HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 6.A 09/19/2005CITYOF PETALUNIA, CALIFORNIA
AGENDA BILL
Agenda Title: Discussion and Possible Action Regarding a
Recommendation from the Planning Commission to Approve: 1) A
Resolution Amending the General Plan from Thoroughfare Commercial
to Mixed Use for Lindberg Circle location at the corner of Lakeville St
and Lindberg Lane, 2) A Resolution for a Tentative Subdivision Map, 3)
A Resolution Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and 4) An
Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map from Commercial Highway to
PUD and Approving the PUD Development Plan and Design Guidelines.
APN 005-020-003,039,040. File # 04 -GPA -0512 -CR, (Moore/Boyle).
Cateam•v (cheer: one): ❑ Consent Calendar N Public Hearing
❑ Unfinished Business ❑ Presentation(,`
Deaartment: Director: V )Contact Person:
Community Mike Moor ePhil Boyle, Associq#
Development Director Planner I
Cost of Pronosal: N/A f
O.1A
September 19, 2005
1\
2005
Meeting Time: ❑ 3:00 PM
® 7:00 PM
❑ New Business
Phone Number:
778-4301
Account Number: N/A
Amount Budgeted: N/A Name of Fund: N/A
Attachments to Agenda Packet Item:
1. Draft Resolution Adopting a General Plan Amendment
2. Draft Resolution Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration
3. Draft Resolution Adopting the Tentative Subdivision Map (includes Conditions of Approval)
4. Draft Ordinance Adopting a Zoning Map Amendment, PUD Plan, and PUD Development Standards
5. Project Location Map and Project Description
6. Staff Report from the June 14 and June 28, 2005 Planning Commission meetings without attachments
7. Letter from the Law Finn of Baddeley, Oliker and Sartori 7/2705 and memo from Petaluma Police
Department 8/03/05
8. Initial Study and Mitigation and Monitoring Program
9. Visual Simulations and Shade Study
10. PUD Development Standards
11. Plans date stamped September 2, 2005 (City Council members only)
Summary Statement:
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project on June 14 and 28, 2005. After deliberating and
taking public testimony, the Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval of the Lindberg Circle
project to the City Council. The proposed project is a mixed use project consisting of a two story 16,975
square foot commercial building, 40 single family detached homes and 4--1,750 sq. ft of private open space.
Recommended Citv Council Action/Suggested Motion:
The Planning Commission and staff recommend that the City Council: 1) Approve the General Plan
Amendment from Thoroughfare Commercial to Mixed Use, 2) Approve the Zoning Map Amendment from
Commercial Highway to PUD and the associated Unit Development Plan and Development Standards, 3)
Approve the Tentative Subdivision Map, 4) Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declai t'on
)/I 6kiewed/bv Admin. Svcs. Dir: Reviewed by City Attornev:p d by City Manager:
1��ipANluf�(fa/� Date:6'�(Jbj Date: D Date:
Today's Date: Revision # and Date Revised: Fil Code:
September 6, 2005 # S:\CC-City Cuuncil'Repurts,Lindherg Circle
CC.dnc
11
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
CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
SEPTEMBER 19, 2005
AGENDA REPORT
FOR LINDBERG CIRCLE
1. EXECUTIVE SUNINIARY:
The applicant has submitted for multiple entitlements to construct a mixed use project consisting of
a two story 16,975 square foot commercial building, 40 single family detached homes and ±7,150
sq. ft. of private open space at 890 Lakeville Street (See Attachment 5). The entitlements requested
are: 1) A General Plan Amendment from Thoroughfare Commercial to Mixed Use 2) A Tentative
Subdivision Map to create 40 lots for residential use ranging in size from 5,938 to 2,007 square feet
and 1 lot for retail/office and open space use. 3) A Zoning Map Amendment from Commercial
Highway to Planned Unit District (PUD) and 4) Site Plan and Architectural Review. The Planning
Commission reviewed the proposed project on June 14 and 28 2005. After deliberating and taking
public testimony, the Commission forwarded a unanimous recommendation of approval of the
project to the City Council. These public hearings can be reviewed on the City of Petaluma's
Website at www.cityofpetaluma.net.
2. BACKGROUND:
The Sonoma County Assessor records show that this site has been vacant since 1947. There are no
records prior to 1947. In July of 2004 the applicant brought a similar project to the Site Plan and
Architectural Review Committee for a preliminary review.
The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on May 16, 2005 to present the project and solicit
questions and comments on the proposed development. Invitations to the meeting were sent out to
all property owners and residents with 500 feet of the project. The list of addresses was provided by
the City of Petaluma.
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project on June 14 and June 28, 2005 (See
Attachment 6 and City of Petaluma's Website at www. cityofpetaluma.net). After deliberating,
taking public testimony and recommending additional conditions of approval, the Commission
forwarded a recommendation of approval of the Lindberg Circle project to the City Council.
The applicant has requested that the condition requiring an irrevocable offer of dedication for a
public access easement through Parcel A and Lot 14 be removed because it poses an unreasonable
liability and security risk for the project. (See Attachment 6 June 28, 2005 Planning Com. Staff
Report Condition #5) The applicant has provided a number of reasons supporting their argument for
the removal of this condition as well as letter from the legal finn of Baddeley, Oliker and Sartori and
a memo from the Petaluma Police Department (See Attachment 7). The City Attorney has also
provided an opinion on this issue for the council's consideration (This opinion will be provided to
the Council on the date of the public hearing -September 19). As stated in the Planning Commission
Staff Report of June 14, 2005 staff recognizes the needs and benefits of connecting neighborhoods;
however the creation of a pedestrianibicycle connection between this development and Vallejo
Street or Payran Street appears infeasible.
IS
1 3.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
is
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
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant has submitted for multiple entitlements to construct a mixed use project consisting of
a two story 16,975 square foot commercial building, 40 single family detached homes and a ±7,150
sq. ft of private open space. The entitlements requested are: 1) A General Plan Amendment from
Thoroughfare Commercial to Mixed Use 2) A Tentative Subdivision Map to create 40 lots for
residential use ranging in size from 5,938 to 2,007 square feet and 1 lot for retail/office and open
space use ± 47,767sq. ft. 3) A Zoning Map Amendment from Commercial Highway to Planned Unit
District (PUD) and 4) Site Plan and Architectural Review.
The residential units will have three floor plans ranging from 1,450 to 1,900 square feet of living
area. The buildings are two stories (±30 feet in height), except for some of the end units, and have
common walls. The units are setback from the street ±20 feet at the garage door and ±15 feet at the
porch. The rear yards are a minimum of ±14 feet. Access to all of the residential properties will be
from a new public street (Lindberg Circle) off of Lindberg Lane which will terminate at a cul-de-
sac.
Parking for the residential units is an average of 2.6 off street parking spaces per unit (including the
four spaces within Parcel A). If street parking within the development is included, the ratio is 3
parking spaces per unit. Each unit has a tandem or single car garage and one space in the driveway.
The two story commercial building will consist of 8,757 square feet of retail on the ground floor
and 8,218 square of office space on the second floor. The building will not exceed 40 feet in height
from peak of roof to grade. The applicant provided visual simulations of the project from 5 different
vantage points (See Visual Simulations, Attachment 9). These simulations show the buildings, the
proposed CMU sound wall around the residential portion of the project and mature landscaping. The
proposed residential units will be approximately 30 feet in height and be setback ± 16 feet from the
rear property lines of the East Court residences. The site plan shows the buildings adjacent to the rear
property lines of East Court as three buildings ± 30 feet in height and ± 100 feet in width separate by
±10 feet. The bulk and massing of these new residential units could impact the natural lighting and
views of the East Court residences. The applicant has provided a shade study which shows the
shading of adjacent properties at the Winter Solstice and Spring Equinox (See Shade Study,
Attachment 9).
The new public street off of Lindberg Lane will be ±38 feet in width with sidewalks and parking on
both sides. The street will terminate at a cul-de-sac. Pedestrian and emergency vehicle access is
provided between the cul-de-sac and the commercial parking lot. Vehicular and pedestrian/bicycle
access to the commercial building is from both Lindberg Lane and Lakeville Street.
The total project density is approximately 9 units per acre and the density of the residential units
alone, including the street, is approximately 12 units per acre.
See Attachment 11, Full size (Council Members Only) and 11x17 Architectural, Civil, and
Conceptual Landscaping Plans.
3
N
1
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
4. STAFF ANAYLSIS
General Plan Consistence,
The current General Plan Land Use Designation of the project parcels is Thoroughfare Commercial.
The City of Petaluma is in the process of updating its General Plan. The most recent version of the
draft Land Use Map shows the project parcels as Mixed Use. Because the updated General Plan has
not yet been adopted by the City and may not be adopted prior to approval of this project, a General
Plan Amendment from Thoroughfare Commercial to Mixed Use is required.
State law requires that any decision on a General Plan Amendment must be supported by findings
of fact. These findings are the rationale for making a decision either to approve or deny a project.
If the City Council chooses to approve the General Plan Amendment, specific findings are required.
These findings and an explanation of how the project complies with each are listed in Attachment 1,
Draft Findings for Approval — General Plan Amendment.
The Mixed Use General Plan Land Use Designation allows for any combination of commercial,
office, and residential uses. The intent of Mixed Use is to allow for housing along with commercial
uses including but not limited to retail, offices and restaurants. Densities of 10 to 30 units per acre
are allowed "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 40 residential units
proposed on 4.5 acres represent a density of 8.8 units per acre or 12 units per acre when the 42,109
square foot office/commercial use parcel is excluded. The applicant states that the project will have
a "measurable community benefit" because it will provide a quality product with a unified and
organized arrangement of buildings and service facilities which are appropriate in relation to the
adjacent and nearby properties. The purposed project will screen the nearby industrial uses and
provide a landscaped site for the residential homes and commercial building. If the Planning
Commission and City Council concur that the project provides a "measurable community benefit"
sufficient to allow a density greater than 10 dwelling units per acre, then the current proposal
complies with the uses and density specified by the General Plan.
ZoninP Consislencv
To develop this project as proposed, an amendment to the Zoning Map is required. The applicant is
requesting a rezoning from Commercial Highway (CH) to Planned Unit District (PUD). The PUD
designation is "designed to allow inclusion within its boundaries a mixture of uses, or unusual
density, building intensity, or design characteristics which would not normally be pennitted in a
single use district or combination of zoning districts ..." The applicant is proposing a PUD to
create a mixed use, interconnected, and more compact project. Specifically, for the residential
portion of the project, the PUD will: 1) have parcels which are less than the 3,000 sq. ft. minimum
required in the Residential Compact District, 2) have a parking ratio of less than 3 spaces per
dwelling unit and 3) have open space areas, which on average, are less than required in the
Residential Compact and Residential Garden Apartment Districts.
The PUD designation gives the applicant greater flexibly in terms of the site plan, setbacks and
building height. Though the project meets the requirements of the City's Subdivision Ordinance
I
52
I and the State Subdivision Map Act, staff has identified a number of issues for the City Council, and
2 SPARC to considering regarding the design and amenities of this PUD:
3
4 1. Park/Open Space Area: The project provides t 7,150 sq. ft. of private common open space for
5 the residents in addition to the front and rear yards of each unit. The typical rear yard for this
6 project is t 400 sq. ft. Do to the limited size of the site it is not desirable to have a public park
7 as part of this project, primarily because of maintenance costs. However, the need for some
8 type of private open space area(s) is desirable as well as a policy of both the General Plan (See
9 Policy #27 above) and a required finding for the PUD. As a point of comparison, if this
10 project was proposed to be zoned Residential Compact (RC) or Garden Apartment (RMG)
1 I the minimum amount of useable open space required would be 600 square feet per unit or a
12 total of 24,000 sq. ft.
13
14 2. Building Bulk and Mass: The proposed residential units will be approximately 30 feet in
15 height and be setback ±16 feet from the rear property lines. The site plan shows the buildings
16 adjacent to the rear property lines of East Court as three buildings t 30 feet in height and t
17 100 feet in width separate by ±10 feet. The bulk and massing of these new residential units
18 could impact the natural lighting and views of the East Court residences. The applicant has
19 provided a shade study which shows the shading of adjacent properties at the Winter Solstice
20 and Spring Equinox. Though shading will occur as a result of the project, most noticeably
21 during the Winter Solstice, it is to a level that is considered less than significant in the initial
22 study.
23
24 3. Sound Wall: The noise study provided by the applicant states that the proposed 6 foot CMU
25 wall, a 6 foot solid wood fence or a landscaped earth berm would provide the necessary
26 sound attenuation to mitigate any noise impacts. Depending on which of these sound
27 mitigation methods is used could impact the site plan and aesthetics of the project.
28
29 4. Commercial Building: The east end of the commercial building closest to the intersection of
30 Lindberg Lane and Lakeville Street does not appear to be an "active" part of the building.
31 Staff suggests that this portion of the building be better utilized as retail/commercial space
32 instead of utility areas and stairways?
33
34 A PUD can be created only after approval by the City Council of a complete unit development plan
35 showing the internal design of the district, the interrelationship of uses, and their relation to the
36 surrounding area. The applicant has submitted all the materials required under Section 19A-202 of
37 the Zoning Ordinance for the creation of a PUD. If the City Council chooses to approve the PUD
38 specific findings are required. These findings are listed in Attachment 4 -Draft Ordinance Adopting
39 a Zoning Map Amendment, Unit Development Plan, and PUD Development Standards.
40
41
42 Environmental review
43
44 Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study
45 of potential environmental impacts was prepared (See Attachment 8). The potential for the
46 following significant impacts were identified: Noise. Mitigation measures have been proposed and
47 agreed to by the applicant that will reduce potential impacts to less than significant. In addition,
48 there is no substantial evidence that supports a fair argument that the project, as mitigated, would
49 have a significant effect on the environment. The applicant has provided the necessary studies (e.g.
50 traffic, noise, etc.) to support a Mitigated Negative Declaration. These studies are available upon
5
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
50
request from the Community Development Department. It is therefore recommended that a
Mitigated Negative Declaration be adopted (See Attachment 2, Draft Resolution Adopting a
Mitigated Negative Declaration)
Proiect anorovals
Following City Council approval, the proposal must receive Site Plan and Architectural Review
Committee approval for the site, architectural, and landscaping plans and the Unit Development
Plan and PUD Development Standards (Attachment 10).
Public corresnondence
No new public comments have been received as of September 12, 2005
3. ALTERNATIVES:
a. The City Council may accept the recommendation from the Planning Commission to
approve the proposed General Plan Amendment, the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the
Zoning Map Amendment, the PUD Development Map and Development Standards, and
the Tentative Subdivision Map.
b. The City Council may deny the request for the General Plan Amendment, the Mitigated
Negative Declaration, the Zoning Map Amendment, the PUD Development Map and
Development Standards, and the Tentative Subdivision Map.
4. FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
This project is subject to any applicable City Special Development Fees. The project is subject to
the cost recovery fee system; therefore, the applicant is required to pay all costs associated with
processing the application. To date the City has collected $24,380. Approximately 192 hours of
total staff time at a cost of approximately $9,300 has been expended to date. If this project is
ultimately approved, additional staff time will be required to guide the application through the
SPARC and building permit process.
5. CONCLUSION:
The Planning Commission and staff found that the proposed General Plan Amendment, Zoning
Map Amendment, PUD Map and Development Standards, and Tentative Subdivision Map for the
Lindberg Circle Project 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 has forwarded a recommendation of approval with conditions to
the City Council.
I
1
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
6. RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council introduce an Ordinance amending the
General Plan from Thoroughfare Commercial to Mixed Use, Amend the Zoning Map from
Commercial Highway to Planned Unit District (PUD), Approve a Unit Development Plan and
Development Standards, Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration, and Approve the Tentative
Subdivision Map to construct a mixed use project consisting of 40 single family detached homes, a
two story 16,975 square foot commercial building and 1,750 sq. ft. of private open space.
7
Sr,CC-City CouncillRepnrtsLindbeig Circle CC doc
4
ATTACHMENT
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. N.C.S.
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
MAP
FOR THE
PETALUMA ECUMENICAL PROPERTIES -CASA GRANDE PROJECT
AT
400 CASA GRANDE ROAD
APN 017-040-047
CITY FILE #05 -GPA -0041 -CR
WHEREAS, an application was filed by Petaluma Ecumenical Properties to develop a
senior residential facility at 400 Casa Grande Road, which occupies approximately 2.3
acres. The application includes a request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map from
Urban Standard to Urban High and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the request on June 28, 2005; and
WHEREAS, all reports and comments from the Planning Commission were forwarded
to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider this
amendment on August 1, 2005, and considered all written and verbal communications
before rendering its decision; and
WHEREAS, the potential environmental impacts of the project were considered and
proper action has been taken by the City Council in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act and local environmental guidelines.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Petaluma City Council herby
approves the requested amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map to change the
designations as outlined above based upon the following findings:
The proposed General Plan Amendment is deemed to be in the public interest
because it provides an independent living facility for low-income seniors as well
as facilities for senior recreation, education, exercise and community events.
Furthermore, the project is along a public transit route and in reasonable
proximity to shopping and city services.
2. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent and compatible with the rest
of the General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected. The
Resolution No. N.0 S. 8
Pagel oft
proposed General Plan Amendment from Urban Standard to Urban High will
increase the density of the project parcel however the project is within the density
limits of the Urban High General Plan designation. The amendment is consistent
with goals and policies of the City's Housing Element to provide housing
opportunities for the low income seniors. Furthermore, the proposed General
Plan Amendment will be consistent with the currently proposed General Plan
Update which designates this site as High Density Residential (18.1-30.0 du/ac)
3. The potential impacts of the proposed General Plan Amendment have been
assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health,
safety or welfare. The project plans were referred to fire, police, public services
and engineering staff for review and comment, and the staff recommendations
have been incorporated into draft conditions of project approval to ensure that the
project will not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare.
4. The proposed General Plan Amendment has been processed in accordance with
the applicable provisions of the California Government Code and the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study of potential
environmental impacts was prepared (See Attachment F, Initial Study). The
Initial Study identifies mitigation measures regarding noise that would reduce
potential impacts to less than significant. Based upon the Initial Study, a
detenmination was made that no significant environmental impacts would result.
A copy of this notice was published in the Araus Courier and provided to
residents and occupants within 500 feet of the site, in compliance with CEQA
requirements.
