Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/08/1994MK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 19 20 21 22 23 24 5 6 '7 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING Tuesday March 8, 1994 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7-00 P.M. CITY HALL PETALUMA, CA PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. ROLL CALL: Bennett* (arrived 7:05 PM), Parkerson, Rahman (arrived 7:08 PM), Shea, Thompson, Torliatt, vonRaesfeld STAFF: Pamela Tuft, Planning Director Jim McCann, Principal Planner Dede Dolan, Assistant Planner Chairman APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of February 15, 1994 (Special Meeting) and February 23, 1994 were approved as printed. . PUBLIC COMMENT: None. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: None. COMMISSIONER'S REPORT: None. CORRESPONDENCE: Rainier Final EIR and staff report (without attachments); General Report (March 4); Letter from Alicia Law regarding Elim Lutheran Church; Letter from Patricia Clarley regarding Elim Lutheran Church; "Taxpayer Alert" flyer and memo from staff regarding Roundwalk. APPEAL STATEMENT: Was read. LEGAL RECOURSE STATEMENT: Was noted on the agenda. 144 Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 Note: Overstrike = Pele4iofi Italics = Addition OLD BUSINESS: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEADING I. BURBANK HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION; ROUNDWALK VILLAGE; 745 MCDOWELL BLVD. NORTH; AP NO. 048- 080 -037 (FILES REZ93013, GPA91008, EIQ91005). Continued consideration of the Draft EIR for a 132-unit affordable housing, project. Consideration of a request for a General Plan Amendment to change the, land use designation of a 6.3 acre parcel from Industrial. to Urban High; consideration of a rezoning of the property from M -L, Light Industrial to PUD, :Planned Unit; District; and approval of a Planned Unit Development Plan to allow the development of 132 affordable residential units. The following actions are requested: 1. Consider the adequacy of the DEIR ,and recommend certification of the EIR. 2. Recommend approval of the General Plan Amendment. 3. Recommend approval of the Rezoning to PUD. 4. Recommend conditional approval of the Planned Unit Development Plan and Density Bonus. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Principal Planner Jim McCann - Presented staff response to "Taxpayer Alert" flyer. Assistant Planner Dede Dolan - Presented the staff report and an overview of the DEIR. John Morgan - Burbank Housing - displayed site plan; expressed concern with condition regarding maximum number of compact parking spaces allowed; expressed concern with Sonoma County Water Agency requirements; noted that approximately 50% of Petaluma residents can qualify for low /moderate income housing. Housing Coordinator Bonne Gaebler - In response to Commissioner's questions, explained rental rates, prospective tenants, City housing efforts, etc. Kathleen Balistren - 8 Raintree - Burbank's Cherry Hills project allowed family of six (4 kids) to stay in Petaluma. Andrea. Hamilton - 6 Locust - (Cherry Hills) Born in Petaluma, had to move from Petaluma because rents were too high; very fortunate to be living back in Petaluma in Cherry Hills; people who need this type of housing are regular people with regular salaries; thanked Petaluma and Burbank Housing. Mark Brown 1009 Madrone ( Madrone Village) - very grateful. that Planning Commission considers the people of Petaluma in their decisions; neighbors [in Madrone Village] are regular people a City Council member, City of Petaluma employee, single parents, restaurant manager - all tax - paying people; because of affordability, families are kept together, kids feel safe in Madrone Village, neighborhood pride; Petaluma is helping Petaluman's. Karen Greene - 311 Olympic Court - (Presented long list of General Plan concerns); Not really an activist; concerned with projects which have potential to effect McDowell Boulevard; City of Petaluma has long- standing relationship with Burbank; concerns with planning issues and placement of these units; financial information of renters /tenants should remain private, anyone in this project has no privacy on financial matters; objectives in General Plan not addressed. fully or appropriately; learned to always question assumptions and always remain flexible; Petaluma does not really know how much u P► 2 4 5 7 9 10 11 CD C 20 21 22 23 24 2 7 9 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 0 1 2 3 54 Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 affordable housing is really available not against growth, but.must take into account large projects and their affects; need to maintain small town atmosphere (per the General Plan); this project will not help in goal of preserving small town atmosphere; project will be in middle of a commercial area; no parks, neighborhood will not be integrated into other nearby areas (because of need to cross McDowell); child care needs for projected 46 pre- school children_ may not be met; in -home family daycare in subdivision not viable because of space restrictions, liability, etc.,; schools (Cinnabar) are too far away; three alternatives listed in EIR need more discussion; transportation goals not reached; traffic already unsafe on McDowell; where will junior and senior high school students go to school ?; regarding health and safety - how will this project affect police /fire protection? EIR states need for another police officer - need more details on this and on private security that could be provided; children cannot walk safely to school; project was originally proposed to be ownership units - now proposed for rental; a project of this type needs to be placed on ballot per California State Constitution - when will this be on a ballot? Arnold Sternberg - Director of Burbank Housing - This project is not subject to Article 34 of the State Constitution regarding placement on referendum ballot; Petaluma's City Attorney-should be able to offer advice on this subject; transportation to schools will be provided by school district buses; large daycare facility is located nearby; Cherry Hill has two licensed daycare providers, anticipate that this development with nine mini - neighborhoods (plans for one fenced yard in each mini - neighborhood) will provide enough daycare within the development; all units will be sprinklered two -story townhomes, some with second -story living areas (kitchen, living room, etc.), which will be able to provide safety by providing "eyes" looking down upon units; walkway runs around village, a private police person could be provided if necessary; information on tenants is not public. David Young - Royal Oaks Mobilehome Park - Against project because of density and traffic; They are being subsidized, why does this project need a density bonus? Who owns Burbank :Housing? Who controls Burbank Housing? How do these projects get these "gifts "? Arnold Sternberg - Burbank responsible to Sonoma County Board of Supervisors; has IRS 501C3 status as a nonprofit; responsible to Board of Directors, Board of Supervisors, County Auditor's