HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 02/09/1999Planning Commission Minutes -February 9, 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
CITY OF PETALUMA, CA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
FEBRUARY 9,1999,7:00 PM
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY HALL, 11 ENGLISH STREET
PETALUMA, CA 94952
Telephone 707/778 -4301 / Fax 707/778 -4498
&Mail planning%j�cipetalumax&us
Web Page http : //www,cLpetaluma,ca.us
Commissioners: Present: Barrett, Bennett*, Broad, Feibusch, Glass, Healy,
Vieler (arrived at 7:10 PN1)
a Chairperson
Staff: Vincent C. Smith mcr, Acting Planning Director
Bonne Gaebler, Housing Administrator
,Elizabeth Dunn Amp, Assistant Planner
Craig Spaulding, Civil Engineer
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Minutes of January 12, 1999 were approved with
corrections to pages 1, 3, 9, 17. (Vote: 6/0 - Vieler absent)
PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Committee appointments (Tree/Bicycle Committees).
COMMISSIONERS' REPORT: Commissioner Feibusch viewed video of January 12
meeting; visited McNear Landing project - Planning Commission and SPARC should meet
at site to discuss the pros and cons of project. Commissioner Healy welcomed the new
Planning Commissioners on behalf of City Council. Chairman Bennett welcomed the
new Planning Commissioners; recommended a future workshop to discuss rules and
procedures.
CORRESPONDENCE: None.
APPEAL STATEMENT: Was read.
LEGAL RECOURSE STATEMENT: Was noted on the agenda.
1
Planning Commission Minutes - February 9, 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
CONTINUED BUSINESS:(CONTPWED FROM 1/12/99 MEETING)
I. MARTIN HISTORIC PLAZA, 1197 E. Washington, APN 007 - 361 -022,
File No's REZ98001 /GPA98004 (ED).
(Applicants have requested a continuance to February 23, 1999.)
The development proposal is to rezone a 1.9 acre parcel from R -1, One Family
Residential, to Planned Unit Development (PUD), and amend the General plan
Land Use designation from Urban High to Mixed use in order to establish the
"Martin Historic Plaza" at 1197 East Washington, APN 007- 361 -022. This
triangular shaped property is to the west of the southbound Highway 101 off -
ramp. Should the development be approved, the barn and tack building would be
demolished; the house and pump house would remain. Four new two-story
buildings would be constructed and are proposed for office use; a total of 16,239
square feet for office/professional use would be created. Access to the site would
come from an existing 30 foot wide easement, known as Sturcon Way, that
intersects with Ellis Street, directly across from Alma Court. The existing East
Washington Street access will be eliminated. As part of the rezoning proposal, the
developer also requests that a Historic District overlay be added to recognize the
existing single family residence designed by Brainerd Jones and constructed
between 1910 and 1914.
This item was continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 23, 1999.
NEW BUSINESS:
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
II. HOFFMAN, 800 Lindberg Lane, APN 005 -020 -035, File CUP98030 (ED)
Consideration of a major Conditional Use Permit and adoption of a Mitigated
Negative Declaration to allow office and warehouse use on a 2.19 acre parcel in
the Highway - Commercial (C -H) zoning district.
Assistant Planner Dunn presented the staff report.
The public hearing was opened.
SPEAKERS:
42 Commissioner Broad - Why are there no architectural plans/elevations? .
43 Vincent Smith - Use Permit requests do not require elevation drawings, the Zoning
44 Ordinance is not completely clear on how much information is necessary.
OA
Planning Commission Minutes - February 9, 1999
1 Chairman Bennett - Could this item return to Planning Commission after SPARC
2 review?
3 Vincent Smith - Yes, will bring back to Planning Commission.
4 Commissioner Glass - Discuss parking adequacy.
ik 5 Elizabeth Dunn - Parking as required will be adequate for any use.
= 6 Commissioner Broad - This property is currently under abatement, are there any
7 penalties to the property owner for two years of inattention to abatement?
8 Vincent Smith - Municipal Code is somewhat ineffective, time- consuming; staff is
9 working with City Attorney on other options for abatements.
10 Ray Hoffman - 591 Redwood Ave., Mill Valley - Applicant - Will be purchasing this
11 property from current owner; existing use will be removed within 30 days of purchase; has
12 won many design awards for his projects; parking requirement may be restrictive - waive
: 13 maximum 35 cars per acre to 1 car per 500 sq.ft. of warehouse space; this would allow
14 enough retail space; does not want to underground utilities at this time.
