Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 06/22/1993479 _ 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 . i 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 53 54 Planning Commission Minutes REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY HALL June 22, 1993 7:00 P.M. PETALUMA, CA COMMISSIONERS: Present: Bennett, Parkerson *, Rahman, Read, Tarr; Absent: Thompson, Torliatt STAFF: Pamela Tuft, Planning Director James McCann, Principal Planner Bonne Gaebler, Housing Coordinator 'Chairman MINUTES OF June 8, 1993 were approved as printed. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Status report regarding Western Charter Tours. COMMISSIONER'S REPORT: None. CORRESPONDENCE: Letter from State Department of Housing and Community Development regarding Draft Housing Element; June 10 and June 18 General Reports; letter from Yvonne Angell regarding Western Charter Tours; memo from Kurt Yeiter regarding McNear Specific Plan; Updated Goals, Objectives Policies, Programs of General Plan. APPEAL STATEMENT: Was read. LEGAL, RECOURSE STATEMENT: Was noted on the agenda. NEW BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING I. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS: A. CITY OF PETALUMA - HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Consideration of text amendment to address the issue of low- income housing units "at -risk" of conversion to market rate, as required by State mandate. The following actions are required: a. Recommend that the City Council determine the request to be exempt from the requirements of CEQA. b. Recommend that the City Council approve the amendment to the text of the Housing Element. _ 4$0 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 1 2 B. CITY OF PETALUMA, WISTERIA SUBDIVISION, AP NO'S 137 -070- 3 11(ptn),137- 060 -85 (ptn). 4 5 Consider request to amend the land use designation of the 4.0+ acre site to 6 reflect Council direction per Resolution 91 -299 N.C.S. 7 g The following actions are required: 9 10 a. Recommend that the City Council adopt a Negative 11 Declaration. 12 b. Recommend that the City Council approve an amendment to 13 the General Plan Land Use Map to change the designation to 14 Urban Diversified. 15 16 C. GATTI LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT, RICHARD GATTI, AP NO. 137- 17 060 -01, 137 -070 -11 & 17. 18 19 Consider request to amend the land use designation on the 83.4+ acre 20 property. 21 22 The following actions are required: 23 24 a. Recommend that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative 25 Declaration. 26 b. Recommend that the City Council approve an amendment to 27 the General Plan Land Use Map to rearrange the land. use 28 classifications on the property. 29 30 D. MCNEAR CHANNEL NEW SPECIFIC PLAN. 31 32 This item will be either postponed or discontinued depending on action 33 taken by the City Council on June 21, 1993. 34 35 The public hearing was opened. 36 37 SPEAKERS: 38 39 Item A - Housing Element Update: 40 41 Housing Coordinator Bonne Gaebler presented the staff report. 42 Commissioner Parkerson - complimented Ms. Gaebler on the timely and well done update. 43 44 A motion was made by Commissioner Bennett and seconded by Commissioner Rahman to 45 recommend to the City Council adoption of the proposed amendment to the General Plan 46 Housing Element based on the findings listed in the staff report. 47 48 COMMISSIONER READ: Yes 49 COMMISSIONER BENNETT: Yes 50 COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes 51 CHAIRMAN PARKERSON: Yes 52 COMMISSIONER TORLIAT I : Absent 53 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Absent 54 COMMISSIONER TARR: Yes 2 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 10 co ce Rem 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 2 3 Planning Commission Minutes Findings 481 June 22, 1993 1. This amendment is deemed to be in the public interest because it was mandated by the State Legislature and it is designed to address the possible loss of affordable housing. 2. This amendment is consistent and compatible with the rest of the General Plan and 'its implementation programs. 3. This amendment is not a "project" as defined by the California Resources Code and is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. Discussion of issues and preservation of existing affordable housing, as proposed by this amendment, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. Item B Wisteria Subdivision Principal Planner McCann - Presented the staff report. Discussion centered around replacement of Urban High projects elsewhere; overall impacts of retail; number of manufactured housing units proposed (30 -40); affordability of manufactured units. A motion was made by Commissioner Bennett and seconded by Commissioner Rahman to recommend to the City Council adoption of a Negative Declaration and approval of the proposed amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map for Wisteria Subdivision based on the findings listed in the staff report. COMMISSIONER READ: Yes COMMISSIONER BENNETT: Yes COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes CHAIRMAN PARKERSON: Yes COMMISSIONER TORLIATT: Absent COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Absent COMMISSIONER TARR: Yes Findings for Negative Declaration 1. An Initial Study has been prepared and proper notice provided in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and local guidelines. 2. Based upon the Initial Study and comments received, there is no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Findings for General Plan Amendment 1. The proposed amendment is deemed to be in the public interest. 2. The proposed General Plan amendment is consistent and compatible with the rest of the General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected. 3. The potential impacts of the proposed amendment have been assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. 3 482 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 1 4. The proposed amendment has been processed in accordance with the applicable 2 provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental 3 Quality Act (CEQA). 4 5 5. The proposed amendment promotes the goals, policies and programs of the City's 6 Housing Element through provision of a City -owned site, suitable for development 7 of a 30 to 40 unit manufactured home subdivision for moderate- income first time 8 homebuyers. 