinalis). This herb occurs in bogs, fens, broadleafed
upland_forest, meadows, marshes, coniferous forest, and dpadan forest. It has no
State or Federal listing, but is consider List 2 (Rare and Endangered in California, More
Common Elsewhere) by the CNPS. The report prepared for the Hull/Piffero project
indicates that Mendocino County populations tend to be located in marshy areas with
a year round water supply near the soil surface and a highly organic, often saturated
soil. While it is unlikely that this plant inhabits the Study Area, it is possible.
Douglas's pogogyne (Pogogyne Douglasii ssp. parviflora). This annual herb is a
more likely candidate for inhabiting the Study Area. It inhabits chaparral and
woodlands as occur on the Study Area. This species does not have a Federal or
State listing and is considered a special status species due to its presence on the
CNPS Rare and Endangered Plant List; it is listed as List 3, Species for Which More
Information is Needed. The City of Ukiah does not consider this a rare plant requiring
protection.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Coast redwood is not a special status species. However, it is an uncommon tree in
the Ukiah Valley. Most redwoods were logged many decades ago, and the larger
trees currently occurring on the Study Area are second growth trees. As stated
previously, several of these second growth trees have become quite large,
particularly near Gibson Creek. The loss of these trees, while perhaps not technically
significant from a CEQA perspective, would be a major loss and would have
potentially significant impacts on water quality, fishery and aquatic resources,
aesthetics, and recreation potential. The small, stunted redwoods located on upper
slopes would also be considered a loss, though it is unlikely these trees will ever
attain typical redwood height or girth.
Sudden Oak Death Syndrome
Sudden Oak Death Syndrome (SODS) is a rapidly spreading disease caused by a fungus
called Phytophthora ramorum. The disease was first identified in Madn County in 1995
and has since spread as far north as Brookings, Oregon and has been reported in
Mendocino County. It is estimated that oaks in most of the 80,000 acres of mixed
hardwood forest in Matin County (where it was first found) are now affected by SODS.
The fungus attacks a vadety of species, with new species being identified as affected
each month. Currently, the disease affects at least coast live oak, black oak, tan oak,
Shreve's oak, rhododendron, huckleberry, California bay, madrone, big leaf maple, and
buckeye. The disease is most virulent in tan oak where it tends to kill all trees in the
stand, once the stand is infected. Even resprouts from the tan oaks die. It also kills coast
live oak and black oak, though there appears to be more resistance to the disease among
these oaks than for tan oak. However, all unhealthy coast live oak and black oak, once
infested will likely die, and, possibly over the long term, all susceptible oaks may die (not
enough is known about the disease to predict the long-term future for these oaks).
For the other susceptible species that occupy the Study Area, the disease is a leaf
disease which does not appear to kill the tree. For California bay and buckeye, new
leaves replace those affected by the disease. Madrone also replaces its leaves,
however, madrone is also currently under attack by a host of other diseases, and some
dead madrones have been found, though it is unclear whether the death is from SODS,
another pathogen, or a combination of effects.
It is entirely possible that the disease will spread to new species. There is already
anecdotal evidence that toyon is susceptible. Currently, there is no cure for the disease,
and even if a cure is found, it is unlikely to be useful at the landscape level (i.e., cures
may be found to help homeowners preserve landscaping trees).
There is every reason to think that the woodlands on the Study Area will soon be
infected by this disease. Once infection occurs, many to all susceptible trees (tan oak,
Coast live oak, and black oak) will die. Observations of areas in Madn County where the
disease has been present longest indicate that the trees do not all die at once, though
relatively large stands of tan oak can succumb within a very short pedod of time. The
deaths take place over a number of years. If one looks at infected hillsides in Madn
County, one sees the brown dead leaves of recently dead trees, but the dead trees are
generally scattered through the living forest.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
It is too soon to predict the eventual results of SODS, but it is likely that many trees on the
Study Area will succumb to it over the next few years or decades. The gaps in the
forest caused by the tree deaths will be filled with new trees and shrubs that are not
susceptible to the disease. The loss of oaks will have a deleterious effect on many
wildlife species that rely on acorns as a principal food source.
There is nothing that can be done about this disease unless and until some cure is found,
nature will take its course regardless of future development of the Study Area (though
applicable quarantines on moving infected woody materials to or from the Study Area
must be followed). The main effects SODS may have as regards future development are
on aesthetics and fire hazard. Tree death will increase fire hazard in the Study Area;
this effect is described in more detail under the subsequent discussion of fire.
2. Constraints
Regulatory Standards
The City's General Plan contains numerous polities and implementation measures aimed
at protecting vegetation and open space (which correspondingly results in preservation
of vegetation and wildlife habitat) Some of the more Pertinent policies and measures
include:
· Ensure that new development includes open space (Policy OC-1.2). Ensure
clustering of new residential development to protect open space (Policy OC-3.1).
· Using transfer of development rights and cluster housing, provide areas of vegetation
and open space conservation in hillside areas (Policy OC-11.1).
The City's existing hillside regulations require the following:
· A vegetation report shall be prepared identifying impacts to vegetation.
· Areas with rare and endangered species will not be developed unless the impact can
be shown to be mitigated.
Constraints
Future development of 66 residences along with development of new access roads and
other required improvements could be constrained by any or all of the following:
Development sites could contain special status species of vegetation. However,
existing City regulations require avoidance of such populations unless adequate
mitigation to offset their loss can be proved. It is possible that development could
affect stands of mature second growth redwood, though generally these trees are in
locations along streams where development is unlikely to occur. Any substantial loss
of redwood trees would likely be considered a significant impact.
The general loss of native vegetation would be an important impact of future
development. Assuming that future development pattems are similar to the site plan
proposed for the Hull/Piffero Subdivision, approximately 8 percent of the native
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
vegetation could be cleared or thinned for residential development and fire hazard
reduction as part of future development. While remaining open space would likely be
considered consistent with City General Plan policies regarding preservation of open
space and vegetation, there would be a cumulative loss of this open space and
native vegetation habitat.
· Erosion caused by road and home development could adversely affect ripadan and
aquatic habitat.
3. Conclusions
Assuming that future development avoids special status plants and mature second
growth redwood stands, the Study Area vegetation does not pose a significant
constraint on future development, given existing policies and regulations. However, from
a CEQA perspective, it is possible that the cumulative loss of open space and native
vegetation could be considered a significant environmental effect of future development.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
C. Wildlife
1. Setting
The relatively unused and uninhabited Study Area provides habitat that supports
populations of many wildlife species that are common to the general area. Wildlife field
surveys were not conducted for this study, since many days and weeks of detailed field
surveying would be required to establish a clear picture of the species present on the
site. The following discussion is based on previously published reports, conversations
with the Department of Fish and Game, and the authors' experience working in similar
habitats.
Special Status Species
The following special status species are known or suspected of occupying or using the
Study Area:
Steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) are listed as a Federally Threatened
Species. Steelhead trout can either be migratory (i.e., emigrating to the ocean for
several years and retuming to their natal stream for spawning), resident (i.e., not
emigrating to the ocean), or mixed populations. Steelhead trout reside in Gibson
Creek and Orrs Creek. The City has plans for restoration and rehabilitation of Gibson
Creek, particularly as it flows through developed portions of the city outside the Study
Area. These recommendations are included in the Gibson Creek Habitat
Enhancement and Public Access Study (LSA, 2001). The Department of Fish and
Game is planning to conduct a Fish Habitat Survey of Gibson Creek; however, the
research had not been conducted at the time this report was wdtten. This upcoming
survey will assess the creek as regards its suitability for supporting trout and other
salmonids. It will likely include land use recommendations to preserve and restore the
stream habitat.
· Coho salmon have historically been reported in Gibson Creek, though there is no
evidence that they currently occupy the stream.
Westem pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata) is considered a Federal Species of
Concern by USFWS (50 CFR Section 10.13), a Califomia Protected Species (14 CCR,
Chap. 5, Section 42(t)) and Species of Special Concem by CDFG. This species
occupies streams and ponds, and could reside in Gibson Creek.
White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus) is a Fully Protected Species in Califomia and is
also considered a Species of Special Concem by CDFG. Federal protection (50 CFR
Section 10.13) is provided (listed as the black-shouldered kite) by the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act (16 USC Sections 703-711). They have no legal status under current
State or Federal endangered species regulations, and their protection is largely limited
to their nests, eggs, young and to the birds themselves. Although use of the area by
this species is possible, they typically prefer habitats that are less steep than those
found on the Study Area. They prefer grassland habitats that are not grazed or are
lightly grazed and that can provide cover for meadow mice (Microtines), their pdmary
prey. It is unlikely this species resides on or uses the Study Area.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caudna) are listed as a Threatened Species
under the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (50 CFR Section 17.11). They
are also protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (50 CFR Section 10.13). The
State of California considers them a Species of Special Concern and their eggs,
young, and nests are protected by Section 3503.5 of Fish and Game Code of
California. Impacts to their habitat must be mitigated under Federal law through a
formal consultation with the USFWS.
The preferred northern spotted owl habitats in northem California include structurally
and floristically diverse, dense, large tree conifer (>30-inch DBH) or
conifer/hardwood habitats dominated by dense multilayered canopies (>60 percent
closure), typically with some associated decadence to provide natural nest trees and
liberal amounts of dead and downed woody matedal on the forest floor. These
habitats are usually found in rather steep, well-watered canyons and are typically
associated with mature forest habitats. In Sonoma, Madn, and Napa Counties,
however, spotted owls often occur in habitats that have more open canopies (< 60
percent), have a less dominating conifer component, and do not have the decadence
or the large tree size found in more mature habitats. It is possible that the species
could reside on or use the Study Area.
Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperi/} and Sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus) are
currently listed as a Species of Special Concern by the CDFG and are protected
under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 USC Sections 703-711). Protection is also
extended to their nests, eggs, and young in California (California Fish and Game Code
Section 3503.5). They have no legal status under current State or Federal
endangered species regulations.
