HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 08/26/1997Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
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
CITY OFPETALUMA
PL4NNING COMMISSION MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING August 26, 1997
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 PM
CITY HALL - PETALUMA, CA
Commissioners Present: Bennett, Feibusch *, Maguire, Thompson, Vieler
Commissioners Absent: Broad, Healy
Staff. Pamela A Tuft, Planning Director
James McCann, Principal Planner
Chairperson
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of August 12, 1997 were approved as printed.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT: None.
COMMISSIONER'S REPORT: None.
CORRESPONDENCE: Letter from Barbara Haushalter regarding Stoneridge
Subdivision; letter from John and Mary Winslow regarding 329 Walnut Street; letter from
Lawrence Jonas, owner /developer of Stone Ridge Subdivision.
APPEAL STATEMENT: Was read.
LEGAL RECOURSE STATEMENT: Was noted on the agenda.
OLD BUSINESS
L STONERIDGE SUBDIVISION; 250, 284, 286 SUNNYSLOPE ROAD;
EDWARD AND CAROL FULLERTON, LARRY JONAS; AP NO'S 019 -
203 -001 AND 002; FILE REZ96015/TSM96006(tp).
Continued consideration of plans for development of 11.66 acres in the
Sunnyslope Assessment District and Annexation Area with 20 custom single -
family homes. Actions include recommendations to the City Council on: 1)
Mitigated Negative Declaration; 2) Rezoning to Planned Unit Development
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 District (PUD); 3) PUD Development Plan and Development Standards; 4)
2 Tentative Subdivision Map.
4 Continued from the Planning Commission meeting of August 12, 1997 (public
5 hearing closed on 8/12/97).
6
7 Principal Planner McCann presented the staff report.
8
9 COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
Commissioner Feibusch - Undergrounding of utilities should occur now; substantial
frontage along Sunnyslope Road toward Sunnyslope Avenue with very limited
development potential - discussed the possible use of Rule 20 money for addressing; the
remaining pole near Suncrest.
(Consensus for requiring undergrounding of utilities.)
Commissioner Maguire - Larry's Lollipop was allowed sidewalk on only one side of
street - this is a larger project, sidewalks should be required on both sides of street.
Commissioner Vieler - Questioned road width and shifting road toward Lot 7 as
recommended by staff to reduce intrusion to lands of Strand.
Commissioner's Thom psonBennett/Feibusch - To retain rural atmosphere, sidewalks
on one side only (example Boulevard Heights).
Commissioner Maguire - Likes Commissioner Vieler's idea of moving street over away
from Strand property; sidewalk on both sides of street more inviting for pedestrians.
Planning Director Tuft - Existing home on Lot 6 - if street were moved, road would be
very close to existing home; staff will look at final alignment of road with an eye toward
providing a greater buffer for the Strand home.
(Consensus - one sidewalk on north side of street only.)
Commissioner Maguire - Cluster of trees should be planted at Strand property, to
provide more privacy.
Consensus - require LAD; require primarily open fencing with option for
solid/closed between homes and along tower lots backing onto existing homes,
minimize use of solid fencing; shift road to allow for tree planting near Strand
property front door.
Principal Planner McCann - SPARC will have flexibility to determine retaining wall
height.
Traffic Engineer Tilton - Reviewed Sunnyslope Road traffic conditions; safety in area is
fair to good; five collisions in this area in last three years; radar surveys (posted 25 MPH
zone) - average speed is approximately 25 MPH (there have been a number of speeders
recorded); recommends parking restriction remain; additional speed limit signs have been
ordered as well as additional bike lane signs; proposed intersection acceptable and has
adequate sight distance; addition of sidewalks positive effect in area.
Assistant Civil Engineer Pedroncelli - Discussed the existing drainage conditions and
the concerns regarding Kelly Creek downstream of project; to mitigate impact on drainage
basin, (1.4 cubic feet per second will be added to drainage basin by this project)
Sunnyslope Road to a point downstream of culvert "A" in Kelly Creek.
Commissioner Bennett - There is already flooding in this area of Kelly Creek - with
proposed mitigation measures, will flooding be less?
Assistant Civil Engineer Pedroncelli - Yes, less flooding; with correction to culvert "A"
installation, flooding would be lessened; Bonnie Diefendorf and Tom Hargis have had
discussions regarding culvert "A" to correct this problem; should be corrected prior to this
project.
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 Principal Planner McCann Proposed improvements are to bypass this culvert; existing
2 culvert does not present any obstruction to Stone Ridge Subdivision as presently designed
3 with the by -pass drainage pipe.
4 Planning Director Tuft - If this project were proposed to drain into culvert "A ", there
5 would 1 be a possibility of more flooding - proposal will bypass this culvert, but problem
6 will be addressed even though drainage from this project will not enter culvert "A ".
7 Commissioner Maguire - Is impact of project estimated because of culvert "A "?
8 Assistant Civil Engineer Pedroncelli - Impact is from added runoff created by project;
9 site is steep, not too much additional runoff.
to Commissioner Maguire - What is additional runoff from this project?
11 Commissioner's Thompson/Feibusch - If culvert "A" were installed properly, would this
12 project use the culvert effectively? site should be further reviewed by Engineering prior to
13 City Council review.
14 Commissioner Maguire - Every tree removed needs to be replaced by at least one tree;
15 tree removal will make a significant change in visual impact of hillside.
16 Commissioner's Feibusch/Maguire - Concur with staff recommendations on building
17 envelopes.
18 Commissioner Vieler - What is logic in combining Lots 7 and 8? Why not lots 19 and
19 20?
20 Principal Planner McCann - Upper lots probably have more value to builder (better
21 views); Lot 7 has dense tree cover and Lot 8 has one of the existing homes.
22 Commissioner Bennett - Somewhat of a site plan issue - staff and applicant can work out
23 and be reviewed by SPARC.
24 Commissioner Maguire - Maximum number of lots for this project ?; Do we want to
25 grant f9 individual lots? Maybe -number of lots and overall project density should be less?
26 Commissioner Vieler - Number of lots in original PUD (Assessment District) was 18;
27 seems inappropriate to add an additional lot; should allow 18, not 19.
28 Principal Planner McCann - Staff used Resolution approving Sunnyslope PUD which
29 indicates 19 units maximum for the two properties.
30 Commissioner Vieler - Misunderstood numbers, thanks for clarification.
31 Commissioner Maguire Disturbing that Planning Commission routinely allows maximum
32 number of units allowed - need to look at this thinking.
33 Commissioner Bennett - Would need a compelling, logical reason to reduce number of
34 lots.
35 Commissioner Thompson - Planning Commission does not "routinely" approve
36 maximum number of lots allowed.
37 Commissioner Maguire - Still a major impact; at least recognize that each hillside that
38 has added homes should be carefully looked at.
39 Consensus - Concrete sidewalks, not asphalt.
40 Commissioner Thompson - Lot 20 - does not want footprint at top of hill.
41 Commissioner Feibusch - Stop sign issue - refer to Traffic Committee.
42 Traffic Engineer Tilton - Traffic Committee will look at stop sign as separate issue.
43 Commissioner Vieler - Is number of lots (at 19) consistent with original PUD? (Yes)
44 Planning Director Tuft - Accessory dwelling units might not have been specifically
45 addressed in EIR, as they are not typically counted in density figures.
46
47 DISCUSSION ENDS.
48
49 A motion was made by Commissioner Bennett and seconded by Commissioner Thompson
50 to recommend to the City Council approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration,
51 Rezoning to Planned Unit Development (PUD); PUD Development Plan and
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 Development Standards and Tentative Subdivision Map based on the findings and subject
2 to the mitigation measures and amended conditions listed below:
3
4
5
6 Commissioner Bennett: Yes
7 Commissioner Broad: Absent
8 Chairman Feibusch: Yes
9 Commissioner Healy: Absent
10 Commissioner Maguire: Yes
11 Commissioner Thompson: Yes
12 Commissioner veler: Yes
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
Findings for Mitigated Negative Declaration
a. An Initial Study has been prepared and proper notice provided in accordance with
CEQA and local guidelines.
b. Based upon the Initial . Study and comments received, potential impacts could be
avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance by mitigation measures attached as
conditions of approval. There is no substantial evidence that the project, as
conditioned, would have a significant effect on the environment.
C. A monitoring program has been included to ensure compliance with the adopted
mitigation measures, if any.
d. The Stone Ridge project does not have potential to affect wildlife resources as
defined in the Fish and Game code, either individually or cumulatively and is
exempt from Fish and Game filing fees.
e. The Stone Ridge 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 Government
Code.
f. The Planning Commission/City Council reviewed the Initial Study/Negative
Declaration and considered the comments before making a decision on the project.
g. The record of proceedings of the decision on the project is available for public
review at the City of Petaluma, Planning Department, City Hall, 11 English Street,
Petaluma, California.
h. Potential circulation impacts resulting from development of the Stone Ridge
project, as conditioned, will be adequately mitigated by minimizing the number of
new access points along the Sunnyslope Road frontage of the project site and
through installation of a new public street and common private driveways, on -site
parking, and pedestrian connections to Sunnyslope Road which are adequately
designed to meet the anticipated traffic volumes generated by the project.
4
Planning Commission Minutes - 8726197
1 i Potential drainage impacts resulting from development of the Stone Ridge project,
2 as conditioned, will be adequately mitigated by installation of drainage
3 improvements to the existing public storm drain system in Sunnyslope Road, an
4 existing culvert which outlets to Kelly Creek, and on -site collection and
5 conveyance systems designed to City and Sonoma County Water Agency
6 standards to preclude lot to lot surface runoff.
7
8 j. Potential noise impacts to existing residents and future residents of the Stone
9 Ridge project and surrounding neighborhoods will be adequately mitigated by the
10 restriction of construction hours; and the construction of homes along
11 Sunnyslope Road in conformance with General Plan standards for acceptable
12 interior and exterior noise levels.
13
14 k. Potential visual impacts of the Stone Ridge project will be adequately mitigate
15 through use of street and lot configurations and design which result in positive
16 orientation of homes, and development sensitive to the hillside character of the
17 site, existing significant trees, view corridors, and neighboring homes.
