The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPlanning Commission Resolution 2016-10 07/26/2016RESOLUTION NO. 2016 -10 CITY OF PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE BURDELL MIXED USE PROJECT LOCATED AT 405 EAST D STREET APN: 007 - 132 -015 and 007 - 132 -033 File No:,•PLMA -15 -0006 WHEREAS, Church Hildreth of Architectural Design & Restoration submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit, on behalf of property owners Jim Nelson and David Martin, to authorize a Dwelling, Multiple land use type ( "Project ") at a property zoned Mixed Use ]A (MU1 A) and located at APN 007 - 132 -015 and 007 -132 -033. More specifically, the Dwelling, Multiple land use would be located within the second -story of the Burdell Building and within a new three -story building; and WHEREAS, Implementing Zoning Ordinance (IZO) Table 4.3 requires a Conditional Use Permit for the Dwelling, Multiple land use type in the MU 1 A Zone; and WHEREAS, on December 22, 2015, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, pursuant to Implementing Zoning Ordinance §24.030(F), to consider this application and at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, on December 22, 2015, the Planning Commission considered a staff report and public comment and, after providing comments on the application, continued consideration of the Project to a date uncertain; and WHEREAS, on July 26, 2016, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider this application for Conditional Use Permit approval; and , WHEREAS, public notice was published in the Argus Courier and mailed to residents and occupants within 500 feet of the project site, all in compliance with state and local law; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: A. The foregoing recitals are true and correct a'nd incorporated herein by reference. B. Based on the staff report, staff presentation, comments received and the public hearing, the Planning Commission makes the following findings based on substantial evidence in the record: California Environmental Quality Act 1. For the reasons stated in the July 26, 2016 Planning Commission staff report, the Project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Guidelines § 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects). General Plan 2. The Project is consistent with the Mixed Use General Plan land use designation because the project includes multiple family housing compliant with the permitted maximum residential density of 30.0 housing units per acre. 3. The Project is, for the reasons discussed in the July 26, 2016 Planning Commission staff report, consistent with the following Petalumd' General Plan policies: Policy 1 -P -1 (Development Within Planning Commission Resolution No. 2016 -10 Page 1 UGB); Policy 1 -P -2 (Efficient Land Use in UGB); Policy 1 -P -11 (Land Use Intensification); Policy 2 -P -1 (Housing Mix); Policy 2 -G -13 (Washington Core - Downtown Connection); Policy 2 -P -75 (Washington Core - Intensify Land Use); Policy 2 -P -76 (Washington Core - Diverse Uses); Policy 3 -P -2 (Historic Resource Preservation); Policy 3 -P -5 (Protect Historic Resources); Policy 3 -P -6 (Historic Resource Compatibility); Policy 5 -P -10 (Multi -Modal Mobility); Policy 5 -P -23 (Pedestrian Access); and Policy 5- P-31 (Bicycling and Pedestrian Support). Implementing Zoning Ordinance 4. The Project is consistent with all development standards of the Mixed Use ]A (MU 1 A) Zone including, but no limited to, those pertaining to building height, setbacks and off - street parking requirements. All the required findings for Conditional Use Permit approval found at Implementing Zoning Ordinance §24.030 (G) can be made, as follows: a) As demonstrated by the Project's conformance to all applicable development standards, the site and buildings are adequate to accommodate the proposed use including all related activities. ( §24.030 (G) (1) (a)) b) As a residential land use, the Project excludes outdoor activities that generally require screening (e.g., storage yard, loading docks). ( §24.030 (G) (1) (b) ) c) The Project appropriately directs outdoor activities to the east elevation of the Burdell Building and west elevation of the new apartment building. Outdoor activities are excluded from the east elevation of the new apartment building which faces the rear yards of abutting residential land uses. This orientation of outdoor activities to the interior of the Project site ensures the peace and quiet of adjacent residential land uses is maintained. Similarly, the Project would locate a new building with sufficient setbacks from adjacent structures to preclude a diminishment of outlook, light or air. ( §24.030 (G)(1)(c)) d) The Project excludes the display of goods and services for sale. Therefore, this finding is not applicable. ( §24.030 (G) (1) (d) ) e) As