Day 1986.05.20PC

PRESENT: Chairman Rasmussen, Vice Chairman Gjervold, Commissioner Breece, Commissioner Brewer, Commissioner Matsuhara, Commissioner McCulley, Commissioner Rajander

ALSO PRESENT: Planning Director Werner, Senior Planner Sexton, Associate Planner Traut, Assistant Planner Potter, and Assistant Public Works Director Baird

Pertains to a request for approval of an Environmental Impact Report which addresses the environmental impacts of adding 1900 acres in the Lagoon Valley area to the City's Sphere of Influence and detaching 2,800 acres from the City's Sphere of Influence east of Leisure Town Road.

Director Werner reviewed the proposal and introduced the staff report dated May 20, 1986 into the record, noting that the enironmental impact report was prepared by the Firm of Blaney-Dyett, under contract to the City. The revision to the City's sphere of influence would add 1900 acres in the Lagoon Valley area to the City's shpere, and would detach 2,800 acres from the City's shpere east of Leisure Town Road. The matter before the Planning Commission was the consideration of the adequacy of the draft environmental impact report, not the revision itself.

Janice Stern, representing Blayney-Dyett, stated that the EIR is a public information document for a specific area and they felt that the information is adequate as discussed in the EIR.

Allan Miller, 5807 Cherry Glen Road, said that in the 1980 General Plan the City agreed that Lagoon Valley and Cherry Glenn was an asset to the City without being in the City. He said that extending the sewer into that area would bring higher density and that we should stay with the General Plan.

Dale Christ, 3361 Cherry Glen Road, said that only the large land owners in the valley will profit from the sewer extension and city development. The small land owners do not want to lose their country area to higher density homes or commercial development, and felt that the green belt should remain.

George Gaudet, Cherry Glen Road, said that the valley has a lot of fog in the winter, which is a traffic hazard and a high pollen area in spring and summer, which is a health hazard. He felt that traffic and air quality was not adequately covered in the EIR.

Timothy Lawrence, Buck Town Lane, said that Vaca Valley was not an appropriate alternative, and should not be inculded. He also felt that Lagoon Valley should have development that is conducive to agriculture. He said that there should be an agreement between Vacaville, Fairfield, and Solano County to preserve a green belt in the area.

Kathleen Sutton, Vacaville, commented on Lagoon Valley area, stating tht she was opposed to the prematureness of the revision to the Sphere of Influence. She asked how urbanization of the area would reduce agricultural conflicts rather than create them. She questioned the costs to the City to go into these areas and provide police and fire services, costs involved in sewer lines and water treatment plant expansion. She felt that the flood plan and drainage should be available prior to any decision on the EIR, that the growth inducing impacts were glossed over ant that "the EIR should not be accepted just because it is a first tier--it whould not be the first step to development." Public hearing closed.

Bob Bishop, Pleasant Valley Road, felt that the letter of intent was very inappropriate at this time. He felt the EIR was a promotion for devlopment. He said that two years ago the people signed petitions against premature development, now they feel that they can't fight the developers money. If the EIR is approved developers will begin to clear land for development and when these orchards and open lands are gone it will forever change Vacavile. He said that " all impacts identified in the EIR must be mitigated--some here cannot be mitigated."

Chairman Rasmussen moved to extend the public hearing to the meeting of June 3rd. The motion was seconded by Vice Chairman Gjervold and approved by a vote of 7-0.

Pertains to a request for approval of 168 2-story multiple-family residentail units o 8.4 acres located on the southeast side of the proposed reloacted Butcher Road and west of Marshall Road (across from the Community Center). The proposal also involves a Tentative Map to allow for the sale of the units as individual condominiums, however, they are intended to be rented as apartments.

Associate Planner Traut reviewed the proposal and introduced the staff report dated May 20, 1986 into the record, noting that the project is consistent with the General Plan and noted that the City Council would have to consider the request if the applicant wanted to turn this project into a rental project.

Mike Kaufman said they would work with staff on carport design and landscape bernming, but felt the wall should be a condition of the Commercial use.

Jack Palmer, adjacent property owner, had concerns about the construction of Buther Road and felt that the full street should be paved initially.

It was the consensus of the Commission that the units were too small, should have garages and upgraded amenities in order to sell as condominiums.

Commissioner McCulley moved, Matsuhara seconded, to continue this item to a date uncertain to provide additional time for the applicant to upgrade the design. Motion approved 7-0.

