Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-05-10 Packet - Joint Planning CTTy OF UK:[AH C]:TY COUNCTL/PLANN:[NG COMM:[SS:[ON 30]:NT MEET]:NG Hillside Zoning Regulation Revisions UK:[AH C]:V]:C CENTER 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Wednesday, May :t0, 2006 4:30 p.m.- City Council 4:45 to 6:15 p.m.--3oint meeting :L. CALL TO ORDER a'. City Council - Roll Call 1 AUDTENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ZTEM$ 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 n~3t 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. UNFTNTSHED BUSTNE$S a. Status Report Concerning Public Benefits Program Financials And Request from Menton Builders for Photovoltaic ]:ncentive Rebate Related To Twelve Unit Townhouse Development on Apple Avenue 4. (;:ALL TO ORDER a. Planning Commission - Roll Call 5. NEW BUSZNESS a. Discussion and Direction Concerning the Draft Revised Hillside Development Regulations 6. AD:Z0URNMENT The City of Ukiah complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. AGENDA ITEM NO: 3a MEETING DATE: May 10, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT CONCERNING PUBLIC BENEFITS PROGRAM FINANCIALS AND REQUEST FROM MENTON BUILDERS FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC (PV) INCENTIVE REBATE RELATED TO TWELVE UNIT TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT ON APPLE AVENUE CONTINUED SUMMARY: At the May 3, 2006 City Council meeting Menton Builders and their solar contractor gave a presentation for a twelve unit townhouse development on Apple Avenue. The project utilizing 'green building' criteria also includes photovoltaic (PV) generating systems and solar hot water heaters for each unit. Menton Builders requested incentive rebates from the city's Public Benefits Fund (PBF) account for these solar installations as follows: $4/AC Watt for each 2,846 AC Watt PV generating unit and a $1,500 incentive rebate for each solar hot water system. This results in an incentive rebate of $12,884/unit, totaling $154,608 for the entire development. The City Council asked staff to provide them with the current balance in the PBF account prior to making a decision on this request. The PBF balance as of April 30, 2006 is $1,922,700. (See Attachment 1). The annual expenditures increased by $83,000 between 2004 and 2005 due to increased participation in the Energy Conservation program. The annual positive difference between revenues and expenses has narrowed in the last two years from $165,000 to $86,000 on average. This average excludes the CNG street sweeper purchase. Staff anticipates that interest in the program will continue to grow and enhanced energy conservation elements will increase public participation even more in the future. Staff requests direction from the city council regarding Menton Builder's request. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provide staff with direction on request for PV incentives. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Request additional information. Citizens Advised: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Approved: N/A Liz Kirkley, Electrical Distribution Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager; Mike McCann, Finance Director 1. Public Benefits Fund Summary 2. CA solar incentive programs Candace Horsley, City, Manager 0 o Z x ~D 0>0o0 ~1:> 0 -~1 °8~ 0 ...~ .,~ 0'100 0~0~0 Io Attachment # 0>~o A'I-rACHMENT ~ California Municipalities Solar Incentive Pro rams Glendale Power and Water Solar Tncentives $4.00 per watt (all necessary City of Glendale licenses, permits, or fees are :[00% reimbursable). Redding Electric Solar Tncentives Solar PV: $4/W for optimized installations and $3/W for non-optimized installations, up to $ :[0,000. Solar Thermal (active and passive): $:[,000 for the first panel, $500 for the second panel and up to $250 for the third panel. Roseville Electric Solar Tncentives Roseville offers retail customers $4.00 per Watt with a maximum rebate of $20,000. Roseville's commercial customers are eligible for a $4.00 per Watt rebate. SMUD Solar ]:ncentives SlVlUD offers a cash rebate to commercial and industrial customers who install solar photovoltaic (PV) systems of 30 kilowatts or larger. SlVlUD will pay a one-time incentive of $3/Watt-DC up to $300,000. Los Angeles Dept. of Water and Power Solar Tncentives For systems smaller than 30 kW: $3.50/W for systems manufactured outside Los Angeles, There is a maximum rebate cap of 75% of eligible costs. For systems larger than 30 kW: $2.75/W for systems manufactured outside Los Angeles, There is a maximum rebate cap of 50% of eligible costs. The incentive program will transition to a performance-based program for fiscal year 2005 - 2006. Santa Clara Water & Sewer Solar Tncentives In 1975, the City of Santa Clara established the nation's first municipal solar utility. Solar equipment is offered by the city for the heating of swimming pools, process water, and domestic hot water. The pieces of hardware (solar collectors, controls and storage tanks) are owned and maintained by the city under a rental agreement. The renter pays an initial installation fee and a monthly utility fee. Pasadena Water and Power Solar :Incentives The one-time rebate is $3.50 per watt (AC) up to $8,000. City of Burbank Solar ]~ncentives The Solar Rebate is $3 dollar per each Watt of the PV system up to $6,000 (2 kW) for a residential site, and $9,000 (3 kW) for a commercial site. ITEM NO' ~ck DATE: May 10, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: DI'SCUSS]:ON AND DIRECTION CONCERNZNG THE DRAFT REVI'SED HZLLSI'DE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS SUMMARY: The City Council and Planning Commission recently agreed to conduct a second joint meeting to discuss the draft revised hillside development regulations. The primary purpose of the meeting is to focus on a dialog between the Council and Commission as the last joint meeting was primarily for public testimony. This Agenda Summary Report includes background information and a discussion of the issues identified by the Council and referred back to the Planning Commission in 2003. