HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 08/27/1996Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
CITY OF PETALUMA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CITY HALL - PETALUMA, CA
AUGUST 27, 1996
7:00 PM
Commissioners Present. Bennett, Feibusch, Rahman, Thompson, vonRa.esfeld, Wick #
Commissioners Absent: Maguire
Staff Pamela Tuft, Planning Director
James McCann, Principal Planner
* Chairperson
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
21
22 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of July 23, 1996 were approved as printed.
23
24 PUBLIC COMMENT: John Fitzgerald - Sunnyslope area issues.
25
26 DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Planning Director Tuft - In response to John Fitzgerald -
27 Discussion regarding Sunnyslope area will be on an upcoming agenda; gave update on
28 printing of River Plan, Department hosted a booth at the River Festival, Central Petaluma
29 Specific Plan update, APA Conference.
30
31 COMMISSIONER'S REPORT: Commissioner Wick - received telephone call from
32 applicant Vieler requesting his item not be continued.
33
34 CORRESPONDENCE: Letters from Jack and Ruth Matelli and from Gary Collins
35 regarding Corona Creek; Letter from Mchael Healy, Lawrence Longenbaugh and Victor
36 Thuesen regarding Kodiak Jack's; Letter from Terry Traktman (Applicant's Attorney)
37 regarding Kodiak Jack's; Status Report No. 7 from Housing Division regarding
38 Opportunity Center.
39
40 APPEAL STATEMENT: Was read.
41
42 LEGAL RECOURSE STATEMENT: Was noted on agenda.
43
44
45 OLD; BUSINESS:
46 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS:
47
48 L MCDONALD'S CUP AMENDMENT; DEBORAH BARRALE; 103 N.
49 MCDOWELL BLVD. acm).
50
1
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
2 Continued consideration of a proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Use
3 Permit Amendment to allow the addition of a 21' tall, 1,584 square foot enclosed
4 play structure to an existing fastfood/drive- through restaurant located at 103
5 North McDowell Blvd. within the Petaluma Plaza Shopping Center (AP No. 007-
6 340 -008).
7
8 Continued from the Planning Commission meeting of July 23, 1996.
9
10 Commissioner Bennett abstained from discussion on this item (was not in attendance for
11 first hearing).
12
13 Principal Planner McCann presented the staff report.
14
15 The public hearing was opened.
16
17 SPEAKERS: None.
18
19 The public hearing was closed.
20
21 COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
22
23 Commissioner Feibusch - Much better design, applicant listened to SPARC comments.
24 Commissioner Rahman - Concern about the large tree to the rear of the addition - will it
25 be saved.
26 Principal Planner McCann - This design reflects best effort to save tree - all involved wish
27 to retain tree.
28 Commissioner Rahman - Should we discuss signage - will that be handled
29 administratively?
30 Principal Planner McCann - SPARC had concerns with the signage proposal; revised
31 drawings for signs have been received - more typical design; any suggestions? Will go
32 back to SPARC
33 Commissioner Rahman - No problem if going back to SPARC.
34 Commissioners Thanked applicant for efforts to respond to their design concerns; the
35 project is much improved.
36
37 A motion was made by Commissioner Thompson and seconded by Commissioner Rahman
38 to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and to approve an amendment to the Use
39 Permit to allow a playland expansion based on the plans reviewed at the SPARC meeting
40 of August 8 and the findings and conditions listed in the staff report of July 23, 1996.
41
42 Commissioner Maguire: Absent
43 Commissioner Bennett: Abstain
44 Commissioner Feibusch: Yes
45 Commissioner Rahman: Yes
46 Commissioner Thompson: Yes
47 Commissioner vonRaesfeld: Yes
48 Chairperson Wick: Yes
49
50
51
52 Negative Declaration Findings:
2
3
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1
2
1.
Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, with
3
respect to construction noise and dust impacts, aesthetic impacts and cumulative
4
impacts on traffic and school facilities, there may not be a significant effect in this case
5
because mitigation measures to reduce all impacts to a level of insignificance or to
6
avoid such impacts have been identified. A Mitigated Negative Declaration should
7
therefore be prepared with the attached mitigation measures as conditions of approval
8
9
2.
There is no evidence that the proposed project, as mitigated, would have any potential
10
for adverse effect on the wildlife resources because the project constitutes an
11
expansion of an existing restaurant within an already urbanized area.
12
13
Mitigations:
14
15
1.
Construction activities shall comply with applicable Zoning Ordinance and
16
Municipal Code Performance Standards (noise, dust, odor, etc.).
17
18
2.
At no time shall future business activities exceed Performance Standards specified
19
in the Uniform Building Code, Section 22 -301 of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance,
20
and the 1987 General Plan.
21
22
3.
Development impact fees shall be paid pursuant to adopted City Resolution.
23
24
4.
The project shall be subject to review by the Site Plan and Architectural Review
25
Committee. The project design shall be modified to improve the relationship to the
26
existing building with respect to scale, architectural detail, and proposed materials.
27
The design of the addition should seek to improve the view of the structure from
28
McDowell Boulevard North in compliance with the City's Community Character
29
objectives. All trees and shrubs removed shall be replaced in -kind on site or in the
30
parking lot area surrounding the McDonald's site. Mature trees shall be replaced
31
at a ratio of 2:1.
32
33
Use Permit Findings:
34
35
1.
The proposed expansion and enclosure of the play area at the McDonald's
36
Restaurant, as conditioned, will conform to the requirements and intent of the
37
Petaluma Zoning Ordinance with respect to required, setbacks, height restrictions,
38
required parking and landscape areas.
39
40
2.
The proposed expansion and enclosure of the play area at the McDonald's
41
Restaurant, as conditioned to require a redesign and review by the Site Plan and
42
Architectural Review Committee, will conform to the requirements and intent,
43
goals, and policies of the Petaluma General Plan with respect to improving the
-
44
appearance of the cities commercial development and with respect to insuring that
45
fast food restaurants do not detract from the desired image in the central
.46
commercial area.
47
48
3.
The proposed expansion and enclosure of the play area at the McDonald's
49
Restaurant, as conditioned will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the
50
public welfare of the community.
.51
3
t
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1 4. The environmental impacts of this project have been reviewed through the
2 preparation of an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration which found that
3 the project as mitigated would not have a significant effect on the environment.
4
5 Use Permit Conditions:
6
7 1. All conditions of the previously approved CUP and CUP amendments shall remain
8 effective and in force unless suspended by conditions of this CUP amendment.
9
10 2. The applicants shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City or any of its boards,
11 commission, agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding
12 against the City, its boards, commission agents, officers, or employees to attack, set
13 aside, void, or annul, the approval of the project when such a claim or action is
14 brought within the time frame provided for in applicable State and/or local statutes.
15 The City shall promptly notify the applicants of any such claim, action or proceeding.
16 The City shall coordinate in the defense. Nothing contained in this condition shall
17 prohibit the City from participating in a defense of any claim, action or proceeding if
18 the City bears its own attorney's fees and costs, and the City defends the action in
19 good faith.
20
21 3. The applicant and Plaza Shopping Center owners must apply for and record a Lot Line
22 Adjustment to incorporate the necessary lands for the addition into the McDonald's
23 parcel prior to issuance of the building permit for the new play structure.
24
25
26 II. CORONA CREEK H SUBDIVISION; Debra Investment Corp.; 464 Corona
27 Rd; AP NO. 137 - 061 -015; (REZ96008, TSM96004) (tp).
28
29 Consideration of development plans for a 41 -lot detached single - family subdivision
30 situated on 10.96 acres in the Corona Ely Specific Plan Area. The request
31 includes: 1) an amendment to the previously approved Corona Club PUD
32 Development Plan and Standards; 2) Tentative Subdivision Map to create 41
33 detached single - family lots.