6. The proposed amendment is consistent with, and implements the City Council's direction as expressed in resolution No. 91 -299 N.C.S. as well as the City's adopted Residential Development Objectives. Item C - Gatti General Plan Land Use Amendment SPEAKERS: Principal Planner Jim McCann presented the staff report. Discussion centered around the following issues: Moving the park site closer to Sonoma Mountain Parkway; pedestrian /traffic access to park from entire Corona /Ely _ area will retail center meet requirements set forth in Specific Plan ?; necessity of adding Urban High Density acreage to this area. Steven. Hicks = Project Architect - described project. Ed Haworth _ Applicant (Gatti) representative described the site, access, etc. Planning Director Tuft indicated that Commission could recommend to the City Council the addition of Urban High Density to this project. A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Rahman to recommend to the City Council adoption of a Negative Declaration and approval of the proposed General Plan Land Use Map amendment with the relocation of the park site along Sonoma Mountain Parkway and the direction that staff and applicant work toward designating 6 -7 acres of Urban High Density based on the findings listed in the staff report. COMMISSIONER READ: Yes. COMMISSIONER BENNETT: Yes COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes CHAIRMAN PARKERSON: Yes COMMISSIONER TORLIATT: Absent COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Absent COMMISSIONER TARR: Yes Findings for Negative Declaration 1. An Initial Study has been prepared -and proper notice provided in accordance with the California Environmental. Quality Act and local guidelines. 2. Based upon the Initial Study and comments received, there is no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Mitigation Measure 53 1. The relocation of the retail site and the.proposed intersection of Sonoma Mountain ■' 54 Parkway /Reisling Road will require the installation of a traffic signal and 4 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 433 1 intersection improvements. The applicant shall be responsible for the design and 2 installation of all necessary intersection and signal improvements. The timing of 3 said design and installation shall be determined in conjunction with future 4 development applications for the property. 5 6 General Plan Amendment: Recommend to the City Council approval of the proposed 7 amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map, to change the land use designations as 8 reflected on Exhibit AA, as modified by the recommendation by the Music, Parks and 9 Recreation Commission based upon the following findings: 10 11 Findings for Amendment to GP Land Use Map 12 (D 1. The proposed amendment is deemed to be in the public interest. ce 2. The proposed General Plan amendment is consistent and compatible with the rest of the General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected. 3. The potential impacts of the proposed amendment have been assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. 21 4. The proposed amendment has been processed in accordance with the applicable 22 provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental 23 Quality Act (CEQA). 24 25 5. The proposed amendment promotes the goals, policies and programs of the City's 26 Housing Element through provision of sites suitable for residential development. 27 28 Item D McNear Channel Specific Plan Area 29 30 This item was removed from the agenda per Council action on 6/21/91 31 32 33 II. GREENMARK; KINGSFIELD SUBDWISION, 729 N. WEBSTER STREET, AP 34 NO'S 006 - 371 -20; 006- 441 -23 & 24. 35 36 Consider a request to amend the land use designation, rezone and subdivide a 2.1 37 acre site to create 14 residential lots. 38 39 The following actions are required: 40 41 a. Recommend that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative 42 Declaration. 43 b. Recommend that the City Council adopt a General Plan Land Use 44 Map Amendment from Urban Standard to Urban Diversified. 45 C. Recommend that the City Council adopt a Zoning Map Amendment 46 from R- 16,500 to Single- Family Residential PUD. 47 d. Recommend that the City Council adopt a PUD Development Plan 48 and associated Design Guidelines. 49 e. Recommend that the City Council adopt a Tentative Subdivision Map 50 to create 14 single - family residential lots. 51 52 The public hearing was opened. 53 54 E 484 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 1 SPEAKERS: 2 3 Principal Planner Jim McCann - presented the staff report. 4 Jeanette Galbraith 735 N. Webster - will street name change affect (her) existing address? 5 concerns with traffic; too much school traffic now. 6 Planning Director Pamela Tuft - Address could probably remain on N. Webster, will 7 discuss with Fire Marshal and. Police Chief. 8 TrafficEngineer Al Tilton Discussed existing "school' traffic; only one documented traffic 9 accident on this road recently; did not identify excessive traffic impacts caused by: this 1""'0 project. 11 Sharon Matterly Very serious traffic problems already exist; concerns with density of 12 project -.10 houses would be enough. 13 Bob Jenkins - Project Applicant - worked with staff for about 10 months; met with 14 neighborhood residents!, hoped all concerns have been taken care of; does not want a 15 garage- dominated streetscape; homes will be affordable - approximately $159,000 (2 16 bedroom), $179,000 (3 bedroom). 17 Discussion Commission pleased to see smaller homes (affordable) with detached garages; 18 well planned project; proper scale - thoughtful to neighbors; would like Webster striped 19 (Sonoma Ave. to Bodega) - applicant should contribute; need increased .Police patrol to cut 20 speeding on Webster. 21 Traffic Engineer Al Tilton -'will arrange for striping this week. 22 Bob Jenkins -- Willing to participate in Webster striping. 23 J.T. Wick - 617 N. Webster - supports project because homes are small scale, fit into 24 neighborhood; traffic: mitigation fees paid by this project should be spent specifically to 25 correct traffic problems on Webster. 26 Kathy Davies ­608 English - existing school parking (for parents dropping off students) 27 needs to be retained.. 28 Planning Director Pamela Tuft - will work with schools to help with parking /drop -off 29 concerns; will discuss. traffic /speeding concerns with Police Chief, will refer concerns to 30 Traffic Committee;, explained Z -Lot configuration. 31 Commissioner Read - Lives on Webster Street, has seen impacts of traffic increase for 19 32 years; proposed homes are very good design, but effect will be cumulative; density is too 33 high; cannot vote in favor of thisproject. 34 35 The public hearing was closed. 36 37 A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner ' Bennett to 38 recommend to the City Council adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration based on the 39 findings and subject to the amended mitigations listed in the staff report. COMMISSIONER READ: No COMMISSIONER BENNETT: Yes COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes CHAIRMAN PARKERSON: Yes COMMISSIONER TORLIATT: Absent COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Absent COMMISSIONER TARR: Yes Findings for a Mitigated Negative Declaration: 1. An Initial Study has been prepared and proper notice provided in accordance with CEQA and local guidelines. D Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 1 2. Based upon the Initial Study and comments received, potential impacts could be 2 avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance by mitigation measures attached as 3 conditions of approval. There is no substantial evidence that the project, as 4 mitigated, will have a significant effect on the environment. 