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission conducted a series of public workshops and public hearings to discuss Draftrevisions to the 1982 Hillside Zoning District regulations. The Commission finalized its review and prepared a formal recommendation to the City Council. The City Council conducted a public workshop to discuss the Commission's recommendation, and after receiving public testimony and having a lengthy discussion, the Council remanded a number of issues to the Commission for further discussion. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED Ac'rION: 1) Determine if the residential hillside regulations should be revised, and if so, consider the Planning Commission's recommendations; 2) Discuss and consider Staff's supplemental recommendations contained in this Agenda Summary Report; and 3) Provide opportunity for interested Helen Avenue hillside property owners to participate in the development of the regulations. ALTERNAT]VE COUNCIL POLICY OPT]ON: Provide alternative direction to Staff. Citizen Advised: Hillside property owners and interested persons Requested by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Ukiah Western Hills Constraints Analysis - Executive Summary 2. Alternative Geotechnical Engineering Report requirement language 3. Upper/Lower hillside areas: property evaluation notes APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City r The topics the City Council identified and remanded to the Planning Commission were: 1. Second residential units - should they be allowed on hillside property? 2. Day care homes and the State preemption - can the City regulate them? 3. The architecture/design elements - are they too strict? 4. The number of allowed accessory buildings- should the number of accessory buildings be regulated? 5. The required soils/geotechnical information -is it too detailed and inflexible? 6. The proposed upper and lower hillside areas- how should the dividing line be created? 7. The Helen Avenue parcels- should these parcels be included? ]:f so, should they be in the upper or lower areas? The property owners of these parcels should be provided more opportunity to participate in the development of the regulations. 1. Second Residential Units: Staff's recommendation to the Planning Commission was to not allow second units in the hillside area. This was based primarily on the 2001 H/Es/de Constraints Ana/ysis Study, which on page 3 of its Executive Summary concluded that second units in the hillside area, particularly in the higher elevations, would result in potentially significant environmental effects in regard to soil erosion, slope stability, loss of native plant and wildlife habitat, increased risk 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 (Attachment No. 1). The Commission's recommendation to the Council was to regulate hillside second units the same as they are regulated elsewhere in the City. While the Council acknowledged the need for a variety of housing types and more housing stock, it expressed some concern about the increased density and associated impacts such as traffic. The State Legislature passed new laws in 2002 encouraging second units and limiting local jurisdictions ability to regulate them. However, Section 65852.2 (c) states: "No/oca/agency sha// adopt an ordinance which tota//y prec/udes second un/ts w/thin sing/e- fam//y or mu/ti-fam//y zoned areas un/ess the ordinance contains ftnd/ngs acknow/edg/ng that the ordinance may i/mit housing opportunities of the region and further contains ftnd/ngs that spec/ftc adverse impacts on the pub//c hea/th, safety, and we/fare that wou/d resu/t from a//owing second un/ts within s/ng/e-fami/y and mu/t/-fam//y zoned areas justify adopting the ordinance." Staff Recommendation: Discuss the second unit issue and determine if the development of second residential units in the hillside area would cause specific adverse impacts on the public health, safety, and welfare. Tf it is found that these impacts would occur, consider disallowing second units in the hillside area. 2. Day Care Homes: The Planning Commissions recommendation to the City Council was to allow small family day care homes and require a Use Permit for large family day care homes. The recommendation was based on the understanding that while large family day care homes and community care facilities in single family dwellings can be regulated (Use Permit required), the City is pre-empted by State law in requiring a Use Permit for small family day care homes. Small family day care homes are operations with 6 to 8 children, and State law precludes local jurisdictions from requiring a discretionary permit (Use Permit). Large Family day care homes can have up to 14 children, and local jurisdictions can require the securing of a Use Permit. Staff reviewed the State Health and Safety Code standards for small and large family day care homes in single family dwellings, and confirmed that we must"allow" small family day care homes without a Use Permit, and that we can require a Use Permits for large family day care homes. ]:n terms of community care facilities, the Council directed Staff to look into the State law regarding "Community Care Facilities" to determine if a Use Permit could be required for a facility of six or fewer persons, as well as the six to twelve person facilities. Staff reviewed the Community Care ?ac/i/ties Act, which defines "community care facilities" as non-medical residential care, day treatment, adult day care, and foster family facilities. These facilities include care for the physically handicapped, mentally impaired, incompetent persons, and abused or neglected children. Section 1566.3 of the Act (Health and Safety Code) states: "No conditional Use Perm/t, zoning variance, or other zoning clearance shall be required ora res/dent/a/facility which serves six or fewer persons which is not requ/red of a single family dwelling of the same type in the same zone." The hillside zoning regulations require a Use Permit for single-family homes, therefore Staff is able to conclude that a Use Permit can be required for a residential care facility serving six or fewer persons. This land use has been removed from the "allowed" land uses and placed under the "permitted" land uses in both the upper and lower hillside areas. Staff Recommendation: Discuss Day Care and Community Care land uses and consider Staff's conclusions. 