Rancho Laguna II SR - Moraga · DESIGN REVIEW BOARD RANCHO LAGUNA II October 27, 2014 Page 3 of 13...

D e s i g n R e v i e wB o a r d

S t a f f R e p o r t

329 Rheem Boulevard Moraga, CA 94556 (925) 888-7040 [email protected] www.moraga.ca.us

FOR BOARD ACTIONOCTOBER 27, 2014

Rancho Laguna II Subdivision

Consider Design Review of New Single-Family Homes and Landscapingfor the Rancho Laguna II Project, a 27-Unit Single-Family ResidentialSubdivision; (N-OS-PD/M-OS, ENS)

I. Application Basics

A. Design Review Board Authority:· Design Review for Subdivisions, under Moraga Municipal Code (MMC) Section

8.72.040

B. CEQA Determination: The Town Council certified an EIR for the project on January26, 2011. An Addendum to the EIR was prepared pursuant to CEQA GuidelinesSection 15164(a) to address changes to the project proposed in the GeneralDevelopment Plan and Vesting Tentative Map applications and the MitigationMonitoring and Reporting Plan revised accordingly.

C. Parties Involved:·Applicant SummerHill Homes, 3000 Executive Parkway, Suite 450,

San Ramon, CA 94583

·Property Owner Rancho Laguna LLC, 3001 I Street, Suite 200,Sacramento, CA 95816-4442

· Architect Dahlin Group, 5865 Owens Drive, Pleasanton, CA 94588

· Landscape Architect Van Dorn Abed, 81 14th Street, San Francisco, CA 94103

· Engineer P/A Design Resources, 3021 Citrus Circle, Suite 150,Walnut Creek CA 94598

· Geotechnical Engineer Engeo, Inc., 2010 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 250, SanRamon, CA 94583

RANCHO LAGUNA II DESIGN REVIEW BOARD of 13 October 27, 2014

Figure 1: Vicinity Map

Table 1: Land Use Information

Location Existing Use Zoning DistrictGeneral PlanDesignation

Subject Property Vacant/UndevelopedMOSONon MOSO-OS PlannedDevelopment

MOSO Open SpaceOpen Space

SurroundingProperties

NorthVacant/UndevelopedEBMUD Reservoir

MOSONon MOSO-OS

MOSO Open Space

SouthVacant/UndevelopedResidential, SingleFamily

MOSOMOSO Open SpaceResidential 6 du/acResidential 2 du/ac

East Vacant/UndevelopedMOSONon MOSO-OS

MOSO Open Space

WestResidential, SingleFamily

MOSONon MOSO-OSResidential 2-DUAResidential 6-DUA

MOSO Open SpaceResidential 6 du/acResidential 2 du/ac

Project Site

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD RANCHO LAGUNA IIOctober 27, 2014 of 13

File: Rancho Laguna II Staff Report

Table 2: Project Chronology

Date Action

January 26, 2011 EIR Certified; Conceptual Development Plan approved by Town Council on appeal

November 26, 2013 Environmental peer review completed

December 3, 2013 Planning Commission Study Session: revised GDP site plan and alternative site plan

March 17, 2014 Planning Commission Public Hearing

April 21, 2014Planning Commission Hearing: Approval of General Development Plan, VestingTentative Map, Grading Permit and Hillside Development Permit

June 9, 2014 Design Review Application submitted

August 25, 2014 Design Review Board Study Session

September 16, 2014 Revised plans submitted

October 14, 2014 Public meeting notices mailed/posted

October 21, 2014Joint Planning Commission, Design Review Board and Parks and RecreationCommittee Meeting

October 27, 2014 Design Review Board Meeting

Table 3: Development Standards

Standard Allowed

Lot Dimensions

Minimum Lot Area 15,000 sq. ft.

Minimum Lot Width* 80 ft.

Minimum Lot Depth 100 ft.

Setbacks and Building Separations

Minimum Front Yard Garage Setback* 20 ft.

Minimum Front Yard Living Area Setback 15 ft.

Minimum Side Yard Setback 5 ft.

Minimum Rear Yard Setback** 15 ft.

Minimum Aggregate Side yard Setbacks 15 ft.

Minimum Building Separation between PrimaryStructures (measured from exterior face of wall)

15 ft.

Other Standards

Maximum Lot Coverage 60%

Maximum Building Height, One-Story*** 21 ft.

Maximum Building Height, Two-Story*** 35 ft.

Maximum Building Stories 2

Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Per Appendix D of the Design Guidelines. Lots over20,000 sq. ft. shall not exceed an FAR of .341.

*Measured at a point parallel to front face of garage.**Measured from the Rear Set Back Line or the Rear Property Line as shown on the project plans.***See Condition 10 for lots that must be limited to single-story homes and lots that may have homes that may be single or

two stories at applicant’s election.


II. Project Setting

A. Neighborhood/Area Description:Undeveloped MOSO and non-MOSO open space areas border the project site to thenorth and east sides of the property, including the site of the approved future PalosColorados subdivision. The East Bay Municipal Utility District’s (EBMUD) Fay HillReservoir is on the northern property line of the site. The Lafayette/Moraga RegionalTrail and surrounding open space is to the southeast of the site.

To the south and west are a mix of low-density residential development and openspace. The property is bordered on the southwest by a neighborhood of single-familyhomes on relatively large lots, fronting on both sides of Rheem Boulevard. A large-lot single-family home and the Woodminster condominiums are located acrossRheem Boulevard to the west of the site.

B. Site Conditions:The project site consists of undeveloped ranch land that is currently used for cattlegrazing (Figure 1). A minor ridge traverses the site in a north-south direction. Thehighest elevation is approximately 950 feet above sea level on the north end of thesite, and the lowest elevation is approximately 650 feet above sea level in thesoutheastern area of the site. The minor ridgeline breaks into three smaller ridges atthe south end with two small intervening valleys. The minor ridgeline has steep east-and west-facing slopes with two wooded valleys on the east side. A portion of CoyoteCreek flows south through the eastern portion of the property, and an unnamedseasonal creek flows south in the western portion of the property, next to RheemBoulevard.

C. Approved SubdivisionPrior approvals for the site include a Conceptual Development Plan, approved onJanuary 26, 2011; a General Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Map wasapproved on April 21, 2014. In addition, a Zoning Text amendment to allow for aminimum 15,000 square foot lot size for projects providing open space/recreationamenities, within the N-OS-PD District, consistent with General Plan Policy LU1.3,was approved in May 28, 2014 and adopted on June 25, 2014.

Site PlanThe approved GDP/VTM allows a residential development of 27 homes on the178.9-acre site. Attachment A includes the approved site plan. The 18,000 to24,000 square foot lots will be clustered on 27 acres, leaving the majority,approximately 152 acres, of the site as open space. All of the proposed lots would bewholly within the Non-MOSO Open Space - Planned Development (N-OS-PD)zoning district and outside MOSO (OS-M) designated areas. The approveddevelopment standards established in the GDP are summarized in Table 3.

The residences will be located in two separate areas of the site, along ‘D’ streetadjacent to Rheem Boulevard and along two small courts in the southeast portion ofthe site on ‘E’ Street. Ten residential lots would front on the west side of ‘D’ Drive,



with Lot 11 at the end of the cul-de-sac. These lots are rectangular, varying from18,901 to 27,912 square feet, 90 to 110 feet wide and from 180 to 230 feet deep.The rear half of these lots, with the exception of Lot 11, was made into a separateparcel to contain the seasonal wetland swale, drainage and landscaping to bemaintained by the GHAD. For the purposes of lot area and allowable FAR, theGHAD owned parcel is included in the aggregate area of the adjacent parcels, asshown on Civil Sheet 3, Lot Area Exhibit of the project plans in Attachment B. Theremaining 17 lots would front on the north side of ‘E’ Street, both sides of ‘C’ Court,and the east side of ‘B’ Court. The lots are irregular in shape, with frontage widthsranging from approximately 75 feet to 150 feet, 150 to 250 feet deep, and from20,006 to 24,504 square feet in area.

CirculationVehicles will enter the project from Rheem Boulevard on Fay Hill Road, an existingroad that provides access to EBMUD’s Fay Hill Reservoir and connects to the newroads, ‘D’ and ‘E’ Street. The internal streets will be privately owned and maintainedby the HOA. An emergency vehicle access will connect from the south end of ‘D’Drive to Rheem Boulevard.

The approved subdivision includes pedestrian paths, a public access trailhead andsmall parking lot at the top of Fay Hill Road, with trails that lead into the open spacearea and towards the EBMUD reservoir. Decomposed granite paths will be locatedon the east side of Rheem Boulevard and on the east side of ‘D’ Drive and a 4-footwide asphalt sidewalk will be on the south side of Fay Hill Road. An approximately 3-foot wide dirt trail, in a 20-foot wide easement will connect from Fay Hill Road to theopen space, and potentially connect to proposed trail of the Palos Coloradosubdivision and the existing Lafayette/Moraga Regional Trail. An informal parking lotand informational kiosk would be located at the trailhead.

GradingThe approved subdivision will require substantial grading to repair Rheem Boulevard,to correct landslides, for the internal street system, and to provide for building pads.The approved grading plan requires approximately 180,340 cubic yards of cut and183,790 cubic yards of fill. The fill material would include approximately 18,000 cubicyards of imported material. Most cut and fill slopes would be 2:1; no slopes areproposed to exceed 2:1.

III. Project Components Included in Design Review Application

During the deliberations for the General Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Map,Grading Permit and Hillside Development Permit, the Planning Commission consideredthe Town’s Design Guidelines related to maintaining the Town’s semi-rural character,protecting ridgeline and hillside areas, enhancing the Town’s scenic corridors andminimizing the impacts of development in its approval (Design Guideline table from theGDP/VTM Staff Report is Attachment C). Therefore, the focus of the current designreview is on the project architecture and landscaping. The Design Review Board


considered these items at a Study Session on August 25, 2014, and provided somepreliminary comments to the applicant, which is discussed in Section IV, below.

A. ArchitectureThe proposed architecture for the 27 residences consists of six floor plans, three ofwhich would be single story and three would be two-story. The six floor plans range insize from 3,586 to 5,882 square feet in floor area. Plans 1 through 4 would have twoelevations bases on different architectural style, and Plans 5 and 6 would have threedistinct elevations. In total there would be 14 different home designs used within thesubdivision. The elevations of the six floor plans are each designed to reflect one ofthree architectural styles:

Craftsman: The Craftsman style utilizes shingle roofs, and a blend of shinglesiding, wood siding, board and batten siding and stone veneers. It also includespaneled doors and divided light windows.

California Ranch: The California Ranch style utilizes plaster finish, horizontallap siding and stone veneers. This style uses horizontal divided light and solidpane windows and vertical stone (veneer) elements.

Bay Classic: The Bay Classic style uses materials including shingle roofs,plaster, lap siding, smooth wood panel siding and more geometric stoneveneers. The home designs feature horizontally divided light windows, woodsectional doors, metal awnings and other details, and vertical stone (veneer)elements

The massing of the proposed residences is asymmetric and features multiple wings andprojections of varying heights. The single story homes feature front patios or courtyards,and the two-story homes have small covered entries or front porches. All of theresidences are designed with varied pitched rooflines with gables and eaves. Someresidences, in the California Ranch and Bay Classic styles, have lesser sections of flatroof. The facade designs are articulated with a blend of textured materials such as stoneveneer, shingles and lap sidings as well as details such as trim, corbels, awnings, andtrellises. Four of the six floor plans would have front-entry garages, Plan 5 has a frontentry and side entry garage and Plan 6 has a side entry garages. The proposed floorplans are also offered with options that reconfigure interior rooms, add bonus rooms ortransitional indoor /outdoor spaces such as California rooms or terraces, and can furtherdifferentiate the appearance of the homes.

B. Landscape and StreetscapeFive plant palettes are proposed, tailored to different locations on the project site varyingform the formally landscaped front yards to natural open space. The palette includes:

Front yard palette comprises a selection of low water use plants, many of whichare from the Traditional Palette of the Design Guideline Appendix B.

Enhanced Streetscapes would be used along ‘E’ Street and ‘B’ Court wherethere is not a front yard; it includes many native plants, such as Californiafescue, coffee berry and monkey flower and some drought tolerant non-natives



such as fortnight lily and coast rosemary. The trees in this palette are lowgrowing California buckeye, western redbud and manzanita, which reach amature height between 10 and 20 feet.

Enhanced Naturalized Edges palettes would be used at the entry features onFay Hill Road, ‘D’ Street and ‘E’ Street, and is comprised of native species,many from the Redwood and Oak Palettes of the Design Guideline Appendix B.

Revegetated Naturalized Hillside/slopes palette would be used on the gradedslopes adjacent to ‘D’ Drive, Fay Hill Road and the upper extent of grading nextto ‘E’ Street. It includes a mixture of small native plants, such as yarrow andlupine, and grasses.

The Riparian/Wetlands Mitigation palette is native riparian plants selected bythe biologist to meet mitigation requirements to restore the wetland areas.

The landscaping is generally designed in a staggered and natural pattern. The frontyards have small pockets of turf and a blend of groundcover, small plants, shrubs andtypically one or more trees. Along ‘E’ street the berm is loosely landscaped with lowtrees and shrubs. Entry features made of stone pilasters and split rail fences withclusters of small trees and shrubs are proposed for the intersections at Rheem Blvd, ‘D’Drive, and ‘E’ Street. Decorative paving in a brick herringbone pattern is proposed tocreate a more pronounced entry at these intersections. Graded slopes on the east sideof ‘D’ Drive , along Fay Hill Road and beyond the roadside planting on ‘E’ Street will bereseeded with small plants and grasses.

Trailhead and ParkingThe proposed informal parking area and trail head would be located at the crest of FayHill Drive, where it intersects with ‘E’ Street. In this location is would be screened fromRheem Boulevard by the slope of the hill. It would be surfaced with compacted gravel.The edge of the parking area would be formed with railroad ties that are partially buried2 inches into the soil and held down with rebar and the curb of Fay Hill Road. Theparking area would allow for four parking stalls that pull directly off of Fay Hill Road. Aninformation kiosk would be located on the east side of the parking area adjacent to thetrailhead. The kiosk is proposed to be 7 feet in height and 4 feet in width, constructed ofwood with a clear Plexiglas cover over the sign board.

IV. Community Discussion

C. Neighbor/Community Concerns:The public meeting notice was mailed to 198 property owners within a 750-footradius of the site and posted near the site on October 15, 2014. The PlanningDepartment received two emails regarding the project, included in Attachment E.

D. Commission/Committee Review:

Design Review Board Study SessionOn August 25, 2014 the Design Review Board held a study session on thearchitecture for the subdivision. Board members were generally supportive of thethree architectural styles and palettes presented. More specific comments included:


Mostly accepting of the flat roof elements used on the front elevations as adistinct characteristic of the subdivision.

Mixed opinion on the use of metal roof material and metal awnings. SomeBoard Members likes the more contemporary appearance of the metal roof andaccents, and others felt it did not match with the rest of the palette.

