HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 9.C 06/20/2005CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA 9.0
AGENDA BILL June 20, 2005
Agenda Title: An Application to Amend the Planned Unit District Meeting Date: June 20, 2005
Zoning, Approve a Unit Development Plan and Development
Standards, Approve a Tentative Subdivision Map, and Adopt a
Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Property Known as the Meeting Time: ❑ 3:00 PM
Martin Farm at 1197 East Washington to Allow the Subdivision of ® 7:00 PM
the 1.6 -Acre Parcel into 18 Lots and to Allow the Construction of
17 Homes, the Reuse of the Existing Farm House as Office, and the
Reuse of the Existing Water Tower as an Accessory Dwelling Unit.
A.P. 007-361-022; File No.: 04 -TSM -0379 -CR. (Moore/Robbe)
Cateeory (check one): ❑ Consent Calendar ® Public Hearing ❑ New Business
❑ Unfinished Business ❑ Presentation
Department: Director: Contact Person: Phone Number:
Community Mike Moore, Tiffany Robbe, 778-4301
Development Director Associate Planner
Cost of Proaosal: N/A
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Account Number: N/A
Name of Fund: N/A
Attachments to Agenda Packet Item:
1. Draft Resolution Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration
2. Draft Ordinance Adopting a Planned Unit District Amendment, Unit Development Plan, and Revised
PUD Development Standards
3. Draft Resolution Adopting the Tentative Subdivision Map
4. Staff Report from the March 8 and May 10, 2005 Planning Commission meeting without attachments
5. Initial Study, Mitigation Monitoring Report, and Related Studies: Geotechnical Investigation Report
(excluding attachments), Biological Assessment, Tree Preservation Report (excluding attachments),
Noise Study, Traffic Impact Analysis with updates (calculations excluded), and Historical Evaluation —
for excluded details, call Planning
6. PUD Development Standards
7. Applicant's Statement of Findings for Measurable Community Benefit (to permit 11.4 u/a density)
8. Plans dated May 23, 2005 (City Council members only)
Summary Statement:
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project on March 8 and May 10, 2005. After
deliberating and taking public testimony, the Commission forwarded a positive recommendation on the
Martin Farm Subdivision to the City Council. The project proposes the subdivision of the 1.6 -acre parcel
at 1197 East Washington into 18 lots, the construction of 10 attached and 7 detached homes, the reuse of
the existing 1910 Martin farm house as office space, and the reuse of the existing water tower as an
accessory dwelling (granny) unit.
Recommended City Council Action/Suggested Motion:
The Planning Commission and staff recommend that the City Council 1) adopt a resolution approving a
Mitigated Negative Declaration, 2) adopt an ordinance amending the Planned Unit District and approving
the PUD Development Plan and Development Standards, and 3) adopt a resolution approving the Tentative
Subdivision Map for the "Martin Farm" project.
)2i ewed by Admin. Svcs. Dir:
Todav� D e::_(
June 10, 2005
Re'WandDa
tornev:
rRevision Revised:
A Dpr crd'WCitvManager:
VVU LL/ Date:
File Code:
SXC-City Council\Reparts\MartinFarmCC.doc
CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
JUNE 20, 2005
AGENDA REPORT
FOR
MARTIN FARM SUBDIVISION
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Civil Engineer Steven Lafranchi on behalf of Anton Selkowitz's Historic Properties LCC, is
requesting approval to amend the Martin Historic Planned Unit District (PUD) to allow this specific
project, to subdivide the 1.6 -acre property at 1197 East Washington Street into 18 lots, to adopt
PUD Map and Development Standards for the "Martin Farm" Subdivision, and to allow the
construction of 10 attached and 7 detached homes, the reuse of the existing 1910 Martin faun house
as office space, and the reuse of the existing water tower as an accessory dwelling (granny) unit.
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project on March 8 and May 10, 2005. After
deliberating and taking public testimony, the Commission recommended the Martin Farm
Subdivision to the City Council.
2, BACKGROUND:
SITE HISTOR ,
This property was historically associated with a much larger walnut orchard. The two-story
residence was built in c.1910 for J.D. Ellis and the water tower/pump house, barn, and tack house
were built in the same period or earlier. The property was owned by the Martin family and
decedents from 1920 until this year. Neighboring development, such as Eden's Washington Creek
Apartments and the shopping center called Petaluma Town Plaza, sit on land sold by the family
over time.
In 1998, the family filed an application to allow the development of a business park on the property.
In 1999, the City Council approved their request to rezone the property from R-1:6,500 to PUD
with a Historic Overlay (Ordinance 2088), to change the General Plan designation from Urban High
(Residential allowing 10 to 15 dwelling units per acre) to Mixed Use, and to adopt a Mitigated
Negative Declaration for the business park project, called Martin Historic Plaza. The plans
reviewed by Council and evaluated in the Initial Study of environmental review included four new
two-story office buildings that referred stylistically to the Martin farm house, the retention of the
farm house and water tower, and the demolition of the barn, tack house and chicken coop. In
approving this project, the Council established the property as a historic landmark with "a number
of structures having a special historic architectural and aesthetic interest and value" and at the same
time did not modify the applicant's proposal to demolish the barn, tack house, and chicken coop
(the more recent coop is not historically significant). Not finding a developer for the project, the
applicant never submitted for design review, so the business park project was never fully entitled.
The Martin property sat vacant for years. In March of 2003, after only very minor improvements,
the house began to be used as office space. On June 28, 2004, Anton Selkowitz's Historic
Properties LLC formally submitted the current project, which envisioned the Martin house used as
office space, the water tower converted to a granny unit, and new single-family residences added
behind and to the sides of the historic buildings. This year the property was purchased by Historic
Properties LLC.
PROJECT DESCR/PT/ON
The project is an 18 -lot subdivision of the 1.6 -acre property at 1197 East Washington Street.
Known as the Martin property, the parcel sits between the Petaluma Town Plaza (Kinko's) shopping
center, Washington Creek, and the southbound 101 off -ramp. Seventeen of the proposed lots would
each be developed with a two-story house (10 of the homes would be attached to one other and 7
would be detached homes) on lots that average 2,250 square feet. Each house would be a three
bedroom, 2 % bath comprising between 1,630 and 1,674 square feet. Each house would have a one -
car attached garage and at least one driveway parking space (6 of the units would also have a
second driveway space). The duplex nearest the Martin farm house would be designed to reflect
elements of the existing barn. Each lot would have a small front yard and a fenced back yard
averaging 590 square feet. Lot 18 would contain the existing 1910 historic house which would be
used as offices (as it has been for the last year). The existing water tower/pump house would be
relocated to lot 14 and the interior converted into a three-story accessory dwelling (granny) unit. It
would have its own parking place and fenced yard. Vehicular access would occur via an easement
over private Martin Way to Ellis Street. Right turns into and out of the project would also be
allowed from East Washington Street. The internal street (Parcel A) would be private. The primary
pedestrian connection would be a public connection west along East Washington Street and the
secondary connection would be on the private Martin Way easement. See Attachment 8 for plans.
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The General Plan designation was amended to Mixed Use in 1999 (from Urban High, 10.1 to 15.0
residential units per acre) by Resolution 99-84. The Mixed Use designation allows for any
combination of commercial, office, and residential uses. Thus, the proposed residential and office
use of the site is consistent.
The Mixed Use designation allows densities up to 10 residential units per acre outright and allows
10 to 30 residential units per acre "where measurable community benefit is to be derived; where
infrastructure, services, and facilities are available to serve the increased density; where superior
design ensures an attractive, comfortable and healthy living environment; and where the effects of
the increased density will be compatible with the major goals of the General Plan." Tile 17
residential units on 1.6 acres represent a density of 10.7 units per acre or 11.4 units per acre when
the 4,246 square foot office parcel is excluded. The applicant has submitted their reasoning as to
the measurable community benefit derived from the project; see Attachment 7. In short, the
applicant contends that the project provides measurable community benefit as it retains the historic
Martin house and water tower while allowing residential opportunities that are architecturally
compatible with the existing property. The Planning Commission did find that the project presents
community benefit sufficient to allow a density of 11.4 rather than 10 dwelling units per acre. If the
City Council concurs, then the current proposal complies with the uses and density specified by the
General Plan.
The General Plan also designates the property as a gateway (G) and states that gateway designated
properties should provide important entries into Petaluma with "extraordinary treatment... through
signs and landscaping" to "provide tourist information and/or impart a sense of entry into the city."
Specifically, the General Plan notes that the Martin site is "an example of private property suitable
for special landscaping... to provide a pleasant entry to the city;" it continues that the "property
makes an important visual statement before the motorist encounters the drive-in establislunents
along East Washington Street." The Planning Commission considered this language and
recommended the project to the Council only after the project was modified to preserve and
improve the lawn and landscaping area in front of the historic Martin house and water tower, reduce
the number of buildings close to East Washington Street, and preserve oak trees near East
Washington Street. Also, as the Historic & Cultural Preservation/Site Plan and Architectural
Review Committee will review and approve the landscape plan with this designation in mind, the
project appears consistent with this designation.
ZONING CONSISTENCY
The Planned Unit District (PUD) with a Historic Overlay (H) adopted in 1999 (rezoned from R-
1:6,500 single-family residential) was intended to allow a business park at 1197 East Washington
Street while preserving the historic significance of the site. This applicant is not proposing a
business park, but rather 17 single-family residential structures and the use of the Martin house for
office tenants; thus, the proposal is not consistent with the existing PUD Ordinance language, which
is why the applicants have proposed a PUD Amendment. However, the historical designation and
overlay component of the 1999 Rezoning Ordinance is not proposed to be amended (though the
language is to be clarified). The City's historic consultant found the currently proposed project to
be somewhat more appropriate than the previously approved project due to its more compatible
style (given its residential characteristics and the smaller scale of the individual units) and due to the
greater visual prominence provided to the retained historic structures. Thus, the project is
consistent with the 1999 adopted Historic overlay.