3. Architectural and Design Elements: The Council directed the Commission to review the Architectural and Design Standards to ensure clarity and reasonableness. Concern was expressed regarding design element number 13, which requires the colors of buildings to be earth-tone, subdued, and blend with the existing native vegetation. Specifically, it was concluded that the term "earth-tone" was too vague. The Council also suggested that the Commission explore ways to make the design elements more flexible. Staff Recommendation: Review and discuss the Architectural and Design Elements and maintain or modify the proposed language. 4. Number of Accessory Buildings: The Council expressed concern regarding the potential number of accessory buildings that could be constructed on individual parcels. While it knew that the regulations required a percentage of each parcel to remain as "natural area," it asked that the Commission take a closer look, and determine if the regulations could result in an excessive number of accessory buildings in the hillside area. The draft regulations allow for an unlimited number of accessory structures provided they are less than 500 square feet in size and do not exceed the "natural area" standard. However, in the upper area, development can only disturb one-half acre of each parcel. The recently constructed Smith residence on a 6.6 acre parcel disturbed approximately one-half acre, leaving 6 acres undisturbed, which would be consistent with the proposed standard. That project included a single-family residence, garage, driveway, and a substantial amount of terraced gardens, paths, and "improved" outdoor living area. However, the regulations would allow an unlimited number of accessory structures within the one-half-acre disturbed area. Tf the homeowner decides not to maintain an open outdoor living area, he could construct as many 500 square foot garden sheds, storage buildings, and guest bedroom structures that would "fit" on the one-half acre terraced gardens, paths, and outdoor living area. The Council expressed concern that an "unlimited" number of 500 square-foot accessory structures as allowed uses could result in significant impacts in terms of visual quality, slope stability, etc. Staff Recommendation: Discuss the accessory structure issue, and consider limiting the number of allowed accessory structures. 5. Soils/Geotechnical Tnformation: The Council received public testimony from a local engineer, who expressed concern about the complexity and amount of soils/geotechnical information required for development projects. He also expressed concern that there were some redundancies in the requirements. He offered to submit written comments for Staff, the Planning Commission and City Council to consider before making a decision on the proposed regulations. As indicated at the March 29TM joint Planning Commission-City Council meeting, Mr. George Rau has submitted the Gu/de//nes for Eng/neer/ng and Geo/og/c Reports, prepared and published by the State Division of Mines and Geology. He believes that these are comprehensive, easy to understand, and reasonable. Staff has prepared alternative language for consideration that is adapted from the material Mr. Rau submitted (Attachment No. 2) Testimony was also provided at the March 29th joint meeting by Ms..lulie Bawcom, who suggested that the City retain a third party geotechnical engineer to review the engineering and geologic reports submitted by project applicants to ensure that the reports were adequately prepared. Unless funded by the project applicants, this proposal has budgetary ramifications for the City. Staff Recommendation: 1) Review and consider the alternative language prepared by Staff; and 2) Discuss and consider the suggestion that the City retain a third party geotechnical engineer to review the engineering and geologic reports submitted by project applicants. 6. The Upper and Lower Hillside Areas: The Council directed Staff and the Planning Commission to look closer at the demarcation between the proposed upper and lower areas, and determine if a less arbitrary method could be found to clearly distinguish which areas different parcels were situated in. Tn response to this direction, Staff visited and hiked a number of parcels, reviewed vegetation, soils, and topographic resource material, and photographed the region to attain a better understanding of the elevations, topography, geology, vegetation, access, and visibility of the hillside properties. Staff was able to conclude that vegetation, geology, topography, and access varies among properties in the hillside area, and that these factors would certainly dictate where development could occur. However, it was concluded further that none of these factors could clearly or definitively be used as a means of distinguishing the upper area from the lower area. For example, there are both steep and gentle slopes in both areas, and there are known areas of both geologic stability and instability in both areas. The major factor distinguishing the upper area from the lower area is elevation and visibility, and this is a factor strongly referenced in the General Plan: Implementation Measure OC-10.2(b): Site and design development to minimize impacts on views from the Valley. 