5. The proposed General Plan Amendment to Urban High with a higher density (10
to 30 units per acre) is allowed "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 58 residential units on
2.33 acres represent a density of 25 units per acre. The "measurable community
benefits" derived from the project are: 1) the creation of an independent living
facility for low-income seniors, and 2) the project will provide seniors with
facilities for recreation, education, exercise and community events. The initial
study demonstrates that the project will have adequate public services and
infrastructure to serve the increased density. The design of the project, including
it's architecture site plan and landscaping plan, have all been reviewed by staff
and comply with the City approved SPARC Guidelines. The project has also
received two preliminary reviews from SPARC and requires formal SPARC
review and approval prior to building permit issuance.
5:\CC-City CounciLresolutions\PEP Casa Grande Resos. and Ord\Casa PEP GP Reso.doe
Resolution No. N.C.S. I
Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. N.C.S.
APPROVAL OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE
LINDBERG CIRCLE PROJECT AT
890 LAKEVILLE STREET
APN 005-020-003, 039, 040, CITY FILE #04 -GPA -0512 -CR
WHEREAS, an Initial Study of potential environmental impacts was prepared and the results of the study
indicated that the proposed Lindberg Circle project, as mitigated, will not cause any significant adverse
environmental impacts; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Petaluma held a public hearing on June 14 and 28, 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 Lindberg Circle Proposal on August 19, 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:
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 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.
I()
Resolution No. N.C.S.
Pagel of 2
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 and the City of
Petaluma's website at www.cityofpetaluma,net.
Mitigation Measures
All mitigation measures, as identified in the Initial Study for the Lindberg Circle Proposal, are herein
incorporated.
Resolution No. N.C.S.
Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. N.C.S.
APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR THE
LINDBERG CIRCLE SUBDIVISION
AT 890 LAKEVILLE STREET AND LINDBERG LANE;
APN 005-020-003, 039, 040
WHEREAS, by action taken on June 14 and 28, 2005, the Planning Commission
considered the proposal and forwarded a recommendation to the City Council to approve
the Tentative Subdivision Map; 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 Fann subdivision; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the proposed project on
September 19, 2005, 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 considered the Tentative Subdivision Map;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves a Tentative
Subdivision Map subject to the following Findings, Conditions, and Mitigation Measures:
1. The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map, as conditioned, is consistent with the
provisions of Title 20, Subdivisions, of the Municipal Code (Subdivision
Ordinance) and the State Subdivision Map Act.
2. That the proposed subdivision, together with provisions for its design and
improvements, is consistent with the General Plan, and will not be detrimental to
the public health, safety, or welfare in that adequate public facilities exist or will
be installed, including roads, sidewalks, water, sewer, storm drains, and other
infrastructure.
3. That the site is physically suitable for the density and the type of development
proposed.
4. That the design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements will not cause
substantial environmental damage, and that no substantial or avoidable injury will
1a
occur to fish or wildlife or their habitat. An Initial Study was prepared indicating
that there would be no significant, umnitigatable environmental impacts.
From the Plannina Division (778-4301)
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 Development Plan and the Tentative Map date stamped June 1, 2005.
3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a water
conservation plan for review and approval by the City of Petaluma Department of
Water Resources. The plan shall identify Best Management Practices for water
conservation that would result in a reduction of water consumption by at least 40%
as compared to a conventional subdivision.
4. The landscape plan, irrigation plan and grading plan shall comply with the City's
Landscape Water Efficiency Standards. Prior to the issuance of a building permit
for the project, each of these plans and all supporting documents shall be submitted
to the City for review and approval. The Landscape Water Efficiency Standards
shall apply to all commercial and residential common areas, open space, park, and
subdivision perimeter landscaping, as well as single-family front yard landscaping
which is installed by the developer.
5. If prior to issuance of the first building pen -nit for this project, the City has enacted
a water conservation fee for new development, the applicant shall be required to
pay the fees necessary in order for the project to result in "water neutral" project,
i.e. zero net increase in water consumption.
6. Plans submitted for building permit shall be in compliance with the approved Solar
Policy for all single-family residential developments of five or more lots or units.
7. All mitigation measures adopted in conjunction with the Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the Lindberg Circle project are herein incorporated by reference as
conditions of project approval.
8. 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
13
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).
9. Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee shall review the site plan design,
building design, PUD Development Standards, colors and materials, landscaping,
and lighting.
10. 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.
11. Prior to SPARC the lighting plan shall be revised to show City of Petaluma Light
Standard on the public street.
12. 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.
13. All noise generating construction activities shall be limited to daytime, weekday
(non -holiday hours) 8:00am to 5pm and 9am to 5pm Saturdays, as stated in the
mitigation measures.
14. 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.
15. Construction maintenance, storage, and staging areas for construction 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.
16. Construction and demolition debris shall be recycled to the maximum extent
feasible in order to minimize impacts on the landfill.
Citv of Petaluma Bicvcle Plan and Petaluma Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory_ Committee
Conditions of ADDroval
17. Bike Parking: Prior to SPARC review, the floor plan of the commercial/office
building shall be revised to provide interior secure parking for (4) four bicycles for
upper floor office personnel.
k
18. Drinking Fountain: Prior to SPARC review, the site plan shall be revised to include
drinking fountain near the commercial/office building.
19. Signs: Prior to SPARC review; the site plan shall be revised to include signs on
Lakeville St., one in each direction, warning motorist of pedestrians and bicyclists
in the area.
20. Through Travel: Prior to SPARC review, the site plan shall be revised showing
bicycle/pedestrian connections from the end of the cul-de-sac through the
commercial parking area to Lakeville St. and Lindberg Ln.
21. Pedestrian and BicPcle Friendlt, h�frastructure: Prior to SPARC review, the site
plan shall be revised to show curb cuts at the two entrances of the commercial
building, corresponding to the pedestrian/bicycle connections through the parking
lot.
22. hicentii'es: Prior to the building permit final on the commercial/office building, the
applicant shall provide to the City a copy of the simple one-page document they
have prepared describing altematives to driving and incentives for employees to
walk, cycle, or take transit to work.
23. Pesticide / Herbicide Use: The developer and/or commercial/office building
manager 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.
From the Eneineerina Division (778-4301)(Craie Soauldina. Citv Enuineer)
The following conditions shall be addressed at final map and improvement plan
application.
24. Lindberg Lane frontage improvements shall include but not be limited to '/ street
pavement reconstruction (4 -inches AC over 12 -inches of class 2 AB), curb, gutter,
sidewalk, street lights, landscaping, etc. A crosswalk, left and right turn lane,
arrows, legends and signs shall be installed at the Lakeville intersection. Parking
shall not be allowed between Lakeville St. and the commercial driveway. Install a
centerline stripe along frontage.
25. Lakeville Street frontage improvements shall include but not be limited to removing
and replacing existing curb, gutter and sidewalk as indicated on the tentative map,
pedestrian ramp, street lights, landscaping etc.
15
26. This development shall provide a fair share contribution toward a future traffic
signal at Lakeville Street and Lindberg Lane.
27. Site grading and retaining walls shall conform to the soil investigation report
prepared for this project.
28. Erosion control and water quality measures shall be employed and the necessary
documentation filed as required by the responsible agencies.
29. The proposed interior public street geometry shall meet the access requirements of
the Fire Marshal. A movable vehicular barrier for emergency vehicles, approved by
the Fire Marshal, shall be installed at the end of the cul-de-sac. Pedestrian ramps
shall be installed at the proposed public street and Lindberg Lane. Parking shall not
be allowed at the following locations in the proposed public street; along the curved
frontage of lot 41, in front of lots 32 and 33 and around the perimeter of the cul-de-
sac bulb. A stop sign, stop legend and crosswalk shall be installed at the new
intersection. A centerline stripe shall be installed along the curve at lot 41.
Sidewalks shall be continuous around the cul-de-sac bulb. The private drive serving
lots 16-19 shall be at least 20 -feet wide and shall be an easement without flag lots.
Vehicles using the private drive shall be able to tum around and exit on to the
public street in a forward direction.
30. Skewed crossings of public utilities shall not be allowed. Maintain required
separation between water, sewer and storm drains.
31. The proposed water main systems shall be capable of delivering a continuous fire
flow as required by the Fire Marshal. If calculations indicate that the fire flow can
be obtained with a single water main connection to Lindberg Lane, then the
connection to Lakeville Street may be eliminated. If the Lakeville Street connection
is necessary, a public water main easement shall be required across lot 1.
32. Off-site storm drain improvements on Lakeville Street, between East Court and the
project site, shall be constructed as required by the preliminary hydrology study.
33. Hydrologic and hydraulic calculations shall be required and submitted to the
Sonoma County Water Agency for review, and approval.
34. Maintenance agreements shall be required for shared driveways and utilities (water,
sewer and storm drains).
35. Provide an emergency vehicle access across lot 1.
36. Water services shall be 1.5 -inches in diameter with 1 -inch meters per City
Standards. Dual water services are not allowed.
10
37. A 10 -foot wide Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated along the frontage
of Lakeville Street, Lindberg Lane, the proposed public street and over the access
easement to lots 14-17. The PUE may be reduced in width or waived by a written
statement from the public utility agencies.
38. Lots 14-17 shall be accessed by an easement. The common Parcel A shall not be
allowed.
39. Prepare map and improvement plans per the latest policies, standards, codes,
resolutions and ordinances.
From the Fire Marshal (778-4398):
Listed below are the fire protection requirement codes for the above project:
Commercial building:
40. The minimum size water line within this project shall be sized to meet the water
flow demand for domestic requirements and fire flow demand.
41. The minimum fire flow for this project is 1,500GPM at 20 pounds residual per sq.
in. Proof that the required flow is available shall be supplied to the Fire Marshal's
Office prior to construction.
42. The building/s shall be protected by an approved automatic fire sprinkler system as
required by the California Fire Code and shall be provided with central station
alarm monitoring, which will notify the fire department in the event of water flow.
In addition, a local alann shall be provided on the exterior and in a normally
occupied location in the interior of the building.
43. Fire sprinkler systems installed in buildings of undetermined occupancy/use shall
be designed to provide a density of .33 gallons per minute per square foot, over a
minimum design area of 3,000 square feet.
Residential buildings:
44. The building/s shall be protected by an approved automatic fire sprinkler system as
required by the California Fire Code, Petaluma Municipal Code and NFPA-13.
45. Provide infonnation for the town homes, will they be rentals or be individually
owned. if individually owned, will there be a Homeowners' Association?
46. This plan has been reviewed with the information supplied; subsequent plan
submittal for review may be subject to additional requirements as plans are revised.
If you have any questions regarding these requirements, please feel free to contact
this office at 707-778-4389.
From the Department of Water Resources and Conservation (778-4582)
47. Landscape and irrigation design shall comply with the "Landscape Water
Efficiency Standards" of the City of Petaluma.
48. Appropriate best management practices (BMP's) to address stone water pollution
control associated with the proposed development should be included in the
improvement plans.
49. Commercial unit water services and irrigation services shall comply with Petaluma
City Standard Details No. 870 and 876.01. Depending on the Fire Marshal's office
- requirements, a double detector check valve may be required on the fire system.
From the Department of Public Works. Transit (Jim Rvan 778-4421)
50. The applicant shall pay the appropriated in -lieu fee or submit plans showing
improvements to the existing bus stop on Lakeville Street in front of the Gateway
Shopping Center per direction from the Department of Public Works. If plans are
submitted they shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department
and the Community Development Department.
S SCC -City CouncibresolulionsUndbcrg Circle Resos.und Oid, Lindberg Circle TPM Reso doe
no
ATTACHMENT 4
DRAFT
ORDINANCE NO. N.C.S.
APPROVAL OF A
REZONING FROM HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL TO PLANNED UNIT
DISTRICT
AND APPROVING THE UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE
LINDBERG CIRCLE PROJECT
AT
890 LAKEVILLE STREET
APN 005-020-003, 039, 040 CITY FILE #04 -GPA -0512 -CR
WHEREAS, by action taken on June 14 and 28, 2005, the Planning Commission
considered the current Lindberg Circle Project and forwarded a recommendation with
conditions to the City Council to approve the rezone the project parcel from a zoning
designation of Highway Commercial to Planned Unit District and approve the PUD
Development Plan and the PUD Standards to allow the Lindberg Circle Project to be
developed; 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 Lindberg Circle Project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the proposed project on August
19, 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 Lindberg Circle Project PUD
Development Plan and PUD Development Standards;
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 Measures:
FINDINGS
1. That the plan clearly results in a more desirable use of land and a better physical
environment than would be possible under a single zoning district or combination
of zoning districts. The proposed forty-two residences and office/commercial
building complies with the General Plan designation of the site as Mixed Use
which allows a combination of residential, commercial, and retail uses. The
Ordinance No. N.C.S. I q
Page 1 oft
project is proposed as a PUD because the residential portion of the proposed
project would not comply with the setbacks requirements of the conventional
residential zoning districts. The density of the project would be compatible with
the range allowed by the Mixed Use designation,
Z. That any P.U.D. District is proposed on property which has a suitable relationship
to one (1) or more thoroughfares, and that said thoroughfares are adequate to
carry any additional traffic generated by the development. This PUD is proposed
on a site which has a suitable relationship to one or more thoroughfares (Lakeville
Street and Lindberg Lane), and that said thoroughfares are adequate to carry any
additional traffic generated by the development, as demonstrate by the traffic
impact study submitted for the project.
3. That 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 adequate landscaping and/or screening is
included if necessary to insure compatibility. 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 Site Plan and
Architectural Review Committee
4. That the natural and scenic qualities of the site are protected, with adequate
available public and private spaces designated on the Unit Development Plan.
The project site is relatively flat and contains no natural or scenic qualities. The
project proposes
5. The Unit Development Plan, including the Development Standards, will result in
appropriate and compatible uses in the district.
6. 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.
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.
8. The Unit Development Plan for the Lindberg Circle Development shall be subject
to the applicable conditions of Tentative Subdivision Map, including Mitigation
Measures adopted as conditions of approval.
S:\CC-City Counciltresolutinns�Lindbcrg Circle Resos.and OrdUndbeig Circle Remne. Ord..duc
Ordinance No. N.C.S. OY /
Page 2 ort
Powered By GeaSmart.net
Location Map
Lindberg Circle
City of Petaluma, California
ATTACHMENT 5
-Crgy�"
A
City Limit
iOParcels
p
GIS Division
Minor Waterways
Major Waterways
wppp[ m.imo-aL�nOdp:.dr
nx.:y[.no�`d•„`��
I�
�wdiwn":i[s. m:.m wo�
rywmi NwTn dCb
M4Mvro�i0 alAn �pvp'felm uxunginy
A
LINDBERG CIRCLE
Project Information
Revised Application Submittal
By
Project Development Team
Lindberg Circle LLC
May 5, 2005
YO
Abstract
This document contains information to support the Lindberg Circle Mixed -Use Planned Unit
Development Project Application for General Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Tentative Subdivision
and Site Plan, and Architectural Review for the development of the three parcels at the northwest
corner of Lakeville Street and Lindberg Lane at 890 Lakeville Street (APN # 005-020-
003,039,040), File Number 04 -GPA -0512 -CR.
LINDBERG CIRCLE
Project Information
Table of Contents
Purpose................................................................
Project Description ..............................................
Required Studies ..................................................
General Plan Amendment ...................................
Environmental Impact .........................................
Rezoning & Land Use .........................................
Parking Commentary ...........................................
Site Plan and Architectural Details .....................
BicyclePlan .........................................................
Water Resources & Conservation .......................
Public Facilities and Services ..............................
FireMarshal.......................................................
Police Department ...............................................
Pesticide / Herbicide Use ....................................
EXHIBIT A-1 Turning Radius ...........................
EXHIBIT A-2 Turning Radius ...........................
EXHIBIT B Cross Section .................................
a3
LINDBERG CIRCLE
Project Information
Purpose
The purpose of this document is to provide detailed information on the proposed
Lindberg Circle Mixed -Use Planned Unit Development project within the Petaluma City
Limits. The Petaluma based company, Lindberg Circle LLC, is actively pursing the
development of approximately 4.5 acres of property consisting of three existing parcels
located at the Northwest corner of Lakeville Street and Lindberg Lane.
The application package submitted for this project is the result of numerous
meetings and dialog between the City of Petaluma Planning Staff and the Lindberg
Circle Design Team. This collaboration has influenced and driven the changes made to
the original project and has resulted in a superior design. Some of the changes
incorporated into the current design include: 1) a curb cut onto Lakeville Street from the
commercial building parking lot; 2) an expanded commercial parking lot that contains 50
spaces and is separate from the residential area; 3) a new curb cut from the commercial
parking lot onto Lindberg Lane to allow for better circulation; 4) a visually attractive wall
that separates the commercial area from the residential area; 5) creation of a single
parcel for the entire commercial area that includes the building, parking lot and
landscape areas; 6) moved the road away from the East Court fence by flipping the
homes on the other side of the street to now back up to the East Court property line; 7)
eliminate the East Court fence from the City right of way and minimize the required
height of the retaining wall at the base of the fence; 8) terminate the Lindberg Circle road
within the residential area and provide an emergency access point to the commercial
parking lot; 9) increase visibility across the open landscape areas and commercial
parking lot; 10) move and expand the Commercial Building toward Lindberg Lane and
add more mass to the corner presence; and 11) expand emergency access between the
commercial and residential areas and design in a larger turning radius for emergency
vehicles.
We are committed to the success of this project and it is our hope that the
proposed design changes will remove the current obstacles and enable the project to
gain the full support of the Planning Department, City Council and Architectural
Committee.
-3-
LINDBERG CIRCLE
Project Information
Project Description
The Lindberg Circle project as proposed by Lindberg Circle, LLC, a Petaluma
based company, is a Mixed -Use Planned Unit Development within the Petaluma City
Limits. The intent of this project is to provide the community with needed entry-level
market priced housing and a commercial building incorporating retail and office use. The
project plan as designed provides a functional site including privacy and visibility where
needed for all the uses; adequate required parking; access throughout the site; and
comfortable surroundings for all. We feel the proposed project revitalizes the existing
neighborhood, fits within the city's redevelopment plans, enhances the local community
by providing needed housing within a developed area of the city limits, and benefits the
City of Petaluma.