18
19 1. Potential impacts to the Kelly Creek riparian corridor will be adequately mitigate
20 through establishment of a non - development/open space easement adjacent to the
21 creek, and installation of riparian plantings directed toward enhancement of the
22 existing habitat.
23
24 Mitigation Measures
25
26 All mitigation measures as specified in the Initial Study for the Stone Ridge Subdivision
27 project are incorporated as. follows:
28
29 EARTH: Mitigations
30
31 1. An erosion control plan shall be prepared for all subdivision improvements, in
32 conformance with City Ordinance requirements, and submitted for staff review and
33 approval in conjunction with application for Final Map approval.
34
35 2. The PUD Development Standards shall be modified prior to SPARC approval of
36 the project to incorporate specific grading standards. These provisions shall limit
37 excavation, fill and significant grading and paving for lot - specific development to
38 within the approved building envelopes, except for necessary driveway and
39 pedestrian access and required utilities. Graded slopes in excess of 3:1 shall not be
40 permitted for all proposed private landscape areas, except where steeper slopes
41 have been approved for street grading transitions, and as approved by a
42 geotechnical engineer. The height of exposed retaining walls and underfloor areas
43 for buildings shall be limited to a maximum of 3', except that for Lot 5, exposed
44 underfloor areas may not exceed 5' in height. Lot "padding" shall be prohibited.
45 Driveway slopes shall not exceed 18 %. All measurements for development of
46 individual lots shall be based upon the grading conditions established with the Final
47 Map and Public Improvement Plans for the subdivision.
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
2 3. Administrative SPARC review of grading and new construction plans shall be
3 required for lots proposed on the upper portion of the hillside and those most
4 visible from D street (proposed Lots 5, 11 -16, 19, 20), as well as those lots with
5 building envelopes in close proximity to Sunnyslope Road (proposed Lots 1, 4, 6,
6 10). The PUD Development Standards shall be amended to reflect. this
7 requirement prior to SPARC approval of the Tentative Map and PUD Plan. All
8 other lots shall be subject to administrative approval of grading plans submitted in
9 conjunction with development permit application, for review of compliance with
10 the adopted PUD standards. Plans submitted for building permits shall include
11 detailed grading plans in conformance with the SPARC- approved subdivision plans
12 and project mitigation measures and conditions.
13
14 4. All grading and excavation shall conform to the geotechnical - investigation report
15 prepared for this project by John K Dailey, Consulting Geotechnical Engineer,
16 dated December 30, 1996. The grading plans shall be approved by the project's
17 geotechnical engineer. All subsurface drains required for filled areas shall be
18 within appropriate easements if not within the public right -of -way. Plans
19 submitted for approval of individual lot development permits shall also reflect
20 compliance with the report recommendations as it relates to the specific site and
21 structural improvements proposed.
22
23 Monitoring
24
25 1. Required improvements shall be reflected on plans submitted in conjunction with
26 the project's improvement drawings and shall be reviewed and approved by the
27 Planning Director and City Engineer prior to Final Map approval.
28
29 2. The Planning Director shall insure that approvals have been obtained from all
30 appropriate agencies prior to the issuance of grading permits.
31
32 3. All public improvements shall be subject to inspection by City staff for compliance
33 with the approved Public Improvement Plans, construction permits and project
34 mitigation measure /conditions of approval, prior to City acceptance.
35
36 4. Plans submitted for approval of grading/building permits for lot- specific
37 development shall be subject to staff review for conformance with the adopted
38 grading standards for the subdivision. All private lot construction shall be subject
39 to staff inspection for compliance with the approved plans and project
40 mitigations /conditions prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for each new
41 unit.
42
43 AIR: Mitigations
44
45 1. Motorized equipment operated during construction activities shall be properly
46 maintained and mufllered to minimize smoke and other air emissions. Equipment
47 shall be turned off when not in use. The project site shall be routinely sprinklered
48 as necessary to prevent dust generation during. grading and construction activity.
49 Tarps shall be utilized to contain soil and debris materials in open trucks (luring
50 transport to and from the site.
6
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
2 2. Prior to issuance of building permits, all homes designed with fireplace units shall
3 meet City specifications for reduction of emissions, as specified under City
4 Ordinance 1881 N.C.S.
5
6 3. All grading and other major dust generating activities shall be conducted in a
7 manner that contains dust within the immediate boundaries of the construction site.
8
9 Moni�
10
11 1. Plans submitted for development permit approval shall contain specifications
12 meeting City Ordinance requirements for fireplace units.
13
14 2. All homes proposed shall be subject to inspection by City staff for compliance with
15 the approved construction plans prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
16
17 3. Construction activities shall be monitored by Public Works (for public
18 improvements) and Building Division (for private lot improvements) staff during
19 the course of required inspections, to ensure compliance with the above mitigation
20 measures.
21
22 WATER: Mitigations
23
24 1. No lot to lot drainage shall be allowed. Surface runoff shall be addressed within
25 each individual lot then conveyed to an approved storm drain system. In order to
26 minimize erosion, surface drainage concrete swales with inlets to a pipe system
27 shall be utilized where slopes exceed 4:1 gradients. Provide public storm drainage
28 systems within public rights -of -way to all extent possible. Privately maintained
29 storm drain systems shall have a mechanism to assure long -term maintenance.
30
31 2. The project shall be subject to payment of Storm Drainage Impact Fees as
32 specified by City Resolution prior to occupancy of each new unit constructed.
33
34 3. All hydrologic, hydraulic and storm drain system design shall be subject to review
35 and approval of the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) within the time
36 frames specified by SCWA, and prior to City approval of the Final Map.
37
38 4. Pursuant to the hydrologic study prepared for the project, this development shall
39 extend the 18 -inch culvert in Sunnyslope Road to a point downstream of Culvert A
40 as identified in said study, or install an acceptable alternative. Either option shall
41 be subject to review and approval of the City and Sonoma County Water Agency.
42
43 Monitoring
44
45 1. Required improvements shall be reflected on plans submitted in conjunction with
46 the project's improvement drawings and shall be reviewed and approved by the
47 Planning Director and City Engineer prior to Final Map approval.
48
b!
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 2. All public improvements shall be subject to inspection by City staff for compliance
2 with the approved public improvement plans, construction permits and project
3 mitigation measures prior to City acceptance.
4
5 PLANT LIFE: Mitigations
6
7 1. Prior to any construction activity on the site, protective fencing shall be installed 5'
8 outside the dripline of existing trees located within the immediate vicinity of
9 proposed construction activity which are identified for preservation per the arborist
to report prepared for the project by Horticultural Associates dated May 7, 1997.
11 City staff.shall be notified by the project proponents prior to commencement of
12 any work proposed closer than 5' outside the driplines of trees recommended for
13 preservation. All such activity, including excavation, pruning and root work shall.
14 be conducted under the supervision of the consulting arborist authorized by :itaff,
15 with costs borne by the project proponents.
16
17 2. Grading and landscape plans submitted for City approval of the Final Map and
18 public improvement plans shall identify the location of existing trees to be
19 preserved. A tree protection plan consistent with recommendations specified
20 under the arborist report, and showing details for installation of protective fencing,
21 root protection and follow -up recovery methods such as mulching and watering
22 schedule, shall be submitted as part of the improvement plans for the Final Map.
23
24 3. Landscape plans for the subdivision right -of -way areas shall reflect use of water
25 conserving and native plant materials (including native oaks and other species with
26 high habitat value) and compatible irrigation system design. Plans shall be included
27 in the submittal for SPARC approval of the Tentative Map and PUD Plan. All
28 public area landscaping shall be installed prior to acceptance of the public
29 improvements for each phase of construction or bonded for 100% of the cost of
30 materials and installation, with .implementation to occur on a lot by lot basis. A
31 maintenance bond shall be retained by the City for a minimum of one year
32 following completion of the required landscape improvements, as maintenance
33 security during the establishment period.
34
35 4. Plans for individual lot development shall be subject to administrative approval in
36 conjunction with SPARC/building permit submittals, for assessment of
37 development impacts upon existing trees to be preserved. Plans shall identify the
38 location and driplines of existing trees and the proximity of all proposed grading
39 contours, structures and utilities, including irrigation systems, in relation to the
40 driplines. Any activities proposed closer than 5' outside the driplines of existing
41 native oak trees shall be conducted under the direct supervision of the consulting
42 arborist, with costs borne by the project proponents.
43
44 5. The written PUD Development standards for the subdivision shall incorporate
45 provisions encouraging the use of water conserving landscaping and irrigation
46 systems on private lots, and landscape designs compatible with existing native
47 trees.
48
49 6. Pursuant to recommendations contained in the FEIR for the Sunnyslope
50 Assessment District and Annexation, where existing trees with a diameter of three
8
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 inches or greater are located within the Sunnyslope Road right -of -way, and must
2 be removed to accommodate development (road improvements, utilities, etc.), the
3 developer shall plant two 15 gallon sized trees for every one tree removed.
4 Species and location of the replacement trees shall be subject to City staff
5 approval.
6
7 7. Proposed drainage improvements in the vicinity of the large oak tree #73 (Lot 7)
8 shall be redesigned to minimize impacts to the root system of that tree. Proposed
9 lot lines may be modified to accommodate redesign of the drainage system. Plans
10 submitted for SPARC approval of the Tentative Map and PUD Development Plan
11 shall reflect the revised proposal.
12
13 8. High or moderate value trees in good condition (as identified under the arborist
14 report for the subdivision) proposed for retention but subsequently damaged or
15 removed during the course of construction, shall be replaced by the developer at
16 the rate of three 15 gallon sized trees for each six inches of trunk diameter
17 removed or damaged, as recommended by the consulting arborist. Species and
18 location of the replacement trees shall be subject to City staff approval.
19
20 LMvion_ torine
21
22 1. Plans submitted for SPARC approval of the Tentative Map and PUD Development
23 Plan shall be reviewed for conformance with the adopted mitigation measures.
24 Public improvement plans submitted for Final Map approval shall be reviewed for
25 conformance with the adopted SPARC conditions of approval. All public area
26 improvements shall be subject to inspection by City staff for compliance with the
27 adopted conditions and mitigation measures, prior to City acceptance.