Office, IRS, investors. David Young - Why does City of Petaluma need to give subsidies if Burbank is nonprofit with tax credits from IRS? Commissioner Bennett - City is mandated by the General Plan to provide funds for affordable housing, staff can provide more information. Andrea Hamilton - Daycare will probably be provided by residents as in other Burbank developments. Commissioner Parkerson - Not ready to recommend approval of the EIR, wants to see the final EIR "with responses to comments. Commissioners Thomvson, Rahman, Shea and Bennett - ready to send EIR on to Council now; no new information has been presented this evening. Planning Director Tuft - Not necessary to bring this back to Commission since no new substantiative information was presented tonight; anticipate only responding to comments made tonight, no new document will be prepared. Commissioner Torliatt - How will wetlands be replaced? Can more eucalyptus be saved? Planning Director Tuft - Army Corps of Engineers has not completed review; all mitigations are planned on -site; will research compact parking at existing comparable projects; will try to save as many eucalyptus as possible. Commissioner vonRaesfeld - How does traffic compare with other uses possible for this site? Allan Tilton - City Traffic Engineer This development will have significantly less traffic than M/L type uses already allowed. Commissioner Parkerson - Supported project from the beginning; if the EIR won't need any changes, will support EIR and project fully tonight. 145 3 M Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 Planning Director Tuft - Responses to comments will be included in next correspondence to Commission. The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Parkerson and seconded by Commissioner Torliatt to recommend to the City Council certification of the EIR incorporating responses to comments presented at this meeting and responses based on the findings, and subject to the mitigations listed in the DEIR as listed in the staff report dated March 8, 1994 COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON Yes COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT: Yes COMMISSIONER TORLIATT: Yes COMMISSIONER vonRAESFELD: Yes Findings: 1. The DEIR has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 2. Required changes to the - project, outlined by the following mitigations, and incorporated into the conditlons of approval for the PUD development Plan, will avoid or substantially lessen all the environmental effects identified in the DEIR. 4. On the basis of the DEIR, the comments received, and the responses to those comments, there is no substantial evidence that the project as mitigated below, will have a significant effect on the environment. Mitigations: All mitigations are recommended to be adopted as listed in the DEIR with the following exceptions: 1. The traffic mitigations shall be amended to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer be- censister tk- Ibe o}posed -ern ti ©r € e tty- Try € €ie - g ees as follows: a. Provide a separate left turn lane on the northbound approach to the North McDowell Boulevard /Palo Verde Way /Access Driveway #1 intersection. This would require removing a portion of the existing raised median to allow for a striped ("painted) left turn lane. b. Provide two outbound lanes, each 12 feet wide, on the Driveway #1 approach to 'North McDowell Boulevard. C. At a minimum, widen project access Driveway #1 to accommodate large vehicle inbound turning movements, with a minimum inbound lane width of 14 feet, and two 12 -foot wide outbound lanes. The total width of the driveway should be 38 feet. Driveway #2 should have 12 400t inbound and 1. Formal legislation certifying the EIR and adopting the mitigations measures and the mitigation monitoring plan will be presented to the City Council. 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 7 9 10 (h co IRM 20 21 22 23 24 25 6 7 8 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 0 1 2 53 Planning Commission Minutes 147 March 8, 1994 12 -foot outbound lanes (total 24 feet). Both driveways should have minimum 15 -foot curb radii. d. Provide Driveway #1 and Driveway #2 sufficient inbound and outbound vehicle stacking space to accommodate two vehicles (minimum 50 feet, measured from the McDowell Boulevard roadway edge), free of conflicting internal driveways or parking spaces. (This would eliminate 4 parking spaces at each driveway.) e., Design the internal roadways to adequately accommodate large vehicle turning movements (fire trucks., garbage trucks, delivery trucks, etc.), so that they can avoid intruding into the opposing traffic lane, consistent with the City's site design standards. This would require that the internal parking aisles be widened to accommodate turning maneuvers of single unit trucks. L Ratio of compact to full size on -site parking spaces comply with the City's Design Guidelines' maximum of 30% compact size spaces, and they should be distributed evenly (and clearly labeled) throughout the site; or alternatively: The EIR Traffic Engineer recommends that the site plan be revised to provide all "mid- size" (17'x 8.5') spaces, with no differentiation in parking space size, maintaining 2 spaces per residential unit (with an additional 6 spaces designated for use by the cafe /store). g. The project applicant will be required to contribute to the City's Traffic Mitigation Fee Program as required by City Ordinance. . 2. Mitigation Number 2 of the Biological Resources Chapter shall be amended to read as follows: Landscape plans should clearly state the use of native trees and shrubs which have greater value to nesting birds and other. wildlife to the maximum extent feasible without compromising the need for providing attractive, useful outdoor places for humans. A motion was made by Commissioner Parkerson and seconded by Commissioner Torliatt to recommend to the City Council approval of the General Plan Land Use Designation Amendment from Industrial to Urban High based on the findings as follow: COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON Yes COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT: Yes COMMISSIONER TORLIATT: Yes COMMISSIONER vonRAESFELD: Yes Findings: 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with and will be compatible with the rest of the General Plan including the Local Economy, Housing and Community Health and Safety Chapters. The conversion of the six acre parcel on McDowell Boulevard North from industrial to residential will not conflict with the Local Economy Goals, Policies and Programs of the City of Petaluma General Plan. 2. The amendment to be in the public interest because a high density residential site in this location will provide a buffer and a reasonable land use transition between the 5 148 Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 1 mobile home park and the industrial park which surrounds two sides of the project 2 site. 3 4 3. The Roundwalk Village project is expected to implement Policies 10, 13, and 5 Programs 14, 20, 21, and 22 of the General Plan Housing element which encourage 6 the development of - housing for low and very low income families, specifically rental 7 housing. 