To achieve the desired results, we have commissioned Hedgpeth Architects to
develop the Architectural design documents; Balcerak Design to develop the
Landscaping design documents; and Robertson Engineering to develop the Civil
Engineering documents. These professionals along with the Lindberg Circle
development team are committed to creating a quality mixed-use development that will
have a positive impact on the surrounding area. It is in the public interest to provide
mixed-use projects that offer residential use in close proximity to retail and office use,
cutting down on the need for commuting between these different uses. Thus the
residential use within our mixed-use project will enhance and expand the existing
neighborhood feel of the area and the project as a whole will provide an example of a
quality mixed-use development for the surrounding properties which have not yet been
developed in accord with the current land use districting.
The proposed Property to be developed is approximately 4.5 acres consisting of
three existing parcels located at the Northwest corner of Lakeville Street and Lindberg
Lane within the City of Petaluma limits. One existing parcel has frontage on Lakeville
Street; one has frontage on Lindberg Lane; and the third parcel has frontage on both
streets. The proposed development consists of a two story commercial building parcel
and forty-two residential parcels for a total development of forty-three parcels. The
proposed land use, zoning, lot description, and residential density are as follows:
Land Use: Existing: Thoroughfare Cormnercial
Proposed: Mixed -Use
Zoning: Existing: Highway Commercial (CH)
Proposed: Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Lots: Existing: Three (3) Parcels: 005-020-003, -039, -040
Proposed: Forty Three Parcels (42 Residential, 1 Commercial)
Residential Density: 9.3 per acre
d5
-4-
LINDBERG CIRCLE
Project Information
The project Buildings and Structures consist of a 16,975 square foot, two-story
Commercial Building fronting Lakeville Street; forty two single family homes to the north
of the commercial building, including three floor plan layouts and a range of livable area
from 1450 square feet to 1900 square feet per house; and coordinated landscape design
throughout the site. The commercial building height will not exceed forty feet, while the
residential building heights will be held to a maximum of thirty feet. The building height
shall be measure by the vertical distance from the average ground level of the finish
grade to the highest point of the roof. This measurement will not include chimneys or
other appurtenances as they are defined by the City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance. The
residential homes are located on a new public street that terminates in a cul-de-sac. A
pedestrian and emergency vehicle access is provided between this cul-de-sac and the
commercial parking lot to enhance the connection between the two areas.
The proposed Street Frontage Improvements along Lakeville Street include: curb,
gutter, sidewalk, pedestrian walkways to building, curb cut into project, and mounded
landscaping along entire building frontage. Along Lindberg Lane improvements include:
curb, gutter, sidewalk, curb cut into project, and landscaping to residential property
fence. The commercial and residential areas of the project are separated by a six-foot
wall and landscape buffer consisting of numerous trees, vines and a variety of plants.
We are sensitive to the needs of the people that will live in the residential and
work in the commercial areas and have taken a proactive approach to planning
amenities and facilities to accommodate cyclists in the project. As such we have at a
minimum met or in some cases exceeded the required codified sections of the Petaluma
Bike Plan that apply to this project including covered bike racks, showers, accessible
bathrooms and drinking fountains.
One of our goals is to attract quality businesses to Petaluma. One perspective
tenant that has expressed an interest in the upper floor of the Commercial Building is the
Corporate and Sales Offices of Golden State Lumber, Inc. Other perspective tenants in
the development, professional service and retail industry have expressed interest in the
bottom floor of the Commercial Building. The combined tenants should generate sizeable
sales tax revenue for the City of Petaluma.
This project is a win for Petaluma. It encompasses the progressive move toward
combining residential and commercial areas together in a workable partnership that
results in a development that as a whole exceeds the sum of its parts.
s-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
77
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
ATTACHMENT 6
CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
MEMORANDUM
Coin munin, Development Deparbnent, Planning Division, 11 English Street, Petalruna, CA 94952
(707) 778-4301 Free (707) 778-4498 E-mail: planningCaci petnhuna.ca.us
DATE: June 14, 2005 AGENDA ITEM NO.1
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Phil Boyle, Associate Plainer
SUBJECT: AN APPLICATION FOR MULTIPLE ENTITLEMENTS TO CONSTRUCT A
MIXED USE PROJECT CONSISTING OF A TWO STORY 16,975 SQUARE
FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND 42 SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED
HOMES. THE ENTITLEMENTS REQUESTED ARE: 1) A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FROM THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE 2)
A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP TO CREATE 42 LOTS FOR
RESIDENTIAL USE AND 1 LOT FOR RETAIL/OFFICE USE 3) A ZONING
MAP AMENDMENT FROM COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY TO PLANNED UNIT
DISTRICT (PUD) INCLUDING THE ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AND PUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
RECOMMENDATIONS. .
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
1. Forward a recommendation to the City Council to:
a. Approve the General Plan Amendment from Thoroughfare Commercial to Mixed
b. Approve the Zoning Map Amendment from Commercial Highway to Planned Unit
District and the associated Unit Development Plan and Development Standards.
c. Approve the Tentative Subdivision Map
d. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration
35 I PROJECT SUMMARY
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
Project: Lindberg Circle
890 Lakeville St. ( Lakeville St. and Lindberg Lane)
APN 005-020-003,039,040
Project File No. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Project Planner: Phil Boyle, Associate Planner
Project Applicant: Mark Eglin
Lindberg Circle LLC
719 Southpoint Blvd. Ste. C
Petaluma CA 94954
Page 1
EM
NJ
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
Property Owner: Lindberg Circle LLC
719 Southpoint Blvd. Ste. C
Petahuna CA 94954
Property Size: 4.5 acres
Site Characteristics: The site is a relatively flat undeveloped 4.5 -acre (197,025 sq. ft.) parcel. The
site is bound by Lakeville St. to the south, Lindberg Lane to the southeast, industrial and
commercial uses to the north and residences to the west (See Project Location Map and Project
Description Map, Attachment F) An arborist report for the project concluded that all of the twelve
trees on the property are of low quality. There are also eight trees on adjacent properties which will
likely be affected by the project.
Existing Use: The site is currently vacant.
Proposed Use: The subdivision will consist of 42 lots for residential use ranging in size from 5,938
to 2,007 square feet and 1 lot for retail/office use approximately 42,109 sq. ft.
Current General Plan Land Use: Thoroughfare Commercial
Proposed General Plan Land Use: Mixed Used - The Mixed Use designation allows for any
combination of commercial, office, and residential uses. The intent of Mixed Use is to allow for
housing along with commercial uses including but not limited to retail, offices and restaurants.
Densities of 10 to 30 units per acre are allowed "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."
Current Zoning: Highway Commercial (CH) which is designed to provide suitable locations for
wholesale, commercial, and industrial establishments usually locating in proximity to highway or
arterial street traffic and designed to serve needs beyond those of the immediate neighborhood.
Proposed Zoning: Planned Unit District (PUD) which is designed to allow inclusion within its
boundaries a mixture of uses, or unusual density, building intensity, or design characteristics which
would not normally be permitted in a single use district,
Subsequent Actions Required:
■ City Council Review and Approval
• Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC) Review and Approval
■ Improvements Plans/Final Map
• Building Permits
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant has submitted for multiple entitlements to construct a mixed use project consisting of
a two story 16,975 square foot commercial building and 42 single family attached homes. The
entitlements requested are: 1) A General Plan Amendment from Thoroughfare Commercial to
Mixed Use 2) A Tentative Subdivision Map to create 42 lots for residential use ranging in size from
a8
Page 2
1 5,938 to 2,007 square feet and 1 lot for retail/office use ±42,109 sq. ft. 3) A Zoning Map
2 Amendment from Commercial Highway to Planned Unit District (PUD) and 4) Site Plan and
3 Architectural Review.
4
5 The residential units will have three floor plans ranging from 1,450 to 1,900 square feet of living
6 area. The buildings are two stories (±30 feet in height), except for some of the end units, and have
7 common walls. The units are setback from the street ±20 feet at the garage door and ±15 feet at the
8 porch. The rear yards are a minimum of±14 feet. Access to all of the residential properties will be
9 from a new public street (Lindberg Circle) off of Lindberg Lane which will terminate at a cul -de -
10 sac.
11
12 Parking for the residential units is an average of 2.5 off street parking spaces per unit. If street
13 parking within the development is included, the ratio is 3 parking spaces per unit. Each unit has a
14 tandem or single car garage and one space in the driveway.
15
16 The two story commercial building will consist of 8,757 square feet of retail on the ground floor
17 and 8,218 square of office space on the second floor. The building will be setback 10 feet from
18 Lakeville Street and Lindberg Lane, ±60 feet from the western property line of the project and ±75
19 feet from the new residential units. The building will not exceed 40 feet in height from peak of roof
20 to grade. The applicant provided visual simulations of the project from 5 different vantage points
21 (See Visual Simulations, Attachment G). These simulations show the buildings, the proposed CMU
22 sound wall around the residential portion of the project and mature landscaping. The buildings will
23 alter the views to the east of Sonoma Mountain for motorists and pedestrians/cyclists traveling on
24 Lakeville St. However, the height, width and setbacks of the building are consistent with the existing
25 Commercial Highway Zoning Designation. The proposed residential units will be approximately 30
26 feet in height and be setback ± 16 feet from the rear property lines of the East Court residences. The
27 site plan shows the buildings adjacent to the rear property lines of East Court as three buildings ± 30
28 feet in height and ± 100 feet in width separate by ±10 feet. The bulk and massing of these new
29 residential units could impact the natural lighting and views of the East Court residences. The
30 applicant has provided a shade study which shows the shading of adjacent properties at the Winter
31 Solstice and Spring Equinox (See Shade Study, Attachment H).
32
33 The new public street off of Lindberg Lane will be ±38 feet in width with sidewalks and parking on
34 both sides. The street will terminate at a cul-de-sac. Pedestrian and emergency vehicle access is
35 provided between the cul-de-sac and the commercial parking lot. Vehicular and pedestrianibicycle
36 access to the commercial building is from both Lindberg Ln. and Lakeville St.
37
38 The total project density is approximately 9 units per acre and the density of the residential units
39 alone, including the street, is approximately 12 units per acre.
40
41 See Attachment O, Full size (SPARC Members Only) and 11x17 Architectural, Civil, and
42 Conceptual Landscaping Plans.
43
44 BACKGROUND
45
46 The Sonoma County Assessor records show that this site been vacant since 1947. In July of 2004
47 the applicant brought a similar project to the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee for a
48 preliminary review (See Attachment L, SPARC Preliminary Review Excerpt Minutes, July 22,
49 2004). At that hearing the issues brought up by the committee were, the park/open space area, the
50 residential access from Lakeville St., landscaping and paving materials, noise impacts from adjacent
a�
Page 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
50
uses, panting and the need for retail. The park/open space area and the access to the residential
units from Lakeville St. have been eliminated in the current proposal.
The original site plan submitted by the applicant showed an undefined park/open space area
adjacent to Lindberg Ln. between the commercial parking lot and the residential units. Since those
original plans the applicant has met with the City regarding a number of aspects of the project
including interior and exterior circulation, building placement and the park/open space area. As a
result of these meetings the project was revised considerably. One revision, which was initiated by
the applicant, was the removal of the park/open space area. Staff is aware of the need and the
requirements of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance regarding open space and has
communicated this to the applicant.
The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on May 16, 2005 to present the project and solicit
questions and comments on the proposed development. Invitations to the meeting were sent out to
all property owners and residents with 500 feet of the project. The list of addresses was provided by
the City of Petaluma.
STAFF ANALYSIS
General Plan Consistenev:
The current General Plan Land Use Designation of the project parcels is Thoroughfare Commercial.
The City of Petaluma is in the process of updating its General Plan. The most recent version of the
draft Land Use Map shows the project parcels as Mixed Use. Because the updated General Plan has
not yet been adopted by the City and may not be adopted prior to approval of this project, a General
Plan Amendment from Thoroughfare Commercial to Mixed Use is required.
State law requires that any decision on a General Plan Amendment must be supported by findings
of fact. These findings are the rationale for making a decision either to approve or deny a project.
If the Planning Commission chooses to forward a recommendation to the City Council specific
findings are required. These findings and an explanation of how the project complies with each are
listed in Attachment A, Draft Findings for Approval — General Plan Amendment.
The Mixed Use General Plan Land Use Designation allows for any combination of commercial,
office, and residential uses. The intent of Mixed Use is to allow for housing along with commercial
uses including but not limited to retail, offices and restaurants. Densities of 10 to 30 units per acre
are allowed "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 42 residential units
proposed on 4.5 acres represent a density of 9.3 units per acre or 12 units per acre when the 42,109
square foot office/commercial use parcel is excluded. The applicant states that the project will have
a "measurable community benefit' because it will provide a quality product with a unified and
organized arrangement of buildings and service facilities which are appropriate in relation to the
adjacent and nearby properties. The purposed project will screen the nearby industrial uses and
provide a landscaped site for the residential homes and commercial building. If the Planning
Commission and City Council concur that the project provides a "measurable community benefit'
sufficient to allow a density greater than 10 dwelling units per acre, then the current proposal
complies with the uses and density specified by the General Plan. 30
Page 4
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
The General Plan policies that may apply specifically to this project are summarized below:
Community Character Element
Policy 10 and 11—The City shall encourage public and private landscaping along or in all major
streets, including street trees. The applicant has proposed a landscaping plan which includes
landscaping and street trees along Lakeville St. and Lindberg Lane.
Policy 14.1 -Street improvements shall incorporate, where applicable, safe pedestrian and
bicycle access and related facilities. The project was referred to the Petaluma Pedestrian and
Bicycle Advisory Committee. The committee provided conditions of approval and recommendations.
Conditions of approval which are codified will be required of the development. The
recommendations from the committee will be forward to the Planning Commission, City Council and
SPARC for consideration.
Policy 14.2 -New development shall include pedestrian and bicycle circulation within and
through the site to connect existing and planned City-wide pedestrian and/or bicycle networks.
The project includes sidewalks throughout the development which connect to the existing sidewalks
on Lakeville St. and Lindberg Ln. A condition has also been added which requires the site plan be
revised to show connections from the residential area, through the parking lot to Lakeville St. and
Lindberg Ln. as well as curb cuts at the two entrances of the commercial building. Bicycle facilities
(i.e. bike rack, showers and lockers) are also included as part of the commercial/office portion of the
project.
Policy 16.2 -Mixed use development is encouraged, particularly within the central area of the
City. The proposed project is a mixed use development, office/retail/residential and is in the central
area of the City.
Policy 20 -The clustering of commercial enterprises shall be encouraged. Additional strip
commercial shall be discouraged along arterial streets including Lakeville, Bodega, East
Washington, Petaluma Boulevard, and Old Redwood Highway. The commercial portion of the
project is adjacent to numerous other commercial businesses on both sides of Lakeville Street and
Lindberg Lane. The commercial/office building is a mixed use, two story structure located close to
the street with parking behind the building minimizing visibility from Lakeville Street so as to not
have a strip commercial look.
Policy 27 -The City shall require the provisions of privately owned open space in residential
developments of more than 15 units where made necessary by project density or design, or
lack or proximity to public parks and open space. The closest parks and open space areas to the
project site are Sunset Park in front of the Line and Twine Building, approximately one third of a
mile from the project site; Kenilworth Park next to the Public Library on Washington and the future
McNear Peninsula Park at the western end of McNear Peninsula; both are approximately half mile
from the project site. The project does not provide any designated private or public open space for
the residents outside of the front and rear yards of each unit.
Page 5
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
Land Use and Growth Mmiagentent Element
Policy 23 -Convenience shopping in proximity to residential shall be encouraged. The proposed
project combines retail/commercial use with residential used within walking distance.
Policy 28 -The City shall support residential development only in those areas where adequate
City facilities are available or will be provided with development. Conditions have been applied
to ensure that adequate City services will be imposed at the appropriate stages of the project
entitlement and building permit review process.
Open Space, Conserilation, and Energy Element
Policy 25 -Developers shall provide adequate drainage and erosion control during
construction. The developer will be required to conform to City and State regulations by providing
an erosion control and storm water pollution prevention plan, which shall be adhered to throughout
project construction.
Policy 29 and 30—Energy conservation measures to reduce energy consumption should be used
in residential, commercial, industrial and public buildings. The applicant has stated that green
building techniques and materials will be used throughout the construction of the project.
Parks, Recreation, Schools, and Child Care
Policy 1 -The City shall require all new residential development to dedicate land or pay a park
fee for public parks. The applicant will be required to pay Park and Recreation prior to occupancy
of the residential units. These fees provide for acquisition, development and improvement of
neighborhood and community park and recreation facilities.
Local Economy
Policy 6 -The City shall actively attempt to increase the number of persons who both work and
live in Petaluma. The project will provide 43 additional residential units for Petaluma and
approximately 17,000 sq. ft. of office/commercial space for employment opportunities.
Policy 10 -The City shall strive to make land available for effective residential/workplace
(mixed use) developments. The project is a mixed use development which has the potential to
provide a housing and employment all on the same site.
Housing
Policy 1.1 and 1.2 -Promote residential development within the Urban Growth Boundary and
encourage the development of housing on underutilized land. The proposed project is within the
UGB and is considered vacant and underutilized land.
Page 6
302
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
Policy 10.1—Promote the use of energy conservation features in the design of residential
development. The applicant has stated that green building techniques and materials will be used
throughout the construction of the project.
Transportation
Policy 1—On city streets where Level of Service (LOS) is currently at "C" or better, LOS shall
not deteriorate below level "C". The traffic report submitted by the applicant concludes that the
LOS for all of the study area intersections will not deteriorate below level "C".
Policy 10—New development shall be required to pay a pro -rata share of needed traffic
improvements. The project is conditioned to provide a fair share contribution toward a future
traffic signal at Lakeville St. and Lindberg Lane, as well as the standard traffic impact fees required
of all projects.
Community Health and Safety
Policy 27—Require sound buffers (particularly landscaped buffers), open space, or other
mitigation measures between residential areas and areas producing higher noise levels, such
as freeways, commercial sites, and industrial developments to achieve the sound level
reduction necessary to produce noise compatible land uses. The consulting firm of Illingworth
and Rodkin, hic. conducted an environmental noise assessment to evaluate the compatibility of the
development with respect to the environmental noise levels at the project site and evaluate noise
impacts upon sensitive receptors in the area. The majority of the noise is generated from Lakeville St.
To mitigate noise impacts, the project includes a 6 foot tall, 8 inch thick CMU wall separating the
residential units from Lindberg Ln. and from the commercial parking lot area. The report also
discusses the option of a solid wood fence or a landscaped earth berm both of which would mitigate
the noise impacts to an acceptable level.
