HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 08/11/1998I Consideration of a variance to allow a reduction of the required off - street parking
2 (155 spaces instead of 213 spaces) in order to preserve riparian habitat and mature
3 oaks on Magnolia Avenue site.
4
5 Continued to the August 11, 1998 Planning Commission meeting.
6
7
8 IV. LIAISON REPORTS
9 Bikej Committee meeting 6 PM Wednesday to review the Administrative Draft of the
10 Bike Plan.
11 Commissioner Healy- CPSP — Advisory Committee has agreed to put away illustrative
12 plan and focus on Design Guidelines.
13 Commissioner Torliatt — Would like on next agenda: Goals and Liaison appointments
14 to Committees (SPARC, Bike Committee, CPSP, CRSP, SPBSP, Tree Committee;
15 SCWA)
16
17
18 ADJOURNMENT: 8:20 PM s:Npc1minutes\min0728.doc
19
Planning Commission Minutes - July 28, 1998 4
Planning Commission Minutes - August 11, 1998
1 CITY OF PETALUMA, CA
2 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
3
4 REGULAR MEETING
5 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6 CITY HALL - PETALUMA, CA
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
August 11, 1998
7:00 PM
Commissioners: Present: Broad, Feibusch, Healy, Torliatt, Thompson *, Vieler;
Absent: Bennett
Staff. Pamela A Tuft, Planning Director
Vincent C. Smith, Principal Planner
Craig Spaulding, Associate Civil Engineer
*Chairperson
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
MINUTES OF July 14, 1998 (as corrected) — were not approved - will return with
further corrections; Minutes of July 28, 1998, were approved with corrections.
23 PUBLIC COMMENT: Linda Buffo, Petaluma Downtown Association: Overview of
24 proposals /requests; requested Commission support in prioritizing projects; 1) draft
25 downtown design guidelines — move forward in a timely manner - Planning has done an
26 excellent job; 2) Master Plan for upgrading underground electrical, installation of vintage
27 lights, will continue to purchase vintage lights; 3) downtown parking study (public and
28 private inventory) survey of people coming into downtown, how many people are
29 employed downtown, how many live downtown; 4) restore fund — used for restoring
30 facades downtown, possible use of PCDC monies, short term loan money, requests
31 support of these projects by Planning Commission.
32 Commissioner Vieler: Regarding traffic study, in conjunction with Traffic Engineer, can
33 study look at what is happening in immediate vicinity of downtown parking area beyond
34 the central business district/ parking district areas?
35 Commissioner Healy: Regarding upgrading undergrounding downtown — wouldn't this
36 be more of a PG &E question/project rather than City?
37 Linda Buffo: Very complicated, City is very involved.
38
39 DIRECTOR'S REPORT: UGB update — request by two citizens was presented to
40 Council, proposal for second ballot measure was defeated; General Plan — working with
41 City Manager on preparing staff and budget commitment information to City Council;
42 Downtown undergrounding questions may be answered by City Engineer Craig Spaulding
43 (in audience). Cross Creek neighborhood meeting held at Community Center last night —
44 attended by residents (Village East and Shelter Hills residents adjacent to Cross Creek) —
Planning Commission Minutes - August 11, 1998
1 working towards solutions regarding fencing, rear yard drainage and pad elevations —
2 developer (Mardel) was represented.
3
4 COMMISSIONERS' REPORT: None.
5
6 CORRESPONDENCE: Correspondence from City/PG &E regarding utility pole
7 replacement; letter from Whitney Hall regarding St. Vincent's.
8
9 APPEAL STATEMENT: Was read.
10
11 LEGAL RECOURSE STATEMENT: Was noted on the agenda.
12
13
14 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
15
16 I. ST. VINCENT HIGH SCHOOL; 849 Keokuk Street, APN 006 - 021 -026 (dh).
17
18 Consideration of a variance to allow a reduction of the required off-street parking
19 (155 spaces instead of 213 spaces) in order to preserve riparian habitat and mature
20 oaks on Magnolia Avenue site.
21
22 Continued from the July 14, 1998, Planning Commission meeting.
23
24 Principal Planner Smith presented the staff report.
25
26 Discussion:
27
28 Commissioner Vieler: Proposed plan was an additional 213 spaces; additional parking
29 on Magnolia would be reduced?
30 Principal Planner Smith: Described reconfiguring of proposed parking, parking lot on
31 Magnolia is not proposed.
32 Proposing 38 more parking spaces around existing buildings.
33 Commissioner Healy: Initial proposal — did it fully comply with parking standards?
34 Were off site parking permits needed?
35 Principal Planner Smith: All parking is on the same parcel.
36 Commissioner Torliatt: Clarify letters in support (in staff report, supporters were
37 switched with dissenters).
