Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 01/09/1990MINUTES REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY HALL January 9, 1990 7:00 P.M. PETALUMA, CA The Planning Commission encourages applicants or their representatives to be available at the meeting to answer questions so that no agenda item need be deferred to a later date due to a lack of pertinent information. COMMISSIONERS: Present: Balshaw, Bennett *, Doyle, Libarle, Parkerson, Read, Tarr Absent: None. STAFF: Warren Salmons, Planning Director Pamela Tuft, Principal Planner Jenny Cavanagh, Assistant Planner Teryl Lister, Assistant Planner * Chairman APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of December 12, 1989 were approved as printed. PUBLIC COMMENT: (15 minutes maximum). The Planning Commission will hear public comments only on matters over which they have jurisdiction. There will be no Commission discussion �or action. The chairman will allot no more than-five minutes to any individual. If more than three persons wish to speak their time will be allotted so that the total amount of time allocated to this agenda item will be 15 minutes. COMMISSIONER COMMENT: None. APPEAL STATEMENT was read. Within fourteen (14) calendar days following the date of a decision of the Planning Commission, the decision may be appealed to the City Council by the applicant or by any other interested party. If no appeal is made within that time, the decision shall be final. An appeal shall be addressed to the Council in writing and shall be filed with the City Clerk. The appeal shall state specifically the grounds for the appeal and the relief sought by the applicant. CORRESPONDENCE: Letter requesting continuance for Park Place 5. DIRECTOR's REPORT: Introduction. of new staff members, Bonne Gaebler and Marty Strauss. �1 Addition italics Deletion st -ri#eeu4 - - -- ------------ ---------------------------------------------------------------------=------------------------- NE. BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS r I. NORBAY IRONWORKS, 1ST AND G STREETS, AP NO. 008- 121 -05 AND 06, FILE NO. L656. 1. Consideration of EIQ. 2. Consideration of a conditional use permit to allow operation of an ornamental iron fabrication shop within the Riverfront Warehouse Zoning + District. The public hearing was opened. U SPEAKERS: Gary Sterner - 247 Alma Avenue, Rohnert Park - Owner of American Towing Company; cannot move immediately, would take 60 -90 days; difficulty with finding appropriate location in City. Walter Haake - property owner /applicant - distributed letter to Commissioners; sprinklering is not necessary, may put in, however. Intends to make all aesthetic improvements .recommended by staff. Main concern - would like to move Norbay Ironworks; in shortly; supports riverfront preservation, wants to be involved with planning. This' build ing has been requested to brought up to earthquake standards, how extensive will this :need to be? Might request a higher use on the waterfront in -the future; very uncomfortable with. easement conditions. (Oue'sti6dby Commissioner Libarle Can Mr. Haake adhere to easement as alluded to in letter:distributed tonight? Walter Haake - Difficult - language is scary; questions of liability. Commission Discussion Commissioner Balshaw - A 30 foot wide easement may not. be necessary, but must address General Plan direction. . Commissioner Doyle - Supports tying easement condition to other easement conditions for area. T'he'se conditions may depend on Council decision on the recent Van Bebber project. The public hearing was closed. A motion;° was made by Commissioner Parkerson to continue this item for two weeks. There was no second. i A mot'ion?was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Parkerson to direct staff to prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration based on the following findings: COMMISSIONER BALSHAW: Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE: Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON:Yes COMMISSIONER READ: Yes COMMISSIONER TARR: Yes 2 12 CHAIRMAN BENNETT: Yes Findings: 1. The use, as conditionally approved, does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the .environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife 'population to drop below self=sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, ' threaten to eliminate a ,plant or animal community reduce the number or restrict the range. of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 2. The use, as conditionally approved, does not have the potential to achieve short- term to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals.. 3. The use, as conditionally approved, does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. 4. The use, as conditionally approved, does not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. 