Zoning Ordinance Consistenev:
To develop this project as proposed, an amendment to the Zoning Map is required. The applicant is
requesting a rezoning from Commercial Highway (CH) to Planned Unit District (PUD). The PUD
designation is "designed to allow inclusion within its boundaries a mixture of uses, or unusual
density, building intensity, or design characteristics which would not normally be permitted in a
single use district or combination of zoning districts ..." The applicant is proposing a PUD to
create a mixed use, interconnected, and more compact project. Specifically, for the residential
portion of the project, the PUD will: 1) have parcels which are less than the 3,000 sq. ft. minimum
required in the Residential Compact District, 2) have a parking ratio of less than 3 spaces per
dwelling unit and 3) have open space areas, which on average, are less than required in the
Residential Compact and Residential Garden Apartment Districts.
The PUD designation gives the applicant greater flexibly in terms of the site plan, setbacks and
building height. Though the project meets the requirements of the City's Subdivision Ordinance
and the State Subdivision Map Act, staff has identified a number of issues for the commission,
council, and SPARC to considering regarding the design and amenities of this PUD:
Page 7
33
I 1. Park/Open Space Area: The project does not provide any designated private or public open
2 space for the residents outside of the front and rear yards of each unit. Do to the limited size
3 of the site it is not desirable to have a public park as part of this project, primarily because of
4 maintenance costs. However, the need for some type of private open space area(s) is desirable
5 as well as a policy of both the General Plan (See Policy #27 above) and a required finding for
6 the PUD (See Attachment B #4). As a point of comparison, if this project was proposed to
7 be zoned Residential Compact (RC) or Garden Apartment (RMG) the minimum amount of
8 useable open space required would be 600 square feet per unit. The typical backyards of
9 this project are about 400 sq. ft. with some as large as 1400 sq. ft.
10
11 2. Building Bulk and Mass: The proposed residential units will be approximately 30 feet in
12 height and be setback ±16 feet from the rear property lines. The site plan shows the buildings
13 adjacent to the rear property lines of East Court as three buildings t 30 feet in height and f
14 100 feet in width separate by t10 feet. The bulk and massing of these new residential units
15 could impact the natural lighting and views of the East Court residences. The applicant has
16 provided a shade study which shows the shading of adjacent properties at the Winter Solstice
17 and Spring Equinox. Though shading will occur as a result of the project, most noticeably
18 during the Winter Solstice, it is to a level that is considered less than significant in the initial
19 study.
20
21 3. Sound Wall: The noise study provided by the applicant states that the proposed 6 foot CMU
22 wall, a 6 foot solid wood fence or a landscaped earth berm would all provide the necessary
23 sound attenuation to mitigate any noise impacts. Depending on which of these sound
24 mitigation methods is used could impact the site plan and aesthetics of the project.
25
26 4. Commercial Building: The east end of the commercial building closest to the intersection of
27 Lindberg Ln. and Lakeville St. does not appear to be an "active" part of the building. Staff
28 suggests that this portion of the building be better utilized as retail/commercial space instead
29 of utility areas and stairways?
30
31 A PUD can be created only after approval by the City Council of a complete unit development plan
32 showing the internal design of the district, the interrelationship of uses, and their relation to the
33 surrounding area. The applicant has submitted all the materials required under Section 19A-202 of
34 the Zoning Ordinance for the creation of a PUD. If the Planning Commission chooses to forward a
35 recommendation to the City Council specific findings are required. These findings and an
36 explanation of how the project complies with each are listed in Attachment B, Draft Findings for
37 Approval — Zoning Map Amendment, Proposed Development Standards, and PUD Map:
38
39 Traffic/Circulation:
40
41 A traffic study was prepared by the consulting firm of Whitlock and Weinberger Transportation, Inc.
42 presenting an analysis of the traffic impacts of the proposed project. Four intersections were
43 evaluated within the project area: 1) Lindberg Lane/Lakeville St .2) Lindberg Lane/Payran St. 3)
44 Caulfield Lane/ Lakeville St. 4) Caulfield Lane / Payran St. An analysis was also performed relative
45 to the projected operating conditions at the new intersection which will be created by the new public
46 street (Lindberg Cir.) and Lindberg Lane A traffic signal is proposed by the City of Petaluma at the
47 intersection of Lakeville St. and Lindberg Lane as part of the planned improvements to Lakeville
48 Street. Preliminary design is currently underway for this project.
49
Page 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
9?
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
Trip generation rates are used to evaluate the potential impacts of a single project or larger
developments with multiple uses. The retail/commercial components of this project are anticipated to
generate 583 daily trips of which 35 will be during the a.m. and p.m. peak while the residential
portion of the project will generate 402 daily trips of which 32 will be during the am peak and 43
during the pm peak. For the purposes of this analysis traffic impacts are assessed as if all trips were
made by motor vehicle.
The existing plus project scenario presents an evaluation of the potential traffic impacts which are
expected to occur with the addition of traffic from the proposed project to the existing traffic levels.
Under this scenario, all of the study intersections are expected to continue operating acceptably at
LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, with both main street and minor street
movements having acceptable levels of delay.
Vehicular access to the residential portion of the site will be via a cul-de-sac off of Lindberg Lane
Access will also be provided for pedestrians/cyclists and emergency vehicle between the commercial
parking lot and the cul-de-sac. The office/retail portion of the site is served by a parking lot with an
access driveway onto Lindberg Lane and an access driveway onto Lakeville Street. The project
access driveway serving the retail/office portion onto Lakeville St. will likely be limited to right -turns
in and out when the planned improvements to Lakeville Street are constructed. The traffic consultants
states in the report that the limitation of the Lakeville Street access to right -tum in and out only will
not result in significant impacts to site and street circulation.
Parking for the residential portion of the project includes an average of 2.5 off street parking spaces
per unit and an average of 3 spaces per unit if on and off street spaces are counted. The City's PUD
development standards allow for more flexible parking requirements than standard zoning, however,
for reference purposes if the standard of 3 parking spaces per unit was applied, the project would be
short 23 parking spaces for the residential portion. The retail/office portion of the project provides 50
off street spaces in the parking lot behind the commercial building. This meets the standard zoning
criteria of 1 space per 300 square feet of retail/office floor area.
The project is located adjacent to Lakeville St. which is currently served by Sonoma County Transit.
The applicant has met with Jim Ryan of the City's Transit Division and agreed to improve or pay an
in -lieu fee to upgrade the existing bus stop on the north side of Lakeville St.(adjacent to McDonalds)
instead of providing a new stop in front of the project. Details of the proposed improvements to the
bus stop would be reviewed and approved by the City's Transit Division.
There may be some short-term impacts to automobile, bicycle and pedestrian traffic due to
construction vehicles entering and exiting via Lakeville St. and Lindberg Lane. Construction
vehicles will be contained to the site to the extent possible and will not impact the movement of
local traffic. The project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal and the Police Department to
ensure that the project provides adequate access for emergency vehicles.
The developer shall be responsible for a fair share contribution to the City's Traffic Mitigation Fee
as established through City Ordinance and in the City's Special Development Fee handout.
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 (PPBAC), allowing
consideration of bicycle/pedestrian issues. The PPBAC reviewed the proposed project and provided
specific recommendations (See Attachment M, Memorandum from Petaluma Pedestrian and
3S
Page 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
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
Bicycle Advisory Committee). These recommendations have been incorporated into the project by
the applicant, added as a condition of approval or not recommended by staff as conditions of
approval.
PPBAC recommendations added as conditions of approval:
Bike Parking
• Prior to SPARC review, provide interior secure parking for four bicycles for upper floor
office personnel.
Intersection Improvements
• The recommended intersection improvements on Lakeville Street, Lindberg Lane and
Lindberg Circle are included as conditions of approval by the City Engineer.
Public Transit Acconnnodations
• The recommended public transit improvements are included as a condition of approval by
the City Public Works Department (Transit).
Drinking Fountain
• A condition requiring a drinking fountain has been added.
Lakeville Improvements
• The City Engineering Division has included the condition that the development shall
provide a fair share contribution toward a future traffic signal at Lakeville Street and
Lindberg Lane.
Signs
• A condition has been added that signs warning motorist of the pedestrians and bicyclists in
the area shall be installed on Lakeville St. for both eastbound and westbound traffic.
Through Travel
• A condition has been added which will require the site plan to be revised prior to going to
SPARC showing bicycle/pedestrian connections from the end of the cul-de-sac through the
commercial parking area to Lakeville St. and Lindberg Ln.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Friendly Infrastructure
• A condition has been added that requires the site plan be revised to show curb cuts at the
two entrances of the commercial building, corresponding to the pedestrianibicycle
connections through the parking lot.
Incentives
• A condition has been added that requires that prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy,
the office/property manager shall provide a simple one-page document to the city naming a
designated "transportation coordinator" describing specific incentives for
residents/employees to used alternative modes to get to work.
Pesticide/ Herbicide Use
A condition has been added regarding pesticide and herbicide use.
Page 10
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
PPBAC recommendations that have been incorporated into the nroiect by the aunlicant:
Bike Parking
• The proposed site plan shows exterior bike parking for four bikes at the western and eastern
ends of the commercial building as requested by the PPBAC.
• As noted on Sheet A2.A0, all single-family homes shall have bicycle hanging hooks or
storage devices within the secure covered garage spaces.
Employee Showers and Lockers
• Employee showers and lockers are shown on Sheet A2.01 & 02
Glare -Free Lighting
• Noted on the project lighting plan Sheet 1.
Benches and Drinking Fountain
• A bench is shown on the east side of the commercial building Sheet A1.01
Pedestrian and Bicycle Friendly Infi astructure
• The PPBAC is requesting a minimum 7 foot sidewalk along the Lakeville St. and Lindberg
Ln. frontage. Sheet C2 of the civil plans show the sidewalks as 7 feet wide.
PPBAC recommendations not added as conditions of annroval:
Through Travel, School, Park, Neighborhood Links
• Staff recognizes the needs and benefits of connecting neighborhoods; however the creation
of a pedestrian/bicycle connection between this development and the end of East Court and
the end Vallejo St. appears infeasible. This would involve a public easement through the
proposed project as well an easement through two parcels on East Court and a third parcel
on Lakeville St. The City cannot legally condition a project to require an easement over
property that is not under the control of the applicant, therefore, staff has not added a
condition requiring a 10 foot public access easement across Parcel A (Sheet Cl) as
recommended by the PPBAC.
Class III Bike Route on New Public Street
• The proposed new public street is wide enough to accommodate a Class III Bike Route.
Staff does not see the need for a Class III Bike Route Sign on this dead end street.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration and a Notice of Public Hearing was published in
the Argus Courier on May 25, 2005 and sent to all residents and property owners within 500 feet of
the project site. Since notification of the public hearing, no written communication has been
received.
As previously mentioned, the applicant held a neighborhood meeting to discuss the project on May
16, 2005.
Page 11
I
1
3
4
5
6
VA
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
IMPACT FEES
The project will be subject to the development fees, including: sewer and water connection,
community facilities development, stone drainage impact, park and recreation land improvement,
school facilities, in -lieu housing, conmmercial linkage fee, and traffic mitigation.
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. 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 (See Attachment D, Draft Findings for Approval — Mitigated Negative
Declaration). A Mitigation Monitoring Program has also been prepared. (See Attachment I, Initial
Study and Mitigation Monitoring Program)
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A:
Draft Findings for Approval — General Plan Amendment
Attachment B:
Draft Findings for Approval — Zoning Map Amendment, Proposed Development
Standards, and PUD Map
Attachment C:
Draft Findings for Approval — Tentative Subdivision Map
Attachment D:
Draft Findings for Approval — Mitigated Negative Declaration
Attachment E
Draft Conditions of Approval
Attachment F
Project Location Map and Project Description
Attachment G
Visual Simulations
Attachment H
Shade Study
Attachment I:
Initial Study & Mitigation Monitoring Program
Attachment J
Studies: Traffic Impact Analysis with updates by W -Trans (without appendices),
Arborist's Report by Balcerak Design, Geotechnical Investigation Report
(without appendices) by PJC & Associates, Hydrology Study by Robertson
Engineering (without appendices), Environmental Noise Study by Illingworth &
Rodkin, Inc. Note: if you would like a copy of the appendices please contact the
Community Development Department.
Attachment K:
PUD Development Standards dated March 25, 2005
Attachment L:
SPARC Preliminary Review Excerpt Minutes, July 22, 2004
Attachment M:
Memorandum from Petaluma Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee dated
April 27, 2004
Attachment N
Memorandum from Craig Spaulding, City Engineer dated May 20, 2005
Attachment O:
Full Size Civil and Architectural Plans and 11x17 Civil, Architectural, and
Conceptual Landscaping Plan
Page 12
W
1
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
CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
MEMORANDUM
Coinnnority Development Deparhnent, Plawditg Division, 11 English Street, Petaluma, CA 94952
(707) 778-4301 Far (707) 778-4498 E-mail: planning&i.petaluma.ca.ns
DATE: June 28, 2005
TO:
roll "L
Planning Commission
Phil Boyle, Associate Planner
AGENDA ITEM NO. II (Consent)
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP TO CREATE 40 LOTS FOR RESIDENTIAL USE AND 1
LOT FOR RETAIL/OFFICE USE AND A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
THIS PROJECT IS CONTINUED FROM THE JUNE 14, 2005 PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING.
MODIFIED PROJECT DESCRIPTION I
The applicant has submitted for multiple entitlements to construct a mixed use project consisting of
a two story 16,975 square foot commercial building, 40 single family attached homes and a 7,150
square foot open space/park area. The entitlements requested at this time are: A Tentative
Subdivision Map to create 40 lots for residential use ranging in size from 5,938 to 2,007 square feet
and 1 lot for retail/office use ±47,767 sq. ft. and a Mitigated Negative Declaration. (See Attachment
D Revised Project Information and Attachment F, Full size (commissioners only) and 11x17 Site
Plan/PUD Plan, Civil, and Landscaping Plans.)
RECOMMENDATION, .
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
1. Forward a recommendation to the City Council to:
a. Approve the Tentative Subdivision Map
b. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration
45 I-. BACKGROUND -
46
31
I This project was reviewed by the Planning Commission on June 14, 2005. At that meeting the
2 commission unanimously approved the General Plan Amendment from Thoroughfare Commercial
3 to Mixed Use and the Zoning Map Amendment from Commercial Highway to Planned Unit District
4 (PUD). The Commission requested that the tentative map be revised to include some type of
5 park/open space area for the residences and tenants of the project. Furthermore, the commission
6 requested that a number of conditions be added regarding water use, photovoltaic systems and
7 public access.
8
9
10 I RESPONSE TO. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS
11
12 The applicant has made the following revisions to the project in response to the commission's
13 recommendations (See Attachment F Project Plans):
14
15 1. Lots 2 and 3 of the tentative map have been removed and the area is now part of the
16 commercial lot 1. The area is approximately 7,150 sq. ft. with landscaping, hardscape and a
17 planter.
18
19 2. The four parking spaces at the rear of lot 41 have been removed and three parallel parking
20 spaces have been added within the cul-de-sac.
21
22 3. The 6 foot high CMU sound wall separating the commercial parking lot from the residential
23 and new park/open space area has been removed. The sound wall adjacent to Lindberg Lane
24 and between lot 4 and the parking lot remains.
25
26 4. The trash enclosure has been relocated closer to Lindberg Lane to decrease the noise impact
27 to the residents.
28
29 STAFF ANALYSIS
30
31 The revised tentative map and site plan are consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning
32 Ordinance. The applicant's noise consultant has provided a revised noise study which concludes
33 that with the suggested mitigation measures the noise impacts to the residential units will still be
34 less than significant with the revised project. (See Attachment E Noise Study form Illingworth and
35 Rodkin dated June 21, 2005). Therefore, the impacts and mitigation measures in the Initial Study
36 and Mitigated Negative Declaration have not changed.
37
38 Several conditions, regarding water conservation, solar photovoltaic systems and public access have
39 been added as requested by the Planning Commission. These new conditions are in italics in
40 Attachment C - Conditions of Approval.
41
42 During the June 14, 2005 Planning Commission Meeting the issue of a bike lane along Lindberg
43 Lane between Lakeville Street and Payran Street was discussed. Upon further review, staff has
44 determine that the width of Lindberg Lane is not adequate to accommodate parallel parking on both
45 sides of the street, bike lane(s) and two twelve foot travel lanes. (See Attachment F Sheet C2
46 Section A -A)
47
48 c)
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Draft Findings of Approval — Tentative Subdivision Map
Attachment B: Draft Findings of Approval — Mitigated Negative Declaration
Attachment C: Draft Conditions of Approval
Attaclmlent D: Revised Project Information
Attachment E: Revised noise study, Illingworth and Rodkin dated 06/21/05 (without appendix)
Attachment F: Full size (commissioners only) and 11x17 Site Plan/PUD Plan, Civil, and
Landscaping Plans.)
3
I+I
ATTACHMENT 7
BADDELEY, OLIKER & SARTORI
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
MICHAEL J. BADDELEY
ROBERT P. OLIKER
DUANE P. SARTORI
Phil Boyle, Planner
City of Petaluma
11 English Street
Petaluma, CA 94952
Re: Lindberg Circle
Dear Mr. Boyle:
THE GRACE BUILDING
17 KELLER STREET
PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA 94952
FAX (707) 778-1086
(707) 778-6313
July 25, 2005
OF COUNSEL:
FREDERIC L. HIRSCHFIELD
We are legal counsel to Lindberg Circle LLC. The company has asked us to
review the final conditions of approval for the project. Five new conditions were added
at the last Planning Commission Meeting, most of which do not present any problem.
However, we believe that Condition No. 5 is unreasonable as it is contrary to City policy
and will create a significant liability and security risk with regard to this subdivision.
New Condition 5 states as follows:
"Prior to approval of the final map an irrevocable offer of dedication of a
public access easement approximately 10 feet in width shall be shown
through Parcel A and lot 16. The intent of this public access easement is
to allow for the possible future connection of this project with East Court,
Vallejo Street and/or Payran Street."
