Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/27/1990m REGULAR MEETING March 27, 1990 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7 :00 P.M. CITY HALL 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: Balshaw (arrived at 7:05 PM), Bennett *, Doyle, Libarle, Parkerson, Read, Tarr STAFF: Warren Salmons, Planning Director Pamela Tuft, Principal Planner Gary Broad, Associate Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF March 13, 1990 - Minutes were approved with corrections to pages 2 and 3. PUBLIC COMMENT: (15 minutes maximum). The 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. SPEAKERS: None. COMMISSIONER COMMENT: None. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Adopted Council goals; renoticing of rezone on Lakeville. COMMISSIONER'S REPORT:_ Commissioner Parkerson, Pamela Tuft ,and SPARC CommitteeMember McAllister attended a seminar regarding preservation of native oaks - Commissioner's Tarr, Read and Bennett and several staff members attended the League of Subcommit ee-worki g on the Tree Ordinance will m et this e Bennett indicated that the week. CORRESPONDENCE: Letter regarding McNear Hill; Memo regarding Twin Creeks . from Tom'Hargis, City Engineer; comments on Twin Creeks EIR from project proponents. APPEAL STATEMENT: Was read. • is � ::rr, OLD BUSYNESS: I. FORMAN PETRO,1004 LAKEVILLE STREET, FILE NO. 1.6640c). 1. Continued consideration. of EIQ. 2. Continued consideration of three conditional use permits to legalize three pre - existing uses (wholesale plumbing, wholesale candy, minor auto repair). The applicant has requested a continuance of this item. Staff recommends granting a continuance to the Planning Commission meeting of April 24, 1990. IN ®R O II. FAIRWAY MEADOWS, DUFFEL COMPANY, AP NO. 17- 040 -50, FILE NO.'S < 3.399, 6.956(tl). 1. Continued consideration of mitigated. negative declaration. 2. Continued consideration of rezone from Agriculture (A) and Flood Plan Combining (FPC) to Planned Unit Development .(PUD) and FPC. 3. Continued consideration of PUD Unit Development Plan. 4. ' Continued consideration of Tentative Map for 41 -lot detached single - family subdivision. This public hearing was closed at a previous meeting. SPEAKERS: Tom Furrer, United Anglers - Concerns regarding Adobe Creek; wants to work with developer to protect spawning areas. Chuck McKee, Duffel Companies - Answers questions regarding creek protection, creek enhancement; RV parking will not be allowed per proposed CC &R's; Can arrangements be made not to plant front lawns if homeowner does not want grass? Frank Bellows, Project Architect - Answerg questions regarding 10% different homes - would like this project to be moved on the SPARC. John Anderson, Project Engineer - Described on- street parking. Commission Concerns - 1. Creek preservation. 2. 10% variable units. 3. Driveway widths; RV parking prohibition. 4. Front yard landscaping - bonding OK. 5. More street tree planting. 6. Emergency access. 7. Sidewalk /bike path must conform to existing width. A motion was made by Commissioner Parkerson and seconded. by Commissioner Libarle to recommend to the City Council approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration based on the findings listed below: 2 MI COMMISSIONER BALSHAW :Yes COMMISSIONER READ: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON:Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE :, Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT:Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE:Yes COMMISSIONER TARR :Yes EIO Findings 1. The project, ,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 project, as conditionally approved, does not have the potential to achieve short - term to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals. 3. The .project, as conditionally approved, does not have impacts which .are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. 4. The project, as conditionally approved, does not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on.hu man beings, either directly or indirectly. 5. The project is consistent with and further promotes the objectives, goals, and policies of the General Plan. A motion was made by Commissioner Parkerson and seconded by Commissioner Libarle to recommend to the City Council approval of the proposed rezone from Agricultural to PUD based on the findings listed below: COMMISSIONER BALSHAW:Yes COMMISSIONER READ: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON:Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE: Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETTYes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE:Yes COMMISSIONER TARR:Yes Rezone Findings 1. That the development plan as conditioned, results in a more desirable use of the land, and. a better physical environment than would be possible. under any single zoning district or combination of zoning districts. 2. That the plan for the proposed development, as conditioned, presents a unified and organized arrangement of buildings and service facilities which are appropriate in relation to adjacent to nearby properties and. that adequate landscaping and /or screening is included if necessary to insure compatibility. 