Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 01/12/1999Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 1 CITY OF PETALUMA, CA 2 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 3 JANUARY 12,1999,7:00 PM 4 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5 CITY HALL, 11 ENGLISH STREET 6 PETALUMA, CA 94952 7 Telephone 707/778 -4301 / Fax 707/778 -4498 8 E -Mail planning*dpetaluma.cxus 9 Web Page http: / /www.cLpetaluma.ca.us 10 11 Commissioners: Present: Bennett*, Broad, Healy, Vieler (two seats vacant) 12 Absent: Feibusch 13 14 * Acting Chairperson 15 16 Staff: Vincent C. Smith AicP, Acting Planning Director 17 Elizabeth Dunn mcr, Assistant Planner 18 Craig Spaulding, Civil Engineer 19 20 21 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 22 APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Minutes of December 8, 1998 were approved with 23 corrections to pages 31 and 32. 24 25 PUBLIC COMMENT: Diane Reilly - Shared with Planning Commission that she had 26 been a City Council candidate without much government experience; read about issues 27 and watched Petaluma Community Access Television; was hesitant to come to speak at -28 public meetings (also, parking lot is not well lighted); was told she probably shouldn't 29 speak at public meetings because she might infringe on their business; the public should 30 not feel intimidated, some feel that way. Chairman Bennett indicated that Commission 31 was pleased to have any member of the public speak before the Commission and 32 encouraged it. 33 34 DIRECTOR'S REPORT: None. 35 COMMISSIONERS' REPORT: Commissioner Healy - Good to be back (as Council 36 Representative); City Council will name two new Planning Commissioners on February 1; 37 Stormwater Ordinance will be reviewed by Council in February. Commissioner Bennett 38 - First section of Riverwalk has been installed (McNear Landing). 39 40 CORRESPONDENCE: Letter from Joseph Tinney regarding Premo Subdivision; letter 41 from Larry Jonas regarding Premo Subdivision; letter from Shawn Montoya regarding 42 Martin Historic Plaza. 43 44 APPEAL STATEMENT: Was read. 45 LEGAL RECOURSE STATEMENT: Was noted on the agenda. Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 1 2 3 NEW BUSINESS - PUBLIC HEARING: 4 5 I. PREMO SUBDIVISION, 398 Sunnyslope Road, File No's 6 REZ98011/TSM98002 (ED). 7 8 The proposed development is to rezone and subdivide a vacant 10.4 acre parcel 9 into ten (10) lots for residential development. Semi - custom homes are proposed 10 for the lots that range in size from .5 to 1.5 acres. Three lots are proposed along 11 Sunnyslope Road with Lots 1 and 2 sharing a driveway access easement. Lot 3 12 would share an access easement with Lot 1 of Suncrest Estates to the south. 13 Access to the remaining lots of the proposed subdivision is to be from the 14 extension of Wallenberg Way, the access road for Suncrest Estates to the south.. 15 The zoning is currently PUD under the Sunnyslope PUD, adopted in 1991. The 16 proposed zoning remains PUD, with a site specific Planned Unit Development 17 (PUD) Plan proposed to address setbacks, allowed and prohibited uses, 18 architectural design guidelines, and landscaping and fencing requirements. 19 20 Assistant Planner Dunn presented the staff report. 21 22 The public hearing was opened. 23 24 SPEAKERS: 25 26 Chairman Bennett - Does staff have concerns with this project? (No) 27 Craig Spaulding - Noted corrections to Engineering Conditions. 28 Tom Sanborn - Applicant - Thanked staff for being supportive; many differences between 29 project adjacent project ( Suncrest) and this project; drawings indicate conservation area 30 (no development); displayed aerial photos showing topography, road configuration in 31 relationship to adjacent project; project designed in accord with Sunnyslope EIR. _ 32 Commissioner Vieler - What is connection between Suncrest Estates and this project? 33 Tom Sanborn - Proposed street design benefits both projects; more environmentally 34 sound. 35 Vincent Smith - Suncrest Estates was approved with this road alternative as an option. 36 Commissioner Healy - Concerned with visual impacts over crest of hill from D Street 37 Extension. 38 Tom Sanborn - Visual screening provided from existing large trees; trail easement was 39 included by Mr. Premo without any monetary compensation. 40 John Fitzgerald - 114 Suncrest Hill - Continue policy of open field fencing on upper 41 slopes (include deed restrictions); supports sidewalk on only one side of street; try to keep 42 as rural a look as possible; supports 24' wide streets - adequate for emergency vehicle 43 access; opposed to access trail from (Maxwell) project; trail doesn't lead anywhere, no 44 reason for trail, not an asset. 2 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 1 Janice Cunningham - 108 Suncrest Hill - Agrees with John Fitzgerald's comments; 2 questions height for new construction - look at height limitations; existing neighborhood 3 homes are one -story; concerns regarding 30 foot setback to Suncrest Hill Drive - increase 4 to 507; concerns with density; existing house at top of hill can be seen from D Street - 5 lots 7 &8 may be visible if there are no height restrictions. 6 Larry Jonas - Worked with Tom Sanborn for a long time; worked toward extending 7 road; supports 24' wide street; regrets agreeing to a 32' wide street in Suncrest Estates; 8 upper lot of Suncrest Estates has a 120' rear yard setback, Initial Study recommends 9 house should be sited toward front of the lot, decrease building setback to 100' at rear; 10 open field fencing is suggested, it should be a condition; disagrees with some lot line 11 layouts; move Lot 9 to where Lot 5 is shown; move Lot 10, giving access to his lot at a 12 different location; all properties would then look into an open field area; have an option to 13 provide a scenic area in the center of the subdivision; consider alternative lot layout; 14 discussion of views from Sunnyslope Road; street trees along Sunnyslope should be 30' 15 apart and should be Valley Oaks to be consistent with Suncrest Estates. 