While we recognize that reasonable conditions can be imposed with regard to the
subdivision process, the most recent U.S. Supreme Court Rulings on this issue require
that there be a reasonable nexus between the condition imposed and the harm or
detriment to be caused by the subdivision. While we recognize the need to connect
reasonable thoroughfares both for pedestrians and for bicycles through various residential
neighborhoods, Condition 5 requires a public right of access over a private driveway
which leads absolutely nowhere. East Court, Vallejo Street and/or Payran Street projects
are completely built out. Therefore, this purported public right of access will lead
91
Re: Lindberg Circle
July 25, 2005
Page 2
nowhere. The only potential access would be through adjoining commercial property
which could potentially allow members of the public to access through a commercial
parking lot which could only create a security risk. As this condition of public access
goes nowhere, and has no reasonable prospect of ever connecting to a public
thoroughfare, we do not believe this condition meets the Supreme Court test for a
reasonable nexus between the project and the conditions imposed.
The condition also imposes an unreasonable liability and security risk. The
proposed public right of access would begin on the public dedicated streets off of
Lindberg Lane and cross in front of four homes which are accessed only by a private
driveway. Therefore, these four individual property owners will be the only homeowners
within the subdivision who will bear the liability risk of members of the public using
their private driveway to essentially access nothing. This is a significantly different risk
than that afforded to homeowners under normal circumstances where members of the
public are on the sidewalks in front of their house. On this basis as well, we believe the
condition is unreasonable.
When the Lindberg Circle project was originally reviewed by staff, there was a
specific comment by the staff that even though there was a recognition of the benefits of
connecting neighborhoods, it was nonetheless simply not feasible to connect this
development with the end of East Court and the end of Vallejo Street. Staff comments
are contained in the June 14, 2005 7:00 p.m. meeting at page 11, lines 26-34. Moreover,
we are informed that the proposed Condition Number 5 providing public access which
leads nowhere is not supported by the Police Department. The area where the purported
public access is to be required will not be patrolled by the Police Department because it
crosses a private driveway. Therefore, the Police Department does not support this
Condition.
For all of the above reasons, we believe it is appropriate to delete Item Number 5
from the conditions of approval for the Lindberg Circle PUD. Our hope would be that
this matter can be handled informally. Your consideration of these issues is greatly
appreciated.
Since ely,
ROBERT P. OLIKER
RPO/cas
cc: Client
Mike Moore
Richard Rudnansky, Esq. ��
CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
MEMORANDUM
Police Department, 969 Petaluma Boulevard North, Petaluma, CA 94952
(707) 778-4372 Fac (707) 778-4476 E-mail. police&i.petaluma.ca. its
DATE: 8-3-05
TO: Phil Boyle, Associate Planner
FROM: Cindie Fahy, CSO
SUBJECT: 05 -GPA -0512 -CR
The Petaluma Police Department requests the following changes to the above revised project.
According to the Revised Draft Conditions of Approval, from the Planning Division an "offer of
dedication of a public access easement approximately 10 feet in width shall be shown through
Parcel A and Lot 14. The intent of this public access easement is to allow for the possible future
connection of this project with East Court, Vallejo Street and/or Payran Street."
According to the above information, it appears a "future" bike access / path will be cutting
through the comer area of this new complex, the rear area of East Court, and the businesses on
Payran Street. Petaluma Police Department requests this bike access / path not be considered for
the following reasons.
1. East Court is a "Dead End" Street.
2. In the future when the bike path is completed, allowing access behind the
industrial businesses and residential housing, this will provide an area for
person(s) to gather and hide.
3. Bike access is already established on Lakeville Street, Lindberg Lane, and
Payran Street which is a major artery for the shopping center.
Crash Gate:
Site plan shows a crash gate for Emergency Vehicles. Petaluma Police Department requests the
gate not be installed. A gate in that location is not needed because having two (2) entry / exits
for Police and Fire Department response allows for greater coverage of the area.
S:\Plan Dept\Memos\Lindberg Circle comments from Police.doc
i N
ATTACHMENT 8
Lindberg Circle, 890 Lakeville File NO.04-GPA-0512-CR
Initial Study
of Environmental Significance
■ Introduction: This Initial Study has been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq) and the CEQA Guidelines. Additional information incorporated by
reference herein includes: the project application, environmental information questionnaire, environmental review
data sheet, project referrals, staff report, General Plan, EIR and Technical Appendices, and other applicable
planning documents (i.e., Petaluma River Access and Enhancement Plan, Petaluma River Watershed Master
Drainage Plan, specific plans, etc.) on file at the City of Petaluma Planning Division.
Project Name: Lindberg Circle
Site Address: 890 Lakeville Street
Posting Date: May 25, 2005
Lead Agency Contact: City of Petaluma, Phil Boyle, Associate Planner
Applicant: Mark Eglin
Lindberg Circle LLC
719 Southpoint Blvd. Ste. C
Petaluma CA 94954
Property Owner:
Project Description:
Lindberg Circle LLC
719 Southpoint Blvd. Ste. C
Petaluma CA 94954
File No: 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
APN: 005-020-003, 039, 040
Comments Due: June 14, 2005
Phone: (707) 778-4301
The applicant has submitted for multiple entitlements to construct a mixed use project consisting of a two story
16,975 square foot commercial building and 42 single family attached homes. The entitlements requested are: 1) A
General Plan Amendment from Thoroughfare Commercial to Mixed Use 2) A Tentative Subdivision Map to create
42 lots for residential use ranging in size from 5,938 to 2,007 square feet and 1 lot for retail/office use ±42,109 sq.
ft. 3) A Zoning Map Amendment from Commercial Highway to Planned Unit District (PUD) and 4) Site Plan and
Architectural Review.
The residential units will have three floor plans ranging from 1,450 to 1,900 square feet of living area. The
buildings are two stories (±30 feet in height), except for some of the end units, and have common walls. The units
are setback from the street ±20 feet at the garage door and ±15 feet at the porch. The rear yards are a minimum of
±14 feet. Access to all of the residential properties will be from a new public street (Lindberg Circle) off of
Lindberg Lane which will terminate at a cul-de-sac.
Parking for the residential units is an average of 2.5 off street parking spaces per unit. If street parking within the
development is included, the ratio is 3 spaces per unit. Each unit has a tandem or single car garage and one space in
the driveway.
102
Lindberg Circle, 890 Lakeville File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
The two story commercial building will consist of 8,757 square feet of retail on the ground floor and 8,218 square
of office space on the second floor. The building will be setback 10 feet from Lakeville Street and Lindberg Lane,
f60 feet from the western property line of the project and f75 feet from the new residential units. The building will
not exceed 40 feet in height from peak of roof to grade.
The new public street off of Lindberg Lane will be ±38 feet in width with sidewalks and parking on both sides. The
street will terminate at a cul-de-sac. Pedestrian and emergency vehicle access is provided between the cul-de-sac
and the commercial parking lot. Vehicular and pedestrian/bicycle access to the commercial building is from both
Lindberg Lane and Lakeville St.
The total project density is approximately 9 units per acre. The density of the residential units alone, including the
street, is approximately 12 units per acre.
Environmental Setting:
The site is a relatively flat undeveloped 4.5 -acre parcel. The site is bound by Lakeville St. to the south, Lindberg
Ln. to the southeast, industrial and commercial uses to the north and residences to the west. An arborist report for
the project concluded that all of the twelve trees on the property are of low quality. There are also eight trees on
adjacent properties which will likely be affected by the project.
Responsible/Trustee Agencies:
The project requires a recommendation from the Planning Commission and approval by the City Council of a
General Plan Amendment, Tentative Subdivision Map, and Rezoning. Following approval from the City Council
the project must be reviewed and approved by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee. Lastly, the
project will be subject to building permit review and approval by the Community Development Department
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact
that is a 'Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
1. Land Use & Planning
2. Population, Employment &
Housing
3. Geology & Soils
4. Air
5. Hydrology & Water Quality
6. Biological Resources
7. Noise
8. Visual Quality & Aesthetics
9. Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
10. Transportation/Traffic
11. Public Services
12. Recreation
13. Utilities Infrastructure
14. Mineral Resources
15. Cultural Resources
16. Agricultural Resources
17. Mandatory Findings of
Significance
Lindberg Circle, 890 Lakeville File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
■ Determination
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION should be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will
X not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to
by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant
unless mitigated" impact on the environment but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in
an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL
_ IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment because all
potentially significant effects a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to
that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project nothing further is required.
A Notice of Intent to adopt a Negative Declaration will be prepared, distributed and posted for the public
comment period of Mav 25, 2005 through June 14, 2005.
Prepared by: Phil Boyle,,
�tnre
A�
Lindberg Circle, 890 Lakeville File NO.04-GPA-0512-CR
■ Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No impact' answers that are adequately supported
by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question: A "No Impact'
answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not
apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A no impact
answer should be explained where it is based in project -specific factors as well as general standards, i.e.,
the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis.
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including: off-site as well as on-site
cumulative, project -level indirect, direct, construction, and operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist
answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or
less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant impact' entries when the
determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact' to a "Less
Than Significant Impact" The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how
they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier
Analyses" may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect
has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration pursuant to Section 15063(c)(3)(D).
In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and
state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
C) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the
earlier document and the extent to which they address site specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside
document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is
substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals
contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.
SLindberg Circle, 890 Lakeville St. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially I Less than I Less Than I No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact w/Mitigation Impact
Measures
■ Environmental Analysis
Land Use and Planning. Would the project:
a. Physically divide an established community? X
b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or X
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation X
plan or natural community conservation plan?
Discussion: The current General Plan Land Use Designation of the project parcels is Thoroughfare Commercial. The
City of Petaluma is in the process of updating its General Plan and the most recent Land Use Map shows the project
parcels as Mixed Use. Because the Updated General Plan has not been adopted by the City and may not be adopted
prior to approval of this project, a General Plan Amendment from Thoroughfare Commercial to Mixed Use is being
requested by the applicant. The Mixed Use designation allows for any combination of commercial, office, and
residential uses. The intent of Mixed Use is to allow for housing along with commercial uses including but not
limited to retail, offices and restaurants. Densities of 10 to 30 units per acre are allowed "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 42 residential
units on 4.5 acres represent a density of 9.3 units per acre or 12 units per acre when the 42,109 square foot
office/commercial parcel is excluded. The applicant states that the project will have a "measurable community
benefit' because it will provide a quality product with a unified and organized arrangement of buildings and service
facilities which are appropriate in relation to the adjacent and nearby properties. The purposed project will screen
the nearby industrial uses and provide a well landscaped space for the residential homes and commercial building.
If the Planning Commission and City Council concur that the project provides a "measurable community benefit"
sufficient to allow a density greater than 10 dwelling units per acre, then the current proposal complies with the
uses and density specified by the General Plan.
The project is within the (CH) Commercial Highway Zoning District, which is intended to provide suitable locations
for wholesale, commercial, and industrial establishments usually locating in proximity to highway or arterial street
traffic and designed to serve needs beyond those of the immediate neighborhood. The proposed project includes a
request for a rezoning from Commercial Highway to Planned Unit District (PUD). The PUD is "designed to allow
inclusion within its boundaries a mixture of uses, or unusual density, building intensity, or design characteristics
which would not normally be permitted in a single use district or combination of zoning districts ...". Development
in this zone is allowable only after the approval by the City Council of a complete Unit Development Plan showing
the internal design of the District, the interrelationship of uses, and their relation to the surrounding area." The
application has submitted all the materials required under Section 19A-202 of the Zoning Ordinance for the
creation of a PUD. The Planning Commission and the City Council are required to make specific findings that are
outlined in the staff report prior to approving the PUD:
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
There is no existing habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan that exists for this area of the
city. Therefore, there is no impact.
Mitigation Measnres/Monitorine: Not applicable.
2. Population. Employment and Housina. Would the project:
a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, X
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, X
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
C. Displace substantial numbers of people X
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Discussion: The proposed project includes 42 housing units and a two story 16,975 square foot commercial building
to be constructed in an infill area at a density for the total project area of 19 units per acre. The density of the
residential units alone, including the street, is approximately 12 units per acre. This density is greater then the
current allowable density of East Court (maximum of 10 units/acre) and the commercial center across Lindberg Ln. if
it was to be developed as all or partially residential (maximum of 30 units/acre). The most recent land use designation
in the 2005-2025 General Plan Update for the project parcels as well as East Court is Mixed Use which would allow
for a maximum of 30 units/acre. Thus, this project would not induce substantial population growth. The
development will not displace any housing or people. In fact, the project would increase the housing supply and
increase employment opportunities.
Residential development projects of 5 or more units are required to contribute to the City's affordable housing
program pursuant to Policy 4.2 and Program 4.4 of the Housing Element of the Petaluma General Plan. The
applicant shall participate by paying an in -lieu housing fee for each residential unit payable at the close of escrow.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring: Not applicable.
M
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
3. Geoloav and Soils. Would the project:
a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial X
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
i. Rupture of a ]mown earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of X
topsoil?
C. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,
or that would become unstable as a result in on- or
off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
M
ii
X
0
/1
e. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic X
substructures?
f. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or X
overcovering of the soil?
g. Change in topography or ground surface relief
features?
X
h. The destruction, covering or modification of any X
unique geologic or physical features?
i. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, X
either on or off site?
j. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or
changes in siltation, deposition or erosion, which
may modify the channel of a river or stream or the
bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
KI
k. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards X
such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground
failure or similar hazards?
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
Discussion: A geotechnical report by PJC & Associates was provided as part of application packet. The report
concluded that the site is suitable for development provided the recommendations and criteria presented in the report
are incorporated into the design and carried out through construction. The primary geotechnical concerns in design
and construction of the project is the presence of unengineered artificial fill and the highly expansive surface and near
surface soils.
The project is an in -fill development. The project will not result in unstable earth or geologic conditions. The soil V.611
be compacted prior to project construction. Additional buildings and associated paved parking and circulation areas
will cover the soil. The project will not result in the destruction or covering of any unique geologic features or expose
people to any geologic hazards not typically associated with this region. The project site is relatively flat with no
significant land features or characteristics. The minor grading required to permit development of the project has the
potential to cause slight water erosion if construction is carried out during the rainy season (October 15th through
April 15th). The grading also has the potential to cause minor wind erosion if the soil conditions are dry.
Landscaping will be installed at the site and will help to mitigate erosion. The Site Plan and Architectural Review
Committee (SPARC) will review the landscape plans for the location, size, type and species of plant material to be
installed. The applicant will be required to submit foundation and structural designs for the proposed structures to
demonstrate compliance with all requirements of the Uniform Building Code. Additionally, the review of grading,
public improvements and erosion control plans by the Engineering Division will mitigate any impacts to soil
erosion that may result from the proposed construction.
The application of the requirements contained in the City of Petaluma Grading and Erosion Control Ordinance and
requirements listed below will reduce any potentially significant environmental impacts resulting from erosion and/or
runoff to a level of less than significant.
1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, building permit or approval of an improvement plan or Final Map, the
Applicant shall provide a Soils Investigation and Geotechnical Report prepared by a registered professional
civil engineer for review and approval of the City Engineer and Chief Building Official in accordance with
the Subdivision Ordinance and Grading and Erosion Control Ordinance. The soils report shall address site
specific soil conditions (i.e. highly expansive soils) and include recommendations for: site preparation and
grading; foundation and soil engineering design; pavement design, utilities, roads, bridges and structures.
2. Final project improvement and grading plans shall be prepared by a California registered Civil Engineer
(P.E.), and accepted by City staff prior to Final Map approval. The plans shall be prepared in compliance
with the City of Petaluma's Subdivision Ordinance and Grading and Erosion Control Ordinance. A
comprehensive erosion control plan shall be prepared, paying special attention to prevention of increased
discharge. The control plan shall include measures such as: a) restricting grading to the non -rainy season;
b) protecting storm drainage outlets from erosion and siltations; c) use of silt fencing, and straw wattles to
retain sediment on the project site or Best Management Practices (BMPs) as recommended by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Required improvements shall be reflected on plans submitted in
conjunction with the project's improvement drawings and shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning
Director and the City Engineer prior to Final Map approval. Prior to City acceptance, all public
improvements shall be subject to inspection by City staff for compliance with the approved Public
Improvement Plans, construction permits and project mitigation measures/conditions of approval. All
public and/or private improvements shall be subject to inspection by City staff for compliance with the
approved Improvement Plans, prior to City acceptance.
64
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
3. All construction activities shall comply with the Uniform Building Code regulations for seismic safety (i.e.,
reinforcing perimeter and/or load bearing walls, bracing parapets, etc.). Foundation and structural design for
buildings shall conform to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, as well as state and local
laws/ordinances. Construction plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Building Division prior to
the issuance of a building permit. All work shall be subject to inspection by the Building Division and must
conform to all applicable code requirements and approved improvement plans prior to issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy.
Mitieation Measures/Monitorine: Not applicable.
4. Air. Where available, the significance of criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air
pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the X
applicable air quality plan?
b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute X
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
C. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase X
of any criteria pollutant for which the project region
is non -attainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard (including
releasing emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant X
concentrations?
e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial X
number of people?
Discussion: Temporary short -tern increases in exhaust emissions and dust would result from the use of construction
equipment. This will not be of a level that would result in a significant impact to ambient air quality. The project will
not result in objectionable odors or alter air movement, moisture, or change in climate. The application of the City's
standard mitigation measures (such as watering graded surfaces to reduce dust and shutting down vehicles when not
in use), these impacts would be short-term. Fireplaces in the residential units will not be wood burning and will
comply with current air quality regulations.
Per City requirement, the applicant shall incorporate the following Best Management Practices into the construction
and improvement plans and shall clearly indicate these provisions in the specifications. The construction contractor
shall incorporate these measures into the required Erosion and Sediment Control Plan to limit fugitive dust and
exhaust emissions during construction.
Exposed soils shall be watered a minimum of twice daily during construction. The frequency of watering
shall be increased if wind speeds exceed 15 mph.
53
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
N/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
'fhe construction site shall provide a gravel pad area consisting of an impermeable liner and drain rock at the
construction entrance to clean mud and debris from construction vehicles prior to entering the public
roadways. Street surfaces in the vicinity of the project shall be routinely swept and cleaned of mud and dust
carried onto the street by construction vehicles.
During excavation activities, haul trucks used to transport soil shall utilize tarps or other similar covering
devices to reduce dust emissions.
• Post -construction re -vegetation, repaving or soil stabilization of exposed soils shall be completed in a timely
manner according to the approved Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and verified by City inspectors prior to
acceptance of improvements or issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
Applicant shall designate a person with authority to require increased watering to monitor the dust and
erosion control program and provide name and phone number to the City of Petaluma prior to issuance of
grading permits.