28
29 2. Plans submitted for administrative review/building permit approval of individual lot
30 development shall be reviewed for conformance with adopted mitigation measures,
31 and subdivision conditions of approval. All construction improvements shall be
32 subject to inspection by City staff for conformance with the adopted conditions
33 and mitigation measures prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for each
34 new unit constructed.
35
36 ANIMAL, LIFE: _Mitigations
37
38 1. A non- development/open space easement shall be established on the Final Map,
39 measured a minimum of 30' from top of creek bank on Lot 1, and 60' from
40 centerline of the creek. The easement area shall be established for the purpose of
41 native riparian planting to enhance the existing creek habitat. Plans submitted for
42 SPARC approval of the Tentative Map and PUD Development Plan shall reflect
43 the - easement area and a planting and irrigation plan for wildlife habitat
44 enhancement. Plans shall be subject to review and approval by State Fish and
45 Game, Sonoma Co. Water Agency, and SPARC. The approved plan shall be
46 implemented in conjunction with the Final Map, with all mitigation plantings to be
47 installed prior to City acceptance of the public improvements for the subdivision,
4 8 and maintained by the subdivider until the lot is sold for development. Long term
49 maintenance of the creek area, including all mitigation plantings, shall be the
50 responsibility of the private property owner.
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
2 Monitoring
3
4 1. See monitoring measures 4.D.1. and 4.D.2 (Plant Life) above.
5
6 NOISE: Mitigations
8 1. All City - authorized grading and construction activity shall be limited to the hours
9 between 7 :00 AM and 7:00 PM Monday through Friday, except that indoor work
10 may be conducted on Saturdays provided noise levels generated are acceptable to
11 nearby residents. No construction work shall be permitted on City recognized
12 holidays, and Sundays. The developer shall designate a construction management
13 person responsible for responding to any complaints generated regarding excessive
14 noise during construction. A telephone number for contacting the designated
15 individual shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site. The responsible
16 authority shall determine the cause of noise complaints received and implement
17 reasonable measures to resolve the issues. City staff shall monitor complaints
18 received and take reasonable steps to resolve issues in a timely manner as they
19 arise, including enforcement of abatement procedures to bring violations into
20 conformance with City General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Performance
21 standards.
22
23 2. All new development proposed within Lots 1, 4, 5, 6, and 10 shall be accompanied
24 by data demonstrating that home construction will be consistent with City
25 Standards for acceptable interior and exterior noise levels.
26
27 3. See mitigation measure 2.C.1. (Air).
28
29 Monitoring
30
31 1. Plans submitted for SPARC approval shall be reviewed for conformance with
32 adopted mitigation measures. Construction plans submitted for development
33 permit approval shall be reviewed for conformance with adopted mitigation
34 measures and SPARC conditions. Construction activities shall be monitored by
35 City staff to ensure compliance with all mitigation measures pertaining to noise
36 control.
37
38 LIGHT AND GLARE: Mitigations, if any
39
40 1. Plans submitted for SPARC approval of the Tentative Map and PUD Development
41 Plan shall incorporate lighting plans, which reflect the location and design of all
42 proposed street lights, and any other exterior subdivision lighting proposed.
43 Lighting shall be designed to prevent the intrusion of direct glare onto adjacent
44 residential properties. Standard City street light fixtures shall be utilized unless
45 otherwise approved by SPARC and City staff.
46
47 2. Plans submitted for administrative approval of individual lot development shall
48 include provisions to avoid vehicular lighting impacts to bedroom areas and other
49 light- sensitive living areas of proposed homes. Development plans for lots
50 proposed at street intersections or in other potentially light- sensitive locations shall
10
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 incorporate architectural or landscape design features to screen interior living
2 space from headlight glare.
3
4 Monitoring
5
6 1. Plans submitted for approval of the Final Map and construction permits shall be
7 reviewed for conformance with SPARC conditions of approval. All construction
8 shall be subject to staff inspection for conformance with the approved construction
9 plans prior to City acceptance of the public improvements and issuance of a
10 Certificate of Occupancy for each new unit constructed.
11
12 LAND USE: Mitigations, if any
13
14 1. One lot shall be omitted for a maximum development yield of 8 lots within the
15 Ward portion of the project site. The deletion of one lot shall be reflected
16 consistently on both the PUD Development Plan and the Final Map prior to
17 application for Final Map approval.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
2. The PUD Development Standards shall be modified prior to application for
SPARC approval of the project to reflect a minimum lot area of 11,000 sq. ft., and
no further subdivision of the lot shall be permitted without approval of an
Amendment to the Sunnyslope Assessment District PUD (based upon Ordinance
1856 NCS and Resolution 91 -152 NCS) and the Stone Ridge Subdivision PUD
Zoning District approvals.
Monies
City staff shall ensure that the PUD Development Plan and Final Map are
appropriately amended to reflect deletion of one lot within the area identified as
the Ward property, to achieve a maximum project yield of 19 lots.
TRANSPORTATION /CIRCULATION
Mitigations
33
34 1. The public street (Stone Ridge Court) shall provide a detached 5 foot standard
35 City sidewalk on at least one side of the street (westside). A 5' detached sidewalk
36 shall also be constructed across the Sunnyslope Road frontage of the project site
37 where feasible as determined by staff at time of Final Map application.
38
39 2. The project sponsor shall be responsible for payment of all applicable special
40 development fees, including Traffic Impact Mitigation fees prior to issuance of a
41 Certificate of Occupancy for each new home constructed.
42
43 3. Lots 1, 4, 6, and 10 shall have a 1 foot non - access easement dedicated to the City
44 on the Final Map across their Sunnyslope Road frontage.
45
46 4. Prior to SPARC review of the subdivision plans, the written PUD Development
47 Standards shall be modified to include provisions requiring a minimum of 5 off -
48 street parking spaces per principal residence.
49
11
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 5. On- street parking shall be prohibited within the cul de sac bulb for Stone Ridge
2 Court, in order to ensure adequate turnaround area for emergency services. Plans
3 submitted at time of Final Map application shall reflect this requirement.
4
Monitoring
7 1. The design of the public street and private driveways, including provisions for
8 pedestrian sidewalks and paths shall be subject to SPARC and staff review and
9 approval. prior to Final Map approval by the City Council. Plans submitted for
10 approval of the Final Map and public improvement plans shall reflect all adopted
11 project conditions of approval and mitigation measures.
12
13 2. All site improvements shall be subject to inspection by City staff for compliance
14 with the approved improvement plans and all adopted mitigation measures and
15 conditions of approval prior to City acceptance of the public area improvements.
16
17 3. All private lot improvements shall be subject to inspection by City staff for
18 compliance with the approved building permits and all adopted mitigation
19 measures and conditions of approval, prior to issuance of a Certificate of
20 Occupancy for all lots with new home construction.
21
22 PUBLIC SERVICE: Mitigations
23
24 1. Post address at or near main entry door - minimum four (4) inch letters on
25 contrasting background.
26
27 2. Address locator required to be posted at or near the driveway entrance.
28 Reflectorized numbers are acceptable. Location and design to be approved by the
29 Fire Marshal's office.
30
31 3. Residential buildings constructed at or above one hundred -sixty feet in elevation
32 are required to have a residential fire sprinkler system (NFPA 13D), this will affect
33 lots 12,1314,15,16,17,19 and 20. The buildable area of Lot 20 is limited to within
34 150' of the last fire hydrant as measured by an approved route around the exterior
35 of the building.
36
37 4. In residential buildings less than 3,500 sq.ft. in floor area and below 160' elevation,
38 provide fire sprinklers, off the domestic water system, at normal sources of
39 ignition. These areas are specifically at clothes dryers, kitchen stoves, furnaces,
40 water heaters, and fireplaces. In addition, spare sprinklers (one of each type in the
41 residence) and wrench shall be provided in a red spare sprinkler head box in the
42 garage.
43
44 5. An approved cul -de -sac is required at the end of the private drive off Stoneridge
45 Court. An approved cul -de -sac will not be required if one of the two following
46 conditions is met:
47
48 For Lots 19 and 20
49
12
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 a) Hammerhead turn - arounds may be acceptable if the houses for Lots 19 and
2 20 are fully sprinklered. Fully sprinklered is defined as an NFPA 13D sprinkler
3 system with additional protection in the attic, garage, bathrooms over 55 square
4 feet and in closets over 24 square feet or over 3 feet deep (this may affect the size
5 of the water service area for these lots).
6
7 b) Hammerhead turn- arounds and fully- sprinklered houses will not be
8 required for Lots 19 and 20 if an emergency vehicle access to the adjacent
9 property line at the end of the private drive off Stoneridge Court is provided.
10 However, a residential fire sprinkler system (NFPA 13D) will still be required
11 because the lots are above the 160' elevation.
12
13 6. Provide access, a minimum twenty (20) feet, exclusive of on- street parking, all
14 asphalt surface with thirteen feet -six inches (13'6 ") vertical height clearance. The
15 private drive off Stoneridge Court appears not to meet this standard.
16
17 7. Add as a general note to plans:
18
19 No combustible construction is permitted above the foundation unless an approved
20 all weather hard surface road is provided to within one hundred -fifty (150') of the
21 farthest point of a building or structure.
22
23 All fire hydrants for the project must be tested, flushed, and in service prior to the
24 commencement of combustible construction on the site.
25
26 8. All required fire lanes in which no parking is allowed shall be designated by
2 painting curbs red. Where no curbs exist, signs approved by the Fire Marshal shall
28 be installed. This applies to the private drive off Stoneridge and Kelly Creek Lane.
29
30 9. The two proposed 30 foot access easements provided for the private drives shall
31 also provide an emergency vehicle access easement dedicated to the City on the
32 Final Map.
33
34 10. The project sponsor shall be responsible for payment of all applicable special
35 development fees, including Community Facilities Development fees, Park and
36 Recreation Land Improvement fees, and School Facilities fees. Fees shall be
37 calculated and paid as specified by City Resolution.