16 Vincent Smith - Regarding 120' setback (on Mr. Jonas' lot), setback was determined by 17 Planning staff (estimated). 18 J.T. Wick - CSW Stuber - Stroeh, Applicant Planning/Engineering Consultant - Discussed 19 25' height limits for upper homes - full SPARC review is proposed on upper lots. 20 Commissioner Healy - Performance Standards should be in place indicating that homes 21 would not be visible from D Street. 22 J.T. Wick - Performance Standards acceptable; full SPARC review is most appropriate 23 way to address privacy concerns; open field fencing is proposed; does not agree with 24 proposed lot reconfiguration presented by Mr. Jonas. 25 Commissioner Vieler - Would you agree to a 25' height limit? (Yes) 26 Commissioner Broad - Questions regarding height restrictions; why is grading being 27 proposed instead of retaining walls? 28 J.T. Wick - Fill slope will be kept out of driplines of uphill trees. 29 Commissioner Healy - Would the joint driveway on lots 1 and 2 be sized so backing 30 wouldn't be necessary (onto Sunnyslope)? 31 Tom Sandborn - Yes, deed restrictions could be placed on those properties to require 32 off - street parking and turn- arounds. - 33 J.T. Wick - Landscaping will be taken care of by homeowners; private fire line requiring a 34 Homeowner's Association would be a huge burden. 35 36 The public hearing was closed. 37 38 Commissioner Healy - Are we discussing easements or improvements for the trail? 39 (answer - easement) need to require a Performance Standard requiring zero - visibility from 40 D Street; regarding configuration of lots backing Suncrest Hill - lots 5,6,7 - setbacks could 41 be increased slightly; hours of construction should be simplified, allow an hour later each 42 day; street design is ok/consistent; utilities along Sunnyslope need to be undergrounded; 43 agrees with finding an alternative to maintain the fire line that is acceptable to City 44 Engineer. 45 Commissioner Broad - Where will the water from this project end up? 3 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 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 Craig Spaulding - Water goes to Thompson Creek - exits down -river from D or H Street; Water Agency review and approval is required. Commissioner Broad - Have lots 1 through 3 been reviewed by City Traffic Engineer? Craig Spaulding - Yes, no concerns. John Fitzgerald - Hydrology Study for this project and Suncrest Project were done together and approved by Sonoma County Water Agency. Commissioner Vieler - How will this impact flow into the river? John Fitzgerald - Additional flow from this project is not in the boundary that would increase flows. Commissioner Broad - Does not object to roadway widths, sidewalk on one side of street; 8AM to 5PM construction hours; add street tree condition (one every 30 feet) consistent with adjacent project; General Plan policy regarding ridgeline protection - given size of building envelopes, don't allow to extend up to ridgeline; Performance Standard requirement acceptable; trees may not give enough visual screening; include in SPARC review for lots 4 through 7 provision for landscaping within setback to insure privacy; agrees with open field fencing; does not need to have subdivision redesigned; include turn- around condition. Commissioner Vieler - Agrees with Commissioner Healy regarding requirement for story- poles; regarding Homeowner's Association requirement - Engineering and Water Departments should run a projection on expenses to maintain the fire line, charge buyers once up front, no Homeowner's Association; leave construction hours as is; tree planting on Sunnyshope should be 30' o.c.; applauds Mr. Premo on donating trail easement. Commissioner Healy - Performance Standard requirement would allow flexibility. Vincent Smith - What point would we measure from? Commissioner Healy - Homes not to be visible from any point on D Street Extension. Commissioner Broad - If we require story- poles, that would preclude written representation; building setback lines can be increased to meet Performance Standards; Engineering staff should look again to see if an acceptable solution to fire line maintenance can be found. Chairman Bennett - Construction hours should be 8AM - 5PM, Monday through Friday only. A motion was made by Commissioner Healy and seconded by Commissioner Broad to recommend to the City Council adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of a Rezoning, Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map, and Planned Unit District Plan based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions listed below: Commissioner Broad: Yes Commissioner Feibusch: Absent Commissioner Healy: Yes Commissioner Vieler: Yes Acting Chair Bennett: Yes 4 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 1 Findings for Approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental 2 Impact: 3 4 1. An Initial Study was prepared, proper notice was provided in accordance with 5 CEQA and local guidelines for the approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration to 6 establish this use. 7 8 2. Based upon the Initial Study, dated December 23, 1998, and any comments 9 received, there is no substantial evidence that the project as mitigated would have 10 a significant effect upon the environment. 11 12 3. As concluded in the attached Initial Study, dated December 23, 1998, the project 13 does not have the potential to affect wildlife resources as defined in the Fish and 14 Game code, either individually or cumulatively. 15 16 4. The project is not located on a site listed on any Hazardous Waste Site List 17 compiled by the State pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. 18 19 5. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Negative Declaration and considered 20 any and all comments before making a recommendation on the project. 21 22 6. A Mitigation and Monitoring Program has been prepared to insure compliance 23 with the adopted mitigation measures for the Premo Subdivision. 24 25 7. The record of proceedings of the decision on the project is available for public 26 review at the City of Petaluma, Planning Department, City Hall, 11 English Street, 27 Petaluma, California. 