TOWN OF WINDSOR PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUMMARY. Tom Micheletti / Silverado Sonoma Vineyards LLC

Transcription

1 Agenda Item No TOWN OF WINDSOR PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT FILE: PRE DATE: August 22, 2017 STAFF: Kim Jordan, Associate Planner SUMMARY Applicant/Owner: Tom Micheletti / Silverado Sonoma Vineyards LLC Location: 657 and 1296 Jensen Lane / APNs and 014 Application: Request: Environmental Determination: Preliminary Review Preliminary Site Plan and Design Review To Be Determined General Plan: Surrounding Residential (3-6 units/acre), Village Residential (5-8 units/acre), Neighborhood Commercial, Park, Agricultural Buffer Area Draft General Plan Update: Estate Residential ( units/acre), Surrounding Residential (3-6 units/acre), Proposed Park, Potential School Site Zoning Map: Recommendation: On-Site Noticing: Not Applicable; Property is located in the County Forward Comments to the Applicant and Town Council. No Planning Commission action will be taken on the project at this time. The site has been posted in compliance with the Town s public notice requirements.

2 Page 2 of 25 I. INTRODUCTION The applicant requests preliminary review of three different concept plans for annexation and development of two parcels totaling acres located at 657 and 1296 Jensen Lane. Both properties are located outside of Town limits but within the Town s urban growth boundary. The concept plans include development of 228 to 236 homes, a 1.5 to 2.1-acre park, and new streets. The eastern portion of the site proposes 18 estate residential homes. Development to the west of these lots includes 225 to 233 single-family homes with lot sizes ranging from 3,000 to 6,000 square feet. The primary difference in the concept plans is the distribution and number of the 3,000 to 6,000 square foot lots. All three concept plans propose the same neighborhood components: a buffer along the eastern edge of the project, a central park, and an interconnected gridded street system. The submitted plans include property located at 595 Jensen Lane (commonly referred to as the Ross Albertson property), and undeveloped property located east of Vancouver Lane and south of Vinecrest Road (commonly referred to as the Mark Ross property). These properties are not included as part of the proposed development, but have been included to demonstrate how their development could be integrated with the proposed development of 657 and 1296 Jensen Lane. The development concepts shown for Ross Albertson s property and Mark Ross s property are for illustrative purposes only and do not reflect the development intentions of property owners. The preliminary review process provides an opportunity for constructive and collaborative discussion on the project development plan. In particular, it is an opportunity to review fundamental planning and policy issues, including interpretation and direction on aspects of the project that may not be clearly in conformance with adopted standards. Planning Commission s comments will be provided to Town Council as part of the staff report prepared for Town Council review of the concept plans. It should be noted that preliminary review comments are not binding and that the Applicant may not be able to address all comments or interests in their final project design. Where a comment or interest cannot be incorporated into the final design, the Applicant should provide an explanation as to the reason why. II. BACKGROUND General Plan Update. For the past several years, the Town has been in the process of updating its General Plan. During this process, the parcels included in the concept plan and in the general vicinity were discussed at several different meetings by Town Council and the Planning Commission. These discussions resulted in changes to the land use designations of the subject properties and other properties in the area. Figure 1 and Table 1 below show the land use designations and corresponding densities being proposed as part of the General Plan Update with land use designations and densities that currently apply to the subject site. In summary, the land use changes being contemplated in the General Plan Update would significantly reduce the development potential of the project site.

3 Page 3 of 25 FIGURE 1: COMPARISON OF LAND USE DESIGNATOINS UNDER THE UPDATED GENERAL PLAN AND CURRENT GENERAL PLAN UPDATED GENERAL PLAN CURRENT GENERAL PLAN TABLE 1: COMPARISON OF LAND USES AND DEVELOPMENT INTENSITIES UNDER THE UPDATED GENERAL PLAN AND CURRENT GENERAL PLAN PARCEL UPDATED GENERAL PLAN CURRENT GENERAL PLAN 657 Jensen Lane Very Low Density Residential 1 (3-6 units/acre) Proposed Park Potential School Site (approx. 10 acres) Surrounding Residential (3-6 units/acre) Village Residential (5-8 units/acre) Park 1296 Jensen Lane Estate Residential ( units/acre Village Residential (5-8 units/acre) Neighborhood Commercial Park Agricultural Buffer 2 1. Change to Very Low Density Residential is a change in name only. The density and allowed uses were not changed. 2. Although the land use map does not include an Agricultural Buffer land use designation on the property, the General Plan Update includes policy ER-2.2 regarding agricultural buffers. The General Plan Update also modifies and renames the area identified in the current General Plan as Special Area D. The boundary of Special Area D extended from Vinecrest Road to south of Pleasant Avenue and encompassed vacant and underdeveloped properties along the eastern edge of Town. Under the updated General Plan, the boundary of this area has been reduced to encompass vacant and underdeveloped land between Jensen Lane and Vinecrest Road. This area is now referred to as the Eastern Edge Community Place Area. Most of the area specific policies for development within Special Area D are proposed to be carried over in the General Plan Update and applied Eastern Edge area.