38 Commissioner Vieler: Clarify existing parking adequacy if population of facility expands
39 in future.
40 Principal Planner Smith: No more parking spaces available on site. May wish to discuss
41 with representatives of the High School whether school expansion is likely.
42 Commissioner Broad: Did Traffic Engineer consider gym use only in determining
43 parking adequacy?
2
Planning Commission Minutes - August 11, 1998
1 Principal Planner Smith: Looked at total population of school (according to ITE),
2 cannot answer for Traffic Engineer; determined 155 spaces an appropriate ratio for entire
3 school including gym proposal.
4 Commissioner Healy: Must we grant a parking variance for a gym to go forward?
5 Principal Planner Smith: Yes, a Mitigated Negative Declaration must be approved
6 (Variance and Site Development Plan) to authorize development of this gym.
7 Planning Director Tuft: In response to Commissioner Broad's question, if this site was
8 developed as a gym only, 215 parking spaces would be required per Zoning Ordinance.
9 Commissioner Vieler: Requested client provide maximum occupancy of gymnasium.
10
11 The public hearing was opened.
12
13 Tim Sullivan, 800 Keokuk: Cherry and Keokuk — there is no creek on this lot, area is
14 not pastoral, mature eucalyptus, garbage, homeless persons; St. Vincent's should be
15 allowed to develop this part of site; parking problems on Keokuk already, lots of
16 speeding; without parking lot very unsafe; neighbors want this to be developed, St.
17 Vincent's is a great neighbor.
18 Kathy Jensen, 809 Keokuk: Supports request for variance; property always upgraded;
19 appreciate neighborhood meeting set up by church; St. Vincent's has been unfairly blamed
20 for parking problems; parking has not been a problem in the past; resident on Kingfish may.
21 have parking problems because of "no parking" signs not being visible; thanked City for
22 installing stop signs.
23 Barry Batchelor, 400 Cherry: Cannot park on Keokuk if trying to park after 8AM;
24 funeral home parking is very limited now; St. Vincent's good neighbor; additional stop
25 signs great but no enforcement; speeding problem every day; Cherry Street (towards
26 ballfield) will be impacted; activity at St. Vincent's stops when sun goes down, there will
27 be traffic with a gym, later into the evening; parking lot can be well laid out among the
28 creek area to avoid damage to trees; area is full of dry grass, St. Vincent's has been good
29 at keeping trash picked up, more activities with a gym will really impact quiet
30 neighborhood; shared parking with mortuary would be helpful; would like to see
31 gymnasium built, but maybe scaled down.
32 Commissioner Torliatt: St. Vincent's tried to propose sharing parking with mortuary,
33 but mortuary was not interested; parking will be reconfigured to add 38 parking spaces.
34 Frieda Kruse, 1115 Winding Ridge Road, Santa Rosa (speaking for aunt - Elsie
35 Kuehn, 624 Cherry Street): Master Plan issued in 1959, Use Permit was only issued for
36 one year, not acted on before deadline; cars park all over Cherry Street which is a one way
37 narrow street; Keokuk always lines up with cars, cars double- parked on both sides of
38 street; gym has 600 capacity — will increase problems on Cherry and Keokuk; gym was
39 master planned in 1959, but neighborhood was not told gym would be this size; views will
40 be blocked; invasion of personal property by blocking views; Petaluma Jr. High Gym
41 - comparable to this proposal; this is not a residential/historical use in this neighborhood;
42 not legally, morally right to place this right up to (Elsie's) property line; does not fit in this
43 historicaUresidential area; parking bad now, no one will be able to park anywhere; balls
44 always go through windows; Magnolia lot should be developed with gym, not this
3
Planning Commission Minutes - August 11, 1998
1 property, oaks on Magnolia lot are not healthy; take into consideration devaluation of
2 (Elsie's) property; would not like a gym like this in your backyard.
3 Elda Famulo, 73 Astoria Circle: Has child at St. Vincent's; Little League is the problem
4 regarding balls going through windows, not St. Vincent's; gym is needed by students.
5 Pat Darcey, 813 Keokuk: Gym is really needed, looking forward to project.
6 Marsha Jobst, 506 Lohrman Lane: Employed by St. Vincent's, has student attending
7 St. Vincent's; Magnolia/Keokuk lot would not be used by students; regarding Little
8 League, first has heard of problems with broken windows; school very willing to meet
9 with neighborhood on problems with Little League; usage will not change with new gym
10 except that they will be able to have home games in this gym; during normal games,
11 parking will be adequate, will not flow out onto street; has been excellent neighbor to
12 Elsie; graduation will still be at St. Vincent's Church (at least as long as Mr. Cavanaugh is
13 Principal); hopes Planning Commission can approve this project.
14 Commissioner Vieler: As an employee of St. Vincent's, what is reality of parking now?
15 What is ratio now?
16 Marsha Jobst: Many cars will be removed from street by these new parking spaces.
17 Sue Keller, 68 Kingston, Cotati: St. Vincent's Athletic Director — May be fewer
18 students driving with recent changes in State Law; only two games during the school year
19 would impact parking and cause overflows onto street;. has major problems getting
20 gymnasium time at other facilities; Tillman Hall is inferior facility; getting harder and
21 harder to find facilities, desperate need for this facility for many years; only high school in
22 area that doesn't have a gymnasium.