Both of these hawks are faidy common residents of the woodlands of Mendocino
County. The nests of sharp-shinned hawks are very difficult to find because the
hawks are quiet and very secretive when nesting. Cooper's hawks, however, are
rather noisy when nesting, and their nests are not difficult to find. The populations of
both species in western North America appear to be fairly stable at present (Shuford
1993), and no alarming declines have been reported.
Both species are protective of their nests and are known to stoop (i.e., dive) at
people that pass too close to an active nest. Cooper's hawks will often become
agitated when people approach within 100 meters of a nest, while sharp-shinned
hawks usually remain very quiet until people are within a few meters of a nest. It is
usually only the males that become agitated, often darting past a person's head in an
attempt to expel an intruder from a nest area. These behaviors are a clear indication
that either species is nesting nearby. However, both species will move their nest
sites from year to year making protection of a given nest difficult. The nesting season
for both species encompasses late March through mid-July.
It is likely that both of these hawks hunt in the Study Area, and both could possibly
nest in the Study Area.
Peregrine falcon (Falco peregdnus anotum) is listed as Endangered both by the State
and Federal Govemments. Peregrine falcons do nest in Mendocino County but on
ledges on cliffs. It is unlikely there is suitable nesting habitat on the Study Area.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Peregrine falcons prey principally on flying birds in the open. The Study Area could
be a part of their hunting territory.
Purple martin (Progne subisL is designated a Species of Special Concern by the
DFG. This bird is the largest of the swallows and feeds on insects. Nests are
typically near areas with heavy insect populations, such as insect-productive ponds,
lakes, reservoirs, and rivers. In inland areas like the Study Area, they forage above
the ridgeline. However, the nest site can be at a considerable distance from the
foraging area. The bird is a cavity nester, nesting in holes in trees crated, by
woodpeckers.
It is unknown whether this species nests on the Study Area or uses the Study Area
for foraging. Even if the bird is present, development of the Study Area at the level
currently allowed would not significantly affect this species since most trees (nesting
sites) would be retained, and the small clearings in the trees resulting from homesite
development would open up habitat for this species.
Golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) are currently listed as a Species of Special
Concern by the CDFG and are a Fully Protected Species under Califomia Fish and
Game Code Section 3511. Protection is also extended to their nests, eggs, and young
in California (California Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5.) They are protected
under Federal law through the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection ACt, 1940 (16 USC
Sections 668a-668d) and under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 USC Sections 703-
711). Golden eagles are not provided protection under any existing State or Federal
endangered species regulations. Their protection is mainly limited to the destruction
of the nests, eggs, young, or the birds themselves under the above stated statutes.
The golden eagle is an uncommon permanent resident of Mendocino County. It
frequents open woodlands as well as mountainous areas in the least populated parts
of the county. While the Study Area could be part of the hunting territory of golden
eagles, it is unlikely they nest on the Study Area, given their sensitivity to the
presence of humans around their nest sites.
Future residential development of the Study Area might reduce the area available for
hunting, though golden eagles, when hunting, do become accustomed to rural
residential uses. Because the Study Area lacks a substantive amount of grassland, it
is not likely that the area provides valuable hunting habitat for these birds. Residential
development at levels allowed per existing hillside regulations would not likely have a
significant impact on this species.
Northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) is listed as a Califomia Species of Special
Concern and a Sensitive Species by the U.S. Forest Service. It prefers middle and
higher elevation dense coniferous forests. It mainly hunts for birds in woodlands.
Northern goshawks have been reported both in Mendocino County and northern
Sonoma County, but generally in the dense coniferous forests nearer the coast or
other areas supporting coniferous forests. While it is possible that the species could
use the Study Area, it is unlikely given the type of vegetation present.
Osprey (Pandion heliaetus) is a California Species of Special Concern. The bird is a
fish hunter and typically nests within one-half mile of the ocean, lakes, or larger
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
rivers. It nests high in large Douglas fir, redwood, or pines. While unlikely, it is
possible that there could be osprey nest sites on the Study Area
There are a variety of bat species that could reside on or use the Study Area.
Potential species include: Townsend's big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendfl)
(Califomia Species of Special Concert), Little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus)
(Califomia Species of Special Concern), Long-eared myotis (M. evotis) (Federal
Species of Concern), Fdnged myotis (M. thysanodes) (Federal Species of Concern),
Long-legged myotis (M. volans) (Federal Species of Concem), and pallid bat
(Antrozous palfidus) (Califomia Species of Special Concem). These bat species
feed on insects generally over water or in openings. They nest in trees, buildings,
and caves. The Study Area does not provide many suitable foraging locations due to
the dense tree/shrub cover. However, the Study Area could provide nest sites for
bats that forage in open lands to the west and east. Study Area development should
not significantly affect these species since most large trees would be retained.
Development could benefit the species by providing nest sites at new buildings and
providing some additional open habitat around building sites.
Red tree vole (Phenacomys Iongicaudus) is listed as a California Species of Special
Concern. These voles occur in old growth, mature forests. They are nocturnal and
feed on conifer needles and twigs. Study Area development should not affect this
secretive species, if it exists on the Study Area, as it is assumed that most large
Douglas fir and other food trees would be retained.
Common Species
In addition to the Special Status Species discussed above, the Study Area likely supports
populations of the following:
· Salamander: pacific giant, California slender, black, arboreal, clouded,
northwestern
· Newt: rough-skinned, California, and red-bellied
· Frog: bullfrog, pacific tree frog, yellow-legged, and red-legged
· Western toad
· Lizard: western fence, sagebrush, western skink, and northern alligator lizard
· Rubber boa
· Sharp-tailed snake
· Ringneck snake.
· Racer snake
· Gopher snake
· Common kingsnake,
· Common garter snake
· Western rattlesnake
· Western terrestrial and western aquatic garter snake
· Opossum
· Trowbridge's shrew
· Myotis (bats): little brown, long-eared, fdnged, and California
· Bats: big brown, red, and hoary
· Brush rabbit
· Black-tailed hare
and
2?
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
· Califomia ground squirrel
· Western gray squirrel
· Botta's gopher
· Califomia kangaroo rat
· Mouse: western harvest, deer, brush, and house
· Dusky-footed woodrat
· Vole: California, western red-backed, and red tree
· Coyote
· Gray fox
· Raccoon
· Skunk: western spotted and striped
· Mountain lion
· Bobcat
· Black-tailed deer
· Turkey vulture
· Red-tailed hawk
· Blue grouse
· Turkey
· California and mountain quail
· Band-tailed pigeon
· Mourning dove
· Owl: flammulated, western screech, great horned, northern saw-whet, and northern
pygmy
· Common nighthawk
· Vaux swift
· Anna's and rufous hummingbird
· Woodpecker: Lewis, acorn, red-breasted sapsucker, hairy, Nuttall's, downey,
northern flicker, and pileated
· Flycatcher: olive-sided, western wood pewee, pacific slope, ash-throated, and
western kingbird
· Swallow: tree, violet-green, northern rough-winged, cliff, and barn
· Stellar's jay
· Scrub jay
· American crow
· Raven
· Chestnut-backed chickadee
· Plain titmouse
· Bushtit
· Nuthatch: red-breasted, white-breasted, and pigmy
· Brown creeper
· Wren: canyon, rock, Bewick's, house, and winter
· Golden-crowned and ruby-crowned kinglet
· Westem bluebird
· Hermitand vaded thrush
· Wrentit
· Northem mockingbird
· Amedcan robin
· Vireo: solitary, Hutton's, and warbling
· Warbler: Nashville, yellow, yellow-rumped, black-throated gray, Townsend's, and
hermit
· Western tanager
28
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
· Rufous-sided and California towhee
· Sparrow; chirping, and lark
· Dark-eyed junco
· Northem odole
· Purple finch
· Red crossbill
· Pine siskin
· Lesser and American goldfinch
2. Constraints
Regulatory Standards
The City General Plan contains the following policies and implementation measures
pertinent to wildlife:
· New development in hillside areas shall incorporate open space reserved for wildlife
habitat and hiking (Policy OC-11.2).
· Each creek will have a Restoration Plan prepared for it (Policy OC-9.1). To date Orrs
Creek and Gibson Creek on the Study Area have had such plans prepared.
· Protect water quality from pollutants in new urban runoff (Policy OC-15.1).
· Ensure that new project grading protect aquatic and dpadan habitat (IM OC-9.2d).
The Gibson Creek Habitat Enhancement and Public Access Study (page 31) states
how the Gibson Creek stretch on the Study Area appears to be "pristine," and how its
headwaters (including that portion of the headwaters on the Study Area) should be
protected to continue to provide a diverse wildlife habitat and the health of the creek
ecosystem.
Constraints
At least the following factors could constrain future development of the Study Area:
Development could displace nesting sites of special status species of raptors (likely
to include Cooper's hawk and sharp-shinned hawk, though, other hawks might
possibly be affected) and northern spotted owl. This would be a significant impact,
and development should be avoided within a set distance of a nesting site. The
distance depends on the species, and DFG and the USFWS should be contacted for a
recommendation once wildlife surveys of development sites are conducted and it is
determined that special status species occupy the Study Area.
If spotted owl nest on the Study Area, removal of trees would displace foraging
territory. Construction of roads and homes would fragmentize their foraging territory.
Spotted owl surveys should be conducted to determine the presence of nesting owls
on or near the Study Area. If nesting owls are located, then the City Should consult
with USFVVS and CDFG to determine appropriate avoidance and development
guidelines.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Development would reduce the hunting territory for special status species of raptors.
However, because there is extensive wildland hunting areas immediately to the west
and because these species are not necessarily displaced simply because of rural
residential development on large lots, this impact may not be significant.
Development would displace habitat used by common species for rearing of young
and foraging. Development would fragment existing wildland habitat. However, most
of these species acclimatize to human presence, at least when the development
pattern is on large lots with few homes. Less wildlife would be supported on the
Study Area than is currently the case due both to direct loss of habitat and
fragmentation of the remaining habitat.
As reported in the City's Initial Study for the Hull/Piffero Subdivision, deer populations
in the Study Area are dependent on south-facing, open, grassy slopes for winter
foraging. Development of such slopes could adversely affect the area deer
population.