4 Page 4 of 25 Urban Growth Boundary. Both parcels included in the concept plans are located outside of Town limits but are within the Town s Urban Growth Boundary. The Urban Growth Boundary was enacted by the voters in January 1998 and is set to expire on December 31 st of this year. It is presumed that properties located within the Urban Growth Boundary will ultimately be annexed and developed. A measure to extend the life of the Urban Growth Boundary to December 31, 2040 (commensurate with the horizon year of the updated General Plan) will put to a vote of Windsor residents at a special election to be held this November. Staff Review Committee. In June, the concept plans were reviewed by the Staff Review Committee. The comments provided by Public Works and the Town s traffic engineer are included as Attachment 5. The Fire Marshal requested additional information regarding street widths and street sections. Planning s comments are incorporated into this staff report. III. SITE CONTEXT The project is comprised of two parcels totaling acres. The western parcel is acres and developed with a single-family home and vineyards. The eastern parcel is acres and planted with vineyards. The project site is located north and west of Jensen Lane, south of Prince George Way and Peppertree Drive, and east of Holly Leaf Drive. The project site is located in the area identified as Special Area D in the current General Plan and as the Eastern Edge Community Place Area ( Eastern Edge area) in the draft General Plan Update. The Eastern Edge area totals acres and is comprised of four parcels: 657 and 1296 Jensen Lane (the project parcels), 595 Jensen Lane (Ross Albertson property), and 1295 Jensen Lane (Mark Ross property). The boundary of the Eastern Edge area is illustrated in Attachment 4. Figure 2 below shows the location of the project parcels.

5 Page 5 of 25 FIGURE 2 PROJECT LOCATION Project Site Table 2 below summarizes the surrounding land uses and zoning. The lot sizes adjacent to the project site also are provided.

6 Page 6 of 25 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF SURROUNDING LAND USES LOCATION North - Pepper Tree Drive and Heritage Court North - Vintage Hills Subdivision (Victoria, Vancouver, and Prince George) North Jensen Lane (Mark Ross Property) West - Holly Leaf Drive South - Jensen Lane Pistachio Place/Gingko Place East - Jensen Lane EXISTING LAND USE AND JURISDICTION Single-family homes Town of Windsor Single-family homes Town of Windsor One Single-family home and orchard Town of Windsor Single-family homes Town of Windsor Single-family homes Town of Windsor Vineyards County LOT SIZES 6,000 sf typical Up to 9,930 sf at cul-desacs ZONING Surrounding Residential (3-6 units/acre) 10,818 sf to 26,895 sf Estate Residential ( units/acre) acre (one lot) 6,046 to 6,418 sf typical Up to 11,491 at cul-desacs 5,663 sf typical 12,632 largest 5,600 6,098 sf Up to 12,632 at cul-desacs Surrounding Residential (3-6 units/acre Surrounding Residential (3-6 units/acre) Surrounding Residential (3-6 units/acre) County IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant submitted a project description and three conceptual development plans, identified as Options A, B, and C. For each option, a site plan and conceptual development plan were provided (Attachments 1 and 2). The site plan shows the lot size and location of each lot. The conceptual development plan shows the location and orientation of the homes, location of the garages, and the street tree planting. The applicant also submitted an area plan for each option that includes the entire Eastern Edge Residential area (see Attachment 3). An area plan showing how development of the various properties within the Eastern Edge area is required by policy for each of the properties within the Eastern Edge area (see discussion below Eastern Edge Residential Community Place). The major components included in the concept plans are described below. Land Use The project would consist of the development of 228 to 236 single-family homes in the westerly portion of the property, a 1.5 to 2.1-acre park in the central portion of the site, and 18 estate residential homes in the eastern-most portion of the property. The westerly portion of the property is designated as Very Low Density Residential (VLDR), 3 to 6 units per acre, in the updated General Plan. The concept plans show four different lot sizes in the VLDR designation: 6,000 square feet; 5,000 square feet; 3,750 square feet; and 3,000 square feet. Most of the 3,000 and 3,750 square foot lots are designed as quad-lots with four lots sharing a common driveway.