The Martin Historic Plaza Development Standards (which were never finalized as they were not
submitted to the Historic and Cultural Preservation/Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee
[HCP/SPARC] for their review and approval as required by Resolution 99-86) allowed uses such as
offices, apartments, bed and breakfast inns, and small retail shops to serve those offices. This
proposal includes a request for an amendment to the Planned Unit District Development Standards
(Attachment 6) to make the standards consistent with the uses of the current proposal. Specifically,
single-family residences have been added to and retail shops have been removed from the list of
allowed uses. A reference has been added that lot dimensions and setbacks shall be as shown on the
PUD Plan (see Attachment 8, especially Civil plan sheet 5). The applicant has prepared an exhibit
using italic to document the proposed additions to the 1999 PUD Development Standards (see
Attachment 6). While the proposed PUD Development Standards are minimally acceptable, their
vagueness would be problematic for the new residents adopted as is. Staff will work with the
applicant to refine the "Character of Proposed Uses" section of the Standards to more specifically
relate to the project's two separate use classifications (residential and office) and to specify
allowable future modifications (which will be minimal given the nature of the project). The final
draft of the PUD Development Standards is subject to HCP/SPARC review and approval.
PLANNING CommiSSIONREVIEW
On March 8, 2005, the Planning Commission held their first Bearing on the project. The
Commission was primarily concerned about access to and parking at the project as well as about the
intensity of the site plan layout. The Commission continued the project to allow the applicant time
to respond to their concerns.
Prior to the Commission's May 10'h hearing, the project was revised. Three residential units were
eliminated, which allowed the applicant to makes site plan modifications including increasing the
amount of on-site parking, adding a common play area, preserving the landscaped yard in front of
the Martin house, preserving the two large oak trees and smaller oaks, and minimizing the number
of new structures most proximal to East Washington Street. Additionally, the applicant proposed
alternative access via private Martin Way to public Ellis Street (rather than via private Sturcon
Way, through the Petaluma Town Plaza shopping center). Use of the Martin Way access (through
Eden Housing's Washington Creek Apartments) results in:
The relocation of 3 parking spaces on the Washington Creek apartment property, (the lost
spaces are most clearly seen on civil sheet 8, the proposed replacement spaces are best
shown on civil sheet 9 and 10) and
The loss of 5 public parking spaces on Ellis Street at its intersection with Martin Way, in
order to ensure minimally adequate sight distance (the to -be -eliminated spaces are best
shown on civil sheet S).
The Planning Commission recommended the project to the City Council after specifying that they
preferred the Martin Way access over the originally proposed Sturcon Way and after recommending
that SPARC consider certain items (condition 5) and recommending that a public pedestrian and
bicycle access easement be recorded along the private street/sidewalk from East Washington Street
to and on the path to the SCWA property line (condition 24).
STAFFANALYSIS
Historic
The historic designation of the property in 1999 formally signified that the Martin property is
historically significant and that it contributes to Petaluma's heritage and enhances its character.
(The Martin house is considered a very good example of architect Brainerd Jones' work and the
parcel retains a high degree of integrity.) The 1999 adoption of the historic designation required the
preservation of (at least) the Martin house and water tower. To prepare a Historical Evaluation and
to evaluate the currently proposed development for compliance with the existing historic
regulations, the City hired Carey & Co. (as an extension of staff services). For more discussion
regarding the historical significance of the property and the historical evaluation, see the March S`h
P.C. staff report page 3 (Attachment 4), the Initial Study page 20, and the Historical Evaluation
itself (both Attachment 5). In brief, the evaluation found that, after the proposed development of
the site, the existing resource would continue to retain its historic significance by keeping and
rehabilitating the most significant contributor, the main house, and the most visibly prominent
structure, the water tower. Retention of these two structures was found to be sufficient for the
historic resource to continue to be considered historically significance for CEQA purposes as it
continues to appear to be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic places [at the local
level] under Criteria A, B, and C or as a City landmark. Planning Commission and the City's
historical consultant found that, with the Mitigation Measures, this project appropriately addressed
the historical nature of the site.
Access
Three access alteratives are available to this site. However, none of the three provide a perfect
alternative. The Fire Department requires the maintenance of the existing access to East
Washington Street; though all City departments and the Traffic Engineer agreed that, for safety
reasons, only right turns in and out could be allowed (the design allows an emergency vehicle to use
the roadway in any direction). Caltrans recommends that all East Washington access be eliminated,
citing the existing congestion on East Washington Street. However, the traffic engineer has
repeatedly responded to their concerns and staff continues to find that the benefits of limited East
Washington access outweigh any Caltrans concern, especially as the residents will travel on East
Washington Street regardless of whether direct access exists and as the traffic study shows that this
project will not affect the level of service at the Caltrans ramp (for more traffic analysis see
Attachment 5, I.S. page 15 & the Traffic Study). Note: as the roadway is outside of Caltrans'
jurisdiction, they are an advisory body to the Council. In addition to its frontage on East
Washington Street, the subject parcel has rights over two adjoining access easements that provide a
connection to Ellis Street. Originally, the applicant proposed vehicular and pedestrian access over
Sturcon Way via the Petaluma Town Plaza Shopping Center; however, after meeting with
opposition from the shopping center owners, the applicant agreed to reorient the project to utilize
the Martin Way easement via Washington Creek apartments. The Martin Way access alternative
requires 1) the relocation of 3 of the apartment's designated parking spaces and probably
modification to the apartment's half -court basketball court to ensure it usability and 2) large curbs
extensions and the loss of 5 public parking spaces on Ellis Street at Martin Way to provide the
minimum intersection sight distance required by the City Engineer (condition 28). Pedestrian
access is now proposed via a public sidewalk west along East Washington Street to the crosswalk at
Ellis Street. To create this connection, the granting of a public sidewalk easement by the shopping
center owners is necessary. Originally, the shopping center owners were not willing to grant this
easement; however, staff understands that now, in exchange for the elimination of the Martin
property's pedestrian and vehicular easements over the shopping center's portion of Sturcon Way,
such an easement is acceptable. As a pre -condition to City Council review, the Planning
Commission required that a declaration of intent for this sidewalk be recorded. The applicant has
stated that the two parties will record this agreement by the June 20"' hearing date; or agree to a
continuance to another agenda. Secondarily, as children walking to McKinley School will travel
the shorter route via Martin Way, staff also recommends, as secondary access, the proposed
sidewalk on private Martin Way. As proposed, the Planning Commission and the consultant traffic
engineer find that the project has been designed to accommodate vehicular and pedestrian access to
the best extent possible considering the existing constraints.
Parking
The project now proposes a total of 64 on-site parking spaces (see Civil Sheet 10 for the Master
Parking Plan): one covered and one driveway parking space for each of the 17 residences (34
spaces) with six residences being designated a second driveway space (+6), one space for the water
tower/accessory dwelling unit on lot 14 (+1), three spaces dedicated solely to the Martin house
offices and seven spaces to be reserved for office users during regular work hours (Monday through
Friday 8 to 5) and otherwise shared by office users and residential visitors (+10, thus, complying
with the zoning ordinance requirement for ten parking spaces around the Martin house to serve the
nearly 3,000 square feet of office), and 13 additional spaces to be shared by the office users and
residential visitors (+13). This is 2 more than the maximum number that would be required by the
Zoning Ordinance, which would assign each space to a specific user. The proposed parking
arrangement (which will be specified in the PUD Standards) instead creates a pool of 20 spaces to
be shared by the guests and office users, which the Planning Commission found appropriate as the
office and guest parking needs are expected to peak at opposite times (weekday 8 to 5 versus
evenings and weekends).
PROJECT APPRO17ALS
Following City Council approval, the proposal must receive Historic and Cultural Preservation/Site
Plan and Architectural Review Committee approval for the site, architectural, and landscaping plans
and the Unit Development Plan 'and PUD Development Standards. (The project has had two
preliminary HCP/SPARC reviews, on December 11, 2003 and on April 28, 2005.) Thereafter, the
Final Map and Improvement Plans must be submitted and approved by Council.
PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE
Since the last Planning Commission hearing and as of June 9`h, no new public comments have been
received.
3. ALTERNATIVES:
a. The City Council may accept the recommendation from the Planning Commission to
approve the proposed project with modifications to the conditions of approval.
b. The City Council may deny the request for the PUD amendment, Tentative Parcel Map,
and PUD Development Standards.
4. FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
This is a private development subject to any applicable City Special Development Fees. The
project is subject to the cost recovery fee system; therefore, the developer is required to pay all costs
associated with processing the application. To date the City has collected 514,522. Approximately
251.5 hours of total staff time at a cost of $12,359.65 has been expended to date. If this project is
ultimately approved, additional staff time will be required to guide the application through the
HCP/SPARC, Final Map, and building permit process; however additional fees will be collected as
specified by the cost recovery fee system and/or at the time new applications (FSM) are filed.
5. CONCLUSION:
The Planning Commission found that the proposed Planned Unit District (PUD) amendment, PUD
Map and Development Standards, and Tentative Subdivision Map for the "Martin Farm"
Subdivision would not create any new significant environmental impacts and that the proposed
project is consistent with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and the Municipal Code. The
Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the project, with conditions.
6. OUTCOMES OR PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS THAT WILL IDENTIFY SUCCESS OR
COMPLETION:
0/1
7. RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council introduce an Ordinance amending the
Martin PUD and approving a unit development plan and PUD Development Standards, adopt a
resolution for a Mitigated Negative Declaration, and approve a Resolution for a 18 -lot Tentative
Subdivision Map to allow the construction of 17 new single-family homes and the reuse of the
Martin house and water tower.
s:/cc/reports/MardnramsCC.doc 7
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. N.C.S.
APPROVAL OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE
MARTIN FARM SUBDIVISION
AT 1197 EAST WASHINGTON STREET AND PRIVATE MARTIN CIRCLE; APN
007-361-022
WHEREAS, an Initial Study of potential environmental impacts was prepared and the results of the
study indicated that the proposed Martin Farm subdivision project, as mitigated, will not cause any
significant adverse environmental impacts; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Petaluma held public hearings on March 8 and
May 10, 2005, on the subject application, heard testimony, and concluded that the findings and
conditions as amended were adequate and recommended to the City Council approval of the
proposed development; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Martin Farm subdivision proposal on June 20, 2005,
and considered all written and verbal communications concerning potential environmental impacts
resulting from the project before rendering a decision;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves a Mitigated Negative
Declaration subject to the following Findings and Mitigation Measures:
1. An Initial Study was prepared and demonstrated that there is no substantial evidence that
supports a fair argument that the project, as conditioned, would have a significant effect on
the environment. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was drafted to avoid or reduce to a level
of insignificance, potential noise, biological, transportation/traffic, and historic resource
impacts generated by the proposed project.
2. The project does not have the potential to have a significant adverse impact on wildlife
resources as defined in the State Fish and Game Code, either individually or cumulatively and
is not exempt from Fish and Game filing fees.