23 Gary Galloway, 6120 Tyler Court, Windsor: Teaches at St. Vincent's — Always a
24 good neighbor to Elsie and husband; students are not allowed to climb fence; enrollment
25 will not be increased with this gym, will stay the same size; need is great in Petaluma;
26 looking for available gym space is difficult, will share gym with other users, will be a
27 benefit to entire community.
28 Richard Heller, 601 Cherry St.: Likes this area because it is quiet; invested in excess of
29 $400,000 in his house, would Commissioners like a parking lot or a gym in their
30 backyard? Cherry Street is very narrow; students are parking on street; likes neighborhood
31 to remain quiet; a new building in this area could damage the infrastructure of this area;
32 nothing should be built, use permit ran out in 1960.
33 Gina Benedetti - Petnic, 511 D Street: Engineer of Record for project (also an alumni of
34 St. Vincent's, born in this area); use permit was issued in 1959 with solid thinking; good
35 summary of neighborhood concerns; staff address one -year statute of limitation?
36 Principal Planner Smith — Two approvals in 1959 — Master Plan and Use Permit —
37 based on the shape on map labeled gymnasium, staff believed proposal is consistent; staffs
38 interpretation that this plan is still in effect is based on the approval of a Master Plan
39 authorizing phased development of the site.
40 Commissioner Torliatt: Explained her interpretation of Use Permit expiration time
41 frame:
42 Principal Planner Smith: Master Plan separate from Use Permit.
43 Commissioner Vieler: Use Permit current at present time?
44 Staff. Yes, because the High School is existing and has continued to develop per Master
45 Plan.
E
Planning Commission Minutes - August 11, 1998
1 Gina Benedetti - Petnic: School has stayed consistent with Master Plan throughout the
2 years; no development on Magnolia area (northern portion) was ever proposed; school
3 does not want to expand with more students, therefore City .will not see an increase in
4 traffic with more student enrollment; more parking spaces are required today than in 1959;
5 has parking up to 157 spaces now, may be able to find a few more; if square footage of
6 gymnasium were calculated using only playing floor area (no showers, offices, etc.) much
7 less parking would be required; St. Vincent's not allowed to make improvements/clean-up
8 in creek area, there are some old, lovely trees in this creek area, they need to be respected;
9 regarding parking complaints, sensitive to parking in neighborhood, many of the parking
10 issues are coming from cemetery and mortuary; applicant requested mortuary participate
11 in shared parking, no interest from mortuary; proposed addition of 40 parking spaces will
12 reduce on- street parking impacts; St. Vincent's has always been a good neighbor to Elsie
13 and others in neighborhood; money is being raised by parents and a low- interest loan will
14 be obtained through Catholic Diocese, not a rich school; expensive homes in area were
15 purchased with existing school next door; regarding subterranean creek mentioned earlier,
16 no mention in Soils Report.
17 Commissioner Vieler: (to star Regarding parking requirements, when an upgrade
18 occurs, new requirements go into effect?
19 Planning Director Tuft: Existence of previous Master Plan has been respected; gym was
20 shown, but size has been proposed to be expanded.
21 Commissioner Vieler: Because proposal is larger, that is why more parking required?
22 What is ratio of seating to square footage?
23 Gina Benedetti - Petnic: Seating might take up one -third of square footage of playing
24 area.
25 Commissioner Healy: What is plan for access to parking? From Cherry Street?
26. Concerns with parking layout.
27 Gina Benedetti - Petnic: Proposed parking will be closer than any existing to classrooms
28 and will definitely be used; described emergency service access only at Cherry Street, will
29 try to work further with Sonoma County Water Agency.
30 Commissioner Healy: Will back parking be used?
31 Answer: Will be assigned to staff. -
32 Stephanie McAllister (project Landscape Architect): Parking lot laid out to avoid as
33 many trees'as possible; many native oaks on this site, only one tree identified as being in
34 poor health; Magnolia Ave. road widening may require removal of many trees; large' oak
35 in center of site would require retaining walls.
36 Commissioner Vieler: Removal of trees on Magnolia, is that a City project, or result of
37 this proposal?
38 Stephanie McAllister: Combination of road widening and Magnolia parking lot is the
39 impact being discussed.