Suggested incorporating tile roofs for variation in color and texture from theshingle roofs.

Liked the carriage style garage doors. Appreciated the California room idea that transitions indoor/outdoor spaces Recommended adjusting the size, type, and location of lap siding or wood

panels used on elevations on sheets A2.3, A3.2, A4.3, A5.2 and A6.2 to visuallybalance the facades.

Sheet A3.1: the kitchen walls could be broken up with windows. Sheet A3.3: the gable above the garage could be better articulated. Sheet 6.2: the tall stone column appeared out of place and scale with the home. Sheet A6.5: The casita with a door out to the street appeared out of place. Concerns about optional landscaping and the resulting appearance of the

community and impact on Town’s enforcement efforts. More detail desired. Fence design along Rheem Boulevard could be modified dependent on visibility

and screening by landscaping.

In response to comments from the August 25, 2014 DRB study session the applicanthas made a number of revisions to the architecture. These changes include:

High windows were added to the kitchen (side elevations) of Plans 1 and 3. Wood paneling on Plan 2 Elevation B was replaced with lap siding. Front elevations were simplified on Plans 3 and 4, removing some elements

form the front facades and simplifying the siding materials on Plan 4 and 6. The design of the optional casita on Plan 6 was modified to move the entrance

to the side elevation. The depth of the stone tower element on Plan 6 was reduced.

Joint Planning Commission, Design Review Board and Parks and RecreationCommission MeetingOn October 21, the Design Review Board, Planning Commission and Park andRecreation Commission discussed the design of the trailhead and informal parking lot.While opinions varied on the quantity of parking that should be provided, there wasgeneral consensus that the height of the trailhead kiosk should be reduced and that analternative material to the railroad ties, which may contain creosote, should be used todefine the parking area. In addition board and commission members recommended theaddition of a trash receptacle and boulders as a landscape material. The Park andRecreation Commission members also expressed an interest in the future programmingof the sign.

Following the Joint PC, DRB and PRC meeting the applicant consulted with thelandscape architect regarding the Board and Commissions’ comments. The landscapearchitect advised that the landscape ties are not former railroad ties, and do not have



creosote treatment. Further, while open to alternative materials, railroad ties wererecommended as a tire stop because drivers have frequently struck boulders in parkinglots and damaged their vehicles. In regards to the kiosk, the applicant prepared analternative design that is 3 feet or less in height, and would display information on anangled table top. The alternative kiosk design and details on the parking lot andmaterials are included in Attachment F.

V. Issues and Analysis

A. Key Issues:1. Massing, Height and Floor Area: Each floor plan is designed with projections, wings

and variation in the footprint between levels that breaks up the appearance of mass ofthe home. The approved development standards require that the residences conformto the FAR guidelines in Appendix D, and sets a maximum FAR of .341 for lots over20,000 square feet. The floor areas of the proposed residences are all less than themaximum floor area allowed by at least 900 square feet. The proposed one storyhomes are mostly 18 feet in height, with the exception of the tower element on Plan 1Band 3A, which has a maximum height of 21 feet. The two-story homes are each amaximum of 28 feet in height. The height and area of the homes are thereforeconsistent with the planned development standards and guidelines SFR 1.4, SFR2.1and SFR2.7 and in scale with the lots and the design of the community.

During the consideration of Conceptual Development Plan, General Development Planand Vesting Tentative Map, the location and height of the residences was carefullyconsidered relative to the future buildings visibility and impact to the scenic corridor.The location and height of the homes on the upper development area were selectedso as not to be visible from the roadway, and along ‘D” Drive they were selected toallow views of the hillside and leave a buffer between the homes and the sceniccorridor. The layout of the floor plans conforms to the location and height restrictions ofGDP Condition of Approval 10, 11 and 13, which restrict Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 26 and 27on ‘D’ Drive to single story homes and allows two-story homes only on Lots 6, 10 and11 on ‘D’ Drive and Lots 7-9 and 14-23 in the upper development area. The GDP alsorequired facades and roofs to be colors that blend with the landscape during the dryseason and that for the rear elevations on the homes on ‘D’ Drive to be of high qualitydesign and oriented towards the outdoor space and the scenic corridor ( Conditions ofApproval 10 and 12). Each of the color palettes consist of neutral and natural colorsand the designs of the rear elevations of the homes are well articulated with windowsand doors oriented towards the yard. Further discussion of the design of thelandscaping along the scenic corridor is discussed further below.

2. Private Open Space: Each home includes a minimum of 6 feet level clearance onthree sides of and most would have a useable yard area that meets or exceeds therecommended dimensions of 25 feet by 40 feet (Design Guidelines SFR1.10 andSFR1.11.) Lots 5, 6, 21 and 22 have rear yards that are less than 25 feet in depth (20to 23 feet in depth) or of an irregular shape that could make the yard space lessusable. However in each case the residences have a total useable yard area greaterthan the suggested 1,000 square feet minimum. The subdivision includes substantial


open space with recreational trails that would be an amenity available to residents,suggesting that the slight deficiencies from the recommended standards areacceptable.

3. Architecture: The project architectural styles are variations on early to mid-centuryCalifornia residential designs, and the facades are generally similar and compatiblewith one another, while showing variety in appearance, color and materials. . Thearchitecture and materials create a harmonious neighborhood aesthetic consistentwith guidelines SFR2.1 through SFR 2.5. Each palette includes one type of stoneveneer, stucco and some type of wood siding, panels or shingles. The rooflines are alllow pitch brown or gray shingles that match with selected California architecturalstyles. A separate color and materials palette is proposed for each floor plan elevation,and the 14 different color schemes are used throughout the development withoutduplicating schemes on adjacent homes. The color and materials are consistentlyused on all elevations of each home.

Staff has some limited concerns with the architecture, both for Plan 6. In this Plan, theCalifornia Ranch and Bay Classic elevations incorporates a metal roofs on the porte-cochere that differ from the shingle used on the rest of the house. The CaliforniaRanch has a large flat roofed stone veneer element that extends above the roofline ofthe gable that may appear out of scale with the other elements of the facade. TheDesign Review Board considered similar comments during the study session, butthere was not consensus on whether changes were needed to the plans, with somepreferring the metal roof design, and others that felt it contrast to sharply. The projectarchitect stated that the metal roof material and vertical stone elements are trying toadd a more contemporary look to the subdivision.

4. Scenic Corridor: The majority of the existing native vegetation that borders RheemBoulevard would be retained, except for the creation of the seasonal wetlandmitigation area to the rear of the homes on ‘D’ Drive. The seasonal wetland wouldcreate a landscape buffer that separates the lots on ‘D’ Drive from Rheem Boulevardby 20 feet or more. This area would be planted with native riparian plants, shrubs andtrees in a natural informal pattern that would enhance the rural and rustic appearanceof the scenic corridor, consistent with guidelines SC3, SC 5 and SC8. No fences, lightpoles or structures would be located within the greenbelt area and parking is notproposed along Rheem Blvd., only a decomposed granite walking path, consistentwith guidelines SC14 and 16.

Fences on ‘D’ DriveGDP Condition of Approval number 27.c of Planning Commission Resolution 05-2014required the fences to the rear of lot a 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 26, and 27 to be wiremesh deer fences, or a design approved by the Design Review Board. These fenceswould be visible from the scenic corridor, and have the potential to create a wall effect.The proposed design would be a 6 foot tall ‘good’ neighbor’ fence that is mostly solid,with 1 foot of lattice along the top. For Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 26 and 27, there would be avariety of low growing trees and shrubs in the seasonal wetland mitigation area thatwould reduce the visibility from Rheem Blvd. However for lots 5, 6 and 10, adjacent to



the water quality detention basin, there would be less landscape screening, limited tothe plantings on the slopes as seen on Sheets L.1 and L1.a. The side yard fence onLot 1, next to the EVA, would be the most visible. At the same time, the layout of therear fence on these lots is not a straight line, which could help to reduce the walledeffect. To further break up the appearance of the fence, Condition of Approval 2 of theattached Action Memo requires the applicant to make a fence that is all lattice on Lots5, 6, and 10 or alternate by lot, the depth of the lattice on the top of the ‘good neighborfence from 2 to 3 feet on lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 26 and 27. This would still allow formore privacy in the rear yards, while avoiding a continuous 5 feet of solid fence thelength of ‘D’ Drive.

5. Landscaping: As noted, the proposed plant palettes use many native and droughttolerant species, some from Appendix B of the Design Guidelines, and minimize theuse of turf in the front yards, consistent with guidelines L2.1, L2.3 and L2.5. Theirrigation is designed using drip line and drip emitters with programmable timers towater only the desired plants in the formal landscaping, consistent with guidelinesL1.3, L2.2, and 2.3

GDP Condition of Approval number 9.c, d, e and f of Planning Commission ResolutionNo. 05-2014 requires that landscape be “broadleaf deciduous and conifer trees andshrubs planted so as to replicate the natural vegetation groupings on site” and includetree species “to screen the ‘D’ Drive residences, but not grow so tall as to block upperhillside and skyline views.” The conditions also require that “along ‘E’ Street and ‘C’and ‘B’ Court shall not include trees that will mature to a height that exceeds the heightof the homes” and that landscaping on the open hillsides should be avoided. Theintent of these landscape conditions is to maintain open hillsides and to keeplandscape on and around the streets and homes on the southern plateau low enoughin height so as not to protrude above the skyline.

The selected trees in the Front Yard palette would have a mature height of between 12and 25 feet, which would be lower than the maximum height of the two story homes(28 feet), and would not significantly surpass the highest of the single story homes (19feet) to an extent that would block views of the hillside or skyline. On ‘B’ and ‘C’ Courtsand ‘D’ Drive, the trees selected for the front yards of the single story homes are CoralBark Maple, Lilliputian Magnolia, Fruitless Olive and Western Redbud, which shouldmature to 12 to 20 feet in height, avoiding the tallest trees in the pallet.

The plantings along the roadways, adjacent to open space, are limited to areas thatneed to be re-vegetated due to grading and construction work. The RevegetatedNaturalized Hillside/slopes palette is used predominately along the edges of the roadsand landscape areas, and its low growing native grasses and plants would blend intothe vegetation for the open space areas. Along ‘E’ Street the trees and shrubs are laidout in a loose and natural pattern. The California Buckeye, Manzanita, WesternRedbud and Fruitless Olive are low growing, reaching a maximum height of 20 feet orless. With the natural variation in the elevation of the hill crest and mature height ofindividual trees and plants, there is a possibility of small amounts of vegetationsporadically extending above the berm along ‘E’ Street. However, the extent of the


visible vegetation would be minimal, especially viewed at a distance, and would notfollow an unnatural and regimented pattern. To be cautious of possible vegetationcresting the ridgeline, Condition of Approval 3 in the draft Action Memorandumrequires the Fruitless Olive trees, the only non-native tree in the EnhancedStreetscape palette and one of the potentially tallest, be removed from the palette, andon the western or upslope side of ‘E’ Street the Fruitless Olive trees be replaced withshrubs.

Custom Front Yard DesignThe applicant has requested that custom front yard landscaping be allowed, raising aconcern that homeowner installed landscaping might not provide a consistent qualityof designer or conform to the mitigation measures. To address this, Conditions ofApproval 4 of the attached Action Memo requires that the applicant provide forapproval a planting palette and standards for front yard landscape design that reflectsthe proposed front yard landscaping and all applicable mitigation measures andconditions of approval. These standards would be subject to Design Review Boardreview and approval, prior to approval of the Precise Development Plan, and would berequired to be incorporated into the CC&Rs

Trailhead and Parking AreaGDP Condition of Approval number 20 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 05-2014 requires that the trailhead and public parking on Fay Hill Road “shall be locatedand designed to minimize visual impacts to residents and from the public right-of-way”.The proposed trailhead design includes minimal infrastructure, a gravel parking lotlined with railroad ties and a simple wooden sign board kiosk with trail information.There are no fences, benches, garbage bins or other structures proposed that wouldcreate a visual impact. The surrounding landscaping will be native grasses and plantsthat will blend with the adjacent open space. To further minimize the visual impact ofthe trailhead facilities, Condition of Approval 5 requires that the informational kiosk beno more than 3 feet in height.

B. General and Area Plan Consistency:

General Plan Policy Analysis: With the approval of the Conceptual DevelopmentPlan and General Development Plan the project was determined to be consistentwith the 2002 General Plan policies; the GDP General Plan Matrix is included asAttachment D. Some of applicable policies include:

1. Policy H1.4–Design Excellence: Review the design of new housingdevelopments to ensure that they are compatible with the scale and character ofthe neighborhood in which they are located and the semi-rural character of theTown as a whole, consistent with policies in the Town’s Community DesignElement. Strive to ensure that affordable housing developments are welldesigned and professionally managed so that they provide a high quality livingenvironment and contribute to the overall quality of life in the Town.



Staff Analysis: The subdivision is designed to create a cohesive neighborhoodfeaturing fourteen different designs and color and material palettes that arecombinations of six floor plans and three different styles. The variation in floorplans materials and elevations in the subdivision will avoid a monotonous andrepetitive appearance.

2. Policy OS1.1–Open Space Preservation: Preserve open space to the maximumextent possible, using tools such as acquisition, lease, dedication, easements,donations, regulation or tax incentive programs.

3. Policy OS1.8–Open Space Access and Recreational Use: Where appropriate andconsistent with other General Plan goals and policies, areas with a MOSO OpenSpace or Non-MOSO Open Space designation on the General Plan Diagramshould be made available to the public for recreational use.

Staff Analysis: 90% of the property is preserved as open space accessible to thepublic and managed at no cost to the Town. Publicly accessible trails will belocated in the open space, which may connect to the Lafayette-Moraga RegionalTrail and Palos Colorados trails. A public parking area will be available onsite, offof Fay Hill Road, for use by the public to access the trails.

VI. Recommendation

Due to the project’s consistency with the Town of Moraga Design Guidelines, thedevelopment standards of the Planned Development District and General Plan, staffrecommends that the Design Review Board APPROVE the attached actionmemorandum approving the subdivision design pursuant to Section 8.72.040 subject tofindings and conditions of approval.

Attachments:

A. Draft Action MemorandumB. Project Plans, received October 23, 2014C. Design Guidelines Table, March 17, 2014D. General Plan Policy Matrix, March 17, 2014E. Communications

Email: Mathai-Jackson, September 29, 2014 Letter: Miller, October 22, 2014

F. Trailhead and Parking Lot Alternative

Staff Planner: Ella Samonsky, [email protected], (925) 888-7042

ATTACHMENT A

DRAFT ACTION MEMORANDUM

of 4 – Draft Action Memorandum for Rancho Laguna II Subdivision Architecture and Landscaping

Town of MoragaPLANNING DEPARTMENT

329 RHEEM BOULEVARD

MORAGA, CA 94556(925) 888-7040

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ACTION MEMORANDUM

On October 27, 2014, the Town of Moraga Design Review Board considered the applicationdescribed below:

Design Review for Landscaping and Single-Family Homes for the RanchoLaguna II Project, a 27-Unit Single-Family Residential Subdivision (RanchoLaguna LLC, Owner and SummerHill Homes, Applicant). The PlanningCommission approved a General Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Map. HillsideDevelopment Permit and Grading Permit for the 27-lot single family subdivision on April 21,2014.

