HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/22/1988� 1.
LM
i
PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION March 22, 1988
REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, 7:00 p.m.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL PETALUMA, CALIF.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
ROLL CALL
i
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bennett, Doyle, Libarle *, Parkerson, Read,
Q Tarr
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Sobel
STAFF: Warren Salmons., Planning Director
Pamela Tuft, Principal Planner
Jenny Cavanagh, Planning Technician
Chairman*
APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of March 8, 1988 were approved with a
correction to wording on Page 11.
PUBLIC COMMENT Doug Caulfield - 205 Casa de Arro o - Anna's Meadows
- drainage and traffic concerns. Landscaping outside o wall - does it have
to be irrigated? Option A (interior lots within subdivision) on tot lot is
most realistic.
Calli "e Beckler - 2034 Crinella Drive - Does not understand new access to
Lot #76 on Anna's Meadow's Map; will there be City streets on three sides
of her house?
COMMISSIONER COMMENT None.
COMMISSIONER REPORT None.
CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence distributed relating to agenda items.
DIRE'CTOR'S REPORT Feedback from Council meetings, development
objectives for 1 "989 Allotment System; Sunnyslope EIR Scoping Session; new
Growth Management ;System adopted; upcoming meetings: Scoping for EIR
Sunn,yslope Assessment - March 31; FEMA meeting, April 7; one -year
anniversary of new General Plan; Zoning Ordinance update ideas needed.
READING OF APPEAL RIGHTS
50
OLD BUSINESS
I. ANNA's MEADOWS, YOUNG AMERICA HOMES, SOUTH MCDOWELL /CASA
GRANDE, AP NO. 017- 040 -06, 23 (File No. 6.882) .
Continued from 3/8[88.
1. Consideration of EIQ .
2. Consideration of rezoning from : R -1- 6,500 to PUD.
3. Consideration of Tentative Map to create 76 single - family dwelling
lots.
This public hearing was closed at the Planning Commission meeting of March
8, 1988.
General Commission discussion.
A motion . was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner
Doyle to recommend to City Council the approval of a Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the Anna's Meadow PUD and tentative map based on the
findings listed below:
COMMISSIONER
BENNETT - Yes
COMMISSIONER
D:OYLE
- Yes
COMMISSIONER
P'ARKERSON - No
COMMISSIONER
READ
_ Yes
COMMISSIONER
SOBEL
- Absent
COMMISSIONER
TARR.
- Yes
CHAIRMAN LIBARLE -
Yes
Findings for Negative Declaration:
(project does not meet GP goals)
1. The project as conditionally approved does not have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment, to substantially reduce the
habitat of 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 major
periods of California history or pre- history.
2. The project as conditionally approved does not jeopardize long term
environmental goals.
3. The project as. condition_ ally approved does not have environmental
effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human. beings
either directly or indirectly.
4. The effects of traffic generated. by the project will be mitigated by
project design and conditions of approval. .
5. Homes within the project located abutting major streets will be
protected from noise by project design and conditions of approval.
6
51
•
S�
A motion was made
Tarr to recommend
findings and subject
by Commissioner
approval of the
to the conditions
COMMISSIONER
BENNETT - Yes
COMMISSIONER
DOYLE - Yes
COMMISSIONER
PARKERSON - No -
COMMISSIONER
READ - Yes - (but
COMMISSIONER
SO.BEL - Absent
COMMISSIONER
TARR - Yes
CHAIRMAN LIBARLE - Yes
PUD Findings:
1. That' the
use of t
possible
districts.
Doyle and seconded by Commissioner
Anna's Meadows PUD based on the
listed below:
does not meet GP goals.
against Alternate A) .
development plan as conditioned, results in a more desirable
he land, and a better physical environment than would be
under any single zoning district or combination of zoning
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 or nearby properties and
that adequate landscaping and /or screening is included if necessary to
insure compatibility.
3. That the natural and scenic qualities of the site are protected to the
extent that they are conclusive to pub safety and welfare, with
.adequate available public and private spaces desig on the Unit
Development Plan.
4. `That the development of the subject
�by the applicant and conditioned by
to the public welfare, will be in the
be in keeping with the general i
regulations of the City of Petaluma
Plan.
property, in the manner proposed
the City, 'will not be detrimental
best interests of the City and will
ntent and spirit of the zoning
and with the Petaluma General
5. That the PUD District is proposed on property which has
relationship to one (1) or more thoroughfares (McDowell
South, Casa Grande Road) ; and that said thoroughfares ar<
to carry any additional traffic generated by the development.
PUD ,Conditions:
a suitable
Boulevard
adequate
1. 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 City Council Resolution No. 84 -199 N.C.S. , 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.
2. ;The applicant shall provide for perpetual maintenance of all landscaped
areas (including street trees) , and sound walls contained on public
property or within the right -of -way, not including median islands and
M
tot lot., to the satisfaction of the: Directors of Community Development
and Parks and Recreation and subject to final approval by the City
Council. Perpetual maintenance may be accommodated through a
maintenance assessment district, the formation of which must be
ratified by the City Council prior to final map, approval.
3. A legally binding maintenance: contract shall be executed by the
owners/ developers of the project with the Cit to insure maintenance
of landscaping and irrigation improvements for the median islands for a
break -in period of P " three years or until the project is completely
developed, whichever is longer. A legally binding, maintenance
contract shall be executed by the owners /developers of the project
with the City to insure maintenance of landscaping, irrigation and
other improvements for the tot lot for a break -in period of one year or
until_ the project is completely developed, whichever is longer. Said
agreements shall be accomplished prior to approval of the Final Map.
4. The development plan /landscape plan, unit architecture and model
distribution are subject to review by SPARC. All SPARC conditions of
approval for the PUD plan which affects the tentative map shall also be
incorporated in the tentative map prior to final map submittal. SPARC
review shall include particular emphasis on the following:
a. Additional trees shall be added to the landscape plan and
PUD development plan to create a tree- lined streetscape
throughout the project, with a minimum of two trees per lot
.for each street frontage.
b. Provision of at least 10% of the units in an architectural
design substantially different from the remaining units within
the project, in response to General Plan policy.
C. Preservation and protection of existing evergreen trees near
South McDowell. Boulevard..
d. Restriction to a single story and increased sideyard setbacks
for homes on Lots 1 and 75.
e. Pad elevations -for proposed homes where adjacent to existing
homes to insure protection of privacy.