3 65 3. That the natural and scenic qualities of the site are .protected, with adequate available public and private spaces designated on the Unit Development Plan. 4. That the development of the subject property, in the manner proposed by the applicant and conditioned by the City, will not be detrimental to the pubic welfare, will be in the best interests of the City and will be, in keeping with the general intent and spirit of the zoning regulations of the City of Petaluma and with the Petaluma General Plan. 5. That the PUD District is ,proposed on property which has a suitable relationship to one (1) or more. thoroughfares (Ely Blvd. South) to carry any additional traffic (0 generated by the development. 0) A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Parkerson to 0 recommend to the City Council approval of the PUD based on the findings listed under the Rezoning - action and subject to the amended conditions listed below: U COMMISSIONER BALSHAW :Yes COMMISSIONER READ: No - Objections to Condition 3B - not enough diversity. COMMISSIONER PARKERSON:Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE: Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT:Yes . COMMISSIONER LIBARLE:Yes COMMISSIONER TARR:Yes PUD Conditions 1. Prior to SPARC review, the PUD Development Plan shall be amended to: a. include provisions for a minim 12' wide non -paved emergency access to the site, designed to Police, Fire and Planning staff satisfaction. b. access for Lots 1, 2 and 3 shall be provided via a shared driveway off Fair Way, as shown on the plans submitted 2/15/90. C. include any necessary landscape, setback and maintenance modifications to satisfy required agency approvals for the Adobe. Creek channel design (for hydrologic capacity) - and habitat restoration plan. d. include provisions for a landscape island in the cul -de -sac if determined feasible by Engineering and Fire Marshal staff. e. include standards for minimum rear yard setbacks of 25' on units adjacent t&— Lakeville Square Apartments. L incorporate _provisions for inclusion of a streamside management plan to restore and monitor the creek environment and habitat;' designed to Fish and Game specifications, with Sonoma County Water Agency, and City staff concurrence. Comments from United Anglers shall be addressed and incorporated into the management plan, to all extent possible. 2. Project CC &R's shall be developed, subject to staff review and approval prior to Final Map, to include a reference to PUD development standards for governing the following: a. maximum lot coverage, setbacks, height and design criteria for principal dwelling and accessory uses and structures 4 i I b. standards for .height, location and' design of fencing, as well as maintenance provisions, to conform to the PUD plan. C. garage conversions shall be prohibited. d: - - - - -- o€€ site` or - gar -age- st ©Fa$"Wy4of+e<f�44OH4l doles e----- - -��g� $tier} -�- home- oe- et�gatisn�; - i€- �per - e- onsist�a�- �i��-- appl}cable Zoning-Qr iaanEeVroYisie 3. All aspects of the proposed development plan are subject to review :by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee prior to application for Final Map including but not limited to: architecture, public and private landscaping, hardscape surface treatments, irrigation and fencing. Particular emphasis shall be placed on SPARC review of the following: a. Alternatives to front- facing garages. where feasible. b. Architecture for the designated 10 units for compliance with the intent of General Plan provisions, as well as to provide variety in design (e.g. roof styles, materials). C. Landscape plans shall include provisions for further enhancement, including groundcover in street tree planters, a stronger project entry treatment, closer spacing of street trees, and denser treatment along the cul de sac frontage further diversity in tree species;_ design. linkage consistent with different sections of the development, building architecture and fencing. d. Front yard landscaping, including ai+--- appropriate- -fix --- 4 --1awa g��eoveFs) - �i�trbs -- and - -€ reed -- aid-- �portx�� -- for-- per�a�a� ©rr -o€ p iviat"a4— spae-e- see_ ded or sod lawns, bonding may be allowed to meet this requirement. e. Appropriate treatment along the Ely Boulevard frontage of the project adequate combined path '-pedestrian walkway and landscaped streetscape) L ' Soundwall, interior fencing and creekside fencing design. g. Review of proposed creek enhancement plans for habitat and drainage values in conformance with a required streamside area management plan approved by Fish and ,.Game Water Agency and City staff including permanent fence or method of delineation h. Reorientation of the unit on Lot 9 to minimize the amount of driveway 4. All landscaping and irrigation systems within the public right -of -way, in creekside public, areas, street tree planting strips and landscape median /islands as well as hydrologic maintenance of the creek shall be maintained by an Assessment District—° through contract services,,.subject to approval of the City Council concurrently with the approval of the Final Map. Landscaping ;and irrigation systems within the public ri ht- of-way shall be designed to standards acceptable to the, City of Petaluma. Cost of g formation of the required Assessment District shall be borne by the project proponent. 