Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 06/09/1992176 Planning Commission Minutes REGULAR MEETING JUNE 9, 1992 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL PETALUMA, CA COMMISSIONERS: Present: Nelson, Parkerson, Rahman, Thompson; Absent: Bennett, Tarr, Libarle STAFF: Pamela Tuft, Planning Director Teryl Phillips, Associate Planner Hans Grunt, Planning Technician Darcy Henry, Planning Technician * Chairman MINUTES OF MAY 26, 1992 were approved with corrections. PUBLIC COMMENT: Daphne Shapiro - Spoke in opposition to Little Oaks Day Care; understands that .another nearby home will also be turned into a daycare home for infants - would like to appeal the project. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: None. COMMISSIONER'S REPORT: None. CORRESPONDENCE: Distributed in packet: Updated Table of Contents for General Plan. APPEAL STATEMENT: Was read. LEGAL RECOURSE STATEMENT: Was noted on Agenda. NOTE: Addition = Italics Deletion = OvefstFike 1 Planning Commission Minutes June 9, 1992 OLD BUSINESS CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS I. MICHAEL LAWRENCE, 33 GRAYLAWN AVENUE, AP NO. 006-433-04, FILE NO. CUP92012 (hg). 1. Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to allow an accessory dwelling attached to an existing residence. The public hearing was opened. C ) SPEAKERS: Hans Grunt - Presented the staff report. Commissioner Nelson - The second -story addition does not match very well; can the parking of the boat in the driveway be regulated through this process? Pamela Tuft - The Planning Commission could require exterior alterations /improvements. The public hearing was closed. { A motion was made by Commissioner Rahman and seconded by Commissioner Thompson to adopt ia finding of exemption to CEQA and to approve a Conditional Use Permit to legalize an existing accessory dwelling based on the findings and subject to the amended condition's listed below: COMMISSIONER NELSON: No COMMISSIONER BENNETT: Absent COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON: Yes CHAIRMAN LIBARLE: Absent COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Yes COMMISSIONER TARR: Absent Findings 1. This project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA Section 15303, New Construction of Small Structures. 2. The proposed accessory dwelling unit, as conditioned, will conform to the requirements and intent, goals, and policies of the Petaluma General Plan. 3. The proposed accessory dwelling unit, as conditioned, will conform to the requirements and intent of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance. 4. The proposed accessory dwelling unit will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of community. Conditions 1. The finish trim around the entry door to the accessory unit shall be completed and painted to match the building within 30 days of use permit approval, subject to staff review and approval. 177 2 178 Planning Commission Minutes June 9, 1992 2. An additional 2' wide strip of concrete shall be installed to the west side of the driveway within 30 days of use permit approval, subject to staff review and approval. Three off- street parking spaces to be reserved for passenger vehicles, boat parking shall not be allowed. 3. The following conditions of the Fire Marshal shall be complied with, including: a. All roofing material shall have a Class "B" rating or better, treated in accordance with the Uniform Building code Standard 32.7. b. 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 Ordinance 1744 City of Petaluma. C. Provide fire suppression system at normal sources of ignition. These areas are specifically at clothes dryers, kitchen stoves, furnaces, water heaters, fireplaces and in attic areas at vents and chimneys for these appliances and equipment. 4. The following conditions of the Building Inspector shall be complied with, including: a. All open permits shall sh@HM be inspected and finaled. b. All alterations done without permits shall shee4d be required to obtain permit. Submit plans of alteration for approval and have work inspected. C. Bedroom on second floor requires exit to outside as per Section 1204 of the 1988 UBC. - 5. The following fees shall be paid: a. A dwelling construction fee of $120.00 shall be paid to the City within 30 days of use permit approval. b. School Facilities (paid directly to the school district) within 30 days of use permit approval. C. A`sewer connection fee of $1,000. d. A water connection fee to be determined by the Water Department. NEW BUSINESS PUBLIC' HEARINGS II. GEORGE - WRIGHT, 760 BODEGA AVENUE, AP NO. 006- 480 -26, FILE NO. CUP92013(dh). 1. Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the conversion of an accessory structure to an accessory dwelling. . The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Darcy Hear presented the staff report. 