5. The use is consistent with and further promotes the objectives, goals, and policies of the General Plan. 6. Potential adverse impacts related to hazardous materials and noise are mitigated to an acceptable degree through conditions of approval. A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Parkerson to approve a use permit based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions listed below: COMMISSIONER BALSHAW: Yes COMMISSIONER. DOYLE: Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE: No Uncomfortable with easement not being clarified by Council yet. COMMISSIONER PARKERSON: Yes COMMISSIONER READ: Yes COMMISSIONER TARR: Yes -� CHAIRMAN BENNETT: Yes Findings: 1. The proposed. use, subject to the conditions of approval, conforms to the intent and requirements of the zoning ordinance and the General Plan. 2. This project will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community due to the mitigation measures incorporated in the conditions of approval. Conditions 1. Prior to commencement of use, the following shall be completed: 3 "� "1' y :' ��`.,�;� + + . ?. � �Ir •. ,'if.1h2 .i�Y.'N"lY.k }. 13 c. • • • �. a. Two parking spaces shall be provided. b. SPARC review of parking area and site improvements shall be completed. This includes removal of the existing fence along 1st Street; landscape screening of the parking area other landscaping deem, ed necessary; rendering the undeveloped area useable for a parking lot; -exterior paint (both street frontages); repair and clean -up of the sidewalk; installation of a safety railing along the edge of the "G" Street sidewalk (exclusive of loading doors); and provision of a trash enclosure. 2 Prior to further occupancy of the building (subsequent to occupancy by NorBay Ironcraft), the following shall be completed. • a. ; As proposed by the applicant, the existing towing company yard use shall be discontinued and all outdoor storage removed. b..': Subject lots shall be merged or deed restrictions executed which tie the parking to the building. 3. Prior to commencement of use, an irrevocable offer of dedication for easement purposes shall be provided to the City, subject to review by City staff. The easement shall meet the following requirements, subject to staff approval: a. An open space /pedestrian and river maintenance easement shall be provided along the Petaluma River frontage across this site. On the most eastern parcel, it shall include any area between the existing building and the riverbank (approximately 5 to 10 feet). On the western parcel, it shall serve as a transition in width between the full path (any easement plus the area claimed by State Lands) to the east and a minimum 30 -foot path width. b. The intent of the open space /pedestrian and river maintenance easement is to create a continuous pedestrian easement along the riverfront. Barriers to pedestrian circulation, such as fences (not buildings), shall be removed at such time as the offer of dedication is. accepted by the City of Petaluma. C. The offer of dedication for an open space /pedestrian and river maintenance easement shall 'be submitted to City staff for review and approval prior to the commencement of use. The City will not accept the offer of dedication until either 10 years from .City approval of this use permit or until a substantial public access corridor is available for dedication, whichever occurs first. This condition will be modified or deleted to reflect consistency with the outcome of Council action on the Van Bebberproject. -� 4. In, rder to reduce noise impacts on neighboring residential uses, the door on First shall remain .closed while the ironworks business is operating. 5. Ate no time shall future noise levels exceed standards specified in the Uniform Building Code, Section 22 -301 of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance, and the 1987 General Plan. This is applicable to areas off -site as well as other areas of the building occupied by tenants other than the steel fabrication operation. Any existing or future equipment utilizing condensers shall be provided with noise attenuation. 6. All work- related activities shall take place indoors. 7. No, storage of any type shall take place outdoors, (i.e., machinery, equipment, parts, materials, items under repair, trash, scrap material, etc.). IV 14 8. This use permit ;may be recalled to the Planning. Commission at any time due to complaints regarding noise generation or other objectionable operating characteristics. At such time, the Commission may repeal the use permit or add modified conditions of approval. i 9. All premises, structures, and operating equipment shall be inspected by Building Inspector, Fire Marshal, and EOS with particular .attention paid to any potentially hazardous materials. Any corrections deemed necessary shall be completed prior to commencement of use or as deemed appropriate by those agencies. 10. All requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be complied with, including: a. Building shall comply with UBC and Fire Code for new occupancy. This use will not require that the building be fire sprinklered at this time." 11. All requirements of the Building Division shall be comph id with, including: a. This appears to be an occupancy change. Therefore, the building must be investigated - for seismic consideration and brought up to code." 12. All requirements of. the Public Works and Engineering Departments shall be complied with, including: a. Repair curb and sidewalk as deemed necessary. b. Cobblestone curbs must be preserved in accordance with City policy. C. Excavation permits are required for work in public 'right -of =way. d. Handicap ramps must be provided on both streets. II. YOUNG ,AMERICA HOMES, PARK PLACE V, RAINIER AVENUE AND ACADIA DRIVE, AP No. 13'6- 111 -51, File No's 3.403, 6.962. 