Development could block wildlife migration or travel routes. Travel routes often follow
streams or noses of ridges or other areas with less steep slopes. Because homes
are likely to be developed on topographic breaks (i.e., tops of ddges), these homes
could block travel routes, particularly if there is a cluster of homes where the wildlife
cannot easily forge a new trail around the group of homes.
· The presence of domestic dogs and cats at new residences would have an adverse
effect on many smaller birds and mammals.
As described in the previous section on Geology, construction of roads and
homesites, particularly near watercourses would cause erosion and have an
adverse effect on water quality and aquatic habitat. This would be a potentially
significant impact on steelhead trout and other aquatic species. This impact is
particularly important as regards new development of roads or homesteads near
Gibson Creek or near tributaries to that creek.
· Development of on-site wells could reduce groundwater levels adversely affecting
springs and seeps essential as water sources for wildlife.
3. Conclusions
Without detailed wildlife studies, the presence of special status species in the Study Area
cannot be accurately predicted. If such species do reside and nest of the Study Area,
the presence of these populations could substantially constrain future development,
particularly if Federally-listed species are involved.
The presence of steelhead trout in Gibson Creek means that any project generating
sediment delivered to that creek would have a significant environmental effect. Such
sediment as well as other waterborne pollutants would adversely affect the fishery,
other aquatic species, and the dpadan habitat in contradiction to General Plan policies
regarding stream protection and water quality.
30
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Conversion of open space and native plant habitat as previously described under
Vegetation would have a corresponding impact on wildlife. There would be a direct
habitat loss which would reduce the wildlife carrying capacity of the Study Area. Roads
and homes could fragmentize habitat thereby adversely affecting species that require
large blocks of undisturbed habitat and potentially blocking wildlife travel and migration
routes. Domestic animals and well development could also have an adverse effect on
certain wildlife species. The cumulative loss of native habitat that supports native wildlife
could be considered a significant adverse cumulative impact for Study Area development.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
D. Hydrology
1. Setting
Drainage
Runoff from the Study Area enters two perennial streams and several unnamed
intermittent stream channels that have their headwaters on the Study Area or areas to
the west of the Study Area. The main drainage channels are shown on Figure 2 and
summarized below.
Runoff from the extreme north end of the Study Area enters Orrs Creek, a
perennial ("blue line") stream with headwaters to the west of the Study Area.
Orrs Creek flows approximately west to east, south of Low Gap Road and Brush
Street, crossing beneath Highway 101 and entedng the Russian River just east of
the City's water treatment facility. A second intermittent channel drains City-
owned property west of the golf course. Water is conveyed east and then south
through Low Gap Regional Park where this channel enters Orrs Creek.
,
The central portion of the Study Area is drained by Gibson Creek, a perennial
("blue line") stream with headwaters to the west of the Study Area. This stream
is located at the bottom of a deep canyon dissecting the Study Area. As the
stream reaches the eastern portion of the Study Area and enters the developed
part of the City, it drains existing development from an area north to Park Place
and south to West Standley Street. After leaving the Study Area, the stream
crosses beneath West Standley Street and travels east through residential and
commercial parts of the city, beneath Highway 101, through Oak Manor, and then
south paralleling the east side of Babcock Lane, and finally east to enter the
Russian River on the north side of Talmage Road.
.
South of Gibson Creek is an intermittent stream channel that conveys runoff to the
northeast entedng Gibson Creek just north of West Standley Street and just east
of the north end of Highland Avenue.
.
Further south, a small intermittent channel drains to Highland Avenue (near where
it makes the horseshoe bend). Runoff from this channel enters a mainly
underground drainageway on Highland Avenue and eventually joins the
underground drainageway described below under No. 5.
.
Further south, another watershed drains east to a mainly underground channel
starting at about the south end of Highland Court and then traveling east beneath
residential and commercial areas until it reaches the railroad where it turns south
paralleling the railroad to Gobbi Street, and then east and south through an open
ditch, and then east through a pipe under the freeway and then south and east
until it enters Doolin Creek.
.
Two intermittent stream channels are located south of the stream channel
described above. They have their headwaters on the Study Area and drain
northeast leaving the Study Area between Hillcrest Avenue and Mendocino Ddve.
These channels join near the bottom of Mendocino Place and enter a mainly
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
underground drainageway. The drainageway travels east through residential
neighborhoods, Yokayo School, additional residential neighborhoods, and then
east under the railroad near the north end of Apple Avenue. It then travels east to
join the channel described under No. 5 above, finally entedng Doolin Creek.
Groundwater Supply
The Study Area groundwater that would be used for well development does not supply
any reservoir or storage facility used for public water. As residences to the east of the
Study Area are served by public water, it is unlikely that development of wells would
adversely affect pdvate groundwater supplies outside the Study Area.
Flooding
The Study Area is located at higher elevations outside the flood zone of the Russian
River. Stream channels traversing the Study Area are generally located in deep, incised
canyons where development would not be feasible. As such, it is unlikely future
development would be affected by relatively restricted flooding occurring along those
streams.
2. Constraints
Regulatory Standards
The City's General Plan contains the following policies and implementation measures
aimed at protecting streams and other wetland resources and ensuring adequate storm
drainage:
· Each creek will have a Restoration Plan prepared for it (Policy OC-9.1). To date Orrs
Creek and Gibson Creek on the Study Area have had such plans prepared.
· Protect the Valley's groundwater resources (Policy OC-13,1).
· Protect water quality from pollutants in new urban runoff (Policy OC-15.1).
· Review new development proposals to ensure adequate stormwater drainage (Policy
OC-16.2).
· Ensure that new project grading protects aquatic and dpadan habitat (Implementation
Measure, OC-9.2d and e).
The City's existing hillside regulations include the following:
Minimize the water runoff and soil erosion problems resulting from proposed
development.
A hydrology report is required that explains how hydrologic hazard areas will be
avoided and that the project will not cause downstream flooding.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Constraints
Hydrologic constraints on future development of the Study Area could include the
following:
Construction of new residences would increase the amount of impermeable surface
and runoff. This increased runoff could result in flooding east of the Study Area.
Conversations with Jim Looney, Superintendent of Streets, noted a number of
drainage problems along drainages that would transport Study Area-generated
runoff. The main problem is that dudng times of sustained rainfall, lower lying
portions of the City currently flood. Any increase in runoff would aggravate these
existing flooding problems. The main areas of concem are near the Orchard
Avenue/Cindee Way intersection, the Oak Manor neighborhood, and the entire area
east of Highway 101, west of Babcock Lane and south of Gobbi Street. These areas
flood on a relatively regular basis.
The existing problem in the Orchard Avenue/Cindee Way area should not be affected
by future development of the Study Area since only the southemmost portion of the
Study Area west of Mendocino Place would drain to this area, and there is very little
development potential in this southem section of the Study Area.
· Future development from other portions of the Study Area would potentially affect
flooding in the other two areas of principal concern east of Highway 101.
In addition to these three main areas of concern, there are numerous other locations
where existing open channels are at capacity (i.e., at bank top dudng peak storm
runoff), existing underground pipes are old and require replacement, and areas
where runoff must travel long distances in street-side gutters prior to entering a
storm drain inlet (e.g., runoff along Clay Street must travel all the way from near its
west end to State Street before there is an inlet). Examples of these problems
include:
· Flooding of backyards on Olga Court near Cleveland Lane.
Gibson Creek can overtop its banks near School Street and flow to Nolan
and flood State Street in the vicinity of Scott to Clara.
There are pedods of high water in an open ditch from St. Mary's School to
State Street.
State Street will flood dudng even normal rains between Mill and
Observatory.
The City has done some studies of the status of the underground pipe system, using
video reconnaissance. However, the status of many underground pipes is currently
unknown. The City is preparing to replace piping on Mendocino Place and beneath
Yokayo School.
· The construction of new access roads could result in sheetflow being intercepted in
roadside ditches. These ditches would then concentrate runoff which would be
34
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
delivered to drainage channels and potentially aggravate flooding problems in
developed portions of the City. As or more importantly, these ditches can increase
flow rates resulting in erosion. The eroded sediments can then be transported either
onto road surfaces where Study Area drainages or roads meet existing developed
areas or into the storm drain system, thereby potentially reducing the capacity of the
storm drain system. Mr. Looney noted the existing problem where the Nix access
road enters West Standley Street. Runoff down this road is conveyed directly onto
the surface of West Standley Street. Silt and mud are deposited on the road,
requiring the City to clean that debris.
3. Conclusions
Development of as many as 66 new residences in Study Area watersheds draining to
storm drain systems Nos. 2-5 described above could aggravate flooding in the City's
storm drain system. A detailed hydrologic study would be required to determine the
precise effects of this new development on each storm drain system. Because many of
the new residences would be located near the headwaters of the watersheds, runoff
from these residences might reach constrained portions of the storm drain system pdor
to or after the peak flows from the already developed portions of the City. It also may be
possible to design the drainage for new residences so that runoff is either spread out to
sheet flow and/or to otherwise be retained on site until peak flows have passed through
the system. New development would require project-specific and cumulative drainage
analyses to determine whether the increased runoff would adversely affect the
receiving drainageways, and, if it is does, how site runoff can be retained on site so that
the new development does not increase the pre-project peak flows.
Any new roads need to be designed to maximize sheet flow across the road (by
outsloping the road) to minimize collection of runoff in roadside ditches. Concentrating
runoff in roadside ditches can both increase runoff and cause sedimentation problems on
roads and in receiving drainageways. Unless properly designed, this runoff and
sedimentation could reduce the capacity of the City's storm drain system and/or require
additional City maintenance to clear ditches, pipes, and roadways.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
E. FIRE HAZARD
1. Setting
The Study Area contains a steep, east-facing ridge that is vegetated with dense trees
and shrubs. This vegetation when combined with the slopes and the hot summer
weather in the area produce an extreme fire hazard. The City through the State Fire
Marshars Office has identified the Study Area as being within a Very High Fire Hazard
Sevedty Zone. Wildfire response to the Study Area is the responsibility of the Ukiah Fire
Department. The Ukiah Fire Department is also responsible for emergency medical
response. As the area is a "mutual threat zone," CDF also provides response to wildfires
in the Study Area. The Ukiah Valley Fire District (UVFD) also provides response through
a mutual response agreement.