5. Any signs erected to advertise or direct persons to the project shall
meet the requirements of the City sign ordinance and obtain a sign
permit from the City.
6. Noise mitigation measures in addition to sound wall shall be
incorporated in home construction such that noise levels inside homes
will not exceed 40. dba in bedrooms and 45 dba in other habitable
rooms.
7. Any modifications to the PUD development plan require. prior approval
of the Director of Community. Development. The Director shall not
grant such approval if it is found to have a detrimental effect on the
housing mix or - visual repetitiveness of the immediate neighborhood.
8. Revised sepia prints of the final approved unit development plan,.
tentative map and landscape plan reflecting all conditions of. approval
shall be submitted to the Community Development and Planning
53
Department within sixty days after Council approval of the revised
development plan.
9. The Unit Development Plan shall clearly note the location and design of
Ahe soundwall and rear and side yard six -foot, solid wood,
view- obscuring fences for each unit.
10. The project CC &R's '(conditions, covenants and restrictions) shall be
:developed to provide references regarding development standards
!which shall become conditions of zoning approval as follows:
(� ;A. Minimum building setbacks shall be as follows:
Detached, single- family - front: 20 feet; side: 5 feet (one side) ,
15 feet (aggregate) ; rear: 20 feet. Side yard setbacks on the
north side of Lot 1 and Lot 75 shall be a minimum of 10 feet.
B. Home Occupations shall be a permitted accessory use subject to
the pertinent regulations of the City Zoning Ordinance related to
Accessory Uses.
;C. Private Swimming Pools shall be a permitted accessory use subject
{ to the pertinent regulations of the City Zoning Ordinance related
to Accessory Uses.
;D. New fences (e.g.. front yard fences) shall be permitted subject to
the pertinent regulations of the City Zoning Ordinance related to
fences and approval of any project Architectural Control
} Committee, if established within the project.
;E. Detached accessory dwellings shall be prohibited.
T. Single - family detached homes shall be permitted the following
modifications:
1. Room additions (including covered patios) subject to the
setback requirements as stated in 10A.
2. Uncovered decks subject to the pertinent requirements of the
City Zoning Ordinance.
3. Bay windows, greenhouse windows and other projections
subject to the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance.
G. Any exterior modifications shall be compatible in architectural
styling and exterior colors and materials to the existing
structure.
H. Maximum lot coverage (including existing building and any
' additions) for standard detached single- family homes shall not
exceed 40 percent.
`I. Garage conversions are prohibited.
5
54
J. Any other questions concerning land use regu "latiom,, building
heights, accessory buildings, etc._ . in the project shall be
governed by the City Zoning Ordinance as long as it does not
expressly conflict with the project CC &R's or the adopted PUD
unit development plan.
11. The tot lot shall be designed to the approval of the Parks and
Recreation Commission. Landscape screening shall be included between
the side and rear yards of adjacent residential_ `lots and activity areas.
Any improvement beyond those called for in the Municipal Code shall
be subject to credit per Section 20.34.160 of the Municipal Code. The
PUD plan shall be revised to include the. proposed tot lot as shown yin
a Alternative Sketch A interior lots)z4ite "rnativc- Sketei -$ .
12. L-c is -42 -arid -45- aH -- - provider - -witlr an- -eight- 4bot-- fem�_-- -alvn -T -the
sicie yar&—whcre-- adjaceiYt- to -t+re- tot -lvte The tot lot shall be separated
from abutting residential lots by a 6 foot high sound wall
13. The PUD plan for Lot 76 may be divided in the future to create a total
of four lots subject to all conditions of the PUD and. tentative map.
14. The POD plan and map must be amended per alternate_ plan provided
by applicant received March 14th to provide access to the existing
home and any future 'lots created from Lot 76 to Henry Way rather
than Casa Grande Road subject to the .approval of the Director of
Community Development and the City Engineer.
15. The existing eucalyptus trees located along the northeastern property
linel abutting the Cambridge Square 'Development shall be removed by
the developer
A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner
Doyle to recommend approval of the Anna's Meadows Tentative Map for '76 .
lots based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions listed
below:
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
CHAIRMAN LIB
Findings
BENNETT - Yes
DOYLE - Yes
PARKERSON - No - Does not meet GP goals.
READ - Yes
SOB'EL Absent
TARR - Yes
ARLE - Yes
1. The proposed subdivision, together with provisions for its design
and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan
2. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives,
policies, general land use and programs specified in said General
Plan.
a
55
8. 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
3.
The site is physically suitable for the type of development
The design of the subdivision for which the tentative map is
proposed, as conditionally approved.
4.
The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of
1
11.
I
development, as conditionally approved.
A ten -foot public utility easement shall be - provided along both
5.
The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements
Pacific Gas and Electric.
therefore. will not cause substantial environmental damage, and no
The developer shall comply with all conditions of the City
substantial or avoidable injury will occur to fish or wildlife or
a. The developer shall comply with the amended Petaluma
their habitat.
Municipal Code Sections 20.36.010 and 20.36.020 which
require the developer to pay storm drainage impact fees (as
6 .
The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will
C
not cause serious public health problems.
IE
17.
The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements
CO
proposed will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public
t
project site. Street section on Casa Grande shall include a
at large, for access through' or use of property within the
curb side bike lane and two travel lanes.
proposed subdivision.
8. 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
7
Control Board.
,9.
The design of the subdivision for which the tentative map is
required will provide to the extent feasible, for future passive or
natural hearing or cooling opportunities in the subdivision.
Conditions
1
11.
Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the Fire Marshal.
2.
A ten -foot public utility easement shall be - provided along both
sides of all street right -of -ways as required by Pacific Bell and
Pacific Gas and Electric.
3.
The developer shall comply with all conditions of the City
Engineer as follows:
a. 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.
b. Street improvements on Casa Grande will include completion
of the full street width, with recommendations from staff to
the City Council for the creation of a pay -back agreement
for improvements to the opposite side of the street from the
t
project site. Street section on Casa Grande shall include a
curb side bike lane and two travel lanes.
c. The project will be required to participate in a proportionate
share of the costs of signalization of the Casa Grande /South
McDowell Boulevard intersection.
7
5 E�
d.
Curb return on major (arterial) street shall be 40' @ face of
curb or 30' @ property line.
e.
The grading plan must address the relationship of the
proposed grading to the existing adjacent lots and homes.
