HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 05/28/19961
2 CI'T'Y OF PETALUMA
3 PLANNING COA'IIVIISSION MINUTES
4
5 REGULAR MEETING MAY 28, 1996
6 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 PM
7 CITY HALL - PETALUMA, CA
8
9 Commissioners Present. Feibusch, Rahman*, Read, Thompson, Torliatt, vonRaesfeld,
10 Wick
11
12 Staff: Pamela Tuft, Planning Director
13 James McCann, Principal Planner
14
15 * Chairperson
16
17 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
18
19
20 PUBLIC COMMENT: Val Hinshaw - Cross Creek - suggested that Commissioners
21 Read and Feibusch should abstain from further involvement in project because of conflict
22 of interest as they received campaign contributions from developer (Mandell - Doyle
23 Heaton); John Fitzgerald - Sunnyslope area property owner /resident - gave a history of the
24 Sunnyslope area; annexation has not been an advantage to area, would like to see area
25 continue to develop how it has been developing in past - does not want cluster housing;
26 Donald Weisenfluh - Regarding comments made at the May 14 City Council meeting
27 regarding sewer treatment plant capacity - recommends moratorium on new development
28 until new sewer plant is built.
29
30 APPROVAL OF LUTES: Minutes of May 14, 1996 were approved with corrections
31 to pages 4 and 32.
32
33 DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Update on Ellwood Center (from Bonne Gaebler); APA
34 Conference information.
35
36 COMMISSIONER'S REPORT: Commissioner Read - attended Sonoma/Marin
37 Transportation Conference (Commissioner Wick also attended); Commissioner Torliatt -
38 June 11, 7PM - discussion regarding economic plan/brainstorming session; Commissioner
39 Rahman - Spoke with ex- Commissioner Don Bennett regarding history of economic plan;
40 Commissioner Wick - Tree Committee Rep. - tree planting along Washington Street -
41 Council gave approval at last meeting (will begin in fall if funded); Commissioner Rahman
42 - Sunnyslope area - requested response at meeting; also requested response regarding
43 sewage treatment plant capacity at future meeting.
44
45 CORRESPONDENCE: 2 letters regarding Cross Creek (May 12 from Donald
46 Weisenfluh, May 24 from Donald Weisenfluh and Val Hinshaw); 1 letter from Mr. and
47 Mrs. Irvine regarding Airport PCD Amendment.
48
49 APPEAL STATEMENT: Was read.
5o LEGAL RECOURSE STATEMENT: Was noted on the agenda.
51
1
2 OLD BUSINESS
3
4 L CROSS CREEK; MARDELL LLC; ELY ROAD AT CASA GRANDE; AP
5 NO. 017-050-001; (0068 CPA/ANX/PREZ/PTSM 07- 95)(jm/tp).
6
7 Continued consideration and recommendation to the City Council of a proposed
8 225 -unit detached single -family subdivision on 96 acres, and Initial Study. The
9 project includes applications for: 1) the adoption of a Mitigated Negative
10 Declaration; 2) General Plan Amendment to expand the Urban Limit Line eastward
11 to incorporate 46 additional acres; 3) General Plan Amendment to designate 46
12 acres as Urban Separator and redesignate 11.4 acres from Urban Separator to
13 Urban Standard; 4) Annexation of 96 acres; 5) Prezoning of 47.5 acres to PUD
14 and 48.5 acres to Agriculture; 6) approval of a Pretentative Subdivision Map to
15 create 225 detached single- family lots on 47.5 acres and one Urban Separator
16 parcel comprising 48.5 acres. (Continued from Planning Commission meetings of
17 October 24 and November 28, 1995 and January 9, February 13 and April 9,
18 1996.) Public Hearing closed April 9, 1996
19
20 Commissioner Rahman - has received requests to reopen public hearing - this item has
21 been heard by Commission 4 times previously; recommends not opening public hearing,
22 would like to allow 15 minutes of speaking - not a public hearing.
