Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 07/25/2000Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 L v City of Petaluma, California w �? City Council Chambers City Hall, 11 English Street Petaluma, CA 94952 Telephone 707/778 -4301 / Fax 707/778 -4498 E -Mail planning(a,ci. petal uma.ca.us Web Page http: / /www.ci.petaluma.ca.us Planning Commission Minutes July 25, 2000 — 7:00 PM Commissioners: present: Barrett , Broad, Glass, Monteschio, Vieler Absent: Cader- Thompson, Feibusch * Chair Staff. George White, Planning Manager Irene Borba, Associate Planner ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of June 27, 2000 were approved as submitted. PUBLIC COMMENT: None COMMISSIONERS' REPORT: None. Commissioner Broad welcomed the new Commissioner Monteschio and thanked Commissioner Bennett for his services. CORRESPONDENCE: APPEAL STATEMENT: Within fourteen (14) calendar days following the date of a decision of the Planning Commission, the decision may be appealed to the City Council by the applicant or by any other interested party. If no appeal is made within that time, the decision shall be final. An appeal shall be addressed to the Council in writing and shall be filed with the City Clerk. Said appeal shall be accompanied by the appeal fee as specified by Resolution 92- 251- N.C.S. as adopted by the City Council. The appeal shall state specifically the grounds for the appeal and the relief sought by the appellant. LEGAL RECOURSE STATEMENT: Was noted on the agenda. SAPC- Plannin Commission \Min= 072>.doc 1 9/19/00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 NEW BUSINESS: I. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Was postponed until next meeting where there would be a full commission. PUBLIC HEARING: II. Petaluma Valley Baptist Church — Rezoning; 580 Sonoma Mountain Parkway; AP No. 136 - 120 -075. (IB) Reconsideration of an application to rezone a 3.31 acre parcel from Planned Community District (PCD) to Planned Unit District (PUD) to expand the existing church facilities and allow for construction of a multi - purpose hall. For this application, the Planning Commission recommended action will be forwarded to the City Council. Irene Borba Presented the staff report. The public hearing was opened. Charlene Wardlow: Introduced the Pastor, architect, landscape architect and the lighting consultant. She then reviewed the changes as outlined in her letter of June 14, 2000. Commissioner Barrett: Have you already set up a direct phone number and how have you made that available? Charlene Wardlow: Yes the number is set up and was mailed to the neighbors, and an adult has the phone when events /meetings are scheduled. Commissioner Barrett: Have you gotten any calls? Charlene Wardow: One Commissioner Barrett: Suggested posting the number or putting it in the phone book. Kiosk — is it a staffed kiosk and is it lighted? Charlene Wardlow: The kiosk is for directions of where to go. Signs have been posted are on the fence reminding people to come and go quietly. Kiosk is not lighted now, but could be. Commissioner Broad: Have you had any contact with the public? Charlene Wardlow: We had another neighborhood meeting. Three people showed up. SAK- Planning Commission\N inuteS0725.doc 2 9/19/00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 Commissioner Barrett: What hours do you want to see from this? Charlene Wardlow: 10 p.m. as the shopping center and the Junior College. Requesting same treatment as anyone else in the area. David McCarthy, 1745 Rosamond Street: Applauded the church for their positive changes. I did see the signs on the fences, the painted red curbs and the loading zone and the glass enclosure in the hallway. I also recognize the reduction in the size and scope of the multipurpose room. However, in speaking to Charlene Wardlow today I understand the wall into the entryway that was on the original site plan had to be removed due to concerns of the fire marshal. The new revised plan without the wall is the primary exit to walk to the front or back lot. Maybe they can enclose it as the breezeway at the administration offices. Also questioned being able to put up a chain to block off the back parking lot when not necessary. They are still parking in the back parking lot at night. Noted the schedule for hours of operation which they are limiting to 8:00 p.m. Maybe they can change their schedule for meetings. This is not exactly the same as other sites in the vicinity. I've measured the other sites noted in the staff report and the sound is less involved because of the distance of the homes to the church or the structures A church with proposed preschool should not expect the same hours as the Junior College where only thirteen homes are adjacent to the parking lot at the Junior College. The hours of operation for the Junior College are 7:00 -10:00 p.m. Sunday through Thursday and they usually end at 9:30. The church would like to compare themselves to the commercial shopping center. There are six homes along Riesling Road and the apartments behind the center are towards the back of the