The Ukiah Fire Department is staffed by 19 full-time career firefighters. The department
has 30 volunteer positions with about 15 volunteer firefighters on the active roster.
Equipment includes two brush trucks (each carrying a 250 gallon water tank), three Type
1 engines, one ladder truck, and one Type 1 Office of Emergency Services (OES) engine.
For OES purposes, this latter engine is classified as a Type 2 engine and carries 750
gallons of water. All equipment and personnel are stationed at the fire department
adjacent to the City Hall.
Chuck Yates of the Ukiah Fire Department reports that response time to the Study Area
would be as long as 20 minutes. This would be the response time to the Hull/Piffero
Subdivision site even with the road paved and improved as described in that project
application. The first response vehicle would be one of the brush trucks. This would be
followed by the OES engine which would take at least an additional five minutes. Other
Type 1 engines would take even longer to reach the site.
CDF would respond to fires on the Study Area from its North State Street station (when it
is staffed; usually June 1 to October 31). Mr. Yates estimated that their response time
would be about five minutes longer than the City's response time.
Urban Interface
Existing residences along the east side of the Study Area extend into the Study Area
wildlands, creating a classic example of what is sometimes called the urban/wildland
interface. Many of these homes are bordered on one or more sides by dangerous
wildland shrubs and trees. This poses two problems. First, the homes are potential fire
ignition sources. Fires starting at these residences can then spread into adjacent
wildland fuels and be carried up the hill. Such fires can bum immediately adjacent
residences as well as more distant residences if the fire spreads into heavy fuels on the
slopes to the west. Second, these homes are susceptible to wildfires traveling down or
across the slopes from the west.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
CDF Plans
To address this wildland/urban interface hazard, CDF in cooperation with the Ukiah Fire
Department and UVFD has prepared a '¥Vestside Vegetation Management Plan"
(Westside VMP). This VMP calls for a vadety of actions, including the following:
Construction of a shaded fuelbreak bordering the east side of the Study Area. This
fuelbreak (shown on Figure 2) is being constructed by handcrews. All trees and
shrubs under 6 inches in diameter are removed and branches of remaining trees are
limbed up to create sufficient clearance so that a ground fire cannot spread into the
crowns of the trees. The width of the fuelbreak vades depending on topography and
vegetation. CDF and the City have been working on this fuelbreak for several years,
and much of the fuelbreak between Low Gap Road and Gibson Creek has been
constructed. Some work has also been done south of Gibson Creek (e.g., recent
cleadng along the Bittenbender Access Road).
The objective of this fuelbreak is that by removing ladder fuels, a fire would slow
when it reached the fuelbreak. The absence of ground fuels could also result in
crown rites dropping back to the ground at the fuelbreak, enhancing the ability of fire
suppression agencies to control or suppress the tire. The fuelbreaks can also be
locations where firefighters can take a stand against a fire, including backfiring from
the fuelbreak. The fuelbreak would act to slow fires starting in residences along the
east side of the Study Area.
Several old firebreaks occurring in the Study Area would be re-established. A
firebreak is when vegetation is cleared down to mineral soil (as opposed to a
fuelbreak where natural vegetation is thinned and limbed but not entirely removed).
The proposed firebreaks are shown on Figure 2. These old firebreaks are mainly
grown over at this time, though the westemmost portion on the Hull/Piffero parcel has
been or is being reopened.
Once the firebreaks and fuelbreak are constructed, a sedes of prescribed burns
would be done on south-facing slopes. These prescribed burns would reduce the
overall fuel volume, especially in chaparral and pine-dominated stands. There is ro
schedule for when these burns would be done.
2. Constraints
Regulatory Standards
The City's General Plan contains the following policies and implementation measures:
· Require sprinklers for new development in high fire hazard zones (Policy SF-7.1).
· Prepare Valley-wide fire safe standards which will be at least as restrictive as the
State's Fire Safe Standards (Policy SF-12.1).
The City's Municipal Code requires the following:
· Roads shall be 20 feet wide.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
· Maximum road grade is 15 percent.
· The turn radii on roads shall be at least a 50-foot inside turn radius.
Dead-end roads (i.e., cul-de-sac roads) shall be no longer than 400 feet.
The City does not have adopted wildland/urban interface fire safety standards.. As
such, the Ukiah Fire Department relies on typical standards developed by CDF (State Fire
Safe Standards), the California Fire Code, and the National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA). The Califomia Fire Code and NFPA are adopted be reference which allows the
Fire department to require those standards. Based on the Fire Department's letter in the
adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Hull/Piffero Subdivision and conversation
with department staff, it appears the following standards are used:
· Roads shall be paved and at least 18 feet wide.
· Road grades up to 20 percent are acceptable if the road is adequately paved.
· A 38-foot inside tuming radius is required.
· Combustible vegetation will be cleared for at least 100 feet around homes and for 10
feet on either side of roadways.
Fireflow storage is required with the requirement based on house size and a hazard
factor for the site. For residences under 3,600 square feet, a basic fireflow of 1,000
gallons per minute is required, though this can be reduced by 50 percent if the
building is spdnklered. Stored fireflow must be capable of fighting a fire at the
required volume for two hours.
· Hydrants must be installed. The number and placement are dependent on the ability to
meet minimum fireflow.
· Though sprinklers are not required, the Ukiah Fire Department typically requires them
for areas such as the Study Area due to a lack of fireflow.
· .Class A roofs are required.
Constraints
New development in the area would be constrained by the following:
Constructing new homes would substantially increase the chance of fire ignitions.
Ignitions can result from such activities as use of power equipment, burning of trash
or vegetation, barbecues, improperly maintained mufflers, downed power lines, fires
starting inside a residence, and other activities. The Study Area already contains a
number of potential ignition sources, including residences in the urban/wildland
interface along the east side of the Study Area (and particularly residences that are
located further to the west such as on Lookout Ddve), public use of Low Gap
Regional Park, and illegal trespassing by hikers, bikers, and motor vehicle drivers.
38
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Most of these ignition sources (with the exception of illegal trespassers) are located
adjacent to or near City streets where access by the fire department is relatively
rapid. Construction of new residences in more western, isolated portions of the
Study Area will increase ignition potential in areas that are more difficult to access.
As previously described, response time to the Hull/Piffero Subdivision site is
estimated to be at least 20 minutes for the first responding vehicle.
Adding new homes and residents to the Study Area would reduce the chance of
ignitions from trespassers since fewer trespassers would be expected if the area
were more developed. However, the public can currently walk across City-owned
property and Low Gap Regional Park to the north. In addition, some trespassing
would continue even if new homes were constructed in vadous parts of the Study
Area. Also, the fire department did not report having to respond to any fires started
by trespassers in the area.
By the time a fire is spotted, called in, and responded to, it will likely have been
burning for neady 30 minutes. Under extreme weather conditions and proper ignition
location, such an ignition would likely be out of control by the time the first brush truck
ardved on the scene. It is also possible to likely that such a fire would be out of
control even with the subsequent arrival of City and CDF engines. It is further
possible that based on visual observation of the spread of the fire from the Valley
floor or based on reports from the first responding brush truck that the City and/or
CDF would decline to send engines up to the site for fear of firefighters either having
to pass through a fire line or being trapped by the fire (given the restricted number of
access routes, the steep gradient of access roads, and the heavy vegetation those
roads pass through).
Such an ignition would likely destroy the residence where the ignition began as well
as other residences in the area. Such a fire could threaten large numbers of
residences along the west side of Ukiah. Prevailing wind patterns are to the west in
the morning and switching to the east in the afternoon. Historically, fires have started
on the east side of the ddges bordering the City, burned west into wildlands, and then
traveled back to the east in the afternoon and evening, following canyons back to the
east.
While actions taken pursuant to CDF's VMP would substantially reduce the chance of
a major wildfire, they would not necessarily prevent such a fire occurring under
extreme weather conditions. In addition, it may be many years before all the actions
included in the VMP are completed (also assuming that the City allows implementation
of all the actions given aesthetic and other impacts of firebreak construction and
prescribed burning). The one part of the VMP currently being implemented is the
construction of the eastern shaded fuelbreak. While this fuelbreak, once completed,
will act to slow a fire, that is all it will do is slow it. Unless the fuelbreak is manned
and used as a suppression point, the fire will pass through the fuelbreak and then
increase its intensity on the other side. The preparers of this report believe it will be
very difficult to man much of this fuelbreak since there is not road access along the
fuelbreak. Access to the fuelbreak is provided by a few east-west roads and/or by
walking. In addition, the fuelbreak is not a safe place for firefighters to make a stand
since a fire approaching such a fuelbreak could kill firefighters caught in or adjacent
to the fuelbreak (200 feet of non-flammable matedal is generally recommended in
chaparral vegetation to allow firefighters to survive a fire that approaches one side of
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
a firebreak). Thus, under worst case conditions, it is unlikely that crew chiefs would
send crews to this fuelbreak if there was a chance the fire could actually approach
the fuelbreak. Again, the pdmary purpose of the fuelbreak would be to slow the fire.
Under non-extreme conditions, slowing the fire at the fuelbreak could allow
suppression at or near the fuelbreak or allow time for suppression agencies to gather
resources to contain the fire at firebreaks to the south, west, or north. However, the
preparers of this report believe that this fuelbreak will have less significant effect on
a wildfire burning under extreme weather conditions. The preparers of this report
would note that they have considerable experience developing fire management
plans. Leonard Chades and Associates has prepared, among others, the Fire
Management Plan for the Mount Tamalpais Area in southern Madn County (20,000+
acres surrounded by seven cities) and are currently updating The Sea Ranch Fire
Management Plan.