Differences in lot and pad elevations . must be addressed as
to the use, of retaining, walls or cut banks for transitioning
the grade. All lots shall have positive lot drainage to the
street.
f.
In order to adequately review all items addressed in
Condition #e,, the tentative map shall be revised to reflect
finished contours on each lot within the development.
g.
All existing utilities (including 12KV lines) shall be
converted to underground facilities The existing service to
the residence on the project, site shall be converted
concurrently with the construction of public. improvements
for the project.
h.
All existing wells; - located within this development shall
conform to the requirements of the Petaluma Municipal Code
Section 15.08.2-20 - Cross- Connections - Premises with
additional water.
i.
All proposed public utilities shall conform to the. City of
Petaluma's minimum design criteria, skewed utility crossings
are not allowed.
j.
Overland gutter flow to the nearest storm drain inlet shall
be 500' maximum, Additional storm drainage 'improvements
such as extension of the proposed storm drain pipe with
additional. storm drain inlets, shall be required within this
subdivision
k.
The proposed bike paths along South McDowell Blvd. shall
be a 5' gutter pan in lieu of :a 3' asphalt/2 gutter pan.
1.
Prior to initial submittal of the final map and improvement
plans, the developer's design engineer and the City Traffic
Engineer shall coordinate all traffic mitigation measures for
this development. These measures shall include;, but not. be
limited to,, lane delineations with relation to the proposed
landscape island, signing, striping, turning pockets and
intersection geometries.
M.
Landscape islands in public streetsi shall be installed to City
Standards and shall be privately maintained. Additionally,
the streets shall be widened appropriately to accommodate a
2' shy - away from curbed medians and landscaping installed
so as not to provide sight distance obstruction for imotorists.
n.
All lot pads within this development, shall be certified by a
registered civil engineer prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
o..
This -project shall . contribute a pro rata share for Lakeville
Highway Assessment District as Traffic Mitigation Fee based
O traffic contr formula, amount to b e determined by
the City Engineer.
4. Design
and construction of median islands on Casa Grande Road and
South McDowell Boulevard shall be subject to review and approval of
City Engineer
.
57
5. A street planting strip or tree walls with meandering sidewalks shall
`be provided along all street frontages, subject to SPARC,. review and
"approval.
6. ;A public easement shall be provided whereever the sidewalk meanders
;onto private property.
7. ;Prior to approval of a final map, the developer shall submit a plan for
'energy conservation measures to be incorporated into the project,
!subject to review and approval of City Staff.
8. !Trucks and other heavy construction equipment traffic to and from the
project site shall be confined to Casa Grande Road and McDowell Blvd.
,South.
9. The developer shall be required to pay school facilities impact fees to
the Old Adobe School District.
10. This project shall participate in any future assessment districts or
iother funding mechanisms formed to improve areawide flooding or other
tsub- regional problems for which development of this project is found to
The a contributing factor. Major Capital Facilities Fees if found to be
!different from said funding mechanism shall- also be applicable in an
, amount to be determined by the City Council prior to Final Map
(approval, payable at time of Final Map or pursuant to adopted
iregulations .
i
11. }The following Special Development Fees shall be applicable to this
project: Sewer and Water Connection, Community Facilities, Storm
,Drainage Impact, Park and Recreation Land Improvement, and In -Lieu
Housing.
12. iThe project sponsor shall execute a binding agreement which shall
4stipulate that upon close of escrow of each residential dwelling unit in
Anna's Meadows, developer shall pay a traffic impact fee of $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 will be either $150.00 per trip end or
; the Major Facilities Traffic Mitigation Fee, whichever is less on a per
[.unit basis.
13. ;If prehistoric or historic remnants are encountered during project
;construction, work shall be halted and a qualified archaeologist
contacted to evaluate the finds. Mitigation measures prescribed by the
`archaeologist and required by the City should be undertaken prior to
;resumption of construction activities.
r
14. iProject street names shall be subject to approval of the City Street
Naming Committee.
i
6
1
15. Off -site storm drainage facilities shall be developed to accommodate
drainage from this area in conformance with and to the approval of,
the Sonoma County Water Agency.
16. Project CC &R's shall be subject to review and approval of City staff
prior to final map approval.
17. Lots
located along the proje ®t north
boundary
shall be no higher than
12"
in elevation from adjoining lots
within the
Cambridge Square Unit
No's
1, 3 and 4 Subdivision, subject
to staff review and approval.
18. The project shall be constructed in two
phases per the adopted Interim
Growth
Management System. The
first
phase shall include 56 units for
a 1988
Final .Map and - the second
phase
-, 19 units for a 198,9 Final Map
unless
given additional 1988 allotments.
Staff suggests that lots 1 -9,
11 -14,
and 71 -75 be reserved for
Phase
II.
19. The tentative map shall be redesigned to create a tot lot with a
minimum area -of 18000 square feet to more closely conform to the
layout of the PUD .development plan. The lot shall be redesigned to
have greater frontage on Wieling' Court.
20. The applicant shall offer to the City, for relocation, the existing house
located on the project site (facing, McDowell) . If the City or another
non - profit housing agency chooses not to accept the house, demolition
may proceed subsequent to obtaining a demolition permit.
21. Lot layout for Lots 71 through 75 shall be revised to provide Henry
Way street access to the existing house on Lot 76 and to .accommodate
up to an additional three lots within the area of Lot 76. A one foot
access denial easement shall be provided along the Casa Grande Road
frontage of Lot 76, subject to staff review and approval.
22. All existing overhead utilities fronting, traaversing or nerving' the
project site "shall be converted to underground, subject to staff review
and approval.
23. The sound w all separating the d ev el opment from Casa Grande -Road and
McDowell - Boulevard South shall be a minimum . hei of 8:' measured
from travel lane Of the arterial stree_ ts_ and a minimum of '' above the
elevation of adjacent residential side and/or rear vards.
24. Hydroseed future entry drive to Lot #76, subject to staff . review and
approval.
25. Bus stop to be provided on S. McDowell, subject to staff review and
approval.
26. The project shall be assessed' for the cost of traffic, control at the
intersection of Anna Way and Daniel Drive.. Traffic Control shall
consist of a four -way or- two -way stop, subject to the determination by
the City Engineer.
10
ri 4
fir . '�, t� :n•
59
II. DAWN PLACE, PACCIORINI DRIVE, AP NO. 019 - 203 -12, (File No.
.6.872).
Continued from 3/8/88.
; 1. Consideration of EIQ.