38
39 11. Landscape plans submitted for SPARC approval of the Tentative Map and PUD
40 Plan shall incorporate the use of plant materials and/or design strategies to
41 minimize maintenance requirements and fire risk for all right -of -way landscape
42 areas. Language encouraging use of fire resistant landscaping for private lot
43 development shall be incorporated into the PUD Development Standards subject
44 to SPARC approval.
45
46 12. All street trees, perimeter fencing/walls and other improvements within the public
47 right of way on Sunnyslope Road and interior public streets (Stone Ridge Court),
48 shall be maintained by a Landscape Assessment District (LAD) through contract
49 services subject to approval of the City Council in conjunction with the Final Map.
50 Landscaping within these areas shall be designed and installed to City standards
13
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 acceptable to City of Petaluma Planning, Engineering, Public Works and Parks
2 staff. Irrigation to serve all landscaping in street tree planter strips adjacent to
3 private residences shall be designed to connect with the private lot irrigation
4 systems of the adjoining lots. Separate irrigation systems shall be established for
5 street frontage landscape areas located between the street curb and any subdivision
6 perimeter walls and landscape islands. Costs of formation of the required LAD
7 shall be borne by the project proponents at the time of Final Map application.
9
Monitoring
10
11
1.
Plans submitted for approval of the Final Map and development permits shall be
12
subject to Fire Marshal, Public Works, and Parks Department review for
13
incorporation of all City safety and maintenance standards, adopted project
14
conditions of approval and mitigation measures.
15
16
2.
All construction shall be subject to inspection by City staff for conformance with
17
the approved plans and adopted mitigation measures and conditions of project
18
approval, prior to City acceptance of the public area improvements and issuance of
19
a Certificate of Occupancy for each new unit constructed.
20
21
UTILITIES: Mitigations
22
23
1.
A 10 foot wide "public water main easement" shall be dedicated to the City on the
24
Final Map over Lot 13 or 14 from the westerly property line, where it intersects
25
with a separately required water main easement on the adjacent lands of Maxwell,
26
to the public street (Stone Ridge Court). Additionally, a 10 foot wide "public
27
water main easement" shall be dedicated to the City on the Final Map over logs 19
28
and/or 20 from Stone Ridge Court to the southeasterly boundary to the adjacent
29
private drive (Suncrest Hill Drive).
30
31
2.
All sanitary sewer mains serving more than one property shall be public unless a
32
maintenance declaration is provided to insure long term private maintenance.
33
Public sanitary sewers on private property shall be within a 10 foot wide easement
34
dedicated to the City on the Final Map and covered with an all weather surface.
35
36
3.
This project shall utilize the existing sanitary sewer mains and water mains stubbed
37
out to this property. Prior to Final Map and improvement plan approval., the
38
developer shall reimburse the City the construction costs incurred for installation
39
of water and sanitary sewer systems improvements which were installed for the
40
benefit of this property as part of Sunnyslope Road improvements. The estimated
41
reimbursement is $3,088.00 (Fullerton) and $2,775.00 (Ward).
42
43
4.
City standard street lights shall be installed on Stone Ridge Court. The
44
improvement plans shall show the electrical service point for the street lights as
45
provided by Pacific Gas and Electric.
46
47
5.
Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 20.36.140, all utility distribution facilities
48
shall be placed underground. All existing overhead utility distribution facilities
49
across the project's Sunnyslope Road frontage shall be placed underground.
50
14
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 Monitoring
2
3 1. All required mitigation measures shall be reflected in plans submitted for City
4 approval of the Final Map and Public Improvement Plans, and shall be subject to
5 the review and approval of Fire, Public Works, Engineering and Planning staff.
6
7 2. All construction shall be subject to inspection by City staff for compliance with the
8 approved Public Improvement Plans prior to City acceptance of public facilities.
9
10 AESTHETICS: Litigations
11
12 1. New home construction shall be subject to administrative review (via
13 administrative SPARC on lots 1,4, 6, 10, 11 -14, 19, 20 and building permit review
14 for other lots, pursuant to the adopted PUD Development Standards) for
15 assessment of the sensitivity of the individual lot development proposals,
16 particularly as they relate to the following: 1) preservation of visible open space
17 along ridgelines visible from D Street; 2) responsiveness to potential privacy issues
18 where lots abut existing development; 3) minimization of drainage and grading
19 impacts, particularly as they relate to downhill development and public views; 4)
20 avoidance of potential grading and irrigation impacts to existing trees (particularly
21 native oaks); 5) avoidance of view obstructions to neighboring properties,
22 particularly those on Suncrest Hill across from Lot 20; 6) avoidance of impacts to
23 the Kelly Creek riparian corridor. Additional lot - specific analysis may be
24 conducted and/or more restrictive grading, height, floor area, lot coverage,
25 exterior design, landscaping or other standards may be imposed through the
26 SPARC/building permit processes as necessary to ensure appropriate architectural
27 and site design for the individual setting under consideration.
28
29 2. The PUD Development Standards shall be amended prior to SPARC approval of
30 the Tentative Map and PUD Development Plan, to incorporate more detailed
31 provisions pertaining to the following:
32
33 a. Maximum permitted building height for all lots shall be consistent with
34 standards under the R -1 20,000 District. However, plans submitted for lots
35 subject to administrative SPARC review shall include a view analysis prepared by a
36 licensed architect or engineer, indicating visibility of proposed structures from
37 primary viewpoints on D St., Sunnyslope Rd., and Suncrest Hill Dr. Building
38 height shall be measured parallel to the proposed grades. Maximum permitted
39 building height for new accessory structures shall be limited to 15' except as
40 permitted for approved accessory dwellings.
41
42 b. Setbacks for the primary structure and all accessory structures in excess of
43 6' in height shall be as defined by the SPARC- approved building envelopes for
44 each lot. The building envelopes for all lots shall be modified as necessary to meet
45 Fire service requirements.
46
47 C. The maximum building footprint coverage for all lots, including all
48 accessory structures, covered decks, patios and carports, shall not exceed 4,500
49 square feet for lots 11 -14, 19, 20. Coverage shall not include roof overhangs,
15
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 open wood decks or patios, and paved areas. Maximum lot coverage for all other
2 lots shall be consistent with provisions of the R -1 20,000 District.
3
4 d. Except where specified under the PUD Standards for the subdivision, all
5 properties and uses within the subdivision shall be regulated in a manner consistent
6 with the R -1 20,000 Zoning District.
7
8 Monitoring
10 1. Plans submitted for approval of the Final Map and development permits shall be
11 reviewed for compliance with all adopted mitigation measures and conditions of
12 project approval.
13
14 2. All construction shall be subject to City staff inspection for compliance with
15 adopted mitigation measures and conditions of project approval, the approved
16 public improvement plans an d approved development permits, prior to City
17 acceptance of public area improvements and issuance of a Certificate of
18 Occupancy for each new unit constructed.
19
20 RECREATION: Mitigations
21
22 1. The developer shall be responsible for payment of Park and Recreation land
23 improvement fees as established by City Council Resolution.
24
25 Monitoring
26
27 1. Fees shall be collected prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for each. new
28 unit constructed.
29
3o ARCHITECTURAL/HISTORICAL: Mitigations
31
32 1. Prior to grading activity, the project proponent shall advise all contractors
33 conducting soil disturbing activities of the potential for encountering buried
34 archaeological resources. If concentrations of historic or prehistoric materials
35 (e.g., adobe foundations or walls, structural remains with square nails, backfield
36 privies, wells or other refuse deposits) are encountered during grading or other
37 ground- disturbing activities, work in the immediate area of the finds shall be halted
38 and City staff notified. A qualified historic archaeologist shall then be consulted
39 for further evaluation of the situation, and any subsequent recommendations
40 implemented.
41
42 Monitoring
43
44 1. All construction activities shall be routinely monitored by City Public Works and
45 Building staff during the course of required inspections. Planning staff shall be
46 notified of any findings of potential archaeological significance for further referral.
47
48 Findings for Rezoning to PUD
49
16
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 1. The proposed Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance No. 1072 NCS, to reclassify
2 and rezone Assessors Parcel Nos. 019 -203 -001, 002, known as the Stone Ridge
3 Subdivision, to Planned Unit Development (PUD) is in general conformity with the
4 Petaluma General Plan.
5
6 2. The public necessity, convenience and general welfare clearly permit and will be
7 furthered by the proposed Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, reclassifying and
8 rezoning the Stone Ridge Subdivision site to PUD.
10 3. The requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been
11 satisfied through preparation of an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration to
12 avoid or reduce, to a level of insignificance, potential impacts generated by the
13 proposed Stone Ridge Subdivision PUD.
14
15 Findings for Approval of the PUD Development Plan and Standards
16
17 1. The proposed Stone Ridge project is proposed on property which has a suitable
i8 relationship to one or more thoroughfares ( Sunnyslope Road), and said
19 thoroughfare, together with new public street and private driveway improvements
20 herein required, are adequate to carry any additional traffic generated by the
21 development.
22
23 2. The plan for the proposed Stone Ridge development presents a unified and
24 organized arrangement of buildings and service facilities which are appropriate in
25 relation to adjacent or nearby properties, and adequate public and private area
26 landscaping and screening is included to ensure compatibility with surrounding
2 uses.
28
29 3. The natural and scenic qualities of the Stone Ridge site are protected, including the
30 Kelly Creek corridor, existing significant vegetation, the natural hillside
31 topography, ridgeline views, and low - density residential character of the
32 Sunnyslope area, with adequate public and private spaces designated on the PUD
33 Development Plan.
34
35 4. The development of the Stone Ridge property in the manner proposed by the
36 applicants, and as conditioned, will not be detrimental to the public welfare, will be
37 in the best interests of the City, and will be in keeping with the general intent and
38 spirit of the zoning regulations of the City of Petaluma, with the Petaluma General
39 Plan, with the Sunnyslope Assessment District and Annexation Area PUD Zoning,
40 and with other applicable plans adopted by the City.
