Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 06/14/1988112 PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL June 14, 198:8 Tuesday, 7.00 p.m. PET`ALUMA, CALIF. PLEDGE. OF _.ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bennett, Doyle, Libarle *, Parker_son, Read, Tarr COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Sobel STAFF-: Warren Salmons, Planning Director Pamela Tuft, Principal Planner Mike Moore, Principal Planner Kurt Yeiter, Associate Planner Teryl 'Lister, Assistant Planner *Chairman APPROVAL ,OF MINUTES Minutes May 24, 1988 were approved. PUBLIC C'OMMENT None. COMMISSIONER COMMENT Commi'ss'ioner Tarr - questions regarding Kwik Stop sign at Payran Plaza; public not "icing, procedures. CORRESPONDENCE Airport Design Guidelines distributed. DIRECTORS" REPORT Council . joint meeting, Westridge, project hearing schedule. Westridge EIR will not be ready until June 28 meeting - project Will be on July ,agenda. COMMISSIONER's REPORT None. READING OF APPEAL RIGHTS 1 0 . T — ;'xs.�.� , `M " ! 1 -. die: ;., 113 OLD BUSINESS CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS I. CITY ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CONCERNING DAY CARE. 1'. Consideration of: Environmental Impact Questionnaire (EIQ) . 2. Continued consideration of Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment for day care facilities ( File 7.118) . The public hearing was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of May 2;4, 1988. SPEAKERS: Carol,*, Stephenson - Child Care Law Center - requests non- discretionary permit,, existing homes should be "grandfathered" in. Large day care homes; allowed in San Diego, Antioch, Duarte, Manhatten Beach, San Francisco, Oakland, Martinez, Gilroy, Marin County. Bob Harper - Sonoma County Public Social Services Agency - On -site inspections done every - three years (once at beginning) and with complaints. Tina ;Paige - Community Child Care Council - There are 10 -13 large day care facilities in Petaluma now; not all large homes have 12 children; try one year without notification; concerns regarding requirement of six foot fence; suggests "good neighbor" handouts for large care providers. Rosalee Gutienez - Petaluma Child Care and Family Task Force - 1409 St. Anne fWay - licensed day care provider; invited Commissioners and staff to drop in unannounced to examine her large family day care facility. I Jackie Slade - licensed provider - IRS does -not restrict licensed care providers, why should cities? duplicating regulations of State; are business licenses required? Kathy_ Barodino - 629 Ely Blvd. S. - Drop- off /pick -up times naturally staggered; parking will prohibit one driveway; concerns regarding staff recommendations. Dr. Gary Kinley - Community Child Care Council - It is GP policy that State child care facilities should be encouraged; lists of active providers can be obtained through Community Child Care Council in Santa Rosa; discussed Maryland- Washington study in which noise, traffic not seen to increase. Karen. Liebowitz - 29 Alta - Presented letter from neighbor, Loretta Jenkins, in support of staff recommendations; feels safety regulations are needed. 2 114 Ann Deb,anzo Santa Rosa - runs large day care center in :Santa. Rosa; all providers 'should be treated equally; service is for children,. Janet Morris - 1073' Wren Drive - homeowner and mother supports recommendations:; must protect property rights .. Lori 'Wild Mill Valley - Operates small day care home in Marin . County; will be moving to Petaluma and hopes to open large- day care :home; objects to parking fencing requirements. Tom Winfrie - 17 Arta - Feels noticing of neighbors is a good idea.. Bob 'Harper - Clarified type of complaints that would warrant responses by Sonoma County Public Social Services. The public hearing was closed.. A motion was made by 'Commi signer Read and seconded by Commissioner. Parkerson to recommend to the Council issuance of a Negative Declaration based on the following findings: COMMISSION -ER BENNETT - Yes COMMISSIONER. DOYLE - Yes: COMMISSIONER PARKERSON = Yes COMMISSTONER READ - Yes COMMISSIONER SOB'EL - Absent COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE* - Yes Findings 1. The zoning ordinance text amendments, do not have the ,potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population, to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal `community, reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community., reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate. important examples of the major periods of California history or 'prehistory. 2 The zoning ordinance text amendments, do not have the potential to achieve short - term, to the disadvantage of long- term, environmental goals. 3. The 'zoning ordinance text amendments, do not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. 