Green Canyon Road improvement requirements removed from Daniels Gray Rabbit Hollow development

When the county's Planning Commission approved the Daniels Gray Rabbit Hollow development in May 2009, the conditions included improvements to Green Canyon Road. The improvements were not necessary for mitigation but were considered a convenience for project applicants Geoffrey and Patricia Daniels, who owned the adjacent land at the time and would have benefited from the synergy of concurrent work.

After the lots which fronted Green Canyon Road were sold, the Daniels family no longer had the ability to construct those improvements, so on Jan. 22, 2016, the Planning Commission voted 7-0 to approve a revised map which eliminated some of the conditions.

"The key issue is that the condition was not required," said Mark Wardlaw, the director of the county's Department of Planning and Development Services (PDS). "It's not about property ownership."

The Daniels Gray Rabbit Hollow development will subdivide 11.22 acres in the 2000 block of Green Canyon Road into 10 residential lots ranging from 1.00 to 1.31 acres. The property has A70 (Limited Agricultural) zoning with an SR-1 (Semi-Rural) land use designation. Much of the parcel has been in use as a citrus grove and the property also includes a single-family residence, a guest house, accessory structures, and a barn.

The original tentative map included the removal of the barn, although the existing single-family residence will be retained. The original conditions also included dedicating right-of-way on Green Canyon Road and improving the western portion with pavement and a decomposed granite pathway.

The conditions called for improving Green Canyon Road to a one-half width of 30 feet with 20 feet of asphalt pavement and a concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk along with a walkway or pathway 9 1/2 feet wide. Those frontage improvements were not required but would have improved the sight distance from Gray Rabbit Hollow Lane to Green Canyon Road and were requested by county staff, and since the Daniels family owned that adjacent property at the time they agreed to that request.

"The developer volunteered these improvements. There's no direct impact," said PDS project manager Ken Brazell. "When he sold the property he was no longer able, even if he wanted to, to grant those easements."

The removal of the barn was based on Zoning Ordinance requirements. The barn and the existing residence will be on different lots after the subdivision, and the Zoning Ordinance prohibits an accessory building such as a barn to be on a parcel without a main structure. However, if the structure is associated with an active principal use on the property such as an agricultural operation, the structure is allowed to remain.

"The change of ownership should not change the conditions of approval whether they were voluntary or not," said Planning Commissioner Michael Beck.

"When a project is proposed, those conditions of the project go with the land and not with the property owner," Beck said. "There's a point in time when that becomes part of the project."

An application for a revised tentative map was filed on Nov. 7, 2014. "The applicant has come forward for a revised map, which he is entitled to do," said senior deputy county counsel Paul Mehnert.

The county's Department of Public Works and land division of PDS have determined that the revisions would not adversely impact surrounding property owners or the original approval's community character and visual impact mitigation. The subdivision is expected to generate a daily average of 120 additional vehicle trips, which would not have a significant enough impact on Green Canyon Road to warrant improvements other than cumulative impacts funded by the development's Transportation Impact Fee payment.

The new conditions require a registered civil engineer or traffic engineer or a licensed surveyor to provide a signed statement stipulating the specific number of feet of unobstructed intersectional sight distance in both directions and noting that such sight distance exceeds the requirement. The conditions still require removal of existing landscaping to improve the sight distance from Gray Rabbit Hollow Lane to Green Canyon Road.

Surrounding neighbors were informed of the revised tentative map application and expressed concern about the sight distance reduction, but they were satisfied by the explanation that the sight distance certification would remain a condition.

The Fallbrook Community Planning Group was notified of the revised map but determined that the changes were not significant enough to hold a new hearing on a recommendation. Fallbrook Community Planning Group chair Jim Russell cited Board of Supervisors Policy I-1 which allows a planning or sponsor group to re-hear a previously-approved project only if significant changes have been made.

The planning group originally recommended approval of the tentative map in December 2008. The Planning Commission's action also found that the previously-adopted environmental Mitigated Negative Declaration is still adequate to meet California Environmental Quality Act requirements.

"I'm okay with the change," Beck said. "I'm fine with the revised map and the process to get there."

The revisions also reflect that what had been an unnamed street will now be called Gray Rabbit Hollow Lane. The conditions for that street, which is expected to have an average daily traffic volume of between 101 and 750 vehicles, include an improved width of 24 feet and a graded width of 28 feet with the cul-de-sac graded to a radius of 40 feet and surfaced to a radius of 36 feet.

The condition changes also reflect a county reorganization which brought the land division of the Department of Public Works into what had been the Department of Planning and Land Use and is now the Department of Planning and Development Services.