5 6 3. A monitoring program has been included with the mitigations, where applicable, to 7 ensure compliance with the adopted mitigation measures. 8 9 4. The project does not have potential to affect wildlife resources as defined in the 10 Fish and Game. code, either individually or cumulatively and is exempt from Fish 11 and Game filing fees because there is no evidence that the proposed project would 2 have any potential for adverse effect on wildlife resources. 3 4 Mitigation Measures 5 6 1. During the construction of Phases 1 and 2 of this project, all grading and erosion 7 control shall conform to the City's Erosion Control Ordinance 15.76. 8 9 2. In the event that archaeological remains are encountered during grading, work shall 20 be halted temporarily and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted for evaluation 21 :of the artifacts and to recommend future action. The local Indian community shall 22 also be notified and consulted in the event any archaeological remains are 23 uncovered. 24 25 3. The project proponent shall acquire and dedicate to the City the additional right -of- 26 way and sidewalk easement from the property owners at 727 and 729 N. Webster 27 Street necessary to accommodate the new public street extension, subject to staff 28 review and approval prior to Final Map approval. 29 30 4. The project proponent shall acquire and dedicate to the City, the necessary storm 31 drainage easement across the adjacent parcel currently owned by the First Baptist 32 Church of Petaluma, APN 006 - 371 -02, subject to staff review and approval prior to 33 Final Map approval. 34 35 5. Grading plans shall, to all extent possible, maintain a maximum fill of 2' above the 36 existing grade for the detached garages and rear yard space on Lots 1 through 7. 37 Any increases in fill over 2' in this area will require the Planning Director's review 38 and approval, and may be subject to additional administrative conditions of the site 39 and /or building design. 40 41 6. The finish pad elevation changes between Lots 11 and 12, and 12 and 13 shall not 42 exceed 2'. Any increases in fill over 2' between these lots will require the Planning 43 Director's review and approval, and may be subject to additional administrative 44 conditions of the site andfor building design. 45 46 7. To offset the cumulative impacts this project is projected to create on the City's 47 services, the project proponent shall pay the following Special Development Fees 48 which are imposed on all like construction in the City of Petaluma: Sewer and 49 Water Connection, Community Facilities Development, Storm Drainage Impact, 50 Park. and Recreation Land Improvements, School Facilities, In -Lieu Contributions 51 for Provision of Very Low, Low and Moderate Income Housing, and Traffic 52 Mitigation. i 53 _ 54 8. Positive lot drainage to Kingsfield Court shall be provided for Lots 8 through 14. r 7 486 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 1 2 9. All storm drainage improvements proposed by this development shall conform to 3 the City and Sonoma County Water Agency requirements and the Petaluma Master 4 Drainage Plan. 5 6 10. If positive lot drainage cannot be obtained then all backyard drainage control shall 7 be within an underground pipe system with surface catchment swales and inlets. 8 9 A; private storm drain maintenance agreement between lots served by this system 10 shall be submitted in a recordable form. This agreement shall also specify timing of 11 maintenance and be in a form acceptable to the City staff, and recorded -concurrent 12 with the Final Map. 11. Construction activities shall comply with applicable Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code Performance Standards (noise, dust, and odor). Days and hours of construction shall be limited to Monday through Friday between the hours of 7:00 AM and 5:00 PM. - No construction shall occur on Saturdays and Sundays or holidays. A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Bennett to recommend to the City Council adoption of General Plan consistency findings. listed below: COMMISSIONER READ: No COMMISSIONER BENNETT: Yes COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes CHAIRMAN PARKERSON: Yes COMMISSIONER TORLIAIT: Absent COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Absent COMMISSIONER TARR yes General Plan Consistency Findings: 1. The proposed amendment is deemed to be in the public interest. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent and compatible with the rest of the General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected. 3. The project is consistent with and further promotes the objectives, foals, and policies of the General Plan by promoting architectural and socioeconomic diversity within residential areas, establishing a realistic ratio between East Side and West Side growth, and provides a housing opportunity for persons of all economic levels. 4. The potential impacts of the proposed amendment have been assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. 5. The proposed amendment has been processed in, accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A motion was made by Commissioner Bennett and seconded by Commissioner Tarr to recommend to the. City Council approval of the PUD Rezone and Development Plan based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions as follow: Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 1 COMMISSIONER READ: No _- 2 COMMISSIONER BENNETT: Yes 3 COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes 4 CHAIRMAN PARKERSON: Yes 5 COMMISSIONER TORLIATT: Absent 6 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Absent 7 COMMISSIONER TARR: Yes 8 9 P.U.D. Rezone and Development Plan Findings 10 11 1. The rezoning to PUD and the PUD Development Plan, ;as conditioned, results in a 12 more desirable use of the land and a better physical environment than would be (0 possible under any single zoning district by providing the opportunity for smaller co lots of a unique style and configuration. M 2. The circulation pattern of the proposed PUD has been dictated by the development of the adjacent neighborhoods along North Webster Street, and existing access easements for adjacent homes, and has been designed to have a suitable relationship to the adjacent circulations system. The existing circulation system is adequate to accommodate the additional traffic impacts generated from the 21 proposed development. 22 23 3. The plan for the proposed development, as conditioned, presents a unified and 24 organized arrangement of buildings which are appropriate in relation to nearby 25 properties. Adequate landscaping and screening will be reviewed by SPARC to 26 insure compatibility. 