5. Street names shall be subject to approval of the Petaluma Street Naming Committee prior to Final Map. b. All restoration, erosion stabilization and enhancement work either proposed and /or required within the upper banks of the Adobe Creek.waterway, and along the top of bank shall be subject to review and':approval by all appropriate regulatory agencies and the City Planning Commission to y determine compliance with the City- adopted olicy to retain the creek in a "natural state with special concerns as to timing WI 87 work to avoid sensitive spawning eriods and shall be completed prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, weather permitting: A monitoring program shall be required for five years following installation of mitigation plantings and shall be prepared by the developer prior to Final Map 'application. - Monitoring program shall be subject to regulatory agency and City staff review and approval. A 8. The following requirements of the Police Department shall be addressed prior to issuance of development permits: a. Install lighted house numbers to facilitate location of residences. b. Burglar proof dead bolt locks on wooden doors.. C. Install securing devices on the sliding windows and sliding glass doors. A motion was made by Commissioner Libarle and seconded by Commissioner Doyle to recommend to the City Council approval of the tentative map for a 41 -lot residential subdivision based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions listed below: COMMISSIONER BALSHAW:Yes COMMISSIONER READ: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON:Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE: Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETTYes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE:Yes COMMISSIONER TARR:Yes - Tentative_ Map Findines 1. The proposed subdivision, as conditionally approved, together with provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan objectives, policies, general land uses and programs. 2. Th'e site is physically suitable for the type and density of development proposed, as conditionally approved. 3. Th_e design of the subdivision and the proposed 'improvements therefore, as conditionally approved, will not cause substantial environmental damage, and no substantial or avoidable injury will occur to fish or wildlife or their habitat. R 7. The following requirements of the Chief Building Inspector shall be met prior to issuance of development permits: a.. Grading must be certified when completed to indicate compliance with approved plans and will be required for occupancy. M b. Soils with expansion index greater than 20 requires special design foundation O per Uniform Building Code 2904(b). C. Show site drainage and grading topography. d., Indicate all utilities on site plan. U e. Verify utilities are adequate for building (i.e.,, size of water, electrical and gas service and size of sewer). L Responsible party to sign plans. g. Submit soils report to verify foundation design. 8. The following requirements of the Police Department shall be addressed prior to issuance of development permits: a. Install lighted house numbers to facilitate location of residences. b. Burglar proof dead bolt locks on wooden doors.. C. Install securing devices on the sliding windows and sliding glass doors. A motion was made by Commissioner Libarle and seconded by Commissioner Doyle to recommend to the City Council approval of the tentative map for a 41 -lot residential subdivision based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions listed below: COMMISSIONER BALSHAW:Yes COMMISSIONER READ: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON:Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE: Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETTYes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE:Yes COMMISSIONER TARR:Yes - Tentative_ Map Findines 1. The proposed subdivision, as conditionally approved, together with provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan objectives, policies, general land uses and programs. 2. Th'e site is physically suitable for the type and density of development proposed, as conditionally approved. 3. Th_e design of the subdivision and the proposed 'improvements therefore, as conditionally approved, will not cause substantial environmental damage, and no substantial or avoidable injury will occur to fish or wildlife or their habitat. R W O O 4. The design of-the Subdivision and the type of improvements will not cause serious public health problems. 5. The design. of the Subdivision and the tYPe of improvements proposed will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. 