23
24 Speakers:
25
26 Don Weisenfluh - Commented that no application for wetlands fill has been submitted to
27 Army Corps of Engineers; not prudent to go forward; developer proposes to delete
28 intention to build ballparks in inner approach - why? apparent that it is unsafe to have
29 activities in this area; ironic that developer would still want to develop in this area -
3o dangerous location.
31 Maureen McGuire - Member of site council at La Tercera School - density issue impacting
32 La Tercera - over 750 students now, built for 500; projected enrollment will not be
33 reduced at any one site; understands there is a full impact in this neighborhood's school
34 system.
35 Matt Hudson - Project Attorney - Well underway with Army Corps process; ballparks
36 deletion misrepresented; new school expected to be finished in Fall of 1997 - school
37 district feels confident of their ability to serve the community (referenced the letter in the
38 staff report from School Superintendent Billy Rae Lipscomb to this effect).
39 Mike Moriarity - Schools have been an issue for years - Jr. High School has never been
4o built.
41
42 Principal Planner McCann presented staff report.
43
44 COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
45
46 Commissioner Feibusch - Disappointed that courtyard component of project has been
47 dropped - feels courtyard units are important part of economic balance and neighborhood
48 diversity; General Plan indicates diversity important; schools - agreement regarding
49 payment of fees to Old Adobe School District - aware of problems; regarding extension of
50 Urban Limit Line - precedent will not be set - this development will not go past existing
I Urban Limit Line; Urban Separator will be significantly larger than the present condition;
2 this is a good project for the community - in favor of project.
3 Commissioner Torliatt - Perception of a development process; developers should work
4 within parameters of the General Plan/Zoning Ordinance; this developer has made an
5 "offer" to City in exchange for development parameter changes requested; has not been
6 proven that the amendments to the General Plan that this development requests can be
7 justified; too dense, feathering not sufficient.
8 Commissioner vonRaesfeld - General perspective: residents have right to expect General
9 Plan will be followed; PUD - based on merit of specific design, not mechanism to look at
10 different planning process; most recent staff information shows deletion of courtyard
11 homes and ballpark; does this project have enough merit to justify moving Urban Limit
12 Line? sufficient merits for PUD ?; issue is diversity, has not seen a plan reflecting the
13 deletion of the courtyard homes; cannot make findings for PUD without seeing revised
14 plan; no clear definition of project being asked to approve; project needs to be redefined.
15 Commissioner Thompson - This is an entirely new project with deletion of courtyard
16 homes; will not support without subdivision map showing greater feathering, less density,
17 etc.; not in favor of project as presented.
18 Commissioner Wick - Opposite perspective - General Plan provided some guidance; my
19 opinion is that the Urban Limit Line should not be moved unless City has reached build -
2o out or unless extraordinary proposal (i.e., affordable housing, etc.) is presented; as City
21 becomes more built -out Urban Limit Line may have to be moved; what types of criteria
22 might be developed by City for allowing Urban Limit Line to be moved ?; appreciates
23 staffs recommendation and opinion, but cannot support the request.
24 Commissioner Read - In reviewing minutes of previous meetings - ironic what this piece
25 of property was discussed in 1995; property owner Ronshiemer - requested Urban Limit
26 Line be drawn south of property; City proposed to include it (entire 96 acre parcel) within
27 Urban Limit Line - compromise was to include 1/2 of property; existing street layout
28 predicated on this development; Williamson Act soon to expire (February, 1997);
29 developer does not own this property - option to purchase; many good features to this
30 project; restoration to Adobe Creek, no garage -door architecture, school will not be
31 impacted; this will occur no matter who develops site; supports this project no matter who
12 developer will be.
33 Commissioner Rahman -Does not remember a more difficult project; could not support
34 this project at first; has spoken to many of the neighbors in this area; did not believe Urban
35 Limit Line should be moved at beginning of this project, after listening to history, looking
36 at map - does not believe moving line will set precedent; cannot see harm in moving line;
37 not crazy about high density, but understands density may be necessary for affordability;
38 schools and sewers will be able to accept capacity - has learned from experiences of past;
39 enough merits to this project to approve - move forward to City Council; will support this
40 project.