3. The project is not located on a site listed on any Hazardous Waste Site List compiled by the
State pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code.
4. The Planning Commission reviewed the Initial Study and considered public comments before
making a recommendation on the project.
5. That a Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared to ensure compliance with the
adopted mitigation measures.
6. The record of proceedings of the decision on the project is available for public review at the
City of Petaluma Planning Division, City Hall, 11 English Street, Petaluma, California.
Mitigation Measures
All mitigation measures, as identified in the Initial Study for the Martin Farm subdivision proposal,
are herein incorporated (Attachment 5, Initial Study).
Attachment 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
DRAFT
ORDINANCE NO. N.C.S.
APPROVAL OF A PLANNED UNIT DISTRICT AMENDMENT AND APPROVING
THE UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE
MARTIN FARM SUBDIVISION
TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE AT
1197 EAST WASHINGTON STREET AND PRIVATE MARTIN CIRCLE;
APN 007-361-022
WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 2088 N.C.S. on May 19, 1999, Assessor's Parcels 007-361-022 was
rezoned from R-1:6,500 (One -Family Residential District) to a Planned Unit District (PUD) with a
Historic Overlay; and
WHEREAS, by action taken on May 10, 2005, the Planning Commission considered the current
Martin Farm proposal and forwarded a recommendation with conditions to the City Council to amend
the previously established PUD and approve the modified PUD Development Standards and the PUD
Map to allow the Martin Farm Subdivision; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) have been satisfied through the preparation of an Initial Study and adoption of
Resolution No. N.C.S., approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration to address the specific
impacts of the Martin Farm subdivision; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the proposed project on June 20, 2005 and,
after giving notice of said hearing, in the manner, for the period, and in the form required by
Ordinance No. 1072 N.C.S., as amended; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the proposed amendment to the Martin PUD and the
Martin Farms Unit Development Plan and PUD Development Standards;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves the PUD Zoning
Amendment subject to the following Findings, Conditions, and Mitigation Measures:
1. The proposed Amendment to Zoning Ordinance No. 1072 N.C.S., to amend the Planned Unit
District to allow the Martin property to develop as proposed rather than as a business park is
consistent with the Petahuna General Plan. The PUD Amendment will result in a more
desirable use of land and a better physical environment than would be possible under any single
zoning district or combination of zoning districts. The proposed 17 residences and the use of
the existing house as an office complies with the General Plan designation of the site as Mixed
Use, which allows a combination of residential, commercial, and retail uses. The proposed
density of 11.4 dwelling units per acre would be compatible with the range allowed by the
Mixed Use designation as, Q
Attachment 2
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
a. The project provides measurable community benefit in that it retains the historic Martin
house and water tower while allowing residential opportunities that are architecturally
compatible with the existing property (thus, furthering General Plan goals), and
b. Infrastructure, services, and facilities are available to serve the increased density, and
C. The Historic and Cultural Preservation/Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee
process will ensure superior design ensures an attractive, comfortable and healthy living
environment.
2. The proposal is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance in that it incorporates the policies and
guidelines of the Historic Article 17 as well as Planned Unit District Article 19A.
3. The public necessity, convenience and general welfare clearly permit and will be furthered by
the proposed amended PUD zoning in that the amended zoning designation will result in
residential and office uses that are appropriate and compatible with the existing surrounding
uses. The project plans present a unified and organized arrangement of lots and public streets,
appropriate to adjacent and nearby properties. Proposed landscaping would further ensure
compatibility. The proposed project would also require review and approval by the Historic
and Cultural Preservation/Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee.
4. The requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been satisfied
through the preparation of an Initial Study and the drafting of a Mitigated Negative Declaration
to avoid or reduce to a level of insignificance potential noise, biological, transportation/traffic,
and historic resource impacts generated by the proposed project. In compliance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, an Initial Study was prepared for
amendment to the PUD zoning at the property. Based upon the Initial Study, a determination
was made that no significant environmental impacts would result. A copy of this notice was
published in the Arcus Courier and provided to residents and occupants within 500 feet of the
site, in compliance with CEQA requirements.
5. The property at 1197 E. Washington Street is a historic resource, contributes to Petaluma's
heritage, and enhances its character. The Martin house, water tower/pump house, barn, and
tack house all contribute to the historic significance of the property. The proposed project is
generally consistent with Zoning Article 17, as it would avoid adverse affects to the exterior
architectural characteristics of the Martin farm house and the water tower/pump house; the two
most visually prominent structures on the property. Retention and rehabilitation of these two
structures would be sufficient for the historic resource to continue to be considered historically
significance for CEQA purposes as it would continue to appear to be eligible for listing in the
National Register or as a City landmark. Mitigation measures are adopted to reduce the
development impact to a less -than -significant level. The Historic District Overlay (H) hereby
applies to the Martin house and water tower parcels (lots 14 and 18) and these lots shall be
subject to the control and standards contained in Article 17 of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance.
The PUD Development Standards for the site as a whole specify the re -use of the two historic
structures and require that all new development be compatibility with the historical character of
the Martin site.
All conditions of the Martin Farm Tentative Subdivision Map and all mitigation measures as
identified in the Initial Study for the Martin Farni subdivision proposal, are herein incorporated.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves the Unit Development Plan
and PUD Development Standards subject to the following Findings, Conditions, and Mitigation I O
Measures:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
1. The Unit Development Plan, including the Development Standards, will result in appropriate
and compatible uses in the district.
2. The PUD is proposed on property which has suitable relationship to one or more thoroughfares
(East Washington Street and Ellis Street), and that said thoroughfares are adequate to carry any
additional traffic generated by development, as demonstrate by the Traffic Impact Study.
3. The plan for the proposed development presents a unified and organized arrangement of
buildings and service facilities which are appropriate in relation to adjacent or nearby
properties, and that provisions for adequate landscaping and screening are included to ensure
compatibility. Conditions have been incorporated requiring design and development standards
that are compatible with neighboring developments.
4. The natural and scenic qualities of the site are protected, with adequate available public and
private spaces designated on the Unit Development Plan.
5. The development of the subject property in the manner proposed by the applicant, and as
conditioned, will 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, and with the Petaluma General Plan. The density standard under the
proposed Development Standards will be 11.4 dwelling units per acre which is appropriate for
the site and consistent with the General Plan, as found above.
6. The requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been satisfied
through the preparation of an Initial Study and the drafting of a Mitigated Negative Declaration
to avoid or reduce to a level of insignificance, potential impacts generated by the proposed
Martin Farm Subdivision/Planned Unit District.
7. The project, as conditioned per the resolution approving the Tentative Subdivision Map
(Resolution No. _) complies with the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code and the
General Plan.
All conditions of the Martin Farm Tentative Subdivision Map and all mitigation measures as
identified in the Initial Study for the Martin Farm subdivision proposal, are herein incorporated.
I DRAFT
2 RESOLUTION NO. N.C.S.
3
4 APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR THE
5 MARTIN FARM SUBDIVISION
6 AT 1197 EAST WASHINGTON STREET AND PRIVATE MARTIN CIRCLE;
7 APN 007-361-022
8
9 WHEREAS, by action taken on May 10, 2005, the Planning Commission considered the proposal
10 and forwarded a recommendation to the City Council to approve the Tentative Subdivision Map;
11 and
12
13 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
14 Act (CEQA) have been satisfied through the preparation of an Initial Study and adoption of
15 Resolution No. _ N.C.S., approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration to address the specific
16 impacts of the Martin Farm subdivision; and
17
18 WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. N.C.S., the Planned Unit District of Assessor's Parcel
19 Number 007-361-022 was amended and the Unit Development Plan and PUD Development
20 Standards were adopted, thereby, permitting the Martin Farm project; and
21
22 WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the proposed project on June 20, 2005, after
23 giving notice of said hearing, in the manner, for the period, and in the form required by Ordinance
24 No. 1072 N.C.S., as amended; and
25
26 WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Tentative Subdivision Map;
27
28
29 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves a Tentative Subdivision
30 Map subject to the following Findings, Conditions, and Mitigation Measures:
31
32 1. The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map, as conditioned, is consistent with the provisions
33 of Title 20, Subdivisions, of the Municipal Code (Subdivision Ordinance) and the State
34 Subdivision Map Act.
35
36 2. That the proposed subdivision, together with provisions for its design and improvements, is
37 consistent with the General Plan, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or
38 welfare in that adequate public facilities exist or will be installed, including roads,
39 sidewalks, water, sewer, storm drains, and other infrastructure.
40
41 3. That the site is physically suitable for the density and the type of development proposed.
42
43 4. That the design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements will not cause substantial
44 environmental damage, and that no substantial or avoidable injury will occur to fish or
45 wildlife or their habitat. An Initial Study was prepared indicating that there would be no
46 significant, unmitigatable environmental impacts.
47
Attachment 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
From the Plannine Division (778-4301)
1. Before issuance of any development permit, the applicant shall revise the site plan or other
first sheet of the office and job site copies of the Building Permit plans to list these Conditions
of Approval and the Mitigation Measures as notes.
2. The plans submitted for building permit review shall be in substantial compliance with the
plans date stamped May 23, 2005.
3. All mitigation measures adopted in conjunction with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for
the Martin Farm project are herein incorporated by reference as conditions of project approval.
4. Upon approval by the City Council, the applicant shall pay the $35.00 Notice of
Determination fee to the Planning Division. The check shall be made payable to the County
Clerk. Planning staff will file the Notice of Determination with the County Clerk's office
within five (5) days of receiving Council approval. The State Department of Fish and Game
has found that a de minimis determination is not appropriate, and that an environmental filing
fee (as required under Fish and Game Code Section 711.4d) must be paid to the Sonoma
County Clerk on or before the filing of the Notice of Determination (for fee amount, contact
them at 944-5500).
5. Historic and Cultural Preservation/Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee shall review
site plan design, building and accessory structure design, PUD Development Standards, colors
and materials, landscaping, play area, and lighting. SPARC should consider possibly:
• Relocating one or more of the visitor parking spaces 12-15 to create more front yard space,
■ Improving the barn unit by diversifying it more from the standard unit type,
• Reducing the homogeneity of the unit plan type,
■ Improving the parking spaces south of the farm house, and
• Utilizing a low open fence in front of the farm house to define the private space.
6. The Martin house shall be structurally rehabilitated (foundation, structural, roofing shall be
evaluated and brought up to a sound level) to ensure against the loss to the historic resource.
(See also Historic Mitigation Measure h.)