40 Commissioner Vieler: (to staff) Clarify if trees bordering Magnolia may be removed
41 anyway road widening.
42 Principal Planner Smith: Described status of native trees and concluded that through
43 the C/P design process an attempt would be made to save the trees.
44 Commissioner Vieler: Will 38 parking spaces proposed require removal of any of these
45 trees? -
Planning Commission Minutes - August 11, 1998
1 Stephanie McAllister: No.
2 Lou`Roberts: 751 Cherry Street: Sympathetic to need for gym; concerns regarding
3 noise, traffic, increased vandalism; some problems with drugs, other illegal activities in
4 parking lot if constructed along Magnolia.
5
6 Public hearing closed.
7
8 Commission Discussion:
9 Commissioner Broad: Reviewed this project at SPARC; complimented applicant on
10 improvements since SPARC review; problem going back to 1959 Master Plan, if school is
11 relying on an old document, then project should be built as originally proposed; if they
12 require a larger building, Master Plan should be revised; not same proposal as discussed in
13 1959; cannot adopt a Mitigated Neg. Dec. if there are environmental impacts that will
14 result from this project (not mitigated); page 9, regarding views, different footprint than
15 originally proposed, home is closer than indicated; regarding noise, introduction of an
16 evening source of noise into neighborhood, vehicular noise will be introduced; regarding
17 traffic. Traffic Engineer should have indicated no additional traffic generated based on
18 gym.alone; several potential impacts identified by neighbors, cannot state that there will be
19 no impacts, there is not enough information to insure no impacts.
20 Commissioner Vieler: One concern regarding trees, utilities will be undergrounded when
21 Magnolia is widened, might change whole proposal, needs more information; sympathizes
22 with school in need for gym; agrees with some of Commissioner Broad's comments wants
23 to see gym built, but more work on plans needed; proposed increase of parking spaces will
24 be good for neighborhood; this is an in -fill project, necessary addition; use of gymnasium
25 with resulting noise is an acceptable reality; can this be allowed with conditions placed for
26 review in future? There could be impacts in the future that could require additional
27 parking; could that be added to the Variance? Prefers to see specific review time on this
28 project for parking requirements; approves of this project, would like to see it go forward
29 with revisions.
30 Commissioner Feibusch: I have one concern, regarding the trees - there is a Rule 20
31 which is a planned undergrounding of electric facilities on Magnolia, I know it's on the
32 books somewhere, but I don't know when it's scheduled, but it's a real important issue in
33 this ,case because it may change the whole way we look at this proposal as far as trees and
34 such and how that's banked through that area, so I need some more information on this
35 issue before making any decisions; for the Commissioner's to understand that, PG &E will
36 give money to the City to underground these facilities; I'm in agreement with the school, 1
37 think they need a gym facility; we are short these type of facilities in Petaluma; the
38 property in question (landscaping area), we could look for some improvement in that area
39 in the future, depending on when the widening takes place; agrees with some of
40 Commissioner Broad's comments; wants to see gym constructed, let's be realistic and
41 construct something useful for that school today, don't shortchange the project; looking at
42 proposed spaces, there is an increase of 38 spaces, improvement for neighborhood, will
43 eliminate some problems; this is an in -fill project, adding a facility to an existing area, in-
44 fills will be tougher and tougher to do as we go on, but it's necessary; a necessary addition
rel
Planning Commission. Minutes - August 11, 1998
1 especially to a school like this and possibly the neighborhood, where they might open it up
2 to the neighborhood also, and not just the school.
3 Commissioner Torliatt: Lives in a small subdivision, adjacent to ballfields; wants to see
4 area at corner of Magnolia and Keokuk preserved; believes parking will be improved by
5 this project on day -to -day basis; concerns with site distance to Elsie's house; can building
6 be lower to allow better site distance from existing house; access onto Cherry Street to
7 parking lot is only for emergency; regarding double- parking on Cherry Street, separate
8 issue, but should be looked at by City; need for another gymnasium desperate; would
9 benefit City as a whole; does not want neighborhood impacted; open space easement or
10 park designation added to creek area, maintain habitat, restore habitat; if parking lot not
11 built, monies should be set aside for habitat restoration; neighborhood should benefit from
12 the proposal; construction time, will there be a staging area for construction to minimize
13 impacts to neighborhood?
14 Commissioner Healy: Make finding, part of reason for Variance is to preserve habitat;
15 proposed north lot is not in a place where it would be used, too remote; Parking lot design
16 professional should relook the current parking proposal; condition that Cherry Street exit
17 is emergency only; any interest to restrict pedestrian access from Cherry Street? New
18 parking lot should be constructed before gym is constructed (applicant indicated that was
19 the plan).