9 Planning Commission Minutes June 9 1992 179 Elia Fowler - I was not allowed to do this conversion when I owned the property - I would like to know why? Darcy Henry - (in answer to above question) Records show that fees were not paid and a Use Permit was not applied for during the time that Ms. Fowler owned the property. Pamela Tuft - (to Ms. Fowler) Please make an appointment to speak to me so that we might trye to resolve some of your concerns. Commissioner Nelson - I am confused about the issues here. Darcy Henry -A Tentative Map Condition (to demolish the building) was not carried out; it was converted back into an accessory building; applicant now wishes to remodel it to an accessory, dwelling. Commissioner Rahman - (To Ms. Fowler) What do you wish us to do? Do you want us to disapprove this project? Elia Fowler - I cannot say more until I speak with my lawyer. I was told this had to be demolished; I was not given an option to convert this structure to an accessory dwelling. I will contact my lawyer. Pamela Tuft - I would very much like to speak to Ms. Fowler regarding her concerns. George Wright I would like to clarify - A demo permit was taken out to remove 2 barns - I elected to keep the accessory building. The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Thompson and seconded by Commissioner Rahman to adopt !a finding of exemption from CEQA and to grant a Conditional Use Permit to legalize an existing accessory dwelling based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed below: COMMISSIONER NELSON: Yes COMMISSIONER BENNETT: Absent COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON: Yes CHAIRMAN LIBARLE: Absent COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Yes COMMISSIONER TARR: Absent Findings:. 1. The proposed accessory dwelling, as conditioned, will conform to the requirements and intent of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance. 2. The proposed accessory dwelling, as conditioned, will conform to the requirements and! intent, goals, and policies of the Petaluma. General Plan. 3. The proposed' accessory dwelling will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. 4. This project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA Se cti orr. 153 03, New Construction of Small Structures. Conditioris 1. All requirements of the Chief Building Official shall be met, including: a. ; Plans submitted at time of building permit application shall indicate: 4 � T ,s +r. ![+- .•T.trs n <xex.r^ .::.. ...- r+<+r.ea.•+r...:..:+.ene. > -.... i... ..-.—..... �_.'. ....+......a..:,.._......._..:_ _. _. 180 Planning Commission Minutes June 9, 1992 that the existing 400 sq. ft. structure is proposed as an accessory — dwelling proposed floor plan for the accessory dwelling location of all utilities to service the accessory. dwelling 2. All requirements of the City Engineer shall be met, including: a. Provide positive lot drainage to streets. 3. All requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be met, including: a. Structure must comply with the Uniform Building Code requirements for a dwelling unit. 4. Administrative Site Plan and Architectural Review (SPARC) shall be required prior to the issuance of a building permit and /or occupancy of the accessory dwelling. 5. Separate gas and electric meters shall be installed for the proposed accessory dwelling to the specifications of PG &E prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 6. Construction activities shall comply with applicable Zoning Ordinance and .Municipal Code performance standards (noise, dust, odor, etc.). 7. This project shall be responsible for the payment of Special Development Fees adopted by the Petaluma City Council for sewer and water connection, Community Facilities Development fees, Storm, Drainage Impact fees, Dwelling Construction School Facilities (Petaluma School District) and Traffic Mitigation fees. III. VINCE PARISI, McDONALD'S RESTAURANT, 981 LAKEVILLE STREET, AP NO. 005-020-60, FILE NO. CUP92014(dd). 1. Consideration of amendment to Conditional Use Permit to, allow the installation of two additional internally illuminated signs. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Te , .lrti Phyllis presented the staff report.. Commissioner Thompson - Requested clarification of the applicant's _request. Commissioner Rahman - From a marketing point of view - McDonald's existing signs are limiting. Pamela Tuft Clarified sign allowances. Vince Parisi - (Owner /operator) There is not another McDonald' -s of the same design as this one; proud, of the design; considers McDonald's the second anchor in the after Luc shopping center ( Lucky);, every other sign is higher and larger than McDonald's; distributed photos showing existin* signs (day and night); many customers drive by because they do not see the McDonald's; dust want to have the. stucco relief "M" on the tower changed to illuminated plastic; all tenants are .dependent on each other to succeed; all' other tenants in the shopping center have illuminated signs; I am only asking for equal signage. 