center and noise at night is minimal. In looking at this project, are 26 homes in a much closer proximity to the church. The main exit is 60' to nearest homes and their backyards. It is 78' from the back of my house to the building. The geographic location is not near the sites noted in the report. Would urge not to amend the hours of operation. Mr. Marston, 1753 Rosamond: Asked applicant if the landscaper who trims the vegetation could come later than 7:00 a.m. Asked if there would be an outside playground or a basketball court which would bring people outside. Has been excessive noise at night. Had to call once. Ross Robertson: The church was there first. I do live on the west side and I don't understand how other individuals can change what's fair. Pam Smith, 1737 Rosamond Street: Commends the church on the changes they have made. All for their expansion. Feel like they have come closer with the plans. Maybe we could compromise on the hours of operation. SAK- Planning Commission \Minute0725.doc 3 9/19/00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 Cynthia Bates: Is a member of the church. Concerned about closeness of church to houses. Those houses were built around us. We were not consulted as a church body how close they are. The other churches he sited were in existence long before the Baptist church. Concerning hours of operation — most evening functions are over by 8:30. Please consider this. Ross Robertson: Hope this isn't based on who was here first. Pam Smith: Cell phone — sometimes what works well is to have the number available on the answering machine if people have a complaint about noise. Also is it possible to have some kind of a waiver to allow for special events in the evening. Felicia Peters, 565 Alamor Street: Would like to clarify three things; 1) lighting — will it be turned off at night; 2) buffer zone from our house to fence; 3) no parking on our side. Pastor Tom Marcum, 1446 Dandelion Way: Hopefully you have recognized our diligence to addressing these concerns. Some have been implemented already and incorporated into the plan and other measures taken to address noise. Regarding the time restrictions, you must recognize our hesitancy as a church to restrict our hours. We will continue to be good neighbors. Hopefully, we have not been singled out. This is to my knowledge the only church that has restrictions on hours of operation. Commissioner Broad: Requested the applicant respond to questions concerning any outside playground, basketball court, the gardener and lighting. Charlene Wardlow: No formal basketball court planned inside or out. Playground proposed between the school building and multipurpose room. Will have the gardeners come later. Lights are interior to parking lot and have been lowered; a timer can be looked into. Commissioner Glass: Preschool would be a benefit in this area. Hopefully with changes a preschool is beneficial for the community. Charlene Wardlow: We left the preschool in; and it would require a CUP. Commissioner Monteschio: Please explain the fence David McCarthy was talking about. Charlene Wardlow: Explained the proposed wall at the entry to the multipurpose room; however because of the fire marshal's concerns they decided not to put the wall in. Commissioner Monteschio: Fence for parking lot? SAPC- Plannins Commission \Minute0725.doc 4 9/19/00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 Charlene Wardlow: We are pursuing a plastic chain link fence for the back parking lot so that it can be restricted for overflow parking. Commissioner Monteschio: Have you spoken to a noise expert. Charlene Wardlow: Yes. Commissioner Vieler: Do you have plans to chain off parking lot area? Charlene Wardlow: Yes, we are looking into it. Commissioner Vieler: Look at minutes from the previous meeting regarding lighting. The idea of a timer has not been incorporated. Charlene Wardlow: Lighting is to be reviewed by SPARC and we are not scheduled to go to SPARC until after City Council. We will then address this. Commissioner Barrett: Consider moving chain to block off parking up further. Where do most people enter the buildings? Commissioner Vieler: Questioned why elevations of the pavilion were not included. Charlene Wardlow: Pointed out the elevation drawings in the plans and explained that portion of the project. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Vieler: Respectfully requested a 5 minute recess to discuss a procedural issue with George White. Readjourned at 8:30. Commissioner Broad: Can you put parking lot timers on. Light expert: Yes. Commissioner Vieler: Include as a condition of approval a timer be put on lighting. Current staff report states on pg. 9, 10, regarding the Parkway Plaza Shopping Center being able to expand their hours of operation. Staff Condition when it went to council. Commissioner Glass: Asked if noise problems can be addressed by cutting off the parking lot. SAPC- Planning Commission\N inute4072�.doc ; 9/19/00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 Church has come a long way in satisfying needs of neighbors. Neighbors need to help