8 9 4. The potential impacts of this proposed change have been addressed through the 10 preparation of aDraft Environmental Impact Report and:have been determined not 11 to be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, if the mitigations proposed 12 in the DEIR are incorporated into the project. 13 14 5. Based on the 1994 Business Park and Industrial. Development Survey, an adequate 15 stock of industrial land, is being maintained to allow development for the next eight 16 years and beyond based on the absorption of vacant industrial land in the last eight 17 years. 18 19 A motion was made by Commissioner Parkerson and seconded by Commissioner Torliatt 20 to recommend approval of the .Rezoning from M -L: Light Industrial to PUD: Planned Unit 21 District based on the findings listed below: COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON Yes COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT: Yes COMMISSIONER.TORLIAT E Yes COMMISSIONER vonRAESFELD: Yes Findings: 1. The proposed Roundwalk Village PUD, as conditioned, is in compliance with the goals and objectives of the General Plan. 2. The public necessity, convenience and general welfare clearly permit the adoption of the proposed Rezoning. 3. The development plan, as conditioned, results in a more desirable use of the land and .a better physical environment than would be possible under any single zoning district by providing affordable units in a creative design. 4. The plan for the proposed 'devel'opment, as conditioned, presents a unified and organized arrangement of buildings and service facilities which are appropriate in relation to nearby properties, and ,adequate landscaping and screening will be reviewed by SPARC to insure compatibility. 5. The development of the Roundwalk; Village project, in the manner proposed by the applicant, will not be detrimental to the public welfare, provide much needed affordable, housing, will be in the best interest of the City, and will be in keeping with the ; general intent and spirit of the zoning regulations and General Plan of the City of Petaluma. 0 Planning .Commission Minutes 149 March 8, 1994 1 6. The circulation pattern of the proposed PUD plan, as conditioned, has been found 2 toi have suitable relationship to the adjacent circulations system as conditioned. All 3 circulation and traffic impacts of the project can be mitigated through the 4 incorporation of specific mitigation measures identified in the FEIR prepared for 5 the project. 6 7 7. The development of the subject property in the manner proposed by the applicant 8 and conditionally approved, shall continue to provide affordable housing for 9 families. 10 8. The natural and scenic qualities of the site will be preserved through the (b incorporation of the biological mitigation measures identified in the DEIR prepared Co for the project. ce 9. All requirements of CEQA have been adhered to through the preparation and Certification of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) which identified impacts and proposed mitigations to avoid or mitigate all impacts to a level of insignificance. A motion was made by Commissioner Parkerson and seconded by Commissioner Torliatt 20 to recommend approval of the PUD Plan, written PUD Standards and approval of a 40% 21 density bonus based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed below: 22 23 COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes 24 COMMISSIONER PARKERSON Yes 25 COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes 6 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Yes 7 CHAIRMAN BENNETT: Yes 8 COMMISSIONER TORLIATT: Yes 29 COMMISSIONER vonRAESFELD: Yes 30 31 Findings: 32 33 1. The proposed Roundwalk Village PUD, as conditioned, is in compliance with the 34 goals and objectives of the General Plan. 35 36 2. The public necessity, convenience and general welfare clearly permit the adoption 37 of ',the proposed Rezoning. 38 39 3. The development plan, as :conditioned, results in a more desirable use of the land 40 and a better physical. environment than would be possible under any single zoning 41 district by providing affordable units in a creative design. 42 43 4. The plan for the proposed development, as conditioned, presents a unified and 44 organized arrangement of buildings and. service facilities which are appropriate in 45 relation to nearby properties, and adequate landscaping and screening will be 46 reviewed by SPARC to insure compatibility. 47 48 5. The development of the Roundwalk Village project, .in the manner proposed by the _49 applicant, will not be detrimental to the public welfare, will provide much needed 0 affordable housing, will be in the best interest of the City, and will be in keeping 1 with the general intent and spirit of the zoning regulations and General Plan of the 2 City of Petaluma. 3 7 150 Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 6. The circulation pattern of the proposed PUD plan, as conditioned, has been found to have a suitable relationship to the adjacent circulations system as conditioned. All circulation and traffic impacts of the project can be mitigated through the incorporation. of specific mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR prepared for the project. 7. The development of the subject property, in the manner proposed by the applicant and conditionally approved, shall continue to provide affordable housing for families. 8. The natural and scenic qualities of the site will be preserved through the incorporation of the biological mitigation measures identified in the DEIR prepared for the project. 9. All requirements of CEQA have been adhered to through the preparation and Certification of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) which identified impacts and proposed mitigations to avoid or mitigate all impacts to a level of insignificance. 10. The proposed project is consistent with the provisions of Govt Code Section 65915 through 65918 regarding Density Bonuses. 11. The project has been designed to accommodate the higher density, in. an attractive environment while providing significant amount of privacy for each future family. 12. The project is located well within the City's Urban Limit Line and can be served by existing infrastructure and services. 13. Granting a density onus will help satisfy City housing policies regarding the provision of affordable rental housing at a lower subsidy per unit than would be required for a lower density project. 14. The benefits of the project (more affordable housing) and the ability to mitigate noise levels to . a reasonable range, warrant the application of the conditionally acceptable noise level for the 14 units along McDowell. Boulevard North as permitted by the City's General Plan. Conditions: 1. The applicants /developers shall, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or any of its boards, commission, agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City, its boards, commission, agents,. officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the approval of the project when such claim or action is brought within the time period provided for in applicable State and /or local statutes. The City shall promptly notify the applicants developers of any such claim, action, or proceeding. The City shall coordinate in the defense. Nothing contained in this condition shall prohibit the' City from participating in a defense of any claim, action, or proceeding if the City bears its own attorney's fees and costs, and the City defends the action in good faith. 