1 Implementation Measure OC-10.2(c): Clearings for roads, buildings, and fire protection zones shall be sited in the least visible and ecologically damaging locations possible and screened with vegetation where feasible. . Implementation Measure CD-5.3(a): Ensure that design standards in the Land Development Code incorporate provisions to be responsive to enhancing or complimenting views from US 101 through the use of landscaping or other site design characteristics. . Implementation Measure CD-6.1(a): Provide guidelines and design recommendations for property owners which assist in their pre-planning for development when their properties are located in highly visible areas. The Kilkenny residence on Lookout Drive is constructed at approximately the 1000-foot elevation above mean sea level or approximately 400-feet above the valley floor. It appears to be located at the highest elevation in the City hillside area except for the recently constructed homes in the Hull/Piffero subdivision. The following photograph shows the Hull, Kilkinney, and Beltrami properties from East Gobbi Street (Picture taken from the Gobbi Street- Highway 101 overpass) The upper arrow shows the Hull residence at the 1,560 foot elevation The middle arrow shows the Kilkenny residence at the 1000 foot elevation The Iower area on the left of the picture shows the City water tank site above Mendocino Place at the 900 foot elevation. The Beltrami residence is located at the 750-foot elevation below and to the left of the water tank location. It is not visible from this location. The following photographs show the lO00-foot elevation from a number of locations: The l O00-foot elevation as seen from Perkins Street The lO00-foot elevation as seen from Low Gap Road The l O00-foot elevation as seen from South State Street near Talmage Road Possible Approach: The 1000-foot elevation above mean sea level (400-feet above the valley floor) could represent a demarcation line between the proposed upper and lower hillside areas. The Kilkinney residence situated at or just below this elevation is the highest development besides the obvious upper area Hull/Piffero subdivision houses. The Kilkinney house could represent the reasonable maximum extent of lower hillside development. Staff Recommendation: Discuss and consider establishing the 1000-foot MSL elevation as the dividing line between the upper and lower hillside areas. 7. The Helen Avenue Parcels: The proposed hillside parcels above Helen Avenue are generally below the lO00-foot elevation. Tf the Council decides to include them in the Residential Hillside Zoning District, and establishes the lO00-foot elevation as the demarcation between the upper and lower areas, these parcels would be situated in the lower area. Staff's original suggestion and the Planning Commission's recommendation was to include most of these parcels in the upper hillside area. During the initial Planning Commission public workshops and public hearings, these parcels were not being considered for inclusion into the Residential Hillside Zoning District. This was a result of the parcels not being in the existing Residential Hillside Zoning District and not studied in the 2001 Western Hills Constraints Analysis. Tt wasn't until late in the process that the parcels were identified as property with similar characteristics as the parcels in the existing Hillside District, and questions arose as to why these parcels were not included when the District was originally established. Discussion of these parcels occurred during the final two Planning Commission public hearings. A number of Helen Avenue property owners expressed concern about being included in the Hillside District, and about not having enough time to participate in the discussions of the proposed regulations. After hiking a number of these properties and evaluating them further, Staff is able to conclude that they are basically located below the lO00-foot elevation, and that if developed would not pose the same potential for significant adverse visual quality impacts and those above the lO00-foot elevation. Staff is also able to conclude that the property owners above Helen Avenue that are potentially affected by the proposed Hillside Zoning regulations should be afforded additional opportunity to discuss and participate in the development of the regulations. Staff Recommendation: 1) Discuss and determine if the parcels above Helen Avenue should be included in the Hillside Zoning District, and if so, whether they should be situated in the lower hillside area; and 2) Provide additional opportunity for interested Helen Avenue property owners to participate in the development of the Hillside Zoning regulations. Ukiah Western Hillside Constraints Analysis II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Affochment.~_ ,/ 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 comprise 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 Severity Zone. Even'if new residences are constructed of fire-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 during 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 injuring 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 risk 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 arterial 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. 4 Attachment Ukiah Hillside Development Regulation Revisions ALTERNATIVE LANGUAGE FOR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIC REPORTS March 2006 The following alternative language was taken from the Guidelines for En.qineerin.q and Geologic Reports, prepared by the State Board of Geologists and Geophysicists. The Guidelines have their roots in eight California Division of Mines and Geology notes that were published in California Geology during 1973-1975. The four Guidelines that evolved through the Technical Advisory Committee for the Board of Registration from 1983 to 1989 are: Guidelines for Engineering 'Geologic Reports Geologic Guidelines foe Earthquake and/or Fault Hazard reports Guidelines for Geophysical Reports Guidelines for Groundwater Investigation Reports The following language is taken from the Guidelines for Engineering and Geoloqic Reports, and is suggested as a possible alternative for the language contained on pages 15-23 of the Sept 2003 Draft Hillside Regulations: H. 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. 