7 8 4. There are no significant scenic qualities of the site that warrant specific site design 9 alterations to insure their preservation, but the plan will provide adequate available 30 public and private spaces designated on the Development Plan. 31 32 5. The development of the Kingsfield Subdivision in the manner proposed by the 33 applicant, and as conditioned by the City will not be detrimental to the public 34 welfare, will be in the best interest of the City, and will be in keeping with the 35 general intent and spirit of the zoning regulations and General Plan of the City of 36 Petaluma. 37 38 PUD Development Plan Conditions: 39 40 1. The PUD Design Guidelines shall be amended as follows: 41 42 #2) "Small Residential Care Facility" and "Small Family Day Care Homes" shall 43 be added under Permitted Uses. 44 45 #4b) The minimum Front Yard setback shall be reduced from 15 feet to "12 feet ". 46 'Porches porch roof overhangs, and porch steps may encroach into the front 47 yard setback a maximum of 3 feet." "Sidewalks" shall be deleted from this 48 section. 49 50 Under Side Yards, #2 shall be rewritten as follows: "Houses may not be 1 51 closer than 11 feet apart; projections such as chimneys, bay windows, steps 52 and other architectural features of the homes are not permitted within the 53 minimum 11 foot separation between homes." 54 Em 488 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 #5) The following sentence shall be added: "All - Permitted Principal Uses, Permitted Accessory Uses, and Conditional Uses, unless specifically prohibited within these Design Guidelines, shall be regulated by City staff through the application of the City Zoning Ordinance as it applies to R -1 6,500 zoning districts." 2. The PUD Development Plan shall be referred to SPARC for review and approval. SPARC's review may include, but not be limited to the following: a. The unit architecture including: building materials; fenestration as it relates to the architecture, views, and privacy; and the design motifs, particularly on the front elevation, and the nee_ d, if any, to carry the motifs around to the side and rear elevations and the garage. b. A proposed color palette including colors for roof shingles, building face and trim. C. The master landscape plan for the public and private areas including the location, variety, and visual and screening qualities of the plant material. 3. Modifications and architectural upgrades to the existing house, including but not limited to, relocation of the garage, painting and landscaping shall be completed with. Phase I, subject to review and approval prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 4. The PUD Development Plan shall be revised to reflect the 48' 4-Y right -of -way, sidewalk and planter improvements indicated on. the Tentative Map submitted on June 1, 1993, prior to acceptance of Public Improvement Plans and /or Final Map recordation. A motion was made by Commissioner Bennett And seconded by Commissioner Tarr to recommend to the City Council approval of the Tentative Subdivision "Map based on the findings and subject to the following conditions: COMMISSIONER READ: No COMMISSIONER BENNETT: Yes COMMISSIONER RAHMAN:, Yes CHAIRMAN PARKERSON: Yes COMMISSIONER TORLIATT: Absent COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Absent COMMISSIONER TARR: Yes Tentative Subdivision Map Findings: 1. The proposed subdivision, together with provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan. 2. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. 3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 4. The Tentative Subdivision Map provides reasonable public access to a public road for the proposed lots. -- 10 1 —2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 9 CO 21 22 23 24 25 26 9 7 8 9 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 5. The proposed map, subject to the following conditions, complies with the 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. Tentative Map Conditions: 1. All requirements of the Engineering Department shall be met, including: a. The City does not allow 100 year flood relief swales to be located on private property or between property lines. Therefore, the proposed relief swale at the end of Kingsfield Court through proposed Lot 7 shall be redesigned with the relief flow directed and contained within the public street or within an adequate overflow channel and dedicated surface easement to the City. b. The soils engineer shall verify the, adequacy of the existing retaining wall located in the rear of Lot 14. All recommended measures to ensure the walls' structural integrity shall be shown on the public improvement plans. Q. If the private utility services (sanitary sewer and water) for APN 006 - 441 -38, 33, 31 and 16 are located within the existing access easement (future Kingsfield Court), they shall be transferred to public, mains. This would require additional sanitary sewer installation within Kingsfield Court. d. Positive lot drainage to Kingsfield Court shall be provided for Lots 8 through 14. e. Adequacy of the existing driveway transitions (including drainage) 'into Kingsfield Court shall be verified current with the public improvement plan review. f. The public sanitary sewer and water mains within this development shall be designed in accordance with City standards to adequately serve this development. g. All storm drainage improvements proposed by this development shall conform to the City and Sonoma. County Water Agency requirements and the Petaluma Master Drainage Plan. h. All publicly owned and maintained sanitary sewer mains located in private property shall be contained in its own exclusive dedicated 10 foot paved easement. L All publicly owned and maintained storm drains located on private property shall be contained within an exclusive dedicated 10 foot easement. j. If positive lot drainage cannot be obtained, then all backyard drainage control shall' be within an underground pipe system with surface catchment swales and inlets. ME 11 490 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 2 A private storm drain maintenance agreement between lots served by this This 3 system shall be submitted in a recordable form. agreement shall also 4 specify timing of maintenance and be in a form acceptable to the City staff, 5 and recorded concurrent with the final map. 6 7 k. The developer shall comply with the Petaluma Municipal Code Section 8 20.36.010 and 20.36,.020 which require the developer to pay storm drainage 9 impact fees (as calculated in Chapter 17.30) on construction in all sections of 10 the City of Petaluma. 11 12 .4. This development shall comply with all recommendations as stated in the 13 soils report for this project. 14 15 M. All grading and erosion control shall conform to the City's Erosion Control 16 Ordinance 15.76. 17 18 n. Signing and striping shall conform to City Standards. 