Even if the fuelbreak slowed the fire, it is still likely that new residences west of the
fuelbreak would bum. These new residences can be constructed to be "fire safe"
by requiring Class A roofs, sprinklers, other fire-resistant construction techniques
and materials, requiring adequate water storage, and cleadng vegetation around
homes and along access roads. However, even homes that are constructed to meet
these standards can burn during severe wildfires. For example, the 13R sprinkler
system required for new residences such as on the Hull/Piffero Subdivision are not
intended to actually save a building (as compared to the 13 system required for
commercial structures). The 13R systems are intended to sufficiently retard the
spread of a fire to allow safe egress by the home's residents. Similarly, with
vegetation clearance, unless this clearance is constructed and maintained over time,
it will not necessarily protect a residence from a fire approaching the home. It is also
noted that sufficient clearance to protect residences in steep heavily vegetated sites
such as occur on the Study Area will be substantial, with consequent visual impacts.
Thus, even if homes are built to current fire safe standards, this does not mean that
such homes would not be destroyed in a major catastrophic wildfire.
The extreme fire hazard on the Study Area will be potentially exacerbated by tree
death caused by SODS.
Residents living in new homes on the Study Area may be unable to evacuate.
Access roads are steep and travel through dense vegetation and down slope.
Catastrophic wildfires frequently start at lower elevations and spread uphill, often at
a very rapid rate. While there are two unpaved roads that travel west off the Study
Area, these roads are very rough and access to Low Gap Road is many miles and
cannot be driven by a normal passenger vehicle. Additionally, even if residents did
use these roads leading to the west, it is entirely possible they could be trapped in the
rough wildlands to the west from a fast-moving wildfire.
The City's hillside regulations include development restrictions to ensure fire safety.
However, it is noted that the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed
Hull/Piffero Subdivision will potentially allow that development despite the fact that the
subdivision will be served by a long road with no secondary access and that road
would not meet City standards for grade, width, and turning radii. The development
may occur if the City Council ultimately approves the requested exceptions to City
standards. If future development was also allowed to not strictly comply with City
requirements, there would be increased risk to future residents and their homes.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
3. Conclusions
The Study Area contains extreme fire hazards. While the hazard can be reduced by
proper residence design and construction, creation of defensible space around homes,
reducing fuel loads around homes and along roads, and other measures, the risk of a
wildfire destroying homes and potentially harming or killing residents, who could be
trapped in the area due to access constraints, is very substantial.
The construction of additional residences in the Study Area will substantially increase the
chance for fire ignitions. A wildfire igniting under proper weather conditions could not
only threaten residences and residents of the Study Area, but adjacent neighborhoods,
especially urban neighborhoods to the east.
The more new residences that are allowed to be constructed on the Study Area, the
greater the dsk of fire ignition, the more homes potentially destroyed, and the greater the
number of people put at risk.
4!
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
F. AESTHETICS
1. Setting
Currently, the Study Area provides a wild, undeveloped western backdrop to the City.
The area includes all but the upper slopes of the ridge bordering the west side of town.
The ridge is heavily wooded; several canyons are noticeable, especially the Gibson
Creek canyon which dissects the ddge. Development is not visible on most of the Study
Area, though a few existing homes at lower elevations are visible from vantage points
relatively near those homesites. From some vantage points in the City or the Ukiah Valley,
one can see the scars resulting from past grading of access roads, firebreaks, and the
building site on the Nix property. The most visible existing development includes:
· One large residence about one-quarter the way up the ridge west of the end of Mill
Street (at the top of Lookout Ddve);
· A second residence further down the hill on Lookout Ddve;
· One residence south of the west end of West Clay Street (not as visible as the two
houses described above as it is located at a lower elevation);
· A dirt road scar running north-south on the upper slope of the ridge (the access road
to the Nix residence and the Hull/Piffero Subdivision site);
· The big "U" near the top of the ddge;
· Several other minor road and firebreak scars; and
· From Low Gap Road, there is a view of a couple of homes west of the end of Maple
Avenue about one quarter way up the ridge.
From most distant vantage points nighttime views are of darkness, except for views of
existing homes at lower elevations, again, from vantage points near those homes.
As was described in the previous section on Fire, CDF has an existing VMP which
includes construction of firebreaks on the Study Area and future prescribed buming.
These firebreaks would be quite visible from the Valley floor, and the City may wish to
review this VMP with CDF to determine the utility of these firebreaks. If they are
determined to be necessary and/or desirable, the City may want to review their location
and construction to minimize visual effects. The VMP also includes future prescribed
buming. Such burning will cause visual impacts. However, relatively small areas would
be burned each year, and burned areas will soon regrow with new vegetation so that
the visual impacts from distant vantage points on the Valley floor should not be long-
lasting.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
2. Constraints
Regulatory Standards
The City's General Plan contains the following pertinent policies and implementation
measures:
· Site and design new hillside development to minimize visual impacts on views from
the valley (IM OC-10.2b).
· Ridgeline areas should be assessed for possible public purchase (IM OC-10.3b).
The City's hillside regulations require the following:
· Encourage clustering to preserve open space.
· Preserve outstanding natural features such as the highest crest of the hill, natural
rock outcroppings, major tree belts, etc.
· Underground all utilities.
Constraints
Additional development on the upper slopes of the Study Area would alter the views of
the area. Even if residences are required to be buffered by existing trees and new
landscaping, designed with colors that blend into the surroundings, and constructed with
elevations limited to one story, many to most residences would be visible from numerous
vantage points in the Valley. For example, a review of the photosimulations prepared for
the proposed development of the five residences on the Hull/Piffero property shows that
certain vantage points would have long-distance views of these residences. The
preparers of this report believe that the residences would be even more visible than may
be evident in reviewing the photosimulations. It is much easier for someone who is used
to looking at an undeveloped hillside to pick out a new building than it is to see that same
building in a photosimulation. Local residents would be quite aware of the new homes on
the hillside despite the design and landscaping conditions recommended for the
subdivision.
People familiar with the existing view of the undeveloped hillside would be able to easily
pick out the new buildings as well as the potential scars caused by constructing access
roads and driveways. While neither the General Plan nor existing hillside regulations
prohibit development that would alter these views, the evident intent is that these
changes should be minimal. While the changes can be reduced by similar conditions of
approval as recommended for the Hull/Piffero Subdivision, they cannot be eliminated.
Many people would perceive this change of open space views as a significant
cumulative adverse impact, while other people may not.
The construction of new roads would be potentially more of a visual impact than the
residences themselves. The existing open space views are currently marred by road
cuts, particularly the road to the Nix residence and Hull/Piffero Subdivision site. While
new access roads from the east would likely not be allowed (as discussed in previous
43
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
sections), new roads connecting off the existing roads would likely be visible, given the
need to construct roads to 18-20 feet in width and thin vegetation along the roads for fire
safety. In addition, widening the existing road on the Bittenbender parcel to provide
access to that parcel would require extensive grading. Currently, this road is not visible,
but widening and cleadng of roadside vegetation could make this road visible from
vantage points to the east.
A potential conflict in approving new development is the condition to require retention of
existing trees near new residences to act as visual screens or buffers and the fire safe
standards requiring clearing of vegetation and substantial thinning of tree cover near
residences and along roads. It is difficult to comply with both conditions (i.e., to preserve
trees near homes and clear vegetation for fire safety).
A potentially significant visual environmental impact of new development would be the
addition of lights to a currently dark nighttime view. Even if secudty lighting is prohibited,
views of interior and extedor lights as well as possible views of headlights from cars
traveling on Study Area roads and driveways would be visible from many vantage points
in the City.
Impacts to views could be reduced by requiring homes be constructed into the grade on
ddge sideslopes, rather than by grading fiat building platforms on more prominent
hillcrests or noses of knolls and ridges. Visual impact could further be reduced by
requiring that buildings be sited so that they are not visible or less visible from the Valley
(e.g., by constructing residences on north and/or south-facing slopes, rather than on
east facing slopes). However, constructing residences on north- or south-facing slopes
could be constrained by previously described geologic constraints as well as access
constraints.
3. Conclusions
It would be difficult if not impossible to allow new development on the Study Area without
substantially affecting existing open space views. Even with careful planning, future
development would transform views of an area that currently has no development (other
than a few road and firebreak scars) to views of a steep ridge with scattered residential
development and, possibly, new roads. Lights would transform existing nighttime views.
While City policy requires that impacts to views from the Valley be minimized, such
policies do not state that no changes to views can occur. It is likely that while conditions
of approval similar to those recommended for the Hull/Piffero Subdivision would
substantially reduce potential visual impacts (and, thus, possibly be deemed consistent
with the General Plan), the overall change in the viewshed would occur.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
G, TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
1. Setting
Public streets that provide access to the Study Area include Low Gap Road, Maple
Avenue, West Standley Street, Highland Avenue, Lookout Drive, and Mendocino Place. It
is possible that future connections across private property could provide connection to
other public streets. However, such connections are currently considered speculative.
In addition, as described in this report, it would be advisable to limit new read connections
due to the environmental constraints on the Study Area. These main access streets are
described below.
Low Gap Road
Low Gap Road borders the north end of the Study Area. This street provides access
from North State Street to the County Administration Center, Ukiah High School, Low Gap
Regional Park, and residential neighborhoods in western Ukiah. The read extends to the
west past the Study Area and serves scattered rural residential development and
rangelands to the west. The City has designated this street as a City Major Collector
within the City Limits and a County Rural Connector to the west.
That portion of the Study Area fronting Low Gap Road is in Low Gap Regional Park. It is
assumed that there would be no residential development on this park or the adjacent (to
the south) City-owned properties. As such, new Study Area development would not use
Low Gap Road for access.
West Standley Street:
This City street starts at North State Street and travels west until it crosses Gibson Creek
and then turns north, ending after a few hundred feet. There is an unpaved access road
leading to the Nix property and the Hull/Piffero property starting before West Standley
Street crosses Gibson Creek, and there is an unpaved access road that extends from
this street (north of Gibson Creek) onto the Study Area. West Standley Street is
designated as a City Minor Collector from State Street to Dora Street and then a
Residential street to its western terminus. The following describes the existing status of
this street.