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 are 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 Public Works 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: 1. Engineering Geologic Reports Engineering geology reports must be prepared by or under the direct supervision of a certified engineering geologist, and must be signed by the preparer. The format and scope of the reports is flexible to allow tailoring to the geologic conditions and intended use of the particular site. Some of the following requirements may not be applicable to small projects or Iow-risk sites, and may be excluded in the judgment of the professional engineering geologist preparing the report. Each report should include the following: A. Purpose and Scope of the Investiqation Shall include a description of the proposed and existing use of the site. B. Regional Geoloqic Setting References shall be made to the geologic province and the location with respect to its major structural features. C. Site Description and Conditions Shall include information on geologic units, landforms, graded and filled areas, vegetation, existing structures, etc., that may affect the choice of investigative methods and the interpretation of data. D. Description of the Investiqation Review of the regional and site geology, and land-use history, based primarily on existing maps and technical literature. a, Geologic hazards that could affect the planned use of the site. , . Significant historic earthquakes in the region Fault traces that may affect the site. Secondary earthquake effects, such as ground breakage in the vicinity of the site, seismically-induced landslides, differential tilting and liquefaction. Regional effects, such as subsidence, uplift, etc. Landslides or other earth movements at the site and vicinity. , . . , Soil and rock properties such as high moisture content, Iow density, swelling, cementation, weathering, fracturing, etc. bo Other geologic conditions that could affect the planned use of the site. · . Soil thickness, types, and relationships to bedrock. Excavatability of rock materials. Depth to and characteristics of subsurface water. C. Conditions imposed on the site by past uses, such as buried objects, contaminated soils, groundwater, or adjacent structures, etc. Interpretation of aerial photographs and other remotely sensed images relative to topography, vegetation, or any other features related to geologic hazards and past use of the site. Surface Investigation a, mapping of the site geology and vicinity; identification and description of geologic units, soil and rock types, and features that could be related to geologic hazards and the proposed use and constructability of the site. A clear distinction should be made on the map and within the report between observed and inferred geologic features and relationships. b. Evaluation of surface-water conditions, including quality, flood potential in relation to site conditions, geomorphology and drainage within or affecting the subject area. Subsurface Investigation a, Trenching and any other excavation (with appropriate logging and documentation) to permit detailed and direct observation of continuously exposed geologic units and features. b. Borings drilled, test pits excavated, and groundwater monitoring wells installed to permit the collection of data needed to evaluate the depth and types of materials and subsurface water, including bedding attitudes, joint/fracture spacing, fault zones, location of clay beds, etc. E. F. Data points sufficient in number and adequately spaced will permit valid correlations and interpretations. C. Geophysical surveys conducted to facilitate the evaluation of the types of site materials and their physical properties, groundwater conditions and any other pertinent site conditions. The types of equipment and techniques used, such as seismic refraction, magnetic, electric resistivity, seismic reflection and gravity, and the name of the geophysicist responsible for the work. d. 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. e. A slope stability analysis of the site. . Special methods (used when special conditions permit or critical structures demand a more intensive investigation) a. Aerial reconnaissance overflights, including special photography. b. Geodetic measurements, radiometric analysis, age dating, etc. Results of Investiqation Describe the results of the investigation. The actual data upon which interpretations are based shall be included in the report to permit technical reviewers to make their own assessments regarding reliability and interpretation. Conclusion Conclusions shall be made relative to the suitability of the site for the intended land use or development. The conclusion section shall include a statement concerning the degree of confidence in and limitations of the data and conclusions, as well as disclosure of known or suspected potentially hazardous geologic processes affecting the project area. . , . , o o , Presence or absence of active or potentially active faulting at the site or in the vicinity, and the potential for renewed fault activity. Effects on the site from ground shaking. Potential for secondary effects from earthquakes, such as ground cracking, landsliding, and liquefaction. Potential for subsidence or other regional effects. The presence of soil instability, creep or landsliding, and the possible future large movements of soil. Soil and rock conditions, such as swelling soils that could affect site use and the presence of and possible effects from any other soil and rock defects. Excavation methods. G, H, Recommendations 1. Effect of fault locations on proposed structures at the site. , Placement of structures to best take advantage of geologic conditions. , Recommended methodology for excavating and moving materials , Means of correcting site defects, such as buttressing landslides, installing special drainage devices, etc. 5. Other recommendations as appropriate for the project. References 1. Literature and records cited and reviewed. , Aerial photographs or images interpreted, listing the type, scale, source, and index numbers, etc° 3. Complied data, maps, or plates included or referenced. , Other sources of information, including well records, personal communications, or other data sources. Illustrations , Location map to identify the site locally, geographic features, or major regional geologic features. g. , Site development map, at an appropriate scale to shoe the site boundaries, existing and proposed structures, graded areas, streets and roads, and locations of exploratory trenches, borings, wells, geophysical traverses, and other data. , Geologic map to show the areal distribution of geologic units, faults and other structures, geomorphic features, aerial photo features noted, along with surface water bodies and springs. The geologic map may be combined with the location and site development maps. . Geologic cross sections illustrating significant or appropriate geologic features. 