7 Page 7 of 25 The easternmost portion of the property is designated as Estate Residential (ER), 0.2 to 3.0 units per acre. A specific policy for development within the Eastern Edge area limits development densities in the area designated Estate Residential to one-half acre minimum lot sizes in the western portion of the Estate Residential area and one acre minimum lot sizes in the eastern portion of the Estate Residential area. In accordance with this policy, five one-acre lots have been proposed along the eastern half of Estate Residential area and thirteen half-acre lots along the western half. Density Approximately acres of the project site is designated as VLDR. At a density range of 3 to 6 units per acre, the allowable number of units in this portion of the project site is 126 to 250. The number of units being proposed in the various options range from 5.46 to 5.65 units per acre, all of which are within the range allowed by the VLDR land use designation. Approximately 14 acres of the project is designated as ER. At a density range of 0.2 to 3.0 units per acre, the ER designation would normally allow for density range of 3 to 50 units. However, the maximum density allowed under the development policies for the Eastern Edge area would be 21 units. The number of units being proposed in this area (18) is within the restricted density range. Site Plan Options All three concept plans include 6,000 square foot lots along the north, west and east portion of the site designated VLDR, a row of the smallest lot sizes along the segment of Jensen Lane at the southern boundary of the site with 5,000 square foot lots at the corners of the internal street connections to the east-west segment of Jensen Lane, the same number and layout of ER lots in the eastern portion of the project site, a park in the center of the development, and the same connections to existing streets. The primary difference between the three concept plans is the location and number of the different size lots in the VLDR area of the site. A summary of the site plan for each option is provided in Table 3 below. TABLE 3 COMPARISON OF SITE PLAN OPTIONS CHARACTERISTIC OPTION A OPTION B OPTION C Connections to Existing Streets Same for all options Same for all options Same for all options Internal Street Network Same as Option B Same as Option A See description below Park 1.7-acres 1.5-acres 2.1-acres School Site None None None Residential Development 0.5-acre lots acre lots Location of ER lots Same for all options Same for all options Same for all options Total Estate Residential Lots ,000 square foot lots ,000 square foot lots ,000 to 3,750 square foot lots Location of VLDR lots See discussion below See discussion below See discussion below Total Very Low Density Lots Total Number of Lots

8 Page 8 of 25 Option A includes 3,000 and 3,750 square foot lots in a quad-lot configuration in the blocks north and south of the park and one row of 3,750 square foot lots east and west of the park. This option includes the largest number of 3,000 and 3,750 square foot lots. Option B includes 3,000 and 3,750 square foot lots in a quad-lot configuration in the blocks north and south of the park and a linear green space north and south of the park. One row of 3,750 square foot lots is located to the east of the park. Two blocks of 5,000 square foot lots are located to the west of the park. This option includes an almost equal distribution of lots sizes (see Table 3 above). Option C includes two east-west streets north of the park, which creates a different internal street network north of the park than proposed for Options A and B. This street network allows two rows of 6,000 square foot lots north of the park. In this option, the smaller lots are concentrated in the southern portion of the property and larger lots are concentrated in the northern portion of the property. This option includes the largest number of 6,000 square foot lots and the fewest number of smaller lots. Internal Circulation The concept plans show a park in the center of the VLDR portion of the project. The internal circulation is designed as a grid system with the park in the center of the circulation system. Circulation and access to the ER lots would be provided by a new street connection from the east-west segment Jensen Lane that turns at 90-degrees to connect with the north-south segment Jensen Lane along the eastern perimeter of the property. The internal street network proposes 40-foot and 56-foot wide streets. Street Connections and Extensions All three concept plans include: 1) two north-south connections to Prince George Street that would align with Vancouver Lane and Victoria Lane; 2) three north-south connections from the east-west segment of Jensen Lane, two connecting to development in the VLDR portion of the development and one connecting to development in the ER portion of the site; and 3) one east-west connection from the north-south segment of Jensen Lane connecting to the ER portion of the of the site. No connection to Buckeye Drive is shown on any of the concept plans. Parks All three concept plans include a park in the center of the development. The park ranges in size from 1.5 to 2.1-acres. The draft General Plan Update includes a Proposed Park designation on 657 Jensen Lane. Agricultural Buffer A buffer is shown along the eastern edge of the site between the one-acre estate residential lots and the north-south segment of Jensen Lane. Area Plan The applicant has provided an area plan that includes all of the properties located in the Eastern Edge area (see attachment 3).

9 Page 9 of 25 Required Entitlements The applicant has indicated the project would require a pre-zoning to Planned Development (PD), and a tentative subdivision map. The PD pre-zoning accommodates the variety of lots sizes and house sizes included in the project. Once pre-zoned, the project would require approval of annexation into Town limits by the Sonoma County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). V. ANALYSIS This section provides a summary analysis of how the project complies with Town policies and identifies areas where feedback from the Planning Commission s feedback is requested. Analysis of the policies included in the draft General Plan Update and the current General Plan is provided. Draft General Plan policies are shown in regular text, with current General Plan policy information shown in italics. Staff analysis of the project s General Plan consistency is provided below for policies in both the General Plan Update and the current General Plan. A. General Update Plan Consistency. The Town is in the process of updating its General Plan. Based on the likely timing of adoption of the General Plan and the submittal of a formal application, the concept plans have been primarily reviewed for consistency with the draft General Plan Update. The draft General Plan Update policies that would likely apply to the project are provided below. The corresponding current General Plan policy is noted in italics. 1. Urban Growth Boundary. Voters approved Measure A, which established an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The UGB is intended to promote orderly and efficient development in the Town. The draft General Plan Update includes the following policies related to development within the UGB. The policies below would be applicable to development of the project. Factors for Identifying Priority Development Areas (Policy LU-7.9). The draft General Plan Update calls for consideration of the following factors for development, including annexations. (Current General Plan policy B.3.2) a) Availability of services and facilities to serve the development The draft General Plan Update and corresponding EIR will analyze the Town s ability to provide facilities and services to the population estimated under General Plan buildout. However, this is not a site-specific analysis. As part of a formal application, the ability to provide and extend services to the site, such as water and sewer, will be required to be analyzed. b) Adjacency to existing urban uses The site is surrounded by urban scale residential development to the north, south and west. c) Promotion of infill development within Town limits Although not within Town limits, the site is within the UGB and surrounded by urban scale residential development to the north, south and west. d) Consistency with Policy LU-2.1 The concept plans advance this policy as described under Residential Development below.