AUti¢ation Measures/Monitorinu: Not applicable
5. Hvdroloav and Water Qualitv. Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste X
discharge requirements?
b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or X
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of X
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river in a manner, which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site?
d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of X
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on -or off-
site?
e. Create or contribute runoff water which would X
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
10 6A
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
f Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g. Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area
as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
h. Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow?
Discussion:
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
X
X
M
a
b!
Robertson Engineering Inc. conducted a Preliminary Hydrology Study for the project. The proposed development of
the site will require the filling of the site between 0.5 feet to 4.3 feet. A combination retaining wall/fence is proposed
to be constructed along the westerly (East Court) and northerly (commercial parcels) sides of the proposed project.
The study included a topographical survey which indicated that the back half of the adjoining 13 parcels on East Court
drain toward the project site where inlets will be constructed for drainage. The study concluded that a 10 year storm
event will stay within the proposed storm drainage system.
The project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge or substantially contaminate the groundwater.
The project may change existing drainage patterns. However, these will not be significant alterations as all
hydrologic, hydraulic, and storm drain system design shall be subject to review and approval by the Sonoma
County Water Agency (SCWA) and the City Engineer. No lot -to -lot drainage shall be permitted, unless private
storm drain easements are created to collect rear yard surface water runoff. Surface runoff shall be addressed
within each individual lot, and then conveyed to an appropriate storm drain system. The project site is not within a
floodway or floodplain. The project would not result in alteration to the course of floodwaters, affect ground water,
surface waters, reduce the public water supply, or expose people to water related hazards. Prior to construction, the
geotechnical engineer will review the final plans and specifications.
In accordance with requirements set by the State Water Resources Control Board, the applicant would prepare a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) per the latest state requirements to be implemented throughout
project construction and operation. The Applicant shall complete and submit an Notice of Intent (NOI) and
appropriate filing fee to the SWCB. The applicant shall file a Notice of Termination (NOT) with the SWRCB upon
project completion. The SWPPP shall be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Division prior to
approval of improvement plans, final map or issuance of grading or building permits. City inspectors shall inspect
the improvements and verify compliance prior to acceptance of improvements. The SWPPP shall comply with San
Francisco Bay Area Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements and include the following as appropriate:
Provision for vegetated streamside buffer areas separating formal landscape and developed areas from creek
channels and drainage ways. The stream buffer zone shall be landscaped with native plant species to filter
55
II
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less'flum
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
and absorb sediment and chemical constituents and provide a zone for rainfall infiltration next to the creek
channel.
• All drainage improvement plans shall include installation of permanent signs (concrete stamps or
equivalent) at each storm drain inlet. The sign at each inlet shall read "No Drooping, Flows To The
Petaluma River" or equivalent, and shall be installed at the time of construction and verified prior to
acceptance of public improvements or issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
All construction activities shall be performed in a manner that minimizes the sediment and/or pollutant entering
directly or indirectly into the storm drain system or ground water. The applicant shall incorporate the following
provisions into the construction plans and specifications, to be verified by the Community Development
Department, prior to issuance of grading or building permits.
The applicant shall designate on the improvement plans construction staging areas and areas for the storage
of any hazardous materials (i.e., motor oil, fuels, paints, etc.) to be used during construction. All
construction staging areas shall be located away from any drainage areas to prevent runoff from
construction areas from entering into the drainage system. Areas designated for storage of hazardous
materials shall include proper containment features to prevent contamination from entering drainage areas
in the event of a spill or leak.
• No debris, soil, sand, cement, or washing thereof, or other construction related materials or wastes, soil or
petroleum products or other organic or earthen material shall be allowed to enter any drainage system. All
discarded material including washings and any accidental spills shall be removed and disposed of at an
approved disposal site. The applicant shall designate appropriate disposal methods and/or facilities on the
construction plans or in the specifications.
• Pesticides and fertilizers shall not be applied to public landscape areas during the rainy season (October
1st -April 15th). The applicant shall utilize Best Management Practices regarding pesticide/herbicide use
and fully commit to Integrated Pest Management techniques. The applicant shall be required, when
pesticide/herbicide use occurs, to post appropriate signs warning pedestrians.
The Applicant shall be subject to the payment of the City's Storm Drainage Impact Fee. Drainage Impact Fees shall
be calculated at the time of Final Map approval and a fair share portion shall be paid for each residential unit prior
to final inspection or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
The project may change existing drainage patterns and result in additional runoff that would occur by creating new
non -pervious surfaces (new paving and new structures). To minimize these impacts the following standard
requirements apply:
1. This developer shall pay the storm drainage impact fee and provide on-site improvements to address
the incremental impact that the new development will have on citywide drainage. The Community
Development Department shall calculate the project's appropriate storm water drainage fee and shall
insure that the fee is collected as provided for in the City's Resolution.
2. The applicant shall submit a detailed grading and drainage plan as a part of the improvement drawings
for review and approval by City staff prior to issuance of a building permit. The drainage plans shall
include supporting calculations of storm drain. Surface runoff shall be addressed and conveyed to an
appropriate storm drain system. All public improvements shall be subject to inspections by City staff
12 15r
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Thun
No
Significant
Significant
Signifcant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
for compliance with the approved Public Improvement plans, construction permits, project mitigation
measures and conditions of approval, prior to City acceptance.
All site drainage improvements shall be designed and constructed in conformance with the minimum
requirements of Sonoma County Water Agency Design Criteria and shall be subject to review and
approval of the Sonoma County Water Agency and the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building
permit. All public improvements shall be subject to inspections by City staff for compliance with the
approved Public Improvement plans, construction permits and project mitigation measures/conditions
of approval, prior to City acceptance.
4. Required mitigations and conditions of approval shall be reflected on plans submitted in conjunction
with the project's improvement drawings, landscaping, drainage, storm water pollution prevention, and
erosion control plans, and shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development
Department and the City Engineer, and as appropriate by the Sonoma County Water Agency. The
applicant shall obtain appropriate approvals from all necessary regulatory and trustee agencies prior to
the issuance of a grading permit.
Mitigation Measures/Monitorine: Not applicable.
6. Bioloaical Resources. Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, and
regulations or by the California Depart. of Fish and
Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
C. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
M
X
KI
X
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances X
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
13
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
preservation policy or ordinance.
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional,
or state habitat conservation plan?
Potentially
Less than
Less 77mn
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
X
Discussion: The project site is surrounded by public streets, industrial/warehouse uses and residences. The project
site is not known to provide habitat for any special status species or to be a wildlife corridor. The project site contains
no wetlands, riparian habitat, or other water sources. No conservation plans apply to the project site. The site is
disked regularly for fire protection.
An arborist report from certified arborist Gary Balcerak identified 20 trees, some shrub like, on or adjacent to the site.
The report concluded that all of the trees on the site are of low quality. Any substantial trees on the site were removed
long ago. Much of the bushy growth noted today is stump sprouts resembling shrubs, instead of trees. The trees on
and adjacent to the site include Box Elders, Plums, Poplars, Eucalyptus and Redwoods. The project proposal includes
the removal of all existing vegetation on the subject property. The report also addresses the impacts to trees adjacent
to the project. Tree #7 is a Blue Gum Eucalyptus that is located to the west of the project in the rear yard of a
residence on East Comm Blue Gums are known to have a moderate tolerance to site disturbances. However, they are
intolerant of fill soil. Given that nearly 50% of the root zone will be impacted by the fill soil, it is probable the roots,
covered with fill soil, will die. The loss of buttress roots may lead to structural failure. Given these facts the retention
of this tree is questionable. If the tree were to be retained a complete hazard evaluation should be performed upon
completion of construction. Trees #9 through #14 are Coast Redwoods and are located to the north of the project
along the existing fence line. These trees were evaluated because the canopies and rooting systems extend onto the
project site and will be affected by the imported fill soil. Redwoods are adaptable to site disturbances, including fill
soil conditions. These Redwoods are young and the healthiest ones are likely to survive the construction impacts, with
only a moderate amount of stress. Their condition would be improved if they receive supplemental irrigation, in the
dry season, during and after construction.
In regards to the proposed landscape the arborists report states "The landscape plan proposes the planting of 124 trees
(a replacement ratio of 6 to 1). The trees indicated include a wide range of species, providing biodiversity as well as
enhanced aesthetics. The end result will yield a site that is, in a biological sense, quantitatively and qualitatively
superior to what currently exists." The Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee will review the type, location,
size and species of the landscaping to be installed.
Lastly, there is no Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan that exists for Petaluma, which would regulate the proposed development on this parcel. For
these reasons, no significant impacts to the existing biological resources will be created as a result of this proposal.
Mitieation Measures/Monitorine: Not applicable.
Noise. Would the project result in?
a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels X
in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
14 5
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less T7an
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive X
groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels?
C. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise X
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in X
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan X
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip X
would the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
Discussion: The community Health and Safety Element of the Petaluma General Plan sets forth goals and policies
related to community noise. The objective of the policies and programs set forth in the Noise Element is to "minimize
the amount of noise that future development creates and the amount of noise to which the community is exposed".
The General Plan establishes 60Ldn as the maximum "normally acceptable" noise level for exterior use areas and 45
Ldn as the interior noise level in single-family residential developments. The noise environment on the site results
primarily from vehicular traffic on Lakeville St. and distant traffic from U.S. Highway 101. Other sources of noise in
the area include a warehouse/storage facility sharing the northeastern property with the project and the delivery area of
the Gateway Shopping Center and an auto repair facility, both of which are located on Lindberg Lane across from the
project site.
The consulting firm of Illingworth and Rodkin, Inc. conducted an environmental noise assessment to evaluate the
compatibility of the development with respect to the environmental noise levels at the project site and evaluate noise
impacts upon sensitive receptors in the area. In summary, the noise assessment concludes that noise impacts would be
less than significant with the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures and standard construction
noise controls.
The noise environment (70 dba) for the commercial building adjacent to Lakeville St. was found to a normally
acceptable level for the proposed retail and office uses. The report states that standard construction would be
sufficient to attenuate environmental noise at this facility.
The residential component of the project would receive some benefit from shielding of Lakeville Highway noise from
both the proposed commercial building and existing buildings of the Gateway Center. The facades and outdoor
spaces of the residential units adjacent to the commercial parking lot (Units G2 and H29) will be exposed to acceptable
levels of noise due to Lakeville St. and Lindberg Ln. traffic. However, noise produced by the traffic and other
activities in the parking lot of the commercial development will exceed the exterior noise standard and therefore a
solid noise barrier is required. This is also the case for the units adjacent to Lindberg Ln. (Units A3 and K3). To
mitigate these noise impacts, the project includes a 6 foot tall, 8 inch thick CNIU wall separating the residential units
15 51
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less'Flum
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
AV/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
from Lindberg Ln. and from the commercial parking lot. The report also discusses the option of a solid wood fence
and a landscaped earth berm which, if properly constructed, would mitigate the noise impacts to an acceptable level.
The Noise Study also fmds that during construction noise levels will be temporarily elevated in the area. Because of
the proximity to existing residences, it is recommended that construction hours be limited.
The implementation of a solid noise barrier and the mitigation measures listed below will mitigate the project noise
impacts to a level which is less than significant.
Additionally, as with each construction project, all construction activities must comply with applicable Performance
Standards in the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code.
While the further residential development of this partially developed site will result in permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity, the project site is currently surrounded by developed residential and commercial
parcels and the effect of additional residential development will be less than significant.
This site is within the Petaluma Municipal Airport's land use study area of the Sonoma County Comprehensive
Airport Land Use Plan, prepared by Coffman Associates, hic. dated January 2001. However, it is not within the
Airport's referral area as designated by that Land Use Plan area and therefore, no special measures are recommended
by the Plan.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring:
1. Construction hours are limited to Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. on Saturday. Construction is prohibited on Sunday and all holidays recognized by the City of Petaluma.
2. There shall be no start up of internal combustion engines on construction related machinery or equipment
prior to 8:00 a.m. Monday through Friday.
3. Delivery of materials or equipment is limited to Monday through Friday (non -holiday) between 7:30 a.m. and
6:00 p.m.
4. Machinery shall not be cleaned past 7:00 p.m. or serviced past 6:45 p.m. Monday through Friday.
5. All construction equipment powered by internal combustion engine shall be properly mufflered and
maintained.
6. Equipment shall be turned off when not in use. Unnecessary idling of internal combustion is prohibited.
7. All stationary noise generating construction equipment shall be located as far as practical from existing
nearby residences and other noise sensitive land uses. All such equipment shall be acoustically shielded.
8. Quiet construction equipment, in particular air compressors, shall be used whenever possible.
9. The project applicant shall designate a "noise disturbance coordinator", such as the contractor or contractor's
representative, who is responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The
disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g. starting too early, bad muffler,
etc.) and take measures to correct the problem. The name and phone number of the disturbance coordinator
16 6o
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less T7ian
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site and the location shall be included on improvements
plans and building permit plans submitted to the City for review.
8. Visual Qualitv and Aesthetics. Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? I X
b. Substantially damage scenic resources including, X
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic h ghway?
C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character X
or quality of the site and its surroundings?
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare X
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
Discussion:
The site is not in an area designated as a scenic resource or highway. The project will include a two story, ±40 feet tall
and 200 foot wide, commercial building which will be set back approximately 20 feet from the edge of Lakeville St.
The applicant provided visual simulations of the project from 5 different vantage points. These simulations show the
buildings, the proposed CMU sound wall around the residential portion of the project and mature landscaping. The
buildings will alter the views to the east of Sonoma Mountain for motorists and pedestrians/cyclists traveling on
Lakeville St. However, the height, width and setbacks of the building are consistent with the existing Commercial
Highway Zoning Designation. The proposed residential units will be approximately 30 feet in height and be setback f
16 feet from the rear property lines of the East Court residences. The site plan shows the buildings adjacent to the rear
property lines of East Court as three buildings f 30 feet in height and t 100 feet in width separate by ±10 feet. The
bulk and massing of these new residential units could impact the natural lighting and views of the East Court
residences. The applicant has provided a shade study which shows the shading of adjacent properties at the Winter
Solstice and Spring Equinox. Though shading will occur as a result of the project, most noticeably during the Winter
Solstice, it is to a level that is considered less than significant.
The project also proposes a 6 foot high CMU wall along the edge of the residential portion of the project adjacent to
Lindberg Lane and the proposed commercial parking lot. This wall, along with the residential units themselves, will
alter the views for motorists and pedestrians/cyclists traveling on Lindberg Lane. The project, including the retaining
wall, is required to be reviewed by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC). In addition, the
landscaping plan for the project includes plantings in front of the retaining wall to screen it. Therefore, the impact is
less than significant.
All exterior lighting shall be directed onto the project site and access ways and shielded to prevent glare and intrusion
onto adjacent properties. Plans submitted for project review and approval shall incorporate lighting plans, which show
the location and design of all proposed streetlights, and any other exterior lighting proposed. Proposed outdoor
lighting in conjunction with development shall include design measures to reduce private light impacts i.e., outdoor
lights only (no flood lights), low profile light standards and/or wall mounted lights, lights attached to buildings shall
provide a "soft wash" of light against the wall, no direct glare.
�I
17
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
W/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
Shade trees shall be incorporated on improvement plans along public streets and within parking areas shall be in
conformance with the City's Site Plan and Architectural Review Guidelines to reduce glare and provide shade and
screening.
Arclutectural detail, landscaping plans and detailed site plans shall be subject to review by the City and conform to
Site Plan and Architectural Review Design Guidelines, prior to issuance of building permits.
The project will not create a new source of substantial light and glare. The development of the new parcels with
commercial and residential uses would increase the light and glare in the immediate area; however, the lighting would
be consistent with that typically associated with these uses and is required to comply with the Zoning Ordinance
Performance Standards for light and glare. Exterior lighting would be reviewed as part of the SPARC review. Any
new light and glare associated with the project is expected to be less than significant.
Mideation Measures/Monitoring: Not applicable.
9. Hazards & Hazardous Materials. Would the project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X
environment through the routine transport use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the X
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or X
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d. Be located on a site, which is included on a list of X
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5, and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan X
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
f For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, X
would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or wonting in the project area?
g. Impair implementation of or physically interferes X
with an adopted emergency response plan or
18 0,
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
emergency evacuation plan?
h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized
areas or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
Discussion:
There are no known hazards on-site or in the ground.
Potentially
Less than
Less' lmn
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
X
The proposed project would not create a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances including but not
limited to oil, pesticides, smoky chemicals, or radiation, in the event of an accident. The project will not interfere with
emergency evacuation plans, create potential health hazards, or result in an increase in fire hazards due to flammable
brush, grass or trees. No storage of chemical or hazardous materials is anticipated with the use of this site. Except
during construction when equipment may be used requiring various types of fuel, the project does not involve
hazardous substances.
The project is located within two miles of an airport and within an airport land use plan (Petaluma Municipal Airport
Chapter of the 2001 Sonoma County Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan). However, the airport land use plan
requires that planes tum north toward the county land and not toward the city. Thus, planes are required to tum away
from the subject site. For this reason, the safety hazard for people residing in the project area appears to be less than
significant.
During construction, the applicant shall comply with all existing Federal and State safety regulations related to the
transport, use, handling, storage, and/or disposal of potentially hazardous substances. A Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that will include specific Best Management Practices (BMPs) related to hazardous
materials will be implemented during construction.
For construction activities involving storage of chemicals or hazardous materials on-site, the applicant shall file a
declaration form with the Fire Marshal's office and shall obtain a hazardous materials storage permit.
If hazardous materials are to be used or stored on-site, the applicant shall prepare a Risk Management Plan (RMP) for
approval by the Fire Marshal. The RMP shall include the following as appropriate:
The applicant shall provide for proper containment within storage areas for hazardous materials and shall
maintain emergency equipment and supplies, as specified by the Fire Marshal, to address any spills or leaks
from the facilities.
The applicant shall identify any potentially hazardous substances or contamination existing on-site and shall
provide for proper treatment, removal, and disposal during construction.
Mitieation Measures/Monitorine: Not applicable
19
0
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
10. Transportation/Traffic. Would the project:
a. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in X
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase
in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated
roads or highways?
C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e. Result in inadequate emergency access?
f Result in inadequate parking capacity? X
g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs X
supporting alternative transportation, i.e., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Discussion:
X
X
X
XI
A traffic study prepared by the consulting firm of Whitlock and Weinberger Transportation, Inc. provides an analysis
of the traffic impacts of the proposed project. Four intersections were evaluated within the project area: 1) Lindberg
Ln./Lakeville St 2) Lindberg Ln./Payran St. 3) Caulfield Ln./ Lakeville St. 4) Caulfield Ln. / Payran St. An analysis
was also performed relative to the projected operating conditions at the new intersection which will be created by the
new public street Lindberg Cir. and Lindberg Ln.
