Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 01/12/1988PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION January 12, 1988 REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, 7 :00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL PETALUMA, CALIF. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL m COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bennett, Doyle, Libarle, Parkerson, Read, Sobel, Tarr COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None. STAFF: Warren Salmons, Planning Director Pamela Tuft, Principal Planner Kurt Yeiter, Associate Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of December 8, 1987 were approved As printed. PUBLIC COMMENT None. COMMISSIONER COMMENT: None. COMMISSIONER REPORT None. CORRESPONDENCE None. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Director Salmons requested that the Planning Department 1988 -89 goals be placed on the January 26 agenda and distributed copies of proposed 1988 -89 goals. READING OF APPEAL RIGHTS NEW BUSINESS I. ENERGY UNLIMITED, 434 PAYRAN STREET, AP NO. 005 - 050 -51, (File No. 1.471). 1. Six month follow -up review on aerobic studio expansion conditional use permit. 1 E A motion was made by Commissioner Bennett and seconded by Commissioner Tarr to renew the use permit for Energy Unlimited based on the one finding and one condition listed below: COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER Finding BENNETT -YES DOYLE - YES PARKERSON -YES READ - YES. SOBEL - YES TARR - YES LIBARLE - YES 1. That there is substantial agreement among the operators of the businesses sharing the building at 434 Payran Street that the traffic and circulation difficulties on site have been substantially and acceptably mitigated by the measures previously required as conditions of approval of the expansion of the use permit of Energy Unlimited. Conditions 1. Conditions shall remain the same as those previously approved for the expansion of this use permit. II. MR. PHILLY, 177 N. MCDOWELL BLVD., AP NO. 007- 340 -07, (File No. 1.565). 1. Consideration of conditional use permit application for fast food restaurant. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Owen McDonough - 1713 Granada Court, Petaluma - Project applicant - Answered questions, stated. he should not be held responsible for conditions 3, 4, 5 and 6. Stated that shopping center owner Mr. Felix would be repairing the trash enclosure, filling in the pot holes in the asphalt and would paint the transformer. The public hearing was closed. A motion. was made by Commissioner Bennett and seconded by Commissioner Parkerson to direct staff to prepare a mitigated negative declaration based on the following findings:. COMMISSIONER B'ENNETT - YES COMMISSIONER DOYLE - YES COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - YES COMMISSIONER READ - YES COMMISSIONER SOBEL - YES COMMISSIONER TARR ABSTAIN (economic conflict of interest) COMMISSIONER LIBARLE - YES 2 L 3 Findings a. Due to the developed nature of the existing site the project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, :substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause 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 major periods of California history or prehistory. b. the project as conditionally approved does not have the potential to ,achieve short term to the disadvantage of long term environmental goals. C. I .Because the project does not include additional phased development the ,project as conditionally approved does not have impacts which are ;individually limited but cumulatively considerable. d. The project as conditionally approved does not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly. e. The Petaluma Plaza contains adequate parking to accommodate this use. A motion was made by Commissioner Sobel and seconded by Commissioner Parkerson to approve a use permit based on the findings and subject to the conditions, as amended, listed below: COMMISSIONER BENNETT - YES COMMISSIONER DOYLE - YES COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - YES COMMISSIONER READ YES COMMISSIONER SOBEL - YES COMMISSIONER TARR - ABSTAIN COMMISSIONER LIBARLE - 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 };- -A -program. of -dai}y litrter- eeHeetrorr- sham -ire- eenthtctc - tcr- izzaecre -that an- atctrrmt}ation- �f- on -arrd- off - site not •-oc�. 3 H 1.2. Any outdoor mechanical equipment, satellite dishes, and any rooftop equipment shall be fully visually screened upon installation and prior to commencement of use., subject to staff review and approval. 2.; 3. One large, pothole and several smaller ones in front of the building shall be patched as needed, prior to final building inspection and occupancy anal - tammenee=e rt- - - of-tease, subject to staff review and approval. 3. 4: The existing trash enclosure shall be repaired rior to occupancy. repfacecl- with -one riziclr nee 9- aH­Eritq� tarrciards- r. .-= correrete - Lift -trp or- �na�onrSr- wad} sr- 3t�e- avp- gaYr�e-- mea }- �- a-te�, -- concrete-- rcH =eest -pfd ; ete. }.