5 Planning, Commission Minutes June 9, 1992 Commissioner Rahman - If another sign needs to be eliminated, would you object? Commissioner Nelson - Pictures make Mr. Parisi's point that the other signs in the center are illuminated. Commissioner Parkerson - When the original sign program was submitted, was the tower sign different than its current design? Pamela Tuft - Yes - the tower was proposed to be taller with internally illuminated "M ". Mr. Parisi does have illuminated signs - existing signs were requested by Mr. Parisi, not required by staff; not counting stucco relief "M's" on tower, Mr. Parisi has five identification Sig on building, all illuminated. Commissioner Parkerson - Would not like to allow internally illuminated sign; agreed with staff compromise; McDonald's has plenty of signage, restaurant is right on the street and (D very visible; the raised "M" could be painted yellow. CV) Commissioner Thompson - The signage is adequate the way it is now; tower was not Co designed ;to attract people from the freeway; will not vote to allow signage to attract people off of the.freeway. Commissioner Parkerson - (To Commissioner Rahman) - How do you feel about painting the "M" yellow? Commissioner Rahman - OK if we can't ive applicant what he is asking for. Commissioner Nelson - (To Pamela Tuft - How many signs are McDonald's allowed? Pamela Tuft - Signage is regulated by square footage and number of signs visible from one vantage point. Commissioner Nelson - In favor of allowing illuminated "M ". Commissioner Rahman - Can applicant move the signs higher? Pamela Tuft - Yes - they could be moved up to an upper building wall plane. Vince Parisi - The tower can't be seen from the freeway; other signs are higher and bolder; just lighting the "M" and painting it yellow may not help; can some of the small signs be removed, in exchange for a higher illuminated sign? Pamela Tuft - Mr. Parisi can propose to amend his sign program within the square footage and other; placement regulations. The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Parkerson to allow the "M" to be painted yellow. Motion died for lack of a second. A motion, was made by Commissioner Nelson and seconded by Commissioner Rahman to adopt a finding of exemption from CEQA and to recommend that the City Council consider an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit to allow the installation of two. additional. internally illuminated signs on the tower of McDonald's Restaurant at 981 Lakeville Street based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions listed below: COMMISSIONER NELSON: Yes COMMISSIONER BENNETT: Absent COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes - The Lucky sign is. large COMMISSIONER PARKERSON: No - Does not need- to be illuminated CHAIRMAN LIBARLE: Absent COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: No - Applicant needs to redesign signage COMMISSIONER TARR: Absent NOTE: THIS ACTION WILL BE FORWARDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH NO RECOMMENDATION DUE TO SPLIT VOTE. 181 on 182 Planning Commission Minutes June 9 1992 Findings 1. The proposed signs, as conditioned, will conform to the requirements and intent of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance. 2. The proposed signs as conditioned, will conform to the requirements and intent, goals, and policies of the Petaluma General Plan relating to City Gateways and quality design. 3. The proposed signs as conditioned will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community. 4. This project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA Section 15311(a), Accessory structures: on premise signs. Conditions . 1. The. news signs shall not exceed the size and shape of the existing "M" on the McDonald's Tower. 2: - - - - -- e- gig - l ally ©t-- be-- iateFnaiiy- -ltd - -a peaf -t ©- be- €e �a �y -- iii -� -eta} -fie 14.- laaki# - caik*iarx tsa�Yaf£raui�aur_Znd_on � s�l_ 3 - - - -- a General discussion regarding concerns with planting areas at the Gateway Center. Pamela Tuft has met with the landscape maintenance company at Gateway Center and is working on redesign /replanting with them. Commissioner Rahman felt that the plantings in the McDowell Boulevard median and along the Caulfield Lane right -of -way are • being unacceptably maintained. ADJOURNMENT 8:50 PM min0609 / pcom19 1 7 The sign material, color and construction shall be subject to approval by SPARC.