15 Commissioner Vieler - There are only 11 parking spaces difference between proposed
16 parking and staff recommended - isn't there room for these spaces?
17 Ray Hoffman - Setbacks are more than required, providing more parking would sacrifice
18 appearance of project.
19 Commissioner Bennett - (to applicant) Are you now saying that you no longer agree to a
20 maximum 2,100 sq.ft. of retail?
21 Ray Hoffman - Yes, does not agree to retail restriction, would like to design to add more
22 retail in future.
23 Commissioner Healy Flexibility in parking would allow intensification of use - could
24 applicant request a variance in the future?
25 Vincent Smith - Development Standards were modified regarding parking requirements
. 26 to preclude intensification of uses beyond parking capability.
27
28 The public hearing was closed.
29
30 Commission Discussion
31
32 Commissioner Healy - Leave parking ratio at 96; would like to see design after SPARC
33 review.
34 Commissioner Glass - Agreed with Commissioner Healy, likes the project, will add local
35 employment opportunities; (to applicant) try to employ local labor to build project and
36 hire local permanent employees.
37 Commissioner Broad - Where will water from this project flow?
38 Craig Spaulding - Described water flow to Marina area.
39 Commissioner Vieler - (To Craig Spaulding) Explain catch basin requirements?
40 Craig Spaulding - Described frontage improvements required of applicant.
41 Commissioner Vieler - Concerns with design of this project since it was not given a
42 preliminary review by SPARC.
43 Commissioner Broad - What discretion does Planning Commission have in parking
44 requirements?
3
Planning Commission Minutes - February 9, 1999
1 Vincent Smith - Reviewed Zoning Ordinance sections - intent is to allow for flexibility of
2 use; recommended staying with staff report requirements.
3 Commissioner Broad - Pleased with site plan, would like to see elevations/architecture
4 after SPARC review; 35 parking spaces per acre is not reflected in parking ratios;
5 setbacks, landscaping will have to be reduced if more parking is required; SPARC and
6 staff could determine total parking required.
7 Commissioner Barrett - If this use is intensified, would drainage still work?
8 Craig Spaulding - Drainage is affected by impervious surface, that should not change.
9 Commissioner Feibusch - As Planning Commission representative to SPARC, assured
to Commission that this project will be very fully scrutinized; (to applicant) undergrounding
11 of utilities is a standard.
12 Ray Hoffman - Is not opposing undergrounding along Lindberg, only small amount of
13 undergrounding along Payran - would be willing to join an assessment district for future
14 undergrounding on Payran.
15 Commissioner Feibusch - Would like a Sonoma County Master Drainage Plan Map.
16 Craig Spaulding - Will supply Commission with a loan copy of map.
17 Commissioner Bennett - Regarding parking - warehousing has to be designed to be
18 convertible (to office); if conversion occurs, parking flexibility has to be built in.
19 Commissioner Healy - (to applicant) Bring undergrounding issue to Council on appeal if
20 necessary - there has been discussion at City Council on this subject in the past.
21 Commissioner Feibusch - If undergrounding does not occur at development, it won't
22 happen.
23
24 A motion was made by Commissioner Feibusch and seconded by Commissioner Broad to
25 adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the Conditional Use Permit based on
26 the findings and subject to the amended conditions listed in the staff report.
27
28 Commissioner Barrett: Yes
29 Commissioner Broad: Yes
30 Commissioner Feibusch: Yes
31 Commissioner Glass: Yes
32 Commissioner Healy: Yes
33 Commissioner Vieler: Yes
34 Chairman Bennett: Yes
35
36 Findings for a Conditional Use Permit:
37
38 1. That the proposed use, as conditioned, will conform to the requirements and intent
39 of the Section 26 -500, Conditional Use Permits, and with Section 20 -300, Number
40 of Parking Spaces Required, of the Zoning Ordinance.
41
42 Office uses are permitted uses and warehouse uses are allowed with a Conditional
43 Use Permit in the Highway- Commercial zoning district. Performance Standards,
44 Article 22 of the Zoning Ordinance addressing noise, vibrations, odors, direct or
45 indirect glare, fire and explosion hazards, heat, radioactivity or electric
46 disturbance, smoke, fumes, gases, dust and particulate matter and liquid or solid
4
Planning Commission Minutes - February 9, 1999
1
wastes, apply to all office, commercial and industrial operations within the City of
2
Petaluma. The future uses at this location must abide by this provision of the
3
Zoning Ordinance.