7. Prior to submittal of any building permit, the work described in Historic Mitigation Measures
f and h (rehabilitation plans for the water tower/pump house and Martin house) shall be
completed.
8. Prior to certificate of occupancy of 80% of units, the construction described in Historic
Mitigation Measures f and h and Condition 6 shall be completed and those permits finaled.
9. Prior to Improvement Plan approval, those plans shall be modified so that rolled curbs are
only utilized where necessary for fire vehicle access purposes.
10. Prior to City Council review, a fidl set of complete plans and updated PUD guidelines shall be
provided. The plans shall be updated and those items specified on page 6 of this staff report
shall be corrected. This project shall not be scheduled for a City Council hearing prior to the
receipt and review of these plans by staff.
'a)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
11. Prior to SPARC review, the plans shall depict enclosed or covered bike parking for one
bicycle and a covered exterior bike rack (near the front entrance) for one bicycle at the Martin
house/office.
12. Prior to Building Permit approval, each duplex and single-family unit shall call out a bicycle
hanging hook or storage device/area within the secure covered garage space.
13. Prior to SPARC review, the plans shall show a bench in front of the Martin house/office.
Specifications on the bench shall also be provided to SPARC.
14. Prior to SPARC review, an exterior lighting plan shall be submitted. Said plan shall include a
detail of the types of all fixtures to be installed for review and approval. All lighting shall be
hooded and project downward, providing a soft "wash" of light. Flood lights are inappropriate,
only low profile light standards and/or wall mounted lights shall be allowed. No lighting on the
site shall create a direct glare into cyclist/pedestrian eyes.
15. Prior to the Building Permit Final on the Martin office, the applicant shall provide to the City
a copy of the simple one-page document they have prepared describing alternatives to driving
and incentives for employees to walk, cycle, or take transit.
16. The applicant and the Homeowners' Association (HOA) shall be required to utilize Best
Management Practices regarding pesticide/herbicide use and fully commit to Integrated Pest
Management techniques for the protection of pedestrian/bicyclists. The applicant shall be
required to post signs when pesticide/herbicide use occurs to warn pedestrians and bicyclists.
17. Prior to SPARC review, the applicant shall provide CDD with a written statement from the
noise consultant stating that the consultant has reviewed the sound wall(s)/fence proposed by
the applicant and found it to satisfy Noise Mitigation Measure a.
18. Prior to certificate of occupancy of 80% of units, all eucalyptus trees approved for removal
shall be removed and all stumps ground.
19. In the event that archaeological remains are encountered during grading, work shall be halted
temporarily and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted for evaluation of the artifacts and
to recommend future action. The local Native American community shall also be notified and
consulted in the event any archaeological remains are uncovered.
20. All noise generating construction activities shall be limited to daytime, weekday (non -holiday
hours) 7:30am to 6pm and 9am to 6pm Saturdays.
21. All construction equipment powered by internal combustion shall be properly muffled and
maintained to minimize noise. Equipment shall be turned off when not in use.
22. Construction maintenance, storage, and staging areas for constriction equipment shall avoid
proximity to residential areas to the maximum extent practicable. Stationary construction
equipment, such as compressors, mixers, etc., shall be placed away from residential areas
and/or provided with acoustical shielding. Quiet construction equipment shall be used when
possible.
23. Construction and demolition debris shall be recycled to the maximum extent feasible in order
to minimize impacts on the landfill. 14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
24. Prior to City Council review, the plans shall note a public pedestrian and bicycle access
easement over parcel A from the driveway and sidewalk at East Washington Street to the
pathway (adjacent to lot 1) to the property line shared with SCWA.
From the En2ineerine Division (778-4301):
25. Prior to Final Map approval, the East Washington Street sidewalk easement document shall be
recorded on the shopping center site.
26. Prior to Improvement Plan approval, the plans shall be modified to depict the sidewalk
between the Washington Creek apartment parking lot and the SCWA property line as at least
5 feet wide.
27. Prior to Improvement Plan approval, the plans shall be show the sidewalk along East
Washington Street as 5 -feet wide.
28. The site distance at the intersection of Martha Way and Ellis Street shall meet the standard as
specified in the traffic report for private driveways. The proposed bulb -outs, stop sign,
pedestrian ramps and crosswalk shall be installed.
29. Vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian access shall be constructed as proposed. Final design shall
be subject to review and approval of improvement plans.
30. Grading shall conform to geotechnical investigation report. Erosion control measures, storm
water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and notice of intent (NOI) shall be prepared as
required by the city and/or jurisdictional authority.
31. The private street shall be at least 20 -feet wide as proposed. On street parking shall not be
allowed except in designated areas as proposed. Red curbs and no parking signs shall be
provided. A minimum pavement thickness of 4 -inches shall be provided in the street section
of Parcel A.
32. The sanitary sewer and storm drain system shall be private and privately maintained. The
proposed water main shall be public and have a separate 10 -foot wide easement within parcel
A with limited utility crossings and subject to review by Water Resources and Conservation.
The water main system shall be capable of delivering a continuous fire flow as designated by
the Fire Marshal.
33. Maintenance of the private street, private sanitary sewer, private storm drains and other shared
facilities shall require a recorded document.
34. Easements for shared facilities shall be recorded on the final map.
35. The common parcel A requires a creation of a Homeowners' Association.
36. Prepare final map and improvement plans per latest standards, codes, resolution, ordinances
and policies.
From the Buildine Division (778-4301):
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
1)1)
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
37. Prior to any (other) building permit issuance, a building permit shall first be issued for the
historic Martin house including all work necessary to make the building comply with CBC
Section 3405 for such division or group of office occupancy (shall be brought up to standards,
including disability and structural). Prior to certificate of occupancy of 80% of units in the
subdivision, all required work on this building shall be finaled.
38. Prior to any (other) building permit issuance, a building permit shall first be issued for the
existing water tower/pump house including all work necessary to make the building comply
with CBC Section 3404 and 3405 for new buildings and the requirements for such division or
group of residential occupancy (shall be brought up to standards, including disability and
structural). Prior to certificate of occupancy of 80% of units in the subdivision, all required
work on this building shall be frnaled.
From the Fire Marshal (778-4398):
39. Prior to building permit issuance for the two units at the complete north end of the project
(units 11 and 12), these plans shall depict these two units as "fully fire sprinklered" as
mitigation for fire apparatus turn -around. In all other dwellings, fire sprinkler system designed
and installed in accordance with N.F.P.A. 13-D is required in residential structures; bathrooms
over 55 square feet, closets over 24 square feet, or 3 feet deep, and other attached structures.
These systems shall be calculated for two -head activation for the most remote two heads.
40. A permit is required from the Fire Marshal's Office for the installation of sprinkler system
prior to commencement of work. A minimum of four (4) sets of plans with calculations is
required to be submitted for review, approval, and permit.
41. Painting curbs red shall designate all required fire lanes where parking is not permitted. Where
no curbs exist, signs approved by the Fire Marshal shall be installed.
42. Parking shall be in designated parking spaces only. On -street parking within this project shall
not be permitted except where specified on the civil sheets.
43. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy, post addresses numbers on or near entry door. Numbers to
be a minimum of four inches high with a minimum 3/8" stroke on a contrasting background or
internally lit and must be visible from the street.
44. Prior to Improvement Plan approval, the design details for the speed tables on Sturcon Way
shall be submitted to the Fire Marshal's Office for review and approval.
45. Prior to City Council review, the turn radius at the location where the road from East
Washington intersects the road serving the majority of homes must be R=25.
46. Prior to Improvement Plan approval, provide fire hydrants as required by the Fire Marshal's
office.
47. Prior to approval of Final Map, the applicant shall provide fire flow calculations for review
and approval by the Fire Marshal's Office; minimum fire flow for this project is 1500 gpnr at
20 psi residual.
16
CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
MEMORANDUM
Conuaanii) Developnteat Department, Planning Division, 11 F,nglish Street, Petalnma, CR 94952
(707) 7784301 Fax (707) 778-3493 E -snail: plm:tring@cipetalreata.ca.as
DATE: March 8, 2005 AGENDA ITEM NO. I
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Tiffany Robbe, Project Planner
SUBJECT: AN APPLICATION TO SUBDIVIDE A 1.6 -ACRE PARCEL AT 1197 EAST
WASHINGTON INTO 20 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS (COMBINATION OF
ATTACHED AND DETACHED UNIT"S) AND TO AMEND THE PLANNED
UNIT DISTRICT ZONING AND ADOPT THE ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT
PLAN AND PUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
RECOMMENDATIONS i
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
I. Forward a recommendation to the City Council to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration
for the project.
2. Forward a recommendation to the City Council to approve:
a. A Planned Unit District Zoning Amendment and a Unit Development Plan and
Development Standards; and
b. A Tentative Subdivision Map
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project: Martin Farm Subdivision
1197 East Washington Street
Access also from Sturcon Way off Ellis Street
APN 007-361-022
Project File No. 04 -TSM -0379 -CR
Project Planner: Tiffany Robbe, Associate Planner
Project Applicant: Steve Lafranchi of Steven J. Lafranchi & Associates, Civil Engineers & Land
Surveyors
Property Owner: SuCyn Enterprises, LLC (Historic Properties, LLC managed by Anton
Selkowitz has a purchase agreement)
Property Size: 1.6 acres
Page 1
Ii
Attachment 4
Site Characteristics: The project would be located on a 1.6 -acre infill site. The parcel is currently
developed with a c. 1910 residence that is currently being used as an office as well as a water tower,
barn, tack house, and coop. Washington Creek runs adjacent to the northern property line. There
are a number of eucalyptus trees along the creek and in the west corner of the property; 4 oaks and a
few other trees are also exist on the site. The parcel is relatively flat. The subject parcel is
surrounded by a small commercial development (Petaluma Town Plaza) to the southwest, an
apartment complex to the northwest, Washington Creek to the north with single-family homes on
the opposite side, the Highway 101 southbound off -ramp to the east, and Kenilworth Junior High
across East Washington Street to the south.
Existing Use: The house is currently utilized as architectural and design offices, which is consistent
with the existing PUD zoning. The parcel is also developed with a water tower, barn, tack house,
and coop; which are not in use.
Proposed Use: Twenty of the proposed 21 lots would be developed with 16 two-story shared -wall
homes and 4 two-story detached homes. The remaining lot (lot 18) would contain the existing c.
1910 house which would be used as offices. The existing water tower house would be relocated to
lot 16 and converted into an accessory dwelling (granny) unit.