34
35 Continued from the canceled Planning Commission meeting of August 13, 1996.
36
37 Planning Director Tuft presented the staff report.
38
39 The public hearing was opened.
40
41 SPEAKERS:
42
43 Commissioner Thompson - How does this proosal relate to the previously approved
44 project (Corona Club)?
45 Planning, Director Tuft - Similar lot configuration (showed previous plan); this has one
46 more lot.
47 Commissioner Rahman - How flat is this property?
48 Planning Director Tuft - Basically flat - small change in elevation from Sonoma Mountain
49 Parkway, will be no more than 2 foot grade change between adjoining properties after
50 grading.
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1 Commissioner Bennett - Question regarding trees to be removed - what species are they?
2 (answer: eucalyptus and cypress)
3 Chairman Wick - Will adjacent uses (agricultural .uses) remain legal uses?
4 Planning Director Tuft - Yes.
5 Chuck Linthicum - Developer (Debra Investment) - Happy with staff report, regarding
6 Rahman's question regarding grading - one foot differential, less than one foot at adjacent
7 Matelli property line.
8 John Matelli - neighbor - Redwood fence will not keep his livestock in - wants the
9 developer to put up electric fence on his property to keep his animals in.
10 Gary Collins - neighbor - Thanks staff for cooperation so far - concerned with the number
11 of two -story homes adjacent to his property; would like 38-40 to be single -story - if
12 necessary, lot 38 could be two -story.
13 Planning; Director Tuft - Minimum rearyard setbacks are 20' - all lots exceed 20' setback.
14 Gary Collins - Regarding drainage - when water builds up on subdivision now, it drains
15 onto his property - wants to be sure this drainage issue is taken care of
16 Planning Director Tuft - Clarified proposed project related drainage improvements - drop
17 inlets in rear lots of 38,39, 40 (and 41) will direct water out into storm drain in street; no
18 fill will be allowed at property line because of possible harm to existing trees.
19
20 Discussion:
21
22 Planning Director Tuft - Clarified lot layout.
23 Commissioner Feibusch - Clarification on fences; concern with two -story homes backing
24 onto Sonoma Mountain Parkway.
25 Commissioner vonRaesfeld - SPARC should be directed to look at Lot 6 (odd condition)
26 side of house is almost front yard, Lot 7 could be softened (streetscape); access to Lot 12
27 will be in Lot 13's front yard; some sideyard fences come very close to cul -de -sac, soften
28 potential impact; Lots 19, 24, 25 - fence setback lines; Lots 21 -24 - rear yard fences.
29 Commissioner Rahman - Focus on abutting subdivision to farms; concerns with transition
30 - 20' setback is not "feathering "; nature of farm in relation to subdivision with two -story
31 homes - greater setback required; merit in solid 8 -foot fence bordering farm property -
32 could be softened with vines, etc.; would like opportunity for higher fence with vegetation
33 - developer should build higher fence.
34 Commissioner Bennett - Agrees with Commissioner Rahman - 8 -foot solid fence should
35 be built by developer - emphasize existing agricultural uses need to be protected.
36 Commissioner Thompson - Part of approval should be designation of which homes are
37 one -and two -story.
38 Planning Director Tuft - Any PUD has ability to administratively modify up to 20% of
39 models without public hearings, unless specific restrictions applied in approval.
40 Commissioner Thompson - Direction to not allow jeopardizing mix along Sonoma Mtn.
41 Parkway - do not allow more two -story homes.
42 Commissioner Rahman - Should not allow any more two -story homes adjacent to
43 farmland; transition should be made softer along transition at farmland.
44 Commissioner Thompson - Fencing options could be looked at.
45 Commissioner Rahman - Rearyard setbacks are too shallow.
46 Commissioner Bennett - What are actual setbacks?
47 Planning Director Tuft - Discussed rearyard setbacks adjacent to Matelli property - could
48 reduce front yard setback to maximize rearyard setbacks adjacent to this agricultural use.
49 Chairman Wick - Summarized the concensus of the Commission: Minimize grading; Lots
50 39 and, 40 should be one -story, Lot 38 may be two -story; fence height - 8 feet solid fence
51 with option of 2 feet lattice (built by developer) adjacent to rural property; electric fence
52 responsibility of property owners.
53 Commissioner Rahman - Preservation of trees overhanging property?
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1
2 Concerns to SPARC:
3
4 - Need to maintain story mix adjacent to rural lands and Sonoma Mountain Parkway
5 - one -story on Lots 39 and 40, Lot 38 can have two -story;
6 - Maximize rear yard setbacks adjacent to farmlands;
7 - Fence height - 8' solid by developer adjacent to rural area (2' lattice option).
8
9 The public hearing was closed.
to
11 A motion was made by Commissioner Feibusch and seconded by Commissioner Rahman
12 to approve the Rezoning, PUD Development Plan and Standards, and Tentative
13 Subdivision Map for the 41 -lot Corona Creek II Subdivision based on the findings and
14 subject to the conditions listed below:
15
16 Commissioner Maguire: Absent
17 Commissioner Bennett: Yes
18 Commissioner Feibusch: Yes
19 Commissioner Rahman: Yes
20 Commissioner Thompson: Yes
21 Commissioner vonRaesfeld: Yes
22 Chairperson Wick: Yes
23
24 Findings for Rezoning:
25
26 1. The proposed Amendment to Zoning Ordinance No. 1072 N.C.S., to reclassify
27 and rezone Assessors Parcel No. 137 -061 -015, known as the Corona Club
28 Subdivision Planned Unit Development (PUD), to the Corona Creek II
29 Subdivision PUD District, is in general conformity with the Petaluma General Plan.
30
31 2. The public necessity, convenience and general welfare clearly permit and will be
32 furthered by the proposed Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, reclassifying and
33 rezoning Assessors Parcel No. 137- 061 -015 to PUD for the Corona Creek II
34 Subdivision.
35
36 3. The requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been
37 satisfied through the preparation and certification of an Environmental Impact
38 Report for the Corona Ely Specific Plan (certified, approved and adopted by
39 Resolution No. 89 -122 N.C.S.) which adequately addresses the potential
40 environmental impacts associated with the Corona Creek II Subdivision project,
41 and no further environmental analysis is necessary pursuant to Section 15182 of
42 the CEQA Guidelines.
43
44 Findings for the PUD Development Plan:
45
46 1. The Corona Creek II PUD District is proposed on property which has a suitable
47 relationship to one or more thoroughfares (Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Corona
48 Road, Maria Drive), and said thoroughfares, with the improvements herein
49 required, are adequate to carry traffic generated by the development.
50
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1 2. The Corona Creek H development plan as conditioned, results in a more desirable
2 use of the land and a better physical environmental than would be possible under
3 any single zoning district by establishing diversity in the streetscape and
4 architecture through varied unit plans and lot- specific street frontage setbacks.
5
6 3. The plan for the Corona Creek H development as conditioned, presents a unified
7 and organized arrangement of buildings which are appropriate in relation to nearby
8 properties, particularly the rural properties along Corona Road, and the adjacent
9 Liberty Farms subdivision, through use of compatible lotting patterns and
10 development standards adjacent to existing development.
