Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Minutes 08/27/1991
473 City of Petaluma Planning Commission Minutes c� 0 ) REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 27, 1991 O CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. Q CITY HALL PETALUMA, CA U COMMISSIONERS: Present Bennett, Nelson, Parkerson* *, Rahman, Tarr, Thompson Absent Libarle* -- _ - - - Pamela Tuft,_ Principal- Planner - Teryl Phillips, Assistant Planner - Dede Dolan, Assistant Planner * Chairman * * Co- Chairman MINUTES OF MEETING OF AUGUST 13, 1991 were approved as corrected. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: DeDe Dolan, Assistant Planner was introduced. COMMISSIONER'S REPORT: None. CORRESPONDENCE: Memo on child care facility inspection; memo from staff regarding Church of'Christ (Item No. 3). APPEAL STATEMENT: Was read. 4 City of Petaluma - Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1991 NOTE: Italics = Additions &Fike vef -= - Deletions NEW BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS I. WOELFEL, 205 WEBSTER STREET, �P NO. 003- 071 -53, FILE NO. CUP91023(dd). 1. Consideration of conditional use permit to allow an accessory dwelling unit in the second floor loft area of an existing detached garage. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Hunt Moore - 203 Webster - Backyard adjacent to property in question; large building looms over backyard; Commission is responsible for quality of life in Petaluma; fence needs to be constructed for privacy - whose responsibility is it? Brent Russell - 202. Webster (across, street); Believes structure was originally proposed as a guesthouse; built right up to property lines; City should be aware that this illegal conversion is happening in many areas. Eric WoelfeI - applicant - Explained that he did not realize he was doing anything "illegal' Mr. Moore-has agre- ed_to. having- a_fence.built on his property to provide answered questions. Discussion _ - - - Pamela Tuft Described permitting /public hearing process to allow an accessory dwelling; discussed fence placement options. Commissioner Nelson - this is an existing structure .(illegal unit) is this handled any differently from any other request for an accessory dwelling? (Answer No.) Commissioner Bennett - Objects to landscaping requirement "to improve the appearance of the site" - this does - not pertain to accessory unit. Commission Tarr - SPARC should look at architecture /colors. even though unit is already built. The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Bennett and seconded by Commissioner Thompson to grant a conditional use permit to allow an accessory dwelling at 205 Webster based on, the findings and subject to the following amended conditions: _ _ . ..... COMMISSIONER NELSON: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON: Yes COMMISSIONER B_ENNETT: Yes. COMMISSIONER RAHMAN Yes COMMISSIONER TARR: Yes CHAIRMAN LIBARLE: - Absent` - COMMISSIONER TI Yes 2 City of Petaluma - Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1991 Findings: 1. The proposed accessory dwelling, as modified and conditioned, will conform to the requirements and the intent of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance. 2. The proposed accessory dwelling unit, as conditioned will conform to the requirements and intent, goals and policies of the Petaluma General Plan to encourage a variety of housing opportunities by permitting accessory dwellings units. 3. The project will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community because the proposed accessory dwelling unit would be located within an existing structure, and the applicant will be required to improve CD landscaping which will improve the appearance of the site. (3) 4. This project is categorically exempt under CEQA Section 15303, New Construction 0 of Small Structures. - U Conditions Q 1. All requirements of the Fire Marshall shall be met, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, including: The applicant shall provide a fire suppression system at normal sources of ignition. These areas are specifically at cloths dryers, kitchen stoves, furnaces, water heaters, fire places, and attic areas at vents and chimneys for these appliances and equipment (Fire 26 -19) 2. All requirements of the City Engineer shall be met, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy including: The site needs positive lot drainage and new driveway slope to dwelling verified. - 3. The, project shall be subject to review by SPARC prior to issuance of a building perirnt, with emphasis on the following: a. Modification. of plans to include 100 square feet of open space directly accessible and available for use by the accessory dwelling unit. b. Landscaping - plan as it applies to the accessory dwelling t©- 4mpFEwe-4he appearanee - ©€ -the -site, and to reduce impacts on neighboring properties. C. Architecture /paint to be reviewed to insure continuity with existing unit. d. Need for additional fencing to insure privacy for adjacent home. 4. The :rear access, including doorway and light - shall be removed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the new unit. 5. Separate gas and electric meters shall be installed.. for the proposed. dwelling -to the - -. specifications of PG &E prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 6. This project shall be responsible for the payment of special development fees adopted - by the Petaluma City Council for Sewer and Water Connection, Community Facilities Development Fees,, Dwelling Construction, School Facilities (Petaluma School District) and Traffic Mitigation. 