4. The zoning ordinance text amendments, do not 'have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,, either directly or indirectly. U� 3 115 5. The zoning ordinance text amendments are consistent with and further promotes the., objectives, goals, and policies of the General Plan. A motion was made by Commissioner Doyle and seconded by Commissioner Parke' son to recommend to Council ,adoption of the amended zoning text amendments presented below and that Council adopt modified regulations to legalize pre - existing non - conforming large family day care. COMMISSIONER BENNETT - Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes COMMISSIONER READ Yes COMMISSIONER SOBEL - Absent (� COMMISSION -ER TARR - Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE* - Yes DAY CARE /CHILD CARE FACILITIES 1. Add to Section 1 -203 (Definitions) Day Care Center A facility _other than a family day care facility which provides nonmedical care except as an accessory use, to children under 18 years of age in need of personal services, supervision, or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living or for the protection of the individual. Day care centers include infant centers, preschools, extended day care .facilities, and , the like. i Family Day Care Home A home which regularly provides care, protection and supervision to twelve or fewer children, in the provider's own home; for periods of less than twenty -four hours per day, while the parents or guardians are away, and includes the following: 1. Large Family Day Care. Home - home which provides family day care to seven to twelve children, inclusive, including children who reside at the home. 2. Small Family Day Care Home - A home which provides family day care to six or fewer children, including children who reside at the home. 2. Add to "Permitted Uses in R -1 Zone": 6 -310 Small Family Day Care Home. 3. Add to "Conditional Uses in R -1 Zone": 6 -407 Large Family Day Care Home (minor use permit only, subject also to provisions of Section 21 -500) . 4. Add to "Permitted Accessory Uses" in all other residential and mobile home zones: 4 0 116 Small Family Day Care Home. 5. ticular (Condi nal) dses St Considerations Governing the Following Pa 2.1 -500 Large 'Family :Day Care Home A.' An application for a conditional use permit shall be accompanied by all information., plans., and descriptions required by the Planning Department to process the application. B. Any side or rear yard area intended for day_ care use shall be fenced with a minimum six foot high solid fence, unless the Planning Director determines that a. fence is not necessary to mitigate sound; e. g., for properties not bordering: residential uses .. Fences shall-also be . rnstall'ed to, protect the children from possible hazards e:,g., swimming pools, ravines, vicious animals, etc.) C. Recreation equipment exceeding. eight feet in height located in any yard area intended for day care; use shall be kept a minimum distance of five feet from perimeter property lines. D . Proposed day care homes shall comply with applicable � b.uilding and fire code providions, with applicable Building Codes, Fire Code standards ,adopted by the State and administered by the City Fire Marshal., and with — social Services Department licensing requirements (California Administrative Code, Title 22„ Division 2). E. Properties used for large family day care homes, shall not be located closer than three hundred feet from one another in all directions. In no case shall a large- 4a=Hq -- day. -tare +zmnes residential property be situated-- so- -as--to directly .abut by a moTrlarge family da care property ('ies on two or more sides. F. All dwellings used for large family day care facilities shall provide at least three or --mare; off- street automobile - parking spaces., no more than one of which may be provided in a garage or carport. G.. Drop -off and' pick -up of children at a proposed day care home shall be staggered so, that no more than three employee/ guardian vehicles are present at any given ;time. --- Ehits7clz -play- time• - for -s ev�err-- or- mrn- e- ziri�dren- siYaH- �re-�imitecl -to tke- hrnxrs- �etwecn- 3'x89 - tad- rr.$A- H J. Noise generated from the proposed day care home must not exceed established standards and policies as set forth in the General Plan; i.e. , not to. exceed Ldn 60 as measured outside : on neighboring property. - � - - -� Or �oncli�icm-srF -- was- eomb�irre� �rit}r- �ondt-iorr�xB} : . 5 a 11'7 ri -. - - -t lieant- rmxsrt- grave -rmr a -�ma 1 - family -42-2- care •- at--tlrat•-p?rapertp for -at least - twelve=- (3-2 =}-- months - anti a�crt-- crirres�lyer]•- conflict -irr -the areas-- ef-- rroiSe- -- traffic, -- parking -, --- spaciirg; =- flr-- �rorrcerrl�atian psrtaiirirrg -fic-= tire- bpera'tiiorr =of= ire- = Clay -- tare == with --nne+ �berizrg propertie•s- prior- to-�ppreva� -ef - tiis-�re e- permit,-- as- determirrecbq the - Planning -- Director . L En Initial approval of .a use permit for large family day care shall be for a one -year period of time and shall then be reviewed by the Director to identify and achieve mitigation of any difficulties related to the day care activities conformance to these Zoning i Ordinance regulations before permit renewal. - Renewal need not be for a limited amount of time. The Director shall give notice of this review to owners and residents of property immediately adjacent to the large family day care to allow at