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ACTION:

The DESIGN REVIEW BOARD hereby approves the design of the architecture andlandscape design of the Rancho Laguna II Subdivision, in accordance with the followingfindings and conditions of approval:

PART 1: CEQA FINDINGS:The project is subject to CEQA, and an Environmental Impact Report was prepared pursuantto the CEQA Guidelines, and Certified by the Town Council of the Town of Moraga onJanuary 26, 2011. An Addendum to the EIR was prepared pursuant to CEQA GuidelinesSection 15164(a) to address changes to the project proposed in the General DevelopmentPlan and Vesting Tentative Map applications and the Mitigation Monitoring and ReportingPlan revised accordingly

PART 2: GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDINGS:The Design Review Board hereby finds the proposed project is consistent the 2002 MoragaPlan, as detailed in Section 5.B and Attachment D of the October 27, 2104 Staff Report.

PART 3: DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS:The Design Review Board hereby makes the following findings for Design Review approval,in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution 16-01:

The structure conforms with good taste, good design and in general contributes to thecharacter and image of the town as a place of beauty, spaciousness, balance, taste,fitness, broad vistas, and high quality;


The project architecture follows three basic styles, ‘California Ranch’, ‘Craftsman’ and‘Bay Classic’, which are variations on early to mid-century California residentialdesigns, and the facades are generally similar and compatible with one another, whileshowing sufficient variety in appearance.

GDP requires that the residences conform to the FAR guidelines in Appendix D, andsets a maximum FAR of .341 for lots over 20,000 square feet. The residences areappropriately sized for the lots because the floor areas are all less than the maximumfloor area allowed by greater than 900 square feet.

The proposed homes will meet all of the approved standards for the PlannedDevelopment, which includes restricting Lots 1,2,3,4,5,26 and 27 to single-story homeand building height to 28 feet for two-story homes and 21 feet for single-story, whichwill protect views of the hillsides and ridgeline.

The landscaping will include native and drought tolerant trees, shrubs, grasses andgroundcover offering texture, color and visual interest, and an appropriate transitionbetween the streets and residences and the adjacent open space.

The structure will be protected against exterior and interior noise, vibrations and otherfactors which may tend to make the environment less desirable;

The project is comprised of single family homes, roads and trails that are notanticipated to generate loud noises or vibrations that will impair public heath safety orwelfare.

The project will require the formation or annexation into a Geologic Hazard AbatementDistrict (GHAD) that will maintain, monitor and manage the open space, trails, fireprotection and controls, erosion control and stormwater facilities for the site to ensurethat the community remains safe and viable.

The project will be constructed in conformance with the Uniform Building Code, FireCode, and other applicable requirements intended to ensure maintenance of publicsafety and welfare.

The exterior design and appearance of the structure is not of inferior quality as tocause the nature of the neighborhood to materially depreciate in appearance andvalue;

The project will include high quality homes that represent an investment in the projectsite and associated infrastructure, and public trails and open space access that willbenefit both the project and the surrounding neighborhood.

In total, 14 different color schemes are used throughout the development withoutduplicating schemes on adjacent homes. All the color schemes are based on earthtones and natural materials that are complimentary to the natural setting of the site.

Each palette includes a limited number of materials; one type of stone veneer, stuccoand some type of wood siding, panels or shingles. The color and materials areconsistently used on all elevations of each home.


The structure is in harmony with proposed developments on land in the general area. The project is consistent with the surrounding land uses. The project is single family

homes on lots of 10,000 square feet or greater, which is similar to the surrounded bysingle family residential neighborhoods to the south and west of the site. The majorityof the project site, 152 acres, will be open space similar to open space uses to thenorth and east of the site.

The project will provide a 20 foot wide landscape buffer between Rheem Boulevardand the rear of the lots on ‘D’ Drive, which is designed as a seasonal wetlandmitigation area with a natural appearance that will enhance the rural appearance of thescenic corridor. Furthermore there are no fences, structures, light poles or parkingareas proposed along the scenic corridor. The nearest structure would be the fenceson the rear of the lots on ‘D’ Drive which is conditioned to be constructed of lattice orhave an alternating pattern of lattice and solid wood to reduce its visual prominence.

The project will have a single connection to Rheem Boulevard, and an emergencyvehicle access, minimizing the points of vehicle access on the scenic corridor.

PART 4: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:The following conditions of approval apply to the design of Rancho Laguna II Subdivision asapproved by the DRB. All previously adopted Conditions of Approval pertaining to theRancho Laguna Subdivision continue to remain in effect.

1. The plans submitted for the proposed 27-unit Rancho Laguna Subdivision, and relatedgrading, building permit and other submittals required for project construction shall besubstantially in accordance with the plans date-stamped by the Town of Moraga onSeptember 16, 2014 and reviewed by the Design Review Board on October 27, 2014,and this Design Review Board Action Memorandum. Any significant changes to the plans,including substantial modifications to the grading, landscaping, site plan, or architecturaldesign, will require re-submittal to the Design Review Board for approval.

2. The applicant shall either install lattice fences on the rear of Lots 5 and 6 and along therear and southern side of Lot 10 or alternate the fences along the rear property lines ofLots 1,2,3,4,5,6,10,26 and 27 between good neighbor fences with 2 and 3 feet of lattice.The fences shall not be greater than 6 feet in height.

3. The applicant shall remove Fruitless Olive trees from the Enhanced Streetscape paletteand that on the western or upslope side of ‘E’ Street the replace the Fruitless Olive Treeswith shrubs.

4. The applicant shall the provide for approval a planting palette and standards for front yardlandscape design that reflects the proposed front yard landscaping and all applicablemitigation measures and conditions of approval. These standards shall be review andapproved by Design Review Board, prior to approval of the Precise Development Plan,and would be required to be incorporated into the CC&Rs.

5. The height of the trailhead kiosk on Fay Hill Road shall be 3 feet or less.


Applicant Responsible for Compliance with Conditions

6. The applicant shall ensure compliance with all of the conditions stated herein. Failure tocomply with any condition may result in construction being stopped, issuance of a citation,and/or modification or revocation of the approval.

Subject to all Town and Other Regulations

7. The approved construction is subject to, and shall comply with, all applicable TownOrdinances and laws and regulations of other governmental agencies, and with any andall Conditions of Approval required by the Planning Commission or Town Council inconjunction with other required project approvals including but not limited to approval ofthe Conceptual and General Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Map, HillsideDevelopment Permit and the Grading Permit, and Terms of the Development Agreement.

Questions regarding the action of the Board should be directed to the Planning Department at(925) 888-7040.

__________________________Ellen ClarkPlanning Director

ATTACHMENT B

PROJECT PLANS

ATTACHMENT C

DESIGN GUIDELINES TABLEMARCH 17, 2014

Attachment CPage 1 of 13

Design Guidelines Matrix

Analysis of Conformance With Town of Moraga Design GuidelinesMarch 17, 2014 Planning Commission Staff Report, Attachment j

Maintain the Town’s Semi-Rural Character (SRC)These guidelines are intended to help preserve the semi-rural features that make Moraga unique when considering applications fordevelopment. Therefore, these guidelines are applicable to all types of development.

Guideline Conformance Analysis

SRC1 Retain, protect, and utilize existing natural features, suchas trees and other vegetation, interesting ground forms, rocks,water, and significant views in the design.

The GDP/VTM would put approximately 90% of the property ina permanent conservations easement in which all naturalfeatures would be retained and protected. A Geologic HazardsAbatement District (GHAD) would be formed and would beresponsible for maintaining property within the conservationeasement. The GHAD would be responsible for implementingfinal the Geotechnical Plan of Control, Drainage Plan, OpenSpace Management Plan, Public Trail System Plan, FireProtection Plan, Wetland/Special-Status Species Plan, and theRheem Valley Revegetation Plan, all of which would bedesigned to retain, protect, and utilize natural features.

SRC2 The impact and presence of vehicles resulting from thedevelopment should be minimized through proper siting andscreening in order to buffer parking areas from locations bothinterior and exterior to the site.

The project site plan, including the grading plan, MitigationMeasures in the project EIR and Conditions of Approval,including required landscape plans, would screen the view ofautomobiles and other development features as the projectwould be viewed from off site.

SRC3 Circulation systems should avoid conflict betweenvehicular, bicycle and pedestrian traffic. Emergency and servicevehicle access shall be accommodated within the circulationsystem.

The project site plan provides pedestrian paths and sidewalksseparated from vehicle lanes. Streets within the proposedproject are designed to the Town’s and MOFD’s standards foremergency and service vehicle access.

SRC4 Accessory structures should not encroach upon frontyard and exterior side yard setbacks.

Proposed development standards regulate accessory structuresin front and side yard setbacks.

SRC5 Preserve natural site amenities.a. Development should be planned in relation to natural

features.b. Natural features must be protected both during and after

construction of the project.c. Retain trees and other native vegetation, consistent with

tree preservation ordinance, to maintain current stability ofsteep hillsides, retain moisture, prevent erosion, andenhance the natural scenic beauty. Grading under tree driplines should be avoided to protect the root system duringdevelopment.

d. Treat significant natural features, such as creeks, rock out-croppings, and prominent knolls, as assets.

The GDP/VTM would put approximately 90% of the property ina permanent conservations easement in which all naturalfeatures would be retained and protected. A GHAD would beformed and would be responsible for maintaining propertywithin the conservation easement. The GHAD would beresponsible for implementing final the Geotechnical Plan ofControl, Drainage Plan, Open Space Management Plan, PublicTrail System Plan, Fire Protection Plan, Wetland/Special-StatusSpecies Plan, and the Rheem Valley Revegetation Plan, all ofwhich would be designed to retain, protect, and utilize naturalfeatures. GDP/VTM Conditions of Approval set protectivemeasures for natural features, including the drip line of trees.Natural features, including Coyote Creek, tree clusters, andseasonal and intermittent wetlands along Rheem Boulevard areprotected by the project layout, which avoids these features tothe extent possible and treats them as design amenities. Wherethese features, including wetlands, are disturbed bydevelopment, Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Measuresrequire restoration.

SRC7 New trees should be planted to compliment the natural Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval require



pattern of tree placement and should be selected from one ofthe palettes in Appendix B.

preparation and implementation of landscape plans utilizingnative species including trees to be planted in natural patterns

SRC8 Mature native tree groupings should be protected. The project layout avoids native tree groupings.

Protect Ridgelines and Hillside Areas (RH)In addition to these Design Guidelines, development along ridgelines and in hillside areas is also regulated by the Moraga OpenSpace Ordinance and Guidelines (MOSO) and the Town’s Hillside Development Permit process.


RH1 Protect ridgelines from development. The portions of the north-south trending ridgeline of the sitethat are within MOSO Open Space would not be developed.Portions of this ridgeline that are not within MOSO Open Spacewould be developed. The development in these areas would bescreened from public view by locating development belowdaylight lines, building height controls, and requiredlandscaping. Permitting development ton this portion of theridgeline allows the project to retain and protect moreenvironmentally and visually sensitive areas of the property.

RH2 New development should be sited in areas that are leastsensitive in terms of environmental and visual resources,including areas of flat or gently sloping topography.

The project layout avoids and/or mitigates development inenvironmentally sensitive areas including wetlands at RheemBoulevard, Coyote Creek and Las Trampas Creek, woodlandgroves on the eastern areas of the property, and visuallyprominent western slopes of the property.

RH3 In hillside and ridgeline areas, building sites should besited so that visual impacts are minimized.

EIR Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval minimizethe visibility of the development by siting building pads androadway at elevations low enough so that adjacent topographyand project landscaping will screen the view of buildings asseen form off site.

RH4 The roofline of all hillside buildings should blend with orfollow the ridgeline’s natural contour.

EIR Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval minimizethe visibility of the development by siting building pads androadway at elevations low enough so that adjacent topographyand project landscaping will screen the view of buildings asseen form off site..

RH5 Hillside buildings and other improvements should have alow visual profile. Dense native landscaping should be providedto blend structures with the natural setting.

EIR Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval minimizethe visibility of the development by siting building pads androadway at elevations low enough so that adjacent topographyand project landscaping will screen the view of buildings asseen form off site. The plan proposes dense native landscaping.

RH6 Hillside grading shall blend with natural slopes and becontoured to achieve a natural appearance. The use ofretaining walls and other man-made grading features to mitigategeologic hazards should be avoided.

The grading plan specifies that finished slopes shall be contourgraded to blend with adjacent natural terrain. One retainingwall is proposed on ‘D’ Drive repair a landslide.

RH7 On hillside lots fire safe landscaping should be used.Landscaping should be distributed around structures to providescreening from off-site views. Adequate water supplies and fire-

GDP/VTM Conditions of Approval require fire safe landscaping.EIR Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval require thedeveloper to prepare and implement landscape plans to screen



fighting access shall be provided. off-site views. Visual simulations prepared for the EIR documentthat required landscaping will provide effective visual screening.

RH9 Larger lots should be created on steeper slopes. Densityshould be minimized in areas prone to seismic and othergeologic hazards.

The project proposes larger lot sizes. For example, the requiredminimum lot size is 15,000 square feet, and the average lot sizeis 21,256 square feet. Development will be clustered to avoidhazard prone areas.

RH10 Preserve both close-up and distant views of the naturalhillside and ridgeline landscape as seen from valley areas.

There are close-up and distant views of the project site fromRheem Valley. The project layout is designed so thatdevelopment on ‘D’ Drive is visible but screened by landscapingin the adjacent restored wetlands and on the building pads. Theclose-up view of the ‘D’ Drive area would be consistent with thesemi-rural character of the surrounding area and neighborhood.Building heights and landscaping on ‘D’ Drive would be subjectto height limits to protect the distant views of the hillside andridgeline as seen from Rheem Boulevard. All other close-up anddistant views of the hillside and ridgeline areas of the projectsite as seen from the Rheem Valley area would remainunchanged.

RH11 All new structures located in hazardous fire areas (suchas hillsides) should be constructed with fire resistant exteriormaterials consistent with applicable building codes andstandards.

GDP and VTM Conditions of Approval require that homes will beconstructed with fire resistant exterior materials consistent withapplicable building codes and standards.

Complement Existing LandscapingMoraga values abundant landscaping and high design standards.


L1. Fire Safe Landscaping

L1.1 On residential lots located adjacent to open space orheavily wooded areas, trees should be planted no closer than15 feet from the exterior wall of a residence.

GDP/VTM Conditions of Approval require that Landscapingaround homes shall be designed to minimize the interfacebetween grassland areas and residences (e.g., fire resistantvegetation).

L1.2 Consideration should be given to avoiding flammabletrees and shrubs where possible. Selection should be fromthose listed as fire resistant in Appendix B. Consult the MoragaFire Protection District for highly flammable plant species to beavoided such as certain pine, juniper, and eucalyptus species.