From State Street, the first block to School Street is one way traveling east; there is a
dght and left turn lane at the State Street intersection, and it is signalized. The
intersection with School Street is stop sign controlled. Proceeding west from School
Street, the street is one-way (eastbound) to Dora Street. Parking is prohibited on the
north side. The road appears to be 25-28 feet wide, but is not centerline striped until
west of Dora Street.
From Dora Street to where West Standley Street starts up the hill (just west of
Highland Place), there is 10 feet of travel lane on the north side with no parking
allowed and 18 feet of pavement on the south side with parking allowed.
· West of Highland Place, the road is centedine striped and about 20 feet wide. There
are "no parking" signs on the south and west sides of the road. While parking is not
45
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
prohibited on the north and east sides, there are only a few locations with sufficient
shoulders for parked cars to be out of the travel lane. The final 300 feet of Standley
is not centerline striped, but it remains about 20 feet wide.
· A number of residences at the western end of the street use this street for access to
commercial areas and main north-south streets. The residences include:
10 homes from the west terminus of West Standley Street to Giomo
Avenue,
3 homes between Giomo Avenue and Gibson Creek,
11 homes on Giomo Avenue, and
about 25 homes from Gibson Creek to Highland Place.
Mendocino Place
This street provides the sole access to the southernmost part of the Study Area. It is
designated by the City as a Residential street. The street is paved and provides
residential access to three homes at its western end (135, 265, and 275 Mendocino
Place). The road is 18-20 feet wide with no centedine striping. The grade is not overly
steep, and there are no hazardous curves in the road. Traveling east, ddvers use
Mendocino Ddve to access Dora Street.
Maple Avenue
This Residential street provides access to the residential neighborhood along that street
and cul de sacs to the north. At the west end of this street are several private
driveways serving existing residences on the Study Area.
Highland A venue
This street parallels the east side of the Study Area between West Standley Street down
to nearly the south end of the Study Area (where it becomes Highland Court and Highland
Ddve). The street has several locations with narrow width and sharp horizontal and
vertical curves. The main Study Area property that would use this street for access if
the Bittenbender parcel which accesses Highland Avenue just north of where the
horseshoe bend on Highland is located.
Lookout Drive
This is a very narrow, steep City street that serves three residences. The street is
paved but is not two lanes wide.
Existing Study Area Access Roads
There are currently five unpaved access roads on the Study Area. These roads are
described below.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Nix Access Road
The first road starts on West Standley Street before that street crosses Gibson Creek.
The road travels about 6,000 feet and ends at the back end of the proposed Hull/Piffero
Subdivision. The road currently provides access to the Nix property, the site of the
Hull/Piffero Subdivision and the Duwe property. The road varies in width from 12-20 feet
and has grades exceeding 20 percent with an average grade of approximately 16
percent. In assessing the Hull/Piffero Subdivision, City staff recommended the following
findings:
The majodty of the road exceeds the 15 percent maximum grade permitted by the City
Municipal Code. The grade also exceeds the State Fire Safety Standard for roadway
grade (maximum of 16 percent)
· Some of the inside radii on the road are less than the required 50 feet.
The road would be widened to 18 feet and paved. While City staff entertained
additional widening of certain sections of the road, it was determined that this
additional widening would result in substantial environmental damage.
Access Road North of Gibson Creek
This unpaved road travels west from near the west end of West Standley Street. It
travels west along the north side of the Gibson Creek canyon and provides access to the
smaller northern Nix parcel, the Eiffert residence (a small 2-acre parcel surrounded by
the McKibbin property), the McKibbin parcel, one additional residence west of the Study
Area, and undeveloped property in the County to the west. The road vades in width from
12-20 feet and is not excessively steep as it follows the north side of the Gibson Creek
canyon.
Road to Fish Hatchery Site
On the north side of Gibson Creek, there is a dirt road extending from West Standley
Street to the old fish hatchery site. The road is relatively level and well-maintained. It is
about 900 feet long.
Bittenbender Access Road
There is an existing dirt road extending from the driveway to the Bittenbender residence
at 350 Highland Avenue onto the 50-acre Bittenbender parcel. This relatively steep road
switchbacks up the hill and ends at an old firebreak that proceeds steeply uphill across
the Hull/Piffero property. The firebreak is abandoned and not suitable for driving. Field
surveys conducted with the Ukiah Fire Department showed that this road can be ddven
by a fire truck (albeit, very slowly). The road is one lane wide and would require
substantial widening to allow access to more than one residence on the property.
Duwe Property Access
This 40-acre property has access off the above-described Nix Access Road. It also has
access to its east side via a private driveway serving 1157 West Standley Street (though
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
the authors of this report cannot confirm whether this second access is a legal access).
Just before this driveway ends at the residence, there is an old dirt road that leads west
onto the Duwe property. This road does not appear to be used, and its status is
unknown.
Private Driveways
A number of existing residences on the lower slopes on the east side of the Study Area
have private driveways that provide access to West Standley Street, Mendocino Place,
and other streets along the west edge of the City.
2. Constraints
Regulatory Requirements
The City's Municipal Code requires roads to not exceed 15 percent grade, be at least
20 feet wide, and have 50-foot turning radii. Dead-end (cul-de-sac) roads should not
exceed 400 feet in length.
The City's General Plan contains the following policies and implementation measures:
Projects shall not exceed the capacity of streets and intersections serving
the project (Policy CT-I.1). Level of Service C is the minimum acceptable
level for Residential streets and Level of Service D for streets carrying
more traffic.
Roads providing access to the Study Area currently operate at better than
Level of Service C (LOS C). For such roads, if a project would cause the
traffic volumes on the Residential street to exceed 10 percent of the
existing volume, a traffic study is required. If the LOS is currently LOS A
or B, and the additional traffic would not drop the LOS to LOS C, then no
additional analysis would be required. However, a full traffic assessment
is required if the LOS would drop to LOS C or worse (Implementation
Measure CT-16.4c). The traffic study shall describe roadway
improvements required to maintain the LOS at an acceptable level, but in
no case less than LOS D (Implementation Measure CT-16.5d).
Ensure that new development is accessible by walking and bicycling
(Policy CT-3.1)
The State's Fire Safe Standards require two 9-foot travel lanes with a maximum
grade of 16 percent. Roads are to be constructed to be "all weather" roads with a
minimum of 6 inches of crushed and compacted aggregate base.
Urban jurisdictions in which the report preparers work typically require roads and
driveways exceeding 18 percent grade to be paved with concrete and the concrete
must be "scored" to allow traction by fire trucks and other emergency equipment.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Many jurisdictions rely on the road standards established in A Policy on Geometric
Design of Highways and Streets prepared by the American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO, 1994) as standards for new road
construction, The AASHTO standards for new roads on the Study Area (based on
the type of road, traffic volumes, and design speed) would include at least two nine-
foot travel lanes, two feet of paved shoulder on either side of the street, grades not
exceeding 14 percent, and adequate sight distance.
New Access Roads on the Study Area
Construction of new access roads leading from public streets onto the Study Area would
be severely constrai.'~ by at .least t.he following factors;
The slopes are very steep. Any new access road would likely exceed maximum
slope gradients established by the City's MuniciPal Code, State Fire Safety Standards
and the Amedcan Association of State Highway and Transportation ~cials
(AASHTO).
Constructing new access roads and/or improving the existing roads on the
Bittenbender parcel and the east side of the Duwe parcel that would comply with
maximum grades described above would require massive grading to keep the new
roads on the contour. Such grading would likely have at least the following effects:
Cause potential slope instability,
Cause substantial erosion and sedimentation of streams,
Adversely impact fish and other aquatic species,
Cause loss of substantial number of trees and other vegetation, and
Cause visual scars in the hillside.
Unless roads were constructed to grades less than 14-15 percent, emergency
access would be hampered. Evacuation could be hazardous in the case of a
wildland fire or other emergency.
· Unless roads were connected or looped, access could be constrained by long cul-
de-sac roads.
In summary, the steep slopes and other environmental conditions on the Study Area mean
that construction of new access roads and/or improving existing roads from the east
would likely be judged as having significant environmental impacts which could not all be
mitigated to a less than significant level. The likely inability to construct new access
roads serving major development on the Study Area significantly constrains Study Area
development potential. It is likely that future development would need to be served by
extensions of the existing roads on the Study Area or upgrading existing roads, with the
possibility that small parcels on the east side of the area being served by driveway
extensions.
49
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
New Private Driveways
It is possible that some of the smaller undeveloped lots along the eastem edge of the
Study Area might be accessed by constructing private driveways from public streets to
these lots. If such driveways are legally feasible, it is likely they could be constructed to
these small eastern lots without substantial environmental damage, assuming that
driveways were constructed in compliance with the City's Municipal Code and other
development guidelines.
Use of Existing Study Area Access Roads
If future development of the larger parcels on the Study Area were contemplated, access
would likely need to be provided by extending the existing Study Area access roads to
currently undeveloped parcels. Access could be provided in the following manner:
The southemmost piece of the Study Area could be accessed by pdvate driveways
off Mendocino Place. There is one undeveloped parcel in this small part of the Study
Area. While detailed geotechnical analyses would be required to assess the
environmental feasibility of constructing such driveways, it is assumed that such a
ddveway could be developed with minimal environmental effect.
The three vacant parcels on or near Lookout Drive would be served by this existing
City street. While this street is steep and narrow, the three new residences would
not substantially increase traffic on this street.
The Bittenbender parcel could be potentially served by the existing road that
traverses much of this parcel (at least the lower eastern portion is served).
However, substantial grading on steep slopes would be required to allow this road to
meet City standards.
· The southem Nix parcel, western portion of the Duwe parcel, and Hull/Piffero parcel
would be accessed by extensions off the existing Nix access road.
The east end of the Duwe property could be served by a road extension or road
improvement of the existing road extending from a pdvate driveway to West Standley
Street. This road and the existing ddveway would need to be improved to meet City
street standards.