4
5 2.
That the proposed use, as conditioned, will conform to the General Plan, and that
6
such use will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public health,
7
safety, or welfare.
8
9
Warehouse and office/retail uses are allowed within the Industrial General Plan
10
land use designation. Hours of construction have been limited from 7:OOam to
' 11
6:O0pm to ensure that existing businesses will not receive any significant adverse
12
impacts from the construction of the new building.
13
14 3.
That the proposed project has complied with the requirements of CEQA through
15
the preparation and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this
16
project, which addresses the potential environmental impacts associated with its
17
development, and no further environmental analysis is necessary.
' :19
In compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act,
20
an Initial Study was prepared for this proposal. Based upon the Initial Study, a
3 21
determination was made that no significant environmental effects would result. A
22
copy of this Notice was published in the Argus Courier and provided to residents
'' ,23
and occupants within 300 ft. of the site, in compliance with CEQA requirements.
°24
Additionally, a Mitigation and Monitoring Program has been created for the this
25
proposal. City staff will monitor the development of the project to insure that all
26
mitigation measures are adhered to.
'28 4.
That the proposed use, as conditioned, will conform to the guidelines of the Site
29
Plan and Architecture Review Committee, required of new development for all
commercial or industrial properties.
31
As all development on commercial or industrial lands require approval by the Site
"33
Plan and Architecture Review Committee (SPARC), the developer must submit
34
site plan, architecture, and landscaping plans for review and approval of the
35
Committee prior to the issuance of a building permit at this location.
36
37 Findines for ADQroval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
38 Impact:
39
40 1. An Initial Study was prepared, proper notice was provided in accordance with
41 CEQA and local guidelines for the approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration to
42 establish this use.
43
5
Planning Commission Minutes - February 9, 1999
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
2. Based upon the Initial Study, dated January 20, 1999, and any comments received,
there is no substantial evidence that the project as mitigated would have a
significant effect upon the environment.
3. As concluded in the attached Initial Study, dated January 20,'1999, the project
does not have the potential to affect wildlife resources as defined in the Fish and
Game code, either individually or cumulatively.
4. The project is not located on a site listed on any Hazardous Waste Site List
compiled by the State pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.
5
13
14
The Planning Commission has reviewed the Negative Declaration and considered
any and all continents before making a recommendation on the project.
15 6. A Mitigation and Monitoring Program has been prepared and is included to insure
16 compliance with the adopted mitigation measures for the Warehouse and Office
17 use at this location.
18
19 7. The recoFd of proceedings of the decision on the project is available for public
20 review at the City of Petaluma, Planning Department, City Hall, 11 English Street,
21 Petaluma, California.
22
23 Mitigation Measures
24
25 All mitigation measures, as identified in the Initial Study filed January 20, 1999 for the
26 proposal, are herein - incorporated.
27
28 Notice of Estimated Fees, Dedications, and other Exactions
29
30 Pursuant to Section 66020 of the California Government Code, the applicant/developer
31 has the statutory right to protest development fees, dedication and reservation
32 requirements, and other exactions included in this project approval as follows:
33
34 The following must be collected at the time of building permit issuance and is
35 calculated based on office and warehouse use:
36
37 ❖ Community Facilities fees in the estimated amount of $25,373.19
38 ❖ Storm Drainage Impact fees in the estimated amount of $ 17,350.00
39 Traffic Mitigation fees in the estimated amount of $45,470.00
40 ❖ Water Connection Fee of $12,423 for a 2" meter in Zone 1
41 ❖ Sewer Connection Fee of $2,550.00
42
43 The School District fee must be paid directly to the School District and prior to the
44 issuance of a building permit. Contact the School District at 778 -4621.
45
2
Planning Commission Minutes - February 9, 1999
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
{ 12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
s 32
33 2.
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
Conditions of Approval:
1. The following requirements of the Building Division shall be met:
a. Grading must be certified when completed to indicate compliance with
approved plans and will be required for occupancy.
b. Certify pad elevations before building slab on grade is poured.