Trip generation rates are used to evaluate the potential impacts of a single project or larger developments with
multiple uses. The retail/commercial components of this project are anticipated to generate 583 daily trips of which
35 will be during the a.m. and p.m. peak while the residential portion of the project will generate 402 daily trips of
which 32 will be during the am peak and 43 during the pm peak. For the purposes of this analysis traffic impacts are
assessed as if all trips were made by motor vehicle.
The existing plus project scenario presents an evaluation of the potential traffic impacts which are expected to occur
with the addition of traffic from the proposed project to the existing traffic levels. Under this scenario, all of the study
intersections are expected to continue operating acceptably at LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours,
with both main street and minor street movements having acceptable levels of delay.
a
20
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
Vehicular access to the residential portion of the site will be via a cul-de-sac off of Lindberg Ln. Access will also be
provided for pedestrians/cyclists and emergency vehicle between the commercial parking lot and the cul-de-sac. The
office/retail portion of the site is served by a parking lot with an access driveway onto Lindberg Ln. and an access
driveway onto Lakeville Street. The project access driveway serving the retail/office portion onto Lakeville St. will
likely be limited to right -turns in and out when the planned City improvements to Lakeville St., including a traffic
signal at Lakeville St. and Lindberg Ln. are constructed. The limitation of the Lakeville Street access to right -tum in
and out only will not result in significant impacts to site and street circulation.
Parking for the residential portion of the project includes an average of 2.5 off street panting spaces per unit and an
average of 3 spaces per unit if on and off street spaces are counted. The City's PUD development standards allow for
more flexible parking requirements than standard zoning, however, for reference purposes if the standard of 3 parking
spaces per unit was applied, the project would be short 23 parking spaces for the residential portion. The retail/office
portion of the project provides 50 off street spaces in the parking lot behind the commercial building. This meets the
standard zoning criteria of 1 space per 300 square feet of retail/office floor area.
The project is located adjacent to Lakeville St. which is currently served by Sonoma County Transit. The applicant
has met with Jim Ryan of the City's Transit Division and proposed to improve the existing bus stop on the north side
of Lakeville St.(adjacent to McDonalds) instead of providing a new stop in front of the project. Details of the
proposed improvements to the bus stop will be reviewed by the City's Transit Division, CDD and SPARC.
There may be some short-term impacts to automobile, bicycle and pedestrian traffic due to construction vehicles
entering and exiting via Lakeville St. and Lindberg Ln. Construction vehicles will be contained to the site to the
extent possible and will not impact the movement of local traffic. The project has been reviewed by the Fire
Marshal and the Police Department to ensure that the project provides adequate access for emergency vehicles.
The developer shall be responsible for a fair share contribution to the City's Traffic Mitigation Fee as established
through City Ordinance and in the City's Special Development Fee handout.
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 provided specific recommendations and conditions. These
recommendations included interior and exterior bike parking, employee showers and lockers, benches and drinking
fountains, intersection improvements for pedestrian travel and a Class III bike route on the new Lindberg Circle
roadway. The committee further recommended that a pedestrian/bicycle easement be required connecting this
project with adjacent properties to the northwest and as well as a better connection between the commercial and
residential portions of the project. Staff has reviewed these recommendations and forwarded those which are
consistent with the City of Petaluma Bike Plan and feasible as conditions of approval to the Planning Commission,
City Council and Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee. Thus, the project would comply with the adopted
policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation.
Mitieation Measures/Monitorine: Not applicable
21
&6
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
11. Public Services. Would the project:
a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public
services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
WMitigation
Impact
Measures
1.
X
X
X
X
Discussion: The development is proposed to occur within an urbanized area, which is already serviced, by a variety
of public services. Additional fire and police service calls may occur as a result of this proposal. However, the impact
upon schools and parks would not be significantly more than is proposed by the current General Plan designation.
The closest parks and open space areas to the project site are Sunset Park in front of the Line and Twine Building,
approximately one third of a mile from the project site; Kenilworth Park next to the Public Library on Washington and
the future McNear Peninsula Park at the western end of McNear Peninsula; both are approximately half mile from the
project site.
The project does not provide any designated private or public open space for the residents outside of the front and rear
yards of each unit. As a point of comparison, if this project was proposed to be zoned Residential Compact (RC) or
Garden Apartment (RMG) the minimum amount of useable open space required would be 600 square feet per unit.
The typical backyards of this project are about 400 sq. ft. with some yard as large as 1400 sq. ft.
The applicant will be required to pay the applicable development fees that are assigned to all other proposals prior to
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to address the incremental impact that the proposal presents to all public
services including parks. Therefore, no significant environmental impacts will occur as a result of this proposal.
Mitieation Measures/Monitoring: Not applicable
12. Recreation.
a. Would the project increase the use of existing X
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
22 ��
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially Less than
Significant Significant
Impact w/Mitigation
Measures
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion on
recreational facilities, which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
Discussion:
Less Than No
Significant Impact
Tmpact
X
The addition of 42 residential units will not significantly increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities in the area. The closest parks and open space areas to the project site are Sunset Park in
front of the Line and Twine, approximately one third of a mile from the project site, Kenilworth Park next to the
Public Library on Washington and the future McNear Pennisula Park at the western end of McNear Pennisula, both
are approximately half mile from the project site.
As stated in the Public Services section above, the proposed project does not include any dedicated public or private
open space outside of the individual yards of the units.
Also, the applicant will be required to pay the applicable park fees that are assigned to all proposals prior to issuance
of a Certificate of Occupancy to address the incremental impact to park usage. Therefore, the recreation impacts that
will occur as a result of this proposal are less than significant.
Mitieation Measures/Monitorin2: Not applicable.
13. Utilities Infrastructure. Would the project:
a.
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
X
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b.
Require or result in the construction of new water or
X
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
C.
Require or result in the construction of new storm
X
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d.
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
X
project from existing entitlements needed?
e.
Result in a determination by the wastewater
X
treatment provider, which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
f
Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
X
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
23
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
Nc
Significant
Significant
Significant
I
Impact
%V/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
mpact
X
Discussion: The subject property is within a largely developed area and is anticipate by the Petaluma General Plan.
For this reason, it is expected that no impacts to the utility infrastructure will occur as a result of this proposal.
Development of the proposed project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements established by the
RWQCB. The site is already served by Pacific Gas & Electric and will have adequate water and sewer service.
The City's treatment plant has adequate capacity to accommodate the additional flow anticipated from the proposed
development. The proposed project is an infill site and would require extensions of existing service lines to provide
water, sewer, natural gas, electric, and storm drain utilities to the new residences. This extension is consistent with
the service needs expected by the General Plan.
The proposed development will comply with all federal, state, and local requirements for solid waste reduction and
recycling. A private company, under contract with the City of Petaluma, will provide solid waste disposal services to
the proposed project site. Solid waste from the general area is transported to the Sonoma County Central Landfill or
other appropriate facility, which has sufficient capacity. To minimize impacts on landfill capacity, the project will
recycle construction and demolition debris to the maximum extent feasible.
All new development approved within the City shall connect to the City's sewer and water system. The applicant
or subsequent owner/builder shall be responsible for the payment of Sewer and Water Connection fees to offset
impacts on City utilities. Water and sewer connections fees are calculated at time of building permit issuance, and
are due and payable prior to final inspection, issuance of a certificate of occupancy, or connection to the City's
utility system.
Mitieation Measures/Monitorins: Not applicable.
14. Mineral Resources. Would the project:
a. Result in the loss or availability of a known mineral X
resource that would be of value to the region, the
residents and/or the state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally -
important mineral resource recovery size delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
R
Discussion: There is no information about this site from the General Plan or additional studies, which indicates that
the site has been known to be a mineral resource. The proposed project would not create a significant impact to
known mineral resources.
Mitieation Measures/Monitorine: Not applicable.
24
A
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
15. Cultural Resources. Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
§15064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to §15064.5?
C. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
d. Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impac
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
F7
M
91
94
Discussion: The site is not known to contain any significant archaeological or historic materials or resources. The
1987 General Plan map of potential archeological resources indicates that there is a low probability of archeological
resources on the project site. The Sonoma County Assessor records show that the site has been vacant since 1947.
A standard condition of approval states that should any archeological/historical remains be encountered during
grading, work shall be halted temporarily and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted to evaluate the artifacts and
to recommend further action. The project will not cause changes, which would affect ethnic or cultural values,
affect religious uses, or result in adverse physical or aesthetic impacts to a historic archaeological resource.
Mitieation Measures/Monitorine: Not applicable.
16. Aaricultural Resources. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use
in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.
Would the project:
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or X
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or X
a Williamson Act contract?
C. Involve other changes in the existing environment, X
which, due to their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
25 0
Lindberg Circle File NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
Potentially
Less than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
w/Mitigation
Impact
Measures
Discussion: The project site is not adjacent to agricultural lands and would not conflict with existing Williamson Act
contracts or other agriculturally related uses. Therefore, no impacts to agricultural resources will occur as a result of
this proposal.
MitiLration Measures/Monitoring: Not applicable.
17. Mandatory Findinas of Sianificance.
Yes No
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, X
substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively X
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects
of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)?
d. Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse X
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Discussion: The project would not have a significant effect on the environment, achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals, have cumulative adverse impacts, or cause substantial adverse
impacts on human beings.
Mitieation Measures/Monitorine: N/A
IMPLEMENTATION:
The applicant shall be required to obtain all required permits from responsible agencies and
provide proof of compliance to the City prior to issuance of grading or building permits.
2. The applicant shall incorporate all applicable code provisions and required mitigation measures and
conditions into the design and improvement plans and specifications for the project.
3. The applicant shall notify all employees, contractors, and agents involved in the project
implementation of the mitigation measures and conditions applicable to the project and shall ensure
compliance with such measures and conditions. The applicant shall notify all assigns and transfers of
the same.
MONITORING:
26
�0
Lindberg Circle file NO. 04 -GPA -0512 -CR
ris-TP1.1
Less than Less Than No
Significant Significant Impact
%V/Mitigation Impact
Measures
The Building, Planning, and Engineering Divisions, and the Fire Department shall review the
improvement and construction plans for conformance with the approved project description and all
applicable codes, conditions, mitigation measures, and permit requirements prior to approval of
a site design review, improvement plans, grading, or building permits.
2. Mitigation Measures required during construction shall be listed as conditions on the building or
grading permits and signed by the contractor responsible for construction.
3. City inspectors shall insure that construction activities occur consistent with the approved plans and
conditions of approval.
CONSTRUCTION:
The applicant shall designate a project manager with authority to implement all mitigation measures
and conditions or approval and provide a statement of his/her name, address, and phone numbers to
the City prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. The applicant's statement appointing a
project manager shall be signed by the contractor responsible for construction.
2. Mitigation measures required during construction shall be listed as conditions on the building or
grading permits and signed by the contractor responsible for construction.
3. City inspectors shall insure that construction activities occur consistent with the approved plans and
conditions of approval.
POST -CONSTRUCTION:
1. The City shall retain a qualified professional to monitor completion of restoration plans or
mitigation plans and reports on the success criteria and management needs.
the project applicant, have reviewed this Initial Study
and hereby agree to incorporate the mitigation measures and monitoring programs identified herein into the project.
Signature of, pplican Date
S:\PC-Plarming Commission\lnitial Studies\890 Lakeville Lindberg Circle IS.doc
fI
27
Project Name:
File Number:
Address/Location:
a0� City ofPetahnna, California
Community Development Department
Planning Division
jaea 11 English Street, Petaluma, CA 94952
Lindberg Circle
04 -GPA -0512 -CR
890 Lakeville Street
ReportinglMonitoring Record - Mitigation Measures
This document has been developed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resource Code Section 21.081.6 to
ensure proper and adequate monitoring or reporting in conjunction with project(s) approval which relies upon a Mitigated Negative
Declaration or an Environmental Impact Report.
DATEDEPT.
DEPT. OR DUE F'IN ISIII STAFF
DATE INITIALS
Noise. Mitigation Measures
1. Construction hours are limited to Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday. Construction is prohibited on Sunday
and all holidays recognized by the City of Petaluma.
2. There shall be no start up of internal combustion engines on construction related
machinery or equipment prior to 8:00 a.m. Monday through Friday.
3. Delivery of materials or equipment is limited to Monday through Friday (non -
holiday) between 7:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.
4. Machinery shall not be cleaned past 7:00 p.m. or serviced past 6:45 p.m. Monday
through Friday.
— 5. All construction equipment powered by internal combustion engine shall be
properly mufflered and maintained.
6. Equipment shall be turned off when not in use. Unnecessary idling of internal
combustion is prohibited.
7. All stationary noise generating construction equipment shall be located as far as
practical from existing nearby residences and other noise sensitive land uses. All
such equipment shall be acoustically shielded.
8. Quiet construction equipment, in particular air compressors, shall be used
whenever possible.
Department Requested By or Due Date Page 1
PD Planning Division FM Final Map
FM Fire Marshal BP Building Permit
ENG Engineering CO Certificate of Occupancy ��
BD Building Division SPARC Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee
LTM Long -Term Monitorin
Lindberg Circle
Reporting/Monitoring Record - Mitigation Measures for Approval
Department
PD Planning Division
FM Fire Marshal
ENG Engineering
BD Building Division
City of Petaluma, California
The project applicant shall designate a "noise disturbance coordinator", such as
the contractor or contractor's representative, who is responsible for responding to
any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator shall
determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g. starting too early, bad muffler,
etc.) and take measures to correct the problem. The name and phone number of
the disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site
and the location shall be included on improvements plans and building permit
plans submitted to the City for review.
IMPLEMENTATION:
1. The applicant shall be required to obtain all required permits from responsible
agencies and provide proof of compliance to the City prior to issuance of
grading or building permits.
2. The applicant shall incorporate all applicable code provisions and required
mitigation measures and conditions into the design and improvement plans and
specifications for the project.
3. The applicant shall notify all employees, contractors, and agents involved in the
project implementation of the mitigation measures and conditions applicable to
the project and shall ensure compliance with such measures and conditions. The
applicant shall notify all assigns and transfers of the same.
MONITORING:
1. The Building, Planning, and Engineering Divisions, and the Fire Department shall
review the improvement and construction plans for conformance with die
approved project description and all applicable codes, conditions, mitigation
measures, and permit requirements prior to approval of a site design review,
improvement plans, grading, or building permits.
2. Mitigation Measures required during construction shall be listed as conditions on
the building or grading permits and signed by the contractor responsible for
construction.
3. City inspectors shall insure that construction activities occur consistent with the
approved plans and conditions of approval.
Requested By or Due Date
FM
Final Map
BP
Building Permit
CO
Certificate of Occupancy
SPARC
Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee
LTM Long -Term Monitoring
Page 2
�3
Lindberg Circle
Reporting/Monitoring Record - Mitigation Measures for Approval
CONSTRUCTION:
City ofPetahnna, California
1. The applicant shall designate a project manager with authority to implement all
mitigation measures and conditions of approval and provide a statement of
his/her name, address, and phone numbers to the City prior to issuance of any
grading or building permits. The applicant's statement appointing a project
manager shall be signed by the contractor responsible for construction.
2. Mitigation measures required during construction shall be listed as conditions on
the building or grading permits and signed by the contractor responsible for
construction.
3. City inspectors shall insure that construction activities occur consistent with the
approved plans and conditions of approval.
POST -CONSTRUCTION:
1. The City shall retain a qualified professional to monitor completion of
restoration plans or mitigation plans and reports on the success criteria and
management needs.
S:\monitoring\Lindberg Circle.doc
Department Reauested By or Due Date
PD Planning Division FM Final Map
FM Fire Marshal BP Building Permit
ENG Engineering CO Certificate of Occupancy
BD Building Division SPARC Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee
LTM Long -Term Monitoring
Page 3
14-
WINTER JOLSTICZ
LINDBERG CIRCLE SHADOW STUDY 2
Er
t
STUDYRM"'
19
ATTACHMENT 10
DRAFT
LINDBERG CIRCLE
A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT
Guidelines for a Planned Unit District
Petalu na, California
June 14, 2005
Presented by:
The LINDBERG CIRCLE, LLC
719 South Point Boulevard Suite C
Petaluma, CA
(707)769-0181
(707) 769-0285 fax
Prepared by:
Hedgpeth Architects
2321 Bethards Dr
Santa Rosa, CA
(707)523-7010
(707) 542-2328 fax
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction Page
Page
1.1 Lindberg Circle Mixed -Use Development ...........................................
3
1.2 Subject Property...........................................................................3
1.3 Surrounding Area..........................................................................3
1.4 Development Plan.........................................................................4
1.5 Ingress and Egress........................................................................4
1.6 Phasing......................................................................................4
1.7 Architecture................................................................................5
2. Building Characteristics
2.1 Plan 1......................................................................................... 5
2.2 Plan 2......................................................................................... 6
2.3 Plan 3......................................................................................... 6
2.4 Commercial Building....................................................................... 6
3. Development Standards
3.1 Parking.......................................................................................
3.2 Lot Size.......................................................................................
3.3 Maximum Building Heights..............................................................
3.4 Setbacks......................................................................................
3.5 Minor Building Additions.................................................................
3.6 Landscaping................................................................................
3.7 Exterior Color Schemes..................................................................
3.8 Fencing.......................................................................................
3.9 Permitted Uses...........................................................................
3.10 Permitted Accessory Uses............................................................
3.11 Prohibited Uses.........................................................................
4. Development Timetable............................................................................ 10
5. Plant Palette........................................................................................... 10
2 DC)
1. Introduction
1.1 Lindberg Circle. A Mixed -Use Development
Lindberg Circle, A Mixed -Use Development, is a Planned Unit District consisting of a two-story retail
and office building and 42 single family homes located just across the street from the Central Specific
Plan Area of Petaluma, along Lakeville Street at the intersection of Lindberg Lane. All of the homes
within the Lundberg Circle mixed-use development shall be built, sold, and conveyed subject to the PUD
guidelines listed below. The purpose of these PUD guidelines is to provide the necessary criteria to
preserve the design and integrity that is consistent with the standards outlined in the City's General Plan.