28 29 Mitigation Measures 30 31 All mitigation measures, as identified in the Initial Study filed December 23, 1998 for the 32 Premo Subdivision proposal, are herein - incorporated. - 33 34 Findings for the Rezoning to Planned Unit Development (PUD) 35 36 1. The proposed Amendment to Zoning Ordinance No. 1072 N.C.S., to classify and 37 rezone a 10.4 acre parcel of Assessor's Parcel Number 019- 203 -006, to be known 38 as the Premo Subdivision, to Planned Unit Development (PUD) is in general 39 conformity with the Petaluma General Plan and Sunnyslope Assessment and 40 Annexation District Plan. 41 42 The proposed density of ten units complies with the General Plan and Sunnyslope 43 Annexation and Assessment District Plan. Additionally, this proposal incorporate 44 the policies and guidelines of the Hillside Development regulations of Article 19.1 45 of the Zoning Ordinance Proposed Planned Unit District (PUD) Design Guidelines 5 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 1 will ensure that the architecture of the proposed homes reflects the character of 2 West Petaluma. 3 4 2. The public necessity, convenience and general welfare clearly permit and will be 5 furthered by the proposed Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, reclassifying and 6 rezoning the Premo Subdivision site to PUD. 7 8 The project complies with the applicable provisions of Article 19A and provides 9 for development standards and permitted and conditional uses. The Planned Unit 10 District for the Premo Subdivision incorporates the policies of the Hillside 11 Development regulations of the Zoning Ordinance. Both the Fire Marshal and 12 Engineering Department have prepared conditions of approval to address fire 13 safety issues, and design criteria for the construction of the proposed homes have 14 been created to ensure that views to adjacent properties are protected. 15 16 3. The requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been 17 satisfied through the preparation of an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative 18 Declaration to avoid or reduce to a level of insignificance, potential impacts 19 generated by the proposed Premo Subdivision PUD. 20 21 In compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, 22 an Initial Study was prepared for the rezoning of the site from Planned Unit 23 District to Planned Unit District. Based upon the Initial Study, a determination was 24 made that no significant environmental effects would result. A copy of this Notice 25 was published in the Arg,us Courier and provided to residents and occupants within 26 300 ft. of the site, in compliance with CEQA requirements. 27 28 Findings for approval of the PUD Development Plan 29 30 1. The proposed Premo Subdivision results in a more desirable use of land and a 31 better physical environment than would be possible under any single zoning district 32 or combination of zoning districts. - 33 34 The proposed PUD will allow proposed residential uses that are compatible with 35 the existing surrounding use. Design guidelines have been prepared to ensure that 36 the architecture of the proposed homes reflects a higher design quality. The project 37 has been conditioned to underground overhead utility lines, which will result in a 38 more attractive streetscape. No additional residential subdivision will be allowed 39 beyond that approved by the City Council. 40 41 2. The proposed Premo Subdivision development plan is proposed on property which 42 has a suitable relationship to one or more thoroughfares ( Sunnyslope Avenue, - r , 43 Street, and Sunnyslope Road) and said thoroughfares with the improvements 44 herein required, are adequate to carry any additional traffic generated by the 45 development. 6 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 1 2 The project complies with the applicable provisions of Article 19A and provides 3 for development standards and permitted and conditional uses. The Planned Unit 4 District allows for a mixture of uses, densities, building intensity, or design 5 characteristics. In accordance with Article 19A, any and all compatible land uses 6 may be allowed in the PUD. 7 8 3. The plan for the proposed Premo Subdivision development presents a unified and 9 organized arrangement of buildings and service facilities which are appropriate in 10 relation to adjacent or nearby properties, particularly the existing Suncrest Hill 11 Drive residents and approved Stone Ridge and Suncrest Estates subdivisions. 12 Adequate landscaping and screening is included to ensure compatibility with 13 surrounding uses. Conditions have been incorporated requiring design and 14 development standards that are compatible with neighboring developments. 15 16 4. Adequate available public and private spaces are designated on the PUD 17 Development Plan. Through mitigation measures and project conditions, adequate 18 building setbacks and other project amenities are provided. Existing clusters of 19 oak, and buckeye trees exist and contribute to the natural beauty of the site. With 20 the exception of trees that will be removed due to poor health, trees will be 21 retained on -site. 22 i 23 5. The development of the subject Premo Subdivision project in the manner proposed 1 24 by the applicant, and as conditioned, will not be detrimental to the public welfare, 25 will be in the best interests of the City, and will be in keeping with the general 26 intent and spirit of the zoning regulations of the City of Petaluma, with the 27 Petaluma General Plan, and with the Sunnyslope Assessment and Annexation 28 District. 29 30 The project, as conditioned, complies with the applicable provisions of the 31 Municipal Code and the General Plan The proposed use is consistent with the 32 General Plan designation. Both the Fire Marshal and Engineering Department have 33 prepared conditions of approval to address fire safety issues, and design criteria for 34 the construction of the proposed homes have been created to ensure that views to 35 adjacent properties are protected. 