C. Soils with expansion index greater than 20 requires special
foundation per Uniform Building Code 2904(b). design
d. All roofing shall be "B" rated or better per Ordinance No. 1744/1988.
e• Show site drainage and grading topography.
f Indicate all utilities on site plan.
9. Responsible party to sign plans.
h. Submit soils report to verify foundation design.
i. Indicate group occupancy, type of construction square footage.
j• Plans must show compliance to 1994 UBC, UPC, UMC, and 1993 NEC.
Plans must also show compliance to current Title 24 Energy Conservation
and/or Disabled Access Requirements.
k. Provide structural calculations for all non - conventional design items.
1. Mixed occupancy separation as described in Chapter 3 of the 1994 UBC
must be followed.
The following requirements of the Engineering Department shall be met:
a. Sonoma County Water Agency approval must be provided for all drainage
improvements.
b. A detailed grading plan must be provided for improvements within the right
Of way and on -site including street improvements, utilities, earthwork,
drainage, landscaping and all transitions at property lines. These
improvements shall also include half- street improvements across the entire
frontage of the subject parcel for Lindberg Lane and Payran Street or as
designated by the City Engineer.
C. All existing and proposed easements associated with the subject parcel
must be included on the plans.
7
Planning Commission Minutes - February 9, 1999
1 d. Provide a fully dimensioned site plan as a portion of the improvement plans
2 including distances from property lines to buildings and parking. This site
3 plan shall also provide accurate metes and bounds of all property lines,
4 radii of all curves, and central angles.
6 e. Frontage improvements are required along Lindberg Lane and Payran
7 Street including City of Petaluma standard curb, gutter, sidewalk,
8 streetlights, fire hydrants, storm drain, catch basins, etc.
9
10 f.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
Locations, directions of flow and names, if available, of both natural and
artificial watercourses and ponding areas, or areas of periodic inundation
on the parcel and on adjacent properties which might affect the design of
the applicant's proposal must be indicated on the plans.
g. All existing overhead utility lines and poles on -site and on peripheral streets
shall be identified and shown as being placed underground.
h. All existing water services serving the subject parcel and not utilized with
the proposed development must be abandoned per current City standards.
i. Identify the location and size of existing and proposed sanitary sewer, fire
hydrants, water mains, and storm drains on the plan. The slopes and
elevations of proposed sewers and storm drains shall be indicated.
j. Provide the location of proposed building setback lines on the site plan.
k. An erosion control plan must be submitted as a part of the improvement
plans for the project.
1. Provide a current Report and Guarantee of Clear Title (less than six
months old) by duly authorized title company naming persons whose
consent is necessary for the preparation of such plans and showing all
interest in the property, existing easements, etc. Said title report shall
include a clear and concise metes and bounds description of the property.
m A final detailed geotechnical investigation shall be required and prepared
concurrently with the grading and erosion control plans prepared by the
developer's engineer. These grading and erosion control plans shall be
reviewed and signed by a registered soils engineer.
n Water pressure calculations shall be required for this development verifying
the system adequacy for fire flows and domestic services.
o. All work in the public right -of -way requires an excavation permit from the
Director of Public Works.
P. A separate water meter shall be required for landscape irrigation systems or
as required by staff.
q. The City Traffic Engineer shall approve driveway access to Lindberg Lane.
r. Verify with the use of templates that delivery truck turning movements can
be achieved along the access drive and loading areas of the site plan.
Planning Commission Minutes - February 9, 1999
1
2
S.
An extension of the 48" storm drain, as shown on the Sonoma County
3
Water Agency Master Drainage Plan, must be installed from the existing
4
48" system located at the intersection of Payran Street and Lindberg Lane
5
to the easternmost corner of the subject parcel.
6
7
t.
Surface drainage from the site shall not cross over sidewalks.
8
9
U.
A pre - construction meeting must be scheduled prior to issuance of a
10
grading, foundation, or building permit. This meeting must include the
11
developer, contractor, engineer, City project engineer, and Public Works
`. 12
inspector.
13
14 3.
The following requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be met:
15
16
a.
The building shall be protected by an automatic fire extinguishing
17
system as required by the Uniform Fire Code.
18
=19
b.
Provide to the Fire Marshal's office a minimum of two (2) sets of
.20
fire sprinkler plans and calculations for approval and issuance of permit
21
prior to the installation of the system.
22
C.
Fire sprinkler system install in buildings of undetermined use shall
23
be designed and installed to have a design density of .33 gallons per minute
=24
per square feet over a minimum design area of 3,000 square feet.