20 Commissioner Thompson: Condition variance to review parking adequacy in certain
21 amount of time.
22 Gina Benedetti- Petnic: Indicated that gym has been lowered by 4 feet from original
23 plans; considerably lower than what is allowed in CUP; lowest grade point at front parking
24 lot used as finished floor elevation.
25 Commissioner Thompson: Problems with mail delivery on Cherry should be explored;
26 concerns with noise generation.
27 Principal Planner Smith: Summarized consensus with additional conditions of approval;
28 Add: require project to return with performance standard in 4 -5 years for review and
29 renotice.
30 Commissioner Torliatt: Then parking will have to be created on the sensitive site?
31 Principal Planner Smith: If proposed parking all on south side of creek is adequate, the
32 High School will not have to construct additional parking spaces.
33 Commissioner Vieler: If parking really does become an issue (in five years), there are a
34 number of ways of addressing problems.
35 Commissioner Broad: Defer additional requirement for parking, but require re- review at
36 a later date.
37 Principal Planner Smith: Add condition :Variance approved with concept that ultimate
38 satisfaction of parking requirement deferred to a later date; explore further lowering of
39 building for view preservation; add condition deferring establishment or open space
40 easement for preservation of creek site until future ruling of adequacy of parking.
41 Commissioner Healy: Variance is being issued with the understanding that the creek
42 area is to be preserved.
43 Commissioner Torliatt: If site were cleaned up and worked on, might be a benefit to
44 entire neighborhood.
7
Planning Commission Minutes - August 11, 1998
1 Commissioner Broad: Add condition to indicate intention that this area needs to be
2 preserved.
3 Principal Planner Smith: Add condition: St. Vincent's along with appropriate City
4 agencies should work to clean/restore the drainage channel.
5 Commissioner Torliatt: How will additional storm water runoff be handled?
6 Principal Planner Smith: Amount of impervious surface very minimal considering
7 construction is on existing impervious surfaces.
8 Commissioner Torliatt: Does not want to burden this project with someone else's
9 problems, but this area needs to be restored.
10 Principal Planner Smith: Add condition: staging of construction vehicles on high school
11 property; construction hours shall adhere to the existing Zoning Ordinance; add condition
12 requiring parking/traffic control during large events; add condition: reaffirming Cherry
13 Street access is for emergency vehicle access only.
14 Commissioner Torliatt: Does not want to restrict access for pedestrian/bicycle access.
15 Commissioner Broad: Will building be air conditioned?
16 Gina'Benedetti- Petnic: Not air conditioned, but air handling units should be able to
17 handle air without requiring windows and doors to be open; skylights will be fixed.
18 Principal Planner Smith: City will look at double - parking on Cherry Street through
19 Traffic Advisory Committee.
20
21 A motion was made by Commissioner Feibusch and seconded by Commissioner Vieler to
22 adopt„ a Mitigated Negative Declaration, approve a Variance to allow a reduction of the
23 required off - street parking at St. Vincent High School to 155 parking spaces (one space
24 per 2.6 persons), and recommend to SPARC approval of the site, architectural, and
25 landscape plans for a proposed 12,900 sq. ft. gymnasium and parking lot improvements
26 based on the findings and subject to the following amended conditions:
27
28 Commissioner Bennett: Absent
29 Commissioner Broad: No
30 Commissioner Feibusch: Yes
31 Commissioner Healy: Yes
32 Commissioner Torliatt: Yes
33 Commissioner Thompson: Yes
34 Commissioner Vieler: Yes
35
36 Findings for Variance
37
38 1. There are peculiar and unusual conditions inherent in the property in question
39 sufficient to cause a hardship, and that such conditions are not common to all or
40 most of the properties in the immediate area.
41
42 The subject property is unusual in its dichotomy. The north property is an expansive and
43 untouched naturally beautiful habitat with very mature and healthy native trees adjacent to
44 a lush riparian habitat that divides it from the contrasting southern portion of the property,
45 which is developed with a very intensive campus use. To develop this currently pristine
8
Planning Commission Minutes - August 11, 1998
1 environment into a large paved parking facility would have significant and irreparable
2 impact on this unique property.
3
4 2. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the owner
5 exists. In this context, personal, family or financial difficulties, loss of prospective
6 profits, and neighboring violations are no hardships justifying a variance.
7
8 The peculiar contradictory condition of the property is existing. It is inherent to the
9 natural geography and topography of the land. The steeply sloping creek banks and the
10 native mature oaks to the north in contrast with the gently sloping south property
11 surrounded by more intense development describe the inherent hardship of treating one
12 part of the property in the same fashion as the other. This situation clearly has not been
13 created by any act of the owner.
14
15 3. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial
16 property rights possessed by other properties in the same zoning district and in the
17 vicinity and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege of
18 the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors.