10. Logs of exploratory trenches and borings to show the details of observed features and conditions. 11. Geophysical data and the geologic interpretations of those data. Signature and Reqistration Number of the Responsible Professional(s). ATrACHMENT NO. 3 THE UPPER AND LOWER H]~LLS]~DE AREAS Elevations, Topography, Geology, Vegetation, Access and Visibility ELEVATIONS The upper arrow shows the Hull residence at the 1,560 foot elevation The middle arrow shows the Kilkenny residence at the 1000 foot elevation The lower area on the left of the picture shows the City water tank site above Mendocino Place at the 900 foot elevation. The Beltrami residence is located at the 750-foot elevation below and to the left of the water tank location. It is not visible from this location. The :LOOO-foot Elevation as seen from Perkins Street The :LOOO-Foot Elevation above the southern most Helen Avenue Parcel~ The lO00-Foot Elevation as seen from Yokayo School on Dora Street The lO00-Foot Elevation as seen from Low Gap Road 11 PARCEL ANALYSTS Staff chose three properties to evaluate that may provide some rationale for defining the dividing line between the upper and lower hillside area. The three chosen parcels were selected for their locations (south, north, and central), owner invitation/accessibility, and information availability. These parcels are the Crane property above Helen Avenue (suuth), the Ashiku property (north) and the Beltrami property (south central). The Crane Property The crane property above Helen Avenue includes two parcels; APN 003-260-01 and 003-500-14. Combined, the two parcels total approximately 13 acres. The site is heavily wooded and steep, yet has a number of fairly level areas suitable for residential development. A dirt access road, cut in the 1960's (or earlier), weaves through the parcels and appears quite stable. The road is moderately steep through most of the site, yet gets very steep towards the top of the property. A ravine and drainage is situated along the northern portion of the site. The southern portion of the site transitions into Doolin Creek Canyon. Picture taken from the SE corner of the South State Street/Talmage Road intersection General Plan Designation: The Ukiah General Plan designates the property as "RR" (Rural Density Residential). Lands with this designation are located in agricultural or environmentally sensitive areas, and are to remain as large parcels (1 acre minimum). When lands are proposed for subdivision, the minimum parcel size is dictated by the steepness of the property. The steeper the property, the larger the parcel is required to be. 12 Geology: The two parcels are comprised of Lookout Peakgreywacke (LPgw), which is a portion of the Central Belt Franciscan Complex. It consists principally of elongated blocks of graywacke sandstone engulfed in sheared shale. In this area, it main contain folded red chert, hard resistant boulders of blueschist, and sheared lenses of greenish-gray serpentine.* The Lookout Peak greywacke generally supports stable cut slopes except for areas of friable shale outcrops or deposits which are fractured or sheared. "L Qc ' Red'-woo ~ LPgw Crane Property LPgw LPgw The vertical line inside the circle depicts the top of the Crane parcels at the approximate 960-foot elevation The following is an excerpt from Landslides and Enqineerinq Geology of the Western Ukiah Area, Central Mendocino County, California, by Robert H. Sydnor and _]ulie A. Sowma-Bawcom of the State Division of Mines and Geology, 1991: Lookout Peak greywacke LPgw (Central Belt Franciscan Complex) "This unit consists principally of elongated blocks of greywacke sandstone engulfed in sheared shale. Locally it contains blocks of folded red chert, hard resistant boulders of blueshist, and sheared lenses of greenish- gray serpentine. Graywacke is a dark gray, firmly indurated sandstone of quartz and plagioclase feldspar grains with lithic fragments in a clayey matrix. 13 The unit has been lightly metamorphosed to prehnite-pumpellyite facies. In practical terms, this degree of metamorphism means that the Lookout Peak greywacke still retains much of the appearance of sedimentary rock, but it is more indurated (harder) than before. Most sedimentary bedding planes have been obscured by the metamorphism. The structural grain of the Lookout Peak greywacke trends approximately N20NV, and dips 30'E. Most of the structural attitudes were mapped as foliation. Only where a less-metamorphosed sedimentary sequence of sandstone/shale/sandstone was clearly evident in the field was the structural attitude mapped as a primary bedding plane. The Lookout Peak greywacke is part of the Central Belt of the Franciscan Complex. The unit ranges in age between late Jurassic (144 million years) to Cretaceous (66 million years), based on radiometric ages elsewhere. It forms the majority (about 80%) of bedrock in the mapping area, ranging from Orrs Creek on the north to Robinson Creek on the south. The Lookout Peak greywacke generally supports stable cut slopes except for friable shale outcrops, greywacke which is highly fractured or sheared and where bedding planes have an orientation in an out-of- slope condition. This unit is generally not suitable for use as paving aggregate to winterize dirt roads, since this particular greywacke is typically friable with a Iow bearing strength." The road cut into the site is approximately 40+ years old, and there is very little evidence of instability or erosion. No slumps or obvious slide areas were observed along the road or on any of the steeper portions of the property. Topo§raphy: According to the Ukiah, CA (NW/4 Ukiah 15' Quadrangle) U.S.G.S. map, the subject parcels are situated between approximately 700-feet to 960-feet above mean sea level. There are steep areas with slopes well in excess of 30%, and areas with more gentle slopes dropping to approximately 10%. ../ 913 14 There is a man-made "bench" along the lower portion of the site