HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 06/26/1996Planning Commission Minutes June 25, 1996
1
2
3 CITY OF PETALUMA
4 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
5
6 REGULAR MEETING JUNE 25, 1996
7 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 PM
8 CITY HALL - PETALUMA, CA
9
10 Commissioners Present. Feibusch, Rahman$, Read, Thompson, Torliatt, Wick Absent.
11 vonRaesfeld
12
13 Staff: Pamela Tuft, Planning Director
14 James McCann, Principal Planner
15 Vincent Smith, Senior Planner
16 Allan Tilton, Traffic Engineer
17
18 * Chairperson
19
20 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
21
22
23 PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
24
25 DIRECTOR'S REPORT: None.
26 COMMISSIONER'S REPORT: Commissioner Thompson - If Cross Creek is
27 approved by City Council, will it come back here? Planning Director Tuft - As originally
28 recommended by staff, Planning Commission would review PUD plan for compliance with
29 the intent of approval prior to SPARC/LAFCO consideration. Commissioner Thompson -
30 Would we then be able to talk about density, construction type, design, etc.? Planning
31 Director Tuft - Assuming Council acted on Pre - Tentative Map, yield (density) would be
32 set - components of PUD, layout, architecture, etc. could be discussed. Commissioner
33 Torliatt - Bike Committee met last night - toured Lucchessi Park/Lynch Creek area,
34 working on bike plan.
35 CORRESPONDENCE: Status report from Housing Division. regarding Opportunity
36 Center:
37 APPEAL STATEMENT: Was read.
38 LEGAL RECOURSE STATEMENT: Was noted on the agenda.
39
40
41 NEW BUSINESS
42 PUBLIC HEARINGS
43
44 I. 'PAMELA PLACE H; 901 and 911 SUNNY SLOPE ROAD; AP NO'S 019-
45 201 -010, 011, 012, 017, 018; FILE NO. TSM96003(vcs).
46
47 Consideration of a request to rezone a 4.98 acre site at 901 and 911 Sunny Slope
48 Road to Planned Unit Development District and to subdivide the site into
49 residential lots to be served by a new public street. The following actions are
50 necessary: 1) Determination that further environmental review is not required
51 pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15162(a) of the California Environmental
1
Planning Commission Minutes June 25, 1996
Quality Act (CEQA); 2) Rezoning of the 4.98 acre site to Planned Unit
Development (PUD) District; 3) approval of the PUD Development Plan and
Standards; and 4) approval of Tentative Subdivision Map to create 10 residential
lots.
6 Senior Planner Smith presented the staff report.
7
8 The public hearing was opened.
9
to SPEAKERS:
11
12 Commissioner Read - Concerns regarding drainage and grading; anything in Sunnyslope
13 Assessment District addressing these issues? How did the EIR assess this?
14 Senior Planner Smith - The EIR did not get into specifics on development or infrastructure
is needs on each individual lot.
16 Steve Kemmerle - 609 Jonas Lane - drainage from the proposed subdivision site goes
17 through his property (an easement is in place); concern is with the adequacy of the
18 easement and facilities to accept additional drainage and impact to his property by
19 improvements, if necessary; before annexation to City there were drainage problems; how
20 can all these houses be hooked -up to this drain? How far from our property line will new
21 homes be? will the new homes be two- story?; lot sizes? will homes fit into existing
22 neighborhood?
23 Larry Jonas - Applicant - brief history of project; developed adjacent subdivision "Donnas
24 Lane (where Mr. Kemmerle lives); has been developing in Petaluma since 1977;
25 configuration of street is not standard, was designed because of Sunnyslope Draft EIR -
26 more rural tone, less urban standard; EIR asks for less concrete, more rural "feel ";
27 Engineering Department is asking for City Standards; presented letter from Steve and
28 Marilyn Genee - project done several years ago (Aaron Acres Subdivision) - the Genee's
29 state no parking problems with street design of Benjamin Lane - no fire delay time; cul -de-
30 sac bulb not necessary; planter island in bulb is a problem, nuisance; has been on Tree
31 Committee for several years - there are many trees on this site that will remain;
32 maintenance on landscaping island is a nightmare; Landscape Assessment District would
33 be created just for landscaped island (2 trees) - undue burden; these houses will be larger
34 houses/lots, Landscape Assessment District not necessary, homeowners will maintain all
35 landscaping - has worked very well in other subdivisions.