Current Zoning: Planned Unit District (PUD) with a Historic Overlay (H), which was adopted for
this property in 1999 (rezoned from R-1:6,500 single-family residential) allows for offices,
apartments, a bed and breakfast inn, and small retail shops to serve the offices
Proposed Zoning: Planned Unit District (Amended) with a Historic Overlay on lots 16 and 18
The proposal includes a request for an amendment to the Planned Unit District Development
Standards to make the standards consistent with the uses of the current proposal. Specifically,
single-family residences have been added to the list of allowed uses. A reference has been added
that lot dimensions and setbacks shall be as shown on the PUD Plan.
Current General Plan Land Use: Mixed Use with a Gateway designation
The General Plan designation was amended to Mixed Use in 1999 (from Urban High, 10.1 to 15.0
residential units per acre) by Resolution 99-84. The Mixed Use designation allows for any
combination of commercial, office, and residential uses.
Proposed General Plan Land Use: No change
Subsequent Actions Required:
• City Council Review and Approval
■ Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee/Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee
(HCP/SPARC) Review and Approval
■ Improvements Plans/Final Map
• Building Permits
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant is seeking approval for a Tentative Subdivision Map and a Planned Unit District
(PUD) Amendment for a 21 -lot subdivision on the 1.59 -acre "Martin Historic Plaza" property at
1197 East Washington Street (at the intersection with the southbound 101 off -ramp) adjacent to I
Washington Creels. Twenty of the lots would be developed with 16 two-story shared -wall homes
Page 2
and 4 two-story detached homes on lots that average 2,142 square feet. Each house would be a
three bedroom, 2 % bath comprising between 1,630 and 1,674 square feet. Each house would have
a one -car attached garage and one driveway space. The development on lots 16 and 17 would be
designed to reflect elements of the existing barn and would not exceed 30 feet in height, (measured
to the roof peak). No other house would exceed 28 % feet to the roof peak. Each lot would have a
small front yard and a fenced back yard of at least 400 square feet. Side setbacks would generally
be 5 feet or more. The remaining lot (lot 18) would contain the existing c. 1910 house that would
continue to be used as offices (though code upgrades would be required). The existing water
tower/pump house would be relocated to lot 16 and the interior converted into a three story
accessory dwelling (granny) unit. It would have its own parking place and fenced yard. Access to
the project would occur from Ellis Street via an easement (called Sturcon Way) behind the strip
shopping center at East Washington and Ellis Street. Right turns in and out would also be allowed
from East Washington Street. The internal street (Parcel A) would be private. See Attachment M
for plans.
BACKGROUND
This property was historically associated with a much larger walnut orchard, which has since been
subdivided. The two-story residence was built in c.1910 for J.D. Ellis and the water tower/pump
house, barn, and tack house were built in the same period or earlier. The Martin family and
decedents (now SuCyn Enterprises LLC comprised of Susannah Trautwein and Cynthia Herzog)
have held the property since 1920. Neighboring development, such as Eden's Washington Creek
Apartments and the commercial center called Petaluma Town Plaza, sit on land sold off by the
family over time. As the family gradually sold off land, they conscientiously maintained their right
of assess to Ellis Street by establishing easements on those parcels.
In 1998, the owners filed an application to allow the development of a business park on the
property. In 1999, the City Council approved the applicant's request to rezone the property from R-
1:6,500 to PUD with a Historic Overlay (Ordinance 2088), to change the General Plan designation
from Urban High (Residential allowing 10 to 15 dwelling units per acre) to Mixed Use, and to adopt
a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the business park project, called Martin Historic Plaza. The
plans reviewed by Council and evaluated in the Initial Study of environmental review included four
new two-story office buildings that referred stylistically to the Martin farm house, the retention of
the farm house and water tower, and the demolition of the barn, tack house and chicken coop. In
approving this project, the Council established the property as a historic landmark with "a number
of structures having a special historic architectural and aesthetic interest and value" and at the same
time did not modify the applicant's proposal to demolish the barn, tack house, and chicken coop
(the more recent coop is not historically significant). The applicant did not take the next step and
submit the project to the Historic and Cultural Preservation /Site Plan and Architectural Committee
(HCP/SPARC), so the business park project was never fully entitled. Staff understands that the
owners were unable to find a developer interested in building a project consistent with the PUD, in
part due to the requirement that the house and water tower be retained.
The property sat vacant for years. In March of 2003, after only very minor improvements, the
house began to be used as office space, one of the tenants being the current project architect, ADR.
Anton Selkowitz's Historic Properties LLC is the proponent of the current project. In December of
2003, plans were submitted for preliminary HCP/SPARC review. HCP/SPARC's comments are
provided at Attachment K. In January of 2004, plans were submitted for preliminary staff level I9
review. On June 28, 2004, the project was formally submitted.
Page 3
STAFF ANALYSIS
General Plan Consistenev:
As part of the 1999 project, the General Plan designation was amended to Mixed Use (from Urban
High, 10.1 to 15.0 residential units per acre). The Mixed Use designation allows for any
combination of commercial, office, and residential uses. The intent of Mixed Use is to allow
housing along with commercial uses and to not allow commercial strip uses/design. Thus, the
proposed residential and office use of the site is consistent.
The General Plan also designates the property as a gateway (G). Gateways are defined as property
providing important entries into Petaluma with the intention that extraordinary treatment of these
gateways will provide tourist information and/or impart a sense of entry into the city. The General
Plan singles this site out as "an example of private property suitable for special landscaping" (page
18). As the Historic & Cultural Preservation/Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee will
review and approve the landscape plan with this designation in mind, the project will be consistent
with this designation.
The Mixed Use designation allows densities up to 10 residential units per acre outright and allows
10 to 30 residential units per acre "where measurable community benefit is to be derived; where
infrastructure, services, and facilities are available to serve the increased density; where superior
design ensures an attractive, comfortable and healthy living environment; and where the effects of
the increased density will be compatible with the major goals of the General Plan." The 20
residential units on 1.6 acres represent a density of 12.6 units per acre. The applicant has submitted
their reasoning as to the measurable community benefit derived from the project; see Attachment H.
In short, the applicant contends that the project provides measurable community benefit as it retains
the historic Martin house and water tower while allowing residential opportunities that are
architecturally compatible with the existing property. If the Planning Commission and City Council
concur that the project presents community benefit sufficient to allow a density of 12.6 rather than
10 dwelling units per acre, then the current proposal complies with the uses and density specified by
the General Plan.
Zonine Ordinance Consistenev:
The Planned Unit District (PUD) with a Historic Overlay (H) adopted in 1999 (rezoned from R-
1:6,500 single-family residential) was intended to allow a business park at 1197 East Washington
Street while preserving the historic significance of the site. This applicant is not proposing a
business park, but rather 20 single-family residential structures and the use of the Martin house for
office tenants, thus the proposal is not entirely consistent with the existing PUD language, which is
why the applicants have proposed a PUD Amendment. However, the historical designation and
overlay component of the 1999 Rezoning Ordinance is not proposed to be amended (though the
language is to be improved and clarified). As discussed below, the historic consultant found the
currently proposed project to be somewhat more appropriate than the previously approved project
due to its more compatible style (given its residential characteristics and the smaller scale of the
individual units) and due to the greater visual prominence provided to the retained historic
structures. Thus, the project is consistent with the 1999 adopted Historic overlay.
The Martin Historic Plaza Development Standards (which were never finalized as they were not
submitted to the HCP/SPARC for their review and approval as required by Resolution 99-86)
allowed uses such as offices, apartments, bed and breakfast inns, and small retail shops to serve
those offices. This proposal includes a request for an amendment to the Planned Unit District O
Page 4
Development Standards (Attachment G) to make the standards consistent with the uses of the
current proposal. Specifically, single-family residences have been added to and retail shops have
been removed from the list of allowed uses. A reference has been added that lot dimensions and
setbacks shall be as shown on the PUD Plan (see Attachment M, especially Civil plan sheet 5). The
applicant has prepared an exhibit using strike ;riga and italic to document the proposed changes
from the 1999 PUD Development Standards (see Attachment G). While the proposed PUD
Development Standards are minimally acceptable, their vagueness would pose a problem if
implemented. Staff will work with the applicant to refine the "Character of Proposed Uses" section
of the Standards to more specifically relate to the project's two separate use classifications
(residential and office) and to specify any allowable future modifications. The fmal draft of the
PUD Development Standards is subject to HCP/SPARC review and approval.
Historic Compatibility/ADDroDriateness:
Establishment of the Historic District Overlay Zone in 1999 formally signifies that the property
(with the exception of the chicken coop) has historic significance, contributes to Petaluma's
heritage, and enhances its character. The City lured Carey & Co., as an extension of staff services,
to prepare a Historical Evaluation and to evaluate the currently proposed development for
compliance with the existing historic regulations (see Attachment F, last study). Carey found that
the property had been previously included in three historic resource surveys and evaluations; 1) the
1976 Peterson Historic Building Survey, 2) the 1998 Evaluation of the property by Tom Origer &
Associates, and 3) the 1999 Evaluation of the property by Archaeological Resource Service. The
Origer survey and evaluation of the property concluded that: "Within the context of rural
subdivisions, this property with the house and intact outbuildings is a good example of the small
farms that appeared throughout the region during the late 1800s and early 1900s. Moreover, the
house was undoubtedly designed by Brainerd Jones, whose noted architectural accomplishments,
and personal and professional ties to the area make him a significant person in Petaluma's past. The
house is a very good example of Jones's work and, while the parcel is much smaller than it was
originally, it retains a high degree of integrity in all other aspects. This property appears eligible for
inclusion in the National Register of Historic places [at the local level] under Criteria A, B, and C."
According to Origer & Associate's report, the outbuildings, with the exception of the chicken coop
which is a more recent addition, were likely built at the same time as the house (c. 1910) or soon
thereafter. As such, it appears that the water tower/pump house, barn, and tack house contribute to
the historic significance of the property. There is some dispute about the exact date of construction
of the outbuildings, as the evaluation by Archaeological Resource Service states, "The farm
buildings date from an earlier period of construction [than the farm house] and seem to be related to
an earlier farm house, now gone."
The 1999 Martin Historic Plaza PUD proposed a new business park consisting of four new two-
story buildings. That project would have retained the farm house and water tower, but demolished
the barn, tack house and chicken coop. The four new two-story office buildings on the site would
have referred stylistically to the Martin farm house. In approving that project, the Council
established the property as a historic landmark and at the sante time approved the associated
development proposal that included the demolition of the barn and tack house.