12. Consideration of rezoning to PUD.
1 3. Consideration of subdivision ordinance modification (length of
flag
i g
4. Consideration of Tentative Map to allow 9 single- family lots.
i
(v The public hearing was opened.
SPEAKERS:
f
Sherry Mansfield - 219 Richfield Drive - Drainage for underground seepage
what will be done by the developer? Does ` not want a two -story house
behind her. Pacciorini Drive should remain same name.
Paul,1'Brown - Adobe Associates (Applicant's Engineer) - Conditions are all
ok with the applicant. Underground seepage was not noted. There will be
minimal grading for Lot 1. Answered questions.
Mario Bregante - 207 Ridgeview Drive - concerns regarding building
envelope and grading of Lot 1; envelope should be at top of hill.
Vina j Patton - 231 Ridgeview Drive - 'Problems with drainage - Paul Brown
answered questions regarding drainage on her property.
The public hearing was closed.
A motion was made by Commissioner Read and seconded by Commissioner
Parkerson to recommend approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
Dawn. i Place PUD and Tentative Map based on the findings below:
COMMISSIONER BENNETT - Yes
COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Yes
COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes
COMMISSIONER READ - Yes
COMMISSIONER SOBEL - Absent
COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes
CHAIRMAN LIBARLE - Yes
Findings For EIQ
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
janimal community, reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
icause a fish to wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels,
':threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number
pr restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history
;or prehistory.
11
I
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 .human beings,
either directly or 'indirectly:
5. Any impacts related to the potential archaeological sensitivity of the
site are mitigated through conditions of approval.
6. The traffic impact of this nine -unit subdivision will be slight relative
to the capacity of the existing road 'network and the. impact of the
subdivision will be mitigated through conditions of approval, which
include payment of Traffic Mitigation Fees and contribution toward the
Sunnyslope Assessment District.
7. The potential adverse drainage impacts of the project are adequately
mitigated through conditions of approval.
8. The .project, as conditioned, will minimize grading and preserve the
hillside.
A motion was made by Commissioner 'Tarr and seconded by Commissioner
Read to recommend approval of the proposed rezoning to . PUD., for Dawn
Place based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions 'listed
below:
COMMISSIONER BENNETT - Yes
COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Yes
COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes
COMMISSIONER READ - Yes
COMMISSIONER SOBEL - Absent
COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes
CHAIRMAN LIBARLE - Yes
PUD Findings
1. Said plan clearly results in a more desirable use of land and a better
physical environment than would be possible under any single zoning
district or combination of zoning districts.
2. P.U.D. District is proposed on property which has, a suitable
relationship to a street pattern which is adequate to carry any
additional traffic generated by the development.
3. The plan for the proposed development, as conditioned, represents a
unified and organized arrangement. of building sites and service
facilities which are appropriate in relation to adjacent or nearby
properties and adequate landscaping and screening will be provided for
each property through, the SPARC review process.
12
31
4. The scenic and natural qualities of the site will be protected through
the use of clustered development, ,preservation of hilltops, reduction of
grading and through,. SPARC review.
5. The development of the project site as conditionally approved will not
be detrimental to the ' public 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 the Petaluma
General Plan.
Recommended PUD Conditions
1. A PUD development plan, subject to SPARC review and approval prior
to submittal of an application for a Final Map, shall be developed for
this subdivision. Development plan shall be submitted to the City
,Council for review -along with the Final Map. Development Plan shall
include but not be limited to the following:
a. Garage conversions are prohibited.
b. Home Occupations are permitted subject to Petaluma Zoning
( Ordinance.
c. All buildings, ;future building additions and decks over three feet
(3') above grade shall be located within the building envelopes.
Swimming pools, accessory structures, decks under 18" in height
and ground level spas may be located in yards outside of street
front yard areas, subject to all provisions of the Petaluma Zoning
Ordinance.
d. All primary or accessory buildings on Lot 1 shall be located
i within the building envelope.
e. No *detached accessory dwellings ( "granny units ") shall be
permitted.
The Performance Standards and any other Zoning or Municipal
Code regulations of the City of 'Petaluma pertaining to an R -1
zone not otherwise addressed by these conditions shall also, apply
to this PUD.
2. Design guidelines shall be developed as part of the PUD development
plan for this subdivision and shall be subject to SPARC review, prior
to application for a final map. Design guidelines shall include but not
be limited to:
a. Building design and materials
b. Landscaping and fencing
1c. Driveway locations
;d. Interface with adjoining residential uses
'e. Tree retention, removal and protection.
�f . Foundations and floor plans shall be
buildings close to the natural grade.
tg. Entry and identification signs, if any.
stepped so as to keep
!h. The same house plan shall not be used more than once in the
project unless substantially modified (to SPARC approval) .
1. Provision of common driveways
3. iSPARC review shall be required for houses on all lots except 2 and 6.
13
X
4. All conditions of approval of the tentative map shall be incorporated
where appropriate into the PUD development plan.
5. Only two (2) types of :fencing shall be permitted' within the subdivision
as identified below. In order to create a uniform appearance, all
required fencing (items a and b) within the subdivision shall be
installed prior to occupancy of the, first unit. Final design shall be
incorporated into the design guidelines to be reviewed and approved
by SPARC. All fences shall be measured from natural grade.
a. Solid six -foot high view obscuring redwood fence along the north
property line of the project site.
b. Fencing to match (a) along the east property line of the project
site on both sides of Pacciorini. Drive. Fencing shall step down
to .31 - feet as it nears Pacciorini Drive. The point at which it
steps down shall be the same as the .(street side) setback of the
adjoining Westridge house (lots 75 & 70.
C. Any fencing installed along the west property line of the site
(from the north property line to the rear property line of Lot 4)
shall match (a),
d. Any fencing installed at side property" lines of Lots 2 through 9
shall match (a) ; likewise for fencing at rear property line on Lot
2.
e. Open post and wire fencing or split rail fencing shall be the only
type allowed along the rear property lines of Lots 3 and 4 and
along south and west property lines of Lot 1.
6. A minimum of two covered and two uncovered parking spaces shall be
provided on each building. site.
7. Instead "of the monolithic curb, gutter and sidewalk proposed, a
serpentine sidewalk (with a cutout per lot to enclose two trees;) shall
be provided for th.e-fv41 4en Pacciorini Drive where - feasible (to
include the cul -de -sac bulb), One additional tree per lot sh "all be
provided in the front yard area For the lots with narrow frontages
(lots 4, 5, 6,.7) the minimum number of trees per lot may be reduced
upon approval of :SPARC. All are subject to SPARC review and
approval and shall "be 'installed prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.