in satisfying the needs of the church. I can understand the church not wanting to sign away their hours. Neighbors have gotten a lot from the church. If Commissioner Barrett's suggestion of blocking off the back parking lot can solve the noise issue then there will be cooperation from both sides. Commissioner Barrett: This is an infill issue. From the neighbors' perspective, the church is changing the neighborhood. Church property is not comparable to those mentioned in the staff report — you are much closer. Moving the no parking chain and also not allowing people to exit from the north would make leaving less noisy. Parking lot area better. Problem is for the Rosamond neighbors. Hours should still be limited as before. Commissioner Vieler: Comments from pastor about being singled out. Noise issue is a real trigger issue in the City. Knowing that other churches don't have a regulation should be taken in germane. I think 8:00 is harsh. It looks like you could operate till 9:00 p.m. with your schedule. As a neighbor who could know that there is a schedule for conclusion. Put a timer on the lights to coincide with hours of operation. Commend the church for the revisions — Sunday through Thursday till 9:00 p.m.; Friday and Saturday till 10:00 p.m. Commissioner Monteschio: Glad to see them working out. Also for the 9:00 p.m. hour — chain should be moved in parking lot. People need to start addressing acoustical issues. Commissioner Broad: Commissioner Glass — can you go till 9:00 p.m. Commissioner Glass: What is the limitation of what 9:00 p.m. is? Commissioner Vieler: Event ends at 9:00 — sometime between 9:00 and 10:00 the lot would be emptied. Commissioner Barrett: Does not want it to go to 9:00 - thinks it's disruptive. Commissioner Monteschio: End by 9:00 so people can be gone by 9:30. Commissioner Broad: This meeting has been rather remarkable that the height has been reduced and that there are no concerns regarding the design. Much more positive meeting since the last time. Much more focused discussion. Big issue is noise. There are differences between this and other projects in the City. Other operations are not coming before the City for entitlements. Didn't find the examples to be on point in terms of the comparisons and Mr. McCarthy did an excellent job in highlighting the other sites noted in the staff report. The comparison is not a valid one. We are to look at what is before us. When I reviewed this in January, I said 8:00- SAK- Plannina Commission \Minte0725.doc 6 9 /19 /00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 - 8:30 is appropriate and still say that. Uses terminated by 8:00 -8:30 and the ground left within half an hour. Commissioner Glass: Commissioner Barrett had the solution which is to chain off the back parking lots. Trying to keep all of the options open — parking in front is not an impact. Commissioner Broad: Consider allowing evening events go to a certain time if the parking lot can be chained off. Wednesday night is a very heavy night for the church — could allow Wed to extend to 9:00, Friday and Saturday till 10:00 p.m. and other nights till 8:30 and then the only issue is the church choir. Commissioner Monteschio: What happens if these people start carpooling? Commissioner Vieler: What is the specific number based on for parking? Commissioner Broad: Parking is based on 1 stall for every four seats. Review the proposed. SPARC condition and expand on condition #4 in report to include those items noted at the previous meeting in which the Planning Commission suggested SPARC review. Include Commissioner Barrett's suggestion about signs that exiting on the north side of the building are discouraged. Consensus on everything but time. Commissioner Vieler: Council will make their own decision on time. Commissioner Broad: Would like to see hours modified from 8:00 p.m. on Sunday through Thursday. Commissioner Glass: Wants to see if limited parking from front to back is ok with neighbors. David McCarthy: You are assuming that this will limit that multiple timeframe, logistics problem. Be willing to go to 8:30. Don Kallenbach: Pointed out the main entry into the multipurpose room explained the ingress /egress requirements. Eric Moriston: No problem with the 8:30 issues, problem with people hanging out chatting in parking lot. Pam Smith: Personally never had a problem with the church coming and going — willing to go to 9:00 p.m. They have been most considerate. Believe problems that arise can be rectified. Commissioner Broad: To staff — can we do as was done with the shopping center? SAK- Planning Commission \Minute0725.doc 7 9/19/00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 George White: I think you can make that recommendation to Council. Several Commissioners are supportive of 9:00 p.m. Commissioner Glass: In the spirit of compromise 9:00 p.m. is a good time. It does have chance to be reviewed by another body. Every effort will be made to be a good neighbor. Commissioner Barrett: Still prefers 8:00 pm. Pastor Tom Marcum: We have every intention of being good neighbors. We will continue to