The current proposal would retain and preserve the Martin Farm House, move the water tower
approximately 20 feet south toward the farm house and reuse it as a 3 -story accessory/granny unit,
and demolish the barn, tack house, and chicken coop. The duplex most adjacent to the existing
house would be designed to reflect elements of the existing barn and would use salvaged board and
batten siding from the demolished barn and tack house. The other new two-story townhouse units,
to be located on the periphery of the property, would echo the Martin Farm House stylistically by I
Page 5
employing hip and gable roof forms, board and batten and/or shingle siding, wood knee braces and
eave brackets, double hung windows, front porches with wood picket railings, and gabled dormer
windows on some unit types. Heritage Homes found the proposal to be "successfully sensitive to
our historic resources".
Carey & Co. found the current project to be somewhat more appropriate than the previously
approved project. Specifically they found:
• The current proposal lends itself more easily to the application of compatible styles, given
its residential characteristics and the smaller scale of the individual units and
• That the current proposal provides greater visual prominence of the retained historic
structures, by primarily locating the new structures behind the Martin farm house and along
the property's peripheral boundaries.
The PUD Development Standards ensure that any exterior or interior modifications are regulated by
Article 17 (Preservation of the Cultural and Historic Environment) of the Zoning Ordinance. In
Carey & Co.'s professional opinion, the proposed project is generally consistent with this section of
Article 17, as:
• It would avoid adverse affects to the exterior architectural characteristics of the Martin farm
house and the water tower/pump house; the two most visually prominent structures on the
property.
• Moving the water tower/pump house approximately 20 feet would keep this structure on the
original property, only minimally altering the historic relationship between the house and the
water tower.
• The proposed loss of the barn and tack house, which could potentially be an adverse effect
on the historic resource (in this case the complex of four buildings on what remains of a
larger walnut orchard), in Carey & Co.'s professional opinion, with mitigation, would
constitute a less than significant effect - as the historic resource would continue to retain its
historic significance by keeping and rehabilitating the most significant contributor, the main
house, and the most visibly prominent structure, the water tower. Retention of these two
structures would be sufficient for the historic resource to continue to be considered
historically significance for CEQA purposes as it would continue to appear to be eligible for
listing in the National Register or as a City landmark. Mitigation measures available to
reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level have been recommended and agreed to by
the applicant (see attachment E Initial Study). Carey & Co. also finds that the loss of these
two structures with mitigation measures in place can be viewed as an acceptable trade-off,
because without an appropriate reuse plan the property would continue to deteriorate,
potentially affecting its historic significance.
• The new construction proposed within the property (which will undergo review by the
Historical and Cultural Preservation/SPARC) would be generally compatible with the
existing structures, and would not substantially affect the character, or the historical,
architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the property.
After relocation, the water tower will be rehabilitated and become structurally sound; giving the
City reasonable assurance that it will be preserved into the future. So that we have similar
assurance regarding the Martin house, staff recommends condition of approval #6 that the house
also must be made structurally sound (foundation, structural, roofing shall be evaluated and brought
up to a sound level) by the time the subdivision is completed. In short, to ensure the preservation of
the house, it must be structurally rehabilitated as part of this project so that the building does not
continue to deteriorate, ultimately resulting in the loss of the historic resource. 22—
Page 6
Traffic/Circulation:
As part of the project submittal the applicant provided a traffic impact study prepared by Whitlock
& Weinberger Transportation Inc. (W -Trans) dated January 27, 2004 and updated with letters dated
September 21, 2004 and February 1 and 9, 2005 (see Attachment F, 5"' of 6 studies).
Proiect Trin Generation
The project (new residential and existing office) is anticipated to generate an average of 336 daily
vehicle trips including 20 trips during the morning peak hour and 25 trips during the evening peak
hour. This is fewer trips in each category than the office project approved on this site in 1999
which would have generated 401 daily trips, including 29 trips during the morning peak hour and 28
trips during the evening peak hour (all of which would travel on Sturcon Way as the driveway to
East Washington Street was proposed to be closed).
Intersections
The following six intersections were studied: the five intersections along East Washington Street
with Payran, Ellis Street/Fairgrounds, the Highway 101 southbound ramps, the Highway 101
northbound ramps, and McDowell Boulevard, as well as the intersection of Ellis Street and Alma
Court. All intersections are currently operating acceptably at LOS (Level of Service) C or better
during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods. All intersections are projected to remain at the same service
levels as expected without the development of this site, with only minor incremental increases in
average intersection delay. The project, as proposed, will therefore have a less than significant
impact with respect to traffic.
Vehicular Access Points
The study evaluated the project based on the two proposed vehicular assess points: 1) the continued
use of a driveway onto East Washington Street with only right turning movements permitted and 2)
the new use of the existing easement via the adjacent Petaluma Town Plaza shopping center (called
Sturcon Way) to Ellis Street. The existing Sturcon Way easement is 30 feet wide, which is
comparable to a minor residential street having a curb -to -curb width of 28 feet. The minor
residential street is designed to accommodate 1,000 vehicles trips per day. With the 143 additional
daily trips the Martin Farm project is expected to add to Sturcon Way (the remaining trips are
expected on East Washington Street), it will continue to stay well below the 1,000 vehicle trip
threshold. In addition, the proposal includes a minor reconfiguration of the intersection of Sturcon
and Ellis to provide improved visibility to drivers traveling from Sturcon Way to Ellis Street. Thus,
the traffic letter of February I" finds that Sturcon Way is adequately designed and has sufficient
capacity to serve as one of two access points for the Martin Farm project.
Internal Vehicular Access
The private internal street (parcel A) is 20 feet wide with a 4 foot sidewalk on only one side; in part,
pursuant to a recommendation from a preliminary SPARC hearing in 2003, to minimize asphalt and
provide a front yard/setback. Staff, including Fire and Engineering, can accept this minimal width.
The applicant/civil engineer prepared a Firetruck Access Exhibit to demonstrate that this width can
accommodate the City's ladder truck. However, to do so, some rolled curbs and thickened traffic -
rated sidewalk sections are necessary. The applicant proposes rolled curb thoughout the
subdivision. Because rolled curbs enable cars to easily park straddling the sidewalk and part of the
travel lane, staff can only support rolled curbs where necessary for fire purposes. Necessary rolled
curb locations can be detennined as the Improvement Plans are prepared (see condition 9),
however, it appears that less than half the curbs will need to be rolled. Parking will not be allowed
on the street, except where shown on civil plan sheet 10.
Page 7
Pedestrian Access
The proposal includes a pedestrian connection within the 30 -foot access easement on Sturcon Way.
The traffic engineer recommended that a 5 foot wide pavement treatment with
distinctive/contrasting color should be constructed on the southerly portion of the paved Sturcon
access to give guidance to pedestrians and motorists and that speed tables also be constructed on
Sturcon to ensure slow vehicular traffic. These recommendations are now incorporated into the
proposal, and can be seen on civil plan sheets 6 and 12.
The proposal also includes a sidewalk via the project's Martin Way access easement to the public
sidewalk on Ellis Street (see civil sheets 6 and 12). The traffic engineer finds this additional
pedestrian access opportunity beneficial as it would provide a continuous pedestrian path for school
aged residents attending McKinley Element School on Ellis Street. Distinctively colored pavement
along the north side of the driveway at lots 1-3 would connect the off-site sidewalk with the on-site
sidewalk at lot 4.
Although a sidewalk west along East Washington Street to the crosswalk at Ellis Street would be
ideal, a sidewalk does not exist along the northern half of the shopping center parcel, therefore, it is
not possible to provide this pedestrian route. Staff, particularly the City Engineer, finds that the two
proposed pedestrian routes provide adequate pedestrian access.
Parking
The Zoning Ordinance requires 3 parking spaces per single-family house, 2 per duplex, 1 per
accessory dwelling, and 1 per each 300 square feet of office. Thus, 56 to 62 total spaces would be
required for this project, depending upon whether the 16 attached units were considered duplexes or
single family dwellings. As the zoning is PUD, the applicant may propose a parking standard
different than that specified by the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant proposes a total of 59 on-site
spaces: one covered and one driveway parking space for each residence (40), one (1) space for the
water tower/accessory dwelling unit on lot 16, five (5) guest parking spaces located on the street
parcel A near the residences (labeled as Guest on civil plan sheet 10), and thirteen (13) parking
spaces around the Martin house to serve the 2,750 square feet of office. This standard complies
with the Institute of Transportation Engineers Transportation Planning Handbook which identifies a
parking space requirement of 2 spaces per single-family residential unit. Additionally, as the
residential and visitor parking need is projected to be greatest during night hours when office uses
are expected be minimal or nonexistent, based on the shared parking concept, the proposed parking
standard of one covered and one driveway parking space for each residential unit and 18 open
spaces to be shared by office users and visitors, is expected to be adequate.
Staff was concerned that the narrow interior street and access driveways might require residents of
certain lots to make multipoint turns to exit their parking spaces. To address these concerns, the
applicant/civil engineer prepared a vehicular movement exhibit for those lots in questionable (1-3
and 11-13). The exhibit showed that residents of all but lot 13 could exit with just one precise
reverse and one forward movement. Lot 13 requires four turning movements to exit forward. As
the City does not have a standard limiting the number of necessary turning movement, staff is
simply recommending condition #10 requiring that lots 1-3 and 11-13 be provided with a copy of
the turning movement that applies to their lot.
Transit
The proximity of the transit transfer site at the Petaluma Library across East Washington Street,
served by Petaluma Transit Service and Golden Gate Transit, provides increased freedom to
Page 8
residences that do not drive as well as alternatives to residences that do. The Class II bike lane on
Ellis Street provides further transportation alternatives to residents.
Pedestrian and Bicvcle Committee Recommendations
In March 2000, the City Council adopted the City of Petaluma Bicycle Plan and Map as an
amendment to the City's General Plan Circulation Element. The Plan states that the City shall route
development plans to the Petaluma Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PBAC), allowing
consideration of bicycle/pedestrian issues. The PBAC reviewed the proposed project and had
specific recommendations (see Attachment Q. Staff has reviewed these recommendations and
placed them in the following categories:
PBAC Recommendations included as Conditions of Approval 11 - 16:
• The applicant shall provide enclosed or covered bike parking for one bicycle and a covered
exterior bike rack (near the front entrance) for one bicycle at the Martin house/office (PBAC
recommended 6 total spaces, but the requirement in the Bike Plan is 1 for every 10 car parking
spaces).