A motion was made by Commissioner Bennett and seconded by Commissioner
Tarr to recommend approval. of the .subdivision ordinance modification to
allow creation of one flag lot (Lot #1 of Dawn Place) based on the findings
in the staff report.
COMMISSIONER
BENNETT - Yes
COMMISSIONER.
DOYLE - Yes
COMMISSIONER
PARKERSON - No
COMMISSIONER
READ - Yes
COM'MIS:SIONER
SOBEL - Absent
COMMISSIONER
TARR - Yes
CHAIRMAN LIBARLE - Yes
Finding's
F�
14
63
1. That there are special circumstances or- conditions affecting this
property in that the hillside is to be preserved through the creation of
only one lot in the steep portion of the site.
2. That the modification is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment
'bf a substantial property right.
3. That the granting of the modification will not be detrimental to the
I
ublic welfare or =safety, or, injurious to other property in the
territory in which said property is situated.
A motion was made by Commissioner Doyle and seconded by Commissioner
Parkerson to recommend approval of the Dawn Place Tentative Map based on
the findings and conditions as amended at this meeting and set forth below:
COMMISSIONER BENNETT - Yes
c COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Yes
COMMISSIONER PARKER.SON - Yes
COMMISSIONER READ - Yes
COMMISS °IONER SOBEL - Absent
COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes
CHAIRMAN LIBARLE - Yes
Findings
1. The proposed subdivision together with provisions for its design and
improvement is consistent with the General Plan.
2, fThe proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies
general land uses and programs specified in said General Plan.
r
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed.
a
4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of
,development.
5. The tentative map provides reasonable public access on a public road
to the proposed lots.
6. The proposed map, subject to the following conditions, complies with
the requirements of the Municipal Code, Chapter 20.16 and the
Subdivision Map Act.
7. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements therefore
will not cause substantial environmental damage, and no substantial or
avoidable injury will occur to fish or wildlife or their habitat.
8. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not
cause serious public health problems.
Tentative Map Conditions
1. Cuts or fills iTr- exvess -of- three- -feet shall not be allowed anti- -are
subject to approval by City staff. Only cut and fill
15
X
necessary to achieve. the required driveway gradient and. garage floor
level and a .minor _amount of fill to achieve positiVe drainage away from
structures shall be allowed on Lots - 7,, ' .8 or '9'. Grading plan shall be
revised to ;reflect this, condition and is subject to the, approval of City
Staff. A minor amount of cut and fill may. be placed in the building
envelope on Lot 1, subject to 'staff review and anoroval.
2. All changes required by SPARC, Planning Commission, and Council
conditions of approval (for PUD District and Tentative Map) shall be
made to the Tentative Map. Two copies and one sepia, print of said
map shall be provided to the Department of Community Development
prior to submittal of the project Final Subdivision Map
3. 'No existing trees may be removed for initial development without prior
SPARC approval.
4. There shall m be a gradual transition In cul -de -sac street width to y
32' feet,, ending in a bulb, with a minimum 43 foot radius:. If this 7.
option is chosen, if shall be subject to staff review and. approval and a
no= parking zone shall ' lbe; provided . 'around the perimeter of the
cul -de -sac bulb. atti�ject -to off- revieron- arrchro'ral,.
5. The owner of each parcel to be created by this Tentative Map shall be
responsible for landscaping and maintenance of any landscapable area
between property lines and curbs or sidewalk in perpetuity.
6. A public access easement shall be provided wherever the sidewalk
meanders onto private property.
7. The recommendations contained in the geotechnical report by Robert G.
Miller, (dated February 24, 1988, May 19, 1986 and .August 3, 1984)
for Job No. 84 -097, will be implemented to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer at such time as each parcel is developed.
8. The tentative map shall be revised to reflect the following building
.setbacks.
a. Lot 2 shall have a. front .yard setback of 30 feet.
b. Lots 3,4 and 6 shall have a front,set-back of 25 feet.
C. The setbacks from, the property lime adjoining lots 4; and 5 shall
be a minimum of 10 feet for each lot.
d. The east (side) setback on Lot 1 shall be 30 feet for the length
of the building envelope.
9. All existing overhead utility lines traversing or fronting on, the subject
property shall be converted to underground facilities and all new
utilities shall be underground, subject to staff review and. approval.
10. All requirements of the City Engineer specified in the accompanying
letter shall be complied with..
11. All requirements of the Police Department shall be complied with:
16
a. High pole mounted vandal proof lighting at each end of the court
or at least two street lights.
b. Lighted numbers on all homes, or 4" high and 1" wide black
i
numbers placed near a light.
12. All requirements of the Chief Building Inspector shall be complied
with:
a. Demolition permits required for any structures to be removed.
b. Show- site drainage and all utilities - new and existing.
Cod
c . Show curb cuts and driveway slopes
13. J; All requirements' of the Fire Marshal shall be complied with:
a. Provide building location on building pad for Lot #1. Depending
on building:, location, a longer driveway and a hydrant will be
i required".
b.. Twenty foot wide;, 13!6" vertical clearance driveway, to within 150'
of all area. -of b:uildiig on Lot #1. '
14. ;j All. grading. and, drainage.. shall. be- in.. conformance with the. Sonoma
c Co.unty..Water Agency's:..Design.iCriteria.:: _ :__•
15. ' This - project shall participate in any future assessment districts or
other funding mechanisms. formed to improve areawide flooding or other
! -re gional' problem "s -for which, development of this project is found to.
be a contributing; factor:..-, Major Capital Facilities Fees if found to be
- different from: saidl. funding.- mechanism.. shall also, - -be applicable in. an
!"r-amount: be . determined by the-- -City Council' °prior: to Final Map:
approval, payable at time of Final Map or. pursuant to adopted
regulations.
16. Temporary protective fencing. shall` be erected at the drip line of all
native trees which may be-_ dama e.d by gradin
activities subject to
1: determination by City staff ' 'The fencing. .shall`. be . erected prior to
•; :. an. _ radin construction .; activity and sub' ect:..to : staff .ins ection prior
y g. g y J P P
to :gr,ading. permit :issuance.