10 Page 10 of 25 e) Encouragement of neighborhood centers, which may include retail services, public facilities, and uses/amenities that enliven the streets The concept plans include a park, agricultural buffer along the eastern edge of the project, landscape setback along east-west Jensen Lane. f) Avoidance of lands under a Williamson Act contract, unless the contact will expire prior to construction The parcels are not under a Williamson Act contract. g) Desirability of the area for a school site The site is one of two locations being considered for a school by the Windsor Unified School District. The site plans and conceptual development plans do identify a location for a future school site. h) Adverse fiscal effect on the Town The net fiscal effect of the project on the Town is unknown. The developer is required to fund the cost of construction of the development, including construction of streets, utilities, park, landscape areas, and extension of utilities to the site. The developer is also required to pay development impact fees to offset the Town-wide impact of the development, including fees for park development, open space and trails, public facilities, police, fire, water capacity, water reclamation, traffic, drainage, and schools. The development would generate property tax revenue, a portion of which the Town receives. Annexation Initiation (Policy LU-7.10). The Town does not actively seek to annex unincorporated lands. Annexation should generally be initiated by the property owner. (Current General Plan policy B.3.3) The developer would be required to submit an application for Town Council approval of a pre-zoning. Subsequent to Town Council approval, the developer would be required to submit an application for LAFCO approval of the annexation. This process would be consistent with this policy. Concurrency (Policy LU-7.11). Ensure the growth occurs concurrently with the provision of services and infrastructure. (Current General Plan policy B.4). The draft General Plan Update and corresponding EIR will analyze the Town s ability to provide facilities and services to the population estimated under General Plan buildout. However, this is not a site-specific analysis. As part of a formal application, the ability to provide and extend services to the site, such as water and sewer, will be required to be analyzed. The developer is required to construct the infrastructure needed for the project, including streets, the park, agricultural buffer area, and landscape areas. The developer will also be required to pay applicable development impact fees.

11 Page 11 of 25 Public Services and Facilities Availability (Policy LU-7.14). To the extent allowed by law, the Town may support the annexation of all or portions of unincorporated residential areas within the Urban Growth Boundary only when public services and facilities meeting Town standards are available or plans are in place demonstrating their availability in the near future to the lands proposed for inclusion in the Town. The Towns shall seek to ensure that the newly annexed lands pay for the additional public services and facilities required to serve the area. Funds for these services and facilities may be generated through such methods, including but not limited to, the establishment of special assessment districts or through payments by the developers/property owners. (Current General Plan policy B.4.3) As part of a formal application, a sewer capacity analysis and water demand analysis would be required. The applicant would also be required to demonstrate that water and sewer can be extended to the site. The impact of the development on Town services and facilities would also be required. As stated above, the developer will also be required to pay applicable development impact fees. 2. Land Use. The draft General Plan Update includes policies that guide the use and development of land. The policies below would be applicable to development of the project. Land Use Diagram (Figure LU-1). The project site has four land use designations: Estate Residential (0.2 to 3.0 units per acre); Very Low Density Residential (3.0 to 6.0 units per acre); Proposed Park; and Potential School Site (approximately 10 acres) (see above). The current General Plan designations are Surrounding Residential (3-6 units/acre), Village Residential (5-8 units/acre), Neighborhood Commercial, Park, and Agricultural Buffer along the eastern edge) (see above). Land Use. The ER land use designation provides areas for the development of large-lot detached single-family residential uses. The VLDR land use designation provides for a mix of housing types on traditional single-family lots. Attached and detached single-family homes, duplexes, and triplexes are compatible with the VLDR designation. The allowed housing types in the VLDR designation are the same as allowed by the SR designation included in the current General Plan. The SR designation allows single-family homes, duplexes, triplexes, and townhomes. The concept plans include large-lot detached single-family homes in the area identified as ER and detached single-family homes on a variety of lot sizes in the area identified as VLDR. Based on the varied lot sizes, it is likely that there would be a variety of sizes of detached homes. The variety of lot sizes and house sizes and provision of a park would be consistent with the intended land uses. The concept plans do not include a school or reserve 10-acres for a school. The project site is one of two locations being considered for a school by the WUSD. In the event the project site is the selected location, the lack of a school site would not be consistent with the land use designation.