19
20 The variance requested is for a reduced parking requirement from that defined by the
21 current Zoning ordinance. Specifically, the applicant is requesting that only 155 on -site
22 parking spaces be required. This provides the opportunity to develop all of the campus
23 parking in the southern portion of the property without the intense development of the
24 more sensitive northern portion for a parking facility. This will allow the preservation and
25 enjoyment of the existing forested meadow for the community. The school would like to
26 have the option of developing a much less invasive accessory use — perhaps recreation —
27 in that area some day. Perhaps a jogging/exercise "Par Course" integrated with a bike
28 path or some other recreational space developed in that area, might be an appropriate use
29 consistent with the environment and neighborhood.
30
31 This variance, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege of the owner not enjoyed
32 by the neighbors. No doubt some on- street overflow parking will occur during signature
33 athletic events. However, it should be noted, that this is very much the case with the
34 frequent funeral and memorial ceremonies and ensuing parking congestion experienced as
35 a result of other neighbor's business activities.
36
37 4. That the authorizing of such a variance shall not be of substantial detriment to
38 adjacent property, and will not materially impair the purposes of the Ordinance or
39 the public interest.
40
41 The authorizing of this variance will not be of a detriment to the adjacent properties,
42 indeed it will maintain the natural beauty of the neighborhood while still allowing for a
43 32% increase over the existing campus parking — and in a location where it truly will be
44 used. (It can easily be argued that if parking were provided at the northern property, it
45 would seldom be used unless and until all on- street parking closer to the campus entrance
Vol
Planning Commission Minutes - August 11, 1998
1 on Keokuk Street were occupied.) The increased parking of approximately 38 spaces
2 proposed on -site will relieve the Keokuk Street overflow parking serving to improve the
3 ambiance of the neighborhood.
4
5 The intent of the Zoning Ordinance with regard to parking is "to reduce street congestion
6 and' traffic hazards in the City of Petaluma by incorporating safe, adequate, attractively
7 designed facilities for off - street parking and loading as an integral part of every use of land
8 in the City" This variance allows the City to meet the test of their ordinance while
9 celebrating the unique and natural environment for the good of the public interest.
10
11 Findings for Approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact:
12
13 1. An Initial Study of the project's environmental impacts was completed and proper
14 notice provided in accordance with the California Environmental Quality act
15 (CEQA).
16
17 2. Based upon the June 19, 1998, Initial Study and any comments received, there is
18 no substantial evidence that the project as mitigated would have a significant
19 adverse impact on the environment.
20
21 3. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Negative Declaration and considered
22 any and all comments before making a decision on the project.
23
24 4. The project is not located on a site listed on any Hazardous Wasted Site List
25 compiled by the State pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.
26
27 Mitigation Measures:
28
29 1. The applicant shall submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan prepared by a
30 registered professional engineer as an integral art of the
�' p grading plan. The
31 Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall be subject to review and approval by the
32 City Engineering and Planning Departments, prior to issuance of a grading permit.
33 The Plan shall include temporary erosion control measures to be used during
34 construction of cut and fill slopes, excavation for foundations, and other grading
35 operations at the site to prevent discharge of sediment and contaminants into the
36 drainage system. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall include the
37 following measures as applicable:
38
39 a. Throughout the construction process, disturbance of groundcover shall be
40 minimized and the existing vegetation shall be retained to the extent
41 possible to reduce soil erosion. All construction and grading activities,
42 including short -term needs (equipment staging areas, storage areas, and
43 field office locations) shall minimize the amount of land area disturbed.
44 Whenever possible, existing disturbed areas shall be used for such
45 purposes.
10
Planning Commission Minutes - August 11, 1998
1
2 b. All drainage ways, wetland areas and creek channels shall be protected
3 from silt and sediment in storm runoff through the use of silt fences,
4 diversion berms, and check dams. All exposed surface areas shall be
5 mulched and reseeded and all cut and fill slopes shall be protected with hay
6 mulch and/or erosion control blankets as appropriate.
7
8 C. Material and equipment for implementation of erosion control measures
9 shall be on -site by October 31st. Upon approval by the Petaluma City
to Engineer, extensions for short-term grading may be allowed. Special
11 erosion control measures may be required by the City Engineer in
12 connection with any specially permitted rainy season grading.
13
14 d. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant shall submit
15 a detailed schedule for field inspection of work in progress to ensure that
16 all applicable codes, conditions and mitigation measures are being properly
17 implemented through construction of the project.
18
19 2. Grading and construction equipment operated during construction activities shall
20 be properly mufflered and maintained to minimize emissions. Equipment shall be
21 turned off when no in use.
22
23 3. All trucks exporting fill or debris from the site shall be properly tarped to avoid
24 loss of material and dust emissions.