36 37 6. The Premo Subdivision project will help the City further the objectives, policies 38 and programs of the Housing Element of the General Plan to provide a range of 39 housing types. 40 41 7. The Premo Subdivision project is designed to be compatible with surrounding uses 42 as it is residential in character. It will not result in a more intensive use of the land 43 with characteristics that are incompatible with neighboring single family residential 44 uses. 45 7 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 1 Notice of Estimated Fees, Dedications, and other Exactions 2 3 Pursuant to Section 66020 of the California Government Code, the applicant/developer 4 has the statutory right to protest development fees, dedication and reservation 5 requirements, and other exactions included in this project approval as follows (calculations 6 based upon 10 lots): 7 8 The following must be collected at the time of building permit issuance: 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 Community Facilities fees in the estimated amount of $ 838.50 per unit ❖ Storm Drainage Impact fees in the estimated amount of $ 340.90 per unit ❖ Park and Recreation Land Improvement fees in the estimated amount of $3,984 per unit o Traffic Mitigation fees in the estimated amount of $ 3,007 per unit °:• Water Connection Fee of $1,250.00 per unit for a 3 /4" meter in Zone 2 ❖ Sewer Connection Fee of $2,550.00 per unit The School District fee must be paid directly to the School District and prior to the issuance of a building permit. Contact the School District at 778 -4621. The In -Lieu for Provision of Low Income Housing contribution, in the estimated amount of $2,400.00 per lot, is collected at the time of escrow. Conditions for PUD Aaaroval 1. All mitigation measures adopted in conjunction with approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Resolution N.C.S.) for the Premo Subdivision project are incorporated herein by reference as conditions of project approval. The project shall also comply with all applicable mitigations specified for properties within the Sunnyslope Assessment and Annexation District Specific Plan Area as contained in Resolution No. 89 -122 N.C.S., which certified, approved and adopted the Environmental Impact Report for the Sunnyslope Assessment and Annexation District Plan. 2 36 37 38 All requirements of the Building Division, Fire Marshal, Engineering, Planning, Police Department and Public Works Departments shall be met and reflected on plans submitted for development permit issuance. 39 3. The applicants/developers shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or 40 any of its boards, commission, agents, officers, and employees from any claim, 41 action or proceeding against the City, its boards, commission, agents, officers, or 42 employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the approval of the project when 43 such claim or action is brought within the time period provided for in applicable 44 State and/or local statutes. The City shall promptly notify the applicants/developers 45 of any such claim, action, or proceeding. The City shall coordinate in the defense. 8 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 1 Nothing contained in this condition shall prohibit the City from participating in a 2 defense of any claim, action, or proceeding if the City bears its own attorney's fees 3 and costs, and the City defends the action in good faith. 4 5 Findings for Tentative Subdivisio May 6 7 5. The proposed Premo Tentative Subdivision Map, as conditioned, is in general ategory and other applicable provisions of 8 conformity with the Suburban land use c 9 the General Plan. 10 11 The proposed density adheres to the Suburban General Plan land use category an 12 the Sunnyslope Annexation and Assessment District. 13 14 6. The proposed Premo Tentative Subdivision Map, as conditioned, is in general 15 conformity with the standards and intent of the PUD Zoning District and other 16 applicable provisions of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance. 17 18 The proposed uses of the Planned Unit District (PUD) comply with allowed uses 19 of the R -1, 20,000 One Family Zoning District. Additionally, the allowed uses 20 incorporate the provisions of Article 19A of the Zoning Ordinance for 21 development standards, and permitted and conditional uses. 22 23 7. Pursuant to Ordinance 1994 NCS, regulating access for lots to public streets, the 24 most logical development of the land requires that proposed Lots 1 -3 be served by 25 private driveway access easements, in order to minimize the grading impacts to the 26 land, and establish lotting patterns for the Premo Subdivision which are compatible 27 with surrounding development and City policies pertaining to hillside development. 28 29 8. The requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act have been met 30 through preparation of an Initial Study and adoption of a Mitigated Negative 31 Declaration, to avoid or reduce to a level of insignificance, potential impacts of the 32 Premo Subdivision. 33 34 A Mitigation and Monitoring Program has been created for the Premo Subdivision. 35 City staff will monitor the development of the project to insure that all mitigation 36 measures are adhered to. 37 38 9. The proposed Premo Tentative Subdivision Map, as conditioned, is in general 39 conformance with the Petaluma Subdivision Ordinance and other applicable 40 provisions of the Petaluma Municipal Code (PMC). In accordance with the by 41 provisions of PMC Section 20.32.230, the public safety is not jeopar u ed s d treet 42 sidewalks on one side of Wallenberg 20.32.270 will r the ue sult sin of he best possible 43 standards pursuant to PM 44 utilization of the land to be subdivided given consideration to the topography and 45 natural cover of the land and the general character of the proposed subdivision. 9 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 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 Conditions For Tentative Map Approval: 1. The following requirements of the Engineering Department shall be met: A. Fronta a Improvements 1. and stre edights. Streetlights shall be required along the frontage according to street light standards. 