41
42 Notice. of Estimated Fees, Dedications, and other Exactions
43
44 Pursuant to Section 66020 of the California Government Code, the applicant/developer
45 has the statutory right to protest development fees, dedication and reservation
46 requirements, and other exactions included in this project approval as follows (calculations
47 based upon 20 lots):
48
49 - Community Facilities fees in the estimated amount of $805.00 /unit
50 - Storm Drainage Impact fees in the estimated amount of $6,600.00 (total)
17
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 - Park and Recreation Land Improvement fees in the estimated amount of
2 $3,894.00 /unit
3 - Traffic Mitigation fees in the estimated amount of $3,007.00/lot
4 - In -Lieu for Provision of Low Income Housing contribution in the estimated
5 amount of $2,400.00/lot
6
7 Conditions for PUD Approval
8
9 1. All mitigation measures adopted in conjunction with approval of the Mitigated
10 Negative Declaration for the Stone Ridge project are incorporated herein by
11 reference as conditions of project approval.
12
13 2. All conditions of the Tentative Subdivision Map approved for the Stone Ridge
14 project are incorporated herein by reference, and shall be enforced as applicable
15 with the PUD Development Plan.
16
17 3. All requirements of the Planning Department shall be met including:
18
19 a. The PUD Development Standards shall be amended to include the
20 following provisions and all text amendments required under the adopted
21 mitigation measures for the project, with the final content and composition of the
22 document subject to SPARC approval prior to Final Map application:
23
24 1. The title of the document shall be amended to reflect "PUD
25 Development Standards for the Stone Ridge Subdivision." References to
26 "guidelines" within the document shall be modified accordingly.
27
28 2. The document shall be modified to incorporate permitted uses
29 consistent with the R -1 20,000 Zoning District, provisions for accessory
30 uses, and a reference to other governing documents including the City
31 Council Resolutions approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration, PUD
32 Development Plan and Standards, and the Tentative Subdivision Map, as
33 well as all SPARC approvals for the project.
34
35 3. The last sentence in Section I p. 1 pertaining to conflict in
36 regulations shall be deleted. A statement shall be incorporated specifying
37 "uses not specified herein shall be subject to determination by the City of
38 Petaluma Planning Director as applicable to the R -1, 20,000 Zoning
39 District."
40
41 4. Section H shall be amended to reflect applicability of administrative
42 SPARC review for all lots identified under the adopted mitigation
43 measures.
44
45 5. Section HIa. shall be amended to reflect underfloor height
46 restrictions pursuant to adopted mitigation measures, and all other adopted
47 conditions /mitigations pertaining to grading of the site.
48
18
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 6. Section IIIb. shall be amended to reflect consistency with tree
2 protection measures identified in the arborist report for the project and
3 adopted mitigation measures.
4
5 7. Section Mh. shall be amended to incorporate reference to City
6 noise ordinance regulations.
7
8 8. Section IIIn. shall be amended to read "Rear entry garages shall be
9 encouraged where possible, particularly on flag lots and on lots adjacent to
10 flag lots."
11
12 9. Section IVa. shall be amended to require submittal of landscape
13 and irrigation plans for all lots in conjunction with administrative
14 SPARC/building permit review as appropriate.
15
16 10. Section IVd. shall be deleted.
17
18 11. Sections IVe. and N. shall be amended to reflect consistency with
19 adopted mitigation measures pertaining to tree removal.
20
21 12. Sections IVf. and IVg. shall be amended to reflect consistency with
22 adopted mitigation measures pertaining to installation and maintenance of
23 public area landscaping.
24
25 13. Section IVh. shall be amended to delete the sentence "Irrigation
26 shall cover a maximum of 20% of the area under existing trees and
27 drip systems are encouraged."
28
29 14. Section Va. shall be amended to specify that fencing shall be
30 installed per City — approved plans and that lattice or trellising
31 may be installed to provide additional screening to a maximum
32 total height of 7.5'. A fence detail shall be incorporated for
33 reference.
34
35 15. Section VI. shall be modified to incorporate criteria for
36 administrative SPARC/building permit review pursuant to adopted
37 mitigation measures.
38
39 16. Section VII. shall be amended to permit accessory dwellings on all
40 lots as a conditional use, pursuant to applicable Zoning Ordinance
41 provisions, and to permit garage conversions subject to
42 replacement of required off - street parking.
43
44 b. The PUD Development Plan shall be amended prior to SPARC approval
45 to reflect the following:
46
47 1. All conditions of the Tentative Map applicable to the Development
48 Plan shall be consistently reflected.
49
19
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 2. Lot configurations, private driveway design and building
2 envelopes shall be modified as necessary to meet mitigation
3 measures pertaining to Fire access requirements
4
5 3. The boundaries of the open space easement required on Lot 1 shall
6 be reflected on the PUD Plan as specified in the adopted mitigation
7 measures.
8
9 4. Landscape plans shall be amended to incorporate street frontage
10 landscaping for all right -of -way areas, and all mitigation plantings
11 proposed within the open space easement. Plans shall be subject to
12 SPARC approval in conjunction with review of the PUD
13 development Plan.
14
15 5. Setbacks for existing structures to be retained shall be specified on
16 the PUD Development Plan, and a reference to applicability of R -1
17 20,000 Zoning District provisions shall be incorporated for all lots
18 where specific building envelopes are not proposed/required.
19
20 C. All proposed building envelopes shall be subject to SPARC review and
21 approval in conjunction with review of the PUD Development Plan ancl
22 Standards and shall generally reflect the modified building envelope plan
23 recommended by the Planning Commission at their August 26, 1997
24 meeting..
25
26 d Except for Lots 17 and 18, all side and rear yard fencing shall be open
27 wire (generally beyond the building envelope) with emphasis on retaining
28 open views; design and final location shall be subject to review and
29 approval of SPARC.
30
31 e. Houses on Lots I and 4 shall be oriented to front onto Sunnyslope Road
32
33
34
35
36
37 Findings for Tentative Subdivision Map
38
39 1. The proposed Stone Ridge Tentative Subdivision Map, as conditioned, is in
40 general conformity with the Suburban land use category and other applicable
41 provisions of the General Plan. -
42
43 2. The proposed. Stone Ridge Tentative Subdivision Map, as conditioned, is in
44 general conformity with the standards and intent of the PUD Zoning District and
45 other applicable provisions of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance.
46
47 3. Pursuant to Ordinance 1994 NCS, regulating access for lots to public streets, the
48 most logical development of the land requires that proposed Lots 14, 14,15, 19,
49 and 20 be served by private driveway access easements, in order to minimize the
20
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 grading impacts to the land, and establish lotting patterns for the Stone Ridge
2 Subdivision which are compatible with surrounding development and City policies
3 pertaining to hillside development.
4
5 4. The requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act have been met
6 through preparation of an Initial Study and adoption of a Mitigated Negative
7 Declaration, to avoid or reduce to a level of insignificance, potential impacts of the
8 Stone Ridge Subdivision.
9
10 5. The Stone Ridge Subdivision has met all requirements of the City of Petaluma
11 Residential Growth Management System, as specified under Chapter 17.26 of the
12 Municipal Code.
13
14 6. The proposed Stone Ridge Tentative Subdivision Map, as conditioned, is in
15 general conformance with the Petaluma Subdivision Ordinance and other
16 applicable provisions of the Petaluma Municipal Code (PMC). In accordance with
17 the provisions of PMC Section 20.32.230, the public safety is not jeopardized by
18 the omission of sidewalks on Kelly Creek Lane, and on one side of Stone Ridge
19 Court. Further, the use of reduced street standards pursuant to PMC Section
20 20.32.270 will result in the best possible utilization of the land to be subdivided
21 given consideration to the topography and natural cover of the land and the
22 general character of the proposed subdivision.
23
24 Conditions for Tentative Map Approval
25
26 1. The following requirements of the City Engineer shall be met prior to City
27 approval of the Final Map:
28
29 a. Sidewalks aFe required en beth sides ef the street. en Stene Ridge-C+
30 (PAI.C. 20.32.220). The Planning
31 sidewalks pef Chapt 20 32 230 '
32
33 b. Any existing cesspools, septic tanks, etc., shall be removed, pursuant to
34 Petaluma Municipal Code Section 20.36.060 and the Sonoma County Department
35 of Health requirements.
36
37 C. The proposed abandonment of the existing well on Lot 4 shall be
38 performed in compliance with Petaluma Municipal Code Section 15.20.010, which
39 incorporates Chapter 25B of the Code of Sonoma County.
40
41 d. A 10 -foot wide "public water main easement" shall be dedicated to the City
42 on the final map over Lot 13 or 14 from the westerly property line, where it
43 intersects with a separately required water main easement on the adjacent lands of
44 Maxwell, to the public street (Stone Ridge Court). Additionally, a 10 -foot wide
45 of public water main easement shall be dedicated to the City on the final map over
46 Lot(s) 19 and/or 20 from Stone Ridge Court to the southeasterly subdivision
47 boundary at the adjacent private drive (Suncrest Hill Drive).
48
49 e. All grading and excavation shall conform to the geotechnical investigation
50 report prepared for this project by John H. Dailey, Consulting Geotechnical
51 Engineer, dated December 30, 1996. The grading plans shall be approved by the
21
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 project's geotechnical engineer. All subsurface drains required for filled areas
2 relative to public right -of -ways shall be within appropriate easements if not within
3 the public right of way.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
f. No lot -to -lot drainage shall be allowed. Surface runoff shall be addressed
within each individual lot then conveyed to an approved storm drain system. In
order to minimize erosion, surface drainage concrete swales with inlets to a pipe
system shall be utilized, where slopes exceed 4:1 gradient.
Provide public storm drainage systems within public rights -of -way to all extents
possible. Privately maintained storm drain systems shall have a mechanism to
assure long -term maintenance.
g. Pursuant to the hydrologic study prepared for this tentative map, this
development shall extend the 18 -inch culvert in Sunnyslope Road to a point
downstream of Culvert "A ", as identified in said study, or install an acceptable
alternative. Either option shall be subject to review and approval of the City and
the Sonoma County Water Agency.
h. All sanitary sewer mains serving more than one property shall be publicly
owned and maintained. Public sanitary sewers on private property shall be within a
10 -foot wide easement dedicated to the City on the final map and covered with an
all weather surface.
i. Lots 1, 4, 6, and 10, shall have a 1 -foot non - access easement, dedicated to
the City on the final map, across their Sunnyslope Road frontage.
j. This project shall utilize the existing sanitary sewer mains and water mains
stubbed out to this property. Prior to final map and improvement plan approval,
the developer shall reimburse the City the construction costs incurred for
installation of water and sanitary sewer systems improvements which were
installed for the benefit of this property as part of Sunnyslope Road improvements.