6. The discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into the existing community sewer system will not result in violation, of the. existing requirements prescribed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Tentative Map Conditions 1. The subdivider shall comply with the following requirements of the City'Engineer: a. The developer shall participate in a fair -share contribution for off -site intersection, signalization for Casa Grande Road /Ely Blvd South; Frates Road/Ely Blvd. South; and Casa Grande Road /South McDowell Blvd. prior to approval of the final map for this development. Actual amounts to be determined by the City Engineer. b. This project shall comply with, all applicable flood, mitigation requirements adopted by the City Council as contained in Zoning. Ordinance Article 16 and Municipal Code, Chapter 17.30 "Storm Drainage Impact Fee ". All i mprovements and grading for natural waterways with provisions to accommodate .flood' flows. C. The public sanitary sewer located adjacent to Lots 40 and 41 shall be located in. an exclusive 10' paved easement with adequate access provided for maintenance of this proposed main. Installation of fences shall be avoided across this easement. d. All street lights within this development shall be standard metal fixtures and dedicated to the City for ownership and .maintenance. Prior to City acceptance, the developer shall verify all lights meet PG &E's LS2 rating system. e. All grading and erosion control measures shall conform to the City's Erosion Control Ordinance No. 1576 N.C.S. —� L This development proposes to connect to the existing sanitary sewer located adjacent to the rear property corner of Lots 40 and 41. Prior to approval of the final map, developer's engineer shall verify if this existing sewer has been dedicated to the City. If it has not, this development shall acquire a 10' exclusive easement in favor of the City or an alternate design to sewer this property shall be required. g. In accordance with the PMC Section 20.28.020 "access to public` streets - all lots or parcels created by the subdivision of land shall have access to a public street improvement to standards hereinafter required ". Therefore, access to Lots 1, 2 and 3 shall, be via Fair Way. 7 69 Ice • • 3. 9 5. 7. h. A minimum of four fire hydrants shall be installed to Fire Marshal specifications with locations to be approved prior to Final Map approval. The subdivider shall comply with the following Pacific Bell requirements: a. We request a ten foot P.U.E. on all streets within and bordering this subdivision. b. A joint P.U.E. will be required on an "as built" basis when PG &E and Pacific Bell facilities are constructed within this subdivision. C. Any rearrangement of telephone facilities that conflict with the development of this subdivision will be at the developer's expense. d.. When developer cancels, modifies or defers its request for facilities, developer shall pay a charge which will allow Pacific Bell to recover the nonrecoverable cost of its engineering, labor, material, equi ment and other related expenses as a result of the work performed by Pac21cc Bell to comply with developer's request. Per C.P.U.C. Rates and Tariffs - Revision A2, Rules 15 and 16. e. Changes made to the map should be resubmitted for our review. The Tentative Map shall be amended prior to submittal for Final Map to reflect all applicable modifications required under the PUD Conditions of Approval. Said map amendment shall meet specifications of the City Engineer and Director of Community Development and shall also incorporate any SPARC conditions of approval pertinent to the map. The following Special Development Fees shall be applicable to this project: Water and Sewer Connection, Community Facilities, Storm Drainage Impact; Park and Recreation Land Improvement, and School Impact. The project• sponsor shall execute a binding agreement which shall stipulate that upon close of escrow of each residential dwelling unit in Fairway meadows, developer shall pay $150.00 to the City per daily trip end estimated to be generated by said unit. Each unit is estimated to generate 10.0 trip ends per day. If the City establishes a Ma or Facilities Traffic Mitigation Fee prior to close of escrow of any uriit(s), the fee for said units(s) and all subsequent units in this project thereafter will be either $150.00 per trip end or the Major Facilities Traffic. Mitigation Fee, whichever is in effect at time of applieal-ion- for F�4-Map issuance of building permits The project sponsor shall be required to pay low and moderate income housing in-- lieu fees of an amount to be determined according to the schedule established by the City Council, or make alternative arrangements to meet the low and moderate income housing provision requirements of the Housing Element, subject to approval of the City and prior to approval of the Final Map. g. The proposed staff to event i disscharge e of s potentially harmful substances n into the Enginee ring p creek waters upstream of the spawning area. 9. Any labeling errors or other erroneous information appearing on the map development or landscape plan shall be corrected prior to Final Map approval. - 70 NEW BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS III. MCNEAR HILL, PETALUMA BOULEVARD SOUTH, (ACROSS FROM MCNEAR AVENUE), AP NO. 008-530-04, FILE NO.'S 3.359A, 6.839A(gb). 1. Consideration of PUD Unit Development Plan. 2. Consideration of Vesting'Tentative Map for a 1,86 -lot townhouse subdivision. (Chairman Bennett abstained - Commissioner Doyle Chaired this item). The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Wally Kieckhefer - Project Applicant Answered questions regarding tree removal, etc.; explained why river access should remain as proposed. The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner. Parkerson to recommend to the City Council approval of the Planned. Unit District Development Plan for a 186 -unit townhouse project based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions listed below: COMMISSIONER BALSHAW:Yes COMMISSIONER READ: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON:Yes .COMMISSIONER. DOYLE: Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETr :ABSTAIN COMMISSIONER L.IBARLE :Yes COMMISSIONER TARR :Yes Findings (for PUD) 1. No additional environmental review is necessary for this project as per CEQA Section 15162. 