41 Planning Director Tuft - Questions for Commission - regarding redesign of project,
.42 motions - provide direction on specific findings if move to deny.
43 Commissioner Torliatt - Some aspects of this project are good, some bad; density along
44 Urban Limit Line sufficient (with 8,000 sq.ft. lots) density issue in interior of project;
45 should use the lower end of the density range - need a less dense development.
46 Commissioner Wick - Clarify vote if denial recommended to City Council.
47 Planning; Director Tuft - Described process.
48 Commissioner Wick - Finding to deny project due to inability to find General Plan
49 findings.
50
51 A motion was made by Commissioner Feibusch and seconded by Commissioner Read to
52 adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration based on the findings and mitigation measures in
53 the staff report and Initial Study.
2 Commissioner Read: Yes
3 Commissioner Feibusch: Yes
4 Commissioner Thompson: No
.5 Commissioner Torliatt: No
6 Commissioner vonRaesfeld: No
7 Commissioner Wick: Yes
8 Chairperson Rahman: Yes
9
10 Findings for Mitigated Negative Declaration
II
12 1. An Initial Study has been prepared for the Cross Creek project, and proper notice
13 provided in accordance with CEQA and local guidelines.
14
15 2. Based upon the Initial Study and comments received, potential impacts could be
16
avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance by mitigation measures attached as
17
conditions of approval. There is not substantial evidence that the Cross Creek
18
project, as conditioned, would have a significant effect on the environment.
19
20 3.
A monitoring program has been included to ensure compliance with the adopted
21
mitigation measures for the Cross Creek project.
22
23 4.
The Cross Creek project does not have potential to affect wildlife resources as
24
defined in the Fish and Game code, either individually or cumulatively, and is not
25
exempt from Fish and Game filing fees.
26
27 5.
The Cross Creek project is not located on any Hazardous Waste Site List compiled
28
by the State pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.
29
3o 6.
The Planning Commission reviewed the Initial Study/Negative Declaration and
31
considered the comments before making a decision on the project.
32
33 7.
The record of proceedings of the decision is available for public review at the City
34
of Petaluma, Planning Department, City Hall, 11 English Street, Petaluma, CA.
35
36 8.
Potential circulation impacts resulting from development of the Cross Creek
37
project, as conditioned, will be adequately mitigated through improvement of the
38
Casa Grande Road and Ely Boulevard South frontages of the project and at the
39
intersection of these two arterials, provision of two circulation connections to
40
adjoining development, and a system of interior streets adequately designed to
41
meet the anticipated traffic volumes. The project will also achieve implementation
42
of pedestrian and bicycle links with the Urban Separator path situated to the north,
43
and existing system along Casa Grande Road and Ely Boulevard South.
44
45 9.
Potential drainage impacts resulting from development of the Cross Creek project,
46
as conditioned, will be adequately mitigated by installation of drainage
47
improvements designed to City and Sonoma County Water Agency Standards to
48
preclude lot -to-lot surface runoff; installation of filter devices to separate
49
contaminants from storm water in areas improved in the Urban Separator and near
50
Adobe Creek, and specific drainage and restoration improvements to the Adobe
51
Creek channel.
4
1
2 10. Potential noise impacts to future residents of the Cross Creek project and
3 surrounding neighborhoods will be adequately mitigated by restriction of
4 construction hours, designation of a noise disturbance manager, construction of
5 homes along Casa Grande and Ely Boulevard South in compliance with General
6 Plan Standards for acceptable noise levels. In addition, an aigation easement will
7 be recorded to advise potential buyers of the existence of the Petaluma Airport and
8 associated noise.
9
10 11. Potential impacts to existing wetlands on the Cross Creek site wdl be adequately
11 mitigated by implementation of a wetlands mitigation plan and restoration plan for
12 Adobe Creek, in conformance with the requirements of the California Department
13 of Fish and Game, California Regional Water Quality Control Board and the U.S.