36 Bonnie Diefendorf - Project Engineer - Much work on these properties - happy to be able
37 to develop them together, one concern - Fire Department requires another turn- around;
38 setback lines would be moved closer to existing neighbors; Sunnyslope is 4 1/2 - 5 feet
39 higher than this property; 7 -8 foot fill would be required to drain property to Sunnyslope;
40 area of steep slopes, lots of grading if several turn- arounds required; if cul -de -sac required
41 in center of property, lots of grading would be required; concerns with sidewalks on both
42 sides of street - only two lots would be without sidewalks; issue of drainage (brought up
43 by neighbor) - area is low, very large amount of fill would be required (also on adjoining
44 property); drainage to be directed to Sunnyslope and to pipe through adjacent subdivision.
45 Principal Planner McCann - Engineering memo dated June 24 amends drainage condition.
46 Bonnie Diefendorf - Landscape Assessment District condition is contradictory.
47 Commissioner Read - City Engineer Hargis should be here to answer drainage questions,
48 grading questions, etc.
49 John Fitzgerald - 114 Suncrest - Reminded Commission of design standards for drainage
50 (designed for 10 -year storm); 1982 had two 250 -year storms; design criteria was met.
51 Larry Jonas - Wants large trees throughout development; proposed rear setbacks 30 feet;
52 lots are 140 feet deep; listening to concerns of neighbors; willing to make one setback 35
53 feet per neighbor request; wants to leave design as is; this project does not fit the City
Planning Co mmissi on Minutes June 25, 1996
1 Standards - this design is more aesthetic, fits in better, Eliminate condition 8 - keep in 11;
2 wants mix of houses - one and two story.
3 Commissioner Rahman - do you have house designs set already?
4 Commissioner Feibusch - questions regarding setbacks.
5
6 The public hearing was closed.
7 °
8 Commissioner Rahman - could staff respond to neighbors concerns?
9 Principal Planner McCann - Design Guidelines are included with this project; two -story
to home restrictions included to insure existing neighborhood privacy - can be amended to
11 assure that.
12 Commissioner Wick - Are homes on Jonas Lane restricted to remain one -story homes?
`13 Principal Planner McCann - No; Design Guidelines are narrative description of zoning;
14 Landscape Assessment District - most common for public street trees, would also include
15 landscaping in street bulb.
'16 Commissioner Wick - Clarification regarding Landscape Assessment District; questions on
17 meandering sidewalk design; with this low density could sidewalk be narrowed?
`18 Planning Director Tuft - would like Traffic Engineer Tilton to discuss street width issues;
19 discussed large sidewalk setback option.
20 Commissioner Torliatt - Can staff discuss neighbor's concerns with CC &R's?
21 Principal Planner McCann - Discussed CUR restrictions.
22 Traffic Engineer Tilton - Regarding 28 foot street width - would be consistent with other
23 similar projects - acceptable to Engineering; 28 feet can work with careful placement of
24 driveways, with parking permitted on both sides of street; Diefendorf brought up
25 interesting points regarding drainage adequacy - Mr. Hargis is working with applicant and
26 Sonoma', County for equitable solution; placement of landscaping and fencing in existing
27 adjacent subdivision has somewhat changed grading - design for this subdivision may
28 lessen drainage impacts existing now; hammerhead at this site not warranted; Engineering
29 Department willing to work with project engineer to work out drainage/grading using cul-
30 de -sac design.
31 Commissioner Thompson - (to Allan Tilton) - City Engineer Hargis letter of June 18 -
32 recommended condition number 4 looks like applicant is meeting this radius.
33 Traffic Engineer Tilton - Mr. Hargis does not feel that this is a difficult project to design,
34 therefore hammerhead not necessary.
35 Commissioner Read - Mr. Hargis needs to be here to answer questions; whose lot will be
36 granted easement?
37 Traffic Engineer Tilton - Does not have information on proposed easements.
38 Commissioner Read - Not convinced of drainage adequacy - concerns; grading concerns -
39 need input from Mr: Hargis.
40 Commissioner Torliatt - Questions regarding drainage - cumulative drainage with future
41 projectsi timeline for drainage improvements on neighbor's property?