2. All mitigations listed in the .Final EIR, as amended shall be conditions of approval of "the Planned °Unit Development Plan. 3. The applicant shall comply with the following conditions of the Planning Department: Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 1 2 a.. All physical aspects of the project including the site plan, landscape plans and 3 architectural drawings, and written PUD standards shall be subject to review 4 by SPARC prior to issuance of building permits. 5 6 b. The project sponsor shall execute a covenant (or comparable binding 7 document to be approved by the City Attorney) with the City f Petaluma 8 insuring that occupancy of 49% of the units shall be exclusively for very low 9 and low income families prior to issuance of building permits. 10 11 4. The applicant shall comply with the following conditions of the Engineering (2 Department: co co a.� A complete topographic survey of the project site shall be produced and shall accurately locate existing frontage improvements, structures above and below ground, easements, adjacent structures and /or improvements, and any other pertinent information. b. A site plan shall be submitted with the building permit package showing accurate horizontal and vertical location of all site improvements. 20 C. Proposed water mains and sanitary sewer mains shall be shown on the plans. 21 If water and sewer lines are to be public, proposed easements shall also be 22 indicated. 23 d.. Right -of -way shall be dedicated along the frontage of this property if deemed 24 necessary. 25 e. Overhead utilities along the frontage and traversing this site shall be placed 26 underground. 27 f.! The proposed storm drain system shall be approved by the Sonoma County 28 Water Agency. 29 g. All public improvements shall conform to the latest standards of the City of 30 Petaluma. 31 32 5. The plans shall be amended so that the meandering pathway along the creek is 33 constructed entirely within the boundaries of the project so as not to intrude upon 34 the lands of the Sonoma County Water Agency unless otherwise approved by 35 SCWA. 36 37 - 38 NEW BUSINESS 39 PUBLIC HEARING 40 41 II. NORTHBAY ECUMENICAL MOUSING,. WISTERIA. SUBDIVISION, ELY ROAD 42 NORTH AT SANDSTONE DRIVE, AP NO. 137- 070- 037(portion), FILES 43 R]EZ93015, TSM93009. 44 45 Request for approval of a 28 -lot manufactured housing development intended for 46 non- market -rate sale to first time homebuyers. Requested actions include: 47 48 1. A determination that the previously certified EIR adequately addresses the 49 environmental effects of this development. 50 2. Recommendation for City Council approval of PUD Development Plan and 51 Standards. 52 3. Recommendation for City Council approval of Tentative Subdivision Map. 53 151 7 152 Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Housing .Coordinator Bonne Gaebler presented the staff report. Kim Blackseth NEH - Affordability achieved through manufactured housing, built on foundations with stick -built garages (homes are built to Federal, not State Standards); requested monolythic sidewalks; trees will, ; still be provided on private property; regarding lots that may. allow second units - requested that foundations be built to, accommodate a second -story but not actual building of shells be required; goal is to provide as much usable lot as possible; will sell in the $150,000 vicinity. Spike Godfrey - MacKay and Somps (Civil Engineer for project) - Discussed setbacks of lots and fencing 'design at entrance to development. Commission Discussion Benefits of seperated sidewalk with street trees outweigh loss of some front yard; have parking requirements for units with possible second units been addressed ?; describe linking road to Americana. Subdivision; issues for SPARC: improved detail design, side entry garages on lots 18,19,25,30 (maybe 17); more diversity. A motion was made by Commissioner Parkerson and seconded by Commissioner vonRaesfeld to recommend to the City Council that the past environmental review is adequate for this project and recommend approval of the PUD Development Plan and written Development Standards based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed below: COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON Yes COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT: Yes COMMISSIONER TORLIATT: Yes COMMISSIONER vonRAESFELD: Yes PUD Findings 1. The PUD Development Plan, as conditioned, results in a more desirable use of the land, and a better physical environment than would be possible u_ nder any single zoning district or combination of zoning districts through provision of medium density, small lot detached single' - family housing and incorporation of affordable manufactured units. 2. The plan for the proposed development, as conditioned, presents a unified and organized arrangement of residential buildings which are appropriate in relation to adjacent and nearby rural properties: and associated future residential and commercial projects, and adequate landscaping and /or screening is included if necessary to insure compatibility. 3. The natural and scenic qualities of the site will be protected through the implementation of conditions of approval. pertaining to circulation, street frontage landscaping, and transition 'to the adjoining properties. 4. The development of the subject Wisteria Subdivision property, in the manner proposed by the applicant and conditioned by the City, will not be detrimental to the public welfare, will be in the best interests of the City, and will be in keeping with 10 153 Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 1 the general intent and spirit of the zoning regulations of the City of Petaluma and 2 with the Petaluma General Plan. 3 4 5. The PUD District is proposed on property which has a suitable relationship to one 5 or more thoroughfares (Ely. Road, Sonoma Mountain Parkway and Corona Road) 6 to carry any additional traffic generated by the development 7 8 6. Mitigation measures adopted with the previously certified Environmental Impact 9 Report for the Corona /Ely Specific Plan will adequately mitigate, or reduce to a 10 level of nonsignificance, any potential impacts of this development. 11 Project Conditions Ce 1. All applicable mitigation measures adopted by the City Council in conjunction with certification of the Corona /Ely Specific Plan EIR shall be conditions of project approval, and are incorporated by reference. 2. Plans submitted at time of SPARC application shall incorporate the following 20 amendments to the PUD Development Plan: 21 22 a. Units on Lots 19, 20, 21 shall be relocated to provide greater setback from 23 Sandstone Drive, and reduction in the length of driveways. Lot lines may be 24 reconfigured as necessary, and use of shared driveways in this vicinity is 25 encouraged. 