14 Army Corps of Engineers.
15
16 12. Potential visual impacts of the Cross Creek project wiIl be adequately mitigated
17 through use of compatible lot and budding configurations adjacent to existing
18 development, larger lots at the edge of the Urban Separator, and positive
19 orientation of the project to Casa Grande Road.
20
21 A motion was made by Commissioner Feibusch and seconded by Commissioner Read to
22 recommend to the City Council the relocation of the Urban Limit Line to the easterly
23 boundary of the project site, to designate 46 new acres as Urban Separator, to redesignate
24 11.4 acres from Urban Separator to Urban Standard, and to designate the Adobe Creek
25 channel within the project site as Open Space, based on findings in the staff report.
26
27 Commissioner Read: Yes
28 Commissioner Feibusch: Yes
29 Commissioner Thompson: No
30 Commissioner Torliatt: No
31 Commissioner vonRaesfeld: No
32 Commissioner Wick: No
33 Chairperson Rahman: Yes
34
35 Note: Motion was defeated.
36
37 A motion was made by Commissioner Feibusch and seconded by Commissioner Read to
"38 recommend to the City Council the prezoning of 47.5 acres to PUD; 48.5 acres to
39 Agriculture, based on findings within the staff report.
40
41 Commissioner Read: Yes
42 Commissioner Feibusch: Yes
43 Commissioner Thompson: No
44 Commissioner Torliatt: No
45 Commissioner vonRaesfeld: No
46 Commissioner Wick: No
4:7 Chairperson Rahman: Yes
48
49 Note: Motion was defeated. Due to the defeat of motions to amend the General Plan and
50 prezone the project site, no action was taken by the Commission on the Unit Development
51 Plan and'Tentative Map.
'52
1
2 NEW BUSINESS
3 PUBLIC HEARING
4
5 H, BOOMERS CABARET; 1 WATER STREET; AP PTO. 008 - 067 -001;
6 CUP960140cm)
7
8 Consideration of Boomer's Cabaret, a proposed Alcoholic Beverage Establishment
9 with Commercial Recreation and Live Music within a 4,500 square foot space in
10 the Old Mill Shopping Complex at 1 Water Street. The following actions are
11 necessary: 1) a Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity to allow an
12 alcoholic beverage service use to locate in an area known to have an over -
13 concentration licensed facilities; 2) adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration;
14 and, 3) approval of a Use Permit to authorize the operation of an Alcoholic
15 Beverage Establishment with Commercial Recreation and Live Entertainment at 1
16 Water Street.
17
18 Principal Planner McCann presented the brief staff report.
19
20 SPEAKERS:
21
22 Commissioner vonRaesfeld - Questions regarding ingresslegress (restaurant ?).
23 Coissioner Wick - Question regarding monthly meetings, 6 month use permit review?
mm
24 Why?
25 Principal Planner McCann - Recommendations more stringent than previously imposed on
26 other establishments.
27 Commissioner Wick - Many conditions recommended by Police Chief have probably come
28 about because of operation of previous owner (Steamer Gold Landing).
29 Commissioner Read - Questions regarding limitation of frequency of live entertainment at
30 this location; questions regarding Noise Ordinance.
31 Commissioner Feibusch - Regarding location in primarily non - residential location - any
32 noise complaints with past operation? (no)
33
34 The public hearing was opened.
35
36 Michael -Ann Dewitt - 4040 Hoen Ave., Santa Rosa; other establishments cannot be
37 compared with this proposal - (proposed jazz, etc.) will not attract same noisy crowd.
38 Claudia O'Flynn - 6 Petaluma Blvd. N.; merchant in Mill (Aesthetic Approach) - This is
39 needed in this area - if this type of establishment is properly run, there should not be
4o problems - many other establishments in Mill in favor of this proposal.
41 Bernard Belg dre - Independent films will be shown at this cabaret one night per week -
42 will attract college students, filmmakers, etc.
43 Raymond Randall - applicant - described his market analysis -will offer blues, jazz, old
44 movies, etc.; access questions - only renting cabaret space at this time, would like to be
45 able to expand to restaurant use; experience in law enforcement; will provide escorts in
46 parking lot; would like to provide community service space; background in law
47 enforcement, youth counseling, social services background; appeal to 30 -year crowd and
48 over.