17 Public . utility access and easement, locations shall be subject to ..approval.
by PG: &'E Pacific - Bell - and other. - applicable utility and service
companies and the City Engineer and shall be shown on the Final Map
as necessary.
18.. Construction activities shall comply with applicable Zoning Ordinance
and Municipal Code performance standards (noise, dust, odor, etc.) .
19. In the event that archaeological remains are encountered during
grading, the work .shall be halted and a qualified archaeologist shall be
consulted for evaluation of the artifacts and to recommend future
action. The local indian- community shall also be notified and consulted
in the event any archaeological remains are uncovered.
,t!Ly
17
20. Street name shall be subject to City Street Name Committee approval.
21. The following Special Development Fees shall be applicable to this
project: Sewer . and Water Connection, Community Facilities, Storm
Drainage Impact, Park and 'Recreation Land Improvement In -Lieu
Housing -and School Facilities.
22. The project sponsor shall execute a binding agreement which shall
stipulate that upon close of, escrow of each residential, 'dwelling unit in
Dawn. Place, developer shall pay $150.,00 to the. City per daily tri p end . .
estimated. to; be generated by .sai'd unit Each— isf estimated' to ,
gene_ rate 10.0 trip ends-. per day._ If ' -the °: ,establishesi, a. Major. -.
Sacilities . Traffic Mitigation' Fee .prior- to closes of escrow. of. unit(s) ,
the.. fee ,for said ; u.nit(.$) and all', sub se q uent.; units in:- .this T•e..
thereafter avill: be either $150.,00 per trip end' or' the :Major- Facilities_
Traffic Mitigation :Fee, whichever i°sless •on ,a per unit;--bbasis ] _
23. Subsurface drainage to' be addressed by applicant to staff's approval
24. Building envelope on Lot; 1 shall• not extend closer than 1 - feet from
the south property line, or 35 feet from the east property line, subject
' To - - stal I approval
�. _ PUB'LIC ,HE'ARINGS
r
NEW B ...
U51N'ESS
III. TOCCHINI . 'DAYCARE, 511 SOUTH MCDOWELL BLVD:, AP NO.
007 301 - 31, (File No. 1.569).
L a„ f g ,... . - „+.�. e y;:� t Yt" :, •r- `` ^ .w. - Y+r—�J
' 1 Consideration of' r
2 Consideration�ofYconditionaluse 'permit for: child' care. facihty.,n�
The , public hearing' was.. opened. " 7.
.. ' -' - , •' -..y. tai . •• ` e F ` ,
Aileen' Tocehini, Applicant described program, ,hours, etc feels. location w
is a good one;;-, compatible with the neighborhood.
< Margaret- ,Kapranos - -.; Applicants consultant 1820; Virginia AYenue,; Novato:
= descri'bed pro lect R" answered' questions'' reel noise, traffic,, ; sparking
described parent' handbook
Dick Silvers - .1313 'Kresky 'Way McDowell Blvd. traffic. at: Kresky "Way is
very bad; does °not want . ,any business ,ati• thi's location.
Robert Ramirez. 600 West -- Street -, App;licant'ss real - estate agent. -
,.
daycare , preschool is a use allowed' in. `this° -zone;, existing preschoold have no"
problems with neighbors,; feeig" there is� enough, space.. -.
Ed Lib,owitz 49 Alta Dr . ,, ':-, Representing concerned, neighbors - spoke
against day care center, in a residential neighborhood
Angela T`ckl'er - '93'0_ I Street Supports day .care i center - has* - children .
attending existing Tocchini daycare ' center..
Mrs•. Worder - 528 S.. McDowell - This location is not the proper place for a
daycare center.:
Frank; Debos 1424' -McGreagor Feels daycare center is needed; supports
project.
18.
S
Mr.. Robello - 1424 McCrea_ o_ r - Traffic very bad all day long; additional
traffic wil be generated.
Holly' Winfrey - 17 Alta Drive - has lived in neighborhood for 10 years:
thinks there is too much traffic and noise already. Petaluma has need for
daycare; does not want neighborhood daycare center.
Edna Flohr - 22 10th Street - does not oppose center.
Mrs.. Jenkins - 521 S. McDowell - 2 houses from site - too much traffic and
pedestrian traffic; children's noise will be very loud.
Shirley Halverson next door to proposed daycare center - opposes center;
too much traffic now; should be in a commercial zone; too close to property
lines.
Tom, !Winfrey - 17 Alta - Intrusion into a residential area.; has spoken to an
acoustical expert regarding noise; feels it would be too noisy.
Sandy Castagnola - Daycare center should be allowed on McDowell.
(� Harold Halberson 505 S. McDowell - Adjacent to daycare center; residence
will be altered to the detriment of the neighborhood,; too much traffic.
Pricelia Fell - Tenant in house - traffic is already very bad.
Elsiea
Winterhalter - 22 Alta Drive - Against daycare center.
Sandia Orchid - 22 Avery Way - Agrees with daycare center in this
location .
Karen Libowitz - 29 Alta Drive - Against project - noise, residential
neighborhood not the place` for this project; too many drop -offs; traffic
study needed; parking problems.
Tina;White - 509 S. McDowell - Not enough parking - too much traffic.
. Margaret Ka ranos Applicant's representative - answered questions;
interior plans will be f inished shortly.
The public hearing was closed.
A motion was made by Commissioner Parkerson and seconded by
Commissioner Tarr to direct staff to prepare a mitigated negative declaration
(using maximum of 36 students) based on findings listed below:
COMMISSIONER BENNETT - Yes
COMMISSIONER DOYLE - No
COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes
COMMISSIONER READ - No
COMMISSIONER SOBEL - Absent
COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes_
CHAIRMAN LIBARLE - Yes
Findings:
1. The proposed use does not have the potential to degrade the quality of
,the environment.
2. ;The proposed use as conditionally approved does not have the potential
to achieve short term disadvantage of long term environmental goals.
3. The proposed use conditionally approved does not have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable.
4. The proposed use as conditionally approved does not have
environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse affect upon
Shuman beings either directly or indirectly.
19
'1 •
5. Potential adverse parking, noise and traffic impacts are mitigated
through conditions of approval.
A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner
Parkerson to grant a conditional use permit to allow a preschool and
childcare facility with a maximum of 36 total (12 preschool for one session
per day and 24 day care) children, per day and 4 staff: at 5:11 South
McDowell Boulevard based on the findings and subject to the conditions
listed below;
COMMISSIONER
BENNETT -
-Yes
COMMISSIONER
DOYLE
- No.