7. The unit shall not be occupied until all Planning Commission and SPARC conditions have been met. 3 475 4 7 6City of Petaluma - Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1991 II. VISCO, 700 E. WASHINGTON STREET, AP NO,. 007- 063 -42, FILE NO. CUP91021(hg). 1. Consideration of EIQ. 2. Consideration of conditional use 'permit to allow the operation of a veterinary clinic within the existing building at 700 East Washington Street. The public, hearing was opened. SPEAKERS Ra, Visco - 7060 Sonoma Mountain Road - Applicant - answered questions. Commissioner Tarr - Is building air conditioned (concerns regarding possible noise if windows were kept open)? (Answer Yes). The public hearing was closed. - A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Nelson to direct staff to repare a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact on the following findings: COMMISSIONER NELSON: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON: Yes COMMISSIONER BENNETT: Yes - - COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: - Yes - - -- - COMMISSIONER TA RR: Yes CHAIRMAN LIBARLE:. Absent COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Yes Fin - dings 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 number, or restrict the ,range of a rare-or endangered plant or animal or eliminate 'important examples Qf 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.. Y 4. The project, as conditionally approved, does not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human 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 Rahman and seconded by Commissioner Tarr to approve a conditional -use permit based on the findings :and subject to the. following conditions: 1 2 City of Petaluma - Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1991 COMMISSIONER NELSON: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON: Yes COMMISSIONER BENNETT: Yes COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes COMMISSIONER TARR: Yes CHAIRMAN LIBARLE: Absent COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Yes- Findings 1. The proposed veterinary clinic, as conditioned, will conform to the requirements and; intent of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance. M 2. The proposed veterinary clinic, as conditioned, will conform to the requirements ® and intent, goals, and policies of the Petaluma General Plan. 3. The proposed veterinary clinic will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to U the public welfare of the community. Site Specific Conditions 477 1. All requirements of the Fire Department shall be complied with, including: a. An inventory of any chemicals and /or gas systems proposed for the operation - -of this use shall be submitted to the Fire Department-prior--to occupation of the building. 2. All. requirements of the Building Department shall be complied with, including: a. Prior to any alterations to the existing building and /or its electrical, plumbing and mechanical systems a building permit shall be obtained. 3., Then existing parking area shall be re- stripped to accommodate five parking spaces, subject to staff review and approval. 4. In all outdoor lighting fixtures bulbs that provide a soft wash of light against the building walls; but do not create- direct glare within or off the site shall be installed, subject to staff review and approval. 5. Business activities shall be limited to use of indoor areas. No outdoor storage of materials or outdoor boarding of animals shall be permitted. 6. Business-.patrons shall be encouraged -by_- clinic staff to .transport animals in closed containers, cages or by leash to prevent straying and injury of animals, and nuisances to neighboring properties. 7. An outdoor trash enclosure large enough to conceal at least three 55+ gallon - containers shall be constructed along the rear of the building, subject to staff review and ,approval, prior to occupation of the building. No disposal of clinic byproducts, organic or synthetic (feces, animal parts and medical supplies), generated from the treatment /care of animals shall be disposed of in the outdoor trash facilities. 8. All clinic byproducts, organic and - synthetic -(feces, animal parts- and medical._ supplies), generated from -the treatment /care of animals shall be disposed of -in a - 9 ,. .. - 4 7 scily of Petaluma - Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1991 separate receptacle(s) and kept inside the building. A plan for the proper disposal of such byproducts shall be submitted to staff for review and approval prior to occupation of the building. Standard Conditional Use Permit Conditions 9. Any outdoor advertising signs shall be submitted for review and approval of the Community Development Department. All signs must conform to the Zoning Ordinance and be, compatible with the building and surroundings. 