12 Page 12 of 25 Density. The estimated number of acres designated ER is 13.94, which would allow 3 to 50 estate residential lots. The estimated number of acres designated VLDR is 41.75, which would allow 126 to 250 VLR lots. The estimated number of acres designated SR is 27.90, which would allow 83 to 167 units. The estimated number of acres designated VR is 30.79, which would allow units. The total number of residential units under the current General Plan would be Under the current General Plan a portion of the site would be developed as neighborhood commercial, park, and agricultural buffer which would reduce the number of units estimated above. The proposed 18 ER lots is within the allowable density range. The proposed 210 to 218 VLR lots is also within the allowable density range. The overall project density, based on the total number of units proposed of 228 to 236, is 3.88 to 4.03 units per acre. The number of units proposed is less than or equal to the minimum allowed under the current General Plan and 177 units less than the maximum allowed under the current General Plan. 3. Residential Development. The draft General Plan Update includes goals and policies to provide guidance for development of new residential development. The policies below would be applicable to development of the project. Residential Development (Goal LU-2): Promote the preservation of residential neighborhoods that provide a variety of housing types, densities, and designs that address the diverse needs of Windsor residents of ages and socio-economic groups. New General Plan policy that is consistent with current Housing Element goal H-1 and policy 1.2. Housing Diversity (Policy LU-2.1): The Town shall support the development of diverse housing types and lot sizes throughout town to accommodate a range of affordability levels and socio-economic diversity. (Current General Plan policy A6.2) The project includes detached single-family homes on a variety of lot sizes, ranging from 3,000 square feet to one-acre. The variety of lot sizes advances this policy by providing a range of home sizes (at a range of home prices) to meet various household sizes. To allow the smaller lot sizes, a Planned Development (PD) would be required. Staff believes the smaller lot sizes would be consistent with the General Plan because there would be no increase in units above the permitted General Plan density, the PD would allow for a variety of house sizes to meet the needs of Windsor residents, and the smaller homes would be more affordable. 4. Eastern Edge Community Place Area. The Eastern Edge Community Place Area (Eastern Edge) is a sub-area of the area defined as Special Area D in the current General Plan (see Attachments 4A and 4B). As part of the General Plan update process, the boundaries of Special Area D were changed (reduced), the area was renamed to Eastern Edge, and some land use designations within the area were changed. These changes resulted in certain Special Area D policies no longer being necessary or applicable to the Eastern Edge area. For example, one policy related to providing open space along north-south segment Jensen Lane at the edge of the Town s Urban Growth Boundary is no longer included in the Eastern Edge policies. This is

13 Page 13 of 25 because the General Plan land use designation for the area along the north-south segment of Jensen Lane has been changed to a lower density designation. In addition, a policy requiring one-acre minimum lot sizes in this area was added. This will result in larger lots and greater yard setbacks adjacent to Jensen Lane, which would increase the separation between the homes and the agricultural use located in the County. Below are the Eastern Edge policies from the draft General Plan Update and analysis of the concept plans consistency with each policy. The corresponding policy from Special Area D is also identified in italics. LU-15.1 Planning Study. Prior to annexation, a plan for development of the Eastern Edge Residential area shall be prepared and submitted for the Town s review and acceptance. The plan shall coordinate local circulation, formulate appropriate treatment of the community edge, encourage compatibility with the active vineyards immediately to the east, and demonstrate consistency with the policies in this section of the General Plan. The type of plan to be submitted may be in the form of a Specific Plan, Area Plan, Master Plan or other form deemed acceptable to the Town Council. The plan shall adequately convey the information described above in sufficient detail for the Town to make a general assessment of consistency with the land use, transportation, and public facilities and services policies requirements. The plan shall be prepared in consultation with all property owners in the area. (Modified current General Plan Special Area D policy B.7.26) The area plan submitted by the applicant includes all of the Eastern Edge parcels and illustrates how development of these properties could be integrated into the existing circulation network and provide connections to the proposed development. A formal application may require the submittal of additional information if it is determined that the area plan and conceptual development plans do not adequately advance area policies or will not preclude or impact the ability to develop adjoining parcels in the Eastern Edge area. Feedback Request: a) The Planning Commission is requested to comment what additional information, if any, will be needed from the applicant to demonstrate consistency with Eastern Edge development policies. LU-15.2 Future Park Location. The Town shall require a park be provided to serve the area north of Jensen Lane. (Modified current General Plan Special Area D Policy B.7.26f based on the Parks and Recreation Master Plan) All three concept plans include a park n the center of the development, which advances this policy.