--- f3esigrr- is-- sa�rject - to- staff- review -- arid- �.pproera�- arret- shad- be completed =Fri `to- ixzab- bark} ng inspection rd- zommenceriieirt�f_�xse- f��l- -d�ct' ails- m�s�t- Vie- - shown- prr-bt�lding- Permit =Plans 5---- Trztslr -enz} Dear. e=- screerr- siza�l - be- �mte+. �tec�- froar- erehittslar-- cnovetnents with - six-+ri-ciT- curbing tacatiorr-ter- aff�pprovaf. b ---- �'�-tr�airsforraer-- bex -at- tine- rearef- the- btiii�iirg - shall- b� -d� -from view = -to =- staff-- ava-- witi� - -a -- material- to- -mtc -- {ire-- 7retiv- ti-ssk enz}csecre ; - prior- to- firrai- irtirrldiYrg= inspeetirnr -$ncl t -of�se . Desig=r -is-- subject --to-- - approval. - --AH= ails-- .must- be she arlr bn- b�xCliirg- permit- -plairs, 4: e-7-. The rear door shall be repainted prior to 'final building inspection and commencement of use- 5. $. All signing shall conform to the Petaluma Plaza Sign Program. No signs shall be erected prior to issuance of a sign permit.. 6. 9r This, use permit may be recalled to the Planning Commission at any time due to complaints regarding noise generation or other operating characteristics. At such time, the Commission may repeal the use permit or add modified conditions of approval. 7. -9. Construction activities shall comply with applicable Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code performance standards (noise, dust, odor, etc.). g.} }- There shall be no outdoor storage of materials or equipment. 9.4:2r Requirements of the Sonoma County Health Department shall be met a. "Prior to issuance of a building, permit, complete plans and specifications must be submitted to our Department for °review and approval." 10. -13-. Requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be, met:. a. Two sets of corrected plans. shall be submitted to the Fire Marshal for the Ansul System. 4 y �, � 5 A. Consideration of EIQ. `2. Consideration of a 17 -lot single- family dwelling subdivision. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: George Heineman - 116 Banff Way - Asked who to contact to get recording of meeting and minutes. Was given Mr. Salmons' name and telephone number. The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Read and seconded by Commissioner Doyle to recommend Council approval of a Negative Declaration based on the following findin COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER Findings ;s: BENNETT - YES DOYLE - YES PARKERSON - YES READ - YES SOBEL - YES TARR - YES LIBARLE - YES 1. The project as conditionally approved does not have the potential to .degrade the quality of the environment, to substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause 'a fish or wildlife population ito drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or ;animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare G 'b. Installation permit shall . be obtained from the Fire Marshal's Office. Fee is $25.00. , c. Remote pull station . location shall be approved by Fire Marshal. �d. Fire extinguisher shall be 2A rated ABC and 40BC rated Dry Chemical type. Locations changed on plan, Sheet A4, by the Fire Marshal. e. Install exit sign-at direction change of corridor with arrow. f. Extend sprinkler system to cover installation of tenant space alterations. �g . Permit required from Fire Marshal's Office for sprinkler system alteration prior to work being , started. Two sets of plans are required. h. No extension cords. All equipment and appliances to be direct plug in.. J. Provide metal or flame retardants plastic waste cans. Post address. at or near main entry door - minimum two inch letters." III. zCITY OF PETALUMA, BOND SUBDIVISION, MARIA DRIVE /BANFF WAY, AP NO. 149 - 280 -45, (File No. 6.866) . A. Consideration of EIQ. `2. Consideration of a 17 -lot single- family dwelling subdivision. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: George Heineman - 116 Banff Way - Asked who to contact to get recording of meeting and minutes. Was given Mr. Salmons' name and telephone number. The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Read and seconded by Commissioner Doyle to recommend Council approval of a Negative Declaration based on the following findin COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER Findings ;s: BENNETT - YES DOYLE - YES PARKERSON - YES READ - YES SOBEL - YES TARR - YES LIBARLE - YES 1. The project as conditionally approved does not have the potential to .degrade the quality of the environment, to substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause 'a fish or wildlife population ito drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or ;animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare G a or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory. .2. There is no significant vegetation slated for removal as part of this project. 3. The project as conditionally approved -does. not have the potential to achieve short -term to the 'disadvantage of . long - -term environmental goals. 4. The „project as conditionally approved does not have 'impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable. 5. The project as conditionally approved does not have: environmental effects which will :cause substantial adverse effects on .human beings either directly or indirectly. 