11
12 4. The natural and scenic qualities of the site, and rural environment along Corona
13 Road, including the historic Corona Club building, and existing significant trees,
14 are protected, with adequate public and private spaces designated on the PUD
15 Development Plan.
16
17 5. The development of the subject Corona Creek H property in the manner proposed
18 by the applicant, and as conditioned, will not be detrimental to the public welfare,
19 will be in the best interests of the City, and will be in keeping with the general
20 intent and spirit of the zoning regulations of the City of Petaluma, with the
21 Petaluma General Plan, and with other applicable plans adopted by the City.
22
23 6. The requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been
24 satisfied through the preparation and certification of an Environmental Impact
25 Report for the Corona Ely Specific Plan (certified, approved and adopted by
26 Resolution No. 89 -122 N.C.S.) which adequately addresses the potential
27 environmental impacts associated with the Corona Creek H Subdivision project,
28 and no further environmental analysis is necessary pursuant to Section 15182 of
29 the CEQA Guidelines.
30
31 Conditions for PUD Approval:
32
33 1. Prior to application for SPARC approval of the PUD Development Plan, the
34 written PUD Standards shall be amended to reflect the following:
35
36 a. No further development potential for the project site shall be permitted. A
37 minimum lot area of 2.0 acres shall be maintained for Lot 41, and a minimum area
38 of 5,000 sq. ft. shall be maintained for Lots 140, as proposed.
39
40 b. Minimum off-street parking requirements shall be specified at the rate of 3
41 stalls at least 9'x18' in dimension for each primary dwelling unit. At least one
42 garage stall shall be permanently maintained; however, garage conversions shall be
43 permitted provided minimum parking requirements are met.
44
45 C. Each proposed lot shall be permitted one principal single family residence.
46 Accessory dwelling units shall be permitted in accordance with Section 21 -408 of
47 the Zoning Ordinance. Existing units shall conform to these requirements.
48
49 d. Section 2.B. of the proposed standards shall be deleted as a principally
50 permitted use and placed under Section 3. as a permitted accessory use.
51
52 e. Section 3.13 shall be deleted as a permitted accessory use.
7
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1
2 f. Section S.C. shall be modified to specify a minimum front yard setback of
3 10' including covered porches, for Lots 140. In addition, for front - facing garages,
4 a minimum setback of 18' shall be maintained between the face of the garage door
5 and the public sidewalk.
6
7 g. Section 7 shall be modified to specify that, in order to preserve the integrity
8 of the streetscape, no floor area additions may be made to the front elevation of a
9 primary residence.
10
11 i. Section 8 shall be modified to specify as permitted accessory uses for Lot
12 41, the non - commercial keeping of chickens and other fowl, horses, cattle, sheep,
13 goats, and other livestock, subject to the provisions of the Petaluma Municipal
14 Code and further, that no enclosure where animals are kept, fed and maintained,
15 shall be located closer than 50' from a residence on any adjoining parcel.
16
17 j. Section 8 shall be modified to specify that sale of agricultural products
18 produced on the premises, shall be permitted as a conditional use, provided that
19 buildings or structures erected or maintained for such sale shall not exceed one
20 story or 15' in height and 650 sq. ft. in floor area. Open air display of produce
21 shall be required to maintain a minimum setback of 20' from all lot lines.
22
23 k. Section 8 shall be modified to specify that accessory buildings shall be
24 permitted, provided such buildings shall not be located within the front yard; shall
25 not exceed a maximum height of 21', and a maximum floor area of 650 sq. ft.
26 Minimum setbacks shall conform to those specified for the primary residence.
27
28 2. Prior to application for SPARC approval of the project, the PUD Development
29 Plan shall be amended to reflect the following:
30
31 a. All applicable conditions of the Tentative Map approval shall be
32 incorporated, to reflect consistency between the two documents.
33
34 b. The location of existing trees to be preserved within the site and on
35 neighboring parcels in close proximity to common property lines shall be identified,
36 and existing structures to remain on Lot 41 shall be reflected.
37
38 3. SPARC review of the project plans shall place emphasis on the following elements:
39
40 a. To reduce the visual dominance of garages and to create a strong
41 pedestrian emphasis in the streetscape, porches and entry elements shall be
42 designed to reflect greater architectural prominence and increased dimensions to
43 accommodate functional outdoor seating.
44
45 b. Greater design diversity and distinction from the homes in the
46 Heatherwood subdivision shall be achieved through use of alternative exterior
47 color schemes, siding and roof materials, garage door and fencing design,
48 landscape materials, or other exterior design elements used to identify the
49 subdivision.
50
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1
C. Variation in unit massing from view of Sonoma Mountain Parkway shall be
2
achieved, through diversity in unit plans, building height, roof pitch, orientation,
3
and setbacks.
4
5
d. Landscape plans shall be reviewed for conformance with the design intent
6
of the Sonoma Mountain Parkway Design Guidelines, and the Corona Ely Specific
7
Plan, as it relates to the project site and transition to rural properties along Corona
8
Road. Consideration shall also be given to the appropriateness of existing
9
landscape elements, including significant existing trees as identified in the arborist
10
report prepared by Horticultural Associates dated February 22, 1995.
11
12
e. The project plans shall incorporate provisions for subdivision identification
13
entry treatments on Mauro Drive at the intersection with Sonoma Mountain
14
Parkway and at the interface with Liberty Farms Subdivision, in accordance with
15
the intent and provisions of the Corona/Ely Specific Plan.
16
17 3.
The subdivider shall be responsible for installation of property line fencing around
18
the interior perimeter of the subdivision, with plans subject to SPARC approval in
19
conjunction with review of the PUD Development Plan. SPARC re'zew of fencing
20
shall stress preservation of privacy for adjacent residences, protection of existing
21
significant trees, and preservation of attractive views from Corona Road,
22
particularly with respect to fence design for installation along the Corona Road
23
frontage of Lot 41. Plans shall include provisions for installation of the Sonoma
24
Mountain privacy wall, consistent with City- approved design plans. Fences on the
25
northwesterly and northeasterly boundaries of the project (adjacent to existing
26
agricultural uses) shall he eight (8) feet tall. Future property owners may install
27
an additional two (2) feet of lattice on top of the solid fence.
28
29 4.
An acoustical study shall be performed prior to application for SPARC approval of
30
the project to determine compliance with General Plan standards for acceptable
31
residential noise levels. Plans submitted for SPARC review shall incorporate
32
modifications to setbacks, unit architecture and unit orientation as necessary to
33
meet City noise standards.
34
35 5.
Prior to application for SPARC approval of the project, the existing dwellings and
36
other structures situated on the project site including those proposed for retention,
37
shall be evaluated by a qualified architectural historian, to document all potential
38
historic significance. Selection of consultant shall be to staff approval, with costs
39
of the study bome by the project proponents. Any proposal for removal or
" 40
demolition of structures found to be potentially significant shall be subject to
41
review and approval by the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee prior to
42
SPARC approval of the PUD Development Plan. In any case, the existing Corona
43
Club historic building shall be retained on Lot 41 as proposed. Future alterations
44
to all buildings identified as potentially significant shall be subject to approval of
45
the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee.
46
47 6.
Following SPARC approval of the PUD Development Plan and Tentative Map,
48
and before approval of the Final Map by the City Council, the applicant shall be
49
responsible for submitting reproducible copies of the Final PUD Development Plan
50
and Tentative Map, and a final copy of the written PUD Standards.
51
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1 7. This project shall comply with all applicable mitigations specified for properties
2 within the Corona/Ely Specific Plan Area as contained in Resolution No. 89 -122
3 N.C.S., which certified, approved and adopted the Environmental Impact Report
4 for the Corona/Ely Specific Plan.
6 8. Single -story homes shall be built on Lots 39 and 40.
7
8 9. No reduction in the number of single -story homes adjacent to Sonoma Mountain
9 Parkway shall be permitted
10
11 10. Rear yard setbacks to the Matelli and Collins properties shall be maximized to the
12 extent possible; front yard setbacks may be reduced to achieve greater rear yard
13
14 11. SPARC shall review carefully fencing configurations for the lots with effort to
15 improve the resulting streetscape and lot- to-lot relationship (especially lots 6, 12,
16 19, 21, 22, 23, 24 & 25).