■ The duplexes and single-family homes shall have bicycle hanging hooks or storage devices
within the secure covered garage spaces.
• Provide a bench in front of the Martin house/office. (PBAC also asked that a bench be located in
a small landscaped area where Sturcon Way enters the project site, however, this area no longer
exists.)
■ Provide no lighting that creates a direct glare into cyclist/pedestrian eyes.
■ Ensure the office workers are provided with a written statement of incentive to reduce vehicular
trips.
■ Use pesticides/herbicides only utilizing Best Management Practices.
PBAC recommendations that have already be incorporated into the project:
• Incorporate the applicant's proposals to improve the intersection of Ellis Street and Sturcon
Way and to allow only right turns in and the right turns out at East Washington, as indicated in
the Traffic Impact Study.
These improvements continue to be proposed.
• Stripe Class If lanes on Ellis. Install proper bike lane signage on Ellis Street. The streets within
the development and on Sturcon Way shall accommodate Class III bikeways.
The bike lane will be provided from Sturcon Way along Ellis Street to East Washington
Street, see civil sheet 9. The streets within the development and Sturcon Way shall be a
Class III bikeway with appropriate signage, but are limited to private use as the applicant
does not have the legal right to dedicate the a public access on the Sturcon easement.
PBAC Recommendations not included as Conditions of Approval:
• Construct one path allowing access from the private internal road (Parcel A) to the existing
(informal) creekside path, preferably between lots 1 and 2.
Interconnectivity is desirable, however, staff is not recommending that a path be constructed
from the private road A to the creek, because the creek parcel is not controlled by the
applicant (but by the Sonoma County Water Agency who at this time are not inviting the
public onto their property at this particular spot), because 12 of the proposed 20 residential
lots back to the creek path and so could choose to put a gate to the creek if allowed by
SCWA, and because placement of such a path would not be possible without significant
subdivision redesign.
• Contribute to a city bicycle/pedestrian impact fund to provide for maintenance of that creek side
trail.
No program or fee has been established by the Council to require such an impact fee. l 5
Page 9 `�
■ Stripe or re -stripe Class II lanes on East Washington (southeast side) along the subdivision
frontage in accordance with the Petaluma Bike Plan Map.
The applicant had originally intended to stripe a Class Il lane along East Washington Street,
however, found there to be insufficient area to accommodate the existing traveled way for
vehicles and provide a bike lane.
■ Place signs on the north side of East Washington alerting south -westbound motorists of
bicyclists and pedestrians entering and exiting the project at the project's East Washington
intersection. Place signs directing people to the existing multi -use path.
The first signage recommendation is not included as the City Engineer finds it to be
unnecessary. The second signage recommendation is not recommended as the path to the
creek is not recommended.
Bioloeical Resources:
Golden Bear Biostudies conducted a Biological Assessment for the project and found no special status
plant or animal species or sensitive natural communities (see Attachment F, 2"d study). Because
Washington Creek adjacent to the site is a SCWA flood control channel and is managed as a
stormflow conveyance channel that has been subject to long-term intensive maintenance that includes
vegetation removal, the aquatic habitat is highly degraded. Regarding special status plants, the
absence of specialized habitats, such as wetlands, serpentines soils, or salt marshes, greatly restricts
the possibility of finding rare and endangered species in the highly disturbed and weedy adjacent
stormflow channel.
The City's policy is to preserve trees wherever possible. However, the Tree Preservation and
Mitigation Report by Horticultural Associates (see Attachment F, 3`d study) recommends that all 49
evaluated trees be removed — either due to their existing hazardous structure, species unsuitability
for a subdivision setting, and/or because their preservation is not possible due to development
impacts. Forty-one of the trees are red or blue gum eucalyptus, an undesirable species in this setting
as they are an invasive species especially problematic along riparian corridors and as they are
structural weak. Only four of the 49 trees are natives, all coast live oaks. Preservation of the two
largest coast live oak trees (T2 at 40 feet high and T3 at 25 feet high) which are healthy, is not
feasible due to their location within the building envelope of the house on lot 14. The Biological
Assessment finds that, with the recommended mitigation measures (see attachment E Initial Study),
the loss of the several native trees as a result of development is not significant. New landscaping is
proposed as a part of the proposed facility. The type, location, size, and species of the landscaping to
be installed will be reviewed by the Historic and Cultural Preservation/Site Plan and Architectural
Review Committee.
Historic and Cultural Preservation/Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee:
The HCP/SPARC will review the project only after the project receives City Council approval and
prior to building permit issuance. HCP/SPARC will review site plan design, building design, PUD
Development Standards, colors and materials, landscaping, and lighting.
Summarv:
The applicant is proposing a subdivision on an infill site where development has been possible since
its annexation into the City in 1959. Since 1999 - when the General Plan was amended, the zoning
changed to PUD with a Historic overlay, and the demolition of all but the house and water tower
permitted - a project similar to the one now proposed could have been developed with just a
Tentative Subdivision Map and Historic and Cultural Preservation/SPARC approval.
Page 10 ZG
This site itself has two primary hurdles. Staff finds that applicant has successfully addressed each.
The first is the historic designation of the property and the constrains that the required preservation
of at least the house and water tower placed on potential developers. Staff and the City's historical
consultant found that, with mitigation measures, this project appropriately addressed the historical
nature of the site. The second is the somewhat awkward existing access (both vehicular and
pedestrian) available to the site. Staff and the traffic engineer find that the project has been
designed as well as possible under these constraints and find that the applicant has in fact
established adequate access.
Additionally, the project will provide housing at a density that is consistent with the General Plan
Land Use Map, so long as the Commission and Council find that the project provides measurable
community benefit. The combination of office and residential uses is compatible with the Mixed
Use General Plan designation. The project provides for the preservation of the Martin house and
water tower in a setting visible to the public as they travel on East Washington and the project
provides a mixture of detached and shared -wall, for -sale houses of a relatively affordable nature (as
they are moderately sized houses on a small lots) which HCP/SPARC will ensure are both attractive
homes and compatible with the historic nature of the property.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration and a Notice of Public Hearing was published in
the Argus Courier on February 16, 2005 and sent to all residents and property owners within 500
feet of the project site. Since notification of the public hearing, one written communication has
been received. Robert Comow, one of the owners of the neighboring Petaluma Town Plaza
requests that the proposal, as proposed with access via Sturcon Way, be denied or that it only be
approved subject to access coming from Martin Way. All correspondence received is included in
Attachment K.
Prior to the noticing of the public hearing, one written communication was received expressing
concern with the proposed development. The letter was from Basil S. Shiber of Miller, Star, &
Regalia law firm, representing Bill Conrow, Robert Comow, and Sherre Strum, the owners of
Petaluma Town Plaza, and dated November 17, 2004. The letter expressed their opposition to any
use of the Sturcon Way easement by the future development of the subject property. Health and
safety, maintenance, traffic congestion, construction, and utility issues are sited with the use of
Sturton Way and alternative access via Martin Lane is proposed (see Attachment I for specifics).
Anton Selkowitz of Historic Properties responded that the Martin easement over Sturcon Way was
approved as the only access to the 1999 project (and the Traffic Impact Study found that the 1999
project would have generated 19% more trips than the currently proposed project) and that a
condition of the shopping center's approval was a requirement to keep the easement open for the
benefit of the Martin property, and that the Martin Lane access had been considered by the applicant
team and found to be less desirable than the Sturcon Way access (see Attachment J for specifics).
The applicant's traffic engineer also responded to Mr. Shiber's comments in a letter dated February
I" and states that the existing easement is adequate to accommodate the traffic volumes of the
proposed project and found that there were no reported collisions on Sturcon Way between 1990
and 2003, suggesting that it is operating appropriately (see Attachment F, Traffic letter Feb I").
IMPACT FEES
The project will be subject to the development fees, including: sewer and water connection,
community facilities development, storm drainage impact, park and recreation land improvement,
school facilities, in -lieu housing and traffic mitigation. 2.7Page 11
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study
of potential environmental impacts was prepared. The potential for the following significant
impacts were identified: noise, biological, and historic resources. Mitigation measures have been
proposed and agreed to by the applicant that will reduce potential impacts to less than significant.
In addition, there is no substantial evidence that supports a fair argument that the project, as
mitigated, would have a significant effect on the environment. It is therefore recommended that a
Mitigated Negative Declaration be adopted. A Mitigation Monitoring Report has also been
prepared. (Initial Study and Mitigation Monitoring Report attached as Attachment E.)
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Draft Findings for Approval — Mitigated Negative Declaration
Attachment B: Draft Findings for Approval — Planned Unit District Amendment, Revised
Development Standards, and PUD Map
Attachment C: Draft Findings for Approval — Tentative Subdivision Map with Recommended
Conditions of Approval
Attachment D: Context Map
Attachment E: Initial Study & Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Attachment F: Studies: Geotechnical Investigation Report (excluding attachments) by John H.
Dailey, Biological Assessment by Golden Bear Biostudies, Tree Preservation and
Mitigation Report (excluding attachments) by Horticultural Associates,
Environmental Noise Study by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc., Traffic Impact
Analysis with updates by W -Trans (calculations excluded), Historical Evaluation
by Carey & Co., — for a copy of excluded items, call Planning Division
Attachment G: PUD Development Standards dated February 24, 2005
Attachment H: Applicant's Statement of Findings for Measurable Community Benefit (proposed
General Plan density findings)
Attachment I: Correspondence Received: Mr. Robert Conrow received February 28, 2005 and
Mr. Shiber received November 17, 2004
Attachment J: Applicant's Response to Mr. Shiber's letter dated December 3, 2004
Attachment K: SPARC Preliminary Review Excerpt Minutes, December 11, 2003
Attachment L: Memorandum from Petaluma Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee dated
July 21, 2004
Attachment M: Full Size Civil and Architectural Plans and 11x17 Civil, Architectural, and
Conceptual Landscaping Plan
Page 12 26
CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
MEMORANDUM
Conuaanitp Development Departnieat, Plannlag Division, 11 English Street, Petaluma, CA 94952
(707) 778-4301 Far (707) 778-4498 E-mail. planning@ ci.petahnna. ca. its
DATE: May 10, 2005
TO: Planning Commission
AGENDA ITEM NO. I
FROM: Tiffany Robbe, Associate Planner & George White, Assistant Director of CDD
SUBJECT: AN APPLICATION TO SUBDIVIDE A 1.6 -ACRE PARCEL AT 1197 EAST
WASHINGTON INTO 17 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS (COMBINATION OF
ATTACHED AND DETACHED UNITS) AND TO AMEND THE PLANNED
UNIT DISTRICT ZONING AND ADOPT THE ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT
PLAN AND PUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
Continued from March 8, 2005.