19 20 0. All overhead utilities fronting or traversing the site, 12KV or less, shall be 21 underground. 22 23 p. This development shall be required to contribute to the City's traffic 24 mitigation fee. 25 26 q. All street lights within this development shall have standard metal fixtures 27 dedicated to the City for ownership and maintenance. Prior to City 28 acceptance, the developer shall verify all lights meet PG &E's LS2 rating 29 system. 30 31 r. The Kingsfield Court within this development shall have, a structural section 32 to meet a traffic index of 5.0 design requirement as stated in the soils report 33 for this development. 34 35 S. Water pressure calculations shall be required for this development verifying 36 the. system adequacy for fire flows and domestic service. (This item shall be 37 verified concurrent with improvement plan review). 38 39 t. A 10' PUE shall be dedicated adjacent to the public right -of -way as required 40 by the utility companies. 41 42 2. All requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be met, including: 43 44 a. Post address at or near main entry doors - minimum two -inch letters. 45 46 b. Provide fire hydrants as required by the Fire Marshal's office. Two (2) fire 47 hydrants are required for project. 48 49 C. All roof covering material shall have a class "B" rating or better, treated in 50 accordance with the Uniform Building. Code Standard 32.7. 51 52 C. All. roof covering materials app lied as exterior wall covering shall have a fire 53 rating of class T",, treated in- accordance with UBC Standard 32.7, as per 54 Ordinance 1744, City of Petaluma. 12 i "' " 13 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 1 2 d. Provide fire suppression system at normal sources of ignition. These areas 3 are specifically at clothes dryers, kitchen stoves, furnaces, water heaters, 4 fireplaces and in attic areas at vents and chimneys for these appliances and 5 equipment. 6 7 3. All requirements of the Building Division shall be met, including: 8 9 a. Grading must be certified when completed to indicate compliance with 10 approved plans and will be required for occupancy. 11 Ca b. Where ground slopes greater than 1 on 10, foundation shall be stepped per co Uniform Building Code 2907(c). co i c. Soils with expansion index greater than 20 requires special design foundation per Uniform Building Code 2904(b). d. Show site drainage and grading topography. 20 e. Indicate all utilities on site plan. 21 22 f. Responsible party to sign plans. 23 24 g. Submit soils report to verify foundation design. 25 h. Plans must show compliance to 1991 UBC, UPC, UMC, and 1990 NEC. 7 F 6 Plans must. also show compliance to current Title 24 Energy Code. 8 29 1 Provide structural calculations for all non- conventional design items. 30 31 J. Demolition permit required to remove any structure. 32 33 k. Abandonment of water well or septic system must be done under permit 34 from County of Sonoma Public Health Department. 35 36 4. The 5 foot private driveway and drainage easement typical for " all lots shall be 37 amended to include "maintenance ". 38 39 5. All work within a public right- of-way requires an excavation permit from the 40 Department of Public Works. 41 42 6. Construction activities shall comply with applicable Zoning Ordinance and 43 Municipal Code Performance Standards (noise, dust, odor, days and hours of 44 construction etc.). 45 46 7. The Final Map and improvement plans shall be consistent with the SPARC 47 approved PUD Development Plan, subject to staff review and approval prior to 48 acceptance of the improvement plans and recordation of the Final Map. 49 0 8. The applicant shall create or annex this property into a Landscape Maintenance 1 Assessment District: to maintain all landscaping and irrigation within the public 2 right -.of -way of the project not normally associated with private front yard �3 maintenance, including entryway landscape area, cul -de -sac islands, and the street 54 tree planter strips subject to approval of City staff prior to Final Map approval. All i "' " 13 492 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 costs associated with the formation of the Landscape Assessment District shall be borne by the developer. All landscaping contained in a proposed Landscape Maintenance Assessment District shall be maintained for a period of one year by the project sponsor prior to acceptance by the district. III. CITY OF PETALUMA, ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS: Consider a request to amend numerous sections of the Zoning Ordinance through text amendments and additions. The following actions are required: a. Recommend that the City Council determine that the request is exempt from the requirements of CEQA. b. Recommend that the "City Council adopt a series of amendments and additions to the Zoning Ordinance. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Principal_ Planner Jim McCann - Presented the staff report - requested that no action be taken on the Swimming Pools and Spas section. Commissioner Read - Thanked staff for preparing these amendments /additions in a very timely manner. Virginia Yant - 300 2nd Street - Supports change regarding residential uses in commercial zoning district. Patricia Brown - 513 Petaluma Blvd. South - This zoning change (allowing residential in a commercial zone) can be seen as an interim measure; eventual goal is to be in the Riverfront Warehouse Zone. Matt Hudson - (Attorney representing Mr. and Mrs: Delongis) - thanked staff for moving along with this amendment (maximum residential development height) so quickly. The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Bennett to recommend to the City Council_ finding the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments and additions exempt from the requirements of CEQA and adoption of the amendments and .additions as outlined and amended in the staff report as follows: COMMISSIONER READ: Yes COMMISSIONER BENNETT' Yes COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes CHAIRMAN PARKERSON: Yes COMMISSIONER TORLIATT: Absent COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Absent COMMISSIONER TARR: Yes RECOMMENDATION Section 1 -203 Detached Accessory Building or Structure: A detached accessory building or structure, shall maintain a minimum separation from a primary structure or building of at least three .feet. For purposes of measurement, roof 14 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 1 eaves and overhangs, bays, balconies and other projections shall be considered points of reference. Section 1 -203: "Caretaker residence" means a building which is used as a residence by a security.guard or caretaker of a use which is located on or adjacent to the. premises 6 occupied by the use and which is reasonably necessary to provide adequate security for the 7 use. 8 9 Section 10- 403.1: Where a finding can be made that residential use is consistent with 10 the General Plan because the site is within an area designated as Residential f -om r-e}al 11 Gonab}fr agArea Mixed Use Section 14 -301: Accessory uses and buildings customarily appurtenant to a permitted use, in accordance with the provisions of Section 21- 2-04201. Section 21 -202: Zoning Permit for Home Occupation Section 21 -202.5 incorrectly numbered 21- 204.5. Sections 23 -102 and 23 -301: Add ' she" to description of the Zoning Administrator 20 (Director;). 