educate our parishioners and we can block off the parking lot. There is a world of difference between 8:30 and 9:00 p.m. Commissioner Broad: Is there a problem that users make efforts to vacate grounds by 9:30 p.m.? Pastor Tom Marcum: Would like a response to the letter that was sent in almost 2 months ago. Commissioner Vicler: Where will the signs on the inside be? Commissioner Barrett: Signs on all doors at north end of buildings. A motion was made by Commissioner Glass and seconded by Commissioner Vieler to move forward with the project on the recommendation that the hours of operation be limited to 9:00 p.m. Sunday through Thursday and Saturday and Sunday until 10:00 p.m. with the provision that the hours of operation may be expanded by the means of a minor Conditional Use Permit (staff approval). Parking to be limited by the use of a chain to restrict parking to front lot and the back lot to be used for overflow parking only. Signs are to be erected on the doors at the north end of the building to prohibit exiting unless an emergency. Site users are requested to leave within '/z hour of the conclusion of an event. Condition 44 be amended to include SPARC review of parking lot design, the feasibility of closing off the back parking lot when it is not needed, timed lighting and landscaping. Commissioner Barrett: No Commissioner Broad: No Commissioner Cader- Thompson: Absent Commissioner Feibusch: Absent Commissioner Glass: Yes Commissioner Monteschio: Yes Commissioner Vieler: Yes Findings for Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration 1. That based upon the Initial Study, potential impacts resulting from the project have been identified. Mitigation measures have been proposed and agreed to by SAK- Planning Commission \Minute90725.doc 8 9/19/00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 the applicant as a condition of project approval 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 conditioned and mitigated, would have a significant effect on the environment. 2. That the project does not have the potential to affect wildlife resources as defined in the State Fish and Game Code, either individually or cumulatively, and is exempt from Fish and Game filing fees because it is proposed on an existing developed site surrounded by urban development with none of the resources as defined in the Code. 3. That 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. That the Planning Commission reviewed the Initial Study and considered public comments before making a recommendation on the project. 5. That a Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared to ensure compliance with the adopted mitigation measures. 6. That the record of proceedings of the decision on the project is available for public review at the City of Petaluma Planning Department, City Hall, I 1 English Street, Petaluma, California. Findinus for Rezoning to Planned Unit District: That the Planned Unit District will result in a more desirable use of land and a better physical environment than would be possible under any single zoning district or combination of zoning districts. The proposed Amendment to Zoning Ordinance No. 1072 N.C.S., to classify and rezone a 3.31 -acre parcel of Assessor's Parcel No. 136 -120 -075. to PUD — Planned Unit District is in conformity with the Petaluma General Plan. The project as proposed provides a plan to the future uses of the site. 2 That the proposed rezoning to PUD is consistent with the provisions of Article 19A, Planned Unit District, of the Zoning Ordinance. The public necessity, convenience and general welfare clearly permit and will be furthered by the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, reclassifying and rezoning the site to PUD. 3. That the PUD is proposed on property which has a suitable relationship to one or more thoroughfares, and that said thoroughfares are adequate to carry any additional traffic generated by the development. The subject property has a suitable relationship to one or more thoroughfares (Sonoma Mountain Parkway, SAPC- Planning Comm issionNinute0725.doc 9 9/19/00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 East Washington Street and Rainer Avenue) and said thoroughfares are adequate to carry any additional traffic generated by the development. 4. That the proposed project, as designed and 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 and with the General Plan. 5. Adequate available public and private spaces are design on the PUD Development Plan. Through mitigation measures and project conditions, adequate building setbacks and other project amenities are provided. 6. The Petaluma Valley Baptist Church expansion project as designed will be compatible with the surrounding residential uses. Adoption of PUD Development Standards 1. That the PUD Development Standards (Attachment 5) allow for the continued operation of the existing uses, and will result in more appropriate and compatible uses in the district. The PUD Development Standards allow for expansion of the existing church facilities and provides for future expansion of the site. 2. 