6. Traffic from the project will be limited because of the limited number of home sites available.. 8. Identified impacts relative to privacy protection from adjacent open space and= public lands will be mitigated to acceptable levels by the incorporation of an adequate fence design during PUD and SPARC review. A motion was made by Commissioner Doyle and seconded. by Commissioner Parker.son to recommend Council approval of Bond Subdivision based on the following conditions: COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER BENNETT YES DOYLE - YES PARKERSON - YES READ - YES SOBEL - YES TARR - YES LIBARLE - YES Findings 1. The proposed subdivision, together with provision for its design and improvement is consistent with the General Plan. 2. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in said General Plan. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. 4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development as conditioned herein. 5. The design of the subdivision will not cause substantial environmental damage and no substantial or avoidable injury will occur to fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6 6. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not .cause serious public health problems as conditionally approved. 7. Response to concerns of neighborhood compatibility will be insured through the review of a PUD development plan package prior to development. Conditions 1. As required by the City Engineer: N a. The developer shall comply with the- Petaluma Municipal Code Section 20.36.030 which erquires the developer to pay storm drainage impact fees (as calculated in Chapter 17.30) on construction in all sections of the City of Petaluma. b. The proposed lot line adjustment as shown on the tentative map shall be approved prior to recordation of the final map. c. Prior to the issuance of any foundation permit, lot pad elevations shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer. d. Signing and striping shall conform to the City of Petaluma. e. All existing broken sidewalks, curbs and /or gutter shall be removed and replaced` as required by the City Engineer. f . The proposed sanitary sewer located in an easement on City property shall be ductile iron pipe. g . To avoid the skewed crossing of the proposed water main and i existing storm drain, the water main shall be relocated into an easement along the westerly frontage of Lot 9. h. Sideyard swales shall be required along Lots 4, 5, 14, 16 and 17 to avoid runoff from this development into the park and school properties. 2. Prior to the issuance of any development permit, the owner./ developer shall process an application for rezoning to PUD in conformance with Article 19A of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance. 3. Public utility access and easement locations and widths shall be subject to approval by PG &E, Pacific Telephone and the City Engineer and `shall be shown on the Final Map as necessary. 4. All utilities shall be placed underground, as required by Code. 5. Concurrently with completion of public improvements the project developer shall construct post and cable fencing along the interface `between the public street and Bond Park, complete all necessary alterations Amp rovements to existing park "amenities, and provide a pedestrian /bike path connection to existing park paths subject to 'review and approval of SPARC and City staff. 7 0 6. The owner/ developer. shall satisfy City policies and programs with regard to providing housing, land, in -lieu fees or alternate measures for affordable housing for very low, low and moderate income households, prior to or concurrent with Final Map approval;. 7. During the course of development, if archeological materials are found, all work in the vicinity of the find shall be stopped and a qualified archeologist contact to evaluate the materials and make recommendations for mitigation as necessary. 8. A ;minimum of 10% of the lots shall be .developed with homes designed to be substantially different in architectural style and materials, subject to SPARC review and approval. 9. Proposed street name shall be subject to approval by the Street Naming Committee. 10. Any retaining walls _located on property lines resulting in a difference in grade from lot to lot in excess of 18" shall be concrete.. 11. Side and rear lot lines for lots abutting_ the park and vacant school site properties shall, be developed with a common property line fence of 8 in :height consisting, of 1 6' of solid wood -, 2' of lattice with the exception of front yard setbacks, subject to SPARC review. 12. Any signs erected to advertise or direct persons to the project shall meet the requriements of the City sign ordinance and obtain a sign permit from the City. 13. Driveways onto Maria Drivei shall be limited to 3 lots (' #s 12,, 13 and 14). 