25
26 4. If necessary, the site shall be watered for dust control during windy periods.
27
28 5. All construction activities shall be performed in a manner that minimiz the
29 sediment and/or pollutants entering directly or indirectly into the storm drain
30 system or ground water. The applicant shall incorporate the following provisions
31 into the construction plans and specifications, to be verified by the Planning
32 Department, prior to issuance of grading or building permits.
33
34 a. Parking lot runoff shall be conveyed through vegetated swales or
35 streamside buffer areas separating the formal landscape areas from the
36 creek channel and storm drains.
37
38 b. The applicant shall designate construction staging areas and areas for
39 storage of any hazardous materials (i.e. motor oil, fuels, paints, etc.) used
40 during construction on the improvement plans. All construction staging
41 areas shall be located away from any stream and adjacent drainage areas to
42 prevent runoff from construction areas from entering into the drainage
43 system. Areas designated for storage of hazardous materials shall include
44 proper containment features to prevent contaminants from entering
45 drainage areas in the event of a spill or leak.
11
Planning Commission Minutes - August 11, 1998
2 C. No debris, soil, silt, sand, cement, concrete or washings thereof or other
3 construction related materials or wastes, oil or petroleum products or other
4 organic or earthern material shall be allowed to enter any drainage system.
5 All discarded material including washings and any accidental spills shall be
6 removed and disposed of at an approved disposal site. The applicant shall
7 designate appropriate disposal methods and/or facilities on the construction
8 plans or in the specifications.
9
10 6. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit or approval of any
11 improvement plans for earthwork within any creek corridor, proof of authorization
12 from all applicable responsible agencies including, but not limited to, the California
13 Department of Fish and Game and the Sonoma County Water Agency, shall be
14 submitted by the applicant to the Planning Department.
15
16 7. Wetlands, significant trees and riparian vegetation shall be retained and protected
17 from damage during construction. The dripline of all trees and riparian vegetation
18 and the footprint of wetland areas shall be accurately depicted on the grading and
19 construction plans as sensitive . areas to be avoided and protected during
20 construction. No grading, earthwork, fill, compaction, drainage or equipment shall
21 be allowed within the sensitive areas. Protective fencing shall be installed at the
22 dripline of trees or wetland boundary, and verified by the Planning Department
23 prior to issuance of grading or building permits within sensitive areas.
24
25 8. All construction activities shall comply with applicable Performance Standards in
26 the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code.
27
28 9. All construction activities shall be limited to 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Monday
29 through Friday and 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM on Saturdays. Construction shall be
30 prohibited on Sundays and all holidays recognized by the City of Petaluma. The
31 Applicant's telephone number shall be made available for noise complaints.
32
33 10. All construction equipment powered by internal combustion engines shall be
34 properly muffled and maintained to minimize noise. Equipment shall be turned off
35 when not in use.
36
37 11. All lights shall conform to City Performance Standards (e.g. no direct glare, no
38 poles in excess of 20 feet height, etc.) and shall compliment building architecture.
39 A Final Lighting Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department
40 prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
41
42 42.
Wetlands, sigpifi
43
Cl
44
J -..e df
areas
one ef all trees and g
shall
A
Planning Commission Minutes - August 11, 1998
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
12. The driving aisle from the existing parking lot back to the newly proposed 38
spaces to two lanes shall be widened to two lanes and eliminate the choker, or an
alternative solution shall be designated, subject to staff review and approval.
Cherry Street access shall remain limited to emergency vehicle access.
13. All requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be met, including:
a. Provide one fire extinguisher, 2Al0BC type, for each 3,000 square feet of
floor space, and/or a maximum travel distance of 75 feet from the
extinguisher
b. Post address at or near main entry door - minimum four (4) inch letters on
contrasting background.
C. This business will require an annual fire department permit for assembly.
The permit fee of $90.00 is due and payable prior to commencement of
use.
d. The building shall be protected by an automatic fire extinguishing system as
required by the Uniform Fire Code.
e. Provide to the Fire Marshal's Office a minimum of two (2) sets of fire
sprinkler plans and calculations for approval and issuance of permit prior to
installation of system.
f. Sprinkler system shall be provided with central station alarm monitoring
which shall notify the Fire Department in the event of water flow. In
addition, a local alarm shall be provided on the exterior and interior of the
building.
g. Activation of the fire sprinkler system shall sound an interior alarm that will
notify all occupied spaces.
h. Provide an exit sign over all required exit doors.
i. Emergency exit lighting shall be provided at or near all exits and as
designated by the Fire Marshal's office.
J. All emergency lighting, exit sign lights, shall have two separate sources of
power as required in the Building Code.
k. Provide panic hardware on all required exit doors.