least ten days for comment. J. M- The facility will be operated in 'a manner which will not adversely affect adjoining residences nor be detrimental to the character of the residential neighborhood. K. K-. Residences located on arterial streets - (as shown on the General Plan Circulation Map) must provide a drop-off/pick-up area J designed to prevent vehicles from . backing onto the arterial roadway. Regularly available on- street parking stalls adjacent to the site may be� considered to satisfy this requirement 6a. Add to regulations governing Minor Use Permits; 26 -512.3 The Director shall approve a minor use permit for large family day care facility if all the provisions of Section 21 -500 are met. 6b. Amend Section 26 -512 (Minor Use Permits) to read, in part: I ..notify pursuant to. Section 26 - 504.2 (except that, for large family day care facilities, notice shall also be given to all owners of property Within 100 feet of the site) , .. . 7. Add to Section 19A -200, "Establishment of a PUD District": All residential PUD's shall permit small family day care .facilities. 8. Add to "Conditional Uses" in all zone districts: Day Care Centers. Recommendation to City Council Grandfather Policy All large family day care homes licensed by the State -at time of Ordinance adoption may, for six months, apply and receive a use permit. No fee or conditions of approval shall b'e imposed to pre- existing this period. M 118 II. RAJA.: DEVELOPMENT, CREEKVIEW' COMMON'S II, CORNER :OF ELY BLVD. NORTH AND MO'NROE STREET, AP NO. 136 - 111 -19, (File No. 6.890). 1. Continued consideration. of five -lot tentative map (for four attached single - family dwellings and common area) . . The public hearing was continued from the May 24, 1988 meeting.: SPEAKERS: Roberta Guderjohn - 164 Creekview Circle - Concerns regarding access from reekvieui Court - is there access to Monroe? The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Parkerson to recommend approval to the City Council of the' proposed Creekview Commons II tentative subdivision map based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed below: . COMM- ISSIONER 'BENNETT Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON Yes COMMISSIONER READ - Yes COMMISSIONER 'SOBEL - Absent COMMISSIONER 'TARR - Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLEt _ Yes Findings 1. The proposed subdivision together with provisions for its design and improvement is consistent with the G "eneral. 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. 5. The tentative map provides r-easona:ble ,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 improvemerts therefor will not- cause substantial environmental damage, and no substantial, or avoidable injury will occur to fish or wildlife or their habitat. 7 119 8. The design, of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not cause serious public health problems.. Conditions 1. All applicable conditions, as determined by staff, of the PUD Development Plan shall become conditions of the Tentative Map. 2. All applicable original and amended conditions of approval, as determined by staff, of the Creekview Commons Tentative Map shall be adopted as part of this tentative map. 3. This project shall participate in any future assessment districts or other funding mechanisms formed to improve areawide flooding or other sub- regional problems for which development of this project is found to be a contributing factor. Major Capital Facilities Fees if found to be different from said funding mechanism and if determined by the City Council prior to issuance of a building permit shall also be applicable. f 4. Temporary protective fencing shall be erected at the drip line of all native trees. The fencing shall be erected prior to any grading/ construction. activity and subject to staff inspection prior to grading permit issuance. 5. 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. 6. Construction activities shall comply with applicable Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code performance standards (noise, dust, odor, etc.) . 7. All requirements of the Chief Building Official shall be complied-with: a. Site drainage must flow to street or to appropriate existing drainage system serving Creekview Commons. b,. Demolition permit must be taken out to remove existing building. 8. All requirements of the Sonoma County Water Agency shall be complied with: a,. Project shall be graded to direct storm runoff into existing facilities in accordance with the SCWA Design Criteria. 9. All requirements of Pacific Gas and Electric Company specified in the accompanying letter shall be complied with: a. Any relocation of existing gas service or existing underground electric facilities will be at owner's expense. b Existing easement (overhead electric) on Ely Road must be kept clear of any .buildings or substructures. " Any landscaping or -other work in this area requires approval of PG &E. c'. Public utilities easements shall be provided as determined upon completion of engineering by PG &E. 0 120 d. Development to be served with underground. electric, - telephone, and cable 'television. 