a mixed -use project consistent with both the floor area and density standards set by the General Plan, the Project would result in an appropriate intensity of activity. ( §24.030 (G) (1) (e) ) f) The Project falls below the threshold for requiring preparation of a traffic study. However, the Project's incremental contribution of traffic to the city's roadway network is adequately addressed through the payment of mandatory traffic impact mitigation fees estimated to be in excess of $216,000. Payment of this fee assists the City of Petaluma in carrying out capital improvement projects to improve traffic circulation. ( §24.030 (G) (2) (a)) g) The Project site would be accessible to pedestrians and motorists from East D Street. In this location, East D Street provides two vehicular travel lanes in each direction with a southbound left turn lane to Lakeville Street. The existing and proposed drive aisle providing access to the Project site has striped "keep clear" signage to provide adequate ingress. As proposed, the Project provides a number of off - street parking spaces conforming to IZO Table 1 l.l. ( §24.030 (G) (2) (b)) h) The Project excludes truck traffic. Therefore, this finding is not applicable. ( §24.030 (G)(2)(c)) As a residential land use, the Project will not result in a level of activity that is not suitable to surrounding land uses which consist of a mixture of commercial, residential and public infrastructure (e.g., train station). ( §24.030 (G)(3)(a)) Planning Commission Resolution No. 2016 -10 Page 2 j) As a residential land use, the setting of hours of operation is not appropriate for the Project. ( §24.030 (G)(3)(b)) k) As a residential land use, the Project's potential for off -site effects is limited to light trespass, loss of privacy at neighboring propertie$, and noise levels. All proposed site lighting is downward facing and not elevated (e.g., pole- mounted). As demonstrated by submitted plans, the Project excludes outdoor areas on the east elevation of the new apartment building; thereby, serving to ensure privacy at the rear of abutting residential uses. Moreover, the Project's apartment building includes floor plans that locate dining and living rooms away from abutting residential uses and, in doing so, further protects their privacy. Lastly, the Project's proposal to locate outdoor areas internal to the site ensures potential noise impacts to adjacent residential uses are substantially minimized. ( §24.030 (G)(3)(c)) As a residential land use, the Project- excludes the handling, storage and /or processing of hazardous materials. Therefore, this finding is not applicable. ( §24.030 (G) (3) (d)) m) As demonstrated by the Project's conformance to all applicable development standards, the proportion of spaces utilized at the site is appropriate. ( §24.030 (G)(3)(e)) n) The Project consists of a permanent residential use and, therefore, the setting of time limits for the duration of this permit is not appropriate. ( §24.030 (G)(4)) o) As a residential land use, the Project's does not raise a question as to whether this application is a matter of public convenience and necessity. ( §24.030 (G) (5)) p) As demonstrated by the findings above, including all information in the July 26, 2016 Planning Commission staff report, the Project will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. ( §24.030 (H)) C. Based on its review of the entire record herein, including the July 26, 2016 Planning Commission staff report, all supporting, referenced, and incorporated documents and all comments received and foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit for the "Dwelling, Multiple" land use at the Project site. D. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or any of its boards, commissions, agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or preceding against the City, it's boards, commissions, agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside void or annul any of the approvals of the project, when such a claim or action is brought within the time period provided for any applicable State and /or local statutes. The City shall promptly notify the applicant /developers of any such claim, action or preceding. The City shall coordinate in the defense. Nothing contained in this condition shall prohibit the City from participating in the defense of any claim, action, or proceeding and if the City chooses to do so appellant shall reimburse the City for attorney fees. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2016 -10 Page 3 ADOPTED this 26th day of July, 2016, by the following vote: Commission Member Aye No Absent Abstain Councilmember Barrett X Vice Chair Benedetti- Petnic X Gomez X Chair Lin X Marzo X Pierre X Wolpert X Jocelyn eh l in =Chair ATTEST: (APPROVED AS TO FORM: Planning Commission Resolution No. 2016 -10 Page 4