GDP/VTM Conditions of Approval require that Landscapingaround homes shall be designed to minimize the interfacebetween grassland areas and residences (e.g., fire resistantvegetation). Fire resistant landscape materials shall be required.

L1.6 The Town will weigh the merits of water conservinglandscapes in conjunction with fire safety and stormwatermanagement.

GDP/VTM Conditions of Approval require installation of waterefficient irrigation systems for residential units that includeefficient sprinkler heads or drip irrigation. Drought-tolerantlandscaping and installation of ultra-low flow toilets are alsorequired.

L2.2 New irrigation systems shall include automatic rain shut-off controller devices.

Conditions of Approval require the project to comply withAssembly Bill 325, Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance(Division 2, Title 23, California Code of Regulations, Chapter2.7, Sections 490 through 495).

L2.3 Irrigation runoff shall not be discharged into the stormdrain system. Therefore, over watering of the landscape shall

The project Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan provides forbiofiltration of runoff.



be avoided. Opportunities shall be provided for biofiltration thatroutes stormwater through landscaping and then to anappropriate drainage facility.

L2.4 Drought tolerant plant species are encouraged as theyuse less water and are often fire safe.

Conditions of Approval require the project to comply withAssembly Bill 325, Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance(Division 2, Title 23, California Code of Regulations, Chapter2.7, Sections 490 through 495

L3.11 Significant trees existing on the property should beprotected retained and integrated with the design whereappropriate.

The site plan for the GDP/VTM avoids woodland groves on theproperty and protects them with a conservation easement. TheMitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval require thatareas beneath tree drip lines shall be protected duringconstruction grading and that damaged trees shall be replaced.

L3.14 Water-conserving system design and materials and dripirrigation should be used wherever appropriate.

Conditions of Approval require the project to comply withAssembly Bill 325, Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance(Division 2, Title 23, California Code of Regulations, Chapter2.7, Sections 490 through 495

L3.16 Plants from the palettes in Appendix B should beselected. The Town of Moraga encourages planting of nativespecies over non-native species and encourages applicants torefer to the Native Plant Society website at www.nps.org tocheck that the plants that you select are not invasive species.

EIR Mitigation measures and GDP/VTM Conditions of Approvalrequire Revegetation Plans for areas of the project open spacethat may be disturbed by construction activities. These planswould require use of local native species and would prohibitnon-native invasives. Native plant species are required forlandscaping g in the developed areas of the project.

Enhance the Town’s Scenic Corridors (SC)The major scenic corridors designated in the General Plan include: Bollinger Canyon Road, Camino Pablo, Canyon Road, DonaldDrive (along the ridgeline of Mulholland Hill), Moraga Road, Moraga Way, Rheem Boulevard, and St. Mary's Road. The purpose ofthese guidelines is to provide further criteria for development that is visible from a major scenic corridor.


SC2 Wide and curved trails should be used along sceniccorridors instead of sidewalks wherever possible. Both trails andsidewalks should be separated from roadways with plantings.See Appendix C.

Grades adjacent to the east side of Rheem Boulevard generallyslope steeply downhill to the adjacent wetland areas.Accordingly, a narrow path is proposed to avoid wetland fillingthat would change the visual character of the scenic corridor.

SC3 A greenbelt should be established between the sceniccorridor major road and a parking area or building that islocated adjacent to the road. The greenbelt must belandscaped and appear to be natural (i.e. a high percentage ofthe ground area could be a mounded redwood bark or stonecovered area as long as plants provide a reasonable amount ofmassing to create a screening effect). All landscaped areas shallbe appropriately irrigated to maintain healthy plants whilepreventing runoff from over watering.

The project site plan would maintain the existing wetlands,which provide a greenbelt that is an essential part of the visualcharacter of the Rheem Boulevard scenic corridor. This wetlandseparates the ‘D’ Drive developed area from the RheemBoulevard, the scenic corridor major road.

SC4 Trees should be planted on medians and along sceniccorridors except where traffic views are blocked. Where treeplanting next to scenic corridors is otherwise not possible,planters for trees should be located in street parking zones. SeeAppendixes B and C. Native grass areas are acceptable alongthe scenic corridor where formal landscaping is inappropriate.

The existing native vegetation that borders the corridor will beretained. Where the native vegetation areas are disturbed, aswould happen in the seasonal wetlands due to rebuildingRheem Boulevard, the vegetation will be restored.

SC5 The greenbelt separating a single-family residence from ascenic corridor roadway should have a minimum depth of 20feet. This depth can be lessened if mitigated by shrubbery,trees and/or other acceptable elements or landscaping.

Homes on ‘D’ Drive would be separated from Rheem Boulevardby more than 20 feet.



SC6 Landscaped mounds or berms are encouraged between thescenic corridor roadway and large parking areas and may besteeper than 3:1 if appropriately landscaped and irrigated.

The project does not propose parking areas adjacent to RheemBoulevard.

SC8 Greenbelts should have a balance of high and low plants togive a natural look to the landscaped area. At no time will alandscaped area (other than grass) exceed 50 lineal feet alongthe scenic corridor road without a change in massing,character, and color.

The project frontage on Rheem Boulevard would beundeveloped and/or restored natural terrain consisting ofwetlands and open grasslands, consistent with the intent of thisguideline.

SC10 A property owner may be required to upgrade existingconditions when major work is accomplished on a parcel that iswithin 500 feet of the center line of a major scenic corridor.

The project would result in significant disturbance to wetlandsand other terrain that is currently in an undeveloped naturalcondition. EIR Mitigation Measures and GDP/VTM Conditions ofApproval require restoration of disturbed areas topredevelopment conditions.

SC11 In order to enhance the landscaping along designatedscenic corridors, new development within 500 feet of thesecorridors should include trees and shrubs from one of thepalettes in Appendix B. The Town of Moraga encouragesplanting of native species over non-native species andencourages applicants to refer to the Native Plant Societywebsite at www.nps.org to check that the plants that you selectare not invasive species.

Development on ’D’ Drive would be within 500 feet of RheemBoulevard. EIR Mitigation Measures and GDP/VTM Conditions ofApproval restoration of wetlands between the Boulevard and ‘D’Drive that would be disturbed during construction. Restorationwould be done with noninvasive native species.

SC12 Roadside landscaping should be selected from one of thepalettes in Appendix B and only lightly trimmed except wherestreet signs and other directional signs are blocked from view.

The Mitigation Measures and GDP/VTM Conditions of Approvallimit roadside landscaping to restoration of disturbed areas inorder to retain the natural terrain and native vegetation thatdefine this section of the Rheem Boulevard scenic corridor.

SC15 Storm water runoff swales should be used alongroadsides and medians of scenic corridors instead of curbing toslow storm water runoff and enhance the semi-rural look. SeeAppendix C.

The project plans propose runoff swales along RheemBoulevard.

SC16 Design shall be consistent with the Moraga MunicipalCode Section 8.132.

Items 1 through 12 below are the developmentguidelines for scenic corridors found in Municipal

Code Section 8.132

1. The design and location of each building and landscapingshall create a compatible visual relationship with surroundingdevelopment and with the natural terrain and vegetation. Roadwidths and road configurations should be considered as part ofthe design element.

GDP/VTM Conditions of Approval require that in order to ensurea project that is consistent with its surroundings and supportthe small town image, the Project Sponsor shall providecomplete landscaping and building design that includes thefollowing features:

a. Landscaping shall utilize existing oak trees and supplementthem with medium-sized broadleaf deciduous street trees andshading canopy trees. Tree species in the valley areas shall beselected to screen the ‘D’ Drive residences but not grow so tallas to block upper hillside and skyline views from RheemBoulevard;

b. Building height shall be restricted to a maximum of 35 feet tothe highest point of the roof for two-story homes and 18-21feet for single story homes; and

c. Color selection for facades and roofs shall be restricted tocolors that blend with the landscape during the dry season (i.e.,earth tones - tans and light browns).

2. Buildings and landscaping shall be so located that each does Buildings would be no closer to Rheem Boulevard than 85 feet,



not create a walled effect along the scenic corridor. Setbacksand building heights may be made more restrictive thanotherwise permitted by the applicable zoning regulations. Ingeneral, the greater the mass or bulk, the greater the setbackshould be. The positioning of buildings shall be varied in orderto create a complimentary relationship between mass and void.

thereby avoiding a wall effect. Landscape plantings alongRheem Boulevard would be limited to species that would notgrow high enough to block views of the hillside and ridgeline.Trees would be planted in natural cluster patterns to avoid awall effect.

3. Existing topography, vegetation and scenic features of thesite shall be retained and incorporated into the proposeddevelopment wherever possible. Manmade structures, as avisual element in the scenic corridor, should be secondary inimportance to natural growth.

The EIR Mitigation Measures, GDP/VTM Conditions of Approvaland the project site plan retain the topography and vegetationof the site as seen from the scenic corridor except thatdevelopment on ‘D’ Drive will be visible. Homes on ‘D’ Drive willbe setback at least 85 feet from Rheem Boulevard and will bescreened by native planting in the adjacent wetland swale andon the building pads. This will retain the semi-rural visualcharacter of this part of the scenic corridor. The remainder ofthe viewshed as seen from the corridor will be in its currentpredevelopment condition.

4. Each structure or feature reviewable under this chapter shallbe limited to scale and siting to reduce visual dominance orobstruction of existing landforms, vegetation, water bodies andadjoining structures.

Homes on ‘D’ Drive will be visible from the scenic corridor,however Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval limitbuilding and landscaping heights in this area to protect corridorviews.

5. Each structure shall be constructed, painted and maintainedand all planted material shall be planted and maintained tocomplement and enhance scenic views and the naturallandscape.

EIR Mitigation Measures and GDP/VTM Conditions of Approvalrequire landscape planting with broadleaf deciduous and conifertrees and shrubs planted so as to replicate the naturalvegetation groupings on site. Landscaping standards for the ‘D’Drive area visible from Rheem Boulevard require denseplantings in natural clusters to screen views. Landscapematerials and building heights on ‘D’ Drive are to be limited toallow views of the hillside and the ridgeline. Similarly, landscapematerials and building heights in the southeast developmentareas would be limited so that buildings and landscaping wouldnot be visible above the ridgeline as seen from RheemBoulevard. Paint colors will be limited to earth tones.

6. Unnatural and conflicting aesthetic elements shall beeliminated to the extent feasible consistent with safetyrequirements (for example, retain street lighting, but placewiring underground). Where it is not possible to locate such afeature out of view, it must be located in an area so as tominimize visibility from a scenic corridor or screened from viewby planting, fence wall or berm. Where the screen consists of afence, wall or berm, it may not be higher than six feet.Screening shall consist of primarily natural materials rather thansolid fencing. Preference shall be given vegetation inconjunction with a low earth berm.

The project site plan limits the size and number of unnaturalelements that would be visible from the corridor to theminimum street lighting necessary for safety, mainly at streetintersections, and to retaining walls. Retaining walls would be inearth tone colors and would be screened with landscaping.

7. Lighting shall be compatible in type, style and intensity to thesurrounding elements and not cause undue or aggravatingdisruption, glare or brightness.

EIR Mitigation Measures and GDP/VTM Conditions of Approvalrequire that common area landscape shall not be lighted andthat all exterior lighting on residential lots shall be reflecteddownward. If any monument signs are proposed, they shall benon-illuminated internally or externally. Conditions of Approvalstate that any safety lighting shall incorporate low voltagelighting and/or treatments designed to reduce the amount ofspill over into surrounding areas

8. Grading or earth-moving shall be planned and executed insuch manner that final contours appear consistent with anatural appearing terrain. Finished contours shall be plantedwith plant materials native to the area so that minimum care isrequired and the material is visually compatible with theexisting ground cover.

The project grading plan shows rounded contours that wouldblend with adjacent natural topography. Conditions of Approvalrequire planting graded slopes with noninvasive nativematerials.



9. The number of access points to and from the scenic corridorshall be minimized consistent with safety and circulation needs.

The project proposes a single connection to Rheem Boulevard.An emergency vehicle access will also be provided on RheemBoulevard but will be limited to emergency vehicles only.

10. Parking on the scenic corridor roadways should beminimized.

The project would not create parking on Rheem Boulevard.

11. Each specimen tree and each grove of trees may beapproved for removal only if the tree or grove of trees is unsafeor diseased or to provide the smallest cleared area necessary tolocate an approved road or structure on the site underguidelines of the tree preservation ordinance. Selective clearingof vegetation may be permitted upon review and approval bythe design review board.

EIR Mitigation Measures and GDP/VTM Conditions of Approvalrequire that existing tree groves shall be preserved. Sheet SE23of the project plans shows the location of all trees within thedevelopment envelope. Twelve trees would be removed as partof the project to repair Rheem Boulevard. These trees would bereplaced as a Condition of Approval.

SC17 Viewsheds, including but not limited to close up anddistant views, ridgelines, hillsides and mature native treegroupings should be protected along the Town’s sceniccorridors to retain the Town’s semi-rural character.

See the discussion of SRC1, SRC 5, SRC7, SRC8, RH1, RH2,RH3, RH4, RH5, RH6, SC16.2 and SC 16.3 above.

Minimize the Impacts of Developments (ID)To the extent possible, development should be concentrated in areas that are least sensitive in terms of environmental and visualresources, including: a) areas of flat or gently sloping topography outside of flood plain or natural drainage areas; b) the MoragaCenter and Rheem Park area; c) Infill parcels in areas of existing developments.


To the extent possible, development should be concentrated inareas that are least sensitive in terms of environmental andvisual resources, including: a) areas of flat or gently slopingtopography outside of flood plain or natural drainage areas; b)the Moraga Center and Rheem park area; c) Infill parcels inareas of existing developments.

The GDP/VTM would put approximately 90% of the property ina permanent conservation easement in which all naturalfeatures would be retained and protected. Natural features,including Coyote Creek, tree clusters, and seasonal andintermittent wetlands along Rheem Boulevard are protected bythe project layout, which avoids these features to the extentpossible and treats them as design amenities. Where thesefeatures, including wetlands, are disturbed by development,Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Measures requirerestoration.

ID1-7 APPLICABLE TO ALL DEVELOPMENT

ID1 Downhill or uphill portions of any project shall providelandscaped treatment to address potential erosion, to be inharmony with adjacent developments, and to provide acomplimenting view from distant horizons. Dense nativelandscaping should be used to blend hillside structures with thenatural setting.

EIR Mitigation Measures and GDP/VTM Conditions of Approvalrequire preparation of an Open Space Management Plan to beimplemented by the GHAD that will include erosion controls forpermanent open space areas of the property. Erosion controlsare required during construction, including a condition thatrequires replanting graded slopes immediately to avoid erosion.Mitigation Measures for visual impacts require landscapeplantings with native evergreen and deciduous trees to screenoff-site views and to blend developed areas with nearby naturalterrain and vegetation.

ID5 Geologic hazards shall be addressed:1. Construction should not take place in geologic hazard

areas identified as landslides, springs, or earthquake faultzones.