The area north of Gibson Creek that is not in public ownership would be served by
extensions off the existing road in that area. This road currently provides access to
the northern Nix Parcel, the existing Eiffert residence, and the lower, eastern part of
the McKibbin property. Access to the western portion of the McKibbin property could
possibly be served by a northern connector off this existing road. However, the very
steep slopes north of the road plus the very steep slopes on the eastern portion of
the McKibbin property make development of this area and this road extension unlikely.
· Smaller vacant parcels east of the McKibbin property and west of West Standley
Street could be served by pdvate ddveway extensions.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
· Vacant parcels west of the west end of Maple Avenue could be served by driveway
extensions to Maple.
Capacity. of the Existing City Street System
If a maximum of 66 new residences were constructed, it is estimated that 35 of these
residences would access the City street system via West Standley Street, 13 via
Highland Avenue (and then to Clay, Church, or Perkins Streets), 3 via Highland Ddve and
Highland Court (and then via Mill Street), 5 via Maple Avenue, and I via Mendocino Place.
All of these Residential streets currently operate at LOS A or B. This small increase in
tdps would not cause these streets to operate below LOS C.
More important than traffic capacity is traffic safety. The City has previously had
complaints about ddvers speeding on West Standley Street. A temporary stop sign was
posted on West Standley in response to neighborhood complaints. Studies showed that
this stop sign did not substantially affect travel speeds along the street, and the stop sign
was removed. Increased development on the Study Area that uses West Standley Street
as access would aggravate this existing speeding problem and likely cause additional
concerns by people living along that street.
The City Superintendent of Streets also noted that there are existing congestion problems
on streets near Yokayo, St. Mary's, and Nokomis Schools. This congestion is primarily
dudng the moming commute and when parents are dropping off children at the schools.
The main commute route for residential neighborhoods to the southeast of the Study Area
is to ddve north on Helen, west on Mendocino Drive, north on Gardens Drive and Spdng
Street, and then further north to Pomolita School or west on Mill Street to Dora Street.
However, future development of the Study Area should not substantially affect this
existing congestion, as there are few vacant parcels (and future residences) near the
south end of the Study Area that would use these streets for access.
Additional traffic from Study Area development would also increase congestion on the
main City arterials and intersections. City staff reports that recently a number of critical
intersections have dropped to LOS F (including at least the Gobbi/Orchard,
Perkins/Orchard, Main/Gobbi, and Main/Perkins intersections). Study Area-generated
traffic would aggravate unacceptable operating conditions at these and potentially other
more distant intersections. However, it is reported that the City is currently conducting a
city-wide traffic study to identify congestion problems and develop a coordinated
approach to making circulation improvements to address those problems. It is assumed
that city-wide buildout, including buildout potential in the Study area, will be included in
that study.
3. Conclusions
The environmental conditions on the Study Area significantly constrain roadway
construction to serve undeveloped parcels. While small parcels along the eastem border
of the Study Area can likely be accessed through extending private driveways from
street ends adjacent to the Study Area, access for larger parcels to the west would
likely be via extensions of or upgrading the existing access roads on the Study Area.
Extension of these roads or widening substandard roads may be difficult given slope
instabilities, erosion potential, vegetation clearance, and visual impacts.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Impacts to the existing City street system are expected to be less than significant except
for increased speeding and related traffic safety problems on West Standley Street. It is
estimated that as many as 350 trips per day would use West Standley Street, and this
number should not cause that street to operate below LOS C. The relatively small number
of new trips to other City streets serving the Study Area is not expected to cause
congestion problems on those streets. Study Area-generated traffic along with traffic
from other new development in the City can be expected to adversely affect intersection
LOS at currently congested intersections on main downtown arterials.
The 350 new trips on West Standley Street would aggravate existing speeding and
traffic safety problems along that street.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
H. PUBLIC SERVICES
1. Setting
The Study Area is within the Ukiah City Limits, and most public services are provided by
City departments. Previous sections assessed impacts as regards fire, streets, and
storm drainage.
Police
The Ukiah Police Department provides police response from its station at City Hall. The
Department is served by 27 sworn officers. At any one time, the Department has one
sergeant and two officers on patrol. According to a Department spokesman (Dewey,
personal communication), the major existing problems in the Study Area include:
· Vandalism reports on the Nix property and a home to the west of the Study Area.
· Frequently people escaping from the police take refuge in the Study Area requiring
police personnel to chase them on foot.
· Responses to young people "partying."
Fire and Emergency Medical
The Ukiah Fire Department provides response to rites and emergency medical calls from
its station. Resources of this department were described previously under Fire.
Water
Public water is provided by the City. The City's main reservoir is on the golf course at
elevation 840 feet. There is a higher, smaller reservoir on the golf course at elevation
878 feet. There is a 32,000 gallon tank at the top of Mendocino Place and a 10,000 gallon
tank at the top of Lookout Drive.
Wastewater
The City provides wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal for existing developed
areas of the City.
2. Constraints
Representatives of all pertinent service providers were consulted in preparing this report
to determine any constraints on their department's resources in serving possible future
development of the area as well as to identify any site constraints that could limit the
provision of services. The representatives reported the following concerns.
Police
Captain Dewey of the Police Department reported the following observations:
53
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Access could be a problem if roads are not constructed to proper widths and grade.
Response time would be slow to upper portions of the Study Area even if roads are
properly constructed. Even if access roads are paved, a 7-10 minute response time
is likely.
New single-family residential development is not expected to result in a substantial
number of calls for police response. The exceptions are the potential for increased
calls regarding trespassing, burglary, and vandalism. However, the Police
Department noted that the increase in the number of residences in the City will
cumulatively expand the demand on department resources, eventually resulting in the
need for additional sworn officers
The Police Department stated that access roads to new development should not
include locked gates or if they do, then a common code or preferably a knox box lock
system should be installed to allow easy police access.
Emergency Medical
Mr. Yates of the Ukiah Fire Department reported the following:
Response times to distant portions of the Study Area would be as long as 20 minutes.
People requiring life-preserving medical intervention may not survive dudng the time it
took to respond to these distant locations, depending on the specific medical situation.
Water
Conversations with George Borecky (City of Ukiah Water and Sanitation Departments)
indicate that most new development in the Study Area could not be served by the
City's main reservoir at the golf course. Certain existing residences at the west end
of West Standley Street and Maple Avenue are above the elevation served by this
reservoir. They are served by a higher reservoir at the golf course (elevation 878
feet). However, Mr. Borecky reports that this and other higher reservoirs are already
operating at full capacity, and there would not be capacity to serve new development
from this or other higher tanks. As such, new residences will either need to be
served by private wells, expanded City reservoirs, and/or a new higher City
reservoir(s) would need to be constructed and water pumped to that reservoir.
Potable water for most development at higher elevations would likely be provided by
wells. While water is scarce in the Study Area, it is possible to drill wells. The
Hull/Piffero subdivision would be served by a well that was drilled 500 feet deep.
This well produces 120 gallons per minute. Residences would need to include
sufficient water storage to supply two hours firefiow.
Wastewater
New development could be served by extending sewer mains from new residences
to existing lines on Maple Avenue, West Standley Street, or other streets adjacent to
the Study Area. Mr. Borecky reports that these existing mains have sufficient
54
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
capacity to handle the relatively small number of new homes that might be
constructed in the Study Area.
More distant residences would likely be served by on-site septic systems. These
systems must be propedy located, designed, constructed, and maintained to ensure
they do not induce landsliding or slope failure. It may be difficult to identify sufficient
leachfield sites in steeper portions of the Study Area.
3. Conclusions
It is possible that new residences will have sufficient water and leachfield area.
However, this would need to be proved for each new residence. Police and emergency
medical response would be long, potentially endangering residents of more distant homes
55
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
I. RECREATION'
1. Setting
On the north side of Gibson Creek, west of West Standley Street, is the site of an old,
abandoned fish hatchery. There is an unpaved road that starts just north of the Gibson
Creek bridge and travels above the north side of Gibson Creek to this histodc site. The
site and access road to the site are owned by the City of Ukiah but the access road
crosses the Nix property. Currently, the public is not legally allowed to access the site
due to the access across this private property. However, the City has official access to
the site to "maintain" it. There has been debate in the past over whether the City has
legal rights to use the access road. If such rights were proved, then public access to the
City-owned site could be provided.
Most of the northern 40 percent of the Study Area is in public ownership. The
northernmost large parcel (40 acres) is part of the existing Low Gap Regional Park, and
the two parcels to the south (totaling about 97 acres) are owned by the City of Ukiah.
2. Constraints
Regulatory Requirements
The City's General Plan includes the following policies and measures:
The City should develop a hillside trail around the Ukiah Valley (Policy PR-10.1). The
General Plan map (Figure V.2-AA) shows the proposed route of this trail mainly to the
west of the Study Area.
Develop stream access plans for creeks traveling through the city which would allow
public access along the creeks and development of pocket parks on public lands,
where feasible (Policy OC-9.4).
New hillside development shall incorporate open space for wildlife habitat and hiking.
Development shall be clustered to allow natural areas for hiking access (Policy OC-
11.2).
· Provide connector trails from the ridgetop trails into the valley in any plans for trail
development (IM OC-10.3c).
The Gibson Creek Habitat Enhancement and Public Access Study recommends that the
City explore legal issues involving the right for the public to access City property on the
Study Area (the abandoned fish hatchery site).
Recreational Opportunities
The Study Area contains wildland recreational possibilities in close proximity to the urban
population. While the Study Area does not lend itself to active recreational uses (e.g.,
playfields), it does provide the opportunity for development of a wildland trail network.
56
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Such a trail network could include small park areas which would allow the public to travel
off the trail in appropriate areas.
Trails could be extended from Low Gap Regional Park through the two City-owned
properties to the south with potential trail connections through the golf course property to
Anton Stadium. The City-owned fish hatchery site could be developed as a small park.
For that portion of the Study Area south of the City-owned property, unless a trail
network is identified and designed pdor to future residential subdivision and development
on the Study Area, the opportunity for such a network could be lost due to development
of homes, roads, and other improvements in areas where the trail would logically cross.