10. All planting shall be maintained in good growing condition. Such maintenance shall include, where appropriate pruning, mowing, weeding, cleaning, of debris and trash, ,fertilizing and regular watering. Whenever necessary, planting shall `be replaced with other plant .materials to insure continued compliance with applicable landscaping requirements. Required irrigation systems shall be fully maintained in sound operating condition with heads periodically cleaned and replaced when missing to insure continued regular watering. of landscape areas, and health and vitality' of landscape materials. 11. This use permit may be recalled to the Planning Commission for review at any time due to complaints regarding lack of compliance with conditions of approval, traffic congestion, noise generation, or other adverse operating characteristics. At such. time, the Commission may revoke the use permit or add /modify conditions of approval. III. CHURCH OF CHRIST, 1487 ELY BOULEVARD, PORTION OF AP NO. 136 -120- 11, FILE NO. REZ91006(tp). 1. Consideration of an E 2. Consideration of amendment to the Kingsmill Subdivision Planned Unit Development (PUD) District to permit. development of a church site within the Corona /Ely area. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: - Truman Whorton 901 St. Francis Drive - Church of Christ applicant representative - Surprised by a few of the recommended conditions; design of building was done with Corona /Ely Specific Plan requirements in mind -entire west elevation will not be visible at one time; social hall will not be used when services are offered; questioned hidden" costs associated with_ "gateway' cos.ts;are undefined some. of the trees on the site.;are. willows -and- - - need to be removed -.the oaks can stay; the windmill. was ,given away to Benia__min /Tuxhorn - now its being given back! mothers in the congregation: have safety concerns about the: windmill; nervous about having an :archaeological site review - it could cause delays; SPARC submittal has been turned into the City for isix months - -- anxious to get through City review what° arek costs of Assessment District? Pamela Tuft - Answered applicant's concerns; staff will. support elimination, of trees. or - windmill; archaeological site survey should not' impact - Church. ' of _ Christ building timeframe; Sonoma Mountain Parkway Landscape Assessment District costs have not been. determined. yet; Willow .trees as well as all other major- trees on-site must be preserved. Commissioner Parkerson - . -SPARC should be looking for architectural design. excellence.- - for -this. site. - - - -- T City of Petaluma - Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1991 4 7 '9 Commissioner Rahman - Does the City have any idea of the costs for the Landscape Assessment District? Pamela Tuft - Proportionally charged based on project site's frontage - no costs have been determined. Commissioner Bennett This development will be included in the Landscape Assessment District. ' Commissioner Thompson - Will church and', social hall buildings -be on the low part of the site?. (Answer :- Yes). - Is parking, required to be - away from the street in the Specific Plan? (Answer � Yes). Commissioner Tarr - Is windmill to be moved to preserve it? (Answer - Yes). Pamela Tuft - (In response to concerns of Commissioner Thompson) - consideration of /aA,l views to Sonoma Mountains can be addressed through SPARC review. W I M The public hearing was closed. - 0 A motion � � was .made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Rahman to recommend to the City Council approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration based on the U following, findings: COMMISSIONER NELSON: Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON: Yes COMMISSIONER BENNETT: Yes COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes COMMISSIONER TARR: Yes _. CHAIRMAN LIBARLE_Absent_- -- COMMIS' IONER THOMPSON: Yes 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 number or restrict the',t 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. i 4. The . project, as_ conditionally approved, does not have environmental effects -which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. 5. The project is consistent with and further promotes the objectives, goals, and policies of the General Plan and the Corona /Ely Specific Plan. - - - A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Nelson to - recommend to the City Council approval of -the proposed PUD Development' Plan based on the findings and subject to the following amended conditions: �I COMMISSIONER NELSON:. Yes ._COMMISSIONER PARKERSON: Yes _ 7 rty of Petaluma - Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1991 COMMISSIONER BENNETT Yes COMMISSIONER RAHMAN: Yes COMMISSIONER TARR: Yes CHAIRMAN-LIB ARLE: Absent COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Yes Findings The amended 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. The amended development plan, as conditioned, presents a unified and organized arrangement of buildings and service facilities which are appropriate in relation to adjacent and nearby properties. and associated proposed projects and that adequate landscaping and /or screening is included if necessary to insure compatibility. 