1. Consideration of EIQ. 2. Consideration of Rezoning 14.8 acres from P.C.D. to P.U.D. 3. Consideration of P.U.D: Unit development plan. 4. Consideration of Tentative Map for 718 detached single - family dwellings. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Robert O'Neil - Vice President, Young America Homes - Chris Craiker, AIA has been hired to review project - there will be a meeting tomorrow with staff to discuss changes. Mr. O'Neil requested one month continuance. The public hearing was continued (by consensus) to the Planning Commission meeting of February 13. 5 15 III. LEONARD JAY, COUNTRY CLUB UNIT 11 PHASE 11 (6 LOTS), PORTION OF AP NO. 008-472-06, FILE NO.. 6.889A- 1. Determination that no additionalenvironmental review is required. 2. Consideration of PUD Uni , t Development Plan revision. 3. Consideration of Tentative Map revision. The"publi'c hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: None. The public hearing was closed. ( D A motion' was made by Commissioner Read and seconded by Commissioner Parkerson to 0) recommend , to the City Council approval of a revised PUD development plan based on the 0 findings and subject to the conditions listed below: COMMISSIONER BALSHAW: Yes COMMISSIONER,DOYILE: Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON: Yes COMMISSIONER READ: Yes COMMISSIONER TARR: Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT: Yes Findings-: 1. This project. is consistent with the City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance and the requirements of the Planned Unit Development Zoning District. 2. This project, as conditioned, is consistent with the City of Petaluma General Plan. 3.. The revised development i plan represents an improved design from the subdivision as' originally designed. 4. This project is exempt from additional environmental review. Conditions: 1. 'This project, including but not limited to the revised tentative map, development, plan, Country Club Estates Architectural and Site Design Guidelines, grading plan, tree study and Preservation Guidelines and master landscape plan shall be subject to SPARC approval prior ito Council consideration of the Final Map. 2. This project shall comply with the conditions of approval for the PUD Development Plan for Country Club Estates Unit No. 2, Resolution No. 89-74 approved by the City Council on March 20, 1989, except where modified by the following conditions of approval. 3. The PUD development plan for Unit 2 shall include these six lots., as revised, as an integral part. The development plan shall be revised, as necessary, to reflect the revised lot configuration. 6 16 4. The PUD development plan shall be amended prior to SPARC review and final map approval, subject to SPARC review and approval, to reflect the following: a. Provision of reasoned building envelopes designed to locate: construction on portions of thelots minimize the need for cutting and filling. b. Provision of reasoned building envelopes which preserve on -site trees by measured locations of tree de of the surveyed location of tree trunks and locating construction outsi canopies. 5. Driveway locations shall be as shown on Sheet 3, Proposed Grading' Plan, unless alternate locations are approved by the Planning and Engineering Departments. 6. A non- access strip shall be provided along Country Club Drive across the frontage of lots 1, 5 and 6 as shown on amended tentative map sheet 2. 7. The water course running,across lots 3, 4 and 5 shall be retained in its natural state. Access to lot 4 shall. span the water course, subject to staff review and approval. A revised grading plan shall be provided for SPARC review and approval which prohibits grading /filling of the water course. 8. A deed restriction shall be recorded concurrent with the filing of the 'Final Map, against lots 3, 4 and 5 requiring the retention of the water course in a natural state in perpetuity. 9. Prior to final map approval, improvement plans for the concrete "V' ditch_ along the north property line shall be reviewed and approved by a horticulturist seected by Planning staff and retained at the applicant's expense. The review shah focus on ensuring the protection and preservation of existing trees on or adjacent to lots 2, 3, and 4. The horticulturist shall also be retained at the applicant's expense, for on -site monitoring of all construction activity within or in close proximity to the drip line of all trees on or adjacent to the site. Hand digging may be required at the discretion of the horticulturist. 