1.2 Subiect Propertv
The development plan for Lindberg Circle incorporates three individual parcels. These three properties
are all currently zoned for highway commercial use (Cl) with the land use designation of Thoroughfare
Commercial and are currently owned by the Lindberg Circle, LLC. The three parcels together total 4.5
acres. Overall, the properties are relatively flat and represent optimum infill locations in Petaluma. Some
of the neighboring single family home properties do, in certain areas, drain onto the proposed project
and the project generally drains from North to South, toward the Lakeville Street frontage, although a
portion of the drainage does flow toward Lindberg Lane. This drainage will be adjusted in the
development of this project. The neighboring properties draining onto the subject property will be
remedied by a new installation of drainage pipe leading the storm water from those properties to the
Lakeville Street storm drain in a private drainage easement for lots 4 -16. All of the properties being
proposed for development are vacant.
1.3 Surrounding Area
The existing land use for the surrounding area is predominantly mixed-use, although an urban
diversified subdivision (5-10 units per acre) exists just west of the subject properties and industrial uses,
riverfront dependant industrial uses, institutional uses, and other thoroughfare commercial uses also
exist in the immediate area. These uses include a shopping center, auto body, auto salvage, wreckers, &
transmission repair shops, a gymnastic training facility, specialty beverage distribution, landscape
contractor, and boots & clothing shops on the immediate borders of the subject properties.
3 'g(
1.4 Development Plan
The development plan for Lindberg Circle locates the commercial building along Lakeville Street
honoring the existing thoroughfare commercial land use. The 42 single family homes wrap the interior
of the properties along a new city street, "Lindberg Circle." This mix of uses is consistent with the
general direction of desired land uses identified in the Petaluma General Plan for this area, while not
specifically staying within the limits of the thoroughfare connnercial land use identified for these three
properties. The plan is designed with three vehicular access points and six pedestrian access points from
the bordering city streets, Lakeville Street and Lindberg Lane.
1.5 Ineress and Eeress
The primary vehicular access for the commercial building will be located on Lakeville Street. The
commercial parking lot will have controlled access for fire and life safety vehicles and pedestrians to the
new city street, located directly behind the commercial building. A secondary access onto Lindberg
Lane completes the loop between the two existing bordering streets for the commercial parking lot. The
residential portion of the project is accessed from a fully functional intersection located more than 350'
north of the Lindberg Lane -Lakeville Street intersection. A cul-de-sac meeting city standards serves
these single family homes. A pedestrian and emergency vehicle access is provided between this cul-de-
sac and the commercial parking lot.
1.6 Phasine
Lindberg Circle will not be phased. The commercial building & all single family homes will be under
construction at the same time and the single family homes will be offered for sale as they are completed,
although Lindberg Circle, LLC reserves the right to hold any of the individual homes it wishes from an
open market sale and may sell homes prior to obtaining final occupancy certificates.
1.7 Architecture
The Commercial building is placed so as to be a prominent element along Lakeville Street as well as a
sound barrier to the single family homes. The architecture evokes a clean and simple modern sensibility
while harkening back to the craftsman influence predominant throughout Petaluma. Quality materials
and pleasing colors will be used. The single family homes have been designed to appeal to a wide
variety of home buyers; however, the target market will be small families. Due to the small lot
configuration, these homes will generate interest from residents who seek a lower maintenance home.
With 42 homes on 4.5 acres, the overall density at 9.3 homes per acre conforms to the neighboring
residential land use; Urban -Diversified. The three floor plans are plotted in groups of four and five
homes with one group of two homes. Each home features an ample and useable front porch as well as a
back deck or patio. A single garage door minimizes the impact of the automobile on the street elevations
while providing for the required covered parking for each home. The jogging of plate heights and the
returns in plan between each unit assures an individual character as well as serving to minimize joint
maintenance issues. This individual character in the single family homes is heightened by the diversity
of the color scheme.
4 V
2. Building Characteristics
2.1 House 1
The largest of the three home models is House 1, a 1,900 square foot home, with three bedrooms, an
office or optional fourth bedroom, and two and a half bathrooms. The home is 24 feet wide on lots
which average 2400 square feet in size. As with the remaining two plans, this two-story home provides
the living area downstairs with the sleeping area upstairs. A family room is located at the front of the
home, with a great room and kitchen toward the back of the home. The laundry room is in the one car
garage. This home also features a front porch and a back patio off the great room. Seventeen of these
units are planned for the development.
5
2.2 House 2
This 1,750 square foot residence provides an expanded front porch as the unit is three feet wider than the
House 1. This plan also offers three bedrooms, an office or optional fourth bedroom, and two and a half
bathrooms. A formal living room is located at the front of the home, while the kitchen and dining room
are in the rear. The laundry room in this home is off the kitchen capturing the under stair space for
utility. A smaller back patio maintains a pure rectangular back yard on most lots which average 2,450
square feet in size. This home features a tandem garage and appears on the site plan in nineteen
locations, the most recurring plan.
2.3 House 3
Designed especially for the more prominent end lots, this home steps down from the two-story masses
of the other homes and offers an "L" shape allowing a better fit into pie shaped lots, averaging 3,000
square feet in size, as well as providing relief and diversity in the projects massing. The 1,450 square
feet offered in this home is efficiently used to provide three bedrooms and two and a half bathrooms. A
vaulted living room juts out in the leg of the "L" providing ample opportunities for natural lighting. A
short hall connecting the living room and dining room offers the opportunity to place a laundry at this
level. The front of this home is also adorned by a useable porch. Behind the one car garage, a well
appointed kitchen overlooks a generous back deck accessed from the dining room.
2.4 Commercial Buildine
The commercial building offers 8,757 square feet of speculative retail space at the ground level and
8,218 square feet of office space at the upper level. Covered bicycle parking, break rooms, showers,
balconies, and trellised patios accent this engine for commerce. Exterior accessed restrooms serve the
ground floor. An elevator, as well as two stairs, provides access to the upper floor of offices which are
highlighted by exposed structural trusses and rafters. The mass of the building steps forward and back
along Lakeville Street providing a pleasing experience of color and material which both invites shoppers
and serves to protect the homes behind the edifice.
I9
M
3. Development Standards
3.1 Parkine
Each residence will have at least one covered parking space (garage) along with a minimum of one
uncovered onsite parking space (on the driveways) as well as one additional parking space (either in a
tandem garage or on the street). Parking in the residential portion of the project is only permitted in
individual garages, on driveways and designated parking spaces on the new public street shown on the
PUD Plan. Parking is prohibited in the "raised island" of Lindberg Circle.
3.2 Lot Sizes
The lots within Lindberg Circle are a minimum of 2,000 square feet. As proposed, they currently range
in size from 2,008 to 5,897 square feet. The average lot size is 2,550 square feet. The minimum depth of
each lot is 83'-8" while the widths vary. The minimum width for the House 1 is 24', while House 2 is 27'
wide, and the minimum frontage width for House 3 is 50'. All Front yards have a minimum driveway of
20', although on Lindberg Circle the landscape area is significantly less than 20' due to each homes
front porch. The backyards for each home maintain a 400 Square foot minimum size varying in depth
from 16'-8" to as much as 28', although again with pie shaped lots there are areas where the home may
be as close as 5' to a property line, however the 400 square foot total size of the back yard is maintained
throughout the project.
3.3 Maximum Buildine Heiehts
The commercial building height will not exceed forty feet, while the residential building heights will be
held to a maximum of thirty feet. The building height shall be measure by the vertical distance from the
average ground level of the finish grade to the highest point of the roof. This measurement will not
include chimneys or other appurtenances as they are defined by the City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance.
7
3.4 Setbacks
Commercial building setbacks will adhere to the following minimums.
Front (property line adjacent to Lindberg Lane):
Rear yard:
Side yard:
10 feet
10 feet, except when abutting residential
then minimum of 20 feet
10 feet, except when abutting residential
then minimum of 20 feet
Residential building setbacks will adhere to the following minimums. Except for minor building
additions described below.
Front of building: 15 feet
Front of garage: 20 feet
Rear yard: as shown on PUD Plan
Side yard: as shown on PUD Plan
Side yard facing streets, parking lot or parcel A: 5 feet
3.5 Minor Building Additions to Residential Buildines Only
The distribution of one story and two story units shall be maintained. No building additions that result in
new floor area shall be allowed except for minor building extensions such as chimneys, patios or decks
no more than 18 inches in height, and bay windows. These minor additions may only encroach into the
rear yard setbacks but not the front or sides. Exceptions to this regulation will require a PUD amendment
per the requirements of the City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance and approval by the City Council.
3.6 Landscauine
The landscaping for the Lindberg Circle neighborhood shall be in substantial conformance with the plant
palette listed below. For each individual residence, the front yard along with any planting strip between
the sidewalks and curbs will be installed by the developer immediately after the construction of the
homes. The individual homeowners shall be responsible for the installation of the rear yard landscaping.
Each homeowner is responsible for the maintenance of their landscaped area including the planting strip.
The remaining landscaping located along Lindberg Lane shall be maintained by the owner of the
commercial property. The landscaping design for the Lindberg Circle Neighborhood shall set a
precedent for the higher quality that is desired in future development in this area.
3.7 Exterior Color Schemes
The exterior colors shall be in substantial compliance with the colors shown in the color elevations
approved by SPARC. The Planning Staff shall approve the color scheme for the community and the
same color scheme may not be used on houses that are side by side or directly across the street from one
another.
3.8 Fencine
C7
Residential:
Private fences shall be installed by the developer along the rear and side property lines as well as the 3.5
foot privacy fence in the front yard, Additional front yard fences no greater than 3.5 feet shall be permit
per the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance. Subsequent changes to the private fencing must be consistent with
the approved fencing detail in the PUD Development Plan, the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance, and the
setback requirements stated within these guidelines.
Commercial/Office Use
No additional fencing shall be allowed on the commercial/office parcel except where it is shown on the
approved PUD Plan.
3.9 Permitted Uses on the Residential Lots 2-43
i. Single family homes
ii. Model homes along with temporary sales office
iii. Temporary construction trailer
iv. Temporary construction storage facilities
v. Licensed small family day care facility per the City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance
vi. Home Occupation Permits per the City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance
3.10 Pennitted Accessory Uses on the Residential Lots 2-43
i. Private garages.
ii. Private swimming pools or spas exclusively for the use of residents and guests per the City of
Petaluma Zoning Ordinance.
iii. Covered and uncovered patios, decks providing they reflect the design theme and use
materials and finishes compatible with the existing residence. The decks and patio can not
exceed 18 inches in height and the patio and deck covers must conform to the City of Petaluma
Zoning Ordinance (Revised November 1999) regarding accessory structures Section 21-200.
v. Satellite dishes less than 24 inches in diameter for receiving only for private
use.
vi. The posting of temporary political and for sale, lease or rent signs.
vii. Other accessory buildings/structures customarily appurtenant to permitted uses, in
accordance with the provisions of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance (Revised November 1999)
regarding accessory structures Sect. 21-200..
3.11 Prohibited Uses on the Residential Lots 2-43 ( APN's ???)
i. Parking of mobile homes, farm equipment, large trucks, buses, boats or recreational vehicles.
ii. Storage of rubbish, debris, dangerous or flammable materials.
iii. Garage Conversions
iv. Accessory Dwellings/Granny Units
v. Any principle or accessory uses which are not listed in these guidelines prohibited.
9 q
3.12 Permitted Uses Commercial/Office Lot 1
Business and professional offices, administrative, executive and editorial offices, financial offices,
including banks and real estate, and other general business offices.
Restaurants cafe, or soda fountain, refreshment stands. (Ord. 1974 N.C.S., 3/95), , not including
entertainment or dancing or sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises.
Any local retail business or service establislunent, such as a grocery (excluding convenience markets),
fruit or vegetable store, bakery, drug store, barber or beauty shop, station, and the like, supplying
commodities or performing services primarily for residents of the neighborhood.
Medical, optical and dental offices and clinics.
Artist supplies, art galleries, gift shops, antique shops.
Business and technical schools, and schools for photography, art, music and dance.
3.13 Permitted Accessory Uses Commercial/Office Lot 1
Accessory uses and buildings customarily appurtenant to a permitted use, in accordance with provisions
of Section 21-201, except when abutting a residential zoning district, then the provisions for primary
uses and structures in this district shall also apply to accessory uses and buildings. (Ord. 1962 N.C.S.,
10/94; Rev. Ord. 2039 N.C.S., 11/96)
Signs, in accordance with the provisions of Section 21-204.
Up to three (3) amusement games, subject to the provisions of Section 21-407
Mini telecommunications facilities, in accordance with all applicable provisions of Chapter 14.44 of the
Petaluma Municipal Code, which have received site plan and architectural review and approval by the
Planning Director (except within a recognized Historic District or on a recognized Historic Landmark
where mini telecommunications facilities shall require a minor conditional use permit and Historic Site
Plan and Architectural Review). (Ord. 2039 N.C.S., 11/96)
3.14 Conditional Permited Uses Commercial/Office Lot 1
Live entertainment incidental to a principally permitted or conditional use. (Ord. 1962 N.C.S., 10/94)
Minor telecommunications facilities, in accordance with all applicable provisions of Chapter 14.44 of
the Petaluma Municipal Code and approved by the Planning Director in accordance with Article 26 of
this Ordinance, subject to administrative site plan and architectural review (except within a recognized
Historic District or on a recognized Historic Landmark where minor telecommunication facilities shall
require a major conditional use permit and Historic Site Plan and Architectural Review). (Ord. 2039
N.C.S., 11/96)
10
Accessory uses and buildings customarily appurtenant to a permitted use, in accordance with provisions
of Section 21-201, except when abutting a residential zoning district, then the provisions for primary
uses and structures in this district shall also apply to accessory uses and buildings. (Ord. 1962 N.C.S.,
10/94; Rev. Ord. 2039 N.C.S., 11/96)
4. Development Timetable
The development schedule for this project is critical to its success. The timeline for this project has
construction beginning on July 1" 2005 through October 31" 2006 with an elapsed time of sixteen
months. It is imperative that we adhere to our proposed timeline to ensure the success of this project.
The phasing plan for the project is to build all 42 residential units in a single phase while simultaneously
constructing the commercial building.
5. Plant Palette
DEVELOPMENT LANDSCAPING
BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME
TREES
Calocedrus decurrens
Incense Cedar
Carpinus betulus
European Hornbeam
Casuarina stricta
Mountain She Oak
Crataegus laevigata'Paul's Scarlet'
English Hawthorn
Eriobotr a deflexa
Bronze Loquat
Ginkgo biloba'Autumn Gold'
Maidenhair Tree
Laurus noblis
Grecian Laurel
Lyonothamnus floribundus 'asplenifolius'
Catalina Ironwood
Magnolia grandiflora'St. Mary'
Magnolia
Magnolia soulangiana'BURGUNDY'
Saucer Magnolia
Malus'Red Silver'
Flowering Crabapple
Melaleuca linariifolia
Flaxleaf Paperbark
Prunus caroliana
Carolina Laurel Cheery
Prunus serrulata'Kanzan'
Japanese Flowering Cherry
Quercus coccinea
Scarlet Oak
Rhus lancea
African Sumac
I1 1C _.
Arbutus unedo 'Elfin King'
Dwarf Strawberry Tree
Arctostaphylos densiflora'Howard McMinn'
Manzanita
Aucuba japonica
Japanese Aucuba
Buxus microphylla japonica'Green Beauty'
Japanese Boxwood
Callistemon viminalis 'Captain Cook'
Weeping Bottlebrush
Camellia sasanqua'Yuletide'
Camellia
Carpenteria californica 'Elizabeth'
Bush Anemone
Choisya ternata
Mexican Orange
11 �q
Cistus X purpureus
Cotoneasterlacteus
Escallonia'Terri'
Fatsia japonica
Grevillea'Noell'
Hebe'Coed'
Hebe'Patty's Purple'
12
Orchid Spot Rock Rose
Parney Cotoneaster
Escallonia
Japanese Aralia
Grevillea
Hebe
Hebe
q0
DEVELOPMENT LANDSCAPING (continued)
BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME
Ilex comuta 'Burfordii Nana'
Dwarf Burford Holly
Ilex vomitori a 'Nana'
Dwarf Chinese Holly
Leptospern-mm scoparium 'Snow'
New Zealand Tea Tree
Ligustrum ovalifolium
California Privet
Mahonia'Golden Abundance'
Oregon Grape
Myrtus communis 'Compacta'
Compact Myrtle
Nandina domestica'Harbour Dwarf
Heavenly Bamboo
Pieris japonica'Temple Bells'
Lily of the Valley
Pittosporum tenuifolium
Pittosporum
Pittosporum tobira'Variegata'
Variegated tobira
Podocarpus gracilior
Fern Pine
Prunus laurocerasus 'Zabelliana'
Zabel Laurel
Rhaphiolepis indica'7ack Evans'
Indian Hawthorn
Rhaphiolepis indica'Springtime'
Indian Hawthorn
Spiraea j aponica 'Anthony Waterer'
Spiraea
Viburnum davidii
Viburnum
Viburnum tinus'Spring Bouquet'
Laumstinus
Xylosma congestum
Xylosma
Achillea X 'Moonshine'
Yarrow
Bergenia cordifolia'Red Beauty'
Heartleaf Bergena
Bleclmum spicant
Deer Tongue Fern
Dietes bicolor
Fortnight Lilly
Erigeron karvinskianus
Mexican Daisy
Gaura lindheimeri
NCN
Heuchera micrantha'Palace Purple'
Coral Bells
Hosta undulata'Great Expectations'
Plantain Lily
Knophofia'Little Maid'
Red Hot Poker Plant
Limonium perezii'Atlantis'
Sea Lavender
Liriope muscari 'Big Blue'
Lily Turf
Penstemon X'Firebird'
Beard Tongue
Phormium tenax 'Maori Queen'
New Zealand Flax
VINES
Ficus pumila Creeping Fig
Parthenocissus quinquefolia Virginia Creeper
GROLINDCOVERS
Ajuga reptans Carpet Bugle
Cotoneaster Dammeri 'Lowfast' Cotoneaster
13
�1
Duchesnea indica
Festuca rubra
Lantana 'Spreading Sunset'
Myoporum parvifolitmi'Putah Creek #2'
Rosmarinus officinalis'Prostrata'
Vinca minor
SAPlan Dept\Misc\Lindberg Circle PUD Guidelines 2.doc
Mock Strawberry
Red Fescue
Lantana
NCN
Rosemary
Dwarf Periwinkle
14 ��