2. All utility services requiring connections to service mains along Sunnyslope Road, including water, sanitary sewer, storm drain, gas, and electric, shall be bored and jacked rather than trenched to conform to the "No cut" policy along the aforementioned road. 3. Right -of -way dedication shall be required as indicated along Sunnyslope Road. 4. Overhead utilities along the frontage of this project and traversing the site shall be placed underground. Undergrounding shall be continued to the nearest poles off -site in both directions along Sunnyslope Road. B. Grading 1. Provide an applicable grading plan indicating the grading for each lot, cut and fill calculations, and drainage patterns for each lot. Pad elevations, spot elevations and slopes for all improvements, existing and proposed utilities (including service laterals), and surface drainage improvements shall be shown on the map. 2. An erosion control plan shall be prepared by the developer. Review and field inspection will be conducted by the Engineering Department. 3. Drainage swales shall be collected in a conduit and directed through the curb face or to a storm drain system. 4. Any existing structures above or below ground that are abandoned or not needed shall be removed. Structures shall include, but be limited to, fences, retaining walls, pipes, debris, septic systems, etc. 10 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 ! 1 C. Streets 2 3 1. The street widths and parking bays for the extension of Wallenberg Way 4 shall be as proposed on the Tentative Map/PUD Plan. The project shall be 5 responsible for constructing Wallenberg Way between the end of ' 6 construction on Suncrest Estates Subdivision and the boundary of this 7 project. The cul -de -sac design shall accommodate fire truck turning 8 requirements. Sidewalk shall extend to the end of the cul -de -sac. City 9 standard curb and gutter shall be constructed along the entire length of 10 Wallenberg Way. Pavement calculations must be submitted for the public 11 street. 12 13 2. Engineeredi driveways shall be required for future building permits. 14 15 D. Site Drainage and Storm Drains 16 17 1. Lot -to -lot surface drainage is not allowed unless collected at property lines 18 with a drop inlet storm drain system. Private storm drain systems shall 19 require easements and recorded maintenance agreements. Concentrated 20 surface drainage shall not be allowed over sidewalks or curbs but shall be 21 directed to the public street with sidewalk underdrains. 22 4 23 2. All site d hinage improvements shall be designed and constructed in 24 conformance with the minimum requirements of the Sonoma County Water 25 Agency Flood Control Design Criteria and shall be subject to review and 26 approval of the Sonoma County Water Agency and the City Engineer prior 27 to Final Map approval. 28 29 3. Skewed crossing between storm drain and other proposed utilities shall not 30 be permitted. The proposed utility assignments should parallel the street 31 alignment as close as possible to avoid such crossing conflicts. 32 33 4. The storm , drain along Sunnyslope .Road shall be extended beyond the 34 I proposed driveways to collect upstream flows and avoid installation of a 35 catch basim at the driveway approach. 36 37 E. Site Sanitary Sewer and Water Systems 38 39 1. This project shall utilize the existing sanitary sewer, storm drain, and water 40 mains located in the most easterly corner of the property. The developer 41 shall reimburse the City for the cost of providing utility stubs as determined 42 by the Engineering Department. 43 44 2. The proposed public sanitary sewer main must be located in the paved 45 portion of Wallenberg Way. 46 11 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 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 3. All finished floor elevations exceeding 160 feet shall require booster pump systems for fire sprinkler and domestic water pressure. Calculations must be provided for those lots requiring such systems. Show details of private pumps and water lines for individual lots. Provide separate one (1) inch water service, meter, and pump systems for lots 4 through 10. Services and meters for lots 4 through 10 shall be located at the end of the City maintained water main. 4. The design of the private water services and private fire line must be reviewed and approved by the Fire Marshal's office. 5. A private ductile iron fire line extending from the end of the City maintained main (located at the fire hydrant at the rear of lot 2) to the end of the cul -de -sac must be installed. The formation of a homeowners association or other financial mechanism acceptable to the City Engineer shall be required to maintain the private fire line. 6. Fire flow and fire suppression systems must, be approved by the Fire Marshal's office. Submit fire flow calculations. 7. A separate water meter shall be provided for landscape irrigation systems or as required by staff. F. Final Man 1. Show all existing or proposed easements that are within the boundary of this subdivision. 2. Provide documentation of any existing off site easements (public or private) that are to be used by this subdivision. 3. Provide the necessary easements for public or private water, sanitary sewer, and storm drain facilities. 4. Provide the necessary easements for private or public access. 5. Prepare the necessary private roadway, sanitary sewer, water line and storm drain maintenance agreements for recordation with the subdivision map. 6. The dedication of easements shall be shown on the subdivision map or as separate documents from the responsible party. 7. Recorded map information and sources must be provided for all adjoining streets and parcels. In addition, the centerline distances between 12 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 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 monuments, bearings and distances, proposed monuments to be set, and ties from the centerline to the existing right of way must be shown on the map to locate the property corners. 