The estimated reimbursement is $3,088.00 (Fullerton) and $2,775.00 (Ward).
k. City standard signing and pavement markings, including no parking signs
and red painted curbs, shall be shown on the plans and installed on Stone Ridge
Court, subject to the City Traffic Engineer's review and approval.
1. City _standard street lights shall be installed on Stone Ridge Court and
Sunnyslope Road. The improvement plans shall show the electrical service ;point
for the street lights as provided by Pacific Gas and Electric.
m. Each individual phase shall be designed to provide the required
improvements necessary for the independent and orderly development of such
phase.
n. The final map(s) shall show any differences in record boundary lines and
occupation lines.
o. The two proposed 30 -foot access easements provided for the private drives
shall be clarified for what. Lot(s) it is in favor of, and also provide an emergency
vehicle access easement dedicated to the City on the final map(s).
22
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
2 P. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 20.36.140; all utility distribution
3 facilities shall be placed underground. All existing overhead utility distribution
4 facilities across the project's Sunnyslope frontage shall be placed underground.
5
6 q. Improvement plans shall be prepared per City Department of Engineering
7 Minimum Design Criteria, Improvement Plan Preparation and Standard Details and
8 Specifications. Record Drawings shall be provided to the City Department of
9 Engineering prior to the subdivision's final acceptance.
10
11 2. All requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be met, as specified under the adopted
12 mitigation measures for the Stone Ridge project:
13
14 a. Post address at or near main entry door - minimum four (4) inch letters on
15 contrasting background.
16
17 b. Address locator required to be posted at or near the driveway entrance.
18 Reflectorized numbers are acceptable. Location and design to be approved by the
19 Fire Marshal's Office.
20
21 C. Residential buildings constructed at or above one hundred -sixty feet in
22 elevation are required to have a residential fire sprinkler system (NFPA 13D), this
23 will affect lots 2, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19 and 20. The buildable area of lot 20 is
24 limited to within 150' of the last fire hydrant as measured by an approved route
25 around the exterior of the building.
26
27 d. An approved cul -de -sac is required at the end of the private drive off
28 Stoneridge Court. An approved cul -de -sac will not be required if one of the two
29 following conditions is met:
30
31 For Lots 19 and 20
32
33 1) Hammerhead turn - arounds maybe acceptable if the houses for lots
34 1,2,3,19 and 20 are fully sprinklered. Fully sprinklered is defined as an
35 NFPA 13D sprinkler system with additional protection in the attic, garage,
36 bathrooms over 55 square feet and in closets over 24 square feet or over 3
37 feet deep. (This may affect the size of the water service area for these
38 lots.)
39
40 2) Hammerhead turn - grounds and fully - sprinklered houses will not be
41 required for lots 19 and 20 if an emergency vehicle access to the adjacent
42 property line at the end of the private drive off Stoneridge Court is
43 provided. However, a residential fire sprinkler system (NFPA 13D) will
44 still be required because the lots are above the 160' elevation.
45
46 e. Provide access, a minimum twenty (20) feet, exclusive of on- street parking,
47 all asphalt surface with thirteen feet -six inches (13'6 ") vertical height
48 clearance. The private drive off Stoneridge Court appears not to meet this
49 standard.
50
51 f. Add as a general note to plans:
23
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
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
No combustible construction is permitted above the foundation unless an
approved all weather hard surface road is provided to within one hundred -
fifty (150') of the farthest point of a building or structure.
All fire hydrants for the project must be tested, flushed, and in service
prior to the commencement of combustible construction on the site.
g. All required fire lanes in which no parking is allowed, shall be designated
by painting curbs red. Where no curbs exist, signs approved by the Fire
Marshal shall be installed. This applies to the private drive off Stoneridge
and Kelly Creek Lane.
3. The following requirements of the Chief Building Official shall be met:
a. Grading must be certified when completed to indicate compliance with
approved plans and will be required for occupancy.
b. Certify pad elevations before building slab on grade is poured.
C. Certify finished floor elevation before occupancy.
d. Any holding tank required for elevations above 160 feet must meet
Engineering Department design requirements.
e. Where ground slopes greater than 1 on 10, foundation shall be stepped per
Uniform Building Code 1803.2.
f. Soils with expansion index greater than 20 requires special design
foundation per Uniform Building Code 1803.2.
g. All roofing shall be "B" rated or better per Ordinance No. 1744/1988.
h. Show site drainage and grading topography.
i. Indicate all utilities on site plan.
j. Driveway gradient shall comply with Ordinance No. 1533/1982.
k. Responsible party to sign plans.
1. Submit soils report to verify foundation design.
M. Indicate group occupancy, type of construction, square footage.
n. Plans must show compliance to 1994 UBC, UPC, UMC, and 1993 NEC.
Plans must also show compliance to current Title 24 Energy
Conservation and/or Disabled Access Requirements.
24
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 0. Provide structural calculations for all non - conventional design items.
2
3 p. Demolition permit required to remove any structure.
4
5 q. Abandonment of water well or septic system must be done under permit
6 from County of Sonoma Public Health Department.
7
8 r. Detail all drainage swales.
9
l0 4. All mitigation measures adopted in conjunction with approval of the Mitigated
11 Negative Declaration for the Stone Ridge project are incorporated herein by
12 reference as conditions of project approval.
13
14 5. Prior to application for SPARC approval, the following modifications shall be
15 incorporated into the Tentative Map:
16
17 a. All adopted mitigation measures applicable to the Tentative Map shall be
18 reflected.
19
20 b. The Tentative Map shall reflect consistency with the PUD Development
21 Plan as conditionally approved.
22
23 C. The proposed street names shall be modified as necessary to meet
24 requirements of the City of Petaluma Street Naming Committee.
25
26 d. The street design for the proposed public street shall be modified to reflect
27 incorporation of public sidewalk(s) as directed by the City Council.
28
29 6. Plans submitted for approval of the Final Map and Improvement Plans shall reflect
30 the following, subject to staff review and approval:
31
32 a. Permitted hours of construction shall be specified on construction drawings
33 as identified in the adopted mitigation measures for the project.
34
35 b. The boundaries of the 100 year storm event shall be identified on the Final
36 Map.
37
38 C. All proposed lot areas shall be specified on the Final Map.
39
40 d. A reference to all project approval documents shall be incorporated as a
4 1 note on the Final Map.
42
43 e. A description of the permitted uses and restrictions within the Open Space
44 easement on Lot 1 and the boundaries of the easement area shall be
45 identified on the Final Map.
46
47 f. The location of all proposed electrical transformers, or other utility
48 structures shall be identified on plans, and located underground in
49 accordance with adopted City policy.
50
25
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 7. The road shall be shifted slightly (approximately 4 -5 feet) to the west in the area
2 of Lots 6,7 and 18 to provide a suitable planting area for a cluster of screen arees
3 at the southwest corner adjacent to the Strand property.
4
5 8. A sidewalk shall be installed on one side of street only (west), and shaft be
6 constructed of concrete. Curbs shall also be constructed of concrete.
7
8 9.-7-. Prior to City approval of the Final Map, the project proponents shall enter into an
9 agreement with the City for payment of an In -Lieu Contribution, to meet
10 affordable housing requirements for the Stone Ridge Subdivision project; as
11 specified under Program 11(iii) of the Petaluma General Plan Housing Element:.
12
13 10.8: Reproducible copies of the finalized Tentative Map, PUD Development Plan, and
14 the PUD Standards shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to City
15 Council approval of the Final Map. A reduced copy of the Final Map shall be
16 submitted to the Planning Department prior to recordation of the Final Map.
17
18 11.9- The applicants/developers shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or
19 any of its boards, commission, agents, officers, and employees from any claim,
20 action or proceeding against the City, its boards, commission, agents, officers, or
21 employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the approval of the project when
22 such claim or action is brought within the time period provided for in applicable
23 State and/or local statutes. The City shall promptly notify the
24 applicants/developers of any such claim, action, or proceeding. The City shall
25 coordinate in the defense. Nothing contained in this condition shall prohibit the
26 City from participating in a defense of any claim, action, or proceeding if the City
27 bears its own attorney's fees and costs, and the City defends the action in good
28 faith.
29
30
31 NEW BUSINESS
32 PUBLIC HEARING
33
34 1I. KNEZ ACCESSORY DWELLING; ROBERT KNEZ; 329 WALNUT
35 STREET; AP NO. 006 - 201- 018(ed).
9
37 Consideration of a request to establish an accessory dwelling within an existing
38 residence at 329 Walnut Street. Actions include: 1) A Variance to permit the
39 accessory dwelling to exceed the maximum area allowed for .such units by 240
40 sq.ft. (860 - 640 sq.ft.); 2) A Variance to permit four on -site parking spaces where
41 the Zoning Ordinance requires five; and 3) A Conditional Use Permit to authorize
42 the establishment of the accessory dwelling.
43
44 Planning Director Tuft presented the staff report; recommended gate removal to better
45 facilitate use of rear yard parking spaces; canopy shall be restored to main dwelling during
46 porch restoration; wrap- around screening added to entry landing/porch for second floor
47 dwelling unit.
48
49 The public hearing was opened.
26
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
SPEAKERS:
4 Commissioner Maguire - Questions regarding parking requirements, lead paint removal
5 requirements; upstairs deck on property line - building permit issued in error (reported to
6 be a .replacement deck, not a new deck); greater degree of diligence in disclosure by
7 involved real estate agents could have limited confusion.
8 Planning Director Tuft - Deck is now partially covered; does not recall that in the past.
9 Commissioner Maguire - Privacy issues from entry to second floor unit.
10 Planning Director Tuft Addressed issue of privacy with the suggestion (tonight) of
11 wrapping porch (landing of stairs).