17
18 Findings for Tentative May Approval:
19
20 1. The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map as conditioned, is in general conformity
21 with the provisions of the General Plan designation for the area.
22
23 2. The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map as conditioned, is in general conformity
24 with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
25
26 3. The proposed project has complied with the requirements of the California
27 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15182 of the Guidelines,
28 through preparation and certification of the EIR for the Corona/Ely Specific Plan
29 on May 1, 1989 (Resolution No. 89 -123 N.C.S.), which addresses the potential
30 environmental impacts associated with the development of the Corona Creek II
31 project, and no further environmental analysis is necessary.
32
33 4. The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map as conditioned, complies with the
34 provisions of the Corona/Ely Specific Plan, and adequately addresses relevant
35 mitigation measures identified in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the
36 Corona/Ely Specific Plan Area.
37
38 5. The Corona Creek II subdivision has met all requirements of the City of Petaluma
39 Residential Growth Management System, as specified under Chapter 17.26 of the
40 Municipal Code.
41
42 Tentative May Conditions:
43
44 1. The applicant/developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or any
45 of its boards, commissions, agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action,
46 or proceeding against the City, its boards, commissions, agents, officers, or
47 employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the approval of the tentative map
48 when such claim or action is brought within the time period provided for in Section
49 66499.37. The City shall promptly notify the applicant/developer of any such
50 claim, action, or proceeding. The City shall coordinate fully in the defense.
51 Nothing contained in this condition shall prohibit the City from participating in a
10
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
's.
1 defense of any claim, action, or proceeding if the City bears its own attorney's fees
2 and costs, and the City defends the action in good faith.
3
4 2. The following requirements of the City Engineer shall be addressed prior to City
5 approval of the Final Map:
6
7 a. Frontage improvements along Sonoma Mountain Parkway shall include
8 sidewalk and privacy wall as indicated on the tentative Map.
9
10 b. Right -of -way along Sonoma Mountain Parkway shall be dedicated as
11 shown on the Tentative Map.
12
13 C. Sonoma Mountain Parkway shall be restriped to accommodate a 100 -foot
14 left turn lane at Mauro Drive.
15
16 d. The storm drain system shall flow to the catch basin at the intersection of
17 Sonoma Mountain Parkway and Mauro Drive.
18
19 e. A landscaped parking island shall be constructed in the cul -de -sac bulb of
20 Elisabetta Court.
21
22 f Parking shall not be allowed along the north side of Elisabetta court and
23 around the perimeter of the cul -de -sac bulb.
24
25 g. The grading plan and grading operation shall conform tot he soils
26 investigation report for this site. Grading on adjacent properties shall require the
27 property owner's permission.
28
29 h. All streets shall be paved with a 3 -inch minimum thickness of asphalt
30 concrete.
31
32 i. Existing surface drainage patterns crossing the subdivision boundary or
33 proposed lot lines shall be addressed. Lot to lot surface drainage is not allowed.
34
35 j. A sanitary sewer lateral and water service shall be installed to serve Lot 41.
36
37 k. The proposed water main system shall be capable of delivering a
38 continuous 1500 GPM fire flow with a residual pressure of 20 PSI. Any
39 improvements necessary to provide the required capacity and pressure shall be the
40 responsibility of the subdivider.
41
42 1. Existing water wells and septic systems shall be abandoned per the
43 requirements of the Sonoma County Permit and Resource Management
44 Department.
45
46 m. All hydrologic, hydraulic and storm drain system design shall be subject to
47 review and approval of the Sonoma County Water Agency.
48
49 n. A 1 -foot non - access easement for all lots contiguous to Sonoma Mountain
50 Parkway shall be shown on the Final Map.
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
to
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
o. A 10 -foot PUE shall be dedicated adjacent to the public right -of -way on
Mauro Drive and Elisabetta Court.
P. Maintenance agreements for private storm drain systems shall be prepared
and submitted by the developer. The Engineering Department shall review said
agreements for recordation with the Final Map.
q. This development shall participate in the cost of the Corona/Ely
improvements as defined by the Corona/Ely Benefit District No. 1 (Resolution 92-
302).
r. Any overhead utilities along the frontage or traversing this site shall be
placed underground.
S. The improvement plans and Final Map shall be prepared per the latest City
policies, standards, codes, resolutions and ordinances.
3. The following requirements of the Chief Building Official shall be met:
a. Grading must be certified when completed to indicate compliance with
approved plans and will be required for occupancy.
b. Soils with expansion index greater than 20 requires special design
foundation per Uniform building Code 1803.2.
C. All roofing shall be "B" rated or better per Ordinance No. 1744/1982.
d. Indicate all utilities on site plan.
e. Driveway gradient shall comply with Ordinance No. 1533/1982.
f. Responsible party to sign plans.
g. Submit soils report to certify foundation design.
h. Indicate group occupancy, type of construction, square footage.
i. Plans must show compliance to 1994 UBC, UPC, UMC, and 1993 NEC
Plans must also show compliance to current Title 24 Energy Code.
j. Provide structural calculations for all non - conventional design items.
k. Demolition permit required to remove any structure.
1. Abandonment of water well or septic system must be done under permit
from County of Sonoma Public Health Department.
4. The following requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be met:
'yr
I
:ro
,
LA
. tJ .
4 �
4
�
3°
? �
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1 a. Post address at or near main entry door - minimum four (4) inch letters on
2 contrasting background.
3
4 b. In residential buildings less than 3,500 sq. ft. in floor area, provide fire
5 suppression system at normal sources of ignition. These areas are specifically at
6 clothes dryers, kitchen stoves, furnaces, water heaters, fireplaces and in attic areas
7 at vents and chimneys for these appliances and equipment. In addition, spare
8 sprinklers (one of each type in the residence) and wrench shall be provided in a red
9 spare sprinkler head box in the garage.
10
11 C. Fire hydrants shall be spaced at a maximum of 300 feet apart. Location and
12 type of fire hydrants are to be approved by the Fire Marshal's office.
13
14 d. Add as a general note to plans:
15
16 No combustible construction is permitted above the foundation unless an approved
17 all weather hard surface road is provided to within one hundred -fifty (150')
18 of the farthest point of a building or structure.
19
20 All fire hydrants for the project must be tested, flushed, and in service prior to the
21 commencement of combustible construction on the site.
22
23 e. Minimum fire flow required for this project is 1,500 gallons per minute at
24 20 pounds per square inch (psi).
25
26 f. All roofing material shall be rated class "B" or better, treated in accordance
27 with the Uniform Building Code Standard 32.7 and City of Petaluma Ordinance
28 1744.
29
30 g. All roofing material applied as exterior wall covering shall have a fire rating
31 of class "B" or better treated in accordance with Uniform Building Code Standard
32 32.7 and City of Petaluma Ordinance 1744.
33
34 5. The following requirements of the Public Works Department shall be met:
35
36 a. Connect new water main to existing 12" in Liberty Farms and carry 12"
37 size through to Sonoma Mountain Parkway.
38
39 b. Run storm drains to drain Mauro Road to Sonoma Mountain Parkway to
40 eliminate the need for the public backyard storm drain running through Lots 2 and
41 3.
42
43 6. The proposed location of easements to accommodate the sanitary sewer lateral and
44 water service to Lot 41 shall be reflected on plans submitted for SPARC approval
45 of the project.
46
47 7. Grading for units abutting existing development shall be designed to limit pad
48 discrepancies to a maximum of 2' in elevation whenever feasible, as determined by
49 staff at time of Final Map application.