9 6 7 b.: At least three lots shall be identified for construction of accessory dwellings 8 above the garage. Elevations shall be developed and all necessary 29 modifications to construction for conversion to living space shall be 30 addressed. Lots 18, 21, 25, 27, 28 shall be considered for this purpose. 31 Modifications to achieve Zoning Ordinance requirements for open space and 32 pparking in order- to accommodate future construction of these units shall also 33 be addressed with the SPARC submittal. 34 35 c. Minimum rear yard setbacks of 12' along,Ely Road and 10' along Sandstone 36 Drive shall be incorporated into the typical setback detail. 37 38 3. The following revisions to proposed landscape plans shall be made prior to SPARC 39 review: 40 41 a. Plans shall be amended to reflect incorporation of street tree planter strips 42 on Wisteria Circle and Mayflower Street, except adjacent to the McBail site. 43 Plans shall include installation of trees and groundcovers. 44 45 b. Interior street frontage fencing shall be located at least 5' behind sidewalks, 46 and shall meet Zoning Ordinance provisions for sight distance visibility at 47 street corners. Fencing on Lots 18, 25, 30, 31 may require modification to 48 meet this requirement. Fencing on Lot 28 should be modified to soften the 49 corners along the street frontage. Fencing along the street frontage of Lots 15 0 18 and 19 shall consist of the perimeter fence design. Design of all other 1 street frontage fencing shall be modified to incorporate stronger design 53 2 interest. 11 154 Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 C. Perimeter fencing along Ely Road shall be revised to incorporate offset in sections, similar to that proposed along Sandstone Drive and existing fencing located' across the Ely frontage of the Graystone Creek project. d. Landscaping within the right -of -way to be maintained .through establishment of a Landscape Assessment District shall consist of -low maintenance, water conserving plant species. The proposed lawn area at the project entry on Ely Road shall be replaced with groundcover or other treatment meeting this criteria. e. Street trees along the Sandstone Drive frontage of the project site shall be consistent with plans approved for the Graystone Creek Subdivision. Street trees proposed along the Mayflower Street frontage of the project shall be consistent with plantings approved for the same street within the Americana Subdivision. Street trees proposed' for use in right -of -way areas on Wisteria Circle shall be distinctly different from those used on Sandstone or Mayflower. 4. The following revisions to architectural plans shall be made prior to submittal for SPARC review of the project: a. Different siding types, garage door styles (including seperated doors) and roof colors shall,,be offered for use on both floor plans. Siding treatment shall be consistent on all exterior elevations for each unit. b. At least two different window .glazing treatments (e.g., grid design) shall be offered for use throughout the project. Treatments shall be used consistently on all elevations for each unit. C. Special emphasis shall be on treatment of those units along Ely Road and Sandstone Drive, (rear elevations) and those units with 'side elevations exposed to street frontages .(e.g., Lots 18, 19, 27, 28, 25, 22, 17). Consideration shall be ' .given to the introduction of additional windows, decorative vents, gable end treatment and window trims, and ' alternative siding treatment to provide interest. d. Side entry garages shall be provided on Lots 18, 19, 25 and 30 at the discretion of SPARC. _ 5. Maintenance easements shall be required and shown on the Final Map to encompass all portions of private lots to be contained in yard areas designated for use by an adjoining. property owner. In addition, project CC &R's shall specify permitted uses for these areas, and any proposed restrictions to use. The CC &R's shall incorporate an exhibit, subject to staff approval, which will enable homeowners to locate property lines for purposes of establishing buildable private yard areas. Provisions contained in the CC &R's and the accompanying exhibit shall reflect consistency with the PUD Development Standards, the Uniform Building Code and other applicable City Ordinances. 6. Project PUD Development Standards and the PUD Development Plan shall be amended prior to Final Map application to incorporate the following: 12 Planning: Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 1 a. Rear yard maintenance easement areas shall be identified and references 2 made to the CC &R's for regulation of the maintenance easement areas for 3 building purposes. 4 5 b , No ground floor additions shall be permitted to the front elevations of units 6 in order to preserve street frontage open space. 7 8 7. Provisions for maintenance of all front yard landscaping and the common driveway 9 serving Lots 1 through 3 and 21, shall be established prior to application for Final 10 Map, to the specifications of City Engineering and Planning staff. All required X 11 maintenance agreements shall be recorded with the Final Map. (V 8. The applicants /developers shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or any of its boards, commission, agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action or proceeding a &ainst the City, its boards, commission, agents, officers, or employees to' attack, set aside, void, or annul, the approval of the project when such claim or action is brought within the time period provided for in applicable State and /or local statutes. The City shall promptly notify the applicants /developers of any such claim, action, or proceeding. The City shall coordinate in the defense. Nothing 20 contained in this condition shall prohibit the City from participating in a defense of 21 any claim, action, or proceeding if the City bears its own attorney's fees and costs, 22 and the City defends the action in good faith. 23 24 9. The PUD Development Plan (including landscape plans) shall be amended to 25 incorporate all Council and SPARC conditions of approval within 30 days of final t 6 SPARC approval of the project or prior to Final Map application, whichever occurs - 7 first. All revisions shall meet the specifications of Planning and Engineering staff, 8 and a reproducible copy of the finalized docent shall be submitted to the 9 Planning Department prior to recordation of the Final Map. 30 31 A motion was made by Commissioner Parkerson and seconded by Commissioner 32 vonRaesfeld to recommend to the City Council approval of the Tentative Map for a 28 -lot 33 detached; single - family subdivision based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed 34 below: 35 36 COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes 37 COMMISSIONER PARKERSON Yes 38 COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes 39 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Yes 40 CHAIRMAN BENNETT: Yes 41 COMMISSIONER TORLIATI': Yes 42 COMMISSIONER vonRAESFELD: Yes 43 44 Tentative Subdivision Map Findings 45 46 1. The proposed subdivision, together with provisions for its design and improvement, 47 is consistent with the General Plan. . 