21 22 The following are more substantive amendments /additions to the Zoning Ordinance: 23 24 Pot - Bellied Pigs 25 6 Request In response to public inquiry in 1992, the City Council directed that Zoning Ordinance be amended to permit the keeping of pot- bellied pigs in residential areas. Recommendation Add the following sections: 30 31 1. Add Section 5 -409 and 6 -410: The keeping of pot - bellied pigs provided that no 32 more than one (pot- bellied pig per household may be kept that the pot - bellied 33 pia not exceed one hundred (100) pounds that the pot- bellied pig be neutered or 34 sspayed and that the pot- bellied _pig be licensed by the City of Petaluma. 35 36 Residential Uses In Commercial Districts 37 38 Request Many commercially zoned areas on the west side of town are composed of older 39 buildings, originally constructed as single family homes. Some of these buildings continue 40 to function as residences; this -mix of uses contributes to the interest and attractiveness of 41 these neighborhoods. The Zoning Ordinance does not presently permit exclusive 42 residential use of commercially zoned properties. Existing residences in , commercially 43 zoned areas are consequently considered to be non- conforming uses. This non - conforming 44 designation prevents the establishment or reversion to exclusively residential uses in 45 commercial districts (it should be noted however that residential uses are presently 46 permitted on floors above the ground level). Staff has received a number of inquiries and 47 requests' from residents in commercial districts to provide a method by which the non - 48 conforming status may be removed. It is therefore recommended that residential uses, e.g., 49 single - family dwellings be conditionally permitted in the Neighborhood Commercial, 0 Central Commercial, and Highway Commercial Zoning Districts. t 1 2 Recommendation Add the following sections: 3 - 4 Section 11 -415: One- family detached dwelling. W 15 494 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 Section 12 -4.15: One - family detached dwelling. Section 13 -425: One - family detached dwelling_ Lot Coverage, Central Commercial District Request The:- development standards of the CC, Central Commercial District (Section 12- 600) allow construction to occur with zero setback from property lines. This section also establishes a maximum lot coverage of 60 9 1o.. However, many buildings in this zoning district (the downtown area) occupy their entire lot with an effective 100% coverage. Therefore, many buildings in the downtown area are considered to be non - conforming as a result of this conflict with the development standards. New construction must retain 40% of the lot in open space (this includes surface parking areas). In order to achieve the intensive and pedestrian oriented nature of development desired in the Central Commercial: District and to eliminate the non- conforming status of many existing buildings a much more intense a maximum coverage of 100 is recommended. Recommendation Amend the following section: Section 12 -600: Maximum allowable coverage 60% 100%. Caretakers Units Request Staff believes that certain commercial and industrial uses require that a caretaker be present for security purposes. This special use is not presently permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. It is recommended that such a use be conditionally allowed in the Highway Commercial, Light Industrial and General Industrial Districts. Recommendation Add the following sections: Section 13 -426, 14 -418 and 15 -415: Caretaker residence Exception and Modifications Request The Planning Commission discussed the DeLongis variance application at the May 25, 1993 meeting. This application sought approval to allow a new home to exceed the maximum hei &ht permitted in the R -1 6,500 zoning district. The applicant argued that additional height is needed to allow a more appropriate building to be designed to fit the context of the neighborhood. Staff recommended denial of the variance but suggested that perhaps some flexibility should be introduced to the Zoning Ordinance to allow additional building; height when improved overall design and neighborhood consistency could be achieved. The Commission concurred. Staff 'has prepared an addition to the Exceptions and Modifications Section to permit additional height in certain very special cases. Recommendation Add' the following section: Section 24 -104 16 1 2 3 5 6 8 10 20 21 22 23 24 25 6 8 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 a 0 2 3 54 Planning Commission Minutes Conditional Use Permits June 22, 1993 Sections 26 -500 through 26 -512.3 establish standards and regulations governing Conditional Use Permits (CUP's). These regulations provide the processing requirements for a CUP, establish a term for the CUP, a revocation process, and establishes a mechanism for "minor" CUP's to be administered by the Zoning Administrator (Planning Director). The Planning Commission and Council considered a request in 1992 to amend this section to provide a &neater term for CUP's. Both bodies found that the present term (one year with the .possibility for a one year extension) is reasonable. They did, however, encourage an accelerated "reapproval" process for CUP's which had' exhausted their available time. Staff has prepared language to provide this vehicle. Recommendation Add the following section: REQUEST The Planning Commission subcommittee recommended and the Planning Commission, in total, agreed to direct staff to amend the "minor" CUP process to allow many projects which raise limited land use or environmental concerns to be processed administratively in an effort to facilitate application streamlining. Staff has expanded the application of the minor CUP as noted below. Recommendation Amend the following section: Section 26 -512 Minor Use Permits For minor use permits, the Zoning Administrator is hereby empowered to receive applications, notify pursuant to Section 26- 504.2, offer the opportunity of public hearings, and approve subject to findings and conditions as required of the Planning Commission. For purposes of this section, "minor use permits" include minor exterior modifications or enlargements to existing use permits, said modifications or enlargements being inconsequential in nature and not involving a significant change in operations; minor extension of operatin hours to existing use permits where the business has no appreciable outside noise and /or does not abut a residential district; new use permits 