8. All private driveways, water lines, storm drainage, and sanitary sewer serving multiple lots shall be contained in private easements. A document shall be created and recorded to provide a maintenance mechanism for the private driveway(s) and utilities. 9. Provide a ten foot wide public utility easement (PUE) adjacent to the public right -of- -way if required by PG &E. Y G. General Conditions 1. The developer shall keep the existing public streets clean that are used for access to the site during construction. 2. The developer shall prepare improvement plans and a final map, pay applicable fees, and submit the required reports and/or documents according to the latest City codes, ordinances, resolutions, policies and standards. a 2. The following requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be met prior to construction: a. Provide access, a minimum twenty (20) feet, exclusive of on street parking, all asphalt surface with thirteen feet -six inches (13'6 ") vertical height clearance. b. The maximum allowable grade for driveways and roadways is 12 %. Special allowances for up to a maximum of 15% may be granted with the approval of the Fire Marshal and City Engineer. C. Minimum fire flow required for this project is 1,000 gallons for non - sprinklered buildings and 500 gallons for sprinklered buildings, per minute, at 20 pounds per square inch (psi). d. Add as a general note to plans: 1. No combustible construction is permitted above the foundation unless an approved asphalt surfaced road is provided to within one hundred -fifty (150') of the farthest point of a building or structure. 2. All fire hydrants for the project must be tested, flushed, and in service prior to the commencement of combustible construction on the site. 13 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 1 e. Water supply for fire fighting purposes to the structure(s) above 160' shall 2 be provided via a dry hydrant fire main. The dry hydrant main shall be 3 supplied by a fire department connection (FDC) within 20' of the last 4 hydrant on the city main. Location of hydrants on the dry main shall be 5 provided every 300' and at the top of the hill within 150' of the 6 structure(s). The dry main shall be designed to handle minimum fire flows 7 of 500 gpm @ 20 psi with a minimum main size of 8 ". The main shall be 8 installed to city standards and specifications. Signs and/or markers 9 identifying the dry hydrant main shall be provided as approved by the Fire 10 Marshal. 11 12 The following requirements shall be met prior to occupancy of the units: 13 14 f. Residential buildings constructed at or above one hundred -sixty feet (160) 15 in elevation are required to have a residential fire sprinkler system. 16 Attention is directed to lots 4 through 10 and the dwelling at the end of the 17 20' right -of -way. 18 19 g. Because the structures on the hill are within the high fire hazard severity 20 zone, the following additional conditions will apply: 21 22 1. Structures at or above the 160' elevation shall have class A roofs. 23 For roof coverings where the profile allows a space between the roof 24 covering and roof decking, the space at the eave ends shall be fire stopped 25 to preclude entry of flames or embers. Combustible eaves, fascias and 26 soffits shall be sheathed with solid materials with a minimum thickness of 27 3/4 inch. No exposed rafter tails shall be permitted unless constructed of 28 heavy timber materials. Exterior windows, window walls and skylights shall 29 be tempered glass or multi - layered glazed panels. 30 31 2. Exterior walls shall be constructed of non - combustible materials. 32 - 33 3. Attic ventilation openings, foundation or underfloor vents, or to 34 other ventilation openings in vertical exterior walls and vents through roofs 35 shall not exceed 144 sq. inches each. Such vents shall be covered with non- 36 combustible corrosion - resistant mesh with openings not to exceed 1/4 ". 37 Attic ventilation openings shall not be located in soffits, in eave overhangs, 38 between rafters at eaves, or in other overhead areas. Gable end and dormer 39 vents shall be located at least 10' from property lines. Underfloor 40 ventilation openings, if any, shall be located as close to grade as practical. 41 42 h. Provisions for annual weed/brush abatement of the urban interface and the 43 developed area shall be the responsibility of the developer /property owner. 44 A plan that outlines the criteria for provisions of weed abatement shall be 14 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 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 developed. This plan shall include but not be limited to the following criteria: 1. Defensible space area of 30' around structures in lots above 160' either man made or natural, where material capable of allowing fire to a spread unchecked must be treated, cleared, modified or fire resistive to slow the rate and intensity of an advancing wildfire. 2. Trees within the defensible space shall be provided with a distance between crowns from adjacent trees, structures, or unmodified fuel of not less than 15'. 3. Areas within 10' of each side of portions of the road/driveway leading up the hill shall be cleared of grass/brush and/or planted with fire resistive vegetation. 4. Fire breaks and/or disked trails up to 30' wide shall be provided and identified on the plan and maintained throughout the fire season. Location of breaks/traHs shall be approved by the Fire Marshal. i. Due to available water and pressure, the furthest point of structures on lots above 160' shall not be in excess of 150' from the street as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the building. 3. All mitigation measures adopted in conjunction with approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Premo Subdivision are incorporated herein by reference as conditions of project approval. 