12 Commissioner Maguire - As part of privacy issue discussed tonight - potential impacts
13 of upper deck.
14 Planning Director Tuft - Tenant has moved in to second unit (upper) - disclosed to
15 Planning staff by owner several weeks ago.
16 Commissioner Vieler - Regarding removal and preparation of surface - should be
17 specified that repainting required.
18 Iry Piotrkowski - Applicant's attorney - Structure was built in 1902; two units since 1962
19 (tax records); purchased. by property owner in 1994 as two units (deck had been on unit
20 since 1987 with permits); believes applicant has a vested right to two units which is why
21 second tenant has moved in; use has been in place for at least 35 years; substantial amount
22 of misunderstanding within the neighborhood; regarding condition of building - has hired
23 Jim Webb to design new porch, canopy, etc., fully intends to do all work; Fire Marshal
24 conditions acceptable; regarding windows at north side of building removal of window
25 would leave only one small window in bedroom; regarding parking - accept staff
26 recommendations; wants to cooperate to extent possible, wants to make building
27 appealing, work for City and neighborhood.
28 Commissioner Maguire - Does Mr. Webb have design drawings?
29 Iry Piotrkowski - Did not bring drawings tonight - will be discussed at SPARC.
30 Brian Hake - 333 Walnut - Several misstatements made; I purchased my house 4 years
31 ago because of quiet, single - family homes; previous owner (Nov. 1993) of 329 Walnut
32 converted 2 unit building at 329 Walnut to single - family; Mr. Knez bought property and
33 reverted it into two units; decision by Planning Commission 2 years ago was that this
34 residence is a single - family dwelling; units do not meet current building codes; Variance
35 for front stairs (1967); concerns - front stairs (on his property line), tower above his
36 house, dwelling not compatible with neighborhood - nuisance, has bright porch light
37 . ( second floor) shining into his house; rear deck - on property line - no setback - dominates
38 view from his kitchen window, deprives privacy; not compatible with neighborhood or
39 building - debris collects on deck (tenants have no storage or garage); guests living in tent
40 on deck (for three weeks in summer); several items have fallen from deck onto his
41 driveway (under bottom slat); original building permit for deck was misrepresented;
42 building permit for deck was never approved (finaled) by City Building Division and
43 theref6re is not legal; brick patio under deck is not fully utilized because of deck structure
44 - deck needs to be removed; concerns regarding parking, drainage; petition signed by 22
45 neighbors against accessory unit; other existing accessory units in neighborhood are
46 unobtrusive (this one is very intrusive).
47 Debbie Ongaro - Owns property at 325 Walnut - (quoted from August 10 letter)
48 Concerns with proposed variances; proposed unit is very obtrusive - other accessory
49 dwellings in neighborhood are detached, to rear of main dwellings; additional 220 sq.ft. of
50 living:, space for the accessory unit should not be allowed (increased traffic and noise);
51 upstairs porch precludes privacy from neighbors; Mr. Knez does not follow through on
27
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 improvements - no improvements have been made since he has owned property - has not
2 even mowed lawn - reported high weeds to Fire Marshal; large dog, barking constantly,
3 problem in neighborhood - obtained court order to remove dog as a public nuisance;
4 Planning Commission previous decision to require this home to be single - family unit; has
s been ignored; second unit has been occupied for quite some time - a new tenant recently
6 moved in; first floor porch unsafe; Mr. Knez has no concern for integrity of neighborhood,
7 does not follow through with promises to City.
8 Andy Jaszewski - 323 Walnut - Has approval to construct an accessory dwelling on his
9 property - was required to submit much detail, very few comments received iiom
10 neighborhoods; Planning Department inconsistent in application of rules for intensification
11 of use - this applicant has not provided landscaping plans, parking plans, architectural
12 details; no covered parking provided; should be required to remove front stairs and rear
13 deck; supports second unit, but owner has to meet planning code requirements (privacy
14 concerns).
15 Clarification by staff: Mr. Jaszewski proposes new construction rather than conversion
16 of space in existing structure. Fully detached drawings are required to be submitted with
17 the SPARC application for this proposal.
18 Chris Lynch - 320 Walnut - As far as General Plan - this parcel size should only allow
19 one unit - this proposal does not enhance the residential quality of this neighborhood;
20 applicant has a disregard for this process; this was decided two years ago by Planning
21 Commission to remain a single - family home; recommended conditions - deck does not
22 meet setback requirements; Condition 7 - would like to be able to rely on SPARC to :have
23 this condition met - front stairs should be removed - entrance should be from rear of
24 building, not from front stairs; gate should be removed - deck and stairs should be
25 voluntarily removed by Mr. Knez.
26 Scott Gende - 315 Walnut - Submitted letter - was not included in staff report - deny
27 variance request to allow additional square footage; documentation very confusing, has
28 been single - family, then two units, etc.; path is being paved for processes to be ignored;
29 surprised to see in staff report very little said regarding neighborhood opposition; very
30 little if anything has been done to maintain property in last seven years - has 'been
31 continuing to deteriorate; owner being given economic benefits of two units - no timetable
32 on any required conditions; should reconsider this property fully.
33 Mike Orton - 324 Walnut - (read letter - wife has been resident since 1970, he since
34 1980); tenants moved in to second unit on August 16 - Planning Department was aware;
35 distressed that staff recommends approval; other accessory units in area are much smaller,
36 to rear of properties; cannot trust promises of owner.
37 Iry Piotrkowski - Regarding neighborhood concerns - in many older neighborhoods
38 privacy is an issue for the resident as well as neighbors - works both ways; time limit for
39 work is 30 days after SPARC review; regarding cooperation with neighborhood - doing
40 best possible; this has always been two units since Mr. Knez has been owner.
41
42 The public hearing was closed.
43
44 Commission Discussion -
45
46 Commissioner Bennett - Clarification from staff - What was intention of Planning
47 Commission two years ago regarding number of units allowed?
48 Planning Director Tuft - Determination was that use of second unit ceased for more than
49 six months and the legal status of the property was /is a single family residence - Planning
50 Commission required a CUP to establish a second unit; noted that the Commission
28
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 determination was appealed and that the appeal was on hold ending the outcome of this
2 CUP application.
3 Commissioner Maguire - Testimony by neighbors very compelling; best thing would be
4 to allow second unit but require removal of front stairs, and the rear deck to meet
5 setbacks; strictly enforce removal of lead paint; establish a time limit for all
6 work/mitigations; noise and privacy issues critical - back entrance must be used; five
7 parking spaces should be provided; non - conforming use has been lost; owner should not
.`' 8 have rented both units before this hearing; owner has not acted responsibly - strict
9 interpretation should be applied; window should be made to be consistent in design, siding
10 also.
11 Commissioner Thompson - Agrees with Mr. Maguire - all conditions should be recalled
12 in three months.
13 Commissioner Vieler - Regarding removal of kitchen, was this work permitted ?; What
14 does Fire Code say about removal of front steps? Stairs are an eyesore; did not have a
15 problem with deck in back - could be left; if this CUP is denied, what can City do to
16 require work to -be done on this property?
17 Planning Director Tuft - UBC requires that entry be clear, direct and obvious, Plans
18 Examiner had concerns with layout of second floor - being adjacent to hallway entrance of
19 rear entrance is used.
20 Commissioner Maguire - If Health and Safety issues cannot be met, City would have
21 legal means.
22 Planning Director Tuft - Health and Safety standards are substantially different than
23 basic property maintenance.
24 Commissioner Vieler - Can City require removal of lead -based paint?
25 Planning Director Tuft - I do not know if there is local authority to require removal of
26 lead -based paint.
27 Commissioner Vieler - Six single - family dwellings in area have accessory dwellings;
28 should not have allowed occupancy before this hearing; would like to see very narrow
29 time frame to make all required improvements.
30 Commissioner Bennett - Would like rear yard deck to meet required setbacks; defer to
31 staff in terms of processing time; insure all conditions be met.
32 Commissioner Feibusch - Are we in favor of a CUP ?(Consensus - yes.) Stairs should be
33 removed - if not possible because of UBC, then a modification should be done, i.e.,
34 screening, etc..
35 Commissioner Maguire - If stairs cannot be removed, then they should be removed and
36 rebuilt in a manner consistent with design of home.
37 Commissioner Vieler - Stairs should be removed - "Motel 6" style as presently built.
38 Commissioner Thompson - If stairs need to remain - faith in Jim Webb design, SPARC
39 can review.
40 Commissioner Maguire - A landing?
41 Commissioner Maguire - Parking should be paved, not gravel.
42 Commissioner Feibusch - Compacted gravel should be adequate - drainage needs to be
43 addressed.
44 Planning Director Tuft - Drainage shall be addressed during parking plan review and
45 approval. (Applicant agrees gate be removed.)
46 Commissioner Feibusch - Consensus on rear deck?
47 Commissioner Maguire - Deck built under fraudulent conditions, should be made to
48 meet setbacks.
49 Commissioner Vieler - What would it take to have deck meet setbacks?
50 (Answer) - 5 feet setback from side property line.
51 Commissioner Vieler - Removing 5 feet in width would not make much difference to
52 neighbor.
29
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 Commissioner Maguire - Five foot setback would be more secure, private for neighbor
2 below.
3 Commissioner Bennett - In terms of an accessory dwelling - deck should be removed or
4 at least brought up to code.
5 Commissioner Feibusch - Believes deck should be removed.
6 (Consensus - require minimum five foot setback for deck from side property line.)
7 (Consensus.- time limit - work to be completed within 4 months of SPARC approval)
8 (Consensus - windows can stay - but trimmed correctly and siding replaced.
10 A motion was made by Commissioner Maguire and seconded by Commissioner Bennett to
11 find this project exempt from CEQA, deny the parking variance, approve the Variance to
12 allow additional square footage and grant a Conditional Use Permit to authorize: the
13 establishment of an Accessory Dwelling Unit subject to the findings and amended
14 conditions listed below:
15
16 Commissioner Bennett: Yes
17 Commissioner Broad: Absent
18 Chairman Feibusch: Yes
19 Commissioner Healy: Absent
20 Commissioner Maguire: Yes
21 Commissioner Thompson: Yes
22 Commissioner Vieler: Yes
23
24 CEQA Findings:
25
26 1. This project is found to be exempt under CEQA Section 15301, when establishing
27 an accessory dwelling unit within an existing single - family residence.