14 Page 14 of 25 LU-15.3 Road Improvements. The Town shall require circulation improvements in the Eastern Edge area to provide connections with existing neighborhoods, including a new road to link this area, the residences to the north, and Mattie Washburn School. (Modified Special Area D Policy B.7.26g) All three concept plans include street connections and extensions, including connections across Prince George Way to Victoria Lane and Vancouver Lane, three connections to east-west Jensen Lane, and one connection to north-south Jensen Lane. The concept plans do not include a connection to Buckeye Drive. With the exception of the lack of connection to Buckeye Drive, staff believes the proposed street connections substantially advance the Town s goals and policies pertaining to local street connections. Feedback Request: b) The Planning Commission is requested to comment on the proposed street connections. LU-15.4 Natural Resource Preservation. The Eastern Edge area shall require special attention to natural resources preservation because the area contains both oaks and riparian habitat. (Current General Plan Special Area D policy B.7.26h) A biological assessment and arborist report would be required as part of a formal application. The applicant is not proposing the extension of Buckeye Drive in order to preserve oak trees. LU-15.5 Defined Edge. Because of the natural amenities and location of the Eastern Edge area at the periphery of the Urban Growth Boundary, the Town shall require the use of landscape setbacks and trails to help define the edge for the neighborhood and the boundary for the Town s urban limits. (Current General Plan Special Area D policy B.7.26i) The concept plans include green space and a row of trees along the north-south segment of Jensen Lane at the eastern edge of the project, which advance this policy. Additional details regarding the treatment of this area would be required as part of a formal application. Feedback Request: c) The Planning Commission is requested to comment on the what treatment should be provided within the buffer. LU-15.6 Feathered Density of Estate Residential Area. The Town shall require the density of development within the Eastern Edge Residential area designated for Estate Residential to be feathered, with a density of up to 2 units per acre allowed on the western portion of the Estate Residential area lowering to a density of no greater than one unit per acre on average in the eastern portion of the area. New draft General Plan Policy. The concept plans include a row of lots along the eastern edge, five lots are one-acre and one lot is less than one-acre. The western portion of the ER area proposes 13 one-half

15 Page 15 of 25 acre lots. The lot that is less than one-acre along the eastern edge does not conform to this policy. It appears that this lot could be modified to meet the one-acre minimum along Jensen Lane. Staff would work with the applicant to explore an alternative lot configuration that more closely follows this policy. LU-15.7 School Site. A school site shall be identified, in consultation with the Windsor Unified School District, if the School District determines this is an appropriate location for a school. New draft General Plan Policy. The concept plans do not identify the location of a future school site or a 10-acre area that could be set aside for a future school site. The school district is evaluating potential school sites, including the project site. The Town Council has expressed its opinion that the potential site located north of Arata Lane would be a more suitable location for a future school. In the event the school district selects the project site as a potential school site, the project would need to be modified to include a location for a future school. 5. Transportation and Mobility. The Transportation and Mobility section of the draft General Plan Update includes the Town s Complete Streets policies, Street Classification Map, and other policies related to multi-modal circulation, development of the circulation system and connectivity. The policies below would be applicable to development of the project. Street Classifications. Consistent with the Complete Street Design Guidelines, the draft General Plan Update identifies street types for the Town. Each street type is designed to establish a multi-modal system that responds to the context of the surrounding area. The internal streets are identified as either being 40-feet wide or 56-feet wide. The Town s traffic engineer recommends that the internal streets be designed as a Residential street, which has a 56-foot width. Complying with this minimum street width could potentially require changes to the lotting plan and/or lotting sizes. Street Classification Map. The Street Classification Map identifies major existing and proposed streets within Town limits and the urban growth boundary. Jensen Lane at the southern edge of the project is identified as a future 2-Lane Crosstown. Jensen Lane at the eastern edge of the project site is identified as a future Rural Lane that would eventually connect to Vinecrest Road. (The current General Plan Circulation Plan Map identifies east-west Jensen Lane as a Crosstown Boulevard and north-south Jensen Lane as a Rural Lane.) The concept plans include Jensen Lane, but do not identify a specific street type for either the east-west segment of Jensen Lane or the north-south segment. The Town s traffic engineer has reviewed the concept plans and has recommended Jensen Lane be improved consistent with the draft General Plan Street Classification Map.