2. This project, as conditioned, is consistent with the City of Petaluma General Plan. 3. This project, as conditioned, is consistent with the City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance and the PUD district. 4. This project, as conditioned, represents a more desirable land use than possible within an individual zoning district and meets the required findings of Section 19A- 300 of the zoning ordinance. Conditions (for PUD) All conditions set forth in Resolution 86 -223 and in Resolution 88 -224 shall remain in effect for the approval of this development plan and shall be complied with as set forth therein, unless amended by the conditions of this project approval. E 1 71 2. The following requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be met, subject to his review and approval: a. Provide smoke detectors in all units on separate circuits with visual alarm device installed above or near main entry door. b. Provide fire. alarm system for all buildings with 3 units or more in accordance with Section 10.306A of the 1985 Uniform Fire Code as amended by the City of Petaluma. C. Each building shall be provided with a strobe light connected to the alarm 0 system to identify which building is in alarm mode. M 3. The following requirements of the Chief Building Inspector shall be complied with, Q subject to his review and approval: a. Grading must be certified when completed to indicate compliance with U approved plans and will be required for occupancy. b. Certify finished floor elevation before occupancy. C. Where ground slopes - greater than 1 on 10, foundation shall be stepped per Uniform Building Code 2907(c). d. Soils with expansion index greater than 20 requires special design foundation per Uniform Building Code 2904(b). e. All roofing shall be "B" rated or better per Ordinance No. 1744/1988. L Show site drainage and grading topography. g. Verify utilities are adequate for building (i.e., size of water, electrical and gas service and size of sewer). h. Responsible party to sign plans. i. Submit soils report to verify foundation design. j. If houses with property lines between them, then parapet would be required— (see section 1709 of 1988 UBC) 4. The conditions of PG &E as indicated in the attached letter shall be complied with in the development of this site. 5. Security lighting shall be provided along the public access pathway as recommended by the Police Department, subject to SPARC review and approval. 6. The following condition related to public access shall be met, subject to staff review and; approval: a. A ten foot wide public access easement shall be offered for dedication to the City of Petaluma from Petaluma Boulevard South to the Petaluma River. For public safety and usability, the easements shall be relocated to not run 10 72 behind the garage structures as proposed. The easement. should be located between units 101 -104 and the garages to the east and continue north on the east side of units 81 -88, unless an alternate location is deemed more desirable by SPARC. (The garages may be pulled closer to the east Property line to facilitate the accessway development.) Final easement location shall be subject to SPARC approval. b. The area between the north property line of the project site and the area labeled as "creek setback line" on the vesting tentative map shall'be offered for dedication to the City of Petaluma as a public access easement. C. The improved pathway within the public access easement shall be a minimum of eight (8) feet in width to allow pedestrian and bicycle use. The pathway, shall be identified by special design treatment, such as the use of decorative paving or special surfacing, where it crosses intemal roadways. The pathway shall be designed to avoid internal roadways to the greatest extent practicable. The pathway _shall be useable by bicyclists and pedestrians for its full extent from Petaluma Boulevard South to the west property edge. d. The physical improvement of the public access easement to the river and along, the river frontage, shall be subject to SPARC review and approval. The goal is the development of a usable and attractive area for both residents of the complex and the public at large. Areas of special SPARC review shall include, but not be limited to: landscaping, lighting, treatment of hard surfaces, fencing, and safety /security, and the provision of active and passive recreational opportunities: SPARC review shall also include review of cleanup and beautification of the river and its banks and protection of the river as a natural resource. e. A special entry treatment to the public access easement from Petaluma Boulevard South shall be provided to identify the public pathway, subject to SPARC review and approval. Signing shall be included as part of the entry treatment to indicate that public access is available. L SPARC shall review development plans for the adequacy of access from within the development itself to the river front. Additional stairways or pathways from unit clusters fronting on the river or from the clubhouse area may be required. 