49 Commissioner Read - Plans for food service?
50 Raymond Randall - Catering (food brought in); no problem with 6 -month use permit
51 review.
6
1 Mike Healy - 344 Kentucky - Process issues - not opposed to project application unique -
2 over -34 audience, not close to residential neighborhood, unique location, closure of
3 Steamer Gold and Holidaze downtown this applicant has benefits of that situation; need
4 of other tenants in Mill to help generate foot - traffic; some aspects of this analysis very
5 complete - some aspects superficial. (regarding public convenience or necessity)'- material
6 provided by applicant regarding alcoholic beverage sales may not be sufficient for other
7 projects of this nature.
8 Bill Corbin -92.9 jazz radio station) - Petaluma gateway to eat center -many
9 jazz entertainers would welcome being able to come to Petaluma will help to establish this
_10 type of club in Petaluma; support project; better crowd can be established in downtown
' 11 Petaluma with this type of establishment.
y 12 Barbara Graves - TAPP Committee - No interest in opposing this use - made that
13 determination that this is an appropriate use for this type of club; 2 key concerns, however
14 - problems with club format is a high risk business no matter how well run; Petaluma
15 downtown in good situation now that Holidaze and Steamer's Cabaret are both closed;
16 look at impact this type of club will present - does believe this particular business will be
17 well-run, pay attention to guidelines in future.
18
19 The public hearing was closed.
-20
21 A motion was made by Commissioner Torliatt and seconded by Commissioner Feibusch to
22 grant a Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity, to adopt a Negative
23 Declaration and to approve a Conditional Use Permit to establish a Cabaret use
24 authorizing an Alcoholic Beverage Establishment with live entertainment and commercial
25 recreation at 1 Water Street based on the findings and Mitigation Measures outlined in the
26 Initial Study and the conditions listed below:
27
28 Commissioner Read: Yes
29 Commissioner Feibusch: Yes
'30 Commissioner Thompson: Yes
31 Commissioner Torliatt: Yes
32 Commissioner vonRaesfeld: Yes
r. 33 Commissioner Wick: Yes
34 Chairperson Rahman: Yes
35
36 Environmental Findings
37
38 1. An Initial Study has been prepared and properly noticed for Boomer's Cabaret in
39 accordance with CEQA and local guidelines.
40
41 2. No substantial evidence has been presented to staff that the project, as conditionally
42 approved, would have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, the Initial
43 Study concludes that no significant environmental impacts will result.
44
45 3
A Mitigation Monitoring Program has been incorporated into the May 7, 1996 Initial
Study/Negative Declaration as an attachment and will ensure compliance with all
required Mitigation Measures.
46
47
'48
49
50
51
52
,53
4. The project does not have the potential to affect wildlife resources as defined in the
Fish and Game code, either individually or cumulatively, and therefore is exempt from
Fish and Game filing fees. Approving the proposed Cabaret use in no way affects
plant life, animal life, or the habitat in which wildlife resources are found.
7
1
5.
The project is not located on a site listed on any Hazardous Waste Site List compiled
2
by the State pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.
3
4
6.
The Planning Commission reviewed the May 7, 1996 Initial Study/Negative
5
Declaration and considered the comments before making a decision on the project.
6
7
7.
The Planning Commission finds that authorizing the establishment of Boomer's
8
Cabaret will have no significant adverse Noise impacts. The Planning Commission
9
finther finds that, although existing noise levels are anticipated to increase, the levels
10
of increase are anticipated to be within the acceptable ranges established by the
11
General Plan for Community Commercial uses and not anticipated to reach dangerous
12
levels. In addition, the Planning Commission finds that there are no sensitive receptors
13
in the area (i.e. residential neighborhoods, hospitals, etc.) that would be impacted by a
14
minimal increase in noise generated by the proposed use.
15
16
S.