2. Risk of off-site geologic property damage should beminimized by locating development away from areas thatare vulnerable to slope failure.

3. Professional evaluation of soil conditions and potentialgeologic hazards should be completed for all new homes.

The project EIR determined that geologic hazards would bereduced to less than significant levels with Mitigation Measuresincluding the requirement to build all improvements to thelatest version of the California Building Code, measures tomitigate the effect of expansive soils and slides such as overexcavation of cuts and fills, moisture conditioning fills to overoptimum and presoaking slab areas. Conditions of Approvalrequire review of all plans and specifications for each homeincluding observation of foundation excavations, as well asobservation and testing of engineered fill, finish subgrade and



aggregate base

ID6 The level of lighting should not exceed the needs forsecurity and safety or detract from the aesthetics of thedevelopment.1. Outdoor lighting should be related to the design of the

structure.2. Outdoor light fixtures should be designed and mounted

so that the source of light has minimal impact off site.3. Outdoor lighting should be directed inward toward the

property and may require additional screening to avoidspillage onto adjacent residential properties.

EIR Mitigation Measures and GDP/VTM Conditions of Approvalrequire that common area landscaping shall not be lighted andthat all exterior lighting on residential lots shall be reflecteddownward. If any monument signs are proposed, they shall benon-illuminated internally or externally. Conditions of Approvalstate that any safety lighting shall incorporate low voltagelighting and/or treatments designed to reduce the amount ofspill over into surrounding areas

ID7 Design shall be consistent with the Moraga Municipal Codesection 13.04.090.

The applicant has prepared a Preliminary Stormwater ControlPlan, which has been peer reviewed and found acceptable. Afinal SWCP is required as a Condition of Approval.

ID10 GRADING

ID10.1 Grading for any purpose may be permitted only inaccordance with an approved development plan that is found tobe geologically safe and aesthetically pleasing.

The proposed grading plan is consistent with the approvedConceptual Development Plan. The grading plan has been peerreviewed and found to be safe. Visual impact analysis in theproject EIR determined that the effects of grading would beless than significant with Mitigation measures.

ID10.3 When the pre-development slope is greater than orequal to 20%, development shall be avoided, but may bepermitted if supported by site-specific analysis. When gradingland with a slope of 20% or more, soil displacement andretaining wall use shall be minimized by using contour gradingtechniques. In MOSO areas, development shall be prohibitedon slopes with an average gradient of 20% or greater. Designshall be consistent with Moraga Municipal Code Title 14.

Predevelopment slopes in the proposed development envelopeare greater than 20%. Site specific analysis in the project EIRand peer review support the grading and drainage plan. Thesteep terrain and the need to cluster development to reduceimpacts require retaining walls; however, the number andheight of walls would be minimized to the extent possible.There is no grading proposed in MOSO areas.

ID10.4 Land with a pre-development average slope of 25% orgreater within the development area shall not be graded exceptas authorized by the Town Council and only where it can beshown that a minimum amount of grading is proposed in thespirit of, and not incompatible with, the intention and purpose ofthe Moraga General Plan. No new residential structures may beplaced on after-graded average slopes of 25% or steeper withinthe development area except that this provision shall not applyto new residential structures on existing lots that were eitherlegally created after March 1, 1951 or specifically approved bythe Town Council after April 15, 2002.

There is no grading proposed in areas with average slopes of25% or greater.

ID10.5 Cut slopes should be placed behind buildings or otherstructures where they will be screened.

The grading plan proposes that all cut slopes will be placedbehind buildings or landscape screening.

ID10.6 Preserve the natural topography of the land, especiallyat the horizon: Round off graded slopes, in a manner that conforms to the

natural contours of the land and to the surrounding terrain.Sharp angles produced by earth moving, specifically at thetop and toe of graded slopes shall be avoided.

Slopes shall be contour graded to achieve a naturalappearance.

Slopes shall be blended with the contours of contiguousproperties and create a smooth transition.

Grading shall minimize scars due to cuts, fills, anddrainage benches on natural slopes.

Neither cuts nor fills shall result in slopes steeper than 3:1(horizontal to vertical), except where natural slopes are steeper.Where steeper slopes are unavoidable, special mitigation

The proposed grading plan would round and contour gradedslopes to blend smoothly with the natural terrain and avoidsharp angles. Most slopes would be finished to a 2:1 grade,which would be generally consistent with the natural slopes.The grading plan proposes measures to mitigate 2:1 slopes,and these measures have been peer reviewed and determinedto ensure public safety.



measures shall be incorporated into the design construction andmaintenance of the slopes.

ID11 RETAINING WALLS

ID11.1 Retaining walls (excluding foundation retaining walls)and other man-made grading features may only be used tomitigate geologic hazards when:1. Required to decrease the possibility of personal injury or

property damage2. designed to blend with the natural terrain and avoid an

artificial or structural appearance3. appropriately screened by landscaping4. designed to avoid creating a tunnel effect along roadways

and to ensure unrestricted views for vehicular andpedestrian safety

5. designed to ensure minimal public and/or privatemaintenance costs

A retaining wall is proposed on the east side of ‘D’ Drive as partof the mitigation for a landslide. The wall would be 4 feet tall orless with colors and materials that would blend with the naturalterrain. Due to its low height and location, it would not obstructviews. The wall would be engineered for low maintenance. TheGHAD would be responsible for maintaining this retaining wall.

ID11.2 Exterior retaining walls shall be limited to five feet inheight, unless it is visible from off site, in which case it shall beno higher than three feet. The total height of a retaining walland fencing on top of the wall shall not exceed eight feetwithout Design Review Board approval. A guardrail or handrail(provided a solid fence does not support it) may be located ontop of the retaining wall.

One retaining wall, on the north side of Fay Hill Road, would be6 feet high and would be visible from off site. This exception tothe Design Guidelines is warranted to facilitate the realignmentof Fay Hill Road, thereby creating safe sight distance at theintersection with ‘D’ Drive. The alternative solution of terracedretaining walls would have a greater visual impact. The visualimpact of the proposed wall would be mitigated by theproposed design consisting of a sculptured finish that would bestained to match nearby rock outcroppings

ID11.3 A retaining wall exceeding 3 feet requires professionalengineering, a building permit, and may require a gradingpermit. Design Review Board approval is required if theretaining wall is visible from off-site.

The 4 feet high retaining wall proposed at ‘D’ Drive and the 6foot high wall on Fay Hill Road are professionally engineeredand are part of a grading permit application.

ID11.5 Retaining walls should be built a minimum of three feetfrom a property line.

All of the proposed retaining walls are at least 3 feet fromproperty lines.

ID12 STORMWATER GUIDELINES

ID12.1 All residential buildings, in aggregate, may cover nomore than 33% of the lot area. Exceptions may be consideredfor cluster and multi-family residential projects. For projectdesigns that cluster the new structures on only a small portionof a large site, the percentage may be calculated using theentire site, rather than the lot size.

Based on the proposed lot sizes and development standards,buildings will cover less than 33% of lot area.

ID12.2 Regulations set forth by the San Francisco Bay RegionalWater Quality Control Board (RWQCB) shall apply to all new orredeveloped residential and commercial projects:1. If the project creates or replaces more than 10,000

square feet of impervious surface;2. Relative to the 10,000 square foot threshold, if 50% or

more of the existing impervious surface is replaced then100% of the site must comply with Provision C.3 of theTown’s Stormwater Permit; or

3. Relative to the 10,000 square foot threshold, if less than50% of the existing impervious surface is replaced, thenProvision C.3 of the Town’s Stormwater Permit onlyapplies to said portion.

Exemptions include: Single-family homes that are not part of alarger development and routine maintenance work such as

RWQCB standards apply to the project.



replacement or resurfacing of roofs and pavements. All newprojects must retain pre-project hydrology. All applicabledevelopments must comply with Provision C.3 of the Town’sStormwater Permit. These requirements are separate from—and in addition to—any requirements for erosion and sedimentcontrol and for pollution prevention measures duringconstruction (see also the Moraga Municipal Code section 13.04and Town Council Resolution 9-96).

ID12.3 For developments whose site constraints prohibit theuse of landscape infiltration, manufactured treatment systemscan be inserted into the conventional storm drain system. Adetailed Operation and Maintenance Plan must be submittedwith the design application (seewww.cccleanwater.org/construction for the C.3 StormwaterGuidebook). Options include:

a. Catch basin or inlet insertsb. Separators (oil-grit or oil-water)c. Media filters (sand, gravel, peat, compost, activated

carbon, fabric, or resin)d. Various filtration treatment devices

The project proposes bioremediation in detention basins tomeet storm water pollution control requirements.

ID12.4 Drainage should follow natural flow patterns and,where appropriate, plans should develop wide area flowpatterns, rather than concentrating flow at one point.

The proposed grading and drainage plan retains natural flowpatterns on 90% of the property and would establish wide areaflow patterns in the developed areas of the project site.

ID12.5 In new development only BMP-treated stormwater shallbe discharged into the Town’s storm drain system.

The project drainage system is designed to ensure that allstormwater would be treated with BMP systems prior todischarge. The principle treatment method would bebioremediation using detention/remediation basins.

ID13 NEW DEVELOPMENTS AND SUBDIVISIONS

ID13.1 Subdivision layout should retain natural topographicfeatures and maintain the Town’s semi-rural character.

The project site plan retains natural topographic features asseen from Rheem Boulevard. Although the natural slope in the‘D’ Drive area will be altered to repair the landslide underlyingRheem Boulevard and to create residential building pads, thisportion of the project will be screened with landscapingconsisting of native plants to blend with the adjacent wetlands,which will be restored as part of the road repair project.Topography in the southeast development area will be alteredwith cuts and fills to accommodate building pads and detentionbasins. Analysis in the project EIR determined that withMitigation Measures, including landscape screening with nativetree species, the visual impact of development in this areawould be mitigated.

ID13.3 New road construction should adapt to topography andnatural features.

The principal roads, ‘D’ Drive and ‘E’ Street, are parallel to thenatural contours and would not damage tree, rock outcroppingsor other natural features

ID13.4 The impact of increased impervious surface of newroads should be mitigated by paving only the minimum width(20 feet), as required by the local Fire Department for roadsthat will not accommodate on-street parking. For streets withparking available on both sides the width shall be 36 feet.

The VTM specifies that ‘B’ Court, which would not have on-street parking, would be 20 feet wide. The project does notpropose any streets with parking on both sides.

ID13.5 Stormwater should be treated before it enters thestorm drain system.

The project drainage system is designed to ensure that allstormwater would be treated with BMP systems prior todischarge. The principle treatment method would bebioremediation using detention basins.

ID13.6 When appropriate, shared driveways should be used forneighboring clusters of houses and pervious parking areas shall

The large lot size required to mitigate development on thissteep property, the need to orient roadways to contour lines in



be used. order to minimize grading, and the steepness of thetopography, require a linear development pattern to minimizegrading. This pattern limits opportunities for shared driveways.

ID13.7 Sidewalks, crosswalks, and landscaped multi-use trailsshall be incorporated into new developments to encouragealternatives to automobile use. Connections shall be made toadjacent neighborhoods and, where feasible, commercial areas.

The GDP/VTM proposes a pedestrian circulation system ofcrosswalks, sidewalks and trails to connect the developed areasof the property to the Lafayette/Moraga Trail, the proposedPalos Colorados Trail, and the Rheem Valley commercial area.

ID13.8 Utility lines for new subdivisions shall be installedunderground to maintain natural vistas.

The GDP/CVTM proposes underground utility lines.

ID13.9 Whenever possible, roads and driveways should beconstructed parallel to existing topographic contours, and, ifnecessary, split in order to reduce the area of cut on hillsides orto preserve trees or other significant features.

With the exception of the existing Fay Hill Road, proposedroadways would be parallel to natural contours.

ID13.10 Street lighting in hillside and ridgeline areas should beunobtrusive and designed to reflect the natural surroundings.

Street lighting will be shielded and reflect downward tominimize visual impacts.

ID13.11 Hillside lots should be larger than lots on naturallylevel terrain.

The proposed average lot size is 21,256 square feet, which islarger than typical lots in Moraga on naturally level terrain.

ID13.13 Residences in new subdivisions should meet Build ItGreen or equivalent requirements for new residences. The Buildit Green requirements are attached herein as Appendix A

GDP/VTM Conditions of Approval require that homes must havea minimum score of 70 points pursuant to the Town’s Build ItGreen program.

Thoughtfully Design Single-Family Neighborhoods (SFR)Residential development shall preserve the Town’s existing scale, character, and quality, and provide an inviting pedestrianenvironment that promotes walking and biking between neighborhoods.


SFR1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SITE PLANNINGThe following guidelines pertain to all single-family residential projects (new homes or additions):

SFR1.4 On padded lots, total building heights greater than 28feet for two-story homes and 19 feet for single-story homesshall require special siting or design treatment to mitigateheight.

Project EIR Mitigation Measures and GDP/VTM Conditions ofApproval would allow building heights up to 35 feet in thesoutheast development area. The grading plan for thesoutheast area would put pad elevations at a level low enoughto assure that homes would not be visible from RheemBoulevard. Conditions of Approval would require that colorselection for facades and roofs should be restricted to colorsthat would blend with the landscape during the dry season (i.e.,tans and light browns). Landscaping for the southern plateaudevelopment area and access street will be comprised of nativeevergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs, including oak trees,for a native woodland appearance. Conditions of Approvalrequire landscaping to be in natural vegetation groupings,designed to screen the houses and streets from public view sothat landscape would blend with the new trees in theforeground below and the existing trees in the ridgelinebackground.

Seven of the 10 homes on ‘D’ Drive would be limited to onestory (18-21 feet). Conditions of Approval would limit landscapespecies in this area to plants that will be tall enough to screenviews of homes from Rheem Boulevard, but not so tall as toblock hillside and skyline views.

SFR1.6 Development of residential lots should take advantage Lots 7 through 18 on the east side of ‘E’ Street and ‘C’ Court



of natural features and unique topography of the site throughsplit level pads or natural contour grading.

preserve existing contours outside of the proposed buildingpads. Lots on ‘D’ Drive would be contoured between thebuilding pads and Rheem Boulevard to replicate the naturalcontours of the seasonal wetland swale. However, flat buildingpads are proposed for all of the residential lots, which isinconsistent with design guideline SFR1.6. The grading planthat was approved as part of the Conceptual Development Plandepicted flat building pads on all residential lots.

SFR1.10 On padded lots there should be a minimum of 10’near level clearance area from any top or toe of a slope to anystructure for access. On padded lots there should be a minimumof 6’ near level clearance area on any 3 sides of any building orstructure.

Lot and building pad sizes are adequate to allow compliancewith this guideline.

SFR1.11 There should be a near level area of at least 25' x 40',other than the front yard, for usable yard area.

Lot and building pad sizes are adequate to allow compliancewith this guideline

SFR2.1 A harmonious relationship with the surroundingneighborhood should be created through the use of compatibledesign schemes and scale. See Appendix D for the single-familyresidential floor area ratio (FAR) guidelines.