10. All existing trees, as indicated on amended tentative map sheet 4, shall be preserved and protected. A motion was made by Commissioner Read and seconded by Commissioner Parkerson to recommend to the City Council approval of the revised tentative subdivision map based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions listed below: COMMISSIONER BALSHAW: Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE: Yes COMMISSIONERTIBARLE: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON: Yes COMMISSIONER READ: Yes COMMISSIONER TARR: Yes CHAIRMAN'BENNETT: Yes Findings 1. This project is consistent with the City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance and the requirements of the Planned Unit Development Zoning District. 7 1'7 2. This project, as conditioned, is consistent with the City of Petaluma General Plan. 3. The revised tentative map represents an improved design from the subdivision as originally designed. 4. This project is exempt from additional environmental review. 5. This project is consistent with the State Subdivision Map Act and the City of Petaluma Subdivision. Ordinance. Conditions W 1. This project shall "comply with all relevant conditions of approval of Resolution No. (7) 89 -75 as required by the City Council for the tentative map for Country Club Estates 0 Unit 2, approved on March 20, 1989, except where modified by the following conditions of approval. U 2. This project shall ' comply with the following conditions of approval of the City Q Engineer, subject to his review and approval: a. The proposed retaining wall shall be located on private property rather than within the public right -of -way and shall'' be built of materials conforming to City Standards. Construction design and location shall be provided prior to b: Final Map approval. The proposed public storm drain easement on Lot 3 shall be 10 ft. rather than 5 ft. as proposed on the Tentative Map. Parcel A, shown on Lots 1 and 2, shall be abandoned prior to recording of C. the final map for Country Club Estates Unit 2 Phase 2. d. On Sheet 3 of 5 of the proposed Tentative Map, Lot 4, there is an indication of some existing structure on the lot. Indication as to what the structure is and its ultimate disposition shall be provided. . e. On Sheet 3 of 5, on Lot 4, no indication is made of drainage facilities under the proposed driveway from the natural water course. Design of this drainage shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer. On Sheet 3 of 5 of the Tentative Map, the yard drain inlet between Lot 2 and 5 1 shall be shifted to Lot 1 so that run -off from Lot 1 is contained within a pipe system before exiting the property. The same change shall be made for the run -off from Lots 4 and 3. There is a discrepancy between Sheet 2 and Sheet 3 of the plans as to the g. street grade. Said discrepancy shall be corrected prior to Final Map h approval. Design and construction of all on and off -site public improvements and to serve the shall be subject to approval of utilities necessary project L appropriate City staff. All backyard and hillside drainage control must be within underground pipe j.' system with surface catchment swales and inlets. Signing and striping shall conform to the City of Petaluma Standards. Prohibited parking areas shall be signed as part of the final improvement k_: plans. The subdrains, on -site but not within public right -of -way (as required by the soils report) shall be private, maintained. by either a homeowner's association shall be or other mechanism to insure regular routine maintenance and connected to an approved closed conduit storm drainage system, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. City shall retain the right, which shall be N . W *1 set forth in the project C.C; &R.s, to inspect subdrain system to insure maintenance and shall have the right to complete said work as deemed necessary and assess property owners. 1. The developer shall comply_ with the amended Petaluma Municipal Code Sections 20.36.010 and 20.36:020 which- require the developer to pay storm drainage impact fees (as calculated in Chapter 17.30) on construction in all sections of the City of',Petaluma. M. All sanitary sewer and water mains shall be ductile iron pipe (DIP) or equivalent throughout the development in sidehill areas due to the unstable nature of the property. n. This development shall contribute a proportionate share to the cost of the proposed Sonoma County Water Agency Master Drainage Plan improvements for the Mountain View Ave._ and Rock Quarry Creek drainage systems. Contribution shall' be determined on a ratio of runoff from site to runoff from the watershed prior to Final Map approval. o. The project. shall contribute a proportionate share of the cost of a traffic signal installation at Petaluma Blvd. So., and Mt. View Ave. and McNear Ave., subject to staff review and approval prior to Final Map approval. 3. The following requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be complied with: a. Hammer head shall conform to City of Petaluma Standards. b. Provide hydrants as shown and marked on plans. Any required revisions to the hammer head design shall be shown on plans submitted for SPARC review. 