The Planning Commission finds that authorizing the establishment of Boomer's
17
Cabaret, with the incorporation of the suggested mitigation measures from the Police
18
Department contained in the May 7, 1996 Initial Study/Negative Declaration, will have
19
no significant adverse environmental impacts to Public Services.
20
21
DE MININIIS RAPACT FINDING:
22
23
9.
The Planning Commission finds that there is no evidence before the City that the
24
proposed project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or
25
the habitat upon which the wildlife depends; on the basis of substantial evidence, the
26
presumption of adverse effect is rebutted. A Certificate of Fee Exemption will be
27
completed and filed with the Notice of Determination for the project.
28
29
Mitigation Measures as outlined in the Initial Study
30
31
Use Permit Findinus
32
33
1.
The proposed Cabaret use, including the suggested conditions from the Police
34
Department, conforms to the intent of the Central Commercial District of the Petaluma
35
Zoning Ordinance in that the CC District is intended to provide a concentration of
36
commercial uses as well as to provide a greater variety of uses not typically located
37
within the neighborhood commercial district.
38
39
2.
The proposed Cabaret use, including the suggested conditions, will conform to the
40
requirements and intent of the General Plan in that the Community Commercial
41
General Plan Designation provides for a wide range of uses and encourages diversity
42
of uses within the downtown area.
43
44
3.
The Planning Commission finds that the proposed Cabaret use will not constitute a
45
nuisance nor be detrimental to the public welfare of the community because the
46
proposed use is not located in close proximity to a sensitive . use such as a residential
47
neighborhood, and the ongoing monitoring of the use through monthly meetings with
48
the Police and Planning Departments will anticipate problems and minimize possible
49
nuisances.
-- 50
51
52
53
8
;1
Mitigation Monitoring
Z
. 3
1.
In order to ensure that the Police Department has an on -site contact during all working
4
hours, a manager shall be on the premises during all business hours.
5
6
2.
Prior to occupancy of the building and commencement of the use, a security plan shall
7
be submitted to, and approved by the Police Department.
;8
9
3.
A monthly meeting shall be held with the owners and managers, Planning Department
to
and Police Department to discuss: 1) security needs for upcoming live events or
1'i
special presentations; 2) possible modifications to the music format; and 3) any
12
complaints received by the City.
"13
14
4.
Thei manager /owner shall ensure that all beverage servers have received responsible
15
beverage Service training given by Alcoholic Beverage control (ABC). Records
16
showing completion of this training shall be easily accessible on -site.
17
18
5.
In order to ensure adherence to the conditions of approval of this Conditional Use
19,
Permit, the Planning Commission should review the Conditional. Use Permit on a bi-
.20
annual basis.
21
22
Supplemental
Findings for Alcoholic Beverage Service Uses
23
24
1.
The Planning Commission finds that no previous Conditional Use Permits have been
25
issued to the applicant or a legal partner of the applicant.
26
27
2.
The Planning Commission finds that the proposed location for Boomer's Cabaret is
28
consistent with the CC, Central Commercial Zoning District and consistent with the
29
development standards of the Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission further
30
finds that any future tenant improvements for the proposed use must receive a building
31
permit approval from the City of Petaluma subject to all applicable codes and
32
requirements.
33
34
3.
The Planning Commission finds that the proposed Cabaret use will not constitute a
35
nuisance nor be detrimental to the public welfare of the community because the
36
proposed use is not located in close proximity to a sensitive use such as a residential
37
neighborhood, and the ongoing monitoring of the use through monthly meetings with
38
the Police and Planning Departments will assist in anticipating problems and
39
minimizing possible nuisances.
40
41
4.
The Planning Commission finds that, by virtue of the location of the proposed use
42
within the downtown and the limited size of the use, the intensity and scope of the
43
proposed Cabaret is consistent with the surrounding service and retail commercial uses
44
and that the character of the Cabaret will not pose any conflict with the surrounding
45
uses.
46
47
Use Permit Conditions
48
49
1.
The owner of Boomer's Cabaret shall be responsible to adhere to all applicable
50
requirements contained in section 21- 430.24 of the Zoning Ordinance. Wherever
51
applicable, the requirements shall be satisfied prior to occupancy and commencement
52
of the proposed use.