4. Plans submitted for approval of the Final Map and Improvement Plans shall reflect the following, subject to staff review and approval: a. Permitted hours of construction of 8AM to SPM Monday through Friday only shall be specified on construction drawings as identified in the adopted mitigation measures for the project. b. All proposed lot areas shall be specified on the Final Map. C. A reference to all project approval documents shall be incorporated as a note on the Final Map. d. The location of all proposed electrical transformers, or other utility structures shall be identified on plans, and located underground in accordance with adopted City policy. 15 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 1 e. The PUD for Lots 5-7 shall include a Standard requiring 40 foot setbacks 2 from the adjacent Suncrest Hill Drive homes. 3 4 f. The PUD plan shall require only open field fencing will be allowed on all 5 lots. 6 7 g. The landscape plan shall show street trees along Sunnyslope Road located 8 a minimum of 30 ' on- center. 9 10 h. Development on Lots 7 and 8 shall not be visible from "D" Street (City 11 and County). In addition, the formal SPARC review shall require 12 placement of story poles 10 days prior to the SPARC meeting. The story 13 poles shall depict the height and location of the corners of the building 14 and the height of the ridgelines of the building. The Planning Department 15 shall review and approve the story pole location plan prior to placement 16 of the poles. 17 18 i. The Planned Unit Development Plan shall require an area adequate for 19 cars to turn around on -site on Lots 1, 2 and 3 is available. This will insure 20 that cars head-out and do not back -out onto Sunnyslope Road 21 22 5. Prior to City approval of the Final Map, the project proponents shall enter into an 23 agreement with the City for payment of an In -Lieu Contribution, to meet 24 affordable housing requirements for the Stone Ridge Subdivision project, as 25 specified under Program 11(iii) of the Petaluma General.Plan Housing Element. 26 27 6. Reproducible copies of the finalized Tentative Map, PUD Development Plan, and 28 the PUD Standards shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to City 29 Council approval of the Final Map. A reduced copy .,of the Final Map shall be 30 submitted to the Planning Department prior to recordation of the Final Map. 31 32 _ 33 34 II. MARTIN HISTORIC PLAZA, -1197 E. Washington, File No's 35 REZ980011GPA98004 (ED). 36 37 The development proposal is to rezone a 1.9 acre parcel from R -1, One Family 38 Residential, to Planned Unit Development (PUD), and amend the General plan 39 Land Use designation from Urban High to Mixed use in order to establish the 40 "Martin Historic Plaza" at 1197 East Washington, APN 007 -361 -022. This 41 triangular shaped property is to the west of the southbound Highway 101 off 42 ramp. Should the development be approved, the barn and tack building would be 43 demolished; the house and pump house would remain. Four new two -story 44 buildings would be constructed and are proposed for office use; a total of 16,239 45 square feet for office/professional use would be created. Access to the site would 16 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 1 come from an existing 30 foot wide easement, known as Sturcon Way, that 2 intersects with Ellis Street, directly across from Alba Lane. The existing East i 3 Washington Street access will be eliminated. As part of the rezoning proposal, the 4 developer also requests that a Historic District overlay be added to recognize the 5 existing single family residence designed by Brainerd Jones and constructed 6 between 1910 and 1914. 7 8 Assistant Planner Dunn presented the staff report. ' 9 10 Commissioner Broad - Clarify historic status of buildings. 11 Elizabeth Dunn - Revised review for house and barn superceded the old determination. ! 12 Commissioner Healy - What will paths and sidewalks link up with later? 13 Vincent Smith - Described linking for future bike paths/sidewalks. 14 Commissioner Healy - Why do we need easements on private property for ' 15 paths/sidewalks ? will proponent be required to install path? where will pedestrians access ! 16 project is overcrossing (Washington Street) is redesigned? concerns with parking 17 adequacy. 18 Elizabeth Dunn - Sufficient parking is provided; if proposed use changes, parking will be 19 recalculated. f 20 21 The public hearing was opened. 22 23 SPEAKERS: 24 25 Sue Trautwein - Applicant (great grand -niece of original owners); home has been a 26 presence in Petaluma for a long time; main goal is to keep the house; looked at many 27 projects, settled on this historic office park project; wants to keep family presence in 28 Petaluma. 29 Shawn Montoya - Original historic survey was not aware that house was Brainerd Jones 30 design; proposal is to keep pumphouse and house; primary goal is to preserve family T 31 home; loss of barn is unavoidable, but building is not a significant barn; requests four items 32 - approval of General Plan Amendment, Mixed Use Designation, Development Plan, 33 Design Guidelines; does not want a sidewalk at Washington Street property line. 1 34 Carol.Whitmire - Applicant's Planning Consultant - Mixed Use classification is best use i 35 for City and owners; integrates existing adjacent uses. I 36 Commissioner Healy - Any fencing between property and Washington Street? 37 Carol Whitmire - No fencing, existing fencing will be removed. 38 Commissioner Healy - Were calculations done on detention ponds? 39 Steve LaFranchi - Applicant's Civil Engineer - Yes, calculations were done. 40 Commissioner Vieler - Why was there no design proposal? 41 Shawn Montoya - Because SPARC will be reviewing plans; some elevations were 42 supplied, can supply more details. 43 Vincent Smith - Any construction or modification work will be required to go through 44 full SPARC review. 17 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 1 Commissioner Vieler - When historic designation is given, will some 2 conditions/Development Standards be superseded by State Historic Law? 3 Vincent Smith - New buildings are required to meet current Codes, historic codes apply 4 only to the old buildings. 