'where the use is of the same or more restricted nature as the previous use Request The present provisions of the Floodway and Floodplain Districts are in need of minor clarification and correction. I, Le 17 Floodway and Floodplain District 496 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 Recommendations Amend the following sections Section 16 -30,0. definition "base flood" means the flood having a one percent chance of being equalled or , exceededf in any given year (also called the "100 -year flood "). "Basement" means any area of the building having its floor subgrade, i.e., below ground level on all sides. "Development means any :man -made change to improved or unirnoroved real estate including, but not limited to, buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, grading, excavation, drilling operations, permanent storage of equipment and materials (i.e. lumber yards, junk yards, vehicle storage yards, etc.) but excluding any change or improvement to public roads. "Flood or Flooding" means a general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation, of normally dry land areas from: 1) the overflow of €loud inland or tidal waters, 2) the unusual and rapid accumulation .or runoff of surface waters from any source, and /or 3) the collapse or subsidence of land along the shore of a lake or other body of water as a result of erosion or undermining caused by waves or currents of water exceeding anticipated cyclical levels or suddenly caused by an unusually high water level in a natural body of water, accompanied by a severe storm, or by an unanticipated force of nature, such as flash flood or an abnormal tidal surge, or by some similarly unusual and unforeseeable event which results in flooding as defined in this definition. "Flood Insurance Study" is the official report provided by the Federal Insurance Administration. The report contains flood profiles, as well as the Flood Boundary- Floodway Map, The Flood `Insurance Rate Maps and the water surface elevation of the base flood. "Floodproofine means any combination of structural and nonstructural additions, changes, or adjustments to structures which reduce or eliminate flood .damage to real estate or improved real property, water and sanitary facilities, structures and their contents. "Mean Sea Level to-Fead means for purposes of the National Flood Insurance Program, the National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) of 1929 or other datum, to which base flood elevations shown on a community's Flood Insurance Rate Map are referenced. "Regulatory floodway" means the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that °must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than a: designated- height one foot Section 16-502 Permitted Uses - Floodway Districts 5. Any other open type of use as, determined by the Zoning Administrator (Director of Planning) to be of the same general character as the above permitted uses. Section 16 -702 Development Permit Required A. Proposed elevation in relation to mean sea level, of the lowest floor. (including basement) of all structures; in Zone AO or VO; elevation of the highest natural grade and lowest ©f highest grade and proposed elevation of lowest floor of all structures. Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 497 1 - 2 16. -702.1 Designation of the Floodplain Administrator. The Planning Director or 3 his /her designee is hereby appointed to administer and implement this ordinance by 4 granting or denying development permits in accordance with its provisions. 5 6 Section 16.703.1 - Manufactured Home Parks. No new manufactured homes shall be 7 placed within floodway areas. Existing manufactured home parks within flood plain areas 8 may be' expanded and new manufactured home parks constructed only when the ground 9 oleva iox lowest floor of each manufactured home gad of such park is elevated at least 12 10 inches above the base flood elevation on reinforced piers or other foundation elements 11 equal in force, unless otherwise restricted in Section 16.703.2, and adequate access and drainage are provided. Existing manufactured home parks in floodway areas may not be expanded under any circumstances. CO All applications for new mobile home parks /subdivisions, or ten percent or greater physical OW expansion of in the number of mobile homes existing prior to the adoption of this ordinance, located in a Floodplain shall include an emergency evacuation plan describing how property and life will be. protected in the event of flooding. Section 16 -705 -2 Construction Materials and Methods 21 22 A. All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed with 23 materials and utilize utili equipment resistant to flood damage. 24 25 Planned Unit Development PUD Plan Modification 26 27 Request Staff has recently received an increased number of requests to amend PUD 28. projects in response to market demands regarding home design. These changes typically 29 involve 'minor to wholesale architectural redesign but have not altered road alignment or 30 project unit yield; some modification to lot lines has, however, been necessary. 31 Amendments of this nature have not generated neighborhood, Commission or Council 32 concern. Design issues have been addressed by virtue of thorough SPARC review. The 33 present sections of the Planned Unit District require that modification to an approved Unit 34 Development Plan be made only by resolution by the City Council following consideration 35 by the Planning Commission. This review process is time consuming and has not raised 36 significant land use or policy issues. Design issues have been the focus of these 37 amendments. Staff therefore recommends that modifications to Unit Development Plans 38 which do not increase unit yield or significantly alter road alignments be subject to SPARC 39 review'and approval rather than requiring hearings before the Planning Commission and 40 City Council. 41 42 Recommendation: Amend the following sections 43 44 Section 19A -508 Requests for modifications shall be submitted to the Planning 45 E©ssioa Director in written form and shall be accompanied by such additional maps, 46 statements, or other information as may be required to support the proposed modification. 47 48 Section 19A -509 If the proposed modification involves an addition of a new use or 49 group of uses not shown on the original Unit Development Plan, oF- the- -r-ear-Fanget -of 50 or if the Planing Eossi ©n Director for any other reason 51 deems it necessary, a public hearing shall be held on the proposed modification, and a 52 recommendation made thereon to the City Council. 