adjacent to the developed smaller lots fronting Helen Avenue. The "bench" area is essentially level and varies in depth. The cut that created the benched area appears stable. The property is steepest near the top property line. There are also steeper slopes near the northern property line where the site falls into a drainage area. The property drops fairly dramatically on the south as it drops into Doolin Canyon. The air photograph below has 2-foot contours superimposed on the subject property. Vegetation: The property is primarily considered a Montane Hardwood-Conifer habitat, consisting of a diverse association of hardwood and conifer trees averaging 80% canopy cover. Hardwood trees such as madrone, laurel, and oak are present on the property, as well as bay and Douglas fir trees. Manzanita is common on the site, particularly along the lower portions. As indicated, the underbrush is surprisingly sparse, perhaps due to past fire events (natural or controlled). Access: The site has two access points from Helen Avenue. The northerly, access road veers to the south and connects to the southerly access road near its intersection with Helen Avenue. As the road travels up into the property, it gets steep at certain points, particularly towards the top of the property. 15 Visibility: The lower portions of the site are not visible from any gateway corridor. The upper portions of the site are visible from various locations along State Street, including its intersections with Talmage Road and Wabash Avenue. Utilities: All utilities would have to be extended onto the property to serve future development. These include water, sewer, electric, gas, telephone, cable, etc. All would be required to be underground. The Beltrami Property The Beltrami parcels (APN 001-420-32, 001-420-3:t and 003-010-48) on Nlendocino Place were visited to understand the physical lay of the land, development potential, visibility, etc. : The Beltrami property from Yokayo School on Dora Street (not a General Plan gateway Street) (Beltrami residence not visible) 001-420-32:145 IVlendocino Place This approximate 2-acre parcel is developed with the Beltrami single-family residence. It is relatively steep and the home is developed on a man-made bench about 300-feet up from the driveway entrance off of Mendocino Place. A very steep ravine is situated close to the south, and comprises Beltrami parcel 003-010-48. Behind the residence, the property is very steep, yet levels off a bit approximately 100 feet up. This area could potentially represent a building site, although access from Mendocino Place could be difficult. This parcel is nicely wooded, hidden, geologically stable, and quiet. 16 001-030-48 This 1~- acre parcel is essentially a steep ravine that functions as a seasonal drainage during heavy storm events. ]:ts developability is questionable, although it does have access from Banker Boulevard. The site is heavily wooded and not highly visible. Geological stability is questionable. 001-420-31 This approximate 71/2 acre parcel is situated at the top end of Mendocino Place, and is very steep and rugged. ]:t is heavily wooded, quite visible, and its geologic stability is questionable. This parcel has been within the hillside district since 1982. General Plan Designation: The Ukiah General Plan designates the property as "RR" (Rural Density Residential). Lands with this designation are located in agricultural or environmentally sensitive areas, and are to remain as large parcels (1 acre minimum). When lands are proposed for subdivision, the minimum parcel size is dictated by the steepness of the property. The steeper the property, the larger the parcel is required to be. Geology:. The two parcels are comprised of Lookout Peak greywa£ke ('/-P~Fw), which is a portion of the Central Belt Franciscan Complex. ]:t consists principally of elongated blocks of graywacke sandstone engulfed in sheared shale. ]:n this area, it main contain folded red chert, hard resistant boulders of blueschist, and sheared lenses of greenish-gray serpentine.* The /_ookout Peak ~_Freywackegenerally supports stable cut slopes except for areas of friable shale outcrops or deposits which are fractured or sheared. The following is an excerpt from Landslides and Engineering Geoloqy of the Western Ukiah Area, Central Mendocino County, California, by Robert H. Sydnor and 3ulie A. Sowma-Bawcom of the State Division of Mines and Geology, 1991: Lookout Peak greywacke (Central Belt Franciscan Complex) "This unit consists principally of elongated blocks of greywacke sandstone engulfed in sheared shale. Locally it contains blocks of folded red chert, hard resistant boulders of blueshist, and sheared lenses of greenish- gray serpentine. Graywacke is a dark gray, firmly indurated sandstone of quartz and plagioclase feldspar grains with lithic fragments in a clayey matrix. The unit has been lightly metamorphosed to prehnite-pumpellyite facies. ]:n practical terms, this degree of metamorphism means that the Lookout Peak greywacke still retains much of the appearance of sedimentary rock, but it is more indurated (harder) than before. Most sedimentary bedding planes have been obscured by the metamorphism. The structural grain of the Lookout Peak greywacke trends approximately N20~V, and dips 30'E. Most of the structural attitudes were mapped as foliation. Only where a less-metamorphosed sedimentary sequence of sandstone/shale/sandstone was clearly evident in the field was the structural attitude mapped as a primary bedding plane. The Lookout Peak greywacke is part of the Central Belt of the Franciscan Complex. The unit ranges in age between late 3urassic (144 million years) to Cretaceous (66 million years), based on radiometric ages elsewhere. It forms the majority (about 80%) of bedrock in the mapping area, ranging from Orrs Creek on the north to Robinson Creek on the south. The Lookout Peak greywacke generally supports stable cut slopes except for friable shale outcrops, greywacke which is highly fractured or sheared and where bedding planes have an orientation in an out-of- slope condition. This unit is generally not suitable for use as paving aggregate to winterize dirt roads, since this particular greywacke is typically friable with a Iow bearing strength." 