The Design Review Board will review project architecture at thePrecise Development Plan stage of project approval to assurecompliance with this standard.

SFR2.2 The color schemes of homes on adjacent lots should becompatible and not duplicate one another.

See the analysis for SFR2.1 above.

SFR2.3 Exterior building design on all elevations should becoordinated with regard to color, texture, materials, finishesand architectural form and detailing to achieve design harmonyand continuity.


SFR2.4 The number of different materials on the exterior faceof the building should be limited. Generally, a variety ofmasonry materials should be avoided. All chimneys on the samehome should be similar in architectural style and materials.


SFR2.5 Roof shape, color, and texture should harmonize withthe color and architectural treatment of exterior walls.


SFR2.6 The side yard setback shall be no less than theminimum permitted by the Zoning Ordinance and shall beincreased by one additional foot for each foot of end wall heightgreater than 20 feet. End wall height is the maximum verticalheight from finished grade to outer roof surface at the sideyard. Chimneys, dormers, and other architectural elements areexcepted from this limitation. The skirt wall is counted as partof the height measurement.

In any individual case, the Planning Commission or the DesignReview Board may require a larger side yard, provided they canmake appropriate findings relating to the following types ofconditions:a. Major ridgeline (as defined by the General Plan);b. Scenic corridor;c. General Plan land use or zoning designation;d. Proposed use of structure, in relation to surrounding

uses;e. Visibility of structure(s) from off site, due to placement

(or absence) of permanent screening;f. Elevation of the lot, compared with the elevation(s) of

abutting street(s) and/or other properties;g. Infill lot or a lot adjacent to an established subdivision;h. Slope or grade of lot, in relation to abutting streets.

The GDP/VTM is proposed for approval under the PlannedDevelopment district regulations (MMC Section 8.48) that allowthe Planning Commission to approve development standardsthat are specific to the project site. For this reason theproposed setbacks are not required to be consistent with thesetbacks of any of the non-PD districts.



SFR2.7 Although the maximum height for any structure is setby the Zoning Ordinance at thirty-five feet, a lower height maybe required, based on the special circumstances of an individuallot.

The Design Review Board will review project architecture at thePrecise Development Plan stage of project approval to assurecompliance with this standard.

ATTACHMENT D

GENERAL PLAN POLICYMATRIX, MARCH 17, 2014

Attachment #General Plan Policy Matrix

1

General Plan Policy MatrixRancho Laguna II

Analysis of Conformance With Town of Moraga 2002 General PlanMarch 17, 2014 Planning Commission Staff Report, Attachment I

General Plan Goal or PolicyApplicable to Project

Conformance to General Plan Goal or Policy

Chapter 3 Land Use Land Use

Residential LU1 Goal Project is a “high quality residential environment” as 90% of site preserved as permanent openspace, including all MOSO land, minor ridgeline, oak woodland, Coyote Creek, and intermittentdrainage. The new homes and landscape will be designed to blend with the environment.

LU1.1 Neighborhood Preservation Project as designed, conditioned and mitigated has no adverse impacts on existing residentialneighborhoods. All environmental impacts are less than significant. Project density is less thannearby neighborhoods. Lot sizes are comparable (some larger, some smaller) and more of thenew neighborhood is preserved as open space than nearby existing neighborhoods. Private view ofnew homes and streets, in and of itself, is not inconsistent with General Plan policies. SomeBirchwood residences are at a higher elevation than the new southern plateau development. InGeneral Plan context, their private views will not be adversely impacted by a view of some of theProject’s new homes and streets in combination its new landscape and preserved open space.

LU1.2 Residential Densities Project is within the residential density range for open space lands (one unit per 5 to 20 acres).Per policy, density is to be determined in the application process and based on environmentaland site constraints, among other factors. Density of one unit per 6.7 acres is appropriate forProject as designed and mitigated.

LU1.3 Residential Building Height Residential building heights of 10 homes in upper Rheem valley will not negatively impact thehillside views for travelers on Rheem Boulevard. Building heights on southern plateau alsotake into account visibility from public views (single story on flat pads of lots along ‘B’ Court and ‘C’Court), which will also benefit private views. None of the new homes will block views of existingresidences so the focus is on the limited public views of the development clusters.

LU1.4 Housing Types Project is limited to conventional detached single-family homes, which is appropriate on openspace lands.


2



LU1.5 Development Densities Openspace Lands

Policy wording comes from MOSO initiative and addresses densities on MOSO open space.Project does not include lots on MOSO portion of property. Project density conforms to LU1.2density standards.

LU1.6 Minimum Lot Sizes andPercentage Mix for SingleFamily Developments

Project includes trails with guaranteed permanent public access. Lots exceed the 15,000sq.ft. minimum size for a project with such recreational facilities. Density on MOSO portion ofproperty is not altered by the implementation of this policy.

a. Additional lots for TDRsand density bonuses.

No TDR or density bonus is being requested.

b. Variation in the mix of lotsizes

Project includes variation in lot sizes (18,472 sqft to 43,496 sq.ft.). Lot size variation does notrequire Town Council approval.

c. Clustering on smaller lot sizes Policy not applicable to open space lands, but clustering concept is implemented in Project withoutthe need to reduce lot sizes below the 15,000 sq.ft. minimum.

d. Lot size and slope Project lot sizes need not be increased any further to mitigate negative visual impacts and/orgeologic hazards. Clustering the lots in two locations and mitigation measures reduce those impactsto less than significant.

e. Lot sizes in Open Spaceareas

See summary above for Policy LU1.6 regarding 15,000 sq.ft. minimum lot size for Project.

LU1.8 Slope Restrictions Project does not require or include development on MOSO portion of property, other than dirttrails and potentially a sewer line off ‘C’ Court. Development on the Non-MOSO portion of theproject site over 800 feet in elevation is on average slopes that do not exceed 20%. On the non-MOSO portion all grading is supported by site-specific analysis that confirms geological risk ismitigated to an insignificant level. Average slopes on all building pads (after-graded slope) areless than 25%. The average slope over the entire graded area is less than 25%. Grading inthose locations is the minimum required in order to create development clusters in a manner thatis “in the spirit of, and not incompatible with, the intention and purpose of all other policies of theGeneral Plan.” For example, the extent of grading on the southern plateau has varied yetcompatible purposes: create mostly flat building pads, provide for adequate road sections,reduce pad and street elevations and construct a berm to limit visibility of the homes, andgenerate cut material to create the valley buttress required to stabilize Rheem Boulevard.


3



Grading in the Rheem valley is the minimum necessary to create the valley buttress and flat padson wide lots for 10 homes. The Project as designed and graded conforms to General Planpolicies and as mitigated has no significant environmental impacts. The significance standardsused in the EIR are informed by the applicable General Plan policies.

LU1.9 Cluster Housing toProtect Open Space

Housing is clustered in two locations, the southern plateau and upper Rheem valley, on less than10% of the property’s 178.89 acres. This results in permanent preservation and protection of161.65 open space acres. The development clusters, as located, designed and mitigated, arenot visually prominent as seen from Rheem Boulevard, a scenic corridor road, or from anyother public view. The prominent view of the property from Rheem Boulevard is its valleys,hillside and ridgeline as a whole. For travelers on Rheem Boulevard, the prominent view ofthe Project as designed and mitigated will be the same. The 10 homes on ‘D’ Drive will bescreened by trees and separated from Rheem Boulevard by the open wetland swale. Thesouthern plateau homes and streets will be screened by the berm on its westerly side incombination with native trees and shrubs planted on portions of the hillside in natural clusters.The intermittent drainage in the lower Rheem valley will be preserved in its current condition tomaintain open views for Rheem Boulevard travelers. Predominant views from the east will beof the minor ridgeline on the MOSO portion of the property, the Non-MOSO ridge adjacent to it,and the ridgelines to the north of the property.

LU1.10 Planned District Zoning The non-MOSO portion of the property is zoned Planned District. MOSO open space is not zonedPlanned District. The application to develop the property is being processed in a mannerconsistent with Chapter 8.48 of the Moraga Municipal Code and thus requires approval of aconceptual development plan

Chapter 4 Community Design

Natural Setting CD1 Goal Project as designed and mitigated protects and preserves the natural scenic qualities of theproperty. 90% is protected and managed as permanent open space. Coyote Creek, oakwoodlands and the minor ridgeline are preserved. The recreated wetland swale in the uppervalley and the preserved intermittent drainage in the lower valley will be natural in appearance andenhanced scenic quality, as will the new native landscape clusters on the hillsides. Open viewsof the valley, hillsides and ridgeline will be maintained.

CD1.1 Location of NewDevelopment

Development on the property has been located in areas that are the least sensitive in terms ofenvironmental and visual resources, to the extent possible. The upper valley cluster is located in


4



a small, degraded area of previously placed fill. Visibility of the southern plateau from publicviews is limited. It does not include oak woodland or other significant environmental resources.The stabilization and repair of Rheem Boulevard in the upper valley as part of the development isnot possible without the valley buttress, but the environmental and visual quality of the recreatedwetland swale will be enhanced.

CD1.2 Site Planning, BuildingDesign and Landscaping

Limiting the two development clusters to the upper Rheem valley and southern plateau retainsnatural topographic features and visual qualities of the property. The recreated wetland swale on theupper valley buttress will be natural and enhanced in function and appearance. New landscape willblend new structures and streets with the environment.

CD1.3 View Protection Project as designed and mitigated maintains the Town’s semi-rural character and protectsimportant elements of its natural setting, with 90% protected and maintained as permanent openspace, including the important elements of Coyote Creek, minor ridgeline, oak woodlands, and openvalleys. Open valley, hillside and skyline views from Rheem Boulevard, a scenic road, aremaintained. Views from St. Mary’s Road, in particular in the section across from the Lafayette-Moraga Regional Trail adjoining the parking lot, are protected by changes in the project design inthe upper development area. The recreated wetland swale in the upper valley and preservedintermittent drainage will be of natural and enhanced visual quality. The predominant higherelevation view of the property from Moraga and Lafayette is the protected minor ridgeline and itsupper hillside and the Non-MOSO ridge, in some instances in combination with the ridgelines to thenorth. Visual quality impacts of the Project from public views in Moraga and Lafayette have beenmitigated to less than significant. View protection with respect to the upper valley is being providedwithout the need for landscape screening there.

CD1.4 Canyon and Valley Areas The scenic and environmental qualities of the two valley areas on the property are protected. Projectmitigation measures and conditions of approval require substantial preservation and enhancementof the intermittent drainage and its topography in the lower valley. Coyote Creek is included in thepermanent open space, as well as the recreated wetland swale in the upper valley and thepreserved intermittent drainage in the lower Rheem valley. The scenic qualities and views of CoyoteCreek and the oak woodland on the adjacent hillsides, now mostly unavailable to the public, will beseen from the Project’s public trails. Along Rheem Boulevard, significant linear open space will bepreserved following construction of the upper valley buttress, and including the preservedintermittent drainage, wetland swale, natural grasses and low riparian vegetation as a visual focus.Native trees and shrubs will be placed and species planted to maintain open views of the valley andminor ridgeline, as well as a natural hillside landscape comprised of native trees and opengrassland. As such, the upper valley buttress will not adversely affect the scenic and environmental


5



qualities of the Rheem valley area. The residential development in the upper Rheem valley at thebottom of the hillside, limited to 10 homes on wide lots, is semi-rural in character. The location of ‘D’Drive and the 10 homes, separated and screened from Rheem Boulevard, will not adversely affectthe environmental and scenic qualities and public views of the valley or the hillside and ridgelinebehind them

CD1.5 Ridgelines and Hillside Areas The General Plan defines ridgelines as the identified major and minor ridgelines under MOSO.The Non-MOSO southern plateau development area is not part of the property’s minor ridgelinebecause its elevation is less than 800 feet or, where it is above that elevation, the averageslope on the development area does not exceed 20%. That development area is limited toapproximately 17 acres, preserves significant oak woodland and grasslands, and minimizes visualimpacts. Homes on the southern plateau will be low profile and designed to blend with theenvironment. Native trees and shrubs will be placed and species selected to blend hillsideimprovements with the environmental setting

CD1.6 Vegetation New project landscape in open space is comprised of native trees, shrubs and grasses suitablefor the particular locations, hillside or riparian. The identified native species in the open spaceand along streets are drought tolerant and fire resistant. The same will be required for landscapeon individual lots during the design review process for those homes

CD1.8 Utility Lines New electrical and other utility lines in the Project will be underground in the private streets.The new electrical utility lines will connect to existing overhead lines located on the non-project sideof Rheem Boulevard

Public Places CD2 Goal Project includes pedestrian connections to existing and future pedestrian trails and to MoragaRoad and St. Mary’s Road. Stabilization, repair and improvement of Rheem Boulevard along theproject frontage in both the upper and lower valley will protect and maintain vehicular connectionsbetween St. Mary’s Road and Moraga Road area, including St. Mary’s College and commercialareas in Rheem

CD2.1 Public Places as Focal Points Project includes an integrated pedestrian path system throughout the site, which can in thefuture link to the Lafayette-Moraga Regional Trail and the future Palos Colorados trails. Includedis a public path on the project side of Rheem Boulevard which connects to the existing sidewalkextending to Moraga Road.

CD3.1 Designation of Scenic Rheem Boulevard and St. Mary's Road are designated scenic corridors consistent with this policy


6



Corridors and the Project has been designed and mitigated with that in mind.

CD3.2 Visual Character Improvements to the visual character of the Rheem Boulevard scenic corridor include theelimination of uneven pavement and evidence of earth movement and an improved road sectionwith a pedestrian path on the project side. The scope of improvements in the upper valley isconsistent with the semi-rural character of this location along Rheem Boulevard. A wetland swalewill be recreated on the upper valley buttress (a visual improvement over the existing visuallydegraded conditions), which will transition to the intermittent drainage in the lower valley. Nativetrees and shrubs will also improve the visual character of the scenic corridor and will beplanted in locations that will not obstruct open views of the valleys, hillsides and skyline. TheGHAD’s long-term management of the open space will preserve the visual character of thescenic corridor. The westerly edge of ‘D’ Drive in the upper valley is set back from RheemBoulevard 120-140 feet and will be screened by trees and shrubs in the open space and in aneasement in front of the homes, so that the 10 homes as designed will not adversely affect thevisual character of the scenic corridor. Lighting and signage is not included because it would notimprove the visual character of the scenic corridor

CD3.5 Landscaping and Amenities See summary above for preceding policy which also applies to this policy

CD3.6 Development Standards andDesign Guidelines

Town has not adopted specific implementing programs for scenic corridors. Project design withrespect to scenic corridors has been developed through the application and environmental reviewprocess, which focuses on visual quality.

CD3.7 Underground Utilities inScenic Corridors

New electrical and other utility lines in the Project will be underground in the private streets,including ‘D’ Drive visible from Rheem Boulevard. The on site electrical utility lines will connectto existing overhead lines located on the non-project side of Rheem Boulevard.