14. The street width shall reflect a reduced street standard, curb to curb, subject to City staff review and approval. Standard Applicable Fee Conditions 15. The applicant is notified that the project site is in the Bernard Eldredge attendance area of the Old Adobe School District and is therefore subject to School Facility Fees. 16. The project developer shall execute a binding agreement which shall stipulate that upon .close of escrow of each residential, dwelling unit in Bond Subdivision, 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 Major Facilities Traffic Mitigation. Fee prior to close of; escrow of any unit(s), the fee for said unit(s) and all subsequent units in this project thereafter be either $150.,00 per trip end' or the Major Facilities Traffic Mitigation Fee, whichever is less on a per unit basis. 17. Developer shall participate on a fair share basis in any future assessment districts or other funding mechansims formed to imrpove areawide flooding or other subregional problems for which. development 3 I ;� :-sex, a mlg F7�' ►lJ of this property is found- to be a contributing factor. Major Capital Facilities Fees shall also be applicable in an amount to - be determined by the City Council prior to Final Map approval and payable at time- of development permit issuance. 18. The developer shall create a landscape maintenance assessment district to maintain all landscaping and irrigation installed within the public right -of -way of the project not normally associated with private yard maintenance, including entryway landscape areas, median islands, and unused areas of right -of -way and cul -de -sac landscape islands subject to approval of City staff prior to final map approval. All landscaping (� contained in a proposed landscape maintenance assessment district shall be maintained for a period of one (1) year by the project sponsor prior to acceptance by the district. 19. :Project shall be subject to the payment of park and recreation fees as co required by Petaluma Municipal Code. IV. CITY ATHLETIC FIELD, E. WASHINGTON STREET, AP NO. 136- 07 -22, '(File No. 3.375) . 1. Consideration of EIQ. 2. Consideration of prezoning of 100 acres to " A " - Agricultural. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: None. 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 a Negative Declaration based on the following findings: COMMISSIONER BENNETT - YES COMMISSIONER DOYLE - YES COMMISSIONER PARKERSON -YES COMMISSIONER READ - YES COMMISSIONER SO.BEL - YES COMMISSIONER TARR - YES COMMISSIONER LIBARLE - YES Findings 1. The proposed project is consistent with the applicable provisions of the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The prezoning leading to a annexation is consistent with applicable State Law (Government Code 35012) and Sonoma County LAFCO. 3. An Initial Study has been prepared and has determined that no "significant adverse impacts are anticipated by the prezoning. 9 ME 4. The prezoning will not trigger. growth-inducing 'impacts due to development restrictions as contained in current City policies. A motion was made by Commissioner Read and seconded by Commissioner Sobel to recommend to the City Council prezoning to Agricultural for this project, based on the following 'findings COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER Fin din s BENNETT - YES' D.OY.LE YES PARKERSO,N - YES READ - YES SOBEL: - YES TARR - YES LIBARLE YES 1. The prezoning is in the .best interest of the City of Petaluma. 2. A minor amendment of: the existing Sphere of Influence, is presently being processed by the City of Petaluma to encompass the entire 100 acres. 3:. That the proposed prezoning is in general conformity with the Petaluma General Plan. 4. That the public necessity, convenience and general welfare require or clearly permit the adoption of the proposed prezoning. CONTINUED HEARING V. MARINA OFFICE PARK ASSOCIATES (MOPA) (PETALUMA,. MARINA), LAKEVILLE HIGHWAY AT .BAYWOOD DRIVE, AP NO.'s, 005- 060 -06, 24, 27, 28, (File No. 3.351) 1. Continued consideration of rezoning to Planned Community District for marina, office and hotel project. The continued public hearing was commenced. A verbal staff report was presented The Commission discussed the report. proposes uses. SPEAKERS:. None. The public hearing was closed. Staff answered questions on the A motion was made. by Commissioner Bennett and seconded by Commissioner Parkerson to recommend the City Council the rezoning to P.CD, with all areas currently zoned FP -C remaining as such., based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed below. Ito] cdai"im_ -:r• .. 11 COMMISSIONER BENNETT - YES COMMISSIONER DOYLE - YES COMMISSIONER PARKERSON YES COMMISSIONER READ - YES COMMISSIONER SOBEL - YES COMMISSIONER' TARR - YES COMMISSIONER LIBARLE YES Findings n (Pursuant to Zoning. Ordinance 19 -500) . � V 1. !The proposed rezoning and development described by its PCD program is in substantial harmony with the General Plan of the City of Petaluma, and is coordinated with existing and planned development of the surrounding areas and, further, the public interest, convenience and general welfare will be furthered by the proposed amendment. 