Senior Planner Sexton reviewed the proposal and introduced the staff report dated May 20, 1986 into the record noted that this is to establish a revised master plan, with major changes over the previously approved l982 development plan, which include: imporvement of Alamo Drive and Leisure Town Road, undergrounding of the Frost Canal, the incorporation of a portion of the Evanikoff property, and adjustments to zoning to provide lower densities near Leisure Town Road. Staff recommended approval of the project subject to conditions of the staff report.

Following a discussion on the park and roofing materials, it was the consensus of the Commission that the park shall be completed by the 800th unit and prior to issuance of permits for the unit #80l. The Commission also agreed to amend condition "E" to delete "upgraded composition shingle" and require wood shakes or shingles, or concrete tiles.

Vice Chairman Gjervold moved, Brewer seconded, to approve Environmental Assessment REA-22-86 regarding the proposed project, reaffirming the Southeast Sector EIR in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and with findings A-C. Motion approved 7-0.

Vice Chairman Gjervold moved, Brewer seconded, to approve Planned Unit Development PUD-6-86 for the master plan of development for 1522 residential units on 289 acres, subject to the standard finding and the findings of Overriding Considerations on Attachment "A", and conditions of approval A-K, amending "E" by deleting "upgraded composition shingles", and by requiring that the park be completed prior to issuance of building permit for unit #80l. Motion approve 7-0.

Vice Chairman Gjervold moved, Brewer seconded, to approve Tentative Map (TM-6-86) for the 1172 residential lots and Parcels A, B, C, D & E subject to Mandatory Findings (a-g) and the findings of Overriding Considerations on Attachment "A", and to conditions of approval A-C as listed, and adding condition D as follows:

"D. The proposed realignment of boundaries of the project adjoining the adjacent Evanikoff property be resolved prior to the filing of a final map for that area."

Vice Chairman Gjervold moved, Brewer seconded, to recommend to the City Council that Zone Change (Z-4-86) be approved reestablishing the following zone district boundaries for the R-1-Variable PD, R-1-6000 PD, R-1-8000 PD, RM-3000 PD, RM-2000 PD and the CN zones on the site, subject to the required findings. Motion approved 7-0.

Pertains to a request to expand the existing facilities located on l.2 acre at 104 Aegean Way to construct an outdoor swimming pool on the south side of the building.

Assistant Planner Potter reviewed the proposal and introduced the staff report dated May 20, 1986 into the record noting that the proposal is consistent with the City's General Plan and the CG Zoning District and and the surrounding uses. Staff recommended approval of the project subject to staff conditions.

Commissioner McCulley moved, Rajander seconded, to approve Conditiona Use Permit (CUP-7-86) for the addition of a pool subject to the standard findings (A-G) and to conditions A-E, as listed in staff report. Motion approved 7-0.

Pertains to requests to: 1) to reduce the rear yard setback by 1.5 ft, 2) to delete the requirement for a masonry wall and 3) to permit a 8 ft. high fence inconjunction with the construction of a duplex located on .15 acre at 513 Elizabeth Street.

Assistent Planner Potter reviewed the proposal and introduced the staff report dated May 20, 1986 into the record noting that the plans that were approved for building permits were not what was built. Instead of the room addition that was approved, the applicant built two complete living units for rentals. In addition, a deck and spa were built in violation of the setbacks required and without building permits. an illegal 8' fence was then constructed along the deck and spa area. It was noted that the required findings could be made for the requests to reduce the rear yard setback and delete the masonry wall, but not for the 8 ft. fence.

Monica Espinosa, applicant, said that the units were rentals, that she would not address the deck and spa, but that the 8' fence was needed for privacy.

Some Commission members felt that since the deck and spa were already constructed they should not have to move them to meet the setbacks from the property line, but that they must obtain building permits for them. They also felt that since the spa 1was so close to the property line, the 8' fence should be allowed for privacy.

Commissioner Rajancer felt that the 8' fence might lead to problems in the future, and Gjervold said that the applicant is a builder and knew that the duplex units were illegal without an approved plan and permit, that additional permits were required for the spa and deck, and that the ordinance states 6' maximum for the fence, and that these violations should not be allowed.

Commissioner McCulley moved, Matsuhara seconded, to approve the variance requests for the reduced rear yard setback from 23' to 21'6", and to allow the existing 8' fence to remain. Motion approved 5-2. (No: Gjervold, Rajander)