50
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1 8. The Assessors records indicate that AP No. 137 - 061 -015 presently contains three
2 dwelling units. If at time of application for approval of the Final Map, more than
3 one unit exists or is proposed on any lot (including Lot 41), application for
4 Conditional Use Permit shall be made and approval obtained in accordance with
5 applicable Zoning Ordinance provisions, prior to recordation of the Final Map or
6 issuance of a building permit for any second unit on the affected lot, as determined
7 appropriate by staff.
8
9 9. The following recommendations of the Police Department shall be addressed prior
10 to issuance of building permits:
11
12 a. All homes shall have lighted address numbers easily visible from the street.
13
14 b. All exterior doors shall have deadbolts.
15
16 C. Exterior landscaping shall be maintained to prevent covering of window
17 openings.
18
19 10. Any labeling errors or other erroneous information appearing on the Tentative
20 Map, Development Plan or landscape plans shall be corrected prior to Final Map
21 approval.
22
23 11. In the event that archaeological remains are encountered during grading, work
24 shall be halted temporarily and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted for
25 evaluation of the artifacts and to recommend future action. The local Indian
26 community shall also be notified and consulted in the event any archaeological
27 remains are uncovered.
28
29 12. Prior to City approval of the Final Map, the project proponents shall enter into an
30 agreement with the City for payment of an In -Lieu Contribution, to meet
31 affordable housing requirements for the Corona Creek II project, as specified
32 under Program 11 (iii) of the Petaluma General Plan Housing Element.
33
34 13. All proposed electrical transformers, or other utility structures shall be identified
35 on plans submitted for Final Map approval, and located underground in
36 accordance with adopted City policy.
37
38 14. All street trees, perimeter fencing/walls, and other improvements within the public
39 rights -of -way shall be maintained by a Landscape Assessment District (LAD)
40 through contract services subject to approval of the City Council in conjunction
41 with the Final Map. Landscaping within these areas shall be designed and installed
42 to City standards acceptable to City of Petaluma Planning, Engineering, Public
43 Works and Parks staff. Irrigation to serve all landscaping in street tree planter
44 strips adjacent to private residences shall be designed to connect with the private
45 lot irrigation systems of the adjoining lots. Separate irrigation systems shall be
46 established for street frontage landscape areas located between the street curb and
47 subdivision perimeter wall on Sonoma Mountain Parkway, and within landscape
48 islands (Elisabetta Court), as determined by staff during review of the public
49 improvement plans. Costs of formation of the required LAD shall be borne by the
50 project proponents at time of Final Map application.
I
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1
2 15. The project sponsor shall be responsible for payment of all applicable special
3 development fees, including Water and Sewer Connection fees, Community
4 Facilities Development fees, Storm Drainage Impact fees, Park and Recreation
5 Land Improvement fees, Traffic Mitigation fees, and School Facilities fees. Fees
J 6 shall be calculated and paid as specified by City Council Resolution.
7
8 16. Street light design shall be consistent with City- approved design specifications for
9 the Corona/Ely Specific Plan Area, and shall be reflected on public improvement
10 plans submitted at time of Final Map application.
11
12 17. A written notice shall be recorded with the Final Map for this project which
13 advises future property owners of the existence of nearby agricultural uses and the
14 possibility of associated noise, traffic, odor and other impacts to subdivision
15 residents. A copy of the notice shall be submitted for staff review and approval
16 prior to City Council approval of the Final Map.
17
18 18. This project shall be subject to payment of a fair share contribution toward
19 Sonoma Mountain Parkway benefit assessment district fees as specified under the
20 Corona/Ely Specific Plan, as determined by Finance staff at time of Final Map
21 application.
22
23 19. Recommendations contained in the February 22, 1995 tree evaluation by
24 Horticultural Associates shall be reflected in the improvement drawings to allow
25 retention of significant trees.
26
27
28 ffi. PETALUMA JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL GENERAL PLAN AMENI)X ENT;
29 700 Bantam Way (APN 006 -441 -022) (GPA 96003) am)
30
31 Consideration and recommendation to the City Council for a General Plan
32 Amendment to change the land use designation of a 1.2 acre portion of the school
33 site from "School" to "Urban Standard" to allow the subdivision of the property
34 into four single - family lots. The project includes requests for: 1) a Mitigated
35 Negative Declaration; and 2) a General Plan Amendment.
36
37 Continued from the canceled Planning Commission meeting of August 13, 1996.
'38
39 Planning Director Tuft presented the staff report.
40
41 The public hearing was opened.
C 42
43 SPEAKERS:
44
45 Commissioner vonRaesfeld - Traffic/parking concerns with existing situation.
46 Chairman Wick - Will this be third General Plan Amendment this year? Will it be linked
47 with other requests.
48 Steve Bolman - Superintendent for Business - School District; presented request.
49 Chairman Wick - Will these funds be used for upgrading administrative offices? Are you
50 aware of seismically unsafe facilities existing now? How many portables are seismically
51 unsafe snow?
-. 1 S
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1 Steve Bolman 17 buildings including one at McNear School need seismic upgrading;
2 they will be phased out over next two years.
3 Chairman Wick - Portables are ok to house students, but not administrators?
4 Steve Bolman - Existing administration building is unsafe; masterplan calls for elimination
5 of all seismically unsafe units - plan adopted in 1993 and being implemented.
6 Gene Peele - 749 Bantam Way - In favor of progress, building homes, etc., but at this site
7. it *would be a disaster, Petaluma School District has not taken care of this property;
8 additional parking spaces for parents needed - Bantam is so congested now, more parking
9 is necessary now; unsafe now - fire trucks couldn't get by; disaster to allow 4 homes; if
10 school district low on money, maybe they should cut down on staff.
11 George Straub - Bantam and Bodega - agree with last speaker - would be a disaster -
12 already too little parking; take a look at situation.
13 John Fitz - Applicant's representative - lands deemed surplus by school district;
14 original lands deemed surplus was larger, narrowed to this smaller size; during school day,
15 no school parking on Bantam; access road anticipated in future subdivision of the surplus
16 land in question has been widened to full 20 feet; addition of new fire hydrants; will allow
17 improved emergency vehicle roadway into school.
18
19 The public hearing was closed.
20
21 DISCUSSION:
22
23 Commissioner Bennett - Respectfully disagree with Chairman Wick on this, this is a
24 separate land use issue, not an administrative issue.
25 Commissioner Rahman - Will not support this land use change - no compelling reason to
26 change General Plan designation; realize reasons are somewhat compelling, but not from
27 land use /General Plan point of view; poor planning - not a land use issue; cannot support.
28 Commissioner vonRaesfeld - May agree with Chairman Wick, but not the issue tonight -
29 seems inappropriate to make a parking problem even worse by eliminating land that could
30 address the problem.
31 Commissioner Thompson - Agrees with Commissioner vonRaesfeld - additional parking
32 to address the existing problem should be proposed, then may consider a General Plan
33 Amendment.
34 Commissioner Feibusch - Agrees with Commissioners Thompson and vonRaesfeld.
35 Chairman Wick - Does believe this is a land use issue.
36 Planning Director Tuft - If majority of Commission has concern with traffic /parking,
37 suggest continuance to discuss with Mr. Bolman and offer solutions for consideration by
38 Commission.
39 Commissioner vonRaesfeld - Solution to traffic at intersections needs to be addressed
40 before land use issue can be discussed.
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
(Public hearing closed).