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 to ensure compatibility. Adequate public and private spaces are designed on the PUD Development Plan. The project as conditioned and through mitigation measures provide adequate building setbacks and other amenities such as an extensive landscaping plan that includes a variety of trees, shrubs and groundcover to enhance the site. 3. That the proposed project has complied with the requirements of CEQA through the preparation and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project, which addresses the potential environmental impacts associated with its development. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines, staff conducted an Initial Study and identified potential environmental impacts, which included noise, visual quality & aesthetic, and transportation/traffic. Mitigation measures have been agreed to by the applicant and are herein incorporated into the approval of the project. NOTICE OF ESTIMATED FEES, DEDICATIONS, AND OTHER EXACTIONS Pursuant to Section 66020 of the California Government Code, the applicant/developer has the statutory right to protest development fees, dedication and reservation requirements, and other exactions included in this project approval, and listed as follows (calculations based on — 19.640 square foot addition) SAK- Planning Commission\N inute §072�.doc 10 9/19/00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 • sewer connection: Existing. • water connection: Contact Water Field Office @ 778 -4392 to determine adequacy of existing meter. • community facilities development: $11,264 (12,800 square feet x $.88 /square feet). . storm drain: . school facilities: . traffic mitigation: Tilton, summary of Trip $10,330 (based on 50,000 square feet of new impervious surface). Contact School District @ 778 -4621 for quotation. $11,970 (based on calculation by Allan Traffic Engineer). See Calculation. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL From the Planning Department: All mitigation measures adopted in conjunction with approval of the. Mitigated Negative Declaration (Resolution N.C.S.) for the Petaluma Valley Baptist Church project are incorporated herein by reference as conditions of project approval. 2. This approval applies to the plans date stamped June 14, 2000, as approved by the Council and as conditioned and/or modified. 3. This approval includes final site plan, landscaping and architectural review approval of the PUD Development Plan, written PUD Development Standards shall be shown on plans for building permit approval. 4. The final architectural details of the proposed buildings and landscaping plan shall be subject to Site Plan and Architectural Review ( SPARC) prior to issuance of a building permit. SPARC shall also look at a) parking lot design, feasibility of closing off parking areas when not needed; b) parking lot lighting /timer; and c) landscaping. 5. The type of materials and colors shall be indicated on plans that are submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval at the time of building permit submittal. 6. All requirements of the Building Division, Fire Marshal, Engineering Departments, Public Works Department and Sonoma County Water Agency shall be met and reflected on plans submitted for development permit issuance. SIPGPIanning Comm ission\MinuteS0725.doc 11 9/19/00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 7. In accordance with he provisions of the Petaluma's Municipal Code, the applicant shall pay City Special Development Fees. If applicable, at time of building permit application, including but not limited to, the following: sewer connection, water connection, community facilities development, storm drainage impact, school facilities and traffic mitigation fees. 8. The following mitigation measures shall be shown on plans submitted for building permit and shall be reviewed by Planning staff: Signs will be placed on the fence around the property to remind the church members to come and go quietly. m A kiosk will be placed near the entrance of the parking lot advising members and visitors where to park and reminding everyone to come and leave the property quietly, especially at night and shall note that parking will be primarily directed to the front lot whenever possible. 9. The use of a loudspeaker for any outside activity shall require a permit under city regulations. 10. The applicant /developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or any of its boards, commission, agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City, its boards, commission, agents, officers, or employees to attach, set aside, void, or annul, the approval of the project when such claim or action is brought within the time period provided for in applicable State and/or local statutes. The City shall promptly notify the applicants /developers of any such claim, action, or proceeding. The City shall coordinate in the defense. Nothing contained in this condition shall prohibit the City from participating in a defense of any claim, action, or proceeding if the City bears its own attorney's fees and costs. and the City defends the action in good faith. 