10. All requirements of the Engineering, Department shall be complied with: 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. NEW BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS` III. FISHER TRUCKING, 983 TRANSPORT WAY, AP NO. 007 - 503 -05,, .(File No. 2.337A) 1. Consideration of EIQ. 2. Consideration of. variance to allow elimination of one side :yard .setback and 'to allow front yard loading facilities - for a 4,250 sq.ft. warehouse building in the ML district. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Dick. Lieb - 1 Bodega Avenue - Applicant representative.; adjacent property owner does not want to cooperate - with joint site plan.; objections to Condition No. 1. Dan Jones - Owner of adjacent lots agrees with variance. The public hearing was closed.. A motion was made by Commissioner Bennett; and seconded by. Commissioner Doyle to issue a. negative declaration' and to grant the variance request with the deletion of Condition No. 1. COMMISSIONER BENN.ETT - Yes. COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON = No (felt Condition No. 1 should be kept in) COMMISSIONER READ - No - (felt Condition .No. 1 should be kept in) COMMISSIONER SOBEL - Absent COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE* - Yes Conditions } - - -- Tire - =btz }d rrg -f }oar - part- s ral rev d-101- UIUCH -p+Erce--fron-t . an-d rear i7rg -d of s =-cloy -to-- tyre- nvrt}r-propertq- dime -sn-- that- -the wid'e tar. ring mzrnee ver f- vng raclrs rzrq - b nro =e - asi�p- accorrrmQdafcd bet weerr �tlre- -re-ar �oazling �oor-aacl- side- yard - rlrve�araSr, 9 121 1_; 2. Vehicles may not park ' or back -up in the street or block the sidewalk during loading or unloading activities., 2.3. The project is subject to SPARC review. IV. MCNEAR HILL, RESIDENTIAL PUD, PETALUMA BLVD. SOUTH, AP NO's 6- 450 -04, 13 and 6- 460 -01, 06 (File No. 6. 1. Consideration of EIQ. 2.. Consideration of vesting tentative map for 190 -unit residential condominiums. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Pete Armano - 143.0 Pet. Blvd.. S. - Questions regarding traffic on Petaluma Blvd.', S. ; view preservation;, when will project start? .l Wally Kiekhefer - Applicant - answered questions regarding project. The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Doyle( to recommend to Council the issuance of a Mitigated _Negative Declaration and the recommendation to Council approval of the vesting tentative map based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions listed below. - COMMISSIONER BENN.ETT - Abstain (Financial conflict) COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes. COMMISSIONER READ Yes COMMISSIONER SOBEL - Absent COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE* - Yes Findings 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, land uses and programs specified in said General Plan. 3. The sloping vacant site is physically suitable for the type and pattern il and density of. development proposed. 4. The design of the subdivision and the proposed_ improvements, as conditionally ' approved, therefore will ' not cause substantial environmental damage and no substantial or unavoidable injury will occur to fish br wildlife' or their habitat. i 10 122 5. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not cause . serious public health problems.. Conditions 1. All conditions set forth in Resolution 86 -223 shall. remain, in effect for the :approval of this tentative map and shall be complied with as set forth therein.,. unless amended. by the conditions of the tentative map approval. 2.. Changes to site plan to provide additional parking subject to SPARC review and approval. 3;. Applicant/ developer shall participate. on a fair share,, basis in any future assessment districts or other funding mechanisms formed to improve ar.eawide flooding, traffic. congestion or other subregional problems for which development. of this property is found to be a contributing factor. Major Capital Facilities Fees, if 'found to be .different from said funding mechanisms;, 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 regulations. 4. Development fees shall be as set forth in "Special Development Fees" .booklet dated. April 1,988. as prepared by the City of Petaluma - Community Development ; and, Planning Department. 5. If the existing 24 inch 'storm drainage easterly of project is not upgraded prior to plan approval, all project storm water discharging at the southeasterly corner of the site must be tied into the site storm. .drain, per Sonoma County Water Agency. 6. Project shall comply' with all conditions as required by the City Engineer, as follows: A., All grading and erosion control measures . shall conform to the City's Erosion Control Ordinance No. 1576. B. All existing and proposed utilities traversing the site and along street frontages shall be placed underground, C. Handicapped ramps shall be provided at the intersections of Petaluma Blvd. South with the primary 'l'oop road'. D. . The developer shall comply, with the amended Petaluma Municipal Code. Sections 20.36.010 and 20.36,020 which requires the developer to pay storm drainage impact fees (as calculated in Chapter 17.30) on construction in all. sections of the City of Petaluma. E. All storm drainage improvements shall conform to the requirements of the Sonoma County Water . Agency Master Drainage Plan including the .42" storm drain along the easterly property line and the 15 "' storm drain along Petaluma Boulevard South. 