1. Provide access, minimum twenty (2) feet, exclusive of on- street parking,
and all asphalt surfaces with thirteen feet -six inches (13'6 ") vertical height
clearance.
M. 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.
13
Planning Commission Minutes - August 11, 1998
1 n. Provide electrical conduit from post indicator to valve to alarm panel
2 location for tamper switch as underground improvements are being
3 installed.
4 0. Contractor shall provide the Fire Marshal's office with two (2) sets of plans
5 for the underground fire service main for permit approval prior to
6 commencement of work.
7 P. A two -inch clearance shall be provided around fire sprinkler lateral and
8 riser at foundation and floor slab.
9
10 14. This project shall be subject to the application of Special Development Fees,
11 including: storm drain impact and water and sewer hook -up fees.
12
13 15. For all construction activities, potential to uncover unknown archeological
14 resources exist. Should any artifacts, cultural remains or potential resources be
15 encountered during construction activities, work in the area of the find shall cease
16 and the construction contractor shall notify the Director of Planning.
17 Archaeological features include artifacts of stone, shell, bone, or other natural
18 materials. Associations of artifacts such as hearth, house floors and dumps.
19 Historic artifacts potentially include all by- products of human land use greater than
20 50 years of age. Human burials, if encountered, require the notification of the
21 County Coroner in addition to the monitoring archaeologist. The City shall
22 consult with a qualified cultural resource specialist to evaluate the fine. If the
23 suspected remains are determined to be potentially significant, all work in the
.24 vicinity shall be halted until mitigation measures are incorporated into the design,
25 or removal of the resource has been accomplished in accordance with
26 recommendations by the archeologist. The Applicant shall comply with all
27 mitigation recommendations of the archeologist prior to commencing work in the
28 vicinity of the archeological finds. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs
29 associated with consulting cultural resource specialist.
30
31 16. Construction vehicles shall be staged on the High School property south of the
32 creek corridor.
33
34 17. Parking /traffic control shall be required during large events (any event that might
35 attract 400 or more people).
36
37 18. l Parking adequacy to be monitored for five years with recall and renotice at the
38 end of this five year period if parking problems are noted.
39
40 19. This Variance is approved with the understanding that the creek area is to be
41 preserved and if an additional parking lot is not needed steps shall be taken to
42 permanently restrict the riparian creek area from future development.
43
44
45
14
Planning Commission Minutes - August 11, 1998
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
CONTINUED COMMISSION BUSENESS:
11 HOLMBERG UPDATE
(Continued from the Planning Commission meeting of July 28, 1998.)
Associate Civil Engineer Spaulding: Described site conditions and water elevations
before and after flood control project work, wants to get an in- depth look at Corps plans
to give definitive answer to physical improvements.
Commissioner Healy: Even a 6" change in elevation to 84" pipe could cause significant
impacts.
Commissioner Feibusch: Cut weeds and examine grading.
Planning Director Tuft: Options could include looking at a larger zero - net -fill area and
giving the Planning Director authorization to say no to these types of fill and grading
requests. At present, grading permits are ministerial subject to review and approval for
applicability to standards, no discretionary authority to deny.
Commissioner Thompson: Questions regarding hours of operation.
Commissioner Healy: Wants answers to drainage and flooding issues; have staff
measure noise; examine dust control.
Commissioner Broad: Build a solid record before bringing this back; how much time
does staff need?
Planning Director Tuft: 30 -60 days.
John Chaney, 55 Rocca Drive: Grading plan/permit has never been approved; "v" ditch
has not been approved and finaled.
Commissioner Healy: Is the "v" ditch adequately sized?
Associate Civil Engineer Spaulding: SCWA and engineer's (Bonnie Diefendorf) letters
of approval show design and improvements have been installed correctly.
Kevin Callanan, 51 Rocca: Shut this project down now; institute a clause for hours of
operation.
Commissioner Healy: If out of compliance again, CUP will be revoked.
Commissioner Broad: Look at all areas.of CUP to look at tightening operations of use,
develop a monitoring program.
III. COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS TO:
Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee - New Appointment:
Commissioner Feibusch
Central Petaluma Specific Plan - New Appointments: Commissioners Healy
and Vieler
Corona Reach Specific Plan - New Appointments: Commissioners Feibusch
and Broad
Petaluma Bicycle Advisory Committee - New Appointment: Commissioner
Thompson
Tree Advisory Committee - New Appointment: Commissioner Healy
15
Planning Commission Minutes - August 11, 1998
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
IV. GOAL SETTING
Discussion and possible direction to staff on Commission goals.
This item was continued to a future Planning Commission meeting (to be
scheduled for review when all Commissioners are present).
V. LIAISON REPORTS
None.
ADJOURNMENT: 11:30 PM
s:/pc/min utes/min0 811. doc
16