5 William Peale - 136 Margo - Lives directly behind Washington Creek from property; 6 Sturcon Way is very hectic now; questioned traffic; would like to see eucalyptus trees 7 remain; concerns with proposed bicycle paths much wildlife living in creek now; security 8 concerns if Washington Creek is opened up for public access. 9 Chris Podele - 132 Margo - Design concerns; will rooftop equipment be visible from rear 10 of project? biggest issue - removal of eucalyptus trees, they provide privacy, noise barrier; 11 proposed landscaping will not compare with trees; security issues - potential for criminal 12 activity, security system would be needed for project; already lots of vandalism in adjacent 13 shopping center, also drug activity; when exiting Sturcon onto Ellis Street, visibility 14 already dangerous; potential for dangerous traffic situation; additional concern with bike 15 path along creek - already a fire hazard. 16 Bonnie Morrow - 909 Martin Circle - Concerns with removal of eucalyptus trees - they 17 must remain; concerns with transient problems; Police patrol, but not enough; against bike 18 path - more problems with transients. 19 Holly Halsey - 909 Martin Circle - Concerns with removal of eucalyptus - sound/wind 20 buffer; traffic concerns, agrees with other neighbors; will there be motion sensor lights at 21 the new project? concerns with glare; main concern is tree removal. 22 Jennifer Sousa - 909 Martin Circle - Concerns with traffic; trees need to remain for 23 sound protection from freeway noise. 24 25 The public hearing was closed. 26 27 Commissioner Broad - Regarding access from Washington Street - maybe ingress only 28 from Washington should be allowed (like adjacent shopping center)? 29 Craig Spaulding - There was some discussion of that, believes there was not sufficient 30 room; Traffic Engineer reviewed project as proposed. 31 Chairman Bennett - Why do trees need to be removed for construction? 32 Elizabeth Dunn - Removal to allow parking. - 33 Commissioner Broad - Evident that lots of effort has been put into plan for this site, but 34 it doesn't work in several specific areas - historic resource itself - reference Historic 35 SPARC meeting concerns regarding removal of barn and tack buildings; more study 36 needed; independent historic architect needs to review the historic aspects of this project; 37 entire site needs to be reviewed including existing landscaping; traffic concerns - surprising 38 that Sturcon is proposed to provide access to this site; lots of impervious surface - 39 crowding site; comments by neighbors regarding trees needs to be further considered. 40 Commissioner Healy - Not too concerned with loss of barn and tack buildings; 41 concerned with loss of trees - wants more information (Council would also be concerned); 42 site may be too dense as proposed; poor access conditions on Sturcon Way now; good 43 comments from neighbors; bike path along creek can be addressed in future - need to 44 preserve an easement at this time; intersection of Sturcon and Ellis has problems now 45 (reconfigure ?) utilities/trash enclosures shouldn't impact neighbors across creek. 18 planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 1 Commissioner Vieler - Trash enclosures need to be enclosed; eucalyptus trees need to 2 remain (unless there is a safety reason); security issue - easement for bike path needs to be 3 in place; concerns with parking adequacy; regarding fire safety on creek - project might 4 need to be responsible for creek maintenance; shares concerns about possible crime 5 potential. 6 Chairman Bennett - Regarding bike path - take a serious look at this from a crime 7 standpoint; regarding tree removal concerns - are we looking at a redesign on this project? 8 landscaping proposed will not replace benefits of eucalyptus trees; needs to be a functional 9 landscaping plan; concerns with density of site. to Commissioner Healy - Depth of detention ponds? 11 Steve LaFranchi - Some options are available; proposed ponds are not too deep maybe 12 possible to use ponds for parking areas; preliminary grades minimiz a lot of cuts; 13 alternative might be additional underground piping. 14 Commissioner Healy - Redesign to preserve trees possible? 15 Steve LaFranchi - Can work on other designs. 16 Chairman Bennett - No problem with taking down barn and tack house; problem with 17 removing trees; should we continue this for redesign? 18 Commissioner Broad - Overall concern is amount of paving around the house - preserve 19 more landscaping around the house; redesign to preserve trees; concerns with access; 20 stipulate hours of operation if certain uses are allowed; limited traffic uses. 21 Commissioner Vieler - How far off of property do trees occur? 22 Shawn Montoya - Some of the trees are on SCWA property; tree removal may be a 23 safety /fire issue - will take another look at trees. 24 Chairman Bennett - Preserve the function that these trees provide. 25 Shawn Montoya - Will take a look at that aspect. 26 Commissioner Vieler - Any plan to use residence as a residential unit or bed and 27 breakfast? 28 Shawn Montoya - No, office uses; might be willing to modify some permitted uses. 29 Commissioner Vieler - Staff needs to look at creek maintenance issues from legal 30 standpoint; look at feasibility of access from E. Washington. 31 _ 32 Commission requested City Traffic Engineer attend the nett meeting. 33 34 Commissioner Healy - Project is close to something that will be very exciting. 35 36 Consensus to continue this item to February 9, 1999 (applicant indicated that February 37 9 would allow enough time for redesign). 38 39 Chairman Bennett requested copies of this video take be given to absent Commissioner 40 and mo new Commissioners prior to February 9 meeting so that they might participate in 41 this discussion and vote. 42 43 This item was continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 9, 1999. 44 45 19 Planning Commission Minutes - January 12, 1999 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 COMMISSION BUSINESS: III. ELECTION OF OFFICERS. Commissioner Bennett was elected Chairman. Commissioner Broad was elected 1 st Vice Chair. Commissioner Vieler was elected 2nd Vice Chair. IV. LIAISON REPORTS - None ADJOURNMENT: 10:55 PM S�)"Ianlage \0112 20