53 19 498 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 Section 19A -510 Modification of an approved Unit Development Plan shall be made only by resolution of the City Council. Within thirty (30) days after receipt of a recommendation from the Planning Commission, the City Council shall approve or deny the proposed modification. As determined by the Director, modification which is minor in nature and clearly inconsequential may be made administratively or, in the judgement of the Director, may be referred to the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee for review and approval. Minor .modification includes modification to unit architecture and M yield results. Up to 20% of the individual dwelling units in residential PUDs may be substituted for other previously approved units if the resulting substitutions do not substantially alter the intent of the PUD as originally approved. Parking Provisions Request Section 20 -300 of the parking standards list parking rates for residential and commercial uses. Some confusion exists regarding the residential classifications used. Recommendation: Amend the following sections: Section 20 -300 Single- Family * Dwellings, ( including attached condominiums and townhouses New construction of dwelling units shall include 1 space which shall'be covered and two additional spaces which ' may be open and located in the driveway. Required existing covered parking facilities may be converted into living quarters, subject to the requirement that if the covered parking space is taken away for living quarters, it be replaced by a parking space that is paved, conforms to the existing Zoning Ordinance, an which may be uncovered. Section 20 -300 Dwellings, two - family or duplex of- compact one space which shall be in a carport or garage, and one space which may be uncovered and in the driveway. Home Occupations Request In 1992, the City Council discussed the provisions of the Home Occupation section of the Zoning Ordinance. The Council wished to encourage the establishment of home occupations more widely so long as "...neighborhoods remain intact ". Council indicated that advertising of the home occupation should be permitted and_ that persons other than residents may be employed in conjunction with the home occupation. The following amendments to Section 21 -202 reflects the 'Council's discussion. Recommendation: Section 21 -202.6 44 G. The home occupation shall not create pedestrian, automobile, or truck_ traffic 45 or parking in residential neighborhoods in excess of that normally associated 46 with residential use, with..no more than two non - occupant vehicles present on �= 47 the street at any given time. A n ---- - -adve }sib- �e- �rsed- which- iri€er- �eh�ie - © €- the - address - �€ - the liege- c�ee�rper�- {b�i�ess -e�da a�d�at }ane�lett�r4iead- e�lnded} I. Flo- per.&&s-other ­tkaa Residents and not more than two non - residents sha11 Ma work at a home occupation location. — 20 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 499 1 Zoning Administrator (Appeals) 2 3 Request: Section 26 -201 of the Zoning Ordinance establishes the Zoning 4 Administrator. This section reads as follows: 5 6 Creation of Zoning Administrator In order to achieve improved coordination in 7 the administration of the Zoning Ordinance; to increase the efficiency of the zoning 8 enforcement proceedings; to reduce the time consumed in processing applications 9 for the various permits and review prescribed herein and to relieve the Planning 10 Commission of certain routine functions in order that it may give its attention to its 11 primary responsibility of comprehensive planning, there is hereby created in the Department of Planning, a Zoning Administrator. The creation of this position was clearly intended to streamline the review process for straightforward land use applications. The Zoning Administrator is, through this section, 6 given the authority and discretion to negotiate and interpret the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 26 -202 of the Zoning Ordinance provides that decisions of the Zoning Administrator may be appealed to the Planning Commission. This appeal section provides due process to the applicant and the general public. This section has, however, been 20 misused in some instances to appeal actions of the Zoning Administrator which were not 21 interpretations of the Zoning Ordinance or rulings on a development proposal, e.g., a 22 minor conditional use permit or a variance, but rather the application of the provisions of 23 the Zoning Ordinance, e.g., requiring the establishment of on -site parking for a new 24 residence. These appeals have been forwarded to the Planning Commission as required by 25 this section. Following a recent appeal of this nature, the Commission directed staff to 26 revise these provisions to clarify that actions of the Zoning Administrator to apply the 2 27 Zoning Ordinance, e.g. requiring on -site parking for new or expanding uses, requiring a 28 setback prescribed by the Zoning Ordinance, etc. are not eligible for appeal. It should be 29 noted that this clarification would not preclude an individual from filing a variance 30 application to authorize a deviation from the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. 31 32 Recommendation Amend the following section: 33 34 26 -202 Mpea1 Any person who disagrees with a ruling or interpretation of the Zoning 35 Administrator may appeal the matter to the Planning Commission. Such appeal shall.be 36 made in writing and filed with the City Clerk within fourteen (14) calendar days of the 37 ruling or interpretation. The City Clerk will then transmit the appeal to the Zoning 38 Administrator, who will cause the matter to be placed on the agenda of the Planning 39 Commission. If no appeal is made within that time, the ruling or interpretation shall be 40 final. The appeal shall be addressed to the Planning Commission and shall set forth in 41 writing the grounds for the appeal and the relief sought by the applicant. The hearing shall 42 be scheduled within two regularly scheduled meetings The Zoning Administrator shall 43 notify in writing all persons who have demonstrated their interest in the matter of the time 44 and place of the meeting on the appeal at least ten (10) calendar days prior to the meeting. 45 The Zoning Administrator shall transmit the application and all exhibits therewith to the 46 Planing Commission for consideration. For the purposes of this section a ruling ii —a 47 discretiona1y action e a minor conditional use permit or a variance and an 48 interpretation refers to the determination of the intent and application of provisions of the 49 Zoning Ordinance Application or enforcement of provisions of the Zoning Ordinance 50 shall not be considered interpretations or rulings and are not subject to appeal. 51 Notwithstanding this section an individual may file a variance from the provisions o the 52 Zoning Ordinance pursuant to Section 26 -300. 53 54 21 500 Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 1993 1 Chairman Parkerson, Commissioners Rahman and Bennett thanked Commissioners Tarr 2 and Read for their service on the Commission (Commissioner Tarr - 8 years of service). 3 4 5 ADJOURNMENT 10:00 PM. 6 7 minO622 /pcomN �I 1 i 22 �y