Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1992 0715 CC REG ITEM 11B Pµ \ TEM / '• eek Oqi\ ® MOORPAR • ^1 "-a . Lulli.(911:5. ^ 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (896y/reefing j �o c( 1992-- sIr� (entY 723 8,i9 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT C1' Cs ua•-%--• TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: William Phelps, Director of Community Development C DATE: July 6, 1992 (CC meeting of 7/15/92) SUBJECT: REVISED PAD ELEVATIONS AND BUILDING ENVELOPES ON VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 4620 - JBH DEVELOPMENT Background On June 3 , 1992 this item was removed from the Consent Calendar portion of the Agenda for further discussion by the Council. The Tentative Map No. 4620 was approved by the Council on January 9, 1991. At that time the elevations of the "building envelopes" were discussed and approved to minimize grading on slopes of 20% or greater. During the final design the applicant's engineer determined that certain adjustments to the grading plan were desired to improve the "building envelopes. " These changes require Council approval because some of the elevations will change by more than 2 feet. After this matter was discussed by the City Council it was referred for further study to the Community Development (Committee) . Committee Report On July 2 , 1992 the Committee met with the subdivider, their engineer, and staff to review the changes proposed for each lot. The Committee was informed that of the 66 lots 5 will not require grading and no changes are proposed to 33 lots. The remaining 28 lots became the subject of the Committee' s study. To assist the Committee' s review the subdivider presented a two page summary and several display exhibits to explain the nature of the changes. A copy of the summary is attached to this report. Since display exhibits cannot be readily reproduced they will be in my office for your review and also available at the Council 's meeting of July 15. PAUL W. LAWRASON JR. JOHN E.WOZNIAK SCOTT MONTGOMERY BERNARDO M.PEHEZ ROY E. TALLEY JR. Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember Printed On Recycled Paper The Honorable City Council July 6, 1992 (CC meeting of 7/15/92) SUBJECT: REVISED PAD ELEVATIONS AND BUILDING ENVELOPS ON VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 4620 - JBH DEVELOPMENT An evaluation of the summary report, review of the display exhibits, and explanations by the applicant (in response to the questions from the Committee) lead to the conclusion that what seemed like major grading changes at the Council meeting of June 3 , 1992 were not. The changes were within the basic parameters of the original approval. The building envelopes on nine lots (2, 3, 13 , 22 , 45, 50, 61, 62 , and 63) were enlarged to accommodate large estate type homes, and accessory uses. The enlargement of the building envelopes was not the result of more grading but rather by changing their original location. A major change on lots 33 , 35, 36, and 38 through 42 resulted from lowering of the road as suggested by staff to provide better access to the lots, improve the drainage, and make the lots better suited for estate type homes. More details on this subject are contained in the attached summary. Additionally, Mr. David Potter, Civil Engineer, Glen Albers and John Hedberg, who represent JBH Development will be present to describe these changes and respond to questions. Recommendation The Committee found that the grading revisions and other changes will not materially alter, or change the basic parameters used for the initial approval. The Committee recommends approval of the Revised Grading Plan subject to compliance with the initial conditions of approval, and payment of a fee to cover the total City cost incurred because of these changes. Tract 4620 Comparison of Grading between the Feasibility Plan and Final Design of those lots with greater than 2' vertical change General The natural terrain of Tract 4620 is such that a change in the configuration of a graded area will necessitate moving it horizontally to minimize the amount of impact the change will have on the adjacent and manufactured slopes, required setbacks from proposed lot lines, views, etc. In order to further minimize the grading and slope heights, these horizontal moves often result in a vertical move as well due to the sloping terrain. . It should be noted that the graded pad areas are required to have a slope of 2% for drainage purposes (2 feet vertically for each 100 feet horizontally). Many of the pads on this project are some 200 feet, or more, in length, resulting in a vertically change of some 4 feet across it. The following is a Iisting of those lots that exceed 2 feet in vertical difference from that depicted on the grading feasibility study submitted with the tentative map of this project, and the main reasons the pad area is changed. Lot No. Reason for change and some comments 2 Enlarged pad for marketing purposes. Original slope map in error-mostly less than 20%. Horizontal moves raised pad 12 feet to minimize grading. 3 Enlarged pad for marketing purposes. Expanded area on slopes that are less than 20%. Pad lowered 4 feet. 13 Enlarged pad for marketing purposes. Pad lowered 13 feet. 14 Relocated driveway which originally crossed Lot 18, creating a high slope on that lot, to be contained wholly within Lot 14. Lot 14 is now self-contained. Pad adjusted horizontally to fit the relocated driveway resulting in it being lowered 5 feet. 15 Deleted pad area, deleted grading in the area of greater than 20%natural slope. Simply filling in to daylight from the street for a more natural look. Pad lowered 5 feet. 16 Adjusted lot line &pad to place knoll on only one lot&to enhance its view to the north. Its an area that Lot 15 can't use. The expanded area is all contained within the less than 20% natural slope area. Pad raised 3 feet. 18 Pad moved northwesterly to minimize the effect of its slopes on Lot 17. This was made possible by the relocation of the driveway to Lot 14. This horizontal move resulted in raising the pad 31 feet in order to not have excessive slopes. 19 Pad cut to daylight to improve view and to minimize slopes. Pad lowered 14 feet. 22 Enlarged pad for marketing purposes. Essentially within the less than 20% natural slope area. Pad raised 3 feet. A - • Lot No. Reason for change and some comments 25 Pad reconfigured to minimize slopes &to fit slope within the less than 20% natural slope area. Pad lowered 5 feet. 27 Pad adjusted to balance the cut& fill slopes and to remove impact on adjacent lots. The size of the pad is essentially the same as shown on the tentative map. Pad lowered 18 feet to effect this change. 32 Little change. Adjustments were made to improve drainage and provide adequate setback at the top of slope. Pad lowered 4 feet. 33,35-36, Pads adjusted and street lowered to provide better utilization and drainage to 38-42 street at suggestion of the City Planning Director. Pad areas lowered an average of 8 feet. 44 Pad moved westerly to smooth contours of small valley, resulting in the pad area being raised 5 feet. 45 Pad enlarged within the less than 20% natural slope area. It was moved northerly for a better fit with the driveway. Due to the gently sloping terrain, this move required a vertical move of some 15 feet. 46 Little change. The pad area adjusted because of a better design of the driveway, which is shared with Lot 48. Pad enlarged somewhat within the less than 20% natural slope area. Pad elevation raised 7 feet due to this horizontal adjustment. 48 Pad rotated to minimize slope on greater than 20% natural slope area, to place slope on less than 20% and to fit the revised driveway shared with Lot 46. These adjustments resulted in a pad elevation about 3 feet higher. 50 Pad enlarged within the less than 20% natural slope area and pad area raised to minimize slope heights. In order to enlarge it and not go into the 20% slope area resulted in it moving horizontally and being raised some 10 feet. 59 Pad rotated out of greater than 20%, but entire site filled per previous discussions with the Planning Director. Net change in pad area about 6 feet higher. 61 Pad enlarged within the less than 20% natural slope area. Enlargement was northerly into the flatter portions of the lot, necessitating it being lowered 7 feet. 62 Pad enlarged within the less than 20% natural slope area and raised 5 feet to better serve it with underground sewer system. 66 Pad reoriented&enlarged somewhat within the less than 20% natural slope area and the cut in the 20% area to its northeast side was eliminated. In order to re- orient it without creating higher slopes, the pad was moved to an area of lower elevation, resulting in a 5 foot change.