42 Traffic Engineer Tilton - Drainage within subdivision - applicant's engineer and City
43 Engineer are working on design acceptable to City and developer; City would like latitude
44 to work'with project engineer.
45 Bonnie Diefendorf - All detailed calculations have been done in advance, convinced design
- 46 will work.
47 Commissioner Rahman - Concerns with "where feasible ", "fairly convinced" terms -
48 project not ready to come before this Commission - needs to be worked out with
49 Engineering staff.
50 Commissioner Thompson - Any other questions should be asked now and return later with
51 answers:,
52 Commissioner Rahman - Concerns only with drainage - would like answers from Mr.
53 Hargis. '
Planning Commission Minutes June 25, 1996
1 Commissioner Torliatt - Mr. Hargis should be here to answer cul- de-sac versus
2 hammerhead question.
3 Commissioner Thompson - Opportunity to further discuss and answer questions before
4 returning.
5 Commissioner Rahman - Variety of housing should be added to conditions; existing
6 neighbors should be taken into consideration regarding privacy.
7 Commissioner Torliatt - 35 foot rear yard setback from existing housing development
8 should be required (offered by developer).
9 Commissioner Feibusch - would like clarification from Engineering Department regarding
to grading/street design/drainage.
11 Planning Director Tuft - suggests continuance to next meeting; would like to answer
12 questions to neighbors regarding impacts to their property.
13 Commissioner Thompson - do we need more information on LAD?
14 Planning Director Tuft - Described responsibility to property owners/City with an LAD.
15
16 Continued to July 9th Planning Commission meeting.
17
18
19 H. SHAMROCK MATERIALS PROPANE TANK; 400 HOPPER STREET;
20 AP NO'S 007 - 163 -008; 007 - 171 -005; FILE NO. SPC960220cm).
21
22 Consideration of a request for a minor change to an existing non - conforming
23 building materials facility in the M -L Zoning District to allow the addition of a
24 500 -gallon propane tank. The Planning Commission is being asked to approve the
25 proposed change pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 25 -402. The project is
26 exempt from processing under CEQA pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15311
27 pertaining to accessory structures and Section 15303 - New Construction of Small
28 Structures.
29
30 Principal Planner McCann presented the staff report.
31
32 The public hearing was opened.
33
34 SPEAKERS:
35
36 Commissioner Feibusch - This proposed location not in area of Flood Plain?
37 Principal Planner McCann - Anchored properly for location proposed.
38 Commissioner Read - Is this an opportunity to add language regarding River Plan?
39 Downtown Plan?
40 Planning Director Tuft - Fire Marshal had no concerns, any questions will check with Fire
41 Marshal; could make acknowledgment that this site is within intended Downtown District
42 Plan.
43 Commissioner Read - Would like an addition to note this.
44 Commissioner Wick - How do we justify imposing Impact Fees?
45 Principal Planner McCann - Impact Fees will not be imposed - this was a standard
46 condition, not applicable.
47 Paul Cheetham Shamrock Materials - What are impacts of notation of Downtown Area
48 designation on this parcel?
49 Commissioner Rahman - Just to make Shamrock aware of Planning.
50 Planning Director Tuft - No intent to "phase -out" non - conforming uses - recognizing
51 value of property and redevelopment potential; Commissioner Read suggesting dust a
52 notification that property is in these Planning areas.
4
Planning Commission Minutes June 25, 1996
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
Commissioner Torliatt - Not imposing any conditions.
The public hearing was closed.
A motion was made by Commissioner Feibusch and seconded by Commissioner Torliatt to
find that this proposal does not constitute a more intensive use of this site and to authorize
staff to ;proceed with administrative processing of the Site Plan and Architectural review
application.
Commissioner Read: Yes
Commissioner Feibusch: Yes
Commissioner Thompson: Yes
Commissioner Torliatt: Yes
Commissioner vonRaesfeld: Absent
Gommissioner Wick: Yes
Chairperson Rahman: Yes
DEPARTMENT REPORTS
IM DISCUSSION OF TRAFFIC /CIRCULATION PRINCIPLES AND ISSUES.