4. The following requirements of the Chief Building Inspector shall be complied with: a. Grading must be certified when, completed to indicate compliance with approved plans arid will be required for occupancy. b. Finished floor elevation must be certified before occupancy. C. Any holding tank required for elevations above 160 feet must Engineering Department design requirements. d. Where ground slopes greater than' 1 on 10, foundation shall be stepped per Uniform Building Code 2907(c). ­01 e. Soils with expansive index greater than 20 require special design foundation per Uniform Building Code 2904(b). L Driveway gradient shall comply with Ordinance No. 1533/1982. g. Responsible party shall sign building plans. h. Submit soils report to verify foundation design. 5. Prior to final map approval,, plans shall be submitted for Fire and Engineering Department review and approval to verify that an adequate area. of Five Farms Road. at its intersection with Country'Club Drive is at a slope to allow engines to stop and start again. E 6. The tentative map shall be amended prior to SPARC review and final map approval, subject to SPARC review and approval, to reflect the following: a. Provision of reasoned building envelopes designed to locate construction on portions of lot which minimizes the need for cutting and filling. b. Provision of reasoned building envelopes which preserve on -site trees by locating construction outside of the surveyed location of tree trunks and measured locations of tree canopies. (0 5. Driveway locations shall be as shown on Sheet 3, Proposed Grading Plan, unless alternate locations are approved by the Planning and Engineering Departments. 0 6. A non - access strip shall be provided along Country Club Drive across the frontage of lots 1, 5 and 6 as shown on amended tentative map sheet 2. U �g 7. The water course running across lots 3, 4 and 5 shall be retained in its natural state. Access to lot 4 shall span the water course, subject to staff review and approval. A revised grading plan shall be provided for SPARC review and approval which prohibits grading /filling of the water course. 8. Prior to final map approval, improvement plans for the concrete "V" ditch along the north property line shall be reviewed and approved by a horticulturist selected by Planning staff and retained at the applicant's expense. The review shall focus on ensuring the protection and preservation of existing trees on or adjacent to lots 2, 3, and 4. The horticulturist shall also be retained at the applicant's expense for on -site monitoring of all construction activity within or in close proximity to the drip line of all trees on or adjacent to the site. Hand digging may be required at the discretion of `the horticulturist. 9. All existing trees, as' indicated on amended tentative map sheet 4, shall be preserved and protected to staff approval. -------------=----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PLANNING MATTERS: IV. REBECCA L. SNYDER, APPEAL OF GARAGE SETBACK AT 1020 B STREET. 1. Consideration of appeal to Community Development and Planning Director's determination that variance granted in 1980 was still in force. s SPEAKERS: Rebecca _Snyder - 1 Pearce Street - Was not given complete information at Planning Department - why would variance not expire, will not be able to maintain this side of her property improvements are too close. Mr. Pietroskv - Representing owner, Mr. Quaresma - Foundation has been 40 inches high for.' last ten years; distri buted pictures and variance application; neighboring (Snyder) house violates side yard setbacks so garage should also be allowed. Garage originally complied to required setbacks, but adjacent house encroached over property line. A lot line adjustment amended line and made garage foundation non - conforming - therefore a variance was granted to legalize the already approved garage. 10 20 Bryant Purtell - (attorney and friend of applicant) - variance has a time lapse; there was no action for 10 years. Mary Meyer - 11 Pearce Street - disregard for law is shown here; this .structure alters appearance of whole neighborhood; strong fire danger. Commission Discussion CommissionefBalshaw Are we discussing a variance lapse or - an expired building permit? A motion was made by Commissioner Libarle-and seconded by Commissioner Parkerson to deny the appeal of the Planning Director's decision that the variance granted in '1980 was still in force. COMMISSIONER BALSHAW: Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE: Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE:. Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON: Yes COMMISSIONER READ: Yes COMMISSIONER TARR! No CHAIRMAN BENNETT: Yes V. DISCUSSION .ITEMS: 1. Tree Preservation. 2. Fiscal 19:90 -1991 Goals. 3. Zoning Ordinance Update 4. Procedures for Corona /Ely 5. Riverfront walkway. General discussion regarding preparation of staff reports in a more timely manner. Recommendation was made that notices should not be published until staff reports complete and all materials required of applicant received. ADJOURNMENT 9:35 PM mn010990 / pcom 11