16 Page 16 of 25 Complete Streets. Complete Streets is a design principle that balances the safety and convenience of everyone using the road. The Complete Streets Design Guidelines are to be considered in the review of all development proposals. The Complete Streets policies implement the Complete Streets goal to provide complete streets with facilities and amenities that meet the needs of all users, regardless of their age or ability, or whether they are walking, bicycling, taking transit, or driving. (Current General Plan goal D.3. The current General Plan also includes policies that implement this goal) A formal application that provides more specific details on street improvements would be required to determine compliance with the Complete Street Design Guidelines. Private Development Street Connections (Policy M-3.2). The Town shall encourage private developments to provide internal complete streets that connect to the existing public roadway system and provide a transition to existing and planned transportation facilities. Bicycle and pedestrian connectivity from the private street to the nearest public streets shall also be provided. (Modified current General Plan policy A.8.10.) The concept plans include connections to Vancouver Lane, Victoria Lane, eastwest Jensen Lane, and north-south Jensen Lane. These connections advance this policy. The concept plans do not: 1) include a connection to Buckeye Drive; 2) include a connection from the area designated as VLDR to the area designated ER; 3) extend the road that provides access to the ER part of the project to the project s north property line (adjacent to the Mark Ross property); or 4) connect the street ending in a cul-de-sac to Jensen Lane. The Town s traffic engineer recommends the project include a connection to Buckeye Drive and eliminate the cul-de-sac and connect this street to Jensen Lane. Feedback Request: d) The Planning Commission is requested to comment on the proposed street connections and extensions. Rural Lanes Designation (Policy M-3.6). The Town shall retain certain streets as Rural Lanes in order to conserve their particular character and beauty. New development along Rural Lanes shall be configured in terms of lot size, setbacks, and design standards per the Complete Street Design Guidelines so that traffic speeds are reduced. (Modified current General Plan policy D.4.7) The concept plans show green space and a row of trees along the north-south segment of Jensen Lane at the eastern edge of the project site. From the information provided, it is unclear if the intent is to improve Jensen Lane as a Rural Lane. The Town s traffic engineer recommends improving this section of Jensen Lane as a Rural Lane.

17 Page 17 of 25 Street Connections in New Developments (Policy M-3.7). The Town shall promote street designs in new developments that provide convenient connections to local destinations and to adjacent neighborhoods. Travel should be dispersed among several streets rather than a few high-volume local streets that divide neighborhoods and discourage walking. (Current General Plan policy D.2.2.) See Private Development Street Connections discussion above. 6. Public Services and Facilities. The draft General Plan Update includes goals and policies related to the provision of public facilities and services. The policies below would be applicable to development of the project. Water System Cost of New Infrastructure (PFS-2.4). The Town shall require that costs of improvements to the water that are necessary for new development are financed by the property owner or developer. (Modified current General Plan policy E.2.2) As stated above, a water capacity analysis and the ability to extend services to the site would be required as part of a formal application. The analysis would identify any improvements needed to the existing system and the cost of the improvements would be the responsibility of the development or property owner as required by this policy. Wastewater and Water Reclamation System Cost of New Infrastructure (PFS-3.11). The Town shall require that costs of improvements to the wastewater and water reclamation system that are necessary for new development are financed by the property owner or developer. (Modified current General Plan policy E.2.2) As stated above, a sewer capacity analysis and the ability to extend services to the site would be required as part of a formal application. The analysis would identify any improvements needed to the existing system and the cost of the improvements would be the responsibility of the development or property owner as required by this policy. 7. Environmental Resources. The draft General Plan Update includes goals and policies related to environmental resources, including agricultural lands, biological resources, and scenic resources. The policies below would be applicable to development of the project. Agricultural Buffers. Proposed new development that would be adjacent to existing agricultural properties should include buffers onsite to protect the continued viability of the neighboring agriculture and to minimize adverse effects of agricultural operations. If the existing agricultural properties lie outside the urban growth boundary, then the onsite buffer should be permanent and composed of predominantly native and lot water-using species, or other appropriate perimeter screening should be required. The Town should allow and encourage the productive use of buffers for appropriate uses, where legally permissible, such as bike trails rather than requiring buffers to be idle open space. The size of the buffer will be determined by parcel specific review for all new development adjacent to agricultural property (Current General Plan policy D.2.2)

18 Page 18 of 25 An active vineyard located outside of the Urban Growth Boundary is located on the east side of Jensen Lane adjacent to the one-acre ER lots. The concept plans include a 52-foot wide green space along the eastern edge of the project. The width and what is included in this area would be determined as part of Planning Commission and Town Council s review of the project as directed by this policy. The inclusion of the buffer advances this policy. Feedback Request: e) The Planning Commission is requested to comment on the proposed width of the buffer and provide recommendations on what should be included within the buffer area. Sensitive Resources Inventory for New Development (Policy ER-6.2). The Town shall require a detailed inventory of sensitive resources conducted by an independent, professionally qualified biologist, plant ecologist, arborist or appropriately qualified specialist for development proposals in sensitive and vulnerable habitats. If sensitive resources are identified on the project site, proposals to protect them shall conform with applicable State and Federal regulations regarding their protection and may include the avoidance of the resource, installing vegetative buffers, providing setbacks, clustering development onto less sensitive areas, preparing restoration plans, and off-site mitigation. (Modified current General Plan policy D.1.1) Most of the project site is planted in vineyards. Environmental studies would be required as part of a formal application, including a biological assessment and arborist report. Biological Studies for Undeveloped Areas (Policy ER-6.3). The Town shall require project applicants to provide a biological assessment for projects on undeveloped parcels, unless a biological assessment has previously prepared for the specific site. The purpose of these assessments is to identify appropriate mitigation measures to avoid or minimize harm to these resources and to avoid or minimize harm to these resources and to incorporate the recommended measures as conditions of approval. (Current General Plan implementation program D2.) See Sensitive Resources Inventory for New Development discussion above. Preservation of Oak Woodlands (Policy ER-6.7). The Town shall encourage the preservation of oak woodlands and significant stands of oaks and heritage trees. Development plans should indicate preservation of these resources to the fullest extent feasible and restrict pavement and other encroachments within the root zones of oak trees to ensure their long-term survival. Should removal be necessary, the project applicant shall be required to plant replacement trees or removal can be done through the payment of an in-lieu fee. (Current General Plan policy D1.6. The current General Plan includes Figure 6-2: Water Resources and Biological Resources. Figure 6-2 identifies oak woodlands in the Town limits and urban growth boundary. No oak woodlands are identified on the project site or in the Eastern Edge Residential area.)