- Site is unacceptable
COMMIS.SION-ER
PARKERSON
- Yes.
COMMISSIONER
READ
- No -
Situ is unacceptable
COMMISSIONER
SOB,EL
- Absent
COMMISSIONER
TARR
- Yes
CHAIRMAN 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 use 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. All requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be met:
a. Project must comply with the fire and life safety standard of Title
19 - California Administrative Code.
b. Plans for building remodel must be reviewed by this office to
determine specific requirements.
2. All requirements of the Building Division shall be met:
a. Building must conform to E -3 Occupancy as indicated in 1985
UBC.
3. All recommendations of the City Traffic Engineer shall become
conditions of approval:
a. As proposed, there shall be a one-way circulation ,pattern in the
drop- off /pick -up area.
b. A no parking zone shall be provided along the west side of the
drop -off /'pick -up urea, subject to staff review and approval.
C. For improving visibility of pedestrians, the landscaping in front
of the center and. parallel to McDowell. should consist of trees with
thin trunks and foliage not lower than 7 feet. Shrubbery should
not be higher than 2 feet..
d. Install a handicapped sign at the handicapped parking space.
20
69
e. If there is access to the, center via that part of the center which
presently is the garage, install. a sidewalk leading from the 4 (or
6) parking spaces to and around the "garage" along "A" and "B"
(as shown on the marked up site plan) for the convenience and
safety of pedestrians. The sidewalk should have a minimum width
of 4 feet.
4. ''This project shall be subject to SPARC review pursuant to Zoning
';Ordinance Section 26 -401. The review shall include fence design,
¢ soundwall design, landscaping and any changes to the building
iarchitecture .
5. An eight foot high soundwall shall be installed around he north, east
;and south boundaries of the playground. Said wall shall wrap around
Efrom the north boundary to the gate proposed for the northwest
corner of the playground. Soundwall design is subject to SPARC
°,review and approval.
6. !Six foot high solid board fencing shall be provided along the full
length of the east (rear) , north and south (side) property lines
;(exclusive of soundwall location. Existing fencing may be retained, if
, repaired as needed. In some locations new fencing may be required.
;'Fencing shall step down at the front setback and shall allow adequate
„site distance at the street. All are subject to SPARC review and
)approval.
!
7. aA majority of the landscaping proposed along the east side of
.(long -term) parking space 3 . shall be replaced with, a 3 -foot wide
. Iwalkway . Said walkway ,shall extend from the proposed walkway to a
,point four feet north of the southwest corn_ er of the (existing) garage,
,!subject to SPARC review and approval.
8. Existing driveway shall be replaced with curb, gutter, and sidewalk
which meet all City Standards.
9. The parallel parking spaces shall 'be widened to 9 feet per SPARC
,Standards. Parallel parking area °shall be striped for two standard
Wand one compact space, subject to SPARC review and approval.
10. ,An additional standard car parking space may be provided east of
space 6, subject to SPARC review and approval.
11. As proposed, hours of operation shall. be limited to 6:30 AM to 6:30
,PM, Monday through Friday.
12. ,As proposed, outdoor play shall be limited to the hours between 9AM
sand 4PM .
13. 4 if-- additional - of4 -rte -- parking --is-- arranges- Okxrg- term, 4eaae+ spaees�
! the- runrl7er- of-- staf #- �rrclfor- fiats- �mrq- e- inzreased - , - - if - also
cenfermam-e-- with- -Stai%—_- 6-uicl-eliYre_s-. The ratio of parking spaces to
!staff /children must conform to the following:
21
70
a. One space per staff member and one space for every six children
to a maximum allowed by 'State. Interior /Exterior Space Standards.
14. No signs may be erected on the site without issuance of a sign permit.
15. This use permit shall be valid indefinitely, but the project shall be
subject to review after a trial period. At the end of six months the
neighbors of the site shall be renoticed and given an opportunity to
present feedback on any . problems which have developed. The use
permit may be. reconsidered by the Planning Commission at. that time
and conditions of approval may be modified.
16. This use permit may also be recalled to the Commission at any time for
review on receipt of complaint or complaints regarding noise, traffic
congestion and any other characteristic of the operation.
17. This project shall be subject to pay $150,.00 to the City per daily trip
end estimated to be created by the project. If the City establishes a
major facilities traffic ,mitigation fee prior to commencement of the use,
the fee for this project shall thereafter be, either $150.00 per trip end,
or the major facilities traffic mitigation . fee, whichever is less. For
purposes of implementation of this condition, a written :agreement shall
be executed between applicant and City wherein she agrees to pay fees
at the end of one year of operation. Said agreement shall allow
reduction of the number of trip .ends based on the ,number of trips to
and from the facility which are proven to be incidental to other trips
being made by parents of the students and or by carpooling „.
18. Project subject to payment of Storm Drainage Mitigation Fees for
additional impervious surface areas added.
IV. PETALUMA VALLEY HOSPITAL, 400 NORTH MCDOWELL BLVD., AP
No. 136- 111 -24, (File No. 3.360A) .
1., Consideration of EM.,
2. Consideration of PUD amendment approving master site plan.
The public hearing was opened.
SPEAKERS:
Joe Greeley - Applicant Concerns regarding conditions 7 &. 8. Both
buildings just finished went through SPARC.
The public hearing was closed.
A motion was made by Commissioner Doyle and seconded. by Commissioner
Read to recommend finding for a mitigated Negative Declaration for the
Petaluma Valley ,Hospital PUD Amendment ,based on the findings listed below:
COMMISSIONER BENNETT - Yes
COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Yes
22
71
COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes
COMMISSIONER READ - Yes
COMMISSIONER SOBEL - 'Absent
COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes
CHAIRMAN LIBARLE - Yes
i
Findings
1. The PUD master plan, 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
c endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory.
i
2. - The PUD master plan, as conditionally approved, does not have the
potential to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long -term,
;environmental goals.
3. ,The PUD master plan, as conditionally approved, does not have
impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable.
4. The PUD master plan, as conditionally approved, does not have
l environmental effects which will cause ;substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly.
5. the PUD master plan is . consistent with the land use designation and
'does not conflict with the objectives, goals, and policies of the General
Plan.
