HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 2015-170 N.C.S. 11/02/2015Resolution No. 2015-170 N.C.S.
of the City of Petaluma, California
MODIFYING THE APPROVED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE LEGHORN
MARKETPLACE TO ENABLE CONSTRUCTION OF A 9,120 SQUARE FOOT
SINGLE -STORY BUILDING AT AN EXISTING PARKING LOT ABUTTING
RIESLING ROAD AND APPROVING A MINOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
TEXT AMENDMENT TO CLARIFY THAT MEDICAL SERVICE -MINOR IS A
PERMITTED USE - ALL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 701 SONOMA MOUNTAIN
PARKWAY (APN 137-070-067)
FILE NO. PLZA-15-0002
WHEREAS, Greg LeDoux submitted an application, on behalf of property owner Keith
M. Moser, to the City of Petaluma for an Amendment to the Unit Development Plan for the
Parkway Plaza Planned Unit Development (File No. PLZA-15-0002) and Site Plan and
Architectural Review (File No. PLSR-15-0009) to enable construction of one 9,120 square foot
single -story building at an existing asphalt parking lot located at 701 Sonoma Mountain Parkway
(APN: 137-070-067) and for a minor Planned Unit Development text amendment to clarify that
Medical Service -Minor is a permitted use within the Parkway Plaza Planned Unit Development;
and
WHEREAS, on August 25, 2015, the City's Planning Commission held a duly noticed
public hearing, pursuant to Implementing Zoning Ordinance §§ 19.040(E) and 19.070, to
consider the application and at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard;
and
WHEREAS, on August 25, 2015, the Planning Commission considered the staff report
dated August 25, 2015, analyzing the application, including the CEQA determination included
therein; and
WHEREAS, on August 25, 2015, the Planning Commission recommended approval of
the Unit Development Plan Amendment and minor Planned Unit Development Plan text
amendment; and
WHEREAS, on November 2, 2015, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing
to consider the proposed Unit Development Plan amendment and minor Planned Unit
Development text amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PETALUMA AS FOLLOWS:
1. Pursuant to Implementing Zoning Ordinance §§ 19.030 and 19.040(E)(5), the
City Council adopts a Resolution approving the amendment to the Unit Development Plan of the
Parkway Plaza Planned Unit Development to enable construction of the proposed new building,
Resolution No. 2015-170 N.C.S. Page 1
as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto, as well as a minor PUD text amendment clarifying that
Medical Service — Minor, defined at Implementing Zoning Ordinance §27.020, is a permitted
use, based on the following findings:
a. The amendment would result in a suitable relationship to one or more thoroughfares
(e.g., Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Riesling Road) and, as demonstrated by the traffic
impact study prepared for the amendment, said thoroughfares are adequate to carry
any additional traffic generated by the development.
b. The amendment presents a unified and organized arrangement of buildings and
service facilities which are appropriate in relation to adjacent or nearby properties.
Adequate new landscaping is included and existing screening by mature trees at
Riesling Road would remain to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. The
project also retains existing circulation features for pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles,
and the architectural design of the project is consistent with existing buildings at the
shopping center.
c. The amendment does not concern a property with natural features (e.g., creek) but
does include adequate private spaces for gathering. Leghorn's Park, a public park,
abuts the site of the amendment and would remain unchanged. The project would
place a new building within an asphalt parking lot and retain an existing landscape
feature along Riesling Road. The project also retains pedestrian access from Riesling
Road through the shopping center to Leghorn's Park.
d. The amendment would not be detrimental to the public welfare, will be in the best
interests of the City, and will be in keeping with the general intent and spirit of the
zoning regulations of the City of Petaluma, with the General Plan, and with the
Corona Ely Specific Plan because it will strengthen and reinforce an existing
commercial shopping center serving residential neighborhoods in the North East
Subarea of the General Plan as demonstrated by its consistency with the following
Petaluma General Plan policies: Goal 2-G-15 (Land Use Mix), Policy 1-P-2 (Infill
Development), Policy 1-P-10 (Neighborhood Centers), Policy 1-P-49 (Tree
Preservation), Policy 2-P-1 (Development Within UGB), Policy 2-P-121 (Green
Building), Policy 2-P-122 (Construction Recycling), 5-P-1 (Interconnected Mobility
System), Policy 5-P-9 (Safety Improvements), Policy 5-P-10 (Intersection LOS),
Policy 5-G-5 (Bicycle and Pedestrian System), Policy 5-P-22 (Pedestrian
Connectivity), Policy 5-P-23 (Pedestrian Site Access), Policy 5-P-24 (Pedestrian
Network Near Schools, Transit, Shopping, and Mixed -Use Corridors), Policy 5-P-31
(Bicycle Support Facilities), Policy 9-P-14 (Retail Uses), Policy 9-P-16 (Retail
Concentrations), and Policy 9-P-17 (Retail Rehabilitation); and the following Corona
Ely Specific Plan Policies 37, 38 and 39.
2. The City Council reviewed the application and, for the reasons explained in
Exhibit B, determined it so be Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small
Resolution No. 2015-170 N.C.S. Page 2
Structures) and not subject to any exceptions to use of a Categorical Exemption provided at
CEQA Guidelines §15300.2 (Exceptions).
Under the power and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City.
REFERENCE: I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the i Approved as to
Council of the City of Petaluma at a Regular meeting on the 2"d day of November, J 'form:
2015, by the following vote:
Ci , Attorney
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Albertson, Mayor Glass, Healy, Kearney, King, Vice Mayor Miller
None
Barrett
None
& aw
City Clerk
Mayor
Resolution No. 2015-170 N.C.S. Page 3
xvmxnvcl w/vIwnow vwowo9
1
Resolution No. ) N.C.S.