48 49 2. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. "0 - 1 3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 2 .)3 4. The parcel map provides reasonable public access on a public road to the proposed 54 lots. 155 13 156 Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 1 2 5. The proposed 'map, subject to the following conditions, complies, with the 3 requirements of the Municipal Code, Chapter 20.20 and the Subdivision Map Act. 6. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements will' not cause substantial environmental damage, and no substantial or avoidable injury will occur to fish or wildlife or their habitat. 7. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not cause public health. problems. 8. The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Section 15315. Conditions of Approval The subdivider shall comply with the following requirements of the City Engineer: a, The storm drain system shown on the tentative map within lots 9 and 10 shall have a private storm maintenance agreement and easement recorded with the final map and said agreement shall specify the timing of maintenance. b. All local residential streets shall have- a structural section to meet a traffic index of 5.0 design requirement with a 3 -inch minimum asphalt concrete thickness. C. Water pressure calculations shall be required for this development verifying the system adequacy for fire flows and domestic service. d. A 10 -foot PUE shall be dedicated adjacent to all public street right- ofways unless letters from all utility companies are provided stating the proposed 5- foot PUE is acceptable. e. This project shall be submitted to the Sonoma County Water Agency for review and approval prior to final map approval.. f. The Old Ely Road, as shown on this tentative map, -shall be abandoned prior to final map approval. The said Old .Ely Road shall not be abandoned until such time as the adjacent access easement on the Gatti Nursery, Inc., property is relocated and quit claimed by the owner(s) of said easement. g. The proposed lot line adjustment shall be executed, approved by the Director of Engineering, and recorded prior to final map recordation. h. The southeasterly terminus of Mayflower Street, as shown on this tentative map, shall conform to the street improvements as proposed on the approved Americana Subdivision tentative map (Gatti Nursery, Inc., property). L A soils investigation report shall be prepared for. this development per Article 7, Soils Report of -the Subdivision Map Act. This development shall comply with all recommendations as stated in the soil investigation report. 14 Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 157 1 j. Lot -to -lot drainage shall not be allowed. All lot drainages shall be directed 2 to a public street or be collected on -site in .a privately owned and maintained 3 storm drain system. To minimize runoff over the sidewalks, under sidewalk 4 drains shall be utilized in order to bring surface runoff through the sidewalks 5 and outlet at the street gutter, subject to the Engineering Department 6 standards and staff review and approval. 7 8 k., Street lights shall be installed within this development and shall have 9 Corona /Ely standard metal fixtures dedicated to the City for ownership and 10 maintenance. The street lighting plans shall include electrical service 11 locations. The electrical service connection points shall be determined and (a included on the plans in coordination with PG &E's electrical service construction design plans. 1. The City of Petaluma Engineering Department's "Minimum Design Criteria ", "Improvement Plan Preparation" and "Standard Details and Specifications" shall be utilized to design this development and shall be incorporated into the improvement plan and final map preparation. 20 m. The 100 -year storm drain relief on the private drive shall be contained within 21 an adequate overflow channel, free of permanent structures and within a 22 dedicated surface easement conveyed to the City. 23 24 2. Plans submitted at time of SPARC application shall incorporate the following 25 amendments to the Tentative Map: 26 27 a.' The street sections for Wisteria Circle (section B -B) and Mayflower Street 28 (section C -C) shall be amended to reflect a street tree planter strip 29 measuring 5' in width from face of curb. Sidewalk_ shall be located behind 30 the planter strip, and may be partially located on private property within a 31 public sidewalk easement. 32 33 b.; Additional right of way shall be dedicated along Sandstone Drive, to reflect a 34 distance of 7' between the back of existing, sidewalk to new property line for 35 lots 1 and 19 through 21. A street section for Sandstone Drive shall be 36 incorporated into the Tentative Map which reflects these requirements. 37 38 c.' All project entry landscape areas, including perimeter fencing, shall be 39 incorporated into the right -of -way along Mayflower Street and Sandstone 40 Drive. 41 42 3. The following requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be met: 43 44 a. Post address at or near main entry door - minimum four (4) inch letters. 45 46 b. All roof covering material shall have a Class 'B" rating or better, treated in 47 accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard 32.7. 48 49 C. All roof covering materials applied as exterior wall covering shall have a fire rating of class "B ", treated in accordance with UBC Standard 32.7, as per 1 50 51 Ordinance 1744 of the City of Petaluma. 52 53 d. In residential buildings less than 3,500 square feet in floor area, provide fire 54 suppression system at normal sources of ignition. These areas are specifically 15 158 Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 at clothes dryers, kitchen stoves, furnaces, water heaters, fireplaces, and in attic areas at vents and chimneys for these appliances and equipment. e. Provide fire hydrants as required by the Fire Marshal's office. Three (3) fire hydrant(s) required for project. 4. All requirements of the Public Works Director shall be met prior to approval of the Final Map. 5. 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 2904(b). C. All retainingwalls shall meet the requirements of the 1991 UBC, and shall comply'with Petaluma Standards Ordinance No. 1727/1988. d. All roofing shall be 'B" rated or better per Ordinance No. 1744/ 1988. e. Responsible party to sign plans. L Submit soils report to verify foundation design. g. Plans must show compliance to 1991 UBC, UPC, UMC, and 1990 NEC. Plans must also show compliance to current Title 24 Energy Code. h. Provide structural calculations for all non - conventional design items. L Demolition permit required to remove any structure. j: Abandonment of water well or septic system must be done under permit from County of Sonoma Public Health Department. 