11. The proposed Rezoning is approved with the provisions that: a) Activities /meetings shall be limited to the following restrictions on hours of operation: Sunday through Thursday's, until 9:00 PM, Friday's and Saturday's until 10:00 PM with the proviso that the users of the site be requested to leave within a '/z hour of the conclusion of the activity /meeting. b) Hours of operation for the subject property may be proposed to extend the hours of operation through the means of a minor Conditional Use Permit (staff approval). c) The applicant shall be required to limit parking to the front parking area for meetings /activities by the use of a chain (or some means acceptable to Fire and SAPC- Planning Commission \Minute�0725.doc 12 9/19/00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 Police for emergency access) and the back parking area shall be used for overflow parking purposes. 12. The applicant shall be required to place signs on the doors on the north end of the buildings, which prohibit people from exiting the door unless there is an emergency. The signs shall be erected prior to issuance of an occupancy permit and shall be reviewed by staff. From the Engineering Department: l Erosion and sediment control measures shall be included with the previously submitted improvement plans prepared by the applicant's engineer. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the plan must be reviewed by the City of Petaluma Engineering Department 2 The proposed location of the landscaping irrigation water meter shall be indicated on the improvement plans. All work within the public right -of -way requires an excavation permit from the City of Petaluma. 3 Water pressure calculations shall be required for this development verifying the system adequacy for fir flows and domestic services. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STAN®�It ®S Petaluma Valley Baptist Church Proposed PUD Development Standards: Planned Unit Development Standards 1.0 Purpose of the PUD Zone. The purpose of the PUD zone for the Petaluma Valley Baptist church property is to recognize the existing sanctuary, fellowship hall, classrooms and administration offices as community serving uses on the site, and to provide appropriate standards to enable the existing church facilities to be expanded and to designate and regulate potential future uses consistent with the property site and adjacent properties by providing the establishment of additional classrooms, a multipurpose hall and a possible future preschool which may serve the needs of the community. 2.0 Project Site. Lands of Petaluma Valley Baptist Church is a 331 acre single parcel (APN 136 -120 -075) within the city limits of the City of Petaluma, and bounded on three sides by existing single - family residences. The subject property is developed with site improvements that include a church sanctuary, fellowship hall, classrooms, administration offices and parking facilities. SAK- Planning Commission \Minute §0725.doc 13 9/19/00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 3.0 Permitted Principal Uses. The following are the principal uses permitted in the Petaluma Valley Baptist Church PUD: Church/sanctuary, and other church sponsored activities, such as bible study classes, weddings, or funerals, etc. The maximum church occupancy is 425. 4.0 Conditional Uses. o Public and quasi - public uses appropriate to the existing uses on site or to the principal permitted uses of the PUD and to the adjacent residential neighborhood. Preschool facility (not a daycare facility) limited to a maximum of 24 children. Hours of operation to be determined at time of Conditional Use Permit application. 5.0 Development Standards. The components of this PUD include; 1) Planned Unit Development Plan (sheets C1, C2, C3, L1, ALL, A1.2, A1.3, AIA, AL5, A1.6, A1.7, A2.1, A3.1, and E4.OA) and 2) Planned Unit Development (PUD) Standards i.e., zoning standards. Maximum Height. The proposed one -story classroom structure on the south side of the sanctuary shall be a maximum height of 17' 10" to peak of gable and as depicted on plans prepared by Hardison, Komatsu, Ivelich & Tucker date stamped 6/14/00 by the City of Petaluma unless approved otherwise by the City of Petaluma Community Development Department. The proposed future one -story multipurpose hall structure on the eastside of the sanctuary shall be a maximum height of 22' as depicted on plans prepared by Hardison, Komatsu, Ivelich & Tucker date stamped 6/14/00 by the City of Petaluma unless approved otherwise by the City of Petaluma Community Development Department. Future structures and/or modifications to existing structures shall be subject to the height restrictions set forth for the R -1 zoning districts or an alternate height restriction(s) as prescribed by the City of Petaluma Community Development Department. Setbacks and Lot Coverage. Minimum setbacks and lot coverage shall be as depicted on plans prepared by Hardison, Komatsu, Ivelich & Tucker stamped 6/14/00 by the City of Petaluma and existing as of the effective date of this Ordinance. SAPC- Planning Comm ission \1\1inutes0725.doc 14 9/19/00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 Landscaping. Landscaping areas shall be as depicted on the Petaluma Valley Baptist Church PUD landscaping plans prepared by Stephanie McAllister, Landscape Architect dated 6/8/00 and date stamped 6/14/00 by the City of Petaluma. An evaluation and approval of landscaping needs, if any, shall be part of future SPARC review(s). 