For example, if all lower gradient ddge tops or noses were developed with homes or
roads, then trails could not be constructed in the locations that might best be suited for
such trails, and future trails might be forced to be located on steeper hillsides. In addition,
if subdivision and development of the Study Area are allowed pdor to:development of a
trail/park system for the Study Area, it would be difficult for the City to require that new
development avoid these trail routes. If a trail/park plan for the Study Area were
developed pdor to additional development, then the City could require dedication of trail
right-of-way as a condition of approval (to mitigate other environmental impacts) for new
subdivisions.
It is beyond the scope of this report to identify potential trail routes through the Study
Area. Again, there are no adopted or proposed City or other govemmental agency plans
for trails or other recreational facilities on the Study Area, though the City's General Plan
does recommend creekside trails and connector trails to the dm trail. Some obvious
routes include routes up the Gibson Creek canyon traversing riorth to City-owned
property and Low Gap Regional Park. Other trail routes to be considered might include
routes that connect City streets (e.g., West Standley, Maple, Highland, and Mendocino
Place) with the General Plan-proposed dm route to the west of the Study Area. If such a
rim route were ever constructed, there would need to be connector trails from the urban
center which would allow people to access this rim trail.
Any trail planning for the Study Area would require detailed studies to determine how
trails could be constructed to avoid environmental damage. Issues such as increased
risk of fire ignitions from allowing the public to traverse high fire hazard wildlands would
need to be addressed along with issues regarding potential trespassing and other illegal
activities.
Any future subdivision or development of the Nix property could include an assessment
of the potential for public access to City-owned property on Gibson Creek. Such public
access would need to be carefully planned to avoid environmental damage to the
sensitive dpadan and aquatic habitat along the creek and on the City-owned property. It
is possible that public access to this site should be limited to visits by guided or
supervised groups.
3. Conclusions
The Study Area provides recreational opportunities for the City. The major constraints on
developing trails or parks on the Study Area are that development of the area may occur
prior to the City developing a plan for trails and parks, thereby eliminating some possible
.5?
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis '
trail routes or park sites. The Study Area also contains steep slopes and is a high fire
hazard area. Any trails or parks would need to be designed and operated so as not to
result in environmental damage or increase the chance of a major wildland fire or criminal
activities.
58
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Ji
SUMMARY OF CONSTRAINTS ON THE SiX MAJOR
PARCELS
The six large, privately-owned parcels on the Study Area include 230 acres. The
following summarizes constraints for each parcel. This summary is not intended as a
site-specific survey of each site as the preparers of this report had limited access to the
sites, but it does present a summary of the range of possible development constraints on
these important larger sites.
HulllPiffero Property
· The 40-acre site is already served by an existing access road, so major new road
construction is not required.
The owners have applied to subdivide the property into five lots. It is likely that this is
the maximum number of residences that could be constructed on the property given
slope constraints.
· Development will remove native vegetation and wildlife habitat and alter views from
the Valley.
Future residents will be at risk from wildfires, and the new homes will increase the
chance of a major wildfire starting in the area. Response times for emergency
personnel are estimated to be up to 20 minutes.
· According to reports submitted for the subdivision application, erosion, drainage,
water, and wastewater constraints can be addressed for this project.
Southern Nix Property
The owner is currently constructing one residence on this 40-acre site. Studies done
as part of the Hull/Piffero Subdivision application indicate a lack of other suitable
building sites. However, there is no guarantee that other sites could not be
developed with homes built on grade (rather than on a graded, flat building platform).
The site is constrained by steep slopes. Any additional development, beyond the
permitted residence, will be constrained by steep slopes, loss of vegetation and
wildlife habitat, and potential lack of water. Additional development would potentially
cause increased sedimentation and flooding of Gibson Creek and alter views from the
Valley. Additional residences would increase the chance of fire ignition and the risk
to residents from a wildfire.
Duwe Property
This property currently has legal access off the road to the Nix residence. This
access is near the lower part of the parcel, and there is no access to the western
part of the parcel. Development of a road up the slope to serve the upper, westem
uppermost parts of the parcel would be severely constrained by slope constraints
and the' potential for erosion and landsliding. Such a road would be quite visible from
59
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
the Valley as it would need to switchback up the hill. As such, it is likely that
development would be restricted to the lower portion of the parcel.
There is also access to the east side of this property. Field surveys indicated that at
least two homes could be constructed on less steep slopes immediately uphill from
the east side of the property, if the property owner has legal access from the private
driveway.
Given average parcel slopes, as many as 8 residences on this site could only be
constructed if clustered in less steep topographic breaks. Unless clustering were
proposed and approved, it is likely that only 3-5 residence sites might be identified and
developed. Even with clustering, it may be difficult to identify sufficient space to
allow 8 residences.
The site is further constrained by all the constraints listed for previous parcels:
vegetation and wildlife habitat loss, erosion, water availability, wildfire hazard, and
impacts on views. New roads through this site would be quite visible as will new
homes, particularly if they are clustered.
Bittenbender Property
This 50-acre property has potential access from an existing road on the property that
connects to Highland Avenue. Future homesites would need to be constructed
immediately adjacent to this road to avoid the need for additional road construction.
Upper portions of the site may be undevelopable due to steep slopes and the lack of
an existing road.
· A survey of the road indicated two small possible homesites adjacent to the road. It
may be difficult to develop other homesites on this steep property.
This existing road would need to be widened and improved if it were to serve more
than one residence. Such widening would be constrained by quite steep slopes
above and below most of the road, slope instability, erosion and sedimentation
potential, and loss of biotic habitat. The existing driveway to the Bittenbender
residence would also need to be widened to Highland Avenue.
· Road widening and/or extension and homesite development would be quite visible
from vantage points in the Valley.
Development could be constrained by lack of water. Development would be at risk
from wildfires. Response times by emergency personnel to the top of the road could
be-15 minutes. Development could aggravate drainage problems in City
drainageways to the east.
Northern Nix Property
This 26.6-acre property parallels the north side of Gibson Creek. There is existing
access through most of the length of this parcel. Many sites on this parcel would not
be visible or less visible from the Valley due to the topography and orientation of the
parcel.
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
However, development would be constrained by steep slopes and proximity to
Gibson Creek. New residences would need to be sited almost adjacent to the
existing road since slopes uphill and downhill of the road are quite steep. Additional
grading would potentially cause erosion and sedimentation of the creek.
The property is very susceptible to wildfire as it is within an east-west cut through
the main ddge. Response times would be slow, and residents could be trapped in the
canyon.
· Development would result in loss of vegetation and wildlife habitat.
sedimentation of the creek would be a significant impact.
Potential
Development could be constrained by lack of water. Additional diversions from
Gibson Creek (as currently serves the southern Nix'property) would likely not be
approved.
· Additional runoff could exacerbate flooding downstream on Gibson Creek.
McKibbin Property
The property is accessed by the above-described road serving the northern Nix
property. There is one suitable building site area at the east end of the property (east
of the existing Eiffert residence) - a relatively open and fiat site perched above homes
to the east off of West Standley Street. To the west of this building site, are steep
slopes. Constructing a new access road on the property itself or off of the existing
access road on the northern Nix property would require extensive grading to
switchback up the hill. Without extensive grading, it is possible that only 1-3
residences could be clustered near the east end of the site.
Development of 1-3 homes on the east end of the site would alter views, but because
this building site is at a lower elevation, the new homes would not be visible from
large numbers of vantage points in the Valley. If homes were built higher on the
property, the homes and access roads to them would be quite visible.
Development of the upper portions of the sites would similar to the other properties be
constrained by loss of biological resources, water availability, visual effects, fire
hazard, and erosion/sedimentation impacts.
Summary
Under the existing City hillside regulations, as many as 46 additional residences could be
constructed on the 237 acres included in these six holdings. It is more likely that given
site constraints, a range of 20-30 building sites could be identified that would be
consistent with the other explicit requirements of the existing City hillside regulations.
Development of even 20-30 new residences would have potentially substantial impacts
on views and such homes would be susceptible to fires as well as result in a range of
other previously described impacts.
61
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Bibliography
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
1984. A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets.
Brady/LSA
1999. Orrs Creek Habitat Enhancement and Flood Control Study.
Burddge, Betty (editor)
1995. Sonoma County Breeding Bird Atlas.
Califomia Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology
1991. Landslides and Engineering Geology of the Western Ukiah Area,
Central Mendocino County, California- Landslide Hazard
Identification Map No. 24, DMG Open-File Report 91-16.
LSA Associates, Inc.
2001. Gibson Creek Habitat Enhancement and Public Access Study.
Shuford, W. David
1993. The Matin County Breeding Bird Atlas.
Skenfield, Michael W.
1991. City of Ukiah, State of California, General Plan Revision and
Growth Management Program - Natural Habitat Section, prepared
for Eric Toll as part of updating the City's General Plan.
Ukiah, City of
n.d. Zoning Ordinance
1995. Ukiah Valley General Plan and Growth Management Program.
U.S. Department of Agriculture
1985. Soil Survey of Mendocino County, Eastern Part, and Trinity
County, Southwestem Part, California.
Zeiner, David C. et al
1990. Califomia's Wildlife, Volume II, Birds, Califomia Statewide Wildlife Habitat
Relationship System, Department of Fish and Game.
1990. California's Wildlife, Volume II, Mammals, Califomia Statewide
Wildlife Habitat Relationship System, Department of Fish and Game.
62
Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis
Persons Contacted
Borecky, George
Dewey, Chris
Looney, Jim
Nussaman, Sarah
Stump, Chadey
Steele, Diana
Yates, Chuck
Ukiah Water Department and Ukiah Valley Sanitation Distdct
Ukiah Police Department
Ukiah Superintendent of Streets
California Department of Fish and Game, Crew
Supervisor for Stream Assessment
City of Ukiah Planning and Community Development
Department Director
City of Ukiah Public Works Director and City Engineer
Ukiah Fire Department
Report Preparers
Leonard Chades, Ph.D.
Lynn Milliman
Project Manager
Environmental Analyst