.5
LLI
xvmxnvcl w/vIwnow vwowo9
1
Resolution No. ) N.C.S.
lel@E� o Y � ys Gf z�
41 I E =W w
z
9 Ota7e�! rn a9 j Y j zlu
iii k R p¢CL
11
m
x
w
EXHIBIT B
CLASS 3 - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION
for
LEGHORN MARKETPLACE
UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT
SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
Prepared By:
City of Petaluma
11 English Street
Petaluma, CA 94952
!858
August 25, 2015
Resolution No. 2015-170 N.C.S. Page 6
Public Resources Code §21084 requires the CEQA Guidelines to include a list of classes of projects which
have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and which shall, therefore, be
considered exempt from the provisions of CEQA. In response to that mandate, the Secretary for Resources
has defined classes of projects, listed at Article 19 of the CEQA Guidelines, that do not have a significant
effect on the environment and they are declared to be categorically exempt from the requirement for the
preparation of environmental documents. The proposed project is categorically exempt from the provisions of
CEQA under CEQA Guidelines §15303, for the reasons described at Attachment C.
CEQA Guidelines §15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures)
CEQA Guidelines §15303 defines the Class 3 categorical exemption, in relevant part, as follows, "Class 3
consists of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures; installation of
small new equipment and facilities in small structures; and the conversion of existing small structures from
one use to another where only minor modifications are made in the exterior of the structure. The numbers of
structures described in this section are the maximum allowable on any legal parcel."
CEQA Guidelines §15303 also includes examples for the exemption. The proposed project is consistent with
the example provided at CEQA Guidelines §15303(c), "A store, motel, office, restaurant or similar structure
not involving the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances, and not exceeding 2500 square feet in
floor area. In urbanized areas, the exemption also applies to up to four such commercial buildings not
exceeding 10,000 square feet in floor area on sites zoned for such use if not involving the use of significant
amounts of hazardous substances where all necessary public services and facilities are available and the
surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive."
More specifically, the proposed project:
• Is located in an urbanized area;
• Is less than 10,000 square feet in floor area;
• Is located at a site zoned for the proposed use;
• Does not involve the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances; and
• Is not environmentally sensitive.
For these reasons, the project qualifies under the basic criteria of CEQA Guidelines §15303. However, in
addition to demonstrating consistency with the criteria at CEQA Guidelines §15303, the proposed project
must also be reviewed to determine if any exceptions to the application of a categorical exemption are
present pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15300.2 (Exceptions).
CEQA Guidelines §15300.2 (Exceptions)
CEQA Guidelines §15300.2 provides a list of exceptions for situations where categorical exemptions shall not
be used because of the potential for significant environmental effects. The following text addresses each
exception, as it relates to the proposed project.
15300.2(a) (Location): This exception states, "Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of
where the project is to be located — a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment
may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply all
instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical
concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local
agencies."
The project site's location does not include any environmental feature indicating that it is sensitive. The
surrounding area is urbanized and the project itself consists of a new building located upon an existing
asphalt parking lot. The project site is also not listed on any governmental list of sites with a prior release of
Resolution No. 2015-170 N.C.S. Page 7
hazardous materials. For these reasons, the location exception at CEQA Guidelines §15300.2(a) does not
apply to the project.
15300.2(b) (Cumulative Impact): This exception states, "All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable
when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is
significant."
As noted in the 2008 Petaluma General Plan, the project is located in the North East subarea which consists
of established suburban residential neighborhoods with low building densities and heights. The General
Plan's Land Use Map provides a Neighborhood Commercial designation to the project site, and is the only
property within the subarea designated for such commercial uses. Since its original construction, the project
site has not been subject to past development approvals relating to new and/or increased commercial building
floor area.
Because the subarea is predominately built -out and since there have not, to date, been a succession of
similar projects in the subarea, the cumulative impact exception of CEQA Guidelines §15300.2(b) does not
apply to the project.
15300.2(c) (Significant Effect): This exception states, "A categorical exemption shall not be used for an
activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment
due to unusual circumstances." The project site's location does not include any environmental feature
indicating that it is sensitive, and the project would provide for commercial land uses similar to that existing at
the shopping center. For these reasons, there are no unusual circumstances applicable to the project or its
site and the exception at CEQA Guidelines §15300.2(c) does not apply to the project.
15300.2(d) (Scenic Highways): This exception states, "A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project
which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock
outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does
not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified
EIR." There are now state scenic highways within the City of Petaluma. Therefore, the exception at CEQA
Guidelines §15300.2(d) does not apply to the project.
15300.2(e) (Hazardous Waste Sites): This exception states, "A categorical exemption shall not be used for a
project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the
Government Code." The project site is also not listed on any governmental list of sites with a prior release of
hazardous materials. Therefore, the exception at CEQA Guidelines §15300.2(e) does not apply to the project.
15300.2(f) (Historic Resources): This exception states, "A categorical exemption shall not be used for a
project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource." The
project site consists of a commercial shopping center constructed in [XXXX]. The project would result in the
construction of one new building at an existing parking lot. Therefore, there are no historic resources at the
project site and the exception at CEQA Guidelines §15300.2(f) does not apply to the project.
Resolution No. 2015-170 N.C.S. Page 8