19 Page 19 of 25 The concept plans do not include an existing conditions site plan, so the types of trees cannot be determined. A formal application would be required to include a plan that identifies the existing site conditions, including the location, size and species of trees. An arborist report would also be required since there are trees located on the site. The project includes connections to existing streets, which may impact trees. The applicant has indicated that a street connection to Buckeye Drive has not been proposed since this connection would require the removal of oak trees. Feedback Request: f) The Planning Commission is requested to comment on the impact the extension of Buckeye Drive could have on protected oak trees. Scenic Corridors (Figure ER-1). Jensen Lane along the eastern edge of the project site is a designated scenic corridor. The draft General Plan Update includes policies that apply to developments located along scenic corridors. (Current General Plan Figure 6-3, which also identifies this area as a scenic corridor.) A formal application would be required to include information on consistency with policies related to consistency with scenic resources policies. Development Guidelines along Scenic Corridors (Policy ER-9.2). The Town shall ensure that development proposals along scenic corridors do not detract from public viewpoints, are protected, and are harmonious and subordinate to the natural features that comprise the scenic viewshed. The Town shall require developers include components of project design that shall be considered in making this assessment include building height, massing, orientation, color, building materials, rooftop appurtenances, storage areas, signage, lighting, and low-water landscaping. The purpose of detailed project review along these corridors is to ensure that development within the viewshed preserves and enhances attractive natural and man-made vistas. (Modified current General Plan policy I1.2.) A formal application would be required to address the items noted above. Development Guidelines along Rural Lanes (Policy ER-9.2). The Town shall require development along scenic public roadways, such as Rural Lanes, to preserve significant public views of the surrounding foothills as well as mature vegetation that contributes to the rural atmosphere. (Modified current General Plan policy I1.3) A formal application would be required to demonstrate how public views are preserved. 8. Pre-zoning. As part of the application for an annexation, pre-zoning of the property would also be required. The property would need to be pre-zoned to a zoning district that corresponds to the General Plan land use designation. In this case, the ER land use designation corresponds to the Estate Residential (ER) zoning district, and the VLDR land use designation corresponds to the Surrounding Residential (SR) zoning district. The

20 Page 20 of 25 minimum lot size allowed in the SR zoning district is 6,000 square feet; however, the minimum lot size, lot width and setbacks may be reduced by Use Permit approval or prezoning the site to Planned Development (PD). Due to the mix of lot sizes in the VLDR area of the site, a pre-zoning to PD would be most likely. (The current General Plan also includes a mix of land use designations. It is likely that development of the site under the current General Plan also would have resulted in a pre-zoning to PD in order to accommodate commercial and residential development and a mix of lot sizes) Due to the street network needed to serve the project, park, agricultural buffer, and enhanced landscape areas, developing the site with only 6,000 square foot lots may not meet the minimum number of lots required. Additionally, developing the site with one lot size would not be consistent with the General Plan Housing Element or with draft General Plan Update Residential Development goal LU-2 or policy LU-2.1 above. Providing a variety of lot sizes and, thereby home sizes, would accommodate a range of affordability levels and housing options which would advance the policies included in the Housing Element, as well as draft General Plan Update goal LU-2 and policy LU-2.1. Feedback Request: g) The Planning Commission is requested to comment on prezoning the site to PD in order to provide a variety of lot sizes. 9. Annexation Timing 10-Year Growth Projection The draft update to the General Plan will set an average annual population growth rate target of approximately 1.5% over the Plan s 22-year planning period (through the year 2040). The 1.5% average annual growth rate target was established based on the Town s historic average annual population growth rate dating back to 1998 (see Attachment 6), the year the Town s Growth Control Ordinance went into effect. The Town s Growth Control Ordinance currently allows for a maximum annual growth rate between 2% and 3%. The targeted annual average growth rate is one-half of the maximum allowed under the Growth Control Ordinance. During the planning period for the updated General Plan (2018 to 2040), the population growth rate is expected to fluctuate annually, with some years being above 1.5% and others being below 1.5%. Through the Town s Growth Control Ordinance, the Town will monitor annual population growth and set or adjust growth control allocations based on the goal of maintaining an overall average annual growth rate of 1.5%. Table 4 below summarizes the maximum population and unit growth based on a 1.5% annual average growth rate for the next ten years.