Single Family Neighborhoods CD4Goal

To the extent the Project is considered part of the existing neighborhood on Rheem Boulevardabove St. Mary’s Road, as designed and mitigated the Project preserves the existing scale,character and quality of the neighborhood. 90% of the property is permanently preserved ashigh quality open space, managed and protected by the GHAD. The density is much lowerthan present in the existing neighborhood. Homes are clustered on large lots and will bedesigned to blend with the environment. The pedestrian trails and sidewalks will promotewalking and biking between neighborhoods. See summaries in neighborhood policies belowfor further discussion applicable to this policy


7



CD4.1 Property DevelopmentStandards

PD and non-MOSO development standards applied to this Project are more restrictive thanexisting neighborhood, and are enforced through planned development, environmental review anddesign review processes, including mitigation measures and conditions of approval

CD4.2 Neighborhood Character andImprovements

Project as designed and mitigated strengthens and enhances neighborhood character. RheemBoulevard is stabilized, repaired and improved along the entire project frontage. Significant openspace is preserved and managed. Pedestrian trails and sidewalks for neighborhood public useare provided. Homes on large lots will be designed to blend with the environment. The twodevelopment clusters are located where they will not adversely affect the existing neighborhood

CD4.4 New ResidentialDevelopments

Project as designed respects the site topography and natural features. Coyote Creek, oakwoodlands and minor ridgeline. A recreated wetland swale in the upper valley with new landscapewill be an enhanced natural feature and will connect to the preserved intermittent drainagechannel in the lower valley. Lot sizes and shapes on the southern plateau are not standard andinstead reflect the topography. Public trails will link nearby neighborhoods in Palos Colorados andalong the Lafayette-Rheem Regional Trail. The pedestrian path on Rheem Boulevard also helpsprovide linkage to the Rheem Boulevard and Moraga Road neighborhoods

Chapter 5 Housing

Housing & Neighborhood Quality H1Goal

Project as designed and mitigated is a “high-quality, safe and livable” residentialneighborhood, in and of itself and as part of the larger neighborhood

H1.3 Design for safety Project has two development clusters, so homes will not be isolated and less likely to be subject tounnoticed criminal activity. GHAD will be responsible to minimize vandalism or other criminalactivity in the open space through its management

H1.4 Design Excellence Project as designed and mitigated is compatible with the scale and character of nearbyneighborhoods and the semi-rural character of the Town as a whole, as more fully discussedunder other policies. Houses will be designed to blend with the environment per Condition III.8.

H2 Housing Mix and AffordabilityGoal

Custom and semi-custom homes on large lots are the appropriate variety of housing for non-MOSO open space on this property. The extent and type of housing on this property musttake into account the objective to preserve a significant amount of open space, limit housing tolow density and maintain a semi-rural character. In that context, the Project will assist the Town inmeeting its housing needs to the extent possible.


8



H2.1 Housing Variety See the summary above for Goal H2, which applies to this policy.

H2.9 Secondary Living Units A future lot owner has the opportunity to submit a secondary living unit application. Thesecondary living unit in combination with the primary unit must meet the design criteria inCondition III.8 (e.g., blend with the environment) and meet the standards in this policy.

Chapter 6 Circulation

Traffic Circulation and Safety C1Goal

Project as mitigated and conditioned improves reasonable and safe access to the Town on RheemBoulevard, through its stabilization, repair and improvement along the project frontage. The turnpocket for ‘D Drive provides a safe Project ingress and egress. Internal project movementmeets Town private road standards and the requirements of the Fire Marshall.

C1.1 Roadway Engineering &Maintenance

Applying standard engineering principles, the roadways within the Project and the RheemBoulevard frontage are designed to be safe for all users (except equestrians; this circulationlocation is not appropriate for horses). Roads will be geologically stable, consistent with themitigation recommended by the Applicant’s geotechnical engineers, ENGEO, and supported by theTown’s geotechnical consultant and EIR geotechnical sub-consultant. Private street widths havebeen narrowed to the extent allowed by the Town Engineer and Fire Marshall and still achievepublic safety. Sidewalks and public trails are included in the Project. The private roads in theProject will be maintained by the HOA and open to public use.

C1.2 Traffic Impact Costs Traffic impact fees will be paid by Applicant.

C1.6 Street Maintenance A homeowners association (HOA) is required for the Project. The HOA will be required to conductprivate street maintenance at a minimum Pavement Condition Index of 70 per Condition 88. TheGHAD will be responsible for geological stability of the private streets.

C1.8 Priority RoadwayImprovements

Stabilization, repair and improvement of Rheem Boulevard is a priority Town capital improvement.This safety related project will be completed by the Applicant at its cost in the upper valley ofRheem Boulevard along its frontage

C1.11 Emergency Vehicle Access Improved access for emergency vehicles closer to Coyote Creek and adjoining open space isprovided in this Project.


9



Regional Coordination C2 Goal Rheem Boulevard is part of the regional circulation system. Its long term stability makes it saferand assures it remains open, which meets the expectations and needs of Lamorinda residents

C2.1 Regional Collaboration &problem- solving

Project development will not exceed established LOS standards along roads leading from Moraga.Payment of applicable traffic fees is sufficient to address cumulative traffic impacts. The Applicantand Town will accomplish the full stabilization of Rheem Boulevard in a coordinated effort.

C2.2 Regional TransportationImprovements

See the summary in the above policy which also applies to this policy

Pedestrians, Bicycles & Transit C4Goal

The Project provides pedestrian pathways, including trails, sidewalks and crosswalks that provideconnections to the Rheem Boulevard / Moraga Road commercial area and to transit.

C4.1 Pedestrian Circulation Public trails in open space may connect to other public trails in Palos Colorados and the Lafayette-Moraga Regional Trail. A public trail is also included along the project side of Rheem Boulevard

C4.2 Bicycle Circulation Striped shoulders on Rheem Boulevard will assist bicycle circulation

Chapter 7: Open Space and Conservation

Open Space Preservation OS1 Goal Project as designed preserves as much open space as possible, including the minor ridgeline,with public trails and parking provided to help meet the recreational needs of Project residents andthe public.

OS1.1 Open Space Preservation 90% of the property is preserved as open space accessible to the public and managed at no cost tothe Town. See also the summary above for Goal OS1.

OS1.2 Major Ridgelines No development will occur on lands designated MOSO on the General Plan diagram. Theproperty does not include a major ridgeline.


10



OS1.3 Development Densities inOpen Space Areas

This policy addresses development on MOSO land. No development is proposed on the MOSOportion of the property, with the potential exception of a sewer line off ‘C’ Court.

OS1.4 Private Ownership and Useof Open Space Areas

Project open space will be owned and managed by the GHAD, a public entity, under the directionof the Town Council. The open space will be accessible to the public through public trails.

OS1.5 Development on Slopes andRidgelines in Open SpaceLands

Project includes no development on the MOSO portion of the property, except for trails andpotentially a sewer line off ‘C’ Court. Environmental and site constraints limit the development tothe two development clusters, plus grading for the upper valley buttress to stabilize RheemBoulevard and other limited grading for slope stability and road construction. There is noenvironmental impact, site constraint and/or other factor, including conformity to General Planpolicies, which warrants a reduction in the number of units, density or extent of the developmentprovided in the Project as designed and mitigated.

OS1.8 Open Space Access andRecreational Use

Public trails in the Project open space are included, which may connect to the Lafayette-MoragaRegional Trail and Palos Colorados trails.

OS1.9 Open Space Management Project open space will be preserved in perpetuity by a conservation easement or otherappropriate deed restriction in favor of the Town. It will be managed by the GHAD consistentwith the applicable mitigation measures, and subject to review and direction from the Town.

OS1.10 Open Space Grazing Per the Project mitigation, open space grazing will be part of the open space management bythe GHAD. Grazing will be controlled so as not to degrade the environment. For example,grazing in and around the recreated wetland swale and the preserved intermittent drainage will beavoided.

Environmental Quality OS2 Goal Project as designed and mitigated, with 90% of the property in managed open space in perpetuity,a recreated and enhanced wetland swale and preserved intermittent drainage in a geologicallystable condition, will help make the Town’s “environmental quality in the future as good or betterthan today.”

OS2.1 Protection of Wildlife Areas Project design, with 90% of the property preserved as permanent open space, andimplementation of the final EIR mitigation measures with respect to wildlife protection, includingopen space management by the GHAD, results in the Project not adversely affecting wildlifeareas.


11



OS2.2 Preservation of RiparianEnvironments

The most valuable riparian resource on the property is Coyote Creek, which will be preservedand managed in perpetuity and not affected by Project development. It is not possible to preservethe wetlands in the upper Rheem valley, and create the valley buttress required to stabilize,repair and improve Rheem Boulevard, for the reasons fully discussed elsewhere. The recreatedwetland swale and its permanent preservation and management in a natural state, conforms to theobjective of this policy. The intermittent drainage in the lower valley will be preserved in itscurrent condition, also in conformance with this policy.

OS2.3 Natural Carrying Capacity The natural carrying capacity of Coyote Creek will not be changed by the Projectdevelopment. For the reasons discussed above, a valley buttress will be constructed and awetland swale in the upper Rheem valley. The intermittent stream in the lower Rheem valley willbe substantially preserved and enhanced. Their carrying capacity will be designed or enhancedto include water from the Project development, and the natural environment of thosewaterways will be maintained by the GHAD.

OS2.4 Areas of Natural Significance Project areas of natural significance that are preserved and managed in perpetuity in the Projectinclude Coyote Creek, oak woodland and open hillsides on the easterly side, minor ridgeline, andhillsides on the Rheem Boulevard side. The existing wetland in the upper Rheem valley cannot bepreserved for the reasons discussed elsewhere. The recreated and enhanced wetland swale willbe preserved and managed in perpetuity in its natural environment. The intermittent drainage inthe lower valley will be substantially preserved and enhanced per the direction of the Town Council.

OS2.5 Wildlife Corridors Mitigation measures to protect and manage wildlife areas and movement corridors, and avoidfragmentation, are included. They will reduce any wildlife corridor impacts to less than significant.

OS2.6 Reintroduction of WildlifeSpecies

Reintroduction of certain species (i.e., red legged frog and Alameda Whipsnake) is avoidedby Project mitigation measures in order to protect those species from predators in the recreatedwetland swale and preserved intermittent drainage areas. The extent and location of Projectopen space, and the recreated wetland swale and preserved intermittent drainage, allprofessionally managed by the GHAD, are such that other wildlife species may be reintroduced tothe property and surrounding open space.

OS2.7 Reintroduction of NativePlant Species

Project landscape design and mitigation measures provide for the reintroduction of nativeplant species, professionally managed by the GHAD in perpetuity.

OS2.8 Tree Preservation Oak woodland on the property is preserved. Arroyo willows and other native trees will need to be


12



removed to create the upper valley buttress. Replacement trees will be planted for mitigation ator above the required ratio, in addition to native trees and shrubs planted on hillsides for visualmitigation. The new trees will contribute to the beauty and environmental quality of the Town.

OS2.9 Tree Covered Area Coyote Creek tree cover and nearby oak woodlands will be preserved in perpetuity.

OS2.11 Recycling and SourceReduction

A construction debris recycling plan is required for the Project.

Water Quality & Conservation OS3Goal

The final Drainage Plan for the Project must address the effect, if any, of new development in theupper and lower Rheem valley areas on the recharge of existing springs and seeps. CoyoteCreek is maintained in its natural condition in perpetuity. The recreated wetland swale will bemaintained in its natural condition in perpetuity. Mitigation measures include water conservationrequirements. The intermittent drainage in the lower valley will be substantially preserved andenhanced.

OS3.1 Sewer Connections CCCSD sewer connections required.

OS3.2 Polluting Materials Per Project mitigation measures, watercourses and drainage facilities will be professionallymanaged by the GHAD. Polluting materials on open space, streets, and residential lots that couldimpact watercourses will be limited through management by the GHAD and HOA.

OS3.3 Street and GutterMaintenance

See summary in above policy, which is applicable to this policy.

OS3.4 Watercourse Capacity Mitigation measures require that design capacity of the recreated wetland swale and preservedintermittent drainage during peak runoff not be exceeded. Coyote Creek peak runoff will not beincreased by Project development.

OS3.5 Watercourse Preservation Coyote Creek will be preserved in perpetuity. It is not possible to preserve the wetland swale inthe upper Rheem valley for the reasons discussed elsewhere (i.e., the upper valley buttressrequired for Rheem Boulevard stabilization and safe development of ‘D’ Drive and the 10 homesthere). That degraded watercourse will be replaced with an enhanced wetland swale, whichconnects to the preserved intermittent drainage. The flora and fauna required as part of thatreplacement meets the objective of this policy, and will be professionally maintained in perpetuity


13



by the GHAD.

OS3.6 Run-off from NewDevelopments

Mitigation measures require peak storm runoff from property with new development be reduced toat or below existing conditions at point of discharge off site. Water quality control basins areincluded in the Project design. All runoff impacts are less than significant.

OS3.7 Water ConservationMeasures

Required Project water conservation includes drought-tolerant landscape, water efficient irrigationsystems, compliance with Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, ultra-low flow toilets, andsuch additional Demand Reduction Measures that EBMUD and the Town may considerappropriate commensurate with Project’s water demand. Dual piping for use of recycled watermay be required by EBMUD if its use seems likely in the future.

OS3.8 Water Recycling Dual piping for use of recycled water may be required by EBMUD for the Project (one pipe forresidences’ water and one for irrigation) if the availability of recycled water seems likely in thefuture.

Air Quality OS4 Goal Air quality is preserved and maintained by the Project through mitigation measures to reducedust and equipment exhaust emissions during construction, the preservation of oak woodland,linked public trails to encourage walking, improved bicycle access on Rheem Boulevard, gasand electrical energy conservation in the design of new homes, and a relatively small number ofnew homes.

OS4.1 Development Design See the summary above in Goal OS4, which is applicable to this policy. Condition 14 requiressignificant energy conservation in the design, construction and use of new homes.

OS4.2 Development Approvals &Mitigation

Project does not exceed regional and local air quality standards.

OS4.3 Development Setbacks Project homes on ‘D’ Drive are set back at a minimum of approximately 85 feet from RheemBoulevard.

OS4.5 Alternate TransportationModes

Project includes linked public trails and Applicant will construct improved pedestrian and bicycleaccess on Rheem Boulevard to link with the St. Mary’s Road and Moraga Road areas.

Energy Conservation OS5 Goal Condition 14 requires new homes to achieve at least 90 points on the Town’s Green Building


14



Program. Photovoltaic cells will be offered to buyers as an option..

OS5.1 Building Standards Building energy efficiency standards exceed California Building Code standards in Title 24, withthe implementation of Condition III.9.

OS5.2 Energy Conservation The summary above for Goal OS5 applies to this policy.

OS5.3 Trip Reduction Project includes linked public trails. Applicant will construct improved pedestrian and bicycleaccess on Rheem Boulevard.

Noise OS6 Goal Homes in the Project will be surrounded by significant open space and well set back fromRheem Boulevard, such that noise levels will be low. The new Project homes and streets will notadversely affect noise levels at existing homes. Construction noise will be mitigated to less thansignificant.