Traffic Engineer Tilton - led discussion - what are Planning Commission's issues? -
overheads - Land Use - Transportation Circle; Petaluma's Land Use Transportation Circle -
Transportation Planning - Operations and Maintenance - Funding Stream - Transportation
Systems.
Commissioner Rahman - Identification of issues for a future forum.
Commissioner Wick - Neighborhood traffic management; would like to see City Standards
for all types of streets, bike paths, etc..
Commissioner Rahman - Specific projects/situations - difficulty with how to deal with; if
State mandates inadequate, Petaluma should have opportunity to create design solutions
to adequately address specific projects; when can we step in? corner of Washington and
Sonoma Mountain Parkway - hazard at this intersection - local jurisdiction policy should
be set; commuter parking - South Petaluma Specific Plan needs to have commuter parking
(Corona/Ely does not adequately address); not enough rapid movement on this issue; local
issues need to be resolved locally.
Traffic Engineer Tilton - Will be meeting with Randy Wyatt - list of several sites/issues; all
Commissioners encouraged to contact him directly.
Commissioner Rahman - Unsafe condition - nothing has been done.
Traffic Engineer Tilton - Sign has been ordered, will be discussed tomorrow; more
creative and innovative designs can be lengthy process.
Commissioner Rahman - Small problems sometimes don't get resolved quickly.
Commissioner Feibusch - D Street - now has several standard stop signs - neighborhood
happy -' problems created with spill-over onto other areas - overall circulation
problems; need input from Traffic Engineering to give direction regarding overall picture;
planned subdivision at Lynch Creek (Willow Glen) - what impact will that have on the
Sonoma Mountain Parkway/E. Washington intersection? public safety, vehicle turn-
around and clearance; more and more in -fill projects; no parking on public streets? impacts
of commercial portion of Corona/Ely area; Lynch Creek impacts; look at good points of
Corona/Ely; reduced funding in transportation - how will we look at this in Petaluma;
Allan Tilton has gotten many ISTEA funds for Petaluma; Colombard/Zinfandel ?.
Planning Commission Minutes June 25, 1996
1 Traffic En,ineer Tilton - Must be flexible; funding flexibility; have to look to where the
2 money is available.
3 Comnnssioner Rahman - Colombard/Zinfandel -what is status of this project?
4 Planning Director Tuft - hosted neighborhood meeting at Meadow School - 75 -80
5 neighbors attended; radar trailer scheduled to be placed at site; reviewing surveys returned
6 (mailed 770); staff will be scheduling another neighborhood meeting. public
transit
7 Commissioner Torliatt - agrees with Commissioner Rahman regarding p
g parking; this parking normally full; Bike Committee will recommend more bike sensors in
9 traffic signals around town to encourage bicycle riders.
to Traffic Enwineer Tilton - 16 intersections will be going out to bid for this type of
11 bicyclelpedestrian enhancement
12 Commissioners thanked Allan Tilton for ISTEA efforts.
13
14
15 IV. LIAISON REPORTS:
16
17 Commissioner Rahman - Missed South Petaluma Specific Plan meeting -pease
18 update.
19 Planning Director Tuft - staff met with property owners to discuss cost estimates,
20 status of plan, options.
21
22
23 V. PROJECT STATUS:
24 pp Commission
25 1. Westview Estates -City Council approved with Planning
26 recommendations. pp Commission
27 2. Woodside Village -City Council approved with Planning
28 recommendations. - City Council approved with Planning
30 recommendations.
31 4. Petaluma Queen -Floating commissary out of Turning Basin; proceeding
32 with other non - compliance issues - parking lot improvements, etc.
33 5. Cardroom Applications - Kodiak Jack's/Petaluma Queen applications being
34 reviewed for completeness.
Telecommunication facilities 35 6. regulations - Drafted - presented to City
Radio Operator concerns - will arrange to
36 Council at last meeting -HAM
1 City Council to request continuance of
37 meet with representatives - July
38 suspension of permit issuance.
39
40
41 Calendar items - Joint SPARC / Planning Commission Field Trip - July 25 not available -
42 Scheduled for August 22.
43
44 Commissioner Rahman - Will not be in attendance August 13.
45
46 APA attendance - October 2 -5, Palm Springs - Commissioners to call staff wi
47 attendance request.
48
49
5o ADJOURNMENT: 9:25PM minO625 i p1an70
51
6