11 •t:r ^��;.v. �. ,.. ,ry ;;: - ice 12'3 F. All publicly owned and maintained water lines located on private property shall be in an exclusive paved '10' water main easement. G. Design and construction of all public street frontage improvements and utilities necessary to serve the project shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer. H. Except for the 12" main, the sanitary sewer within this development shall be private. i I. At such time as this project is converted to condos, a Homeowners Association shall be formed to maintain the sanitary 1 sewers, water lines, storm drain lines, roadway and common areas. J. The proposed looped roadway section shall be constructed to City c Standards (2" AC over 5" AB over 5" ASB) . K. Outbound exits on both east and west sides shall be stop -sign controlled. L. A dequate stopping sight distance shall be provided at both access driveways. M. Signalization shall be provided for Petaluma Blvd. at Mt. View Avenue by the developer concurrently with the project. Improvements subject to review and approval of the City r Engineer. The formula for payback amounts shall be established i through negotiations by the City and the project developer. N . This development shall contribute a proportionate share of the cost of a traffic signal installation at Petaluma Blvd. South and McNear Avenue. O. Signing and striping shall conform to the City of Petaluma standards. P. The proposed sidewalk located outside the Petaluma Blvd. South right -of -way shall be contained in public - access easement. Q. The pedestrian path to be dedicated for public use shall be stabilized in accordance with the soils report -to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 'R. The proposed location of the - crosswalk at the most easterly I entrance shall be evaluated with respect to sign distance with the improvement plans. S. Extend 12" rather than 8" water main in Petaluma Boulevard to southerly street connection. T. Both the east and west entrances to the project shall be widened appropriately to accommodate a 2 foot shy -away from curbed 12 124 medians . and landscaping installed so as not to provide site distance obstructions for- motorists. 7. Applicant shall execute a binding recorded agreement wherein each tenant of a unit within the McN.ear Hill development shall be' given 1,80 days written notice prior to offer of any unit for sale. Such notice shall include an offer of an. exclusive right to contract for his or her respective unit or another unit within the project upon, the same terms and conditions that such unit will be initially offered to the general public or on terms more, favorable to the tenant. Following the completion of the 180 day written notice period., the' tenant shall be given a minimum of an additional 90 days to ar- range. for unit_ purchase financing,.. 8. The project developer shall pay $150.00 per estimated daily trip end, to the City of Petaluma.. Each unit is estimated to generate '7 10-.9 trip ends per day. If the City establishes a Major Facilities Traffic Mitigation Fee prior to close of escrow of any unit(s) or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the free, . for said unit(s), and all subsequent unit(s), in this project thereafter shall be either $150.00 per trip end or the Major Facilities Traffic Mitigation Fee, whichever is less on a per unit basis. PLANNINGG MATTERS V. RESIDENTIAL DENSITY DETERMINATION. SPEAKER Robert ,Ramirez - 61.1 West Street - questions regarding specific property. Michael Duchan - 460' .Chapman St,. - Questions regarding inconsistency of General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The Commission reached a consensus to allow the Planning Director to determine residential density using the following policies: 1. When calculating; density for infill projects ( - under six units), permit staff to include the area of one -half of adjacent public right -of -way as part of the site area. 2. Until Zoning Ordinance /General' Plan inconsistency. is resolved, use Zoning Ordinance to calculate maximum potential density for small infill projects, i.e., .under six units,, and General Plan designation for projects: six units or larger: 3. Continue to exempt addition of accessory dwellings in single- family zones from General Plan density limitations.. VI. DRAFT ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT: VIEWS FROM MAJOR THOROUGHFARES. Due to lack of time, this item will be placed on a future agenda. 13 JO � 125 VII. ELECTION OF OFFICERS. New Chairman - Commissioner Parkerson New Vice Chairman - Commissioner Bennett New ; SPARC Representative - Commissioner Doyle Chairman and Vice Chairman offices to become effective at the first meeting following action on the Westridge project. SPARC representative to become effective July 1, 1988. 3 ADJOURNMENT 11:05 PM. 0 c i j i 14