3. The natural and scenic qualities of the site will be protected through the implementation of tree preservation conditions of approval, and that adequate available public and private spaces are designated on the amended Unit Development. Plan. 4. The development of the subject property, in the manner proposed by the applicant and conditioned by the City, will not be detrimental to the public welfare, will be in .-the . best interests . of the .City, and will. be. in keeping-with - thegeneral intent -and- spirit of the zonng regulations of.the City of.Petaluma and with the Petaluma General Plan. 5. The PUD District is .proposed on property which has a suitable relationship to one or more thoroughfares (Sonoma. Mountain Parkway) to carry any additional traffic generated by the development. Conditions L Development of the proposed 3.9 acre church site` shall be hinted to the following uses: a. Principal and accessory uses as shown on. the development plan: primary church building social hall two single - family residences b. Conditional uses permitted in the northeast corner of the site: All principal and conditionally permitted use& identified under the R -1 Zoning District. 2. Parking shall be provided for each of the- proposed =uses in conformance with Zoning Ordinance Standards. - ti 3. All proposed buildings shall conform to relevant provisions contained in the Corona /Ely Specific Plan, including restrictions on. height and setback along the Sonoma Mountain Parkway frontage,, architectural quality, location of parking, and designation of the site as a. Gateway. Specific Development Standards (Le., height, setback,-lot coverage, etc.) shall - not -be .required. Rather, each building shall be- - I%i : p . City of Petaluma - Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1991 I reviewed in context of the surrounding development for architectural and site design compatibility. 4. A parcel map shall be recorded prior to issuance of development permits for this site to achieve the following: a. A separate legal parcel shall be created for the church site. b. Right-of-way and public utility easements shall be dedicated as deemed necessary by City staff along the Sonoma Mountain Parkway and Windmill Lane street frontages of the site. CD c. An agreement providing for cross- access and maintenance of the shared driveway along Sonoma Mountain Parkway shall be executed and recorded 0 by the owners of the church site and the McDowell property located directly h to the south, subject to staff review and approval. U d. Parcel B (the narrow strip of land between the church property and Castle Drive) created by Phase I Final Map for Kingsmill Subdivision shall be merged with the church property. P 5. Prior to application for SPARC review, a study of the site shall be conducted for archaeological sensitivity/significance. Cost of archaeological study be borne by the project proponent, with selection of consultant to staff approval. 6. Each phase of this project shall be subject to Site Plan and Architectural Review with emphasis placed on the following;issues: a. Proposed architecture for the primary church building shall be modified to �! offer additional interest warranted by the Gateway status of the site and u improved design linkage with the rural elements fostered within the Kingsmill high- amenity area. Consideration should. be given to the massing and siting of the large buildings to insure preservation of vistas/corridors to I, Sonoma Mountains. b. I � Architecture for all future buildings proposed shall be reviewed for compatibility context of surrounding development. h c. Landscaping shall be provided along street frontages in conformance with the Sonoma Mountain Parkway Master Landscape Plan and the Kingsmill j Subdivision Master Landscape Plan. d. -A landscape -plan for on -site landscape areas shall be- developed. Plans shall include provisions for interim landscaping in undeveloped (future phase) areas. Existing trees shall be preserved and incorporated into the plan. e. �� Noise attenuating features shall be incorporated into construction plans to.- �' reduce traffic noise impacts to acceptable levels as determined by staff for buildings located along Sonoma Mountain Parkway. _ f. Windmill relocation and preservation in accordance with the Corona /Ely Specific Plan. -7. - . The; following- requirements of the -City Engineer shall -be met: - I' i j 9 482 City of Petaluma - Planning Commission Minutes - August 27, 1991 b. Positive lot drainage to the public streets shall be provided. C. Minimum 30' driveway width to be provided at street on Castle Drive. 8. Property owner shall participate in the Sonoma Mountain Parkway Benefit Assessment District. 9. Any outdoor advertising signs shall be submitted for review and a proval of SPARC orthe Community Develop merit. Department. All signs must co orm to the Zoning Ordinance and be compatible with the building and surroundings: 10. This project shall be subJect to imposition of all applicable, special development fees. 11. Property owner -shall enter into an agreement the City to provide for annexation of this property to the Kingsmill Subdivision landscape Assessment District. DISCUSSION ITEM: - Childcare facility inspections and regulations; drop -in care versus full -time card; transition of inspection responsibility from Fire Marshal to Building Inspection Division. AD.101JIt MENT 8:40'p M. min0827 / pcom15 10