BACKGROUND
The Planned Unit District (PUD), Mixed Use General Plan designation, and historic landmark
designation were established in 1999, when the Council approved the Martin Historic Plaza
project, which envisioned a business park at the site. That project was never pursued further.
On June 28, 2004, Anton Selkowitz's Historic Properties LLC proposed the current project, which
envisioned the Martin house used as office space, the water tower converted to a granny unit, and
new single-family residences added behind and to the sides of the historic buildings (as viewed
from East Washington Street). On March 8, 2005, the project was reviewed by the Planning
Commission. The Commission was primarily concerned about access to and parking at the project
as well as about the site plan layout. The Commission's action was to continue the project, to
allow the applicant time to respond to their concerns.
PROJECT:MODIFICATIONS
On March 31", the applicant submitted a revised site plan, area plan, elevations, and conceptual
landscape plan, as well as a potential vehicular & pedestrian access exhibit and, on April 26`h, a
Washington Creek apartment parking exhibit (all included as Attachinent I). The plans were
modified in the following ways from the plans presented to the Planning Commission at the March
8°i hearing:
Regarding project access:
■ Access to Ellis Street is now proposed via an easement over private Martin Way, instead of
via an easement over private Sturcon Way (though the shopping center). The Planning
Commission should consider each alternative and recommend one to the City Council.
Page 1 ��
■ The drive entry from East Washington Street has been simplified. Right turns in and right
turns out to East Washington Street continue to be proposed under both the Martin and
Sturton Way alternatives.
■ Two means of pedestrian access are proposed; a private sidewalk via the project's Martin
Way access easement to the public sidewalk at Ellis Street (as with the original plan) and a
sidewalk along East Washington Street southwest to the public sidewalk at the shopping
center's East Washington Street drive entry (instead of the Sturcon Way route).
■ A pathway to Washington Creek is now proposed, so that this connection is in place
should the Sonoma County Water Agency allow new points of access to the creek.
Regarding the Lot Arrangement:
■ Three residential units/lots were eliminated, resulting in a 17 (rather than 20) residential
unit/lot project. This allowed three of the four native oaks to remain, a common play area
to be created, and fewer new structures to be sited proximate to East Washington Street.
• The parking ratio was increased.
■ The roadway and parking area in front of the historic house were removed. Lawn and
landscaping are now proposed in front of the house
RESPONSE TO PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS
The Planning Commission made the following italicized comments at their March 8°i hearing.
Most all of the Commission's comments were addressed by the revised plans in some way, as
noted below:
ACCESS AND PARKING
• Fully evaluate the alternative Martin Way and analyze the Sturcon and Martin accesses
side by side
The consulting transportation engineer submitted a letter evaluating the revised project, with
access evaluated via Martin Way instead of Sturcon Way, dated March 31, 2005 (see Attachment
E). The letter first notes that the revised project, with 3 fewer residential units, will result in 29
fewer daily trips, 2 fewer a.m. peak hour trips, and 3 fewer p.m. peak hour trips than the original
20 unit residential project — regardless of which access to Ellis is utilized. The letter notes that, if
utilized, the Martin/Ellis intersection would continue to operate at acceptable levels with no
change to level of service with the addition of project added traffic volumes (the same was found
regarding the Sturcon/Ellis intersection). Table A of that traffic impact letter shows that both the
Sturcon and Martin access alternatives are expected to continue to operate at acceptable levels
with the addition of project added traffic volumes. The letter continues with a review of collisions
reported in recent years and notes that each intersection has been the site of one collision. Table B
shows that under the existing condition, the site distance at Sturcon Way is superior to Martin
Way. With the addition of bulbouts/curb extensions, the Sturcon intersection would achieve the
minimally desired sight distance for a private drive entering on to a public street with a 25 mph
design speed (Ellis) while, with the same improvement, Marlin would not. hr order to achieve
minimally desired sight distance at the Martin Way/Ellis Street intersection, in addition to the bulb
outs, two parking spaces to the right and three parking spaces to the left of Martin Way on Ellis
Street would need to be eliminated and striped as no -parking. Additionally, use of the Martin
Way easement for project access would result in the loss of parking spaces on Eden's Washington
Creek Apartment site. The applicant is working on a proposal to replace these spaces (see
Attachment I Parking Exhibit for their preliminary proposal, which has not yet been reviewed by
staff).
Page 2
3D
Originally, pedestrian access was proposed via the access easement on Sturcon Way and via the
access easement on Martin Way. The revised proposal includes a sidewalk to the southwest along
East Washington Street instead of the Sturcon Way route, in addition to the Martin Way route.
Attachment I, Potential Vehicular & Pedestrian Access Exhibit, depicts the proposed routes.
However, no sidewalk or pedestrian easement currently exists along East Washington from the
shared property line with the Petaluma Plaza Shopping Center to the public sidewalk which begins
at the shopping center's East Washington Street drive entrance. The applicant has been working
with the owners of the Petaluma Plaza Shopping Center to acquire a pedestrian access easement
and the ability to construct a sidewalk on their property. If the shopping center owners do not
voluntarily consent to a sidewalk being added in their landscape strip, this pedestrian access will
not be possible, and the applicant will revert to the previously proposed pedestrian access along
the Sturcon Way easement to Ellis Street, as shown on the September 24, 2004 plans (a 5 -foot
wide pavement treatment with distinctive/contrasting color constructed on the southerly portion of
the paved Sturcon easement), in addition to the Martin Way sidewalk. The consulting traffic
engineer found that these two pedestrian routes would provide the site with adequate pedestrian
access. The City Engineer has added condition of approval 24 requiring the recordation of a
declaration of intent between the parties regarding the East Washington Street pedestrian access
(subject to Tentative Subdivision Map approval) prior to Council review.
• Provide additional parking
The revised project proposes four more parking spaces than the original plan while eliminating 3
residential units. The applicant now proposes a total of 65 on-site spaces: one covered and one
driveway parking space for each of the 17 residences (34 spaces) with six residences being
designated a second driveway space (+6), one space for the water tower/accessory dwelling unit
on lot 14 (+1), and 24 spaces to be shared by the office users and residential visitors (+24) with
thirteen of those spaces located on the street near the residences (labeled as Visitor on sheet A1.0),
and eleven parking spaces around the Martin house to serve the 2,750 square feet of office. The
proposal now results in more total parking spaces than the maximum minimum that would be
required by the Zoning Ordinance, which would require 52 to 62 total spaces (depending upon
whether the 10 attached units are considered duplexes or single family dwellings with 3 parking
spaces required per single-family house, 2 per duplex, 1 per accessory dwelling, and 1 per each
300 square feet of office). The Zoning Ordinance would assign each space to a specific user while
this proposal instead creates a pool of 24 spaces to be shared by the guests and office users, which
seems appropriate as the office and guest parking needs are expected to peak at opposite times
(weekday 8 to 5 versus evenings and weekends). With a PUD, the development standards can
propose a parking standard that differs from the Zoning Ordinance, where it is found to be
appropriate.
• Also, consider bikes on East Washington Street
The revised plan does not show a bike lane on East Washington Street in the Cal-Trans/City right-
of-way. In the applicant's response to Planning Commission comments (Attachment F), they state
that the project civil engineer felt that Cal -Trans would not allow a bike lane there.
• Also, considerpedestrian access to Washington Creek
The revised plan does include an access walk from the Martin's internal street (near lot 1) to the
Sonoma County Water Agency's Washington Creek property line. SCWA is not currently
allowing new pedestrian access connections on this stretch of Washington Creek; however, this
path and the associated easement would ensure a link could be made should the SCWA change
this policy.
Page 3
31
SITE DESIGN
• Reduce the intensity
The number of residential units was reduced from 20 to 17. This allowed the site plan to be
modified to address the Commission's related concerns including:
• Provide more recreational space and provide a conunon (private) play area
The revised plan now includes a 2,000 square foot play area under and adjacent to the 3
largest on-site native trees. Additionally, the proposal now includes a lawn area in front of
the Martin house, which also may be used recreationally by the residents and office users.
• Consider proximity of units to the arterial, especially units 13-15. Location of
units 12-17 is troubling.
Former units 14 and 15 were eliminated. The current plan minimizes the number of new
structures most proximal to East Washington Street. Additionally, the preservation of on-
site oak trees 2 - 4 as well as the existing trees in the Cal Trans right-of-way (mostly
redwoods) will provide some screening of the site from East Washington Street.
• Provide landscaping, not parking in front of historic house
The interior roadway (Parcel A) was redesigned so that it does not circle in front of the
Martin house. The parking directly in front of the Martin house was also removed. The
traditional front yard of lawn and landscaping in front of the Martin ]souse will be
maintained and improved.
• Reduce or eliminate the visibility of parking from East Washington (to facility the
General Plan specified "gateway')
By eliminating the parking and roadway from the front of the Martin house, the visibility
of parking and paving will be reduced. Only the diagonal parking spaces at the southwest
(shopping center) property line are expected to be visible from East Washington Street.
• Preserve the two largest oaks
The site plan has been revised to preserve both of these two large coast live oak trees (T2
at 40 feet high and T3 at 25 feet high) as well as the larger of the two small oaks (T4 at 12
feet high). These three largest oaks are located on the common parcel A, with the largest
two at the play area. The plan also now includes the preservation of two additional small
oaks (one in the play area and one on the northwestern rear fence of lot 11, which were not
previously evaluated because of their small size) and the protection of several off-site oaks
whose canopies reach into the Martin project. The only native tree proposed for removal is
the small (10 foot height and 3 foot canopy radius) oak tree 1 at lot 12. Additionally, the
applicant is proposing to preserve the magnolia tree and the pepper tree, each located
behind the Martin farm house. Mitigation Measure Biological c. requires that the licensed
arborist reevaluate the to -be -preserved trees and recommend conditions to ensure their
preservation.
• Consider a redesign with the historic Allartin house and water tower as an island with
traditional landscaping in front and row -houses backing to creek
While the landscaping portion of this suggestion was incorporated into the revised plan, the "barn
style" duplex continues to be sited adjacent to the historic buildings. The row -house concept was
not included and all of the units do not back to the creel:.
Page 4