OS6.4 Noise Impacts of NewDevelopment

Noise from Project will not raise noise levels above acceptable levels on any Town arterials ormajor streets, per analysis in the final EIR.

OS6.5 Acoustical Data withDevelopment Applications

The final EIR includes sufficient acoustical data so that noise impacts of the Project are properlyevaluated and mitigated. A detailed mitigation measure to reduce construction noise is included.

Chapter 8 Public Safety

General Public Safety PS1 Goal Project as designed and mitigated will provide a semi-rural environment that is relatively free fromhazards and as safe as practicable. Final EIR confirms that, with implementation of mitigationmeasures, hazards such as geotechnical and fire risk are insignificant for the new developmentin the Project as designed. After the Project is developed, the GHAD will continue to controlthose risks through its professional management of the property.

PS1.1 Assessment of Risk The final EIR and studies conducted for the Project referenced therein have sufficiently assessedand mitigated natural hazard risks to the development. Those studies are sufficient for this stagein the development process. With implementation of the mitigation measures, the level of naturalhazard risks is less than significant and acceptable in terms of effect on life and property.Ongoing protection against natural hazard risks will be provided by the GHAD’s professionalmanagement of the property, including geotechnical, peak storm and wildfire risks. GHAD


15



management will be subject to review and direction from the Town. Risk management by theGHAD will be paid for through homeowner assessments, not public funds.

PS1.2 Public Review of Risk Data The environmental and planning review process for the Project has provided sufficientopportunity for public review of risk data and the evaluation of existing and potential hazards.

PS1.3 High Risk Areas No finished lots, homes, streets or water quality basins in the Project will be constructed within a“high risk” area in terms of land instability or other risk factors. Approved mitigation measures willbe implemented in the design and construction of the Project to eliminate high or moderate risks inthe Project development clusters. For example, debris benches on “D” Drive will eliminate high ormoderate risk to those homes from inactive landslides above those debris benches. All streets,buildings pads, and foundations will be on engineered soil. They will be protected against thepotential for future landslide activity within the surrounding open space, and from the potentialadverse effects of soil creep, shallow groundwater, erosion, and storm runoff.

PS1.4 Moderate Risk Areas No finished lots, homes, streets or water quality basins in the Project will be constructed within a“moderate risk” area per the summary in the policy above, which also applies to this policy.

PS1.6 Public Safety Improvements The stabilization, repair and improvement of Rheem Boulevard is a high priority improvementidentified by the Town Council. This public improvement will benefit the Town for many years tocome.

PS1.7 Hazardous Wastes Mitigation measures require use and disposal of hazardous materials used in the course ofconstruction to comply with all State and Federal regulations.

Police and Emergency Services PS2Goal

Project homes will pay applicable Town development fee for cumulative impact of newdevelopment on police services.

PS2.1 Police Services Summary for Goal PS2 above applies to this policy to maintain adequate police services.

PS2.2 Address Visibility Home address visibility will be required at the building permit stage of development.

Fire Safety and Emergency ServicesPS3 Goal

Project contributes to a high level of fire and life safety through improved emergency vehicleaccess and GHAD management of open space to reduce the risk of wildfire hazard, amongother mitigation measures as implemented through the Project’s Fire Protection Plan described


16



in mitigation measures. The Town Engineer and Fire Marshall will approve the Plan.

PS3.4 Fire Flows Mitigation measures require water lines serving the Project provide continuous water flow andadequate pressure for fire suppression, and that fire flows meet the latest Fire Code requirements.Compliance will be confirmed by the Fire Marshall.

PS3.5 Development Review forEmergency Response Needs

Project as designed and mitigated provides sufficient emergency response per Town Engineerand Fire Marshall review.

PS3.6 Fire Vehicle Access Project as designed and mitigated provides sufficient fire vehicle access per Town Engineer andFire Marshall.

PS3.8 Fire Safety Devices inBuildings

Project mitigation measures require a residential fire sprinkler system in each home, as well as fireretardant roofing and other fire resistant exterior materials. Landscaping will be fire resistant.

PS3.10 Fire Protections Systems The summary for the above policy also applies to this policy.

PS3.11 Development Review by theMoraga- Orinda Fire District

Fire Marshall has reviewed street access for the Project and other fire safety impacts andmitigation. Final review will be provided when subdivision improvement plans are completed.

PS3.12 Hazardous Fire Areas Project Fire Protection Plan must be reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer and FireMarshall. Dry grass and brush in the open space will be controlled by the GHAD, in part throughgrazing. The proposed project streets as designed will support fire-fighting vehicles. Adequatewater supplies for fire control will be provided. Individual lot landscaping will be subject to designreview for fire protection.

PS3.13 Dry Grass and BrushControl

Project Fire Protection Plan will require control of dry grass and brush control during and afterconstruction.

PS3.14 Fire Retardant Roofing Fire retardant roofing is required for each new home.

PS3.15 Fire Roads and Trails The subject property is served by existing and adequate fire access roads to open spaceareas. The proposed project does not impact them.

Seismic and Geologic Hazards PS4 Project as designed and mitigated presents minimal risk to lives and property due to


17



Goal earthquakes and other geologic hazards. The Project geotechnical engineer, Towngeotechnical consultant and EIR geotechnical sub-consultant all concur. GHAD management ofthe property and its geotechnical and storm drainage features will assure that minimal risk willnot increase over time or through neglect.

PS4.1 Development in GeologicHazard Areas

Where finished lots, homes, streets and water quality basins are developed, geologic hazardsthat could adversely affect them will be eliminated, corrected or mitigated to a level ofinsignificance. That is also true with respect to the stabilization of Rheem Boulevard with avalley buttress in the upper valley area prior to its improvement. This is the conclusion of the EIRgeotechnical sub-consultant and the Town’s geotechnical consultant in their technicalevaluation of the proposed development, including their evaluation of the geotechnical studiesand recommendations by ENGEO. All geology and soils mitigation measures in the final EIR willbe implemented.

PS4.2 Development Review forGeologic Hazards

Technical reports addressing the geologic hazards on the site have been prepared by ENGEO, alicensed soil engineering and geology firm for the Applicant and accepted by the Town, as well asthe EIR geotechnical sub-consultant in the geology and soils section and analysis of the EIR.Town staff and its geotechnical consultant have found all the technical reports to be complete forapproval of the conceptual development plan and conditional use permit.

PS4.3 Development Densities inHazard Areas

Finished lots, homes, streets and water quality basins will not be developed in areas that willbe prone to seismic and other geotechnical hazards. A density of one unit per 6.7 acres, restrictedto 27 lots in two development clusters on less than 10% of the property, conforms to theobjective of this policy to minimize density to avoid such hazards.

PS4.6 Construction Standards Seismic and geologic safety construction standards will be required prior to issuance of a buildingpermit.

PS4.7 Construction Oversight Implementation of the Project mitigation measures will ensure that all new construction in theProject is built to established standards with respect to seismic and geologic safety.

PS4.10 Grading Grading of the site must be substantially consistent with the preliminary grading plan approvedas part of the Project conceptual development plan. That plan, implemented consistent with theProject mitigation measures, will result in a geologically safe development that is aestheticallyconsistent with the Town’s Design Guidelines. There will be no significant environmentalimpacts, including visual quality impacts. The preliminary grading plan approved with the


18



conceptual development plan shows the limits of average slope grading. See the summary inPolicy LU1.8 on slope restrictions for permitting development on predevelopment average slopesthat are 25% or greater. It also applies to this policy. The average predevelopment slope of theentire graded area of the project is less than 25%.

PS4.11 Retaining Walls Project does not include retaining walls or other man-made features for the purpose of mitigatinggeologic hazards, except for a debris benche along ‘D’ Drive. This grading feature is permittedbecause: (i) it is designed to catch any potential debris flow from the inactive landslides on thehillside before it reaches ‘D’ Drive or on any lot and creates property damage; (ii) it will blendwith the terrain; (iii) it will be screened from view by the homes in front of them and rear yardlandscape and fences; and (iv) it is designed to ensure minimal GHAD maintenance costs. Theretaining walls on lots throughout the project (3 - 4 foot maximum height) are intended to increasethe size of the useable yards, not as mitigation for geologic hazards

PS4.12 Maintenance of HillsideAreas

Hillside areas, along with the rest of the property, will be under the permanent, professionalmanagement of the GHAD.

Flooding and Stream Bank ErosionPS5. Goal

Project as designed, mitigated and conditioned will create minimal risk due to flooding andstream bank erosion.

PS5.2 Development in Floodways Property is not within the FEMA 100-year floodplain or the 500-year floodplain.

PS5.3 New Structures in FloodHazard Areas

No new homes will be placed in potentially hazardous areas along stream courses. CoyoteCreek area is not developed. No homes are included in the lower Rheem valley where thepreserved intermittent drainage is located.

PS5.5 Stream Bank Erosion andFlooding Potential

Project as designed, mitigated and conditioned will reduce the potential for future stream bankerosion and flooding. Coyote Creek drainage will not be affected. The recreated wetland swalein the upper valley will be designed so that bank erosion is avoided. The Project stormdrainage will be designed so that, at a minimum, off site discharge will not exceed existingconditions. The Applicant has further agreed, to the extent feasible using storm water detentionbasins, to reduce peak flows during the 10 year and 100 year storm events to less than existingconditions to help reduce bank erosion and flooding in the intermittent drainage channel behind theexisting Rheem Boulevard homes. The Applicant has further agreed to work with interestedhomeowners to secure permits for and place buried riprap in strategic locations identified byENGEO in order to reduce bank erosion behind their homes.


19



PS5.6 On-Site Storm WaterRetention

On-site storm water retention will be retained to the extent necessary as described in thesummary for the above policy.

Chapter 9 Community Facilities & Services

Schools FS2 Goal Project will not impede the goal of continued high quality schools.

FS2.1 Population Growth andSchool Capacity

The three public schools that will serve Project students have residual capacity. State law requiresproject mitigation: payment of school impact fees per home collected prior to issuance of abuilding permit. Fee amounts are set by the school district in accordance with a State lawformula.

FS2.2 Pace of Growth Timing and location of the Project does not impact school facilities.

FS2.3 School Impact Fees The summary for the policy above applies to this policy.

Parks and Recreation FS3 Goal Parks & Recreation Commission has had the opportunity to comment on the proposed public trailsystem in the Project. Further opportunity is available through the ongoing development process.

FS3.1 Parks & RecreationCommission

Public trails in the Project open space, managed by the GHAD, are adequate recreationalfacilities for this location.

FS3.2 Parks & Recreation Facilitiesin New Developments

Park dedication requirements will be satisfied consistent with ordinance requirements andsubject to consideration of credit for on site recreational facilities.

FS3.3 Park DedicationRequirements

Convenient public parking for trail users is proposed at the junction of ‘E Street and the Fay HillRoad split to the reservoir.

FS3.7 Parking at Parks andRecreational Facilities

The Project Open Space Management Plan will require GHAD to professionally manage theProject open space in accordance with recognized land management principles, as outlined inmitigation measures applicable to the open space.

FS3.10 Land Management Project trails have been located and designed for a minimum adverse environmental impact.For example, narrow dirt trails are located on the steeper, easterly open space slopes.Maintenance will be the GHAD responsibility, not the Town. Trail routes and motor routes are


20



separate, except for the access to Fay Hill Reservoir, which has nominal EBMUD vehicleuse. The public path on the project side of Rheem Boulevard will be separated from the road.

FS3.21 Trails and Maintenance Parks & Recreation Commission has had the opportunity to comment on the proposed public trailsystem in the Project. Further opportunity is available through the ongoing development process.

Chapter 10 Growth Management

Growth Management GM1 Goal Project development will not impede the Town in maintaining approved Performance Standardsfor Town facilities, services and infrastructure.

GM1.4 Traffic Service Standards LOS standard for all Moraga roads will not be exceeded with this Project. Cumulative impact isaddressed by payment of applicable traffic fees.

GM1.5 Other PerformanceStandards

Other Performance Standards will not be exceeded with this Project, including parks, fire,police, sanitary facilities, water, and flood control, as detailed in the EIR and applicablemitigation measures.

GM1.6 Development Impacts andShare of Costs

Payment of development impact fees, per Town ordinance and its nexus study, as a fair sharecontribution toward capital improvements undertaken by the Town to meet PerformanceStandards, will address the cumulative development impact of this Project. The Town has electedto apply those fees toward its share of the cost to stabilize Rheem Boulevard in the lowervalley at high risk for landslide movement. The Town will address the project’s share of otherdevelopment capital improvement costs with alternative funding.

GM1.7 Development Review andApproval

Mitigation Measures and Conditions relating to traffic and facility/service performance are beingapproved.

GM1.9 Concurrency Rheem Boulevard will be stabilized, repaired and improved prior to completion of the Project bythe applicant and Town in a coordinated effort. The applicant will be stabilizing the upper valley ofRheem Boulevard at no cost to the Town.

GM1.10 Findings of Consistency Adopted Level of Service standards for Lamorinda will not be exceeded with development ofthe Project. The Project is consistent with and will not adversely affect approved action plans forLamorinda. These “Findings of Consistency” are supported by the traffic and circulation analysis


21



in the final EIR.

ATTACHMENT E

COMMUNICATIONS

ATTACHMENT F

TRAILHEAD AND PARKING LOTALTERNATIVE

YESMaximize your HomeDepot.com experience. Let us use your location to find your nearest store. Close x

Tool & Truck Rental Installation Services and Repair Help

Daly City #1092 (Change)Your Store:

SPECIFICATIONS

Assembled Depth (in.) 6 in Assembled Height (in.) 96 in

Assembled Width (in.) 6 in

8 ft. White Pine Landscape Timber EdgingModel # TIWP522 Internet # 100294436

Write the First Review Ask a Question

PRODUCT OVERVIEW Model # TIWP522 Internet # 100294436

This 8 ft. White Pine Landscape Timber Edging is treated with environmentally-friendly ACQ. It is 5-1/2 in. x 5-1/2 in. x 8 ft. It is recommended for long-term ground contact, so it is good for landscaping applications.

• Made of Northern white pine• Pressure-treated with environmentally-friendly ACQ• Good for landscaping projects where there will be long-term ground contact• 5-1/2 in. x 5-1/2 in. x 8 ft.

SHIPPING AND DELIVERY OPTIONSStore Exclusive. This item is available for purchase in select stores only.

Model # TIWP522

8 ft. White Pine Landscape Timber Edging

Page 1 of 18 ft. White Pine Landscape Timber Edging-TIWP522 at The Home Depot

10/23/2014http://www.homedepot.com/p/Unbranded-8-ft-White-Pine-Landscape-Timber-Edging-TI...

Rancho Laguna II SR - Moraga · DESIGN REVIEW BOARD RANCHO LAGUNA II October 27, 2014 Page 3 of 13...

Documents

Transcript of Rancho Laguna II SR - Moraga · DESIGN REVIEW BOARD RANCHO LAGUNA II October 27, 2014 Page 3 of 13...