14 ATTACHMENT 1-5 - Laserfiche WebLink

PUD-138 and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 8616 Planning Commission 14 of 28 Program 8.2: Use the City’s development review procedures to minimize intrusions into existing neighborhoods. Policy 10: Provide flexibility in residential development standards and housing type consistent with the desired community character. Program 10.1: Use planned unit development (PUD) zoning for residential properties that have unique characteristics or to accommodate development that does not fit under standard zoning classifications. HVSP The HVSP has land use designations of PUD-SRDR and PUD-A/OS for the project site. The HVSP density section for the project site states a maximum of 22 units may be permitted within the 33-acre PUD-SRDR portion of Lot 98, in return for major dedication of open space land or agriculture/open space easements to the City at the time of final subdivision map approval. As proposed, the project meets this density requirement. Vacation of Undeveloped Portions of an Existing Public Roadway Easement A project site title search identified a 16.5-foot public road easement that lies within the project site, specifically a segment of the easement across the proposed Lots 8-12 (Figure 10). This easement was deeded by the property owners, including the Spotornos, to Alameda County in 1927. In 2002, when the project site was annexed to the City, the roadway easement was transferred to the City. Per the California Streets and Highways Code §8333, the City may summarily vacate an easement if the easement has not been used for the purpose for which it was dedicated or acquired for five consecutive years immediately preceding the proposed vacation. While a small portion of this 1927 easement was developed at the time of the golf course’s development as Westbridge Lane, a remaining portion along the Project eastern boundary is undeveloped and not proposed for any public roadway purposes.3 The City notified utility agencies of the City’s intent to vacate the easement on November 3, 2021. No objections or comments have been received at the time this report was prepared. Staff will draft a resolution for City Council to approve the vacation of the unused portion of the easement when the project goes to the City Council for an action. In an event the summary vacation of this public roadway easement fails, the easement affected lots are still buildable with the except of Lot 8 (identified with a red dot) as the easement diagonally crosses said lot. Staff will include a condition to address this item. 3 The easement does not align with either the conceptual bypass road alignment shown in the HVSP, or the amended alignment later recommended by the Blue Ribbon Committee, both of which traverse the adjacent hillside further to the east.