.Continued to September 10, 1996
IV. KODIAK JACK'S HONKY TONK AND SALOON; 256 Petaluma Blvd.
North; AP No. 006 -284 -036 (CUP95048)okt)
50 Consideration of a request to operate a cardroom (three tables) at Kodiak Jack's
51 Honky Tonk and Saloon. The application includes: 1) a Mitigated Negative
52 Declaration; and 2) an amendment to the existing Conditional Use Permit to
16
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1
authorize the operation of a cardroom and to legalize the existing non - conforming
2
use as an Alcoholic Beverage Establishment.
3
4
Continued from the canceled Planning Commission meeting of August 13, 1996.
5
6
Principal Planner McCann presented the staff report.
7
8
The public hearing was opened.
9
10
SPEAKERS:
-
11
12
Commissioner Bennett - Is this cardroom entitlement transferable?
13
Principal Planner McCann - Yes - as provided for in the Zoning Ordinance.
14
Commissioner Bennett - If certain games (22) are determined to be illegal, would an
15
amendment to this permit be necessary to allow different games than presented in this
16
applicaiton.
17
Principal Planner McCann - Yes.
18
Captain Long - Petaluma Police - Mr. Vieler has been very responsive; alcohol and gaming
F:
19
do not mix many times; potential for violence with bar so accessible to gaming area -
20
prefer no bar in the cardroom area.
21
Commissioner Feibusch - Per Ordinance - upon entry by Police, do you need a clear view
22
of gaming?
23
Captain Long - Yes.
24
Commissioner Bennett - Is the game of 22 deemed illegal?
25
Captain Long - No, per Attorney General's decision.
26
Commissioner Rahman - Is alcohol readily available at Sonoma Joe's and the Boulevard
27
Bowl?
28
Captain Long - Yes, Sonoma Joe's most people patronize for major purpose of gaming
29
rather than other activities.
30
Principal Planner McCann - Condition requiring revised floor plan deals with legality of
'
31
clear view of gaming as referenced by Commissioner Feibusch and the removal of the bar
32
from the cardroom area.
33
Wayne Vieler - Applicant - First applied on November 30, 1995; described process
34
waiting for clarification to many questions; reference to additional parking of 44 spaces -
35
building occupancy of 299 (maximum allowed by Building Code) will not be any
36
additional occupancy - please remove reference of additional parking requirements from
37
application; Initial Study - two bars needed in terms of operation - sound stage very close
38
to existing second bar; happy to restrict service to cocktail service only - no walk up
39
orders; Condition 7 - ask to change to non - specific gaming - CUP be tied to State Gaming
40
Commission Permit - in event that State Gaming Permit not be issued, would like this to
41
be tied to legalized status.
42
43
The public hearing was closed.
44
45
Discussion:
46
47
Commissioner Feibusch - Is there a door to allow entrance to cardroom directly?
48
Wayne Vieler - Yes, side entrance.
49
Captain Long - Emergency entrance, probably locked from outside.
50
(Clarification - emergency exit - no access from outside without unlockinglopening.)
.
51
Commissioner vonRaesfeld - Will not be supporting this application; cannot make
52
findings; 2 cardrooms are more than adequate for the community.
17
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1 Commissioner Rahman - Will support this application: one purpose of CUP's is to grant
2 the City some control over land uses; applicant has worked well with community and City.
4 A motion was made by Commissioner Rahman and seconded by Chairman Wick to adopt
5 a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve a Conditional Use Permit to authorize
6 Kodiak Jack's to operate a 3 -table cardroom and to legalize the bar as an Alcoholic
7 Beverage Establishment at 256 Petaluma Boulevard North, based on the findings and
8 subject to the conditions listed below:
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
Discussion:
Commissioner Bennett - Problem with concept of "22" game - probably supports this; no
problem with bar in this area.
Chairman Wick - Is existing parking adequate? Do 100 spaces remain adequate ?; How
will this affect legalization of the existing non - conforming use.
Commissioner Rahman - Back bar can remain with waitress service only.
Chairman Wick - Summarized the consensus of the Commission:
Back bar can remain with waitress service only; unspecified games; allow more
time for establishment of uses (270 days after granting of Use Permit); tree
installation not necessary if not possible; omit reference in the conditions to the
additional 44 parking spaces.
Commissioner Maguire: Absent
Commissioner Bennett: Yes
Commissioner Feibusch: Yes
Commissioner Rahman: Yes
Commissioner Thompson: Yes
Commissioner vonRaesfeld: No
Chairperson Wick: Yes
Findings for Approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact
An Initial Study has been prepared and proper notice provided in accordance with
CEQA and local guidelines.
2. Based upon the Initial Study and comments received, potential impacts could be
avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance by mitigation measures attached as
conditions of approval. There is no substantial evidence that the project, as
conditioned, would have a significant effect on the environment.
3
45
46
47 4
48
49
The project does not have potential to affect wildlife resources as defined in the
Fish and Game code, either individually or cumulatively and is exempt from Fish
and Game filing fees because no significant wildlife resources have been identified
on the project site.
The project site 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.
50 5. The Planning Commission reviewed the July 23, 1996 Initial Study/Mitigated
51 Negative Declaration and considered the comments before making a decision on
52 the project.
in
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1
2
6.
The Planning Commission finds that authorizing the establishment of a 3 -table
3
cardroom, with the incorporation of the suggested mitigation measures from the
4
Police Department contained in the July 23, 1996 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
5
Declaration, will avoid or reduce potential environmental impacts to Police
6
Services to a level of insignificance.
7
s
7.
The record of proceedings of the decision on the project is available for public
9
review at the City of Petaluma, Planning Department, City Hall, 11 English Street,
10
Petaluma, California.
11
12
Findings
for the Conditional Use Permit
13
14
For the' Cardroom
15
16
1.
The proposed operation of a 3 -table cardroom, as conditioned, will conform to the
17
requirements and intent of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance Section 21 -420, and
18
includes conditions requiring improvements which will comply with all applicable
19
-
Taws, including, but not limited to, the City's building, health, zoning, fire
20
ordinances, and police requirements.
21
22
2.
The location of the proposed 3- table cardroom is in conformance with Petaluma
23
Zoning Ordinance Section 21- 420.26. Although the cardroom will be located
24
within two hundred fifty (250) feet of the exterior limits of a residentially zoned
25
district, the cardroom is an ancillary use in the larger commercial recreational use
26
for which Kodiak Jack's is governed by a Conditional Use Permit.
27
28
3.
The proposed operation of a 3 -table cardroom, as conditioned, is consistent with
29
Petaluma Zoning Ordinance Section 21- 420.22, which limits the number of
30
cardrooms operating in the City to 3, based on population, and limits the number
31
of tables per establishment to 15. As there are currently two (2) cardrooms
32
operating inside City limits, approval of a third at Kodiak Jack's would not exceed
33
this limit. The proposal to operate 3 tables does not exceed the maximum allowed.
34
35
4.
The proposed operation of a 3 -table cardroom, as conditioned, will be consistent
36
with Petaluma Zoning Ordinance Section 21- 420.30 as relates to operating
37
regulations.
38
39
5.
The proposed operation of a 3 -table cardroom, as conditioned, will conform to the
40
requirements and intent, goals, and policies of the Petaluma General Plan, which
41
encourages the expansion of small, locally -owned businesses which attract visitors
42
and shoppers downtown and upgrade the development of commercial ventures,
43
and supports the economic viability of the downtown area.
44
45
6.
The proposed operation of a 3 -table cardroom will not constitute a nuisance or be
46
detrimental to the public welfare of the community, as mitigation measures have
47
been imposed as conditions of approval to address any potential adverse operating
48
characteristics and recall/revocation options exist if necessary.
49
50
For the Alcoholic Beveraize Establishment
51
f
19
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1 1. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the bar, to authorize its continued
2 use as an Alcoholic Beverage Establishment, as conditioned, is consistent with the
3 provisions requiring Conditional Use Permits for non - conforming uses that change
4 their mode and manner of operation, and will conform to the requirements and
5 intent of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance, as the current non - conforming status
6 would be removed.