7. Plans submitted for SPARC review and approval shall include the following revisions related to parking: a. No more than five garage stalls shall be Provided consecutively along the west property line without a landscape strip equal to one parking space in width. b. The triangular area of parking near the east property line shall include a mix of compact and full -sized spaces. C. All parking spaces shall meet SPARC guidelines for size and for parking area landscaping, including providing landscape fingers between every eight consecutive parking spaces. 11 d. While meeting the above requirements, the project shall attempt to retain its parking ratio of 2.4 spaces /units by creating replacement spaces on site. 8. Common open space areas shall be subject to SPARC review and approval. Areas shall be developed to provide pleasant, attractive areas which encourage people to use the areas for socializing, sitting or reading, not merely as areas to pass through on the way - to their front doors. The space shall - be defined both through_ the surrounding structures and through its design. SPARC review shall include, but not be, limited to, landscaping; choice of hadscape material, location and design; opportunities for passive recreation; and texture and color of surface materials. ( 9. The treatment of the private areas of each lot shall be provided for SPARC review and approval. O 10. The landscape plan for this project shall be subject to SPARC review and approval. In addition to the normal areas of landscape review, SPARC shall review the plans (� for °compliance with the following: a. Provision of appropriate riparian landscaping along portion of the site contiguous to the Petaluma River, including native oaks as feasible. Provision of landscaping along river and other portions of the site visible from the river to soften the unit massing and height and provide attractive views of the site from the river. b. Provision. of landscaping to buffer the impacts of this development. Landscaping along the east and west property lines shall both screen the heavy uses which will be visible from the condominium uses and soften the impact of the rear of, the garages as viewed from off site. Landscaping shall also be provided to soften the visual impact of the mass and height of this development as viewed from Petaluma Boulevard South and to provide an attractive entryway into the city. C. The landscape plan shall emphasize the replanting of native trees, particularly along the hillside areas, along the Petaluma Boulevard South frontage and along the riverfront. It shall be recognized that additional tree landscaping of this site is required as a replacement program for the removal of existing mature trees. 11. a. None of the existing trees on -site shall be removed or disturbed by site development. Plans shall be revised to allow the retention of the 15" redwood— proposed for removal. Prior to the SPARC review of this project, the development plans shall be reviewed by a registered arborist /horticulturist, selected by staff at the developer's expense, to .ensure that no zadditional tree removal or deterioration will occur from this project. Said review shall consider the impact of development based on the present condition of remaining trees. b. In- ground fencing shall be provided around all existing trees at drip line Verification of the adequacy of the fencing shall be provided to staff by the selected arborist /horticulturist prior to the Issuance of a building permit. The arborist /horticulturist shall be retained on site to, monitor all construction and grading activity, subject to staff approval, which could impact existing trees. The cost of the on -site inspection and monitoring shall be borne by the developer. 12 74 12. The public access shall be offered for dedication_ prior to or concurrent with approval of a final map for the project. The developer shall either provide the improved public access from Petaluma Boulevard South to the river in conjunction with phase 1 or shall provide a temporary means of public access through the development. A sign indicating such temporary access shall be provided on Petaluma Boulevard South. The full length of the public access easement along the Petaluma River shall be improved in phase 1. Phase 1 shall also include the implementation of the tree replacement program and provision of landscaping along the Petaluma Boulevard South frontage, uphill of the B units, and along the riverfront. 13. All conditions of approval of the PUD development plan requiring modification of the tentative map shall be incorporated into a revised tentative map submitted for SPARC review. 14. The proposed Covenants, Conditions and Regulations for this development shall be subject to City.review and approval prior to final map approval 15. Development fees shall be as set forth in "Special Development Fees booklet dated February 7, 1990 as prepared by the City of Petaluma Community Development or at time of buildingpermit issuance. whichever is most current 16. This project shall be responsible: for the payment of Major Traffic Facilities Improvement Fees of $150.00 per daily trip end estimated to be generated by this project. Trip , generation figures shall be as determined by the City Engineer and 17. Signs shown on plan are not approved as part of this project. Sign permits must be obtained through the Building Department, and be designed to conform with the Zoning Ordinance, to staff satisfaction through the administrative SPARC' process. 