28
29 Findings to Deny the Parking Variance:
30
31 1. There are no peculiar and unusual conditions inherent in this narrow, deep
32 and flat lot that create a hardship on the parcel in question. The location of
33 the residence on the front portion of the lot does not prevent the creation
34 of the required five parking spaces in the middle portion of this narrow but
35 deep lot. The shape of the parcel does not qualify as an unusual condition
36 which would justify approval of this parking variance request.
37
38 2. There is no hardship peculiar to the property that exists on a narrow, but
39 deep lot. Slight grading can be accomplished in the middle portion of the
40 lot to create the additional two parking spaces to provide five on -site
41 parking spaces for the single - family residence and the second story
42 accessory dwelling unit.
43
44 3. No decrease in the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property
45 rights has occurred on the subject parcel. A variance was granted for the
46 second story stairs along the northern property line in 1967; subsequent
47 building permits have been applied for by the previous and current property
48 owners since 1987. A parking variance would constitute a special privilege
49 to the current property owner since there is sufficient room in the middle
50 portion of the property to create the additional two parking spaces to
30
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 provide the required five on -site parking spaces for the single- family
2 residence and the second -story accessory dwelling unit.
3
4 4. Approving the parking variance request at this location would be
5 detrimental to the adjacent property to the south, impair the purposes of
6 this Ordinance and would not be in the public interest.
7
8 Findings for the Square Footage Variance:
9
10 1. There are peculiar and unusual conditions inherent to the property in question
11 sufficient to cause a hardship. The use of the structure at 329 Walnut Street as a
12 duplex pre -dated the current Zoning Ordinance. The structure is most easily
13 divided for the purpose of re- establishing an accessory unit by floor areas. No
14 exterior, visible benefit is provided to the neighboring properties by restricting the
15 accessory unit to less than the area contained on a single floor.
16
17 2. A hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the owner exists.
18 The structure pre - exists the current Zoning Ordinance, and is therefore not in
19 compliance in that both floor areas of the structure exist and no benefit is derived
20 from eliminating a specified amount of square footage from one floor to insure the
21 maximum square footage of an accessory unit is met.
22
23 3. Such re- establishment of a second dwelling unit is necessary for the preservation
24 and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties who
25 have or have the potential to create accessory dwelling units in the same zoning
26 district and in the vicinity, and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a
27 special privilege of the recipient not potentially enjoyed by neighbors. Such a
28 variance would also bring the structure closer to conformity with land use
29 regulations.
30
31 4. The authorizing of such variance shall not be of substantial detriment to adjacent
32 property, and will by virtue of the conditions of approval not materially impair the
33 purposes of this ordinance or the public interest.
34
35 Findings for the Conditional Use Permit
36
37 1. The proposed residential use with an accessory residential dwelling unit, as
38 conditioned, will be in conformance with the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance, as the
39 project provides parking in conformance with the Zoning Standards and the
40 project is in accordance with Section 6 -404 which allows second units on
41 properties zoned R -1 6,500.
42
43 2. The proposed residential use with an accessory residential dwelling unit, with
44 provisions for the legalization of the second dwelling unit, will not constitute a
45 nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community inasmuch as:
46 building location, parking, and other potentially offensive activities or aspects of
47 the proposal may be regulated through the project approval.
48
49 3. The proposed residential use with an accessory dwelling unit, on a site with an
50 Urban Standard General Plan land use designation, will conform to the
31
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
1 requirements, intent, goals, and policies of the Petaluma General Plan.
2 Specifically, this proposal adheres to the requirements and/or intent of the
3 Petaluma General Plan where the Housing Section has these objectives:
4
5 (a)
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
.2
(e)
Provide a range of housing types.
Provide housing opportunities for persons of all economic levels.
Insure a choice of housing types and locations to all persons regardless of
sex, cultural origin, age, marital status or physical handicaps
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
CUP97007NAR97001:
From the Building Inspection Division:
All previous stopwork orders and abandoned building permits must be addressed
and cleared with the approval of the Building Division.
From the Engineering Department:
2 Replace broken/displaced sidewalk across street frontage.
From the Fire Marshal:
3. Post addresses at or near main entry door - minimum four (4) inch letters on
contrasting background. Provide a directional address sign to the upstairs unit.
4. Provide smoke detectors in all sleeping rooms and common hallways. Det,
Electrical circuits supplying detectors
shall be separate dedicated lines with no other devises on the circuits.
5. Tests have been conducted on the exterior paint of the residential structure which
indicates that a high level of lead exists in the paint. The paint surface shall be
cleaned and prepared for the new exterior color that is to be applied prior to the
issuance of building permit for the second story unit. Any lead -based paint chips
that fall to the ground during the cleaning and preparation process must be
disposed to a hazardous waste facility. The applicant shall coordinate with the
Fire Marshal's office regarding the disposal of the paint chips. Wier R ► e
IJJCZTZZIVV VZ 4. li \r1Z 111V ZZZV V un the pain
fr id s t fue +... two 0 ed a nd � f:e g ht t ter., f
e�ssa� cc�racz
From the Planning Department:
32
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
6. a. Construction activities shall comply with applicable Zoning Ordinance and
Municipal Code Performance Standards (noise, dust, odor, etc.).
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
b. At no time shall future business activities exceed Performance Standards
specified in the Uniform Building Code, Section 22 -301 of the Petaluma
Zoning Ordinance, and the 1987 General Plan.
7. The location and size of the five parking spaces shall be established as shown on
the parking plan, revised by staff, dated August 15, 1997. Prior to the issue of a
building permit, the applicant shall provide a revised site plan, with dimensions of
the parking spaces, that demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City/Traffic
Engineer that adequate circulation and access exists on site. The parking surface
area shall be striped and improved with a City approved compacted gravel base
with grading provided to address proper drainage patterns. No deviation in the on-
site stripping shall occur without the review and approval of the Planning Director.
The new on -site striping shall be in place prior to the issuance of a building permit
or occupancy of the second -story dwelling unit.
.3
Within 30 days of the approval of the CUP, the applicant shall submit a landscape
plan for review and approval by the Planning Director with planting materials that
are to be established at the base of the stairs. The landscaping shall be installed
within 30 days after approval of the landscape plan.
23
24 9
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
This use permit and variance may be recalled to the Planning Commission for
review at any time due to complaints regarding lack of'compliance with conditions
of approval, traffic congestion, noise generation, or other adverse operating
characteristics. At such time, the Commission may consider revocation of the use
permit or add/modify conditions of approval.
10. The project will be subject to the following special fees, as listed below:
1. Dwelling Construction Fee: $180.00
($120.00 for one bedroom, $60 for each additional bedroom)
2. School Facilities Fees can be obtained by contacting the School District at
778-4621.
3. Traffic Nlitigation Fee: $1885.00
Any future development of the parcel may result in additional development impact
fees.
11. The following information shall be reflected on plans submitted for review and
approval by the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee (Historic SPARC)
prior to the issuance of a building permit and/or occupancy of the second -story
accessory unit:
a. Siding shall be installed to make exterior repairs to the residence.
This includes, but is not limited to, areas that abut window sashes, casing
and other areas that are to be repaired.
b. The existing first floor porch window shall remain with new trim
and siding installed around the window that is consistent in design to the
33
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
house. sh b e ,id a w fr-afned v A ndew _ e f a:.,,e,. ;iens
similar te these present en tWs elevatien.
4 C. The window along the northwestern property line on the first floor
5 shall remain with new trim and siding around the window than is
6 consistent in design to the house. of t he Fesidenee shall be re • °a; ni�
7 .
8
9 d. The front door of the second story dwelling unit shall. be
10 comparable to the appearance of the first floor door. A detail or
11 manufacturer's brochure shall be submitted to the Planning Department for
12 review and approval of the second story door.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
e. The applicant shall submit a color board which depicts the proposed
color scheme for the exterior of the house, including the window casing
and sashes of the house.
f. The stairs to the north of the house shall be removed subject to
approval of the Chief Building Official. If stairs are required per UBC,
they must be reconstructed or screened in to be consistent with the
architectural style of the building subject to review and approval of
SPARC. �#e
9. The stairs shall be bexed in.
g. The rear deck shall be modified to be consistent with the Zoning
Ordinance (5'side yard setback).
h. The gate at the rear of the property shall be removed
i. Drainage of parking area shall be designed subject to staff
approval.
12. The Historic SPARC application shall be processed within thirty (30) days of the
effectiveness of the CUP.
13. The applicants shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or any of its
boards, commissions, agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action or
proceeding against the City, its boards, commission, agents, officers, or employees
to attack, 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 arid/or
local statutes. The City shall promptly notify the applicants 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.
34
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/26/97
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
14. All work shall be completed no later than four months from the date of SP.ARC
approval.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
III. Discussion and direction to staff regarding request for initiation of General Plan
Amendment - area of Copeland Street at McNear Peninsula (portion of the lands
of Jerico Products and City of Petaluma).
Planning Director Tuft - Presented staff report.
A motion was made by Commissioner Maguire and seconded by Commissioner Thompson
to initiate a General Plan Amendment in the area of Copeland Street at McNear Peninsula.
Commissioner Bennett: Yes
Commissioner Broad: Absent
Chairman Feibusch: Yes
Commissioner Healy: Absent
Commissioner Maguire: Yes
Commissioner Thompson: Yes
Commissioner Vieler: Yes
IV. PROJECT STATUS REPORTS:
1. Central Petaluma Specific Plan - (Commissioner Bennett) Teams looked at
location of transit stations - main line of railroad remain - create view
corridor to downtown area.
2. Corona Reach Specific Plan - Walking tour last Sunday, very
enlightening.
3. Frates Road Specific Plan Area - PC recommendation forwarded to City
Council - continued to second meeting in September.
ADJOURNMENT: 10:13 PM
n in0826 / plan87
35