8 2. The proposed legalization of the bar as an Alcoholic Beverage Establishment, as
9 conditioned, will conform to the requirements and intent, goals, and policies of the
10 Petaluma General Plan, which encourages the expansion of small, locally -owned
11 businesses which attract visitors and shoppers downtown and upgrade the
12 development of commercial ventures, and supports the economic viability of the
13 downtown area.
14
15 3. The proposed legalization of the bar as an Alcoholic Beverage Establishment will
16 not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community,
17 as a Conditional Use Permit will provide a benefit to the community by virtue of its
18 presence, and ability to regulate the Alcoholic Beverage Establishment.
19 Furthermore, mitigation measures have been imposed as conditions of approval to
20 address any potential adverse operating characteristics which have the potential to
21 create a nuisance.
22
23 4. The proposed legalization of the bar as an Alcoholic Beverage Establishment is
24 consistent with the requirements set forth in Zoning Ordinance Section 21-
25 430.24(A)(1 through 13), as conditions have been imposed to regulate operating
26 characteristics.
27
28 Mitigation Measures
29
30 NOISE
31
32 6.C. Mitigations, if any
33
34 1. All mitigation measures of the November 21, 1994, and the December 18,
35 1995 Conditional Use Permits, Resolutions #94 -309, and 95 -318
36 respectively, shall be a part of this Use Permit except as superseded by
37 these specific mitigation measures.
38
39 2. At no time shall business activities exceed Performance Standards specified
40 in the Uniform Building Code, Section 22 -301 of the Petaluma Zoning
41 Ordinance, and the 1987 General Plan.
42
43 LIGHT AND GLARE
44
45 8.C. Mitigations, if any Recommended mitigation measures contained herein and
46 conditions of approval directly address potential adverse impacts caused by the
47 intensification of the land use.
48
49 8.D. Monitoring
50
51 1. As required by the mitigations and conditions, monitoring shall be as above
52 noted, and performed by the responsible departments.
20
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
11
r=
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
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
TRANSPORTATION /CIRCULATION
13.C. Mitigations, if any
1. Occupancy load shall at no time exceed 299 persons, and shall be based on
the ability of the owner /operator to provide parking either on -site or within 600
feet of the property, based on the ratio of one (1) parking space for every three (3)
'potential occupants. The owner /operator shall be responsible for maintaining on
file with the Planning Department agreements for 100 parking spaces. An increase
''in occupancy may not occur without the approval of the Planning Director, Fire
Marshal, and Chief Building Official, and shall require an amendment to this CUP.
Minor changes in occupancy if not more than 5% (cumulatively) may be
authorized by the Planning Director, with the concurrence of the Fire Marshal and
Chief Building Official, without amendment to the CUP.
13.D. Monitoring
1. As required by the mitigations and conditions, monitoring shall be through
SPARC and Building permit review, approval, and inspection(s).
PUBLIC SERVICE
14.C. Mitigations, if any
1. All mitigation measures of the November 21, 1994, and the December 18,
1995 Conditional Use Permits, Resolutions #94 -309, and 95 -318
respectively, shall be a part of this Use Permit except as superseded by
these specific mitigation measures.
2. Kodiak Jack's shall establish and maintain a security plan specifically
designed for the cardroom operation. Recognizable and/or clearly
identifiable security officers shall be on duty during all night time gaming
operations. The plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Chief of Police no later than 30 days prior to the commencement of the
cardroom use.
3. A specific operational plan shall be established and maintained for the
control and security of alcoholic beverages.
4. A specific "cage" area shall be established for the control of money and
chips.
5. Surveillance cameras shall be installed in the area to be used for all
cardroom, money /chips activities. Cameras shall be attached to recorders
kept in a secured area. Location and number of cameras shall be subject to
City Police Department approval prior to commence of gaming activity.
6. Hours and days of operation for both the Alcoholic Beverage
Establishment and the cardroom shall be 7 days per week, 9AM to 2AM.
Hours of operation for the live entertainment, commercial recreation and
arcade uses shall remain as approved by Resolution 95 -318 N.C.S.
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
2 7. At no time shall business activities exceed Performance Standards specified
3 in the Uniform Building Code, Section 22 -301 of the Petaluma Zoning
4 Ordinance, and the 1987 General Plan.
6 8. The operating hours and other provisions of the Conditional Use Permit
7 Amendment for operation of gaming/cardroom activities may be recalled to
8 the Planning Commission for review at any time due to complaints
9 regarding lack of compliance with mitigation measures and conditions of
10 approval, noise generation, or other adverse operating characteristics. At
11 such time, the Commission may revoke the Use Permit or add/modify the
12 mitigations and conditions of project approval. Planning and Police staff
13 shall maintain records detailing the nature and frequency of complaints
14 received for evaluation by the Planning Commission.
15
16 14.D. Monitorin -
17
18 1. All required improvements listed herein, shall be reviewed, approved, and
19 inspected by City staff prior to commencement of gaming activity.
20
21 Conditions
22
23 From the State of California Department of Justice
24
25 1. The cardroom shall comply with all rules, regulations and requirements of the
26 State of California, Department of Justice, Gaming Registration program.
27
28 From the Building Division
29
30 2. The occupancy load in Kodiak Jack's shall not exceed 299 persons at any time.
31
32 From the Planning Department
33
34 3. All conditions of approval of the November 21, 1994 Use Permit, Resolution #94-
35 309 N.C.S, and the December 18, 1995 Use Permit, Resolution #95 -318 N.C.S.,
36 shall remain in full force (except as modified by the following conditions) and shall
37 be a part of this Use Permit.
38
39 4. Within 30 days of this approval, the striping and signing for the 10 parking spaces
40 located behind the building at 264 Petaluma Boulevard North shall be amended to;
41 (a) clearly delineate the parking spaces; and (b) indicate to Kodiak Jack patrons
42 that utilization of the lot is permitted.
43
44 For the Cardroom:
45
46 5. This authorization to operate a cardroom at 256 Petaluma Boulevard North is
47 hereby issued exclusively to Wayne Vieler and Kodiak Jack's Honky Tonk and
48 Saloon, located at 256 Petaluma Boulevard North. The CUP shall not be
49 transferable without review by the Planning Commission per Zoning Ordinance
50 Section 21420.14 and 21420.16.
51
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1
6.
The cardroom use (operation of the 3 gaming tables), shall not commence unless
2
and until a "cardroom permit" per the Petaluma Municipal Code, and all other
3
appropriate licenses and approvals have been received from the State of California
4
Department of Justice, Alcoholic Beverage Control, and the City of Petaluma.
5
6
7.
The proposed cardroom, composed of three tables twe -(2) blael.,ack and-
7
ene -(1) p ekef mole, shall be the limit of the tables permitted at this site. Any
8
change in location, expansion, conversion, etc. of the cardroom facility shall be
9
subject to Planning Commission review per Zoning Ordinance Section 21420.18.
10
11
8.
Operation of the cardroom shall be in compliance with all regulations governing
12
the operation of cardroom facilities per Sections 21420 -00 through 21420 -42 of
13
the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance, and all provisions of Chapter 6.20 of the
14
Petaluma Municipal Code.
15
16
9:
The operation of the cardroom shall be subject to annual review by the Chief of
17
Police. Should the Police Chief find that security problems are caused by the
18
cardroom operation and that additional conditions to regulate this operation are
'
19
necessary, he shall recommend review by the Planning Commission which shall
20
consider the concerns and may modify existing conditions or impose additional
21
conditions as deemed necessary.
22
23
10.