53
9
1 2. The proposed commercial recreation activities, including: live music, the collection of
2 a cover charge, weddings, banquets, civic meetings, fashion shows, dance lessons (i.e.
3 Salsa), movie productions, comedy, billiards, special seminar training, birthday parties,
4 private engagements, theater productions (plays), etc. shall be the limit of activities
5 permitted through this Conditional Use Permit. Any activity not specifically named in
6 the above, shall be prohibited. Additional activities or expansion in hours shall require
7 an amendment of this Conditional Use Permit.
9 3. Bar personnel shall check identification (T.D.) at the front door to insure patrons are of
10 legal age to enter.
11
12 4. At closing time or during special events, crowd control by qualified security personnel
13 shall be provided to insure safety and orderly conduct in front of the premises.
14 Sidewalks shall be kept open for pedestrian traffic at all times.
15
16 5. The Planning Director and Chief of Police shall be notified a minimum of ten (10) days
17 in advance of special events that may attract larger than normal crowds. The Chief of
18 Police may require and the owner /operator shall provide additional qualified security
19 personnel on site to provide adequate crowd control.
20
21 6. Hours of operation shall be limited to 12 PM to 2 AM, Monday through Saturday and
22 11 AM to 10 PM Sunday.
23
24 7. All employees shall complete a responsible hospitality training program within 90 days
25 of commencement of employment and/or the effective date of this CUP.
26
27 8. The applicant shall comply with Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) laws and
28 regulations. Suspension of the applicant's license by the ABC may constitute sufficient
29 basis for review and possible revocation of this conditional use permit.
30
31 9. This conditional use permit may be recalled to the Planning Commission for review at
32 any time due to complaints regarding lack of compliance with conditions of approval,
33 traffic congestion, noise generation, or other adverse operating characteristics. At
34 such time, the Commission may revoke the conditional use permit or add/modify
35 conditions of approval.
36
37 10. The applicants/developers shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or any
38 of its boards, commission, agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action or
39 proceeding against the City, its boards, commission, agents, officers, or employees to
40 attack, set aside, void, or annul, the approval of the project when such claim or action
41 is brought within the time period provided for in applicable State and/or local statutes.
42 The City shall promptly notify the applicants/developers of any such claim, action, or
43 proceeding. The City shall coordinate in the defense. Nothing contained in this
44 condition shall prohibit the City from participating in a defense of any claim, action, or
45 proceeding if the City bears its own attorney's fees and costs, and the City defends the
46 action in good faith.
47
48 11. From the Fire Department:
49
50 a. Provide one fire extinguisher, 2AlOBC type, for each 3,000 square feet of floor
51 space, and/or a maximum travel distance of 75 feet.
10
I b. Post address at or near main entry door - minimum four (4) inch letters on
2 contrasting background.
3 c. All compressed gas cylinders shall be adequately secured to prevent falling or being
4 knocked over. Fasteners used to secure the cylinders shall be of non - combustible
5 material.
6 d. Use of extension cords in lieu of permanent wiring is prohibited.
7 e. Provide metal or flame retardant plastic waste cans.
8 £ Storage shall be maintained a minimum of eighteen (18) inches below sprinkler
9 heads.
10 g. Provide an exit sign over all required exit doors.
- 11 h. Emergency exit lighting shall be provided at or near all exits and as designated by
12 the Fire Marshal's office.
13 i. All emergency lighting, exit sign lights, shall have two separate sources of power as
14 required in the Building Code.
15 j. Provide panic hardware on all required exit doors.