2. The streets and thoroug- hfares proposed are. suitable and adequate to serve the proposed uses and the anticipated traffic which will be ,?generated thereby. Incorporation of conditional uses in the PCD - :program allow incremental" review of some uses most likely to create too much traffic. 3. Development of the °P -C District will be initiated within a reasonable 'time. 4. 'Development will be appropriate in area., location, and overall planning to the purpose intended; and that the development will be in harmony with or improve upon the character of the surrounding areas. 5. xThe development will be appropriate in area, location and overall planning to the purpose intended; that the design and development standards are such a's to create an environment of sustained desirability and stability. (Pursuant to State and Local Environmental Review Procedures) . 6. The City is committed to implement measures to mitigate potential significant adverse effects of this development through the design, construction, and on -going management of the marina facilities. 7. Requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines' Section 15091 are satisfied because changes or alterations have been "required in or incorporated into the project which avoid or substantially lessen the potentially significant, environmental effects .identified in the EIR and further identified in the following sub-findings: A. Traffic The City Council hereby' finds that potentially significant impacts to traffic circulation will be substantially lessened by all of the -following measures which have been incorporated into the project as Condition Nos. 1,3,4. 11 12 B, Flood /Drainage.. The City Council hereby finds that potentially signi icant impacts to the site's water runoff and corresponding effects to areawide flooding due to installation of impervious surfaces and fill have. been substantially lessened by Condition No. 5. C. Archaeological. The City Council hereby finds that the possibility df discovering and damaging subsurface prehistoric and /or historic archaeological materials within the project boundaries will be avoided by the halting of construction as required in Condition No. 13.. D Water Quality/Sedimentation. The City Council hereby finds that .the possible adverse effects to water quality due, to sedimentation or pollution caused, by this project will be lessened to a level of insignificance by the requirements of Condition No.. 1.9, 20 and 21. E. Wet -land Habitat The City Council hereby finds: that potentially significant adverse 'impacts to wetland habitat areas will be mitigated through designs already incorporated in the project design and requirements of Condition 'No. 2,12,16,17,19 and 21. 8. A downstream erosion monitoring and levee repair program that may minimize property damage from project- related increases In shoreline erosion (i.e., due to increased boat traffic) shall be considered. by the City after completion, of the marina upon evidence that a significant increase in erosion has, in fact, occurred. CONDITIONS .(.To be implemented by the private sponsor, MO.PA) . 1. Maximum floor area of office., retail commercial, restaurant, and hotel uses shall not exceed a total' of 250., 000 square feet without prior city approval through a PCD program amendment or rezone to PUD . Square footage allotments for each- use, category shall conform to those shown in the PCD program and shall be confirmed by the project sponsor upon request of the City., 2. Pedestrian access across the property to the water's edge shall be provided. Access along all water frontages shall be encouraged to the ,greatest amount -feasible, considering preservation of wetland habitats, security for berths, etc. 3. Major Traffic Facilities Improvement Fees: The project sponsors shall, .prior to issuance of a building permit, pay a fee of $150.00 per daily trip end estimated to be generated by each permit. Trip generation figures shall be as determined by the City Engineer. If the City establishes a Major Facilities Traffic Mitigation fee prior to issuance of a building permit., the fee for said project shall thererinafter be either $150.00 per trip end or the major facilities' traffic mitigation fee, which ever is less. A binding agreement per Condition 4 shall be regarded 12 as a credit with respect to a Major Traffic Facilities Improvement Fee 8. All site plan and architectural improvements shall be subject to SPARC review and approval .prior to commencement. SPARC review shall also be coordinated with review by other responsible agencies and permitting authorities; specifically, the police and fire departments shall be contacted to assertain whether security programs and emergency response plans can be coordinated with project design and operations (e.g. security .guards, lighting., fire equipment, hydrant placement, etc.) . 9. Maximum landscaping within project parking areas should be encouraged in order to minimize the visual impact associated with the extensive paved area and large numbers of parked vehicles, subject to SPARC approval. 