6. The Tentative Map 'shall be amended within 30 days of final SPARC approval_ of the project to incorporate, all applicable conditions of Council and SPARC approval. All modifications shall meet the specifications of Engineering and Planning staff, and a reproducible copy of the finalized document shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to recordation of the Final Map. 7. This development shall be subject to all applicable special development fees, including but not limited to water and sewer connection fees, community facilities development fees, storm drainage impact fees, park and recreation land improvement fees, school facilities fees, and traffic nutigation fees. Fees shall be calculated and paid in accordance with adopted City Resolutions. 8. Any labeling errors or other erroneous information appearing on the map, development plan or landscape plans shall be corrected prior to ' Final Map approval. 9. Abandonment of the Old. Ely Road right of way shall not occur until, satisfactory agreement for the relocation of the existing access serving the five county residents 16 Planning; Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 159 1 to the east of the Gatti property is reached. However, abandonment of the Old Ely 2 Road right of way shall be accomplished prior to development of lots 1 through 10, 3 and installation of any right of way improvements in this area. 4 5 10. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, a lot line adjustment between the Wisteria 6 and Gatti /Sonoma Parkway Co. properties shall be recorded to achieve the 7 proposed configuration and dimensions shown on the Tentative Map in the vicinity 8 of Old Ely Road. 9 10 11. A', note shall be included on the Final Map for the project (agency information 11 sheet) referencing all project approvals and other regulating documents. Ca 12. A; note shall be included on the Final Map referencing a disclosure notice which shall accompany the map at time of recordation and' describe potential noise, odor and traffic impacts from nearby agricultural uses located outside City limits. The disclosure shall further identify Sandstone Drive as a designated access route for the five county residents located east of the Gatti proPerty. 13. All trees, perimeter fencing, arbors, entry walls, and other improvements within the 20 public right of way street tree planter strips, Ely Road, and Sandstone Drive 21 frontage areas shall be maintained by a Landscape Assessment District (LAD) 22 through contract services subject to approval of the City Council in conjunction with 23 the Final Map. Landscaping within these areas shall be designed and installed to 24 City standards acceptable to City of Petaluma Planning, Engineering, Public Works 25 and Parks staff. Irrigation to serve all landscaping in the street tree planter strips 6 shall be designed to connect with the private lot irrigation. systems of the adjoining 7 lots. Separate irrigation systems shall be established for street frontage areas along 8 Ely Road and Sandstone Drive. Costs of formation of the required LAD shall be 29 borne by the project proponents at time of Final Map application. 30 31 14. This project is subject to all applicable provisions contained in the Development 32 Agreement for the Gray property and subsequent amendments to the Agreement. 33 34 35 III. DAVID RABBIT; ELIM LUTHERAN CHURCH; 220 STANLEY STREET; AP NO. 36 006- 385 -025; FILE NO. CUP93045. 37 38 Request to amend an existing Conditional Use Permit to permit a 5,393 square foot 39 expansion to the existing church and daycare facility and to permit an increase in the 40 number of daycare students from 40 to 60 students plus 25 kindergarten. The 41 following actions are requested: 42 43 1. A determination that the project is exempt from the requirements of CEQA. 44 2. Consideration of and amendment to a Conditional. Use Permit permitting a 45 church and childcare facility in an R -C Zoning District. 46 47 The public hearing was opened. 48 49 SPEAKERS: 0 1 Assistant Planner Dede Dolan presented the staff report. 17 160 Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 David Rabbit - Applicant /Architect /Churchmember - Increased preschool numbers not needed at this time, but looking for future growth; ample on -street parking available, hasn't been a parking problem in past. Bob Hammel' 421 Upham - Has had water in his backyard since church parking .lot was revamped and a sidewalk and fence added; talked to the church, they haven't made any effort to correct; consider requiring some a of drain in parking lot to ;correct this problem. (Speaking for neighbor, Mrs. Martin there is a noise problem with a basketball court and hoop very close to her property - a compromise has been reached with Reverend Kellgren in discussions tonight. David Rabbit Civil Engineer for project is addressing the drainage problem. Commission Discussion - Outdoor lighting should not cause glare to isurrounding properties; addition of trees for shade for children playing outside; cyclone fence surrounding play area should be softened with vegetation; if drainage is not corrected, this should be reevaluated; good project overall. The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner vonRaesfeld and seconded by Commissioner Rahman to find this project exempt from CEQA and to grant an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed below: COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON Yes COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes COMMISSIONER T 4OMPSON: Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT: Yes COMMISSIONER TORLIATE Yes COMMISSIONER vonRAESFELD: Yes Fines 1. The, proposed Elim Lutheran church and childcare facility expansion, as conditioned, will conform to the requirements and intent of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance and will provide the minimum number of required parking spaces on site as required by the ordinance, with over -flow parking spaces available on nearby church property on Baker Street and on the public street. 2. The proposed church and childcare facility expansion, as conditioned, will conform to the requirements and intent, goals, and policies of the Petaluma General Plan which encourage "all day" care centers and private preschools to provide childcare year- round. 3. The proposed church and childcare facility will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community but represents an attractive re- use of the property, and will provide an expanded childcare facility for the neighborhood. 4. This project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA Section 15301, Additions to existing structures and thus no further environmental review is required. Conditions: 1. This use permit may be recalled to the Planning. Commission for review at any time due to complaints regarding lack of compliance with conditions of approval, traffic IN Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 161 1 congestion, noise generation, or other adverse operating characteristics. At such 2 time, the Commission may revoke the use permit or add /modify conditions of 3 approval. 