16
17
18 UL AIRPORT PCD AMENDMENT; PETALUMA MUNICIPAL AIRPORT;
19 AP NO. 136- 070 -028; REZ96006(hg)
20
21 Consideration of an amendment to the Petaluma Municipal Airport Planned
22 Community District to add Aircraft Hangers as a conditional use within the
23 Aviation Commercial Subzone.
24
25 Principal Planner McCann presented the staff report.
26
27 SP EAKERS :
28
29 Commissioner Read - Questions regarding Federal Grant for building these hangars.
30 Bill Graham - Airport Manager, Not a grant, State Loan Fund.
31 Commissioner Read - Match or straight loan?
32 Bill Graham - Straight loan.
33 Commissioner vonRaesfeld - Is this the area where planes used to park? (yes)
34
35 The public hearing was opened.
36
37 SPEAKERS: None
38
39 The public hearing was closed.
40
41 A motion was made by Commissioner Feibusch and seconded by Commissioner
42 vonRaesfeld to recommend to the City Council a recommendation for exemption of the
43 PCD Amendment from CEQA and approval of an amendment to the Petaluma Municipal
44 Airport PCD Zoning District Regulations to include Aircraft Hangars as a conditional use
45 within the Aviation Commercial Subzone based on the findings and conditions listed
46 below:
47
48
Commissioner Read: Yes
49
Commissioner Feibusch: Yes
50
Commissioner Thompson: Yes
51
Commissioner Torliatt: Yes
52
Commissioner vonRaesfeld: Yes
11
I Commissioner Wick: Yes
2 Chairperson Rahman: Yes
4 Legislation Findings
5
6 1. This legislative amendment is exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to
7
Section 15061 (b)(3) of the Guidelines because the proposed amendment to the
8
Petaluma Municipal Airport PCD Zoning District Regulations for the Aviation
9
Commercial Subzone to included aircraft hangars as a conditional use does not
10
result in any significant environmental impacts.
11
12
2.
The amendment to the Petaluma Municipal Airport PCD Zoning District
13
Regulations to include Aircraft Hangars as a conditional use within the Aviation
14
Commercial Subzone does not raise issues contrary to applicable Policies,
15
Programs and Objectives of the General Plan regarding compatible and safe uses
16
within the airport or surrounding lands; the proposed amendment is consistent with
17
Policies, Programs and Objectives of the General Plan which are germane to the
18
preservation of compatible and safe airport operations.
19
20
3.
The amendment to the Petaluma Municipal Airport PCD Zoning District
21
Regulations to include aircraft hangars as a conditional use within the Aviation
22
Commercial Subzone will serve the public convenience and general welfare by
23
providing the opportunity to include additional for -rent aircraft hangars at the
24
airport.
25
26
4.
The existing streets (E. Washington, Sky Ranch Drive and Executive Drive) are
27
suitable and adequate to serve the existing and conditional uses within the
28
Petaluma Municipal Airport subzones.
29
30
5.
The amendment to the Petaluma Municipal Airport PCD Zoning District
31
Regulations to include aircraft hangars as a conditional use within the Aviation
32
Commercial Subzone is appropriate in context with the overall planning purposes
33
intended; and to include aircraft hangars within the Aviation Commercial Subzone
34
will be in harmony with the character of the surrounding areas.
35
36
6.
The amendment to the Petaluma Municipal Airport PCD Zoning District
37
Regulations to include aircraft hangars as a conditional use within the Aviation
38
Commercial Subzone will allow for the development of a needed service for users
39
of the airport.
40
41
Condition of PCD Zoning District Regulations Amendment
42
43
1.
City Staff shall amend the Petaluma Municipal Airport PCD Zoning District
44
Regulations under Aviation Commercial Subzone to include Aircraft Hangars as a
45
conditional use.
46
47
48
IV.
LIAISON REPORTS: None.
49
50
51 V. PROJECT STATUS:
12
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1. GPAs:
River Plan - Adopted by City Council.
Gatti - Approved by City Council
East "D" Street - Approved by City Council
2. Westview Estates - Will return to Council on June I
3. Colombard Road - Neighborhood Community Meeting - May 29, 7PM - 772
notices sent; 100 responses received from questionnaire.
Miscellaneous:
Commissioner Rahman - Would like to develop protocol allowing applicant to speak first
if they choose.
Commissioner Torliatt - Congratulations to Senior Planner Vincent Smith - new baby
boy, Grant Clinton Smith, born last week.
ADJOURNMENT: 9:30 PM.
min0529 / plan69
13