A motion was made ., by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner
Doyle to recommend approval of the PUD Amendment for Petaluma Valley
Hospital based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed below:
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
CHAI +RMAN LIB
Findings
BENNETT Yes
DOYLE - Yes
PARKERSON Yes
READ - Y_ es
SOBEL - Absent
TARR - Yes
ARLE - Yes
1. That the hospital has a suitable relationship to a thoroughfare
(McDowell Boulevard); and said thoroughfare is adequate to carry any
I traffic generated by development in accordance with the
Approved Master Plan.
23
72
2. The Master Plan presents a unified. and organized arrangement of
buildings and service facilities which are appropriate 'in relation to
existing buildings and facilities and to adjacent properties, and
adequate landscaping is included_ in the conditional approval to insure
compatibility.
3. The natural and :scenic qualities. of the site are protected with
adequate available public spaces along the creek front.
4. The development of the proposed Master Plan, in the manner proposed
by the applicant, will riot be detrimental to the public 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.
Conditions
1. The PUD Master Plan shall be revised (prior to submission of any
expansion proposal) to incorporate the following minimum setbacks:
a. McDowell. Boulevard - ; 50 1 ;
b. Entry drive. - 30' 'on' north side, 25' on south. side
C. Interior (facing parking lot) 12
d. North property line - 12
e. Professional Drive - 25
2. The PUD Master Plan. shall be subject to SPARC review prior to
submission of any expansion 'proposal'. The Master Plan shall include,
but not be limited to, the following :
a. Redesign of on -site traffic circulation pattern for emergency
access, including the assurance of providing covered
protection for walk -in emergency patients.
b. Provision of a revised Master Landscape .Plan to incorporate,
by phase but not be limited to;
1. Provision of landscaping adjacent to the building for
additions to the existing main hospital structure.
2. Enhancement of existing 'landscaping along the McDowell
Boulevard frontage and establishment of landscaping
improvements along Professional Drive street frontage..
3. Enhancement. of existing landscaping along Lynch
Creek
C. Design guidelines to propose architectural standards; sign
and lighting programs; building height, bulk and separation
restrictions.
3. Hospital policy shall be established to enforce employee parking to the
rear (northeast) of the project site. Appropriate signing shall be
provided.
4. Future phase development shall conform to minimum parking
requirements, both for the overall site and each expansion proposal
area;, as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance, subject to SPARC review.
24
®3
5. SPARC review of specific proposals for structures within the "future
building sites" facing McDowell shall include emphasis on the following
'values:
a. The need to provide a variety of setbacks within the
building envelopes along McDowell Boulevard. Blending of
building sizes, scale and mass to insure architectural
diversity.
b. The need to insure architectural compatibility between
proposed expansion and existing buildings and landscaping.
C. The need to provide easy pedestrian movement throughout
the site.
0 d. Insuring "building front" quality of design for all building
elevations due to the high visibility of the "future building
sites".
6. jUses within the PUD Master Plan area shall be limited to Petaluma
Walley Hospital services and related independently owned or operated
;medical support uses (including outpatient services and care, but not
including medical and /or dental offices) .
7. •Expansion areas shall participate in the North McDowell Improvement
;Assessment District, contribution shall be subject to determination by
tthe City Engineer. Participation shall include the proportionate share
`of costs for installation of landscape median islands along property
frontage on McDowell Boulevard, subject to negotiation with staff
8. If applicable, expansion projects shall be subject to the following fees
,(subject to negotiation with staff)
Via. Community Facilities
�b . Storm Drainage Impact
;c. Traffic Impact
;d. School Impact (Old Adobe School District) .
V. ' ?LEONARD ACCESSORY DWELLING, 742 "B" STREET, AP NO.
A08- 163 -38, (File No. 1.574) .
1. Consideration of conditional use permit for an accessory dwelling.
The public hearing was opened.
SPEA'KE'RS: Mr. Leonard, applicant - accessory dwelling is for family
member residence.
The public hearing was closed.
A motion was made by Commissioner Bennett and seconded by Commissioner
Parkerson to grant a conditional use permit for an accessory dwelling at 742
"B" Street based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed below:
f
COMMISSIONER BENNETT - Yes
COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Yes
25
74
COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes
COMMISSIONER READ - Yes
COMMISSIONER .SOBEL - Absent
C:OMMISSIO.NER TARR - Yes
CHAIRMAN LIBARLE - Yes
Fin ding s
1. The proposed accessory dwelling use, subject to the conditions which
have been attached, will conform to the requirements and, intent of the
Petaluma Zoning Ordinance.
2. The proposed accessory dwelling, as conditioned, will conform to the
requirements and intent, goals and policies of the Petaluma General
Plan.
3. The proposed accessory dwelling, as conditioned, will not, constitute a
nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community.
Conditions :
.1. The proposed accessory dwelling shall conform with all requirements of
the Uniform Building and Fire Codes.
2. Separate meters shall be installed for gas and electric for the
accessory unit., subject to staff review and approval. Sewer and water
connections shall con -form to the City Code.
3. Existing trees shall remain, and shall ,b protected during construction
activities by temporary fencing at drip lines, subject to staff review
and approval.
4. The accessory dwelling shall be subject to review by the Site Plan and
Architectural Review Committee (SPARC) with special emphasis on the
following:
a,. Exterior siding and roof design of the accessory dwelling shall be
compatible with those characteristics of the existing house.
b. The yard area of' the proposed unit shall be fully landscaped
subject to staff approval.
5. If the sidewalk in front• of the property is damaged or .cracked it shall
be repaired and upgraded and subject to staff review and approval.
6. The applicant shall provide for .adequate on -site drainage, to insure
drainage is directed to the, public street, subject to staff review and
approval.
7. This project is subject to the, following; fees (,for the applicants
information only) :
a. School Facilities
b. Sewer /Water Connection
C. Dwelling Construction
26
d. Storm Drainage Impact
8. Two feet of lattice on top of existing rear fence to be added, subject
to staff approval and building permit issuance
i
VI. MILLIKEN - AMUSEMENT ARCADE - 800 PETALUMA BLVD. NORTH,
AP NO. 006 - 051 -23, (File No. 1.576).
ll. Consideration of Conditional Use Permit to allow up to 8 video
games.
CD This item was withdrawn by the applicant.
� f
T— PLANNING MATTER
VII. GENERAL DISCUSSION SESSION (if time allows) .
'Child Care Standards, Traffic Mitigation Fees.
1
This' item was not discussed due to lateness of hour.
ADJOURNMENT 11:25 PM.
75
27