6.0 Storage and Refuse Areas. Any storage and refuse areas shall be screened by visual barriers and shall be located on the rear or side portions of the site and not within the front setback area. No junk, scrap, rubbish, trash, litter, or refuse shall be deposited or permitted to remain or accumulate on any site or portion thereof which will detract from its neat and orderly appearances. All such rubbish, trash, litters, or refuse shall be kept in sanitary containers. 7.0 Signs. Signage must be consistent with existing approved signs. New signage shall comply with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance regarding signs. 8.0 Parking and Loading. Parking and Loading facilities shall be provided as depicted on the Petaluma Valley Baptist Church PUD Map date stamped 6/14/00. or as approved by City Council consistent with Article 20 of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance. 9.0 Amplified Music/Noise. Using or operating for any purpose any loudspeaker, loudspeaker system or similar device in such a manner as to create a noise disturbance shall be prohibited unless a Facility Permit per Section 13.28.050 of the Petaluma Municipal Code and in accordance with Article 22 of the Zoning Ordinance has been obtained. 10.0 Noise Abatement /Enforcement. Every use in the City must conform to Performance Standards set forth in Article 22 of the Zoning Ordinance. Provisions to enforce compliance with Performance Standards shall be invoked by the Building Inspector against any use if there are reasonable grounds to believe that Performance Standards are being violated by such use. 11.0 Design Guidelines. All new buildings, additions, and exterior improvements are subject to the City of Petaluma Site Plan & Architectural Review Committee ( SPARC) approval. Administrative or by Committee as deemed appropriate by the Petaluma Community SAK- Planning Commission \MinuteA0725.doc 15 9/19/00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 Development Department. All new buildings, additions, and exterior improvements shall be consistent in architectural style and detailing as the existing structures. The proposed future multipurpose hall shall be required to obtain approval by the Site Plan & Architectural Review Committee (SPARC) prior to issuance of a building permit. 12.0 Unless Otherwise Addressed. Unless otherwise addressed within these PUD Development Standards, all applicable provisions of the Petaluma. Zoning Ordinance, Site Plan & Architectural Review Committee Design Guidelines, and the Municipal Code shall apply. 13.0 Schedule of Regular On -site Activities: The project narrative provided by the applicant has outlined the proposed types of uses that includes, the construction of a one -story classroom building and future construction of a multipurpose hall, administration offices, classrooms, or possible future preschool (as a Conditional Use). The applicant has also included a schedule of regular on -site activities that take place at the church facilities which is as follows: Schedule of Regular On -site Activities Day Sunday Activity Comments Worship Service Sunday School Hispanic Service Chinese Service Bible Study Evening Worship Monday Chinese Women's Bible Study Tuesday Group Choir Rehearsal Committee Meetings week Wednesday Women's Group Youth (Sr. High) Choir Rehearsal Time Number Attending 9:25 -10:30 a.m. 11:00 -noon 9:25 -10:30 a.m. 11:00 -noon 1:00 -3:00 p.m. 1:00 -2:30 p.m. 5:00 -6:00 p.m. 6:00 -7:30 p.m. 10:30 a.m. -noon 10 7:00 -9:00 p.m. 10 7:00 -8:30 p.m. 10 175 175 150 150 75 25 25 50 10:30 a.m. -noon 7:00 -9:00 p.m. 7:00 -9:00 p.m. SAPC- Plannins Comm ission\h4inute90725.doc 16 15 50 30 Not every Once a month 9/19/00 Planning Commission Minutes - July 25, 2000 Bible Study 7:00 -8:30 p.m. 10 Prayer meeting 7:00 -8:30 p.m. 10 Hispanic Bible 7:00 -9:00 p.m. 10 Study Thursday AWANAS 6:25 -8:00 p.m. 125 -150 between (children's program) both groups Youth (Jr. High) 6:25 -8:00 p.m. Friday Mother's of 9:00 -noon 100 mom's & Twice a month Preschoolers children Senior Adults noon -2:30 p.m. 15 Once a month Saturday Christian Coffee 7:00 -10:00 p.m. 20 House — College And Young Adults Staff finds that the types and orientation of uses proposed/permitted are appropriate for the site will not adversely impact the surrounding neighborhood and are in keeping with the uses commonly associated with a church facility. 111. LIAISON REPORTS: City Council (]C -T): SPARC ( ®G) Petaluma Bicycle Advisory Committee (WV) Tree Advisory Committee (TB): ADJOURNMENT: 9:40 SAK- Planning Commission \N inuteS0725.doc 17 9/19/00