A revised floor plan reflecting the location of the 3 gaming tables shall be
24
submitted to the Planning and Police Departments for review and approval before
25
commencement of use.
. .,.
26
27
11.
The cardroom shall be in operation within 270 days from the effective date of this
28
Conditional Use Permit approval (completion of the appeal period), or the CUP
29
shall be deemed void and the cardroom entitlement shall no longer be valid
30
`
31
For the,Alcoholic Beverage Establishment:
'
32
33
12.
The Alcoholic Beverage Establishment shall comply with all rules, regulations and
_
34
:requirements of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance, the Petaluma Municipal Code,
35
and the State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.
36
37
- 13.
This CUP to legalize the bar as an Alcoholic Beverage Establishment is hereby
38
issued exclusively to Wayne Veler and Kodiak Jack's Honky Tonk and Saloon,
39
located at 256 Petaluma Boulevard North. The CUP shall not be assigned,
- _
40
transferred, enlarged, expanded, or mode and/or manner of operation changed
41
without prior notification to the Planning Director. The Planning Director may,
42
refer a sale or transfer request to the Planning Commission. (Petaluma Zoning
43
Ordinance Sections 21- 430.16(A)and (B), and 21- 430.18).
44
45
14.
Within 90 .days of this approval, an updated list of all persons employed by Kodiak
46
Jack's Honky Tonk and Saloon that have completed the required Responsible
r
47
Beverage Service Program recognized by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage
48
Control (ABC) shall be filed with the Planning Department. Employees that have
49
not completed a responsible hospitality training program shall do so within 90 days
50
of commencement of employment, and/or the effective date of this CUP.
51
52
Standard Conditions
23
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
2 15. If possible due to subsurface conditions, a minimum of two (2) street trees shall
3 be required on the Petaluma Boulevard North frontage. Planter wells shall be
4 excavated for the street trees, and the trees (with grates) shall be installed in
5 conformance with the City's street tree standard. Trees chosen shall be per the
6 Downtown Tree Planting Plan, and shall be subject to the Planning Director's
7 review and approval. An excavation permit shall be obtained from the Public
8 Works Department for any sidewalk removal/replacement during this endeavor.
9 The property owner shall be responsible for the watering and maintenance of the
10 trees.
11
12 15. This CUP amendment which authorizes the establishment of a 3 table cardroom
13 and legalization of the bar as an Alcoholic Beverage Establishment may be recalled
14 to the Planning Commission for review at any time due to complaints regarding
15 lack of compliance with conditions of approval, noise generation, or other adverse
16 operating characteristics. At such time, the Commission may revoke the CUP or
17 add/modify conditions of approval.
18
19 16. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or any of its
20 boards, commission, agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action or
21 proceeding against the City, its boards, commission, agents, officers, or employees
22 to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the approval of the project when such claim or
23 action is brought within the time period provided for in applicable State and/or
24 local statutes. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any such claim,
25 action, or proceeding. The City shall coordinate in the defense. Nothing
26 contained in this condition shall prohibit the City from participating in a defense of
27 any claim, action, or proceeding if the City bears its own attorney's fees and costs,
28 and the City defends the action in good faith.
29
30
31 9:30 PM
32
33 V. PETALUMA QUEEN CARDROOM; William Barker, 226 Weller St; AP
34 No. 007 - 142 -004; (CUP96025) (tp).
35
36 Consideration of a request to operate a cardroom (10 tables) aboard the Petaluma
37 Queen cruise vessel within the Turning Basin while the vessel is docked and along
38 the Petaluma River within the City Limits. The application includes: 1) A
39 Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 2) an amendment to the Conditional Use
40 Permit to authorize the operation of a cardroom on the Petaluma Queen within
41 City Limits.
42
43 Continued from the canceled Planning Commission meeting of August 13, 1996.
44
45 Principal Planner McCann presented the staff report.
46 ,
47 The public hearing was opened.
48
49 SPEAKERS:
50
51 Commissioner Bennett - Impacts to "D" Street Bridge - what would impacts be?
24
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1
Principal Planner McCann - Application requests gaming at any place along the River or in
2
the Turning Basing in City Limits.
3
Dick Lieb - Applicant's Architecture/Planning Consultant - Outstanding site improvements
4
being worked on; only reached maximum number of passengers (for parking) twice;
F _
ti
5
games being played now are legal (has State Gaming Permit) for outside of City Limits;
6
staff has been great working with applicants; contention is gaming is incidental to cruise;
7
applicant will not make a living from gaming aspect of this application; if dockside gaming
8
is approved, bridge will be opened/closed less; Petaluma Queen is a tourist attraction to
9
town, part of fabric of Turning Basin; recreational use, will not attract professional
10
cardplayer; Petaluma Queen - top floor devoted to gaming (also 2 tables at bar); putting
'.'
11
$17,000 of improvements into (leased) office building; applicant environmentally sensitive
12
(Fossil filter in parking lot) will catch spills before going into river; should be exempted
13
from cardroom count - not a typical cardroom use; cost of operation of this boat is very
14
high; not cardroom in typical sense; does not believe dockside gaming will require valet
.15
parking; would like a 30 -day delay; would like to work with staff on policy (Zoning
16
Ordinance) change.
17
18
The public hearing was closed.
.
19
20
Discussion:
-,...
-;
21
22
Captain Parks - Petaluma Police - Barkers initially did not understand gaming laws, were
23
notified that they were in violation; continued to receive complaints; Petaluma Police
24
asked for clarification from State Attorney General's Office; Barker's were notified that
7+
25
they would be in violation if there was any gaming in City Limits; a police officer
26
witnessed illegal gaming (within City Limits) and a complaint has been filed with the
27
District Attorney's Office).
28
Chairman Wick - Apologize if any prejudice was implied; believes it is consensus of
-�
29
Commission that another cardroom license cannot be issued; do not have authority to
30
issue another cardroom CUP; recommends denying without prejudice.
31
Commissioner Rahman - Agrees with Chairman Wick.
32
Commissioner Bennett - Does Commission wish to consider amending the Code? Staff
':.
33
would have to make findings that this is not just another cardroom; agrees denying
34
without prejudice.
rat.
35
36
A motion was made by Chairman Wick and seconded by Commissioner Bennett to deny
37
this application without prejudice.
38
39
Commissioner Maguire: Absent
't
40
Commissioner Bennett: Yes
41
Commissioner Feibusch: Yes
42
Commissioner Rahman: Yes
43
Commissioner Thompson: Yes
44
Commissioner vonRaesfeld: Yes
45
Chairman Wick: Yes
46
47
Chairman Wick - Looking forward to working with applicant during the next year.
y_
48
}.:
s
49
50
VL COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS.
51
.-
52
- SPARC - Don Bennett
-
ar
25
:.a
Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1996
1 - BICYCLE COMMITTEE - Clark Thompson
2 - CENTRAL PETALUMA SPECIFIC PLAN - Steve vonRaeseld, Don
3 Bennett
4 - CORONA REACH SPECIFIC PLAN - Marcel Feibusch, Clark
5 Thompson
6 - SOUTH BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN - J.T. Wick, Linda
7 Rahman
8 - TREE COMMITTEE - Marcel Feibusch
9
10
11 Future agenda items -
12
13 Add to September meeting - first items - Discussion of GP amendments and requisite form
14 of environmental review; Planning Commission rules; future agenda updates from
15 Director.
16
17 APA - October 2 -5, Palm Springs - who will attend?
18
19 Commissioner Rahman - thanked staff for delivering packets earlier.
20
21
22 VII. LIAISON REPORTS - None.
23
24
25 ADJOURNMENT: 10:30 PM
26
27 min0827 / plan7l
28
29
30
31
N
26