4 5 2. The applicants /developers shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or 6 any of its boards, commission, agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action 7 or proceeding against the City, its boards, commission, agents, officers, or employees 8 to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the approval of the project when such claim or 9 action is brought within the time period provided for in applicable State and /or 10 local statutes. The City shall promptly notify the applicants /developers of any such 11 claim, action, or proceeding. The City shall coordinate in the defense. Nothing C�2 contained in this condition shall prohibit the City from participating in a defense of C3 any claim, action, or proceeding if the City bears its own attorney's fees and costs, Cf)4 and the City defends the action in good faith. 5 6 3. This Use Permit is for the proposed expansion of the Elim Lutheran Church as 7 shown on the plans submitted December 30th and on file in the City of Petaluma 8 Planning Department. This permit allows the ongoing use of the facility as 9 described in the project Environmental Information form submitted on December 20 30, 1993 and as amended by the letter from David Rabbit dated February 16, 1994. 21 22 4. This permit allows the operation of a childcare and kindergarten facility for no more 23 than 85 children subject to all necessary state permits. Any expansion in the number 24 of children served will require an amendment to this Use Permit. 25 26 5. The project plans will be subject to review and approval by SPARC prior to issuance 27 of building permits with emphasis on the following: 28 29 a: Adequate landscaping and screening of the parking lot and new buildings 30 from adjacent uses. 31 32 b: Use of building materials which will be compatible with or enhance the 33 existing structure. 34 35 c Placement of new light fixtures on the building and in the parking lot so as to 36 - avoid impacts from increased glare in neighboring properties. 37 38 6. In the event that 504 Baker Street is converted from church offices back to a single 39 family home, the covered parking which is being demolished as a result of this 40 addition shall be replaced, on site, with at least - one. covered space and two 41 uncovered spaces as required by the City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance. 42 43 7. Church employees shall be required to park in the six spaces available at 508 Baker 44 Street during Sunday morning services and special events. 45 46 8. The project will be subject to the following fees unless otherwise indicated by the 47 City Council: Community Facilities Development, Storm Drain Impact, School 48 Facilities, and Traffic Mitigation. 49 50 9. The following conditions of the Engineering Department shall be considered 51 conditions of Use Permit approval: 52 53 a. A pedestrian ramp shall be installed on the corner of Stanley Street and 54 Baker Street to satisfy the Engineering Department's standards. 19 162 Planning Commission Minutes 10. March 8, 1994 b. Any broken or displaced. concrete sidewalk within this property's street frontage that is a public hazard shall be replaced to the Engineering Departments satisfaction. C. The existing driveway approach for 210 Stanley Street shall be removed and .replaced with City standard sidewalk. A new City standard driveway approach shall be installed as shown at the proposed location on sheet C1.1 of the approved plans. d. The proposed 10 inch RCP storm drain connecting, into Stanley Street is not appropriate as there is no existing storm drain to connect to at that proposed location. The use of under sidewalk drains is suggested to drain the on -site runoff to the street. e. On -site drainage improvements shall be made to resolve drainage problems on the Hammel property at 421 Upham Street. The design of said improvements shall be reflected on plans submitted with the building permit application. Said drainage improvement plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and shall be installed prior to completion of the project. The following conditions of the Fire Department shall be considered conditions of the Use Permit: a. Buildings larger than 3,500 square feet in area or three stories or more in height shall be protected by an automatic fire extinguishing system as required by Section 10.507B of the 1991 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code. b. Permit required from the Fire Marshal's office for fixed fire extinguishing systems. Two sets of plans are required. C. Provide alarm system for sprinkler. Alarm system is to be monitored by an approved,, central receiving station. d. Provide one fire extinguisher 2A rated ABC dry chemical type for each 3,000 square feet of floor space. e. Post address at or near main entry door - minimum four (4) inch letters. f. Provide KNOX box for key control located on building as required by the Fire Marshal: g. All curtains, drapes, hangings and other decorative material shall be of flame retardant material or treated with an approved fire retardant chemical by a licensed State Fire Marshal applicator. h. Provide. exist lights over or near all required exits. L Provide emergency lighting in all public areas and at or near all required exits. j. Provide panic hardware on all required exit doors. 20 Planning Commission Minutes March 8, 1994 163 1 2 k. Exiting: exit ways and exit doors shall conform to 1988 Edition of the _. Uniform Fire Code and Uniform Building Code. 3 4 L All roof covering material shall have a Class 'B" rating or better, treated in 5 accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard 32.7. 6 7 m. All roof covering materials applied as exterior wall covering shall have a fire 8 rating of class "B ", treated in accordance with UBC Standard 32.7, as per 9 Ordinance 1744 of the City of Petaluma. 10 11 11. The following conditions of the City Building Inspection Division shall be addressed X2 with the building permit application: C1 3 Ct)4 a. Grading must be certified when completed to indicate compliance with 5 1 approved plans and will be required for occupancy. �i 6 7 b. Soils with expansion index greater than 20 requires special design foundation per Uniform Building Code 2904(b). 20 c. Plans shall show site drainage and grading topography. 21 22 d. Plans shall show all utilities. 23 24 25 e. Applicant shall verify that utilities are adequate for building (i.e., size of water, electrical and gas service and size of sewer). 26 27 f Responsible party shall sign plans. .28 29 g. Applicant shall submit soils report to verify foundation design. 30 31 h. Plans shall indicate group occupancy, type of construction, square footage. 32 33 is Plans must show compliance to 1991 . UBC, UPC, UMC, and 1990 NEC. 34 Plans must also show compliance to current Title 24 Energy Code. 35 36 j Provide structural calculations for all non - conventional design items. 37 38 k. Demolition permit required to remove any structure 39 40 1. Abandonment of water well or septic system must be done under permit 41 from County of Sonoma Public Health Department. 42 43 44 IV. PROJECT STATUS': 45 46 L Food4Less - Appeals have been tentatively scheduled for City Council 47 meeting of April 4. 48 49 50 ADJOURNMENT 10:15 PM. 51 52 min0308 / pianjt2 21