18. SPARC review of building architecture shall include, in addition to standard review, consideration of opportunities to add diversity, embellishment or otherwise create greater differentiation between the unit clusters of the same type unit. COMIVIISSIONER BALSHAW:Yes COMMISSIONER READ: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON:Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE: Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT:Abstain COMMISSIONER LIBARLE:Yes COMMISSIONER TARR:Yes l�J 13 A motion was made by Commissioner Parkerson and seconded by Commissioner Libarle to recommend to the City Council approval of the vesting tentative map based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions listed below: 15 Findings (for Tentative Map) 1. No additional environmental review is necessary for this project as per CEQA Section 15162. 2. This project, as conditioned, is consistent with the City of Petaluma General Plan. 3. This project, as conditioned, is 'consistent with the City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance and the PUD district. 4. This project represents a more desirable land use than possible within an individual zoning district and meets the required findings of Section 19A -300 of the zoning (o ordinance. 0) 0 5. This project, as conditioned, is consistent with the State Subdivision Map Act and the' City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance. U Conditions (for Tentative Map) 1. The following requirements of the City Engineer shall be met, subject to his review and approval: a. All proposed grading, proposed and relocated public and private utilities (sanitary sewer, water main and storm drain) to be installed to serve this development shall require review and approval by the appropriate City department. This submittal shall be in accordance with the City's minimum design criteria. 2. Prior to filing an application for a final map, this tentative map shall be subject to review and approval of the City of Petaluma Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee. 3. Ash required by the Subdivision Map Act, "any public access route or routes and any easements along the bank of a public waterway 'river shall be expressly designated on; the tentative and final map, and such map shall expressly designate the governmental entity to which such route is dedicated and its acceptance of such dedication. 4. All conditions set forth in Resolution 86 -223 and in Resolution 88 -224 shall remain in + effect for the approval of this development plan and shall be complied with as set' forth therein, unless amended by the conditions of this project approval, subject to review and approval by City staff. IV. TWIN CREEKS, off Holly Lane - northwest of Madison Street, AP NO.s 007 - 221 -19, 136- 100 -26 and 33, FILE NO.'S 11.871, 3.381, 6.917(gb). 1. Commencement of review and consideration of Draft Environmental Impact Report (conclusion of environmental review and PUD unit development plan and tentative map review will be considered at subsequent meeting). 14 76 The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Carolyn .Mills - City Consultant on DEIR - Presented overview of DEIR; answered questions. Dave Harland - Ouesta. Engineering - Hydrology consultant for DEIR - described hydrology of project; answered questions regarding increased runoff. Stan Richie - 500 Wilmington Concerns regarding existing flooding on Wilmington; project site is 2 -2 1/2 feet lower than Wilmington; privacy concerns with 2-story homes backing existing homes on Wilmington; How will this affect Redevelopment Plan? George Beter - Ellis /Madison - Concerns regarding routing of emergency access; major pedestrian access will be created; who will maintain this area? Don Burke - Wilmington Drive - Lot same level as project site; concerns regarding loss of privacy; flooding concerns. Ms. Maggie Burton 905 Holly Lane Maps in DEIR inaccurate; traffic already a problem; many accidents; bridge is not as wide as street; project site already floods; project site is always underwater when it. rains; streets in front of McKinley School are not as wide as standard; traffic on Ellis and Madison is alreadyvery bad. Israel Polonsky - Developer - 1982 flood was a 5.0.0 -year event; 1986 flood did not flood project site bridge on Madison probably 'inadequate; all problems can be mitigated by location of windows; two accessways may not be feasible; there will not, be an added traffic problem .after this development is finished. The public hearing was continued to the Planning Commission meeting of April 24th. PLANNING_ MATTERS V. DISCUSSION ITEMS. 1. Full -sized plans vs. reduced plans -for Commission packets. 2. Referred from City Council: -� a. Institute an annual General Plan implementation progress' report. b. Improve back -on development treatment.on arterials, C. Strengthen ordinances to preserve ridgelines. d. Establish zoning for manufactured housing /mobile home development. These items were not discussed due to time constraints. ADJOURNMENT: 11:15 PM. min0327 / pcom3 15