17 West Hills Constraints Study: The West Hills Constraints Study approved by the City Council in 2002 identified a Major slide on the Beltrami property. ~ J,..--.-..I r~' ~,-,,,~"t""T' I I I/-~~, ~...,,~T'T~., ~ ~r.~:Y --.~ Ii.iiCII I 1~ % / l Ill ~ t~ ~ ~ / , t ~ i I -~ ' ' I ~. ~t I j The Beltrami parcels are located in the area indicated above. The orange color depicts the area ora known landslide. The green color depicts a north facing slope, and the blue denotes an intermittent stream. (From: Western Hills Constraints Analysis, Leonard Charles & Associates, 2002) The Leonard Charles Study identified the slide from the Landslides and Enqineering Geology of the Western Ukiah Area, Central Mendocino County, California, by Robert H. Sydnor and 3ulie A. Sowma-Bawcom of the State Division of Mines and Geology, 1991. The slide is described in that work as an "oval erosional feature." It also indicates that there was a "debris flood emanating from the oval erosional feature in 1972-1973. It appears that the debris flood slid down the hill through the ravine feature on Beltrami parcel 001-030-48. The Sydnor/Sowma-Bawcom report indicates that during the winter of 1972-1973, a significant debris flood occurred and filled the IVlendocino Place cul-de-sac with mud and woody debris. It originated on what is now the upper Beltrami parcel (001-420-31). The report indicates that slopes in excess of 50% exist on this parcel. Topography: As indicated above, the Beltrami parcels are steep, particularly the larger vacant parcel located above the developed parcel (single-family residence) and ravine parcel. 18 Elevation: The developed Beltrami parcel, as well as the "ravine" parcel are situated at approximately 750 feet above mean sea level. The larger undeveloped parcel is located between 750 and 1000 feet above mean sea level. 913 '" U. S.G.S. Topographic Map - Ukiah Quadrangle ,DriP, Vegetation: The property is primarily considered a Montane Hardwood-Conifer habitat, consisting of a diverse association of hardwood and conifer trees averaging 80% canopy cover. Hardwood trees such as madrone, laurel, and oak are present on the property, as well as bay and Douglas fir trees. Manzanita is common on the site, particularly along the lower portions. As indicated, the underbrush is surprisingly sparse, perhaps due to past fire events (natural or controlled). Access: The parcels are accessed from Mendocino Place. Utilities: All utilities would have to be extended onto the upper undeveloped property to serve future development. These include water, sewer, electric, gas, telephone, cable, etc. All would be required to be underground. 19 Visibility: The Beltrami parcels are situated due west from the Gobbi Street gateway entrance into the City, but are obscured by trees and utility infrastructure. The Beltrami property as seen from the South State Street / Gobbi Street intersection (Beltrami residence not visible) 2O The Ashiku Property The Ashiku property is comprised of four parcels located at the end of Maple Avenue. One of the parcels is developed with a single-family residence, and the remaining four are vacant. A narrow paved driveway provides access to the existing residence, and a rough dirt road forking off of the driveway provides access to the vacant parcels. The upper Ashiku property above Maple Avenue taken from Low Gap Road The Ashiku Property looking nodh 21 General Plan Designation: The Ukiah General Plan designates the property as "RR" (Rural Density Residential). Lands with this designation are located in agricultural or environmentally sensitive areas, and are to remain as large parcels (1 acre minimum). When lands are proposed for subdivision, the minimum parcel size is dictated by the steepness of the property. The steeper the property, the larger the parcel is required to be. Geology: The geology of the four parcels is comprised of Low Gap Road Pla/ange (~Gm/), which is a portion of the Central Belt Franciscan Complex. It contains blocks of sandstone, red chert, serpentine, and blueschist. The subject parcels are underlain predominantly by red chert, a very hard and blocky rock. Most of the Maple Avenue residential neighborhood is underlain by red chert indicating that this geologic formation is suitable for development. The following is an excerpt from Landslides and Enqineering Geology of the Western Ukiah Area, Central Mendocino County, California, by Robert H. Sydnor and .lulie A. Sowma-Bawcom of the State Division of Mines and Geology, 1991: Low Gap melange (Central Belt Franciscan Complex) Red Chert "Chert is a microcrystalline sedimentary rock consisting of interlocking crystals of quartz (SiO2), amorphous silica, and may contain other impurities such as calcite and iron oxide. Chert is reactive if used as an aggregate in Portland cement and may be satisfactorily used in compacted fills when blended with sufficient volume of finer-grained cohesive matrix (shale and soft sandstone). Chert is suitable for use as permeable aggregate in subdrains and as paving aggregate on secondary roads to avoid muddy surfaces in the rainy season." Topography: As evidenced in the above photographs, the parcels have a varied topography with generally moderate slopes. There are areas with fairly steep slopes exceeding 20%, but also areas of gentle slopes that level off considerably. Vegetation: The property contains grass woodland type vegetation with a mix of grasses, shrubs and trees. It is more sparsely vegetated than some surrounding properties and has some open grass areas framed with oak, madrone, and other typical species of trees found at this elevation above the valley. A grove of exotic eucalyptus trees is present on the northern portion of the site. Elevation: The existing home is located at about the 880-foot elevation, and is less visible than some residences below it. Access: Access to the property is provided by a driveway off of Maple Avenue. Utilities: All utilities would have to be extended onto the property to serve future development. These include water, sewer, electric, gas, telephone, cable, etc. All would be required to be underground. 22