. 26
d.
Fire hydrants shall be spaced at a maximum of 300 feet apart.
27
Location and type of fire hydrants are to be approved by the Fire Marshal's
'28
office.
29
30
e.
Minimum fire flow required for this project is 2,500 gallons per minute at
t 31
20 pounds per square inch (psi).'
p ' "32
°33 4.
The following requirements of the Planning Department shall be met:
34
- 35
a.
The developer must have the site plan, architecture and landscaping plans
. '36
reviewed and approved by the Site Plan and Architecture Review
_ 37
Committee (SPARC) prior to the issuance of a building permit for any
. .38
construction at this site.
,39
40
b.
In order to comply with the parking provisions of the Zoning Ordinance,
41
the developer will alter the square footage that is to be offered for
42
office/retail and warehouse uses. Any revisions to the site plan must be
43
illustrated on plans that are submitted to the Site Plan and Architecture
44
Review Committee.
45
9
Planning Commission Minutes - February 9, 1999
1 C. Within 5 days of the approval of this approval, the applicant shall submit a
2 check to the Planning Department in the amount of $35.00 payable to the
3 Sonoma County Clerk for the Notice of Determination Fee.
4
5 d. This use permit may be recalled by the Planning Director for review at any
6 time due to complaints regarding the lack of compliance with conditions of
7 approval or mitigation measures or adverse operating characteristics. At
8 such time, the Planning Director may revoke the use permit or add/modify
9 conditions of approval.
10
11 e. The applicants shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or any of
12 its boards, commissions, agents, officers., and employees from any claim,
13 action or proceeding against the City, its boards, commissions, agents,
14 officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the approval of
15 the project when such claim or action is brought within the time period
16 provided for in applicable State and/or local statutes. The City shall
17 promptly notify the applicants of any such claim, action, or proceeding.
18 The City shall coordinate in the defense. Nothing contained in this
19 condition shall prohibit the City from participating in a defense of any
20 claim, action, or proceeding if the City bears its own attorney's fees and
21 costs, and the City defends the action in good faith.
22
23 f. Upon approval by the Site Plan and Architectural Review committee, the
24 site plan, architecture and landscaping drawings shall be brought back to
25 the Planning Commission.
26
27 g. The intent of the Zoning Ordinance for the parking ratios for the
28 office /retail and warehouse project shall be met. This will allow flexibility
29 in the number of parking spaces where between 84 -96 spaces shall be
30 created
31
32
33 III. "ARMORY REPLACEMENT" COMMITTEE UPDATE.
34
35 Verbal presentation.
36
37 At Commission's direction, staff has implemented a site search effort, search
38 committee, and plan of action. Councilmember /Commissioner Healy requested an
39 update on that process.
40
41 Housing Administrator Gaebler distributed Master Plan of Homeless Services, Site
42 Search Criteria.
43
44 COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
45
10
Planning Commission Minutes - February 9, 1999
1 Commissioner Vieler - Explain your "special population ".
2 Bonne Gaebler - Dealing with "special population" very difficult, this would provide a
3 better place for them to go.
4 Commissioner Healy - Will you announce location of site when one is chosen?
5 Bonne Gaebler - Swim Center is such a success, HUD wanted City of Petaluma to apply
6 for an award; time frame for site search is 15 months.
7 Commissioner Healy - Will to Committee narrow the choices down to one site before
8 announcing publicly?
9 Bonne 'Gaebler - Yes, site will be chosen before public announcement; open to
10 suggestions on this issue; thanked Commission for all past help in this matter.
. 11
.12
13 IV. LIAISON REPORTS. None.
y -14
15
16
'17
18
19
20
21
22
"23
24
25
'26
27
:28
29
30
`31
Commission Discussion:
Commissioner Bennett - Would like to set up a Planning Commissioner's workshop in
late March or early April to discuss processes/procedures, readdress process of SPARC
and Commission, Conflict of Interest discussion.
Commissioner Vieler - Good idea, look at next several months for a small agenda.
Commissioner Bennett - Would like to hold workshop in City Manager's Conference
Room, informal agenda, not a regular meeting night if possible; discussion of new
procedures/ rules for abstaining for financial reasons; Brown Act; Environmental Review
process.
ADJOURNMENT: 8 :20 PM
8Vc- plan\agendaw209
11