10. A coordinated system of signing, lighting, and landscaping should be extended from the project to Lakeville Highway in an effort to clearly identify project entrances and to strengthen the connection between the project and other Lakeville development, subject to SPARC approval. 11. A master sign program shall be submitted for review as part of the SPARC submission package. Any signs erected to advertise the project or businesses therein shall meet the requirements of the City sign ordinance, as amended by the PCD program. A sign permit shall 'be obtained from the City prior to installation. 12. SPARC review of the project shall specifically include consideration of the following items: 1.3 13 obligation. 4. Applicant shall execute and record a binding agreement committing to Lakeville Highway improvements via an assessment district or other funding mechanism subject to approval by the City Engineer. Amount Of contribution may be up to 50� per square foot of land area. 5. The 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 improvements and grading shall comply with 0) the Sonoma County Mater Agency's Design Criteria. 6. The privately sponsored portion of the project is subject to Community Facilities Fees. co (To be implemented by both the private sponsor and City for their respective portions of the project) . 7. A reasonable effort should be made by the City and the applicant to accommodate the rowing club's needs onsite since the site still appears to be the most appropriate location for such a use. 8. All site plan and architectural improvements shall be subject to SPARC review and approval .prior to commencement. SPARC review shall also be coordinated with review by other responsible agencies and permitting authorities; specifically, the police and fire departments shall be contacted to assertain whether security programs and emergency response plans can be coordinated with project design and operations (e.g. security .guards, lighting., fire equipment, hydrant placement, etc.) . 9. Maximum landscaping within project parking areas should be encouraged in order to minimize the visual impact associated with the extensive paved area and large numbers of parked vehicles, subject to SPARC approval. 10. A coordinated system of signing, lighting, and landscaping should be extended from the project to Lakeville Highway in an effort to clearly identify project entrances and to strengthen the connection between the project and other Lakeville development, subject to SPARC approval. 11. A master sign program shall be submitted for review as part of the SPARC submission package. Any signs erected to advertise the project or businesses therein shall meet the requirements of the City sign ordinance, as amended by the PCD program. A sign permit shall 'be obtained from the City prior to installation. 12. SPARC review of the project shall specifically include consideration of the following items: 1.3 13 14 a. Use of compact parking stalls to increase overall amount of parking, b. Provisions for adequate amounts of boat trailer parking, c,. Barriers to .restrict human and pet access to wetlands, and d. Accommodations for bi'cycl'ists. 13. Should' any subsurface archaeological materials including shell, bone, obsidian, artifacts, and' burials, be uncovered during project construction, all work within a 30 -meter radius of the discovery shall 'be halted, and a qualified professional archaeologist retained to determine the nature of the discovery, evaluate its .importance, and recommend further action as necessary. 14. All construction. activity should be limited to weekdays, Saturdays, and non - holidays:. Pile driving and other construction activities should be limited to daytime hours (8:00 AM to 7:00 PM')' or as extended per City Engineer's approval. 15,. Water conservation measures shall be incorporated, into project design, subject to review and approval through the SPARC review process. 16. The edge of the wetlands preserve shall' be clearly posted with - signs instructing marina users 'and visitors to avoid disturbing wildlife. 17. Use of native trees, shrubs,, plants, and grasses in the project landscaping scheme is recommended to improve habitat for local - .species. Groundcover on embankment slopes is also desirable, where feasible, to reduce erosion processes. (For City implementation,) . 18. All infrastructure necessary to serve the project (i.e., 'roads turning lanes; water, sewer, and power) shall be. installed to the satisfacation of the City Engineer prior Io the opening of the marina facilities to the public. 1'9. On -site wetland areas should be avoided in disposing of dredged materials. 20. Dredging of the marina entrance channel shall occur after excavation of the • marina basin is completed to minimize sediment loading in the river. 21. Berth lease agreements or other brochure should inform. berth users of the existence and vulnerability of shoreline habitats and wetland areas an instruct boaters how to avoid disturbing wildlife. _ The standard berth 'agreements could also set specific wildlife protection requirements as lease conditions (e.,g. , control of pets, etc.) . ADJOURNMENT 8:35 PM. 14